







































 

 

 

 

 

Influences of Teachers, Students and School 

Climate on Bullying Victimization: 

Evidence from China

Ying Zhu,
1,3 

 Yiying Teng
2,3

 

 
1. Shanghai Sanda University, Shanghai, China  

2. Shanghai Zhongqiao Vocational and Technical University, Shanghai, 

China;  

3. Chapman University, California, USA

Abstract: Given the common occurrence of school bullying incidents and 
high prevalence rates of victimization in China, this study aims to 

explore the association between multiple school-related predictors and 

Chinese adolescents’ overall experiences with bullying victimization. 
Guided by the social-ecological framework for violence prevention, this 

study integrated different factors involving teachers, students, and 
school climate into one single research to detect the bullying problem 

more systematically and holistically. Further, the study applied the data 

from the 2018 Program for International Student Assessment while 
utilizing binary logistic regression analyses to perceive anti-bullying 

variables and their relationships with bullying victimization. The study 

revealed that teachers’ emotional, instrumental, and informational 
support other than appraisal support were negatively associated with 

students’ experiences of being bullied and victimized. The research also 
indicated that students’ sense of belonging, a cooperative school 

environment, and classroom disciplinary climate played a buffering role 

in bullying victimization while competition in school settings adversely 
increased overall bullying exposure. The results have highlighted the 

integration of various predictors in influencing multiple social relations 

and school environments to battle against in-person bullying. The results 
also have implications for stopping cyberbullying to achieve inclusive 

school education for all in the post-COVID-19 era. 

Best Evidence in Chinese Education 2022; 12(1):1547-1571. 

Doi: 10.15354/bece.22.or065 

How to Cite: Zhu, Y., & Teng, Y. (2022). Influences of teachers, students and school 

climate on bullying victimization: Evidence from China. Best Evidence in Chinese 



Zhu & Teng. (Shanghai & California). School Bullying Victimization in China. 

BECE, Vol.12, No.1, 2022 1548 

Education, 12(1):1547-1571. 

Keywords: Bullying Victimization, Classroom Disciplinary Climate, Cooperation and 

Competition, Sense of Belonging, Teacher Support 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 
 

About the Authors: Ying Zhu, Shanghai Sanda University, Shanghai, China; and Chapman University, California, 

USA. E-mail: yinzhu@chapman.edu 

Correspondence to: Yiying Teng, Shanghai Zhongqiao Vocational and Technical University, Shanghai, China; and 

Chapman University, California, USA. E-mail: yiteng@chapman.edu 

Author Contribution: Zhu and Teng contributed equally to the design, draft, critical revision, and final agreement 

of the present article to be published. 

Conflict of Interests: None. 
 

© 2022 Insights Publisher. All rights reserved. 

Creative Commons Non Commercial CC BY-NC: This article is distributed under the terms of the 

Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial 4.0 License 

(http://www.creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) which permits non-commercial use, reproduction and distribution of 

the work without further permission provided the original work is attributed by the Insights Publisher. 

mailto:yinzhu@chapman.edu
mailto:yiteng@chapman.edu
http://www.creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/


Zhu & Teng. (Shanghai & California). School Bullying Victimization in China. 

BECE, Vol.12, No. 1, 2022 1549 

HE significance of bullying prevention and intervention has been well 

addressed in a series of initiatives taken by the Chinese government, 

including The Guidance on the Prevention and Treatment of Bullying 

and School Violence in 2016, Comprehensive Plan on Strengthening the 

Management of Bullying among Primary and Middle School Students in 

2017, and the newly revised Minor Protection Law that took effect in 2021. 

However, school bullying still topped the agenda of this year’s two plenary 

sessions of China’s political bodies (2022 two sessions) and incidents of bul-

lying victimization are often reported in media outlets. In one case, a teenag-

er in Guangdong Province drowned after being slapped and knocked by 

peers in a restroom (Zuo, 2021); in another case, an adolescent from Anhui 

Province suffered from being bullied by a group of 12 schoolmates (China 

National Radio [CNR], 2022). These single incidents are just a tip of the ice-

berg and in fact, more instances of school bullying have surfaced with vic-

timization constituting a major source of injuries (Li et al., 2020). Statistics 

from a national survey led by Central China Normal University has revealed 

that the proportion of students who had bullying experiences in 2019 and 

2020 amounted to 32.4 percent (Zhao, 2021). Worse still, when classes were 

moved online due to the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic, cyberbullying 

(a form of bullying using the Internet) still persisted in China (Han et al., 

2021). That is why legislators and deputies at the 2022 two sessions called 

on schools and communities to speed up the process of building a bullying-

free, equitable, and inclusive campus for all. To achieve this goal, it is im-

perative for Chinese researchers and educators to identify intervention pre-

dictors pertaining to school violence and bullying victimization and work out 

detailed plans to reduce the incidence of bullying behaviors. 

As for the factors predicting bullying victimization, teachers, students 

and school climate are generally regarded as three major components for as-

sessing an engaging or a horrifying learning experience (e.g., Ahnert et al., 

2012; Maxwell et al., 2017). Among them, teacher support (Flaspohler et al., 

2009; Huang & Zhao, 2019), a fundamental need to belong (Underwood & 

Ehrenreich, 2014), a socially cooperative environment (Van Ryzin & Roseth, 

2018a), and benign competition in one’s immediate settings (Volk et al., 

2015) have been respectively evidenced in previous bullying literature. De-

rived from classroom settings, management style or disciplinary climate is 

more associated with students’ academic achievement (Sortkær & Reimer, 

2018), but seldom mentioned to be directly linked to school bullying. Further, 

researchers’ renewed attention to the fundamental relationships involving 

teachers, students, classroom settings, and school cultures could help to ex-

plain cyberbullying patterns during the COVID-19 pandemic (Vaillancourt 

T 



Zhu & Teng. (Shanghai & California). School Bullying Victimization in China. 

BECE, Vol.12, No. 1, 2022 1550 

et al., 2021). But in the Chinese context, little has been known about the 

multiple school-related factors that jointly work on anti-bullying endeavors. 

Therefore, this empirical study aims to explore the association between the 

different facets of school learning and Chinese students’ overall experiences 

with bullying victimization while controlling for such demographics as gen-

der, age, student backgrounds, and grade repetition. Three overarching re-

search questions have guided this exploration. 

(i) How much variance in overall bullying experience is explained by 

school-related factors and demographics? 

(ii) Do school-related predictors have associations with high or low fre-

quencies of bullying experiences? 

(iii)What intervention factors predict the likelihood of Chinese students’ high 

or low exposure to bullying victimization? 

Literature Review 

Theoretical Framework 

Guided by the social-ecological framework for violence prevention (CDC, 

2004), this study addresses the complex interplay between individual, rela-

tionship, community, and societal factors in relation to bullying and bullying 

victimization. Originating from Bronfenbrenner’s (1979) social-ecological 

model (SEM), this updated framework offers an ecological angle to “investi-

gate the combined impact of social contexts and influences on behavioral 

development” (Swearer et al., 2010, p. 42). 

As Figure 1 shows, a range of factors work to alert people to the 

possible risks for experiencing or perpetrating violence while the overlap-

ping circles indicate how one level of factors influences another and how 

different levels of factors coexist to function on the entire model. At the in-

dividual level, prevention strategies may involve personal attitudes, beliefs, 

or behaviors that prevent or stop violence. At relationship and community 

levels, a person’s close connection to family members and active interaction 

with schools/workplaces/ neighborhoods may provide a pathway for risk re-

duction and violence prevention, including teacher-student interaction, posi-

tive peer relations, and reliable school/work environments. The final level 

(societal factors) features social and cultural norms that encourage or hamper 

violence. The following sections briefly introduce the variables that fall 

within this framework, which will form the basis of the bullying model to be 

tested in our empirical study and help to understand anti-bullying efforts 

over time and beyond human-level impact. 



Zhu & Teng. (Shanghai & California). School Bullying Victimization in China. 

BECE, Vol.12, No. 1, 2022 1551 

 

Figure 1: Social-Ecological Model - A Framework for Prevention. 
Note: Adapted from Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (p.5), 2004, CDC. 

 

 

 

 

Teacher Support 

Students’ healthy development cannot be sustained without the involvement 

of teachers, who provide support for, build trust in, and form close interper-

sonal relationships with students (e.g., Hughes et al., 2012; Quin et al., 2018; 

Ryan & Patrick, 2001; Wentzel et al., 2010). Moreover, such teacher-student 

relationships seem more collaborative rather than hierarchical (Schleicher, 

2018). Tardy (1985) pointed out that teacher support as a form of social sup-

port was composed of four categories, namely emotional, instrumental, ap-

praisal, and informational support. Emotional support is the type of teacher 

support that reflects love, concern, empathy, confidence, and patience; in-

strumental support refers to the substantial help passed on to the students in 

real need; appraisal support could be interpreted as the constructive feedback 

and appropriate evaluation system offered for students who will then know 

where and how to improve their learning behaviors; informational support is 

viewed as instruction, guidance, assistance, and counselling provided to help 

with students’ problem-solving (Wentzel, 2016). 



Zhu & Teng. (Shanghai & California). School Bullying Victimization in China. 

