Lee 2021

Journal of School Psychology 84 (2021) 95–108
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Journal of School Psychology

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jschpsyc
The relations between students’ sense of school belonging,

perceptions of school kindness and character strength of kindness
Chi-Kin John Lee a, b, Jing Huang b, c, *
a
Department of Curriculum and Instruction, The Education University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong S.A.R
b
Centre for Religious and Spirituality Education, The Education University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong S.A.R
c
Office of the Vice President (Academic) and Provost, The Education University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong S.A.R
A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T
Keywords: This study explored the associations between secondary school students’ sense of school
Sense of school belonging belonging, their perceptions of school kindness, and character strength of kindness, and examined
School kindness possible differences in these constructs across gender groups. The study, which included 1973
Character strength of kindness
Hong Kong secondary school students, revealed that students’ sense of school belonging was
School climate
positively correlated with their perceptions of school kindness at the school and student levels
(0.021 and 0.185, respectively). Furthermore, students’ sense of school belonging was positively
linked to character strength of kindness at the student level, although this relationship was found
to be non-significant at the school level. At both levels of analysis, the positive relationships
between students’ perceptions of school kindness and character strength of kindness were sig
nificant. In addition, girls reported higher levels of character strength of kindness than boys. The
findings of this study provide a better understanding of the relationships between sense of school
belonging, school kindness, and character strength of kindness. Implications for research are also
discussed.
1. Introduction
Recent studies have demonstrated that character strengths, including a group of individual characteristics that have moral value
and lead to “good virtues,” play a crucial role in students’ participation in society and achievement of success (Park, Peterson, &
Seligman, 2006). Kindness, which is a significant aspect of character strength, has been considered essential for school programs to
improve students’ mental health and foster positive well-being (Binfet, 2015; Taggart, Lee, & McDonald, 2014). Schools, as a key social
context, influence students’ academic, psychological, and social well-being during their schooling (Lynch & Cicchetti, 1997; Wentzel,
Filisetti, & Looney, 2007). Schools not only influence students’ mastery of knowledge but also shape their whole-person development.
Numerous studies have highlighted the social aspects of school functions and recognized the effects of schooling on students’ academic
and psychological outcomes (e.g., Anderman, 2002; Hughes & Kwok, 2007).
Kindness in the school context has been conceptualized in multiple ways. For example, Eisenberg (1986) defined it as “voluntary,
intentional behaviors that benefit another and are not motivated by external factors such as rewards or punishments” (p. 63).
Seligman, Steen, Park, and Peterson (2005) defined kindness simply as “doing favors and good deeds for others” (p. 412). Numerous
studies have applied a pretest-posttest design to investigate the effects of kindness interventions on various psychological outcomes
* Corresponding author at: Room A-1/F-08C, The Education University of Hong Kong, 10 Lo Ping Road, Tai Po, New Territories, Hong Kong S.A.R.
E-mail address: huangj@eduhk.hk (J. Huang).
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2020.12.001
Received 29 May 2019; Received in revised form 2 May 2020; Accepted 3 December 2020
Available online 20 January 2021
0022-4405/© 2020 Society for the Study of School Psychology. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
C.-K.J. Lee and J. Huang Journal of School Psychology 84 (2021) 95–108
and to explore the development of character strength of kindness through intervention programs (e.g., Curry et al., 2018; Haslip, Allen-
Handy, & Donaldson, 2019; Pressman, Kraft, & Cross, 2015). However, little attention has been given to the associations between
character strength of kindness and school-related factors.
In recent decades, school climate has been increasingly recognized as a way to improve student positive development (National
School Climate Council, 2007; Rudasill, Snyder, Levinson, & Adelson, 2018; Thapa, Cohen, Guffey, & Higgins-D’Alessandro, 2013).
School climate is a multidimensional construct consisting of the culture, expectations, norms, and values that are collectively accepted
and endorsed by school members and that reflects the quality of school life (Aldridge et al., 2016; Aldridge & Ala’i, 2013; Aldridge,
McChesney, & Afari, 2018; National School Climate Council, 2007). Studies have examined different perspectives on school climate in
various ways, including by assessing students’ thoughts on the social environment (e.g., school kindness) and their sense of school
belonging (Wang & Degol, 2016).
Exploring the contributions of school climate to the development of character strength of kindness is essential, not only for
identifying students’ understanding and interpretations of school climate, but also for providing a better understanding of school
climate’s effects on character strength of kindness in the school context. Understanding the relationships between students’ sense of
school belonging, perceptions of school kindness, and character strength of kindness could inform school stakeholders (e.g., admin
istrators, teachers, parents, and students) and researchers regarding the mechanism by which composing elements of school climate (e.
g., sense of school belonging and feelings of kindness at school) influence character strength of kindness. Although prior research has
identified the effects of school climate on educational and psychological outcomes (e.g., Freeman et al., 2009; MacNeil, Prater, &
Busch, 2009; Patrick, Ryan, & Kaplan, 2007; Suldo, Thalji-Raitano, Hasemeyer, Gelley, & Hoy, 2013; Wang & Holcombe, 2010;
Zaykowski & Gunter, 2012), few studies have investigated the extent to which sense of school belonging and perception of school
kindness contribute to the development of character strength of kindness. Furthermore, research on the link between school climate
and character strength of kindness could be used to improve school-based kindness education interventions and programs to enhance
motivation to be kind and kind behavior (Waters, 2011).
Therefore, this study intended to bridge the gap between these two bodies of research and enrich the findings of the role of school
climate in developing character strengths in the Hong Kong school context. The primary goal was to explore the relationships between
students’ sense of school belonging, perceptions of school kindness, and character strength of kindness. Given that gender differences
in students’ character strengths and perceptions of school climate have been found in early literature (e.g., Biswas-Diener, 2006; Furrer
& Skinner, 2003; Gillen-O’Neel & Fuligni, 2013; Smerdon, 2002), the secondary aim was to examine possible differences in the study
constructs across gender groups.
Fig. 1. Conceptual model in the current study. H1-H4c = Hypothesis 1 to Hypothesis 4c.
96
1.1. School climate
Although school climate has received extensive attention of researchers and educators in recent decades, there is still a lack of
consensus on the definition of school climate (Rudasill et al., 2018; Thapa et al., 2013; Wang & Degol, 2016). Many studies defined
school climate as shared culture, beliefs, values, norms, and expectations between students, teachers, and school members (e.g.,
Aldridge & Ala’i, 2013; Esposito, 1999; Kuperminc, Leadbeater, Emmons, & Blatt, 1997). Freiberg and Stein (1999) adopted a broader
definition and described school climate as “the heart and soul of the school” (p. 11). Recent studies have been in agreement regarding
the multidimensionality of school climate. Wang and Degol (2016) conducted an extensive literature review and identified four do
mains and 13 dimensions of school climate. The four domains included (a) academic climate, (b) community, (c) safety, and (d)
institutional environment. The current study mainly focused on the two dimensions of the community domain of school climate:
connectedness and quality of interpersonal relationships (see Fig. 1).
The community domain of school climate represents the relationships among school members (Battistich, Solomon, Kim, Watson, &
Schaps, 1995; Gottfredson & Gottfredson, 2002; Wang & Degol, 2016; Way & Robinson, 2003). Wang and Degol (2016) categorized
this domain of school climate into four dimensions: (a) connectedness, (b) quality of interpersonal relationships, (c) respect for di
versity, and (d) community partnerships. Connectedness refers to how school members feel a sense of belongingness in school. Stu
dents with strong feelings of acceptance and inclusion in school tend to believe themselves to be an essential part of the whole
community (McNeely, Nonnemaker, & Blum, 2002; Whitlock, 2006). Quality of interpersonal relationships indicates the essential
characteristics of the interactions among school members (Crosnoe, Cavanagh, & Elder Jr., 2003; Hopson & Lee, 2011). Positive
relations with others in school are characterized by supporting and trusting relationships with other school members showing respect,
caring, and intimacy (Birch & Ladd, 1997; Wang, Brinkworth, & Eccles, 2012). The extent to which school members perceive school as
a kind, caring, and helpful environment is important for fostering positive interpersonal relationships in school. Thus, kindness in
school could serve as an indicator of positive interpersonal relationships.
Scholars have recognized the importance of the social environment and interpersonal relationships within the school setting and
their relations to students’ sense of school belonging (Solomon, Battistich, Watson, Schaps, & Lewis, 2000). As Nichols (2008) pointed
out, “Most students attributed positive or negative belonging beliefs to the quality of their relationships with their teachers or other
students” (p. 164). Students’ sense of school belonging is closely associated with interpersonal relationships in school. Students who
have high-quality interpersonal relationships tend to feel that they belong at their school (McMahon, Wernsman, & Rose, 2009;
Nichols, 2006, 2008). Conversely, students’ sense of school belonging can contribute to positive interpersonal relationships in school
(La Guardia, Ryan, Couchman, & Deci, 2000; Patrick, Knee, Canevello, & Lonsbary, 2007). In fact, students with a great sense of school
belonging tend to establish positive interpersonal relationships with their peers, teachers, and other school members (Patrick, Knee,
et al., 2007; Patrick, Ryan, & Kaplan, 2007). However, to our knowledge, no previous research has explored the relationship between
students’ sense of school belonging and perceptions of kindness in school. Students’ sense of school belonging and perceptions of
school kindness share similar operational aspects, including relationships and experiences in school, as well as students’ general beliefs
about their school environment. It is reasonable to assume that students who typically consider their school as a kind, caring, and
friendly environment would feel accepted and included in the school community; students with strong feelings of belongingness and
acceptance in school would easily perceive the school as a fair, caring, and kind community in which school members behave kindly
and help each other. Therefore, it was hypothesized that there is a positive correlation between the two sub-constructs underlying
school climate.
1.2. Sense of school belonging and character strength of kindness
Sense of school belonging is used interchangeably with several terms in the literature, including school membership, sense of
relatedness, student engagement, academic engagement, school engagement, school attachment, school connectedness, sense of
school community, and school bonding (Osterman, 2000). In addition, sense of school belonging has a number of definitions in the
literature. For instance, Goodenow (1993, p. 80) defined sense of school belonging as “the extent to which students feel personally
accepted, respected, included, and supported by others in the school social environment.” Libbey (2007, p. 52) defined it as “feel[ing]
close to, a part of, and happy at school.” The current study adopted the definition of sense of school belonging proposed by Goodenow
(1993).
Based on the Basic Psychological Needs Theory (BPNT), a sub-theory within the Self-Determination Theory (SDT; Deci & Ryan,
1985, 2000, 2002), there are three fundamental psychological needs (i.e., need for autonomy, need for competence, and need for
relatedness) that are innate in human nature. Relatedness refers to an individual’s perceived need to be connected and accepted by
other people around the individual. This need is fulfilled when an individual considers oneself as a part of a group, feels a sense of
belonging, and builds intimate connections (Baumeister & Leary, 1995; Reis, 1994). People’s positive or negative outcomes depend on
whether the environment fulfills or dissatisfies their basic psychological needs (Deci & Ryan, 2000; Ryan & Deci, 2000b). Need
satisfaction leads to prosocial behaviors such as acts of kindness and voluntary work (Twenge, Baumeister, DeWall, Ciarocco, &
Bartels, 2007), whereas need thwarting results in antisocial behaviors, such as violence and bullying (Gagne, 2003a; Tian, Wang, &
Huebner, 2015). Greater fulfillment of the needs for relatedness is indicated to result in optimal psychological growth and prosocial
tendencies (Pavey, Greitemeyer, & Sparks, 2011; Ryan & Deci, 2000a).
There is substantial evidence concerning the role of sense of school belonging in students’ educational outcomes, with studies
illustrating the positive effects of students’ sense of belonging at school on their academic outcomes such as engagement, performance,
persistence and effort, self-efficacy, and success expectations (Osterman, 2000; Tinto, 1997), and psychological outcomes such as
97
prosocial behavior (Solomon, Battistich, Kim, & Watson, 1996) and gratitude (Froh, Sefick, & Emmons, 2008). Students who feel
accepted, welcomed, or included by a community tend to have positive feelings such as contentment and happiness. In contrast,
students who feel rejected, ignored, or excluded often experience negative emotions such as depression, loneliness, and anxiety.
