Refine
Document Type
Way of publication
- Open Access (16)
Keywords
- adolescents (10)
- hate speech (10)
- Schule (9)
- bullying (6)
- empathy (6)
- Hatespeech (5)
- school (5)
- Hate speech (4)
- Intervention (4)
- cyberhate (4)
Institute
BTU
Our understanding of how bystanders respond to hate speech is limited. This may be due, in part, to the lack of available measurement tools. However, understanding adolescents’ responses to hate speech is critical because this kind of research can support schools in empowering students to exhibit courageous moral behavior. Thus, the purpose of the present study was to investigate the psychometric properties of the newly developed Multidimensional Bystander Responses to Hate Speech Scale (MBRHS) and to explore demographic differences and correlates of bystander behavior in school hate speech. The sample consisted of 3225 seventh to ninth graders from Germany and Switzerland. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses supported a model with seven factors. We found that adolescents with immigrant background and boys showed particularly unfavorable response patterns. In addition, our study suggests that empathy is positively correlated with the factors comforting the victim, seeking help at school, and countering hate speech but negatively correlated with helplessness, revenge, reinforcing, and ignoring. Moral disengagement showed the opposite correlational pattern. The findings indicate that the MBRHS is a psychometrically valid and reliable measure that could aid in measuring varied responses to hate speech. In addition, this work highlights the relevance of empathy and moral engagement training in anti‐hate speech prevention programs.
Introduction. Hate speech is a widespread global issue that is also prevalent among children and youth and requires an educational response (United Nations, 2021). Hate speech can be defined as an intentionally harmful and derogatory expression about people (directly or vicariously) based on assigned group characteristics (e.g., ethnicity, sexual orientation, religious affiliation; Kansok-Dusche et al., 2022). For many authors concerned with hate speech among children and adolescents, the extent of the overlap between hate speech and bullying is a debatable question that requires more research (e.g., Bedrosova et al., 2022; Fulantelli et al., 2022). Initial studies showed that online hate speech and cyberbullying perpetration correlate moderately (Kansok-Dusche et al., 2022). However, no studies have investigated the overlap between hate speech and bullying perpetration in on- and offline modes.
Concerning the causes, a systematic review identified joint cyberbullying and online hate speech perpetration determinants (Fulantelli et al., 2022). However, the findings of this review are mainly based on studies examining these factors for either cyberbullying or online hate speech. Whether similar or different associations can also be found for offline hate speech/bullying perpetration is unknown. This study aims to investigate similarities and differences between hate speech and bullying from three analytic perspectives: First, using a variable-centered approach, this paper examines how strong the correlations are between bullying and hate speech perpetration by considering both phenomena in the online and offline context (Aim 1). Following a person-centered approach, it will be further investigated how much overlap exists between the respective student groups perpetrating hate speech and/or bullying, separately for online and offline activities (Aim 2). Finally, we are interested in the similarities and differences in the importance of various determinants of perpetration: we consider social perspective-taking, school belonging, social dominance orientation, and classroom climate (Aim 3).
Methods. The analyses are based on data from a sample of 3.620 students attending grades 7 to 9 (51% female, 41.4% with migration background) from 42 Swiss and German secondary schools. Students voluntarily and anonymously completed self-report surveys (December 2020 to April 2021). The frequency of bullying and hate speech perpetration was assessed with two single items for each phenomenon, one for the online and one for the offline mode (Olweus, 2012; Wachs et al., 2022). Social perspective-taking (Jurkowski & Hänze, 2014, 3 Items, α = .72), social dominance orientation (Klocke, 2012, 8 items, α = .80), school belonging (OECD, 2017; 6 items α = .83), and classroom climate (Currie et al., 2014, 3 items, α = .78) were measured with validated scales.
To address Aim 1, we will investigate bivariate correlations between hate speech and bullying perpetration in on- and offline modes. Regarding Aim 2, contingency tables and Chi-Square tests will be used to examine overlaps by creating mutually distinctive typologies of perpetration (e.g., pure hate speech perpetration, pure bullying perpetration, combined perpetration). This analysis will be done separately for on- and offline modes. To address Aim 3, we will run four multilevel regression analyses in Mplus with hate speech and bullying perpetration as outcomes (online and offline). At Level 1, social perspective-taking, social dominance orientation, and school belonging will be entered while controlling for gender, grade, socio-economic status, and migration background. At Level 2, we include classroom climate. The model-testing follows a stepwise procedure (1: random intercept model, 2: adding covariates, 3: adding classroom climate on L2, and all other variables on L1). The improvement of model fit will be assessed by relative decreases in indices such as AIC, BIC, and ABIC. These procedures will be performed separately for hate speech and bullying perpetration (online and offline). Regression coefficients and explained variance of the models for hate speech and bullying perpetration will be compared.
