Empathy and Self-Compassion Mediate the Relationships between Parental Attachment, Prosocial Behavior, and Antisocial Behavior among Adolescents after the Jiuzhaigou Earthquake

DOI: https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-2627633/v1

Abstract

Objective

This study examined the mediating roles of empathy and self-compassion in the relationship between parental attachment, prosocial behavior, and antisocial behavior among Chinese adolescents after the Jiuzhaigou earthquake.

Methods

A total of 411 adolescents (M = 14.73, SD = 0.91) were assessed 16 months after the Jiuzhaigou earthquake using self-report questionnaires of trauma exposure, parental attachment, empathy, self-compassion, prosocial behavior, and antisocial behavior.

Results

The parental attachment had a positive effect on prosocial behavior via empathy and positive self-compassion, as well as via an indirect path from empathy to positive self-compassion. Parental attachment had a negative effect on antisocial behavior via empathy and negative self-compassion, and had an indirect path from empathy to negative self-compassion.

Conclusions

These findings indicate that enhancing parental attachment may promote prosocial behavior and reduce antisocial behavior of post-earthquake adolescents. Empathy and self-compassion play significant mediating roles between parental attachment, prosocial behavior, and antisocial behavior.

Highlights

1. The present study examined the mediating roles of empathy and self-compassion in the association between parental attachment, prosocial behavior, and antisocial behavior among Chinese adolescents after an earthquake. 

2. Parental attachment can promote prosocial behavior and prevent antisocial behavior among post-traumatic adolescents. 

3. Empathy and different components of self-compassion played significant mediating roles between parental attachment prosocial behavior, and antisocial behavior.

Introduction

An earthquake is a major natural traumatic event that has a serious negative impact on human behavioral response and mental health (Cisler et al., 2011; Ehring, Razik, & Emmelkamp, 2011; Feder et al., 2013). Researchers have focused on the psychological reactions of earthquake survivors, such as depression disorder, post-traumatic stress disorder, and anxiety disorder (Ehlers & Clark, 2000; Guo et al., 2018; Cheng et al., 2013). However, only a few researchers have focused on the behavioral responses of adolescents who experienced traumatic events in earthquakes. Adolescence is the key period of a human’s lifelong physical and mental development, and the impact of traumatic events on adolescents is enormous and far-reaching (Steinberg, 2005). Therefore, studying the internal mechanism of adolescent behavioral response after traumatic earthquake events is of great significance.

Antisocial Behavior and Prosocial Behavior

When individuals experience traumatic events, they often have negative behavioral reactions, and antisocial behavior is one of the representative negative behavioral reactions (Ford et al., 2012). Antisocial behavior is a pattern of behavior characterized by neglect and violation of the interests of others, such as assault, vandalism, deception, and theft (American Psychiatric Association, 2013). Social information processing model (Holtzworth-Munroe, 1992) points out that when individuals experience serious natural disasters, they often have unreasonable beliefs, such as that the surrounding environment is hostile and threatening. These irrational beliefs can cause individuals to exhibit antisocial behaviors such as aggression and destructive behavior (Taft et al., 2012). Most empirical studies also support the view that children and adolescents may exhibit different antisocial behaviors after a major earthquake disaster (Cheng et al., 2013; Wang et al., 2020). 

Meanwhile, Vollhardt and Staub (2011) found that after an earthquake, individuals are more likely to actively participate in prosocial behaviors such as rescuing, donating money, and providing volunteer services. These prosocial behaviors have positive and important significance for the mutual aid reconstruction after an earthquake. Vollhardt (2009) described this phenomenon as the altruistic behavior that comes from experiencing suffering.

Prosocial behavior and antisocial behavior often coexist in groups that have experienced catastrophic traumatic events (Eron & Huesmann, 1984; Gomà-i-Freixanet, 1995). Therefore, Are there common factors and underlying mechanisms that influence both of these behavior patterns? This study includes prosocial and antisocial behaviors to provide new insights for psychological intervention in post-earthquake adolescent behavioral patterns.

Parental Attachment affects Antisocial Behavior and Prosocial Behavior

For adolescents, the family environment can promote the development of their social function and shape their behavioral pattern (Hirschi, 1969). Parental attachment, which is defined as the emotional bond between adolescents and their parents (Bowlby, 1969), is an important part of the family environment. It can provide supportive resources for adolescents to cope with the stress caused by traumatic events (Tian et al., 2018). Moreover, parental attachment may play an important role in the prosocial behaviors and antisocial behaviors of individuals who have experienced catastrophic traumatic events.

In terms of the relationship between parental attachment and prosocial behavior, attachment theory (Bowlby, 1969) suggested that individuals are born with caregiving systems. These systems can guide people to pay more attention to the feelings and needs of others and can encourage individuals to provide protection and support to those in need (Mikulincer & Shaver, 2007; Mikulincer et al., 2005). High levels of parental attachment sets the important psychological foundation for a caregiving system that enables individuals to feel safe in providing help without worrying excessively about the internal resources consumed. Hence, High levels of parental attachment promotes individuals’ prosocial behavior (Mikulincer & Shaver, 2007; Richman et al., 2015; Wang et al., 2017). 

Previous theories and studies have provided evidence for the relationship between attachment and antisocial behavior. According to social control theory (Hirschi, 1969), antisocial behavior is low in families with strong affective ties, because adolescents who are strongly attached to their parents are more likely to care about the normative expectations of their parents, which are born against antisocial behavior. Existing empirical studies suggest that parental attachment can significantly reduce the level of antisocial behavior in adolescents (Arbona & Power, 2003; Thompson & Gullone, 2008; Bekker et al., 2007).

Although previous studies have generally shown that parental attachment as an environmental factor can influence adolescent behavior patterns, only a few studies have explored the potential mechanisms of parental attachment on prosocial and antisocial behaviors in the context of natural disasters. In previous studies, one potential mechanism of particular interest in understanding the links between parental attachment and behaviors is empathy (Carlo et al., 2012). 

Mediating Role of Empathy

As a personality trait, empathy is the ability to accurately feel the feelings of others and understand the meaning of those feelings (Kalisch, 1973). Regarding the association between parental attachment and empathy, attachment theory provides evidence that empathic responses to self and others are based on positive internal working models (Stern & Cassidy, 2018). Individuals with high levels of parental attachment, that is, with positive internal working model about themselves and their environment, perceived others with greater understanding and acceptance. This ability enables them to pay attention to the feelings and needs of others and respond empathically when they feel the suffering of others (Kestenbaum, 1989; Bretherton & Munholland, 2008). Research also supports the relationship between parental attachment and empathy (Schoeps et al., 2020; Thompson & Gullone, 2008). 

