Left-Behind Status and Bullying in Chinese Rural Children: The Roles of Parental Supervision and Support and Friends in Puppy Love

Abstract

Bullying behaviors, as exhibited by left-behind children (LBC) in China, occur commonly. Parental supervision and support, as well as friendship networks, have previously been verified as crucial aspects in determining the bullying behaviors of LBC. However, evidence of the interactive effect of these vital factors is sparse, and puppy love, which is inevitable among school-age children, is seldom investigated. The current study aimed to examine the roles of parental supervision and support as well as peers in puppy love in LBC bullying behaviors by means of a moderated mediation model. The data were derived from 28 counties/districts across China. We used data from the China Education Panel Survey (CEPS) of 3,252 junior high school students. A moderated mediation model was conducted by PROCESS procedure in Statistical Product and Service Solutions (SPSS) and the bootstrapping method was performed for inference test. The moderated mediation analysis showed that left-behind status was associated with bullying behaviors displayed by school-age students. Parental supervision and support mediated this association; furthermore, the mediation effects were dependent on the number of friends in puppy love. In particular, as the number of friends in puppy love increased, the mediating effect of parental supervision weakened, whereas the mediating effect of parental support became stronger. These results revealed the importance of parental support and supervision and peers in puppy love in shaping bullying behaviors among LBC. Future bullying prevention and intervention should promote parental supervision and support among LBC in rural China, especially those with many friends in puppy love.

Keywords

parental supervision parental support puppy love left-behind children bullying China

Introduction

Bullying behaviors among children and adolescents has been recognized as a problematic behavior that negatively impacts psychological well-being and prosocial skills for both perpetrators and victims (Georgiou, 2008; Sourander et al., 2000). Bullying is a repeated aggression with a deliberate intent to harm or disturb a less powerful person or group (Olweus, 1993; Zhang, Chi, et al., 2019). The aggression could be physical (e.g., hitting, pushing), verbal (e.g., name-calling, threats), or psychological (e.g., rumors, shunning).

Bullying among school-age children is an emerging problem in China. In a nationally representative sample from Beijing, Hangzhou, Wuhan, and Urumqi, 25.7% of middle school students reported being victims of bullying incidents in the previous 30 days (Cheng et al., 2010). In addition, middle school students in Xi’an reported a 54.9% incident rate of having been bullied in their lifetime (Zhu & Chan, 2015). Furthermore, rural children were more often involved in bullying perpetration than their urban counterparts (Zhang, Zhou, & Tao, 2019). Notably, Chinese left-behind children (LBC) in rural areas have recently been reported to have a higher probability of being bullied than non-LBC (Otake et al., 2019). However, it is not clear how the left-behind status is associated with bullying others.

LBC have been defined as rural children below 18 years of age who are left at home with grandparents, relatives, or nonrelatives when one or both of their parents migrate abroad or from rural to urban areas for better job opportunities (Liu et al., 2009). Since the 1990s, hundreds of millions of rural laborers in China have moved from rural communities to urban regions to improve their life prospects, due in part to an unequal social welfare system based on the rural-urban divide (Graham & Jordan, 2011; Wen & Lin, 2012). Consequently, more than 61 million children have been reported to be left behind in the countryside by their migrant parents, constituting 47.7% of rural children (All-China Women’s Federation, 2013; Xu et al., 2018). The migration from rural to urban areas has geographically separated many parents from their children.

Previous research has revealed that parent–child separation among LBC can result in poor physical health (Li et al., 2015), psychological problems (Graham & Jordan, 2011), and developmental issues (Jia & Tian, 2010; Liu et al., 2009). In particular, low-quality parent–child involvement may contribute to LBC’s bullying behaviors (Flouri & Buchanan, 2003). In this sense, parental supervision (Farrington, 1994; Jimenez et al., 2010) and support (Cassidy, 2009; Kionishi & Hymel, 2009; Otake et al., 2019) have been empirically proven to be two notable factors associated with bullying behaviors among LBC. Moreover, the separation between parents and school-age children may increase the influence of peers on their development (Sun et al., 2010) although friendship networks have both protective and risk-related effects on children’s bullying behaviors (Wang et al., 2009). However, few studies have systematically examined the association among left-behind status, parental supervision and support, friendship networks, and bullying behaviors among school-age children in rural China. In the present research, bullying behaviors indicate perpetrating or engaging in bullying behaviors rather than being victims of bullying.

Parental supervision and support and friendship networks on LBC’s bullying behaviors could be based on hierarchical compensatory mechanisms. This theory highlights the ordered preference or need for support that one pursues according to the primacy intensity between the support givers and the recipient (Cantor, 1979). Generally, kin are viewed as the most important source of support, followed by significant others and/or organizations, with formal organizations positioned last. When the initially preferred support giver is absent, other groups play a role in a compensatory manner as replacement (Cantor, 1979). Guided by this theory, we speculate that interaction with parental supervision and support and friendship networks would function in a hierarchical compensatory pattern, with parents being the most important in the hierarchy for affecting the bullying behaviors of LBC. That is, friends would compensate for the lack of parental support.

