M±SD
SM, social media; SNS, social networking site.
The content, mean score, and standard deviation of the Basic Empathy Scale and Revised Cyber Bullying Inventory-II are presented in Table 2 . The total mean score for empathy was 3.4±0.4 out of 5, indicating a high level of empathy among the participants. The item with the highest mean score was “I can understand my friend’s happiness when she/he does well at something” (3.7±1.1). Followed by “When someone is feeling ‘down’ I can usually understand how they feel” (3.6±1.2), “I often become sad when watching sad things on or in films” (3.6±1.3), “I can often understand how people are feeling even before they tell” (3.7±1.1), and “I can usually work out when people are cheerful” (3.6±1.1). The item with the lowest mean score was “I find it hard to know when my friends are frightened” (2.8±1.1). The average score was divided by 10 which is the number of items. Thus, for cyberbullying was 1.6±0.5, and that for cybervictimization was 1.7±0.6 out of 4, which indicated the existence of cyberbullying and cybervictimization, with a slightly higher score for the latter. “Insulting someone [on the internet]” was the item with the highest average score (1.9±1.0 for cyberbullying and 2.1±1.1 for cybervictimization), followed by “taking over the password of someone’s account [on the internet]”(1.8±0.9 for cyberbullying and 1.8±0.9 for cybervictimization). “Creating a humiliating website [on the internet]” showed the lowest mean score (1.1±0.5 for cyberbullying and 1.2±0.6 for cybervictimization).
Empathy, Cyberbullying, and Cybervictimization of the Participants ( N =168)
Variable | Categories | Contents | M±SD |
---|---|---|---|
Empathy | Cognitive empathy | I can understand my friend’s happiness when she/he does well at something. | 3.7±1.1 |
I find it hard to know when my friends are frightened. | 2.8±1.1 | ||
When someone is feeling ‘down’ I can usually understand how they feel. | 3.6±1.2 | ||
I can usually work out when my friends are scared. | 3.1±1.0 | ||
I can often understand how people are feeling even before they tell me. | 3.6±1.1 | ||
I can usually work out when people are cheerful. | 3.6±1.1 | ||
I am not usually aware of my friend’s feelings. | 3.4±1.2 | ||
I have trouble figuring out when my friends are happy. | 3.0±1.2 | ||
Sub total | 3.4±0.5 | ||
Affective empathy | My friend’s emotions don’t affect me much. | 3.3±1.2 | |
After being with a friend who is sad about something, I usually feel sad. | 3.5±1.0 | ||
I get caught up in other people’s feelings easily. | 3.2±1.1 | ||
Other people’s feelings don’t bother me at all. | 3.3±1.2 | ||
I often become sad when watching sad things on or in films. | 3.6±1.3 | ||
Seeing a person who has been angered has no effect on my feelings. | 3.0±1.1 | ||
I tend to feel scared when I am with friends who are afraid. | 3.0±1.0 | ||
I often get swept up in my friend’s feelings. | 3.3±1.0 | ||
Sub total | 3.3±0.5 | ||
Total | 3.4±0.4 |
Variable | Contents | Cyber bullying | Cyber victimization |
---|---|---|---|
M±SD | M±SD | ||
Cyberbullying and cybervictimization | [On the internet] taking over the password of someone’s account. | 1.8±0.9 | 1.8±0.9 |
[On the internet] using someone’s account without his/her permission. | 1.5±0.8 | 1.6±0.9 | |
[On the internet] threatening someone. | 1.4±0.8 | 1.7±0.9 | |
[On the internet] insulting someone. | 1.9±1.0 | 2.1±1.1 | |
[On the internet] sending embarrassing and hurtful messages. | 1.7±0.9 | 1.8±1.0 | |
[On the internet] sharing an inappropriate photo or a video of someone without his/her permission. | 1.5±0.8 | 1.7±0.9 | |
[On the internet] sharing a secret with others without the permission of the owner. | 1.6±0.8 | 1.8±0.9 | |
[On the internet] spreading rumors. | 1.5±0.7 | 1.7±0.9 | |
[On the internet] creating an account on behalf of someone without letting him/her know and acting like the account’s owner. | 1.3±0.7 | 1.4±0.8 | |
[On the internet] creating a humiliating website. | 1.1±0.5 | 1.2±0.6 | |
Total | 1.6±0.5 | 1.7±0.6 |
Patterns in empathy, cyberbullying and cybervictimization according to participants’ general characteristics are shown in Table 3 . Total empathy, cognitive empathy, and affective empathy were significantly higher among female participants than among male participants (t=3.82, p <.001, t=2.19, p =.030, and t=4.05, p =.001, respectively). However, there were no significant differences in cyberbullying and cybervictimization by gender (t=0.20, p =.838, and t=0.35, p =.724, respectively).
Differences in Participants’ Empathy, Cyberbullying, and Cybervictimization According to Their Characteristics ( N =168)
Characteristics | Categories | Cognitive empathy | Affective empathy | Empathy (total) | Cyberbullying | Cybervictimization | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
M±SD | t or F ( ) | M±SD | t or F ( ) | M±SD | t or F ( ) | M±SD | t or F ( ) | M±SD | t or F ( ) | ||
Gender | Male | 27.0±4.4 | 2.19 (.030) | 25.6±3.9 | 4.05 (.001) | 52.7±7.0 | 3.82 (<.001) | 15.7±4.4 | 0.20 (.838) | 16.9±6.3 | 0.35 (.724) |
Female | 28.5±4.3 | 28.4±4.3 | 57.3±7.7 | 15.5±4.4 | 17.2±5.0 | ||||||
Grade | 7th | 26.2±4.7 | 3.80 (.012) | 25.3±4.9 | 3.45 (.010) | 51.9±8.0 | 3.90 (.010) | 14.0±3.9 | 3.03 (.031) | 15.0±5.2 | 7.66 (<.001) |
8th | 27.7±4.6 | 27.3±4.6 | 55.2±7.8 | 16.9±5.0 | 19.6±6.9 | ||||||
9th | 27.5±3.8 | 27.5±4.5 | 55.1±7.0 | 15.2±3.8 | 15.2±4.3 | ||||||
10th | 29.5±3.9 | 28.4±3.9 | 57.9±7.1 | 16.1±4.5 | 18.3±4.4 | ||||||
Age (year) | 12-15 | 27.3±4.4 | 2.67 (.008) | 26.7±4.7 | 2.51 (.013) | 54.3±7.7 | 2.86 (.005) | 15.3±4.1 | 0.59 (.558) | 16.7±5.8 | 1.13 (.262) |
16-19 | 29.5±3.7 | 28.8±3.9 | 58.4±7.0 | 15.8±4.8 | 17.9±4.6 | ||||||
Daily use (time) | 1-2 | 26.96±4.35 | 0.60 (.615) | 25.79±4.19 | 1.05 (.372) | 52.65±7.53 | 0.92 (.434) | 14.42±3.05 | 0.71 (.547) | 15.42±3.96 | 1.37 (.253) |
3-4 | 26.86±4.59 | 26.09±4.15 | 53.19±7.63 | 15.65±4.17 | 17.04±5.29 | ||||||
5-6 | 26.73±3.44 | 26.85±3.49 | 53.54±6.38 | 15.90±4.71 | 16.67±5.73 | ||||||
≥7 | 27.71±3.55 | 27.10±3.98 | 55.06±6.29 | 15.91±5.01 | 18.11±6.50 |
There was a statistically significant difference in total empathy and both cognitive and affective empathy according to grade level (F=3.90, p =.010, F=3.80, p =.012, and F=3.45, p = .010, respectively). Empathy was significantly higher among grade 10 students than among students of the other grade levels, but the Duncan post hoc test showed no significant difference in the mean scores. In addition, participants’ grade showed a statistically significant association with cyberbullying (F=3.03, p =.031). Cyberbullying was significantly more common among students in grade 8 than among students of the other grade levels, but the Duncan post hoc test showed no significance. In addition, cybervictimization showed a statistically significant difference according to grade level (F=7.66, p <.001), and was also higher in grade 8 participants, but the Duncan post hoc test showed no significance.
Statistically significant differences in total empathy and both cognitive and affective empathy were found according to participants’ age (t=2.86, p =.005, t=2.67, p =.008, and t=2.51, p =.013, respectively). There were no significant differences in cyberbullying or cybervictimization by age (t=0.59, p =.558, and t=1.13, p =.262, respectively). Finally, there were no significant differences in any dependent variables according to the daily use of SM.
Cybervictimization was significantly correlated with participants’ total empathy (r=.18, p =.025) and cognitive empathy (r=.17, p =.030), but not with affective empathy (r=.12, p =.114). Total empathy was not significantly correlated with cyberbullying (r=−.07, p =.359). Cyberbullying was significantly correlated with cybervictimization (r=.60, p <.001) ( Table 4 ).
Correlations among Empathy, Cyberbullying, and Cybervictimization ( N =168)
Variables | Empathy | Cyberbullying | Cybervictimization | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Cognitive empathy | Affective empathy | Total | ||||
r ( ) | r ( ) | r ( ) | r ( ) | r ( ) | ||
Empathy | Cognitive empathy | 1 | ||||
Affective empathy | 1 | |||||
Total | .86 (<.001) | .87 (<.001) | 1 | |||
Cyberbullying | .03 (.753) | −.09 (.274) | −.07 (.359) | 1 | ||
Cybervictimization | .17 (.030) | .12 (.114) | .18 (.025) | .60 (<.001) | 1 |
The Philippines has a total population of 108 million, of whom 73 million are active SM users [ 3 , 18 ]. In the current study, Facebook was the most used SM application used by adolescents. In 2020, Facebook had approximately of 2.4 billion monthly users worldwide, thus making it the most popular SM application [ 3 ]. In the Philippines, Facebook is currently the most popular SM application, with at least 70 million users, and most SM users use cellphones to access SM; this trend was also found in a study conducted among Filipino adolescents [ 18 ]. The Philippines have had the longest average daily time of SM use for 4 consecutive years, which reached 4 hours in 2020 [ 3 ]. This finding is in line with the current study, which recorded an average of almost 5 hours of SM use. Most respondents used SM to watch videos (n=121) and for communication (n=106). Watching videos and communication were also the top 2 purposes of using SM in an earlier study [ 18 ].
Filipinos have been observed to value camaraderie and find it natural to be friendly to others, for which reason they place considerable importance on interpersonal relationships [ 11 ]. The importance placed on friendship may be interpreted as reflecting a high level of empathy among Filipino adolescents. The existence of cyberbullying and cybervictimization was evident according to the findings of the study. Even with the increase in cyberbullying in the Philippines, some undocumented cases may exist due to victims’ fear of their situation being publicized. Some schools also tend to under-report cyberbullying due to fears of tarnishing the school’s reputation [ 19 ].
Demographic characteristics are believed to possibly influence empathy, cyberbullying, and cybervictimization. A significant relationship was found between empathy and gender in the current study, with female adolescents scoring higher for empathy than male adolescents. This may result from gender expectations in Filipino culture between the two genders. Female adolescents are expected to help their mothers with chores and to take care of their siblings, which fosters nurturing characteristics and helps them to understand different emotions. In contrast, male adolescents are trained to be logical and independent, and to keep their emotions to themselves [ 20 ]. This may explain why the female participants in this study had a higher degree of empathy than the male participants. However, no significant relationship was found between cyberbullying or cybervictimization and gender, similar to another study conducted in the Philippines [ 21 ]. These results show that when considering factors influencing empathy, other demographic characteristics such as age, educational level, and economic level must also be considered, as well as gender. Thus, further research is needed to predict the variables that affect Filipino adolescents’ empathy regarding cyberbullying and cybervictimization.
The current study established a significant relationship between age and empathy. Another study also reported a similar result, and this relationship reflects the development of empathy, which grows with age until it reaches full development in adolescence [ 22 ]. However, some studies have reported a decrease in cognitive empathy and an increase in affective empathy in the elderly. A decrease in cognitive empathy may be related to reduced activity in brain areas associated with cognitive function [ 23 ].
No significant relationship was found between age and cybervictimization or cyberbullying in this study. This finding is similar to a study conducted among Filipino university students, where it was found that cyberbullying and cybervictimization experiences of students were not significantly related to their age [ 24 ].
There is scarce evidence regarding the relationships among grade level, empathy, cyberbullying, and cybervictimization. The current study identified a significant relationship between grade level and empathy, as well as with cyberbullying and cybervictimization. A study among grade 7-12 students found that the cognitive empathy of victims of cyberbullying was high [ 25 ]. However, in a comparison of cognitive empathy in cyberbully-victims (a term for victims who also engaged in cyberbullying) and bystanders, lower grade levels had higher levels of cognitive empathy than other groups, while higher grade levels had higher levels of cognitive empathy only among cyberbully-victims, but not bystanders. Furthermore, it was found that victimization increased after grade 7 and continued through grade 12 [ 25 ].
Empathy has consistently shown a negative relationship with antisocial behavior [ 15 ], implying that empathy may have a possible influence on cyberbullying. A study investigating the relationship between cyberbullying and empathy found out that a low level of both cognitive and affective empathy predicted cyberbullying [ 26 ]. The current study found no significant relationship between empathy and cyberbullying. The same result was found in another study, and a possible explanation for this result is that even though the participants had a high empathy level, which may make them sensitive to others’ emotions, they may have viewed cyberbullying as a normal phenomenon [ 27 ]. As such, it is crucial to provide Filipino adolescents with the necessary information to protect themselves against cyberbullying. In addition, active interest and participation of parents and teachers are needed for the development of programs, practices, and policies to protect and support this population from this problem.
