SOCIAL SUPPORT FOR ADOLESCENTS INVOLVED IN TRADITIONAL AND

CYBER BULLYING

A Thesis

Presented to the faculty of the Department of Education

California State University, Sacramento

Submitted in partial satisfaction of

the requirements for the degree of

MASTER OF ARTS

in

Child Development

(Theory and Research)

by

Ilanit Offen

SUMMER

2012

ii

© 2012

Ilanit Offen

ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

iii

SOCIAL SUPPORT FOR ADOLESCENTS INVOLVED IN TRADITIONAL AND

CYBER BULLYING

A Thesis

by

Ilanit Offen

Approved by:

__________________________________, Committee Chair

Dr. Juliana Raskauskas

__________________________________, Second Reader

Dr. Melina Bersamin

____________________________

Date

iv

Student: Ilanit Offen

I certify that this student has met the requirements for format contained in the University

format manual, and that this thesis is suitable for shelving in the Library and credit is to

be awarded for the thesis.

__________________________, Department Chair ___________________

Dr. Ana Garcia-Nevarez Date

Department of Child Development

v

Abstract

of

SOCIAL SUPPORT FOR ADOLESCENTS INVOLVED IN TRADITIONAL AND

CYBER BULLYING

by

Ilanit Offen

Social support may mitigate the negative effects adolescents might experience when

exposed to bullying. This study aimed to identify who adolescents turned to when they

experienced bully victimization and whether their choice of support differed by type of

bullying (traditional or cyber), role in the bullying (bully, victim, bully-victim,

uninvolved) or gender of the victim and /or aggressor. This study included a secondary

data analysis of survey data from 64 7th

and 8th

graders from one middle school in

Northern California. Analysis showed that sources of support differed by gender and type

of bullying. Adolescents who were cyber bullied in chat rooms and group sites (e.g.

MySpace, Facebook) relied on their best friends for social support. However, when

encountering traditional bullying, only females relied on their best friends and adults for

social support.

_______________________, Committee Chair

Dr. Juliana Raskauskas

_______________________

Date

vi

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

When I started this journey more than two years ago, I had no idea whether or

when I would reach the finish line. Now, looking back I know I could not have made it

without the help and support of my mentors, family members, and friends.

First, I would like to thank Dr. Juliana Raskauskas whose support and guidance

throughout the way enabled and encouraged me to keep on going. Dr. Raskauskas not

only allowed me to use her current data but also provided me with constant support and

feedback about data analysis, relevant readings, writing, formatting, as well as graduate

requirements and deadlines. Thank you Dr. Raskauskas for the wonderful guidance and

support along the way.

I would also like to thank my second reader, Dr. Malina Bersamin. Dr.

Bersamin‘s reviews and feedback have been invaluable for the thesis and are truly

appreciated.

Finally, I would like to thank my beautiful family. First, my husband, Zeev, my

love, who encouraged me to pursue a master‘s degree and supported me by taking upon

himself the chores of the house and the care of three children when I was busy studying.

Second, I would like to thank my three wonderful kids, Yael (14), Tamir (11), and Noa

(6). You are the pride and joy of my life and I could not have made it without your

patience and cooperation. I would also like to thank my beloved parents, Israel and Lizzet

Hanien, who believed in me and encouraged me throughout the way.

vii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

Acknowledgments........................................................................................................ vi

List of Tables .............................................................................................................. ix

Chapter

1. INTRODUCTION …………………………………………………………..........1

Purpose of the Study…………………………………………………………...1

Statement of the Problem ................................................................................... 1

Significance of the Study………………………………………………….…...2

Methods…………………………………………………………………….….5

Definition of Terms……………………………………………………….……6

Limitations……………………………………………………………….…….7

Organization of the Thesis……………………………………………….…….8

2. REVIEW OF LITERAURE………………………………………………………9

Traditional Bullying…………………………………………………………...9

Cyber Bullying ................................................................................................ 10

Differences and Similarities Between Traditional and Cyber Bullying ..........12

Bullying Roles………………………………………………………………..14

Social Support………………………………………………………………..18

Theoretical Framework……………………………………………………….27

Implications for the Present Study…………………………………………...32

3. METHODS ........................................................................................................... 34

Design of the Study…………………………………………………………..34

Research Questions…………………………………………………………..34

Participants……………………………………………………………….…..35

Measure………………………………………………………………………36

viii

Procedures……………………………………………………………….…..40

4. RESULTS…………………………………………………………………….….42

Gender Comparisons…………………………………………………….….…43

Types of Bullying……………………………………………………….……..45

Role in Bullying…………………………………………………….…………47

Efficacy and Actual Social Support……………….……….………….………51

Social and Academic Support………….………………….…………………..52

5. DISCUSSION ........................................................................................................54

Key Findings ......................................................................................................54

Limitations and Future Research .......................................................................58

Appendix A. Parents‘ Consent Form ....................................................................... 63

Appendix B. Students‘ Self-Report Questionnaires ................................................. 67

Appendix C. Student Assent Form ............................................................................86

References .................................................................................................................. 88

ix

LIST OF TABLES

Tables Page

1. Role in Bullying…………………………………….……………………………..40

2. Access of Actual Support……………………………….……………………….. .42

3. Social and Academic Percentage of Participants Reporting High* Self-Efficacy...43

4. Gender and Actual Social Support...........................................................................44

5. Gender and Social Self-Efficacy – Adult…………….……………………............45

6. Cyber Bullying and Best Friends‘ Actual Social Support…………………………46

7. Correlational Table Between Adults and Friends‘ Social Support and Online

Bullying……………………………………………………………………………47

8. Role in Bullying and Actual Social Support………………………………………49

9. Role in Bullying and Social Self-Efficacy…………..…………………………….50

10. Actual Parents‘ Social Support and Social Self-Efficacy ………………..……....51

11. Prosocial Behavior and Adults and Peers‘ Social Self-Efficacy………..……..…52

12. Perceived Academic Support and Social Self-Efficacy…………………...……..53

1

Chapter 1

INTRODUCTION

Purpose of the Study

Numerous studies indicate that bullying is associated with negative consequences

and that social support can play a protective role for adolescents who are involved in

bullying (see Espelage & Swearer for review). The purpose of the present study was to

examine adolescents‘ accessing of social support when they experience bully

victimization and whether their choice of support differs by type of bullying (traditional

or cyber), role in the bullying (bully, victim, bully-victim, uninvolved) or gender (female

or male). The difference between social support accessed for bullying and perceived

social support in relation to these variables was also examined.

Statement of the Problem

Bullying is a significant issue in the lives of many school students (McElearney,

Roosmale, Cocq, Scott & Stephenson, 2008). Adolescents who are exposed to bullying

may suffer from poorer physical and psychological health, which can negatively

influence school attendance, academic performance, social and emotional development

2

(Bowes, Maughan, Caspi, Moffitt, & Arseneault, 2010; Due, Lynch, Gabhain, Scheidt, &

Currrie, 2005; Raskauskas & Stoltz, 2007).

According to research, social support from peers, teachers, and parents helps

reduce the negative effects associated with bullying (Rothon, Head, Klineberg &

Stansfeld, 2011; Wang, Iannotti, Nansel &Tonja, 2009; Yeung & Leadbeater, 2010).

Still, a significant number of adolescents who experience bullying do not share this

information with nor seek help from others (McElearney et al., 2008). For example,

Smith and Shu (2000) found that 30% of victims tell no one about the bullying.

Matsunaga (2009) found that victims of traditional bullying do not disclose their situation

to their families. An even higher number of adolescents do not seek help with cyber

bullying. Juvoenen and Gross (2008) reported that 90% of cyber bullied adolescents in

their research did not tell adults about their experience with online aggression. Gaining a

better understanding of how adolescents make use of the available social support

resources in and outside of school and individual characteristics of those who seek help

may help to reduce negative impact on future victims.

Significance of the Study

Although today bullying is more openly discussed in schools than it was in the

past, many students still do not tell others that they are being bullied (Smith & Shu,

2000). According to Wang et al. (2009), only 58% of eight graders reported they would

share bullying victimization with a parent, and only 31% of eighth graders reported that

3

they would approach a teacher for help (Oliver & Canadappa, 2007). Even though

adolescents perceive peer support as the least risky option, about 70% of eight graders

report sharing bullying experiences with friends (Oliver & Candappa, 2007).

Many factors may influence social support seeking behavior. Gender may be a

primary factor in the help-seeking decisions adolescents make. Studies indicate that girls

and boys differ in the way they perceive and react to bullying (Wang et al., 2009). Girls

tend to be more supportive of victims than boys (Holt & Espelage, 2007; Smith & Shu,

2000) and are more likely to seek help (Hunter, Boyle & Wardern, 2004; Smith & Shu,

2000) by telling a parent, a peer, or a school staff member (Craig, Pepler, & Blais, 2007).

Hunter et al. (2004) found that 86% of female victims tell someone about the

victimization, as compared to 64% of male victims. This may be due to societal norms

that make it less acceptable for males to be vulnerable and ask for help than females

(Crick & Grotepeter, 1995; Holt & Espelage, 2007).

The type of bullying may also influence adolescents‘ selection of help seeking.

Cyber bullying seems to be more elusive and harder to detect than traditional bullying

since it is often anonymous (Dehue, Bolman, Vollink, 2008; Ybarra & Mitchell, 2004),

and often experienced outside of school (Dehue et al., 2008; Smith, Mahdavi, Carvalho,

Fisher, Russell, & Tippett, 2008), both of which may limit opportunities to access social

support and concern about who to go to. Even though social support for cyber bullying

victims can only be provided if the victims report the bullying, the limited research on

cyber bullying suggests that many victims are reluctant to report such incidents (Patchin

& Hinduja, 2006; Raskauskas, 2010). Much of the fear in reporting is not retaliation like

4

with traditional bullying but the fear that parents or school officials will take away their

technology to reduce access of the bully to the victim, but also effectively isolating them

from their peer group and potential support (Raskauskas, 2010).

Traditional and cyber bullying, their negative symptoms, and the importance of

coping such as the use of social support have been researched for years. Social support

can help decrease the negative effects bullying may have on involved adolescents

(Davidson & Demaray, 2007; Flaspohler, Elfstom, Vanderzee, Sink, & Birchmeier, 2009;

Rothon et al, 2011; Yeung & Leadbeater, 2010). While parental social support can

promote resilience to bullying victimization (Bowes et. al., 2010) and reduce the levels of

behavioral and emotional problems victims may have (Yeung & Leadbeater, 2010),

peers‘ social support can protect victims from poor academic achievement (Rothon et. al,

2011) and inhibit peer victimization for all youth (Ladd, Kochenderfer-Ladd, Eggun,

Kochel & McConnell, 2011). In addition, teachers‘ social support is associated with

lower levels of adolescents‘ behavioral and emotional problems from bullying (Davidson

& Demaray, 2007; Yeung & Leadbeater, 2010).

Even though the positive effects of social support have been studied, there is little

research regarding the strategies and choices adolescents make as they seek help from

these available social supports. This study examined who adolescents turn to (peers,

teachers, or parents) when they encounter or witness traditional or cyber bullying.

Additionally, the study investigated whether adolescents‘ help seeking strategies are

influenced by factors such as the adolescent‘s role in bullying, the type of bullying, or

gender of those involved.

5

Social support from teachers, parents and peers can do much to prevent bullying

as well as mitigate its negative effects (Holt & Espelage, 2007; Wang et al., 2009). But

this can only happen if adolescents seek out this support. Results in this study can help

teachers and parents understand better how adolescents perceive the social supports

available to them as well as how factors such as type of bullying, bullying roles, or

gender may influence their help seeking choices. Additionally, this study can help

educators enhance students‘ use of already preferred social support sources (e.g. peers,

uninvolved students) to reduce bullying while guiding others (e.g. parents, teachers) on

how to handle bullying in a way that will encourage adolescents to approach them for

help.

Methods

The present study was a secondary analysis of pilot data collected prior to a larger

study conducted by Dr. Juliana Raskauskas (Sacramento State University). The study

employed a quantitative, correlational design that included self-report questionnaires. In

the pilot 66 7th

and 8th

grade students from a single school completed two surveys about

bullying and social support of peers, teachers, and parents. This is the data included in the

presents study.

Two surveys were administered over two weeks. Items from these two surveys

measured rumor-spreading, exclusion, hitting, pushing or name-calling, as well as social

support seeking behavior, help offering and caring for peers, perceived support available

6

were included in this study. Since both surveys included numerous questions about varied

topics, my secondary analysis focused only on the survey items directly related to the

research questions in this study. Analytical methods including descriptive statistics,

correlations, T-test, ANOVA, and Chi-square were used to examine similarities and

differences between adolescents‘ use of peer and adult social support, their social self-

efficacy as well as differences within gender, role in bullying, and type of bullying. .

Definition of Terms

―Bullying‖ is defined as repeated aggression that is imposed from a position of

power in which the victim cannot stop the abuse (Craig et al., 2007). There are two types

of bullying: ―traditional bullying‖ and ―cyber bullying‖. Traditional bullying typically

occurs in a face-to-face encounter and includes three different forms: ―physical bullying‖

(e.g. hitting, pushing, tripping, spitting), ―verbal bullying‖ (e.g. threats, insults, put-

downs), and ―relational bullying‖ (e.g. social exclusion, malicious gossip). Cyber

bullying, on the other hand, refers to activities where technology is used to bully others,

for example, sending mean e-mails or text-messages, posting mean pictures or messages

online, or creating defamatory profiles online (Craig et al.2007; Kraft & Jinchang, 2009).

There are different roles that individuals can assume in a bullying episode. The

―bully‖ is the person who is exhibiting the bullying behavior/s. The ―victim‖ is the person

who is the target of the bullying behaviors. The ―bully-victim‖ is an individual who is a

bully and a victim at the same time, and an ―uninvolved‖ person is an individual who is

7

neither a victim nor a perpetrator of bullying (Flaspohler et al., 2009). A bystander is an

individual who witnesses the bullying whose role may vary from assisting the bullies to

defending the victims (Oh & Hazler, 2009).

Limitations

It is important to note the limitations of this study in interpreting results and

drawing conclusions. First, the study employed quantitative methods that allowed

researchers to examine a number of participants in a relatively short period. However,

these types of measures do not provide the kind of in depth understanding of participants‘

perceptions that could have been revealed with open-ended questions or interviews.