The Roles of Parental Supervision and Support

In rural China, most LBC live with their grandparents (Lu, 2012). Coresidence with grandparents, however, does not ensure sufficient education and attention in rearing children (Gao et al., 2010). Moreover, owing to grandparents either spoiling children or failing to give them sufficient care and warmth, it may lead to unacceptable habits in LBC, including arrogant and bullying behaviors (Xiang, 2007; Xu & Liu, 2018). Prior studies have shown that children who experience bullying problems are more likely than nonbullied peers to be confronted with long-term parental absence during adolescence (Wang, 2009). Physical absence challenges the method of parent–child communication. Hence, compared with the general population of children, LBC may mainly rely on internet sources for communication with their parents, whereas face-to-face meetings are generally rare. Remote monitoring and support through telecommunications may be inferior to the care received from parents who are physically present, and the care provided by parents who do not even use internet telecommunications may be even worse. It is highly likely that parent–child separation can lead to inadequate or unavailable social support or guidance from the family (Song, 2017) and thus incur negative consequences regarding the children’s behaviors (Graham & Jordan, 2011; Li et al., 2015).

In addition, the negative outcomes of parental absence may be derived from the incapacity of LBC to receive effective parental supervision and monitoring. For example, evidence has shown that a lack of parental supervision may lead to bullying behaviors (Farrington, 1994; Jimenez et al., 2010). In addition, parental absence involves low levels of parental support, with the latter being a protective factor for children’s bullying behaviors (Cassidy, 2009; Kionishi & Hymel, 2009). For LBC, parental absence can lead to the disruption of the family structure, resulting in a lack of love and security for LBC and their difficulty receiving sufficient parental support (Xu, 2017). Furthermore, the prolonged absence of parents has a negative impact on the parent–child relationship (Zhao et al., 2017); as a result, children may develop negative emotional problems (Kobak & Madsen, 2008), particularly bullying behaviors (Liu et al., 2012; Walden & Beran, 2010). Therefore, we speculate that parental supervision and support serve as two important mediators in the association between left-behind status and bullying behaviors among children in rural China.

Number of Friends in Puppy Love as Moderator

Friendship plays an important role in child development. Interaction with friends is the affair of not only children themselves but also those in close relationships with the children who are responsible for their development (e.g., parents, grandparents, and relatives). For instance, Chinese parents or families will allow and/or encourage their children to get along with other children who have good performance at school or whose parents have high levels of socioeconomic status, whereas they will prevent their children from having contact with friends who do not meet their expectations (Zhao & Zhang, 2017). Accordingly, Tang (2017) found that the existence of friendship did not ensure a beneficial effect; in a certain sense, a larger number of good friends indicated a higher probability of inappropriate behaviors (e.g., health-risk behaviors). For LBC, high-quality peer relationships can buffer against their feeling of loneliness due to irregular contacts with their parents (Sun et al., 2010). Conversely, friends and companions can also contribute to triggering LBC’s aberrant behaviors when their parents are absent from them when they are in need (Wang, 2006). These notions give rise to a question about the impact of friends in childhood who are in puppy love, namely, a group of children with whom LBC’s kin would strongly object to them communicating in the Chinese context.

Puppy love is a phenomenon that may occur among school-age children but is often forbidden by families and teachers or other caregivers in China. Puppy love is defined by Chinese scholars as acts of love that occur in juvenile groups who are not completely independent in economic and life affairs and/or that occur at an age long before the legal age of marriage (Min, 2002). Generally, in Western cultures, expressing emotion openly is viewed as a healthy route for social relations and well-being (Floyd et al., 2005). In Chinese culture, in contrast, reticence is an encouraged characteristic in relation to emotional expressiveness; it is thought to preserve group harmony (Markus & Kitayama, 1991). In particular, different cultures hold different attitudes toward love experience among children. Love experience in school-age children is not condoned in Chinese society. Behaviors such as writing love letters, sending photos, dating romantic partners, hugging and kissing are viewed as acts of puppy love (Liu, 1991). Students who display culturally unwelcome and improper behaviors are often labeled as “bad students,” and teachers and parents or families will strongly encourage their own children to avoid interacting with them. However, from the perspective of psychosocial development, romantic attachments are beneficial for a healthy personality and positive interpersonal behaviors (Montgomery & Scorell, 1998). Interaction with friends could result in the frequent disclosure of feelings and thoughts, and knowing about the love experience of these friends, if applicable, can provide the basis for a very intimate relationship between children and their friends. Friends who are in puppy love actually serve as a vital source of support for children and safeguard their identity formation and self-exploration (Margalit, 2010). Indeed, love experience among students is unavoidable, and LBC are not excluded from such peer experiences. The differing approaches to love experience among children between Chinese culture and the area of individual psychosocial development conflict; however, the actual effect of love experience on children’s development is still unclear and understudied. Therefore, the unknown effect of LBC’s friends who have love experience on the bullying behaviors of LBC is worthy of exploring; such an exploration could indicate whether these “bad friends” have a detrimental effect on this group of children. In the current study, the number of friends in puppy love is representative of the social network size that reflects the effect to be explored.

Using data from the 2015 China Education Panel Survey (CEPS; a national representative sample) (National Survey Research Center, Renmin University of China 2015), the present study aimed to investigate (a) whether LBC are more likely to bully than other children in China, (b) whether this association is mediated by parental supervision and support, and (c) whether the mediation of parental supervision and support depends on the number of friends in puppy love (see Figure 1).

Figure 1.

The hypothesized moderated mediation model.

