In need of professional help, can someone please help me!

Izer_6786

ParticipantRolesinBullying.pdf

Home >Social Science homework help >Sociology homework help >In need of professional help, can someone please help me!

Research Trends

Participant Roles in Bullying Behavior and Their Association

with Thoughts of Ending One’s Life Ian Rivers1 and Nathalie Noret2

1Brunel University, Uxbridge, UK, 2York St John University, UK

Abstract. Background: Studies have shown that students who are bullied at school are at an increased risk of poor mental health and suicide. Little is known, however, about those who have other participant roles in bullying interactions (e.g., bystanders). Aims: To better understand the implications exposure to bullying has upon thoughts of ending life among students who have multiple participant roles. Methods: This study was a cross-sectional survey of a representative sample of 2,002 students (55% boys, 45% girls) aged 12 to 16 years (M = 13.60, SD = 1.06) attending 14 schools in the North of England. Results: The majority of students in this study were involved in bullying behavior at school as victims, bullies, bystanders, or a combination of all three. Those with multiple roles (victim, bully, and bystander) were significantly more likely to report having had thoughts of ending their life. Conclusions: The findings from this study have significant implications for clinicians, educational, and school psychologists working with students involved in bullying behavior. Whole school antibullying initiatives are necessary to reduce the psychological distress and thoughts of ending life found among members of the school population. Further studies exploring covictimization among bystanders and revictimization among former victims of bullying are recommended.

Keywords: bully, victim, bystander, suicide, risk

Introduction Various researchers have demonstrated that there are sig- nificant mental health risks associated with bullying at school (Fekkes, Pijpers, & Verloove-Vanhorick, 2004; Hawker & Boulton, 2000; Juvonen, Graham, & Schuster, 2003; Kaltiala-Heino, Rimpela, Marttunen, Rimpela, & Rantanen, 1999; Kochenderfer-Ladd & Wardrop, 2001; Nansel et al., 2001; Schwartz, Gorman, Nakamoto, & Tob- lin, 2005; Srabstein, McCarter, Shao, & Huang, 2006). This research has focused upon the correlates and implications of various participant roles. For example, studies have shown that depression and anxiety together with psychoso- matic complaints are common among victims (Fekkes et al., 2004; Kaltiala-Heino et al., 1999; Srabstein et al., 2006). Among bullies, there are high rates of delinquent behavior, drug abuse, and alcohol use, and a lack of a sense of belonging to a school is often reported (Espelage & Holt, 2001; Haynie, Nansel, & Eitel, 2001; Nansel et al., 2001). More recently researchers extended the scope of their stud- ies to include those students who are described as “bully- victims” (bullies in some situations and victims in others), and this particular group has been of great concern as high rates of depression and somatic complaints have been dis- covered together with an increased likelihood of being re-

ferred for psychiatric assessment or treatment (Kumpulai- nean, Rasanen, & Henttonen, 1998; Nansel, et al., 2001; Swearer, Song, Cary, Eagle, & Mickelson, 2001).

There remains very little research on the role or experi- ence of bystanders, who undoubtedly make up the majority of students involved in bullying at school (Smith & Shu, 2000). Initial research conducted in Finland suggests that bystanders have a number of different roles in the school setting (Salmivalli, Lagerspetz, Björkqvist, Österman, & Kaukiainen, 1996). In some instances they may act in the capacity of “assistant” or “reinforcer,” providing the bully with overt peer approval. In other instances their role may be more passive by empathizing with the victim or active by defending him or her either by challenging the bully or by seeking help from teachers. While there has been some evidence to suggest that, among boys in particular, playing a secondary or less active role in bullying fosters social acceptance within the peer hierarchy, those who empathize with or support the victim are more likely to face peer re- jection.

