青少年友谊网络与受欺凌的共同变化关系：一项纵向社会网络分析研究

doi:10.3724/SP.J.1041.2022.01048

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

欺凌是一种涉及多类行为和多主体互动的群体过程, 但是已有研究很少在同伴的群体互动和关系变化过程中研究欺凌相关行为的发展。尤其是受欺凌作为一种被动承受而非主动选择的行为结果, 对其在同伴情境中的变化过程研究更为有限。本研究从青少年的友谊网络与其受欺凌的共变关系入手, 采用纵向社会网络分析法, 对来自26个班1406名学生进行为期1年的3个时间点(七年级末、八年级上学期末、八年级下学期末)的追踪研究, 结果发现：(1)受欺凌影响群体内友谊关系的建立：受欺凌水平高的青少年更难以与同伴建立朋友关系(同伴回避效应), 且更倾向于选择同样受欺凌水平高的个体作为朋友(同伴选择效应); (2)友谊关系影响受欺凌水平的变化：在群体中拥有更多朋友关系的青少年, 其受欺凌水平会逐渐降低(同伴保护效应); 但另一方面, 拥有高受欺凌水平朋友的青少年, 自己的受欺凌水平会随着时间呈增高趋势(同伴影响效应); (3)随着时间的发展, 女生的受欺凌水平比男生更容易降低(性别影响效应)。研究结果揭示了友谊网络和受欺凌的共变关系, 为校园欺凌群体干预提供启示。

关键词: 受欺凌, 友谊网络, 选择效应, 影响效应, 纵向社会网络分析

Abstract:

Bullying is a group process that involves multiple behaviors and multiagent interactions. However, few studies have focused on the development of bullying-related behaviors in the context of peer group interaction and relationship change, particularly in friendship networks. Although social support theory suggests that positive friendships act as a buffer, previous research has found that victims have difficulty making friends. Furthermore, recent research on friendship networks has indicated that the potential buffering role of friends may depend on the extent to which friends engage in certain behaviors. It is thus crucial to determine how victims shape their friendship networks and the protection mechanisms or detrimental effects associated with victims that such networks can trigger. Accordingly, the aim of this study was to longitudinally examine the selection and influence effects of victimization in dynamic classroom friendship networks using a sample of Chinese adolescents. We expected that (1) while peers tend to avoid selecting victims as friends (H1a: peer avoidance effect), victims tend to select other victimized youth as friends (H1b: peer selection effects), and that (2) the more friends that an adolescent has, the less he or she is victimized (H2a: peer protective effect), whereas one's victimization increases as a result of one’s friends being victimized (H2b: peer influence effect).
A total of 1406 eighth-grade students in public middle schools from Central China were recruited to participate in three assessments, with an interval of six months. Peer nomination was applied to evaluate friendship and victimization, with a maximum of five nominations allowed from classmates who fit the description. Capitalizing on longitudinal social network analysis (SIENA) to disentangle selection and influence processes, this study focuses on the role of friendship in adolescents’ peer victimization after controlling for structural characteristics of the network (e.g., transitivity and reciprocity) in friendship network dynamics.
It was found that (1) while peers avoided selecting victims as friends (peer avoidance effect), victims tended to select other victims as friends (peer selection effect); (2) whether peers nominated others as friends was not influenced by their level of victimization; (3) having more friends decreased one’s level of victimization (peer protection effect), while being friends with a victim increased one’s possibility of being victimized over time (peer influence effect); (4) the higher the victimization level of an adolescent was, the higher his or her victimization level gradually rose over time (enhanced effect of victimization); and (5) the level of victimization decreased over time among girls compared to that of boys. These results revealed the peer selection and influence effects on the covariation of friendship networks and victimization among Chinese adolescents and demonstrated the peer “contagion” that is associated with victimization, which provides insights for interventions for school bullying.

Key words: victimization, adolescent friendship network, selection effect, influence effect, longitudinal social network analysis

中图分类号:

B844

张云运, 张其文, 张李斌, 任萍, 秦幸娜, 常睿生. (2022). 青少年友谊网络与受欺凌的共同变化关系：一项纵向社会网络分析研究. 心理学报, 54(9), 1048-1058.

