Moral emotions play a crucial role in aggressive group dynamics. Developing specific instruments to measure these emotions is essential for understanding the decision-making processes. In particular, moral anger refers to the anger elicited by perceived injustice or transgressions of ethical values. This emotion is especially relevant in the school context, where research suggests an association between the anger experienced in reaction to aggression and their ethical behavior. However, to date, no specific instrument has been developed to measure moral anger in response to such situations. This study aimed to design and validate a scale for measuring moral anger in the context of online and offline peer aggression and to examine the predictive validity of the instrument in relation to defending behaviors. A total of 3,183 pupils (51.6% boys, Mage = 12.76, SD = 1.52) participated in the study. The results confirmed that the unidimensional model provided the best fit, presenting good psychometric properties in terms of reliability and validity. Likewise, the invariance and replicability of the scale were tested across gender and age groups. Good incremental predictive validity was also demonstrated, as evidenced by a positive association between moral anger and defending behaviors. In conclusion, the instrument designed in this study can be used to measure moral anger in aggressive peer contexts, both online and offline. Identifying moral anger is a key to understanding group dynamics in cases of aggression and power imbalance, as well as the behavior of bystanders. Moreover, this research contributes to the development of interventions aimed at promoting social justice, equity, and the creation of a more peaceful society that actively opposes mistreatment and aggression.
AndrewsJ. L.AhmedS. P.BlakemoreS. J. (2021). Navigating the social environment in adolescence: The role of social brain development. Biological Psychiatry, 89(2), 109–118. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.BIOPSYCH.2020.09.012
2.
AtariM.LaiM. H. C.DehghaniM. (2020). Sex differences in moral judgements across 67 countries. Proceedings of the Royal Society B, 287(1937), Article 20201201. https://doi.org/10.1098/RSPB.2020.1201
BarhightL. R.HubbardJ. A.GrassettiS. N.MorrowM. T. (2017). Relations between actual group norms, perceived peer behavior, and bystander children’s intervention to bullying. Journal of Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology, 46(3), 394–400. https://doi.org/10.1080/15374416.2015.1046180
5.
BatsonC. D.KennedyC. L.NordL. A.StocksE. L.FlemingD. A.MarzetteC. M.LishnerD. A.HayesR. E.KolchinskyL. M.ZergerT. (2007). Anger at unfairness: Is it moral outrage?European Journal of Social Psychology, 37(6), 1272–1285. https://doi.org/10.1002/EJSP.434
BoatengG. O.NeilandsT. B.FrongilloE. A.Melgar-QuiñonezH. R.YoungS. L. (2018). Best practices for developing and validating scales for health, social, and behavioral research: A primer. Frontiers in Public Health, 6, Article 149. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2018.00149
8.
BradyW. J.WillsJ. A.BurkartD.JostJ. T.Van BavelJ. J. (2019). An ideological asymmetry in the diffusion of moralized content on social media among political leaders. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 148(10), 1802–1813. https://doi.org/10.1037/XGE0000532
9.
Cabrera-VázquezA.FallaD.Ortega-RuizR.RomeraE. M. (2025). Development and validation of Schadenfreude in Bullying and Cyberbullying Scale (SBCS). Psicothema, 37(2), 32–41. https://doi.org/10.70478/psicothema.2025.37.14
10.
CarvalhoM.BranquinhoC.MatosM. G.CarvalhoM.BranquinhoC.MatosM. G. (2021). Cyberbullying and bullying: Impact on psychological symptoms and well-being. Child Indicators Research, 14(1), 435–452. https://doi.org/10.1007/S12187-020-09756-2
11.
CaseyE. A.StorerH. L.HerrenkohlT. I. (2018). Mapping a continuum of adolescent helping and bystander behavior within the context of dating violence and bullying. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 88(3), 335–345. https://doi.org/10.1037/ort0000245
12.
