Peer victimization : an integrative review and cross-national test of a tripartite model

Herbert W. Marsh; Jiesi Guo; Philip D. Parker; Reinhard Pekrun; Geetanjali Basarkod; Theresa Dicke; Roberto H. Parada; Johnmarshall Reeve; Rhonda Craven; Joseph Ciarrochi; Baljinder Sahdra; Emma K. Devine

Peer victimization : an integrative review and cross-national test of a tripartite model

Herbert W. Marsh, Jiesi Guo, Philip D. Parker, Reinhard Pekrun, Geetanjali Basarkod, Theresa Dicke, Roberto H. Parada, Johnmarshall Reeve, Rhonda Craven, Joseph Ciarrochi, Baljinder Sahdra, Emma K. Devine

Western Sydney University

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

Abstract

School victimization issues remain largely unresolved due to over-reliance on unidimensional conceptions of victimization and data from a few developed OECD countries. Thus, support for cross-national generalizability over multiple victimization components (relational, verbal, and physical) is weak. Our substantive-methodological synergy tests the cross-national generalizability of a three-component model (594,196 fifteen-year-olds; nationally -representative samples from 77 countries) compared to competing (unidimensional and two-component) victimization models. We demonstrate the superior explanatory power of the three-component model"”goodness-of-fit, component differentiation, and discriminant validity of the three components concerning gender differences, paradoxical anti-bullying attitudes (the Pro-Bully Paradox) whereby victims are more supportive of bullies than of other victims, and multiple indicators of well-being. For example, gender differences varied significantly across the three components, and all 13 well-being indicators were more strongly related to verbal and particularly relational victimization than physical victimization. Collapsing the three components into one or two components undermined discriminant validity. Cross-nationally, systematic differences emerged across the three victimization components regarding country-level means, gender differences, national development, and cultural values. These findings across countries support a tripartite model in which the three components of victimization"”relational, verbal, and physical-relate differently to key outcomes. Thus, these findings advance victimization theory and have implications for policy, practice, and intervention. We also discuss directions for further research: the need for simultaneous evaluation of multiple, parallel components of victimization and bullying, theoretical definitions of bullying and victimization and their implications for measurement, conceptual bases of global victimization indices, cyberbullying, anti-bullying policies, and capitalizing on anti-bullying attitudes.

Original language	English
Article number	46
Number of pages	51
Journal	Educational Psychology Review
Volume	35
Issue number	2
Publication status	Published - Jun 2023

Bibliographical note

Publisher Copyright:
© 2023, The Author(s).

Open Access - Access Right Statement

This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4. 0/.

Cite this

@article{def531f7fb90420e92cc6650fb4788e1,

title = "Peer victimization : an integrative review and cross-national test of a tripartite model",

abstract = "School victimization issues remain largely unresolved due to over-reliance on unidimensional conceptions of victimization and data from a few developed OECD countries. Thus, support for cross-national generalizability over multiple victimization components (relational, verbal, and physical) is weak. Our substantive-methodological synergy tests the cross-national generalizability of a three-component model (594,196 fifteen-year-olds; nationally -representative samples from 77 countries) compared to competing (unidimensional and two-component) victimization models. We demonstrate the superior explanatory power of the three-component model{"}”goodness-of-fit, component differentiation, and discriminant validity of the three components concerning gender differences, paradoxical anti-bullying attitudes (the Pro-Bully Paradox) whereby victims are more supportive of bullies than of other victims, and multiple indicators of well-being. For example, gender differences varied significantly across the three components, and all 13 well-being indicators were more strongly related to verbal and particularly relational victimization than physical victimization. Collapsing the three components into one or two components undermined discriminant validity. Cross-nationally, systematic differences emerged across the three victimization components regarding country-level means, gender differences, national development, and cultural values. These findings across countries support a tripartite model in which the three components of victimization{"}”relational, verbal, and physical-relate differently to key outcomes. Thus, these findings advance victimization theory and have implications for policy, practice, and intervention. We also discuss directions for further research: the need for simultaneous evaluation of multiple, parallel components of victimization and bullying, theoretical definitions of bullying and victimization and their implications for measurement, conceptual bases of global victimization indices, cyberbullying, anti-bullying policies, and capitalizing on anti-bullying attitudes.",

author = "Marsh, {Herbert W.} and Jiesi Guo and Parker, {Philip D.} and Reinhard Pekrun and Geetanjali Basarkod and Theresa Dicke and Parada, {Roberto H.} and Johnmarshall Reeve and Rhonda Craven and Joseph Ciarrochi and Baljinder Sahdra and Devine, {Emma K.}",

note = "Publisher Copyright: {\textcopyright} 2023, The Author(s).",

year = "2023",

month = jun,

language = "English",

volume = "35",

journal = "Educational Psychology Review",

issn = "1040-726X",

publisher = "Springer New York",

number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Peer victimization : an integrative review and cross-national test of a tripartite model

AU - Marsh, Herbert W.

