, Dorothy L. Espelage2 and Leslie Carroll3
(1)
Los Angeles Biomedical Research Institute at Harbor-UCLA Medical Center, Torrance, CA, USA
(2)
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Champaign, IL, USA
(3)
Family Voices, Albuquerque, NM, USA
Bullying is regarded as a significant problem in the US among school-aged youth. Rates for bullying among school-age youth range from 10 % to 30 % internationally with a notable increase during the middle school years (Cook et al. 2010; Espelage et al. in press). More specifically, in the US, between 15 % and 23 % of elementary students and 20–28 % of secondary school students report being bullied within a 6-month to 1-year period (Carlyle and Steinman 2007; National Center for Educational Statistics 2011; Turner et al. 2011). Also, approximately nine to eleven percent of youth report being called hate-related words having to do with their race, religion, ethnic background, and/or sexual orientation (Robers et al. 2013).
Rates appear to vary across sex and race/ethnicity. Many studies report that boys are more likely to engage in physical bullying than girls (Espelage et al. 2014; Nansel et al. 2001; Varjas et al. 2009). During the 1990s, much research supported the notion that girls are socialized to exercise more relational forms of aggression or social bullying, whereas boys engage in multiple forms of aggression (Neal 2007). Despite these findings, several studies have failed to document significant sex differences in relational aggression or social forms of bullying (Card et al. 2008; Crick et al. 1997). In addition to sex, race/ethnicity has been another major focus of research, and higher frequency of bullying perpetration and victimization among African-American students has been reported (Belgrave 2009; Koo et al. 2012; Wang et al. 2009). When African-American youth report more bullying perpetration (Carlyle and Steinman 2007; Espelage et al. 2012; Low and Espelage 2012), these studies have yielded small effect sizes. Thus, the research on both sex and race/ethnicity differences in reports of bullying perpetration are inconsistent and limited.
Definitional Issues
Prevalence rates vary in large part because of differences in how bullying is defined and measured (AERA 2013; Rodkin et al. in press). One of the first predominant definitions of bullying that continues to be used in the literature and in the legal arena is as follows: “A student is being bullied or victimized when he or she is exposed, repeatedly and over time, to negative actions on the part of one or more students.” (Olweus 2010, p. 11). More recent definitions of bullying emphasize observable or non-observable aggressive behaviors, the repetitive nature of these behaviors, and the imbalance of power between the individual/group perpetrator and victim (Gladden et al. 2014; Ybarra et al. 2014). An imbalance of power exists when the perpetrator or group of perpetrators have more physical, social, or intellectual power than the victim. In a recent examination of a nationally-representative study, early and late adolescents that perceived their perpetrator as having more power reported greater adverse outcomes (e.g., depression, suicidal ideation) than victims who did not perceive a power differential (Ybarra et al. 2014).
For the last 3 years, the Department of Education and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention have worked closely to develop a uniform research definition. This group defined bullying as follows: “Bullying is any unwanted aggressive behavior(s) by another youth or group of youths who are not siblings or current dating partners that involves an observed or perceived power imbalance and is repeated multiple times or is highly likely to be repeated. Bullying may inflict harm or distress on the targeted youth including physical, psychological, social, or educational harm.” (Gladden et al. 2014). These behaviors include verbal and physical aggression that ranges in severity from making threats, spreading rumors, and social exclusion, to physical attacks causing injury. Bullying can occur face-to-face and/or through technology (e.g., cell phones, computers).