Furthermore, empathy has been indicated as an important predictor of prosocial behaviors and antisocial behaviors (McGinley & Carlo, 2012). According to the empathy altruism hypothesis proposed by Batson (1987), when individuals witness others’ misfortune, a high level of empathy will cause them to feel compassion and encourage them to implement prosocial behaviors. In a study of adolescents who had experienced an earthquake, empathy was found to have a positive effect on prosocial behavior (Wang & Wu, 2020). However, the relationship between empathy and antisocial behavior from previous studies is not consistent. Some scholars have noted, for example, that feelings of concern for others would inhibit intention to hurt others. Thus, empathy may be expected to negatively predict antisocial behaviors (Eisenberg & Fabes, 1998; Carlo et al., 2012). However, some researchers have suggested that individuals with high empathic abilities are more likely to experience negative emotions when they perceive others’ distress. These negative emotions, if not properly regulated, will increase the occurrence of antisocial behavior (Gill & Calkins, 2003). Therefore, the effect of empathy on antisocial behavior needs to be further explored in trauma samples.

In addition to the personality factor of empathy, what other psychological processes play a role in the relationship between parental attachment, prosocial behavior, and antisocial behavior? Gilbert's theory of emotional regulation system suggests that early parental attachment can cultivate individuals' level of self-compassion (Gilbert, 2014), and the ability of self-compassion will further affect individuals' psychological and behavioral outcomes (Pietromonaco & Barrett, 2000; Jiang et al., 2017). Therefore, self-compassion may work as an underlying mechanism that plays a role between parental attachment and post-traumatic behavioral responses.

Mediating Role of Self-compassion

Self-compassion is defined as an individual’s tendency to understand, forgive, and not judge themselves in the face of suffering (Neff, 2003a). Conceptually, self-kindness, common humanity and mindfulness are the positive components of self-compassion, representing an individual's tolerance and understanding of himself, calmness towards suffering, and rational and clear attitude towards the current predicament. While the three dimensions of self-judgment, isolation and over-identification are negative components, which are a tendency to be extremely harsh to self and excessively exaggerated to pain (Neff, 2003a). Self-compassion is commonly measured as the sum of all items of the Self-compassion Scale (SCS; Neff, 2003b) after reverse scoring the items that assessed negative components. However, reliance on the SCS total score as an indicator of self-compassion is debatable. The positive and negative components of self-compassion are relatively independent in structure and have different effects on an individual’s mental health (Brenner et al., 2017; Muris & Petrocchi, 2016; Muris et al., 2018). Furthermore, Mackintosh et al. (2018) pointed out that future studies on the relationship between attachment, self-compassion, and psychopathology must account for the different dimensions of self-compassion. Therefore, we divide self-compassion into positive self-compassion and negative self-compassion in this study.

The relationship between parental attachment and self-compassion has been supported by earlier theories. Attachment theory (Bowlby, 1969, 1979) suggested that early life experiences of attachment images shape key internal working models of the self. Individuals with positive attachment are more likely to form positive internal working models of self, because they fully feel the security and support provided by attachment figures. This security enables individuals to form values worthy of being cared about and to concern and love themselves when they are suffering (Mikulincer & Shaver, 2007). Thus, high quality parental attachment may enable individuals to employ strategies of positive self-compassion when experiencing negative events (Homan, 2018; Jiang et al., 2017). In terms of the relationship between attachment and negative self-compassion, those with a higher level of insecure attachment are likely to develop a negative view of self (Pietromonaco et al., 2000) and to be self-critical in suffering (Cantazaro & Wei, 2010). Naturally, self-criticism and blame are important manifestations of negative self-compassion. In an empirical study of adults, low levels of parental attachment was found to be a significantly positive predictor of negative self-compassion (Brophy et al., 2020). 

As an emotional regulation strategy, self-compassion can further influence individuals’ post-traumatic behavioral responses. In terms of the relationship between positive self-compassion and prosocial behavior, a person with positive self-compassion is expected to be more likely to recognize when another is suffering from negative events. This ability is an important step in showing prosocial behavior (Atkins & Parker, 2012). Researchers suggest that building the capacity for caring and accepting oneself in suffering can help extend compassion to others. Such capacity makes individuals more likely to help others when they witness their suffering (Hofmann, et al., 2011). Thus, positive self-compassion may facilitate prosocial behavior (Longe, 2009; Crocker & Canevello, 2008; Liu et al., 2021). However, individuals with high negative self-compassion may focus on their own painful emotions and interpersonal estrangement from others, which may lead to social withdrawal and loneliness, neither of which are conducive to engaging in prosocial behaviors (Charmaz, 1980; Kahn, 1965). 

Self-compassion and antisocial behavior are also correlated. In the face of setbacks and failures, positive self-compassion can reduce the risk of antisocial behavior by alleviating negative emotional reactions such as anger and impulsivity (Leary, 2007; Neff & Beretvas, 2013). In contrast, people with higher levels of negative self-compassion tend to make excessive demands to others as well as being hard on themselves (Kahn, 1965). If the demands and expectations of others are not met, feelings of dissatisfaction, anger and hostility will arise, which may lead to aggressive behavior (Milrod, 1972; Wilson, 1985). 

Although empathy and self-compassion are potential mediators of the relation between parental attachment, prosocial behavior, and antisocial behavior, these two mediators have a combined relationship. Theoretically, when a person with a high level of empathy witnesses someone else’s misfortune, his or her own painful emotions may be triggered (Loggia et al., 2008). Moreover, self-compassion naturally arises from the affective component of empathy when one desires to alleviate the negative emotions through self-regulation (Steffen & Masters, 2005). Existing studies have demonstrated a positive association between empathy and positive self-compassion (Marshall et al., 2020; Rachel et al., 2018). Although a few studies have examined the relationship between empathy and negative self-compassion, evidence shows an association between empathy and variables with concepts similar to negative self-compassion. Heym et al. (2019) mentioned in their study that individuals with high levels of empathy may be at risk of over-identification due to excessive emotional involvement when witnessing others’ misfortune. However, in a study of medical workers, empathy was found to be significantly negatively correlated with self-judgment (Beaumont et al., 2016). Therefore, the possible effects of empathy on negative self-compassion have not been consistent in previous studies. The relationship between these two variables needs to be explored in future studies.

