The Prevalence and Psychopathological Correlates of Sibling Bullying in Children with and without Autism Spectrum Disorder
Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders
The Prevalence and Psychopathological Correlates of Sibling Bullying in Children with and without Autism Spectrum Disorder
Umar Toseeb 0 1
Gillian McChesney 0 1
Dieter Wolke 0 1
0 Department of Psychology, University of Warwick , Coventry CV4 7AL , UK
1 Department of Psychology, Manchester Metropolitan University , Brooks Building, 53 Bonsall Street, Manchester M15 6GX , UK
Using data from a prospective population based study, the prevalence and psychopathological correlates of sibling bullying in children with and without autism spectrum disorder (ASD) were estimated. There were 475 children with ASD and 13,702 children without ASD aged 11 years. Children with ASD were more likely to be bullied by their siblings compared to those without ASD. They were also more likely than those without ASD to both bully and be bullied by their siblings, which was associated with lower prosocial skills as well as more internalizing and externalizing problems compared to those not involved in any sibling bullying. Interventions to improve social and emotional outcomes in children with ASD should focus on both the affected and the unaffected sibling.
Sibling bullying; Autism spectrum disorder; Psychopathology; Childhood; Prosocial; Millennium Cohort Study
Autism spectrum disorder (ASD) is characterized by social
and communication difficulties, repetitive behaviours, and
high sensitivity to sensory stimulus
. In the UK, the prevalence of ASD has
been estimated at 1–3%
(Baird et al. 2006; Dillenburger et al.
. ASD has a number of psychopathological correlates,
which further reduce the quality of life in affected
(Matson and Nebel-Schwalm 2007; van Steensel et al.
. Children with ASD have difficulties in social
interactions, such as turn taking in conversation, and deficits in
. These difficulties have implications for childrens’
relationships with the people around them.
Department of Education, Derwent College, University
of York, York YO10 5DD, UK
In the UK, 85% of children have at least one sibling. Good
quality sibling relationships are important as they help
children to develop social skills and are a source of emotional
(Brown et al. 1996; Downey and Condron 2004;
Stormshak et al. 1996)
. However, sibling relationships can
also include frequent conflict and aggression. Up to 50% of
children have been bullied by their siblings and up to 40%
have bullied their siblings
(Wolke et al. 2015)
bullying is defined as “any unwanted aggressive behaviour(s)
by a sibling that involves an observed or perceived power
imbalance and is repeated multiple times or is highly likely
to be repeated; bullying may inflict harm or distress on the
targeted sibling, including physical, psychological, or social
harm. It encompasses two modes of bullying (direct and
indirect) as well as four types of bullying (physical, verbal,
relational, and damage to property)”
(Wolke et al. 2015,
. Boys are more likely to bully their siblings
and Wolke 2015)
and girls and younger children are more
likely to be victims of sibling bullying, usually by an older
sibling (Bowes et al. 2014). As the number of children in
the household increases, so does the rate of sibling bullying
(Bowes et al. 2014; Tippett and Wolke 2015)
Sibling bullying is associated with higher levels of
depression and loneliness
, more behavioural
(Wolke and Samara 2004; Wolke and Skew 2011)
and higher levels of mental distress
(Tucker et al. 2014b)
Furthermore, children who are bullied by a sibling at the age
of 12 years old are more likely to have depression, anxiety,
and have self-harmed by the age of 18 years old compared
to those who are not
(Bowes et al. 2014)
There are different roles siblings can take in their
involvement in bullying. The ‘bully only’ children bully their
siblings but are not bullied themselves. The ‘victim only’
children are bullied but they do not bully their siblings.
‘Bully-victims’ are children who are perpetrators of sibling
bullying and also become victims at other times.
Involvement in these different sibling bullying roles is associated
with different levels of psychopathology. Bully-victims who
engage in physical and relational bullying have more
socialemotional difficulties compared to victim only and bully
(Wolke and Samara 2004)
bullyvictims who engage in relational bullying are less prosocial
compared to the other two types
(Wolke and Samara 2004)
To the best of our knowledge, there are no reports on
the prevalence of sibling bullying in children with ASD. It
is, however, well documented that peer bullying in children
with ASD is higher compared to the children without ASD
(Cappadocia et al. 2012; Little 2002; Sterzinget al. 2012; van
Roekel et al. 2010)
. This heightened risk of being bullied by
peers in children with ASD may be mirrored in vulnerability
to sibling bullying
(Hebron et al. 2015)
One of the reasons why children with ASD may be at
increased risk for sibling bullying is due to their social and
communication difficulties, which are related to peer
bullying in children with ASD
(Cappadocia et al. 2012)
Conversely, good are a protective factor in peer bullying
and Sharp 1994)
. Secondly, sibling bullying may be more
likely in families who have a child with ASD due to a higher
risk of poorer communication skills within these families.
