current issues in personality psychology · 3

doi: https://doi.org/10.5114/cipp/162007

original article

Factors affecting loneliness among left-behind

children

Luot V. Nguyen id 1 · A,B,C,D,E,F, Thu T. A. Nguyen1 · C,D,E,F, Linh T. Trinh id 1 · A,D,E,F,

Hanh H. V. Nguyen2 · E,F

1: University of Social Sciences and Humanities, Vietnam National University, Hanoi, Vietnam
2: Vientiane International School, Vientiane, Laos

background givers and resilience factors of affect control (RAC), family

In Vietnam, research on the impact of parental migra- support (RFS) and help-seeking (RHS) are protective fac-
tion on left-behind children (LBC) has discussed various tors for loneliness of LBC, with regression coefficient of
dimensions of the subject such as subjective well-being, –.27, –.18, –.11, –.11 and –.09 respectively.
emotional states, social skills, self-esteem and nutrition of
LBC. However, there are still gaps in studies on loneliness conclusions
among LBC in Vietnam. The study aims to explore the sta- Perceived social support from friends, care-giving attach-
tus of loneliness in LBC, including associated protective ment and resilience factors of RAC, RFS, and RHS are pro-
and risk factors, to make suggestions on preventive mea- tective factors for LBC against loneliness. Parents, teachers
sures against LBC’s loneliness. and guardians are encouraged to have a close connection
with LBC, provide adequate care giving; and create a sup-
participants and procedure portive environment for LBC in pursuing healthy peer re-
The conveniently selected sample includes 439 LBC in lationships and train/improve children’s skills to strength-
4 Vietnamese provinces: Thai Nguyen, Bac Ninh, Thai Binh en their resilience.
and Nghe An. The mean age is 12.73 (SD = 1.68). Female
children account for 47.80%. The Children’s Loneliness key words
Scale was employed in the study. social support; resilience; loneliness; left-behind children;
caregivers-child attachments
results
The total loneliness score of LBC is 28.62 (SD = 9.40), 95%
CI: 27.75-29.48. Perceived social support from friends, care-

corresponding author – Luot V. Nguyen, Ph.D., University of Social Sciences and Humanities, Vietnam National
University, 336 Nguyen Trai, Thanh Xuan, 084 Hanoi, Vietnam, e-mail: [email protected]
authors’ contribution – A: Study design · B: Data collection · C: Statistical analysis · D: Data interpretation ·
E: Manuscript preparation · F: Literature search · G: Funds collection
to cite this article – Nguyen, L. V., Nguyen, T. T. A., Trinh, L. T., & Nguyen, H. H. V. (2023). Factors affecting loneliness
among left-behind children. Current Issues in Personality Psychology.
received 22.12.2021 · reviewed 30.10.2022 · accepted 08.03.2023 · published 17.04.2023
 Loneliness among left-behind children

Background theless, some research has shown the inverse (Faisal

& Turnip, 2019; Jiang et al., 2020). Furthermore, some
In developing countries, millions of parents migrate research indicates no difference in how boys and girls
to domestic urban areas or overseas to seek employ- experience loneliness (Wang et al., 2006). A number
ment. Many of them are forced to leave their children of studies have revealed that LBC with both parents
behind in their home town in the care of a  parent/ migrating or with the mother migrating report more
guardian (UNICEF, 2020). Overall, this trend has both feelings of loneliness than those with the father mi-
positive and negative consequences to the people left grating (Yue & Lu, 2015; Zhao et al., 2015). Loneliness
behind, especially children and the elderly. For the in LBC decreases with age and maturity (Chai et al.,
left-behind children (LBC), there has been substantial 2019; Wang et  al., 2006) and LBC endure emotional
evidence on the negative impacts of parental migra- more than social loneliness (Faisal & Turnip, 2019).
tion on socio-psychological aspects and academic Parent-child relationships and loneliness. Several
performance in children such as low self-esteem, researchers affirm that as compared to non-LBC, the
mental health problems, substance abuse, self-harm lack of parental companionship is one of the biggest
and school bullying (Chai et al., 2019; Fellmeth et al., challenges that LBC may encounter. Lengthy separa-
2018; Tang et al., 2018). As one of the negative impacts tion from parents often results in inadequate care and
of LBC, “loneliness” is the most common word when intimacy for LBC (Davison & Birch, 2001; Jia & Tian,
they report their emotional states (Jia & Tian, 2010). 2010; Ling et al., 2015). Accordingly, children who had
In recent years, researchers from many disciplines poor relationships with parents were at the highest
(e.g. psychology, education, sociology, anthropology) risk for severe loneliness. Inversely, positive fam-
have shown great interest in understanding LBC’s ily functioning and support from parents as well as
healthy growth and well-being (Zhao et  al., 2015). healthy connections between parents and their child
The resulting research has shown that LBC encoun- are likely protective factors against loneliness (Shara-
ter problems relating to loneliness more often than bi et al., 2012; Zhao et al., 2015). This is also strongly
non-LBC (Chen & Chan, 2016; Chen et al., 2017; Faisal confirmed and supported in a meta-analysis by Chai
& Turnip, 2019; Jia & Tian, 2010; Shen et al., 2015; Su et al. (2019) on loneliness among LBC. Additionally,
et al., 2012, 2017; Tang et al., 2019; Wang et al., 2020); a  number of studies have shown that a  strong par-
and long-term loneliness is extremely detrimental ent-child relationship plays a  role in regulating the
to the physical and mental health of LBC (Cacioppo relationship between loneliness and friendship qual-
et al., 2015; Chang et al., 2017; Lempinen et al., 2018; ity among LBC (Wang et al., 2020). Contrary to these
Qualter et al., 2015; Wang & Yao, 2019). Considering results, some research does not indicate a  statistical
the consequences that lengthy feelings of loneliness relationship between loneliness and parent-child in-
may cause, a growing amount of worldwide research teraction (Su et  al., 2012) or mother-child cohesion
has focused on exploring personal as well as envi- when either both parents or only the mother migrates
ronmental factors that contribute to the loneliness (Zhao et al., 2015). In the context of parental migra-
in children in general and LBC in particular. How- tion, this interaction and connection have been trans-
ever, according to Chai et  al. (2019), some research ferred to the daily caregiver of the child.
gaps still exist in this area of concern. According to Resilience and loneliness of LBC. Research on LBC
the aforementioned author, “it is difficult to tell what has suggested that psychological resilience can be
factors are more important for left-behind children”. a protective factor against loneliness (Ai & Hu, 2016).
Therefore, further research is necessary to explore the In other words, developing resilience can help the
predictability of these factors for the LBC’s loneliness child foster confidence and positivity, which are im-
in Vietnamese survey samples at this point of time. portant traits that reduce the risk of loneliness. A me-
ta-analysis by Chai et al. (2019), once again, confirms
the consistency of research results on the relationship
Literature review between resilience and loneliness in LBC. Recently,
Cao et al. (2022) showed that resilience can be a me-
Loneliness among left behind children. Research has diating factor that reduces negative impacts of loneli-
shown that LBC experience a higher level of loneli- ness related to internet addiction among LBC. Accord-
ness as compared to non-LBC. Jia and Tian (2010) es- ing to Hu and Gan (2008), the resilience of LBC can be
timated that LBC children had a score for loneliness generalized in two ways. First, it is finding the drive/
2.5 times higher than non-LBC and loneliness is the support from within, such as setting goals for oneself,
most common and significant experience among LBC regulating one’s own emotions or fostering positive
(Su et  al., 2012). There is a  difference between how thinking. Second, it is seeking support from external
male and female LBC endure the loneliness, although societal factors, such as from family, peers, teachers
these results are not consistent. A number of studies or trustworthy individuals. Specifically, LBC utilize
indicate that boys have a  higher level of loneliness 5 different types of resilience such as setting goals,
than girls (Chai et al., 2019; Zhao et al., 2015). Never- thinking positively, regulating emotions and seeking

