This article was downloaded by: [University of Eastern Finland]

On: 10 February 2012, At: 04:05

Publisher: Routledge
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered
office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK
Studies in Higher Education
Publication details, including instructions for authors and
subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/cshe20
Bullying at a university: students'
experiences of bullying
Hanna-Maija Sinkkonen
a
, Helena Puhakka
a
& Matti Merilinen
a
a
University of Eastern Finland, , School of Educational Sciences
and Psychology, Joensuu, Finland
Available online: 09 Feb 2012
To cite this article: Hanna-Maija Sinkkonen, Helena Puhakka & Matti Merilinen (2012):
Bullying at a university: students' experiences of bullying, Studies in Higher Education,
DOI:10.1080/03075079.2011.649726
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2011.649726
PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE
Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-
conditions
This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any
substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,
systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden.
The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representation
that the contents will be complete or accurate or up to date. The accuracy of any
instructions, formulae, and drug doses should be independently verified with primary
sources. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss, actions, claims, proceedings,
demand, or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or
indirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of this material.
Bullying at a university: students experiences of bullying
Hanna-Maija Sinkkonen, Helena Puhakka and Matti Merilinen*
University of Eastern Finland, School of Educational Sciences and Psychology, Joensuu,
Finland
This study focuses on bullying at a Finnish university. In May 2010 an e-
questionnaire was sent to each university student (N = 10,551), and 27% of these
students (N = 2,805) responded. According to the results, 5% of the university
students had experienced either indirect public bullying or direct verbal bullying
on campus. In most cases, the bully was another student, although almost as
often a member of the teaching personnel was reported to be the bully. Bullied
students had resolved the unpleasant situations by using either active or passive
responses. One example of an active response was to interrupt studies or avoid
situations in which bullying occurred. Passively, students responded by
submitting to the bullies, which resulted in psychic symptoms such as weakening
of capacity, motivation and self-condence, low spirits and even depression.
Keywords: higher education; university student; bullying
Introduction
In recent decades increasing attention has been drawn to the phenomenon of bullying
in workplaces and schools. There is a growing body of research on this issue, both in
Finland and in many other countries (e.g. Analitis et al. 2009; Coleyshaw 2010; Finnish
School Health Inquiry 2010; Keashly and Neuman 2010; Kunttu and Huttunen 2009;
Salmivalli et al. 2005; Simpson and Cohen 2004). However, there seems to be a dearth
of research concerning bullying at university level.
Knowledge of bullying among university students, and the manner in which it has
been experienced, is rather unspecic. Neither universities nor sponsors have been
interested in encouraging research in this eld (Coleyshaw 2010). However, as bullying
is known to exist in schools, educational institutes and workplaces, it is reasonable to
assume that universities cannot be exempt from it either. Research provides evidence
that being the target of bullying inuences a persons well-being, and increases the
risk of psychic and social problems later in life. Roles which relate to the bully or
the victim can follow individuals throughout their lives, from school up until
working life (e.g. Hawker and Boulton 2000; Woods and Wolke 2004; Ledley et al.
2006; Monks et al. 2009; Meland et al. 2010).
This article focuses on the issue of bullying at one university. To what degree does it
exist? What is the nature of bullying at this university, and how do students react when
caught up in a bullying incident?
ISSN 0307-5079 print/ISSN 1470-174X online
2012 Society for Research into Higher Education
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2011.649726
http://www.tandfonline.com
*Corresponding author. Email: matti.merilainen@uef.
Studies in Higher Education
2012, 113, iFirst Article
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[
U
n
i
v
e
r
s
i
t
y

o
f

E
a
s
t
e
r
n

F
i
n
l
a
n
d
]

