Table 1 Study characteristics for longitudinal studies presented by exposure (school connectedness and school disconnectedness constructs)

School Connectedness

Arango et al. (2018) [43]

142 (75%), USA

T1: 13.41 (1.12)

T2: 6 months later

School Connectedness Scale

RADS-2:SF

School connectedness (T1)

Depression (T2)

Protective

Arora et al. (2017) [15]

186 (49%), Asian American youth, USA

T1: 12.50 (1.16)

T2: 1 yr later

School engagement (5 items), Teacher support (5 items)

CESD (adapted), State–Trait Anxiety Inventory for Children (adapted)

Teacher support (T1)

Depression (T2)

Protective

When teacher support was moderate-to-high at T1, high levels of anxiety at T1 were associated with increased levels of depressive symptoms at T2, an association that was not present under conditions of low teacher support

School engagement (T1)

Depression (T2)

NS

Davis et al. (2019) [61]

2,177 (48%), USA

T1: 12.3 (0.7)

T2: NR

T3: NR

T4: 13.8 (0.72)

PSSM (4/20 items)

Orpinas Modified Depression Scale

School belonging (T1)

Depression (T2)

NS

Result across the whole sample

School belonging (T2)

Depression (T3)

NS

Result across the whole sample

School belonging (T3)

Depression (T4)

NS

Result across the whole sample

School belonging (T1)

Depression (T2)

Protective

Result for females only

School belonging (T2)

Depression (T3)

Protective

Result for females only

School belonging (T3)

Depression (T4)

Protective

Result for females only

DeWit et al. (2011) [53]

2,616 (54%), Canada

T1: 13.77 (0.54)

T2: ~ 6 months later

T3: 1 yr later

Social Support Appraisals Scale (SSAS) of the Survey of Children’s Social Support

CESD; Generalized Social Avoidance and Distress subscale of the Revised Social Anxiety Scale for Children

Classmate support (slope)

Depression (slope)

Protective

Teacher support (slope)

Depression (slope)

Protective

Classmate support (intercept)

Depression (slope)

NS

Teacher support (intercept)

Depression (slope)

NS

Classmate support (slope)

Social anxiety (slope)

Protective

Teacher support (slope)

Social anxiety (slope)

Protective

Classmate support (intercept)

Social anxiety (slope)

Risk

Teacher support (intercept)

Social anxiety (slope)

Risk

Fulco et al. (2019) [16]

427 (50%), USA

T1: 14

T2: 15

T3: 16

T4: 17

School engagement (9 items)

CESD (13 items)

Change in school engagement (T1 to T4, time-varying covariate)

Change in depressive symptoms (T1 to T4, non-significant)

Protective

Result for males only

Change in school engagement (T1 to T4, time-varying covariate)

Change in depressive symptoms (T1 to T4, linear growth)

Protective

Result for females only

Gonzales et al. (2014)** [54]

516 (51%), Mexican American adolescents, USA

T1: 12.3 (0.54)

T2: 2 yrs later

T3: 5 yrs later

School Engagement Scale—draws items from The School is Important Now Scale, the Academic Liking Scale, and the Importance of Education Scale

YSR at T1, T2, ASR at T3

School engagement (T2)

Internalizing problems (T3)

Protective

T2 school engagement mediated the association between a family focused intervention and T3 internalising problems

Hatchel et al. (2018) [55]

404 (45.3% F; 51.8% M, 2.9% other), LGBTQ youth, USA

T1: 15.27 (15–17)

T2: 1 yr later

T3: 2 yrs later

PSSM (9 items)

Orpinas Modified Depression Scale (9 items)

School belonging (T1)

Depression (T2)

Protective

School belonging mediated the relationship between victimization and depression

School belonging (T2)

Depression (T3)

Protective

Jiang et al. (2020) [45]

2,041 (46%), Migrant adolescents, China

T1 13.6 (0.71)

T2: 1 yr later

Emotional engagement (5 items)

CESD (5 items)

Emotional engagement (T1)

Depression (T2)

Protective

Emotional school engagement partially mediated the relationship between teacher discrimination and depression

Joyce (2019) [35]

13,120 (52%), USA

T1: Grade 7–12

T2: 1 yr later

Teacher support (2 items)

CESD (adapted)

Getting along with teachers (T1)

Depression (T2)

Protective

School connectedness at T2 partially mediated the effect between 1) getting along with teachers at T1 and depression at T2 and 2) feeling cared for by teachers at T1 and depression at T2

Feeling cared about by teachers (T1)

Depression (T2)

Protective

Klinck et al. (2020) [46]

