Exploring the Dimensional Structure of Bullying Victimization Among Primary and Lower-Secondary School Students: Is One Factor Enough, or Do We Need More?

Davide Marengo,Roberto H Parada,Michele Settanni,Laura Elvira Prino,Claudio Longobardi

doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00770

Davide Marengo, Roberto H Parada + Show 3 more

Open Access

https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00770

Copy DOI

Abstract

In adolescence, bullying victimization is typically represented in terms of a three-fold factor structure reflecting three components of verbal, physical, and social victimization. Recent studies have suggested the usefulness of alternativte models including both general and component-specific factors. In this study, we assessed the empirical and theoretical validity of an instrument assessing verbal, physical and social victimization using a set of alternative models of victimization: a unidimensional model, a three-factor model, and a bifactor model. Association between emerging factors and student variables were explored to establish theoretical fit of the models. Sample consisted of upper primary and lower secondary school students [N = 1311; 53% Male; Mean age (SD) = 10.73 (1.45)] and their teachers. The three factor and bifactor models showed good fit. In spite of acceptable fit, the unidimensional model showed lower empirical support when compared with the other models. The dimensions of the three-factor model showed similar associations with most student variables, while the bifactor showed more heterogeneous, and theoretically coherent associations. General victimization decreased with age and was positively related with externalizing and internalizing symptoms, student–teacher conflict and negative expectations. Verbal victimization showed increased prevalence among girls and older students. Physical victimization showed increased prevalence among boys and younger students, and positive associations with externalizing symptoms and student–teacher conflict. Social victimization was more frequent among girls, and positively related with internalizing symptoms and negative expectations toward teachers. These findings highlight the usefulness of modeling victimization using both general and form-specific dimensions for both assessment and theory-building purposes.

Highlights

In-school bullying victimization refers to the continued, intentional aggression of a victim who is lower in power when compared to the aggressor, i.e., the bully (Olweus, 1996)
Students’ exposure to verbal and physical bullying behaviors is typically considered a direct form of victimization, while social/relational victimization is considered an indirect form of victimization which is aimed at damaging the social status of the victims
Concerning the three specific victimization factors emerging from the bifactor model and their association with demographic variables, we found age was positively correlated with verbal bullying victimization and negatively correlated with physical victimization, while gender was positively correlated with verbal and social victimization, and negative correlated with physical victimization

Summary

Introduction

In-school bullying victimization refers to the continued, intentional aggression of a victim who is lower in power when compared to the aggressor, i.e., the bully (Olweus, 1996). When compared with uninvolved peers, bullies and their victims are both at greater risk of reporting increased emotional and behavioral problems (e.g., Smith et al, 2004; Schneider et al, 2012; Kowalski and Limber, 2013; Longobardi et al, 2018a; Marengo et al, 2018), as well as poorer in-school adjustment (e.g., increased student–teacher conflict, Marengo et al, 2018; lower academic engagement and achievement, Buhs et al, 2010; Rueger and Jenkins, 2014). In-school bullying victimization is typically described as comprising three main components, each mirroring different forms of bullying – namely verbal, physical, and social/relational bullying (Crick et al, 2001; Cornell and Bandyopadhyay, 2010; Marsh et al, 2011; Harris et al, 2018). Studies show the existence of differential relations of each form of victimization with students’ characteristics and psychosocial outcomes, supporting the importance of conceptualizing them as separate constructs

Methods

Results

Discussion

Conclusion