Present study

Empathy and self-compassion can theoretically mediate the relationship of parental attachment with prosocial/antisocial behavior. However, to our knowledge, no empirical study has simultaneously examined the mediating roles of empathy, positive self-compassion, and negative self-compassion in the relationship between parental attachment and prosocial/antisocial behavior. Therefore, the main objective of the current study is to examine how adolescents’ parental attachment after the Jiuzhaigou earthquake predicted prosocial/antisocial behavior by including empathy, positive self-compassion, and negative compassion as mediating variables. 

Methods

Participants and procedures 

One and a half years after the Jiuzhaigou earthquake, we contacted local education authorities in the most severely affected county. We informed them of the aims and methods of this study, and offered to provide psychological services when they were required. With the help of these authorities, we obtained approval from two middle schools to recruit students for our research, and then randomly selected several classes from each school. All the selected students agreed to participate; they comprised 411 adolescent earthquake survivors. The mean age was 14.73 (SD = 0.91), ranging from 12.0 to 17.0 years. Of the 411 participants, 225 (54.7%) were female, 186 (45.3%) were male, and one did not report gender.

Participants came from two middle schools in Jiuzhaigou County in Sichuan Province. Both schools were affected by the earthquake. The study protocol was approved by the research ethics committee of Beijing Normal University (No. 202003190026). Before the formal investigation, we solicited the approval of the principals and teachers of the two middle schools. Additionally, we obtained the signed consent forms from students and their guardians on a voluntary basis. All questionnaires were recalled immediately after completion.

Measures

Trauma exposure. The trauma exposure questionnaire revised by Qi et al. (2020) was adopted to measure the severity of Chinese adolescent survivors’ traumatic experiences. This scale measured seven items, including whether participants witnessed harm or death and whether participants were notified afterwards of the harm or death of others. The scoring standard of this scale is a two-point scoring system, with each item having a score range of 0 (no) to 1 (yes). The sum of each participant’s scores considered an indicator of trauma exposure, and the scoring range of this questionnaire was from 0 to 7. The internal reliability of the questionnaire used is acceptable, and the Cronbach’s α of the questionnaire is 0.68.

Parental attachment. In this study, the Inventory of Parent and Peer Attachment (Armsden & Greenberg, 1989) was used to assess parental attachment of adolescents. This questionnaire provides an overall score for attachment security and scores on the three subscales: trust, communication, and alienation. In each sub-scale, the item format was a five-point Likert scale (1 = almost always or always true, 2 = often true, 3 = sometimes true, 4 = rarely true, and 5 = almost never or never true). In the present sample, the sub-scales of parental attachment showed good internal consistency reliability, and the Cronbach’s α of the questionnaire is 0.87.

Empathy. In this study, the 28-item self-report questionnaire Interpersonal Reactivity Index (IRI) (Davis, 1980) was used to assess participants’ empathy. This questionnaire is composed of four subscales (7 items each): perspective taking, fantasy scale, empathetic concern, and personal distress. Items range in score from 1 (does not describe me well) to 5 (describes me very well). According to Siu and Shek (2005), in the IRI, the items most representative of empathy are mainly reflected in the two dimensions of perspective taking and empathetic concern. On this basis, the two dimensions of viewpoint selection and empathic concern were selected in this study. The reliability of the scale was acceptable, and the Cronbach’s α of the questionnaire is 0.74.

Self-compassion. In this study, the 26-item SCS compiled by Neff (2003a) was used to measure participants’ self-compassion. This questionnaire was composed of six subscales, which were divided into positive self-compassion and negative self-compassion. Positive self-compassion includes three different dimensions, namely, common humanity, self-kindness, and mindfulness. Negative self-compassion includes three different dimensions, namely, isolation, self-judgment, and over-identification. The five-point Likert scale used in this scale had items that range in score from 1 to 5. Moreover, the applicability of this scale has been verified in post-traumatic Chinese adolescents (Liu, Wang, Wu, 2020). The internal reliability of PSC (Cronbach’s α = 0.70) and NSC (Cronbach’s α = 0.80) was good. 

Antisocial behavior. To assess antisocial behavior, participants completed the subscale of the Achenbach’s Youth Self-report version of the Child Behavior Checklist (Achenbach & Edelbrock, 1987). This scale includes nine items, and a three-point Likert Scale is used in this scale. The items range in score from 0 (none) to 2 (frequently). This scale shows good test–retest reliability and criterion validity in Chinese adolescents (Lan, Marci, & Moscardino, 2019). The internal reliability of the scale was acceptable (Cronbach’s α = 0.73).

Prosocial behaviorIn this study, the Prosocial Behaviors Scale was used to measure prosocial behaviors in Chinese adolescents. The scale is composed of 15 items, and the scale was specially developed for Chinese adolescents (Zhang & Kou, 2008). This scale is composed of four different dimensions, which are altruism, commonwealth-rule, interpersonal relationships, and personality traits. The Likert scale used in this study had items that range in score from 1 to 7. In the present sample, the Cronbach’s alpha index of internal consistency reliability for the scale was good (Cronbach’s α = 0.91).

Data analysis 

In this study, SPSS (Windows 24.0) and AMOS (22.0) software were used to analyze our data. The missing value for item level was minimal (i.e., the missing value for each individual was not more than 1.5%) and the data were missing at random. so were handled with maximum likelihood estimates (ML) in structural models.

In this study, we used the Chi-square values, comparative fit index (CFI), Tucker–Lewis index (TLI), root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA), and 95% confidence interval (CI) for model fit. According to academic consensus (Hu & Bentler, 1999), when CFI and TLI are greater than or equal to 0.09 and RMSEA is less than or equal to 0.08, the overall model fits well.

Results

Descriptive statistics and correlations among measures

Table 1 presents the correlation analysis among major variables. 

[Table 1 near here]

Structural equation model analyses

To test our hypothesis, we used four steps to examine the multiple mediating effects of empathy and self-compassion on the relationship between parental attachment, prosocial behavior, and antisocial behavior. First, we test the measurement model. The measurement model in this study consists of five latent variables, and each latent variable is extracted from the dimensions of each scale. According to the test results, the fitting indexes of the measurement model were acceptable: χ2/df = 2.17, CFI = 0.957, TLI = 0.949, RMSEA (90% CI) = 0.061 (0.048–0.075). The factor loadings of the indicators in the latent variables were significant (p < 0.001). 

