Physical,verbal, and relational forms of bullying among German students: age trends,gender differences,and correlates

A revised version of the Bully/Victim Questionnaire [Olweus, 1991] was given to 2,086 fifth–tenth grader students from schools in two German federal states. The results were analysed in terms of frequencies of self‐reports of different forms of bullying (physical, verbal, relational/indirect; for bullies and for victims), gender and grade differences. Overall, 12.1% of the students reported bullying others and 11.1% reported being bullied (victimisation). We classified 2.3% of the students as bully/victims due to their self‐report. Significantly more boys reported bullying others, regardless of bullying form, and significantly more boys than girls were classified as bully/victims. Although there was no gender difference for victimisation at all, boys reported significantly more often than girls being bullied physically. Besides, self‐reports of pure and overlapping forms of bullying behaviour (relational, verbal, physical) were analysed. With regard to age trends, students from middle grades reported the highest rates of bullying. Self‐reported rates of victimisation were higher for younger students, regardless of form of victimisation. Furthermore, class size was not linked to reports of bullying and victimisation. Results from logistic regression analyses emphasised that the variables “gender” and “grade” add significantly to the prediction of self‐reported bullying; “grade” and variables measuring impaired psychosocial “well‐being” of students at school (e.g., feeling of not being popular, negative attitude towards breaks) add significantly to the prediction of self‐reported victimisation. The results are discussed against the background of other study findings, accentuating the significance of gender‐ and age‐specific forms of bullying/victimisation. Aggr. Behav. 32:1–15, 2006. © 2006 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.     

Differences in Proactive and Reactive Aggression in Traditional Bullies and Cyberbullies

This study examined how proactive and reactive aggression related to traditional bullying and cyberbullying. Participants were 851 students in Grades 6 through 8 who completed a survey that assessed bullying behaviors, proactive aggression, and reactive aggression. Most of these students were Caucasian and from a rural background. For both traditional bullying and cyberbullying groups, uninvolved students were found to have significantly lower proactive and reactive aggression than bullies and bully-victims. Further, it was found that for traditional and cyberbullying groups, bully-victims had significantly higher proactive and reactive aggression than bullies. Implications and future directions are discussed.     

The perceived consequences of responding to bullying with aggression: A study of male and female adult prisoners

This research addresses whether prisoners who bully others and/or are victimised themselves can be distinguished by the perceptions that they have of the consequences about using aggression as a solution to being bullied. Male and female adult prisoners (n = 406) were required to complete a self‐report behavioural checklist (Direct and Indirect Prisoner Behaviour Checklist [DIPC]) that addressed the level of bullying behaviour at their present institution. Prisoners were also required to complete a questionnaire (Bullying Social Problem Solving Questionnaire [BSPSQ]) that provided them with five different bullying situations and asked them what would be the consequences if they were to respond aggressively to each. Four categories of prisoners were examined: pure bullies, pure victims, those who reported both bullying others and being victimised themselves (bully/victims), and those not involved in bullying/victimisation. Pure bullies reported significantly more positive than negative consequences of aggression compared with the overall category mean in response to theft‐related bullying. Bully/victims reported significantly more positive than negative consequences compared with the overall category mean in response to indirect and indirect‐physical bullying. Those not involved reported significantly more negative than positive consequences compared with the overall category mean in response to all scenarios except one involving indirect‐physical bullying. Males reported significantly more positive than negative consequences compared with females for all types of bullying. Aggr. Behav. 28:257–272, 2002. © 2002 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.     