BECE, Vol.12, No. 1, 2022 1552 

Previous literature has revealed that teacher support positively corre-

lates with students’ emotional and cognitive development (Quin, 2016; Quin 

et al., 2018) as well as with their interest in classroom activities (Lapointe et 

al., 2005) and their academic enjoyment (Ahmed et al., 2010; Ma et al., 

2021). Despite much attention devoted to the connection between teacher 

support and academic performance, scholars have begun to realize the im-

portance of anti-bullying efforts in the presence of teachers. Furlong and 

Chung (1995) early indicated in their empirical research that those non-

victims are almost twice as likely as bullying victims to report the presence 

of a teacher to whom they can express their problems and pour out their feel-

ings; other studies (e.g., Baik et al., 2019; Colarossi & Eccles, 2003; Mazzer 

& Rickwood, 2015) then emphasized the close relationship between teacher 

influences and students’ well-being, which could further determine students’ 

sense of security, problem behavior and victimization experience (Berkowitz 

& Benbenishty, 2012; McNeely & Falci, 2004). Besides, through analyzing 

the index of informational support, Huang and Zhao (2019) implied that 

teacher support could slightly mitigate bullying exposure, but they did not 

discuss the remaining three categories. Hence in this study, all four types of 

teacher support will be examined in relation to bullying victimization in 

China. 

Students’ Sense of Belonging 

In educational settings, belonging is identified as the feeling of security, ac-

ceptance and inclusion a student connects to peers, teachers, and the school 

(Goodenow, 1993). Research shows that students’ sense of belonging is 

closely linked to academic achievement (Wang & Eccles, 2012; Wang & 

Holcombe, 2010) and psychological adjustment (Lester et al., 2013; Loukas 

et al., 2016), and has sparked renewed concern for educators as a result of a 

high prevalence of bullying exposure (Duggins et al., 2016; Ma, 2003). Pre-

vious studies have suggested that the stronger a sense of belonging students 

have, the lower the level of bullying perpetration and victimization occurs 

(Goldweber et al., 2013; Raskauskas et al., 2010). Accordingly, we hypothe-

size that students’ sense of belonging might play a buffering role in bullying 

victimization while influencing multiple relationships and different commu-

nities. 

Classroom Disciplinary Climate 

A major component of a positive classroom environment, disciplinary cli-

mate is provided when students listen to their teachers and peers attentively 

and focus only on their academic tasks without the interference of noise or 



Zhu & Teng. (Shanghai & California). School Bullying Victimization in China. 

BECE, Vol.12, No. 1, 2022 1553 

disorder (Moos, 1979). Three key elements characterize the variable: stu-

dents’ reverence for classroom rules as always, teachers’ utmost responsibil-

ity for ensuring a favorable learning environment, and peers’ disruptive-free 

behavior in the classroom (Cheema & Kitsantas, 2014; Matsumura et al., 

2008). A positive disciplinary classroom secures more teaching and learning 

opportunities (Mostafa et al., 2018), better academic performance (Blank & 

Shavit, 2016), students’ psychological wellbeing (Kim et al., 2021; Wang et 

al., 2020), and the efforts against bullying involvement (e.g., victimization 

and witnessing) (Kim et al., 2021). Additionally, an orderly, nondisruptive 

classroom can also facilitate students’ sense of belonging (Organization for 

Economic Cooperation and Development [OECD], 2017) and benefit ethnic 

minorities and students in a disadvantaged position (Cheema & Kitsantas, 

2014). In this research, we hypothesize that classroom disciplinary climate 

might predict bullying victimization while influencing various social rela-

tions. 

Cooperation and Competition 

Skills of cooperation is nurtured in an educational setting where students 

learn together (usually in small groups) to fulfill well-structured learning 

tasks and accomplish a well-defined learning goal (Van Ryzin & Roseth, 

2019; Zook, 2018). If properly created, a cooperative learning environment 

brings about a high level of peer relatedness or peer relations (Roseth et al., 

2008; Van Ryzin & Roseth, 2018a), which in turn promotes the attainment 

of learning goals (Johnson et al., 2014) as well as encourages positive feel-

ings and supportive interactions. Ultimately, benign spiral emerges with the 

repetition of collaborative learning atmosphere and positive social interac-

tions within the group (Deutsch, 1949, 1962). After class, students still have 

the opportunity to enhance their favorable peer relations by relating each in-

dividual’s contribution to the performance of the entire group. This type of 

cooperation with an emphasis on social contact and skills benefits anti-

bullying behaviors and helps to reduce bullying victimization (Van Ryzin & 

Roseth, 2019). 

The opposite side of school learning is perceived as having a climate 

of competition, in which students compare one another or work against each 

other to obtain their academic or social benefits (e.g., excellent grades and 

admission to prestigious universities) (Johnson & Johnson, 1978; Volk et al., 

2015). Views differ as to whether competition should be fostered in the 

learning process. One perspective considers competition as being supported 

by in-group distinctions, social hierarchy, and socioeconomic backgrounds 

and hence linked to increased bullying (Volk et al., 2015); another opinion 



Zhu & Teng. (Shanghai & California). School Bullying Victimization in China. 

BECE, Vol.12, No. 1, 2022 1554 

identifies competition as a catalyst for student engagement and students’ 

competitive instincts (Anderson, 2006); a third perception regards competi-

tion as potentially feasible depending on different disciplines and education-

al levels (Chen & Chen, 2014; Vandercruysse et al., 2013). Whatever views 

prevail and whatever environmental attribute is outlined, students need to 

learn to create and bolster positive social relations while taking advantage of 

every factor in the learning community (e.g., teacher and peers) to achieve 

what is to be achieved (Johnson & Johnson, 1978; Gutiérrez-Braojos et al. 

2019). In this study, we hypothesize that both cooperation and competition 

might work together to influence school violence and bullying victimization 

while affecting different relationships and school environments. 

Study Design 

Previous bullying-related literature has identified that in both Chinese and 

non-Chinese contexts, gender, grade repetition (or the practice of having stu-

dents remain in the same grade without promotion), and economic, social 

and cultural status (ESCS) all closely correlate with bullying exposure and 

bullying victimization. Therefore, this study regards the above literature-

supported predictors as student-level control variables (as they might con-

found the bullying model) and centers the underlying mechanism of the as-

sociation between the fore mentioned school-related predictors and bullying 

victimization for Chinese adolescents. In line with the theoretical model and 

out of the urge to identify anti-bullying factors in the Chinese context, we 

proposed the following three hypotheses for the present study (see Figure 2). 

H1: Teacher support (at the relationship level) significantly influences 

bullying victimization at school. 

H1-1: Emotional support significantly influences bullying victimiza-

tion. 

H1-2: Instrumental support significantly influences bullying victimiza-

tion. 

H1-3: Appraisal support significantly influences bullying victimization. 

H1-4: Informational support significantly influences bullying victimi-

zation. 

H2: Students’ sense of belonging (at the community level) strongly 

predicts bullying victimization. 

H3: School climate (at the community level) greatly affects bullying 

victimization while influencing various social relations. 

H3-1: Classroom disciplinary climate strongly predicts bullying vic-

timization. 



Zhu & Teng. (Shanghai & California). School Bullying Victimization in China. 

BECE, Vol.12, No. 1, 2022 1555 

 

Figure 2: School-Related Predictors Hypothesized for Bulling Victimization. 

 

 

 

 

H3-2: Cooperation greatly influences bullying victimization. 

H3-3: Competition greatly influences bullying victimization. 

Methods 

Sample 

This study analyzed the publicly available dataset from the 2018 Program for 

International Student Assessment (PISA 2018) conducted by OECD in Chi-

na’s Beijing, Shanghai, Jiangsu, and Zhejiang provinces (B-S-J-Z, China). 

PISA, a triennial survey featuring 15-year-olds, measures to what extent they 

have obtained the critical knowledge and skills essential for active involve-

ment in society. PISA 2018 adopted a stratified two-stage sampling proce-

dure to select sample students. In the initial phase, schools were chosen 

through systematic probability proportional to size (PPS) sampling (OECD, 

2019c). In the subsequent phase, 42 students were selected with equal prob-

ability within each sampled school. For schools with a required number of 

students fewer than 42, all 15- year-olds were singled out (OECD, 2019c). 

Ultimately, 12,058 adolescents were selected from 361 schools, among 

which 4306 (35.7%) came from lower-secondary schools, 5594 (46.4%) 

from upper secondary schools, and 2158 (17.9%) from vocational schools. 

As stipulated by PISA’s international protocol (OECD, 2019b), PISA 2018 



Zhu & Teng. (Shanghai & California). School Bullying Victimization in China. 

BECE, Vol.12, No. 1, 2022 1556 

China data met the minimum requirements of the weighted response rate for 

selected schools within participating countries/regions (85%) and that for 

students from those selected schools (80%). Before data collection, informed 

consent was acquired from principals, teachers, parents, and students. The 

secondary data analyses of PISA 2018 would be crucial for this study as the 

large-scale survey through a careful sampling process reflected the real bul-

lying situation in Chinese schools. 

Dependent Variable 

The dependent variable in PISA 2018 was measured from the perspective of 

the bullying victims (OECD, 2019a) and assessed by asking students to re-

port how often they had experienced physical, verbal and social forms of 

school bullying during the past 12 months (see Table 1). Participants re-

sponded on a four-point Likert-type scale ranging from 1 = never or almost 

never to 4 = once a week or more. The corresponding items were then added 

up for the bullying scale with the internal consistency or reliability tested 

(Cronbach’s α = 0.843). 

