The healthy context paradox of bullying victimization and academic adjustment among Chinese adolescents: A moderated mediation model

Yongqi Huang; Xiong Gan; Xin Jin; Zixu Wei; Youhan Cao; Hanzhe Ke

doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0290452

. 2023 Aug 18;18(8):e0290452. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0290452

The healthy context paradox of bullying victimization and academic adjustment among Chinese adolescents: A moderated mediation model

Yongqi Huang ^1,^#, Xiong Gan ^1,^*,^#, Xin Jin ¹, Zixu Wei ¹, Youhan Cao ¹, Hanzhe Ke ¹

Editor: Gianpiero Greco²

PMCID: PMC10437784 PMID: 37594975

Abstract

Few empirical studies have specifically examined the underlying mechanisms of the "healthy context paradox" in Chinese cultural context. By constructing a moderated mediation model, the present study investigated the relationship between bullying victimization and academic adjustment, as well as the mediating effects of subjective well-being and the moderating role of classroom-level victimization. A sample of 631 adolescents (M_age = 13.75, SD = 0.74, 318 boys) were recruited from four schools in Hubei, Southern China. Results show that: (1) classroom-level victimization moderates the relationship between bullying victimization and academic adjustment. (2) Classroom-level victimization moderates the association through subjective well-being. This study confirms the healthy context paradox of bullying victimization and first reveals the mechanism of the mediating role of subjective well-being. Understanding the mechanisms that contribute to the health context paradox is crucial for developing targeted intervention strategies for individuals who experience ongoing bullying.

1. Introduction

Bullying is usually defined as the intentional, repeated and sustained negative behaviors of the bullied by one or more peers [1]. A latest study of 4360 junior high school students revealed that 81 (1.9%) were bullies, 647 (14.8%) were victims, and 196 (4.5%) were both bullies and victims [2]. This shows that school bullying is still widespread in our lives. It is well known that bullying in schools poses many externalizing or internalizing problems, both for the bullies and the victims, such as truancy, academic problems, depression and anxiety [3–5], and in more serious cases, self-harm or suicide [6]. And since the main task of adolescents as students is to study, academic adjustment has become a severe problem caused by bullying perpetration. There is accumulating evidence that victimized adolescents in healthy contexts had more severe adaptation problems, that is, in classrooms or schools where classroom-level victimization is low [7, 8]. Researchers have named this phenomenon the "healthy context paradox" [9, 10]. The development of this theory has attracted the attention of many researchers and provided an explanation and basis for its validity [11]. However, the role and mechanisms of the healthy context paradox are not fully understood, nor is there sufficient empirical evidence to demonstrate the validity and general applicability of this paradox. Therefore, the results of this study may help to explain the theory and provide empirical support for it to some extent.

1.1. Healthy context paradox

A "healthy" context is one where the individual’s surroundings are positive, healthy, low-harm and have better external conditions for development than the average environment. Most studies use three indicators, including lower levels of bullying and victimization (the average of all students bullying and victimization levels within the class), a lower incidence of bullying and victimization, and higher levels of anti-bullying attitudes in the class [8, 12]. When victimization levels decrease in a given context, it has positive effects not only on those who avoid being victims but also on their peers at school [13]. For example, classrooms with low levels of victimization are associated with reduced social anxiety and depressive symptoms among children [14, 15]. However, a number of empirical studies have found that in this healthy context, the victims have more adjustment problems [9, 16]. This phenomenon may be the result of a mismatch between the individual and the environment [17].

As evidence for the healthy context paradox, previous research has shown that a healthy environment enhances the relationship between bullying and internalizing problems. The initial studies on this issue were conducted by Juvonen and colleagues. They discovered that the link between peer victimization and emotional distress was more pronounced in classrooms with lower levels of social disorder, which was measured as classroom levels of victimization and aggression [14]. For example, Gini et al. [16] found that bullied children and adolescents were more likely to report somatization problems in classes with lower levels of bullying. Recent longitudinal studies have also indicated that adolescents who were consistently bullied had more depressive symptoms and lower self-esteem in schools with effective anti-bullying programs and dropping bullying rates [8, 9]. In summary, prior studies suggest that victimized children are more likely to show signs of adaptation problems in classrooms with low levels of victimization compared to those with high levels. In contexts where victimization is low, these children may be less desirable as friends and more prone to negative self-evaluations [17]. Previous studies have examined the moderating role of healthy context in the relationship between experiences of bullying victimization and internalizing problems such as anxiety and depression. Nevertheless, few studies have explored the applicability of the healthy context paradox to the relationship between experiences of bullying victimization and externalizing problems such as academic adjustment. Understanding the mechanisms that contribute to the health context paradox is crucial for developing targeted intervention strategies for individuals who experience ongoing bullying.

1.2. Bully victimization and academic adjustment

Academic adjustment is a behavioral process where the individual, based on the needs of learning and the environment, strives to adjust themselves to achieve balance with the learning environment [18]. It is a long-term self-adjustment process that changes with the learning environment and has an impact on students’ academic performance [18, 19]. Some studies have identified factors that influence academic adjustment as the learning environment, mental health and behavior [20, 21]. Children’s experiences of bullying are a predictor of externalizing problems [22]. Peer victimization leaves students in a disadvantageous situation that seriously harms their mental health, leading to learning maladaptation. Furthermore, bullying victimization causes isolation from mainstream peer groups, a loss of opportunities to learn social skills, and more deviant peers, which can contribute to more adjustment problems for victimized children [23]. There may also be a healthy context paradox between bullying victimization and adjustment problems. As the mismatch between classroom environment and individual experience can contribute to a range of adjustment problems, victimized children in a healthy context may also exhibit more academic adjustment problems.

The reason why a "healthy" classroom environment worsens the academic adjustment of victimized students may be that it hampers their interpersonal relationships, especially friendships [24]. The person-group dissimilarity model suggests that group members’ attitudes towards children are influenced by the norms within the group [25]. Consequently, victims are often seen as social outcasts in classrooms with low levels of victimization and are more likely to face rejection from the mainstream peer group [26]. In classrooms where victimization is rare or nonexistent, it becomes even more challenging for victimized children to form friendships since there are few or no peers who can relate to their experiences. In this study, classroom-level victimization was chosen as an indicator of a healthy context [11, 16], to examine its moderating role between experiences of bullying victimization and academic adjustment. The classroom-level victimization is the average of the bullying victimization of all students in the class. As the victims’ adjustment problems may be caused by a mismatch between class bullying and individual bullying, classroom-level victimization is more relevant to the victimized children’s adjustment than other indicators (e.g., level of aggression in the class, witnessing others being bullied). Therefore, it is necessary to further explore the moderating role of classroom-level victimization between bullying and academic adjustment.

1.3. Mediating role of subjective well-being

Subjective well-being is a comprehensive assessment of a person’s quality of life according to their own standards [27]. Subjective well-being is related to perceptions of the environment, and when students are surrounded by hostile peer relationships and bullying incidents, it can affect their psychological security and belonging. This increases the student’s negative emotional experiences (e.g., anxiety and tension) and ultimately undermines their subjective well-being [28, 29]. School bullying significantly and negatively predicted junior high school students’ optimism, self-esteem, positive coping and subjective well-being [30]. And optimism, self-esteem and positive coping partially mediated the effect of school bullying on subjective well-being [31]. A study of Algerian students showed that non-bullying students had higher subjective well-being than bullying victimization students and lower life satisfaction among the bullied [32]. Due to the fact that victims of bullying often lack the social skills to manage their relationships with their peers [33]. There is also a mediating effect of a positive psychological orientation between school bullying and well-being, and it gives a mechanism to mediate bullying perceptions (whether as a victim or a bully) and hence improve subjective well-being [34].

Research shows that students with high subjective well-being are more engaged in their studies so that they can achieve greater academic success [35, 36]. Salmela-Aro and Tuominen-Soini [37] found that there is a significant positive correlation between adolescent well-being and academic achievement. Moreover, considerable evidence has shown a positive correlation between subjective well-being and self-efficacy [38, 39]. Additionally, high academic self-efficacy, academic achievement, and study engagement all mean good academic adjustment [40, 41]. Students with high academic self-efficacy have a positive effect on their interpersonal and environmental adjustment, which stimulates their interest in learning and leads to greater academic adjustment. However, few studies have explored the relationship between subjective well-being and academic adjustment and the mediating role of subjective well-being on bullying victimization and academic adjustment. Given the prior findings and theory, the present study is intended to provide a complement.

1.4. The present study

Previous research has found that in classes with lower average levels of bullying, victims have poorer adjustment. Few studies, however, have been conducted to investigate the impact of classroom-level victimization on the learning adjustment problems of bullying victimization and the underlying mechanisms. The present study examines whether classroom-level victimization moderates such victimization-adaptation associations and furthers the mediating role of subjective well-being between bullying victimization and academic adjustment. Hypothesis: (1) Classroom-level victimization moderates the association between bullying victimization and academic adjustment, victimized children in low classroom-level victimization are likely to exhibit more academic adjustment problems. This may be due to the fact that in low-victimization classrooms, where there is relatively little support and help among students, victims may feel more isolated and helpless, which can affect their academic performance. (2) In lower classroom-level victimization, bullying victimization will reduce children’s subjective well-being and cause them to exhibit more academic adjustment problems. In a further step, we added grade, gender, parental education level and classroom size as control variables. Classroom size was indicated by the number of students in each measured class. By controlling for these variables, the study aimed to ensure that any observed effects were specifically related to the variables of interest rather than being influenced by other demographic or contextual factors. Overall, this study provides new insights into the complex interplay between classroom-level victimization, bullying victimization, subjective well-being, and academic adjustment. By understanding the role of the classroom environment and subjective well-being, educators and policymakers can develop targeted interventions and support systems to mitigate the negative consequences of bullying and enhance students’ academic well-being.

