Adolescents’ subjective well-being (SWB) has emerged as a major focus of current educational research, reflecting the move away from individual-deficit models and toward methods that take into account the intricate interactions between social, environmental, and personal elements. The term “SWB” describes how individuals assess and feel about their own lives, placing more emphasis on subjective assessments of life quality than on outside metrics (Diener, 1984). According to this viewpoint, SWB entails how people perceive everyday occurrences and how they interpret those experiences when considering their life in their whole (Diener et al., 2018). This construct consists of two complementary dimensions: an affective component that includes everyday emotions that range from positive to negative (Busseri, 2015; Diener, 1984; Diener et al., 1999; Disabato et al., 2016; Lucas et al., 1996) and a cognitive component that reflects how people judge their lives overall and whether they perceive their existence as satisfactory upon reflection. Taking into account both aspects gives us a better understanding of how teenagers perceive their own lives, since their thoughts and feelings combine to form what we consider to be well-being. SWB has become an increasingly important topic in many fields that study human development and adaptability because it connects how people think about their lives with how they feel in everyday situations (Busseri, 2015; Diener et al., 2018; Diener and Seligman, 2002). What started off as a supplementary concept in psychology has progressively become increasingly important, particularly in areas related to learning, motivation, and emotional health. In this study, we focus on the cognitive aspect of subjective well-being, which is defined as adolescents’ overall assessments of satisfaction across important life domains. This is operationalized using a well-known life satisfaction index that has been extensively validated and used as a cognitive indicator of adolescents’ subjective well-being (Cummins, 2010; Cummins and Lau, 2005).

The majority of the research that has been done in Latin America, however, has come from North American and European contexts and frequently ignores the particular difficulties that the region’s youth face due to extreme inequality and social vulnerability (Cabieses et al., 2020; Baquerizo Cabrera et al., 2025; Casas et al., 2022). This gap severely limits our comprehension of how school-based mechanisms and structural conditions function as risk or protective factors for adolescent well-being in high-inequality settings. In addition to pointing out these shortcomings, this study is novel in that it looks at how school-related factors affect teenage wellbeing and explores how they may be used as levers for proactive intervention. This work emphasizes the role of contextual characteristics as modifiable elements–amenable to targeted policies and psychosocial programs–that may mitigate disadvantage and promote resilience in socially vulnerable settings, rather than treating them as static background factors (Cai et al., 2025; López et al., 2017; Podiya et al., 2025).

By centering the Chilean public school context, where vulnerability is pervasive and individual, familial, and community factors converge, this research offers a situated, empirically grounded contribution that advances both theoretical understanding and practical implications for educational policy and intervention. Current perspectives no longer portray well-being as a static condition but as something that evolves through social interaction and experience. Adolescents’ sense of well-being tends to mirror the quality of their everyday relationships–how close they feel to their peers, how supported they perceive their teachers to be, and how capable they feel of meeting academic challenges within their school context. These everyday experiences give shape to the emotional atmosphere of the classroom and gradually build what we understand as school climate (Wu and Lee, 2022). From this perspective, SWB cannot be reduced to an individual trait; it also reflects a shared, relational dimension influenced by the practices and values that circulate within educational settings. For this reason, current research identifies SWB as a central indicator for understanding students’ holistic development and the overall quality of their learning environments (Bücker et al., 2018; Eckert et al., 2025; López et al., 2017; Renshaw et al., 2015).

In the realm of well-being psychology, subjective well-being (SWB) is understood as a dynamic self-regulatory system with homeostatic attributes, defined as the biological and psychological ability to regulate and sustain internal equilibrium that can uphold consistent levels of well-being despite daily stressors. This system engages personal and contextual resources that assist individuals in maintaining a sense of control and balance (Cummins, 2003, 2010; Metler and Busseri, 2017; Caprara et al., 2003). Within this homeostatic system, emotional self-regulation (ESR) constitutes a central personal resource. ESR refers to the collection of automatic and intentional mechanisms by which individuals manage the emotions they experience, when these emotions occur, and how they are expressed (Gross and John, 2003; Thompson, 2019). Through ESR, adolescents can modulate the intensity and duration of their affective states and reinterpret stressful events in ways that help preserve a relatively stable level of life satisfaction (Côté et al., 2010; Cummins, 2010). ESR is defined as a collection of automatic and intentional mechanisms by which humans manage the emotions they feel, the timing of these emotions, and their expression (Gross and John, 2003; Thompson, 2019). Emotional Self-regulation (ESR) constitutes a fundamental psychological resource, substantially contributing to individual’s adaptation to environmental demands (Bailen et al., 2019; Gross, 2014, 2015a; 2015b).