1,344 (51%), USA

T1: 12.73 (11–14)

T2: ~ 6 months later

School Connectedness Scale

CESD; SCARED (total score and subscales)

School connectedness (T1)

Depression (T2)

Protective

School connectedness (T1)

Anxiety (T2)

NS

School connectedness (T1)

School avoidance (T2)

Protective

Association was not significant for other SCARED subscales (GAD, PD, SAD, SEP)

Moderation analyses:

Anxiety: Anxiety moderated the association between school connectedness and depression such that in adolescents at low risk of an anxiety disorder, higher school connectedness at T1 predicted lower levels of depressive symptoms at T2. Conversely, in adolescents at high risk of an anxiety disorder, there were no significant relationships between school connectedness and depressive symptoms.

Gender: Time 1 associations between school connectedness and internalizing problems were stronger in magnitude for girls as compared with boys across all models.

Race: In addition, race moderated the association, such that in adolescents identifying as non-Hispanic White, Hispanic, or Latinx, higher levels of school connectedness at T1 was associated with lower depression at T2, which was not the case for adolescents identifying as Black/African American

Leonard et al. (2016) [30]

769 (56%), Children in contact with CWS, USA

T1: 12.69 (1.3)

T4: 3 yrs later

11 items from Drug-Free Schools and Communities Act Survey

YSR

School engagement (T1)

Internalizing problems (T4)

Protective

School engagement did not moderate the association between placement instability and internalizing problems

Leonard & Gudiño (2016) [31]

224 (58%), Children in out-of-home care during the study period, USA

T1: 12.85 (1.25)

T4: 3 yrs later

11 items from Drug-Free Schools and Communities Act Survey

YSR

School engagement (T1)

Internalizing problems (T4)

NS

School instability prospectively predicted internalizing symptoms

Lester et al. (2013) [63]

T1: 1,054 (~ 54%)

T2: 1,743 (additional students in secondary school [grade 8] that were not enrolled in the primary school at T1 [grade 7]),

Australia

T1: ~ 12 (end of grade 7)

T2: ~ 12 (start of grade 8)

T3: ~ 13

T4: ~ 14

School Connectedness Scale (4 items)

DASS-21

School connectedness (T1)

Depression (T2)

NS

Result for males only

School connectedness (T1)

Depression (T2)

Protective

Result for females only

School connectedness (T2)

Depression (T3)

Protective

Result for males only

School connectedness (T2)

Depression (T3)

Protective

Result for females only

School connectedness (T3)

Depression (T4)

Protective

Result for males only

School connectedness (T3)

Depression (T4)

NS

Result for females only

School connectedness (T1)

Anxiety (T2)

Protective

School connectedness (T2)

Anxiety (T3)

Protective

School connectedness (T3)

Anxiety (T4)

Protective

Lester & Cross (2015) [56]

1616 (50% F) Australia

T1: 12

T2: 13

T3: 14

Teacher connectedness (Teacher Connectedness Scale), School connectedness (School Connectedness Scale), The peer support at school scale (adapted from the 24-item Perceptions of Peer Social Support Scale)

Emotional symptoms (SDQ), Depression (DASS-21), Anxiety (DASS-21)

School connectedness (T1)

Depression (T2)

Protective

Anxiety (T2)

Protective

Emotional problems (T2)

Protective

Teacher connectedness (T1)

Depression (T2)

NS

Anxiety (T2)

NS

Emotional problems (T2)

NS

Peer support (T1)

Depression (T2)

Protective

Anxiety (T2)

Protective

Emotional problems (T2)

Protective

School connectedness (T2)

Depression (T3)

Protective

Anxiety (T3)

Protective

Emotional problems (T3)

Protective

Teacher connectedness (T2)

Depression (T3)

NS

Anxiety (T3)

NS

Emotional problems (T3)

NS

Peer support (T2)

Depression (T3)

Protective

Anxiety (T3)

Protective

Emotional problems (T3)

Protective

Li & Lerner (2011) [64]

1,977 (43%), USA

T1: 11 (0.52)

T4: 3 yrs later

Emotional school engagement (3 items)

CESD

Emotional school engagement

Depression

Protective

Four growth trajectories established for emotional school engagement (decreasing, moderate, high with decrease, and highest). Emotional engagement trajectory groups at T1 were associated with T4 depression. Members of the decreasing group of emotional engagement reported the highest levels of depression, whereas youth in the highest group were least depressed. Students who experienced high but decreasing emotional engagement were more depressed than youth in the highest group

Loukas et al. (2016) [57]

