View in EDS HTML Full Text PDF Full Text

Adolescents' Perceptions of Student and Teacher/Staff Defending against Stigma-Based Peer Victimization

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Title: Adolescents' Perceptions of Student and Teacher/Staff Defending against Stigma-Based Peer Victimization
Language: English
Authors: Diana J. Meter, Justin T. Worley, Kevin Butler, Tyler L. Renshaw, V. Paul Poteat
Source: European Journal of Developmental Psychology. 2024 21(4):663-678.
Availability: Routledge. Available from: Taylor & Francis, Ltd. 530 Walnut Street Suite 850, Philadelphia, PA 19106. Tel: 800-354-1420; Tel: 215-625-8900; Fax: 215-207-0050; Web site: http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals
Peer Reviewed: Y
Page Count: 16
Publication Date: 2024
Document Type: Journal Articles
Reports - Research
Education Level: Elementary Education
Grade 6
Intermediate Grades
Middle Schools
Grade 7
Junior High Schools
Secondary Education
Grade 8
Grade 9
High Schools
Descriptors: Peer Relationship, Victims, Bullying, Social Bias, Gender Differences, Student Behavior, Teacher Behavior, Well Being, Educational Environment, Adolescents, Grade 6, Grade 7, Grade 8, Grade 9, School Personnel, Teacher Role, Student Role, Peer Influence
DOI: 10.1080/17405629.2024.2315761
ISSN: 1740-5629
1740-5610
Abstract: We investigated (1) grade differences in perceived stigma-based peer victimization (SBPV); (2) differences in perceived student and teacher/staff defending against types of SBPV; and (3) whether defending against SBPV affected student subjective wellbeing (SSWB) via anti-victimization school climate perceptions. Participants were 1124 US adolescents (48% girls, 48% boys, 3% another identity) in Grades 6-9. Participants identified as Hispanic (61%), Black (12%), White/Non-Hispanic (12%), and other racial/ethnic identities (15%). We found small differences in perceived defending against different types of SBPV. There were no differences between grades for perceived student defending, but teachers/staff defended 9th-graders less than 6th-graders across all types of SBPV. Student defending against ability-based victimization and teacher/staff defending against sexuality- and weight-based victimization predicted SSWB indirectly through anti-victimization school climate perceptions. Although SBPV is harmful to adolescents' school functioning, students and teachers/staff can defend against SBPV to promote more adaptive perceptions of school climate and wellbeing.
Abstractor: As Provided
Entry Date: 2024
Accession Number: EJ1432183
Database: ERIC
Full text is not displayed to guests.
FullText Links:
  – Type: pdflink
    Url: https://content.ebscohost.com/cds/retrieve?content=AQICAHj0k_4E0hTGH8RJwT4gCJyBsGNe_WN95AvKlDbXJGqwxwGAs4ilKMGq8eH53wecV_ZvAAAA4zCB4AYJKoZIhvcNAQcGoIHSMIHPAgEAMIHJBgkqhkiG9w0BBwEwHgYJYIZIAWUDBAEuMBEEDIlIkLmsMXqPHgUdmQIBEICBmzBvnsFHHNreaRynZNj1_dpStErNYFHUFKd0lLa3lmShD-o4lg502aFJYgo0ZiwApHp1fbHukZPiZy-t2henN-Mm-Fji51VJ3yxQ1SpfWfULsBTTCx9hlqSNS5imgS2gz7TLvmc-E1Us08CQ6_Hr7znqMLhLgPb15w4jvNzHj_BmMXMm31_-_1zoWfnbxtnesSJw0fvdeQgxk3me
Text:
  Availability: 1
  Value: <anid>AN0178530479;a9o01jul.24;2024Jul23.05:15;v2.2.500</anid> <title id="AN0178530479-1">Adolescents' perceptions of Student and Teacher/Staff Defending Against Stigma-Based Peer Victimization </title> <p>We investigated (<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref1">1</reflink>) grade differences in perceived stigma-based peer victimization (SBPV), (<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref2">2</reflink>) differences in perceived student and teacher/staff defending against types of SBPV, and (<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref3">3</reflink>) whether defending against SBPV affected student subjective wellbeing (SSWB) via anti-victimization school climate perceptions. Participants were 1124 US adolescents (48% girls, 48% boys, 3% another identity) in Grades 6–9. Participants identified as Hispanic (61%), Black (12%), White/Non-Hispanic (12%), and other racial/ethnic identities (15%). We found small differences in perceived defending against different types of SBPV. There were no differences between grades for perceived student defending, but teachers/staff defended 9th-graders less than 6th-graders across all types of SBPV. Student defending against ability-based victimization and teacher/staff defending against sexuality- and weight-based victimization predicted SSWB indirectly through anti-victimization school climate perceptions. Although SBPV is harmful to adolescents' school functioning, students and teachers/staff can defend against SBPV to promote more adaptive perceptions of school climate and wellbeing.</p> <p>Keywords: Stigma-based peer victimization; defending; identity; appearance; adolescents</p> <p>Some youth experience peer victimization at school due to socially stigmatized or devalued characteristics, including minoritized disability status, racial/ethnic identity, sexual orientation, or body size (Bayram Özdemir et al., [<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref4">3</reflink>]; Gage et al., [<reflink idref="bib11" id="ref5">11</reflink>]). This is referred to as <emph>stigma-based peer victimization</emph> (SBPV; Earnshaw et al., [<reflink idref="bib7" id="ref6">7</reflink>]). Stigma-based peer victimization can have pronounced negative effects on students (Russell et al., [<reflink idref="bib37" id="ref7">37</reflink>]), underscoring the need to consider and intervene against it. Nevertheless, there remains limited scholarship on the extent of student and teacher/staff intervention against SBPV and the benefits of such intervention. We investigated grade differences in perceived defending of SBPV, differences in adolescents' perceived student and teacher/staff defending of SBPV, and whether perceptions of defending against SBPV linked with student subjective wellbeing (SSWB) by way of anti-victimization school climate perceptions.</p> <p>Victimization based on disability status, race/ethnicity, sexual orientation, and weight are common types of SBPV (Farmer et al., [<reflink idref="bib10" id="ref8">10</reflink>]; Myers et al., [<reflink idref="bib28" id="ref9">28</reflink>]; Van Geel et al., [<reflink idref="bib41" id="ref10">41</reflink>]). <emph>Ability-based peer victimization</emph> may result from difficulties in students' social competencies and lower positioning in social networks compared to typically developing peers, which place youth with disabilities at increased risk (Farmer et al., [<reflink idref="bib10" id="ref11">10</reflink>]). <emph>Racial/ethnic-based peer victimization</emph> reflects victimization based on one's race or ethnicity, typically enacted by peers from different racial or ethnic backgrounds (Bayram Özdemir et al., [<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref12">3</reflink>]). <emph>Sexual orientation-based peer victimization</emph> can include pejorative labels or name-calling that denigrate gender and sexual orientation identities or non-conforming behaviour (Myers et al., [<reflink idref="bib28" id="ref13">28</reflink>]). Although sexual orientation-based peer victimization frequently targets youth with marginalized sexual or gender identities, it is also directed at heterosexual youth as a way of reinforcing traditional sexual and gender norms (Espelage et al., [<reflink idref="bib9" id="ref14">9</reflink>]). <emph>Weight-based peer victimization</emph> is targeted at youth who are considered overweight or obese (Van Geel et al., [<reflink idref="bib41" id="ref15">41</reflink>]).