Bullying is defined as repetitive and deliberate aggressive behaviors, which can take the form of verbal, physical, relational, and cyber actions directed at a peer or group of peers (El-ony et al., 2023), who typically have less power and find it harder to defend themselves (Olweus, 1993; Rettew & Pawlowski, 2016). This form of peer violence is recognized as a significant public health challenge globally (Akanni et al., 2020; Romera et al., 2019), given its high prevalence across countries of varying socioeconomic status (Currie et al., 2012; Fleming & Jacobsen, 2010). In fact, Kathlin Modecki et al. (2014), in a meta-analytic study (overall sample = 335,519 youth), found a mean prevalence of 35% for traditional bullying around the world. In Brazil, the prevalence varies from 7.2% to 38.9% (Silva et al., 2023).

Similar to other forms of violence, the bullying phenomenon is multifactorial, influenced by individual factors such as gender, age, and race/ethnicity; interpersonal factors including family and peer relationships; and contextual factors such as school and community influences (Azeredo, 2015; Currie et al., 2012).

Urie Bronfenbrenner (1979), with his bioecological perspective, has long recognized that individuals are embedded within situations that themselves are embedded within broader social contexts. In this sense, context is the “general and continuing multilayered and interwoven set of material realities, social structures, patterns of social relations, and shared belief systems that surround any given situation” (Ashmore et al., 2004, p. 103). Therefore, within the bioecological perspective, human development is seen as an increasingly complex outcome of reciprocal interactions between individual characteristics and various environmental contexts over the course of development. This ecological model has been applied to bullying (Espelage & Swearer, 2010; Swearer et al., 2010; Swearer & Hymel, 2015), as it helps to understand, among other aspects, how community characteristics can influence victimization and bullying behaviors in adolescents.

Studies that seek to understand the effects of the broader context on bullying have begun to investigate specific aspects of the community environment, such as feelings of insecurity, poverty, or gang affiliation in the neighborhood (Swearer & Hymel, 2015) and community violence and disorder in the neighborhood (Azeredo et al., 2023). Besides community violence, disorder in the neighborhood and in the school environment was associated with bullying victimization and perpetration in a sample of 2,108 Brazilian adolescents (Azeredo et al., 2023). In general, it has been suggested that higher rates of bullying occur in communities where violence is modeled or tolerated. However, little is known about the causal nature of these relationships (Swearer & Hymel, 2015).

Community violence can be defined as the type of violence that occurs in the context of a delimited community or neighborhood, which can take the form of homicides, shootings, physical assaults, robbery, and rape (Hill & Madhere, 1996). Since 1993, the Pan American Health Organization (OPAS, 1993) has declared that violence is an endemic and priority health problem, given the number of victims and the emotional consequences that it produces.

Children and adolescents who become direct or indirect victims of community violence may exhibit short-term consequences such as behavioral disorders, aggression, mood disorders, and post-traumatic stress symptoms, including nightmares, flashbacks, psychosomatic issues, and academic difficulties (Dubé et al., 2018; McFarland et al., 2003; Wilson & Rosenthal, 2003). In the long term, exposure to violence is associated with aggressive behavior in adolescence, depression, involvement with drugs and the police (Paxton et al., 2004), antisocial behavior, and conflict with the law (Chang et al., 2003). Moreover, Tara Kuther and Scyatta Wallace (2003), in their study, were able to identify a series of changes in the moral development of adolescents exposed to situations of chronic community violence.

Over the past two decades, research has explored how exposure to community violence relates to bullying behavior (Davis et al., 2020; Elsaesser et al., 2016; Espelage et al., 2000; Foster & Brooks-Gunn, 2013; Khoury-Kassabri et al., 2004; Low & Espelage, 2014). In general, there is strong evidence that community violence predicts aggressive violence (Davis et al., 2020; Elsaesser et al., 2016; Foster & Brooks-Gunn, 2013; Khoury-Kassabri et al., 2004; Low & Espelage, 2014). Studies that investigate the relationship between exposure to community violence and bullying victimization, however, are scarcer (Lee et al., 2022).

According to the pathological adaptation model of exposure to community violence, repeated experiences of violence within the community lead young people to accept violence as a normative and legitimate strategy for dealing with conflict, thereby increasing their involvement in aggressive behaviors (Esposito et al., 2022). In this respect, Concetta Esposito et al. (2022) found that adolescents who experience higher levels of community violence, whether as witnesses or victims, are more likely to develop morally uncompromised beliefs about violence. This, in turn, increases the likelihood of them perpetrating bullying. Furthermore, according to opportunity theory (Popp, 2012), adolescents who are repeatedly exposed to violence in their neighborhoods are more likely to develop morally uncompromised beliefs about violence and are more inclined to seek out non-conventional peers who engage in maladaptive behaviors, including bullying (Boulton, 2013), as befriending “conventional” peers becomes challenging. Consequently, these adolescents are at greater risk of becoming either aggressors or victims of bullying.