ZHANG Yunyun, ZHANG Qiwen, ZHANG Libin, REN Ping, QIN Xingna, CHANG Ruisheng. (2022). The covariant relationship between adolescent friendship networks and bullying: A longitudinal social network analysis. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 54(9), 1048-1058.

图/表 6

参考文献 57

[1]	Bagwell, C. L., & Schmidt, M. E. (2011). The friendship quality of overtly and relationally victimized children. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 57(2), 158-185. doi: 10.1353/mpq.2011.0009 URL
[2]	Bandura, A., & Walters, R. H. (1977). Social learning theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-hall.
[3]	Batanova, M., Espelage, D. L., & Rao, M. A. (2014). Early adolescents' willingness to intervene: What roles do attributions, affect, coping, and self-reported victimization play?. Journal of School Psychology, 52(3), 279-293. doi: 10.1016/j.jsp.2014.02.001 pmid: 24930820
[4]	Berger, C., Gremmen, M. C., Palacios, D., & Franco, E. (2019). "Would you be my friend?": Friendship selection and contagion processes of early adolescents who experience victimization. Journal of Early Adolescence, 39(9), 1286- 1310. doi: 10.1177/0272431618824753 URL
[5]	Burk, W. J., Steglich, C. E., & Snijders, T. A. (2007). Beyond dyadic interdependence: Actor-oriented models for co-evolving social networks and individual behaviors. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 31(4), 397-404. doi: 10.1177/0165025407077762 URL
[6]	Caspi, A., Bem, D. J., & Elder Jr, G. H. (1989). Continuities and consequences of interactional styles across the life course. Journal of Personality, 57(2), 375-406. pmid: 2769561
[7]	Chu, X.-W., Fan, C.-Y., Liu, Q.-Q., & Zhou, Z.-K. (2018). Stability and change of bullying roles in the traditional and virtual contexts: A three-wave longitudinal study in chinese early adolescents. Journal of Youth & Adolescence, 47(11), 2384-2400.
[8]	Crick, G. (2010). Relational aggression, overt aggression, and friendship. Child Development, 67(5), 2328-2338. doi: 10.2307/1131626 URL
[9]	Deng, X. P., Xu, C., Cheng, M. W., & Zhang, X. K. (2017). Peer selection and peer influence: A meta-analysis on social network based research on adolescent delinquency. Advances in Psychological Science, 25(11), 1898-1909. doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1042.2017.01898 URL
	[邓小平, 徐晨, 程懋伟, 张向葵. (2017). 青少年偏差行为的同伴选择和影响效应:基于纵向社会网络的元分析. 心理科学进展, 25(11), 1898-1909.]
[10]	Deptula, D. P., & Cohen, R. (2004). Aggressive, rejected, and delinquent children and adolescents: A comparison of their friendships. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 9(1), 75-104. doi: 10.1016/S1359-1789(02)00117-9 URL
[11]	Dishion, T. J., Piehler, T. F., & Myers, M. W. (2008). Dynamics and ecology of adolescent peer influence. In M. J. Prinstein & K. A. Dodge (Eds.), Understanding peer influence in children and adolescents (pp.72-93). New York: Guilford Press.
[12]	Faris, R., & Felmlee, D. (2014). Casualties of social combat: School networks of peer victimization and their consequences. American Sociological Review, 79(2), 228-257. doi: 10.1177/0003122414524573 URL
[13]	Fox, C. L., & Boulton, M. J. (2006). Friendship as a moderator of the relationship between social skills problems and peer victimisation. Aggressive Behavior, 32(2), 110-121. doi: 10.1002/ab.20114 URL
[14]	Giletta, M., Scholte, R. H., Prinstein, M. J., Engels, R. C., Rabaglietti, E., & Burk, W. J. (2012). Friendship context matters: Examining the domain specificity of alcohol and depression socialization among adolescents. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 40(7), 1027-1043. doi: 10.1007/s10802-012-9625-8 pmid: 22441645
[15]	Hawkins, D. L., Pepler, D. J., & Craig, W. M. (2010). Naturalistic observations of peer interventions in bullying. Social Development, 10(4), 512-527. doi: 10.1111/1467-9507.00178 URL
[16]	Hodges, E. V., Boivin, M., Vitaro, F., & Bukowski, W. M. (1999). The power of friendship: Protection against an escalating cycle of peer victimization. Developmental Psychology, 35(1), 94-101. pmid: 9923467
[17]	Huitsing, G., Snijders, T. A., van Duijn, M. A., & Veenstra, R. (2014). Victims, bullies, and their defenders: A longitudinal study of the coevolution of positive and negative networks. Development and Psychopathology, 26(3), 645-659. doi: 10.1017/S0954579414000297 pmid: 24762337
[18]	Kärnä, A., Voeten, M., Little, T. D., Alanen, E., Poskiparta, E., & Salmivalli, C. (2013). Effectiveness of the KiVa Antibullying Program: Grades 1-3 and 7-9. Journal of Educational Psychology, 105(2), 535-551. doi: 10.1037/a0030417 URL