2. Method

2.1. Participants and procedure

Using random cluster sampling, we recruited students from four junior middle schools in Hubei, China, in May 2022. Our survey was carried out on a class basis, and a total of 631 adolescents ranging in age from 11 to 16 years (M_age = 13.75 years, SD = 0.74, 318 boys) participated in this study. Before the formal investigation, several junior high schools were properly negotiated with for the timing of the test administration, and we obtained informed consent from the participants and their parents or legal guardians involved. Adolescents were informed that their personal information would be kept confidential, and they had the right to refuse to respond whenever they wanted. The questionnaires of the students who participated voluntarily were collected after they finished, while the remainder were not required to. The survey was carried out by well-trained psychology postgraduates during school time. During the survey, emphasis was placed on the significance of truthful responses and their contribution to the research in order to encourage truthful self-report. The present study was approved by the Research Ethics Committee of the College of Education and Sports Sciences, Yangtze University.

2.2. Measures

2.2.1. Bullying victimization

The bullying questionnaire in the Chinese version of the Olweus Bullying Victimization Questionnaire, revised by Zhang et al. [42], was used to assess the participants’ bullying victimization in school. It comprised six items (e.g., ‘‘Certain students spread some rumors about me and tried to make others dislike me”), which were rated on a 5-point scale ranging from 1 (never) to 5 (several times a week). Responses were averaged across the six items, with a higher score indicating a higher level of bullying victimization. In the present study, the Cronbach’s alpha was 0.83.

2.2.2. Subjective well-being

We used the Index of Well-being Scale to assess adolescents’ subjective well-being [43]. It consisted of nine items in total (e.g., “How satisfied or dissatisfied are you with life in general?”), which could be divided into two dimensions, including an index of general affect and life satisfaction rated on a 7-point scale. In general affect part, participants need to choose between the two ends of the emotional spectrum, with the closer the score the stronger the emotion (e.g., 1 = tiring, 7 = interesting). Responses were averaged across the nine items, with a higher score representing a higher level of subjective well-being. In the present study, the Cronbach’s alpha was 0.77.

2.2.3. Classroom-level victimization

Referring to previous studies [11, 15, 16, 44], the mean of all students bullying scale scores in class was used as an indicator of classroom-level victimization. This means that classroom-level victimization is measured at the class level.

2.2.4. Academic adjustment

We used the Adaptive Behavior for Learning subscale of the Adolescent Social Adjustment Scale to measure adolescents’ academic adjustment [19]. It consisted of thirty items in total (e.g., “I have my own study plan”), which could be divided into five dimensions, including learning habits, learning styles, use of learning resources, learning motivation, and learning satisfaction. Participants chose the behaviors described in the question according to their own situation, with one point for “Yes” and two points for “No”. Responses were summed across all items, with a higher score meaning a higher level of academic maladjustment. In the present study, the Cronbach’s alpha was 0.82.

2.3. Data analysis

SPSS 26.0 and PROCESS were used for processing the data. First, given that data were collected through a self-reported questionnaire, we conducted the Harman single factor method to test the shared method biases. Second, we performed descriptive statistics and bivariate correlations for the key variables. Third, we used the PROCESS to examine the mediation and moderation effects.

3. Results

3.1. Common method bias analyses

Given the possibility of common method bias in the self-report method, the common method bias was examined using the Harman single factor test procedure [45]. Results showed that there were 13 factors with a characteristic root greater than 1. The first factor of them explained a variation of 16.02%, much less than the 40% critical value. That is, the results in the present study were less influenced by the shared method biases.

3.2. Descriptive statistics and correlation analyses

Means, standard deviations, and bivariate associations are shown in Table 1. Particularly, bullying victimization was negatively correlated with subjective well-being (r = −0.17, p < 0.001) and positively correlated with academic adjustment (r = 0.31, p < 0.001), meaning that adolescents who experience more bullying victimization have lower subjective well-being and more academic adjustment problems. Subjective well-being was negatively associated with academic adjustment (r = −0.22, p < 0.001). Grade was negatively associated with classroom-level victimization (r = −0.08, p < 0.05), indicating that students with high subjective well-being have fewer academic adjustment problems.

Table 1. Descriptive statistics and correlations of individual (Level 1) and classroom-level (Level 2) variables.

	M	SD	1	2	3	4	5
Level 1
1 Gander	—	—	—
2 Mother’s education level	2.23	0.88	0.06	—
3 Father’s education level	2.37	1.19	0.05	0.50^***	—
4 Bullying victimization	1.39	0.68	0.06	−0.02	0.02	—
5 Subjective well-being	3.85	0.73	−0.05	0.04	-0.06	−0.17^***	—
6 Academic adjustment	1.34	0.21	−0.04	−0.06	-0.02	0.31^***	−0.22^***
Level 2
1 Grade	—	—	—
2 Classroom size	30.56	4.18	0.33^***	—
3 Classroom-level victimization	1.39	0.30	−0.08^*	0.07	—

Open in a new tab

Note.

*p < .05,

**p < .01,

***p < .001.

3.3. Mediation effect and moderation effect analyses

Frist, the results of the linear regression test showed that, without considering the effect of other variables, bullying victimization could predict academic adjustment directly and positively (β = 0.31, t = 8.02, p < 0.001). Second, model 4 in PROCESS was used to test the moderated mediation model. After controlling gender, grade, parental education level and classroom size, bullying victimization could negatively predict subjective well-being (β = −0.16, t = −4.12, p < 0.001) and positively predict academic adjustment (β = 0.28, t = 7.24, p < 0.001); subjective well-being could negatively predict academic adjustment (β = −0.17, t = −4.50, p < 0.001). Bootstrapping analyses were used to test the relationship between each path and if the 95% confidence interval did not include 0, then the indirect effect was significant. The result revealed that subjective well-being mediated the relationship between bullying victimization and academic adjustment (β = 0.03, 95% CI = [0.01, 0.05]; see Fig 1), indicating that bullying victimization not only directly predicts academic adjustment but also predicts academic adjustment through the mediating effect of subjective well-being.

Third, model 8 in PROCESS was used to assess the moderating effect of classroom-level victimization on the relationships between bullying victimization and academic adjustment, as well as bullying victimization and subjective well-being. Controlling gander, grade, parental education level and classroom size, the interaction term (bullying victimization × classroom-level victimization) could negatively predict subjective well-being and academic adjustment (β = −0.29, t = −2.06, p < 0.05; β = −0.11, t = −3.20, p < 0.001; see Fig 1), indicating that classroom-level victimization moderated the direct pathway from bullying victimization to academic adjustment and the predictive effect of bullying victimization on subjective well-being. Then, according to the score of classroom-level victimization, adolescents were divided into two groups. The high/low classroom-level victimization group included adolescents whose score was one standard deviation (SD) above/below the average. And we drew two simple slope pictures (see Figs 2 and 3). As shown in Fig 2, in classes with a low level of victimization (M−1SD), bullying victimization had a positive predictive effect on academic adjustment, simple slope = 0.14, t = 5.81, p < 0.001. For classes with a high level of victimization (M+1SD), although bullying victimization also has a positive predictive effect on academic adjustment, it is minor, simple slope = 0.08, t = 6.94, p < 0.001. This suggests that the predictive effect of bullying victimization on academic adjustment increases with classroom-level victimization lowering. As can be seen in Fig 3, when adolescents were in classes with a low level of victimization (M−1SD), bullying victimization had a negative predictive effect on subjective well-being, simple slope = −0.19, t = −4.05, p < 0.001. That indicated that in classrooms with lower levels of victimization, the effect of bullying victimization on subjective well-being became bigger.

4. Discussion

By constructing a moderated mediation model, the present study investigated the relationship between bullying victimization and adolescents’ academic adjustment. It was found that classroom-level victimization moderated the association between bullying victimization and academic adjustment, with stronger associations between children’s bullying victimization and academic adjustment problems in classes with low classroom-level victimization. Moreover, lower classroom-level victimization decreases the victimized child’s subjective well-being, which then predicts academic adjustment problems. These findings provide further evidence of the health context paradox between individual bullying victimization and academic adjustment and the first evidence of the mediating role of subjective well-being.

The results of this study are consistent with our hypothesis and the previous studies [46, 47], and we found that the association between bullying victimization and academic adjustment was stronger in healthy contexts (i.e., low classroom-level bullying victimization levels). As shown in Fig 2, the simple slope picture shows that frequently victimized students in healthy contexts with lower classroom-level victimization are likely to exhibit more academic adjustment problems. This result also provides further support for the healthy context paradox of bullying victimization and academic adjustment. This may be due to a mismatch between individual experiences of bullying victimization and the low levels of bullying victimization in the classroom, causing the victimized children to show more adjustment problems [26]. In healthy contexts, where the number of bullied individuals is low, the bullied adolescents lack peers who have similar experiences for social comparisons. They can only make upward social comparisons with those who are not victims, which can lead to more negative emotional problems [48, 49] and thus maladaptive academic problems.

In view of the individual level, according to person-environment fit theory, stress increases when individuals perceive a mismatch between their environment and themselves [50]. In a healthy classroom environment, bullying contributes to sensitivity to exclusion and rejection, generating a great contrast between the surroundings and the attitudes of others, which produces stress and a reduced sense of belonging at school [51]. Students who do not feel belonging and security will develop a variety of academic problems [52]. In view of the environment level, classroom-level victimization reflects the environment level of a class group. If the classroom-level victimization is high, then the class is considered to be an unhealthy environment; if the classroom-level victimization is low, then the class is considered to be a healthy environment. According to social identity theory, people have more apparent perceptions of similar characteristics within a group and more apparent perceptions of differences between dissimilar objects [53]. Therefore, when an individual is bullied in a low-victimization classroom environment, he or she becomes a ’minority’ and an ’anomaly’ in the class. In Wright’s theory of social status, people do not understand why they are bullied, and exclusion and rejection of them leave the victimized adolescents without safety and belonging, which causes academic difficulties [25]. Furthermore, because there is little or no bullying in a healthy classroom environment, it is difficult for the bullied student to find classmates who have gone through similar experiences to support and comfort each other, and they must bear and disperse their pain alone. But the immature minds of teenagers are not yet capable of supporting them to overcome their negative emotions, and this leads to more serious emotional problems. Conversely, the negative effects of a relatively poor classroom environment are less likely to be experienced. In classrooms where victimization is more common, students are accustomed to such behavior and even being bullied, thus bullied children are not seen as different. The bullied are more likely to receive consolation from their peers; therefore, being bullied in a poor environment might alleviate stress and emotional issues.