To date only a handful of studies have considered the mental health implications of bystander status. For exam- ple, Juvonen et al. (2003) found that those sixth-grade stu- dents they classified as “uninvolved” in bullying behavior experienced fewer symptoms of depression, anxiety, or in-

T hi

s do

cu m

en t i

s co

py ri

gh te

d by

th e

A m

er ic

an P

sy ch

ol og

ic al

A ss

oc ia

tio n

or o

ne o

f i ts

a lli

ed p

ub lis

he rs

. T

hi s

ar tic

le is

in te

nd ed

s ol

el y

fo r t

he p

er so

na l u

se o

f t he

in di

vi du

al u

se r a

nd is

n ot

to b

e di

ss em

in at

ed b

ro ad

ly .

dices of loneliness compared to both victims and bully-vic- tims. Among younger students, Glew, Fan, Katon, Rivara, and Kernic (2005) found that those they classified as “by- standers” had a greater sense of belonging to their school, were less likely to feel unsafe at school, and were less likely to report feeling sad from day to day.

The statistics currently available suggest that victims of bullying are at greater risk of suicide ideation than bullies, bystanders, and uninvolved students (ranging from 2% to 11.5% for those who are frequently bullied; Kaltiala-Heino et al., 1999; Klomek, Marrocco, Kleinman, Schonfield, & Gould, 2007). However, studies that have reported the af- ter-effects of student suicides suggest that early interven- tion on a whole-school basis may be necessary to counter the trauma experienced by classmates who sympathize or empathize with the victim (Mauk & Rodgers, 1994; Brock, 2002). Given the fact that we know so little about the men- tal health implications of bullying beyond the roles of vic- tim, bully, and bully-victim, theoretically the findings above suggest that those students who either witness bul- lying or those who know students who are being bullied could experience a degree of covictimization that, in turn, may have an impact upon their own mental health and sui- cide ideation. This was the case among sexual minority victims of violence in high school (D’Augelli, Pilkington, & Hershberger, 2002).

In this study we report the results of a cross-sectional study of the mental health and well-being of students at- tending 14 schools in the North of England. Particular at- tention is paid to participant roles in bullying interactions across one school term (9 weeks) and the implications of exposure to bullying in terms of suicide ideation and thoughts of ending life.

Method

Participants

The study consisted of a representative sample of 2,002 students (55% boys, 45% girls) aged 12 to 16 years (M = 13.60, SD = 1.06). The sample represented 50% of our ini- tial target group of 4,000 students. In accordance with the approved classification system for ethnicity used in the 2001 UK Census, 91% of participants described them- selves as “White” or “British White,” 1.8% as of mixed/du- al heritage, 1.3% as “Asian” or “British Asian,” 0.4% as “Black” or “British Black,” 0.3% as “Chinese,” and 5.1% as “other.” 82 students (4%) were identified as having spe- cial education needs.

Procedure

Some 47 schools in the North of England were approached and asked to participate in this study. Of those who initially

expressed an interest, 14 were eventually chosen by school liaison personnel at the Local Education Authority (LEA) to ensure that they were generally representative of the re- gion in terms of students’ socio-economic background, sex, and ethnicity, and that the appropriate weighting of urban and rural, coeducational and single-sex schools was achieved. Of the 14 schools, 13 were coeducational (rural and urban), ranging in size from 60 students to 1,731 stu- dents. One school was residential and single-sex (36 boys) providing extended services for students with special edu- cational needs. All of the schools in this study were non- denominational. Prior to data collection, the parents and guardians of students chosen to participate in the study re- ceived consent letters from the headteachers (principals) of each of the schools. In line with LEA protocols, students were not surveyed if parents or guardians confirmed orally or in writing that they did not wish their children to partic- ipate. Similarly, students were also excluded from the study where data collection coincided with examination prepara- tion or assessment. Prior to data collection, researchers were introduced to the students by class teachers who dis- cussed how the data would be collected and the types of questions students would answer. It was stressed that they could omit answering any questions they felt were too per- sonal or made them feel uncomfortable. Questionnaires were completed independently in class over a 40–60-min period. Classes were supervised by a researcher supported by a teacher. Students with special needs were given addi- tional support or extra time to complete the questionnaire. The headteachers of each of the schools received custom- ized reports detailing prevalence rates of bullying by age and sex as well data on the average rates of bullying found across the local authority.

