The Influence of Parenting Styles on Cyberbullying Victimization: The Mediating Role of Social-emotional Skills and The Moderating Role of Parent-child Relationships

The Influence of Parenting Styles on Cyberbullying Victimization: The Mediating Role of Social-emotional Skills and The Moderating Role of Parent-child Relationships | Research Square window.SnipcartSettings = { analytics: { enabled: false } }; (function() { var accessVector = localStorage.getItem('access_vector') || ''; window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || []; if (accessVector) { window.dataLayer.push({ user: { profile: { profileInfo: { snid: accessVector } } } }); } })(); (function(w,d,s,l,i){w[l]=w[l]||[];w[l].push({'gtm.start':new Date().getTime(),event:'gtm.js'});var f=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],j=d.createElement(s),dl=l!='dataLayer'?'&l='+l:'';j.async=true;j.src='https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtm.js?id='+i+dl;f.parentNode.insertBefore(j,f);})(window,document,'script','dataLayer','GTM-K279D39R'); Browse Preprints In Review Journals COVID-19 Preprints AJE Video Bytes Research Tools Research Promotion AJE Professional Editing AJE Rubriq About Preprint Platform In Review Editorial Policies Our Team Advisory Board Help Center Sign In Submit a Preprint Cite Share Download PDF Article The Influence of Parenting Styles on Cyberbullying Victimization: The Mediating Role of Social-emotional Skills and The Moderating Role of Parent-child Relationships Xuzhong Huang, Ruxu Cheng, Yipu Hao, Jing Cao, Xi Wang, Qiuyue Zhu This is a preprint; it has not been peer reviewed by a journal. https://doi.org/ 10.21203/rs.3.rs-7712506/v1 This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License Status: Posted Version 1 posted You are reading this latest preprint version Abstract Parenting styles are significant factors that cannot be overlooked concerning adolescent cyberbullying victimization.This study primarily investigates the mediating role of social-emotional skills in the relationship between parenting styles and adolescent cyberbullying victimization, as well as the moderating role of parent-child relationships. The study utilized OECD SSES2019 survey data from Suzhou , China, with 15-year-old adolescent students in Suzhou City as primary participants. The study focused on four variables: parenting styles, social-emotional skills, cyberbullying victimization, and parent-child relationships. Data analysis was conducted using SPSS Process macro to perform moderated mediation analysis. The results indicated :(1) Understanding-listening parenting style negatively predicts adolescent cyberbullying victimization, while strict-punitive parenting style positively predicts the probability of cyberbullying victimization; (2) The adolescents' social-emotional skills partially mediates the relationship between parental parenting styles (excepting maternal strict-punitive parenting) and cyberbullying victimization; (3) The parent-child relationship plays a moderating role in both the direct pathway "parenting styles→cyberbullying victimization" and the indirect pathway "parenting styles→social-emotional skills→cyberbullying victimization",but this moderating effect varies across different parenting styles. The parent-child relationship significantly moderated the pathways of maternal understanding-listening parenting and maternal strict-punitive parenting, as well as the pathway of paternal listening-understanding parenting. However, neither pathway of paternal strict-punitive parenting was moderated by parent-child relationship.This study confirms that while understanding-listening parenting reduces adolescent cyberbullying victimization and strict-punitive parenting increases it, adolescents' social-emotional skills mediate these relationships. Critically, high-quality parent-child relationships amplify protective effects by both directly moderating parenting styles' influence and indirectly strengthening parenting’s positive impact on social-emotional skills.​Thus, the interplay of parenting styles, parent-child relationship, and skill development collectively determines victimization risk. Social science/Criminology Biological sciences/Psychology Social science/Psychology Social science/Sociology Cyberbullying Victimization Parenting Styles Social-emotional Skills Parent-child Relationships SSES Figures Figure 1 Figure 2 Figure 3 1 INTRODUCTION Cyberbullying refers to intentional and repetitive aggressive behaviors perpetrated by individuals or groups through information and communication technologies with the aim of harming others (Brown, 2006). Unlike traditional school bullying that occurs in a controllable physical space, cyberbullying can transcend the boundaries of time and space, has stronger concealment, and is more difficult for teachers and parents to detect and intervene. Moreover, the content of the violent harm can be widely spread online, causing continuous trauma (Iorga et al., 2022 ). Cyberbullying can lead to psychological problems such as depression, anxiety, and suicidal tendencies in the victims, seriously affecting their academic performance, social development, long-term emotional regulation disorders and damaged interpersonal relationships (Marín-López et al., 2020 ; Zhu et al., 2020). China survey data also revealed that victims acknowledge cyberbullying's significant detrimental impact on academic focus and performance outcomes (Huang et al., 2021).Another study showed that a majority of adolescents experience at least one incident of cyberbullying, with verbal aggression constituting the most prevalent form (Peled, 2019 ; Llorent et al., 2021 ). Consequently, given cyberbullying's pervasive scale, insidious nature, and persistent harm, investigating its determinants and developing effective interventions represents a critical leverage point for addressing educational equity challenges in the digital era. Multiple factors contribute to adolescents' vulnerability to cyberbullying victimization, encompassing individual psychological traits and personality characteristics such as introversion and diminished self-efficacy (Shaikh et al., 2020 ). Concurrently, contextual determinants such as competitive school climates, strained peer relationships, and intensive digital platform engagement amplify psychological pressures that heighten aggression propensity. (Peter & Petermann, 2018 ). Moreover, parenting styles represent a significant yet understudied dimension of family dynamics affecting adolescent cyberbullying victimization, with their impact exceeding that of individual and school factors(Padir et al., 2021 ). Compared to traditional school bullying, cyberbullying often occurs outside the school setting, and parents bear undeniable responsibility for supervision. High parental acceptance and communication can significantly reduce adolescents' risk of cyberbullying victimization. Conversely, coercive parenting practices, such as physical punishment and excessive lecturing, can heighten adolescent anxiety, thereby potentially attracting attention from bullies. Furthermore, parental verbal abuse and physical punishment can induce fear or distrust in youth, hindering the establishment of a positive parent-child relationship. This may lead adolescence to avoid seeking parental help when encountering cyberbullying, thereby increasing their risk of victimization (Martínez et al., 2019 ). Additionally, social-emotional skills are a crucial factor influencing adolescent cyberbullying victimization; adolescents with higher levels of social-emotional skills, such as emotion regulation, face a lower risk of being victimized online (Yang C et al.,2021 ). While existing research has explored the impact of certain parenting styles on cyberbullying, few studies have utilized data from China. Moreover, research investigating the mechanisms through which parenting styles influence cyberbullying, specifically examining the mediating effect of students' social-emotional skills and the moderating role of parent-child relationships, is currently lacking. To address this gap, this study will utilize data from the OECD's Survey on Social and Emotional Skills (SSES) conducted in Suzhou, China (2019). It will investigate the mechanisms by which parenting styles affect cyberbullying, employing students' social-emotional skills as a mediating variable and the quality of parent-child relationships as a moderating variable. The study aims to contribute to a deeper understanding of the protective effects of specific parenting styles against cyberbullying victimization. 2 LITERATURE REVIEW 2.1 Parenting Styles & Cyberbullying Victimization Parenting styles are manifested through attitudes of care, expectations, communication patterns, and disciplinary approaches toward adolescence (Kong & Yasmin, 2022). The seminal typology proposed by Baumrind (1991) categorizes styles along two core dimensions: responsiveness (encompassing emotional support, warmth, acceptance, and attunement to adolescence's needs) and demandingness (involving supervision, behavioral control, rule-setting, and conduct regulation), thereby delineating four archetypes: authoritarian, authoritative, permissive, and neglectful. Expanding this model, Kuppens & Ceulemans (Kuppens et al., 2019) introduced psychological control as a third dimension beyond support and behavioral control. Through dual-phase cluster analysis, they identified four joint parenting styles: authoritative, authoritarian, positive authoritative, and intrusive, each integrating tripartite components of support, behavioral control, and psychological control. Concurrently, Mengqin et al. (2025) developed an alternative taxonomy based on rejection, emotional warmth, and overprotection, classifying styles as indifferent-neglectful, warmth-controlling, and harsh-controlling. While researchers exhibit divergent conceptualizations of parenting styles due to variations in educational objectives and cultural contexts, they universally recognize two core dimensions: warmth (responsiveness-affective expression) and control (demandingness-behavioral regulation). Consequently, parenting approaches are broadly dichotomized into: (1) positive styles characterized by warm emotional expression, frequent communication, and emotional support (understanding-oriented); and (2) negative styles marked by deficient warmth, limited emotional communication, and rigid behavioral control (strictness-oriented). Aligning with this framework, Chinese scholars Li Yifan et al. (2025) classified parenting styles into understanding-listening and strict-punitive types based on affective expression and behavioral control. Informed by empirical evidence, this study adopts their taxonomy, which defines understanding-listening parenting as emphasizing nurturing support and empathic attunement, while defining strict-punitive parenting as prioritizing harsh behavioral regulation and punitive discipline. The research has found that parental parenting styles can significantly influence the risk of cyberbullying victimization among teenagers through emotional support and behavioral supervision. The former emphasizes emotional warmth, understanding support, and moderate rules, while the latter emphasizes strict control, emotional neglect, and punitive discipline. Scholarly evidence indicates that parenting styles characterized by high warmth and high behavioral control mitigate adolescents' vulnerability to cyberbullying victimization through facilitating open parent-child communication and collaborative rule-setting regarding online boundaries, thereby enhancing risk awareness in virtual environments (Moreno-Ruiz et al., 2019). Conversely, high warmth coupled with low behavioral control necessitates integration with moderate supervision to confer protective benefits, as insufficient rule enforcement undermines its efficacy (Legate et al., 2019). Low warmth with high control often manifests through coercive verbal criticism and punitive constraints, eroding parental trust and exacerbating youth loneliness, which subsequently reduces help-seeking behaviors during cyberbullying incidents and heightens victimization risks (Iorga et al., 2022). Most critically, low warmth and low control consistently predict elevated probabilities of both perpetrating and experiencing cyberbullying (Broll & Reynolds, 2021). Empirical studies demonstrate a significant negative correlation between parental implementation of high warmth-supportive parenting and adolescents' exposure to cyberbullying. Parents who demonstrate affective warmth, provide structured guidance while respecting adolescent autonomy exhibit offspring with substantially reduced vulnerability to online victimization. Conversely, parenting approaches characterized by deficient warmth and unresponsive affect compromise youths' psychological resilience, thereby diminishing their capacity to counteract digital aggression and elevating cyberbullying victimization risks (Siddiqui et al., 2024; Patchin & Hinduja, 2022). Collectively, parenting styles function as pivotal predictors of cyberbullying through their fundamental role in shaping adolescents' social behavioral schemas and digital coping strategies. Consequently, this study proposes the following hypothesis H1: Hypothesis 1a: Understanding-listening parenting will reduce adolescent risk of experiencing cyberbullying victimization. Hypothesis 1b: Strict-punitive parenting will increase adolescent risk of experiencing cyberbullying victimization. 2.2 The Mediating Effect of Social-emotional Skills Social-emotional skills serve as critical protective factors against cyberbullying victimization among adolescents. Those equipped with emotion regulation skills, empathic capacities, and conflict resolution strategiesexhibit significantly lower vulnerability to bullying, whereas social-emotional skills deficits substantially elevate victimization risks (Khairi et al., 2022). Parental implementation of high warmth-supportive parenting significantly enhances adolescence's social-emotional skills development through affective scaffolding. This parenting approach fosters secure attachment, thereby internalizing emotion regulation and social skills (Sharif et al., 2024). It concurrently cultivates critical thinking and risk-coping capabilities while strengthening emotional regulation, empathy, and psychological resilience (Wang et al., 2024; Segrin & Flora, 2019). Notably, research on adolescence with attention-deficit disorders demonstrates that parental high warmth combined with low anger expression significantly enhances prosocial behaviors and self-control (Bhide et al., 2019). Conversely, low warmth/high demanding parenting, which is characterized by affective neglect and excessive behavioral control, impedes the development of social-emotional skills. This style correlates significantly with emotion comprehension deficits and social avoidance tendencies (O'Reilly & Peterson, 2014). Empirical evidence indicates that punitive discipline within negative parenting contexts suppresses language development and amplifies negative emotional expressions (e.g., heightened anger and sadness frequency), consequently impeding the acquisition of adaptive emotion regulation strategies (Ketelaar et al., 2017). Empirical evidence indicates that emotion regulation deficits predispose individuals to adopt suppression or venting strategies during online conflicts, perpetuating a maladaptive cycle of cyberbullying victimization→emotional dysregulation→re-victimization (Den Hamer & Konijn, 2016). Conversely, individuals with heightened stress resistance and psychological well-being maintenance capacities exhibit a direct negative correlation with cyberbullying victimization likelihood, suggesting that social-emotional skills buffer the adverse effects of cyberbullying through enhanced psychological resilience (Martinez-Monteagudo et al.,2020). Adolescents capable of effectively regulating emotions and managing stressors demonstrate reduced vulnerability to cyberbullying victimization, primarily due to their superior capacity to navigate social conflicts and negative interactions. Furthermore, robust social adaptation abilities, including the capacity to establish friendships and integrate into peer groups, significantly lower victimization risk. Maladaptive social functioning increases exposure to bullying due to deficient coping strategies and lack of peer protection. (Kowalski et al., 2014). Strong social networks and interpersonal skills provide critical social support, mitigate isolation, and thereby fortify defenses against cyber threats. When adolescents lack effective emotion regulation strategies, they experience heightened helplessness during cyberbullying incidents, amplifying victimization impact (Arató et al., 2022). Additionally, impairments in social information processing hinder the formation of healthy peer relationships, increasing susceptibility to targeting (Rose & Espelage, 2012). Collectively, social-emotional skills function as multidimensional protective factors against cyberbullying, holding significant practical implications for reducing cyberbullying prevalence. Given their sensitivity to parenting styles and their direct influence on cyberbullying victimization, social-emotional skills are posited to mediate the link between parental parenting styles and adolescent cyberbullying risk.Consequently, this study proposes the following hypothesis H2: Hypothesis 2a: Adolescent social-emotional skills positively mediate the relationship between understanding-listening parenting and cyberbullying victimization. Hypothesis 2b: Adolescent social-emotional skills positively mediate the relationship between strict-punitive parenting and cyberbullying victimization. 2.3 The Moderating Effect of Parent-child Relationships Parent-child relationship refers to offspring's subjective interpretation of parent-child interaction quality. It functions not merely as a perceptual experience of parental practices, but as a psychological filter that modulates the influence of parenting on adolescent social-emotional skills (Tani et al., 2017). While extant research has established associations between parenting styles and adolescent social-emotional skills, the moderating role of adolescents' subjective relational perceptions remains underexplored: particularly their perceived familial support and affective responsiveness. Empirical evidence indicates that when offspring perceive high parental support and emotional warmth, the promotive effect of warmth-supportive parenting on prosocial behaviors is significantly amplified. Notably, even moderately strict discipline may reduce behavioral problems if interpreted by youth as "care-driven guidance" (Wang et al., 2025). Conversely, in contexts of low relational quality, adolescence may exhibit social skill deficits due to emotional alienation, even when parents implement authoritative practices characterized by high warmth and behavioral control(Sukumaran & Balakrishna, 2021). A longitudinal study further revealed that retrospectively perceived relational quality significantly moderates the deployment of emotion regulation strategies. Specifically, adolescence with high externalizing behaviors showed markedly reduced adolescent externalizing problems when perceiving high paternal care in childhood; this protective effect was absent under conditions of low paternal care (Ge et al., 2017). When parent-child relationship quality is suboptimal, adolescents exhibit heightened tendencies to seek social validation through social media platforms. This behavior impedes parental identification of potential online risks, thereby significantly diminishing the protective efficacy of parenting practices (Bolenbaugh et al., 2020). Conversely, elevated relational quality correlates with offspring's voluntary disclosure of online activities to parents. Such trust-based disclosure enables timely parental detection of cyberbullying threats and facilitates effective intervention (Mesch, 2018), leading to a consequently reduction in cyberbullying victimization probability by 19.3–27.6% (Elsaesser et al., 2017). Crucially, the protective effect derived from disclosure fails to manifest among parents relying solely on monitoring software, indicating that perceived relational quality moderates the effectiveness of surveillance strategies. Furthermore the prevalent third-person perception bias among parents—a cognitive distortion whereby they perceive other children as more vulnerable to cyberbullying than their own offspring—further compromises intervention efficacy. This bias reduces parental vigilance toward cyberbullying threats and subsequently attenuates proactive intervention behaviors. However, high intimacy in parent-child relationships corrects this cognitive bias. When parents establish close relational bonds with offspring, they demonstrate heightened vigilance toward adolescence's actual risks rather than relying on distorted perceptions (Ho et al., 2020). Proactive and open parent-adolescent communication enables youth to perceive parental concern and support, effectively reducing loneliness (Larranaga et al., 2016) and associated cyberbullying victimization risks. Conversely, adolescents who fail to perceive parental warmth and support are less likely to disclose cyberbullying victimization experiences to parents, consequently diminishing parental monitoring and protective interventions (Elsaesser et al., 2017). Consequently, this study proposes the following hypothesis H3: H3a: Parent-child relationship quality will enhance the positive effect of understanding-listening parenting style on the development of social-emotional skills. H3b: Parent-child relationship quality will strengthen the positive association between strict-punitive parenting style and social-emotional skills. H3c: Parent-child relationship quality will amplify the direct protective effect of understanding-listening parenting style on reducing cyberbullying victimization. H3d: Parent-child relationship quality will attenuate the direct harmful effect of strict-punitive parenting style on increasing cyberbullying victimization risk. H3e: Parent-child relationship quality will strengthen the indirect protective pathway through which understanding-listening parenting style reduces cyberbullying victimization by enhancing social-emotional skills. H3f: Parent-child relationship quality will weaken the indirect harmful pathway wherein strict-punitive parenting style increases cyberbullying victimization risk via improved social-emotional skills. Based on the preceding analysis, this study establishes the following conceptual framework (as illustrated in Figure 1 and Figure 2 ). Figure 1 . Conceptual Framework of Mother Figure 2 . Conceptual Framework of Father 3 METHOD 3.1 Participants The study utilized data derived from the SSES 2019 survey (Study on Social and Emotional Skills) administered by the OECD, with a specific focus on student samples from Suzhou, China. Given that assessment items related to​cyberbullying victimization​ were exclusively designed for adolescents aged 15, this research restricted its analytical sample to youth within this age cohort. During data cleaning procedures, missing values for model-relevant variables were found to account for only 0.1%–0.2% of total observations. Consequently, listwise deletion was employed to address missing data, resulting in a final analytical sample of 3,593 valid cases. 3.2 Measures 3.2.1 Cyberbullying Victimization Cyberbullying victimization primarily denotes repeated and intentional harmful behaviors perpetrated by peers through electronic/digital media, accompanied by negative psychological or behavioral consequences among children and adolescents (Thomas et al., 2015 ). In this study, cyberbullying victimization was operationalized using two validated items measured on a 4-point Likert scale, where responses ranged from 1 = Never or almost never to 4 = Once a week or more, with higher scores indicating greater severity of victimization; the fifth response option ("I do not use social media") was systematically excluded from measurement. Victimization was specifically assessed through the items: "I have been threatened by others while using online chat or social media" and "Malicious rumors about me have been disseminated by others through online chat or social media". 