Phubbing is the act of snubbing someone by focusing on a mobile phone instead of engaging in face-to-face interaction.
This behavior can negatively impact relationships by reducing the quality of communication and intimacy between partners.
Relational aggression is a form of indirect aggression intended to harm others through manipulation of social relationships. Examples include spreading rumors, social exclusion, and silent treatment.
In romantic relationships, it may manifest as withholding affection, flirting with others to provoke jealousy, or sharing private information to embarrass a partner.
Ying, L., Ren, L., Wang, X., He, J., Yang, X., & Zhang, G. (2025). Partner phubbing and relational aggression in romantic relationships among young adults in China: The roles of social support and gender. Frontiers in Psychology, 15, 1470175. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1470175
Key Points
- Partner phubbing was positively associated with relational aggression in romantic relationships for both males and females.
- Actual support and support discrepancy partially mediated the relationship between partner phubbing and relational aggression among all participants.
- For females, actual support and support discrepancy partially mediated the relationship between partner phubbing and relational aggression, but were not significant mediators for males.
- Social support may play a significant role between partner phubbing and relational aggression in females only.
Rationale
Romantic relationships play a crucial role in late adolescence and early adulthood, impacting self-identity, academic achievement, sexuality, and future planning (Furman & Buhrmester, 1992).
Recent studies have focused on conflicts and aggression within young adults’ romantic relationships (e.g., Deans & Bhogal, 2019; Luetke et al., 2020; Voulgaridou & Kokkinos, 2023). However, little is known about relational aggression in Chinese young adults’ romantic relationships.
Relational aggression, defined as harm through deliberate manipulation of social standing and relationships (Steinberg et al., 2001), has been linked to mental health issues and poor interpersonal relationships (Bagner et al., 2007; Linder et al., 2002).
In the digital age, partner phubbing may be an important factor affecting relational aggression among young adults, but the mechanism behind this relationship remains unclear.
This study aims to fill this gap by examining the association between partner phubbing and relational aggression, the mediating role of social support, and gender differences in these relationships among young Chinese adults.
Method
Procedure
Cross-sectional online survey design
- Participants read an informed consent document
- Completed anonymous survey on Wen Juan Xing platform
- Received RMB 5 compensation via Alipay
Sample
772 unmarried young adults in China (34.97% male)
- Age range: 18-35 years old
- Currently involved in a romantic relationship
- Daily smartphone users
Measures
- Partner Phubbing Scale (9 items)
- Significant Others Scale (10 items, measuring actual and ideal support)
- Dating Relational Aggression Subscale (10 items)
Statistical measures
- Descriptive statistics and correlation analyses
- Parallel multiple mediation model using PROCESS macro
- Bootstrapping analysis (5,000 resamples, 95% CI)
Results
H1: Partner phubbing is positively associated with relational aggression in romantic relationships.
Results: Supported for both males (r = 0.28, p < 0.001) and females (r = 0.30, p < 0.001).
H2: Actual social support mediates the relationship between partner phubbing and relational aggression.
Results: Partially supported. Actual support partially mediated the relationship for all participants (B = 0.04, SE = 0.01, 95% CI [0.01, 0.07]), accounting for 12.7% of the total effect.
H3: The discrepancy between actual and ideal support mediates the association between partner phubbing and relational aggression.
Results: Partially supported. Support discrepancy partially mediated the relationship for all participants (B = −0.01, SE = 0.01, 95% CI [−0.03, −0.01]), accounting for 4.3% of the total effect.
H4: There are differences in the relationship among partner phubbing, social support, and relational aggression between genders.
Results: Supported. For females, actual support and support discrepancy partially mediated the relationship between partner phubbing and relational aggression. For males, no significant mediators were found.
Insight
This study provides valuable insights into the complex relationship between partner phubbing and relational aggression in romantic relationships among young Chinese adults.
The findings highlight the significant role of social support, particularly for females, in mediating this relationship.
By demonstrating that partner phubbing is positively associated with relational aggression for both genders, the study extends previous research on the negative impacts of phubbing behaviors in romantic relationships (e.g., McDaniel & Coyne, 2016; Wang et al., 2017).
The gender differences observed in the mediation model suggest that females may be more sensitive to partner phubbing and its effects on social support and relational aggression.
This aligns with previous research indicating that females are more likely to engage in relational aggression and use social support as a coping strategy (Goldstein et al., 2008; Cameron et al., 1996).
Future research could explore the underlying mechanisms of these gender differences, such as investigating the role of emotional intelligence, communication styles, or cultural factors in shaping responses to partner phubbing.
Implications
The findings of this study have several important implications for practitioners and policymakers working in the fields of relationship counseling, mental health, and digital wellbeing:
- Tailored interventions: Develop gender-specific interventions addressing partner phubbing in romantic relationships, with a particular focus on enhancing social support mechanisms for females.
- Digital awareness programs: Implement educational campaigns to raise awareness about the negative impacts of partner phubbing on relationship quality and mental health.
- Couples therapy techniques: Incorporate strategies to address phubbing behaviors and improve face-to-face communication skills in couples therapy sessions.
- Social support enhancement: Design programs to strengthen social support networks and teach effective support-seeking behaviors within romantic relationships.
