Peer Victimization and Anxiety in Youth: A Moderated Mediation of Peer Perceptions and Social Self-Efficacy

Abstract

The central objective of the study was to investigate a moderated mediation model addressing social cognitive mechanisms that account for the association between peer victimization and anxiety. A sample of 81 youth (M age = 12.78, SD = 0.88) completed questionnaires assessing peer victimization, anxiety, social self-efficacy, and peer perceptions. Reports of peer victimization were associated with anxiety symptoms. Moreover, social self-efficacy partially mediated the relationship between peer victimization and anxiety. Lastly, the perception of school peers moderated the mediation process between peer victimization and anxiety via social self-efficacy. These findings suggest that social contextual variables (e.g., peer victimization and perception of school peers) and negative self-evaluations (e.g., social self-efficacy) are risk factors for anxiety symptom severity in youth. Limitations and practical implications were discussed.

Keywords

anxiety peer victimization self-evaluations youth

Many youth are not successful in their attempts to make and maintain friendships and encounter adverse peer experiences such as peer victimization (Rubin et al., 2015). Peer victimization, defined as a power imbalance between a bully and a victim, in which the bully intentionally and repeatedly harms the victim (Jacobs, 2008), has gained the attention of mental health professionals, educators, parents, and researchers. Peer victimization has been associated with a host of many consequences such as psychopathology, substance use, and school failure (Fosse & Holen, 2004). Due to these adverse outcomes, there has been a plethora of research examining Canada’s bullying policy, prevention programs, as well as the causes and consequences of peer victimization in schools (Winton & Tuters, 2015). Compared to other countries, Canada has made limited progress in addressing peer victimization in schools. Many countries encounter fewer forms of victimization and are ranked more positively compared to Canada (Molcho et al., 2009). Additionally, research suggests that other countries are preventing peer victimization more effectively than Canada (Pepler & Craig, 2011).

Peer Victimization and Anxiety

Numerous studies have demonstrated that peer victimization is a significant risk factor concerning youth anxiety (Guimond et al., 2015; Schleider et al., 2018; Stapinski et al., 2014). In addition to such direct associations, a series of studies have further identified mediators and moderators to explain underlining mechanisms in the link between peer victimization and internalizing symptoms in youth (Cohen & Kendall, 2015).

Social-Self Efficacy as a Mediator

Previous research has suggested that negative self-evaluations are a possible psychological mediator of the link between peer victimization and anxiety in youth (Gómez-Ortiz et al., 2018). Social self-efficacy, defined as an individual’s perceived ability in developing and/or maintaining healthy and supportive social relationships, emerges through self-interpretations based on personal evaluations of past social successes and failures (Schunk & Pajares, 2009). Beck’s cognitive model of anxiety posits that cognition, such as self-evaluations, play a vital role in the development of anxiety (Clark & Beck, 2009). Consistent with this perspective, Raskauskas et al. (2015) found that social self-efficacy was related to youths’ quality of peer experiences, such that youth aged 12 to 15 with higher social self-efficacy ratings reported lower peer victimization incidents. Based on the above empirical evidence, we propose that social self-efficacy will mediate the relationship between peer victimization and anxiety in youth.

Peer Perceptions as a Moderator

Although peer victimization is an influential risk factor of anxiety (Stapinski et al., 2014), the development of anxiety is multifaceted, reflective of the complex interplay among several biological, individual, and contextual factors (Hambrick et al., 2010). While there continues to be a gap in the literature linking the perception of peers (i.e., positive and negative beliefs about peer groups in a social context) to anxiety, this is another critical factor associated with anxiety in youth who are victimized. For example, Cohen and Kendall (2015) observed that participants who reported more positive perceptions of peers and greater reports of victimization were more likely to experience increased internalizing symptoms. From a cognitive-behavioral standpoint, after an adverse peer experience, youth who experience symptoms of anxiety may hold more positive perceptions of their peers and blame the actions of others on their own social incompetence. Thus, in comparison to their non-anxious counterparts, youth with anxiety may have a poor social self-efficacy and be more likely to hold positive beliefs about their peer groups in social contexts. In other words, when anxious adolescents’ think about previous negative social encounters, they tend to focus on negative thoughts and images as it pertains to their own social abilities, thereby increasing the experience of anxiety (Clark & Beck, 2009; Essau & Ollendick, 2013).

