Child Indicators Research

https://doi.org/10.1007/s12187-020-09717-9

Perceived Social Support, School Adaptation

and Adolescents’ Subjective Well-Being

José M. Tomás 1 & Melchor Gutiérrez 2 & Ana María Pastor 3 & Patricia Sancho 2

Accepted: 6 January 2020/

# Springer Nature B.V. 2020

Abstract
Positive psychology has promoted well-being research in adolescents. However, there is
not enough research about the determinants of well-being at school. Specifically, the
determinants of academic performance have been investigated in depth, to the detriment
of the determinants of subjective well-being. Research in this area highlights the impor-
tance of social support received, and school adaptation. However, there is still a lack of
comprehensive studies on perceived support, students’ adaptation and their subjective
well-being in complex multivariate models. The aim of this research is to analyze the
influence of the perceived social support from different sources (parents, teachers and
friends) on adolescents’ subjective well-being, mediated by their school adaptation, in a
sample of 1035 students in the city of Lima. An a priori structural model with latent
variables was tested, with a reasonable, but not excellent fit. According to modification
indexes, there was a strong link of family support on well-being, and therefore, this new
direct effect was added in order to improve model fit. This final model predicts well-
being with three social support measures. This association is partially mediated by school
adjustment and academic achievement, while controlling for age and gender. Each source
of support influences aspects of the school context differently. School adjustment had a
relevant mediational role in the relationship among social support sources and well-
being. In addition, women and younger students showed better school adaptation and
subjective well-being. These results show the importance of working in promoting
education that pursues the happiness of the students, not only the academic qualifications.

Keywords Family support . Teacher support . Friends support . Secondary education . Peru

1 Introduction

Researchers in the fields of psychology and education recognize that the rise of positive
psychology has boosted studies on the global well-being of adolescents (Arslan 2019).

* Patricia Sancho
Patricia.Sancho@uv.es

Extended author information available on the last page of the article

 J. M. Tomás et al.

Nevertheless, we still have limited knowledge of the well-being of adolescents in

specific life domains, such as school (Bradshaw et al. 2011). Many schools are focused
on the students’ performance, specifically in terms of good grades, without paying
enough attention to other relevant aspects that should be part of the overall personal
development. Positive psychology tries to compensate for this deficiency, making its
way into the schools and onto school psychology. In this sense, the positive psychology
perspective (Seligman and Csikszentmihalyi 2000) highlights that schools are not only
places where young people acquire academic skills, they are also places where people
connect with others, develop their personality, experience all facets of social function-
ing, and all this may influence their subjective well-being (Bücker et al. 2018).
As Ciarrochi et al. (2016) have pointed out, positive psychology has increased the
promotion of happiness and well-being in the educational context, also highlighting
that students’ well-being and academic success are closely related. Noddings stated that
“happiness and education are properly, intimately connected; happiness should be an
aim of education, and a good education should contribute significantly to personal and
collective happiness” (Noddings 2003, p.1). Additionally, subjective well-being has
become an area of growing interest since it is considered essential for the promotion of
people’s mental health, and researchers have been increasingly interested in knowing
the effects of school on the students’ health, highlighting its importance not only for
academic achievement but also in relation to adolescents’ physical and mental health
(Datu and King 2018; Karvonen et al. 2018; Lampropoulou 2018). Nevertheless,
whereas the determinants of academic achievement have been extensively investigated,
far less research has been devoted towards school-related determinants of subjective
well-being (Steinmayr et al. 2018).
As referred in the scientific literature, two important precursors of the adolescents’
well-being are, either directly or indirectly, the social support received from their
family, teachers and friends (e.g., Lampropoulou 2018; Liu et al. 2016; Steinmayr
et al. 2018; Tian et al. 2013, 2015a, 2016), and the students’ school adaptation (e.g.,
Bücker et al. 2018; Gutiérrez and Gonçalves 2013; Şahin and Kirdök 2018; Steinmayr
et al. 2016; Varela et al. 2019; Yang et al. 2019). Given all this, we try to contribute to
the existing literature by analyzing the relationships between perceived social support
(from family, teachers and friends) and students’ subjective well-being, mediated by
students’ school adaptation.

1.1 Social Support from Significant Others

Social support is one of the most active research areas in recent decades (Ma 2019;
Zhou et al. 2019). Social support refers to the interactive process where a person
perceives or experiences that he/she is loved, and valued, feeling himself/herself a
participant in a social network of mutual assistance and obligations. Social support may
include emotional, instrumental, informational, or appraisal support. Perceived social
support is many times used as an indicator of quality of social support because it is an
overall assessment of the availability of the social network to provide social support
(Demaray and Malecki 2002a).
Academic literature has shown that parents, teachers, and peers are the main sources
of support for adolescents. These three sources of social support may be available for
students, and potentially they may provide different influences on students’ school
Perceived Social Support, School Adaptation and Adolescents’...

satisfaction, school adjustment, and/or levels of competence and achievement

(Danielsen et al. 2009). Specifically, parents’ support may be particularly appropriate
to promote good school behavior, optimal academic performance, an intrinsic motiva-
tion for achievement, and adequate social skills. Social support from friends may
influence good school attitudes, school involvement, and academic success, motivation
for academic achievement, increased participation in learning activities, and the good
behavior of the students. Finally, the perception of teacher’s support has also been
related to better academic and behavioral results, greater involvement with the school,
or lower risk of bullying, among others. In general, studies show that young adoles-
cents who perceive their parents, peers and/or teachers as supportive fare better in
school than those who do not perceive their socializers as such (Rosenfeld et al. 2000).

1.2 Students’ School Adaptation

School adaptation means adaptation to the demands and characteristics of the school
system, as well as the degree to which adolescents feel comfortable with, committed to
and accepted by the school environment. Ladd and Troop-Gordon (2003) consider that
school adaptation is multidimensional and refers to the ability to adapt to the school,
feeling comfort, commitment and social acceptance in this context. This implies the
conjugation of cognitive, attitudinal and behavioral aspects. A good school adaptation
shows up with active engagement in school activities, following the rules, interacting
well with the school environments, and making prosocial relationships with all mem-
bers of the school. School adaptation affects relationships between the student and his/
her peers and teachers, their academic abilities, and an active school involvement (Ki
2018).
Academic achievement and absence of behavioral problems are considered indica-
tors of adaptation through middle school, and they extend its effects into early
adulthood (Masten et al. 2010). In the same vein, Shoshani and Slone (2013) or
Steinmayr et al. (2016) also considered grades, and academic achievement in general,
as an important component of school adaptation.
Aldrup et al. (2018) assessed achievement as a domain-specific indicator of stu-
dents’ school adaptation. Lan et al. (2019) measured school adaptation via social
competence, understood as interpersonal skills and socially appropriate behaviors,
and academic achievement. Vaillancourt et al. (2019) state that a first aspect of
adolescents’ adaptation during middle school is their academic achievement, common-
ly measured with an average grade.

