Peer Victimization, Aggression, and Their Co-Occurrence in Middle School: Pathways to Adjustment Problems

An ethnically diverse sample of 6th-grade students completed peer nomination procedures that were used to create subgroups of students with reputations as victims, aggressors, aggressive victims, and socially adjusted (neither aggressive nor victimized). Self-report data on psychological adjustment, attributions for peer harassment, and perceived school climate were gathered. In addition, homeroom teachers rated participating students on academic engagement and students' grades were collected from school records. Victims reported the most negative self-views, aggressors enjoyed the most positive self-views, and aggressive victims fell between these two groups, although their psychological profile more closely resembled that of victims. However, all three subgroups encountered more school adjustment problems when compared to their socially adjusted classmates. Different pathways to school adjustment problems for aggressors and victims were examined. For victims, characterological self-blame for victimization and psychological maladjustment were the key mediators, whereas for aggressors, the significant pathway was mainly through perceived unfairness of school rules. Analyses by ethnicity revealed that African American boys were most likely to be perceived as aggressive and as aggressive victims and they were doing most poorly in school. Implications for intervention with subgroups of problem behavior youth and the particular vulnerabilities of African American adolescents were discussed.     

Blame for constitutivists: Kantian constitutivism and the victim’s special standing to complain

Constitutivists about moral norms are often suspected of providing an overly “self-centered” account of morality which does not take seriously enough morality’s interpersonal nature. This worry seems particularly pressing in the light of recent debates about the relational character of many moral norms. In this paper, I discuss one aspect of this worry, which concerns the special standing to complain which the victims of wrongdoing have. I argue that, contrary to appearances, Kantian constitutivism can explain this latter feature, since there is a special need for remedying the denial of equal moral standing of the victim and the impairment of the victim’s agency which any wrongdoing involves.     

An integrative review of South Africa’s approach to victim support

This integrative review seeks to consider the evidence on how crime victims’ rights are served within South Africa’s criminal justice system. Victims view criminal proceeding as the means through which justice for the harms they suffered can be obtained. Such aspirations are often misplaced since criminal proceedings are a legal process between the state and accused with the sole purpose of determining guilt or innocence. As such, the concerns of victims are secondary. Victim’s rights in South Africa was only truly acknowledged during the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) in 1995. South Africa’s victim empowerment policy is underpinned by restorative justice principles. Contradictory to legal procedures, restorative justice is not offender-driven, but aims to elevate the role of crime victims in the criminal justice system.     

Seeking revenge or seeking reconciliation? How concern for social‐image and felt shame helps explain responses in reciprocal intergroup conflict

In conflicts with reciprocal violence, individuals belong to a group that has been both perpetrator and victim. In a field experiment in Liberia, West Africa, we led participants (N = 146) to focus on their group as either perpetrator or victim in order to investigate its effect on orientation towards inter‐group reconciliation or revenge. Compared to a perpetrator focus, a victim focus led to slightly more revenge orientation and moderately less reconciliation orientation. The effect of the focus manipulation on revenge orientation was fully mediated, and reconciliation orientation partly mediated, by viewing the in‐group's social‐image as at risk. Independent of perpetrator or victim focus, shame (but not guilt) was a distinct explanation of moderately more reconciliation orientation. This is consistent with a growing body of work demonstrating the pro‐social potential of shame. Taken together, results suggest how groups in reciprocal conflict might be encouraged towards reconciliation and away from revenge by feeling shame for their wrongdoing and viewing their social‐image as less at risk. As victims and perpetrators are widely thought to have different orientations to inter‐group reconciliation and revenge, we suggest that work on reciprocal conflicts should account for the fact that people can belong to a group that has been both perpetrator and victim.     

Children's evaluations of provocation between peers

The present study examined children's evaluations of potentially conflictual situations between peers. Eight- and 11-year-olds evaluated two hypothetical target children in three scenarios which differed as to the intent of a provocative act (Accidental, Ambiguous, Hostile). In addition to grade and sex, relationship between targets was manipulated as a between-subjects variable with targets portrayed as either Best Friends Acquaintances, or Enemies. Children evaluated targets in terms of attributions of intentions, behavior response, affective state of targets, and mutual liking between targets. Results indicated that aggressor's intentions and victim's behavior response were evaluated as positive for the Accidental scenario and as negative for the Hostile scenario regardless of target relationship. When aggressor's intentions were unclear (e.g., Ambiguous), interactions between Best Friends and interactions between Acquaintances were evaluated as positive while interactions between Enemies were perceived as negative. Further, while all children predicted a negative response by the victim during the Hostile situation, younger children predicted the victim's response would be less negative than did older children. Children reported Best Friends and Acquaintances as liking each other more before the provocation situation started than after it occurred while liking between Enemies remained unchanged, thus indicating a belief that provocations may hurt a positive or neutral relationship. Targets were perceived to be in negative affective states during the Accidental and Ambiguous scenarios and the aggressor was perceived to be in a neutral affective state during the Hostile scenario. Results are discussed in terms of previous research on response to provocation and implications for research on children's peer conflicts. Aggr. Behav. 23:417–431, 1997. © 1997 Wiley-Liss, Inc.