Publication | Closed Access
Self-Evaluated Self-Esteem, Peer-Evaluated Self-Esteem, and Defensive Egotism as Predictors of Adolescents’ Participation in Bullying Situations
322
Citations
16
References
1999
Year
Social PsychologyDefensive PersonalityPeer RelationshipEducationVictimisationPsychologySocial SciencesSocioemotional DevelopmentYouth Well-beingSelf-esteemPeer-evaluated Self-esteemBehavioral SciencesBullyingDefensive EgotismLow SeAdolescent PsychologyApplied Social PsychologyAdolescent DevelopmentCyberbullyingBullying PreventionAdolescent CognitionSocial BehaviorSociologySelf-evaluated Self-esteemSe ProfilesAggression
The study used cluster analysis to create five self‑esteem profiles and examined their association with bullying behavior. Self‑ and peer‑evaluated SE were positively correlated, but defensive egotism was unrelated; the five SE profiles showed distinct bullying patterns—defensive SE associated with bullying or supporting bullies, high SE with defending victims, and low SE with victimization, with stronger effects in boys.
Three dimensions of self-esteem (SE) (self-evaluated, peer-evaluated, defensive egotism) were related to each other and to adolescents’ social behavior. In addition to exploring links between single variables, five SE profiles were formed by means of a cluster analysis and connected to adolescents’ behavior in situations of bullying. Self-and peer-evaluated SEs were significantly correlated, whereas defensive egotism was not connected to either self-or peer-evaluated SE. Adolescents’ SE profiles were associated with their behavior in bullying situations; these connections were stronger among boys than among girls. Bullying others and assisting or reinforcing the bully were typical of adolescents with so-called defensive SE. Defending the victims of bullying was typical of adolescents with genuine high SE. Being victimized by peers was most typical of adolescents with low SE and, among girls, of those in the cluster thed authors named “humble pride.” The social behavior of so-called self-belittlers did not clearly distinguish them from the other groups.
| Year | Citations | |
|---|---|---|
Page 1
Page 1