There is evidence for social impairment
(Constantino et al.
, language difficulties
(Toth et al. 2007)
, and worse
(Stoner et al. 2007)
siblings of children with ASD. This also extends to parents
of children with ASD
(Dawson et al. 2007)
. Therefore, the
broader autism phenotype in family members might make
undiagnosed siblings more likely to bully and subsequently
it may exacerbate social difficulties experienced by
children with ASD. Such suboptimal levels of communication
for siblings may lead to higher levels of sibling bullying in
families who have a child with ASD compared to the general
population. Thirdly, siblings of children with ASD have been
reported to have more behavioural problems compared to
their typically developing peers
(Bagenholm and Gillberg
1991; Verte et al. 2003)
, which may increase the potential
for conflict between siblings. Finally, reactive aggression is
higher in boys with ASD compared to those without ASD
(Kaartinen et al. 2014)
, which may also be associated with
more sibling bullying. Indeed, when unaffected siblings
were asked to identify a recent problem with their affected
sibling, over half reported aggressive behaviour
. It is, however, unclear how this compares to
sibling dyads in which neither child has ASD, as there was
no control sample. There is a range of evidence why one
might expect more sibling bullying experiences in children
with ASD. On the other hand, there are also reports that
siblings of children with ASD report less conflict with their
affected sibling compared to typically developing children
(Kaminsky and Dewey 2001)
and studies that point towards
positive relationships, or at least no adverse relationships
(see Meadan et al. 2010 for a review)
. Such mixed findings
support the case for further research on the sibling
interactions where one child has ASD.
In this prospective longitudinal study, we investigated
sibling bullying, and the associated psychopathological
adversities, in children with and without ASD. We hypothesized
that children with ASD (child has ASD but their sibling
does not) would experience higher levels of sibling
bullying compared to those without ASD (child and sibling do
not have ASD). The psychopathological correlates of sibling
bullying were also investigated. In line with previous work,
we expected to find that those children who are involved in
sibling bullying will have worse psychopathology compared
to those who are not involved in any sibling bullying.
The Millennium Cohort Study (MCS) is a longitudinal
cohort of children drawn from all live births in the United
Kingdom between 2000 and 2002. Electoral wards were
used to randomly select the MCS sample population,
ensuring that all four areas of the UK (England, Scotland,
Wales, Northern Ireland) were adequately represented.
Ethnic minorities and deprived areas were oversampled using
disproportionate stratification. Primary caregivers,
usually a parent, and the child contributed to data collection.
Data was accessed via the UK Data Archive (http://www.
data-archive.ac.uk/). Further details of the MCS cohort are
(Connelly and Platt 2014)
. In this study,
data collected during wave 5 (age 11 years) were analysed.
Covariates from earlier waves were also used
(psychopathology when the child was 3 years old and harsh
parenting when the child 7 years old). Twins and those who did
not have any siblings were excluded. Therefore, only one
child per family was included the analysis. As described in
the subsequent paragraphs, each child was assigned to only
one of two mutually exclusive groups (with ASD or without
ASD). Data was collected from parents and one child but not
the siblings. Therefore, no information about the siblings,
such as ASD diagnosis status, was available to include in
the analysis. The total weighted sample size was N: 14,177
siblings (1, 2, 3, 4 or more), and birth order (1st, 2nd, 3rd,
4th or later).
Children with Autism Spectrum Disorder
When the child was aged 5, 7, and 11 years, the primary
caregiver was asked, “Has a doctor or health professional ever
told you that [child] had Autism, Asperger’s syndrome or
autistic spectrum disorder?”. Those children whose primary
care givers responded positively to the question at any one of
the three time points were identified as children with ASD.
There were 475 children (81% Boys) with ASD (mean age
10.66 years, 95% CI 10.59–10.72).
Children without Autism Spectrum Disorder
The remainder of the sample was used as a comparison
group, which will be referred to as children without ASD.
There were 13,702 children (51% Boys) without ASD (mean
age 10.67 years, 95% CI 10.65–10.68).
When the child was aged 11 years, he/she was asked to
respond to two questions on a six-point scale (never, less
often, every few months, approximately once a month,
approximately once a week, most days): “how often do your
brothers or sisters hurt you or pick on you on purpose?”
(victimization) and “how often do you hurt or pick on your
brothers or sisters on purpose?” (perpetration). Based on
(Wolke and Samara 2004)
, mutually exclusive
sibling bullying groups were then defined as follows; victim
only: victimised at least once a week but not perpetrated at
least once a week; bully only: perpetrated at least once a
week but not victimised at least once a week; bully-victim:
both perpetrated and victimized at least and once a week.
