Socioeconomic Differences in the Association Between Bullying Behaviors and Mental Health in Canadian Adolescents
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Bullying and poverty are each associated with poor health in adolescents. We examined socioeconomic differences in the association of bullying and health. METHODS: The 2017/2018 Canadian Health Behaviour of School-aged Children study surveyed 21,750 youth (9-18 years). We used linear regression models to investigate interactive effects of bullying involvement (traditional and cyberbullying) and socioeconomic position (SEP) on self-reported life satisfaction, psychological symptoms, and physical symptoms. RESULTS: Involvement in either form of bullying, as a perpetrator or a target, was associated with worse health and well-being compared to uninvolved youths. Associations of victimization via conventional bullying with low life satisfaction (b = -.33 [-.61, .05]), more psychological symptoms (b = .83 [.27, 1.38]), and more somatic symptoms (b = .56 [.14, .98]) were stronger at lower SEP. CONCLUSION: Socioeconomic disadvantage intensifies the association between bullying victimization and poor health. The intersections of victimization and poverty pose a significant health risk to adolescents.
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 | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".