Studies have shown the negative associations between students’ sense of school belonging and bullying victimization (Bosworth,
Espelage, & Simon, 1999), mental health issues (Gaete, Rojas-Barahona, Olivares, & Araya, 2016), dropout rates (Finn & Rock, 1997),
and risky behaviors such as suicidal behavior and substance abuse (Marraccini & Brier, 2017). In summary, prior research has
examined the effect of sense of belonging on educational performance and psychological well-being. However, research has been
limited in examining the association between sense of belonging and behavioral outcomes in the school context. Among the studies
investigating the effect of sense of school belonging on students’ behavior, efforts have been made to explore the effects on negative
behavior, rather than positive behavioral outcomes, such as prosocial behavior.
Prosocial behavior refers to an intentional act to benefit or help other individuals or society as a whole (Eisenberg, Fabes, &
Spinrad, 2006) and includes diverse kinds of actions with distinguishing characteristics. Helping, volunteering, sharing, and co-
operating are typical prosocial behavior (Brief & Motowidlo, 1986). These actions aim to aid or benefit other people. An act of
kindness is one type of prosocial behavior. As Ryan and Deci (2000a) indicated, human beings inherently tend to be prosocial as long as
they are provided with a satisfying environment. In fact, an individual tends to engage in positive behaviors when the fundamental
psychological needs for relatedness are fulfilled (Deci & Ryan, 2000; Weinstein & Ryan, 2010). When an individual lacks this envi
ronment that satisfies the needs for relatedness, the individual is likely to give up on the needs and strive for other goals, such as
extrinsic rewards and fame, which may discourage prosocial motives and behaviors (Gagne, 2003b). Empirical evidence has revealed a
positive association between students’ sense of school belonging and prosocial behavior (e.g., Demanet & van Houtte, 2012; Lonczak,
Abbott, Hawkins, Kosterman, & Catalano, 2002; Wagle et al., 2018). Therefore, it can be inferred that students’ sense of school
belonging is positively linked to character strength of kindness. Students who experience more acceptance at school are more likely to
accept, support, and help others and to show more consideration than their counterparts who experience rejection (Osterman, 2000).
Thus, consistent with BPNT, the second hypothesis in the current study concerns the positive relationship between students’ sense of
school belonging and character strength of kindness.
1.3. Perception of school kindness and character strength of kindness
School kindness is “a construct of school climate” (Binfet, Gadermann, & Schonert-Reichl, 2016, p. 115) that could reflect the
school environment in which students and others’ needs are considered and prosocial acts and positive relationships are encouraged.
According to Binfet et al., school kindness is conceptualized as “students’ perceptions of both the extent or prevalence of kindness in
their classroom and in their school, and the extent to which students perceive that their teachers and the school climate at large
encourage kind behavior” (p. 113). This definition of school kindness was used in this study.
Attachment theory emphasizes the social and emotional bond between children and primary caregivers (Ainsworth, Blehar, Wa
ters, & Wall, 1978). The relationships and experiences of a child with a primary caregiver form an internal working model that offers
mental representations of the self and others and serves as a system to affect the quality of later attachment relationships. Positive
caregiver-child relationships enhance children’s emotional security, which is viewed as a prerequisite for exploring the environment
(Bowlby, 1969, 1975, 1988). An attachment model can be extended to the school environment (Kennedy & Kennedy, 2004). People (e.
g., teachers and peers) could function as a secure base for students, which is beneficial in helping students explore their school
environment and engage in learning activities (Birch & Ladd, 1997; Pianta, 1999; Pianta, Nimetz, & Bennett, 1997). Positive inter
personal relationships in school reflect having feelings of security and are believed to promote positive behaviors and provide support
for engagement in school, whereas unfavorable interpersonal relationships with a lack of security are considered to hinder and impede
students’ engagement in school (Al-Yagon & Mikulincer, 2004; Hamre & Pianta, 2001; Rey, Smith, Yoon, Somers, & Barnett, 2007).
Students’ engagement in school includes behavioral, emotional, and cognitive components (Fredricks, Blumenfeld, & Paris, 2004).
When people are involved in a high-quality interpersonal relationship, they are likely to learn and internalize specific beliefs and
values that are regarded highly by other individuals and can be used to deal with demands in specific environments (Wentzel, 1999).
As such, the belief system of each individual is established based on the beliefs and values internalized from other significant people.
For instance, in the school context, students who have positive relationships with a particular teacher or peer tend to take in some of
the cognitive, emotional, and behavioral beliefs of the teacher or peer (Wentzel, 1999; Wentzel & McNamara, 1999). These beliefs can
be useful for students to know what to do not only in academic situations, but also in other aspects of their school life (Ryan & Deci,
2000a). In general, all school personnel expect students to be kind, friendly, and helpful in the school community. Teachers educate
students to be kind through discussions on kindness in the classrooms. School kindness can be considered as typical of high-quality
interpersonal relationships in the school context. It is inferred that when teachers and peers highly value kindness and behave
kindly in school, students are likely to view them as a security base and internalize the beliefs and values on kindness, which leads to
their kind behaviors in school.
Empirical evidence supports the association between the quality of school-based interpersonal relationships and student behavioral
outcomes. For example, negative teacher-student relationships have shown to be associated with fewer prosocial behaviors (Myers &
Morris, 2009), whereas positive teacher-student relationships have been found to be linked to fewer anti-social behaviors (Lang,
Marlow, Goodman, Meltzer, & Ford, 2013; Silver, Meassella, Armstrong, & Essex, 2005). In addition, supportive peer relationships
have been associated with more prosocial behaviors (Wentzel & Erdley, 1993; Wentzel & McNamara, 1999). To our knowledge, no
research has investigated the relationship between students’ perceptions of school kindness and character strength of kindness.
Therefore, the current study tested the hypothesis that students’ perceptions of school kindness are positively associated with character
98
strength of kindness.
1.4. Gender differences in school climate and character strength
The limited research on gender difference in students’ sense of school belonging has produced mixed findings. Several studies have
found that female students are more likely to report a stronger sense of school belonging than their male counterparts in primary and
secondary schools (Furrer & Skinner, 2003; Gillen-O’Neel & Fuligni, 2013; Johnson, Crosnoe, & Elder Jr, 2001; Smerdon, 2002). In
contrast, Niehaus, Rudasill, and Rakes (2012) found that females and males did not significantly differ in their sense of school
belonging through their middle years of school, although females expressed higher levels of sense of belonging at school than males.
Furthermore, the positive effect of the sense of school belonging for female adolescents at the beginning of the school year gradually
disappeared during their school years (Witherspoon & Ennett, 2011). Regarding gender difference in students’ perceptions of school
kindness, in the limited literature, female students reported higher levels of perceptions of school kindness than their male counter
parts (Binfet et al., 2016).
A few studies have confirmed that gender differences exist in character strengths, although the patterns vary across cultures
(Biswas-Diener, 2006; Linley et al., 2007; Shimai, Otake, Park, Peterson, & Seligman, 2006). Females are more likely to show positive
interpersonal emotions and have higher levels of character strengths such as kindness and love, whereas males tend to have stronger
character in strengths such as persistence and bravery (Eagly & Wood, 1999; Linley et al., 2007; Stoppard & Gunn Gruchy, 1993).
Cultures and beliefs, such as Confucianism, strengthen the importance of character strengths such as kindness and integrity for
Japanese males (Sugihara & Katsurada, 2000), although no gender differences were found in character strength of kindness for the
American and Japanese samples (Shimai et al., 2006). Studies on gender stereotypes have found that females usually receive higher
ratings on kindness, helpfulness, compassion, and devotion to others than males (Bern, 1974; Ruble, 1983; Spence & Helmreich, 1979).
Therefore, the current study explored gender differences in students’ sense of school belonging, perceptions of school kindness, and
character strength of kindness.
1.5. Hong Kong: The background
In Hong Kong, increasing attention is being paid to moral, life, and character education. The Character Education Foundation
organized Character Day with the theme “Kindness” (Character Education Foundation, 2019). Seven priority values are promoted in
the school curriculum, one of which is “caring for others,” which is to a large extent related to kindness (Education Bureau, 2014).
Moreover, in the Quality Assurance and School-based Support Division, which includes the Education Bureau’s performance indicators
for schools in Hong Kong (Education Bureau, 2016), the “Student Support and School Ethos” domain consists of an indicator of “school
climate” based on the rationale that schools are obliged to cultivate good interpersonal relationships and team spirit among students,
foster an active and cheerful school atmosphere, and promote a sense of belonging.
However, there is inadequate empirical research on the development of morality or character strengths of children and students,
especially in the secondary school setting. Although several studies have emphasized the critical role of school in character education
and moral development from a theoretical perspective or through school-based interventions and programs (e.g., Ma, 2009; Mak,
2014), little is known about how students in Hong Kong perceive and respond to kindness, and what factors, such as sense of school
belonging and kindness in school, have made this experience possible. Character education raises questions about the school–student
relationship, and most previous research was conducted in the Western context. It is therefore desirable to empirically investigate the
associations between sense of school belonging, school kindness, and character strength of kindness to obtain a fuller understanding of
the Hong Kong experience of character education.
1.6. The current study
This study aimed to examine the relationships between students’ sense of school belonging, perceptions of school kindness, and
character strength of kindness in secondary schools. All of these relationships were examined at both student and school levels to
decompose variance in character strength of kindness into within- and between-group variations, and to recognize where effects on
character strength of kindness occur. In addition, because prior studies have identified gender differences in students’ character
strengths and perceptions of school climate (e.g., Biswas-Diener, 2006; Furrer & Skinner, 2003; Gillen-O’Neel & Fuligni, 2013;
Johnson et al., 2001; Linley et al., 2007; Shimai et al., 2006; Smerdon, 2002), the study also aimed to examine possible differences in
students’ sense of belonging at school, perceptions of school kindness, and character strength of kindness across gender groups. These
research questions were investigated during adolescence within a cross-sectional design. The secondary school was targeted because
adolescents have been understudied concerning school environmental influences on the development of character strengths. In sum,
the following hypotheses were tested in the study:
Hypothesis 1. (H1): (a) Students’ sense of school belonging at the between-school level and (b) students’ sense of school belonging at
the within-school level are positively correlated with students’ perceptions of school kindness.
Hypothesis 2. (H2): (a) Students’ sense of school belonging at the between-school level and (b) students’ sense of school belonging at
the within-school level are positively associated with character strength of kindness.
Hypothesis 3. (H3): (a) Students’ perceptions of school kindness at the between-school level and (b) students’ perceptions of school
99
kindness at the within-school level are positively associated with character strength of kindness.
Hypothesis 4. (H4): Female students have higher levels of (a) sense of school belonging, (b) perceptions of school kindness, and (c)
character strength of kindness than male students.
2. Method
2.1. Participants and design
This research, which was part of the study called Academic Emotions, Social-Emotional Health, Self-Regulated Learning, and Sense of
School Membership: Teacher and Student Perspectives, was undertaken in the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (SAR), China, in
2018. Research ethics approval was obtained from a local university. The data collection was conducted during the second semester of
the 2017–2018 school year (from April to June 2018). Teachers were invited to be responsible for data collection. Teachers were
provided with an information sheet about the purposes of the study, and the steps of collecting the consent forms and questionnaires.
With the agreement of school leaders and parental informed consent, students received invitations to voluntarily participate in the
study and complete a paper-and-pencil questionnaire in which measures were presented in a standard order. The questionnaire
included descriptions about the purposes of the research, the topic of the questionnaire, and the requirements of participation. It also
included specific instructions on how to respond to each item. All participants had full autonomy in deciding what information to
provide and what items to answer. The final sample included 1973 students (55.2% girls) in 29 local secondary schools (average
number of students per school = 67.4) in Hong Kong. Students were enrolled in Secondary (S) 1–5 and were aged between 13 and 17
years (S1, N = 251, 12.7%; S2, N = 371, 18.8%; S3, N = 279, 14.1%; S4, N = 539, 27.3%; S5, N = 530, 26.9%).
2.2. Instruments
2.2.1. Students’ sense of school belonging

