Your privacy, your choice

We use essential cookies to make sure the site can function. We also use optional cookies for advertising, personalisation of content, usage analysis, and social media.

By accepting optional cookies, you consent to the processing of your personal data - including transfers to third parties. Some third parties are outside of the European Economic Area, with varying standards of data protection.

See our privacy policy for more information on the use of your personal data.

for further information and to change your choices.
Skip to main content
Download PDF

Managing malice in negative environments: the mediating effect of coping styles on the relationship between negative sense of place and malevolent creativity among Chinese high school students

BMC Psychology volume 13, Article number: 35 (2025) Cite this article

Abstract

Background

Creativity motivated by negative intentions can be referred to as malevolent creativity. While existing findings have largely focused on environmental or individual factors influencing malevolent creativity, less attention has been directed towards understanding how the sense of place—derived from individual-environment interaction—affects malevolent creativity. Additionally, the role of coping styles as mediating mechanisms in negative environments has been insufficiently explored.

Methods

This study aims to investigate the relationship between negative sense of place and malevolent creativity, while examining the mediating role of coping styles. To this end, a paper-based survey was conducted among 1310 Chinese high school students, utilizing the Negative Sense of Place Scale, Coping Styles Scale, and Malevolent Creativity Scale. Data were analyzed using SPSS 26.0 and Mplus 8.3.

Results

The findings revealed that a negative sense of place in the school environment significantly and positively predicted malevolent creativity. Negative sense of place was also positively associated with negative coping styles and negatively associated with positive coping styles. Furthermore, coping styles mediated the relationship between negative sense of place and malevolent creativity.

Conclusion

This study enriches existing literature by elucidating the links between sense of place, coping styles, and malevolent creativity. These findings provide valuable insights for strategies aimed at reducing malevolent creativity and preventing harmful creative behaviors in educational contexts.

Peer Review reports

Introduction

Creativity, recognized as a key driver of modern scientific and technological progress [1], is broadly defined as the ability to generate novel and applicable ideas or solutions [2, 3]. In an era marked by rapid technological advancement, global interconnectedness, and increasingly complex challenges, creativity has become a fundamental educational goal, contributing significantly to individual self-actualization and lifelong development [4]. However, creativity possesses a “dark side” [5], exemplified by malevolent creativity, which involves the use of creative processes with the intent to cause harm [6]. Malevolent creativity encompasses both the potential for harm and the execution of harmful acts [7]. While malevolent creative potential shares core characteristics with general creativity, such as novelty and utility, it is distinguished by its harmful intent [8]. Malevolent creative behaviors—immoral, harmful actions aimed at causing damage—are characterized by novelty and intentional harm directed toward oneself or others [6]. Such behaviors, including cheating, lying, and betrayal, are frequently observed in everyday life [9].

Given the harmful effects of malevolent creativity on both individual development and societal stability, identifying its contributing factors and developing effective strategies to mitigate its occurrence is crucial. Studies indicate that, beyond individual traits such as personality and emotional intelligence [10, 11], external factors—including inequitable societal conditions and neglectful family environments—play a significant role in fostering malevolent creativity [10, 12]. Specifically, negative school environments are recognized as key triggers for malevolent creativity [13, 14]. Negative sense of place, defined as adverse experiences and perceptions of one’s surroundings, has also been shown to negatively impact behavior and emotions. Such negative perceptions of school often lead to decreased academic performance and increased problematic behaviors [15, 16]. For example, school alienation is frequently linked to disruptive behaviors and higher dropout rates [17], while malevolent creativity—deliberate acts intended to cause harm—is more likely to manifest in students already exhibiting behavioral issues [6, 18]. Previous research has found that, in the context of stigma surrounding vocational schools, the perceived supportiveness of the school climate among vocational school students is relatively low, which may lead to consequences such as an escalation in aggressive behavior, deteriorating student-teacher relationships, and an increased risk of school dropout [19, 20]. Additionally, a negative sense of place can exacerbate emotional distress [21], heightening the risk of mental health challenges such as stress, anxiety, and depression [22]. Malevolent creativity is closely linked to negative emotional experiences [23] and poorer mental well-being [24]. However, existing research on malevolent creativity in adolescents has limited attention to the mechanisms of individual-environment interaction, particularly with regard to vocational high school students, a specific and widespread group that has been relatively underexplored.

Coping refers to the cognitive and behavioral strategies individuals employ to manage frustration, stress, or emotional distress, generally classified as positive or negative [25]. Positive coping, characterized by a proactive, problem-solving approach, involves seeking internal and external resources to formulate strategies for addressing challenges. In contrast, negative coping is marked by avoidance, denial, or escapism in response to difficulties [26]. The choice of coping styles plays a critical role in shaping individuals’ perceptions of and reactions to their environment [27]. Positive strategies like reframing and reappraisal allow individuals to reinterpret negative situations more favorably, fostering resilience and enhancing their capacity to overcome adversity [28]. Moreover, positive coping enhances coping efficiency and mitigates the adverse effects of stress on adaptive outcomes, serving as a protective factor for mental health [29, 30]. In contrast, adolescents who rely on negative coping methods, such as avoidance, often display poorer psychological functioning and are more likely to develop aggressive or problematic behaviors [31]. Coping styles regulate emotions, shape psychological functioning, and indirectly influence malevolent creativity. Additionally, negative perceptions of place have been shown to impact coping styles, which in turn affect malevolent creativity. Studies show that negative campus perceptions, such as fear and alienation, are linked to increased stress and anxiety, shaping students’ coping styles and often leading to avoidance behaviors [32]. Conversely, adopting positive coping styles can diminish the likelihood of malevolent behavior by tempering hostile or aggressive responses to adverse circumstances [33, 34]. However, research on the mediating role of coping styles between negative sense of place and malevolent creativity remains limited.

This study explored the relationship between adolescents’ negative sense of place and malevolent creativity within the context of vocational high school education, focusing on the mediating role of coping styles. By examining these dynamics, the study enhances the understanding of the 5 A framework of creativity and provides valuable insights into strategies for reducing malevolent creativity within school environments.

Rationale and assumptions

Theoretical framework

Theoretical frameworks for malevolent creativity have progressed from a single-dimensional focus to more multidimensional perspectives [35]. These frameworks now encompass both social-environmental contexts [36] and individual-level factors [37, 38]. At the individual level, malevolent creativity is closely associated with personality traits and emotional factors [10]. For example, individuals low in conscientiousness and high in aggression tend to perform better in malevolent creativity tasks [37]. Additionally, factors such as emotional intelligence, gender, and other personal characteristics uniquely influence the expression of malevolent creativity [11, 38].

Rhodes introduced the widely recognized 4P model of creativity, encompassing four dimensions: person, process, product, and environment [39]. Hunter’s Malevolent Innovation Transformation framework posits those individual motivations—such as internal drives, external pressures, justice-related beliefs, and group ideologies—play a critical role during both the ideation and execution phases of malevolent creativity [8]. Glăveanu expanded the socio-cultural perspective by developing the 5 A framework, which includes actor (creator), action (creative process), artifact (creative product), audience, and affordance [40]. In this framework, affordance emphasizes the role of environmental and material resources in supporting creativity. Both the 4P model [39], Malevolent Innovation Transformation framework [8], and the 5 A framework [40] highlight the influence of physical and socio-cultural contexts on creativity. These contexts can also trigger malevolent creativity, particularly when negative external factors—such as neglectful family environments—foster malevolent creative behaviors [10]. Research has shown that threatening social environments can promote malevolent creative ideas [12]. For example, school environments strongly predict students’ involvement in drug use or criminal behavior [41], whereas a strong sense of community reduces the likelihood of aggressive behaviors [42].

This study, grounded in the 5 A framework of creativity, investigates the factors influencing malevolent creativity, with a specific focus on students’ malevolent creativity within the campus environment. The socio-cultural perspective of the 5 A framework underscores the importance of considering both the individual and the campus environment, along with their dynamic interactions. Consequently, this study investigates the mediating role of coping styles adopted by students.

