Mapping Classrooms and Peer Victimization Using a Latent Profile Approach: Network, Normative and Demographic Factors

Background: Bullying is a complex group phenomenon, influenced by classroom social conditions that cannot be understood solely through individual characteristics. While previous research has examined factors like cohesion, hierarchy, norms, and structural characteristics separately as gender ratio and class size little is known about how these elements combine to form distinct social configurations associated with different bullying levels. This study aimed to identify latent classroom profiles based on multiple social and structural indicators and examine their relationship with peer victimization patterns. Methods: A latent class analysis was conducted with 19,708 students from 746 classrooms across primary and secondary education in Spain, participating in the Sociescuela program. Data were collected through computer-based sociometric peer nominations assessing victimization, cohesion, hierarchy, aggressive norms, class size, and gender composition. Classroom-level indicators were standardized and analyzed using Gaussian Mixture Models. Model selection was based on multiple fit indices including AIC, BIC, aBIC, entropy, and likelihood ratio tests. Results: A three-class solution provided the optimal balance between statistical fit and interpretability. A female-dominated low-risk profile (Class 1, n = 80 classrooms, 11.6%) showed the lowest victimization levels (M = -0.40), below-average aggressive norms (M = -0.12), low cohesion (M = -0.59) and gender imbalance favoring girls (M = 1.26). A high-risk vulnerable profile (Class 2, n = 130 classrooms, 18.9%) exhibited the highest victimization levels (M = 0.56), the highest aggressive norms (M = 0.38), the smallest class sizes (M = -0.98), and high cohesion (M = 0.17), representing the most problematic classroom environment. A normative balanced profile (Class 3, n = 478 classrooms, 69.5%) demonstrated slightly below-average victimization (M = -0.09), moderate positive cohesion (M = 0.19), larger class sizes (M = 0.32), and below-average aggressive norms (M = -0.16), representing the most stable and typical classroom climate. Conclusions: The study identified three distinct classroom social configurations with implications for bullying prevention. Findings emphasize that victimization risk depends on combinations of social and structural factors. Class 2 represents the highest-risk environment requiring intensive intervention, while Classes 1 and 3 show different protective mechanisms. Results support intervention strategies tailored to specific classroom profiles rather than applying universal approaches.