Second, since the study was a correlational design, the ability to draw causal conclusions

about the results is limited (Wang et al., 2009). Third, since data collection was a self-

report survey of the adolescent students, the veracity of their responses is uncertain. The

credibility of adolescents‘ reports of their use of social support is also limited by the fact

that no corroborating data were collected from either parents or teachers. In addition, this

study was based on a secondary data which limited the author‘s opportunity to include

more relevant items on social support and to add more questions that would refer to

parents and teachers separately. Finally, the use of a non-representative convenience

sample of participants may affect generalizability of results. Since the sample was

composed of volunteers recruited from only one public school there may be a threat to

8

external validity and results cannot be generalized to the rest of the adolescent

population.

Organization of the Thesis

The current chapter provided an overview of this study of adolescents‘ use of

social support in response to bullying. Chapter 2 includes a review of the literature

related to bullying, such as types of bullying, bullying roles, gender differences, and

different social support strategies. Chapter 3 explains the methods used in this research.

Chapter 4 reports the results of the data analyses. Finally, chapter 5 presents a summary

of the findings, discussion of the limitations, and suggestions for further research.

9

Chapter 2

REVIEW OF LITERATURE

Traditional Bullying

Bullying is a form of aggressive behavior that is repeated over time, characterized

by an intent to do harm, and imposed from a position of power such that it is difficult for

the victim to defend themselves or stop the bullying (Craig et al., 2007; Espelage &

Swearer, 2003). Traditional bullying can involve verbal acts (e.g. threats, insults),

physical acts (e.g. hits, pushes, spitting), or aggression that uses relationships, commonly

called relational aggression (e.g. social exclusion, malicious gossip) (Crick & Gropeter,

1995; Espelage & Swearer, 2003). Bullying is considered direct when it is done face-to-

face or indirect when it is behind someone‘s back, uses other people or technology to

harm, or causes distress without confrontation (Craig et al. 2007; Due et al., 2005;

Rothon et al., 2011).

Bullying is a significant issue in the lives of many school students (McElearney et

al., 2008). About 32% of U.S. adolescents report being bullied at school (National Crime

Victimization Survey, 2007). But the effects of bullying are not limited to victims.

Traditional bullying may cause serious short- and long-term negative consequences for

all participants in the bullying scene (Due et al., 2005; McElearney et al., 2008). Victims

may report more internalizing symptoms, such as anxiety, depression and loneliness as a

10

result of being bullied (Nishina, Juvonen & Witkow, 2005). Bullies may demonstrate a

higher level of externalizing problems such as delinquent, rule-breaking and aggressive

behavior (Due et al., 2005; Menesini, Modena & Tani, 2009; Nishina et al., 2005; Rothon

et al., 2011). Bully-victims seem to be a particularly high-risk group (Holt & Espelage,

2007) with studies indicating that bully-victims may exhibit higher levels of the

internalizing and externalizing behaviors exhibited by bullies and victims but also show

poorer social skills (Menesini et al., 2009).

Cyber Bullying

Cyber bullying is defined as ― any behavior performed through electronic or

digital media by individuals or groups that repeatedly communicates hostile or aggressive

messages intended to inflict harm or discomfort on others‖ (Tokunaga, 2010, p. 278). It is

similar to relational and verbal bullying where bullies use messages, pictures, and

webpages to spread rumors, insults, secrets, or threats to hurt or socially exclude their

victims (Raskauskas & Stoltz, 2007; Raskauskas, 2010). About 20-40% of adolescents

have experienced cyber bullying at least once in their lives according to recent

publications (Hinduja & Patchin, 2008; Patchin & Hinduja, 2006; Tokunaga, 2010).

Unlike traditional bullying, a cyber-bullying attack is not constrained by any

physical location (Patchin & Hinduja, 2006; Tokunaga, 2010). Cyber bullying victims

claimed to be affected by the online behaviors not only at school but also at home, or

with friends (Patchin & Hinduja, 2006; Hinduja & Patchin, 2008). This is due to the

11

mobility of the technology used to commit cyber bullying. In a large Internet-based

survey by Patchin and Hinduja (2006), 30% of respondents reported having been cyber

bullied on their cell phones and/or computers. Access and frequent use of technology,

such as access to a cell phone (Patchin & Hinduja, 2006), having a computer in one‘s

bedroom (Law, Shapka & Olson, 2010), having an active profile on social networking

sites, and participation in chat rooms (Mesch, 2009) increase the likelihood that students

will engage in cyber bullying

Even though most of the research on cyber bullying is in its infancy, studies have

already demonstrated that cyber bullying can have lasting social and psychological

effects on victims. It can vary from trivial levels of distress to severe mental,

psychological and social problems (Tokunaga, 2010). While cyber bullies behavior can

be related to delinquency (Dilmac, 2009; Hay, Meldrum & Mann, 2010; Oh & Hazler,

2009), cyber victims‘ behavior may be associated with internalizing distress, such as

increased social anxiety ( Juvonen & Gross, 2008), low self-esteem (Patchin & Hinduja,

2010), depression (Ybarra & Mitchell, 2004) and self-harm (Hay & Meldrum, 2009; Hay,

Meldrum & Mann, 2010). In Raskauskas (2010), 38% of text-message victims reported

feeling anxious and depressed and text-victims reported significantly more depression

than non-victims (Raskauskas, 2010). In other studies, cyber victims reported feeling sad

and powerless to stop anonymous harassment (Hinduja & Patchin, 2008; Raskauskas &

Stoltz, 2007). Because cyber bullying is elusive and harder to stop, social support may be

both more important to buffering against negative effects and less effective in preventing

future victimization than in traditional bullying. Students who are text bullied are often

12

reluctant to turn off their phones or to report the harassment. The fear of phones being

taken away inhibits them from telling others and thus increases their feelings of

hopelessness to stop the harassment (Raskauskas, 2010). Adolescents may also perceive

their parents as unable to stop the bullying if they know less about technology (Holt &

Espelage, 2007; Oliver & Candappa, 2007) or potentially making it worse if they take

ineffective action (Oliver & Candappa, 2007Adults are often unaware of adolescents‘

online interactions which limits their ability to observe and supervise them. Therefore,

cyber bullying is generally outside of the regulatory reach of parents and teachers, and

adult help can be provided only when the victims themselves seek it (Patchin & Hinduja,

2006; Tokanuga, 2010).

Differences and Similarities Between Traditional and Cyber Bullying

Bullying is a significant issue in the lives of many school students (McElearney et

al., 2008). Both traditional and cyber bullying intend to inflict repeated harm on victims

who find it difficult to defend themselves or stop the bullying (Braig et al, 2007;

Expelage & Swearer, 2003; Tokunaga, 2010). While traditional and cyber bullies use

different methods to harm their victims, cyber bullying is similar to relational and verbal

bullying where bullies use pictures, messages, and webpages to spread rumors, secrets,

insults, and threats to socially exclude their victims (Raskauskas & Stoltz, 2007;

Raskauskas, 2010). Both traditional and cyber bullying can cause negative consequences

for all involved participants (Due et al., 2005; McElearney et al., 2008). Victims of

13

traditional and cyber bullying may suffer from internalizing symptoms, such as

depression, loneliness, and social anxiety (Dilmac, 2009; Hay et al., 2010:Nishina et al,

2005; Oh & Hazler, 2009; Tokunage, 2010), whereas traditional and cyber bullies may

demonstrate higher delinquency and rule-breaking behaviors (Due et al, 2005; Nishina et

al., 2005; Rothon et al., 2011).

Examining the possible differences between traditional and cyber bullying can

help us better understand the role or the help seeking strategy adolescents may choose

when they encounter bullying. Wolak, Mitchell and Finkelhor (2007) suggest that online

bullying is not as intimidating as traditional bullying since the victims are not exposed to

face-to-face aggression. Raskauskas and Stoltz (2007) dispute this finding, arguing in

contrast that electronic bullying may have a bigger impact due to the anonymous nature

of harassment where students do not know the identity of their bully and feel powerless

to stop it. Furthermore, while traditional bullying takes place mainly on school grounds,

cyber bullies use their access to the electronic world to harass their victims both at school

and beyond the school ground (Patchin & Hinduja, 2006) and can make them feel unsafe

even in their own homes (Raskauskas & Stoltz, 2007). Since cyber bullying is more

elusive and harder to detect by adults (Dehue et al., 2008; Smith et al., 2008) and many

cyber victims are reluctant to report such incidents (Patchin & Hinduja, 2006;

Raskauskas, 2010), the opportunity that those victims have for social support may be

more limited.

Raskauskas and Stoltz (2007) identified some areas of overlap between traditional

and cyber bullying. For example, traditional victims were often also electronic victims.

14

In addition, some Internet victims were engaged themselves in traditional bullying

behaviors such as physical bullying, teasing, rumor spreading, and exclusion. According

to Patchin and Hinduja (2006), cyberspace and life in the real world are often

inseparable; adolescents spend their days at school with the same friends they chat with

online at night. Thus there is no clear separation between the incidents that happen at

school during the day and the rumor spreading, name-calling, threats, or gossip that

circulate online.

Bullying Roles

Past research about bullying has focused primarily on the roles and behaviors of

bullies and victims. More recent studies have brought attention to another important

group - the bully-victims group (also known as aggressive victims). Preliminary studies

suggest that each group has its own unique characteristics that influence the behaviors of

its members as well as relationships within and between groups. Thus there is a need for

the current research to include all three groups (bully, victim, bully-victim) in order to

create a better understanding of the bullying phenomenon.

Characteristics of Bullies

Bullies use power and control to distress others (Craig et al., 2007). They may

have more positive attitude toward violence and may use it against peers, parents, and

teachers. Male bullies are likely to be physically stronger than males in general and they

15

have the need to dominate others while showing little empathy toward victims of bullying

(Olweus, 1993). Studies indicate that somewhere between 14% and 17% of adolescents

can be categorized as bullies (Boulton & Underwood, 1993; Holt & Espelage., 2007).

Even though bullies are less prosocial, they seem to enjoy high peer acceptance within

their own bully-like group (Craig et al. 2007; Perren & Hornung, 2005; Perren &

Alsaker, 2006) but experience lower perceived teacher and parent support (Demaray &

Malecki, 2003). Holt and Espelage (2007) found that bullies often receive stronger peer

support than victims or bully-victims, particularly if they affiliate with other bullies and

form a group that supports their bullying behaviors. In contrast, bullies who belong to a

group that does not approve the use of aggression experience more rejection and lower

levels of peer social support. Several other studies confirm that bullying behavior is

correlated with a high level of externalizing problems (Ivarsson, Broberg, Arvidson &

Gillberg, 2005; Menesini et al, 2009; Perren & Hornung, 2005) which results in higher

scores on delinquent and aggressive behaviors than victims and uninvolved adolescents

(Menesini et al.,2009). Olweus (1993) suggested that bullies have developed a certain

degree of hostility toward the environment and that they derive satisfaction from

inflicting injury on others.

Characteristics of Victims

Victims, on the other hand, do not condone the use of aggression. They are often

withdrawn and perceived as unable to defend themselves from the abuse of their peers

(Perren & Hornung, 2005). In a representative sample of U.S. adolescents (n=7,182),

16

Wang and colleagues (2009) found that many adolescents have been victimized by one or

more forms of bullying. Over a two month period, adolescents reported being bullied

physically (20.8%), verbally (53.6%), socially (51.4%) or electronically (13.6%).

Previous research has indicated that bullied individuals tend to be more submissive,

isolated, less sociable and cooperative, and have fewer leadership skills than non-victims

(Perren & Alsaker, 2006). They are less satisfied with their lives and feel less socially

supported by peers but more socially supported by teachers (Flaspohler et al., 2009;

Perren & Hornung, 2005). Victims are also typically less successful academically than

their non-bullied peers (Rothon et al., 2011).

Studies comparing victims, bullies and uninvolved adolescents indicate that

victims exhibit more internalizing symptoms such as withdrawal, somatic complaints,

anxiety or depression (Menesini et al., 2009; Perren & Hornung, 2005). According to

Menesini et al., stable victims (victims who have been victimized over time) report an

even greater degree of suffering than victims who have only been involved in bullying

incidents once or twice. In addition, as the duration of the bullying increases, the

victim‘s ability to stop the bullying seems to decrease and internalizing problems increase

(Due et al., 2005; Perren & Hornung, 2005).

It is unclear from the research how social support may reduce bullying or mitigate

its effects for victims. While Rothon et al. (2011) found that adolescents who have high

levels of peer social support are less likely to be bullied; Holt and Espelage (2007) claim

that high levels of peer social support do not help buffer victims against bullying.

However, research on traditional bullying indicates that being in the company of at least

17

one friend has been found to significantly decrease the likelihood of being victimized

(Hodges & Perry, 1999; Rothon et al., 2011). Associations with friends who can provide

protection or comfort against bullying is buffering, while having friends with low social

skills who are not capable of providing protection can contribute to internalizing

problems and victimization (Hodges & Perry, 1999; Pellegrini & Long, 2002). Further

studies are needed to determine the effectiveness of social support in preventing and

minimizing the effects of bullying. The present study sought to gain a better

understanding of how social support is used by adolescents involved in bullying.

Characteristics of Bully-Victims

Adolescents who engage in bullying and are bullied by others are called

aggressive victims or bully-victims (Perren & Hornung, 2005). Bully-victims often

demonstrate reactive aggression; they respond to provocations since they perceive hostile

intent in others. They are also more aggressive than bullies (Demaray & Malecki, 2003;

Perren & Assaker, 2006). According to several studies, bully-victims are a particularly

high-risk group (Demaray & Malecki, 2003; Holt & Espelage, 2007); they demonstrate

higher levels of criminal thinking and reactive aggression (Ragatz, Anderson, Fremouw

& Schwartz, 2011), problems in peer relations (O‘brennan, Bradshaw & Sawyer, 2009),

and the poorest psychological health and school attitudes in relation to bullies, victims, or

uninvolved students (Stein, Dukes &Warren, 2007) . These symptoms may lead them to

choose delinquent pathways that might result in maladjustment (Perren & Hornung,

2005). Menesini et al. (2009) reported that bully-victims exhibited higher levels of

18

externalizing and internalizing problems. This is because bully-victims tend to show a

bully-like profile for externalizing problems (e.g. aggressive and delinquent behavior) as

well as a victim-like profile for internalizing problems (e.g. anxiety, depression,

withdrawal). In Flaspohler et al.‘s study of bullying groups (2009), bully-victims

consistently fared the worst, reporting less life satisfaction and less social support from

teachers and peers than bullies, victims, or uninvolved students.

