Stuck in a Loop: Rumination as a Mediator in the Relationship Between High School Bullying Victimization and Depression
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Victims of bullying are more likely to engage in persistent negative thoughts about their experiences, which can include intrusive and deliberate rumination. Rumination is problematic since it can exacerbate adverse mental health outcomes over time, including depression. The current study investigated whether either of these types of rumination would mediate the association between high school victimization and depression in early adulthood. Intrusive and deliberate rumination were separately analyzed to contribute to limited research analyzing intrusive thoughts in rumination, and mixed findings implicating deliberate rumination with improved mental health outcomes. Undergraduate students from a large Canadian university (N = 485, Mage = 19.08) completed an online questionnaire assessing high school bullying victimization, event-related rumination, and depression. The results revealed that both intrusive and deliberate rumination partially mediated the relationship between high school bullying victimization and depression. These findings suggest that rumination, whether intrusive or deliberate, is a risk factor for mental health problems following victimization, which can persist in the long term. Therefore, interventions aimed at enhancing mindfulness and reducing rumination should be provided to victims of bullying to mitigate the risk of negative psychological outcomes.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".