Negative sense of place and malevolent creativity

Tuan [43] introduced the concept of “sense of place”, describing the emotional experiences individuals undergo when adapting to their environment. These experiences can be categorized as either “positive” or “negative”. Positive responses lead to “place attachment”, characterized by satisfaction and happiness, while negative responses result in “place fear”, associated with discomfort or fear [44]. Hummon [45] introduced “place alienation”, highlighting the weakening of emotional bonds with a particular geographic area. McCreanor et al. [46] also emphasized that sense of place encompasses both attachment and aversion to specific locations. Scannell and Gifford [22] developed a framework that includes elements such as place dissatisfaction and aversion. A negative sense of place includes dimensions such as place alienation, place aversion, and place fear. Place alienation refers to the erosion or loss of emotional connection to a location, often stemming from social alienation, lack of identity, or difficulty adapting to the spatial environment [45]. Place aversion involves emotional rejection or avoidance of a location [47], while place fear describes locations perceived as threatening or dangerous [48]. A negative sense of place affects not only emotions [47] but also behavior and attitudes [49]. Both quantitative and qualitative methods have been used to assess negative sense of place. Quantitative measures include the Workplace Fear and Avoidance Scale [50]. Qualitative approaches such as walking interviews [51] and semi-structured interviews [52] have also been employed. Building on the measures by Alagarsamy et al. [50] and Van Andel [53], this study developed a 10-item scale to assess three dimensions: campus alienation, campus aversion, and campus fear. An example from the campus fear dimension is, “I prefer routes that avoid certain areas of the campus.”

Malevolent creativity is shaped by various factors, with significant individual differences observed in its manifestation [10]. Research has shown that gender plays a notable role, with males typically exhibiting higher levels of malevolent creativity, primarily due to the influence of dark personality traits [11]. Additionally, life circumstances such as exposure to unfair conditions [54] and social threats [12] can activate defense and aggression mechanisms, which in turn stimulate malevolent creativity. Measuring malevolent creativity is a complex process, with different methods employed to assess it. For example, Clark and James [54] utilized problem-solving tasks, whereas Lee and Dow [37] examined it through divergent thinking tests to evaluate individuals’ thought processes. In this study, malevolent creativity was assessed using the scale developed by Ning Hao et al. [9], which evaluates individuals’ daily behaviors.

The 5 A framework of creativity emphasizes the crucial roles of actors (creators), actions (creative processes), artifacts (creative products), audience, and affordances in shaping creativity [40]. This comprehensive perspective has encouraged researchers to investigate the interconnected influences of these elements on creativity. In this study, the negative sense of place arises from the interaction between students and their campus environment, encompassing relationships with others (e.g., peers), physical aspects (e.g., campus infrastructure), and social dynamics (e.g., campus climate). These factors are strongly tied to students’ creative development [50, 55]. On one hand, negative sense of place is understood as a multifaceted construct involving both environmental characteristics and individual perceptions [56, 57]. For instance, adverse campus features such as noise, overcrowding, and pollution often provoke emotions like disgust, irritation, and alienation [58]. These negative feelings can lead to behavioral issues and manifestations of malevolent creativity, including depression, absenteeism, dishonesty, and bullying [14, 59]. On the other hand, negative sense of place also refers to an individual’s unfavorable perception of their environment, characterized by emotional disconnection, which can influence malevolent creativity by impacting mood and mental health. This emotional response may trigger stress reactions such as anxiety, fear, and depression [48]. During adolescence, a period of intense physical, social, and emotional growth, changes in school structure can intensify feelings of loneliness, isolation, and victimization, potentially leading to disruptive behaviors [60,61,62]. Based on these findings, the following hypothesis is proposed:

  • H1: A positive correlation exists between negative sense of place and malevolent creativity.

The mediating role of coping styles

Coping is defined as the process by which individuals are adapted to their environment [27], and it significantly influences emotional and behavioral responses [63]. Lazarus and Folkman [27] conceptualized coping as dynamic mechanisms aimed at mastering or mitigating the impact of perceived threats or challenges. Endler et al. [64, 65] categorized coping strategies into three primary types: task-oriented, emotion-oriented, and avoidance coping. Similarly, Liu et al. [26] categorized coping into two broad types: positive and negative coping. Positive coping, which aligns closely with task-oriented strategies, involves a problem-solving approach wherein individuals actively seek internal and external resources to devise effective solutions. In contrast, negative coping, akin to emotion-oriented and avoidance coping, relies on strategies such as denial, avoidance, or fantasizing to address challenges. Research consistently highlights the substantial influence of coping styles on students’ mental health, peer relationships, and problematic behaviors [66, 67]. For instance, adolescents with higher resilience are more likely to adopt positive coping styles, which are positively associated with improved psychological outcomes. Conversely, negative coping styles are linked to lower resilience and poorer psychological well-being [68]. Moreover, students who resort to negative coping styles in response to social exclusion are more likely to disregard others’ interests and engage in socially deviant behaviors, including malevolent creativity [67, 69].

Individuals’ coping styles are influenced by various factors, including environmental conditions [70], social support [71], emotions [72], and gender [73]. Students’ coping styles are particularly shaped by their campus environment [74], which comprises physical, social, and psychological components [75]. In this context, academic pressures and peer relationships can foster a negative sense of place [76, 77], thereby impacting how students cope [74]. Social support serves as a critical resource for promoting positive psychological development [78] and plays a key role in determining students’ coping behaviors. In educational settings, students often turn to family, teachers, and peers for support [79]. However, when students experience a negative sense of place, such as feelings of campus alienation, the social support they receive may diminish, negatively influencing their coping mechanisms [80]. Additionally, research has documented gender differences in coping styles, with women more likely to engage in maladaptive strategies, such as self-distraction, denial, and behavioral disengagement [73]. Women also tend to rely more on instrumental and emotional support to manage stress. In contrast, men are more inclined to adopt passive and avoidant coping styles, including substance use [73, 81, 82].

The 5 A framework emphasizes the creative process, the surrounding environment, and the availability of resources that nurture creativity [40]. Lazarus and Folkman [27] conceptualized coping as a mechanism for managing both internal and external demands. Internal demands, such as motivation and reflection, involve cognitive processes that are assessed based on whether they challenge or surpass an individual’s resources. The ability to manage these demands can significantly impact the creative process and the accessibility of essential resources. Research consistently demonstrates a strong link between adolescents’ coping styles and malevolent creativity [31]. Task-oriented coping strategies, regarded as positive coping styles, are associated with improved psychological well-being and a reduction in both internalizing and externalizing behaviors during adolescence [83, 84]. These effects, in turn, help diminish the likelihood of malevolent creativity [85, 86]. Conversely, avoidance-oriented coping strategies are linked to poor resilience and an increase in problematic behaviors, such as substance abuse [84], which can further escalate malevolent creativity [12, 87]. Based on these findings, the following hypothesis is proposed:

  • H2: Positive and negative coping styles mediate the relationship between a negative sense of place and malevolent creativity.

Figure 1 shows a diagram of the mediation model proposed in the two hypotheses that depicts relationships between the independent, mediator, and dependent variables.

Fig. 1
figure 1

Research model

Full size image

Research design and methodology

Survey procedures and research subjects

This study used convenience sampling to select a public vocational high school in eastern China for data collection, conducted between November and December 2023. Paper-based questionnaires were distributed during class breaks and collected on-site. A total of 1310 questionnaires were distributed. Following validity checks, including lie detection items and logical consistency evaluations to exclude incomplete or careless responses,1175 valid questionnaires were obtained, yielding an effective response rate of 89.70%.The confidentiality of all data was strictly maintained, and the information will be used exclusively for academic purposes. Informed consent was secured from all participants, their parents, classroom teachers, and geography teachers. The age of the respondents ranges from 15 to 18 years old. Table 1 provides a detailed overview of the study’s respondents.