2 current issues in personality psychology

 Luot V. Nguyen, Thu T. A. Nguyen, Linh T. Trinh, Hanh H. V. Nguyen

external support from others. Therefore, resilience little research on current situation and factors affecting
plays a role in protecting LBC against negative conse- loneliness in LBC in Vietnam. According to existing
quences of parental migration, helping them achieve research mentioned above, factors that have impacts
better adaptation in their studies and lives. on LBC’s loneliness have not been confirmed. There
Social support and loneliness of LBC. Previous re- is no clear significant difference in the importance of
search has demonstrated that, as compared to non- individual and contextual factors in predicting LBC’s
LBC, LBC reported lower levels of social support loneliness. This research was carried out on LBC in
(Lian &  Chen, 2016; Luo et  al., 2009). Along with Vietnam with the aim of assessing their loneliness
interpersonal relationships, social support is re- situation and identifying protective and risk factors.
garded as one of the two important predictive fac- In consideration of that, it recommended a number of
tors against a  child’s loneliness (Bowker &  Spencer, actions to reduce the risk of loneliness among LBC.
2010; Merz & Jak, 2013). Man et al. (2017) also found This research aims to answer the following ques-
that social support was negatively associated with tions: (1) What is the current situation of loneliness
the psychological problems of left-behind children. in LBC in Vietnam? (2) How do the factors of per-
LBC who have higher perceived social support are ceived social support, caregiver-child attachment and
reported to achieve a  lower score on the loneliness resilience affect loneliness among LBC?
scale than those who have low perception of social
support (Ai &  Hu, 2016). Chai et  al. (2019) pointed
out that social support serves as one of the most im- Participants and procedure
portant protective factors in predicting loneliness of
left-behind children. Based on the ecological theory Participants
by Bronfenbrenner (1979), through this research, we
suppose that in addition to exploring the child’s in- This is a  quantitative, cross-sectional study with
ternal factors (resilience) as well as external factors samples selected by the convenient sampling method.
derived from their closest relationships (parent-child The data were collected at the end of 2020 and begin-
relationship), it is necessary to look at the social sup- ning of 2021. At that time, Vietnam had not recorded
port that the child receives and how that relates to any COVID-19 infection in the community for 55 con-
their experiences of loneliness. secutive days. There were no COVID cases in the 4 lo-
cal provinces in which the survey was conducted.
The total number of surveyed samples includes
Present study 439 children (ages 10-17), mean age = 12.73 (SD = 1.68);
mean time of parental migration  =  6.44  years
In Vietnam, since Vietnam’s economic and politic re- (SD = 3.72); 210 females (47.8%), 229 males (52.20%);
forms called Doi Moi in Vietnam in 1986, the develop- 231 children with father migration (52.60%), 71 chil-
ment of industrial areas in urban cities has attracted dren with mother migration (16.20%), 137 children
a large number of migrating workers from rural areas (31.20%) with migration of both parents; 118 overseas
to seek employment (Dang, 2017). In 2019, domes- migrant parents (30.10%), 274 domestic migrant par-
tic migration for employment accounted for 8.6% of ents (69.90%). The survey was carried out in the four
Vietnam’s entire workforce (4.2 million people), with provinces of Thai Nguyen, Bac Ninh, Thai Binh and
the main reason being seeking or starting a new job. Nghe An in Vietnam. The site selection was based on
Women constitute 53.4% of the domestic working mi- the fact that the ratio of local people migrating for
grants (UNFPA, 2020). For international migration, employment in these sites is higher than in other re-
the number of international migrants from 2017 to gions in the north of Vietnam. Children from grade
2019 increased to 100,000 per year. For example, the 6 to 12 at secondary schools and high schools were
international workforce in 3 consecutive years (2017- questioned in this study.
2019) was 134,751, 142,860 and 147,387, respectively
(Dolab – MOLISA Vietnam, 2020). Many people in
this workforce are compelled to leave their children Measures
behind with their spouse or a  close relative, mostly
with a  grandparent(s) given their difficulties in ac- On the basis of the literature review, we determined
cessing public services such as education, medical that the dependent variable is loneliness and the three
care and affording expensive cost of living in the host independent variables are: perceived social support
area (Tran, 2015; Tran & Pham, 2015). (PSS); parental bonding and resilience.
Studies on LBC in Vietnam have mentioned various Loneliness of LBC. The Children’s Loneliness Scale
aspects such as nutrition, perception (Nguyen, 2016), (CLS) was first developed by Asher et al. (1984) and
behaviour problems (Nguyen, 2017), subjective well- has been utilized by many researchers on loneliness
being (Graham &  Jordan, 2011; Nguyen et  al., 2018) among LBC (Su, 2012; Zhao et  al., 2015). This scale
and self-esteem (Giang et al., 2019). However, there is includes 24 items, where 16 are focused on the child’s