Method

Data and Sample

This study used data from the follow-up survey of the CEPS conducted in 2015, a nationally representative school-based survey of junior high school students in China (N = 20,000). Based on a multistage stratified probability proportional-to-size (PPS) sampling design, 28 counties/districts across the country were selected for the survey, and four junior high schools within the geographic boundaries of each county/district were sampled. At the last stage, four classes were recruited from the selected schools to participate in the study; all students within each class were surveyed. The questionnaire included the following extensive range of domains: demographic characteristics, family background characteristics, mobility and migration status, academic performance, extracurricular activities, health status, relationship with teachers and peers, social behavior development, and expectations for the future. Participants completed the CEPS anonymously. Consent from the children and their parents was obtained according to the requirements of the participating school districts.

This study was deliberately designed to focus on rural children; therefore, rural hukou holders in local rural areas were sampled, and the rest of the children were excluded from the sample. The hukou registration system in China grants each person with a permanent residence status based on household and resource distribution that influences individual and regional development.

The questionnaires collected information on each participant’s gender, age, grade, location, hukou, bullying behaviors, family status, peer behaviors, and so on. Children were excluded from the present analysis if they did not answer the bullying question. In total, 3,252 students were involved in the following analyses.

Measures

Dependent variable

In this study, bullying behaviors included verbal and physical bullying. Three items were used to assess the dependent variable of bullying behaviors in the past year: (a) cursing or saying swear words, (b) quarreling with others, and (c) having a fight with others. These items were rated on a 5-point Likert-type scale with response options ranging from never to always (0 = never, 1 = seldom, 2 = sometimes, 3 = often, and 4 = always). The total scores of the three items were added together; higher scores indicated higher levels of bullying engagement. The Cronbach’s alpha value for bullying behaviors was .652, which was above .600 and therefore acceptable (George & Mallery, 2003; Kline, 2000).

Independent variable

LBC were children with a local rural hukou with one or both parents absent due to outmigration (Hao & Yu, 2015). The survey did not ask about the specific reasons for parental absence or the parents’ current place of residence. Therefore, we used the question about “whether or not parents live in the same household with you” as an alternative measure for the status of being left behind. Participants who reported that one or both parents did not live with them were coded as 1; other children were coded as 0.

Mediators

In this study, parental supervision and parental support were two mediators. Parental supervision was measured with four items. Participants responded on a 3-point Likert-type scale from 0 (they don’t care) to 2 (they are very strict about it) regarding their parents’ attitudes about the following dimensions: (a) your behavior at school, (b) whom you make friends with, (c) time you spend watching TV, and (d) your dress style. Higher scores indicated higher levels of parental supervision. The Cronbach’s alpha value of the parental supervision scale suggested acceptable reliability (Cronbach’s α = .637). Parental support was assessed by three questions for LBC to indicate the first person to whom they would turn to when in the following situations of need: (a) when you want to chat with someone, (b) when you are in trouble, and (c) when you need help. For each question, participants who reported that they would turn to parents were coded as 1; others were coded as 0. The scores of the three items were summed, and higher scores indicated higher levels of parental support. The Cronbach’s alpha value of the parental support scale was .627, indicating acceptable reliability (George & Mallery, 2003; Kline, 2000).

Moderator

The number of friends in puppy love was measured using a single item: “How many of your best friends have had or are having a romance?” The response options were 0 = none of them, 1 = one or two of them, and 2 = most of them.

Control variables

Children’s age, gender, family economic status, single-child family status, and place of residence (living on campus or not) were controlled for in this study.

Data Analysis Strategy

Because the variable of bullying was continuous, we used a general linear regression model to achieve the study aims.

Age, gender, family economic status, single-child family status, and place of residence were used as covariates in this study. We first tested the direct effect of left-behind status on bullying behaviors with linear regression after controlling for the covariates in Statistical Product and Service Solutions (SPSS) 22.0 (Hypothesis 1c in Figure 1). Thereafter, mediation analysis was performed with PROCESS 2.13 installed in SPSS. We estimated the indirect effect related to Hypothesis 2 (a₁ × b₁ and a₂ × b₂ in Figure 1) after controlling for the covariates. In addition, a bootstrapping procedure with 5,000 resamples was performed to produce the bias-corrected confidence intervals (CIs) to conduct an inference test on the indirect effects as the value of a × b did not meet the normal distribution. Specifically, this procedure involved 5,000 instances of resampling with replacement from which a sampling distribution of the indirect effect was constructed that could be used to determine the CIs. A CI that excluded zero indicated significant indirect effects.

Standardized coefficients are reported, and z scores were used for the product terms in all the regression models. A moderated mediation analysis was then conducted with PROCESS 2.13. In this study, the number of friends in puppy love was included as a moderator of the relationship between parental supervision/support and bullying behaviors (b₁/b₂ in Figure 1; Hypothesis 3). To perform a formal test of the moderated mediation effect, we examined the index of moderated mediation (Hayes, 2015). This index is an interval estimate of the parameter of a function linking the indirect effect to the values of a moderator. Conditional indirect effects conditioned by the moderator’s various values are present if the index is significant.

Results

Sample Characteristics

The participants had an average age of 13.621 ± .767 (range = 12–18) years. The sample comprised mostly male students who lived on campus, came from a multiple-child family, and had a moderate economic status. For more information, please refer to Table 1.

Table 1.

Personal Information of the Participants (N = 3,252).

