Influence of Chinese adolescents’ BMI on peer relationships: The moderating role of teachers’ experience and gender

Influence of Chinese adolescents’ BMI on peer relationships: The moderating role of teachers’ experience and gender | 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 Research Article Influence of Chinese adolescents’ BMI on peer relationships: The moderating role of teachers’ experience and gender Cheng-long Miao, Shwa Zhang, Myoungjin Shin This is a preprint; it has not been peer reviewed by a journal. https://doi.org/ 10.21203/rs.3.rs-7072936/v1 This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License Status: Under Review Version 1 posted 7 You are reading this latest preprint version Abstract This study examines the influence of body mass index (BMI) on peer relationships among students, focusing on teacher-related factors (teacher experience and gender) using hierarchical linear and regression analyses. Study 1 applied a hierarchical linear model to 2013–2014 China Education Panel Survey (CEPS) data, analyzing 100 teachers (Level 2) and 2,002 students (Level 1). It explored how teacher experience and gender moderated the relationship between student BMI and peer relationships. Study 2 used survey research with 413 students to replicate Study 1’s findings through hierarchical regression analysis. In Study 1, students with higher BMIs had poorer peer relationships. However, this negative association was reduced when the teacher was male or had more teaching experience. In Study 2, the negative BMI–peer relationship was again mitigated when the homeroom teacher was male, replicating Study 1’s results. Although teacher experience showed no significant effect in Study 2, a new finding emerged: when male homeroom teachers had relatively little experience, higher BMI was associated with better peer relationships. These findings suggest that teacher gender and experience can moderate the social effects of BMI among students. Both panel data and survey research confirm their role in student social adjustment. As such, teacher-related factors may serve as valuable references for educational policy and teacher training aimed at supporting students facing peer rejection due to weight-related stigma. BMI teacher experience teacher gender peer relationship Figures Figure 1 Figure 2 Figure 3 Introduction Peer relationships among students have become a central topic in the field of school education, increasingly emphasizing the importance of exploring factors that affect students’ social interactions and psychological well-being [1,2]. During middle school, a period marked by adolescence, social demands and peer relationships play a crucial role in psychological development [3]. At this stage, students’ popularity can be influenced not only by individual characteristics (e.g., BMI) but also by teacher-level factors such as teacher gender and teacher experience [4,5]. Research has shown that teacher experience affects both academic performance and the formation of social relationships [6]. Within China’s educational system in particular, the teachers’ authority plays a significant role in classroom culture and group hierarchy [7]. It is therefore important to examine how homeroom teachers’ characteristics influence students’ psychological changes and development. Among teacher characteristics, gender plays a significant role in influencing students’ psychological development. Research indicates that male and female teachers differ in their teaching styles and ways of interacting with students [8]. Female teachers tend to be more attentive to students’ appearance and emotional needs, whereas male teachers are generally less so [5]. These differences may have varying effects on the formation of students’ social relationships. During school years, students spend more time with friends and teachers than with their families, progressing through adolescence under the care of their teachers. Therefore, teacher characteristics significantly impact adolescents’ social relationships and psychological development. Statistically, students are nested within teachers, making it essential to use analytical methods that account for this structure, such as hierarchical linear modeling, to examine how teacher characteristics influence students’ social relationship formation. This topic will be addressed in Study 1. Furthermore, in Study 2, the findings derived from Study 1 will be replicated or revalidated through a survey to ensure the validity of the effects of teacher characteristics on students’ social development. BMI and Peer Relationships Adolescents’ BMI is one of the key factors influencing their popularity among peers and plays an important role in shaping peer relationships. BMI not only reflects physical health but also affects first impressions in social settings, particularly among adolescents, where appearance and body shape are critical in social interactions [9]. Students within the normal BMI range are generally perceived as having a healthy body, which aligns with societal expectations and thus earns them greater likability among peers. These students tend to have higher self-efficacy and stronger social initiative, increasing their chances of accessing social resources and opportunities [10,11]. In contrast, students outside the normal BMI range are more likely to be negatively stigmatized as “unhealthy,” “lazy,” or “physically weak,” which may result in ridicule from peers or difficulty integrating into mainstream social groups [12]. Therefore, adolescents with a normal BMI are more likely to receive positive attention and be advantageous in social interactions, leading to increased popularity among peers. Interaction Between Teacher Experience, Student BMI, and Social Relationships Teacher experience is closely linked to teacher efficacy, which in turn can shape students’ psychological outcomes [13]. In general, experienced teachers demonstrate higher levels of teacher efficacy and are more capable of managing students and responding effectively to school organizational culture [14]. Teachers who are well-liked by students tend to foster a more positive classroom atmosphere and enhance students’ sense of belonging and social interaction skills [15]. Furthermore, maintaining strong social networks with fellow teachers can indirectly affect students’ social adjustment [16]. Students with higher BMIs are more likely to experience peer rejection or negative evaluations based on appearance compared to students with lower BMIs [17,18]. However, experienced teachers are skilled in employing inclusive and supportive instructional strategies that help mitigate the negative social effects experienced by students with higher BMIs [19,20]. Veteran teachers not only provide stronger in-class support but also utilize their social relationships to promote inclusivity within peer groups [21]. In addition, experienced teachers enhance positive interactions with students and create inclusive classroom environments by leveraging their social influence, thereby improving the social adaptability of students with higher BMIs [22]. The more teaching experience a teacher has, the more effective their classroom management and social influence, which increases their capacity to reduce the social disadvantages that students with higher BMIs may face. Ultimately, teachers with extensive experience are better equipped to effectively support students’ psychological development and social adaptation Interaction Between Teacher Gender, Student BMI, and Social Relationships Female teachers tend to make greater use of observation strategies in the classroom and are generally more sensitive and responsive to students’ physical appearance and body shape [23-25]. In contrast, male teachers are more likely to focus on students’ academic achievement, behavioral development, and overall growth and maturity [26,27]. Due to their attentive and detail-oriented nature, female teachers are more likely to show concern and care for overweight students and actively intervene to support forming their social relationships. On the other hand, male teachers often adopt a more inclusive and goal-oriented perspective toward the class. They are more likely to structure social interactions within the classroom based on academic achievement and classroom participation, rather than students’ appearance. Female teachers generally form closer social networks within the classroom and are more actively involved in students’ daily concerns [23]. These characteristics may help students with higher BMIs receive support more easily from the teacher, but they also risk drawing excessive attention to these students, potentially intensifying their body image anxiety [24,28]. Male teachers, on the other hand, tend to maintain a certain distance in their relationships with students and focus classroom interactions more on academic achievement and teamwork activities [29]. In the case of male teachers, overweight students are less likely to be treated as requiring special attention and more likely to be regarded as equal members of the class working together toward common goals. Therefore, teacher gender directly influences classroom culture. We accordingly expect that differences based on teacher gender will also be reflected in the social adaptation of students with higher BMIs. Study 1 Participants This study used the CEPS to examine how BMI influences peer relationships depending on teacher characteristics, considering the nested relationship between teachers and students through a hierarchical linear model. CEPS is a large-scale, nationally representative survey conducted by Renmin University of China and organized by the National Survey Research Center. The 2013–2014 survey data and related documentation are publicly accessible at the official website ( http://ceps.ruc.edu.cn ). It analyzes the effects of family, school, community, and individual factors on educational outcomes and explores how these outcomes shape individuals’ life trajectories. CEPS was conducted in 2013 and 2014, targeting students from Grade 7 (first year of middle school) to Grade 9 (third year of middle school). For this study, one homeroom teacher was randomly selected from each of the 100 schools, resulting in a total of 100 teachers (male = 39, female = 61, M age = 38.30, SD age = 6.61). Approximately 20 students were nested under each teacher, with a total of 2,002 students (male = 1,015, female = 987, M age = 13.47, SD age = 1.13) included in the analysis. Measurement Tools Teacher Characteristics (Level 2) In the CEPS dataset, teacher experience was self-reported. The average teaching experience among the 100 teachers was 14.30 years ( SD = 6.61). Teacher gender was dummy-coded, with male teachers coded as ‘0’ and female teachers as ‘1’. BMI and Peer Relationships (Level 1) In the CEPS dataset, students’ BMIs were calculated based on their height and weight using the formula BMI = weight (kg) / height (m²). Subsequently, students with BMIs ≤ 25 (underweight or normal weight) were coded as ‘0’, and those with BMI ≥ 25 (overweight) were coded as ‘1’. As a result, there were 975 students in the underweight or normal weight group and 1,027 students in the overweight group. This study measured peer relationships using six items assessed on a 10-point scale. Sample items included statements such as “I can easily make friends” and “My friends feel comfortable when they are with me.” The mean and standard deviation for peer relationship scores were 5.32 and 1.34, respectively. Research Model and Data Analysis At Level 1, the model explains the linear relationship between individual students’ BMIs and peer relationships. At Level 2, the model examines how teacher characteristics—specifically teacher experience and teacher gender—affect the slope and intercept of the relationship between BMI and peer relationships at the individual level. Based on this, the equations for the research model used in this study are presented in . HLM 7.0 software was used for the analysis, and the significance level was set at .05. Table 1. Analysis Models Model Level Equations Unconditional model 1 ( PR ) ij = β 0j + r ij 2 β 0j = γ 00 + u 0j Random-coefficient model 1 ( PR ) ij = β 0j + β 1j ( BMI ) ij + r ij 2 β 0j = γ 00 + u 0j , β 1j = γ 10 + u 1j Conditional model 1 ( PR ) ij = β 0j + β 1j ( BMI ) ij + r ij 2 β 0j = γ 00 + γ 01 (TE) j + γ 0 2 (SEX) j + u 0j β 1 j = γ 1 0 + γ 1 1 (TE) j + γ 1 2 (SEX) j + u 1 j Note. PR = peer relationship; TE = teaching experience Data Analysis To examine the general characteristics of the collected data, descriptive statistics were conducted using SPSS 26.0. A correlation analysis was performed to check for multicollinearity among the variables, and hierarchical linear modeling was carried out using HLM 7.0 [30]. BMI values were calculated using Excel, and the statistical significance level was set at .05. Research Results Unconditional Model(UM) In the fixed effects of the Unconditional Model ( UM ) shown in , γ 00 was 5.308 ( p < .001), indicating the average peer relationship score at the individual level. The Intra-Class Correlation ( ICC ) was 58.01, meaning that 41.99% of the variance in the dependent variable—peer relationships—was explained at Level 1 (individual level), while 58.01% was explained by Level 2 variables related to teacher characteristics. In the random effects, the value of u 0 was 0.883 ( p < .001), which was statistically significant. This suggests that the average peer relationship scores of the approximately 20 students within each class varied across the 100 classes, indicating that including teacher-level variables is statistically appropriate. Table 2. Hierarchical Linear Model Analysis Results Unconditional Model Random-Coefficient Model Conditional Model β S.E β S.E β S.E Fixed Effect Intercept (β 0 ) Intercept, γ 00 5.308 *** 0.095 5.734 *** 0.140 5.734 *** 0.082 TE , γ 01 0.078 *** 0.011 SEX, γ 02 0.364 * 0.173 BMI (β 1 ) Intercept, γ 10 -0.844 *** 0.059 -0.844 *** 0.053 TE, γ 11 0.031 *** 0.007 SEX, γ 12 -0.274 * 0.105 Random Effect Level 1, r 0.639 0.392 0.392 Level 2, u 0 0.883 *** 0.935 *** 0.663 *** Level 2, u 1 0.271 *** 0.211 *** Total variance( ICC ) 1.522(58.01) 1.598(75.46) 1.266(69.03) Note. PR = peer relationship; TE = teaching experience, ICC = intra-class correlation * p < .05, *** p < .001. Random-Coefficient Model In the Random-Coefficient Model ( RCM ), BMI was included as a Level 1 variable to explain peer relationships. The fixed effects results showed that BMI had a statistically significant negative effect on peer relationships ( β = -0.844, p < .001). This indicates that overweight students with higher body fat had poorer peer relationships compared to students with lower or normal body fat. In the UM , the total Level 1 variance was 0.639. After including BMI as a Level 1 predictor in the RCM , the Level 1 variance decreased to 0.392, representing a reduction of 0.247 (0.639 – 0.392). This suggests that BMI accounted for 0.247 of the variance in peer relationships, meaning that BMI explained 38.65% of the total Level 1 variance (0.639). In the RCM, the ICC increased to 75.46%, compared to 58.01% in the UM . This indicates that after including BMI as a Level 1 variable, the proportion of variance explained at Level 2 increased. In other words, the BMI variable, which predicts peer relationships, increases the variance that Level 2 teacher characteristics can explain. In the random effects of the RCM , the value of u 0 was 0.935 ( p < .001), which was statistically significant, indicating that the average peer relationship scores of the approximately 20 students within each of the 100 classes varied significantly; Level 2 variables likely influence this variation. Additionally, u 1 was also statistically significant at 0.271 ( p < .001), suggesting that the negative slope of the effect of BMI on peer relationships at the individual level (Level 1) differs across the 100 classes and can be explained by Level 2 variables. Since both u 0 and u 1 were statistically significant, a Conditional Model ( CM ) analysis was conducted. Conditional Model In the fixed effects of the CM , γ 01 was 0.078 ( p < .001), which was statistically significant, indicating that students’ peer relationships improved as teacher experience increased. γ 02 was 0.364 ( p < .05), suggesting that students assigned to female teachers had better peer relationships than those assigned to male teachers. Additionally, both γ 11 (0.031, p < .001) and γ 12 (-0.274, p < .05) were statistically significant, indicating that teacher characteristics (Level 2)—specifically teacher experience and teacher gender—had a significant effect on the negative slope of the relationship between BMI and peer relationships at the individual level (Level 1). To better interpret these interactions, an interaction graph was created as shown in . The results revealed that the negative impact of BMI on peer relationships was stronger when teacher experience was lower, and a similar pattern was observed in classes taught by female teachers. In the random effects of the CM, u 0 was 0.663, which represents a reduction of 0.272 compared to 0.935 in the RCM . This decrease of 0.272 indicates the amount of variance in the Level 1 intercept explained by the Level 2 variables—teacher experience and teacher gender. Since the