ArticlePDF Available

Abstract and Figures

The present study examined the predictive effect of moral disengagement (within and between classrooms) on antisocial behaviors in Colombian adolescents, as well as the interaction of moral disengagement with classroom composition by age, socioeconomic status (SES), and perceived teacher–student relationship quality. Multilevel modeling was used to identify individual, compositional, and contextual effects on antisocial behaviors. The predictive variables were: (a) classroom mean score (i.e., between-classroom analysis), and (b) student deviation from the classroom mean score (i.e., within-classroom analysis). The sample included 879 students nested in 24 seventh-grade classrooms in three Colombian cities. The results showed that age, SES, and moral disengagement at the within-classroom level predicted antisocial behaviors. At the between-classroom level, antisocial behaviors were predicted by higher moral disengagement and lower aggregate SES. In addition, significant interactions were found between moral disengagement at the within-classroom level and SES at the between-classroom level. The findings expand our knowledge of the interdependence between individual and classroom contexts in the exercise of moral agency during adolescence.
This content is subject to copyright.
feduc-07-897277 September 2, 2022 Time: 14:15 # 1
TYPE Original Research
PUBLISHED 08 September 2022
DOI 10.3389/feduc.2022.897277
OPEN ACCESS
EDITED BY
Jesus de la Fuente,
University of Navarra, Spain
REVIEWED BY
Verena Hofmann,
Université de Fribourg, Switzerland
Tobias Kärner,
University of Hohenheim, Germany
*CORRESPONDENCE
Maryluz Gomez Plata
maryluz.gomezplata@uniroma1.it
SPECIALTY SECTION
This article was submitted to
Educational Psychology,
a section of the journal
Frontiers in Education
RECEIVED 15 March 2022
ACCEPTED 04 August 2022
PUBLISHED 08 September 2022
CITATION
Gomez Plata M, Laghi F, Pastorelli C,
Paba Barbosa C, Uribe Tirado L,
Luengo Kanacri BP, Zuffiano A,
Cirimele F, Ruiz García M,
Tamayo Giraldo G, Narváez Marín M
and Gerbino MG (2022) The effect
of individual and classroom moral
disengagement on antisocial behaviors
in Colombian adolescents: A multilevel
model.
Front. Educ. 7:897277.
doi: 10.3389/feduc.2022.897277
COPYRIGHT
© 2022 Gomez Plata, Laghi, Pastorelli,
Paba Barbosa, Uribe Tirado, Luengo
Kanacri, Zuffiano, Cirimele, Ruiz
García, Tamayo Giraldo, Narváez Marín
and Gerbino. This is an open-access
article distributed under the terms of
the Creative Commons Attribution
License (CC BY). The use, distribution
or reproduction in other forums is
permitted, provided the original
author(s) and the copyright owner(s)
are credited and that the original
publication in this journal is cited, in
accordance with accepted academic
practice. No use, distribution or
reproduction is permitted which does
not comply with these terms.
The effect of individual and
classroom moral
disengagement on antisocial
behaviors in Colombian
adolescents: A multilevel model
Maryluz Gomez Plata1*, Fiorenzo Laghi1,
Concetta Pastorelli2, Carmelina Paba Barbosa3,
Liliana Uribe Tirado4, Bernadette P. Luengo Kanacri5,
Antonio Zuffiano2, Flavia Cirimele1, Marcela Ruiz García4,
Gonzalo Tamayo Giraldo6, Mariela Narváez Marín6and
Maria G. Gerbino2
1Department of Social and Developmental Psychology, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy,
2Department of Psychology, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy, 3Grupo de Investigaciòn
Cogniciòn y Educaciòn, University of Magdalena, Santa Marta, Colombia, 4Faculty of Psychology,
Universidad de San Buenaventura Medellín, Medellín, Colombia, 5Escuela de Psicologia, Pontificia
Universidad Católica de Chile, Santiago, Chile, 6Facultad de Ciencias Sociales y Humanas,
Universidad de Manizales, Manizales, Colombia
The present study examined the predictive effect of moral disengagement
(within and between classrooms) on antisocial behaviors in Colombian
adolescents, as well as the interaction of moral disengagement with
classroom composition by age, socioeconomic status (SES), and perceived
teacher–student relationship quality. Multilevel modeling was used to identify
individual, compositional, and contextual effects on antisocial behaviors. The
predictive variables were: (a) classroom mean score (i.e., between-classroom
analysis), and (b) student deviation from the classroom mean score (i.e.,
within-classroom analysis). The sample included 879 students nested in 24
seventh-grade classrooms in three Colombian cities. The results showed that
age, SES, and moral disengagement at the within-classroom level predicted
antisocial behaviors. At the between-classroom level, antisocial behaviors
were predicted by higher moral disengagement and lower aggregate SES. In
addition, significant interactions were found between moral disengagement
at the within-classroom level and SES at the between-classroom level. The
findings expand our knowledge of the interdependence between individual
and classroom contexts in the exercise of moral agency during adolescence.
KEYWORDS
antisocial behaviors, moral disengagement, classroom composition, contextual
effects, multilevel
Frontiers in Education 01 frontiersin.org
feduc-07-897277 September 2, 2022 Time: 14:15 # 2
Gomez Plata et al. 10.3389/feduc.2022.897277
Introduction
Adolescence is a developmental period characterized by
greater independence from parents and higher peer influence.
It is also a period in which antisocial behaviors are explored.
Antisocial behaviors refer to behaviors that violate social norms
and rules, challenge authority, and break social conventions;
in many cases, they are also illegal. Due to the negative
consequences of these behaviors for individuals and society,
many researchers have dedicated significant effort to identifying
predictors and explanatory models to prevent and limit their
occurrence (Manrique-Millones et al.,2021).
There is a wide body of criminological, sociological, and
psychological research on antisocial behaviors in adolescence
(Curtis,2015). Several meta-analyses have accounted for a
variety of predictors and explanatory models for such behaviors
(e.g., Serketich and Dumas,1996;Ogilvie et al.,2011;Malti and
Krettenauer,2013;Braga et al.,2018). However, as evidenced
by Yousefi-Nooraie et al. (2006) and Plancikova et al. (2021),
most studies have considered samples from English-speaking
and high-income countries, despite the fact that 80% of the
world’s population lives in low- and middle-income countries
with high rates of crime and violence.
The present study examined determinants of antisocial
behaviors in a sample of Colombian adolescents, thus
contributing to the literature on low- and middle-income
countries. As recently reported (Institute for Economics and
Peace,2022), Colombia ranks 143rd out of 163 countries in
the Global Peace Index. In fact, Colombia is a country with a
long history of violence due conflict between the Colombian
Government and illegal armed groups. Many Colombian
children and adolescents are raised amidst and otherwise
exposed to violent and transgressive behavior, and although the
country is currently in a state of peace (recently inaugurated
by the government), more empirical studies are needed to
provide insight into the psycho-social processes involved in the
development of antisocial behaviors in adolescents, which may
still apply to many Colombian youth.
The study adopted Bandura’s (1986) socio-cognitive model,
which holds that aggressive and antisocial behaviors are
determined by a reciprocal interplay between contextual,
personal, and behavioral factors. In particular, it focused on
mechanisms of moral disengagement that operate at both
an individual and a contextual level. Unlike ethical theories
that focus on moral reasoning as a direct generator of
moral behavior, Bandura’s theory focuses on self-regulatory
mechanisms in the exercise of moral agency. Most of the time,
individuals are knowledgeable about the negative consequences
of their wrongdoing and possess moral principles that condemn
norm violations and antisocial behaviors. However, as Bandura
(2002, p. 102) reported, “the self-regulation of morality is not
entirely an intrapsychic matter as rationalist theories might lead
one to believe. People do not operate as autonomous moral
agents impervious to the social realities in which they are
enmeshed.”
