Affective Teacher-Student Relationships and Students’ Internalizing Behaviors: A Meta-Analytic Approach
Carmen Cuculescu (12655031) Faculty of Social and Behavioral Sciences Graduate School of Child Development and Education
Supervisor: Dr. D.L. (Debora) Roorda Reviewer: Dr. H.M.Y. (Helma) Koomen
Abstract
In the present study, we used a meta-analytic approach to examine the strength of the association between the affective quality of teacher-student relationships (TSR) and students’ internalizing behaviors. Furthermore, we investigated whether associations between TSR and internalizing behaviors were stronger for boys or girls and for students of ethnic majority or minority background. Our analysis was based on 123 articles, describing 146 studies (k), and included a total of 190,633 students (N). The results showed that both the negative
association between positive TSR and internalizing behaviors (r = -.17) and the positive association between negative TSR and internalizing behavior (r = .18) were small to medium. Furthermore, our results indicate that the negative association between positive TSR and internalizing behaviors was stronger for students with majority ethnicity than for students with minority ethnicity. However, the ethnic background did not appear to moderate the association between negative TSR and internalizing behaviors, and gender did not appear to moderate any of the associations between TSR and internalizing behaviors. Our findings suggest that interventions focusing on decreasing negative TSR and increasing positive TSR might help prevent internalizing behaviors and that this would be equally important for girls and boys.
KEYWORDS: affective teacher-student relationships, internalizing behaviors, gender, ethnicity, meta-analysis.
Affective Teacher-Student Relationships and Students’ Internalizing Behaviors: A Meta-Analytic Approach
Previous research has shown that teacher-student relationships (TSR) impact several aspects of students’ school adjustment, such as externalizing behaviors (see the meta-analysis of Lei et al., 2016), engagement, and achievement (see the meta-analysis of Roorda et al., 2011). Although the impact of TSR on these aspects of students’ school adjustment received much attention and several meta-analyses are available, associations with other aspects of school functioning remain understudied. For example, to our knowledge, no meta-analysis exists yet about internalizing behaviors (negative affect directed inwards that results in social inhibition, emotional symptoms, depressive symptoms, anxiety, and somatic complaints). Taking into consideration that internalizing behaviors have been found to have long-term effects on depression and other forms of maladjustment (Bosquet & Egeland, 2006; Groh et al., 2012; Stark et al., 1999), we propose that studying the impact of TSR on internalizing behaviors could prove important for improving students outcomes. On the association
between TSR and internalizing behaviors, current research shows different results, with some of the existing studies show significant effects of TSR on internalizing behaviors (Arora et al., 2017; Martínez et al., 2011; Runions, 2014), while others report not-significant effects (Kurdi & Archambault, 2018; Ly & Zhou, 2018; Pakarinen et al., 2018). Therefore, the present study used a meta-analytic approach to examine the effects of TSR on internalizing behaviors.
Previous meta-analyses indicated that associations between TSR and students’ school adjustment could be stronger for some groups of students than for others (Lei et al., 2016; Roorda et al., 2011). For example, the negative associations between positive TSR and externalizing behaviors were found to be stronger for girls than for boys (Lei et al., 2016) and stronger associations were found between both positive and negative TSR and engagement
for boys, while stronger associations between positive TSR and achievement were found for girls (Roorda et al., 2011). Similarly, stronger associations of positive TSR and achievement were found for samples with fewer majority students (Roorda et al., 2011). Therefore, in the present meta-analysis, we also examined the moderating effects of gender and ethnicity.
Extended attachment theory
A common theoretical framework used when studying the impact of relationship quality on children’s outcomes is the attachment theory (Bowlby, 1988). According to the attachment theory, positive parent-child relationships can help children build the emotional security that they need for healthy development and can offer them a secure base from which they can explore the world. Emotional security, in turn, is considered to be a precondition for exploration of the environment and subsequent healthy development (Bowlby, 1988). The attachment theory has also been extended and applied to other relevant adult-child
relationships, such as teacher-student relationships (Pianta, 1999; Verschueren & Koomen, 2012). According to the extended attachment theory, positive teacher-student relationships help children feel emotionally secure at school, and emotional security, in turn, is considered to be a precondition for healthy development and exploration. Negative teacher-student relationships, however, threatens students’ emotional security with negative effects on school outcomes. (Pianta, 1999; Verschueren & Koomen, 2012).
Studies based on the attachment theory generally distinguish the degree of closeness and conflict in teacher-student relationships (Pianta, 1999). Closeness refers to the positive aspects of the TSR and includes sensitivity, warmth, support, and affiliation. Conflict refers to the degree of discordant interactions, negativity, and rejection in teacher-child
relationships. (Pianta, 2001; Verschueren & Koomen, 2012). Internalizing behaviors refer to behaviors that are inwardly directed, which are caused by an overcontrol of feelings and are especially harmful to the person itself. (Merrell, 1999; Cicchetti & Toth, 1991). Examples of
internalizing behaviors are anxiety, social inhibition, social withdrawal, and depressive symptoms (Liu et al., 2011; Roorda et al., 2014). Seeing that closeness is considered to be a positive relationship dimension, which enhances children’s emotional security, we would expect that it will diminish internalizing behaviors. Conflict, on the other hand, is considered as a negative dimension, which threatens children’s emotional security and, therefore it would increase internalizing behaviors (Verschueren & Koomen, 2012).
Teacher-student relationships and students’ internalizing behaviors
Some of the studies that examined the associations between the affective quality of teacher-student relationships and students’ internalizing behavior show significant
associations. One example is a longitudinal study conducted in the USA (Arora et al., 2017), that included 186 Asian American early adolescents (48.90 girls), aged 10 to 14 years, from 100 schools. Adolescents reported teacher support and depressive symptoms each spring in two subsequent school years. The authors report that teachers’ support was significantly associated with decreased depressive symptoms over time (r = -.44).
Another example is also a longitudinal study conducted in the USA (Martínez et al., 2011) on a sample of 140 early adolescents (57.14% girls), aged 11 to 12 years. The
adolescents reported on perceived teachers’ support and internalizing behaviors at two measurement times (one year apart). The results showed a negative association between the positive TSRs, represented by the teachers’ support and internalizing behaviors (r = -.30).
A third study conducted in Australia (Runions, 2014) on a sample of 451 primary school students (49.44% girls), aged 4 to 6 years, used teachers’ reports to measure the association between teacher-student relationship and depression. This study found a
significant negative association for the positive TSR (r = -.36) and a positive association for the negative TSRs (r = .36). The measurements were approximately one year apart.
However, some studies did not find a significant association between the affective quality of teacher-student relationships and students’ internalizing behavior. For example, one study conducted in the USA (Ly & Zhou, 2018) on 258 Chinese American immigrant children (47.8 girls), aged 6 to 10 years, found that the quality of the teacher-child
relationship did not predict internalizing problems. Data were collected in two waves and the quality of teacher-student relationship internalizing behaviors were measured by parents and teachers’ reports (150 teachers from 80 schools were involved), and children self-reports.
Moreover, another longitudinal study conducted in Canada (Kurdi & Archambault, 2018) on a sample of 350 students (48% girls), aged 6 to 11 years, found no significant associations between the positive TSR (teacher reported) and anxiety (student reported) but significant association between negative TSR and anxiety (r = .20). Finally, another
longitudinal study conducted in Finland (Pakarinen et al., 2018) on 440 early adolescents (48% girls), aged 9 to 11 years found no significant associations between either positive TSR and anxiety or between negative TSR and anxiety. Both teacher-student relationship quality and anxiety symptoms were reported by the teachers.
