The research team, led by Jing Wang and colleagues at Yangzhou University, followed 2,228 adolescents across five waves of measurement spanning three years. At baseline, the participants averaged just under 13 years of age, and 46.3 percent were girls. Rather than taking a single snapshot, the investigators repeatedly assessed three constructs: parental child-oriented perfectionism, parental negative attribution, and adolescent social anxiety. Child-oriented perfectionism refers to the degree to which parents hold excessively high standards specifically for their child, scrutinizing performance and demanding flawlessness. Negative attribution, meanwhile, is the tendency to interpret a child’s ambiguous or unwanted behavior as intentionally hostile, lazy, or characterologically flawed rather than as a product of circumstance, fatigue, or developmental immaturity.

Methodologically, the study’s power comes from its use of the random intercept cross-lagged panel model, or RI-CLPM, a statistical framework that has reshaped how developmental psychologists interpret longitudinal data. Traditional cross-lagged models conflate two very different sources of association: stable differences between families (some adolescents are simply more anxious than others, and some parents are simply more critical than others) and genuine within-person dynamics (the question of whether a rise in one variable in a given individual predicts a subsequent rise in another in that same individual). By separating a stable random intercept for each person from the time-specific fluctuations around it, the RI-CLPM isolates the within-person processes that actually carry implications for intervention. A correlation that looks alarming at the between-person level may dissolve entirely once stable trait-like differences are removed; conversely, genuine reciprocal dynamics may emerge that older designs masked.

What the researchers found at the within-person level was a robust, stable, reciprocal relationship between parental negative attribution and adolescent social anxiety, and this held for both boys and girls. In practical terms, when an adolescent’s social anxiety rose above their own typical level at one wave, their parents became more likely to attribute the child’s behavior negatively at the next wave. And when parents’ negative attributions spiked, the adolescent’s social anxiety rose in turn. This bidirectional pattern is consistent with transactional models of development, which hold that children and their social environments continuously shape one another rather than one simply programming the other. An anxious teenager who avoids eye contact or refuses social invitations may be read by a frustrated parent as deliberately uncooperative; that attribution may then color parenting behavior in ways that confirm and amplify the adolescent’s fear of evaluation.

The findings on child-oriented perfectionism add a second, more intricate layer. Parental negative attribution did not operate in isolation from perfectionistic expectations; instead, the two fed into each other in patterns that were distinctly gender-specific. Fathers’ negative attributions showed reciprocal associations with their own child-oriented perfectionism and with mothers’ perfectionism when the adolescent was a daughter. For sons, however, fathers’ negative attributions only unidirectionally predicted mothers’ child-oriented perfectionism. Mothers’ negative attributions, by contrast, showed reciprocal links with fathers’ child-oriented perfectionism for daughters, and unidirectionally predicted their own perfectionism for adolescents of both genders. The adolescent’s gender, in other words, was not a peripheral demographic variable but a key moderator of the entire dynamic system.

These gender-differentiated patterns resonate with a broader literature on parenting in Chinese cultural contexts, where fathers’ involvement has historically been shaped by traditional role expectations even as contemporary shifts have increased paternal presence in childcare. They also echo theoretical models proposing that fathers may exert a distinctive influence on the development of social anxiety in children, potentially through their characteristic styles of challenge, evaluation, and humor. The new findings suggest that in Chinese families, the interpretive lens a father applies to a daughter’s behavior may become tightly coupled with the perfectionistic standards both parents hold for her, whereas the coupling works differently for sons. Why daughters’ family systems show more reciprocal interweaving of blame and perfectionism remains an open question, but it aligns with evidence that parents may socialize emotions differently in boys and girls, and that girls may be more sensitive to social evaluative feedback during adolescence.

The clinical implications are considerable. Social anxiety is among the most common and most impairing conditions of adolescence, typically emerging during the very developmental window this study captured, when sensitivity to peer evaluation peaks and the brain’s social processing circuitry is undergoing profound reorganization. If parental negative attribution and adolescent social anxiety reinforce each other within individuals over time, then interventions that target only the adolescent’s cognition may be fighting half a battle. The results argue for family-based approaches that also retrain parental attributional habits—helping parents recognize when they are defaulting to hostile or characterological explanations for developmentally normal behavior, and breaking the loop before perfectionistic standards and blame become mutually entrenching.

