This study provides a thorough psychometric evaluation of construct and criterion validity and measurement invariance of the promising Florence Bullying-Victimization Scales (FBVS). A special focus was devoted to the concurrent criterion validity of the victimization scale with regard to well-being and social self-efficacy. Exploratory and confirmatory multidimensional item response theory and structural equation modeling were applied to cross-sectional data retrieved from 3rd to 6th-grade Czech primary school students (N = 1795; 49% female; Mage = 10.42, SD = 1.25). The results supported the use of unidimensional factor structure that demonstrated acceptable model fit and measurement invariance across genders and grades. Moderate to high correlations of the FBVS scores with bullying and victimization measured by the Olweus Bully/Victim Questionnaire and other instruments indicated very good convergent validity. Regarding criterion validity, higher victimization was associated with lower levels of well-being and social self-efficacy.
BarcacciaB.PalliniS.BaioccoR.SalvatiM.SalianiA. M.SchneiderB. H. (2018). Forgiveness and friendship protect adolescent victims of bullying from emotional maladjustment. Psicothema, 30(4), 427–433. https://doi.org/10.7334/psicothema2018.11
2.
BarchiaK.BusseyK. (2010). The psychological impact of peer victimization: Exploring social‐cognitive mediators of depression. Journal of Adolescence, 33(5), 615–623. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adolescence.2009.12.002
3.
CaiL.MonroS. (2014). A new statistic for evaluating item response theory models for ordinal data. National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, & Student Testing. Technical Report.
4.
CamodecaM.BaioccoR.PosaO. (2019). Homophobic bullying and victimization among adolescents: The role of prejudice, moral disengagement, and sexual orientation. European Journal of Developmental Psychology, 16(5), 503–521. https://doi.org/10.1080/17405629.2018.1466699
5.
ChalmersR. P. (2012). mirt: A multidimensional item response theory package for the R environment. Journal of Statistical Software, 48(6), 1–29. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v048.i06
6.
ChenF. F. (2007). Sensitivity of goodness of fit indexes to lack of measurement invariance. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 14(3), 464–504. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705510701301834
7.
CheungG. W.RensvoldR. B. (2002). Evaluating goodness-of-fit indexes for testing measurement invariance. Structural Equation Modeling, 9(2), 233–255. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15328007sem0902_5
8.
CrickN. R.OstrovJ. M.BurrJ. E.Cullerton-SenC.Jansen-YehE.RalstonP. (2006). A longitudinal study of relational and physical aggression in preschool. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 27(3), 254–268. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appdev.2006.02.006
9.
DempseyJ. P.FiremanG. D.WangE. (2006). Transitioning out of peer victimization in school children: Gender and behavioral characteristics. Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment, 28(4), 271–280. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10862-005-9014-5
González‐CabreraJ.Sánchez‐ÁlvarezN.CalveteE.León‐MejíaA.OrueI.MachimbarrenaJ. M. (2020). Psychometric properties of the triangulated version of the European bullying intervention project questionnaire: Prevalence across seven roles. Psychology in the Schools, 57(1), 78–90. https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.22320
12.
GuhnM.Schonert-ReichlK. A.GadermannA. M.HymelS.HertzmanC. (2013). A population study of victimization, relationships, and well-being in middle childhood. Journal of Happiness Studies, 14(5), 1529–1541. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10902-012-9393-8
13.
HawkerD. S. J.BoultonM. J. (2000). Twenty years’ research on peer victimization and psychosocial maladjustment: A meta-analytic review of cross-sectional studies. The Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry and Allied Disciplines, 41(4), 441–455. https://doi.org/10.1111/1469-7610.00629
14.
HuL.BentlerP. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6(1), 1–55. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705519909540118
15.
HuiC. H.TriandisH. C. (1985). Measurement in cross-cultural psychology: A review and comparison of strategies. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 16(2), 131–152. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022002185016002001
16.
HuitsingG.LodderG. M. A.OldenburgB.SchacterH. L.SalmivalliC.JuvonenJ.VeenstraR. (2019). The healthy context paradox: Victims’ adjustment during an anti-bullying intervention. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 28(9), 2499–2509. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10826-018-1194-1
17.
HunterS. C.NoretN.BoyleJ. M. E. (2021). Measurement issues relevant to questionnaire data. In SmithP. K.NormanJ. O. (Eds.), The Wiley Blackwell handbook of bullying: A comprehensive and international review of research and intervention (Vol. 1, pp. 179–195). Wiley Blackwell.
18.
JuvonenJ.NishinaA.GrahamS. (2001). Self-views versus peer perceptions of victim status among early adolescents. In JuvonenJ.GrahamS. (Eds.), Peer harassment in school: The plight of the vulnerable and victimized (pp. 105–124). Guilford.
19.