Table 1 Detailed information about respondents
Full size table

Research tools

The questionnaire used in this study consisted of four parts: demographic information, the Negative Sense of Place Scale, the Coping Styles Scale, and the Malevolent Creativity Scale. The demographic section collected data on gender and grade level. To ensure translation accuracy, portions of the questionnaire, originally in English, were adapted into Chinese using the back-translation method [88]. One researcher translated the instrument from English to Chinese, another translated it back to English, and a third researcher compared the original, translated, and back-translated versions to ensure consistency, thus minimizing potential translation errors that could compromise study validity.

Negative sense of place scale

The Negative Sense of Place Scale was developed with reference to relevant literature, including the work of Riley K and other scholars [48, 50, 51, 89]. This scale comprises three subscales: Campus Alienation, Campus Aversion, and Campus Fear, with a total of 15 items. The Campus Alienation subscale includes five items, such as, “I will not regret leaving this place after graduation.” The Campus Aversion subscale contains five items, such as, “Even if offered a reward, I would not want to remain and study on this campus.” Lastly, the Campus Fear subscale includes five items, such as, “I am afraid of being threatened or bullied here.” The responses were recorded on a 7-point Likert scale ranging from “strongly disagree” to “strongly agree”, with higher scores indicating stronger negative feelings about the campus. The Cronbach’s alpha for the scale was 0.940, indicating high internal consistency. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) demonstrated strong model fit indices: χ²/df = 5.0, CFI = 0.960, TLI = 0.948, RMSEA = 0.076, and SRMR = 0.036, supporting the scale’s reliability and validity.

Coping styles scale

The Coping Styles Scale was adapted from Xie [90] Simple Coping Styles Scale, comprising two subscales: Positive Coping and Negative Coping, with a total of 20 items. The Positive Coping subscale contains 12 items, such as, “When faced with a difficult problem, I seek advice from relatives, friends, or classmates.” The Negative Coping subscale includes 8 items, exemplified by: “When encountering an intractable problem, I fantasize that a miracle might occur to change the situation.” Responses were recorded on a 7-point Likert scale, ranging from “never” to “always”, with higher scores reflecting stronger tendencies toward positive or negative coping. Item 15 was reverse scored. In this study, the scale demonstrated high internal consistency with a Cronbach’s alpha of 0.951. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) indicated acceptable model fit indices: χ²/df = 3.53, CFI = 0.918, TLI = 0.907, RMSEA = 0.060, and SRMR = 0.076, supporting the scale’s reliability and validity.

Malevolent creativity behavior scale

The Malevolent Creativity Behavior Scale, developed by Hao et al. [9], assesses three dimensions of malevolent creativity: inflicting harm, deceit, and mischief, with a total of 13 items. Sample items include: “I have devised innovative ways to punish those who commit wrongdoings,” “I can think of numerous bad ideas for pranking others,” and “When I do something wrong, I try to avoid getting caught to stay safe.” Responses are rated on a 7-point Likert scale, ranging “never” to “always”, where higher scores reflect greater tendencies toward malevolent creativity. In this study, the scale demonstrated excellent internal consistency with a Cronbach’s alpha of 0.975. CFA results yielded strong model fit indices: χ²/df = 3.5, CFI = 0.960, TLI = 0.950, RMSEA = 0.060, and SRMR = 0.029, indicating robust internal consistency and validity.

Data analysis

Data analysis was conducted using SPSS 26.0 and Mplus 8.3. To ensure the validity of the analyses and control for potential common method bias, Harman′s One-factor Test was performed [91]. The results identified six factors with eigenvalues greater than 1, with the primary factor accounting for 27.71% of the variance, which is below the 40% threshold, indicating that common method bias was not a concern. Descriptive statistics and correlation analyses were performed in SPSS 26.0 to assess data distribution and explore relationships among the variables. Mplus 8.3 was employed to construct a model examining the effect of negative sense of place on malevolent creativity, while also investigating the mediating role of coping styles and the differences between negative and positive coping mechanisms.

Results

Descriptive statistics and correlation analysis

The results of the descriptive statistics and correlation analyses for all variables are presented in Table 2. The negative sense of place is slightly positively correlated with negative coping (r = 0.073, p = 0.012) and significantly positively correlated with malevolent creativity (r = 0.386, p < 0.001), while it shows a significant negative correlation with positive coping (r = −0.356, p < 0.001). Additionally, a significant negative correlation was found between positive coping and malevolent creativity (r = −0.255, p < 0.001). Conversely, negative coping displayed a significant positive correlation with malevolent creativity (r = 0.102, p < 0.001). Except for the weak correlation between negative sense of place and negative coping, the remaining variables demonstrated moderate to high correlation strength.

Table 2 Descriptive Statistics and Correlation Analysis Results for all variables
Full size table

Intermediary analysis

To further examine the hypothesized relationships between negative sense of place, coping styles, and malevolent creativity, structural equation modeling (SEM) was performed. Considering the significant gender differences in malevolent creativity, gender was included as a control variable in the model. After controlling for the gender and grade, the model fit indices indicated a strong fit [χ² = 127.891, df = 31, χ²/df = 4.13, CFI = 0.979, TLI = 0.971, RMSEA = 0.052 (90% CI 0.042–0.061), SRMR = 0.047].

The results of the mediation model (Fig. 2) demonstrate that a negative sense of place exerts a significant positive direct effect on both negative coping styles and malevolent creativity (β = 0.077, p = 0.005; β = 0.279, p < 0.001), while exerting a significant negative direct effect on positive coping styles (β = −0.227,p < 0.001). Additionally, there was a significant positive correlation between positive and negative coping styles (β = 0.407, p < 0.001). Furthermore, positive coping styles have a significant negative direct effect on malevolent creativity (β = −0.227, p < 0.001), whereas negative coping styles have a significant positive direct effect on malevolent creativity (β = 0.159, p < 0.001).

Fig. 2
figure 2

Model of the mediating role of coping styles between negative sense of place and malevolent creativity.Note: *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001

Full size image

To rigorously assess the mediating effects, a bias-corrected percentile bootstrap test was employed, drawing 1000 samples to calculate the 95% confidence intervals. The results (see Table 2) revealed that the total effect of negative sense of place on malevolent creativity was 0.343 (95% CI [0.286, 0.391]), with an indirect effect of 0.064 (95% CI [0.045, 0.083]). Both of the two mediation pathways between negative sense of place and malevolent creativity were statistically significant, as the 95% confidence intervals for both did not include zero. These findings suggest that negative sense of place influences malevolent creativity both directly and indirectly through positive and negative coping styles. The direct effect accounted for 81.34% of the total effect, while the indirect effect constituted 18.66%.

As shown in Table 3, when examining the relationship between negative sense of place and malevolent creativity, the findings indicate that gender has a direct impact on malevolent creativity. Male students demonstrate higher levels of malevolent creativity compared to female students (Estimate = 0.129, S. E.=0.014, p < 0.001). Gender also significantly influences coping styles: male students are more likely to adopt negative coping styles (Estimate = 0.035, S.E.=0.013, p = 0.005), whereas they are less likely to engage in positive coping styles (Estimate=−0.105, S.E.=0.011, p < 0.001). The findings also indicate that grade level has a direct impact on malevolent creativity, with higher-grade students exhibiting significantly higher levels of malevolent creativity compared to lower-grade students (Estimate = 0.160, S.E. = 0.018, p < 0.001). Grade level also significantly influences coping styles: higher-grade students are more inclined to adopt negative coping strategies (Estimate = 0.044, S.E. = 0.016, p = 0.005) and less likely to employ positive coping strategies (Estimate = −0.130, S.E. = 0.013, p < 0.001). Furthermore, both gender and grade level may indirectly influence malevolent creativity through their effects on coping styles.