AU - Guo, Jiesi

AU - Parker, Philip D.

AU - Pekrun, Reinhard

AU - Basarkod, Geetanjali

AU - Dicke, Theresa

AU - Parada, Roberto H.

AU - Reeve, Johnmarshall

AU - Craven, Rhonda

AU - Ciarrochi, Joseph

AU - Sahdra, Baljinder

AU - Devine, Emma K.

PY - 2023/6

Y1 - 2023/6

N2 - School victimization issues remain largely unresolved due to over-reliance on unidimensional conceptions of victimization and data from a few developed OECD countries. Thus, support for cross-national generalizability over multiple victimization components (relational, verbal, and physical) is weak. Our substantive-methodological synergy tests the cross-national generalizability of a three-component model (594,196 fifteen-year-olds; nationally -representative samples from 77 countries) compared to competing (unidimensional and two-component) victimization models. We demonstrate the superior explanatory power of the three-component model"”goodness-of-fit, component differentiation, and discriminant validity of the three components concerning gender differences, paradoxical anti-bullying attitudes (the Pro-Bully Paradox) whereby victims are more supportive of bullies than of other victims, and multiple indicators of well-being. For example, gender differences varied significantly across the three components, and all 13 well-being indicators were more strongly related to verbal and particularly relational victimization than physical victimization. Collapsing the three components into one or two components undermined discriminant validity. Cross-nationally, systematic differences emerged across the three victimization components regarding country-level means, gender differences, national development, and cultural values. These findings across countries support a tripartite model in which the three components of victimization"”relational, verbal, and physical-relate differently to key outcomes. Thus, these findings advance victimization theory and have implications for policy, practice, and intervention. We also discuss directions for further research: the need for simultaneous evaluation of multiple, parallel components of victimization and bullying, theoretical definitions of bullying and victimization and their implications for measurement, conceptual bases of global victimization indices, cyberbullying, anti-bullying policies, and capitalizing on anti-bullying attitudes.

AB - School victimization issues remain largely unresolved due to over-reliance on unidimensional conceptions of victimization and data from a few developed OECD countries. Thus, support for cross-national generalizability over multiple victimization components (relational, verbal, and physical) is weak. Our substantive-methodological synergy tests the cross-national generalizability of a three-component model (594,196 fifteen-year-olds; nationally -representative samples from 77 countries) compared to competing (unidimensional and two-component) victimization models. We demonstrate the superior explanatory power of the three-component model"”goodness-of-fit, component differentiation, and discriminant validity of the three components concerning gender differences, paradoxical anti-bullying attitudes (the Pro-Bully Paradox) whereby victims are more supportive of bullies than of other victims, and multiple indicators of well-being. For example, gender differences varied significantly across the three components, and all 13 well-being indicators were more strongly related to verbal and particularly relational victimization than physical victimization. Collapsing the three components into one or two components undermined discriminant validity. Cross-nationally, systematic differences emerged across the three victimization components regarding country-level means, gender differences, national development, and cultural values. These findings across countries support a tripartite model in which the three components of victimization"”relational, verbal, and physical-relate differently to key outcomes. Thus, these findings advance victimization theory and have implications for policy, practice, and intervention. We also discuss directions for further research: the need for simultaneous evaluation of multiple, parallel components of victimization and bullying, theoretical definitions of bullying and victimization and their implications for measurement, conceptual bases of global victimization indices, cyberbullying, anti-bullying policies, and capitalizing on anti-bullying attitudes.

UR - https://hdl.handle.net/1959.7/uws:71360

M3 - Article

SN - 1040-726X

VL - 35

JO - Educational Psychology Review

JF - Educational Psychology Review

IS - 2

M1 - 46

ER -

Peer victimization : an integrative review and cross-national test of a tripartite model

Abstract

Bibliographical note

Open Access - Access Right Statement

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this