HEXACO personality correlates of adolescents' involvement in bullying situations.

Adolescents' involvement in bullying situations is-at least partially-personality trait-activated. Although some studies investigated personality correlates of bullying and being victimized, little is known about personality correlates of bystander responses (i.e., reinforcing, outsider behavior, indirect defending, and direct defending). The present study investigated whether Dutch adolescents' self-reported HEXACO personality traits could explain their peer-reported involvement in bullying (N = 552; Mage = 13.4 years, SD = 0.8 years). The results show that bullying was negatively related to honesty-humility, emotionality, agreeableness (for boys specifically), and openness, whereas reinforcing was only negatively related to honesty-humility and openness. Conversely, direct defending and outsider behavior were positively related to honesty-humility, emotionality, and openness, whereas indirect defending was only positively related to emotionality and openness. Furthermore, reinforcing was positively related to extraversion (for boys only), whereas outsider behavior was negatively related extraversion and positively to conscientiousness. Finally, being victimized was positively related to emotionality and negatively to extraversion. These findings contribute to our understanding of the heterogeneity in adolescents' involvement in bullying and fit the view of bullying and defending as strategic and goal-directed behavior. Implications for bullying prevention programs are discussed.

Longitudinal Associations Between Adolescents' Bullying-Related Indirect Defending, Outsider Behavior, and Peer-Group Status.

During adolescence, youth become more likely to avoid involvement in witnessed bullying and less likely to support victims. It is unknown whether-and how-these bystander behaviors (i.e., outsider behavior and indirect defending) are associated with adolescents' peer-group status (i.e., popularity and social acceptance) over time. Cross-lagged path modeling was used to examine these longitudinal associations in a sample of 313 Dutch adolescents (Mage-T1  = 10.3 years). The results showed that status longitudinally predicted behavior, rather than that behavior predicted status. Specifically, unpopularity predicted outsider behavior and social acceptance predicted indirect defending. These findings suggest that a positive peer-group status can trigger adolescents' provictim stance. However, adolescents may also strategically avoid involvement in witnessed bullying to keep a low social profile.

Differences in adolescents' motivations for indirect, direct, and hybrid peer defending.

Adolescents' defending of peers who are being bullied-or peer defending-was recently found to be a heterogeneous behavioral construct. The present study investigated individual differences in adolescents' motivations for executing these indirect, direct, and hybrid defending behaviors. In line with the literature on bullying as goal-directed strategic behavior, we adopted a social evolution theory framework to investigate whether these peer-defending behaviors could qualify as goal-directed strategic prosocial behaviors. A sample of 549 Dutch adolescents (49.4% boys; M age = 12.5 years, SD = 0.6 years) participated in this study. Their peer reported defending behaviors (including bullying behavior as a control variable) and the following behavioral motivations were assessed: (a) agentic and communal goals (self-report), (b) prosocial and coercive social strategies (peer report), and (c) altruistic and egocentric motivations for prosocial behavior (self-report). The outcomes of hierarchical linear regression analyses suggest that adolescents' motivations for executing the different subtypes of peer defending partially overlap but are also different. While indirect defending was fostered by genuine concerns for victims' well-being, direct defending was more motivated by personal gains. Hybrid defending combined favorable aspects of both indirect and direct defending as a goal-directed, strategic, and altruistically motivated prosocial behavior. The implications of these findings are discussed.

Bullying-related behaviour in adolescents with autism: Links with autism severity and emotional and behavioural problems.

This study examined the association between peer-reported bullying-related behaviours (bully, victim, outsider and defender), age, gender, autism severity and teacher-rated emotional and behavioural problems in adolescents with autism spectrum disorder, using a multi-informant approach. The sample comprised 120 adolescents (11% girls, Mage = 15.6 years, standard deviation = 1.89 years) attending a special school for children with autism. Results show that bullying decreased with age and was associated with behavioural problems, while victimisation was only associated with peer problems - a pattern of results comparable to studies exploring these associations in typically developing children. However, there were few associations among study variables for outsider or defender behaviours in this sample. Notably, children's autism severity did not significantly predict bullying-related behaviours.

Predicting aggression in adolescence: The interrelation between (a lack of) empathy and social goals.

