(JoĮnn tt,;uJaļĮĄ aa,d a''u.

rlį1'ua B"fu
m:ffirh.
Italy, by Gėnta et al. (1996) with a sample of over 1000
students from primary (B- to I l-years-old) and middle
schools (l l- to 14-years-old). They found that about 30%
of students from middļe schooļs reported being bullied
sometimes or more often, and 1070 were bullied at least once
h
a week in the previous 3 months. About l57o of aI] studentŠ
į
t
Ī
reported bullying others sometimes or more often and about
Į
I
5olo reported bullying at least once a week.
Į
ļ According to Farrington"(l993), Rivers and Smirh (1994)
and Smith and Sharp (1994), whereas boys bully more than
I

Į girls on average, boys and girls report about the same

Ļ, prevalence of victimization. What differs, however, is the
Į, type of bullying in which students are involved. Studies
.: ,

conducted on aggression among peers by Bjorkvist et al.

Criiicol Reoding
In Task Nine, you wilļ critically read a sļrort report on a topic that yotr
may have some experience with-bullying. The brief research report
is taken from the Jo 'rnaĮ of AdoĮescen'ce.
i
ļ.
(1992), Lagerspetz et al. (1988) and Rivers and Smith (1994)
i have shown significant differences between boys and girls.
Boys are more likely to inflict direct physicalaggression with
i the intent of causing physical harm, whereas girls are more
i
lil<ely to inflict indirect forms of aggression with the intent of
)

i
ļ
i causing psychological harm. However, there were no
TASK NINE significant gender differences in direct verbal aggression.
ļ

Read the following report fairly quiclily to get an idea of what it is ļ

I
Results from the study conducted in Sheffield by Whitney
about. Answer the qrrestions that folļow the report witlr a partner or !I
and Smith (1993) found that mosr of rhe bullying in
in a smalļ group. secondary schools took place in the classroom. Children
i
$

I
į|
were also bullied in corridors or in other parts of the schools
BRIEF REPORT į such as in the toilets. Similar results were reported in the
į Italian study (Genta et al., 1996), indicating that more than
Types of BuĮĮying among ltaĮįan ScltooĮ ChįĮdren įl
500/o of those children ever bullied were victimized in their
Anna C. Baldry and David Fl Farrington
fi
r
lr
own cļassroom.
Introduction I
Method
The main aim of this research is to investigate the prevalence r

of bullies and victims and tlhe types of bullying and places

r Sample
The sample consisted of I l3 girls and 125 boys aged
lĮ,

of bulŅing in a sample of sr:hool children in Rome. Tlre first r

extensive study on bullying in Įtaly was conducted in
Fļorence and Cosenza, twcr towns of centraļ and southern
between l l and I4 years (mean aįe = years' s.D' = 1.1).
72.7
Students came from a representative middle schooļ in Rome.
I ļ
Nearly half (44o/o) of the fathers were skilled workers,2To/o
were unskilled workers, 200/owere merchants or operators of
other businesses and l5% were in professional or managerial
jobs. Nearly half (4270) of the mothers were homemakers, {
 were sĮtilled workers, l10/o were merchants, 6% were īrr
387o l or more often. This relationship was not far off statistical
managerial or executive positions and 3o/o were unskiļļed significance (X2 = 2.70, df = 1 , p < 0.1 0). Overall; 47.50/o of all
workers. l
I stuclents had never bulļied others in the p'revious 3 months,
buļļied once or twice, 17.60/o somelimes and 7.67o
Procedure ļ
27.37o