Students’ sense of belonging at school was measured using the Psychological Sense of School Membership scale (PSSM; Goodenow,
1993). The PSSM scale was designed and has been frequently utilized to assess primary and secondary school students’ sense of school
membership (e.g., Cheung & Hui, 2003; Goodenow, 1993; Hagborg, 1994). The original PSSM scale consists of 18 items and was
adapted to the Hong Kong context by Cheung and Hui. These 18 items include 13 positive items and 5 negative items (i.e., Items 3, 6, 9,
12, and 16), which were extracted into two factors (school belonging and feeling of rejection; Cheung & Hui, 2003). Based on the
findings of Cheung and Hui and that the purpose of this study was to explore students’ sense of school belonging, the 13 positive items
of the PSSM scale (e.g., “I feel like a real part of this school”; “I feel proud of belonging in this school”; p. 70) were used, and were
scored in a range from 1 (never) to 4 (always). A higher score indicated a greater sense of school belonging. In the current study, internal
consistency was assessed using Cronbach’s alpha, and the result was satisfactory (α = 0.898).
2.2.2. Students’ perceptions of school kindness

Students’ perceptions of kindness at school were measured using the 5-item School Kindness Scale (SKS; Binfet et al., 2016). The
SKS is a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). Students answered whether kindness was frequently
shown in their schools and classrooms (e.g., “Kindness happens regularly in my classroom”; p. 119) and whether kindness was pro
moted (e.g., “The adults in my school model kindness”; “At my school, I am encouraged to be kind”; p. 119). Higher values reflected
higher levels of perceptions of kindness at school. Cronbach’s alpha for this measure was satisfactory (α = 0.820).
2.2.3. Students’ character strength of kindness