During adolescence, this skill enhances emotional stability and signifies a socioemotional competence that fosters school integration, harmonious cohabitation, and social engagement (Aldao et al., 2010; Quoidbach et al., 2010). In this sense, ESR can be conceived as a homeostatic resource within the broader SWB system, as it enables individuals to compensate for emotional imbalances, cognitively reappraise stressful experiences, and sustain life satisfaction even under conditions of vulnerability (Côté et al., 2010; Cummins and Cahill, 2000; Rodríguez et al., 2022; Zapata and Onwuegbuzie, 2023).

Adolescence is a pivotal phase for the establishment of emotional regulation and well-being, marked by significant neurobiological, cognitive, and social changes (Martínez-Líbano, 2025; Sabatier et al., 2017; Silvers et al., 2014; Silvers, 2022). During this stage, a reorganization of brain circuits related to executive control and emotional reactivity takes place, resulting in heightened sensitivity to social contexts and an active pursuit of autonomy (Cracco et al., 2017; Heller and Casey, 2016; Steinberg et al., 2015). Accordingly, adaptive regulatory strategies such as cognitive reappraisal, planning, and goal persistence are consistently associated with greater well-being and lower levels of negative affect, stress, and behavioral problems (Aldao et al., 2010; Garcia et al., 2015; Kelley et al., 2019). In contrast, maladaptive strategies such as suppression or rumination predict lower life satisfaction and poorer psychosocial adjustment (Gross, 1998; Silk et al., 2003). In this way, emotional regulation functions as a bridge between personal development and the environmental factors influencing adolescent well-being (Gross and John, 2003).

Several studies have shown that the relationship between emotional regulation and subjective well-being is associated by sociodemographic variables such as gender, age, nationality, and socioeconomic status, which modulate both the expression and control of emotions (Jiang et al., 2023; Morosanova et al., 2021; Ricarte Trives et al., 2016; Sanchis-Sanchis et al., 2020). In general, research indicates that adolescent girls report lower levels of subjective well-being and higher negative affect than their male peers (Chen et al., 2020; González-Carrasco et al., 2017; Hezomi and Nadrian, 2018; McKay et al., 2020). These differences are typically attributed to the interaction between gender norms, cultural expectations, and differential emotional socialization (Cracco et al., 2017; González-Carrasco et al., 2020). Likewise, age has been identified as a negative predictor of well-being: as adolescents mature, their life satisfaction tends to decline, reflecting developmental obstacles, increased self-awareness, and academic or social pressures (Casas et al., 2012; González-Carrasco and Casas, 2024; Oyanedel et al., 2014; Steinmayr et al., 2019). Similarly, cross-cultural studies indicate that nationality and migration status influence the perception of well-being, as experiences of displacement or cultural integration can affect adolescents’ perceived social support and sense of belonging (Derdikman-Eiron et al., 2011; Neto and Barros, 2007; Yi-Jhen and Lee, 2022).

In addition to these personal factors, educational and socioeconomic contexts also play a significant role. In school environments, social vulnerability constitutes a structural variable that reflects inequalities in access to resources, family support, cultural capital, and psychosocial services–all of which are essential for well-being and emotional regulation skills (Betancourt and Castro Muñoz, 2019; Cabieses et al., 2020; World Health Organization [WHO], 2016). Recent studies show that, in such contexts, adolescent well-being depends not only on material conditions but also on the presence of protective networks, including a positive school climate, a sense of belonging, and the availability of socioemotional support programs (Eckert et al., 2025; López et al., 2017; Podiya et al., 2025; Richter et al., 2022). Consequently, schools can serve as compensatory environments, mitigating the impacts of structural inequality and promoting avenues for resilience (Cai et al., 2025).

Although research on adolescent well-being has gained increasing attention in recent years, evidence from Latin America remains limited and dispersed (Cabieses et al., 2020). Much of what is currently known still comes from European and Anglo-Saxon contexts, which constrains our ability to understand how structural conditions, emotional regulation, and sociocultural factors interact in societies marked by deep inequality gaps (Baquerizo Cabrera et al., 2025; Casas et al., 2022; Meiri et al., 2024). Likewise, studies that simultaneously incorporate emotional regulation strategies and contextual variables, such as school vulnerability or migration, are still scarce. This gap makes it difficult to clearly identify the protective mechanisms that could be reinforced through educational policy or psychosocial intervention.