Measures

Perpetrator, Victim, and Bystander Status

The 15-item antibullying inventory adapted from the Eng- lish version of the Olweus Bully/Victim Questionnaire (Ol- weus, 1994) provided students with the opportunity to in- dicate whether they had experienced, perpetrated, or wit- nessed one or more specific forms of bullying behavior (i.e., called names about race or color, hit or kicked, called other names, rumours spread, no one speaks, frightened by a look or stare, belongings taken, threatened with violence, homework destroyed, graffiti written, pressured to smoke tobacco, drink alcohol, or take drugs) over the current term (0 = no, 1 = yes), the frequency with which it occurred (1 = never to 5 = several times a week), and the various loca- tions it happened at (corridors, classrooms during lessons, school yard at recess, playing fields during physical educa- tion, school bus or bus stop, walking to and from school, lavatories, away from school, and other). Additional ques- tions related to the age and number of perpetrators, teacher and student intervention, and whether or not someone at

144 I. Rivers & N. Noret: Bullying and Thoughts of Ending One’s Life

T hi

s do

cu m

en t i

s co

py ri

gh te

d by

th e

A m

er ic

an P

sy ch

ol og

ic al

A ss

oc ia

tio n

or o

ne o

f i ts

a lli

ed p

ub lis

he rs

. T

hi s

ar tic

le is

in te

nd ed

s ol

el y

fo r t

he p

er so

na l u

se o

f t he

in di

vi du

al u

se r a

nd is

n ot

to b

e di

ss em

in at

ed b

ro ad

ly .

home or at school was informed about the bullying taking place. For the purposes of this study, we used students’ self-reports of bullying others, being bullied, and/or watch- ing others being bullied that term as our independent group- ing variable. Overall, eight different participant roles were identified: those with no involvement in bullying (labeled not involved), those who were victims only (victim only), those who were bullies only (bully only), those who were both bullies and victims (bully-victim), those who were by- standers only (bystander only), those who were victims in some instance and bystanders in others (victim-bystander), those who were sometimes bullies and sometimes bystand- ers (bully-bystander), and those who sometimes victims, sometimes bullies and at other times bystanders (victim- bully-bystander).

Thoughts of Ending Life

All students completed the 53-item adolescent version of the Brief Symptom Inventory (BSI; Derogatis, 1993), which provided mean scores on nine dimensions of psy- chopathology or psychological distress: somatization, ob- sessive-compulsiveness, interpersonal sensitivity, depres- sion, anxiety, hostility, phobic anxiety, paranoid ideation, and psychoticism. Students were asked to assess their lev- els of recent distress for each item on a scale from 0 = not at all to 4 = extremely. Reported internal consistency reli- ability coefficients for each of the dimensions range from .78 to .83 with test-retest reliability coefficients ranging from .68 to .91 (see Derogatis, 1993). The BSI has also been used successfully with children with special educa- tional needs in multiple cultural contexts (see Bachar, Ca- netti, Galilee-Weisstub, Kaplan-DeNour, & Shalev, 1998). For this study, the mean scores for two items (Thoughts of ending your life and Thoughts of death or dying) were com- bined to provide a generic measure of Thoughts of ending life. The reliability coefficient for this measure was α = .78.

Common Student Concerns

Common student concerns and worries were assessed using 17 items that were of interest to the researchers and LEA (e.g., school work or examinations, looks/dress, sex, health, being lesbian or gay, being pregnant or getting a girl preg- nant, drugs, alcohol, smoking, being left alone at home, weight, size or body shape, parents/family issues, friend- ships, being picked on by a teacher, name-calling and bul- lying, problems at home, being different from other peo- ple). Students were asked to indicate current concerns by checking individual items which were scored 0 = no, 1 = yes. These items were summed to provide a score for stu- dents’ concerns that term. We hypothesized that the greater the number of concerns or worries, including bullying, the greater the distress. The reliability coefficient for this com- posite measure (KR20) was .71.

