Peer Rejection and Internalizing Behavior: The ...

The Journal of Genetic Psychology Research and Theory on Human Development

ISSN: 0022-1325 (Print) 1940-0896 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/vgnt20

Peer Rejection and Internalizing Behavior: The Mediating Role of Peer Victimization in Preschool Özge Metin Aslan To cite this article: Özge Metin Aslan (2018): Peer Rejection and Internalizing Behavior: The Mediating Role of Peer Victimization in Preschool, The Journal of Genetic Psychology To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/00221325.2018.1468993

Published online: 23 May 2018.

Submit your article to this journal

View related articles

View Crossmark data

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=vgnt20

THE JOURNAL OF GENETIC PSYCHOLOGY , VOL. , NO. , – https://doi.org/./..

Peer Rejection and Internalizing Behavior: The Mediating Role of Peer Victimization in Preschool Özge Metin Aslan Department of Early Childhood Education, Faculty of Education, Alanya Alaaddin Keykubat University, Antalya, Turkey

ABSTRACT

ARTICLE HISTORY

The author examined the relationship among peer rejection, peer victimization, and internalizing behaviors. The author hypothesized that physical and relational victimization would have a different indirect effect on the relationship between peer rejection and internalizing behaviors. Participants were 94 preschool children (37 girls; average age 49.97 months) from two university preschools located in the northern part of the United States. The results indicated that internalizing behaviors predicted the mediating variables only regarding relational victimization. Relational victimization indirectly affected the association between peer rejection and internalizing behaviors. The study provides evidence of the mediating effect of victimization behaviors on the relationship among peer rejection, victimization, and internalizing behaviors.

Received  December  Accepted  April  KEYWORDS

Internalizing behavior; peer rejection; peer victimization; preschool

Peer rejection includes situations of isolation, including when children are not accepted by their peers and do not play with them because of different behavioral reactions toward targeted children. Bierman (2004) and Rubin, Bukowski, and Parker (2006) have indicated that rejection results in isolation from peers as a function of individual differences. According to Rubin, Wojslawowicz, Rose-Krasnor, BoothLaForce, and Burgess (2006), peer rejection has the potential to greatly affect children’s social, emotional, and cognitive functions. Peer rejection is independently related to psychological problems, and it includes psychological difficulties related to some behavioral risk factors like anxiety and shyness (Ladd, 2006; Parker et al., 2006; Parkhurst & Asher, 1992). Peer victimization occurs when a child targeted by another child is exposed intentionally to physical, relational, or verbally aggressive behaviors for a long time. Crick and Grotpeter (1995) suggested that there are two main types of peer victimization. One of these is physical victimization, which involves being exposed to physical aggressive behaviors like hitting, kicking, and pushing; the other type is relational victimization, which is caused when a child intentionally controls and damages the relationships of another child with his or her peers. For example, being excluded from an important event, such as a birthday party, when a peer’s request is not obeyed, or being the target of a hostile rumor within the peer group (Crick, 1995; Crick & Bigbee, 1998; Crick & Grotpeter, 1995; Crick & Grotpeter, 1996; Crick, Ostrov, & Kawabata, 2007; Ostrov & Crick, 2007; Ostrov & Godleski, 2010). Crick, Ostrov, and Werner (2006) showed that relational aggression is related to peer exclusion, and they have confirmed the relationship between peer exclusion and relational victimization in preschool. According to Bierman (2004), rejected children are considered an easy target by their peer group, and they may be victimized by them. The social process model indicates that peer rejection can cause an increase in peer victimization over time as the rejected children become easier targets (Boivin & Hymel, 1997; Ostrov, 2008). One of the most important consequences of peer victimization that may occur concurrently with peer exclusion is internalized behavior. CONTACT Özge Metin Aslan [email protected] Faculty of Education, Department of Early Childhood Education, Alanya Alaaddin Keykubat University,  Alanya- Antalya, Turkey. ©  Taylor & Francis

