Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Understanding Bullying, Victimization, and Bystander Behaviors Through Resource Control Theory

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Child & Youth Care Forum Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

Resource control theory posits that individuals may utilize prosocial and/or coercive strategies to access social resources. Resource control theory has utility for understanding adolescents’ engagement in bullying role behaviors.

Objective

The current study examined direct associations between bullying role behaviors (i.e., bullying, victimization, assisting, defending, and outsider behavior) and resource control strategies (i.e., prosocial and coercive resource control), as well as differences in bullying behaviors among groups of resource controllers identified through latent profile analysis (LPA).

Method

In a sample of 6th–8th grade students (N = 680; 44% female) via self-report, bullying role behaviors were assessed using the Bullying Participant Behaviors Questionnaire and resource control strategies were assessed using the Resource Control Strategies Inventory.

Results

Prosocial resource control was positively associated with defending behavior, and coercive resource control was positively associated with bullying and defending. The current study validated the use of LPA for grouping adolescents based on their use of resource control strategies, although the emergent groups differed slightly from the traditional approach.

Conclusions

Findings suggest an absence of a purely coercive resource control group as posited by resource control theory. Advanced understanding of social behaviors, including the use of resource control strategies, leads to a more comprehensive approach to preventing bullying and victimization in schools.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • American Psychological Association. (2017). Ethical principles of psychologists and code of conduct. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arsenio, W. F., & Lemerise, E. A. (2001). Varieties of childhood bullying: Values, emotion processes, and social competence. Social Development,10, 59–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen, B. B., & Chang, L. (2012). Adaptive insecure attachment and resource control strategies during middle childhood. International Journal of Behavioral Development,36, 389–397.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Choudhury, S., Blakemore, S. J., & Charman, T. (2006). Social cognitive development during adolescence. Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience,1, 165–174.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Demaray, M. K., Summers, K. H., Jenkins, L. N., & Becker, L. D. (2014). Bullying participant behaviors questionnaire (BPBQ): Establishing a reliable and valid measure. Journal of School Violence,15, 158–188.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eisenberg, N., Fabes, R. A., & Spinrad, T. L. (2015). Prosocial development. In R. M. Lerner & M. E. Lamb (Eds.), Handbook of child psychology and developmental science (7th ed., Vol. 3, pp. 610–656). John Wiley & Sons.