Few studies have reported a relationship between empathy and cybervictimization. It was found that cybervictims scored higher than cyberbullies and uninvolved students or bystanders in both cognitive and affective empathy [ 28 ]. One study reported higher affective empathy among cybervictims [ 29 ]. Another study reported significant relationships of both cognitive and affective empathy with cybervictimization [ 30 ]. In the current study, total empathy and cognitive empathy, but not affective empathy, had significant relationships with cybervictimization. This finding of distinct relationships of cognitive and affective empathy with cybervictimization was not found in previous research. The significant relationship between cybervictimization and cognitive empathy may be explained by cybervictims’ capability to understand the perspective of others, while still having problematic social relationships, as shown by the lack of a significant association between affective empathy and cybervictimization. Furthermore, affective empathy is important in establishing social relationships [ 27 ].
Taking revenge is a possible response of a cybervictim to his or her bullies. The desire to take revenge may lead a cybervictim to engage in cyberbullying [ 30 ]. Another explanation is the application of general strain theory, which was developed by Agnew [ 13 ]. Greater exposure or experiences of cyberbullying may increase the likelihood that cybervictims will engage in cyberbullying to release their stress. This is an example of a negative response to strain. A study conducted in the Philippines and Turkey reported a positive relationship between cyberbullying and cybervictimization [ 21 ]. The current study yielded a significant relationship between cyberbullying and cybervictimization.
Several limitations were found in this study. The first is the length of the duration of data collection, which resulted in a small sample of participants from a single school. The second is that the researcher used convenience sampling to choose where to conduct the study and the participants to be included. Participants were picked by the teachers due to their availability and knowledge regarding SM use. The third is the use of a self-report survey. There is a possibility that students over-reported or misreported some data (e.g., SM time usage per day and the reasons for SM usage). The questionnaires used may have made the students feel discomfort, anxiety, and fear due to the questions. The fourth is the scarcity of articles about empathy, cyberbullying, cybervictimization, and characteristics of Filipino adolescents. The fifth is the reliability of the Basic Empathy Scale. This study recorded Cronbach’s α values of .67 for the total Basic Empathy Scale, .51 for the cognitive empathy subscale, and .52 for the affective empathy subscale. This is considered a low reliability score, but according to a book by Hinton et al. [ 15 ], a Cronbach’s α value ranging from .50 to .75 is accepted because it indicates moderate reliability.
Despite the limitations of this study, it still made a pertinent contribution to the study of empathy, cyberbullying, and cybervictimization.
The findings of this study shed important light on the issues of cyberbullying and cybervictimization, which could become more problematic in the COVID-19 pandemic. Empathy was not found to be negatively associated with cyberbullying. This can be explained by a lack of self-awareness, because some SM users post or send whatever they want without thinking about whether the content can harm others [ 1 ]. It is also possible that cyberbullying was viewed as a normal phenomenon, especially as SM use has increased over time. Cognitive empathy, but not affective empathy, was significantly associated with cybervictimization. It is possible for cybervictims to understand the emotions of others but still have difficulty in establishing social relationships or feeling the emotions of other people. The finding of this study that cyberbullying was significantly associated with cybervictimization is alarming. This relationship may be explained by the stress that cybervictims experience and their desire to take revenge on the perpetrators, especially since SM can be anonymously.
We expect that the findings of this study may contribute to the prevention of cyber-related problems among adolescents as it offers basic guidelines. Since adolescence can be a confusing period due to changes and transitions from childhood to adulthood, adolescents deserve special attention and guidance from people surrounding them. It is vital for parents, teachers, and even guardians to establish open and good communication with adolescents to properly guide them towards betterment. At this time, with one’s capacity to empathize, it is possible to become a bystander or a defender of a victim, for which reason we should highlight empathy in efforts to prevent and solve various types of cyber-related problems. We also suggest that as cyberbullying and cybervictimization are closely related, it is important to focus on this relationship and to make multilateral efforts to ensure that cyberbullying does not lead to other negative problems.
Conflict of interest
No existing or potential conflict of interest relevant to this article was reported.
Data availability
Please contact the corresponding author for data availability.
EDCOM 2 Communications
‘2 weeks does not solve 6 years of learning loss’ – edcom 2 commissioner benitez, edcom 2 commissioners gatchalian, villanueva eye increase in global competitiveness, internationalization of public heis, edcom 2 hrep commissioners file concurrent resolution on creation of cabinet cluster for education.
Researchers from the De La Salle University and the Second Congressional Commission on Education (EDCOM 2) today released findings of several studies on bullying in the Philippines, with the results highlighting the alarming prevalence of bullying in schools.
In an EDCOM 2 Sub-committee Meeting on Basic Education Meeting on Bullying and Home & School Environment held on June 13, 2024, results of a series of studies entitled “ Understanding Bullying in Philippine Education: Impacts and Opportunities for Change 1 “ were presented.
Striking PISA 2018 and 2022 Reports
“One of the most striking findings in the Program from International Student Assessment (PISA) 2018 results was that the Philippines had the highest percentage of bullying among all participating countries and territories (OECD, 2019). This trend was replicated in the PISA 2022 assessment although the percentage was lower in this round of assessment (OECD, 2023),” says Dr. Allan B.I. Bernardo, a distinguished university professor and university fellow from DLSU.
According to the PISA 2019, 65% of Filipino students reported being victims of any type of bullying at least a few times in a month, with 40% being bullied frequently (once a week or more). On the other hand, the PISA 2022 reports that one out three Filipino students are being bullied in schools. This is about 43% of girls and 53% of boys in the Philippines encounter bullying incidents multiple times a month. This is much higher than the OECD average of 20% of girls, and 21% of boys.
“International large-scale assessments show us an alarmingly high prevalence of bullying in our schools, which threatens the safety and well-being of our learners. Since we are also looking at the possibility that actual bullying incidents are underreported, we need to ensure that DepEd has strong reporting mechanisms so we can fully capture what is happening on the ground,” EDCOM 2 Co-Chairperson Senator Win Gatchalian said.
EDCOM 2 Executive Director Dr. Karol Mark Yee pointed out the discrepancy between data reported by DepEd and data released by international assessments, citing the alarmingly high incidence of bullying in the country as shown in the PISA and the SEA-PLM. “ Parang ang layo ng numbers na collected [by DepEd], and the data collected by Trends in International Mathematics and Science Studies (TIMMS) and PISA. Can these numbers be reconciled?”, asked EDCOM 2 Co-Chairperson Rep. Roman Romulo.
Source: Learner Rights and Protection Office – Department of Education. Data as of June 10, 2024
DepEd clarified that there were actually reports collated annually at the Central Office coming from divisions, however these remain unverified. The data shows however that from 2013 (the year the Anti Bullying Law was passed) to 2018, the number of reported bullying cases surged from 1,158 to 20,172.
Romulo added, “The law was passed in 2013. From then, until last year, bakit hindi na-identify [ yung reporting issues ?]. Maliwanag naman ‘yung batas. DepEd knew the responsibilities that they had. Why did it take this long [to implement the law]?”
Usec. Escobedo explained that the responsibility of monitoring bullying cases passed between different units in the Department through the years. He also explained that not all Child Protection Committees (CPCs) in schools were functional, and it was only recently, when they formulated a functionality tool to assess the level of operationalization of the CPC’s responsibilities.
“Considering that all members of the CPCs are just designated representatives, who actually fulfills its many responsibilities day-to-day under the DepEd Order 40, series of 2012? For instance, to conduct information dissemination programs, handle referral of cases, assist parents and guardians, and coordinate with the PNP and NGOs?” asked Yee.
Under DepEd Order 40, series of 2012, CPCs are composed of the School Head as Chairperson, the Guidance Counselor/Teacher as Vice Chairperson, as well as representatives of teachers, parents, students, and the community.
“ Kahit na matagal na ‘yung batas, sa totoo, last year lang talaga natutukan ng DepEd, by creating an ad hoc office and by asking for personnel. So right now, we don’t actually know the depth of the problem – ‘yung dimensions ng problema – ng bullying. Kasi last year lang pala naumpisahan ‘yung Learners’ Rights Protection Office (LRPO)”, said Cong. Romulo.
Five bullying studies completed
Through the partnership between De La Salle University and the EDCOM II, five studies on bullying were published. Led by Dr. Bernardo, other scholars included Katrina F. Resurreccion, Ma. Caridad H. Tarroja, Rene M. Nob, Macario O. Cordel II, Rochelle Irene G. Lucas, Minie Rose C. Lapinid, Thomas James Tiam-Lee, Geselle Manguiat, Althea Patricia Aranillo, Jim Rey R. Baloloy, Reinier Dave Zapanta, Elaine Marie D. Aranda, Joel C. Narvaez, Rosette D. Morga, and Patricia Mae A. Taba.
Dr. Bernardo, presenting an overview of the studies, noted that tackling bullying calls for school-wide anti-bullying approaches. “Bullying is not just one thing. We need to look at it as sustaining and supporting the whole school environment”. He stressed the need for programs ranging from education and prevention, to handling consequences of bullying for victims, perpetrators, and witnesses.
Bullying hotspots: Regions XIII and MIMAROPA, congested public schools
The DLSU study highlighted how the school structure and environment, and the level of support they get from adults can predict exposure to bullying among students. According to Nob, et.al., bullying is more prevalent in public schools with large class sizes, discriminatory teacher behavior, and lower levels of competition and discipline. Bullying is also more widespread in public schools with a higher percentage of students coming from lower socioeconomic environments.
One of the studies developed a digital visualization tool using data from the 2019 PISA report to map bullying hotspots in the country. According to the findings of Cordel, et.al, Regions XIII and IV-B MIMAROPA were identified to have the highest incidence of bullying, followed by Regions XII, V, and I.
Findings of Baloloy et,al., revealed that Filipinos who are bullied often deal with mental health concerns like depression and anxiety, and experience both traditional physical bullying, and relational cyberbullying. Other factors influencing bullying include psychosocial issues and the learner’s environment, such as school safety, relationships with their parents, and their prevailing attitudes towards bullying.
Amend IRR of Anti Bullying Act of 2013, pass mental health bills
The DLSU team recommended for EDCOM to push for amendments to the Implementing Rules and Regulations of Republic Act 10627, strengthening the provisions related to the Child Protection Committee (CPC), improving systems for reporting bullying cases, and clarifying DepEd’s structures and systems related to bullying.
During the hearing, the EDCOM decided to establish a joint Technical Working Group composed of the members of the EDCOM 2 Standing Committee on Basic Education, together with DepEd, to review the IRR of RA 10627, and to propose reforms to make the policy implementable.
“Let’s not disappoint – because madami na talagang good plans, but hindi talaga na-iimplement, and we end up disappointing our teachers, our students, and the DepEd family itself. So let’s do our part. Let’s make it work, so we don’t disappoint our parents, teachers, and our learners. We have good plans, but we couldn’t implement them”, said Rep. Romulo.
Download the full report of “Understanding Bullying in Philippine Education: Impacts and Opportunities for Change” at https://edcom2.gov.ph/publications/
During a field visit to a public high school in Metro Manila, the Second Congressional Commission on Education (EDCOM 2) expressed its concerns over the implementation of the National Learning Camp (NLC) of the Department of Education (DepEd), as it seems to fail to achieve its intended outcomes. EDCOM 2 led by its Co-Chairperson Senator Sherwin…
The Second Congressional Committee on Education (EDCOM 2) Co-Chairperson Senator Sherwin Gatchalian and Commissioner Senator Joel Villanueva filed Senate Bill No. 2733 yesterday, An Act Amending Section 5 (3) of Republic Act No. 9225, Otherwise Known as the “Citizens Retention and Re-acquisition Act of 2003”. SBN 2733 intends to increase the global competitiveness and promote…
Commissioners of the Second Congressional Commission on Education (EDCOM 2) at the House of Representatives filed yesterday, July 16, House Concurrent Resolution No. 28 urging President Marcos to create a cabinet cluster for education. Introduced by EDCOM 2 Commissioners Rep. Roman T. Romulo, Rep. Mark O. Go, Rep. Jose Francisco B. Benitez, Rep Khalid Q. Dimaporo and Rep Pablo…
Get updates on the latest news, publications, and more, straight to your inbox! Email Address* |
By answering this form, you acknowledge that you have read, understood, and agree to our Privacy Policy .
This research looked into prevalence rate of bullying victimization and perpetration as well as teachers’ response to bullying incidence in the Philippines. A total of 340 sixth graders from five different schools in Western Visayas participated in the study. Slightly more than half (54.1%) of the sample were boys and 45.9% were girls. Descriptive statistics were used to analyze data gathered from the survey. Children’s self-reports revealed that prevalence rate for victimization was 40.6% and that for perpetration was 23.8%. Similar to previous literature, results also showed that there were significantly more boys than girls who reported to be victims ( χ 2 (1, N = 340) = 4.26, p = 0.039) and bullies ( χ 2 (1, N = 340) = 4.35, p = 0.037). Regardless of gender, verbal bullying came out as the most common type of bullying children experienced as a victim and bully. Teachers’ response to bullying was all in line with direct sanctions, i.e. verbal reprimands, temporary removal from class, withdrawal of privileges, and suspension, which were imposed on individuals involved in bullying as bullies. Although all teachers and school personnel were required to report bullying cases they had knowledge of to the child protection committee in their institution, very few did so. These findings suggest the need for a more effective bullying prevention program and a careful examination of the implementing rules and guidelines of RA 10627, otherwise known as the Anti-Bullying Act of 2013.