Demographic Variables 

Included in the demographic variables were such student background predic-

tors as age, gender, grade repetition, and the ESCS index (see Table 2). Age, 

a continuous variable, spanned from 15.33 to 15.77 years old (mean = 15.77, 

SD = 0.29). Gender and grade repetition were all used as dummy variables 

with “0” for boys/no grade repetition and “1” for girls/grade repetition. The 

ESCS index, a weighted score rooted in PISA 2018, contained three family 

background variables, namely home possessions, parents’ highest education-

al levels, and their highest occupational status (OECD, 2019c). 

Independent Variables 

All the independent variables (teacher support, students’ sense of belonging, 

cooperation and competition, classroom disciplinary climate) in the study 

were directly derived from the PISA 2018 database (see Table 3). To ensure 

validity and reliability of the independent scales applied to this research, 

scaling procedures and construct validation of context questionnaire data 

were well documented in the dataset with the internal consistency 

(Cronbach’s alpha) all exceeding 0.800 (Cronbach’s α > 0.800) (OECD, 

2019c). 

Parallel with Tardy’s (1985) and Wentzel’s (2016) categorization of teacher 

support, this study applied four indices from PISA 2018: TEACHINT (rep- 



Zhu & Teng. (Shanghai & California). School Bullying Victimization in China. 

BECE, Vol.12, No. 1, 2022 1557 

Table 1: Dependent Variable: Bullying Scale. 

Bullying Scale: 

1 (never or almost never)  

to 

4 (once a week or more) 

1. Other students left me out of things on purpose. 

2. Other students made fun of me. 

3. I was threatened by other students. 

4. Other students took away or destroyed things that belonged to me. 

5. I got hit or pushed around by other students. 

6. Other students spread nasty rumors about me. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Table 3: Independent Variables and Scale Reliabilities. 

Teacher 
Support 

Emotional Support 
(TEACHINT) 
Cronbach’s α = 0.893 

It reflects teachers’ love, concern, enthusiasm, and encouragement 
for students. 

Instrumental Support 
(DIRINS) 
Cronbach’s α = 0.805 

It represents pedagogically tangible help (e.g., clear goals for learn-
ing, instructions, a short summary of the previous lesson, and check-
ing questions on whether teaching has been understood) in student 
learning. 

Appraisal Support 
(PERFEED) 
Cronbach’s α = 0.892 

It refers to the feedback on students’ strengths in a subject, the areas 
that should be improved, and how the areas can be improved. 

Informational Support 
(TEACHSUP) 
Cronbach’s α = 0.851 

It indicates guidance, assistance, and counseling provided to help 
students understand the subject. 

Sense of Belonging 
Cronbach’s α = 0.822 

It refers to students’ perceptions of community connectedness and 
school inclusion. 

School 
Climate 

Disciplinary Climate 
in the Test 
Language Classroom 
(DISCLIMA) 
Cronbach’s α = 0.892 

It measures order and discipline to be maintained in classroom set-
tings. 

Perception of 
Cooperation 
(PERCOOP) 
Cronbach’s α = 0.924 

It shows the environment where cooperation is addressed by stu-
dents in target schools. 

Perception of 
Competition 
(PERCOMP) 
Cronbach’s α = 0.829 

It refers to the environment where competitiveness is reported by 
students in target schools. 

Table 2: Descriptive Statistics for Demographic Variables. 

Continuous demographic variable(s) 
 Minimum Maximum Mean SD N 

Age (years) 15.33 16.25 15.77 0.29 12,058 

Categorical demographic variables 

 Variables Frequency %   

Gender 
Female 
Male 

5,775 
6,283 

47.9 
52.1 

  

Grade Repetition 
No 

Yes 

11,237 

753 

93.2 

6.8 
  



Zhu & Teng. (Shanghai & California). School Bullying Victimization in China. 

BECE, Vol.12, No. 1, 2022 1558 

resenting emotional support), DIRINS (indicating instrumental support), 

PERFEED (reflecting appraisal support), and TEACHSUP (pointing to in-

formational support). As for students’ sense of belonging, the index naturally 

derived from the PISA data examined how easy it was for students to make 

friends at school, how they were welcomed or accepted by peers, and how 

they felt isolated or asocial in their community (Goodenow, 1993). 

For school climate predictors in PISA 2018, disciplinary climate in 

the test language classroom (DISCLIMA), perception of cooperation 

(PERCOOP), and perception of competition (PERCOMP) were singled out 

for study. The disciplinary climate index described how orderly or disruptive 

the entire classroom environment appeared with higher values pertaining to 

positive climate appropriate for student learning and classroom communica-

tion. Meanwhile, the cooperation index asked respondents to assess if they 

value cooperation, collaborate with each other, and are encouraged to coop-

erate at school; the competition index required participants to report if they 

cherish competition and compete with each other in the school environment. 

Analytic Procedure 

Because the dependent variable (the bullying scale) was not normally dis-

tributed, we split it into a dummy one (high and low frequencies of being 

bullied or victimized) in response to the research questions. Low frequency 

means that participants never or almost never experienced the listed forms of 

bullying events while high frequency indicates that respondents experienced 

at least one of the listed bullying events a few times a year or more (see Ta-

ble 4). Further, inspired by previous logistic regression models used to un-

derstand Chinese students’ perceptions of and experiences with an educa-

tional phenomenon (Allen, 2019), we conducted the research developing a 

stepwise binary logit model (Pallant, 2016). Utilizing SPSS software Version 

28.0, the whole analytical process of data began with the entrance of demo-

graphic variables to create a predictive model (Model 1), which was fol-

lowed by the addition of other variables of interest, namely the teacher-

support model (Model 2), the sense-of-belonging model (Model 3), and the 

school-climate model (Model 4). The final model (Model 5) ended up with 

all the above predictors. 

However, preliminary assumption tests revealed that for Models 3 

and 4
1
 (see Appendix I), the Hosmer and Lemeshow Goodness of Fit Tests 

were not passed (significance values all below 0.05), suggesting no support 

for these three models (Hosmer & Lemeshow, 2000). Hence, this study only 

concentrated on the other three models (i.e., Model 1: demographic model; 

Model 2: teacher-support model; Model 5: full-predictor model). 



Zhu & Teng. (Shanghai & California). School Bullying Victimization in China. 

BECE, Vol.12, No. 1, 2022 1559 

 

 

 

 

Table 5: Logistic Regression Analysis of Demographic, Teacher-Support and 
Full-Predictor Models. 

Variables  

Model 1a Model 2b Model 5c 

B S.E. Exp(B) B S.E. Exp(B) B S.E. Exp(B) 

Gender 

Age 

Grade Repetition 

ESCS 

0.506‡ 

0.004 

0.245† 

-0.072‡ 

0.037 

0.064 

0.078 

0.017 

1.658 

1.004 

1.278 

0.930 

0.524‡ 

-0.104 

0.264‡ 

-0.017 

0.039 

0.066 

0.080 

0.018 

1.690 

0.901 

1.302 

0.983 

0.495‡ 

-0.235‡ 

0.211* 

0.030 

0.040 

0.069 

0.084 

0.019 

1.640 

0.791 

1.235 

1.031 

TEACHINT 

DIRINS 

PERFEED 

TEACHSUP 

   -0.264‡ 

-0.110‡ 

-0.022 

-0.200‡ 

0.025 

0.025 

0.024 

0.028 

0.768 

0.896 

0.978 

0.819 

-0.098‡ 

-0.064* 

0.30 

-0.142‡ 

0.027 

0.026 

0.025 

0.030 

0.907 

0.938 

1.031 

0.867 

BELONG       -0.454‡ 0.027 0.635 

DISCLIMA       -0.311‡ 0.022 0.733 

PERCOOP 
PERCOMP 

      -0.168‡ 

0.248‡ 

0.023 

0.022 

0.846 

1.281 

Notes. *<0.05, †p < 0.01, ‡p < 0.001 
a Demographic model, b Teacher-support model, c Full-predictor model 

 

 

 

 

Results 

Through binary logistic regression analyses, this study explored the likeli-

hood that Chinese adolescents were exposed to high or low frequencies of 

being bullied or victimized. For Model 1 using age, gender, grade repetition, 

and ESCS, the likelihood-ratio test produced a chi-square value of 16,101.62 

and was statistically significant (p < 0.001), indicating the logistic model 

was better than the null model without predictors. The chi-square value for 

the Hosmer-Lemeshow test was 11.07 with a significance level of 0.198 (p > 

0.05), suggesting the data fit the above model well (Hosmer & Lemeshow, 

2000). The statistical significance (χ
2
(4, N = 11,847) = 224.125, p < 0.001) 

of the demographic model implied that it was able to distinguish between 

respondents’ high or low exposure to bullying experiences. Moreover, the 

Table 4: Descriptive Statistics for Categorical Dependent Variable(s). 

 Variables Frequency % 

Bullying Low 6,463 54.5 

Scale High 5,390 45.5 



Zhu & Teng. (Shanghai & California). School Bullying Victimization in China. 

BECE, Vol.12, No. 1, 2022 1560 

model as a whole explained 1.9% (Cox & Snell R square) and 2.5% 

(Nagelkerke R square) of the variance in the two bullying groups, and cor-

rectly classified 56% of the cases with a very small improvement of 1.5% in 

predictions. As presented in Table 5, three of the four demographic variables 

made a unique statistically significant contribution to the model (except for 

age, p > 0.05). This meant that male students were more likely to be found in 

the high-level bullying groups than girls when controlling for other factors in 

the model. The strongest predictor of reporting the high-level bullying 

groups was gender, recording an odds ratio of 1.658. Likewise, the odds ratio 

of being in the high-level bullying groups was positively associated with 

grade repetition (p < 0.01). For ESCS, its negative correlation with bullying 

exposure and bullying victimization was identified (p < 0.001). 