ChaplinT. M. (2015). Gender and emotion expression: A developmental contextual perspective. Emotion Review: Journal of the International Society for Research on Emotion, 7(1), 14–21. https://doi.org/10.1177/1754073914544408
13.
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
14.
ChenQ.ChanK. L.GuoS.ChenM.LoC. K.IpP. (2023). Effectiveness of digital health interventions in reducing bullying and cyberbullying: A meta-analysis. Trauma, Violence, and Abuse, 24(3), 1986–2002. https://doi.org/10.1177/15248380221082090
15.
ChiangJ. T. J.LiuH.FehrR.WangZ.HuangQ. (2023). Leaders and the punishment of misconduct: Examining the roles of leader moral identity and cognitive load. Journal of Applied Psychology, 109(7), 1022–1038. https://doi.org/10.1037/APL0001108
16.
CohenJ. (1992). A power primer. Psychological Bulletin, 112(1), 155–159. http://doi.org/10.1037//0033-2909.112.1.155
17.
CostelloA. B.OsborneJ. W. (2005). Best practices in exploratory factor analysis: Four recommendations for getting the most from your analysis. Practical Assessment Research & Evaluation, 10(7), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.7275/jyj1-4868
18.
DeGueS.RayC. M.BontempoD.NiolonP. H.TracyA. J.EstefanL. F.LeV. D.LittleT. D. (2023). Prevalence of violence victimization and perpetration during middle and high school in underresourced, urban communities. Violence and Victims, 38(6), 839–857. https://doi.org/10.1891/VV-2022-0033
19.
DijkerA. J. M. (2010). Perceived vulnerability as a common basis of moral emotions. British Journal of Social Psychology, 49(2), 415–423. https://doi.org/10.1348/014466609X482668
20.
FolgerR. (2001). Fairness as deonance. In GillilandS. W.SteinerD. D.SkarlickiD. P. (Eds.), Research in Social Issues in Management (pp. 3–31). Information Age Publishing.
21.
FornellC.LarckerD. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39–50. https://doi.org/10.1177/002224378101800104
22.
GalvánA. (2021). Adolescent brain development and contextual influences: A decade in review. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 31(4), 843–869. https://doi.org/10.1111/jora.12687
23.
HairJ. F.BlackW. C.BabinB. J.AndersonR. E. (2010). Multivariate Data Analysis: A Global Perspective (7th ed.). Pearson Education.
24.
HallT. K.DhananiL. Y. (2023). Cloaked in kindness: Bystander responses to witnessed benevolent and hostile sexism. Sex Roles, 89(11–12), 658–669. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-023-01431-4
25.
HartE.MellersB. A.BicchieriC. (2019). Bad luck or bad intentions: When do third parties reveal offenders’ intentions to victims?Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 84, Article 103788. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JESP.2019.02.009
26.
HeyneN.GnambsT.LocklK.NeuenhausN. (2023). Predictors of adolescents’ change in reading literacy: The role of reading strategies, reading motivation, and declarative metacognition. Current Psychology, 42(36), 32061–32075. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-022-04184-7
27.
HornJ. L. (1965). A rationale and test for the number of factors in factor analysis. Psychometrika, 30(2), 179–185. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02289447
28.
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
29.
HuQ.AdamH.DesaiS.MoS. (2024). Turning a blind eye to team members’ unethical behavior: The role of reward systems. Journal of Business Ethics, 194(2), 297–316. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-023-05598-4
30.
JagannathanS.RaiR. (2017). Organizational wrongs, moral anger and the temporality of crisis. Journal of Business Ethics, 141(4), 709–730. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-016-3153-3
31.
JenkinsL. N.DemarayM. K.TennantJ. (2017). Social, emotional, and cognitive factors associated with bullying. School Psychology Review, 46(1), 42–64. https://doi.org/10.17105/SPR46-1.42-64
32.
JiangW.ShumC.MinH.DingY. (2023). How observed customer mistreatment of supervisors affects employees’ service sabotage: A cross-cultural examination from the deontic justice theory. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 110, Article 103452. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.IJHM.2023.103452
33.