Statistical Analyses

For this study we used χ² to report associations between sex and participant roles in bullying behavior, and sex and reports of current worries or concerns. Sex-wise differences in mean scores for our measure of thoughts of ending life were ana- lyzed using analysis of variance (ANOVA). Finally we used analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) to compare mean scores for thoughts of ending life by participant role in bullying be- havior, with students’ reports of the total number of current concerns or worries they had as the covariate. All data were analyzed using SPSS version 15.0 software.

Results

Descriptive Statistics

Bully, Victim, and Bystander Roles

27.6% of students (549) indicated that they had no involve- ment in bullying behavior at school across the most recent term with 30.4% reporting bystander status only (605). 6.7% (133) reported being victims of bullying, and 1.5% (29) said that they had bullied another student. Only 1.3% (25) reported dual bully-victim status. However 15.2% (303) reported having being victims in some situations and bystanders in others, and 6.7% (123) reported having bul- lied others and having been bystanders in other incidents that term. 10.7% (213) reported having been sometimes victims, sometimes bullies, and sometimes bystanders. Missing data n = 12.

Overall, a significant association was found between sex and participant role, χ² (7, N = 1990) = 16.19, p ≤ .02, with more girls than boys reporting having been bystanders (32.4% versus 28.8%), or victim-bystanders (17.8% versus 13.2%).

Exposure to Different Types of Bullying

In terms of the types of bullying to which students were exposed, we clustered the different behaviors into four dis- tinct categories: direct-physical bullying (hit or kicked, be- longings taken, threatened with violence, homework de- stroyed), direct-verbal bullying (called names about race or color, called other names), indirect or relational bullying (rumors spread, no one speaks, frightened by a look or stare, graffiti written), and pressure to conform (pressured to smoke tobacco, drink alcohol, or take drugs). It should be acknowledged that because students often were exposed to or engaged in more than one type of bullying behavior, our data are interdependent. Overall 34.7% of students re- ported having seen instances of direct-physical bullying in the last term, while only 11.4% reported having been vic- tims and 7.5% perpetrators. In terms of direct-verbal bul-

I. Rivers & N. Noret: Bullying and Thoughts of Ending One’s Life 145

T hi

s do

cu m

en t i

s co

py ri

gh te

d by

th e

A m

er ic

an P

sy ch

ol og

ic al

A ss

oc ia

tio n

or o

ne o

f i ts

a lli

ed p

ub lis

he rs

. T

hi s

ar tic

le is

in te

nd ed

s ol

el y

fo r t

he p

er so

na l u

se o

f t he

in di

vi du

al u

se r a

nd is

n ot

to b

e di

ss em

in at

ed b

ro ad

ly .

lying, 23.4% of students said they had been victims in the last term, 13.9% indicated that they were perpetrators, and 41.8% had witnessed such behavior. In terms of indirect or relational bullying, while reports of victimization and per- petration were low (14.5% and 6.6% respectively), 35.8% of students reported having witnessed at least one incident of this type of bullying in the last term. Finally, very few students reported that they had been pressured into smok- ing tobacco, drinking alcohol or taking drugs (1.6%), even fewer (0.4%) reported perpetrating such behavior, though 4.5% reported having witnessed it.

Concerns or Worries

Girls reported having more current concerns or worries (M = 1.95, SD = 2.10) than boys (M = 1.20, SD = 1.89), F(1, 2001) = 70.04, p ≤ .0001. In particular girls reported being more concerned about the way they look or dress (65.6%) than boys (34.0%), χ² (1, N = 1988) = 50.94, p ≤ .0001. They were also more concerned about their weight, size, or body shape (68.5% versus 31.5%), χ² (1, N = 1989) = 151.28, p ≤ .0001, and issues associated with their fam- ilies (57.1% versus 42.9%), χ² (1, N = 1989) = 14.05, p ≤ .0001. Finally, girls reported being concerned or worried about their friendships much more than boys (69.9% versus 30.1%), χ² (1, N = 1989) = 83.81, p ≤ .0001.

