Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology

, Volume 41, Issue 8, pp 1217–1229 | Cite as

Costs and Benefits of Bullying in the Context of the Peer Group: A Three Wave Longitudinal Analysis

  • Albert Reijntjes
  • Marjolijn Vermande
  • Tjeert Olthof
  • Frits A. Goossens
  • Rens van de Schoot
  • Liesbeth Aleva
  • Matty van der Meulen


Whereas previous research has shown that bullying in youth is predictive of a range of negative outcomes later in life, the more proximal consequences of bullying in the context of the peer group at school are not as clear. The present three-wave longitudinal study followed children (N = 394; 53 % girls; M age = 10.3 at Time 1) from late childhood into early adolescence. Joint trajectory analyses were used to examine the dynamic prospective relations between bullying on the one hand, and indices tapping perceived popularity, peer-reported social acceptance, self-perceived social competence, and internalizing symptoms on the other. Results show that although young bullies may be on a developmental path that in the long run becomes problematic, from the bullies’ perspective in the shorter term personal advantages outweigh disadvantages. High bullying is highly positively related to high social status as indexed by perceived popularity. Although bullies are not very high in peer-rated social acceptance, most are not very low either. Moreover, bullies do not demonstrate elevated internalizing symptoms, or problems in the social domain as indexed by self-perceived social competence. As bullying yields clear personal benefits for the bullies without strong costs, the findings underscore the need for interventions targeting mechanisms that reward bullying (198 words).


Bullying Youth Perceived popularity Joint trajectory analysis Peer acceptance Internalizing symptoms Self-perceived social competence 