Adolescence is a developmental period in which youth
increase their use of abstract reasoning and adopt moral
principles and personal standards to account for their behaviors.
However, while adolescents may generally refrain from violating
their moral standards to avoid self-condemnation, they may still
commit antisocial actions by justifying their wrongdoing. Thus,
adolescents’ enactment of antisocial behaviors may result from
their incapacity to self-regulate their moral behaviors. In this
vein, Bandura et al. (1996) proposed that cognitive mechanisms
of moral disengagement represent active maneuvers to defuse
internal moral sanctions (e.g., guilt) and allow for antisocial
behaviors, despite established moral principles (Bandura,2016).
As a result of interactive, coordinative, and synergistic group
dynamics, moral disengagement may also be activated at a
collective level (Bandura,2002;White et al.,2009;Zimbardo,
2011). In recent years, studies focused on bullying behaviors
have highlighted the importance of the classroom context
(in which adolescents spend several hours a day interacting
with peers of the same age), and particularly classroom moral
disengagement (e.g., Gini et al.,2014;Bjärehed et al.,2021).
The present study aimed at expanding the knowledge base on
the relationship between moral disengagement and antisocial
behaviors at both individual and classroom levels.
Individual and classroom moral
disengagement and antisocial
behaviors
Social cognitive theory (Bandura,1986), which focuses on
aggressive and antisocial conduct, highlights the role of moral
disengagement in either activating or disengaging from moral
self-sanction. Mechanisms of moral disengagement operate
individually and collectively according to three sets of self-
regulatory practices. The first set of practices is comprised
of moral justification, euphemistic labeling, and advantageous
comparison. These practices have the effect of substantially
redefining a reprehensible action. Through moral justification,
individuals appeal to a desired outcome (i.e., “the ends justify
the means”) to overshadow the reprehensibility of their conduct.
Through euphemistic labeling, they misdescribe their actions to
mitigate the severity of the effects. And through advantageous
comparison, they again diminish the severity of their offenses by
comparing their conduct with more serious and reprehensible
actions committed by others.
The second set of practices is comprised of distortion
of responsibility, diffusion of responsibility, and distortion of
consequence. These practices aim at deforming the relationship
between the cause and the effect of a reprehensible action.
Through distortion of responsibility, individuals appeal to the
fault of others to alleviate the blame placed on themselves.
Frontiers in Education 02 frontiersin.org
feduc-07-897277 September 2, 2022 Time: 14:15 # 3
Gomez Plata et al. 10.3389/feduc.2022.897277
FIGURE 1
Hypothesized cross-level interaction between moral disengagement within and compositional classroom predictors on antisocial behaviors.
Through diffusion of responsibility, they exempt all others
from imputability. And through the distortion of consequences,
they minimize or ignore the seriousness of the consequences
of their conduct.
Finally, the third set of practices is comprised of
the attribution of blame (i.e., “victim blaming”) and
dehumanization. These practices involve a reconsideration
of the victim. Through the attribution of blame, individuals
attest that the offense they caused to another was fully deserved.
And through dehumanization, they degrade the victim to a
lower object or species and thereby perceive and treat them
as a target of offense with no empathic or identifying concern
(Bandura et al.,1996;Bandura,2002;Caprara et al.,2006).
Research has confirmed the predictive and mediating role
of moral disengagement on various transgressive behaviors.
For example, moral disengagement has been associated
with a higher probability of alcohol consumption (Newton
et al.,2012), aggressive behavior (Bandura et al.,1996;Gini
et al.,2014), bullying (Killer et al.,2019;Bjärehed et al.,
2021), and cyberbullying (Bjärehed,2021;Thornberg et al.,
2021). Regarding antisocial behavior, studies have shown that
adolescents with high moral disengagement manifest more
problem behaviors (Yang and Wang,2012). In addition, a
meta-analysis showed that the effect of moral disengagement
on antisocial behaviors increases in line with the severity of
the action (Férriz-Romeral et al.,2019). Longitudinal studies
have shown that, in most youths (89%), levels of moral
disengagement are relatively high in early adolescence and
decrease with age into early adulthood (Paciello et al.,2008).
Furthermore, some studies have shown that a decrease/increase
in moral disengagement contributes to a decrease/increase in
antisocial behaviors in the transition to adulthood (Bandura
et al.,2001;Shulman et al.,2011).
Moral disengagement has also been studied as a mediator
in cross-sectional and longitudinal studies to explain
the relationship between school and family factors and
antisocial behaviors. Specifically, the mediating effects of moral
disengagement have been observed in the relationship between
peer rejection in middle adolescence and adult delinquency
(Fontaine et al.,2014); a positive perception of the school
climate and antisocial behaviors (Zhang et al.,2020); parental
monitoring (but only with the most collaborative strategies)
and school climate with respect to cyberbullying (Bartolo et al.,
2019); positive parenting and child antisocial behaviors (Pelton
et al.,2004); and secure parental attachment and child antisocial
behaviors (Bao et al.,2015).
Classroom composition and antisocial
behaviors
Some studies (Vitoroulis et al.,2016;Alivernini et al.,
2019;Rambaran et al.,2020) have explored the effect of
classroom composition on adolescents’ transgressive behaviors.
In particular, research has shown that classrooms with more
students (Finn et al.,2003), lower academic performance
(Junger-Tas et al.,2009), and a lower median income
(Westphal et al.,2016) have more student antisocial behaviors.
Most studies in this area have explored school-related
behaviors in the educational context (e.g., school bullying).
Frontiers in Education 03 frontiersin.org
feduc-07-897277 September 2, 2022 Time: 14:15 # 4
Gomez Plata et al. 10.3389/feduc.2022.897277
TABLE 1 Descriptive statistics and correlation for study variables.
Variables % or M(SD)123456789
Outcome variable
1. Antisocial behaviors (multi-informant) 0.29 (0.26)
Variables
2. Gendera55.6% 0.056
3. Age 12.72 (1.03) 0.253** 0.003
4. SESb0.44 (0.50) 0.087* 0.054 0.009
5. Moral disengagement 2.01 (0.61) 0.365** 0.225** 0.138** 0.031
6. Teacher-student relation 3.13 (0.86) 0.108** 0.047 0.044 0.044 0.133**
Transformed variables
7. Age classroom (mean aggregate) 12.72 (0.32) 0.218** 0.058 0.305** 0.071 0.045 0.126**
8. SES classroom (mean aggregate) 0.43 (0.16) 0.121** 0.006 0.077* 0.311** 0.284** 0.032 0.269**
9. Moral disengagement (mean aggregate) 2.03 (25) 0.150** 0.013 0.048 0.219** 0.399** 0.054 0.174** 0.741**
10. Teacher-student relation (mean aggregate) 3.13 (24) 0.181** 0.087* 0.136** 0.035 0.070* 0.286** 0.443** 0.117** 0.187**
aboy = 1, girl = 0; bMiddle = 1, Low = 0.
*p<0.05 and **p<0.01.
However, as suggested by Müller et al. (2016), the effects of
classroom composition on adolescent aggressive and antisocial
behaviors should be explored more widely, to expand our
understanding of the predictive value of classroom composition
on (especially) severe antisocial problems. Also, in considering
the class context, we considered the quality of teacher-student
relationship. As part of the classroom climate, the protective
function of teacher-student relationships on antisocial behavior
has been pointed out. Students who feel supported and close
to their teachers give importance to the expectations of their
teachers not to transgress and to contrast the expression of
aggressive and antisocial behaviors (Cunningham,2008).