Table 3 Standardized indirect effects and 95% confidence intervals
Full size table

Discussion

This study employed a mediation model based on the 5 A framework of creativity to examine the associations between negative sense of place and malevolent creativity. The results indicate that negative sense of place is associated with malevolent creativity through the mediating roles of both positive and negative coping styles.

The relationship between negative sense of place and malevolent creativity

Empirical studies have consistently demonstrated a positive correlation between a negative sense of place and malevolent creativity [12, 92]. Negative school environments, often associated with feelings of alienation and fear, tend to erode students’ social support systems and psychological resilience. This deterioration increases the likelihood of engaging in maliciously creative behaviors [14, 93]. Hunter’s Malevolent Innovation Transformation framework suggests that group ideologies are an important linkage factor in generating malevolent creativity [8]. Social psychological research further supports these findings, indicating that the degradation of a community’s physical environment intensifies negative perceptions, fostering feelings of fear, insecurity, alienation, and a diminished sense of belonging. These emotions significantly influence individuals’ behaviors and interactions within the community [94, 95]. Particularly, students in vocational high schools are a vulnerable group that is more susceptible to the influence of negative environments. For instance, one study found that the prevalence of direct self-harming behaviors among vocational school students is higher compared to that of high school students [96]. Moreover, a permissive school culture towards violent behaviors may further cultivate malevolent creativity [8]. Chen et al. [20] identified that vocational school students reported significantly higher rates of cyberbullying and lower levels of perceived school climate compared to students in regular schools. Neuroscientific evidence also corroborates these insights, showing that community alienation and insecurity are linked to heightened psychological stress [97], which impairs prefrontal cognitive functions and reduces inhibitory control [98, 99]. Damage to the prefrontal cortex—critical for moral judgment—has been associated with increased deceptive behaviors and impaired moral reasoning, rendering individuals more susceptible to malevolent creative behaviors [100, 101].

The mediating role of coping styles in negative sense of place and malevolent creativity

This study demonstrates that, in alignment with both the Creativity 5 A framework [40] and the Malevolent Innovation Transformation framework [8], negative sense of place is associated with malevolent creativity through coping styles. On the one hand, a negative correlation was identified between negative sense of place and positive coping styles, while a positive correlation emerged with negative coping styles. These findings corroborate earlier studies, which suggest that negative perceptions of school environments—such as feelings of alienation—can lead to dissatisfaction and avoidance behaviors, thus weakening positive coping styles and fostering negative ones [102, 103]. On the other hand, coping styles are closely related to psychological states and self-efficacy [104, 105]. Evidence shows that students’ perceptions of classroom climate significantly affect their self-efficacy, with negative perceptions diminishing self-efficacy and increasing the likelihood of adopting negative coping styles [106, 107]. Moreover, a lack of support or poor student-teacher relationships can reinforce a fixed mindset, leading students to avoid challenges and exhibit negative learning attitudes [104, 108].

The reduction in positive coping styles or the increase in negative coping styles has been positively correlated with the onset and progression of malevolent creativity, consistent with previous studies [109, 110]. Negative coping styles typically lower student satisfaction and increase the likelihood of engaging in malevolent behaviors [110]. In contrast, positive coping styles are associated with reduced stress levels and enhanced problem-solving abilities [109], which help mitigate the occurrence of malevolent behaviors, including malevolent creativity [111, 112]. Further research indicates that positive coping styles, such as confronting challenges and seeking social support, enhance psychological resilience and foster a supportive social environment, both crucial for alleviating psychological distress [113]. These strategies also foster positive emotions while reducing negative ones, thereby promoting overall emotional well-being [114]. A study conducted in a secondary vocational high school in a poverty-stricken county in China found that mindfulness promotes resilience, thereby enhancing quality of life and mitigating negative emotions such as depression and anxiety [115]. It is evident that adolescents who tend to adopt positive coping styles are better able to regulate their emotions in adverse environments, actively seek support, and thereby effectively suppress the emergence of malevolent creativity. Individuals who rely on negative coping styles often experience insufficient social support [113], which increases stress and psychological difficulties, ultimately impairing emotional health [116, 117]. While anxiety and stress can, at times, enhance creativity by fostering cognitive flexibility and persistence, they can also give rise to malevolent creativity [118]. Moreover, the absence of social support can exacerbate stress and dissatisfaction, potentially triggering maliciously creative actions [119].

This study demonstrates that a negative sense of place is associated with malevolent creativity through coping styles. This finding is consistent with existing research. A negative sense of place involves individuals’ unfavorable perceptions and evaluations of their environment, which can impact emotional regulation [120]. Hunter et al. [8] found in their study that students’ discomfort with their school environment may heighten their perceived need to engage in malevolent innovation, prompting malevolent creative acts. Moreover, emotional regulation is crucial in shaping coping styles. Effective emotional regulation encourages positive coping styles, while poor regulation leads to negative coping methods like avoidance and denial [121, 122], thereby increasing the risk of malevolent creativity [123]. Zhou et al. [124] reported that the prevalence of deliberate self-harm among vocational high school students is significantly higher than that of general high school students. Students who adopt positive coping styles, such as problem-solving and seeking social support, exhibit fewer instances of deliberate self-harm, whereas emotionally negative coping styles lead to adverse outcomes. Furthermore, malevolent creativity is a complex process involving interactions between various brain regions, including the prefrontal cortex and hippocampus [125, 126]. Positive coping styles activate the prefrontal cortex and other executive function networks, thereby reducing the likelihood of malevolent behaviors [127, 128]. Therefore, it can be concluded that coping styles, as adaptive responses to the environment, may serve as a mediating link between a negative sense of place and malevolent creativity, bridging these two constructs.

Moreover, the findings reveal a significant gender difference in malevolent creativity, with male students exhibiting higher levels of malevolent creativity compared to female students, consistent with previous studies [69]. A study found that males tend to score higher on average in the traits associated with the Dark Triad, which are linked to negative creativity [129]. Research by Wang et al. [130] indicates that boys exhibit a higher prevalence of health-risk behaviors compared to girls, which often increases the likelihood of health problems and psychological problems. This may stimulate malevolent creativity and lead to adverse aggressive behaviors. Other studies suggest that cultural norms, social expectations, and gender roles contribute to boys exhibiting higher levels of aggressive behavior [131, 132]. Consistent with previous studies, this study also found that females are more likely to adopt positive coping styles, such as acceptance, self-distraction, positive reframing, and seeking emotional support, while males tend to show higher levels of emotional suppression, avoidance, or rely on proactive aggression and confrontational coping strategies [133,134,135]. One study suggests that, when facing more daily stress than boys do, girls are more likely to adopt positive coping styles [136]. Another study also indicates that female students will overly consider how their behaviors are evaluated within social and cultural norms and exhibit higher maladaptive coping styles, which may curb the occurrence of malevolent creative behaviors [137]. In addition, the physical advantage gained by the increased height and weight of adolescent boys provides a basis for adopting emotional and aggressive coping strategies [138]. Therefore, gender differences in coping styles lead to disparities in behaviors such as malevolent creativity.

Differences in malevolent creativity were found between students of different grade levels, with higher-grade students exhibiting higher levels of malevolent creativity than their lower-grade counterparts. Çevik et al. [139] found that bullying behaviors or the risk of becoming a bully tend to be more prevalent as age and grade levels increase. While individuals with high aggression tendencies tend to perform better in tasks involving malevolent creativity. Moreover, in the context of collectivist values in China, individuals place greater emphasis on interpersonal relationships, adherence to the collective, and compliance with social norms and standards. Freshmen, who are new to an unfamiliar campus environment, are more likely to comply with campus discipline and be morally constrained. One study identified moral disengagement as a key mediator in the development of malevolent creativity [7]. Therefore, freshmen and lower-grade students may demonstrate lower levels of malevolent creativity. Additionally, the findings indicate that higher-grade students are more likely to adopt passive coping styles, whereas lower-grade students tend to adopt more active coping styles. One study reported that the frequency and emotional intensity of teacher-student conflicts tend to increase with grade level [140]. To adapt to the new environment and establish positive relationships [141], Freshmen often employ relatively active problem-solving strategies to reduce interpersonal tension and conflicts, which may suppress malevolent creativity. However, there are also viewpoints suggesting that students mature as they age. Wang et al. [142] found that effective peer conflict resolution strategies increase among middle school students during adolescence, peaking in the 12th grade. Therefore, it is both necessary to guide students towards healthier coping styles as they grow.