total variance in the intercept explained by Level 2 variables in the RCM was 0.935, the statistical explanatory power of the included Level 2 variables for the Level 1 intercept is 29.09%. Additionally, u 1 was 0.221, showing a reduction of 0.05 from 0.271 in the RCM . This reduction reflects the variance in the slope of BMI’s effect on peer relationships explained by teacher experience and teacher gender. Given that the total variance in the slope explained by Level 2 variables in the RCM was 0.271, the statistical explanatory power of the Level 2 variables for the Level 1 slope is 18.4%. Lastly, since both u 0 and u 1 remained statistically significant, other variables beyond the included Level 2 variables (teacher experience and teacher gender) are suggested to still have a statistically significant influence on the Level 1 intercept and slope. Discussion In Study 1, a hierarchical linear model was used to analyze how teacher experience and gender influence the peer relationships of students with higher BMIs. The results indicated that students with higher BMIs were negatively affected in terms of their peer relationships; the extent of this negative impact varied depending on teacher characteristics. First, the results showed that the negative impact of higher BMIs on peer relationships was reduced when the teacher had more teaching experience. Experienced teachers generally possess stronger classroom management skills and a deeper understanding of individual student differences [31,20], allowing them to foster a more inclusive classroom environment. Therefore, teachers with greater experience are more capable of helping overweight students form more positive interactions with their peers [32,33]. Second, teacher gender also served as an important moderating variable. Previous studies have shown that compared to male teachers, female teachers tend to create more supportive classroom environments and demonstrate greater emotional sensitivity and individualized support in teacher-student interactions [4]. These characteristics generally help promote positive peer relationships among students. However, in this study, for students with higher BMIs, the negative impact on peer relationships was more pronounced in classrooms led by female teachers. This may be because female teachers, while paying more attention to these students, may have unintentionally emphasized their physical differences, thereby hindering the formation of natural peer relationships [34]. Study 2 Participants Since the analysis in Study 1 was based on secondary data collected 11 years ago, it was necessary to verify whether the same results could still be obtained to ensure the reliability and validity of the findings. To address this, Study 2 applied a survey research method involving 413 middle school students (male = 197 [Grade 1 = 68, Grade 2 = 70, Grade 3 = 59]; female = 216 [Grade 1 = 68, Grade 2 = 85, Grade 3 = 63]) from five middle schools, to examine whether the results from Study 1 could be replicated. Measurement Tools BMI and Teacher Gender The method for measuring BMI in Study 2 was the same as in Study 1. Students’ height and weight were measured, and BMI was calculated using the formula: BMI = weight (kg) / height (m²). Based on the calculated BMI values, students with BMIs ≤ 25 (underweight or normal weight) were coded as ‘0’, and those with BMIs ≥ 25 (overweight) were coded as ‘1’. Teacher gender was also coded, with male teachers as ‘0’ and female teachers as ‘1’. Teacher Experience Teacher experience was measured by asking the question, “How many years of teaching experience does your homeroom teacher have?” with the following response options: 1 = “More than 1 year but less than 2 years,” 2 = “More than 2 years but less than 5 years,” 3 = “More than 5 years but less than 10 years,” and 4 = “More than 10 years.” Students unsure about their homeroom teacher’s experience were encouraged to confirm the information by contacting the teacher before responding. Peer Relationship Peer relationships were measured using a questionnaire developed by Aroian et al. (2008)[35]. This scale consists of six items representing a single factor, including statements such as: “1. I feel that I make friends easily; 2. I feel that people want to be friends with me; 3. My friends enjoy playing with me; 4. My friends feel comfortable when they are with me; 5. My friends enjoy talking with me; 6. I do not like playing alone.” Confirmatory factor analysis yielded statistically significant results ( χ² = 18.67, df = 6, p < .01), but the model showed good fit ( GFI = 0.986, TLI = 0.973, CFI = 0.989, RMSEA = 0.072). The internal consistency reliability of the scale ( Cronbach’s α ) was confirmed to be 0.871. Research Procedure and Data Analysis Unlike Study 1, which used hierarchical data, Study 2 employed a survey method to determine whether the same results could be obtained with a different statistical analysis process and sample. Data were collected through random sampling from five middle schools. The researcher visited each school, obtained permission from school authorities, and distributed questionnaires to students who voluntarily agreed to participate. The purpose of the study and instructions for completing the survey were explained in detail before conducting the survey. On the first day, parental consent forms were distributed, and only students who submitted signed consent forms from their guardians the following day were allowed to participate in the survey. The collected data were analyzed using SPSS 26.0. Spearman's rho correlation analysis was conducted for categorical variables, while Pearson correlation analysis was used for continuous variables to examine the relationships between variables. To assess the reliability and validity of the survey, internal consistency reliability ( Cronbach’s α ) was calculated to evaluate the scale’s reliability, and confirmatory factor analysis was conducted using AMOS 26.0 to test the construct validity of the questionnaire. To interpret the moderating effects of teacher experience and gender, interaction graphs were created. The significance level was set at p < .05. Research Results Descriptive Statistics Analysis The correlations and basic descriptive statistics of the variables used in the analysis are presented in . The results showed that all correlation coefficients were below .70, indicating a low risk of multicollinearity [36]. Additionally, skewness values were within ±2 and kurtosis within ±7, confirming that the data followed a normal distribution [37]. The correlation analysis revealed a statistically significant positive relationship between teacher experience and peer relationships ( r = .441, p = .001), and a significant negative relationship between BMI and peer relationships ( r = –.360, p < .001), indicating that overweight students tended to have poorer peer relationships. Table 3. Correlations and Descriptive Statistics Variable 1 2 3 4 1. Teacher Experience 1 2. Teacher Gender -.323** 1 3. BMI -.084 .001 1 4. Peer Relationship .441** -.471** -.360** 1 M 3.570 - - 5.320 SD 0.775 - - 1.337 Skewness -1.906 - - 0.374 Kurtosis 3.050 - - 0.030 Note. ** Correlations are statistically significant at the .01 level (one-tailed). Hierarchical Regression Analysis To examine whether the effect of BMI on peer relationships differs according to teacher experience and teacher gender, a hierarchical regression analysis was conducted. As shown in , the combined explanatory power of the independent variable, two moderator variables, and their interaction terms on peer relationships was 43%, which was statistically significant ( F (7, 405) = 43.76, p < .001). Among the two-way interaction terms, the interaction between BMI and teacher gender was statistically significant ( t = -2.46, p < .01). To interpret this two-way interaction effect, an interaction graph was created as shown in . The analysis revealed that as students’ BMI increased, their peer relationship scores decreased; this negative trend was more pronounced in classes taught by female teachers than those taught by male teachers, supporting the findings from Study 1. However, the interaction between BMI and teacher experience was not statistically significant ( t = -1.49, p = .136), but the three-way interaction of BMI × teacher experience × teacher gender showed a marginal level of statistical significance ( t = 1.83, p = .067). To interpret this three-way interaction, a graph was created as shown in . The results indicated that for female teachers with higher levels of experience, the negative slope of the relationship between BMI and peer relationships tended to be weaker compared to that of less experienced female teachers. In contrast, among male teachers, lower teaching experience was associated with a positive relationship between BMI and peer relationships, suggesting that in such classrooms, higher-BMI students experienced more favorable peer relationships. Table 4. Results of Hierarchical Regression Analysis DV Peer Relationship β S.E. t R 2 ( ∆R 2 for a ´ b ´ c) IV BMI a -.25 0.28 -.89 .43 ( .01 † ) PMV TE b .60 0.16 3.84 *** SMV TG c -.62 0.20 -3.40 ** IT a×b -.34 0.23 -1.49 a×c -.80 0.30 -2.64 ** b×c -.42 0.17 -2.46 * a×b×c .46 0.24 1.83 † Note . DV = dependent variable; IV = independent variable; PMV = primary moderator variable; SMV = secondary moderator variable; IT = interaction term; TE = teaching experience; TG = teacher gender *** p < .001, ** p < .01, * p < .05, † p < .10 Discussion In Study 2, a hierarchical regression analysis was conducted to replicate the findings of Study 1 by examining the moderation effect of students’ BMI, teacher experience, and teacher gender on peer relationships, as well as their moderated moderation effect. Consistent with Study 1, BMI was found to be negatively associated with peer relationships. This result supports the findings of Puhl and Latner (2007), who reported that students with higher BMIs are more likely to face discrimination in social interactions. Additionally, Lobo et al. (2025) argued that adolescents with higher BMIs tend to experience greater social isolation and negative evaluations in school settings [34,38]. These findings suggest that students with higher BMIs may face greater challenges in forming and maintaining peer relationships. Based on the findings from Study 1, two-way interaction effects between BMI and teacher experience, and between BMI and teacher gender were examined. Among these, only the interaction between BMI and teacher gender showed a significant effect. Consistent with Study 1, results from Study 2 also indicated that when the homeroom teacher was female, the negative impact of high BMI on peer relationships was more pronounced. Interestingly, while there was no significant two-way interaction between BMI and teacher experience, the results suggested the possibility of a significant three-way interaction effect involving BMI, teacher experience, and teacher gender. Among female teachers, consistent with the findings of Study 1, greater teaching experience tended to reduce the negative relationship between BMI and peer relationships. However, in the case of male teachers, lower teaching experience was associated with a more positive relationship between BMI and peer relationships. According to Wolff et al. (2021), teacher experience significantly influences classroom management style, with experienced teachers tending to prefer structured and institutionalized management scripts to maintain instructional quality and efficiency [39]. While such pre-established structures can be effective for overall classroom operations, they may be less responsive to the individual social needs of students with specific physical characteristics such as BMI. In particular, novice teachers, whose teaching styles are not yet fully fixed, tend to manage classrooms in more flexible and adaptive ways, often showing greater openness in their interactions with students [40]. This flexibility and openness may offer students with higher BMIs more opportunities for social participation and help alleviate disadvantages in peer relationships. Therefore, in the case of male teachers, lower teaching experience may have played a positive role in creating a more inclusive peer environment for students with higher BMIs. General Discussion Both Study 1 and Study 2 demonstrated that students with higher BMIs experience more negative peer relationships. This suggests that appearance can influence social interactions, and students with higher BMI may face challenges in forming social networks due to social prejudice and stereotypes [41,42]. Given that adolescence is a period of heightened sensitivity to appearance, students with higher BMIs are likely to be more susceptible to peer rejection during this stage [43]. Teacher gender also played a consistent role in both studies in the relationship between BMI and peer relationships. Specifically, the negative impact of high BMI on peer relationships was more pronounced in classrooms led by female teachers, whereas this effect was relatively mitigated in classrooms led by male teachers. However, the results regarding teacher experience differed between Study 1 and Study 2. In Study 1, we found that greater teaching experience mitigated the negative impact of BMI on peer relationships. This indicates that experienced teachers are more capable of creating inclusive learning environments, strengthening classroom cohesion, and reducing social pressure stemming from appearance-based biases [44]. However, this effect was not observed in Study 2, possibly due to the presence of a moderated moderation effect. Due to the nature of the hierarchical linear modeling used in Study 1, it was limited in detecting such three-way interactions, whereas the hierarchical regression analysis used in Study 2 offers the advantage of testing moderated moderation effects. Through Study 2, it was newly discovered that when teacher experience was low and the teacher was male, BMI had a positive influence on peer relationships. This finding emerged uniquely from the analysis in Study 2. Previous studies have primarily focused on the impact of BMI on mental health [45] or academic achievement [46]. In contrast, this study distinguishes itself by examining the influence of BMI on peer relationships and further exploring how teacher-related factors moderate this relationship. This adds a unique dimension to the existing literature. Additionally, this study confirmed the important role of teacher experience in supporting the social adaptation of students with higher BMIs and revealed the distinct influence of teacher gender on the social interactions of these students. The findings of this study offer several important implications for the educational field. First, teacher training programs should include content that highlights the importance of student appearance-related factors such as BMI. Teachers should be educated on the social challenges that students with higher BMI may face and be trained in strategies for creating more inclusive classroom environments [47], as well as in management practices that support the social adaptation of students with high BMIs. Second, educational policies should promote teamwork and cooperative learning activities to reduce the negative impact of body shape differences on social interaction. Third, support systems should be established to enhance the self-esteem of students with higher BMIs and help them adapt smoothly to peer relationships [48]. The relationship between teachers and students is not a simple one-to-one interaction but a complex, multidimensional structure, necessitating appropriate analytical tools that reflect this complexity. Although Study 2 involved the collection of new data, it was still conducted as a cross-sectional study, limiting its ability to capture the long-term effects of BMI on peer relationships. Therefore, future studies should employ hierarchical analyses using more recent longitudinal data. Additionally, since this study focused on Chinese middle school students, it is difficult to generalize the relationship between BMI and peer relationships across different cultural contexts. Future research should include comparative analyses across different countries and educational systems. Conclusion This study systematically analyzed the impact of BMI on peer relationships among middle school students through two empirical investigations and explored the moderating effects of teacher experience and gender. The findings revealed that students with higher BMIs face greater challenges in peer relationships; however, experienced teachers were found to effectively mitigate these negative effects. Moreover, male teachers were shown to reduce the adverse impact of BMI on social adaptation more effectively than female teachers. These findings provide substantial empirical evidence for educational management, teacher training, and psychological support for students. Future research should further explore similar phenomena in different cultural contexts and adopt longitudinal designs to examine the long-term effects of BMI on adolescents’ social development in greater depth. Abbreviations BMI: Body Mass Index CEPS: China Education Panel Survey HLM: Hierarchical Linear Modeling PR: Peer Relationship TE: Teaching Experience TG: Teacher Gender RCM: Random-Coefficient Model CM: Conditional Model UM: Unconditional Model DV: Dependent Variable IV: Independent Variable PMV: Primary Moderator Variable SMV: Secondary Moderator Variable IT: Interaction Term SD: Standard Deviation SE: Standard Error CFI: Comparative Fit Index TLI: Tucker–Lewis Index GFI: Goodness-of-Fit Index RMSEA: Root Mean Square Error of Approximation Declarations Ethics approval and consent to participate : This study was submitted to and approved by the Academic Ethics Committee of Kangwon National University (IRB Approval No. 2025-07-001). All procedures involving human participants were conducted in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional committee and with the 1964 Declaration of Helsinki and its later amendments. Informed consent was obtained from all participants; for minors, written informed consent was additionally obtained from their legal guardians. Consent for publication : Not applicable. Availability of data and materials : The datasets used and/or analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request. Competing interests : The authors declare that they have no competing interests. Funding : This research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors. Authors’ Contributions : Conceptualisation, CM and MS; methodology, MS; software, CM and MS; formal analysis, CM and MS; investigation, MS; data curation, MS; writing—original draft preparation, CM, SZand MS; writing—review and editing, CM and MS; supervision, MS. References Liu Y. The role of peer relationships in adolescents’ psychological well-being. SHS Web Conf. 2023;180:03027. doi:10.1051/shsconf/202318003027. Shao Y, Kang S, Lu Q, Zhang C, Li R. How peer relationships affect academic achievement among junior high school students: The chain mediating roles of learning motivation and learning engagement. BMC Psychol. 