</p> <hd id="AN0178530479-2">Grade differences in defending</hd> <p>Adolescence is a time to investigate student and teacher/staff defending of SBPV in schools, given developmental changes that may contribute to increased prevalence of victimization. Adolescents are peer-oriented, sensitive to peer acceptance and rejection, and bestow importance to preserving peer status (Buhrmester & Furman, [<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref16">4</reflink>]). Many youth in this age group begin to explore their sexuality and engage in romantic and sexual relationships (Kar et al., [<reflink idref="bib20" id="ref17">20</reflink>]). Adolescents also commonly gain weight and experience body changes during puberty (Rogol et al., [<reflink idref="bib35" id="ref18">35</reflink>]). At the same time, students develop heightened awareness of social norms and may use aggression to promote these norms by ostracizing peers who do not 'fit in' (Juvonen & Galván, [<reflink idref="bib18" id="ref19">18</reflink>]). Therefore, we may expect to see increased SBPV within schools across early to middle adolescence.</p> <p>Perceptions of student and teacher/staff defending could differ based on student age. Prosocial behaviour, such as student defending, appears more socially acceptable among younger students (Salmivalli & Voeten, [<reflink idref="bib38" id="ref20">38</reflink>]). For example, younger students tend to defend more than older students (Ma et al., [<reflink idref="bib26" id="ref21">26</reflink>]) and pro-bully attitudes increase as youth get older (Jeffrey et al., [<reflink idref="bib16" id="ref22">16</reflink>]). Examining descriptive trends in defending of SBPV by grade would provide valuable insight into the age range of students engaging in SBPV defending behaviours. To our knowledge, research has not investigated whether perceptions of student and teacher/staff defending vary by age. Given that students and teacher/staff are part of the same school ecology, we expect to see similar patterns of perceived defending for students and teacher/staff across age ranges. However, considering that peer victimization may increase across adolescence, we anticipate that adolescents in earlier grades may perceive students and teachers/staff to defend at higher frequencies than later grades.</p> <hd id="AN0178530479-3">Differences between types of SBPV defending</hd> <p>The context in which SBPV occurs is also important to consider relative to whether students and teachers/staff engage in defending behaviour. In the US, there is a history of discrimination against those with disabilities (Mackelprang & Salsgiver, [<reflink idref="bib25" id="ref23">25</reflink>]), people of colour (Harrell, [<reflink idref="bib14" id="ref24">14</reflink>]), sexual minorities (Nadal, [<reflink idref="bib29" id="ref25">29</reflink>]), and those who are overweight or obese (Puhl & Brownell, [<reflink idref="bib30" id="ref26">30</reflink>]). This historic context sets the stage for the existence of SBPV given that particular characteristics are devalued due to social dominance, stereotypes, and prejudice (Earnshaw et al., [<reflink idref="bib7" id="ref27">7</reflink>]). Although all types of SBPV discussed above are pervasive and harmful to youth, some types of SBPV may be deemed more acceptable and therefore students and teachers/staff may defend against them less consistently.</p> <p>Societal and structural norms and policies may affect the prevalence of SBPV types, as well as how willing bystanders (e.g., students, teachers/staff) are to intervene. Only some types of SBPV are explicitly prohibited in antibullying or antidiscrimination policies. For example, policies include specific protections for students based on race/ethnicity and disability (stopbullying.gov). While there is no US law prohibiting peer victimization, these acts often overlap with behaviour prohibited by Title IX and civil rights legislation (stopbullying.gov). Harassment based on race/ethnicity, sex, disability, or religion must be enumerated and legally addressed by schools according to federal law (stopbullying.gov). Specific identities protected by law may signal that these types of harassment are unacceptable and have lawful consequences. In contrast, policies to protect sexual and gender minority youth vary from state to state, as does support for LGBTQ+ youth (Lessard et al., [<reflink idref="bib22" id="ref28">22</reflink>]). Despite the presence of protections against several types of SBPV at the federal and state level, specific laws protecting against victimization of youth with larger bodies are rare (Lessard et al., [<reflink idref="bib23" id="ref29">23</reflink>]).</p> <p>Given variability in protections against SBPV, we expect that perceived student and teachers/staff defending could differ as a function of SBPV type. More specifically, we expect that students and teachers/staff may defend more often against race/ethnicity-based victimization and less against sexual- or weight -based peer victimization. Understanding these potential differences has important implications for identifying trends in defending behaviours and may identify potential at-risk subgroups for SBPV.</p> <hd id="AN0178530479-4">Potential benefits of defending against SBPV</hd> <p>Several studies have explored the relationship between SBPV and students' mental health and academic performance (e.g., Lessard et al., [<reflink idref="bib21" id="ref30">21</reflink>]). However, research has yet to investigate the impact of SBPV on school-specific quality of life indicators, such as <emph>subjective school wellbeing</emph> (SSWB). Student subjective school wellbeing refers to youths' self-perceptions of positive psychological functioning at school, which is operationalized via social, emotional, cognitive, and performance domains (Renshaw et al., [<reflink idref="bib34" id="ref31">34</reflink>]). Student subjective school wellbeing is increasingly recognized as a valued educational outcome and a key predictor of adaptive experiences. For instance, higher levels of SSWB are associated with lower odds of self-reported victimization and higher odds of receiving social support at school (Renshaw et al., [<reflink idref="bib34" id="ref32">34</reflink>]), lower cumulative psychosocial risks and higher cumulative developmental assets (Renshaw, [<reflink idref="bib32" id="ref33">32</reflink>]), and better school engagement (Renshaw & Chenier, [<reflink idref="bib33" id="ref34">33</reflink>]). Understanding the link between SBPV and SSWB is important because it will elucidate whether and how witnessing SBPV can impair students SSWB.</p> <p>Within education contexts, the school climate is a primary factor that shapes social interactions between individuals (e.g., with peers, teachers/staff) and creates shared norms and values that guide behaviour. Authoritative school climate theory is an emerging framework that addresses how a positive school climate may be conducive for students' achievement and wellbeing (Cornell et al., [<reflink idref="bib6" id="ref35">6</reflink>]). From this perspective, students who feel they are treated with respect (i.e., student support) and that school rules are fairly enforced (i.e., disciplinary structure) are more likely to report adaptive adjustment and functioning at school. Research has offered empirical support for this perspective and demonstrated associations between perceptions of an authoritative school climate with higher student engagement and achievement (Cornell et al., [<reflink idref="bib6" id="ref36">6</reflink>]), lower dropout rates (Jia et al., [<reflink idref="bib17" id="ref37">17</reflink>]), and lower rates of student reported substance use and bullying (Cornell & Huang, [<reflink idref="bib5" id="ref38">5</reflink>]). Together, there is theoretical and empirical support that perceptions of a more adaptive school climate are tied to more adaptive school experiences.