The effect of supervisory neglect on adolescent peer victimization: Mediating role of self-esteem and internalizing problems

Journal Pre-proofs The effect of supervisory neglect on adolescent peer victimization: Mediating role of self-esteem and internalizing problems Seunghee Baeg, Boram Lee, Hye Jun Park PII: DOI: Reference:

S0190-7409(19)31197-1 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2020.104839 CYSR 104839

To appear in:

Children and Youth Services Review

Received Date: Revised Date: Accepted Date:

21 October 2019 5 February 2020 5 February 2020

Please cite this article as: S. Baeg, B. Lee, H. Jun Park, The effect of supervisory neglect on adolescent peer victimization: Mediating role of self-esteem and internalizing problems, Children and Youth Services Review (2020), doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2020.104839

This is a PDF file of an article that has undergone enhancements after acceptance, such as the addition of a cover page and metadata, and formatting for readability, but it is not yet the definitive version of record. This version will undergo additional copyediting, typesetting and review before it is published in its final form, but we are providing this version to give early visibility of the article. Please note that, during the production process, errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain.

© 2020 Published by Elsevier Ltd.

RUNNING HEAD: EFFECT OF SUPERVISORY NEGLECT ON ADOLESCENT PEER VICTIMIZATION

1

The effect of supervisory neglect on adolescent peer victimization: Mediating role of self-esteem and internalizing problems Seunghee Baeg ∙ Boram Lee ∙ Hye Jun Park

S. Baeg (First author) Doctoral student/ Department of Child Development & Family Studies

College of Human Ecology, Seoul

National University Gwanakgu Gwanakro 1, Seoul, Korea, 08826 Tel: 82-10-9370-8793 e-mail: [email protected] ORCiD: 0000-0002-5646-8425

B. Lee (Corresponding author) Ph. D. Postdoctoral Research Fellow/ Department of Child Development & Family Studies College of Human Ecology, Seoul National University Gwanakgu Gwanakro 1, Seoul, Korea, 08826 Tel: 82-10-3600-1162 e-mail: [email protected] ORCiD: 0000-0003-1569-4415

H. J. Park Ed.D. Associate Professor/ Department of Child Development & Family Studies Research Institute of Human Ecology, College of Human Ecology, Seoul National University

RUNNING HEAD: EFFECT OF SUPERVISORY NEGLECT ON ADOLESCENT PEER VICTIMIZATION

Gwanakgu Gwanakro 1, Seoul, Korea, 08826 Tel: 82-10-3890-6378 e-mail: [email protected] ORCiD: 0000-0002-5950-7362

2

RUNNING HEAD: EFFECT OF SUPERVISORY NEGLECT ON ADOLESCENT PEER VICTIMIZATION

3

The Effect of Supervisory Neglect on Adolescent Peer Victimization: Mediating Role of Self-Esteem and Internalizing Problems

Abstract Past research indicates that parental maltreatment increases the risk of problems in adolescence; however, research is limited on how a specific form of maltreatment, supervisory neglect, is associated with the experience of peer victimization. In this study, we aim to help clarify the pathway from parental supervisory neglect to peer victimization through the mediating roles of self-esteem and internalizing problems among adolescents in South Korea. Data were derived from the Korea Welfare Panel Study of 2009 which included 605 middle school-aged adolescents (299 girls and 306 boys). The structural equation modeling used in this study revealed that supervisory neglect was indirectly associated with peer victimization through a sequential pathway of self-esteem and internalizing problems. More specifically, self-esteem and internalizing problems were not direct mediators in the relationship between supervisory neglect and peer victimization, instead, it suggested concurrent effects by mediating this relationship sequentially. Our results indicate that adolescents who experience supervisory neglect in their relationships with their parents may develop lower self-esteem, which then leads to higher levels of internalizing problems, which in turn leads to higher levels of peer victimization. Research implications are highlighted.

Keywords: adolescent maltreatment, supervisory neglect, peer victimization, selfesteem, internalizing problems, South Korea

RUNNING HEAD: EFFECT OF SUPERVISORY NEGLECT ON ADOLESCENT PEER VICTIMIZATION

4

1. Introduction Adolescence can be a highly stressful period of life with an increase in emotional instability, limited judgment, and aggressive behaviors (Romer, 2010). During this time, adolescents begin to express a desire for autonomy and independence from parents and place greater emphasis on peer relationships (Dubas & Gerris, 2002; McElhaney, Allen, Stephenson, & Hare, 2009). Hence, peer bullying is a common experience for many adolescents, and mental health problems associated with peer relationship problems are frequently reported (Moore et al., 2017). Thus, parents play a critical role during this time of turmoil, and consistent monitoring and guidance are needed; lack of adequate supervision forecasts a range of detrimental outcomes that can endure throughout life (Cicchetti & Toth, 2016). This study aims to explore the associations between this specific aspect of parental neglect and peer victimization in adolescence. Several decades of research indicates that adolescent maltreatment is associated with a number of subsequent deleterious outcomes. These studies have documented that maltreatment, including different types of abuse and neglect, increases the risk of behavioral problems such as aggression, delinquency, violence, substance use, and criminal involvement (Craig, Piquero, Farrington, & Ttofi, 2017; Hayre et al., 2019; Ryan, Williams, & Courtney, 2013; Smith, Ireland, & Thornberry, 2005) and psychological problems such as depression, anxiety, eating disorders, and suicidal ideation (Basto-Pereira, Miranda, Riberiro, & Maia, 2016; Cecil, Viding, Fearon, Glaser, & McCrory, 2017; Muniz et al., 2019). Evidence from the research also suggests that exposure to one type of harm increases the risk of exposure to other forms of harm; maltreated children are more likely to experience other types of victimization outside the home (Shields & Cicchetti, 2001). Previous studies have reported

RUNNING HEAD: EFFECT OF SUPERVISORY NEGLECT ON ADOLESCENT PEER VICTIMIZATION

5

that abused or neglected children have difficulties in establishing positive peer relationships and are at risk of bullying victimization in school (Bolger & Patterson, 2001; Duncan, 1999; Manly, Kim, Rogosch, & Cicchetti, 2001). Chapple, Tyler, and Bersani’s (2005) longitudinal study also found that adolescents who were neglected by their parents during childhood were more likely to be rejected by their peers in early adolescence and to develop violent tendencies during late adolescence subsequently. 2. Literature Review 2.1.

