“…">Week 1: Students were placed sitting in a “U” shape and asked to introduce themselves to the group. An activity called the “shadow game” (Altinay, 2003) and a psychodrama technique where children were asked to explain to the group what their name means to them, ensued. This was then followed by a short introductory lecture on empathy and empathetic skills using a diadtic approach. Slogan: Be kind, loving and forgiving to each other to lead a happy life .…”
Background: Bullying first emerged as an important topic of research in the 1980s in Norway (Olweus), and a recent meta-analysis shows that these forms of aggression remain prevalent among young people globally (Modecki et al.). Prominent researchers in the field have defined bullying as any aggressive behavior that incorporates three key elements, namely: (1) an intention to harm, (2) repetitive in nature, and (3) a clear power imbalance between perpetrator and victim (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; Farrington). There are many negative outcomes associated with bullying perpetration, such as: suicidal ideation (Holt et al.), weapon carrying (Valdebenito et al.), drug use (Ttofi et al.), and violence and offending in later life (Ttofi et al.). Bullying victimization too is associated with negative outcomes such as: suicidal ideation (Holt et al.), anxiety, low self-esteem and loneliness (Hawker& Boulton). Therefore, school bullying is an important target for effective intervention, and should be considered a matter of public health concern.Objectives: The objective of this review is to establish whether or not existing school-based antibullying programs are effective in reducing school-bullyng behaviors. This report also updates a previous meta-analysis conducted by Farrington and Ttofi. This earlier review found that antibullying programs are effective in reducing bullying perpetration and victimization and a primary objective of the current report is to update the earlier analysis of 53 evaluations by conducting new searches for evaluations conducted and published since 2009.
“…">Week 1: Students were placed sitting in a “U” shape and asked to introduce themselves to the group. An activity called the “shadow game” (Altinay, 2003) and a psychodrama technique where children were asked to explain to the group what their name means to them, ensued. This was then followed by a short introductory lecture on empathy and empathetic skills using a diadtic approach. Slogan: Be kind, loving and forgiving to each other to lead a happy life .…”
Background: Bullying first emerged as an important topic of research in the 1980s in Norway (Olweus), and a recent meta-analysis shows that these forms of aggression remain prevalent among young people globally (Modecki et al.). Prominent researchers in the field have defined bullying as any aggressive behavior that incorporates three key elements, namely: (1) an intention to harm, (2) repetitive in nature, and (3) a clear power imbalance between perpetrator and victim (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; Farrington). There are many negative outcomes associated with bullying perpetration, such as: suicidal ideation (Holt et al.), weapon carrying (Valdebenito et al.), drug use (Ttofi et al.), and violence and offending in later life (Ttofi et al.). Bullying victimization too is associated with negative outcomes such as: suicidal ideation (Holt et al.), anxiety, low self-esteem and loneliness (Hawker& Boulton). Therefore, school bullying is an important target for effective intervention, and should be considered a matter of public health concern.Objectives: The objective of this review is to establish whether or not existing school-based antibullying programs are effective in reducing school-bullyng behaviors. This report also updates a previous meta-analysis conducted by Farrington and Ttofi. This earlier review found that antibullying programs are effective in reducing bullying perpetration and victimization and a primary objective of the current report is to update the earlier analysis of 53 evaluations by conducting new searches for evaluations conducted and published since 2009.
“…In this respect, it can be said that the education level of the study sample is higher than the average education level of women in the Türkiye (TUIK, 2022). High level of education is considered as protective factor that for being victim of violence (Altinay and Arat, 2009;Basar and Demirci, 2018;Eralp and Gokmen, 2022;Kotan et al, 2020;Oram et al, 2017;Sen and Bolsoy, 2017). Kizilgol and Ipek (2018) conducted a study with the data of Survey on Domestic Violence against Women in Türkiye of 2014.…”
The Covid-19 pandemic has caused health, economic, social, and psychological problems in Türkiye as well as all over the world. It has been argued that economic hardship because of the pandemic, implemented pandemic restrictions such as lockdown and other social problems may increase domestic violence. The aim of this study is to investigate the exposure to violence of married women with children in Türkiye before and during the Covid-19 outbreak, their awareness of violence, knowledge about institutional mechanisms, and attitudes towards institutional mechanisms. The sample obtained by convenient sampling method consists of 324 married women between the ages of 23 and 60. Married women participated in the study by filling out the online questionnaire prepared in accordance with the purpose of the study. Domestic violence was evaluated together with different types of physical, psychological, sexual, and economic violence. In addition, in the study, women's awareness of the types of violence and the institutional mechanisms evaluated. According to the study results, it is seen that women's awareness of violence was high. In addition, it is determined that during the pandemic, 18.5% of women were exposed to physical violence, 51.5% to psychological violence and 25% to economic violence. However, it is reported that women are less exposed to all types of violence during the pandemic compared to the pre-pandemic period.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