Longitudinal studies have shown that students who report
better relationships with their teachers at age 10 engage in
fewer criminal acts at ages 13, 15, and 17 (Obsuth et al.,2021).
On the contrary, stressful classroom environments, with other
conflicts between teachers and students and lack of teacher
support, contribute to mental health problems, school failure,
and antisocial behavior (Roslyne Wilkinson and Jones Bartoli,
2021).
Finally, during early adolescence, there is a significant
influence of peers on antisocial behaviors (e.g., Kaplan et al.,
1987;Dishion and Patterson,2016). Peer behavior also
contributes to establishing classroom dynamics, which may have
a further effect on antisocial behaviors (Müller et al.,2016).
The nesting of individual student characteristics could explain
the variability in individual student behaviors. Individuals who
belong to a group (e.g., a classroom) tend to be interdependent,
whereby the behavior of one group member influences the
group’s behavior either directly, through interaction with others
(i.e., within-classroom level), or indirectly, by contributing
to the formation of a group environment that influences
each member of the group (i.e., between-classroom level)
(Feaster et al.,2011). The influence of classroom composition,
represented by the average of individual characteristics, can be
explained by Cialdini et al.’s (1990) concept of the descriptive
norm. A descriptive norm refers to a belief about what most
others in a social group actually do. Unlike prescriptive norms,
which are beliefs about what should be done, descriptive
norms do not typically imply social sanctions for non-
compliance with the norm.
The present study
The present study aimed at examining the predictive
role of moral disengagement (both within and between
classrooms) on antisocial behaviors in Colombian adolescents,
and the interaction of moral disengagement with classroom
composition by age, SES, and perceived teacher–student
relationship quality. More specifically, the study analyzed: (a)
the degree of variance in antisocial behaviors explained by
classroom composition; (b) the predictive effect of students’
Frontiers in Education 04 frontiersin.org
feduc-07-897277 September 2, 2022 Time: 14:15 # 5
Gomez Plata et al. 10.3389/feduc.2022.897277
TABLE 2 Multilevel estimates for models predicting student antisocial behaviors.
Effect Student antisocial behaviors
Model 1.
unconditional
Model 2.
within
classroom
Model 3.
reduced
Model 4.
between
classroom
Model 5.
cross level
interaction
Model 6.
final model
Fixed effects
Intercept 0.284 (0.02)*** 0.248 (0.03)*** 0.268 (0.02)*** 1.53 (0.60)* 1.54 (0.57)* 2.10 (0.47)***
City (dummy variables)
SMT vs. MED MAZ 0.014 (0.04)
MED vs. SMT MAZ 0.050 (0.04)
Student variables
Gender (1 = boy) 0.001 (0.02)
Age (Age_cwc) 0.031 (0.01)*** 0.031 (0.01)*** 0.031 (0.01)*** 0.030 (0.01)*** 0.030 (0.01)***
SES (SES_cwc)10.043 (0.02)* 0.039 (0.01)* 0.039 (0.02)* 0.040 (0.02)* 0.040 (0.02) *
Moral disengagement (MD_cwc) 0.135 (0.02)*** 0.132 (0.01)*** 0.131 (0.01)*** 1.91 (0.8)* 1.88 (0.57)**
Teacher-student relation (TSR_cwc) 0.011 (0.01)
Classroom variables
Age classroom (Age_mean) 0.137 (0.04)** 0.139 (0.04)** 0.162 (0.03)***
SES classroom (SES_mean) 0.026 (0.09) 0.029 (0.09) 0.043 (0.09)
Moral disengagement (MD_mean) 0.126 (0.06)* 0.126 (0.06)* 0.140 (0.06)*
Teacherstudent relation (TSR_mean) 0.065 (0.05) 0.066 (0.04)
Cross-level interaction
MD_mean*MD_cwc 0.077 (0.09)
SES_mean*MD_cwc 0.315 (0.14)* 0.225 (0.04)*
Age_mean*MD_cwc 0.147 (0.05)** 0.151 (0.04)**
TSR_mean*MD_cwc 0.037 (0.06)
Random effects
Student level variance 0.064 (0.003)*** 0.043 (0.002)*** 0.043 (0.002)*** 0.042 (0.002)*** 0.040 (0.002)*** 0.042 (0.002)***
Classroom level variance 0.005 (0.002)* 0.004 (0.002)* 0.005 (0.002)* 0.0008 (0.0006) 0.0009 (0.0007) 0.0009 (0.0007)
ICC 0.067
Model deviance
2*Log likelihood 110.366 (3) 181.33 (10) 192.04 (6) 214.55 (10) 229.84 (14) 226.15 (11)
χ2test 291.69*** 10.71* 22.51*** 15.28** 3.69
Within-classroom R20.331 0.336 0.356 0.349 0.375
Between-classroom R20.137 0.011 0.823 0.837 0.739
SMT, Santa Marta city; MED, Medellin city; MAZ, Manizales city; SES, Socioeconomic status (Middle = 1, Low = 0).
*p<0.05, **p<0.01, and ***p<0.001.
moral disengagement within classrooms on antisocial behavior;
(c) the predictive effect of between-classroom differences in
moral disengagement on students’ antisocial behaviors; and
(d) the moderating effect of classroom composition by age,
SES, and perceived teacher–student relationship quality on
the relationship between moral disengagement and antisocial
behaviors (see Figure 1).
On the basis of social cognitive theory and the literature,
it was expected that moral disengagement at the individual
and classroom levels would be associated with more frequent
antisocial behaviors. It was also expected that classroom
climates perceived as positive would reduce the effect of moral
disengagement on antisocial behaviors and, on the contrary,
classrooms composed of older students and students with a
lower socio-economic status (SES) would increase the impact of
moral disengagement on antisocial behaviors.
Materials and methods
Data and analytic sample
The sample included 879 seventh-grade students in 24
classrooms across three Colombian cities (M= 12.7 years;
SD = 1.03; 55.6% boys), and their parents (N= 734).
Recruitment proceeded according to the following steps:
Frontiers in Education 05 frontiersin.org
feduc-07-897277 September 2, 2022 Time: 14:15 # 6
Gomez Plata et al. 10.3389/feduc.2022.897277
(1) four public schools were identified in each city that
agreed to participate in the project; (2) in each school, two
seventh-grade classes were randomly selected; and (3) students
from each of the selected classes who voluntarily agreed
to participate and whose parents gave their consent were
enrolled in the study. No exclusion criteria were established for
age, sex, or SES.
Procedure
All study data were collected within the CEPIDEA project
(i.e., “Promotion of Prosocial Behaviors and Emotional
Regulation Competencies in Adolescence”), which was
conducted in 2015–2016 in three Colombian cities. The
project was submitted for ethical review at the Universidad
del Magdalena, the Universidad San Buenaventura, and the
Universidad de Manizales. The participation of all schools,
students, and parents was voluntary. Prior to the data
collection, informed consent was obtained from the students’
parents, according to the Colombian regulations for the
participation of minors in investigations. Subsequently, the
questionnaires were administered in the classrooms by three
research assistants, who provided the necessary guidance
and were available to answer any questions. Participants
identifying data were replaced with codes to maintain
confidentiality.
Measures
Outcome (antisocial behavior)
The outcome variable of antisocial behaviors was measured
using eight items from the parent-report Child Behavior
Checklist (CBCL; Achenbach and Rescorla,2001) and eight
identical items from the self-report version of this form (YSR).