Discussion of significance

The study investigates the relationship between a negative sense of place and students’ malevolent creativity. In contrast to previous research, this study specifically focuses on the “dark side” of creativity and highlights the mediating effects of coping styles, providing an explanation for the mechanisms that may drive malevolent creative behaviors. These findings are of significance in reducing students’ malevolent creativity within the school context.

Several key practical implications arise from this study. First, acknowledging the psychological and behavioral effects of the campus environment and students’ perceptions is crucial. Thus, improving the environment, such as repairing facilities and addressing security concerns, may help regulate these responses. Additionally, the role of coping styles in shaping malevolent creativity should be considered. Schools can provide counseling to promote positive coping styles, enhance social support perception, and strengthen psychological resilience and emotional well-being.

Limitations and future directions

Although this study provides significant insights into the relationship between a negative sense of place and malevolent creativity, it has certain limitations. Firstly, the cross-sectional design limits the ability to establish causal relationships. Secondly, the sample is confined to vocational high school students in eastern China, which may restrict the generalizability of the findings. Furthermore, the study overlooks the potential impact of family background and other individual characteristics on coping styles and malevolent creativity. In fact, factors such as the socio-economic and cultural capital of the family, support from peers, and individual traits may all influence how individuals cope with negative events, their mental health, and the expression of behaviors [143, 144].

Therefore, future research should consider adopting a longitudinal design to explore the causal mechanisms underlying the formation of malevolent creativity. In addition, it is important to further investigate individual background factors that may influence school sense of place, coping styles, and malevolent creativity, such as academic performance [145], family background [146], and individual health status [2]. Analyzing the potential impact mechanisms of these factors on malevolent creativity is crucial. Moreover, expanding the sample to include different types of schools and comparing the differences and similarities between samples from general schools and vocational schools would provide valuable insights. These improvements could contribute to the development of more effective and universally applicable interventions for mitigating malevolent creativity in adolescents.

Conclusion

This study explored the relationships between negative sense of place, coping styles, and malevolent creativity. The results revealed a significant positive correlation between students’ negative perceptions of their school environment and their propensity for malevolent creativity, with coping styles serving as a mediating factor. These findings suggest that interventions targeting students’ negative sense of place, alongside efforts to guide and cultivate more positive and adaptive coping styles, could effectively reduce both the likelihood and expression of malevolent creativity.

Data availability

The datasets used and/or analysed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

References

  1. Rubenstein LD, McCoach DB, Siegle D. Teaching for creativity scales: An instrument to examine teachers’ perceptions of factors that allow for the teaching of creativity. Creat Res J. 2013;25(3):324–34.

  2. Sternberg RJ, Lubart TI. The concept of creativity: prospects and paradigms. In: Sternberg RJ, editor. Handbook of creativity. Cambridge University Press; 1999. pp. 3–15.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Runco MA, Jaeger GJ. The standard definition of creativity. Creativity Res J. 2012;24(1):92–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Desmet OA, Sternberg RJ. Innovative teaching strategies for fostering transformational creativity. Think Skills Creativity. 2024;52:101543.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. De Saint Laurent C, Glaveanu V, Chaudet C. Malevolent creativity and social media: creating anti-immigration communities on Twitter. Creativity Res J. 2020;32(1):66–80.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Cropley DH, Kaufman JC, Cropley AJ. Malevolent creativity: a functional model of creativity in terrorism and crime. Creativity Res J. 2008;20(2):105–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Shi Z, Zhou Z, Tian L, Zhu Y, Liu C, Xu L. What causes malevolent creative people to engage in malevolent behaviors? Mediating role of moral disengagement and moderating effects of conscience. Think Skills Creativity. 2023;49:101329.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Hunter ST, Walters K, Nguyen T, Manning C, Miller S. Malevolent Creativity and Malevolent Innovation: a critical but tenuous linkage. Creativity Res J. 2021;34(2):123–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Hao N, Tang M, Yang J, Wang Q, Runco MA. A new tool to measure malevolent creativity: the malevolent creativity behavior scale. Front Psychol. 2016;7:682.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  10. Jia X, Wang Q, Lin L. The relationship between childhood neglect and malevolent creativity: the mediating effect of the dark triad personality. Front Psychol. 2020;11:613695.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  11. Perchtold-Stefan CM, Fink A, Rominger C, Papousek I. Creative, antagonistic, and angry? Exploring the roots of malevolent creativity with a real world idea generation task. The Journal of Creative Behavior. Advance online publication; 2020.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Baas M, Roskes M, Koch S, Cheng YJ, De Dreu CKW. Why social threat motivates malevolent creativity. Pers Soc Psychol Bull. 2019;45(11):1590–602.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Harris DJ, Reiter-Palmon R, Kaufman JC. The effect of emotional intelligence and task type on malevolent creativity. Psychol Aesthet Creativity Arts. 2013;7(3):237–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Thapa A, Cohen J, Guffey S, Higgins-D’Alessandro A. A review of school climate research. Rev Educ Res. 2013;83(3):357–85.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. MacNeil AJ, Prater DL, Busch S. The effects of school culture and climate on student achievement. Int J Leadersh Educ. 2009;12(1):73–84.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Wang MT, Selman RL, Dishion TJ, Stormshak EA. A tobit regression analysis of the covariation between middle school students’ perceived school climate and behavioral problems. J Res Adolescence. 2010;20(2):274–86.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Archambault I, Janosz M, Morizot J, Pagani L. Adolescent behavioral, affective, and cognitive engagement in school: relationship to dropout. J Sch Health. 2009;79:408–15.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Gino F, Ariely D. The dark side of creativity: original thinkers can be more dishonest. J Personal Soc Psychol. 2012;102(3):445.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Fossum S, Skokauskas N, Handegård BH, Hansen KL, Kyrrestad H. The significance of traditional bullying, cyberbullying, and Mental Health Problems for Middle School Students feeling unsafe in the School Environment. Scandinavian J Educational Res. 2023;67(2):281–93.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Chen Q, Tang J, Zhu Y, Chan KL. (2024). The role of school climate on student disclosure of private information and cyberbullying: a comparison of regular and vocational school students in China. Front Public Health, 12.

  21. Farrow JA. Youth alienation as an emerging pediatric health care issue. Am J Dis Child. 1991;145:491–2.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Scannell L, Gifford R. Defining place attachment: a tripartite organizing framework. J Environ Psychol. 2010;30(1):1–10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Hao N, Ku Y, Liu M, Hu Y, Runco MA. Enhancing creativity: proper body posture meets proper emotion. Acta Psychol. 2016;163:169–76.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Hopfensitz M, Mangione F, Wey S. Navigating the multiple dimensions of the creativity-mental disorder link: a convergence mental health perspective. Discover Mental Health. 2022;2(1):1–9.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Folkman S, Lazarus RS. Coping as a mediator of emotion. J Personality Social Psychol. 1998;3:466–75.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Liu W, Li Z, Ling Y, Cai T. Core self-evaluations and coping styles as mediators between social support and well-being. Pers Indiv Differ. 2016;88:35–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Lazarus RS, Folkman S. Stress, appraisal, and coping. Springer; 1984.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Garnefski N, Kraaij V, Spinhoven P. Negative life events, cognitive emotion regulation and emotional problems. Pers Indiv Differ. 2001;30(8):1311–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Freire C, Ferradás MDM, Núñez JC, Valle A, Vallejo G. Eudaimonic well-being and coping with stress in university learners: the mediating/moderating role of self-efficacy. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2019;16(1):48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Abdollahi A, Panahipour S, Akhavan Tafti M, Allen KA. Academic hardiness as a mediator for the relationship between school belonging and academic stress. Psychol Sch. 2020;57(5):823–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Inguglia C, Costa S, Ingoglia S, et al. The role of parental control and coping strategies on adolescents’ problem behaviors. Curr Psychol. 2022;41:1287–300.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Hascher T, Hadjar A. School alienation–Theoretical Approaches Educational Res Educational Res. 2018;60(2):171–88.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Tobin DL, Holroyd KA, Reynolds RV. The hierarchical factor structure of the coping strategies inventory. Cogn Therapy Res. 1984;8(4):381–99.