Second, we established a direct effects model to test the influence of parental attachment on prosocial behavior and antisocial behavior (FIGURE 1). The fitting indexes of the direct effects were acceptable: c2/df = 3.56, CFI = 0.954, TLI = 0.923, RMSEA (90% CI) = 0.079 (0.061−0.098). The results of path analysis showed that parental attachment had a positive effect on prosocial behavior and a negative effect on antisocial behavior.

[FIGURE 1 near here]

After controlling for gender, age, and traumatic exposure, we built a mediating effect model to examine the mediating roles of empathy and self-compassion between parental attachment, prosocial behavior, and antisocial behavior. The fitting indexes of the indirect effects were acceptable: c2/df = 2.09, CFI = 0.962, TLI = 0.947, RMSEA (90% CI) = 0.052 (0.041−0.062). According to the results of path analysis, parental attachment had a negative effect on antisocial behavior, but the predictive effect on prosocial behavior is not significant. Moreover, parental attachment had an indirect and positive effect on prosocial behavior via empathy and positive self-compassion, as well as via an indirect path from empathy to positive self-compassion. Parental attachment had a negative effect on antisocial behavior via empathy and negative self-compassion, but had an indirect and positive path from empathy to negative self-compassion on antisocial behavior. 

[FIGURE 2 near here]

Finally, bias-corrected bootstrap tests were performed on the path with significant indirect effect in the path analysis. Table 2 illustrates the results of these tests. The 95% CI of the above mediating effect did not contain 0, and the mediating effect was significant. The indirect effect accounts for 43.6% of the total effect.

[TABLE 2 near here]

Discussion

This study have investigated the mediating roles of empathy and self-compassion in the relationships between parental attachment and prosocial/antisocial behavior. In the direct effects model, parental attachment has direct positive effects on prosocial behavior, which is consistent with previous studies (Mikulincer & Shaver, 2007; Wang, Sun, Zhao, Lai, & Zhou, 2017; Richman, DeWall, & Wolff, 2015). According to attachment theory (Bowlby, 1969), caregiving systems are an innate ability of human beings to directs one’s attention toward others’ distress and demands rather than exclusively focusing on his/her own vulnerability, provides protection, and support to those in need. The sense of security and supportive resources provided by high levels of parental attachment can promote the formation of adolescents’ caregiving system (Mikulincer et al., 2005), and then improve the level of adolescents’ prosocial behavior. Parental attachment can also play a significant negative predictive role for antisocial behavior, which is consistent with previous studies (Arbona & Power, 2003; Thompson & Gullone, 2008; Bekker et al., 2007). Therefore, high levels of parental attachment can make adolescents care more about what their parents expect of them, thus reducing the likelihood of antisocial behavior.

When considering relationships explained by empathy as a standalone mediator, parental attachment was associated with high levels of empathy, and concomitantly with more prosocial behavior and less antisocial behavior. These results were supported by findings from various prior studies (Schoeps, et al., 2020; Ardenghi et al., 2019; Wang & Wu, 2020; Carlo et al., 2007; Berger et al., 2015). Attachment theory (Bowlby, 1979) proposes that patterns of caregiving behavior shape an adolescent’s internal working model of the self and others, which is the basis of an individual’s ability to empathize. That is, high levels of parental attachment enable adolescents to have a positive internal working model, which leads to a stronger emotional resonance to others around them and a prompt response to others’ needs, which ultimately promotes their ability to empathize (Cozolino, 2006; Siegel, 2001). Adolescents with high levels of empathy were more likely to feel sorrow about others’ suffering. On the one hand, feelings of sorrow for someone else are an important motivation to alleviate others’ distress, and thus, to show more prosocial behavior toward others (Batson, 1991; Batson et al., 1989). On the other hand, individuals who experience high levels of empathy and related processes are presumed to feel responsibility toward others, and as a result are motivated to reduce their distress (Eisenberg & Fabes, 1998). In this study, therefore, adolescents with high levels of empathy showed lower levels of antisocial behavior.

Furthermore, the positive and negative components of self-compassion played an important mediating role in the relationship between parental attachment and prosocial/antisocial behavior. Specifically, parental attachment has a positive effect on prosocial behavior through positive self-compassion, which is consistent with previous studies (Homan, 2018; Jiang, et al., 2017; Longe, 2009; Crocker & Canevello, 2008; Liu et al., 2021). This result suggests that high levels of parental attachment is more likely to form positive internal working models of self, thus enabling adolescents to form values that they are worthy of being loved and cared for (Mikulincer & Shaver, 2012; Shaver et al., 2017). As a result, their level of positive self-compassion is improved. Adolescents who were adept in self-care after the earthquake were more likely to extend their kindness to others (Hofmann et al., 2011), thus exhibiting more prosocial behavior. In addition, parental attachment can negatively predict antisocial behavior by reducing negative self-compassion, which is consistent with results from recent studies (Brophy et al., 2020; Liu et al., 2021). The positive inner working model developed by high-quality parental attachment can promote individuals to view themselves and others around them from a positive perspective. Such adolescents usually have high self-evaluation and good interpersonal relationships (Mikulincer & Shaver, 2012; Shaver et al., 2017); hence, they are less likely to use negative self-compassion as an emotional regulation strategy when experiencing traumatic events. Considering that painful emotions and social isolation induced by negative self-compassion may be risk factors for antisocial behavior (Kahn, 1965; Milrod, 1972; Wilson, 1985; Liu et al., 2020), parental attachment can reduce the incidence of antisocial behavior by alleviating negative self-compassion.

