Jing Gao1
Jianjun Xu- 1International College, Ningbo University, Ningbo, China
- 2College of Teacher Education, Ningbo University, Ningbo, China
- 3United Faculty of China and French, Ningbo University, Ningbo, China
- 4College of Education, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, China
Previous research has extended the stress literature by exploring the relationship between family incivility and cyberbullying perpetration, yet relatively less attention has been paid to underlying psychological mechanisms between that relationship among university students. According to the Frustration-Aggression Theory, this study examined the relationships of family incivility, cyberbullying perpetration, negative emotions and neuroticism among Chinese university students. Data were collected from 814 university students (females, N = 423; Mage = 19.96 years, SD = 3.09). The results examined the mechanism through which family incivility was significantly related to cyberbullying perpetration through the mediation of negative emotions, suggesting a strong link of stressful life events to online aggression. In addition, high levels of neuroticism moderated the relationship between family incivility and cyberbullying perpetration, as well as that between family incivility and negative emotions. The study revealed the chronic and potential impact of family incivility, underlined the interaction between stressful life events and online aggression, and put forward the intervention strategies of cyberbullying among university students.
Introduction
Family interaction plays an important role in the development of individual social emotion and cognition (Bronfenbrenner, 1986). Recently, family incivility, a new form of negative family interactions, has attached widespread attention. Family incivility is low-intensity deviant interpersonal behaviors that undermine mutual respect in the family, such as excluding family members from social activities and doubting the judgment of family members (Lim and Tai, 2014; Bai et al., 2016). It is easily ignored since its intensity is low and its consequence is not as immediate as family abuse or violence (Cortina and Magley, 2009), for which the negative family interaction is difficultly restrained and can repeatedly inflict the victims (Bai et al., 2020). Moreover, due to its ambiguity in purposes, the victims usually deem it as unintentional, tolerable, and acquiescent, leading to its long-term existence in our daily life (Sliter et al., 2011).
Previous studies examined the associations between family incivility and adults’ work performance (Naeem et al., 2020; Ren et al., 2021). Less is known, however, about the influence of family incivility on students. A study from China (Bai et al., 2020) indicated that family incivility was positively associated with cyberbullying perpetration among Chinese middle school students. An empirical study found that family incivility had a negative effect on university students’ work engagement in India (Gopalan et al., 2021). However, to our knowledge, no research has been conducted on the influence of family incivility on cyberbullying perpetration among university students. Cyberbullying perpetration is defined as willful and repeated harm of an individual or a group inflicted by computers, cell phones, and other electronic devices (Hinduja and Patchin, 2008; Campbell et al., 2013). This new-form aggression with anonymity, concealment, high dissemination, can result in a variety of negative consequences, for instance, anxiety, depression, and suicidal ideation (Patchin and Hinduja, 2011; Kowalski et al., 2012).
Recently, the booming of Internet and social media has intensified cyberbullying in China (Chu et al., 2021). Early in 2018, Li and his colleagues found that one in three Chinese adults has experienced cyberbullying and one in two Chinese minors has experienced cyberbullying (Li et al., 2018). However, university students as the major net-citizens are more likely involved in cyberbullying than middle school students. In addition, previous studies have shown that family interactions are significantly related to the development of university students’ cognition and behaviors (Wright et al., 2020; Smith and D’Aniello, 2021). Negative family interactions are positively associated problem behaviors among university students (Fortesa and Ajete, 2014). Therefore, it is necessary to investigate how family incivility influences university students’ cyberbullying perpetration, theoretically and empirically, to restrain the prevalence of cyberbullying from the perspective of the frustration-aggression theory.
This study has three-fold contributions. Firstly, although previous studies have been devoted to the influence of family incivility on adolescents’ cyberbullying perpetration (Bai et al., 2020), it is unclear how family incivility might be related to cyberbullying perpetration among university students. To explore the negative effects of family incivility on university students, we establish a moderated mediation model based on the frustration-aggression theory, central to which is negative emotions, while neuroticism moderates the relationship between family incivility and negative emotions as well as that between family incivility and cyberbullying perpetration. Secondly, the empirical findings support the frustration-aggression theory by demonstrating the mechanism through which frustration, such as family incivility, is associated with aggressive behaviors, such as cyberbullying perpetration, and extend the existing theory by observing the interplay between online and offline behaviors. Thirdly, through the chronic and low-intensity negative family interaction, this paper throws new light on the mechanism and intervention of cyberbullying in universities.
Investigating the relationship between family incivility and university students’ cyberbullying perpetration
The frustration-aggression theory states that frustration can affect the inclination to act aggressively (Berkowitz, 1988). Individuals experiencing more frustration are more likely to perpetrate aggression in the future. However, the anticipation of punishment can influence their choices of the target, as they expect to escape from the repercussions of their aggression and keep themselves from being inflicted (Berkowitz, 1989). In face of parental authority, frustrated individuals may give up fighting back while tending to perpetrate some covert forms of aggression (Bai et al., 2020). The Internet provides a virtual and anonymous space for them to release their negative emotions (Pabian and Vandebosch, 2014), where they can better modify their representation of themselves (Valkenburg and Peter, 2011) and conceal their real identity, to reduce their possibility of being negatively evaluated or retaliatorily attacked by others (Bane et al., 2010). Family incivility as a frustration possibly results in less punitive aggressive acts as well, such as cyberbullying perpetration. Many studies have also suggested that negative family interactions were significantly related to cyberbullying perpetration (Low and Espelage, 2013; Barlett and Fennel, 2016; Lee and Kang, 2019; Romero-Abrio et al., 2019). Barlett and Fennel (2016) found that parental neglect was positively associated with individual cyberbullying perpetration. A cross-sectional study (Romero-Abrio et al., 2019) also found that problematic family interaction was directly associated with online aggressive acts among adolescents. A study of 423 Korean middle school students indicated that high levels of cyberbullying perpetration was significantly associated with low levels of parent-adolescent relationship quality and high levels of parental control (Lee and Kang, 2019). Longitudinal research also found that high level of parental monitoring could significantly predict increasing cyberbullying perpetration after one and a half years (Low and Espelage, 2013). Accordingly, the following hypothesis is proposed:
H1: Family incivility will be positively correlated with cyberbullying perpetration among university students.
Negative emotions as a mediator
Negative emotions are fundamentally a subjective experience of unpleasant or depressed mood in the past week, including various annoying emotional states, e.g., depression, anxiety, and fear (Watson et al., 1988), which may increase individuals’ tendency to bullying or self-injury (Agnew, 1992). Thus, family incivility as a stressful life event may cause the person’s cyberbullying perpetration and increase their intention to perpetrate cyberbullying through negative emotions as well. Empirical studies found that depression, anxiety, and stress were the most common mental illnesses among university students worldwide (Smith et al., 2017; Paudel et al., 2020). The frustration-aggression theory (Berkowitz, 1989) argues that individuals with stressful life events would first produce negative emotions, and then develop an instigation to aggression. Family incivility as a stressful life event can lead to negative emotions. Previous studies have found that family incivility significantly predicated individual emotional consumption (Hassan et al., 2019) and negative emotions (Sarwar et al., 2019). A cross-sectional study found that family incivility, as a subtle and chronic stressful life event among family members resulted in individual psychological distress (Lim and Tai, 2014). A study of 3030 Chinese high school students found that family neglect, rejection, and suspicion made individuals feel hopeless about the future (Bai et al., 2020). A longitudinal study indicated that family incivility lowered employees’ job satisfaction by depleting their psychological resources and causing their stress (Maria et al., 2021).
