Money and age in schools: Bullying and power imbalances

Abstract

School bullying continues to be a serious problem around the world. Thus, it seems crucial to clearly identify the risk factors associated with being a victim or a bully. The current study focused in particular on the role that age and socio-economic differences between classmates could play on bullying. Logistic and multilevel analyses were conducted using data from 53,316 5th and 9th grade students from a representative sample of public and private Colombian schools. Higher age and better family socio-economic conditions than classmates were risk factors associated with being a bully, while younger age and poorer socio-economic conditions than classmates were associated with being a victim of bullying. Coming from authoritarian families or violent neighborhoods, and supporting beliefs legitimizing aggression, were also associated with bullying and victimization. Empathy was negatively associated with being a bully, and in some cases positively associated with being a victim. The results highlight the need to take into account possible sources of power imbalances, such as age and socio-economic differences among classmates, when seeking to prevent bullying. In particular, interventions focused on peer group dynamics might contribute to avoid power imbalances or to prevent power imbalances from becoming power abuse. Aggr. Behav. 41:280-293, 2015. © 2014 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Peer victimization in single‐grade and multigrade classrooms

“…This is surprising given evidence on the differences between girls' and boys' friendship networks during the middle to late childhood developmental period (see Rose & Rudolph, 2006), with important differences found in playmate selection, friendship formation (Maccoby, 1998) to control or harm others is peer perceived popularity (Salmivalli, 2010), or more broadly defined status differences, for instance in the form of SES (Chaux & Castellanos, 2015), majority/minority status or LGBT status (Juvonen & Graham, 2014). This is surprising given evidence on the differences between girls' and boys' friendship networks during the middle to late childhood developmental period (see Rose & Rudolph, 2006), with important differences found in playmate selection, friendship formation (Maccoby, 1998) to control or harm others is peer perceived popularity (Salmivalli, 2010), or more broadly defined status differences, for instance in the form of SES (Chaux & Castellanos, 2015), majority/minority status or LGBT status (Juvonen & Graham, 2014).…”

Do adolescent risk behaviors mediate health and school bullying? Testing the stress process and general strain frameworks

“…Prior research suggests that the family, school, and community environments may all play roles in the emergence or desistence of bullying (Chaux & Castellanos 2015; Twemlow and Sacco 2013; Beaty and Alexeyev 2008; Baldry & Farrington 2000). Thus, the mechanisms used to explain what leads to bullying can be situated in terms of general strain theory.…”

School Bullying and Moral Reasoning Competence

“…Victims are typically vulnerable, have difficulties in defending themselves and lack genuine support from friends. This power imbalance distinguishes bullying from other types of aggression (Chaux & Castellanos, ; Vaillancourt, Hymel, & McDougall, ). Bullying is widely considered as instrumental behavior, which enables bullies to gain and sustain dominance within their group (Hawley, ; Juvonen, Wang, & Espinoza, ).…”