The gender-specific findings sharpen that prescription further. A one-size-fits-all parenting workshop may miss the mark if the pathways linking blame, perfectionism, and anxiety genuinely differ for families of daughters versus sons. The authors suggest that their results provide a foundation for developing targeted, gender-sensitive intervention strategies designed to alleviate adolescent social anxiety. Screening tools that assess parental attributions, particularly fathers’ attributions toward daughters, could identify families at elevated risk, while attribution retraining—already used in programs for parents of children with behavior problems—could be adapted to address the perfectionism-anxiety nexus identified here.

As with any study, caveats apply. The sample was drawn from Chinese schools, and attributional norms, gender role expectations, and the cultural weight of academic perfectionism vary across societies, so replication in other cultural settings will be essential before generalizing. The measures relied on adolescent reports of parental behavior and attitudes, which capture perceived parenting rather than directly observed parenting. And while the RI-CLPM is a powerful tool for establishing within-person temporal dynamics, it cannot deliver the certainty of an experiment; unmeasured third variables could still contribute to the observed cross-lagged relations. The authors note that all data supporting the findings are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request, and the study was supported by the Double Innovation Talents Program of Jiangsu Province.

Even with those limitations, the study marks a meaningful advance. It moves the conversation about parental perfectionism and adolescent anxiety beyond static correlations and into the realm of dynamic, within-person processes unfolding over years. It demonstrates that the blame an adolescent perceives and the anxiety that adolescent carries are locked in a mutually reinforcing dance, and it shows that the choreography of that dance depends on which parent is doing the interpreting and whether the child is a daughter or a son. For researchers, it offers a template for how to study family influence with the rigor the question deserves. For parents, it offers a simpler, humbling takeaway: the stories you tell yourself about why your teenager behaves the way they do may matter more than you think—and changing those stories could help change how your child feels walking into a room full of strangers.

Subject of Research: Longitudinal reciprocal associations between parental child-oriented perfectionism, parental negative attribution, and adolescent social anxiety

Article Title: Longitudinal Reciprocal Associations between Parental Child‑oriented Perfectionism, Negative Attribution, and Social Anxiety in Chinese Adolescents: A Five‑wave RI‑CLPM Study

Article References: Wang, J., Xin, Z., Jiang, Z., & Wang, M. (2026). Longitudinal Reciprocal Associations between Parental Child‑oriented Perfectionism, Negative Attribution, and Social Anxiety in Chinese Adolescents: A Five‑wave RI‑CLPM Study. Child Psychiatry & Human Development. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10578-026-02106-3

Image Credits: AI Generated

DOI: 10.1007/s10578-026-02106-3

Keywords: social anxiety, parenting, perfectionism, negative attribution, adolescence, RI-CLPM, longitudinal study, Chinese adolescents, developmental psychology, family systems, gender differences, mental health

The study was led by Yunyun Huang and Yaohua Zhang, co-first authors, together with Song Chang, Min Xu, and Sufei Xin at Ludong University in Yantai, China. Their starting point was an ecological one: developmental science has long recognized that children rarely experience adversity in isolation. A teenager who is maltreated at home is more likely to be victimized by peers, and a student who perceives themselves as losing in social and academic competition often carries those vulnerabilities across settings. Prior work, including influential cohort studies published in The Lancet Psychiatry, has shown that childhood bullying and maltreatment produce overlapping adult mental health consequences, but less is known about how these exposures pattern together within adolescent populations—and what psychological mechanisms transmit their effects.

To answer that question, the team turned to latent profile analysis, a statistical technique that classifies individuals into unobserved subgroups based on their responses across multiple measures simultaneously. Rather than asking whether maltreatment predicts depression on average, latent profile analysis asks whether natural groupings of adolescents exist who share distinctive adversity signatures. Using this approach on self-reported childhood maltreatment, bullying victimization, and perceived weakness in social competition, the researchers identified three distinct profiles. The first, and by far the largest, was a low-adversity profile containing 84.2 percent of the sample—adolescents reporting relatively little hardship across family, peer, and school domains.

The remaining two profiles told a more troubling story. The second group, comprising 11.2 percent of participants, was characterized as a moderate-adversity profile with a predominantly family maltreatment signature: these adolescents reported elevated maltreatment at home, with comparatively lower levels of peer victimization and social competitive weakness. The third and smallest group, 4.6 percent of the sample, was a high-adversity profile marked predominantly by peer-related adversity—elevated bullying victimization and perceptions of losing in social competition—combined with substantial overall exposure. This profile-driven approach revealed something that single-variable analyses routinely obscure: adversity is not evenly distributed, and its most damaging configurations involve co-occurring exposures rather than isolated incidents.