In addition, Berkowitz (1983) emphasized the role of negative emotions in the frustration-aggression process, arguing that the negative emotions reflected the strength of frustration-produced instigation to aggression. Psychological discomfort or depression activates other negative memories and feelings, thereby promoting individual inclination to aggression (Berkowitz and Heimer, 1989). In other words, family incivility, that is, frustration, may lead to individual negative emotions, which in turn triggers or reinforces their aggressive tendencies, making them more likely to perpetrate aggression for alleviating or getting rid of the negative effects from chronic negative family interactions, such as neglect, contempt, rejection. A longitudinal study found a significant positive correlation between family incivility and bank employees’ counterproductive work behaviors in Pakistan, with psychological distress mediating the direct relationship (Hameed et al., 2017). Another longitudinal study found that depression and anxiety predicted cyberbullying perpetration over time (Laura et al., 2020). A six-year longitudinal study indicated that negative mental factors positively predicted cyberbullying perpetration (You and Lim, 2016). Several studies have also confirmed a significant correlation between negative emotions and cyberbullying perpetration (Balta et al., 2020; Schodt et al., 2021). Accordingly, the following hypothesis is proposed:
H2: Negative emotion will mediate the direct relationship between family incivility and cyberbullying perpetration among university students. Specifically, family incivility increases university students’ negative emotions, leading to cyberbullying perpetration.
Neuroticism as a moderator
Personality is a relatively stable individual trait, which has a long-term impact on individual behavioral style (Back et al., 2009). The Five-Factor Model of personality holds that personality has five basic dimensions: Extraversion, Agreeableness, Conscientiousness, Openness, and Neuroticism (Koivisto et al., 2021). Different personality traits have different influences on individual observation and interaction with environmental stressors (Bai et al., 2020). Neuroticism represents individual differences in the tendency to experience distress (Mccrae and Costa, 1987) and negative mental health outcomes (Anglim et al., 2020), because of which it is widely studied in stress research (Hill and Kemp-Wheeler, 1986; Mineka et al., 2020). Highly neurotic individuals frequently have high levels of anxiety, depression, anger, and guilt, as well as an aggravating somatization tendency of psychological problems, leading to individual cognitive and behavioral differences (Costa and Mccrae, 1992). Those with high levels of neuroticism are more likely to experience stressful and negative events in reality (Miceli et al., 2021).
Previous studies have considered personality as a moderator that influences the association between stressful life events and negative emotions. A cross-sectional study found highly neurotic individuals were more vulnerable to depression in face of stressful life events (Roberts and Kendler, 1999). A case study with 83 survey participants also indicated that individuals with high levels of neuroticism were more vulnerable to external environment, unstable in affection, and sensible to various stimuli, which made them more prone to depression and anxiety (Johan et al., 2002). A meta-analysis study under an organizing framework of the big-five model found that highly neurotic individuals tended to exhibit poor adjustment and were prone to negative emotional states, including nervousness, anxiety, moodiness, and worry (Judge et al., 2002). A one-year longitudinal study demonstrated that highly neurotic individuals were more likely to embrace negative automatic thoughts while suffering some frustrations or failures, leading to their negative emotions (Amy et al., 2009). Another two-year longitudinal study indicated that highly neurotic individuals were more likely to have high levels of depressive symptoms because of stressful life events (Loey et al., 2014). As mentioned above, family incivility is a chronic, imperceptible but influential stressful life event. Therefore, neurotics at a high level appear more sensitive to negative family interactions, such as neglect, exclusion, and contempt by family members, and thereby produce more negative emotions. Accordingly, the following hypothesis is proposed:
H3: Neuroticism will moderate the relationship between family incivility and negative emotions, so that the positive correlation between family incivility and negative emotions is stronger for highly neurotic university students, and vice versa.
Berkowitz (2003) argued that aggression was not always a consequence of frustration since the frustration-aggression process was related to more cognitive factors, e.g., personality, understanding of frustration, mentality in the face of frustration and ability to bear frustration. Personality played an indispensable part in the theoretical construct of frustration-aggression model (Berkowitz, 1989). Neuroticism, a typical personality can also affect individuals’ cognitive processing, thereby influencing their aggressive acts (Olver and Mooradian, 2003). Individuals with a higher level of neuroticism were more prone to emotional orientation instead of problematical orientation in selecting coping strategies, making them harder to deal with stressors and consequently adopt negative coping strategies (Horner, 1996), e.g., cyberbullying perpetration. Taylor and Kluemper (2012) found that neurotics at a high level perceived more incivility in workplaces and behaved more aggressive during their work, while neurotics at a low level did not. A prior study found that neuroticism played a moderating role in the influence of stressful life events on aggression (Sun et al., 2016). Accordingly, the following hypothesis is proposed:
H4: Neuroticism will moderate the relationship between family incivility and cyberbullying perpetration, so that the positive correlation between family incivility and cyberbullying perpetration is stronger for highly neurotic university students, and vice versa.
Taken together, the whole research model is presented in Figure 1.
Figure 1. The moderate mediating model.
Materials and methods
Participants and procedures
A total of 814 participants of this study were recruited from a university in Zhejiang Province, China. They are aged 17–26 years old [mean(M) ± standard deviation (SD) = 19.96 ± 3.090], with 391 (48%) being males and 423 (52%) being females. Among the participants, 403 (49.5%) were freshmen, 198 (24.3%) were sophomores, 92(11.3%) were juniors and 121(14.9%) were seniors. Average monthly household income ranges from less than 2000 yuan to more than 10000 yuan (10.3%, less than 2000 yuan; 23.3%, 2001–5,000 yuan; 34.8%, 5001–10000 yuan; 31.6%, more than 10000 yuan). Average daily smartphone usage time ranges from 1 h to more than 9 h (12.5%, 1–3 h; 46.1%, 3–6 h; 28.1%, 6–9 h; 13.3%, more than 9 h).
Measures
Family incivility
The family incivility scale was originated from the Workplace Incivility scale (Cortina et al., 2001) modified by Lim and Tai (2014). The scale measured incivility experienced from family members, comprising of six items (e.g., “Ignored or excluded you from social activities?”), which were rated by participants on a five-point scale (1 = not at all and 5 = most of the times). In the present study, the Cronbach’s alph coefficient for the family incivility is 0.926.