In an attempt to explain the inconsistent findings and overall weak relation between empathy and aggression, we focused on the role of emotional empathy (emotions of concern, compassion or sympathy toward a (potential) victim), agentic goals (the desire to be dominant during social interaction with peers) and their interplay (mediation or moderation) in the prediction of proactive aggression (learned instrumental behavior) in adolescence. Data were collected from 550 young Dutch adolescents, who filled out multiple questionnaires. Findings showed that the link between a lack of empathic concern and proactive aggression is partly mediated and moderated by agentic goals. The moderation analyses showed that the predictive value of a lack of empathic concern with regard to proactive aggression was greater when adolescents reported a stronger desire to be dominant in social situations with peers. In addition, the findings supported the assumption that the relation between empathic concern and reactive aggression (a hostile and angry response to perceived provocation) is not mediated or moderated by agentic goals. Findings were discussed in terms of their implications for future research. Aggr. Behav. 43:204-214, 2017. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Defending victimized peers: Opposing the bully, supporting the victim, or both?

To reduce bullying, more knowledge on children defending their victimized peers is critical. In previous work, predominantly cross-sectional in nature, defending has typically been operationalized as one single, broad construct. However, there are good reasons to assume that attacking the bully (bully oriented defending) and comforting the victim (victim-oriented defending) are relatively independent constructs, with potentially different correlates. This longitudinal study in the Netherlands (N = 394; Mage = 10.3) combined person- and variable-centered techniques to examine relations between two different forms of defending and multiple outcome variables. In addition to the largest group scoring low on both types of defending, three subgroups emerged. A small group of "traditional," predominantly female defenders, scored high on both forms of defending. These children were well liked and high in reputation-based status, as indexed by perceived popularity and resource control. A larger, predominantly female second group only scored high on victim-oriented defending. These children were also well liked, but low in reputation-based status. The third group only scored high on bully oriented defending, and predominantly contained boys. These children were high in reputation-based status but quite disliked, and they scored high on bullying. Findings strongly suggest that bully oriented defending does not in all cases reflect desirable interventions of empathic children. Aggr. Behav. 42:585-597, 2016. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Narcissism, Bullying, and Social Dominance in Youth: A Longitudinal Analysis.

A few previous studies have shown that narcissistic traits in youth are positively associated with bullying. However, research examining the developmental relationship between narcissism and bullying is lacking. Moreover, it is unclear whether narcissists constitute a homogeneous group and whether the bullying of narcissistic youth results in establishing social dominance over peers. The present work addresses these gaps. Children (N = 393; M age = 10.3; 51% girls) were followed during the last 3 years of primary school. Person-centered analyses were used to examine whether groups with distinct developmental trajectories for narcissism and two bullying forms (direct and indirect) can be identified, and how these trajectories are related. Multiple groups emerged for all constructs examined. For girls, higher narcissism was neither related to more intense bullying, nor to higher social dominance. In contrast, highly narcissistic boys were more likely than their peers to show elevated direct bullying, and in particular elevated indirect bullying. Hence, high narcissism is a risk factor for bullying in boys, but not in girls. However, narcissism is not always accompanied by high bullying, given that many boys on the high bullying trajectories were not high in narcissism. Results show that among narcissistic youth only those who engage in high levels of bullying are high in social dominance.

Bullying-related behaviour in a mainstream high school versus a high school for autism: Self-report and peer-report.

This study examined the frequency of bullying, victimisation and defending behaviours among children with autism spectrum disorder and normal intelligence, using both self-report and peer-report information. Peer-report and self-report data were collected on a single classroom of 26 early adolescent boys attending a special school for children with autism and compared with 23 typically developing boys attending a single mainstream secondary school. Results showed that self- and peer-reported bully and victimisation rates did not differ between boys with autism spectrum disorder and typically developing boys. However, self-reported defending behaviour was less likely to be reported by boys in the autism spectrum disorder school compared to boys in the mainstream school, although there was no such difference for peer-reported defending.

Peer and self-reported victimization: Do non-victimized students give victimization nominations to classmates who are self-reported victims?