Filipino Children , School Bullying , Direct Sanctions , Anti-Bullying Act of 2013
Share and Cite:
1. Introduction
Although aggression is one of the elements of bullying, not all violence or aggressive actions in school can fall under this category. For bullying to occur, Olweus (1993) mentioned that a student must be repeatedly exposed to negative behavior of his/her peers. Moreover, the perpetrator must have a deliberate intention to harm the victim and the latter should have limited power to fight back (Nansel et al., 2001; Olweus, 1993) . Without the power imbalance between the aggressor and the victim as well as regularity of the aggressive act, a negative action done by one child to another cannot be considered as bullying; rather, it will fall under violence or aggression (Olweus, 1993) .
Bullying is categorized into four types, namely: physical, verbal, cyber, and relational. Physical bullying includes all forms of physical harm done on the victim such as kicking, shoving, punching, and the like. Verbal bullying is usually in the form of derogatory remarks or insults hurled at the target. This may include but not limited to name-calling, taunting, teasing in a hurtful way, and making fun of the individual (Berger, 2007; Wang, Iannotti, & Nansel, 2009) . Relational bullying involves social seclusion. It may be done in the form of spreading rumors and lies about the victim in order to make others avoid socializing with him/her (Wang et al., 2009) . Cyberbullying, on the other hand, occurs electronically, and has proven to be more damaging because it often relates to victims’ depressive state, delinquent behavior and substance abuse (Mitchell, Ybarra, & Finkelhor, 2007) as well as suicidal thoughts and suicide attempts (Hinduja & Patchin, 2010) .
In Asia-Pacific, the most common type of school bullying was verbal, e.g., “being made fun of” or “being called names” (Chen, 2015; Lai, Ye, & Chang, 2008) . A similar study in South America also found verbal bullying as the most pervasive school bullying experience of youngsters (Silva, Pereira, Mendonca, Nunes, & de Oliveira, 2013) . However, in Egypt and Ghana, physical assaults were the most common form of bullying among students (Wilson, Dunlavy, & Berchtold, 2013) . The same was true for Singaporean children in one study (Kwan & Skoric, 2012) . Cyberbullying, though becoming controversial recently with a number of youth suicides, was said to be less prevalent than that of traditional or face-to-face bullying (Chen, 2015; Gofin & Avitrzour, 2012; Lapidot-Lefler & Dolev-Cohen, 2015; Modecki, Minchin, Harbaugh, Guerra, & Runions, 2014) .
As to involvement in school bullying, high rate of victimization of at least 40% was often reported by African countries (Kubwalo, Muula, Siziya, Pasupulati, & Rudatsikira, 2013; Owusu, Hart, Oliver, & Kang, 2011; Siziya, Rudatsikira, & Muula, 2013) . In the Philippines, two studies conducted by foreign researchers in 2008 showed different results. In one study, the prevalence rate was 35.5% (Rudatsikira, Mataya, Siziya, & Muula, 2008) while in another it was 85.5% (Lai et al., 2008) . However, in a research conducted by Fleming and Jacobsen (2009) involving 19 low and middle income countries in which Philippines was included, prevalence rate in the country was only 37.1%, or a lot closer to that found by Rudatsikira et al. (2008) . As to cyberbullying, Australia showed to have a high number of incidence rate in the youngsters’ lifetime at 27% (Cross et al., 2012) , Japan at 18% (Aoyama, Utsumi, & Hasegawa, 2012) , the US at 17% (Bauman, 2012) , and South Korea at 12% (Tippett & Kawk, 2012) . Respondents for these studies ranged from grade 5 to 11. It should be noted that these are just glimpses of the pervasiveness of bullying in the countries mentioned and may not be true for the whole nation.
Bullying research has also shown that victimization was found to be higher than perpetration. For example, in one study in Romania which used self-re- ports, it was found out that 40.5% of 264 students surveyed indicated that they were victims of school bullying and only 33.8% admitted that they had bullied others (Belden-Galea, Jurcau, & Tigan, 2010) . The same was true for sampled students in Turkey (Arslan, Hallett, Akkas, & Akkas, 2012; Tayli, 2013) .
With regard to gender differences in school bullying experience, several studies have shown that boys were more involved as perpetrators and victims than do girls (Berger, 2007; Caravita, Gini, & Pozzoli, 2012; Cosma & Baban, 2013; Jansen et al., 2012; Khamis, 2015; Siann, Callaghan, Glissov, Lockhart, & Rawson, 2006; Silva et al., 2013; Tayli, 2013; Wang et al., 2009; Wu et al., 2015) and were more likely to be victims of direct form of bullying such as physical fights (Cheng et al., 2010; Jansen et al., 2012; Lai et al., 2008; Shujja et al., 2014; Silva et al., 2013; Uwusu et al., 2011) while girls were more likely to experience relational bullying (Cheng et al., 2010; Silva et al., 2013) .
As to gender and frequency of victimization, results were mixed. On the one hand, research has shown that boys and girls did not differ significantly in the frequency of victimization (Malecki et al., 2015) , but on the other hand, it revealed that boys have higher self-reported frequency of being bullied than do girls (Chen, 2015; Fleming & Jacobsen, 2009; Nansel et al., 2001) .
With regard to intervention programs that could help reduce the prevalence rate of bullying in schools, involving the community, family (Mann, Kristiansson, Sigfusdottir, & Smith, 2015) , especially parents (Jones & Augustine, 2015; Lester et al., 2017) , students (Cross et al., 2011; Jones & Augustine, 2015) and teachers (Duy, 2013) reduced the odds of young people engaging in bullying behavior. In another study, arousing the bullies’ empathy for their victims and condemning their actions proved to be effective in increasing their intention to stop their aggressive behavior (Garandeau, Vartio, Poskiparta, & Salmivalli, 2016) . However, Ken Rigby, a school bullying expert, had found in his study that the most commonly used intervention methods in schools were direct sanctions or “the imposition of disciplinary sanctions on the person or persons identified as responsible for the bullying” (Rigby, 2014: p. 409) . These direct sanctions include verbal reprimands, temporary removal from class, and withdrawal of privileges, among others, which were imposed on individuals involved in bullying others (Rigby, 2014) . He said that these may deter bullies to perpetuate the act but only temporarily. In addition, he also suggested that this kind of response is only reactive and it does little to prevent students from engaging in bullying behavior in the future.
In the Philippines, with the passing of Republic Act (RA) 10627, otherwise known as the Anti-bullying Law of 2013, schools are required to establish their own anti-bullying programs which includes the formation of a committee who would ensure the protection of children against abuses from their peers as well as adults, formulation of awareness programs to increase students’ knowledge of bullying, and provision of counseling programs for both bullies and victims. Educators, school personnel, and students are also encouraged to report school bullying they have witnessed to proper channels.
This study was conducted to find out the prevalence rate of the different forms of school bullying among the sixth graders in selected schools in Western Visayas; feelings of victims and bullies after the act; proportion of males and females who engaged in school bullying as a victim and perpetrator, and; teachers’ response to bullying cases they have witnessed. It is hoped that this research could be of help, especially to Filipino educators and policy makers in formulating effective bullying programs in schools.
2.1. Participants
A total of 340 sixth graders from five different public schools in Western Visayas, which is located in central Philippines participated in the study. They were chosen using cluster sampling. Each cluster consisted of students in one grade six class. On the average there were six classes (or clusters) per school. In a school with only five grade six classes, two were chosen and those with six-seven, three classes. This sampling technique was used for ease of data gathering and to minimize disruption in the normal activities of the children.
The average age for participants during data gathering was 12.1. Slightly more than half (54.1%, n = 184) of the sample were boys and 45.9% (n = 156) were girls. The number of respondents per school and gender distribution were proportional to the total population of their sixth graders.
The total sample size was approximately 30% of the entire grade six populations in the selected five schools. In determining how many will be selected from each school, 30% of the total population of grade six pupils was first computed. Then, the total number of sixth graders per school was divided by the total grade six population of the five schools multiplied by 100 (to get the percentage). So if one school’s total sixth graders was 28% of the entire grade six population in all five schools, they also contributed 28% to the total sample. This is to avoid over- representing one school while under representing another.
2.2. Research Instrument
The questionnaire used for this research was constructed by the author. This is to ensure that questions included are appropriate to the Philippine context. It consisted of an open-ended and multiple-choice items which were all expressed in the participants’ mother tongue. Questions on gauging respondents’ experience on bullying were based on Olweus’ (1993) definition of the phenomenon. This includes questions such as: 1) Did you initiate a fight with other children in the last six months? If yes, how often in a week? 2) How do you fight with him/her? How often do you do this in a week? 3) Who do you always fight with? 4) Are your victims capable of fighting back with you?
The follow-up question for item #1 was meant to find out whether participants initiate the fight on a regular basis. If they do, it would satisfy the first criterion for an act to be considered as bullying: regularity of the aggressive behavior. This question was also the basis for determining the frequency of fights or bullying. The second question was included to find out the type of aggressive acts or bullying they usually do with their peers. The third question was meant to find out who they usually victimize―are the victims younger, older, of the same age, male, or female, among others. The third and fourth questions were very important because they could determine whether there was a power imbalance between the bully and victim, a very important component of bullying.
Questions aimed at identifying the victim were also included. They were similar to the one aforementioned, but instead of asking questions like, “Did you initiate a fight with other children in the last six months?” it was rephrased as, “Did other children initiate a fight with you in the last six months?” In addition, instead of asking them, “Who do you always fight with?” it was posed as, “Who usually initiates a fight with you?” Other questions include: “Are the children who initiate a fight with you those you can easily fight back?”
The children were also asked motives or reasons for bullying other children, how they feel after engaging in bullying or fights as an initiator of the behavior or as a victim and what their teachers do after witnessing the event.
The said questionnaire was pretested among children of similar age and educational level in the same area a few months before the study was conducted. This pretest was done to find out whether the items were aptly phrased in the participants’ mother tongue or not. The pretest showed that questions were well-understood by local children.
2.3. Procedure
This study was conducted during the first quarter of 2014. All public elementary schools located in each of the town proper of a selected semi-urban district in Western Visayas were included in the current research. The target participants were grade six pupils and they were recruited through their school heads. The survey was conducted during the children’s recess so as not to disrupt their classes.
In lieu of a research ethics committee which was yet to be established in the district where the study was conducted, the principals or head of schools selected for the survey were the ones who reviewed the nature of the research. A letter, which detailed the purpose of the study, survey procedure, and students’ participation was submitted to each of the school principals for review. A copy of the questionnaire in the respondents’ dialect was also attached with the letter to enable principals concerned to get a clear understanding of what will be asked from their students. After a week’s deliberation with their teachers in the sixth grade and representatives of the parent-teacher association, all of them granted permission to the author/researcher to conduct the survey in their institutions. Although the study was approved by school authorities concerned, participants’ assent was still solicited. They were informed of the nature of the study, their participation in it, and how their responses will be used and analyzed. They were also told that although their schools agreed for them to participate, they still have the right to withdraw participation should they feel uncomfortable with the questions in the survey questionnaire. None of them withdrew.
2.4. Data Analysis
Cross tabulations were done to determine the number of male and female victims and perpetrators of school bullying while chi-square analysis was used to find out whether there was a significant difference between the number of boys and girls who reported to be bullies or victims. Frequencies and percentages were also used to describe the data.
3.1. Prevalence of Bullying
Children’s self-reports revealed that there were more of them who indicated they were victims of school bullying (40.6%, n = 138) than those who admitted they were the perpetrators (23.8%, n = 81). Of the 138 participants who were victimized, 84 (60.9%) were males and 54 (39.1%) were females. As to the bullies, the majority were also boys (64.2%, n = 52). Chi-square analysis showed that indeed there were significantly more boys than girls who were victims (χ 2 (1, N = 340) = 4.26, p = 0.039) and bullies (χ 2 (1, N = 340) = 4.35, p = 0.037).
The majority of female victims (74.1%, n = 40) experienced bullying from both sexes, while only 41.7% (n = 35) for male victims. But when it comes to being bullied by the same sex, more than half of the boys (56.0%, n = 47) and only 14.8% (n = 8) of the girls indicated that they had experienced such type of victimization.
When bullies were asked as to who they usually torment in school, 53.8% (n = 28) of the boys reported that their victims came from both sexes. But there were 40.4% (n = 21) of them who bullied only boys and 5.8% (n = 3) only girls. For the female bullies, most of them (65.5%, n = 19) indicated that their victims were either their fellow girls or boys. Only 17.2% (n = 5) of them victimized just boys or just girls.
3.2. Types of School Bullying Done by Bullies
Prevalence rates for bullying types done by perpetrators are presented in Table 1 . As shown in this table, all four types of school bullying, namely: verbal, physical, cyber, and relational were done by bullies in the current study. Verbal bullying topped the list at 60.5% (n = 49). This included threatening their victims, calling them names, saying hurtful words to them, and taunting them because of
Table 1 . Forms of bullying done by bullies.
their names, looks, or smell. Even when respondents were categorized by gender, verbal bullying still emerged as the most prevalent form of bullying done by both male (63.5%, n = 33) and female (55.2%, n = 16) bullies (see Table 1 ). Table 1 also shows that there were more boys than girls (n = 9 vs. n = 1) who used physical bullying to torment their peers. Surprisingly, relational bullying (1%, n = 3) came out as the least prevalent even by female bullies. Boys reported to have never done it at all.
