PDF
ePub
Citation
Print
Abstract
Objectives
In recent years, school violence has been increasing and this situation is complicated by various factors. The objective of this study is to explore the distribution of the participants' roles and to examine the psychopathology associated with these roles among middle school students.
Methods
In a cross-sectional study, 490 middle school students completed the Participant Role Questionnaire (PRQ) for classifying the participants' roles in a bullying situation. The Korean-Youth Self Report (K-YSR), Revised Children's Manifest Anxiety Scale (RCMAS), Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale (RSE) and Parent Adolescent Communication Inventory (PACI) were also included to evaluate the psychopathology of the students.
Results
The distribution rates of the bully, assistant, reinforcer, defender and outsider groups were 4.1%, 3.1%, 5.3%, 53.7%, and 32.0%, respectively. Among the syndrome scales of K-YSR, almost each items' and the total scores (p=0.049), RCMAS (p=0.000), PACI (p=0.000), and RSE (p=0.000) were significantly different among all group. The average scores on the K-YSR and RCMAS were the highest in the assistant and reinforcer groups.
Conclusion
The assistant and reinforcer groups showed more severe psychopathologies. This means that they suffered from more difficulties than the other groups. Therefore, they need more intensive therapeutic interventions. Except for the defender group, who prevented bullying, the outsider group was the largest group. Therefore, a comprehensive approach that can change outsiders to defenders should be employed for the prevention of bullying in adolescents.
Figures and Tables
Table 3
Comparison of K-YSR, RCMAS, RSE and PACI among participants' role
*: p<0.05. M : Mean, SD : Standard deviation, K-YSR : Korean-Youth Self Report, RCMAS : Revised Children's Manifest Anxiety Scale, RSE : Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale, PACI : Parent Adolescent Communication Inventory, A : Assistant, B : Bully, D : Defender, O : Outsider, R : Reinforce, ANOVA : Analysis of variance, HSD : Honestly significant difference
References
1. Sutton J, Smith PK. Bullying as a group process: an adaptation of the participant role approach. Aggress Behav. 1999; 25:97–111.
2. Salmivalli C, Lagerspetz K, Björkqvist K, Österman K, Kaukiainen A. Bullying as a group process: participant roles and their relations to social status within the group. Aggress Behav. 1996; 22:1–15.
3. Salmivalli C, Voeten M. Connections between attitudes, group norms, and behaviour in bullying situations. Int J Behav Dev. 2004; 28:246–258.
4. Twemlow SW, Fonagy P, Sacco FC. The etiological cast to the role of the bystander in the social architecture of bullying and violence in schools and communities. In : Jimerson SR, Swearer SM, Espelage DL, editors. Handbook of bullying in schools: an international perspective. New York: Routledge;2009. p. 73–86.
5. Smith PK, Brain P. Bullying in schools: lessons from two. Aggress Behav. 2000; 26:1–9.
6. Janson GR, Hazler RJ. Trauma reactions of bystanders and victims to repetitive abuse experiences. Violence Vict. 2004; 19:239–255.
7. Langdon SW, Preble W. The relationship between levels of perceived respect and bullying in 5th through 12th graders. Adolescence. 2008; 43:485–503.
8. Moon YL. School violence prevention and counseling. Seoul: Hakjisa;2006. p. 69–90.
9. Salmivalli C. Bullying and the peer group: a review. Aggress Violent Behav. 2010; 15:112–120.
10. Salmivalli C. Participant role approach to school bullying: implications for interventions. J Adolesc. 1999; 22:453–459.
11. O'Connell P, Pepler D, Craig W. Peer involvement in bullying: insights and challenges for intervention. J Adolesc. 1999; 22:437–452.
12. Tapper K, Boulton MJ. Victim and peer group responses to different forms of aggression among primary school children. Aggress Behav. 2005; 31:238–253.
13. Salmivalli C, Lappalainen M, Lagerspetz KM. Stability and change of behavior in connection with bullying in schools: a two-year follow-up. Aggress Behav. 1998; 24:205–218.
14. Sim HO. A cross-sectional and short-term longitudinal study on bullying/victimization and interpersonal behavior characteristics: the participant roles approach. Korean J Child Stud. 2005; 26:263–279.
15. Stevens V, Van Oost P, De Bourdeaudhuij I. The effects of an anti-bullying intervention programme on peers' attitudes and behaviour. J Adolesc. 2000; 23:21–34.
16. Menesini E, Codecasa E, Benelli B, Cowie H. Enhancing children's responsibility to take action against bullying: evaluation of a befriending intervention in Italian middle schools. Aggress Behav. 2003; 29:1–14.
17. Merrell R. The impact of a drama intervention program on the response of the bystander to bullying situations [dissertation]. New York: University of Rochester;2004.
