Search

Using data from 2413 Dutch first-year secondary school students (M age=13.27, SD age=0.51, 49.0% boys), this study investigated as to what extent students who according to their self-reports had not been victimized (referred to as reporters) gave victimization nominations to classmates who according to their self-reports had been victimized (referred to as receivers). Using a dyadic approach, characteristics of the reporter-receiver dyad (i.e., gender similarity) and of the reporter (i.e., reporters' behavior during bullying episodes) that were possibly associated with reporter-receiver agreement were investigated. Descriptive analyses suggested that numerous students who were self-reported victims were not perceived as victimized by their non-victimized classmates. Three-level logistic regression models (reporter-receiver dyads nested in reporters within classrooms) demonstrated greater reporter-receiver agreement in same-gender dyads, especially when the reporter and the receiver were boys. Furthermore, reporters who behaved as outsiders during bullying episodes (i.e., reporters who actively shied away from the bullying) were less likely to agree on the receiver's self-reported victimization, and in contrast, reporters who behaved as defenders (i.e., reporters who helped and supported victims) were more likely to agree on the victimization. Moreover, the results demonstrated that reporters gave fewer victimization nominations to receivers who reported they had been victimized sometimes than to receivers who reported they had been victimized often/very often. Finally, this study suggested that reporter-receiver agreement may not only depend on characteristics of the reporter-receiver dyad and of the reporter, but on classroom characteristics as well (e.g., the number of students in the classroom)., (Copyright © 2015 Society for the Study of School Psychology. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

The present study is an examination of sex differences in the sources of annoyance that partners in close relationships might experience as a result of each other's behavior. To test hypotheses derived from S. E. Cross and L. Madson's (1997) self-construal theory and from D. M. Buss's (1989) evolutionary psychology-based model, men and women of varying ages and educational levels were asked to rate how annoyed they would be with each of 13 potentially annoying behaviors of their intimate partner. Results were consistent with self-construal theory in that relationship-threatening behaviors were more annoying to women than to men and autonomy threatening behaviors were more annoying to men than to women. Results were also consistent with evolutionary psychology in that aggressive behaviors were more annoying to women than to men and sexual withholding was relatively more annoying to men than to women. Sex differences in annoyance with relationship-threatening, autonomy-threatening, and reproductive strategy behaviors were independent of age and education level, although these factors did affect respondents' annoyance when partners were unemotional, sloppy, or pleased with their own appearance. Results showed that sources of annoyance in intimate relationships should not only be studied from an evolutionary perspective but from the perspectives of social, personality, and developmental psychology as well.

The present study assessed fear of hurricanes in children who had been confronted with this natural event (i.e., Antillean children, n=161). Their fear levels were compared to those of children who are unfamiliar with such an event (i.e., Belgian children, n=185). Antillean children reported significantly higher levels of fear of storms than Belgian children did, thus providing support for the notion that exposure to dangerous events promotes children's fears of those events. Surprisingly, however, Antillean children had lower scores on the 'Hurricanes' item than Belgian children. Plausibly, differences in how children interpreted this item may have accounted for this unexpected finding. That is, ratings of Antillean children were probably based on actual experiences with hurricanes, whereas scores of Belgian children presumably reflected appraisal of threat in case they would be confronted with such an event. Implications of this finding for the assessment of childhood fears are briefly discussed.