Special Topic: Bullying Research From a Social-Ecological Perspective
The Relation of Empathy and Defending in Bullying: A Meta-Analytic Investigation
Amanda B. Nickerson
University at Buffalo, The State University of New York
Ariel M. Aloe
University of Iowa
Jilynn M. Werth
University at Buffalo, The State University of New York
Correspondence regarding this article should be addressed to Amanda B. Nickerson, Alberti Center for Bullying Abuse Prevention, Graduate School of Education, University at Buffalo, The State University of New York, 428 Baldy Hall, Buffalo, NY ; e-mail:
Amanda B. Nickerson PhD, NCSP, is a professor of school psychology at the University at Buffalo, The State University of New York, where she directs the Alberti Center for Bullying Abuse Prevention. Her research focuses on school crisis prevention and intervention, with a particular emphasis on violence and bullying, as well as the role of parents, peers, and educators in building the social–emotional strengths of children and adolescents.
Ariel M. Aloe, PhD, is an assistant professor of educational measurement and statistics at The University of Iowa. His research focuses on research synthesis, meta-analysis, and mixed-effects models.
Jilynn M. Werth MA, is a graduate research assistant at the Alberti Center for Bullying Abuse Prevention and a doctoral candidate in the Combined Counseling and School Psychology Program within the Department of Counseling, School, and Educational Psychology at the University at Buffalo, The State University of New York. Her research interests focus on bullying, the role of the bystander, and how bullying affects individuals with disabilities.
Guest Editor: Chad A. Rose
This meta-analysis synthesized results about the association between empathy and defending in bullying. A total of 20 studies were included, with 22 effect sizes from 6 studies that separated findings by the defender's gender, and 31 effect sizes from 18 studies that provided effects for the total sample were included in the analysis. The weighted average correlation was 0.31 for gender-separated studies and 0.33 for studies that included total samples without separating by gender. Moderator analyses indicated that the effects differed because of measurement variables (e.g., number of items in the measure, whether the measure was used previously) for the gender-separated studies, although the total sample studies' moderator analyses were not significant. Implications for future research and practice are discussed.
Received: March 31, 2015; Accepted: October 14, 2015;
Copyright 2015 by the National Association of School Psychologists
Previous Article