Using data from 2413 Dutch first-year secondary school students (M age=13.27, SD age=0.51, 49.0% boys), this study investigated as to what extent students who according to their self-reports had not been victimized (referred to as reporters) gave victimization nominations to classmates who according to their self-reports had been victimized (referred to as receivers). Using a dyadic approach, characteristics of the reporter-receiver dyad (i.e., gender similarity) and of the reporter (i.e., reporters' behavior during bullying episodes) that were possibly associated with reporter-receiver agreement were investigated. Descriptive analyses suggested that numerous students who were self-reported victims were not perceived as victimized by their non-victimized classmates. Three-level logistic regression models (reporter-receiver dyads nested in reporters within classrooms) demonstrated greater reporter-receiver agreement in same-gender dyads, especially when the reporter and the receiver were boys. Furthermore, reporters who behaved as outsiders during bullying episodes (i.e., reporters who actively shied away from the bullying) were less likely to agree on the receiver's self-reported victimization, and in contrast, reporters who behaved as defenders (i.e., reporters who helped and supported victims) were more likely to agree on the victimization. Moreover, the results demonstrated that reporters gave fewer victimization nominations to receivers who reported they had been victimized sometimes than to receivers who reported they had been victimized often/very often. Finally, this study suggested that reporter-receiver agreement may not only depend on characteristics of the reporter-receiver dyad and of the reporter, but on classroom characteristics as well (e.g., the number of students in the classroom).

DRD4 Genotype and the Developmental Link of Peer Social Preference with Conduct Problems and Prosocial Behavior Across Ages 9-12 Years.

The peer environment is among the most important factors for children's behavioral development. However, not all children are equally influenced by their peers, which is potentially due to their genetic make-up. The dopamine receptor D4 gene (DRD4) is a potential candidate gene that may influence children's susceptibility to the peer environment. In the present study, we explored whether variations in the DRD4 gene moderated the association between children's social standing in the peer group (i.e., social preference among classmates) with subsequent conduct problems and prosocial behavior among 405 (51% females) elementary school children followed annually throughout early adolescence (ages 9-12 years). The behavioral development of children with and without the DRD4 7-repeat allele was compared. The results indicated that children who had higher positive social preference scores (i.e., who were more liked relative to disliked by their peers) showed less conduct problem development in subsequent years relative to children who had lower positive social preference scores. In contrast, children who had more negative preference scores (i.e., who were more disliked relative to liked among peers) showed more conduct problem development in subsequent years, relative to children who had less negative preference scores. However, these effects only occurred when children had a 7-repeat allele. For children who did not have a 7-repeat allele, the level of social preference was not associated with subsequent conduct problems. No evidence for gene-environment interaction effects for prosocial behavior was found. The implications for our understanding of conduct problem development and its prevention are discussed.

Children's intervention strategies in situations of victimization by bullying: social cognitions of outsiders versus defenders.

This study examined the social cognitions of outsiders and defenders about intervening in situations of victimization by bullying. Do outsiders and defenders behave differently in victimization situations because of differences in competence beliefs, or because of a selectivity effect in intervening? These issues were examined in a sample of 102 outsiders and 107 defenders who were classified into these bullying roles through a peer-nomination procedure out of a total sample of 761 10- to 14-year-old Dutch children. These children were presented with imaginary victimization events. They answered questions about their cognitions and self-efficacy beliefs about intervening in victimization situations and about handling such situations. Outsiders, compared to defenders, claimed to intervene indirectly in victimization situations rather than directly. Defenders, compared to outsiders, claimed to intervene directly in victimization situations rather than indirectly. Both outsiders and defenders claimed to be more likely to intervene when a friend was being victimized than when a neutral classmate was being victimized. Outsiders and defenders did not differ in their self-efficacy for indirect intervention, but only defenders claimed a high self-efficacy for direct intervention. Both outsiders and defenders claimed to benefit from direct help when they themselves are victimized, but only outsiders also reported to need indirect help. The results suggest that outsiders and defenders behave differently in victimization situations because of differences in competence beliefs rather than because of a selectivity effect. More generally, the results suggest that not only defenders but also outsiders have the intention to help children who are being bullied. However, outsiders' anti-bullying attempts are likely to be indirect and less firm than those of defenders.