To unravel the health context paradox of bullying victimization and academic adjustment, we examined the mediating role of subjective well-being. It was found that bullying victimization indirectly predicted academic adjustment by affecting subjective well-being. Bullying victimization causes a decrease in subjective well-being, which then leads to an increase in academic adjustment problems, with the mediating effect being more prominent in healthy environments. Additionally, this present finding is consistent with previous studies [54–56]. This study also found that adolescents’ subjective well-being predicted their academic adjustment problems. Subjective well-being has a direct impact on students’ emotional experiences during the learning process, when subjective well-being is high, they tend to have positive emotional experiences. This positive emotion will enhance their academic adjustment, for instance, by increasing their recognition of school activities [57]. Positive emotions have a positive effect on students’ ability to pay attention and remember things, as well as on their ability to deal with learning stress and problems [58]. They are also linked to higher motivation, better independent learning, and better test scores [59]. In general, bullying victimization has a direct impact on academic adjustment but also has a partially mediated effect on subjective well-being. This finding provided the first insight into the mechanisms underlying the healthy context paradox of bullying and academic adjustment and shed light on how classroom-level victimization affects the academic adjustment of victimized children. Specifically, this study found that when victimized youth are exposed to low classroom-level victimization, it negatively affects their academic performance due to a decrease in subjective well-being. These findings highlight why seemingly positive environments can still have a detrimental impact on victimized children’s academic adjustment. It emphasizes the importance of not only implementing effective antibullying programs but also providing additional support and assistance to specific children who are at risk of continued victimization.

5. Implications, limitations and future directions

The results of this study extend and deepen the understanding of existing research on the relationship between the classroom environment and the academic adjustment of victims of bullying. Actually, this study is the first to demonstrate that a healthy classroom environment can contribute to the low subjective well-being and academic maladjustment of victimized children. We found that the subjective well-being of the bullied children was lower in healthy contexts. Another contribution of this research is examining a sample of Chinese youth participants. Our findings align with previous research conducted in Western countries, which has shown that classroom-level victimization plays a moderating role in the relationship between victimization and adjustment [8, 9, 16]. Additionally, we have identified a mediating mechanism that explains this phenomenon. While our hypotheses were originally derived from well-established theories and empirical studies in Western culture, it is worth considering that these mechanisms could potentially apply to other cultures as well. However, it is crucial to acknowledge that due to the emphasis on social harmony and interdependence in Chinese culture, victimized children within more supportive environments may face heightened rejection and develop negative social self-perceptions. Future research may be able to focus on adolescents’ interpersonal relationships and cognitive processes to explore other mediating roles in more depth. We believe that our results are instructive and deserve the attention of our interventionists. In prevention and intervention, we aim to reduce the incidence of bullying and the number of victimized students, but in the process, adolescents who continue to experience bullying may exhibit more emotional and academic problems. Therefore, while improving the classroom environment, teachers need to take a proactive approach to the psychology and academic performance of bullied students. More specifically, it is crucial to enhance and modify anti-bullying programs, especially in challenging situations where victimization cannot be immediately stopped [24]. Anti-bullying initiatives should not only focus on preventing incidents and reducing the number of victims overall but also on identifying specific victims and recognizing their status within the classroom. Schools should have policies that facilitate reporting of victimization, effective handling of cases, and monitoring to ensure successful adult intervention. Moreover, during the intervention, teachers should improve students’ subjective well-being. Specifically, parents and teachers should give prompt care and attention to students after bullying incidents to reduce their negative emotions. Teachers can also design positive and interactive games and activities to help students develop good peer beliefs and gain friendship support, encouraging peers to support victimized children in improving their situation [60]. Additionally, teachers can provide victimized children with information about others who are also experiencing victimization. This helps the victims understand that they are not alone, and that the situation is not their fault.

The present research also has some limitations that should be noted. First, this study used a cross-sectional design, revealing only the concurrent associations between bullying victimization, subjective well-being, and adolescent academic adjustment. These three may have a complicated two-way relationship [61–63]. Therefore, longitudinal research is necessary to examine whether there is an interaction between bullying victimization, subjective well-being, academic adjustment and classroom-level victimization. Secondly, this study focused on only one possible indicator of classroom environments (i.e., low classroom-level victimization) that might have a substantial influence in determining the variance in the association between victimization and academic adjustment. Nonetheless, it would be intriguing to investigate the moderating effect of additional environmental factors. For example, researchers have found that classroom climate is strongly associated with bullying behavior among primary school students, and the most harmonious classroom atmosphere is perceived by the uninvolved [64]. Examining these various contextual factors would give a wider view of how classroom environments impact the academic adjustment of victims. Third, a limitation of this study in using data analysis methods is that we did not eventually use hierarchical linear models. Considering the problem of estimation bias or standard error that may arise from traditional regression models, in the future we may consider constructing multi-level models with larger sample sizes and better organized data structures. Finally, data was collected only through self-reported measures. Self-reporting may be subject to more bias (e.g., socially desirable responses), and participants may report less bullying victimization and academic adjustment problems. Reports from multiple informants (e.g., parents, teachers, and peers) should be considered in future research.

6. Conclusion

The findings of this study support the existence of the healthy context paradox and its mechanisms in the relationship between bullying victimization and academic adjustment. Consistent with previous research, our study revealed that victimized children are more prone to academic maladjustment when they experience low levels of victimization in their classrooms compared to high levels. Specifically, it includes two aspects: (1) classroom-level victimization moderates the relationship between bullying victimization and academic adjustment. In classrooms with low levels of victimization, victimized children exhibit more academic adjustment problems; (2) the classroom-level victimization moderates the associations through subjective well-being, a lower classroom-level victimization increases academic adjustment problems by reducing the subjective well-being of the victims.

Supporting information

S1 Dataset. Dataset used for analyses in present study.

(SAV)

Click here for additional data file.^{(111.3KB, sav)}

Data Availability

All relevant data are within the paper and its Supporting information files.

Funding Statement

This research was supported by Youth project of Science and Technology Research Plan of Department of Education of Hubei Province in 2020 (Q20201306), the Social Science Fund Project of Yangtze University in 2022 (2022csz03), the Faculty Scientific Fund Project of the College of Education and Sports Sciences of Yangtze University in 2022 (2022JTB01), and the key projects of education science plan of Hubei Province in 2022: Study on the influencing factors and intervention mechanism of non-suicidal self-injurious behaviors in adolescents (2022GA030). The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

