Victimization and Somatic Problems: The Role of Class Victimization Levels.
bullying
class victimization
classroom environment
peer victimization
somatic problems
Journal
The Journal of school health
ISSN: 1746-1561
Titre abrégé: J Sch Health
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 0376370
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
01 2020
01 2020
Historique:
received:
20
06
2017
revised:
24
10
2018
accepted:
12
03
2019
pubmed:
11
11
2019
medline:
20
4
2021
entrez:
11
11
2019
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
The link between peer victimization and somatic problems is well-established. What is currently understudied is under what contextual conditions victims' health might be most likely to be compromised. Studies demonstrate that victims suffer from poorer adjustment when they belong to a group in which victimization is less normative (social misfit hypothesis). We examined whether the association between individual victimization and somatic problems was stronger in classrooms with lower class victimization. A sample of 1906 adolescents (65% girls; M Multilevel modeling with Bayes estimator indicated modest variation in somatic problems between classrooms. At the individual level, peer victimization was associated with higher reports of somatic problems. This association varied across classroom as a function of class victimization level. Simple slope computation confirmed that the association between peer victimization and somatic complaints became stronger as class victimization levels decreased. Victims in classrooms with lower levels of victimization are more likely to report somatic problems. Anti-bullying programs should consider the effects of class norms on victims' adjustment and address the possible risks for those who continue to be victimized.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
The link between peer victimization and somatic problems is well-established. What is currently understudied is under what contextual conditions victims' health might be most likely to be compromised. Studies demonstrate that victims suffer from poorer adjustment when they belong to a group in which victimization is less normative (social misfit hypothesis). We examined whether the association between individual victimization and somatic problems was stronger in classrooms with lower class victimization.
METHODS
A sample of 1906 adolescents (65% girls; M
RESULTS
Multilevel modeling with Bayes estimator indicated modest variation in somatic problems between classrooms. At the individual level, peer victimization was associated with higher reports of somatic problems. This association varied across classroom as a function of class victimization level. Simple slope computation confirmed that the association between peer victimization and somatic complaints became stronger as class victimization levels decreased.
CONCLUSIONS
Victims in classrooms with lower levels of victimization are more likely to report somatic problems. Anti-bullying programs should consider the effects of class norms on victims' adjustment and address the possible risks for those who continue to be victimized.
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
39-46Informations de copyright
© 2019, American School Health Association.
Références
Due P, Holstein BE, Lynch J, et al. Bullying and symptoms among school-aged children: international comparative cross sectional study in 28 countries. Eur J Public Health. 2005;15(2):128-132.
Molcho M, Craig W, Due P, et al. Cross-national time trends in bullying behaviour 1994-2006: findings from Europe and North America. Int J Public Health. 2009;54(2):225-234.
Nansel TR, Craig W, Overpeck MD, Saluja G, Ruan WJ. Health Behaviour in School-Aged Children Bullying Analyses Working Group. Cross-national consistency in the relationship between bullying behaviors and psychosocial adjustment. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 2004;158(8):730-736.
Casper DM, Card NA. Overt and relational victimization: a meta-analytic review of their overlap and associations with social-psychological adjustment. Child Dev. 2017;88(2):466-483.
Holt MK, Vivolo-Kantor AM, Polanin JR, et al. Bullying and suicidal ideation and behaviors: a meta-analysis. Pediatrics. 2015;135(2):e496-e509.
Reijntjes AHA, Kamphuis JH, Prinzie P, Telch MJ. Peer victimization and internalizing problems in children: a meta-analysis of longitudinal studies. Child Abuse Negl. 2010;34(4):244-252.
Ttofi MM, Farrington DP, Losel F, Loeber R. Do the victims of school bullies tend to become depressed later in life? A systematic review and meta-analysis of longitudinal studies. J Aggress Confl Peace Res. 2011;3(2):63-73.
Gini G, Pozzoli T. Association between bullying and psychosomatic problems: a meta-analysis. Pediatrics. 2009;123(3):1059-1065.
Gini G, Pozzoli T. Bullied children and psychosomatic problems: a meta-analysis. Pediatrics. 2013;132(4):720-729.
Gini G, Pozzoli T, Vieno A, Lenzi M. Bullying victimization at school and headache: a meta-analysis of observational studies. Headache. 2014;54(6):976-986.
Bellmore AD, Witkow MR, Graham S, Juvonen J. Beyond the individual: the impact of ethnic context and classroom behavioral norms on victims' adjustment. Dev Psychol. 2004;40(6):1159-1172.
Huitsing G, Veenstra R, Sainio M, Salmivalli C. “It must be me” or “it could be them?”: the impact of the social network position of bullies and victims on victims' adjustment. Soc Networks. 2012;34(4):379-386.
Sentse M, Scholte R, Salmivalli C, Voeten M. Person-group dissimilarity in involvement in bullying and its relation with social status. J Abnorm Child Psychol. 2007;35(6):1009-1019.
Schacter HL, Juvonen J. The effects of school-level victimization on self-blame: evidence for contextualized social cognitions. Dev Psychol. 2015;51(6):841-847.
