Teasing is prevalent among late adolescents and young adults (Beck et al., 2007). Adults with mature cognitive abilities and verbal skills can recognize the subtle implications of irony and puns in conversations (Steinberg, 2014), leading to their enjoyment of teasing. Consequently, teasing can promote bonding in peer relationships (Eckert et al., 2020; Shapiro et al., 1991). However, research has seldom explored the link between mental competencies and positive perceptions of teasing. Notably, social and emotional learning (SEL) competencies, which are indicators of psychosocial adjustment (Durlak & Mahoney, 2019; Jones & Bouffard, 2012), influence how people perceive teasing (Jones & Bouffard, 2012). Additionally, SEL competencies influence emotional regulation strategies (CASEL, 2020a, 2020b), which are associated with perceptions of teasing (Myers et al., 2013). To address the aforementioned research gaps, the present study explored whether college students’ emotion regulation strategies mediate the relationship between SEL competencies and positive perceptions of teasing. Specifically, theaims of this study were to (1) assess the direct effect of SEL competencies on positive perceptions of teasing; (2) evaluate howSEL competencies affect general and specific emotion regulation strategies; (3) test the direct effects of these strategies onperceptions of teasing when SEL competencies are controlled for; and (4) explore the indirect effects of SEL competencies onpositive perceptions of teasing through general and specific emotion regulation strategies.

      A pilot study was conducted to develop three assessment scales, and the study included 441 college students (boys: 33%, girls: 66%, prefer not to answer: 1%) recruited from universities in southern Taiwan. After the pilot study, the formal study, conducted using the finalized scales, was conducted; the formal study included 1,207 college students (boys: 36%, girls: 64%)recruited from different universities in Taiwan.

      In this study, three assessment scales were developed and validated. The first scale, called Scale of College Students’ SEL Competencies, was developed to evaluate SEL competencies on a 5-point scale; the scale comprises 21 items. The scale includes five subscales: “self-management” (accounting for 14.63% of the variance), “self-wareness” (accounting for 13.63% of the variance); “interpersonal tolerance and basic interpersonal operation ” (accounting for 13.23% of the variance), “altruism”(accounting for 10.97% of the variance), and “interpersonal coping skills” (accounting for 10.91% of the variance). Collectively, these factors explained 63.37% of the variance. The reliability of the overall scale, as measured by Cronbach’s α, was .93. Regarding the reliability of the subscales, the Cronbach’s α value was .83 for “self-management,” .84 for “self-awareness,” .84 for “interpersonal tolerance and basic interpersonal operation,” .79 for “altruism,” and .73 for “interpersonal coping skills.”

       The second scale, called Scale of College Students’ Emotion Regulation Strategies, was developed to assess emotion regulation strategies on a 5-point scale; the scale comprises 15 items. It includes four factors: “taking positive perspectives” (accounting for 25.60% of the variance), “avoidance” (account for 15.81% of the variance), “suppression” (accounting for 14.03% of the variance), and “problem-solving” (accounting for 12.19% of the variance). Overall, these factors explained 67.63% of the variance. The reliability of the overall scale, as measured by Cronbach’s α, was .89. Regarding the reliability of the subscales, the Cronbach’s α was .91 for “taking positive perspectives,” .80 for “avoidance,” .83 for “suppression,” and .67 for “problem-solving.”

       The third scale, called Scale of College Students’ Positive Perceptions of Teasing, was developed to measure perceptions of teasing on a 5-point scale; the scale comprises nine items. It includes two factors: “getting close with each other” (accounting for 39.42% of the variance) and “expressing positive emotion” (accounting for 32.33% of the variance). Collectively, these factors explained 71.75% of the variance. The reliability of the overall scale, as measured by Cronbach’s α, was .93. Regarding the reliability of the subscale, the Cronbach’s α value was .90 for “getting close with each other” and .86 for “expressingpositive emotion.”

      Preliminary analyses of this study yielded several findings: (1) Significant differences in the SEL competencies were observed among college students from different schools. However, post hoc analysis results revealed no significant differences across school types. (2) Significant sex-based differences in emotion regulation strategies were observed; specifically, male students employed more emotion regulation strategies than did female students.(3) Significant school- and sex-based differences in positive perceptions of teasing were observed, although post hoc analysis results indicated no significant differences between school types. Male students were more likely to perceive teasing positively when compared with female students. Furthermore, the study observed a positive association between the students’ SEL competencies, emotion regulation strategies, and positive perceptions of teasing. These findings are in agreement with those of previous studies that have revealed associations between these factors and mental health (CASEL, 2020a, 2020b).

Mediation analyses addressing the main objectives of this study revealed the following: (1) College students’ SEL

competencies had a direct effect on their positive perceptions of teasing. (2) College students’ SEL competencies directly

influenced both general and specific emotion regulation strategies. (3) When students’ SEL competencies were controlled for,

general and specific emotion regulation strategies had direct effects on students’ positive perceptions of teasing. (4) College

students’ SEL competencies indirectly influenced their positive perceptions of teasing through general and specific emotion regulation strategies.

       Notably, the mediation analysis results provide essential insights. The results demonstrate that the general strategy for regulating emotions fully mediated the association between college students’ SEL competencies and their positive perceptions of teasing. Moreover, an exploratory factor analysis of specific emotion regulation strategies—namely “taking positive perspectives,” “problem-solving,” “avoidance,” and “suppression”—revealed that “taking positive perspectives” emerged as a full mediator in the aforementioned association. However, “problem-solving,” “avoidance” and “suppression” were partial mediators in this relationship.

         These findings highlight the importance of emotion regulation in the association between the SEL competencies of college students and their positive perceptions of teasing. Effective emotion regulation could be a protective factor enabling college students to interpret social behaviors positively and maintain positive social connections. Overall, the study demonstrated that when the participants adequately used emotion regulation strategies—especially positive reappraisal—greater SEL competencies were associated with more positive perceptions of their teasing experiences. Moreover, even strategies such as problem-solving or the less adaptive approaches of avoidance and suppression could partially enhance positive perceptions of teasing, provided that the students possessed strong SEL competencies.

      Overall, this study contributes to the relevant literature on SEL, emotion regulation, and peer teasing among late adolescents and young adults. Its findings can inform university student guidance centers in their efforts to cultivate SEL skills and emotion regulation strategies, which can ultimately aid students in positively interpreting common teasing interactions in peer relationships.