References

1.Olweus D. Aggression in the schools: Bullies and whipping boy. Hemisphere; 1978. pp. 4–10. doi: 10.1016/S0002-7138(09)60732-9 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
2.Wu F, Luo XR, Yang MS, Liu QW, Liu XQ. Psychotic-like experiences between different roles of school bullying among junior school students. Chinese Mental Health Journal. 2022; 36(9):774–9. [Google Scholar]
3.Raskauskas Juliana. Text-Bullying: Associations with traditional bullying and depression among New Zealand adolescents. Journal of School Violence. 2009; (1):74–97. doi: 10.1080/15388220903185605 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
4.Tokunaga RS. Following you home from school: A critical review and synthesis of research on cyberbullying victimization. Computers in Human Behavior. 2010; 26(3):277–87. doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2009.11.014 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
5.Cassidy W, Faucher C, Jackson M. Cyberbullying among youth: A comprehensive review of current international research and its implications and application to policy and practice. School Psychology International. 2013; 34(6):575–612. doi: 10.1177/0143034313479697 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
6.Geoffroy MC, Arseneault L, Girard A, Ouellet-Morin I, Power C. Association of childhood bullying victimization with suicide deaths: findings from a 50-year nationwide cohort study. Psychological Medicine. 2022; 1–8. doi: 10.1017/S0033291722000836 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
7.Bin P, Tengfei L, Linqin J, Sarah M, Wenxin Z, Christina S. Why Does Classroom-Level Victimization Moderate the Association Between Victimization and Depressive Symptoms? The "Healthy Context Paradox" and Two Explanations. Child development. 2021; 92(5):1836–54. doi: 10.1111/cdev.13624 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
8.Garandeau CF, Lee IA, Salmivalli C. Decreases in the proportion of bullying victims in the classroom: Effects on the adjustment of remaining victims. International Journal of Behavioral Development. 2018; 42:64–72. doi: 10.1177/0165025416667492 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
9.Huitsing G, Lodder GMA, Oldenburg B, Schacter HL, Salmivalli C, Juvonen J, et al. The healthy context paradox: Victims’ adjustment during an anti-bullying intervention. Journal of Child and Family Studies. 2019; 28:2499–2509. doi: 10.1007/s10826-018-1194-1 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
10.Salmivalli C. (2018). Peer victimization and adjustment in young adulthood: Commentary on the special section. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology. 2018; 46:67–72. doi: 10.1007/s10802-017-0372-8 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
11.Liu XW, Pan B, Chen L, Li TF, Ji LQ, Zhang WX. Healthy context paradox in the association between bullying victimization and externalizing problems: The mediating role of hostile attribution bias. Acta Psychologica Sinica. 2021; 53(2):170–181. [Google Scholar]
12.Bellmore AD, Witkow MR, Graham S, Juvonen J. Beyond the individual: the impact of ethnic context and classroom behavioral norms on victims’ adjustment. Developmental Psychology. 2004; 40(6):1159–72. doi: 10.1037/0012-1649.40.6.1159 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
13.Williford A, Boulton A, Noland B, Little TD, Kärnä A, Salmivalli C. Effects of the KiVa anti-bullying program on adolescents’ depression, anxiety, and perception of peers. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology. 2012; 40:289–300. doi: 10.1007/s10802-011-9551-1 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
14.Bellmore AD, Witkow MR, Graham S, Juvonen J. Beyond the individual: The impact of ethnic context and classroom behavioral norms on victims’adjustment. Developmental Psychology. 2004; 40:1159–1172. doi: 10.1037/0012-1649.40.6.1159 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
15.Huitsing G, Veenstra R, Sainio M, Salmivalli C. “It must be me” or “It could be them?”: The impact of the social network position of bullies and victims on victims’ adjustment. Social Networks. 2012; 34(4):379–86. doi: 10.1016/j.socnet.2010.07.002 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
16.Gini G, Holt, Pozzoli T, Marino. Peer victimization and somatic problems: The role of class victimization levels. Journal of School Health. 2020; 90(1):39–46. doi: 10.1111/josh.12844 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
17.Garandeau CF, Salmivalli C. Can healthier contexts be harmful? A new perspective on the plight of victims of bullying. Child Development Perspectives. 2019; 13(3):147–52. doi: 10.1111/cdep.12331 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
18.Feng TY, Li H. (2002). Primary Research about Study Adaptation of Undergraduate. Exploration of Psychology. 2002; 22(81):44–8. [Google Scholar]
19.Nie YG, Yang A, Zeng MX. The Relationship among Adolescents’ Meta-cognition, Big Five Personality and Academic Adaptive Behavior. Psychological Development and Education. 2011; 27(2):151–7. doi: 10.16187/j.cnki.issn1001-4918.2011.02.011 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
20.Birch SH, Ladd GW. Interpersonal relationships in the school environment and children’s early school adjustment: The role of teachers and peers. Social motivation: Understanding children’s school adjustment. 1996; 15:199–225. doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511571190.011 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
21.Raza SA, Qazi W, Yousufi SQ. The influence of psychological, motivational, and behavioral factors on university students’ achievements: the mediating effect of academic adjustment. Journal of Applied Research in Higher Education. 2021; 13(3):849–70. doi: 10.1108/JARHE-03-2020-0065 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
22.Casper DM, Card NA. Overt and relational victimization: A meta-analytic review of their overlap and associations with social-psychological adjustment. Child Development. 2017; 88(2):466–83. doi: 10.1111/cdev.12621 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
23.Rudolph KD, Lansford JE, Agoston AM, Sugimura N, Schwartz D, Dodge KA, et al. Peer victimization and social alienation: Predicting deviant peer affiliation in middle school. Child Development. 2014; 85(1):124–39. doi: 10.1111/cdev.12112 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
24.Garandeau CF, Lee IA, Salmivalli C. Decreases in the proportion of bullying victims in the classroom: Effectson the adjustment of remaining victims. International Journal of Behavioral Development. 2018; 42:64–72. doi: 10.1177/0165025416667492 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
25.Wright JC, Giammarino M, Parad HW. Social status in small groups: Individual–group similarity and the social "misfit". Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 1986; 50(3):523–36. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.50.3.523 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
26.Sentse M, Scholte R, Salmivalli C, Voeten M. Person-group dissimilarity in involvement in bullying and its relation with social status. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology. 2007; 35(6):1009–19. doi: 10.1007/s10802-007-9150-3 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
27.Emmons RA, Diener E. Personality Correlates of Subjective Well-Being. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. 1985; 11(1):89–97. doi: 10.1177/0146167285111008 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
28.Kowalski RM, Giumetti GW, Schroeder AN, Lattanner MR. Bullying in the digital age: a critical review and meta-analysis of cyberbullying research among youth. Psychological Bulletin. 2012; 140(4):1073–137. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
29.Wei CZ, Liu WL. The Association between School Bullying and Mental Health of Sexual Minority Students. Chinese Journal of Clinical Psychology. 2015; 23(4):701–5. [Google Scholar]
30.Fantaguzzi C, Allen E, Miners A, Christie D, Opondo C, Sadique Z, et al. Health-related quality of life associated with bullying and aggression: A cross-sectional study in English secondary schools. The European journal of health economics. 2018; 19(5):641–51. doi: 10.1007/s10198-017-0908-4 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
31.Guo MJ. The impact of school bullying on the mental health of junior high school students: the multiple mediating effects of optimism, self-esteem and coping styles (Master). 2019; Guangzhou University, Guangzhou.
32.Tiliouine H. School bullying victimization and subjective well-being in Algeria. Child Indicators Research. 2015; 8(1):133–50. [Google Scholar]
33.Salmivalli C. Bullying and the peer group: A review. Aggression and violent behavior. 2010; 15(2):112–20. [Google Scholar]
34.Arslan G, Allen KA, Tanhan A. School bullying, mental health, and wellbeing in adolescents: Mediating impact of positive psychological orientations. Child Indicators Research. 2021; 14(3):1007–26. [Google Scholar]
35.Choi J. Sustainable behavior: Study engagement and happiness among university students in South Korea. Sustainability. 2016; 8(7):599–610. doi: 10.3390/su8070599 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
36.Hu F, Ma YH, Zhuang LL, Lv XJ, Li R. Subjective well-being and influence factors among middle school students. Chinese Journal of School Health. 2011; 32(5):576–9. doi: 10.16835/j.cnki.1000-9817.2011.05.029 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
37.Salmela-Aro K, Tuominen-Soini H. Adolescents’ Life Satisfaction During the Transition to Post-Comprehensive Education: Antecedents and Consequences. Journal of Happiness Studies. 2010; 11(6):683–701. doi: 10.1007/s10902-009-9156-3 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
38.Chu XY, Zeng P, Xu Q, Zhao XY, Lei L. The Association between Friend Support and Well–Being for Undergraduates: The Mediating Role of Self-Efficacy and Moderating Role of Social Comparison Orientation. Journal of Psychological Science. 2021; 44(2):426–32 [Google Scholar]
39.Ma ZW, Zeng WN, Ye KY. Gender differences in Chinese adolescents’ subjective well-being: The mediating role of self-efficacy. Psychological Reports. 2015; 116(1):311–21. doi: 10.2466/17.07.PR0.116k15w2 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
40.Calaguas GM. Academic achievement and academic adjustment difficulties among college freshmen. Researchers World Journal of Arts Science & Commerce. 2011; 2(3):72–6. [Google Scholar]
41.Wang W, Lei L, Wang XC. The Relationship of College Students’ Proactive Personality and Academic Performance: The Mediating Roles of Academic Self-efficacy and Academic Adjustment. Psychological Development and Education. 2016; 32(5):579–86. [Google Scholar]
42.Zhang WX, Wu JF, Jones Kevin. Revision of the Chinese version of the Olweus Child Bullying Questionnaire. Psychological Development and Education. 1999; 15(2):7–11. [Google Scholar]
43.Campbell Angus. Subjective Measures of Well-Being. American Psychologist. 1976; 31(2):117–24. doi: 10.1037//0003-066x.31.2.117 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
44.Schacter HL, Juvonen J. The effects of school-level victimization on self-blame: Evidence for contextualized social cognitions. Developmental Psychology. 2015; 51(6):841–7. doi: 10.1037/dev0000016 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
45.Podsakoff PM, MacKenzie SB, Podsakoff NP. Sources of Method Bias in Social Science Research and Recommendations on How to Control It. Annual review of psychology. 2012; 63(1):539–69. doi: 10.1146/annurev-psych-120710-100452 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
46.Lei L, Wang Y, Guo BL, Chang L. The influence of classroom norms on the relations between social behaviors and peer victimization. Acta Psychologica Sinica. 2004; 36(5):563–7. [Google Scholar]
47.Yun HY, Juvonen J. Navigating the healthy context paradox: Identifying classroom characteristics that improve the psychological adjustment of bullying victims. Journal of Youth and Adolescence. 2020; 49(11):2203–13. doi: 10.1007/s10964-020-01300-3 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
48.Brendgen M, Vitaro F, Barker ED, Girard A, Dionne G, Tremblay RE, et al. Do other people’s plights matter? A genetically informed twin study of the role of social context in the link between peer victimization and children’s aggression and depression symptoms. Developmental Psychology. 2013; 49(2):327–40. doi: 10.1037/a0025665 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
49.Gerber JP, Wheeler L, Suls J. A social comparison theory meta-analysis 60+ years on. Psychological Bulletin. 2018; 144(2):177–97. doi: 10.1037/bul0000127 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
50.Edwards JR, Caplan RD, Van Harrison R. Person-environment fit theory. Theories of organizational stress. 1998; 28(1):67–94. [Google Scholar]
51.Goldweber A, Waasdorp TE, Bradshaw CP. Examining the link between forms of bullying behaviors and perceptions of safety and belonging among secondary school students. Journal of School Psychology. 2013; 51(4):469–85. doi: 10.1016/j.jsp.2013.04.004 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
52.Osterman KF. Teacher Practice and Students’ Sense of Belonging. In Lovat T., Toomey R., Clement N. (Eds.). International Research Handbook on Values Education and Student Wellbeing. Springer; Netherlands; 2010. pp. 239–260. doi: 10.1007/978-90-481-8675-4_15 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
53.Tafel H, Turner JC. The social identity theory of intergroup behavior. In: Worchel S, Austin W(Eds.). Psychology of Intergroup Relations. Chicago: Nelson Hall; 1986. pp. 7–24. [Google Scholar]
54.Bailey TH, Phillips LJ. The influence of motivation and adaptation on students’ subjective well-being, meaning in life and academic performance. Higher Education Research & Development. 2016; 35(2):201–16. doi: 10.1080/07294360.2015.1087474 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
55.Datu JAD, King RB. Subjective well-being is reciprocally associated with academic engagement: A two-wave longitudinal study. Journal of School Psychology. 2018; 69:100–10. doi: 10.1016/j.jsp.2018.05.007 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
56.Liu S, Wang M, Fu C. Maternal academic involvement and adolescents’ subjective well-being: The mediating role of adolescents’ academic adjustment in China. Children and Youth Services Review. 2021; 128:106154. doi: 10.1016/j.childyouth.2021.106154 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
57.Kong QP, Yao PY. The students’ subjective well-being has important value of education: the theory of well-being research review in recent years. Global Education. 2013; 42(11):39–45. [Google Scholar]
58.Xu H. The impact of positive emotion on college students’ learning resilience. Journal of Higher Education. 2015; 36(3):74–7. [Google Scholar]
59.Mega C, Ronconi L, De Beni R. What makes a good student? How emotions, self-regulated learning, and motivation contribute to academic achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology. 2014; 106(1):121–31. doi: 10.1037/a0033546 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
60.van der Ploeg R, Steglich C, Veenstra R. The support group approach in the Dutch KiVa anti-bullying programme: Effects on victimization, defending and well-being at school. Educational Research. 2016; 58:221–236. doi: 10.1080/00131881.2016.1184949 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
61.Bortes C, Ragnarsson S, Strandh M, Petersen S. The Bidirectional Relationship Between Subjective Well-Being and Academic Achievement in Adolescence. Journal of youth and adolescence. 2021; 50(5):992–1002. doi: 10.1007/s10964-021-01413-3 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
62.Glew GM, Fan MY, Katon W, Rivara FP, Kernic MA. Bullying, Psychosocial Adjustment, and Academic Performance in Elementary School. Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine. 2005; 159(11):1026–31. doi: 10.1001/archpedi.159.11.1026 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
63.van Lier PAC, Koot HM. Developmental cascades of peer relations and symptoms of externalizing and internalizing problems from kindergarten to fourth-grade elementary school. Development and Psychopathology. 2010; 22(3):569–82. doi: 10.1017/S0954579410000283 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
64.Li MN, Shi HJ, Zhang Z, Guo JP, Xu XE. Impact of classroom climate on school bullying behavior among high grade students of migrant elementary school. Chinese Journal of School Health. 2015; 36(2):194–7. doi: 10.16835/j.cnki.1000-9817.2015.02.012 [DOI] [Google Scholar]

PLoS One. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0290452.r001

Decision Letter 0

Gianpiero Greco

29 Jun 2023

PONE-D-23-06364The Healthy Context Paradox of Adolescent Bullying Victimization and Academic Adjustment: A Moderated Mediation ModelPLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Gan,

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS ONE. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS ONE’s publication criteria as it currently stands. Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that addresses the points raised during the review process.

