Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-mlc7c Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-13T00:50:29.838Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Why the bully/victim relationship is so pernicious: A gendered perspective on power and animosity among bullies and their victims

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 July 2014

Philip C. Rodkin ,
Laura D. Hanish ,
Shuai Wang  and
Handrea A. Logis
Philip C. Rodkin*
Affiliation:
University of Illinois, Urbana–Champaign
Laura D. Hanish
Affiliation:
Arizona State University
Shuai Wang
Affiliation:
University of Illinois, Urbana–Champaign
Handrea A. Logis
Affiliation:
University of Illinois, Urbana–Champaign
*
Address correspondence and reprint requests to: Philip C. Rodkin, Department of Educational Psychology, University of Illinois, Urbana–Champaign, 403 East Healey Street, Champaign, IL 61820; E-mail: [email protected].
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The bully/victim relationship was studied in a sample of elementary school children (N = 1,289 in first, third, and fifth grades). Three questions were tested. Does bullying involve a power differential between bully and victim? Are bully/victim dyads participants in a relationship, whether mutual liking or disliking? Does the gender composition of the bully/victim dyad moderate power differential and relational context patterns? Hierarchical linear modeling was used to analyze predictors of the reputational strength of bully/victim ties. The findings revealed that the bully/victim dyads most frequently nominated by peers were characterized by asymmetries in social status, where bullies were increasingly more popular than their victims, and by asymmetries in aggression, where bullies were increasingly less aggressive than their victims. Bullies and victims were likely to select one another as among the children that they least like. Most effects with respect to aggression, popularity, and relationships were moderated by the gender composition of the bully/victim dyad. Implications for a developmental psychopathology perspective on peer bullying and victimization are highlighted.

Type
Regular Articles
Information
Development and Psychopathology , Volume 26 , Special Issue 3: The Legacy of Nicki R. Crick's Contributions to Developmental Psychopathology , August 2014 , pp. 689 - 704
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2014 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Ahn, H.-J., Rodkin, P. C., & Gest, S. D. (2013). Teacher–student agreement on “Bullies and Kids they Pick On” in elementary school classrooms: Gender and grade differences. Theory Into Practice, 52, 257–263.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Andrews, N. C. Z., Hanish, L. D., Martin, C. L., & Santos, C. E. (2014). Aggression and social prominence in early adolescence: Why form of aggression matters. Manuscript submitted for publication.Google Scholar
Barcelo, H., Hanish, L. D., White, J., Severs, C., Gosney, S., Raman, P., et al. (2012). Q-Connectivity software program. Downloaded from http://cocteau.la.asu.edu/cd1/login.php Google Scholar
Barcelo, H., & Laubenbacher, R. (2005). Perspectives on a homotopy theory and its applications. Journal of Discrete Mathematics, 298, 39–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Berger, C., & Rodkin, P. C. (2009). Male and female victims of male bullies: Social status differences by gender and informant source. Sex Roles, 61, 72–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Card, N. A., & Hodges, E. V. E. (2007a). Shared targets for aggression by early adolescent friends. Developmenal Psychology, 42, 1327–1338.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Card, N. A., & Hodges, E. V. E. (2007b). Victimization within mutually antipathetic peer relationships. Social Development, 16, 479–496.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Card, N. A., & Little, T. D. (2006). Proactive and reactive aggresion in childhood and adolescence: A meta-analysis of differential relations with psychosocial adjustment. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 30, 466–480.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Card, N. A., Rodkin, P. C., & Garandeau, C. F. (2010). A description and illustration of the Triadic Relations Model: Who perceives whom as bullying whom? International Journal of Behavioral Development, 34, 374–383.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Casper, D. M., & Card, N. A. (2010). “We were best friends, but . . .”: Two studies of antipathetic relationships emerging from broken friendships. Journal of Adolescent Research, 25, 499–526.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cicchetti, D., & Cohen, D. J. (Eds.). (2006). Developmental psychopathology. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.Google ScholarPubMed
Cook, C. R., Williams, K. R., Guerra, N. G., Kim, T. E., & Sadek, S. (2010). Predictors of bullying and victimization in childhood and adolescence: A meta-analytic investigation. School Psychology Quarterly, 25, 65–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crick, N. R., Casas, J. F., & Ku, H. (1999). Relational and physical forms of peer victimization in preschool. Developmental Psychology, 35, 376–385.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Crick, N. R., & Nelson, D. A. (2002). Relational and physical victimization within friendships: Nobody told me there'd be friends like these. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 30, 599–607.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crick, N. R., & Zahn-Waxler, C. (2003). The development of psychopathology in females and males: Current progress and future challenges. Development and Psychopathology, 15, 719–742.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
