Does Theory of Mind Mediate Aggression and Bullying in Middle School Males and Females?

186 Pages·2013·0.87 MB·English

by  Jami E. Givens

UUnniivveerrssiittyy ooff NNeebbrraasskkaa -- LLiinnccoollnn
DDiiggiittaallCCoommmmoonnss@@UUnniivveerrssiittyy ooff NNeebbrraasskkaa -- LLiinnccoollnn
Public Access Theses and Dissertations from Education and Human Sciences, College of
the College of Education and Human Sciences (CEHS)
11-2009
DDooeess TThheeoorryy ooff MMiinndd MMeeddiiaattee AAggggrreessssiioonn aanndd BBuullllyyiinngg iinn MMiiddddllee
SScchhooooll MMaalleess aanndd FFeemmaalleess??
Jami E. Givens
University of Nebraska - Lincoln, [email protected]
Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/cehsdiss
Part of the Education Commons
Givens, Jami E., "Does Theory of Mind Mediate Aggression and Bullying in Middle School Males and
Females?" (2009). Public Access Theses and Dissertations from the College of Education and Human
Sciences. 54.
https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/cehsdiss/54
This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Education and Human Sciences, College of (CEHS) at
DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. It has been accepted for inclusion in Public Access Theses and
Dissertations from the College of Education and Human Sciences by an authorized administrator of
DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln.
DOES THEORY OF MIND MEDIATE AGGRESSION AND BULLYING IN
MIDDLE SCHOOL MALES AND FEMALES?
by
Jami E. Givens
A DISSERTATION
Presented to the Faculty of
The Graduate College at the University of Nebraska
In Partial Fulfillment of Requirements
For the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy
Major: Psychological Studies in Education
Under the Supervision of Professor Susan M. Swearer
Lincoln, Nebraska
November, 2009
DOES THEORY OF MIND MEDIATE AGGRESSION AND BULLYING IN
MIDDLE SCHOOL MALES AND FEMALES?
Jami E. Givens, Ph.D.
University of Nebraska, 2009
Advisor: Susan M. Swearer
The purpose of this study was to investigate the relationship between theory of mind,
gender, physical aggression, relational aggression, and bullying. Specifically, this
research study was guided by the question: Does theory of mind mediate the relations
between gender and physical aggression, gender and relational aggression, and gender
and bullying? Three main hypotheses were made following Baron and Kenny’s (1986)
mediation model steps. The first hypothesis sought to identify whether gender differences
existed in aggressive and bullying behaviors. Specifically, it was hypothesized that (a)
adolescent females will endorse higher levels of relational aggression compared to
adolescent males, (b) adolescent males will endorse higher levels of physical aggression
compared to adolescent females, and (c) adolescent males and adolescent females will
report similar engagement in bullying behaviors. The second hypothesis was that
adolescent females will have higher theory of mind scores than adolescent males. Finally,
it was hypothesized that theory of mind will mediate the relationship between gender and
relational aggression, gender and physical aggression, and gender and bullying.
Participants for the study included 810 sixth, seventh, and eighth grade students
from three Midwestern middle schools who participated in a larger longitudinal
investigation examining school experiences in the United States, Japan, Korea, Australia,
and Canada. Analyses were conducted using structural equation modeling (SEM) with
latent variables. Results revealed a significant direct effect between gender and physical
aggression. As hypothesized, males were more physically aggressive than females. There
was also a significant direct effect between gender and theory of mind. Also as
hypothesized, females had higher theory of mind scores than males. No indirect effects
were identified. Additionally, theory of mind did not emerge as a mediator in the model.
Implications of the results are discussed as well as the applicability of the study
findings to aggression and bullying prevention and intervention efforts. Study limitations
and future research are identified.
i
Acknowledgements
I would first like to express my gratitude to Dr. Susan Swearer for her guidance,
support, and encouragement through this project and throughout my graduate career. Her