Students’ character strength of kindness was measured using the scale developed by Otake, Shimai, Tanaka-Matsumi, Otsui, and
Fredrickson (2006). This scale consists of three items ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). Students reported their
motivation to be kind (e.g., “I am always thinking that I wish to be kind and help other people in daily life”; p. 365), recognition of
kindness (e.g., “I recognize that I always do kind behaviors and help other people in daily life”; p. 365), and kind behaviors (e.g., “I do
kind things and help others every day”; p. 365). Higher values indicated higher levels of character strength of kindness. The internal
consistency for the three items was satisfactory (α = 0.818).
2.2.4. Gender
Students reported their gender on the questionnaire. Their responses were coded 0 and 1 for male and female, respectively.
2.3. Data analysis
Because of the hierarchical structure (i.e., students nested within schools), traditional structural equation modeling (SEM) is
inappropriate, even though it is well suited to handle measurement and path models. In addition, traditional multilevel modeling,
although widely used in multilevel settings, only reports a single estimate that combines the student-level and school-level effects,
resulting in an effect bias (Preacher, Zhang, & Zyphur, 2011; Preacher, Zyphur, & Zhang, 2010). Therefore, multilevel structural
equation modeling (ML-SEM) was used for hypothesis testing.
The data analysis procedure included three main stages. In the first stage, the intra-class correlations (ICCs) were computed to test
100
the appropriateness of the multilevel analysis. In the second stage, multilevel confirmatory factor analysis (ML-CFA) was used to
confirm the measurement model and examine the factor loadings’ invariance across levels. In the third stage, the effects were detected
by including paths between latent variables at both levels (i.e., school and student levels) in the final ML-SEM model. All models tested
in this study were doubly latent multilevel structural equation models that are beneficial to control for sampling and measurement
errors (Lüdtke et al., 2008; Lüdtke, Marsh, Robitzsch, & Trautwein, 2011; Marsh et al., 2009; Marsh et al., 2012). Within the models,
students’ self-ratings based on the multiple items were used to measure latent factors indicating students’ sense of school belonging,
perceptions of school kindness, and character strength of kindness at the school and student levels. At the school level, these constructs
were modeled as climate effects and measured by aggregating students’ ratings at the student level (Marsh et al., 2012).
The full information maximum likelihood (FIML) estimator was implemented in Mplus to handle the missing values (Enders, 2010;
Graham, 2012; Peugh & Enders, 2004). The FIML algorithm uses the full information of the covariance matrices at both student and
school levels to obtain unbiased parameter estimates under the “missing at random” assumption. Although the present study involved
relatively few missing values, they should be handled carefully. For students’ sense of belonging at school, 0.1% to 0.3% of the values
were missing. For students’ perceptions of school kindness, 0.2% to 0.5% of the values were missing. For character strength of
kindness, 0.1% to 0.3% of the values were missing. For gender, 0.9% of the values were missing.
IBM SPSS 25 was used to prepare the data and Mplus 8.0 was used for all data analyses. Both the ML-CFA and ML-SEM models used
robust maximum likelihood (MLR) estimation so as to produce the results for the chi-squares and standard errors, which are robust to
non-independence and non-normality (Muthén & Muthén, 1998-2018). Multiple criteria and fit indices were used to evaluate models:
the χ2 statistic, the root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA ≤0.08; Cudeck & Browne, 1992), the comparative fit index (CFI
≥ 0.90; Bentler, 1990), and the Tucker–Lewis index (TLI ≥ 0.90; Tucker & Lewis, 1973).
3. Results
Fig. 2 shows the final ML-SEM model examined in the current study. The associations between students’ sense of school belonging,
perceptions of school kindness, character strength of kindness, and gender were estimated at both school and student levels.
3.1. Appropriateness of the multilevel analysis
To confirm the appropriateness of the multilevel analysis, between-school variability was examined through the calculation of
ICCs. ICC1 was utilized to test the proportion of total variance at the school level (Level 2), whereas ICC2 was utilized to test the
reliability of the group-mean rating. To support the appropriateness of the multilevel analysis, it is desirable that ICC1 > 0.05, and ICC2
Fig. 2. ML-SEM model examined in the present study.
101
> 0.70 (Bliese, 2000; Marsh et al., 2012; Preacher et al., 2010). In this study, the values of ICC1 and ICC2 were satisfactory (students’
sense of school belonging, ICC1 = 0.090, ICC2 = 0.870; students’ perceptions of school kindness, ICC1 = 0.059, ICC2 = 0.811; students’
character strength of kindness, ICC1 = 0.097, ICC2 = 0.880).
3.2. ML-CFA
Two ML-CFA models were used to examine the factor loading invariance across levels to determine whether they showed a good fit
with the data (Morin, Marsh, Nagengast, & Scalas, 2014). Although it is not a requirement of ML-SEM model estimation, examining the
factor loading invariance can provide important information about whether the constructs at the school and student levels are the
same, confirm the comparability of the models, and simplify the final ML-SEM model (Lüdtke et al., 2011; Marsh et al., 2009; Marsh
et al., 2012; Mehta & Neale, 2005). The results shown in Table 1 indicated that the ML-CFA models satisfied the recommended criteria
and fitted the data well (Bentler, 1990; Cudeck & Browne, 1992; Tucker & Lewis, 1973). The fit indices of the ML-CFA model with
invariant factor loadings across levels (χ2 = 2604.016, df = 390, CFI = 0.892, TLI = 0.884, RMSEA = 0.054) were found to be slightly
better than those with free factor loadings (χ2 = 2671.184, df = 372, CFI = 0.888, TLI = 0.874, RMSEA = 0.056), revealing invariant
factor loadings across levels and comparable constructs at the school and student levels.
3.3. ML-SEM
Table 1 presents the goodness of fit indices for the complete ML-SEM model. Table 2 shows the parameter estimates for the ML-SEM
model. Table 3 summarizes the results of the hypothesis tests. The results displayed in Table 1 indicated that the ML-SEM model fitted
the data well (χ2 = 2465.145, df = 408, CFI = 0.900, TLI = 0.892, RMSEA = 0.051).
3.3.1. Correlation between students’ sense of school belonging and perceptions of school kindness
The results shown in Table 2 demonstrated that at the school level (L2), the correlation between students’ sense of school belonging
and perceptions of school kindness was statistically significant (β = 0.021, p < .01), so Hypothesis 1a (i.e., students’ sense of school
belonging at the between-school level are positively corelated with students’ perceptions of school kindness) was supported. Likewise,
a significant correlation between students’ sense of school belonging and perceptions of school kindness at the student level (L1) was
observed (β = 0.185, p < .001), supporting Hypothesis 1b (i.e., students’ sense of school belonging at the within-school level are
positively correlated with students’ perceptions of school kindness).
3.3.2. Effect of students’ sense of school belonging on character strength of kindness

According to the results presented in Table 2, which shows the path coefficients of the ML-SEM model, students’ sense of school
belonging was not significantly linked to character strength of kindness at the school level (L2) (β = − 0.039, p > .05). Thus, Hypothesis
2a (i.e., students’ sense of school belonging at the between-school level are positively associated with character strength of kindness)
was not supported. However, at the student level (L1), the results indicated that students’ sense of school belonging was significantly
related to character strength of kindness (β = 0.109, p < .01), supporting Hypothesis 2b (i.e., students’ sense of school belonging at the
within-school level are positively associated with character strength of kindness).
3.3.3. Effect of students’ perceptions of school kindness on character strength of kindness

The results presented in Table 2 showed a significant path from students’ perceptions of school kindness to character strength of
kindness at the school level (L2) (β = 0.609, p < .001), supporting Hypothesis 3a (i.e., students’ perceptions of school kindness at the
between-school level are positively associated with character strength of kindness). Similarly, the path between students’ perceptions
of school kindness and character strength of kindness at the student level (L1) was significant (β = 0.492, p < .001), supporting
Hypothesis 3b (i.e., students’ perceptions of school kindness at the within-school level are positively associated with character strength
of kindness).
3.3.4. Effect of gender

At the student level (L1), the results displayed in Table 2 revealed that in comparison with boys, girls reported higher levels of
character strength of kindness (β = 0.099, p < .001), supporting Hypothesis 4c (i.e., female students have higher levels of character
strength of kindness than male students). However, no gender differences were found in students’ sense of belonging at school (β =
− 0.039, p > .05) and perceptions of school kindness (β = 0.019, p > .05); consequently, Hypotheses 4a (i.e., female students have
Table 1
Fit indices for the ML-CFA and ML-SEM models.
Model χ2 df CFI TLI RMSEA
ML-CFA with free factor loadings 2671.184 372 0.888 0.874 0.056
ML-CFA with invariant factor loadings across levels 2604.016 390 0.892 0.884 0.054
ML-SEM, full model 2465.145 408 0.900 0.892 0.051
Notes. ML-CFA = Multilevel confirmatory factor analysis; ML-SEM = Multilevel structural equation modeling; χ2 = Chi square test; df = Degrees of
freedom; CFI = Comparative fit index; TLI = Tucker–Lewis index; RMSEA = Root mean square error of approximation.
102
Table 2
Path coefficients for the final multilevel structural equation modeling.
Unstandardized parameter estimate (SE) Standardized parameter estimate (SE)
School level (L2)

SSSB ↔ SPSK 0.021(0.007)** 0.876(0.062)***
SSSB → SCSK − 0.039(0.205) − 0.065(0.339)
SPSK → SCSK 0.609(0.163)*** 1.061(0.295)***
Student level (L1)
SSSB ↔ SPSK 0.185(0.016)*** 0.584(0.024)***
SSSB → SCSK 0.109(0.037)** 0.110(0.039)**
SPSK → SCSK 0.492(0.050)*** 0.507(0.051)***
Gender → SSSB − 0.039(0.026) − 0.035(0.023)
Gender → SPSK 0.019(0.035) 0.017(0.030)
Gender → SCSK 0.099(0.018)*** 0.089(0.017)***
Notes. SE = Standard error; SSSB = Students’ sense of school belonging; SPSK = Students’ perceptions of school kindness; SCSK = Students’
character strength of kindness.
**
p < .01.
***
p < .001.
Table 3
Summary of hypotheses and results.
Relationship Supported?
H1a SSSB ↔ SPSK (School level) Yes