    Google Scholar 

  34. Skinner EA, Edge K, Altman J, Sherwood H. Searching for the structure of coping: a review and critique of category systems for classifying ways of coping. Psychol Bull. 2003;129(2):216–69.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Zhou J, Zhao B, Zhang M. Hotspots and research trends of the dark side of creativity in the last decade. Creativity Res J. 2023;35(1):47–60.

    Google Scholar 

  36. James K, Clark K, Cropanzano R. Positive and negative creativity in groups, institutions, and organizations: a model and theoretical extension. Creativity Res J. 1999;12(3):211–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Lee S, Dow G. Malevolent creativity: does personality influence malicious divergent thinking? Creativity Res J. 2011;23(2):73–82.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Harris DJ, Reiter-Palmon R. Fast and furious: the influence of implicit aggression, premeditation, and provoking situations on malevolent creativity. Psychol Aesthet Creativity Arts. 2015;9(1):54.

  39. Rhodes M. An analysis of creativity. Phi delta Kappan. 1961;42(7):305–10.

    Google Scholar 

  40. Glăveanu VP. Rewriting the Language of Creativity: the Five A’s Framework. Rev Gen Psychol. 2013;17:69.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Battistich V, Hom A. The relationship between students’ sense of their school as a community and their involvement in problem behaviors. Am J Public Health. 1997;87(12):1997–2001.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  42. Prati G, Albanesi C, Cicognani E. The relationship between sense of community in the school and students’ aggressive behavior: a multilevel analysis. School Psychol Q. 2018;33(4):512–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Tuan YF. Topophilia: a study of environmental perception. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall; 1974.

    Google Scholar 

  44. Tuan YF. Landscapes of fear. University of Minnesota Press; 2013.

    Google Scholar 

  45. Hummon DM. Community attachment. In: Altman I, Low SM, editors. Place attachment. New York, NY: Springer; 1992. pp. 253–78.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  46. McCreanor T, Penney L, Jensen V, Witten K, Kearns R, Barnes HM. This is like my comfort zone’: senses of place and belonging within Oruāmo/Beachhaven, New Zealand. NZ Geogr. 2006;62(3):196–207.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Moore J. Placing home in context. J Environ Psychol. 2000;20(3):207–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Modly AR. Geography of fear: understanding students’ sense of place. Chrestomathy. 2009;8:115–46.

    Google Scholar 

  49. Bandura A. Exercise of human agency through collective efficacy. Curr Dir Psychol Sci. 2000;9(3):75–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Alagarsamy S, Mehrolia S, Mathew J. Fear of COVID-19, workplace phobia, workplace deviance and perceived organizational support: a moderated mediation model. Stress Health. 2024;40(1):e3289.

  51. Skår M. Forest dear and forest fear: Dwellers’ relationships to their neighbourhood forest. Landsc Urban Plann. 2010;98(2):110–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Coble TG, Selin SW, Erickson BB. Hiking alone: understanding fear, negotiation strategies and leisure experience. J Leisure Res. 2003;35(1):1–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. Van Andel J. Places children like, dislike, and fear. Children’s Environ Q. 1990;7(1):24–31.

  54. Clark K, James K. Justice and positive and negative creativity. Creativity Res J. 1999;12(4):311–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. Stokols D, Clitheroe C, Zmuidzinas M. Qualities of work environments that promote perceived support for creativity. Creativity Res J. 2002;14(2):137–47.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  56. Hashemnezhad H, Heidari AA, Mohammad Hoseini P. Sense of place and place attachment. Int J Archit Urban Dev. 2013;3(1):5–12.

  57. Xu Y, Wang Q, Zhang D, Lin P. The influence of sense of place on elementary school students’ creativity during the COVID-19 pandemic: the mediating and buffering effects of psychological resilience. Front Psychol. 2022;13:1003245.

  58. Evans GW, Stecker R. Motivational consequences of environmental stress. J Environ Psychol. 2004;24(2):143–65.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  59. Kidger J, Araya R, Donovan J, Gunnell D. The effect of the school environment on the emotional health of adolescents: a systematic review. Pediatrics. 2012;129(5):925–49.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  60. Cohen JS, Smerdon BA. Tightening the dropout tourniquet: easing the transition from middle to high school. Prev Sch Fail. 2009;53(3):177–84.

  61. Cross D, Shaw T, Hearn L, Epstein M, Monks H, Lester L, et al. Australian covert bullying prevalence study. 2009.

  62. Lester L, Cross D. The relationship between school climate and mental and emotional wellbeing over the transition from primary to secondary school. Psychol Well-Being. 2015;5:9.

  63. Skinner EA, Zimmer-Gembeck MJ. The development of coping. Ann Rev Psychol. 2007;58:119–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  64. Endler NS, Parker JDA. Multidimensional assessment of coping: a critical evaluation. J Personal Soc Psychol. 1990;58:844–54.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  65. Endler NS, Parker JDA. Assessment of multidimensional coping: Task, emotions, and avoidance strategies. Psychol Assess. 1994;6:50–60.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  66. Wright M, Banerjee R, Hoek W, et al. Depression and social anxiety in children: Differential links with coping strategies. J Abnorm Child Psychol. 2010;38:405–19.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  67. Petrou P, van der Linden D, Salcescu OC. When breaking the rules relates to creativity: the role of creative problem-solving demands and organizational constraints. J Creative Behav. 2020;54(1):184–95.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  68. Weidong J, Guangyao L, Hua T, Ruohong C, Qian Y. Relationship between resilience and social support, coping style of children in middle school. Eur Psychiatry. 2013;28(S1):1–1.

    Google Scholar 

  69. Zhang W, Liang Q, Qiao X, Hao N. Unfairness brings malice: malevolent creativity is modulated by perceived unfairness of others. Think Skills Creativity. 2024;101586.

  70. Lazarus RS. Coping theory and research: past, present, and future. Psychosom Med. 1993;55(3):234.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  71. Siu OL, Lo BCY, Ng TK, et al. Social support and student outcomes: the mediating roles of psychological capital, study engagement, and problem-focused coping. Curr Psychol. 2023;42:2670–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  72. Rettie H, Daniels J. Coping and tolerance of uncertainty: predictors and mediators of mental health during the COVID-19 pandemic. Am Psychol. 2021;76(3):427.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  73. García F, Barraza-Peña C, Wlodarczyk A, Alvear-Carrasco M, Reyes A. Psychometric properties of the Brief-COPE for the evaluation of coping strategies in the Chilean population. Psicol Reflex Crit. 2018;31(22).