In Model 2 with all teacher-support predictors added to the de-

mographics, the likelihood-ratio test and the Hosmer-Lemeshow test again 

identified the model as being worthwhile with the former yielding a χ
2
(8) of 

15,498.97 (N = 11,081, p < 0.001) and the latter obtaining the chi-square 

value of χ
2
(8) of 9.67 (p > 0.05). Moreover, able to distinguish between par-

ticipants’ high or low exposure to bullying behaviors (χ
2
(8, N = 11818) = 

786.503, p < 0.001), the teacher-support model explained 6.4% (Cox & Snell 

R square) and 8.6% (Nagelkerke R square) of the variance in bullying 

groups, and correctly classified 61.2% of the cases with a modest improve-

ment of 6.7% in predictions. As observed in Table 5, five of the eight pre-

dictors made a unique statistically significant contribution to the model 

(gender, grade repetition, TEACHSUP, DIRINS, TEACHINT). The two 

demographic variables (gender and grade repetition) of reporting the high-

level bullying groups echoed those in Model 1, recording a slightly higher 

odds ratio of 1.690 and 1.302 respectively when compared with those in 

Model 1. Additionally, adolescents with more teacher support (TEACHINT, 

DIRINS, and TEACHSUP) were 0.768, 0.896, and 0.819 times less likely to 

be reported in the high-level bullying groups (p < 0.001). This pointed to the 

fact that emotional, instrumental, and informational support all played a 

buffering role in bullying victimization with emotional support being most 

conducive to anti-bullying efforts. Thus, Hypothesis 1 was partially support-

ed except for the role of appraisal support. 

In the final model (Model 5) with all independent variables added, 

the likelihood-ratio test achieved a χ
2
(12) of 14,525.39 (N = 11,723, p < 

0.001), suggesting that the model was better than the null model with all 

predictors removed. The Hosmer-Lemeshow test yielded a χ
2
(8) of 9.68 (p > 

0.05), indicating that the data fit the model well. The whole model again sig-

nified its ability to differentiate between respondents’ high or low frequen-



Zhu & Teng. (Shanghai & California). School Bullying Victimization in China. 

BECE, Vol.12, No. 1, 2022 1561 

cies of bullying exposure (χ
2
(8, N = 11,723) = 1,627.086, p < 0.001). More-

over, the model as a whole explained 13% (Cox & Snell R square) and 17.3% 

(Nagelkerke R square) of the variance in bullying groups, and correctly clas-

sified 65.8% of the cases with a remarkable improvement of 11.2% in pre-

dictions. Ten of the 12 predictors made a unique statistically significant con-

tribution to the model (gender, age, grade repetition, TEACHSUP, DIRINS, 

TEACHINT, DISCLIMA, PERCOMP, PERCOOP, and BELONG) except 

for ESCS and PERFEED (p > 0.05). The two demographic variables (gender 

and grade repetition) of reporting the high-level bullying groups recorded a 

slightly lower odds ratio of 1.640 and 1.235 compared with those in Models 

1 and 2. Statistically insignificant in the previous two models, age (p < 0.001) 

this time witnessed a 0.791 likelihood increase in the high-level bullying 

groups. For the three forms of teacher support (TEACHINT, DIRINS, and 

TEACHSUP), they displayed similar patterns as were revealed in Model 2, 

reporting a mitigating effect on the high level of bullying exposure with in-

strumental support (DIRINS) replacing emotional support (TEACHINT) in 

Model 2 as the most effective form of teacher support for anti-bullying en-

deavors. Here in the full-predictor model, the first hypothesis was again ba-

sically supported. Regarding the newly added factors in the model, students 

with a strong sense of belonging, in a better disciplinary climate, and in a 

cooperative environment were respectively 0.733, 0.846, and 0.635 times 

less likely to be identified in the high-level bullying groups (p < 0.001). On 

the contrary, students in the school settings that fostered competition among 

peers were 1.281 times more likely to report a high level of bullying victimi-

zation (p < 0.001). Thus, Hypothesis 2 was fully supported while Hypothesis 

3 only was partially supported. 

Discussion 

Applying PISA 2018 China data and utilizing binary logit regression anal-

yses, this study has added to the empirical experience by investigating the 

relationship between multiple intervention factors and bullying victimization 

involving teachers, students, and school climate in the Chinese context. 

From the perspective of student characteristics, male adolescents, grade re-

peaters (regardless of their gender), younger students, and low-income stu-

dents/students from disadvantaged families are more likely to be bullied and 

victimized, as has been reported in a variety of Chinese literature (e.g., Ba et 

al., 2019; Huang & Zhao, 2019; Li et al., 2020; Lian et al., 2021; Yu & Zhao, 

2021). In this sense, top priority needs to be given to the above types of stu-

dents when intervention measures are introduced locally or nationwide. 



Zhu & Teng. (Shanghai & California). School Bullying Victimization in China. 

BECE, Vol.12, No. 1, 2022 1562 

Second, the research findings have verified that teacher support emotionally, 

informationally, and instrumentally moderates school bullying and bullying 

victimization. This could link teachers to their practical assistance and sub-

stantial help students can seek in case of bullying occurrence. Such support 

at the relationship level could extend beyond daily instructions provided for 

adolescents and penetrate further into almost every aspect of classroom 

learning, eventually benefiting multiple levels of influencing factors within 

the social-ecological framework. For example, student-perceived love, con-

cern, enthusiasm, encouragement, and guidance are beneficial not only to 

students themselves, but to teacher-student communication channels, peers’ 

recognition, positive school climate, and a set of core social values to be pre-

served. To minimize bullying exposure for all students, teachers are encour-

aged to treat students more fairly, evaluate their behavioral and mental pro-

gress more proactively, and offer timely support to those in academic diffi-

culties and with life or socializing problems (Bosworth et al., 2018). Howev-

er, appraisal support, identified as a teacher’s feedback on students’ strengths 

or weaknesses, is more directly associated with their behavioral engagement 

(Carvalho et al., 2020) and academic performance (e.g., Carvalho et al. 2014; 

Fyfe & Rittle-Johnson, 2016; Wei & Xie, 2017), thus requiring more empiri-

cal evidence to identify its possible correlation with bullying victimization. 

Third, consistent with previous Chinese studies (Huang, 2020; Li et 

al., 2020), this research has illustrated that students’ sense of belonging acts 

as an important buffer against the detriment of bullying victimization. This 

indicates that students’ identification with and connectedness to a peer group 

or a school environment at the community level are viewed as major social 

resources to protect student learning against being hampered by school vio-

lence/bullying victimization (Adams & Hannum, 2018). 

For school climate, the findings have demonstrated that a disciplinary, 

cooperative environment supported anti-bullying endeavors. Specifically, 

this study augments prior research on cooperative learning by showing that a 

cooperative environment reduces bullying victimization while promoting 

peer relatedness across the entire student population (Ryzin & Roseth, 2019). 

However, a socially competitive climate in this study tends to catalyze bully-

ing victimization, urging schools and educators to reconsider the balanced 

relationship between cooperation and competition in bringing about student 

engagement and facilitating anti-bullying behaviors in school settings 

(OECD, 2019a). Besides, a positive school climate cannot be maintained 

without the participation of teachers, who help students cultivate such class-

room habits as being friendly to and respectful for peers as well as becoming 

social, feeling inclusive, and fostering values that will form certain school 



Zhu & Teng. (Shanghai & California). School Bullying Victimization in China. 

BECE, Vol.12, No. 1, 2022 1563 

norms. The connectedness within the entire school system will in turn bene-

fit teachers, students, and schools, and eventually bullying prevention and 

control efforts. 

Therefore, a single bullying incident is interpreted not as an isolated 

phenomenon that probably causes victimization, but as the social behavior 

dynamically incorporated into an intricate network of interpersonal relation-

ships, institutional factors, community contexts, and policy components. As 

is reflected in the socio-ecological framework, its interactive and reciprocal 

nature implies that individual behavior influences and is influenced by mul-

tiple levels of factors while shaping and being shaped by the socio-cultural 

environment (Salihu et al., 2015; Townsend & Foster, 2011). In this sense, to 

better understand students’ bullying behaviors is not to split them from the 

larger social context—schools in which students acquire knowledge, com-

municate with teachers, get along with peers, develop egos, and gradually 

form the way a school culture is fostered or ruined. This may point to the 

necessity of creating improved school conditions for increasing anti-bullying 

awareness on campus and encouraging sustained behavioral change on bul-

lies. The close contact between schools and individuals also promotes the 

building of a nonviolent campus and effectively supports the implementation 

of anti-bullying programs/policies. 

Limitations 

Despite our focus on school-based factors in bullying victimization and the 

strength in integrating multiple predictors to address the issue holistically, 

there exist limitations in this study. First, at the individual and relationship 

levels, only student-perceived teacher support was taken into consideration, 

but in fact in the entire school community, the involvement of school admin-

istrators, principals, and other school leaders would never be ignored (Minis-

try of Education [MOE], 2021). Their active participation in building an ap-

propriate school climate and use of process-oriented strategies (Bosworth et 

al., 2018) could exert a far-reaching impact on anti-bullying endeavors and 

reduction of victimization. Besides, this study only featured 15-year-olds in 

general in the test language classroom, but seldom explored the subcatego-

ries of this student body including those marginalized or at-risk groups who 

are prone to be bullied or victimized (e.g., students with disabilities and un-

der-achieving students) (MOE, 2017, 2021). Hence, future studies can be 

realized in showing concern for special student groups as well as considering 

professionals (e.g., school counselors) and school leadership in the battle 

against bullying. 