296 (50%), USA

T1: 11.7 (0.76)

T2: 12.3 (0.49)

T3: 13.25 (0.44)

5 items from the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health

CDI

School connectedness (T1)

Depression (T2)

Protective

School connectedness (T1)

Depression (T3)

Protective

School connectedness (T2)

Depression (T3)

Protective

Markowitz (2016) [36]

9,698 (53%), USA

T1: 15.76 (1.57)

T2: 1 yr later

T3: 5 yrs later

6 items

CESD (9 items)

School connection (T2)

Depression (T3)

Protective

There was an interaction between early adversity and school connection such that early adversity was associated with depressive symptoms only for boys with low levels of school connection

McNeil et al. (2020) [32]

627 (53%), Children in contact with CWS, USA

T1: 12.5 (1.13)

T2: 1.5 yrs later

T3: 3 yrs later

11 items from Drug-Free Schools and Communities Act Survey

CDI

School engagement (T1)

Depression (slope)

NS

School engagement (slope)

Depression (slope)

Protective

Moderation analyses: 

Decreasing school engagement explained the association between parental non-involvement and increasing depression symptoms for Hispanic youth, but the indirect effect of parental non-involvement on depressive symptoms via school engagement was negative in White youth (increasing school engagement with low parental involvement led to decreasing depressive symptoms). The indirect effect was not significant for African American or Asian/other participants

Moffa et al. (2016) [47]

1,867 (51%, 1% other), USA

T1: Grade 9–11

T2: 1 yr later

5 items from the School Satisfaction subscale of the Multidimensional Students’ Life Satisfaction Scale

Internal distress (anxiety and depressive symptoms measured using 7 items)

School belonging (T1)

Internal distress (T2)

Risk

The authors noted that “the explained variance in internal distress was not substantial, Cohen’s f2 = .006. For this observed negligible effect size, the achieved power was not adequate (.75)”. A 1 standard deviation increase in school connectedness only predicted a 0.08 standard deviation increase in internal distress

Okado et al. (2018) [58]

209 (50%; survivors of pediatric cancer), USA

T1: 12.48 (2.86)

T2: 13.20 (2.93)

T3: 15.64 (2.93)

Hemingway Measure of Adolescent Connectedness

Behavior Assessment System for Children

School connectedness (T2)

Internalizing problems (T3)

Protective

Teacher connectedness (T2)

Internalizing problems (T3)

Protective

Peer connectedness (T2)

Internalizing problems (T3)

Protective

Pierre et al. (2020) [48]

119 (0%) African-American males, USA

T1: 15.33 (0.95)

T2: 16.56 (0.97)

PSSM

DASS

School belonging (T1)

Depression (T2)

NS

Sample included males only. T1 violence victimization and witnessing violence did not predict T2 depressive, anxiety, or stress symptoms at high levels of school belongingness

School belonging (T1)

Anxiety (T2)

NS

School belonging (T1)

Stress (T2)

NS

Pössel et al. (2016) [66]

2,545 (51%), Australia

T1: Grade 8 (13.11 [0.56])

T2—T5: Grade 9–12 (1 yr intervals)

Teacher-reported school climate (12 items)—obtained scores of two factors (teacher–student relationships and safe/orderly environment), which were averaged for analyses. The correlation between the two factors was 0.6, p < 0.001

CESD

School climate (T1)

Depression (slope T1 to T5)

Risk

No difference between males and females

School climate (T1 to T5 slope)

Depression (T1 to T5 slope)

NS

Sanders et al. (2020)**[49]

294 (? F in 7th grade, but 54% at original recruitment in KG), USA

T1: 7th Grade

T2: 9th Grade

School bonding and Affiliation with teacher subscales (People in My Life Questionnaire); General Adjustment subscale (SAQ)

SDQ

School bonding

Emotional symptoms

Protective

Estimated latent profiles of change in emotional symptoms and change in school bonding, resulting in three profiles (each) of both variables (high distress, medium distress and low distress for emotional symptoms, and strong school bond, average school bond, and weak school bond for school bonding). The profiles showed a moderate level of intercorrelation (r = 0.41), and 50% of the sample fell into a profile reflecting the same adjustment level (e.g., low, medium, or high) in both domains of emotional symptoms and school bonding

Shochet & Smith (2014) [59]

504 (45%), Australia

T1: 13.3 (0.5)

T2: 1 yr later

T3: 1.5 yrs later

PSSM

CDI

School connectedness (T1)

Depression (T2)

Protective

School connectedness (T1)

Depression (T3)

Protective

School connectedness (T2)