Social Support

Social support has been defined as ―information leading the subject to believe that

he is cared for and loved, esteemed, and a member of a network of mutual obligations‖

(Cobb, 1976, p. 300). Supportive interactions among people are found to be protective

against many life stresses (Cobb, 1976). However, many children who experience

bullying do not seek or share social support (McElearney et al., 2008). Even though

victims/ bully-victims place greater importance on social support than other groups, they

report lower levels of perceived social support (Demaray & Malecki, 2003). Victims also

perceive their coping strategies (e.g. self-defense, stand up to the bully, seek social

support) as mostly being ineffective in reducing bullying (Tenenbaum, Varjas, Meyers &

Parris, 2011). However, victims may tend to seek more social support in cases of direct

bullying where showing evidence is easier (e.g. physical bullying) rather than in indirect

bullying (e.g.relational bullying, psychological bullying, verbal bullying, social

exclusion) which may be more manipulative and harder to prove unless others have

19

witnessed the bullying (Kristensen & Smith ,2003). Smith and Shu (2000) found that

30% of victims tell no one about the bullying. In some cases, victims may fear being

made fun of or being labeled as a tattle-tale or mama‘s boy (Oliver & Candappa, 2007,)

while in other cases victims are afraid that involving an adult would upset the bully and

increase the bullying (Tenenbaum et al., 2011). Older victims who are developing a

greater sense of personal autonomy as they reach adolescence may try to solve bullying

issues on their own (Kristensen & Smith, 2003; Oliver & Candappa 2007).

A complex process of risk assessment is involved in the process of deciding

whether to tell others about bullying and who to tell. The adolescent needs to understand

the social dynamics that operate in their everyday school and family lives in order to

decide if telling is risky or helpful (Oliver et al., 2007). In addition, adolescents‘ social

support systems go through change, with closeness and intimacy with parents declining

in adolescence and friendships becoming more valuable, intimate, and supportive

(Furman & Buhrmester, 1992). These changes may influence adolescents‘ decisions

about whom to approach for support when bullying occurs.

Below the existing literature on use of parents, teachers and peers as social

support is reviewed. The literature about gender differences in social support and the

positive effects of social support are also presented.

Parents

Family functioning variables, such as social support, discipline, monitoring,

structure, and beliefs have a role in the exposure of the child to community violence

20

(Gorman-Smith, Henry, & Tolan, 2004; Lynch & Cicchetti, 2002; Proctor, 2006).

According to Hammack, Richards, Edlynn, and Roy (2004) variables such as, maternal

closeness and the time spent with family had a protective-stabilizing effect in the lives of

adolescents, while adolescents who felt less secure with their caregivers and reported

higher levels of separation anxiety and negative maternal behavior were associated with

more exposure to community violence (Lynch & Cicchetti ,2002). Similarly, Gorman-

Smith et al. (2004) found that youth from struggling families who were consistently

exposed to poor parenting practices and low levels of emotional cohesion were more

likely to be exposed to community violence, which was also related to later violence

perpetration. Familial social support can buffer the relation between violence exposure

and anxiety (Kliewer, Murrelle, Mejia, De G., & Angold, 2001) as well as weaken the

association between violent exposure and poor child outcomes (Proctor, 2006).

Families are a source of support that protects and buffers adolescents against the

risk of peer victimization (Rothon et al., 2011; Stadler, Feifel, Rohrmann, Vermeiren &

Poustka, 2010). Parental support may protect adolescents from all forms of bullying, such

as physical, verbal, relational, and cyber (Wang et al., 2009). For example, parents can

promote their children‘s social development by inviting friends over, role-playing social

situations, and getting involved in social organizations that promote the child‘s strengths.

They can also enhance their child‘s physical development by encouraging the child to

participate in individual sports, such as swimming, running, or karate (team sports might

increase social rejection)(Crothers & Kolbert, 2008). Smith, Twemlow, and Hoover

(1999) found that children who could not appreciate the harm they inflicted on others had

21

parents who did not spent time with them, read to them, or provided them with structured

and consistent environment. Relationship with parents affected the way bullies and

victims saw and experienced their lives.

When available, parental support helps buffer children from the negative

outcomes of bullying victimization and also promotes children‘s resilience to it (Bowes et

al., 2010).It is particularly effective in protecting peer-victimized girls (Stadler et al.,

2010) and reducing all adolescents‘ depression symptoms (Conners-Burrow, Johnson,

Whiteside-Mansell, Mckelrey & Gargus, 2009).

Unfortunately, students‘ willingness to share bullying experiences with parents

declines over time. In their research, Oliver et al. (2007) found that 78% of fifth graders

felt it was ‗quite easy‘ or ‗very easy‘ to share information about bullying with their

parents as compared to only 58% of eight graders. Even though children appreciate their

parents‘ support and guidance, they are wary of parents who are over protective. Such

parents may take an action that is against the child‘s wishes, which undermines the

child‘s autonomy and can result in a more stressful situation at school (Oliver et al.,

2007). Rothon et al. (2001) found that parental social support is most effective when it is

done in a moderate way and in conjunction with the child.

Conversely, other studies imply that parental social support is not highly effective

in deterring bullying. Holt and Espelage (2007) found that maternal social support does

not buffer against bullying since adolescents do not share bullying experiences with their

mothers or access support from them. This lack of effectiveness is particularly evident

with cyber bullying, where the fear of parents‘ restrictions deters youth from sharing their

22

online bullying experiences. In one study, 90% of adolescents reported not telling adults

about online aggression; the primary reason reported for not telling parents was the fear

that parents would restrict their use of electronic devices in order to prevent further

bullying incidents (Juvonen & Gross, 2008).

Teachers

In general, children tend not to share their experiences of bullying with adults,

and this is even more the case with their teachers. Children believe that telling teachers is

the riskiest course of action and this belief strengthens as children mature. In Oliver et

al.‘s study (2007), 51% of fifth graders reported they would inform their teachers about

bullying as compared to 31% of eight graders. There are several reasons why students

may not approach teachers for help. Victims are concerned that teachers may share the

information with others in a way that will trigger retaliation or hurt their reputation with

their peer. Adolescents especially value secrecy from friends about matters that occur

and to breech this confidence even to get help can get you labeled as a ―snitch‖ within the

peer group. Victims also fear that severe consequences to the bullies will only escalate

the bullying and present a further risk for the victims (Oliver et al., 2007; Tenenbaum et

al., 2011). However, it has been shown that teachers that respond effectively can get

students to seek their help. Once adolescents perceive teachers‘ ability to resolve a

conflict as effective they may choose to approach the teachers for support rather than

retaliate in aggression (Aceves, Hinshaw, Mendoza-Denton & Page-Gould, 2010).

23

Even though adolescents tend not to share bullying experiences with their

teachers, those who do experience lower incidences of emotional and behavioral

problems as compared to adolescents with low levels of teacher support (Yeung &

Leadbeater, 2010). Studies of victims‘ reports suggest that teachers are more helpful in

dealing with bullying than family or peers most likely because of their authority role

within the school (Smith & Shu, 2000). Other reasons teachers are good sources of

support for children being bullied: (1) Teachers are often the first, or only, adults on the

scene that can respond immediately and offer help; (2) Teachers provide an extrafamilial

source of support for adolescents who are seeking more autonomy from parents in

solving their problems (Yeung & Leadbeater, 2010).

Teachers use different practices to assist victims of bullying. In Stauffer, Heath,

Coyne and Ferrin (2012), teachers who were aware of cyber bullying tended to talk with

the cyber bully and the victim while some took away the cyber bully‘s privileges if the

bullying happened at school. A school in Kansas (Smith et al., 1999) with the highest

state retention rates offered its students a special program called ―Gentle Warriors‖ where

students learned martial arts techniques, coping skills, meditation, and self-control that

led to improved self-esteem and anger control. Crothers & Kolbert (2008) suggest that

teachers can encourage victims to establish social connections and focus more on the

effort rather than the result. They can instruct victims to use more confident body

language, positive thinking, and verbal strategies to deal with bullying. They may also

help victims‘ parents develop a perspective of their child as competent, able to deal with

bullying incidents, and able to develop friendships with guided assistance.

24

Peers

Victims perceive that telling peers of bullying experiences is a less risky option

than telling parents or teachers, and the likelihood of their doing so remains consistently

high as victims get older (Oliver et al., 2007). Oliver et al. reported that 68% of 5th

graders and 71% of 8th

graders find it ‗quite easy‘ or ‗very easy‘ to share bullying

experiences with friends, because they believe that the emotional support of a friendship

can help them cope better with bullying (Flaspohler et al., 2009; Oliver et al., 2007). It

may also be easier since peers are likely to have seen or be aware of the bullying already.

Peer social support can also help to reduce occurrences of bullying. Peer support

can protect adolescents from being selected as targets of bullies because adolescents with

more friends are less likely to be victims (Wang et al., 2009; Rothon et al., 2011).

Having the support of a best friend may also decrease victimization (Holt & Espelage,

2007) and buffer against the negative consequences of bullying (Woods, Done & Kalsi,

2009), such as social withdrawal, anxiety or depression (Menesini et al., 2009). However,

research suggests that there are gender effects related to peer support. In their study,

Kochenderfer-Ladd and Skinner (2002) found that peer support benefitted mainly

nonvictimized boys (and victimized girls), who received more support, sympathy, and

help from peers than did victimized boys. Thus, one purpose of the present study was to

examine the role of gender in peer support.

25

Gender

Females and males differ in the way they perceive and react to bullying. Males

seem to be more involved in direct bullying such as physical and verbal forms while

indirect bullying such as relational or social victimization is more common among

females (Craig et al., 2007; Wang et al., 2009). Females may be bullied by either females

or males, while males are bullied mainly by males (Smith & Shu, 2000). Some research

indicates that males are more likely to be cyber bullies and females are more likely to be

cyber victims (Mesch, 2009; Wang et al., 2009) while other research has shown no

significant differences in victim gender (Raskauskas, 2010; Smith et al., 2008).

Females are more likely to seek help from others (Hunter et al., 2004; Smith &

Shu, 2000) by telling a parent, sibling, school staff or another student (Craig et al., 2007).

Hunter et al. (2004) found that 86% of female victims tell someone about the

victimization as compared to 64% of male victims. Females were more likely to view

support as the best strategy of stopping the bullying, and sharing it with others helps them

feel better. According to Kochenderfer-Ladd and Skinner (2002) peer social support is

more effective for victimized females than for victimized males. Asking for a peer‘s help

seems to buffer victimized females from social problems, but seems to lead to a lower

peer preference for males. Therefore, males tend to choose more confrontational

strategies to stop the bullying, such as physical aggression, humor, revenge, distracting or

ignoring the bully, while females rely more on social support (Craig et al., 2007).

Females seem to be less affected by the stress of bullying (Rothon et al., 2011), most

likely due to their greater dependence on outside social support.

26

Positive Effects of Social support

Parents, peers, and teachers‘ social support can help decrease the negative effects

bullying may have on involved adolescents (Davidson & Demaray, 2007; Flaspohler et

al, 2009; Rothon et al, 2011; Yeung & Leadbeater, 2010). High levels of family social

support are important in promoting good mental health (Rothon et. al., 2011) and

resilience to bullying victimization (Bonanno & Hymel, 2010; Bowes et. al, 2010).

Family support can reduce the levels of adolescents‘ behavioral and emotional problems

(Yeung & Leadbeater, 2010) and protect victims from maladjustment (Stadler et. al.,

2010). It may also moderate the relationship between victimization and internalizing

distress for females (Davidson & Demaray, 2007) and protect all adolescents from

physical, verbal, relational, and cyber bullying (Wang et. al, 2009).

High levels of peers social support provide the strongest buffer against the

negative effects of bullying (Flaspohler et. al, 2009); it can protect victims from poor

academic achievement (Rothon et. al, 2011) and may reduce anxiety and depression

symptoms among bullies, victims, and bully-victims (Holt & Espelage , 2007). Close

friends were found to moderate the relationship between victimization and externalizing

distress from bullying for females (Davidson & Demaray, 2007) and inhibit peer

victimization for all youth (Ladd et al., 2011).

Teachers‘ social support was also found to buffer against the effects of

victimization (Flaspohler et al, 2009; Stadler et. al, 2010). Teachers‘ emotional support

was associated with lower levels of adolescents‘ behavioral and emotional problems

27

(Yeung & Leadbeater, 2010) and was found to moderate the relationship between

victimization and internalizing distress from bullying (Davidson & Demaray, 2007).

Even though the positive effects of social support have been studied vastly, there

seems to be little research regarding the strategies and choices adolescents make as they

seek help from these available social supports. This study therefore examined who

adolescents turn to (peers, teachers, or parents) when they encounter or witness

traditional or cyber bullying. Additionally, the study investigated whether adolescents‘

help seeking strategies were influenced by factors such as the adolescent‘s role in the

bullying, the type of bullying, or the gender of the participant.

Theoretical Framework

In order to understand some aspects of bullying better, the following section will

review Bandura‘s social cognitive theory that may help explain how social networks can

influence bullying behaviors and adolescents‘ perceptions of bullying and aggression.

According to Bandura‘s social cognitive model (Bandura, 1996 as cited in Card,

2011) experimental and observational learning in different contexts, such as home, peers

or school influences aggressive behavior on three cognitive components. The first

cognitive component is self-efficacy and the ability of the aggressor to enact aggression.

The second component is the outcome expectation and the belief that the aggression will

result in positive outcome for the aggressor. The third component is the outcome values

for the aggression and the perceived desirability that can be obtained via the use of

28

aggression. The outcomes of the model are subjective and depend upon the interaction

between the three components called reciprocal determinism.

Individuals are social beings who seek and appreciate another‘s

acknowledgement, comfort, and support. For example, children seek the feeling of

acceptance and pride of others such as parents and their development is greatly

influenced by them (Berger, 2006; Miller, 2011). According to Bandura, people learn

through cognitive processes where observed or learned behaviors are mentally

manipulating and interpreted in the context of the child‘s perceived ability and feedback

from those around them (Flaspohler et al., 2009; Miller, 2011; Oliver et al., 2007).

Adolescents are more influenced by modeling and feedback from peers than other age

groups. Thus, adolescents who are associated with peer aggression behavior may also

demonstrate aggression because they model the behavior of their aggressive friends

(Mouttapa, Valente, Gallaher, Rohrbach & Urger, 2004).