Gender differences in the strength of associations between TSR and internalizing behaviors
Previous research has also found that the affective quality of the teacher-student relationship could be more important for the school adjustment of some students than for others (i.e. gender or ethnicity) (Roorda et al., 2011). According to the gender role
socialization theory (Maccoby, 1998), the benefits that girls and boys have from positive TSR and risks from negative TSR could vary according to their gender-specific behavior and the teachers’ gender-biased expectations (Ewing & Taylor, 2009). As a result, we could expect a stronger effect of positive TSR for girls because stronger affiliation is more frequently
TSR for boys because conflict-related behaviors are frequently validated as gender-specific for boys (Ewing & Taylor, 2009)
Empirical results seem to support this theoretical assumption. For example, a longitudinal study conducted in Australia (Runions, 2014) found a stronger negative
association for the positive TSR and internalizing behaviors for girls (r = -.40) than for boys (r = -.32). Also, the same study found a stronger positive association for the negative TSR for boys (r = .39) than for girls (r = .33). Moreover, meta-analyses on other school outcomes show results that support gender moderation. First, stronger negative associations between positive TSR and externalizing behaviors (Lei et al., 2016) as well as stronger associations between positive TSR and achievement (Roorda et al., 2011) were found for girls. However, for engagement, stronger associations were found between both positive and negative TSR and engagement for boys.
Student ethnicity
Considering the academic risk theory (Hamre & Pianta, 2001), certain categories of students are in a higher risk group concerning school failure. One of these categories is ethnic minority students. Students that are part of an ethnic minority could therefore be more
vulnerable to the influence of the teacher-student relationship, and therefore show stronger associations between both positive and negative TSR and internalizing behaviors.
Empirical results regarding other outcomes as engagement and achievement show mixed results regarding the confirmation of the academic risk theory. In a meta-analysis examining associations between TSR and achievement and engagement (Roorda et al., 2011), stronger associations were found for minority students only for positive TSR with
achievement. The ethnicity moderation effect was not significant for the associations between negative TSR with either achievement or engagement. However, for primary students, the association between positive TSR and engagement was weaker for ethnic minority students.
The present study
In the present study, we conducted two separate analyses for the associations between (1) positive TSR and internalizing behaviors, and (2) negative TSR and internalizing
behaviors. We hypothesized that positive TSR and students’ internalizing behaviors are negatively associated and negative TSR and students’ internalizing behaviors are positively associated. We expected that associations for negative TSR and internalizing behaviors were stronger than those for positive TSRs. We also expected that the strength of the associations between TSR and students’ internalizing behaviors would be moderated by (3) students’ gender and (4) ethnicity, thus, we included both as moderators in our analyses.
Based on the findings of previous meta-analyses (Lei et al., 2016 and Roorda et al., 2011), we analyzed the affective quality of TSRs, both positive and negative TSR, and performed separate analyses for each of these two aspects of the TSR concerning internalizing behaviors.
Methods Literature search
We searched three databases, the Educational Resources Information Center (ERIC), PsychInfo, and Web of Science. The following keywords were used to represent affective TSRs: relationship(s), support, care/caring, interaction, closeness, relatedness, emotional involvement, conflict, neglect, reject, dependency, negative expectations. The following keywords were chosen to represent Internalizing Behavior: internalizing,
depression/depressive, anxiety/anxious, fear, inhibition, shyness, somatic
symptom/complaint, emotional symptoms, social withdrawal/inhibition, emotional (dys)regulation/ problem/ control/restrain/constrain, solitary behavior, loneliness/lonely, negative affect, obsessive-compulsive disorder, trauma, stressor-related disorder, dissociative disorder, nervous, sadness/sad, worry, timid. Our literature search was up to date until
February 10th, 2020, and yielded 4229 articles. After deduplication, there were 3265 articles left.
Selection of papers
We looked at the titles and abstracts of the found papers to make a first selection of which papers were suitable to include. After this first round of selection, 455 papers were retained. In the second round of selection, we also looked at the full paper and ended up with 129 articles, based on the following criteria: (1) papers should be published in English; (2) papers should be published in a peer-reviewed journal (to guarantee a basic level of quality; cf., Roorda et al., 2017); (3) the studies had to measure both teacher-student relationships and students’ internalizing behaviors; (4) the studies had to focus on affective quality of the relationship; (5) the studies had to report sufficient statistical information to calculate the effect sizes for the association between positive TSR and internalizing behavior, between negative TSR and internalizing behavior, or both; (6) TSR had to be measured before or at the same time as internalizing behaviors because we considered TSR as the predictor of internalizing behavior (Roorda et al., 2011; Roorda et al., 2017); (7) TSR had to be measured at the dyadic level. We decided to exclude studies measuring relationships at the group level (such as classroom climate or teacher styles) because previous research has shown that the quality of TSR differs across students (Hamre & Pianta, 2001); (8) the studies had to include students from preschool until twelfth grade. We decided to exclude the papers concerning university students because they are in a different development phase and benefit from a different form of education; (9) we excluded the papers concerning math anxiety, test anxiety, etc. because we considered these to be a measure of school emotional engagement (students’ feelings and emotions about school work) (Fredricks et al. 2004), rather than a measure of internalizing behaviors.
Sample
Our final sample consisted of 123 articles, describing 146 studies (k), from 1995 to 2020. In total, these studies included 190,633 students (N). Sample sizes varied from 34 to 49,172 students. Not all studies reported the number of teachers but, at least 4313 teachers (between 6 and 932 teachers per study) were included in our sample. Studies were conducted in the United States of America (k = 53), Europe (k = 39), Asia (k = 38), Canada (k = 7), Australia (k = 6), Africa (k = 2), and Peru (k = 1). Studies included children from preschool to high-school: preschool and kindergarten (k = 23), primary and secondary school (k = 76) and high-school (k = 47). Of the 146 studies (k), 139 studies reported the association between Positive TSR and Internalizing Behavior and 55 studies reported the association between Negative TSR and Internalizing Behavior. Overall the studies covered TSR from preschool and kindergarten to high-school and the mean of the sample was school grade 6 and,
respectively, age 11. One-third of the analyzed studies were longitudinal (k = 50) and the rest cross-sectional.
Coding of Studies
We coded the following sample characteristics for each study: the number of students and teachers, student mean age, student Gender (percentage of girls), student Ethnicity (percentage of majority ethnic students), and country. We also coded study characteristics: design (0 = cross-sectional study, 1 = longitudinal study), months between the measurement of TSR and Internalizing Behavior, instruments used, and some other sample and study characteristics as well, which were beyond the scope of the present study. When the same sample was used in multiple articles, we selected one article for each sample to be included, based on sample size and amount of relevant information reported. A total of 6 articles were excluded from our meta-analysis because of overlapping samples.
not reported we used standardized regression coefficients as effect size. In case of multiple effect sizes, we dealt with them in these ways: (1) For longitudinal studies in which the TSR were measured once and internalizing behavior at multiple time points, we included the first measurement for TSR and the next closest measurement occasion for Internalizing
Behaviors; (2) For longitudinal studies in which both TSR and Internalizing Behaviors were measured at multiple time points, we averaged the correlations of the occasions that are most close to each other, but still longitudinal (e.g. TSR at measurement time 1 and Internalizing Behaviors at measurement time 2 with TSR at time 2 with Internalizing Behaviors at time 3); (3) In studies that used more than one concept (e.g., shyness and anxiety) or measure (e.g., teacher reports and child reports) to measure TSR and/or Internalizing Behaviors, we averaged all relevant effect sizes into one effect size per study. In addition, when an article provided separate effect sizes for different non-overlapping subgroups in their sample (e.g., for boys and girls) we coded each subsample as a separate study.
Analyses
The analyses were conducted in SPSS version 26, using SPSS macros published by Lipsey and Wilson (2001). First, in order to investigate the associations between positive TSR and Internalizing Behaviors (research question 1) and negative TSR and Internalizing Behaviors (research question 2), we estimated overall effect sizes (Pearson’s correlations) for positive TSR and Internalizing Behaviors and negative TSR and Internalizing Behaviors. Effect sizes were weighted by their inverse variance (N – 3). Both fixed and random estimations are reported for the overall effect sizes because the random effects allow generalizations to comparable studies that are not included in the dataset, whereas fixed effects do not allow such generalization (Schmidt, Oh, & Hayes, 2009). According to Lipsey & Wilson (2001), small correlations are considered those under .10, small to medium
correlations between .25 and .40, while correlations greater than .40 are considered as large. Second, we estimated the moderation effects of gender and ethnicity on the
associations between TSR and Internalizing Behaviors (research question 3 and 4). Separate analyses were run for Gender and Ethnicity, as not all studies in our dataset provided
information about the number of ethnic majority students in the sample, hence, including the two moderators in the same model would decrease power (Roorda et al., 2011). For the moderator analyses, we only reported fixed effect sizes, because fixed-effects models have more statistical power to detect significant effects (Roorda et al., 2011). With regard to the moderator analyses, the interpretation of the standardized regression coefficients (β) depends on the sign of the overall effect size. When this is positive (i.e., the association between negative TSR and Internalizing Behaviors), a positive β means that effect sizes are stronger in studies with a larger score on the moderator variable (containing more girls than boys and more ethnic majority than ethnic minority students). When the overall effect size is negative (i.e., the association between positive TSR and Internalizing Behaviors), a positive β means that effect sizes are weaker for the studies that included more girls or more ethnic majority students.