3 3
 Loneliness among left-behind children

loneliness and 8 serve as buffer questions (not be- calculated as the sum of the items. Higher scores in-
ing scored). The scale depends on the child’s percep- dicate higher levels of attachment.
tions and feelings on their peer relationships. Items Resilience of children. In measuring the resilience
are graded from 1 to 5: 1 – not true at all; 2 – hardly of children, we employed the psychological resilience
ever true; 3 – sometimes true; 4 – true most of the time; scale, which was used in the study of Hu and Gan
5 – always true (example items: “I have lots of friends”, (2008) with left-behind children in China. It consists of
“I get along with other kids”). The scale score is the 27 items, which are rated on a five-point Likert scale,
sum of all scores of the items, with the minimum and rating from 1 (not true at all), 2 (mostly not true), 3 (half
maximum score of 16 and 80, respectively. The higher true, half not true), 4 (mostly true) to 5 (completely true).
the score is, the more loneliness the child experiences. The resilience of children is measured according to five
In Vietnam, CLS has been used by Nguyen et al. types of resilience: resilience by goal planning (RGP)
(2020) for children of mean age 14.89 (SD = 2.52). The with 5 items (e.g. “I set goals for myself to motivate me
results showed that CLS ensures internal consistency to move forward”), α =.72; resilience by affect control
with a  Cronbach’s α of .85, split-half part  1  =  0.76 (RAC) with 6 items (e.g. “I can regulate my emotions
and part 2  =  0.81. The item-to-total-score correla- in a short time”), α = .60; resilience by positive think-
tion ranged from 0.43 to 0.74. In this study, the Cron- ing (RPT) with 4 items (e.g. “I think everything has its
bach’s α is .85. good side”), α = .67; resilience by family support (RFS)
Perceived social support. The scale reflects multiple with 6 items (e.g. “My parents/grandparents respect
dimensions of the children’s perception of social sup- my opinion”), α = .72; and resilience by help-seeking
port that they receive from family (e.g. “my family from individuals (RHS) including 6 items (e.g. “I can
really tries to help me”), friends (e.g. “I can count on talk about my problems with a  friend of my age”),
my friends when things go wrong”) and others (e.g. α = .60. The score of the total scale is calculated based
“there is a special person with whom I can share my on the average score of each sub-scale. Higher scores
joys and sorrows”). It includes 12 items designed in of sub-scales reflect higher levels of use of the respec-
a 7-point Likert-type scale from 1 (strongly disagree) tive resilience type by children.
to and 7 (very strongly agree). The scores of the to- Among the CLS scales, perception of social support
tal scale are calculated based on the average score of and parent-child attachment has been used in previ-
each sub-scale. Higher scores show higher levels of ous research for adolescents in Vietnam by Nguyen
the children’s perceived social support. In Vietnam, et al. (2020), Dinh (2016) and Tran et al. (2013), prov-
this scale has been used by Dinh (2016) for research ing its reliability and efficacy. The resilience measure-
on adolescents. The reliability of the sub-scale of sup- ment scale was translated from Chinese into Viet-
port from a special care-giver, family and friends is namese by a Vietnamese Ph.D., who is not a member
.91, .87 and .85, respectively. In this research, the scale of the research team. Each item of the resilience scale
by Dinh (2016) was applied and the Cronbach’s α val- is then discussed in the research team, and the lan-
ues of sub-scales including perceived social support guage is edited in terms of vocabulary and expression
from family, perceived social support from friends, to make it understandable to children in Vietnam. In
perceived social support from significant others with the next step, we conducted a  pre-test survey with
4 items each were .78, .73 and .81, respectively. 5 children, including 3 secondary school students and
Caregiver-child attachment. The parental bond- 2 high school students. A group discussion among re-
ing instrument (PBI) developed by Parker (1979) was searchers, investigators, and the school students was
employed to measure the bonding of caregivers with conducted immediately after the pre-test to discuss
children. The scale consists of 25 items, designed the suitability of the scale content and the words and
according to a 4-point Likert-type scale to measure expressions used in the questionnaire. Based on this
the caregiver’s attachment to the child in the two group discussion, a  final questionnaire was formed
dimensions of care and overprotection. This scale and used for the official survey.
has been widely used in previous studies to ensure
high reliability and validity. Research by Tran et al.
(2013) on a group of Vietnamese adolescents showed Procedure
that α = .83 and .84 for the younger version report-
ing attachment to parents separately. In this study, The research team first contacted the managing boards
the subscale of caregiver’s attachment to the child of schools with a high number of LBC and asked for
according to the type of care included 12 items (e.g. their agreement to the survey being conducted in
“spoke to me in a warm and friendly voice”; “enjoyed the schools. With the data provided by the school
talking things over with me”), α = .80. The subscale managing boards, we made lists of students who are
of caregiver’s attachment to the child is in the type LBC. The research team then sent the consent form
of control consisting of 13 items (e.g. “tried to con- to parents/caregivers of the selected LBC for their
trol everything I did”, “invaded my privacy”), α = .70. agreement to allow their children to participate in the
The  scale is self-reported by the child. The score is survey. Upon receiving the signed consent form, we

