"Prospective Associations Between Aggression and Peer Victimization" Jamie M. Ostrov, Ph.D., Associate Professor of Psychology, University at Buffalo April 19, 2012

1. Prospective associations between
aggression and peer victimization
Jamie M. Ostrov, Ph.D.
Associate Professor of Psychology
Director, Social Development Laboratory
Department of Psychology
Faculty Affiliate, Dr. Jean M. Alberti Center for the Prevention of
Bullying Abuse and School Violence
University at Buffalo, The State University of New York
Alberti Center Colloquium Series, April 2012

2. • Please note: Some unpublished content
from the original talk was removed from
this handout.

3. Acknowledgments
• UB Social Development Lab (Research assistants listed on website)
– Emily Ries, M.S., Kirstin Grös, Ph.D., Stephanie Godleski, M.A., Chris
Bailey, B.S., Adam Mullins, M.A., Emily Hart, M.A., Kim Kamper, B.A.,
Alyssa Tevens, EdM, & Jilynn Werth, B.S.
• Emil Coccaro, M.D. (University of Chicago)
• Nicki R. Crick, Ph.D. (University of Minnesota)
• Greta Massetti, Ph.D. (Center’s for Disease Control)
• Annie Murray-Close, Ph.D. (University of Vermont)
• David Nelson, Ph.D. (Brigham Young University)
• Nicole Werner, Ph.D. (Washington State University)
• Participating families, teachers & directors
• NICHD R03HD059781 (NICHD ECCRN and SECCYD Staff)

4. Overview
• Definitions and Background
• Links between aggression and peer victimization
• Links between peer victimization and aggression
– Early Childhood, Middle Childhood, & Late
Adolescence
• Is intervention needed?
– What have we tried to do to intervene?
• Bullying in Early Childhood (Preliminary Data)

5. Definitions
• Aggression: The intent to hurt, harm or injure
another person (Coie & Dodge, 1998)
• Physical Aggression: Using physical force or
threat of physical acts to hurt or harm.
– Ex: Hit, Kick, Bite, Punch, Push, Take
Toys/Property from others.
5

6. Toward a Gender-Balanced
Approach
• Physical Aggression
• Relational Aggression: Using the removal or threat of the
removal of the relationship as the vehicle of harm
– Ex: Malicious gossip, rumors, & lies, Exclude from play/group; Ignore
(Silent treatment).
• Direct: “You can’t come to my birthday party” or “You are not my friend
anymore”
• Covert: Spreading malicious rumors through a third person

7. Evidence from Past Studies
Relational (and Physical) aggression exists during early childhood
(3-5 years) & may be observed in both naturalistic and more
structured contexts.
Relational (and Physical) aggression is associated with problems
in early childhood
Group level (e.g., peer rejection)
Dyadic level (e.g., parent-child conflict)
Individual level (e.g., deception, lying)
There are reliable gender differences for relational (and physical)
aggression in early childhood
(Relational aggression is modal type for girls)
Ostrov (2008) Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology
Ostrov (2010) Child Development
Ostrov & Keating (2004) Social Development
Ostrov et al. (2008) Journal of Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology

8. Process or mechanisms of change
– How do we become aggressive or
victimized?
– Social Process Model suggests that children
become victimized by becoming rejected by
our peers and that makes them an easy
target (Boivin et al., 2001; see also Bierman, 2004).

9. Social Process Models
in Early Childhood

10. Study #1a: Social Process Model
Supports
the
Social
Process
Model

11. Study 1b
Change the next slide
N = 101 (61 girls); Measures: Observer ratings of aggression; Teacher reports of
exclusion (alpha > .70).

12. Study #1c:Reverse Direction of Effects?

13. Study 2: Social Process Model in
Emerging Adulthood

15. In Sum (so far)
• Direct Paths:
– EC, MC, EA: Aggression Peer Victimization
• Indirect Paths for original model:
– EC: Aggression  Peer Rejection  Victimization
• Indirect Paths for alternative model:
– EA: Victimization  Exclusivity  Aggression
– EA: Victimization  HAB-R  Aggression

16. Is relational aggression associated
with serious problems?
• Based on theory and prior work,
one place to first examine is
depression or internalizing
problems

17. Study #3: Growth of Relational Aggression
Murray-Close, Ostrov & Crick (2007) Development & Psychopathology
• 689 (50% female) 3rd through 5th graders
– 41 public elementary school classrooms (16
schools)
– Diverse sample: 30% African American, 28%
European American, 14% Hmong, 13% Latino, 4%
Asian American, 4% Native American; 7% other
ethnic groups
– Lower to middle class SES
• 3 time points (Fall, Spring, Fall)
– Peer nomination of relational aggression
– TRF: Internalizing symptoms

18. Growth of Relational Aggression in Middle Childhood
Girls started higher than boys Associated w/ Internalizing
0.8
Problems (Depressive Symptoms)
0.7
0.6
0.5
Relational Aggression
Girls
0.4 Total
Boys
0.3
Associated w/ Friendship Intimacy
for girls only
0.2
Girls increased at a faster rate than boys
0.1
0
1 2 3
Assessment Period