</p> <p>Although there is debate in developmental literature about identifying key dimensions of school climate, various school climate theories (e.g., authoritative school climate theory) recognize the importance of setting clear guidance on boundaries and expectations (i.e., structure) for student behaviour. Student and teacher/staff defending of SBPV is an underexplored, but potentially salient, element that may reinforce an <emph>anti-victimization school climate</emph> characterized by students' willingness to seek help for peer victimization. That is, stronger perceptions of student and teacher/staff defending against SPBV may signal that teachers/staff are aware of peer victimization, there are norms for reporting these incidents, and reports will lead to action (i.e., an anti-victimization school climate). In turn, this type of positive school climate may offer developmental benefits to students' SSWB. The final purpose of this study is to evaluate the plausibility of this model. We hypothesize that higher perceptions of student and teacher/staff defending (across SBPV types) will be positively related to SWWB by way of anti-victimization school climate perceptions.</p> <hd id="AN0178530479-5">Methods</hd> <p></p> <hd id="AN0178530479-6">Participants</hd> <p>Participants were 1124 adolescents in Grades 6 (<emph>n</emph> = 326), 7 (<emph>n</emph> = 305), 8 (<emph>n</emph> = 341), and 9 (<emph>n</emph> = 152) from 19 schools in the United States. Their average age was 12.91 years (<emph>SD</emph> = 1.25). There were 539 girls, 548 boys, and 30 participants who identified with another gender or chose not to answer. Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, 728 participants attended in-person and 395 attended online. According to school records, participants were 61% Hispanic, 12% Black, 12% White/Non-Hispanic, 7% Asian, less than 1% American Indian or Pacific Islander, and 8% multiracial or multiethnic or another race or ethnicity. Fifty-three percent of the participants received free or reduced-price lunch, 13% were English Language Learners, 18% were eligible for special education, and 44% reported a home language of English. Data were collected by the Character Lab Research Network (CLRN) in Spring 2021. The authors' university institutional review board (IRB) established a reliance agreement with the IRB serving the Character Lab Research Network, which was the organization responsible for recruiting and collecting data from participants. All participants' parents or guardians provided informed consent for the child's participation. The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.</p> <hd id="AN0178530479-7">Measures</hd> <p></p> <hd id="AN0178530479-8">Defending against stigma-based peer victimization</hd> <p>Participants reported how often other students and teachers/staff intervened when body size, race/ethnicity, homophobic, and ability-based negative remarks were made in their presence (e.g., 'When race/ethnicity-based remarks are made and a teacher or other school staff person is present, how often does the teacher or staff person intervene?'). There were two items for each type of SBPV, one for student defending and one teacher/staff defending. All items were rated on a scale from 0 = <emph>Never</emph> to 3 = <emph>Always</emph>, with higher scores indicating greater perceived defending. This measure was adapted from items in the CDC Compendium of Bullying Assessment Tools (Hamburger et al., [<reflink idref="bib13" id="ref39">13</reflink>]) which asked if other students and teachers/staff would stop what was happening in various peer victimization situations. We created the SBPV-specific scenarios that asked about an incident of body size, race/ethnicity, homophobic, or ability-based peer victimization explicitly.</p> <hd id="AN0178530479-9">Student subjective wellbeing</hd> <p>The 16-item Student Subjective Wellbeing Questionnaire (Renshaw et al., [<reflink idref="bib34" id="ref40">34</reflink>]) measured four facets of adolescents SSWB: joy of learning (4 items; e.g., 'I get excited about learning new things in class'), school connectedness (4 items; e.g., 'I feel like I belong at my school'), educational purpose (4 items; e.g., 'I believe the things I learn at school will help me in my life'), and academic efficacy (4 items; e.g., 'I am a successful student'). Participants rated items on a scale from 0 = <emph>Almost never</emph> to 3 = <emph>Almost always</emph>. Average-item scores were calculated for each subscale for use in parcelling (Little et al., [<reflink idref="bib24" id="ref41">24</reflink>]), with higher scores indicating greater levels of SSWB. Cronbach's alphas for the four parcels ranged from 85 to.93.</p> <hd id="AN0178530479-10">Perceived anti-victimization climate</hd> <p>Six items, measured on a scale from 0 = <emph>Strongly disagree</emph> to 3 = <emph>Strongly agree</emph>, assessed the climate for students being able to get help from teachers or report problems regarding bullying and peer aggression (e.g., 'Students feel free to ask for help from teachers if there is a problem with a student'; Huang & Cornell, [<reflink idref="bib15" id="ref42">15</reflink>]). Average-item scores were calculated across these 6 items, with higher scores indicating greater levels of a perceived anti-victimization climate at school (α =.90).</p> <hd id="AN0178530479-11">Plan of analysis</hd> <p>Only complete cases were included in the analysis (<8% missing). Considerations for multilevel modelling are described in the supplemental material. First, analyses of variance (ANOVAs) were performed to test mean differences in defending types of SBPV for students and teachers/staff while controlling for delivery method (online = 1, in-person = 0). Corrections for sphericity and Bonferroni corrections were applied. Grade differences were assessed using ANOVAs and post-hoc Tukey tests.</p> <p>A structural equation model (SEM) with 5000 bootstrapped samples was run to investigate the effect of perceived defending against SBPV by students and teachers/staff on perceptions of SSWB by way of anti-victimization school climate. Global data – model fit was assessed using four indices: the Comparative Fit Index (CFI), Tucker-Lewis Index (TLI), Root Mean Square Error of Approximation (RMSEA), and Standardized Root Mean Residual (SRMR). Acceptable data – model fit was indicated by values >.90 for the CFI and TLI, and <.08 for the RMSEA and SRMR. Analyses were run using the lme4 (Bates et al., [<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref43">2</reflink>]) and lavaan (Rosseel, [<reflink idref="bib36" id="ref44">36</reflink>]) packages in the R statistical environment (R Core Team, [<reflink idref="bib31" id="ref45">31</reflink>]).</p> <hd id="AN0178530479-12">Results</hd> <p>Participants perceived students to intervene with different frequency across types of SBPV, even after controlling for instructional delivery, <emph>F</emph>(<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref46">1</reflink>, 1053.0) = 11.85, <emph>p</emph> <.001, participants perceived students to intervene with different frequency across types of SBPV, <emph>F</emph>(2.84, 1993.6) = 9.84, <emph>p</emph> <.001. Participants reported more student defending against peer victimization based on race/ethnicity compared with ability (<emph>t</emph>(1054) = −3.42, <emph>p</emph> <.01, <emph>d</emph> = −.11), more defending against peer victimization based on race/ethnicity compared with weight (<emph>t</emph>(1054) = −3.56, <emph>p</emph> <.01, <emph>d</emph> = −.11), and more defending against peer victimization based on sexuality compared with weight (<emph>t</emph>(1054) = 4.63, <emph>p</emph> <.001, <emph>d</emph> =.14). The effect sizes for these differences were small in magnitude. After controlling for instructional delivery method, <emph>F</emph>(<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref47">1</reflink>, 1058.0) = 33.95, <emph>p</emph> <.001, participants perceived teachers/staff to intervene with different frequency across types of SBPV, <emph>F</emph>(2.89, 3058.8) = 12.57, <emph>p</emph> <.001. Participants perceived more teacher/staff defending against peer victimization based on ability than sexuality (<emph>t</emph>(1059) = −5.65, <emph>p</emph> <.001, <emph>d</emph> =.17), more defending against peer victimization based on ability than on weight (<emph>t</emph>(1059) = −4.60, <emph>p</emph> <.001, <emph>d</emph> = −.14), and more defending against peer victimization based on race/ethnicity than on sexuality (<emph>t</emph>(1059) = −3.13, <emph>p</emph> <.05, <emph>d</emph> = −.10). These effect sizes were also small in magnitude. Other comparisons across frequency of teacher/staff defending of different SBPV subtypes were not statistically significant.