Perceptions of the Frequency and Importance of Social Support by Students Classified as Victims, Bullies, and Bully/Victims in an Urban Middle School

By Michelle Kilpatrick Demaray, Christine K. Malecki. 2003

428 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Clinical Psychology, Safety Research, Social Psychology

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/f35f447048d684d858b33eec92881c55f62155c5

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Clinical Psychology

In Safety Research

In Social Psychology

Citations in the corpus

Perceived social support among bullies, victims, and bully-victims (2007, result): “Consistent with the study hypotheses and previous research (Demaray and Malecki, 2003), uninvolved students reported greater perceived peer social support from their mothers and friends than victims and bully-victims, and greater maternal social support than victims.”
Victims and their defenders: A dyadic approach (2011, background): “…directly the function of defenders for victimized children, although there are related studies on perceived support (e.g., Davidson & Demaray, 2007; Demaray & Malecki, 2003; Holt & Espelage, 2007; Rigby, 1997) and friendship (e.g., Fox & Boulton, 2006; Hodges, Boivin, Vitaro, & Bukowski, 1999;…”
Importance Ratings of Socially Supportive Behaviors by Children and Adolescents (2003, background): “Finally, little research has been conducted on racial differences; however, initial investigations have found differences in the reported frequency of support by race (Demaray & Malecki, 2002).”
Teachers: A Critical But Overlooked Component of Bullying Prevention and Intervention (2014, background): “Victims also report low levels of teacher support (Demaray & Malecki, 2003).”
Social Support as a Moderator Between Victimization and Internalizing–Externalizing Distress From Bullying (2007, background): “Yet, other researchers have found that merely the awareness of support availability is enough to warrant an ameliorating effect (Demaray & Malecki, 2003b; Malecki & Demaray, 2002).”
Bullying and the Gifted: Victims, Perpetrators, Prevalence, and Effects (2006, background): “Similar to other studies (e.g., Demaray & Malecki, 2003), the survey could have included more of the low-level direct physical behaviors and relational kinds of bullying that females appear to engage in, including social exclusion or rumorspreading.”
Hidden Forms of Victimization in Elementary Students Involved in Bullying (2007, result): “In line with previous research (Demaray & Malecki, 2003; Haynie et al., 2001), students were considered “bullies” if their scores were in the top 25th percentile on the bullying measure and not in the top 25th percentile on the victimization measure.”
Different forms of bullying and victimization: Bully-victims versus bullies and victims (2013, background): “Bully-victims, in contrast, have been shown to be impulsive (Schwartz, 2000), highly rejected, and often without friends (Demaray & Malecki, 2003; Nansel et al., 2004), all characteristics that make it difficult to gain information and resources needed in order to implement indirect bullying.”
Parent/Child Concordance about Bullying Involvement and Family Characteristics Related to Bullying and Peer Victimization (2008, result): “In line with previous research (Demaray & Malecki, 2003; Haynie et al., 2001), students were considered “victims” if their scores were in the top 25th percentile on the peer victimization measure and not in the top 25th percentile on the bullying perpetration measure.”