a
t

0
4
:
0
5

1
0

F
e
b
r
u
a
r
y

2
0
1
2

Bullying as a phenomenon
The denition of bullying is not unequivocal. The denition depends on the viewpoint
and the context in which the bullying occurs. Research articles dene bullying as a
long-lasting, repeated, direct or indirect aggressive action which is focused on the
target person (Monks et al. 2009; Olweus 1993, 9). Bullying can be verbal or physical,
but it is always a systematic and deliberate way of action. Further, there is evidence of
negative effects on the victims well-being (Monks et al. 2009). This research adopts
Olweuss (1993, 9) denition of bullying, one student ending up as a victim of
repeated negative actions committed by one or more other students, or member of
the teaching or administration personnel. These actions may be physical (e.g.
hitting, pushing around, kicking, blocking the way or hiding objects) or verbal (e.g.
calling names, ridiculing, threatening, blackmailing, making negative comments or
gossiping). It may also take the form of social manipulation (e.g. making faces, avoid-
ing verbal contact). Bullying is usually continual, which disheartens the victim. There is
always a disproportion of domination and power in bullying. For example, a situation in
which two equal student peers are occasionally quarrelling cannot be dened as bully-
ing. The same applies to situations in which teaching or administration personnel
adhere to the written rules of the curriculum. Sociological research has been critical
of these denitions, stating that they overlook situational factors and sociocultural
dimensions, such as gender, social class, race or sexual orientations (Ringrose and
Renold 2010).
Coping under stress demands the ability to encounter difcult situations, and to be
prepared to handle stressful experiences. Moreover, it involves the ability to solve
various kinds of problematic situations (Carver 2004; Carver, Scheier, and Weintraub
1989). Thus, the bullying situation is related to both controlling the life of the bullied
person, as well as the prevailing situation and context. Exposure to bullying is always a
personal experience. Bullying may exist anywhere amongst students or employees, and
in the same way a teacher or some other member of the working community can also
become the target or the bully. Parzefal and Salin (2010) review bullying as a vertical
and horizontal phenomenon; it is vertical when someone bullies another who is subor-
dinate to him/her. If a student experiences bullying or mistreatment from teachers or
administrative personnel, their trust in the university, faculty or the subject they are
studying gets fractured or breaks down. The student feels that the ethos of the university
is false: the curriculum can be sidestepped and there are different rules for different stu-
dents. On the other hand, bullying is horizontal when it occurs between two equal
persons; for instance, two students in the same year. It is possible that the one feels
injured or bullied while the other thinks that his/her behaviour is justied and does
not intentionally want to hurt others in any way. The interpretation of the experience
depends on who is bullying whom, when, where, why and how often (Twale and
DeLuca 2008). In horizontal bullying, the experience is often interpreted likewise.
However, when the bully and the victim are not on equal terms, the interpretation is
also different. It is very common that the senior person does not view the deed they
committed as bullying.
Finnish research (Salmivalli 2010; Salmivalli and Isaacs 2005; Salmivalli et al.
2005) denes bullying as a group action. Bullying is related to social relationships
within the group; it is more than just the interaction between the bully and the
victim, it is how the other group members relate to both parties. According to this de-
nition, being a witness to the incident without negatively reacting to it shows that they
2 H.-M. Sinkkonen et al.
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[
U
n
i
v
e
r
s
i
t
y

o
f

E
a
s
t
e
r
n

F
i
n
l
a
n
d
]

a
t

0
4
:
0
5

1
0

F
e
b
r
u
a
r
y

2
0
1
2

accept bullying and are thus a party to it. Bullying is a kind of aggressive behaviour
based on social relationships within the group. Ergo, the phenomenon of bullying
can be studied as a manifestation of aggressiveness. The reactive form and the proactive
form of aggression together constitute a solid ground for the concept of bullying, and
the varying manifestations of behaviour involving it (e.g. Mathieson and Crick 2010;
Tuvblad et al. 2009). Reactive aggression is a reaction to a threat, provocation or hos-
tility, and the initiatory factor in it is irritation by other persons and their actions.
Because the stimulus for the behaviour comes from outside, this kind of bullying
may be situation-related and totally unsystematic. Acting with proactive aggression
is based on the purpose of beneting from the act. This kind of bullying is a planned
and goal-oriented action that the bully believes will benet them personally (Arsenio
and Lemerise 2001; Dodge and Coie 1987; Dodge et al. 1990).
University as a context for bullying
Students are admitted to universities through entrance examinations, and aim to develop
their expertise in the academic eld they have chosen to study. Most wish to graduate and
they are intent on studying. They expect high-quality education and encouragement, and
amicable and equal treatment (Kuittinen and Merilinen 2008). Bullying is a mode of vic-
timization. The psychological research concerning bullying in schools has sought expla-
nations for victimization in the victims personalities or behaviour models. In the context
of higher education, the motive for bullying may, for example, be age, sexuality, ethnic
origin or some handicap (Ringrose and Renold 2010).
Research on bullying in workplaces has been mainly concentrated at the organiz-
ational level (Coleyshaw 2010). When bullying exists in workplaces, there is always
some structure that motivates and promotes uncivil behaviour and misconduct (Salin
2003). Many factors facilitate the bullying process and unfair treatment. No single
factor can be demonstrated for causing bullying, but some triggers can be found that
generate inappropriate activities. One such example at universities can be found in
administrative orders and procedures in decision making. Interpretations of rules
may vary between faculties, and this can result in unjust decisions for students.
At the university level, bullying may increase when resources become limited and
competition to acquire them grows tighter. With fewer resources, the potential for offer-
ing quality education diminishes, with the result that faculties invest their resources in
the most protable subjects. This kind of situation inevitably means organizational
changes, which in turn affect students revision and planning. Students may experience
problems when staff are too busy to give them advice. Conversely, staff may regard
students questions and concerns as non-signicant. Bullying may also be reinforced
in faculties where the academic culture emphasizes the freedom and autonomy of the
work of professors, lecturers and researchers. This means that their ways of working
are very diverse, making it difcult to intervene when problems arise concerning teach-
ing and the mistreatment of students. When the settings are favourable to unjust treat-
ment in general, it is possible that interaction between students suffers (e.g. Salin 2003;
Twale and DeLuca 2008). Moreover, when the university personnel feel their position
to be insecure, they may direct their dissatisfaction towards students.
Finlands rst higher education survey on bullying was a part of a larger health
inquiry (Kunttu and Huttunen 2009) targeted at 5086 students (3222 women, 1864
men). Some results have been published on the frequency of bullying, which indicate
that 37% of the informants had experienced bullying in school. Bullying was more
Studies in Higher Education 3
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[
U
n
i
v
e
r
s
i
t
y

o
f

E
a
s
t
e
r
n

F
i
n
l
a
n
d
]