In Chile, the school system–particularly the public sector–constitutes a strategic setting for examining these relationships, as it concentrates a significant number of students living in conditions of vulnerability and functions as an ecosystem where individual, family, and community factors converge (Donoso et al., 2021; Junta Nacional de Auxilio Escolar y Becas [JUNAEB], 2005; Mieres Brevis, 2020). Viewed from this angle, studying how emotional regulation, subjective well-being, and sociodemographic conditions come together in Chilean adolescents’ everyday lives helps to build a richer, more situated understanding of well-being in schools (Canenguez et al., 2023). Looking at these dimensions together not only reinforces the evidence that emotional regulation serves as a protective resource–closely linked to psychological balance and socioemotional development–but also underscores how students’ social and demographic backgrounds shape their chances to experience and sustain well-being. Building on these foundations, the present study seeks to explore how emotional regulation and sociodemographic variables shape the subjective well-being of adolescents enrolled in public schools that operate under high and very high levels of social vulnerability.

Based on previous literature, it is hypothesized that: (a) emotional regulation will have a positive and significant influence on subjective well-being; and (b) gender and age will be associated with levels of well-being and, together with nationality and school vulnerability, may exert effects on adolescents’ well-being. In this way, the study seeks to provide empirically grounded and contextually relevant evidence to better understand the psychosocial mechanisms that sustain adolescent well-being in socially vulnerable settings.

This investigation employed a non-experimental, cross-sectional design with a descriptive-correlational scope.

This study’s primary goal was to investigate the relationship between sociodemographic characteristics and short-term emotional self-regulation (ESR) and subjective well-being (SWB) in teenagers attending public schools in socially vulnerable settings. Overall, the results show a little but steady positive correlation between ESR and SWB: even after controlling for age, gender, school vulnerability, and immigration status, adolescents who report having superior short-term regulating skills are generally happier with their life. Simultaneously, a statistically significant adjusted coefficient in the hierarchical model and a trivial zero-order correlation between ESR and SWB are consistent with what has been called a classic suppression effect in regression analysis. Gender was associated with both variables in our data, while age, school vulnerability, and migrant status showed stronger correlations with SWB than with ESR (see Table 2). When combined, these covariates probably function as suppressor-like variables, absorbing parts of the variance in SWB that are unrelated to the regulatory abilities of teenagers. Once this variance is eliminated, the adjusted model shows the distinct contribution of ESR to wellbeing. Furthermore, the findings support established developmental patterns, such as the decrease in SWB with age and the lower well-being levels reported by girls. The adjusted models show a positive relationship between very high school vulnerability and SWB at the contextual level, suggesting that schools may play a compensating role as regular settings that activate protective relational and psychosocial resources.

Frameworks that view subjective well-being (SWB) as a dynamic system with homeostatic features are compatible with the observed effects’ magnitude and direction. According to this viewpoint, people’s well-being is sustained by ongoing interactions between their own abilities and the assistance they receive from their environment, which enables them to maintain a fundamental sense of balance in the face of daily challenges (Cummins, 2010). As a proximal homeostatic resource in this system, short-term ESR affects the strength, duration, and meaning of emotions, hence impacting how they are perceived and expressed (Gross, 2014, 2015a). Adolescents who employ adaptive strategies like cognitive reappraisal, planning, and attentional control report higher levels of life satisfaction, more stable emotional states, and fewer internalizing or behavioral issues (Aldao et al., 2010; Garcia et al., 2015; Quoidbach et al., 2010; Rodríguez et al., 2022). Our findings indicate that ESR primarily supports the cognitive component of SWB while also favoring more frequent positive emotional experiences, which is consistent with tripartite models of SWB that integrate life satisfaction, positive affect, and negative affect (Busseri, 2015; Diener, 1984; Diener et al., 1999; Metler and Busseri, 2017; Pavot and Diener, 2008). This supports the notion that both exterior environmental factors and interior psychological resources contribute to subjective well-being.