3.2.2 Parenting Style Parent-child relationships are crucial to adolescent developmental outcomes. This study operationalized parenting styles using a validated instrument comprising eight items equally distributed between maternal and paternal dimensions (four items each), measured on a 4-point Likert scale ranging from 1 = Almost never or never true to 4 = Almost always, or always true, with higher scores indicating closer alignment with actual behaviors. The independent variables were derived from the OECD SSES assessment, specifically capturing parenting practices through the items: "Discuss how well my child is doing at school"; "Share the main daily meal with my child"; "Spend time conversing with my child"; and "Assist my child with homework." As maternal and paternal parenting styles were measured separately in the original instrument, this study adopted the typological framework established by Li et al. ( 2025 ), categorizing parenting styles into four distinct constructs: Maternal understanding-listening (M_UND), Maternal strict-punitive (M_STR), Paternal understanding-listening (F_UND), and Paternal strict-punitive (F_STR). 3.2.3 Social-emotional Skills The 2019 OECD Survey on Social and Emotional Skills (SSES), grounded in the Big Five personality theory, encompasses five dimensions: Task Performance, Emotional Regulation, Engagement with Others, Collaboration, and Open-Mindedness (Fruyt et al., 2015 ; Abrahams et al., 2019 ; Lipnevich et al., 2017 ). Each dimension represents a cluster of interrelated behavioral or cognitive patterns, operationalized through 144 assessment items. These dimensions are further delineated into 15 sub-competencies: Task Performance includes Self-control, Responsibility, and Persistence; Emotional Regulation comprises Stress Resilience, Optimism, and Emotional Control; Engagement with Others incorporates Sociability, Assertiveness, and Energy; Collaboration integrates Empathy and Trust; Open-Mindedness covers Tolerance, Curiosity, and Creativity. To examine the relationship between social and emotional competencies and other variables, this study consolidates the five dimensions into a unified composite variable termed Social and Emotional Competence by averaging standardized scores across all dimensions, following the methodological approach established by Kankaraš and Suarez-Alvarez ( 2019 ). 3.2.4 Parent-child relationships The measurement of parent-child relationships employed three validated items, all reverse-scored on a 4-point Likert scale ranging from 1 = Almost never or never true to 4 = Almost always, or always true, with higher scores indicating closer alignment with actual experiences. The specific items were: "I get upset easily with my parents"; "It is hard for me to talk with my parents"; and "I feel angry with my parents". The construct Perceived Relations with Parents, validated by the OECD, was operationalized in this investigation. Given that all items predominantly reflected negative parent-child relational dynamics (i.e., perceived negative parent-child relationships) and were scored on a 0 ~ 100 scale, each raw score was systematically reverse-coded by subtracting it from 100 before data analysis. After this reverse-coding, higher values indicate more positive parent-child relationships (hereinafter referred to as PCR). 4 RESULTS 4.1 Descriptive Statistics and Correlation Analysis This study conducted descriptive statistics and correlation analyses on cyberbullying victimization, adolescents' social-emotional skills, and diverse parenting styles (see Table 1 ). The results reveal a statistically significant negative correlation between social-emotional skills and cyberbullying victimization (r = − 0.150***). Furthermore, social-emotional skills exhibited statistically significant positive correlations with M_UND (r = 0.328***), F_UND (r = 0.374***), and F_STR (r = 0.049**). However, no significant correlation was observed with M_STR (r = 0.023). Cyberbullying victimization exhibited significant negative correlations with M_UND (r = − 0.112***) and F_UND (r = − 0.109***), while showing significant positive correlations with M_STR (r = 0.070***) and F_STR(r = 0.085***). Additionally, cyberbullying victimization was significantly negatively correlated with PCR (r = − 0.171***). Conversely, social-emotional skills demonstrated a significant positive correlation with PCR (r = 0.338***). Parent-child relationships were significantly positively associated with M_UND (r = 0.475***) and F_UND (r = 0.433***), but significantly negatively correlated with M_STR (r = − 0.233***) and F_STR (r = − 0.242***). Table 1 Descriptive Statistics and Correlation Analysis Results MEAN SD 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Cyberbullying Victimization 1.171 0.469 1 M_UND 2.790 0.818 -0.112 *** 1 F_UND 2.555 0.865 -0.109 *** 0.505 *** 1 M_STR 1.942 0.631 0.070 *** -0.170 *** -0.038 * 1 F_STR 1.994 0.707 0.085 *** -0.048 ** -0.114 *** 0.406 *** 1 Social-emotional Skills 562.161 58.312 -0.150 *** 0.328 *** 0.374 *** 0.023 0.049 ** 1 PCR 41.963 11.541 -0.171 *** 0.475 *** 0.433 *** -0.233 *** -0.242 *** 0.338 *** 1 Note: The significance levels are indicated as follows:***p < 0.001,**p < 0.01,*p < 0.05. 4.2 Common Method Bias Test Common method bias was assessed for the core sample using Harman's single-factor test. The results indicated that the first factor explained 34.109% of the variance, below the critical threshold of 40% (Podsakoff et al., 2003 ), while the cumulative total variance explained reached 54.149%. These findings confirm the absence of significant common method bias in the study data. 4.3 Testing for Mediation Effects The mediation analysis results indicate that M_UND had a significant negative effect on cyberbullying victimization, with a total effect of -0.064 (p < 0.001). M_UND exerted a significant indirect effect on cyberbullying victimization through social-emotional skills (indirect effect = -0.024, p < 0.001), and the 95% CI does not contain 0, indicating significant mediation. F_UND also had a significant negative effect on cyberbullying victimization, with a total effect of -0.059 (p < 0.001). F_UND exerted a significant indirect effect on cyberbullying victimization through social-emotional skills (indirect effect = -0.026, p < 0.001), demonstrating significant mediation. F_STR had a significant positive effect on cyberbullying victimization (total effect = 0.056, p < 0.001), and exerted a significant indirect effect through social-emotional skills (indirect effect = -0.005, p < 0.001), demonstrating significant mediation. In contrast, M_STR had a significant positive effect on cyberbullying victimization (total effect = 0.052, p 0.05), indicating no significant mediation. The 95% CI results once again corroborate the mediation effects reported above: the 95% CIs for the indirect effects of M_UND, F_UND, and F_STR do not include 0, whereas only the CI for M_STR’s indirect effect includes 0. Collectively, these findings reveal that understanding-listening parenting (whether maternal or paternal) serves as a protective factor, reducing the risk of cyberbullying victimization. Conversely, strict-punitive parenting whether originating from mothers or fathers, represents a risk factor, increasing the risk of cyberbullying victimization. Adolescents’ social-emotional skills partially mediated the effect of parenting styles on cyberbullying victimization, M_UND, F_UND, and F_STR indirectly reduce the likelihood of adolescents cyberbullying victimization by fostering their social-emotional skills (see Table 2 ).The results supported Hypotheses H1 and H2., confirming the diametric roles of responsive versus punitive parenting dimensions in adolescent cyberbullying victimization outcomes. The mediation pathway coefficients are provided in appendix (see Appendix 1 ). Table 2 Mediation Analysis Results of the Model Path Standardized effect size Bootstrap SE Bootstrap 95% confidence interval Percentage of mediation effect M_UND Total effect -0.064 *** 0.010 [-0.083, -0.046] Direct effect -0.040 *** 0.010 [-0.060, -0.021] 0.630 Indirect effect -0.024 *** 0.003 [-0.031, -0.017] 0.370 M_STR Total effect 0.052 *** 0.012 [0.028, 0.076] Direct effect 0.054 *** 0.012 [0.030, 0.078] 1.048 Indirect effect -0.003 0.002 [-0.007, 0.002] -0.048 F_UND Total effect -0.059 *** 0.009 [-0.077, -0.041] Direct effect -0.033 *** 0.010 [-0.052, -0.014] 0.564 Indirect effect -0.026 *** 0.004 [-0.033, -0.019] 0.436 F_STR Total effect 0.056 *** 0.011 [0.035, 0.078] Direct effect 0.061 *** 0.011 [0.040, 0.083] 1.089 Indirect effect -0.005 *** 0.002 [-0.009, -0.001] -0.081 4.4 Testing for Moderated Mediation Effects This study incorporated the four parental styles (for both paternal and maternal) sequentially into moderated mediation models.To generate interaction terms, values of the four parenting styles and the parent-child relationship were mean-centered, and subsequently entered into Model 8 of the SPSS PROCESS 4.1 macro for moderated mediation regression analysis. The analyses examined how PCR, as a moderator, influenced the relationships between M_UND, M_STR, F_UND, F_STR, and child outcomes: social-emotional skills and cyberbullying victimization. For paths to social-emotional skills, the interaction term coefficient between M_UND and PCR was positive and significant (β = 0.393, p < .001). This indicates that PCR significantly and positively moderated the effect of M_UND on social-emotional skills. The interaction term coefficient between F_UND and PCR was positive and significant (β = 0.470, p < 0.001). This indicates that PCR significantly and positively moderated the effect of F_UND on social-emotional skills. Specifically, a better parent-child relationship strengthened the positive effect of parents’ understanding-listening style on social-emotional skills; The interaction term coefficient between M_STR and PCR was positive and significant (β = 0.316, p < 0.01). This indicates that PCR significantly and positively moderated the effect of maternal strict-punitive parenting style on social-emotional skills. In contrast, the interaction term coefficient between F_STR and PCR was non-significant (β = 0.086, p > 0.05), indicating that the effect of paternal strict-punitive parenting style on social-emotional skills was not significantly moderated by PCR. The results demonstrate that in households with higher parent-child relationship quality, parenting styles foster a more conducive environment for the development of adolescence's social-emotional skills, with the exception of paternal strict-punitive parenting. For paths to cyberbullying victimization, the interaction term coefficient between M_UND and PCR was positive and significant (β = 0.002, p < 0.01). This indicates that PCR significantly and positively moderated the effect of M_UND on cyberbullying victimization; The interaction term coefficient between F_UND and PCR was positive and significant (β = 0.002, p < 0.01). This indicates that PCR significantly and positively moderated the effect of F_UND on cyberbullying victimization; This indicates that in families with better parent-child relationships, an understanding-listening parenting style exerts a stronger inhibitory effect on cyberbullying victimization. The interaction term coefficient between M_STR and PCR was negative and significant (β= -0.003, p < 0.01). This indicates that PCR significantly and negatively moderated the effect of M_STR on cyberbullying victimization. This suggests that in families with a better parent-child relationships, the positive effect of maternal strict-parenting parenting on cyberbullying victimization becomes weaker. Conversely, the interaction term coefficient between F_STR and PCR was non-significant (β= -0.0005, p > 0.05), indicating that the effect of F_STR on cyberbullying victimization was not significantly moderated by PCR. These results confirmed hypotheses H3a and H3c, while hypotheses H3b and H3d received partial support (see Table 3 ). Table 3 Results of Moderating Effect Analysis for Parent-child Relationship Regression Equation Fit Index Significance of Regression Coefficients Outcome Variable Predictor Variable R 2 F β LLCI ULCI t Social-emotional Skills M_UND x PCR 0.155 219.973 0.393 *** 0.226 0.560 4.617 M_STR x PCR 0.127 174.231 0.316 ** 0.112 0.519 3.044 F_UND x PCR 0.186 273.113 0.470 *** 0.312 0.629 5.828 F_STR x PCR 0.132 182.417 0.086 -0.105 0.276 0.882 Cyberbullying Victimization M_UND x PCR 0.041 38.151 0.002 ** -0.003 -0.0004 2.517 M_STR x PCR 0.043 40.514 -0.003 ** -0.004 -0.001 -3.125 F_UND x PCR 0.041 38.035 0.002 ** 0.0004 0.003 2.484 F_STR x PCR 0.043 39.800 -0.0005 -0.002 0.001 -0.585 Bias-corrected percentile bootstrap analyses further demonstrated that the indirect effects of parenting styles on cyberbullying victimization via social-emotional skills were moderated by parent–child relationship quality (PCR). Specifically, for adolescents reporting high PCR, the indirect effects were significant: the M_UND → social-emotional skills → cyberbullying victimization pathway yielded b = − 0.017, SE = 0.003, 95% CI [–0.024, − 0.011]; the F_UND → social-emotional skills → cyberbullying victimization pathway yielded b = − 0.021, SE = 0.004, 95% CI [–0.029, − 0.014]; and the F_STR → social-emotional skills → cyberbullying victimization pathway yielded b = − 0.011, SE = 0.003, 95% CI [–0.018, − 0.007]. Conversely, for adolescents with low PCR, these indirect effects were weaker: M_UND: b = − 0.010, SE = 0.002, 95% CI [–0.014, − 0.006]; F_UND: b = − 0.012, SE = 0.002, 95% CI [–0.016, − 0.007]; and F_STR: b = − 0.010, SE = 0.002, 95% CI [–0.014, − 0.006]. The results for M_STR are not interpreted while the mediating effect of social-emotional skills on the M_STR→Cyberbullying Victimization path was statistically non-significant ( Table 4 ). Table 4 Results of the Moderated Mediation Effects Involving the Parent-child Relationship Parenting Style Types PCR Effect BootSE BootLLCI BootULCI M_UND (M-SD) -0.010 0.002 -0.014 -0.006 (M) -0.014 0.003 -0.019 -0.009 (M + SD) -0.017 0.003 -0.024 -0.011 M_STR (M-SD) -0.006 0.002 -0.010 -0.003 (M) -0.009 0.002 -0.013 -0.005 (M + SD) -0.012 0.003 -0.018 -0.007 F_UND (M-SD) -0.012 0.002 -0.016 -0.007 (M) -0.016 0.003 -0.022 -0.011 (M + SD) -0.021 0.004 -0.029 -0.014 F_STR (M-SD) -0.010 0.002 -0.014 -0.006 (M) -0.011 0.002 -0.015 -0.007 (M + SD) -0.011 0.003 -0.018 -0.007 However, the test for moderated mediation involving F_STR was significant. This finding contrasts with the previous non-significant moderation effect of parent-child relationships (PCR) on the direct F_STR→Social-emotional Skills path. This discrepancy may stem from PCR exerting its moderating effect specifically at the second stage (Social-emotional Skills→Cyberbullying Victimization pathway), contrary to the initial hypothesis of first-stage (F_STR→Social-emotional Skills) moderation. To formally test this proposition, supplementary analyses were conducted using PROCESS macro (Model 58) detailed results are presented in appendix (see Appendix 2 ). These analyses revealed that the moderated mediation conclusions involving PCR remained unchanged for the M_UND, M_STR, and F_UND parenting types. Crucially, PCR's moderating effect in the F_STR model occurred predominantly at the second stage (Social-emotional Skills→Cyberbullying Victimization pathway). As this study deliberately limited its scope to examining PCR's moderating role on both the direct effect of parenting on cyberbullying victimization and its role at the first stage (parenting → Social-emotional Skills path) of indirect effects, the results pertaining to second-stage moderation are not discussed further.​ Collectively, these findings confirm that PCR moderates the indirect associations between parenting styles and adolescents’ cyberbullying victimization via social-emotional skills, thereby supporting Hypotheses 3e and Hypotheses 3f. 5 DISCUSSION This study focuses on the prevalent phenomenon of cyberbullying victimization among adolescents, conducting an in-depth analysis of the differential effects of distinct parenting styles exhibited by both parents on adolescents' cyberbullying victimization. Additionally, it examines the mediating mechanisms of social-emotional skills, as well as the moderating influence of parent-child relationships. Given the severe detrimental impact of cyberbullying victimization on adolescents' psychological well-being, this research agenda holds significant practical implications within contemporary sociocultural contexts. The key findings of the study are presented in Fig. 3 . Figure 3 . Path Diagram for Moderated Mediation Model of Parental Parenting Style First, the study found that an understanding-listening parenting style significantly reduces the risk of adolescents experiencing cyberbullying victimization, with both parents' understanding-listening parenting demonstrating a significant protective effect. Conversely, a strict-punitive parenting style significantly increases adolescents' risk of cyberbullying victimization, primarily through direct effects. Thus, strict-punitive parenting is generally detrimental to adolescents' healthy development. understanding-listening parenting serves as a crucial protective factor against adolescent cyberbullying victimization. The emotional support, active listening, and guidance provided by parents effectively reduce the likelihood of their offspring experiencing cyberbullying victimization. Characterized by empathic responsiveness and attentive listening during interactions, this parenting style significantly mitigates the incidence of self-harm behaviors and psychological trauma resulting from cyberbullying among adolescents (Khairi et al., 2022 ). Concurrently, parents employing an understanding-listening parenting style typically exhibit high levels of dispositional mindfulness. This parenting approach fosters the development of dispositional mindfulness in offspring (Golchoobi & Nooripour, 2025 ), thereby enabling individuals to utilize adaptive emotion regulation strategies, such as acceptance and positive reappraisal. Adolescents raised by highly mindful parents are less likely to manifest psychological problems or engage in bullying behaviors towards others as sequelae of their victimization experiences (Royuela-Colomer et al., 2018 ). Conversely, strict-punitive parenting hinders the development of these critical capacities. Furthermore, this study delved into the mediating role of social-emotional skills in the relationship between parenting styles and adolescent cyberbullying victimization. The findings indicate that social-emotional skills play a significant mediating role between parenting styles and adolescent experiences of cyberbullying victimization. Parental understanding-listening parenting and F_STR both inhibit adolescence's cyberbullying victimization by promoting the development of their social-emotional skills, whereas social-emotional skills demonstrates nonsignificant mediating effects between M_STR and cyberbullying victimization. Specifically, understanding-listening parenting significantly reduces the likelihood of cyberbullying victimization by enhancing adolescence's social-emotional skills. This aligns with the perspective positing social-emotional skills as a core psychological buffer against cyberbullying victimization among adolescents (Den Hamer & Konijn, 2016 ). understanding-listening parenting, through emotional acceptance and guidance, effectively fosters the development of adolescents' emotion regulation abilities. This capacity helps disrupt the vicious cycle of "cybervictimization → emotion dysregulation → revictimization /perpetration" (Alegre, 2011 ; Schütz et al., 2022 ), enabling adolescents to respond to conflict in a stable and adaptive manner rather than resorting to suppression or impulsive outbursts. Intriguingly, this study demonstrates that fathers' strict parenting style exerts a significant positive influence on adolescence's development of social-emotional skills, whereas mothers' strict parenting style yields non-significant effects. This finding is explained by drawing upon the highly gendered model of parenting role differentiation in Chinese society—the " strict father, kind mother " paradigm (Ying, 2021 ). Within this framework, the " strict father " embodies the authoritative role, focused on establishing rules and enforcing behavioral discipline, while the " kind mother " embodies the nurturing role, primarily characterized by providing emotional support and responsive warmth. According to this cultural logic, paternal strictness benefits from greater cultural legitimacy, leading adolescence to interpret it as evidence of responsibility-oriented concern, such as a focus on the child's long-term development. Conversely, maternal strictness, representing a deviation from the expected " kind mother " norm, is more likely perceived as a signal of relational threat, interpreted as emotional rejection. This negative interpretation tends to trigger maladaptive reactions, including avoidance or confrontation, which ultimately counteracts the potential influence of maternal strictness on adolescence's social-emotional development, resulting in the observed non-significant findings. Moreover, the study further revealed that parent-child relationships serve as a key moderating variable in the core pathway through which parenting styles influence adolescent cyberbullying victimization via social-emotional skills. Specifically, adolescents' parent-child relationships moderate the impact of parenting styles on their social-emotional skills. Parent-child relationship (PCR) significantly and positively moderated the effects of both maternal and paternal understanding and listening styles on adolescence's social-emotional skills. Higher levels of parent-child relationships enhance the positive effects of authoritative parenting (characterized by understanding and attentive listening) on adolescents' social-emotional skills. Effective parent-child interactions strengthen adolescence's social-emotional skills (S. Mukhtar & Zahid Mahmood, 2018), thereby reducing aggressive behaviors. Furthermore, positive parent-child relationships facilitate the generalization of relational patterns to other contexts, such as peer interactions, ultimately advancing the development of interpersonal skills. Parent-child relationships also moderate the direct effects of parenting styles on cyberbullying victimization. Specifically, higher levels of parent-child relationship quality amplify the protective effect of authoritative parenting (characterized by understanding and attentive listening) against adolescence's cyberbullying victimization, while simultaneously attenuating the marginal positive association between maternal strict-punitive parenting and such victimization. Within a trusting family climate, parental supportive behaviors are more readily internalized by offspring. Concurrently, relational harmony enhances family cohesion, thereby strengthening the direct protective effect of understanding and warm parenting style against cyberbullying victimization (Ortega-Barón et al.,2016). Regarding understanding-listening parenting, high parent-child relationship quality reinforces its direct protective role—that is, elevated levels of perceived relationship quality intensify the negative association between authoritative parenting and cyberbullying victimization risk. For maternal strict-punitive parenting, high relationship quality buffers adolescence's cyberbullying victimization risk, whereas low levels exacerbate such harm. However, perceived relationship quality exhibits no significant moderating effect on paternal strict-punitive parenting, either in pathways influencing social-emotional skills or in direct effects on cyberbullying victimization. This divergence likely stems from gendered caregiving dynamics: mothers typically shoulder greater emotional care responsibilities in daily life, engage in more frequent interactions with offspring, and elicit stronger emotional dependence from offspring. When mothers employ strict-punitive practices, high perceived relationship quality partially counteracts the negative impact, as adolescence tend to interpret maternal strictness as "concern rather than rejection" (Fu, 2024). In contrast, fathers generally engage in less daily emotional reciprocity with adolescence, resulting in lower emotional expectations from adolescence. Even when parent-child relationships are moderately positive, adolescence rarely anticipate paternal emotional support as a buffer. 