Primary caregivers were asked to choose their child’s
ethnicity from a list of options. A dummy variable was created
(non-White or White). They were also asked to list income
from all sources (e.g. main job, government benefits etc.),
which was used to calculate their overall income. This was
standardised using the OECD-modified scale
et al. 1994)
. Those families who were below the 60% median
income level were categorised as low household income.
Primary caregivers completed a grid about other members
of the household. This was used to determine lone parent
status (one parent/carer or two parents/carers), number of
The primary caregiver completed Strengths and Difficulties
(SDQ, Goodman 1997)
when the child was
aged 3 years (covariate) and 11 years (outcome). As per the
instructions for scoring, the emotional and peer problems
subscales were summed to create a measure of
internalizing symptoms (0–20). Conduct and hyperactivity subscales
were summed to create a measure of externalizing symptoms
(0–20). The prosocial subscale was used to measure
prosocial skills (0–10). Higher scores indicated more
internalizing symptoms, more externalizing symptoms, and better
prosocial skills. The internal reliability for all three measures
was high (internalizing 0.98, externalizing 0.98, prosocial
skills 0.99). The SDQ has previously been used to assess
psychopathology in children with developmental disorders
such as ASD and Developmental Language Disorder (Baird
et al. 2006; Pickles et al. 2016; Russell et al. 2013; Toseeb
et al. 2017)
When the child was aged 7 years, primary caregivers were
asked about how often they smack, shout, or tell their child
off on a five-point scale (never, rarely, sometimes, often,
daily). Higher summed scores indicated harsher parenting.
This was used as a covariate in statistical models.
At age 11 years, the verbal similarities subscale of the
British Ability Scales
(Elliot et al. 1996)
was used to assess
the child’s verbal ability. Scoring instructions were used to
generate standardised scores. Higher scores indicated
better verbal ability. The Cambridge Neuropsychological Test
Automated Battery (CANTAB) Spatial Working Memory
(Robbins et al. 1994)
was used as a proxy for cognitive
function. The total number of errors was used and reverse
scored so that a higher score indicated better cognitive
function. Both measures were used as indicative of wider
cognitive function in the absence of a full battery of cognitive data
All analyses were conducted using Stata/SE 14.2
and two tailed tests, p < .05, were used. To account for
unequal sample attrition and the application of
disproportionate stratification, all estimates were weighted to
population level. All reported values are weighted estimates.
Two multivariable ordered logistic regression models
were run to calculate odds ratios for the prevalence of
sibling bullying (one for sibling bullying victimization, Model
1 in Table 2, and the other sibling bullying perpetration,
Model 2 in Table 2). The predictors were entered as ASD
group, gender, ethnicity, household income, lone parent
status, number of siblings, birth order, harsh parenting score,
verbal ability, and cognitive function. Then, relative risk
ratios were calculated using logistic regression models to
investigate membership of sibling bullying involvement
groups (the prevalence of groups in shown in Table 3 and
relative risk ratios in Table 4). The outcome variable was
entered as the sibling bullying group (neither, victim only,
bully only, bully-victim). In separate models the predictors
were entered as ASD group, gender, ethnicity, household
income, lone parent status, number of siblings, harsh
parenting score, birth order, verbal ability, and cognitive function.
The model for ASD group was repeated with (1) gender,
ethnicity, household income, lone parent status, number of
siblings, harsh parenting score, and birth order as covariates
and (2) with all of the covariates previously specified and
additionally verbal ability and cognitive function.
Psychopathological correlates of sibling bullying were
estimated using three linear regression models (Table 5).
Collinearity tests indicated that the data met the
assumption of multicollinearity (tolerance 0.72–0.98 and VIF
1.02–1.36). The outcome variable was either internalizing
symptoms, externalizing symptoms, or prosocial skills. The
predictors were bullying group (neither, victim only, bully
only, or bully-victim), which were entered as a dummy
variable, ASD group, bullying group x ASD group interaction,
gender, household income, ethnicity, lone parent status,
psychopathology at age 3 years, number of siblings, birth order,
harsh parenting score, verbal ability, and cognitive function.
Prevalence of Sibling Bullying
Descriptive statistics for the prevalence of sibling bullying
are reported in Table 1.
The logistic regression model for sibling bullying
victimization (Model 1 in Table 2) showed that having ASD, being
a girl, of White ethnicity, having more siblings, and
experiencing harsher parenting were all associated with increased
odds of being bullied by a sibling. The logistic regression
model for sibling bullying perpetration (Model 2 in Table 2)
showed that being of White ethnicity, having more siblings,
harsher parenting, and better cognitive function were
associated with increased odds of bullying a sibling. Being from a
low-income family and being a younger sibling was
associated with decreased odds of bullying a sibling.
Types of Sibling Bullying Involvement
Based on their responses to the sibling bullying
involvement questions, each child was categorised into one of the
mutually exclusive sibling bullying groups. The prevalence
of these groups is shown in Table 3 and the results of the
multinomial logistic regressions are shown in Table 4.