The consequences were clear in the symptom data. Adolescents in both the moderate- and high-adversity profiles reported significantly more depressive symptoms—persistent sadness, anhedonia, and negative self-evaluation—than their low-adversity peers. They also scored higher on externalizing symptoms, the constellation of aggression, rule-breaking, and impulsive behavior that tends to attract attention from teachers and disciplinary systems rather than clinicians. Critically, the high-adversity profile showed the highest levels of both symptom classes, suggesting a dose-like relationship: the more domains in which adversity accumulates, the worse the psychological toll. This pattern is consistent with stress sensitization models, which propose that repeated exposure to threat calibrates the developing stress-response system toward hypervigilance and dysregulation.

But the study’s most theoretically interesting contribution lies in the mechanism it tested. The researchers examined belief in a just world, or BJW, a construct with deep roots in social psychology. First articulated by Melvin Lerner in 1980, the just-world hypothesis describes the widespread conviction that people generally get what they deserve and deserve what they get. Later scholarship, notably the work of Claudia Dalbert, refined this idea by distinguishing between general BJW—the belief that the world is fair for most people—and personal BJW, the belief that events in one’s own life tend to unfold fairly. For adolescents navigating adversity, this distinction matters. Personal BJW has been characterized as a personal resource that helps people cope with critical life events, while general BJW supports trust in institutions and social order.

Using multicategorical mediation analyses, the team tested whether these two forms of BJW statistically transmitted the association between adversity profiles and adolescent adjustment. The results were strikingly specific. Both general and personal BJW indirectly linked adversity profiles to depressive symptoms: adolescents in the higher-adversity groups held weaker just-world beliefs, and weaker just-world beliefs in turn predicted elevated depression six months later. For externalizing symptoms, however, only general BJW carried the indirect effect. Personal just-world beliefs did not mediate the pathway to aggressive and rule-breaking behavior. This asymmetry suggests that the two belief types serve partially distinct functions—protective for internalizing distress across both forms, but relevant to outward behavioral problems primarily through the broader, society-oriented belief that the world operates fairly.

The theoretical interpretation is compelling. Adversity, particularly victimization by the people who are supposed to care for you or the peers who share your daily environment, can shatter the fundamental assumption that the world is a predictable and fair place—a process consistent with Janoff-Bulman’s work on shattered assumptions following trauma. When that assumption collapses, adolescents lose a cognitive resource that normally buffers negative affect and sustains trust in social rules. Weakened personal BJW undermines the sense that one’s own efforts will be rewarded, feeding hopelessness and depressive cognition. Weakened general BJW erodes faith in fairness as an organizing principle, which may loosen the normative restraints that inhibit aggressive or delinquent conduct, a mechanism echoing general strain theory in criminology.

The practical implications follow directly. Screening programs that assess only one adversity type—say, bullying at school or maltreatment at home—may miss the adolescents at greatest risk, namely the small group experiencing high adversity across multiple domains simultaneously. Interventions that target just-world beliefs, for example by restoring experiences of fairness at school through transparent teacher justice, could offer a complementary protective lever alongside traditional trauma-informed care. Earlier studies in Chinese samples have linked just-world beliefs to academic resilience, gratitude, and forgiveness, and the present findings extend this literature to the domain of co-occurring adversity profiles. Because the study followed adolescents over six months, its mediation findings carry more temporal weight than purely cross-sectional designs, though the authors note that the datasets are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request and the work was funded by the Shandong Provincial Social Science Planning Project.

For the vast majority of adolescents—more than eight in ten in this sample—adversity exposure was low and adjustment was comparatively sound. But for roughly one in six, hardship was neither isolated nor transient, and the psychological costs registered within months. The study’s message to researchers and clinicians alike is that the architecture of adolescent adversity is profile-shaped, not ingredient-shaped, and that the quiet conviction that the world is fair may be one of the first casualties of that architecture—and one of the most promising targets for repair.

