Ostracism,school engagement,and academic achievement: Examining a mediation model among senior high school students

Abstract

Ostracism and school engagement have important implications for adolescents’ academic perseverance and success. However, limited previous studies have investigated the mediating effects of school engagement on the association between ostracism and academic achievement in the Chinese cultural context. The present study fills in this research gap by examining the mediating effects of emotional engagement, cognitive engagement, and behavioral engagement on the association between ostracism and adolescents’ academic achievement. Clustered random sampling was employed, and a total of 728 adolescents (52.6% female) were recruited as participants. The results showed that ostracism was negatively associated with academic achievement. Ostracism was negatively associated with emotional engagement and cognitive engagement, which in turn were related to worse academic achievement. Notably, within the Chinese cultural context, behavioral engagement did not exhibit a mediating effect between ostracism and academic achievement. The findings of the present research have theoretical and practical implications for curtailing ostracism and improving adolescents’ academic achievement.

Keywords

Ostracism school engagement academic achievement adolescent

Introduction

School engagement plays a pivotal role in achieving school completion and academic excellence. Previous research has delineated three distinct yet interrelated dimensions of school engagement: emotional, behavioral, and cognitive engagement (Fredricks et al., 2004). Emotional engagement pertains to students’ attitudes and sentiments regarding school and academic tasks, as well as their interactions with teachers and peers (Hirschi, 2017). Behavioral engagement encompasses activities and conduct that signify adherence to school norms, participation in school-related extracurricular activities (e.g. music, sports, and student council), and involvement in class activities (e.g. asking questions and attentiveness; Fredricks et al., 2004). Cognitive engagement involves intrinsic motivation for learning and the utilization of metacognitive strategies (e.g. planning and monitoring; Christenson et al., 2012). Researchers have shown that school engagement is an important factor in predicting adolescents’ educational outcomes over the last several decades (Baroody et al., 2016; Carter et al., 2012; Christenson et al., 2012; Fredricks et al., 2004).

Furthermore, a substantial body of research has consistently shown that students who exhibit poor academic performance and experience a sense of alienation from school are at a higher risk of achieving lower academic outcomes (Nakamoto & Schwartz, 2010; Raabe, 2019). This phenomenon may be attributed to inherent psychological processes in humans, specifically the ostracism detection system, which enables them to effectively notice and respond to cues indicating exclusion or neglect (Critcher & Zayas, 2014; Spoor & Williams, 2007; Williams, 2001). Previous research has documented the effects of peer exclusion and being ignored on learning. For example, children who have unpleasant experiences with their peers in the classroom might stop taking part in class (Ladd et al., 2008), disconnect from academic guidance (Iyer et al., 2010), and have a lower sense of academic achievement (Flook et al., 2005)—all of which may lead to lower grades and test scores (Mikami et al., 2017). Nevertheless, limited research has focused on associations between ostracism, school engagement, and academic achievement. To address this research gap, the present study utilized a sample of Chinese adolescents to examine the links between ostracism and academic achievement. Additionally, it explored the potential mediating roles of school engagement dimensions, including emotional engagement, cognitive engagement, and behavioral engagement, in the relationship between ostracism and academic achievement.

Ostracism and academic achievement

Ostracism is defined as any action involving the disregard or exclusion of an individual or group, which can be detrimental to their mental well-being because it jeopardizes one or more of four fundamental human needs: (a) the need for belonging; (b) the need for self-esteem; (c) the need for control; and (d) the need for a meaningful existence (Williams, 2001; Zwolinski, 2012). Ostracism happens commonly throughout adolescence, since non-physical forms of aggression increase with age (Björkqvist, Österman, & Kaukiainen, 1992), including relational aggression or bullying (Wölfer & Scheithauer, 2013). Meanwhile, since most of adolescents’ social interactions take place in peer groups (Larson & Richards, 1991), ostracism from peers limits their access to social resources and social support.

Current research on adolescent ostracism has been conducted primarily in Western countries, and findings have generally indicated that social adversities, such as exclusion or ostracism, can undermine academic achievement (Nakamoto & Schwartz, 2010; Raabe, 2019). Because sensitivity to exclusion or ostracism is deeply rooted in evolutionary history and is a fundamental component of human beings’ psychological makeup, it has been presumed that adolescents’ responses to it may be culturally universal (Gonsalkorale & Williams, 2007; Over & Uskul, 2016). However, cultural differences in responses to ostracism need to be further investigated, as adolescents’ responses to ostracism may vary across different social contexts. For example, Pfundmair et al. (2015) found that after experiencing an incident of social exclusion, participants from independent cultures (e.g. Germany) had lower levels of belonging, self-esteem, mood, meaningful existence, and control, whereas participants from interdependent cultures (e.g. China) were affected less or not at all. While existing studies have compared the influence of ostracism on positive psychological constructs among adolescents in different countries, there is a dearth of research examining the consequences of ostracism on adolescents’ academic achievements within diverse social contexts. Second, the impact of exclusion on adolescents may be influenced by group cultural values. For example, Confucian culture places a high value on the pursuit of knowledge and education as a pathway to social advancement and success. This emphasis results in a significant emphasis on academic achievement among children and families in Confucian societies (e.g. Fu et al., 2020; Ho, 1994). Given that academic achievement is highly valued in Chinese society (Ho, 1994), the effects of ostracism on adolescent academic achievement need to be thoroughly investigated.