Means of the matched items were used to calculate a score
for antisocial behaviors. The selected items measured antisocial
behaviors such as theft, cheating, lying, destructiveness,
and truancy. Responses ranged from 0 (not true) to 2
(very true). Cronbach’s alpha was 0.67 for the CBCL and
0.72 for the YSR.
Predictors
Two predictor variables were used: (1) student deviation
from the classroom mean (i.e., Level 1, within-classroom) and
(2) classroom mean scores (i.e., Level 2, between-classroom).
Level 1 variables
Predictor variables at the student (i.e., within-classroom,
individual) level included demographic factors (i.e., gender, age,
SES), moral disengagement, and teacher–student relationship
quality. Gender was a dichotomous variable coded as 1 for boys
and 0 for girls. SES was evaluated according to the classification
established in Law 142 of 1994 of Colombia; the variable was
coded as 0 for low SES and 1 for medium SES.
The Moral Disengagement Scale (Bandura et al.,1996)
was used as a measure of moral disengagement. The 32 items
on this scale assess the degree to which adolescents resort to
mechanisms (i.e., moral justification; palliative comparison;
euphemistic labeling; minimizing, ignoring, or misconstruing
consequences; displacement; diffusion of responsibility;
dehumanization; attribution of blame) to selectively disengage
from moral self-regulation of their harmful behaviors (e.g.,
“It is okay to tell small lies because they don’t really do any
harm”). Responses ranged from 1 (don’t agree at all) to 5
(totally agree). In the present study, Cronbachs alpha for
this scale was 0.90.
Quality of the student–teaching relationship was also
included as a predictor at this level. For this, four items from
the Comer School Development Program (Cook et al.,1999)
were used as a measure (e.g., “How many teachers listen to the
students’ proposals with pleasure?”).
Level 2 variables
All classroom variables (i.e., mean SES, mean age,
mean moral disengagement, mean teacher–student relationship
quality) were constructed from aggregate student data.
Data analysis
Several scholars have emphasized the importance of
using multilevel models to examine the influence of the
school context on antisocial behaviors (Gottfredson,2001;
Müller et al.,2016). Accordingly, the present study used a
multilevel random intercept model to explore individual
and contextual effects on antisocial behaviors. The complete
multilevel random intercept model was executed in three
steps. In the first step, an unconditional mean model
(Model 1) was used to determine the intraclass correlation
coefficient (ICC), indicating the variance in antisocial behaviors
explained by the grouping structure (i.e., classrooms). The
second step employed a hierarchical linear model that
initially added within-classroom predictors (Model 2) and
subsequently added classroom-level predictors (Model 4).
The hypothesized interaction effects (see Figure 1) were then
estimated (Model 5). The third and final step involved the
estimation of a reduced model with a backward elimination
of predictors and non-significant interactions to ease model
interpretation (Model 6). According to Heck and Thomas
(2009), for predictive studies (i.e., the present study),
variables can be retained in a model only when they are
statistically significant.
All hierarchical linear model analyses were estimated
with the maximum likelihood method, using SPSS
version 25 statistical software. Deviation (2Log
Likelihood) and explained variance (Pseudo R2) were
Frontiers in Education 06 frontiersin.org
feduc-07-897277 September 2, 2022 Time: 14:15 # 7
Gomez Plata et al. 10.3389/feduc.2022.897277
used to evaluate model fit, with lower significant
deviation and higher explained variance considered
indicative of better model fit. In addition, the likelihood-
ratio chi-square test (χ2test) was used to evaluate
the significance of the difference in model fit between
subsequent models.
Results
Descriptive statistics
Table 1 presents the descriptive statistics and correlation
analysis of the observed and transformed variables at the
classroom level. The mean for delinquent behavior was0.29
(min = 0, max = 2). Of note, 55.6% of the sample were
boys, and students’ mean age was 12.72 years. Antisocial
behaviors (according to both the CBCL and the YSR) were
positively associated with age and moral disengagement,
as well as with classrooms’ mean age and mean moral
disengagement. On the contrary, antisocial behaviors
were negatively associated with students’ SES, teacher–
student relationship quality at the student level, classroom
mean SES, and teacher–student relationship quality at the
classroom level.
Unconditional mean model
An unconditional mean model was estimated to calculate
ICC. Table 2 (Model 1) shows that the intercept was
estimated at0.284, representing the level of antisocial behaviors
across the 24 classrooms. The ICC for antisocial behaviors
was 0.067 [ICC = 0.005/(0.005 + 0.064)], describing that
6.7% of the variance in antisocial behaviors was between
classrooms. The deviation (2LL) of the unconditional
model was 110.366.
Multilevel analysis
Within-classroom level
At the within-classroom level, the predictive effect of
moral disengagement on antisocial behaviors was modeled,
while controlling for the effects of sites (i.e., cities), gender,
age, SES, and teacher–student relationship quality. As shown
in Table 2 (Model 2), a significant positive association was
found between moral disengagement (within-classroom level)
and antisocial behaviors. Regarding the control variables,
antisocial behaviors were positively associated with age and
negatively associated with SES and teacher–student relationship
quality. Gender and sites were not significantly associated
with antisocial behaviors; therefore, a reduced model was
run without these variables (see Model 3). The reduced
model showed lower deviance (2LL) than the unconditional
model, and the difference in fit between Model 2 and the
reduced Model (3) was not statistically significant. The reduced
model explained 33.6% of the variance in antisocial behaviors
within the classroom.
Between-classroom level
At the between-classroom level, the effect of moral
disengagement on antisocial behaviors was tested while
controlling for individual predictors and covariates
at the classroom level (i.e., age, SES, teacher–student
relationship quality). As Table 2 (Model 4) shows, a
significant positive association was found between moral
disengagement (mean classroom) and antisocial behaviors.
Regarding the control variables (i.e., classroom level),
antisocial behaviors were positively associated with age
(mean classroom). SES (mean classroom) and student–
teacher relationship quality (mean classroom) were not
significantly associated with antisocial behaviors. This
model showed a lower deviation (2LL) than Model
3, and the difference in fit between the two models was
statistically significant. Model 4 explained 35.6% of the variance
in antisocial behaviors within the classroom and 82.3%
between classrooms.
Interplay between within-classroom and
between-classroom predictors
Table 2 (Model 5) shows the interaction effects of moral
disengagement (individual level) with moral disengagement
(classroom level), age (classroom level), SES (classroom level),
and teacher–student relationship quality (classroom level).
A significant interaction of age (classroom level) was found
between moral disengagement (individual level) and antisocial
behaviors, whereby students with higher moral disengagement
in classrooms with a higher mean age showed more delinquent
behaviors (see Figure 2). A significant SES interaction was
also found between moral disengagement (individual level)
and antisocial behaviors, whereby students with high moral
disengagement in classrooms with a lower SES showed more
antisocial behaviors (see Figure 3). The final model (Model 6)
explained 37.5% of the variance in antisocial behaviors within
the classroom and 73.9% between classrooms.
Discussion
The present study explored the predictive role of moral
disengagement (both within and between classrooms)
on antisocial behaviors in Colombian adolescents, and
the interaction of moral disengagement with classroom
composition by age, SES, and perceived teacher–student
relationship quality. Bivariate analyses showed that student
Frontiers in Education 07 frontiersin.org
feduc-07-897277 September 2, 2022 Time: 14:15 # 8
Gomez Plata et al. 10.3389/feduc.2022.897277
FIGURE 2
Cross-level interaction effect of individual moral disengagement with classroom mean age on antisocial behaviors.
FIGURE 3
Cross-level interaction effect of individual moral disengagement with classroom means SES on antisocial behavior.