Negative emotions
The Chinese version of Depression Anxiety and Stress Scale 21 (DASS-21) (Gong et al., 2010) was used to measure the level of negative emotions in half a year and the initial version was developed by Lovibond and Lovibond (1995). The Dass-21 scale with 21 items includes three subscales (i.e., depression, anxiety, and stress with 7 items, respectively) rated on 4-point Likert scale ranging from 0 (“did not apply at all”) to 3 (apply to me very much), with higher scores representing higher levels of negative emotions. Many studies have employed this scale to assess the frequency and severity of three negative emotional states (i.e., depression, anxiety, and stress) among university students (Ng et al., 2010; Aoyama et al., 2011; Chong et al., 2017), including Chinese university students (Xu et al., 2013; Yang et al., 2020), with documented evidence of reliability and validity (Antony et al., 1998; Holfeld and Baitz, 2020). In the present study, the Cronbach’s alph coefficient for the Chinese DASS-21 is 0.954.
Cyberbullying perpetration
The Chinese version of Cyberbullying Scale (CVCS) (Xu, 2015) was used in this research, which integrated the scales developed by Olweus (1993); Zhang and Wu (1999), as well as Cretin et al. (2011). CVCS is composed of 12 items (e.g., “Rumoring on the Internet”) that measures the level of cyberbullying perpetration in direct and indirect ways. Participants responded on a 5 – point scale ranging from never (1) to always (5), with higher scores representing higher levels of cyberbullying perpetration. In the present study, the Cronbach’s alph coefficient for the CVCS is 0.943.
Neuroticism
The Chinese Big Five Personality Inventory Brief Version (CBF-PI-B) (Wang et al., 2011) was used in this research and initial version was developed by John et al. (1991). The CBF-PI-B is a 40-item scale consisting of 5 personality factors (i.e., Extroversion, Conscientiousness, Neuroticism, Openness, and Agreeableness) and it is rated on 6-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 6 (strongly agree), measuring personality traits as defined by the Five Factors Model (Costa and Mccrae, 1992). For the present study, we analyzed only data from the Neuroticism subscale with 8 items (e.g., “I am relatively stable from an emotional point of view”). We computed the total score by averaging participants’ scores for each of the items of the scale, with higher scores representing higher levels of neuroticism. In the present study, the Cronbach’s alph coefficient for the CBF-PI-B is 0.851.
Covariates
The variables of participants’ age, gender, average monthly household income, and average daily smartphone usage time were controlled for, as former studies showed that they might affect negative emotions and cyberbullying significantly (Deb and Walsh, 2012; Anat, 2014; Kim, 2015; Peng et al., 2021).
Data analysis
Firstly, we calculated descriptive statistics and correlations matrix. To facilitate result interpretation and avoid the multicollinearity problem (Aiken and West, 1991), all the data were standardized except for the dependent variable. Secondly, we used PROCESS macro (Model 4) developed by Hayes (2013) to test the mediation effect of negative problems. Thirdly, we conducted PROCESS macro (Model 8) developed by Hayes (2013) to examine whether neuroticism moderated this mediation process. Additionally, to investigate the significance of indirect effects, we drew on the bootstrapping method (Hayes and Scharkow, 2013), which produces 95% bias-corrected confidence intervals from 5000 resamples of the data. The effects are significant when the confidence intervals exclude zero.
Results
Statistical description
As this study aimed at exploring whether negative emotions would mediate the association between family incivility and cyberbullying perpetration and whether this mediation effect would be moderated by neuroticism, the analysis included the following three steps.
Preliminary analyses
The means, standard deviations, and correlation coefficients for all variables of the current study are displayed in Table 1. The results indicated that the relationship between all variables were statistically significant, and family incivility was positively related to cyberbullying perpetration. Therefore, H1 received support.
Table 1. Descriptive statistics and correlations for all variables.
Testing for mediating effect of negative emotions
Table 2 showed that family incivility was positively related to negative emotions (β = 0.27, p < 0.001), and negative emotions was positively associated with cyberbullying perpetration (β = 0.20, p < 0.001). Finally, it was found that family incivility had an indirect effect on cyberbullying perpetration (β = 0.18). Bootstrapping results confirmed the significance of the indirect effect, with a 95% confident interval of [0.133, 0.327]. Therefore, H2 was supported.
Table 2. Testing the mediation effect of negative emotions on cyberbullying perpetration (N = 814).
Testing for moderated mediation
The results for H3 and H4 are reported in Table 3. Results demonstrated that the interaction of family incivility with neuroticism significantly predicted negative emotions (β = 0.04, p < 0.001) and cyberbullying perpetration (β = 0.03, p < 0.001).
Table 3. Testing the moderated mediation effect of neuroticism on cyberbullying perpetration.
Next, we plotted simple slopes which predicted the relationship between family incivility and negative emotions as well as that between family incivility and cyberbullying perpetration, separately for high and low levels of neuroticism. As presented in Figure 2, the slope of the association between family incivility and negative emotions was relatively strong for participants with high levels of neuroticism (βhigh Neuroticism = 7.44, t = 9.84, p < 0.001). When participants with low levels of neuroticism, the moderating association between family incivility and negative emotions was insignificant (βlow Neuroticism = −7.44, t = 1.34, p = 0.18). Additionally, as shown in Figure 3, the effect of family incivility on cyberbullying perpetration was stronger for participants with high levels of neuroticism (βhigh Neuroticism = 7.44, t = 0.04, p < 0.001), whereas the moderating association between family incivility and cyberbullying perpetration was insignificant for participants with low levels of neuroticism (βlowNeuroticism = −7.44, t = 0.06, p = 0.148).
Figure 2. Interaction effect of family incivility and neuroticism on cyberbully perpetration. The black triangle represents low neuroticism and the white square represents high neuroticism.
Figure 3. Interaction effect of family incivility and neuroticism on Negative emotions. The black triangle represents low neuroticism and the white square represents high neuroticism.
Discussion
The current study aims at investigating how family incivility affects university students’ cyberbullying perpetration, as well as the role of negative emotions and neuroticism in the above relationship, which enriches previous research on family incivility and extends the frustration-aggression theory. Specifically, the results indicated that family incivility was positively related to cyberbullying perpetration among university students through negative emotions. The effects of family incivility on negative emotions and cyberbullying perpetration were stronger for university students with high levels of neuroticism. However, low levels of neuroticism hardly moderated the relationship between family incivility and negative emotions, as well as that between family incivility and cyberbullying perpetration, which is consistent with previous studies demonstrating that low levels of neuroticism hardly affected individual mental health problems and problematic behaviors (Kuang et al., 2020; Wang et al., 2021). Contrary to highly neurotic individuals, those at a low level were always feeling more relaxed and imperturbable (Mccrae and Costa, 1987) and therefore had less negative emotional experience of stressful life events, such as family incivility.