Subject of Research: Co-occurring family, peer, and school adversity profiles and the mediating role of belief in a just world in adolescent depressive and externalizing symptoms

Article Title: Profiles of Adversity Across Family, Peer, and School: Predicting Depressive and Externalizing Symptoms Through Belief in a Just World Among Chinese Adolescents

Article References: Huang, Y., Zhang, Y., Chang, S., Xu, M., & Xin, S. (2026). Profiles of Adversity Across Family, Peer, and School: Predicting Depressive and Externalizing Symptoms Through Belief in a Just World Among Chinese Adolescents. Child Psychiatry & Human Development. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10578-026-02080-w

Image Credits: AI Generated

DOI: 10.1007/s10578-026-02080-w

Keywords: adolescent mental health, adversity profiles, childhood maltreatment, bullying victimization, belief in a just world, depressive symptoms, externalizing symptoms, latent profile analysis, Chinese adolescents, mediation analysis, developmental psychology, child psychiatry

The study, led by Yunqing Ma of Beijing Normal University alongside colleagues including Xiuyun Lin of the Beijing Key Laboratory of Applied Experimental Psychology, recruited 1,062 adolescents with an average age of approximately twelve years, of whom 53.7 percent were girls, together with their fathers and mothers. Each family completed standardized assessments at two waves separated by a one-year interval. Depression was measured using the Center for Epidemiological Studies Depression Scale, a widely validated instrument that captures the full range of depressive symptoms from negative mood to physical complaints, while internet addiction was assessed using the Internet Addiction Test, the most commonly employed measure of problematic internet use worldwide.

Methodologically, the researchers adopted a dual-level analytical strategy that distinguishes their work from most prior investigations. At the aggregate level, they deployed cross-lagged panel models, a statistical technique that examines whether scores on one variable at an earlier time point predict changes in another variable at a later time point, while controlling for the stability of each variable over time. This allowed the team to disentangle directionality: did parental depression predict later adolescent internet addiction, or did adolescent internet addiction predict later parental depression?

The aggregate-level findings came as a surprise. Adolescent internet addiction significantly predicted paternal depression one year later, but the reverse pathway did not hold: fathers’ depression did not predict subsequent increases in adolescent internet addiction. Equally striking, maternal depression and adolescent internet addiction showed no significant longitudinal associations in either direction. In other words, the popular assumption that depressed parents, particularly depressed mothers, push their children toward problematic internet use was not supported at the level of overall symptom totals. Instead, the data suggest that living with an adolescent whose internet use has become compulsive may take a toll on fathers’ mental health, a pathway that has received little attention in the family systems literature.

Yet the story deepens considerably when the researchers moved from total scores to individual symptoms. Employing cross-lagged panel network analysis, a technique rooted in modern network theory that treats individual symptoms as nodes connected by statistical associations, the team modeled each specific depression symptom and each specific internet addiction symptom as a separate element within a dynamic system. This approach, increasingly influential in psychopathology research, recognizes that mental health conditions are not uniform bundles but collections of distinct symptoms that may activate one another in specific, identifiable pathways.

The symptom-level analysis identified key drivers within these networks. The internet addiction symptom of deception, meaning lying or concealing the extent of one’s online activity, emerged as a central predictor of later network dynamics, as did the maternal symptom of somatic complaints, the physical manifestations of depression such as headaches, fatigue, and bodily discomfort. On the receiving end, tolerance, the symptom reflecting the need for ever-increasing amounts of internet use to achieve satisfaction, proved to be the most influenced symptom in the network, suggesting that problematic use escalates in response to broader family and psychological dynamics rather than emerging in isolation.

Gender-specific analyses added another layer of nuance. At the aggregate level, the researchers found no significant differences between boys and girls in the longitudinal associations between parental depression and internet addiction, meaning the overall temporal pathways operated similarly across genders. However, when the analysis descended to the symptom level, meaningful gender-related variations appeared in network structure, edge weights, and centrality indices, the statistical measures describing which symptoms are most connected and most influential within each network. Particularly notable was the finding that father-daughter dyads exhibited gender-specific associations running from the internet addiction symptom of escape, using the internet to flee from real-world problems, to paternal somatic complaints, indicating that the escape-driven online behavior of daughters may be uniquely linked to the physical symptoms of depression in their fathers.