Moreover, parental attachment has a two-mediator indirect effect on prosocial behavior and antisocial behavior through empathy via self-compassion. High quality parental attachment can cultivate the ability to empathize (Kestenbaum, 1989; Bretherton & Munholland, 2008). A high level of empathy can play a role in adolescents’ self-compassion, including positive self-compassion and negative self-compassion. In the aftermath of the earthquake, empathy for others who have also suffered negative events may result in unpleasant emotions, such as sadness and guilt, especially for adolescents (Loggia et al., 2008). Self-compassion naturally arises from the affective component of empathy when one desires to deal with negative emotions through self-regulation (Steffen & Masters, 2005). When the negative emotions caused by empathy bring painful feelings to individuals, the motivation of self-improvement will urge individuals to adopt the emotional regulation strategy of positive self-compassion to care for and treat themselves well (Breines & Chen, 2012), so as to help them alleviate negative psychological reactions. An individual who treats himself kindly and gently is more likely to exhibit prosocial behavior. However, the psychological impact from empathy for the misfortunes of others may trap an individual in pain for a long time, leading to strong feelings of loneliness and self-criticism (Heym et al., 2019). Therefore, empathy may increase people’s levels of negative self-compassion, which, in turn, promotes antisocial behavior. In general, parental attachment can promote adolescents’ prosocial behavior through the chain mediating effect of empathy and positive self-compassion. It can also increase antisocial behavior through the mediating path from empathy to negative self-compassion.

Finally, parental attachment could not influence antisocial behavior through positive self-compassion, and it could not influence prosocial behavior through negative self-compassion. Although this result is inconsistent with the results of previous studies (Neff & Beretvas, 2013; Charmaz, 1980; Kahn, 1965), it echoes the debate about the structure and concept of self-compassion in previous studies. Existing research has shown that the positive and negative components of self-compassion have unique effects on an individual’s psychological and behavioral responses, rather than the opposite (Brenner et al., 2017; Coroiu et al., 2018; Gilbert et al., 2006). Specifically, positive self-compassion has a stronger effect on positive psychological and behavioral outcomes, whereas negative self-compassion can induce more adverse psychological and behavioral responses (Montero-Marin et al., 2018; Muris and Petrocchi, 2016; Muris et al., 2018; Pfattheicher et al., 2017). In this study, although positive self-compassion promoted prosocial behavior, self-care and caring did not mean that antisocial behavior was prevented. In fact, a few scholars believe that positive self-compassion is a form of egoism, which may seek to comfort oneself by damaging the interests of others (Marshall et al., 2020). Similarly, although people with negative self-compassion are more likely to engage in antisocial behavior, it does not mean that it may further block prosocial behavior. Moreover, self-criticism and shame, which are associated with negative self-compassion, may even prompt individuals to exhibit altruistic behavior (Gausel et al., 2016). Therefore, at least in this study, positive and negative self-compassion, as two separate concepts, have different, and not only opposite effects, on the behavioral responses of post-traumatic adolescents.

Several limitations of the current study should be acknowledged. First, all data were collected by self-report scales, which may be susceptible to common method bias. In addition, prosocial behavior and antisocial behavior, for example, are likely to be influenced by the social desirability effect, leading to bias in the results. Future studies should use more evaluation methods to collect data. Second, this study explores the effect of empathy on self-compassion, and this relationship can be traced theoretically. However, the causal relationship between the two seems is not clear in previous studies. Therefore, collecting data on empathy and self-compassion at different times is necessary to examine their causal relationship.

Despite these limitations, this study used longitudinal analysis, which provides meaningful insights into the relationships between parental attachment, empathy, self-compassion, and prosocial and antisocial behaviors in the context of natural disasters. First, this study explores the potential mechanisms of family environmental factors on adolescents’ post-traumatic behavior responses from positive and negative perspectives. The findings not only confirm the applicability of attachment theory to the field of trauma, but also establish a dialectical integration perspective to explore the double-edged role of personality and emotion regulation strategy factors in family relationships and adolescents’ post-traumatic behavioral responses. Specifically, parental attachment can improve adolescents’ empathic ability and further enhance adolescents’ adaptive behavior through the emotional regulation strategy of positive self-compassion. However, empathizing with the misfortune of others may also activate adolescents’ negative self-compassion and lead to adverse behavioral responses. Therefore, psychological intervention workers should pay attention to adolescents’ attachment relationship, and if necessary, carry out family counseling to promote their harmonious relationship with their parents, so as to solve adolescents’ post-traumatic behavior problems. In addition, a dialectical perspective should be adopted in the intervention of post-traumatic adolescent behavioral response. Empathy and self-compassion, for example, may play positive and negative roles and lead to different post-traumatic behavioral responses.

Declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate

Informed consent was obtained from participating adolescents and their legal guardians. The study protocol was approved by the research ethics committee of Beijing Normal University (No. 202003190026). All procedures performed in this study involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of Beijing Normal University and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Consent for publication

Not applicable

Availability of data and materials

The datasets generated during and/or analyzed during the current study are available at https://pan.baidu.com/s/1lXQtRrT5zMC7t1kxxh8gKg?pwd=gzl1.

Funding

The current study was supported by “The National Natural Science Foundation of China” (Project No. 32071085) and “The Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities of China” (Project No. 2020NTSS02).

Authors’ contributions

A.L. was conceived of the study, performed the statistical analysis and interpretation, and drafted the manuscript; B.X. and W.W. participated in the design and helped to revise the manuscript; X.W. was involved in the conceptualization, ethical approval, interpretation and writing. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Competing interests 

The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare that are relevant to the content of this article.

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank the staff and administrators at our participating school sites. We are especially indebted to the adolescents and their parents and teachers whose participation made this research possible.