19. Study #4: Relational & Physical Aggression &
Internalizing & Externalizing Problems
• Crick, Ostrov, & Werner (2006) Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology
– Time 1 (3rd grade) and Time 2 (4th grade)
– 106 classrooms & 40 elementary schools (n = 2,589, screening sample)
• At time 1, peer nominations of Ragg/Pagg (focal child sample = 234
children; 115 girls)
• Diverse: 18% African American, 4% Latino; 3% Native American, 2%
Asian American, 2% Hmong; 60% European American

20. Study #4: Relational & Physical Aggression &
Internalizing & Externalizing Problems
• Major findings:
– Relational and Physical Aggression were moderately stable
for girls and boys.
– Relationally aggressive children became significantly more
withdrawn/anxious-depressed over 12 months compared
to others.
– Relationally aggressive children displayed a significant
increase in somatic complaints.
– Relationally aggressive children also were more likely than
any other group to show increases in delinquency
– Suggests the need for prevention & intervention efforts
in middle childhood as well!

21. Forms and Functions of Aggression
in Late Adolescence/Adulthood
Are the behaviors (relational subtypes)
still associated with problems?

22. Study 5
• We used the SRASBM in a large sample (N =
1387) of adults in study 1
– Only reactive relational aggression was
associated with history of childhood maltreatment
• Similar findings have been found with reactive physical
aggression (Dodge et al., 1997)

23. Murray-Close et al. (2010) study 2
50 participants meeting Research
Criteria for Intermittent Explosive Dx
50 participants meeting DSM-IV
Criteria for Axis 1 (25) or 2 (25)
50 Healthy controls

24. Evidence-based Interventions

25. Intervention during Early Childhood
• Why do we need to intervene?
– Aggressive Behavior is relatively Stable
– Aggressive Behavior is associated with maladaptive
outcomes in EC & Later
• When should we do something about it?
– We have a higher probability of change early
• How should we intervene?
• UB EC Friendship Project

26. • Guided by appropriate
theory and evidence-
based practices
• Use of developmentally
appropriate intervention
materials
• Empirical test our
hypotheses

27. Ostrov et al. (2009) ECRQ
• Design:
– Randomly Assigned to Intervention (9 classes,
202 children) vs. Control (9 classes, 201 children)
• 6 weeks
• Focus on both +/- Behavior
• Reinforcement of Behavior
– Interventionist & Puppet in room (DAP)
• “Identify good friendship skills” in other children
• Clarified weekly skills to monitor comprehension
– Participatory Activities & Concept Activities

28. 6 week program
• Week 1 Introduction & Physical Aggression
• Week 2 Social Exclusion
• Week 3 Social Inclusion
• Week 4 Friendship Withdrawal
• Week 5 Friendship Formation
• Week 6 Review & Graduation

29. Treatment Fidelity
• Content checklists: 100% of material was
covered in each session
• Process evaluations: (7 point scale from 1
“Superior” to 7 “Inadequate”)
M = 1.78 (SD = .44)
– Interventionists were rated as “warm,
developmentally appropriate, with good pacing and
high levels of child engagement”

30. Findings: Evaluations

31. UB Intervention Study
• Findings

32. Future Direction:
Bullying in Early Childhood

33. Bullying in Early Childhood
• Aggression
– Takes several forms
• Power Imbalance
• Usually Repetition (or fear of)
-------------------------------
• Usually Proactive (goal oriented)
http://www.cdc.gov/ViolencePrevention/pdf/Bullying_Factsheet-a.pdf

34. Bullying
• What is it not?
– Not all aggression is bullying.
• Not reactive
• Not among friends (equal status peers)

35. Bullying in EC?
• We know that • Bullying does exist
Bulling does exist in preschool
at the same rate in classrooms and
kindergarten there is even
relative to older evidence that
school age children children will take
on the role of
“defenders” of the
victim in EC
(Belacci & Farina,
2010)

36. Bullying in Early Childhood:
Webisodes
• http://www.stopbullying.gov/videos/2012/
02/thats-bullying.html
StopBullying.gov is an official U.S.
Government Web site managed by the
Department of Health & Human Services in
partnership with the Department of
Education and Department of Justice

37. • EME was associated with future relational
aggression. (We have replicated this finding)
• Relational Aggression is modeled at high rates
on many “educational programs”. Modeling the
content & not learning lesson
at the end of the show

38. In Conclusion
• Both forms of aggression are apparent as young as 3-
years-old
• Bi-directional associations between aggression and
peer victimization
• Support for social process model and points of
intervention (Associations with problems in EC, MC,
EA, & Adult)
• Intervention is warranted
– Evidence-based interventions are only beginning but
suggest promising effects
• Bullying exists in young children & requires attention

39. Questions

40. Thank you!
jostrov@buffalo.edu
• Recent publications available at:
http://wings.buffalo.edu/psychology/labs/SocialDevLab/home