Although literature has provided solid theoretical understanding of the relationship between peer perceptions, peer victimization, social self-efficacy, and anxiety, future research is needed to empirically confirm the association between these variables as part of an overall model. Consistent with the cognitive-behavioral model and developmental psychopathology perspective of anxiety disorders, multiple social contextual variables may have direct effects on the development of anxiety, but these variables may also interact with each other, influencing the maintenance and development of anxious symptoms (Hambrick et al., 2010). Although positive peer perceptions have been found to play a role in the association between peer victimization and internalizing symptoms, it remains unclear whether there is an interaction between peer victimization and peer perceptions. Further, the mediation of peer victimization on anxiety through social self-efficacy is moderated if the indirect effects depends on a fourth variable, such as peer perceptions (Hayes, 2018). To our knowledge, no extant research has examined the moderating effect of peer perceptions on the direct and indirect associations of peer victimization on anxiety symptoms. Peer victimization, combined with positive perceptions of peers, may play a critical role in the maintenance of anxiety disorders when youth have dysfunctional social self-views. As such, we propose that adolescents’ perception of school peers will moderate the indirect association between peer victimization and anxiety via social self-efficacy.

The Current Study

The present study examined whether victimization experiences were associated to anxiety in youth. Youth (defined here as between ages 12 and15) is of particular interest because the prevalence of anxiety begins to increase during this developmental period (Comer & Olfson, 2010). Within a multifactorial framework, many potential factors may be critical in predicting the severity of anxious symptoms, beyond that of victimization events. Consequently, our overarching purpose was to examine the interrelationships and interactions between peer victimization, social self-efficacy, perception of peers, and associated anxiety in youth. To this end, our specific goals were twofold: (1) to test whether youths’ social self-efficacy mediated the association between peer victimization and anxiety; (2) to examine whether youths’ perceived perception of peers moderated the indirect associations between peer victimization and anxiety via youth’s social self-efficacy skills. We aimed to determine whether peer perceptions and social-self efficacy are important variables that explain the variance between peer victimization and anxiety. This research allows for a more comprehensive research design and improves upon findings from retrospective studies solely examining the association of peer victimization on anxious symptoms.

Method

Participants

A total of 81 youth aged 12 to 15 (M = 12.78, SD = 0.88) from five elementary schools in western Canada who received parent permission participated in the study. Participants were predominantly female (64.2%) and came from diverse ethnic backgrounds, with the majority of the sample Caucasian (38.5%) followed by South Asian (29%), other (13.6%), European (8.6%), African (2.5%), and Latino/Hispanic (2.5%). Six participants did not disclose their ethnicity.

Procedure

Before conducting this research, the study was reviewed and fully approved by The Conjoint Faculties Research Ethics Board at a university and by school board districts. Students took home information packages explaining the purpose and nature of this research, requirements for consent, acknowledgement of confidentiality, and demographic questionnaires. Once parents or guardians consented to participate in the research study, they completed a demographic questionnaire and returned the research package to their respective schools. Data collection at each school first involved obtaining written consent. Past research has determined that children as young as nine are best predictors of their anxiety (Cosi et al., 2010). Further, there appears to be poor parent-child concordance (i.e., low agreement) in the report of anxiety, with parent/child agreement particularly low with respect to school-based fears (Comer & Kendall, 2004). Given that the study is examining victimization within a school context, to gain the most valid measure of youth anxiety, students who consented to participate only completed self-report questionnaires on perceived levels of anxiety, social self-efficacy, peer perceptions, and reports of peer victimization.