2024;12:278. doi:10.1186/s40359-024-01780-z. Wang H. The effects of school climate, parent–child closeness, and peer relations on the problematic internet use of Chinese adolescents: testing the mediating role of self-esteem and depression. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2022;19(13):7583. doi:10.3390/ijerph19137583. Graziano F, Mastrokoukou S, Monchietto A, Marchisio C, Calandri E. The moderating role of emotional self-efficacy and gender in teacher empathy and inclusive education. Sci Rep. 2024;14(1):22587. doi:10.1038/s41598-024-70836-2. Zhang Z, Wang Y, Deng W, Ma X, Qi C. The impact of teacher care on teacher–student relationship: evidence from cross-sectional and longitudinal data. Front Psychol. 2025;16:1551081. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2025.1551081. Xianguo W, Amirrudin S. Teacher leadership research in China (2020–2024): trends, gaps, and future directions in educational development. Int J Educ Humanit. 2025;5(2):375–386. doi:10.58557/(ijeh).v5i2.320. Wang T, Lee JS. “A total warp”? Negotiating teacher authority in a Chinese heritage language classroom. J Lang Teach. 2025;5(1):1–13. doi:10.54475/jlt.2025.003. Alnahdi GH, Schwab S. The impact of gender differences in teachers’ teaching practices and attitudes on students’ math and science achievement in Saudi Arabia: evidence from TIMSS 2019 data. Front Psychol. 2023;14:1066843. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1066843. Jacobs W, Merianos AL, Smith ML, Nabors L, Fajayan A, Valente TW. Examining the role of weight status and individual attributes on adolescent social relations. J Adolesc Health. 2020;67(1):108–114. doi:10.1016/j.jadohealth.2020.01.014. Maheux AJ, Burnell K, Choukas-Bradley S. Bidirectional associations between online and offline appearance concerns during early-to-middle adolescence. Dev Psychol. 2024;60(10):1885–1901. doi:10.1037/dev0001795. Zhao D, Xiao W, Tan B, Zeng Y, Li S, Zhou J, Song P. Association between dietary habits and emotional and behavioral problems in children: the mediating role of self-concept. Front Nutr. 2025;12:1426485. doi:10.3389/fnut.2025.1426485. Li P, Lyu J, Zhou S, Liu Z, Feng X, Lin Y, Wang H. Association of peer network with childhood obesity in DECIDE-Children Program. Nutrients. 2023;15(19):4154. doi:10.3390/nu15194154. Symes W, Lazarides R, Hußner I. The development of student teachers’ teacher self-efficacy before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. Teach Teach Educ. 2023;122:103941. doi:10.1016/j.tate.2022.103941. Lazarides R, Watt HM, Richardson PW. Teachers’ classroom management self-efficacy, perceived classroom management and teaching contexts from beginning until mid-career. Learn Instr. 2020;69:101346. doi:org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2020.101346. Chen J, Jiang H, Justice LM, Lin TJ, Purtell KM, Ansari A. Influences of teacher–child relationships and classroom social management on child-perceived peer social experiences during early school years. Front Psychol. 2020;11:586991. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2020.586991. Moolenaar NM. A social network perspective on teacher collaboration in schools: theory, methodology, and applications. Am J Educ. 2012;119(1):7–39. doi:10.1086/667715. Ayar D, Aksu Ç, Polat F, Elkoca A. The effects of popularity perceptions and social appearance anxiety on the desire of young people to have aesthetic procedures on social media. Curr Psychol. 2025;44:3811–3820. doi:10.1007/s12144-025-07424-8. Yiyi O, Xue X, Jiong L, Yanhui Z. Research on the influence of body image on college students’ weight-loss intention: chained intermediary analysis of self-efficacy and self-esteem. Front Psychol. 2024;15:1458259. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1458259. Bakibangou YB, Balou GF, Ibara RT. Inclusion des élèves obèses en Éducation Physique et Sportive dans les collèges publics de Brazzaville: une analyse des pratiques enseignantes. Lakisa Rev Sci Educ. 2024;4(8):279–290. doi:10.55595/lakisa.v4i8.206. Rukavina P, Doolittle S, Li W, Beale‐Tawfeeq A, Manson M. Teachers’ perspectives on creating an inclusive climate in middle school physical education for overweight students. J Sch Health. 2019;89(6):476–484. doi:10.1111/josh.12760. Poulou MS, Garner PW. Teacher–student relationships: the roles of teachers’ emotional competence, social emotional learning beliefs, and burnout. Teach Teach. 2025;1–22. doi: 10.1080/13540602.2024.2435080. Bhuvaneshwara C, Chehayeb L, Haberl A, Siedentopf J, Gebhard P, Tsovaltzi D. InCoRe—An interactive co-regulation model: training teacher communication skills in demanding classroom situations. arXiv. 2025. doi:10.48550/arXiv.2502.20025. Imran M, Sultan A, Ali F. Gender differences in teacher’s pedagogical practices and attitudes towards students’ learning. J Educ Soc Stud. 2024;5(1):176–182. doi:10.52223/jess.2024.5117. Hidalgo SG, Henning T, Gomez F, Perez M. Examining teacher concerns and anxiety on the implementation of a universal body image program. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2024;21(4):419. doi:10.3390/ijerph21040419. Jennings PA, Greenberg MT. The prosocial classroom: teacher social and emotional competence in relation to student and classroom outcomes. Rev Educ Res. 2009;79(1):491–525. doi:10.3102/0034654308325693. Blazar D. Teacher and teaching effects on students’ academic performance, attitudes, and behaviors [dissertation]. Cambridge (MA): Harvard University; 2016. Blazar D, Kraft MA. Teacher and teaching effects on students’ attitudes and behaviors. Educ Eval Policy Anal. 2017;39(1):146–170. doi:10.3102/0162373716670260. Nutter S, Ireland A, Alberga AS, Brun I, Lefebvre D, Hayden KA, Russell-Mayhew S. Weight bias in educational settings: a systematic review. Curr Obes Rep. 2019;8:185–200. doi:10.1007/s13679-019-00330-8. Carrington B, Tymms P, Merrell C. Role models, school improvement and the ‘gender gap’—do men bring out the best in boys and women the best in girls? Br Educ Res J. 2008;34(3):315–327. doi:10.1080/01411920701532202. Raudenbush SW, Bryk AS, Cheong YF, Congdon RT, du Toit M. HLM 7: hierarchical linear and nonlinear modeling. Lincolnwood (IL): Scientific Software International; 2011. Kenney EL, Redman MT, Criss S, Sonneville KR, Austin SB. Are K-12 school environments harming students with obesity? A qualitative study of classroom teachers. Eat Weight Disord. 2017;22:141–152. doi:10.1007/s40519-016-0268-6. Cardenal ME, Díaz-Santana O, González-Betancor SM. Teacher–student relationship and teaching styles in primary education: a model of analysis. J Prof Cap Community. 2023;8(3):165–183. doi:10.1108/JPCC-09-2022-0053. Jansen PW, Verlinden M, Dommisse-van Berkel A, Mieloo CL, Raat H, Hofman A, Tiemeier H. Teacher and peer reports of overweight and bullying among young primary school children. Pediatrics. 2014;134(3):473–480. doi:10.1542/peds.2013-3274. Puhl RM, Latner JD. Stigma, obesity, and the health of the nation’s children. Psychol Bull. 2007;133(4):557–580. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.133.4.557. Aroian KJ, Hough ES, Templin TN, Kaskiri EA. Development and psychometric evaluation of an Arab version of the Family Peer Relationship Questionnaire. Res Nurs Health. 2008;31(5):402–416. doi:10.1002/nur.20277. Hair JF, Black WC, Babin BJ, Anderson RE. Multivariate data analysis. 7th ed. Upper Saddle River (NJ): Pearson; 2010. West SG, Finch JF, Curran PJ. Structural equation models with nonnormal variables: problems and remedies. In: Hoyle RH, editor. Structural equation modeling: concepts, issues, and applications. Thousand Oaks (CA): Sage Publications; 1995. p. 56–75. Lobo AC, Shanbhag S, Jaidev MD, Prabhu HS. Behavioral patterns in overweight and obese school-going adolescents. Arch Ment Health. 2025;26(1):101-105. doi:10.4103/amh.amh_110_24. Wolff CE, Jarodzka H, Boshuizen HP. Classroom management scripts: a theoretical model contrasting expert and novice teachers’ knowledge and awareness of classroom events. Educ Psychol Rev. 2021;33(1):131–148. doi:10.1007/s10648-020-09542-0. De Klerk ED, Palmer JM. Navigating a path of uncertainty: profiling novice teachers as adaptive leaders. IAFOR J Educ. 2024;12(3):299–323. doi:10.22492/ije.12.3.12. Cerolini S, Vacca M, Zegretti A, Zagaria A, Lombardo C. Body shaming and internalized weight bias as potential precursors of eating disorders in adolescents. Front Psychol. 2024;15:1356647. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1356647. Di Pasquale R, Celsi L. Stigmatization of overweight and obese peers among children. Front Psychol. 2017;8:524. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00524. Voelker DK, Reel JJ, Greenleaf C. Weight status and body image perceptions in adolescents: current perspectives. Adolesc Health Med Ther. 2015;6:149–158. doi:10.2147/AHMT.S68344. Ali HH, Bashir R, Raza AA, Ejaz H, Shabir R, Aftab MJ. Role of inclusive education in promoting equity in education: teacher’s perspectives. Qual Res. 2024;24(1):1–19. https://qualitativeresearchjournal.com/index.php/view/article/view/31. Iversen KD, Pedersen TP, Rasmussen M, Hansen MBL, Roikjer BH, Teilmann G. Mental health and BMI in children and adolescents during one year in obesity treatment. BMC Pediatr. 2024;24(1):406. doi:10.1186/s12887-024-04835-7. Bielik V, Nosáľ V, Nechalová L, Špánik M, Žilková K, Grendar M. The prediction model of academic achievement based on cardiorespiratory fitness and BMI status for ninth-grade students. BMC Pediatr. 2025;25(1):20. doi:10.1186/s12887-024-05353-2. Cardoza K. Kids in larger bodies do worse in school. One reason may be teacher bias. Teen Vogue. 2024. Kim YM. Mirror, mirror on the wall: the role of self-esteem and attachments in early adolescent body-esteem. Int J Ment Health Promot. 2024;26(9):1017–1024. doi:10.32604/ijmhp.2024.057597. Additional Declarations No competing interests reported. Cite Share Download PDF Status: Under Review Version 1 posted Reviews received at journal 04 Sep, 2025 Reviewers agreed at journal 31 Aug, 2025 Reviewers invited by journal 28 Aug, 2025 Editor invited by journal 24 Jul, 2025 Editor assigned by journal 24 Jul, 2025 Submission checks completed at journal 23 Jul, 2025 First submitted to journal 23 Jul, 2025 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-7072936","acceptedTermsAndConditions":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"archivedVersions":[],"articleType":"Research Article","associatedPublications":[],"authors":[{"id":510423275,"identity":"38a219db-a89b-4320-bfa1-13bc133b2fec","order_by":0,"name":"Cheng-long Miao","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Kangwon National University","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Cheng-long","middleName":"","lastName":"Miao","suffix":""},{"id":510423279,"identity":"c8a95ebd-c232-4dba-a6fc-5450a9a360aa","order_by":1,"name":"Shwa Zhang","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Kangwon National University","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Shwa","middleName":"","lastName":"Zhang","suffix":""},{"id":510423280,"identity":"c659e9d5-2f96-430b-98e1-1f8d03c51cbe","order_by":2,"name":"Myoungjin Shin","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Kangwon National University","correspondingAuthor":true,"prefix":"","firstName":"Myoungjin","middleName":"","lastName":"Shin","suffix":""}],"badges":[],"createdAt":"2025-07-08 09:08:30","currentVersionCode":1,"declarations":"","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-7072936/v1","doiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-7072936/v1","draftVersion":[],"editorialEvents":[],"editorialNote":"","failedWorkflow":false,"files":[{"id":90660264,"identity":"536ee76a-9133-4993-9374-9b1de88f8ac8","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-09-05 11:20:02","extension":"png","order_by":1,"title":"Figure 1","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":150803,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eInteraction Graph\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"1.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7072936/v1/8108613d2f4a1011145edd1c.png"},{"id":90660265,"identity":"fb468827-bb50-454c-9f44-d6a546ffa6b6","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-09-05 11:20:02","extension":"png","order_by":2,"title":"Figure 2","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":60484,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eTwo-way interaction graph for BMI and teacher gender\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"2.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7072936/v1/ad7b2b699cea2116d7041000.png"},{"id":90660268,"identity":"16e32624-ebd7-40b8-9050-8d609b6c835a","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-09-05 11:20:02","extension":"png","order_by":3,"title":"Figure 3","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":147694,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eThree-way interaction graph for BMI, teacher gender, and teaching experience\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"3.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7072936/v1/2658d15eac3b05b0615e3abd.png"},{"id":90662417,"identity":"2e2e6f1f-b17a-4e2a-8a7f-776428b96047","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-09-05 11:52:03","extension":"pdf","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"manuscript-pdf","size":1203304,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"manuscript.pdf","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7072936/v1/ef510ae8-58da-4fad-a5bf-ab04ab0eea29.pdf"}],"financialInterests":"No competing interests reported.","formattedTitle":"Influence of Chinese adolescents’ BMI on peer relationships: The moderating role of teachers’ experience and gender","fulltext":[{"header":"Introduction","content":"\u003cp\u003ePeer relationships among students have become a central topic in the field of school education, increasingly emphasizing the importance of exploring factors that affect students\u0026rsquo; social interactions and psychological well-being [1,2]. During middle school, a period marked by adolescence, social demands and peer relationships play a crucial role in psychological development [3]. At this stage, students\u0026rsquo; popularity can be influenced not only by individual characteristics (e.g., BMI) but also by teacher-level factors such as teacher gender and teacher experience [4,5]. Research has shown that teacher experience affects both academic performance and the formation of social relationships [6]. Within China\u0026rsquo;s educational system in particular, the teachers\u0026rsquo; authority plays a significant role in classroom culture and group hierarchy [7]. It is therefore important to examine how homeroom teachers\u0026rsquo; characteristics influence students\u0026rsquo; psychological changes and development.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAmong teacher characteristics, gender plays a significant role in influencing students\u0026rsquo; psychological development. Research indicates that male and female teachers differ in their teaching styles and ways of interacting with students [8]. Female teachers tend to be more attentive to students\u0026rsquo; appearance and emotional needs, whereas male teachers are generally less so [5]. These differences may have varying effects on the formation of students\u0026rsquo; social relationships.