1.3 Adolescents’ Subjective Well-Being

One of the key dimensions of psychological well-being is subjective well-being (Diener

2000). Adolescent’ subjective wellbeing is a vital aspect in a young person’s life
development (Varela et al. 2019). There are several theoretical models and approaches
to the construct of subjective well-being and its several dimensions. A well accepted
approach divides subjective well-being into two components: emotional and cognitive.
The emotional one includes frequency of positive and negative affect, while the
cognitive is the appraisal of life satisfaction (Diener 2012). Suldo et al. (2015) follows
this reasoning when claims that students’ subjective well-being is indicated by their
 J. M. Tomás et al.

satisfaction with (school) and their affect towards themselves. Subjective well-being is
defined here as consisting of high positive affect (positive moods), low negative affect
(negative moods), and high satisfaction with life (Diener et al. 2018). Therefore,
subjective well-being is viewed as a combination of the experience of general positive
affect (subjective happiness), global life satisfaction, and life satisfaction within the
context of various domains, such as school (Diener et al. 2018). Tian et al. (2015b)
have proposed to measure students’ subjective well-being with three dimensions:
school satisfaction and positive and negative affect in school. Other authors do slight
modification when measure well-being at school. For example, Hascher (2008) mea-
sured well-being at school with positive attitudes towards school, enjoyment of school,
and a positive academic self-concept, and the absence of worries at school. Anyway
measured, almost everybody agrees that well-being is a relevant indicator of school
effectiveness and the ultimate aim in students’ personal development (Baker and
Maupin 2009).
The main value of education lies in individuals’ development, which is extremely
related to their subjective well-being. The development of students’ well-being, par-
tially independent of cognitive ability, is thus a desired outcome in education. Although
considered important, research on educational effectiveness has mainly considered
academic achievement as the sole outcome of educational processes and has system-
atically forgotten the subjective well-being of students (Yao et al. 2018). Fortunately, in
the last few years, well-being has become an explicit educational objective in many
educational systems and it is considered that youths’ subjective well-being should
represent a primary outcome of public schooling (Opre et al. 2018). Youths’ subjective
well-being in a key life domain like school reflects not only the quality of their life but
also the quality of education in schools (Engels et al. 2004). The interest for increasing
the youths’ subjective well-being in the educational context is based on two important
changes in the research in the field: the refocusing of research interest from global
subjective well-being to domain specific subjective well-being (Elmore and Huebner
2010; Long et al. 2012; Tian et al. 2015a), and the extension of the theoretical model of
subjective well-being from adults to children and adolescents (Long et al. 2012).
The scientific literature has shown that well-being is considered a precursor of
adolescents’ adaptive school behaviors and academic performance (Bücker et al.
2018; Datu and King 2018; Putwain et al. 2019; Shoshani and Slone 2013; Steinmayr
et al. 2016), and as a result of predictive factors that participate in the configuration of
the students’ quality of life (Bücker et al. 2018; Datu and King 2018; Karvonen et al.
2018; Steinmayr et al. 2016; Yao et al. 2018). In this paper we will follow the second
trend, the consideration of adolescents’ subjective well-being as an outcome.
A problem that presents the adolescents’ well-being is its measurement (Moore
2019). Since the 90s, studies of child well-being have moved beyond the use of a single
overall indicator to a more multifaceted understanding, based on life course, child-
centered and rights-based theories (Seligman 2011). Despite various concerns in
different countries, ongoing considerations of measuring child well-being generally
involve the six indicators listed by UNICEF: material well-being, health and safety,
educational well-being, relationships, behaviors and risks, and subjective well-being
(Wang et al. 2019).
Subjective well-being has traditionally been assessed using self-report behavior
rating scales targeting experiences of positive affect and life satisfaction. Within recent
Perceived Social Support, School Adaptation and Adolescents’...

years, several multidimensional self-report behavior rating scales have been developed
and validated for measuring students’ domain-general and domain-specific well-being
behavior (Arslan and Renshaw 2018). Although several scales have been developed to
measure adolescents’ subjective well-being, several important limitations are notewor-
thy (Tian et al. 2015b), one of the most important being that they do not assess
students’ subjective well-being in school in a comprehensive manner, including all
the cognitive and affective components. Moreover, some of these assessment tools
underscore the cognitive component of subjective well-being in school or omit the
affective component. Other instruments, even though they consider the affective
component, they exclude some school specific subjective well-being indicators that
could be very informative for practitioners, teachers, parents and students alike
(Eryılmaz 2012; Opre et al. 2018).

1.4 Perceived Support, School Adaptation and Adolescents’ Subjective Well-Being

The positive effect of social support from teachers, peers, and parents’ outcomes such
as self-concept, self-efficacy, school engagement, academic achievement, school ad-
justment, academic competence, life satisfaction, school satisfaction, and well-being
has been supported in numerous investigations (Danielsen et al. 2009; Gutiérrez and
Gonçalves 2013; Karvonen et al. 2018; Liu et al. 2016; Rosenfeld et al. 2000; Zhou
et al. 2019). By contrast, social support has been negatively related to school disen-
gagement, dropout, anxiety, depression, delinquency, or substance abuse (Demaray and
Malecki 2002a).
However, of all the works referred to, few have been those that have addressed the
study of the existing relationships between perceived support, students’ adaptation and
their subjective well-being in a complex multivariate model. Among these few works
are the one by Gutiérrez and Gonçalves (2013) and the one by Şahin and Kirdök
(2018). Specifically, Gutiérrez and Gonçalves (2013) analyzed the relationships be-
tween the students’ developmental assets, school adjustment, and adolescents’ subjec-
tive well-being. They found positive and direct effects of self-esteem and family
support on adolescents’ life satisfaction; and significant indirect effects of school
support and family support on the subjective well-being, mediated by satisfaction with
school. Şahin and Kirdök (2018) studied the relationship between students’ perceived
social support from their family, teachers and friends, career adaptability and subjective
well-being. Results showed a significant relationship between subjective well-being,
career adaptability and perceived social support. The perceived social support from
family, teachers and friends were variables that predicted the career adaptability of
school students, and career adaptability was also been found to be a significant
predictor of students’ subjective well-being. The rest of the studies mentioned above
explored relationships between successive pairs of variables, that is, social support-
school adaptation, social support-wellbeing, and school adaptation-wellbeing.

1.4.1 Perceived Social Support and Adolescents’ School Adaptation

Lots of research has shown the positive effects of social support on many outcomes of
interest to educators, such as school adaptation (Rosenfeld et al. 2000). Research
suggests significant relationships between students’ perceived social support and
 J. M. Tomás et al.

positive and negative school adaptation variables (Demaray and Malecki 2002a, b;
Demaray et al. 2005; Malecki and Demaray 2003). Indeed, Demaray and Malecki
(2002b) found positive relations of social support with social skills and academic
competence, and negative relations with aggression, hyperactivity, anxiety, and depres-
sion. In the same line, Demaray et al. (2005), with longitudinal data, also found positive
relationships between social support and school adaptation. As Wentzel (1998) has
stated, studies show that early adolescents who perceive their parents, peers and/or
teachers as supportive fare better in school than those who do not perceive their
socializers as such. Supportive social relationships may influence academic achieve-
ment indirectly through motivational and affective mechanisms (Ahmed et al. 2010).
Although there are some inconsistencies in the literature, there is evidence that there
are gender differences in the role that social support may play for adolescents (Demaray
and Malecki 2002a). Rueger et al. (2008) found gender differences in the relationship
between social support and several indices of student adaptation, thus providing
evidence for the importance of considering gender differences in planning future
research related to social support. Specifically, they found that for girls there were
small to moderate relations of parents with almost all school adaptation variables, and
less significant relations for other sources of support (teacher and specially friends). For
boys, parent support significantly related only with adaptive functioning, there were
significant relations between teacher support and internalizing scores, and a moderate
and negative relation among friend support and depression and anxiety.
In addition, several studies have found significant differences between adaptation
indices and different sources of support. Support from parents is most often related to
indicators of student adaptation, and support from teachers has been associated with
more adaptive emotional functioning and higher levels of school achievement (Malecki
and Demaray 2003). With respect to the effect of peer support perception, classmate
support is more strongly associated to student adaptation than close friend support
(Demaray and Malecki 2002a, b).
Finally, and considering the school engagement as an important component of
school adaptation, a study developed by Jelas et al. (2016) showed that perceptions
of learning support influence adolescents’ affective, behavioral and cognitive engage-
ment in school, which in turn influences their academic achievement.