Theoretical contributions
Our study contributed to the current literature from four aspects. Firstly, although abundant research has been conducted in the field of family incivility, most of them were focused on the effect of family incivility in the family work context (Bai et al., 2016; Wright et al., 2020; Ren et al., 2021). Little attention has been paid to the relationship between family incivility and cyberbullying perpetration among university students in the family school context. In the present study, we put family incivility into the theoretical framework of the frustration-aggression theory, finding that chronic frustration (i.e., family incivility) also influenced university students’ cyberbullying perpetration, supporting Hypothesis 1. That is consistent with the previous research, showing that stressful life events resulted in the person’s cyberbullying perpetration (Yudes et al., 2021). Gurr (1970) found that the repeated and chronic frustration can cause the outbreak of aggression at both individual and social levels. Along with a constant source of frustration, the victims experiencing more family incivility are more likely to perpetrate cyberbullying. Besides, the social status of the target is a potential moderator (Cohen, 1955), and retaliation is more likely to happen and increase in an anonymous environment (Rule et al., 1978), where the imbalance of power is eliminated to large extent, so that anyone, even weak individuals or from lower social class, can attack others online (Barlett and Gentile, 2012). Our study provides a new perspective for exploring the effects of family incivility and the intervention of cyberbullying in universities.
Secondly, we examined the mediating role of negative emotions and found that negative emotions played a mediating role between family incivility and cyberbullying perpetration, supporting Hypothesis 2. Previous studies have demonstrated that stress, anxiety, and depression were the most frequent mental illnesses among university students (Paudel et al., 2020), which were positively related to cyberbullying perpetration (Schodt et al., 2021). A prior study claimed that negative emotions, such as stress and anxiety, can lead to individuals’ impulsivity (Metcalfe and Mischel, 1999). The persons with high levels of impulsivity are more inclined to cyberbullying perpetration (Kowalski et al., 2014). However, previous research has paid little attention to the stressor, that is, family incivility. As a matter of fact, external stimuli, that is, stressors, can only produce general arousal, while the way an individual interprets his internal perception influences his perception of stressful life events and aggression much more (Berkowitz, 1978). Family incivility as a stressor can cause real disturbance or pressure, creating individual negative emotions that is an instigation for the person to perpetrate cyberbullying. Many studies have explored the impacts of family incivility on individual negative emotions and aggressive acts (Maria and Devi, 2020). Family incivility (e.g., familial indifference, exclusion, or privacy inquiry) can make individuals feel more psychological distress (Lim and Tai, 2014) and emotional consumption (Hassan et al., 2019), then experiencing more negative emotions further. With more family incivility for a long duration, individuals may fail to release their negative emotions timely and effectively, thus causing their cyberbullying perpetration. Therefore, through examining the relationship between family incivility and negative emotions, it is plausible that university students experiencing more family incivility will develop more negative emotions and be more likely to carry out aggressive acts, such as cyberbullying perpetration. Our study stresses the significance of university students’ mentality, associating their prior experiences with problem behaviors and offering a new angle to inspect the association between family interactions and aggressive acts online.
Thirdly, the results partially support the moderating role of neuroticism. Neuroticism reinforces the person’s stress responses and the person with neuroticism is more vulnerable to stress (Suls, 2001). Neurotics are more likely to experience pain and negative emotions (Mccrae and Costa, 1987), which prepares them for perceiving threats (Schneider, 2004). In face of stressful life events, highly neurotic individuals are easily affected by negative cognition and feel a lack of strategic resources to stressors, and accordingly they may regard stressful life events as a threat more easily (Gallagher, 1990). A two-year longitudinal study showed that a threat appraisal to stressful life events resulted in the person’s negative emotions, such as anxiety and depression, and aggressive behaviors (Taylor et al., 2013). As shown in the results, high levels of neuroticism strengthened the correlation between family incivility and negative emotions, as well as the correlation between family incivility and cyberbullying perpetration. Hypotheses 3 and 4 were partially supported. However, our findings are consistent with previous studies showing that university students with high levels of neuroticism are more susceptible to stressors, leading to negative emotions and cyberbullying perpetration, while those with low levels of neuroticism are less likely to have such problems (Miceli et al., 2021). Neuroticism influences the person’s ability of emotional control. Individuals with different levels of neuroticism are different from selective attention, cognitive appraisals, and coping strategies (Mccrae and Costa, 1987). In face of stressful life events, highly neurotic individuals with poor emotional regulation ability are more sensitive to negative information and possibly experience a higher level of negative emotions, making their emotional interpretation problematic (Horner, 1996). In addition, individuals with high levels of neuroticism are more inclined to adopt negative cognitive appraisal, considering family incivility (i.e., the stressor) threatening (Schneider, 2004), eventually leading individuals to adopt negative coping strategies (e.g., cyberbullying perpetration), to alleviate their negative emotions. A recent biological experiment also showed that high neuroticism can increase individuals’ reactivity of limbic system and decrease their tolerance to stressors or aversive stimuli, so that highly neurotic individuals are always disturbed by negative emotions and adopt negative coping strategies (Magal et al., 2021). Our study reflects individual differences among victims suffering from family incivility, and neuroticism plays an important role in this moderated mediation model.
Finally, this study enriches the applicability of the frustration-aggression theory among contemporary university students. It provides empirical support for this theory and explores the interactive interface between online and offline environments. The family incivility is a low-intensity and inconspicuous stressful life events (Lim and Tai, 2014). Therefore, it is always difficult to find that family incivility is an incentive to university students’ negative emotions and cyberbullying perpetration. This study found that family incivility was positively associated cyberbullying perpetration directly or through the mediator of negative emotions, indicating that chronic negative experiences in real life can also cause online aggressive acts. This study provides a new perspective for the frustration-aggression theory in interpreting the influence of frustration strength on aggressive behavior. In addition, personality, as a relatively stable individual trait, can chronically affect individual cognition and behavioral style (Back et al., 2009). Combined with the Five – Factor Model of personality, this paper discusses the mechanism of neuroticism in the frustration-aggression theory, which also provides an empirical test for the mechanism of personality traits in stress research.
Practical implications
This research also has some practical implications. As the findings of this study, there was a positive correlation between family incivility, negative emotions, and cyberbullying perpetration, suggesting that parents should avoid negative family interactions,such as neglect, rejection and probing into privacy, and establish a respectful, harmonious and intimate family relationship to restrain individual negative emotions and cyberbullying perpetration.
Moreover, university students’ mental health is closely related to their growing experience. The research reveals that the lasting influence of negative family interaction on university students is hardly weakened even if they have left their families away to live in a new environment. Therefore, psychological education should be united with students’ families, which is beneficial to prevent university students’ negative emotions from the source and intervene the vicious circle of cyberbullying in university efficiently.
Finally, the findings suggest that neuroticism plays an important role in how individuals interact with stressful life events. Highly neurotic individuals are more vulnerable to pressure events and prone to cyberbullying. Therefore, for university students with high levels of neuroticism, they should learn to manage their emotions and maintain emotional stability, to alleviate the negative emotions caused by family incivility.