</p> <p>Across SBPV types, participants reported significantly more defending by teachers/staff than by students, with moderate sized effects (<emph>t</emph><subs>ability</subs> (1084) = −16.63, <emph>p</emph> <.001, <emph>d</emph> =.51; <emph>t</emph><subs>race/ethnicity</subs> (1094) = −14.22, <emph>p</emph> <.001, <emph>d</emph> =.43; <emph>t</emph><subs>sexuality</subs> (1079) = −8.06, <emph>p</emph> <.001, <emph>d</emph> =.24; <emph>t</emph><subs>weight</subs> (1101) = −14.44, <emph>p</emph> <.001, <emph>d</emph> =.43).</p> <p>Table 1 presents differences in study variables by grade. There were no differences between grades for rates of student defending; however, participants reported that teachers/staff defended 9th-graders less than 6th-graders across all types of SBPV. Perceived anti-victimization school climate and SSWB also tended to be higher among students in earlier versus later grades.</p> <p>Table 1. Mean levels of study variables across grade.</p> <p> <ephtml> <table><thead><tr><td /><td>Grade 6</td><td>Grade 7</td><td>Grade 8</td><td>Grade 9</td></tr><tr><td /><td><italic>M</italic></td><td><italic>SD</italic></td><td><italic>M</italic></td><td><italic>SD</italic></td><td><italic>M</italic></td><td><italic>SD</italic></td><td><italic>M</italic></td><td><italic>SD</italic></td></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>SD – Ability</td><td>1.15</td><td>1.03</td><td>1.03</td><td>.98</td><td>1.02</td><td>.95</td><td>.99</td><td>.96</td></tr><tr><td>SD – Race/Ethnicity</td><td>1.17</td><td>1.02</td><td>1.08</td><td>1.00</td><td>1.02</td><td>.97</td><td>.98</td><td>.94</td></tr><tr><td>SD – Sexuality</td><td>1.16</td><td>1.05</td><td>1.07</td><td>1.04</td><td>1.11</td><td>1.00</td><td>1.06</td><td>1.05</td></tr><tr><td>SD – Weight</td><td>1.02</td><td>.93</td><td>.99</td><td>.90</td><td>.93</td><td>.81</td><td>.97</td><td>.90</td></tr><tr><td>TD – Ability</td><td>1.63 <sup>a</sup></td><td>1.20</td><td>1.58<sup>b</sup></td><td>1.11</td><td>1.45</td><td>1.14</td><td>1.16<sup>a,b</sup></td><td>1.11</td></tr><tr><td>TD – Race/Ethnicity</td><td>1.56<sup>a</sup></td><td>1.21</td><td>1.51<sup>b</sup></td><td>1.09</td><td>1.40</td><td>1.14</td><td>1.17<sup>a,b</sup></td><td>1.08</td></tr><tr><td>TD – Sexuality</td><td>1.48<sup>a</sup></td><td>1.24</td><td>1.33</td><td>1.12</td><td>1.32</td><td>1.12</td><td>1.11<sup>a</sup></td><td>1.09</td></tr><tr><td>TD – Weight</td><td>1.51<sup>a</sup></td><td>1.16</td><td>1.42<sup>b</sup></td><td>1.00</td><td>1.34</td><td>1.01</td><td>1.11<sup>a,b</sup></td><td>1.08</td></tr><tr><td>Student Subjective Wellbeing</td><td>1.64<sup>a,b,c</sup></td><td>.75</td><td>1.45<sup>a</sup></td><td>.70</td><td>1.42<sup>b</sup></td><td>.76</td><td>1.38<sup>c</sup></td><td>.84</td></tr><tr><td>Anti-Victimization School Climate</td><td>1.97 <sup>a,b,c</sup></td><td>.81</td><td>1.72</td><td>.77</td><td>1.60<sup>b</sup></td><td>.84</td><td>1.54 <sup>c</sup></td><td>.90</td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <p>1 <emph>Notes</emph>: Means that share a superscript are significantly different from one another at least at the <emph>p</emph> <.05 level; SD = Defending by student, TD = Defending by Teacher/Staff.</p> <p>Correlations between study variables are presented in the supplemental material. In the SEM examining whether student and teacher/staff defending predicted SSWB by way of anti-victimization school climate, the global data – model fit of the mediation model was satisfactory: χ<sups>2</sups>(<reflink idref="bib98" id="ref48">98</reflink>) = 360.21, <emph>p</emph> <.001; CFI =.96, TLI =.95, RMSEA [95% CI] =.05 [0.04, 0.05], SRMR =.03. Student defending against ability-based peer victimization and teacher/staff defending against sexuality- and weight-based peer victimization did significantly predict perceptions of an anti-victimization school climate. There was a significant indirect effect between student defending against ability-based peer victimization and SSWB via perceptions of an anti-victimization school climate, which was also observed for teacher/staff defending against sexuality- and weight-based peer victimization (see Figure 1 and Supplemental Material).</p> <p>Graph: Figure 1. Significant paths from the indirect effects model with 95% confidence intervals.</p> <hd id="AN0178530479-13">Discussion</hd> <p>We investigated grade differences in defending of SBPV, differences in adolescents' perceived defending against particular types of SBPV by students and teachers/staff, and whether perceptions of defending were associated with SSWB via anti-victimization school climate perceptions. There were no grade differences in participants' perceived student defending, but teachers/staff defended 9th-graders less than 6th-graders across all types of SBPV. In addition, we found more defending against SBPV based on legally protected identities relative to other types of SBPV. Furthermore, adolescents' perceptions of student and teacher/staff defending of some types of SBPV were positively associated with SSWB through their anti-victimization school climate perceptions. There was a significant indirect effect between perceptions of student defending against ability-based peer victimization and SSWB via perceptions of an anti-victimization school climate. Additional indirect effects were found for perceptions of teacher/staff defending against sexuality- and weight-based peer victimization. To our knowledge, this study was the first study to test implications of perceived defending of different types of SBPV in a diverse school setting.</p> <p>Perceived teacher defending of all types of SBPV, anti-victimization school climate, and SSWB were higher among 6th-graders than 9th-graders, with some additional differences between groups. This generally aligns with previous research showing that younger students defend more often than older students (Ma et al., [<reflink idref="bib26" id="ref49">26</reflink>]). It is important to note that general peer victimization tends to decrease after peaking in early-mid adolescence (Sumter et al., [<reflink idref="bib39" id="ref50">39</reflink>]), so higher rates of defending may be connected to more defending opportunities. Unexpectedly, there were no grade differences in perceived defending of SBPV by students. Although age differences exist for <emph>general</emph> defending (CITATION?), it is possible that defending against SPBV is particularly risky given that these identities deviate from social norms of peer groups or society more broadly. Social norms also tend to be designated by popular and dominant peers who are difficult to stand up to (Juvonen & Graham, [<reflink idref="bib19" id="ref51">19</reflink>]). Alternatively, adolescents with marginalized identities may be vulnerable to self-blame (Juvonen & Graham, [<reflink idref="bib19" id="ref52">19</reflink>]), which may prevent their peers from interpreting victimization events as one that requires their intervention. Taken together, patterns of student defending against SBPV may differ from general peer victimization, which would be a worthy area of future study.</p> <p>We found that some types of SBPV were defended against more frequently; however, the magnitude of these differences were small. It is notable that the types of SBPV that focused on non-protected identities (i.e., sexual- and weight-based) were defended less by both students and teachers/staff. Though it is possible these trends corresponded with less opportunities for defending such victimization behaviour, it could be helpful to provide students and teachers/staff with tools to readily identify and respond to these types of SBPV. The results also signal a potential need for sexual- and weight-based identities to be included in enumerated protected identities in antibullying policies. This would make explicit that these types of SBPV are unacceptable at school and require a response from bystanders.