The theoretical implications of these findings are substantial. Consistent with family systems perspectives, which view the family as an interconnected unit in which each member’s functioning influences and is influenced by the others, the study demonstrates that psychological distress and problematic behavior flow in multiple directions rather than simply cascading downward from parent to child. The results also align with the compensatory internet use framework, which holds that adolescents may turn to the internet to cope with unmet emotional needs, and with developmental science’s emphasis on reciprocal, dynamic interactions between individuals and their environments. The researchers suggest that adolescents’ deceptive online behavior and escape motives may create parental stress and worry, which in turn manifests as somatic symptoms in fathers, illustrating how problematic internet use can reverberate through the family system in unexpected ways.

For clinicians and prevention specialists, the practical message is clear and potentially transformative. Rather than treating adolescent internet addiction as a consequence of parental depression requiring broad, undifferentiated family interventions, the authors argue for gender-tailored interventions that target specific symptom pathways. Identifying and addressing deception and escape motives in adolescents, and attending to somatic complaints in parents, particularly fathers, may offer more precise and effective entry points for preventing and reducing problematic internet use. In a country where meta-analyses of 164 epidemiological studies indicate that internet addiction is a significant public health concern among Chinese adolescents, and where problematic internet use globally affects youth across 31 nations, such symptom-level precision could reshape how families, schools, and mental health professionals approach one of the defining behavioral health challenges of the digital age.

Subject of Research: Longitudinal associations between parental depression and adolescent internet addiction examined at aggregate and symptom levels with gender-specific network analysis.

Article Title: Longitudinal Association Between Parental Depression and Adolescent Internet Addiction: An Explanatory Gender-Specific Analysis at the Aggregate and Symptom Levels

Article References: Ma, Y., Qiu, J., Qiao, L., Chi, P., & Lin, X. (2026). Longitudinal Association Between Parental Depression and Adolescent Internet Addiction: An Explanatory Gender-Specific Analysis at the Aggregate and Symptom Levels. International Journal of Mental Health and Addiction. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11469-026-01725-0

Image Credits: AI Generated

DOI: 10.1007/s11469-026-01725-0

Keywords: parental depression, adolescent internet addiction, cross-lagged panel analysis, cross-lagged panel network analysis, gender differences, symptom networks, family systems, somatic complaints, tolerance, escape, Chinese adolescents, mental health

At the heart of the study lies a conceptual innovation. Traditional research has treated stress mindsets along a single bipolar dimension, asking whether a student leans toward a stress-is-enhancing (SIE) orientation or a stress-is-debilitating (SID) orientation. The research team argued that this compression obscures the cognitive reality of adolescents in high-stakes, competitive school environments, where students often hold co-occurring, seemingly contradictory beliefs about pressure. Drawing on the dialectical thinking tradition—associated with holistic cognition, in which contradictions are accepted as coexisting rather than resolved—the investigators used latent profile analysis, a person-centered statistical technique that identifies unobserved subgroups within a population, to map how these beliefs naturally cluster together in real students.

The analysis extracted four distinct stress mindset profiles. The Optimistic profile combined high SIE beliefs with low SID beliefs, the configuration that much of the existing literature would predict to be the most adaptive. The Vulnerable profile sat at the opposite corner, combining low SIE with high SID, while the Indifferent profile scored low on both dimensions, reflecting students who neither idealized nor catastrophized stress but simply disengaged from it. The fourth and most dominant group was the Dialectical profile: students who scored high on both the enhancing and debilitating dimensions at the same time, simultaneously endorsing stress’s growth-promoting power and its capacity to wear them down. The emergence of this profile as a prevalent, culturally specific configuration underscores how adolescents in East Asian educational contexts may be particularly attuned to the dual character of academic pressure.

What makes the study compelling is not merely the identification of these profiles but the longitudinal demonstration that they predict different futures. Six months after baseline measurement, the researchers assessed academic buoyancy, the everyday academic resilience construct pioneered by Andrew Martin and Herbert Marsh to describe students’ ability to deal with typical academic setbacks, as distinct from chronic, severe adversity. Crucially, the team controlled for a demanding set of baseline covariates, including students’ initial levels of academic buoyancy, academic anxiety, overall educational stress, academic contingent self-worth—the degree to which students tie their sense of value to academic performance—and their mindsets about the fixedness or malleability of intelligence. This statistical rigor means the reported effects reflect the predictive power of the mindset configurations themselves rather than pre-existing differences in anxiety, stress exposure, or general beliefs about ability.