Groups were compared to the neither group based on the
variables of interest. Children with ASD were more likely
than those without ASD to be in the bully-victim group, and
this effect remained after controlling for socio-demographic
variables but not when also controlling for verbal ability and
cognitive function (see note on Table 4). Girls were less
likely than boys to be in the bully only group. Children from
a White ethnic background were more likely than children
from a non-White ethnic background to be in the victim only
group and bully-victim group. Those from a low-income
household were more likely than those from a high-income
household be in the bully only group. Those with two or
three siblings were more likely than those with one sibling
to be in the victim only and bully-victim groups. The
children with only two siblings were more likely than those with
one to be in the bully only group. Children of parents who
adopted harsher parenting were more likely to be in the
victim only, bully only, and bully-victim groups. For the most
part, children who had more older siblings were more likely
to be in the victim only group, less likely to be in the bully
only group, and less likely to be in the bully-victim group
(see Table 4 for exceptions).
Psychopathological Correlates of Sibling Bullying
The results of linear regression analyses are shown in
Table 5. When compared to the neither group, children in
the victim only and bully-victim groups had more
internalizing symptoms. Those in the bully-victim and bully only
groups had more externalizing symptoms. There was a
significant interaction between bullying involvement and ASD
group for externalizing symptoms. Posthoc analysis showed
that children with ASD in the victim only group had more
externalizing symptoms but this was not the case for children
without ASD. Having ASD was also predictive of higher
internalizing and externalizing symptoms. That is,
bullying involvement of any kind and having ASD were both
independently predictive of externalizing psychopathologies
even after gender, household income, ethnicity, lone parent
status, earlier psychopathology, number of siblings, birth
order, harsh parenting, verbal ability, and cognitive
function were kept constant. This was also true for internalizing
symptoms but only for victim only and bully-victim groups.
Similar to the internalizing and externalizing symptom
findings, for prosocial skills, when compared to the neither
group, children in the bully only and bully-victim groups
012 )42% 2703 )(32% 831 )(43% 2691 ()32% 8511 ()42% 249 (21% 7280 (24%
t f o
tie ldo e rea reb sg rom
llraev ttssauSD ttiuohAW tihSADW reednG syoB lirsG ititcnyhE -nohwN tiehW sehuoH iconm ihgH oLw enopL oN seY uNm lin 1 2 3 4
were less prosocial. Having ASD was also predictive of
lower prosocial skills compared to children without ASD.
That is, bullying involvement in a perpetrator role
(irrespective of being a victim or not) and having ASD were both
independently predictive of lower prosocial skills when
gender, household income, ethnicity, lone parent status, earlier
psychopathology, number of siblings, birth order, harsh
parenting, verbal ability, and cognitive function were held
Summary of Main Findings
In this population based prospective cohort study of
children, it was found that children with ASD were more likely
to be bullied by their siblings compared to those without
ASD, in particular as bully-victim. This effect remained even
after controlling for socio-demographic and family level
variables and was associated with adverse psychopathologies.
These novel findings shed new light on the nature of
sibling relationships in children with ASD. They are in line
with previous research, which suggests elevated
behaviour problems in children with ASD and their siblings
aPsychopathological scores at age 3. For internalizing symptoms, early psychopathology refers to internalizing symptoms in the SDQ at age 3.
For externalising symptoms, early psychopathology refers to externalizing symptoms in the SDQ at age 3. For prosocial skills, early
psychopathology refers to prosocial scale of the SDQ at age 3
+Posthoc analyses showed that children with ASD in the victim only group had more externalizing symptoms (unstandardized beta 1.64 95% CI
[0.09, 3.20], p = .039) but this was not the case for children without ASD (unstandardized beta 1.91 95% CI [− 0.12, 0.39], p = .065).
(Bagenholm and Gillberg 1991; Sterzing et al. 2012; Verte
et al. 2003)
. Our findings indicate that children with ASD
are specifically at increased risk of sibling victimization as
a bully-victim. This may indicate that children with ASD
display reactive aggression in response to first being bullied
by their siblings. In particular, boys with ASD have been
found to more likely respond aggressively to mild forms of
(Kaartinen et al. 2014)
and so it may be that such
disproportionate responses lead to an escalation in sibling
conflict. Alternatively, it may be that the aggression from
the child with ASD is proactive and the non-affected sibling
displays reactive aggression. In any case, these findings
suggest that children with ASD are more likely to be involved in
two-way bullying (bully-victim) rather than one way (victim
only or bully only).