  74. Parikh R, Sapru M, Krishna M, et al. It is like a mind attack: stress and coping among urban school-going adolescents in India. BMC Psychol. 2019;7:31.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  75. Fraser BJ. Learning environment in curriculum evaluation: a review. Evaluation Educ. 1981;5(1):1–93.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  76. Rovai AP, Wighting MJ, Lucking R. The classroom and school community inventory: development, refinement, and validation of a self-report measure for educational research. Internet High Educ. 2004;7(4):263–80.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  77. Montoro JP, Kilday JE, Rivas-Drake D, et al. Coping with discrimination from peers and adults: implications for adolescents’ school belonging. J Youth Adolesc. 2021;50:126–43.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  78. Newman A, Nielsen I, Smyth R, Hirst G. Mediating role of psychological capital in the relationship between social support and wellbeing of refugees. Int Migration. 2018;56:117–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  79. Ng TK, Wang KWC, Chan W. Acculturation and cross-cultural adaptation: the moderating role of social support. Int J Intercultural Relations. 2017;59:19–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  80. Gao Y, Zhang W, Deng Q, et al. Shyness and social adjustment in Chinese college students: a moderated mediation of alienation and school connectedness. Curr Psychol. 2022;41:1006–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  81. Carver CS, Scheier MF, Weintraub JK. Assessing coping strategies: a theoretically based approach. J Personal Soc Psychol. 1989;56(2):267.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  82. Eschenbeck H, Kohlmann CW, Lohaus A. Gender differences in coping strategies in children and adolescents. J Individ Differ. 2007;28(1):18–26. 

  83. Modecki KL, Zimmer-Gembeck MJ, Guerra N. Emotion regulation, coping, and decision making: three linked skills for preventing externalizing problems in adolescence. Child Dev. 2017;88:417–26.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  84. Undheim AM, Sund AM. Associations of stressful life events with coping strategies of 12–15-year-old Norwegian adolescents. Eur Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 2017;26:993–1003.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  85. Cheng R, Lu K, Hao N. The effects of anger on different forms of malevolent creative performance. J Psychol Sci. 2021;44:1336–45.

    Google Scholar 

  86. Gao Z, Qiao X, Xu X, Hao N. Darkness within: the internal mechanism between dark triad and malevolent creativity. J Intell. 2022b;10:119.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  87. Johnson KJ, Zaback M, Tokuno CD, Carpenter MG, Adkin AL. Exploring the relationship between threat-related changes in anxiety, attention focus, and postural control. Psychological Research. 2019;83:445–58.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  88. Brislin RW. Back-translation for cross-cultural research. J Cross-Cult Psychol. 1970;1(3):185–216.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  89. Riley K. Agency and belonging: what transformative actions can schools take to help create a sense of place and belonging? Educational Child Psychol. 2019;36(4):91–103.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  90. Xie Yaning. A preliminary study on the reliability and validity of the simplified coping Style Questionnaire. Chin J Clin Psychol. 1998;6(2):114–5.

    Google Scholar 

  91. Podsakoff PM, MacKenzie SB, Lee JY, Podsakoff NP. Common method biases in behavioral research: a critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. J Appl Psychol. 2003;88(5):879.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  92. Gong Z, Liu C. Malevolent creativity: Concept, measurement, influence factors and future research. J Psychol Sci. 2016;39:63–8.

    Google Scholar 

  93. Astor RA, Benbenishty R, Estrada JN. School violence and theoretically atypical schools: the principal’s centrality in orchestrating safe schools. Am Educ Res J. 2009;46(2):423–61.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  94. O’Brien DT, Farrell C, Welsh BC. Looking through broken windows: the impact of neighborhood disorder on aggression and fear of crime is an artifact of research design. Annual Rev Criminol. 2019;2(1):53–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  95. Sui Y, Ettema D, Helbich M. Longitudinal associations between the neighborhood social, natural, and built environment and mental health: a systematic review with meta-analyses. Health Place. 2022;77:102893.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  96. Horváth LO, Balint M, Ferenczi-Dallos G, Farkas L, Gadoros J, Gyori D, Kereszteny A, Meszaros G, Szentivanyi D, Velo S, Sarchiapone M, Carli V, Wasserman C, Hoven CW, Wasserman D, Balazs J. Direct self-injurious behavior. D-SIB) and Life Events among Vocational School and H; 2018.

    Google Scholar 

  97. Wen M, Hawkley LC, Cacioppo JT. Objective and perceived neighborhood environment, individual SES and psychosocial factors, and self-rated health: an analysis of older adults in Cook County, Illinois. Soc Sci Med. 2006;63(10):2575–90.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  98. Starcke K, Wiesen C, Trotzke P, Brand M. Effects of acute laboratory stress on executive functions. Front Psychol. 2016;7:461.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  99. Jiang C, Rau PP. The detrimental effect of acute stress on response inhibition when exposed to acute stress: an event-related potential analysis. NeuroReport. 2017;28(14):922–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  100. Moll J, de Oliveira-Souza R. Moral judgments, emotions and the utilitarian brain. Trends Cogn Sci. 2007;11(8):319–21.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  101. Zhu L, Jenkins AC, Set E, Scabini D, Knight RT, Hsu M. Damage to dorsolateral prefrontal cortex affects tradeoffs between honesty and self-interest. Nat Neurosci. 2014;17(10):1319–21.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  102. Lombardi E, Traficante D, Bettoni R, Offredi I, Giorgetti M, Vernice M. The impact of school climate on well-being experience and school engagement: a study with high-school students. Front Psychol. 2019;10:482084.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  103. Morinaj J, Hascher T. School alienation and student well-being: a cross-lagged longitudinal analysis. Eur J Psychol Educ. 2019;34:273–94.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  104. Dweck CS. Mindset: the new psychology of success. New York, NY: Random House; 2006.

    Google Scholar 

  105. Hernández-Barco M, Cañada-Cañada F, Corbacho-Cuello I, et al. An exploratory study interrelating emotion, self-efficacy, and multiple intelligence of prospective science teachers. Frontiers in education. Volume 6. Frontiers Media SA; 2021. p. 604791.

    Google Scholar 

  106. Schunk DH, Zimmerman BJ. Competence and control beliefs: distinguishing the means and ends. In: Alexander PA, Winne PH, editors. Handbook of educational psychology. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum; 2006. pp. 349–67.

    Google Scholar 

  107. Kamel OM. Academic overload, self-efficacy, and perceived social support as predictors of academic adjustment among first-year university students. Psycho-Educational Res Reviews. 2018;7(1):86–93.

    Google Scholar 

  108. Canning EA, Ozier E, Williams HE, AlRasheed R, Murphy MC. Professors who signal a fixed mindset about ability undermine women’s performance in STEM. Social Psychological and Personality Science; 2021.

    Google Scholar 

  109. Thompson MD, Draper BS, Kreitler CM. The relationship between stress, coping strategies, and problem-solving skills among college students. Inquiries J. 2022;14(1).

  110. Zhao Y. The impact of college students’ academic stress on student satisfaction from a typological perspective: a latent profile analysis based on academic self-efficacy and positive coping strategies for stress. Behav Sci. 2024;14(4):311.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  111. Santarnecchi E, Sprugnoli G, Tatti E, Mencarelli L, Neri F, Momi D, Rossi A. Brain functional connectivity correlates of coping styles. Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci. 2018;18(3):495–508.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  112. Huang H, Ding Y, Zhang Y, Peng Q, Liang Y, Wan X, Chen C. Resilience and positive coping style affect the relationship between maladaptive perfectionism and academic procrastination among Chinese undergraduate nursing students. Front Psychol. 2022;13:1014951.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  113. Akbar Z, Aisyawati MS. Coping strategy, social support, and psychological distress among university students in Jakarta, Indonesia during the COVID-19 pandemic. Front Psychol. 2021;12:694122.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  114. Xu C, Wang Q. The relationships of creative coping and college students’ achievement emotions and academic stress: the mediating role of psychological capital. J Intell. 2022;10(4):126.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  115. Cheung S, Xie X, Huang C. Mind over Matter: Mindfulness, Income, Resilience, and Life Quality of Vocational High School students in China. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020;17(16):Article16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  116. Johari FS. Work-related stress and coping strategies: a systematic review. Front Psychol. 2020.

