Peer and self-reported victimization: Do non-victimized students give victimization nominations to classmates who are self-reported victims?

Abstract

Using data from 2413 Dutch first-year secondary school students (M age = 13.27, SD age = 0.51, 49.0% boys), this study investigated as to what extent students who according to their self-reports had not been victimized (referred to as reporters) gave victimization nominations to classmates who according to their self-reports had been victimized (referred to as receivers). Using a dyadic approach, characteristics of the reporter-receiver dyad (i.e., gender similarity) and of the reporter (i.e., reporters' behavior during bullying episodes) that were possibly associated with reporter-receiver agreement were investigated. Descriptive analyses suggested that numerous students who were self-reported victims were not perceived as victimized by their non-victimized classmates. Three-level logistic regression models (reporter-receiver dyads nested in reporters within classrooms) demonstrated greater reporter-receiver agreement in same-gender dyads, especially when the reporter and the receiver were boys. Furthermore, reporters who behaved as outsiders during bullying episodes (i.e., reporters who actively shied away from the bullying) were less likely to agree on the receiver's self-reported victimization, and in contrast, reporters who behaved as defenders (i.e., reporters who helped and supported victims) were more likely to agree on the victimization. Moreover, the results demonstrated that reporters gave fewer victimization nominations to receivers who reported they had been victimized sometimes than to receivers who reported they had been victimized often/very often. Finally, this study suggested that reporterreceiver agreement may not only depend on characteristics of the reporter-receiver dyad and of the reporter, but on classroom characteristics as well (e.g., the number of students in the classroom).

Do teachers know their students? Examining teacher attunement in secondary schools

“…(2011), attunement was negatively related to classroom size, probably because keeping track of behaviors and attributes of the students becomes more difficult in larger classrooms. This finding is also consistent with Oldenburg and colleagues (2015) who found less overlap between self-reported and peer reported victimization in larger classrooms. As public funds are generally becoming scarce and public education recently faced severe cuts in many countries, developing training programs dedicated to increase teachers’ attunement could be a strategy to cope with the lack of resources that force schools to form increasingly large classes.…”

Who helps whom? Investigating the development of adolescent prosocial relationships.

“…Previous researchers have maintained that adolescents' behavior can be explained in part by their extrinsic wish to attain status and affection among peers (Adler & Adler, 2003;Baumeister & Leary, 1995;Ormel et al, 1999). Considering the consequences of asking for help at all, and asking peers with more or less helping potential in particular, we consider helping relations to be instrumental in the attainment of these goals.…”

“…This shift in context from parents to peers also influences how giving and receiving help are perceived: Given the importance of peers in shaping adolescents' behaviors and relationships (Adler & Adler, 2003;Baumeister & Leary, 1995;Ormel, Lindenberg, Steverink, & Verbrugge, 1999), which peers to give help to and which peers to receive help from become salient questions at this age. Traditionally, research on adolescent helping in the peer context has overlooked this relational nature of prosociality, and mainly focused on explaining adolescent prosocial tendencies as an individual outcome (for a review, see Eisenberg et al, 2006; some exceptions notwithstanding; Baerveldt, van Duijn, Vermeij, & van Hemert, 2004;Lomi, Snijders, Steglich, & Torlò, 2011).…”

So you want to study bullying? Recommendations to enhance the validity, transparency, and compatibility of bullying research

“…However, we recommend some caution in relying on these reports as teachers and parents can be relatively poor sources of data on individual episodes of bullying given that they sometimes already fail to observe overt acts of bullying (Craig & Pepler, 1998;Gladden et al, 2014) or they may have to rely on second-hand information from adolescents who are possibly biased or withholding information (e.g., Fekkes, Pijpers, & Verloove-Vanhorick, 2005;Oldenburg et al, 2015Oldenburg et al, , 2016. This does not invalidate these choices of reporters, particularly if they are supported by one's logic model (e.g., using teacher reports in a study of school atmosphere and teacher interventions).…”