Bearing this in mind, the objective of the present study was to investigate whether adolescents grouped into four types of bullying behaviors (aggressors, victims, non-involved, and victims/aggressors) would differ in terms of their perception of community violence, whether it is diffuse (perception of diffuse violence, at a distance/feeling of insecurity) or proximate (experience of a close violence situation). For the purpose of this study, diffuse violence refers to a form of violence that is perceived as pervasive and widespread within a community or society but not directly experienced by individuals. It encompasses the general feeling of insecurity and fear that people have due to the prevalence of violence in their environment. On the other hand, proximate violence refers to violence that is experienced directly by individuals. This can include personal encounters with violence, such as being a victim of an assault or witnessing a violent event. Furthermore, considering the four types of bullying (cyberbullying, physical, verbal, and relational), we sought to investigate whether victimized adolescents would differ significantly from non-victimized adolescents and whether aggressors would differ from non-aggressors in the way they perceive community violence.

This study investigates the complex interplay between community violence and bullying among Brazilian adolescents, guided by several theoretical frameworks. The Bioecological Model (Bronfenbrenner, 1979) provides a foundational lens, positing that individual development is shaped by nested systems of influence, ranging from microsystems (e.g., family, school) to macrosystems (e.g., cultural norms, societal structures). This model directly informed our decision to examine both proximal (direct experiences of violence) and distal (perceived pervasiveness of violence in the community) aspects of community violence, recognizing that adolescents’ exposure to violence encompasses a range of experiences beyond immediate personal encounters.

Further shaping our understanding is the pathological adaptation model (Esposito et al., 2022). This model proposes that repeated exposure to violence can normalize aggressive behaviors, leading to a higher likelihood of involvement in bullying. Specifically, it predicts that adolescents exposed to higher levels of community violence will demonstrate increased rates of bullying perpetration, particularly among those who also experience victimization. This prediction stems from the model’s suggestion that individuals experiencing frequent exposure to community violence may adopt violence as a legitimate strategy for resolving conflict.

Finally, opportunity theory (Popp, 2012) informs our exploration of how community factors might facilitate bullying. This theory suggests that the availability of opportunities for bullying (e.g., through peer networks, community structures) can influence involvement. We therefore explore whether adolescents living in high-violence communities, where violence is potentially more normalized or accepted, exhibit a higher likelihood of both victimization and perpetration of bullying, reflecting an increased opportunity for such behaviors.

In summary, this study employs a multi-theoretical approach to investigate the multifaceted relationships between community violence and bullying. We anticipate that the bioecological perspective will shed light on the proximal and distal influences of community violence, the pathological adaptation model will highlight the normalization of violence leading to increased aggression, and opportunity theory will uncover how community context can create permissive conditions for bullying behaviors

The current study aimed to investigate whether adolescents grouped into four types of bullying behaviors (aggressors, victims, neither aggressors nor victims, and victim-aggressors) differ in their perception of community violence. Additionally, considering the four types of bullying (cyberbullying, physical, verbal, and relational), we examined whether victimized adolescents differ significantly from non-victimized adolescents and whether bullies differ from non-bullies in how they perceive community violence.

First of all, the unexpectedly high percentage of verbal bullying (63.4%) in this study compared to other research warrants careful consideration. Several factors could contribute to this discrepancy: The study focused on a specific population of Brazilian adolescents attending a particular Federal Institute of Science and Technology. This specific context may have unique characteristics influencing the prevalence of verbal bullying. Cultural norms, school environment, peer dynamics, and socio-economic factors within this specific group could contribute to higher verbal bullying rates. Generalizability to other populations needs caution. The study’s operational definition and measurement of verbal bullying might differ from those used in other studies. Variations in questionnaire design, wording of questions, and scoring criteria can influence the reported prevalence. Subtle differences in how “verbal bullying” is defined can significantly alter the results. For example, some studies may focus primarily on direct insults, while the present study included indirect forms like “making bad jokes about me” or “things that people say and make me cry,” thus leading to varying numbers.