3.3. Types of School Bullying Experienced by Victims
Table 2 shows the prevalence rate for victimization. As shown in the table, verbal bullying also came out as the most frequent type experienced by victims regardless of gender. The pattern of responses is comparable to that of the bullies’ experience, with relational form being exclusively experienced by girls.
A chi-square test was not performed for this bullying and victimization data because there were many cells which contained a frequency count lower than five, a criterion which should be met to obtain a reliable result.
3.4. Frequency of Bullying Behavior
In this section, only the top three categories were discussed. The total frequencies for victimization was 138, while for bullying 84.
Slightly more than half (55.8%, n = 77) of the victims indicated that they were bullied less than once a week. Even when boys’ and girls’ responses were segregated, this still emerged as the most common frequency of bullying experience. Only around 15.2% (n = 21) were victimized every day, closely followed by twice a week at 14.5% (n = 20).
This pattern was also reflected in the bullying behavior of bullies. The majority of them (58.0%, n = 47) also indicated that they torment their victims less than once a week, about 17.3% (n = 14) bullied their peers twice a week, followed by every day at 14.8% (n = 12). This was true for both male and female bullies.
Table 2 . Forms of bullying experienced by victims.
3.5. Why Bullies Bully Other Children
Bullies reported several reasons why they bully other children ( Figure 1 ). The most common of which was retaliation or getting even (44%). Aside from retaliation, just for fun also got a double figure (33%). Other reasons had something to do with the physical attribute of the victim (i.e. smells bad or ugly).
3.6. Feeling of Bullies after Bullying Others
Although retaliation came out as the most frequent reason for bullying other children, only a few number of participants (13%) felt good for hurting their peers. As shown in Figure 2 , “feeling sorry” came out as the most common reaction to bullying others. This was followed by “feeling guilty” (29%) and “scared” (27%). However, these did not stop them from repeating what they had been doing as shown in the prevalence rate of bullying in the selected areas.
3.7. Feeling of Victims after Being Bullied
When victims were asked to indicate what they felt after being bullied, the majority indicated negative reactions such as anger, sadness, felt like crying, and embarrassment with anger (30%) as the topmost reaction ( Figure 3 ). A few of them (8%) reported that they didn’t feel anything at all.
3.8. Teachers/Class Advisers’ Response to Bullying
According to the majority (78%) of the participants, the most common reaction of teachers to bullying incidence they have witnessed was stopping the act immediately and resolving the matter right there and then. This means teachers would ask students involved to say sorry to each other, reprimand or give sanctions to bullies, and make sure both bullies and victims become “friends”. These reprimands were usually verbal in nature which included scolding the bullies or threatening to report them to their parents, guidance office, or the school’s principal. Other sanctions were withdrawal of privileges, e.g. not allowing them to have a recess, temporary suspension from classes, or in worst case scenarios being kicked out of school. The latter sanction is only applied after all the alternatives have been exhausted and are proven to be ineffective to solve the problem.
Figure 1 . Why bullies bully other kids.
Figure 2 . Feeling of bullies after bullying other children.
Figure 3 . Feeling of victims after being bullied
Although teachers or school personnel are expected to report the bullying incidence they have witnessed personally to the committee of child protection to which the guidance counselor is a member, only few did so according to participants. In fact, there were only 9% of respondents who indicated this type of response to bullying from their teachers or class advisers. About the same number (10%) said that their teachers informed parents of children involved in the bullying incident. The remaining three percent (3%) of participants indicated that their educators have done nothing about the bullying case they have witnessed.
4. Discussion
The results have shown that 40.6% or roughly four out of 10 Filipino children experienced bullying from their peers. This prevalence rate is comparable to two studies done in the Philippines (Jacobsen & Fleming, 2009; Rudatsikira et al., 2008) but a lot different from that reported by Lai et al. (2008) . The discrepancy in prevalence rate of the four studies could be attributed to the time range by which bullying involvement was measured. For example, in Lai et al. (2008) , participants were asked to report their lifetime experience in bullying, whereas in the other three including the current study, it was only within a year.
When compared to prevalence rate of victimization in studies in other countries, it was either a lot higher (Shujja et al., 2014; Wu, et al., 2015) , lower (Siziya et al., 2012; Wang et al., 2009) or just at par (Kubwalo et al., 2013; Owusu et al., 2011) .
When respondents’ experiences were examined according to gender, it was revealed that there were significantly more Filipino boys who reported to be victims and bullies as compared to girls. This result is consistent with several studies (Berger, 2007; Caravita et al., 2012; Cosma & Baban, 2013; Jansen et al., 2012; Khamis, 2015; Siann et al., 2006; Silva et al., 2013; Tayli, 2013; Wang et al., 2009; Wu et al., 2015) . In addition, the study also supports previous literature that says boys were more victimized by their fellow boys than girls being victimized by girls (Shujja et al., 2014) .
As to the most common form of bullying experienced by both perpetrators and victims, current results were similar to that found by Lai et al. (2008) and Silva et al. (2013) which showed verbal bullying as the most frequent form experienced by young respondents but differed from that found by Wilson et al. (2013) and Kwan and Skoric (2012) . Though other countries such as Australia (Cross et al., 2012) , Japan (Aoyama et al., 2012) , the US (Bauman, 2012) , and South Korea (Tippett & Kawk, 2012) showed double figures in cyberbullying rate, respondents in this study identified such form of peer abuse as the least common they experienced as bullies and victims as shown by a barely seven per cent prevalence rate. This difference could be due to age of respondents and access to electronics and the Internet. Participants in the abovementioned studies were adolescents in affluent nations who may have their own electronic devices equipped with Wi-Fi connection, whereas participants in the current research were 12-year olds, most of whom had no cell phones or computers of their own. In addition, the result of this study showing cyberbullying prevalence rate to be a lot lesser than that of traditional bullying was also consistent with findings from existing literature (Gofin & Avitzour, 2012; Lapidot-Lefler & Dolev-Cohen, 2015; Modecki et al., 2014) .
With regard to the frequency of bullying behavior, the result showing that boys and girls alike showed similar frequency of victimization supports previous African study (Malecki et al., 2015) , but contradicts that done by Chen (2015) and Nansel et al. (2001) . In addition, the current research was also consistent with that done in Romania (Belden-Galea et al., 2010) and Turkey (Arslan et al., 2012; Tayli, 2013) that argued the incidence of victimization was higher than that of perpetration.
What’s new about this study was the fact that not all bullies had the intention to harm their victims. Some bullies said they were just teasing their victims in a ‘friendly way’; however, this got out of hand and their victims were emotionally hurt or humiliated in the process. This is especially true for those who were making fun of their classmates because of the latter’s funny name, physical defect, or peculiar characteristics. Although in Olweus’ (1993) definition this type of behavior cannot be considered as bullying, it was identified as such in this study because according to RA 10627 any act done by one student to another that causes emotional harm or infringes on the rights of another student at school is considered as school bullying. Teachers in five selected schools also use this definition together with that of Olweus’ (1993) in determining whether their students engage in bullying behavior or not.
As expected, victims reacted negatively to being bullied with the majority reported feeling angry towards their bullies. This anger could have motivated some to get back at their aggressor when they got an opportunity because Figure 1 shows retaliation as the most common motivation of bullies, who used to be victims, in hurting their targets. Although the majority reacted negatively to being bullied, a few others reported to have felt nothing about their experience. This may have something to do with how severe they perceived their experience was. It may be that those who felt nothing were those who had a mild form of victimization. For future research, looking into the relationship between victims’ perception of their bullying experience and how they feel after being bullied could provide valuable insights on how to help them effectively.
As to teachers’ response to bullying, it showed that they were more in line with direct sanctions (Rigby, 2014) . Based on participants’ reports, the focus of the intervention was the bullies as they were the ones who were reprimanded and threatened to be reported to their parents, guidance counselor, and principal. The victim seemed to be left out. It also implied that teachers’ reactions were more in line with short-term intervention strategies which Rigby (2014) thought to have no significant impact on future behavior. Although RA 10627 required these educators to bring the bully and victim to the guidance counselor or the child protection committee for proper handling of the case, very few of them did more than stopping the act and reprimanding students involved. This seemingly inadequate response of educators with regard to school bullying incidence they had witnessed may be attributed to their schools’ lack of established school bullying programs or lack of proper training in responding to such problem. Inasmuch as the study was conducted a few months after the implementation of the Anti-Bullying Act of 2013, it was somehow understandable that many schools have not yet established their own comprehensive anti-bullying intervention strategies during the data gathering period.
Research on intervention strategies (Cross et al., 2011; Duy, 2013; Garandeau et al., 2016; Jones & Augustine, 2015; Lester et al., 2017; Man et al., 2015) recommended a number of ways on how to help minimize the bullying incidence in schools. These include involving the family especially the parents, community, students, teachers, and non-teaching school personnel in the preventative programs. Based on participants’ reports in the current study, these strategies seemed to be not exhausted yet.
5. Conclusion
The results showed that school bullying was prevalent among children in selected schools in the Philippines. There was also evidence that there were more boys than girls who had experienced bullying both as a perpetrator and victim. However, when it comes to the frequency of victimization they did not show any significant difference between male and female participants. The study also revealed that verbal bullying and victimization was the common form experienced by the children. Their report also indicated that teachers’ responses to bullying were mainly short-term intervention. Very few of them go beyond direct sanctions.
6. Limitations
The data relied primarily on participants’ self-reports. As is often the problem with self-reports, there is always a tendency for respondents to withhold information or to respond in a biased way. Even when they try to respond as honestly as possible, there may still be instances when some of them would overestimate the occurrence of bullying when they see themselves as victims and underestimate those incidences when they are the bullies. However, given the limited time and resources, surveys employing self-reports was the most appropriate method for this study. In addition, school authorities in the area allowed only this type of data gathering method to be used with their students. Overt observation in the schools’ premises was not authorized because the school heads felt it would disrupt the normal activities of their students.
7. Recommendations
Given the result of the current study, it is imperative for each school to train their teaching and non-teaching staff to properly identify students involved in bullying as well as teach them how to respond to such problem. Merely stopping the act when it occurs or using direct sanctions on children concerned may not be effective in the long run. Educators also need to address the root cause of bullying by talking with the bullies and victims alike or reporting them to their counselors for proper guidance. Schools also need to design programs which could help both bullies and victims and not just focus on one of them.
With regard to other stakeholders on the issue such as parents and community, schools could greatly benefit if these people are also actively participating in the formulation of preventative programs for school bullying. At present, parents’ role or responsibilities in the prevention of peer abuse were not clearly stated in the Child Protection Policy and in the Implementing Rules and Regulations (IRR) of RA 10627. Although the Anti-bullying Law and the Child Protection Policy were clear about punishments for bullies, there was no corresponding clear-cut accountability for their parents or guardians. Unless parents or guardians are made answerable to the actions of their children, they will not actively participate in school bullying programs, especially if the victims are not their children. It may also be beneficial to all educational institutions in the country to solicit help from the community such as village leaders and elders, parish priests, or catechism teachers. Since Philippines is a catholic country, children look up to religious leaders and elders.
Last but not least, students should also be involved in all these to make them fully aware of their rights as well as that of their peers. By increasing their awareness and actively involving them in the formulation of anti-bullying programs, they may also learn how to protect themselves from abuses of fellow children. In addition, asking the help of popular students especially in influencing bullies to stop their aggressive behavior may also be effective inasmuch as young people listen to their influential peers.
Declaration of Conflicting Interests
The author declared that there is no potential conflict of interests as to the authorship and publication of this research article.
Acknowledgements
The author would like to thank all the principals of the schools and class advisers of students who participated in the study for their time and cooperation during data gathering.
Conflicts of Interest
The authors declare no conflicts of interest.
