5
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Peer Victimization: an Integrative Review and Cross-National Test of a Tripartite Model

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          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.

          Related collections

          Most cited references123

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            Ecological Correlations and the Behavior of Individuals

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Article: not found

              In Search of Golden Rules: Comment on Hypothesis-Testing Approaches to Setting Cutoff Values for Fit Indexes and Dangers in Overgeneralizing Hu and Bentler's (1999) Findings

                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                (View ORCID Profile)
                Journal
                Educational Psychology Review
                Educ Psychol Rev
                Springer Science and Business Media LLC
                1040-726X
                1573-336X
                June 2023
                April 15 2023
                June 2023
                : 35
                : 2
                Article
                10.1007/s10648-023-09765-x
                03072078-ec07-49d7-896f-1f387724659d
                © 2023

                https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0

                https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0

                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article