Correlates and Consequences of Bully Perpetration and Victimization
Academic Outcomes
Several national and international research studies relying on cross-sectional data have documented that experiences of being victimized or bullying other students are associated with decreased academic achievement. For example, findings from a sample of 7th, 9th, and 11th graders in an urban public school district, revealed that for each 1-point increase in grade point average, the odds of being a victim versus a bystander decreased by 10 % (Glew et al. 2008). These associations also are found when students are followed over time in longitudinal studies (e.g., Juvonen et al. 2011; Schwartz et al. 2005). Juvonen and colleagues (2011) documented that peer victimization can account for an average 1.5 letter grade decrease in one academic subject (e.g., math) across 3 years of middle school. Moreover, the researchers found that greater self-reported victimization was associated with lower grades and lower teacher-rated academic engagement. However, a meta-analytic review of 33 cross-sectional studies conducted by Nakamoto and Schwartz (2010) reported that empirical research on this association has produced an incongruent pattern of findings and modest correlations. In fact, these authors reported a small but significant negative correlation between peer victimization and academic achievement. Friendship quality and peer social support appear to have a complex moderating role in the association between peer victimization and academic performance (Schwartz et al. 2008).
Psychiatric Disorders, Depression, and Suicidality
Few studies directly assess the relationship between bullying and mental health disorders (Copeland et al. 2013; Fanti and Kimonis 2013; Kumpulainen et al. 2001). Kumpulainen et al. (2001), using an epidemiological sample of second graders from Finland, found that children who were classified as bullies (children who bully others but are not bullied themselves) and bully-victims (children who both bully and are bullied) had high rates of psychiatric disorders relative to uninvolved children, largely for externalizing behaviors like attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder, oppositional defiant disorder, and conduct disorder. In particular, bully-victims were likely to have more severe problems and to have used mental health services. Similar findings emerge in Copeland et al.’s (2013) U.S. Great Smoky Mountain study; children and youth who self-reported involvement in bullying were more likely than uninvolved youth to be diagnosed via child- and parent-reports with disruptive and substance use disorders; bully-victims were additionally at risk for internalizing disorders including depression and suicidality. These youth were later assessed for psychiatric disorders such as depression, suicidality, anxiety, panic disorder, agoraphobia, antisocial personality disorder, and alcohol and marijuana abuse between the ages of 19 and 26 (Copeland et al. 2013). Youth who bullied during childhood were no different than children not involved in bullying on any of the nine long-term outcomes examined for except antisocial personality disorder. Childhood victims of bullying had higher rates of depression, anxiety, panic disorder, and agoraphobia as young adults. Bully-victims had the highest rates of depression, suicidality, anxiety, and panic disorder of all the groups. Other studies support these findings indicating that victims of bullying report significant psychosomatic problems and report depression later in life (Ttofi et al. 2011).
The majority of extant research indicates that involvement in bullying in any capacity is associated with higher rates of suicidal ideation and behaviors (Kim and Leventhal 2008). Most of the research on the links between bully/peer victimization and suicidal behaviors has been conducted outside of the US, but a 2009 paper examined the association between peer victimization and suicidal ideation and attempts across three nationally-representative samples of US adolescents (Kaminski and Fang 2009). Youth victimized by their peers were 2.4 times more likely to report suicidal ideation and 3.3 times more likely to report a suicide attempt than youth who reported not being bullied.
Although there is fairly consistent evidence that there is increased suicide risk for those involved in bullying, evidence suggests that risk might vary for youth who are bullies, victims, and bully-victims. For instance, some studies have shown that the association between suicidal ideation and bullying is stronger for targets of bullying than for perpetrators (e.g., Rigby and Slee 1999). Another study, however, found that after controlling for depression, the association between bullying and suicidal ideation was strongest for bully perpetrators (Kaltiala-Heino et al. 1999). Another study of middle school youth reported that the bully-suicide association was minimized when depression and delinquency were considered for all youth (Espelage and Holt 2013). Whereas multiple studies have found that bully-victims report more suicidal ideation and behaviors than uninvolved youth, victims, or perpetrators (e.g., Klomek et al. 2007), there are other studies that do not support this pattern. For instance, Herba and colleagues (2008) found that there were no differences in levels of suicidal ideation between bully-victims and uninvolved youth. These studies point to the complexity of assessing suicide risk based on the level of involvement youth play in the bully-victim dynamic.
