Tjeert Olthof

Trumping Shame by Blasts of Noise: Narcissism, Self-Esteem, Shame, and Aggression in Young Adolescents.

This experiment tested how self-views influence shame-induced aggression. One hundred and sixty-three young adolescents (M = 12.2 years) completed measures of narcissism and self-esteem. They lost to an ostensible opponent on a competitive task. In the shame condition, they were told that their opponent was bad, and they saw their own name at the bottom of a ranking list. In the control condition, they were told nothing about their opponent and did not see a ranking list. Next, participants could blast their opponent with noise (aggression measure). As expected, narcissistic children were more aggressive than others, but only after they had been shamed. Low self-esteem did not lead to aggression. In fact, narcissism in combination with high self-esteem led to exceptionally high aggression.

Development and validation of the childhood narcissism scale

In this article, we describe the development and validation of a short (10 item) but comprehensive self-report measure of childhood narcissism. The Childhood Narcissism Scale (CNS) is a 1-dimensional measure of stable individual differences in childhood narcissism with strong internal consistency reliability (Studies 1–4). The CNS is virtually unrelated to conventional measures of self-esteem but is positively related to self-appraised superiority, social evaluative concern and self-esteem contingency, agentic interpersonal goals, and emotional extremity (Study 5). Furthermore, the CNS is negatively related to empathic concern and positively related to aggression following ego threat (Study 6). These results suggest that childhood narcissism has similar psychological and interpersonal correlates as adult narcissism. The CNS provides researchers a convenient tool for measuring narcissism in children and young adolescents with strong preliminary psychometric characteristics.

Peer and self-reports of victimization and bullying: Their differential association with internalizing problems and social adjustment

Researchers typically employ either peer or self-reports to assess involvement in bullying. In this study, we examined the merits of each method for the identification of child characteristics related to victimization and bullying others. Accordingly, we investigated the difference between these two methods with regard to their relationship with social adjustment (i.e., perceived popularity, likeability, and self-perceived social acceptance) and internalizing problems (i.e., anxiety, depression, and self-worth) in 1192 Dutch school children, aged 9 to 12 years. Perceived popularity and likeability were more strongly correlated with peer reports than self-reports, for both victimization and for bullying others. Self-perceived social acceptance correlated equally strong with peer and self- reports of victimization. Furthermore, peer reports of bullying were also correlated with self-perceived social acceptance, whereas self-reports of bullying were not. All internalizing problems showed stronger relations with self-reports than peer reports; although only the relation between self-reported victimization and internalizing problems was of practical significance. Despite our findings indicating that using only one type of report could be efficient for examining the relation between bullying behaviors and separate child characteristics, both types of report are necessary for a complete understanding of the personal and social well-being of the children involved.

Morality‐ and identity‐related antecedents of children's guilt and shame attributions in events involving physical illness

It is theorised that guilt‐ and shame‐related appraisals vary on two separate dimensions. Guilt implies an appraisal that one has either committed a moral transgression or that one has otherwise been involved in the creation of a morally wrong outcome. Shame implies ones appraisal that the current event or condition reflects negatively on ones identity. To test these claims, 206 7‐ to 16‐year‐old children gave shame and guilt ratings of three types of events that were drawn from the domain of physical illness and that were designed to elicit primarily guilt, primarily shame, or both emotions. The 12‐year‐olds and older childrens ratings were fully consistent with our hypothesis. Younger childrens greatest difficulty was in not attributing shame to protagonists who were involved in causing a moral wrong without there being the threat of an unwanted identity.

Development in Processing of Multiple Emotional Situations

Abstract Two age groups of children (6- and 10-year-olds) were told stories that could lead to a simultaneous experience of two different emotions. In half of these situations both of the impulses were negative; in the other half, one was positive and the other negative. The 6-year-olds were inclined to ignore one of the two emotion impulses, especially when the two emotions were of opposite kinds. Childrens simultaneous experience of more than two emotions led to speculation about the origin of new emotions out of the blending of emotions. On the basis of a simple intensity index with every emotion, we could also investigate further the mutual intensity and influence of simultaneously occuring emotions.