a
t

0
4
:
0
5

1
0

F
e
b
r
u
a
r
y

2
0
1
2

frequent at universities than in universities of applied sciences. Almost one-fth of the
men students studying at universities had experienced bullying. A quarter of the infor-
mants had been bullied during their higher education studies, and 56% of them stated
that they had been bullied quite frequently or very frequently. About 1.7% of the respon-
dents had themselves been bullies and had directed their actions at other students (Kauppi
and Prhl 2009). According to the Student Experience Report (2008), 7% of British
higher education students (N= 3135) had been bullied, and women students had experi-
enced it more often than men. Three out of four students mentioned that the bully had
been another student; one out of four that it had been a member of the staff.
Bullying is less frequent in higher education than at other levels of studies.
However, this may be partly explained by the lack of research on the subject in this
context (Coleyshaw 2010). In addition, many protective factors can be found in univer-
sity studies. From the students viewpoints, compared to comprehensive schools, for
example, universities are less hierarchic. Studying is not compulsory and students
are freer to choose what courses they take and how their studies progress. Students
in higher education are a heterogeneous group. Because there is great variation in
their age, origin and previous studies, unequivocal structural explanations for bullying
in higher education are tough to nd. To nd solutions, research on this subject should
be multidisciplinary and bullying should be reviewed as a systematic phenomenon.
Research should include a viewpoint of bullying as being a part of the life course of
those concerned.
Method
Measure
In May 2010, all students at one Finnish university received an e-questionnaire via
email. It consisted of two parts. The rst part focused on variables such as gender,
age, campus, faculty, main subject, and the starting time and phase of their studies.
In the second part, there were questions related to experiences of bullying and the
role of the respondent; had they seen anybody being bullied, had they been bullies
themselves and how had the bullying been dealt with. In the last open-ended question,
the respondents had the opportunity to suggest how bullying could be weeded out from
the university. In its entirety, the questionnaire included 40 questions: 20 multiple-
choice and 20 open-ended questions.
Participants
The Finnish questionnaire was translated into English. The Finnish version was sent to
10,189 students and the English version to 362 students (N= 10,551). A personal letter
was included and the survey was replicated twice. The letter contained advice on how
possible bullying should be reported and dealt with, and how the victim could gain
support in the matter.
The email did not reach 113 students; therefore, 10,438 students received it, of
which 63 % were women and 37 % men students. The nal data included 2732
responses in Finnish and 73 in English. In total 2,805 students answered, and the
response rate was 27%. Since response rates in website questionnaires vary between
20% and 60% (Cook, Heath, and Thompson 2000), the response rate for this study
is sufcient.
4 H.-M. Sinkkonen et al.
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[
U
n
i
v
e
r
s
i
t
y

o
f

E
a
s
t
e
r
n

F
i
n
l
a
n
d
]

a
t

0
4
:
0
5

1
0

F
e
b
r
u
a
r
y

2
0
1
2

Of the respondents who answered the questionnaire, their mean age was 27 years
(Md 24, SD= 7.76); 72% of the respondents were women and 28% men. In 2008,
among Finnish university students (N= 164,100) 53% were women and 47% men
(Statistics Finland 2008). Hence, the proportional representation of women respondents
must be taken into account when the results are evaluated.
Some responses were incomplete. For example, the question about gender was left
blank in 29 questionnaires. This is understandable, considering the delicate nature of
the phenomenon in question. These respondents have tried to hide their identity as
far as possible.
Data analysis
Analyses were conducted using both quantitative and qualitative methods. In the stat-
istical analyses, descriptive statistics such as frequencies, means and percentage distri-
butions were used. With respect to categorical variables such as sex, the phase of
studies and the year of studies, frequency and differences in bullying experiences
were analysed by the chi-square test for independence (Robson and Langdridge
2002). Qualitative content analysis was adopted for scrutinising the nature of bullying
and the interrelation between bullying and studying.
Results
Who bullies whom?
One hundred and forty-seven respondents (5%) reported that they had been bullied
while studying or within the studying environment. When asked the question How
often do you get bullied?, the respondents evaluated the frequency of bullying, choos-
ing between daily (21 answers), a couple of times a month (43) or a few times
during the academic term (62). All these alternatives reect the severity of bullying
in academic studies. Therefore, in the analyses, the experiences were handled as one
group.
The difculty of interpreting what is bullying and how often it occurs is related in
the denition of bullying. Thus, if a student feels they are being bullied by a member of
staff this may well be so, but it is also possible that they are applying the label bullying
to something that is not really bullying: e.g. academic criticism, humour. Conversely
the member of staff does not necessarily recognize that they are bullying.
The victims represent both genders, 106 women (72%) and 39 men (27%). Two stu-
dents did not disclose their gender. The distribution of bullying experiences reiterates
the distribution of sex among the respondents, and showed no statistical differences
between men and women students (
2
(1) = 1.32, p = .72). Instead, at the masters
level (4th5th study year), bullying was more common than at the bachelors level
(1st3rd study year) (
2
(1) = 5.68, p = .017) (Table 1). Clear differences were also
found in the data when the year of studies was analysed (
2
(7) = 26.13, p = .000). Bul-
lying seems to intensify after the fth year. However, it was reported that bullying
occurred only occasionally among those who were studying for more than seven
years. So the possibility that these students experienced other problems, such as delay-
ing or even dropping out, cannot be excluded.
Among the victims, 89% (N= 131) reported the status of the bully or bullies. In
most cases, it was another student (N= 67, 51%), but almost as often it was a
Studies in Higher Education 5
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[
U
n
i
v
e
r
s
i
t
y