Indirect link between maltreatment and peer victimization One possible way to explain the connection between maltreatment and peer relationship

problems is that maltreatment is associated with negative self-perception and lower self-esteem, which may, in turn, contribute to difficulties in peer relationships (Bolger, Patterson, & Kupersmidt, 1998; Rohner & Rohner, 1980). Self-esteem refers to one’s overall sense of selfworth or personal value (Rosenberg, 1979), and parents play a critical role in building their child’s self-esteem (Harter, 2008; Shafer & Kipp, 2010). Studies have consistently revealed a strong association between parental maltreatment and low-self-esteem (Cicchetti & Toth, 2016; Kinard, 1982; Oates, Forrest, & Peacock, 1985; Sturkie & Flanzer, 1987). In other words, adolescents who have been maltreated by parents may develop low self-esteem. Moreover, some studies have further indicated a significant negative relationship between self-esteem and internalizing problems (Beck, Steer, Epstein, & Brown, 1990; Mann, Hosman, Schaalma, & de Vries, 2004) and a significant association between internalizing problems and peer relationships especially salient for adolescents (LaGreca & Harrison, 2005; Moran & Dubois, 2002). Research suggests that depression is related to friendship attachment (Armsden &

RUNNING HEAD: EFFECT OF SUPERVISORY NEGLECT ON ADOLESCENT PEER VICTIMIZATION

6

Greenberg, 1987), friendship quality (Parker & Asher, 1993), peer victimization (Callagan & Joseph, 1995; Hodges & Perry, 1999), and social isolation (Boivin, Hymel, & Bukowski, 1995). Youth who suffer from depression and anxiety are likely to display decreased interest in activities and school refusal behaviors (Heyne & Rollings, 2002) and also have problems in their peer relationships (Swearer, Collins, Radliff, & Wang, 2011). 2.2.

Adolescent Neglect- Supervisory Neglect While there exists a considerable body of literature on the impacts of adolescent

maltreatment, few studies have attempted to determine whether a specific form of maltreatment is differentially predictive of certain outcome over the other. Adolescent neglect, in particular, has hardly featured as a focus for research in spite of the fact that it is the most common experience for teenagers who are maltreated by their parents (Dubowitz, 2013; Korbin & Krugman, 2014; Mennen, Kim, Sang, & Trickett, 2010). Some of the challenges are the inherent complexity in adequately conceptualizing and identifying neglect since children require varying degrees of care and attention depending on their developmental stage (Hildyard & Wolfe, 2002; Straus & Kaufman Kantor, 2005; Turner, Vanderminden, Finkelhor, & Hamby, 2019). Especially because neglect is often viewed as an act of omission and is generally experienced over time without immediate impact, it is difficult to evaluate (Dubowitz 2007). Although there is no universally accepted definition of neglect, the official definition provided by the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) as a guidance to children’s services professionals says that it is “the failure to meet a child’s basic physical and/or psychological needs and which is likely to result in the serious impairment of the child’s health or development.” To understand the concept more in detail, researchers have proposed different

RUNNING HEAD: EFFECT OF SUPERVISORY NEGLECT ON ADOLESCENT PEER VICTIMIZATION

7

typologies for the conceptualization of neglect: Emotional, educational, physical, and supervisory (Howarth, 2007; Mennen et al., 2010; Raws, 2016). In the present study, we seek to evaluate the effects of supervisory neglect (SN), and it occurs when a parent or caregiver fails to provide a child adequate rules and boundaries for behavior and to protect from harmful people or situations (Mennen et al., 2010; Raws, 2019). However, SN varies with the age of the young person concerned, and parental supervision has to be balanced alongside factors which assist emerging independence (Hicks & Stein, 2013); adolescents are not seen to be neglected in the same way that younger children are (Howarth, 2013). The charity commissioned researchers from the University of York investigated teenagers’ experience of different types of neglect by surveying a representative sample of a thousand 14- to 15-year-olds to establish the scale of adolescent neglect, and the questions measuring SN were how often their parents asked where they were going when they went out, where they were after school, and if they were going to be home late (Raws, 2016). With reference to the above classification and findings, we operationalized SN as being unaware and uninterested in the child’s whereabouts and failing to monitor his/her activities outside the home. Adolescent supervisory neglect is an understudied problem, and a great deal remains to be addressed. Thus far, a small number of studies have investigated the consequences of SN. According to the results of these studies, SN increases the risk of developing aggressive behaviors (Knutson, DeGarmo, Koeppl, & Reid, 2005), antisocial behaviors (Knutson, DeGarmo, & Reid, 2004), alcohol risk behaviors (Snyder & Merritt, 2016), substance use (Oshri, Carlson, Kwon, Zeichner, & Wickrama, 2017), and early sexual experience in teenagers (Wight, Williamson, & Henderson, 2006). Yet, much of the earlier research has mainly focused on externalizing problems, and it remains uncertain how (and if) SN relates differently to adolescents’ internalizing problems

RUNNING HEAD: EFFECT OF SUPERVISORY NEGLECT ON ADOLESCENT PEER VICTIMIZATION

8

and victimization experiences at school. 2.3.