Older adolescents tended to report lower levels of subjective well-being (SWB), a result that echoes what has been described in other international and regional studies. As adolescents grow older, they often become more self-aware and face increasing academic and social demands, which together can place pressure on their emotional balance (Casas et al., 2012; González-Carrasco and Casas, 2024; Oyanedel et al., 2014; Steinmayr et al., 2019). Gender differences followed a comparable pattern. Girls generally reported lower levels of well-being, consistent with research that links this gap to gender norms, emotional socialization, and differences in the kinds of stressors each group faces (Hezomi and Nadrian, 2018; Snedden et al., 2019). Part of this difference may stem from how emotions are managed. For example, girls report greater reliance on maladaptive forms such as rumination, which can amplify negative feelings and disturb emotional equilibrium (González et al., 2023; Goubet and Chrysikou, 2019). Within this framework, strengthening ESR may operate as a compensatory mechanism, buffering the normative decline in SWB associated with age and mitigating gender disparities. Such efforts could focus on fostering adaptive strategies (e.g., cognitive reappraisal, problem-solving) and attentional skills (e.g., inhibition and focus-shifting) that are sensitive to developmental change (D’Souza and Smyth, 2025; Phan et al., 2022; Sharma et al., 2025; Zhu et al., 2025). Given that ESR is a developing competence rooted in executive functioning–which continues to mature during adolescence, particularly within the prefrontal cortex (Fernandes et al., 2023)–its capacity should be understood as dynamic and highly trainable (Heller and Casey, 2016).

In both bivariate comparisons and the adjusted models, very high school vulnerability (SVI) was found to be a minor but positive predictor of SWB. After adjusting for age, gender, ESR, and nationality (B = 0.41, SE(HC3) = 0.11, 95% CI [0.19, 0.63], β = 0.12, p < 0.001; see Table 3), adolescents attending schools classified as very high in vulnerability reported somewhat higher levels of well-being than those in high-vulnerability schools (see Table 2). This pattern is more likely to be seen as proof of compensatory mechanisms at work in extremely vulnerable schools rather than as evidence that vulnerability is intrinsically advantageous. In these situations, resilience is better understood as the outcome of dynamic interactions between young people and the social ecologies that surround them, such as peers, community organizations, and supporting adults (Masten and Reed, 2002; Luthar, 2021). Material resources, psychosocial programs, and regular relational practices frequently function as protective components in schools and communities with high levels of vulnerability, allowing kids to preserve their sense of stability and connection when life gets challenging. According to an ecological perspective (Bronfenbrenner, 1979), schools situated in extremely vulnerable areas may therefore serve as important microsystems where peer networks, teacher-student relationships, and institutional practices come together to foster a sense of community and care (López et al., 2017).

The most obvious conclusion from these findings seems to be that a school’s environment, including the relationships it creates and the sense of security it provides, influences how kids learn to manage their emotions and, eventually, how they feel about their life. According to Guzmán-Pozo et al. (2025), when young people perceive their school as a respected and caring environment, it becomes more than just a place to learn; it becomes a daily setting that aids in stress management and the development of social and emotional confidence. Initiatives that combine social-emotional learning with psychosocial support tend to promote engagement and emotional stability in schools facing social or economic hardship, according to research on resilience (Cai et al., 2025; Llistosella et al., 2024; van Loon et al., 2023). International initiatives like the RULER and FRIENDS programs demonstrate how long-term, context-sensitive instruction in emotional regulation can enhance students’ wellbeing and the standard of regular classroom interactions (Barrett, 2010; Brackett, 2019). School psychologists and interdisciplinary teams frequently modify more general mental-health frameworks to fit the needs of their communities in Chile’s many public schools, which operate under difficult and precarious circumstances (Richter et al., 2022). Their work demonstrates that providing emotional support as a stand-alone initiative is less beneficial than integrating it into regular school activities.

The positive correlation between well-being and school vulnerability (SVI) does not negate the importance of inequality. Instead, it likely indicates that specific protective elements inside schools and their communities begin to function when other conditions remain mostly same. While having a stable peer group, feeling like one belongs, or receiving attention from a teacher may not eliminate disadvantage, these modest forms of support can help students maintain emotional stability even in challenging situations, which is consistent with the homeostatic protection feature of the well-being system (Allen et al., 2024; Cummins, 2010; Shum et al., 2025). However, these patterns need to be interpreted in the context of a larger social framework. Many of the constraints and opportunities that young people encounter are still defined by structural inequality, and closing such disparities is crucial if gains in well-being are to be long-lasting (Medel et al., 2025; United Nations Children’s Fund, 2018, 2023). This study adds that schools can function as compensating ecosystems in real life, creating environments where kids can find some stability and connection in spite of external pressures through regular acts of support and acknowledgment.

