Teachers' Punishment Intensity and Student Observer Trust: A Moderated Mediation Model.

Publisher: MDPI AG Country of Publication: Switzerland NLM ID: 101576826 Publication Model: Electronic Cited Medium: Print ISSN: 2076-328X (Print) Linking ISSN: 2076328X NLM ISO Abbreviation: Behav Sci (Basel) Subsets: PubMed not MEDLINE

Original Publication: Basel, Switzerland : MDPI AG

During social interactions, people decide whether to trust an actor based on their punitive behaviour. Several empirical studies have indicated that punishment intensity impacts observer trust, yet the underlying mechanism remains to be elucidated. This study included 242 junior high school students and was conducted to investigate the relationship between teachers' punishment intensity and levels of student bystander trust. Additionally, the mediating role of trustworthiness and the moderating role of group relationships were explored. The results showed that the relationship between punishment intensity and observer trust follows an inverted U-shaped pattern. In addition, mild punishment boosts observer trust by improving perceived trustworthiness (ability and integrity) compared to no punishment, while harsh punishment reduces observer trust more than mild punishment by diminishing perceived trustworthiness (ability, benevolence, and integrity). More importantly, group relationships positively moderate the relationship between punishment intensity and observer trust. Specifically, compared to mild or no punishment, harsh punishment decreases trustworthiness (ability, benevolence, and integrity) in close teacher-student relationships but has less impact on neutral relationships. The above findings demonstrate that guiding educators in developing appropriate disciplinary concepts contributes to enhancing student observer trust.

Front Psychol. 2023 Dec 11;14:1251276. (PMID: 38146400)
Perspect Psychol Sci. 2014 May;9(3):245-74. (PMID: 26173262)
Cognition. 2015 Jul;140:14-23. (PMID: 25867996)
Nature. 2016 Feb 25;530(7591):473-6. (PMID: 26911783)
J Pers Soc Psychol. 2014 Jul;107(1):122-41. (PMID: 24819869)
Behav Res Methods. 2007 May;39(2):175-91. (PMID: 17695343)
Int J Psychol. 2021 Dec;56(6):917-933. (PMID: 34212370)
Annu Rev Psychol. 2014;65:187-207. (PMID: 24016274)
Nat Hum Behav. 2021 Nov;5(11):1528-1534. (PMID: 34002053)
Soc Neurosci. 2009;4(4):287-93. (PMID: 18671168)
Psychol Sci. 2020 Mar;31(3):227-242. (PMID: 31990627)
Trends Cogn Sci. 2023 Jul;27(7):642-655. (PMID: 37198089)
J Appl Psychol. 2007 Jul;92(4):909-27. (PMID: 17638454)
J Appl Psychol. 2017 Oct;102(10):1385-1402. (PMID: 28471207)
Dev Psychol. 2022 Dec;58(12):2275-2286. (PMID: 36136782)
Risk Anal. 2021 Mar;41(3):480-490. (PMID: 31046144)
Br J Soc Psychol. 2024 Jan;63(1):453-471. (PMID: 37787476)
Trends Neurosci. 2019 Feb;42(2):92-101. (PMID: 30482606)
Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2016 Jan 19;371(1686):20150073. (PMID: 26644592)
Dev Psychol. 2018 Nov;54(11):2139-2151. (PMID: 30284884)
Lancet Child Adolesc Health. 2018 Mar;2(3):223-228. (PMID: 30169257)
Front Behav Neurosci. 2015 Feb 13;9:15. (PMID: 25762906)

32000754 the National Natural Science Foundation of China; 20YJC190030 Youth Foundation of the Ministry of Education of Humanities and Social Science Project of China; 2022-JSJYYB-011 Teacher Education Reform Project of Henan Province

Keywords: group relationship; observer trust; punishment intensity; trustworthiness

Date Created: 20240626 Latest Revision: 20240628

20240628

PMC11200534

10.3390/bs14060471

38920803