Peer Victimization in Rural and American Indian Youth: Is Prosocial Behavior a Resilient Response?

• In Event: 3-230 - Understanding Correlates and Outcomes of Prosocial Behavior Across Adolescence: The Utility of Person-Centered Approaches

Integrative Statement

INTRODUCTION: Peer victimization studies suggest up to 82% of rural youth report some form of peer victimization (Dulmus, Sowers, & Theriot, 2006) – a rate nearly four times that reported in more urban populations. These heightened rates of peer victimization, typically coupled with fewer mental health resources and lower rates of help-seeking behavior usually found in rural communities, likely exacerbate the negative impact peer victimization has on mental health (Kann & Shanklin, 2014; Rudolph et al., 2001). Research focused on rural youth, especially targeting protective factors youth can enact themselves (e.g., prosocial behaviors), has been limited and victimization studies including American Indian (AI) youth are extremely rare.
Previous findings indicated prosocial behaviors are an important protective factor for victimized youth’s loneliness (Griese & Buhs, 2014; Griese, Buhs, & Lester, 2016) and showed a significant, inverse relationship between peer victimization and prosocial behavior for some groups. Specifically, advanced latent modeling techniques revealed a group of resilient youth with consistent, higher rates of prosocial behaviors associated with decreases in victimization (Griese, Buhs, Lester, 2016). This finding and the indication that prosocial behavior may be an adaptive response to peer victimization describes a potential pathway to resilience for victimized youth. The current study extends previous research by 1) examining two-year longitudinal relationships between changes in victimization and changes in prosocial behaviors (a potential protective factor), 2) Focusing on groups of rural and AI youth and, 3) by examining a broader range of key internalizing outcomes (Figure 1). We also include a cross-section of victimization forms that includes electronic victimization.
HYPOTHESES: We expect heterogeneity in victimization rates/types and prosocial behaviors (i.e., latent classes) will be differentially associated with internalizing adjustment and that increases in prosocial behavior will predict lower internalizing rates for victimized adolescents. Patterns of resiliency, if present, will support rural and AI community-specific development of more effective youth interventions.
STUDY POPULATION: Participants include 300 4th-6th grade students and 30 teachers from four rural, Midwestern public school districts (80.4% Caucasian, 13.4% American Indian, 2.6% Hispanic, 0.7% African American, 2% multiracial).
METHODS: Longitudinal, multi-informant data has been collected to examine parallel growth trajectories of peer victimization and prosocial behavior. School district approval, parental consent, and participant assent were obtained. Data are collected from two cohorts over three time points (T3 data available October, 2018); Cohort 1 from 4th- through 5th-grade and Cohort 2 from 5th- through 6th-grade. Data sources include student self-reports, peer nominations, and teacher-reports. Latent classes identified using Latent Growth Mixture Modeling (LGMM) will be examined as predictors of internalizing outcomes for youth.
RESULTS: Preliminary findings, including data from time points 1 and 2, show prosocial behaviors predicted changes in peer victimization levels. Self-reported change in prosocial behavior frequency were negatively correlated with change in electronic victimization: an increase in prosocial behavior was associated with a decrease in peer victimization (ρ = -0.14); a finding reiterated through regression (Table 1). The final model will estimate two years of growth/change and examine potential links to a range of internalizing outcomes (Figure 1).

Authors

• Emily R. Griese, Sanford Research
  Presenting Author

• Eric Buhs, University of Nebraska-Lincoln
  Non-Presenting Author

• Jaymi Russo, Sanford Research
  Non-Presenting Author

• Valerie Bares, Sanford Research
  Non-Presenting Author