受欺凌经历对青少年亲欺凌旁观行为的影响:道德推脱与感知班级反欺凌规范的作用机制

doi:10.16187/j.cnki.issn1001-4918.2025.02.12

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 受欺凌经历是青少年目睹欺凌时做出亲欺凌旁观行为的重要风险因子。但关于受欺凌经历“如何”及“何种情况下”影响亲欺凌旁观行为少有研究涉及。基于社会认知理论和风险—保护性因素模型,本研究提出一个有调节的中介模型考察道德推脱的中介作用及感知班级反欺凌规范的调节作用。研究采用问卷法对1562名青少年(M_age=14.39岁,SD=1.00)进行施测。结果显示:受欺凌经历显著正向预测青少年的亲欺凌旁观行为;道德推脱部分中介受欺凌经历与亲欺凌旁观行为间的关系;感知班级反欺凌规范调节了中介模型的前半段和后半段路径。研究揭示了受欺凌经历与青少年亲欺凌旁观行为间的潜在作用机制,并对实践干预具有一定启发。

关键词: 受欺凌经历, 道德推脱, 亲欺凌旁观行为, 感知班级反欺凌规范

Abstract: Bullying victimization is the risk factor of pro-bullying bystander behaviors. However, little is known about how and under what condition bullying victimization is related with pro-bullying bystander behaviors. Based on the social cognitive theory and risk and protective factor framework, the present study examined a moderated mediation model to explore whether moral disengagement would mediate the relationship between bullying victimization and pro-bullying bystander behaviors and perceived antibullying class norms as protective factor would moderate the direct and/or indirect pathway. A total of 1562 adolescents (M_age = 14.39 years, SD = 1.00) was recruited to participate in this study and completed relevant anonymous questionnaires. Data was analyzed using SPSS 26.0 and Mplus 8.3. The results indicated: (1) Bullying victimization was positively related to pro-bullying bystander behaviors; (2) The relationship between bullying victimization and pro-bullying bystander behaviors was partly mediated by moral disengagement; (3) Perceived antibullying class norms moderated the indirect pathways between bullying victimization and pro-bullying bystander behaviors. The present study revealed that how and under what condition bullying victimization is associated with pro-bullying bystander behaviors. Those findings contributed to our understanding of the underlying psychological mechanisms of pro-bullying bystander behaviors and provided suggestions for future bullying prevention interventions.

Key words: bullying victimization, moral disengagement, pro-bullying bystander behaviors, perceived antibullying class norms

中图分类号:

B844

鲍振宙, 储怡佳, 王帆, 柳希希, 于明申. 受欺凌经历对青少年亲欺凌旁观行为的影响:道德推脱与感知班级反欺凌规范的作用机制[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2025, 41(2): 265-275.

BAO Zhenzhou, CHU Yijia, WANG Fan, LIU Xixi, YU Mingshen. Bullying Victimization and Adolescents’ Pro-bullying Bystander Behaviors: The Mechanisms of Moral Disengagement and Perceived Antibullying Class Norms[J]. Psychological Development and Education, 2025, 41(2): 265-275.