Stormshak EA, Bierman KL, Bruschi C, Dodge KA, Coie JD. The relation between behavior problems and peer preference in different classroom contexts. Child Dev. 1999;70(1):169-182.
Bachman R, Gunter WD, Bakken NW. Predicting feelings of school safety for lower, middle, and upper school students: a gender specific analysis. Appl Psychol Crim Justice. 2011;7(2):59-76.
Sacco VF, Nakhaie MR. Fear of school violence and the ameliorative effects of student social capital. J Sch Violence. 2007;6(1):3-25.
Valois RF, Kerr JC, Huebner SE. Peer victimization and perceived life satisfaction among early adolescents in the United States. Am J Health Educ. 2012;43(5):258-268.
Verkuyten M, Thijs J. School satisfaction of elementary school children: the role of performance, peer relations, ethnicity, and gender. Soc Indic Res. 2002;59(2):203-228.
Wilkins-Shurmer A, O'Callaghan MJ, Najman JM, Bor W, Williams GM, Anderson MJ. Association of bullying with adolescent health-related quality of life. J Paediatr Child Health. 2003;39(6):436-441.
Vieno A, Lenzi M, Gini G, Pozzoli T, Cavallo F, Santinello M. Time trends in bullying behaviour in Italy. J Sch Health. 2015;85(7):441-445.
Vieno A, Gini G, Lenzi M, Pozzoli T, Canale N, Santinello M. Cybervictimization and somatic and psychological symptoms among Italian middle school students. Eur J Public Health. 2015;25(3):433-437.
Vitoroulis I, Vaillancourt T. Meta-analytic results of ethnic group differences in peer victimization. Aggress Behav. 2015;41(2):149-170.
Gini G, Marino C, Pozzoli T, Holt M. Associations between peer victimization, perceived teacher unfairness, and adolescents' adjustment and well-being. J Sch Psychol. 2018;67:56-68.
Istituto nazionale di statistica. Studenti e Scuole dell'Istruzione Primaria e Secondaria in Italia: Differenze Strutturali tra Scuole Statali e Paritarie. Roma, Italy: Istat; 2017. Available at: https://www.istat.it/it/archivio/199182. Accessed October 17, 2018.
Ministero dell'Istruzione e della Ricerca - Ufficio di Statistica. Gli Alunni Stranieri nel Sistema Scolastico Italiano. A.S. 2014/2015. Roma, Italy: Miur; 2015 Available at: http://www.istruzione.it/allegati/2015/Notiziario_Alunni_Stranieri_1415.pdf. Accessed October 17, 2018.
Boyce W, Torsheim T, Currie C, Zambon A. The family affluence scale as a measure of national wealth: validation of an adolescent self-report measure. Soc Indic Res. 2006;78(3):473-487.
Pozzoli T, Gini G, Thornberg R. Bullying and defending behavior: the role of explicit and implicit moral cognition. J Sch Psychol. 2016;59:67-81.
Pozzoli T, Gini G, Vieno A. The role of individual correlates and class norms in defending and passive bystanding behavior in bullying: a multilevel analysis. Child Dev. 2012;83(6):1917-1931.
Peets K, Pöyhönen V, Juvonen J, Salmivalli C. Classroom norms of bullying alter the degree to which children defend in response to their affective empathy and power. Dev Psychol. 2015;51(7):913-920.
Gini G. Associations between bullying, psychosomatic symptoms, emotional and behavioral problems. J Paediatr Child Health. 2008;44(9):492-497.
Haugland S, Wold B. Subjective health complaints in adolescence. Reliability and validity of survey methods. J Adolesc. 2001;24(5):611-624.
Gilman R, Huebner ES, Laughlin J. A first study of the multidimensional students' life scale with adolescents. Soc Indic Res. 2000;52(2):135-160.
Huebner ES. Preliminary development and validation of a multidimensional life satisfaction scale for children. Psychol Assess. 1994;6(2):149-158.
Fisher BW, Nation M, Nixon CT, McIlroy S. Students' perceptions of safety at school after Sandy hook. J Sch Violence. 2016;16(4):1-12.
Gini G, Pozzoli T, Borghi F, Franzoni L. The role of bystanders in students' perception of bullying and sense of safety. J Sch Psychol. 2008;46(6):617-638.
Goldweber A, Waasdorp TE, Bradshaw CP. Examining the link between forms of bullying behaviors and perceptions of safety and belonging among secondary school students. J Sch Psychol. 2013;51(4):469-485.
Muthén LK, Muthén BO. Mplus User's Guide. 7th ed. Los Angeles, CA: Muthén & Muthén; 1998-2012.
Muthén BO. Bayesian Analysis in Mplus: A Brief Introduction. Version 3. Los Angeles, CA: Muthen & Muthen; 2010.
Zyphur MJ, Oswald FL. Bayesian estimation and inference: a user's guide. J Manage. 2015;41(2):390-420.
Arbuckle JL. IBM SPSS Amos22 User's Guide. Chicago, IL: Amos Development Corporation; 2013.