4 current issues in personality psychology

 Luot V. Nguyen, Thu T. A. Nguyen, Linh T. Trinh, Hanh H. V. Nguyen

surveyed the students in the schools, with the sup- score range of 16-80. There is no difference in loneli-
port of the school managing boards and teachers in ness in LBC in terms of gender, location of where the
room arrangements. Before filling in the question- parents migrate, age range, duration of parental mi-
naire, students were clearly explained in detail the re- gration or whether the parent migrating is the father,
search’s purpose and content. Students were gathered mother or both.
in schoolrooms to participate in the self-report sur- The data in Table 2 show an inverse relationship
vey so that their study was not affected. A researcher with statistical significance between loneliness and
and a teacher were present in each room to explain to PSS from family, friend and significant others, care-
students when they completed the questionnaire. Par- giver attachment type of care, and types of resilience:
ticipants were guaranteed that non-participation in RPT, RAC, RFS, RHS (p < .01). There is a positive cor-
the study would not result in any harm to them, and relation between loneliness in LBC and caregiver at-
the participants could stop answering the question- tachment type of control (p < .01).
naires at any time if any research participant felt un- The research team used regression analysis with
comfortable. All personal information and answered the stepwise method. Among the independent vari-
questionnaires in the research were kept confidential ables mentioned above, the regression model pro-
in a secure place and used only for research purpos- posed 5 models, from model 1 to model 5 for 1 to 5
es. Ethics approval for this study was granted by the independent variables. Testing of the model’s ap-
University of Social Science and Humanities, Vietnam propriateness showed that the statistic F in the five
National University, Hanoi, no. 2887/CN-XHNV-KH. models has a  significance level of p from  <  .001 to
.044 (p < .05), VIF from 1.00 to 1.72, Durbin-Watson
statistic  =  1.82. Therefore, it can be confirmed that
Statistical processing the database is consistent with these five models. In
model 1, 17.00% of the variation in loneliness of LBC
All the data were processed by SPSS version 26.0. In is explained by PSS from friends. In model 2, 26.00%
this study, we conducted descriptive statistics, corre- of the variation in loneliness is explained by PSS from
lation and multiple regression analyses by the step- friends, caregiver attachment type of care. In model 3,
wise method. 28.00% of the variation in loneliness is explained by
PSS from friends, caregiver attachment type of care,
type of RAC. In model 4, 29.00% of the variation in
Results loneliness is explained by PSS from friends, caregiver
attachment type of care, types of RAC, RFS. In model
The data in Table 1 show that LBC report feelings of 5, 29.00% of the variation in loneliness is explained by
loneliness with a total score of 28.62 (95% CI: 27.75- PSS from friends, caregiver attachment type of care,
29.48), min = 16, max = 70 on the CLS scale with the types of RAC, RFS and RHS.

Table 1

Loneliness in left-behind children

Demographic Sort M (SD) 95% CI F, t, df, p

Gender Male 28.23 (9.14) 27.07-29.41 t(437) = –0.90
p = .368
Female 29.04 (9.69) 27.74-30.33
Type of migration Domestic 28.45 (9.16) 27.42-31.30 t(390) = 0.80
p = .390
International 29.30 (10.44) 27.34-29.66
Age range 10-14 28.76 (9.18) 27.92-29.67 t(437) = 0.85
p = .394
15-17 27.56 (11.03) 24.58-30.76
Duration of parental < 6 years 28.11 (9.05) 28.86-29.47 t(437) = –1.02
migration p = .306
> 6 years 29.04 (9.69) 27.88-30.26
Parent migrating Father 28.39 (9.06) 27.22-29.57 F(2, 436) = 1.27
p = .283
Mother 30.23 (10.34) 27.78-32.68
Both parents 28.17 (9.45) 27.74-29.50
Loneliness_score_total 28.62 (9.40) 27.75-29.48 –

3 5
 Loneliness among left-behind children

Table 2

Correlation between loneliness and independence variables of left-behind children

Variables 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
1. Loneliness 1
2. PSS from family –.40** 1
3. PSS from friend –.42** .51** 1
4. PSS from significant
–.32** .51** .56** 1
others
5. Caregiver attachment
–.40** .56** .30** .34** 1
type of care
6. Caregiver attachment
.24** –.36** –.21** –.21** –.56** 1
type of control
7. RGP –.25** .39** .32** .36** .36** –.25** 1
8. RAC –.27** .22** .14** .04 .26** –.14** .04 1
9. RPT –.07 .18** .15** .21** .21** –.22** .51** –.14** 1
10. RFS –.39** .48** .31** .32** .59** –.49** .35** .30** .22** 1
11. RHS –.36** .35** .38** .30** .38** –.25** .14** .35** –.08 .43** 1
Note. **p < .01; PSS – perceived social support; RGP – resilience by goal planning; RAC – resilience by affect control; RPT – resilience
by positive thinking; RFS – resilience by family support; RHS – resilience by help-seeking.

Table 3

Multivariate linear regression to predict scores of loneliness among left-behind children

Independent variable Loneliness Collinearity statistics

β R 2
adj. R 2
Tolerance VIF
1. PSS from friend –.27*** .30*** .29*** .81 1.22
2. Caregiver attachment type of care –.18*** .61 1.62
3. RAC –.11*** .84 1.19
4. RFS –.11* .57 1.72
5. RHS –.09* .68 1.46
Note. *p < .05, ***p < .001. PSS – perceived social support from friend; RAC – resilience by affect control; RFS – resilience by family
support; RHS – resilience by help-seeking.