Alļ students from the schooļ participated in the study' Those l

once a week or more often. About one-ttrird (31.2010) of boys
missing on the day when the qĮļestionnaires vlere initially ļ
had bulļied at least sometimes in the pre'l'ious 3 months,
another ļ compared with 18.60lo of girls (Į2 = 5.01, df = l, p < 0.05).
administered irr a group were able to fill them in on
by one
day. Students weļe approachecl in their own classes Types of BuĮllng
of the autirors (A.C.B.). They were told tļrat tļre research was ļ Tabļe ļ shows that most students were d.įrectļy victimized by
about bulii,ing in school. They were assured of anonymity ļ
Į

being called nasty names or being physically hurt, or were

and conficlentiality and informed that aļl information
wouļd ļ indirectly victimized by being reiected or having rumours
be used orrly for research purposes' Students were asked
to ļ spread about them. Boys were significantly more likely to
sit separateĮy to aļļow no conferring, talking or helping when ]

suffer from types of direct bullying, whereas girls were

filling in the questionnaire. The following definition
of
slightly more likely to suffer from indirect forms of bullying
"bullying'' was read to students foļlowed by a short
discussion (e.g. being reļected, rumours spread abclut them). Significant
to ensure a common understanding of what constitutes differences emerged for types of direct b,ullying, especially for
"buĮĮying''. "Students bully weaker peers at school
by
being threatened and marginally for being physically hurt.
and upsetting them in
deliberately and repeatedly hurting There were no significant gender differences in direct verbal
severaļ ways; by calling them names, hitting or threatening
bullying or indirect bullying; boys were almost as likely as
them and playing nasty games' lt is not bullying
when two
girls to suffer indirect bullying. Both boys (69.37o) and girls
students of about the same strength qttarrel or
have a fight"' (72.20/o) were most likely to be bullied by one or several boys.
Girls (9.30/o) and boys (10.20lo) were equally likely to be
Measures
(Genta bullied by one or several girls, and 18.50h of girls, compared
The questionnaire was based on the ltalian version
by'. t, Įo 20.4o/o of boys, admitted being bullied by both girls and
et aļ., 1996) of the original questionnaire developed
population' subsęQuentlY boys. Both girļs (86.87o) and boys (75.0%D tended to be
oĮweus (ļ993) for the Scandinavian
bullied by other children in the same clarss' However, boys
rans}ated and vaļidated in English by Smith and his
were more lil<ely to be bullied by older children (29.20/o as
colleagues (Whitney and Smith, 1993; Smith and Sharp'
r994).
the 3-month period opposed to 15.00/o; (X2 = 2.89, df : 1, p ': 0.09) and by
Ąl quĮstions on bullying referred to
preĮeaing the administration of the questionnaire' For aļļ children in the same year but in a differr:nt cļass (l6.70lo as
questions students were aļļowed to choose more than
one opposed Įo7.}o/o;n.s.). Neitherboys (4.2vo) nor girls (3.80/0)
tended to be bullied by younger chiļdreirr. BuĮlying most
of the alternatives if they appĮied'
commonly toolr place in the cļassroom (Table l). This is in
Resuļts conformity with the fact that most bullies were in the same
Prevaļence of BulŅng class as the victims. Other common places for bullying were
overall, 56.70lo of aļl students had never been
bulļied in the
in the corridors and in the playground. I3oys were
ļast 3 months, 13'90/o were bulļied once or twice' |4'7g/o
significantly more likely to be bullied in the toilets
Girļs
sometimes and 14.7olo once a weeļ< or more often'
Discussion
tendedtobevictimizedmorethanboys;34'5o/oofgirls'
compared wįth 24.B0/o of boys, had been victimiz d sorn"..!Į,,.','.'.',.ę,:
TABLE l. Ļpes and Placeg of BulŅing
or pļayground. Boys were more likely than girls to be bulļied
Girļs
0/o (/o
Boys
(n = 54)'l' (rr = 49)'l in the toiļets.

Ņpes of Bullying References

Called nasŲ names 59.3 Į Į.3 BjorĮ<qvist, K. (l994). Sex differences in physical,'verbal and indirect
Rejected 51 .3 48.0 aggression: a review of recent research. Sex Roles, 30, 1 77-l 88.t
Physically hurt 8.5 Biorkqvist, K., Lagerspetz, K. M. J. and Kaulriainen, A. (l992). Do 8irļs
r 34.0{'
manipulate and boys'fight? Developmental trends in regard to direct and .