1.4.2 Perceived Social Support and Adolescents’ Subjective Well-Being

Social support is one of the most powerful contextual factors contributing to individ-
uals’ general subjective well-being (Gallagher and Vella-Brodrick 2008; Ma 2019;
Wang et al. 2019). Studies with adolescents have found robust relations between
perceived social support (from parents, teachers and friends) and students’ school
well-being; individuals with high levels of social support have higher levels of well-
being (Arslan 2018; Rosenfeld et al. 2000; Tian et al. 2013). The source of social
support may play a key role in students’ well-being, as several studies have found
associations of different magnitude between support and well-being depending on the
source (Danielsen et al. 2009; Suldo et al. 2008): support from teachers showed the
strongest association with students’ well-being, when all parents, peers, and teachers
are considered. The effects of social support on well-being may also be moderated by
gender. For example, Danielsen et al. (2009) found that social support from teachers,
Perceived Social Support, School Adaptation and Adolescents’...

classmates, and parents was more strongly related to girls’ life satisfaction than to that
of boys.
Researcher Lili Tian and her colleagues have successively published several works
in which they analyze the relationships between the perception of social support and
adolescents’ well-being, first mediated by self-esteem (Tian et al. 2013), then mediated
by the scholastic competence and social acceptance (Tian et al. 2015a), and finally with
the mediation of basic psychological needs satisfaction (Tian et al. 2016). Tian et al.
(2013) related parents, teachers and friends’ support with several dimensions of school
well-being (school satisfaction, positive affect in school, and negative affect in school).
They found that the most effective source of support to promote well-being depended
on the age of the adolescents, with teacher and parent support significantly related to
early adolescents’ school well-being, but only teacher support significantly related to
middle adolescents’ school well-being. They also found that self-esteem mediated the
effects of perceived social support on school well-being, both for early and middle
adolescent students. In two different mediational models Tian and colleagues found that
scholastic competence (Tian et al. 2015a) and autonomy, competence and relatedness
(Tian et al. 2016) were also mediators of the support and well-being relationships.
As already indicated above, gender can be a differentiating variable in terms of the
relationship between perceived social support and adolescents’ well-being. For exam-
ple, Helsen et al. (2000) found that parents’ support explained emotional well-being for
girls but was not relevant for boys.
Finally, gender and age may also directly affect well-being of adolescents. There is
evidence in this sense. For example, Liu et al. (2016) found that well-being was related
with gender and negatively related with age: girls reported higher levels of school
satisfaction, and older age students reported lower levels of school well-being than
younger students. Lampropoulou (2018) also found that younger students had higher
well-being but contrary to Liu et al. (2016), boys reported higher well-being than girls.

1.4.3 School Adaptation and Adolescents’ Subjective Well-Being

Since the school adaptation is composed of different aspects, such as academic achieve-
ment and academic engagement, in this section we will show some works that the
scientific literature offers in which these elements (school adjustment, academic achieve-
ment, and school engagement) may be considered as precursors of adolescents’ subjective
well-being. Vaillancourt et al. (2019) state that school adjustment is relevant because it is
positively related with a wide range of measures of well-being, among others low
depressive symptoms, high self-esteem, or good physical health during adolescence. Some
authors point out that both academic achievement and subjective well-being are key
indicators of positive psychological functioning, and both are of interest in identifying
the characteristics of high-performing education systems (Suldo et al. 2006). Karvonen
et al. (2018) found that academic achievement and well-being were related, and that
schools on a poor achievement trajectory were more often on a low well-being trajectory.
A meta-analysis found that the correlations between academic achievement and
well-being were small to medium in size (Bücker et al. 2018). Steinmayr et al. (2016)
found that grades positively predicted life satisfaction, and Suldo et al. (2008) also
found that a good academic achievement was related positively to subjective well-being
and negatively with psychopathology.
 J. M. Tomás et al.

Therefore, a growing body of evidence suggests that school functioning and the
subjective well-being of schooled adolescents are related. Apparently a high well-being
may help them in terms of dealing or coping with school demands, managing
resources, and, in general, adopting a positive attitude towards school (Danielsen
et al. 2009; Suldo et al. 2011). Shoshani and Slone (2013) found great support for an
association between well-being and students’ adaptation to middle school. Steinmayr
et al. (2016) found that academic achievement predicted the cognitive component of
subjective well-being (life satisfaction), but not the emotional component (mood-level).
The reverse direction of prediction, that is, the effects of better well-being on academic
achievement was not supported in their study, and therefore they concluded that the
theoretical claim that students are more successful the happier they are was not
supported by their data.
Datu and King (2018) used a two-wave panel design to test for the associations of
the different dimensions of subjective well-being (life satisfaction, positive affect, and
negative affect) with academic engagement. Results showed a reciprocal effect of well-
being and academic engagement. This result points to the possibility that subjective
well-being may be both an antecedent and a consequence of the student’s degree of
engagement with the school. Few longitudinal studies have been designed in this area
of research, but the evidence so far supports a reciprocal relationship between subjec-
tive well-being and academic achievement. With three waves of measurement Yang
et al. (2019) examined the relations between academic achievement and school well-
being, and found that academic achievement positively affected subjective school well-
being, but the contrary did not happen.

1.5 Study Purpose

Situated within the positive youth development framework, the main aim of this study
is to examine the multivariate relationships between perceived social support, school
adaptation, and adolescents’ subjective well-being. Previous literature (e.g., Danielsen
et al. 2009; Demaray et al. 2005; Karvonen et al. 2018; Rosenfeld et al. 2000;
Steinmayr et al. 2016; Suldo et al. 2008; Vaillancourt et al. 2019; Yang et al. 2019,
among others) analyzed the relationships between these three variables (social support,
school adaptation and subjective well-being) but mainly in a bivariate way, and only a
very few works analyzed the relationships between these three variables through
multivariate models, as it has been done in this work. Therefore, the aim of this
research is to test a processual model on the influences of several social and educational
variables on the wellbeing of the students. This theoretical processual model specifi-
cally implies a sequence of influences. First, perceived social support from different
sources (parents, teachers and friends) is hypothesized to affect academic adaptation.
Second, this school adjustment is hypothesized to affect adolescents’ subjective well-
being. Therefore, the effects of social support on well-being are specified as fully
mediated by academic adaptation (see Fig. 1).

1.6 Hypotheses

In this study, we tested some models of the independent and combined effects of
perceived social support and school adaptation on adolescents’ subjective well-being,
Perceived Social Support, School Adaptation and Adolescents’...

Age

Gender

School
Adjustment
Family
support

Subjective
Well-being

Friends
support Academic
Achievement

Teacher
support

Fig. 1 Hypothetical or a priori model of relationships between variables

with age and gender also included as control variables. Hypothesis 1: We expected social
support from family, friends and teachers to have a positive association with adolescents’
academic adaptation (as measured with two constructs, school adjustment and academic
achievement). Hypothesis 2: We also expected that adolescents’ academic adaptation will
be positively related to their subjective well-being, and therefore the effects of support on
well-being will be totally mediated by academic adaptation. Hypothesis 3: Women would
perceive more subjective well-being than men. Hypothesis 4: As adolescents grew older,
they would perceive less well-being. This predictions derive from findings by some
authors who previously observed that perceived social support was related to adoles-
cents’ school adaptation (e.g., Demaray et al. 2005; Jelas et al. 2016); school adaptation
was positively associated to adolescents’ subjective well-being (e.g., Karvonen et al.
2018; Vaillancourt et al. 2019); perceived social support was a predictor of adolescents’
subjective well-being (e.g., Danielsen et al. 2009; Ma 2019; Rosenfeld et al. 2000; Tian
et al. 2016; Wang et al. 2019); girls manifested better subjective well-being than boys
(e.g., Huebner et al. 2000; Liu et al. 2016); and adolescents presented lower levels of
subjective well-being as they grew older (e.g., Lampropoulou 2018; Ronen et al. 2016).