The regression coefficient for model 5 is shown 16 to 80. Perception of social support from friends,
in Table 3. In particular, the variation of loneliness caregiver’s care, RAC, RFS, and RHS are protective
is most explained by PSS from friends with –.27 factors against LBC’s loneliness.
(p < .001), followed by caregiver attachment type of First, LBC in this study have a  lower loneliness
care with –.18 (p < .001), and types of resilience are score than LBC in other studies, especially in China
RAC with –.11 (p < .01), RFS with –.11 (p < .05), and (Ai &  Hu, 2016; Cao et  al., 2022; Zhao et  al., 2015;
RHS with –.09 (p < .05). Zhao et  al., 2019). The score is comparable for the
adolescent group in Vietnam studied by Nguyen et al.
(2020). There is no significant difference in loneliness
Discussion among different sub-groups of LBC. These results are
inconsistent with other studies which showed differ-
The study aims to assess the prevalence of loneliness ences in loneliness in terms of gender (Jiang et  al.,
and identify factors affecting loneliness among LBC. 2020; Zhao et al., 2015), age (Wang et al., 2006), and
The results show that, on average, LBC obtained a to- parental migration status (Yue et al., 2015; Zhao et al.,
tal score of 28.62 on the loneliness scale ranging from 2015). Overall, this research indicates that LBC in

6 current issues in personality psychology

 Luot V. Nguyen, Thu T. A. Nguyen, Linh T. Trinh, Hanh H. V. Nguyen

Vietnam experienced a lower level of loneliness than LBC by connecting LBC with their peers and other
LBC in previous research and that there are no differ- support networks (Nam, 2015; Zhao et al., 2017).
ences in loneliness across subgroups of LBC. In the The third matter concerns the attachment of the
cultural context of Vietnam, the score of loneliness in caregiver with LBC. The results show that caregiver’s
the group of children whose parents work far away care is a  protective factor against loneliness. This is
is lower than the previous LBC groups for two rea- consistent with previous research, which showed
sons. The first is that, when children do not live with that children with negative relationships with their
their parents, they may receive support from other parents often experience a higher level of loneliness
relatives, such as aunts and uncles. This situation is (Jia &  Tian, 2010; Wang et  al., 2006); limited com-
expressed via a Vietnamese idiom “when there is no munication with parents is also a significant predic-
father, uncles help, when there is no mother, aun- tor of loneliness among LBC (Faisal & Turnip, 2019;
ties help”. It emphasizes love and protection from the Jia & Tian, 2010). Moreover, parent-child cohesion is
larger family for the child separated from his or her an important protective factor against loneliness, in
parents. These relatives’ support may be a protective which a stronger bond helps reduce LBC’s experience
factor helping the child to be less lonely in compari- of loneliness (Zhao et al., 2013; Zhao et al., 2015). In
son to the LBC in previous studies. The second reason the context of Vietnam, our study is similar to the pre-
is that the long-distance care strategy used by mi- vious study of Nguyen et al. (2019). With the sample
grant parents has contributed to reducing loneliness of 331 Vietnamese children aging from 8 to 12, the
in children. Nowadays, with the support of informa- study indicated that parental control was significantly
tion technology, especially smartphones, the LBC and associated with greater likelihood of being physical
parents can easily communicate through online video attacked, and mental health problems such as suicid-
calls and social networks (Madianou & Miller, 2011). al ideation and loneliness. In other words, the study
Thanks to modern technology, mothers can provide demonstrated that, in the cultural context of South-
emotional support and guidance to their children re- east Asia, the bond between children and parents/
gardless of geographical distance, helping mothers to caregivers in the caring manner can help protect ado-
have a  copresence in their children’s lives (Nedelcu lescents’ psychological health (Nguyen et  al., 2019).
&  Wyss, 2016). Migrant parents can participate in Likewise, a survey of high school students in Vietnam
day-to-day childcare such as decision making, aca- shows that poor communication between parents and
demic support and daily activities through video con- adolescents has a negative impact on children’s men-
ferencing (Jordan et al., 2018). tal health (Le et al., 2018).
Secondly, the current study suggests that percep- The role of resilience against loneliness in LBC in
tion of social support is the key protective factor this study has also been demonstrated in previous re-
against loneliness among LBC. In line with the find- search (Ai & Hu, 2016;; Liao et al., 2014). For example,
ings, Ai and Hu (2016) stated that perceived social Ai and Hu (2016) stated that psychological resilience
support accounts for 54.5% of the variance in LBC’s is a predictor of loneliness in LBC. Furthermore, psy-
loneliness. However, unlike Ai and Hu (2016), our chological resilience is shown to moderate the rela-
study shows that only social support from friends tionship between social support and loneliness in
was regarded as a  protective factor against LBC’s LBC. Particularly, high psychological resilience will
loneliness. It is noted that social support in Ai and enhance the effect of social support on LBC’s loneli-
Hu’s study was the total score of all three dimensions ness. In addition, positive coping styles such as prob-
rather than the composite score for each dimension lem-solving and help-seeking are shown to have an
(family, friends, and significant others). This could be essential role in reducing LBC’s loneliness (Liao et al.,
attributed to the fact that due to parental migration, 2014). Similarly, the study of Cao et  al. (2022) indi-
adolescents did not have a close connection with their cated that resilience plays a mediating role in the re-
parents; thus, seeking connection from their peers lationship between feelings of loneliness and Internet
would help them reduce their loneliness (Wang et al., addiction in children whose parents work away from
2020). In a  similar view, Zhao et  al. (2015) reported home in China. Specifically, a statistically significant
that the loneliness of LBC with a migrating father and positive effect of loneliness was noted on Internet ad-
two migrating parents is negatively correlated with diction among children with low resilience, whereas
friend companionship. Additionally, when examining no significant association between loneliness and In-
the effect of friendship quality and left-behind experi- ternet addiction was found among those with a high
ence on LBC’s loneliness, Ling et al. (2017) found that level of resilience.
friendship quality has a greater impact on predicting
loneliness than left-behind experience. Therefore,
peer support should be encouraged to help LBC deal Limitations and future research
with their problems and overcome loneliness due to
parental migration. Communities for LBC in China The results of the study should be considered to-
and Vietnam may be a great source that could support gether with some limitations. The sample chosen for

