What Makes Youth Harass Their Immigrant Peers? Understanding the Risk Factors

Abstract

Immigrant youth are at risk of experiencing harassment in school; however, we have only limited understanding of what makes youth harass their peers on ground of their ethnic origin. To address this major limitation, we examined (a) whether youth’s negative attitudes toward immigrants impact their engagement in ethnic harassment over time and (b) whether youth’s impulsivity, their tendencies to engage in risky behaviors, and a chaotic surrounding school environment moderate the link between their negative attitudes toward immigrants and their involvement in ethnic harassment. The sample included 583 Swedish youth ( ${\bar{X}}_{age}$ = 13.93, SD = .71). Youth with negative attitudes toward immigrants ethnically were found to harass their immigrant peers when they had high levels of impulsivity and violent tendencies. Contrary to our expectation, youth perceptions of school atmosphere did not act as a moderator. The present study highlights the importance of identifying risk factors to reach a comprehensive understanding of ethnic harassment.

Keywords

ethnic harassment impulsivity violence school atmosphere and immigrant youth

School is one of the most important environments in which inter-ethnic relations develop in youth. Nevertheless, there is evidence to indicate that there are challenges to the development of harmonious relationships between youth of different ethnic origins. A number of studies have shown that young people victimize or harass their peers in school on ground of their ethnic, cultural, or religious background (e.g., Durkin et al., 2012; Larochette, Murphy, & Craig, 2010; Monks, Ortega-Ruiz, & Rodriguez-Hidalgo, 2008; Strohmeier, Karna, & Salmivalli, 2011; Verkuyten & Thijs, 2002; Volk, Craig, Boyce, & King, 2006). For instance, in a nationally representative study in Canada, 10% of the adolescents sampled reported that they had experienced derogatory comments because of their religious beliefs (Volk et al., 2006). Similarly, immigrant children in the Netherlands were found to be the frequent victims of racist name calling and ethnic exclusion in schools (Verkuyten & Thijs, 2002). Such negative experiences have consequences for the psychological and social functioning of immigrant adolescents, including negative self-perception (Bayram Özdemir & Stattin, 2014), elevated anxiety and depressive symptoms (Hoglund & Hosan, 2012; McKenney, Pepler, Craig, & Connolly, 2006; Pepler, Connolly, & Craig, 1999; Volk et al., 2006), and school adjustment difficulties such as low school satisfaction, low academic performance, and high school dropout (Bayram Özdemir & Stattin, 2014; Huynh & Fuligni, 2010).

Despite a growing body of research on ethnic victimization and harassment, the available studies only provide information from the victim perspective. By contrast, there is a dearth of information from the perpetrator perspective: What makes youth harass their immigrant peers due to their ethnic origin? Such understanding is needed to take effective measures to prevent ethnic harassment, and, in turn, to increase social cohesion in schools. To address this important gap in the literature, we used 2-year longitudinal data to identify the reasons why some youth harass their immigrant peers in school due to their ethnic background. Specifically, we examined whether youth’s perceptions of and feelings toward immigrants explain why they engage in ethnic harassment. In addition, we investigated the factors that might increase the risk of prejudiced youth acting in conformity with their attitudes. We tested whether youth’s impulsivity, their tendencies to engage in risky behaviors, and a chaotic surrounding school environment—where conflicts and coercive interactions among students are commonplace—provoke ethnic harassment. We conceptualized ethnic harassment as verbally undermining or victimizing others because of their ethnic origin in this study.

Why Do Youth Engage in Ethnic Harassment?

Social identity theory posits that people develop a set of beliefs and attitudes toward out-group members during their own social identification process (Tajfel & Turner, 1986). Such attitudes influence their approach to inter-group relationships (Fiske, 2000). Specifically, some people develop neutral or favorable attitudes toward out-group members, and are often open to contact and maintenance of positive relationships with them (Jugert, Noack, & Rutland, 2011). By contrast, other people develop negative attitudes to and prejudiced beliefs about out-groups. These individuals often display one of two patterns of behaviors in their inter-ethnic relationships: avoidance of contact with members of out-groups, or engagement in discriminatory and coercive acts.

Empirical studies have provided consistent evidence that prejudiced people have a tendency to contact avoidance in inter-ethnic relationships across different developmental periods. For example, youth with negative emotions and attitudes, such as feelings of annoyance, anger, or distrust, toward immigrants were found to have fewer cross-racial friends and they perceived their relationship closeness to out-group peers as low (Binder et al., 2009). Similar findings have been reported among college students (Dovidio, Kawakami, & Gaertner, 2002; Levin, van Laar, & Sidanius, 2003), suggesting that prejudiced attitudes act as a barrier to forming inter-ethnic relationships among both adolescents and young adults.

Studies of adult samples show that negative attitudes or prejudiced beliefs may also establish a foundation for discriminatory and coercive behaviors. Prejudiced people often hold negative stereotypes about minorities and perceive them as a threat. Partly for these reasons, they exclude inferior groups from access to resources (Krings & Olivares, 2007), or harass them in work settings (Bergman, Palmieri, Drasgow, & Ormerod, 2007). When it comes to adolescent samples, prejudiced beliefs are commonly assumed to be an important antecedent of inter-ethnic relational problems in school, including ethnic victimization (e.g., Dessel, 2010; Scherr & Larson, 2010). Hence, several intervention programs have been developed and implemented to reduce prejudiced attitudes in school (see Beelmann & Heinemann, 2014, for a meta-analysis). Nevertheless, neither basic nor preventive-intervention research has directly tested whether youth’s prejudiced attitudes explain why they victimize or harass their immigrant peers. To address this gap in the literature, we examined whether adolescents’ negative attitudes toward immigrants predict changes over time in their involvement in ethnic harassment in a school context.

Under What Conditions Do Youth With Negative Attitudes Engage in Ethnic Harassment?

