|
Abstract
|
VioLit summary:
OBJECTIVE:
This aim of this study by Boulton and Smith was to examine the development of bully/victim problems in British middle-school children aged 8 and 9.
METHODOLOGY:
A quasi-experimental design was employed for this study. The sample was comprised of 158 middle-school children (75 girls and 83 boys) who attended three urban schools. Two classes were selected from each school to participate. The ethnic breakdown of the participants was as follows: 50% native British, 44% of Asian origins, and 6% of mixed race or other ethnic origins.
The variables of peer nomination of liked-most and liked-least classmates, bullies and victims, and personal characteristics were assessed by the following data collection procedure. Interviewers spent as much as one week in their assigned class and became familiar with the children. Then, each child was assured of confidentiality and individually given a structured interview. A standardized procedure was ensured, as all interviewers followed a set protocol: children's responses were recorded on prepared data sheets, children were thanked for participating, and each was asked not to discuss the interview with any other classmate. First, the children were asked to name three of their favorite classmates, then three of their least favorite. Then, the interviewer showed individual photos of all the children in the subject's class and asked the child to point to those who fit the following descriptions: shy, starts fights, cooperates, seeks help, disrupts, leader, bully and victim. The descriptions were presented in random order for each photo. The interviewers confirmed each subject's comprehension of the descriptions by utilizing the following operational definitions. They defined a bully as, "someone who often picks on other children, or hits them, or teases them, or does other nasty things to them for no good reason," and they defined a victim as, "someone who often gets picked on, or hit, or teased, or has nasty things done to them by other children for not good reason" (p. 318). Children were classified as a bully if at least 50% of their classmates nominated them as a bully, and less than 33% of their classmates nominated them as a victim. Children were classified as a victim if more than 50% of their classmates nominated them as a victim, and no more than 33% of their classmates nominated them as a bully. All children were interviewed at four different times: October, March, June, and the next October. However, the composition of the classes differed at the last interview due to school policy to reorganize each grade.
The variables of self-perceived competence and sociometric status were estimated by the following data collection procedure. Self-perceived competence was measured by Harter's (1985) Self-Perception Profile for Children. Each teacher and the first author administered this instrument on all of the above four time slots. The teachers read the instructions and asked each child to record answers to each item. The first author helped children with any difficulties. Sociometric status was assigned to each child on the basis of peer nominations of status: popular, average, rejected, neglected, controversial, and other.
The authors set out to find answers to the following questions. Did a stable propensity to bully/be bullied exist earlier than 13 years of age? In general, how stable was the bully/victim status in the population of middle-school children? More specifically, did the children who were perceived by peers to be either bullies or victims at the start of the school year remain so during that school year, and also remain so during the next school year? Finally, how were sociometric status, peer rejection/acceptance and bullying status related?
The authors used descriptive statistics, Fisher Exact Probability test, one-factor ANOVAs, and Tukey HSD tests.
FINDINGS/DISCUSSION:
The authors confirmed prior studies that bullying and victimization were a major problem for middle-school children. They found that 35% of the sample were either victims, bullies, or both. They also confirmed prior findings that aggression is significantly more of a problem for boys than for girls (p<.01). However, victimization did not discriminate between the sexes. Authors answered the question of stability: the bully/victim nominations over the four assessment periods were largely consistent. However, the stability coefficient for percentage of victim nominations for boys was significantly greater than that for girls. They also found that those identified as bullies were significantly more likely to be perceived as leaders(p<.01) than were victims. Whereas, identified victims were more significantly more likely to be perceived as cooperative (p<.01) than were bullies.
The authors demonstrated that sociometrically rejected boys received significantly more bully nominations (p<.01). Also, both male and female rejected children received significantly more victim nominations (p<.01). Girls had a significantly higher victimization score than boys (p<.05). They also demonstrated that bullies were significantly over represented in the sociometric grouping of controversial.
AUTHORS' RECOMMENDATIONS:
The authors recommended that future research consider the causal relationship between low self-esteem and victimization. They also suggested that longitudinal investigations be conducted to determine whether measures of self-perceived competence were a consequence or a cause of either victimization or bullying.
EVALUATION:
In general, this study provides some important findings on the bully/victim problem in middle schools. Internal validity is an issue: the authors admit that children may have given more weight to physical bullying over non-physical bullying when classifying their classmates. It should be noted that selection bias is an issue: authors did not specify how schools or classes were selected for participation. This study has a limited degree of generalizability because it lacks random sampling and fails to present statistical comparison of its sample to the national population of British middle-school children. In conclusion, this study offers some insights into the dynamics of bullying and victimization. (CSPV Abstract - Copyright © 1992-2007 by the Center for the Study and Prevention of Violence, Institute of Behavioral Science, Regents of the University of Colorado)
KW - Countries Other Than USA
KW - England
KW - Late Childhood
KW - Child Bully
KW - Child Offender
KW - Child Victim
KW - Bullying
KW - Bully Offender
KW - Bully Victim
KW - Elementary School Student
KW - Peer Ratings
KW - Peer Perceptions
KW - Peer Rejection
KW - Peer Acceptance
KW - Child Violence
KW - Peer Relations
KW - School Violence
KW - Social Acceptance
KW - Victim Self-Esteem
KW - Offender Self-Esteem
KW - Child Self-Esteem
KW - Victim Characteristics
KW - Bullying Causes
KW - Offender Characteristics
KW - Child Aggression
KW - Aggression Causes
KW - Longitudinal Studies |