KärnäA.VoetenM.LittleT. D.PoskipartaE.KaljonenA.SalmivalliC. (2011). A large-scale evaluation of the KiVa antibullying program: Grades 4–6. Child Development, 82(1), 311–330. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.2010.01557.x
20.
KlocekA.KollerováL.HavrdováE.KotrbováM.NetíkJ.PourM. (2024). Effectiveness of the KiVa anti-bullying program in the Czech republic: A cluster randomized control trial. Evaluation and Program Planning, 106(3), 102459. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2024.102459
21.
Kochenderfer-LaddB.LaddG. W.ThibaultS. A. (2021). School bullying and peer victimization: Its role in students’ academic achievement. In SmithP. K.NormanJ. O. (Eds.), The Wiley Blackwell handbook of bullying: A comprehensive and international review of research and intervention (Vol. 1, pp. 619–638). Wiley Blackwell.
22.
KonacD.YoungK. S.LauJ.BarkerE. D. (2021). Comorbidity between depression and anxiety in adolescents: Bridge symptoms and relevance of risk and protective factors. Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment, 43(3), 583–596. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10862-021-09880-5
23.
KyriakidesL.KaloyirouC.LindsayG. (2006). An analysis of the revised Olweus bully/victim questionnaire using the Rasch measurement model. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 76(Pt 4), 781–801. https://doi.org/10.1348/000709905X53499
24.
LiddleI.CarterG. F. (2015). Emotional and psychological well-being in children: The development and validation of the stirling children’s well-being scale. Educational Psychology in Practice, 31(2), 174–185. https://doi.org/10.1080/02667363.2015.1008409
MeadeA. W.LautenschlagerG. J. (2004). Same question, different answers: CFA and two IRT approaches to measurement invariance. Symposium presented at the 19th Annual Conference of the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Chicago, IL.
27.
MenesiniE.ZambutoV.PalladinoB. E. (2018). Online and school-based programs to prevent cyberbullying among Italian adolescents: What works, why, and under which circumstances. In CampbellM.BaumanS. (Eds.), Reducing cyberbullying in schools (pp. 135–143). Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-811423-0.00010-9
28.
MurisP. (2001). A brief questionnaire for measuring self-efficacy in youths. Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment, 23(3), 145–149. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1010961119608
29.
NocentiniA.MenesiniE. (2016). KiVa anti-bullying program in Italy: Evidence of effectiveness in a randomized control trial. Prevention Science, 17(8), 1012–1023. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11121-016-0690-z
30.
NoorazarS. G.MohebbiM.Alizadeh‐MaralaniF. (2021). The Retrospective Bullying Experiences Questionnaire (RBEQ): Its psychometric properties in Iranian university students. Psychology in the Schools, 58(9), 1673–1689. https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.22522
31.
OlweusD. (1996). The revised Olweus bully/victim questionnaire for students. University of Bergen.
32.
OstrovJ. M.KamperK. E. (2015). Future directions for research on the development of relational and physical peer victimization. Journal of Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology, 44(3), 509–519. https://doi.org/10.1080/15374416.2015.1012723
33.
PalladinoB. E. (2013). Evidence-based intervention against bullying and cyberbullying: Measurement of the constructs, evaluation of efficacy and mediation processes. [Doctoral dissertation]. https://hdl.handle.net/2158/856713
34.
PalladinoB. E.NappaM. R.ZambutoV.MenesiniE. (2020). Ethnic bullying victimization in Italy: The role of acculturation orientation for ethnic minority adolescents with differing citizenship statuses. Frontiers in Psychology, 11(3), 499. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.00499
35.
PalladinoB. E.NocentiniA.MenesiniE. (2015). Psychometric properties of the florence cyberbullying-cybervictimization scales. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 18(2), 112–119. https://doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2014.0366
36.
PalladinoB. E.NocentiniA.MenesiniE. (2016). Evidence-based intervention against bullying and cyberbullying: Evaluation of the NoTrap! program in two independent trials. Aggressive Behavior, 42(2), 194–206. https://doi.org/10.1002/ab.21636
37.
PalladinoB. E.NocentiniA.MenesiniE. (2019). How to stop victims’ suffering? Indirect effects of an anti-bullying program on internalizing symptoms. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 16(14), 2631. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph16142631
38.
PanB.LiT.JiL.MalamutS.ZhangW.SalmivalliC. (2021). Why does classroom-level victimization moderate the association between victimization and depressive symptoms? The “healthy context paradox” and two explanations. Child Development, 92(5), 1836–1854. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.13624
39.
QiuX.-Y.ZhangX.WangM.-C.LiuX.-Q.WangX.-F. (2021). Psychometric properties of the Bullying Participant Behaviors Questionnaire (BPBQ) among Chinese middle school students. Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment, 43(3), 545–558. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10862-021-09873-4
40.
