Cyber-victimization and popularity in early adolescence: Stability and predictive associations

The present study examined: (1) the one-year stability of cyber-victimization; (2) the temporal sequence of cyber-victimization and traditional victimization; and (3) popularity and perceived popularity as possible antecedents and consequences of cyber-victimization and traditional victimization. The sample comprised 665 early adolescents (356 boys, 309 girls) aged 11.63 (SD = 0.84) at Time 1. Data were collected using self- and peer reports. To test for the temporal sequence a cross-lagged panel design was used. Traditional victimization, popularity and perceived popularity were moderately stable for both boys and girls. Cyber-victimization was neither stable during a one-year period, nor could it be predicted by traditional victimization, popularity or perceived popularity. Instead, cyber-victimization fostered popularity in girls. The implications of these findings are discussed.

[1]  Peter K. Smith,et al.  School Bullying: Insights and Perspectives , 1994 .

[2]  P. Bentler,et al.  Comparative fit indexes in structural models. , 1990, Psychological bulletin.

[3]  G. Ladd,et al.  Peer victimization: cause or consequence of school maladjustment? , 1996, Child development.

[4]  Inge B. Wissink,et al.  Associations of Peer Acceptance and Perceived Popularity With Bullying and Victimization in Early Adolescence , 2010 .

[5]  C. Spiel,et al.  Traditional Bullying and Cyberbullying Identification of Risk Groups for Adjustment Problems , 2009 .

[6]  D. Cross,et al.  Cyberbullying Versus Face-to-Face Bullying A Theoretical and Conceptual Review , 2009 .

[7]  Kenneth H. Rubin,et al.  Handbook of Peer Interactions, Relationships, and Groups , 2011 .

[8]  Clayton R. Cook,et al.  Predictors of Bullying and Victimization in Childhood and Adolescence: A Meta-analytic Investigation , 2010 .

[9]  Robert S. Tokunaga,et al.  Following you home from school: A critical review and synthesis of research on cyberbullying victimization , 2010, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[10]  Peter K. Smith,et al.  Aggressors, Victims, and Defenders in Preschool: Peer, Self-, and Teacher Reports , 2003 .

[11]  Elisheva F. Gross,et al.  Extending the school grounds?--Bullying experiences in cyberspace. , 2008, The Journal of school health.

[12]  Christina Salmivalli,et al.  Prospective relations among victimization, rejection, friendlessness, and children's self- and peer-perceptions. , 2005, Child development.

[13]  G. Bogat,et al.  Temporal patterns of variable relationships in person-oriented research: longitudinal models of configural frequency analysis. , 2008, Developmental psychology.

[14]  A. Cillessen,et al.  From censure to reinforcement: developmental changes in the association between aggression and social status. , 2004, Child development.

[15]  M. Boulton,et al.  Bully/victim problems in middle-school children: Stability, self-perceived competence, peer perceptions and peer acceptance , 1994 .

[16]  Peter K. Smith,et al.  Cyberbullying: another main type of bullying? , 2008, Scandinavian journal of psychology.

[17]  D. Olweus.  Bully/victim problems among schoolchildren: Basic facts and effects of a school based intervention program. , 1991 .

[18]  Mark Meerum Terwogt,et al.  Bullying and Victimization Among School-age Children: Stability and Links to Proactive and Reactive Aggression , 2002 .

[19]  J. H. Steiger.  Structural Model Evaluation and Modification: An Interval Estimation Approach. , 1990, Multivariate behavioral research.

[20]  Sarah N. Woods,et al.  Who escapes or remains a victim of bullying in primary school? , 2009, The British journal of developmental psychology.

[21]  T. Vaillancourt,et al.  Bullying: Are researchers and children/youth talking about the same thing? , 2008 .

[22]  T. Little.  Mean and Covariance Structures (MACS) Analyses of Cross-Cultural Data: Practical and Theoretical Issues. , 1997, Multivariate behavioral research.

[23]  Peter K. Smith,et al.  Profiles of non-victims, escaped victims, continuing victims and new victims of school bullying. , 2004, The British journal of educational psychology.

[24]  Christina Salmivalli,et al.  Stability and change of behavior in connection with bullying in schools: A two‐year follow‐up , 1998 .

[25]  Alexander von Eye,et al.  Configural Frequency Analysis: The Search for Extreme Cells , 2004 .

[26]  S. Graham,et al.  Peer harassment, psychological adjustment, and school functioning in early adolescence. , 2000 .

[27]  A. Eye,et al.  Stability and Constancy of Bully-Victim Behavior , 2010 .

[28]  Juliana Raskauskas,et al.  Involvement in traditional and electronic bullying among adolescents. , 2007, Developmental psychology.

[29]  C. Spiel,et al.  National strategy for violence prevention in the Austrian public school system: Development and implementation , 2011 .

[30]  Felix C. Brodbeck,et al.  Bullying roles in changing contexts: The stability of victim and bully roles from primary to secondary school , 2005 .

[31]  E V Hodges,et al.  Personal and interpersonal antecedents and consequences of victimization by peers. , 1999, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[32]  W. Bukowski,et al.  The power of friendship: protection against an escalating cycle of peer victimization. , 1999, Developmental psychology.

[33]  Robin M. Kowalski,et al.  Electronic bullying among middle school students. , 2007, The Journal of adolescent health : official publication of the Society for Adolescent Medicine.

[34]  K. Kumpulainen,et al.  Peer Harassment in School: The Plight of the Vulnerable and Victimized , 2002 .

[35]  S. Lindenberg,et al.  The complex relation between bullying, victimization, acceptance, and rejection: giving special attention to status, affection, and sex differences. , 2010, Child development.

[36]  D. G. Perry,et al.  Victims of Peer Aggression. , 1988 .