Temporal patterns and predictors of bullying roles among adolescents in Vietnam: a school-based cohort study

Abstract

Although many cross-sectional studies have examined bullying experiences and correlated factors among adolescents in schools, relatively little is known about the extent to which bullying roles are stable or fluid over time. This short-term quantitative longitudinal study in Vietnam examined temporal patterns and predictors of bullying roles over an academic year. A total of 1424 middle and high school students aged 12-17 years completed two anonymous, self-administered questionnaires six months apart in 2014 and 2015. Young people were classified into different bullying roles as follow: not-involved (38.9%), victims only (24%), bullies only (6.6%), and bully-victims (40.4%) across the two times. About 60% of all surveyed students experienced bullying either as victim, bully, or bully-victim during the year. Of these students, nearly three in four indicated unstable bullying roles over time. Multivariate multinomial logistic regressions indicated factors ranging from individual (age, gender, and mental health) to family (social support, parental supervision and monitoring, witnessing parental violence, and conflict with siblings), school (perceived social support, teachers' attempt to stop bullying at school), and peers (social support, students' attempt to stop bullying at school) have significant associations with levels of bullying involvement. Implications for bullying prevention programs nationally and internationally are discussed.

Influence of Family Variables on Cyberbullying Perpetration and Victimization: A Systematic Literature Review

“…Finally, Shams et al (2017) discovered that children who had witnessed violence between their parents were more likely to show bullying behaviors (cyber and traditional perpetration and victimization was included). However, Le et al (2017) found that witnessing violence between their parents was a significant predictor of cyberbullying perpetration, but not in case of victimization.…”

“…There were 6 (18%) studies which focused only on contextual family variables (Abdulsalam et al 2017;Çakır et al 2016;Chen et al 2018;Garmy et al 2018;Marret and Choo 2017;Shaheen et al 2018). However, there were 9 more studies (26%) which took into account such variables (Bevilacqua et al 2017;Beyazit et al 2017;Buelga et al 2017;Doty et al 2017;Garaigordobil and Machimbarrena 2017;Gómez et al 2017;Le et al 2017;Shams et al 2017;Uludasdemir and Kucuk 2018). The following variables were included: Family composition, family conflict, family's socioeconomic status, parents' education level, parental employment situation, family's home degree of rurality, parents' age, technological competence, stress, and parents' city of residence.…”

“…Garmy et al (2018) found a correlation between children who did not live with their parents and higher frequencies of being bullied (cyber and traditional victimization was included). Finally, Le et al (2017) identified the composition of the household as a predictor of perpetration behavior (cyber and traditional perpetration was included). However, the other research studies that took this variable into account did not find any relationship between the composition of the household and the probability of being a cybervictim or a cyberbullying perpetrator (Beyazit et al 2017;Doty et al 2017;Uludasdemir and Kucuk 2018).…”

“…Gómez et al (2017) also indicated that the parental control and limitations over children's Internet use may be associated with cyberbullying perpetration and victimization. Le et al (2017) detected a correlation between parental control and diminished odds of becoming a bully/a victim (cyber and traditional bullying perpetration and victimization were included). Finally, Sasson and Mesch (2017) found a positive correlation between the parental control over their children's activities by technological means or by checking their emails, IM accounts, or Facebook profile and the likelihood of online victimization.…”

Ending violence in childhood: a global imperative

“…Lessons from anti bullying programmes are reviewed by Menesini and Salmivalli (2017). Le et al (2017) draw attention to the need to link anti-bullying programmes to mental health promotion, and to focus on peer social relationships more broadly, including with the engagement of family members, as relevant. Sherr et al (2017) show that effective changes in institutions can alleviate violence either by structural and code of conduct interventions or policy changes that avert such placements or expedite onward movement to family type environments.…”