  • Espelage, D., Holt, M., & Henkel, R. (2003). Examination of peer-group contextual effects on aggression during early adolescences. Child Development,74, 205–220.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Faris, R., & Felmlee, D. (2014). Casualties of social combat school networks of peer victimization and their consequences. American Sociological Review,79, 228–257.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Farrell, A. D., Mehari, K., Mays, S., Sullivan, T. N., & Lee, A. T. (2015). Participants’ perceptions of a violence prevention curriculum for middle school students: Was it relevant and useful? The Journal of Primary Prevention,36, 227–246.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Findley, D., & Ojanen, T. (2013). Adolescent resource control: Associations with physical and relational aggression, prosocial and withdrawn behaviors, and peer regard. International Journal of Behavioral Development,37, 518–529.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fox, C. L., & Boulton, M. J. (2005). The social skills problems of victims of bullying: Self, peer and teacher perceptions. British Journal of Educational Psychology,75, 313–328.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gini, G., Albiero, P., Benelli, B., & Altoè, G. (2008). Determinants of adolescents’ active defending and passive bystanding behavior in bullying. Journal of Adolescence,31, 93–105.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hawley, P. H. (1999). The ontogenesis of social dominance: A strategy-based evolutionary perspective. Developmental Review,19, 97–132.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hawley, P. H. (2003a). Prosocial and coercive configurations of resource control in early adolescence: A case for the well-adapted Machiavellian. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly,49, 279–309.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hawley, P. H. (2003b). Strategies of control, aggression, and morality in preschoolers: An evolutionary perspective. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology,85, 213–235.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hawley, P. H. (2006). Evolution and personality: A new look at Machiavellianism. In D. Mroczek & T. Little (Eds.), Handbook of personality development (pp. 147–161). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hawley, P. H., & Geldhof, G. J. (2012). Preschoolers’ social dominance, moral cognition, and moral behavior: An evolutionary perspective. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology,112, 18–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hawley, P. H., Johnson, S. E., Mize, J. A., & McNamara, K. A. (2007). Physical attractiveness in preschoolers: Relationships with power, status, aggression and social skills. Journal of School Psychology,45, 499–521.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hawley, P. H., Shorey, H. S., & Alderman, P. M. (2009). Attachment correlates of resource-control strategies: Possible origins of social dominance and interpersonal power differentials. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships,26, 1097–1118.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • IBM Corporation. (2013). IBM SPSS statistics for windows, version 22.0. Armonk: IBM Corp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O. (2015). Mplus user’s guide: Statistical analysis with latent variables—User’s guide. Los Angeles: Muthén & Muthén.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nylund, K. L., Asparouhov, T., & Muthén, B. O. (2007). 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Olthof, T., Goossens, F. A., Vermande, M. M., Aleva, E. A., & van der Meulen, M. (2011). Bullying as strategic behavior: Relations with desired and acquired dominance in the peer group. Journal of School Psychology,49, 339–359.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pellegrini, A. D., & Bartini, M. (2000). A longitudinal study of bullying, victimization, and peer affiliation during the transition from primary school to middle school. American Educational Research Journal,37, 699–725.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reijntjes, A., Vermande, M., Goossens, F. A., Olthof, T., van de Schoot, R., Aleva, L., et al. (2013). Developmental trajectories of bullying and social dominance in youth. Child Abuse and Neglect,37, 224–234.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reijntjes, A., Vermande, M., Olthof, T., Goossens, F. A., Aleva, L., & van der Meulen, M. (2016a). Defending victimized peers: Opposing the bully, supporting the victim, or both? Aggressive Behavior,42, 585–597.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reijntjes, A., Vermande, M., Thomaes, S., Goossens, F., Olthof, T., Aleva, L., et al. (2016b). Narcissism, bullying, and social dominance in youth: A longitudinal analysis. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology,44, 63–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Salmivalli, C. (2010). Bullying and the peer group: A review. Aggression and Violent Behavior,15, 112–120.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Salmivalli, C., Lagerspetz, K., Björkqvist, K., Österman, K., & Kaukiainen, A. (1996). Bullying as a group process: Participant roles and their relations to social status within the group. Aggressive Behavior,22, 1–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Steinberg, L. (2001). We know some things: Parent–adolescent relationships in retrospect and prospect. Journal of Research on Adolescence,11, 1–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sutton, J., Smith, P. K., & Swettenham, J. (1999). Bullying and ‘theory of mind’: A critique of the ‘social skills deficit’ view of anti-social behaviour. Social Development,8, 117–127.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Swearer, S. M., & Cary, P. T. (2003). Perceptions and attitudes toward bullying in middle school youth: A developmental examination across the bully/victim continuum. Journal of Applied School Psychology,19(2), 63–79.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Underwood, M. K., Beron, K. J., & Rosen, L. H. (2009). Continuity and change in social and physical aggression from middle childhood through early adolescence. Aggressive Behavior: Official Journal of the International Society for Research on Aggression,35, 357–375.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wei, H. S., & Chen, J. K. (2012). The moderating effect of Machiavellianism on the relationships between bullying, peer acceptance, and school adjustment in adolescents. School Psychology International,33, 345–363.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weil, L. G., Fleming, S. M., Dumontheil, I., Kilford, E. J., Weil, R. S., Rees, G., et al. (2013). The development of metacognitive ability in adolescence. Consciousness and Cognition,22, 264–271.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Psychology, Northern Illinois University, Psychology-Computer Science Building, Room 400, DeKalb, IL, 60115, USA

    Kelly N. Clark, Nicole B. Dorio, Michelle K. Demaray & Christine K. Malecki

Authors
  1. Kelly N. Clark
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Nicole B. Dorio
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Michelle K. Demaray
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Christine K. Malecki
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kelly N. Clark.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical Approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed Consent

In accordance with State law and as approved by the Institutional Review Board of the authors’ institution, the participating school informed parents/guardians of the data collection and parents/guardians were able to opt their children out of the evaluation through a passive consent procedure. Adolescents participating in the evaluation provided assent.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Clark, K.N., Dorio, N.B., Demaray, M.K. et al. Understanding Bullying, Victimization, and Bystander Behaviors Through Resource Control Theory. Child Youth Care Forum 49, 489–510 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10566-019-09539-z

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10566-019-09539-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation