Advertisement

Journal of Youth and Adolescence

, Volume 48, Issue 4, pp 692–702 | Cite as

Depression, Anxiety, and Peer Victimization: Bidirectional Relationships and Associated Outcomes Transitioning from Childhood to Adolescence

  • Miriam K. ForbesEmail author
  • Sally Fitzpatrick
  • Natasha R. Magson
  • Ronald M. Rapee
Empirical Research

Abstract

Experiences of depression, anxiety, and peer victimization have each been found to predict one another, and to predict negative outcomes in the domains of school connectedness, social functioning, quality of life, and physical health. However, the common co-occurrence of depression, anxiety, and peer victimization experiences has made it difficult to disentangle their unique roles in these associations. The present study thus sought to characterize the precise nature of the bidirectional relationships between depressive symptoms, anxiety, and victimization over time, and to examine their unique sequelae during the transition from childhood to early adolescence. Longitudinal multi-informant (child-reported, parent-reported, and teacher-reported) data from a nationally representative sample were analyzed using path analysis when the study child was aged 10–11 (n= 4169; Mage = 10.3; 48.8% female) and aged 12–13 (n= 3956; Mage = 12.4; 48.2% female). Depressive symptoms, anxiety, and peer victimization had small but significant unique bidirectional relationships. All three constructs also uniquely and prospectively predicted poorer life functioning across all domains examined. These results demonstrate that current interventions should broaden their scope to simultaneously target depression, anxiety, and peer victimization, as each of these experiences independently act as additive risk factors for subsequent negative outcomes.

Keywords

Depression Anxiety Peer victimization Internalizing symptoms Longitudinal research 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This article uses unit record data from Growing Up in Australia, the Longitudinal Study of Australian Children. The study is conducted in partnership between the Department of Social Services (DSS), the Australian Institute of Family Studies (AIFS) and the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS). The findings and views reported in this article are those of the authors and should not be attributed to DSS, AIFS, or the ABS.

Authors’ Contributions

M.K.F. and R.M.R. conceived of the study; M.K.F. designed and conducted the statistical analyses, interpreted the results, drafted the Abstract, Method, Results, and Discussion, and revised the manuscript critically for intellectual content; S.F. wrote the first draft of the Introduction, and revised the manuscript critically for intellectual content; N.R.M. wrote subsequent drafts of the Introduction, contributed to the revised discussion, and revised the manuscript critically for intellectual content; R.M.R. participated in drafting all sections of the manuscript, and revised the full manuscript critically for intellectual content. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Funding

This research was supported in part by a National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA) training grant supporting the work of M.K.F. (T320A037183), an Australian Research Council (ARC) Laureate Fellowship grant supporting the work of M.K.F., N.R.M., and R.M.R. (FL150100096), and a National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) grant supporting the work of R.M.R. (APP1047185). NIDA ARC, and NHMRC had no further role in the study design; in the collection, analysis, and interpretation of data; in writing; nor in the decision to submit the manuscript for publication.

Data Sharing and Declaration

The data that support the findings of this study were obtained from the Department of Social Services under license. Restrictions apply to the availability of these data, so they are not publicly available.

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical Approval

The Longitudinal Study of Australian Children was approved by the Australian Institute of Family Studies Ethics Committee. All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed Consent

All individual participants provided informed consent.

