Peer Victimization and Bullying in Childhood and Adolescence
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Given the wide-reaching implications of peer bullying and victimization for children and adolescents as well as increasing public attention to this topic, research in this area has grown during the late 20th and early 21st centuries. Beginning with efforts in Norway in the 1970s, research on bullying and victimization has expanded to include an abundance of research in the United States, Canada, Europe, Australia, and other countries. Regardless of geographic area, important targets of research include defining the constructs (e.g., what is aggression and when does it become bullying or victimization behavior? Are there bullying or victimization behaviors that are more characteristic of males or females?) and understanding the degree to which the problem affects youth (e.g., What are prevalence rates for preschoolers versus school-aged children versus adolescents?). Some studies distinguish between physical or overt forms and social or relational forms of bullying and victimization, but others include measures of general bullying and victimization that do not distinguish among different types. Even with more agreement on definitions, researchers still use different methodologies and measures to study bullying and victimization. A fundamental goal of much of the research literature is to identify predictors and consequences of both bullying and victimization. The correlates and predictors of bullying and victimization exist within multiple contexts and can be grouped into several categories, such as Individual-Level Risk Factors, Family- and Home-Level Risk Factors, Social-Level Risk Factors, and School-Level Risk Factors. Considerable attention has been given to Internalizing Distress and externalizing behavior problems as key outcomes or consequences of bullying and victimization. In addition, other consequences include peer problems and school-related problems. Both cross-sectional and longitudinal studies explore these topics, and a number of useful review articles and meta-analyses provide additional evidence. As researchers have considered more complex models involving risk factors and outcomes associated with bullying and victimization, many have focused on identifying protective factors that might moderate the link between risk factors and victimization or that might function as a buffer against negative outcomes associated with victimization and bullying. Friendship is one such moderator variable with considerable evidence that it disrupts both of these links. The ultimate goal of much of the research on bullying and victimization is to inform the development of effective prevention and intervention efforts. With regard to intervention, research efforts are most often school-based with objectives that include, for example, reducing bullying behaviors, empowering victims, educating teachers, and effectively engaging bystanders.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".