6 CONCLUSION This study comprehensively investigates the mechanisms through which parenting styles influence adolescent cyberbullying victimization, confirming that understanding-listening parenting serves as a critical protective factor significantly mitigating cyberbullying victimization risk. Firstly, understanding-listening parenting, which is characterized by parental understanding and active listening, directly reduces cyberbullying victimization vulnerability by helping adolescents construct psychological buffers against online conflicts, thereby effectively suppressing susceptibility to victimization. Conversely, strict-punitive parenting constitutes a significant risk factor, primarily through direct escalation of cyberbullying victimization likelihood. Secondly, adolescents' social-emotional skills are identified as the core mediating variable linking parenting styles to cyberbullying victimization outcomes. Understanding-listening parenting enhances social emotional skills (encompassing emotion regulation, empathy, and conflict resolution skills), which can reduce adolescents' targeting by cyberbullies. Although strict-punitive parenting exerts a countervailing suppression effect on cyberbullying victimization through enhancing social-emotional skills, this insufficient protective mechanism is outweighed by its direct detrimental impact, resulting in a net increase in victimization risk Furthermore, parent-child relationship quality functions as a key moderator, akin to a "magnifying lens." High-quality relationships amplify the positive impact of understanding-listening parenting on social-emotional skills development and cyberbullying victimization protection, while simultaneously buffering the adverse effects of strict-punitive parenting on victimization risk. Conversely, low-quality relationships diminish understanding-listening parenting's protective capacity and exacerbate the negative outcomes associated with strict-punitive parenting, strengthening its positive correlation with cyberbullying victimization. These findings provide robust empirical support for the social ecological model and family systems theory, underscoring the profound influence of micro-level interactions within families on adolescent online behaviors. Parents play a pivotal role in child development, as their parenting styles directly shape adolescence's values, psychological well-being, and behavioral patterns. Consequently, there is an urgent need to promote warm and understanding-listening parenting to foster nurturing environments characterized by warmth and support, with particular emphasis on the pivotal role of mothers. Efforts should prioritize building harmonious parent-child relationships grounded in trust and emotional bonding, while integrating social-emotional skills into core developmental strategies. Additionally, timely professional interventions​ must be provided for adolescents exposed to strict-punitive parenting or strained parent-child relationships to break the vicious cycle. Collectively, cultivating positive family environments, enhancing adolescents' social-emotional skills, and fostering cohesive parent-child relationships constitute an effective multi-tiered approach to preventing and intervening in adolescent cyberbullying perpetration or victimization. Limitations & Prospects Although this study systematically elucidates the mechanism through which parenting styles influence cyberbullying victimization via social-emotional skills, it exhibits limitations in sample representativeness​and cross-cultural generalizability. The sample was confined to 15-year-old adolescents in Suzhou, China, restricting the generalizability of findings to broader populations. Additionally, cultural variations in parenting practices and cyberbullying manifestations were not fully explored. Future research should expand sampling to diverse demographic groups and incorporate cross-cultural comparative studies. Triangulation with multi-source data is also recommended to enhance analytical rigor. Declarations Author contributions Huang Xuzhong and Hao Yipu contributed to the Methodology; Cheng Ruxu wrote the original draft and performed Data curation; Hao Yipu conducted the Formal analysis; Cao Jing and Wang Xi provided Supervision; Zhu Qiuyue handled Project administration; Huang Xuzhong was responsible for reviewing and editing the manuscript. Acknowledgments We would like to thank the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) for granting access to the Study on Social and Emotional Skills (SSES 2019) database. Its comprehensive data enabled empirical analysis of a representative sample of 15-year-old students from Suzhou, China. Institutional support from the Normal School of Vocational Techniques at Hubei University of Technology and the School of Education at Central China Normal University was indispensable. We thank both institutions for their academic resources, collaborative frameworks, and intellectual engagement, particularly in theoretical structuring and methodological refinement. FUNDING INFORMATION This research was funded by the Humanities and Social Science Project of Ministry of Education (China), "Research on tracking evaluation and optimization strategy of 'county management and school employment' policy from the perspective of quality and balance", Grant number 23YJC880045;This research is also funded by the "Educational Statistics" research project of the Graduate Teaching Reform Project of Hubei University of Technology, Grant number 2025025. The content is that of the authors and does not represent the position of the founding sponsor, which had no role in the study design , data analysis or interpretation, or in the writing of the report. Ethics statement All data used in this study were obtained from OECD’s publicly accessible databases and were released under an application to the OECD SSES project team. In accordance with that Team’ s requirements, the investigators strictly adhered to the following conditions: the social and emotional skills assessment items may be used solely for the present research project; no confidential materials may be disclosed to any third party; and any subsequent publications must be shared with the OECD SSES project team. During the original data-collection phase, informed consent was secured from all participants.All SSES 2019 materials—including assessment instruments, datasets, and documents marked “secure”—have remained strictly confidential. For the present study’ s primary sample of 15-year-old students in Suzhou, personal identifiers were replaced with a “student complete ID,” “region ID”, and “school ID”, ensuring that neither the researchers nor readers can identify any private or personally identifiable information. Accordingly, the investigators carefully reviewed the data-collection procedures, evaluated the reliability and validity of the measures, and acquired a comprehensive understanding of the entire dataset, with particular attention to the subsample analysed here. On this basis, the researchers have endeavoured to ensure impartiality and transparency in data analysis, interpretation of results, and disclosure of potential biases or limitations. Finally, the investigators declare that they have no conflicts of interest that could influence the findings or their interpretation. Patient Consent Statement This study utilizes the publicly available SSES (2019) data published by the OECD. This survey rigorously obtained informed consent from all participants and their guardians. The authors formally submitted a data usage request to the OECD and received explicit approval and authorization to utilize this dataset. Detailed procedures and methodological information regarding consent acquisition and data collection are documented in the official SSES Technical Report. CONFLICT OF INTEREST STATEMENT The authors declare that they have no actual or perceived conflicts of interest in the conduct and reporting of the research. Availability of data The data that support the findings of this study are openly available in the OECD SSES 2019 (Survey on Social and Emotional Skills) database at https://www.oecd.org/education/ceri/social-emotional-skills-study/. Authors Contact Details Xuzhong Huang, Normal School of Vocational Techniques, Hubei University of Technology, Wuhan 430068, China. [email protected] (X.H.) ; Profile page URL: https://nsvte.hbut.edu.cn/info/1010/1872.htm Ruxu Cheng, Normal School of Vocational Techniques, Hubei University of Technology, Wuhan 430068, China. [email protected] (R.C.); Student Yipu Hao, School of Education, Central China Normal University, Wuhan 430079, China. [email protected] ; Ph.D Student Jing Cao , Normal School of Vocational Techniques, Hubei University of Technology, Wuhan 430068, China. [email protected] (J.C.); Profile page URL: https://nsvte.hbut.edu.cn/info/1010/1011.htm Xi Wang, Normal School of Vocational Techniques, Hubei University of Technology, Wuhan 430068, China. [email protected] (X.W.); Profile page URL: https://nsvte.hbut.edu.cn/info/1010/1012.htm Qiuyue Zhu1*, Normal School of Vocational Techniques, Hubei University of Technology, Wuhan 430068, China. [email protected] (Q.Z.) ;corresponding authors Profile page URL: https://nsvte.hbut.edu.cn/info/1010/1873.htm Ethics Declaration All data used in this study were obtained from OECD’s publicly accessible databases and were released under an application to the OECD SSES project team. In accordance with that Team’ s requirements, the investigators strictly adhered to the following conditions: the social and emotional skills assessment items may be used solely for the present research project; no confidential materials may be disclosed to any third party; and any subsequent publications must be shared with the OECD SSES project team. During the original data-collection phase, informed consent was secured from all participants.All SSES 2019 materials—including assessment instruments, datasets, and documents marked “secure”—have remained strictly confidential. For the present study’ s primary sample of 15-year-old students in Suzhou, personal identifiers were replaced with a “student complete ID,” “region ID”, and “school ID”, ensuring that neither the researchers nor readers can identify any private or personally identifiable information. Accordingly, the investigators carefully reviewed the data-collection procedures, evaluated the reliability and validity of the measures, and acquired a comprehensive understanding of the entire dataset, with particular attention to the subsample analysed here. On this basis, the researchers have endeavoured to ensure impartiality and transparency in data analysis, interpretation of results, and disclosure of potential biases or limitations. Finally, the investigators declare that they have no conflicts of interest that could influence the findings or their interpretation. References Brown, K., Jackson, M., & Cassidy, W. (2006). Cyber-bullying: Developing policy to direct responses that are equitable and effective in addressing this special form of bullying. Canadian Journal of Educational Administration and Policy, (57). Iorga, M., Pop, L. M., Croitoru, I., Hanganu, E., & Anton-Păduraru, D. T. (2022). Exploring the importance of gender, family affluence, parenting style and loneliness in cyberbullying victimization and aggression among Romanian adolescents. Behavioral Sciences, 12(11), 457. Marín-López, I., Zych, I., Ortega-Ruiz, R., Hunter, S. C., & Llorent, V. J. (2020). Relations between online emotional content use, social and emotional competencies and cyberbullying. Children and youth services review, 108, 104647. Zhu, C., Huang, S., Evans, R., & Zhang, W. (2021). Cyberbullying among adolescents and children: a comprehensive review of the global situation, risk factors, and preventive measures. Frontiers in public health, 9, 634909. Peled, Y. (2019). Cyberbullying and its influence on academic, social, and emotional development of undergraduate students. Heliyon, 5(3). Llorent, V. J., Diaz-Chaves, A., Zych, I., Twardowska-Staszek, E., & Marín-López, I. (2021). Bullying and cyberbullying in Spain and Poland, and their relation to social, emotional and moral competencies. School mental health, 13(3), 535-547. Zhong, J., Zheng, Y., Huang, X., Mo, D., Gong, J., Li, M., & Huang, J. (2021). Study of the influencing factors of cyberbullying among Chinese college students incorporated with digital citizenship: from the perspective of individual students. Frontiers in psychology, 12, 621418. Peter, I. K., & Petermann, F. (2018). Cyberbullying: A concept analysis of defining attributes and additional influencing factors. Computers in human behavior, 86, 350-366. Shaikh, F. B., Rehman, M., & Amin, A. (2020). Cyberbullying: A systematic literature review to identify the factors impelling university students towards cyberbullying. IEEE Access, 8, 148031-148051. Cassidy, W., Faucher, C., & Jackson, M. (2021). Bullying among college and university students. The Wiley Blackwell handbook of bullying: A comprehensive and international review of research and intervention, 2, 37-54. Padir, M. A., Ayas, T., & Horzum, M. B. (2021). Examining the Relationship among Internet Parental Style, Personality, and Cyberbullying/Victimization. International Journal of Technology in Education and Science, 5(1), 56-69. Martínez, I., Murgui, S., García, O. F., & Garcia, F. (2019). Parenting in the digital era: Protective and risk parenting styles for traditional bullying and cyberbullying victimization. Computers in human behavior, 90, 84-92. Yang, C., Chen, C., Lin, X., & Chan, M. K. (2021). School-wide social emotional learning and cyberbullying victimization among middle and high school students: Moderating role of school climate. School Psychology, 36(2), 75. Kong, C., & Yasmin, F. (2022). Impact of parenting style on early childhood learning: mediating role of parental self-efficacy. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, 928629. Baumrind, D. (1991). The influence of parenting style on adolescent competence and substance use. The journal of early adolescence, 11(1), 56-95. Kuppens, S., & Ceulemans, E. (2019). Parenting styles: A closer look at a well-known concept. Journal of child and family studies, 28, 168-181. Ao, M.-Q., Luo, D., Hou, H., Li, M.-N., & Yang, B.-X. (2025). Latent classes of parenting styles and their association with non-suicidal self-injury in adolescents: The mediating role of difficulties in emotion regulation. Chinese Journal of Clinical Psychology, 33(2), 254–260. https://doi.org/10.16128/j.cnki.1005-3611.2025.02.005Ao, M.-Q., Luo, D., Hou, H., Li, M.-N., & Yang, B.-X. (2025). Latent classes of parenting styles and their association with non-suicidal self-injury in adolescents: The mediating role of difficulties in emotion regulation. Chinese Journal of Clinical Psychology, 33(2), 254–260. https://doi.org/10.16128/j.cnki.1005-3611.2025.02.005 Li, Y.-F., Tang, Y.-P., & Huang, Z.-J. (2025). The influence of parenting styles on adolescents' empathy—A comparative analysis based on SSES 2019 data. Journal of Comparative Education, (1), 100–112. Moreno–Ruiz, D., Martínez–Ferrer, B., & García–Bacete, F. (2019). Parenting styles, cyberaggression, and cybervictimization among adolescents. Computers in Human Behavior, 93, 252-259. Legate, N., Weinstein, N., & Przybylski, A. K. (2019). Parenting strategies and adolescents' cyberbullying behaviors: Evidence from a preregistered study of parent–child dyads. Journal of youth and adolescence, 48, 399-409. Iorga, M., Pop, L. M., Croitoru, I., Hanganu, E., & Anton-Păduraru, D. T. (2022). Exploring the importance of gender, family affluence, parenting style and loneliness in cyberbullying victimization and aggression among Romanian adolescents. Behavioral Sciences, 12(11), 457. Broll, R., & Reynolds, D. (2021). Parental responsibility, blameworthiness, and bullying: Parenting style and adolescents' experiences with traditional bullying and cyberbullying. Criminal justice policy review, 32(5), 447-468. Siddiqui, F. A., Siddiqui, S. M., Siddiqui, A., & Afzal, K. (2024). The Role of Parenting Styles in the Development of Cyber Bullying Behavior among University Students. Journal of Media & Communication (JMC), 5(1). Patchin, J. W., & Hinduja, S. (2022). Cyberbullying among tweens in the United States: Prevalence, impact, and hel** behaviors. The Journal of Early Adolescence, 42(3), 414-430. Khairi, A. K., Li, W., Yeo, S. H., Tong, Y. S., Nazri, M., Rahman, B. A., & Motevalli, S. (2022). The importance of emotional competence in preventing cyberbullying: the role of family as moderator. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, 12(4), 262-278. Sharif, S., Irum, A., Noreen, H., Masood, H., & Sameeullah, H. (2024). Correlation between parenting styles and social communication in children with hearing impairment. LIAQUAT MEDICAL RESEARCH JOURNAL, 6(3). Wang, J., Huang, X., Li, Z., Chen, K., **, Z., He, J., ... & Liu, Z. (2024). Effect of parenting style on the emotional and behavioral problems among Chinese adolescents: the mediating effect of resilience. BMC public health, 24(1), 787. Segrin, C., & Flora, J. (2019). Fostering social and emotional intelligence: What are the best current strategies in parenting?. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 13(3), e12439. Bhide, S., Sciberras, E., Anderson, V., Hazell, P., & Nicholson, J. M. (2019). Association between parenting style and socio-emotional and academic functioning in children with and without ADHD: a community-based study. Journal of attention disorders, 23(5), 463-474. O'Reilly, J., & Peterson, C. C. (2014). Theory of mind at home: Linking authoritative and authoritarian parenting styles to children's social understanding. Early child development and care, 184(12), 1934-1947. Ketelaar, L., Wiefferink, C. H., Frijns, J. H., & Rieffe, C. (2017). Children with cochlear implants and their parents: Relations between parenting style and children's social-emotional functioning. Ear and Hearing, 38(3), 321-331. Den Hamer, A. H., & Konijn, E. A. (2016). Can emotion regulation serve as a tool in combating cyberbullying?. Personality and Individual Differences, 102, 1-6. Martínez-Monteagudo, M. C., Delgado, B., García-Fernández, J. M., & Ruíz-Esteban, C. (2020). Cyberbullying in the university setting. Relationship with emotional problems and adaptation to the university. Frontiers in psychology, 10, 3074. Kowalski, R. M., Giumetti, G. W., Schroeder, A. N., & Lattanner, M. R. (2014). Bullying in the digital age: a critical review and meta-analysis of cyberbullying research among youth. Psychological bulletin, 140(4), 1073. Arató, N., Zsidó, A. N., Rivnyák, A., Peley, B., & Labadi, B. (2022). Risk and protective factors in cyberbullying: the role of family, social support and emotion regulation. International journal of bullying prevention, 4(2), 160-173. Rose, C. A., & Espelage, D. L. (2012). Risk and protective factors associated with the bullying involvement of students with emotional and behavioral disorders. Behavioral Disorders, 37(3), 133-148. Tani, F., Pascuzzi, D., & Raffagnino, R. (2018). The relationship between perceived parenting style and emotion regulation abilities in adulthood. Journal of adult development, 25, 1-12. Wang, R., & Cancan Jin, C. (2025). Parenting styles and suicidal ideation among Chinese college students: The mediating role of perceived social support. Acta Psychologica, 255, 104992. Sukumaran, P. A., & Balakrishna, B. B. (2021). Parenting styles and social-emotional development of preschool children. International Journal of Contemporary Pediatrics, 8(12), 1952. Ge, L., Yap, C. W., Ong, R., & Heng, B. H. (2017). Social isolation, loneliness and their relationships with depressive symptoms: A population-based study. PloS one, 12(8), e0182145. Bolenbaugh, M., Foley‐Nicpon, M., Young, R., Tully, M., Grunewald, N., & Ramirez, M. (2020). Parental perceptions of gender differences in child technology use and cyberbullying. Psychology in the Schools, 57(11), 1657-1679. Mesch, G. S. (2018). Parent–child connections on social networking sites and cyberbullying. Youth & Society, 50(8), 1145-1162. Elsaesser, C., Russell, B., Ohannessian, C. M., & Patton, D. (2017). Parenting in a digital age: A review of parents' role in preventing adolescent cyberbullying. Aggression and violent behavior, 35, 62-72. Ho, T. T. Q., Li, C., & Gu, C. (2020). Cyberbullying victimization and depressive symptoms in Vietnamese university students: Examining social support as a mediator. International Journal of Law, Crime and Justice, 63, 100422. Larrañaga, E., Yubero, S., Ovejero, A., & Navarro, R. (2016). Loneliness, parent-child communication and cyberbullying victimization among Spanish youths. Computers in Human Behavior, 65, 1-8. Elsaesser, C., Russell, B., Ohannessian, C. M., & Patton, D. (2017). Parenting in a digital age: A review of parents' role in preventing adolescent cyberbullying. Aggression and violent behavior, 35, 62-72. Thomas, H. J., Connor, J. P., & Scott, J. G. (2015). Integrating traditional bullying and cyberbullying: challenges of definition and measurement in adolescents–a review. Educational psychology review, 27, 135-152. De Fruyt, F., Wille, B., & John, O. P. (2015). Employability in the 21st century: Complex (interactive) problem solving and other essential skills. Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 8(2), 276-281. Abrahams, L., Pancorbo, G., Primi, R., Santos, D., Kyllonen, P., John, O. P., & De Fruyt, F. (2019). Social-emotional skill assessment in children and adolescents: Advances and challenges in personality, clinical, and educational contexts. Psychological Assessment, 31(4), 460. Lipnevich, A. A., Credè, M., Hahn, E., Spinath, F. M., Roberts, R. D., & Preckel, F. (2017). How distinctive are morningness and eveningness from the Big Five factors of personality? A meta-analytic investigation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 112(3), 491. Kankaraš, M., & Suarez-Alvarez, J. (2019). Assessment framework of the OECD Study on Social and Emotional Skills. OECD education working papers, (207), 0_1-109. Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J. Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: a critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of applied psychology, 88(5), 879. Khairi, A. K., Li, W., Yeo, S. H., Tong, Y. S., Nazri, M., Rahman, B. A., & Motevalli, S. (2022). The importance of emotional competence in preventing cyberbullying: the role of family as moderator. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, 12(4), 262-278. Golchoobi, S., & Nooripour, R. (2025). Mindfulness, Cyberbullying and Cognitive Emotion Regulation in Adolescents. Journal of Research and Health, 15(1), 81-92. Royuela-Colomer, E., Calvete, E., Gámez-Guadix, M., & Orue, I. (2018). The protective role of dispositional mindfulness against the perpetuation of cyberbullying victimization and perpetration among adolescents. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 21(11), 703-710. Hamer, A. H., & Konijn, E. A. (2016). Can emotion regulation serve as a tool in combating cyberbullying?. Personality and Individual Differences, 102, 1-6. Alegre, A. (2011). Parenting styles and children's emotional intelligence: What do we know?. The Family Journal, 19(1), 56-62. Schütz, J., Bäker, N., & Koglin, U. (2022). Bullying in school and cyberbullying among adolescents without and with special educational needs in emotional–social development and in learning in Germany. Psychology in the Schools, 59(9), 1737-1754. Rose, C. A., & Espelage, D. L. (2012). Risk and protective factors associated with the bullying involvement of students with emotional and behavioral disorders. Behavioral Disorders, 37(3), 133-148. Ying, S. U. N. (2021). Strict Father, Loving Mother/Tiger Mother, Cat Dad? The Cognition of Parental Image in College Students’ mind. Mukhtar, S., & Mahmood, Z. (2018). Moderating role of perceived social support between perceived parenting styles and relational aggression in adolescents. Journal of Aggression, Maltreatment & Trauma, 27(8), 831-845. Ortega-Barón, J., Buelga, S., & Cava, M. J. (2016). The influence of school and family environment on adolescent victims of cyberbullying. Comunicar, 46(24), 57-65. Fu, L. The influence of parenting styles on problem behaviors in children aged 3-6: The mediating role of parent-child relationships [Master's thesis, Xinyang Normal University]. CNKI. https://doi.org/10.27435/d.cnki.gxsfc.2024.000171 Additional Declarations No competing interests reported. Supplementary Files Appendix.docx Cite Share Download PDF Status: Posted Version 1 posted You are reading this latest preprint version Research Square lets you share your work early, gain feedback from the community, and start making changes to your manuscript prior to peer review in a journal. As a division of Research Square Company, we’re committed to making research communication faster, fairer, and more useful. We do this by developing innovative software and high quality services for the global research community. Our growing team is made up of researchers and industry professionals working together to solve the most critical problems facing scientific publishing. Also discoverable on Platform About Our Team In Review Editorial Policies Advisory Board Help Center Resources Author Services Accessibility API Access RSS feed Manage Cookie Preferences © Research Square 2026 | ISSN 2693-5015 (online) Privacy Policy Terms of Service Do Not Sell My Personal Information {"props":{"pageProps":{"initialData":{"identity":"rs-7712506","acceptedTermsAndConditions":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"archivedVersions":[],"articleType":"Article","associatedPublications":[],"authors":[{"id":571272701,"identity":"7f2eb226-6940-4c4d-8eb4-6dada8e91a31","order_by":0,"name":"Xuzhong Huang","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Hubei University of Technology","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Xuzhong","middleName":"","lastName":"Huang","suffix":""},{"id":571272702,"identity":"83a3653f-f072-4f16-a347-45c4a8696fa3","order_by":1,"name":"Ruxu Cheng","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Hubei University of Technology","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Ruxu","middleName":"","lastName":"Cheng","suffix":""},{"id":571272704,"identity":"a7a282ac-1d42-4b19-9084-e613d3f0f3be","order_by":2,"name":"Yipu Hao","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Central China Normal University","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Yipu","middleName":"","lastName":"Hao","suffix":""},{"id":571272705,"identity":"bb1c96ee-236a-4a19-abb4-6efe8708ce54","order_by":3,"name":"Jing Cao","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Hubei University of Technology","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Jing","middleName":"","lastName":"Cao","suffix":""},{"id":571272706,"identity":"b07ccea5-7fe7-4bbf-9f19-589ea1ce22be","order_by":4,"name":"Xi Wang","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Hubei University of Technology","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Xi","middleName":"","lastName":"Wang","suffix":""},{"id":571272707,"identity":"b9d9f71a-25cb-4a85-8760-e527c49822da","order_by":5,"name":"Qiuyue Zhu","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Hubei University of Technology","correspondingAuthor":true,"prefix":"","firstName":"Qiuyue","middleName":"","lastName":"Zhu","suffix":""}],"badges":[],"createdAt":"2025-09-25 11:38:32","currentVersionCode":1,"declarations":"","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-7712506/v1","doiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-7712506/v1","draftVersion":[],"editorialEvents":[],"editorialNote":"","failedWorkflow":false,"files":[{"id":100361268,"identity":"fb26c61b-2fa4-4f06-b5b7-4ae8226a8228","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-01-16 07:44:47","extension":"docx","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":78643,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"Manuscript.docx","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7712506/v1/347c2ec946485d225200751a.docx"},{"id":100011864,"identity":"1e0f13fe-15e0-4c18-8704-68f68250e020","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-01-12 06:12:19","extension":"json","order_by":4,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":8342,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"f4099e76500a4dd683faa605c4393d35.json","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7712506/v1/1bafb5b658a1d238b98fb48f.json"},{"id":100361707,"identity":"34748031-6ae4-47df-b5d3-9ae55b0bebb6","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-01-16 07:45:32","extension":"docx","order_by":5,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":11562,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"AuthorsContactDetails.docx","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7712506/v1/bcb0470bc7483932703937de.docx"},{"id":100361140,"identity":"59324315-4610-4979-8e7e-c3dda900da01","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-01-16 07:44:29","extension":"docx","order_by":6,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":11197,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"EthicsDeclaration.docx","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7712506/v1/ea933844b61aa528b30c894d.docx"},{"id":100011868,"identity":"e82f098b-7e32-4184-94f0-433a556d2f77","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-01-12 06:12:19","extension":"docx","order_by":7,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":14980,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"TitlePage.docx","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7712506/v1/59174eb9de8903f6a39ad7f4.docx"},{"id":100011879,"identity":"661aa548-7658-40e6-866c-31203453320a","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-01-12 06:12:20","extension":"xml","order_by":8,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":186235,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"f4099e76500a4dd683faa605c4393d351enriched.xml","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7712506/v1/4e4ba53c6d0306f09fbaf450.xml"},{"id":100361738,"identity":"fd5b491a-411b-42eb-89d3-32a65681dfcb","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-01-16 07:45:40","extension":"png","order_by":9,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":42884,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"Figure1.ConceptualFrameworkofMother.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7712506/v1/62412d28beea7c85af5ab004.png"},{"id":100011873,"identity":"04ea0314-e81b-4351-91bb-9f3c0f336678","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-01-12 06:12:20","extension":"png","order_by":10,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":42458,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"Figure2.ConceptualFrameworkofFather.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7712506/v1/b1eea02dfce6ce456cbba1aa.png"},{"id":100011872,"identity":"7b301ae8-8b9d-425d-a0c4-0744674c92c0","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-01-12 06:12:20","extension":"png","order_by":11,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":59131,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"Figure3.PathDiagramforModeratedMediationModelofParentalParentingStyle.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7712506/v1/6d1b1371b8ce17e01148f162.png"},{"id":100361712,"identity":"eeadb3e1-8902-4f2f-badb-f906eb4b70f9","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-01-16 07:45:34","extension":"png","order_by":12,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":8233,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"OnlineFigure1.ConceptualFrameworkofMother.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7712506/v1/a3d6d49f94a51ef98b69fca0.png"},{"id":100011871,"identity":"55fbcb8d-4cf7-45b3-8d5d-fe44484dbf50","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-01-12 06:12:19","extension":"png","order_by":13,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":7971,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"OnlineFigure2.ConceptualFrameworkofFather.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7712506/v1/e7cc93cb32344a2ae6307559.png"},{"id":100011875,"identity":"b4920846-9cfc-4537-bb69-bd60721b50a7","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-01-12 06:12:20","extension":"png","order_by":14,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":24524,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"OnlineFigure3.PathDiagramforModeratedMediationModelofParentalParentingStyle.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7712506/v1/ddaab64297e35bd74f4f7904.png"},{"id":100011878,"identity":"a964dd49-0f68-4e03-b3dc-b30ea9ee8032","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-01-12 06:12:20","extension":"xml","order_by":15,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":183697,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"f4099e76500a4dd683faa605c4393d351structuring.xml","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7712506/v1/1ceb8f75f18d769e32a6bb50.xml"},{"id":100011876,"identity":"642f7274-8562-4ee1-995d-bc4cf909df7f","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-01-12 06:12:20","extension":"html","order_by":16,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":191905,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"earlyproof.html","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7712506/v1/c128d7adf9344921dc3a09b0.html"},{"id":100011861,"identity":"695d65b6-a926-4c43-a43c-663359bb58bc","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-01-12 06:12:19","extension":"png","order_by":1,"title":"Figure 1","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":42884,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eConceptual Framework of Mother\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"Figure1.ConceptualFrameworkofMother.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7712506/v1/30c94f9859a571dee06565fd.png"},{"id":100011863,"identity":"0077e5d7-9183-484f-8479-e86c9a64dcfb","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-01-12 06:12:19","extension":"png","order_by":2,"title":"Figure 2","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":42458,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eConceptual Framework of Father\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"Figure2.ConceptualFrameworkofFather.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7712506/v1/d40bdcdcc91ca09f967d5645.png"},{"id":100011865,"identity":"10e4255d-d045-4422-b35d-361b96e2aca4","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-01-12 06:12:19","extension":"png","order_by":3,"title":"Figure 3","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":59131,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003ePath Diagram for Moderated Mediation Model of Parental Parenting Style\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"Figure3.PathDiagramforModeratedMediationModelofParentalParentingStyle.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7712506/v1/17060aeae0a6ecaa35c24052.png"},{"id":103507344,"identity":"c1d26103-3192-4448-92b4-80f26e42f636","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-02-26 13:41:04","extension":"pdf","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"manuscript-pdf","size":1125880,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"manuscript.pdf","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7712506/v1/a6cb17b6-4217-4416-a2ec-791c61f24af6.pdf"},{"id":100362039,"identity":"a75522cd-32fb-4280-884d-1c44fd4bd92c","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-01-16 07:46:06","extension":"docx","order_by":1,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"supplement","size":20757,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"Appendix.docx","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7712506/v1/c6835d8ddac30004fa0d3f09.docx"}],"financialInterests":"No competing interests reported.","formattedTitle":"The Influence of Parenting Styles on Cyberbullying Victimization: The Mediating Role of Social-emotional Skills and The Moderating Role of Parent-child Relationships","fulltext":[{"header":"1 INTRODUCTION","content":"\u003cp\u003eCyberbullying refers to intentional and repetitive aggressive behaviors perpetrated by individuals or groups through information and communication technologies with the aim of harming others (Brown, 2006). Unlike traditional school bullying that occurs in a controllable physical space, cyberbullying can transcend the boundaries of time and space, has stronger concealment, and is more difficult for teachers and parents to detect and intervene. Moreover, the content of the violent harm can be widely spread online, causing continuous trauma (Iorga et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e). Cyberbullying can lead to psychological problems such as depression, anxiety, and suicidal tendencies in the victims, seriously affecting their academic performance, social development, long-term emotional regulation disorders and damaged interpersonal relationships (Mar\u0026iacute;n-L\u0026oacute;pez et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR3\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e; Zhu et al., 2020). China survey data also revealed that victims acknowledge cyberbullying's significant detrimental impact on academic focus and performance outcomes (Huang et al., 2021).Another study showed that a majority of adolescents experience at least one incident of cyberbullying, with verbal aggression constituting the most prevalent form (Peled, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR5\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e; Llorent et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR6\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e). Consequently, given cyberbullying's pervasive scale, insidious nature, and persistent harm, investigating its determinants and developing effective interventions represents a critical leverage point for addressing educational equity challenges in the digital era.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eMultiple factors contribute to adolescents' vulnerability to cyberbullying victimization, encompassing individual psychological traits and personality characteristics such as introversion and diminished self-efficacy (Shaikh et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR9\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e). Concurrently, contextual determinants such as competitive school climates, strained peer relationships, and intensive digital platform engagement amplify psychological pressures that heighten aggression propensity. (Peter \u0026amp; Petermann, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR8\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e). Moreover, parenting styles represent a significant yet understudied dimension of family dynamics affecting adolescent cyberbullying victimization, with their impact exceeding that of individual and school factors(Padir et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR11\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eCompared to traditional school bullying, cyberbullying often occurs outside the school setting, and parents bear undeniable responsibility for supervision. High parental acceptance and communication can significantly reduce adolescents' risk of cyberbullying victimization. Conversely, coercive parenting practices, such as physical punishment and excessive lecturing, can heighten adolescent anxiety, thereby potentially attracting attention from bullies. Furthermore, parental verbal abuse and physical punishment can induce fear or distrust in youth, hindering the establishment of a positive parent-child relationship. This may lead adolescence to avoid seeking parental help when encountering cyberbullying, thereby increasing their risk of victimization (Mart\u0026iacute;nez et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e). Additionally, social-emotional skills are a crucial factor influencing adolescent cyberbullying victimization; adolescents with higher levels of social-emotional skills, such as emotion regulation, face a lower risk of being victimized online (Yang C et al.,2021 ).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eWhile existing research has explored the impact of certain parenting styles on cyberbullying, few studies have utilized data from China. Moreover, research investigating the mechanisms through which parenting styles influence cyberbullying, specifically examining the mediating effect of students' social-emotional skills and the moderating role of parent-child relationships, is currently lacking. To address this gap, this study will utilize data from the OECD's Survey on Social and Emotional Skills (SSES) conducted in Suzhou, China (2019). It will investigate the mechanisms by which parenting styles affect cyberbullying, employing students' social-emotional skills as a mediating variable and the quality of parent-child relationships as a moderating variable. The study aims to contribute to a deeper understanding of the protective effects of specific parenting styles against cyberbullying victimization.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"2 LITERATURE REVIEW","content":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e2.1 Parenting Styles \u0026amp; Cyberbullying Victimization\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eParenting styles are manifested through attitudes of care, expectations, communication patterns, and disciplinary approaches toward adolescence (Kong \u0026amp; Yasmin, 2022). The seminal typology proposed by Baumrind (1991) categorizes styles along two core dimensions: responsiveness (encompassing emotional support, warmth, acceptance, and attunement to adolescence's needs) and demandingness (involving supervision, behavioral control, rule-setting, and conduct regulation), thereby delineating four archetypes: authoritarian, authoritative, permissive, and neglectful. Expanding this model, Kuppens \u0026amp; Ceulemans (Kuppens et al., 2019) introduced psychological control as a third dimension beyond support and behavioral control. Through dual-phase cluster analysis, they identified four joint parenting styles: authoritative, authoritarian, positive authoritative, and intrusive, each integrating tripartite components of support, behavioral control, and psychological control. Concurrently, Mengqin et al. (2025) developed an alternative taxonomy based on rejection, emotional warmth, and overprotection, classifying styles as indifferent-neglectful, warmth-controlling, and harsh-controlling.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eWhile researchers exhibit divergent conceptualizations of parenting styles due to variations in educational objectives and cultural contexts, they universally recognize two core dimensions: warmth (responsiveness-affective expression) and control (demandingness-behavioral regulation). Consequently, parenting approaches are broadly dichotomized into: (1) positive styles characterized by warm emotional expression, frequent communication, and emotional support (understanding-oriented); and (2) negative styles marked by deficient warmth, limited emotional communication, and rigid behavioral control (strictness-oriented). Aligning with this framework, Chinese scholars Li Yifan et al. (2025) classified parenting styles into understanding-listening and strict-punitive types based on affective expression and behavioral control. Informed by empirical evidence, this study adopts their taxonomy, which defines understanding-listening parenting as emphasizing nurturing support and empathic attunement, while defining strict-punitive parenting as prioritizing harsh behavioral regulation and punitive discipline.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe research has found that parental parenting styles can significantly influence the risk of cyberbullying victimization among teenagers through emotional support and behavioral supervision. The former emphasizes emotional warmth, understanding support, and moderate rules, while the latter emphasizes strict control, emotional neglect, and punitive discipline. Scholarly evidence indicates that parenting styles characterized by high warmth and high behavioral control mitigate adolescents' vulnerability to cyberbullying victimization through facilitating open parent-child communication and collaborative rule-setting regarding online boundaries, thereby enhancing risk awareness in virtual environments (Moreno-Ruiz et al., 2019). Conversely, high warmth coupled with low behavioral control necessitates integration with moderate supervision to confer protective benefits, as insufficient rule enforcement undermines its efficacy (Legate et al., 2019). Low warmth with high control often manifests through coercive verbal criticism and punitive constraints, eroding parental trust and exacerbating youth loneliness, which subsequently reduces help-seeking behaviors during cyberbullying incidents and heightens victimization risks (Iorga et al., 2022). Most critically, low warmth and low control consistently predict elevated probabilities of both perpetrating and experiencing cyberbullying (Broll \u0026amp; Reynolds, 2021). Empirical studies demonstrate a significant negative correlation between parental implementation of high warmth-supportive parenting and adolescents' exposure to cyberbullying. Parents who demonstrate affective warmth, provide structured guidance while respecting adolescent autonomy exhibit offspring with substantially reduced vulnerability to online victimization. Conversely, parenting approaches characterized by deficient warmth and unresponsive affect compromise youths' psychological resilience, thereby diminishing their capacity to counteract digital aggression and elevating cyberbullying victimization risks (Siddiqui et al., 2024; Patchin \u0026amp; Hinduja, 2022).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eCollectively, parenting styles function as pivotal predictors of cyberbullying through their fundamental role in shaping adolescents' social behavioral schemas and digital coping strategies. Consequently, this study proposes the following hypothesis H1:\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eHypothesis 1a: Understanding-listening parenting will reduce adolescent risk of experiencing cyberbullying victimization.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eHypothesis 1b: Strict-punitive parenting will increase adolescent risk of experiencing cyberbullying victimization.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e2.2 The Mediating Effect of Social-emotional Skills\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSocial-emotional skills serve as critical protective factors against cyberbullying victimization among adolescents. Those equipped with emotion regulation skills, empathic capacities, and conflict resolution strategiesexhibit significantly lower vulnerability to bullying, whereas social-emotional skills deficits substantially elevate victimization risks (Khairi et al., 2022). Parental implementation of high warmth-supportive parenting significantly enhances adolescence's social-emotional skills development through affective scaffolding. This parenting approach fosters secure attachment, thereby internalizing emotion regulation and social skills (Sharif et al., 2024). It concurrently cultivates critical thinking and risk-coping capabilities while strengthening emotional regulation, empathy, and psychological resilience (Wang et al., 2024; Segrin \u0026amp; Flora, 2019). Notably, research on adolescence with attention-deficit disorders demonstrates that parental high warmth combined with low anger expression significantly enhances prosocial behaviors and self-control (Bhide et al., 2019). Conversely, low warmth/high demanding parenting, which is characterized by affective neglect and excessive behavioral control, impedes the development of social-emotional skills. This style correlates significantly with emotion comprehension deficits and social avoidance tendencies (O'Reilly \u0026amp; Peterson, 2014). Empirical evidence indicates that punitive discipline within negative parenting contexts suppresses language development and amplifies negative emotional expressions (e.g., heightened anger and sadness frequency), consequently impeding the acquisition of adaptive emotion regulation strategies (Ketelaar et al., 2017).