2 Methods

2.1 Participants

The sample consisted of a total of 1035 Lima adolescent students. Of this total, 541
were males (52.3%) and 494 (47.7%) females. They were between the ages of 12 and
16, with an average of 13.9 (SD = 1.4). Regarding their educational level, they were
distributed in the 5 grades of secondary education, that is, from 1st to 5th year of
secondary school. The adolescents were enrolled in 10 educational institutions, 5 of
them public and 5 private. A total of 507 students belonged to public schools (49%)
and 528 to private schools (51%). All of them reside in urban areas of Metropolitan
Lima. For the selection of the sample an incidental or convenience procedure was
followed, using the support of contacts in the educational field. Table 1 shows
percentages divided by age and gender.
 J. M. Tomás et al.

Table 1 Sample distribution by sex and age

Age Boys % Girls % Total %

12 years 106 10.2% 108 10.4% 214 20.7%

13 years 114 11.0% 120 11.6% 234 22.6%
14 years 100 9.7% 85 8.2% 185 17.9%
15 years 103 10% 110 10.6% 213 20.6%
16 years 118 11.4% 71 6.9% 189 18.3%
Total 541 52.3% 494 47.7% 1035 100%

2.2 Instruments

To assess the perception of social support of Peruvian adolescents, two instruments

have been used: The Family and Friends Support Scale, and the Teachers’ Support
Scale.

2.2.1 Family and Friends Support

The Family and Friends Social Support Questionnaire (AFA-R; González and
Landero 2014), is a 15-item scale, 8 for the family support dimension (e. g., “I
have someone in my family to speak with when I need it”), and 7 for friends support
(e. g., “I am satisfied with the support I receive from my friends”). The answers
must be given on a Likert scale of 5 alternatives, from (1) Almost never, to (5)
Almost always. A Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) in this sample with the two
aforementioned factors fitted the data very well: χ 2 (98) = 775.56, p < .001,
CFI = .945, TLI = .933, RMSEA = .082 [90% CI .076–.087], SMR = .046. The
reliability estimates of this scale in this sample were: family support (α = .86) and
support from friends (α = .85).

2.2.2 Teachers Support

The Teacher Support Scale of the HBSC-2010 questionnaire (Moreno et al. 2012)
has 8 items that refer to the attitude of teachers to different situations in which
students can benefit from their support (e. g., “My teachers encourage me when I do
school work”, “My teachers try to understand how I see things, before suggesting a
new way of doing them”). Students answered a Likert scale of 5 alternatives, from
(1) Strongly disagree, to (5) Strongly agree. A one-factor CFA had satisfactory fit to
the data: χ2 (20) = 252.67, p < .001, CFI = .967, TLI = .954, RMSEA = .106 [90%
CI .095–.118], SMR = .029, which confirms that the scale is unidimensional as
claimed by its authors. The reliability of this scale in the present sample was
α = .87.
Following the conceptual proposals by Aldrup et al. (2018), we have consid-
ered that school adaptation also integrates academic achievement, and accordingly
we have used a scale for school adjustment and also self-reported academic
achievement (grades).
Perceived Social Support, School Adaptation and Adolescents’...

2.2.3 School Adjustment

One of the dimensions in the School Adjustment Scale by Ishida (2009) has been used.
Specifically, the dimension of general relations with the school in general. An example
item of this dimensions is “I am proud to be a student at my school”. Again, a 5-point
Likert scale from (1) Strongly disagree to (5) Strongly agree was used. In the four items
of the dimension, a CFA on the overall scale showed a good model fit: χ2 (98) =
775.56, p < .001, CFI = .945, TLI = .933, RMSEA = .082 [90% CI .076–.087],
SMR = .046. Internal consistency of the dimensions of school adjustment was .75.

2.2.4 Academic Achievement

The students’ academic achievement has been measured through the grades in Com-
munication (Spanish), English and Mathematics obtained in the evaluation of the last
semester. The scale of school grades in Peru ranges from 0 to 20 points.
The perception of Peruvian adolescents’ subjective well-being has been measured
through two instruments: The Satisfaction with Life Scale (SWLS) and the Affect
Balance Scale (EBA).

2.2.5 Satisfaction with Life

The Satisfaction with Life Scale (Diener et al. 1985) has 5 items measuring a global
judgment on one’s own life satisfaction. Example items are “I am satisfied with my
life” or “In most ways my life is close to my ideal”. Again, five-point Likert scale from
(1) Totally disagree to (5) Totally agree is used as response scale. Reliability in this
sample was α = .79.

2.2.6 The Affect Balance Scale

To measure the positive and negative affect of Peruvian adolescents, we used the Affect
Balance Scale (EBA; Godoy-Izquierdo et al. 2008), a Spanish version of the Positive
and Negative Affect scale by Warr et al. (1983). The scale consist of 18 items
measuring two dimensions (positive and negative affect), with a 5-point Likert scale
from (1) Never to (5) Almost all the time. Example items are: “Have you been afraid of
what might happen?” (negative affect) and “Have you felt particularly motivated or
interested in something?” (positive affect). Alpha estimates were .78 for negative affect
and .81 for positive affect.

2.3 Procedure

The first step was to contact the Peruvian National Authorities to get access to
educational institutions. In the case of private institutions, contact was made indepen-
dently with each of the five schools. In the case of public institutions, it was through the
DRELM (Regional Office of Metropolitan Lima), the governing entity that administers
the educational institutions of Metropolitan Lima, who assigned five public institutions,
belonging to UGEL 7. To do this, they were writing and/or contacted by telephone
explaining what the investigation consisted of and requesting them the appropriate
 J. M. Tomás et al.

permits to carry it out. Once the official permission of the educational authorities was
obtained, the instruments were applied, assuring the respondents the totally anonymous
processing of the data obtained and giving them the opportunity of a voluntary
participation. The application time in each classroom was 25 to 30 min on average
and was supervised by a person in charge of facilitating the process and clarifying any
doubts that might arise. All students completed all questionnaires in the survey. Given
that the participation was voluntary and that the students filled the questionnaires in
their classrooms during normal teaching hours, the rate of missing values was less than
2%. Missing data were statistically handled as specified in the statistical analyses
section.

2.4 Statistical Analyses

Descriptive statistics, correlations and alpha coefficients for all variables in the analyses
were calculated in SPSS 22. Factor structure of all scales was analyzed with Confirma-
tory Factor Analyses (CFA), as presented in Instruments. Then an a priori structural
model with latent variables was specified and estimated. CFAs and the structural models
were estimated in Mplus 8.2 (Muthén and Muthén 1998-2017). WLSMV (Weighted
Least Square Mean and Variance corrected) method of estimation was employed in
order to accommodate the non-normality and ordinal nature of most of the indicators and
variables. Missing data were handled with Full Information Maximum Likelihood.
Model fit was evaluated using several goodness-of-fit indexes and statistics: chi-
square test, Comparative Fit Index (CFI), Standardized Root Mean Residual (SRMR),
and Root Mean Square error of Approximation (RMSEA). The approximate cut-off
criteria used to determine good fit were CFI above .90 (better if above .95), RMSEA and
SRMR below .08 (Marsh et al. 2004). Additional to goodness-of-fit indexes, the
acceptability of the model was evaluated by the strength and interpretability of the
parameter estimates and a careful look at meaningful modification indices.

3 Results

3.1 Intercorrelations

Descriptive statistics and correlations of the variables included in the predictive model
are shown in Table 2. Zero-order correlations among variables were all statistically
significant (p < .01).