Frontiers in Education 08 frontiersin.org
feduc-07-897277 September 2, 2022 Time: 14:15 # 9
Gomez Plata et al. 10.3389/feduc.2022.897277
antisocial behaviors were positively associated with age
and moral disengagement and negatively associated with
SES and teacher–student relationship quality. In other
words, students with high moral disengagement, older
age, and lower SES who perceived a poor teacher–student
relationship quality showed more antisocial behavior. These
results are consistent with the findings of prior studies
that have identified moral disengagement (e.g., Yang and
Wang,2012;Gini et al.,2014;Férriz-Romeral et al.,2019),
SES (e.g., Guerra,2018;Khaliq and Rasool,2020), and
age (e.g., Wissink et al.,2014) as risk factors, as well as
teacher–student relationship quality (Roslyne Wilkinson and
Jones Bartoli,2021) as a protective factor for adolescents’
transgressive behaviors.
Multilevel modeling showed that moral disengagement
predicted antisocial behaviors at both individual (i.e., within-
classroom) and classroom (i.e., between-classroom) levels,
while controlling for the effect of age, SES, and teacher–
student relationship quality. In other words, students with
high moral disengagement, nested in classrooms with high
moral disengagement, showed high antisocial behaviors. These
findings align with the results of recent multilevel studies
that have analyzed moral disengagement at the individual and
classroom levels as a predictor of bullying and cyberbullying
behaviors (Gini et al.,2015;Bjärehed,2021;Bjärehed et al.,2021;
Thornberg et al.,2021).
Regarding compositional effects, an association was found
between student age and antisocial behaviors at both individual
and classroom levels. Thus, students who were older than
their classmates and who belonged to a classroom with older
students were more likely to engage in high antisocial behavior.
Considering that all of the participating students were in the
same academic grade, older students may have had a history
of academic failure or a period of school dropout. According to
the literature (Patterson et al.,1989;McEvoy and Welker,2000),
academic failure plays a significant role in escalating antisocial
behaviors, through affiliation with deviant peers. School dropout
has also been shown to be associated with peer rejection and
antisocial behaviors (French and Conrad,2001;Gubbels et al.,
2019).
Cross-level interaction analyses showed a significant
interaction between age at the classroom level and individual
moral disengagement in predicting antisocial behaviors,
whereby the relationship between moral disengagement and
antisocial behaviors was stronger in classrooms with an older
mean age than those with a lower mean age.
Although the bivariate analyses showed a significant
correlation between teacher–student relationship quality and
antisocial behavior, this association was not significant when the
variable was factored within and between classrooms, and moral
disengagement, gender, and SES were included as covariates.
It is possible that the moral disengagement effect suppressed
the effect of teacher–student relationship quality. In this vein,
a previous study found that moral disengagement mediated
the relationship between school climate and cyberbullying
(Wang et al.,2021).
These findings expand our knowledge of the
interdependence between individuals and the classroom in
the exercise of moral agency during adolescence.
Limitations and recommendations for
future research
Despite several strengths of the present study (e.g., a
relatively large sample size, multi-informant data), some
limitations should also be considered. First, the sample size
at the classroom level was relatively small, since it did not
meet the 30/30 rule discussed by Bickel (2007). This may have
generated bias in the estimation of variance components, as
some simulation studies have documented (Maas and Hox,
2005). Therefore, the models tested here should be replicated
with a larger number of students in each classroom.
Second, the study was based on correlational data, which did
not allow for causal inferences to be drawn. Therefore, future
studies may benefit from experimental designs or instrumental
variable approaches that are capable of identifying causal effects.
Finally, some classroom factors, such as the number
of students and the type of establishment (e.g., private or
public), should be considered in future research analyzing
classroom composition in Latin American contexts, which are
characterized by unequal educational systems.
Conclusion
The present results highlight the role of moral
disengagement, measured at the individual and classroom
levels, as a predictor of students’ antisocial behavior in
adolescence. Students with higher levels of moral disconnection
and students from more disengaged classes were found to
engage in more antisocial behaviors.
Regarding the influence of the classroom context on
student behavior, a significant effect of age and SES at
the classroom level was found in the relationship between
moral disengagement and antisocial behaviors. In classrooms
composed of older students with a lower SES, the effect of
the relationship between moral disengagement and antisocial
behaviors was amplified.
Data availability statement
The raw data supporting the conclusions of this article will
be made available by the authors, without undue reservation.
Frontiers in Education 09 frontiersin.org
feduc-07-897277 September 2, 2022 Time: 14:15 # 10
Gomez Plata et al. 10.3389/feduc.2022.897277
Ethics statement
The studies involving human participants were reviewed
and approved by the Ethics Committee of the Universidad
del Magdalena, Universidad de Manizales, and Universidad
San Buenaventura- Medellin. Written informed consent to
participate in this study was provided by the participants’ legal
guardian/next of kin.
Author contributions
MGP: investigation, data curation, formal analysis, and
writing—original draft. FL: conceptualization and supervision.
CP: conceptualization, supervision, and writing—review and
editing. CPB, MN, and LU: investigation, data curation, and
validation. BL: conceptualization, investigation, and validation.
MRG: validation and data curation. AZ: methodology and
formal analysis. FC: methodology and data curation. GT:
investigation and validation. MG: conceptualization. All authors
contributed to the article and approved the submitted version.
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that the research was conducted in the
absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could
be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
Publisher’s note
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the
authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated
organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the
reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or
claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed
or endorsed by the publisher.
References
Achenbach, T. M., and Rescorla, L. A. (2001). Manual for the ASEBA school-age
forms & profiles: Child behavior checklist for ages 6-18, teacher’s report form, youth
self-report: An integrated system of multi-informant assessment. Burlington, VT:
University of Vermont.
Alivernini, F., Cavicchiolo, E., Girelli, L., Di Leo, I., Manganelli, S., and
Lucidi, F. (2019). The effects of classroom composition and size on bullying and
victimization of Italian and immigrant high school students. Rassegna Psicol. 36,
5–20.
Bandura, A. (1986). Social Foundations Of Thought And Action. Englewood
Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Bandura, A. (2002). Selective moral disengagement in the exercise of moral
agency. J. Moral Educ. 31, 101–119. doi: 10.1080/0305724022014322
Bandura, A. (2016). Moral Disengagement: How People Do Harm And Live With
Themselves. New York, NY: Worth Publishers.
Bandura, A., Barbaranelli, C., Caprara, G. V., and Pastorelli, C. (1996).
Mechanisms of moral disengagement in the exercise of moral agency. J. Pers. Soc.
Psychol. 71:364.
Bandura, A., Caprara, G. V., Barbaranelli, C., Pastorelli, C., and Regalia,
C. (2001). Sociocognitive self-regulatory mechanisms governing transgressive
behavior. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 80, 125–135.
Bao, Z., Li, D., Zhang, W., and Wang, Y. (2015). School climate and delinquency
among Chinese adolescents: Analyses of effortful control as a moderator and
deviant peer affiliation as a mediator. J. Abnorm. Child Psychol. 43, 81–93. doi:
10.1007/s10802-014- 9903-8
Bartolo, M. G., Palermiti, A. L., Servidio, R., Musso, P., and Costabile, A. (2019).
Mediating processes in the relations of parental monitoring and school climate
with cyberbullying: The role of moral disengagement. Eur. J. Psychol. 15, 568–594.
doi: 10.5964/ejop.v15i3.1742
Bickel, R. (2007). Multilevel analysis for applied research: It’s just regression!.
New York, NY: Guilford Press.
Bjärehed, M. (2021). Individual and classroom collective moral disengagement
in offline and online bullying: A short-term multilevel growth model study.