3 7
 Loneliness among left-behind children

the study is within the school environment; thus, chology, 21, 1066–1073. https://doi.org/10.1177/
the results might not fully reflect the problems of 1359105314544992
out-of-school LBC. The regions chosen for sampling Asher, S. R., Hymel, S., & Renshaw, P. D. (1984). Lone-
were from the rural areas in the North and Central liness in children. Child Development, 55, 1456–
regions of Vietnam, so there is a  lack of represen- 1464. https://doi.org/10.2307/1130015
tation from the further South and from remote and Bowker, J. C., & Spencer, S. V. (2010). Friendship and
inaccessible areas. The children loneliness scale used adjustment: a focus on mixed-grade friendships.
in the study was particularly developed to measure Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 39, 1318–1329.
children’s loneliness in school settings. Therefore, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-009-9474-0
an alternative measurement is needed to measure Bronfenbrenner, U. (1979). The ecology of human
children’s perception of loneliness in a  household- development – experiments by nature and design.
specific context or out-of-school environment such Cambridge.
as the UCLA Loneliness Scale (Kwiatkowska et  al., Cacioppo, S., Grippo, A. J., London, S., Goossens, L.,
2018). Another limitation of the study is that it did &  Cacioppo, J. T. (2015). Loneliness: Clinical im-
not consider the impact of socio-economic factors, port and interventions. Perspectives on Psychologi-
such as level of economic and material satisfaction cal Science, 10, 238–249. https://doi.org/10.1177/
as well as factors related to caregiver’s health status 1745691615570616
and education that may have an impact on children’s Cao, Q., An, J., Yang, Y., Peng, P., Xu, S., Xu, X.,
loneliness. Moreover, the nature of the study, being & Xiang, H. (2022). Correlation among psycholog-
a cross-sectional study based on self-report by chil- ical resilience, loneliness, and internet addiction
dren, can lead to biases in the research (for example, among left-behind children in China: a cross-sec-
social desirability bias). Future research is strongly tional study. Current Psychology, 41, 4566–4573.
recommended to include the primary caregiver’s and https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-020-00970-3
teachers’ perspectives, the impact of socio-economic Chai, X., Du, H., Li, X., Su, S., & Lin, D. (2019). What
status on children’s loneliness, and, overall, more really matters for loneliness among left-behind
qualitative research on the matter is needed. children in rural China: a  meta-analytic review.
Frontiers in Psychology, 10, 774. https://doi.org/10.
3389/fpsyg.2019.00774
Conclusions Chang, H., Yan, Q., Tang, L., Huang, J., Ma, Y., Ye, X.,
& Yu, Y. (2017). A comparative analysis of suicide at-
The loneliness score in the Vietnamese LBC group tempts in left-behind children and non-left-behind
was lower than that of the LBC investigated in the children in rural China. PLoS One, 12, e0178743.
previous study. There was no statistically significant https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0178743
difference in loneliness between LBC groups accord- Chen, M., &  Chan, K. L. (2016). Parental absence,
ing to some sociodemographic criteria. Social support child victimization, and psychological well-being
from friends, caring caregivers, and affect control, in rural China. Child Abuse & Neglect, 59, 45–54.
family support, and help-seeking recovery patterns https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chiabu.2016.07.009
are factors that protect children from loneliness. Par- Chen, M., Sun, X., Chen, Q., & Chan, K. L. (2017). Pa-
ents, carers and others involved with LBC need to rental migration, children’s safety and psycholog-
create conditions for children to establish good re- ical adjustment in rural China: a  meta-analysis.
lationships with friends. Carers need to continue to Trauma, Violence and Abuse, 21, 113–122. https://
engage with children in a safe, caring manner. Edu- doi.org/10.1177/1524838017744768
cational programmes for LBC to enhance children’s Dang, N. A. (2017). Rural-to-urban migration in Viet-
resilience should also be emphasized. nam: Trend and institutions. VNU Journal of Social
Sciences and Humanities, 3, 158–170.
Davison, K. K., & Birch, L. L. (2001). Weight status,
FUNDING parent reaction, and self‐concept in five‐year‐old
girls. Pediatrics, 107, 46–53. https://doi.org/10.1542/
This research was funded by Vietnam National Foun- peds.107.1.46
dation for Science and Technology Development Dinh, T. H. V. (2016). The relationship between the
(NAFOSTED) under grant number 501.01-2019.300. coping strategies with sadness in social relation-
ships and social support in adolescents. Proceed-
ing of International Conference “Psychological trau-
References ma and support activities” (pp. 123–131). Vietnam
National University Press.
Ai, H., & Hu, J. (2016). Psychological resilience mod- Dolab – Molisa Vietnam (2020). Department of Over-
erates the impact of social support on loneliness seas Labour, Ministry of Labour, War Invalids and
of “left-behind” children. Journal of Health Psy- Social Afairs. Retrieved from http://www.dolab.