It is evident from a closer examination of these results that emotional self-regulation (ESR) cannot be viewed as a fixed personal characteristic. Instead, it functions as a collection of abilities that may be acquired and improved over time. This implies that kids who receive guidance and support are more equipped to handle pressure, bounce back from frustration, and maintain emotional equilibrium when things do not go as planned in day-to-day school life. This process probably involves a number of processes. One is cognitive reappraisal, which is the practice of viewing social or academic circumstances from a different perspective in order to make them seem less daunting (Quoidbach et al., 2010; Volkaert et al., 2018). Another is attentional and inhibitory control, which supports students’ sense of calm and self-efficacy by assisting them in stopping harmful ideas and refocusing on their objectives (Gross, 2014; Li et al., 2022; McKay et al., 2022; Silvers et al., 2014). Persistence and planning, or the ability to carry on after errors and refocus when demands become too great, constitute a third mechanism (Bae et al., 2024; Huttunen et al., 2024; Rodríguez et al., 2022). The explanation of these mechanisms explains why ESR is still a useful and flexible target for intervention even though it only accounts for a modest but statistically significant incremental proportion of explained variance in SWB (ΔR² = 0.008). Practically speaking, this implies that emotional control is a skill that schools can deliberately develop through real-world encounters, thoughtful discussion, and encouraging connections that allow children to grow from emotional difficulties.

Finally, based on the hypothesis that (a) emotional regulation positively influences subjective well-being and (b) gender, age, nationality, and school vulnerability are associated with adolescents’ well-being, current research provides strong empirical support. Multiple studies consistently show that adaptive emotional regulation strategies, especially cognitive reappraisal, are significantly linked to higher life satisfaction and overall well-being in adolescents, acting as protective factors against depression and anxiety. Sociodemographic variables like gender and age yield predictable patterns, with girls and older adolescents typically reporting lower well-being, while school vulnerability interacts as a contextual factor influencing well-being outcomes. These findings align with the hypothesis and confirm that emotional regulation, combined with sociodemographic and contextual influences, sustains adolescent subjective well-being in vulnerable social settings. Interventions focusing on emotional regulation can thus be effective in improving adolescents’ psychosocial adjustment and resilience (Ryff and Singer, 1998).

In the aftermath of the pandemic, many adolescents continue to face new layers of social and emotional strain that put their coping abilities to the test (Loades et al., 2020; Ellis et al., 2020). These experiences have made it clear that schools must do more than provide academic instruction, they must also help students learn how to manage their emotions and rebuild a sense of stability in daily life. Strengthening these skills is not simply preventive; it is part of preparing young people to recover from disruption and to adapt to ongoing change. Viewed from this standpoint, the present findings shed light on how emotional regulation interacts with age, gender, and vulnerability to shape well-being among Chilean adolescents attending high- and very-high-vulnerability public schools. They point to the importance of developing interventions that are both multidimensional and sensitive to students’ developmental stage, programs grounded in resilience, in the brain’s capacity to adapt, and in the social environments that make such growth possible. Ultimately, promoting adolescent well-being requires long-term efforts that link emotional learning with the everyday realities of schools and communities.

In short, the findings show that short-term emotional self-regulation (ESR) is a pivotal, trainable factor. It supports the homeostatic stability of adolescents’ subjective well-being (SWB), even in socioeconomically vulnerable school settings. Therefore, this work also highlights the strong need for schools to start systematically assessing well-being and emotional regulation.

The incremental impact of ESR on SWB remains clear after adjusting for age, gender, and the compensatory pattern linked to school vulnerability defines a direct path for psychoeducational work. Teaching emotional regulation simply means reducing the negative effects of school vulnerability and improving overall well-being. We must prioritize universal interventions that also include selective and indicated targeting. This can boost the resilience resources already present in highly vulnerable school communities, converting compensatory potential into sustainable well-being gains and real improvements in school coexistence and classroom climate. Significantly, the positive association between SVI and well-being, observed after statistically controlling for sociodemographic and emotional factors, suggests schools may indeed serve as compensatory ecosystems. These institutions are crucial; they activate communal and relational resources that enable well-being to persist despite considerable challenges. This fact highlights the considerable promise inherent in school-based programs designed to systematically embed emotional regulation training within daily educational practice. Therefore, subsequent research should be primarily concerned with determining the effects of these intervention types on both long-term well-being and institutional outcomes.

For future work, researchers must expand on these findings by utilizing longitudinal and multilevel methods to precisely gauge how the development of ESR shapes long-term outcomes for both student well-being and the institutions themselves. Ultimately, supporting emotional regulation within supportive, inclusive school climates offers the most viable, sustained approach to improve adolescent mental health and foster educational equity within socially vulnerable public school systems to improve adolescent mental health and foster educational equity in vulnerable contexts.