Thoughts of Ending Life

Girls were found to score higher on our measure of thoughts of ending life (M = 0.79, SD = 1.13) than boys (M = 0.68, SD = 1.09). However, this was not found to be sig- nificant following a Bonferroni correction for sample size, F(1, 2001) = 4.49, ns.

Participant Roles and Thoughts of Ending Life

To determine whether or not participant roles in bullying behavior had an effect upon means scores for thoughts of

ending life, we opted to conduct a one-way analysis of covariance (ANCOVA). As noted previously, our inde- pendent variable was the participant role reported by stu- dents (not involved, victim only, bully only, bully-victim, bystander only, victim-bystander, bully-bystander, and victim-bully-bystander). Our dependent variable was our measure: thoughts of ending life. Finally we used stu- dents’ reports of the number of current concerns or wor- ries they had as our covariate. Given the lack of parity in the scales used to measure thoughts of ending life (range, 0–4) and students’ reports of current concerns or worries (range, 0–17) we opted to transform these data into stan- dardized Z-scores.

Preliminary analyses indicated that the assumptions underlying the use of ANCOVA were met in terms of normality, linearity, homogeneity, and reliability of the covariate. As there were eight observations in our analy- sis (i.e., participant roles), we used a Bonferroni adjusted α level of .00625, 8/0.5. We also used Bonferroni pair- wise comparison tests to determine which pairs of means were significantly different from each other.

A significant difference was found between the partic- ipant role groups in terms of thoughts of ending life, F(7, 1,981) = 11.02, p ≤ .0001, η2 = .04, controlling for students’ current worries or concerns (see Table 1). Post- hoc comparisons indicated that those most likely to report having thoughts of ending life were students who report- ed being sometimes bullies, sometimes victims, and sometimes bystanders at school (M = 0.54, SD = 1.27), when compared to those who were bystanders (M = –0.12, SD = 0.88), or those not involved in bullying (M = –0.26, SD = 1.03).

Note that the group of students that had been of sig- nificant concern to researchers, the bully-victims, were found to be significantly more likely to report thoughts of ending life (M = 0.43, SD = 1.21) than those students not involved in bullying. We also noted that students who reported being bystanders only in bullying situations (30.4%) were at a slightly elevated risk compared those reporting no involvement in bullying that term, though this was not significant at p = .006.

Table 1. Mean Z-scores and significance levels for suicide risk by participant role

Participant role N M SD Sig.

Not involveda 549 –0.26 1.03 a < b*, d*, f***, h***

Victim onlyb 133 0.15 0.77 b > a*, b < h**

Bully onlyc 29 0.22 1.15

Bully-victimd 25 0.43 1.21 d > a*

Bystander onlye 605 –0.12 0.88 e < f*, e > h***

Victim-bystanderf 303 0.19 1.11 f > a***, e*, f < h***

Bully-bystanderg 133 0.06 1.08 g < h***

Victim-bully-bystanderh 213 0.54 1.27 h > a***, b**, e***, f***, g***

Note. * p = .006, ** p = .001, *** p = .0001.

146 I. Rivers & N. Noret: Bullying and Thoughts of Ending One’s Life

T hi

s do

cu m

en t i

s co

py ri

gh te

d by

th e

A m

er ic

an P

sy ch

ol og

ic al

A ss

oc ia

tio n

or o

ne o

f i ts

a lli

ed p

ub lis

he rs

. T

hi s

ar tic

le is

in te

nd ed

s ol

el y

fo r t

he p

er so

na l u

se o

f t he

in di

vi du

al u

se r a

nd is

n ot

to b

e di

ss em

in at

ed b

ro ad

ly .