de Bryun, E. H., Cillessen, A. H. N., & Wissink, I. B. (2010). Associations of peer acceptance and perceived popularity with bullying and victimization in early adolescence. Journal of Early Adolescence, 30, 543–566.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dodge, K. A., & Albert, D. (2012). Evolving science in adolescence: Comment on Ellis et al. (2012). Developmental Psychology, 48, 624–627.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Espelage, D. L., Low, S. K., Anderson, C., & De La Rue, L. (2013). Bullying, sexual, and dating violence trajectories from early to late adolescence. Report submitted to the National Institute of Justice. Champaign, IL: University of Illinois, College of Education.Google Scholar
Faris, R., & Felmee, D. (2011). Status struggles: Network centrality and gender segregation in same- and cross-gender aggression. American Sociological Review, 76, 48–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Farmer, T. W., Irvin, M., Leung, M.-C., Hall, C., Hutchins, B., & McDonough, E. (2010). Social preference, social prominence, and group membership in late elementary school: Homophilic concentration and peer affiliation configurations. Social Psychology of Education, 13, 271–293.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Garandeau, C. F., Wilson, T., & Rodkin, P. C. (2010). The popularity of elementary school bullies in gender and racial context. In Jimerson, S. R., Swearer, S. M., & Espelage, D. L. (Eds.), Handbook of bullying in schools: An international perspective (pp. 119–136). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Hafen, C. A., Laursen, B., Nurmi, J.-E., & Salmela-Aro, K. (2013). Bullies, victims, and antipathy: The feeling is mutual. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 41, 801–809.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hanish, L. D., Barcelo, H., Martin, C. L., Fabes, R. A., Holmwall, J., & Palermo, F. (2007). Using the Q-connectivity method to study frequency of interaction with multiple peer triads: Do preschoolers' peer group interactions at school relate to academic skills? In Rodkin, P. C. & Hanish, L. D. (Eds.), New directions for child and adolescent development: Social network analysis and children's peer relationships (Vol. 118, pp. 9–24). San Francisco, CA: Jossey–Bass.Google Scholar
Hanish, L. D., & Guerra, N. G. (2004). Aggressive victims, passive victims, and bullies: Developmental continuity or developmental change? Merrill–Palmer Quarterly, 50, 17–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hanish, L. D., Martin, C. L., Fabes, R. A., & Barcelo, H. (2008). The breadth of peer relationships among preschoolers: An application of the Q-connectivity method to externalizing behavior. Child Development, 79, 1119–1136.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hanish, L. D., Sallquist, J., DiDonato, M., Fabes, R. A., & Martin, C. L. (2012). Aggression by whom—Aggression toward whom: Behavioral predictors of same- and other-gender aggression in early childhood. Developmental Psychology, 48, 1450–1462.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hinde, R. A., & Stevenson-Hinde, J. (1987). Interpersonal relationships and child development. Developmental Review, 7, 1–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hodges, E. V. E., Peets, K., & Salmivalli, C. (2009). A Person × Situation approach to understanding aggressive behavior and underlying aggressogenic thought. In Harris, M. J. (Ed.), Bullying, peer rejection, and peer victimization: A social cognitive neuroscience perspective (pp. 125–150). New York: Springer.Google Scholar
Kawabata, Y., & Crick, N. R. (2011). The significance of cross-racial/ethnic friendships: Associations with peer victimization, peer support, sociometric status, and classroom diversity. Developmenal Psychology, 47, 1763–1775.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kochenderfer-Ladd, B., & Wardrop, J. L. (2001). Chronicity and instability of children's peer victimization experiences as predictors of loneliness and social satisfaction trajectories. Child Development, 72, 134–151.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Leff, S. S., Power, T. J., & Goldstein, A. B. (2004). Outcome measures to assess the effectiveness of bullying-prevention programs in the schools. In Espelage, D. L. & Swearer, S. M. (Eds.), Bullying in American schools: A social-ecological perspective on prevention and intervention (pp. 269–294). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Maccoby, E. E. (1998). The two sexes: Growing up apart, coming together. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Marsh, H. W., Nagengast, B., Morin, A. J. S., Parada, R. H., Craven, R. G., & Hamilton, L. R. (2011). Construct validity of the multidimensional structure of bullying and victimization: An application of exploratory structural equation modeling. Journal of Educational Psychology, 103, 701–732.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Murray-Close, D., & Crick, N. R. (2006). Mutual antipathy involvement: Gender and associations with aggression and victimization. School Psychology Review, 35, 472–492.