mentorship was paramount in achieving a tremendous graduate education. I would also
like to thank the members of my dissertation committee; Dr. Eric Buhs, Dr. Jim Bovaird,
and Dr. John Maag, for their thoughtful reviews, time, and attention to my dissertation.
I would like to thank my friends and colleagues in Dr. Swearer’s research group;
Dr. Amanda Siebecker, Dr. Lynae Frerichs, and Dr. Rhonda Turner, who made this
international project and “massive data collection” a success. Sincere thanks to Cixin
Wang, Chaorong Wu, and Brett Foley for their valuable statistical expertise. I would also
like to thank my fellow graduate students, who have been enormous assets throughout my
graduate training, and examples of grace and good humor through both trying and
rewarding times.
I also want to thank my family and friends who have continually encouraged me
to achieve my goals, and showed patience when my work took precedence on more than
one occasion. Thank you to my parents; for their love, patience, and support of all my
ambitions. Finally, thank you to my husband Ben, for his steadfast support throughout my
years of graduate school. He offered motivation when mine was dwindling, a voice of
reason when mine was lost, and immeasurable sacrifices to help me reach my goals.
ii
Table of Contents
I. Chapter One: Introduction 1
A. Consequences of Aggressive and Bullying Behavior 3
B. Subtypes of Aggression and Bullying 7
C. Gender Differences in Aggression and Bullying 8
D. Theories of Aggression and Bullying 9
1. Social Information Processing 9
2. Resource Control Theory 10
3. Theory of Mind 10
E. Purpose of the Study 11
II. Chapter Two: Overview of Previous Research 13
A. Definition of Aggression 13
B. Subtypes of Aggressive and Bullying Behavior 14
C. Prevalence of Aggression and Bullying 19
D. Development of Aggression and Bullying 22
E. Gender, Aggression, and Bullying 24
F. Maladaptive and Adaptive Consequences of Aggression and Bullying 28
Behavior
III. Theoretical Explanations for Aggression and Bullying 35
A. Social Information Processing 35
1. Social Information Processing, Aggression, and Bullying 36
2. Social Understanding, Aggression, and Bullying 41
B. Resource Control Theory 44
iii
1. Resource Control Theory, Aggression, and Bullying 45
C. Theory of Mind 47
1. Definition of Theory of Mind 47
2. Measures of Theory of Mind 50
3. Theory of Mind, Gender, and Development 54
4. Theory of Mind, Aggression, and Bullying 59
D. Purpose of the Study 62
1. Overall Research Question and Hypotheses 63
IV. Chapter Three: Methods 64
A. Participants 64
B. Instrumentation 64
1. Demographic Variables 65
2. Children’s Social Behavior Scale (CSBS; Crick & Grotpeter, 1995) 65
3. The Pacific-Rim Bullying Measure (Konishi et al., 2009) 66
4. Reading of the Mind in the Eyes (Baron-Cohen, Wheelwright, Hill et 69
al., 2001)
C. Procedures 70
V. Chapter Four: Results 73
A. Overview of Analysis 73
1. Missing Data 73
2. Descriptive Statistics 73
B. Analytic Strategy 75
1. Bootstrapping 75
iv
2. Structural Equation Modeling 76
C. Model Fit 77
1. Measurement Model 77
D. Test of the Structural Model 78
1. Direct effects 78
2. Indirect effects 79
E. Test of the Mediation Model 79
F. Mediation Results According to Research Hypotheses 81
1. Step One 81
a. Hypothesis 1a 81
b. Hypothesis 1b 81
c. Hypothesis 1c 81
2. Step Two 82
a. Hypothesis 2 82
3. Step Three 82
a. Hypothesis 3 82
4. Step Four 83
VI. Chapter Five: Discussion 84
A. Overview 84
B. Study Findings 85
1. Direct Effect of Gender on Aggression and Bullying: Hypothesis 1a, 85
1b, and 1c
2. Direct Effect of Gender on Theory of Mind: Hypothesis 2 89
3. Direct and Indirect Effect of Theory of Mind: Hypothesis 3 90
v
C. Possible Explanations for Unexpected Findings 92
D. Limitations of the Present Study 94
1. Cross-sectional design 94
2. Self-report 94
3. Reliability flaws 95
4. Non-normality 96
E. Future Research 97
F. Implications of the Current Study 100
VII. References 105
vi
List of Tables
Table 1 Demographic Characteristics of Participants across Schools 145
Table 2 Demographic Characteristics of Total Participants 147
Table 3 Means, Standard Deviations, Factor Loadings, Skew, and Kurtosis 148
for Latent Indicators
Table 4 Estimated Latent Variable Correlations 150
Table 5 Bootstrapped Direct and Indirect Effects 151