3.2 Prediction of the Adolescents’ Subjective Well-Being

To test the influence of perceived social support from different sources (family, teachers
and friends) on the adolescents’ subjective well-being, mediated by adolescents’ school
adjustment, the a priori model specified in Fig. 1 was tested. This initial model obtained
a reasonable, but not excellent fit (χ2 (539) = 2170.11; p < .001); CFI = .932;
RMSEA = .054 [.052–056]; SRMR = .049). According to modification indexes, there
was a strong link of family support on well-being, and therefore, this new direct effect
was added in order to improve model fit. This final model is presented in Fig. 2.
Perceived Social Support, School Adaptation and Adolescents’...

Table 2 Mean, standard deviation, and bivariate correlations among the studied variables

Variables Fam. Friend Teach School Acad. Life Negat. Posit.

supp supp. supp. Adjust achiev. satisf. affect affect.

Family support 1 .30** .34** .33** .15** .56** −.34** .47**

Friends support 1 .21** .21** .20** .28** −.07* .38**
Teachers support 1 .48** .13** .39** −.20** .30**
School adjustm. 1 .10** .43** −.19** .35**
Acad. achievem. 1 .15** −.11** .18**
Life satisfact. 1 −.43** .58**
Negative affect 1 −.28**
Positive affect 1
M 3.56 3.55 3.36 3.65 14.76 3.46 2.72 3.56
SD 0.84 0.84 0.76 0.83 2.18 0.84 0.78 0.70

*p < .05; **p < .01

This model predicts well-being with three social support measures. This association
is partially mediated by school adjustment and academic achievement, while control-
ling for age and gender. This final model obtained a better fit than the a priori model:
χ2 = 1806.89; p < .001); CFI = .947; RMSEA = .048 [.045–.050]; SRMR = .044. Factor
saturations of the latent variables had adequate values: in family support ranged from
.427 (item 9) to .800 (item 14); in friends support ranged from .384 (item 10) to .843
(item 2), in teacher support ranged from .672 (item 5) to .756 (item 2); in academic
achievement ranged from .457 (item 16) to .881 (item 4); in school adjustment, .623 for
Spanish, .562 for Math, and .670 for English, and in well-being, .823 for satisfaction
with life, .441 for positive affectivity, and .723 for negative affectivity.
Three dimensions of social support affected the mediators in different ways. Family
support was a statistically significant predictor of school adjustment and academic
achievement, but teacher support was only a significant predictor of school adjustment
and friends support was only a significant predictor of academic achievement. School
adjustment was significantly affected by gender (girls had better adjustment than boys)
and age (younger students more adjusted than the older ones). However, academic
achievement was not affected by gender or age. Jointly, the amount of variance in
school adjustment and academic achievement explained by the antecedents as 43% and
11%, respectively. Well-being was explained significantly by school adjustment, aca-
demic achievement and also by family support. R-square for well-being was .69. There
were also statistically significant indirect effects on well-being: β = .098 p < .001 from
family support; β = .026 p = .012 from friends’ support; β = .164 p < .001; β = -.035
p < .001 from age; and β = .057 p < .001 from gender.

4 Discussion

The conceptual model in which this work is framed is that of positive psychology,
highlighting the need to contemplate subjective well-being and not only academic
 J. M. Tomás et al.

Age

-.05n.s.

-.04n.s. -.10
Gender (R2 = .43)
.14
-.04n.s.
.14 .079n.s. School
.24 Adjustment
Family
.33
.20 support

.15 .60 Subjective

-.14 .38 .014n.s. Well-being

-.01n.s. .12 (R2 = .69)

Friends
support .22 Academic
.40 Achievement
.25
.49
(R2 = .11)

Teacher
support

Notes: All relationships shown are significant with p < .01 unless n.s. (non significant) is stated. For
the sake of clarity factor loadings not shown.
Fig. 2 Standardized solution for the final structural equation model

performance as ingredients in adolescents’ academic success (Seligman et al. 2009).

For this, in the present study we assessed the combined effect of three variables of
perceived social support (from family, teachers and friends) on adolescents’ school
adaptation, which in turn predicts adolescents’ subjective well-being. Gender and age
effects were also controlled for.
The first hypothesis, according to which perceived social support from parents,
teachers and friends would be positively related to adolescents’ academic adapta-
tion, understood as both school adjustment and good academic achievement, has
been totally fulfilled. These results, in general lines, coincide with those obtained
by Demaray and Malecki (2002a, b), Demaray et al. (2005), Ahmed et al. (2010),
and Şahin and Kirdök (2018). However, in the present work we must make a
nuance, because we have considered that a good academic adaptation includes, as
already said, a good school adjustment, but also an adequate academic achievement.
This consideration allowed us to show that the perception of support from signif-
icant others presents different relationships with each of the academic adaptation
factors, adjustment and achievement. Thus, the perception of support from friends
is only related to academic achievement and not to school adjustment, and teachers’
perception of support appears related to school adjustment but not to academic
achievement. The perception of family support shows significant and positive
relationships with the two factors, school adjustment and academic achievement.
This suggests the importance of differentiating the social and emotional aspects of
the performance aspects, although all of them are part of the general concept of
student’s adaptation to the school context, as also pointed out by Shoshani and
Slone (2013), Steinmayr et al. (2016), Aldrup et al. (2018), Vaillancourt et al.
(2019), and Lan et al. (2019).
The second hypothesis was that the two measures of academic adaptation, school
adjustment and achievement, would be positively related to their subjective well-being,
and therefore the effects of support on well-being would be totally mediated by school
adjustment. This hypothesis has been mostly fulfilled, showing results that are in line
Perceived Social Support, School Adaptation and Adolescents’...

with those obtained by Steinmayr et al. (2016) and Suldo et al. (2008). It should be
noted, however, other nuances in the results found here. On the one hand, both school
adjustment and academic achievement have shown to be good predictors of student
well-being. However, there has not been a total mediation of school engagement in the
prediction of well-being, given that there is a direct relationship between the perception
of family support and the well-being of the students, a relationship that turns out to be
the most powerful of all the relationships found in the multivariate model verified. This
reinforces the idea of Rosenfeld et al. (2000), Gallagher and Vella-Brodrick (2008), and
Yang et al. (2019), who affirm that social support can be one of the contextual factors
with greater capacity to influence the students’ subjective well-being. In any case, as
also indicated by Suldo et al. (2008) and Danielsen et al. (2009), the magnitude of the
relationship between social support and well-being depends on the source that provides
the support, and in our case it has been the family the most important one.
The third hypothesis stated that women would perceive more subjective well-being
than men. Our results indicate that the relationship between gender and well-being is
mediated by school adjustment, with women showing higher values than men. These
results corroborate those obtained by Liu et al. (2016) who found that women show
greater satisfaction with school and well-being than men, and are contradictory with
those obtained by Lampropoulou (2018), who found that boys reported higher well-
being than girls.
The fourth hypothesis stated that as adolescents grew older would perceive less well-
being. The results of this work show that the youngest students indeed had greater well-
being than the older ones. These results are in line with those of Lampropoulou (2018).

5 Conclusion

The current study highlights the importance of social support, given its relevance to
adolescent well-being in contemporary societies around the world. It is worth to remark,
on the one hand, the relevance of the social support that adolescent students perceive from
their family, teachers and friends. On the other hand, all support sources are not equally
relevant for all aspects of the school context: teachers are more related with school
adjustment, friends are more related with academic adjustment, and family are equally
related with both factors. Results supported the hypothesized indirect influence of per-
ceived social support from family, teachers and friends on students’ subjective well-being.
Family support also had direct effects on students’ well-being. The structural model
showed quite strong predictive power of school adjustment on well-being, but a more
moderate effect of academic achievement on adolescents’ well-being. Brioux and
Oubrayrie-Roussel (2017) confirm the complementarity of the role of parents and teachers
to adolescents in this context. These are the two main sources of support identified as the
most protective factors of the adolescents’ well-being in the school context.
Apart of the direct effect of family’s support on well-being, school adjustment had a
relevant mediational role in the relationship among social support sources and well-
being. It is also interesting to see that women showed better school adaptation and
subjective well-being than men. Finally, the youngest students are better adapted to the
school environment than the older ones. Or, in other words, as students go up the
school ladder, their subjective well-being slowly deteriorates.
 J. M. Tomás et al.

