Authoritarian Parenting and Physical Bullying: The Mediation Effect of Aggression Attitudes and the Dual Moderation Effects of Low Self-Control and Teacher Support

doi:10.16719/j.cnki.1671-6981.20230525

Abstract

Abstract: Physical bullying is considered as one of the most harmful forms of school bullying, posing threats to individuals' physical and psychological well-being, educational achievement, and healthy development. However, most existing studies have treated school bullying as a whole, and neglected mechanisms underlying physical bullying. The bioecological model, which explores the interaction effects between individual features and ecological systems on individuals' social behaviors, provides an appropriate theoretical framework to explain physical bullying. In the bioecological model, individuals' aggressive attitudes, low self-control, authoritarian family parenting, and teacher apathy have been found to be significant predictors of school bullying. Based on this theoretical framework, the current study built a dual moderated mediation model, providing a systematic understanding of physical bullying and offering evidence-based implications for bullying prevention and intervention programs. Moreover, the study introduced a novel method of moderation analysis, the Polynomial Curved Surface Fitting (PCSF) approach, which can visualize models with dual moderation effects in 3D space.
The Revised Bully/Victim Questionnaire, the Short Version of Parental Authority Questionnaire, the Aggression Attitudes Scale in Authoritative School Climate Survey, the Low Self-Control Scale, and the Teacher Apathy Scale were used. The cluster sampling method was adopted to recruit 6638 students from a vocational high school in Shandong Province. A total of 5806 individuals (M_age= 15.75 ± 0.81 years old, 34.7% females) finally participated in this research, resulting in a response rate of 87.5%. Mediation analysis was conducted using SEM with 5000 draw BC Bootstrap. The significance of moderation effects was tested using multivariate linear regression. For single-moderation analysis, the Johnson-Neyman analysis was adopted. The PCSF approach was used to analyze the dual moderated mediation effect.
The results showed that authoritarian parenting directly predicted physical bullying. Mediation analysis suggested that individuals' aggression attitudes significantly mediated the relationship between authoritarian parenting and physical bullying. Moderation analysis further revealed that individuals' low self-control significantly moderated the impact of authoritarian parenting on aggression attitudes, with a higher level of low self-control leading to a greater positive effect of authoritarian parenting on aggression attitudes. Additionally, teacher apathy significantly moderated the effects of authoritarian parenting and aggression attitudes on physical bullying, with a higher level of teacher apathy contributing to greater positive effects of authoritarian parenting and aggression attitudes on physical bullying. Moreover, low self-control and teacher apathy significantly moderated the indirect effect of authoritarian parenting on physical bullying, with higher levels of low self-control and teacher apathy leading to greater levels of the mediation effect. The mediation effect increased nonlinearly under the dual moderation effects of low self-control and teacher apathy.
The current study not only provides theoretical and practical contributions to understanding physical bullying, but also introduces the PCSF analysis for the models with dual moderation effects. The findings suggest that individual, family, and school domains can interactively predict physical bullying. Family's authoritarian parenting is the primary predictor, which can directly predict physical bullying even after controlling the mediation effect of individuals' aggression attitudes. The risk factors of individual characteristics (e.g., low self-control) and school settings (e.g., teacher apathy) can amplify the mediation effect, showing a nonlinear growth tendency. From a practical perspective, reducing individuals' aggression attitudes and authoritarian parenting while improving individuals' self-control skills and teachers' classroom management skills may effectively reduce physical bullying. From a methodological perspective, the introduction of the PCSF approach has overcome the technical limitations of the Johnson-Neyman approach, providing researchers with opportunities to investigate complicated models with dual moderation effects.

Key words: physical bullying, authoritarian parenting, aggressive attitudes, self-control, teacher apathy, PCSF

摘要： 基于生物生态模型,本文在探究家庭专制教养方式与校园身体欺凌的关系之上,进一步探讨了个体的攻击态度、低自我控制和学校的教师漠视起到的中介和双重调节作用。结果显示,专制教养既可直接且正向地预测身体欺凌,也可通过个体的攻击态度间接且正向地预测身体欺凌;教师漠视显著调节专制教养对身体欺凌的直接作用;个体的低自我控制与教师漠视均显著调节专制教养对身体欺凌的中介效应,且该中介效应在双重调节作用下呈非线性增长。本研究对于揭示校园身体欺凌的成因提供了一定理论参考,为防范和干预校园暴力提供了相关循证建议。

关键词: 校园身体欺凌, 专制教养, 攻击态度, 自我控制, 教师漠视, PCSF

Zhou You, Xu Boyang, Shi Jingmin, Lin Xiuyun. Authoritarian Parenting and Physical Bullying: The Mediation Effect of Aggression Attitudes and the Dual Moderation Effects of Low Self-Control and Teacher Support[J]. Journal of Psychological Science, 2023, 46(5): 1228-1236.