Measures

Demographic information

A demographic questionnaire was developed and utilized in order to obtain specific demographic information on participating youth and their parents. Information included: (a) sex, (b) birth date/age, (c) ethnic background, (d) parental employment, (e) parental level of education.

Anxiety

Anxiety symptoms were measured using the Multidimensional Anxiety Scale for Children-Second Edition (MASC-2; March, 2012). The MASC-2 assesses six dimensions of anxiety (separation anxiety/phobias, generalized anxiety disorder, social anxiety, obsessions and compulsions, physical symptoms, and harm avoidance) in children and youth aged 8 to 19 years old. For each item, students responded on a Likert Scale ranging from “Never” (0) to “Often” (3). The MASC-2 Total Score, which includes all six dimensions of anxiety, was used to evaluate youth’s anxiety symptoms. Individual responses were summed and converted to standardized T-scores to adjust for age and gender. Higher T-scores indicate a greater number of anxiety symptoms across all six dimensions, such that T-Scores higher than 65 indicate Elevated anxiety symptoms. To determine the reliability of the student’s answers, an inconsistency index was used to measure the consistency of the student’s responses (overall internal consistency α = .95).

Peer victimization

The frequency of peer victimization experiences was assessed using The Revised Peer Experiences Questionnaire (RPEQ; De Los Reyes & Prinstein, 2004). Due to the nature of the current study, items assessing the personal acts of victimization (i.e., bully version) were excluded. The questionnaire included nine items and three subscales assessing overt victimization (sample question: “A teen chased me like he or she was really trying to hurt me”), relational victimization (sample question: “Some teens left me out of an activity or conversation that I really wanted to be included in”) and reputational victimization (sample question: “Another teen gossiped about me so others would not like me”). Students based their responses on a five-point Likert scale ranging from “Never” (1) to “Few Times a Week” (5). Responses were added to create an overall index score, with higher scores indicative of greater peer victimization (overall internal consistency α = .88, overt victimization α = .80, relational victimization α = .82, and reputational victimization α = .92).

Social self-efficacy

The Self-Efficacy Questionnaire for Children (SEQ-C; Muris et al., 2001) was used to examine youth’s rating of their social self-efficacy. The SEQ-C contains 24 items that are allocated into three domains of self-efficacy. In the current study, only the social self-efficacy domain was used to assess youth’s ratings. This scale consists of eight items, and students score each item on a five-point Likert scale with answers ranging from “Not At All” (1) to “Very Well” (5). Total and subscale scores are computed by summing relevant items, with higher scores indicative of stronger self-efficacy skills (internal consistency α = .76).

Peer perceptions

The Peer Beliefs Inventory (PBI; Rabiner et al., 1993) was used to measure youth’s perception of peer’s social characteristics, including prosocial and antisocial qualities (sample question: “some kids try and help other kids when they need it. How much do the kids in your school try and help other kids”). The PBI consists of 12 questions with student’s answers based on a Likert scale ranging from “Not At All” (1) to “Very Much” (5). The antisocial items are reversed scored, and final total scores range from 12 to 60, with higher scores indicating more positive beliefs about peers (Internal consistency α = .82).

Analytic Strategy

Missing values were accounted for using the multiple imputation method using SPSS 25. A total of one case was missing, where one participant did not complete items on questionnaires. Data analyzes were performed using SPSS 25 and running the PROCESS script (Hayes, 2017). Minimum sample requirements were met for all analyzes that were conducted (Tabachnick & Fidell, 2013). First, initial descriptive analyzes (i.e., mean, median, mode, standard deviations) and an assessment of the normality of the data was employed. Next, Pearson-product moment correlations were computed to examine the relations among and between all variables. In order to address whether sex was associated to the variables used in the current study, a T-test was run to examine group differences (i.e., between males and females). Following this analysis, a correlation analysis using a Bonferroni correction was completed to determine whether age was associated to all variables. Both age and sex were not significantly related to all variables and as such, age and sex were not entered as covariates in the regression analyzes.