School engagement as a mediator

School engagement is regarded as a predictor of student boredom, alienation, and withdrawal (Finn & Rock, 1997), and it has been recognized as a fundamental dimension influencing students’ learning levels and educational quality (Rosário et al., 2016). According to the self-system processes theory (Connell & Wellborn, 1991), the evolving self is considered an “active participant” in evaluating the extent to which the school fulfills students’ fundamental needs. Furthermore, the theory suggests that engagement ensues when individuals attain satisfaction with their basic needs within a particular context. When students perceive that the school effectively addresses their fundamental psychological needs, they are more inclined to engage in school activities, potentially leading to improved academic performance. In the context of the current study, ostracism may threaten adolescents’ sense of belonging, which in turn may influence their engagement and, as a result, lead to poor academic performance.

Ostracism, emotional engagement, and academic achievement

Emotional engagement refers to positive emotional dispositions and affective responses to educational processes and practices (Christenson et al., 2012). According to research, experiences associated with being ignored or excluded by peers may foster an overgeneralized maladaptive perception of peers (Asher et al., 2001; Ladd et al., 2014), whereas positive interactions with others can help promote learning (Ramey & Ramey, 2004). Furthermore, previous research has found that children's emotional engagement is related to their school readiness and academic achievement (Bierman et al., 2008).

Ostracism, behavior engagement, and academic achievement

Behavioral engagement encompasses participation in school activities, including both academic and extra-curricular ones (Hirschi, 2017). It is defined as adolescent effort, attention, and persistence in initiating and carrying out learning activities (Skinner et al., 2008). Ladd et al. (2008) found that peer exclusion or ignorance created constraints that inhibited children's classroom participation, whereas Mikami et al. (2017) showed that the perception of increased relatedness among adolescents with their peers was a predictor of a gradual improvement in their classroom behavioral engagement. Students with higher levels of behavioral engagement, on the other hand, participate in more class discussions and exert more overall effort in school activities (Reyes et al., 2012), which may improve their achievement outcomes. Research indicates that students’ academic achievement is predicted by their behavioral engagement (e.g. Guo et al., 2011, Ladd & Dinella, 2009, Reyes et al., 2012).

Ostracism, cognitive engagement, and academic achievement

Cognitive engagement encompasses the mental effort individuals invest or are motivated to invest in academic tasks, including attributes like problem-solving flexibility, a willingness to tackle challenging work, and adopting a positive approach in response to setbacks (Fredricks et al., 2004). Essentially, cognitive engagement denotes a student's readiness to undertake challenging mental efforts when the comprehension of intricate concepts and the mastery of complex skills are demanded (Hirschfield & Gasper, 2011). A plethora of studies demonstrate that when students prioritize mastery, they exhibit a greater inclination to engage in profound and comprehensive thinking about their academic tasks. They employ effective learning and self-regulation strategies, including monitoring their comprehension and considering the connections between current academic tasks and previously acquired knowledge. These practices contribute significantly to academic achievement (Christenson et al., 2012; Graham & Golan, 1991; Wolters, 2004). However, if the need for belonging is not met, it can lead to decreased motivation, impaired development, and alienation (Furrer & Skinner, 2003).

Previous research found that students’ general perceptions of exclusion or being ignored predicted emotional, behavioral, and cognitive engagement (Ladd et al., 2008, 2014). Meanwhile, studies have found that the three types of school engagement are related to academic achievement (Carter et al., 2012; Hirschfield & Gasper, 2011; Reyes et al., 2012). According to the tenets of self-system processes theory, ostracism may contribute to poor student engagement, which may result in low academic achievement. However, the potential mediation effects of specific dimensions of school engagement on ostracism and academic achievement have not been fully investigated.

The present study

The present study extends the previous literature by examining the potential mediating effect of school engagement in the association between ostracism and academic achievement among Chinese adolescents. Specifically, the current study examined the direct association between ostracism and academic achievement within the Chinese cultural context. Moreover, the mediating effect of school engagement, including emotional engagement, behavioral engagement, and cognitive engagement, in the relationship between ostracism and academic achievement was also investigated. Consistent with the previous literature, we expected that ostracism would be associated with lower academic achievement during adolescence. We also hypothesized that higher levels of ostracism would lead to lower levels of school engagement (emotional engagement, behavioral engagement, and cognitive engagement), which would in turn contribute to poorer academic achievement. The conceptual framework is shown in Figure 1.

Figure 1.

Conceptual framework.