Results
Table 1 provides the effect sizes and methodological and student characteristics for all individual studies included in our final analyses. All the studies reported information about students’ Gender, with on average 50.09% of the students in the sample being girls (SD = 24.09, range 0 to 100%). For 67% of the studies (k = 98), information about students’
Ethnicity was available. On average, 70% of the students had an ethnic majority background (SD = 30.12, range 0 to 100%).
Table 1.
Effect sizes, numbers of students, and methodological and student characteristics for individual studies
Sample r TSR on IB6
Study Size M-Age1 % girls % maj2 Country Des3 +4 -5
Al-Yagon et al. 2004 205 10 45 100 Israel CS -0.43 0.54 Al-Yagon et al. 2012 181 16 55 100 Israel CS -0.15 0.17 Al-Yagon et al. 2012 188 16 52 100 Israel CS -0.18 0.31 Al-Yagon et al. 2016 90 16 56 100 Israel CS -0.24 0.09 Al-Yagon et al. 2016 91 16 55 100 Israel CS -0.08 0.19 Al-Yagon et al. 2016 99 16 55 100 Israel CS -0.08 0.31 Attar-Schwartz et al. 2019 243 13 60 Canada CS -0.20 Banks et al. 2015 748 13 50 Ireland CS -0.17 0.01
Bardack et al. 2017 89 6 52 41 USA CS -0.13
Berg-Nielsen et al. 2012 732 5 49 47 Norway CS 0.00 -0.12
Capp et al. 2016 14633 15 52 27 USA CS -0.02
Chang et al. 2018 1507 12 48 China CS -0.25
Chen et al. 2011 1376 14 50 100 Taiwan CS 0.17
Cheung et al. 1995 3582 17 53 100 Hong Kong CS -0.28 Chun et al. 2011 137 11 44 0 South Korea CS -0.06 Colarossi et al. 2003 125 16 100 92 Netherlands CS -0.28 Colarossi et al. 2003 92 16 0 92 Netherlands CS -0.07
Collins et al. 2017 262 11 0 53 USA CS 0.10 0.10
Conner et al. 2014 5557 16 55 52 USA CS -0.28
Conners-Burrow et al. 2009 977 14 50 76 USA CS -0.08
Coplan et al. 2017 1275 10 50 100 China CS -0.18
Demuthova et al. 2019 1961 17 63 100 Slovakia CS -0.15
DiLalla et al. 2004 42 12 45 98 USA CS -0.03 0.01
Drugli et al. 2011 825 9 51 Norway CS -0.34 0.46
Elmelid et al. 2015 643 15 55 12 USA CS -0.06
Erben Kecici et al. 2013 301 8 100 Turkey CS -0.17 Erben Kecici et al. 2013 211 8 0 Turkey CS 0.07
Ezzell et al. 2000 37 10 54 32 USA CS -0.23
Fan et al. 2016 570 15 54 China CS 0.26
Fiorilli et al. 2019 182 13 51 100 Italy CS 0.09
Fredrick et al. 2017 85 13 100 87 USA CS -0.52
Fredrick et al. 2017 85 13 0 87 USA CS -0.57
Fredrick et al. 2018 201 15 100 65 USA CS -0.42
Fredrick et al. 2018 198 15 0 65 USA CS -0.29
Galand et al. 2013 400 13 47 76 Belgium CS -0.37
Granot et al. 2016 65 11 51 Israel CS -0.24
Haj-Yahia et al. 2018 855 16 58 0 Israel CS -0.01 Haj-Yahia et al. 2018 977 16 54 100 Israel CS -0.01
Han et al. 2016 463 4 43 100 China CS -0.25 0.31
Henriksen et al. 2009 501 15 48 Norway CS -0.20 Hoferichteret al. 2014 1088 14 54 100 Germany CS -0.28 Hoferichteret al. 2015 301 14 100 Germany CS -0.17 Hoferichteret al. 2015 212 14 0 Germany CS 0.07
Holdaway et al. 2018 176 9 53 93 USA CS -0.10 0.40
Howes et al. 2011 3001 5 50 44 USA CS -0.12 0.14
Humm et al. 2018 616 13 55 Cape Town CS 0.11
Jellesma et al. 2015 500 11 53 Netherlands CS -0.20 0.33
Jia et al. 2009 709 12 52 31 USA CS -0.25
Jia et al. 2009 706 12 51 China CS -0.34
Table 1. (continued)
Sample r TSR on IB6
Study Size M-Age1 % girls % maj2 Country Des3 +4 -5
Kjellstrom et al. 2017 49172 16 53 Sweden CS -0.17
Koles et al. 2009 36 3 50 75 USA CS -0.05 0.18
Leeves et al. 2014 108 12 45 England CS -0.07
Lisonbee et al. 2008 507 4 50 USA CS 0.07 -0.11
Liu et al. 2015 1442 14 52 China CS -0.32
Luo et al. 2011 534 15 100 China CS 0.08 0.27
Luo et al. 2011 416 15 0 China CS -0.01 0.24
Luo et al. 2017 1573 16 49 China CS -0.56
McCarty et al. 2012 521 12 48 40 USA CS -0.32
Mercer et al. 2008 1193 10 51 73 USA CS -0.17
Moksnes et al. 2016 1239 15 51 Norway CS 0.36
Murberg et al. 2004 516 15 100 Norway CS -0.14
Murberg et al. 2004 537 15 0 Norway CS -0.20
Murberg et al. 2010 259 15 50 Norway CS -0.03
Murray et al. 2001 193 12 43 61 USA CS -0.41 0.30
Murray et al. 2001 96 12 43 61 USA CS 0.08 0.21
Murray et al. 2004 99 10 51 14 USA CS -0.29 0.53
Olivier et al. 2018 582 11 51 93 Canada CS 0.07
Oriol et al. 2017 21416 14 46 Peru CS 0.17
Overbeek et al. 2006 532 14 100 Sweden CS -0.36
Overbeek et al. 2006 435 14 0 Sweden CS -0.33
Rudasill et al. 2019 104 4 54 80 USA CS -0.03 -0.07
Rueger et al. 2008 138 13 100 92 USA CS -0.23
Rueger et al. 2008 108 13 0 92 USA CS -0.29
Schmitt et al. 2018 260 4 47 42 USA CS -0.30
Scrimin et al. 2014 205 11 50 Italy CS -0.31
Sette et al. 2014 129 5 51 Italy CS -0.28 -0.20
Sette et al. 2019 131 5 51 82 Italy CS -0.20
Sikora et al. 2019 186 12 53 Poland CS -0.19
Silinskas et al. 2016 372 7 48 Finland CS -0.11 0.17
Stewart et al. 2011 390 13 61 55 USA CS -0.21
Sulkowski et al. 2018 539 16 51 27 USA CS -0.41
Sun et al. 2006 433 12 45 China CS -0.26
Sun et al. 2007 678 14 100 China CS -0.27
Sun et al. 2007 680 14 0 China CS -0.28
Tong et al. 2019 1369 14 48 China CS -0.39
Valiente et al. 2012 291 6 46 75 USA CS -0.12
Wang et al. 2009 1042 14 52 32 USA CS -0.09
Weyns et al. 2019 118 5 100 100 China CS -0.08 0.11
Weyns et al. 2019 112 5 0 100 China CS -0.06 0.08
Wu et al. 2015 524 4 44 100 China CS -0.16 -0.08
Yanfang Li et al. 2015 543 5 50 China CS -0.01 0.46
Yue et al. 2017 881 12 45 China CS -0.17
Zatto et al. 2019 443 4 48 33 Canada CS -0.10 0.43
Zee et al. 2018 269 10 51 75 Netherlands CS -0.09 0.10
Zeedyk et al. 2016 127 6 50 65 USA CS -0.17 0.46
Arora et al. 2017 186 13 49 90 USA Long -0.44
Averdijk et al. 2014 1675 8 48 54 Switzerland Long -0.05 Baroncelli et al. 2020 301 13 52 90 Italy Long -0.15 0.26
Chen et al. 2018 4163 16 50 Taiwan Long -0.02
Coulombe et al. 2018 228 7 50 11 USA Long -0.27
de Jong et al. 2018 226 11 51 0 Netherlands Long -0.11 0.21 De Wit et al. 2011 2616 14 54 100 Canada Long -0.32 Diaconu-Gherasim et al. 302 17 60 100 Romania Long -0.11
Table 1. (continued)
Sample r TSR on IB6
Study Size M-Age1 % girls % maj2 Country Des3 +4 -5
Henricsson et al. 2006 91 8 48 84 Sweden Long -0.23 0.30
Herres et al. 2015 132 14 53 21 USA Long 0.26
Joyce et al. 2019 13120 15 52 52 USA Long -0.30
Justice et al. 2008 133 4 44 92 USA Long -0.26 -0.15
Karlsson et al. 2014 593 14 56 13 USA Long -0.06
Kurdi et al. 2018 350 9 48 Canada Long -0.01 0.20
Kurdi et al. 2018 424 10 53 64 Canada Long -0.08
Latsch et al. 2018 1088 14 54 100 Germany Long -0.17
Lee et al. 2015 164 4 56 56 USA Long -0.31