The remaining hypotheses were tested using PROCESS regression analyzes based on 10,000 bootstrapped samples using bias-corrected and accelerated 95% confidence intervals (CIs) with centred variables. Bootstrapped approaches are considered superior to other mediation analytic approaches, such as the Sobel Test (Hayes, 2017). To test the mediation effect, the PROCESS macro (model 4 for one mediator) was used to generate the bootstrapped CIs. Following Hayes suggestion, the reported mediation effects was interpreted such that when the lower and upper 95% CIs were either both above or below zero (i.e., lower and upper CIs did not include a zero) the mediation effect was deemed significant, whereas if lower and upper CIs included a zero the effect was deemed non-significant (Guo et al., 2018; Hayes, 2017). Second, we used PROCESS macro (model 7 for one mediator and one moderator) described in Hayes (2017) to test the moderated mediation hypothesis. A similar methodology to the simple mediation was employed to determine significance, and as per the suggestion of Hayes (2017), the indirect effect of peer victimization on anxiety was examined at the various vales of the moderator (i.e., ± 1 SD).

Results

Descriptive and Correlation Analyzes

As shown in Table 1, all data were normally distributed. Correlations among the variables are also presented in Table 2.

Table 1.

Descriptive Information of the Study’s Variables.

Variable	n	M	SD	Skew	Kurt
Anxiety	81	63.22	12.80	0.08	−0.93
Peer victimization	81	17.52	6.61	0.93	0.20
Social self-efficacy	81	27.32	5.29	−0.76	−0.81
Peer perceptions	81	38.29	6.73	−0.43	−0.15

Table 2.

Correlation Matrix.

	1	2	3	4	5	6	7
1. OV	—
2. RV	0.295**	—
3. RPV	0.385**	0.657**	—
4. Anxiety	0.317**	0.603**	0.424**	—
5. PV	0.651**	0.826**	0.836**	0.577**	—
6. SS	−0.185	−0.401**	−0.358**	−0.506**	−0.420**	—
8. PP	−0.434**	−0.289**	−0.403**	−0.333**	−0.439**	0.231*	—

Note. OV = overt victimization; RV = relational victimization; RPV = reputational victimization; PV = peer victimization; SS = social-self efficacy; PP = peer perceptions.

p < .05. **p < .01.

Mediation Analyzes

The total effect of peer victimization and youths’ anxiety was significantly and positively associated (c; β = .58, p < .001). There was also a significant and negative effect of peer victimization on social self-efficacy (a; β = –.42 p < .001) and social self-efficacy on anxiety symptoms (b; β = –.32, p < .001), such that the indirect effect (a × b) of social self-efficacy on the relation between peer victimization and anxiety symptoms was significant (β = .13, 95% bias-corrected bootstrap 0.04–0.23). Despite the significant indirect effect, the direct effect indicated a partial mediation (c′; β = .44, p < .001). The resulting model is portrayed in Figure 1.

Figure 1.

The mediation model outlining the relation of youth’s anxiety from peer victimization.

Moderated Mediation Analyzes

A moderated mediation was conducted to test our second hypothesis. The resulting model is portrayed in Figure 2. The numbers represent the path coefficients and significant direct paths are indicated with asterisks. As suggested by Hayes (2017), the conditional indirect effects were examined to determine whether the overall moderated mediation model was significant. Specifically, we examined whether the null of 0 did not fall between the lower and upper limit of the 95% confidence interval. Results indicated that the effect of peer perceptions significantly moderated the indirect effect of peer victimization on anxiety via social self-efficacy (95% bias-corrected bootstrap 0.0003–0.0477). While the conditional indirect effect was significant, the interaction term was not.

Figure 2.

The moderated mediation model outlining the relation of youth’s anxiety from peer victimization.