Psychol. Sch. 59, 356–375.
Bjärehed, M., Thornberg, R., Wänström, L., and Gini, G. (2021). Individual
moral disengagement and bullying among Swedish fifth graders: The role of
collective moral disengagement and pro-bullying behavior within classrooms.
J. Interpers. Violence 36, N9576–N9600. doi: 10.1177/0886260519860889
Braga, T., Cunha, O., and Maia, Â (2018). The enduring effect of maltreatment
on antisocial behavior: A meta-analysis of longitudinal studies. Aggress. Violent
Behav. 40, 91–100.
Caprara, G. V., Barbaranelli, C., Pastorelli, C., Iafrate, C., Beretta, M., Steca, P.,
et al. (2006). La misura del disimpegno morale nel contesto delle trasgressioni
dell’agire quotidiano. G. Ital. Psicol. 33, 83–106.
Cialdini, R. B., Reno, R. R., and Kallgren, C. A. (1990). A focus theory of
normative conduct: Recycling the concept of norms to reduce littering in public
places. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 58:1015.
Cook, T. D., Habib, F. N., Phillips, M., Settersten, R. A., Shagle, S. C., and
Degirmencioglu, S. M. (1999). Comer’s school development program in Prince
George’s County, Maryland: A theory-based evaluation. Am. Educ. Res. J. 36,
543–597.
Cunningham, W. V. (2008). Youth at risk in Latin America and the Caribbean:
Understanding the Causes, Realizing the Potential. Washington, DC: World Bank
Publications.
Curtis, C. (2015). Anti-Social Behavior: A Multi-National Perspective Of The
Everyday To The Extreme. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Dishion, T. J., and Patterson, G. R. (2016). “The Development and Ecology
of Antisocial Behavior: Linking Etiology, Prevention, and Treatment, in
Developmental Psychopathology, ed. D. Cicchetti (Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons,
Ltd), 1–32. doi: 10.1002/9781119125556.devpsy315
Feaster, D., Brincks, A., Robbins, M., and Szapocznik, J. (2011). Multilevel
models to identify contextual effects on individual group member outcomes: A
family example. Fam. Process 50, 167–183. doi: 10.1111/j.1545-5300.2011.01353.x
Férriz-Romeral, L., Navas-Sánchez, M. P., Gómez-Fraguela, J. A., and
Sobral-Fernández, J. (2019). Desconexión moral y delincuencia juvenil severa:
Metaanálisis de su asociación. Rev. Latinoam. Psicol. 51, 162–170.
Finn, J. D., Pannozzo, G. M., and Achilles, C. M. (2003). The «Why’
of Class Size: Student Behavior in Small Classes. Rev. Educ. Res. 73,
321–368.
Fontaine, R. G., Fida, R., Paciello, M., Tisak, M. S., and Caprara, G. V. (2014).
The mediating role of moral disengagement in the developmental course from
peer rejection in adolescence to crime in early adulthood. Psychol. Crime Law 20,
1–19. doi: 10.1080/1068316X.2012.719622
French, D. C., and Conrad, J. (2001). School dropout as predicted by peer
rejection and antisocial behavior. J. Res. Adolesc. 11, 225–244.
Frontiers in Education 10 frontiersin.org
feduc-07-897277 September 2, 2022 Time: 14:15 # 11
Gomez Plata et al. 10.3389/feduc.2022.897277
Gini, G., Pozzoli, T., and Bussey, K. (2015). The role of individual and collective
moral disengagement in peer aggression and bystanding: A multilevel analysis.
J. Abnorm. Child Psychol. 43, 441–452. doi: 10.1007/s10802-014-9920-7
Gini, G., Pozzoli, T., and Hymel, S. (2014). Moral disengagement among
children and youth: A meta-analytic review of links to aggressive behavior. Aggress.
Behav. 40, 56–68. doi: 10.1002/ab.21502
Gottfredson, D. C. (2001). Schools and Delinquency. Cambridge Criminology
Series. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Gubbels, J., van der Put, C. E., and Assink, M. (2019). Risk factors for school
absenteeism and dropout: A meta-analytic review. J. Youth Adolesc. 48, 1637–1667.
doi: 10.1007/s10964-019- 01072-5
Guerra, R. C. (2018). Psychological and Sociological Mechanisms Linking Low
SES and Antisocial Behavior. Blacksburg: Virginia Tech.
Heck, R. H., and Thomas, S. L. (2009). An introduction to multilevel modeling
techniques, 2nd Edn. New York, NY: Routledge.
Institute for Economics and Peace (2022). Global Peace Index 2022: Measuring
Peace in a Complex World. Sydney: Institute for Economics & Peace.
Junger-Tas, J., Marshall, I. H., Enzmann, D., Killias, M., Steketee, M., and
Gruszczynska, B. (2009). Juvenile Delinquency In Europe And Beyond: Results Of
The Second International Self-Report Delinquency Study. Berlin: Springer.
Kaplan, H. B., Johnson, R. J., and Bailey, C. A. (1987). Deviant peers and deviant
behavior: Further elaboration of a model. Soc. Psychol. Q. 50, 277–284.
Khaliq, A., and Rasool, S. (2020). Causes of student antisocial behavior at
secondary level schools. Spark 4, 116–148.
Killer, B., Bussey, K., Hawes, D. J., and Hunt, C. (2019). A meta-analysis of the
relationship between moral disengagement and bullying roles in youth. Aggress.
Behav. 45, 450–462. doi: 10.1002/ab.21833
Maas, C. J. M., and Hox, J. J. (2005). Sufficient Sample Sizes for Multilevel
Modeling. Methodology 1, 86–92. doi: 10.1027/1614-2241.1.3.86
Malti, T., and Krettenauer, T. (2013). The relation of moral emotion attributions
to prosocial and antisocial behavior: A meta-analysis. Child Dev. 84, 397–412.
doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8624.2012.01851.x
Manrique-Millones, D. L., Pineda-Marin, C. P., Millones-Rivalled, R. B.,
and Dimitrova, R. (2021). “The 7Cs of Positive Youth Development Youth
Development (YD) in Colombia and Peru Perú: A Promising Model Models
for Reduction of Risky Behaviors Risky behaviors Among Youth and Emerging
Adults Emerging adults, in Handbook of Positive Youth Development: Advancing
Research, Policy, and Practice in Global Contexts, eds R. Dimitrova and N. Wiium
(New York, NY: Springer International Publishing), 35–48. doi: 10.1007/978-3-
030-70262- 5_3
McEvoy, A., and Welker, R. (2000). Antisocial behavior, academic failure, and
school climate: A critical review. J. Emot. Behav. Disord. 8, 130–140.
Müller, C. M., Hofmann, V., Fleischli, J., and Studer, F. (2016). Effects of
classroom composition on the development of antisocial behavior in lower
secondary school. J. Res. Adolesc. 26, 345–359. doi: 10.1111/jora.12195
Newton, N. C., Havard, A., and Teesson, M. (2012). The association between
moral disengagement, psychological distress, resistive self-regulatory efficacy and
alcohol and cannabis use among adolescents in Sydney, Australia. Addict. Res.
Theory 20, 261–269.
Obsuth, I., Murray, A. L., Knoll, M., Ribeaud, D., and Eisner, M. (2021). Teacher-
student relationships in childhood as a protective factor against adolescent
delinquency up to age 17: A propensity score matching approach. Crime Delinq.
15, 1–26. doi: 10.1177/00111287211014153
Ogilvie, J. M., Stewart, A. L., Chan, R. C., and Shum, D. H. (2011).
