CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 129Bullying, Victimization, and AggressionWorkplace Violence and BullyingChild and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development

Defending victims: What does it take to intervene in bullying and how is it rewarded by peers?

Open access
van der Ploeg, Rozemarijn, Kretschmer, Tina, Salmivalli, Christina, Veenstra, René·2017·Journal of School Psychology
DOI 10.1016/j.jsp.2017.06.002
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Defending is considered important in reducing bullying and victimization in schools. Yet, the prevalence of defending is quite low and there is little insight into aspects that explain why students intervene in bullying situations. The current study used a longitudinal design to simultaneously examine the antecedents and status outcomes of defending behavior. It was expected that affective and social-cognitive factors explain involvement in defending. Moreover, it was proposed that defending would be rewarded with popularity among peers, but only for defenders who were not victimized themselves. Unconflated multilevel path models were used and data came from students in grades 4-6 of Finnish elementary schools (N=4209 students from 210 classrooms and 38 schools; M age 11.25; 50% boys). Affective empathy and students' self-efficacy beliefs were predictive of defending behavior over time, whereas cognitive empathy was not. Additionally, defenders increased their popularity among their peers. No substantial differences between victims and non-victims were found. This pattern of results suggests that, irrespective of victim status, specific children are more likely to defend in bullying situations and are rewarded with increased popularity.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jsp.2017.06.002

Cites

54 of 55 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Acting for someone else can produce anxiety, guilt, or strain when loyalty to friends clashes with personal values.

    “Acting for someone else can produce anxiety, guilt, or strain when loyalty to friends clashes with personal values (van der Ploeg et al., 2017).”

    From Children's perceptions of bullying, exclusion and defending in English primary schools: A qualitative study (2026) · cites this paper as van der Ploeg et al., 2017

    Section 1.1 (p. 4) discusses empathy and self-efficacy as factors influencing whether students defend bullying victims, not anxiety, guilt, or strain resulting from defending. The Discussion (p. 9) addresses peer popularity but does not describe a conflict between loyalty to friends and personal values. Searches for those emotions and that conflict found no supporting passage in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.75)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 56 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy . New York, NY: Freeman. http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0022-4405(1730075-4/rf0005)
  2. Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. (2012). Mplus user's guide (7th ed.). Los Angelos, CA: Muthén & Muthén. http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0022-4405(1730075-4/rf0125)
  3. Pöyhönen, V., & Salmivalli, C. (2008). New directions in research and practice addressing bullying: Focus on defending behavior. In D. J. Pepler, & W. M. Craig (Eds.), Understanding and addressing bullying: An international perspective (pp. 26 -42). Bloomington, IN: Author House. http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0022-4405(1730075-4/rf0155)

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
van der Ploeg, R., Kretschmer, T., Salmivalli, C., & Veenstra, R.
Affiliations
  • University of Groningen (NL)
  • University of Turku (FI)
ORCID
Venue
Journal of School Psychology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2017-12
Volume
65
Pages
1-10
ISSN
0022-4405 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.jsp.2017.06.002
OpenAlex
W2724915600
Cited by
129
References
56
Citations by year
2026: 17 · 2025: 14 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 15 · 2022: 16 · 2021: 19 · 2020: 14 · 2019: 13 · 2018: 11
FWCI
14.88
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Journal of School Psychology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • University of Groningen research database (University of Groningen / Centre for Information Technology) (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • University of Groningen research database (University of Groningen / Centre for Information Technology) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Bullying, Victimization, and Aggression
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Workplace Violence and Bullying
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Child and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development
Keywords
bullying, defending behavior, peer victimization, peer popularity, affective empathy, cognitive empathy, self-efficacy, elementary school students, peer intervention, socio-cognitive factors
MeSH terms
Child, Child Behavior, Female, Humans, Interpersonal Relations, Male, Peer Group, Social Desirability, Students, Crime Victims, Bullying

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review