RaschG. (1960). Studies in mathematical psychology: I. Probabilistic models for some intelligence and attainment tests. Nielsen & Lydiche.
41.
RaskauskasJ. (2010). Multiple peer victimization among elementary school students: Relations with social-emotional problems. Social Psychology of Education, 13(4), 523–539. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11218-010-9124-0
42.
RaskauskasJ.RubianoS.OffenI.WaylandA. K. (2015). Do social self-efficacy and self-esteem moderate the relationship between peer victimization and academic performance?Social Psychology of Education, 18(2), 297–314. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11218-015-9292-z
43.
R Core Team. (2020). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing. https://www.R-project.org/
44.
ReiseS. P.WidamanK. F.PughR. H. (1993). Confirmatory factor analysis and item response theory: Two approaches for exploring measurement invariance. Psychological Bulletin, 114(3), 552–566. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.114.3.552
45.
RosseelY. (2012). Lavaan: An R package for structural equation modeling. Journal of Statistical Software, 48(2), 1–36. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v048.i02
46.
SalmivalliC.LagerspetzK.BjörkqvistK.ÖstermanK.KaukiainenA. (1996). Bullying as a group process: Participant roles and their relations to social status within the group. Aggressive Behavior: Official Journal of the International Society for Research on Aggression, 22(1), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1002/(sici)1098-2337(1996)22:1<1::aid-ab1>3.0.co;2-t
SchäferM.WernerN. E.CrickN. R. (2002). A comparison of two approaches to the study of negative peer treatment: General victimization and bully/victim problems among German schoolchildren. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 20(2), 281–306. https://doi.org/10.1348/026151002166451
49.
SchulzW. (2006). Testing parameter invariance for questionnaire indices using confirmatory factor analysis and item response theory. Annual Meetings of the American Educational Research Association2005, San Francisco, USA. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED493509.pdf
50.
TyupaS. (2011). A theoretical framework for back-translation as a quality assessment tool. New Voices in Translation Studies, 7(1), 35–46. https://doi.org/10.14456/nvts.2011.4
51.
van RensburgE. J.RaubenheimerJ. (2015). Does forgiveness mediate the impact of school bullying on adolescent mental health?Journal of Child and Adolescent Mental Health, 27(1), 25–39. https://doi.org/10.2989/17280583.2014.955502
52.
ViejoC.LevaB.ParedesJ.Ortega-RuizR. (2020). Bullying and psychological dating violence: The relation between two aggressive peer-behaviours. Psicothema, 32(4), 533–540. https://doi.org/10.7334/psicothema2019.223
53.
VílloraB.LarrañagaE.YuberoS.AlfaroA.NavarroR. (2020). Relations among poly-bullying victimization, subjective well-being and resilience in a sample of late adolescents. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 17(2), 590. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17020590
54.
WangC.SuS.WeissD. J. (2018). Robustness of parameter estimation to assumptions of normality in the multidimensional graded response model. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 53(3), 403–418. https://doi.org/10.1080/00273171.2018.1455572
55.
WidgersonS.LynchM. (2013). Cyber-and traditional peer victimization: Unique relationships with adolescent well-being. Psychology of Violence, 3(4), 297. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0033657
56.
WildD.GroveA.MartinM.EremencoS.McElroyS.Verjee-LorenzA.EriksonP.ISPOR Task Force for Translation and Cultural Adaptation. (2005). Principles of good practice for the translation and cultural adaptation process for patient-reported outcomes (PRO) measures: Report of the ISPOR task force for translation and cultural adaptation. Value in Health, 8(2), 94–104. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1524-4733.2005.04054.x
57.
YanagidaT.GradingerP.StrohmeierD.Solomontos-KountouriO.TripS.BoraC. (2016). Cross-national prevalence of traditional bullying, traditional victimization, cyberbullying and cyber-victimization: Comparing single-item and multiple-item approaches of measurement. International Journal of Developmental Science, 10(1-2), 21–32. https://doi.org/10.3233/DEV-150173
58.
YangJ. S.CaiL. (2014). Estimation of contextual effects through nonlinear multilevel latent variable modeling with a Metropolis–Hastings Robbins–Monro algorithm. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 39(6), 550–582. https://doi.org/10.3102/1076998614559972
59.
YoonJ. S.KerberK. (2003). Bullying: Elementary teachers’ attitudes and intervention strategies. Research in Education, 69(1), 27–35. https://doi.org/10.7227/RIE.69.3
60.
ZambutoV.PalladinoB. E.NocentiniA.MenesiniE. (2019). Why do some students want to be actively involved as peer educators, while others do not? Findings from NoTrap! Anti-bullying and anti-cyberbullying program. European Journal of Developmental Psychology, 16(4), 373–386. https://doi.org/10.1080/17405629.2017.1419954
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