References

  1. Achenbach, T. M., Edelbrock, C., & Howell, C. T. (1987). Empirically based assessment of the behavioral/emotional problems of 2-and 3-year-old children. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 15(4), 629-650. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf00917246
  2. American Psychiatric Association. (2013). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders. Arlington, VA: American Psychiatric Association.
  3. Arbona, C., & Power, T. (2003). Parental attachment, self-esteem, and antisocial behaviors among African American, European American, and Mexican American adolescents. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 50(1), 40-51. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0167.50.1.40
  4. Armsden, G. & Greenberg, M. T. (1989). The inventory of parent peer attachment (IPPA). WA, USA: University of Washington.
  5. Atkins, P. W., & Parker, S. K. (2012). Understanding individual compassion in organizations: The role of appraisals and psychological flexibility. Academy of Management Review, 37(4), 524-546. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2010.0490
  6. Batson, C. D. (1987). Prosocial motivation: Is it ever truly altruistic? Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 20, 65-122. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0065-2601(08)60412-8
  7. Batson, C. D. (1991). The altruism question: Toward a social psychological answer. New York, NY: Psychology Press.
  8. Batson, C. D., Batson, J. G., Griffitt, C. A., Barrientos, S., Brandt, J. R., Sprengelmeyer, P., & Bayly, M. J. (1989). Negative-state relief and the empathy-altruism hypothesis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 56(6), 922-933. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.56.6.922
  9. Beaumont, E., Durkin, M., Martin, C. J. H., & Carson, J. (2016). Compassion for others, self-compassion, quality of life and mental well-being measures and their association with compassion fatigue and burnout in student midwives: A quantitative survey. Midwifery, 34, 239-244. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.midw.2015.11.002i
  10. Bekker, M. H., Bachrach, N., & Croon, M. A. (2007). The relationships of antisocial behavior with attachment styles, autonomy‐connectedness, and alexithymia. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 63(6), 507-527. https://doi.org/10.1002/jclp.20363
  11. Bowlby, J. (1969). Attachment and loss: Attachment (Vol. 1). London: Pimlico.
  12. Bowlby, J. (1979). The Bowlby-Ainsworth attachment theory. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 2(4), 637-638. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X00064955
  13. Breines, J. G., & Chen, S. (2012). Self-compassion increases self-improvement motivation. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 38(9), 1133-1143. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167212445599
  14. Brenner, R. E., Heath, P. J., Vogel, D. L., & Credé, M. (2017). Two is more valid than one: Examining the factor structure of the Self-Compassion Scale (SCS). Journal of Counseling Psychology, 64(6), 696-707. https://doi.org/10.1037/cou0000211
  15. Bretherton, I., & Mulholland, K. A. (2008). Internal working models in attachment relationship: Elaborating a central construct in attachment theory. In J. A. Cassidy & P. Shaver (Eds.), Handbook of attachment (pp. 102-127). Guilford Press.
  16. Brophy, K., Brähler, E., Hinz, A., Schmidt, S., & Körner, A. (2020). The role of self-compassion in the relationship between attachment, depression, and quality of life. Journal of Affective Disorders, 260, 45-52. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jad.2019.08.066
  17. Cantazaro, A., & Wei, M. (2010). Adult attachment, dependence, self‐criticism, and depressive symptoms: A test of a mediational model. Journal of Personality, 78(4), 1135-1162. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.2010.00645.x
  18. Carlo, G., McGinley, M., Hayes, R. C., & Martinez, M. M. (2012). Empathy as a mediator of the relations between parent and peer attachment and prosocial and physically aggressive behaviors in Mexican American college students. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 29(3), 337-357. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.2010.00645.x
  19. Cheng, J., Liang, Y. M., Zhou, Y. Y., Eli, B., & Liu, Z. K. (2019). Trajectories of PTSD symptoms among children who survived the Lushan earthquake: A four-year longitudinal study. Journal of Affective Disorders, 252, 421-427. 10.1016/j.jad.2019.04.047
  20. Cheng, K., Zhou, X., Chen, Q., Zhang, C., & Wu, X. (2013). The effect of posttraumatic stress disorder on aggressive behavior after the Wenchuan earthquake: The moderating effect of coping style. Psychological Development and Education, 29(6), 649-656. https://doi.org/ 10.16187/j.cnki.issn1001-4918.2013.06.007
  21. Cisler, J. M., Amstadter, A. B., Begle, A. M., Resnick, H. S., Danielson, C. K., Saunders, B. E., & Kilpatrick, D. G. (2011). PTSD symptoms, potentially traumatic event exposure, and binge drinking: A prospective study with a national sample of adolescents. Journal of Anxiety Disorders, 25(7), 978-987. 10.1016/j.janxdis.2011.06.006
  22. Coroiu, A., Kwakkenbos, L., Moran, C., Thombs, B., Albani, C., Bourkas, S., & Körner, A. (2018). Structural validation of the Self-Compassion Scale with a German general population sample. PloS ONE, 13(2), e0190771.  https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0190771
  23. Crocker, J., & Canevello, A. (2008). Creating and undermining social support in communal relationships: The role of compassionate and self-image goals. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 95(3), 555-575. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.95.3.555
  24. Davis, M. H. (1980). A multidimensional approach to individual differences in empathy. JSAS Catalog of Selected Documents in Psychology, 10, 85. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.44.1.113
  25. Ehlers, A., & Clark, D. M. (2000). A cognitive model of posttraumatic stress disorder. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 38(4), 319-345. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0005-7967(99)00123-0
  26. Ehring, T., Razik, S., & Emmelkamp, P. M. (2011). Prevalence and predictors of posttraumatic stress disorder, anxiety, depression, and burnout in Pakistani earthquake recovery workers. Psychiatry Research, 185(1-2), 161-166. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychres.2009.10.018
  27. Eisenberg, N., Eggum, N. D., & Di Giunta, L. (2010). Empathy-related responding: Associations with prosocial behavior, aggression, and intergroup relations. Social Issues and Policy Review, 4(1), 143-180. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1751-2409.2010.01020.x
  28. Eisenberg, N., Fabes, R. A., Shepard, S. A., Murphy, B. C., Jones, S., & Guthrie, I. K. (1998). Contemporaneous and longitudinal prediction of children's sympathy from dispositional regulation and emotionality. Developmental Psychology, 34(5), 910-924. https://doi.org/10.1037/0012-1649.34.5.910
  29. Eron, L. D., & Huesmann, L. R. (1984). The relation of prosocial behavior to the development of aggression and psychopathology. Aggressive Behavior, 10(3), 201-211. https://doi.org/10.1002/1098-2337(1984)10:3<201::AID-AB2480100304>3.0.CO;2-S
  30. Feder, A., Ahmad, S., Lee, E. J., Morgan, J. E., Singh, R., Smith, B. W., & Charney, D. S. (2013). Coping and PTSD symptoms in Pakistani earthquake survivors: Purpose in life, religious coping and social support. Journal of Affective Disorders, 147(1-3), 156-163. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jad.2012.10.027
  31. Ford, J. D., Chapman, J., Connor, D. F., & Cruise, K. R. (2012). Complex trauma and aggression in secure juvenile justice settings. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 39, 694-724. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093854812436957
  32. Gausel, N., Vignoles, V. L., & Leach, C. W. (2016). Resolving the paradox of shame: Differentiating among specific appraisal-feeling combinations explains pro-social and self-defensive motivation. Motivation and Emotion, 40(1), 118-139. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11031-015-9513-y
  33. Gilbert, P. (2014). The origins and nature of compassion focused therapy. British Journal of Clinical Psychology, 53(1), 6-41. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjc.12043
  34. Gill, K. L., & Calkins, S. D. (2003). Do aggressive/destructive toddlers lack concern for others? Behavioral and physiological indicators of empathic responding in 2-year-old children. Development and Psychopathology, 15(1), 55-71. https://doi.org/10.1017/s095457940300004x
  35. Gomà-i-Freixanet, M. (1995). Prosocial and antisocial aspects of personality. Personality and Individual Differences, 19(2), 125-134. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0191-8869(00)00121-5
  36. Guo, J., Liu, C., Kong, D., Solomon, P., & Fu, M. (2018). The relationship between PTSD and suicidality among Wenchuan earthquake survivors: The role of PTG and social support. Journal of Affective Disorders, 235, 90-95. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jad.2018.04.030
  37. Heym, N., Heasman, B. C., Hunter, K., Blanco, S. R., Wang, G. Y., Siegert, R., & Sumich, A. L. (2019). The role of microbiota and inflammation in self-judgement and empathy: Implications for understanding the brain-gut-microbiome axis in depression. Psychopharmacology, 236(5), 1459-1470. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00213-019-05230-2
  38. Hirschi, T. (1969). Social control theory. In F.T. Cullen, & R. Agnew (Eds.), Criminological theory: Past to present (pp. 219-227). Los Angeles, CA: Roxbury Publishing Company.