6 Limitations

Like other researches, this research presents both strengths and limitations. Analyzing
the relationships between the social support perceived by the students, their school
adjustment and achievement, and their subjective well-being in a complex multivariate
model may be considered one of the strengths. Another positive aspect is the use of a
large sample. Regarding the limitations, it should be noted, for example, that although
the sample is large, the recruitment process has been a convenience one, although the
variety of places where the data has been collected favors some approximation to
random sampling. Another limitation is the students’ self-report of school grades.
Unfortunately, official grades were not available, and therefore conclusions should be
taken with caution. Furthermore, as with most self-report questionnaires, the current
responses may reflect social desirability (Ronen et al. 2016). Future studies should
include other assessment methods different from self-reports such as peer ratings or
performance measures of family functioning.
The cross-sectional nature of the data is also a methodological limitation, preventing
the establishment of causal relationships among the variables. The hypothetical model
tested here is only one of the possible models, and there may be other models capable
of contributing with new explanations to the interpretation of the relationships between
the variables studied. For example, Tian et al. (2013) studied the relationships between
social support and students’ subjective well-being mediated by self-esteem, or Tian
et al. (2016) used basic psychological needs satisfaction as mediators. Another issue
that should be clarified is whether students’ subjective well-being can be considered as
a result of school adjustment or as a precursor of it, an aspect contemplated by authors
such as Shoshani and Slone (2013), Steinmayr et al. (2016), or Vaillancourt et al.
(2019). Finally, as we have mentioned above, a problem that arises when measuring the
adolescents’ well-being is the use of an appropriate instrument. In future research, a
measurement scale of adolescent well-being could be used to contemplate more
ingredients of the school context, such as the one created by Tian et al. (2015b), which
comprises eight subscales: achievement, school management, teacher-student relation-
ships, peer relationships, teaching, academic learning, positive affect, and negative
affect; or the one proposed by Renshaw (2018), which contains four dimensions:
academic efficacy, academic satisfaction, school connectedness, and college gratitude.

7 Practical Implications

The strong effect of teacher support on school adjustment may have important impli-
cations for the educational system’s position on social support by teachers. Strength-
ening the consciousness at different levels of the educational system about the impor-
tant effects of teacher support may influence teachers’ practice (Danielsen et al. 2009).
Another very important implication of these results may be that efforts should be made
to increase the amount of social support that adolescents perceive from their family
(Demaray et al. 2005). Schaub (2010, 2015) points out that parental involvement has
been increasing in recent years in relation to the cognitive tasks of their children. In this
regard, research has shown that the involvement of parents in school activities helps to
promote the quality of the classroom climate and, in fact, to influence adolescents’
Perceived Social Support, School Adaptation and Adolescents’...

school engagement through parent-teacher-school communication (Brioux and

Oubrayrie-Roussel 2017). However, although there is a growing consensus that paren-
tal social support is a crucial factor in determining adolescents’ well-being (Wang et al.
2019), there is a need for parents to become more involved in their sons and daughters’
emotional abilities and increase their efforts to support them in order to promote their
subjective well-being. Specifically, results of the current study demonstrated that
supportive families may have a long-term and powerful effect on students’ subjective
well-being. Interventions and services for improving parenting skills could positively
influence the well-being of adolescents. As Lampropoulou (2018) stated, “these results
are significant not only because they provide an insight into adolescents’ subjective
well-being, but also because of their potential practical implications for school psy-
chologists” (p. 12). From an educational point of view these results show the impor-
tance of social support from family, teachers and friends in order to achieve a good
school adaptation, both in terms of school adjustment and academic achievement, and
finally achieve a better subjective well-being. However, more research is needed in this
regard, because as Bücker et al. (2018) stated, “low-achieving students do not neces-
sarily report low well-being, and high-achieving students do not automatically experi-
ence high levels of well-being” (p. 83). From the theoretical framework of positive
psychology and the positive youth development that has guided us to develop this
work, we agree with Ciarrochi et al. (2016) that school plays an important role in
facilitating or inhibiting successful lifelong development of students, and Noddings
(2003) also stressed that education of “good quality” should be concerned about not
only academic learning, but also the happiness of the students. These are the reasons
why we advocate an education that pursues not only the academic qualifications but
also the students’ satisfaction with the school and with their own life, their personal
well-being.

References

Ahmed, W., Minnaert, A., van der Werf, G., & Kuyper, H. (2010). Perceived social support and early
adolescents’ achievement: The mediational roles of motivational beliefs and emotions. Journal of Youth
and Adolescence, 39, 36–46. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-008-9367-7.
Aldrup, K., Klusmann, U., Lüdtke, O., Göllner, R., & Trautwein, U. (2018). Social support and classroom
management are related to secondary students’ general school adjustment: A multilevel structural
equation model using student and teacher ratings. Journal of Educational Psychology, 110(8), 1066–
1083. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000256.
Arslan, G. (2018). Social exclusion, social support and psychological wellbeing at school: A study of
mediation and moderation effect. Child Indicators Research, 11, 897–918. https://doi.org/10.1007
/s12187-017-9451-1.
Arslan, G. (2019). Exploring the effects of positive psychological strengths on psychological adjustment in
adolescents. Child Indicators Research, 12, 1449–1464. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12187-018-9589-5.
Arslan, G., & Renshaw, T. L. (2018). Student subjective wellbeing as a predictor of adolescent problem
behaviors: A comparison of first-order and second-order factor effects. Child Indicators Research, 11,
507–521. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12187-017-9444-0.
Baker, J. A., & Maupin, A. N. (2009). School satisfaction and children’s positive school adjustment. In R.
Gilman, E. S. Huebner, & M. J. Furlong (Eds.), Handbook of positive psychology in the schools (pp. 189–
196). New York: Routledge.
Bradshaw, J., Keung, A., Rees, G., & Goswami, H. (2011). Children’s subjective well-being: International
comparative perspectives. Children and Youth Services Review, 33(4), 548–556. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
childyouth.2010.05.010.
 J. M. Tomás et al.