Limitations and future research
The current study still has several limitations. First, this study is a cross-sectional study rather than a longitudinal one, so that we can hardly evaluate the causal relationship between various variables. As reported by Acker and Pitchford (2014), family intimacy among university students was positively related to their peer intimacy and life satisfaction that are the two main factors for students’ negative emotions and aggressive behaviors (Huang et al., 2021; Yokotani and Takano, 2021). In our study, nearly half of the participants were freshmen who may have a strong relationship with their family, for which most of them would be more affected by family incivility. However, precious studies found that the family influence on university students was dynamic in terms of their age and grade (Lopez, 1995). Therefore, further studies are needed to extend the relationship between family incivility and cyberbullying perpetration longitudinally.
Secondly, to preliminarily reflect the impact of family incivility on the mental health of Chinese university students, this study takes negative emotions (namely stress, anxiety, and depression) as an overall intermediary variable, but to some extent fails to reflect the stronger impact of family incivility on negative emotions among the three dimensions. However, anxiety and stress are phenomenologically different (Henry and Crawford, 2011). Future studies could be extended the mediating role of stress, anxiety, and depression prospectively, to gain full understanding on how these three psychologically distinct negative emotions play a role in the relationship between family incivility and cyberbullying perpetration.
Finally, to improve the theoretical construction and practical application of incivility in frustration-aggression model (Berkowitz, 2003), the influence of family incivility on daily aggressive behavior of university students can be further explored in the future. Meanwhile, some protective factors on the relationship of family incivility and bullying can be explored, such as peer support, individual positive traits, rumination (Naylor and Cowie, 1999; Muris et al., 2005).
Conclusion
We investigated the correlations between family incivility and cyberbullying perpetration among Chinese university students and examined the mediated moderation model of negative emotions and neuroticism. Overall, family incivility was positively correlated with negative emotions and cyberbullying perpetration among university students. Negative emotion played a mediating role in the influence of family incivility on cyberbullying perpetration. Neuroticism can regulate the impact of family incivility on negative emotions and cyberbullying perpetration prospectively. High levels of neuroticism can increase the impact of family incivility on cyberbullying perpetration and on negative emotions, while low levels of neuroticism had no such effect on the relationships. This study provides an insight for exploring how family incivility affects university students’ negative emotions and aggression. It also constructs a theoretical model for how family incivility affects the development of university students.
Data availability statement
The raw data supporting the conclusions of this article will be made available by the authors, without undue reservation.
Ethics statement
The studies involving human participants were reviewed and approved by the Ethics Committee of Faculty of Psychology, Ningbo University. Written informed consent to participate in this study was provided by the participants and the participants’ legal guardian/next of kin. Written informed consent was obtained from the individual(s), and minor(s)’ legal guardian/next of kin, for the publication of any potentially identifiable images or data included in this article.
Author contributions
JG, JX, and FL designed the work. JM and JW analyzed the data results. JX drafted the manuscript. JG, FL, and LW revised the manuscript. All authors contributed to the article and approved the submitted version.
Funding
This research was supported by the Fundamental Research Funds for the Provincial Universities of Zhejiang (SJWY2020004) awarded to FL.
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
Publisher’s note
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.
References
Acker, K., and Pitchford, K. (2014). Family matters: The impact of culture on family interactions, and of family interaction on peer relations. Adv. Mat. Res. 922, 475–480. doi: 10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMR.922.475
Aiken, L. S., and West, S. G. (1991). Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Agnew, R. (1992). Foundation for a general strain theory of crime and delinquency. Criminology 30, 47–87. doi: 10.1111/j.1745-9125.1992.tb01093.x
Amy, J., Kercher, R. M., and Rapee, C. A. (2009). Neurticism, life events and negative thoughts in the development of depression in adolescent girls. J. Abnorm. Child Psychol. 37, 903–915. doi: 10.1007/s10802-009-9325-1
Anat, H. (2014). Using scenarios to understand the frontiers of IS: Fifteen years later (a postscript). Inform. Syst. Front. 16, 347–352. doi: 10.1007/s10796-014-9501-x
Anglim, J., Horwood, S., Smillie, L. D., Marrero, R. J., and Wood, J. K. (2020). Predicting psychological and subjective well-being from personality: A meta-analysis. Psychol. Bull. 146, 279–323. doi: 10.1037/bul0000226
Antony, M. M., Bieling, P. J., Cox, B. J., Enns, M. W., and Swinson, R. P. (1998). Psychometric properties of the 42-item and 21-item versions of the depression anxiety stress scales in clinical groups and a community sample. Psychol. Ass. 10, 176–181. doi: 10.1037/1040-3590.10.2.176
Aoyama, I., Terrill, F., Saxon, D., and Fearon, D. (2011). Internalizing problems among cyberbullying victims and moderator effects of friendship quality. Multicult. Educ. Tech. J. 5, 92–105. doi: 10.1108/17504971111142637
Back, M., Schmukle, S. C., and Egloff, B. (2009). Predicting actual behavior from the explicit and implicit self-concept of personality. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 97, 533–548. doi: 10.1037/a0016229
Bai, Q., Bai, S., Huang, Y., Hsueh, F. H., and Wang, P. (2020). Family incivility and cyberbullying in adolescence: A moderated mediation model. Comput. Hum. Behav. 110:106315. doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2020.106315
Bai, Q. Y., Lin, W. P., and Wang, L. (2016). Family incivility and counterproductive work behavior: A moderated mediation model of self-esteem and emotional regulation. J. Voc. Behav. 94, 11–19. doi: 10.1016/j.jvb.2016.02.014
Balta, S., Emirtekin, E., Kircaburun, K., and Griffiths, M. D. (2020). The mediating role of depression in the relationship between body image dissatisfaction and cyberbullying perpetration. Int. J. Ment. Health Addict. 18, 1482–1492. doi: 10.1007/s11469-019-00151-9
Bane, C. M. H., Cornish, M., Erspamer, N., and Kampman, L. (2010). Self-disclosure through weblogs and perceptions of online and “real-life” friendships among female bloggers. Cyberpsych. Behav. Soc. N. 13, 131–139. doi: 10.1089/cyber.2009.0174
Barlett, C. P., and Gentile, D. (2012). Attacking Others Online: The formation of cyberbullying in late adolescence. Psychol. Pop. Media Cult. 1, 123–135. doi: 10.1037/a0028113
Barlett, C. P., and Fennel, M. (2016). Examining the relation between parental ignorance and youths’ cyberbullying perpetration. Psychol. Pop. Media Cult. 7, 547–560. doi: 10.1037/ppm0000139
Berkowitz, L. (1978). Whatever happened to the frustration-aggression hypothesis? Am. Behav. Sci. 21, 691–708. doi: 10.1177/000276427802100505
Berkowitz, L. (1983). Aversively stimulated aggression. Some parallels and differences in research with animals and humans. Am. Psychol. 38, 1135–1144. doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.38.11.1135
Berkowitz, L. (1988). Frustrations, appraisals, and aversively stimulated aggression. Aggress. Behav. 14, 3–11.
