Search

We examined the moderating effect of guilt on the associations between moral disengagement and bullying, defending and outsider behaviors in a sample of 404 students (203 boys;Mage= 11.09 years;SD = 1.48). Bullying, defending and outsider behavior were assessed through peer nominations, whereas guilt and moral disengagement were assessed by self-reports. Results showed that moral disengagement was associated with high levels of bullying and low levels of defending. Guilt was negatively associated with bullying and positively with defending. A moderating effect for guilt was also found: increasing levels of moral disengagement contributed to more bullying and outsider behavior, and to less defending, among students with low levels of guilt. The current research broadens the extant literature, showing the combined effects of guilt and moral disengagement on bullying-related behaviors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study aimed to investigate: (I) the influence of gender, sibling age, and sibling gender on sibling bullying and victimization; (2) the links between personality characteristics, quality of the sibling relationship, and sibling bullying/victimization; (3) the association between sibling and school bullying/victimization, and the direct and indirect associations between personality variables and school bullying/victimization. The sample comprised 195 children (98 boys and 97 girls, aged 10-12 years). Instruments included: a self-report questionnaire for bullying and victimization, the Big Five Questionnaire for Children and the Sibling Inventory of Behaviour. Results highlighted that the presence of an older brother is a risk factor for the emergence of sibling victimization. For both boys and girls, high levels of conflict in the dyad and low levels of empathy were significantly related to sibling bullying and sibling victimization. For males, energy was associated with sibling bullying and indirectly to school bullying; friendliness and high emotional instability were directly associated with school bullying. School victimization was directly associated with emotional instability for both males and females. Finally, both sibling bullying and sibling victimization were associated with bullying and victimization at school. The discussion highlights the role of a multi- contextual approach to understand and prevent bullying. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In order to find out what children would suggest as useful interventions to stop bullying, we designed a questionnaire administered to 311 children (155 boys and 156 girls; mean age = 11 years). Thirty-six items were employed to ask children how effective, in their opinion, retaliation, nonchalance and assertiveness could be in stopping bullying. Items were presented to children from three different perspectives (imagine you are the victim, the bully or a witness). We used peer reports to assess children's role in bullying. Children were grouped into bullies, followers of the bully, defenders of the victims, outsiders, victims and those not involved. The strategy most frequently chosen by all children was to cope with bullying through assertiveness. Bullies considered retaliation effective more often than their classmates, especially when they adopted the perspective of the victim or witness. Bullies did not consider assertive strategies as efficient in stopping the bully. Defenders, outsiders, victims and children not involved, on the other hand, were very much in favour of strategies aimed at solving the conflict through nonchalance or assertiveness, especially when they imagined being the bully. Girls chose assertive strategies more often than boys and younger children preferred nonchalance more often than older children, who tended to choose retaliation more often. Suggestions for intervention are made. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The present study aimed to investigate children's social information processing (SIP) and emotions in the bullying situation, taking into account reactive and proactive aggression. More specifically, we investigated the way in which children interpret social information, which goals they select, how they evaluate their responses and which emotions they express in hypothetical situations.The participants comprised 242 Dutch children (120 girls and 122 boys; mean age: 117.2 months), who were assigned by means of peer nominations () to one of the following roles: bully (n = 21), follower of the bully (n = 38), victim (n = 35), defender of the victim (n = 48), outsider (n = 52) and not involved (n = 32). Sixteen children (including 3 bully/victims) were not given any role. The reactive and proactive aggression scale () was filled out by teachers in order to test the association between these types of aggression and involvement in bullying. Children were presented with ambiguous scenarios and responded to questions about attribution of intent, goal selection and emotions (anger and sadness). In addition, two questionnaires were administered to children: one assessed perceived self-efficacy in performing aggression, inhibiting aggression and using verbal persuasion skills, and the other assessed expected outcomes from behaving aggressively or prosocially.Results showed that while reactive aggression was common in bullies and victims, proactive aggression was only characteristic of bullies. Both bullies and victims, compared to the other children, scored higher on hostile interpretation, anger, retaliation and ease of aggression. Bullies and followers claimed that it was easy for them to use verbal persuasion, while victims turned out to be the saddest group. All children, irrespective of their role in the peer group, thought that aggressive as well as prosocial behavior was more likely to produce desired results from a friendly peer than from an aggressive one.Bullies and victims seem to be similar in reactive aggression, SIP, and in the expression of anger, but the motivations which lead to their behavior may be different, as well as the final outcomes of their acts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The main aim of the study relates to the links between bullying and victimization on the one hand and reactive and proactive aggression on the other. In addition, we also investigated stability and incidence of bullying and victimization. At age 7, 236 children were rated on bullying and victimization using peer reports. At age 8, 242 children were rated again. Two hundred and fifteen children (114 girls and 101 boys) were present at both time points. Reactive and proactive aggression was assessed by teachers. The results showed that bullies and bully/victims were both reactively and proactively aggressive, while victims were only reactively aggressive. A moderate degree of stability of bullying and victimization was found, with bullying being more stable than victimization. Boys were more often bullies than girls and more stable than girls in victimization. Stable victims and stable bully/victims were more reactively aggressive than their unstable counterparts. The relevance of the outcomes to preventing future maladjustment and suggestions for further research are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Research reveals that social anxiety may be predictive of bullying victimization, but it is not clear whether this relation stands for different groups of youth. The present study examines this association by employing a longitudinal design over 1 year and including the moderating role of developmental period (childhood vs. early adolescence) and students' immigrant status (native vs. non-native). T1 sample included 506 children (46.44% girls, mean age M = 8.55 years, SD = 0.55) and 310 early adolescents (50% girls, mean age = 12.54 years, SD = 0.59) recruited in schools in Northern Italy. Due to missing cases and drop-outs from T1 to T2, the final sample comprised 443 and 203 students from primary and middle school, respectively. Social anxiety and peer victimization were assessed through self-reported questionnaires. Results indicated that victimization at T2 was predicted by a 3-way interaction between T1 social anxiety, immigrant status, and developmental period. In particular, socially anxious early adolescents with an immigrant background were the most victimized. The results are discussed in terms of group dynamics and intergroup processes. The findings highlight the importance of personal variables in the cumulation of risks: social anxiety is more predictive of bullying victimization for immigrant early adolescents than for children or native early adolescents. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]