Present study and hypotheses Supervisory neglect does not clearly infer malicious intent or harsh treatment; however,

the need to predict where potential harm could result from a lack of adequate supervision is vital. To deepen our understanding of the link between SN and peer victimization, we examine the relationship between SN and peer victimization through the mediating roles of self-esteem and internalizing problems. Based on the previous research showing the significance of parental support, involvement, and responsiveness on victimization at school (Card & Hodges, 2008), we hypothesize that SN would be especially harmful during adolescence by placing them at particular risk for peer relationship problems; SN would be associated with increases in peer victimization through the mediating influence of self-esteem and internalizing problems. The current study will begin to fill the gap in the literature by investigating the process of how SN is associated with selfesteem, internalizing problems, and peer victimization among adolescents. Determining the potential mechanism underlying this association would be essential to the development of effective prevention and risk reduction interventions. Method Data Source and Participants This study utilized data from the Korea Welfare Panel Study (KOWEPS), which is a nationally representative survey with detailed information on the general features, economic conditions, employment status, social security status, welfare needs, and disabilities of the participants. The KOWEPS is an on-going longitudinal panel survey conducted annually since 2006 and consisted of total 7,072 South Korean households using a two-stage stratified cluster

RUNNING HEAD: EFFECT OF SUPERVISORY NEGLECT ON ADOLESCENT PEER VICTIMIZATION

9

sampling design. The sampling includes that largest number of low-income households in South Korea’s panel survey, as low-income households with below 60 percent median income allocated about 50 percent of the total sample. The size of the original sample of the KOWEPS started at 7,072 households and has decreased slightly, but the total number of original sample households completed in the 13th survey in 2018 was 4,266 with a high sample retention rate. The KOWEPS was conducted by the Korea Institute for Health and Social Affairs and Seoul National University, South Korea. Data was collected using in-home face-to-face interviews. Further details and information about the panel can be found elsewhere (http:/www.koweps.re.kr). In the KOWEPS, surveys for children and adolescents were conducted every three years, so the first interview was conducted in 2006 when the children were in elementary school, second was 2009 in middle school, and the third was 2012 in high school. The first, fourth, and seventh waves were longitudinal data that tracks a child; however, the tenth survey was re-started with new participants attending elementary schools. In this study, the second interview conducted at fourth was used because some of questions about the SN were not included in the first wave despite there is a longitudinal data set of first, fourth, and seventh. Moreover, children have reported a peak in peer victimization during the middle school years (Nansel et al., 2001; Waasdorp, Pas, Zablotsky, & Bradshaw, 2017). The sample of the present study consisted of 605 Korean adolescents who were attending middle school at the time of survey. Among the participants, 50.6% were boys and 49.4% were girls. The participants’ general characteristics are presented in Table 1, and demographic characteristics are presented in Table 2. [ Table 1, 2 near here]

RUNNING HEAD: EFFECT OF SUPERVISORY NEGLECT ON ADOLESCENT PEER VICTIMIZATION

10

Measures Supervisory Neglect. Supervisory neglect was measured using six questions selected from two different scales. The first four questions were measured on a four-point scale (1 = never to 4 = always) and consist of the following questions: (1) ‘My parents know where I am and with whom I am when I am not home’; (2) ‘My parents know what time I get home’; (3) ‘My parents know what I am doing when I am not home’; (4) ‘My parents call me when I am home alone’. All four items were reverse coded, so higher scores indicated higher levels of supervisory neglect. The following two questions measured the frequency of supervisory neglect (1 = never, 2 = once or twice a year, 3 = once or twice in two-three months, 4 = once or twice in a month, 5 = once or twice in a week): (5) ‘My parents are not interested whether I come home late’; (6) ‘My parents say nothing even if I’m absent from school for no reason’. The responses to these two questions indicated that the higher the score, the more frequent the supervisory neglect. The Cronbach’s alpha for six items was .728. Self-esteem. Self-esteem was measured using the translated version of the Rosenberg SelfEsteem Scale (Rosenberg, 1965), where participants responded to 10 items ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 4 (strongly agree). Reverse coding was done on the five questions that were negatively described. Sample items include: ‘I feel that I have a number of good qualities’ and ‘I certainly feel useless at times.’ Higher scores indicated higher levels of self-esteem. Due to the large number of items in the RESE, two item parcels were created through random assignment of items to individual parcels in order to reduce the estimation error and to obtain more stable parameter estimates (Bandalos & Finney, 2001). The Cronbach’s alpha was .868.

RUNNING HEAD: EFFECT OF SUPERVISORY NEGLECT ON ADOLESCENT PEER VICTIMIZATION

11

Internalizing Problems. Internalizing problems were measured by 34 items from the translated and modified Korean version of Child Behavior Checklist Youth Self-Report: K-CBCL (Oh, Lee, Hong, & Ha, 1998). The K-CBCL originally provides composite scores for internalizing and externalizing problems, and this study used the internalizing problem score which was composed of three subscales: depression/anxiety, withdrawn, and attention problem. Each scale contained 9 to 14 items, and response options were based on a three-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (“not true”) to 3 (“very true). The total score was calculated by summing all response values, with higher scores indicating higher levels of internalizing problems. The Cronbach’s alpha in this sample was .866 for depression/anxiety, .791 for withdrawn, and .829 for attention problems. Peer Victimization. Peer victimization was measured using the translated and revised Korean version of a scale (Lee, 1998) derived from Olweus’(1989) Bully/Victim Questionnaire. The scale contained six items asking about the level of direct and indirect forms of peer victimization experienced in the past 12 months. Items included malicious teasing, insulting, exclusion from groups of play, rumor spreading, making threats, extortion, and physical violence. Each item was rated on a four-point Likert scale (1= “not at all”, 2 = “once”, 3 = “two or three times”, 4 = “more than four times). A composite score was calculated, with higher scores indicating higher levels of peer victimization. Six items were randomly assigned into two 3-item parcels since using a relatively few parcels per factor rather than a larger number of items typically result in better model fit (Bandalos & Finney, 2001). The Cronbach’s alpha was .718. Statistical analysis Descriptive and correlational analyses were performed with IBM SPSS Statistics 19.0 (SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL). Variables were tested for deviation from normality based on inspections