KaiserH. F. (1960). The application of electronic computers to factor analysis. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 20(1), 141–151. https://doi.org/10.1177/001316446002000116
LambeL. J.CraigW. M. (2019). Peer defending as a multidimensional behavior: Development and validation of the Defending Behaviors Scale. Journal of School Psychology, 78, 38–53. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JSP.2019.12.001
36.
LambeL. J.CraigW. M. (2023). Anger and empathy: Exploring the underlying emotional processes of peer defending behaviors using virtual reality. International Journal of Bullying Prevention, 5(4), 348–361. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42380-022-00128-8
37.
LambeL. J.HudsonC. C.CraigW. M.PeplerD. J. (2017). Does defending come with a cost? Examining the psychosocial correlates of defending behaviour among bystanders of bullying in a Canadian sample. Child Abuse and Neglect, 65, 112–123. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chiabu.2017.01.012
38.
LiX.LiuZ.WuyunT. (2022). Environmental value and pro-environmental behavior among young adults: The mediating role of risk perception and moral anger. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, 771421. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.771421
39.
LindebaumD.GabrielY. (2016). Anger and organization studies: from social disorder to moral order. Organization Studies, 37(7), 903–918. https://doi.org/10.1177/0170840616640848
40.
LindebaumD.GeddesD. (2016). The place and role of (moral) anger in organizational behavior studies. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 37(5), 738–757. https://doi.org/10.1002/JOB.2065
41.
LiuY. L.ChangC. Y.WangC. Y. (2023). Using VR to investigate bystander behavior and the motivational factors in school bullying. Computers & Education, 194, Article 104696. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2022.104696
Lorenzo-SevaU.TimmermanM. E.KiersH. A. L. (2011). The hull method for selecting the number of common factors. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 46(2), 340–364. https://doi.org/10.1080/00273171.2011.564527
44.
MaT. L.MeterD. J.ChenW. T.LeeY. (2019). Defending behavior of peer victimization in school and cyber context during childhood and adolescence: A meta-analytic review of individual and peer-relational characteristics. Psychological Bulletin, 145(9), 891–928. https://doi.org/10.1037/BUL0000205
45.
MaltiT.GalarneauE.PeplakJ. (2021). Moral development in adolescence. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 31(4), 1097–1113. https://doi.org/10.1111/JORA.12639
46.
MameliC.MenabòL.BrighiA.MeninD.CulbertC.HamiltonJ.ScheithauerH.SmithP. K.VöllinkT.WillemsR. A.PurdyN.GuariniA. (2022). Stay safe and strong: Characteristics, roles and emotions of student-produced comics related to cyberbullying. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 19(14), Article 8776. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19148776
47.
MazzoneA.CamodecaM.SalmivalliC. (2016). Interactive effects of guilt and moral disengagement on bullying, defending and outsider behavior. Journal of Moral Education, 45(4), 419–432. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057240.2016.1216399
48.
MenesiniE.SalmivalliC. (2017). Bullying in schools: The state of knowledge and effective interventions. Psychology, Health & Medicine, 22(1), 240–253. https://doi.org/10.1080/13548506.2017.1279740
49.
MoroÁ.Ruiz-NarezoM.FonsecaJ. (2022). Use of social networks, video games and violent behaviour in adolescence among secondary school students in the Basque Country. BMC psychology, 10(1), Article 241. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40359-022-00947-w
NeukrugE.FawcettR. C. (2014). Essentials of Testing and Assessment: A Practical Guide for Counselors, Social Workers, and Psychologists (3rd ed.). Cengage Learning.
52.
O’ReillyJ.AquinoK.SkarlickiD. (2016). The lives of others: Third parties’ responses to others’ injustice. Journal of Applied Psychology, 101(2), 171–189. https://doi.org/10.1037/APL0000040
53.
