Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40949343›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in psychology2025

Classroom injustice and university students' cyberloafing: the mediating role of neutralization techniques.

Zhiyong Han, Zhiyong Yang, Ziwei Huang

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Zhiyong HanSchool of Business Administration, Anhui University of Finance and Economics, Bengbu, China.
Zhiyong YangSchool of Business Administration, Anhui University of Finance and Economics, Bengbu, China.
Ziwei HuangSchool of Business Administration, Anhui University of Finance and Economics, Bengbu, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Cyberloafing in the classroom has been linked to adverse educational outcomes, undermining students' learning and frustrating instructors. From a neutralization perspective, students may justify deviant acts when they perceive injustice. This study examined how perceived classroom justice relates to students' intention to cyberloaf and tested the mediating roles of two neutralization techniques: condemning the condemners and appealing to higher loyalties. Methods: We conducted a questionnaire study with 310 university students recruited from multiple universities in the central and eastern regions of China. Measures assessed perceived classroom justice, intention to cyberloaf, and the neutralization techniques of condemning the condemners and appealing to higher loyalties. We tested a mediation model linking classroom justice to cyberloafing intention through these neutralization techniques. Results: Perceived classroom justice was negatively associated with students' intention to cyberloaf. Classroom justice also negatively predicted condemning the condemners and appealing to higher loyalties. Furthermore, both neutralization techniques mediated the relationship between classroom justice and intention to cyberloaf. Discussion: Findings suggest that higher levels of classroom justice may deter students' cyberloafing partly by weakening justificatory neutralizations. These results highlight the importance of enhancing classroom justice to reduce cyberloafing behaviors. Educators are encouraged to adopt strategies that strengthen perceptions of fairness in classroom practices.

Indexed as

appeal to higher loyaltiesclassroom justicecondemnation of condemnerscyberloafingneutralization

Identifiers

PMID40949343
PMCPMC12426119

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.