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.

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).

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.

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.

Fear of storms and hurricanes in Antillean and Belgian children.

The present study assessed fear of hurricanes in children who had been confronted with this natural event (i.e., Antillean children, n=161). Their fear levels were compared to those of children who are unfamiliar with such an event (i.e., Belgian children, n=185). Antillean children reported significantly higher levels of fear of storms than Belgian children did, thus providing support for the notion that exposure to dangerous events promotes children's fears of those events. Surprisingly, however, Antillean children had lower scores on the 'Hurricanes' item than Belgian children. Plausibly, differences in how children interpreted this item may have accounted for this unexpected finding. That is, ratings of Antillean children were probably based on actual experiences with hurricanes, whereas scores of Belgian children presumably reflected appraisal of threat in case they would be confronted with such an event. Implications of this finding for the assessment of childhood fears are briefly discussed.