参考文献

Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (1980).Understanding attitudes and predicting social behavior. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Bai, Q. Y., Bai, S. G., Huang, Y. Y., Hsueh, F. H., & Wang, P. C. (2020). Family incivility and cyberbullying in adolescence: A moderated mediation model. Computers in Human Behavior, 110, Article e106315.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2020.106315
Bandura, A. (1999). Moral disengagement in the perpetration of inhumanities.Personality and Social Psychology Review, 3(3), 193-209.
Bandura, A., Barbaranelli, C., Caprara, G. V., & Pastorelli, C. (1996). Mechanisms of moral disengagement in the exercise of moral agency.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71(2), 364-374.
Bandura, A., Caprara, G. V., Barbaranelli, C., & Pastorelli, C. (2001). Sociocognitive self-regulatory mechanisms governing transgressive behavior.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 80(1), 125-135.
Berger, C., & Caravita, S. C. (2016). Why do early adolescents bully? Exploring the influence of prestige norms on social and psychological motives to bully.Journal of Adolescence, 46(1), 45-56.
Bjärehed, M., Thornberg, R., Wänström, L., & Gini, G. (2021). Mechanisms of moral disengagement and their associations with indirect bullying, direct bullying, and pro-aggressive bystander behavior. The Journal of Early Adolescence, 40(1), 28-55.
Camodeca, M., & Coppola, G. (2018). Participant roles in preschool bullying: The impact of emotion regulation, social preference, and quality of the teacher-child relationship.Review of Social Development, 28(1), 3-21.
Cheung, G. W., Cooper-Thomas, H. D., Lau, R. S., & Wang, L. C. (2021). Testing moderation in business and psychological studies with latent moderated structural equations.Journal of Business and Psychology, 36(4), 1009-1033.
Ettekal, I., Kochenderfer-Ladd, B., & Ladd, G. W. (2015). A synthesis of person-and relational-level factors that influence bullying and bystanding behaviors: Toward an integrative framework. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 23, 75-86.
Garandeau, C. F., & Cillessenb, H. N. (2006). From indirect aggression to invisible aggression: A conceptual view on bullying and peer group manipulation.Aggression and Violent Behavior, 11(6), 641-654.
Graham, K. A., Resick, C. J., Margolis, J. A., Shao, T., & Kiker, J. D. (2019). Egoistic norms, organizational identification, and the perceived ethicality of unethical pro-organizational behavior: A moral maturation perspective.Human Relations, 73(9), 1249-1277.
Jiang, S. Y., Liu, R. D., Ding, Y., Jiang, R. H., Fu, X. C., & Hong, W. (2020). Why the victims of bullying are more likely to avoid involvement when witnessing bullying situations: The role of bullying sensitivity and moral disengagement. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 37(1), 1-22.
Lönnqvist, J. E., Walkowitz, G., Wichardt, P., Lindeman, M., & Verkasalo, M. (2009). The moderating effect of conformism values on the relations between other personal values, social norms, moral obligation, and single altruistic behaviours. British Journal of Social Psychology, 48(3), 525-546.
Masten, A. S. (2001). Ordinary magic: Resilience processes in development.American Psychologist, 56(3), 227-238.
Ma, T. L., Meter, D. J., Chen, W. T., & Lee, Y. (2019). Defending behavior of peer victimization in school and cyber context during childhood and adolescence: A meta-analytic review of individual and peer-relational characteristics.Psychological Bulletin, 145(9), 891-928.
Meter, D. J., & Card, N. A. (2015). Effects of defending: The longitudinal relations among peer-perceived defending of victimized peer, victimization, and liking. Social Development, 24(4), 734-747.
Midgett, A., & Doumas, D. M. (2019). Witnessing bullying at school: The association between being a bystander and anxiety and depressive symptoms.School Mental Health, 11(4), 454-463.
Olweus, D. (1996).The revised Olweus bully/victim questionnaire. Bergen, Norway: University of Bergen.
Perkins, H. W., Craig, D. W., & Perkins, J. M. (2011). Using social norms to reduce bullying: A research intervention among adolescents in five middle schools.Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 14(5), 703-722.
Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J. Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies.Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(5), 879-903.
Runions, K. C., Shaw, T., Bussey, K., Thornberg, R., Salmivalli, C., & Cross, D. S. (2019). Moral disengagement of pure bullies and bully/victims: Shared and distinct mechanisms. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 48(9), 1835-1848.
Salmivalli, C., Kärnä, A., & Poskiparta, E. (2011). Counteracting bullying in Finland: The KiVa program and its effects on different forms of being bullied.International Journal of Behavioral Development, 35(5), 405-411.
Salmivalli, C., Lagerspetz, K., Björkqvist, K., Österman, K., & Kaukiainen, A. (1996). Bullying as a group process: Participant roles and their relations to social status within the group. Aggressive Behavior, 22(1), 1-15.
Thornberg, R., & Jungert, T. (2013). Bystander behavior in bullying situations: Basic moral sensitivity, moral disengagement and defender self-efficacy.Journal of Adolescence, 36(3), 475-483.
Thornberg, R., Tenenbaum, L., Varjas, K., Meyers, J., Jungert, T., & Vanegas, G. (2012). Bystander motivation in bullying incidents: To intervene or not to intervene? Western Journal of Emergency Medicine, 13(3), 247-252.
Thornberg, R., & Wänström, L. (2018). Bullying and its association with altruism toward victims, blaming the victims, and classroom prevalence of bystander behaviors: A multilevel analysis.Social Psychology of Education, 21(5), 1133-1151.
Thornberg, R., Wänström, L., & Pozzoli, T. (2017). Peer victimization and its relation to class relational climate and class moral disengagement among school children.Educational Psychology, 37(5), 524-536.
Troop-Gordon, W., Frosch, C. A., Wienke Totura, C. M., Bailey, A. N., Jackson, J. D., & Dvorak, R. D. (2019). Predicting the development of pro-bullying bystander behavior: A short-term longitudinal analysis.Journal of School Psychology, 77, 77-89.
Vaillancourt, T., & Hymel, S. (2006). Aggression and social status: The moderating roles of sex and peer-valued characteristics.Aggressive Behavior, 32(4), 396-408.
Yun, H. Y. (2019). New approaches to defender and outsider roles in school bullying.Child Development, 91(4), 814-832.
Zhang, J., Li, D., Ahemaitijiang, N., Peng, W., & Wang, Y. (2020). Perceived school climate and delinquency among Chinese adolescents: A moderated mediation analysis of moral disengagement and effortful control.Children and Youth Services Review, 116, Article e105253. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2020.105253
陈慧, 刘扬, 曾垂凯. (2015). 守范？失范？作为参照点的社会规范对决策行为的影响. 心理科学, 38(2), 408-413.
陈静, 冉光明, 张琪, 牛湘. (2022). 儿童和青少年同伴侵害与攻击行为关系的三水平元分析.心理科学进展, 30(2), 275-290.
方杰, 温忠麟. (2018). 基于结构方程模型的有调节的中介效应分析. 心理科学, 41(2), 453-458.
刘晓薇, 潘斌, 陈亮, 李腾飞, 纪林芹, 张文新. (2021). 受欺负与青少年外化问题关系的“健康环境悖论”:敌意性归因的中介作用. 心理学报, 53(2), 170-181.
王建平, 喻承甫, 甄霜菊, 曾姝倩. (2020, 7月). 同伴侵害与青少年攻击行为——心理需求满足与意向性自我调节的作用. 北京师范大学学报(社会科学版), (4), 60-69.
温忠麟, 叶宝娟. (2014). 中介效应分析:方法和模型发展. 心理科学进展, 22(5), 731-745.
吴晗, 魏昶, 陆惠诗, 赖伟平, 邢锦涛, 喻承甫, 张卫. (2021). 同伴侵害与青少年抑郁:社会退缩的中介作用与师生关系的调节作用. 心理发展与教育, 37(2), 249-256.
吴艳, 温忠麟. (2011). 结构方程建模中的题目打包策略. 心理科学进展, 19(12), 1859-1867.
谢家树, 谢璐, Chunyan Yang, George G. Bear, 凌宇. (2016). 中美青少年校园欺负受害问题的比较研究. 中国临床心理学杂志, 24(4), 706-709+683.
曾欣然, 汪玥, 丁俊浩, 周晖. (2019). 班级欺凌规范与欺凌行为:群体害怕与同辈压力的中介作用. 心理学报, 51(8), 935-944.
张荣荣, 董莉. (2019). 校园欺凌中旁观者行为的作用机制. 心理技术与应用, 7(2), 118-128.
张云运, 牛丽丽, 任萍, 秦幸娜. (2018). 同伴地位对青少年早期不同类型攻击行为发展的影响:性别与班级规范的调节作用. 心理发展与教育, 34(1), 38-48.