[19]	Laninga-Wijnen, L., Harakeh, Z., Steglich, C., Dijkstra, J. K., Veenstra, R., & Vollebergh, W. (2017). The norms of popular peers moderate friendship dynamics of adolescent aggression. Child Development, 88(4), 1265-1283. doi: 10.1111/cdev.12650 pmid: 27779756
[20]	Lodder, G. M., Scholte, R. H., Cillessen, A. H., & Giletta, M. (2016). Bully victimization: Selection and influence within adolescent friendship networks and cliques. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 45(1), 132-144. doi: 10.1007/s10964-015-0343-8 URL
[21]	Low, S., Polanin, J. R., & Espelage, D. L. (2013). The role of social networks in physical and relational aggression among young adolescents. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 42(7), 1078-1089. doi: 10.1007/s10964-013-9933-5 URL
[22]	McGloin, J. M. (2009). Delinquency balance: Revisiting peer influence. Criminology, 47(2), 439-477. doi: 10.1111/j.1745-9125.2009.00146.x URL
[23]	Miller, H. V. (2010). If your friends jumped off of a bridge, would you do it too? Delinquent peers and susceptibility to peer influence. Justice Quarterly, 27(4), 473-491. doi: 10.1080/07418820903218974 URL
[24]	Montoya, R. M., & Horton, R. S. (2013). A meta-analytic investigation of the processes underlying the similarity- attraction effect. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 30(1), 64-94. doi: 10.1177/0265407512452989 URL
[25]	Newcomb, A. F., & Bagwell, C. L. (1995). Children's friendship relations: A meta-analytic review. Psychological Bulletin, 117(2), 306-347. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.117.2.306 URL
[26]	Olweus, D. (1996). Bullying at school:Knowledge base and an effective intervention program. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 794(1), 265-276.
[27]	Park, H., & Jung, H. (2010). Different pathways to problem behaviors in adolescence: Delinquency peer, parent attachment, and self-control. Studies on Korean Youth, 21, 5-34.
[28]	Pellegrini, A. D., Bartini, M., & Brooks, F. (1999). School bullies, victims, and aggressive victims: Factors relating to group affiliation and victimization in early adolescence. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91(2), 216-224. doi: 10.1037/0022-0663.91.2.216 URL
[29]	Peters, E., Cillessen, A. H., Riksen-Walraven, J. M., & Haselager, G. J. (2010). Best friends’ preference and popularity: Associations with aggression and prosocial behavior. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 34(5), 398-405. doi: 10.1177/0165025409343709 URL
[30]	Pikas, A. (1975). Sa stoppar vi mobbning [So do we stop bullying]. Stockholm: Prisma.
[31]	Popp, D., Laursen, B., Kerr, M., Stattin, H., & Burk, W. K. (2008). Modeling homophily over time with an actor-partner interdependence model. Developmental Psychology, 44(4), 1028-1039. doi: 10.1037/0012-1649.44.4.1028 URL
[32]	Prinstein, M. J., & Giletta, M. (2016). Peer relations and developmental psychopathology. In D. Cicchetti (Ed.), Developmental psychopathology (3rd ed., pp. 527-579). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
[33]	Ray, G. E., Cohen, R., Secrist, M. E., & Duncan, M. K. (1997). Relating aggressive and victimization behaviors to children's sociometric status and friendships. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 14(1), 95-108. doi: 10.1177/0265407597141005 URL
[34]	Ripley, R. M., Snijders, T. A. B., Boda, Z., Vörös, A., & Preciado, P. (2016). Manual for RSiena. Oxford: University of Oxford
[35]	Rose, A. J., Carlson, W., & Waller, E. M. (2007). Prospective associations of co-rumination with friendship and emotional adjustment: Considering the socioemotional trade-offs of co-rumination. Developmental Psychology, 43(4), 1019-1031. doi: 10.1037/0012-1649.43.4.1019 URL
[36]	Rotella, K. N., Richeson, J. A., Chiao, J. Y., & Bean, M. G. (2013). Blinding trust: The effect of perceived group victimhood on intergroup trust. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 39(1), 115-127. doi: 10.1177/0146167212466114 pmid: 23131906
[37]	Rulison, K. L., Gest, S. D., Loken, E., & Welsh, J. A. (2010). Rejection, feeling bad, and being hurt: Using multilevel modeling to clarify the link between peer group aggression and adjustment. Journal of Adolescence, 33(6), 787-800. doi: 10.1016/j.adolescence.2010.07.005 pmid: 20832107
[38]	Sainio, M., Veenstra, R., Huitsing, G., & Salmivalli, C. (2011). Victims and their defenders: A dyadic approach. International journal of Behavioral Development, 35(2), 144-151. doi: 10.1177/0165025410378068 URL