Regarding the perception of exposure to community violence, we found that victim-aggressors perceive their communities as more violent, both in terms of diffuse (distal) and proximal violence. Conversely, students not involved in bullying perceive less community violence. Victim-aggressors are a particularly problematic group of bullies characterized by low self-esteem, aggressive, and provocative attitudes. It has been suggested that they exhibit behavioral problems, seeking to humiliate their schoolmates to compensate for their limitations, while simultaneously becoming victims themselves (Flannery et al., 2023). It is plausible to consider that their increased risk of behavioral problems at school is due to greater exposure to community violence, whether from distant (distal) or nearby (proximal) sources. This suggests that community violence may impact school violence, as students may normalize and reproduce the violent behaviors they perceive. It is well known that bullying behaviors may be related to an unfavorable social environment (Silva et al., 2023) and community violence (Davis et al., 2020; Elsaesser et al., 2016; Espelage et al., 2000; Foster & Brooks-Gunn, 2013; Low & Espelage, 2014). In fact, according to the pathological adaptation model of exposure to community violence, repeated experiences of violence within the community may lead peers to accept violence as a normative and legitimate strategy for dealing with conflicts in their relationships (Esposito et al., 2022). Furthermore, according to opportunity theory (Popp, 2012), repeated exposure to neighborhood violence is linked to the development of morally uncompromised beliefs about violence and an increased inclination to seek out peers who engage in maladaptive behaviors, including bullying (Boulton, 2013), thereby increasing the odds of becoming either a victim or a bully.

When considering all forms of bullying and comparing victims to non-victims, we found that victims of cyberbullying and physical bullying tend to experience more proximal violence (violence close to their daily lives) compared to non-victims. Similarly, victims of verbal and relational bullying also report higher exposure to this type of violence. Additionally, victims of relational bullying perceive more diffuse or distant violence in their neighborhoods. These results indicate that victims more frequently perceive proximal violence as a part of their daily lives. This suggests that these students are doubly victimized, being subjected to both community and school violence, which can further compromise their mental health and well-being, making the issue even more challenging to address.

Furthermore, the results show that victims of verbal and relational bullying perceive violence in their immediate surroundings more intensely than victims of physical bullying and cyberbullying. The study’s findings regarding the varied associations between community violence and different types of bullying (physical, verbal, relational, cyber) likely reflect the multifaceted nature of both phenomena. Several factors could contribute to these differences: the types of bullying differ in their mechanisms and impact.

Physical bullying involves direct physical harm, potentially leading to more immediate, tangible consequences. Cyberbullying, while impactful, often lacks direct physical contact. Verbal and relational bullying, however, are insidious. They inflict emotional and psychological damage, often subtly and pervasively eroding a victim’s sense of safety and well-being. This subtle, ongoing nature might make victims more acutely aware of and sensitive to broader societal violence in their environment, as their sense of security is already compromised.

We found that victims of relational bullying perceived both proximal (close to their daily lives) and distal (distant/diffuse) violence in their neighborhoods. Relational bullyingParte superior do formulário often exploits social hierarchies and relationships. The power dynamics involved in this type of bullying might amplify the victim’s sense of vulnerability and their perception of danger, impacting how they experience and interpret violence in their community, whether it is distal or proximate. Physical bullying, while also involving power imbalances, often manifests more directly and visibly, which might focus the victim’s experience more on the immediate incident than broader societal issues.

Finally, there is a possibility of reporting bias influencing the results. Victims of physical bullying may be more likely to report the physical aspects of their experiences, while victims of verbal or relational bullying might focus on their feelings of insecurity and the broader implications for their safety and well-being. This could lead to a perceived difference in the level of association between community violence and specific bullying types.

In short, the varied levels of association may not reflect a simple cause-and-effect relationship between community violence and specific bullying types but rather a complex interplay of factors related to the nature of the aggression, the victim’s perception and experience, the social dynamics, and even the way these experiences are reported. Further research is crucial to disentangle these influences and arrive at a more complete understanding.

The association between community violence and aggressive behavior has been strongly established (Davis et al., 2020 Elsaesser et al., 2016; Foster & Brooks-Gunn, 2013; Khoury-Kassabri et al., 2004; Low & Espelage, 2014). On the other hand, studies that investigate the relationship between exposure to community violence and bullying victimization are rarer (Lee et al., 2022). Thus, the results from the current study may help to fill this gap.

The current study found that adolescents who engage in cyberbullying, physical bullying, or relational bullying do not differ significantly from non-bullies in their perception of community violence. However, verbal bullying aggressors do differ significantly in their perception of both diffuse/distant and proximal violence compared to non-bullies. It is noted that analyses involving bullies of all four types yielded fewer significant results, possibly due to the small number of adolescents who admitted to being bullies: 17 (8.8%) were cyberbullying aggressors, 36 (18.6%) were physical bullying aggressors, and 28 (14.4%) were relational bullying aggressors. This small sample size may have prevented detecting an effect that actually exists. Conversely, the group of verbal bullying aggressors was relatively large (n = 101, 52.1%), which likely contributed to finding statistically significant differences.

