Literature DB >> 28589674

Differences in the early stages of social information processing for adolescents involved in bullying.

Alexa Guy1, Kirsty Lee1, Dieter Wolke1,2.   

Abstract

Bullying victimization has commonly been associated with deficiencies in social information processing (SIP). In contrast, findings regarding bullying perpetration are mixed, with some researchers claiming that bullies may have superior SIP abilities than victimized or uninvolved youth. This study investigated the effects of bullying and victimization on early SIP; specifically the recognition and interpretation of social information. In stage 1, 2,782 adolescents (11-16 years) were screened for bullying involvement, and in stage 2, 723 of these participants (mean age = 13.95) were assessed on measures of emotion recognition, hostile attribution bias, and characterological self-blame (CSB). No associations between bullying and early SIP were found. In contrast, victimization was associated with more hostile attribution bias and CSB attributions. Girls performed better than boys on the emotion recognition task while boys showed greater hostile attribution biases. No interaction effects of bullying or victimization with gender were found. Follow-up categorical analyses that considered pure victims versus victims who also bullied (bully-victims) on SIP, found a similar pattern of findings. These findings suggest that those who purely bully others are neither superior nor deficient in the early stages of SIP. Victimized adolescents, however, show biases in their interpretations of social situations and the intentions of others. These biases may lead to maladaptive responses and may increase risk for further victimization by peers.
© 2017 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Entities:  

Keywords:  attribution bias; bully-victims; bullying; social information processing; victimization

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28589674     DOI: 10.1002/ab.21716

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Aggress Behav        ISSN: 0096-140X            Impact factor:   2.917


  8 in total

Review 1.  Why do children and adolescents bully their peers? A critical review of key theoretical frameworks.

Authors:  Hannah J Thomas; Jason P Connor; James G Scott
Journal:  Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol       Date:  2017-11-22       Impact factor: 4.328

2.  Subtypes of Aggressive Behavior in Children with Autism in the Context of Emotion Recognition, Hostile Attribution Bias, and Dysfunctional Emotion Regulation.

Authors:  Simone Kirst; Katharina Bögl; Verena Loraine Gross; Robert Diehm; Luise Poustka; Isabel Dziobek
Journal:  J Autism Dev Disord       Date:  2021-12-20

3.  Is aggression associated with biased perceptions of one's acceptance and rejection in adolescence?

Authors:  Sarah T Malamut; Claire F Garandeau; Daryaneh Badaly; Mylien Duong; David Schwartz
Journal:  Dev Psychol       Date:  2022-03-17

4.  Association between Facial Emotion Recognition and Bullying Involvement among Adolescents with High-Functioning Autism Spectrum Disorder.

Authors:  Tai-Ling Liu; Peng-Wei Wang; Yi-Hsin Connie Yang; Gary Chon-Wen Shyi; Cheng-Fang Yen
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2019-12-15       Impact factor: 3.390

5.  Amygdala activity to angry and fearful faces relates to bullying and victimization in adolescents.

Authors:  Johnna R Swartz; Angelica F Carranza; Annchen R Knodt
Journal:  Soc Cogn Affect Neurosci       Date:  2019-10-01       Impact factor: 3.436

6.  Sibling Bullying: A Prospective Longitudinal Study of Associations with Positive and Negative Mental Health during Adolescence.

Authors:  Umar Toseeb; Dieter Wolke
Journal:  J Youth Adolesc       Date:  2021-09-30

7.  Differences in Aggression and Alcohol Use among Youth with Varying Levels of Victimization and Popularity Status.

Authors:  Sarah T Malamut; Molly Dawes; Tessa A M Lansu; Yvonne van den Berg; Antonius H N Cillessen
Journal:  J Youth Adolesc       Date:  2022-07-01

8.  Why does decreased likeability not deter adolescent bullying perpetrators?

Authors:  Claire F Garandeau; Tessa A M Lansu
Journal:  Aggress Behav       Date:  2019-02-01       Impact factor: 2.917

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.