Apart from the novel finding that ASD is related to
sibling victimisation, the study replicates previously reported
findings of structural and parenting factors related to sibling
bullying. As the number of siblings increases there is also an
increase in the likelihood of both bullying perpetration and
(Bowes et al. 2014; Tippett and Wolke 2015)
In the current study, it was found that both victimization
and perpetration was increased if parents were more likely
to use harsh parenting approaches. This has been previously
reported as the most consistent factor related to sibling
(Tippett and Wolke 2015; Wolke et al. 2015)
. In line
with previous reports, White ethnicity (Tucker et al. 2013)
and birth order
(Bowes et al. 2014)
were predictive of sibling
bullying. Furthermore it has been reported by some
et al. 2014a)
but not others
(Wolke et al. 2015)
bullying may be higher in lone parent compared to two
parent households. In the current study, such an effect was not
found. Overall, bullying, whether between peers or between
siblings, has been conceptualised as being motivated by
competition for resources. It may thus not be surprising that
increases are found where there are more siblings. Studies
on general sibling conflict
(McHale et al. 1995; Volk et al.
and on sibling bullying
(Updegraff et al. 2005)
identified a link with differential parental treatment of
siblings, suggesting that sibling bullying might be motivated
by inequality and a desire to improve one’s status, thereby
mimicking the motivations that underlie bullying at school.
Given that children with ASD have more social and
emotional difficulties, it may be that parents spend more time
with the affected child and are more accommodating of their
needs. The unaffected child may feel resentment at the
perceived inequality and adopt bullying behaviour to improve
his/her own status.
Consistent with previous findings
(Bowes et al. 2014;
Tucker et al. 2014b; Wolke and Skew 2011)
, an increase
of both internalizing and externalizing problems in those
involved in sibling bullying was found in this study.
Furthermore, those involved in perpetrating sibling bullying, bullies
and bully-victims, were less prosocial in their behaviour to
peers. The adverse associations of sibling bullying on
internalizing or externalizing problems were comparable to those
living in a low-income household or being raised by a lone
parent (Table 5).
Not surprisingly, considering the pervasive nature of
ASD, the effects of ASD on internalizing, externalizing and
lack of prosocial skills were all very large and by far larger
than any of the other factors considered. However, being
involved in sibling bullying further increased externalizing
and internalizing problems in those with ASD. This
suggests a double-dose effect of sibling bullying involvement
and having ASD.
Strengths, Limitations, and Implications
A major strength of the research reported here is the large
population-based sample. This allowed for accurate estimates
of sibling bullying in children with and without ASD. Studies
of clinical populations suffer from issues such as referral bias,
which may lead to inaccurate estimates. Additionally, the large
battery of data that was collected from each family allowed for
a number of covariates to be included in all statistical models.
This ensured that the effects that were observed were unique
to the variables of interest. Despite best efforts, residual
confounding cannot be excluded.
Whilst the sample size and research design were major
strengths of this study, there were some drawbacks that
should to be considered. The sample of children with ASD
was based on parental report, which was not independently
validated by the research team. The analyses were repeated
to only include those children who had been reported as
having ASD at all three ages (5, 7, and 11 years) and the
effects remained and were stronger (further details
available upon request from the corresponding author). Given
that children with ASD have poorer reading and literacy
skills compared to children without ASD, the self-report
method may have introduced an additional source of error.
It may also be the case that children with ASD at the
lowest level of functioning were not able to complete the
questionnaires and so dropped out of the study. Population and
sample weights were used to minimise such unequal
attrition. Additionally, self-report is arguably a more accurate
way to measure sibling bullying, as parents are not aware
of all the conflicts that happen between siblings with much
of the bullying occurring behind closed doors. Therefore,
the alternative method of measuring sibling bullying, would
introduce different measurement error. However, it should be
noted that there was no independent corroboration of the
sibling bullying involvement, e.g. by the sibling. The measure
of sibling bullying perpetration and victimisation are both
based on single items and future studies should attempt to
utilise multi-item scales. Furthermore, as the ASD diagnosis
status of siblings was not determined, this, again, may have
introduced an additional source of error. Similarly, because
ethnicity was defined using binary categorisation, it may
be that heterogeneity that exists within ethnic group was
(Tippett et al. 2013)
. Given the very large sample
size, this additional error was likely minimal but nonetheless
the findings should be interpreted with this in mind. Finally,
associations between sibling bullying and internalizing and
externalizing behaviour were assessed concurrently. Thus
causality cannot be inferred. However, there is currently
only one prospective study of sibling victimization and its
adverse effects that found that sibling victimization is a
temporal precursor of later internalizing problems and a
doseresponse effect suggests a potentially causal effect of sibling
(Bowes et al. 2014)
In this population-based sample of children with and without
ASD, it was found that children with ASD were more likely
than those without ASD to be victims and perpetrators of
sibling bullying as opposed to only victims or only
perpetrators. Sibling bullying was associated with more internalizing
and externalizing problems irrespective of ASD status.