Lien et al. 2016 4163 17 50 Taiwan Long -0.04
Liu et al. 2018 1154 11 51 90 China Long -0.04
Ly et al. 2018 245 8 48 0 USA Long -0.02 0.02
Martinez et al. 2011 140 11 57 92 USA Long -0.30
Mejia et al. 2016 461 7 51 51 Canada Long -0.10 0.46 Murberg et al. 2009 198 17 56 Norway Long -0.22 Pakarinen et al. 2018 440 10 48 Finland Long -0.03 0.13 Poessel et al. 2013 1356 13 100 92 Australia Long -0.03 Poessel et al. 2013 969 13 0 92 Australia Long -0.02 Poessel et al. 2018 1452 13 52 93 Australia Long -0.25
Reddy et al. 2003 1202 13 100 82 USA Long -0.14
Reddy et al. 2003 1174 13 0 82 USA Long -0.17
Ren et al. 2018 2453 13 50 China Long -0.23
Roorda et al. 2014 175 5 0 91 Belgium Long -0.08 0.31 Rucinski et al. 2019 526 10 54 12 USA Long -0.06 0.17 Rudasill et al. 2014 1156 5 49 82 USA Long -0.08 0.05
Rueger et al. 2010 325 14 100 52 USA Long -0.22
Rueger et al. 2010 313 14 0 52 USA Long -0.09
Rueger et al. 2014 542 14 100 54 USA Long -0.26
Rueger et al. 2014 577 14 0 54 USA Long -0.16
Runions et al. 2013 377 5 50 Australia Long -0.29 -0.01 Runions et al. 2014 223 5 100 86 Australia Long -0.40 0.33 Runions et al. 2014 228 5 0 86 Australia Long -0.32 0.39 Schwab et al. 2019 359 13 52 Austria Long -0.18
Schwab et al. 2019 34 13 32 Austria Long -0.05
Shavega et al. 2019 310 5 50 Tanzania Long -0.29 0.35
Spilt et al. 2014 570 7 51 95 Belgium Long -0.15
Wang et al. 2013 1057 13 52 44 USA Long -0.20
Way et al. 2007 1451 13 54 91 USA Long -0.15
Wenz-Gross et al. 1997 773 12 50 85 USA Long -0.15
Weymouth et al. 2018 416 12 51 91 USA Long -0.17
Zhang et al. 2011 118 3 53 100 China Long -0.10 0.22 1Mean age across the sample
2Percentage ethnic majority of students in the total sample
3Methodological design of the study: CS = cross-sectional; Long = longitudinal 4Positive TSR
5Negative TSR
Overall associations between TSR and Internalizing Behaviors
The overall effect size for the association between Positive TSR and Internalizing Behaviors was significant and negative (r = -.17, p < .001 for fixed-effects model; r = -.17, p < .001 for random-effects model). This effect size can be considered as being small to medium. The overall effect size for Negative TSR and Internalizing Behaviors was significant and positive (r = .18, p < .001 for fixed-effects model; r = .20, p < .001 for random-effects model). This effect size is also small to medium.
Moderation by Gender and Ethnicity
With regard to Gender as a moderator, Gender did not have a significant impact on the association between Positive TSR and Internalizing Behaviors (β = -.04, p = .070). Gender also did not impact the association between Negative TSR and Internalizing
Behaviors (β = .05, p = .225). This means that the strength of the associations between both Positive and Negative TSR and students’ Internalizing Behaviors was not influenced by the number of girls in the sample.
However, students’ Ethnicity had a significant impact on the association between Positive TSR and Internalizing Behaviors (β = -.32, p < .001), indicating that the negative association between Positive TSR and Internalizing Behaviors appear to be stronger in samples with more ethnic majority students. In contrast, Ethnicity did not influence the association between Negative TSR and Internalizing Behaviors (β = -.02, p < .786), indicating that the strength of the association between negative TSR and Internalizing Behaviors did not depend on the number of ethnic majority students in the sample.
Discussion
In the present study, we used a meta-analytic approach to examine the associations between positive and negative TSR and internalizing behaviors. Furthermore, we examined if
this association is moderated by gender and ethnicity. According to expectations, we found significant effects on both positive and negative dimensions of TSRs.
Overall associations between teacher-student relationships and internalizing behaviors
As expected (Lei et al., 2016; Roorda et al., 2011), the association between positive TSR and internalizing behaviors was negative, whereas the association between negative TSR and internalizing behaviors were positive. This means that students who share a more positive relationship with their teachers tend to show less internalizing behaviors, whereas students who have a negative relationship with their teacher tend to show more internalizing behaviors. As such, the present study adds to previous meta-analyses (Lei et al., 2016; Roorda et al., 2011), as it shows that affective TSR are not only associated with students’ engagement, achievement, and externalizing behaviors, but also with internalizing behaviors.
Different than for TSR and externalizing behaviors (Lei et al., 2016), associations between TSR and internalizing behaviors were not stronger for negative TSR than for
positive TSRs. This can be due to the overall sample composition if we consider the findings of the meta-analysis by Roorda et al. (2011), where the authors found stronger associations between negative TSR and outcomes in elementary school and stronger associations between positive TSR and outcomes in secondary school. Further research would be necessary to examine this hypothesis that age or level of education could moderate these associations. Our results suggest that both positive and negative teacher-student relationships are equally important for students’ outcomes and that interventions should focus on both reducing the negative interactions and on encouraging positive TSR.
The overall associations found by our meta-analysis are small to medium, which is in line with the findings of the previous meta-analysis on other outcomes (i.e. achievement, see Roorda et al., 2011). However, other outcomes as externalizing behaviors and engagement show stronger associations with TSR (Lei et al., 2016; Roorda et al., 2011). This could imply
that other important factors are influencing internalizing behaviors in school and outside it (i.e. peers and parents relationships, see Elmelid et al., 2015; McCarty et al., 2012). Further research examining the interactions with such factors could prove useful. Using different intervention groups and manipulating TSR could bring new information regarding the implications of each type of relationship and the interactions between them.