Variable	M ± SD (Range)N (%)
Age	13.621 ± .767 (12−18)
Gender
Male	1,691 (52%)
Female	1,561 (48%)
Whether or not to live on campus
No	1,500 (46.13%)
Yes	1,752 (53.87%)
Whether or not only child family
No	2,369 (72.85%)
Yes	883 (27.15%)
Family economic status
Very poor	145 (4.46%)
Somewhat poor	625 (19.22%)
Moderate	2,285 (70.26%)
Somewhat rich	181 (5.57%)
Very rich	16 (0.49%)

Mediation Model Results

The correlations of the study variables are presented in Table 2. Left-behind status (r = .069, p < .05), parental supervision (r = –.147, p < .05), parental support (r = –.135, p < .05), and the number of friends in puppy love (r = .196, p < .05) were significantly associated with bullying behaviors. In addition, left-behind status was negatively associated with parental supervision (r = –.053, p < .05) and parental support (r = –.062, p < .05). Consistent with Hypothesis 1, left-behind status had a positive effect on children’s bullying behaviors (c = .049, p < .01; Table 3).

Table 2.

Descriptive Statistics and Bivariate Correlations of the Study Variables.

Variable	M	SD	1	2	3	4	5
1. Left-behind status	0.229	0.420	1
2. Parental supervision	4.642	1.770	−.053*	1
3. Parental support	0.597	0.889	−.062*	.135*	1
4. The number of friends in puppy love	0.325	0.009	.042*	−.127*	−.096*	1
5. Bullying behaviors	1.685	1.025	.069*	−.147*	−.135*	.196*	1

p < .05.

Table 3.

The Indirect Effects of Left-behind Status on Bullying Behaviors Through Parental Supervision and Parental Support.

Variable	Bullying Behaviors	Parental Supervision	Parental Support	Bullying Behaviors
Intercept	−.056	−.040	.050	−.056
Age	.028	−.023	.058*	.032
Gender	.167***	−.081***	−.054**	.151***
Live on campus	.097***	.039*	−.007	.101***
Only child family	−.063**	−.031	.011	−.066**
Family economic status	.002*	.014	.042*	−.008
Left-behind status	.049**	−.051**	−.056**	.037*
Parental supervision				−.124***
Parental support				−.106***
Indirect effects[95% bootstrap CI]
Total				.012 [.006, .019]
Parental Supervision				.006 [.002, .012]
Parental Support				.006 [.002, .010]
R ²	.048***	.116***	.094***	.278***

Note. Standardized coefficients are presented. CI = confidence interval. Bootstrap = 5,000.

p < .05. **p < .01. ***p < .001.

Table 3 depicts the indirect effects of left-behind status on bullying behaviors in terms of parental supervision and parental support. Left-behind status had significant direct effects on parental supervision (a₁ = –.051, p < .001) and parental support (a₂ = –.056, p < .001), and parental supervision (b₁ = –.124, p < .0001) and support (b₂ = –.106, p < .0001) each had a direct effect on bullying behaviors. In addition, left-behind status had indirect effects on bullying behaviors through parental supervision (a₁ × b₁ = .006, CI = [.002, .012]) and parental support (a₂ × b₂ = .006, CI = [.002, .010]); the total indirect effect was significant (a₁ × b₁₊ a₂ × b₂ = .012, CI = [.006, .019]). Thereafter, we added parental supervision and parental support as mediators; the direct effects of left-behind status on bullying behaviors decreased but remained significant (c’ = .037, p < .05). Thus, Hypothesis 2 was supported.

Moderated Mediation Model Results

As displayed in Table 4, the two interaction terms, that is, Parental supervision × The number of friends in puppy love and Parental support × The number of friends in puppy love, had a significant interaction effect in the moderated mediation models. The comparison between the mediation model and moderated mediation model indicate that a considerable amount of additional variance in bullying behaviors was explained (ΔR² = .044), which means that the moderated mediation model fit the data better than the mediation model did. Meanwhile, the indexes of moderated mediation were significant (Table 4; index _{parental supervision} = –.002, 95% CI = [–.005, –.000]; index _{parental support} = .002, 95% CI = [.000, .006]), which indicated that the indirect effects left-behind status had on bullying through parental supervision and parental support varied, depending on the number of friends in puppy love. To better interpret the results, we graphed the interaction effects and presented the slopes of parental supervision/ support on bullying in Figures 2 and 3, sorting by high and low numbers of friends in puppy love. High and low numbers of friends in puppy love were defined as 1 SD above and below the mean, respectively. A simple slope test revealed that the associations between parental supervision and bullying were stronger for children with a low number of friends in puppy love than for children with a high number of friends in puppy love, but the association between parental support and bullying behaviors was in the opposite direction.

Table 4.

The Moderated Mediation Model With Parental Supervision and Parental Support Mediators and the Number of Friends in Puppy Love as a Moderator.

Variable	Bullying Behaviors
Direct effects
Left-behind status	.033
Parental supervision	−.107***
Parental support	−.098***
The number of friends in puppy love	.164***
Parental supervision × The number of friends in puppy Love	.041*
Parental support × The number of friends in puppy love	−.039*
Conditional indirect effects [95% CI]
Parental supervision
Low number of friends in puppy love	.007 [.002, .013]
Average number of friends in puppy love	.006 [.002, .011]
High number of friends in puppy love	.004 [.001, .008]
Parental support
Low number of friends in puppy love	.004 [.002, .008]
Average number of friends in puppy love	.005 [.002, .010]
High number of friends in puppy love	.008 [.003, .014]
Index of moderated mediation [95% CI]
Parental supervision	−.002 [−.005, −.000]
Parental support	.002 [.000, .006]
R ²	.322***

Note. Age, gender, family economic status, whether or not only child family, and whether or not living on campus were controlled in the regression model. CI = confidence interval. Bootstrap = 5,000.

p < .05. **p < .01. ***p < .001.