  1. Bender, D., & Losel, F. (2011). Bullying at school as a predictor of delinquency, violence, and other anti-social behaviour in adulthood. Criminal Behaviour and Mental Health, 21, 99–106.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Brendgen, M., Vitaro, F., Turgeon, L., Poulin, F., & Wanner, B. (2004). Is there a dark side of positive illusions? overestimation of social competence and subsequent adjustment in aggressive and non-aggressive children. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 32, 302–320.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Chorpita, B. F., Yim, L., Moffitt, C., Umetoto, L. A., & Francis, S. E. (2000). Assessment of symptoms of DSM-IV anxiety and depression in children: a revised child anxiety and depression scale. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 38, 835–855.Google Scholar
  4. Cook, C. R., Williams, K. R., Guerra, N. G., Kim, T. E., & Sadek, S. (2010). Predictors of bullying and victimization in childhood and adolescence: A meta-analytic investigation. School Psychology Quarterly, 25, 65–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. David, C. F., & Kistner, J. A. (2000). Do positive self-perceptions have a “dark side?” Examination of the link between perceptual bias and aggression. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 28, 327–337.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Goossens, F. A., Olthof, T., & Dekker, P. (2006). The new participant role scales: A comparison between various criteria for assigning roles and indications for their validity. Aggressive Behavior, 32, 343–357.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Harter, S. (1982). The perceived competence scale for children. Child Development, 53, 87–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Hawley, P.H., Stump, K.N., & Ratliff, J.M. (2010). Sidestepping the jingle fallacy: Bullying, aggression, and the importance of knowing the difference. In D. Espelage & S. Swearer, Bullying in American Schools (pp. 101–115). Rutledge.Google Scholar
  9. Hymel, S., Bowker, A., & Woody, E. (1993). Aggressive versus withdrawn unpopular children: Variations in peer and self-perceptions in multiple domains. Child Development, 64, 879–896.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Huberman, B. A., Loch, C. A., & Őnçűler, A. (2004). Status a s a valued resource. Social Psychology Quarterly, 67, 103–114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Kärnä, A., Voeten, M., Little, T. D., Pospikarta, E., Kaljonen, A., & Salmivalli, C. (2011). A large-scale evaluation of the KiVa antibullying program: Grades 4–6. Child Development, 82, 311–330.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Klugkist, I., Laudy, O., & Hoijtink, H. (2005). Bayesian evaluation of inequality and equality constrained hypotheses for contingency tables. Psychological Methods, 15, 281–299.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. LaFontana, K. M., & Cillessen, A. H. N. (2002). Children’s perceptions of popular and unpopular peers: A multimethod assessment. Developmental Psychology, 38, 635–647.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Maassen, G. H., Akkermans, W., & van der Linden, J. L. (1996). Two- dimensional sociometric status determination with rating scales. Small Group Research, 27, 56–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Meeus, W., Van De Schoot, R., Klimstra, T., & Branje, S. (2011). Personality types in adolescence: Change and stability and links with adjustment and relationships: A five-wave longitudinal study. Developmental Psychology, 47, 1181–1195.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Muris, P., Meesters, C., & Schouten, E. (2002). A brief questionnaire of DSM-IV defined anxiety and depression symptoms among children. Clinical Psychology & Psychotherapy, 9, 430–442.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Muthén, B. O. (2004). Latent variable analysis: Growth mixture modeling and related techniques for longitudinal data. In D. Kaplan (Ed.), The Sage handbook of quantitative methodology for the social sciences (pp. 345–368). Thousand Oaks: Sage.Google Scholar
  18. Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O. (2010). MPlus User’s guide (6th ed.). Los Angeles: Muthén & Muthén.Google Scholar
  19. Nagin, D. S. (2005). Group-based modelling of development over the life course. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  20. Nagin, T. R., & Tremblay, R. E. (2001). Analyzing developmental trajectories of distinct but related behaviors: A group-based method. Psychological Methods, 6, 18–34.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Nansel, T. R., Overpeck, M. D., Pilla, R. S., Ruan, W. J., Simons-Morton, B., & Scheidt, P. (2001). Bullying behaviors among US youth: Prevalence and associations with psychosocial adjustment. Journal of the American Medical Association, 285, 2094–2100.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Ojanen, T., Gronroos, M., & Salmivalli, C. (2005). An interpersonal circumplex model of children’s social goals: Links with peer-reported behavior and sociometric status. Developmental Psychology, 41, 699–710.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Olthof, T., & Goossens, F. A. (2008). Bullying and the need to belong: Early adolescents’ bullying-related behavior and the acceptance they desire and receive from particular classmates. Social Development, 17, 24–46.Google Scholar
  24. Olthof, T., Goossens, F. A., Vermande, M. M., Aleva, E. A., & van der Meulen, M. (2011). Bullying as strategic behavior: Relations with desired and acquired dominance in the peer group. Journal of School Psychology, 49, 339–359.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Olweus, D. (1991). Bully-victim problems among schoolchildren: Basic facts and effects of a school-based intervention program. In D. Pepler & K. Rubin (Eds.), The development and treatment of childhood aggression (pp. 411–448). Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  26. Parkhurst, J. T., & Hopmeyer, A. (1998). Sociometric popularity and peer-perceived popularity: Two distinct dimensions of peer status. Journal of Early Adolescence, 18, 125–144.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Pepler, D. J., Craig, W. M., Connolly, J., Yuile, A., & Jiang, D. (2006). A developmental perspective on bullying. Aggressive Behavior, 32, 376–384.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Pepler, D., Jiang, D., Craig, W., & Connolly, J. (2008). Developmental trajectories of bullying and associated factors. Child Development, 79, 325–338.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Roland, E., & Idsoe, T. (2001). Aggression and bullying. Aggressive Behavior, 27, 446–462.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Rose, A. J., & Swenson, L. P. (2009). Do perceived popular adolescents who aggress against others experience emotional adjustment problems themselves? Developmental Psychology, 45, 868–872.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Salmivalli, C., Kärnä, A., & Poskiparta, E. (2010). Development, evaluation, and diffusion of a national anti-bullying program, KiVa. In B. Doll, W. Pfol, & J. S. Yoon (Eds.), Handbook of youth prevention science (pp. 240–254). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  32. Salmivalli, C., & Peets, K. (2009). Bullies, victims, and bully-victim relationships in middle childhood and early adolescence. In K. H. Rubin, W. M. Bukowski, & B. Laursen (Eds.), Handbook of peer interaction, relationships, and groups (pp. 322–340). New York: Guilford.Google Scholar
  33. Scholte, R. H. J., Engels, R. C. M. E., Overbeek, G., Van de Kemp, R. A. T., & Haselager, G. J. T. (2007). Stability in bullying and victimization and its association with social adjustment in childhood and adolescence. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 35, 217–228.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Seals, D., & Young, J. (2003). Bullying and victimization: Prevalence and relationship to gender, grade level, ethnicity, self-esteem, and depression. Adolescence, 38, 735–747.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. Smith, P. K., Mahdavi, J., Carvaldo, M., Fisher, S., Russell, S., & Tippett, N. (2008). Cyberbullying: its nature and impact in secondary school pupils. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 49, 376–385.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Sourander, A., Jensen, P., Rönning, J. A., Niemelä, S., Helenius, H., Sillanmäki, L., Kumpulainen, K., Piha, J., Tamminen, T., Moilanen, I., & Almqvist, F. (2007). What is the early adulthood outcome of boys who bully or are bullied in childhood? The finnish “From a Boy to a Man” study. Pediatrics, 120, 397–404.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Sutton, J., Smith, P. K., & Swettenham, J. (1999). “Bullying and theory of mind”: A critique of the social skills deficit view of anti-social behavior. Social Development, 8, 117–127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Ttofi, M. M., Farrington, D. P., Losel, F., & Loeber, R. (2011). The predictive efficiency of school bullying versus later offending: A systematic/meta analytic review of longitudinal studies. Criminal Behavior and Mental Health, 21, 80–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Vaillancourt, T., & Hymel, S. (2006). Aggression and social status: The moderating roles of sex- and peer valued characteristics. Aggressive Behavior, 32, 396–408.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Vaillancourt, T., Hymel, S., & McDougall, P. (2003). Bullying is power: Implications for school-based intervention strategies. Journal of Applied School Psychology, 19, 157–176.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Veenstra, R., Lindenberg, S., Munniksma, A., & Dijkstra, J. K. (2010). The complex relation between bullying, victimization, acceptance, and rejection: Giving special attention to status, affection, and sex differences. Child Development, 81, 480–486.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Veerman, J. W., Straathof, M. A. E., & Ten Brink, L. T. (1996). Measuring children’s self-concept. Factorial validity and invariance across normal and clinical groups. Journal of Personality Assessment, 67, 142–154.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Wong, T., & Van de Schoot, R. (2012). Reporting violent victimization to the police: The role of the sex of the offender. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 27, 1276–1292.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Albert Reijntjes
    • 1
    • 4
  • Marjolijn Vermande
    • 1
  • Tjeert Olthof
    • 2
  • Frits A. Goossens
    • 2
  • Rens van de Schoot
    • 1
  • Liesbeth Aleva
    • 1
  • Matty van der Meulen
    • 3
  1. 1.Utrecht UniversityUtrechtthe Netherlands
  2. 2.VU University AmsterdamAmsterdamthe Netherlands
  3. 3.Groningen UniversityGroningenthe Netherlands
  4. 4.Research Centre Psychosocial Development in ContextUtrecht UniversityUtrechtthe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations