Marengo Davide, Settanni Michele, Prino Laura Elvira, Parada Roberto H, Longobardi Claudio
Department of Psychology, University of Turin, Turin, Italy.
Department of Philosophy and Educational Science, University of Turin, Turin, Italy.
Front Psychol. 2019 Apr 4;10:770. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00770. eCollection 2019.
In adolescence, bullying victimization is typically represented in terms of a three-fold factor structure reflecting three components of verbal, physical, and social victimization. Recent studies have suggested the usefulness of alternativte models including both general and component-specific factors. In this study, we assessed the empirical and theoretical validity of an instrument assessing verbal, physical and social victimization using a set of alternative models of victimization: a unidimensional model, a three-factor model, and a bifactor model. Association between emerging factors and student variables were explored to establish theoretical fit of the models. Sample consisted of upper primary and lower secondary school students [ = 1311; 53% Male; Mean age () = 10.73 (1.45)] and their teachers. The three factor and bifactor models showed good fit. In spite of acceptable fit, the unidimensional model showed lower empirical support when compared with the other models. The dimensions of the three-factor model showed similar associations with most student variables, while the bifactor showed more heterogeneous, and theoretically coherent associations. General victimization decreased with age and was positively related with externalizing and internalizing symptoms, student-teacher conflict and negative expectations. Verbal victimization showed increased prevalence among girls and older students. Physical victimization showed increased prevalence among boys and younger students, and positive associations with externalizing symptoms and student-teacher conflict. Social victimization was more frequent among girls, and positively related with internalizing symptoms and negative expectations toward teachers. These findings highlight the usefulness of modeling victimization using both general and form-specific dimensions for both assessment and theory-building purposes.
在青少年时期，欺凌受害通常以一种三重因素结构来体现，反映了言语、身体和社交受害的三个组成部分。最近的研究表明了包括一般因素和特定成分因素在内的替代模型的有用性。在本研究中，我们使用一组受害替代模型评估了一种评估言语、身体和社交受害的工具的实证和理论效度：单维模型、三因素模型和双因素模型。探讨了新出现的因素与学生变量之间的关联，以确定模型的理论契合度。样本包括小学高年级和初中低年级学生[ = 1311；53%为男性；平均年龄() = 10.73(1.45)]及其教师。三因素模型和双因素模型显示出良好的拟合度。尽管拟合度可接受，但与其他模型相比，单维模型的实证支持较低。三因素模型的维度与大多数学生变量显示出相似的关联，而双因素模型显示出更多异质性且理论上连贯的关联。一般受害情况随年龄增长而减少，与外化和内化症状、师生冲突及负面期望呈正相关。言语受害在女孩和年龄较大的学生中患病率增加。身体受害在男孩和年龄较小的学生中患病率增加，与外化症状和师生冲突呈正相关。社交受害在女孩中更频繁，与内化症状和对教师的负面期望呈正相关。这些发现凸显了使用一般维度和形式特定维度对受害情况进行建模对于评估和理论构建目的的有用性。
