Individual Submission Summary
Share...

Direct link:

Link between Delinquent Behavior and Peer Victimization: Do Peer Group Norms Play a Moderating Role?

Fri, March 22, 3:00 to 4:30pm, Hilton Baltimore, Floor: Level 1, Latrobe

Integrative Statement

Background: Delinquent behavior begins in late childhood and peaks around 17 years of age (Broidy et al., 2003). Students reporting higher levels of delinquency are more likely to report higher levels of peer victimization than non-delinquent students (Paetsch & Bertrand, 1999). Results from a meta-analysis (Reijntjes et al., 2011) illustrate a bi-directional relationship between peer victimization and externalizing problems (including violent and nonviolent delinquency). The authors suggest that externalizing problems provoke attacks from peers, which then augments externalizing behaviors, resulting in a downward spiral effect.
Given that the prevalence and the acceptance of delinquent behavior vary considerably between social contexts (Vitaro et al., 2015), delinquent youths’ risk of being victimized may depend upon peer group norms. Descriptive norms are defined as a behavior’s prevalence, whereas norm salience reflects the association between a behavior and acceptance or rejection within a group (Veenstra et al., 2018). Thus, it is possible that delinquent youth are more victimized by peers in contexts in which delinquency is infrequent or socially rejected, whereas delinquent youth may not be subject to peer victimization in contexts where delinquency is frequent or accepted. To address this issue, this study examined the moderating role of descriptive norms and norm salience in the classroom on the association between violent and nonviolent delinquency and subsequent peer victimization.

Methods: The sample included 1017 students (8 to 13 years old, 51 % girls) in 67 urban classrooms. Data were collected in the fall (T1) and spring (T2) of one academic year. The frequency of students’ involvement in violent and nonviolent delinquency over the course of the previous 12 months was assessed with the Self-Reported Delinquency Questionnaire (LeBlanc, 1994). Peer nominations were used to measure students’ victimization scores via the Pupil Evaluation Inventory (Pekarik et al., 1976). Descriptive norms for violent and nonviolent delinquency were operationalized as the average violent and nonviolent delinquency score within each classroom. Norm salience was operationalized as the correlation between children’s violent and nonviolent delinquency scores, respectively, and their social preference scores (i.e., acceptance-rejection) (Henry et al., 2000).

Results: Linear Mixed Modeling controlling for T1 victimization revealed a two-way interaction between T1 nonviolent delinquency and norm salience and a triple interaction between T1 violent delinquency, norm salience and sex (resp. b=-.07, p<.000; b=-.10, p<.02). Regarding the two-way interaction, T1 nonviolent delinquency predicted increased T2 victimization when nonviolent delinquency was socially rejected (b=.09, p<.01). However, when norms were neutral or indicated acceptance of nonviolent delinquency, such behavior was not associated with later victimization. In regards to the triple interaction, T1 violent delinquency predicted increased T2 victimization among girls when norms were neutral or indicated rejection of such behavior (resp. b=.15, p<.000; b=.26, p<.000). No significant main effects or moderating effects were found for descriptive norms.

Conclusions: These results highlight the salient role of peer group norms in predicting delinquent youths’ social experiences. Delinquent youth, and specifically violently delinquent girls, are subject to victimization when delinquent behavior is socially rejected, thus impeding integration into the normative peer group and hampering opportunities to develop conventional social skills.

Authors