8 current issues in personality psychology

 Luot V. Nguyen, Thu T. A. Nguyen, Linh T. Trinh, Hanh H. V. Nguyen

gov.vn/New/View2.aspx?Key=4202 [accessed July adolescents’ experiences of and reflections about

6, 2021] interpersonal violence. Global Mental Health, 5,
Fellmeth, G., Rose-Clarke, K., Zhao, C., Busert, L. K., 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1017/gmh.2017.34
Zheng, Y., Massazza, A., Sonmez, H., Eder, B., Ble- Lian, W., & Chen, X. (2016). Research on the relation-
witt, A., Lertgrai, W., Orcutt, M., Ricci, K., Mohamed- ship between perceived social support and sub-
Ahmed, O., Burns, R., Knipe, D., Hargreaves, S., jective well-being of left behind children. Cross-
Hesketh, T., Opondo, C., & Devakumar, D. (2018). Cultural Communication, 12, 1–8. https://doi.org/
Health impacts of parental migration on left-be- 10.3968/8465
hind children and adolescents: a systematic review Liao, C., Liu, Q., &  Zhang, J. (2014). The correlation
and meta-analysis. Lancet, 392, 2567–2582. https:// between social anxiety and loneliness of left-be-
doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(18)32558-3 hind children in rural China: Effect of coping style.
Faisal, C. M., &  Turnip, S. S. (2019). Predictors of Health, 6, 1714–1723. https://doi.org/10.4236/health.
loneliness among the left-behind children of 2014.614204
migrant workers in Indonesia. Journal of Public Ling, H., Fu, E., & Zhang, J. R. (2015). Effects of sepa-
Mental Health, 18, 49–57. https://doi.org/10.1108/ ration age and separation duration among left-
jpmh-04-2018-0023 behind children in China. Social Behavior and Per-
Giang, T. T. M., Nguyen, V. L., Harriot, B., & Nguy- sonality, 43, 241–253. https://doi.org/10.2224/sbp.
en,  B.  D. (2019). Self-esteem among “left-behind 2015.43.2.241
children” of labour migrant parents in rural Ling, H., Fu, E., & Zhang, J. R. (2017). Peer relation-
northern Vietnam. VNU Journal of Social Sciences ships of left-behind children in China moderate
and Humanities, 5, 595–615. their loneliness. Social Behavior and Personality,
Graham, E., & Jordan, L. P. (2011). Migrant parents 45, 901–913. https://doi.org/10.2224/sbp.6021
and the psychological well‐being of left‐behind Luo, J., Wang, W., & Gao, W. (2009). Review of the stud-
children in Southeast Asia. Journal of Marriage ies on rural left-behind children in China. Advances
and Family, 73, 763–787. https://doi.org/10.1111/ in Psychological Science, 7, 990–995.
j.1741-3737.2011.00844.x Man, Y., Mengmeng, L., Lezhi, L., Ting, M., &  Jing-
Hu, Y. Q., & Gan, Y. Q. (2008). Development and psy- ping, Z. (2017). The psychological problems and
chometric validity of the resilience scale for Chi- related influential factors of left-behind adoles-
nese adolescents. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 40, 902– cents (LBA) in Hunan, China: a  cross sectional
912. https://doi.org/10.3724/SP.J.1041.2008.00902 study. International Journal for Equity in Health,
Jordan, L. P., Bilisuma, D., Nobles, J., &  Graham, E. 16, 163. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12939-017-0639-2
(2018). Engaged parenting, gender and children’s Madianou, M., &  Miller, D. (2011). Mobile phone
time use in transnational families: an assessment parenting: Reconfiguring relationships between
spanning three global regions. Population Space and Filipina migrant mothers and their left-behind
Place, 24, e2159. https://doi.org/10.1002/psp.2159 children. New Media & Society, 13, 457–470. https://
Jia, Z., & Tian, W. (2010). Loneliness of left-behind chil- doi.org/10.1177/1461444810393903
dren: a cross-sectional survey in a sample of rural Merz, E. M., & Jak, S. (2013). The long reach of child-
China. Child: Care Health and Development, 36, 812– hood: Childhood experiences influence close re-
817. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2214.2010.01110.x lationships and loneliness across life. Advances in
Jiang, L., Liao, M., & Ying, R. (2020). The relationship Life Course Research, 18, 212–222. https://doi.org/
between loneliness, self-efficacy, and satisfaction 10.1016/j.alcr.2013.05.002
with life in left-behind middle school students in Nedelcu, M., &  Wyss, M. (2016). ‘Doing fam-
China: Taking Binhai County of Jiangsu province ily’ through ICT-mediated ordinary co-presence:
as an example. Best Evidence in Chinese Education, Transnational communication practices of Roma-
6, 803–824. https://doi.org/10.15354/bece.20.or034 nian migrants in Switzerland. Global Networks, 16,
Kwiatkowska, M. M., Rogoza, R., & Kwiatkowska, K. 202–218. https://doi.org/10.1111/glob.12110
(2018). Analysis of the psychometric properties Nam, G. (2015, January 10). When mother work away
of the Revised UCLA Loneliness Scale in a Polish from home. Retrieved from https://baohatinh.vn/
adolescent sample. Current Issues in Personality xa-hoi/khi-me-vang-/91122.htm
Psychology, 6, 164–170. https://doi.org/10.5114/ Nguyen, C. V. (2016). Does parental migration really
cipp.2017.69681 benefit left-behind children? Comparative evi-
Lempinen, L., Junttila, N., &  Sourander, A. (2018). dence from Ethiopia, India, Peru and Vietnam. So-
Loneliness and friendships among eight-year-old cial Science & Medicine, 153, 230–239. https://doi.
children: Time-trends over a 24-year period. Jour- org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2016.02.021
nal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 59, 171–179. Nguyen, H. T. L., Nakamura, K., Seino, K., & Al-Sobai-
https://doi.org/10.1111/jcpp.12807 hi, S. (2019). Impact of parent–adolescent bond-
Le, M. T. H., Holton, S., Kirkman, M., &  Fisher, J. ing on school bullying and mental health in Viet-
(2018). “I feel that life is meaningless”: Vietnamese namese cultural setting: Evidence from the global