[ ] | Aoyama, I., Utsumi, S., & Hasegawa, M. (2012). Cyberbullying in Japan. In Q. Li, D. Cross, & P. K. Smith (Eds.), Cyberbullying in the Global Playground: Research from International Perspective (pp. 183-201). New York: Wiley-Blackwell. |
[ ] | Arslan, S., Hallett, V., Akkas, E., & Akkas, O. A. (2012). Bullying and Victimization among Turkish Children and Adolescents: Examining Prevalence and Associated Health Symptoms. European Journal of Pediatrics, 171, 1549-1557. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00431-012-1782-9 |
[ ] | Bauman, S. (2012). Cyberbullying in the United States. In Q. Li, D. Cross, & P. K. Smith (Eds.), Cyberbullying in the Global Playground: Research from International Perspective (pp. 143-179). New York: Wiley-Blackwell. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119954484.ch8 |
[ ] | Belden-Galea, I. E., Jurcau, N., & Tigan, S. I. (2010). Frequency of Bullying Behaviors in Secondary Schools in Cluj-Napoca. Applied Medical Informatics, 27, 62-66. |
[ ] | Berger, K. S. (2007). Update on Bullying at School: Science Forgotten? Developmental Review, 27, 90-126. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dr.2006.08.002 |
[ ] | Caravita, S. C. S., Gini, G., & Pozzoli, T. (2012). Main and Moderated Effects of Moral Cognition and Status on Bullying and Defending. Aggressive Behavior, 38, 456-468. https://doi.org/10.1002/ab.21447 |
[ ] | Chen, L. M. (2015). Self-Reported Frequency and Perceived Severity of Being Bullied among Elementary School Students. Journal of School Health, 85, 587-594. https://doi.org/10.1111/josh.12289 |
[ ] | Cheng, Y., Newman, I. M., Qu, M., Mbulo, L., Chai, Y., Chen, Y., & Shell, D. F. (2010). Being Bullied and Psychological Adjustment among Middle School Students in China. Journal of School Health, 80, 193-199. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1746-1561.2009.00486.x |
[ ] | Cosma, A., & Baban, A. (2013). The Associations between Bullying Behaviors and Health Outcomes among Romanian School Children. Cognition, Brain, Behavior, 17, 263-276. |
[ ] | Cross, D., Monks, H., Hall, M., Shaw, T., Pintabona, Y., Erceg, E., & Lester, L. (2011). Three-year Results of the Friendly Schools Whole-of-School Intervention on Children’s Bullying Behavior. British Educational Research Journal, 37, 105-129. https://doi.org/10.1080/01411920903420024 |
[ ] | Cross, D., Shaw, T., Epstein, M., Monks, F., Dooley, J., & Hearn, L. (2012). Cyberbullying in Australia: Is School Context Related to School Bullying Behavior? In Q. Li, D. Cross, & P. K. Smith (Eds.), Cyberbullying in the Global Playground: Research from International Perspective (pp. 75-98). New York: Wiley-Blackwell. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119954484.ch5 |
[ ] | Duy, B. (2013). Teachers’ Attitudes toward Different Types of Bullying Victimization. Psychology in the Schools, 50, 987-1002. https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.21729 |
[ ] | Fleming, L. C., & Jacobsen, K. H. (2009). Bullying among Middle-School Students in Low and Middle Income Countries. Health Promotion International, 25, 73-74. https://doi.org/10.1093/heapro/dap046 |
[ ] | Garandeau, C. F., Vartio, A., Poskiparta, E., & Salmivalli, C. (2016). School Bullies’ Intention to Change Behavior following Teacher Interventions: Effects of Empathy Arousal, Condemning of Bullying, and Blaming of the Perpetrator. Prevention Science, 17, 1034-1043. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11121-016-0712-x |
[ ] | Gofin, R., & Avitzour, M. (2012). Traditional versus Internet Bullying in Junior High School Students. Maternal and Child Health Journal, 16, 1625-1635. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10995-012-0989-8 |
[ ] | Hinduja, S., & Patchin, J. W. (2010). Bullying, Cyberbullying, and Suicide. Archives of Suicide Research, 14, 206-221. https://doi.org/10.1080/13811118.2010.494133 |
[ ] | Jansen, P. W., Verlinden, M., Berkel, A. D., Mieloo, C., van der Ende, J., Veenstra, R. et al. (2012). Prevalence of Bullying and Victimization among Children in Early Elementary School: Do Family and School Neighborhood, Socioeconomic Status Matter? BioMed Central Public Health, 12, 494. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2458-12-494 |
[ ] | Jones, J. R., & Augustine, S. M. (2015). Creating an Anti-Bullying Culture in Secondary Schools: Characteristics to Consider When Constructing Appropriate Anti-Bullying Programs. American Secondary Education, 43, 73-84. |
[ ] | Khamis, V. (2015). Bullying among School-Age Children in the Greater Beirut Area: Risk and Protective Factors. Child Abuse & Neglect, 39, 137-146. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chiabu.2014.08.005 |
[ ] | Kubwalo, H. W., Muula, A. S., Siziya, S., Pasupulati, S., & Rudatsikira, E. (2013). Prevalence and Correlates of Being Bullied among In-School Adolescents in Malawi: Results from the 2009 Global School-Based Health Survey. Malawi Medical Journal, 25, 12-14. |
[ ] | Kwan, G. C. E., & Skoric, M. M. (2012). Facebook Bullying: An Extension of Battles in School. Computers in Human Behavior, 29, 16-25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2012.07.014 |
[ ] | Lai, S., Ye, R., & Chang, K. (2008). Bullying in Middle Schools: An Asian-Pacific Regional Study. Asia Pacific Education Review, 9, 503-515. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03025666 |
[ ] | Lapidot-Lefler, N., & Dolev-Cohen, M. (2015). Comparing Cyberbullying and School Bullying among School Students: Prevalence, Gender, and Grade Level Differences. Social Psychology of Education, 18, 1-16. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11218-014-9280-8 |
[ ] | Lester, L., Pearce, N., Waters, S., Barnes, A., Beatty, S., & Cross, D. (2017). Family Involvement in a Whole-School Intervention: Mothers’ and Fathers’ Communication and Influence with Children. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 26, 2716-2727. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10826-017-0793-6 |
[ ] | Malecki, C. K., Demaray, M. C., Coyle, S., Geosling, R., Rueger, S. Y., & Becker, L. D. (2015). Frequency, Power Differential, and Intentionality and the Relationship to Anxiety, Depression, and Self-Esteem for Victims of Bullying. Child & Youth Care Forum, 44, 115-131. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10566-014-9273-y |
[ ] | Mann, M. J., Kristiansson, A. L., Sigfusdottir, I. D., & Smith, M. L. (2015). The Role of Community, Family, Peer, and Social Factors in Group Bullying: Implications for School-Based Intervention. Journal of School Health, 85, 477-486. https://doi.org/10.1111/josh.12270 |
[ ] | Mitchell, K. J., Ybarra, M., & Finkelhor, D. (2007). The Relative Importance of Online Victimization in Understanding Depression, Delinquency, and Substance Abuse. Child Maltreatment, 12, 314-324. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077559507305996 |
[ ] | Modecki, K. L., Minchin, J., Harbaugh, A. G., Guerra, N. G., & Runions, K. C. (2014). Bullying Prevalence across Contexts: A Meta-Analysis Measuring Cyber and Traditional Bullying. Journal of Adolescent Health, 55, 602-611. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jadohealth.2014.06.007 |
[ ] | Nansel, T. R., Overpeck, M., Pilla, R. S., Ruan, W. J., Simons-Morton, B., & Scheidt, P. (2001). Bullying Behaviors among US Youth: Prevalence and Association with Psychosocial Adjustment. Journal of the American Medical Association, 285, 2094-2100. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.285.16.2094 |
[ ] | Olweus, D. (1993). Understanding Children’s World: Bullying at School. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing. |
[ ] | Owusu, A., Hart, P., Oliver, B., & Kang, M. (2011). The Association between Bullying and Psychological Health among Senior High School Students in Ghana, West Africa. Journal of School Health, 81, 231-238. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1746-1561.2011.00590.x |
[ ] | Rigby, K. (2014). How Teachers Address Cases of Bullying in Schools: A Comparison of Five Reactive Approaches. Educational Psychology in Practice, 30, 409-419. https://doi.org/10.1080/02667363.2014.949629 |
[ ] | Rudatsikira, E., Mataya, R. H., Siziya, S., & Muula, A. S. (2008). Association between Bullying Victimization and Physical Fighting among Filipino Adolescents: Results from the Global School-Based Survey. Indian Journal of Pediatrics, 75, 1243-1247. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12098-008-0244-x |
[ ] | Shujja, S., Atta, M., & Shujjat, J. M. (2014). Prevalence of Bullying and Victimization among Sixth Graders with Reference to Gender, Socio-Economic Status, and Type of Schools. Journal of Social Science, 38, 159-165. https://doi.org/10.1080/09718923.2014.11893246 |
[ ] | Siann, G., Callaghan, M., Glissov, P., Lockhart, R., & Rawson, L. (2006). Who Gets Bullied? The Effect of School, Gender, and Ethnic Group. Journal of Educational Research, 36, 123-134. https://doi.org/10.1080/0013188940360202 |
[ ] | Silva, M. A. I., Pereira, B., Mendonca, D., Nunes, B., & de Oliveira, W. A. (2013). The Involvement of Girls and Boys with Bullying: An Analysis of Gender Differences. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 10, 6820-6831. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph10126820 |
[ ] | Siziya, S., Rudatsikira, E., & Muula, A. S. (2012). Victimization from Bullying among School-Attending Adolescents in Grades 7 to 10 in Zambia. Journal of Injury and Violence Research, 4, 30-35. https://doi.org/10.5249/jivr.v4i1.84 |
[ ] | Tayli, A. (2013). School Size as a Predictor of Bullying. International Journal of Academic Research, 24, 124-130. https://doi.org/10.7813/2075-4124.2013/5-5/B.19 |
[ ] | Tippett, N., & Kawk, K. (2012). Cyberbullying in South Korea. In Q. Li, D. Cross, & P. K. Smith (Eds.), Cyberbullying in the Global Playground: Research from International Perspective (pp. 202-219). New York, NY: Wiley-Blackwell. |
[ ] | Wang, J., Jannotti, 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. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jadohealth.2009.03.021 |
[ ] | Wilson, M. L., Dunlavy, A. C., & Berchtold, A. (2013). Determinants for Bullying Victim ization among 11-16-Year Olds in 15-Low-and-Middle Income Countries: A Multi-Level Study. Social Sciences, 2, 208-220. https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci2040208 |
[ ] | Wu, J., He, Y., Lu, C., Deng, X., Gao, X., Guo, L. et al. (2015). Bullying Behaviors among Chinese School-Aged Youth: A Prevalence and Correlates Study in Guangdong Province. Psychiatry Research, 225, 716-722. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychres.2014.11.004 |
+1 323-425-8868 | |
+86 18163351462(WhatsApp) | |
Paper Publishing WeChat |
Copyright © 2024 by authors and Scientific Research Publishing Inc.
This work and the related PDF file are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License .
Child and Adolescent Psychiatry and Mental Health volume 15 , Article number: 74 ( 2021 ) Cite this article
107k Accesses
17 Citations
37 Altmetric
Metrics details
To examine recent trends in bullying and mental health problems among adolescents and the association between them.
A questionnaire measuring mental health problems, bullying at school, socio-economic status, and the school environment was distributed to all secondary school students aged 15 (school-year 9) and 18 (school-year 11) in Stockholm during 2014, 2018, and 2020 (n = 32,722). Associations between bullying and mental health problems were assessed using logistic regression analyses adjusting for relevant demographic, socio-economic, and school-related factors.
The prevalence of bullying remained stable and was highest among girls in year 9; range = 4.9% to 16.9%. Mental health problems increased; range = + 1.2% (year 9 boys) to + 4.6% (year 11 girls) and were consistently higher among girls (17.2% in year 11, 2020). In adjusted models, having been bullied was detrimentally associated with mental health (OR = 2.57 [2.24–2.96]). Reports of mental health problems were four times higher among boys who had been bullied compared to those not bullied. The corresponding figure for girls was 2.4 times higher.
Exposure to bullying at school was associated with higher odds of mental health problems. Boys appear to be more vulnerable to the deleterious effects of bullying than girls.
Bullying involves repeated hurtful actions between peers where an imbalance of power exists [ 1 ]. Arseneault et al. [ 2 ] conducted a review of the mental health consequences of bullying for children and adolescents and found that bullying is associated with severe symptoms of mental health problems, including self-harm and suicidality. Bullying was shown to have detrimental effects that persist into late adolescence and contribute independently to mental health problems. Updated reviews have presented evidence indicating that bullying is causative of mental illness in many adolescents [ 3 , 4 ].
There are indications that mental health problems are increasing among adolescents in some Nordic countries. Hagquist et al. [ 5 ] examined trends in mental health among Scandinavian adolescents (n = 116, 531) aged 11–15 years between 1993 and 2014. Mental health problems were operationalized as difficulty concentrating, sleep disorders, headache, stomach pain, feeling tense, sad and/or dizzy. The study revealed increasing rates of adolescent mental health problems in all four counties (Finland, Sweden, Norway, and Denmark), with Sweden experiencing the sharpest increase among older adolescents, particularly girls. Worsening adolescent mental health has also been reported in the United Kingdom. A study of 28,100 school-aged adolescents in England found that two out of five young people scored above thresholds for emotional problems, conduct problems or hyperactivity [ 6 ]. Female gender, deprivation, high needs status (educational/social), ethnic background, and older age were all associated with higher odds of experiencing mental health difficulties.
Bullying is shown to increase the risk of poor mental health and may partly explain these detrimental changes. Le et al. [ 7 ] reported an inverse association between bullying and mental health among 11–16-year-olds in Vietnam. They also found that poor mental health can make some children and adolescents more vulnerable to bullying at school. Bayer et al. [ 8 ] examined links between bullying at school and mental health among 8–9-year-old children in Australia. Those who experienced bullying more than once a week had poorer mental health than children who experienced bullying less frequently. Friendships moderated this association, such that children with more friends experienced fewer mental health problems (protective effect). Hysing et al. [ 9 ] investigated the association between experiences of bullying (as a victim or perpetrator) and mental health, sleep disorders, and school performance among 16–19 year olds from Norway (n = 10,200). Participants were categorized as victims, bullies, or bully-victims (that is, victims who also bullied others). All three categories were associated with worse mental health, school performance, and sleeping difficulties. Those who had been bullied also reported more emotional problems, while those who bullied others reported more conduct disorders [ 9 ].