Costs and benefits of bullying in the context of the peer group: a three wave longitudinal analysis.

Whereas previous research has shown that bullying in youth is predictive of a range of negative outcomes later in life, the more proximal consequences of bullying in the context of the peer group at school are not as clear. The present three-wave longitudinal study followed children (N = 394; 53 % girls; M(age) = 10.3 at Time 1) from late childhood into early adolescence. Joint trajectory analyses were used to examine the dynamic prospective relations between bullying on the one hand, and indices tapping perceived popularity, peer-reported social acceptance, self-perceived social competence, and internalizing symptoms on the other. Results show that although young bullies may be on a developmental path that in the long run becomes problematic, from the bullies' perspective in the shorter term personal advantages outweigh disadvantages. High bullying is highly positively related to high social status as indexed by perceived popularity. Although bullies are not very high in peer-rated social acceptance, most are not very low either. Moreover, bullies do not demonstrate elevated internalizing symptoms, or problems in the social domain as indexed by self-perceived social competence. As bullying yields clear personal benefits for the bullies without strong costs, the findings underscore the need for interventions targeting mechanisms that reward bullying (198 words).

Developmental trajectories of bullying and social dominance in youth.

OBJECTIVE: Bullying is increasingly conceptualized as strategic behavior motivated by a desire to gain social dominance in the peer group. Cross-sectional research has shown that relative to their peers bullies are higher in social dominance as indexed by resource control, and are often perceived as powerful and "cool." However, research examining the developmental relationship between bullying and resource control is lacking. The present longitudinal study fills this gap in the literature. METHOD: Using a three wave design, participants (N=394) were followed from late childhood into early adolescence. Joint trajectory analyses were used to test whether groups with distinct developmental trajectories of bullying and resource control can be identified, and how these trajectories are related. RESULTS: For both bullying and resource control three groups emerged (high, medium, and low), indicating that bullies and social dominants do not constitute one homogeneous group. More intense bullying is associated with higher levels of social dominance. Being consistently high in bullying is almost synonymous with being consistently high in resource control, whereas the reverse is not the case. CONCLUSIONS: Findings suggest that high bullying leads to the attainment of high social dominance, and do not support the view that children high in social dominance engage in bullying to maintain their dominant position. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: This study further underscores the need for interventions targeting mechanisms by which the peer group assigns social dominance to bullies.

Peer and self-reports of victimization and bullying: their differential association with internalizing problems and social adjustment.

Researchers typically employ either peer or self-reports to assess involvement in bullying. In this study, we examined the merits of each method for the identification of child characteristics related to victimization and bullying others. Accordingly, we investigated the difference between these two methods with regard to their relationship with social adjustment (i.e., perceived popularity, likeability, and self-perceived social acceptance) and internalizing problems (i.e., anxiety, depression, and self-worth) in 1192 Dutch school children, aged 9 to 12 years. Perceived popularity and likeability were more strongly correlated with peer reports than self-reports, for both victimization and for bullying others. Self-perceived social acceptance correlated equally strong with peer and self- reports of victimization. Furthermore, peer reports of bullying were also correlated with self-perceived social acceptance, whereas self-reports of bullying were not. All internalizing problems showed stronger relations with self-reports than peer reports; although only the relation between self-reported victimization and internalizing problems was of practical significance. Despite our findings indicating that using only one type of report could be efficient for examining the relation between bullying behaviors and separate child characteristics, both types of report are necessary for a complete understanding of the personal and social well-being of the children involved.

Bullying as strategic behavior: relations with desired and acquired dominance in the peer group.

To examine whether bullying is strategic behavior aimed at obtaining or maintaining social dominance, 1129 9- to 12-year-old Dutch children were classified in terms of their role in bullying and in terms of their use of dominance oriented coercive and prosocial social strategies. Multi-informant measures of participants' acquired and desired social dominance were also included. Unlike non-bullying children, children contributing to bullying often were bistrategics in that they used both coercive and prosocial strategies and they also were socially dominant. Ringleader bullies also expressed a higher desire to be dominant. Among non-bullying children, those who tended to help victims were relatively socially dominant but victims and outsiders were not. Generally, the data supported the claim that bullying is dominance-oriented strategic behavior, which suggests that intervention strategies are more likely to be successful when they take the functional aspects of bullying behavior into account.