H1b SSSB ↔ SPSK (Student level) Yes
H2a SSSB → SCSK (School level) No
H2b SSSB → SCSK (Student level) Yes
H3a SPSK → SCSK (School level) Yes
H3b SPSK → SCSK (Student level) Yes
H4a Gender → SSSB (Student level) No
H4b Gender → SPSK (Student level) No
H4c Gender → SCSK (Student level) Yes
Notes. H1a-H4c refer to Hypotheses 1a to 4c. SSSB = Students’ sense of school belonging; SPSK =
Students’ perceptions of school kindness; SCSK = Students’ character strength of kindness.
higher levels of sense of school belonging than male students) and 4b (i.e., female students have higher levels of perceptions of school
kindness than male students) were not supported.
4. Discussion
This study extended the literature by investigating the associations between secondary school students’ sense of school belonging,
perceptions of kindness in schools, and character strength of kindness in the context of Hong Kong. Prior empirical studies have often
emphasized the link between school climate and students’ positive behavioral outcomes. However, the present investigation provides
further understanding of how students’ sense of school belonging and perceptions of school kindness may jointly influence character
strength of kindness. Furthermore, the study offers more knowledge of possible differences in students’ sense of school belonging,
perceptions of school kindness, and character strength of kindness across gender groups.
4.1. Relationships between students’ sense of school belonging, perceptions of school kindness, and character strength of kindness
Three sets of hypotheses were developed to examine the relations between students’ sense of school belonging, perceptions of
school kindness, and character strength of kindness. First, the expected correlation between students’ sense of school belonging and
perceptions of school kindness emerged and was consistent with early research on the relationship between sense of belongingness and
positive interpersonal relationships in school (e.g., McMahon et al., 2009; Nichols, 2006, 2008; Patrick, Knee, et al., 2007; Patrick,
Ryan, & Kaplan, 2007). The results revealed that students’ sense of school belonging was positively correlated with their perceptions of
school kindness at the school and student levels. Consistent with the hypotheses, it was found that at the individual level, as students’
sense of school belonging increased, students were more likely to perceive the school as a fair, caring, and kind community. At the
school level, if a school was characterized by a high level of sense of belongingness, it can be predicted that the school tended to be
considered as a kind and caring place where school members helped and cared about each other. This finding echoes the categorization
of the community domain of school climate and provides empirical evidence on the positive correlations between the two sub-
dimensions, that is, connectedness and quality of interpersonal relationships (Wang & Degol, 2016). The two sub-dimensions share
similar characteristics. Both sub-dimensions concern the interactions that take place in the school setting. Quality of interpersonal
relationships describes the nature of relationships among school members which may affect the psychological needs of school
members. Connectedness refers to the psychological state influenced by the relationships that school members experience (Wang &
103
Degol, 2016). In addition, the two sub-dimensions have been commonly measured based on school members’ general feelings about
school-based relationships and experiences (e.g., Goodenow, 1993; Pianta, 1999). In line with BPNT (Deci & Ryan, 2000) and extended
Attachment Theory (Kennedy & Kennedy, 2004), high-quality interpersonal relationships offer a security base for students and play a
key role in fulfilling the needs for relatedness. Likewise, the satisfaction of the needs for relatedness determines the emergence and
development of positive relationships among school members.
Second, with regard to the relationship between students’ sense of school belonging and character strength of kindness, the results
revealed a positive link between students’ sense of school belonging and character strength of kindness at the individual level. In other
words, students who perceived a greater sense of belonging at school tended to have higher levels of character strength of kindness.
Consistent with BPNT (Deci & Ryan, 2000), need satisfaction of relatedness with a social contextual environment contributes to human
optimal growth and well-being. This finding is also consistent with prior empirical studies that demonstrated the positive effects of
sense of belonging at school on prosocial behavior and psychological well-being (e.g., Solomon et al., 1996; Tanigawa, Furlong, Felix,
& Sharkey, 2011). As Carlo, Fabes, Laible, and Kupanoff (1999) stated, the school context could enhance prosocial behaviors if schools
highlight and encourage sense of school belonging and cooperation between members of the school community. Students who feel
accepted and included by other people in the social environment of the school are more likely to be motivated to act in kindness toward
others.
However, the relationship between students’ sense of school belonging and character strength of kindness was found to be non-
significant at the school level. That is, there was no significant relationship identified between schools characterized by high levels
of sense of school belonging and those characterized by high levels of character strength of kindness. The sample characteristics (e.g.,
ages of students and types of schools with different backgrounds) and measures of sense of school belonging and character strength of
kindness may provide possible explanations for this result. The sample used in this study consisted of Hong Kong secondary school
students, and the school-level relationship may vary for students of different ages or socio-economic backgrounds and for students
from schools with different religious or charitable backgrounds. Furthermore, students’ self-reports were used to measure the con
structs in this study. Data collected by observation and interviews may provide more evidence on the relationship. As few studies have
investigated the link between sense of school belonging and character strength of kindness, further research is required to better
document the observed associations by exploring the changes in the relations when considering alternative constructs (e.g., school
climate, interpersonal relationships), character strengths (e.g., happiness), and well-being outcomes, replicating the present study
using different samples, and including multiple data sources.
Third, at both levels, a positive relation was found between students’ perceptions of school kindness and character strength of
kindness. This result is compatible with the findings of earlier research (e.g., O’Brennan & Bradshaw, 2013; Ruus et al., 2007; Virtanen
et al., 2009). Specifically, at the within-cluster level, students with high levels of perceptions of kindness in their schools were more
likely to present high levels of character strength of kindness. At the between-cluster level, schools characterized by high levels of
school kindness were also more likely to have high levels of character strength of kindness. Consistent with extended Attachment
Theory (Kennedy & Kennedy, 2004), students’ perceived kind behaviors and caring school environment serve as a security base that
can motivate students to help and care about other school members. Past studies have indicated the vital role of teachers’ relationships
with students in the growth of prosocial behavior and social-emotional skills (e.g., Baker, 2006; Hamre & Pianta, 2001; Rimm-
Kaufman & Hamre, 2010). Students who feel cared about and respected, and perceive their teachers and peers as supportive, caring,
and kind tend to be more motivated to be kind, and act in kindness toward themselves and other school community members. As
argued by Battistich, Solomon, Watson, and Schaps (1997), in a caring school environment, students tend to cultivate prosocial
behavior and cooperation. Schools with a kind and friendly environment establish a common language for teachers and students to
discuss kindness and its positive functions, and they encourage students in the school community to recognize kindness around them
and to act in kindness toward themselves and toward classmates, teachers, and other school stakeholders. Consistent with the
important roles of positive school climate and school kindness in students’ educational and psychological development (e.g., Binfet
et al., 2016; Thapa et al., 2013), students who perceive their school as a fair and kind community where school members help each
other and kindness frequently happens around them are more likely to increase their motivation to be kind and kind behavior.
From a theoretical perspective, the findings provide important implications. Schools where students’ need for relatedness is
satisfied, and school members help each other and establish positive interpersonal relationships, may play an essential role in the
emergence and enhancement of motivation to be kind and act of kindness among adolescents. As Carlo et al. (1999) pointed out, the
fulfillment of the need for relatedness and promotion of cooperation among school members could encourage students to participate in
prosocial activities. Research on the relations between school environment and character strengths in the current study is relatively
limited in Asian countries and regions such as Hong Kong. These findings may be generalized to other samples with similar cultural,
socioeconomic, and historical characteristics. Therefore, students’ sense of school belonging and perceptions of school kindness may
positively contribute to the development of character strength of kindness in many Asian countries and regions that share similar
characteristics.
4.2. Gender difference in character strength of kindness
The results from the current study identified the existence of gender difference in character strength of kindness for students in
secondary schools. Specifically, girls had higher levels of character strength of kindness than boys. This finding is consistent with prior
research. For example, in research investigating various character strengths (e.g., Biswas-Diener, 2006; Linley et al., 2007; Shimai
et al., 2006), female students reported greater strengths that accompany the virtue of humanity and involve caring about and
befriending others, whereas male students exhibited greater strengths that accompany the virtue of courage and include accomplishing
104
