From Bullied to Deviant

• Author: Whitney DeCamp,Brian Newby
• Published date: 01 January 2015
• Date: 01 January 2015
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1177/1541204014521250
• Subject Matter: Articles

Article
Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice
2015, Vol. 13(1) 3-17
From Bullied to Deviant:
ª The Author(s) 2014
Reprints and permission:
The Victim–Offender Overlap
sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav
DOI: 10.1177/1541204014521250
yvj.sagepub.com
Among Bullying Victims
Whitney DeCamp1 and Brian Newby2
Abstract
Although much research has explored bullies and bullying victims, little has been done to explore the
long-term effects on those who have been bullied. Separately, a growing body of evidence suggests
that there is a victim–offender overlap, in which many victims are or become offenders themselves.
Taken together, this suggests that bullying victims may themselves be at elevated risk of involvement
in deviance or crime. The present study uses data from the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth
1997 to explore this issue, utilizing propensity score matching to control for the shared predictors
of offending and victimization. Given that bullying experiences can vary dramatically by gender,
gender-specific analyses are performed. Results indicate that controlling for the propensity to be
bullied reduces, but does not eliminate, the effect on later criminality.
Keywords
bullying, youth victimization, victim–offender overlap, NLSY97, propensity score matching
Social scientific research on bullying has historically focused on the fact that people, particularly
children and adolescents, bully others or are bullied themselves as well as the frequency and style
with which these incidences occur. These studies have been conducted in many countries over the
past several decades (e.g., Campbell, 1986; Glover, Gough, Johnson, & Cartwright, 2000; Graham &
Bowling, 1995; Whitney & Smith, 1993). These studies, and others like them, address the use and
frequency of violence in schools, in the streets, and among peer groups. Their use of myriad meth-
odological approaches has made comparisons difficult and has shown that methodological
approaches in this area of research vary widely. Additionally, studies on bullying often overlook the
long-term effects of bullying on the victims, choosing instead to focus on the bullies alone. The cur-
rent study focuses on the underexplored area of these long-term effects on the life course of victims,
using propensity score matching (PSM) to analyze self-reported data from American youth to
1 Department of Sociology, Western Michigan University, Kalamazoo, MI, USA
2 Department of Sociology & Criminal Justice, University of Delaware, Newark, DE, USA
Corresponding Author:
Whitney DeCamp, Department of Sociology, Western Michigan University, 1903 Western Michigan Avenue, Kalamazoo,
MI 49008, USA.
Email: whitney.gunter@wmich.edu