Methods

Procedure and sample

Participants were 728 students randomly stratified from four senior high schools in Hebei Province, China on the basis of a cluster random sampling method. First, a list of senior high schools was obtained from the local government, and four of them were randomly selected. Then, from each of the three grades (10–12) in all four chosen schools, one class was chosen at random. Students in these selected classes were then invited to take part in the survey. Ultimately, a total of 728 adolescents from the four chosen senior high schools were recruited for this survey. After obtaining the list of selected students, we informed the selected students and their parents of the nature and objectives of the study. The present study adheres to the principles of voluntary participation and anonymity, and participants were informed that their responses would be treated confidentially and they had the option to withdraw from the study without any negative consequences. Prior to data collection, informed consent for participation was obtained from students, their parents, and school principals. The research protocol received approval from the ethics review committee of the university where the authors are affiliated. Three hundred forty-five (47.4%) boys and 383 (52.6%) girls made up the 728 respondents. The respondents’ average age was 16.33 (SD = 1.00). One hundred fifty-seven (21.6%) respondents were in Grade 10, 359 (49.3%) were in Grade 11, and 152 (20.9%) were in Grade 12. Four hundred twenty-eight (66.2%) students came from rural families, while 246 (33.8%) came from urban families.

Measures

Ostracism

The Ostracism Experience Scale for Adolescents, translated into Chinese, was used to measure ostracism (Gilman et al., 2013; Zhang et al., 2018). Adolescents reported their ostracism experiences through 11 items (e.g. “In general, others treat me as if I am invisible”), and each item was given a score between 1 (strongly disagree) and 5 (strongly agree) on a 5-point scale. Prior studies have indicated that this measure had strong evidence of reliability and validity, and it has been applied and verified in the Chinese context (Zhang et al., 2018). Items were averaged such that higher scores indicated more ostracism experiences (Cronbach's α = 0.866).

School engagement

Adolescents’ school engagement was assessed using the school engagement scale developed by Fredricks et al. (2004). This scale consisted of 19 items divided into three subscales: emotional engagement (six items, e.g. I like being at school), cognitive engagement (eight items, e.g. I read extra books to learn more about things we do in school), and behavioral engagement (five items, e.g. I follow the rules at school). On a 5-point Likert scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree), participants reported their responses. The mean value of each subscale was calculated with higher scores indicating greater school engagement in each dimension. Previous research has indicated that this measure showed good reliability and validity, and it has been used and validated in the Chinese context (Asogwa et al., 2020). The Cronbach's α of the total scale, emotional engagement, cognitive engagement, and behavioral engagement subscales were 0.889, 0.844, 0.862, and 0.703, respectively.

Academic achievement

Academic achievement was measured with the adapted Academic Achievement Subscale of the Academic Adjustment Scale (Anderson, Guan, & Koc, 2016). This scale contained three items that captured adolescents’ evaluation of their academic achievement (e.g. I am satisfied with my ability to learn at school). Each item was scored from 1 (rarely applies to me) to 5 (always applies to me) on a 5-point scale. This scale has been used in studies conducted in various countries and has shown high levels of both reliability and validity (Quan et al., 2014; Wang et al., 2021). The three items were averaged, with a higher total score indicating a higher level of academic achievement (Cronbach's α = 0.691).

Control variables

The following control variables were included gender (male = 0 and female = 1), hukou (household registration; rural = 0, urban = 1), age, grade, and SES (socioeconomic status: participants reported their family socioeconomic status as follows: very poor = 1, relatively poor = 2, general = 3, relatively rich = 4, very rich = 5).

Analytical strategy

Descriptive analysis and the correlations between the variables were conducted using SPSS 25.0. In this study, the missing values were < 5% and were missing completely at random, so they were replaced by the mean. Using the SPSS PROCESS macro (Model 4), path analysis was used for examining mediation effects. The dependent variable was academic achievement, the independent variable was ostracism, and the mediators were the three indicators of school engagement (i.e. emotional, cognitive, and behavioral engagement). Five thousand bootstrap samples were utilized to determine a 95% confidence interval for the mediating effect. A significant effect was indicated by a confidence interval that did not include 0. Gender, age, hukou (household registration), and subjective social status were controlled in the analysis.

Results

Preliminary analyses

Table 1 shows the means, standard deviations, and correlations of the study variables. Ostracism was found to be negatively associated with emotional engagement (r = −0.127, p < .01), cognitive engagement (r = −0.174, p < .001), behavioral engagement (r = −0.174, p < .001), and academic achievement (r = −0.165, p < .001). Emotional engagement was positively associated with cognitive engagement (r = 0.495, p < .001), behavioral engagement (r = 0.555, p < .001), and academic achievement (r = 0.287, p < .001). Cognitive engagement was positively associated with behavioral engagement (r = 0.429, p < .001) and academic achievement (r = 0.296, p < .001). Behavioral engagement was positively associated with academic achievement (r = 0.263, p < .001).

Table 1.

Means, standard deviations, and correlations of study variables.

	M	SD	1	2	3	4	5
1. Ostracism	2.500	0.704	1
2. Emotional engagement	3.123	0.864	−0.127**	1
3. Cognitive engagement	3.220	0.702	−0.174***	0.495***	1
4. Behavioral engagement	3.436	0.588	−0.174***	0.555***	0.429***	1
5. Academic achievement	2.963	0.746	−0.165***	0.287***	0.296***	0.263***	1

Note: ** p < .01; *** p < .001.