goals in the face of things that oppose them (Eagly & Wood, 1999; Linley et al., 2007; Stoppard & Gunn Gruchy, 1993). Moreover,
students appear to evaluate their character strengths in line with gender stereotypes; females generally are more likely to show
sympathy or empathy than males (Feshbach, 1982; Hoffman, 1977). Based on this finding, schools could use various school-based
kindness education programs and interventions that are targeted to male students to improve their motivation to act in kindness
and to encourage their kind behaviors in the school setting.
4.3. Limitations and future research
Although this study presented a unique understanding of the topic, it was not without limitations. First, consistent with several
early studies (e.g., Marsh et al., 2012; Morin et al., 2014), the constructs related to school climate (i.e., students’ sense of belonging and
perceptions of kindness at school) at the school level were yielded by aggregations of individual ratings at the student level. Although
students’ thoughts and understanding of the school climate have been considered more relevant to their own experiences than to
others’ perceptions in the school context, other school stakeholders, such as teachers and administrators, may perceive the school
climate differently. The use of students’ self-reports about the school climate may be regarded as a potential limitation. Future research
could use other school stakeholders’ perceptions of the school climate or teachers’ perceptions of school kindness (Binfet & Passmore,
2017) to measure constructs at the between-cluster level (L2) for comparison with the results of this study using students’ perceptions
of school climate to aggregate the L2 constructs.
Another limitation lies in the measurement of the constructs via self-reports. Students’ actual behaviors may not be identified and
captured completely by students’ perceptions, which may lead to shared-source variance. A future study using observational data with
interview and survey data would allow for a more specific investigation and understanding of student behaviors to explore the re
lations between sense of school belonging, school kindness, and character strength of kindness.
A further limitation was that this study used a cross-sectional design to explore possible associations between the constructs.
Although the results revealed the positive effects of school climate on character strength of kindness, students with higher levels of
kindness might have more positive experiences in the school setting and therefore perceive their school climate as kinder and
friendlier, and they might feel more accepted and part of the community. A longitudinal design could be used to investigate the
possible bidirectional relations among the constructs over time. Furthermore, conducting longitudinal studies would not only provide
insight into the changes in students’ sense of school belonging, perceptions of school kindness, and character strength of kindness but
also offer a better understanding of developmental trends regarding the effects of school climate on the development of character
strength of kindness.
5. Conclusions
This study aimed to obtain a more comprehensive understanding of the relationships between students’ sense of school belonging,
perceptions of school kindness, character strength of kindness, and gender in Hong Kong’s secondary school context. One of the main
findings was that students’ sense of school belonging was positively correlated with their perceptions of school kindness at the school
and student levels. Furthermore, students’ sense of school belonging was positively associated with character strength of kindness at
the student level but this relationship was non-significant at the school level. At both levels of analysis, the positive relationships
between students’ perceptions of school kindness and character strength of kindness were significant. In addition, female students
reported higher levels of character strength of kindness than male students. Our findings inform the ways in which educators and
policymakers could enhance the secondary school climate to facilitate the development of students’ character strength of kindness.
Acknowledgements
This paper is intended to contribute to “EdUHK Teachers of Tomorrow – Life Education and Virtues for Empowerment Leadership
(TT-LEVEL) Programme”. The authors would like to thank Dr. Cheung Hoi Yan, Dr. Hui King Fai Sammy, Dr. John-Tyler Binfet, and
Prof. Keiko Otake for their support, and Ms. Michelle Li and Dr. Raymond Kong for their help during the research preparation. Thanks
are extended to the UNESCO Chair in the Regional Education Development and Lifelong Learning program at the Education University
of Hong Kong (EdUHK) as well as Centre for Religious and Spirituality Education, Faculty of Education and Human Development,
EdUHK for supporting the preparation of this paper. The views presented in this paper expressed therein are not necessarily those of
UNESCO and EdUHK and do not commit the respective Organizations. The authors would like to thank the editor and reviewers for
their valuable comments for improving this paper.
References
Ainsworth, M. D. S., Blehar, M. C., Waters, E., & Wall, S. (1978). Patterns of attachment: A psychological study of the strange situation. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Aldridge, J., & Ala’i, K. (2013). Assessing students’ views of school climate: Developing and validating the What’s Happening In This School? (WHITS) questionnaire.
Improving Schools, 16, 47–66.
Aldridge, J. M., Fraser, B. J., Fozdar, F., Ala’i, K., Earnest, J., & Afari, E. (2016). Students’ perceptions of school climate as determinants of wellbeing, resilience and
identity. Improving Schools, 19, 5–26.
Aldridge, J. M., McChesney, K., & Afari, E. (2018). Relationships between school climate, bullying and delinquent behaviours. Learning Environments Research, 21,
153–172.
Al-Yagon, M., & Mikulincer, M. (2004). Socioemotional and academic adjustment among children with learning disorders: The mediational role of attachment-based
factors. Journal of Special Education, 38, 111–123.
105
Anderman, E. M. (2002). School effects on psychological outcomes during adolescence. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94, 795–809.
Baker, J. A. (2006). Contributions of teacher-child relationships to positive school adjustment during elementary school. Journal of School Psychology, 44, 211–229.
Battistich, V., Solomon, D., Kim, D. I., Watson, M., & Schaps, E. (1995). Schools as communities, poverty levels of student populations, and students’ attitudes,
motives, and performance: A multilevel analysis. American Educational Research Journal, 32, 627–658.
Battistich, V., Solomon, D., Watson, M., & Schaps, E. (1997). Caring school communities. Educational Psychologist, 32, 137–151.
Baumeister, R., & Leary, M. R. (1995). The need to belong: Desire for interpersonal attachments as a fundamental human motivation. Psychological Bulletin, 117,
497–529.
Bentler, P. M. (1990). Comparative fit indexes in structural models. Psychological Bulletin, 107, 238–246.
Bern, S. L. (1974). The measurement of psychological androgyny. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 42, 155–162.
Binfet, J. T. (2015). Not-so random acts of kindness: A guide to intentional kindness in the classroom. The International Journal of Emotional Education, 7(2), 49–62.
Binfet, J. T., Gadermann, A. M., & Schonert-Reichl, K. A. (2016). Measuring kindness at school: Psychometric properties of a school kindness scale for children and
adolescents. Psychology in the Schools, 53, 111–126.
Binfet, J. T., & Passmore, H. A. (2017). Teachers’ perceptions of kindness at school. The International Journal of Emotional Education, 9, 37–53.
Birch, S. H., & Ladd, G. W. (1997). The teacher-child relationship and children’s early school adjustment. Journal of School Psychology, 35, 61–79.
Biswas-Diener, R. (2006). From the equator to the North Pole: A study of character strengths. Journal of Happiness Studies, 7, 293–310.
Bliese, P. D. (2000). Within-group agreement, non-independence, and reliability: Implications for data aggregation and analysis. In K. J. Klein, & S. W. J. Kozlowski
(Eds.), Multilevel theory, research, and methods in organizations: Foundations, extensions, and new directions (pp. 349–381). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Bosworth, K., Espelage, D. L., & Simon, T. R. (1999). Factors associated with bullying behavior in middle school students. The Journal of Early Adolescence, 19(3),
341–362.
Bowlby, J. (1969). Attachment. London: Harper Collins.
Bowlby, J. (1975). Separation: Anxiety and anger. Harmondsworth: Penguin.
Bowlby, J. (1988). A secure base: Clinical applications of attachment theory. London: Routledge.
Brief, A. P., & Motowidlo, S. J. (1986). Prosocial organizational behaviors. Academy of Management Review, 11, 710–725.
Carlo, G., Fabes, R. A., Laible, D., & Kupanoff, K. (1999). Early adolescence and prosocial behavior II: The role of social and contextual influences. Journal of Early
Adolescence, 9, 133–147.
Character Education Foundation. (2019). Character Day Hong Kong. Retrieved from https://www.charactereducation.org.hk/characterday.hk.
Cheung, H. Y., & Hui, S. K. F. (2003). Mainland immigrant and Hong Kong local students’ psychological sense of school membership. Asia Pacific Education Review, 4
(1), 67–74.
Crosnoe, R., Cavanagh, S., & Elder, G. H., Jr. (2003). Adolescent friendships as academic resources: The intersection of friendship, race, and school disadvantage.
Sociological Perspectives, 46, 331–352.
Cudeck, R., & Browne, M. W. (1992). Constructing a covariance matrix that yields a specified minimizer and a specified minimum discrepancy function value.
Psychometrika, 57(3), 357–369.
Curry, O. S., Rowland, L. A., van Lissa, C. J., Zlotowitz, S., McAlaney, J., & Whitehouse, H. (2018). Happy to help? A systematic review and meta-analysis of the effects
of performing acts of kindness on the well-being of the actor. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 76, 320–329.
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). The general causality orientations scale: Self-determination in personality. Journal of Research in Personality, 19, 109–134.
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). The “what” and “why” of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry, 11, 227–268.
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2002). Self-determination research: Reflections and future directions. In E. L. Deci, & R. M. Ryan (Eds.), Handbook of self-determination
research (pp. 431–441). Rochester, NY: University of Rochester Press.