Similarly, mixed findings exist with regard to whether the association between bullying and suicidal ideation varies by sex. One study found that victimization from bullying increases the likelihood of suicidal ideation among boys 2.5 times, and almost 4 times among girls (Hinduja and Patchin 2010). Klomek and colleagues (2009) found that bullying victimization at age 8 was associated with later suicide attempts and completed suicides after controlling for depression and conduct problems, but this was the case only for girls. Among boys, the relationship between victimization and suicidal ideation was mediated by depression and conduct disorder. The authors speculate that this sex difference might have emerged given that girls are more likely to experience relational victimization (e.g., indirect, manipulative, social or emotion-based) whereas boys are more likely to experience physical victimization (physical aggression, fights), and relational victimization might have a more long-lasting impact. On the other hand, other studies have found that boys might be at greater risk. For instance, male bullies showed higher than average levels of suicidal ideation in one study of a community population (Rigby and Slee 1999), and in a sample of Italian youth seeking psychological help suicidal ideation was predicted by being bullied at school only for boys (Laukkanen et al. 2005). Overall, research comparing sexual and gender minority and heterosexual youth has consistently shown that sexual minority youth report higher levels of suicidality (Eisenberg and Resnick 2006; Remafedi et al. 1998; Robinson and Espelage 2011; Russell and Toomey 2012). The existing research on the relationship between bullying involvement and suicide suggests that bullying may be a contributor to suicidality, however, other factors also may contribute to this relationship.
Delinquency, Criminal Activity, and Alcohol/Drug Use
Only recently, have studies examined the link between bullying involvement and later delinquency and/or criminal behavior. In a 2011 meta-analysis, bullying perpetration at age 14 led to higher violent conviction rates between ages 15–20, lower job status at age 18, increased drug use from ages 27–32, and relationship problems by age 48 (Farrington and Ttofi 2011). Further, Hemphill and colleagues (2011) found that greater bullying perpetration among Australian youth in Year 7 of school was associated with a two-fold increase in binge drinking and marijuana use when these students were in Year 10 of school. From the US-based Raising Healthy Children project, childhood bullying in grade 5 was associated with heavy drinking and marijuana use at age 21 (Kim et al. 2011). Other studies have shown longitudinal associations between bullying among older adolescents and associations with heavy drinking and marijuana use into adulthood, but these studies often do not examine the potential mediating effects of family influence on the relationship between bullying and substance use.
Characteristics of Bullies and Victims
Children who bully are often believed to be insecure, aggressive, and lacking empathy. Although this is true for some bullies (Smokowski and Kopasz 2005), all bullies do not fit this profile. Some bullies have high self-esteem, good social skills, and are considered popular among their peers; they may use bullying as a strategy to attain social dominance (Smokowski and Kopasz 2005; Barker et al. 2008; Juvonen et al. 2003). Other children who bully may be involved in high-risk behaviors such as drug use, demonstrate behavioral problems such as defiance, attention deficit disorder, or conduct disorder, and may be less engaged in school (Smokowski and Kopasz 2005; Juvonen et al. 2003). It also is important to recognize that most children who bully do so for a short period of time. Children who bully others during middle school often cease to do so by the end of high school, with almost 90 % of children discontinuing involvement in bullying over time (Pepler et al. 2008).
Risk factors for child engagement in bullying perpetration include poor parent-child involvement and communication, use of corporal punishment in the home, family conflict, and exposure to violence in the home in the form of child abuse/neglect or domestic violence (Espelage et al. 2000; Yang et al. 2006; Spriggs et al. 2001; Bowes et al. 2009). Parental mental health also may influence child socioemotional development and involvement in bullying (Georgiou 2008; Kane and Garber 2004; Ramchandani et al. 2005). This relationship may be mediated by an influence on parenting behaviors (Georgiou 2008; McLearn et al. 2006). Paternal involvement in bullying in childhood is associated with child bullying, with children of fathers who bullied others in childhood having a higher likelihood of bullying others as well (Farrington 1993).
Stay updated, free articles. Join our Telegram channel
Full access? Get Clinical Tree
