Rachel Kupferberg Developmental Psychology Adolescent Attachment Style, Peer Relationship Quality and Bullying: A Mediational Model Rachel Kupferberg Developmental Psychology

Overview of the Model PV: Adolescent attachment style Unresolved- disorganized adolescent attachment MV: Peer relationship quality Poor peer relationship quality DV: Bullying behavior Adolescent attachment style  peer relationship quality  bullying behavior

Literature Review Definition of bullying and statistics Bullying through attachment theory Later in life, adolescents remain attached to important parental figures despite a shift toward increasing investment in peer relationships (Steinberg & Silk, 2002) Less about maintaining proximity to attachment figures and more about internal working models and emotional regulation (Allen, McElhaney, Kuperminc, & Jodl, 2004) Research concludes that unresolved-disorganized attachment correlates most highly with bullying behavior (Monks, Smith, Swettenham, 2005) Bullying behavior in children and adolescents has largely been associated with parent-offspring relationships characterized by low parental involvement and inconsistent parental monitoring (Curtner-Smith, 2000). Attachment insecurities are related to antisocial traits, such as lack of empathy, and predict callous/unemotional characteristics in adolescents (Fite, Greening, & Stoppelbien, 2008). Hostile/unemotional traits are positively correlated with direct bullying Bullying is defined as aggression that is intended to harm another person, occurring over a sustained period of time, and involving a power imbalance in which a more powerful individual is abusing a less powerful individual (Olweus, 1993). Bullying can take several forms, including aggression that is verbal, physical, psychological or relational. In the U.S. alone, approximately half of adolescents report that they have either bullied their peers or been victims of bullying (Williams, 2011).

Literature Review (Cont.) Disorganized attachment and peer relationships Are less likely to be accepted by their peers and tend to report lower levels of perceived support and higher levels of conflict (Liu, 2006). Peer relationships and bullying Bullying as a social phenomenon cannot be considered without taking into account the social context Hodges, Malone & Perry (1997) found that the lack of supportive friends and the presence of peer rejection are correlated with bullying, while friendships and support by peers provide a buffer against bullying behaviors. Why is this important? Considering the aforementioned increased rates of bullying in the adolescent population and the profound physical, emotional and psychological impact bullying has on victims worldwide, it is also necessary to examine the possible clinical implications of bullying behaviors. According to the Center for Disease Control and Prevention, bullies are two to five times more likely to attempt suicide than non- bullies and their victims are two to nine times more likely to attempt suicide than non-victims (CDC, 2011). Examining the relationship between attachment style, peer relationship quality and bullying behaviors can help to identify risk factors for bullying, leading to better development of protective factors and prevention efforts.

Hypotheses 1)  It is first hypothesized that disorganized attachment in adolescents will predict poor peer relationship quality. 2)  It is also hypothesized that poor peer relationships will predict higher levels of bullying behavior in these adolescents. 3) Thirdly, a disorganized attachment style will also predict increased bullying behaviors in adolescents. 4)  Poor peer relationship quality will mediate the relationship between disorganized attachment style and bullying behavior in adolescents such that poor peer relationship quality significantly predicts bullying behaviors, and disorganized attachment no longer predicts bullying behaviors after controlling for poor peer relationship quality.

Participants 450 public high school students in the New York metropolitan area (taken from 3 different schools) Age range: 13 to 18 (M= 16.2 years, SD= 1.3) 58% female, 42% male Socioeconomic status: 17% lower class, 70% middle class, and 13% upper class The annual family incomes of the participants were varied from $24,0000 to $285,000 (M= 142,000, SD= 53,000) Race/ ethnicity breakdown: 35% White/Caucasian, 32% Hispanic/ Latino, 21% Black/African American, 4% Asian/Pacific Islander and 8% Mixed/Other Education: all participants had at least eight years of education (M= 9.86, SD= 3.97)

Measure 1 Demographic questionnaire Given to all participants prior to enrolling in the study Sent to participants via an online survey system, Survey Monkey Asked participants to report their age, gender, race, years of education and parental income Takes about ten minutes to complete

