The informant matters: Differences in bullying victim categorization rates assessed with self- and peer-reports in children with developmental language disorder and reading difficulties.
Self-report alone lets many DLD victims slip through the cracks—add peer nominations to find them.
01Research in Context
What this study did
Aguilar-Mediavilla et al. (2024) asked 9- to young learners with developmental language disorder (DLD) and reading difficulties about bullying.
Kids filled out a self-report survey. Their classmates also filled out a peer-report survey. Researchers compared the two lists of victims.
What they found
Self-report caught only half of the DLD victims that peers named.
Reading-difficulty victims were picked about the same way by both methods.
In plain numbers: peer-report showed DLD kids were bullied more, but self-report missed most of them.
How this fits with other research
Dudley et al. (2019) extends this idea to adults with IDD. When researchers let adults define bullying in their own words, the adults described more events than standard checklists allow. Both studies say the same thing: people with language or intellectual disabilities need extra room to tell their story, or we miss the hurt.
van Schalkwyk et al. (2018) looked at high-functioning teens with ASD. Half said they were bullied, and parent agreement was only moderate. Eva’s DLD data now shows the opposite risk: self-report can under-count, not just disagree. Together the papers warn BCBAs to gather more than one voice before deciding “no bullying here.”
Favart et al. (2016) reminds us that language-impaired students can look fine on later tasks when the prompt is clear. Eva’s finding fits: give DLD kids clear, maybe supported, ways to report bullying, and the gap may shrink.
Why it matters
If you only hand a bullying checklist to a child with DLD, you may miss the victim who needs help. Add a short peer nomination or ask a few classmates privately. One extra step can move your intervention from “nothing happening” to “stop the daily teasing.”
Want CEUs on This Topic?
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.
Join Free →Add one peer nomination question to your next bullying screen: “Who gets picked on?” and compare names to self-reports.
02At a glance
03Original abstract
BACKGROUND: Children with Developmental Language Disorder (DLD) and Reading Difficulties (RD) can show more peer relation problems depending on the informant. AIMS: (1) To explore bullying victims' categorization, evaluated by self- and peer-reports, in children with DLD and RD; and (2) to assess agreement rates between informants. METHOD AND PROCEDURES: Victimization was assessed using a self-report (EBIP-Q) and a peer-report sociogram (CESC) in a sample of 83 participants (9-12 years; 10.5 ± 1.1 years), comprising of DLD (n = 19), RD (n = 32), and Control (n = 32) groups. OUTCOMES AND RESULTS: We found a higher frequency of the rejected sociometric profile in the DLD and RD groups, a higher peer-reported victimization in the DLD group, and more severe self-reported victimization in the DLD and RD groups. Odds of being classified as victimized were higher for self-report except in the DLD group. Informants' agreement was high using the most restrictive EBIP-Q criterion (7 points) for both the Control and the RD groups, being non-significant for the DLD group regardless of the criteria used. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: We found a higher victimization risk in children with language difficulties, although self-assessment seems to under-detect children with DLD according to the agreement rates, pointing out the need to combine assessments and informants. WHAT DOES THIS PAPER ADD?: Several studies have shown that children with DLD or RD obtain higher scores of victimization and score lower on several scales of social skills with continuous data. Although continuous analyses are usual in research, professional decisions are usually based on cut-off criteria more than how high or low a score is in contrast to another group. This is one of the first works that analyses victimization following the cut-off criteria of self and peer assessments that professionals used in the school settings in children with DLD and RD. Our results will raise awareness among school professionals based on the evidence about the high risk of victimization, especially in children with DLD, and the implications of selecting between several measures of victimization, in this group of children. We think that our results would help to better detect and prevent bullying in schools for children with DLD.
Research in developmental disabilities, 2024 · doi:10.1016/j.ridd.2024.104747