  117. Pérez-Chacón M, Borda-Mas M, Chacón A, Avargues-Navarro ML. Personality traits and coping strategies as psychological factors associated with health-related quality of life in highly sensitive persons. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2023;20(9):5644.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  118. Baas M, Roskes M, Sligte D, Nijstad BA, De Dreu CK. Personality and creativity: the dual pathway to creativity model and a research agenda. Soc Pers Psychol Compass. 2013;7(10):732–48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  119. Ng TW, Feldman DC. Employee voice behavior: a meta-analytic test of the conservation of resources framework. J Organizational Behav. 2012;33(2):216–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  120. Kals E, Müller MM. Emotions and environment. In: Clayton SD, editor. The Oxford handbook of environmental and conservation psychology. Oxford University Press; 2012. pp. 128–47.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  121. De la Fuente J, Paoloni P, Kauffman D, Yilmaz Soylu M, Sander P, Zapata L. Big five, self-regulation, and coping strategies as predictors of achievement emotions in undergraduate students. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020;17(10):3602.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  122. Bonilla RP, Armadans I, Anguera MT. June). Conflict mediation, emotional regulation and coping strategies in the educational field. Front Educ. 2020;5:50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  123. Ceballos NA, Watt TT. The influence of adverse childhood experiences on malevolent creativity in young adulthood. Behav Sci. 2023;13(12):961.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  124. Zhou J, Zhang J, Huang Y, Zhao J, Xiao Y, Zhang S, Li Y, Zhao T, Ma J, Ou N, Wang S, Ou Q, Luo J. Associations between coping styles, gender, their interaction and non-suicidal self-injury among middle school students in rural west China: a multicentre cross-sectional study. Front Psychiatry. 2022;13:1003245.

  125. Ruggiero RN, Rossignoli MT, Marques DB, de Sousa BM, Romcy-Pereira RN, Lopes-Aguiar C, Leite JP. Neuromodulation of hippocampal-prefrontal cortical synaptic plasticity and functional connectivity: implications for neuropsychiatric disorders. Front Cell Neurosci. 2021;15:732360.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  126. Ding K, He R, Wang X, Chen Q, Kenett YN. Recognizing ideas generated in a creative task: the roles of the hippocampus and medial prefrontal cortex in facilitating self-generated learning. Cereb Cortex. 2024;34(5):bhae219.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  127. Theodoratou M, Argyrides M. Neuropsychological insights into coping strategies: integrating theory and practice in clinical and therapeutic contexts. Psychiatry Int. 2024;5(1):53–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  128. Easdale-Cheele T, Parlatini V, Cortese S, Bellato A. A narrative review of the efficacy of interventions for emotional dysregulation, and underlying bio–psycho–social factors. Brain Sci. 2024;14(5):453.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  129. Jonason PK, Davis MD. A gender role view of the Dark Triad traits. Pers Individ Dif. 2018;125:102–5.

  130. Wang J, Zhang H, Tian D, An Y, Wang Y, Zheng Y. Examining the mediating effect of real and cyber self-control on cyberbullying and health risk behaviors among secondary vocational students in China: a cross-sectional study. BMC Public Health. 2024;24(1):2926.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  131. Baer J, Kaufman JC. Gender differences in creativity. J Creative Behav. 2008;42(2):75–105.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  132. Ogg J, Anthony CJ, Wendel M. Student-teacher conflict or student-school conflict? Exploring bidirectional relationships between externalizing behavior and teacher conflict. Early Child Res Q. 2024;67:44–54.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  133. Guszkowska M, Zagórska-Pachucka A, Kuk A, Skwarek K. Gender as a factor in differentiating strategies of coping with stress used by physical education students. Health Psychol Rep. 2016;4(3):237–45.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  134. Cholankeril R, Xiang E, Badr H. Gender differences in coping and psychological adaptation during the COVID-19 pandemic. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2023;20(2):993.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  135. Xia F, Liu M, Liu T. The role of coping styles in mediating the Dark Triad and bullying: an analysis of gender difference. Behav Sci. 2023;13(7):Article7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  136. Rodríguez-Naranjo C, Caño A. Daily stress and coping styles in adolescent hopelessness depression: moderating effects of gender. Pers Indiv Differ. 2016;97:109–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  137. Al-Bahrani M, Aldhafri S, Alkharusi H, Kazem A, Alzubiadi A. Age and gender differences in coping style across various problems: Omani adolescents’ perspective. J Adolesc. 2013;36(2):303–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  138. Li W, et al. Childhood trauma and malevolent creativity in Chinese college students: moderated mediation by psychological resilience and aggression. J Intell. 2022;10(4):97.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  139. Çevik Ö, ATA, R., Çevik M. Bullying and victimization among Turkish adolescents: the predictive role of problematic internet use, school burnout and parental monitoring. Educ Inform Technol. 2021;26(3):3203–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  140. Esperanza, M., Vacas, C., Rodríguez, N. C., Delia, A., Piñero, C., Hernández, J., & Ruiz, B. R. (2012). The Student Perspective in School Conflicts.

  141. Li J-B, Wang Y-S, Sun Y, Liang Y, Dou K. Individual and interpersonal correlates of changes in college adaptation among Chinese freshmen: A longitudinal study. Curr Psychol. 2023;42(4):3349–61.

  142. Wang L-J, Wang W-C, Gu H-G, Zhan P-D, Yang X-X, Barnard J. Relationships among teacher support, peer conflict resolution, and school emotional experiences in adolescents from Shanghai. Soc Behav Pers. 2014;42(1):99–113.

  143. Ennis E, Bunting BP. Family burden, family health and personal mental health. BMC Public Health. 2013;13(1):255.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  144. Freitas DF, Mendonça M, Wolke D, Marturano EM, Fontaine AM, Coimbra S. Resilience in the face of peer victimization and perceived discrimination: the role of individual and familial factors. Volume 125. Child Abuse & Neglect; 2022. p. 105492.

    Google Scholar 

  145. Kim KH. Can Only Intelligent People Be Creative? A Meta - Analysis. J Sec Gift Educ. 2005;16(2-3):57–66.

  146. Lareau A. Unequal Childhoods: Class, Race, and Family Life. In: Inequality in the 21st Century. Routledge; 2018.

Download references

Acknowledgements

We would like to express our sincere gratitude to all participants in this study.

Funding

This study was funded by The National Social Science Fund of China (BAA180017).

Author information

Author notes

  1. Jianzhen Zhang, Jiaxin Lu and Jiahao Ge contributed equally to this work.

Authors and Affiliations

  1. College of Geography and Environmental Sciences, Zhejiang Normal University, Jinhua, China

    Jianzhen Zhang & Jiaxin Lu

  2. College of Education, Zhejiang Normal University, Yingbin Avenue, Jinhua, China

    Jiahao Ge, Susu Li & Xiaoyu Liang

Authors
  1. Jianzhen Zhang
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jiaxin Lu
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Jiahao Ge
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Susu Li
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Xiaoyu Liang
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

Funding acquisition, research design and manuscript writing were done by J.Z; conceptualization, data analysis, manuscript writing, methods and visualization were carried out by J.L; database organization, manuscript writing and review were performed by J.G; manuscript writing and review were conducted by S.L; manuscript writing, review and editing were completed by X.L. All authors reviewed the manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Xiaoyu Liang.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate

Ethics approval was obtained from the Ethics Committee of Zhejiang Normal University. All methods were carried out in accordance with relevant guidelines and regulations. The survey informed consent was obtained from all participants included in the study before the survey.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License, which permits any non-commercial use, sharing, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if you modified the licensed material. You do not have permission under this licence to share adapted material derived from this article or parts of it. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Zhang, J., Lu, J., Ge, J. et al. Managing malice in negative environments: the mediating effect of coping styles on the relationship between negative sense of place and malevolent creativity among Chinese high school students. BMC Psychol 13, 35 (2025). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40359-024-02333-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s40359-024-02333-0

Keywords

BMC Psychology

ISSN: 2050-7283

Contact us