</p> <p>Mediation results showed the association between student and teacher/staff defending and SSWB via anti-victimization school climate was only supported for particular types of SBPV. Unexpectedly, defending of ability-based peer victimization was the only significant predictor of anti-victimization climate and SSWB perceptions. In some cases, students with disabilities may be unable to defend themselves during episodes of SBPV due to physical or cognitive impairment. Perhaps defending behaviour from others in these situations is a more obvious signal of an anti-victimization school climate. Also, only teachers/staff defending of sexuality and weight-based peer victimization was associated with SSWB through anti-victimization school climate perceptions. Descriptive trends show that SBPV among racial/ethnic minority youth may be more prevalent compared to other identity-groups (Galán et al., [<reflink idref="bib12" id="ref53">12</reflink>]). There are also no specific policies that protect sexual and weight-based identities in the same way as ability and race/ethnicity. Perhaps witnessing teachers/staff defend against these types of SBPV may play a particularly strong role in signalling teachers/staff contribution to an anti-victimization school climate. From a conceptual lens, authoritative school climate theory is rooted in developmental theory on authoritative parenting wherein establishing a school climate based on a combination of disciplinary structure and support is important for promoting student achievement and wellbeing (Cornell et al., [<reflink idref="bib6" id="ref54">6</reflink>]). Given the similar authority role of teacher/staff, they may play a particularly influential role in establishing clear guidelines for boundaries and expectations (i.e., structure) surrounding anti-victimization norms. Teachers/staff should be vigilant of overt and covert displays of SBPV and recognize that youth with marginalized identities may be at particular risk for peer victimization.</p> <p>It is important to note that not all pathways between perceptions of defending and perceptions of an anti-victimization school climate (and the indirect effects analysis) were significant. A potential explanation for this inconsistent pattern is that while we measured specific types of perceived SBPV defending, we assessed more general perceptions of whether students could get help from teachers/staff or report problems regarding bullying. It is possible that a stronger and more consistent pattern of effects would be observed if we assessed climate perceptions pertaining to students' ability to report and receive help for specific types SBPV. In addition, approximately one-third of the participants in our sample attended school online. Although we controlled for learning modality in descriptive analyses, some literature suggests that the prevalence of bullying involvement declined during shifts to online learning (Vaillancourt et al., [<reflink idref="bib40" id="ref55">40</reflink>]). Examination of online SBPV defending behaviour would be a novel area of study that would add meaningful insight to the findings in this study. Finally, school-level variables may be important to consider in the associations between defending behaviours, school climate, and student wellbeing. For instance, attending schools with a wider array of diversity education opportunities is linked with lower rates of identity-based victimization (e.g., race/ethnicity, sexual orientation; Eisenberg et al., [<reflink idref="bib8" id="ref56">8</reflink>]). Though our data structure did not allow for the inclusion of school level-predictors, researchers should consider this focus in future work.</p> <hd id="AN0178530479-14">Limitations</hd> <p>We did not attend to intersectionality among characteristics of victimized youth and how this could affect perceived defending of students and teachers/staff against SBPV. This study also grouped stigmatized identities together within specific types of SBPV, when experiences of peer victimization may vary due to within-group differences like spoken language, immigration status, and outness. Although investigating intersectionality was beyond the scope of this study, it is important to be sensitive to experiences of SBPV that may be unique to adolescents. In addition, this study is cross-sectional and includes only students' self-reports. Longitudinal research could help elucidate the directionality of effects. Data from multiple reporters/methods would provide richer information about SBPV, defending behaviour of students and teachers/staff, and decrease shared method variance. Student and teacher/staff defending of peer victimization were also measured with single-item scores. Future research should include more robust measures of defending to increase confidence in construct validity.</p> <p>There are factors beyond those investigated in this study that may account for defending. These include individual and peer group characteristics, relationships between actors (Meter & Card, [<reflink idref="bib27" id="ref57">27</reflink>]), and the socio-political context and historical circumstances regarding stigmatized identities (Basilici et al., [<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref58">1</reflink>]). Future research should investigate the effects of being a recipient of defending against SBPV. This will help us know whether receiving support from peers and teachers (in the form of defending behaviour) could buffer the effects of SPBV. Last, because of the nature of the data, we were unable to analyse multilevel models that would allow us to investigate school level demographics.</p> <p>In closing, we reiterate that SBPV, especially towards youth whose identities or appearances are not distinctly protected, needs to be recognized as a problem facing youth in schools and be addressed by peer and teacher/staff bystanders. Our findings suggest that perceptions of SBPV defending may be related to perceptions of an anti-victimization school climate, and in turn, student subjective wellbeing.</p> <hd id="AN0178530479-15">Disclosure statement</hd> <p>No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.</p> <hd id="AN0178530479-16">Supplementary data</hd> <p>Supplemental data for this article can be accessed online at https://doi.org/10.1080/17405629.2024.2315761</p> <ref id="AN0178530479-17"> <title> References </title> <blist> <bibl id="bib1" idref="ref1" type="bt">1</bibl> <bibtext> Basilici, M. C., Palladino, B. E., & Menesini, E. (2022). Ethnic diversity and bullying in school: A systematic review. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 65, 1 – 12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.avb.2022.101762</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib2" idref="ref2" type="bt">2</bibl> <bibtext> Bates, D., Mächler, M., Bolker, B., & Walker, S. (2015). Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. Journal of Statistical Software, 67 (1), 1 – 48. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v067.i01</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib3" idref="ref3" type="bt">3</bibl> <bibtext> Bayram Özdemir, S., Yanagida, T., & Özdemir, M. (2022). Bystanders of ethnic victimization: Do classroom context and teachers' approach matter for how adolescents intend to act? Child Development, 93 (5), 1540 – 1558. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.13822</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib4" idref="ref16" type="bt">4</bibl> <bibtext> Buhrmester, D., & Furman, W. (1987). The development of companionship and intimacy. Child Development, 58 (4), 1101 – 1113. https://doi.org/10.2307/1130550</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib5" idref="ref38" type="bt">5</bibl> <bibtext> Cornell, D., & Huang, F. (2016). Authoritative school climate and high school student risk behavior: A cross-sectional multi-level analysis of student self-reports. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 45 (11), 2246 – 2259. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-016-0424-3</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib6" idref="ref35" type="bt">6</bibl> <bibtext> Cornell, D., Shukla, K., & Konold, T. R. (2016). Authoritative school climate and student academic engagement, grades, and aspirations in middle and high schools. AERA Open, 2 (2), 1 – 18. https://doi.org/10.1177/2332858416633184</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib7" idref="ref6" type="bt">7</bibl> <bibtext> Earnshaw, V. A., Reisner, S. L., Menino, D. D., Poteat, V. P., Bogart, L. M., Barnes, T. N., & Schuster, M. A. (2018). Stigma-based bullying interventions: A systematic review. Developmental Review, 48, 178 – 200. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dr.2018.02.001</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib8" idref="ref56" type="bt">8</bibl> <bibtext> Eisenberg, M. E., Gower, A. L., Brown, C., Nam, Y. S., & Ramirez, M. R. (2022). School-based diversity education activities and bias-based bullying among secondary school students. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 37 (17–18), NP15992 – NP16012. https://doi.org/10.1177/08862605211025016</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib9" idref="ref14" type="bt">9</bibl> <bibtext> Espelage, D. L., Valido, A., Hatchel, T., Ingram, K. M., Huang, Y., & Torgal, C. (2019). A literature review of protective factors associated with homophobic bullying and its consequences among children & adolescents. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 45, 98 – 110. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.avb.2018.07.003</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Farmer, T., Wike, T. L., Alexander, Q. R., Rodkin, P. C., & Mehtaji, M. (2015). Students with disabilities and involvement in peer victimization: Theory, research, and considerations for the future. Remedial and Special Education, 36 (5), 263 – 274. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741932515572911</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Gage, N. A., Katsiyannis, A., Rose, C., & Adams, S. E. (2021). Disproportionate bullying victimization and perpetration by disability status, race, and gender: A national analysis. Advances in Neurodevelopmental Disorders, 5 (3), 256 – 268. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41252-021-00200-2</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Galán, C. A., Stokes, L. R., Szoko, N., Abebe, K. Z., & Culyba, A. J. (2021). Exploration of experiences and perpetration of identity-based bullying among adolescents by race/ethnicity and other marginalized identities. JAMA Network Open, 4 (7), e2116364 – e2116364. <ulink href="http://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2021.16364">http://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2021.16364</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Hamburger, M. E., Basile, K. C., & Vivolo, A. M. (2011). Measuring bullying victimization, perpetration, and bystander experiences: A compendium of assessment tools. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Injury Prevention and Control.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Harrell, S. P. (2000). A multidimensional conceptualization of racism‐related stress: Implications for the well‐being of people of color. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 70 (1), 42 – 57. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0087722</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Huang, F. L., & Cornell, D. G. (2016). Multilevel factor structure, concurrent validity, and test–retest reliability of the high school teacher version of the authoritative school climate survey. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 34 (6), 536 – 549. https://doi.org/10.1177/0734282915621439</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Jeffrey, L. R., Miller, D., & Linn, M. (2001). Middle school bullying as a context for the development of passive observers to the victimization of others. Journal of Emotional Abuse, 2 (2–3), 143 – 156. https://doi.org/10.1300/J135v02n02_09</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Jia, Y., Konold, T. R., & Cornell, D. (2016). Authoritative school climate and high school dropout rates. School Psychology Quarterly, 31 (2), 289 – 303. https://doi.org/10.1037/spq0000139</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Juvonen, J., & Galván, A. (2008). Peer influence in involuntary social groups: Lessons from research on bullying. In M. J. Prinstein & K. A. Dodge (Eds.), Understanding peer influence in children and adolescents (pp. 225 – 244). Guilford Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Juvonen, J., & Graham, S. (2014). Bullying in schools: The power of bullies and the plight of victims. Annual Review of Psychology, 65 (1), 159 – 185. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-010213-115030</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Kar, S. K., Choudhury, A., & Singh, A. P. (2015). Understanding normal development of adolescent sexuality: A bumpy ride. Journal of Human Reproductive Sciences, 8 (2), 70. https://doi.org/10.4103/0974-1208.158594</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Lessard, L. M., Lawrence, S. E., & Puhl, R. M. (2021). Weight-based victimization and school performance in adolescence: Can teachers help reduce academic risks? School Psychology, 36 (1), 69 – 74. https://doi.org/10.1037/spq0000371</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Lessard, L. M., Watson, R. J., & Puhl, R. M. (2020). Bias-based bullying and school adjustment among sexual and gender minority adolescents: The role of gay-straight alliances. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 49 (5), 1094 – 1109. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-020-01205-1</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Lessard, L. M., Watson, R. J., Schacter, H. L., Wheldon, C. W., & Puhl, R. M. (2022). Weight enumeration in United States anti-bullying laws: Associations with rates and risks of weight-based bullying among sexual and gender minority adolescents. Journal of Public Health Policy, 43 (1), 27 – 39. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41271-021-00322-w</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Little, T. D., Cunningham, W. A., Shahar, G., & Widaman, K. F. (2002). To parcel or not to parcel: Exploring the question, weighing the merits. Structural Equation Modeling, 9 (2), 151 – 173. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15328007SEM0902_1</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Mackelprang, R. W., & Salsgiver, R. O. (1996). People with disabilities and social work: Historical and contemporary issues. Social Work, 41 (1), 7 – 14. https://doi.org/10.1093/sw/41.1.7</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Ma, T. L., Meter, D. J., Chen, W. T., & Lee, Y. (2019). Defending behavior of peer victimization in school and cyber context during childhood and adolescence: A meta-analytic review of individual and peer-relational characteristics. Psychological Bulletin, 145 (9), 891 – 928. https://doi.org/10.1037/bul0000205</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Meter, D. J., & Card, N. A. (2015). Defenders of victims of peer aggression: Interdependence theory and an exploration of individual, interpersonal, and contextual effects on the defender participant role. Developmental Review, 38, 222 – 240. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dr.2015.08.001</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Myers, W., Turanovic, J. J., Lloyd, K. M., & Pratt, T. C. (2020). The victimization of LGBTQ students at school: A meta-analysis. Journal of School Violence, 19 (4), 421 – 432. https://doi.org/10.1080/15388220.2020.1725530</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Nadal, K. L. (2013). A brief history of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender people and civil rights. In K. L. Nadal (eds.), That's so gay! Microaggressions and the lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender community (pp. 14 – 37). American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/14093-002</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Puhl, R., & Brownell, K. D. (2001). Bias, discrimination, and obesity. Obesity Research, 9 (12), 788 – 805. https://doi.org/10.1038/oby.2001.108</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> R Core Team. (2022). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing. https://<ulink href="http://www.R-project.org/">www.R-project.org/</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Renshaw, T. L. (2015). A replication of the technical adequacy of the student subjective wellbeing questionnaire. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 33 (8), 757 – 768. https://doi.org/10.1177/0734282915580885</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Renshaw, T. L., & Chenier, J. S. (2018). Further validation of the student subjective wellbeing questionnaire: Comparing first-order and second-order factor effects on actual school outcomes. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 36 (4), 392 – 397. https://doi.org/10.1177/0734282916678494</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Renshaw, T. L., Long, A. C. J., & Cook, C. R. (2015). Assessing adolescents' positive psychological functioning at school: Development and validation of the student subjective wellbeing questionnaire. School Psychology Quarterly, 30 (4), 534 – 552. https://doi.org/10.1037/spq0000088</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Rogol, A. D., Roemmich, J. N., & Clark, P. A. (2002). Growth at puberty. Journal of Adolescent Health, 31 (6), 192 – 200. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1054-139X(02)00485-8</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Rosseel, Y. (2012). Lavaan: An R package for structural equation modeling. Journal of Statistical Software, 48 (2), 1 – 36. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v048.i02</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Russell, S. T., Everett, B. G., Rosario, M., & Birkett, M. (2014). Indicators of victimization and sexual orientation among adolescents: Analyses from youth risk behavior surveys. American Journal of Public Health, 104 (2), 255 – 261. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2013.301493</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Salmivalli, C., & Voeten, M. (2004). Connections between attitudes, group norms, and behaviour in bullying situations. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 28 (3), 246 – 258. https://doi.org/10.1080/01650250344000488</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Sumter, S. R., Baumgartner, S. E., Valkenburg, P. M., & Peter, J. (2012). Developmental trajectories of peer victimization: Off-line and online experiences during adolescence. Journal of Adolescent Health, 50 (6), 607 – 613. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jadohealth.2011.10.251</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Vaillancourt, T., Brittain, H., Krygsman, A., Farrell, A. H., Landon, S., & Pepler, D. (2021). School bullying before and during COVID‐19: Results from a population‐based randomized design. Aggressive Behavior, 47 (5), 557 – 569. https://doi.org/10.1002/ab.21986</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Van Geel, M., Vedder, P., & Tanilon, J. (2014). Are overweight and obese youths more often bullied by their peers? A meta-analysis on the relation between weight status and bullying. International Journal of Obesity, 38 (10), 1263 – 1267. https://doi.org/10.1038/ijo.2014.117</bibtext> </blist> </ref> <aug> <p>By Diana J. Meter; Justin T. Worley; Kevin Butler; Tyler L. Renshaw and V. Paul Poteat</p> <p>Reported by Author; Author; Author; Author; Author</p> </aug> <nolink nlid="nl1" bibid="bib11" firstref="ref5"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl2" bibid="bib37" firstref="ref7"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl3" bibid="bib10" firstref="ref8"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl4" bibid="bib28" firstref="ref9"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl5" bibid="bib41" firstref="ref10"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl6" bibid="bib20" firstref="ref17"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl7" bibid="bib35" firstref="ref18"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl8" bibid="bib18" firstref="ref19"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl9" bibid="bib38" firstref="ref20"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl10" bibid="bib26" firstref="ref21"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl11" bibid="bib16" firstref="ref22"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl12" bibid="bib25" firstref="ref23"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl13" bibid="bib14" firstref="ref24"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl14" bibid="bib29" firstref="ref25"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl15" bibid="bib30" firstref="ref26"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl16" bibid="bib22" firstref="ref28"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl17" bibid="bib23" firstref="ref29"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl18" bibid="bib21" firstref="ref30"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl19" bibid="bib34" firstref="ref31"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl20" bibid="bib32" firstref="ref33"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl21" bibid="bib33" firstref="ref34"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl22" bibid="bib17" firstref="ref37"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl23" bibid="bib13" firstref="ref39"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl24" bibid="bib24" firstref="ref41"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl25" bibid="bib15" firstref="ref42"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl26" bibid="bib36" firstref="ref44"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl27" bibid="bib31" firstref="ref45"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl28" bibid="bib98" firstref="ref48"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl29" bibid="bib39" firstref="ref50"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl30" bibid="bib19" firstref="ref51"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl31" bibid="bib12" firstref="ref53"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl32" bibid="bib40" firstref="ref55"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl33" bibid="bib27" firstref="ref57"></nolink>
Header DbId: eric
DbLabel: ERIC
An: EJ1432183
AccessLevel: 3
PubType: Academic Journal
PubTypeId: academicJournal
PreciseRelevancyScore: 0
IllustrationInfo
Items – Name: Title
  Label: Title
  Group: Ti
  Data: Adolescents' Perceptions of Student and Teacher/Staff Defending against Stigma-Based Peer Victimization
– Name: Language
  Label: Language
  Group: Lang
  Data: English
– Name: Author
  Label: Authors
  Group: Au
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Diana+J%2E+Meter%22">Diana J. Meter</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Justin+T%2E+Worley%22">Justin T. Worley</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Kevin+Butler%22">Kevin Butler</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Tyler+L%2E+Renshaw%22">Tyler L. Renshaw</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22V%2E+Paul+Poteat%22">V. Paul Poteat</searchLink>
– Name: TitleSource
  Label: Source
  Group: Src
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="SO" term="%22European+Journal+of+Developmental+Psychology%22"><i>European Journal of Developmental Psychology</i></searchLink>. 2024 21(4):663-678.