To further investigate the nature of the moderation, simple slope analyzes were estimated using the “pick-a-point” method (Hayes, 2017; Preacher et al., 2007). The indirect effect of peer victimization on anxiety was examined at various values (± 1 SD) of the moderator (i.e., low, average, high). The point estimates and 95% CIs for the conditional indirect effects allow to probe for significant interaction effects in the regression. The results of the conditional indirect effects are presented in Table 3. When individuals had a low perception of their peers, the indirect effect was not significant (0.10, 95% CI—0.03–0.20). However, the indirect effects at the average (0.15, 95% CI 0.05–0.26) and high (0.19, 95% 0.06–0.38) values of peer perceptions were significant. In other words, social self-efficacy was only a successful mediator when participants viewed their peers at the average or high range (i.e., more positive view of peers).

Table 3.

Conditional Indirect Effects of Peer Victimization on Youth Anxiety through Peer Perceptions via Social Self-Efficacy ± 1 SD.

	Peer victimization
Peer perceptions	Effect	SE	95% CI
Low	0.10	0.06	−0.03–0.20
Average	0.15	0.05	0.05–0.26
High	0.19	0.07	0.06–0.38

Discussion

The effect of peer victimization on anxiety symptom severity in youth has gained considerable empirical support (Schleider et al., 2018). Based on both a developmental psychopathology and cognitive behavioral framework of anxiety we examined: (1) whether youths’ social self-efficacy would mediate the positive association between peer victimization and anxiety; (2) whether perception of peers would moderate the indirect association between peer victimization and youths’ anxiety via social self-efficacy. The present findings highlight the strong relationship between peer victimization and anxiety and indicated: (1) the mediating effect of social self-efficacy was manifested in the association between peer victimization and anxiety; (2) the moderating effect of peer perceptions was manifested in the indirect association between peer victimization and anxiety via social self-efficacy.

The current study contributes to the literature in two important ways. First, youth’s social self-efficacy partially mediated the positive relationship between peer victimization and anxiety. While previous research has consistently indicated that peer victimization is an important environmental factor associated with anxiety symptoms (Schleider et al., 2018), emerging evidence has stipulated that negative self-evaluations are potential features contributing to this relationship (Gómez-Ortiz et al., 2018). For example, Trompeter et al. (2018) found that adverse peer experiences, specifically cyber victimization, led to youth’s negative self-evaluations and subsequent social anxiety symptoms. This result suggests that self-evaluations could be a pivotal element to take into account when developing interventions for youth who experience both adverse peer experiences and anxiety.

Second, the moderated mediation model was able to account for peer perceptions as an important social variable contributing to the indirect relationship between peer victimization and anxiety. On the one hand, although we found negative associations between the individual correlations of peer perceptions, anxiety, and peer victimization, it is best to understand the risk of anxiety through a developmental psychopathology perspective. This view states that there are multiple pathways through which developmental outcomes occur (Kertz & Woodruff-Borden, 2011). As such, rather than examining single associations of anxiety, it is important to examine multiple paths and unique transactions between numerous risk factors (i.e., cognitive, emotional, environmental).

On the other hand, our examination indicated that perception of peers moderated the indirect relation between peer victimization and anxiety, and the strength of the mediation effect was contingent on average and positive perceptions of school peers. Although we did not find a significant interaction term, from a developmental psychopathology perspective and through examining the model as a whole, perception of peers was an important contributor in the indirect association between peer victimization and anxiety. Within the model specifically, social self-efficacy had a stronger indirect effect between peer victimization and anxiety when youth viewed their peers more positively. This explanation is consistent with prior research illustrating that the vulnerability to anxiety disorders operates within a cognitive-behavioral (Hambrick et al., 2010) and social information processing framework (Guo et al., 2018). Children who are victimized are more prone to develop poor views of self (Ranta et al., 2015), potentially leading to the development of clinical anxiety symptoms over time. Compared to self-views, individuals who view their peers more positively often experience internalizing difficulties (Troop-Gordon & Ladd, 2005). Additional findings have suggested that victims of relational victimization, who have greater perceptions of peers, are more likely to feel a greater sense of sadness and isolation (Cohen & Kendall, 2015). Thus, positive perceptions of school peers may operate as a risk factor that exacerbates the effect of low social self-efficacy on anxiety symptom severity in youth who experience victimization. Through rationalizing automatic thoughts associated with views of both self and others, youth may start to develop a sense of empowerment when dealing with adverse peer experiences. Thus, when experiencing peer victimization, rational core beliefs about self and others may serve as protective factors to anxiety.