[39]	Salmivalli, C., Huttunen, A., & Lagerspetz, K. M. (1997). Peer networks and bullying in schools. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 38(4), 305-312. doi: 10.1111/1467-9450.00040 URL
[40]	Salmivalli, C., Lagerspetz, K., Björkqvist, K., Österman, K., & Kaukiainen, A. (1996). Bullying as a group process: Participant roles and their relations to social status within the group. Aggressive Behavior, 22(1), 1-15. doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1098-2337(1996)22:1<1::AID-AB1>3.0.CO;2-T URL
[41]	Schaefer, D. R. (2012). Homophily through nonreciprocity: Results of an experiment. Social Forces, 90(4), 1271-1295. doi: 10.1093/sf/sos065 URL
[42]	Scholte, R. H., Overbeek, G., Ten Brink, G., Rommes, E., de Kemp, R. A., Goossens, L., & Engels, R. C. (2009). The significance of reciprocal and unilateral friendships for peer victimization in adolescence. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 38(1), 89-100. doi: 10.1007/s10964-008-9287-6 pmid: 19636794
[43]	Schwartz, D., Dodge, K. A., & Coie, J. D. (1993). The emergence of chronic peer victimization in boys' play groups. Child Development, 64(6), 1755-1772. pmid: 8112117
[44]	Sentse, M., Dijkstra, J. K., Salmivalli, C., & Cillessen, A. H. (2013). The dynamics of friendships and victimization in adolescence: A longitudinal social network perspective. Aggressive Behavior, 39(3), 229-238. doi: 10.1002/ab.21469 URL
[45]	Sentse, M., Kiuru, N., Veenstra, R., & Salmivalli, C. (2014). A social network approach to the interplay between adolescents' bullying and likeability over time. Journal of Youth & Adolescence, 43(9), 1409-1420.
[46]	Sijtsema, J. J., Lindenberg, S. M., & Veenstra, R. (2010). Do they get what they want or are they stuck with what they can get? Testing homophily against default selection for friendships of highly aggressive boys. The TRAILS study. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 38(6), 803-813. doi: 10.1007/s10802-010-9402-5 pmid: 20336362
[47]	Sijtsema, J. J., Rambaran, A. J., & Ojanen, T. J. (2013). Overt and relational victimization and adolescent friendships: Selection, de-selection, and social influence. Social Influence, 8(2-3), 177-195.
[48]	Snijders, T. A., & Baerveldt, C. (2003). A multilevel network study of the effects of delinquent behavior on friendship evolution. Journal of Mathematical Sociology, 27(2-3), 123-151.
[49]	Snijders, T. A., van de Bunt, G. G., & Steglich, C. E. (2010). Introduction to stochastic actor-based models for network dynamics. Social Networks, 32(1), 44-60. doi: 10.1016/j.socnet.2009.02.004 URL
[50]	Steglich, C., Snijders, T. A., & Pearson, M. (2010). Dynamic networks and behavior: Separating selection from influence. Sociological Methodology, 40(1), 329-393. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9531.2010.01225.x URL
[51]	Veenstra, R., & Steglich, C. (2012). Actor-based model for network and behavior dynamics.
[52]	Viechtbauer, W. (2010). Conducting meta-analyses in R with the metafor package. Journal of Statistical Software, 36(3), 1-48.
[53]	Wang, J. M., Duong, M., Schwartz, D., Chang, L., & Luo, T. (2014). Interpersonal and personal antecedents and consequences of peer victimization across middle childhood in Hong Kong. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 43(11), 1934-1945. doi: 10.1007/s10964-013-0050-2 URL
[54]	Wellman, B., Carrington, P. J., Hall, A. (1988). Networks as personal communities. In Wellman & Berkowitz (Eds.) Social structure: A network approach (pp.130-184). NewYork: Cambridge University Press.
[55]	Witkow, M. R., & Fuligni, A. J. (2011). Ethnic and generational differences in the relations between social support and academic achievement across the high school years. Journal of Social Issues, 67(3), 531-552. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-4560.2011.01713.x URL
[56]	Witvliet, M., Olthof, T., Hoeksma, J. B., Goossens, F. A., Smits, M. S., & Koot, H. M. (2010). Peer group affiliation of children: The role of perceived popularity, likeability, and behavioral similarity in bullying. Social Development, 19(2), 285-303. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9507.2009.00544.x URL
[57]	Zhang, W. X., & Wu, J. F. (1999). Revision of the Chinese version of the Olweus Bullying/Victimization Questionnaire. Psychological Development and Education, 15(2), 7-11.
	[张文新, 武建芬. (1999). Olweus儿童欺负问卷中文版的修订. 心理发展与教育, 15(2), 7-11.]

