Self-Reported Executive Functioning in Young Adult Survivors of Childhood Bacterial Meningitis.

OBJECTIVE: This study investigated executive functions (EFs) in young adult survivors of childhood bacterial meningitis (BM). These skills are important for normal development, and their potential vulnerability in early years suggests that childhood BM could affect executive functions in the longer term. METHOD: The adult self-report Behavior Rating Inventory of Executive Function was administered to 474 young adult survivors of childhood BM who participated in the 20|30 Dutch Postmeningitis study. Average scores were compared to population-norm group scores. Subgroup scores were compared according to causative pathogen and age at onset. RESULTS: Young adult survivors of childhood BM scored lower on overall metacognition than the age-matched population norm group. Young adult survivors of childhood BM caused by Streptococcus pneumoniae, S. agalactiae, or Escherichia coli had lower scores than cases caused by Neisseria meningitidis. Survivors with age-at-onset below 12 months had a higher (worse) overall EF score than survivors with age-at-onset above 12 months. CONCLUSIONS: Young adult survivors of childhood BM experience difficulties in EF. However, most of the self-reported EF scores were within the norm. Future studies need to additionally assess EF in adult survivors of childhood BM using performance-based tests.

Promoting informed decision-making about maternal pertussis vaccination in Centering Pregnancy group-antenatal care: A feasibility study.

PROBLEM: Effective interventions are needed to promote informed decision making about vaccination. BACKGROUND: We developed a group-antenatal care (CP; Centering Pregnancy) intervention, i.e., a session about MPV within existing group-care settings, to promote informed decision making about Maternal Pertussis Vaccination in the Netherlands. AIM: This study aimed to assess (1) to what extent the intervention was implemented as intended, (2) to what extent the intervention met the needs and wishes of pregnant individuals and midwives facilitating CP. METHODS: We conducted exploratory interviews with 6 CP facilitators and 10 CP participants to assess the implementation of the intervention, and how the intervention and its different components were perceived. Interviews were analysed using thematic analysis. In addition, we conducted a pre- and post-intervention survey amongst 35 participants, measuring knowledge about MPV, and MPV attitude and intention. RESULTS: The CP intervention was implemented as intended in 6 out of 7 groups. Participants were positive about the interactive CP-methods used to discuss MPV. Participants and facilitators evaluated the intervention as positive and relevant, although the intervention was time-consuming, and some participants had already made the de decision about MPV. Those who had not yet decided indicated that the session was helpful for their decision. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: Discussing MPV in CP care settings is a feasible strategy to support decision making about MPV during pregnancy. The intervention could be improved by discussing the MPV sooner than 16-18 weeks of pregnancy. A larger-scale study is needed to assess effects on MPV uptake and informed decision making.

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.

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.