Depression (T3)

Protective

Mediated the association between classroom environment and depression

Shochet et al. (2011) [60]

504 (45%), Australia

T1: 13.3 (0.5)

T2: 1 yr later

T3: 1.5 yrs later

School connectedness subscales: Caring Relations, Acceptance, and Rejection (PSSM)

CDI

Caring Relations (T2)

Depression (T3)

NS

Result for males only

Acceptance (T2)

Depression (T3)

Protective

Result for males only

Rejection (T2)

Depression (T3)

NS

Result for males only

Caring Relations (T2)

Depression (T3)

NS

Result for females only

Acceptance (T2)

Depression (T3)

Protective

Result for females only

Rejection (T2)

Depression (T3)

NS

Result for females only

Stiles & Gudiño (2018) [33]

2633 (52%), Youth in contact with CWS, USA

T1: 10.04 (2.72)

T2: 1.5 yrs later

T3: 3 yrs later

11 items adapted from the Drug-Free Schools and Community Act Survey

CBCL (subscale)

School engagement (T1)

Internalizing problems (T2)

NS

School engagement (T2)

Internalizing problems (T3)

NS

Wright & Wachs (2019) [51]

416 (46%), USA

T1: 13.89 (0.41)

T2: 1 yr later

School belongingness (18 items)

CESD; The Multidimensional Anxiety Scale for Children

School belongingness (T1)

Depression (T2)

Protective

For T2 depression and anxiety, there was a significant three-way interaction between cyber victimization, school-belongingness, and ethnicity. T2 depression/anxiety and cyber victimization were more strongly associated at lower levels of school-belongingness for Latinx adolescents

School belongingness (T1)

Anxiety (T2)

Protective

Yu et al. (2016) [65]

236 (58%), China

T1: 7th Grade

T2: 6 months later

T3: 1 yr later

T4: 14.34 (0.57); 1.5 yrs later

School Engagement Scale at T2 and T3

YSR at T3 and T4 (mean of 16 items)

School engagement (T2)

Anxiety & Depression (T3)

Protective

School engagement (T2)

Anxiety & Depression (T4)

Protective

School engagement (T3)

Anxiety & Depression (T4)

Protective

School Disconnectedness

Benner et al. (2017) [44]

252 (50%),

Predominantly Latina/o and African American youth, USA

T1: 14.38 (0.46)

T2: 15.58 (0.51)

Gottfredson’s measurement (5 items)

CDI

Decreasing school belonging (T1 to T2) (compared to stable and increasing school belonging)

Change in depressive symptoms (T1 to T2)

Risk

Boen et al. (2020) [34]

20,475 (?), USA

T1: Grade 7–12

T2: 1/2 yrs later

T3: 5/6 yrs later

T4: 12/13 yrs later

Component obtained from Principal Component Analysis of interview and questionnaire items

CESD (9 items)

Low school connectedness (T1)

Depression (trajectory T1 to T4)

Risk

Low school connectedness was found to have a strong positive association with depressive risk, that diminished over time

Cristini et al. (2012) [52]

347 (53%), Italy

Data were collected at the end of each of the three middle school years (T1, T2, T3)

Teacher-student and student–student relationships using the School Situation Questionnaire

Depression and anxiety (5 items)

Socially isolated cluster (low on student–student relationships) at T1

Depression/Anxiety (T2 & T3)

Risk (at T2 and T3)

Socially isolated group showed higher levels of emotional problems than the well-adjusted cluster at each wave

Gunnarsódttir et al. (2021) [62]

944 (48%), Sweden

T1: 16

T2: 21

T3: 30

T4: 43

Principal Component Analysis on variables considered to capture interrelations occurring within the family and the school context

Depression (captured using six symptom measures)

Poor school connectedness (T1)

Depression (T2 to T4)

Risk

Tucker et al. (2011) [50]

4,329 (52%), USA

T1: 14.83 (95% CI 14.82 – 14.85)

T2: ~ 21

School disengagement (5 items)

CESD (8 items)

School disengagement (T1)

Depression (T2)

Risk

Wickrama & Vazsonyi (2011) [37]

20,745 (49%), USA

T1: 13—19 yrs

T2: NRT3: 6 yrs later

School disengagement (4 items)

Depression (CESD; 8 items)

School disengagement (T1)

Depression (change in symptoms T1 to T3)

Risk

Interaction effects between race/ethnicity and school disengagement and between school minority concentration and school experiences were also statistically significant. For Hispanic American adolescents, school disengagement had a stronger influence on changes in depressive symptoms than for European American adolescents (reference group)