↓ Skip to main content

The Effect of Psychological Suzhi on Problem Behaviors in Chinese Adolescents: The Mediating Role of Subjective Social Status and Self-esteem

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, August 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (76th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (67th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
15 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
The Effect of Psychological Suzhi on Problem Behaviors in Chinese Adolescents: The Mediating Role of Subjective Social Status and Self-esteem
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, August 2017
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01490
Pubmed ID
Authors

Guangzeng Liu, Dajun Zhang, Yangu Pan, Yuanxiao Ma, Xingyue Lu

Abstract

In this study, we examined subjective social status (SSS) and self-esteem as potential mediators between the association of psychological suzhi and problem behaviors in a sample of 1271 Chinese adolescents (44.5% male, grades 7-12). The results showed that SSS and self-esteem were fully mediating the relationship between psychological suzhi and problem behaviors. Moreover, the indirect effect was stronger via self-esteem than via SSS. These findings perhaps provide insight into the preliminary effect that SSS and self-esteem underlie psychological suzhi's effect on adolescents' problem behaviors, and also are important in helping school-teachers and administrators to develop a better understanding of problem behaviors in their schools as a pre-requisite to the development of more effective behaviors management practices from the perspective of psychological suzhi. Implications and limitations in the present study have also been discussed.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 15 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 15 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Unspecified 2 13%
Other 1 7%
Student > Bachelor 1 7%
Professor 1 7%
Student > Ph. D. Student 1 7%
Other 2 13%
Unknown 7 47%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 4 27%
Unspecified 2 13%
Social Sciences 1 7%
Medicine and Dentistry 1 7%
Unknown 7 47%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 23 September 2017.
All research outputs
#4,116,313
of 22,999,744 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#6,936
of 30,225 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#72,916
of 316,373 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#191
of 594 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,999,744 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 82nd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 30,225 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 316,373 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 594 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% of its contemporaries.