| Literature DB >> 36186869 |
Jiaying Zhang1,2, Guangyao Lin1, Qiaole Cai1, Qian Hu3, Yuan Xu2, Zhaoming Guo2, Defan Hong2, Yingying Huang2, Yijun Lv4, Jing Chen5, Suo Jiang1,2.
Abstract
Few studies have explored the trajectories of Chinese early adolescent depressive symptoms or comprehensively considered the factors of family and peers. The present study aimed to identify the trajectories of depressive symptoms in early adolescence using a school-based sample assessed in three waves. The study also examined whether family and peer factors were significant predictors. A total of 586 Chinese primary and middle school students participated in the survey. A growth mixture model was used to find the trajectories of depressive symptoms, and multinominal logistic regression was used to identify the predictors. Three trajectories were identified, including a stable-low class, an increasing class, and a high-decreasing class. Results indicated that gender, parental psychological aggression and neglect, parental psychological control, traditional bullying/cyberbullying victimization, and friendship quality were significant predictors. However, witnessing intimate partner violence, parental behavior control, and traditional bullying/cyberbullying perpetration could not significantly predict the trajectories. The findings of this study can provide an empirical basis for teachers and clinical interveners to determine different development trajectories of depressive symptoms and carry out prevention and intervention.Entities:
Keywords: depressive symptoms; development trajectories; early adolescence; family; peers
Year: 2022 PMID: 36186869 PMCID: PMC9520917 DOI: 10.3389/fpsyt.2022.914055
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Psychiatry ISSN: 1664-0640 Impact factor: 5.435
Descriptive statistics of study variables and correlations between them.
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | ||
| 1. Baseline depressive symptoms | 1.71 ± 0.50 | |||||||||
| 2. Witnessing intimate partner violence | 1.23 ± 0.50 | 0.31 | ||||||||
| 3. Psychological aggression/neglect | 1.80 ± 0.86 | 0.41 | 0.44 | |||||||
| 4. Parental psychological control | 2.06 ± 0.84 | 0.21 | 0.23 | 0.46 | ||||||
| 5. Parental behavioral control | 2.91 ± 0.86 | −0.13 | 0.04 | 0.01 | 0.29 | |||||
| 6. Traditional bullying perpetration | 0.39 ± 0.58 | 0.27 | 0.28 | 0.41 | 0.24 | –0.07 | ||||
| 7. Traditional bullying victimization | 0.76 ± 0.84 | 0.40 | 0.27 | 0.35 | 0.23 | –0.06 | 0.33 | |||
| 8. Cyberbullying perpetration | 1.19 ± 0.37 | 0.25 | 0.23 | 0.26 | 0.20 | –0.02 | 0.28 | 0.24 | ||
| 9. Cyberbullying victimization | 1.25 ± 055 | 0.27 | 0.31 | 0.30 | 0.27 | 0.00 | 0.25 | 0.24 | 0.39 | |
| 10. Friendship quality | 2.53 ± 0.30 | −0.23 | −0.15 | −0.15 | –0.04 | 0.26 | −0.24 | −0.26 | −0.18 | −0.20 |
*p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001.
Relative fit indices for class models 1 through 5.
| Number of classes | AIC | BIC | Adj. BIC | BLRT | VLMR | Entropy |
| Percentage |
| 1 | 11616.36 | 11629.48 | 11619.96 | − | − | − | − | |
| 2 | 11578.00 | 11608.62 | 11586.39 | 0.40 | 137/449 | 23%/77% | ||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 4 | 11529.51 | 11595.11 | 11547.49 | 0.79 | 465/16/38/67 | 79%/3%/6%/12% | ||
| 5 | 11537.69 | 11620.78 | 11560.47 | 0.80 | 468/15/65/38/0 | 80%/3%/11%/6%/0 |
Bold shows the best fit.
FIGURE 1Depressive symptoms trajectories.
Predictors from family and peers of depressive symptom trajectories.
| Predictors | Stable-low class | Stable-low class | Increasing class | ||||||
|
| OR | 95% CI |
| OR | 95% CI |
| OR | 95% CI | |
| Gender (1 = male) |
|
|
| 0.683 | 1.245 | 0.435∼3.567 | 0.074 | 2.783 | 0.907∼8.540 |
| Origin (1 = urban) | 0.292 | 1.396 | 0.751∼2.597 | 0.776 | 0.859 | 0.301∼2.452 | 0.389 | 0.616 | 0.204∼1.858 |
| Father’s education | 0.420 | 1.190 | 0.779∼1.818 | 0.673 | 1.169 | 0.566∼2.414 | 0.963 | 0.982 | 0.452∼2.134 |
| Mother’s education | 0.158 | 0.714 | 0.447∼1.139 | 0.868 | 0.935 | 0.421∼2.072 | 0.535 | 1.310 | 0.559∼3.070 |
| Witnessing intimate partner violence | 0.795 | 1.061 | 0.678∼1.660 | 0.809 | 1.087 | 0.551∼2.147 | 0.908 | 1.054 | 0.432∼2.572 |
| Psychological aggression/neglect |
|
|
| 0.110 | 1.440 | 0.920∼2.253 | 0.167 | 0.639 | 0.339∼1.206 |
| Parental behavioral control | 0.918 | 0.984 | 0.732∼1.326 | 0.290 | 0.767 | 0.470∼1.253 | 0.662 | 0.870 | 0.0464∼1.628 |
| Parental psychological control | 0.460 | 1.127 | 0.821∼1.546 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Traditional bullying perpetration | 0.672 | 0.909 | 0.585∼1.413 | 0.472 | 0.786 | 0.408∼1.515 | 0.491 | 0.698 | 0.251∼1.942 |
| Traditional bullying victimization |
|
|
|
|
|
| 0.441 | 1.240 | 0.717∼2.145 |
| Cyberbullying perpetration | 0.859 | 1.059 | 0.566∼1.980 | 0.983 | 0.989 | 0.377∼2.598 | 0.997 | 0.997 | 0.253∼3.934 |
| Cyberbullying victimization |
|
|
|
|
|
| 0.512 | 0.809 | 0.429∼1.525 |
| Friendship quality | 0.476 | 0.768 | 0.372∼1.586 |
|
|
| 0.206 | 0.383 | 0.087∼1.694 |
Bold shows the significant results. OR is odds ratio. If the OR value > 1, the stronger the factor, the less likely the individual is to be in the reference group; On the contrary, if the OR value < 1, it means that the stronger the factor is, the more likely the individual is in the reference group.