Negative attitudes toward immigrants may be an important driving force in youth engagement in ethnic harassment. However, not all adolescents with negative attitudes toward immigrants harass their peers because of their ethnic background. Differences between youth personality traits and behavioral tendencies, and characteristics of the schools where native youth interact with their immigrant peers, may explain why young people harass their immigrant peers. In light of major theoretical and conceptual arguments in the aggression literature (Dodge, 1986; Gottfredson & Hirschi, 1990) and in the bullying literature (Olweus, 1978), we examined whether prejudiced youth engage more in ethnic harassment when they are impulsive, are involved in violent behaviors, or attend schools with a chaotic environment.

The Role of Youth’s Impulsive Traits

Certain features of youth predispose them to engage in risky behaviors without paying attention to the consequences of these behaviors. Specifically, some youth have the ability to regulate their impulses and refrain from displaying undesired behaviors. When they act, they consider the consequences of their actions, for both themselves and others. By contrast, other youth tend to react impulsively, have difficulties in controlling their temper, and seek out activities that thrill them. Such youth often do not thoroughly consider the long-term consequences of their actions, and act in pursuit of immediate gratification (Gottfredson & Hirschi, 1990; Hirschi & Gottfredson, 1994).

Self-control theory posits that impulsivity—an aspect of poor self-control—may interfere with the ability of individuals to apply adequate reasoning to the pros and cons of their actions, and thus predispose them to engage in aggressive behaviors and delinquent activities (Gottfredson & Hirschi, 1990). Many empirical studies have supported the premises of self-control theory. Impulsive and risk-seeking youth have been found to experience difficulties in regulating their anger, and to overreact to minor frustrations (e.g., Chui & Chan, 2013; Colder & Stice, 1998). Such youth have also been found to exhibit externalizing problems in schools (Krueger, Caspi, Moffitt, White, & Stouthamer-Loeber, 1996), bully their peers (Chui & Chan, 2013; Fanti & Kimonis, 2012; Haynie et al., 2001; Olweus, 1994a, 1994b), display overt and relational aggression (Marsee, Silverthorn, & Frick, 2005), and engage in delinquent behaviors, including threatening others verbally, engaging in fights, and damaging property (Meier, Slutske, Arndt, & Cadoret, 2008). Together, these findings suggest that impulsivity is a critical predisposition that puts young people at risk of acting aggressively toward others.

Despite the wide use of self-control theory to explain youth involvement in aggressive behaviors and bullying in interpersonal relationships (e.g., Chui & Chan, 2013; Haynie et al., 2001; Olweus, 1994a, 1994b), this theory, to our knowledge, has never been used as a guide to understanding why some youth act aggressively in their inter-ethnic relationships. If self-control theory adequately explains why people engage in aggressive and deviant behaviors, it might be claimed that young people with difficulties in regulating their impulses are also at risk of experiencing problems in their inter-ethnic relationships, particularly if they have prejudiced beliefs about out-group members. Specifically, we argue that youth who perceive immigrants as a burden on society may be more susceptible to act out aggressively toward their immigrant peers if they have problems in inhibiting their impulses and evaluating the consequences of their actions.

Role of Engagement in Violent Behaviors

Adolescents develop a repertoire of behaviors that help them handle their lives in different situations and in their relationships with others. Some of them follow social rules and expectations. Others defy the norms of society and engage in risky behaviors. Developmental theorists (Dodge, 1986; Dodge, Coie, & Lynam, 2006) argue that youth who engage in aggressive and violent behaviors tend to be biased in their interpretations of social situations and others’ intentions and behaviors. These young people perceive aggression as a valid means to reach their goals, and they value its consequences more favorably. In other words, they develop the understanding that they can dominate others by using coercive acts. In support of these arguments, aggressive and violent youth have been found to display disruptive behaviors and engage in bullying in school (Andershed, Kerr, & Stattin, 2001; Roland & Idsoe, 2001). These findings suggest that aggressive and violent behaviors might endanger interpersonal relationships between young people.

Despite an extensive body of research on the consequences of aggressive and violent behaviors for youth’s interpersonal relationships in general, to our knowledge, no research has focused specifically on inter-ethnic relationships. However, dispositions to such behaviors may also jeopardize inter-ethnic relationships, especially among native youth with prejudiced attitudes toward immigrants. We argue that prejudiced youth with aggressive and violent tendencies may not have the socially acceptable behavioral repertoire needed to handle inter-ethnic relationships. They may see the adoption of coercive strategies as a viable way of dominating their immigrant peers. As a consequence, they may be at greater risk of engaging in ethnic harassment than their counterparts without aggressive and violent tendencies.

The Role of a Chaotic School Atmosphere

The social norms theories (Perkins & Berkowitz, 1986) highlight that individuals’ attitudes and behaviors are influenced by how they perceive the norms in their social contexts. Individuals are inclined to display behaviors that are consistent with the norms of a social context. In contrast, they avoid transactions that are inconsistent with group norms to circumvent social sanctions. Applied to the school context, young people might be more likely to manifest deviant and disruptive behaviors in a school context where conflicts and coercive interactions among students are common (Olweus, 1978). On the other hand, possibility of negative evaluations may demotivate youth’s display of aggressive reactions toward their peers in schools where such behaviors are not common. Empirical findings support these arguments, showing that adolescents display more deviance, anger, and physical aggression in schools high in conflict (Kasen, Berenson, Cohen, & Johnson, 2004) whereas they engage in less bullying in positive classroom settings (Stefanek, Strohmeier, van de Schoot, & Spiel, 2011). Jointly, these findings suggest that a negative school context, where conflicts and coercive interactions among students are commonplace, may aggravate youth’s tendencies to victimize their peers, whereas a positive climate in schools may prevent it.

Despite the demonstrated importance of school context in youth involvement in victimization in general, we have limited knowledge of whether it matters for youth engagement in ethnic harassment. To our knowledge, there is only one study that examined whether youth’s perceptions of school climate—particularly how safe and fairly treated they feel in school and their perception of peer cohesion—determine their engagement in racial bullying (Larochette et al., 2010). However, no significant main effect of school climate was found. Even though school climate may not directly impact the existence of racial bullying per se, it may create a suitable context for youth with negative attitudes toward immigrants to act out. If the school context is chaotic and allows coercive and aggressive interactions among students, young people with negative attitudes toward immigrants may have greater scope to behave in conformity with their attitudes, for example, by harassing their targets. However, the extent to which school context plays a role in enabling young people with negative attitudes toward immigrants to engage in ethnic harassment has not been empirically tested.