These findings have important implications for the
provision of resources for children with ASD. Given that the
evidence for peer bullying in children with ASD is well
established, resources are already being targeted to improve peer
relations in children with ASD. Our novel evidence
suggests additional targeting of resources at improving
interactions between children with ASD and their siblings. Given,
that our findings show that the bullying is more likely to be
two-way in children with ASD compared to those without
ASD, interventions should focus on the siblings as well as
the affected child. Overall, a reduction in sibling bullying
is likely to reduce social and emotional adversities in both
those with ASD and without ASD. Such interventions would
reduce the economic and social burden of adverse
psychopathology associated with sibling bullying.
Acknowledgments We are grateful to The Centre for Longitudinal
Studies, UCL Institute of Education for the use of these data and to
the UK Data Archive and UK Data Service for making them available.
However, they bear no responsibility for the analysis or interpretation
of these data.
Author Contributions UT conceptualized the design of the analysis,
carried out the main analysis, drafted the initial manuscript, revised
the manuscript, and approved the final manuscript. GM carried out the
initial analysis, replicated the main analysis, revised the manuscript,
and approved the final manuscript. DW conceptualized the design of
the analysis, advised on data analysis strategy, critically reviewed and
revised the manuscript, and approved the final draft of the manuscript.
Compliance with Ethical Standards
Conflicts of Interest The authors have no conflicts of interest relevant
to this article to disclose.
Ethical Approval All procedures performed in studies involving human
participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the
institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki
declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.
The University of London research governance ensured covering of
Informed Consent Informed consent was obtained from all individual
participants included in the study.
Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativeco
mmons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use,
distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate
credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the
Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.
American Psychiatric Association. ( 2013 ). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (5th edition) . Arlington, VA: American Psychiatric Publishing.
Bagenholm , A. , & Gillberg , C. ( 1991 ). Psychosocial effects on siblings of children with autism and mental-retardation-A populationbased study . Journal of Mental Deficiency Research , 35 , 291 - 307 .
Baird , G. , Simonoff , E. , Pickles , A. , Chandler , S. , Loucas , T. , Meldrum , D. , & Charman , T. ( 2006 ). Prevalence of disorders of the autism spectrum in a population cohort of children in South Thames: the Special Needs and Autism Project (SNAP) . Lancet , 368 ( 9531 ), 210 - 215 . https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140- 6736 ( 06 ) 69041 - 7 .
Bowes , L. , Wolke , D. , Joinson , C. , Lereya , S. T. , & Lewis , G. ( 2014 ). Sibling bullying and risk of depression, anxiety, and self-harm: A prospective cohort study . Pediatrics , 134 ( 4 ), E1032 - E1039 . https ://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2014- 0832 .
Brown , J. R. , DonelanMcCall, N., & Dunn , J. ( 1996 ). Why talk about mental states? The significance of children's conversations with friends, siblings, and mothers . Child Development , 67 ( 3 ), 836 - 849 . https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467- 8624 . 1996 .tb01767.x.
Cappadocia , M. C. , Weiss , J. A. , & Pepler , D. ( 2012 ). Bullying experiences among children and youth with autism spectrum disorders . Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders , 42 ( 2 ), 266 - 277 . https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-011-1241-x.
Connelly , R. , & Platt , L. ( 2014 ). Cohort profile: UK Millennium Cohort Study (MCS) . International Journal of Epidemiology , 43 ( 6 ), 1719 - 1725 .
Constantino , J. N. , Lajonchere , C. , Lutz , M. , Gray , T. , Abbacchi , A. , McKenna , K. , et al. ( 2006 ). Autistic social impairment in the siblings of children with pervasive developmental disorders . American Journal of Psychiatry , 163 ( 2 ), 294 - 296 . https://doi. org/10.1176/appi.ajp. 163 .2.294.
Cowie , H. , & Sharp , S. ( 1994 ). Empowering pupils to take positive action against bullying . In P. K. Smith & S. Sharp (Eds.), School bullying: Insights and perspectives . London: Routledge.
Dawson , G. , Estes , A. , Munson , J. , Schellenberg , G. , Bernier , R. , & Abbott , R. ( 2007 ). Quantitative assessment of autism symptomrelated traits in probands and parents: Broader Phenotype Autism Symptom Scale . Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders , 37 ( 3 ), 523 - 536 . https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-006-0182-2.
Dillenburger , K. , Jordan , J. A. , McKerr , L. , & Keenan , M. ( 2015 ). The millennium child with autism: Early childhood trajectories for health, education and economic wellbeing . Developmental Neurorehabilitation , 18 ( 1 ), 37 - 46 . https://doi.org/10.3109/17518 423. 2014 . 964378 .
Downey , D. B. , & Condron , D. J. ( 2004 ). Playing well with others in kindergarten: The benefit of siblings at home . Journal of Marriage and Family , 66 ( 2 ), 333 - 350 . https://doi.org/10.111 1/j.1741- 3737 . 2004 . 00024 .x.