Preliminary Results. Regarding Aim 1, moderate correlations were found between online hate speech and online bullying perpetration (r = .48 p < .001) as well as between offline hate speech and offline bullying perpetration (r = .42; p <. 001). The final results for the three research aims will be presented at the conference.
Conclusion. These findings support researchers and practitioners in deciding whether hate speech and bullying among young people should be researched and addressed as interlinked or separate forms of aggression.
Practical Implications. Although there are some limitations (e.g., use of self-report and cross-sectional data), the findings of this study will be informative for prevention and intervention efforts aimed at protecting children and adolescents from becoming perpetrators and victims of hate speech, bullying, or both.
Hintergrund. Hatespeech (dt. Hassrede) ist weltweit ein Problem, das auch unter Jugendlichen verbreitet ist und pädagogisch ausgerichtete Präventions- und Interventionsansätze erfordert (Castellanos et al., 2023; United Nations, 2021). Hatespeech wird hier als intentional herabwürdigende Äußerung über Personen verstanden, die auf zugeschriebene Merkmale sozialer Gruppen Bezug nimmt (Kansok-Dusche et al., 2022). Da Hatespeech mit negativen Konsequenzen für Betroffene und die Gesellschaft einhergeht, ist die Schule ein wichtiger Ort zur Hatespeech-Prävention.
Forscher:innen thematisieren mit Blick auf Hatespeech bei Kindern und Jugendlichen die Überlappung von Hatespeech und Mobbing und fordern mehr Studien dazu (z.B. Bedrosova et al., 2022; Fulantelli et al., 2022). Eine Übersichtsarbeit verweist auf moderate Korrelationen zwischen dem Ausüben von Online-Hatespeech und Cyberbullying (Kansok-Dusche et al., 2022). Studien zur Überlappung der Phänomene im Offline-Modus gibt es bisher nicht. Eine weitere Übersichtsarbeit zeigt, dass das Ausüben von Cyberbullying und Online-Hatespeech durch ähnliche Faktoren determiniert ist (Fulantelli et al., 2022). Allerdings basiert diese Erkenntnis hauptsächlich auf Studien, die diese Faktoren entweder für Cyberbullying oder für Online-Hatespeech untersuchten. Zur Divergenz bzw. Konvergenz von Determinanten beider Phänomene im Offline-Modus gibt es bisher keine Studien.
Fragestellung und Ziele. Die Forschungsfrage der Studie richtet sich auf Ähnlichkeiten und Unterschiede zwischen Hatespeech und Mobbing. Sie nutzt drei analytische Perspektiven: Zunächst untersuchen wir variablenorientiert die Korrelationen zwischen dem Ausüben von Mobbing und Hatespeech im Online- und Offline-Modus (Ziel 1). Dann folgen wir einer personenzentrierten Perspektive und ermitteln, inwieweit es Überschneidungen bei den involvierten Schülergruppen gibt (Ziel 2). Schließlich interessieren uns Gemeinsamkeiten und Unterschiede in der Relevanz verschiedener Determinanten: wir betrachten die soziale Perspektivenübernahme, das schulische Zugehörigkeitsempfinden, die Soziale Dominanzorientierung und das Klassenklima (Ziel 3).
Methoden. Die Analysen basieren auf Selbsteinschätzungen von 3.260 Schüler:innen der Jahrgangsstufen 7 bis 9 aus 42 Schulen in Deutschland und der Schweiz (51% weiblich, 41.4% mit Migrationsstatus). Die Schüler:innen beantworteten freiwillig und anonym einen Fragebogen (12/2020 – 04/2021). Mit Einzelitems wurden die Häufigkeiten für das Ausüben von Mobbing und Hatespeech, separat für den On- und Offline-Modus erfasst. Weitere Skalen dienten der Erfassung der sozialen Perspektivenübernahme (Jurkowski & Hänze, 2014, 3 Items, α = .72), der sozialen Dominanzorientierung (Klocke, 2012, 8 Items, α = .80), des schulischen Zugehörigkeitsempfindens (OECD, 2017; 6 Items α = .83), und des Klassenklimas (Currie et al., 2014, 3 Items, α = .78).