  39. Hofmann, S. G., Grossman, P., & Hinton, D. E. (2011). Loving-kindness and compassion meditation: Potential for psychological interventions. Clinical Psychology Review, 31(7), 1126-1132. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpr.2011.07.003
  40. Holtzworth-Munroe, A. (1992). Social skill deficits in maritally violent men: Interpreting the data using a social information processing model. Clinical Psychology Review, 12(6), 605-617. https://doi.org/10.1016/0272-7358(92)90134-T
  41.  Homan, K. J. (2018). Secure attachment and eudaimonic well-being in late adulthood: The mediating role of self-compassion. Aging and Mental Health, 22(3), 363-370. https://doi.org/10.1080/13607863.2016.1254597
  42. Hu, L. T., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6(1), 1-55. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705519909540118
  43. Jiang, Y., You, J., Zheng, X., & Lin, M. P. (2017). The qualities of attachment with significant others and self-compassion protect adolescents from non-suicidal self-injury. School Psychology Quarterly, 32(2), 143-155. https://doi.org/10.1037/spq0000187
  44. Kalisch, B. J. (1973). What is empathy? The American Journal of Nursing, 73(9), 1548-1552. https://doi.org/10.2307/3422614
  45. Kestenbaum, R. (1989). Individual differences in empathy among preschoolers: Relation to attachment history. New Directions for Child Development, 44, 51-63. https://doi.org/10.1002/cd.23219894405
  46. Lan, X., Marci, T., & Moscardino, U. (2019). Parental autonomy support, grit, and psychological adjustment in Chinese adolescents from divorced families. Journal of Family Psychology, 33(5), 511-520. https://doi.org/10.1037/fam0000514
  47. Leary, M. R., Tate, E. B., Adams, C. E., Batts Allen, A., & Hancock, J. (2007). Self-compassion and reactions to unpleasant self-relevant events: The implications of treating oneself kindly. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 92(5), 887-904. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.92.5.887
  48. Liu, A., Wang, W., & Wu, X. (2021) Self-compassion and posttraumatic growth mediate the relations between social support, prosocial behavior, and antisocial behavior among adolescents after the Ya’an earthquake, European Journal of Psychotraumatology, 12(1), 1864949. https://doi.org/10.1080/20008198.2020.1864949
  49. Loggia, M. L., Mogil, J. S., & Bushnell, M. C. (2008). Empathy hurts: Compassion for another increases both sensory and affective components of pain perception. Pain, 136(1-2), 168-176. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pain.2007.07.017
  50. Longe, O., Maratos, F. A., Gilbert, P., Evans, G., Volker, F., Rockliff, H., & Rippon, G. (2010). Having a word with yourself: Neural correlates of self-criticism and self-reassurance. NeuroImage, 49(2), 1849-1856. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2009.09.019
  51. Mackintosh, K., Power, K., Schwannauer, M., & Chan, S. W. (2018). The relationships between self-compassion, attachment and interpersonal problems in clinical patients with mixed anxiety and depression and emotional distress. Mindfulness, 9(3), 961-971. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12671-017-0835-6
  52. Marshall, S. L., Ciarrochi, J., Parker, P. D., & Sahdra, B. K. (2020). Is self‐compassion selfish? The development of self‐compassion, empathy, and prosocial behavior in adolescence. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 30, 472-484. https://doi.org/10.1111/jora.12492
  53. Mikulincer, M., & Shaver, P. R. (2007). Boosting attachment security to promote mental health, prosocial values, and inter-group tolerance. Psychological Inquiry, 18(3), 139-156. https://doi.org/10.1080/10478400701512646
  54. Mikulincer, M., Shaver, P. R., Gillath, O., & Nitzberg, R. A. (2005). Attachment, caregiving, and altruism: Boosting attachment security increases compassion and helping. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 89(5), 817-839. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.89.5.817
  55. Milrod, D. (1972). Self-pity, self-comforting, and the superego. The Psychoanalytic Study of the Child, 27(1), 505-528. https://doi.org/10.1080/00797308.1972.11822726
  56. Muris, P., van den Broek, M., Otgaar, H., Oudenhoven, I., & Lennartz, J. (2018). Good and bad sides of self-compassion: A face validity check of the Self-Compassion Scale and an investigation of its relations to coping and emotional symptoms in non-clinical adolescents. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 27(8), 2411-2421. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10826-018-1099-z
  57.  Neff, K. D. (2003a). Self-compassion: An alternative conceptualization of a healthy attitude towards oneself. Self and Identity, 2(2), 85-101. https://doi.org/10.1080/15298860309032
  58. Neff, K. D. (2003b). The development and validation of a scale to measure self-compassion. Self and Identity, 2(3), 223-250. https://doi.org/10.1080/15298860309027
  59. Neff, K. D., & Beretvas, S. N. (2013). The role of self-compassion in romantic relationships. Self and Identity, 12(1), 78-98. https://doi.org/10.1080/15298868.2011.639548
  60. Pietromonaco, P. R., & Barrett, L. F. (2000). The internal working models concept: What do we really know about the self in relation to others? Review of General Psychology, 4(2), 155-175. https://doi.org/10.1037/1089-2680.4.2.155
  61. Qi, J., Yang, X., Tan, R., Wu, X., & Zhou, X. (2020). Prevalence and predictors of posttraumatic stress disorder and depression among adolescents over 1 year after the Jiuzhaigou earthquake. Journal of Affective Disorders, 261, 1-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jad.2019.09.071
  62. Richman, S. B., DeWall, C. N., & Wolff, M. N. (2015). Avoiding affection, avoiding altruism: Why is avoidant attachment related to less helping? Personality and Individual Differences, 76, 193-197. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2014.12.018
  63. Schafer, J. L., & Graham, J. W. (2002). Missing data: Our view of the state of the art. Psychological Methods, 7(2), 147-177. https://doi.org/10.1037/1082-989X.7.2.147
  64. Schoeps, K., Mónaco, E., Cotolí, A., & Montoya-Castilla, I. (2020). The impact of peer attachment on prosocial behavior, emotional difficulties and conduct problems in adolescence: The mediating role of empathy. PloS ONE, 15(1), e0227627. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0227627
  65. Steffen, P. R., & Masters, K. S. (2005). Does compassion mediate the intrinsic religion-health relationship? Annals of Behavioral Medicine, 30(3), 217-224. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15324796abm3003_6
  66. Steinberg, L. (2005). Cognitive and affective development in adolescence. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 9(2), 69-74. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2004.12.005
  67. Stern, J. A., & Cassidy, J. (2018). Empathy from infancy to adolescence: An attachment perspective on the development of individual differences. Developmental Review, 47, 1-22. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dr.2017.09.002
  68. Taft, C. T., Creech, S. K., & Kachadourian, L. (2012). Assessment and treatment of posttraumatic anger and aggression: A review. Journal of Rehabilitation Research and Development, 49(5), 777-788. 10.1682/jrrd.2011.09.0156
  69. Thompson, K. L., & Gullone, E. (2008). Prosocial and antisocial behaviors in adolescents: An investigation into associations with attachment and empathy. Anthrozoös, 21(2), 123-137. https://doi.org/10.2752/175303708X305774
  70. Tian, Y., Wu, X., Wang, W., & Zhou, X. (2018). The relation between attachment and PTSD/PTG among adolescents after the Wenchuan earthquake: The mediating roles of cognitive reappraisal and expressive suppression. Psychological Development and Education, 34(1), https://doi.org/105-111. 10.16187 /j.cnki.issn1001-4918.2018.01.13
  71. Vachon, D. D., Lynam, D. R., & Johnson, J. A. (2013). The (non) relation between empathy and aggression: Surprising results from a meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 140(3), 751-773. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0035236
  72. Vollhardt, J. R. (2009). Altruism born of suffering and prosocial behavior following adverse life events: A review and conceptualization. Social Justice Research, 22, 53-97. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11211-009-0088-1
  73. Vollhardt, J. R., & Staub, E. (2011). Inclusive altruism born of suffering: The relationship between adversity and prosocial attitudes and behavior toward disadvantaged outgroups. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 81(3), 307-315. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1939-0025.2011.01099.x
  74. Wang, W., & Wu, X. (2020). Mediating roles of gratitude, social support and posttraumatic growth in the relation between empathy and prosocial behavior among adolescents after the Ya’an earthquake. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 52(3), 307-316. 10.3724/SP.J.1041.2020.00307
  75. Wang, W., Wu, X., Liu, A., & Lan, X. (2020). Moderating role of social support in the relationship between posttraumatic stress disorder and antisocial behavior in adolescents after the Ya'an earthquake. PsyCh Journal, 9(3), 350-358. https://doi.org/10.1002/pchj.343
  76. Wang, Y., Li, D., Sun, W., Zhao, L., Lai, X., & Zhou, Y. (2017). Parent-child attachment and prosocial behavior among junior high school students: Moderated mediation effect. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 49(5), 663-679. https://doi.org/10.3724/SP.J.1041.2017.00663
  77. Zhang, Q. P., & Kou, Y. (2008). A confirmative research on prototype concept structure of prosocial behavior endorsed by adolescents. Sociological Study, 4, 182-202. https://doi.org/10.19934/j.cnki.shxyj.2008.04.009