Berkowitz, L. (1989). Frustration-aggression hypothesis: Examination and reformulation. Psychol. Bull. 106, 59–73. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.106.1.59
Berkowitz, L. (2003). Affect, aggression, and antisocial behavior. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Berkowitz, L., and Heimer, K. (1989). On the construction of the anger experience: Aversive events and negative priming in the formation of feelings. Adv. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 22, 1–37. doi: 10.1016/S0065-2601(08)60304-4
Bronfenbrenner, U. (1986). Ecology of the family as a context for human development: Research perspectives. Dev. Psychol. 22, 723–742. doi: 10.1037/0012-1649.22.6.723
Campbell, M. A., Slee, P. T., Spears, B., Butler, D., and Kift, S. (2013). Do cyberbullies suffer too? Cyberbullies’ perceptions of the harm they cause to others and to their own mental health. Sch. Psychol. Int. 34, 613–629. doi: 10.1177/0143034313479698
Chong, L., Michelle, T., Kathryn, C., Kelvin, L., and Bonnie, K. D. (2017). Cortisol awakening response, internalizing symptoms, and life satisfaction in emerging adults. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 18:2501. doi: 10.3390/ijms18122501
Chu, X., Li, Y., Wang, P., Zeng, P., and Lei, L. (2021). Social support and cyberbullying for university students: The mediating role of internet addiction and the moderating role of stress. Curr. Psychol. doi: 10.1007/s12144-021-01607-9
Cohen, A. R. (1955). Social norms, arbitrariness of frustration, and status of the agent of frustration in the frustration-aggression hypothesis. J. Abnrom. Soc. Psychol. 51, 222–226. doi: 10.1037/h0039947
Cortina, L. M., and Magley, V. J. (2009). Patterns and profiles of response to incivility in the workplace. J. Occup. Health Psychol. 14, 272–288. doi: 10.1037/a0014934
Cortina, L. M., Magley, V. J., Williams, J. H., and Langhout, R. D. (2001). Incivility in the workplace: Incidence and impact. J. Occup. Health Psychol. 6, 64–80. doi: 10.1037/1076-8998.6.1.64
Costa, P. T., and Mccrae, R. R. (1992). Normal personality assessment in clinical practice: The NEO personality inventory. Psychol. Ass. 4, 5–13. doi: 10.1037/1040-3590.4.1.5
Cretin, B., Yaman, E., and Peker, A. (2011). Cyber victim and bullying scale: A study of validity and reliability. Comp. Educ. 57, 2261–2271. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2011.06.014
Deb, S., and Walsh, K. (2012). Impact of physical, psychological, and sexual violence on social adjustment of school children in India. Sch. Psychol. Int. 33, 391–415. doi: 10.1177/0143034311425225
Fortesa, K., and Ajete, K. (2014). Family influence on disordered eating behaviour. Procedia Soc. Behav. Sci. 159, 314–318. doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.12.379
Gallagher, D. J. (1990). Extraversion, neuroticism and appraisal of stressful academic events. Pers. Individ. Differ. 11, 1053–1057. doi: 10.1016/0191-8869(90)90133-C
Gong, X., Xie, X. Y., Xu, R., and Luo, Y. J. (2010). Psychometric properties of the chinese versions of DASS-21 in Chinese college students. Chi. J. Clin. Psychol. 18, 443–446.
Gopalan, N., Pattusamy, M., and Goodman, S. (2021). Family incivility and work engagement: Moderated mediation model of personal resources and family-work enrichment. Curr. Psychol. 17, 1–12. doi: 10.1007/s12144-021-01420-4
Hameed, Z., Khan, I. U., Chudhery, M., and Ding, D. (2017). Incivility and counterproductive work behavior: A moderated mediation model of emotional regulation and psychological distress. Int. J. Appl. Behav. Econom. 6, 1–22. doi: 10.4018/IJABE.2017070101
Hassan, S. A., Fatima€, T., and Saeed, I. (2019). A regional study on spillover perspective: Analyzing the underlying mechanism of emotional exhaustion between family incivility, thriving and workplace aggression. Glob. Reg. Rev. 4, 28–36. doi: 10.31703/grr.2019(IV-III).04
Hayes, A. F. (2013). In process: A versatile computational tool for observed variable mediation, moderation, and conditional process modeling. New York, NY: Guiford Press.
Hayes, A. F., and Scharkow, M. (2013). The relative trustworthiness of inferential tests of the indirect effect in statistical mediation analysis: Does method really matter? Psychol. Sci. 24, 1918–1927. doi: 10.1177/0956797613480187
Henry, J. D., and Crawford, J. R. (2011). The short-form version of the depression anxiety stress scales (DASS-21): Construct validity and normative data in a large non-clinical sample. Br. J. Clin. Psychol. 44, 227–239. doi: 10.1348/014466505X29657
Hill, A. B., and Kemp-Wheeler, S. M. (1986). Personality, life events and subclinical depression in students. Pers. Individ. Differ. 7, 469–478. doi: 10.1016/0191-8869(86)90125-X
Hinduja, S., and Patchin, J. W. (2008). Cyberbullying: An exploratory analysis of factors related to offending and victimization. Deviant Behav. 29, 129–156. doi: 10.1080/01639620701457816
Holfeld, B., and Baitz, R. (2020). The mediating and moderating effects of social support and school climate on the association between cyber victimization and internalizing symptoms. J. Youth Adoles. 49, 2214–2228. doi: 10.1007/s10964-020-01292-0
Horner, K. L. (1996). Locus of control, neuroticism, and stressors: Combined influences on reported physical illness. Pers. Individ. Differ. 21, 195–204. doi: 10.1016/0191-8869(96)00067-0
Huang, L., Zhang, J., Duan, W., and He, L. (2021). Peer relationship increasing the risk of social media addiction among Chinese adolescents who have negative emotions. Curr. Psychol. 20, 1–9. doi: 10.1007/s12144-021-01997-w
Johan, O., Oldehinkel, A. J., and Brilman, E. I. (2002). The interplay and etiological continuity of neuroticism, difficulties and life events in theetiology of major and subsyndromal, first and recurrent depressive episodes in later life. Am. J. Psychiatry 158, 885–891. doi: 10.1176/appi.ajp.158.6.885
John, O. P., Donahue, E. M., and Kentle, R. (1991). The Big-Five inventory. Berkeley, CA: University of California.
