Behavioural Science Institute, Radboud University Nijmegen, Montessorilaan 3, 6500 HE, Nijmegen, The Netherlands,
J Youth Adolesc. 2013 Dec;42(12):1789-800. doi: 10.1007/s10964-012-9896-y. Epub 2013 Jan 13.
Previous studies on victimization have either used self-reports of peer-reports, but correspondence between these measures is low, implying that types of victims may exist that differ in convergence between self- and peer-reported victimization. Importantly, the very few studies that do exist on such types were cross-sectional, and did not address the stability nor predictive validity in terms of adjustment of these types. Using a person-centered approach, the present study identified types of victims that were either convergent or divergent in self- and peer-reported victimization, and examined how these types differed in concurrent and prospective adjustment. Participants were 1,346 adolescents (50 % girls, mean age 14.2) who were followed for 1 year. Using Latent Profile Analysis, we identified two convergent types (self-peer identified victims and non-victims) and two divergent types (self-identified and peer-identified) of victims. The types were highly stable over time. Self-peer identified victims were not only concurrently but also prospectively the least well adjusted. Self-identified victims showed lower levels of emotional adjustment but did not show problems on social adjustment. On the other hand, peer-identified victims were at risk for social but not emotional maladjustment. The findings corroborate previous studies that suggest that self-reported victimization is related to emotional problems, while peer-reported victimization is more indicative of social problems. The findings also suggest that using self-reports or peer-reports only may lead to incomplete conclusions about victims' adjustment on different domains.
先前关于受害的研究要么使用自我报告或同伴报告，但这些测量方法之间的一致性较低，这表明可能存在不同类型的受害者，他们在自我和同伴报告的受害情况之间存在差异。重要的是，极少数关于这些类型的研究是横断面的，没有涉及这些类型的稳定性或调整方面的预测有效性。本研究采用以个体为中心的方法，确定了在自我和同伴报告的受害情况中具有一致性或发散性的受害者类型，并探讨了这些类型在同时期和前瞻性调整方面的差异。参与者为 1346 名青少年（50%为女孩，平均年龄为 14.2 岁），他们的随访时间为 1 年。使用潜在剖面分析，我们确定了两种具有一致性的受害者类型（自我和同伴均认定的受害者和非受害者）和两种具有发散性的受害者类型（自我认定的受害者和同伴认定的受害者）。这些类型在时间上具有高度稳定性。自我和同伴均认定的受害者不仅在同时期，而且在前瞻性上调整得最差。自我认定的受害者在情绪调整方面的水平较低，但在社会调整方面没有问题。另一方面，同伴认定的受害者存在社会问题的风险，但不存在情绪失调的风险。这些发现与先前的研究一致，表明自我报告的受害情况与情绪问题有关，而同伴报告的受害情况更能说明社会问题。这些发现还表明，仅使用自我报告或同伴报告可能会导致对不同领域受害者调整情况的不完整结论。