Brioux, K., & Oubrayrie-Roussel, N. (2017). Le soutien social perçu comme facteur protecteur du bien-être en
contexte scolaire: son influence sur la mobilisation scolaire d’adolescents scolarisés en classe de
troisième. Neuropsychiatrie de l'Enfance et de l'Adolescence, 65(3), 188–195. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
neurenf.2017.03.004.
Bücker, S., Nuraydin, S., Simonsmeier, B. A., Schneider, M., & Luhmann, M. (2018). Subjective well-being
and academic achievement: A meta-analysis. Journal of Research in Personality, 74, 83–94. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.jrp.2018.02.007.
Ciarrochi, J., Atkins, P. W. B., Hayes, L. L., Sahdra, B. K., & Parker, P. (2016). Contextual positive
psychology: Policy recommendations for implementing positive psychology in schools. Frontiers in
Psychology, 7(1561), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01561.
Danielsen, A. G., Samdal, O., Hetland, J., & Wold, B. (2009). School-related social support and students'
perceived life satisfaction. The Journal of Educational Research, 102(4), 303–320. https://doi.
org/10.3200/JOER.102.4.303-320.
Datu, J. A. D., & King, R. B. (2018). Subjective well-being is reciprocally associated with academic
engagement: A two-wave longitudinal study. Journal of School Psychology, 69, 100–110. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.jsp.2018.05.007.
Demaray, M. K., & Malecki, C. K. (2002a). Critical levels of perceived social support associated with student
adjustment. School Psychology Quarterly, 17(3), 213–241. https://doi.org/10.1521/scpq.17.3.213.20883.
Demaray, M. K., & Malecki, C. K. (2002b). The relationship between perceived social support and malad-
justment for students at risk. Psychology in the Schools, 39, 305–316. https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.10018.
Demaray, M. K., Malecki, C. M., Davidson, L. M., Hodgson, K. K., & Rebus, P. J. (2005). The relationship
between social support and student adjustment: A longitudinal analysis. Psychology in the Schools, 42,
691–706. https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.20120.
Diener, E. (2000). Subjective well-being: The science of happiness and a proposal for a national index.
American Psychologist, 55(1), 34–43. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.55.1.34.
Diener, E. (2012). New findings and future directions for subjective well-being research. American
Psychologist, 67(8), 590–597. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0029541.
Diener, E., Emmons, R. A., Larsen, R. J., & Griffin, S. (1985). The satisfaction with life scale. Journal of
Personality Assessment, 49, 71–75.
Diener, E., Oishi, S., & Tay, L. (2018). Advances in subjective well-being research. Nature Human Behaviour,
2, 253–260. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-018-0307-6.
Elmore, G. M., & Huebner, E. S. (2010). Adolescents’ satisfaction with school experiences: Relationships with
demographics, attachment relationships, and school engagement behavior. Psychology in the Schools,
47(6), 525–537. https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.20488.
Engels, N., Aelterman, A., Petegem, K. V., & Schepens, A. (2004). Factors which influence the well-being of
pupils in Flemish secondary schools. Educational Studies, 30(2), 127–143. https://doi.org/10.1080
/0305569032000159787.
Eryılmaz, A. (2012). A model of subjective well-being for adolescents in high school. Journal of Happiness
Studies, 13(2), 275–289. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10902-011-9263-9.
Gallagher, E. N., & Vella-Brodrick, D. A. (2008). Social support and emotional intelligence as predictors of
subjective well-being. Personality and Individual Differences, 44, 1551–1561. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
paid.2008.01.011.
Godoy-Izquierdo, D., Martínez, A., & Godoy, J. F. (2008). The «affect balance scale». Its psychometric
properties as a tool for measuring positive and negative affect in the Spanish population. Clínica y Salud,
19(2), 157–189.
González, M. T., & Landero, R. (2014). Psychometric properties of the family and friends social support scale
(AFA-R) in a students’ sample. Acta de Investigación Psicológica, 4(2), 1469–1480. https://doi.
org/10.1016/S2007-4719(14)70387-4.
Gutiérrez, M., & Gonçalves, T. O. (2013). Developmental assets, school adjustment, and adolescents’
subjective well-being. International Journal of Psychology and Psychological Therapy, 13(3), 339–355.
Hascher, T. (2008). Quantitative and qualitative research approaches to assess student well-being.
International Journal of Educational Research, 47, 84–96. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2007.11.016.
Helsen, M., Vollebergh, W., & Meeus, W. (2000). Social support from parents and friends and emotional
problems in adolescence. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 29, 319–335. https://doi.org/10.1023
/A:1005147708827.
Huebner, E. S., Drane, J. W., & Valois, R. F. (2000). Levels and demographic correlates of adolescent life
satisfaction reports. School Psychology International, 21, 281–292. https://doi.org/10.1177
/0143034300213005.
Perceived Social Support, School Adaptation and Adolescents’...

Ishida, Y. (2009). Development of a subjective school adjustment scale. Bulletin of the Educational Practice
Synthesis Center, 12, 287–292.
Jelas, Z. M., Azman, N., Zulnaidi, H., & Ahmad, N. A. (2016). Learning support and academic achievement
among Malaysian adolescents: The mediating role of student engagement. Learning Environments
Research, 19(2), 221–240. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10984-015-9202-5.
Karvonen, S., Tokola, K., & Rimpelä, A. (2018). Well-being and academic achievement: Differences between
schools from 2002 to 2010 in the Helsinki metropolitan area. Journal of School Health, 88(11), 821–829.
https://doi.org/10.1111/josh.12691.
Ki, P. (2018). School adjustment and academic performance: Influences of the interaction frequency with
mothers versus fathers and the mediating role of parenting behaviours. Early Child Development and
Care. https://doi.org/10.1080/03004430.2018.1518904.
Ladd, G. W., & Troop-Gordon, W. (2003). The role of chronic peer difficulties in the development of
children’s psychological adjustment problems. Child Development, 74(5), 1344–1367. https://doi.
org/10.1111/1467-8624.00611.
Lampropoulou, A. (2018). Personality, school, and family: What is their role in adolescents' subjective well-
being. Journal of Adolescence, 67, 12–21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adolescence.2018.05.013.
Lan, X., Scrimin, S., & Moscardino, U. (2019). Perceived parental guan and school adjustment among
Chinese early adolescents: The moderating role of interdependent self-construal. Journal of
Adolescence, 71, 18–27. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adolescence.2018.12.003.
Liu, W., Mei, J., Tian, L., & Huebner, E. S. (2016). Age and gender differences in the relation between school-
related social support and subjective well-being in school among students. Social Indicators Research,
125, 1065–1083. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-015-0873-1.
Long, R. F., Huebner, E. S., Wedell, D. H., & Hills, K. J. (2012). Measuring school-related subjective well-
being in adolescents. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 82(1), 50–60. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1939-
0025.2011.01130.x.
Ma, C. M. S. (2019). The relationship between social support and life satisfaction among Chinese and ethnic
minority adolescents in Hong Kong: The mediating role of positive youth development. Child Indicators
Research, 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12187-019-09638-2.
Malecki, C. K., & Demaray, M. K. (2003). What type of support do they need? Investigating student
adjustment as related to emotional, informational, appraisal, and instrumental support. School
Psychology Quarterly, 18, 231–252. https://doi.org/10.1521/scpq.18.3.231.22576.
Marsh, H. W., Hau, K. T., & Wen, Z. (2004). In search of golden rules: Comment on hypothesis-testing
approaches to setting cutoff values for fit indexes and dangers in overgeneralizing Hu and Bentler’s
(1999) findings. Structural Equation Modeling, 11, 320–341. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15328007
sem1103_2.
Masten, A. S., Desjardins, C. D., McCormick, C. M., Kuo, S. I.-C., & Long, J. D. (2010). The significance of
childhood competence and problems for adult success in work: A developmental cascade analysis.
Development and Psychopathology, 22, 679–694. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0954579410000362.
Moore, K. A. (2019). Developing an indicator system to measure child well-being: Lessons learned over time.
Child Indicators Research, 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12187-019-09644-4.
Moreno, C., Ramos, P., Rivera, F., Jiménez-Iglesias, A., García-Moya, I., Sánchez-Queija, I., et al. (2012). The
behaviors related to the health and development of Spanish adolescents. Results of the HBSC-2010 study
with Spanish boys and girls from 11 to 18 years old. Madrid: Ministerio de Sanidad, Servicios Sociales e
Igualdad.
Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O. (1998-2017). Mplus user's guide (8th ed.). Los Angeles: Muthén & Muthén.
Noddings, N. (2003). Happiness and education. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Opre, D., Pintea, S., Opre, A., & Bertea, M. (2018). Measuring adolescents’ subjective well-being in
educational context: Development and validation of a multidimensional instrument. Journal of
Evidence-Based Psychotherapies, 18(2), 161–180.
Putwain, D. W., Loderer, K., Gallard, D., & Beaumont, J. (2019). School-related subjective well-being
promotes subsequent adaptability, achievement, and positive behavioural conduct. British Journal of
Educational Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjep.12266.
Renshaw, T. L. (2018). Psychometrics of the revised college student subjective well-being questionnaire.
Canadian Journal of School Psychology, 33(2), 136–149. https://doi.org/10.1177/0829573516678704.
Ronen, T., Hamama, L., Rosenbaum, M., & Mishely-Yarlap, A. (2016). Subjective well-being in adolescence:
The role of self-control, social support, age, gender, and familial crisis. Journal of Happiness Studies, 17,
81–104. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10902-014-9585-5.
 J. M. Tomás et al.

