3.1 Common method bias test
To protect the privacy of adolescents, the survey was conducted anonymously, reducing the potential influence of common method bias on the data. The Harman one-way test was used for analysis, revealing seven factors with eigenvalues greater than 1. The maximum factor variance explained accounted for 21.48% (less than 40%), indicating that common method bias is not significant in this study.
3.2 Basic demographic information
Among the 1951 students who completed valid questionnaires, 1,840 (94.3%) were cisgender and 111 (5.7%) were transgender. Within the transgender group, 40 individuals (36.0%) identified as transgender females, and 71 individuals (64.0%) identified as transgender males. The basic demographic information is detailed in Table 1.
Table 1 Basic demographic information on adolescent students
|
|
Total (%)/Mean (standard deviation)
|
Cisgender (N=1840)
|
Transgender (N=111)
|
Age
|
13.19±1.243
|
13.18±1.242
|
13.26±1.256
|
Sex at birth
|
|
|
|
Male
|
1030
|
990(96.1)
|
40(3.9)
|
Women
|
921
|
850(92.3)
|
71(7.7)
|
Grade
|
|
|
|
First year of junior middle school
|
634
|
600(94.6)
|
34(5.4)
|
Second year in junior middle school
|
893
|
844(94.5)
|
49(5.5)
|
First year in senior high school
|
274
|
253(92.3)
|
21(7.7)
|
Second year in senior high school
|
150
|
143(95.3)
|
7(4.7)
|
Ethnic Group
|
|
|
|
Han
|
1837
|
1734(94.4)
|
103(5.6)
|
Others
|
114
|
106(93.0)
|
8(7.0)
|
3.3 Comparison of the mental health status of different adolescent students' gender identity groups
This study found significant differences in depression, family functioning, and self-efficacy among different gender identity groups (see Table 2 for details). In the cisgender group, 287 subjects (15.6%) were detected with depression, whereas in the transgender group, 45 subjects (40.5%) were detected with depression. Additionally, family functioning and self-efficacy levels were significantly lower in the transgender group compared to the cisgender. Overall, the transgender group exhibited significantly poorer mental health, particularly with higher levels of depression, compared to the cisgender group.
Table 2 Comparison of the mental health status of different adolescent students' gender identity groups
|
Variant
|
t
|
p
|
Cisgender (N=1840)
|
Transgender (N=111)
|
(mean ± standard deviation)
|
Depression
|
-6.724
|
0.000
|
5.11±4.89
|
9.03±6.03
|
Family functioning
|
5.139
|
0.000
|
6.30±2.72
|
4.93±2.70
|
Self-efficacy
|
3.527
|
0.000
|
24.62±6.31
|
22.44±6.32
|
3.4 Correlation analysis between self-efficacy and mental health status of adolescent students
Pearson correlation analysis was conducted, and the results (see Table 3 for details) present the correlation matrix of the variables observed in this study. It was concluded that in both cisgender and transgender groups, (1) depression was significantly negatively correlated with family functioning and self-efficacy (p < 0.05), and (2) self-efficacy was significantly positively correlated with family functioning (p < 0.01).
Table 3 Correlation analysis between self-efficacy and depression, family functioning
|
variant
|
cisgender
|
transgender
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
1. Depression
|
1
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
2. Family functioning
|
-0.427***
|
1
|
|
-0.284**
|
1
|
|
3. Self-efficacy
|
-0.225***
|
0.278***
|
1
|
-0.190*
|
0.272**
|
1
|
Notes:*p<0.05,**p<0.01,***p<0.001
|
3.5 Test of mediating effects of self-efficacy
To further investigate the potential mechanisms by which gender identity affects mental health, firstly, this project standardized and centered all continuous variables, The mediation effect analysis of categorical variables, proposed by Wen Zhonglin's team[35], was employed, using the cisgender group as the base reference. Stepwise regression analysis was conducted to determine the mediating effect of self-efficacy in the transgender group while controlling for age. The results showed that relative to the cisgender group, the transgender group had a significant positive predictive effect on depression. When the mediator variable (self-efficacy) was included, the positive predictive effect of the transgender group on depression remained significant. Gender identity was a significant negative predictor of the mediator variable self-efficacy, and self-efficacy was also a significant negative predictor of depression. Therefore, gender identity not only directly predicts depression, but also predicts depression through the mediating role of self-efficacy, indicating that self-efficacy partially mediates the relationship between gender identity and depression[36]. (See Table 4 for details)