RUNNING HEAD: EFFECT OF SUPERVISORY NEGLECT ON ADOLESCENT PEER VICTIMIZATION

12

of skew and kurtosis, using cutoff scores of < 2 for skew and < 7 for kurtosis (Kim, 2013). This indicated normal distributions for all variables in this study. Before testing for mediation, correlational analyses were performed to investigate the relationships between variables. All pvalues less than 0.01 were considered statistically significant. Structural equation modeling (SEM) was applied to examine whether self-esteem and internalizing problems mediate between SN and peer victimization, after controlling for gender, subjective health states, family structure, and family income. Several fit indices recommended by Hu and Bentler (1999) were used to verify if the specified models were good representations of the data. According to Hu and Bentler (1999), goodness-of-fit criteria for the excellent fit are as follows: χ 2/df ratio < 2, comparative fit index (CFI) and Tucker Lewis index (TLI) > 0.95, root means square of approximation (RMSEA) < 0.06. Lastly, we conducted bootstrapping procedure (Shrout & Bolger, 2002) to verify the significance of the indirect path with the recommended 1,000 random re-sample with replacement. The significance of the indirect effects was evaluated using 95% bootstrapped confidence intervals (MacKinnon & Fairchild, 2009). When zero is not included in the confidence interval, the indirect effect is considered significant. These analyses were conducted in Mplus 7.0 (Muthen & Muthen, 1998-2002), using maximum likelihood estimation to handle missing values. Results Descriptive statistics and correlations Table 3 provides descriptive statistics and correlations for the key variables. The mean score for SN was 2.26 (SD=.76), for self-esteem it was 3.02 (SD=.50), for depression/anxiety it was 1.31 (SD=.33), for withdrawn it was .31 (SD=.33), for attention problem it was 1.41 (SD=.36),

RUNNING HEAD: EFFECT OF SUPERVISORY NEGLECT ON ADOLESCENT PEER VICTIMIZATION

13

and for peer victimization, it was 1.15 (SD=.33). As presented in Table 3, correlation analyses among the study variables indicated that all of them were significantly correlated with each other. SN was negatively associated with self-esteem and positively associated with internalizing problems and peer victimization. [ Table 3 near here] Structural equation modeling Figure 1 portrays our structural model in which we hypothesized that self-esteem and internalizing problems act as mediators of the relationship between SN and peer victimization. The mediation model demonstrated a good fit to the data: χ 2 = 182.555 (df = 95), p < .000, TLI = .954, CFI = .966, RMSEA = .039 (.030 ~ .048). The direct effect of SN as a single indicator variable on peer victimization was not significant; the relationship between them was found to be fully mediated by self-esteem and internalizing problems. As shown in figure 1, a sequential mediation was found: a direct link from SN to self-esteem (β = -.334, p < .001), a direct link from self-esteem to internalizing problems (β = -.699, p < .001), and a direct link from internalizing problems to peer victimization (β = .653, p < .001). [ Figure 1 near here] To test for indirect effects, bootstrapping was used. A mediator effect is often tested when there appears to be a significant direct effect between the predictor variable and outcome variable (Kenny, 1986); however, when the association between the predictor and outcome variable is more distal, it is also permissible to proceed with the mediator analyses (Shrout & Bolger, 2002). As shown in table 4, SN was indirectly related to peer victimization sequentially through self-esteem and internalizing problems (b = .083, C.I. 95 = .043, .140). SN exerted a significant indirect effect

RUNNING HEAD: EFFECT OF SUPERVISORY NEGLECT ON ADOLESCENT PEER VICTIMIZATION

14

on peer victimization via self-esteem and internalizing problems, while self-esteem influenced peer victimization indirectly via internalizing problems. [ Table 4 near here] Discussion This study explored the relationship between supervisory neglect and peer victimization, as well as the mediating role of self-esteem and internalizing problems, among South Korean adolescents. The SEM results indicated that SN indirectly influenced peer victimization through a sequential pathway of self-esteem and internalizing problems. The final model in this study did not support the mediating role of either self-esteem or internalizing problems independently between supervisory neglect and peer victimization. Instead, it suggested concurrent effects via another significant path: SN → self-esteem → internalizing problems → peer victimization. The following conclusions were drawn from the above results of the study. First, consistent with previous research demonstrating a strong relationship between parental maltreatment and lower self-esteem (Oates et al., 1985; Sturkie & Flanzer, 1987), adolescents who reported greater supervisory neglect in their relationships with their parents were significantly more likely to have lower self-esteem. According to attachment theory (Bowlby, 1969), children develop a positive sense of self through safe, nurturing, and responsive relationships with a primary caregiver, usually a parent or parents. Not receiving adequate attention from them may lead to the development of a poor self-image, wondering about their own selfworth (Harter, 2008). Thus, SN appears to be associated with negative feelings about the self. Second, self-esteem mediated the link between SN and internalizing problems. In other

RUNNING HEAD: EFFECT OF SUPERVISORY NEGLECT ON ADOLESCENT PEER VICTIMIZATION

15

words, adolescents who have experienced supervisory neglect tend to have lower self-esteem, which then contributes to increased internalizing problems. In accord with cognitive models of depression and anxiety (Beck, 1987), damage to self-esteem may, in turn, increase vulnerability to internalizing problems. Previous studies have demonstrated that adolescents with lower selfesteem tend to have higher levels of internalizing problems such as depression and anxiety (Beck et al. 1990; Mann et al., 2004). This result corresponds with the prediction that an adolescent’s emerging sense of self may be adversely affected by SN, which in turn would increase the risk of internalizing problems. Third, self-esteem and internalizing problems were not direct mediators respectively in the relationship between SN and peer victimization, although they play important roles by mediating this relationship sequentially. In other words, adolescents who have experienced supervisory neglect in their relationships with their parents tend to have lower self-esteem, which then leads to higher levels of internalizing problems, which in turn leads to higher levels of peer victimization. Although lower self-esteem may not be related to peer victimization directly, it may affect the relationships with peers by inducing internalizing problems such as depression and anxiety which usually lead to problems in establishing or maintaining satisfying relationships (Swearer et al., 2011). It, therefore, seems reasonable to assume that higher levels of internalizing problems, indirectly affected by SN via self-esteem, would significantly predict a higher chance of experiencing peer victimization. Limitations and implications Interpretation of the present findings should take into account certain limitations. First, the results presented here cannot be considered proof of causality since SEM cannot establish