The Present Study

In the present study, we used 2-year longitudinal data to address two questions. Our first goal was to investigate the extent to which Swedish youth’s negative attitudes toward immigrants impact their engagement in ethnic harassment over time. Our second goal was to examine the factors that may moderate the link between youth’s attitudes toward immigrants and their involvement in ethnic harassment. Based on the self-control theory (Gottfredson & Hirschi, 1990) and Dodge’s (1986) conceptual argument, we expected that youth who held negative attitudes toward immigrants would be more likely to harass their immigrant peers if they had high levels of impulsive personality traits or a high tendency to engage in violent behaviors. In addition, relying on the social norms theories (Perkins & Berkowitz, 1986), we examined the moderating role of youth perceptions of school context. We expected that youth with negative attitudes toward immigrants would be more likely to harass their immigrant peers in more chaotic schools.

To enable us to reach robust conclusions, we have taken into account three potentially important covariates: gender of perpetrator, ethnic diversity in school, and youth engagement in general harassment. Several studies have shown that boys are more likely than girls to engage in racial bullying (e.g., Larochette et al., 2010). However, findings about the role of ethnic diversity in school have been mixed so far. Some studies have reported that native youth engage more in bullying in more ethnically homogeneous schools (e.g., Graham & Juvonen, 2002), whereas others have not found any impact of ethnic diversity on engagement in bullying (Larochette et al., 2010; Stefanek et al., 2011). In our analyses, we controlled for the possible confounding effects of adolescent gender, school ethnic diversity, and youth engagement in general harassment.

Method

Participants

The sample was taken from a longitudinal study, Seven School Study, of youth’s experiences inside and outside school, and of their relationships with parents, peers, and teachers. The study was conducted by Håkan Stattin and Margaret Kerr in a medium-size town in central Sweden. Seven schools from neighborhoods with different socio-economic characteristics were selected. In order to have schools with a wide range of native-to-immigrant youth ratios, we took into account the ethnic composition of schools in the selection process. Students in seventh to ninth grades were targeted in each school, and were followed over 3 years. In the original study, the interval between Time 1 and Time 2 was 6 months for some of the participants, whereas it was 1 year for some others. In order to eliminate the possible confounding effect of variation in interval, we decided not to include Time 1 data in our analysis. Thus, in the present study, we only used data from the second and third assessments (hereafter referred to as Time 1 [T1] and Time 2 [T2], respectively). At T1, the target sample included 1,654 adolescents in Grades 7, 8, and 9. Of the target sample, 88% of them participated at T1. Data on the seventh- and eighth-grade students were collected 1 year later (T2). Data collection was conducted in the spring semester at both assessment points. Of the seventh- and eighth-grade students who participated at T1, 583 had parents who were both born in Sweden. These young people ( ${\bar{X}}_{age}$ = 13.93, SD = .71, range = 12-16; 50% girls) comprised the analytical sample for the present study. More than half of the young people were from intact families and lived together with both of their parents. A majority of them had parents who were employed full-time (83% of the mothers and 91% of the fathers), and they perceived the financial situation of their family to be as healthy as other families in their neighborhood (91%).

Attrition Analysis

We conducted a logistic regression analysis to examine whether attrition from T1 to T2 was related to the sample characteristics and the study variables (n = 583 at T1 and n = 528 at T2). Specifically, we regressed attrition (dropout = 1, retention = 0) on the demographic characteristics of the adolescents, including their age, gender and family structure, and all the other study variables. The results revealed that those who dropped out at T2 were more likely to engage in violence and have negative attitudes toward immigrants than those retained at T2 (Nagelkerke R² = .10). None of the other variables significantly predicted attrition.

Procedure

Trained research assistants administered the data collection during regular class hours. Students were informed about the goal of the study, the amount of time needed to complete the questionnaire, that their participation was voluntary, and that they could quit the study whenever they wanted. Students were guaranteed that their responses were confidential, and would not be shared with anyone else. A Regional Ethics Review Board in Sweden approved the study procedure.

Measures

Attitudes toward immigrants

An eight-item scale was used to assess Swedish youth’s attitudes toward immigrants in Sweden (van Zalk, Kerr, van Zalk, & Stattin, 2013). Some of the sample items were, “Immigrants most often come here to take advantage of our welfare,” “Immigrants increase crime,” and “Immigrants often get the jobs that Swedes ought to have.” The young people were asked to rate each item on a 4-point scale, ranging from “1” (don’t agree at all) to “4” (agree completely). Each youth’s responses to the eight items were averaged to create a scale score. Higher scores indicated high negative attitudes toward immigrants. Inter-item reliability was .79.

General harassment

We used a three-item scale to measure how many times young people had harassed their peers at school (Andershed et al., 2001). The items included, “Have you said nasty things, mocked or teased anyone in an unpleasant way at school?” “Have you beaten, kicked, or assaulted anyone in an unpleasant way at school or on the way to or from school?” “Have you participated in ostracizing someone?” The youth responded to each of the items on a 4-point scale, ranging from “1” (no, it has not happened) to “4” (yes, it has happened several times a week). Inter-item reliability of this scale was .74.

Ethnic harassment

A single item was used to measure how many times the young people had harassed their peers on ground of their ethnic background. The item was, “Have you said nasty things to anyone in school this semester, simply because that person was an immigrant?” Students were asked to respond this question at both T1 and T2. The response scale for the question ranged from “1” (no, it has not happened) to “4” (yes, it has happened several times a week). Our analyses provided preliminary evidence for the validity of ethnic harassment measure. Specifically, a significant and positive correlation between general harassment and ethnic harassment provided evidence for the criterion validity of this measure. In addition, the magnitude of the association between youth’s negative attitudes toward immigrants and ethnic harassment (r = .27) was significantly stronger than youth’s negative attitudes toward immigrants and general harassment (r = .15; z = 2.11, p < .05), suggesting discriminant validity of the measure (see Table 1).

Table 1.

Means and Standard Deviations of and Correlations Among the Study Variables.