多维度评价

Viewed

Full text

Abstract

Cited

Shared

Discussed

[1]	史滋福, 周志豪, 许磊, 陈火红, 管锦亮, 刘承珍. 父母消极教养方式与大学生恶意创造性行为的关系:有调节的中介模型[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2024, 40(6): 808-815.
[2]	胡志琴, 熊猛. 相对剥夺感与大学生网络欺凌的关系：道德推脱的中介作用与道德认同的调节作用[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2024, 40(3): 346-356.
[3]	鲍振宙, 储怡佳, 王帆, 柳希希. 校园欺凌中的“袖手旁观”:校园氛围、学校联结和道德推脱的作用[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2023, 39(4): 580-589.
[4]	汪悦, 熊昱可, 任萍, 杨柳, 苗薇. 受欺负对初中生主动性和反应性攻击的影响:道德推脱和性别的作用[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2023, 39(3): 410-418.
[5]	张林, 陈燕铃, 洪新伟, 赵明玉, 范航, 刘燊. 冷酷无情特质与初中生校园欺凌行为的关系:一个有调节的中介模型[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2023, 39(2): 266-275.
[6]	金童林, 陆桂芝, 张璐, 金祥忠, 王晓雨. 特质愤怒对大学生网络攻击行为的影响:道德推脱的作用[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2017, 33(5): 605-613.
[7]	孙丽君, 杜红芹, 牛更枫, 李俊一, 胡祥恩. 心理虐待与忽视对青少年攻击行为的影响:道德推脱的中介与调节作用[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2017, 33(1): 65-75.
[8]	高玲, 王兴超, 杨继平. 交往不良同伴对男性未成年犯攻击行为的影响:道德推脱的中介作用[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2015, 31(5): 625-632.
[9]	杨继平, 王兴超, 高玲. 道德推脱对大学生网络偏差行为的影响:道德认同的调节作用[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2015, 31(3): 311-318.
[10]	杨继平, 王兴超. 青少年道德推脱与攻击行为：道德判断调节作用的性别差异[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2013, 29(4): 361-367.
[11]	王兴超, 杨继平, 刘丽, 高玲, 李霞. 道德推脱对大学生攻击行为的影响:道德认同的调节作用[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2012, 28(5): 532-538.
[12]	杨继平, 王兴超. 父母冲突与初中生攻击行为:道德推脱的中介作用[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2011, 27(5): 498-505.
[13]	杨继平, 王兴超, 陆丽君, 张力维. 道德推脱与大学生学术欺骗行为的关系研究[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2010, 26(4): 364-370.