Demanet, J., & van Houtte, M. (2012). School belonging and school misconduct: The differing role of teacher and peer attachment. Journal of Youth and Adolescence,
41, 499–514.
Eagly, A. H., & Wood, W. (1999). The origins of sex differences in human behavior: Evolved dispositions versus social roles. American Psychologist, 54, 408–423.
Education Bureau. (2014). Basic curriculum guide – To sustain, deepen and focus on learning to learn. 3A Moral and civic education. Retrieved from https://cd.edb.
gov.hk/becg/english/chapter3A.html.
Education Bureau. (2016). Assessment program for affective and social outcomes (2nd version) (APASO-II). Retrieved from https://www.edb.gov.hk/en/sch-admin/
sch-quality-assurance/performance-indicators/apaso2/index.html.
Eisenberg, N. (1986). Altruistic emotion, cognition, and behavior. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Eisenberg, N., Fabes, R. A., & Spinrad, T. L. (2006). Prosocial development. In W. Damon, R. M. Lerner, & N. Eisenberg (Eds.), Handbook of child psychology: Social,
emotional, and personality development (pp. 701–708). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.
Enders, C. K. (2010). Applied missing data analysis. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
Esposito, C. (1999). Learning in urban blight: School climate and its effect on the school performance of urban, minority, low-income children. School Psychology
Review, 28, 365–377.
Feshbach, N. D. (1982). Sex differences in empathy and social behavior in children. In N. Eisenberg (Ed.), The development of prosocial behavior (pp. 315–338). New
York: Academic Press.
Finn, J. D., & Rock, D. A. (1997). Academic success among students at risk for school failure. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82(2), 221–234.
Fredricks, J. A., Blumenfeld, P. C., & Paris, A. H. (2004). School engagement: Potential of the concept, state of the evidence. Review of Educational Research, 74,
59–109.
Freeman, J. G., Samdal, O., Klinger, D. A., Dur, W., Griebler, R., Currie, D., & Rasmussen, M. (2009). The relationship of schools to emotional health and bullying.
International Journal of Public Health, 54, 251–259.
Freiberg, H. J., & Stein, T. A. (1999). Measuring, improving and sustaining healthy learning environments. In H. J. Freiberg (Ed.), School climate: Measuring, improving
and sustaining healthy learning environments (pp. 11–29). Philadelphia, PA: Falmer Press.
Froh, J. J., Sefick, W. J., & Emmons, R. A. (2008). Counting blessings in early adolescents: An experimental study of gratitude and subjective well-being. Journal of
School Psychology, 46, 213–233.
Furrer, C., & Skinner, E. (2003). Sense of relatedness as a factor in children’s academic engagement and performance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95, 148–162.
Gaete, J., Rojas-Barahona, C. A., Olivares, E., & Araya, R. (2016). Brief report: Association between psychological sense of school membership and mental health
among early adolescents. Journal of Adolescence, 50, 1–5.
Gagne, M. (2003a). Autonomy support and need satisfaction in the motivation and well-being of gymnasts. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 15, 372–390.
Gagne, M. (2003b). The role of autonomy support and autonomy orientation in prosocial behavior engagement. Motivation and Emotion, 27, 199–223.
Gillen-O’Neel, C., & Fuligni, A. (2013). A longitudinal study of school belonging and academic motivation across high school. Child Development, 84, 678–692.
Goodenow, C. (1993). The psychological sense of school membership among adolescents: Scale development and educational correlates. Psychology in the Schools, 30,
79–90.
Gottfredson, D., & Gottfredson, G. (2002). Quality of school-based prevention programs: Results from a national survey. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency,
39, 3–35.
Graham, J. W. (2012). Missing data: Analysis and design. New York, NY: Springer Science + Business Media.
Hagborg, W. J. (1994). An exploration of school membership among middle-and high-school students. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 12, 312–323.
Hamre, B. K., & Pianta, R. C. (2001). Early teacher-child relationships and the trajectory of children’s school outcomes through eighth grade. Child Development, 72,
625–638.
Haslip, M. J., Allen-Handy, A., & Donaldson, L. (2019). How do children and teachers demonstrate love, kindness and forgiveness? Findings from an early childhood
strength-spotting intervention. Early Childhood Education Journal, 47(5), 531–547.
Hoffman, L. W. (1977). Changes in family roles, socialization, and sex differences. American Psychologist, 32, 644–657.
106
Hopson, L. M., & Lee, E. (2011). Mitigating the effect of family poverty on academic and behavioral outcomes: The role of school climate in middle and high school.
Children and Youth Services Review, 33, 2221–2229.
Hughes, J., & Kwok, O.-M. (2007). Influence of student-teacher and parent-teacher relationships on lower achieving readers’ engagement and achievement in the
primary grades. Journal of Educational Psychology, 99, 39–51.
Johnson, M. K., Crosnoe, R., & Elder, G. H., Jr. (2001). Students’ attachment and academic engagement: The role of race and ethnicity. Sociology of Education, 74,
318–340.
Kennedy, J. H., & Kennedy, C. E. (2004). Attachment theory: Implications for school psychology. Psychology in the Schools, 41, 247–259.
Kuperminc, G. P., Leadbeater, B. J., Emmons, C., & Blatt, S. J. (1997). Perceived school climate and difficulties in the social adjustment of middle school students.
Applied Developmental Science, 1, 76–88.
La Guardia, J. G., Ryan, R. M., Couchman, C. E., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Within-person variation in security of attachment: A self-determination theory perspective on
attachment, need fulfillment, and well-being. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79, 367–384.
Lang, I. A., Marlow, R., Goodman, R., Meltzer, H., & Ford, T. (2013). Influence of problematic child–teacher relationships on future psychiatric disorder: Population
survey with 3-year follow-up. The British Journal of Psychiatry, 202, 336–341.
Libbey, H. P. (2007). School connectedness: Influence above and beyond family connectedness. University of Minnesota.
Linley, P. A., Maltby, J., Wood, A. M., Joseph, S., Harrington, S., Peterson, C., … Seligman, M. E. (2007). Character strengths in the United Kingdom: The VIA
inventory of strengths. Personality and Individual Differences, 43, 341–351.
Lonczak, H. S., Abbott, R. D., Hawkins, J. D., Kosterman, R., & Catalano, R. (2002). The effects of the Seattle social development project: Behavior, pregnancy, birth,
and sexually transmitted disease outcomes by age 21. Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine, 156, 438–447.
Lüdtke, O., Marsh, H. W., Robitzsch, A., & Trautwein, U. (2011). A 2×2 taxonomy of multilevel latent contextual models: Accuracy-bias trade-offs in full and partial
error correction models. Psychological Methods, 16, 444–467.
Lüdtke, O., Marsh, H. W., Robitzsch, A., Trautwein, U., Asparouhov, T., & Muthen, B. (2008). The multilevel latent covariate model: A new, more reliable approach to
group-level effects in contextual studies. Psychological Methods, 13, 203–229.
Lynch, M., & Cicchetti, D. (1997). Children’s relationships with adults and peers: An examination of elementary and junior high school students. Journal of School
Psychology, 35, 81–99.
Ma, H. K. (2009). Moral development and moral education: An integrated approach. Educational Research Journal, 24, 293–326.
MacNeil, A. J., Prater, D. L., & Busch, S. (2009). The effects of school culture and climate on student achievement. International Journal of Leadership in Education, 12,
73–84.
Mak, W. S. (2014). Evaluation of a moral and character education group for primary school students. Evaluation, 3, 142–164.
Marraccini, M. E., & Brier, Z. M. (2017). School connectedness and suicidal thoughts and behaviors: A systematic meta-analysis. School Psychology Quarterly, 32, 5–21.
Marsh, H. W., Lüdtke, O., Nagengast, B., Trautwein, U., Morin, A. J. S., Abduljabbar, A. S., & Köller, O. (2012). Classroom climate effects: Methodological issues in the
evaluation of group-level effects. Educational Psychologist, 47, 106–124.
Marsh, H. W., Lüdtke, O., Robitzsch, A., Trautwein, U., Asparouhov, T., Muth, … Muthénst, B. (2009). Doubly-latent models of school contextual effects: Integrating
multilevel and structural equation approaches to control measurement and sampling error. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 44, 764–802.
McMahon, S. D., Wernsman, J., & Rose, D. S. (2009). The relation of classroom environment and school belonging to academic self-efficacy among urban fourth- and
fifth-grade students. The Elementary School Journal, 109, 267–281.
McNeely, C. A., Nonnemaker, J. M., & Blum, R. W. (2002). Promoting school connectedness: Evidence from the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health.
Journal of School Health, 72, 138–146.
Mehta, P. D., & Neale, M. C. (2005). People are variables too: Multilevel structural equations modeling. Psychological Methods, 10, 259–284.
Morin, A. J., Marsh, H. W., Nagengast, B., & Scalas, L. F. (2014). Doubly latent multilevel analyses of classroom climate: An illustration. The Journal of Experimental
Education, 82, 143–167.
Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. (1998-2018). Mplus user’s guide. Los Angeles, CA: Muthén & Muthén.
Myers, S. S., & Morris, A. S. (2009). Examining associations between effortful control and teacher–child relationships in relation to Head Start children’s
socioemotional adjustment. Early Education and Development, 20, 756–774.
National School Climate Council. (2007). The School Climate Challenge: Narrowing the gap between school climate research and school climate policy, practice
guidelines and teacher education policy. Retrieved from http://www.schoolclimate.org/climate/advocacy.php.
Nichols, S. L. (2006). Teachers’ and students’ beliefs about student belonging in one middle school. The Elementary School Journal, 106, 255–271.
Nichols, S. L. (2008). An exploration of students’ belongingness beliefs in one middle school. The Journal of Experimental Education, 76, 145–169.
Niehaus, K., Rudasill, K. M., & Rakes, C. R. (2012). A longitudinal study of school connectedness and academic outcomes across sixth grade. Journal of School
O’Brennan, L., & Bradshaw, C. (2013). Importance of school climate. National Education Association Research Brief, 1–4.
Osterman, K. F. (2000). Students’ need for belonging in the school community. Review of Educational Research, 70, 323–367.
Otake, K., Shimai, S., Tanaka-Matsumi, J., Otsui, K., & Fredrickson, B. L. (2006). Happy people become happier through kindness: A counting kindnesses intervention.
