Self-ratings and peer-ratings of bullying perpetrators: Intrapersonal and interpersonal factors that differentiate bully subgroups

IF 3.8 1区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL
Hye-Young Yun , Dorothy Espelage
{"title":"Self-ratings and peer-ratings of bullying perpetrators: Intrapersonal and interpersonal factors that differentiate bully subgroups","authors":"Hye-Young Yun ,&nbsp;Dorothy Espelage","doi":"10.1016/j.jsp.2024.101358","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Using a large sample of students (<em>N</em> = 1373; 40% girls; <em>M</em><sub>age</sub> = 14 years) from 54 classrooms in South Korea, this study identified subtypes of bullies based on specific combinations of self-reports and peer-reports and examined the intrapersonal and interpersonal factors that explain the differences in characteristics between these identified groups. Latent profile analysis identified four subgroups of bullies: (a) non-bullies (59.5%), (b) peer-identified bullies (21%), (c) self-identified bullies (9.8%), and (d) self/peer-identified bullies (9.7%). Multinomial logistic hierarchical analysis revealed significant differences between the bully subgroups on the four intrapersonal factors (i.e., anti-bullying attitudes, perception of teachers' reaction to bullying, delinquent behavior, and depression; odds ratios [<em>OR</em>] ranged from 0.24 to 3.13) and three of the four interpersonal factors (i.e., overestimated popularity, rejection, and victimization; <em>OR</em>s ranged from 0.39 to 2.26). More specifically, compared to the peer-identified bully group, the non-bully and self/peer-identified bully groups showed opposite patterns of anti-bullying attitudes, delinquent behavior, and peer status (<em>OR</em>s ranged from 0.46 to 3.13). Relative to the peer-identified bully group, the self-identified bully group was more likely to exhibit depressive symptoms and perceive themselves as being victimized, was less likely to endorse anti-bullying attitudes, and had a less positive perception of teacher's reaction to bullying (<em>OR</em>s ranged from 0.24 to 1.40). Gender differences emerged as well. Implications for optimizing the screening of bullying perpetrators and anti-bullying interventions are discussed.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":48232,"journal":{"name":"Journal of School Psychology","volume":"106 ","pages":"Article 101358"},"PeriodicalIF":3.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of School Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022440524000785","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Using a large sample of students (N = 1373; 40% girls; Mage = 14 years) from 54 classrooms in South Korea, this study identified subtypes of bullies based on specific combinations of self-reports and peer-reports and examined the intrapersonal and interpersonal factors that explain the differences in characteristics between these identified groups. Latent profile analysis identified four subgroups of bullies: (a) non-bullies (59.5%), (b) peer-identified bullies (21%), (c) self-identified bullies (9.8%), and (d) self/peer-identified bullies (9.7%). Multinomial logistic hierarchical analysis revealed significant differences between the bully subgroups on the four intrapersonal factors (i.e., anti-bullying attitudes, perception of teachers' reaction to bullying, delinquent behavior, and depression; odds ratios [OR] ranged from 0.24 to 3.13) and three of the four interpersonal factors (i.e., overestimated popularity, rejection, and victimization; ORs ranged from 0.39 to 2.26). More specifically, compared to the peer-identified bully group, the non-bully and self/peer-identified bully groups showed opposite patterns of anti-bullying attitudes, delinquent behavior, and peer status (ORs ranged from 0.46 to 3.13). Relative to the peer-identified bully group, the self-identified bully group was more likely to exhibit depressive symptoms and perceive themselves as being victimized, was less likely to endorse anti-bullying attitudes, and had a less positive perception of teacher's reaction to bullying (ORs ranged from 0.24 to 1.40). Gender differences emerged as well. Implications for optimizing the screening of bullying perpetrators and anti-bullying interventions are discussed.

欺凌者的自我评价和同伴评价:区分欺凌者亚群的人内和人际因素
本研究使用了来自韩国 54 个班级的大量学生样本(样本数 = 1373;40% 为女生;年龄 = 14 岁),根据自我报告和同伴报告的特定组合确定了欺凌者的亚型,并研究了解释这些被确定的群体之间特征差异的人内和人际因素。潜在特征分析确定了四个欺凌者亚群:(a) 非欺凌者(59.5%),(b) 同伴认定的欺凌者(21%),(c) 自我认定的欺凌者(9.8%),(d) 自我/同伴认定的欺凌者(9.7%)。多项式逻辑层次分析表明,欺凌者亚群在四个人内因素(即反欺凌态度、对教师对欺凌行为反应的看法、不良行为和抑郁;几率比[OR]介于 0.24 至 3.13 之间)和四个人际因素中的三个因素(即高估受欢迎程度、被拒绝和受害;几率比介于 0.39 至 2.26 之间)上存在显著差异。更具体地说,与同伴认定的欺凌者组相比,非欺凌者组和自我/同伴认定的欺凌者组在反欺凌态度、不良行为和同伴地位方面表现出相反的模式(ORs 介于 0.46 至 3.13 之间)。与同伴认定的欺凌者组相比,自我认定的欺凌者组更有可能表现出抑郁症状,认为自己是受害者,不太可能赞同反欺凌态度,对教师对欺凌行为的反应的看法也不那么积极(ORs 介于 0.24 至 1.40 之间)。性别差异也有所显现。本文讨论了优化欺凌实施者筛查和反欺凌干预措施的意义。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of School Psychology
Journal of School Psychology PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL-
CiteScore
6.70
自引率
8.00%
发文量
71
期刊介绍: The Journal of School Psychology publishes original empirical articles and critical reviews of the literature on research and practices relevant to psychological and behavioral processes in school settings. JSP presents research on intervention mechanisms and approaches; schooling effects on the development of social, cognitive, mental-health, and achievement-related outcomes; assessment; and consultation. Submissions from a variety of disciplines are encouraged. All manuscripts are read by the Editor and one or more editorial consultants with the intent of providing appropriate and constructive written reviews.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信