– Name: Avail
  Label: Availability
  Group: Avail
  Data: Routledge. Available from: Taylor & Francis, Ltd. 530 Walnut Street Suite 850, Philadelphia, PA 19106. Tel: 800-354-1420; Tel: 215-625-8900; Fax: 215-207-0050; Web site: http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals
– Name: PeerReviewed
  Label: Peer Reviewed
  Group: SrcInfo
  Data: Y
– Name: Pages
  Label: Page Count
  Group: Src
  Data: 16
– Name: DatePubCY
  Label: Publication Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2024
– Name: TypeDocument
  Label: Document Type
  Group: TypDoc
  Data: Journal Articles<br />Reports - Research
– Name: Audience
  Label: Education Level
  Group: Audnce
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="EL" term="%22Elementary+Education%22">Elementary Education</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="EL" term="%22Grade+6%22">Grade 6</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="EL" term="%22Intermediate+Grades%22">Intermediate Grades</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="EL" term="%22Middle+Schools%22">Middle Schools</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="EL" term="%22Grade+7%22">Grade 7</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="EL" term="%22Junior+High+Schools%22">Junior High Schools</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="EL" term="%22Secondary+Education%22">Secondary Education</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="EL" term="%22Grade+8%22">Grade 8</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="EL" term="%22Grade+9%22">Grade 9</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="EL" term="%22High+Schools%22">High Schools</searchLink>
– Name: Subject
  Label: Descriptors
  Group: Su
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Peer+Relationship%22">Peer Relationship</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Victims%22">Victims</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Bullying%22">Bullying</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Social+Bias%22">Social Bias</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Gender+Differences%22">Gender Differences</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Student+Behavior%22">Student Behavior</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Teacher+Behavior%22">Teacher Behavior</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Well+Being%22">Well Being</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Educational+Environment%22">Educational Environment</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Adolescents%22">Adolescents</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Grade+6%22">Grade 6</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Grade+7%22">Grade 7</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Grade+8%22">Grade 8</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Grade+9%22">Grade 9</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22School+Personnel%22">School Personnel</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Teacher+Role%22">Teacher Role</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Student+Role%22">Student Role</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Peer+Influence%22">Peer Influence</searchLink>
– Name: DOI
  Label: DOI
  Group: ID
  Data: 10.1080/17405629.2024.2315761
– Name: ISSN
  Label: ISSN
  Group: ISSN
  Data: 1740-5629<br />1740-5610
– Name: Abstract
  Label: Abstract
  Group: Ab
  Data: We investigated (1) grade differences in perceived stigma-based peer victimization (SBPV); (2) differences in perceived student and teacher/staff defending against types of SBPV; and (3) whether defending against SBPV affected student subjective wellbeing (SSWB) via anti-victimization school climate perceptions. Participants were 1124 US adolescents (48% girls, 48% boys, 3% another identity) in Grades 6-9. Participants identified as Hispanic (61%), Black (12%), White/Non-Hispanic (12%), and other racial/ethnic identities (15%). We found small differences in perceived defending against different types of SBPV. There were no differences between grades for perceived student defending, but teachers/staff defended 9th-graders less than 6th-graders across all types of SBPV. Student defending against ability-based victimization and teacher/staff defending against sexuality- and weight-based victimization predicted SSWB indirectly through anti-victimization school climate perceptions. Although SBPV is harmful to adolescents' school functioning, students and teachers/staff can defend against SBPV to promote more adaptive perceptions of school climate and wellbeing.
– Name: AbstractInfo
  Label: Abstractor
  Group: Ab
  Data: As Provided
– Name: DateEntry
  Label: Entry Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2024
– Name: AN
  Label: Accession Number
  Group: ID
  Data: EJ1432183
PLink https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=eric&AN=EJ1432183
RecordInfo BibRecord:
  BibEntity:
    Identifiers:
      – Type: doi
        Value: 10.1080/17405629.2024.2315761
    Languages:
      – Text: English
    PhysicalDescription:
      Pagination:
        PageCount: 16
        StartPage: 663
    Subjects:
      – SubjectFull: Peer Relationship
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Victims
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Bullying
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Social Bias
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Gender Differences
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Student Behavior
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Teacher Behavior
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Well Being
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Educational Environment
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Adolescents
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Grade 6
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Grade 7
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Grade 8
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Grade 9
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: School Personnel
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Teacher Role
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Student Role
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Peer Influence
        Type: general
    Titles:
      – TitleFull: Adolescents' Perceptions of Student and Teacher/Staff Defending against Stigma-Based Peer Victimization
        Type: main
  BibRelationships:
    HasContributorRelationships:
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Diana J. Meter
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Justin T. Worley
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Kevin Butler
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Tyler L. Renshaw
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: V. Paul Poteat
    IsPartOfRelationships:
      – BibEntity:
          Dates:
            – D: 01
              M: 01
              Type: published
              Y: 2024
          Identifiers:
            – Type: issn-print
              Value: 1740-5629
            – Type: issn-electronic
              Value: 1740-5610
          Numbering:
            – Type: volume
              Value: 21
            – Type: issue
              Value: 4
          Titles:
            – TitleFull: European Journal of Developmental Psychology
              Type: main
ResultId 1