Neuropsychological measures of executive function and antisocial behavior: A
meta-analysis. Criminology 49, 1063–1107. doi: 10.1016/s0272-7358(98)00096- 8
Paciello, M., Fida, R., Tramontano, C., Lupinetti, C., and Caprara, G. V. (2008).
Stability and change of moral disengagement and its impact on aggression and
violence in late adolescence. Child Dev. 79, 1288–1309. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8624.
2008.01189.x
Patterson, G. R., DeBaryshe, B. D., and Ramsey, E. (1989). A developmental
perspective on antisocial behavior. Am. Psychol. 44, 329–335. doi: 10.1037/0003-
066X.44.2.329
Pelton, J., Gound, M., Forehand, R., and Brody, G. (2004). The moral
disengagement scale: Extension with an american minority sample.
J. Psychopathol. Behav. Assess. 26, 31–39. doi: 10.1023/B:JOBA.0000007454.
34707.a5
Plancikova, D., Duric, P., and O’May, F. (2021). High-income countries remain
overrepresented in highly ranked public health journals: A descriptive analysis
of research settings and authorship affiliations. Crit. Public Health 31, 487–493.
doi: 10.1080/09581596.2020.1722313
Rambaran, J. A., van Duijn, M. A., Dijkstra, J. K., and Veenstra, R. (2020).
Stability and change in student classroom composition and its impact on peer
victimization. J. Educ. Psychol. 112:1677.
Roslyne Wilkinson, H., and Jones Bartoli, A. (2021). Antisocial behavior and
teacher–student relationship quality: The role of emotion-related abilities and
callous–unemotional traits. Br. J. Educ. Psychol. 91, 482–499. doi: 10.1111/bjep.
12376
Serketich, W. J., and Dumas, J. E. (1996). The effectiveness of behavioral parent
training to modify antisocial behavior in children: A meta-analysis. Behav. Ther.
27, 171–186. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD008559.pub3
Shulman, E. P., Cauffman, E., Piquero, A. R., and Fagan, J. (2011). Moral
disengagement among serious juvenile offenders: A longitudinal study of the
relations between morally disengaged attitudes and offending. Dev. Psychol. 47,
1619–1632. doi: 10.1037/a0025404
Thornberg, R., Wänström, L., Gini, G., Varjas, K., Meyers, J., Elmelid, R.,
et al. (2021). Collective moral disengagement and its associations with bullying
perpetration and victimization in students. Educ. Psychol. 41, 952–966. doi: 10.
1080/01443410.2020.1843005
Vitoroulis, I., Brittain, H., and Vaillancourt, T. (2016). School ethnic
composition and bullying in Canadian schools. Int. J. Behav. Dev. 40, 431–441.
Wang, X., Zhao, F., Yang, J., and Lei, L. (2021). School climate and
adolescents’ cyberbullying perpetration: A moderated mediation model of moral
disengagement and friends’ moral identity. J. Interpers. Violence 36, N9601–
N9622. doi: 10.1177/0886260519860089
Westphal, A., Becker, M., Vock, M., Maaz, K., Neumann, M., and
McElvany, N. (2016). The link between teacher-assigned grades and classroom
socioeconomic composition: The role of classroom behavior, motivation, and
teacher characteristics. Contemp. Educ. Psychol. 46, 218–227.
White, J., Bandura, A., and Bero, L. A. (2009). Moral disengagement in the
corporate world. Account. Res. 16, 41–74. doi: 10.1080/08989620802689847
Wissink, I. B., Dekovi´
c, M., Stams, G.-J., Asscher, J. J., Rutten, E., and Zijlstra,
B. J. H. (2014). Moral orientation and relationships in school and adolescent
pro- and antisocial behaviors: A multilevel study. J. Sch. Nurs. 30, 216–225. doi:
10.1177/1059840513497402
Yang, J.-P., and Wang, X.-C. (2012). Effect of moral disengagement on
adolescents’ aggressive behavior: Moderated mediating effect. Acta Psychol. Sin.
44, 1075–1085. doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1041.2012.01075
Yousefi-Nooraie, R., Shakiba, B., and Mortaz-Hejri, S. (2006). Country
development and manuscript selection bias: A review of published studies. BMC
Med. Res. Methodol. 6:37. doi: 10.1186/1471-2288-6-37
Zhang, J., Li, D., Ahemaitijiang, N., Peng, W., Zhai, B., and Wang, Y.
(2020). Perceived school climate and delinquency among Chinese adolescents: A
moderated mediation analysis of moral disengagement and effortful control. Child.
Youth Serv. Rev. 116:105253. doi: 10.1016/j.childyouth.2020.105253
Zimbardo, P. (2011). The Lucifer Effect: How Good People Turn Evil. New York,
NY: Random House.
Frontiers in Education 11 frontiersin.org
... As pesquisas têm uma variável em comumo desengajamento moral (tabela 1). É possível afirmar que o construto desengajamento moral no contexto escolar da educação básica tem sido alvo de interesse dos pesquisadores no âmbito mundial Octávia et al., 2022;Sjögren et al., 2020;D'urso;Symonds, 2021;Plata et al., 2022;Lin;Xiao, 2023). É um achado importante diante do que esse conceito pode significar nas ações sociais em geral e, particularmente, no contexto escolar, no qual há grande número de crianças e adolescentes que podem presenciar, ser vítimas e ser influenciados por ações negativas como se desengajar moralmente. ...
Article
Full-text available
Atos violentos têm sido evidenciados nas escolas e sempre há uma justificativa entre os perpetradores pela ação danosa. Esse tipo de atitude é o que se denomina de desengajamento moral, agir imoralmente e justificar sua ação para não se sentir culpado e, ainda, tornar seu ato bem aceito. Este estudo analisou pesquisas acerca do desengajamento moral na educação básica, publicadas nacional e internacionalmente, no período de 2014 a 2023. Realizou-se uma revisão de escopo, utilizando os descritores “desengajamento moral”; “professores”, “docentes”, “educação básica” e “Teoria Social Cognitiva”. Das buscas, 21 artigos foram considerados válidos para a pesquisa. É um estudo misto com ênfase na Análise de Conteúdo, com uso do Iramuteq. Os resultados revelaram que há relação direta ou indireta entre desengajamento moral e outras variáveis que permeiam a vida de estudantes e professores, apontando fatos e eventos que podem estar presentes em qualquer espaço escolar. Os estudos, de modo geral, sugerem a possibilidade de mediação para contornar problemas que envolvam situações de violência no espaço escolar, bem como a utilização de estratégias de intervenção para coibir a prática violenta.
Article
Full-text available
A developmental model of antisocial behavior is outlined. Recent findings are reviewed that concern the etiology and course of antisocial behavior from early childhood through adolescence. Evidence is presented in support of the hypothesis that the route to chronic delinquency is marked by a reliable developmental sequence of experiences. As a first step, ineffective parenting practices are viewed as determinants for childhood conduct disorders. The general model also takes into account the contextual variables that influence the family interaction process. As a second step, the conduct-disordered behaviors lead to academic failure and peer rejection. These dual failures lead, in turn, to increased risk for depressed mood and involvement in a deviant peer group. This third step usually occurs during later childhood and early adolescence. It is assumed that children following this developmental sequence are at high risk for engaging in chronic delinquent behavior. Finally, implications for prevention and intervention are discussed.
