Weapon carrying in and out of school among pure bullies, pure victims and bully-victims: A systematic review and meta-analysis of cross-sectional and longitudinal studies

Abstract

Weapon carrying has detrimental effects for perpetrators and victims alike. It is therefore imperative that research efforts are invested into establishing those contextual factors that are associated with this antisocial behavior. This systematic and meta-analytic review investigates the association of weapon carrying with bullying perpetration and victimization inside and outside the school context. Results on pure bullies, pure victims and bully-victims are also presented. Further to extensive searches, across 20 databases and 46 journals, and careful screening of reports, in line with pre-established methodological criteria, a total of 35 manuscripts are included in the meta-analysis. Narrative results based on longitudinal studies are also presented but not meta-analyzed given the variability in study characteristics and the small number of studies. Weapon carrying is significantly associated with both bullying perpetration (adjusted OR = 2.64; p <.001) and victimization (adjusted OR = 1.58; p <. 05). Effect sizes are larger when looking at discrete categories of pure bullies (adjusted OR = 3.24; p < 0.01), pure victims (adjusted OR = 1.79; p < 0.05) and bully-victims (adjusted OR =5.66; p < .001) when compared with non-involved school children. Subgroup analyses suggest that pure victims (Q= 6.77; p < .01) and bully-victims (Q = 8.01; p < .01) are significantly more likely to carry a weapon inside than outside the school, thus rendering support to the 'vulnerability/selfprotection' hypothesis. Pure bullies have the same odds of carrying a weapon inside and outside the school context (Q= 0.60; p = .44), supporting a persistent antisocial personality theoretical framework. Implications for policy and practice arising from our results are discussed.

Psychometric properties of the cyberbullying triangulation questionnaire: A prevalence analysis through seven roles

“…The reason is that two‐dimensional instruments detect the overlap between victimization and aggression, thereby yielding the new category of Bully‐Victim. This category has been addressed both in traditional bullying (Austin & Joseph, ; Leiner, Dwivedi, Villanos, Singh, Blunk & Peinado, ; Valdebenito, Ttofi, Eisner & Gaffney, ) and in cyberbullying (Buelga, Martínez‐Ferrer & Cava, ; Gámez‐Guadix, Gini & Calvete, ; González‐Cabrera, Calvete, León‐Mejía, Pérez‐Sancho & Peinado, ; Romera, Cano, Garcia‐Fernandez & Ortega‐Ruiz, ). However, the overlap between both roles – victimization and aggression – is much more frequent in cyberbullying than in traditional bullying (Mishna, Khoury‐Kassabri, Gadalla & Daciuk, ) and Bully‐Victim has been identified as the most prevalent role in many studies (Festl, Vogelgesang, Scharkow & Quandt, ).…”

A Longitudinal Study on Stability and Transitions Among Bullying Roles

“…School bullying has received a lot of attention since the 1970s and the number of projects on the topic has increased exponentially (Zych, Ortega-Ruiz, & Del Rey, 2015a). This expansion in research contributed to a better understanding of the detrimental effects of school bullying on the psychosocial development of children both concurrently (Gini & Pozzolli, 2009;Valdebenito, Ttofi, Eisner, & Gaffney, 2017) and longitudinally (Ttofi, Farrington, & Losel, 2012;Ttofi, Farrington, L€ osel, & Loeber, 2011). There is also now a better understanding of factors that predict children's involvement in bullying as perpetrators, victims, or bully/victims (Cook, Williams, Guerra, Kim, & Sadek, 2010;Zych, Farrington, & Ttofi, 2019).…”

Risk factors for youth violence: Youth violence commission, International Society For Research On Aggression (ISRA)

“…The mere presence of guns can also increase the likelihood of aggressive responding in social situations (Berkowitz & LePage, ). Social exclusion and isolation. Being regularly victimized or ostracized by peers is also a risk factor for youth violence (Raitanen, Sandberg, & Oksanen, ; Valdebenito, Ttofi, Eisner, & Gaffney, ). This may lead individuals to feel socially isolated, with little access to a support system that could otherwise be protective against violent behavior.…”