The moderating role of students’ gender and ethnicity
In contrast to the academic risk hypothesis (Hamre & Pianta, 2001), associations between positive TSR and internalizing behavior appeared to be stronger for ethnic majority students than for ethnic minority students. This is in line with previous findings regarding engagement in primary school (Roorda et al., 2011) but differs from the findings on
engagement across the sample (see meta-analysis Roorda et al., 2011). This could be due to the sample composition (studies conducted in Europe vs. the USA) or to specific differences related to each of these outcomes. Further research that makes distinctions between different groups and future research that includes these outcomes together would be necessary for clarification. Students’ ethnic background, however, did not impact the association between negative TSR and internalizing behaviors, indicating that negative TSR have an impact equally important for students without ethnic minority background as for those from a minority group.
In contrast to our hypothesis (Lei et al., 2016; Runions, 2014), students’ gender did not significantly influence the associations between TSR and internalizing behaviors, indicating that both positive and negative TSR were just as important for girls and boys. These findings differ from the findings of other meta-analyses on school outcomes. For example, positive TSR were found to have a stronger effect for girls both as a protective factor when associated with externalizing behaviors (Lei et al., 2016) as well as a booster for increasing achievement (Roorda et al., 2011). On the other hand, stronger associations were
found between both positive and negative TSR and engagement for boys by Roorda et al. (2011). One of the possible explanations could be our larger and more diverse sample
structure and the differences between different countries and cultures. Further research should focus on considering these cultural distinctions, as well as age and school level.
Limitations
When interpreting the findings of the present meta-analysis, some limitations need to be taken into account: First, only one-third of the included studies were longitudinal studies (k = 50) and therefore our findings do not permit strong statements about causality. Future research should focus on exploring the association between TSR and internalizing behaviors in a longitudinal context.
Second, both TSR and internalizing behaviors are rather broad concepts, at least as defined in our meta-analysis. The concepts and instruments used to assess both TSR and internalizing behaviors were diverse and future research should consider if there are
significant differences between them. For example, internalizing was measured considering concepts like anxiety, depression, and shyness, measured with different instruments.
Although all the included concepts and instruments were relevant for internalizing behaviors and they are overlapping, future research that considers them separately would be necessary in order to control for the differences between them. Similarly, for TSR, warmth, closeness, and support were used for positive relations, with the same limitations as for the internalizing concepts. Future research could, for example, make a distinction between studies that use the Student-Teacher Relationship Scale (STRS, Pianta, 2001).
Third, many studies had different informants for TSR and internalizing (teacher vs. student or parent) which could lead to an overestimation of the association between TSR and internalizing behavior due to the same informant bias (Roorda et al., 2011). Moreover, more than two-thirds of the studies used a single measure for either positive and negative TSR, and
therefore it is difficult to interpret the specific impact of each type of interaction. Future research should focus on exploring each of these dimensions separately.
Conclusion
In conclusion, this meta-analysis has gathered information that shows the importance of both positive and negative TSR for students’ internalizing behaviors. Additionally, the analysis of the two mediators that we chose shows that TSR are equally important for girls as for boys. Also, although the ethnic majority children could benefit more from positive TSR, our results suggest that negative TSR are similarly detrimental to both minority and majority children.
The size of the effects shows that, although TSR are important they represent only one of the factors that are associated with internalizing behaviors. Interventions could therefore consider TSR in relation to other school factors as peer relationships and classroom and school climate in an effort to maximize positive effects on children’s outcomes. The
connections between our results and the results of other meta-analyses on TSR could imply that also school outcomes are correlated and could, similarly, be included as complementary targets of intervention (i.e. decreasing internalizing with increasing engagement)
References
The references for the studies included in the meta-analysis are marked with an asterisk.
* Ahn, H. J., & Stifter, C. (2010). Early Education and Development Child Care Teachers ’ Response to Children ’ s Emotional Expression. 9289(January 2014), 37–41.
https://doi.org/10.1207/s15566935eed1702
* Al-Yagon, M. (2016). Perceived Close Relationships With Parents, Teachers, and Peers: Predictors of Social, Emotional, and Behavioral Features in Adolescents With LD or Comorbid LD and ADHD. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 49(6), 597–615.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0022219415620569
* Al-Yagon, M. (2012). Adolescents with Learning Disabilities: Socioemotional and Behavioral Functioning and Attachment Relationships with Fathers, Mothers, and Teachers. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 41(10), 1294–1311.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-012-9767-6
* Al-Yagon, M., & Mikulincer, M. (2004). Socioemotional and academic adjustment among children with learning disorders: The mediational role of attachment-eased factors. Journal of Special Education, 38(2), 111–123.
https://doi.org/10.1177/00224669040380020501
* Arora, P. G., Wheeler, L. A., Fisher, S., & Barnes, J. (2017). Prospective examination of anxiety as a predictor of depressive symptoms among asian american early adolescent youth: The role of parent, peer, and teacher support and school engagement. Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology, 23(4), 541–550.
* Attar-Schwartz, S., Mishna, F., & Khoury-Kassabri, M. (2019). The Role of Classmates’ Social Support, Peer Victimization and Gender in Externalizing and Internalizing Behaviors among Canadian Youth. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 28(9), 2335– 2346. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10826-017-0852-z
* Averdijk, M., Eisner, M., & Ribeaud, D. (2014). Do Social Relationships Protect
Victimized Children Against Internalizing Problems? Journal of School Violence, 13(1), 80–99. https://doi.org/10.1080/15388220.2013.842175
* Banks, J., & Smyth, E. (2015). ‘Your whole life depends on it’: academic stress and high-stakes testing in Ireland. Journal of Youth Studies, 18(5), 598–616.
https://doi.org/10.1080/13676261.2014.992317
* Bardack, S., & Obradović, J. (2017). Emotional Behavior Problems, Parent Emotion
Socialization, and Gender as Determinants of Teacher–Child Closeness. Early Education and Development, 28(5), 507–524. https://doi.org/10.1080/10409289.2017.1279530
* Baroncelli, A., & Ciucci, E. (2020). Bidirectional Effects Between Callous-Unemotional Traits and Student-Teacher Relationship Quality Among Middle School Students. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 48(2), 277–288. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10802-019-00595-6
* Berg-Nielsen, T. S., Solheim, E., Belsky, J., & Wichstrom, L. (2012). Preschoolers’ psychosocial problems: In the eyes of the beholder? Adding teacher characteristics as determinants of discrepant parent-teacher reports. Child Psychiatry and Human Development, 43(3), 393–413. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10578-011-0271-0
Bosquet, M., & Egeland, B. (2006). The development and maintenance of anxiety symptoms from infancy through adolescence in a longitudinal sample. Development and
Psychopathology, 18(2), 517–550. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0954579406060275
Bowlby, J. (Edward J. M. (1988). A Secure Base : Clinical Applications of Attachment Theory. Routledge.
* Capp, G., Berkowitz, R., Sullivan, K., Astor, R. A., De Pedro, K., Gilreath, T. D., … Rice, E. (2016). Adult Relationships in Multiple Contexts and Associations With Adolescent Mental Health. Research on Social Work Practice, 26(6), 622–629.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1049731515624967
* Chang, C. W., Yuan, R., & Chen, J. K. (2018). Social support and depression among Chinese adolescents: The mediating roles of self-esteem and self-efficacy. Children and Youth Services Review, 88(October 2017), 128–134.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2018.03.001
* Chen, J. K., & Wei, H. S. (2011). The Impact of School Violence on Self-Esteem and Depression Among Taiwanese Junior High School Students. Social Indicators Research, 100(3), 479–498. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-010-9625-4
* Chen, C. Y., & Lien, Y. J. (2018). Trajectories of co-occurrence of depressive symptoms and deviant behaviors: The influences of perceived social support and personal characteristics. Children and Youth Services Review, 95(162), 174–182. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2018.10.037
* Cheng, Q., Xu, Y., Xie, L., Hu, Y., & Lv, Y. (2019). Prevalence and environmental impact factors of somatization tendencies in eastern Chinese adolescents: a multicenter
observational study. Cadernos de Saude Publica, 35(1), e00008418. https://doi.org/10.1590/0102-311X00008418
* Cheung, S.-K. (2006). Life Events, Classroom Environment, Achievement Expectation, and Depression Among Early Adolescents. Social Behavior and Personality: An
International Journal, Vol. 23, pp. 83–92. https://doi.org/10.2224/sbp.1995.23.1.83
* Children, C., & Investigation, A. M. (2017). the Impact of Positive School Experiences. 8, 37–58.