Please submit your revised manuscript by Aug 13 2023 11:59PM. If you will need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at plosone@plos.org. When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.

Please include the following items when submitting your revised manuscript:

A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the academic editor and reviewer(s). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.
A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.
An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Manuscript'.

If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter. Guidelines for resubmitting your figure files are available below the reviewer comments at the end of this letter.

If applicable, we recommend that you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io to enhance the reproducibility of your results. Protocols.io assigns your protocol its own identifier (DOI) so that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols. Additionally, PLOS ONE offers an option for publishing peer-reviewed Lab Protocol articles, which describe protocols hosted on protocols.io. Read more information on sharing protocols at https://plos.org/protocols?utm_medium=editorial-email&utm_source=authorletters&utm_campaign=protocols.

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Gianpiero Greco

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Journal Requirements:

When submitting your revision, we need you to address these additional requirements.

1. Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming. The PLOS ONE style templates can be found at

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=wjVg/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_main_body.pdf and

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=ba62/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_title_authors_affiliations.pdf

2. Please provide additional details regarding participant consent. In the ethics statement in the Methods and online submission information, please ensure that you have specified what type you obtained (for instance, written or verbal, and if verbal, how it was documented and witnessed). If your study included minors, state whether you obtained consent from parents or guardians. If the need for consent was waived by the ethics committee, please include this information.

3. We note that the grant information you provided in the ‘Funding Information’ and ‘Financial Disclosure’ sections do not match.

When you resubmit, please ensure that you provide the correct grant numbers for the awards you received for your study in the ‘Funding Information’ section.

4. Thank you for stating the following in the Acknowledgments Section of your manuscript:

This research was supported by Youth project of Science and Technology Research Plan of Department of Education of Hubei Province in 2020 (Q20201306), the Social Science Fund Project of Yangtze University in 2022 (2022), the Faculty Scientific Fund Project of the College of Education and Sports Sciences of Yangtze University in 2022 (2022JTB01), and the key projects of education science plan of Hubei Province in 2022: Study on the influencing factors and intervention mechanism of non-suicidal self-injurious behaviors in adolescents (2022GA030).

We note that you have provided funding information that is not currently declared in your Funding Statement. However, funding information should not appear in the Acknowledgments section or other areas of your manuscript. We will only publish funding information present in the Funding Statement section of the online submission form.

Please remove any funding-related text from the manuscript and let us know how you would like to update your Funding Statement. Currently, your Funding Statement reads as follows:

The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

Please include your amended statements within your cover letter; we will change the online submission form on your behalf.

Additional Editor Comments:

Dear authors,

please reply point by point to the reviewers' comments.

[Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.]

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Partly

Reviewer #2: No

**********

2. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: No

**********

3. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

4. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: No

**********

5. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: Comments to authors:

I am pleased to receive the invitation to review this paper entitled " The Healthy Context Paradox of Adolescent Bullying Victimization and Academic Adjustment: A Moderated Mediation Model", which explores the relationship between bullying victimization and academic adjustment, as well as the mediating effects of subjective well-being and the moderating role of classroom-level victimization. My comments are as follows:

Introduction

(1) It would help if the author provides more theoretical and empirical base for the debate of “Healthy Context Paradox”.

Methods and results

(2) The authors should give more detailed information about their random cluster sampling process.

(3) The measures used in the study suffer from several drawbacks. The most important one is that it is unclear whether the classroom-level victimization variable is a class level measure or an individual level measure. It must be clarified at which level it has been measured and included in the model, and the modeling must adjust accordingly. In my view, the study could benefit from re-analysis using more appropriate and advanced statistical methods. The authors could have considered using multi-level models, also known as hierarchical linear models, to account for the potential issue of biased estimates or standard errors that can arise from traditional regression models.

(4) Bootstrap analysis could be helpful to test the mediating effect.

Discussion

(5) Please give more specific practical implications both on policy level and management level.

(6) In addition, there are some grammar errors in your manuscript. Please check it carefully.

Reviewer #2: Thank you for the opportunity to review the manuscript. Certainly, the topic is interesting, relevant and fits the contents of the magazine. I believe it has good potential and great practical relevance in the field of education. The origin of the students should be included in the title. The abstract defines conceptually different parts of the study and summarizing the content and objectives of the work, contains the required number of words and at least five keywords. Keywords refer to the most important variables or topics of the study. The justification explained in the manuscript is shallow, some references should be updated, and secondary citations are used. Occasionally, the writing is somewhat confusing (the information should be better organized, some ideas should be lightened, and the discourse should be coherent). The sample selection procedure should be better explained. The research hypotheses should be explained after stating the objectives. You should better explain the data analysis section and justify the statistics used. I consider that the practical relevance of the results found should be explained in greater depth, not simply describing them, but explaining their practical scope and justifying them according to previous empirical evidence. Sometimes a literal description of the results is made without a discussion of them. It would be important to include a section after the limitations that includes the main practical implications, in order to better organize the information of the work. I believe that it would also be interesting to include other variables that may be mediating the relationship between the variables. It would be interesting to explain the following statement in the text (page 19, lines 3-5): "This finding provided the first insight into the mechanisms underlying the healthy context paradox of bullying and academic adjustment, and shed light on how the classroom-level victimization affects the academic adjustment of victimized children”. On a formal level, the manuscript complies with the requirements of the Journal and references are written in accordance with the regulations of the Journal. It should indicate the exact location of tables and figures in the manuscript. You should revise some English expressions and phrases to make the text more coherent. The work is ambitious, and the results confirm most of the hypotheses and the relevance and potential of the work is therefore recognized, but this Reviewer considers that several changes are needed to the manuscript is publishable. In this sense, it should better explain the novelty and relevance of the work considering the previous empirical evidence and should better describe the practical implications, and the principal limitations. It should describe the discussion and conclusions of the work better and, above all, update the manuscript references (most should be from the last 5 years). Finally, I wish the Authors the best in continuing this line of research.

Best wishes for Authors.

**********

6. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: Yes: David Aparisi

**********

[NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files.]

While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/. PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email PLOS at figures@plos.org. Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step.

PLoS One. 2023 Aug 18;18(8):e0290452. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0290452.r002

Author response to Decision Letter 0

13 Jul 2023

Dear Editor and Reviewers:

Thank you for your letter and for the reviewers’ comments concerning our manuscript entitled “The Healthy Context Paradox of Bullying Victimization and Academic Adjustment Among Chinese Adolescents: A Moderated Mediation Model” [PONE-D-23-06364]. We are pleased to know that our work was rated as potentially acceptable for publication, subject to adequate revision. These comments are all valuable and very helpful for revising and refining our paper, as well as providing important guidance for our research. Based on your suggestion and request, we have carefully studied these comments and made corrections, which we hope will meet with your approval. We would also like to thank you for allowing us to resubmit a revised version of the manuscript. Revised sections are marked in red in the paper. Responses to the reviewer’s comments are as flowing:

Changes regarding financial disclosure:

The updated statement on financial disclosure is included in the cover letter, as detailed in the section marked in red.

Response to Journal Requirements:

1. Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming.

The author’s answer: In the revised version, we carefully examined the manuscript and made changes to the parts that did not meet the norms. First, for different levels of titles, we changed the format accordingly. See lines 13, 26, 41, 68, 95, 118, 139, 140, 152, 153, 159, 166, 170, 178, 184, 185, 190, 200, 235, 296, 344, 354. Second, we added the title to the manuscript and made sure it appeared directly after the paragraph in which they were first cited. See lines 212, 231-234. Third, we checked and revised the format of all references to ensure they were consistent and met the requirements of the journal. Finally, we have included the captions of the supporting information files at the end of the manuscript. See lines 521-522.

The author’s answer: Our study was approved by the Research Ethics Committee of the Psychology, College of Education and Sports Sciences, Yangtze University. During the study, we always maintain the important principles of voluntary participation and informed consent. Since the participants in the study were minors, we were informed in advance in order to obtain the consent of their parents or guardians. During the study, their informed consent was reflected by the return of the questionnaire. If either parent or the student does not agree to participate in this survey, the student does not be required to complete the questionnaire if he or she verbally states so. In the participants section, the specific details of obtaining informed consent have been added accordingly. See lines 144-147.

3. We note that the grant information you provided in the ‘Funding Information’ and ‘Financial Disclosure’ sections do not match.

When you resubmit, please ensure that you provide the correct grant numbers for the awards you received for your study in the ‘Funding Information’ section.

The author’s answer: Thanks for pointing this out. We submitted again with the correct version.

4. We note that you have provided funding information that is not currently declared in your Funding Statement. However, funding information should not appear in the Acknowledgments section or other areas of your manuscript. We will only publish funding information present in the Funding Statement section of the online submission form. Please remove any funding-related text from the manuscript and let us know how you would like to update your Funding Statement. Currently, your Funding Statement reads as follows: The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript. Please include your amended statements within your cover letter; we will change the online submission form on your behalf.