2

Ö. M. ASLAN

Internalizing behaviors are characterized by depressive, fearful, or anxious affect, along with anxious behavior such as social withdrawal (Achenbach & Edelbrock, 1978; LaFreniere & Dumas, 1996; Rubin, LeMare, & Lollis, 1990; Stacks & Goff, 2006). Internalizing behaviors observed in the preschool period have some behavioral consequences, and are related to a wide range of different social and emotional difficulties in the following stages of development, including peer rejection, loneliness, low self-esteem, poor friendships, anxiety, and depression (Boivin & Hymel, 1997; Coplan, Closson, & Arbeau, 2007; Gazelle & Ladd, 2003; Hanish & Guerra, 2004; Hodges, Malone, & Perry, 1997; Rubin, Coplan, & Bowker, 2009; Rubin, Hymel, & Mills, 1989). Blakely-McClure and Ostrov (2018) stated that internalizing disorders such as depression and anxiety are not typically present between three and five year old children; symptoms of internalization such as fearful or anxious affect (e.g., a worried and fearful child), depressed affect (e.g., a child who often looks sad and does not appear to have fun), and asocial behavior (e.g., a child who may avoid or withdraw from peers) could emerge in this age group (Crick, Casas, & Ku, 1999; Kochenderfer & Ladd, 1996; Ostrov & Godleski, 2013). Compared with children who are not victimized by their peers, it has been found that victimized children are more depressed, anxious, lonely, and rejected by their peers. They also have problems with school adjustment and a more negative perception of their competences (Boulton & Smith, 1994; Boulton & Underwood, 1992; Crick & Bigbee, 1998; Crick & Grotpeter, 1996; Kochenderfer & Ladd, 1997; Olweus, 1993; Perry, Kusel, & Perry, 1988; Schwartz, Dodge, & Coie, 1993). Particularly, relationally victimized children face internal problems such as peer exclusion, loneliness, depression, and social isolation in later development (Crick & Grotpeter, 1995; Crick et al., 2001; Crick et al., 2006; Johnson & Foster, 2005). Reijntjes, Kamphuis, Prinziea, and Telchc (2010) stated that perceived victimization or rejection by peers might be important indicators of internalizing problems. To date, despite the growing development of results on this topic, it might be revised to read the concurrent associations with victimization and internalizing problems in young children, particularly the physical and relational victimization–mediated role between peer rejection and internalizing behavior (Crick & Bigbee, 1998; Crick & Grotpeter, 1996; Crick et al., 1999; Prinstein, Boergers, & Vernberg, 2001; Rudolph, Troop-Gordon, & Flynn, 2009; Van der Ploeg, Steglich, Salmivalli, & Veenstra, 2015). McDougall and Vaillancourt (2015) stated that peer victimization in early childhood had been associated with adjustment problems later in life. As a result, it is important to analyze the relationships among peer rejection, victimization behaviors, and internalizing behavior for young children. The present study In the present study I sought to examine the bivariate relations among internalizing behaviors, victimization behaviors, and peer rejection. The primary aim was to reveal the mediator role of physical victimization and relational victimization in the relationships between peer rejection and internalizing behaviors. I hypothesized that the relation between peer rejection and internalizing behaviors would be mediated by victimization behaviors. I expected that physical and relational victimization would be a different indirect effect on the relationship between peer rejection and internalizing behaviors (see Figure 1).

Figure . Hypothesized parallel mediation model.

