Table 2.
Peer Victimization Status by Group
| Peer victimization status | Chronic pain (n = 70) |
Community (n = 73) |
Total (n = 143) |
Group differences |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cybervictimization | ||||
| Victims | 28.6% | 29.6% | 28.7% | χ2(1) = .017, p = .895 |
| Frequent victims | 10% | 7% | 8.4% | χ 2(1) = .396, p = .529 |
| Cyberdistress | ||||
| Victims | 26.5% | 14.1% | 19.6% | χ 2(1) = 3.313, p = .067 |
| Frequent victims | 4.5% | 0% | 2.9% | χ 2(1) = 1.154, p = .355a |
| Relational victimization | ||||
| Victims | 51.4% | 49.3% | 50.3% | χ 2(1) = .064, p = .801 |
| Frequent victims | 24.3% | 18.1% | 21.3% | χ 2(1) = .911, p = .340 |
| Reputational victimization | ||||
| Victims | 32.9% | 27.4% | 30.1% | χ 2(1) = .507, p = .477 |
| Frequent victims | 10.0% | 5.5% | 7.7% | χ 2(1) = 1.028, p = .311 |
| Overt victimization | ||||
| Victims | 10.0% | 9.6% | 9.8% | χ 2(1) = .012, p = .912 |
| Frequent victims | 5.7% | 2.7% | 4.2% | χ 2(1) = .819, p = .365 |
| Any victimizationb | ||||
| Victims | 56.5% | 59.2% | 57.9% | χ 2(1) = .100, p = .752 |
| Frequent victims | 27.9% | 22.5% | 25.2% | χ 2(1) = .544, p = .461 |
a
Fisher’s exact test used to evaluate significance attributable to failure to meet chi square assumptions (cells had expected count less than five).
b
Does not include cyber-distress for ease of interpretation of anchors.