Relevance to the Practice of School Psychology

In Canada, most school psychologists continue to report the importance of ongoing mental health prevention services in our education systems (Montreuil, 2016). Yet, questions reamin regarding how to overcome barriers in developing and implementing interventions in schools, such as which specific factors need to be addressed in prevention programs, and how to deliver these services in a multileveled framework (Christner & Mennuti, 2009). The results of the current study offer a starting point to address these limitations. First, professionals within schools should consider addressing specific coping strategies that youth who experience victimization can utilize. While prevention programs are critical, additional resources are also needed to focus on the distress youth develop after victimization has occurred. Importantly, peer victimization is inevitable and will likely never fully become eradicated within and across schools and no known school-based program specifically addresses the consequences of peer victimization and how to cope after these events have occurred. Lastly, core treatments of anxiety are primarily cognitive-behavioral in nature and peer victimization and social cognitive variables (e.g., peer perceptions, social self-efficacy) can be integrated into a systematic cognitive behavioral approach to addressing anxiety in schools, including psychoeducation to teachers and parents about the nature and relationship between peer factors related to the development of anxiety in youth, and specific factors that need to be considered in the development of prevention and intervention efforts to treat anxiety in schools.

Limitations and Future Directions

While the current review has strengths worth merit, our findings should be interpreted in light of several limitations. First, the current study was restricted in terms of age sample. Future research should utilize a larger number of youth within and across age groups in order to better establish and confirm the differences among age group and anxiety level concerning peer victimization, social self-efficacy, and peer perceptions. Next, the current study solely relied on self-report data. Future research may want to use teacher reports to corroborate the relationship among the variables included in study. Teachers may provide greater insight into youth anxiety symptoms during this developmental period as they are more likely to observe youth’s school and social based anxieties. The last limitation relates to the cross-sectional nature of the data. While theory allowed the researchers to specify the direction of the relationships included within the model, the current data cannot draw causal implications. Future studies may want to incorporate prospective designs in order to determine the predictive nature of peer victimization, peer perceptions, and social self-efficacy on anxiety symptoms.

Conclusion

The current research addresses empirical gaps within the literature and provides researchers and practitioners with additional information and data regarding the relationship between peer victimization and anxiety. The results from the current study allowed for a more succinct understanding of the factors related to the association between peer victimization and anxiety. Further, our findings demonstrated the utility of moderated mediation models in understanding the direct and indirect effects of peer victimization on anxiety and yielded several implications.

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.

ORCID iD

Victoira L. Purcell

Author Biographies

Victoira L. Purcell, MSc, is a doctoral candidate in the School and Applied Child Psychology program at the University of Calgary. Her research focuses on understanding the complex nature of anxiety in children in youth. She is particularly interested in understanding how peer, parent, and self factors play a role in the development of anxiety symptoms in females.

Jac J. W. Andrews, PhD, is a registered psychologist in the Province of Alberta and a professor and chair of School and Applied Child Psychology at the University of Calgary. His research and scholarly interests include childhood psychopathology, educational psychology, psycho- educational assessment and intervention, and diversity education.

David Nordstokke, PhD, is an associate professor in the Werklund School of Education at the University of Calgary. He received his PhD in 2009 from the University of British Columbia in Measurement, Evaluation and Research Methodology. He teaches courses in the area of measurement, research design and statistical analysis. Dr. Nordstokke conducts research across a variety of educational and psychological contexts. Much of Dr. Nordstokke’s current research revolves around youth transition/youth mental health and factors (e.g., resilience) that are related to successful transition and positive life and mental health outcomes. Many projects that Dr. Nordstokke engage in are interdisciplinary and collaborative in nature and his typical role in this type of research has him focusing on designing sound research studies, selecting valid measurement strategies, and applying statistical models to data that are gathered across a number of disciplines. Another part of Dr. Nordstokke’s research is focused on applied methods that include: (1) the design of research studies, (2) the collection and statistical analysis of data, and (3) the interpretation and dissemination of results.