RUNNING HEAD: EFFECT OF SUPERVISORY NEGLECT ON ADOLESCENT PEER VICTIMIZATION

16

cause and effect in the absence of longitudinal data or a true experimental design. In addition, this study was based on retrospective self-reports that may have introduced biases or distortions in participants’ recall of parental supervisory neglect, as well as their proclivity to under- or overreport internalizing problems. Using multiple methods of evaluation (e.g., parents, teacher, peer reports) could reduce the influence of subjectivity in future studies. In addition, because SN was measured as a continuous variable in the present study, and no specific harm standard of SN is currently available, it is unclear how much supervisory neglect is required before it should be deemed maltreatment. As a result, some lower intensity SN might be better described as a problematic parenting style, as opposed to child maltreatment, per se. Future research is indicated to determine at what severity SN must occur before it meets sociocultural definitions of unacceptability, and/or result in significant psychological disturbance. Lastly, the present findings may reflect cultural differences since this sample was drawn from the Korean panel study. We suggest future researchers to use cross-cultural samples to confirm the findings. Despite these limitations, the present study makes several important contributions. Because it is mostly silent and invisible, supervisory neglect is a largely overlooked phenomenon in research. The present study revealed that SN was indirectly associated with peer victimization among adolescents, a subject not covered by previous studies. Furthermore, this study advances our understanding of the roles of self-esteem and internalizing problems in this relationship. Considering the probable mechanisms, these findings may provide valuable guidance on ways of implementing interventions aimed at reducing the negative effects of parental maltreatment on peer victimization during adolescence. Supporting those affected to enhance their self-esteem may help reduce tendencies toward internalizing problems. Teenagers are often viewed as more independent and resilient than younger children, however, they still need dedicated care to stay

RUNNING HEAD: EFFECT OF SUPERVISORY NEGLECT ON ADOLESCENT PEER VICTIMIZATION

17

safe and healthy. SN itself may not appear to be harsh, but the consequences can be devastating. This study highlights the significance of consistent attention and guidance from parents for adolescents. References Armsden, G. & Greenberg, M. (1987). The inventory of parent and peer attachment: Individual differences and their relationship to psychological well-being in adolescence. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 16, 427-454. doi:10.1007/BF02202939. Bandalos, D. L., & Finney, S. J. (2001). Item parceling issues in structural equation modeling. In G. A. Marcoulides & R. E. Schumacker (Eds.), New developments and techniques in structural equation modeling (pp. 269-296). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Basto-Pereira, M., Miranda, A., Ribeiro, S., & Maia, A. (2016). Growing up with adversity: From juvenile justice involvement to criminal persistence and psychosocial problems in young adulthood. Child Abuse & Neglect, 62, 63-75. doi:10.1016/j.chiabu.2016.10.011. Beck, A., Steer, R. A., Epstein, N., & Brown, G. (1990). Beck self-concept test. Psychological Assessment, 2, 191-197. doi:10.1037/1040-3590.2.2.191. Boivin, M., Hymel, S., & Bukowski, W. M. (1995). The roles of social withdrawal, peer rejection, and victimization by peers in predicting loneliness and depressed mood in childhood. Development and Psychopathology, 7, 765-785. doi:10.1017/S0954579400006830. Bolger, K. E., & Patterson, C. J. (2001). Developmental pathways from child maltreatment to peer rejection. Child Development, 72, 549-568. doi:10.1111/1467-8624.00296. Bolger, K. E., Patterson, C. J., & Kupersmidt, J. B. (1998). Peer relationships and self-esteem among children who have ben maltreated. Child Development, 69, 1171-1197. doi:10.2307/1132368. Callagan, S., & Joseph, S. (1995). Self-concept and peer victimization among school children. Personality and Individual Differences, 19, 161-163. doi:10.1016/0191-8869(94)00127-e.

RUNNING HEAD: EFFECT OF SUPERVISORY NEGLECT ON ADOLESCENT PEER VICTIMIZATION

18

Card, N. A., & Hodges, E. V. E. (2008). Peer victimization among school children: Correlations, causes, consequences, and considerations in assessment and intervention. School Psychology Quarterly, 23, 451-461. doi:10.1037/a0012769. Cecil, C. A., Viding, E., Fearon, P., Glaser, D., & McCrory, E. J. (2017). Disentangling the mental health impact of childhood abuse and neglect. Child abuse & Neglect, 63, 106-119. doi:10.1016/j.chiabu.2016.11.024. Chapple, C. L., Tyler, K. A., & Bersani, B. E. (2005). Child neglect and adolescent violence: Examining the effects of self-control and peer rejection. Violence and Victims, 20, 39-53. doi:10.1891/088667005780927638. Cicchetti, D., & Toth, S. L. (2016). Child maltreatment and developmental psychopathology: A multilevel perspective. In D. Cicchetti (Ed.), Developmental psychopathology (Vol. 3, pp. 457-512). New York, NY: Wiley. doi:10.1002/9781119125556.devpsy311. Craig, J. M., Piquero, A. R., Farrington, D. P., & Ttofi, M. M. (2017). A little early risk goes a long bad way: Adverse childhood experiences and life-course offending in the Cambridge study. Journal of Criminal Justice, 53, 34-45. doi:10.1016/j.crimjus.2017.09.005. Craig, W., Harel-Fisch, Y., Foger-Grinvald, H., Dostaler, S., Hetland, J., Simons-Morton, B., et al. (2009). A cross-national profile of bullying and victimization among adolescents in 40 countries. International Journal of Public Health, 54, 216-224. doi:10.1007/s0038-0095413-9. Dubas, J. S., & Gerris, J. R. M. (2002). Longitudinal changes in the time parents spend in activities with their adolescent children as a function of child age, pubertal status and gender. Journal of Family Psychology, 16(4), 415-426. doi:10.1037/0893-3200.16.4.415. Dubowitz, H. (2007). Understanding and addressing the “neglect of neglect”: Digging into the molehill. Child Abuse & Neglect, 31(6), 603-606. doi:10.1016/j.chiabu.2007.04.002. Dubowitz, H. (2013). Neglect in children. Pediatric Annals, 42, 73-77. doi:10.3928/0090448120130326-11. Harter, S. (2008). The developing self. In W. Damon & R. L. Lerner (Eds.), Child and