Figure 2.

The association between parental supervision and bullying behaviors with the number of friends in puppy love as a moderator.

Figure 3.

The association between parental support and bullying behaviors with the number of friends in puppy love as a moderator.

To illustrate the presence of moderated mediation, we reported the indirect effect at various levels of the moderators (1 SD below the mean, the mean, and 1 SD above the mean; Table 4). For children with a low number of friends in puppy love, the indirect effects were significant (parental supervision = .007, 95% CI = [.002, .013]; parental support = .004, 95% CI = [.002, .008]). For children with the mean number of friends in puppy love, the indirect effect of left-behind status on bullying through parental supervision was weakened (parental supervision = .006, 95% CI = [.002, .011]), and the indirect effect was the weakest among children with a high number of friends in puppy love (parental supervision = .004, 95% CI = [.001, .008]). For parental support, the indirect effect became stronger with an increased number of friends in puppy love. For children with an average number of friends in puppy love, the indirect effect of left-behind status on bullying behaviors through parental support was .005, 95% CI = [.002, .010]. The mediating effect of parental support continued to become stronger (parental support = .008, 95% CI = [.003, .014]) as the number of friends in puppy love increased to a high number. These results imply that the indirect effects of left-behind status on bullying behaviors through parental supervision and support are contingent on the number of friends in puppy love, but through inverse paths. Overall, LBC are generally more likely to bully others than non-LBC, and this higher probability of bullying behaviors among LBC is partially attributed to insufficient parental supervision and support. Notably, the number of friends in puppy love could ameliorate the negative influence of inadequate parental supervision but aggravate the adverse impact of insufficient parental support.

Discussion

In the final model (the moderated mediation model), the direct effect of left-behind status on bullying behaviors was nearly positively significant (p = .051). In combination with the significance of this effect in the mediation model, this finding suggests that LBC are inclined to have a high possibility of committing bullying behaviors. This notion is consistent with the results of the mediation model, wherein being left behind was significantly associated with bullying behaviors.

Moreover, the roles of parents in determining children’s bullying behaviors were also confirmed. That is, both parental supervision and support could alleviate the behavioral problems of children. Regarding the mediating effects of parental supervision and support, among LBC, the levels of parental supervision and support were lower than those of children who were living with their parents. The incidence of bullying behaviors increased with decreasing degrees of parental supervision and support. These paths were manifested in the positive mediating functions of parental supervision and support in the relationship between left-behind status and bullying behaviors. Overall, it is concluded that children who are left behind by parents are likely to lack parental supervision and support and thus tend to engage in bullying behaviors. This finding is consistent with previous evidence (Cassidy, 2009; Farrington, 1994; Jimenez et al., 2010; Kionishi & Hymel, 2009; Wang, 2009).

One reason for the low levels of parental supervision and support may lie in the fact that migrant parents are likely to be busy due to their work schedules and not spend enough time with or supervise their children. Although telecommunications, for example, the use of mobile phones, could improve migrant parents’ involvement with their LBC, the wireless network is the main problem that stops many migrant parents from paying attention to their children in rural homes (Liu & Leung, 2017). The more supervision or attention children receive from their parents, the more children care about their parents’ attitudes toward them (Lu et al., 2016). Therefore, with supervision and support from parents, LBC would know which behaviors their parents would allow and which behaviors they would forbid. Their concern about their parents’ attitudes could contribute to the reduction in their risk of committing bullying behaviors. Based on the fact that the majority of migrant parents use mobile phones to call their children in distance parenting (Liu & Leung, 2017), diverse approaches for parent–child communication should be attempted to enhance LBC satisfaction with parenting.

Regarding the role of friends, this study also revealed a significant effect of friend networks on LBC behaviors. The physical absence of parents from the lives of LBC, along with a lack of sufficient communication, can give rise to estrangement between LBC and their parents (Ye & Murray, 2005). The low quality of parent–child interaction may cause LBC to place great value on peer relationship and strive to secure belongingness to and acceptance from their friendship groups because of their perceived vulnerability (Devine, 2013). Peer interaction, therefore, plays an important role in shaping the behaviors of LBC who are influenced by parent–child separation. The current study showed that the number of friends in puppy love had a different moderating effect concerning parental supervision and support. Specifically, among LBC who had a larger number of friends in puppy love, the effect of parental supervision on bullying behaviors was weakened; in contrast, the effect of parental support on bullying behaviors became stronger with an increasing number of friends in puppy love.

The reason for the opposite outcomes in the moderated mediation model may originate from the different attributes of supervision and support from parents. Supervision involves restrictions on the interests and actions of children, whereas support involves approval and/or promotion of those engagements. For LBC who had more friends in puppy love, estrangement between parents and children made parental supervision ineffective when friends held dominant positions in the daily lives of LBC (Devine, 2013). This can be reflected by the diminishing effect of parental supervision on the frequency of bullying behaviors among LBC who had a larger number of best friends in a romantic relationship. Amezcua et al. (2016) claimed that close communication in the parent–child relationship could predict proper parental supervision and monitoring and less inappropriate behaviors of children. Thus, it can be seen that the effectiveness of supervision is conditioned by the relationship between parents and their children.