THE JOURNAL OF GENETIC PSYCHOLOGY

3

Method Participants A total of 94 (37 girls) preschool children were recruited from two university preschools located in the northern part of the United States and were on average 49.97 months old (SD = 8.91 months). The overall parental consent rate was 80%. Children were relatively diverse in their ethnic origins: Caucasian or White children made up a large majority (74.5%), 3.2% were African American or Black, 8.5% were Asian or Pacific Islander, and 13.8% were from other ethnic backgrounds or unknown. The educational backgrounds of both parents (mothers and fathers) were collected separately. The mothers of 62.8% of children had a high school diploma or a profession, 29.8% had a bachelor’s degree, and 7.5% had finished college. The fathers of 59.6% of children had a high school diploma or a profession, 31.9% had a bachelor’s degree, and 8.5% had finished college. Procedure Consent forms were sent to parents explaining the purpose of the study and asking them to authorize their children to participate in the study. Upon parent approval, teachers filled in their participation forms. Measures To detect the internalizing behavior of preschool children, I used the Preschool Behavior Questionnaire (PBQ; Behar & Stringfield, 1974) and the Preschool Social Behavior Scale–Teacher form (PSBS-T; Crick et al., 1999; Crick, Casas, & Mosher, 1997).The PBQ (Behar & Stringfield, 1974) consists of three subscales: hostile-aggressive, anxious-fearful, and hyperactive-distractible. Each item is rated on a 5-point Likert-type scale ranging from 1 (not at all—strongly disagree) to 5 (a lot—strongly agree). In the present study, only the anxious-fearful subscale was used. This subscale consists of the following items: 6 (being anxious), 7 (being by oneself), 9 (being distressed), 14 (being scared), 23 (cries), and 29 (stares). In the present study, this subscale had appropriate internal consistency (Cronbach’s α = .80). The PSBS-T (Crick et al., 1997; Crick et al., 1999) contains four subscales: relational aggression, physical aggression, prosocial behavior, and depressive affect. In this case, only the depressive affect subscale was used for the present research. Each item is rated on a 5-point Likert-type scale ranging from 1 (never or almost never) to 5 (always or almost always) and assesses the depressed affect of children (three items; e.g., “This child looks sad,” “This child smiles at other kids” (reversed item), and “This child doesn’t have much fun”). Both subscales were completed by the head teacher of each participating preschool child. In the present study, the depressed affect subscale demonstrated acceptable internal consistency (Cronbach’s α = .85). Internalizing behavior was obtained from the average scores of the depressive affect subscale of the PSBS-T and the anxious-fearful subscale of the PBQ. Obtaining a target variable by compiling related subscales from different scales has been done previously (Blakely-McClure & Ostrov, 2018; Crick et al., 1999; Fowler & Robert, 1979; Hagekull & Bohlin, 1994; Moller & Rubin, 1988). As in previous research, the same process was performed by creating an internalizing behavior variable. These two subscales, the depressive affect subscale of the PSBS-T and the anxious-fearful subscale of the PBQ were gathered, averaged and standardized, and then internalizing behavior was established as a variable. To assess relationships with peers, I used the Child Behavior Scale (CBS; Ladd & Profilet, 1996), which evaluates the relationship of preschool children with their peers. The CBS comprises 35 items and five subscales, namely, aggressive with peers, prosocial with peers, asocial with peers, excluded by peers, and hyperactive-distractible. Excluded by peers subscale was used for this study. This subscale has seven items, including “Not chosen as playmate, or avoided,” “Not much liked by other children,” “Peers refuse to let this child play with them,” “Peers avoid this child,” and so on. Teachers responded on a 3-point Likert-type scale ranging from 1 (doesn’t apply) to 3 (certainly applies). In the present study, this subscale had appropriate internal consistency (Cronbach’s α = .87).

4

Ö. M. ASLAN

To detect peer victimization, I used the Preschool Peer Victimization Measure–Teacher Report (PPVM-T; Crick et al., 1999), which consists of nine items; three of these items assess relational victimization (e.g., “This child gets left out of the group when someone is mad at them or wants to get back at them”), three assess physical victimization (e.g., “This child gets pushed or shoved by peers”), and three that tap being the recipient of prosocial behavior (e.g., “This child gets invited to join a group of playmates when he/she is playing alone”) Each item is rated on a 5-point Likert-type scale ranging from 1 (not at all—strongly disagree) to 5 (a lot—strongly agree). For this study, physical victimization and relational victimization subscales were used and had appropriate internal consistency (Cronbach’s α = .83). Data analysis In this study, the mediating role of victimization behaviors concerning the relationship between peer rejection and internalizing behavior was examined with regression analyses, as suggested by Baron and Kenny (1986). Gender was entered as a covariate. Whether the indirect mediation effect obtained was statistically and significantly nonzero or not was evaluated through the bootstrap method, as suggested by Preacher and Hayes (2008). The significance of the mediation effect obtained after resampling was determined according to the calculation of the most typical 95% CI, and whether zero was included in this interval. The absence of zero in the 95% CI indicates that the indirect effect was nonzero (i.e., significant). The bootstrapping analyses were performed using PROCESS Multiple Mediation Model 6 (Hayes, 2012) in SPSS (version 22) through a downloadable add-on (http://afhayes.com/spss-sas-andmplusmacros-andcode.html). Results Simple t-test analyses were used to test gender differences in internalizing behavior, victimization behaviors, and peer rejection. Significant gender differences were revealed for only physical victimization. Boys were more physically victimized than girls. Boys were also meaningfully more rejected by peers than girls. The means and standard deviations of the variables as a function of gender are presented in Table 1. Table . Means and standard deviations of all variables.

Variables Physical victimization Relational victimization Peer rejection Internalizing behaviors

Boys (n = )

Girls (n = )

M

SD

M

SD

t (df = )

M diff

. . . .

. . . .

. . . .

. . . .

. . . .

. . . .

∗

% CI

Cohen’s d

[., .] [ − ., .] [ − ., .] [ − ., .]

. . . .

∗ p < ..

Correlations between the study variables are presented in Table 2. Age and gender were not related to any variables. Physical victimization was associated with relational victimization, peer rejection, and internalizing behaviors. Moreover, relational aggression was correlated with peer rejection and internalizing behaviors. As an independent variable, peer rejection was related to physical victimization, relational victimization, and internalizing behaviors. Findings related to the effects of physical victimization and relational victimization on internalizing behaviors and peer rejection are shown in Table 3. Items were evaluated for multicollinearity using the correlation values and the variance inflation index. There was no evidence of multicollinearity between variables in this study. The suggested model was significant, F(4, 89) = 13.75, p < .001, predicting 38% of the variance in peer rejection from internalizing behaviors through victimization behaviors when gender was a control variable.


5

Table . Correlations between the study variables.

Age Gender Physical victimization Relational victimization Peer rejection Internalizing behavior M SD Skewness Kurtosis

Age

Gender

—

. —

Physical victimization

Relational victimization

Peer rejection

Internalizing behavior

. − . —

. − . ∗∗∗ . —

− . − . ∗∗∗ . ∗∗∗ . —

. . . .

. . . .

. . . .

− . − . ∗∗∗ . ∗∗∗ . ∗∗∗ . — . . . .

∗ p < .. ∗∗ p < .. ∗∗∗ p < ..

Table . Regression coefficients, standard errors, and model summary for the Victimization Behaviors Parallel Multiple Mediator Model. M Coeff. X M M Gender Constant

a

iM

. — — − . − .

SE . — — . . R = . F(, ) = . ∗∗∗ p = .

M p

Coeff. ∗∗∗

. — — . .

. — — − . − .

SE . — — . .

Y p ∗∗∗

. — — . .

R = . F(, ) = . ∗∗∗ p = .

c b b iY

Coeff.

SE

p

. . . − . .

. . . . .

. . ∗ . . ∗∗∗ .

∗

R = . F(, ) = . ∗∗∗ p = .

Note. Y = internalizing behavior; X = peer rejection; M = physical victimization; M = relational victimization. ∗ p < .. ∗∗ p < .. ∗∗∗ p < ..

Peer rejection predicted the mediating variables physical victimization (β = .51, p < .001, 95% CI [.40, .63]) and relational victimization (β = .66, p < .001, 95% CI [.47, .84]). There was a significant direct effect of peer rejection (c’ path: β = .23, p < .05, 95% CI [.03, .42]), as a predicted variable, on internalizing behavior. The total effect was also significant (c path: β = .44, p < .001, 95% CI [.30, .59]). Additionally, among mediators, only relational victimization predicted peer rejection (β = 22, p < .05, 95% CI [.02, .42]). As a predictive indirect effect of mediating variables in peer rejection on internalizing behavior, only relational victimization (β = .14, p < .05; z = 2.04; 95% CI [.04, .30]) had an indirect effect on the relationship between peer rejection and internalizing behavior (see Figure 2).

Figure . Physical and relational victimization mediation effects in the relationships between peer rejection and internalizing behaviors.

