Life satisfaction and school experience in adolescence: the impact of school supportiveness, peer belonging and the role of academic self-efficacy and victimization

Figures & data

Table 1. Cronbach’s alpha, means and standard deviations statistics for study variables and correlations between them.

		α	Sample		Male		Female		1	2	3	4
			M	SD	M	SD	M	SD
1	Life satisfaction	.85	3.89	.90	3.90	.90	3.88	.91
2	Academic self-efficacy	.78	4.31	.67	4.28	.69	4.35	.64	.47***
3	Victimization	.74	1.60	.70	1.62	.72	1.58	.67	−.31***	−.18***
4	Peer belonging	.80	4.16	.88	4.22	.87	4.09	.89	.33***	.27***	−.28***
5	School supportiveness	.67	3.54	.84	3.47	.86	3.61	.83	.34***	.34***	−.20***	.28***

Note. α: Cronbach’s alpha; M: mean; SD: standard deviation.

*** p < .001.

Table 2. Estimated effects of 95% bootstrapped confidence intervals for simple indirect effects of school supportiveness and peer belonging on life satisfaction.

Effect being tested	Value^a	95% Bias-corrected CI
		LL	UL
Indirect effect of SchoolSupp on LS through Vict	.045	.025	.070
Indirect effect of SchoolSupp on LS through AcadSE	.223	.178	.279
Indirect effect of PeerBel on LS through Vict	.058	.039	.082
Indirect effect of PeerBel on LS through AcadeSE	.069	.035	.106

Note. SchoolSupp: school supportiveness; LS: life satisfaction; Vitc: victimization; AcadSE: academic self-efficacy; PeerBel: peer belonging; CI: confidence interval; LL: lower limit; UL: upper limit.

^a Unstandardized estimate of the effect obtained with the maximum likelihood procedure.

Figure 1. SEM model including life satisfaction, academic self-efficacy, victimization, peer belonging, and school supportiveness as latent variables.

Graphic representation of the structural equation model showing the direct influence of school supportiveness and peer belonging on life satisfaction, and their influence mediated by academic self-efficacy and victimization.