The outcome hierarchy that emerged was striking. Students in the Dialectical profile achieved significantly higher trajectories of academic buoyancy over time than their Optimistic peers, with an effect size of d = 0.41, a moderate difference by conventional standards in psychological research. In other words, the adolescents who acknowledged both faces of stress outperformed those who viewed stress exclusively in glowing terms. Meanwhile, the Vulnerable and Indifferent profiles converged into a statistically indistinguishable, low-resilience bottom tier, suggesting that disengagement from stress beliefs offers no protective advantage over pessimism about them. The result inverts a core intuition of the positive-psychology era: holistic acceptance of stress’s dual nature appears to provide a more adaptive and more sustainable cognitive buffer under chronic pressure than a strictly positive outlook.

How could holding a seemingly contradictory belief confer an advantage? The authors draw on cognitive appraisal theory, the framework originating with Richard Lazarus and Susan Folkman, in which the consequences of a stressor depend on how it is evaluated. A student who believes stress is purely enhancing may be unprepared for the genuine fatigue, anxiety, and diminishing returns that chronic pressure produces; when those costs arrive, they may be experienced as evidence of personal failure rather than as a normal feature of demanding environments. Conversely, the dialectical student expects both growth and strain, and this expectation may allow the strain to be absorbed without destabilizing motivation. Acknowledging the costs of stress may paradoxically protect students from the demoralization that follows when the costs become undeniable, while still preserving access to the motivational benefits of viewing pressure as an opportunity for development.

The cultural dimension of the findings deserves emphasis. Dialectical thinking, as documented in cross-cultural cognitive research by Richard Nisbett and colleagues, is more prevalent in East Asian societies, where contradictory propositions are more readily tolerated as complementary rather than mutually exclusive. In the context of intensely competitive educational systems, adolescents may internalize messages that exam stress is both a gateway to achievement and a genuine burden on health and mood. The fact that the Dialectical profile emerged as the dominant subgroup in the sample, and the one associated with the best longitudinal outcomes, suggests that this culturally patterned cognitive style is not a liability to be corrected but a resource to be understood. The study’s two-factor treatment of stress mindsets, consistent with recent psychometric work questioning bipolar measurement of mindsets more broadly, offers a framework that may travel to other cultures even if the specific profile distribution does not.

The practical implications reach into how schools screen and counsel students. The authors propose school-wide screening protocols that use the four-profile taxonomy to identify students in the Vulnerable and Indifferent tiers, who may benefit most from intervention, and balanced counseling approaches that validate the real discomfort of stress while simultaneously highlighting its growth potential. Rather than urging anxious students to simply reframe stress as good, counselors might help them hold both truths at once: that pressure can sharpen focus and deepen learning, and that it will also demand recovery, rest, and emotional regulation. Such balanced interventions align with the construct of academic buoyancy, which has been shown in prior research to interact reciprocally with motivation, engagement, and achievement emotions over the school year.

Limitations and future directions frame the study appropriately. The six-month window captures meaningful change but cannot speak to outcomes across entire school careers, and the sample, drawn from adolescents in a Chinese educational context with a tight age band, leaves open whether the same four profiles emerge with the same prevalence among younger students, university students, or Western samples. The self-report design means the findings index students’ own perceptions of buoyancy and mindset rather than externally observed coping behavior. Still, the study’s person-centered, longitudinal architecture represents a meaningful advance over cross-sectional, variable-centered designs, and its core message is one with broad resonance: the most resilient students are not those who deny the costs of stress, but those who possess the cognitive sophistication to hold its benefits and its burdens in view at the same time. In an era of intensifying academic pressure worldwide, teaching adolescents the power of both may prove one of the most durable psychological investments a school can make.

Subject of Research: Dialectical academic stress mindset profiles and their longitudinal prediction of adolescent academic buoyancy

Article Title: The power of both: how dialectical academic stress mindset profiles predict longitudinal trajectories of adolescent academic buoyancy

Article References: Ching, B. H.-H., Chen, T. T., Qiu, T. H., & Zhang, Y. (2026). The power of both: how dialectical academic stress mindset profiles predict longitudinal trajectories of adolescent academic buoyancy. Current Psychology, 45(18), Article 1519. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-026-10088-7

Image Credits: AI Generated

DOI: 10.1007/s12144-026-10088-7

Keywords: academic stress mindsets, academic buoyancy, latent profile analysis, Chinese adolescents, longitudinal study, cognitive appraisal theory, dialectical thinking, educational psychology, stress mindset profiles, adolescent resilience, power, both