What Works for Whom? Evaluating Patterns and Mechanisms of Change Among Bullies, Victims, and Bully-Victims Participating in a School-Based Prevention Program

Abstract

The effectiveness and program mechanisms of a whole-school anti-bullying program that builds on the socio-ecological framework were investigated by applying person-oriented methods of data analyses. A longitudinal cluster randomized control study was utilized comprising 1377 adolescents (48.5% girls, Mage = 11.7) who participated in a 1-year whole school anti-bullying program that was implemented in 13 schools and 665 adolescents (45.2% girls, Mage = 11.6) who attended 5 control schools. Student reports were collected at pre- and post-test within a 1-year interval. Applying latent profile analyses (LPA), students who were actively involved in bullying as perpetrators (e.g., bullies), who were the target of bullying (e.g., victims), who were both (e.g., bully-victims), and who were not involved either as perpetrators or victims (e.g., uninvolved) were identified. Latent transition analyses (LTA) investigated transition patterns between bully, victim, bully-victim, and uninvolved subgroups in the control and intervention group before and after the 1-year program implementation. Program effectiveness (e.g., a higher transition probability in the intervention compared to the control group) were found for victims and bully-victims. It was explored whether changes in program mechanisms were differently related to changes in these sub-group memberships in the intervention group. Victims transiting to the uninvolved sub-group increased in help-seeking and anti-bullying norms, while bully-victims transiting to the uninvolved sub-group increased help-seeking, perceived teacher intervention, and anti-bullying norms. It can be concluded that this program works differently for different sub-groups of students and that different mechanisms of change drive changes in different sub-groups of students.

Gender differences of individual and contextual factors in predicting bullying and victimization: A multi‐informant approach

“…Our findings suggest the importance of considering the predictive role of specific personality traits in planning bullying awareness‐raising and prevention interventions. This perspective aligns with a recent studies (Gkatsa, 2023; Strohmeier et al, 2023) which investigated the relationship of personality traits with all roles of active involvement in school bullying, from primary school to university, proposing interventions that take into account specific personality traits as targets. The present study could offer new insights on traits to be considered for interventions involving adolescents, specifically for males and females.…”

School Bullying and Personality Traits from Elementary School to University

“…Just thirty studies refer to the third category (Walsh et al, 2018). Modern literature practically argues that a better understanding of school bullying and its treatment requires distinguishing roles into the four subcategories of bully, victim, bully/victim, and non-involved (Strohmeier et al, 2023).…”

Parent perceptions of school relationships: Considerations of racial–ethnic differences and youth’s peer victimization.

“…Additional research is therefore needed to include multi-informant assessments of bullying victimization. Moreover, youth’s peer victimization status was measured using a single item, which is a suboptimal approach that does not allow the estimation of measurement reliability and construct validity or account for measurement error, despite being often used in prior research (e.g., Strohmeier et al, 2023; Waasdorp, Pas, et al, 2011) and one study endorsing that the single- and multiple-item approach did not result in different prevalence rates for traditional bullying victimization (Yanagida et al, 2016). These results should be interpreted with caution and replicated in future studies that assess peer victimization using multiple items and multiple sources.…”