网络参数	T1	T2	T3	网络变化参数	T1-T2	T2-T3
有效被试数	1385	1343	1287	流失人数	38	62
班级平均数	53	51	50	新增人数	21	9
密度	0.07	0.07	0.06	平均稳定提名数	99.30	95.20
互惠性	0.50	0.51	0.53	平均增加提名数	85.20	77.80
传递性	0.32	0.34	0.35	平均减少提名数	107	90.20
平均入度	3.82	3.43	3.23	Hamming距离	192	168
受欺凌 (M ± SD)	2.49 ± 0.39	2.39 ± 0.41	2.36 ± 0.41	Jaccard系数	0.34	0.36

网络参数	T1	T2	T3	网络变化参数	T1-T2	T2-T3
有效被试数	1385	1343	1287	流失人数	38	62
班级平均数	53	51	50	新增人数	21	9
密度	0.07	0.07	0.06	平均稳定提名数	99.30	95.20
互惠性	0.50	0.51	0.53	平均增加提名数	85.20	77.80
传递性	0.32	0.34	0.35	平均减少提名数	107	90.20
平均入度	3.82	3.43	3.23	Hamming距离	192	168
受欺凌 (M ± SD)	2.49 ± 0.39	2.39 ± 0.41	2.36 ± 0.41	Jaccard系数	0.34	0.36

参数	Est.	se	p
网络密度	-1.86	0.13	< 0.001
互惠性	1.81	0.04	< 0.001
传递性	0.58	0.02	< 0.001
传递互惠性	-0.25	0.02	< 0.001
入度-受欢迎性	0.06	0.01	< 0.001
出度-受欢迎性	-0.20	0.02	< 0.001
出度-活跃性	-0.12	0.01	< 0.001
性别-接收者Sex alter (女生)	0.07	0.05	0.15
性别-发出者Sex ego (女生)	-0.13	0.07	0.04
性别-性别相似性Same sex (女生)	0.90	0.06	< 0.001

参数	Est.	se	p
网络密度	-1.86	0.13	< 0.001
互惠性	1.81	0.04	< 0.001
传递性	0.58	0.02	< 0.001
传递互惠性	-0.25	0.02	< 0.001
入度-受欢迎性	0.06	0.01	< 0.001
出度-受欢迎性	-0.20	0.02	< 0.001
出度-活跃性	-0.12	0.01	< 0.001
性别-接收者Sex alter (女生)	0.07	0.05	0.15
性别-发出者Sex ego (女生)	-0.13	0.07	0.04
性别-性别相似性Same sex (女生)	0.90	0.06	< 0.001

参数	Est.	se	p
受欺凌-接收者 (H1a：同伴回避效应)	-0.07	0.02	< 0.001
受欺凌-发出者	0.03	0.02	0.18
受欺凌-选择效应 (H1b：选择效应)	0.10	0.02	< 0.001