References

Christner

R. W.

Mennuti

R. B.

(Eds.). (2009). School-based mental health: A practitioner’s guide to comparative practices. Routledge.

Clark

D. A.

Beck

A. T.

(2009). Cognitive therapy of anxiety disorders: Science and practice. Guilford Press.

Cohen

J. S.

Kendall

P. C.

(2015). Peer victimization among children and adolescents with anxiety disorders. Child Psychiatry & Human Development, 46(3), 393–405. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10578-014-0479-x

Comer

J. S.

Kendall

P. C.

(2004). A symptom-level examination of parent–child agreement in the diagnosis of anxious youths. Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 43(7), 878–886. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.chi.0000125092.35109.c5

Comer

J. S.

Olfson

(2010). The epidemiology of anxiety disorders. In Simpson

H. B.

Neria

Lewis-Fernández

(Eds.), Anxiety disorders: Theory, research and clinical perspectives (pp. 6–19). Cambridge University Press.

Cosi

Canals

Hernández-Martinez

Vigil-Colet

(2010). Parent–child agreement in SCARED and its relationship to anxiety symptoms. Journal of Anxiety Disorders, 24(1), 129–133. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.janxdis.2009.09.008

De Los Reyes

Prinstein

M. J

. (2004). Applying depression-distortion hypotheses to the assessment of peer victimization in adolescents. Journal of Clinical Child & Adolescent Psychology, 33(2), 325–335. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15374424jccp3302_14

Essau

C. A.

Ollendick

T. H.

(2013). The Wiley-Blackwell handbook of the treatment of childhood and adolescent anxiety. John Wiley & Sons, Incorporated.

Fosse

G. K.

Holen

(2004). Cohabitation, education, and occupation of psychiatric outpatients bullied as children. The Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 192(5), 385–388.

10.

Gómez-Ortiz

Roldán

Ortega-Ruiz

García-López

L.-J.

(2018). Social anxiety and psychosocial adjustment in adolescents: Relation with peer victimization, self-esteem and emotion regulation. Child Indicators Research, 11(6), 1719–1736. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12187-017-9506-3

11.

Guimond

F.-A.

Brendgen

Vitaro

Dionne

Boivin

(2015). Peer victimization and anxiety in genetically vulnerable youth: The protective roles of teachers’ self-efficacy and anti-bullying classroom rules. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 43(6), 1095–1106. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10802-015-0001-3

12.

Guo

Tian

Scott Huebner

(2018). Family dysfunction and anxiety in adolescents: A moderated mediation model of self-esteem and perceived school stress. Journal of School Psychology, 69, 16–27. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2018.04.002

13.

Hambrick

Comer

Albano

A. M.

(2010). Cognitive–behavioral treatment of anxiety disorders: Model and current issues. In Simpson

H. B.

(Ed.), Anxiety disorders: Theory, research, and clinical perspectives (pp. 205–215). Cambridge University Press.

14.

Hayes

A. F.

(2017). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis, second edition: A regression-based approach. Guilford Publications.

15.

Hayes

A. F.

(2018). Partial, conditional, and moderated mediation: Quantification, inference, and interpretation. Communication Monographs, 85(1), 4–40. https://doi.org/10.1080/03637751.2017.1352100

16.

Jacobs

A. K.

(2008). Components of evidence-based interventions for bullying and peer victimization. In Handbook of evidence-based therapies for children and adolescents (pp. 261–279). Springer.

17.

Kertz

S. J.

Woodruff-Borden

(2011). The developmental psychopathology of worry. Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review, 14(2), 174–197. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10567-011-0086-3

18.