As most adolescents spend a considerable amount of time at school, the school environment has been a major focus of mental health research [ 10 , 11 ]. In a recent review, Saminathen et al. [ 12 ] concluded that school is a potential protective factor against mental health problems, as it provides a socially supportive context and prepares students for higher education and employment. However, it may also be the primary setting for protracted bullying and stress [ 13 ]. Another factor associated with adolescent mental health is parental socio-economic status (SES) [ 14 ]. A systematic review indicated that lower parental SES is associated with poorer adolescent mental health [ 15 ]. However, no previous studies have examined whether SES modifies or attenuates the association between bullying and mental health. Similarly, it remains unclear whether school related factors, such as school grades and the school environment, influence the relationship between bullying and mental health. This information could help to identify those adolescents most at risk of harm from bullying.
To address these issues, we investigated the prevalence of bullying at school and mental health problems among Swedish adolescents aged 15–18 years between 2014 and 2020 using a population-based school survey. We also examined associations between bullying at school and mental health problems adjusting for relevant demographic, socioeconomic, and school-related factors. We hypothesized that: (1) bullying and adolescent mental health problems have increased over time; (2) There is an association between bullying victimization and mental health, so that mental health problems are more prevalent among those who have been victims of bullying; and (3) that school-related factors would attenuate the association between bullying and mental health.
The Stockholm school survey is completed every other year by students in lower secondary school (year 9—compulsory) and upper secondary school (year 11). The survey is mandatory for public schools, but voluntary for private schools. The purpose of the survey is to help inform decision making by local authorities that will ultimately improve students’ wellbeing. The questions relate to life circumstances, including SES, schoolwork, bullying, drug use, health, and crime. Non-completers are those who were absent from school when the survey was completed (< 5%). Response rates vary from year to year but are typically around 75%. For the current study data were available for 2014, 2018 and 2020. In 2014; 5235 boys and 5761 girls responded, in 2018; 5017 boys and 5211 girls responded, and in 2020; 5633 boys and 5865 girls responded (total n = 32,722). Data for the exposure variable, bullied at school, were missing for 4159 students, leaving 28,563 participants in the crude model. The fully adjusted model (described below) included 15,985 participants. The mean age in grade 9 was 15.3 years (SD = 0.51) and in grade 11, 17.3 years (SD = 0.61). As the data are completely anonymous, the study was exempt from ethical approval according to an earlier decision from the Ethical Review Board in Stockholm (2010-241 31-5). Details of the survey are available via a website [ 16 ], and are described in a previous paper [ 17 ].
Students completed the questionnaire during a school lesson, placed it in a sealed envelope and handed it to their teacher. Student were permitted the entire lesson (about 40 min) to complete the questionnaire and were informed that participation was voluntary (and that they were free to cancel their participation at any time without consequences). Students were also informed that the Origo Group was responsible for collection of the data on behalf of the City of Stockholm.
Mental health problems were assessed by using a modified version of the Psychosomatic Problem Scale [ 18 ] shown to be appropriate for children and adolescents and invariant across gender and years. The scale was later modified [ 19 ]. In the modified version, items about difficulty concentrating and feeling giddy were deleted and an item about ‘life being great to live’ was added. Seven different symptoms or problems, such as headaches, depression, feeling fear, stomach problems, difficulty sleeping, believing it’s great to live (coded negatively as seldom or rarely) and poor appetite were used. Students who responded (on a 5-point scale) that any of these problems typically occurs ‘at least once a week’ were considered as having indicators of a mental health problem. Cronbach alpha was 0.69 across the whole sample. Adding these problem areas, a total index was created from 0 to 7 mental health symptoms. Those who scored between 0 and 4 points on the total symptoms index were considered to have a low indication of mental health problems (coded as 0); those who scored between 5 and 7 symptoms were considered as likely having mental health problems (coded as 1).
Experiences of bullying were measured by the following two questions: Have you felt bullied or harassed during the past school year? Have you been involved in bullying or harassing other students during this school year? Alternatives for the first question were: yes or no with several options describing how the bullying had taken place (if yes). Alternatives indicating emotional bullying were feelings of being mocked, ridiculed, socially excluded, or teased. Alternatives indicating physical bullying were being beaten, kicked, forced to do something against their will, robbed, or locked away somewhere. The response alternatives for the second question gave an estimation of how often the respondent had participated in bullying others (from once to several times a week). Combining the answers to these two questions, five different categories of bullying were identified: (1) never been bullied and never bully others; (2) victims of emotional (verbal) bullying who have never bullied others; (3) victims of physical bullying who have never bullied others; (4) victims of bullying who have also bullied others; and (5) perpetrators of bullying, but not victims. As the number of positive cases in the last three categories was low (range = 3–15 cases) bully categories 2–4 were combined into one primary exposure variable: ‘bullied at school’.
Assessment year was operationalized as the year when data was collected: 2014, 2018, and 2020. Age was operationalized as school grade 9 (15–16 years) or 11 (17–18 years). Gender was self-reported (boy or girl). The school situation To assess experiences of the school situation, students responded to 18 statements about well-being in school, participation in important school matters, perceptions of their teachers, and teaching quality. Responses were given on a four-point Likert scale ranging from ‘do not agree at all’ to ‘fully agree’. To reduce the 18-items down to their essential factors, we performed a principal axis factor analysis. Results showed that the 18 statements formed five factors which, according to the Kaiser criterion (eigen values > 1) explained 56% of the covariance in the student’s experience of the school situation. The five factors identified were: (1) Participation in school; (2) Interesting and meaningful work; (3) Feeling well at school; (4) Structured school lessons; and (5) Praise for achievements. For each factor, an index was created that was dichotomised (poor versus good circumstance) using the median-split and dummy coded with ‘good circumstance’ as reference. A description of the items included in each factor is available as Additional file 1 . Socio-economic status (SES) was assessed with three questions about the education level of the student’s mother and father (dichotomized as university degree versus not), and the amount of spending money the student typically received for entertainment each month (> SEK 1000 [approximately $120] versus less). Higher parental education and more spending money were used as reference categories. School grades in Swedish, English, and mathematics were measured separately on a 7-point scale and dichotomized as high (grades A, B, and C) versus low (grades D, E, and F). High school grades were used as the reference category.
The prevalence of mental health problems and bullying at school are presented using descriptive statistics, stratified by survey year (2014, 2018, 2020), gender, and school year (9 versus 11). As noted, we reduced the 18-item questionnaire assessing school function down to five essential factors by conducting a principal axis factor analysis (see Additional file 1 ). We then calculated the association between bullying at school (defined above) and mental health problems using multivariable logistic regression. Results are presented as odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (Cis). To assess the contribution of SES and school-related factors to this association, three models are presented: Crude, Model 1 adjusted for demographic factors: age, gender, and assessment year; Model 2 adjusted for Model 1 plus SES (parental education and student spending money), and Model 3 adjusted for Model 2 plus school-related factors (school grades and the five factors identified in the principal factor analysis). These covariates were entered into the regression models in three blocks, where the final model represents the fully adjusted analyses. In all models, the category ‘not bullied at school’ was used as the reference. Pseudo R-square was calculated to estimate what proportion of the variance in mental health problems was explained by each model. Unlike the R-square statistic derived from linear regression, the Pseudo R-square statistic derived from logistic regression gives an indicator of the explained variance, as opposed to an exact estimate, and is considered informative in identifying the relative contribution of each model to the outcome [ 20 ]. All analyses were performed using SPSS v. 26.0.
Estimates of the prevalence of bullying at school and mental health problems across the 12 strata of data (3 years × 2 school grades × 2 genders) are shown in Table 1 . The prevalence of bullying at school increased minimally (< 1%) between 2014 and 2020, except among girls in grade 11 (2.5% increase). Mental health problems increased between 2014 and 2020 (range = 1.2% [boys in year 11] to 4.6% [girls in year 11]); were three to four times more prevalent among girls (range = 11.6% to 17.2%) compared to boys (range = 2.6% to 4.9%); and were more prevalent among older adolescents compared to younger adolescents (range = 1% to 3.1% higher). Pooling all data, reports of mental health problems were four times more prevalent among boys who had been victims of bullying compared to those who reported no experiences with bullying. The corresponding figure for girls was two and a half times as prevalent.
Table 2 shows the association between bullying at school and mental health problems after adjustment for relevant covariates. Demographic factors, including female gender (OR = 3.87; CI 3.48–4.29), older age (OR = 1.38, CI 1.26–1.50), and more recent assessment year (OR = 1.18, CI 1.13–1.25) were associated with higher odds of mental health problems. In Model 2, none of the included SES variables (parental education and student spending money) were associated with mental health problems. In Model 3 (fully adjusted), the following school-related factors were associated with higher odds of mental health problems: lower grades in Swedish (OR = 1.42, CI 1.22–1.67); uninteresting or meaningless schoolwork (OR = 2.44, CI 2.13–2.78); feeling unwell at school (OR = 1.64, CI 1.34–1.85); unstructured school lessons (OR = 1.31, CI = 1.16–1.47); and no praise for achievements (OR = 1.19, CI 1.06–1.34). After adjustment for all covariates, being bullied at school remained associated with higher odds of mental health problems (OR = 2.57; CI 2.24–2.96). Demographic and school-related factors explained 12% and 6% of the variance in mental health problems, respectively (Pseudo R-Square). The inclusion of socioeconomic factors did not alter the variance explained.
Our findings indicate that mental health problems increased among Swedish adolescents between 2014 and 2020, while the prevalence of bullying at school remained stable (< 1% increase), except among girls in year 11, where the prevalence increased by 2.5%. As previously reported [ 5 , 6 ], mental health problems were more common among girls and older adolescents. These findings align with previous studies showing that adolescents who are bullied at school are more likely to experience mental health problems compared to those who are not bullied [ 3 , 4 , 9 ]. This detrimental relationship was observed after adjustment for school-related factors shown to be associated with adolescent mental health [ 10 ].
A novel finding was that boys who had been bullied at school reported a four-times higher prevalence of mental health problems compared to non-bullied boys. The corresponding figure for girls was 2.5 times higher for those who were bullied compared to non-bullied girls, which could indicate that boys are more vulnerable to the deleterious effects of bullying than girls. Alternatively, it may indicate that boys are (on average) bullied more frequently or more intensely than girls, leading to worse mental health. Social support could also play a role; adolescent girls often have stronger social networks than boys and could be more inclined to voice concerns about bullying to significant others, who in turn may offer supports which are protective [ 21 ]. Related studies partly confirm this speculative explanation. An Estonian study involving 2048 children and adolescents aged 10–16 years found that, compared to girls, boys who had been bullied were more likely to report severe distress, measured by poor mental health and feelings of hopelessness [ 22 ].
Other studies suggest that heritable traits, such as the tendency to internalize problems and having low self-esteem are associated with being a bully-victim [ 23 ]. Genetics are understood to explain a large proportion of bullying-related behaviors among adolescents. A study from the Netherlands involving 8215 primary school children found that genetics explained approximately 65% of the risk of being a bully-victim [ 24 ]. This proportion was similar for boys and girls. Higher than average body mass index (BMI) is another recognized risk factor [ 25 ]. A recent Australian trial involving 13 schools and 1087 students (mean age = 13 years) targeted adolescents with high-risk personality traits (hopelessness, anxiety sensitivity, impulsivity, sensation seeking) to reduce bullying at school; both as victims and perpetrators [ 26 ]. There was no significant intervention effect for bullying victimization or perpetration in the total sample. In a secondary analysis, compared to the control schools, intervention school students showed greater reductions in victimization, suicidal ideation, and emotional symptoms. These findings potentially support targeting high-risk personality traits in bullying prevention [ 26 ].
The relative stability of bullying at school between 2014 and 2020 suggests that other factors may better explain the increase in mental health problems seen here. Many factors could be contributing to these changes, including the increasingly competitive labour market, higher demands for education, and the rapid expansion of social media [ 19 , 27 , 28 ]. A recent Swedish study involving 29,199 students aged between 11 and 16 years found that the effects of school stress on psychosomatic symptoms have become stronger over time (1993–2017) and have increased more among girls than among boys [ 10 ]. Research is needed examining possible gender differences in perceived school stress and how these differences moderate associations between bullying and mental health.
Strengths of the current study include the large participant sample from diverse schools; public and private, theoretical and practical orientations. The survey included items measuring diverse aspects of the school environment; factors previously linked to adolescent mental health but rarely included as covariates in studies of bullying and mental health. Some limitations are also acknowledged. These data are cross-sectional which means that the direction of the associations cannot be determined. Moreover, all the variables measured were self-reported. Previous studies indicate that students tend to under-report bullying and mental health problems [ 29 ]; thus, our results may underestimate the prevalence of these behaviors.
In conclusion, consistent with our stated hypotheses, we observed an increase in self-reported mental health problems among Swedish adolescents, and a detrimental association between bullying at school and mental health problems. Although bullying at school does not appear to be the primary explanation for these changes, bullying was detrimentally associated with mental health after adjustment for relevant demographic, socio-economic, and school-related factors, confirming our third hypothesis. The finding that boys are potentially more vulnerable than girls to the deleterious effects of bullying should be replicated in future studies, and the mechanisms investigated. Future studies should examine the longitudinal association between bullying and mental health, including which factors mediate/moderate this relationship. Epigenetic studies are also required to better understand the complex interaction between environmental and biological risk factors for adolescent mental health [ 24 ].
Data requests will be considered on a case-by-case basis; please email the corresponding author.
Not applicable.