The author’s answer: We removed this information from the resubmitted manuscript. Our Funding Statement reads as follows:

Xiong Gan received fund. This research was supported by Youth project of Science and Technology Research Plan of Department of Education of Hubei Province in 2020 (Q20201306), the Social Science Fund Project of Yangtze University in 2022 (2022csz03), the Faculty Scientific Fund Project of the College of Education and Sports Sciences of Yangtze University in 2022 (2022JTB01), and the key projects of education science plan of Hubei Province in 2022: Study on the influencing factors and intervention mechanism of non-suicidal self-injurious behaviors in adolescents (2022GA030).

Response to Reviewer #1:

(1) It would help if the author provides more theoretical and empirical base for the debate of “Healthy Context Paradox”.

The author’s answer: We have elaborated more on the original manuscript. See lines 46-48, 52-55, 59-61, 81-87.

(2) The authors should give more detailed information about their random cluster sampling process.

The author’s answer: Thanks for your suggestion. We have described this in more detail. See lines140-142.

The author’s answer: Thank you very much for your review and valuable suggestions on our research measures. The measurement method you mentioned has some drawbacks, we fully agree with your point of view and have made corresponding explanations in the revised draft. See lines 168-169, 337-340. In our preliminary analysis, we attempted to use hierarchical linear models to construct model and analyze data. However, we found that the Intra-Class Correlation (ICC) indicator did not meet requirements, indicating lower than expected within-group correlation which affected our interpretation and modeling of victim variables at the classroom level. In addition, according to Peugh (2010), when the design effect of the sample is greater than 2, it is necessary to analyze the data using a multilevel model to avoid statistical bias. For some reason, the design effect for one of our variables did not reach 2, so on balance we did not use a multilevel linear model. It is possible that the data structure or the sample size caused these problems, so we recognize that this is a limitation of our statistical approach, and in the future research, we will consider collecting larger samples and ensuring good data structure to construct more appropriate models.

Peugh, J. L. (2010). A practical guide to multilevel modeling. Journal of School Psychology, 48(1), 85–112. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2009.09.002

(4) Bootstrap analysis could be helpful to test the mediating effect.

The author’s answer: Thank you for your suggestion. We have used bootstrap analysis in the process of analyzing the mediation effect. It may have been due to our oversight that we did not explicitly state it in the manuscript. We have now improved this part. See lines 206-211.

(5) Please give more specific practical implications both on policy level and management level.

The author’s answer: Thanks for your advice. We give additional and specific practical implications at both levels. See lines 314-319, 322-325.

(6) In addition, there are some grammar errors in your manuscript. Please check it carefully.

The author’s answer: Thanks for your careful review, we have checked and corrected it.

Response to Reviewer #2:

Thank you for the opportunity to review the manuscript. Certainly, the topic is interesting, relevant and fits the contents of the magazine. I believe it has good potential and great practical relevance in the field of education.

1. The origin of the students should be included in the title.

The author’s answer: Thank you for your advice. We have made a change to this. See lines 1-2.

2. The abstract defines conceptually different parts of the study and summarizing the content and objectives of the work, contains the required number of words and at least five keywords. Keywords refer to the most important variables or topics of the study.

The author’s answer: Thanks for your suggestion. We refined the abstract and keywords. See lines 14-25.

3. The justification explained in the manuscript is shallow, some references should be updated, and secondary citations are used.

The author’s answer: We provide additional explanations of the healthy environment paradox and update some of the references. See lines 46-48, 52-55, 59-61, 81-87.

4. Occasionally, the writing is somewhat confusing (the information should be better organized, some ideas should be lightened, and the discourse should be coherent).

The author’s answer: Thank you for your suggestions, we have scrutinized our manuscript and made some changes.

5. The sample selection procedure should be better explained.

The author’s answer: We made further clarifications. See lines 140-142, 144-147.

6. The research hypotheses should be explained after stating the objectives.

The author’s answer: We have explained accordingly in the research hypotheses section. See lines 125-127, 130-136.

7. You should better explain the data analysis section and justify the statistics used. I consider that the practical relevance of the results found should be explained in greater depth, not simply describing them, but explaining their practical scope and justifying them according to previous empirical evidence. Sometimes a literal description of the results is made without a discussion of them.

The author’s answer: We have revised the relevant sections to provide a more in-depth analysis and interpretation of the findings. See lines 193-194, 196-197, 206-211, 244, 301-303.

8. It would be important to include a section after the limitations that includes the main practical implications, in order to better organize the information of the work.

The author’s answer: Thanks for your advice. We have added some information about this. See lines 298-311, 314-319, 322-325.

9. I believe that it would also be interesting to include other variables that may be mediating the relationship between the variables.

The author’s answer: Thanks for your advice. We have provided some clarification on this. See lines 309-310.

10. It would be interesting to explain the following statement in the text (page 19, lines 3-5): "This finding provided the first insight into the mechanisms underlying the healthy context paradox of bullying and academic adjustment, and shed light on how the classroom-level victimization affects the academic adjustment of victimized children”.

The author’s answer: Thanks for your review. We have explained this further. See lines 290-295.

11. On a formal level, the manuscript complies with the requirements of the Journal and references are written in accordance with the regulations of the Journal. It should indicate the exact location of tables and figures in the manuscript.

The author’s answer: Thanks for the heads up. We've added the headings where the figure should be in. See lines 212, 231-234.

12. You should revise some English expressions and phrases to make the text more coherent.

The author’s answer: Thanks for the mention. We've double-checked the entire article and made changes accordingly.

13. The work is ambitious, and the results confirm most of the hypotheses and the relevance and potential of the work is therefore recognized, but this Reviewer considers that several changes are needed to the manuscript is publishable. In this sense, it should better explain the novelty and relevance of the work considering the previous empirical evidence and should better describe the practical implications, and the principal limitations.

The author’s answer: Thank you for taking the time to review our manuscript. We appreciate your valuable feedback and constructive comments. We have carefully considered your suggestions and have made the necessary revisions to address the concerns raised. See lines 298-311, 314-319, 322-325, 337-340.

14. It should describe the discussion and conclusions of the work better and, above all, update the manuscript references (most should be from the last 5 years). Finally, I wish the Authors the best in continuing this line of research.

The author’s answer: We sincerely appreciate your feedback and suggestions for improving the discussion and conclusions of our work. See lines 290-295, 345-352. We have made improvements to optimize the discussion and conclusion sections of our manuscript and replaced outdated references with more current and relevant sources.

In short, our original manuscript is relatively immature. Your suggestions have helped us clarify the variable relationships and illuminate the significance of the study. Also, your suggestions for certain misrepresentations were very timely. Based on your questions, we have carefully examined the entire text and added appropriate additions to the text where it is unclear, in order to improve it. These descriptions may not be what you asked for, but based on your suggestions, we think it is necessary after carefully combing through the article. We are grateful and will pay more attention in our future research. Thank you!

Thanks to the reviewer for their approval and suggestions, which helped us to improve the article, especially the description and explanation of the relationship between the variables. We tried our best to improve the manuscript and made some changes in the manuscript. These changes will not influence the framework of the paper. We appreciate for Editors and Reviewers warm work earnestly and hope that the correction will meet with approval.

Once again, thank you very much for your comments and suggestions.

Yours sincerely,

Xiong Gan

July 12, 2023

Department of Psychology, College of Education and Sports Sciences, Yangtze

University, Hubei, Jingzhou 434023, China

E-mail: 307180052@qq.com

Attachment

Submitted filename: renamed_0127e.docx

Click here for additional data file.^{(25.8KB, docx)}

PLoS One. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0290452.r003

Decision Letter 1

Gianpiero Greco

9 Aug 2023

The Healthy Context Paradox of Bullying Victimization and Academic Adjustment Among Chinese Adolescents: A Moderated Mediation Model

PONE-D-23-06364R1

Dear Dr. Gan,

We’re pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been judged scientifically suitable for publication and will be formally accepted for publication once it meets all outstanding technical requirements.

Within one week, you’ll receive an e-mail detailing the required amendments. When these have been addressed, you’ll receive a formal acceptance letter and your manuscript will be scheduled for publication.

An invoice for payment will follow shortly after the formal acceptance. To ensure an efficient process, please log into Editorial Manager at http://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/, click the 'Update My Information' link at the top of the page, and double check that your user information is up-to-date. If you have any billing related questions, please contact our Author Billing department directly at authorbilling@plos.org.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please notify them about your upcoming paper to help maximize its impact. If they’ll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team as soon as possible -- no later than 48 hours after receiving the formal acceptance. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information, please contact onepress@plos.org.

Kind regards,

Gianpiero Greco

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Additional Editor Comments (optional):

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. If the authors have adequately addressed your comments raised in a previous round of review and you feel that this manuscript is now acceptable for publication, you may indicate that here to bypass the “Comments to the Author” section, enter your conflict of interest statement in the “Confidential to Editor” section, and submit your "Accept" recommendation.

Reviewer #1: All comments have been addressed

Reviewer #2: All comments have been addressed

**********

2. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

3. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

4. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

5. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

6. Review Comments to the Author

Reviewer #1: (No Response)

Reviewer #2: Thank you for the opportunity to review the manuscript again.

Overall, the writing is clear, the goals are well described, well-considered introduction and the results properly made and presented. Therefore, the manuscript brings significant knowledge of the scientific literature so and still covers existing gaps in the field of Education. Therefore, my assessment is positive for the publication of this work, with a new suggestion.

Firstly, I would like to thank the efforts by the authors of the manuscript and congratulate them on the work. I recognize that they have considered almost all considerations of the Reviewers. Clearly, all the comments from Reviewers have contributed to a better quality of the manuscript. I have checked in the revised manuscript are corrected the most of errors found by the reviewers, both formally and content.

Secondly, I have verified that the information is presented in a clear and organized way in subtitles. It assumes good work with great potential.

Thirdly, in the Discussion section appears practical and educational implications and future directions correctly described. I have found the manuscript show a paragraph of study limitations. However, the conclusions section is somewhat concise. It is precisely a section to highlight the main practical implications of the study.

Fourthly, I have found that all the references are correctly written. The references are quite current, and all references comply with the Journal style.

Fifthly, I have verified that the format of the figures complies with the regulations of the Journal.

Finally, considering the changes made to the manuscript by the authors and the new suggestion, I consider that the manuscript can continue with the review process, considering the opinion and suggestions of other Reviewers.

Best wishes for Authors.