Die Analysen erfolgen separat für den On- und Offline-Modus mittels Korrelationsanalysen (Ziel 1), Kontingenztabellen (Ziel 2) und regressionsanalytische Mehrebenenmodelle (Ziel 3).
Ergebnisse und Diskussion. Die Analysen werden gerade durchgeführt und sollen auf der Konferenz vorgestellt werden. Die Ergebnisse können Forscher:innen und PraktikerIinnen bei der Entscheidung unterstützen, ob Hatespeech und Mobbing unter Jugendlichen als miteinander verknüpfte oder getrennte Formen der Aggression erforscht und adressiert werden sollten. Trotz Limitationen (z.B. Selbsteinschätzungen, Querschnittsdaten) können die Ergebnisse Ausgangspunkt für Präventions- und Interventionsmaßnahmen sein, die Kinder und Jugendliche davor schützen, Täter:in und/oder Opfer von Hatespeech, Mobbing oder beidem zu werden.
Das Phänomen Hatespeech (dt. Hassrede) wird momentan weltweit als Problem wahrgenommen, das sich parallel mit der zunehmenden Nutzung sozialer Medien ausbreitet und den sozialen Zusammenhalt von Gesellschaften gefährdet. Hiervon zeugen länderübergreifende Initiativen zur Eindämmung von Hatespeech, z.B. der Vereinten Nationen oder der Europäischen Kommission.
Zumeist werden unter Hatespeech Äußerungen verstanden, durch die Menschen auf der Grundlage bestimmter Gruppenmerkmale (z.B. ethnische Zugehörigkeit, Geschlecht, sexuelle Orientierung) abgewertet werden. Spezifischere Definitionen betonen zudem, dass eine Schädigungsabsicht sowie ein Schädigungspotenzial auf verschiedenen Ebenen (z. B. individuell, gesellschaftlich) vorliegen müssen.
Kinder und Jugendliche gelten als besonders anfällig für die schädlichen Auswirkungen von Hatespeech. Jüngste Forschungen zeigen, dass Personen, die Cyberhate ausgesetzt sind, häufig Gefühle von Wut, Scham und Schuld sowie ein vermindertes Vertrauen erleben (UK Safer Internet Centre, 2016; Reichelmann et al., 2020; Krause et al., 2021; Näsi et. al, 2015). Die Konfrontation mit Hatespeech kann auch Prozesse der politischen Radikalisierung begünstigen (Bilewicz & Soral, 2020).
Somit stellt Hatespeech auch für die Schule eine besondere Herausforderung dar. Zum einen machen Kinder und Jugendliche auch in dieser Lebenswelt Erfahrungen mit Hatespeech, zum anderen ist die Schule der Ort, an dem diesen Entwicklungen durch Demokratie- und Medienerziehung sowie Soziales Lernen entgegengewirkt werden kann (Wachs et al., 2021). Die empirische Basis hierfür ist jedoch äußerst schmal. Es liegen weder zur Verbreitung von Erfahrungen mit Hatespeech im Kindes- und Jugendalter noch zu den Ursachen oder wirksamen Interventions- und Präventionsstrategien Studienbefunde vor. Auch bezüglich der Schnittmenge mit verwandten Phänomenen, wie z.B. Mobbing, gibt es bisher kaum Erkenntnisse.
An diesen Forschungslücken setzt das geplante Symposium an. Aus der Mobbingforschung ist bekannt, dass die Reaktionen des Umfeldes eine wichtige Rolle bei der Eindämmung von Gewalt spielen. Vor diesem Hintergrund werden in den drei Einzel-Beiträgen Forschungsergebnisse zur Verbreitung von Hatespeech und zu den Reaktionen von Schüler:innen und Lehrkräften vorgestellt, die sowohl auf qualitativen als auch auf quantitativen Zugängen beruhen. Entstanden sind sie im Rahmen eines aktuellen DFG-Forschungsprojektes mit erziehungswissenschaftlichen und psychologischen Forschungsteams in Deutschland und der Schweiz. Befragt wurden über 3.600 Schüler:innen und fast 500 Lehrkräfte in beiden Ländern. Im Rahmen des Symposiums sollen die Ergebnisse diskutiert und Implikationen für weitere Forschungen im Rahmen dieses Projekts sowie darüber hinaus abgeleitet werden.