o
f

E
a
s
t
e
r
n

F
i
n
l
a
n
d
]

a
t

0
4
:
0
5

1
0

F
e
b
r
u
a
r
y

2
0
1
2

member of the teaching personnel (N= 58, 44%). In six cases (6%), the bully was a
member of the administration staff. Only 26 victims had sought some kind of help to
stop the victimization; 107 victims reported that they had not sought any help and
14 did not answer the question at all. Those who had tried to look for help had consulted
teaching or administration personnel (9), fellowstudents (5), the students union (4) and
students subject organization (1). Others directed their request for help to the students
health organization (3), students housing corporation (1), police (1) and Akava (Con-
federation of Unions for Professional and Managerial Staff in Finland) (1). The fact,
that only one victim had consulted the students counsellor at the university is interest-
ing and worthy of consideration.
Moreover, 305 students (11%) reported that they had witnessed bullying on
campus, but only a third (N= 110) had tried to intervene. Most eyewitnesses (N=
182) disclosed that they had not reacted in any way.
Bullying situations and practices
The ways of bullying which were reported in the data were analysed using content
analysis. As previous knowledge about bullying at the university was scarce, the
content analysis created an insight into the data which ensured that no part was over-
looked (Patton 2002). The data was charted with an inductive method which system-
ized it so that no information was missed. All descriptions of bullying were
scrutinized, and 26 different kinds of bullying were found. Some theoretical connec-
tions were identied from the previous research literature (Kauppi and Prhl 2009;
Olweus 1993), and these connections were used to link the rst subclasses which
were found to wider categories.
Bullying is a multifaceted phenomenon. It can appear in verbal, non-verbal or phys-
ical forms, and it can be direct or indirect (Kauppi and Prhl 2010). In addition,
exposure to bullying can be a public or private social experience
Verbal bullying can be divided into direct verbal bullying (e.g. insulting and calling
names) and indirect verbal bullying (e.g. gossiping). Non-verbal forms of direct bully-
ing can be inappropriate touching or being disturbingly close. Non-verbal indirect bul-
lying can be, for example, keeping one outside the group (Kauppi and Prhl 2010). In
this data there were no mentions of direct nonverbal bullying. Types of physical bully-
ing in this data were physical violence and sexual harassment.
In this research, experiences of bullying are categorized on the basis of Kauppi and
Prhls (2010) categorization. This categorization is grounded on the type of bullying
rst mentioned in the responses, although there were reports of multiple types of bully-
ing targeted at the same person. Ninety-nine students (67%) who had been bullied
answered the question How do you get bullied? (Table 2).
Table 1. Prevalence of bullying at the bachelor and masters studies level.
I study for
Do you get bullied here at the university or in your study
environment?
No Yes Total
Bachelors degree 1366 (95.8%) 60 (4.2%) 1426
Masters degree 1268 (93.8%) 84 (6.2%) 1352
Total 2634 (94.8%) 144 (5.2%) 2778
6 H.-M. Sinkkonen et al.
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[
U
n
i
v
e
r
s
i
t
y

o
f

E
a
s
t
e
r
n

F
i
n
l
a
n
d
]

a
t

0
4
:
0
5

1
0

F
e
b
r
u
a
r
y

2
0
1
2

Indirect public bullying was most frequent and the word discrimination was the
word most used in the students responses. Every second student bullied mentioned
having suffered from discrimination and unequal treatment, and also experienced
being excluded, thus facing deliberate bullying. Every third student bullied mentioned
direct verbal bullying, for instance, being called names, being exposed to public ridi-
cule or gossip. The category of indirect individual bullying includes different kinds
of interactional issues that are based on the interpretations of the victims. For
example, experiences of receiving ambiguous advice may have concerned several
persons, but in the data they appear as individual experiences. Physical bullying was
mentioned twice in our data.
The question about the situations in which bullying had occurred was answered by
82 bullied students (56%) (Table 3). Most of these situations (72) had happened during
teaching and studying situations on campus. The others (10) had happened during free
time or were not related to any special studying event.
Almost half of the reported bullying (N= 36) took place during studying situations. A
quarter (N= 19) were interlinked with common social events on the campus, and one-
Table 2. Ways of bullying.
Classication N = 99 How do you get bullied?
Indirect public bullying 48 Discrimination, discrimination by age, exclusion from the
group, unfair or unequal treatment, pressure and
inadequate activity
Direct verbal bullying 32 Being called names, gossip, reprimand, picked on,
humour, exposed to public ridicule
Indirect individual
bullying
17 By getting inappropriate assignments, belittling, being
impolite, expressing contempt and giving ambiguous
advice on purpose. Disturbed by noise and bullying on
the network
Physical harassment and
bullying
2 Intimidation, coming too close, sexual harassment
Table 3. Situations of bullying.
Classication N= 82 In what kinds of situations do you get bullied?
During studying situations,
lessons, lectures,
examinations
36 Workshops, labs.
During lessons, group work and in my free time.
Within studying environments.
Situation of guidance or
feed-back, evaluation
17 When asking for help with my master thesis and
when I go in person to meet my supervisor.
Evaluation of my performance.
Common social situations
related to studying
19 After the lessons I felt that nobody wanted to have
lunch with me.
During the breaks.
Free time 2 On the premises of the student organization. Not
while I am studying.
In general, not in any special
event
8 Always when there are more than two persons in
the situation.
Studies in Higher Education 7
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[
U
n
i
v
e
r
s
i
t
y