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eDuring school years, students spend more time with friends and teachers than with their families, progressing through adolescence under the care of their teachers. Therefore, teacher characteristics significantly impact adolescents\u0026rsquo; social relationships and psychological development. Statistically, students are nested within teachers, making it essential to use analytical methods that account for this structure, such as hierarchical linear modeling, to examine how teacher characteristics influence students\u0026rsquo; social relationship formation. This topic will be addressed in Study 1. Furthermore, in Study 2, the findings derived from Study 1 will be replicated or revalidated through a survey to ensure the validity of the effects of teacher characteristics on students\u0026rsquo; social development.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eBMI and Peer Relationships\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAdolescents\u0026rsquo; BMI is one of the key factors influencing their popularity among peers and plays an important role in shaping peer relationships. BMI not only reflects physical health but also affects first impressions in social settings, particularly among adolescents, where appearance and body shape are critical in social interactions [9]. Students within the normal BMI range are generally perceived as having a healthy body, which aligns with societal expectations and thus earns them greater likability among peers. These students tend to have higher self-efficacy and stronger social initiative, increasing their chances of accessing social resources and opportunities [10,11]. In contrast, students outside the normal BMI range are more likely to be negatively stigmatized as \u0026ldquo;unhealthy,\u0026rdquo; \u0026ldquo;lazy,\u0026rdquo; or \u0026ldquo;physically weak,\u0026rdquo; which may result in ridicule from peers or difficulty integrating into mainstream social groups [12]. Therefore, adolescents with a normal BMI are more likely to receive positive attention and be advantageous in social interactions, leading to increased popularity among peers.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eInteraction Between Teacher Experience, Student BMI, and Social Relationships\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTeacher experience is closely linked to teacher efficacy, which in turn can shape students\u0026rsquo; psychological outcomes [13]. In general, experienced teachers demonstrate higher levels of teacher efficacy and are more capable of managing students and responding effectively to school organizational culture [14]. Teachers who are well-liked by students tend to foster a more positive classroom atmosphere and enhance students\u0026rsquo; sense of belonging and social interaction skills [15]. Furthermore, maintaining strong social networks with fellow teachers can indirectly affect students\u0026rsquo; social adjustment [16].\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eStudents with higher BMIs are more likely to experience peer rejection or negative evaluations based on appearance compared to students with lower BMIs [17,18]. However, experienced teachers are skilled in employing inclusive and supportive instructional strategies that help mitigate the negative social effects experienced by students with higher BMIs [19,20]. Veteran teachers not only provide stronger in-class support but also utilize their social relationships to promote inclusivity within peer groups [21]. In addition, experienced teachers enhance positive interactions with students and create inclusive classroom environments by leveraging their social influence, thereby improving the social adaptability of students with higher BMIs [22]. The more teaching experience a teacher has, the more effective their classroom management and social influence, which increases their capacity to reduce the social disadvantages that students with higher BMIs may face. Ultimately, teachers with extensive experience are better equipped to effectively support students\u0026rsquo; psychological development and social adaptation\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eInteraction Between Teacher Gender, Student BMI, and Social Relationships\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eFemale teachers tend to make greater use of observation strategies in the classroom and are generally more sensitive and responsive to students\u0026rsquo; physical appearance and body shape [23-25]. In contrast, male teachers are more likely to focus on students\u0026rsquo; academic achievement, behavioral development, and overall growth and maturity [26,27]. Due to their attentive and detail-oriented nature, female teachers are more likely to show concern and care for overweight students and actively intervene to support forming their social relationships. On the other hand, male teachers often adopt a more inclusive and goal-oriented perspective toward the class. They are more likely to structure social interactions within the classroom based on academic achievement and classroom participation, rather than students\u0026rsquo; appearance.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eFemale teachers generally form closer social networks within the classroom and are more actively involved in students\u0026rsquo; daily concerns [23]. These characteristics may help students with higher BMIs receive support more easily from the teacher, but they also risk drawing excessive attention to these students, potentially intensifying their body image anxiety [24,28]. Male teachers, on the other hand, tend to maintain a certain distance in their relationships with students and focus classroom interactions more on academic achievement and teamwork activities [29]. In the case of male teachers, overweight students are less likely to be treated as requiring special attention and more likely to be regarded as equal members of the class working together toward common goals. Therefore, teacher gender directly influences classroom culture. We accordingly expect that differences based on teacher gender will also be reflected in the social adaptation of students with higher BMIs.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Study 1","content":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eParticipants\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThis study used the CEPS to examine how BMI influences peer relationships depending on teacher characteristics, considering the nested relationship between teachers and students through a hierarchical linear model. CEPS is a large-scale, nationally representative survey conducted by Renmin University of China and organized by the National Survey Research Center. The 2013\u0026ndash;2014 survey data and related documentation are publicly accessible at the official website (\u003cem\u003ehttp://ceps.ruc.edu.cn\u003c/em\u003e).\u0026nbsp;It analyzes the effects of family, school,\u0026nbsp;community, and individual factors on educational outcomes and explores how these outcomes shape individuals\u0026rsquo; life trajectories. CEPS was conducted in 2013 and 2014, targeting students from Grade 7 (first year of middle school) to Grade 9 (third year of middle school). For this study, one homeroom teacher was randomly selected from each of the 100 schools, resulting in a total of 100 teachers (male = 39, female = 61, \u003cem\u003eM\u003csub\u003eage\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/em\u003e = 38.30, \u003cem\u003eSD\u003csub\u003eage\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/em\u003e = 6.61). Approximately 20 students were nested under each teacher, with a total of 2,002 students (male = 1,015, female = 987, \u003cem\u003eM\u003csub\u003eage\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/em\u003e = 13.47, \u003cem\u003eSD\u003csub\u003eage\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/em\u003e = 1.13) included in the analysis.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eMeasurement Tools\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eTeacher Characteristics (Level 2)\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIn the CEPS dataset, teacher experience was self-reported. The average teaching experience among the 100 teachers was 14.30 years (\u003cem\u003eSD\u003c/em\u003e = 6.61). Teacher gender was dummy-coded, with male teachers coded as \u0026lsquo;0\u0026rsquo; and female teachers as \u0026lsquo;1\u0026rsquo;.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eBMI and Peer Relationships (Level 1)\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIn the CEPS dataset, students\u0026rsquo; BMIs were calculated based on their height and weight using the formula BMI = weight (kg) / height (m\u0026sup2;). Subsequently, students with BMIs \u0026le; 25 (underweight or normal weight) were coded as \u0026lsquo;0\u0026rsquo;, and those with BMI \u0026ge; 25 (overweight) were coded as \u0026lsquo;1\u0026rsquo;. As a result, there were 975 students in the underweight or normal weight group and 1,027 students in the overweight group. This study measured peer relationships using six items assessed on a 10-point scale. Sample items included statements such as \u0026ldquo;I can easily make friends\u0026rdquo; and \u0026ldquo;My friends feel comfortable when they are with me.\u0026rdquo; The mean and standard deviation for peer relationship scores were 5.32 and 1.34, respectively.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eResearch Model and Data Analysis\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAt Level 1, the model explains the linear relationship between individual students\u0026rsquo; BMIs and peer relationships. At Level 2, the model examines how teacher characteristics\u0026mdash;specifically teacher experience and teacher gender\u0026mdash;affect the slope and intercept of the relationship between BMI and peer relationships at the individual level. Based on this, the equations for the research model used in this study are presented in \u0026lt;Table 1\u0026gt;. HLM 7.0 software was used for the analysis, and the significance level was set at .05.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eTable 1. Analysis Models\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cdiv align=\"center\"\u003e\n \u003ctable border=\"1\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\" width=\"99%\"\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 30px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eModel\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 13px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eLevel\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 56px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eEquations\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 30px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eUnconditional model\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 13px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 56px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e(\u003c/em\u003e\u003cem\u003ePR\u003c/em\u003e\u003cem\u003e)\u003csub\u003eij\u003c/sub\u003e = \u0026beta;\u003csub\u003e0j\u003c/sub\u003e + r\u003csub\u003eij\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 13px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 56px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u0026beta;\u003c/em\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u003csub\u003e0j\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/em\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u0026nbsp;=\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u0026gamma;\u003c/em\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u003csub\u003e00\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/em\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u0026nbsp;+\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e\u003cem\u003eu\u003c/em\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u003csub\u003e0j\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 30px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eRandom-coefficient\u0026nbsp;model\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 13px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 56px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e(\u003c/em\u003e\u003cem\u003ePR\u003c/em\u003e\u003cem\u003e)\u003csub\u003eij\u003c/sub\u003e = \u0026beta;\u003csub\u003e0j\u003c/sub\u003e + \u0026beta;\u003csub\u003e1j\u003c/sub\u003e(\u003c/em\u003e\u003cem\u003eBMI\u003c/em\u003e\u003cem\u003e)\u003csub\u003eij\u003c/sub\u003e + r\u003csub\u003eij\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 13px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 56px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u0026beta;\u003c/em\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u003csub\u003e0j\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/em\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u0026nbsp;=\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u0026gamma;\u003c/em\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u003csub\u003e00\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/em\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u0026nbsp;+\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e\u003cem\u003eu\u003c/em\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u003csub\u003e0j\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/em\u003e\u003cem\u003e,\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u0026beta;\u003c/em\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u003csub\u003e1j\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/em\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u0026nbsp;=\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u0026gamma;\u003c/em\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u003csub\u003e10\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/em\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u0026nbsp;+\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e\u003cem\u003eu\u003c/em\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u003csub\u003e1j\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 30px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eConditional model\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 13px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 56px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e(\u003c/em\u003e\u003cem\u003ePR\u003c/em\u003e\u003cem\u003e)\u003csub\u003eij\u003c/sub\u003e = \u0026beta;\u003csub\u003e0j\u003c/sub\u003e + \u0026beta;\u003csub\u003e1j\u003c/sub\u003e(\u003c/em\u003e\u003cem\u003eBMI\u003c/em\u003e\u003cem\u003e)\u003csub\u003eij\u003c/sub\u003e + r\u003csub\u003eij\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 13px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 56px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u0026beta;\u003csub\u003e0j\u003c/sub\u003e = \u0026gamma;\u003csub\u003e00\u003c/sub\u003e + \u0026gamma;\u003csub\u003e01\u003c/sub\u003e(TE)\u003csub\u003ej\u003c/sub\u003e + \u0026gamma;\u003csub\u003e0\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/em\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/em\u003e\u003cem\u003e(SEX)\u003csub\u003ej\u003c/sub\u003e +\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e\u003cem\u003eu\u003c/em\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u003csub\u003e0j\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u0026beta;\u003c/em\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u003csub\u003e1\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/em\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u003csub\u003ej\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/em\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u0026nbsp;= \u0026gamma;\u003c/em\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u003csub\u003e1\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/em\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u003csub\u003e0\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/em\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u0026nbsp;+ \u0026gamma;\u003c/em\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u003csub\u003e1\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/em\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u003csub\u003e1\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/em\u003e\u003cem\u003e(TE)\u003csub\u003ej\u003c/sub\u003e + \u0026gamma;\u003c/em\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u003csub\u003e1\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/em\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/em\u003e\u003cem\u003e(SEX)\u003csub\u003ej\u003c/sub\u003e +\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e\u003cem\u003eu\u003csub\u003e1\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/em\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u003csub\u003ej\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n \u003c/table\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eNote.\u003c/em\u003e PR = peer relationship; TE = teaching experience\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eData Analysis\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTo examine the general characteristics of the collected data, descriptive statistics were conducted using SPSS 26.0. A correlation analysis was performed to check for multicollinearity among the variables, and hierarchical linear modeling was carried out using HLM 7.0 [30]. BMI values were calculated using Excel, and the statistical significance level was set at .05.