People who are perceived by adolescents as having high status, competence, and

power are more likely to be imitated (Miller, 2011). Children have the ability to abstract

general concept from observing specific behaviors. Once they reproduce the behaviors

they have seen and receive feedback they process the information and decide how to

behave in similar future instances accordingly (Miller, 2011). For example, the

reinforcement bullies may get from their surroundings serves as an incentive which

encourages them (or discourages them) to continue with the behavior if it provided them

with self-satisfaction, competence, or attention from others. Bandura believed that

viewing aggression, especially if it is not punished, leads to imitation that may cause/

29

increase further aggression (Miller, 2011) Mouttapa et al. (2004)(YEAR?) found that

aggressive adolescents had friends who were also aggressive while nonaggressive

adolescents were more associated with other nonaggressive adolescents and were

involved in less aggressive behaviors. This set up provides bullies and bully-victims with

both modeling and reinforcement for their aggressive behavior (Craig et al. 2007; Perren

& Alsaker, 2006; Perren & Hornung, 2005).

Gender can also influence the type of aggression adolescents decide to engage in.

Gender development is influenced from the interaction between interpersonal, behavioral,

and social influences that includes parents, peers, teachers, and other social institutions

(Miller, 2011). Even though biological factors are important, individuals are greatly

influenced by observational learning, self-regulation, and socialization (Miller, 2011).

This may explain why males tend to be more physically aggressive than females (Wang

et al., 2009) whereas females tend to engage more in indirect forms of bullying, such as

social exclusion or rumor spreading (Craig et al., 2007; Wang et al., 2009). Even though

females and males may be exposed to similar models in society and the media, the

behaviors they observe other females engaging in and being rewarded for will be indirect

aggression and for males direct aggression. The youth are more likely to take on and use

the behaviors modeled by the gender they identify with (Miller, 2011). Social inhibitions

also effect the amount of support adolescents get and perceive from their peers which

affects the way adolescents react to bullying. It is more socially acceptable for females to

be vulnerable in front of their friends than males, therefore females are more likely to

30

view support as a viable option in stopping the bullying, and sharing it with others helps

them feel better than males (Craig et al., 2007; Hunter et al., 2004; Smith & Shu, 2000).

According to Bandura, individuals‘ self-efficacy is connected to their perceptions

and interpretations of how they see themselves within their social context. It is their

belief in their own ability to succeed at a new task or in a new situation, a belief that is

related to their self-understanding, self-confidence, social reflection, and feelings on how

competent they are in dealing with their environment (Berger, 2006; Miller, 2011).

Femalesperceive their peers as supportive when it comes to victimization (Craig et al.,

2007; Hunter et al., 2004; Smith & Shu, 2000) which should make them rate their self-

efficacy in getting support from peers higher.

Adolescents with low self-efficacy tend to attribute their failure to low ability

which may deter them from trying again. High self- efficacy is essential for persisting in

the face of challenge (Miller, 2011). Adolescents who have high self-efficacy for

aggression tend to use aggression with their peers in order to reach their goals (Miller,

2011). Victims, on the other hand, do not have high self-efficacy in their ability to stop

the bullying; they perceive their coping strategies as mostly being ineffective in reducing

bullying which may deter them from using social support strategies (Tenenbaum et al.,

2011). Social self-efficacy can be affected by the duration of bullying; the longer the

abuse continues the more powerless and unable to defend themselves adolescents

perceive they are (Perren & Hornung, 2005). In addition, type of bullying also affects

adolescents social self-efficacy; adolescents tend to perceive social support with direct

bullying as more effective than with indirect types of bullying (e.g. relational bullying,

31

verbal bullying) since direct bullying is easier to prove (Kristensen & Smith ,2003) and

thus get others‘ support.

Besides self-efficacy, a person has an agency that influences his behavior,

thoughts, emotions, and one‘s course of development (Miller, 2011). Once an adolescent

has a peer self-efficacy, he will have the agency to approach a friend for social support in

case of bullying. According to Bandura, there are four core properties of human agency:

intentionality, forethought, self-reactiveness, and self-reflectiveness (Miller, 2011). First,

people form goals and plan to reach them. Then, thinking about future goals motivates

them to carry out their plans. They regulate themselves to achieve their goal in self-

reflectiveness. Finally, they reflect on their self-efficacy on achieving their goals and

adjust their actions if necessary. We can apply this model to social support efficacy; if the

goal of an adolescent is to achieve peers‘ acceptance and attention, bullying may be a

route to choose. To get maximum support, the bully may affiliate himself with other

bullies who encourage the abuse (Craig et al. 2007; Perren & Hornung, 2005; Perren &

Alsaker, 2006). The bully will repeat the abuse and even ‗improve‘ his techniques based

on the social cues he gets from other bullies and the victim himself. On the other hand,

Aceves et al. (2010) found that a victim whose goal is to stop the bullying may choose to

approach a teacher for social support if that teacher has proved to be affective in dealing

with similar situations in the past. The victim assess the teacher‘s social support and once

it seems to be affective he may get motivated to do so by regulating his behavior to

approach the teacher for support rather than retaliate in aggression.

32

Implications for the Present Study

This review has presented an overview of the types and roles of bullying, and the

various social supports adolescents may seek when they are involved in bullying.

Although the research shows that all forms of social support (parents, teachers, peers) can

help reduce life stress and buffer the risk of bullying victimization, the benefit degree of

social support may change due to factors of gender, age, or the source of the social

support. There continues to be a lack of research regarding which source of support

adolescents approach when they seek help once they encounter bullying.

The literature also suggests important differences in how adolescents perceive the

different options they have for receiving social support. Adolescents may perceive

telling peers of bullying experiences as a better and safer option than telling parents or

teachers (Oliver et al., 2007). There also appear to be gender differences in support

seeking. Female adolescents may view social support as the best strategy of stopping the

bullying (Hunter et al., 2004) while males may choose more confrontational strategies

(Craig et al., 2007). Further research is needed to examine social help seeking, its reasons

and effects on adolescents.

Considering the previous research, the overall aim of this study was to examine

which sources of social support adolescents seek when they are confronted with bullying

as well as their self-efficacy or perceived ability to elicit support when needed. In

addition, the research examined whether there were differences in help seeking

behaviors related to an adolescent‘s gender or to bullying role (victim, bully, bully-

33

victim, uninvolved). Since students today may be victims of either traditional or cyber

bullying, the researcher also sought to determine whether there were differences in help

seeking behavior related to the type of bullying experienced. An additional question of

interest was whether help seeking or giving was influenced by the individual‘s role in the

bullying incident. A better understanding of how adolescents seek and provide social

support will help schools and families prevent all forms of bullying and mitigate its

effects.

34

Chapter 3

METHODS

Design of the Study

This research was based on a secondary data analysis of 66 7th

and 8th

grade

students from a single junior high school in Northern California. Participants completed

two self-report surveys that provided information about their academic achievements,

traditional/ cyber bullying and victimization, and actual social support, as well as social

self-efficacy at and outside of school. This study used a correlational design to examine

relationships between variables with actual social support and social self-efficacy and see

if these relationships differ by groups, specifically in terms of gender differences, role in

bullying, and type of bullying.

Research Questions

There seems to be a lack in research that focuses on who adolescents turn to for

social support, their help seeking strategies and social self-efficacy. Therefore, the main

questions that were examined are:

1. Who do adolescent report utilizing for actual social support around

bullying and what is their self-efficacy for obtaining support?

35

2. Do differences in social support access or efficacy emerge by gender?

3. Do differences in social support emerge by role in the bullying (victim,

bully, bully-victim, uninvolved)?

4. Do differences in social support emerge by type of bullying/

victimization experienced (traditional/ cyber)?

5. Is there a correlation between perceived academic support and social

support efficacy?

In addition, prosocial behavior was examined in relation to role in bullying and

social self-efficacy.

Participants

All students in 7th and 8th

grades at a single middle school who had courses from

the teacher hosting the study were invited to participate (Approximately 150 students).

66 students completed the surveys which was a 44% participate rate. Student participants

were 12 to 14 years old (M=12.8, SD= 0.6); 72% studied in the 7th

grade while 25%

studied in the 8th

grade. 52% of the participants were female and 46% were male.

The school the sample was drawn from was middle-to-upper socioeconomic

status. 58% of students at the school have parents who have attended college and 32%

have a college degree. Only 52% of students qualified for free and reduced lunch. The

ethnic breakdown of the school was 28% Hispanic, 26% White, 24% African American,

and 22% Asian/Pacific Islander. Even though it was a public school, students had to pass

36

admission tests for enrollment since the school focused on technology and offered

advanced technological programs. When asked how they would consider their academic

performance at school, only 6% perceived their grades to be below average level while

82% self-reported getting Bs and above.

The present study was conducted with the pilot data from a larger research

project. It includes the data from students in 7th and 8th

grades at a single middle school

who had courses from the teacher hosting the study. In the present study, the researcher

conducted a secondary data analysis based on the work of my sponsor, Dr. Juliana

Raskauskas. This is an ongoing study visiting middle schools to collect data on bullying

and social cognitive factors over time. The pilot school is used in this study because it

was the only school from which complete data had been collected at the start of this

thesis.

Measure

Dr. Raskauskas‘ study employed a quantitative correlational survey design using

two self-report questionnaires (Appendix B). The surveys were drawn from existing

measures or scales. The first survey included items from five measures: The Children

Social Behavior Scale (Crick & Grotepeter, 1995), the Being Bullied Scale of Ladd and

Kochenderfer (1996), the Aggression Questionnaire ( Buss & Perry, 1992), the

Attributions about Bullying scale (Raskauskas, 2005), and The Center for Epidemiologic

Studies Depression Scale (CES-D; Radloff, 1977). In this survey, some questions were

37

about rumor-spreading, exclusion, hitting, pushing or name calling others, while other

questions focused on offering help or caring for peers. Students also chose which

individuals they reached for help and how often they bullied or were bullied.

The second survey included items from the following measures: the Adolescent

Egocentrism Scale (Enright, Lapsley, & Shukla, 1979), the Children‘s Self-Efficacy

Scale (Bandura, 2006), and the Gray Scale (1969) which examined cognitive reasoning of

youth aged 6-18. In this survey, some of the questions were about who the participants

turned to for help and how confident, supportive, friendly, or self-conscious they believed

they were. In addition, the second survey included four hypothetical items that assessed

passive-aggression (e.g. ―What types of rumors do people usually start at your school?‖,

―Why would someone do this?‖, ―How would that make you feel?‖, ―What would you do

about it?‖).

The participants also reported demographic information related to their grade

level, gender, academic performance, absenteeism, and technology access at the

beginning of each survey. To enhance confidentiality participants used a code rather than

their names. The questions/data sources used in the current study are described in more

detail in the next section.

Data Sources and Instruments

Social Support Actual. Items were added to the bullying measures asking

students if they had ever accessed social support when being picked on. Items included

four questions about accessing help from a teacher, parents, classmates or best friends.

38

These items, which had ―Yes‖ or ―No‖ answers, were taken from the Ladd and

Kochenderfer scale (1996) and were used to examine which social sources (e.g. parents,

teachers, classmates, best friends) participants used when they were exposed to bullying.

Social Self-Efficacy. The researcher used four items to examine participants‘

social self- efficacy from adults or peers in relation to social problems and schoolwork.

The items were taken from Bandura‘s Children‘s Self-Efficacy Scale (2006) and

examined the degree of confidence participants had to (1) Get teachers to help when they

got stuck on schoolwork; (2) Get another student to help when they got stuck on

schoolwork; (3) Get adults to help when they had social problems; (4) Get a friend to

help when they had social problems. The answers where rated in a 0 (―Cannot do it at

all‖) to a 100 (―Highly certain I can do it‖) scale and were used to examine if actual

social support correlated with social support efficacy and whether efficacy in getting help

on schoolwork correlated with efficacy in getting social support from adults or peers.

Bullying and Victimization. This study used only the questions that related

directly to the research. In order to examine aggression The Children‘s Social Behavior

Scale of Crick and Grotpeter (1995) was divided into three subscales. The mean of five

items was used to create the relational aggression subscale. ―Some kids tell lies about a

classmate so that the other kids won‘t like the classmate anymore. How often do you do

this?‖ is an example of a relational aggression item. The physical aggression subscale

was computed by using the mean of two items, for example: ―Some kids hit other kids at

school. How often do you do this? ―Verbal aggression included one item: ―Some kids

yell at others and call them mean names. How often do you do this? ―Survey A also

39

included a cyber-bullying subscale that used the mean of three items, for instance: ―Some

kids post mean things about others in chatrooms or on group sites like MySpace or

Facebook. How often do you do this? ―Participants rated their answers on a Likert scale:

Never (1), Almost Never (2), Sometimes (3), Almost All the Time (4), and All the Time

(5).

The researcher also examined four types of victimization. The physical

victimization subscale was computed by taking the mean of two items, for instance:

―Since January how often have you been pushed around or hit at school?‖ The relational

victimization subscale was also computed by taking the mean of two items. An example

for such an item is: ―Since January how often have kids said mean things about you to

other kids behind your back?‖ The researcher used one item to examine verbal

victimization: ―Since January how often have kids said mean things to you at school?‖

Three items were used to compute the cyber victimization subscale, for example: ―Since

January how often have you been bullied in chatrooms or group sited like MySpace or

Facebook?‖ Participants rated their answers in a Likert scale: Not at All (1), Only Once

(2), 2 or 3 Times (3), Once a Week (4), and More than Once a Week (5).

In order to examine role in bullying in relation to social support, the researcher

created new variables: bully, victim, bully-victim, and uninvolved. First, the researcher

examined the reliability among the bully scale (M =.18, SD = .39, = .74) and the victim

scale (M =.76, SD=.84, =.88). The victim scale was composed of 8 items that included

physical, verbal, relational, and cyber victimization (Appendix B). Answers included a 5-

option Likert scale: (1) Not At All, (2) Only Once, (3) 2 or 3 Times, (4) Once a Week, (5)

40

More Than Once a Week. Participants who were considered ‗victims‘ were the ones who

chose options 3, 4, and 5. The bully scale was composed of 11 items about physical,

relational, verbal, and cyber bullying (Appendix B). Answers included a Likert scale of

(1) Never, (2) Almost Never, (3) Sometimes, (4) Almost All the Time, (5) All the Time.

‗Bullies‘ were the ones who chose options 3, 4, and 5. ‗Uninvolved‘ were the ones who

chose options 1 and 2. ‗Bully-victims‘ were the participants who were both ‗bullies‘ and

‗victims‘. A ‗Role in Bullying‘ variable was composed and included the 4 different roles

(Table 1).

