Neighborhood predictors of bullying perpetration and victimization trajectories among South Korean adolescents

Abstract

Aims This study examined latent trajectories of bullying perpetration and victimization, and identified neighborhood antecedents of these trajectories among South Korean adolescents. Methods Nationally representative individual‐level data from waves 2 to 6 (middle school to high school) of the Korean Children and Youth Panel Survey were merged with neighborhood‐level data drawn from the Korean Census and the Korean Ministry of Education. Latent class growth analysis (N = 2,178) and logistic regression were conducted (N = 2,021). Results Three unique trajectories of bullying experience—low‐risk (80.8%), transient (13.3%), high‐risk (5.9%)—were identified. Neighborhood factors (e.g., public assistance receipt, marital status, official bullying incidents, collective efficacy) predicted these distinct developmental paths. Conclusion Joint trajectories of perpetration and victimization can inform service or policy decisions as each developmental path may represent unique experiences for youth in need of specific resources for treatment or intervention. Neighborhood indicators are important predictors of developmental trajectories of bullying experience among adolescents.

Sociocultural values, attitudes and risk factors associated with adolescent cyberbullying in East Asia: A systematic review

“…For instance, Ji et al (2016) proposed that strong social norms in collectivistic cultures such as China can lead to lower tolerance for deviant behaviors amongst group members, resulting in lower involvement in bullying in these countries. On the other hand, strong social norms and collectivistic values can lead to more acquiescence and conformity in these cultures, and one may suspect that the prevalence and severity of cyberbullying behaviors are higher in this region (see Han et al, 2019). Also, there might be unique contributing factors for bullying specific to East Asian adolescents, who may be more likely to cyberbully others as a way of conforming to the group norm or for penalising someone who does not adhere to such collectivistic ideals.…”

A systematic review and meta-analysis of interventions to decrease cyberbullying perpetration and victimization: An in-depth analysis within the Asia Pacific region

“…However, strong social norms and collectivistic values may also lead to high conformity to group behaviors and could impact the prevalence and severity of cyberbullying behaviors within the Asia-Pacific region. Collectivistic adolescents may be more likely to cyberbully others as a way of conforming to the group norm or for penalizing someone who does not adhere to such collectivistic ideals (31).…”

Early risk factors for joint trajectories of bullying victimisation and perpetration

“…In addition, because many children who are victimised also bully others [13,14], it is critical to understand the joint development of bullying victimisation and perpetration over time. To date, only a handful of studies based in Scotland [12], Canada [8], Australia [15], South Korea [16,17], and China [18] have mapped the joint developmental Jean-Baptiste Pingault and Jessie R. Baldwin are joint senior authors.…”

“…These studies have broadly provided evidence for three to six joint trajectories, which typically include an uninvolved group, an increasing victimisation group, a decreasing victimisation group, a bully group, and a bully-victim group [8,12,[15][16][17][18]. However, these studies examined bullying involvement over a short period of three to four years, focusing on early to mid-adolescence only [8,12,16,18] or mid to late adolescence only [15,17]. Little is known about the joint trajectories of bullying victimisation and perpetration over a longer period from early childhood across adolescence.…”

“…In addition, because many children who are victimised also bully others [ 13 , 14 ], it is critical to understand the joint development of bullying victimisation and perpetration over time. To date, only a handful of studies based in Scotland [ 12 ], Canada [ 8 ], Australia [ 15 ], South Korea [ 16 , 17 ], and China [ 18 ] have mapped the joint developmental trajectories of bullying victimisation and perpetration. These studies have broadly provided evidence for three to six joint trajectories, which typically include an uninvolved group, an increasing victimisation group, a decreasing victimisation group, a bully group, and a bully-victim group [ 8 , 12 , 15 – 18 ].…”