Testing for the mediation effect of school engagement

The standardized, unstandardized, direct, indirect, and total effects are presented in Tables 2 and 3. As hypothesized, the total effect of ostracism on academic achievement was significant (b = −0.148, 95% confidence interval [CI] = [−0.230, −0.065]). Specifically, in regard to main effects, ostracism had a significant direct effect on academic achievement, with higher levels of ostracism predicting lower levels of academic achievement (b = −0.089, p < .05). For the indirect effects, the results showed that the total indirect effect was significant (b = −0.059, 95% CI = [−0.093, −0.029]). The results showed significant indirect effects of ostracism on academic achievement via emotional engagement (b = −0.019, 95% CI = [−0.041, −0.004]). Specifically, ostracism was negatively associated with emotional engagement (b = −0.146, p < .01), which, in turn, predicted worse academic achievement (b = 0.130, p < .01). Similarly, the results showed significant indirect effects of ostracism on academic achievement via cognitive engagement (b = −0.024, 95% CI = [−0.049, −0.006]). Specifically, ostracism was negatively associated with emotional engagement (b = −0.142, p < .001), which, in turn, predicted worse academic achievement (b = 0.172, p < .001). However, contrary to our expectation, the indirect effect of ostracism on academic achievement via behavioral engagement was insignificant (b = −0.016, 95% CI = [−0.035, 0.0001]).

Table 2.

Mediation model.

Predictors	Emotional engagement		Cognitive engagement		Behavioral engagement		Academic achievement
Predictors	b	SE	b	SE	b	SE	b	SE
Ostracism	−0.146**	0.047	−0.142***	0.039	−0.124***	0.031	−0.089*	0.040
Gender	−0.055	0.063	0.007	0.052	−0.133**	0.041	0.081	0.081
Age	−0.144***	0.031	−0.108***	0.026	−0.047*	0.021	0.004	0.004
Hukou	0.189**	0.068	0.006	0.056	0.105*	0.044	0.001	0.001
Socioeconomic status (SES)	0.028	0.053	0.062	0.044	0.040	0.035	0.046	0.046
Emotional engagement							0.130**	0.041
Cognitive engagement							0.172***	0.045
Behavioral engagement							0.127*	0.061
R ²	0.057		0.055		0.059		0.133
F	8.410***		8.079***		8.728***		13.391***

Note: * p < .05; ** p < .01; *** p < .001.

Table 3.

Total, direct, and indirect effects.

Effects	b	Boot SE	95% Confidence interval
Effects	b	Boot SE	Lower	Upper
Total effect	−0.148	0.042	−0.230	−0.065
Direct effect	−0.089	0.040	−0.168	−0.009
Total indirect effect	−0.059	0.016	−0.093	−0.029
OS → EE → AC	−0.019	0.010	−0.041	−0.004
OS → CE → AC	−0.024	0.011	−0.049	−0.006
OS → BE → AC	−0.016	0.009	−0.035	0.0001

Note: OS = Ostracism; EE = Emotional engagement; CE = Cognitive engagement; BE = Behavioral engagement; AC = Academic achievement.

Discussion

Adolescents who experience ostracism are more likely to have poor academic performance (Nakamoto & Schwartz, 2010; Raabe, 2019). Adolescents’ reactions to ostracism may be influenced by cultural differences (Over & Uskul, 2016; Pfundmair et al., 2015). As a result, research on the relationship between ostracism and academic achievement in the Chinese cultural context is required. School engagement is conceived as a multidimensional construct comprising behavioral aspects (participation in class activities and the level of focus dedicated to learning), cognitive elements (commitment to learning and the aspiration for mastery), as well as emotional components (interest in education and a sense of belonging to the school community). These factors collectively contribute to academic achievement (Carter et al., 2012; Fredricks et al., 2004). Nonetheless, the potential mediating roles of specific dimensions of school engagement in the relationship between ostracism and academic achievement have not been thoroughly investigated. This study aimed to fill in these research gaps. The findings of this study partially supported the hypotheses.

Ostracism and academic achievement

In line with our hypothesis, ostracism was negatively associated with academic achievement in the Chinese cultural context. Furthermore, the findings agree with those of Gallardo et al. (2016), who revealed that acceptance from one's peer group had a significant and positive relationship with academic achievement. The results showed that ostracism had a negative impact on adolescents’ academic achievement in both interdependent and independent cultures. This implies that all humans require a sense of belonging. One particularly fundamental and pervasive motivation is the desire to create and maintain social bonds (Baumeister & Leary, 1995). Consequently, many people are sensitive to threats of exclusion (Over & Carpenter, 2009), and ostracism can be extremely painful (Over & Uskul, 2016). The finding also lends support to the tenets of the temporal need-threat model of ostracism (Williams, 2009), which proposes that ostracism is registered by the brain as painful while simultaneously threatening four fundamental needs; cognitive appraisals then occur in the service of coping with the pain and need-threat. In the long run, these people exhaust their coping mechanisms and can experience depression, alienation, helplessness, and ultimately existential angst (Saylor et al., 2013). As a result, children who are more socially included by their peers perform better academically (Gallardo et al., 2016; Hughes & Chen, 2011).