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eResearch Results\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eUnconditional Model(UM)\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIn the fixed effects of the Unconditional Model (\u003cem\u003eUM\u003c/em\u003e) shown in \u0026lt;Table 2\u0026gt;,\u003cem\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u0026gamma;\u003csub\u003e00\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/em\u003e was 5.308 (\u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e \u0026lt; .001), indicating the average peer relationship score at the individual level. The Intra-Class Correlation (\u003cem\u003eICC\u003c/em\u003e) was 58.01, meaning that 41.99% of the variance in the dependent variable\u0026mdash;peer relationships\u0026mdash;was explained at Level 1 (individual level), while 58.01% was explained by Level 2 variables related to teacher characteristics. In the random effects, the value of \u003cem\u003eu\u003csub\u003e0\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/em\u003e was 0.883 (\u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e \u0026lt; .001), which was statistically significant. This suggests that the average peer relationship scores of the approximately 20 students within each class varied across the 100 classes, indicating that including teacher-level variables is statistically appropriate.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eTable 2. Hierarchical Linear Model Analysis Results\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cdiv align=\"center\"\u003e\n \u003ctable border=\"1\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\" width=\"99%\"\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" rowspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 36px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 20px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eUnconditional\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eModel\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 21px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eRandom-Coefficient\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eModel\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 21px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eConditional\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eModel\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 11px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u0026beta;\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 8px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eS.E\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 13px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u0026beta;\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 8px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eS.E\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 12px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u0026beta;\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 8px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eS.E\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 36px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eFixed Effect\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 11px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 8px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 13px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 8px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 12px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 8px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"3\" style=\"width: 21px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eIntercept\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e(\u0026beta;\u003csub\u003e0\u003c/sub\u003e)\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 15px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eIntercept, \u003cem\u003e\u0026gamma;\u003csub\u003e00\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 11px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e5.308\u003csup\u003e***\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 8px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.095\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 13px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e5.734\u003csup\u003e***\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 8px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.140\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 12px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e5.734\u003csup\u003e***\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 8px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.082\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 15px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eTE\u003csub\u003e,\u0026nbsp;\u003c/sub\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u0026gamma;\u003csub\u003e01\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 11px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 8px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 13px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 8px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 12px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.078\u003csup\u003e***\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 8px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.011\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 15px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSEX,\u003cem\u003e\u0026gamma;\u003csub\u003e02\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 11px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 8px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 13px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 8px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 12px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.364\u003csup\u003e*\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 8px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.173\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"3\" style=\"width: 21px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eBMI\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e(\u0026beta;\u003csub\u003e1\u003c/sub\u003e)\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 15px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eIntercept, \u003cem\u003e\u0026gamma;\u003csub\u003e10\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 11px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 8px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 13px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-0.844\u003csup\u003e***\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 8px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.059\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 12px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-0.844\u003csup\u003e***\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 8px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.053\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 15px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eTE,\u003cem\u003e\u0026gamma;\u003csub\u003e11\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 11px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 8px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 13px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 8px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 12px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.031\u003csup\u003e***\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 8px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.007\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 15px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSEX,\u003cem\u003e\u0026gamma;\u003csub\u003e12\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 11px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 8px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 13px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 8px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 12px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-0.274\u003csup\u003e*\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 8px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.105\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 36px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eRandom Effect\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 11px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 8px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 13px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 8px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 12px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 8px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 36px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eLevel 1, \u003cem\u003er\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 20px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.639\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 21px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.392\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 21px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.392\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 36px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eLevel 2,\u003cem\u003e\u0026nbsp;u\u003csub\u003e0\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 20px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.883\u003csup\u003e***\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 21px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.935\u003csup\u003e***\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 21px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.663\u003csup\u003e***\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 36px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eLevel 2,\u003cem\u003e\u0026nbsp;u\u003csub\u003e1\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 20px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 21px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.271\u003csup\u003e***\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 21px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.211\u003csup\u003e***\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 36px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eTotal variance(\u003cem\u003eICC\u003c/em\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 20px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.522(58.01)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 21px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.598(75.46)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 21px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.266(69.03)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"8\" style=\"width: 100px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eNote.\u003c/em\u003e PR = peer relationship; TE = teaching experience, \u003cem\u003eICC\u003c/em\u003e = intra-class correlation\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e*\u003c/em\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e\u003cem\u003ep \u0026lt; .05, ***\u003c/em\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e\u003cem\u003ep \u0026lt; .001.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n \u003c/table\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eRandom-Coefficient Model\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIn the Random-Coefficient Model (\u003cem\u003eRCM\u003c/em\u003e), BMI was included as a Level 1 variable to explain peer relationships. The fixed effects results showed that BMI had a statistically significant negative effect on peer relationships (\u003cem\u003e\u0026beta;\u003c/em\u003e = -0.844, p \u0026lt; .001). This indicates that overweight students with higher body fat had poorer peer relationships compared to students with lower or normal body fat. In the \u003cem\u003eUM\u003c/em\u003e, the total Level 1 variance was 0.639. After including BMI as a Level 1 predictor in the \u003cem\u003eRCM\u003c/em\u003e, the Level 1 variance decreased to 0.392, representing a reduction of 0.247 (0.639 \u0026ndash; 0.392). This suggests that BMI accounted for 0.247 of the variance in peer relationships, meaning that BMI explained 38.65% of the total Level 1 variance (0.639).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIn the RCM, the \u003cem\u003eICC\u003c/em\u003e increased to 75.46%, compared to 58.01% in the \u003cem\u003eUM\u003c/em\u003e. This indicates that after including BMI as a Level 1 variable, the proportion of variance explained at Level 2 increased. In other words, the BMI variable, which predicts peer relationships, increases the variance that Level 2 teacher characteristics can explain. In the random effects of the \u003cem\u003eRCM\u003c/em\u003e, the value of \u003cem\u003eu\u003csub\u003e0\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/em\u003e was 0.935 (\u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e \u0026lt; .001), which was statistically significant, indicating that the average peer relationship scores of the approximately 20 students within each of the 100 classes varied significantly; Level 2 variables likely influence this variation. Additionally, \u003cem\u003eu\u003csub\u003e1\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/em\u003e was also statistically significant at 0.271 (\u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e \u0026lt; .001), suggesting that the negative slope of the effect of BMI on peer relationships at the individual level (Level 1) differs across the 100 classes and can be explained by Level 2 variables. Since both \u003cem\u003eu\u003csub\u003e0\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/em\u003e and \u003cem\u003eu\u003csub\u003e1\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/em\u003e were statistically significant, a Conditional Model (\u003cem\u003eCM\u003c/em\u003e) analysis was conducted.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eConditional Model\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIn the fixed effects of the \u003cem\u003eCM\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e\u0026gamma;\u003csub\u003e01\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/em\u003e was 0.078 (\u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e \u0026lt; .001), which was statistically significant, indicating that students\u0026rsquo; peer relationships improved as teacher experience increased. \u003cem\u003e\u0026gamma;\u003csub\u003e02\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/em\u003e was 0.364 (\u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e \u0026lt; .05), suggesting that students assigned to female teachers had better peer relationships than those assigned to male teachers. Additionally, both \u003cem\u003e\u0026gamma;\u003csub\u003e11\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/em\u003e (0.031, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e \u0026lt; .001) and \u003cem\u003e\u0026gamma;\u003csub\u003e12\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/em\u003e (-0.274, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e \u0026lt; .05) were statistically significant, indicating that teacher characteristics (Level 2)\u0026mdash;specifically teacher experience and teacher gender\u0026mdash;had a significant effect on the negative slope of the relationship between BMI and peer relationships at the individual level (Level 1). To better interpret these interactions, an interaction graph was created as shown in \u0026lt;Figure 1\u0026gt;. The results revealed that the negative impact of BMI on peer relationships was stronger when teacher experience was lower, and a similar pattern was observed in classes taught by female teachers.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIn the random effects of the CM, \u003cem\u003eu\u003csub\u003e0\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/em\u003e was 0.663, which represents a reduction of 0.272 compared to 0.935 in the \u003cem\u003eRCM\u003c/em\u003e. This decrease of 0.272 indicates the amount of variance in the Level 1 intercept explained by the Level 2 variables\u0026mdash;teacher experience and teacher gender. Since the total variance in the intercept explained by Level 2 variables in the \u003cem\u003eRCM\u003c/em\u003e was 0.935, the statistical explanatory power of the included Level 2 variables for the Level 1 intercept is 29.09%. Additionally, \u003cem\u003eu\u003csub\u003e1\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/em\u003e was 0.221, showing a reduction of 0.05 from 0.271 in the \u003cem\u003eRCM\u003c/em\u003e. This reduction reflects the variance in the slope of BMI\u0026rsquo;s effect on peer relationships explained by teacher experience and teacher gender. Given that the total variance in the slope explained by Level 2 variables in the \u003cem\u003eRCM\u003c/em\u003e was 0.271, the statistical explanatory power of the Level 2 variables for the Level 1 slope is 18.4%. Lastly, since both \u003cem\u003eu\u003csub\u003e0\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/em\u003e and \u003cem\u003eu\u003csub\u003e1\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/em\u003e remained statistically significant, other variables beyond the included Level 2 variables (teacher experience and teacher gender) are suggested to still have a statistically significant influence on the Level 1 intercept and slope.