The informant matters: Differences in bullying victim categorization rates assessed with self- and peer-reports in children with developmental language disorder and reading difficulties

Abstract

Background

Children with Developmental Language Disorder (DLD) and Reading Difficulties (RD) can show more peer relation problems depending on the informant.

Aims

(1) To explore bullying victims' categorization, evaluated by self- and peer-reports, in children with DLD and RD; and (2) to assess agreement rates between informants.

Method and procedures

Victimization was assessed using a self-report (EBIP-Q) and a peer-report sociogram (CESC) in a sample of 83 participants (9–12 years; 10.5 ± 1.1 years), comprising of DLD (n = 19), RD (n = 32), and Control (n = 32) groups.

Outcomes and Results

We found a higher frequency of the rejected sociometric profile in the DLD and RD groups, a higher peer-reported victimization in the DLD group, and more severe self-reported victimization in the DLD and RD groups. Odds of being classified as victimized were higher for self-report except in the DLD group. Informants’ agreement was high using the most restrictive EBIP-Q criterion (7 points) for both the Control and the RD groups, being non-significant for the DLD group regardless of the criteria used.

Conclusions and Implications

We found a higher victimization risk in children with language difficulties, although self-assessment seems to under-detect children with DLD according to the agreement rates, pointing out the need to combine assessments and informants.

What does this paper add?

Several studies have shown that children with DLD or RD obtain higher scores of victimization and score lower on several scales of social skills with continuous data. Although continuous analyses are usual in research, professional decisions are usually based on cut-off criteria more than how high or low a score is in contrast to another group. This is one of the first works that analyses victimization following the cut-off criteria of self and peer assessments that professionals used in the school settings in children with DLD and RD. Our results will raise awareness among school professionals based on the evidence about the high risk of victimization, especially in children with DLD, and the implications of selecting between several measures of victimization, in this group of children. We think that our results would help to better detect and prevent bullying in schools for children with DLD.