Journal of Happiness Studies, 7, 361–375.
Park, N., Peterson, C., & Seligman, M. E. (2006). Character strengths in fifty-four nations and the fifty US states. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 1, 118–129.
Patrick, H., Knee, C. R., Canevello, A., & Lonsbary, C. (2007). The role of need fulfillment in relationship functioning and wellbeing: A self-determination theory
perspective. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 92, 434–457.
Patrick, H., Ryan, A. M., & Kaplan, A. (2007). Early adolescents’ perceptions of the classroom social environment, motivational beliefs, and engagement. Journal of
Educational Psychology, 99, 83–98.
Pavey, L., Greitemeyer, T., & Sparks, P. (2011). Highlighting relatedness promotes prosocial motives and behavior. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 37,
905–917.
Peugh, J. L., & Enders, C. K. (2004). Missing data in educational research: A review of reporting practices and suggestions for improvement. Review of Educational
Research, 74, 525–556.
Pianta, R. C. (1999). Enhancing relationships between children and teachers. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Pianta, R. C., Nimetz, S. L., & Bennett, E. (1997). Mother–child relationships, teacher–child relationships, and school outcomes in preschool and kindergarten. Early
Childhood Research Quarterly, 12, 263–280.
Preacher, K. J., Zhang, Z., & Zyphur, M. J. (2011). Alternative methods for assessing mediation in multilevel data: The advantages of multilevel SEM. Structural
Equation Modeling, 18, 161–182.
Preacher, K. J., Zyphur, M. J., & Zhang, Z. (2010). A general multilevel SEM framework for assessing multilevel mediation. Psychological Methods, 15, 209–233.
Pressman, S. D., Kraft, T. L., & Cross, M. P. (2015). It’s good to do good and receive good: The impact of a “pay it forward” style kindness intervention on giver and
receiver well-being. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 10(4), 293–302.
Reis, H. T. (1994). Domains of experience: Investigating relationship processes from three perspectives. In R. Erber, & R. Gilmour (Eds.), Theoretical frameworks for
personal relationships (pp. 87–110). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Rey, R. B., Smith, A. L., Yoon, J., Somers, C., & Barnett, D. (2007). Relationships between teachers and urban African American children: The role of informant. School
Psychology International, 28, 346–364.
Rimm-Kaufman, S. E., & Hamre, B. K. (2010). The role of psychological and developmental science in efforts to improve teacher quality. Teachers College Record, 112,
2988–3023.
Ruble, T. L. (1983). Sex stereotypes: Issues of change in the 1970s. Sex Roles, 9, 397–402.
Rudasill, K. M., Snyder, K. E., Levinson, H., & Adelson, J. L. (2018). Systems view of school climate: A theoretical framework for research. Educational Psychology
Review, 30, 35–60.
107
Ruus, V., Veisson, M., Leino, M., Ots, L., Pallas, L., Sarv, E., & Veisson, A. (2007). Students’ well-being, coping, academic success, and school climate. Social Behaviors
and Personality, 35, 919–936.
Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000a). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55,
68–78.
Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000b). The darker and brighter sides of human existence: Basic psychological needs as a unifying concept. Psychological Inquiry, 11,
319–338.
Seligman, M. E., Steen, T. A., Park, N., & Peterson, C. (2005). Positive psychology progress: Empirical validation of interventions. American Psychologist, 60, 410–421.
Shimai, S., Otake, K., Park, N., Peterson, C., & Seligman, M. E. (2006). Convergence of character strengths in American and Japanese young adults. Journal of
Happiness Studies, 7, 311–322.
Silver, R. B., Meassella, J. R., Armstrong, J. M., & Essex, M. J. (2005). Trajectories of classroom externalizing behavior: Contributions of child characteristics, family
characteristics, and teacher–student relationship during school transition. Journal of School Psychology, 43, 39–60.
Smerdon, B. A. (2002). Students’ perceptions of membership in their high schools. Sociology of Education, 75, 287–305.
Solomon, D., Battistich, V., Kim, D. I., & Watson, M. (1996). Teacher practices associated with students’ sense of the classroom as a community. Social Psychology of
Education, 1, 235–267.
Solomon, D., Battistich, V., Watson, M., Schaps, E., & Lewis, C. (2000). A six-district study of educational change: Direct and mediated effects of the child development
project. Social Psychology of Education, 4, 3–51.
Spence, J. T., & Helmreich, R. L. (1979). Masculinity and femininity: Their psychological dimensions, correlates, and antecedents. Austin, TX: University of Texas Press.
Stoppard, J. M., & Gunn Gruchy, C. D. (1993). Gender, context, and expression of positive emotion. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 19, 143–150.
Sugihara, Y., & Katsurada, E. (2000). Gender-role personality traits in Japanese culture. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 24, 309–318.
Suldo, S. M., Thalji-Raitano, A., Hasemeyer, M., Gelley, C. D., & Hoy, B. (2013). Understanding middle school students’ life satisfaction: Does school climate matter?
Applied Research in Quality of Life, 8, 169–182.
Taggart, H., Lee, S., & McDonald, L. (2014). Perceptions of wellbeing and mental health in English secondary schools: A cross-sectional study. London, England: A Centre
Forum Commission.
Tanigawa, D., Furlong, M. J., Felix, E. D., & Sharkey, J. D. (2011). The protective role of perceived social support against the manifestation of depressive symptoms in
peer victims. Journal of School Violence, 10, 393–412.
Thapa, A., Cohen, J., Guffey, S., & Higgins-D’Alessandro, A. (2013). A review of school climate research. Review of Educational Research, 83, 357–385.
Tian, L., Wang, D., & Huebner, E. S. (2015). Development and validation of the brief adolescents’ subjective well-being in school scale (BASWBSS). Social Indicators
Research, 120, 615–634.
Tinto, V. (1997). Classrooms as communities: Exploring the educational character of student persistence. The Journal of Higher Education, 68, 599–623.
Tucker, L. R., & Lewis, C. (1973). A reliability coefficient for maximum likelihood factor analysis. Psychometrika, 38, 1–10.
Twenge, J. M., Baumeister, R. F., DeWall, C. N., Ciarocco, N. J., & Bartels, J. M. (2007). Social exclusion decreases prosocial behavior. Journal of Personality and Social
Virtanen, M., Kivimaki, M., Luopa, P., Vahtera, J., Elovainio, M., Jokela, J., & Pietikainen, M. (2009). Staff reports of psychosocial climate at school and adolescents’
health, truancy and health education in Finland. European Journal of Public Health, 19, 554–560.
Wagle, R., Dowdy, E., Yang, C., Palikara, O., Castro, S., Nylund-Gibson, K., & Furlong, M. J. (2018). Preliminary investigation of the psychological sense of school
membership scale with primary school students in a cross-cultural context. School Psychology International, 39, 568–586.
Wang, M. T., Brinkworth, M. E., & Eccles, J. S. (2012). The moderation effect of teacher–student relationship on the association between adolescents’ self–regulation
ability, family conflict, and developmental problems. Developmental Psychology, 49, 690–705.
Wang, M. T., & Degol, J. L. (2016). School climate: A review of the construct, measurement, and impact on student outcomes. Educational Psychology Review, 28,
315–352.
Wang, M. T., & Holcombe, R. (2010). Adolescents’ perceptions of school environment, engagement, and academic achievement in middle school. American Educational
Research Journal, 47, 633–662.
Waters, L. (2011). A review of school-based positive psychology interventions. The Educational and Developmental Psychologist, 28, 75–90.
Way, N., & Robinson, M. G. (2003). A longitudinal study of the effects of family, friends, and school experiences on the psychological adjustment of ethnic minority,
low-SES adolescents. Journal of Adolescent Research, 18, 324–346.
Weinstein, N., & Ryan, R. M. (2010). When helping helps: Autonomous motivation for prosocial behavior and its influence on well-being for the helper and recipient.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 98, 222–244.
Wentzel, K. R. (1999). Social-motivational processes and interpersonal relationships: Implications for understanding motivation at school. Journal of Educational
Wentzel, K. R., & Erdley, C. A. (1993). Strategies for making friends: Relations to social behavior and peer acceptance in early adolescence. Developmental Psychology,
29, 819–826.
Wentzel, K. R., Filisetti, L., & Looney, L. (2007). Adolescent prosocial behavior: The role of self-processes and contextual cues. Child Development, 78, 895–910.
Wentzel, K. R., & McNamara, C. C. (1999). Interpersonal relationships, emotional distress, and prosocial behavior in middle school. The Journal of Early Adolescence,
19, 114–125.
Whitlock, J. L. (2006). Youth perceptions of life at school: Contextual correlates of school connectedness in adolescence. Applied Developmental Science, 10, 13–29.
Witherspoon, D., & Ennett, S. (2011). Stability and change in rural youths’ educational outcomes through the middle and high school years. Journal of Youth and
Adolescence, 40, 1077–1090.
Zaykowski, H., & Gunter, W. (2012). Youth victimization: School climate or deviant lifestyles? Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 27, 431–452.
108

Lee 2021

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Lee 2021

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Journal of School Psychology 84 (2021) 95–108

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of School Psychology

The relations between students’ sense of school belonging,

1.1. School climate

1.2. Sense of school belonging and character strength of kindness

1.3. Perception of school kindness and character strength of kindness

1.4. Gender differences in school climate and character strength

1.5. Hong Kong: The background

1.6. The current study

2.1. Participants and design

2.2.1. Students’ sense of school belonging

2.2.2. Students’ perceptions of school kindness

2.2.3. Students’ character strength of kindness

2.3. Data analysis

3.1. Appropriateness of the multilevel analysis

Fig. 2. ML-SEM model examined in the present study.

3.3.2. Effect of students’ sense of school belonging on character strength of kindness

3.3.3. Effect of students’ perceptions of school kindness on character strength of kindness

3.3.4. Effect of gender

School level (L2)

H1a SSSB ↔ SPSK (School level) Yes

4.2. Gender difference in character strength of kindness

4.3. Limitations and future research

You might also like