Children's opinions on effective strategies to cope with bullying: the importance of bullying role and perspective

Vaillancourt

et al. 2011

Aggressive Behavior

We used a discrete choice conjoint experiment to model the bullying prevention recommendations of 845 students from grades 5 to 8 (aged 9-14). Students made choices between experimentally varied combinations of 14 four-level prevention program attributes. Latent class analysis yielded three segments. The high impact segment (27.1%) recommended uniforms, mandatory recess activities, four playground supervisors, surveillance cameras, and 4-day suspensions when students bully. The moderate impact segment (49.5%) recommended discretionary uniforms and recess activities, four playground supervisors, and 3-day suspensions. Involvement as a bully or bully-victim was associated with membership in a low impact segment (23.4%) that rejected uniforms and surveillance cameras. They recommended fewer anti-bullying activities, discretionary recess activities, fewer playground supervisors, and the 2-day suspensions. Simulations predicted most students would recommend a program maximizing student involvement combining prevention with moderate consequences. The simulated introduction of mandatory uniforms, surveillance cameras, and long suspensions reduced overall support for a comprehensive program, particularly among students involved as bullies or bully-victims.

mentioning

confidence: 98%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Modeling the bullying prevention program design recommendations of students from grades five to eight: a discrete choice conjoint experiment

Vaillancourt

et al. 2011

Aggressive Behavior

School Psychology International

“…In a study of strategies to cope with bullying, Camodeca and Goossens (2005) found that children most frequently chose assertiveness. There were gender differences in the favoured responses: girls chose assertive strategies more often than boys.…”

Section: Craig Et Al: Responding To Bullyingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Responding to Bullying

Craig

Pepler

Blais

2007

145

116

Children who are bullied are often told to 'solve the problems themselves'; however, when bullying is repeated over time, it becomes increasingly difficult for victimized children to stop the torment because of their relative lack of power. We examine the ways in which children respond to bullying and their evaluations of the effectiveness of various strategies in reducing their bullying problems. One thousand eight hundred and fifty-two Canadian children and youth, ranging in age from 4-to 19-years-old (mean 12.6, SD 2.4) responded to a web-based questionnaire. Few respondents indicated that they were motivated by public education campaigns or information about bullying. Participants indicated they were motivated to do something to stop bullying by their own need to exert control and be assertive and by their emotional reactions to bullying. A significant group of youth responded that they did nothing to stop bullying. Finally, the longer the bullying had been ongoing, the less effective students perceived their own strategies. The results highlight the importance of adults supporting students. Similarly, it is important to provide children and youth with strategies that are effective, as they are most likely to implement strategies that are only going to increase the victimization over time. KEY WORDS: aggression; bullying; coping; strategies; victimization Bullying is a form of abuse at the hands of peers that can take different forms at different ages. Bullying is defined as repeated aggression in which there is a power differential (Juvonen and Graham, 2001;Olweus, 1991;Pepler and Craig, 2000). Two elements of bullying are key to understanding its complexity. First, bullying is a form of aggressive behaviour imposed from a position of power: children who bully have more power than the children they victimize. This power can derive from a physical advantage such as size and strength, but also through a social advantage such as a dominant social role (e.g. teacher compared to a student), higher social status in a peer group (e.g. popular versus rejected student), strength in numbers (e.g. group of children bullying a solitary child) or through systemic power (e.g. racial or cultural groups, sexual minorities, economic disadvantage, disability). Power can also be achieved by knowing another's vulnerability (e.g. obesity, stuttering, learning problem, sexual orientation, family background) and using that knowledge to cause distress. The second key element is that bullying is repeated over time. With each repeated bullying incident, the power relations become consolidated: as children bully and repeatedly cause distress for others, they increase in power over time, whereas the children who are being victimized lose power in that relationship.Bullying can take many forms. It can be physical (e.g. hits, pushes, tripping, spitting), verbal (e.g. threats, insults, put-downs), social (e.g. social exclusion, malicious gossip) or cyber-bullying (e.g. threats, insults, demeaning messages spread through the i...