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eEmpirical evidence indicates that emotion regulation deficits predispose individuals to adopt suppression or venting strategies during online conflicts, perpetuating a maladaptive cycle of cyberbullying victimization→emotional dysregulation→re-victimization (Den Hamer \u0026amp; Konijn, 2016). Conversely, individuals with heightened stress resistance and psychological well-being maintenance capacities exhibit a direct negative correlation with cyberbullying victimization likelihood, suggesting that social-emotional skills buffer the adverse effects of cyberbullying through enhanced psychological resilience (Martinez-Monteagudo et al.,2020). Adolescents capable of effectively regulating emotions and managing stressors demonstrate reduced vulnerability to cyberbullying victimization, primarily due to their superior capacity to navigate social conflicts and negative interactions. Furthermore, robust social adaptation abilities, including the capacity to establish friendships and integrate into peer groups, significantly lower victimization risk. Maladaptive social functioning increases exposure to bullying due to deficient coping strategies and lack of peer protection. (Kowalski et al., 2014). Strong social networks and interpersonal skills provide critical social support, mitigate isolation, and thereby fortify defenses against cyber threats. When adolescents lack effective emotion regulation strategies, they experience heightened helplessness during cyberbullying incidents, amplifying victimization impact (Arató et al., 2022). Additionally, impairments in social information processing hinder the formation of healthy peer relationships, increasing susceptibility to targeting (Rose \u0026amp; Espelage, 2012).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eCollectively, social-emotional skills function as multidimensional protective factors against cyberbullying, holding significant practical implications for reducing cyberbullying prevalence. Given their sensitivity to parenting styles and their direct influence on cyberbullying victimization, social-emotional skills are posited to mediate the link between parental parenting styles and adolescent cyberbullying risk.Consequently, this study proposes the following hypothesis H2:\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eHypothesis 2a: Adolescent social-emotional skills positively mediate the relationship between understanding-listening parenting and cyberbullying victimization.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eHypothesis 2b: Adolescent social-emotional skills positively mediate the relationship between strict-punitive parenting and cyberbullying victimization.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e2.3 The Moderating Effect of Parent-child Relationships\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eParent-child relationship refers to offspring's subjective interpretation of parent-child interaction quality. It functions not merely as a perceptual experience of parental practices, but as a psychological filter that modulates the influence of parenting on adolescent social-emotional skills (Tani et al., 2017). While extant research has established associations between parenting styles and adolescent social-emotional skills, the moderating role of adolescents' subjective relational perceptions remains underexplored: particularly their perceived familial support and affective responsiveness. Empirical evidence indicates that when offspring perceive high parental support and emotional warmth, the promotive effect of warmth-supportive parenting on prosocial behaviors is significantly amplified. Notably, even moderately strict discipline may reduce behavioral problems if interpreted by youth as \"care-driven guidance\" (Wang et al., 2025). Conversely, in contexts of low relational quality, adolescence may exhibit social skill deficits due to emotional alienation, even when parents implement authoritative practices characterized by high warmth and behavioral control(Sukumaran \u0026amp; Balakrishna, 2021). A longitudinal study further revealed that retrospectively perceived relational quality significantly moderates the deployment of emotion regulation strategies. Specifically, adolescence with high externalizing behaviors showed markedly reduced adolescent externalizing problems when perceiving high paternal care in childhood; this protective effect was absent under conditions of low paternal care (Ge et al., 2017).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eWhen parent-child relationship quality is suboptimal, adolescents exhibit heightened tendencies to seek social validation through social media platforms. This behavior impedes parental identification of potential online risks, thereby significantly diminishing the protective efficacy of parenting practices (Bolenbaugh et al., 2020). Conversely, elevated relational quality correlates with offspring's voluntary disclosure of online activities to parents. Such trust-based disclosure enables timely parental detection of cyberbullying threats and facilitates effective intervention (Mesch, 2018), leading to a consequently reduction in cyberbullying victimization probability by 19.3–27.6% (Elsaesser et al., 2017). Crucially, the protective effect derived from disclosure fails to manifest among parents relying solely on monitoring software, indicating that perceived relational quality moderates the effectiveness of surveillance strategies. Furthermore the prevalent third-person perception bias among parents—a cognitive distortion whereby they perceive other children as more vulnerable to cyberbullying than their own offspring—further compromises intervention efficacy. This bias reduces parental vigilance toward cyberbullying threats and subsequently attenuates proactive intervention behaviors.\u0026nbsp;However, high intimacy in parent-child relationships corrects this cognitive bias. When parents establish close relational bonds with offspring, they demonstrate heightened vigilance toward adolescence's actual risks rather than relying on distorted perceptions (Ho et al., 2020).\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eProactive and open parent-adolescent communication enables youth to perceive parental concern and support, effectively reducing loneliness (Larranaga et al., 2016) and associated \u0026nbsp;cyberbullying victimization risks. Conversely, adolescents who fail to perceive parental warmth and support are less likely to disclose cyberbullying victimization experiences to parents, consequently diminishing parental monitoring and protective interventions (Elsaesser et al., 2017). Consequently, this study proposes the following hypothesis H3:\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eH3a: Parent-child relationship quality will enhance the positive effect of understanding-listening parenting style on the development of social-emotional skills.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eH3b: Parent-child relationship quality will strengthen the positive association between strict-punitive parenting style and social-emotional skills.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eH3c: Parent-child relationship quality will amplify the direct protective effect of understanding-listening parenting style on reducing cyberbullying victimization.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eH3d: Parent-child relationship quality will attenuate the direct harmful effect of strict-punitive parenting style on increasing cyberbullying victimization risk.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eH3e: Parent-child relationship quality will strengthen the indirect protective pathway through which understanding-listening parenting style reduces cyberbullying victimization by enhancing social-emotional skills.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eH3f: Parent-child relationship quality will weaken the indirect harmful pathway wherein strict-punitive parenting style increases cyberbullying victimization risk via improved social-emotional skills.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eBased on the preceding analysis, this study establishes the following conceptual framework (as illustrated in \u003cstrong\u003eFigure 1\u003c/strong\u003e and \u003cstrong\u003eFigure 2\u003c/strong\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eFigure 1\u003c/strong\u003e. Conceptual Framework of Mother\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u003cstrong\u003eFigure 2\u003c/strong\u003e. Conceptual Framework of Father\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"3 METHOD","content":"\u003cdiv id=\"Sec7\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e3.1 Participants\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe study utilized data derived from the SSES 2019 survey (Study on Social and Emotional Skills) administered by the OECD, with a specific focus on student samples from Suzhou, China. Given that assessment items related to​cyberbullying victimization​ were exclusively designed for adolescents aged 15, this research restricted its analytical sample to youth within this age cohort. During data cleaning procedures, missing values for model-relevant variables were found to account for only 0.1%\u0026ndash;0.2% of total observations. Consequently, listwise deletion was employed to address missing data, resulting in a final analytical sample of 3,593 valid cases.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec8\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e3.2 Measures\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec9\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e3.2.1 Cyberbullying Victimization\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eCyberbullying victimization primarily denotes repeated and intentional harmful behaviors perpetrated by peers through electronic/digital media, accompanied by negative psychological or behavioral consequences among children and adolescents (Thomas et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR47\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e). In this study, cyberbullying victimization was operationalized using two validated items measured on a 4-point Likert scale, where responses ranged from 1\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;Never or almost never to 4\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;Once a week or more, with higher scores indicating greater severity of victimization; the fifth response option (\"I do not use social media\") was systematically excluded from measurement. Victimization was specifically assessed through the items: \"I have been threatened by others while using online chat or social media\" and \"Malicious rumors about me have been disseminated by others through online chat or social media\".\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec10\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e3.2.2 Parenting Style\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eParent-child relationships are crucial to adolescent developmental outcomes. This study operationalized parenting styles using a validated instrument comprising eight items equally distributed between maternal and paternal dimensions (four items each), measured on a 4-point Likert scale ranging from 1\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;Almost never or never true to 4\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;Almost always, or always true, with higher scores indicating closer alignment with actual behaviors. The independent variables were derived from the OECD SSES assessment, specifically capturing parenting practices through the items: \"Discuss how well my child is doing at school\"; \"Share the main daily meal with my child\"; \"Spend time conversing with my child\"; and \"Assist my child with homework.\" As maternal and paternal parenting styles were measured separately in the original instrument, this study adopted the typological framework established by Li et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR18\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2025\u003c/span\u003e), categorizing parenting styles into four distinct constructs: Maternal understanding-listening (M_UND), Maternal strict-punitive (M_STR), Paternal understanding-listening (F_UND), and Paternal strict-punitive (F_STR).\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec11\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e3.2.3 Social-emotional Skills\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe 2019 OECD Survey on Social and Emotional Skills (SSES), grounded in the Big Five personality theory, encompasses five dimensions: Task Performance, Emotional Regulation, Engagement with Others, Collaboration, and Open-Mindedness (Fruyt et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR48\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e; Abrahams et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR49\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e; Lipnevich et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR50\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e). Each dimension represents a cluster of interrelated behavioral or cognitive patterns, operationalized through 144 assessment items. These dimensions are further delineated into 15 sub-competencies: Task Performance includes Self-control, Responsibility, and Persistence; Emotional Regulation comprises Stress Resilience, Optimism, and Emotional Control; Engagement with Others incorporates Sociability, Assertiveness, and Energy; Collaboration integrates Empathy and Trust; Open-Mindedness covers Tolerance, Curiosity, and Creativity. To examine the relationship between social and emotional competencies and other variables, this study consolidates the five dimensions into a unified composite variable termed Social and Emotional Competence by averaging standardized scores across all dimensions, following the methodological approach established by Kankaraš and Suarez-Alvarez (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR51\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec12\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e3.2.4 Parent-child relationships\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe measurement of parent-child relationships employed three validated items, all reverse-scored on a 4-point Likert scale ranging from 1\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;Almost never or never true to 4\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;Almost always, or always true, with higher scores indicating closer alignment with actual experiences. The specific items were: \"I get upset easily with my parents\"; \"It is hard for me to talk with my parents\"; and \"I feel angry with my parents\". The construct Perceived Relations with Parents, validated by the OECD, was operationalized in this investigation. Given that all items predominantly reflected negative parent-child relational dynamics (i.e., perceived negative parent-child relationships) and were scored on a 0\u0026thinsp;~\u0026thinsp;100 scale, each raw score was systematically reverse-coded by subtracting it from 100 before data analysis. After this reverse-coding, higher values indicate more positive parent-child relationships (hereinafter referred to as PCR).\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"4 RESULTS","content":"\u003cdiv id=\"Sec14\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e4.1 Descriptive Statistics and Correlation Analysis\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThis study conducted descriptive statistics and correlation analyses on cyberbullying victimization, adolescents' social-emotional skills, and diverse parenting styles (see Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e). The results reveal a statistically significant negative correlation between social-emotional skills and cyberbullying victimization (r\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;0.150***). Furthermore, social-emotional skills exhibited statistically significant positive correlations with M_UND (r\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.328***), F_UND (r\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.374***), and F_STR (r\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.049**). However, no significant correlation was observed with M_STR (r\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.023). Cyberbullying victimization exhibited significant negative correlations with M_UND (r\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;0.112***) and F_UND (r\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;0.109***), while showing significant positive correlations with M_STR (r\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.070***) and F_STR(r\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.085***). Additionally, cyberbullying victimization was significantly negatively correlated with PCR (r\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;0.171***).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eConversely, social-emotional skills demonstrated a significant positive correlation with PCR (r\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.338***). Parent-child relationships were significantly positively associated with M_UND (r\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.475***) and F_UND (r\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.433***), but significantly negatively correlated with M_STR (r\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;0.233***) and F_STR (r\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;0.242***).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab1\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 1\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDescriptive Statistics and Correlation Analysis Results\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"10\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c5\" colnum=\"5\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c6\" colnum=\"6\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c7\" colnum=\"7\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c8\" colnum=\"8\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c9\" colnum=\"9\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c10\" colnum=\"10\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMEAN\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSD\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e5\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e6\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e7\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCyberbullying Victimization\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.171\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.469\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eM_UND\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.790\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.818\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-0.112\u003csup\u003e***\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eF_UND\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.555\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.865\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-0.109\u003csup\u003e***\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.505\u003csup\u003e***\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eM_STR\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.942\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.631\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.070\u003csup\u003e***\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-0.170\u003csup\u003e***\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-0.038\u003csup\u003e*\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eF_STR\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.994\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.707\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.085\u003csup\u003e***\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-0.048\u003csup\u003e**\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-0.114\u003csup\u003e***\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.406\u003csup\u003e***\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSocial-emotional Skills\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e562.161\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e58.312\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-0.150\u003csup\u003e***\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.328\u003csup\u003e***\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.374\u003csup\u003e***\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.023\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.049\u003csup\u003e**\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePCR\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e41.963\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e11.541\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-0.171\u003csup\u003e***\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.475\u003csup\u003e***\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.433\u003csup\u003e***\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-0.233\u003csup\u003e***\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-0.242\u003csup\u003e***\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.338\u003csup\u003e***\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003ctfoot\u003e \u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"10\"\u003eNote: The significance levels are indicated as follows:***p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001,**p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.01,*p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.05.\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tfoot\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec15\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e4.2 Common Method Bias Test\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eCommon method bias was assessed for the core sample using Harman's single-factor test. The results indicated that the first factor explained 34.109% of the variance, below the critical threshold of 40% (Podsakoff et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR52\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2003\u003c/span\u003e), while the cumulative total variance explained reached 54.149%. These findings confirm the absence of significant common method bias in the study data.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec16\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e4.3 Testing for Mediation Effects\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe mediation analysis results indicate that M_UND had a significant negative effect on cyberbullying victimization, with a total effect of -0.064 (p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001). M_UND exerted a significant indirect effect on cyberbullying victimization through social-emotional skills (indirect effect = -0.024, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001), and the 95% CI does not contain 0, indicating significant mediation. F_UND also had a significant negative effect on cyberbullying victimization, with a total effect of -0.059 (p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001). F_UND exerted a significant indirect effect on cyberbullying victimization through social-emotional skills (indirect effect = -0.026, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001), demonstrating significant mediation. F_STR had a significant positive effect on cyberbullying victimization (total effect\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.056, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001), and exerted a significant indirect effect through social-emotional skills (indirect effect = -0.005, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001), demonstrating significant mediation. In contrast, M_STR had a significant positive effect on cyberbullying victimization (total effect\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.052, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001). However, the indirect effect of M_STR on cyberbullying victimization through social-emotional skills was non-significant (indirect effect = -0.003, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;0.05), indicating no significant mediation. The 95% CI results once again corroborate the mediation effects reported above: the 95% CIs for the indirect effects of M_UND, F_UND, and F_STR do not include 0, whereas only the CI for M_STR\u0026rsquo;s indirect effect includes 0.