Article
Full-text available
This short‐term longitudinal study examined whether individual moral disengagement and classroom collective moral disengagement were associated with offline and online bullying over the course of 1 year. Multilevel growth modeling with three levels was used to analyze data from a sample of 1048 Swedish students in 68 classrooms. The students completed a self‐report questionnaire at two time‐points separated by approximately 1 year. All students were in fifth grade (Mage = 11.5) at the first timepoint and in sixth grade (Mage = 12.6) at the second timepoint. Results showed that students reported more offline and online bullying if they had higher initial levels of individual moral disengagement and if they belonged to classrooms with higher initial levels of classroom collective moral disengagement. Also, a change in individual moral disengagement was positively associated with a change in bullying others offline and online.
Article
Full-text available
In this paper we examined the impact of the quality of teacher-student relationships at age 10 on young people’s delinquency at ages 13, 15, and 17 utilizing propensity-score matching. The young people were matched based on 105 characteristics, measured at ages 7 to 10. The sample comprised 1483 (49.4% female) adolescents representing around 80 different countries of origin, residing in Zurich, Switzerland. We found that young people who reported a better relationship with their teacher at age 10, engaged in fewer delinquent acts at ages 13, 15, and 17. These findings suggest that when young people perceive a better relationship with their teachers this serves as a protective factor against their engagement in delinquency up to 7 years later.
Article
Full-text available
The aim of the current study was to examine whether collective moral disengagement in the classroom was associated with bullying perpetration and victimisation. One-thousand-and-fifty-four students from 70 classrooms in 29 schools in the middle and southern parts of Sweden completed a questionnaire in their classroom. In line with the hypotheses, the bivariate correlation analyses at the classroom level showed that students who belonged to classrooms with lower collective moral disengagement were less likely to be victimised by bullying or engaged in bullying perpetration. Moreover, when controlling for gender and age at the individual level and including collective moral disengagement in the same model at the classroom level, multilevel analyses revealed that students who belonged to classrooms with a higher level of collective moral disengagement were more likely to be engaged in bullying perpetration or to be targets of bullying victimisation.
Article
Full-text available
Background Childhood antisocial behaviour has been associated with poorer teacher–student relationship (TSR) quality. It is also well‐established that youth with antisocial behaviour have a range of emotion‐related deficits, yet the impact of these students’ emotion‐related abilities on the TSR is not understood. Furthermore, the addition of the Limited Prosocial Emotions Specifier in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM‐5) indicates that understanding the role of callous–unemotional (CU) traits for youth with antisocial behaviour problems is of particular importance. Aims The aim of this study was to investigate the association between antisocial behaviour difficulties and the TSR by examining the influence of emotion‐related abilities and CU traits. Sample Twelve teachers from 10 primary schools provided anonymized information on 108 children aged 6–11 years. Results Antisocial behaviour was associated with higher teacher–student conflict (but not closeness) as well as higher emotion lability/negativity and lower emotion understanding/empathy. Emotion lability/negativity was associated with higher teacher–student conflict (but not closeness), and emotion understanding/empathy was associated with lower teacher–student conflict and higher closeness. CU traits were associated with higher teacher–student conflict and lower teacher–student closeness (controlling for antisocial behaviour more broadly). We found no evidence of a moderating effect of CU traits or emotion‐related abilities on the association between antisocial behaviour and TSR quality. Conclusions Interventions for behaviour difficulties should consider teacher–student relationships in the classroom. Strategies which aim to improve teacher–student closeness as well as reduce teacher–student conflict may be of particular value to students with high CU traits.
Article
Full-text available
Antisocial behaviour refers to the destructive, harmful, negative actions or maladaptive behaviour of an individual towards other individuals or things in the society. These negative behaviours consist of unlawful activities and harm the people in interpersonal manners. Such behaviours occur due to the result of unsatisfactory social, ethical, moral, and/or psychological development of children at home, school, and/or under socialization in the society. Therefore, the present research study aimed to delve, uncover, and highlight the major causes (e.g., school related factors, parental factors, parental support, socioeconomic factors) that influence secondary school students' antisocial behaviour in province Punjab, Pakistan. The present study was descriptive survey type by method and quantitative by approach. A cross-sectional type survey was conducted to elicit the perceptions of the research subjects. All students and teachers of public sector secondary schools in province Punjab were the target population while all secondary school students and teachers in public sector schools in district Faisalabad constituted the accessible population. Through proportionate stratified random sampling technique, a sample of 150 male teachers and 400 male students of 10th grade were taken in the sample. A self-developed and structured questionnaire was used as a research instrument for data collection. Both types of statistical techniques (e.g., descriptive, inferential) were used for the data analysis. It was concluded from the results of this study that school related factors (e.g., teacher-student relationships, peers' influence); parental factors (e.g., poor father-child relationships, parental aspirations, parental negligence); parental support (e.g., empathy, guidance, material resources); and socioeconomic factors (e.g., parental income) are some of the major causes of secondary school students' antisocial behavior.
Article
Full-text available
Scientific contribution in high-impact journals is largely from authors affiliated with institutions in high-income countries (HICs). Publication of papers by contribution of individual countries to leading journals can provide a picture of the most influential countries in a particular discipline. The aim of the study was to identify changes in the patterns in authorship and origin of original research articles in relation to countries’ income level in the field of public health in 2016 in comparison to previous studies. A descriptive analysis was conducted based on articles published in highly ranked public health journals in 2016. Based on the inclusion criteria, 368 research articles were identified. Over 80% of these studies were conducted in HICs. Authors were mainly based in HICs (84%), especially in the USA. The majority of first, last, and corresponding authors were affiliated with HICs (over 90%). Our study might serve as a prompt for editorial and advisory boards of the leading international journals to provide more opportunities for researchers based in low and middle-income countries.
Chapter
The present chapter promotes PYD scholarship in Latin America by testing the 7Cs model of competence, confidence, character, caring, connection, contribution and creativity in Colombia and Peru. Young people in these countries represent a particularly vulnerable group due to significant rates of risky behaviors such as alcohol and drug use, violence and suicide. This chapter applies the 7Cs of PYD as a potentially powerful model to reduce these risky behaviors among this vulnerable population. A total of 755 youth and emerging adults from Colombia (n = 248) and Peru (n = 507) provided data on the 7Cs and their experience of alcohol and drug use, violence, and suicide attempts. The results of the structural equation modeling provided solid evidence for the reliability and validity of the 7Cs model as psychometrically reliable measurement across these populations and meaningful relations between the 7Cs and risky behaviors. The 7Cs represent a promising model promoting thriving of young people in Colombia and Peru by reducing their experience of alcohol and drug use, violence, and suicide attempts. The chapter offers unique conceptual and methodological contributions to the PYD field with relevant applications for research, policy and practice in Latin America and globally.
Article
Although scholarly interest in the association between perceived school climate and adolescent delinquency is growing, research on how and for whom perceived school climate relates to delinquency is underdeveloped. Based on social control theory and the general theory of crime, the present study established a moderated mediation model to examine whether moral disengagement would mediate the relationship between perceived school climate and delinquency and whether the mediation process would be moderated by effortful control. A total of 1,529 Chinese adolescents (Mage = 14.74 years, SD = 1.48) from seven middle and high schools completed anonymous questionnaires on perceived school climate, moral disengagement, effortful control, and delinquency. After controlling for gender, age, and socioeconomic status, the results indicated that: (a) perceived school climate was negatively related to adolescent delinquency; (b) the relationship between perceived school climate and delinquency was partially mediated by adolescent moral disengagement; and (c) effortful control moderated the direct and indirect relationships between perceived school climate and adolescent delinquency, such that these relationships were only significant for adolescents with low levels of effortful control. These findings shed light on how and for whom perceived school climate is associated with adolescent delinquency, and they can inspire practitioners to pay attention to the interaction of social control (e.g., perceived school climate) and self-control (e.g., effortful control) when providing prevention and intervention.