Duncan , R. D. ( 1999 ). Peer and sibling aggression: An investigation of intra- and extra-familial bullying . Journal of Interpersonal Violence , 14 ( 8 ), 871 - 886 . https://doi.org/10.1177/0886260990 14008005.
Elliot , C. D. , Smith , P. , & McCulloch , K. ( 1996 ). British ability scales second edition (BAS II) . Administration and scoring manual . London: Nelson.
Goodman , R. ( 1997 ). The strengths and difficulties questionnaire: A research note . Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry , 38 ( 5 ), 581 - 586 .
Hagenaars , A. , de Vos , K. , & Zaida , M. A. ( 1994 ). Poverty statistics in the late 1980s: Research based on micro-data. Retrieved from Luxembourg .
Hebron , J. , Humphrey , N. , & Oldfield , J. ( 2015 ). Vulnerability to bullying of children with autism spectrum conditions in mainstream education: a multi-informant qualitative exploration . Journal of Research in Special Educational Needs , 15 ( 3 ), 185 - 193 .
Kaartinen , M. , Puura , K. , Helminen , M. , Salmelin , R. , Pelkonen , E. , & Juujarvi , P. ( 2014 ). Reactive aggression among children with and without autism spectrum disorder . Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders , 44 ( 10 ), 2383 - 2391 . https://doi.org/10.1007/ s10803-012-1743-1.
Kaminsky , L. , & Dewey , D. ( 2001 ). Siblings relationships of children with autism . Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders , 31 ( 4 ), 399 - 410 . https://doi.org/10.1023/a: 1010664603039 .
Little , L. ( 2002 ). Middle-class mothers' perceptions of peer and sibling victimization among children with Asperger's syndrome and nonverbal learning disorders . Issues Compr Pediatr Nurs , 25 ( 1 ), 43 - 57 .
Matson , J. L. , & Nebel-Schwalm , M. S. ( 2007 ). Comorbid psychopathology with autism spectrum disorder in children: An overview . Research in Developmental Disabilities, 28 ( 4 ), 341 - 352 . https:// doi.org/10.1016/j.ridd. 2005 . 12 .004.
McHale , S. M. , Crouter , A. C. , McGuire , S. A. , & Updegraff , K. A. ( 1995 ). Congruence between mothers and fathers differential treatment of siblings-Links with family-relations and childrens well-being . Child Development , 66 ( 1 ), 116 - 128 . https://doi. org/10.1111/j.1467- 8624 . 1995 .tb00859.x.
Meadan , H. , Stoner , J. B. , & Angell , M. E. ( 2010 ). Review of literature related to the social, emotional, and behavioral adjustment of siblings of individuals with autism spectrum disorder . Journal of Developmental and Physical Disabilities , 22 ( 1 ), 83 - 100 . https:// doi.org/10.1007/s10882-009-9171-7.
Pickles , A. , Durkin , K. , Mok , P. L. H. , Toseeb , U. , & Conti-Ramsden , G. ( 2016 ). Conduct problems co-occur with hyperactivity in children with language impairment: A longitudinal study from childhood to adolescence . Autism & Developmental Language Impairments , 1 , 1 - 11 .
Robbins , T. W. , James , M. , Owen , A. M. , Sahakian , B. J. , McInnes , L. , & Rabbitt , P. ( 1994 ). Cambridge Neuropsychological Test Automated Battery (CANTAB): A factor analytic study of a large sample of normal elderly volunteers . Dementia , 5 ( 5 ), 266 - 281 .
Ross , P. , & Cuskelly , M. ( 2006 ). Adjustment, sibling problems and coping strategies of brothers and sisters of children with autistic spectrum disorder . Journal of Intellectual & Developmental Disability , 31 ( 2 ), 77 - 86 . https://doi.org/10.1080/13668250600710864.
Russell , G. , Rodgers , L. R. , & Ford , T. ( 2013 ). The strengths and difficulties questionnaire as a predictor of parent-reported diagnosis of autism spectrum disorder and attention deficit hyperactivity disorder . PLoS ONE , 8 ( 12 ), e80247 . https://doi.org/10.1371/journ al. pone.0080247.
StataCorp. ( 2015 ). Stata statistical software: Release 14 . Retrieved from College Station, Texas.
Sterzing , P. R. , Shattuck , P. T. , Narendorf , S. C. , Wagner , M. , & Cooper , B. P. ( 2012 ). Bullying involvement and autism spectrum disorders prevalence and correlates of bullying involvement among adolescents with an autism spectrum disorder . Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine , 166 ( 11 ), 1058 - 1064 . https:// doi.org/10.1001/archpediatrics. 2012 . 790 .
