MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415655575 · doi:10.1177/01650254251382282

Bullying perpetration and HEXACO personality: Examining between- and within-person longitudinal associations

2025· article· en· W4415655575 on OpenAlexaff
Ann H. Farrell, Natalie Spadafora, Andrew V. Dane, Anthony A. Volk

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Behavioral Development · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicBullying, Victimization, and Aggression
Canadian institutionsBrock University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBig Five personality traitsPersonalityAssociation (psychology)Psychological interventionHuman factors and ergonomicsPoison controlLongitudinal studyInjury prevention

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Previous findings indicate the utility of the HEXACO model in understanding the personality traits associated with bullying perpetration. However, these studies are all cross-sectional, limiting the understanding of how bullying and HEXACO personality develop alongside one another across adolescence. Therefore, we examined between- and within-person longitudinal associations between bullying and the HEXACO traits in a sample of 392 youth ( M age = 11.88 at Wave 1; SD = 1.42; 49.5% boys) across 3 years of development using random intercept cross-lagged panel models. As expected, we found a between-person association between higher bullying and lower Honesty-Humility, as well as within-person, within-time associations between bullying and lower Honesty-Humility. Unexpectedly, we did not find within-person cross-lagged paths. Our findings suggest that individuals higher on exploitative traits (i.e., lower Honesty-Humility) are more likely to be higher on bullying perpetration. In addition, individuals whose exploitative traits increase are likely to concurrently increase on bullying perpetration. Our findings highlight the importance of understanding developmental processes at the between- and within-person levels. Our results suggest that anti-bullying interventions might benefit from taking note of individuals who possess exploitative personality traits.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.040
Threshold uncertainty score0.549

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.087
GPT teacher head0.372
Teacher spread0.285 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Behavioral DevelopmentSame topicBullying, Victimization, and AggressionFrench-language works237,207