Table 1

Role in Bullying

Role Percentage n (Out of66)

Uninvolved 65.2 43

Bully 10.6 7

Victim 16.7 11

Bully-victim 7.6 5

Procedures

Data were collected in three steps over a three-week period. After permission

from the school district was obtained, researchers visited the classrooms for the first time

41

and gave a 5- minute presentation about bullying and its effects. Consent forms

(Appendix A) were sent home with students to be signed by their parents as a condition

for participation in the study. Confidentiality and the right not to participate were

explained at each visit. The researchers returned to administer the first survey a week

later and the second survey a week after that (Appendix B). Out of the 150 who were

invited to participate, 70 consent letters were returned and 66 parents/ guardians allowed

their children to participate. Out of the 66 who had permission to participate, 64 were

present the day of data collection, signed the assent form (Appendix C) and participated

in the study.

The classroom teacher was present in the classroom while the two surveys were

administered by the researchers. It took the students approximately 20-30 minutes to

complete each survey. The students who did not wish to participate in the research were

asked to move to one side of the classroom and worked individually on a classroom

assignment, while the students who took the survey were seated in the two to three right

rows of the classroom. Students who handed in the survey got a ‗glow-in-the-dark‘

silicone bracelet with the words ―Safe Schools for All‖ printed on it.

42

Chapter 4

RESULTS

In this study, the researcher examined who adolescents turned to when they

experienced bully victimization and whether their choice of support differed by type of

bullying (traditional or cyber), role in the bullying (bully, victim, bully-victim,

uninvolved) or gender of the victim and/or the aggressor. The choice of support refers to

actual support (Table 2) and self-efficacy support (Table 3).The researcher presents the

results of the survey in this chapter, using descriptive and inferential statistics.

Table 2

Access of Actual Support (N=59)

______________________________________________________________________

Actual Support of Percentage M SD

________________________________________________________________________

Parents 27.9 .44 .50

Teachers 16.2 .26 .45

Peers 17.6 .29 .46

Best friends 41.2 .65 .48

43

Table 3

Social and Academic Percentage of Participants Reporting High* Self-Efficacy (N=59)

Self-Efficacy Items Percentage M SD

Teachers‘ Schoolwork 26.5 66.75 29.73

Peers‘ Schoolwork 20.6 64.63 31.25

Adults‘ Social Support 14.7 48.02 35.62

Peers‘ Social Support 17.6 59.81 33.69

Note. * High Self-efficacy is defined as score of 80 or greater on a 100 scale.

Gender Comparisons

In order to examine gender and actual social support of teachers, parents, and

peers a chi-square test was conducted to see if the distribution of use of social support by

gender differed than expected by chance. Participants chose ‗yes‘ or ‗no‘ to indicate if

they approached one of the sources. No significance was found between gender and

asking teachers, parents, or classmates for social support (Table 4). However, a

significance was found between gender and asking a best friend for help, χ² (1) = 4.72, p

= 0.3. More girls asked for help from their best friends than would boys (19 girls vs. 9

boys).

44

Table 4

Gender and Actual Social Support

Teachers Parents Classmates Best Friends

Male – Yes (n) 6 5 6 9

Female – Yes (n) 5 10 6 19

χ² .83 .42 .04 4.72*

Note *p<.05

The researcher used an independent t-test to examine whether genders differed on

social self-efficacy. On a scale of 0-100 participants rated whether they would approach

adults or friends when they needed help with social problems. There was a significance

difference between female and male and adults‘ social self-efficacy, t (57) = 2.11, p =

.04, d= -.56 (Table 5). Findings indicate that females reported significantly more efficacy

for getting help from adults than males. No significant differences were found for gender

and peers‘ social support efficacy.

45

Table 5

Gender and Social Self-Efficacy - Adult

Adults

n M SD t p d

Females 33 40.00 34.19 2.11 .04 -.55

Males 26 59.27 35.35

Types of Bullying

Traditional and Cyber Victimization and Actual support

Conducting a t-test, no significance was found between traditional or cyber

victimization and approaching teachers, parents, and classmates for support. However, a

statistical significance was found between cyber victimization and approaching best

friends for support, t (31) = -4.72, p = .00, d = .41. The researcher used a second t-test to

examine which of the three items of cyber victimization approached significance in

relation to approaching best friends for social support. A significant relationship was

found for adolescents who were bullied in chat rooms or group sites like MySpace or

Facebook and asking best friends for social support, t(41)= -4.87, p = .00, d = .39 (See

Table 6 for mean and standard deviation) . However, no significance was found for those

who were bullied by text-messages, offensive pictures, blogs, or websites.

46

Table 6

Cyber Bullying and Best Friends’ Actual Social Support

________________________________________________________________________

Best Friends‘ Support n M SD t p d

Cyber Victimization No 15 .04 .17 -1.10 .28 -0.67

Scale – Total

Yes 28 .38 .84

Adolescents Bullied No 15 .07 .26 -1.54 .13 .22

In Chat rooms – Item

Yes 28 .54 1.20

Traditional and Cyber Victimization and Perceived Social Support

There was a correlation between approaching friends and adults for social

support, r(60) = .36, p < .01. There was also a correlation between adolescents who were

bullied online by others creating offensive webpages, blogs, or posting pictures on

themand approaching friends for social support, r (58) = .27, p < .05 (See Table 7 for

correlation values).

47

Table 7

Correlational Table Between Adults and Friends’ Social Support and Online Bullying

1 2 3

1. Adults‘ Support 1.00

2. Friends‘ Support .36** 1.00

3. Victims of Offensive -.04 .27* 1.00

Online Pictures, Websites

and blogs.

Note *p < .05, ** p < .01

Role in Bullying

Actual Social Support

In order to examine role in bullying in relation to social support, the researcher

created 4 new variables: bully, victim, bully-victim, and uninvolved. First, the researcher

examined the reliability among the bully scale (M = .18, SD = .39, α = .74) and the victim

scale (M = .76, SD = .84, α = .88). The victim scale was composed of 8 items that

included physical, verbal, relational, and cyber victimization (Appendix B). Answers

included a 5-option Likert scale: (1) Not At All, (2) Only Once, (3) 2 or 3 Times, (4)

Once a Week, (5) More Than Once a Week. Participants who were considered ‗victims‘

were the ones who chose options 3 or more in accordance with findings from Solberg and

48

Olweus (2003) that this cutoff differentiates transient from ongoing victims. The bully

scale was composed of 11 items about physical, relational, verbal, and cyber bullying

(Appendix B). Answers included a Likert scale of (1) Never, (2) Almost Never, (3)

Sometimes, (4) Almost All the Time, (5) All the Time. ‗Bullies‘ were the ones who chose

options 3, 4, and 5. ‗Uninvolved‘ were the ones who chose options 1 and 2. ‗Bully-

victims‘ were the participants who were both ‗bullies‘ and ‗victims‘. A ‗Role in Bullying‘

variable was composed and included the 4 different roles.

The researcher used chi-square to examine the role in bullying in relation to actual

social support and gender. There was no significant difference between roles of bullying,

gender, and approaching teachers, χ² (3) = .02, p = 1, parents, χ² (3) = 5.48, p = .14,

classmates, χ² (3) = .72, p = 1, or best friends, χ² (3) = .69, p = .88 for social support (See

Table 8).

49

Table 8

Role in Bullying and Actual Social Support (N=68)

Teachers Parents Classmates Best Friends

(n = 43) (n = 42) (n = 43) (n = 42)

Approached M F M F M F M F

For Support

Bully 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 2

Victim 2 1 3 4 1 2 3 5

Bully-Victim 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 2

Uninvolved 3 3 5 6 3 4 4 10

χ2 .83 .42 .04 4.72*

Note. M = Males. F = Females *p < .05.

Social Self-Efficacy

The researcher used ANOVA to examine the role in bullying in relation to social

self-efficacy. On a scale of 0-100 bullies, victims, bully-victims, and uninvolved rated

whether they would approach adults or friends when they needed social support. The one

way ANOVA yielded no significant differences between roles in bullying in regard to

adults‘ social self-efficacy, F(3,55) = .678, p = .57. No significant difference was found

between roles in bullying and friends‘ social self-efficacy, F(3,54) = .275, p = .84. The

means and standard deviations are presented in Table 9.

50

Table 9

Role in Bullying and Social Self-Efficacy

Role Adults (N=58) Friends (N= 57)

M SD M SD

Noninvolved 47.03 34.84 58.69 32.67

Bully 42.00 39.62 58.00 24.90

Victim 63.33 38.08 68.89 40.45

Bully-Victim 40.00 39.37 66.00 35.78

Prosocial Behavior and Role in Bullying

It was also an interest to look at prosocial support in relation to roles in bullying.

One way ANOVA was used to examine which role in bullying (e.g. bully, victim, bully-

victim, uninvolved) was associated with higher levels of prosocial behavior. A prosocial

behavior scale (M = 3.77, SD = 0.75, = 0.79) was composed of 4 questions (e.g. ―Some

kids try to cheer up other kids who feel upset or sad. How often do you do this?‖, ―Some

kids help out other kids when they need it. How often do you do this?‖). Participants

rated their answers in a Likert scale of (1) Never, (2) Almost Never, (3) Sometimes, (4)

Almost All the Time, (5) All the Time. No significance was found between roles in

bullying and prosocial support, F(3,62) = 1.64, p = .19.

51

Efficacy and Actual Social Support

The researcher used t-tests to examine actual social support and social self-

efficacy. A statistical significance was found between approaching parents for social

support and adult and peer social self-efficacy, t(34) = -2.29, p = .04 d = .84. See Table

10 for means and standard deviations.

Table 10

Actual Parents’ Social Support and Social Self-Efficacy

________________________________________________________________________

Actual Parents‘ Social Support n M SD t p d

Adults‘ No 23 40.00 36.43 -2.20 .04 -.75

Social Self-Efficacy

Yes 15 64.67 29.49

Friends‘ No 23 70.43 28.84 1.48 .15 .49

Social Self-Efficacy Yes 15 55.33 33.35

Prosocial Behavior and Social Support Efficacy

It was also an interest to examine prosocial behavior in relation to social self-

efficacy. There was a correlation between friends‘ social self-efficacy and adults‘ social

self-efficacy, r(59) = .36, p = .01. Another correlation was found between prosocial

behavior and friends‘ social self-efficacy, r(58) = .31, p = .02 (see Table 11 for

correlation matrix).

52

Table 11

Prosocial Behavior and Adults and Peers’ Social Self-Efficacy

1 2 3

1. Prosocial Behavior. 1

2. Adults‘ -.03 1

Social Self-Efficacy

3. Peers‘ .31* .36** 1

Social Self-Efficacy

Note. * p < .05, **p < .01

Social and Academic Support

Perceived Academic Support and Social Support Efficacy

In order to examine if perceived academic support is a proxy for social efficacy a

correlation was used. The researcher correlated between the degree of confidence in

asking teachers for academic support (―Get teachers to help me when I get stuck on

schoolwork‖) and the degree of confidence in asking adults for social support (― Get

adults to help me when I have social problems‖). Participants rated their answers in a

scale of 0 to 100 (0- cannot do it at all; 50- moderately sure can do it; 100- highly certain

I can do it). There was a statistical significance in perceived academic support and social

support from adults, r (60) = .51, p < 0.01. The researcher also examined the correlation

between perceived academic support of peers (―Get another student to help me when I am

stuck on schoolwork‖) and perceived social support of peers (―Get a friend to help me

53

when I have social problems‖). Participants chose their answers on a scale of 0 to 100.

Statistical correlation was found between perceived academic support and perceived

social support of peers, r (58) = .65, p < 0.01. See Table 12 for correlation values.

Table 12

Perceived Academic Support and Social Self-Efficacy

1 2 3 4

1. Teachers‘ Academic Support. 1

2. Students‘ Academic Support. .45** 1

3. Adults‘ Social Self-Efficacy. .51** .33* 1

4. Friends‘ Social Self-Efficacy. .31* .65** .36** 1

Note. * p <.05, ** p < .01.

54

Chapter 5

DISCUSSION

Bullying is a significant issue in the lives of many school students (McElearney et

al., 2008). Researchers agree that bullying is associated with negative consequences for

all involved adolescents (Bowes et al., 2010; Due et al., 2005; Raskauskas & Stoltz,

2007). Although social support can help reduce the negative impacts bullying may have

on adolescents (Rothon et al., 2011; Wang et al., 2009; Yeung &Leadbeater, 2010), many

children who experience bullying do not share this information with or seek help from

others (Juvonen & Gross, 2008; Matsunaga, 2009; McElearney et al, 2008; Oliver &

Candappa, 2007). The present study examined who adolescents turned to when they

experienced bully victimization and whether their choice of support differed by type of

bullying (traditional or cyber), role in the bullying (bully, victim, bully-victim,

uninvolved) or gender of the victim and /or aggressor.

Key Findings

Gender and Social Support

In the current study, no statistical difference was found between gender and

asking teachers, parents, or classmates for actual social support. On the one hand, these

findings were inconsistent with other findings in the field that indicated that females

tended to rely more on social support and seek more help from teachers, parents, siblings,

55

or peers than males (Craig et al, 2007; Hunter et al., 2004; Smith & Shu, 2000). On the

other hand, other studies suggested that older females do not approach their parents for

support since they feel too mature to do so (Stadler et al., 2010). Although gender and

actual social support was statistically insignificant, females and adults‘ social support

efficacy was found to be significant. This may indicate that even though girls do not

approach adults for social support, they are still confident in the help they would get from

adults in times of need. According to Hunter et al. (2004), females were more likely to

view support as the best strategy of stopping the bullying, and sharing it with others

helped them feel better. These findings may be due in part to the small sample size and

small number of students who reported experiencing recent bully victimization.

A statistical significance was also found between gender and asking a best friend

for help which is consistent with expectations. In the current study, 19 females compared

to 9 males asked their best friends for social support. Kochenderfer-Ladd and Skinner

(2002) found that peer social support was more effective for victimized females than for

victimized males since males who were in a need for social support were perceived by

their peers as somehow socially incompetent. Asking for a peer‘s help seems to buffer

victimized females from social problems, but seems to lead to a lower peer preference for

males. Additional research is needed on males coping strategies and which strategies

could be protective for them.

56

Types of Bullying and Social Support

In the present research, differences were not found between traditional

victimization and actual social support. While these results are consistent with findings of

other studies that found that victims do not tend to approach others for social support due

the stigma of being a victim (Oliver & Candappa, 2007) the low number of victimized

students makes this more a measure of overall willingness to access support. It may also

be related to victims‘s fear of bullies‘ retaliations (Tenenbaum et al., 2011). Victims tend

to perceive their coping strategies as mostly being ineffective which may have also

influenced these findings (Tenenbaum, Varjas, Meyers & Parris, 2011).

Developmentally adolescents often like to solve problems independently which may also

related to low reports of accessing social support (Kristensen & Smith, 2003; Oliver &

Candappa 2007;).