Tables

 TABLE 1 

Means, Standard Deviations, and Correlations of Main Variables

Variables               M±SD

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

1 Gendera

——

1

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2 Age

14.73±0.91

-0.15**

1

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

3 Traumatic Exposure

1.42±1.58

0.04

0.05

1

 

 

 

 

 

 

4 PA

83.30±14.91

0.05

-0.01

-0.08

1

 

 

 

 

 

5 Empathy

46.89±6.42

0.26***

-0.05

-0.01

0.23***

1

 

 

 

 

6 PSC

38.93±7.01

-0.01

-0.03

0.04

0.25***

0.37***

1

 

 

 

7 NSC

37.91±7.70

0.08

-0.16**

0.05

-0.12*

0.19***

0.29***

1

 

 

8 PB

73.98±15.54

0.14**

-0.03

-0.01

0.24***

0.46***

0.36***

0.07

1

 

9 AB

2.78±2.33

-0.31***

0.08

0.21***

-0.22***

-0.22***

-0.06

0.17***

-0.28***

1

Note. Codeda: 1 = male, 2 = female; PA = parental attachment; PSC = positive self-compassion; NSC = negative self-compassion; PB = prosocial behavior; AB = antisocial behavior. 

< 0.05, ** < 0.01, ***p < 0.001.  

TABLE 2

Bias-Corrected Bootstrap Tests of Mediating Effects

Path 

Standardized β

Standardized 95% CI

Low             High

PA-PSC-PB

0.046*

0.003

0.098

PA-NSC-AB

0.031*

-0.016

-0.079

PA-Empathy-PB

0.125***

0.049

0.232

PA-Empathy-AB

-0.083**

-0.057

-0.038

PA-Empathy-PSC-PB

0.036*

0.002

0.082

PA-Empathy-NSC-AB

0.012*

0.002

0.040

Note: PA = parental attachment; PSC = positive self-compassion; NSC = negative self-compassion; PB = prosocial behavior; AB = antisocial behavior.

 *< 0.05. **< 0.01. ***< 0.001.