The Co-evolution of Bullying Perpetration, Homophobic Teasing, and a School Friendship Network

Outlining Individual and Contextual Factors Related to LGBTQ+ Bullying: A Systematic Review of Two Decades of Research

Scientific interest in lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer and any other sexual orientation, gender identity and/or expression (LGBTQ+) bullying in educational settings has grown exponentially in recent years. However, the varied ways of measuring its occurrence and associated factors have made it difficult to achieve a holistic understanding of this problem. Therefore, this systematic review aimed to provide an updated overview of individual and contextual factors related to LGBTQ+ bullying over the past two decades, based on the measurement approach to this phenomenon. Studies published from 2000 to 2020 were analyzed following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses strategy. Inclusion and exclusion criteria were applied in a staggered process, and 111 articles met all the criteria. Studies focusing on LGBTQ+ bullying victimization or aggression were eligible for inclusion. Our analysis revealed LGBTQ+ bullying is usually examined by measures of general aggressions (47.8%) from the victims' perspective (87.3%). The best-represented factors across studies were individual characteristics (63.1%; n = 70), especially participants' sexual orientation and gender identity and expression (68.5%). Boys/males, from a binary gender perspective, and sexual and gender minority youth in general, were more at risk of being targeted for LGBTQ+ bullying. Although contextual factors were far less well-represented, the results revealed that gay-straight alliances, anti-homophobia policies, and social support act as protective factors. This review highlights the need to analyze LGBTQ+ bullying considering the full spectrum of sexual and gender diversity, to examine in more detail its contextual risk/protective factors, and to design public policies and psychoeducational programs in order to address the low effectiveness of generic interventions. Implications for future research and practice are discussed.

Interpersonal Violence Victimization Experiences of Middle School Youth: An Exploration by Gender and Sexual/Romantic Attraction

Sexual minority youth (SMY) are at increased risk for interpersonal violence victimization compared to heterosexual youth. The current study examined how self-reported victimization (i.e., bullying, sexual harassment and dating violence) among middle school youth varied as a function of sexual/romantic attraction as well as gender identity. Cross-sectional data were gathered from students at seven middle schools in New England (n = 2245). Mean comparisons with post-hoc Tukey tests determined differences in rates of past 6-month and lifetime interpersonal violence victimization by sexual/romantic attraction and the intersection of gender and attraction. As hypothesized, interpersonal violence victimization among middle school youth differed as a function of sexual/romantic attraction as well as gender. To date, most research has focused on older samples, particularly high-school youth and young adults. These data are consistent with these prior studies documenting increased risk for interpersonal violence victimization among youth who indicate same-gender attraction but add to the literature in demonstrating the expansive forms of peer victimization that same-gender-attracted youth already experience by early adolescence. Given that victimization is associated acutely and longitudinally with many deleterious outcomes, including poorer mental health and increased risk for subsequent victimization, greater structural supports are needed for early adolescent SMY.

Social-Ecological Predictors of Homophobic Name-Calling Perpetration and Victimization Among Early Adolescents

Bias-based aggression at school in the form of homophobic name-calling is quite prevalent among early adolescents. Homophobic name-calling is associated with low academic performance, higher risky sexual behaviors, and substance abuse, among other adverse outcomes. This longitudinal study examined risk and protective factors across multiple domains of the social ecology (individual, peer, family, school and community) and levels of analysis (within- and between-person) associated with homophobic name-calling perpetration and victimization. Students from four middle schools in the U.S. Midwest (N = 1,655; X ¯ age = 12.75; range = 10-16 years) were surveyed four times (Spring/Fall 2008, Spring/Fall 2009). For homophobic name-calling perpetration, significant risk factors included impulsivity, social dominance, traditional masculinity, family violence, and neighborhood violence; while empathy, peer support, school belonging, and adult support were significant protective factors. For homophobic name-calling victimization, significant risk factors included empathy (between-person), impulsivity, traditional masculinity, family violence, and neighborhood violence, while empathy (within-person), parental monitoring, peer support, school belonging, and adult support were significant protective factors.

Bidirectional associations between biased language exposure and school-based relationships across gender

Students often hear their peers use biased language regarding race, religion, sexual orientation, or disability status in the school setting. Prior research has indicated that biased language is related to school climate, and specifically to school-based relationships between peers and between students and their teachers. This study investigated the longitudinal associations among student-student relationships, teacher-student relationships, and being the target of or hearing biased language in middle school students. Students (N = 501; 46.5% White, 21.8% Hispanic, 13% African American, and 15% Multi-Racial; 48.7% female) reported on how much they were targeted or heard biased language related to race/religion, sexual orientation, and disability status. Students also reported on their relationships with their peers and teachers. Using a cross-lagged panel model with the overall sample, a negative unidirectional association from being the target of or hearing biased language and student-student relationships and teacher-student relationships was identified. Separate models for boys and girls identified unique patterns. For boys, biased-language exposure predicted more negative student-student relationships and teacher-student relationships, whereas for girls, biased-language exposure was not associated with school-based relationships. Implications include addressing language use and building positive student-student and teacher-student relationships.

Profiles of Risk and Protection for Violence and Bullying Perpetration Among Adolescent Boys

BACKGROUND

Violence and bullying perpetration among boys are major public health problems. We address gaps in the literature by examining: (1) how risk and protective factors co-occur, and (2) how different risk/protection profiles are associated with violence and bullying perpetration among adolescent boys.

METHODS

Data came from the population-based 2016 Minnesota Student Survey. The analytic sample included boys in grades 8, 9, and 11 (N = 63,818). Latent profile analyses identified patterns of 22 behavioral, intrapersonal, family, and school and community risk/protective factors. Logistic regression analyses examined how these patterns related to violence and bullying perpetration.

RESULTS

We identified 5 groups: Class 1: Low risk, high safety, high connectedness; Class 2: Low risk, moderate safety, moderate connectedness; Class 3: Moderate risk, high safety, moderate connectedness; Class 4: High risk, moderate safety, low connectedness; and Class 5: High risk, low safety, low connectedness. Compared to Class 1, Class 5 students had the highest odds of all for violence and bullying perpetration. Class 4 students also demonstrated high odds of violence and bullying, compared to Class 1. Though not as high as Classes 4 or 5, Class 2 and 3 students showed higher odds for both outcomes, compared to Class 1.

CONCLUSIONS

Substantive variations exist in boys who engage in violence and bullying. We highlight cumulative, co-occurring risk factors, connectedness to parents and other prosocial adults (eg, teachers), and school and neighborhood safety as important factors to address in school health programs seeking to prevent violence and bullying perpetration among boys.

Bullying as a Group Process in Childhood: A Longitudinal Social Network Analysis

This study investigates the dynamic interplay between bullying relationships and friendships in a sample of 481 students in 19 elementary school classrooms (age 8-12 years; 50% boys). Based on a relational framework, it is to be expected that friendships would be formed when two children bullied the same person and that children would start to bully the victims of their friends. Similarly, it is to be expected that friendships would be formed when two children were victimized by the same bully and that children would become victimized by the bullies of their friends. Longitudinal bivariate social network analysis supported the first two hypotheses but not the latter two. This study provides evidence for group processes in bullying networks in childhood.

The role of perceived bullying norms in friendship dynamics: An examination of friendship selection and influence on bullying and victimization

The current study examined whether youth’s perceived bullying norms play a role in friendship dynamics related to bullying and victimization among the fifth and sixth grade ( N = 736, 52% girls at Wave 1, N = 677, 52% girls at Wave 2) in elementary schools. Youth completed peer nominations (friendship, bullying, and victimization) and a self-reported measure of perceived bullying norms in the classroom. With longitudinal social network analysis (RSiena), this study investigated selection and influence of friends in bullying and victimization as well as the moderating role of perceived bullying norms in these processes. Results indicated that high bullying youth received many friendship nominations and tended to be more influenced by high bullying friends. In addition, highly victimized youth tended to form friendships with highly victimized peers, and youth whose friends are highly victimized became highly victimized themselves over time. As hypothesized, youth’s perceived bullying norms moderated these processes. As youth perceived higher bullying norms, the greater was the tendency for high bullying youth to select high bullying peers as friends and to be influenced by high bullying friends. Likewise, friend influence on victimization was magnified when youth perceived high bullying norms. The current study underscores the importance of youth’s perceived bullying norms in friendship dynamics of bullying and victimization.

The influence of group values and behavior on adolescent male perceptions of and use of homophobic language

INTRODUCTION

The pervasive and derogatory use of homophobic language is a threat to safe, respectful, and inclusive school environments. Group membership has been shown to influence how students use homophobic language. Previous qualitative studies have largely approached the use of this language from the theoretical framework of hegemonic masculinity. In contrast, the current study actively challenged all assumptions about the use of this language.

METHOD

This study was conducted in a public high school located in a rural conservative Christian community in the Intermountain West (USA). Using hermeneutic qualitative methodology to assess individual perceptions of homophobic language, 20 randomly selected 12th-grade male students (17-18 years of age) were individually interviewed.

RESULTS

Three distinct groups emerged during our interviews: students on the debate team, students who strongly identified with a conservative religion, and students on popular athletic teams. Membership in specific peer groups influenced how students participated in or abstained from using homophobic language. Contrary to the prevailing research that pairs religiosity with negatively biased attitudes toward LGBTQIA, in this study, participants' religious beliefs appeared to be associated with respecting others' feelings and a decreased likelihood of using homophobic language.

CONCLUSIONS

After summarizing this study's findings, we conclude with implications for practice. To more effectively deter the use of homophobic language, we encourage school-based interventions that target specific groups of adolescents and consider the social context in which homophobic language occurs.