(PS3-57) Examining Peer Victimization Parameters as Predictors of Children’s Internalizing Symptoms

Children who experience peer victimization (PV) face increased risk for maladjustment, including symptoms of anxiety and depression (Card & Hodges, 2008; Copeland et al., 2013). Extant literature assessing PV has employed various approaches, including multi-informant methods (e.g., self-reports, teacher reports) and indices of victimization (e.g., frequency, duration). However, prior work has not clearly established whether different parameters used to measure PV (e.g., frequency, stability) vary in their ability to predict later internalizing problems in victimized youth. This study compared the predictive utility of three different parameters of PV: frequency, stability, and visibility.
Data were collected from 445 fourth graders (Mage=9.3; girls=52.1%; Hispanic=60.9%, White=39.1%) in the southern US at three time points: October (T1), December (T2), and May (T3). Verbal, physical, and relational PV experiences were assessed using modified child (School Experiences Questionnaire; Ladd & Kochenderfer-Ladd, 2004) and teacher reports (SEQ-T; Elledge et al., 2010) and peer nominations (Class Play; Masten et al., 1985). PV scores were averaged and standardized. Internalizing symptoms (depression, generalized anxiety, social phobia) were assessed via the Revised Children’s Anxiety and Depression Scale (RCADS; Chorpita et al., 2000) and aggregated into a total internalizing score.
Parametric Indices: a) PV-Frequency assessed mean PV frequency across 3 time points (scores for each source [child, teacher, peer]); b) PV-Stability assessed persistence of PV (number of elevated PV scores [≥ 1 SD] within same-informant across 3 time points; 4 levels [None, Once, Repeated, Persistent]); and c) PV-Visibility assessed cross-informant agreement (number of sources reporting elevated PV scores [≥ 1 SD] within same time point; 4 levels [0, 1, 2, 3]); with gender and ethnoracial identity as covariates.
Bivariate and multivariate analyses (e.g., hierarchical regressions) were conducted. Results indicated PV indices (except Stability-Teach) modestly predicted child T3 internalizing outcomes: Frequency-Teach (r = .114); Frequency-Peer (r = .096); Stability-Peer (r =.091; Visibility-T1 (r = .179); Visibility-T2 (r = .202). Frequency-Child (r = .528), Stability-Child (r = .404), and Visibility-T3 (r = .316) were best predictors of internalizing maladjustment, even when controlling for baseline internalizing scores. Full statistics from hierarchical models (e.g., Δ R2, Δ F, beta) will be provided.
Finding suggest self-reported PV is more predictive of internalizing outcomes than reports by other informant sources. Child-endorsed frequency and stability predicted internalizing adjustment, with perceived victimization frequency across the year being most predictive. Visibility also played a key role, as children identified by multiple sources as victimized by year’s end were at risk for internalizing sequelae. Continuing to examine parameters of PV and their predictive utility for later internalizing problems could enhance efforts to identify children at high risk for victimization-related maladjustment and inform development of more effective, targeted interventions for this vulnerable population.