Family communication patterns, self-efficacy, and adolescent online prosocial behavior: a moderated mediation model

The study examines how family communication patterns shape adolescents’ online prosocial behavior (OB) and the mechanisms underpinning this relationship. Against the backdrop of widespread adolescent internet use in China and a literature emphasis on negative online behaviors, the paper focuses on positive online behaviors such as sharing, helping, and offering support. Family is a core socialization context influencing adolescents’ cognitions and behaviors, particularly through communication patterns that transmit values and norms. The authors propose that self-efficacy (SE), a key construct in social cognitive theory, and emotion regulation (ER) strategies are crucial individual factors linking family environments to OB. The research aims to: (1) delineate the effects of conversation orientation (CV) and conformity orientation (CF) on SE and OB; (2) test SE as a mediator between family communication and OB; and (3) assess ER strategies—cognitive reappraisal (CR) and expressive suppression (ES)—as moderators in these pathways.

Definition of online prosocial behavior (OB): OB is defined as voluntary, online conduct intended to benefit others (e.g., offering comfort, sharing, providing guidance), which maintains core features of offline prosocial behavior while leveraging the affordances of digital spaces (e.g., speed, anonymity, reach). Prior work suggests OB supports adolescent well-being and social development, yet adolescent-focused OB research remains limited. Self-efficacy and OB: Grounded in social cognitive theory, SE—beliefs about one’s capabilities—predicts behavior across domains and has been linked to prosocial tendencies, including online contexts. Hypothesis: H1 Higher SE predicts higher adolescent OB. Family communication patterns (FCP), SE, and OB: FCP comprises two dimensions—Conversation Orientation (CV) and Conformity Orientation (CF). CV families encourage open dialogue; CF families emphasize uniformity and obedience. Prior evidence links CV positively and CF negatively to SE and social outcomes. Hypotheses: H2a Greater CV predicts higher SE; H2b Greater CF predicts lower SE. CV is expected to enhance OB, while CF is expected to reduce OB. Hypotheses: H3a Greater CV predicts higher OB; H3b Greater CF predicts lower OB. Based on social cognitive theory, SE should mediate the effects of FCP on OB: H4a SE positively mediates CV→OB; H4b SE negatively mediates CF→OB. Emotion regulation strategies as moderators: ER involves altering emotional experiences and expressions. Two strategies are examined: Cognitive Reappraisal (CR; reframing situations) and Expressive Suppression (ES; inhibiting expression). CR is expected to strengthen beneficial effects of CV and buffer harmful effects of CF, while ES is expected to dampen CV’s benefits and exacerbate CF’s harms. Hypotheses: H5a CR strengthens CV→OB; H5b CR weakens CF→OB’s negative effect; H5c ES weakens CV→OB’s positive effect; H5d ES strengthens CF→OB’s negative effect. Similarly for SE: H6a CR strengthens CV→SE; H6b CR weakens CF→SE’s negative effect; H6c ES weakens CV→SE’s positive effect; H6d ES strengthens CF→SE’s negative effect.

Design and sampling: Cross-sectional questionnaire survey using stratified cluster sampling. Provinces in China were stratified by 2022 GDP (high/medium/low), with Jiangsu (east), Henan (central), and Shaanxi (west) selected. Capital cities (Nanjing, Zhengzhou, Xi’an) were targeted. From each city, one school was randomly chosen from four categories: ordinary junior high, key junior high, ordinary senior high, key senior high. Two classes per school were sampled, totaling 24 classes across 12 schools. Data were collected face-to-face during self-study classes. Sample: 1300 questionnaires distributed; 1183 valid responses (91% response rate). Gender: 566 females (47.8%), 617 males (52.2%). Age: 12–20 years, mean ~15. Parental education: 40.7% neither parent beyond high school (n=482); 44.2% one parent beyond high school (n=523); 15.0% both parents beyond high school (n=178). Measures: - Family Communication Patterns (independent variable): Adapted from Fitzpatrick & Ritchie (1994); 17 items; two dimensions with 5-point Likert scales (1=strongly disagree to 5=strongly agree). Conversation Orientation (9 items; example: “Every family member should have a say in decision-making.”; M=2.729, SD=0.957). Conformity Orientation (8 items; example: “My parents sometimes get angry when I disagree with them.”; M=3.370, SD=0.996). Dimension scores averaged; higher scores indicate stronger respective orientation. - Self-efficacy (mediator): 5 items from Kleppang et al. (2023), 4-point Likert scale (1–4). Example: “I am confident that I can handle unexpected situations.” Average score computed (M=2.510, SD=0.718). - Emotion Regulation Strategies (moderators): Gross & John (2003) 10-item scale with two dimensions on 5-point Likert scales. Cognitive Reappraisal (6 items; example: “When facing stressful situations, I am capable of thinking about it in a calm way.”; M=2.459, SD=0.800). Expressive Suppression (4 items; example: “I control my emotions by not expressing them.”; M=3.430, SD=0.957). Dimension averages used; higher indicates greater tendency. - Online Prosocial Behavior (dependent variable): 13 items from Guo et al. (2018), 5-point frequency scale (1=never to 5=always). Example: sharing useful learning information. Average score computed (M=2.381, SD=0.864). Analysis: Descriptive statistics and common method bias test (SPSS 24.0). Measurement and structural modeling via PLS-SEM in SmartPLS 4. Reliability and validity assessed (indicator loadings, Cronbach’s alpha, rho_A, composite reliability >0.70; AVE>0.50; Fornell-Larcker and HTMT<0.85). Harman’s single-factor test indicated no serious common method bias (first factor <50%; 6 factors; cumulative variance 36.277%). Structural model assessed for collinearity (VIF<5), path coefficients (bootstrapping), R², Q², and GoF. Mediation tested via bootstrapping with VAF to classify mediation magnitude; moderation tested via interaction terms for CR and ES with CV and CF on SE and OB.