Stoner , J. B. , Angell , M. E. , House , J. J. , & Bock , S. J. ( 2007 ). Transitions: Perspectives from parents of young children with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) . Journal of Developmental and Physical Disabilities , 19 ( 1 ), 23 - 39 . https://doi.org/10.1007/s1088 2- 007 -9034-z.
Stormshak , E. A. , Bellanti , C. J. , & Bierman , K. L. ( 1996 ). The quality of sibling relationships and the development of social competence and behavioral control in aggressive children . Developmental Psychology , 32 ( 1 ), 79 - 89 . https://doi.org/10.1037/ 0012 - 1649 . 32 .1.79.
Tippett , N. , & Wolke , D. ( 2015 ). Aggression between siblings: Associations with the home environment and peer bullying . Aggressive Behavior , 41 ( 1 ), 14 - 24 . https://doi.org/10.1002/ab.21557.
Tippett , N. , Wolke , D. , & Platt , L. ( 2013 ). Ethnicity and bullying involvement in a national UK youth sample . Journal of Adolescence , 36 ( 4 ), 639 - 649 . https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adolescenc e. 2013 . 03 .013.
Toseeb , U. , Pickles , A. , Durkin , K. , Botting , N. , & Conti-Ramsden , G. ( 2017 ). Prosociality from early adolescence to young adulthood: A longitudinal study of individuals with a history of language impairment . Research in Developmental Disabilities, 62 , 148 - 159 . https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ridd. 2017 . 01 .018.
Toth , K. , Dawson , G. , Meltzoff , A. N. , Greenson , J. , & Fein , D. ( 2007 ). Early social, imitation, play, and language abilities of young non-autistic siblings of children with autism . Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders , 37 ( 1 ), 145 - 157 . https:// doi.org/10.1007/s10803-006-0336-2.
Tucker , C. J. , Finkelhor , D. , Shattuck , A. M. , & Turner , H. ( 2013 ). Prevalence and correlates of sibling victimization types . Child Abuse & Neglect , 37 ( 4 ), 213 - 223 . https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chiab u. 2013 . 01 .006.
Tucker , C. J. , Finkelhor , D. , Turner , H. , & Shattuck , A. M. ( 2014a ). Family dynamics and young children's sibling victimization . Journal of Family Psychology , 28 ( 5 ), 625 - 633 . https://doi. org/10.1037/fam0000016.
Tucker , C. J. , Finkelhor , D. , Turner , H. , & Shattuck , A. M. ( 2014b ). Sibling and peer victimization in childhood and adolescence . Child Abuse & Neglect , 38 ( 10 ), 1599 - 1606 . https://doi. org/10.1016/j.chiabu. 2014 . 05 .007.
Updegraff , K. A. , Thayer , S. M. , Whiteman , S. D. , Denning , D. J. , & McHale , S. M. ( 2005 ). Relational aggression in adolescents' sibling relationships: Links to sibling and parent-adolescent relationship quality . Family Relations , 54 ( 3 ), 373 - 385 . https://doi.org /10.1111/j.1741- 3729 . 2005 . 00324 .x.
van Roekel , E. , Scholte , R. H. J. , & Didden , R. ( 2010 ). Bullying among adolescents with autism spectrum disorders: Prevalence and perception . Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders , 40 ( 1 ), 63 - 73 . https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-009-0832-2.
van Steensel , F. J. A. , Bogels , S. M. , & Perrin , S. ( 2011 ). Anxiety disorders in children and adolescents with autistic spectrum disorders: A meta-analysis . Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review , 14 ( 3 ), 302 - 317 . https://doi.org/10.1007/s10567-011-0097-0.
Verte , S. , Roeyers , H. , & Buysse , A. ( 2003 ). Behavioural problems, social competence and self-concept in siblings of children with autism . Child Care Health and Development , 29 ( 3 ), 193 - 205 . https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365- 2214 . 2003 . 00331 .x.
Volk , A. A. , Camilleri , J. A. , Dane , A. V. , & Marini , Z. A. ( 2012 ). Is adolescent bullying an evolutionary adaptation? Aggressive Behavior , 38 ( 3 ), 222 - 238 . https://doi.org/10.1002/ab.21418.
Wolke , D. , & Samara , M. M. ( 2004 ). Bullied by siblings: association with peer victimisation and behaviour problems in Israeli lower secondary school children . Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry , 45 ( 5 ), 1015 - 1029 . https://doi. org/10.1111/j.1469- 7610 . 2004 .t01-1- 00293 .x.
Wolke , D. , & Skew , A. J. ( 2011 ). Bullied at home and at school: Relationship to behaviour problems and unhappiness . Retrieved from London.
Wolke , D. , Tippett , N. , & Dantchev , S. ( 2015 ). Bullying in the family: Sibling bullying . Lancet Psychiatry , 2 ( 10 ), 917 - 929 .