6

Ö. M. ASLAN

Discussion Within the results of this research, gender difference found in physical victimization. I found that boys were more physically victimized than girls. Results about gender experiences of physical and relational victimization have been mixed. A substantial amount of past research has revealed that physical victimization behaviors differ according to gender (Boulton & Underwood, 1992; Crick & Grotpeter, 1996; Crick et al., 1999; Ostrov, 2008). In contrast, relational victimization, peer rejection, and internalizing behavior showed no difference between boys and girls. These results support those observed in earlier studies (Crick & Bigbee, 1998; Crick & Grotpeter, 1996). Similarly, the meta-analysis study conducted by Casper and Card (2017) reported no significant difference between boys and girls concerning relational victimization. In the present study I found that internalizing behavior was positively related to physical and relational victimization as well as peer rejection. Additionally, peer rejection, as a predicted variable, had a significant direct effect on internalizing behavior. The results of the present study have similarities with findings that show a relationship between relational victimization and peer rejection, concurrently (Crick et al., 1999; Cullerton-Sen & Crick, 2005; Nelson & Crick, 2002; Ostrov, 2008). Rejected children can be seen by their peers as easy targets and as physically and emotionally weak; they may also target aggression behaviors easily. Crick and Grotpeter (1996) found that rejected children were more likely to experience relational or physical victimization than children who were liked by their peers. Although peer victimization has two different contexts—physical and relational victimization—it has been determined that both increase peer rejection (Crick & Bigbee, 1998; Crick & Grotpeter, 1996; Hanish & Guerra, 2002; Perry et al., 1988). Another important finding of this study was that only relational victimization mediated the relationship between peer rejection and internalizing behavior. An indirect concurrent mediating effect of relational victimization on the relation between peer rejection and internalizing behavior has been determined, suggesting that the context of peer victimization might affect internalizing behavior differently. When rejected children are relationally victimized by their peers, they may display more depressive affect and anxious behavior compared with when they are physically victimized. Studies have shown that children who are the frequent targets of relational aggression are significantly more likely to be socially and psychologically maladjusted than nonvictimized peers (e.g., more depressed, lonely, socially anxious, and rejected) (Crick & Bigbee, 1998; Crick & Grotpeter, 1996). During early childhood, relational victimization has been associated with peer rejection, loneliness, internalizing problems, and absence of prosocial behavior (Bonica, Yershova, Arnold, Fisher, & Zeljo, 2003; Crick et al., 1999; Ostrov, Woods, Jansen, Casas, & Crick, 2004). Kamper-DeMarco and Ostrov (2017) found that relational victimization was associated with internalizing adjustment outcomes. Alsaker (1997) and Perren (2000) suggested that relational victimization behaviors such as isolation by peers, exclusion, and rejection behaviors are stronger victimization techniques than physical victimization behaviors are. The meta-analysis study conducted by Casper and Card (2017) reported that relational victimization is more strongly related to internalizing problems than physical victimization. The findings of previous research are consistent with the present findings. The results of this research, however, have some limitations. First, the number of participants was small, with a sample size more suitable for observational studies. Second, although this study utilized valid, widely used, and reliable teacher-report instruments for early childhood, depressive affect and anxious behaviors may represent social withdrawal, but may not be the best measure for internalizing problems. Future researchers should use a larger study group by including observational groups and different measurement methods (peer, self-assessment, and teacher report). Besides, a larger sample would allow the analysis of the role of gender moderation models in further studies.

Conclusion In this study, the mediating role of victimization behaviors in the relationship between peer rejection and internalizing behaviors has been analyzed. Results showed that relational victimization predicts maladjustment problems, such as internalizing behavior, having effects above and beyond physical


7

victimization. Given that peer rejection and internalizing behaviors are important in the development of social psychological issues, intervention and prevention programs may be useful for victims and support at-risk children. Peer relations in the preschool period, in particular, should be examined from a larger developmental perspective because of their strong interrelationships.

Acknowledgement I am proud of dedicating this paper to my unrivaled mentors. This article is dedicated to the memory and legacy of Dr. Nicki R. Crick and also dedicated to Dr. Kenneth H. Rubin for inspiring my academic research.