Ortega-RuizR. (2020). Education for sustainable development: from the cosmopolitan project to cybercoexistence. Investigación en la Escuela, 100, 11–22. https://dx.doi.org/10.12795/IE.2020.i100.02
54.
PannoA.De CristofaroV.OlivetiC.CarrusG.DonatiM. A. (2021). Personality and environmental outcomes: The role of moral anger in channeling climate change action and pro-environmental behavior. Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy, 21(1), 853–873. https://doi.org/10.1111/ASAP.12254
55.
PannoA.De CristofaroV.PellegriniV.LeoneL.GiacomantonioM.Anna DonatiM. (2023). Proud to support social equality: Investigating the roles of pride, guilt, anger, and disgust in attitudes towards immigrants. Group Processes and Intergroup Relations, 26(5), 985–1009. https://doi.org/10.1177/13684302221098633
56.
PedersenE. J.McAuliffeW. H. B.McCulloughM. E. (2018). The unresponsive avenger: More evidence that disinterested third parties do not punish altruistically. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 147(4), 514–544. https://doi.org/10.1037/xge0000410
57.
PeplerD.MishnaF.DoucetJ.LameiroM. (2021). Witnesses in cyberbullying: Roles and dilemmas. Children & Schools, 43(1), 45–53. https://doi.org/10.1093/cs/cdaa027
58.
PronkJ.OlthofT.GoossensF. A. (2016). Factors influencing interventions on behalf of victims of bullying: A counterfactual approach to the social cognitions of outsiders and defenders. Journal of Early Adolescence, 36(2), 267–291. https://doi.org/10.1177/0272431614562836
59.
ReeseG.JacobL. (2015). Principles of environmental justice and pro-environmental action: A two-step process model of moral anger and responsibility to act. Environmental Science & Policy, 51, 88–94. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ENVSCI.2015.03.011
RomeraE. M.CasasJ. A.Gómez-OrtizO.Ortega-RuizR. (2019). Moral domain as a risk and protective factor against bullying. An integrating perspective review on the complexity of morality. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 45, 75–82. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.avb.2018.07.005
62.
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
ScheinC.GrayK. (2018). The theory of dyadic morality: Reinventing moral judgment by redefining harm. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 22(1), 32–70. https://doi.org/10.1177/1088868317698288
66.
ShaoB. (2019). Moral anger as a dilemma? An investigation on how leader moral anger influences follower trust. The Leadership Quarterly, 30(3), 365–382. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.LEAQUA.2018.10.002
67.
SingletonR.StraitsB. (2004). Approaches to Social Research. Oxford University Press.
68.
SpencerL. (2017). Seeing red? But for whom? Exploring experiences of personal and moral anger in nurses. Research on Emotion in Organizations, 13, 79–109. https://doi.org/10.1108/S1746-979120170000013006
69.
TrachJ.HymelS. (2020). Bystanders’ affect toward bully and victim as predictors of helping and non-helping behaviour. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 61(1), 30–37. https://doi.org/10.1111/sjop.12516
70.
WatsonJ. C. (2017). Establishing evidence for internal structure using exploratory factor analysis. Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development, 50(4), 232–238. https://doi.org/10.1080/07481756.2017.1336931
71.
WongT. K. Y.KonishiC.ZhaoK. (2018). Anger and anger regulation among adolescents: A consideration of sex and age differences. Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science, 50(1), 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1037/cbs0000089
72.
XieD.XieZ. (2023). Effects of undergraduates’ conscientiousness on their cyber aggression: The roles of online moral anger and gender. Social Behavior and Personality, 51(1), 1–8. https://doi.org/10.2224/SBP.11920
73.
ZengK.WangD.YeQ.LiZ.ZhengX. (2021). Influence of an individual’s unethical behaviour on peers’ vicarious learning in organisations: The role of moral anger. Chinese Management Studies, 15(3), 557–574. https://doi.org/10.1108/CMS-08-2019-0281