o
f

E
a
s
t
e
r
n

F
i
n
l
a
n
d
]

a
t

0
4
:
0
5

1
0

F
e
b
r
u
a
r
y

2
0
1
2

fth (N= 17) with situations of guidance or evaluation. On reviewing bullying on the ver-
tical-horizontal dimension, it is evident that, when the teacher had been the bully, the
experiences were related to teaching and guidance, while those when being bullied by
another student were related to common social situations on campus.
Course of action when targeted by bullying
Being prepared to operate in unpleasant situations, and having the ability to face
anxiety and stress, are decisive qualities needed when exposed to insecurity (Carver
1997; Carver, Scheier, and Weintraub 1989). There are three strategies available to
solve the situation. First, a person in an unpleasant and intimidating situation can act
constructively and try to nd a solution to resolve it. Second, they may choose a less
functional way of acting and remain without any solution to the uncomfortable situ-
ation. The third option, destructive functioning, is the worst choice for an individual.
It can be harmful and cause permanent damage to the person in question.
The victims strategies were analyzed using the models of Carver, Scheier, and
Weintraub (1989). Using the constructive strategy, the victim may pursue a solution
by seeking active help, either committing themselves to other available activities,
adapting their functioning to be more suitable to the situation or trying to inuence
the environment so that their position becomes less threatened. However, a solution
to the problem cannot always be found. The person may be aware of the problem
but is unable to act when the solution cannot be found.
The choice of strategy can therefore be problem- or emotion-orientated (Lazarus
and Folkman 1984). Using the problem-orientated strategy, the person seeks solutions
that focus on the actions necessary to achieve a solution, whereas a person following an
emotion-orientated strategy seeks social support, interprets the situation to be more
favourable than it is in reality, or totally denies their difcult position. Ineffective
emotion-orientated strategies include emotional outbursts and difculties in committing
to prevailing tasks. Mental and physical absenteeism may exist as well. This kind of
activity does not lead to nding solutions but further worsens the situation. It may
lead to feelings of desperation and anxiety, which are hard to overcome (Carver,
Scheier, and Weintraub 1989; Lazarus and Folkman 1984). Strategies such as totally
giving up ones attempts to adapt or nd a solution, exaggerated self-criticism,
taking responsibility for the bullying and turning to drugs are problematic (Carver
1997).
Table 4 presents a categorization of the strategies used by the bullied victims. The
question How have you acted when you have gotten or get bullied? was answered by
65 students.
Every fourth victim stated they had actively sought a way out of the situation. They
attempted to nd relief by delaying, interrupting or dropping out of their studies, and
even changing their study places. Some respondents also indicated getting poorer
grades than earlier because of the bullying. They clearly described how difcult their
situation was regarding studying, but information about attempts to nd solutions
was missing (cf. Carver, Scheier, and Weintraub 1989). Some students had tried to
conform by adapting their behaviour, avoiding attention in studying environments
and situations where they had earlier been exposed to bullying (Carver 1997; Carver,
Scheier, and Weintraub 1989). Almost every second student reported psychological
symptoms as a result of bullying: reduced capacity, feeling low, lack of motivation
and self-efcacy and feelings of stress, fearfulness and disengagement.
8 H.-M. Sinkkonen et al.
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[
U
n
i
v
e
r
s
i
t
y

o
f

E
a
s
t
e
r
n

F
i
n
l
a
n
d
]

a
t

0
4
:
0
5

1
0

F
e
b
r
u
a
r
y

2
0
1
2

Discussion
Courage to defend and sensitivity to intervene
The focus of this article is on bullying at university. Findings show that 5% of rst-
degree students had experienced bullying. If the number is compared with the total
amount of students in 2008 (N= 164,100), then nearly 8200 students in Finnish univer-
sities will have been targets of bullying. Forbidding bullying in the university is not a
satisfactory method of intervention. More efcient courses of action and models for
prevention are required at the university. The reported bully was in most cases
another student, but almost as often a staff member was mentioned as the bully. This
data was collected in spring 2010 when many reforms related to both students and
staff were underway. Changes in administration, being too busy, fears concerning
Table 4. Course of action taken when being a target of bullying.
Course of action N= 65
How have you acted when you have
been bullied?
Problem-orientated, active
Slowing down the studies, dropping
out, changing university
18 I dont continue my studies until the
bully leaves the campus.
I have been avoiding this teachers
lessons and I have taken an
examination only when it is really
necessary.
Im not going to do my master studies at
this university. I plan to complete
them at another university.
Adjusting behaviour 9 Nowadays I consider more what I say
when I speak up during lessons or
workshops. I have lowered my
performance so that I can better t into
the group.
As I havent any friends in my class, I
have started to avoid these situations
and I dont participate in lectures I
learn less.
Problem-orientated, passive
Impaired performance, earning poor
marks
4 I have been given poorer marks than I
am worthy of.
Because I have to repeat my
examinations (even to get the lowest
grade) my studies are lengthened. Ive
never got more than Cs.
Emotion-orientated, passive
Destructive strategies: desperation,
giving up and action that is useless
for solving the situation
34 I am nervous if I have to perform
something when the teacher is
present.
My motivation declines and I just
perform just for the sake of earning
marks.
I got depressed; I felt anxious and
avoided the lessons.
I felt inadequate.
Studies in Higher Education 9
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[
U
n
i
v
e
r
s
i
t
y