- Gender-sensitive policies: Develop policies and guidelines for digital etiquette in relationships that take into account gender differences in response to phubbing behaviors.
- Preventive measures: Implement early intervention programs in schools and universities to promote healthy digital habits and relationship skills among young adults.
- Workplace initiatives: Encourage organizations to adopt policies that promote work-life balance and reduce the pressure to be constantly connected, which may contribute to phubbing behaviors.
Implementing these recommendations may face challenges such as resistance to changing established digital habits, cultural differences in relationship norms, and the need for specialized training for mental health professionals.
However, the potential benefits of improved relationship quality, reduced relational aggression, and enhanced well-being among young adults make these efforts worthwhile.
Strengths
This study had several methodological strengths, including:
- Large sample size (N = 772) providing good statistical power
- Use of validated measures for key constructs
- Examination of both actual support and support discrepancy
- Inclusion of gender differences in the analysis
- Application of advanced statistical techniques (parallel multiple mediation model, bootstrapping)
Limitations
This study also had several methodological limitations, including:
- Cross-sectional design limiting causal inferences
- Self-reported data potentially introducing reporting bias
- Limited generalizability due to the focus on Chinese young adults
- Lack of differentiation between relational aggression perpetration and victimization in the mediation model
- Exclusion of other potential mediators or moderators (e.g., personality traits, relationship satisfaction)
References
Primary reference
Ying, L., Ren, L., Wang, X., He, J., Yang, X., & Zhang, G. (2025). Partner phubbing and relational aggression in romantic relationships among young adults in China: The roles of social support and gender. Frontiers in Psychology, 15, 1470175. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1470175
Other references
Bagner, D. M., Storch, E. A., & Preston, A. S. (2007). Romantic relational aggression: What about gender?. Journal of Family Violence, 22, 19-24. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10896-006-9055-x
Cameron, R. P., Wells, J. D., & Hobfoll, S. E. (1996). Stress, Social Support and Coping in Pregnancy. Journal of Health Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1177/135910539600100204
Deans, H., & Bhogal, M. S. (2019). Perpetrating cyber dating abuse: A brief report on the role of aggression, romantic jealousy and gender. Current Psychology, 38, 1077-1082. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-017-9715-4
Furman, W., & Buhrmester, D. (1992). Age and Sex Differences in Perceptions of Networks of Personal Relationships. Child Development, 63(1), 103-115. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.1992.tb03599.x
Goldstein, S. E., Chesir-Teran, D., & McFaul, A. (2008). Profiles and correlates of relational aggression in young adults’ romantic relationships. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 37, 251-265. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-007-9255-6
Linder, J. R., Crick, N. R., & Collins, W. A. (2002). Relational Aggression and Victimization in Young Adults’ Romantic Relationships: Associations with Perceptions of Parent, Peer, and Romantic Relationship Quality. Social Development, 11(1), 69-86. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9507.00187
Luetke, M., Hensel, D., Herbenick, D., & Rosenberg, M. (2020). Romantic relationship conflict due to the COVID-19 pandemic and changes in intimate and sexual behaviors in a nationally representative sample of American adults. Journal of sex & marital therapy, 46(8), 747-762. https://doi.org/10.1080/0092623X.2020.1810185
McDaniel, B. T., & Coyne, S. M. (2016). “Technoference”: The interference of technology in couple relationships and implications for women’s personal and relational well-being. Psychology of popular media culture, 5(1), 85.
Steinberg, L. D., Reyome, N., & Bjornsen, C. A. (2001). Study guide for use with adolescence. New York: McGraw-Hill Higher Education.
Voulgaridou, I., & Kokkinos, C. M. (2023). Relational aggression in adolescents across different cultural contexts: a systematic review of the literature. Adolescent research review, 8(4), 457-480. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40894-023-00207-x
Wang, X., Xie, X., Wang, Y., Wang, P., & Lei, L. (2017). Partner phubbing and depression among married Chinese adults: The roles of relationship satisfaction and relationship length. Personality and Individual Differences, 110, 12-17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2017.01.014
Socratic Questions
- How might cultural factors specific to China influence the relationship between partner phubbing and relational aggression? How might these findings differ in other cultural contexts?
- The study found gender differences in the mediating role of social support. What other factors might contribute to these differences, and how could they be explored in future research?
- How might the age range of participants (18-35) affect the results? Would you expect to see different patterns in older or younger populations?
- The study used self-reported measures. What are the potential limitations of this approach, and how might alternative methods of data collection address these limitations?
- How might the findings of this study be applied to develop interventions for reducing relational aggression in romantic relationships? What challenges might arise in implementing such interventions?
- The study focused on unmarried young adults. How might the dynamics of partner phubbing and relational aggression differ in married couples or long-term relationships?
- What ethical considerations should be taken into account when conducting research on sensitive topics like relational aggression in romantic relationships?
- How might the prevalence of social media and digital communication technologies influence the relationship between partner phubbing and relational aggression? How could future research address this aspect?
- The study found that support discrepancy played a role in mediating the relationship between partner phubbing and relational aggression. How might this concept be applied to other areas of relationship research?
- Given the cross-sectional nature of this study, what longitudinal research designs could be proposed to further explore the causal relationships between partner phubbing, social support, and relational aggression?