On the other hand, willingness to approach a best friend for support was related

to cyber victimization. However, adolescents reported differences based on the different

types of cyber bulling they were exposed to. While no relationships were found for those

who were bullied by text-messages, offensive pictures, blogs, or websites, approaching

significance was found for adolescents who were bullied in chat rooms and group sites

like MySpace or Facebook and asking best friends for social support. These findings are

consistent with other research suggesting that most adolescents do not tell adults about

online aggression due to their fear that parents would restrict their use of electronic

devices in order to prevent further bullying incidents (Juvonen & Gross, 2008). Since

intimacy with parents declines during adolescence, friendships become more valuable

57

and peer support may seem to be the better choice for cyber victims (Furman &

Buhrmester, 1992; Juvonen & Gross, 2008; Ladd et al., 2011).

Roles in Bullying and Social Support

There was no significant difference between roles of bullying and approaching

teachers, parents, classmates, or best friends for actual social support or for perceived

social support. Based on prior research it was expected that bullies may often receive

stronger peer support than victims or bully-victims, particularly if they affiliate with other

bullies and form a group that supports their bullying behaviors (Holt & Espelage, 2007).

The inconsistency of this study‘s findings with others may be due to the small sample

size or other sample characteristics. For example, since the school that participated in

this study was composed of high middle class students that took part in advanced

academic programs, bullies‘ aggressive behavior might have not been approved by other

students, which could have resulted in lower levels of peer social support for these bullies

(Holt & Espelage, 2007). Nevertheless, among the groups associated with bullying,

uninvolved individuals have been found to receive the most social support both in and

outside school. According to Holt and Espelage (2007), uninvolved adolescents receive

greater social support both from their mothers and their friends as compared to victims

and bully-victims. These results are in contrast to the results of the present study.

58

Social and Academic Support

Statistical correlations found between perceived academic support and perceived

social support both from peers and adults, while not central to the current investigation,

was noteworthy. Adolescents who perceive adults can help them with schoolwork also

perceive that adults can help them with social problems. In addition, adolescents who

believe they can approach their peers for academic support also believe they can

approach those friends for social support. Wang, Iannotti and Luk (2011) found that

perceived classmate support was positively associated with academic adjustment and

negatively associated with victimization for both genders. More research on the

correlation between social support and academic support is needed in order to understand

how educators can utilize academic support to encourage social support.

Limitations and Future Research

First, the present study employed quantitative methods which allowed the

researcher to examine a large number of participants in a relatively short period of time.

However, the questionnaires that were used did not provide the kind of in depth

understanding of participants‘ social support, many analyses were based on a single item

which can reduce the reliability of self-report data. In addition, the researcher used

existing data which cannot be changed to include follow-up questions the researcher

would have asked if these research questions were the purpose for the larger study, this

can be a potential threat to validity. A future study should include direct items and a

59

larger sample that will provide more power allowing for the use of more advanced

research methods (e.g. MANOVA). Instruments comprised of survey and interview/

open-ended questions specific to accessed and perceived social support could increase

internal validity.

Second, since the study was based on a correlational causal conclusions cannot be

drawn (Wang et al, 2009). Therefore, adding a longitudinal studies that will examine

bullying and social support can shade more light on how adolescents‘ perspectives of

social support change through time and which strategies work better for which age level.

Third, since data collection was based on a self-report survey of the adolescent

students, the honesty of their answers is in question. Some adolescents may underrate or

underreport their experiences as victims or as bullies to avoid the stigma that is associated

with it (Raskauskas & Stoltz, 2007; Yeung & Leadbeater, 2010). The adolescents‘

perceived social support can also be affected by the current relationship status they have

with their parents or teachers (Yeung & Leadbeater, 2010). The credibility of their use of

social support may be limited by the fact that no corroborating data were collected from

either parents or teachers. Thus, in order to get more objective results and

generalizability, there is a need to add peers, teachers, and parents‘ reports.

Fourth, there seems to be inconsistency in the field regarding how many incidents

of victimization a victim needs to experience in order to be considered a victim, a bully,

or a bully-victim. While in other studies a victim is someone who has been victimized

only once (Kraft & Wang, 2009), in the current study a victim is someone who has

experienced victimization at least twice. Inconsistency with other research effects

60

generalizability of results. ―Repeated‖ is a vague part of the definition. Experts in the

field need to come up with a consistent definition for the different roles in the bullying

scene and with a uniformed way to measure those roles.

Finally, the use of a non-representative convenience sample of participants may

also affect generalizability of results. Since the sample was composed of volunteers

recruited from only one public school with unique enrollment requirements, there may be

a threat to external validity and results cannot be generalized to other schools or the rest

of the adolescent population.

61

APPENDICES

62

APPENDIX A

63

APPENDIX A

Parents‘ Consent Form

Taken from Dr. Raskauskas‘ Research (2011-2012)

Child Development Department

Sacramento State University

Covert Aggression in Middle Schools

PARENT INFORMATION SHEET FOR CHILD PARTICIPATION

Researcher Introduction My name is Dr. Juliana Raskauskas and I am an Assistant Professor of Child

Development at Sacramento State University’s College of Education. I am interested in bullying in schools, specifically why students use covert forms of aggression such as gossip spreading, exclusion, and cyber bullying. The purpose of this research is to examine different factors that may better explain the use of covert forms of bullying and their related effects. All of the students in your child’s class are being invited to participate in this research.

Importance of the Research Understanding why students use covert bullying and how it affects them may

help in the formation of bullying prevention programs. This research will also look at how covert bullying and the related factors are associated with grades and depressive symptoms. It is important that participants represent all students’ experiences and include those who have been bullied, those who bully others, and those who have not been bullied.

Participant Recruitment All middle schools in you school district are being invited to participate. All the

classes taught by two 7th and 8th grade teachers (including your students’ class) are being asked to do this survey. Approximately 250-300 students at each school are eligible.

64

Project Procedures If your child takes part in this study, he or she will be asked to complete two

surveys one week apart. These surveys are confidential and ask about their experiences with bullying at school, the quality of relationships at school, the ways they think about bullying, how others view them, their confidence in dealing with peers, and depressive symptoms. A copy of the survey is available in the school office for you to review.

To examine the relationship of bullying to academic performance your child’s

GPA for each quarter in the 2010-2011 school year and overall GPA be obtained from the school district office and matched with their scores on the survey.

An ID number provided by the district will be used to obtain GPA but will not be

associated with the surveys they complete. The GPA information and survey responses will be entered into a password protected data file on my office computer for analysis and surveys will be stored in a filing cabinet at the University. Students will be assigned identification (ID) numbers and their scores will not be associated with their name or district ID in the data file. After five years the surveys will be destroyed.

This research will be used for scholarly journal articles and presentations;

however no child or school will be identifiable. Scores will be reported as a group and not individually.

Participant Involvement As stated above, if your child takes part in this research they will be asked to

complete two confidential surveys. This will take approximately 20 minutes to complete. Your child will complete the questionnaire in their classroom with the researcher, while students who do not participate will work with the classroom teacher on another task.

Risks and Benefits Some children are uncomfortable or distressed by answering questions about

bullying, especially if in a classroom that includes the child bullying them. Questions ask about bullying incidents however no questions will ask them to name specific bullies. Children have the right to skip any questions they do not want to answer or to stop at any time. Your child will be reminded of the school counseling services and school procedures for reporting bullying prior to the survey in case they wish to use these resources. Students can also call the Teen Line Hotline at (800) 852-8336 if they wish to speak to someone not affiliated with their school.

You or your child will not receive any direct compensation for participating in

this study. However, a summary of results will be made available to participating schools

65

and parents. Findings will be pooled across schools and no individual classrooms or

students will be indentified. If you would like to receive a copy of the summary of

results please provide your email or mailing address below.

Participant Rights Participation is completely voluntary; you and your child are under no obligation

to participate. Refusal to participate will not disadvantage your student in any way. Your child has the right to decide not to answer any particular question and to stop the survey at any time.

If you have any questions about this research, you may contact Dr. Juliana

Raskauskas at (916) 278-7029 or by e-mail at jraskauskas@csus.edu.

Your child‘s participation in this research is entirely voluntary. Your signature

below indicates that you have read this consent form and agree to allow your child to

participate.

YES I give permission for my child, _____________________________ to

complete the survey. I also authorize________ School District to release

information on my child‘s GPA to researchers at Sacramento State University.

________________________________ ____________________

Signature of Parent/Guardian Date

NO, I do not give permission for my child to participate in this study.

If you would like to receive a copy of the summary of findings at the conclusion

of this research, please provide your mailing or email address below:

________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________

66

APPENDIX B

67

APPENDIX B

Students‘ Self-Report Questionnaires

Taken form Dr. Raskauskas‘ Research (2011-2012)

Child Development Department

Sacramento State University

Student ID (Will be provided)_________________________________________

School Name________________________________________________________

Student Questionnaire (Survey A)

Thank you for agreeing to complete this survey. Please choose the best response to each question below. The items on this survey will ask about your relationships at school, bullying at school, and your attitudes to school.

Before we start please tell us a little about you:

What grade are you in school (Circle one): 7 8

What is your gender (Circle one): Boy Girl

How old are you now:_______ years old

How are you doing in school? Overall, would you consider your grades… □ Above Average □ Average □ Below average

What grades do you usually get in school? □ Mostly As □ Mostly As and Bs □ Mostly Bs □ Mostly Bs and Cs □ Mostly Cs □ Mostly Cs and Ds □ Mostly Ds □ Mostly Ds and Fs □ Mostly Fs

In the past couple of months (since winter break) how many times have you been absent from school? _______

68

In the past couple of months (since winter break) how many times have you had to leave school early because you were sick? ________

Which of the following do you use? (check all that apply) □ Computer with email □ Social Website (Myspace, Facebook, Classmate) □ Cell phone with text-messaging capabilities □ Cell phone with picture taking capabilities □ Cell phone with video recording capabilities □ Cell phone with Internet capabilities

Things I Do At School

We are interested in how kids get along with one another. Please think about your relationship with other kids and how often you do these things while you’re with them.

1. Some kids tell lies about a classmate so that the other kids won’t like the classmate anymore. How often do you do this?

Never

1 Almost Never

2 Sometimes

3 Almost All The Time

4 All The Time

5

2. Some kids try to keep certain people from being in their group when it is time to play or do an activity. How often do you do this?

Never

1 Almost Never

2 Sometimes

3 Almost All The Time

4 All The Time

5

3. Some kids try to cheer up other kids who feel upset or sad. How often do you do this?

Never

1 Almost Never

2 Sometimes

3 All The Time

4 All The Time

5

4. When they are mad at someone, some kids get back at the person by not letting the person be in their group anymore. How often do you do this?

Never

1 Almost Never

2 Sometimes

3 Almost All The Time

4 All The Time

5

5. Some kids hit other kids at school. How often do you do this?

69

Never

1 Almost Never

2 Sometimes

3 Almost All The Time

4 All The Time

5

6. Some kids let others know that they care about them. How often do you do this?

Never

1 Almost Never

2 Sometimes

3 Almost All The Time

4 All The Time

5

7. Some kids help out other kids when they need it. How often do you do this?

Never

1 Almost Never

2 Sometimes

3 Almost All The Time

4 All The Time

5

8. Some kids yell at others and call them mean names. How often do you do this?

Never

1 Almost Never

2 Sometimes

3 Almost All The Time

4 All The Time

5

9. Some kids push and shove other kids at school. How often do you do this?

Never

1 Almost Never

2 Sometimes

3 Almost All The Time

4 All The Time

5

10. Some kids tell their friends that they will stop liking them unless the friends do what they say. How often do you tell friends this?

Never

1 Almost Never

2 Sometimes

3 Almost All The Time

4 All The Time

5

11. Some kids have a lot of friends in their class. How often do you have a lot of friends in your class?

Never

1 Almost Never

2 Sometimes

3 Almost All The Time

4 All The Time

5

12. Some kids try to keep others from liking a classmate by saying mean things about the classmate. How often do you do this?

Never

1 Almost Never

2 Sometimes

3 Almost All The Time

4 All The Time

5

13. Some kids wish that they had more friends at school. How often do you feel this way?

Never

1 Almost Never

2 Sometimes

3 Almost All The Time

4 All The Time

5

70

14. Some kids say or do nice things for other kids. How often do you do this?

Never

1 Almost Never

2 Sometimes

3 Almost All The Time

4 All The Time

5

15. Some kids post mean things about others in chatrooms or on group sites like MySpace or Facebook? How often do you do this?

Never

1 Almost Never

2 Sometimes

3 Almost All The Time

4 All The Time

5

16. Some kids send others mean text-messages to make them feel bad. How often do you do this?

Never

1 Almost Never

2 Sometimes

3 Almost All The Time

4 All The Time

5

17. Some kids are mean to other kids online by creating webpages, blogs, or posting pictures of them. How often do you do this?

Never

1 Almost Never

2 Sometimes

3 Almost All The Time

4 All The Time

5

18. Some kids have a lot of classmates who like to play with them. How often do the kids in your class like to play with you?

Never

1 Almost Never

2 Sometimes

3 Almost All The Time

4 All The Time

5

Bullying At School

The following questions will ask about bullying that occurs at school. Please choose the best answer for each item. Bullying means that these things happened more than once, that the action hurt you, either physically or so that you felt bad, and that they were hard to stop. It is not considered bullying if people of equal strength fight or if the fighting is playful.

1. Since January how often have you been picked on by kids at school? Not at all Only Once 2 or 3 Times Once a Week More than once a week

2. Since January how often have you been pushed around or hit at school?

71

Not at all Only Once 2 or 3 Times Once a Week More than once a week

3. Since January how often have kids said mean things to you at school? Not at all Only Once 2 or 3 Times Once a Week More than once a week

4. Since January how often have kids said mean things about you to other

kids behind your back? Not at all Only Once 2 or 3 Times Once a Week More than once a week

5. Since January how often have kids left you out of things on purpose? Not at all Only Once 2 or 3 Times Once a Week More than once a week

6. Since January how often have you been bullied by text-messages? Not at all Only Once 2 or 3 Times Once a Week More than once a week

7. Since January how often have you been bullied online by creating

webpages, blogs, or posting pictures of you? Not at all Only Once 2 or 3 Times Once a Week More than once a week

8. Since January how often have you been bullied in chatrooms or group

sites like MySpace or Facebook? Not at all Only Once 2 or 3 Times Once a Week More than once a week

9. When kids pick on you do you ever ask your teacher for help?

Yes No I’ve Never Been Picked On

10. When kids pick on you do you ever ask your parents for help? Yes No I’ve Never Been Picked On

11. When kids pick on you do you ever ask other kids in your class for help? Yes No I’ve Never Been Picked On

72

12. When kids pick on you do you ever ask your best friend for help? Yes No I’ve Never Been Picked On

Relationships with People

Now we have some questions about your relationships with others, both positive and conflicted relationships. Using the 5 point scale shown below, indicate how uncharacteristic or characteristic each of the following statements is in describing you. Place your rating on the line to the right of the statement.