Compared with parental supervision, support from parents had a directly effective buffering function against bullying behaviors among LBC. For LBC with more friends in puppy love, parental support had a stronger influence on their bullying behavior. In other words, even though children make friends with “bad students” whom their teachers and families are not fond of because of Chinese cultural doctrines, support from parents could prevent children, including LBC, from being influenced by disobedient students (friends). It is mainly through the family that developing children are able to have the opportunities and experiences that are necessary to obtain the crucial skills, behaviors, values, beliefs, and knowledge that make them successful in social relationships (Maccoby, 1992). As Tang (2017) noted, friend support seems ineffective when parents are absent, and children—including LBC—could be expected to perform best based on the expectations of others (e.g., teachers and families), when support from both parents and friends is available.

This cross-sectional study indicates opportunities for further research efforts. First, a longitudinal observation would be of value in examining how LBC develop bullying behaviors in the absence of their parents. Such observation would deepen the understanding of the impact that migrant parents have on their children’s development. Second, qualitative investigation would complement the results of this quantitative study. Although this investigation showed different interaction effects of parent and friends in determining the bullying behaviors of LBC, the underlying reasons for the contrary phenomenon are still uncertain. For example, this study merits further exploration on whether the role of best friends in puppy love is positive or negative and how these friends interact with children and influence their behaviors. In addition, the investigation of the influences of parental supervision and support among LBC is worth expanding based on the results of this study. Third, the internal consistency of the main variables was not excellent or good; thus, improvement in this area through the addition and/or adaptation of the items for those variables will be promising in further efforts. Fourth, this study relied on secondhand data; fieldwork and the use of primary sources are recommended for research on the behavioral and health problems of LBC. Fifth, this study studied verbal and behavioral bullying behaviors, whereas other forms, for example, indirect forms of bullying, namely, relational bullying (Wang et al., 2009), were not included. Thus, the types of bullying behaviors studied could be extended to enrich our understanding of bullying behaviors among LBC. Sixth, although the data set is from a nationally representative survey, we admit the bias of subsample of LBC when we selected all of the children who were rural hukou holders in local rural areas from the full sample, excluding those with missing data. Thus, the shrinking representativeness of the results of this study warrant carefulness in interpreting the results. Finally, puppy love is not condoned in Chinese culture, whereas people in Western cultures do not regard it as irregular. Thus, the interpretation of the results of this study are limited to the Chinese context. Further studies comparing the behavioral outcomes of children left behind by parents between Chinese and Western societies or other cultural settings will be interesting.

Although these limitations should be taken into consideration, this study comprehensively explored the importance of parental supervision and support and friend networks for the bullying behaviors of LBC. First, this study sheds light on the interactive function of parents and friends in influencing bullying behaviors among LBC. In particular, romantic relationships in friendship networks were primarily taken into account in this current study because of the cultural diversity regarding this issue. This could be an interesting but neglected theme in the research field on child development, especially among LBC. Second, the current study has many implications for teachers and families to update their thoughts and actions in taking care of LBC. For instance, making the combination of the “stick” (supervision) and the “carrot” (support) more effective could be an angle for better rearing LBC. Although communication through the internet network is possible, it does not seem to provide the same advantages as face-to-face interaction. In this sense, understanding how to make distant supervision and support available and effective is also desirable when departure is inevitable. Third, given the different interactions of the number of friends in puppy love with parental supervision and support, kin in the Chinese context should adjust their viewpoints about love experience among school-age children, especially those left behind in rural areas. Fourth, the results revealed that it is not always the case that there are no benefits of children interacting with other children labeled as “bad” students who have love experience as children with love experience could boost the inhibitory effect of parental support on bullying behaviors for LBC. Finally, the moderated mediation mechanism reflects the hierarchical roles of parents and friends in influencing the bullying behaviors of LBC. This study provided evidence of hierarchical compensatory mechanisms, especially among LBC in China, to supplement studies that have applied this concept in older populations (e.g., Friedman, 1993; Lu et al., 2019). It is true that friendship can compensate for the absence of parents in terms of developing LBC’s behaviors.

Conclusion

This study sheds light on the mediating roles of parental supervision and support in the relationship between left-behind status and bullying behaviors. The results suggest that the increased rate of bullying behaviors among LBC could in part result from a lack of parental supervision and support. Such mediating roles of parental supervision and support are also dependent on the number of best friends in puppy love. As the number of friends in puppy love increases, the ameliorating effect of parental supervision on bullying behaviors among LBC was weakened, whereas the ameliorating effect of parental support became stronger. This study highlights the vital role of companionship with parents and friends. Intimate communication between parents and children is still necessary despite the physical distance between them. For LBC, calling on parents for help and chatting with them when they are in need can sometimes provide a source of happiness for them. In addition, puppy love has a positive influence although it is culturally forbidden in China. Rethinking opinions about the love experience of children is important for developing prosocial behaviors among LBC.

Footnotes

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.

Funding

The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: This study received funding support from National Social Science Fund of China (16BSH081).