Measurement model: All outer loadings >0.70; Cronbach’s alpha, rho_A, composite reliability >0.70; AVE>0.50; Fornell-Larcker and HTMT supported discriminant validity; no substantial common method bias. Structural paths (all p<0.001 unless noted): - SE → OB: β=0.367, t=13.172 (H1 supported). - CV → SE: β=0.403, t=17.793 (H2a supported). - CF → SE: β=-0.366, t=16.981 (H2b supported). - CV → OB: β=0.235, t=10.004 (H3a supported). - CF → OB: β=-0.190, t=7.574 (H3b supported). Model fit and prediction: R²(OB)=0.604; R²(SE)=0.573; Q²(OB)=0.377; Q²(SE)=0.386; GoF=0.561. Mediation (bootstrapping, VAF): - CV → SE → OB: indirect β=0.148, p<0.001, VAF=0.386 (partial mediation; H4a supported). - CF → SE → OB: indirect β=-0.134, p<0.001, VAF=0.350 (partial mediation; H4b supported). Moderation: - CR × CV → SE: β=0.172, t=7.701, p<0.001 (H6a supported). - CR × CV → OB: β=0.115, t=5.563, p<0.001 (H5a supported). - CR × CF → SE: β=0.102, t=4.677, p<0.001 (H6b supported). - CR × CF → OB: β=0.009, t=0.433, p=0.665 (not significant; H5b not supported). - ES × CV → SE: β=-0.225, t=10.093, p<0.001 (H6c supported). - ES × CV → OB: β=-0.134, t=6.577, p<0.001 (H5c supported). - ES × CF → SE: β=-0.135, t=6.175, p<0.001 (H6d supported). - ES × CF → OB: β=-0.066, t=3.081, p=0.002 (H5d supported). Summary: Conversation orientation positively predicts SE and OB; conformity orientation negatively predicts SE and OB. SE partially mediates both relationships. CR strengthens the positive effects of CV and attenuates CF’s negative effect on SE (but not on OB). ES weakens CV’s positive effects and exacerbates CF’s negative effects on both SE and OB.

Findings support the central role of family communication in shaping adolescents’ online prosocial behavior. Conversation-oriented families foster open dialogue that bolsters adolescents’ self-beliefs and willingness to help others online, while conformity-oriented families constrain autonomy and expression, diminishing SE and OB. SE functions as a proximal cognitive mechanism linking family context to behavior, consistent with social cognitive theory: supportive communication enhances efficacy beliefs that in turn promote prosocial action online. Emotion regulation strategies differentially condition these effects. Cognitive reappraisal augments the benefits of conversation orientation and buffers the harmful impact of conformity orientation on SE, likely by enabling adolescents to reinterpret stressors and maintain confidence. However, CR did not significantly moderate CF’s link to OB, suggesting prosocial behavior is influenced by additional motives and traits beyond ER. Expressive suppression undermines the positive influence of conversation orientation and intensifies the negative impact of conformity orientation on both SE and OB, consistent with its inhibitory effects on expression, social support, and confidence. These patterns emphasize the interplay between family communication, cognition (SE), and emotion processes in predicting adolescents’ online prosocial engagement and underscore targets for family education and youth interventions.

This study advances understanding of adolescent online prosocial behavior by integrating family communication patterns, self-efficacy, and emotion regulation into a moderated mediation framework. It demonstrates that conversation orientation enhances, and conformity orientation reduces, both self-efficacy and online prosocial behavior; self-efficacy partially transmits these effects. Cognitive reappraisal strengthens conversation orientation’s benefits and mitigates conformity orientation’s harm on self-efficacy, whereas expressive suppression exerts the opposite pattern on both self-efficacy and behavior. Theoretical contributions include extending social cognitive theory to adolescents’ online contexts, clarifying dual emotion regulation roles, and specifying distinct FCP effects on OB. Practically, the results inform family communication guidance, platform designs that encourage prosocial engagement, and school programs incorporating prosocial and emotion education. Future research should broaden samples across regions and cultures, incorporate objective behavioral indicators, and examine longitudinal dynamics of OB and family influences over time.

- Sample generalizability: The sample was localized to capital cities in three provinces and did not include adolescents from less economically developed or educationally disadvantaged regions, limiting external validity. - Self-report bias: All measures were self-reported and may be influenced by social desirability and subjective perception; inclusion of objective or behavioral data is recommended. - Cross-sectional design: Short-term snapshot precludes causal inference and overlooks long-term trajectories; longitudinal studies are needed to assess stability and change in OB and the evolving impact of family communication patterns and individual factors.