Development of the Multidimensional Peer Victimization Scale–Revised (MPVS-R) and the Multidimensional Peer Bullying Scale (MPVS-RB)

Abstract

Peer victimization is a frequent occurrence for many adolescents; however, some of the psychometric properties of self-report scales assessing these experiences remain unclear.Furthermore, with an increase in access to technology, electronic aggression should also be considered. The study examined the psychometric properties of the Multidimensional Peer Victimization Scale (MPVS, Mynard & Joseph, 2000), and developed versions to include the assessment of electronic aggression according to whether the adolescent was the target or perpetrator of peer victimization. Three hundred and 71 (191 girls and 180 boys Mage = 13 years 4 months, SDage= 1 year 2 months) adolescents in the UK completed the MPVS including 5 newly developed items assessing electronic aggression, a version of the MPVS designed to assess victimization perpetration, and a measure of self-esteem. Confirmatory factor analyses yielded a five-factor structure comprising: Physical, social manipulation, verbal, attacks on property, and electronic for both scales. Convergent validity was established through negative associations between the victimization scales and self-esteem.Sex differences also emerged. One revised scale and one new scale are subsequently proposed: The Multidimensional Peer Victimization Scale -Revised (MPVS-R) and the Multidimensional Peer Bullying Scale (MPVS-RB).

Validity and reliability of the Cyber-aggression Questionnaire for Adolescents (CYBA)

“…Both the European Cyberbullying Intervention Project Questionnaire (ECIPQ) by Del Rey et al (2015) and the Cyberbullying Questionnaire (CBQ) by Gámez-Guadix, Villa-George, and Calvete (2014) include two factors (cyber-aggression and cyber-victimization), and the Cyberbullying test (Garaigordobil, 2013) includes three (victimization, aggression, and observation). This coincides with other validated self-reports at the international level: the Cyberbullying Scale (CS) by Menesini, Nocentini, and Calussi (2011) includes two factors (cyber-aggression and cyber-victimization); the Virtual Aggression among Students subscale by Jiménez, Castillo, and Cisternas (2012) includes two factors ("conducted or observed virtual aggressions" and "victimisation through virtual aggression"); the Multidimensional Peer Bullying Scale (MPVS-RB) by Betts, Houston, and Steer (2015) measures a factor consisting of cyber-aggression behaviours and the rest relating to offline aggression; and the cyber-aggression scale of the Revised Cyber Bullying Inventory (RCBI) by Topcu and Erdur-Baker (2010) has a unifactorial structure.…”

Adolescents’ experiences of street harassment: creating a typology and assessing the emotional impact

“…One potential explanation for this finding resides in the fact that street harassment is often a one-off episode whereas bullying behaviours are often used to maintain social status within peer networks (Volk et al, 2014). Specifically, adolescent males may engage in more physical forms of aggression with their peers because their networks are characterised by physical activity whereas adolescent females' social networks tend to be maintained by self-disclosure and Running head: STREET HARASSMENT TYPOLOGY 13 intimacy (Betts et al, 2015). Although there were no significant gender differences in young people's experiences of street harassment, as with the previous research with adults (Bastomski and Smith, 2017) and adolescents (Hand and Sanchez, 2000), adolescent females in our sample reported greater negative emotions following an episode of street harassment.…”

“…Based on research examining children's experiences of peer harassment and bullying, it is possible that comparable gender differences in experiences of street harassment will emerge. Males frequently report experiencing higher level of physical harassment and bullying (Nishina and Juvonen, 2005) and attacks on property (Betts et al, 2015) whereas females more frequently report verbal (Nishina and Juvonen, 2005) and social (Betts et al, 2015) forms. However, not all studies have reported such gender differences in young people's experiences of peer harassment (von Marées and Petermann, 2010).…”

Adolescents’ Experiences of Victimization: The Role of Attribution Style and Generalized Trust

“…The 20-item Multidimensional Peer-Victimisation Scale-Revised (MPVS-R, Betts, Houston, & Steer, 2015) assessed victimisation experiences across five subscales: Physical victimisation (e.g., "punched me", α1 = .78) social manipulation ("tried to turn my friends against me", α = .81), verbal victimisation (e.g., "called me names" α = .78), attacks on property (e.g., "tried to break something of mine", α = .79), and cyber victimisation (e.g., "Sent you a nasty text", α = .81). The adolescents responded to the items using a three-point scale ranging from 1 (Not at all) to 3 (More than once) to denote the frequency with which they had experienced victimisation during the past year.…”