Discussion

The results from this study indicate that students who have multiple roles in bullying are more likely to report having had thoughts of ending life than those who are only victims, bullies, or bystanders, or those not involved in bullying behavior at all. It was also found that bully-victims were more likely to report such thoughts compared to students with no involvement in bullying behavior, although this group was small (n = 25).

Our data support previous research suggesting that stu- dents who are both bullies and victims are at particular psy- chological risk, even more so when they also witness inci- dents of bullying that go on at other times. Sex-wise com- parisons suggest that girls who are both victims and bystanders are more likely to experience thoughts of ending life or death and dying much more than those peers who are not involved in bullying, or those who are bystanders only. Furthermore, our data support the findings of Smith and Shu (2000), who noted that 66% of the students in their study had some involvement in bullying behavior as vic- tims, perpetrators, or witnesses.

In this study we opted to use behavioral indices of partic- ipant roles rather than those suggested by Salmivalli and col- leagues (1996) for two reasons: First, Salmivalli et al. includ- ed both active and passive items in their measures of “as- sistant,” “reinforcer,” and “defender” roles, which may confound indices of mental health (i.e., those who take on a passive role may experience greater cognitive dissonance and this distress than those who take on more active roles). Sec- ond, it seemed likely that those students in the bully-bystand- er role would share many of the active behavioral character- istics of the “assistant” or “reinforcer.” Similarly, those in the role of victim-bystander were more likely to share character- istics of the more passive “defender.” Notwithstanding, the complexity of the roles students play or have thrust upon them in bullying behavior cannot be underestimated. These roles go beyond those often reported in the research literature. Thus, we do not yet fully understand the mental health risk implications of bullying, not only for victims who have been the focus of much of the past research, but also for bully-vic- tims and those who also have the additional role of bystander in aggressive interactions.

There are a number of strengths to this study which are worthy of note. First, the data were gathered from a sample of 2,002 students attending 14 schools in one local authority. Participating students were representative of the local com- munities in which they lived, and the sample represented the diversity of this particular region. In addition, while we ac- knowledge that the use of self-report questionnaires is often deemed a limitation by researchers (without appropriate cor- roboration from other students and teachers), it would not have been possible to incorporate peer and/or teacher nomi- nations given the nature of the study, as well as the complex and sometimes opaque nature of bullying behavior. Notwith- standing, a great deal of effort was expended in establishing

a rapport between the researchers and students, school staff, and local authority officers. Researchers not only visited the schools prior to data collection, but throughout the data-col- lection process consistently reassured students of the confi- dentiality of their responses, and headteachers of the ways in which findings from the data would be used.

In terms of limitations, we acknowledge that the issue of cyberbullying (bullying perpetrated through electronic me- dia) was not addressed here. While there is anecdotal evi- dence demonstrating a link between cyberbullying and sui- cide among adolescents, it is also evident that many victims of cyberbullying are themselves victims of other forms of bullying behavior, and that where the tragic death of a young person has occurred it has not always been the result of be- haviors enacted at school (see Rivers & Noret, in press). It seems likely that mobile communication technology and the internet are becoming additional tools to be exploited by per- petrators of bullying in addition to more traditional methods of intimidation. Nevertheless, this is an area for further inves- tigation – and one which requires urgent attention.

We also acknowledge that an index of the severity of bul- lying perpetrated, experienced, and witnessed at school was not used in the analysis. Undoubtedly, severity plays a signif- icant factor in the mental health risk associated with bullying, and future studies should consider this factor as a covariate in assessing risks to well-being and mental health and suicide ideation. While composite indices of severity have been cre- ated by summing items drawn from Olweus’ Bully/Victim Questionnaire (primarily a series of ordinal scales), many of the items used have been interdependent (see Rivers & Noret, 2008). Consequently, the psychometric properties of the var- ious composites currently in existence are open to interpreta- tion despite relatively robust reliability coefficients. Finally, while the data set was representative of the region in terms of ethnicity, it should be noted that the majority of students were Caucasian, and future studies should include larger and more nationally representative samples of students from different ethnic and cultural backgrounds.

