The effects of student bullying on non-suicidal self-injurious behavior in rural adolescents: the chain-mediated effects of alexithymia and ruminate thinking
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Bullying among students is a significant risk factor for non-suicidal self-injury (NSSI), which can adversely impact the physical and mental health development of individuals. To explore the mechanisms by which student bullying affects adolescent non-suicidal self-injury, 701 adolescents were selected as participants. The assessment tools included the Bullying Questionnaire, Toronto Alexithymia Scale, Ruminative Responses Scale, and Adolescents Non-suicidal Self-injury Assessment Questionnaire, which were used to measure the experiences of bullying, levels of alexithymia, rumination tendencies, and the severity of non-suicidal self-injury, respectively. This study aimed to examine whether there is a chain mediation effect of alexithymia and rumination in the relationship between student bullying and non-suicidal self-injury. The results indicated that: (1) Student bullying has a significant positive impact on adolescent non-suicidal self-injury (63.62%) and indirectly influences it through alexithymia and rumination (12.69%); (2) There are gender differences in the chain mediation effect between student bullying and non-suicidal self-injury, with the chain mediation effect of rumination and alexithymia being significantly greater in females (0.12) compared to males (0.06). This study not only provides a cognitive-emotional perspective and a gender difference perspective on the effects of bullying on adolescent non-suicidal self-injury but also focuses on rural adolescents, who often face more physical and mental health issues. Therefore, the conclusions enrich the understanding of the complex mechanisms between student bullying and non-suicidal self-injury, offering new theoretical guidance for preventing bullying and intervening with victims of bullying.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".