* Chun, J. S., & Chung, Y. (2011). A comparison of path factors influencing depressive symptoms in children of immigrant women and Korean children in South Korea. Children and Youth Services Review, 33(11), 2087–2095.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2011.04.032
* Collins, B. A., O’Connor, E. E., Supplee, L., & Shaw, D. S. (2017). Behavior problems in elementary school among low-income boys: The role of teacher–child relationships. Journal of Educational Research, 110(1), 72–84.
https://doi.org/10.1080/00220671.2015.1039113
* Colarossi, L. G., & Eccles, J. S. (2003). Differential effects of support providers on adolescents’ mental health. Social Work Research, 27(1), 19–30.
https://doi.org/10.1093/swr/27.1.19
* Coplan, R. J., Liu, J., Cao, J., Chen, X., & Li, D. (2017). Shyness and school adjustment in Chinese children: The roles of teachers and peers. School Psychology Quarterly, 32(1), 131–142. https://doi.org/10.1037/spq0000179
* Coplan, R. J. and W. M. (2009). Shy and soft spoken. Infant and Child Development, 18(6), 238–254. https://doi.org/10.1002/icd
Cotter, K. L., & Smokowski, P. R. (2017). An Investigation of Relational Risk and Promotive Factors Associated with Adolescent Female Aggression. Child Psychiatry and Human Development, 48(5), 754–767. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10578-016-0700-1
* Coulombe, B. R., & Yates, T. M. (2018). Prosocial pathways to positive adaptation: The mediating role of teacher-child closeness. Journal of Applied Developmental
Psychology, 58(September 2017), 9–17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appdev.2018.08.003
* de Jong, E. M., Koomen, H. M. Y., Jellesma, F. C., & Roorda, D. L. (2018). Teacher and child perceptions of relationship quality and ethnic minority children’s behavioral adjustment in upper elementary school: A cross-lagged approach. Journal of School Psychology, 70(June), 27–43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2018.06.003
* Ding, W., Meza, J., Lin, X., He, T., Chen, H., Wang, Y., & Qin, S. (2020). Oppositional Defiant Disorder Symptoms and Children’s Feelings of Happiness and Depression: Mediating Roles of Interpersonal Relationships. Child Indicators Research, 13(1), 215– 235. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12187-019-09685-9
* Drugli, M. B., Klökner, C., & Larsson, B. (2012). Do demographic factors, school functioning, and quality of student-teacher relationships as rated by teachers predict internalising and externalising problems among Norwegian schoolchildren? Evaluation and Research in Education, 24(4), 243–254.
* DiLalla, L. F., Marcus, J. L., & Wright-Phillips, M. V. (2004). Longitudinal effects of preschool behavioral styles on early adolescent school performance. Journal of School Psychology, 42(5), 385–401. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2004.05.002
* Diaconu-Gherasim, L. R., & Măirean, C. (2019). Depressive Symptoms and Academic Achievement: The Role of Adolescents’ Perceptions of Teachers’ and Peers’ Behaviors. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1111/jora.12538
* Demuthova, S. (2019). The School Environment as a Source of Somatic Problems in Adolescents. Revista Romaneasca Pentru Educatie Multidimensionala, 11(2), 59. https://doi.org/10.18662/rrem/117
* Elmelid, A., Stickley, A., Lindblad, F., Schwab-Stone, M., Henrich, C. C., & Ruchkin, V. (2015). Depressive symptoms, anxiety and academic motivation in youth: Do schools and families make a difference? Journal of Adolescence, 45, 174–182.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adolescence.2015.08.003
Ewing, A. R., & Taylor, A. R. (2009). The role of child gender and ethnicity in teacher-child relationship quality and children’s behavioral adjustment in preschool. Early Childhood Research Quarterly. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecresq.2008.09.002
* Ezzell, C. E., Swenson, C. C., & Brondino, M. J. (2000). The relationship of social support to physically abused children’s adjustment. Child Abuse and Neglect, 24(5), 641–651. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0145-2134(00)00123-X
* Fan, C., Chu, X., Wang, M., & Zhou, Z. (2016). Interpersonal stressors in the schoolyard and depressive symptoms among Chinese adolescents: The mediating roles of
rumination and co-rumination. School Psychology International, 37(6), 664–679. https://doi.org/10.1177/0143034316678447
* Fiorilli, C., Capitello, T. G., Barni, D., Buonomo, I., & Gentile, S. (2019). Predicting adolescent depression: The interrelated roles of self-esteem and interpersonal stressors. Frontiers in Psychology, 10(MAR), 1–6. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00565
* Fredrick, S. S., Demaray, M. K., & Jenkins, L. N. (2017). Multidimensional Perfectionism and Internalizing Problems: Do Teacher and Classmate Support Matter? Journal of Early Adolescence, 37(7), 975–1003. https://doi.org/10.1177/0272431616636231
* Fredrick, S. S., Demaray, M. K., Malecki, C. K., & Dorio, N. B. (2018). Can social support buffer the association between depression and suicidal ideation in adolescent boys and girls? Psychology in the Schools, 55(5), 490–505. https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.22125
* Galand, B., & Hospel, V. (2013). Peer victimization and school disaffection: Exploring the moderation effect of social support and the mediation effect of depression. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 83(4), 569–590. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8279.2012.02077.x
* Granot, D. (2016). Socioemotional and behavioural adaptation of students with disabilities: the significance of teacher–student attachment-like relationships. Emotional and
Behavioural Difficulties, 21(4), 416–432.
https://doi.org/10.1080/13632752.2016.1235324
Groh, A. M., Roisman, G. I., van Ijzendoorn, M. H., Bakermans-Kranenburg, M. J., & Fearon, R. P. (2012). The Significance of Insecure and Disorganized Attachment for
Children’s Internalizing Symptoms: A Meta-Analytic Study. Child Development, 83(2), 591–610. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.2011.01711.x
* Haj-Yahia, M. M., Leshem, B., & Guterman, N. B. (2018). The Roles of Family and Teacher Support in Moderating and Mediating Externalized and Internalized Outcomes of Exposure to Community Violence Among Arab and Jewish Adolescents in Israel. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 62(14), 4465– 4488. https://doi.org/10.1177/0306624X18759624
Hamre, B. K., & Pianta, R. C. (2001). Early teacher-child relationships and the trajectory of children’s school outcomes through eighth grade. Child Development.
https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8624.00301
* Henriksen, R. E., & Murberg, T. A. (2009). Shyness as a risk-factor for somatic complaints among Norwegian adolescents. School Psychology International, 30(2), 148–162. https://doi.org/10.1177/0143034309104149
* Herres, J., & Kobak, R. (2014). The Role of Parent, Teacher, and Peer Events in Maintaining Depressive Symptoms during Early Adolescence. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 43(2), 325–337. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10802-014-9896-3
* Holdaway, A. S., & Becker, S. P. (2018). Children’s sleep problems are associated with poorer student–teacher relationship quality. Sleep Medicine, 47, 100–105.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sleep.2017.12.001
* Holdaway, A. S., & Becker, S. P. (2018). Sluggish cognitive tempo and student-teacher relationship quality: Short-term longitudinal and concurrent associations. School Psychology Quarterly, 33(4), 537–546. https://doi.org/10.1037/spq0000245
* Hoferichter, F., & Raufelder, D. (2015). Examining the role of social relationships in the association between neuroticism and test anxiety – results from a study with German secondary school students. Educational Psychology, 35(7), 851–868.
https://doi.org/10.1080/01443410.2013.849326
* Howes, C., Wishard Guerra, A., Fuligni, A., Zucker, E., Lee, L., Obregon, N. B., & Spivak, A. (2011). Classroom dimensions predict early peer interaction when children are diverse in ethnicity, race, and home language. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 26(4), 399–408. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecresq.2011.02.004
* Humm, A., Kaminer, D., & Hardy, A. (2018). Social support, violence exposure and mental health among young south african adolescents. Journal of Child and Adolescent Mental Health, 30(1), 41–50. https://doi.org/10.2989/17280583.2018.1476358
* Jellesma, F. C., Zee, M., & Koomen, H. M. Y. (2015). Children’s perceptions of the
relationship with the teacher: Associations with appraisals and internalizing problems in middle childhood. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 36, 30–38.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appdev.2014.09.002
* Jia, Y., Ling, G., Chen, X., Ke, X., Way, N., Hughes, D., … Lu, Z. (2018). The Influence of Student Perceptions of School Climate on Socioemotional and Academic Adjustment : A Comparison of Chinese and American Adolescents Published by : Wiley on behalf of the Society for Research in Child Development Stable URL : http://www.jst. 80(5), 1514–1530.