Measure 2 Adult Attachment Interview (AAI) Semi-structured interview for individuals over the age of 13, devised to assess attachment style and quality in adolescents and adults Interview is transcribed and evaluated on scales that measure the manner in which the questions were answered, internal coherence, consistency and reflectiveness of the narrative or memory (Music, 2011) Has approximately 20 questions and takes about one hour to complete The four possible attachment classifications include secure- autonomous, preoccupied, dismissing, and unresolved- disorganized (Music, 2011) Measure has been found to have a test- retest reliability of approximately .90 (Sagi et al., 1994) characterizes an adolescent or adult’s internal working models and representational worlds related to attachment by examining the organization and integration of specific memories and judgments related to attachment figures (typically parents or caregivers Developed by (George, Kaplan & Main, 1996)

Measure 3 Friendship Quality Scale (FQS) A measure composed of 23 items, with five subscales measuring four positive aspects of friendship quality (companionship, help, security and closeness) and one aspect of negative quality (conflict) Responses are measured on a 5-point Likert-type scale, with a score of 1 indicating “not at all true” and a score of 5 indicating “extremely true” The FSQ should take participants about fifteen minutes to complete Strong internal consistency reliability with a value of .86 (Terrion, Rocchi, & O’Rielly, 2015) Developed by Bukowski, Hoza, & Boivin, 1994 Participants are asked to indicate the extent to which the statements were true about their relationship with their peers The range of scores therefore is 23-115

Measure 4 Bullying Behavior Scale (BBS) A six-item measure designed to assess bullying behaviors in school Three of the items refer to being the perpetrator of negative physical actions and three refer to being the perpetrator of negative verbal/ emotional actions 1 to 4 on a Likert-type scale, where a score of 1 indicates “never true for me” and a score of 4 indicates “really true for me” Should take participants about five minutes to complete Has acceptable internal consistency reliability in a range of adolescent school samples (α = .82) Developed by Austin, & Joseph, 1996) The range of scores is therefore 6-24. Higher scores indicate greater bullying behavior.

Procedure Institutional Review Board approval from Long Island University before study commenced Informed consent, informed assent, and demographic questionnaire completed at start of the study Session 1: A trained graduate-level psychology student administered the Adult Attachment Interview (90 mins.) Session 2: Complete the Friendship Quality Scale measure (15 mins.) Session 3: Complete the Bullying Behavior Scale (10 mins.) This study lasted one year and occurred across three consecutive weeks for each participant at his or her respective high school in New York City All sessions took place at the students respective high schools either during lunch breaks or after school After session 3 they were compensated with a Stabrucks gift card

Procedure (cont.) Graduate-level psychology students scored both the FSQ and BBS measures Six postdoctoral students transcribed the data from the AAI The transcripts were sent to two trained experts who independently coded the data and determined the attachment classifications, blind to the study’s hypotheses The AAI coders established .86 interrater reliability for the attachment classifications of the adolescents in this study After classifying each participant into an attachment style, data from the FSQ and BBS were separated into two groups: those with disorganized attachment style, and those with non-disorganized attachment style.

Data Analysis Poor peer relationship quality will mediate the relationship between disorganized attached adolescents and bullying behaviors such that there will be a significant correlation between poor peer relationships and bullying behaviors and no significant correlation between disorganized attached adolescents and bullying behaviors after controlling for poor peer relationship quality Data were analyzed using a hierarchical regression analysis, performed at an alpha level of p < .05 (Baron & Kenny, 1986).

