Bullying among Chinese adolescents: the roles of parental practices and empathy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Bullying at school is recognized as a global phenomenon and has serious impacts on students' well-being. Previous studies have explored how parental practices as well as children's empathy were separately linked to children's bullying behaviors. However, few studies have examined the combined association between parental practices, adolescents' empathy, and their bullying behaviors. The present study investigated the relationship among Chinese adolescents' perceived parental practices (parental warmth, parental autonomy support, and parental psychological control), empathy (cognitive empathy and affective empathy), and bullying behaviors. Participants of this study included 277 Chinese adolescents from grade seven to grade twelve. Using the structural equation model, results indicated that affective empathy mediated between maternal warmth (but not paternal) and bullying behaviors. In addition, both parental autonomy support and psychological control were mediated by cognitive empathy, which, in turn, were linked to bullying behaviors. Findings from this study are expected to contribute to better understanding of how bullying behavior is related to parenting and adolescents' empathic development. Further the information obtained in this study will provide parents and educators with useful insights in reducing bullying in the Chinese context.
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 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".