Ostracism, emotional engagement, and academic achievement

The results of this study indicated that emotional engagement mediated the association between ostracism and academic achievement. And this result is in line with the findings of Véronneau et al. (2010). They discovered that peer rejection in childhood can have a negative impact on future academic achievement. Reduced school interest and academic self-perception are two mediators of this relationship. Emotional engagement, which is believed to strengthen ties with an institution and have an impact on willingness to work, essentially includes positive as well as negative responses to and relations with teachers, classmates, scholars, and schools. In addition, it reflects students’ feeling in the classroom, including interest, boredom, happiness, sadness, and anxiousness (Christenson et al., 2012). These interactions, in turn, can foster a sense of belonging to school, as well as the development of social-emotional competencies, which have been shown to reduce off-task behavior and increase prosocial classroom and task engagement (Bierman et al., 2008). However, when adolescents experience exclusion or are ignored, this sense of belonging may fail, which may have a negative impact on the extent to which they value learning, and show excitement about classroom and after-school activities (Finn & Rock, 1997; Luo et al., 2009; Rose-Krasnor, 2009), thereby resulting in poor academic achievement (Finn & Rock, 1997; Luo et al., 2009).

Ostracism, cognitive engagement, and academic achievement

The results of this study found that cognitive engagement mediated the association between ostracism and academic achievement. This finding is consistent with previous research, in which Song, Bong, et al. (2015), and Song, Over, et al. (2015) revealed that social belonging increases mastery goals, peer help-seeking, motivation, and participation in class discussions, all of which influence achievement. As such, participating in an academic activity and having the opportunity to collaborate with other classmates can support cognitive and academic development (Rogoff, 1998; Sette et al., 2020). Cognitive engagement refers to a learner's willingness to put forth the effort required to comprehend and master complex phenomena (Christenson et al., 2012). Hormones elicited by social stressors, such as peer exclusion and being ignored, can directly effect the brain's ability to form connections and create memories after a learning task (Yeager et al., 2014). Furthermore, when social threats are chronic (e.g. being ostracized), they may monopolize attention, impairing the ability to focus on academic content and engage in abstract learning (Guinote, 2007; Smith & Trope, 2006). Such exclusion can have long-term negative effects on children's health, well-being, and academic achievement (Song, Bong, et al., 2015; Song, Over, et al., 2015).

Ostracism, behavioral engagement, and academic achievement

Unexpectedly, the findings revealed that behavioral engagement had no mediating effect on the association between ostracism and academic achievement. The result contradicts the tenets of academic achievement models, which posit that components of school engagement, such as performing well and mastering academic challenges (Wentzel, 1993), becoming involved in classroom tasks (Buhs, 2005), and concentrating on academic activities (Fredricks et al., 2004), are significantly and consistently associated with academic achievement (Totura et al., 2014). One possible explanation for this phenomenon is that ostracism does, in fact, limit students’ opportunities to receive help from their peers. This research indicates a way whereby students who struggle to connect with their classmates might not ask for or accept assistance from their peers, thus preventing them from accessing the well-established advantages of peer-assisted learning (McMaster et al., 2006), which may have an impact on adolescents’ academic achievement. Moreover, many adolescents from China display high effort, self-regulation, dependability, and adherence to classroom rules, which are perhaps not as easily influenced by the effect of ostracism. Therefore, it is possible that behavioral engagement does not moderate the relationships between ostracism and school achievement. As a result, behavioral engagement may not mediate the links between ostracism and academic achievement. However, dismissing the mediating effect of behavioral engagement is premature because more research is needed before any definitive conclusions can be drawn.

Limitations and implications

There are some limitations to this study. First, the cross-sectional design did not allow for the establishment of causal links between the predictors (i.e. ostracism, emotional, behavioral, and cognitive engagement) and the outcome variable (i.e. academic achievement). As a result, future research should use a longitudinal design to fully investigate the relationships in this study. The second limitation pertains to the generalizability of the study's findings. As mentioned earlier, the data for this study were collected exclusively from a single city within one province in mainland China. Consequently, these findings may not be entirely representative of conditions in other regions of the country. Third, it is worth noting that this study exclusively assessed the mediating role of school engagement. Exploring multiple mediating factors would be beneficial in constructing a more comprehensive model that elucidates the mechanisms through which ostracism influences academic achievement among adolescents. Finally, it should be noted that the data for this study were obtained via self-report questionnaires, which may be susceptible to social desirability bias, potentially compromising internal validity. Future research endeavors might incorporate information from external observers, such as teachers, to mitigate this limitation.

Apart from the aforementioned limitations, the findings of this study have several important theoretical and practical implications. On the theoretical level, the findings of the study further supported the existence of a direct relationship between ostracism and adolescents’ academic achievement. Additionally, the finding that behavioral engagement had no mediating effect between ostracism and academic achievement may derive from cultural differences. Academic achievement is highly valued in Chinese society, which contributes to adolescent behaviors such as high effort, reliability, self-regulation, and compliance with classroom rules, all of which may not easily be influenced by peer exclusion. In sum, these findings have enriched the empirical literature exploring the effects of ostracism on adolescent academic achievement.

On the practical level, these findings indicate that it is important to conduct school-based intervention programs to reduce ostracism among students. Teachers, practitioners, and school psychologists should build a supportive atmosphere that reduces ostracism in the classroom by acting as fair role models in managing ostracism and educating students to understand ostracism as a significant violation of others’ rights. Meanwhile, cultivating high-quality peer relationships may potentially lead to positive outcomes among adolescents. For example, prevention and intervention efforts should consider equipping children and adolescents with interpersonal skills to help them foster high-quality peer relationships and then promote positive school engagement and academic outcomes. In addition, since anyone may be a victim of ostracism, teachers, practitioners, and school psychologists should help students develop positive self-esteem and enhanced resilience. Teachers should encourage students to deal with ostracism using positive coping methods, such as seeking help from parents, teachers, and others.