**********

7. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: No

**********

PLoS One. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0290452.r004

Acceptance letter

Gianpiero Greco

11 Aug 2023

PONE-D-23-06364R1

The Healthy Context Paradox of Bullying Victimization and Academic Adjustment Among Chinese Adolescents: A Moderated Mediation Model

Dear Dr. Gan:

I'm pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been deemed suitable for publication in PLOS ONE. Congratulations! Your manuscript is now with our production department.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please let them know about your upcoming paper now to help maximize its impact. If they'll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team within the next 48 hours. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information please contact onepress@plos.org.

If we can help with anything else, please email us at plosone@plos.org.

Thank you for submitting your work to PLOS ONE and supporting open access.

Kind regards,

PLOS ONE Editorial Office Staff

on behalf of

Dr. Gianpiero Greco

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Associated Data

This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

Supplementary Materials

S1 Dataset. Dataset used for analyses in present study.

(SAV)

Click here for additional data file.^{(111.3KB, sav)}

Attachment

Submitted filename: renamed_0127e.docx

Click here for additional data file.^{(25.8KB, docx)}

Data Availability Statement

All relevant data are within the paper and its Supporting information files.

[pone.0290452.ref001] 1.Olweus D. Aggression in the schools: Bullies and whipping boy. Hemisphere; 1978. pp. 4–10. doi: 10.1016/S0002-7138(09)60732-9 [DOI] [Google Scholar]

[pone.0290452.ref002] 2.Wu F, Luo XR, Yang MS, Liu QW, Liu XQ. Psychotic-like experiences between different roles of school bullying among junior school students. Chinese Mental Health Journal. 2022; 36(9):774–9. [Google Scholar]

[pone.0290452.ref003] 3.Raskauskas Juliana. Text-Bullying: Associations with traditional bullying and depression among New Zealand adolescents. Journal of School Violence. 2009; (1):74–97. doi: 10.1080/15388220903185605 [DOI] [Google Scholar]

[pone.0290452.ref004] 4.Tokunaga RS. Following you home from school: A critical review and synthesis of research on cyberbullying victimization. Computers in Human Behavior. 2010; 26(3):277–87. doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2009.11.014 [DOI] [Google Scholar]

[pone.0290452.ref005] 5.Cassidy W, Faucher C, Jackson M. Cyberbullying among youth: A comprehensive review of current international research and its implications and application to policy and practice. School Psychology International. 2013; 34(6):575–612. doi: 10.1177/0143034313479697 [DOI] [Google Scholar]

[pone.0290452.ref006] 6.Geoffroy MC, Arseneault L, Girard A, Ouellet-Morin I, Power C. Association of childhood bullying victimization with suicide deaths: findings from a 50-year nationwide cohort study. Psychological Medicine. 2022; 1–8. doi: 10.1017/S0033291722000836 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

[pone.0290452.ref007] 7.Bin P, Tengfei L, Linqin J, Sarah M, Wenxin Z, Christina S. Why Does Classroom-Level Victimization Moderate the Association Between Victimization and Depressive Symptoms? The "Healthy Context Paradox" and Two Explanations. Child development. 2021; 92(5):1836–54. doi: 10.1111/cdev.13624 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

[pone.0290452.ref008] 8.Garandeau CF, Lee IA, Salmivalli C. Decreases in the proportion of bullying victims in the classroom: Effects on the adjustment of remaining victims. International Journal of Behavioral Development. 2018; 42:64–72. doi: 10.1177/0165025416667492 [DOI] [Google Scholar]

[pone.0290452.ref009] 9.Huitsing G, Lodder GMA, Oldenburg B, Schacter HL, Salmivalli C, Juvonen J, et al. The healthy context paradox: Victims’ adjustment during an anti-bullying intervention. Journal of Child and Family Studies. 2019; 28:2499–2509. doi: 10.1007/s10826-018-1194-1 [DOI] [Google Scholar]

[pone.0290452.ref010] 10.Salmivalli C. (2018). Peer victimization and adjustment in young adulthood: Commentary on the special section. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology. 2018; 46:67–72. doi: 10.1007/s10802-017-0372-8 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

[pone.0290452.ref011] 11.Liu XW, Pan B, Chen L, Li TF, Ji LQ, Zhang WX. Healthy context paradox in the association between bullying victimization and externalizing problems: The mediating role of hostile attribution bias. Acta Psychologica Sinica. 2021; 53(2):170–181. [Google Scholar]

[pone.0290452.ref012] 12.Bellmore AD, Witkow MR, Graham S, Juvonen J. Beyond the individual: the impact of ethnic context and classroom behavioral norms on victims’ adjustment. Developmental Psychology. 2004; 40(6):1159–72. doi: 10.1037/0012-1649.40.6.1159 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

[pone.0290452.ref013] 13.Williford A, Boulton A, Noland B, Little TD, Kärnä A, Salmivalli C. Effects of the KiVa anti-bullying program on adolescents’ depression, anxiety, and perception of peers. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology. 2012; 40:289–300. doi: 10.1007/s10802-011-9551-1 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

[pone.0290452.ref014] 14.Bellmore AD, Witkow MR, Graham S, Juvonen J. Beyond the individual: The impact of ethnic context and classroom behavioral norms on victims’adjustment. Developmental Psychology. 2004; 40:1159–1172. doi: 10.1037/0012-1649.40.6.1159 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

[pone.0290452.ref015] 15.Huitsing G, Veenstra R, Sainio M, Salmivalli C. “It must be me” or “It could be them?”: The impact of the social network position of bullies and victims on victims’ adjustment. Social Networks. 2012; 34(4):379–86. doi: 10.1016/j.socnet.2010.07.002 [DOI] [Google Scholar]

[pone.0290452.ref016] 16.Gini G, Holt, Pozzoli T, Marino. Peer victimization and somatic problems: The role of class victimization levels. Journal of School Health. 2020; 90(1):39–46. doi: 10.1111/josh.12844 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

[pone.0290452.ref017] 17.Garandeau CF, Salmivalli C. Can healthier contexts be harmful? A new perspective on the plight of victims of bullying. Child Development Perspectives. 2019; 13(3):147–52. doi: 10.1111/cdep.12331 [DOI] [Google Scholar]

[pone.0290452.ref018] 18.Feng TY, Li H. (2002). Primary Research about Study Adaptation of Undergraduate. Exploration of Psychology. 2002; 22(81):44–8. [Google Scholar]

[pone.0290452.ref019] 19.Nie YG, Yang A, Zeng MX. The Relationship among Adolescents’ Meta-cognition, Big Five Personality and Academic Adaptive Behavior. Psychological Development and Education. 2011; 27(2):151–7. doi: 10.16187/j.cnki.issn1001-4918.2011.02.011 [DOI] [Google Scholar]

[pone.0290452.ref020] 20.Birch SH, Ladd GW. Interpersonal relationships in the school environment and children’s early school adjustment: The role of teachers and peers. Social motivation: Understanding children’s school adjustment. 1996; 15:199–225. doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511571190.011 [DOI] [Google Scholar]

[pone.0290452.ref021] 21.Raza SA, Qazi W, Yousufi SQ. The influence of psychological, motivational, and behavioral factors on university students’ achievements: the mediating effect of academic adjustment. Journal of Applied Research in Higher Education. 2021; 13(3):849–70. doi: 10.1108/JARHE-03-2020-0065 [DOI] [Google Scholar]

[pone.0290452.ref022] 22.Casper DM, Card NA. Overt and relational victimization: A meta-analytic review of their overlap and associations with social-psychological adjustment. Child Development. 2017; 88(2):466–83. doi: 10.1111/cdev.12621 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

[pone.0290452.ref023] 23.Rudolph KD, Lansford JE, Agoston AM, Sugimura N, Schwartz D, Dodge KA, et al. Peer victimization and social alienation: Predicting deviant peer affiliation in middle school. Child Development. 2014; 85(1):124–39. doi: 10.1111/cdev.12112 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

[pone.0290452.ref024] 24.Garandeau CF, Lee IA, Salmivalli C. Decreases in the proportion of bullying victims in the classroom: Effectson the adjustment of remaining victims. International Journal of Behavioral Development. 2018; 42:64–72. doi: 10.1177/0165025416667492 [DOI] [Google Scholar]

[pone.0290452.ref025] 25.Wright JC, Giammarino M, Parad HW. Social status in small groups: Individual–group similarity and the social "misfit". Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 1986; 50(3):523–36. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.50.3.523 [DOI] [Google Scholar]

[pone.0290452.ref026] 26.Sentse M, Scholte R, Salmivalli C, Voeten M. Person-group dissimilarity in involvement in bullying and its relation with social status. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology. 2007; 35(6):1009–19. doi: 10.1007/s10802-007-9150-3 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

[pone.0290452.ref027] 27.Emmons RA, Diener E. Personality Correlates of Subjective Well-Being. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. 1985; 11(1):89–97. doi: 10.1177/0146167285111008 [DOI] [Google Scholar]

[pone.0290452.ref028] 28.Kowalski RM, Giumetti GW, Schroeder AN, Lattanner MR. Bullying in the digital age: a critical review and meta-analysis of cyberbullying research among youth. Psychological Bulletin. 2012; 140(4):1073–137. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

[pone.0290452.ref029] 29.Wei CZ, Liu WL. The Association between School Bullying and Mental Health of Sexual Minority Students. Chinese Journal of Clinical Psychology. 2015; 23(4):701–5. [Google Scholar]

[pone.0290452.ref030] 30.Fantaguzzi C, Allen E, Miners A, Christie D, Opondo C, Sadique Z, et al. Health-related quality of life associated with bullying and aggression: A cross-sectional study in English secondary schools. The European journal of health economics. 2018; 19(5):641–51. doi: 10.1007/s10198-017-0908-4 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

[pone.0290452.ref031] 31.Guo MJ. The impact of school bullying on the mental health of junior high school students: the multiple mediating effects of optimism, self-esteem and coping styles (Master). 2019; Guangzhou University, Guangzhou.