Zhu & Teng. (Shanghai & California). School Bullying Victimization in China. 

BECE, Vol.12, No. 1, 2022 1564 

Implications 

The present study has provided implications for minimizing the impacts of 

bullying victimization and the development of different intervention 

measures from the perspective of school settings, especially in the context of 

Chinese schools. Theoretically, the research allows for the room to perceive 

school bullying and school violence as something complicated yet intercon-

nected that springs from a combination of multiple influences upon individu-

al behaviors. Thus, the interaction of various levels of factors for violence 

prevention could offer an effective mechanism for the understanding of how 

school bullying occurs and what to do with bullying before it begins. Empir-

ically, the findings adds to the Chinese-based evidence of the association be-

tween school-based predictors and anti-bullying awareness. Since the enact-

ment of the Comprehensive Plan on Strengthening the Management of Bul-

lying among Primary and Middle School Students in 2017, great importance 

has been attached to anti-bullying education for all and bullying prevention 

before it develops (MOE, 2017). Based on the experience of anti-bullying 

legislation in other countries, China adheres to the principle of prevention as 

a primary concern and intervention as a top priority in an effort to push for-

ward the establishment of an anti-bullying campus. Under such circumstanc-

es, this research regards a harmonious classroom climate and a positive 

school environment as the starting point to develop a sense of security, form 

social values (e.g., justice, unity, collaboration, and responsibility) amid cul-

tivation of self-awareness, and eventually curb bullying behaviors on campus. 

At the micro level, teachers play an indispensable part in teaching 

students what to learn and how to shape values as they spend a large propor-

tion of time listening to adolescents’ voices and building rapport (Schleicher, 

2018). In this process, teachers’ role in assisting the young to identify bully-

ing behaviors and timely stop victimization cannot be taken no notice of. 

Noteworthily, imperative to bullying intervention is teacher training, which 

means teachers’ skilled coping strategies relieve students’ anxiety in con-

fronting bullying and help to form appropriate management styles of class-

room learning (Di Stasio et al., 2016). As suggested in the study, teacher 

training is feasible in promoting a sense of school belonging, improving 

classroom disciplinary climate, and balancing the skills of cooperation and 

competition. For school climate, our study points to all stakeholders who 

join the entire school community in creating a caring, inclusive atmosphere, 

not only teachers and student victims in the forefront of this anti-bullying 

battle. Also in climate building, our findings have recognized social compar-

ison and intense competition as crucial characteristics that deserve educa-



Zhu & Teng. (Shanghai & California). School Bullying Victimization in China. 

BECE, Vol.12, No. 1, 2022 1565 

tional practitioners’ scrutiny and deliberation over their own teaching prac-

tices (Di Stasio et al., 2016). 

However, the lingering impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic have 

made bullying patterns somewhat different. While strengthening online 

learning, the pandemic still secures cyberbullying as mentioned above. But 

the fact lies in that with the decrease in in-person bullying, cyberbullying 

follows a downward trend (Bacher-Hicks et al., 2021). This echoes previous 

evidence that cyberbullying rarely occurs independently of in-person bully-

ing (Waasdorp & Bradshaw, 2015). In order to work out strategies for cop-

ing with cyberbullying, close attention would be paid to such fundamental 

relationships in educational reforms and anti-bullying attempts as teacher-

student interactions, peer-to-peer relations, classroom environments and 

school cultures (Vaillancourt et al., 2021). Therefore, this study may provide 

a route to the understanding of cyberbullying in China that in a sense repli-

cates the patterns of in-person bullying and bullying victimization. Although 

it is still pending to see how a positive classroom climate plays a role in 

adapting the bullied to the school life, the emphasis upon multiple relations 

within the school system offers an angle to propose intervention measures 

aimed at achieving equity and inclusivity for all schoolchildren in the post-

COVID-19 era. 
 

 

Note: 

1. For the failed models (Model 3: the sense-of-belonging model and Model 4: the 

school-climate model), please refer to the online appendix for details. 

 

 
Acknowledgement 

We wish to express our sincere gratitude to Dr. Ryan Allen and Dr. Doug Havard, who 

have offered professional assistance and constructive suggestions during our research, 

upon the completion of this academic paper, and in the process of revision. Their will-

ingness to spare the time and energy so generously has been very much appreciated. 

Our grateful thanks are also extended to our colleagues for their firm support and val-

uable insight in the research. Finally, we would like to thank OECD for making the 

PISA database publicly available for researchers and their analyses. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 



Zhu & Teng. (Shanghai & California). School Bullying Victimization in China. 

BECE, Vol.12, No. 1, 2022 1566 

References
Adams, J., & Hannum, E. (2018). School vio-

lence in China: a multilevel analysis of stu-

dent victimization in rural middle schools. 

Research in the Sociology of Education, 

20:41-69. DOI: 

https://doi.org/10.1108/S1479-

353920180000020003  

Ahmed, W., Minnaert, A., van der Werf, G., & 

Kuyper, H. (2010). Perceived social support 

and early adolescents’ achievement: The 

mediational roles of motivational beliefs and 

emotions. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 

39:36-46. DOI: 

https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-008-9367-7  

Ahnert, L., Harwardt-Heinecke, E., Kappler, G., 

Eckstein-Madry, T., & Milatz, A. (2012). 

Student–teacher relationships and classroom 

climate in first grade: How do they relate to 

students’ stress regulation? Attachment & 

Human Development, 14(3):249-263, DOI: 

https://doi.org/10.1080/14616734.2012.6732

77  

Allen, R. M. (2019). What Do Students Know 

about University Rankings? Testing Famili-

arity and Knowledge of Global and Domes-

tic University League Tables in China. Fron-

tiers of Education in China, 14(1):59-89. 

DOI: 

https://doi.org/10.1177/1028315317697539  

Anderson, J. R. (2006). On cooperative and 

competitive learning in the management 

classroom. Mountain Plains Journal of 

Business and Technology, 7(1): 35-47. 

Available at: 

https://openspaces.unk.edu/mpjbt/vol7/iss1/4

/  

Ba, Z., Han, Z., Gong, Z., Li, F., Zhang, H., & 

Zhang, G. (2019). Ethnic differences in ex-

periences of school bullying in China. Chil-

dren and Youth Services Review, 

104:104402. DOI: 

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2019.10

4402  

Bacher-Hicks, A., Goodman, J., Green, J. G., & 

Holt, M. (2022). The COVID-19 Pandemic 

Disrupted Both School Bullying and 

Cyberbullying. National Bureau of Econom-

ic Research (NBER Working Paper No. 

29590). Available at: 

https://www.nber.org/papers/w29590  

Baik, C., Larcombe, W., & Brooker, A. (2019). 

How universities can enhance student mental 

wellbeing: The student perspective. Higher 

Education Research & Development, 

38(4):674-687. DOI: 

https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2019.1576

596  

Berkowitz, R., & Benbenishty, R. (2012). Per-

ceptions of teachers’ support, safety, and 

absence from school because of fear among 

victims, bullies, and bully‐victims. Ameri-

can Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 82(1):67-74. 

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1939-

0025.2011.01132.x  

Blank, C., & Shavit, Y. (2016). The association 

between student reports of classmates’ dis-

ruptive behavior and student achievement. 

AERA Open. DOI: 

https://doi.org/10.1177/2332858416653921  

Bosworth, K., Garcia, R., Judkins, M., & Saliba, 

M. (2018). The impact of leadership in-

volvement in enhancing high school climate 

and reducing bullying: An exploratory study. 

Journal of School Violence, 17(3):354-366  

DOI: 

https://doi.org/10.1080/15388220.2017.1376

208  

Bronfenbrenner, U. (1979). The ecology of hu-

man development: Experiments by nature 

and design. Harvard University Press. 

Carvalho, C., Santos, J., Conboy, J., & Martins, 

D. (2014). Teachers’ feedback: Exploring 

differences in students’ perceptions. Social 

and Behavioral Sciences, 159:169-173. DOI: 

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.12.351  

Carvalho, C., Santos, N. N., António, R., & 

Mendonça Martins, D. S. (2021). Supporting 

students’ engagement with teachers’ feed-

back: The role of students’ school identifica-

tion. Educational Psychology, 41(7):863-882, 

DOI: 

https://doi.org/10.1080/01443410.2020.1849

564  

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention 

[CDC]. (2004). Sexual violence prevention: 

Beginning the dialogue. Available at: 

https://doi.org/10.1108/S1479-353920180000020003
https://doi.org/10.1108/S1479-353920180000020003
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-008-9367-7
https://doi.org/10.1080/14616734.2012.673277
https://doi.org/10.1080/14616734.2012.673277
https://doi.org/10.1177/1028315317697539
https://openspaces.unk.edu/mpjbt/vol7/iss1/4/
https://openspaces.unk.edu/mpjbt/vol7/iss1/4/
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2019.104402
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2019.104402
https://www.nber.org/papers/w29590
https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2019.1576596
https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2019.1576596
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1939-0025.2011.01132.x
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1939-0025.2011.01132.x
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2332858416653921
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2332858416653921
https://doi.org/10.1080/15388220.2017.1376208
https://doi.org/10.1080/15388220.2017.1376208
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.12.351
https://doi.org/10.1080/01443410.2020.1849564
https://doi.org/10.1080/01443410.2020.1849564


Zhu & Teng. (Shanghai & California). School Bullying Victimization in China. 