In addition, the mediating effect of self-efficacy between adolescents' gender identity and depression was validated by the Bootstrapping test (5000 resamples) with Model 4 of PROCESS for SPSS, prepared by Hayes[37, 38]. The results showed that the Bootstrap confidence intervals for both the direct effect on depression and the mediating effect of self-efficacy did not include "0"[49], indicating that the mediating effect of self-efficacy was significant. The direct effect (3.515) and the mediating effect (0.364) accounted for 90.62% and 9.38%, respectively, of the total effect (3.879). (See Table 5 for details)
Table 4 Mediation effect test for self-efficacy
|
regression equation
|
fitness index
|
Significance of coefficients
|
Outcome variable
|
Predictor variable
|
R
|
R2
|
F
|
B
|
t
|
Depression
|
|
0.223
|
0.05
|
50.864***
|
|
|
|
Age
|
|
|
|
0.532
|
5.934***
|
|
Gender identity
|
|
|
|
3.879
|
8.067***
|
Self-efficacy
|
|
0.098
|
0.01
|
9.454***
|
|
|
|
Age
|
|
|
|
-0.291
|
-2.537*
|
|
Gender identity
|
|
|
|
-2.153
|
-3.494***
|
Depression
|
|
0.307
|
0.094
|
67.551***
|
|
|
|
Age
|
|
|
|
0.483
|
5.504***
|
|
Gender identity
|
|
|
|
3.515
|
7.463***
|
|
Self-efficacy
|
|
|
|
-0.169
|
-9.796***
|
Notes:*p<0.05,**p<0.01,***p<0.001
Table 5 Breakdown of total, direct, and mediating effects
|
|
efficiency value
|
SE
|
Boot LLCI
|
Boot ULCI
|
relative affect value
|
Aggregate effect
|
3.879
|
0.481
|
2.936
|
4.823
|
|
Direct effect
|
3.515
|
0.471
|
2.592
|
4.439
|
90.62%
|
Mediating effects of
Self-efficacy
|
0.364
|
0.116
|
0.142
|
0.598
|
9.38%
|
3.6 Moderating effects of family functioning on the mediating effects of self-efficacy
Model 14 (the second half of the moderated mediation model, consistent with the theoretical framework of this study) in the Process program developed by Hayes was used to standardize and center all continuous variables, and a moderated mediation effect test was conducted on the transgender group, controlling for age. The analysis results indicated (see Table 6 for details) that, compared to the cisgender group, transgender identity significantly positively predicted depression and significantly negatively predicted self-efficacy, which in turn significantly and negatively predicted depression. With the inclusion of family functioning as a moderator variable, the interaction term of self-efficacy and family functioning significantly moderated depression. As shown in Table 7, there was a significant negative moderating effect of family functioning on depression in the transgender group relative to the cisgender group. This indicates that gender identity, self-efficacy, family functioning, and depression constitute a moderated mediation model, moderating the latter paths of the mediation process.
Further simple slope analyses(see Figure 3 for details) showed that self-efficacy negatively predicted depression in subjects with both lower levels of family functioning (M-1SD) and higher levels of family functioning (M+1SD). However, the predictive effect of self-efficacy on depression progressively decreased as family functioning increased. This suggests that as family functioning improves, transgender individuals are less likely to experience depression through diminished self-efficacy compared to cisgender individuals.
Table 6 Moderated mediated effects analysis for transgender
|
Outcome variable
|
Predictor variable
|
Overall fit index
|
Significance of regression coefficients
|
R
|
R2
|
F
|
β
|
t
|
Self-efficacy
|
|
0.0980
|
0.0096
|
9.4536***
|
|
|
|
Age
|
|
|
|
-0.2915
|
-2.5368*
|
|
Transgender
|
|
|
|
-2.1534
|
-3.4937***
|
Depression
|
|
0.4761
|
0.2267
|
114.0495 ***
|
|
|
|
Age
|
|
|
|
0.4237
|
5.2190***
|
|
Transgender
|
|
|
|
2.7009
|
6.1689***
|
|
Self-efficacy
|
|
|
|
-0.0934
|
-5.5899***
|
|
Family functioning
|
|
|
|
-0.6875
|
-17.8529***
|
|
Self-efficacy* Family functioning
|
|
|
|
0.0177
|
3.2903**
|
Notes:*p<0.05,**p<0.01,***p<0.001
Table 7 Analysis of moderating effects of family functioning
|
Outcome variable
|
Moderating effects of family functioning
|
Index of moderated mediation
|
|
Effect
|
SE
|
Boot
LLCI
|
Boot
ULCI
|
Index
|
SE
|
Boot
LLCI
|
Boot
ULCI
|
Depression
Score
|
M-1SD
|
0.3105
|
0.1133
|
0.1163
|
0.5540
|
-0.0365
|
0.0182
|
-0.0762
|
-0.0065
|
M
|
0.2105
|
0.0745
|
0.0807
|
0.3712
|
M+1SD
|
0.1105
|
0.1105
|
0.0175
|
0.2406
|