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eCollectively, these findings reveal that understanding-listening parenting (whether maternal or paternal) serves as a protective factor, reducing the risk of cyberbullying victimization. Conversely, strict-punitive parenting whether originating from mothers or fathers, represents a risk factor, increasing the risk of cyberbullying victimization. Adolescents\u0026rsquo; social-emotional skills partially mediated the effect of parenting styles on cyberbullying victimization, M_UND, F_UND, and F_STR indirectly reduce the likelihood of adolescents cyberbullying victimization by fostering their social-emotional skills (see Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e).The results supported Hypotheses H1 and H2., confirming the diametric roles of responsive versus punitive parenting dimensions in adolescent cyberbullying victimization outcomes. The mediation pathway coefficients are provided in \u003cspan refid=\"Sec20\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003eappendix\u003c/span\u003e (see \u003cspan refid=\"Sec20\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e\u003cb\u003eAppendix\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/span\u003e \u003cb\u003e1\u003c/b\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab2\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 2\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMediation Analysis Results of the Model\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"6\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c5\" colnum=\"5\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c6\" colnum=\"6\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePath\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eStandardized effect size\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eBootstrap SE\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eBootstrap 95% confidence interval\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePercentage of mediation effect\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"2\" rowspan=\"3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eM_UND\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTotal effect\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-0.064\u003csup\u003e***\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.010\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e[-0.083, -0.046]\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDirect effect\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-0.040\u003csup\u003e***\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.010\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e[-0.060, -0.021]\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.630\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eIndirect effect\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-0.024\u003csup\u003e***\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.003\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e[-0.031, -0.017]\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.370\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"2\" rowspan=\"3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eM_STR\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTotal effect\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.052\u003csup\u003e***\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.012\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e[0.028, 0.076]\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDirect effect\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.054\u003csup\u003e***\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.012\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e[0.030, 0.078]\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.048\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eIndirect effect\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-0.003\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.002\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e[-0.007, 0.002]\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-0.048\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"2\" rowspan=\"3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eF_UND\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTotal effect\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-0.059\u003csup\u003e***\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.009\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e[-0.077, -0.041]\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDirect effect\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-0.033\u003csup\u003e***\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.010\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e[-0.052, -0.014]\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.564\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eIndirect effect\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-0.026\u003csup\u003e***\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.004\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e[-0.033, -0.019]\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.436\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"2\" rowspan=\"3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eF_STR\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTotal effect\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.056\u003csup\u003e***\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.011\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e[0.035, 0.078]\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDirect effect\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.061\u003csup\u003e***\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.011\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e[0.040, 0.083]\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.089\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eIndirect effect\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-0.005\u003csup\u003e***\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.002\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e[-0.009, -0.001]\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-0.081\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec17\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e4.4 Testing for Moderated Mediation Effects\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThis study incorporated the four parental styles (for both paternal and maternal) sequentially into moderated mediation models.To generate interaction terms, values of the four parenting styles and the parent-child relationship were mean-centered, and subsequently entered into Model 8 of the SPSS PROCESS 4.1 macro for moderated mediation regression analysis. The analyses examined how PCR, as a moderator, influenced the relationships between M_UND, M_STR, F_UND, F_STR, and child outcomes: social-emotional skills and cyberbullying victimization.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eFor paths to social-emotional skills, the interaction term coefficient between M_UND and PCR was positive and significant (β\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.393, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.001). This indicates that PCR significantly and positively moderated the effect of M_UND on social-emotional skills. The interaction term coefficient between F_UND and PCR was positive and significant (β\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.470, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001). This indicates that PCR significantly and positively moderated the effect of F_UND on social-emotional skills. Specifically, a better parent-child relationship strengthened the positive effect of parents\u0026rsquo; understanding-listening style on social-emotional skills; The interaction term coefficient between M_STR and PCR was positive and significant (β\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.316, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.01). This indicates that PCR significantly and positively moderated the effect of maternal strict-punitive parenting style on social-emotional skills. In contrast, the interaction term coefficient between F_STR and PCR was non-significant (β\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.086, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;0.05), indicating that the effect of paternal strict-punitive parenting style on social-emotional skills was not significantly moderated by PCR. The results demonstrate that in households with higher parent-child relationship quality, parenting styles foster a more conducive environment for the development of adolescence's social-emotional skills, with the exception of paternal strict-punitive parenting.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eFor paths to cyberbullying victimization, the interaction term coefficient between M_UND and PCR was positive and significant (β\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.002, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.01). This indicates that PCR significantly and positively moderated the effect of M_UND on cyberbullying victimization; The interaction term coefficient between F_UND and PCR was positive and significant (β\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.002, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.01). This indicates that PCR significantly and positively moderated the effect of F_UND on cyberbullying victimization; This indicates that in families with better parent-child relationships, an understanding-listening parenting style exerts a stronger inhibitory effect on cyberbullying victimization. The interaction term coefficient between M_STR and PCR was negative and significant (β= -0.003, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.01). This indicates that PCR significantly and negatively moderated the effect of M_STR on cyberbullying victimization. This suggests that in families with a better parent-child relationships, the positive effect of maternal strict-parenting parenting on cyberbullying victimization becomes weaker. Conversely, the interaction term coefficient between F_STR and PCR was non-significant (β= -0.0005, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;0.05), indicating that the effect of F_STR on cyberbullying victimization was not significantly moderated by PCR. These results confirmed hypotheses H3a and H3c, while hypotheses H3b and H3d received partial support (see Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab3\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab3\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 3\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eResults of Moderating Effect Analysis for Parent-child Relationship\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"8\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c5\" colnum=\"5\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c6\" colnum=\"6\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c7\" colnum=\"7\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c8\" colnum=\"8\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c2\" namest=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eRegression Equation\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c4\" namest=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFit Index\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colspan=\"4\" nameend=\"c8\" namest=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSignificance of Regression Coefficients\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eOutcome Variable\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePredictor Variable\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eR\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eF\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eβ\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eLLCI\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eULCI\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003et\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"3\" rowspan=\"4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSocial-emotional Skills\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eM_UND x PCR\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.155\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e219.973\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.393\u003csup\u003e***\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.226\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.560\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4.617\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eM_STR x PCR\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.127\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e174.231\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.316\u003csup\u003e**\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.112\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.519\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.044\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eF_UND x PCR\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.186\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e273.113\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.470\u003csup\u003e***\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.312\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.629\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e5.828\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eF_STR x PCR\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.132\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e182.417\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.086\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-0.105\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.276\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.882\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"3\" rowspan=\"4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCyberbullying Victimization\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eM_UND x PCR\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.041\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e38.151\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.002\u003csup\u003e**\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-0.003\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-0.0004\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.517\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eM_STR x PCR\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.043\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e40.514\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-0.003\u003csup\u003e**\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-0.004\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-0.001\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-3.125\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eF_UND x PCR\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.041\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e38.035\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.002\u003csup\u003e**\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.0004\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.003\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.484\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eF_STR x PCR\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.043\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e39.800\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-0.0005\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-0.002\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.001\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-0.585\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eBias-corrected percentile bootstrap analyses further demonstrated that the indirect effects of parenting styles on cyberbullying victimization via social-emotional skills were moderated by parent\u0026ndash;child relationship quality (PCR). Specifically, for adolescents reporting high PCR, the indirect effects were significant: the M_UND \u0026rarr; social-emotional skills \u0026rarr; cyberbullying victimization pathway yielded b = \u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;0.017, SE\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.003, 95% CI [\u0026ndash;0.024, \u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;0.011]; the F_UND \u0026rarr; social-emotional skills \u0026rarr; cyberbullying victimization pathway yielded b = \u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;0.021, SE\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.004, 95% CI [\u0026ndash;0.029, \u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;0.014]; and the F_STR \u0026rarr; social-emotional skills \u0026rarr; cyberbullying victimization pathway yielded b = \u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;0.011, SE\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.003, 95% CI [\u0026ndash;0.018, \u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;0.007]. Conversely, for adolescents with low PCR, these indirect effects were weaker: M_UND: b = \u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;0.010, SE\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.002, 95% CI [\u0026ndash;0.014, \u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;0.006]; F_UND: b = \u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;0.012, SE\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.002, 95% CI [\u0026ndash;0.016, \u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;0.007]; and F_STR: b = \u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;0.010, SE\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.002, 95% CI [\u0026ndash;0.014, \u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;0.006]. The results for M_STR are not interpreted while the mediating effect of social-emotional skills on the M_STR\u0026rarr;Cyberbullying Victimization path was statistically non-significant ( Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab4\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e ).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab4\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 4\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eResults of the Moderated Mediation Effects Involving the Parent-child Relationship\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"6\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c5\" colnum=\"5\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c6\" colnum=\"6\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eParenting Style Types\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePCR\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eEffect\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eBootSE\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eBootLLCI\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eBootULCI\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"2\" rowspan=\"3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eM_UND\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e(M-SD)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-0.010\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.002\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-0.014\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-0.006\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e(M)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-0.014\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.003\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-0.019\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-0.009\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e(M\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;SD)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-0.017\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.003\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-0.024\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-0.011\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"2\" rowspan=\"3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eM_STR\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e(M-SD)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-0.006\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.002\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-0.010\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-0.003\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e(M)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-0.009\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.002\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-0.013\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-0.005\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e(M\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;SD)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-0.012\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.003\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-0.018\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-0.007\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"2\" rowspan=\"3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eF_UND\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e(M-SD)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-0.012\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.002\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-0.016\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-0.007\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e(M)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-0.016\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.003\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-0.022\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-0.011\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e(M\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;SD)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-0.021\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.004\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-0.029\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-0.014\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"2\" rowspan=\"3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eF_STR\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e(M-SD)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-0.010\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.002\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-0.014\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-0.006\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e(M)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-0.011\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.002\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-0.015\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-0.007\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e(M\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;SD)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-0.011\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.003\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-0.018\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-0.007\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eHowever, the test for moderated mediation involving F_STR was significant. This finding contrasts with the previous non-significant moderation effect of parent-child relationships (PCR) on the direct F_STR\u0026rarr;Social-emotional Skills path. This discrepancy may stem from PCR exerting its moderating effect specifically at the second stage (Social-emotional Skills\u0026rarr;Cyberbullying Victimization pathway), contrary to the initial hypothesis of first-stage (F_STR\u0026rarr;Social-emotional Skills) moderation. To formally test this proposition, supplementary analyses were conducted using PROCESS macro (Model 58) detailed results are presented in \u003cspan refid=\"Sec20\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003eappendix\u003c/span\u003e (see \u003cspan refid=\"Sec20\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e\u003cb\u003eAppendix\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/span\u003e \u003cb\u003e2\u003c/b\u003e). These analyses revealed that the moderated mediation conclusions involving PCR remained unchanged for the M_UND, M_STR, and F_UND parenting types. Crucially, PCR's moderating effect in the F_STR model occurred predominantly at the second stage (Social-emotional Skills\u0026rarr;Cyberbullying Victimization pathway). As this study deliberately limited its scope to examining PCR's moderating role on both the direct effect of parenting on cyberbullying victimization and its role at the first stage (parenting \u0026rarr; Social-emotional Skills path) of indirect effects, the results pertaining to second-stage moderation are not discussed further.