Olweus D. School bullying: development and some important challenges. Ann Rev Clin Psychol. 2013;9(9):751–80. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-clinpsy-050212-185516 .
Article Google Scholar
Arseneault L, Bowes L, Shakoor S. Bullying victimization in youths and mental health problems: “Much ado about nothing”? Psychol Med. 2010;40(5):717–29. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0033291709991383 .
Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar
Arseneault L. The long-term impact of bullying victimization on mental health. World Psychiatry. 2017;16(1):27–8. https://doi.org/10.1002/wps.20399 .
Article PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
Moore SE, Norman RE, Suetani S, Thomas HJ, Sly PD, Scott JG. Consequences of bullying victimization in childhood and adolescence: a systematic review and meta-analysis. World J Psychiatry. 2017;7(1):60–76. https://doi.org/10.5498/wjp.v7.i1.60 .
Hagquist C, Due P, Torsheim T, Valimaa R. Cross-country comparisons of trends in adolescent psychosomatic symptoms—a Rasch analysis of HBSC data from four Nordic countries. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2019;17(1):27. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12955-019-1097-x .
Deighton J, Lereya ST, Casey P, Patalay P, Humphrey N, Wolpert M. Prevalence of mental health problems in schools: poverty and other risk factors among 28 000 adolescents in England. Br J Psychiatry. 2019;215(3):565–7. https://doi.org/10.1192/bjp.2019.19 .
Article PubMed Central Google Scholar
Le HTH, Tran N, Campbell MA, Gatton ML, Nguyen HT, Dunne MP. Mental health problems both precede and follow bullying among adolescents and the effects differ by gender: a cross-lagged panel analysis of school-based longitudinal data in Vietnam. Int J Ment Health Syst. 2019. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13033-019-0291-x .
Bayer JK, Mundy L, Stokes I, Hearps S, Allen N, Patton G. Bullying, mental health and friendship in Australian primary school children. Child Adolesc Ment Health. 2018;23(4):334–40. https://doi.org/10.1111/camh.12261 .
Article PubMed Google Scholar
Hysing M, Askeland KG, La Greca AM, Solberg ME, Breivik K, Sivertsen B. Bullying involvement in adolescence: implications for sleep, mental health, and academic outcomes. J Interpers Violence. 2019. https://doi.org/10.1177/0886260519853409 .
Hogberg B, Strandh M, Hagquist C. Gender and secular trends in adolescent mental health over 24 years—the role of school-related stress. Soc Sci Med. 2020. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2020.112890 .
Kidger J, Araya R, Donovan J, Gunnell D. The effect of the school environment on the emotional health of adolescents: a systematic review. Pediatrics. 2012;129(5):925–49. https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2011-2248 .
Saminathen MG, Låftman SB, Modin B. En fungerande skola för alla: skolmiljön som skyddsfaktor för ungas psykiska välbefinnande. [A functioning school for all: the school environment as a protective factor for young people’s mental well-being]. Socialmedicinsk tidskrift [Soc Med]. 2020;97(5–6):804–16.
Google Scholar
Bibou-Nakou I, Tsiantis J, Assimopoulos H, Chatzilambou P, Giannakopoulou D. School factors related to bullying: a qualitative study of early adolescent students. Soc Psychol Educ. 2012;15(2):125–45. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11218-012-9179-1 .
Vukojevic M, Zovko A, Talic I, Tanovic M, Resic B, Vrdoljak I, Splavski B. Parental socioeconomic status as a predictor of physical and mental health outcomes in children—literature review. Acta Clin Croat. 2017;56(4):742–8. https://doi.org/10.20471/acc.2017.56.04.23 .
Reiss F. Socioeconomic inequalities and mental health problems in children and adolescents: a systematic review. Soc Sci Med. 2013;90:24–31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2013.04.026 .
Stockholm City. Stockholmsenkät (The Stockholm Student Survey). 2021. https://start.stockholm/aktuellt/nyheter/2020/09/presstraff-stockholmsenkaten-2020/ . Accessed 19 Nov 2021.
Zeebari Z, Lundin A, Dickman PW, Hallgren M. Are changes in alcohol consumption among swedish youth really occurring “in concert”? A new perspective using quantile regression. Alc Alcohol. 2017;52(4):487–95. https://doi.org/10.1093/alcalc/agx020 .
Hagquist C. Psychometric properties of the PsychoSomatic Problems Scale: a Rasch analysis on adolescent data. Social Indicat Res. 2008;86(3):511–23. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-007-9186-3 .
Hagquist C. Ungas psykiska hälsa i Sverige–komplexa trender och stora kunskapsluckor [Young people’s mental health in Sweden—complex trends and large knowledge gaps]. Socialmedicinsk tidskrift [Soc Med]. 2013;90(5):671–83.
Wu W, West SG. Detecting misspecification in mean structures for growth curve models: performance of pseudo R(2)s and concordance correlation coefficients. Struct Equ Model. 2013;20(3):455–78. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705511.2013.797829 .
Holt MK, Espelage DL. Perceived social support among bullies, victims, and bully-victims. J Youth Adolscence. 2007;36(8):984–94. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-006-9153-3 .
Mark L, Varnik A, Sisask M. Who suffers most from being involved in bullying-bully, victim, or bully-victim? J Sch Health. 2019;89(2):136–44. https://doi.org/10.1111/josh.12720 .
Tsaousis I. The relationship of self-esteem to bullying perpetration and peer victimization among schoolchildren and adolescents: a meta-analytic review. Aggress Violent Behav. 2016;31:186–99. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.avb.2016.09.005 .
Veldkamp SAM, Boomsma DI, de Zeeuw EL, van Beijsterveldt CEM, Bartels M, Dolan CV, van Bergen E. Genetic and environmental influences on different forms of bullying perpetration, bullying victimization, and their co-occurrence. Behav Genet. 2019;49(5):432–43. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10519-019-09968-5 .
Janssen I, Craig WM, Boyce WF, Pickett W. Associations between overweight and obesity with bullying behaviors in school-aged children. Pediatrics. 2004;113(5):1187–94. https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.113.5.1187 .
Kelly EV, Newton NC, Stapinski LA, Conrod PJ, Barrett EL, Champion KE, Teesson M. A novel approach to tackling bullying in schools: personality-targeted intervention for adolescent victims and bullies in Australia. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 2020;59(4):508. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaac.2019.04.010 .
Gunnell D, Kidger J, Elvidge H. Adolescent mental health in crisis. BMJ. 2018. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.k2608 .
O’Reilly M, Dogra N, Whiteman N, Hughes J, Eruyar S, Reilly P. Is social media bad for mental health and wellbeing? Exploring the perspectives of adolescents. Clin Child Psychol Psychiatry. 2018;23:601–13.
Unnever JD, Cornell DG. Middle school victims of bullying: who reports being bullied? Aggr Behav. 2004;30(5):373–88. https://doi.org/10.1002/ab.20030 .
Download references
Authors are grateful to the Department for Social Affairs, Stockholm, for permission to use data from the Stockholm School Survey.
Open access funding provided by Karolinska Institute. None to declare.
Authors and affiliations.
Stockholm Prevents Alcohol and Drug Problems (STAD), Center for Addiction Research and Department of Clinical Neuroscience, Karolinska Institutet, Solna, Sweden
Håkan Källmén
Epidemiology of Psychiatric Conditions, Substance Use and Social Environment (EPiCSS), Department of Global Public Health, Karolinska Institutet, Level 6, Solnavägen 1e, Solna, Sweden
Mats Hallgren
You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar
HK conceived the study and analyzed the data (with input from MH). HK and MH interpreted the data and jointly wrote the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.
Correspondence to Mats Hallgren .
Ethics approval and consent to participate.
As the data are completely anonymous, the study was exempt from ethical approval according to an earlier decision from the Ethical Review Board in Stockholm (2010-241 31-5).
Competing interests.
The authors declare that they have no competing interests.
Publisher's note.
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Additional file 1..
Principal factor analysis description.
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
Reprints and permissions
Cite this article.
Källmén, H., Hallgren, M. Bullying at school and mental health problems among adolescents: a repeated cross-sectional study. Child Adolesc Psychiatry Ment Health 15 , 74 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1186/s13034-021-00425-y
Download citation
Received : 05 October 2021
Accepted : 23 November 2021
Published : 14 December 2021
DOI : https://doi.org/10.1186/s13034-021-00425-y
Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:
Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.
Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative
ISSN: 1753-2000
Experiences on the implementation of child protection policies.
Child protection capacity of public secondary schools in northern samar division and academic performance of victims of violence against children, the use of resilience-based group intervention program for victims of bullying, bullying in south-east asian countries: a review, barriers in the implementation of school-based anti-bullying intervention programs and strategies in public elementary schools in a certain division in the philippines., height matters, 16 references, policies and programming for safer schools: are “anti-bullying” approaches impeding education for peacebuilding, school violence: a qualitative case study, violence in schools and representations of young people: a critique of government policies in france and england, bullying in middle schools: an asian-pacific regional study, school bullying in korea and christian educational approach, the association of community violence exposure with middle-school achievement: a prospective study, presentation and management of school bullying and the impact of anti-bullying strategies for pupils: a self-report survey in london schools., effectiveness of antibullying school programmes: a systematic review by evidence levels, facebook bullying: an extension of battles in school, preventing the bullying of foster children in our schools, related papers.
Showing 1 through 3 of 0 Related Papers
Bullying is an increasing problem globally, which affects school children over the years. The students who have experienced bullying have a greater risk of psychological distress. Likewise, the incidence of bullying has been increasing despite the efforts of the Philippine government and Department of Education. Moreover, the problem of bullying was even exacerbated by technology resulting in a new form called cyberbullying. Studies also show that students are aware of the different bullying types, yet high bullying incidence still prevails. Hence, the paper describes the level of bullying awareness and the extent of bullying incidence in a public school in Antique during the School Year 2019-2020. The paper also evaluates if a significant difference exists in the level of awareness and the extent of bullying practices when respondents are grouped according to sex, grade level, birth order, living condition, and family monthly income. Furthermore, it also investigates whether a relationship exists between awareness and extent of bullying incidence.
Journal Information
Aim and Scope
Editorial Team
Submission Policy
Responsibilities of Authors
Guide to Authors
Peer Review Process
Guide to Referees
Criteria for Acceptance and Rejection
Publication Ethics and Malpractice
Policy on Handling Complaints
Policy on Retraction
Policy on Conflicts of Interest
Policy on Use of Human Subjects in Research
Policy on Digital Preservation
Open Access and Copyright Policy
Privacy Statement
Publication Frequency
Sources of Support
Journal History
Make Submission
ISSN 2704-288X (Electronic)
ISSN 2672-3107(Print)
Philippine Social Science Journal
Current Issue
Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.
To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to upgrade your browser .
Enter the email address you signed up with and we'll email you a reset link.
This paper discussed bullying and its effects on the children who have been bullied, who is bully and children who witness bullying situations. It also discussed how the school, parents and guardians deal if their children are caught are up in different bullying situations. The paper highlighted the issues of school bullying in the Philippines and its serious psychological consequences for victims that includes low psychological well-being, poor social adjustment, psychological distress and physical illness.
Arvi Cabungcal
Randwick International of Education and Linguistics Science Journal
Rodalyn Lapada
This study was conducted to determine students’ experiences, reactions and opinions on bullying. It used a descriptive research design wherein students’ experiences, reactions and opinions were gathered through survey questionnaires. Purposive sampling technique was employed using snowball sampling technique. Online survey questionnaire was sent to the selected students via messenger. These students forwarded the online survey questionnaire to those students who they thought potential respondents of the study via messenger too. Finding revealed that Esperanza National High School has maintained a healthy school environment suited to the different types of learners since the bullying was less evident in the school. Occasional occurrence of bullying in the school prompted the students to rarely report the incidence to the concerned people. Students very seldom experienced the bullying from the people they frequently engaged and communicated. They normally responded to the minor incide...
Laurence dela cruz
Bullying affects 50 percent of the Filipino school children. However, there is still the lack of literature that discusses this problem in a Philippine setting. This paper employed descriptive research technique to determine the profile of school bullying, peer aggression, and victimization among junior high school students of the UP High School in Cebu. Results of the survey revealed that bullying exists in the school with classmates as the perpetrators; direct verbal and relational are the most common forms of bullying; gender is not a factor in bullying and victimization, both sexes are involved in bullying and peer victimization, and, there is a significant relationship between bullying and victimization. Results underscore the need to implement a bullying prevention program focusing on awareness of the problem and their long-term impact to students is highly recommended. There is a need for the school to organize a peer counseling group to address the high rate of bullying cases reported only to their peers instead of school officials.
IJESRT Journal
The main purpose of the study was to assess the bullying management approaches in selected secondary schools in Zone III, Schools Division of Zambales, Philippines during the school year 2015-2016 from the perspective of the teachers. The study made used of descriptive research design with questionnaire as the main instrument in gathering data from sixty-one (61) teacher-respondents. Based on the summary of the investigations conducted, the researcher had concluded that the teacher-respondents are predominantly females in their early adulthood, married with a family income below poverty level and who have been in the teaching profession for 10 years. The type or nature of bullying perceived strongly agreed by the teachers was forcing someone to do something against one's will, the bullying occurred among bossy students do violence to meek and shy students and effects of bulling strongly agreed were emotional and psychological disturbance. The teachers perceived that the character building as bullying management approach was very effective. The teachers perceived strongly agreed on the coping mechanisms of bullying mainly counseling. The analysis of variance result revealed a no significant differences on the teachers' perceptions towards type or nature of bullying, occurrence of bullying and bullying management approaches. However, the teachers have perceived differences on age towards coping mechanisms.
roldan cardona
While bullying in schools has begun to receive great attention with the enactment of the Republic Act 10627 or the Anti-Bullying Act and the DepEd’s Child Policy, little is known about the link between and among classroom discipline techniques, parenting styles and bullying incidences. This descriptive study is aimed to provide insights how bullying behaviors could be integrated in the classroom discipline techniques employed by the teacher and be able to craft an anti-bullying program involving the stakeholders of Binakayan National High School, Kawit, Cavite.