ORCID Özge Metin Aslan

http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3719-6970

References Achenbach, T. M., & Edelbrock, C. S. (1978). The classification of child psychopathology: A review and analysis of empirical efforts. Psychological Bulletin, 85(6), 1275–1301. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.85.6.1275 Alsaker, F. D. (1997). Was wissen wir über das Plagen im Kindergarten? Erste Resultate aus Norwegen und der Schweiz [What do we know about bullying in kindergarten? First results from Norway and Switzerland]. Switzerland: Berichtserie (No. 1) des NFP40 Projekts “Das Plagen im Kindergarten”, Department of Psychology, University of Berne. Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in Social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1173–1182. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.51.6.1173 Behar, L., & Stringfield, S. (1974). A behavior rating scale for the preschool child. Development Psychology, 10, 601–610. Bierman, K. L. (2004). Peer rejection: Developmental processes and intervention strategies. New York, NY: Guilford Press. Blakely-McClure, S. J., & Ostrov, J. M. (2018). Examining co-occurring and pure relational and physical victimization in early childhood. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 166, 1–16. doi:10.1016/J.JECP.2017.07.011 Boivin, M., & Hymel, S. (1997). Peer experiences and social self-perceptions: A sequential model. Developmental Psychology, 33, 135–145. doi:10.1037/0012-1649.33.1.135 Bonica, C., Yershova, K., Arnold, D. H., Fisher, P. H., & Zeljo, A. (2003). Relational aggression, relational victimization, and language development in preschoolers. Social Development, 12, 551–562. doi:10.1111/1467-9507.00248 Boulton, M. J., & Smith, P. K. (1994). Bully/victim problems in middleschool children: Stability, self-perceived competence, peer perceptions and peer acceptance. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 12, 315–329. doi:10.1111/j.2044835X.1994.tb00637.x Boulton, M. J., & Underwood, K. (1992). Bully/victim problems among middle school children. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 62, 73–83. doi:10.1111/j.2044-8279.1992.tb01000.x Casper, D. M., & Card, N. A. (2017). Overt and relational victimization: A meta-analytic review of their overlap and associations with social-psychological adjustment. Child Development, 88, 466–483. doi:10.1111/cdev.12621 Coplan, R. J., Closson, L. M., & Arbeau, K. A. (2007). Gender differences in the behavioral associates of loneliness and social dissatisfaction in kindergarten. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 48(10), 988–995. doi:10.1111/j.14697610.2007.01804.x Crick, N. R., & Bigbee, M. A. (1998). Relational and overt forms of peer victimization: A multiinformant approach. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 66, 337–347. doi:10.1037/0022-006X.66.2.337 Crick, N. R. (1995). Relational aggression: The role of intent attributions, feelings of distress, and provocation type. Development and Psychopathology, 7(2), 313–322. doi:10.1017/S0954579400006520 Crick, N. R., & Grotpeter, J. K. (1995). Relational aggression, gender, and social-psychological adjustment. Child Development, 66, 710–722. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8624.1995.tb00900.x Crick, N. R., Casas, J. F., & Ku, H. C. (1999). Relational and physical forms of peer victimization in preschool. Developmental Psychology, 35(2), 376–385. doi:10.1037/0012-1649.35.2.376 Crick, N. R., Casas, J. F., & Mosher, M. (1997). Relational and overt aggression in preschool. Developmental Psychology, 33(4), 579. doi:10.1037/0012-1649.33.4.579 Crick, N. R., Nelson, D. A., Morales, J. R., Cullerton-Sen, C., Casas, J. F., & Hickman, S. E. (2001). Relational victimization in childhood and adolescence: I hurt you through the grapevine. In J. Juvonen & S. Graham (Eds.), Peer harassment in school: The plight of the vulnerable and victimized (pp. 196–214). New York, NY: Guilford Press. Crick, N. R., Ostrov, J. M., & Kawabata, Y. (2007). Relational aggression and gender: An overview. In D. J. Flannery, A. T. Vazsonyi, & I. D. Waldman (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of violent behavior and aggression (pp. 245–259). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