* Joyce, H. D. (2019). Does School Connectedness Mediate the Relationship between Teacher Support and Depressive Symptoms? Children and Schools, 41(1), 7–15. https://doi.org/10.1093/cs/cdy024
* Justice, L. M., Cottone, E. A., Mashburn, A., & Rimm-Kaufman, S. E. (2008). Relationships between teachers and preschoolers who are at risk: Contribution of children’s language skills, temperamentally based attributes, and gender. Early Education and Development, 19(4), 600–621.
https://doi.org/10.1080/10409280802231021
* Joyce, H. D., & Early, T. J. (2014). The impact of school connectedness and teacher support on depressive symptoms in adolescents: A multilevel analysis. Children and Youth Services Review, 39, 101–107. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2014.02.005
* Karlsson, E., Stickley, A., Lindblad, F., Schwab-Stone, M., & Ruchkin, V. (2014). Risk and protective factors for peer victimization: a 1-year follow-up study of urban American students. European Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 23(9), 773–781.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00787-013-0507-6
* Keçici, S. E. (2013). Test Anxiety and Neuroticism. Educational Research and Reviews, 8(13), 911–918. https://doi.org/10.5897/ERR2013.1477
* Kjellström, J., Modin, B., & Almquist, Y. B. (2017). Support From Parents and Teachers in Relation to Psychosomatic Health Complaints Among Adolescents. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 27(2), 478–487. https://doi.org/10.1111/jora.12281
* Koles, B., O’Connor, E., & Mccartney, K. (2009). Teacher-child relationships in prekindergarten: The influences of child and teacher characteristics. Journal of Early Childhood Teacher Education, 30(1), 3–21. https://doi.org/10.1080/10901020802667672
* Kurdi, V., & Archambault, I. (2018). Student–Teacher Relationships and Student Anxiety: Moderating Effects of Sex and Academic Achievement. Canadian Journal of School Psychology, 33(3), 212–226. https://doi.org/10.1177/0829573517707906
* Kurdi, V., Archambault, I., Brière, F. N., & Turgeon, L. (2018). Need-supportive teaching practices and student-perceived need fulfillment in low socioeconomic status elementary schools: The moderating effect of anxiety and academic achievement. Learning and Individual Differences, 65(June), 218–229. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2018.06.002
* Ladd, G. W., & Burgess, K. B. (1999). Charting the relationship trajectories of aggressive, withdrawn, and aggressive/withdrawn children during early grade school. Child
Development, 70(4), 910–929. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8624.00066
* Lätsch, A. (2018). The interplay of emotional instability and socio-environmental aspects of schools during adolescence. European Journal of Educational Research, 7(2), 281– 293. https://doi.org/10.12973/eu-jer.7.2.281
* Lee, P., & Bierman, K. L. (2015). Classroom and teacher support in Kindergarten: Associations with the behavioral and academic adjustment of low-income students. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 61(3), 383–411.
https://doi.org/10.13110/merrpalmquar1982.61.3.0383
* Leeves, S., & Banerjee, R. (2014). Childhood social anxiety and social support-seeking: Distinctive links with perceived support from teachers. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 29(1), 43–62. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10212-013-0186-1
Lei, H., Cui, Y., & Chiu, M. M. (2016). Affective teacher-student relationships and students’ externalizing behavior problems: A meta-analysis. Frontiers in Psychology, 7(AUG), 1– 12. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01311
* Li, Y. (2011). School engagement. 131–160. https://doi.org/10.1016/b978-0-12-386492-5.00006-3
* Lien, Y. J., Hu, J. N., & Chen, C. Y. (2016). The influences of perceived social support and personality on trajectories of subsequent depressive symptoms in Taiwanese youth. Social Science and Medicine, 153, 148–155.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2016.02.015
* Lisonbee, J. A., Mize, J., Payne, A. L., & Granger, D. A. (2008). Children’s cortisol and the quality of teacher-child relationships in child care. Child Development, 79(6), 1818– 1832. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.2008.01228.x
Liu, J., Chen, X., & Lewis, G. (2011). Childhood internalizing behaviour: Analysis and implications. Journal of Psychiatric and Mental Health Nursing, 18(10), 884–894. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2850.2011.01743.x
* Liu, J., Xiao, B., Coplan, R. J., Chen, X., & Li, D. (2018). Cross-Lagged Panel Analyses of Child Shyness, Maternal and Paternal Authoritarian Parenting, and Teacher-Child Relationships in Mainland China. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 27(12), 4116– 4125. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10826-018-1229-7
* Liu, Y., Li, X., Chen, L., & Qu, Z. (2015). Perceived positive teacher-student relationship as a protective factor for Chinese left-behind children’s emotional and behavioural
adjustment. International Journal of Psychology, 50(5), 354–362. https://doi.org/10.1002/ijop.12112
* Luo, Y., Xiang, Z., Zhang, H., & Wang, Z. (2017). Protective factors for depressive symptoms in adolescents: Interpersonal relationships and perceived social support. Psychology in the Schools, 54(8), 808–820. https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.22033
* Luo, J., Gao, W., & Zhang, J. (2011). The influence of school relationships on anxiety and depression among Chinese adolescents whose parents are absent. Social Behavior and Personality, 39(3), 289–298. https://doi.org/10.2224/sbp.2011.39.3.289
* Ly, J., & Zhou, Q. (2018). Bidirectional Associations Between Teacher–Child Relationship Quality and Chinese American Immigrant Children’s Behavior Problems. Journal of Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology, 47(6), 954–966.
https://doi.org/10.1080/15374416.2016.1183496
* Martínez, R. S., Aricak, O. T., Graves, M. N., Peters-Myszak, J., & Nellis, L. (2011). Changes in Perceived Social Support and Socioemotional Adjustment Across the Elementary to Junior High School Transition. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 40(5), 519–530. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-010-9572-z
* Mazer, J. P., McKenna-Buchanan, T. P., Quinlan, M. M., & Titsworth, S. (2014). The Dark Side of Emotion in the Classroom: Emotional Processes as Mediators of Teacher
Communication Behaviors and Student Negative Emotions. Communication Education, 63(3), 149–168. https://doi.org/10.1080/03634523.2014.904047
* McCarty, C. A., Rhew, I. C., Murowchick, E., McCauley, E., & Vander Stoep, A. (2012). Emotional health predictors of substance use initiation during middle school.
Psychology of Addictive Behaviors, 26(2), 351–357. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0025630
* Mejia, T. M., & Hoglund, W. L. G. (2016). Do children’s adjustment problems contribute to teacher–child relationship quality? Support for a child-driven model. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 34, 13–26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecresq.2015.08.003
* Mercer, S. H., & DeRosier, M. E. (2008). Teacher preference, peer rejection, and student aggression: A prospective study of transactional influence and independent contributions to emotional adjustment and grades. Journal of School Psychology, 46(6), 661–685. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2008.06.006
* Moksnes, U. K., Løhre, A., Lillefjell, M., Byrne, D. G., & Haugan, G. (2016). The Association Between School Stress, Life Satisfaction and Depressive Symptoms in Adolescents: Life Satisfaction as a Potential Mediator. Social Indicators Research, 125(1), 339–357. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-014-0842-0
* Murberg, T. A., & Bru, E. (2009). The relationships between negative life events, perceived support in the school environment and depressive symptoms among Norwegian senior high school students: A prospective study. Social Psychology of Education, 12(3), 361– 370. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11218-008-9083-x
* Murberg, T. A., & Bru, E. (2004). Social support, negative life events and emotional problems among Norwegian adolescents. School Psychology International, 25(4), 387– 402. https://doi.org/10.1177/0143034304048775
* Murray, C., & Murray, K. M. (2004). Child level correlates of teacher-student relationships: An examination of demographic characteristics, academic orientations, and behavioral orientations. Psychology in the Schools, 41(7), 751–762.
https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.20015
* Murray, C., & Greenberg, M. T. (2001). Social Emotional Adjustment Correlates for Children. Psychology in the Schools, 38(1), 25–41.