1 = extremely uncharacteristic of me 2 = somewhat uncharacteristic of me 3 = neither uncharacteristic nor characteristic of me 4 = somewhat characteristic of me 5 = extremely characteristic of me . 1. Some of my friends think I am a hothead

2. If I have to resort to violence to protect my rights, I will.

. 3. When people are especially nice to me, I wonder what they want.

4. I tell my friends openly when I disagree with them.

5. I have become so mad that I have broken things.

. 6. I can’t help getting into arguments when people disagree with me.

7. I wonder why sometimes I feel so bitter about things.

Once in a while, I can’t control the urge to strike another person.

. I am an even-tempered person.

I am suspicious of overly friendly strangers.

1 I have threatened people I know.

1 I flare up quickly but get over it quickly.

1 Given enough provocation, I may hit another person.

1 When people annoy me, I may tell them what I think of them.

1 I am sometimes eaten up with jealousy.

1 I can think of no good reason for ever hitting a person.

1 At times I feel I have gotten a raw deal out of life.

1 I have trouble controlling my temper.

73

1 When frustrated, I let my irritation show.

2 I sometimes feel that people are laughing at me behind my back.

2 I often find myself disagreeing with people.

2 If somebody hits me, I hit back.

2 I sometimes feel like a powder keg ready to explode.

2 Other people always seem to get the breaks.

2 There are people who pushed me so far that we came to blows.

2 I know that “friends” talk about me behind my back.

2 My friends say that I’m somewhat argumentative.

2 Sometimes I fly off the handle for no good reason.

2 I get into fights a little more than the average person.

What Do You Think?

These are things some kids think or feel when kids pick on them - how would you feel and what would you think if you were being picked on. Circle how true is each statement for you.

1. It was my fault, I am easy to pick on. Not at All True Kind of True Sometimes True Very True

2. Some kids are just mean to people. Not at All True Kind of True Sometimes True Very True

3. If I changed the way I act this would probably not happen to me. Not at All True Kind of True Sometimes True Very True

4. There is nowhere I can go to avoid bullies. Not at All True Kind of True Sometimes True Very True

5. This always happens to me. Not at All True Kind of True Sometimes True Very True

6. Sometimes I do things that bother other kids. Not at All True Kind of True Sometimes True Very True

7. If I were a cooler kid, I wouldn’t get picked on. Not at All True Kind of True Sometimes True Very True

74

8. It was not my fault, some kids like to pick on other people. Not at All True Kind of True Sometimes True Very True

9. If I told them to stop, they probably would not do it again. Not at All True Kind of True Sometimes True Very True

10. Kids like them pick on everyone, there’s nothing I can do about it. Not at All True Kind of True Sometimes True Very True

11. This is not a safe school for anybody. Not at All True Kind of True Sometimes True Very True

12. The bully was probably just in a bad mood that day. Not at All True Kind of True Sometimes True Very True

75

How Do You Feel?

How are you doing? We are interested in how you have been feeling lately because this is often related to what is going on at school. Please circle the number for each statement which best describes how often you felt or behaved this way during the past week.

Since winter break…

Rarely or none Some of A lot of Most or of the time the time the time all of the

time

A. I did not feel like eating. 0 1 2 3

B. I felt I was just as good as other kids. 0 1 2 3

C. I was bothered by things that don’t 0 1 2 3

usually bother me.

D. I felt depressed. 0 1 2 3

E. I had trouble keeping my mind 0 1 2 3

on what I was doing.

F. I felt hopeful about the future. 0 1 2 3

G. I felt fearful. 0 1 2 3

H. My sleep was restless. 0 1 2 3

I. People were friendly. 0 1 2 3

J. I could not get going 0 1 2 3

K. I felt lonely. 0 1 2 3

L. I felt the people I hung out with 0 1 2 3

really didn’t like me

M. I enjoyed life. 0 1 2 3

N. I felt sad. 0 1 2 3

O. I was happy. 0 1 2 3

76

Student Questionnaire (Survey B) Student ID (Will be provided)___________________________________________________________

School Name_______________________________________________________________

Thank you for agreeing to complete this survey. Please choose the best response to each question below. The items on this survey will ask about your relationships at school, bullying at school, and your attitudes to school.

Before we start please tell us a little about you:

What grade are you in school (Circle one): 7 8

What is your gender (Circle one): Boy Girl

How old are you now:_______ years old

How are you doing in school? Overall, would you consider your grades… □ Above Average □ Average □ Below average

What grades do you usually get in school? □ Mostly As □ Mostly As and Bs □ Mostly Bs □ Mostly Bs and Cs □ Mostly Cs □ Mostly Cs and Ds □ Mostly Ds □ Mostly Ds and Fs □ Mostly Fs

In the past couple of months (since winter break) how many times have you been absent from school? _______

In the past couple of months (since winter break) how many times have you had to leave school early because you were sick? ________

Which of the following do you use? (check all that apply) □ Computer with email □ Social Website (Myspace, Facebook, Classmate) □ Cell phone with text-messaging capabilities

77

□ Cell phone with picture taking capabilities □ Cell phone with video recording capabilities □ Cell phone with Internet capabilities

How Important Is It?

This survey will ask about how you think or feel about things. We won’t ask specifically about bullying this time but these things may be related to bullying that happens at school. For the questions below we want to know how important certain things are to you. Please select the best answer for each statement.

1. When walking in late to class I try not to attract attention

No Importance Little Importance Some Importance Much Importance

Great Importance

2. Being able to daydream about great successes and thinking of other people’s reactions.

No Importance Little Importance Some Importance Much Importance

Great Importance

3. Trying to figure out how other people will react to my accomplishments and failures.

No Importance Little Importance Some Importance Much Importance

Great Importance

4. Trying to get other people to know what it is like to be me.

No Importance Little Importance Some Importance Much Importance Great Importance

5. Knowing my own thoughts and feelings.

No Importance Little Importance Some Importance Much Importance Great Importance

6. Accepting the fact that others don’t know what it’s like to be me.

78

No Importance Little Importance Some Importance Much Importance Great Importance

7. Thinking about my own feelings.

No Importance Little Importance Some Importance Much Importance Great Importance

8. Explaining my unique feelings and viewpoints to others so they can get some idea about what I am like.

No Importance Little Importance Some Importance Much Importance Great Importance

9. Being real good at knowing what others are thinking of me.

No Importance Little Importance Some Importance Much Importance Great Importance

10. Trying and being able to figure out if two people are talking about me

when they are looking at me.

No Importance Little Importance Some Importance Much Importance Great Importance

11. Accepting that no one will ever really understand me.

No Importance Little Importance Some Importance Much Importance Great Importance

12. Finding out about myself.

No Importance Little Importance Some Importance Much Importance Great Importance

13. Getting other people to better understand why I do things the way I do.

No Importance Little Importance Some Importance Much Importance Great Importance

79

How Sure Are You?

These questions will ask about the kinds of things that are easy and difficult for students. Please rate how certain you are that you can do each of the things described below by writing the appropriate number on the line. Remember that no one will see your answers and you will not be identified by name.

Rate your degree of confidence by recording a number from 0 to 100 using the scale given below:

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Cannot do Moderately Highly certain it at all sure can do it I can do it

1. Get teachers to help me when I get stuck on schoolwork. ______

2. Get another student to help me when I get stuck on schoolwork. ______

3. Get adults to help me when I have social problems. ______

4. Get a friend to help me when I have social problems. ______

5. Learn new things in school. ______

6. Learn to use new technology. ______

7. Make and keep friends of the same gender. ______

8. Make and keep friends of opposite gender. ______

9. Carry on conversations with other. ______

10. Work well in a group. ______

11. Express my opinions when other classmates disagree with me. ______

12. Stand up for myself when I feel I am being treated unfairly. ______

13. Get others to stop annoying me or hurting my feelings. ______

14. Stand firm against someone who is asking me to do something

80

I don‘t want to do. ______

15. Control my temper ______

What If… Four scenarios are presented, please read each scenario and respond to the questions below.

1. Someone starts a mean rumor about you that is not true.

What types of rumors to people usually start at your school? Why would someone do this? How would that make you feel? What would you do about it?

81

2. You start picking on a shy kid at lunch. You and your friend laugh at them every day and intentionally embarrass them.

Why would you do something like this? How would that make the other person feel? What do you think they would do about it?

3. You send someone a text-message that says “Every1 H8 U” and you tell them not to come to school again. Why would you do something like this? How would that make the other person feel? What do you think they would do about it?

82

4. One day you come to school and your friends won’t talk to you and don’t let you sit with them at lunch.

Why would someone do this? How would that make you feel? What would you do about it?

83

What do you think?

These final questions are aimed at understanding how people solve different types of problem. They are not specifically about peer relationships but they present a problem and you have to give an answer and explain your reasoning. Remember there are no right or wrong answers we are just interested in how you think.

1. The following sentences about mice are all true. What pieces of

information determines whether or not the mice will fight with each other?

THE MICE ARE NOT BROWN; THE MICE ARE NOT OLD; THE MICE HAVE FOOD; THE MICE DO NOT FIGHT.

THE MICE FIGHT; THE MICE DO NOT HAVE FOOD; THE MICE ARE OLD; THE MICE ARE BROWN.

THE MICE ARE NOT OLD; THE MICE DO NOT FIGHT; THE MICE ARE BROWN; THE MICE DONOT HAVE FOOD.

THE MICE HAVE FOOD; THE MICE ARE NOT BROWN; THE MICE FIGHT; THE MICE ARE OLD.

a. Your Answer: b. Explain Your Answer:

84

2. All of the following sentences about outdoor activities are true. Which piece of information determines whether or not there is good weather?

CHARLIE IS NOT SWIMMING; DAVE IS BOATING; THERE IS

NOT GOOD WEATHER. CHARLIE IS NOT SWIMMING; THERE IS GOOD WEATHER;

DAVE IS BOATING. CHARLIE IS SWIMMING; THERE IS NOT GOOD WEATHER;

DAVIS IS NOT BOATING. DAVE IS NOT BOATING; THERE IS GOOD WEATHER;

CHARLIE IS SWIMMING.

a. Your Answer:

b. Explain Your Answer:

85

APPENDIX C

86

APPENDIX C

Student Assent Form

Taken from Dr. Raskauskas Research (2011-2012)

Sacramento State University

Child Development

Covert Aggression in Middle Schools

STUDENT INFORMATION SHEET FOR PARTICIPATION IN A RESEARCH STUDY

This study is looking at bullying in schools and the ways that people think and act that are related to bullying. We are specifically interested in the less obvious forms of bullying like gossip spreading, leaving people out on purpose, and cyber bullying. It doesn’t matter whether or not you’ve been bullied. We need all kinds of kids in this study, kids who have been bullied, those who have bullied others, and those who have not been bullied too. All of the students in your class are being invited to be part of this study.

If you decide to take part in this study, you will be asked to complete two short surveys, one week apart. One survey is about bullying and relationships, the other is about the ways that people think, feel, and behave. If you don’t want to be part of the study your teacher will give you something else to do. We will also be getting your GPA from the school district.

We will keep your answers confidential - no one but the researchers will see what you write on your survey. Do not put your name anywhere on the survey; we will give you an ID number to write instead.

Some students may be uncomfortable answering questions about bullying. Although you will be asked about bullying incidents, you will never be asked to give names and you don’t have to answer any question you do not want to answer. If the questions make you feel uncomfortable you may go speak to the counselor during or after the survey. You can also call the Teen Line Hotline at (800) 852-8336 later if you want to talk to someone about bullying or how you feel.

87

Your parent/guardian has already given their permission for you to be part of this study.

However, you don‘t have to participate and you don‘t have to say why. Remember, if

you do the survey you have the right to skip any questions you do not want to answer or

to stop at any time.

You will not receive any compensation for helping us with this survey, but it is our hope

that your information will help us to design bullying interventions that will help keep all

kids safe at school.

Please print your name: _______________________________ Date: ______________

YES: I want to be part of this study: ___________________________________

Signature

NO: I do not want to be part of this study.

88

References

Aceves, M. J., Hinshaw, S. P., Mendoza-Denton, R., & Page-Gould, E. (2010). Seek help

from teachers or fight back? Student perceptions of teachers‘ actions during

conflicts and responses to peer victimization. Journal Of Youth And Adolescence,

39(6), 658-669. doi:10.1007/s10964-009-9441-9

Bandura, A. (2006). Guide for creating self-efficacy scales. In F. Pajares & T. Urdan

(Eds.) Self-efficacy beliefs of adolescence (pp. 307-337). Greenwhich,

CT:Information Age Publishing.

Bonanno, R. A., & Hymel, S. (2010). Beyond hurt feelings: Investigating why some

victims of bullying are at greater risk for suicidal ideation. Merrill-Palmer

Quarterly: Journal Of Developmental Psychology, 56(3), 420-440.

Berger K. S. (2006). The Developing Person Through Childhood and Adolescence (7th

ed.). New York; NY: Worth Publishers.

Bornstein, M. H., & Lamb, M. E. (2011). Developmental Science. An Advanced Textbook

(6th ed.).New York; NY: Psychology Press.

Bowes, L., Maughan, B., Caspi, A., Moffitt, T. E., & Arseneault, L. (2010). Families

promote emotional and behavioral resilience to bullying: evidence of an

environmental effect. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 51, 809-817.

Bronfenbrenner, U., & Morris, P. A. (2006). The Bioecological Model of Human

Development. NJ, NY: Hoboken.

Buss, A.H., & Perry, M. (1992). The aggression questionnaire. Journal of Personality

and Social Psychology, 63, 452-459.

Card, N. A. (2011). Toward a relationship perspective on aggression among

schoolchildren: Integrating social cognitive and interdependence theories.

Psychology Of Violence, 1(3), 188-201. doi:10.1037/a0023711

Cobb, S. (1976). Social support as a moderator of life stress. Psychosomatic Medicine,

38, 300-314. Retrieved from EBSCOhost.