Overall, the current findings have significant implications for clinicians, educational, and school psychologists working with students involved in bullying behavior. Concomitant with intervention studies following student suicide, whole school antibullying initiatives can play a substantive role in reducing psychological distress and suicide risk among mem- bers of the school population. Further research is needed to explore whether bystanders in bullying episodes experience a degree of covictimization that renders them susceptible to psychological distress. In addition, research should also con- sider whether or not bystanders who are currently victims or have been victims in the past experience a degree of revic- timization when they observe bullying taking place. By understanding the experiences of bullying for whole school populations and designing interventions to meet the needs of all students rather than those primarily involved (e.g., bullies and victims), it may be possible to reduce the distress and po- tential risk to life caused by this form of aggressive behavior.

I. Rivers & N. Noret: Bullying and Thoughts of Ending One’s Life 147

T hi

s do

cu m

en t i

s co

py ri

gh te

d by

th e

A m

er ic

an P

sy ch

ol og

ic al

A ss

oc ia

tio n

or o

ne o

f i ts

a lli

ed p

ub lis

he rs

. T

hi s

ar tic

le is

in te

nd ed

s ol

el y

fo r t

he p

er so

na l u

se o

f t he

in di

vi du

al u

se r a

nd is

n ot

to b

e di

ss em

in at

ed b

ro ad

ly .

Acknowledgments

There were no conflicts of interest.

References

Bachar, E., Canetti, L., Galilee-Weisstub, E., Kaplan-DeNour, A., & Shalev, A. Y. (1998). Childhood vs. adolescence transitional ob- ject attachment, and its relation to mental health and parental bonding. Child Psychiatry and Human Development, 28, 149–167.

Brock, S. E. (2002). School suicide postvention. In S. E. Brock, P. J. Lazarus, & S. R. Jimerson (Eds.), Best practices in school crisis prevention and intervention (pp. 553–575). Bethesda, MD: Na- tional Association of School Psychologists.

D’Augelli, A. R., Pilkington, N. W., & Hershberger, S. L. (2002). Incidence and mental health impact of sexual orientation victim- ization of lesbian, gay, and bisexual youths in high school. School Psychology Quarterly, 17, 148–167.

Derogatis, L. R. (1993). Brief Symptom Inventory: Administration, scoring, and procedures manual. Minneapolis, MN: National Computer Systems, Inc.

Espelage, D. L., & Holt, M. L. (2001). Bullying and victimization during early adolescence: Peer influences and psychosocial cor- relates. Journal of Emotional Abuse, 2, 123–142.

Fekkes, M., Pijpers, F. I. M., & Verloove-Vanhorick, S. P. (2004). Bullying behavior and associations with psychosomatic com- plaints in victims. Journal of Pediatrics, 144, 17–22.

Glew, G. M., Fan, M., Katon, W., Rivara, F. P., & Kernic, M. A. (2005). Bullying, psychosocial adjustment, and academic perfor- mance in elementary school. Archives of Pediatric and Adoles- cent Medicine, 159, 1026–1031.

Hawker, D. S. J., & Boulton, M. J. (2000). Twenty years’ research on peer victimization and psychosocial maladjustment: A meta-an- alytic review of cross-sectional studies. Journal of Child Psy- chology and Psychiatry and Allied Disciplines, 41, 441–455.

Haynie, D. L., Nansel, T., & Eitel, P. (2001). Bullies, victims, and bully/victims: Distinct groups of at-risk youth. Journal of Early Adolescence, 21, 29–49.

Juvonen, J., Graham, S., & Schuster, M. A. (2003). Bullying among young adolescents: The strong, the weak, and the troubled. Pedi- atrics, 112, 1231–1237.

Kaltiala-Heino, R., Rimpela, M., Marttunen, M., Rimpela, A., & Rantanen, P. (1999). Bullying, depression, and suicidal ideation in Finnish adolescents: School survey. British Medical Journal, 319, 348–351.