---

4
Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice 13(1)
examine the likelihood of childhood bullying victims committing violent offenses or other forms of
deviance themselves later in their youth.
Bullying and Victimization
Olweus (1993) proposed a definition of bullying involving several criteria that have been widely
accepted by researchers. For Olweus, bullying is repeated direct (physical) or indirect (verbal/men-
tal) assaults on a person by someone with more power or strength than them. This definition has been
modified to fit many different studies on bullying. Haddow (2006) narrows Olweus’ definition to
specifically address the abuse of one student by others. Other definitions are more generalized,
addressing acts of cruelty or meanness (Jiang, Walsh, & Augimeri, 2011) or simply a forceful lack
of cooperation in social situations (Rigby, Cox, & Black, 1997). This study retains the basic
elements of Olweus’ original definition, noting that the bully’s power/strength over the victim is per-
ceived by the victim without necessarily being a proven fact. Even though the majority of bullying
among youth occurs in school (Haddow, 2006; Nolin & Davies, 1996), this study focuses on
bullying during childhood, not necessarily within a school setting. Therefore, the definition is not
amended to reflect school-related bullying alone but rather recognizes that bullying can take place
anywhere and at any time.1
Although the nature and extent of the connection are still a matter of ongoing debate and analysis,
research exploring the effects of victimization on a person’s life course has concluded that there is a
link between victimization and offending (Macmillan & Hagan, 2004). Studies have shown that not
only criminal involvement increases the likelihood of a person becoming a victim (Jensen &
Brownfield, 1986; Sampson & Lauritsen, 1990; Stewart, Elifson, & Sterk, 2004) but also criminals
are often the victims of crime prior to their offending (Esbensen & Carson, 2009; Lauritsen, Samp-
son, & Laub, 1991; Sampson & Lauritsen, 1990; Wolfgang, 1958). Regarding youth, victimization
is a strong indicator of future offenses, particularly domestic violence (Ford, 2002) and violent and
property offenses (Menard, 2002) in adulthood. Other studies, however, have concluded that
victimization in adulthood also has a strong impact on the probability that a person will become
an offender later in life (Sampson & Laub, 1993).
When specifying bullying as the source of victimization, several conclusions have been drawn by
researchers, primarily in regard to the psychological effects of bullying on victims. Being bullied has
been linked to increases in depression (Arseneault, Bowes, & Shakoor, 2010; Farrington, Loeber,
Stallings, & Ttofi, 2011; Piquero, Connell, Piquero, Farrington, & Jennings, 2013), suicide ideation
(Arseneault et al., 2010; Kim, Koh, & Leventhal, 2005; Robinson & Esplage, 2012; Ttofi & Farring-
ton, 2008), eating disorders (Kaltiala-Heino, Rimpela, Rantanen, & Rimpela, 2000), self-harm (Hay &
Meldrum, 2010), school-related fear (Bachman, Gunter, & Bakken, 2011), drug use (Carbone-Lopez,
Esbensen, & Brick, 2010), and delinquency (Haddow, 2006; Higgins, Khey, Dawson-Edwards, &
Marcum, 2012). Several studies have also noted that bully victimization is a factor in a person’s
tendency toward violence against others (Carbone-Lopez et al., 2010; Friedlander, 1993; Haddow,
2006).
In addition to the psychological problems associated with bullying victims, several studies have
demonstrated psychosocial problems as well, particularly in regard to social bonds. Ttofi and
Farrington (2008) note that children directly involved with bullying (as the bully, as the victim,
or as a bully victim2) scored lower in measurements of prosocial behaviors than respondents who
were not directly involved with bullying. Victims in particular suffer from a lack of social bonds
according to this literature, although age appears to be a factor in the severity of this result. For
example, Borg (1998) noted that children below the sixth grade are likely to confide in their parents
regarding a bullying event. Girls are more likely to confide in their parents and friends about such
incidences. Boys, Borg concludes, are more likely to become socially isolated as a result of being

---

DeCamp and Newby
5
bullied. In these studies, social bond damage is seen as a result of bullying. However, this is not the
only way social bonds factor into victimization. Phillips (2003) notes that bullying was used as a tool
for the girls in her study to justify and negotiate social hierarchies. Social bonds, in this sense, are a
mitigating cause justifying bullying and victimization (Faris & Felmlee, 2011).
Several studies have sought to expound upon the effects of bullying on social bonds. Popp and
Peguero (2012) note that bullying victims are more likely to have a low commitment toward their
school and their own education. In particular, students bullied at school exhibit lower levels of com-
mitment, attachment, and belief, the three elements necessary for social bonding. A lack of social
bonding to school is associated with lower educational outcomes as well (Catalano, Haggerty,
Oesterie, Fleming, & Hawkins, 2004; Schwartz, Gorman, Nakamoto, & Toblin, 2005). Children
experienced in direct bullying (as the bully, the victim, or as a bully victim) tend to have greater
behavioral problems and lower prosocial behavioral scores than those who have not experienced
bullying (Ttofi and Farrington, 2008; Wolke, Woods, Bloomfield, & Karstadt, 2000). Overall, lower
social bonds are associated with a sense of having ‘‘nothing to lose,’’ and therefore the youth are
viewed as being at risk of delinquent behaviors (Cullen, Unnever, Hartman, Turner, & Agnew,
2008). This risk is heightened if social bonds are lowered during a person’s school-age years. Mac-
millan and Hagan (2004) note that this psychological withdrawal from school can lower grades,
causing ripple effects in the victim’s life that lead to lower socioeconomic status and an increased
likelihood of turning to deviant behaviors to compensate.
Regardless of age, however, are the facts that males are often found to be more physically aggres-
sive than females, while females are more verbally abusive (Faris & Felmlee, 2011). Gender is also
noted as having an effect on how a person reacts to being bullied, with gender roles mitigating the
way a person reacts and what opportunities they have to react (Popp & Peguero, 2011; Kruttschnitt,
2013). Gender also affects who is victimized, with men being the most likely to be victimized, but
women being seen as more vulnerable (Popp & Peguero, 2011).
Victimization and Offending
Research utilizing life course theory, the study of developmental issues in people due to changes in
social location and circumstances, has offered some longitudinal...