8

Ö. M. ASLAN

Crick, N. R., Ostrov, J. M., & Werner, N. E. (2006). A longitudinal study of relational aggression, physical aggression and children’s social-psychological adjustment. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 34, 131–142. doi:10.1007/s10802005-9009-4 Crick, N., & Grotpeter, J. (1996). Children’s treatment by peers: Victims of relational and overt aggression. Development and Psychopathology, 8(2), 367–380. doi:10.1017/S0954579400007148 Cullerton-Sen, C., & Crick, N. R. (2005). Understanding the effects of physical and relational victimization: The utility of multiple perspectives in predicting social-emotional adjustment. School Psychology Review, 34, 147–160. doi:10.1016/j.jsp.2007.05.003 Fowler, P. C., & Robert, M. P. (1979). Factor Structure of the Preschool Behavior Questionnaire in a Normal Population. Psychological Reports, 45(2), 599–606. doi:10.2466/pr0.1979.45.2.599 Gazelle, H., & Ladd, G. (2003). Anxious solitude and peer exclusion: A diathesis-stress model of internalizing trajectories in childhood. Child Development, 74, 257–278. doi:10.1111/1467-8624.00534 Hagekull, B., & Bohlin, G. (1994). Behavioural problems and competences in 4-year-olds: Dimensions and relationships. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 17(2), 311–327. doi:10.1177/016502549401700205 Hanish, L. D., & Guerra, N. G. (2004). Aggressive victims, passive victims, and bullies: Developmental continuity or developmental change? Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 50(1), 17–38. Hanish, L., & Guerra, N. (2002). A longitudinal analysis of patterns of adjustment following peer victimization. Development and Psychopathology, 14, 69–89. doi:10.1017/S0954579402001049 Hayes, A. F. (2012). PROCESS: A versatile computational tool for observed variable mediation, moderation, and conditional process modeling [White paper]. Retrieved from http://www.afhayes.com/public/process2012.pdf Hodges, E. V. E., Malone, M. J., & Perry, D. G. (1997). Individual risk and social risk as interacting determinants of victimization in the peer group. Developmental Psychology, 33, 1032–1039. doi:10.1037/0012-1649.33.6.1032 Johnson, D. R., & Foster, S. L. (2005). The relationship between relational aggression in kindergarten children and friendship stability, mutuality, and peer liking. Early Education and Development, 16, 141–160. doi:10.1207/s15566935eed1602_3 Kamper-DeMarco, K. E., & Ostrov, J. M. (2017). Prospective associations between peer victimization and social– psychological adjustment problems in early childhood. Aggressive Behavior, 43(5), 471–482. doi:10.1002/ab.21705 Kochenderfer, B. J., & Ladd, G. W. (1997). Victimized children’s responses to peers’ aggression: Behaviors associated with reduced versus continued victimization. Development and Psychopathy, 9, 59–73. Kochenderfer, B., & Ladd, G. (1996). Peer victimization: Cause or consequence of school maladjustment? Child Development, 67(4), 1305–1317. doi:10.2307/1131701 Ladd, G. W. (2006). Peer rejection, aggressive or withdrawn behavior, and psychological maladjustment from ages 5 to 12: An examination of four predictive models. Child Development, 77, 822–846. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8624.2006.00905.x Ladd, G. W., & Profilet, S. M. (1996). The Child Behavior Scale: A teacher-report measure of young children’s aggressive, withdrawn, and prosocial behaviors. Developmental Psychology, 32(6), 1008–1024. LaFreniere, P. J., & Dumas, J. E. (1996). Social competence and behavior evaluation in children ages 3 to 6 years: The short form (SCBE-30). Psychological Assessment, 8, 369–377. doi:10.1037/1040-3590.8.4.369 McDougall, P., & Vaillancourt, T. (2015). Long-term adult outcomes of peer victimization in childhood and adolescence: Pathways to adjustment and maladjustment. American Psychologist, 70, 300–310. doi:10.1037/a0039174 Moller, C. L., & Rubin, K. H. (1988). A psychometric assessment of a two-factor solution for the Preschool Behavior Questionnaire in mid-childhood. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 9(2), 167–180. doi:10.1016/01933973(88)90021-4 Nelson, D. A., & Crick, N. R. (2002). Parental psychological control: Implications for childhood physical and relational aggression. In B. K. Barber (Ed.), Intrusive parenting: How psychological control affects children and adolescents (pp. 168–189). Washington, DC: APA. Olweus, D. (1993). Bullying at school: What we know and what we can do. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing. Ostrov, J. M. (2008). Forms of aggression and peer victimization during early childhood: A short-term longitudinal study. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 36, 311–322. doi:10.1007/s10802-007-9179-3 Ostrov, J. M., & Crick, N. R. (2007). Forms and functions of aggression during early childhood: A short-term longitudinal study. School Psychology Review, 36, 22–43. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8624.2009.01300.x Ostrov, J. M., & Godleski, S. A. (2010). Toward an integrated gender-linked model of aggression subtypes in early and middle childhood. Psychological Review, 117, 233–242. doi:10.1037/a0018070 Ostrov, J. M., & Godleski, S. A. (2013). Relational aggression, victimization, and adjustment during middle childhood. Development and Psychopathology, 25, 801–815. doi:10.1017/S0954579413000187 Ostrov, J. M., Woods, K. E., Jansen, E. A., Casas, J. F., & Crick, N. R. (2004). An observational study of delivered and received aggression, gender, and social psychological adjustment in preschool: “This white crayon doesn’t work …”. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 19, 355–371. doi:10.1016/j.ecresq.2004.04.009 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 D. Cicchetti & D. J. Cohen (Eds.), Developmental psychopathology: Theory and method (Vol. 1, 2nd ed., pp. 419–493). New York, NY: Wiley. Parkhurst, J. T., & Asher, S. R. (1992). Peer rejection in middle school: Subgroup differences in behavior, loneliness, and interpersonal concerns. Developmental Psychology, 28, 231–241. doi:10.1037/0012-1649.28.2.231