Proactive and reactive aggression among school bullies,victims, and bully‐victims

Bullies, victims, bully‐victims, and control children were identified from a sample of 1062 children (530 girls and 532 boys), aged 10 to 12 years, participating in the study. Their reactive and proactive aggression was measured by means of peer and teacher reports. Peer and teacher reports were more concordant with respect to reactive than proactive aggression. Comparing the children in different bullying roles in terms of their reactive and proactive aggression, bully‐victims were found to be the most aggressive group of all. For this group, it was typical to be highly aggressive both reactively and proactively. Although bullies were significantly less aggressive than bully‐victims, they scored higher than victims and controls on both reactive and proactive aggression. However, observations at the person level, i.e., cross‐tabulational analyses, indicated that bullies were not only overrepresented among children who were both reactively and procatively aggressive but also among the only reactively aggressive as well as the only proactively aggressive groups. Victims scored higher than control children on reactive aggression, but they were not proactively aggressive. Furthermore, even their reactive aggression was at a significantly lower level than that of bullies and bully‐victims. Aggr. Behav. 28:30–44, 2002. © 2002 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.     

Developmental relations between ADHD symptoms and bullying perpetration and victimization in adolescence

It has previously been hypothesized that individuals with elevated attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) symptoms are at greater risk of bullying perpetration and victimization. Using autoregressive latent trajectory models with structured residuals (ALT‐SR) and four waves (ages 11, 13, 15, and 17) of longitudinal data from the normative z‐proso study (n = 1526, 52% male), we evaluated the developmental relations between ADHD and bullying using both self‐ and teacher‐reported ADHD symptom data. Analyses suggested that ADHD symptoms primarily increase the risk of bullying perpetration, with a within‐person effect of ADHD symptoms on bullying perpetration symptoms identified across ages 13–15 (β = .13) and ages 15–17 (β = .19) based on self‐reported ADHD symptoms and a similar effect identified across ages 11–13 (β = .24) and 13–15 (β = .29) based on teacher‐reported inattention symptoms. There were also some indications of reciprocal effects and effects involving victimization that merit further exploration in future research. Results imply that the content of bullying intervention and prevention programs should take account of ADHD symptoms to ensure that those with elevated symptoms can benefit as much as their typically developing peers. This will involve addressing bullying perpetration that may reflect impulsive/reactive aggression and impaired social skills rather than instrumental aggression. Further, programs should go beyond classical curriculum/classroom‐based delivery to ensure that individuals with elevated ADHD symptoms can be successfully engaged.     

Does cost–benefit analysis or self‐control predict involvement in bullying behavior by male prisoners?

The main aim of this study is to assess whether lack of self-control or the perceived costs and benefits of aggression provide the better predictors of bullying behavior and victimization, and direct aggression perpetration, in a sample of 122 male British prisoners. We also assessed whether bullying was associated with height and weight. Zero-order correlations showed that perceived benefits, self-control, and perceived costs were most closely associated with perpetration of bullying, and that lack of self-control was weakly associated with victimization. Height and weight were unrelated to bullying or victimization. In a standard regression analyses, perceived benefits was the strongest predictor of bullying perpetration, with lack of self-control contributing further; all three variables made a significant contribution when direct aggression was the criterion. Mediation analysis showed that a combined cost-benefit measure partially mediated the association between self-control and both bullying and direct aggression. The findings are discussed in relation to explanations of aggression based on impulse control or a cost-benefit analysis.     

Does Maladaptive Coping Mediate the Relationship Between Borderline Personality Traits and Reactive and Proactive Aggression?

The aim of this study was to identify associations between borderline personality (BP) traits and reactive and proactive aggression, and to compare the meditational effects of maladaptive coping in samples of older adolescents (n = 133) and young adults (n = 93), which has not hitherto been explored. This was a cross‐sectional study that used self‐report measures to assess BP traits on a continuum, trait‐based reactive and proactive aggression, and coping strategies. In adults, maladaptive emotional coping significantly mediated the relationship between BP and reactive aggression, and maladaptive avoidant coping mediated the relationship between BP and proactive aggression; no significant mediational effects were found for adolescents. These findings highlight potential explanations for associations between BP traits and reactive and proactive aggression in young adults, and indicate that reactive aggression in adult BPs could be decreased by reducing emotional coping, and proactive aggression by reducing avoidant coping. Aggr. Behav. 38:403‐413, 2012. © 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

