A meta‐analysis of the relationship between moral disengagement and bullying roles in youth

Abstract

Over the last several years, researchers have become increasingly interested in the influence of moral factors on bullying behaviors. This is the first meta‐analytic review to exclusively examine the relationship between moral disengagement (MD) and the key bullying roles of bully, victim, defender, and bystander. Forty‐seven independent samples examining a total of 43,809 children/adolescents (aged 7–19) were included in this meta‐analysis. Results indicated a positive relationship between MD and bullying (r = 0.31; 95% CI [0.27, 0.34]), MD and victimization (r = 0.08; 95% CI [0.05, 0.12]), and a negative relationship between MD and defending (r = −0.11; 95% CI [−0.17, −0.04]). No significant relationship was found for MD and bystanding behavior. Moderators of bullying type (traditional vs. cyberbullying), reporting type (self vs. peer report), age, and gender were included in the analyses. The results are discussed in the context of relevant literature with particular emphasis on the importance of distinguishing between guilty and unconcerned bystanders, and the significant overlap between bullying and victimization in the cyber context.

Moral Disengagement and School Bullying Perpetration in Middle Childhood: A Short-Term Longitudinal Study in Sweden

“…Concurrent correlations between the two variables were also confirmed. In line with the social-cognitive theory on moral disengagement (Bandura, 2016) and prior cross-sectional studies (Killer et al, 2019), children who are more prone to moral disengagement tend to be more inclined to bully others. Also, children who more often bully others are more prone to develop a higher tendency of moral disengagement over time, independent of their initial levels of moral disengagement.…”

“…Previous cross-sectional research has shown that moral disengagement is associated with bullying perpetration (Caravita, Gini, & Pozzoli, 2012;Fitzpatrick & Bussey, 2018;Gini, Pozzoli, & Hauser, 2011;Mazzone, Camodeca, & Salmivalli, 2016;Pozzoli, Gini, & Thornberg, 2016;Tanrikulu & Campbell, 2015;Thornberg & Jungert, 2014;Thornberg, Pozzoli, Gini, & Jungert, 2015; for a recent meta-analysis, see Killer, Bussey, Hawes, & Hunt, 2019). In the context of cyberbullying, a recent study found that moral disengagement was positively associated with revenge motive, harm motive, and dominance motive of perpetration (Tanrikulu & Erdur-Baker, 2019).…”

“…In the context of cyberbullying, a recent study found that moral disengagement was positively associated with revenge motive, harm motive, and dominance motive of perpetration (Tanrikulu & Erdur-Baker, 2019). However, the directionality between moral disengagement and bullying perpetration remains unclear due to limited longitudinal research investigating this relationship (Gini, Pozzoli, & Hymel, 2014;Killer et al, 2019). Barchia and Bussey (2011) conducted a short-term longitudinal study based on an Australian adolescent sample.…”

“…This is also the case with most of the cross-sectional studies. However, at least ten studies have used peernomination to measure bullying and they were also able to find a link between moral disengagement and bullying (Killer et al, 2019). Future research with peer nomination data could explore the longitudinal associations between moral disengagement and bullying perpetration further.…”

Standing up for the victim or supporting the bully? Bystander responses and their associations with moral disengagement, defender self-efficacy, and collective efficacy

“…Examples of moral disengagement mechanisms are moral justification (i.e., using worthy ends or moral purposes to excuse pernicious means), diffusion of responsibility (i.e., diluting personal responsibility because other people are also involved), disregarding or distorting the negative or harmful consequences of the actions, and blaming the victim (i.e., believing that the victim deserves his or her suffering). Moral disengagement is associated with greater aggression, including bullying (for a meta-analyses, see Gini et al 2014;Killer et al 2019), assisting and reinforcing (Gini 2006;Sjögren et al 2020;Thornberg and Jungert 2013), and less defending (Doramajian and Bukowski 2015;Gini 2006;Gini et al 2018b;Mazzone et al 2016;Obermann 2011;Pozzoli et al 2016;Jungert 2013, 2014;Thornberg et al 2015Thornberg et al , 2017; for a meta-analysis, see Killer et al 2019; for exceptions, see Barchia and Bussey 2011b;Sjögren et al 2020) in bullying and peer aggression among students.…”