Footnotes

Acknowledgements

The authors appreciate the support from the Zhejiang Provincial Cultural Innovation Research Center.

Declaration of conflicting interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Ethical approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki Declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards. Research ethics approval was received from the institution where the authors were affiliated.

Funding

The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: This work was supported by the MOE (Ministry of Education in China) Project of Humanities and Social Sciences (grant number 22YJC880024).

Informed Consent

Informed consent was obtained from all students and their parents included in the study.

ORCID iD

Shan Jiang

Author biographies

Lin Wang, PhD, is an assistant professor in the Department of Social Work at Fudan University. Her current research interests focus on child welfare, child development, and bullying. She is interested in using quantitative methods as tools to investigate the mechanisms of aggressive behavior among adolescents.

Shan Jiang, PhD, is a tenure-track associate professor in the Department of Sociology at Zhejiang University. He obtained his PhD in Social Welfare at the Chinese University of Hong Kong. His research focuses on child and adolescent well-being from a contextual-developmental perspective.

Shilin Tan is a part-time research assistant in Dr. Jiang's research lab in the Department of Sociology at Zhejiang University. Her research interests focus on child and family social work.

Yangyang Wan is a PhD candidate in the Department of Social Work at Fudan University. Her research interests include adolescent and youth development, social governance, and social policy.

Wanyan Fei is a master's student in the Department of Social Work at Fudan University. Her research interests include youth network protection.

References

Anderson

J. R.

Guan

Koc

(2016). The academic adjustment scale: Measuring the adjustment of permanent resident or sojourner students. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 54, 68–76. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijintrel.2016.07.006

Asher

S. R.

Rose

A. J.

Gabriel

S. W.

(2001). Peer rejection in everyday life. Interpersonal Rejection, 105–142. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195130157.003.0005

Asogwa

U. D.

Ofoegbu

T. O.

Ogbonna

C. S.

Eskay

Obiyo

N. O.

Nji

G. C.

Ngwoke

O. R.

Eseadi

Agboti

C. I.

Uwakwe

Eze

B. C.

(2020). Effect of video-guided educational intervention on school engagement of adolescent students with hearing impairment. Medicine, 99(23): e20643. https://doi.org/10.1097/md.0000000000020643

Baroody

A. E.

Rimm-Kaufman

S. E.

Larsen

R. A.

Curby

T. W.

(2016). A multi-method approach for describing the contributions of student engagement on fifth grade students’ social competence and achievement in mathematics. Learning and Individual Differences, 48, 54–60. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2016.02.012

Baumeister

R. F.

Leary

M. R.

(1995). The need to belong: Desire for interpersonal attachments as a fundamental human motivation. Psychological Bulletin, 117, 497–529. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781351153683-3

Bierman

K. L.

Domitrovich

C. E.

Nix

R. L.

Gest

S. D.

Welsh

J. A.

Greenberg

M. T.

Blair

Nelson

K. E.

Gill

(2008). Promoting academic and social-emotional school readiness: The head start REDI program. Child Development, 79(6), 1802–1817. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.2008.01227.x

Björkqvist

Österman

Kaukiainen

(1992). The development of direct and indirect aggressive strategies in males and females. Of Mice and Women, 51–64. https://doi.org/10.1016/b978-0-12-102590-8.50010-6

Buhs

E. S.

(2005). Peer rejection, negative peer treatment, and school adjustment: Self-concept and classroom engagement as mediating processes. Journal of School Psychology, 43(5), 407–424. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2005.09.001

Carter

C. P.

Reschly

A. L.

Lovelace

M. D.

Appleton

J. J.

Thompson

(2012). Measuring student engagement among elementary students: Pilot of the student engagement instrument—Elementary version. School Psychology Quarterly, 27(2), 61–73. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0029229

10.

Christenson

Reschly

A. L.

Wylie

(2012). Handbook of research on student engagement (Vol. 840). Springer.

11.

Connell

J. P.

Wellborn

J. G.

(1991). Competence, autonomy, and relatedness: A motivational analysis of self-system processes. In Gunnar

M. R.

Sroufe

L. A.

(Eds.), Minnesota symposium on child psychology (Vol. 23). University of Chicago Press.

12.

Critcher

Zayas

(2014). The involuntary excluder effect: Those included by an excluder are seen as exclusive themselves. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 107(3), 454–474. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0036951

13.

Finn

J. D.

Rock

D. A.

(1997). Academic success among students at risk for school failure. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82(2), 221–234. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.82.2.221

14.

Flook

Repetti

R. L.

Ullman

J. B.

(2005). Classroom social experiences as predictors of academic performance. Developmental Psychology, 41(2), 319–327. https://doi.org/10.1037/0012-1649.41.2.319

15.

