Abstract: Drawing on the Zhongyong practical thinking framework and the dual-factor model of mental health, this study employed a three-level meta-analytic approach to examine the relationship between Zhongyong thinking and mental health, as well as its moderators. A systematic review identified 56 studies on Zhongyong thinking and positive mental health and 43 studies on Zhongyong thinking and negative mental health published before April 30, 2025. The final analysis incorporated 60 independent samples (139 effect sizes, N = 35,410) for the relationship with positive mental health, and 45 independent samples (136 effect sizes, N = 35,596) for the relationship with negative mental health. The pooled correlation indicated that Zhongyong thinking had a significant positive association with positive mental health (r = .24) and a significant negative association with negative mental health (r = －.21), both of medium effect size. Furthermore, Zhongyong thinking showed stronger correlations with resilience, job satisfaction, and work-related well-being than with life satisfaction. Its correlations with general well-being, peace of mind, and positive affect did not significantly differ from its correlation with life satisfaction. Moreover, the effect sizes measured by the Zhongyong Belief–Value Scale, the Zhongyong Opinion Expression Scale, and the Zhongyong Value Orientation Scale were relatively similar to each other, but differed significantly from those measured by the Zhongyong Practice Self-report Scale. Based on these findings, the study discusses the theoretical connotations and measurement approaches of Zhongyong thinking, as well as its relationship with mental health, highlighting the theoretical significance of understanding Zhongyong thinking and mental health from the perspective of “Holding Balance Brings Harmony”, which transcends binary oppositions.

Key words: Zhongyong thinking, mental health, three-level meta-analysis