周由, 许博洋, 史敬敏, 蔺秀云. 专制教养与校园身体欺凌：攻击态度的中介作用与低自我控制和教师漠视的双重调节作用 ^*[J]. 心理科学, 2023, 46(5): 1228-1236.

References

[1] 刘程. (2020). 中小学校园欺凌行为及其影响因素. 青年研究, 39(6), 24-33.
[2] 罗峥, 唐新纳, 王雪, 魏锦. (2013). 初中生移情、攻击态度与攻击行为的关系. 首都师范大学学报(社会科学版), 1, 148-154.
[3] 马皓苓. (2019). 校园欺凌者行为发生的影响因素: 生态系统理论视角. 教育科学论坛, 26(11), 75-77.
[4] 宋月萍, 张婧文. (2018). 初三学生遭受校园欺凌对健康的影响——基于中国教育追踪调查的分析. 中国卫生政策研究, 11(6), 62-67.
[5] 许博洋, 周由, Chang, L. (2021). 青少年网络越轨行为的发生过程及原理——基于自我控制理论和差别交往理论的视角. 中国青年社会科学, 40(3), 79-87.
[6] 杨学锋. (2018). 自我控制理论中的Grasmick量表之标准化及性别差异研究. 刑法论丛, 55(3), 530-564.
[7] 曾欣然, 汪玥, 丁俊浩, 周晖. (2019). 班级欺凌规范与欺凌行为: 群体害怕与同辈压力的中介作用. 心理学报, 51(8), 935-944.
[8] 朱薇. (2020). 生态系统理论视域下女生校园欺凌现象的检视及治理. 教师教育论坛, 33(6), 63-66.
[9] Agnew, R. (1992). Foundation for a general strain theory of crime and delinquency. Criminology, 30(1), 47-88.
[10] Alkharusi H., Aldhafri S., Kazem A., Alzubiadi A., & Al-Bahrani M. (2011). Development and validation of a short version of the parental authority questionnaire. Social Behavior and Personality: An International Journal, 39(9), 1193-1208.
[11] Anderson, D. M. (2014). In school and out of trouble? The minimum dropout age and juvenile crime. Review of Economics and Statistics, 96(2), 318-331.
[12] Bandura, A. (1979). The social learning perspective: Mechanisms of aggression. In H. Toch (Ed.), Psychology of crime and criminal justice (pp. 198-236). Waveland Press.
[13] Barboza G. E., Schiamberg L. B., Oehmke J., Korzeniewski S. J., Post L. A., & Heraux C. G. (2009). Individual characteristics and the multiple contexts of adolescent bullying: An ecological perspective. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 38(1), 101-121.
[14] Bauer, D. J., & Curran, P. J. (2005). Probing interactions in fixed and multilevel regression: Inferential and graphical techniques. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 40(3), 373-400.
[15] Bender, D., & Lösel, F. (2011). Bullying at school as a predictor of delinquency, violence and other anti-social behaviour in adulthood. Criminal Behaviour and Mental Health, 21(2), 99-106.
[16] Bronfenbrenner, U. (1979). The ecology of human development: Experiments by nature and design. Harvard University Press.
[17] Bronfenbrenner, U., & Morris, P. A. (2006). The bioecological model of human development. In R. M. Lerner & W. Damon (Eds.), Handbook of child psychology: Theoretical models of human development (pp. 793-828). Wiley.
[18] Chan, S. M. (2010). Aggressive behaviour in early elementary school children: Relations to authoritarian parenting, children's negative emotionality and coping strategies. Early Child Development and Care, 180(9), 1253-1269.
[19] Cheung, N. W. T., & Cheung, Y. W. (2010). Strain, self-control, and gender differences in delinquency among Chinese adolescents: Extending general strain theory. Sociological Perspectives, 53(3), 321-345.
[20] Cho, S., & Lee, J. M. (2018). Explaining physical, verbal, and social bullying among bullies, victims of bullying, and bully-victims: Assessing the integrated approach between social control and lifestyles-routine activities theories. Children and Youth Services Review, 91, 372-382.
[21] Cornell, D. G. (2011). The school climate bullying survey: Description and research summary. University of Virginia.
[22] Darling, N., & Steinberg, L. (1993). Parenting style as context: An integrative model. Psychological Bulletin, 113(3), 487-496.
[23] Farrington D. P.,& Welsh, B. C. (2008). Saving children from a life of crime: Early risk factors and effective interventions Oxford University Press Early risk factors and effective interventions. Oxford University Press.
[24] Fenny, O. A. (2022). Low self-control and school bullying: Testing the GTC in Nigerian sample of middle school students. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 37(13-14), NP11386-NP11412.
[25] Forster M., Grigsby T. J., Unger J. B., & Sussman S. (2015). Associations between gun violence exposure, gang associations, and youth aggression: Implications for prevention and intervention programs. Journal of Criminology, 2015, Article 963750.