The Effects of Rejection Sensitivity on Reactive and Proactive Aggression

The aim of this research was to use a pure measure of aggression to clarify whether rejection sensitive children exhibit higher levels of aggressive behavior than those who are not as rejection sensitive and to examine whether the components of rejection sensitivity (RS) vary according to the types of aggression. A total of 287 Australian primary school students aged between 9 and 12 completed self‐report measures of RS and aggression. As expected, RS and its components, angry and anxious expectations of rejection, were linked to generalized aggression (GA) in adolescents, with angry expectations being more strongly associated with GA and in particular, proactive aggression. As expected, RS predicted reactive aggression better than it did proactive aggression and a three‐way interaction was found whereby the relationship between the type of RS and aggression differed as a function of the type of aggression. The present study offers new evidence to support the theory that RS is predictive of aggressive behavior in children and clarifies some confusion about the attributional affect and processes behind this behavior. The findings both support and extend existing research in the areas of RS and aggression. Aggr. Behav. 39:3‐12, 2013. © 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Is bad intent negligible? Linking victim justice sensitivity,hostile attribution bias,and aggression

The hostile attribution bias (HAB) is a well‐established risk factor for aggression. It is considered part of the suspicious mindset that may cause highly victim‐justice sensitive individuals to behave uncooperatively. Thus, links of victim justice sensitivity (JS) with negative behavior, such as aggression, may be better explained by HAB. The present study tested this hypothesis in N = 279 German adolescents who rated their JS, HAB, and physical, relational, verbal, reactive, and proactive aggression. Victim JS predicted physical, relational, verbal, reactive, and proactive aggression when HAB was controlled. HAB only predicted physical and proactive aggression. There were no moderator effects. Injustice seems an important reason for aggression irrespective of whether or not it is intentionally caused, particularly among those high in victim JS. Thus, victim JS should be considered as a potential important risk factor for aggression and receive more attention by research on aggression and preventive efforts.

     

Reactive and proactive aggression as meaningful distinctions at the variable and person level in primary school‐aged children

Reactive and proactive aggression is a dichotomous classification of aggression in adults and children. This distinction has been supported by a number of variable‐based and factor analytic studies. Due to high inter‐correlations, however, the reactive—proactive aggression distinction may not be entirely useful for understanding how group or individual aggressive behavior varies in children and adolescents. Drawing on a sample of primary school‐aged children (N = 242) aged 7–12 years, this study sought to determine whether reactive and proactive aggression could be distinguished at the variable‐level and the person‐level in children. Exploratory Factor Analysis of data from an aggression instrument measuring both functions and forms of aggression, found a two‐factor construct of aggression constituted by a reactive and proactive aggression factor. A person‐based analysis was then conducted after classifying children according to the presence of reactive and/or proactive aggression. Discriminant function analysis was used to discern whether classifications on the basis of aggression function produced meaningful distinctions in terms of antisocial traits and emotional valence and intensity measures. Two functions were identified which distinguished children with different combinations of reactive and proactive aggression. Reactive‐only aggressive children were defined primarily by high levels of impulsivity, while proactive‐only children were defined primarily by higher levels of antisocial traits. Children high in both types of aggression exhibited both the presence of antisocial traits and impulsivity. Contrary to recent findings, this suggests that differences in aggression functions remain meaningful at the person level in children. Implications for interventions are discussed.

     

Homophobic bullying victimization trajectories: The roles of perpetration,sex assigned at birth,and sexuality

There is a paucity of research on developmental trajectories of bias-based aggression. We examined homophobic bullying victimization trajectories among high school students (N = 3,064; M age = 13.67; Girls = 50.2%) and how these developmental pathways vary as a function of factors like homophobic bullying perpetration, sex assigned at birth, and sexuality. Using data from a 3-wave longitudinal investigation over a 2-year period, we utilized latent growth mixture modeling to explore the aforementioned trajectories. Findings suggested that there were three distinct classes characterized by high initial rates and declines over time, low initial rates, and increases over time, and low, stable, rate across time. Furthermore, results indicated that homophobic bullying perpetration, sex assigned at birth, and sexuality all predicted class membership.     

