“…Removing the study of Howard et al () and Newman‐Carlson and Horne () results in nonsignificant summary effect sizes. The impact of antibullying programs on teachers became negligible when the study of Limber et al () was removed from the data set, indicating that our findings related to teacher interventions seems to be influenced by the outcomes of this large‐scale study.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 78%
“…The included studies ( n = 13) examined a total of eight antibullying interventions: KiVa (originated in Finland), Bully Busters (UK), Olweus Bullying Prevention Program (OBPP; Norway), I DECIDE (UK), Steps to Respect (US), ViSC Social Competence Program (Austria), the Sheffield Project (UK), and Expect Respect (US). Almost all studies were conducted in the country where the program was developed, except three studies from the United Studies that examined effects of the OBPP (see Black & Washington, ; Limber, Olweus, Wang, Masiello, & Breivik, ; Pepler, Craig, O'Connell, Atlas, & Charach, ). Table provides an overview of the study characteristics of the included studies.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“… Note : Limber et al () conducted an extended‐age cohort design. Black and Washington () and Pepler et al () conducted a longitudinal design. …”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Applying the leaving‐one‐out analysis results in statistically significant summary effect sizes varying between g = 0.095 (leaving out Limber et al, ) and g = 0.435 (leaving out Smith et al, ). Removing the study of Howard et al () and Newman‐Carlson and Horne () results in nonsignificant summary effect sizes.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In addition to these possible moderators at outcome level, the differences in effect sizes can also be related to differences in the research design and interventions (Higgins, Thompson, Deeks, & Altman, ). For instance, the study of Limber et al () heavily influenced the summary effect size due to the exceptionally large sample. More primary studies are needed to conduct an analysis in which moderating variables can be identified with adequate statistical power.…”
Even though teachers are key figures of a program's effectiveness, most intervention studies have not focused explicitly on the effects of antibullying programs at teacher level. We conducted a meta‐analysis into the effects of school‐based antibullying programs on determinants of teacher intervention, including teachers’ attitudes towards bullying, their self‐efficacy and knowledge regarding intervention strategies, and the effects on teachers’ bullying intervention itself. Following the PRISMA guidelines, 13 peer‐reviewed papers were retrieved that reported outcomes on teachers, staff, and students (N = 948, 2,471, and 138,311, respectively). Antibullying programs had a significant moderate effect on determinants of teacher intervention (g = 0.531) and a significant small to moderate effect on teacher intervention in bullying situations (g = 0.390). Results of the meta‐analysis indicate that the effectiveness of antibullying programs may increase when components are included to reinforce teachers’ attitudes, subjective norms, self‐efficacy, knowledge, and skills towards reducing bullying in the school.
“…Removing the study of Howard et al () and Newman‐Carlson and Horne () results in nonsignificant summary effect sizes. The impact of antibullying programs on teachers became negligible when the study of Limber et al () was removed from the data set, indicating that our findings related to teacher interventions seems to be influenced by the outcomes of this large‐scale study.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 78%
“…The included studies ( n = 13) examined a total of eight antibullying interventions: KiVa (originated in Finland), Bully Busters (UK), Olweus Bullying Prevention Program (OBPP; Norway), I DECIDE (UK), Steps to Respect (US), ViSC Social Competence Program (Austria), the Sheffield Project (UK), and Expect Respect (US). Almost all studies were conducted in the country where the program was developed, except three studies from the United Studies that examined effects of the OBPP (see Black & Washington, ; Limber, Olweus, Wang, Masiello, & Breivik, ; Pepler, Craig, O'Connell, Atlas, & Charach, ). Table provides an overview of the study characteristics of the included studies.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“… Note : Limber et al () conducted an extended‐age cohort design. Black and Washington () and Pepler et al () conducted a longitudinal design. …”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Applying the leaving‐one‐out analysis results in statistically significant summary effect sizes varying between g = 0.095 (leaving out Limber et al, ) and g = 0.435 (leaving out Smith et al, ). Removing the study of Howard et al () and Newman‐Carlson and Horne () results in nonsignificant summary effect sizes.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In addition to these possible moderators at outcome level, the differences in effect sizes can also be related to differences in the research design and interventions (Higgins, Thompson, Deeks, & Altman, ). For instance, the study of Limber et al () heavily influenced the summary effect size due to the exceptionally large sample. More primary studies are needed to conduct an analysis in which moderating variables can be identified with adequate statistical power.…”
Even though teachers are key figures of a program's effectiveness, most intervention studies have not focused explicitly on the effects of antibullying programs at teacher level. We conducted a meta‐analysis into the effects of school‐based antibullying programs on determinants of teacher intervention, including teachers’ attitudes towards bullying, their self‐efficacy and knowledge regarding intervention strategies, and the effects on teachers’ bullying intervention itself. Following the PRISMA guidelines, 13 peer‐reviewed papers were retrieved that reported outcomes on teachers, staff, and students (N = 948, 2,471, and 138,311, respectively). Antibullying programs had a significant moderate effect on determinants of teacher intervention (g = 0.531) and a significant small to moderate effect on teacher intervention in bullying situations (g = 0.390). Results of the meta‐analysis indicate that the effectiveness of antibullying programs may increase when components are included to reinforce teachers’ attitudes, subjective norms, self‐efficacy, knowledge, and skills towards reducing bullying in the school.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.