March

J. S.

(2012). Multidimensional anxiety scale for children 2nd Edition. Pearson Inc.

19.

Molcho

Craig

Due

Pickett

Harel-Fisch

Overpeck

, & HBSC Bullying Writing Group. (2009). Cross-national time trends in bullying behaviour 1994-2006: Findings from Europe and North America. International Journal of Public Health, 54(Suppl. 2), 225–234. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00038-009-5414-8

20.

Montreuil

T. C.

(2016). The practice of school and educational psychology in Canada: The best is yet to come. Canadian Journal of School Psychology, 31(3), 155–159. https://doi.org/10.1177/0829573516655231

21.

Muris

Schmidt

Merckelbach

Schouten

(2001). Anxiety sensitivity in adolescents: Factor structure and relationships to trait anxiety and symptoms of anxiety disorders and depression. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 39(1), 89–100. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0005-7967(99)00179-5

22.

Pepler

Craig

(2011). Promoting relationships and eliminating violence in Canada. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 35(5), 389–397. https://doi.org/10.1177/0165025411407455

23.

Preacher

K. J.

Rucker

D. D.

Hayes

A. F.

(2007). Addressing moderated mediation hypotheses: Theory, methods, and prescriptions. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 42(1), 185–227. https://doi.org/10.1080/00273170701341316

24.

Rabiner

D. L.

Keane

S. P.

MacKinnon-Lewis

(1993). Children’s beliefs about familiar and unfamiliar peers in relation to their sociometric status. Developmental Psychology, 29(2), 236–243. https://doi.org/10.1037/0012-1649.29.2.236

25.

Ranta

La Greca

A. M.

Garcia-Lopez

L.-J.

Marttunen

(2015). Social anxiety and phobia in adolescents: Development, manifestation and intervention strategies. Springer.

26.

Raskauskas

Rubiano

Offen

Wayland

A. K.

(2015). Do social self-efficacy and self-esteem moderate the relationship between peer victimization and academic performance? Social Psychology of Education, 18(2), 297–314. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11218-015-9292-z

27.

Rubin

K. H.

Coplan

R. J.

Chen

Bowker

Mcdonald

K. L.

Heverly

(2015). Peer realtionships. In Bronstein

M. H.

Lamb

M. E.

(Eds.), Developmental science (7th ed., pp. 587–644). Psychology Press.

28.

Schleider

J. L.

Ginsburg

G. S.

Drake

(2018). Perceived peer victimization predicts anxiety outcomes in a prevention program for offspring of anxious parents. Journal of Clinical Child & Adolescent Psychology, 47(Suppl. 1), S255–S263. https://doi.org/10.1080/15374416.2016.1270831

29.

Schunk

Pajares

(2009). Self-Efficacy theory. In Wentzel

K. R.

Wigfield

(Eds.), Handbook of motivation at school (pp. 35–53). Routledge.

30.

Stapinski

L. A.

Bowes

Wolke

Pearson

R. M.

Mahedy

Button

K. S.

Lewis

Araya

(2014). Peer victimization during adolescence and risk for anxiety disorders in adulthood: A prospective cohort study. Depression and Anxiety, 31(7), 574–582. https://doi.org/10.1002/da.22270

31.

Tabachnick

B. G.

Fidell

L. S.

(2013). Using multivariate statistics (6th ed). Pearson Education.

32.

Trompeter

Bussey

Fitzpatrick

(2018). Cyber victimization and internalizing difficulties: The mediating roles of coping self-efficacy and emotion dysregulation. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 46(5), 1129–1139. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10802-017-0378-2

33.

Troop-Gordon

Ladd

G. W.

(2005). Trajectories of peer victimization and perceptions of the self and schoolmates: Precursors to internalizing and externalizing problems. Child Development, 76(5), 1072–1091. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.2005.00898.x

34.

Winton

Tuters

(2015). Constructing bullying in Ontario, Canada: A critical policy analysis. Educational Studies, 41(1–2), 122–142. https://doi.org/10.1080/03055698.2014.955737