Results Significant: Nonsignificant Adolescents with disorganized attachment were significantly correlated with bullying behaviors (r = 0.87) Disorganized attachment styles were significantly correlated with poor peer relationship quality (r = 0.85) Poor peer relationship quality was also significantly correlated with bullying behavior (r = 0.92 ) When controlling for peer relationship quality, however, disorganized attachment styles’ effect on bullying behaviors became nonsignificant Nonsignificant Although significant correlations were found between poor peer relationships and bullying behavior, as well as disorganized attachment styles in adolescents and bullying behavior, no significant correlation was found between disorganized attachment style and poor peer relationships Significant: Poor peer relationship quality therefore mediates the pathway between adolescents with disorganized attachment style and bullying behaviors. Nonsignificant: did not support the hypothesis that poor peer relationship quality would mediate the relationship between adolescents with disorganized attachment style and bullying behavior

Discussion (Significant) Correlation between adolescents with disorganized attachment style and bullying behaviors: Children who experience responsive, empathetic, sensitive and attuned caregiving are likely to develop empathic responses to others in need, whereas those that do not have secure attachment respond with aggressive, unemotional and hostile behaviors Develop a view of the world as an unsafe environment and are therefore likely to selectively attend to hostile social cues Correlation between disorganized attachment and poor peer relationship quality: Form negative internal working models of the world Switch from the family unit to the peer unit as a basis for the adolescent’s social world Isolation may cause adolescents with disorganized attachment to learn to manipulate and control their peers, rather than relying on them for support

Discussion (Significant) Correlation between poor peer relationships and bullying Accountability and support Bullies themselves often tend to lack strong peer relationships and acceptance in the social realm Exhibit control and social dominance Clinical implications Help bolster attachment patterns and peer relationship quality early on Crucial to provide psychological aid to the bullies as well as the victims Combining work on attachment in the home environment and peer relationships at school seems to provide another successful therapeutic intervention opportunity (Rodkin, 2012) Bullies are often not held accountable by their peers for their aggressive and malicious actions

Discussion (Nonsignificant) Limitations: Relatively small sample size Both measures used to assess peer relationship quality and bullying behaviors were self-report Future research considerations: An all- male and all-female study to determine whether the same variables of attachment style and peer relationship quality are applicable equally to both genders Bullying as a continuous variable by examining the severity of the bullying behavior Disorganized attachment quality in adolescents and poor peer relationship quality were not significantly correlated, suggesting that the correlation between attachment style in adolescence and bullying behaviors may be mediated by some other variable. These measures may also have been influenced by parental pressure; since almost all of the participants had to have informed consent; they may have been hesitant to provide honest information about their peer relationships and bullying behaviors for fear of familial shame or punishment.

References Allen, J. P., McElhaney, K. B., Kuperminc, G. P., & Jodl, K. M. (2004). Stability and change in attachment security across adolescence. Child Development, 75(6), 1792-1805. Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator–mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51(6), 1173. Curtner-Smith, M. E. (2000). Mechanisms by which family processes contribute to school-age boy’s bullying. Child Study Journal, 30, 169-186. Fite, J. P., Greening, L., & Stoppelbein, L. (2008). Relation between parenting stress and psychopathic traits among children. Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 26, 239-248. Hodges, E.V., Malone, M.J., & Perry, D.G. (1997). Individual risk and social risk as interacting determinants of victimization in the peer group. Developmental Psychology, 33(6), 1032-1039. Liu, Y. (2006). Paternal/maternal attachment, peer support, social expectations of peer interaction, and depressive symptoms. Adolescence, 41, 705-721. Monks, C. P., Smith, P. K., & Swettenham, J. (2005). The psychological correlates of peer victimization in preschool: Social cognitive skills, executive function and attachment profiles. Aggressive Behavior, 31, 571- 588. Music, G. (2011). Nurturing Natures: Attachment and children’s emotional, sociocultural and brain development. Hove, England: Psychology Press Rodkin, P.C. (2012). Bullying and children’s peer relationships. Colleagues, 8(2), 1-6. Sagi, A., Van Uzendoorn, M. H., Scharf, M., Koren-Karie, N., Joels, T., & Mayseless, O. (1994). Stability and discriminant validity of the Adult Attachment Interview: A psychometric study in young Israeli adults. Developmental Psychology, 30, 988- 1000. Terrion, J.L., Rocchi, M., & O’Rielly, S. (2015). The relationship between friendship quality and antisocial behavior in adolescents in residential substance abuse treatment. Journal of groups in addiction and recovery, 10, 141- 162.