Associations between School-Level Disadvantage, Bullying Involvement and Children's Mental Health.

Bullying is a modifiable risk factor for poor mental health across childhood and adolescence. It is also socially patterned, with increased prevalence rates in more disadvantaged settings. The current study aimed to better understand whether school-level disadvantage is associated with different types of bullying roles, and whether it is a moderator in the association between bullying and children's mental health. Cross-sectional data were used from 4727 children aged 6-11 years, from 57 primary schools across England and Wales. The child data included previous bullying involvement and bullying role characteristics (bully, victim, bully-victim, reinforcer, defender, outsider), and the teacher-reported data included each child's mental health (emotional symptoms and externalizing) problems. School-level disadvantage was calculated from the proportion of children in the school eligible to receive free school meals (an indicator of disadvantage). Children in more disadvantaged schools were more likely to report being bully perpetrators, bully-victims, and engage less in defending behaviors during a bullying incident. Children from more disadvantaged schools who reported bullying others showed fewer emotional symptoms than those from less disadvantaged schools. There was no other evidence of moderation by school-level disadvantage between bullying roles and emotional and externalizing problems. The findings highlight the potential for school-based interventions targeting children's emotional and social development, targeting bullying, and promoting defending behaviors, particularly in more disadvantaged settings.

Developing a virtual reality environment for educational and therapeutic application to investigate psychological reactivity to bullying.

Understanding how bullying victimisation influences cognitive and emotional processes may help to direct early intervention to prevent the development of psychopathology. In a convenience sample of 67 female adolescents, we assessed the potential of a newly developed classroom-set bullying experience in virtual reality (VR) to evoke psychological reactions. Two VR experiences were co-developed with young people, one neutral and one hostile (bullying). Participants were matched and assigned to a condition based on measures of anxiety, depression, paranoia, and previous bullying, before experiencing either the neutral or hostile scenario. Before and after the VR session, participants completed measures of negative affect and levels of distress. All participants remained immersed for the whole duration, which supports the acceptability of using these VR experiences with more vulnerable participants. Those experiencing the hostile version reported greater negative affect post-immersion compared to those experiencing the neutral version (p = .018; d = 0.61). Although non-significant, a similar outcome was found regarding distress (p = .071; d = 0.37). Whilst we did not find a significant relationship between pre-existing internalisation on negative affect and distress, our sample was limited by containing adolescents with relatively low levels of previous bullying experience. Yet we still found evidence that the VR scenario evoked bullying-related psychological reactions. Further testing with a more representative groups of adolescents, especially those with more experience of bullying, would be advised. The VR scenario could potentially be used in educational and therapeutic settings to enhance empathy towards victimised children or enhance resilience following victimisation.

Revealing hidden talents: The development, use, and benefit of VESPARCH.

BACKGROUND: School attainment tests and Cognitive Abilities Tests are used in the United Kingdom to set targets for educational outcome. Whilst these are good predictors, they depend not only on basic ability but also on learnt knowledge and skills, such as reading. METHOD AND AIMS: VESPARCH is an online group test of verbal and spatial reasoning, which we propose gives a measure that more closely approximates to basic ability - fluid intelligence. The verbal test contains highly familiar words, does not require the child to read them, is untimed, and provides detailed feedback on five practice questions for each part of the test. The tests - one suitable and standardized for children aged 7-9 years and one for children aged 10-12 years - have good test-retest reliability and validity and conform to the Rasch model. Comparison of VESPARCH scores with school attainment measures allows identification of those students who are underachieving academically relative to their potential. The matched nature of the verbal and spatial tests allows reasoning ability in the two domains to be compared; those with much higher spatial scores might be expected to do well in STEM subjects. CONCLUSION: VESPARCH can be used alongside current school tests to ensure targeted teaching and encouragement for every child.

Evidence of a transition from perceptual to category induction in 3- to 9-year-old children.

We examined whether inductive reasoning development is better characterized by accounts assuming an early category bias versus an early perceptual bias. We trained 264 children aged 3 to 9 years to categorize novel insects using a rule that directly pitted category membership against appearance. This was followed by an induction task with perceptual distractors at different levels of featural similarity. An additional 52 children were given the same training followed by an induction task with alternative stimuli. Categorization performance was consistently high; however, we found a gradual transition from a perceptual bias in our youngest children to a category bias around 6 or 7 years of age. In addition, children of all ages were equally distracted by higher levels of featural similarity. The transition is unlikely to be due to an increased ability to inhibit perceptual distractors. Instead, we argue that the transition is driven by a fundamental change in children's understanding of category membership.

Development of reasoning: Behavioral evidence to support reinforcement over cognitive control accounts.

Abstract Speed's theory makes two predictions for the development of analogical reasoning. Firstly, young children should not be able to reason analogically due to an undeveloped PFC neural network. Secondly, category knowledge enables the reinforcement of structural features over surface features, and thus the development of sophisticated, analogical, reasoning. We outline existing studies that support these predictions and highlight some critical remaining issues. Specifically, we argue that the development of inhibition must be directly compared alongside the development of reasoning strategies in order to support Speed's account.