9

Perren, S. (2000). Kindergarten children involved in bullying: Social behavior, peer relationships, and social status (Unpublished doctoral thesis). Der Philosophisch-historischen Fakultät der Universität Bern, Selbstverlag, Basel. Perry, D. G., Kusel, S. J., & Perry, L. C. (1988). Victims of peer aggression. Developmental Psychology, 24, 807–814. doi:10.1037/0012-1649.24.6.807 Preacher, K. J., & Hayes, A. F. (2008). Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models. Behavior Research Methods, 40, 879–891. doi:10.3758/BRM.40.3.879 Prinstein, M. J., Boergers, J., & Vernberg, E. M. (2001). Overt and relational aggression in adolescents: Social psychological adjustment of aggressors and victims. Journal of Clinical Child Psychology, 30(4), 479–491. doi:10.1207/S15374424JCCP3004_05 Reijntjes, A., Kamphuis, J. H., Prinziea, P., & Telchc, M. J. (2010). Peer victimization and internalizing problems in children: A meta-analysis of longitudinal studies. Child Abuse & Neglect, 34, 244–252. doi:10.1016/j.chiabu.2009.07.009 Rubin, K. H., Bukowski, W. M., & Parker, J. G. (2006). Peer interactions, relationships, and groups. In N. Eisenberg, W. Damon, & R. M. Lerner (Eds.), Handbook of child psychology: Social, emotional, and personality development (Vol. 3, 6th ed., pp. 571–645). New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons Inc. Rubin, K. H., Coplan, R. J., & Bowker, J. (2009). Social withdrawal and shyness in childhood and adolescence. Annual Review of Psychology, 60, 141–171. doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.60.110707.163642 Rubin, K. H., Hymel, S., & Mills, R. S. L. (1989). Sociability and social withdrawal in childhood: Stability and outcomes. Journal of Personality, 57, 238–255. doi:10.1111/j.1467-6494.1989.tb00482.x Rubin, K. H., LeMare, L. J., & Lollis, S. (1990). Social withdrawal in childhood: Developmental pathways to peer rejection. In S. R. Asher & J. D. Coie (Eds.), Cambridge studies in social and emotional development. Peer rejection in childhood (pp. 217–249). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. Rubin, K. H., Wojslawowicz, J. C., Rose-Krasnor, L., Booth-LaForce, C. L., & Burgess, K. B. (2006). The best friendships of shy/withdrawn children: Prevalence, stability, and relationship quality. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 34, 139–153. doi:10.1007/s10802-005-9017-4 Rudolph, K. D., Troop-Gordon, W., & Flynn, M. (2009). Relational victimization predicts children’s socialcognitive and self-regulatory responses in a challenging peer context. Developmental Psychology, 45, 1444–1454. doi:10.1037/a0014858 Schwartz, D., Dodge, K. A., & Coie, J. D. (1993). The emergence of chronic victimization in boys’ peer groups. Child Development, 64, 1755–1772. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8624.1993.tb04211.x Stacks, A., & Goff, J. (2006). Family correlates of internalizing and externalizing behavior among boys and girls enrolled in head start. Early Child Development and Care, 176(1), 67–85. doi:10.1080/0300443042000302609 Van der Ploeg, R., Steglich, C., Salmivalli, C., & Veenstra, R. (2015). The intensity of victimization: Associations with children’s psychosocial well-being and social standing in the classroom. PLoS ONE, 10(10), e141490.