Research on the predictors of 3 bully status groups (bullies, victims, and bully victims) for school-age children and adolescents was synthesized using meta-analytic procedures. The primary purpose was to determine the relative strength of individual and contextual predictors to identify targets for prevention and intervention. Age and how bullying was measured were also considered as moderators. From an original pool of 1,622 studies conducted since 1970 (when research on bullying increased significantly), 153 studies were identified that met criteria for inclusion. A number of common and unique predictors were found for the bully status groups. The implications of the meta-analytic findings for future research on bullying and victimization prevention and intervention are discussed.

Research in the area of youth violence has identified multiple causes and pathways of development that lead to aggression, violence, and other problem behaviors (Patterson, DeBaryshe, & Ramsey, 1989;Tolan, Guerra, & Kendall, 1995). An array of risk and protective factors has been delineated emphasizing individual, peer, family, and community predictors. Given the disproportionate rates of youth violence among ethnic minority youth, it is particularly important to examine the salience of these risk factors for children from distinct ethnic groups as well as to examine risk factors directly linked to an individual's ethnic background.In general, this area of inquiry has been somewhat neglected. In particular, there is a paucity of research that focuses on the psychological processes related to ethnicity that increase or decrease the risk of youth violence. For the most part, the link between ethnicity and violence has been attributed Data collection for the work reported in this chapter was supported by grants from the National Institute of Mental Health (MH43084) and the Carnegie Corporation (B4850) awarded to Edward

In this article we present a cognitive-ecological model for understanding and preventing emotional and behavioral difficulties and propose directions for school-based intervention programs, particularly with aggressive children. In the cognitive-ecological framework, intervention efforts should target certain cognitive skills (e.g., skills that encourage attention to multiple cues in a setting) and knowledge structures (e.g., normative beliefs about appropriate responses to conflict) across multiple contexts that change over time (e.g., classroom, peer, school, family). We also emphasize the importance of coordination among contextual influences so that children learn consistent, cross-context standards that encourage prosocial and socially competent behavior. Practitioners working with students who exhibit emotional and behavioral difficulties should strive to integrate efforts at modifying cognition as well as context in the service of promoting behavioral change that maintains over time and across situations.