In den letzten Jahren ist digitales Hassmaterial zu einem gewissen Alltagserleben in der Onlinewelt geworden. Ein Fachbegriff, der diese verrohte Kommunikationskultur zum Ausdruck bringt, ist Hatespeech. Hatespeech beschreibt kommunikative Äußerungen, mit dem Ziel gewisse Personengruppen (z.B. aufgrund der nationalen Herkunft, Religionszugehörigkeit, sexuellen Orientierung) öffentlich und mit Absicht auszugrenzen, abzuwerten oder zu demütigen (Wachs et al., 2020). Hatespeech ist jedoch nicht auf die Onlinewelt beschränkt, auch in der Schule werden Schüler*innen und pädagogisches Schulpersonal damit konfrontiert (Ballaschk et al., in press; Krause et al., 2021). Dabei kommt der Schule eine besondere Rolle zu. Sie ist nicht nur ein Ort der demokratischen Wissensvermittlung, sondern auch demokratischer Erfahrungsraum für Heranwachsende, dessen Aufgabe darin besteht, diskriminierenden und demokratiefeindlichen Tendenzen, zu denen auch Hatespeech gezählt werden kann, entgegenzuwirken (KMK, 2018). Bis heute liegt jedoch nur sehr wenig empirisch abgesichertes Wissen über Hatespeech unter Heranwachsenden und dem Umgang damit in der Schule vor. Hier setzt das vorliegende Symposium an, in dem empirische Beiträge basierend auf qualitativen und quantitativen Studien präsentiert werden und Implikationen für die zukünftige Forschung und die pädagogische Praxis abgeleitet werden.
Hate speech, or intentional derogatory expressions about people based on assigned group characteristics, has been studied primarily in online contexts. Less is known about the occurrence of this phenomenon in schools. As it has negative consequences for victims, perpetrators, and those who witness it, it is crucial to characterize the occurrence of offline (i.e., in the school) and online hate speech to describe similarities and differences between these two socialization contexts. The present study aimed to investigate the prevalence of hate speech witnessing, victimization, and perpetration, in a sample of 3,620 7th to 9th graders (51% self-identified as female) from 42 schools in Germany and Switzerland. We found that 67% of the students witnessed hate speech in their school, and 65% witnessed online hate speech at least once in the past twelve months. Approximately 21% of the students self-identified as offline perpetrators and 33% as offline victims, whereas these percentages were lower for online hate speech (13% and 20%, respectively). In both settings, skin color and origin were the most common group references for hate speech (50% offline and 63% online). Offline hate speech mainly came from classmates (88%), unknown sources (e.g., graffiti; 19%), or teachers (12%), whereas online hate speech mostly came from unknown persons (77%). The most frequent forms of offline hate speech were offensive jokes (94%) and the spread of lies and rumors about the members of a specific social group (84%). Significant differences by country, gender, and migration background were observed. Girls reported more offline victimization experiences, less perpetration, and a greater frequency of witnessing hate speech. This difference was larger in magnitude in the online setting. Students in Switzerland reported being exposed to hate speech more often than students in Germany. Students with a migration background reported higher hate speech victimization based on skin color and origin than students without a migration background. The high prevalence of hate speech highlights the need for school-based prevention programs. Our findings are discussed in terms of the practical implications.
Hate speech has become a widespread phenomenon, however, it remains largely unclear why adolescents engage in it and which factors are associated with their motivations for perpetrating hate speech. To this end, we developed the multidimensional “Motivations for Hate Speech Perpetration Scale” (MHATE) and evaluated the psychometric properties. We also explored the associations between social norms and adolescents’ motivations for hate speech perpetration. The sample consisted of 346 adolescents from Switzerland (54.6% boys; Mage=14; SD=0.96) who reported engagement in hate speech as perpetrators. The analyses revealed good psychometric properties for the MHATE, including good internal consistency. The most frequently endorsed subscale was revenge, followed by ideology, group conformity, status enhancement, exhilaration, and power. The results also showed that descriptive norms and peer pressure were related to a wide range of different motivations for perpetrating hate speech. Injunctive norms, however, were only associated with power. In conclusion, findings indicate that hate speech fulfills various functions. We argue that knowing the specific motivations that underlie hate speech could help us derive individually tailored prevention strategies (e.g., anger management, promoting an inclusive classroom climate). Furthermore, we suggest that practitioners working in the field of hate speech prevention give special attention to social norms surrounding adolescents.