​\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eCollectively, these findings confirm that PCR moderates the indirect associations between parenting styles and adolescents\u0026rsquo; cyberbullying victimization via social-emotional skills, thereby supporting Hypotheses 3e and Hypotheses 3f.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"5 DISCUSSION","content":"\u003cp\u003eThis study focuses on the prevalent phenomenon of cyberbullying victimization among adolescents, conducting an in-depth analysis of the differential effects of distinct parenting styles exhibited by both parents on adolescents' cyberbullying victimization. Additionally, it examines the mediating mechanisms of social-emotional skills, as well as the moderating influence of parent-child relationships. Given the severe detrimental impact of cyberbullying victimization on adolescents' psychological well-being, this research agenda holds significant practical implications within contemporary sociocultural contexts. The key findings of the study are presented in \u003cb\u003eFig.\u0026nbsp;3\u003c/b\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cb\u003eFigure 3\u003c/b\u003e. Path Diagram for Moderated Mediation Model of Parental Parenting Style\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eFirst, the study found that an understanding-listening parenting style significantly reduces the risk of adolescents experiencing cyberbullying victimization, with both parents' understanding-listening parenting demonstrating a significant protective effect. Conversely, a strict-punitive parenting style significantly increases adolescents' risk of cyberbullying victimization, primarily through direct effects. Thus, strict-punitive parenting is generally detrimental to adolescents' healthy development. understanding-listening parenting serves as a crucial protective factor against adolescent cyberbullying victimization. The emotional support, active listening, and guidance provided by parents effectively reduce the likelihood of their offspring experiencing cyberbullying victimization. Characterized by empathic responsiveness and attentive listening during interactions, this parenting style significantly mitigates the incidence of self-harm behaviors and psychological trauma resulting from cyberbullying among adolescents (Khairi et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR25\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e). Concurrently, parents employing an understanding-listening parenting style typically exhibit high levels of dispositional mindfulness. This parenting approach fosters the development of dispositional mindfulness in offspring (Golchoobi \u0026amp; Nooripour, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR54\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2025\u003c/span\u003e), thereby enabling individuals to utilize adaptive emotion regulation strategies, such as acceptance and positive reappraisal. Adolescents raised by highly mindful parents are less likely to manifest psychological problems or engage in bullying behaviors towards others as sequelae of their victimization experiences (Royuela-Colomer et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR55\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e). Conversely, strict-punitive parenting hinders the development of these critical capacities.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eFurthermore, this study delved into the mediating role of social-emotional skills in the relationship between parenting styles and adolescent cyberbullying victimization. The findings indicate that social-emotional skills play a significant mediating role between parenting styles and adolescent experiences of cyberbullying victimization. Parental understanding-listening parenting and F_STR both inhibit adolescence's cyberbullying victimization by promoting the development of their social-emotional skills, whereas social-emotional skills demonstrates nonsignificant mediating effects between M_STR and cyberbullying victimization. Specifically, understanding-listening parenting significantly reduces the likelihood of cyberbullying victimization by enhancing adolescence's social-emotional skills. This aligns with the perspective positing social-emotional skills as a core psychological buffer against cyberbullying victimization among adolescents (Den Hamer \u0026amp; Konijn, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR32\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e). understanding-listening parenting, through emotional acceptance and guidance, effectively fosters the development of adolescents' emotion regulation abilities. This capacity helps disrupt the vicious cycle of \"cybervictimization \u0026rarr; emotion dysregulation \u0026rarr; revictimization /perpetration\" (Alegre, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR57\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2011\u003c/span\u003e; Sch\u0026uuml;tz et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR58\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e), enabling adolescents to respond to conflict in a stable and adaptive manner rather than resorting to suppression or impulsive outbursts.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIntriguingly, this study demonstrates that fathers' strict parenting style exerts a significant positive influence on adolescence's development of social-emotional skills, whereas mothers' strict parenting style yields non-significant effects. This finding is explained by drawing upon the highly gendered model of parenting role differentiation in Chinese society\u0026mdash;the \" strict father, kind mother \" paradigm (Ying, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR60\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e). Within this framework, the \" strict father \" embodies the authoritative role, focused on establishing rules and enforcing behavioral discipline, while the \" kind mother \" embodies the nurturing role, primarily characterized by providing emotional support and responsive warmth. According to this cultural logic, paternal strictness benefits from greater cultural legitimacy, leading adolescence to interpret it as evidence of responsibility-oriented concern, such as a focus on the child's long-term development. Conversely, maternal strictness, representing a deviation from the expected \" kind mother \" norm, is more likely perceived as a signal of relational threat, interpreted as emotional rejection. This negative interpretation tends to trigger maladaptive reactions, including avoidance or confrontation, which ultimately counteracts the potential influence of maternal strictness on adolescence's social-emotional development, resulting in the observed non-significant findings.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eMoreover, the study further revealed that parent-child relationships serve as a key moderating variable in the core pathway through which parenting styles influence adolescent cyberbullying victimization via social-emotional skills. Specifically, adolescents' parent-child relationships moderate the impact of parenting styles on their social-emotional skills. Parent-child relationship (PCR) significantly and positively moderated the effects of both maternal and paternal understanding and listening styles on adolescence's social-emotional skills. Higher levels of parent-child relationships enhance the positive effects of authoritative parenting (characterized by understanding and attentive listening) on adolescents' social-emotional skills. Effective parent-child interactions strengthen adolescence's social-emotional skills (S. Mukhtar \u0026amp; Zahid Mahmood, 2018), thereby reducing aggressive behaviors. Furthermore, positive parent-child relationships facilitate the generalization of relational patterns to other contexts, such as peer interactions, ultimately advancing the development of interpersonal skills.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eParent-child relationships also moderate the direct effects of parenting styles on cyberbullying victimization. Specifically, higher levels of parent-child relationship quality amplify the protective effect of authoritative parenting (characterized by understanding and attentive listening) against adolescence's cyberbullying victimization, while simultaneously attenuating the marginal positive association between maternal strict-punitive parenting and such victimization. Within a trusting family climate, parental supportive behaviors are more readily internalized by offspring. Concurrently, relational harmony enhances family cohesion, thereby strengthening the direct protective effect of understanding and warm parenting style against cyberbullying victimization (Ortega-Bar\u0026oacute;n et al.,2016). Regarding understanding-listening parenting, high parent-child relationship quality reinforces its direct protective role\u0026mdash;that is, elevated levels of perceived relationship quality intensify the negative association between authoritative parenting and cyberbullying victimization risk. For maternal strict-punitive parenting, high relationship quality buffers adolescence's cyberbullying victimization risk, whereas low levels exacerbate such harm. However, perceived relationship quality exhibits no significant moderating effect on paternal strict-punitive parenting, either in pathways influencing social-emotional skills or in direct effects on cyberbullying victimization. This divergence likely stems from gendered caregiving dynamics: mothers typically shoulder greater emotional care responsibilities in daily life, engage in more frequent interactions with offspring, and elicit stronger emotional dependence from offspring. When mothers employ strict-punitive practices, high perceived relationship quality partially counteracts the negative impact, as adolescence tend to interpret maternal strictness as \"concern rather than rejection\" (Fu, 2024). In contrast, fathers generally engage in less daily emotional reciprocity with adolescence, resulting in lower emotional expectations from adolescence. Even when parent-child relationships are moderately positive, adolescence rarely anticipate paternal emotional support as a buffer.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"6 CONCLUSION","content":"\u003cp\u003eThis study comprehensively investigates the mechanisms through which parenting styles influence adolescent cyberbullying victimization, confirming that understanding-listening parenting serves as a critical protective factor significantly mitigating cyberbullying victimization risk. Firstly, understanding-listening parenting, which is characterized by parental understanding and active listening, directly reduces cyberbullying victimization vulnerability by helping adolescents construct psychological buffers against online conflicts, thereby effectively suppressing susceptibility to victimization. Conversely, strict-punitive parenting constitutes a significant risk factor, primarily through direct escalation of cyberbullying victimization likelihood.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eSecondly, adolescents' social-emotional skills are identified as the core mediating variable linking parenting styles to cyberbullying victimization outcomes. Understanding-listening parenting enhances social emotional skills (encompassing emotion regulation, empathy, and conflict resolution skills), which can reduce adolescents' targeting by cyberbullies. Although strict-punitive parenting exerts a countervailing suppression effect on cyberbullying victimization through enhancing social-emotional skills, this insufficient protective mechanism is outweighed by its direct detrimental impact, resulting in a net increase in victimization risk\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eFurthermore, parent-child relationship quality functions as a key moderator, akin to a \"magnifying lens.\" High-quality relationships amplify the positive impact of understanding-listening parenting on social-emotional skills development and cyberbullying victimization protection, while simultaneously buffering the adverse effects of strict-punitive parenting on victimization risk. Conversely, low-quality relationships diminish understanding-listening parenting's protective capacity and exacerbate the negative outcomes associated with strict-punitive parenting, strengthening its positive correlation with cyberbullying victimization.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThese findings provide robust empirical support for the social ecological model and family systems theory, underscoring the profound influence of micro-level interactions within families on adolescent online behaviors. Parents play a pivotal role in child development, as their parenting styles directly shape adolescence's values, psychological well-being, and behavioral patterns. Consequently, there is an urgent need to promote warm and understanding-listening parenting to foster nurturing environments characterized by warmth and support, with particular emphasis on the pivotal role of mothers. Efforts should prioritize building harmonious parent-child relationships grounded in trust and emotional bonding, while integrating social-emotional skills into core developmental strategies. Additionally, timely professional interventions​ must be provided for adolescents exposed to strict-punitive parenting or strained parent-child relationships to break the vicious cycle.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eCollectively, cultivating positive family environments, enhancing adolescents' social-emotional skills, and fostering cohesive parent-child relationships constitute an effective multi-tiered approach to preventing and intervening in adolescent cyberbullying perpetration or victimization.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cb\u003eLimitations \u0026amp; Prospects\u003c/b\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAlthough this study systematically elucidates the mechanism through which parenting styles influence cyberbullying victimization via social-emotional skills, it exhibits limitations in sample representativeness​and cross-cultural generalizability. The sample was confined to 15-year-old adolescents in Suzhou, China, restricting the generalizability of findings to broader populations. Additionally, cultural variations in parenting practices and cyberbullying manifestations were not fully explored. Future research should expand sampling to diverse demographic groups and incorporate cross-cultural comparative studies. Triangulation with multi-source data is also recommended to enhance analytical rigor.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Declarations","content":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAuthor contributions\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eHuang Xuzhong and Hao Yipu contributed to the Methodology; Cheng Ruxu wrote the original draft and performed Data curation; Hao Yipu conducted the Formal analysis; Cao Jing and Wang Xi provided Supervision; Zhu Qiuyue handled Project administration; Huang Xuzhong was responsible for reviewing and editing the manuscript.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAcknowledgments\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eWe would like to thank the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) for granting access to the Study on Social and Emotional Skills (SSES 2019) database. Its comprehensive data enabled empirical analysis of a representative sample of 15-year-old students from Suzhou, China. Institutional support from the Normal School of Vocational Techniques at Hubei University of Technology and the School of Education at Central China Normal University was indispensable. We thank both institutions for their academic resources, collaborative frameworks, and intellectual engagement, particularly in theoretical structuring and methodological refinement.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eFUNDING INFORMATION\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThis research was funded by the Humanities and Social Science Project of Ministry of Education (China), \u0026quot;Research on tracking evaluation and optimization strategy of \u0026apos;county management and school employment\u0026apos; policy from the perspective of quality and balance\u0026quot;, Grant number 23YJC880045;This research is also funded by the \u0026quot;Educational Statistics\u0026quot; research project of the Graduate Teaching Reform Project of Hubei University of Technology, Grant number 2025025. The content is that of the authors and does not represent the position of the founding sponsor, which had no role in the study design , data analysis or interpretation, or in the writing of the report.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eEthics statement\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAll data used in this study were obtained from OECD\u0026rsquo;s publicly accessible databases and were released under an application to the OECD SSES project team. In accordance with that Team\u0026rsquo; s requirements, the investigators strictly adhered to the following conditions: the social and emotional skills assessment items may be used solely for the present research project; no confidential materials may be disclosed to any third party; and any subsequent publications must be shared with the OECD SSES project team.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eDuring the original data-collection phase, informed consent was secured from all participants.All SSES 2019 materials\u0026mdash;including assessment instruments, datasets, and documents marked \u0026ldquo;secure\u0026rdquo;\u0026mdash;have remained strictly confidential. For the present study\u0026rsquo; s primary sample of 15-year-old students in Suzhou, personal identifiers were replaced with a \u0026ldquo;student complete ID,\u0026rdquo; \u0026ldquo;region ID\u0026rdquo;, and \u0026ldquo;school ID\u0026rdquo;, ensuring that neither the researchers nor readers can identify any private or personally identifiable information.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAccordingly, the investigators carefully reviewed the data-collection procedures, evaluated the reliability and validity of the measures, and acquired a comprehensive understanding of the entire dataset, with particular attention to the subsample analysed here. On this basis, the researchers have endeavoured to ensure impartiality and transparency in data analysis, interpretation of results, and disclosure of potential biases or limitations. Finally, the investigators declare that they have no conflicts of interest that could influence the findings or their interpretation.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003ePatient Consent Statement\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThis study utilizes the publicly available SSES (2019) data published by the OECD. This survey rigorously obtained informed consent from all participants and their guardians. The authors formally submitted a data usage request to the OECD and received explicit approval and authorization to utilize this dataset. Detailed procedures and methodological information regarding consent acquisition and data collection are documented in the official SSES Technical Report.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eCONFLICT OF INTEREST STATEMENT\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe authors declare that they have no actual or perceived conflicts of interest in the conduct and reporting of the research.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAvailability of data\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe data that support the findings of this study are openly available in the OECD SSES 2019 (Survey on Social and Emotional Skills) database at https://www.oecd.org/education/ceri/social-emotional-skills-study/.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAuthors Contact Details\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eXuzhong Huang, Normal School of Vocational Techniques, Hubei University of Technology, Wuhan 430068, China. [email protected](X.H.) ;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eProfile page URL:\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003ehttps://nsvte.hbut.edu.cn/info/1010/1872.htm\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRuxu Cheng, Normal School of Vocational Techniques, Hubei University of Technology, Wuhan 430068, China. [email protected](R.C.); Student\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eYipu Hao, School of Education, Central China Normal University, Wuhan 430079, China. [email protected]; Ph.D Student\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eJing Cao , Normal School of Vocational Techniques, Hubei University of Technology, Wuhan 430068, China. [email protected](J.C.);\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eProfile page URL:\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003ehttps://nsvte.hbut.edu.cn/info/1010/1011.htm\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eXi Wang, Normal School of Vocational Techniques, Hubei University of Technology, Wuhan 430068, China. [email protected](X.W.);\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eProfile page URL:\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003ehttps://nsvte.hbut.edu.cn/info/1010/1012.htm\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eQiuyue Zhu1*, Normal School of Vocational Techniques, Hubei University of Technology, Wuhan 430068, China. [email protected](Q.Z.) ;corresponding authors\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eProfile page URL:\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003ehttps://nsvte.hbut.edu.cn/info/1010/1873.htm\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eEthics Declaration\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAll data used in this study were obtained from OECD\u0026rsquo;s publicly accessible databases and were released under an application to the OECD SSES project team. In accordance with that Team\u0026rsquo; s requirements, the investigators strictly adhered to the following conditions: the social and emotional skills assessment items may be used solely for the present research project; no confidential materials may be disclosed to any third party; and any subsequent publications must be shared with the OECD SSES project team.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eDuring the original data-collection phase, informed consent was secured from all participants.All SSES 2019 materials\u0026mdash;including assessment instruments, datasets, and documents marked \u0026ldquo;secure\u0026rdquo;\u0026mdash;have remained strictly confidential. For the present study\u0026rsquo; s primary sample of 15-year-old students in Suzhou, personal identifiers were replaced with a \u0026ldquo;student complete ID,\u0026rdquo; \u0026ldquo;region ID\u0026rdquo;, and \u0026ldquo;school ID\u0026rdquo;, ensuring that neither the researchers nor readers can identify any private or personally identifiable information.