Psychological Dating Violence Perpetration and Victimization: Trajectories From Middle to High School

Despite evidence documenting the negative consequences, psychological dating violence occurs frequently in adolescent dating relationships. No information exists on the trajectories that adolescents follow and their association to nonphysical peer violence. The sample comprised 624 randomly selected 6th graders. In yearly surveys from 6th through 12th grade, 550 of the 624 students reported dating at least twice during the 3 months prior to completing the survey. These students responded to questions about frequency of engagement in psychological dating violence perpetration and victimization. We used Proc TRAJ to identify developmental trajectories of behavior over time and generalized estimating equation models to examine the associations of the trajectories and peer aggression. Adolescents followed three distinct developmental trajectories related to psychological dating violence victimization and perpetration: low, increasing, and high. Based on the joint probabilities of victimization and perpetration, we identified four predominant groups: low victimization/low perpetration (LVLP; 36%), increasing victimization/increasing perpetration (40%), high victimization/high perpetration (HVHP; 15%), and increasing victimization/low perpetration (IVLP; 7%). The LVLP had significantly more boys and White students; the HVHP group had an even gender distribution and more African‐American students. For all groups, peer aggression decreased from Grade 6 to 12; students in the HVHP group reported the highest peer aggression, and students in the LVLP reported the lowest peer aggression. Findings suggest a strong, reciprocal relationship in the developmental trajectories of adolescents who experience and perpetrate psychological dating violence. Those highly engaged in these behaviors were also more likely to be violent toward peers. Aggr. Behav. 38:510‐520, 2012. © 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Disentangling proactive and reactive aggression in children using self-report

The distinction between proactive and reactive functions of aggression is one of the most common divisions when investigating aggression among children and adolescents. To date, self-report is the least used measurement, despite existing literature supporting the view that the best informant regarding internal processes and motives are children themselves. The main aim of this study was to examine the construct and concurrent validity of a new self-report questionnaire, which aims to disentangle acts of reactive vs. proactive aggression that are most common within the daily lives of children. We examined the self-report measure among 578 children (313 girls, 265 boys, mean age 11 years, range 9–13 years). Most children (90% boys; 85% girls) reported at least one act of aggression over the last four weeks. Furthermore, the outcomes support the two-factor structure (reactive and proactive aggression) and the questionnaire showed good concurrent and discriminant validity with measures for emotional and social functioning. This study validates the use of the self-report instrument for reactive and proactive aggression and demonstrates that children can successfully distinguish between their own motives for reactive and proactive forms of aggressive behaviours.     

The associations between parenting styles and proactive and reactive aggression in Hong Kong children and adolescents

Previous research suggests that reactive and proactive aggression may be differentially related to family contextual (e.g. parenting practices) factors. However, the existing research has focused largely on children and adolescents from Western countries, and no study has examined the parenting–aggression association using a parenting style measure sensitive to Asian culture. In this study parenting styles (i.e. warmth, control and guan/training) and proactive and reactive aggression were assessed in a large sample of school children in Hong Kong, China (N = 4,175, mean age = 11.75). We found that: (a) both low warmth (in boys only) and guan (i.e. high expectation and close supervision, in both boys and girls) were associated with elevated parent‐reported proactive aggression, (b) high restrictive control (i.e. dominating and rejecting) was associated with high reactive aggression (in both boys and girls) based on parent‐ or child‐report data, and with high proactive aggression (in boys only) based on parent‐report data, and (c) guan was also positively associated with parent‐reported reactive aggression. Findings provide more information about the Parenting Inventory using a large Asian sample, and extend existing research on familial correlates of different types of aggression.     