Prior research suggests that teachers with higher levels of empathy are more willing to intervene in bullying among students. However, these findings are based on hypothetical bullying situations and teachers’ self-reports. In this study with 2,071 German students and their 556 teachers, we analysed reactions to hypothetical relational bullying situations as well as retrospectively reported bullying situations both from the teachers’ as well as the students’ perspectives. Results showed that teachers with higher levels of empathy reported stronger intentions to intervene in hypothetical relational bullying situations but were not more likely to intervene in retrospectively reported bullying situations. From the students’ perspective, teachers’ empathy was neither connected to the teachers’ intention to intervene nor to the likelihood of intervention in the retrospectively reported situations. These different results could be taken as an opportunity to investigate whether existing findings could be influenced by methodological aspects such as teachers’ self-reports. Implications for future research are discussed.
Although it is known that social dominance orientation directly affects hate speech perpetration, few studies have explored the mechanisms by which this effect takes place during adolescence. Based on the socio-cognitive theory of moral agency, we aimed to fill this gap in the literature by exploring the direct and indirect effects of social dominance orientation on hate speech perpetration in offline and online settings. The sample included seventh, eigth, and ninth graders (N = 3225) (51.2% girls, 37.2% with an immigrant background) from 36 Swiss and German schools who completed a survey about hate speech, social dominance orientation, empathy, and moral disengagement. A multilevel mediation path model revealed that social dominance orientation had a direct effect on offline and online hate speech perpetration. Moreover, social dominance also had indirect effects via low levels of empathy and high levels of moral disengagement. No gender differences were observed. Our findings are discussed regarding the potential contribution to preventing hate speech during adolescence.
Introduction. Hate speech is a current challenge for schools around the globe. At the same time, students worldwide stand up to hate speech by countering it. Guided by a positive youth development perspective, the present study investigated the direct and indirect associations between classroom climate (environmental assets), social skills (personal assets), and countering hate speech (as a proxy of thriving) among adolescents.
Methods. The sample included 3225 students in grades 7–9 (51.7% self-identified as female) from 40 schools in Germany (n = 1841) and Switzerland (n = 1384). Students completed self-report questionnaires that assessed classroom climate, three facets of social skills (i.e., perspective-taking, prosocial behavior, assertiveness), and counterspeech.
Results. The results of the 2-(1-1-1)-1 multilevel mediation analysis revealed that classroom climate (L2) and the three facets of social skills (L1) had a direct positive effect on counterspeech (L1). Furthermore, classroom climate (L2) also had a direct positive effect on the three facets of social skills (L1). Finally, classroom climate (L2) had an indirect positive effect on counterspeech (L1) via all three aspects of social skills (L1).
Conclusion. The findings highlight that successful anti-hate speech programs may entail a combination of environmental and personal factors for increasing adolescents' active contribution to an inclusive and discrimination-free classroom environment where hate speech is not tolerated.
Although hate speech is widely recognized as an online phenomenon, very few studies have investigated hate speech among adolescents in offline settings (e.g., schools). At the same time, not much is known about countering hate speech (counterspeech) among adolescents and which factors are associated with it. To this end, the present study used the socio- ecological framework to investigate the direct and indirect links among one contextual factor (i.e., classroom climate) and two intrapersonal factors (i.e.,empathy for victims of hate speech, self-efficacy regarding intervention in hate speech) to understand counterspeech among adolescents. The sample is based on self-reports of 3,225 students in Grades 7 to 9 (51.7% self- identified as female) from 36 schools in Germany and Switzerland. Self- report questionnaires were administered to measure classroom climate, empathy, self-efficacy, and counterspeech. After controlling for adolescents’ grade, gender, immigrant background, and socioeconomic status (SES), the 2-(1-1)-1 multilevel mediation analysis showed that classroom climate (L2), empathy for victims of hate speech (L1), and self-efficacy toward intervention in hate speech (L1) had a positive effect on countering hate speech (L1). Classroom climate (L2) was also positively linked to empathy for victims of hate speech (L1), and self-efficacy toward intervention in hate speech (L1). Furthermore, classroom climate (L2) was indirectly associated with countering hate speech (L1) via greater empathy (L1) and self-efficacy (L1). The findings highlight the need to focus on contextual and intrapersonal factors when trying to facilitate adolescents’ willingness to face hate speech with civic courage and proactively engage against it.
Teachers play a crucial role in bullying interventions. Recent research has suggested that empathy is particularly important for this. But two important limitations arise. Firstly, all of these findings are based on artificial bullying scenarios presented in vignettes. Secondly, the likelihood that teachers will intervene is assessed solely from the teacher’s perspective.