[pone.0290452.ref032] 32.Tiliouine H. School bullying victimization and subjective well-being in Algeria. Child Indicators Research. 2015; 8(1):133–50. [Google Scholar]

[pone.0290452.ref033] 33.Salmivalli C. Bullying and the peer group: A review. Aggression and violent behavior. 2010; 15(2):112–20. [Google Scholar]

[pone.0290452.ref034] 34.Arslan G, Allen KA, Tanhan A. School bullying, mental health, and wellbeing in adolescents: Mediating impact of positive psychological orientations. Child Indicators Research. 2021; 14(3):1007–26. [Google Scholar]

[pone.0290452.ref035] 35.Choi J. Sustainable behavior: Study engagement and happiness among university students in South Korea. Sustainability. 2016; 8(7):599–610. doi: 10.3390/su8070599 [DOI] [Google Scholar]

[pone.0290452.ref036] 36.Hu F, Ma YH, Zhuang LL, Lv XJ, Li R. Subjective well-being and influence factors among middle school students. Chinese Journal of School Health. 2011; 32(5):576–9. doi: 10.16835/j.cnki.1000-9817.2011.05.029 [DOI] [Google Scholar]

[pone.0290452.ref037] 37.Salmela-Aro K, Tuominen-Soini H. Adolescents’ Life Satisfaction During the Transition to Post-Comprehensive Education: Antecedents and Consequences. Journal of Happiness Studies. 2010; 11(6):683–701. doi: 10.1007/s10902-009-9156-3 [DOI] [Google Scholar]

[pone.0290452.ref038] 38.Chu XY, Zeng P, Xu Q, Zhao XY, Lei L. The Association between Friend Support and Well–Being for Undergraduates: The Mediating Role of Self-Efficacy and Moderating Role of Social Comparison Orientation. Journal of Psychological Science. 2021; 44(2):426–32 [Google Scholar]

[pone.0290452.ref039] 39.Ma ZW, Zeng WN, Ye KY. Gender differences in Chinese adolescents’ subjective well-being: The mediating role of self-efficacy. Psychological Reports. 2015; 116(1):311–21. doi: 10.2466/17.07.PR0.116k15w2 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

[pone.0290452.ref040] 40.Calaguas GM. Academic achievement and academic adjustment difficulties among college freshmen. Researchers World Journal of Arts Science & Commerce. 2011; 2(3):72–6. [Google Scholar]

[pone.0290452.ref041] 41.Wang W, Lei L, Wang XC. The Relationship of College Students’ Proactive Personality and Academic Performance: The Mediating Roles of Academic Self-efficacy and Academic Adjustment. Psychological Development and Education. 2016; 32(5):579–86. [Google Scholar]

[pone.0290452.ref042] 42.Zhang WX, Wu JF, Jones Kevin. Revision of the Chinese version of the Olweus Child Bullying Questionnaire. Psychological Development and Education. 1999; 15(2):7–11. [Google Scholar]

[pone.0290452.ref043] 43.Campbell Angus. Subjective Measures of Well-Being. American Psychologist. 1976; 31(2):117–24. doi: 10.1037//0003-066x.31.2.117 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

[pone.0290452.ref044] 44.Schacter HL, Juvonen J. The effects of school-level victimization on self-blame: Evidence for contextualized social cognitions. Developmental Psychology. 2015; 51(6):841–7. doi: 10.1037/dev0000016 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

[pone.0290452.ref045] 45.Podsakoff PM, MacKenzie SB, Podsakoff NP. Sources of Method Bias in Social Science Research and Recommendations on How to Control It. Annual review of psychology. 2012; 63(1):539–69. doi: 10.1146/annurev-psych-120710-100452 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

[pone.0290452.ref046] 46.Lei L, Wang Y, Guo BL, Chang L. The influence of classroom norms on the relations between social behaviors and peer victimization. Acta Psychologica Sinica. 2004; 36(5):563–7. [Google Scholar]

[pone.0290452.ref047] 47.Yun HY, Juvonen J. Navigating the healthy context paradox: Identifying classroom characteristics that improve the psychological adjustment of bullying victims. Journal of Youth and Adolescence. 2020; 49(11):2203–13. doi: 10.1007/s10964-020-01300-3 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

[pone.0290452.ref048] 48.Brendgen M, Vitaro F, Barker ED, Girard A, Dionne G, Tremblay RE, et al. Do other people’s plights matter? A genetically informed twin study of the role of social context in the link between peer victimization and children’s aggression and depression symptoms. Developmental Psychology. 2013; 49(2):327–40. doi: 10.1037/a0025665 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

[pone.0290452.ref049] 49.Gerber JP, Wheeler L, Suls J. A social comparison theory meta-analysis 60+ years on. Psychological Bulletin. 2018; 144(2):177–97. doi: 10.1037/bul0000127 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

[pone.0290452.ref050] 50.Edwards JR, Caplan RD, Van Harrison R. Person-environment fit theory. Theories of organizational stress. 1998; 28(1):67–94. [Google Scholar]

[pone.0290452.ref051] 51.Goldweber A, Waasdorp TE, Bradshaw CP. Examining the link between forms of bullying behaviors and perceptions of safety and belonging among secondary school students. Journal of School Psychology. 2013; 51(4):469–85. doi: 10.1016/j.jsp.2013.04.004 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

[pone.0290452.ref052] 52.Osterman KF. Teacher Practice and Students’ Sense of Belonging. In Lovat T., Toomey R., Clement N. (Eds.). International Research Handbook on Values Education and Student Wellbeing. Springer; Netherlands; 2010. pp. 239–260. doi: 10.1007/978-90-481-8675-4_15 [DOI] [Google Scholar]

[pone.0290452.ref053] 53.Tafel H, Turner JC. The social identity theory of intergroup behavior. In: Worchel S, Austin W(Eds.). Psychology of Intergroup Relations. Chicago: Nelson Hall; 1986. pp. 7–24. [Google Scholar]

[pone.0290452.ref054] 54.Bailey TH, Phillips LJ. The influence of motivation and adaptation on students’ subjective well-being, meaning in life and academic performance. Higher Education Research & Development. 2016; 35(2):201–16. doi: 10.1080/07294360.2015.1087474 [DOI] [Google Scholar]

[pone.0290452.ref055] 55.Datu JAD, King RB. Subjective well-being is reciprocally associated with academic engagement: A two-wave longitudinal study. Journal of School Psychology. 2018; 69:100–10. doi: 10.1016/j.jsp.2018.05.007 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

[pone.0290452.ref056] 56.Liu S, Wang M, Fu C. Maternal academic involvement and adolescents’ subjective well-being: The mediating role of adolescents’ academic adjustment in China. Children and Youth Services Review. 2021; 128:106154. doi: 10.1016/j.childyouth.2021.106154 [DOI] [Google Scholar]

[pone.0290452.ref057] 57.Kong QP, Yao PY. The students’ subjective well-being has important value of education: the theory of well-being research review in recent years. Global Education. 2013; 42(11):39–45. [Google Scholar]

[pone.0290452.ref058] 58.Xu H. The impact of positive emotion on college students’ learning resilience. Journal of Higher Education. 2015; 36(3):74–7. [Google Scholar]

[pone.0290452.ref059] 59.Mega C, Ronconi L, De Beni R. What makes a good student? How emotions, self-regulated learning, and motivation contribute to academic achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology. 2014; 106(1):121–31. doi: 10.1037/a0033546 [DOI] [Google Scholar]

[pone.0290452.ref060] 60.van der Ploeg R, Steglich C, Veenstra R. The support group approach in the Dutch KiVa anti-bullying programme: Effects on victimization, defending and well-being at school. Educational Research. 2016; 58:221–236. doi: 10.1080/00131881.2016.1184949 [DOI] [Google Scholar]

[pone.0290452.ref061] 61.Bortes C, Ragnarsson S, Strandh M, Petersen S. The Bidirectional Relationship Between Subjective Well-Being and Academic Achievement in Adolescence. Journal of youth and adolescence. 2021; 50(5):992–1002. doi: 10.1007/s10964-021-01413-3 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

[pone.0290452.ref062] 62.Glew GM, Fan MY, Katon W, Rivara FP, Kernic MA. Bullying, Psychosocial Adjustment, and Academic Performance in Elementary School. Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine. 2005; 159(11):1026–31. doi: 10.1001/archpedi.159.11.1026 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

[pone.0290452.ref063] 63.van Lier PAC, Koot HM. Developmental cascades of peer relations and symptoms of externalizing and internalizing problems from kindergarten to fourth-grade elementary school. Development and Psychopathology. 2010; 22(3):569–82. doi: 10.1017/S0954579410000283 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

[pone.0290452.ref064] 64.Li MN, Shi HJ, Zhang Z, Guo JP, Xu XE. Impact of classroom climate on school bullying behavior among high grade students of migrant elementary school. Chinese Journal of School Health. 2015; 36(2):194–7. doi: 10.16835/j.cnki.1000-9817.2015.02.012 [DOI] [Google Scholar]

PERMALINK

The healthy context paradox of bullying victimization and academic adjustment among Chinese adolescents: A moderated mediation model

Yongqi Huang

Xiong Gan

Xin Jin

Zixu Wei

Youhan Cao

Hanzhe Ke

Roles

Abstract

1. Introduction

1.1. Healthy context paradox

1.2. Bully victimization and academic adjustment

1.3. Mediating role of subjective well-being

1.4. The present study

2. Method

2.1. Participants and procedure

2.2. Measures

2.2.1. Bullying victimization

2.2.2. Subjective well-being

2.2.3. Classroom-level victimization

2.2.4. Academic adjustment

2.3. Data analysis

3. Results

3.1. Common method bias analyses

3.2. Descriptive statistics and correlation analyses

Table 1. Descriptive statistics and correlations of individual (Level 1) and classroom-level (Level 2) variables.

3.3. Mediation effect and moderation effect analyses

Fig 1. Test of the moderated mediation model.

Fig 2. Moderating effect of classroom-level victimization in the relationship between bullying victimization and academic adjustment.

Fig 3. Moderating effect of classroom-level victimization in the relationship between bullying victimization and subjective well-being.

4. Discussion

5. Implications, limitations and future directions

6. Conclusion

Supporting information

Data Availability

Funding Statement

References

Decision Letter 0

Gianpiero Greco

Roles

Author response to Decision Letter 0

Decision Letter 1

Gianpiero Greco

Roles

Acceptance letter

Gianpiero Greco

Roles

Associated Data

Supplementary Materials

Data Availability Statement

ACTIONS

PERMALINK

RESOURCES

Similar articles

Cited by other articles

Links to NCBI Databases