o
f

E
a
s
t
e
r
n

F
i
n
l
a
n
d
]

a
t

0
4
:
0
5

1
0

F
e
b
r
u
a
r
y

2
0
1
2

limited resources and pressurised working situations together may have created ten-
sions and anxiety among both students and staff. This may have set the scene for the
bullying that the students had experienced (cf. Salin 2003; Twale and DeLuca 2008).
Indirect public bullying (e.g. exclusion from a group, unequal treatment, avoiding
contact) or direct verbal bullying (gossiping, humiliating, calling names) were the most
common forms of bullying. When the bully was another student, bullying occurred
mostly in social events on campus (e.g. in the cafeteria, in corridors). Bullying which
was committed by staff occurred in different situations of teaching and guidance (semi-
nars, lectures, thesis guidance). The number of bullies among teaching personnel, and the
nature of their bullying, remains unsolved in this study, because within this dataset it was
not possible to dene the teaching competence and pedagogical studies of those teachers
who were reported to be committing bullying during lessons. It is possible that the acts
committed by teaching personnel may have originated from incompetence.
Although bullying is a serious problem caused for numerous reasons, it is still
always an individual experience. That is why we have to take into account the reliability
of self-reported data based on individual experiences and a personal understanding of
what bullying is.
Further research is still needed on the origin of the experience and its causes. In this
study, a part of the bullying reported was intentional, but it is quite possible in other
examples that the bully did not realize that their behaviour could be interpreted as bul-
lying. For this reason, it is necessary for both students and personnel to become con-
scious of the essence of uncivil behaviour and bullying. Students experiences
should be reviewed in a larger context, which is not possible in this research because
of the design of this questionnaire. For example, if a student is excluded from a
group going for lunch, this may not be explained as a way of intentional bullying by
others. Similarly, that a member of the teaching personnel did not reply to an email
can be explained by him/her being overworked or forgetting. Further, purposely
giving ambiguous advice may have its origins in the staffs incompetence and lack
of qualication. However, this question does demand additional research.
Self-esteem can be connected to being a victim of bullying and it also has an effect
on the victims human relationships (Salmivalli and Isaacs 2005). Among other things,
it affects the victims conceptions of other people (e.g. Ledley et al. 2006). In some
aspects, the psychological and social traits of the victim may promote bullying. One
way to prevent bullying is to offer the victims the opportunity of going through the
experiences with a student psychologist, or some other ofcial who has sufcient train-
ing in the eld. In this kind of procedure, the student could recover from the unpleasant
experiences and nd support for his/her fractured self-esteem. Student health services
could play an active role in counselling and support, and universities should clearly
name the contact persons the victim can call on when he/she faces bullying. It is alarm-
ing to notice the continuity of bullying from one education level to another; students
have often been victimized earlier, and in some cases the same bullies are repeating
their offences. There is clear evidence of cases where bullying at work has created a
vicious circle. As a result of being bullied, the victim has suffered from psychological
symptoms, which in turn have increased the vulnerability to be bullied (Vartia-Vn-
nen 2003). This continuity of occurrences should be rmly brought to an end. The
victim is not the only party involved who is exposed to the negative effects of bullying.
The psychological and social well-being of both the victims and the bullies is put in
danger. The bully can make a habit of using unsocial means, such as belittling and dis-
criminating against others in pursuit of some kind of benet (Arsenio and Lemerise
10 H.-M. Sinkkonen et al.
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[
U
n
i
v
e
r
s
i
t
y

o
f

E
a
s
t
e
r
n

F
i
n
l
a
n
d
]

a
t

0
4
:
0
5

1
0

F
e
b
r
u
a
r
y

2
0
1
2

2001; Dodge and Coie 1987). Adopting the role of the bully can be a part of develop-
ment which leads to an anti-social way of life (Salmivalli 2010). Some victims and
bullies need help in overcoming their psychological symptoms; hence, psychological
and psychiatric services should be always available to students. These services have
diminished substantially during recent years owing to the scarcity of resources. In all
universities in Finland students have to queue for mental health services.
Victims in this study have used either active coping strategies such as delaying or
dropping out of studies, or passive coping strategies that allowed the situation to con-
tinue. Every fourth student coping with passive strategies suffered from psychological
symptoms, such as decreasing motivation, capacity, self-esteem and even depression.
This nding is alarming, and demonstrates the severity of the problem. Extra research
is required, as too little is known of the effects and interrelation of bullying concerning
students life control and well-being in higher education.
The results of this study are based on the responses of 2805 students; the response
rate was 27 % which was adequate for statistical analyses. Relative to the validity (gen-
eralizability) of the results, it is essential for the collected data to be a highly represen-
tative sample of the population (all rst-degree students). In particular, the data used
should have the same kind of sociodemographic features as those of the basic popu-
lation. This survey reached almost every student in the target group for this research
(63% women, 37% men). Nonetheless, the proportion of women in the group of
respondents was larger (72%) than that of men (28%), but this can partly be explained
by this particular university having a larger than average proportion of women students.
In 2008, the proportion of women students in Finnish universities (N =164,100) was
53% (Statistics Finland 2008). The larger ratio of women may also be explained by
the subjects being studied mainly humanities, pedagogies and social sciences.
Another reason for the greater proportion of women could be that women students
had experienced bullying more than men, and they wanted to make this known. More-
over, it is possible that women were more diligent, and therefore answered the survey
more than men. In relation to those who had experienced bullying, the distribution of
sex was the same as those who had answered the survey, and there were no statistical
differences between women and men respondents in terms of bullying. Even so, the
proportion of women respondents was larger, and it must be taken into account
when reviewing and generalising the results.
One shortcoming in this research is the missing information in the data, despite the
clearly informed anonymity clause in the letter provided with the questionnaire. The
letter declared that the identity of the informant would not be disclosed during the ana-
lyses or while writing the report. Further, evidence from the qualitative data in the
reports was chosen carefully and discreetly, and this information was also included
in the letter. Despite this, some respondents left a part of the questions regarding back-
ground variables unanswered. The questions about sexuality, ethnic origin and disabil-
ity should, however, be reconsidered in the future, because they are factors that may
increase or inuence the possibility of being bullied (Ringrose and Renold 2010).
The well-being of university students, and ways of giving them support, should be
reviewed as a comprehensive phenomenon from the viewpoint of students handling
their own lives and their physical, psychological and social well-being. Additional proac-
tive and comprehensive efforts are necessary in the development of students health be-
haviour, guidance and qualications to study at university. The pedagogical competence
of teachers is at the core of students well-being. By dividing students into groups and
promoting benevolent interaction within and between groups, teachers can contribute
Studies in Higher Education 11
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[
U
n
i
v
e
r
s
i
t
y