Based on data from 2,071 German students and their 93 teachers, the connection between teachers’ self-reported empathy and the likelihood that they will intervene in bullying was assessed using a bullying vignette as well as a retrospectively reported bullying situation that had been experienced by the teachers or the students in question. The associations were analysed in multilevel regression models from the teachers’ and the students’ perspective.
Results showed that teachers who are more empathic are more likely to report that they would intervene in a hypothetical relational bullying situation. However, this finding could not be replicated when using real, remembered bullying situations. In addition, when based on students’ perspectives, no significant associations between teachers’ empathy and their actual or intended intervention behaviour were found.
In this presentation we will discuss implications for the validity of existing research and for future research.
We applied the Social Cognitive Theory to investigate whether parent–child relationships, bullying victimization, and teacher–student relationships are directly as well as indirectly via self-efficacy in social conflicts associated with adolescents’ willingness to intervene in a bullying incident. There were 2071 (51.3% male) adolescents between the ages of 12 and 17 from 24 schools in Germany who participated in this study. A mediation test using structural equation modeling revealed that parent–child relationships, bullying victimization, and teacher–student relationships were directly related to adolescents’ self-efficacy in social conflicts. Further, teacher–student relationships and bullying victimization were directly associated with adolescents’ willingness to intervene in bullying. Finally, relationships with parents, peers and teachers were indirectly related to higher levels of students’ willingness to intervene in bullying situations due to self-efficacy in social conflicts. Thus, our analysis confirms the general assumptions of Social Cognitive Theory and the usefulness of applying its approach to social conflicts such as bullying situations.
To date, little has been known about teachers’ success in bullying interventions. Thus, the present study analyzes how successfully teachers intervene in real bullying situations, based on an analysis of 1,996 reports by German students aged between 12 and 15 (49.2% female) from 24 schools. Predictors of success included intervention strategy (authoritarian-punitive, supportive-individual, supportive-cooperative intervention), bullying form (physical, verbal, relational, cyber), and the student’s bullying role (bully, victim, bystander) in the particular situation. Multilevel analyses showed that supportive-cooperative intervention strategies were the most successful in dealing with bullying in both the short and long term. In the long term, students evaluated teachers as being more successful in dealing with cyberbullying compared with physical bullying. Compared with students who observed bullying, students who perpetrated it were less likely to report that teachers’ interventions were successful in the short term. Implications for bullying intervention, preservice teacher-training, and future research are discussed.
Although school climate and self-efficacy have received some attention in the literature, as correlates of students’ willingness to intervene in bullying, to date, very little is known about the potential mediating role of self-efficacy in the relationship between classroom climate and students’ willingness to intervene in bullying. To this end, the present study analyzes whether the relationship between classroom cohesion (as one facet of classroom climate) and students’ willingness to intervene in bullying situations is mediated by self-efficacy in social conflicts. This study is based on a representative stratified random sample of two thousand and seventy-one students (51.3% male), between the ages of twelve and seventeen, from twenty-four schools in Germany. Results showed that between 43% and 48% of students reported that they would not intervene in bullying. A mediation test using the structural equation modeling framework revealed that classroom cohesion and self-efficacy in social conflicts were directly associated with students’ willingness to intervene in bullying situations. Furthermore, classroom cohesion was indirectly associated with higher levels of students’ willingness to intervene in bullying situations, due to self-efficacy in social conflicts. We thus conclude that: (1) It is crucial to increase students’ willingness to intervene in bullying; (2) efforts to increase students’ willingness to intervene in bullying should promote students’ confidence in dealing with social conflicts and interpersonal relationships; and (3) self-efficacy plays an important role in understanding the relationship between classroom cohesion and students’ willingness to intervene in bullying. Recommendations are provided to help increase adolescents’ willingness to intervene in bullying and for future research.
Hate speech is a global challenge, requiring research on adolescents’ hate speech perpetration in schools. We examined whether perceived parents’ prosocial educational goals moderate the association between social competencies (social perspective-taking, openness to diversity) and hate speech perpetration in schools. In total, 1,719 adolescents
(aged 11–18 years) from 22 Swiss schools completed selfreport questionnaires (December 2020 to April 2021). Social perspective-taking and hate speech perpetration correlated negatively, alongside openness to diversity and hate speech perpetration. Perceived parents’ prosocial educational goals strengthened the negative association between openness to diversity and hate speech perpetration in schools but did not moderate the association with social perspective-taking.