中小学生欺负问题中的性别差异的研究

本研究运用修订的Olweus欺负/受欺负问卷对我国城乡4726名中小学生进行调查,考察了欺负与受欺负的性别差异问题,结果表明1.小学生和初中生受欺负的发生率不存在显著的性别差异,而男孩中欺负他人的比率却极显著地高于女孩;2.中小学生对欺负问题的态度存在显著的性别差异,初中生对欺负的态度受性别和年级的交互作用的影响;3.中小学生不同欺负方式的发生率存在显著的性别差异,男生直接的身体欺负和间接欺负显著地高于女生,而言语欺负的性别差异并不显著.     

Relationship between bullying and scores on the Buss‐Perry Aggression Questionnaire among imprisoned male offenders

This study investigated the relationship between bullying and aggression among imprisoned male adult offenders. The participants were 70 imprisoned male offenders, who were classified using the Direct and Indirect Prisoner Behaviour Checklist (DIPC) as one of four ‘bully’ groups: pure bully, pure victim, bully/victim, or not involved. Participants also completed the Buss‐Perry Aggression Questionnaire (AQ), a measure of aggression and hostility. The majority of the prisoners reported behaviors indicative of bullying, with 42.9 percent classified in the bully/victim group and 12.9 percent as pure bullies. 15.7 percent of participants were classified as pure victims, while 28.6 percent did not report any involvement in bullying. Bully/victims scored higher than participants who were not involved in bullying on the Hostility scale and Total score of the AQ. A number of correlations were found between the AQ scores and number of bully behaviors perpetrated. These suggested there is an overlap between the constructs measured by the AQ and type of bullying behaviors perpetrated. The number of bullying behaviors experienced was only correlated with the Hostility scale. The results are discussed in terms of previous research and their implications for theory and practice. Aggress. Behav. 31:1–11, 2005. © 2005 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.     

Links Between Stressful Life Events and Proactive and Reactive Functions of Aggression

Recently, more attention has been devoted to understanding how stressful life events might relate to proactive and reactive aggression. Findings suggest that stressful life events are more strongly linked to reactive, than proactive, aggression; however, it is unclear whether the impact of stressful life events on proactive and reactive aggression might vary as a function of the level of exposure to or type of stressful life event. The current study examined how level of exposure to stressful life events (i.e., witnessed, experienced, and learned about) and stressful life event types (i.e., war zone exposure, sexual victimization, interpersonal violence, and other trauma exposure) related to proactive and reactive aggression. The sample was comprised of 500 undergraduate students (M = 18.96, SD = 1.22, 49.6% male) recruited from a Midwestern university. Findings indicated that all three levels of stressful life event exposure (i.e., experienced, witnesses, and learned) were associated with reactive aggression; however, only witnessed stressful life events were associated with proactive aggression. Clinical implications and future directions are discussed.     

The reactive–proactive aggression questionnaire: differential correlates of reactive and proactive aggression in adolescent boys

This study reports the development of the Reactive–Proactive Aggression Questionnaire (RPQ), and the differential correlates of these two forms of aggression. Antisocial, psychosocial and personality measures were obtained at ages 7 and 16 years in schoolboys, while the RPQ was administered to 334 of the boys at age 16 years. Confirmatory factor analysis indicated a significant fit for a two‐factor proactive–reactive model that replicated from one independent subsample to another. Proactive aggression was uniquely characterized at age 7 by initiation of fights, strong‐arm tactics, delinquency, poor school motivation, poor peer relationships, single‐parent status, psychosocial adversity, substance‐abusing parents, and hyperactivity, and at age 16 by a psychopathic personality, blunted affect, delinquency, and serious violent offending. Reactive aggression was uniquely characterized at age 16 by impulsivity, hostility, social anxiety, lack of close friends, unusual perceptual experiences, and ideas of reference. Findings confirm and extend the differential correlates of proactive–reactive aggression, and demonstrate that this brief but reliable and valid self‐report instrument can be used to assess proactive and reactive aggression in child and adolescent samples. Aggr. Behav. 32:159–171, 2006. © 2006 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.