o
f

E
a
s
t
e
r
n

F
i
n
l
a
n
d
]

a
t

0
4
:
0
5

1
0

F
e
b
r
u
a
r
y

2
0
1
2

to joint responsibility and solidarity as a part of education, and could simultaneously act
as facilitators in reducing bullying at the university (Merilinen 2008).
Bullying is harmful at the individual level, but it contributes negatively to the com-
munity in which it exists, and causes inconvenience and harm to the whole society.
Organized public support can help victims, bullies and witnesses to overcome these
situations. In our data, support or help was rarely sought, and even then it was not
always found. Bullying should be responded to or addressed immediately when some-
body detects it. Knowledge about quick intervention increases students condence in
their university (Parzefall and Salin 2010).
Moreover, bullying which is targeted at university personnel needs also to be scru-
tinized; it could then be examined as a systematic phenomenon, as suggested by Coley-
shaw (2010). Laws in Finland protect all students and personnel from bullying, at the
same time obligating everybody to act so that the right to safety in studying environ-
ments holds true. In order to equip all students and personnel with necessary infor-
mation on the issue of bullying, this should be made clear to all concerned.
References
Analitis, F., M. Velderman, U. Ravens-Sieberer, S. Detmar, M. Erhart, M. Herdman, S. Berra,
J. Alonso, L. Rajmil, and the European Kidscreen Group. 2009. Being bullied: Associated
factors in children and adolescents 8 to 18 years old in 11 European countries. Pediatrics
123, no. 2: 56977.
Arsenio, W., and E. Lemerise. 2001. Varieties of childhood bullying: Values, emotion pro-
cesses, and social competence. Social Development 10, no. 1: 5973.
Carver, C. 1997. You want to measure coping but your protocols too long: Consider the brief
COPE. International Journal of Behavioral Medicine 4, no. 1: 92100.
Carver, C. 2004. Negative affects deriving from the behavioral approach system. Emotion 4:
322.
Carver, C., M. Scheier, and J. Weintraub. 1989. Assessing coping strategies: A theoretically
based approach. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 56, no. 2: 26783.
Coleyshaw, L. 2010. The power of paradigms: A discussion of the absence of bullying research
in the context of the university student experience. Research in Post-Compulsory Education
15, no. 4: 37786.
Cook, C., F. Heath, and R. Thompson. 2000. A meta-analysis of response rates in web- or inter-
net-based surveys. Educational and Psychological Measurement 60, no. 6: 82136.
Dodge, K., and J. Coie. 1987. Social information processing factors in reactive and proactive
aggression in childrens peer groups. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 53,
no. 6: 114658.
Dodge, K., J. Coie, G. Pettit, and J. Price. 1990. Peer status and aggression in boys groups:
Developmental and contextual analyses. Child Development 61, no. 5: 1289309.
Finnish School Health Inquiry. 2010. School Health Conference, 2425 August 2010, Tampere.
http://info.stakes./kouluterveyskysely/FI/kouluterveyspaivat/index.htm.
Hawker, D., and M. Boulton. 2000. Twenty years research on peer victimization and psycho-
social maladjustment: A meta-analytic review of cross-sectional studies. Journal of Child
Psychology and Psychiatry and Allied Disciplines 41, no. 4: 44145.
Kauppi, T., and M. Prhl. 2009. Harassment experienced by school teachers from students: A
review of the literature. In Anti- and pro-social communication: Theories, methods and
applications, ed. Terry Kinney and Maili Prhl, 4958. New York: Peter Lang.
Kauppi, T., and M. Prhl. 2010. Peruskoulun opettajat oppilaidensa kiusaamina: Kiusaamisen
muodot, kohteena olevat opettajat ja kiusaavat oppilaat [Elementary school teachers as
victims of bullying: Types of bullying, teachers as targets and students as bullies].
Tyelmn tutkimus 8, no. 2: 13144.
Keashly, L., and J. Neuman. 2010. Faculty experiences with bullying in higher education.
Administrative Theory & Praxis 32, no. 1: 4870.
12 H.-M. Sinkkonen et al.
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[
U
n
i
v
e
r
s
i
t
y

o
f

E
a
s
t
e
r
n

F
i
n
l
a
n
d
]

a
t

0
4
:
0
5

1
0

F
e
b
r
u
a
r
y

2
0
1
2

Kuittinen, M., and M. Merilinen. 2008. Opiskelijan psykologinen sopimus. In Pedagoginen
hyvinvointi, [Pedagogical well-being], ed. Kristiina Lappalainen, Matti Kuittinen and
Matti Merilinen, 15573. Jyvskyl, Finland: Suomen kasvatustieteellinen seura.
Kunttu, K., and T. Huttunen. 2009. Student health survey 2008: A national survey among
Finnish university students. Helsinki: Finnish Student Health Service. http://www.yths./
lebank/582-Tutkimus_2008_verkkoon.pdf.
Lazarus, R., and S. Folkman. 1984. Stress, appraisal, and coping. New York: Springer.
Ledley, D., E. Storch, M. Coles, R. Heimberg, J. Moser, and E. Bravata. 2006. The relationship
between childhood teasing and later interpersonal functioning. Journal of Psychopathology
and Behavioral Assessment 28, no. 1: 3340.
Mathieson, L.C., and N.R. Crick. 2010. Reactive and proactive subtypes of relational and phys-
ical aggression in middle childhood: Links to concurrent and longitudinal adjustment.
School Psychology Review 39, no. 4: 60111.
Meland, E., J. Rydning, S. Lobben, H.-J. Breidablik, and T.-J. Ekeland. 2010. Emotional, self-
conceptual, and relational characteristics of bullies and the bullied. Scandinavian Journal of
Public Health 38, no. 8: 35967.
Merilinen, M. 2008. Opiskeluympristn pedagogiset hyvinvointitekijt yliopistossa
[Components of pedagogical well-being in university teaching-learning environment]. In
Pedagoginen hyvinvointi, [Pedagogical well-being], ed. K. Lappalainen, M. Kuittinen and
M. Merilinen, 13553. Jyvskyl, Finland: Suomen kasvatustieteellinen seura.
Monks, C., P. Smith, P. Naylor, C. Barter, J. Ireland, and I. Coyne. 2009. Bullying in different
contexts: Commonalities, differences and the role of theory. Aggression and Violent
Behavior 14, no. 2: 14656.
Olweus, D. 1993. Bullying at school: What we know and what we can do. Oxford: Blackwel. l.
Parzefall, M.-R., and D. Salin. 2010. Perceptions of and reactions to workplace bullying: A
social exchange perspective. Human Relations 63, no. 6: 76180.
Patton, M. 2002. Qualitative research & evaluation methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Ringrose, J., and E. Renold. 2010. Normative cruelties and gender deviants: The performative
effects of bully discourses for girl and boys in school. British Educational Research Journal
36, no. 4: 57379.
Robson, C., and D. Langdridge. 2002. The analysis of quantitative data. In Real world research.
ed. C. Robson, 391454. Oxford: Blackwell.
Salin, D. 2003. Ways of explaining workplace bullying: A review of enabling, motivating and
precipitating structures and processes in work environment. Human Relations 56, no. 10:
121332.
Salmivalli, C. 2010. Bullying and peer group: A review. Aggression and Violent Behavior 15,
no. 2: 11220.
Salmivalli, C., and J. Isaacs. 2005. Prospective relations among victimization, rejection, friend-
lessness, and childrens self- and peer-perceptions. Child Development 76, no. 6: 116171.
Salmivalli, C., T. Ojanen, J. Haanp, and K. Peets. 2005. Im o.k. but youre not and other
peer-relational schemas. Explaining individual differences in childrens social goals.
Developmental Psychology 41, no. 2: 36375.
Simpson, R., and C. Cohen. 2004. Dangerous work: The gendered nature of bullying in the
context of higher education. Gender, Work and Organization 11, no. 2: 16386.
Statistics Finland. 2008. Yliopistoissa 164 100 opiskelijaa vuonna 2008. http://tilastokeskus./
til/yop/2008/01/yop_2008_01_2009-04-20_tie_001.html.
Student Experience Report. 2008. http://www.nus.org.uk/PageFiles/4017/NUS_
StudentExperienceReport.pdf.
Tuvblad, C., A. Raine, M. Zheng, and L. Baker. 2009. Genetic and environmental stability
differs in reactive and proactive aggression. Aggressive Behavior 35, no. 6: 43752.
Twale, D., and B. DeLuca. 2008. Faculty incivility. The rise of the academic bully culture and
what to do about it. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Vartia-Vnnen, M. 2003. Workplace bullying A study on the work environment, well-being
and health, People and Work Research Reports 56. Helsinki: Finnish Institute of
Occupational Health.
Woods, S., and D. Wolke. 2004. Direct and relational bullying among primary school children
and academic achievement. Journal of School Psychology 42, no. 2: 13555.
Studies in Higher Education 13
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[
U
n
i
v
e
r
s
i
t
y

o
f

E
a
s
t
e
r
n

F
i
n
l
a
n
d
]

a
t

0
4
:
0
5

1
0

F
e
b
r
u
a
r
y

2
0
1
2