BECE, Vol.12, No. 1, 2022 1567 

https://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/pdf

/SVPrevention-a.pdf  

Cheema, J., & Kitsantas, A. (2014). Influences 

of disciplinary classroom climate on high 

school student self-efficacy and mathematics 

achievement: A look at gender and racial-

ethnic differences. International Journal of 

Science and Mathematics Education, 

12(5):1261-1279. DOI: 

https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-013-9454-4  

Chen, Z. H., & Chen, S. Y. (2014). When educa-

tional agents meet surrogate competition: 

Impacts of competitive educational agents 

on students’ motivation and performance. 

Computers & Education, 75:274-281. DOI: 

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2014.02.0

14  

China National Radio [CNR]. (2022, April 4). 

Comments on punishing 12 bullies: School 

violence should be contained before it esca-

lates. China National Radio. Available at: 

https://www.thepaper.cn/newsDetail_forwar

d_17462363  

Colarossi, L. G., & Eccles, J. S. (2003). Differ-

ential effects of support providers on adoles-

cents’ mental health. Social Work Research, 

27(1):19-30. DOI: 

https://doi.org/10.1093/swr/27.1.19   

Deutsch, M. (1949). A theory of cooperation and 

competition. Human Relations, 2:129-152. 

DOI: 

https://doi.org/10.1177%2F00187267490020

0204  

Deutsch, M. (1962). Cooperation and trust: 

Some theoretical notes. In M. Jones (Ed.), 

Nebraska symposium on motivation (pp. 

275-319). University of Nebraska Press. 

Di Stasio, M. R., Savage, R., & Burgos, G. 

(2016). Social comparison, competition and 

teacher-student relationships in junior high 

school classrooms predicts bullying and vic-

timization. Journal of Adolescence, 53:207-

216. DOI: 

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adolescence.2016.1

0.002  

Duggins, S. D., Kuperminc, G. P., Henrich, C. 

C., Smalls-Glover, C., & Perilla, J. L. (2016). 

Aggression among adolescent victims of 

school bullying: Protective roles of family 

and school connectedness. Psychology of 

Violence, 6(2):205-212. 

https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/a003943

9  

Flaspohler, P. D., Elfstrom, J. L., Vanderzee, K. 

L., Sink, H. E., & Birchmeier, Z. (2009). 

Stand by me: The effects of peer and teacher 

support in mitigating the impact of bullying 

on quality of life. Psychology in the Schools, 

46(7):636-649. DOI: 

https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.20404  

Furlong, M. J., & Chung, A. (1995). Who are the 

victims of school violence? A comparison of 

student non-victims and multi-victims. Edu-

cation & Treatment of Children, 18(3):282-

299. 

http://www.jstor.org/stable/42899414?origin

=JSTOR-pdf  

Fyfe, E. R., & Rittle-Johnson, B. (2016). Feed-

back both helps and hinders learning: The 

causal role of prior knowledge. Journal of 

Educational Psychology, 108(1):82-97. DOI: 

https://doi.org/10.1037/EDU0000053  

Goldweber, A., Waasdorp, T. E., & Bradshaw, C. 

P. (2013). Examining associations between 

race, urbanicity, and patterns of bullying in-

volvement. Journal of Youth & Adolescence, 

42(2):206-219. DOI: 

https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-012-9843-y  

Goodenow, C., & Grady, K. E. (1993). The rela-

tionship of school belonging and friends’ 

values to academic motivation among urban 

adolescent students. The Journal of Experi-

mental Education, 62(1):60-71. DOI: 

https://doi.org/10.1080/00220973.1993.9943

831  

Gutiérrez-Braojos, C., Montejo-Gamez, J., Mar-

in-Jimenez, A., & Campaña, J. (2019). Hy-

brid learning environment: Collaborative or 

competitive learning? Virtual Reality, 

23:411-423. DOI: 

https://doi.org/10.1007/s10055-018-0358-z  

Han, Z., Wang, Z., & Li, Y. (2021). 

Cyberbullying involvement, resilient coping, 

and loneliness of adolescents during Covid-

19 in rural China. Frontiers in Psychology, 

12:664612. DOI: 

https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.664612  

Hosmer, D. W., & Lemeshow, S. (2000). Ap-

plied logistic regression (2nd Edition). John 

Wiley & Sons. 

Huang, L. (2020). Exploring the relationship 

between school bullying and academic per-

https://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/pdf/SVPrevention-a.pdf
https://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/pdf/SVPrevention-a.pdf
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10763-013-9454-4
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10763-013-9454-4
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2014.02.014
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2014.02.014
https://www.thepaper.cn/newsDetail_forward_17462363
https://www.thepaper.cn/newsDetail_forward_17462363
https://doi.org/10.1093/swr/27.1.19
https://doi.org/10.1177%2F001872674900200204
https://doi.org/10.1177%2F001872674900200204
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adolescence.2016.10.002
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adolescence.2016.10.002
https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/a0039439
https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/a0039439
https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.20404
http://www.jstor.org/stable/42899414?origin=JSTOR-pdf
http://www.jstor.org/stable/42899414?origin=JSTOR-pdf
https://doi.org/10.1037/EDU0000053
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-012-9843-y
https://doi.org/10.1080/00220973.1993.9943831
https://doi.org/10.1080/00220973.1993.9943831
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10055-018-0358-z
https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.664612


Zhu & Teng. (Shanghai & California). School Bullying Victimization in China. 

BECE, Vol.12, No. 1, 2022 1568 

formance: The mediating role of students’ 

sense of belonging at school. Educational 

Studies, 48(2):216-232. DOI: 

https://doi.org/10.1080/03055698.2020.1749

032  

Huang, L., & Zhao, D. (2019). Empirical re-

search on relationship between family, eco-

nomic, social and cultural status and students’ 

exposure to school bullying—Mediating ef-

fects of parental support and teacher support. 

Best Evidence in Chinese Education, 

1(1):15-27. DOI: 

https://doi.org/10.15354/bece.19.ar1006  

Hughes, J. N., Wu, J. Y., Kwok, O. M., Villar-

real, V., & Johnson, A. Y. (2012). Indirect 

effects of child reports of teacher-student re-

lationship on achievement. Journal of Edu-

cational Psychology, 104(2):350-365. DOI: 

https://doi.org/10.1037/a0026339  

Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (1978). Coop-

erative, competitive, and individualistic 

learning. Journal of Research & Develop-

ment in Education, 12(1):3-15. 

https://psycnet.apa.org/record/1980-26458-

001  

Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R. T., Roseth, C., & 

Shin, T. S. (2014). The relationship between 

motivation and achievement in interdepend-

ent situations. Journal of Applied Social 

Psychology, 44(9):622-633. DOI: 

https://doi.org/10.1111/jasp.12280  

Kim, S., Spadafora, N., Craig, W., Volk, A. A., 

& Zhang, L. (2021). Disciplinary structure 

and teacher support in Chinese and Canadian 

schools: Examining how authoritative disci-

plinary practices protect youth involved in 

bullying at school. School Mental Health, 

13:501-517. DOI: 

https://doi.org/10.1007/s12310-021-09431-z  

Lapointe, J. M., Legault, F., & Batiste, S. J. 

(2005). Teacher interpersonal behavior and 

adolescents’ motivation in mathematics: A 

comparison of learning disabled, average, 

and talented students. International Journal 

of Educational Research, 43(1-2):39-54. 

DOI: 

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2006.03.005  

Lester, L., Waters, S., & Cross, D. (2013). The 

relationship between school connectedness 

and mental health during the transition to 

secondary school: A path analysis. Australi-

an Journal of Guidance and Counselling, 

23(2):157-171. DOI: 

https://doi.org/10.1017/jgc.2013.20  

Li, L., Chen, X., & Li, H. (2020). Bullying vic-

timization, school belonging, academic en-

gagement and achievement in adolescents in 

rural China: A serial mediation model. Chil-

dren and Youth Services Review, 

113:104946. DOI: 

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2020.10

4946  

Lian, Q., Yu, C., Tu, X., Deng, M., Wang, T., Su, 

Q., & Zuo, X. (2021). Grade repetition and 

bullying victimization in adolescents: A 

global cross-sectional study of the Program 

for International Student Assessment (PISA) 

data from 2018. PLoS Medicine, 

18(11):e1003846. DOI: 

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.100384

6  

Loukas, A., Cance, J. D., & Batanova, M. (2016). 

Trajectories of school connectedness across 

the middle school years examining the roles 

of adolescents’ internalizing and externaliz-

ing problems. Youth & Society, 48(4):557-

576. DOI: 

https://doi.org/10.1177/0044118X13504419  

Ma, L., Luo, H., & Xiao, L. (2021). Perceived 

teacher support, self-concept, enjoyment and 

achievement in reading: A multilevel media-

tion model based on PISA 2018. Learning 

and Individual Differences, 85:101947. DOI: 

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2020.101947  

Ma, X. (2003). Sense of belonging to school: 

Can schools make a difference? The Journal 

of Educational Research, 96(6):340-349. 

DOI: 

https://doi.org/10.1080/00220670309596617  

Matsumura, L., Slater, S., & Crosson, A. (2008). 

Classroom climate, rigorous instruction and 

curriculum, and students’ interactions in ur-

ban middle schools. The Elementary School 

Journal, 108(4):293-312. DOI: 

https://doi.org/10.1086/528973  

Maxwell, S., Reynolds, K. J., Lee, E., Subasic, 

E., & Bromhead, D. (2017). The impact of 

school climate and school identification on 

academic achievement: Multilevel modeling 

with student and teacher data. Frontier in 

Psychology, 8:2069. DOI: 

https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.02069  

https://doi.org/10.1080/03055698.2020.1749032
https://doi.org/10.1080/03055698.2020.1749032
https://doi.org/10.15354/bece.19.ar1006
https://doi.org/10.1037/a0026339
https://psycnet.apa.org/record/1980-26458-001
https://psycnet.apa.org/record/1980-26458-001
https://doi.org/10.1111/jasp.12280
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12310-021-09431-z
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2006.03.005
https://doi.org/10.1017/jgc.2013.20
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2020.104946
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2020.104946
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1003846
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1003846
https://doi.org/10.1177/0044118X13504419
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2020.101947
https://doi.org/10.1080/00220670309596617
https://doi.org/10.1086/528973
https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.02069


Zhu & Teng. (Shanghai & California). School Bullying Victimization in China. 

BECE, Vol.12, No. 1, 2022 1569 

Mazzer, K. R., & Rickwood, D. J. (2015). 

Teachers’ role breadth and perceived effica-

cy in supporting student mental health. Ad-

vances in School Mental Health Promotion, 

8(1):29-41. DOI: 

https://doi.org/10.1080/1754730X.2014.978

119  

McNeely, C., & Falci, C. (2004). School con-

nectedness and the transition into and out of 

health-risk behavior among adolescents: A 

comparison of social belonging and teacher 

support. Journal of School Health, 

74(7):284-292. DOI: 

https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1746-

1561.2004.tb08285.x  

Ministry of Education [MOE]. (2017). MOE and 

other 11 relevant departments print and dis-

tribute “Comprehensive Plan on Strengthen-

ing the Management of Bullying among 

Primary and Middle School Students”. MOE 

of the People’s Republic of China. Available 

at: 

http://www.moe.gov.cn/srcsite/A11/moe_17

89/201712/t20171226_322701.html  

Ministry of Education [MOE]. (2021). MOE 

carries out supervision and appraisal work 

on kindergarten headmasters and school 

principals after their terms of office expire. 

MOE of the People’s Republic of China. 

Available at: 

http://www.moe.gov.cn/srcsite/A11/s7057/2

02201/t20220124_596061.html  

Moos, R. (1979). Evaluating educational envi-

ronments. Jossey-Bass. 

Mostafa, T., Echazarra, A., & Guillou, H. (2018), 

The science of teaching science: An explora-

tion of science teaching practices in PISA 

2015. OECD Education Working Papers. 

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1787/f5bd9e57-en  

Organization of Economic Cooperation and 

Development [OECD]. (2017). PISA 2015 

results (Volume III): Students’ well-being. 

OECD Publishing. DOI: 

https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264273856-en  

Organization of Economic Cooperation and 

Development [OECD]. (2019a). PISA 2018 

assessment and analytical framework. 

OECD Publishing. DOI: 

https://doi.org/10.1787/b25efab8-en  

Organization of Economic Cooperation and 

Development [OECD]. (2019b). PISA 2018 

results (Volume III): What school life means 

for students’ lives. OECD Publishing.  DOI: 

https://doi.org/10.1787/acd78851-en  

Organization of Economic Cooperation and 

Development [OECD]. (2019c). PISA 2018 

technical report. OECD Publishing. 

http://www.oecd.org/pisa/data/pisa2018tech

nicalreport  

Pallant, J. (2016). SPSS Survival Manual (6th 

Edition). McGraw-Hill Education. 

Quin, D. (2016). Longitudinal and contextual 

associations between teacher-student rela-

tionships and student engagement: A sys-

tematic review. Review of Educational Re-

search, 87(2):345-387. DOI: 

https://doi.org/10.3102%2F00346543166694

34  

Quin, D., Heerde, J. A., & Toumbourou, J. W. 

(2018). Teacher support within an ecological 

model of adolescent development: Predictors 

of school engagement. Journal of School 

Psychology, 69:1-15. DOI: 

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2018.04.003  

Raskauskas, J. L., Gregory, J., Harvey, S. T., 

Rifshana, F., & Evans, I. M. (2010). Bully-

ing among primary school children in New 

Zealand: Relationships with prosocial be-

haviour and classroom climate. Educational 

Research, 52(1):1-13. DOI: 

https://doi.org/10.1080/00131881003588097  

Roseth, C. J., Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. 

(2008). Promoting early adolescents’ 

achievement and peer relationships: The ef-

fects of cooperative, competitive, and indi-

vidualistic goal structures. Psychological 

Bulletin, 134(2):223-246. DOI: 

https://doi.org/10.1037/0033‐

2909.134.2.223  

Ryan, A. M., & Patrick, H. (2001). The class-

room social environment and changes in ad-

olescents’ motivation and engagement dur-

ing middle school. American Educational 

Research Journal, 38:437–460. DOI: 

https://doi.org/10.3102%2F00028312038002

437  

Ryzin, M. J., & Roseth, C. J. (2019). Effects of 

cooperative learning on peer relations, em-

pathy, and bullying in middle school. Ag-

gressive Behavior, 45(6):643-651. DOI: 

https://doi.org/10.1002/ab.21858  

https://doi.org/10.1080/1754730X.2014.978119
https://doi.org/10.1080/1754730X.2014.978119
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1746-1561.2004.tb08285.x
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1746-1561.2004.tb08285.x
http://www.moe.gov.cn/srcsite/A11/moe_1789/201712/t20171226_322701.html
http://www.moe.gov.cn/srcsite/A11/moe_1789/201712/t20171226_322701.html
http://www.moe.gov.cn/srcsite/A11/s7057/202201/t20220124_596061.html
http://www.moe.gov.cn/srcsite/A11/s7057/202201/t20220124_596061.html
https://doi.org/10.1787/f5bd9e57-en
https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264273856-en
https://doi.org/10.1787/b25efab8-en
https://doi.org/10.1787/acd78851-en
http://www.oecd.org/pisa/data/pisa2018technicalreport
http://www.oecd.org/pisa/data/pisa2018technicalreport
https://doi.org/10.3102%2F0034654316669434
https://doi.org/10.3102%2F0034654316669434
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2018.04.003
https://doi.org/10.1080/00131881003588097
https://doi.org/10.1037/0033‐2909.134.2.223
https://doi.org/10.1037/0033‐2909.134.2.223
https://doi.org/10.3102%2F00028312038002437
https://doi.org/10.3102%2F00028312038002437
https://doi.org/10.1002/ab.21858


Zhu & Teng. (Shanghai & California). School Bullying Victimization in China. 

BECE, Vol.12, No. 1, 2022 1570 

Schleicher, A. (2018). Educating learners for 

their future, not our past. ECNU Review of 

Education, 1(1):58-75. DOI: 

https://doi.org/10.30926/ecnuroe201801010

4  

Sortkær, B., & Reimer, D. (2018). Classroom 

disciplinary climate of schools and gender– 

Evidence from the Nordic countries. School 

Effectiveness and School Improvement, 

29(4):511-528. DOI: 

https://doi.org/10.1080/09243453.2018.1460

382  

Salihu, H. M., Wilson, R. E., King, L. M., Marty, 

P. J., & Whiteman, V. E. (2015). Socio-

ecological model as a framework for over-

coming barriers and challenges in random-

ized control trials in minority and under-

served communities. International Journal 

of MCH and AIDS, 3(1):85-95. Available at: 

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/P

MC4948176/  

Swearer, S. M., Espelage, D. L., Vaillancourt, T., 

& Hymel, S. (2010). What can be done 

about school bullying? Linking research to 

educational practice. Educational Research-

er, 39(1):38-47.  DOI:  

https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X09357622  

Tardy, C. H. (1985). Social support measure-

ment. American Journal of Community Psy-

chology, 13:187-202. DOI: 

https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00905728  

Townsend, N., & Foster, C. (2011). Developing 

and applying a socio-ecological model to the 

promotion of healthy eating in the school. 

Public Health Nutrition, 16(6):1101–1108. 

http://doi.org/10.1017/S1368980011002655  

Underwood, M. K., & Ehrenreich, S. E. (2014). 

Bullying may be fueled by the desperate 

need to belong. Theory into Practice, 

53(4):265-270. DOI: 

https://doi.org/10.1080/00405841.2014.9472

17  

Vaillancourt, T., Brittain, H., Krygsman, A., 

Farrell, A. H., Landon, S., & Pepler, D. 

(2021). School bullying before and during 

COVID‐19: Results from a population‐

based randomized design. Aggressive Behav-

ior, 47:557-569. DOI: 

https://doi.org/10.1002/ab.21986  

Vandercruysse, S., Vandewaetere, M., Cornillie, 

F., & Clarebout, G. (2013). Competition and 

students’ perceptions in a game-based lan-

guage learning environment. Educational 

Technology Research and Development, 

61:927-950. DOI: 

https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-013-9314-5  

Van Ryzin, M. J., & Roseth, C. J. (2018a). Co-

operative learning in middle school: A 

means to improve peer relations and reduce 

victimization, bullying, and related out-

comes. Journal of Educational Psychology, 

110(8):1192-1201. DOI: 

https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000265  

Van Ryzin, M. J., & Roseth, C. J. (2019). Ef-

fects of cooperative learning on peer rela-

tions, empathy, and bullying in middle 

school. Aggressive Behavior, 45(6):643-651. 

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/ab.21858  

Volk, A. A., Cioppa, V. D., Earle, M., & Farrell, 

A. H. (2015). Social competition and bully-

ing: An adaptive socioecological perspective. 

In V. Zeigler-Hill, L. Welling, & T. Shackel-

ford (Eds.), Evolutionary perspectives on so-

cial psychology (pp. 387-399). Springer. 

DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-

12697-5_30  

Waasdorp, T. E., & Bradshaw, C. P. (2015). The 

overlap between cyberbullying and tradi-

tional bullying. Journal of Adolescent 

Health, 56(5):483-488. DOI: 

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jadohealth.2014.12.

002  

Wang, M. T, Degol, J. L., Amemiya, J., Parr, A., 

& Guo J. (2020). Classroom climate and 

children’s academic and psychological well-

being: A systematic review and meta-

analysis. Developmental Review, 57:100912. 

DOI: 

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dr.2020.100912  

Wang, M. T., & Eccles, J. S. (2012). Social sup-

port matters: Longitudinal effects of social 

support on three dimensions of school en-

gagement from the middle to high school. 

Child Development, 83(3):877-895. DOI: 

https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-

8624.2012.01745.x  

Wang, M. T., & Holcombe, R. (2010). Adoles-

cents’ perceptions of the school environment, 

engagement, and academic achievement in 

middle school. American Educational Re-

search Journal, 47(3):633-662. DOI: 

https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831209361209  

https://doi.org/10.30926/ecnuroe2018010104
https://doi.org/10.30926/ecnuroe2018010104
https://doi.org/10.1080/09243453.2018.1460382
https://doi.org/10.1080/09243453.2018.1460382
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4948176/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4948176/
http://dx.doi.org/10.3102/0013189X09357622
http://dx.doi.org/10.3102/0013189X09357622
https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00905728
http://doi.org/10.1017/S1368980011002655
https://doi.org/10.1080/00405841.2014.947217
https://doi.org/10.1080/00405841.2014.947217
https://doi.org/10.1002/ab.21986
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-013-9314-5
https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000265
https://doi.org/10.1002/ab.21858
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-12697-5_30
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-12697-5_30
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jadohealth.2014.12.002
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jadohealth.2014.12.002
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dr.2020.100912
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.2012.01745.x
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.2012.01745.x
https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831209361209


Zhu & Teng. (Shanghai & California). School Bullying Victimization in China. 

BECE, Vol.12, No. 1, 2022 1571 

Wei, W., & Xie, Y. (2018). University teachers’ 

reflections on the reasons behind their 

changing feedback practice. Assessment & 

Evaluation in Higher Education, 43(6):867-

879, DOI: 

https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2017.1414

146  

Wentzel, K. R. (2016). Teacher-student relation-

ships. In K. R. Wentzel, & D. B. Miele 

(Eds.), Handbook of motivation at school 

(pp. 211-230). Routledge. 

Wentzel, K. R., Battle, A., Russell, S. L., & 

Looney, L. B. (2010). Social supports from 

teachers and peers as predictors of academic 

and social motivation. Contemporary Educa-

tional Psychology, 35(3):193-202. DOI: 

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2010.03.0

02  

Yu, S., & Zhao, X. (2021). The negative impact 

of bullying victimization on academic litera-

cy and social integration: evidence from 51 

countries in PISA. Social Sciences & Hu-

manities Open, 4(1):100151. DOI: 

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssaho.2021.100151  

Zhao, X. (2021, November 19). Strict punish-

ment urged to prevent bullying. China Daily 

(Global Edition). Available at: 

http://global.chinadaily.com.cn/a/202111/19/

WS6196fe63a310cdd39bc763f2.html  

Zook, C. (2018, October 18). What is coopera-

tive learning and how does it work? Applied 

Educational Systems [AES]. Available at: 

https://www.aeseducation.com/blog/what-is-

cooperative-learning-and-how-does-it-work  

Zuo, M. (2021, November 11). China’s bullying 

problem in spotlight after teenager’s death. 

South China Morning Post. Available at: 

https://www.scmp.com/news/people-

culture/social-

welfare/article/3155602/teenage-boys-

drowning-spotlights-chinas-bullying  

 

 

 

 

 

Received: 21 July 2022 

Revised: 10 August 2022 

Accepted: 18 August 2022 

 

 

 

 

 

https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2017.1414146
https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2017.1414146
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2010.03.002
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2010.03.002
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssaho.2021.100151
http://global.chinadaily.com.cn/a/202111/19/WS6196fe63a310cdd39bc763f2.html
http://global.chinadaily.com.cn/a/202111/19/WS6196fe63a310cdd39bc763f2.html
https://www.aeseducation.com/blog/what-is-cooperative-learning-and-how-does-it-work
https://www.aeseducation.com/blog/what-is-cooperative-learning-and-how-does-it-work
https://www.scmp.com/news/people-culture/social-welfare/article/3155602/teenage-boys-drowning-spotlights-chinas-bullying
https://www.scmp.com/news/people-culture/social-welfare/article/3155602/teenage-boys-drowning-spotlights-chinas-bullying
https://www.scmp.com/news/people-culture/social-welfare/article/3155602/teenage-boys-drowning-spotlights-chinas-bullying
https://www.scmp.com/news/people-culture/social-welfare/article/3155602/teenage-boys-drowning-spotlights-chinas-bullying


Zhu & Teng. (Shanghai & California). School Bullying Victimization in China. 

BECE, Vol.12, No. 1, 2022 

Appendix I 

Figure S1. Normal P-P Plot of Regression Standardized Residual. 

 

Note. The points did not lie in a reasonably straight diagonal line from bottom left to 

top right. This would suggest major deviations from normality and multiple regression 

analyses did not fit for statistics. 

  



Zhu & Teng. (Shanghai & California). School Bullying Victimization in China. 

BECE, Vol.12, No. 1, 2022 

Figure S2. Scatterplot of Standardized Residuals. 

 

Note. In the Scatterplot of the standardized residuals, the residuals appeared as a 

clear or systematic pattern, higher on one side than the other. This suggested that 

multiple regression analyses did not fit for statistics. 

  



Zhu & Teng. (Shanghai & California). School Bullying Victimization in China. 

BECE, Vol.12, No. 1, 2022 

Table S1. Multiple Regression Analysis of Demographic, Teacher-support, 

Sense-of-belonging, School-climate, and Full-predictor Models. 

 

Variables  

Model 1 
a, b

 Model 2
 

Model 3
c
 Model 4

 d
 Model 5

 e
 

β β β β β 

Gender 

Age 

Grade Repetition 

ESCS 

.169‡ 

-.008 

.048‡ 

-.050‡ 

.165‡ 

-.019‡ 

.047‡ 

-.025† 

.178‡ 

-.030‡ 

.043‡ 

-.012 

.146‡ 

-.030‡ 

.045‡ 

-.016 

.149‡ 

-.039‡ 

.039‡ 

.001 

TEACHINT 

DIRINS 

PERFEED 

TEACHSUP 

 -.113‡ 

-.019 

.017 

-.108‡ 

  -.016 

.009 

.045‡ 

-.076‡ 

BELONG   -.283‡  -.215‡ 

DISCLIMA    -.208‡ -.169‡ 

PERCOOP  

PERCOMP 

   -.153‡ 

.119‡ 

-.071‡ 

.112‡ 

Notes. *<.05, †p < .01, ‡ p < .001 

a 
Demographic model, 

b
 Teacher-support model, 

c 
Sense-of-belonging model, 

d
 School-climate model,

 e 

Full-predictor model 

 

  



Zhu & Teng. (Shanghai & California). School Bullying Victimization in China. 

BECE, Vol.12, No. 1, 2022 

Table S2. Logistic Regression Analysis of Sense-of-belonging and School-climate 

Models. 

 

Variables  

Model 3
a
 Model 4

b
 

B S.E. Exp(B) B S.E. Exp(B) 

Gender 

Age 

Grade Repetition 

ESCS 

.568‡ 

-.136* 

.215† 

-.008 

.039 

.066 

.081 

.018 

1.765 

.873 

1.239 

.651 

.457‡ 

-.158* 

.238† 

-.007 

.039 

.067 

.082 

.019 

1.580 

.854 

1.269 

.993 

BELONG -.640‡ .026 .527    

DISCLIMA    -.409‡ .020 .664 

PERCOOP  

PERCOMP 

   -.344‡ 

.246‡ 

.021 

.022 

.709 

1.279 

Notes. *<.05, † p < .01, ‡ p < .001,  

a
 Sense of Belonging, 

b
 School Climate 

Preliminary assumption tests revealed that for Models 3 and 4, the Hosmer and Lemeshow Goodness of 

Fit Tests were not passed (significance values all below .05), suggesting no support for these two 

models. 


	BECE_V12N1_Sep2022-Title-Teng
	BECE_V12N1_Sep2022-Maintext-Teng
	Supplementary-Appendix-BECE-V12N1-September2022-Teng