RUNNING HEAD: EFFECT OF SUPERVISORY NEGLECT ON ADOLESCENT PEER VICTIMIZATION

19

Adolescent Development: An Advanced Course. (pp. 216-262). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley. Hayre, R. S., Goulter, N., & Moretti, M. M. (2019). Maltreatment, attachment, and substance use in adolescence: Direct and indirect pathways. Addictive Behaviors, 90, 196-203. doi:10.1016/j.addbeh.2018.10.049. Heyne, D., & Rollings, S. (2002). School Refusal. Malden, Mass: Blackwell. Hicks, L., & Stein, M. (2013). Understanding and working with adolescent neglect: Perspectives from research, young people and professionals. Childs & Family Social Work, 22, 223233. doi:10.1111/cfs.12072. Hildyard, K. L., & Wolfe, D. A. (2002). Child neglect: Developmental issues and outcomes. Child Abuse & Neglect, 26, 679-695. doi:10.1016/s0145-2134(02)00341-1. Hodges, E., & Perry, D. (1999). Personal and interpersonal antecedents and consequences of victimization by peers. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 76, 677-685. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.76.4.677. Howarth, J. (2007). Child Neglect: Identification and Assessment. London: Palgrave. Howarth, J. (2013). Child Neglect: Planning and Intervention. London: Palgrave. Hu, L. T. & Bentler, P. 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. doi:10.1080/10705519909540118. Kim, H. Y. (2013). Statistical notes for clinical researchers: assessing normal distribution (2) using skewness and kurtosis. Restorative dentistry & endodontics, 38(1), 52-54. doi: 10.5395/rde.2013.38.1.52 Kinard, E. M. (1982). Experiencing child abuse: Effects on emotional adjustment. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 52, 82-91. doi:10.1111/j.1939-0025.1982.tb02667.x. Knutson, J. F., DeGarmo, D., Koeppl, G., & Reid, J. B. (2005). Care neglect, supervisory neglect, and harsh parenting in the development of children’s aggression: A replication and extension. Child Maltreatment, 10, 92-107. doi:10.1177/1077559504273684.

RUNNING HEAD: EFFECT OF SUPERVISORY NEGLECT ON ADOLESCENT PEER VICTIMIZATION

20

Knutson, J. F., DeGarmo, D., & Reid, J. B. (2004). Social disadvantage and neglectful parenting as precursors to the development of antisocial and aggressive child behavior: Testing a theoretical model. Aggressive Behavior, 30, 187-205. doi:10.1002/ab.20016. Korbin, J. E., & Krugman, R. D. (2014). The handbook of child maltreatment. Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Springer. doi:10.1007/978-94-007-7208-3. La Greca, A. & Harrison, H. M. (2005). Adolescent peer relations, friendships, and romantic relationships: Do they predict social anxiety and depression. Journal of Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology, 34, 49-61. doi:10.1207/s15374424jccp3401_5. Lee, S. G. (1998). Influencing factors on bullying at school (unpublished doctoral dissertation). Seoul, South Korea: Seoul National University. MacKinnon, D. P., & Fairchild, A. J. (2009). Current directions in mediation analysis? Current Directions in Psychological Science, 18(1), 16–20. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8721.2009.01598.x. Manly, j. T., Kim, J. E., Rogosch, F. A., & Cicchetti, D. (2001). Dimensions of child maltreatment and children’s adjustment: Contributions of developmental timing and subtype. Development and Psychopathology, 13, 759-782. Doi:10.1017/S0954579401004023. Mann, M., Hosman, C. M. H., Schaalma, H. P., & de Vries, N. K. (2004). Self-esteem in a broad-spectrum approach for mental health promotion. Health Education Research, 19(4), 357-372. doi:10.1093/her/cyg041. McElhaney, K. B., Allen, J. P., Claire, S. J., & Hare, A. L. (2009). Attachment and Autonomy During Adolescence. In R. M. Lerner and L. D. Steinberg (Eds.), Handbook of Adolescent Psychology (pp. 358-403). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons. doi:10.1002/9780470479193.adlpsy001012. Mennon, F. E., Kim, K., Sang, J., & Trickett, P. K. (2010). Child neglect: Definition and identification of youth’s experiences in official reports of maltreatment. Child Abuse and Neglect, 34, 647-658. doi:10.1016/j.chiabu.2010.02.007. Moore, S. E., Norman, R. E., Suetani, S., Thomas, H. J., Sly, P D., & Scott, J. G. (2017).