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eDiscussion\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIn Study 1, a hierarchical linear model was used to analyze how teacher experience and gender influence the peer relationships of students with higher BMIs. The results indicated that students with higher BMIs were negatively affected in terms of their peer relationships; the extent of this negative impact varied depending on teacher characteristics.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eFirst, the results showed that the negative impact of higher BMIs on peer relationships was reduced when the teacher had more teaching experience. Experienced teachers generally possess stronger classroom management skills and a deeper understanding of individual student differences [31,20], allowing them to foster a more inclusive classroom environment. Therefore, teachers with greater experience are more capable of helping overweight students form more positive interactions with their peers [32,33].\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSecond, teacher gender also served as an important moderating variable. Previous studies have shown that compared to male teachers, female teachers tend to create more supportive classroom environments and demonstrate greater emotional sensitivity and individualized support in teacher-student interactions [4]. These characteristics generally help promote positive peer relationships among students. However, in this study, for students with higher BMIs, the negative impact on peer relationships was more pronounced in classrooms led by female teachers. This may be because female teachers, while paying more attention to these students, may have unintentionally emphasized their physical differences, thereby hindering the formation of natural peer relationships [34].\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Study 2","content":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eParticipants\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSince the analysis in Study 1 was based on secondary data collected 11 years ago, it was necessary to verify whether the same results could still be obtained to ensure the reliability and validity of the findings. To address this, Study 2 applied a survey research method involving 413 middle school students (male = 197 [Grade 1 = 68, Grade 2 = 70, Grade 3 = 59]; female = 216 [Grade 1 = 68, Grade 2 = 85, Grade 3 = 63]) from five middle schools, to examine whether the results from Study 1 could be replicated.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eMeasurement Tools\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eBMI and Teacher Gender\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe method for measuring BMI in Study 2 was the same as in Study 1. Students\u0026rsquo; height and weight were measured, and BMI was calculated using the formula: BMI = weight (kg) / height (m\u0026sup2;). Based on the calculated BMI values, students with BMIs \u0026le; 25 (underweight or normal weight) were coded as \u0026lsquo;0\u0026rsquo;, and those with BMIs \u0026ge; 25 (overweight) were coded as \u0026lsquo;1\u0026rsquo;. Teacher gender was also coded, with male teachers as \u0026lsquo;0\u0026rsquo; and female teachers as \u0026lsquo;1\u0026rsquo;.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eTeacher Experience\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTeacher experience was measured by asking the question, \u0026ldquo;How many years of teaching experience does your homeroom teacher have?\u0026rdquo; with the following response options: 1 = \u0026ldquo;More than 1 year but less than 2 years,\u0026rdquo; 2 = \u0026ldquo;More than 2 years but less than 5 years,\u0026rdquo; 3 = \u0026ldquo;More than 5 years but less than 10 years,\u0026rdquo; and 4 = \u0026ldquo;More than 10 years.\u0026rdquo; Students unsure about their homeroom teacher\u0026rsquo;s experience were encouraged to confirm the information by contacting the teacher before responding.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003ePeer Relationship\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003ePeer relationships were measured using a questionnaire developed by Aroian et al. (2008)[35]. This scale consists of six items representing a single factor, including statements such as: \u0026ldquo;1. I feel that I make friends easily; 2. I feel that people want to be friends with me; 3. My friends enjoy playing with me; 4. My friends feel comfortable when they are with me; 5. My friends enjoy talking with me; 6. I do not like playing alone.\u0026rdquo; Confirmatory factor analysis yielded statistically significant results (\u003cem\u003e\u0026chi;\u0026sup2;\u003c/em\u003e = 18.67, \u003cem\u003edf\u003c/em\u003e = 6, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e \u0026lt; .01), but the model showed good fit (\u003cem\u003eGFI\u003c/em\u003e = 0.986, \u003cem\u003eTLI\u003c/em\u003e = 0.973, \u003cem\u003eCFI\u003c/em\u003e = 0.989, \u003cem\u003eRMSEA\u003c/em\u003e = 0.072). The internal consistency reliability of the scale (\u003cem\u003eCronbach\u0026rsquo;s \u0026alpha;\u003c/em\u003e) was confirmed to be 0.871.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eResearch Procedure and Data Analysis\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eUnlike Study 1, which used hierarchical data, Study 2 employed a survey method to determine whether the same results could be obtained with a different statistical analysis process and sample. Data were collected through random sampling from five middle schools. The researcher visited each school, obtained permission from school authorities, and distributed questionnaires to students who voluntarily agreed to participate. The purpose of the study and instructions for completing the survey were explained in detail before conducting the survey. On the first day, parental consent forms were distributed, and only students who submitted signed consent forms from their guardians the following day were allowed to participate in the survey.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe collected data were analyzed using SPSS 26.0. Spearman\u0026apos;s rho correlation analysis was conducted for categorical variables, while Pearson correlation analysis was used for continuous variables to examine the relationships between variables. To assess the reliability and validity of the survey, internal consistency reliability (\u003cem\u003eCronbach\u0026rsquo;s \u0026alpha;\u003c/em\u003e) was calculated to evaluate the scale\u0026rsquo;s reliability, and confirmatory factor analysis was conducted using AMOS 26.0 to test the construct validity of the questionnaire. To interpret the moderating effects of teacher experience and gender, interaction graphs were created. The significance level was set at \u003cem\u003ep\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e\u0026lt; .05.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eResearch Results\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eDescriptive Statistics Analysis\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe correlations and basic descriptive statistics of the variables used in the analysis are presented in \u0026lt;Table 3\u0026gt;. The results showed that all correlation coefficients were below .70, indicating a low risk of multicollinearity [36]. Additionally, skewness values were within \u0026plusmn;2 and kurtosis within \u0026plusmn;7, confirming that the data followed a normal distribution [37]. The correlation analysis revealed a statistically significant positive relationship between teacher experience and peer relationships (\u003cem\u003er\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e= .441, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e = .001), and a significant negative relationship between BMI and peer relationships (\u003cem\u003er\u003c/em\u003e = \u0026ndash;.360, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e \u0026lt; .001), indicating that overweight students tended to have poorer peer relationships.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eTable 3. Correlations and Descriptive Statistics\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cdiv align=\"center\"\u003e\n \u003ctable border=\"0\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\" width=\"99%\"\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 23px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eVariable\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 19px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 19px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 19px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 19px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 23px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1. Teacher Experience\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 19px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 19px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 19px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 19px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 23px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2. Teacher Gender\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 19px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-.323**\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 19px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 19px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 19px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 23px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3. BMI\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 19px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-.084\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 19px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.001\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 19px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 19px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 23px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4. Peer Relationship\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 19px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.441**\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 19px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-.471**\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 19px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-.360**\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 19px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 23px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eM\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 19px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.570\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 19px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 19px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 19px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e5.320\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 23px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eSD\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 19px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.775\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 19px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 19px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 19px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.337\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 23px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSkewness\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 19px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-1.906\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 19px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 19px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 19px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.374\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 23px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eKurtosis\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 19px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.050\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 19px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 19px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 19px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.030\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"5\" style=\"width: 100px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eNote.\u003c/em\u003e \u003cem\u003e**\u003c/em\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e\u003cem\u003eCorrelations are statistically significant at the .01 level (one-tailed).\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n \u003c/table\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eHierarchical Regression Analysis\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTo examine whether the effect of BMI on peer relationships differs according to teacher experience and teacher gender, a hierarchical regression analysis was conducted. As shown in \u0026lt;Table 4\u0026gt;, the combined explanatory power of the independent variable, two moderator variables, and their interaction terms on peer relationships was 43%, which was statistically significant (\u003cem\u003eF\u003c/em\u003e(7, 405) = 43.76, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e \u0026lt; .001). Among the two-way interaction terms, the interaction between BMI and teacher gender was statistically significant (\u003cem\u003et\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e= -2.46, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e \u0026lt; .01). To interpret this two-way interaction effect, an interaction graph was created as shown in \u0026lt;Figure 2\u0026gt;. The analysis revealed that as students\u0026rsquo; BMI increased, their peer relationship scores decreased; this negative trend was more pronounced in classes taught by female teachers than those taught by male teachers, supporting the findings from Study 1.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eHowever, the interaction between BMI and teacher experience was not statistically significant (\u003cem\u003et\u003c/em\u003e = -1.49, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e = .136), but the three-way interaction of BMI \u0026times; teacher experience \u0026times; teacher gender showed a marginal level of statistical significance (\u003cem\u003et\u003c/em\u003e = 1.83, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e = .067). To interpret this three-way interaction, a graph was created as shown in \u0026lt;Figure 3\u0026gt;. The results indicated that for female teachers with higher levels of experience, the negative slope of the relationship between BMI and peer relationships tended to be weaker compared to that of less experienced female teachers. In contrast, among male teachers, lower teaching experience was associated with a positive relationship between BMI and peer relationships, suggesting that in such classrooms, higher-BMI students experienced more favorable peer relationships.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eTable 4. Results of Hierarchical Regression Analysis\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ctable border=\"1\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\" width=\"99%\"\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 13px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 14px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eDV\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"4\" style=\"width: 72px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePeer Relationship\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 10px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u0026beta;\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 11px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eS.E.