[26] Fox, C. L., & Boulton, M. J. (2005). The social skills problems of victims of bullying: Self, peer and teacher perceptions. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 75(2), 313-328.
[27] Gottfredson M. R.,& Hirschi, T. (1990). A general theory of crime. Stanford University Press..
[28] Hayes A. F.(2013). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach. Guilford Press.
[29] Hayes, A. F. (2018). Partial, conditional, and moderated moderated mediation: Quantification, inference, and interpretation. Communication Monographs, 85(1), 4-40.
[30] Hong J. S., Espelage D. L., Grogan-Kaylor A., & Allen-Meares P. (2012). Identifying potential mediators and moderators of the association between child maltreatment and bullying perpetration and victimization in school. Educational Psychology Review, 24(2), 167-186.
[31] Hopkins L., Taylor L., Bowen E., & Wood C. (2013). A qualitative study investigating adolescents' understanding of aggression, bullying and violence. Children and Youth Services Review, 35(4), 685-693.
[32] Kaufmann D., Gesten E., Santa Lucia R. C., Salcedo O., Gobioff G. R., & Gadd R. (2000). The relationship between parenting style and children's adjustment: The parents' perspective. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 9(2), 231-245.
[33] Kopko, K. (2007). Parenting styles and adolescents. Cornell University Cooperative Extension.
[34] Lee, C. H. (2011). An ecological systems approach to bullying behaviors among middle school students in the United States. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 26(8), 1664-1693.
[35] Lei H., Chiu M. M., Cui Y. H., Zhou W. Y., & Li S. Y. (2018). Parenting style and aggression: A meta-analysis of mainland Chinese children and youth. Children and Youth Services Review, 94, 446-455.
[36] McConville, D. W., & Cornell, D. G. (2003). Aggressive attitudes predict aggressive behavior in middle school students. Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders, 11(3), 179-187.
[37] Moon, B., & Alarid, L. F. (2015). School bullying, low self-control, and opportunity. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 30(5), 839-856.
[38] Oliver R. M., Wehby J. H., & Reschly D. J. (2011). Teacher classroom management practices: Effects on disruptive or aggressive student behavior. Campbell Systematic Reviews, 7(1), 1-55.
[39] Olweus, D. (1996). The revised olweus bully/victim questionnaire. Research Center for Health Promotion, University of Bergen.
[40] Olweus, D., & Breivik, K. (2014). Plight of victims of school bullying: The opposite of well-being. In A. Ben-Arieh, F. Casas, I. Frønes, and J. E. Korbin (Eds.), Handbook of child well-being: Theories, methods and policies in global perspective (pp. 2593-2616). Springer.
[41] Olweus, D., & Limber, S. P. (2010). Bullying in school: Evaluation and dissemination of the Olweus Bullying Prevention Program. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 80(1), 124-134.
[42] Sofia, R. M., & Cruz, J. F. A. (2015). Self-control as a mechanism for controlling aggression: A study in the context of sport competition. Personality and Individual Differences, 87, 302-306.
[43] Thomas H. J., Chan G. C. K., Scott J. G., Connor J. P., Kelly A. B., & Williams J. (2016). Association of different forms of bullying victimization with adolescents' psychological distress and reduced emotional wellbeing. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry, 50(4), 371-379.
[44] United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO). (2019). Behind the numbers: Ending school violence and bullying. United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization.
[45] Walker, J. M. T. (2009). Authoritative classroom management: How control and nurturance work together. Theory Into Practice, 48(2), 122-129.
[46] Wang J., Iannotti R. J., & Nansel T. R. (2009). School bullying among adolescents in the United States: Physical, verbal, relational, and cyber. Journal of Adolescent Health, 45(4), 368-375.
[47] Wu, L. L., & Gao, X. L. (2018). Children's dental fear and anxiety: Exploring family related factors. BMC Oral Health, 18(1), Article 100.