* Murberg, T. A. (2010). The role of personal attributes and social support factors on passive behaviour in classroom among secondary school students: A prospective study. Social Psychology of Education, 13(4), 511–522. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11218-010-9123-1
* Olivier, E., Archambault, I., & Dupéré, V. (2018). Boys’ and girls’ latent profiles of behavior and social adjustment in school: Longitudinal links with later student behavioral engagement and academic achievement? Journal of School Psychology, 69(January), 28–44. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2018.05.006
* Oriol, X., Miranda, R., Amutio, A., Acosta, H. C., Mendoza, M. C., & Torres-Vallejos, J. (2017). Violent relationships at the social-ecological level: A multi-mediation model to predict adolescent victimization by peers, bullying and depression in early and late adolescence. Plos One, 12(3), e0174139. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0174139
* Overbeek, G., Biesecker, G., Kerr, M., Stattin, H., Meeus, W., & Engels, R. C. M. E. (2006). Co-occurrence of depressive moods and delinquency in early adolescence: The role of failure expectations, manipulativeness, and social contexts. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 30(5), 433–443.
* Pakarinen, E., Silinskas, G., Hamre, B. K., Metsäpelto, R. L., Lerkkanen, M. K., Poikkeus, A. M., & Nurmi, J. E. (2018). Cross-Lagged Associations Between Problem Behaviors and Teacher-Student Relationships in Early Adolescence. Journal of Early Adolescence, 38(8), 1100–1141. https://doi.org/10.1177/0272431617714328
* Pi Guo, H., Yun Peng, W., Yu, T., Min Xia, X., & Feng Qiang, G. (2016). The Relationship between Shyness and Externalizing problem in Chinese Preschoolers: The Moderating Effect of Teacher-child Relationship. Journal of Education and Training Studies, 4(3), 167–173. https://doi.org/10.11114/jets.v4i3.1295
Pianta, R. C. (2001). STRS Student-teacher Relationship Scale. In Professional Manual.
* Pössel, P., Burton, S. M., Cauley, B., Sawyer, M. G., Spence, S. H., & Sheffield, J. (2018). Associations between Social Support from Family, Friends, and Teachers and depressive Symptoms in Adolescents. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 47(2), 398–412.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-017-0712-6
* Pössel, P., Rudasill, K. M., Sawyer, M. G., Spence, S. H., & Bjerg, A. C. (2013).
Associations between teacher emotional support and depressive symptoms in australian adolescents: A 5-year longitudinal study. Developmental Psychology, 49(11), 2135– 2146. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0031767
* Press, N. C. (2019). How Many Teachers Does It Take to Support a Student ? Examining the Relationship between Teacher Support and Adverse Health Outcomes in High-Performing , Pressure- Cooker High Schools Author ( s ): Jerusha O . Conner , Sarah B . Miles and Denise C . Pope . 98(1), 22–42.
* Raufelder, D., Hoferichter, F., Romund, L., Golde, S., Lorenz, R. C., & Beck, A. (2016). Adolescents’ Socio-Motivational Relationships With Teachers, Amygdala Response to Teacher’s Negative Facial Expressions, and Test Anxiety. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 26(4), 706–722. https://doi.org/10.1111/jora.12220
* Reddy, R., Rhodes, J. E., & Mulhall, P. (2003). The influence of teacher support on student adjustment in the middle school years: A latent growth curve study. Development and Psychopathology, 15(1), 119–138. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0954579403000075
* Ren, P., Qin, X., Zhang, Y., & Zhang, R. (2018). Is social support a cause or consequence of depression? A longitudinal study of adolescents. Frontiers in Psychology, 9(SEP), 1– 8. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01634
* Roorda, D. L., Verschueren, K., Vancraeyveldt, C., Van Craeyevelt, S., & Colpin, H. (2014). Teacher-child relationships and behavioral adjustment: Transactional links for preschool boys at risk. Journal of School Psychology.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2014.06.004
Roorda, D. L., Koomen, H. M. Y., Spilt, J. L., & Oort, F. J. (2011). The influence of affective teacher-student relationships on students’ school engagement and achievement: A meta-analytic approach. Review of Educational Research, 81(4), 493–529.
https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654311421793
* Rucinski, C. L., Sutton, E., Carlton, R., Downer, J., & Brown, J. L. (2019). Classroom racial/ethnic diversity and upper elementary children’s social-emotional development. Applied Developmental Science, 0(0), 1–17.
* Rucinski, C. L., Brown, J. L., & Downer, J. T. (2018). Supplemental Material for Teacher– Child Relationships, Classroom Climate, and Children’s Social-Emotional and
Academic Development. Journal of Educational Psychology, 110(7), 992–1004. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000240.supp
* Rudasill, K. M. (2011). Child temperament, teacher-child interactions, and teacher-child relationships: A longitudinal investigation from first to third grade. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 26(2), 147–156. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecresq.2010.07.002
* Rudasill, K. M., Hawley, L., Molfese, V. J., Tu, X., Prokasky, A., & Sirota, K. (2016). Temperament and Teacher–Child Conflict in Preschool: The Moderating Roles of Classroom Instructional and Emotional Support. Early Education and Development, 27(7), 859–874. https://doi.org/10.1080/10409289.2016.1156988
* Rudasill, K. M., Pössel, P., Winkeljohn Black, S., & Niehaus, K. (2014). Teacher support mediates concurrent and longitudinal associations between temperament and mild depressive symptoms in sixth grade. Early Child Development and Care, 184(6), 803– 818. https://doi.org/10.1080/03004430.2013.821610
* Rudasill, K. M., & Rimm-Kaufman, S. E. (2009). Teacher-child relationship quality: The roles of child temperament and teacher-child interactions. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 24(2), 107–120. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecresq.2008.12.003
* Rudasill, K. M., & Acar, I. (2019). The Synergy of Teacher-Child Dependency and
Temperament for Children’s Early Language Skills. Early Education and Development, 30(5), 639–654. https://doi.org/10.1080/10409289.2019.1572383
* Rueger, S. Y., Chen, P., Jenkins, L. N., & Choe, H. J. (2014). Effects of Perceived Support from Mothers, Fathers, and Teachers on Depressive Symptoms During the Transition to Middle School. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 43(4), 655–670.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-013-0039-x
* Runions, K. C. (2014). Does gender moderate the association between children’s behaviour and teacher-child relationship in the early years? Australian Journal of Guidance and Counselling, 24(2), 197–214. https://doi.org/10.1017/jgc.2014.3
* Runions, K. C., & Shaw, T. (2013). Teacher-child relationship, child withdrawal and aggression in the development of peer victimization. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 34(6), 319–327. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appdev.2013.09.002
* Rueger, S. Y., Malecki, C. K., & Demaray, M. K. (2010). Relationship between multiple sources of perceived social support and psychological and academic adjustment in early adolescence: Comparisons across gender. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 39(1), 47– 61. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-008-9368-6
* Rueger, S. Y., Malecki, C. K., & Demaray, M. K. (2008). Gender Differences in the Relationship Between Perceived Social Support and Student Adjustment During Early Adolescence. School Psychology Quarterly, 23(4), 496–514.
https://doi.org/10.1037/1045-3830.23.4.496
* Sakiz, G. (2017). Perceived teacher affective support in relation to emotional and
motivational variables in elementary school science classrooms in Turkey. Research in Science and Technological Education, 35(1), 108–129.
