Nathaniel Oliver Iotti

Mr. Nathaniel Oliver Iotti

Lund University, Lund, Sweden
orcid

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

12Years (2015-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
6 December 2017 in Journal of Adolescence
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
Claudio LongobardiClaudio Longobardi
Claudio Longobardi
Nathaniel Oliver IottiNathaniel Oliver Iotti
Nathaniel Oliver Iotti
TJT. Jungert
T. Jungert
MSM. Settanni
M. Settanni

24 July 2018 in Educational Psychology
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
Davide MarengoDavide Marengo
Davide Marengo
TJTomas Jungert
Tomas Jungert
Nathaniel Oliver IottiNathaniel Oliver Iotti
Nathaniel Oliver Iotti
Michele SettanniMichele Settanni
Michele Settanni
Robert ThornbergRobert Thornberg
Robert Thornberg
Claudio LongobardiClaudio Longobardi
Claudio Longobardi
This study investigated the links between students' behavioral problems, student–teacher conflict, and students' involvement in bully, victim, and bully/victim roles in adolescence. The role of student–teacher conflict as moderator of the association between students' behavioral problems and their involvement in each bullying role was examined. Sample included 430 students from Italy (48.4% female; mean age 12.2 years; grades 6–8). Multinomial logistic regression analyses indicated that conduct problems positively predicted engagement in each bullying role, while peer-relationship problems predicted involvement in a victim role. Additionally, students experiencing higher student–teacher conflict were more likely of being victims and bully/victims, but not bullies. Finally, student–teacher conflict emerged as a moderator of the association between peer-relationship problems and both bully and victim roles, and between hyperactivity/inattention and victim role. These findings highlights the importance of considering students’ characteristics in relation to student–teacher relationship quality when investigating the factors influencing students' involvement in bullying behaviors.

1 May 2015 in Infant Behavior and Development
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
RQRocco Quaglia
Rocco Quaglia
Claudio LongobardiClaudio Longobardi
Claudio Longobardi
Nathaniel Oliver IottiNathaniel Oliver Iotti
Nathaniel Oliver Iotti
Laura Elvira PrinoLaura Elvira Prino
Laura Elvira Prino

21 August 2015 in Frontiers in Psychology
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
Claudio LongobardiClaudio Longobardi
Claudio Longobardi
RQRocco Quaglia
Rocco Quaglia
Nathaniel Oliver IottiNathaniel Oliver Iotti
Nathaniel Oliver Iotti
Although the scribbling stage of drawing has been historically regarded as meaningless and transitional, a sort of prelude to the “actual” drawing phase of childhood, recent studies have begun to re-evaluate this important moment of a child's development and find meaning in what was once considered mere motor activity and nothing more. The present study analyzes scribbling in all its subphases and discovers a clear intention behind young children's gestures. From expressing the dynamic qualities of an object and the child's relationship with it, to gradually reducing itself to a simple contour of a content no more “alive” on the paper, but only in the child's own imagination, we trace the evolution of the line as a tool that toddlers use to communicate feelings and intentions to the world that surrounds them. We will provide a selected number of graphical examples that are representative of our theory. These drawings (13 in total) were extracted from a much wider sample derived from our studies on children's graphical-pictorial abilities, conducted on children aged 0–3 years in various Italian nurseries. Our results appear to indicate that scribbling evolves through a series of stages, and that early graphical activity in children is sparked and maintained by their relationship with their caregivers and the desire to communicate with them.

20 August 2019 in Child & Youth Care Forum
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
Nathaniel Oliver IottiNathaniel Oliver Iotti
Nathaniel Oliver Iotti
RTRobert Thornberg
Robert Thornberg
Claudio LongobardiClaudio Longobardi
Claudio Longobardi
Tomas JungertTomas Jungert
Tomas Jungert
School bullying is a widespread phenomenon across the world, which involves bystanders who take on various roles. Motivation to defend victims is important to investigate because it helps us devise better, evidence-based, anti-bullying interventions.

30 August 2020 in Aggressive Behavior
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
Tomas JungertTomas Jungert
Tomas Jungert
KHKristoffer Holm
Kristoffer Holm
Nathaniel Oliver IottiNathaniel Oliver Iotti
Nathaniel Oliver Iotti
Claudio LongobardiClaudio Longobardi
Claudio Longobardi
This study was aimed at exploring which latent profiles emerge based on ratings of self‐determined motivation to defend victims of bullying, and to explore if they are related to bystander roles and victimization in bullying, as well as student–teacher relations. Data were collected from 1,800 Swedish and Italian students, with an age range between 10 and 18 years (M = 12.6, standard deviation = 1.74). The students completed a survey in their classrooms. Latent profile analysis was used to explore the possible clusters of individuals with similar ratings on the motivational variables. Multivariate analysis of variances were conducted to explore differences between the profiles in relation to their roles when witnessing bullying and to student–teacher relationships. Four latent profiles emerged. The profiles represented respondents (a) high in prosocial motivation, (b) high in externally extrinsic motivation, (c) intermediate in externally extrinsic motivation, and (d) with identified/introjected motivation. Multivariate analyses showed that reports of bystander roles when witnessing bullying, teacher–student relationships, and bullying victimization, significantly differed over the motivational profiles. The bystanders were unevenly distributed across the four groups and most individuals were categorized in the prosocial motivation group. Female and male bystanders were evenly distributed across clusters. The prosocial motivation group experienced victimization to a lesser extent than the other profile groups. Students in the intermediate externally extrinsic group were more likely to take the pro‐bully and outsider role during bullying. Concerning student–teacher relationships, the prosocial motivation group reported the closest relationships with their teachers, while the intermediate externally extrinsic group reported the most conflictual relationships.