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Olson, S. L. (1992). Development of conduct problems and peer rejection in preschool children: A social systems analysis. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 20, 327–350.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Olweus, D. (1993). Bullying at school. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Olweus, D. (2010). Understanding and researching bullying: Some critical issues. In Jimerson, S. R., Swearer, S. M., & Espelage, D. L. (Eds.), Handbook of bullying in schools: An international perspective (pp. 9–34). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Parker, J. G., Rubin, K. H., Erath, S. A., Wojslawowicz, J. C., & Buskirk, A. A. (2006). Peer relationships, child development, and adjustment: A developmental psychopathology perspective. In Cicchetti, D. & Cohen, D. J. (Eds.), Developmental psychopathology: Vol. 1. Theory and method (2nd ed., pp. 419–493). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.Google Scholar
Pauletti, R. E., Cooper, P. J., & Perry, D. G. (in press). Influences of gender identity on children's maltreatment of gender non-conforming peers: A Person × Target analysis of aggression. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology.Google Scholar
Pellegrini, A. D. (2001). A longitudinal study of heterosexual relationships, aggression, and sexual harassment during the transition from primary school through middle school. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 22, 119–133.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pepler, D. J., Craig, W. M., Connolly, J. A., Yulie, A., McMaster, L., & Jiang, D. (2006). A developmental perspective on bullying. Aggressive Behavior, 32, 376–384.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Robinson, J. P., & Espelage, D. L. (2012). Bullying explains only part of LGBTQ–heterosexual risk disparities: Implications for policy and practice. Educational Researcher, 41, 309–319.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rodkin, P. C., & Berger, C. (2008). Who bullies whom? social status asymmetries by victim gender. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 32, 473–485.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rodkin, P. C., Farmer, T. W., Pearl, R., & Van Acker, R. (2000). Heterogeneity of popular boys: Antisocial and prosocial configurations. Developmental Psychology, 36, 14–24.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rodkin, P. C., & Fischer, K. (2003). Sexual harassment and the cultures of childhood: Developmental, domestic violence, and legal perspectives. Journal of Applied School Psychology, 19, 177–196.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rose, A. J., Glick, G., & Smith, R. L. (2011). Popularity and gender: The two cultures of boys and girls. In Cillessen, A. H. N., Schwartz, D., & Mayeux, L. (Eds.), Popularity in the peer system (pp. 103–122). New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
Ross, S. W., & Horner, R. H. (2009). Bully prevention in positive behavior support. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 42, 747–759.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rudolph, K. D., Lansford, J. L., & Rodkin, P. C. (in press). Interpersonal theories of developmental psychopathology. In Cicchetti, D. (Ed.), Developmental psychopathology (3rd ed.). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.Google Scholar
Sainio, M., Veenstra, R., Huitsing, G., & Salmivalli, C. (2010). Victims and their defenders: A dyadic approach. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 35, 144–151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Salmivalli, C., & Helteenvuori, T. (2007). Reactive but not proactive aggression predicts vicitmization among boys. Aggressive Behavior, 33, 198–206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schwartz, D., Dodge, K. A., & Coie, J. D. (1993). The emergence of chronic peer victimization in boys' play groups. Child Development, 64, 1755–1772.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Stroheimer, D., Kärnä, A., & Salmivalli, C. (2011). Intrapersonal and interpersonal risk factors for peer victimization in immigrant youth in Finland. Developmenal Psychology, 47, 248–258.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vaillancourt, T., McDougall, P., Hymel, S., Krygsman, A., Miller, J., Stiver, K., et al. (2008). Bullying: Are researchers and children/youth talking about the same thing? International Journal of Behavioral Development, 32, 486–495.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Veenstra, R., Lindenberg, S., Zijlstra, B. J. H., De Winter, A. F., Verhulst, F. C., & Ormel, J. (2007). The dyadic nature of bullying and victimization: Testing a dual-perspective theory. Child Development, 78, 1843–1854.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wolke, D., Copeland, W. E., Angold, A., & Costello, J. (2013). Impact of bullying in childhood on adult health, wealth, crime, and social outcomes. Psychological Science, 24, 1958–1970.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Zimmer-Gembeck, M. J., Pronk, R. E., Goodwin, B., Mastro, S., & Crick, N. R. (2013). Connected and isolated victims of relational aggression: Associations with peer group status and differences between girls and boys. Sex Roles, 68, 363–377.CrossRefGoogle Scholar