Besides, an additional explanation regarding cyberbullying may be plausible. Scholars in the field argue that the rise of social networks has introduced new avenues for socialization, entertainment, and knowledge sharing. However, they also highlight the potential for these platforms to pose dangers to the development of children and adolescents by reinforcing inappropriate attitudes and influencing aggressive behaviors (Beane, 2010; Garay, 2012). Therefore, it is conceivable that the influence of virtual communities on cyberbullying behavior could be greater than that of physical communities.

Another possible explanatory hypothesis for the non-significant results found could be that students who engage in bullying live in communities where violence is so prevalent that it becomes normalized for them—they may not even consciously perceive it. Furthermore, because they themselves exhibit aggressive behaviors, they might identify with the violent norms of their community. They may report perceptions of violence with a bias towards self-protection, feeling secure among peers who also engage in violence, as violence in their community is commonly perpetrated by their peers and friends. To test this hypothesis, future studies should investigate the impact of community violence normalization on students who engage in bullying. Exploring this phenomenon could provide valuable insights and contribute to a better understanding of the relationship between community violence and bullying behaviors.

Nevertheless, these results in some ways corroborate the literature indicating that broader contextual factors, such as exposure to community violence, are associated with aggressive verbal behavior (Davis et al., 2020; Elsaesser et al., 2016; Espelage et al., 2000; Foster & Brooks-Gunn, 2013; Khoury-Kassabri et al., 2004; Low & Espelage, 2014). Thus, it is possible to interpret, as Jiménez and Estévez (2017) suggest, based on Uri Bronfenbrenner’s theory, that understanding the acts of violence that permeate social relationships during adolescence requires considering these occurrences not as isolated incidents but as influenced directly and indirectly by their surrounding contexts. According to Ferrer et al. (2011), school victimization should be understood as a complex social process tied to adolescents’ developmental context; it results from interactions between the individual and their environment, including family, school, and community. Top of FormTherefore, both distant, diffuse community violence and closer, proximal violence within the community impact violence within the immediate context of the individual, including the school environment (Pinto & Assis, 2013). In school settings, aggression manifests in various forms of antisocial behavior, including the verbal violence examined in this study.

This study represents one of the initial attempts to evaluate the perceptions of community violence (both distal and proximal) among adolescent students in the Brazilian context, examining its relationship with various bullying typologies (non-victims/non-aggressors, victims, aggressors, and victims/aggressors). Additionally, the study compared victims and non-victims, as well as aggressors and non-aggressors, across four types of bullying concerning their perception of community violence.

Initially, the study found that victims/aggressors perceive their communities as more violent, whether this violence is diffuse (distal) or proximal, particularly when compared to those not involved in bullying. Furthermore, victims of all four types of bullying more frequently perceive proximal violence as a part of their daily lives compared to non-victims, although victims of relational bullying also report more frequent perceptions of diffuse or distant violence in their neighborhoods. Finally, only bullies who engage in verbal aggression differ significantly in terms of their perceived community violence, whether it is diffuse/distant or proximal, compared to non-bullies.

This study represents an advancement in relation to other national studies on bullying by investigating the role of a variable (community violence) that has received limited attention in Brazil. Moreover, the instrument used to measure community violence distinguishes between distal and proximal violence, providing a more nuanced understanding of how levels of community violence may relate to bullying victimization and aggression. Additionally, we either utilized instruments validated for the Brazilian context or conducted a preliminary validation of scales not previously validated in the country.

Like all studies, this research also has several limitations: it employed convenience sampling, and the sample size is relatively small, collected from a single educational institution. Therefore, caution is needed when generalizing the findings beyond this specific context, such as to other regions in Brazil or even the state of Bahia. Furthermore, non-parametric tests were utilized due to non-normal data distribution, which are less powerful and may increase the risk of failing to reject the null hypothesis when it is false (type I error). However, these tests were deemed appropriate given the data’s characteristics.

Additionally, this study is cross-sectional in nature, which limits our ability to track changes over time. Future studies should consider longitudinal data collection to explore how perceptions of community violence predict changes in bullying behaviors over time. Moreover, future research could further investigate the influence of other socialization contexts such as family, friends, and schoolmates to enhance our understanding of this phenomenon.

This study reveals a strong link between community violence and bullying among Brazilian adolescents, particularly verbal bullying. Practical implications include enhancing school-based anti-bullying programs to address the impact of community violence, providing early intervention for students exhibiting both victim and aggressor behaviors, and training staff to recognize and support affected students. Community-level violence prevention initiatives are crucial, alongside increased access to support services for vulnerable students and families. Policymakers should develop collaborative strategies between education, law enforcement, and social services to comprehensively address both community violence and bullying. Further longitudinal and qualitative research is needed to refine these interventions and improve understanding of the complex interplay between these issues.