Why do some students want to be actively involved as peer educators,while others do not? Findings from NoTrap! anti-bullying and anti-cyberbullying program

The present study aims to explore if students who voluntarily decide to become peer educators in an anti-bullying program differ from their classmates who don’t take on this role. 524 Italian students (age 13–18; males = 57%), completed self-report questionnaires at the pre-test measure of the NoTrap! anti-bullying program. In a following step, 118 of them voluntarily decided to become peer educators. Probit regression separate for gender, showed that male peer educators have a higher level of victimization, perceived support from friends and prosocial behaviour. On the other hand, female peer educators are characterized by a higher level of defending behaviours. These findings may guide further investigation about the role of peer educator in regards to bullying and cyberbullying prevention and intervention programs.     

The measurement of cyberbullying: dimensional structure and relative item severity and discrimination

In relation to a sample of 1,092 Italian adolescents (50.9% females), the present study aims to: (a) analyze the most parsimonious structure of the cyberbullying and cybervictimization construct in male and female Italian adolescents through confirmatory factor analysis; and (b) analyze the severity and the discrimination parameters of each act using the item response theory. Results showed that the structure of the cyberbullying scale for perpetrated and received behaviors in both genders could best be represented by a monodimensional model where each item lies on a continuum of severity of aggressive acts. For both genders, the less severe acts are silent/prank calls and insults on instant messaging, and the most severe acts are unpleasant pictures/photos on Web sites, phone pictures/photos/videos of intimate scenes, and phone pictures/photos/videos of violent scenes. The items nasty text messages, nasty or rude e-mails, insults on Web sites, insults in chatrooms, and insults on blogs range from moderate to high levels of severity. Regarding the discrimination level of the acts, several items emerged as good indicators at various levels of cyberbullying and cybervictimization severity, with the exception of silent/prank calls. Furthermore, gender specificities underlined that the visual items can be considered good indicators of severe cyberbullies and cybervictims only in males. This information can help in understanding better the nature of the phenomenon, its severity in a given population, and to plan more specific prevention and intervention strategies.     

Physical Dating Aggression Growth During Adolescence

The development of Physical Dating Aggression from the age of 16 to 18 years was investigated in relation to time-invariant predictors (gender, parental education, family composition, number of partners) and to time-varying effects of delinquent behavior and perception of victimization by the partner. The sample consisted of 181 adolescents with a current or past dating relationship. Results showed an average trend of decrease from 16 to 18 years with significant inter-individual variability in intra-individual change across time, suggesting that different trajectories of Physical Dating Aggression among the population can be found. Inter-individual variability can be explained by background variables representing a distal risk on Dating Aggression at 16 years (mother’s education, precocious dating experience), and by time-varying effect of delinquent behavior and perception of partner perpetration. These latter variables can act as snares (Moffitt 1993), representing mechanisms responsible for prolonging the otherwise normative pattern of decrease of Physical Dating Aggression.     

A Pilot Study Implementing Coping Power in Italian Community Hospitals: Effect of Therapist Attachment Style on Outcomes in Children

The study presented the initial report of a project regarding the implementation of the Coping Power Program in Italian community hospitals, and the program’s ability to reduce externalizing behavioral problems in children with a Disruptive Behavior Disorder diagnosis. Usually, interventions for children are implemented by a number of therapists with different personal characteristics, which therefore influence the implementation quality of an intervention. That said, the present study aimed to establish whether the insecure attachment styles of therapists predict unfavorable outcomes for children treated with the Coping Power Program. The sample included 80 children with a Disruptive Behavior Disorder diagnosis and 16 therapists. The results showed that the change in children’s aggressive behavioral problems was significantly related to the levels of the therapist’s preoccupation with relationships. Higher levels of change in aggression (where a higher value means that the aggression at the end of the treatment is higher than aggression at the baseline evaluation) are associated with higher levels of therapist’s preoccupied attachment style (anxious attachment style). This study provided some preliminary evidence that therapists need to be sensitive to their own attachment experiences when delivering therapy for children.     

Bullying among siblings: The role of personality and relational variables

This study aimed to investigate: (1) 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.     

Morality,values, traditional bullying,and cyberbullying in adolescence

The aim of the present study was to investigate moral aspects and human values in traditional bullying and cyberbullying, in order to detect differences between the two types of bullying and to test the role of immoral and disengaged behaviours in mediating the relationships between personal values and involvement in bullying. Sample comprised 390 adolescents aged 14–18, balanced for gender, attending different high schools. Traditional and cyberbullying were detected by means of two self‐report measures, while the Portrait Values Questionnaire was used to assess 10 values in four dimensions according to the value system model by Schwartz (1992): self‐trascendence, self‐enhancement, openness to change, and conservation. Finally, immoral and disengaged behaviours were assessed by means of five items about behavioural and personal aspects salient for morality. Results showed that, irrespective of gender, self‐enhancement and self‐trascendence moderately predicted cyber and traditional bullying, respectively, while immoral and disengaged behaviours predicted both. Indirect effects showed that self‐enhancement and openness to change predicted both forms of bullying through immoral behaviour. Results are discussed in terms of similarities and differences between cyber and traditional bullying and with attention to the central role of morality in explaining bullying nature.