Associations Between Self, Peer, and Teacher Reports of Victimization and Social Skills in School in Children With Language Disorders

Abstract

Previous studies have shown that teachers and parents of children with language disorders report them to have higher victimization scores, a heightened risk of low-quality friendships and social difficulties, and may be more vulnerable to peer rejection than control peers. However, there are few studies of bullying in children with developmental language disorder (DLD) and reading difficulties (RD), and none has considered the mutual relationships between teacher reports, the perceptions of classmates, and children’s self-reports. We analyzed the experiences of bullying and peer relationships in primary school students with DLD and RD as compared to their age-matched peers using teacher reports, peer reports, and self-reports on victimization. Additionally, we explored how these three perspectives are associated. Results indicated lower levels of peer-rated prosocial skills in DLD and RD students compared to their peers, as well as higher levels of victimization as assessed by peers for students with DLD. In the same line, the teachers’ ratings showed that students with DLD presented poorer social skills, less adaptability, and more withdrawal in social interaction. Contrastingly, self-reports informed of similar rates of interpersonal relationships, social stress, and peer victimization between the three groups. Consequently, we found significant correlations between measures of peer reports and teacher reports that contrasted with the lack of correlations between self and other agents’ reports. These findings stress the importance of using self-reports, peer reports, and teacher reports at the same time to detect bullying situations that might go unnoticed.

Exploring Intergroup Peer Exclusion: Validation of the Latency Social-Psychological Developmental Questionnaire (LSPD)

“…Intergroup peer exclusion can be identified from various perspectives [ 37 , 38 ]. The perspectives may be those of outsiders’ (e.g., teachers’ [ 39 ] or other children’s [ 39 , 40 , 41 ]), or a self-perspective from the children experiencing the event [ 37 , 41 , 42 , 43 ]. We developed this study’s questionnaire as a self-report.…”

“…One child’s experience of exclusion is not necessarily the same as that of the others. Children may perceive themselves as excluded or included, while others perceive the same situation differently [ 39 ]. Obtaining these self-reports is necessary to provide appropriate intervention for children who feel excluded [ 40 , 44 , 45 ].…”

Retrospective bullying trajectories in adults with self‐reported oral language difficulties

“…Regarding group differences, a greater proportion of participants with self‐reports of oral language difficulties experienced bullying victimisation at any point in their lives than a comparable control group. Therefore, our results evidence that people with language difficulties are at a higher risk for bullying victimisation, congruently with past research (Conti‐Ramsden & Botting, 2004 ; Knox & Conti‐Ramsden, 2003 , 2007 ; McCormack et al ., 2011 ; Øksendal et al ., 2021 ; Redmond, 2011 ; Savage, 2005 ; Sureda‐García et al ., 2021 ; van den Bedem et al ., 2018 ). The relation between bullying and language difficulties could be due to different reasons.…”

“…Moreover, a non‐probabilistic sampling method was implemented in the present study, which may have caused that the sample was not accurately representative of the population: for example, the study sample shows an over‐representation of people with tertiary education (63.4% in our sample vs. 39.7% in Spanish adults; Ministerio de Educación y Formación Profesional, 2021 ). We speculate that this over‐representation might underestimate the rates of bullying victimisation in the LD group because individuals that reach higher educational levels probably show better language levels and, consequently, fewer difficulties in the social domain (Aguilar‐Mediavilla et al ., 2019 ; Sureda‐García et al ., 2021 ). Furthermore, the online surveying method did not allow to control for non‐response (26.9% of recorded accesses), which might lead to participation bias, also called non‐response bias (Gideon, 2012 ).…”

“…Pre-vious literature consistently shows that being bullied during childhood and/or adolescence is associated with multiple present and future adjustment and well-being difficulties, such as manifestations of psychological distress (e.g., being tearful or irritable, losing motivation, or experiencing sleep problems), new symptoms of mental health problems (especially anxiety and depression), or higher risk of self-harm and suicidal ideation (Arseneault, 2018). That means that bullying behaviours do not just affect youths' mental health, but symptoms persist onwards, even long after the bullying has stopped (Valera-Pozo et al, 2021). The negative impact of bullying on the present and future mental health and well-being of youths, and by extension, of society, highlights the need to prevent bullying victimisation during childhood and adolescence.…”