Swipe om te navigeren naar een ander artikel
Previous studies on victimization have either used self-reports of peer-reports, but correspondence between these measures is low, implying that types of victims may exist that differ in convergence between self- and peer-reported victimization. Importantly, the very few studies that do exist on such types were cross-sectional, and did not address the stability nor predictive validity in terms of adjustment of these types. Using a person-centered approach, the present study identified types of victims that were either convergent or divergent in self- and peer-reported victimization, and examined how these types differed in concurrent and prospective adjustment. Participants were 1,346 adolescents (50 % girls, mean age 14.2) who were followed for 1 year. Using Latent Profile Analysis, we identified two convergent types (self-peer identified victims and non-victims) and two divergent types (self-identified and peer-identified) of victims. The types were highly stable over time. Self-peer identified victims were not only concurrently but also prospectively the least well adjusted. Self-identified victims showed lower levels of emotional adjustment but did not show problems on social adjustment. On the other hand, peer-identified victims were at risk for social but not emotional maladjustment. The findings corroborate previous studies that suggest that self-reported victimization is related to emotional problems, while peer-reported victimization is more indicative of social problems. The findings also suggest that using self-reports or peer-reports only may lead to incomplete conclusions about victims’ adjustment on different domains.
Log in om toegang te krijgen
Met onderstaand(e) abonnement(en) heeft u direct toegang:
Archer, J., & Cote, S. (2005). Sex differences in aggressive behavior. In R. E. Tremblay, W. W. Hartup, & J. Archer (Eds.), Developmental origins of aggression (pp. 425–443). New York: Guilford Press.
Baldwin, M. W. (1992). Relational schemas and the processing of social information. Psychological Bulletin, 112, 461–484. CrossRef
Bergman, L. R., Magnusson, D., & El-Khouri, B. M. (2003). Studying individual development: A person-oriented approach. In D. Magnusson (Series Ed.), Paths through life (Vol. 4, pp. 24–148). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Björkqvist, K., Lagerspetz, K. M. J., & Kaukiainen, A. (1992). Do girls manipulate and boys fight? Developmental trends in regard to direct and indirect aggression. Aggressive Behavior, 18, 117–127. CrossRef
Centraal Bureau voor de Statistiek. (2011). Jaarboek onderwijs in cijfers 2011. [Statistics Netherlands (2011). Yearbook education in numbers 2011.] Retrieved from http://www.cbs.nl/NR/rdonlyres/FC6D3388-0F9E-4129-8F2B-53022BA3F774/0/2011f162pub.pdf.
Crick, N. R., & Dodge, K. A. (1994). A review and reformulation of social information-processing mechanisms in children’s social adjustment. Psychological Bulletin, 115, 74–101. CrossRef
Dempsey, J. P., Fireman, G. D., & Wang, E. (2006). Transitioning out of peer victimization in school children: Gender and behavioral characteristics. Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment, 28, 273–282. CrossRef
Eslea, M., Menesini, E., Morita, Y., O’Moore, M., Mora-Merchán, J. A., Pereira, B., et al. (2003). Friendship and loneliness among bullies and victims: Data from seven countries. Aggressive Behavior, 30, 71–83. CrossRef
Hawker, D. S. J., & Boulton, M. J. (2000). Twenty years’ research on peer victimization and psychosocial maladjustment: A meta-analytic review of cross-sectional studies. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry and Allied Disciplines, 41, 441–455. CrossRef
Hymel, S., Wagner, E., & Butler, L. J. (1990). Reputational bias: View from the peer group. In S. R. Asher & J. D. Coie (Eds.), Peer rejection in childhood (pp. 156–186). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Jiang, X. L., & Cillessen, A. H. N. (2005). Stability of continuous measures of sociometric status: A meta-analysis. Developmental Review, 25, 1–25. CrossRef
Ladd, G. W., & Kochenderfer-Ladd, B. (2002). Identifying victims of peer aggression from early to middle childhood: Analysis of cross-informant data for concordance, estimation of relational adjustment, prevalence of victimization, and characteristics of identified victims. Psychological Assessment, 14, 74–96. PubMedCrossRef
Lo, Y., Mendell, N. R., & Rubin, D. B. (2001). Testing the number of components in a normal mixture. Biometrika, 88, 778. CrossRef
Marcoen, A., Goossens, L., & Claes, P. (1987). Loneliness in pre- through late adolescence: Exploring the contributions of a multidimensional approach. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 16, 561–577. CrossRef
Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O. (2006). Mplus user’s guide (6th ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Muthén & Muthén.
Newcomb, A. F., & Bukowski, W. M. (1983). Social impact and social preference as determinants of children’s peer group status. Developmental Psychology, 19, 856–867. CrossRef
Nylund, K. L., Asparouhov, T., & Muthén, B. O. (2007a). Deciding on the number of classes in latent class analysis and growth mixture modeling: A monte carlo simulation study. Structural Equation Modeling, 14, 535–569. CrossRef
Olweus, D. (1989). The Olweus Bully/victim Questionnaire. Bergen, Norwegen: Mimeo.
Österman, K., Björkqvist, K., Lagerspetz, K. M. J., Kaukiainen, A., Huesmann, L. R., & Fraczek, A. (1994). Peer and self-estimated aggression and victimization in 8-year-old children from five ethnic groups. Aggressive Behavior, 20, 411–428. CrossRef
Pellegrini, A. D., Bartini, M., & Brooks, F. (1999). School bullies, victims, and aggressive victims: Factors relating to group affiliation and victimization in early adolescence. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91, 26–224. CrossRef
Pellegrini, A. D., & Long, J. D. (2002). A longitudinal study of bullying, dominance, and victimization during the transition from primary to secondary school. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 20, 259–280. CrossRef
Rosen, P. J., Milich, R., & Harris, M. J. (2007). Victims of their own cognitions: Implicit social cognitions, emotional distress, and peer victimization. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 28, 211–226. CrossRef
Rosenberg, M. (1979). Conceiving the self. New York: Basic Books.
Rusbult, C. E., Martz, J. M., & Agnew, C. R. (1998). The Investment Model Scale: Measuring commitment level, satisfaction level, quality of alternatives, and investment size. Personal Relationships, 5, 357–391. CrossRef
Salmivalli, C. (2002). Is there an age decline in victimization by peers at school? Educational Research, 44, 269–277. CrossRef
Schäfer, M., Werner, N. E., & Crick, N. R. (2002). A comparison of two approaches to the study of negative peer treatment: General victimization and bully/victim problems among German schoolchildren. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 20, 281–306. CrossRef
Stassen Berger, K. (2007). Update on bullying at school: Science forgotten? Developmental Review, 27, 90–126. CrossRef
Wienke Totura, C. M., Green, A. E., Karver, M. S., & Gesten, E. L. (2009). Multiple informants in the assessment of psychological, behavioral, and academic correlates of bullying and victimization in middle school. Journal of Adolescence, 32, 193–211.
- Divergence in Self- and Peer-Reported Victimization and its Association to Concurrent and Prospective Adjustment
Ron H. J. Scholte
William J. Burk
- Springer US