References

  1. American Psychiatric Association. (2013). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders. 5th Edn. Arlington, VA: American Psychiatric Publishing.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Angold, A., Costello, E. J., Messer, S. C., & Pickles, A. (1995). Development of a short questionnaire for use in epidemiological studies of depression in children and adolescents. International Journal of Methods in Psychiatric Research, 5, 237–249.Google Scholar
  3. Arseneault, L. (2017). The long-term impact of bullying victimization on mental health. World Psychiatry, 16, 27–28.  https://doi.org/10.1002/wps.20399.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Becker, A., Hagenberg, N., Roessner, V., Woerner, W., & Rothenberger, A. (2004). Evaluation of the self-reported SDQ in a clinical setting: Do self-reports tell us more than ratings by adult informants? European Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 13, ii17–ii24.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00787-004-2004-4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Beck, A. T. (1976). Cognitive theory and the emotional disorders. New York, NY: International Universities Press.Google Scholar
  6. Benjamini, Y., & Hochberg, Y. (1995). Controlling the false discovery rate: a practical and powerful approach to multiple testing. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B, 57, 289–300.Google Scholar
  7. Besag, V. (1989). Bullies and victims in schools: a guide to understanding and management. Philadelphia, PA: Open University Press.Google Scholar
  8. Bogart, L. M., Elliott, M. N., Klein, D. J., Tortolero, S. R., Mrug, S., Peskin, M. F., & Schuster, M. A. (2014). Peer victimization in fifth grade and health in tenth grade. Pediatrics, 133, 440–447.  https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2013-3510.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Brown, R. D., & Hauenstein, N. M. (2005). Interrater agreement reconsidered: An alternative to the rwg indices. Organizational Research Methods, 8, 165–184.  https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428105275376.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Burke, M. J., & Dunlap, W. P. (2002). Estimating interrater agreement with the average deviation index: A user’s guide. Organizational Research Methods, 5, 159–172.  https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428102005002002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Craig, W., Harel-Fisch, Y., Fogel-Grinvald, H., Dostaler, S., Hetland, J., Simons-Morton, B., & Pickett, W. (2009). A cross-national profile of bullying and victimization among adolescents in 40 countries. International Journal of Public Health, 54, 216–224.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. De Los Reyes, A., Augenstein, T. M., Wang, M., Thomas, S. A., Drabick, D. A. G., Burgers, D. E., & Rabinowitz, J. (2015). The validity of the multi-informant approach to assessing child and adolescent mental health. Psychological Bulletin, 141, 858–900.  https://doi.org/10.1037/a0038498.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. De Los Reyes, A., & Kazdin, A. E. (2006). Conceptualizing changes in behavior in intervention research: The range of possible changes model. Psychological Review, 113, 554–583.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.113.3.554.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. De Los Reyes, A., Thomas, S. A., Goodman, K. L., & Kundey, S. M. (2013). Principles underlying the use of multiple informants’ reports. Annual Review of Clinical Psychology, 9, 123–149.  https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-clinpsy-050212-185617.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Dixon, M. A., & Cunningham, G. B. (2006). Data aggregation in multilevel analysis: A review of conceptual and statistical issues. Measurement in Physical Education and Exercise Science, 10, 85–107.  https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327841mpee1002_2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Enders, C. K. (2011). Analyzing longitudinal data with missing values. Rehabilitation Psychology, 56, 267–288.  https://doi.org/10.1037/a0025579.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Espelage, D. L., & Holt, M. K. (2001). Bullying and victimization during early adolescence. Journal of Emotional Abuse, 2, 123–142.  https://doi.org/10.1300/J135v02n02_08.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Forrest, W., & Edwards, B. (2015) The Longitudinal Study of Australian Children Annual statistical report 2014. Melbourne, Australia: Australian Institute of Family Studies.Google Scholar
  19. Garber, J., & Weersing, V. R. (2010). Comorbidity of anxiety and depression in youth: Implications for treatment and prevention.Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice, 17, 293–306.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2850.2010.01221.x.Google Scholar
  20. Goodenow, C. (1993). The psychological sense of school membership among adolescents: Scale development and educational correlates. Psychology in the Schools, 30, 79–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Goodman, A., Lamping, D. L., & Ploubidis, G. B. (2010). When to use broader internalising and externalising subscales instead of the hypothesised five subscales on the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ): data from British parents, teachers and children. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 38, 1179–1191.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10802-010-9434-x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Goodman, R. (1997). The strengths and difficulties questionnaire: a research note. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 38, 581–586.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-7610.1997.tb01545.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Graham, S., Bellmore, A., & Juvonen, J. (2014). Peer victimization in middle school: When self-and peer views diverge. Vol. 121, Bullying, Victimization, and Peer Harassment: A Handbook of Prevention and Intervention.Google Scholar
  24. Griffith, J. W., Zinbarg, R. E., Craske, M. G., Mineka, S., Rose, R. D., Waters, A. M., & Sutton, J. M. (2010). Neuroticism as a common dimension in the internalizing disorders. Psychological Medicine, 40, 1125–1136.  https://doi.org/10.1017/S0033291709991449.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Hamilton, J. L., Potter, C. M., Olino, T. M., Abramson, L. Y., Heimberg, R. G., & Alloy, L. B. (2016). The temporal sequence of social anxiety and depressive symptoms following interpersonal stressors during adolescence. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 495–509,  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10802-015-0049-0
  26. Hawker, D. S., & Boulton, M. J. (2000). Twenty years’ research on peer victimization and psychosocial maladjustment: A meta-analytic review of cross-sectional studies. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 41, 441–455.  https://doi.org/10.1111/1469-7610.00629.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Homburg, C., Klarmann, M., & Totzek, D. (2012). Using multi-informant designs to address key informant and common method bias. In A. Diamantopoulos, W. Fritz & L. Hildebrandt (Eds.), Quantitative marketing and marketing management (pp. 81–102). Wiesbaden: Gabler Verlag.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Hunt, C. (2015). Understanding and combating school-based bullying from an individual-level perspective: A review. Australian Psychologist, 50, 182–185.  https://doi.org/10.1111/ap.12093.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Hymel, S., & Swearer, S. M. (2015). Four decades of research on school bullying: An introduction. American Psychologist, 70, 293–299.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Juvonen, J., & Graham, S. (2014). Bullying in schools: The power of bullies and the plight of victims. Annual Review of Psychology, 65, 159–185.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Juvonen, J., Wang, Y., & Espinoza, G. (2011). Bullying experiences and comprimised academic performance across middle school grades. The Journal of Early Adolescence, 31, 152–173.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0272431610379415.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Kljakovic, M., & Hunt, C. (2016). A meta-analysis of predictors of bullying and victimisation in adolescence. Journal of Adolescence, 49, 134–145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Kokkinos, C. M., & Kipritsi, E. (2012). The relationship between bullying, victimization, trait emotional intelligence, self-efficacy and empathy among preadolescents. Social Psychology of Education, 15, 41–58.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11218-011-9168-9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. LeBreton, J. M., & Senter, J. L. (2007). Answers to 20 questions about interrater reliability and interrater agreement. Organizational Research Methods, 11, 815–852.  https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428106296642.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Little, T. D. (2013). Longitudinal structural equation modeling. Guilford press, New York, NY.Google Scholar
  36. Luchetti, S., & Rapee, R. M. (2014). Liking and perceived probability of victimization of peers displaying behaviors characteristic of anxiety and depression. Journal of Experimental Psychopathology, 5, 212–223.  https://doi.org/10.5127/jep.036913.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Modecki, K. L., Minchin, J., Harbaugh, A. G., Guerra, N. G., & Runions, K. C. (2014). Bullying prevalence across contexts: A meta-analysis measuring cyber and traditional bullying. Journal of Adolescent Health, 55, 602–611.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jadohealth.2014.06.007.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Moore, S. E., Norman, R. E., Suetani, S., Thomas, H. J., Sly, P. D., & Scott, J. G. (2017). Consequences of bullying victimization in childhood and adolescence: A systematic review and meta-analysis. World Journal of Psychiatry, 7, 60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Muris, P., Meesters, C., & van den Berg, F. (2003). The Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ). European Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 12, 1–8.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00787-003-0298-2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O. (1998). Mplus User’s Guide. Seventh Edition Los Angeles, CA: Muthén & Muthén. 2012.Google Scholar
  41. Nanni, V., Uher, R., & Danese, A. (2012). Childhood maltreatment predicts unfavorable course of illness and treatment outcome in depression: a meta-analysis. American Journal of Psychiatry, 169, 141–151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Olweus, D. (1996). The Revised Olweus Bullying Questionnaire. Mimeo: University of Bergen, Norway Bergen.Google Scholar
  43. Ranta, K., Kaltiala-Heino, R., Pelkonen, M., & Marttunen, M. (2009). Associations between peer victimization, self-reported depression and social phobia among adolescents: The role of comorbidity. Journal of Adolescence, 32, 77–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Reijntjes, A., Kamphuis, J. H., Prinzie, P., & Telch, M. J. (2010). Peer victimization and internalizing problems in children: A meta-analysis of longitudinal studies. Child Abuse and Neglect, 34, 244–252.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Roth, D. A., Coles, M. E., & Heimberg, R. G. (2002). The relationship between memories for childhood teasing and anxiety and depression in adulthood. Journal of Anxiety Disorders, 16, 149–164.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Salmivalli, C. (2010). Bullying and the peer group: A review. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 15, 112–120.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.avb.2009.08.007.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Schacter, H. L., & Juvonen, J. (2017). Depressive symptoms, friend distress, and self-blame: Risk factors for adolescent peer victimization. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 51, 35–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Schwartz, D., Gorman, A. H., Nakamoto, J., & Toblin, R. L. (2005). Victimization in the peer group and children’s academic functioning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 97, 425.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Sentse, M., Kretschmer, T., & Salmivalli, C. (2015). The longitudinal interplay between bullying, victimization, and social status: Age‐related and gender differences. Social Development, 24, 659–677.  https://doi.org/10.1111/sode.12115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Sentse, M., Prinzie, P., & Salmivalli, C. (2017). Testing the direction of longitudinal paths between victimization, peer rejection, and different types of internalizing problems in adolescence. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 45, 1013–1023.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10802-016-0216-y.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Smith, P. K., Talamelli, L., Cowie, H., Naylor, P., & Chauhan, P. (2004). Profiles of non-victims, escaped victims, continuing victims and new victims of school bullying. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 74, 565–581.  https://doi.org/10.1348/0007099042376427.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Snyder, J., Prichard, J., Schrepferman, L., Patrick, M. R., & Stoolmiller, M. (2004). Child impulsiveness—inattention, early peer experiences, and the development of early onset conduct problems. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 32, 579–594.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Soloff, C., Lawrence, D., & Johnstone, R. (2005). Longitudinal Study of Australian Children technical paper no. 1: Sample design. Melbourne, Australia: Australian Institute of Family Studies.Google Scholar
  54. Spear, L. P. (2009). Heightened stress responsivity and emotional reactivity during pubertal maturation: Implications for psychopathology. Development and Psychopathology, 21, 87–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Stapinski, L. A., Araya, R., Heron, J., Montgomery, A. A., & Stallard, P. (2015). Peer victimization during adolescence: Concurrent and prospective impact on symptoms of depression and anxiety. Anxiety, Stress, & Coping, 28, 105–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Takizawa, R., Maughan, B., & Arseneault, L. (2014). Adult health outcomes of childhood bullying victimization: Evidence from a five-decade longitudinal British birth cohort. American Journal of Psychiatry, 171, 777–784.  https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.ajp.2014.13101401.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Trosper, S. E., Whitton, S. W., Brown, T. A., & Pincus, D. B. (2012). Understanding the latent structure of the emotional disorders in children and adolescents. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 40, 621–632.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Van Bruggen, G. H., Lilien, G. L., & Kacker, M. (2002). Informants in organizational marketing research: Why use multiple informants and how to aggregate responses. Journal of Marketing Research, 39, 469–478.  https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkr.39.4.469.19117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Wagner, S. M., Rau, C., & Lindemann, E. (2010). Multiple informant methodology: A critical review and recommendations. Sociological Methods and Research, 38, 582–618.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0049124110366231.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Wang, C. (2011). A longitudinal investigation of peer victimization, self-esteem, depression, and anxiety among adolescents: A test of cognitive diathesis-stress theory. Public Access Theses and Dissertations from the College of Education and Human Sciences. 110. http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/cehsdiss/110.

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Centre for Emotional HealthMacquarie UniversitySydneyAustralia
  2. 2.Departments of Psychiatry and PsychologyUniversity of MinnesotaMinneapolisUSA

Personalised recommendations