	1	2	3	4	5	6	7
1. Attitudes toward immigrants—T1	—	.27***	.28***	.15***	.10*	.18***	.09*
2. Ethnic harassment—T1		—	.44***	.54***	.18***	.39***	.20***
3. Ethnic harassment—T2			—	.30***	.13**	.39***	.13**
4. General harassment—T1				—	.35***	.47***	.19***
5. Impulsivity—T1					—	.32***	−.01
6. Violent behaviors—T1						—	.11**
7. School atmosphere—T1							—
$\bar{X}$	2.35	1.13	1.10	1.20	2.49	1.16	1.96
SD	.61	.45	.47	.41	.52	.49	.92

Note. T1 refers to Time 1 assessment and T2 refers to Time 2 assessment. Values presented on the table are based on raw scores; logarithmic transformation was used for the analyses to reduce skewness.

p < .05; **p < .01.;***p < .001

Impulsive personality traits

Youth impulsive personality traits were assessed using the Youth Psychopathic Traits Inventory (YPI; Andershed, Kerr, Stattin, & Levander, 2002). The YPI was developed to measure psychopathic traits among 12-year-old or older youth in community samples. It comprises 44 items, tapping into three different dimensions: a grandiose-manipulative dimension, a callous-unemotional dimension, and an impulsive-irresponsible dimension. For the present study, we only used 13 items measuring the impulsive-irresponsible dimension (e.g., “I often speak first and think later” and “If I get the chance to do something fun I’ll do it, regardless of what I’m doing at the time”) and averaged the participants’ responses to these items to create an impulsive personality traits score. The response scale for these items ranged from “1” (do not agree at all) to “4” (agree completely). Cronbach’s alpha was .80.

Violent behaviors

The young people were asked to report on whether they were involved in various violent acts during their leisure time (Andershed et al., 2001). Specifically, they were presented with five questions, including “Have you participated in a street fight in town?” and “Have you threatened or forced someone to give you money, cigarettes, or anything else?” They responded to each question on a 5-point scale, ranging from “1” (no, it has not happened) to “5” (more than 10 times). Cronbach’s alpha was .85.

Chaotic school atmosphere

The students were presented with the following four questions: “Have there been problems with noisy students, graffiti, locker break-ins, or similar things at your school?” “Are there groups of students who hang around at your school and act threateningly toward others?” “Have you ever seen things in school that made you concerned?” and “Have you ever been afraid of other students during break time?” They were asked to respond to each of the questions on a 5-point scale, ranging from “1” (no) to “5” (yes, often). Responses were averaged to create a scale score for each adolescent, where a high score indicated a highly chaotic school atmosphere. The inter-item reliability value was .82. As an indicator of the agreement of students on the characteristics of school context, we estimated intra-class correlations (ICC) for the chaotic school atmosphere measure. The ICCs ranged between .70 and .85, except one school where ICC was .65. In sum, the ICCs suggested that students’ perception of their school atmosphere was consistent within each school.

School demography

We divided the schools participating in the study into two groups based on the percentage of students with an immigrant background. In three schools, more than half the students were from immigrant families, and these schools were coded as “1” (high immigrant population). Fewer than 20% of the students were from immigrant families in the other four schools. These schools were coded as “0” (low immigrant population).

Data Analysis

To address the first research question (Do youth’s negative attitudes toward immigrants impact their engagement in ethnic harassment over time?), we estimated a regression model. In this model, we regressed youth’s engagement in ethnic harassment at T2 from their negative attitudes toward immigrants at T1, and controlled for T1 assessments of the outcome variable to obtain an estimate of change over time in ethnic harassment. To address the second research question (Do youth’s personal characteristics and the characteristics of their school moderate the link between their negative attitudes toward immigrants and their involvement in ethnic harassment?), we conducted a hierarchical linear regression analysis (Aiken & West, 1991). In the regression model, youth’s gender, school demography, and general and ethnic harassment measured at T1 were entered at Step 1. In Step 2, youth’s attitudes toward immigrants and the moderators (i.e., impulsivity, violent behaviors, and school atmosphere) were entered. Two-way interactions between youth’s negative attitudes toward immigrants and the moderators were entered in Step 3.

We inspected the distributions of the study variables for deviations from normality. Some of the variables (i.e., violent behaviors, general harassment, and ethnic harassment) had skewness values, which were above acceptable criteria. Thus, we used logarithmic transformation (log₁₀ transformation; Tabachnick & Fidell, 1996) and corrected for the non-normal distribution of these scales. After transformation, the skewness statistics decreased. Skewness values for all of the variables (except ethnic harassment at T2) were around 3. According to Kline (2011), skewness around 3 indicates minimal concerns with univariate normality. In addition, we employed the expectation-maximization (EM) method to handle the missing data. Compared with the traditional missing data approaches (e.g., listwise deletion, pairwise deletion, or mean imputation), the EM method is more effective in eliminating Type II errors, not underestimating correlations and standardized regression coefficients, and in turn dealing with biased results (Acock, 2005; Kline, 2011).

Results

Descriptive Statistics and Preliminary Analyses

Inspection of the bivariate correlations showed that all the study variables were associated with each other in the expected direction (see Table 1). The greater the negativity of young people’s attitudes toward immigrants, the more likely they were to harass their peers. Impulsivity, violent behaviors, and chaotic school atmosphere were also positively associated with ethnic harassment at both T1 and T2. Finally, negative attitudes toward immigrants were positively associated with violent behaviors and a chaotic school atmosphere. We also compared boys’ and girls’ ratings on each of the study variables, and observed significant gender differences. Specifically, boys were more likely to have negative attitudes toward immigrants and to harass their peers than girls. Moreover, boys showed more violent behaviors than girls. Finally, girls perceived their school context as more chaotic than did boys.

Do Youth’s Negative Attitudes Toward Immigrants Impact Their Engagement in Ethnic Harassment?

The results of the regression showed that youth’s negative attitudes toward immigrants significantly predicted their engagement in ethnic harassment over time, β = .17, p < .001. Specifically, the greater the negativity of youth’s attitudes toward immigrants, the more they harassed their immigrant peers in school on ethnic grounds over time.

Do Youth’s Impulsivity, Violent Behaviors, and Their Perceptions of School Context Operate as Moderators?

Our second research question concerned whether youth’s impulsive traits and violent tendencies, and their perceptions of school context moderate the link between their attitudes toward immigrants and their engagement in ethnic harassment. We performed a hierarchical linear regression analysis to test this research question, which was followed by simple slope tests to aid interpretation of any moderation effects found. The results of the hierarchical regression analysis showed that there were significant main effects of youth’s negative attitudes toward immigrants, β = .15, p < .001, and violent behaviors, β = .24, p < .001, on their engagement in ethnic harassment over time. Specifically, when youth had negative attitudes toward immigrants or when they displayed violent behaviors, they were more likely to harass their immigrant peers over time. On the other hand, neither impulsivity nor chaotic school atmosphere had significant main effects on youth’s involvement in ethnic harassment over time. Below, we present the interactions effect results for each moderating variable separately.

The moderating role of impulsivity

In line with our expectation, youth’s impulsive traits significantly moderated the association between their attitudes and engagement in ethnic harassment, β = .09, p < .05 (see Table 2). Follow-up simple slope tests revealed that negative attitudes toward immigrants positively predicted more ethnic harassment over time among adolescents with high levels of impulsivity, β = .21, p < .001. At low levels of impulsivity, however, no such association was found, β = .05, p = .36 (see Figure 1). In sum, the findings indicate that being impulsive increases the risk that youth with negative attitudes toward immigrants will harass their immigrant peers over time.

Table 2.

The Moderating Roles of Impulsivity, Violent Behaviors, and School Atmosphere.

	Ethnic harassment at T2
	Step 1	Step 2	Step 3
Gender	−.05	−.03	−.03
School demography	−.01	−.01	.00
General harassment	.09*	.01	.01
Ethnic harassment at T1	.33***	.30***	.27***
NA	.17***	.15***	.13**
Impulsivity		.02	.01
Violent behaviors		.24***	.20***
School atmosphere		.03	.04
NA × Impulsivity			.09*
NA × Violent behaviors			.11*
NA × School atmosphere			.01
ΔR²	—	.045***	.023***
Total R²	.23***	.27***	.30***

Note. NA = negative attitudes toward immigrants.

p < .05; **p < .01; ***p < .001

Figure 1.

Moderating role of impulsivity

The moderating role of violent behaviors

Supporting our expectation, youth’s engagement in violent behaviors significantly moderated the effect of youth’s negative attitudes toward immigrants on their involvement in ethnic harassment over time, β = .11, p < .05 (see Table 2). Specifically, the simple slope tests showed that negative attitudes toward immigrants positively predicted more ethnic harassment over time among adolescents with high violent tendencies, β = .21, p < .001. At low levels of violent behaviors, however, no such association was observed, β = .05, p = .31 (see Figure 2). Taken together, these findings suggest that youth involvement in violent behaviors elevates the risk of engaging in ethnic harassment among those native youth who hold negative attitudes toward immigrants.

Figure 2.

Moderating role of violent behaviors

The moderating role of school atmosphere

The results of the moderated regression analysis did not support our expectation. Specifically, youth’s perceptions of school atmosphere did not significantly predict changes in ethnic harassment over time. Nor did they significantly moderate the association between youth’s negative attitudes toward immigrants and their harassment behaviors (see Table 2). In sum, the findings suggest that youth’s perceptions of school atmosphere have a concurrent effect on their involvement in ethnic harassment. However, such perceptions do not have a long-lasting effect on ethnic harassment, either as a predictor or a moderator, of the link between negative attitudes and ethnic harassment.

Additional analyses

We also conducted a series of regression analyses with three-way interactions further to explore whether youth with negative attitudes toward immigrants harass their immigrant peers more if they have dual risk factors (e.g., both being impulsive and attending a school with a chaotic atmosphere). None of the three-way interactions were statistically significant, suggesting that being exposed to multiple risk factors does not elevate the risk of prejudiced youth’s involvement in ethnic harassment.

Discussion

Most of the research on ethnic victimization and harassment to date has adopted a victim perspective, focusing on the predictors or consequences of victimization (e.g., Bayram Özdemir & Stattin, 2014; McKenney et al., 2006; Pepler et al., 1999; Verkuyten & Thijs, 2002; Volk et al., 2006). Accordingly, the current literature does not provide knowledge on perpetrators’ reasons for engaging in ethnic harassment. In the present study, we have addressed this important gap in knowledge. We tested two ideas that might enable the development of an understanding of the factors that contribute to incidents of ethnic harassment. First, we examined the extent to which young people’s beliefs and attitudes toward immigrants play a role in their engagement in ethnic harassment in school. Second, we investigated the conditions that might elevate prejudiced youth’s engagement in ethnic harassment.

Our findings show that youth’s prejudiced out-group perceptions form the motivational base for their engagement in ethnic harassment. Supporting the conceptual arguments derived from the premises of social identity theory (Tajfel & Turner, 1986), we found that when native youth had negative attitudes toward immigrants, they were more likely to harass their immigrant peers in school over time. This finding is in line with the results of empirical studies of adult samples, which show a link between prejudiced attitudes and coercive behaviors in work settings (Bergman et al., 2007). Like adults, youth with negative beliefs about immigrants may view their immigrant peers as a threat to mainstream society. More specifically, they may blame them for social problems nationally (in this case, in Sweden). Such negative ideologies may impact how young people interact with their peers from other ethnic and cultural groups. Hence, earlier studies have shown that prejudiced attitudes hinder the development of positive inter-ethnic interactions between young people (e.g., Binder et al., 2009; Levin et al., 2003). This consequence of prejudiced attitudes, however, does not fully explain various aspects of inter-ethnic relationships. Our findings add to the inter-ethnic relationship literature by showing that prejudiced attitudes do not just erect a barrier to the establishment of positive inter-ethnic relationships but also create a foundation for native youth’s engagement in coercive behaviors toward their immigrant peers.

A noteworthy finding of the present study is that youth with negative attitudes toward immigrants are particularly likely to engage in ethnic harassment over time when they have high levels of impulsivity. There are two mechanisms that might explain why prejudiced youth with impulsive traits engage in ethnic harassment. First, consistent with the premises of self-control theory (Gottfredson & Hirschi, 1990), prejudiced youth with impulsive traits may have difficulties in regulating their impulses. Thus, they may act coercively without evaluating the consequences of their actions. For instance, they may not be able to assess whether making derogatory comments harms their immigrant peers, and thus may not see the need to suppress their intention to behave coercively. Second, prejudiced youth with impulsive traits may lack the ability to manage their negative thoughts and emotions. Specifically, such youth may be preoccupied with negative ideas about immigrants, and generalize these ideas to immigrant peers in their school. Due to such preoccupation, prejudiced youth with impulsive traits may fail to see their immigrant peers’ positive features, and in turn display coercive behaviors in conformity with their prejudices. These two potential explanations need to be thoroughly tested in future studies to identify the mechanisms via which impulsive personality traits increase the risk of engagement in ethnic harassment among prejudiced youth.

Another important conclusion to draw from our findings is that engaging in violent behaviors elevates the risk of the involvement of prejudiced youth in ethnic harassment. We found that youth with negative attitudes toward immigrants were more likely to harass their immigrant peers if they also engaged in violent behaviors in different settings. In line with Dodge’s (1986) conceptual arguments, prejudiced youth with violent tendencies may have deficits in fully processing information in their social relations. Specifically, they may focus on aggressive cues in their interactions with immigrant peers, and make hostile attributions regarding the intentions of peer behaviors. Perhaps, due to their inability to manage their thoughts and emotions in an appropriate manner, prejudiced youth with high violent tendencies may evaluate coercive behaviors more favorably. They may develop a false belief that they can dominate their immigrant peers by employing derogatory means to harass them about their ethnic background. All in all, this finding suggests that prejudiced youth act in accord with their cognitions when their behavioral repertoire of interpersonal relationships includes aggressive and violent behaviors.

Contrary to our expectation, youth’s perceptions of the school atmosphere were found not to influence their engagement in ethnic harassment over time. In addition, they did not increase the risk that prejudiced youth would act in accordance with their attitudes when interacting with their immigrant peers. These findings somewhat contradict the social norms theories (Perkins & Berkowitz, 1986) and empirical findings, which indicate that a chaotic school atmosphere increases adolescents’ involvement in aggressive and deviant behaviors (Kasen et al., 2004), and also in bullying (Harel-Fisch et al., 2011). On the other hand, our findings are in line with those of Larochette and colleagues (2010), which showed that youth’s perceptions of school safety and cohesion are not related to their engagement in racial bullying. Given the mixed results in previous research, it is important not to overgeneralize our findings about the role played by the school. Two issues, however, need carefully to be considered in future studies if we are to reach more robust conclusions about the role of school context in immigrant and minority youth’s victimization experiences.

First, in the present study, in our measurements of chaotic school atmosphere, we relied on youth’s self-reports on whether certain problems arose in their school (e.g., if there were cliques threatening others, and if students felt unsafe during breaks). Our measure did not specifically focus on the presence of inter-ethnic conflicts within schools. In schools where inter-ethnic conflicts among students are more common, prejudiced adolescents might have greater scope to act in conformity with their thoughts and beliefs. Their behaviors may not be socially sanctioned due to the common occurrence of similar behaviors. Thus, using a measure specifically designed to assess inter-ethnic conflict among young people may contribute to understanding of the role of school context in ethnic harassment.

An alternative explanation relates to how teachers and other school staff deal with diversity and negative inter-ethnic interactions in school. Adolescents may perceive the school context as chaotic. However, if teachers and school staff adopt an approach that does not tolerate inter-ethnic conflict, prejudiced adolescents may be more hesitant, in light of possible sanctions, to harass their immigrant peers. In line with this argument, Verkuyten and Thijs (2002) showed that in classes where children considered that their teachers reacted to ethnic harassment, the children reported less experience of ethnicity-based victimization (e.g., racist name calling and ethnic exclusion). This finding implies that teachers’ stances on and reactions to ethnic victimization may carry a strong message to students about what is and is not acceptable in a school setting.

Despite its important contribution to the literature, several limitations of the present research need to be acknowledged. First, we focused on ethnic harassment behaviors that were displayed by native youth toward immigrants. However, ethnic harassment may occur among young immigrants themselves. For instance, a qualitative study in England showed that Asian children (i.e., Hindu, Indian Muslim, and Pakistani) are not only bullied by their native British peers but also by other Asian children (Eslea & Mukhtar, 2000). A holistic understanding of the precursors and conditions of ethnic harassment requires not only the examination of inter-ethnic relations between native and minority/immigrant groups but also of relations between members of different ethnic minority and immigrant groups. Second, as in previous research (see Larochette et al., 2010), we used a single item to measure whether young people verbally harassed their peers on ethnic grounds during the past semester. This measurement approach may not provide in-depth information about the variations in the ways youth harass their peers. Future studies need to investigate covert behaviors, such as social exclusion, and severe forms of behaviors, such as physical coercion, as well as verbal harassment. Such an approach will provide more comprehensive understanding of the various ways in which ethnic harassment is manifested, and potential variations in the involvement of ethnic harassment between young people facing different types of risks. Third, in the current study, we only focused on understanding the factors that influence perpetrators’ engagement in ethnic harassment. We did not examine whether certain characteristics of immigrant youth trigger Swedish youth’s engagement in aggressive behaviors, and in turn put them at risk of being victimized. Immigrant or minority youth might be more at risk of victimization when they have certain difficulties, including lack of local language competence (von Grunigen, Perren, Nagele, & Alsaker, 2010), interpersonal problems (e.g., friendliness and peer rejection), and intrapersonal problems (e.g., depressive symptoms and social anxiety; Strohmeier et al., 2011). Thus, future research should examine how perpetrators choose their targets when they engage in ethnic harassment. Fourth, we used self-reports to measure the characteristics of school context. We do not know how adolescents’ perceptions of school context compare with actual school characteristics. Thus, future studies using objective measures of school context would contribute to the literature. Finally, the sizes of our moderation effects were low (e.g., f² = .02 for impulsivity and f² = .009 for violent behaviors) according to Cohen’s (1988) guidelines. However, recent studies have shown that sizes of observed moderation effects are in general smaller than what is conventionally defined as a small effect. For instance, in their review of effect sizes and power in moderation analysis, Aguinis, Beaty, Boik, and Pierce (2005) showed that overall mean observed effect size (i.e., f²) in moderation analysis is .009 and the median effect size is .002. Even though the effect sizes of our moderation effects are in the range of observed moderation effects in the literature (Aguinis et al., 2005), further replication studies are needed to make robust conclusions.