Fredricks

J. A.

Blumenfeld

P. C.

Paris

A. H.

(2004). School engagement: Potential of the concept, state of the evidence. Review of Educational Research, 74(1), 59–109. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543074001059

16.

Lee

Chen

Wang

(2020). Academic self-perceptions and academic achievement in Chinese children: A multiwave longitudinal study. Child Development, 91(5), 1718–1732. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.13360

17.

Furrer

Skinner

(2003). Sense of relatedness as a factor in children’s academic engagement and performance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95(1), 148–162. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.95.1.148

18.

Gallardo

L. O.

Barrasa

Guevara-Viejo

(2016). Positive peer relationships and academic achievement across early and midadolescence. Social Behavior and Personality: An International Journal, 44(10), 1637–1648. https://doi.org/10.2224/sbp.2016.44.10.1637

19.

Gilman

Carter-Sowell

DeWall

C. N.

Adams

R. E.

Carboni

(2013). Validation of the ostracism experience scale for adolescents. Psychological Assessment, 25(2), 319–330. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0030913

20.

Gonsalkorale

Williams

K. D.

(2007). The KKK won’t let me play: Ostracism even by a despised outgroup hurts. European Journal of Social Psychology, 37, 1176–1186. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.392

21.

Graham

Golan

(1991). Motivational influences on cognition: Task involvement, ego involvement, and depth of information processing. Journal of Educational Psychology, 83(2), 187–194. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.83.2.187

22.

Guinote

(2007). Power affects basic cognition: Increased attentional inhibition and flexibility. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 43(5), 685–697. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2006.06.008

23.

Guo

Connor

C. M.

Tompkins

Morrison

F. J.

(2011). Classroom quality and student engagement: Contributions to third-grade reading skills. Frontiers in Psychology, 2, 157. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2011.00157

24.

Hirschfield

P. J.

Gasper

(2011). The relationship between school engagement and delinquency in late childhood and early adolescence. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 40(1), 3–22. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-010-9579-5

25.

Hirschi

(2017). Causes of delinquency. Routledge.

26.

D. Y. F.

(1994). Cognitive socialization in Confucian heritage cultures. In Greenfield

P. M.

Cocking

R. R.

(Eds.), Cross-cultural roots of minority child development (pp. 285–313). Erlbaum Associates.

27.

Hughes

J. N.

Chen

(2011). Reciprocal effects of student–teacher and student–peer relatedness: Effects on academic self-efficacy. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 32(5), 278–287. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appdev.2010.03.005

28.

Iyer

R. V.

Kochenderfer-Ladd

Eisenberg

Thompson

(2010). Peer victimization and effortful control: Relations to school engagement and academic achievement. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 56(3), 361–387. https://doi.org/10.2307/23098074

29.

Ladd

Ettekal

Kochenderfer-Ladd

Rudolph

Andrews

(2014). Relations among chronic peer group rejection, maladaptive behavioral dispositions, and early adolescents’ peer perceptions. Child Development, 85(3), 971–988. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.12214

30.

Ladd

Herald-Brown

Reiser

(2008). Does chronic classroom peer rejection predict the development of children’s classroom participation during the grade school years? Child Development, 79(4), 1001–1015. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.2008.01172.x

31.

Ladd

G. W.

Dinella

L. M.

(2009). Continuity and change in early school engagement: Predictive of children’s achievement trajectories from first to eighth grade? Journal of Educational Psychology, 101(1), 190–206. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0013153

32.

Larson

Richards

M. H.

(1991). Daily companionship in late childhood and early adolescence: Changing developmental contexts. Child Development, 62(2), 284–300. https://doi.org/10.2307/1131003

33.

Luo

Hughes

J. A.

Liew

Kwok

(2009). Classifying academically at-risk first graders into engagement types: Association with long-term achievement trajectories. The Elementary School Journal, 109(4), 380–405. https://doi.org/10.1086/593939

34.

McMaster

K. L.

Fuchs

L. S.

(2006). Research on peer assisted learning strategies: The promise and limitations of peer mediated instruction. Reading and Writing Quarterly, 22(1), 5–25. https://doi.org/10.1080/10573560500203491

35.

Mikami

Ruzek

Hafen

Gregory

Allen

(2017). Perceptions of relatedness with classroom peers promote adolescents’ behavioral engagement and achievement in secondary school. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 46(11), 2341–2354. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-017-0724-2

36.

Nakamoto

Schwartz

(2010). Is peer victimization associated with academic achievement? A meta-analytic review. Social Development, 19(2), 221–242. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9507.2009.00539.x

37.

Over

Carpenter

(2009). Priming third-party ostracism increases affiliative imitation in children. Developmental Science, 12(3), F1–F8. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-7687.2008.00820.x

38.

Over

Uskul

(2016). Culture moderates children’s responses to ostracism situations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 110(5), 710–724. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspi0000050

39.

Pfundmair

Aydin

Yeung

Frey

Graupmann

(2015). Exclude me if you can: Cultural effects on the outcomes of social exclusion. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 46(4), 579–596. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022022115571203

40.

Quan

Zhen

Yao

Zhou

(2014). The effects of loneliness and coping style on academic adjustment among college freshmen. Social Behavior and Personality: An International Journal, 42(6), 969–977. https://doi.org/10.2224/sbp.2014.42.6.969

41.