Rosenfeld, L. B., Richman, J. M., & Bowen, G. L. (2000). Social support networks and school outcomes: The
centrality of the teacher. Child and Adolescent Social Work Journal, 17, 205–226. https://doi.org/10.1023
/A:1007535930286.
Rueger, S. Y., Malecki, C. K., & Demaray, M. K. (2008). Gender differences in the relationship between
perceived social support and student adjustment during early adolescence. School Psychology Quarterly,
23(4), 496–514. https://doi.org/10.1037/1045-3830.23.4.496.
Şahin, I., & Kirdök, O. (2018). Investigation of relationship between high school students’ career adaptability,
subjective well-being and perceived social support. International Education Studies, 11(8), 127–135.
https://doi.org/10.5539/ies.v11n8p127.
Schaub, M. (2010). Parenting for cognitive development from 1950 to 2000: The institutionalization of mass
education and the social construction of parenting in the United States. Sociology of Education, 83(1), 46–
66. https://doi.org/10.1177/0038040709356566.
Schaub, M. (2015). Is there a home advantage in school readiness for young children? Trends in parent
engagement in cognitive activities with young children, 1991-2001. Journal of Early Childhood
Research, 13(1), 47–63. https://doi.org/10.1177/1476718X12468122.
Seligman, M. (2011). Flourish: A visionary new understanding of happiness and well-being. New York: Free
Press.
Seligman, M. E., & Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2000). Positive psychology: An introduction. American
Psychologist, 55(1), 5–14. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.55.1.5.
Seligman, M., Ernst, R., Gillham, J., Reivich, K., & Linkins, M. (2009). Positive education: Positive
psychology and classroom interventions. Oxford Review of Education, 35(3), 293–311. https://doi.
org/10.1080/03054980902934563.
Shoshani, A., & Slone, M. (2013). Middle school transition from the strengths perspective: Young adoles-
cents’ character strengths, subjective well-being, and school adjustment. Journal of Happiness Studies,
14, 1163–1181. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10902-012-9374-y.
Steinmayr, R., Crede, J., McElvany, N., & Wirthwein, L. (2016). Subjective wellbeing, test anxiety, academic
achievement: Testing for reciprocal effects. Frontiers in Psychology, 6(1994), 1–13. https://doi.
org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01994.
Steinmayr, R., Heyder, A., Naumburg, C., Michels, J., & Wirthwein, L. (2018). School-related and individual
predictors of subjective well-being and academic achievement. Frontiers in Psychology, 9(2631), 1–16.
https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.02631.
Suldo, S. M., Riley, K. N., & Shaffer, E. J. (2006). Academic correlates of children and adolescents’ life
satisfaction. School Psychology International, 27(5), 567–582. https://doi.org/10.1177
/0143034306073411.
Suldo, S. M., Shaffer, E. J., & Riley, K. N. (2008). A social-cognitive-behavioral model of academic predictors
of adolescents’ life satisfaction. School Psychology Quarterly, 23(1), 56–69. https://doi.org/10.1037
/1045-3830.23.1.56.
Suldo, S., Thalji, A., & Ferron, J. (2011). Longitudinal academic outcomes predicted by early adolescents’
subjective well-being, psychopathology, and mental health status yielded from a dual factor model. The
Journal of Positive Psychology, 6, 17–30. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439760.2010.536774.
Suldo, S. M., Hearon, B. V., Bander, B., McCullough, M., Garofano, J., Roth, R. A., & Tan, S. Y. (2015).
Increasing elementary school students’ subjective well-being through a classwide positive psychology
intervention: Results of a pilot study. Contemporary School Psychology, 19(4), 300–311. https://doi.
org/10.1007/s40688-015-0061-y.
Tian, L., Liu, B., Huang, S., & Huebner, E. S. (2013). Perceived social support and school well-being among
Chinese early and middle adolescents: The mediational role of self-esteem. Social Indicators Research,
113(3), 991–1008. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-012-0123-8.
Tian, L., Du, M., & Huebner, E. S. (2015a). The effect of gratitude on elementary school students’ subjective
well-being in schools: The mediating role of prosocial behavior. Social Indicators Research, 122(3), 887–
904. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-014-0712-9.
Tian, L., Wang, D., & Huebner, E. S. (2015b). Development and validation of the brief adolescents’ subjective
well-being in school scale (BASWBSS). Social Indicators Research, 120, 615–634. https://doi.
org/10.1007/s11205-014-0603-0.
Tian, L., Tian, Q., & Huebner, E. S. (2016). School-related social support and adolescents’ school-related
subjective well-being: The mediating role of basic psychological needs satisfaction at school. Social
Indicators Research, 128, 105–129. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-015-1021-7.
Vaillancourt, M. C., Paiva, A. O., Véronneau, M. H., & Dishion, T. J. (2019). How do individual predispo-
sitions and family dynamics contribute to academic adjustment through the middle school years? The
Perceived Social Support, School Adaptation and Adolescents’...

mediating role of friends’ characteristics. Journal of Early Adolescence, 39(4), 576–602. https://doi.
org/10.1177/0272431618776124.
Varela, J. J., Sirlopú, D., Melipillán, R., Espelage, D., Green, J., & Guzmán, J. (2019). Exploring the influence
school climate on the relationship between school violence and adolescent subjective well-being. Child
Indicators Research, 12, 2095–2110. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12187-019-09631-9.
Wang, Z., Kouvonen, A., Satka, M., & Julkunen, I. (2019). Parental social support and adolescent well-being:
A cross-sectional study in China. Child Indicators Research, 12, 299–317. https://doi.org/10.1007
/s12187-018-9547-2.
Warr, P. B., Barter, J., & Brownbridge, G. (1983). On the independence of positive and negative affect.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 44(3), 644–651. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-
3514.44.3.644.
Wentzel, K. R. (1998). Social relationships and motivation in middle school: The role of parents, teachers, and
peers. Journal of Educational Psychology, 90, 202–209. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.90.2.202.
Yang, Q., Tian, L., Huebner, E. S., & Zhu, X. (2019). Relations among academic achievement, self-esteem,
and subjective well-being in school among elementary school students: A longitudinal mediation model.
School Psychology Quarterly, 34(3), 328–340. https://doi.org/10.1037/spq0000292.
Yao, Y., Kong, Q., & Cai, J. (2018). Investigating elementary and middle school students’ subjective well-
being and mathematical performance in Shanghai. International Journal of Science and Mathematics
Education, 16(S1), S107–S127. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-017-9827-1.
Zhou, L. H., Ntoumanis, N., & Thøgersen-Ntoumani, C. (2019). Effects of perceived autonomy support from
social agents on motivation and engagement of Chinese primary school students: Psychological need
satisfaction as mediator. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 58, 323–330. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
cedpsych.2019.05.001.

Publisher’s Note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and
institutional affiliations.

Affiliations

José M. Tomás 1 & Melchor Gutiérrez 2 & Ana María Pastor 3 & Patricia Sancho 2

José M. Tomás
Jose.M.Tomas@uv.es
Melchor Gutiérrez
Melchor.Gutierrez@uv.es

Ana María Pastor

pastor.am@pucp.pe

1
Department of Methodology for the Behavioral Sciences, University of Valencia, Av. Blasco Ibáñez, 21,
46010 Valencia, Spain
2
Department of Developmental and Educational Psychology, University of Valencia, Av. Blasco Ibáñez,
21, 46010 Valencia, Spain
3
Department of Psychology, Pontifical Catholic University of Peru, Av Universitaria 1801 San Miguel,
15088 Lima, Peru