ORCID iD

Haimin Pan

Author Biographies

Qian Liu, PhD, is a lecturer in the School of Public Administration at Hunan Normal University. Her research focuses on the effect of migration on children of migrants’ bullying behaviors. She is interested in using the evaluation as tool to initiate and support policy-level change and improvement and in identifying mechanisms to translate research into practice.

Haimin Pan, is a doctoral graduate from the Department of Social and Behavioral Sciences, City University of Hong Kong in October 2018. She is now a Lecturer in Department of Sociology at Zhejiang University. Her research interests pertain to, but are not limited to, aging, bereavement and grief, and loss in traumatic events. She is interested in using the quantitative method to investigate phenomenon in social science.

Yiling Huang, is a master’s student in the School of Public Administration at Hunan Normal University. Her research focuses on the left-behind children’s bullying behavior. She is interested in probing the vital factors and mechanisms for left-behind children’s bullying behavior.

Yaolin Pei, PhD, is a postdoctoral associate in Rory Meyers College of Nursing at New York University. Her research focuses on aging, end of life care, oral health, and family demography.

References

All-China Women’s Federation. (2013). Research report on the situation of rural left-behind China, rural-urban migration children in China [Electronic resource]. http://acwf.people.com.cn/n/2013/0510/c9901321437965.html

Amezcua

L. C.

Garcia

F. J.

Gonzalez-Forteza

Velez

N. A. M.

Icaza

M. E. M. M

. (2016). Relationship between parent supervision and anti-social behavior in juvenile offenders from the state of Morelos. Salud Mental, 39(1), 11–17.

Cantor

(1979). Neighbors and friends: An overlooked resource in the informal support system. Research on Aging, 1, 434–463.

Cassidy

(2009). Bullying and victimization in school children: The role of social identity, problem solving style, and family and school context. Social Psychology of Education, 12, 63–76.

Cheng

Newman

I. M.

Mbulo

Chai

Chen

Shell

D. F.

(2010). Being bullied and psychosocial adjustment among middle school students in China. Journal of School Health, 80(4), 193–199.

Devine

(2013). “Value”ing children differently? Migrant children in education. Children & Society, 27(4), 282–294.

Farrington

D. P.

(1994). Childhood, adolescent, and adult features of violent males. In Huesmann

L. R.

(Ed.), Aggressive behavior: Current perspective (pp. 215–240). Plenum Press.

Flouri

Buchanan

(2003). The role of mother involvement and father involvement in adolescence bullying behavior. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 18(6), 634–644.

Floyd

Hess

J. A.

Miczo

L. A.

Halone

K. K.

Mikkelson

A. C.

Tusing

K. J.

(2005). Human affection exchange: VIII. Further evidence of the benefits of expressed affection. Communication Quarterly, 53, 285–303.

10.

Friedman

M. M.

(1993). Social support sources and psychological well-being in older women with heart disease. Research in Nursing & Health, 16, 405–413.

11.

Gao

L. P.

Kim

J. H.

Congdon

Lau

Griffiths

(2010). The impact of parental migration on health status and health behaviours among left behind adolescent school children in China. BMC Public Health, 10(1), Article 56.

12.

George

Mallery

(2003). SPSS for Windows step by step: A simple guide and reference (4th ed.). Allyn & Bacon.

13.

Georgiou

N. S.

(2008). Parental style and child bullying and victimization experiences at school. Social Psychology of Education, 11, 213–227.

14.

Graham

Jordan

L. P.

(2011). Migrant parents and the psychological well-being of left-behind children in Southeast Asia. Journal of Marriage and Family, 73, 763–787.

15.

Hao

(2015). Rural-urban migration and children’s access to education: China in comparative perspective. Background paper for the EFA Global Monitoring Report. UNESCO. http://acwf.people.com.cn/n/2013/0510/c9901321437965.html

16.

Hayes

A. F.

(2015). An index and test of linear moderated mediation. Multivariate Behavior Research, 50(1), 1–22.

17.

Jia

Tian

(2010). Loneliness of left-behind children: A cross-sectional survey in a sample of rural China. Child Care Health and Development, 36(6), 812–817.

18.

Jimenez

Musitu

Ramos

Murgui

(2010). Community involvement and victimization at school: An analysis through family, personal and social adjustment. Journal of Community Psychology, 37, 959–974.

19.

Kionishi

Hymel

(2009). Bullying and stress in early adolescence: The role of coping and social support. Journal of Early Adolescence, 29, 333–356.

20.

Kline

(2000). The handbook of psychological testing (2nd ed.). Routledge.

21.

Kobak

Madsen

(2008). Disruptions in attachment bonds: Implications for theory, research, and clinical intervention. In Cassidy

Shaver

P. R.

(Eds.), Handbook of attachment: Theory, research, and clinical applications (2nd ed., pp. 23–48). Guilford Press.

22.

Liu

Zang

(2015). The health of left-behind children in rural China. China Economic Review, 36, 367–376.

23.

Liu

(1991). The types, causes, and educations of puppy love among middle-school students. Educational Review, 2, 17–20. (In Chinese)

24.

Liu

P. L.

Leung

(2017). Migrant parenting and mobile phone use: Building quality relationships between Chinese migrant workers and their left-behind children. Applied Research in Quality of Life, 12(4), 1–22.

25.

Liu

Yang

Zhou

Wang

(2012). Relationship between attachment to parents and bullying, victimization of 4-6 graders. Chinese Journal of Clinical Psychology, 20, 246–248.