\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 15px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003et\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 34px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eR\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e(\u003cem\u003e∆R\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/em\u003e for a \u0026acute; b \u0026acute; c)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 13px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eIV\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 14px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eBMI \u003csup\u003ea\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 10px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-.25\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 11px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.28\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 15px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-.89\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"7\" style=\"width: 34px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.43\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e( .01\u003csup\u003e\u0026dagger;\u003c/sup\u003e\u003csup\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/sup\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 13px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePMV\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 14px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eTE \u003csup\u003eb\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 10px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.60\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 11px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.16\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 15px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.84\u003csup\u003e***\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 13px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSMV\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 14px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eTG \u003csup\u003ec\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 10px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-.62\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 11px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.20\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 15px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-3.40\u003csup\u003e**\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"4\" style=\"width: 13px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eIT\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 14px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ea\u0026times;b\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 10px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-.34\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 11px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.23\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 15px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-1.49\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 14px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ea\u0026times;c\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 10px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-.80\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 11px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.30\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 15px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-2.64\u003csup\u003e**\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 14px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eb\u0026times;c\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 10px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-.42\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 11px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.17\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 15px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-2.46\u003csup\u003e*\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 14px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ea\u0026times;b\u0026times;c\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 10px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.46\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 11px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.24\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 15px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.83\u003csup\u003e\u0026dagger;\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n\u003c/table\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eNote\u003c/em\u003e\u003cem\u003e.\u003c/em\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003eDV = dependent variable; IV = independent variable; PMV = primary moderator variable; SMV = secondary moderator variable; IT = interaction term; TE = teaching experience; TG = teacher gender\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003csup\u003e***\u0026nbsp;\u003c/sup\u003e\u003cem\u003ep\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e\u0026lt; .001, \u003csup\u003e**\u0026nbsp;\u003c/sup\u003e\u003cem\u003ep\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e\u0026lt; .01, \u003csup\u003e*\u0026nbsp;\u003c/sup\u003e\u003cem\u003ep\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e\u0026lt; .05, \u003csup\u003e\u0026dagger;\u0026nbsp;\u003c/sup\u003e\u003cem\u003ep\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e\u0026lt; .10\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eDiscussion\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIn Study 2, a hierarchical regression analysis was conducted to replicate the findings of Study 1 by examining the moderation effect of students\u0026rsquo; BMI, teacher experience, and teacher gender on peer relationships, as well as their moderated moderation effect. Consistent with Study 1, BMI was found to be negatively associated with peer relationships. This result supports the findings of Puhl and Latner (2007), who reported that students with higher BMIs are more likely to face discrimination in social interactions. Additionally, Lobo et al. (2025) argued that adolescents with higher BMIs tend to experience greater social isolation and negative evaluations in school settings [34,38]. These findings suggest that students with higher BMIs may face greater challenges in forming and maintaining peer relationships.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eBased on the findings from Study 1, two-way interaction effects between BMI and teacher experience, and between BMI and teacher gender were examined. Among these, only the interaction between BMI and teacher gender showed a significant effect. Consistent with Study 1, results from Study 2 also indicated that when the homeroom teacher was female, the negative impact of high BMI on peer relationships was more pronounced. Interestingly, while there was no significant two-way interaction between BMI and teacher experience, the results suggested the possibility of a significant three-way interaction effect involving BMI, teacher experience, and teacher gender.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAmong female teachers, consistent with the findings of Study 1, greater teaching experience tended to reduce the negative relationship between BMI and peer relationships. However, in the case of male teachers, lower teaching experience was associated with a more positive relationship between BMI and peer relationships. According to Wolff et al. (2021), teacher experience significantly influences classroom management style, with experienced teachers tending to prefer structured and institutionalized management scripts to maintain instructional quality and efficiency [39]. While such pre-established structures can be effective for overall classroom operations, they may be less responsive to the individual social needs of students with specific physical characteristics such as BMI. In particular, novice teachers, whose teaching styles are not yet fully fixed, tend to manage classrooms in more flexible and adaptive ways, often showing greater openness in their interactions with students [40]. This flexibility and openness may offer students with higher BMIs more opportunities for social participation and help alleviate disadvantages in peer relationships. Therefore, in the case of male teachers, lower teaching experience may have played a positive role in creating a more inclusive peer environment for students with higher BMIs.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"General Discussion","content":"\u003cp\u003eBoth Study 1 and Study 2 demonstrated that students with higher BMIs experience more negative peer relationships. This suggests that appearance can influence social interactions, and students with higher BMI may face challenges in forming social networks due to social prejudice and stereotypes [41,42]. Given that adolescence is a period of heightened sensitivity to appearance, students with higher BMIs are likely to be more susceptible to peer rejection during this stage [43]. Teacher gender also played a consistent role in both studies in the relationship between BMI and peer relationships. Specifically, the negative impact of high BMI on peer relationships was more pronounced in classrooms led by female teachers, whereas this effect was relatively mitigated in classrooms led by male teachers.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eHowever, the results regarding teacher experience differed between Study 1 and Study 2. In Study 1, we found that greater teaching experience mitigated the negative impact of BMI on peer relationships. This indicates that experienced teachers are more capable of creating inclusive learning environments, strengthening classroom cohesion, and reducing social pressure stemming from appearance-based biases [44]. However, this effect was not observed in Study 2, possibly due to the presence of a moderated moderation effect. Due to the nature of the hierarchical linear modeling used in Study 1, it was limited in detecting such three-way interactions, whereas the hierarchical regression analysis used in Study 2 offers the advantage of testing moderated moderation effects. Through Study 2, it was newly discovered that when teacher experience was low and the teacher was male, BMI had a positive influence on peer relationships. This finding emerged uniquely from the analysis in Study 2.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003ePrevious studies have primarily focused on the impact of BMI on mental health [45] or academic achievement [46]. In contrast, this study distinguishes itself by examining the influence of BMI on peer relationships and further exploring how teacher-related factors moderate this relationship. This adds a unique dimension to the existing literature. Additionally, this study confirmed the important role of teacher experience in supporting the social adaptation of students with higher BMIs and revealed the distinct influence of teacher gender on the social interactions of these students.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe findings of this study offer several important implications for the educational field. First, teacher training programs should include content that highlights the importance of student appearance-related factors such as BMI. Teachers should be educated on the social challenges that students with higher BMI may face and be trained in strategies for creating more inclusive classroom environments [47], as well as in management practices that support the social adaptation of students with high BMIs. Second, educational policies should promote teamwork and cooperative learning activities to reduce the negative impact of body shape differences on social interaction. Third, support systems should be established to enhance the self-esteem of students with higher BMIs and help them adapt smoothly to peer relationships [48].\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe relationship between teachers and students is not a simple one-to-one interaction but a complex, multidimensional structure, necessitating appropriate analytical tools that reflect this complexity. Although Study 2 involved the collection of new data, it was still conducted as a cross-sectional study, limiting its ability to capture the long-term effects of BMI on peer relationships. Therefore, future studies should employ hierarchical analyses using more recent longitudinal data. Additionally, since this study focused on Chinese middle school students, it is difficult to generalize the relationship between BMI and peer relationships across different cultural contexts. Future research should include comparative analyses across different countries and educational systems.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Conclusion","content":"\u003cp\u003eThis study systematically analyzed the impact of BMI on peer relationships among middle school students through two empirical investigations and explored the moderating effects of teacher experience and gender. The findings revealed that students with higher BMIs face greater challenges in peer relationships; however, experienced teachers were found to effectively mitigate these negative effects. Moreover, male teachers were shown to reduce the adverse impact of BMI on social adaptation more effectively than female teachers. These findings provide substantial empirical evidence for educational management, teacher training, and psychological support for students. Future research should further explore similar phenomena in different cultural contexts and adopt longitudinal designs to examine the long-term effects of BMI on adolescents\u0026rsquo; social development in greater depth.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Abbreviations","content":"\u003cp\u003eBMI: Body Mass Index\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eCEPS: China Education Panel Survey\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eHLM: Hierarchical Linear Modeling\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003ePR: Peer Relationship\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTE: Teaching Experience\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTG: Teacher Gender\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRCM: Random-Coefficient Model\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eCM: Conditional Model\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eUM: Unconditional Model\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eDV: Dependent Variable\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIV: Independent Variable\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003ePMV: Primary Moderator Variable\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSMV: Secondary Moderator Variable\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIT: Interaction Term\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSD: Standard Deviation\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSE: Standard Error\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eCFI: Comparative Fit Index\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTLI: Tucker\u0026ndash;Lewis Index\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eGFI: Goodness-of-Fit Index\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRMSEA: Root Mean Square Error of Approximation\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Declarations","content":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eEthics approval and consent to participate\u003c/strong\u003e:\u0026nbsp;This study was submitted to and approved by the Academic Ethics Committee of Kangwon National University (IRB Approval No. 2025-07-001). All procedures involving human participants were conducted in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional committee and with the 1964 Declaration of Helsinki and its later amendments. Informed consent was obtained from all participants; for minors, written informed consent was additionally obtained from their legal guardians.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eConsent for publication\u003c/strong\u003e: Not applicable.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAvailability of data and materials\u003c/strong\u003e: The datasets used and/or analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eCompeting interests\u003c/strong\u003e: The authors declare that they have no competing interests.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eFunding\u003c/strong\u003e: This research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAuthors\u0026rsquo; Contributions\u003c/strong\u003e: Conceptualisation, CM and MS; methodology, MS; software, CM and MS; formal analysis, CM and MS; investigation, MS; data curation, MS; writing\u0026mdash;original draft preparation, CM, SZand MS; writing\u0026mdash;review and editing, CM and MS; supervision, MS.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"References","content":"\u003col\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eLiu Y. The role of peer relationships in adolescents\u0026rsquo; psychological well-being. SHS Web Conf. 2023;180:03027. doi:10.1051/shsconf/202318003027.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eShao Y, Kang S, Lu Q, Zhang C, Li R. How peer relationships affect academic achievement among junior high school students: The chain mediating roles of learning motivation and learning engagement. BMC Psychol. 2024;12:278. doi:10.1186/s40359-024-01780-z.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eWang H. The effects of school climate, parent\u0026ndash;child closeness, and peer relations on the problematic internet use of Chinese adolescents: testing the mediating role of self-esteem and depression. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2022;19(13):7583. doi:10.3390/ijerph19137583.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eGraziano F, Mastrokoukou S, Monchietto A, Marchisio C, Calandri E. The moderating role of emotional self-efficacy and gender in teacher empathy and inclusive education. Sci Rep. 2024;14(1):22587. doi:10.1038/s41598-024-70836-2.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eZhang Z, Wang Y, Deng W, Ma X, Qi C. The impact of teacher care on teacher\u0026ndash;student relationship: evidence from cross-sectional and longitudinal data. Front Psychol. 