Skip to main content
GLOB5-min read

Parental migration and Chinese adolescents' friendship networks in school

By Yuanfei Li, Cheng Cheng, Glenn Deane, Zai Liang

#Left-Behind Children#Peer Stigma#Migration#Social Networks#Homophily#Exclusion

Section 1: Analysis & Insights

Executive Summary​

Thesis: Being a "Left-Behind Child" (parents migrated for work) is a Stigma. It causes peer rejection. Surprisingly, it causes rejection even from other left-behind children. The study shows that the disadvantage is not just "lack of parental supervision" but active Social Exclusion in the classroom.

Unique Contribution: It debunks the myth that these kids are friendless because they are "bad" or "dumb" (their grades/behavior are average). They are friendless because of the Label. It also reveals that Boys suffer more exclusion than girls (because boys need large networks, while girls rely on dyadic/small groups).

Target Outcome: A child who understands that their social isolation is a systemic stigma issue, not a personal flaw, and a parent (or guardian) who actively facilitates social connection to break the "In-Group Avoidance."

Chapter Breakdown​

  • The Stigma: Left-behind status as a mark.
  • The Network: Measuring "In-degree" (popularity) vs "Out-degree" (effort).
  • The Finding: Left-behind kids try to make friends (Out-degree) but are rejected (In-degree), even by each other.
  • The Gender Split: Why boys lose more status.

Nuanced Main Topics​

"In-Group Avoidance"​

This is the saddest finding. You would expect Left-Behind kids to stick together (Homophily). They don't. They avoid each other. This is Internalized Stigma. "I don't want to hang out with him because he reminds me of my own low status." This prevents them from forming a support network.

Diagnosing the "Popularity Gap"​

Left-behind kids get fewer friend nominations. This isn't because they are anti-social. They nominate others at normal rates. The gap is purely "Incoming." This proves they are being actively filtered out by the peer hierarchy.

Gendered Impact​

  • Boys: Need large, public networks for status. The stigma hits them hard.
  • Girls: Rely on 1-2 close friends. They are insulated from the broader "popularity" hit. This means interventions need to target Boys' detailed social integration more aggressively.

Section 2: Actionable Framework

The Checklist​

  • The "Stigma" Talk: validate that it's hard to be "different" (parent away).
  • Propinquity Push: Create opportunities for connection (invite friends over).
  • Boys' Support: Is the boy withdrawing? (High risk).
  • Guardian Check: Is the grandparent facilitating social life or just feeding them?

Implementation Steps (Process)​

Process 1: Stigma Inoculation​

Purpose: Prevent internalization.

Steps:

  1. Reframe: "Your parents are heroes working for the family." (Turn shame into pride).
  2. Identify: "Do you feel kids treat you different?"
  3. Connect: Find a mentor/cousin who acts as a social bridge.

Process 2: Breaking In-Group Avoidance​

Purpose: Build a squad.

Steps:

  1. Notice: "I see [Friend X] also has parents in the city."
  2. Encourage: "Maybe you guys understand each other better than anyone else."
  3. Facilitate: Set up a low-pressure hang-out (gaming/sports) where the "Stigma" isn't the focus.

Process 3: The "Guardian" Activation​

Purpose: Ensure social logistics.

Steps:

  1. Instruct: Tell the Grandparent/Guardian: "His social life is as important as his food."
  2. Resource: Give them budget for hosting friends (snacks/games).
  3. Monitor: Ask "Who did he play with?" in the weekly call.

Common Pitfalls​

  • Thinking it's "Behavior": Punishing the child for being lonely/withdrawn when they are actually being excluded.
  • Ignoring the Boys: Assuming boys are "tough" and don't need help with friends.
  • The "Study Harder" Trap: Telling them grades will fix social isolation. (They won't).