Raabe

(2019). Social exclusion and school achievement: Children of immigrants and children of natives in three European countries. Child Indicators Research, 12(3), 1003–1022. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12187-018-9565-0

42.

Ramey

C. T.

Ramey

S. L.

(2004). Early learning and school readiness: Can early intervention make a difference? Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 50(4), 471–491. https://doi.org/10.1353/mpq.2004.0034

43.

Reyes

M. R.

Brackett

M. A.

Rivers

S. E.

White

Salovey

(2012). Classroom emotional climate, student engagement, and academic achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 104(3), 700–712. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0027268

44.

Rogoff

(1998). Cognition as a collaborative process. In Kuhn

Siegler

R. S.

(Eds.), Cognition, perception, and language (Vol. 2, pp. 679–744). In Damon

(Ed.), Handbook of child psychology (5th ed.). Wiley.

45.

Rosário

Núñez

J. C.

Vallejo

Cunha

Azevedo

Pereira

Nunes

A. R.

Fuentes

Moreira

(2016). Promoting Gypsy children school engagement: A story-tool project to enhance self-regulated learning. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 47, 84–94. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2015.11.005

46.

Rose-Krasnor

(2009). Future directions in youth involvement research. Social Development, 18(2), 497–509. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9507.2008.00506.x

47.

Saylor

Williams

Nida

McKenna

Twomey

Macias

(2013). Ostracism in pediatric populations. Review of Theory and Research. Journal of Developmental & Behavioral Pediatrics, 34(4), 279–287. https://doi.org/10.1097/DBP.0b013e3182874127

48.

Sette

Gasser

Grütter

(2020). Links between teachers’ liking of students, peer inclusion, and students’ academic achievement: A two-wave longitudinal study. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 49(3), 747–756. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-019-01048-5

49.

Skinner

Furrer

Marchand

Kinderman

(2008). Engagement and disaffection in the classroom: Part of a larger motivational dynamic? Journal of Educational Psychology, 100(4), 765–781. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0012840

50.

Smith

P. K.

Trope

(2006). You focus on the forest when you’re in charge of the trees: Power priming and abstract information processing. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 90(4), 578–596. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.90.4.578

51.

Song

Bong

Lee

Kim

S. I.

(2015). Longitudinal investigation into the role of perceived social support in adolescents’ academic motivation and achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 107(3), 821–841. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000016

52.

Song

Over

Carpenter

(2015). Children draw more affiliative pictures following priming with third-party ostracism. Developmental Psychology, 51(6), 831–840. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0039176

53.

Spoor

Williams

K. D.

(2007). The evolution of an ostracism detection system. In Forgas

J. P.

Haselton

von Hippel

(Eds.), Evolution and the social mind: Evolutionary psychology and social cognition (pp. 279–292). Psychology Press.

54.

Totura

C. M. W.

Karver

M. S.

Gesten

E. L.

(2014). Psychological distress and student engagement as mediators of the relationship between peer victimization and achievement in middle school youth. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 43(1), 40–52. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-013-9918-4

55.

Véronneau

M.-H.

Vitaro

Brendgen

Dishion

T. J.

Tremblay

R. E.

(2010). Transactional analysis of the reciprocal links between peer experiences and academic achievement from middle childhood to early adolescence. Developmental Psychology, 46(4), 773–790. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0019816

56.

Wang

Liu

Wang

Lin

Wang

(2021). Left-behind children’s social adjustment and relationship with parental coping with children’s negative emotions during the COVID-19 pandemic in China. International Journal of Psychology, 56(4), 512–521. https://doi.org/10.1002/ijop.12754

57.

Wentzel

K. R.

(1993). Does being good make the grade? Social behavior and academic competence in middle school. Journal of Educational Psychology, 85(2), 357–364. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.85.2.357

58.

Williams

K. D.

(2001). Ostracism: The power of silence. Guilford Press.

59.

Williams

K. D.

(2009). Ostracism: A temporal need-threat model. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 41, 275–314. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2601(08)00406-1

60.

Wölfer

Scheithauer

(2013). Ostracism in childhood and adolescence: Emotional, cognitive, and behavioral effects of social exclusion. Social Influence, 8(4), 217–236. https://doi.org/10.1080/15534510.2012.706233

61.

Wolters

(2004). Advancing achievement goal theory: Using goal structures and goal orientations to predict students’ motivation, cognition, and achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 96(2), 236–250. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.96.2.236

62.

Yeager

D. S.

Johnson

Spitzer

B. J.

Trzesniewski

K. H.

Powers

Dweck

C. S.

(2014). The far-reaching effects of believing people can change: Implicit theories of personality shape stress, health, and achievement during adolescence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 106(6), 867–884. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0036335

63.

Zhang

Huang

Dong

(2018). Reliability and validity of the ostracism experience scale for adolescents in Chinese adolescence. Chinese Journal of Clinical Psychology, 26, 1123–1126. https://doi.org/10.16128/j.cnki.1005-3611.2018.06.016

64.

Zwolinski

(2012). Psychological and neuroendocrine reactivity to ostracism. Aggressive Behavior, 38(2), 108–125. https://doi.org/10.1002/ab.21411