2025;16:1551081. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2025.1551081.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eXianguo W, Amirrudin S. Teacher leadership research in China (2020\u0026ndash;2024): trends, gaps, and future directions in educational development. Int J Educ Humanit. 2025;5(2):375\u0026ndash;386. doi:10.58557/(ijeh).v5i2.320.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eWang T, Lee JS. \u0026ldquo;A total warp\u0026rdquo;? Negotiating teacher authority in a Chinese heritage language classroom. J Lang Teach. 2025;5(1):1\u0026ndash;13. doi:10.54475/jlt.2025.003.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eAlnahdi GH, Schwab S. The impact of gender differences in teachers\u0026rsquo; teaching practices and attitudes on students\u0026rsquo; math and science achievement in Saudi Arabia: evidence from TIMSS 2019 data. Front Psychol. 2023;14:1066843. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1066843.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eJacobs W, Merianos AL, Smith ML, Nabors L, Fajayan A, Valente TW. Examining the role of weight status and individual attributes on adolescent social relations. J Adolesc Health. 2020;67(1):108\u0026ndash;114. doi:10.1016/j.jadohealth.2020.01.014.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eMaheux AJ, Burnell K, Choukas-Bradley S. Bidirectional associations between online and offline appearance concerns during early-to-middle adolescence. Dev Psychol. 2024;60(10):1885\u0026ndash;1901. doi:10.1037/dev0001795.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eZhao D, Xiao W, Tan B, Zeng Y, Li S, Zhou J, Song P. Association between dietary habits and emotional and behavioral problems in children: the mediating role of self-concept. Front Nutr. 2025;12:1426485. doi:10.3389/fnut.2025.1426485.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eLi P, Lyu J, Zhou S, Liu Z, Feng X, Lin Y, Wang H. Association of peer network with childhood obesity in DECIDE-Children Program. Nutrients. 2023;15(19):4154. doi:10.3390/nu15194154.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eSymes W, Lazarides R, Hu\u0026szlig;ner I. The development of student teachers\u0026rsquo; teacher self-efficacy before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. Teach Teach Educ. 2023;122:103941. doi:10.1016/j.tate.2022.103941.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eLazarides R, Watt HM, Richardson PW. Teachers\u0026rsquo; classroom management self-efficacy, perceived classroom management and teaching contexts from beginning until mid-career. Learn Instr. 2020;69:101346. doi:org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2020.101346.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eChen J, Jiang H, Justice LM, Lin TJ, Purtell KM, Ansari A. Influences of teacher\u0026ndash;child relationships and classroom social management on child-perceived peer social experiences during early school years. Front Psychol. 2020;11:586991. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2020.586991.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eMoolenaar NM. A social network perspective on teacher collaboration in schools: theory, methodology, and applications. Am J Educ. 2012;119(1):7\u0026ndash;39. doi:10.1086/667715.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eAyar D, Aksu \u0026Ccedil;, Polat F, Elkoca A. The effects of popularity perceptions and social appearance anxiety on the desire of young people to have aesthetic procedures on social media. Curr Psychol. 2025;44:3811\u0026ndash;3820. doi:10.1007/s12144-025-07424-8.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eYiyi O, Xue X, Jiong L, Yanhui Z. Research on the influence of body image on college students\u0026rsquo; weight-loss intention: chained intermediary analysis of self-efficacy and self-esteem. Front Psychol. 2024;15:1458259. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1458259.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eBakibangou YB, Balou GF, Ibara RT. Inclusion des \u0026eacute;l\u0026egrave;ves ob\u0026egrave;ses en \u0026Eacute;ducation Physique et Sportive dans les coll\u0026egrave;ges publics de Brazzaville: une analyse des pratiques enseignantes. Lakisa Rev Sci Educ. 2024;4(8):279\u0026ndash;290. doi:10.55595/lakisa.v4i8.206.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eRukavina P, Doolittle S, Li W, Beale‐Tawfeeq A, Manson M. Teachers\u0026rsquo; perspectives on creating an inclusive climate in middle school physical education for overweight students. J Sch Health. 2019;89(6):476\u0026ndash;484. doi:10.1111/josh.12760.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003ePoulou MS, Garner PW. Teacher\u0026ndash;student relationships: the roles of teachers\u0026rsquo; emotional competence, social emotional learning beliefs, and burnout. Teach Teach. 2025;1\u0026ndash;22. doi: 10.1080/13540602.2024.2435080.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eBhuvaneshwara C, Chehayeb L, Haberl A, Siedentopf J, Gebhard P, Tsovaltzi D. InCoRe\u0026mdash;An interactive co-regulation model: training teacher communication skills in demanding classroom situations. arXiv. 2025. doi:10.48550/arXiv.2502.20025.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eImran M, Sultan A, Ali F. Gender differences in teacher\u0026rsquo;s pedagogical practices and attitudes towards students\u0026rsquo; learning. J Educ Soc Stud. 2024;5(1):176\u0026ndash;182. doi:10.52223/jess.2024.5117.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eHidalgo SG, Henning T, Gomez F, Perez M. Examining teacher concerns and anxiety on the implementation of a universal body image program. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2024;21(4):419. doi:10.3390/ijerph21040419.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eJennings PA, Greenberg MT. The prosocial classroom: teacher social and emotional competence in relation to student and classroom outcomes. Rev Educ Res. 2009;79(1):491\u0026ndash;525. doi:10.3102/0034654308325693.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eBlazar D. Teacher and teaching effects on students\u0026rsquo; academic performance, attitudes, and behaviors [dissertation]. Cambridge (MA): Harvard University; 2016.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eBlazar D, Kraft MA. Teacher and teaching effects on students\u0026rsquo; attitudes and behaviors. Educ Eval Policy Anal. 2017;39(1):146\u0026ndash;170. doi:10.3102/0162373716670260.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eNutter S, Ireland A, Alberga AS, Brun I, Lefebvre D, Hayden KA, Russell-Mayhew S. Weight bias in educational settings: a systematic review. Curr Obes Rep. 2019;8:185\u0026ndash;200. doi:10.1007/s13679-019-00330-8.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eCarrington B, Tymms P, Merrell C. Role models, school improvement and the \u0026lsquo;gender gap\u0026rsquo;\u0026mdash;do men bring out the best in boys and women the best in girls? Br Educ Res J. 2008;34(3):315\u0026ndash;327. doi:10.1080/01411920701532202.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eRaudenbush SW, Bryk AS, Cheong YF, Congdon RT, du Toit M. HLM 7: hierarchical linear and nonlinear modeling. Lincolnwood (IL): Scientific Software International; 2011.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eKenney EL, Redman MT, Criss S, Sonneville KR, Austin SB. Are K-12 school environments harming students with obesity? A qualitative study of classroom teachers. Eat Weight Disord. 2017;22:141\u0026ndash;152. doi:10.1007/s40519-016-0268-6.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eCardenal ME, D\u0026iacute;az-Santana O, Gonz\u0026aacute;lez-Betancor SM. Teacher\u0026ndash;student relationship and teaching styles in primary education: a model of analysis. J Prof Cap Community. 2023;8(3):165\u0026ndash;183. doi:10.1108/JPCC-09-2022-0053.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eJansen PW, Verlinden M, Dommisse-van Berkel A, Mieloo CL, Raat H, Hofman A, Tiemeier H. Teacher and peer reports of overweight and bullying among young primary school children. Pediatrics. 2014;134(3):473\u0026ndash;480. doi:10.1542/peds.2013-3274.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003ePuhl RM, Latner JD. Stigma, obesity, and the health of the nation\u0026rsquo;s children. Psychol Bull. 2007;133(4):557\u0026ndash;580. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.133.4.557.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eAroian KJ, Hough ES, Templin TN, Kaskiri EA. Development and psychometric evaluation of an Arab version of the Family Peer Relationship Questionnaire. Res Nurs Health. 2008;31(5):402\u0026ndash;416. doi:10.1002/nur.20277.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eHair JF, Black WC, Babin BJ, Anderson RE. Multivariate data analysis. 7th ed. Upper Saddle River (NJ): Pearson; 2010.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eWest SG, Finch JF, Curran PJ. Structural equation models with nonnormal variables: problems and remedies. In: Hoyle RH, editor. Structural equation modeling: concepts, issues, and applications. Thousand Oaks (CA): Sage Publications; 1995. p. 56\u0026ndash;75.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eLobo AC, Shanbhag S, Jaidev MD, Prabhu HS. Behavioral patterns in overweight and obese school-going adolescents. Arch Ment Health. 2025;26(1):101-105. doi:10.4103/amh.amh_110_24.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eWolff CE, Jarodzka H, Boshuizen HP. Classroom management scripts: a theoretical model contrasting expert and novice teachers\u0026rsquo; knowledge and awareness of classroom events. Educ Psychol Rev. 2021;33(1):131\u0026ndash;148. doi:10.1007/s10648-020-09542-0.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eDe Klerk ED, Palmer JM. Navigating a path of uncertainty: profiling novice teachers as adaptive leaders. IAFOR J Educ. 2024;12(3):299\u0026ndash;323. doi:10.22492/ije.12.3.12.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eCerolini S, Vacca M, Zegretti A, Zagaria A, Lombardo C. Body shaming and internalized weight bias as potential precursors of eating disorders in adolescents. Front Psychol. 2024;15:1356647. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1356647.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eDi Pasquale R, Celsi L. Stigmatization of overweight and obese peers among children. Front Psychol. 2017;8:524. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00524.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eVoelker DK, Reel JJ, Greenleaf C. Weight status and body image perceptions in adolescents: current perspectives. Adolesc Health Med Ther. 2015;6:149\u0026ndash;158. doi:10.2147/AHMT.S68344.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eAli HH, Bashir R, Raza AA, Ejaz H, Shabir R, Aftab MJ. Role of inclusive education in promoting equity in education: teacher\u0026rsquo;s perspectives. Qual Res. 2024;24(1):1\u0026ndash;19. https://qualitativeresearchjournal.com/index.php/view/article/view/31.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eIversen KD, Pedersen TP, Rasmussen M, Hansen MBL, Roikjer BH, Teilmann G. Mental health and BMI in children and adolescents during one year in obesity treatment. BMC Pediatr. 2024;24(1):406. doi:10.1186/s12887-024-04835-7.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eBielik V, Nos\u0026aacute;ľ V, Nechalov\u0026aacute; L, \u0026Scaron;p\u0026aacute;nik M, Žilkov\u0026aacute; K, Grendar M. The prediction model of academic achievement based on cardiorespiratory fitness and BMI status for ninth-grade students. BMC Pediatr. 2025;25(1):20. doi:10.1186/s12887-024-05353-2.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eCardoza K. Kids in larger bodies do worse in school. One reason may be teacher bias. Teen Vogue. 2024.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eKim YM. Mirror, mirror on the wall: the role of self-esteem and attachments in early adolescent body-esteem. Int J Ment Health Promot. 2024;26(9):1017\u0026ndash;1024. doi:10.32604/ijmhp.2024.057597.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003c/ol\u003e"}],"fulltextSource":"","fullText":"","funders":[],"hasAdminPriorityOnWorkflow":false,"hasManuscriptDocX":true,"hasOptedInToPreprint":true,"hasPassedJournalQc":"","hasAnyPriority":false,"hideJournal":false,"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":"bmc-psychology","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"externalIdentity":"psyo","sideBox":"Learn more about [BMC Psychology](http://bmcpsychology.biomedcentral.com/)","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"","title":"BMC Psychology","twitterHandle":"BMC_series","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":true,"editorialSystem":"stoa","reportingPortfolio":"BMC Series","inReviewEnabled":true,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true},"keywords":"BMI, teacher experience, teacher gender, peer relationship","lastPublishedDoi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-7072936/v1","lastPublishedDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-7072936/v1","license":{"name":"CC BY 4.0","url":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"},"manuscriptAbstract":"\u003cp\u003eThis study examines the influence of body mass index (BMI) on peer relationships among students, focusing on teacher-related factors (teacher experience and gender) using hierarchical linear and regression analyses. Study 1 applied a hierarchical linear model to 2013\u0026ndash;2014 China Education Panel Survey (CEPS) data, analyzing 100 teachers (Level 2) and 2,002 students (Level 1). It explored how teacher experience and gender moderated the relationship between student BMI and peer relationships. Study 2 used survey research with 413 students to replicate Study 1\u0026rsquo;s findings through hierarchical regression analysis. In Study 1, students with higher BMIs had poorer peer relationships. However, this negative association was reduced when the teacher was male or had more teaching experience. In Study 2, the negative BMI\u0026ndash;peer relationship was again mitigated when the homeroom teacher was male, replicating Study 1\u0026rsquo;s results. Although teacher experience showed no significant effect in Study 2, a new finding emerged: when male homeroom teachers had relatively little experience, higher BMI was associated with better peer relationships. These findings suggest that teacher gender and experience can moderate the social effects of BMI among students. Both panel data and survey research confirm their role in student social adjustment. As such, teacher-related factors may serve as valuable references for educational policy and teacher training aimed at supporting students facing peer rejection due to weight-related stigma.\u003c/p\u003e","manuscriptTitle":"Influence of Chinese adolescents’ BMI on peer relationships: The moderating role of teachers’ experience and gender","msid":"","msnumber":"","nonDraftVersions":[{"code":1,"date":"2025-09-05 11:19:57","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-7072936/v1","editorialEvents":[{"type":"communityComments","content":0},{"type":"editorInvitedReview","content":"","date":"2025-09-04T04:29:59+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"283739540217175930189205989679383479865","date":"2025-08-31T12:09:05+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewersInvited","content":"","date":"2025-08-28T15:45:59+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorInvited","content":"","date":"2025-07-24T10:52:07+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorAssigned","content":"","date":"2025-07-24T10:45:24+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"checksComplete","content":"","date":"2025-07-23T05:02:44+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"submitted","content":"BMC Psychology","date":"2025-07-23T04:59:35+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""}],"status":"published","journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"bmc-psychology","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"externalIdentity":"psyo","sideBox":"Learn more about [BMC Psychology](http://bmcpsychology.biomedcentral.com/)","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"","title":"BMC Psychology","twitterHandle":"BMC_series","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":true,"editorialSystem":"stoa","reportingPortfolio":"BMC Series","inReviewEnabled":true,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true}}],"origin":"","ownerIdentity":"dcb788ca-3efe-407a-84f6-1064a77ec251","owner":[],"postedDate":"September 5th, 2025","published":true,"recentEditorialEvents":[],"rejectedJournal":[],"revision":"","amendment":"","status":"under-review","subjectAreas":[],"tags":[],"updatedAt":"2025-09-05T11:19:58+00:00","versionOfRecord":[],"versionCreatedAt":"2025-09-05 11:19:57","video":"","vorDoi":"","vorDoiUrl":"","workflowStages":[]},"version":"v1","identity":"rs-7072936","journalConfig":"researchsquare"},"__N_SSP":true},"page":"/article/[identity]/[[...version]]","query":{"redirect":"/article/rs-7072936","identity":"rs-7072936","version":["v1"]},"buildId":"8U1c8b4HqxoKbykW_rLl7","isFallback":false,"isExperimentalCompile":false,"dynamicIds":[84888],"gssp":true,"scriptLoader":[]}