Externalizing shame responses in children: The role of fragile-positive self-esteem

When faced with shame, children can either respond in submissive ways to withdraw from their environment or in externalizing ways to oppose their environment. This study tested the hypothesis that fragile-positive views of self predispose children to respond in externalizing ways to shame situations. Narcissism, actual and perceived social preference, global self-worth and propensity towards externalizing shame responding were measured in 122 pre-adolescent children. As expected, results revealed that narcissism, in contrast to global self-worth, was associated with externalizing shame responding. In addition, actual but not perceived social preference was inversely related to externalizing shame responding, suggesting that the social self-perceptions of children prone to employ externalizing shame responses may be inflated. Discussion focuses on the self-regulatory function of externalizing shame responses.

Self-perception but not peer reputation of bullying victimization is associated with non-clinical psychotic experiences in adolescents

BACKGROUND Bullying victimization may be linked to psychosis but only self-report measures of victimization have been used so far. This study aimed (a) to investigate the differential associations of peer-nominated versus self-reported victim status with non-clinical psychotic experiences in a sample of young adolescents, and (b) to examine whether different types of self-reported victimization predict non-clinical psychotic experiences in these adolescents. Method A combination of standard self-report and peer nomination procedures was used to assess victimization. The sample (n = 724) was divided into four groups (exclusively self-reported victims, self- and peer-reported victims, exclusively peer-reported victims, and non-victims) to test for a group effect on non-clinical psychotic experiences. The relationship between types of victimization and non-clinical psychotic experiences was examined by a regression analysis. RESULTS Self-reported victims, along with self- and peer-reported victims, scored higher than peer-reported victims and non-victims on non-clinical psychotic experiences. Self-reports of direct relational, indirect relational and physical victimization significantly improved the prediction of non-clinical psychotic experiences whereas verbal and possession-directed victimization had no significant predictive value. CONCLUSIONS The relationship between victimization and non-clinical psychotic experiences is only present for self-reported victimization, possibly indicative of an interpretation bias. The observed discrepancy between self-report and peer-report highlights the importance of implementing a combination of both measures for future research.

Factors Influencing Interventions on Behalf of Victims of Bullying: A Counterfactual Approach to the Social Cognitions of Outsiders and Defenders

While both outsiders and defenders have antibullying attitudes, only defenders have the reputation to defend victims. However, outsiders—despite their reputation of avoiding involvement in bullying—do receive some defender nominations and thus defend victims at least occasionally. This study investigated the relationship between these behavioral reputations and social-cognitive antecedents of students’ provictim intervention decision: Is provictim intervention related to a cost-reward analysis or to an analysis based on the presence and reactions of others? A sample of 489 Dutch early adolescents ( X ¯ age = 11.5 years) was presented a scenario in which they were to imagine being witness to victimization. Through a counterfactual thinking item procedure, the relationships between students’ reputations and social cognitions about antecedents of provictim intervention were investigated. Distress awareness and anticipated guilt and shame for not helping victims positively predicted defender behavior. Practical implications with regard to promoting defender behavior in outsiders are discussed.

Differential personality correlates of early adolescents' bullying-related outsider and defender behavior

This study investigated personality correlates of early adolescents’ tendency to either defend victims of bullying or to avoid involvement in bullying situations. Participants were 591 Dutch fifth- and sixth-grade students ( X ¯ a g e = 11.42 years). Hierarchical regression models were run to predict these students’ peer-reported defender and outsider behavior by their self-reported Big Five and Reinforcement Sensitivity scores. Agreeableness (i.e., politeness) positively predicted both behaviors. Emotional stability (i.e., impulse control) positively and extraversion (i.e., dominance) negatively predicted only outsider behavior. Finally, punishment sensitivity positively and reward sensitivity negatively predicted only outsider behavior. While agreeableness seems conducive to executing provictim interventions, lacking in dominance and a strong impulse control make actively avoiding involvement in bullying situations more likely. The latter also holds for early adolescents who are afraid of punishment and unresponsive to rewards. The findings suggest that antibullying interventions aiming at promoting defending in outsiders need to take the influence of personality into account.

Bullying-related behaviour in a mainstream high school versus a high school for autism: Self-report and peer-report:

This study examined the frequency of bullying, victimisation and defending behaviours among children with autism spectrum disorder and normal intelligence, using both self-report and peer-report information. Peer-report and self-report data were collected on a single classroom of 26 early adolescent boys attending a special school for children with autism and compared with 23 typically developing boys attending a single mainstream secondary school. Results showed that self- and peer-reported bully and victimisation rates did not differ between boys with autism spectrum disorder and typically developing boys. However, self-reported defending behaviour was less likely to be reported by boys in the autism spectrum disorder school compared to boys in the mainstream school, although there was no such difference for peer-reported defending.