Judge, T. A., Bono, J. E., Ilies, R., and Gerhardt, M. W. (2002). Personality and leadership: A qualitative and quantitative review. J. Appl. Psychol. 87, 765–780. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.87.4.765
Kim, J. E. (2015). Gender differences in problematic online behavior of adolescent users over time. Fam. Environ. Res. 53, 641–654. doi: 10.6115/fer.2015.051
Koivisto, M., Virkkala, M., Puustinen, M., and Aarnio, J. (2021). Open and empathic personalities see two things at the same time: The relationship of big-five personality traits and cognitive empathy with mixed percepts during binocular rivalry. Curr. Psychol. doi: 10.1007/s12144-021-02249-7
Kowalski, R. M., Morgan, C. A., and Limber, S. P. (2012). Traditional bullying as a potential warning sign of cyberbullying. Sch. Psychol. Int. 33, 505–519. doi: 10.1177/0143034312445244
Kowalski, R. M., Giumetti, G. W., Schroeder, A. N., and Lattanner, M. R. (2014). Bullying in the digital age: A critical review and meta-analysis of cyberbullying research among youth. Psychol. Bull. 140, 1073–1137. doi: 10.1037/a0035618
Kuang, L., Wang, W., Huang, Y., Chen, X., and Chen, J. (2020). Relationship between Internet addiction, susceptible personality traits, and suicidal and self-harm ideation in Chinese adolescent students. J. Behav. Addict. 9, 1–9. doi: 10.1556/2006.2020.00032
Laura, M., Schulz, P. J., and Anne-Linda, C. (2020). Cyberbullying perpetration and victimization in youth: A meta-analysis of longitudinal studies. J. Comput. Mediat. Commun. 25, 1–19. doi: 10.1093/jcmc/zmz031
Lee, J., and Kang, M. J. (2019). Effects of parent-adolescent relationship quality and parental controlling behavior on cyberbullying perpetration: Mediating effects of cyberbullying victimization. Korean J. Child Stud. 40, 69–83. doi: 10.5723/kjcs.2019.40.1.69
Li, P. L., Chen, G. J., Zhang, Y., Li, W., Fan, L., and Tian, F. (2018). Society of China Analysis and Forecast (2019). Beijing: Social Sciences Academic Press.
Lim, S., and Tai, K. (2014). Family incivility and job performance: A moderated mediation model of psychological distress and core self-evaluation. J. Appl. Psychol. 99, 351–359. doi: 10.1037/a0034486
Loey, N. E., Oggel, A., Goemanne, A. S., Braem, L., Vanbrabant, L., and Geenen, R. (2014). Cognitive emotion regulation strategies and neuroticism in relation to depressive symptoms following burn injury: A longitudinal study with a 2-year follow-up. J. Behav. Med. 37, 839–848. doi: 10.1007/s10865-013-9545-2
Lopez, E. M. (1995). Challenges and resources of Mexican American students within the family, peer group, and university: Age and gender patterns. Hisp. J. Behav. Sci. 17, 499–508. doi: 10.1177/07399863950174006
Lovibond, P. F., and Lovibond, S. H. (1995). The structure of negative emotional states: Comparison of the depression anxiety stress scales (DASS) with the beck depression and anxiety inventories. Behav. Res. Ther. 33, 335–345. doi: 10.1016/0005-7967(94)00075-U
Low, S., and Espelage, D. (2013). Differentiating cyber bullying perpetration from non-physical bullying: Commonalities across race, individual, and family predictors. Psychol. Violence 3, 39–52. doi: 10.1037/a0030308
Magal, N., Hendler, T., and Admon, R. (2021). Is neuroticism really bad for you? Dynamics in personality and limbic reactivity prior to, during and following real-life combat stress. Neurobiol. Stress 15:100361. doi: 10.1016/j.ynstr.2021.100361
Maria, T., and Devi, N. U. (2020). Family incivility and entrepreneurial success of MSMEs: Moderating role of psychological capital. S. Asian J. Mark. Manag. Res. 10, 35–45. doi: 10.5958/2249-877X.2020.00069.7
Maria, T., Aboobaker, N., and Devi, N. U. (2021). Family incivility, burnout and job satisfaction: Examining the mediation effect. Benchmarking Int. J. 28, 2110–2129. doi: 10.1108/BIJ-10-2020-0534
Mccrae, R. R., and Costa, P. T. (1987). Validation of the five-factor model of personality across instruments and observers. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 52, 81–90. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.52.1.81
Metcalfe, J., and Mischel, W. (1999). A hot/cool-system analysis of delay of gratification: Dynamics of willpower. Psychol. Rev. 106, 3–19. doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.106.1.3
Miceli, S., Cardaci, M., Scrima, F., and Caci, B. (2021). Time perspective and Facebook addiction: The moderating role of neuroticism. Curr. Psychol. doi: 10.1007/s12144-021-01355-w
Mineka, S., Williams, A. L., Wolitzky-Taylor, K., Vrshek-Schallhorn, S., and Zinbarg, R. E. (2020). Five-year prospective neuroticism-stress effects on major depressive episodes: Primarily additive effects of the general neuroticism factor and stress. J. Abnorm. Psychol. 129, 646–657. doi: 10.1037/abn0000530
Muris, P., Roelofs, J., Rassin, E., Franken, I., and Mayer, B. (2005). Mediating effects of rumination and worry on the links between neuroticism, anxiety and depression. Pers. Individ. Differ. 39, 1105–1111. doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2005.04.005
Naeem, M., Weng, Q. D., and Ali, A. (2020). Linking family incivility to workplace incivility: Mediating role of negative emotions and moderating role of self-efficacy for emotional regulation. Asian. J. Soc. Psychol. 23, 69–81. doi: 10.1111/ajsp.12391
Naylor, P., and Cowie, H. (1999). The effectiveness of peer support systems in challenging school bullying. J. Adolesc. 22, 467–479.
Ng, F., Trauer, T., Dodd, S., Callaly, T., and Berk, M. (2010). The validity of the 21-item version of the depression anxiety stress scales as a routine clinical outcome measure. Acta Neuropsychiatr. 19, 304–310. doi: 10.1111/j.1601-5215.2007.00217.x
Olver, J. M., and Mooradian, T. A. (2003). Personality traits and personal values: A conceptual and empirical integration. Pers. Individ. Differ. 35, 109–125. doi: 10.1016/S0191-8869(02)00145-9
Olweus, D. (1993). Bullying at school: What we know and what we can do. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.