RUNNING HEAD: EFFECT OF SUPERVISORY NEGLECT ON ADOLESCENT PEER VICTIMIZATION

21

Consequences of bullying victimization in childhood and adolescence: A systematic review and meta-analysis. World J Psychiatry, 7(1), 60-76. doi:10.5498/wjp.v7.i1.60. Moran, B. L. & DuBois, D. L. (2002). Relation of social support and self-esteem to problem behavior: Investigation of differing models. Journal of Early Adolescence, 22, 407-435. doi:10.1177/027243102237190. Muniz, C. N., Fox, B., Miley, L. N., Delisi, M., Cigarran II, G. P., & Birnbaum, A. (2019). The effects of adverse childhood experiences on internalizing versus externalizing outcomes. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 46, 568-589. doi:10.1177/0093843819826213. Nansel, T. R., Overpeck, M., Pilla, R. S., Ruan, W. J., Simons-Morton, B., & Scheidt, P. (2001). Bullying behaviors among US youth: Prevalence and association with psychosocial adjustment. The Journal of the American Medical Association, 285(16), 2094-2100. doi:10.1001/jama.285.16.2094. Oates, R. K., Forrest, D., & Peacock, A. (1985). Self-esteem of abused children. Child Abuse and Neglect, 9, 159-163. doi:10.1016/0145-2134(85)90007-9. Oh, K. J., Lee, H. R. Hong, K. I., & Han, E. H. (1998). Tests of K-CBCL reliability and validity. Seoul, South Korea: Central Adjustment Research. Olweus, D. (1989). Bully/victim questionnaire for students. Department of Psychology, University of Bergen, Norway. Oshri, A., Carlson, M. W., Kwon, J. A., Zeichner, A., & Wickrama, K. K. A. S. (2017). Developmental growth trajectories of self-esteem in adolescence: Associations with child neglect and drug use and abuse in young adulthood. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 46, 151-164. doi:10.1007/s10964-016-0483-5. Parker, J. & Asher, S. (1993). Friendship and friendship quality in middle childhood: Links with peer groups acceptance and feelings of longlines and social dissatisfaction. Developmental Psychology, 29, 611-621. doi:10.1037/0012-1649.29.4.611. Raws, P. (2016). Troubled teens: A study of the links between parenting and adolescent neglect. Retrieved from the Children’s Society, London

RUNNING HEAD: EFFECT OF SUPERVISORY NEGLECT ON ADOLESCENT PEER VICTIMIZATION

22

Achievement website: https://www.childrenssociety.org.uk/what-we-do/resources-and-publications/troubledteens-a-study-of-the-links-between-parenting-and Rohner, R. P., & Rohner, E. C. (1980). Antecedents and consequences of parental rejection: A theory of emotional abuse. Child Abuse and Neglect, 4, 189-198. doi:10.1016/01452134(80)90007-1. Romer, D. (2010). Adolescent risk taking, impulsivity, and brain development: implications for prevention. Developmental Psychobiology, 52(3), 263-276. doi:10.1002/dev.20442. Rosenberg, M. (1965). Society and the Adolescent Self-Image. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. doi:10.1515/9781400876136. Ryan, J. P., Williams, A. B., & Courtney, M. E. (2013). Adolescent neglect, juvenile delinquency and the risk of recidivism. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 42, 454-465. doi:10.1007/s10964-013-9906-8. Sedlak, A. J. & Broadhurst, D. D. (1996). Third National Incidence Study of Child Abuse and Neglect. Washington, DC: U. S. Government Printing Office. Shaffer, D. R., & Kipp, K. (2010). Developmental Psychology: Childhood and Adolescence (8th ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth, Cengage Learning. Shields, A., & Cicchetti, D. (2001). Parental maltreatment and emotion dysregulation at risk factors for bullying and victimization in middle childhood. Journal of Clinical Child Psychology, 30, 349-363. doi:10.1207/s15374424jccp3003_7. Shrout, P. E., & Bolger, N. (2002). Mediation in experimental and nonexperimental studies: New procedures and recommendations. Psychological methods, 7(4), 422-445. doi:10.1037/1082-989x.7.4.422. Smith, C. A., Ireland, T. O., & Thornberry, T. P. (2005). Adolescent maltreatment and its impact on young adult antisocial behavior. Child Abuse & Neglect, 29, 1099-1119. doi:10.1016/j.chiabu.2005.02.011. Smith, P. K., Madsen, K. C., & Moody, J. C. (1999). What causes the age decline in reports of

RUNNING HEAD: EFFECT OF SUPERVISORY NEGLECT ON ADOLESCENT PEER VICTIMIZATION

23

being bullied at school? Towards a developmental analysis of risks of being bullied. Educational Research, 41, 267-285. doi:10.1080/0013188990410303. Snyder, S. M., & Merritt, D. H. (2016). The effect of childhood supervisory neglect on emerging adults’ drinking. Substance Use & Misuse, 51, 1-14. doi:10.3109/10826084.2015.1073321. Straus, M. A., & Kaufman Kantor, G. (2005). Definition and measurement of neglectful behavior: Some general principles and guidelines. Child Abuse & Neglect, 29, 19-29. doi:10.1016/j.chiabu.2004.08.005. Sturkie, K., & Flanzer, J. P. (1987) Depression and self-esteem in the families of maltreated adolescents. Social Work, 33, 491-496. doi:10.1093/sw/32.6.491. Swearer, S. M., Collins, A., Radliff, K. H., & Wang, C. (2011). Internalizing problems in students involved in bullying and victimization. In D. L. Espelage & S. M. Swearer (Eds.), Bulling in North American Schools (2nd ed., pp. 45-61). New York: Routledge. Turner, H. A., Vanderminden, J., Finkelhor, D., & Hamby, S. (2019). Child neglect and the broader context of child victimization. Child Maltreatment, 1-10. doi:10.1177/1077559518825312. Waasdorp, T. E., Pas, E. T., Zablotsky, B., & Bradshaw, C. P. (2017). Ten-year trends in bullying and related attitudes among 4th- to 12th- graders. Pediatrics, 139(6), e20162615. doi:10.1542/peds.2016-2615. Wight, D., Williamson, L., & Henderson, M. (2006). Parental influences on young people’s sexual behavior: A longitudinal study. Journal of Adolescence, 29(4), 475-494. doi:10.1016/j.adolescence.2005.08.007.