Klomek, A. B., Marrocco, F., Kleinman, M., Schonfield, I. S., & Gould, M. S. (2007). Bullying, depression and suicidality in ad- olescents. Journal of the American Academy of Child and Ado- lescent Psychiatry, 46, 40–49.

Kochenderfer-Ladd, B., & Wardrop, J. L. (2001). Chronicity and instability of children’s peer victimization experiences as predic- tors of loneliness and social satisfaction trajectories. Child Devel- opment, 72, 134–151.

Kumpulainen, K., Rasanen, E., & Henttonen, I. (1998). Children involved in bullying: Psychological disturbance and the persis- tence of the involvement. Child Abuse and Neglect, 23, 1253–1262.

Mauk, G. W., & Rodgers, P. L. (1994). Building bridges over trou-

bled waters: School-based postvention with adolescent survivors of peer suicide. Crisis Intervention and Time Limited Treatment, 1, 103–123.

Nansel, T. R., Overpeck, M., Pilla, R. S., Ruan, W. J., Simons-Mor- ton, B. G., & Scheidt, P. (2001). Bullying behaviors among US youth: Prevalence and association with psychosocial adjustment. Journal of the American Medical Association, 285, 2094–2100.

Olweus, D. (1994). Annotation: Bullying at school: Basic facts and effects of a school based intervention program. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 35, 1171–1190.

Rivers, I. & Noret, N. (2008). Well-being among same-sex and op- posite-sex attracted youth at school. School Psychology Review, 37, 174–187.

Rivers, I. & Noret, N. (in press). “I hate u”: Findings from a five-year study of text and email bullying. British Educational Research Journal.

Salmivalli, C., Lagerspetz, K., Björkqvist, K., Österman, K., & Kau- kiainen, A. (1996). Bullying as a group process: Participant roles and their relations to social status within the group. Aggressive Behavior, 22, 1–15.

Schwartz, D., Gorman, A. H., Nakamoto, J., & Toblin, R. L. (2005). Victimization in the peer group and children’s academic func- tioning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 97, 425–435.

Smith, P. K., & Shu, S. (2000). What good schools can do about bullying: Findings from a survey in English schools after a de- cade of research and action. Childhood, 7, 193–212.

Srabstein, J. C., McCarter, R. J., Shao, C., & Huang, Z. J. (2006). Morbidities associated with bullying behaviors in adolescents: School based study of American adolescents. International Jour- nal of Adolescent Medicine and Health, 18, 587–596.

Swearer, S. M., Song, S. Y., Cary, P. T., Eagle, J. W., & Mickelson, W. T. (2001). Psychosocial correlates in bullying and victimiza- tion: The relationship between depression, anxiety, and bul- ly/victim status. Journal of Emotional Abuse, 2, 95–121.

About the authors

Ian Rivers, PhD is Professor of Human Development within the School of Sport & Education at Brunel University. He is a Health Psychologist and previously held the posts of Professor and Head of Psychology at Queen Margaret University and before that of Professor of Applied Psychology at York St John College.

Nathalie Noret, BSc, PCAP is Lecturer in Developmental Psy- chology within the Faculty of Health and Life Sciences at York St John University. Together with Ian Rivers, she has conducted various studies of bullying behavior in UK schools.

Ian Rivers

Professor of Human Development School of Sport & Education Brunel University Uxbridge UB8 3PH UK Tel. +44 1895 267636 Fax +44 1895 269805 E-mail [email protected]

148 I. Rivers & N. Noret: Bullying and Thoughts of Ending One’s Life

T hi

s do

cu m

en t i

s co

py ri

gh te

d by

th e

A m

er ic

an P

sy ch

ol og

ic al

A ss

oc ia

tio n

or o

ne o

f i ts

a lli

ed p

ub lis

he rs

. T

hi s

ar tic

le is

in te

nd ed

s ol

el y

fo r t

he p

er so

na l u

se o

f t he

in di

vi du

al u

se r a

nd is

n ot

to b

e di

ss em

in at

ed b

ro ad

ly .