Ma Monique DeLuna
While bullying in schools has begun to receive great attention with the enactment of the Republic Act 10627 or the Anti-Bullying Act and the DepEd's Child Policy, little is known about the link between and among classroom discipline techniques, parenting styles and bullying incidences. This descriptive study is aimed to provide insights how bullying behaviors could be integrated in the classroom discipline techniques employed by the teacher and be able to craft an anti-bullying program involving the stakeholders of Binakayan National High School, Kawit, Cavite.
ACE2019 Official Conference Proceedings
Philippine Education Research Journal
Cynthia CORREO , Ronaldo SP. Elicay
Background: Bullying is a complex social phenomenon influenced by a myriad of factors, including psychological and environmental ones. It is generally perceived as dangerous and life-threatening and, thus, must be urgently addressed. Purpose: Investigate the prevalence and the actual bullying experiences of Filipino junior high school students using Urie Bronfenbrenner's socioecological theory or ecological model of development as a framework. Participants: 1,090 students from nine selected secondary schools in the 4th and 6th District in the province of Batangas, with 30 of them chosen as key informants Research design: Mixed method expansion sequential research design Data collection and analysis: The V-SCAIRD Acts of Bullying Inventory Tool was administered to determine the prevalence of bullying (by bullying role, form of bullying, and effect of bullying) across genders and school types. Independent sample t-tests were used to compare male and female differences in the bullying roles, the forms of bullying, and the effects of bullying across genders. Analysis of variance showed the degree of significant differences in the bullying roles, the forms of bullying, and the effects of bullying across school types. Fisher's least significant difference test was run as post hoc test. All statistical analyses were tested at p < .05. The students who scored high as bullies, victims, and bystanders were interviewed to draw out their actual bullying experiences and the possible psycho-social environmental factors influencing this social phenomenon. Findings: Prevalence rates of 8, 14, and 78 in 100 students translate to one bully, two victims, and seven bystanders in every 10 students, with a victimization ratio of 1:5. Male students exhibited a significantly higher tendency to be bullies and victims. All forms of bullying (covert indirect, cyberbullying, physical, and verbal) were experienced by students regardless of gender. However, it appeared that the male students were more exposed to verbal bullying while the female students were more exposed to cyberbullying. Significant gender differences were found in the students' experiences of the cognitive, affective, and behavioral effects of bullying. Across school types, no significant differences were found in bully tendencies, but a significant difference was found in victim tendencies between public and Catholic schools, with the former having a higher rate than the latter. Students from both Catholic and non-sectarian schools registered a significantly higher tendency to become bystanders than those in public schools. The interview disclosed various forms of bullying experienced by the students, categorized into covert indirect, cyberbullying, physical, and verbal types. Verbal abuse from family members was reported, primarily due to failed expectations such as perceived poor academic performance. Psycho-social factors influencing bullying phenomenon in schools include teachers' attitude in school, peer influence, and school discipline. Recommendation: Provide continuing professional development to teachers on bullying management in schools and create clear structure and school policies that emphasize home and school partnership and certain discipline in school.
Salmi Sudan
This research paper examines the problem of school bullying in a primary school in the state of Selangor, Malaysia. Particularly the paper looks at bullying victimization with the focus on how bullying affects the thinking, feelings and behavior of the bullying victims. The paper also explores how the school regards school bullying, what type of intervention measures that the school has and how these measures are implemented in the school. Data was collected through in depth interviews with the participants of this study who were two victims of school bullying, a school counselor, and a Discipline Head. The results showed that bullying affects negatively the thinking, feelings and behavior of the victims in which they reported among other feelings of fear, anguish, anger, foolish, and hating school as the outcomes of being bullied. It was also found that the school under study does not have a particular or constant intervention programs for both bullies and victims of school bullyin...
Yakup Can Avcı
In all cultures, the "bullying", which is confronted in some way, is an issue that students feel freak, insecure, in severe situations commit suicide. This study is criticized, Roldan S. Cardona, Agnes, S. Reyes and Marlu M. Tangalin’s The Bullying Experiences and Classroom Discipline Techniques in an Urban National High School in the Philippines: A Basis for an Anti-Bullying Program article from Philippine Normal University and Binakayan National High School which is published by American International Journal of Contemporary Research Magazine Vol.5, No. 2; April 2015 with community benefit and implementation, methodology, arguments and recommendations. The article main target audiences are Local public and Academic communities especially teachers and parents. The aim of the study is, researching is there a link between bullying incidences and classroom management skills together with parenting styles? On the other hand, reveal the what capabilities has teacher to recognize bullying incidences and what should they act to decrease bullying behaviors in their classroom. This paper aim criticized and evaluate main arguments of the text. The study use Graham Hewitt criticized methods (Hewitt. G 2017) . The general opinion about the article is insufficient background knowledge and wrong method to link classroom discipline technique and parenting style.
Loading Preview
Sorry, preview is currently unavailable. You can download the paper by clicking the button above.
International Journal of Innovative Research and Development
Maria Lourdes G . Tan
Bernie Tandang
Universal Journal of Educational Research
Hasnizam Hashim
Proceedings of the 2nd Social and Humaniora Research Symposium (SoRes 2019)
Sulisworo Kusdiyati
AL-ISHLAH: Jurnal Pendidikan
Fajar Satrio Nugroho
International Journal of Scientific & Technology Research
Muhamad Hasan Abdillah
Jerome Hugno Emralino
International Journal of Advanced Research (IJAR)
IJAR Indexing
Mark Joseph Boca
Proceedings of the International Joint Conference on Arts and Humanities 2021 (IJCAH 2021)
nurul murtadho
Cecilia L . Calub
Revista de Cercetare şi Intervenţie Socială
Indigenous: Jurnal Ilmiah Psikologi
medina chodijah
Dr.Thseen Nazir
SCHOULID: Indonesian Journal of School Counseling
Farah Aulia
Indian Journal of Pediatrics
Seter Siziya
M Syahruddin
Yulius Yusak
Oyaziwo Aluede
International Journal of Scientific Research & Engineering Trends
Kuenga Dendup
Khazanah Pendidikan Islam
Maulana Suhandani
Malahayati International Journal of Nursing and Health Science
Susri Utami
Pediatrics International
Emmy Amalia
Home ⇛ smcc higher education research journal (multidisciplinary journal) ⇛ vol. 8 no. 1 (2021), effects of bullying on the academic performance of grade 3 learners.
EVELYN T. PENALES
The role of school in school is to help children develop their mental, physical, and moral abilities. The study determined the effects of bullying on the academic performance of Grade 3 learners in Kitcharao District, Division of Agusan del Norte, Philippines. The researcher in the study used the descriptive survey method. The test questionnaires were administered to 147 respondents. Physical bullying, verbal bullying has been affecting the academic performance of grade learners significantly. The study concludes that bullying in school, such as physical, verbal, and gang of bullies, has been happening in school often and disturbing to some extent the learners’ performance. These disturbances have only obtained average performance. The school should monitor without let-up bullying and strictly implement disciplinary action to it versus bullies to protect graders from disturbances of their learning process. Moreover, the teachers should always advise and guide their learners to shun away from resorting to bullying at all times.
Copyright © 2024 KITE Digital Educational Solutions | Exclusively distributed by CE-Logic Terms and Conditions -->
IMAGES
VIDEO
COMMENTS
Drawing on diverse studies spanning various regions 196 of the Philippines, our findings reveal a pervasive pattern of bullying encompassing physical, verbal, and relational aggression.
This study aimed to understand bullying through the lived experiences of three students who became bully-targets in state universities and colleges (SUCs) using a socio-ecological perspective.
This study explored the nature and extent of bullying among high school students in Baguio City, Philippines. It determined the relations between parent-child attachment, parenting styles, and bullying via a quantitative survey (n = 876) and focus group discussions (n = 16). Results revealed that verbal bullying/victimization is more frequent than
Philippine Education Research Journal June-December 2020, volume 2020, numbers 1-2, pages 29-47 ... world experiencing peer-to-peer bullying. The Philippines has not been spared from this socioeducational concern (Plan Philippines,2008; Selim,2018), prompting scholars ... studies conducted in the Philippines focused on certain aspects of ...
Keywords: Anti-bullying act, bullying prevention, bullying solution, perception of anti-bullying, prevention of bullying. 1. Introduction. Bullying is commonly defined as repeated aggressive behavior in which there is an imbalance of power and strength between two parties. Bullying behavior may be direct or overt.
According to the Pisa study published on Dec. 5, the incidence of bullying in Philippine schools went down between 2018 and 2022. The country first took part in the large-scale international ...
The present study retrospectively examined gender differences in bullying and suicidal behaviour (ideation, plan, and attempts) as well as associations between selected risk factors and suicidal behaviour among secondary school Filipino students. The study used a secondary data set from the GSHS developed by the World Health Organization, which was conducted in the Philippines in 2011.
Abstract. During the school years, bullying is one of the most common expressions of violence in the peer context. Research on bullying started more than forty years ago, when the phenomenon was defined as 'aggressive, intentional acts carried out by a group or an individual repeatedly and over time against a victim who cannot easily defend him- or herself'.
2012). Understanding the specific nuances of bullying in the Philippines is crucial for developing targeted interventions that address the unique cultural and contextual factors influencing this phenomenon. While research on bullying has gained traction globally, there remains a dearth of comprehensive studies focused on the Philippine context.
The research data were drawn from a larger study aimed at describing the incidence, forms, and experience of bullying in the elementary and secondary schools in Iloilo City, Philippines. Given the magnitude and scope of the time required to meet bureaucratic requirements and schedule students to be surveyed in each school, it was decided to cut ...
The purpose of this study was to gain insights into empathy, cyberbullying, and cybervictimization among Filipino adolescents.The participants were 168 junior high school students in the 7th to 10th grades at a public high school in Cavite Province, Philippines. ...
Department of Education1-Region XI, Davao City, Philippines Abstract: This study examines the effects of bullying on the mental health and academic performance of Senior High School (SHS) students. The research aims to determine the prevalence of physical, verbal, and cyberbullying and how these forms of bullying impact students' mental health.
This research sought to explore the effects of cyberbullying on high school students attending public schools in the Philippines. Given the widespread use of digital communication platforms and ...
On the other hand, the PISA 2022 reports that one out three Filipino students are being bullied in schools. This is about 43% of girls and 53% of boys in the Philippines encounter bullying incidents multiple times a month. This is much higher than the OECD average of 20% of girls, and 21% of boys. "International large-scale assessments show ...
Abstract. This research looked into prevalence rate of bullying victimization and perpetration as well as teachers' response to bullying incidence in the Philippines. A total of 340 sixth graders from five different schools in Western Visayas participated in the study. Slightly more than half (54.1%) of the sample were boys and 45.9% were girls.
Research is needed examining possible gender differences in perceived school stress and how these differences moderate associations between bullying and mental health. Strengths and limitations Strengths of the current study include the large participant sample from diverse schools; public and private, theoretical and practical orientations.
Using a socio-cultural perspective, the study developed a 48-item assessment tool that reflected the context-specific bullying experiences of Filipino high school students. Scale items were generated from the one-on-one interview results conducted among bullied high school students and from existing literature and studies on bullying. Exploratory Factor Analysis yielded a 3-factor structure of ...
Local and international studies have affirmed the alarming situation of bullying and school violence involving Filipino children. The intensity of violence has reached a disturbing rate that has pushed policy-makers to formulate bullying prevention schemes. Despite organized attempts to make schools a safe environment, this dilemma poses critical risks that call for aggressive and determined ...
Abstract. The purpose of this qualitative case study was to describe the campus bullying experiences of senior high school students in a certain secondary school of Davao City, Philippines. Three ...
Bullying is an increasing problem globally, which affects school children over the years. The students who have experienced bullying have a greater risk of psychological distress. Likewise, the incidence of bullying has been increasing despite the efforts of the Philippine government and Department of Education. Moreover, the problem of bullying was even exacerbated by technology resulting in ...
In the Philippines, latest national data show that cyberviolence affects almost half of children aged 13-17 1. The prevalence of cyberviolence for males (44 per cent) is almost the same for females (43 per cent). One-third of cyberviolence experienced by Filipino children are in the form of verbal abuse over the internet or cellphone, while a ...
The paper highlighted the issues of school bullying in the Philippines and its serious psychological consequences for victims that includes low psychological well-being, poor social adjustment, psychological distress and physical illness. ... The study made used of descriptive research design with questionnaire as the main instrument in ...
The study determined the effects of bullying on the academic performance of Grade 3 learners in Kitcharao District, Division of Agusan del Norte, Philippines. The researcher in the study used the descriptive survey method. The test questionnaires were administered to 147 respondents. Physical bullying, verbal bullying has been affecting the ...