18. Espelage DL, Gutgsell EW, Swearer SM. Bullying in American schools: a social-ecological perspective on prevention and intervention. Atlanta: Routledge;2004.
19. Evers KE, Prochaska JO, Van Marter DF, Johnson JL, Prochaska JM. Transtheoretical-based bullying prevention effectiveness trials in middle schools and high schools. Educ Res. 2007; 49:397–414.
20. Polanin JR, Espelage DL, Pigott TD. A meta-analysis of school-based bullying prevention programs' effects on bystander intervention behavior. Sch Psychol Rev. 2012; 41:47.
21. Achenbach TM, Edelbrock CS. Manual for the child behavior check-list and revised child behavior profile. Burlington: University of Vermont Department of Psychiatry;1983.
22. Oh KJ, Kim YA, Ha EH, Lee HR, Hong KE. Korea-youth self-report. Seoul: Huno Consulting;2010.
23. Reynolds CR, Richmond BO. Revised Children's Manifest Anxiety Scale (RCMAS) manual. Los Angeles: Western Psychological Services;1985.
24. Choi JS, Cho SC. Assessment of anxiety in children: reliability and validity of Revised Children's Manifest Anxiety Scale. J Korean Neuropsychiatr Assoc. 1990; 29:691–702.
25. Rosenberg M. Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale (RSE). Acceptance and commitment therapy. Measures Package. 1965; 61:52.
26. Jeon BJ. Self-esteem: a test of its measurability. Yonsei Nonchong. 1974; 11:107–130.
27. Barnes HL, Olson DH. Parent-adolescent communication and the circumplex model. Child Dev. 1985; 56:438–447.
28. Min HY. Circumplex model and parent-adolescent communication [dissertation]. Seoul: Yonsei University;1990.
29. Gini G, Albiero P, Benelli B, Altoè G. Determinants of adolescents' active defending and passive bystanding behavior in bullying. J Adolesc. 2008; 31:93–105.
30. Seo M. Participation in bullying: bystanders' characteristics and role behaviors. Korean J Child Stud. 2008; 29:79–96.
31. Crapanzano AM, Frick PJ, Childs K, Terranova AM. Gender differences in the assessment, stability, and correlates to bullying roles in middle school children. Behav Sci Law. 2011; 29:677–694.
32. Boulton MJ, Underwood K. Bully/victim problems among middle school children. Br J Educ Psychol. 1992; 62(Pt 1):73–87.
33. Whitney I, Smith PK. A survey of the nature and extent of bullying in junior/middle and secondary schools. Educ Res. 1993; 35:3–25.
34. Menesini E, Eslea M, Smith PK, Genta ML, Giannetti E, Fonzi A, et al. Cross-national comparison of children's attitudes towards bully/victim problems in school. Aggress Behav. 1997; 23:245–257.
35. Rivers I, Soutter A. Bullying and the Steiner school ethos: a case study analysis of a group-centred educational philosophy. Sch Psychol Int. 1996; 17:359–377.
36. Olthof T, Goossens FA. Emotional and motivational correlates of playing a particular role in bullying. In : Biennial Meeting of the Society for Research in Child Development; 2003 Apr; Tampa, Florida.
37. Witvliet M, Olthof T, Hoeksma JB, Goossens FA, Smits MS, Koot HM. Peer group affiliation of children: the role of perceived popularity, likeability, and behavioral similarity in bullying. Soc Dev. 2010; 19:285–303.
38. Rigby K, Slee PT. Dimensions of interpersonal relation among Australian children and implications for psychological well-being. J Soc Psychol. 1993; 133:33–42.
39. O'Moore M, Kirkham C. Self-esteem and its relationship to bullying behaviour. Aggress Behav. 2001; 27:269–283.
40. Hong KE. Korean textbook of child psychiatry. Seoul: Hakjisa;2014.
41. Farrington DP. Understanding and preventing bullying. Crime Justice. 1993; 17:381–458.
42. Salmivalli C, Kaukiainen A, Kaistaniemi L, Lagerspetz K. Self-evaluated self-esteem, peer-evaluated self-esteem, and defensive egotism as predictors of adolescents' participation in bullying situations. Pers Soc Psychol Bull. 1999; 25:1268–1278.
43. Kim JY, Jang YE, Min JA. A study on the effect of school violence to adolescent's school adjustment: moderating effect of parent-child commuinication. Korean J Youth Stud. 2011; 18:209–234.
44. Moon YS. The effects of parent-adolescent communication on self-concept and problem behavior. J Korean Acad Child Health Nurs. 2008; 14:405–414.
45. Tani F, Greenman PS, Schneider BH, Fregoso M. Bullying and the big five: a study of childhood personality and participant roles in bullying incidents. Sch Psychol Int. 2003; 24:131–146.
XML Download