“…Στην περίπτωση της ΠΘ, έχει φανεί πως τα θύματα ενδέχεται να σημειώνουν μειωμένη επάρκεια ως προς τις στρατηγικές δια-χείρισης ψυχοπιεστικών καταστάσεων και περιορισμού της επιθετικότητας των συνομηλί-κων τους (Didaskalou et al, 2015). Αρνητικές εμφανίζονται και οι σχέσεις της κοινωνικής υποστήριξης με την ΠΘ , εύρημα που μπορεί να αποδοθεί σε δυσκολί-ες διαχείρισης της κατάστασης (Camodeca & Goossens, 2005) και σε κρίσεις περί επιδείνω-σης της κατάστασης με την παρέμβαση άλλων (Kanetsuna & Smith, 2002). Επιπλέον, βρέθη-κε αρνητική συσχέτιση του συμπεριφορικού εκφοβισμού και του έμμεσου εκφοβισμού σχέ-σεων με τον μηρυκασμό ιδεών .…”

Section: στρατηγικές διαχείρισης ψυχοπιεστικών καταστάσεωνunclassified

Εκφοβισμός Και Θυματοποίηση: Βιβλιογραφική Ανασκόπηση Ερευνητικών Ευρημάτων Από Τον Ελληνικό Χώρο

Kokkinos

Karagianni

2017

Ppej

The current review aims at providing an understanding of factors implicated in traditional and cyber-bullying/victimization (TB, TV, CB, CV). More specifically, the purpose of the present review is to critically analyze and synthesize empirical findings from Greek samples and organize them within the theoretical framework of General Aggression Model (GAM). According to the GAM, some person and situational factors based on pre-existing knowledge structures could lead to specific behavioral outcomes through cognitive, affective and arousal routes. The interplay among these routes reflecting the individual’s internal state may be associated with appraisal and decision- making processes which in turn may be linked to bullying or victimization experiences. Using the GAM as a theoretical framework, a synthetic review of past empirical research of person and situational factors related to TB/TV and CB/CV is presented. Socio-demographic (e.g., gender, age, academic achievement), personality factors (e.g., big five, psychopathic traits, self-esteem, emotional intelligence, social intelligence, sensation seeking, empathy), psychological states (e.g., depression), attachment style, online disinhibition, skills (e.g., social/internet), maladaptive behaviors (e.g., Specific Learning Difficulties), beliefs (e.g., low self-efficacy), and values/perceptions (e.g., moral disengagement), (i.e. person factors), as well as specific parenting styles/practices, low friendship quality, and perceived school climate (i.e. situational factors) are proposed as risk factors of such experiences. Furthermore, possible mechanisms and processes (i.e. present internal state; cognition, affect, arousal), which may serve as routes for both TB/TV and CB/CV experiences are described. In this vein, Hostile Attribution Bias, Theory of Mind, expectation of reward and expectation of victim suffering (i.e. social cognition) are suggested as paths through which specific individual or situational factors could lead to bullying and victimization. The present review also focuses on appraisal and decision-making processes, and specifically on coping strategies, through which individual and situational factors, as well as present internal states, could be linked to bullying and victimization. Moreover, some possible psychological and behavioral consequences (e.g., low self-esteem, internalizing and externalizing problems, aggressive behaviors) of experiencing TB/TV and CB/CV are suggested. Overall, the present review provides indications that some person and situational factors, which in many cases are common in both physical contexts and cyberspace, could be associated through specific processes to TB/TV and CB/CV. However, there are some differentiations among the factors linked with TB/TV and CB/CV suggesting that these phenomena, although partially related, may not be similar. The factors and processes, which could lead to aggression, seem also to be in line with the GAM. However, some empirical findings attest that a cluster of person, cognitive and emotional factors, as well as appraisal processes might interact (e.g., personality, social cognition and coping factors) to predict specific behavioral outcomes such as bullying and aggressive behaviors. These interactive relationships are not currently considered by the GAM. Thus, the present review provides further insights into the strengths and the limitations of the aforementioned theoretical framework. In this direction, it underlines the need for reconsidering past theory and integrating several theoretical models, in order to provide a comprehensive understanding of the factors and mechanisms implicated in bullying and victimization experiences. Some possible explanations about the proposed linkages are provided, while limitations and suggestions for future studies are discussed.