Conners-Burrow, N. A., Johnson, D. L., Whiteside-Mansell, L., McKelvey, L., & Gargus,

R. A. (2009). Adults matter: Protecting children from the negative impacts of

bullying. Psychology In The Schools, 46(7), 593-604. doi:10.1002/pits.20400

89

Craig, W., Pepler, D., & Blais, J. (2007). Responding to bullying: What works. School

Psychology International, 28, 465-477. doi:10.1177/0143034307084136

Crick, N. R., & Grotpeter, J. K. (1995). Relational aggression, gender, and social-

psychological adjustment. Child Development, 66, 710-722. doi:10.2307/1131945

Crothers, L. M., & Kolbert, J. B. (2008). Tackling a Problematic Behavior Management

Issue: Teachers' Intervention in Childhood Bullying Problems. Intervention In

School And Clinic, 43, 132-139.

Davidson, L. M., & Demaray, M. (2007). Social support as a moderator between

victimization and internalizing-externalizing distress from bullying. School

Psychology Review, 36, 383-405.

Dehue, F., Bolman, C., & Völlink, T. (2008). Cyberbullying: Youngsters' Experiences

and Parental Perception. Cyberpsychology & Behavior, 11(2), 217-223.

doi:10.1089/cpb.2007.0008

Dılmaç, B. (2009). Psychological Needs as a Predictor of Cyber bullying: a Preliminary

Report on College Students. Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice, 9(3),

1307-1325.

Due, P., Holstein, B. E., Lynch, J., Diderichsen, F., Gabhain, S., Scheidt, P., & Currie, C.

(2005). Bullying and symptoms among school-aged children: international

comparative cross sectional study in 28 countries. European Journal of Public

Health, 15, 128-132. doi:10.1093/eurpub/cki105

Enright, R.D., Lapsley, D.K., & Shukla, D.G. (1979). Adolescent egocentrism in early

and late adolescence. Adolescence, 14, 687-695.

Espelage, D. L., & Swearer, S. M. (2003). Research on school bullying and victimization:

What have we learned and where do we go from here? School Psychology

Review, 32, 365-383.

Flaspohler, P. D., Elfstrom, J. L., Vanderzee, K. L., Sink, H. E., & Birchmeier, Z. (2009).

Stand by me: The effects of peer and teacher support in mitigating the impact of

bullying on quality of life. Psychology in the Schools, 46, 636-649.

doi:10.1002/pits.20404

Gorman-Smith, D., Henry, D. B., & Tolan, P. H. (2004). Exposure to community

violence and violence perpetration: The protective effects of family functioning.

Journal Of Clinical Child And Adolescent Psychology, 33, 439-449.

doi:10.1207/s15374424jccp3303_2

90

Hay, C., Meldrum, R., & Mann, K. (2010). Traditional Bullying, Cyber Bullying, and

Deviance: A General Strain Theory Approach. Journal Of Contemporary

Criminal Justice, 26(2), 130-147. doi:10.1177/1043986209359557

Hay, C., & Meldrum, R. (2010). Bullying Victimization and Adolescent Self-Harm:

Testing Hypotheses from General Strain Theory. Journal Of Youth And

Adolescence, 39(5), 446-459.

Hinduja, S., & Patchin, J. W. (2008). Cyberbullying: An exploratory analysis of factors

related to offending and victimization. Deviant Behavior, 29(2), 129-156.

doi:10.1080/01639620701457816

Hammack, P. L., Richards, M. H., Luo, Z., Edlynn, E. S., & Roy, K. (2004). Social

support factors as moderators of community violence exposure among inner-city

African American young adolescents. Journal Of Clinical Child And Adolescent

Psychology, 33, 450-462. doi:10.1207/s15374424jccp3303_3

Holt, M. K., & Espelage, D. L. (2007). Perceived social support among bullies, victims,

and bully-victims. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 36, 984-994.

doi:10.1007/s10964-006-9153-3

Hodges, E.V.E. & Perry, D.G. (1999). Personal and interpersonal antecedents and

consequences of victimization by peers. Journal of Personality and Social

Psychology, 76, 677-685. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.76.4.677

Hunter, S. C., Boyle, J. E., & Warden, D. (2004). Help seeking amongst child and

adolescent victims of peer-aggression and bullying: The influence of school-

stage, gender, victimization, appraisal, and emotion. British Journal of

Educational Psychology, 74, 375-390. Retrieved from EBSCOhost.

Ivarsson, T., Broberg, A. G., Arvidsson, T., & Gillberg, C. (2005). Bullying in

adolescence: Psychiatric problems in victims and bullies as measured by the

Youth Self Report (YSR) and the Depression Self-Rating Scale (DSRS). Nordic

Journal Of Psychiatry, 59(5), 365-373.

Juvonen, J., & Gross, E. F. (2008). Extending the school grounds?—Bullying experiences

in cyberspace. Journal of School Health, 78, 496-505. doi:10.1111/j.1746-

1561.2008.00335.x

Kilpatrick Demaray, M., & Kerres Malecki, C. (2003). Perceptions of the Frequency and

Importance of Social Support by Students Classified as Victims, Bullies, and

Bully/Victims in an Urban Middle School. School Psychology Review, 32(3),

471-489.

91

Kliewer, W., Murrelle, L., Mejia, R., de G., Y., & Angold, A. (2001). Exposure to

violence against a family member and internalizing symptoms in Colombian

adolescents: The protective effects of family support. Journal Of Consulting And

Clinical Psychology, 69, 971-982. doi:10.1037/0022-006X.69.6.971

Kochenderfer, B. J., & Ladd, G. W. (1996). Peer victimization: Cause or consequence of

school maladjustment? Child Development, 67, 1305-1317. doi:10.2307/1131701

Kochenderfer-Ladd, B., & Skinner, K. (2002). Children's coping strategies: Moderators

of the effects of peer victimization? Developmental Psychology, 38, 267-278.

doi:10.1037/0012-1649.38.2.267

Kraft, E. M., & Jinchang, W. (2009). Effectiveness of cyber bullying prevention

strategies: A study on students' perspectives. International Journal of Cyber

Criminology, 3, 513-535.

Kristensen, S. M., & Smith, P. K. (2003). The use of coping strategies by Danish children

classed as bullies, victims, bully/victims, and not involved, in response to

different (hypothetical) types of bullying. Scandinavian Journal Of Psychology,

44(5), 479-488. doi:10.1046/j.1467-9450.2003.00369.x

Ladd, G., Kochenderfer-Ladd, B., Eggum, N., Kochel, K., & McConnell, E. (2011).

Characterizing and comparing the friendships of anxious-solitary and unsociable

preadolescents. Child Development, 82, 1434-1453. doi:10.1111/j.1467-

8624.2011.01632.x

Lynch, M., & Cicchetti, D. (2002). Links between community violence and the family

system: Evidence from children's feelings of relatedness and perceptions of parent

behavior. Family Process, 41, 519-532. doi:10.1111/j.1545-5300.2002.41314.x

Matsunaga, M. (2009). Parents don‘t (always) know their children have been bullied:

Child-parent discrepancy on bullying and family-level profile of communication

standards. Human Communication Research, 35, 221-247. doi:10.1111/j.1468-

2958.2009.01345.x

McElearney, A., Roosmale-Cocq, S., Scott, J., & Stephenson, P. (2008). Exploring the

anti-bullying role of a befriending peer support programme: A case study within

the primary school setting in northern Ireland. Child Care in Practice, 14, 109-

130. doi:10.1080/13575270701868694

Menesini, E., Modena, M., & Tani, F. (2009). Bullying and victimization in adolescence:

concurrent and stable roles and psychological health symptoms. Journal of

Genetic Psychology, 170, 115-134.

92

Miller P. H. (2011). Theories of Developmental Psychology (5th

ed). New York,

NY: Worth Publishers.

Mouttapa, M., Valente, T., Gallaher, P., Rohrbach, L., & Unger, J. (2004). Social

network predictors of bullying and victimization. Adolescence, 39, 315-335.

O'Brennan, L. M., Bradshaw, C. P., & Sawyer, A. L. (2009). Examining development

differences in the social-emotional problems among frequent bullies, victims, and

bully/victims. Psychology In The Schools, 46(2), 100-115. doi:10.1002/pits.20357

Oh, I., & Hazler, R. J. (2009). Contributions of personal and situational factors to

bystanders' reactions to school bullying. School Psychology International, 30(3),

291-310. doi:10.1177/0143034309106499

Oliver, C., & Candappa, M. (2007). Bullying and the politics of ‗telling‘. Oxford Review

of Education, 33, 71-86. doi:10.1080/03054980601094594

Olweus, D. (1993).Bullying at School. What We Know and What We Can Do (1st ed).

Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publishers.

Patchin, J. W., & Hinduja, S. (2006). Bullies move beyond the schoolyard: A preliminary

look at cyberbullying. Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice, 4, 148-169.

doi:10.1177/1541204006286288

Patchin, J. W., & Hinduja, S. (2010). Cyberbullying and Self-Esteem. Journal Of School

Health, 80(12), 614-621.

Pellegrini, A.D. & Long, J.D. (2002). A longitudinal study of bullying, dominance, and

victimization during the transition from primary school through secondary school.

British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 20, 259-280. doi:

10.1348/026151002166442

Perren, S., & Alsaker, F. D. (2006). Social behavior and peer relationships of victims,

bully-victims, and bullies in kindergarten. Journal Of Child Psychology And

Psychiatry, 47(1), 45-57. doi:10.1111/j.1469-7610.2005.01445.x

Perren, S., & Hornung, R. (2005). Bullying and Delinquency in Adolescence: Victims'

and Perpetrators' Family and Peer Relations. Swiss Journal Of

Psychology/Schweizerische Zeitschrift Für Psychologie/Revue Suisse De

Psychologie, 64(1), 51-64. doi:10.1024/1421-0185.64.1.51

Proctor, L. J. (2006). Children growing up in a violent community: The role of the

family. Aggression & Violent Behavior, 11, 558-576.

doi:10.1016/j.avb.2005.12.004

93

Radloff, L.S. (1977). The CES-D scale: A self-report depression scale for research in the

general population. Applied Psychological Measurement, 1, 385-401.

Ragatz, L. L., Anderson, R. J., Fremouw, W., & Schwartz, R. (2011). Criminal thinking

patterns, aggression styles, and the psychopathic traits of late high school bullies

and bully-victims. Aggressive Behavior, 37(2), 145-160. doi:10.1002/ab.20377

Raskauskas, J. (2005). Role of attribution style and coping strategy selection in the

relationship between peer victimization and outcomes among economically

disadvantaged students. Unpublished Dissertation. Davis, CA: University of

California, Davis.

Raskauskas, J. (2010). Text-bullying: Associations with traditional bullying and

depression among New Zealand adolescents. Journal of School Violence, 9, 74-

97. doi:10.1080/15388220903185605

Raskauskas, J., & Stoltz, A. D. (2004). Identifying and intervening in relational

aggression. Journal of School Nursing, 20, 209-215.

Raskauskas, J., & Stoltz, A. D. (2007). Involvement in traditional and electronic bullying

among adolescents. Developmental Psychology, 43, 564-575. doi:10.1037/0012-

1649.43.3.564

Rothon, C., Head, J., Klineberg, E., & Stansfeld, S. (2011). Can social support protect

bullied adolescents from adverse outcomes? A prospective study on the effects of

bullying on the educational achievement and mental health of adolescents at

secondary schools in east London. Journal of Adolescence, 34, 579-588.

Retrieved from EBSCOhost.

Salkind, N.J.(2008). Statistics for People Who Think They Hate Statistics (3rd

ed).London, England: Sage.

Solberg, M. E., & Olweus, D. (2003). Prevalence estimation of school bullying with the

Olweus Bully/Victims Questionnaire. Aggressive Behavior, 29, 239-268.

Smith, J., Twemlow, S. W., & Hoover, D. W. (1999). Bullies, victims and bystanders: A

method of in-school intervention and possible parental contributions. Child

Psychiatry and Human Development, 30, 29-37.

Smith, P. K., & Shu, S. (2000). What good schools can do about bullying: Findings from

a survey in English schools after a decade of research and action. Childhood, 7,

193. Retrieved from EBSCOhost.

94

Stauffer, S., Heath, M., Coyne, S., & Ferrin, S. (2012). High school teachers' perceptions

of cyberbullying prevention and intervention strategies. Psychology In The

Schools, 49, 352-367. doi:10.1002/pits.21603Stein, J. A., Dukes, R. L., & Warren,

J. I. (2007). Adolescent male bullies, victims, and bully-victims: A comparison of

psychosocial and behavioral characteristics. Journal Of Pediatric Psychology,

32(3), 273-282. doi:10.1093/jpepsy/jsl023

Tenenbaum, L. S., Varjas, K., Meyers, J., & Parris, L. (2011). Coping strategies and

perceived effectiveness in fourth through eighth grade victims of bullying. School

Psychology International, 32(3), 263-287. doi:10.1177/0143034311402309

Tokunaga, R. S. (2010). Following you home from school: A critical review and

synthesis of research on cyberbullying victimization. Computers In Human

Behavior, 26, 277-287. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2009.11.014

Underwood, M. K. (2003). Social Aggression among Girls. New York: NY: The Guilford

Press.

Wang, J., Iannotti, R. J., & Nansel, T. R. (2009). School bullying among adolescents in

the United States: Physical, verbal, relational, and cyber. Journal of Adolescent

Health, 45, 368-375. doi:10.1016/j.jadohealth.2009.03.021

Wang, J., Iannotti, R. J., & Luk, J. W. (2011). Peer victimization and academic

adjustment among early adolescents: Moderation by gender and mediation by

perceived classmate support. Journal of School Health, 81, 386-392.

Woods, S., Done, J., & Kalsi, H. (2009). Peer victimisation and internalising difficulties:

The moderating role of friendship quality. Journal Of Adolescence, 32(2), 293-

308. doi:10.1016/j.adolescence.2008.03.005

Ybarra, M., & Mitchell, K. (2004). Youth engaging in online harassment: associations

with caregiver-child relationships, Internet use, and personal characteristics.

Journal Of Adolescence, 27(3), 319-336.

Ybarra, M. L., & Mitchell, K. J. (2004). Online aggressor/targets, aggressors, and targets:

a comparison of associated youth characteristics. Journal Of Child Psychology &

Psychiatry, 45(7), 1308-1316. doi:10.1111/j.1469-7610.2004.00328.x

Yeung, R., & Leadbeater, B. (2010). Adults make a difference: The protective effects of

parent and teacher emotional support on emotional and behavioral problems of

peer-victimized adolescents. Journal of Community Psychology, 38, 80-98.

Retrieved from EBSCOhost.