3 9
 Loneliness among left-behind children

school based health survey. BMC Psychology, 7, health risk behavior among school children in ur-
7–16. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40359-019-0294- ban Vietnam. Global Health Action, 6, 18876. https://
Nguyen, V. L. (2017). Problem behaviors of children doi.org/10.3402/gha.v6i0.18876
due to their parent working far from home. VASP Tran, V. K., & Pham, V. Q. (2015). Access to social ser-
Journal of Social Psychology, 5, 3–11. vices: How poor migrants experience their life in
Nguyen, V. L., Nguyen, B. D., & Truong, Q. L. (2018). contemporary Vietnamese urban areas. VNU Jour-
Subjective well-being among left-behind children nal of Social Sciences and Humanities, 1, 277–290.
of labour migrant parents in rural northern Viet- Tran, T. M. T. (2015). The life of left behind children in
nam. Pertanika Journal of Social Sciences &  Hu- rural Vietnam. Journal of Family and Gender Stud-
manities, 26, 1529–1545. ies, 4, 61–68.
Nguyen, V. L., Nguyen, D. L., & Le, A. D. (2020). Chil- UNFPA (2020). Population and housing census 2019.
dren’s loneliness: a  pilot study in Vietnam. Pro- Factsheet on migration and urbanization in Vietnam.
ceedings of International Conference “Psychology – Retrieved from https://vietnam.unfpa.org/sites/
Pedagogy for Students’s Developments and Happy default/files/pub-pdf/migration_and_urbaniza-
Schools” (pp. 286–292). Publishing Pedagogy. tion_factsheet_eng_final_0.pdf.
Parker, G. (1979). Parental characteristics in relation to UNICEF (2020). UNICEF working paper: Children “left
depressive disorders. British Journal of Psychiatry, behind”. Retrieved from https://www.unicef.org/
134, 138–147. https://doi.org/10.1192/bjp.134.2.138 media/83581/file/Children-Left-Behind.pdf
Qualter, P., Vanhalst, J., Harris, R., Van Roekel, E., Wang, L. F., Zhang, S., Sun, Y. H., &  Zhang, X. J.
Lodder, G., Bangee, M., Maes, M., & Verhagen, M. (2006). The current situation of loneliness of left
(2015). Loneliness across the life span. Perspectives behind children in the countryside. China Journal
on Psychological Science, 10, 250–264. https://doi. of Behavioral Media Science, 15, 639–640.
org/10.1177/1745691615568999 Wang, L., &  Yao, J. (2019). Life satisfaction and so-
Sharabi, A., Levi, U., & Margalit, M. (2012). Children’s cial anxiety among left‐behind children in rural
loneliness, sense of coherence, family climate, and China: The mediating role of loneliness. Journal
hope: Developmental risk and protective factors. of Community Psychology, 48, 259–266. https://doi.
The Journal of Psychology, 146, 61–83. https://doi. org/10.1002/jcop.22252
org/10.1080/00223980.2011.568987 Wang, Q., Wang, H., & Liu, X. (2020). Loneliness, non-
Shen, J. L., Liu, X., Zhao, J. X., &  Shi, B. G. (2015). suicidal self-injury, and friendship quality among
The psychological development of Chinese left‐ Chinese left-behind adolescents: The role of parent-
behind children and migrant children in urbani- child cohesion. Journal of Affective Disorders, 271,
zation process. Psychology Development Educa- 197–200. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jad.2020.03.112
tion, 31, 108–116. https://doi.org/10.16187/j.cnki. Yue, S. H., &  Lu, X. Y. (2015). Comparison of social
issn1001-4918.2015.01.15 support and loneliness among left-behind children
Su, S., Li, X., Lin, D., Xu, X., & Zhu, M. (2012). Psycho- in eastern and western China. Chinese Journal of
logical adjustment among left-behind children in School Health, 36, 1662–1664.
rural China: The role of parental migration and Zhao, J., Liu, X., & Zhang, W. (2013). Peer rejection,
parent-child communication. Child: Care, Health peer acceptance and psychological adjustment of
and Development, 39, 162–170. https://doi.org/ left-behind children: The roles of parental cohe-
10.1111/j.1365-2214.2012.01400.x sion and children’s cultural beliefs about adver-
Su, S., Li, X., Lin, D., & Zhu, M. (2017). Future orien- sity. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 45, 797–810. https://
tation, social support, and psychological adjust- doi.org/ 10.3724/SP.J.1041.2013.00797
ment among left-behind children in rural China: Zhao, J., Liu, X., &  Wang, M. (2015). Parent–child
a  longitudinal study. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, cohesion, friend companionship and left-behind
1309. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01309 children’s emotional adaptation in rural China.
Tang, D., Choi, W. I., Deng, L., Bian, Y., & Hu, H. (2019). Child Abuse & Neglect, 48, 190–199. https://doi.org/
Health status of children left behind in rural areas 10.1016/j.chiabu.2015.07.005
of Sichuan Province of China: a  cross-sectional Zhao, C., Zhou, X., Wang, F., Jiang, M., & Hesketh, T.
study. BMC International Health and Human Rights, (2017). Care for left-behind children in rural China:
19, 4. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12914-019-0191-9 a realist evaluation of a community-based interven-
Tang, W., Wang, G., Hu, T., Dai, Q., Xu, J., Yang, Y., tion. Children and Youth Services Review, 82, 239–
&  Xu,  J. (2018). Mental health and psychosocial 245. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2017.09.034
problems among Chinese left-behind children: Zhao, J., Li, Q., Wang, L., Lin, L., & Zhang, W. (2019).
a  cross-sectional comparative study. Journal of Latent profile analysis of left-behind adolescents’
Affective Disorders, 241, 133–141. https://doi.org/ psychosocial adaptation in rural China. Journal of
10.1016/j.jad.2018.08.017 Youth and Adolescence, 48, 1146–1160. https://doi.
Tran, B. P., Nguyen, T. H., Truong, Q. T., Hoang, K. C., org/10.1007/s10964-019-00989-1
&  Michael, P. D. (2013). Factors associated with

10 current issues in personality psychology