Citation

Cantone E, Piras AP, Vellante M, Preti A, Daníelsdóttir S, d'Aloja E, Lesinskiene S, Angermeyer MC, Carta MG, Bhugra D. Clin. Pract. Epidemol. Ment. Health 2015; 11(Suppl 1 M4): 58-76.

Affiliation

Institute of Psychiatry (KCL), DeCrespigny Park, London, United Kingdom.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2015, Holtzbrinck Springer Nature Publishing Group - BMC)

DOI

10.2174/1745017901511010058

PMID

25834628

PMCID

PMC4378064

Abstract

Background : bullying (and cyberbullying) is a widespread phenomenon among young people and it is used to describe interpersonal relationships characterized by an imbalance of power. In this relationships often show aggressive behavior and intentional "harm doing" repeated over time. The prevalence of bullying among youth has been reported to vary widely among countries (5.1%-41.4%) and this behavior seems generally higher among student boys than girls. Several school interventions have been developed to reduce bullying, but reported inconsistent results possibly related to limitations in the study design or to other methodological shortcomings. Aims : evaluating randomized-controlled trials (RTCs) conducted between 2000 and 2013 to assess the effectiveness of school interventions on bullying and cyberbullying.

METHODS : a systematic search of the scientific literature was conducted on Pubmed/Medline and Ebsco online databases. We also contacted experts in the field of preventive bullying research.

RESULTS : 17 studies met the inclusion criteria. The majority of studies did not show positive effects in the long term; the interventions focused on the whole school were more effective in reducing bullying than interventions delivered through classroom curricula or social skills training alone.

CONCLUSION : while there is evidence that programs aimed at reducing bullying can be effective in the short term, their long-term effectiveness has not been established, and there are important differences in the results based on gender, age and socio-economic status of participants. Internal inconsistency in the findings of some studies, together with the wide variability of experimental designs and lack of common standardized measures in outcome evaluation, are important limitations in this field of research.

Language: en