In conclusion, the present research sheds light on the perpetrator side of the ethnic harassment phenomenon. Our findings demonstrate that youth’s negative attitudes toward immigrants play an important role in their engagement in ethnic harassment in school. Prejudiced youth are more likely to engage in ethnic harassment than unprejudiced youth, especially when they have impulsive dispositions and violent tendencies. These findings may inform programs that aim to improve inter-ethnic relationships in schools. Traditionally, most programs with this aim focus on reducing prejudiced and stereotypic attitudes toward members of ethnic groups. The results of these programs have been mixed (see Beelmann & Heinemann, 2014, for a meta-analysis). Our findings suggest that future programs should integrate components that address risky predispositions and violent tendencies, in addition to focusing on youth cognitions concerning out-group members. By adding such components, preventive strategies may become more successful in reducing ethnic harassment and victimization and improving inter-ethnic relationships in schools.

Footnotes

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Author Biographies

Sevgi Bayram Özdemir, PhD, is a postdoctoral researcher at Örebro University. She received her doctoral degree in the Applied Developmental Psychology program at the University of Maryland, Baltimore County. Her research interests include understanding the role of family, social, and cultural influences on children’s and adolescents’ adjustment, with a particular emphasis on migration context.

Metin Özdemir, PhD, is a senior lecturer in Psychology Department at Örebro University. He received his doctoral degree in the Community and Applied Social Psychology program at the University of Maryland, Baltimore County. His research focuses on adolescents’ adjustment in normative populations and prevention works targeting youth and their families.

Håkan Stattin, PhD, is a professor in Psychology Department at Örebro University and past president of European Association of Research on Adolescence (EARA). His research interests include understanding the developmental trajectories of antisocial behaviors and the role of pubertal maturation in adolescent development. He also has conducted studies on healthy functioning and protective factors, crime prevention, parent-child interactions, and communication.

References

Acock

A. C.

(2005). Working with missing values. Journal of Marriage and Family, 67, 1012-1028.

Aguinis

Beaty

J. C.

Boik

R. J.

Pierce

C. A.

(2005). Effect size and power in assessing moderating effects of categorical variables using multiple regression: A 30-year review. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90, 94-107.

Aiken

West

(1991). Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions. Thousands Oak, CA: SAGE.

Andershed

Kerr

Stattin

(2001). Bullying in school and violence on the streets: Are the same people involved? Journal of Scandinavian Studies in Criminology and Crime Prevention, 2, 31-49.

Andershed

Kerr

Stattin

Levander

(2002). Psychopathic traits in non-referred youths: A new assessment tool. In Blau

Sheridan

(Eds.), Psychopaths: Current international perspectives (pp. 131-158). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Elsevier.

Bayram Özdemir

Stattin

(2014). Why and when is ethnic harassment a risk for immigrant adolescents’ school adjustment? Understanding the processes and conditions. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 43, 1252-1265.

Beelmann

Heinemann

K. S.

(2014). Preventing prejudice and improving intergroup attitudes: A meta-analysis of child and adolescent training programs. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 35, 10-24.

Bergman

M. E.

Palmieri

P. A.

Drasgow

Ormerod

A. J.

(2007). Racial and ethnic harassment and discrimination: In the eye of the beholder? Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 12, 144-160.

Binder

Zagefka

Brown

Funke

Kessler

Mummendey

. . . Leyens

J. P.

(2009). Does contact reduce prejudice or does prejudice reduce contact? A longitudinal test of the contact hypothesis among majority and minority groups in three European countries. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 96, 843-856.

10.

Chui

W. H.

Chan

H. C. O.

(2013). Association between self-control and school bullying behaviors among Macanese adolescents. Child Abuse & Neglect, 37, 237-242.

11.

Cohen

(1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

12.

Colder

C. R.

Stice

(1998). A longitudinal study of the interactive effects of impulsivity and anger on adolescent problem behavior. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 27, 255-274.

13.

Dessel

(2010). Prejudice in schools: Promotion of an inclusive culture and climate. Education and Urban Society, 42, 407-429.

14.

Dodge

K. A.

(1986). A social information processing model of social competence in children. In Perlmutter

(Ed.), The Minnesota Symposia in Child Psychology: Vol. 18. Cognitive perspectives on children’s social and behavioral development (pp. 77-125). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

15.

Dodge

K. A.

Coie

J. D.

Lynam

(2006). Aggression and antisocial behavior in youth. In Damon

Eisenberg

(Eds.), Handbook of child psychology: Social, emotional, and personality development (6th ed., Vol. 3, pp. 719-788). New York, NY: Wiley.

16.

Dovidio

J. F.

Kawakami

Gaertner

S. L.

(2002). Implicit and explicit prejudice and interracial interaction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82, 62-68.

17.

Durkin

Hunter

Levin

K. A.

Bergin

Heim

Howe

(2012). Discriminatory peer aggression among children as a function of minority status and group proportion in school context. European Journal of Social Psychology, 42, 243-251.

18.

Eslea

Mukhtar

(2000). Bullying and racism among Asian schoolchildren in Britain. Educational Research, 42, 207-217.

19.

Fanti

K. A.

Kimonis

E. R.

(2012). Bullying and victimization: The role of conduct problems and psychopathic traits. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 22, 617-631.

20.

Fiske

S. T.

(2000). Stereotyping, prejudice, and discrimination at the seam between the centuries: Evolution, culture, mind, and brain. European Journal of Social Psychology, 30, 299-322.

21.

Gottfredson

M. R.

Hirschi

(1990). A general theory of crime. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

22.

Graham

Juvonen

(2002). Ethnicity, peer harassment, and adjustment in middle school: An exploratory study. Journal of Early Adolescence, 22, 173-199.