Turning shame inside-out: "humiliated fury" in young adolescents.

The term "humiliated fury" refers to the anger people can experience when they are shamed. In Study 1, participants were randomly exposed to a prototypical shameful event or control event, and their self-reported feelings of anger were measured. In Study 2, participants reported each school day, for 2 weeks, the shameful events they experienced. They also nominated classmates who got angry each day. Narcissism was treated as a potential moderator in both studies. As predicted, shameful events made children angry, especially more narcissistic children. Boys with high narcissism scores were especially likely to express their anger after being shamed. These results corroborate clinical theory holding that shameful events can initiate instances of humiliated fury.

Understanding emotional transfer in children with autism spectrum disorders.

The present study examined the understanding of emotional transfer in 11 children with autism, 20 children with PDD-NOS and 31 typically developing children, aged 6 to 12 years. Children were asked about their emotional responses to successive, conflicting emotional situations. All children reported that preceding emotional situations would influence their emotional response towards a successive situation. Children from the typically developing group reported a stronger influence of preceding negative versus positive emotions. However, children with autism reported equal effects of preceding positive and negative emotions, and children with PDD-NOS were relatively unaffected by the preceding emotions. These findings may indicate a scripted understanding of emotions in children with autism in contrast to a more personalized understanding of typically developing children.

Trumping shame by blasts of noise: narcissism, self-esteem, shame, and aggression in young adolescents.

This experiment tested how self-views influence shame-induced aggression. One hundred and sixty-three young adolescents (M = 12.2 years) completed measures of narcissism and self-esteem. They lost to an ostensible opponent on a competitive task. In the shame condition, they were told that their opponent was bad, and they saw their own name at the bottom of a ranking list. In the control condition, they were told nothing about their opponent and did not see a ranking list. Next, participants could blast their opponent with noise (aggression measure). As expected, narcissistic children were more aggressive than others, but only after they had been shamed. Low self-esteem did not lead to aggression. In fact, narcissism in combination with high self-esteem led to exceptionally high aggression.

Development and validation of the childhood narcissism scale.

In this article, we describe the development and validation of a short (10 item) but comprehensive self-report measure of childhood narcissism. The Childhood Narcissism Scale (CNS) is a 1-dimensional measure of stable individual differences in childhood narcissism with strong internal consistency reliability (Studies 1-4). The CNS is virtually unrelated to conventional measures of self-esteem but is positively related to self-appraised superiority, social evaluative concern and self-esteem contingency, agentic interpersonal goals, and emotional extremity (Study 5). Furthermore, the CNS is negatively related to empathic concern and positively related to aggression following ego threat (Study 6). These results suggest that childhood narcissism has similar psychological and interpersonal correlates as adult narcissism. The CNS provides researchers a convenient tool for measuring narcissism in children and young adolescents with strong preliminary psychometric characteristics.

Sources of annoyance in close relationships: sex-related differences in annoyance with partner behaviors.

The present study is an examination of sex differences in the sources of annoyance that partners in close relationships might experience as a result of each other's behavior. To test hypotheses derived from S. E. Cross and L. Madson's (1997) self-construal theory and from D. M. Buss's (1989) evolutionary psychology-based model, men and women of varying ages and educational levels were asked to rate how annoyed they would be with each of 13 potentially annoying behaviors of their intimate partner. Results were consistent with self-construal theory in that relationship-threatening behaviors were more annoying to women than to men and autonomy threatening behaviors were more annoying to men than to women. Results were also consistent with evolutionary psychology in that aggressive behaviors were more annoying to women than to men and sexual withholding was relatively more annoying to men than to women. Sex differences in annoyance with relationship-threatening, autonomy-threatening, and reproductive strategy behaviors were independent of age and education level, although these factors did affect respondents' annoyance when partners were unemotional, sloppy, or pleased with their own appearance. Results showed that sources of annoyance in intimate relationships should not only be studied from an evolutionary perspective but from the perspectives of social, personality, and developmental psychology as well.