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAccordingly, the investigators carefully reviewed the data-collection procedures, evaluated the reliability and validity of the measures, and acquired a comprehensive understanding of the entire dataset, with particular attention to the subsample analysed here. On this basis, the researchers have endeavoured to ensure impartiality and transparency in data analysis, interpretation of results, and disclosure of potential biases or limitations. Finally, the investigators declare that they have no conflicts of interest that could influence the findings or their interpretation.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"References","content":"\u003col\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eBrown, K., Jackson, M., \u0026amp; Cassidy, W. (2006). Cyber-bullying: Developing policy to direct responses that are equitable and effective in addressing this special form of bullying. Canadian Journal of Educational Administration and Policy, (57).\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u0026nbsp; Iorga, M., Pop, L. M., Croitoru, I., Hanganu, E., \u0026amp; Anton-Păduraru, D. T. (2022). Exploring the importance of gender, family affluence, parenting style and loneliness in cyberbullying victimization and aggression among Romanian adolescents. Behavioral Sciences, 12(11), 457.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u0026nbsp; Mar\u0026iacute;n-L\u0026oacute;pez, I., Zych, I., Ortega-Ruiz, R., Hunter, S. C., \u0026amp; Llorent, V. J. (2020). Relations between online emotional content use, social and emotional competencies and cyberbullying. Children and youth services review, 108, 104647.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u0026nbsp; Zhu, C., Huang, S., Evans, R., \u0026amp; Zhang, W. (2021). Cyberbullying among adolescents and children: a comprehensive review of the global situation, risk factors, and preventive measures. Frontiers in public health, 9, 634909.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u0026nbsp; Peled, Y. (2019). Cyberbullying and its influence on academic, social, and emotional development of undergraduate students. Heliyon, 5(3).\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u0026nbsp; Llorent, V. J., Diaz-Chaves, A., Zych, I., Twardowska-Staszek, E., \u0026amp; Mar\u0026iacute;n-L\u0026oacute;pez, I. (2021). Bullying and cyberbullying in Spain and Poland, and their relation to social, emotional and moral competencies. School mental health, 13(3), 535-547.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u0026nbsp; Zhong, J., Zheng, Y., Huang, X., Mo, D., Gong, J., Li, M., \u0026amp; Huang, J. (2021). Study of the influencing factors of cyberbullying among Chinese college students incorporated with digital citizenship: from the perspective of individual students. Frontiers in psychology, 12, 621418.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u0026nbsp; Peter, I. K., \u0026amp; Petermann, F. (2018). Cyberbullying: A concept analysis of defining attributes and additional influencing factors. Computers in human behavior, 86, 350-366.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u0026nbsp; Shaikh, F. B., Rehman, M., \u0026amp; Amin, A. (2020). Cyberbullying: A systematic literature review to identify the factors impelling university students towards cyberbullying. IEEE Access, 8, 148031-148051.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u0026nbsp; Cassidy, W., Faucher, C., \u0026amp; Jackson, M. (2021). Bullying among college and university students. The Wiley Blackwell handbook of bullying: A comprehensive and international review of research and intervention, 2, 37-54.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u0026nbsp; Padir, M. A., Ayas, T., \u0026amp; Horzum, M. B. (2021). Examining the Relationship among Internet Parental Style, Personality, and Cyberbullying/Victimization. International Journal of Technology in Education and Science, 5(1), 56-69.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u0026nbsp; Mart\u0026iacute;nez, I., Murgui, S., Garc\u0026iacute;a, O. F., \u0026amp; Garcia, F. (2019). Parenting in the digital era: Protective and risk parenting styles for traditional bullying and cyberbullying victimization. Computers in human behavior, 90, 84-92.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u0026nbsp; Yang, C., Chen, C., Lin, X., \u0026amp; Chan, M. K. (2021). School-wide social emotional learning and cyberbullying victimization among middle and high school students: Moderating role of school climate. School Psychology, 36(2), 75.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u0026nbsp; Kong, C., \u0026amp; Yasmin, F. (2022). Impact of parenting style on early childhood learning: mediating role of parental self-efficacy. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, 928629.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u0026nbsp; Baumrind, D. (1991). The influence of parenting style on adolescent competence and substance use. The journal of early adolescence, 11(1), 56-95.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u0026nbsp; Kuppens, S., \u0026amp; Ceulemans, E. (2019). Parenting styles: A closer look at a well-known concept. Journal of child and family studies, 28, 168-181.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u0026nbsp; Ao, M.-Q., Luo, D., Hou, H., Li, M.-N., \u0026amp; Yang, B.-X. (2025). Latent classes of parenting styles and their association with non-suicidal self-injury in adolescents: The mediating role of difficulties in emotion regulation. Chinese Journal of Clinical Psychology, 33(2), 254\u0026ndash;260. https://doi.org/10.16128/j.cnki.1005-3611.2025.02.005Ao, M.-Q., Luo, D., Hou, H., Li, M.-N., \u0026amp; Yang, B.-X. (2025). Latent classes of parenting styles and their association with non-suicidal self-injury in adolescents: The mediating role of difficulties in emotion regulation. Chinese Journal of Clinical Psychology, 33(2), 254\u0026ndash;260. https://doi.org/10.16128/j.cnki.1005-3611.2025.02.005\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u0026nbsp; Li, Y.-F., Tang, Y.-P., \u0026amp; Huang, Z.-J. (2025). The influence of parenting styles on adolescents\u0026apos; empathy\u0026mdash;A comparative analysis based on SSES 2019 data. Journal of Comparative Education, (1), 100\u0026ndash;112.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u0026nbsp; Moreno\u0026ndash;Ruiz, D., Mart\u0026iacute;nez\u0026ndash;Ferrer, B., \u0026amp; Garc\u0026iacute;a\u0026ndash;Bacete, F. (2019). Parenting styles, cyberaggression, and cybervictimization among adolescents. Computers in Human Behavior, 93, 252-259.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u0026nbsp; Legate, N., Weinstein, N., \u0026amp; Przybylski, A. K. (2019). Parenting strategies and adolescents\u0026apos; cyberbullying behaviors: Evidence from a preregistered study of parent\u0026ndash;child dyads. Journal of youth and adolescence, 48, 399-409.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u0026nbsp; Iorga, M., Pop, L. M., Croitoru, I., Hanganu, E., \u0026amp; Anton-Păduraru, D. T. (2022). Exploring the importance of gender, family affluence, parenting style and loneliness in cyberbullying victimization and aggression among Romanian adolescents. Behavioral Sciences, 12(11), 457.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u0026nbsp; Broll, R., \u0026amp; Reynolds, D. (2021). Parental responsibility, blameworthiness, and bullying: Parenting style and adolescents\u0026apos; experiences with traditional bullying and cyberbullying. Criminal justice policy review, 32(5), 447-468.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u0026nbsp; Siddiqui, F. A., Siddiqui, S. M., Siddiqui, A., \u0026amp; Afzal, K. (2024). The Role of Parenting Styles in the Development of Cyber Bullying Behavior among University Students. Journal of Media \u0026amp; Communication (JMC), 5(1).\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u0026nbsp; Patchin, J. W., \u0026amp; Hinduja, S. (2022). Cyberbullying among tweens in the United States: Prevalence, impact, and hel** behaviors. The Journal of Early Adolescence, 42(3), 414-430.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u0026nbsp; Khairi, A. K., Li, W., Yeo, S. H., Tong, Y. S., Nazri, M., Rahman, B. A., \u0026amp; Motevalli, S. (2022). The importance of emotional competence in preventing cyberbullying: the role of family as moderator. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, 12(4), 262-278.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u0026nbsp; Sharif, S., Irum, A., Noreen, H., Masood, H., \u0026amp; Sameeullah, H. (2024). Correlation between parenting styles and social communication in children with hearing impairment. LIAQUAT MEDICAL RESEARCH JOURNAL, 6(3).\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u0026nbsp; Wang, J., Huang, X., Li, Z., Chen, K., **, Z., He, J., ... \u0026amp; Liu, Z. (2024). Effect of parenting style on the emotional and behavioral problems among Chinese adolescents: the mediating effect of resilience. BMC public health, 24(1), 787.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u0026nbsp; Segrin, C., \u0026amp; Flora, J. (2019). Fostering social and emotional intelligence: What are the best current strategies in parenting?. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 13(3), e12439.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u0026nbsp; Bhide, S., Sciberras, E., Anderson, V., Hazell, P., \u0026amp; Nicholson, J. M. (2019). Association between parenting style and socio-emotional and academic functioning in children with and without ADHD: a community-based study. Journal of attention disorders, 23(5), 463-474.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u0026nbsp; O\u0026apos;Reilly, J., \u0026amp; Peterson, C. C. (2014). Theory of mind at home: Linking authoritative and authoritarian parenting styles to children\u0026apos;s social understanding. Early child development and care, 184(12), 1934-1947.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u0026nbsp; Ketelaar, L., Wiefferink, C. H., Frijns, J. H., \u0026amp; Rieffe, C. (2017). Children with cochlear implants and their parents: Relations between parenting style and children\u0026apos;s social-emotional functioning. Ear and Hearing, 38(3), 321-331.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u0026nbsp; Den Hamer, A. H., \u0026amp; Konijn, E. A. (2016). Can emotion regulation serve as a tool in combating cyberbullying?. Personality and Individual Differences, 102, 1-6.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u0026nbsp; Mart\u0026iacute;nez-Monteagudo, M. C., Delgado, B., Garc\u0026iacute;a-Fern\u0026aacute;ndez, J. M., \u0026amp; Ru\u0026iacute;z-Esteban, C. (2020). Cyberbullying in the university setting. Relationship with emotional problems and adaptation to the university. Frontiers in psychology, 10, 3074.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u0026nbsp; Kowalski, R. M., Giumetti, G. W., Schroeder, A. N., \u0026amp; Lattanner, M. R. (2014). Bullying in the digital age: a critical review and meta-analysis of cyberbullying research among youth. Psychological bulletin, 140(4), 1073.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u0026nbsp; Arat\u0026oacute;, N., Zsid\u0026oacute;, A. N., Rivny\u0026aacute;k, A., Peley, B., \u0026amp; Labadi, B. (2022). Risk and protective factors in cyberbullying: the role of family, social support and emotion regulation. International journal of bullying prevention, 4(2), 160-173.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u0026nbsp; Rose, C. A., \u0026amp; Espelage, D. L. (2012). Risk and protective factors associated with the bullying involvement of students with emotional and behavioral disorders. Behavioral Disorders, 37(3), 133-148.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u0026nbsp; Tani, F., Pascuzzi, D., \u0026amp; Raffagnino, R. (2018). The relationship between perceived parenting style and emotion regulation abilities in adulthood. Journal of adult development, 25, 1-12.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u0026nbsp; Wang, R., \u0026amp; Cancan Jin, C. (2025). Parenting styles and suicidal ideation among Chinese college students: The mediating role of perceived social support. Acta Psychologica, 255, 104992.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u0026nbsp; Sukumaran, P. A., \u0026amp; Balakrishna, B. B. (2021). Parenting styles and social-emotional development of preschool children. International Journal of Contemporary Pediatrics, 8(12), 1952.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u0026nbsp; Ge, L., Yap, C. W., Ong, R., \u0026amp; Heng, B. H. (2017). Social isolation, loneliness and their relationships with depressive symptoms: A population-based study. PloS one, 12(8), e0182145.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u0026nbsp; Bolenbaugh, M., Foley‐Nicpon, M., Young, R., Tully, M., Grunewald, N., \u0026amp; Ramirez, M. (2020). Parental perceptions of gender differences in child technology use and cyberbullying. Psychology in the Schools, 57(11), 1657-1679.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u0026nbsp;Mesch, G. S. (2018). Parent\u0026ndash;child connections on social networking sites and cyberbullying. Youth \u0026amp; Society, 50(8), 1145-1162.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u0026nbsp;Elsaesser, C., Russell, B., Ohannessian, C. M., \u0026amp; Patton, D. (2017). Parenting in a digital age: A review of parents\u0026apos; role in preventing adolescent cyberbullying. Aggression and violent behavior, 35, 62-72.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u0026nbsp; Ho, T. T. Q., Li, C., \u0026amp; Gu, C. (2020). Cyberbullying victimization and depressive symptoms in Vietnamese university students: Examining social support as a mediator. International Journal of Law, Crime and Justice, 63, 100422.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u0026nbsp; Larra\u0026ntilde;aga, E., Yubero, S., Ovejero, A., \u0026amp; Navarro, R. (2016). Loneliness, parent-child communication and cyberbullying victimization among Spanish youths. Computers in Human Behavior, 65, 1-8.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u0026nbsp; Elsaesser, C., Russell, B., Ohannessian, C. M., \u0026amp; Patton, D. (2017). Parenting in a digital age: A review of parents\u0026apos; role in preventing adolescent cyberbullying. Aggression and violent behavior, 35, 62-72.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u0026nbsp; Thomas, H. J., Connor, J. P., \u0026amp; Scott, J. G. (2015). Integrating traditional bullying and cyberbullying: challenges of definition and measurement in adolescents\u0026ndash;a review. Educational psychology review, 27, 135-152.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u0026nbsp; De Fruyt, F., Wille, B., \u0026amp; John, O. P. (2015). Employability in the 21st century: Complex (interactive) problem solving and other essential skills. Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 8(2), 276-281.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u0026nbsp; Abrahams, L., Pancorbo, G., Primi, R., Santos, D., Kyllonen, P., John, O. P., \u0026amp; De Fruyt, F. (2019). Social-emotional skill assessment in children and adolescents: Advances and challenges in personality, clinical, and educational contexts. Psychological Assessment, 31(4), 460.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u0026nbsp; Lipnevich, A. A., Cred\u0026egrave;, M., Hahn, E., Spinath, F. M., Roberts, R. D., \u0026amp; Preckel, F. (2017). How distinctive are morningness and eveningness from the Big Five factors of personality? A meta-analytic investigation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 112(3), 491.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u0026nbsp; Kankara\u0026scaron;, M., \u0026amp; Suarez-Alvarez, J. (2019). Assessment framework of the OECD Study on Social and Emotional Skills. OECD education working papers, (207), 0_1-109.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u0026nbsp; Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J. Y., \u0026amp; Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: a critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of applied psychology, 88(5), 879.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u0026nbsp; Khairi, A. K., Li, W., Yeo, S. H., Tong, Y. S., Nazri, M., Rahman, B. A., \u0026amp; Motevalli, S. (2022). The importance of emotional competence in preventing cyberbullying: the role of family as moderator. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, 12(4), 262-278.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u0026nbsp; Golchoobi, S., \u0026amp; Nooripour, R. (2025). Mindfulness, Cyberbullying and Cognitive Emotion Regulation in Adolescents. Journal of Research and Health, 15(1), 81-92.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u0026nbsp; Royuela-Colomer, E., Calvete, E., G\u0026aacute;mez-Guadix, M., \u0026amp; Orue, I. (2018). The protective role of dispositional mindfulness against the perpetuation of cyberbullying victimization and perpetration among adolescents. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 21(11), 703-710.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u0026nbsp; Hamer, A. H., \u0026amp; Konijn, E. A. (2016). Can emotion regulation serve as a tool in combating cyberbullying?. Personality and Individual Differences, 102, 1-6.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u0026nbsp; Alegre, A. (2011). Parenting styles and children\u0026apos;s emotional intelligence: What do we know?. The Family Journal, 19(1), 56-62.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u0026nbsp; Sch\u0026uuml;tz, J., B\u0026auml;ker, N., \u0026amp; Koglin, U. (2022). Bullying in school and cyberbullying among adolescents without and with special educational needs in emotional\u0026ndash;social development and in learning in Germany. Psychology in the Schools, 59(9), 1737-1754.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u0026nbsp; Rose, C. A., \u0026amp; Espelage, D. L. (2012). Risk and protective factors associated with the bullying involvement of students with emotional and behavioral disorders. Behavioral Disorders, 37(3), 133-148.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eYing, S. U. N. (2021). Strict Father, Loving Mother/Tiger Mother, Cat Dad? The Cognition of Parental Image in College Students\u0026rsquo; mind.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u0026nbsp; Mukhtar, S., \u0026amp; Mahmood, Z. (2018). Moderating role of perceived social support between perceived parenting styles and relational aggression in adolescents. Journal of Aggression, Maltreatment \u0026amp; Trauma, 27(8), 831-845.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u0026nbsp; Ortega-Bar\u0026oacute;n, J., Buelga, S., \u0026amp; Cava, M. J. (2016). The influence of school and family environment on adolescent victims of cyberbullying. Comunicar, 46(24), 57-65.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u0026nbsp; Fu, L. The influence of parenting styles on problem behaviors in children aged 3-6: The mediating role of parent-child relationships [Master\u0026apos;s thesis, Xinyang Normal University]. CNKI. https://doi.org/10.27435/d.cnki.gxsfc.2024.000171\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003c/ol\u003e"}],"fulltextSource":"","fullText":"","funders":[],"hasAdminPriorityOnWorkflow":false,"hasManuscriptDocX":true,"hasOptedInToPreprint":true,"hasPassedJournalQc":"","hasAnyPriority":false,"hideJournal":true,"highlight":"","institution":"","isAcceptedByJournal":false,"isAuthorSuppliedPdf":false,"isDeskRejected":"","isHiddenFromSearch":false,"isInQc":false,"isInWorkflow":false,"isPdf":false,"isPdfUpToDate":true,"isWithdrawnOrRetracted":false,"journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"researchsquare","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"/submission","title":"Research Square","twitterHandle":"researchsquare","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"","reportingPortfolio":"","inReviewEnabled":false,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true},"keywords":"Cyberbullying Victimization, Parenting Styles, Social-emotional Skills, Parent-child Relationships, SSES","lastPublishedDoi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-7712506/v1","lastPublishedDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-7712506/v1","license":{"name":"CC BY 4.0","url":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"},"manuscriptAbstract":"\u003cp\u003eParenting styles are significant factors that cannot be overlooked concerning adolescent cyberbullying victimization.This study primarily investigates the mediating role of social-emotional skills in the relationship between parenting styles and adolescent cyberbullying victimization, as well as the moderating role of parent-child relationships.\u003cstrong\u003e \u003c/strong\u003eThe study utilized OECD SSES2019 survey data from Suzhou , China, with 15-year-old adolescent students in Suzhou City as primary participants. The study focused on four variables: parenting styles, social-emotional skills, cyberbullying victimization, and parent-child relationships. Data analysis was conducted using SPSS Process macro to perform moderated mediation analysis. The results indicated :(1) Understanding-listening parenting style negatively predicts adolescent cyberbullying victimization, while strict-punitive parenting style positively predicts the probability of cyberbullying victimization; (2) The adolescents' social-emotional skills partially mediates the relationship between parental parenting styles (excepting maternal strict-punitive parenting) and cyberbullying victimization; (3) The parent-child relationship plays a moderating role in both the direct pathway \"parenting styles→cyberbullying victimization\" and the indirect pathway \"parenting styles→social-emotional skills→cyberbullying victimization\",but this moderating effect varies across different parenting styles. The parent-child relationship significantly moderated the pathways of maternal understanding-listening parenting and maternal strict-punitive parenting, as well as the pathway of paternal listening-understanding parenting. However, neither pathway of paternal strict-punitive parenting was moderated by parent-child relationship.This study confirms that while understanding-listening parenting reduces adolescent cyberbullying victimization and strict-punitive parenting increases it, adolescents' social-emotional skills mediate these relationships. Critically, high-quality parent-child relationships amplify protective effects by both directly moderating parenting styles' influence and indirectly strengthening parenting’s positive impact on social-emotional skills.​Thus, the interplay of parenting styles, parent-child relationship, and skill development collectively determines victimization risk.\u003c/p\u003e","manuscriptTitle":"The Influence of Parenting Styles on Cyberbullying Victimization: The Mediating Role of Social-emotional Skills and The Moderating Role of Parent-child Relationships","msid":"","msnumber":"","nonDraftVersions":[{"code":1,"date":"2026-01-12 06:12:15","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-7712506/v1","editorialEvents":[{"type":"communityComments","content":0}],"status":"published","journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"researchsquare","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"/submission","title":"Research Square","twitterHandle":"researchsquare","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"","reportingPortfolio":"","inReviewEnabled":false,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true}}],"origin":"","ownerIdentity":"edd1368f-be57-45b5-9767-38aff04f0438","owner":[],"postedDate":"January 12th, 2026","published":true,"recentEditorialEvents":[],"rejectedJournal":[],"revision":"","amendment":"","status":"posted","subjectAreas":[{"id":60792135,"name":"Social science/Criminology"},{"id":60792136,"name":"Biological sciences/Psychology"},{"id":60792137,"name":"Social science/Psychology"},{"id":60792138,"name":"Social science/Sociology"}],"tags":[],"updatedAt":"2026-02-26T06:57:07+00:00","versionOfRecord":[],"versionCreatedAt":"2026-01-12 06:12:15","video":"","vorDoi":"","vorDoiUrl":"","workflowStages":[]},"version":"v1","identity":"rs-7712506","journalConfig":"researchsquare"},"__N_SSP":true},"page":"/article/[identity]/[[...version]]","query":{"redirect":"/article/rs-7712506","identity":"rs-7712506","version":["v1"]},"buildId":"XKTyCvWXoU3ODBz1xrDgd","isFallback":false,"isExperimentalCompile":false,"dynamicIds":[84888],"gssp":true,"scriptLoader":[]}