Bidirectional relations between early adolescents' moral judgment of aggression and defending behaviors: The...

This three-wave longitudinal study examined the relations between moral judgment of aggression and defending behaviors, with a focus on the moderating effects of self-reported and peer-nominated victimization. Participants included 1183 elementary-school students (M_age = 10.88 years, SD = 0.86; 43% girls, 57% boys). Results from random intercept cross-lagged panel models revealed reciprocal effects between moral judgment of aggression and defending behaviors at the within-person level, moderated by self-reported victimization. Specifically, stronger-than-usual moral judgment of aggression more strongly predicted higher-than-usual subsequent defending behaviors when adolescents self-reported higher-than-usual victimization. In contrast, higher-than-usual defending behaviors predicted stronger-than-usual subsequent moral judgment of aggression only when adolescents self-reported lower-than-usual victimization. Peer-nominated victimization and gender did not show moderation effects. These findings emphasize the importance of fostering a positive cycle between moral judgment of aggression and defending behaviors, especially when supporting victimized adolescents.