23.

Harel-Fisch

Walsh

S. D.

Fogel-Grinvald

Amitai

Pickett

Molcho

. . . Craig

(2011). Negative school perceptions and involvement in school bullying: A universal relationship across 40 countries. Journal of Adolescence, 34, 639-652.

24.

Haynie

D. L.

Nansel

Eitel

Crump

A. D.

Saylor

Simons-Morton

(2001). Bullies, victims, and bully/victims: Distinct groups of at-risk youth. Journal of Early Adolescence, 21, 29-49.

25.

Hirschi

Gottfredson

M. R.

(1994). The generality of deviance. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers.

26.

Hoglund

W. L. G.

Hosan

N. E.

(2012). The context of ethnicity peer victimization and adjustment problems in early adolescence. Journal of Early Adolescence, 33, 585-609.

27.

Huynh

Fuligni

A. J.

(2010). Discrimination hurts: The academic, psychological, and physical well-being of adolescents. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 20, 916-941.

28.

Jugert

Noack

Rutland

(2011). Friendship preferences among German and Turkish preadolescents. Child Development, 82, 812-829.

29.

Kasen

Berenson

Cohen

Johnson

J. G.

(2004). The effects of school climate on changes in aggressive and other behaviors related to bullying. In Espelage

D. L.

Swearer

S. M.

(Eds.), Bullying in American schools: A social-ecological perspective on prevention and intervention (pp. 187-210). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

30.

Kline

R. B.

(2011). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (3rd ed.). New York, NY: The Guilford Press.

31.

Krings

Olivares

(2007). At the doorstep to employment: Discrimination against immigrants as a function of applicant ethnicity, job type, and raters’ prejudice. International Journal of Psychology, 42, 406-417.

32.

Krueger

R. F.

Caspi

Moffitt

T. E.

White

Stouthamer-Loeber

(1996). Delay of gratification, psychopathology, and personality: Is low self-control specific to externalizing problems? Journal of Personality, 64, 107-129.

33.

Larochette

Murphy

A. N.

Craig

W. M.

(2010). Racial bullying and victimization in Canadian school-aged children: Individual and school level effects. School Psychology International, 31, 389-408.

34.

Levin

van Laar

Sidanius

(2003). The effects of in-group and out-group friendship on ethnic attitudes in college: A longitudinal study. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 6, 76-92.

35.

Marsee

M. A.

Silverthorn

Frick

P. J.

(2005). The association of psychopathic traits with aggression and delinquency in non-referred boys and girls. Behavioral Sciences & the Law, 23, 803-817.

36.

McKenney

K. S.

Pepler

Craig

Connolly

(2006). Peer victimization and psychosocial adjustment: The experiences of Canadian immigrant youth. Electronic Journal of Research in Educational Psychology, 9, 239-264.

37.

Meier

M. H.

Slutske

W. S.

Arndt

Cadoret

R. J.

(2008). Impulsive and callous traits are more strongly associated with delinquent behavior in higher risk neighborhoods among boys and girls. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 117, 377-385.

38.

Monks

C. P.

Ortega-Ruiz

Rodriguez-Hidalgo

(2008). Peer victimization in multicultural schools in Spain and England. European Journal of Developmental Psychology, 5, 507-535.

39.

Olweus

(1978). Aggression in the schools: Bullies and whipping boys. Washington, DC: Hemisphere.

40.

Olweus

(1994a). Bullying at school: Basic facts and effects of a school-based intervention program. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 35, 1171-1190.

41.

Olweus

(1994b). Bullying at school: Long-term outcomes for the victims and an effective school-based intervention program. In Huesmann

L. R.

(Ed.), Aggressive behavior: Current perspectives (pp. 97-130). New York, NY: Plenum.

42.

Pepler

Connolly

Craig

(1999). Bullying and harassment: Experiences of minority and immigrant youth (Research report 1997-98, CERIS-funded project, 980). Retrieved from http://ceris.metropolis.net/Virtual%20Library/education/pepler1/pepler1.html

43.

Perkins

H. W.

Berkowitz

A. D.

(1986). Perceiving the community norms of alcohol use among students: Some research implications for campus alcohol education programming. Substance Use & Misuse, 21, 961-976.

44.

Roland

Idsoe

(2001). Aggression and bullying. Aggressive Behavior, 27, 446-462.

45.

Scherr

T. G.

Larson

(2010). Bullying dynamics associated with race, ethnicity, and immigration status. In Jimerson

Swearer

Espelage

(Eds.), Handbook of bullying in schools: An international perspective (pp. 223-234). New York, NY: Routledge.

46.

Stefanek

Strohmeier

van de Schoot

Spiel

(2011). Bullying and victimization in ethnically diverse schools: Risk and protective factors on the individual and class level. International Journal of Developmental Science, 5, 73-84.

47.

Strohmeier

Karna

Salmivalli

(2011). Intrapersonal and interpersonal risk factors for peer victimization in immigrant youth in Finland. Developmental Psychology, 47, 248-258.

48.

Tabachnick

B. G.

Fidell

L. S.

(1996). Using multivariate statistics (3rd ed.). New York, NY: HarperCollins.

49.

Tajfel

Turner

J. C.

(1986). The social identity theory of intergroup behavior. In Worchel

Austin

W. G.

(Eds.), Psychology of intergroup relations (pp. 7-24). Chicago, IL: Nelson-Hall.

50.

van Zalk

M. H. W.

Kerr

van Zalk

Stattin

(2013). Xenophobia and tolerance toward immigrants in adolescence: Cross-influence processes within friendships. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 41, 627-639.

51.

Verkuyten

Thijs

(2002). Racist victimization among children in the Netherlands: The effect of ethnic group and school. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 25, 310-331.

52.

Volk

Craig

Boyce

King

(2006). Adolescent risk correlates of bullying and different types of victimization. International Journal of Adolescence & Mental Health, 18, 375-386.

53.

von Grunigen

Perren

Nagele

Alsaker

F. D.

(2010). Immigrant children’s peer acceptance and victimization in kindergarten: The role of local language competence. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 28, 679-697.