RUNNING HEAD: EFFECT OF SUPERVISORY NEGLECT ON ADOLESCENT PEER VICTIMIZATION

Figure 1. Structural equation model of supervisory neglect, self-esteem, internalizing problems, and peer victimization, with non-significant paths in dashed lines. Path coefficients were standardized. Gender, subjective health states, family structure, and family income are controlled in this model. ** p < .01, *** p < .001

24

RUNNING HEAD: EFFECT OF SUPERVISORY NEGLECT ON ADOLESCENT PEER VICTIMIZATION

Table 1. Participants’ general characteristics (N=605) Variable

Gender

Grade

Subjective health states

Group

Frequency (%)

Boy

306 (50.6)

Girl

299 (49.4)

Total

605 (100.0)

Seventh

210 (34.7)

Eighth

190 (31.4)

Ninth

197 (32.6)

Not applicable

8 (1.3)

Total

605 (100.0)

Bad

21 (3.5)

Average

102 (16.9)

Good

482 (79.6)

Table 2. Socioeconomic information for participants’ families (N=605) Variables Father’s age Under 40 41-50 51-60 Over 61 Missing /not applicable Father’s education level Graduated middle school or under

Frequency (%) 44 (7.3) 373 (61.7) 62 (10.2) 31 (5.1) 95 (15.7) 86 (14.2)

Variables Mother’s age Under 40 41-50 51-60 Over 61 Missing /not applicable Mother’s education level Graduated middle school or under

Frequency (%) 155 (25.6) 331 (54.7) 31 (5.1) 35 (5.8) 53 (8.8) 107 (17.7)

25

RUNNING HEAD: EFFECT OF SUPERVISORY NEGLECT ON ADOLESCENT PEER VICTIMIZATION

Graduated high school 248 (41.0) Graduated college/university 161 (26.6) Postgraduate degree 15 (2.5) Missing /not applicable 95 (15.7) Father’s work skill level 1) 1 level 56 (9.3) 2 level 334 (55.2) 3 level 51 (8.4) 4 level 10 (1.7) Not working/missing/N.A. 154 (25.4) Father’s working condition Permanent employee 182 (30.1) Temporary employee 65 (10.7) Daily employee 54 (8.9) Employer/self-employed 145 (24.0) Etc. Not working 57 (9.4) Missing /not applicable 102 (16.9) Family structure Parents 460 (76.0) Single parent 145 (24.0) 3) 4) Household annual income (KRW) Under 15 million 15 – 30 million 30 – 45 million 45 – 60 million Over 60 million

Graduated high school Graduated college/university Postgraduate degree Missing /not applicable Mother’s work skill level 1 level 2 level 3 level 4 level Not working/missing/N.A. Mother’s working condition Permanent employee Temporary employee Daily employee Employer/self-employed Etc. Not working Missing /not applicable Public assistance 2) Recipient households Not recipient households

26

336 (55.5) 107 (17.7) 1 (0.2) 54 (8.9) 65 (10.7) 200 (33.1) 33 (5.5) 307 (50.7) 60 (9.9) 112 (18.5) 31 (5.1) 44 (7.3) 7 (1.2) 294 (48.5) 57 (9.4) 178 (29.4) 427 (70.6)

198 (32.7) 155 (25.6) 112 (18.5) 75 (12.4) 65 (10.7)

Note. 1) The skill level of jobs was re-categorized as proposed by the Korean standard classification of occupations (KSCO). 2) The Basic Livelihood Security Program (BLSP) is one of government initiatives social security programs to ensure the basic standard of living for every citizen. The reported household income for BLSP beneficiaries is below the thirty percent of the standard median income. 3) 1 million KRW = about 900 USD 4) The average annual salary of Korean workers in 2010 was 35 million ($29,000) (Korea Economic Research Institute, 2011).

Table 3. Descriptive statistics and inter-correlations for main variables (N=605) 1. supervisory neglect 2. self-esteem 3. depression & anxiety 4. withdrawn

1 1 -.326*** .208*** .261***

2

3

4

1 -.554** -.500**

1 .626**

1

5

6

RUNNING HEAD: EFFECT OF SUPERVISORY NEGLECT ON ADOLESCENT PEER VICTIMIZATION

5. attention problem 6. peer victimization M (SD) skewness kurtosis ** p

.251*** .131** 2.26 .76 .467 .094

-.513** -.264** 3.02 .50 -.356 .086

.665** .419** 1.31 .33 1.688 3.044

.627** .316** 1.31 .33 1.550 2.580

1 .376** 1.41 .36 1.248 1.610

1 1.15 .33 3.221 5.557

< .01 *** p < .001

Table 4. Bootstrapping indirect effects and 95% confidence intervals (CI) B(SE)

bootstrap 95% CIs Lower to Upper

.376(.28)

-.148 to .925

Direct effect Supervisory neglect → victimization experience

-.015(.04)

-.089 to .065

Indirect effect Supervisory neglect → self-esteem → peer victimization

-.023(.02)

-.071 to .014

Supervisory neglect → self-esteem → internalizing problem → peer victimization

.083(.03)***

.043 to .140

Total effect

Note: Confidence intervals (Cls) are bias corrected; 1,000 bootstrap samples. *** p < .001

27

RUNNING HEAD: EFFECT OF SUPERVISORY NEGLECT ON ADOLESCENT PEER VICTIMIZATION

28

The Effect of Supervisory Neglect on Adolescent Peer Victimization: Mediating Role of Self-Esteem and Internalizing Problems

Highlights 

Neglect is one of the most common experiences for teenagers who are maltreated; however, there is a lack of research knowledge on adolescent neglect.



Children report a peak in peer victimization during the middle school years.



Maltreated children are more likely to experience other types of victimization outside the home.



Self-esteem and internalizing problems sequentially mediated the link between supervisory neglect and peer victimization.