Pabian, S., and Vandebosch, H. (2014). Using the theory of planned behaviour to understand cyberbullying: The importance of beliefs for developing interventions. Eur. J. Dev. Psychol. 11, 463–477. doi: 10.1080/17405629.2013.858626
Patchin, J. W., and Hinduja, S. (2011). Traditional and nontraditional bullying among youth: A test of general strain theory. Youth Soc. 43, 727–751. doi: 10.1177/0044118X10366951
Paudel, S., Gautam, H., Adhikari, C., and Yadav, D. K. (2020). Depression, anxiety and stress among the undergraduate students of Pokhara metropolitan. J. Nepal Health Res. Counc. 18, 27–34. doi: 10.33314/jnhrc.v18i1.2189
Peng, Y., Zhou, H., Zhang, B., Mao, H., Hua, R., and Jiang, H. (2021). Perceived stress and mobile phone addiction among college students during the 2019 coronavirus disease: The mediating roles of rumination and the moderating role of self-control. Pers. Individ. Differ. 185:111222. doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2021.111222
Ren, S., Babalola, M. T., Ogbonnaya, C., Hochwarter, W. A., and Peter, A.-M. (2021). Employee thriving at work: The long reach of family incivility and family support. J. Organ. Psych. 43, 17–35. doi: 10.1002/job.2559
Roberts, S. B., and Kendler, K. S. (1999). Neuroticism and self-esteem as indices of the vulnerability to major depression in women. Psychol. Med. 29, 1101–1119. doi: 10.1017/S0033291799008739
Romero-Abrio, A., Martínez-Ferrer, B., Musitu-Ferrer, D., León-Moreno, C., Villarreal-González, M., and Callejas-Jerónimo, J. (2019). Family communication problems, psychosocial adjustment and cyberbullying. Int. J. Env. Res. Pub. Health 16, 2417–2429. doi: 10.3390/ijerph16132417
Rule, B. G., Dyck, R., and Nesdale, A. R. (1978). Arbitrariness of frustration: Inhibition or instigation effects on aggression. Eur. J. Soc. Psychol. 8, 237–244. doi: 10.1002/ejsp.2420080208
Sarwar, A., Bashir, S., and Khan, A. K. (2019). Spillover of workplace bullying into family incivility: Testing a mediated moderation model in a time-lagged study. J. Interpers. Violence 36, 1–26. doi: 10.1177/0886260519847778
Schneider, T. R. (2004). The role of neuroticism on psychological and physiological stress responses. J. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 40, 795–804. doi: 10.1016/j.jesp.2004.04.005
Schodt, K. B., Quiroz, S. I., Wheeler, B., Hall, D. L., and Silva, Y. N. (2021). Cyberbullying and mental health in adults: The moderating role of social media use and gender. Front. Psychiatry 12:1–14. doi: 10.3389/fpsyt.2021.674298
Sliter, M., Sliter, K., and Jex, S. (2011). The employee as a punching bag: The effect of multiple sources of incivility on employee withdrawal behavior and sales performance. J. Organ. Behav. 33, 121–139. doi: 10.1002/job.767
Smith, M., and D’Aniello, C. (2021). The effect of parental attachment on risky alcohol use and disordered eating behaviors in college students. Contemp. Fam. Ther. 43, 290–297. doi: 10.1007/s10591-021-09573-x
Smith, M. M., Saklofske, D. H., Yan, G., and Sherry, S. B. (2017). Does perfectionism predict depression, anxiety, stress, and life satisfaction after controlling for neuroticism? A study of Canadian and Chinese undergraduates. J. Individ. Differ. 38, 63–70. doi: 10.1027/1614-0001/a000223
Suls, J. (2001). “Affect, stress, and personality,” in Handbook of affect and social cognition, ed. J. P. Forgas (Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum), 392–409.
Sun, J.-W., Xue, J.-M., Bai, H.-Y., Zhang, H.-H., and Lin, P.-Z. (2016). The association between negative life events, neuroticism and aggression in early adulthood. Pers. Individ. Differ. 102, 139–144. doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2016.06.066
Taylor, K. A., Sullivan, T. N., and Kliewer, W. (2013). A longitudinal path analysis of peer victimization, threat appraisals to the self, and aggression, anxiety, and depression among urban African American adolescents. J. Youth Adolesc. 42, 178–189. doi: 10.1007/s10964-012-9821-4
Taylor, S. G., and Kluemper, D. H. (2012). Linking perceptions of role stress and incivility to workplace aggression: The moderating role of personality. J. Occup. Health Psychol. 17, 316–329. doi: 10.1037/a0028211
Valkenburg, P. M., and Peter, J. (2011). Online communication among adolescents: An integrated model of its attraction, opportunities, and risks. J. Adolesc. Health Care 48, 121–127. doi: 10.1016/j.jadohealth.2010.08.020
Wang, M., Dai, X., and Yao, S. (2011). Development of the Chinese big five personality inventory (CBF-PI) III: Psychometric peoperties of CBF-PI brief version. Chi. J. Clin. Psychol. 19, 454–457.
Wang, X., Wang, K., Huang, K., Wu, X., and Yang, L. (2021). The association between demographic characteristics, personality, and mental health of bus drivers in China: A structural equation model. Physiol. Behav. 229:113247. doi: 10.1016/j.physbeh.2020.113247
Watson, D., Clark, L. A., and Tellegen, A. (1988). Development and validation of brief measures of positive and negative affect: The PANAS scales. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 54, 1063–1070. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.54.6.1063
Wright, S. L., Kacmarski, J. A., Firsick, D. M., Jenkins-Guarnieri, M., and Kimm, A. J. (2020). Family influences on college students’ anticipated work-family conflict, social self-efficacy, and self-esteem. Career Dev. Q. 68, 112–128. doi: 10.1002/cdq.12217
Xu, Y. C., Yang, Y. P., and Wu, D. X. (2013). Mediating effect of trait impulsivity between negative affect and internet overuse in college students. Chi. J. Clin. Psychol. 21, 942–945.
Yang, X. F., Li, X. F., and Hu, P. (2020). Trait procrastination and mobile phone addiction in college students: The mediating role of negative affect. Chi. J. Clin. Psychol. 28, 1148–1151. doi: 10.16128/j.cnki.1005-3611.2020.06.014
Yokotani, K., and Takano, M. (2021). Social contagion of cyberbullying via online perpetrator and victim networks. Comp. Human Behav. 119:106719. doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2021.106719
You, S., and Lim, S. A. (2016). Longitudinal predictors of cyberbullying perpetration: Evidence from Korean middle school students. Pers. Individ. Differ. 89, 172–176. doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2015.10.019
Yudes, C., Rey, L., and Extremera, N. (2021). The moderating effect of emotional intelligence on problematic internet use and cyberbullying perpetration among adolescents: Gender differences. Psychol. Rep. doi: 10.1177/00332941211031792
Keywords: family incivility, cyberbullying perpetration, negative emotions, neuroticism, the frustration-aggression theory
Citation: Gao J, Liu F, Xu J, Wang J, Mou J and Wang L (2022) The influence of family incivility on cyberbullying perpetration: A moderated mediation model. Front. Psychol. 13:975335. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.975335
Received: 22 June 2022; Accepted: 25 July 2022;
Published: 25 August 2022.
Edited by:
Gonzalo Del Moral, Universidad Pablo de Olavide, SpainReviewed by:
Ana Romero-Abrio, Pablo de Olavide University, SpainAngelo Carrieri, University of Macerata, Italy
Copyright © 2022 Gao, Liu, Xu, Wang, Mou and Wang. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
*Correspondence: Jianjun Xu, eHVqaWFuanVuQG5idS5lZHUuY24=