26.

Liu

(2009). Left too early: The effects of age at separation from parents on Chinese rural children’s symptoms of anxiety and depression. American Journal of Public Health, 99(11), 2049–2054.

27.

Zhang

Xue

Mao

Zheng

Wang

(2019). Moderating effect of social support on depression and health promoting lifestyle for Chinese empty nesters: A cross-sectional study. Journal of Affective Disorders, 256, 495–508.

28.

Lin

Y. T.

Vikse

J. H.

Huang

C. C.

(2016). Well-being of migrant and left-behind children in China: Education, health, parenting, and personal values. International Journal of Social Welfare, 25, 58–68.

29.

(2012). Education of children left behind in rural China. Journal of Marriage and Family, 74(2), 328–341.

30.

Maccoby

E. E.

(1992). Socialization in the context of the family: Parent–child interaction. In Müssen

P. H.

Hetherington

E. M.

(Eds.), Handbook of child psychology: Socialization, personality, and social development (4th ed., pp. 1–101). Wiley.

31.

Margalit

(2010). Peer relations and loneliness within different cultures. In Margalit

(Ed.), Lonely children and adolescents (pp. 133–163). Springer.

32.

Markus

H. R.

Kitayama

(1991). Culture and the self: Implications for cognition, emotion, and motivation. Psychological Review, 98, 224–253.

33.

Min

(2002). Re-understanding of and educational countermeasures for “puppy love” (I). Beijing Education, 1, 14–15. (In Chinese)

34.

Montgomery

M. J.

Scorell

G. T.

(1998). Love and dating experience in early and middle adolescence: Grade and gender comparisons. Journal of Adolescence, 21(6), 677–689.

35.

National Survey Research Center, Renmin University of China. (2015). China Educational Panel Survey. http://ceps.ruc.edu.cn/index.php?r=index/index&hl=en

36.

Olweus

(1993). Bullying at school: What we know and what we can do. Blackwell.

37.

Otake

Liu

Luo

(2019). Involvement in bullying among left-behind children in provincial Chinese cities: The role of perceived emotional support. Journal of Aggression, Maltreatment & Trauma, 28, 943–957.

38.

Song

H. Y.

(2017). Research on prevention and treatment of school bullying from the perspective of nat/ional governance. Journal of Chinese Youth Social Science, 1, 26–33. (In Chinese)

39.

Sourander

Helstela

Helenius

Piha

(2000). Persistence of bullying from childhood to adolescent: A longitudinal 8-year follow-up study. Child Abuse & Neglect, 24(7), 873–881.

40.

Sun

Zhou

Wang

Fan

(2010). Loneliness of children left in rural areas and its relation to peer relationship. Psychological Science, 33, 337–340. (In Chinese)

41.

Tang

(2017). What makes a difference to children’s health in rural China? Parental migration, remittances, and social support. Chinese Sociological Review, 49, 89–109.

42.

Walden

L. M.

Beran

(2010). Attachment quality and bullying behavior in school-aged youth. Canadian Journal of School Psychology, 25, 5–18.

43.

Wang

Lannotti

R. J.

Nansel

T. R.

(2009). School bullying among US adolescents: Physical, verbal, relational and cyber. Journal of Adolescence Health, 45(4), 368–375.

44.

Wang

Q. X.

(2006). Weakened family education and socialization of left-behind children. Culture and History Vision, 7, 69–70. (In Chinese)

45.

Wang

Y. Y.

(2009). Study of the impact left by the weakening family function on the rear children’s socialization. Soochow University. (In Chinese)

46.

Wen

Lin

(2012). Child development in rural China: Children left behind by their migrant parents and children of nonmigrant families. Child Development, 83(1), 120–136.

47.

Xiang

(2007). How far are the left-behind left behind? A preliminary study in rural China. Population Space and Place, 13, 179–191.

48.

Zhang

Dronkers

(2018). Not a zero-sum game: Migration and child well-being in contemporary China. Demographic Research, 38, 691–726.

49.

Q. N.

(2017). The revelation of the family functional recovery for Rural left-behind children from the attachment theory. Journal of Hebei Youth Administrative Cadres College, 1, 23–26. (In Chinese)

50.

X. F.

Liu

(2018). On the cause of campus violence by left-behind children and the countermeasures. Journal of Zunyi Normal University, 20(3), 161–163. (In Chinese)

51.

J. Z.

Murray

(2005). Left-behind children in rural China. Social Science Academic Press.

52.

Zhang

Chi

Long

Ren

(2019). Bullying victimization and depression among left-behind children in rural China: Role of self-compassion and hope. Child Abuse & Neglect, 96, Article 104072.

53.

Zhang

Zhou

Tao

(2019). Bullying behaviors and psychosocial adjustment among school-aged children in China. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 34(11), 2363–2375.

54.

Zhao

Wang

Zhou

Hesketh

(2017). Long-term impacts of parental migration on Chinese children’s psychosocial well-being: Mitigating and exacerbating factors. Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology, 52, 669–677.

55.

Zhao

K. X.

Zhang

(2017). A strict mother and a gentle father: The power and action logic of husband and wife in family education. Modern Communication, 8, 173–174. (In Chinese)

56.

Zhu

Chan

K. L.

(2015). Prevalence and correlates of school bullying victimization in Xi’an, China. Violence & Victims, 30(4), 714–732.