Gelman A, Rubin DB. Inference from iterative simulation using multiple sequences. Stat Sci. 1992;7(4):457-511.
Gelman A, Carlin JB, Stern HS, Dunson DB, Vehtari A, Rubin DB. Bayesian Data Analysis. 3rd ed. New York, NY: Chapman & Hall; 2014.
Kaplan D, Depaoli S. Bayesian structural equation modeling. In: Hoyle R, ed. Handbook of Structural Equation Modeling. New York, NY: Guilford Press; 2012:650-673.
Chang L. The role of classroom norms in contextualizing the relations of children's social behavior to peer acceptance. Dev Psychol. 2004;40(5):691-702.
Wright JC, Giammarino M, Parad HW. Social status in small groups: individual-group similarity and the social “misfit.”. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1986;50(3):523-536.
Graham S, Juvonen J. Self-blame and peer victimization in middle school: an attributional analysis. Dev Psychol. 1998;34(3):587-599.
Juvonen J, Gross EF. The rejected and the bullied: lessons about social misfits from developmental psychology. In: Williams KD, Forgas JP, von Hippel W, eds. The Social Outcast: Ostracism, Social Exclusion, Rejection, and Bullying. New York, NY: Psychology Press; 2005:155-170.
McDougall P, Vaillancourt T. Long-term adult outcomes of peer victimization in childhood and adolescence: pathways to adjustment and maladjustment. Am Psychol. 2015;70(4):300-310.
Nishina A, Juvonen J. Daily reports of witnessing and experiencing peer harassment in middle school. Child Dev. 2005;76(2):435-450.
Graham S, Juvonen J. An attributional approach to peer victimization. In: Juvonen J, Graham S, eds. Peer Harassment in School: The Plight of the Vulnerable and Victimized. New York, NY: Guilford Press; 2001:49-72.
Compas BE, Hiden BR, Gerhardt CA. Adolescent development: pathways and processes of risk and resilience. Annu Rev Psychol. 1995;46(1):265-293.
Eccles J, Midgley C. Stage/environment fit: developmentally appropriate classrooms for early adolescents. In: Ames R, Ames C, eds. Research on Motivation in Education. New York, NY: Academic Press; 1989:139-181.
Rubin KH, Bukowski WM, Parker JG. Peer interactions, relationships, and groups. In: Damon W, Eisenberg N, eds. Handbook of Child Psychology: Vol. 3. Social, Emotional, and Personality Development. 5th ed. New York, NY: Wiley; 1998:619-700.
Cameron J, Bachman M, Alvarez J, Ruble DN. The development of a sense of ‘we’: the emergence and implications of children's collective identity. In: Bennett M, Sani F, eds. The Development of the Social Self. East Sussex, UK: Psychology Press; 2004:43-90.
Simmons RG, Blyth DA. Moving into Adolescence: The Impact of Pubertal Change and School Context. New York, NY: Aldine; 1987.
Graham S, Bellmore A, Nishina A, Juvonen J. “It must be me”: ethnic diversity and attributions for peer victimization in middle school. J Youth Adolesc. 2009;38(4):487-499.
Swearer SM, Hymel S. Understanding the psychology of bullying: moving toward a social-ecological diathesis-stress model. Am Psychol. 2015;70(4):344-353.
Schacter HL, White SJ, Chang VY, Juvonen J. “Why me?”: characterological self-blame and continued victimization in the first year of middle school. J Clin Child Adolesc Psychol. 2015;44(3):446-455.
Van Dyk TR, Nelson TD. Peer victimization and child physical health: the moderating role of pessimism. J Pediatr Psychol. 2014;39(4):469-480.
Fekkes M, Pijpers FIM, Fredriks AM, Vogels T, Verloove-Vanhorick SP. Do bullied children get ill, or do ill children get bullied? A prospective cohort study on the relationship between bullying and health-related symptoms. Pediatrics. 2006;117(5):1568-1574.
Bradshaw CP. Preventing bullying through positive Behavioral interventions and supports (PBIS): a multitiered approach to prevention and integration. Theory Pract. 2013;52(4):288-295.
Bradshaw CP. Translating research to practice in bullying prevention. Am Psychol. 2015;70(4):322-332.
Flannery DJ, Todres J, Bradshaw CP, et al. Bullying prevention: a summary of the report of the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. Prev Sci. 2016;17(8):1044-1053.
Green JG, McLaughlin KA, Alegría M, et al. School mental health resources and adolescent mental health service use. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 2013;52(2):501-510.
Brewer SL Jr, Brewer HJ, Kulik KS. Bullying victimization in schools: why the whole school, whole community, whole child model is essential. J Sch Health. 2018;88(11):794-802.
Reinke WM, Stormont M, Herman KC, Puri R, Goel N. Supporting children's mental health in schools: teacher perceptions of needs, roles, and barriers. Sch Psychol Q. 2011;26(1):1-13.
Bruns EJ, Duong MT, Lyon AR, et al. Fostering SMART partnerships to develop an effective continuum of behavioral health services and supports in schools. Am J Orthopsychiatry. 2016;86(2):156-170.