Citation

Frey KS, Higheagle Strong Z. J. Abnorm. Child Psychol. 2018; 46(2): 305-318.

Affiliation

Educational Psychology, College of Education, Washington State University, Pullman, WA, USA.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2018, Holtzbrinck Springer Nature Publishing Group)

DOI

10.1007/s10802-017-0306-5

PMID

28500469

Abstract

Peer victimization is predictive of serious problems in adjustment, especially among children who are both victimized and aggressive. This study investigated how different types of aggression contribute to later victimization. Specifically, we examined prospective relationships between the types of aggression that children perpetrated and the types that they experienced at the hands of others. Trained observers coded schoolyard behavior of 553 children in grades 3-6 during the initial year of a bullying intervention program. Both observed aggression and victimization were specified by form (direct, indirect) and function (proactive, reactive). Total hourly rates of victimization were highest in the upper grades. Direct-reactive aggression uniquely predicted increases in victimization, while direct-proactive aggression predicted decreases, particularly in direct-proactive victimization. Indirect-proactive aggression (e.g., derogatory gossip) predicted increases in indirect-proactive victimization only in the control group. Indirect-reactive aggression and victimization occurred too rarely to detect change. Aggression-victimization relationships did not differ for boys and girls.

DISCUSSION considers why children might risk direct reactive aggression in the face of increased victimization. Different sequelae for different forms and functions of aggression highlight the need to resolve theoretical ambiguities in defining proactive and reactive aggression.

Language: en

Keywords

Direct aggression; Indirect aggression; Observed behavior; Proactive aggression; Reactive aggression; Victimization