Rumours spread 27.8 23.4 indirect aggres.ion. A8g'essįue Behauįor, 18' 117-127.
Had belongings tal<en away 16.7 i9.ļ Farrington' D. P (t993). Undęrstanding and preventing bulŅing. lnCrįme
Other forms of bullying (e.9. teased) r 4.8 r 0.6 dnd justįce. Voļ. l 7, M. Tonry (Ed.). Chicago: University of Chicago Press,
Threaįened 0.0 Į2,8{ pp.381-458.
No one would talk Genta, M. L., Menesini, E.' Fonzi, A., Costabiļe, A. and Smith, P K. (1996).
.). / 6,,ļ
Bullies and victims in schooļs in central and southern |la|y. European
Dįrect bullyingi 66.7 93.6{
Jom'nal of PsychoĮogy of Educafįon, ļ l , 97_ļ 1 0.
lndirect bullyingį 74.1 68.8 Lagerspetz, K. M. J., Bjorl<qvist, K. and Peltonen, T. (1988). ls indirect
aggression typical of females? Gender differences in aggressiveness in
Places of Bullying
l 1_ to l2_years_old children. Äggressiue Behauior, l4' 403_4ļ4.
In the classroom 79.6 66.7 olweus, D. (l993). BuĮĮying at school: uhat ue hnou and LDhot ue can do.
In the corridors 24.1 JJ.J oxford: BlackweĮl.
Įn the playgrouIrd 27.8 ,1J. it Rigby, K. (1996'). BuįĮying ln scltooįs and uhat to do about įt. London: Jessica
Otlrer places (gym, luncl'r hall) 7.Ą
Kingsley.
10.4
Rįvers, l. & Smith, P K. (1994). Types of bullying behavįor and their
In the toilets 0.0 l2.s Į
correlates. Aggtęssįue Behauio 20, 359-368.
n
x2 = 3.17,df = l,p < 0.07; { 1l? = 7.33, df = l, p < 0.0l ; { x: = l l.0Įļ, clf = ļ. p < 0.0ļ :
Smith, P K. and Sharp, S. (1994). School Bullying: insights and perspectives.'
) X2 = 7.lz, df = l, P < 0.01. London: Routledge.
tPercentages ĮefeI to those studenįs evel buļIied. Totaļ pelcenįa8es exceed l 00 Whitney, l. and Smith, P K. (i993). A survey of the nature and extent of
because sįudents couļd check multiple respolrses. bullying in junior/middle and secondary schools. EducationaĮ Research,
į''Direct bullying'' includes ČalIed nasty nan]es, physicaļly huiį' beIongings tal(el] a ,įr\,. 35, 3-25.
thleaįened, others (e.g. teasing). "Indirecl lrullying'' įrcludes beirrq rcļccįe(l' rtilllOĮll.s
JournoĮ of AdoĮescence 22, Anna C. Baldry and David P Farrington, "BĖef
spread, no one would tall(.
report: Types of bullying among ltalian schooļ children 423426' o l999'
'"
with permission from Eļsevier.

br-rllied. Boys bullied more [han girls, and girl.s were

Somewhat more likely thanL boys to be bullied someįilĪes or
more often. In accordance with findings from other studies
(Olweus, 1993;Smith and Siharp, 1994; Rigby, 1996), boys
were more likely to suffer ČĮirect br_rllying sĮlcl'] as being
threatened or physicaļly hurt. Surprisingly, boys were almost
as lil(ely as girls to suffer indirect bullying sLlch aS beįng
rejected and having rumours spread about them, in contrast
to the findings of Biorkqvisį (l994). Conttadicting resultS from
previous studies (Whitney and Srnith, 1993; Genta et al.,
l996), which showed that boys were mainly buļIied by otlrer
boys and girls by other girls, in our sample both boys and girls
were bullied by one or several boys. Most of the bullying took
place in the classroom, Wit,h lesser amounts in the corrįdors
 1. What researcļr question is beirrg addressed? (Try to state tļris
as a yes-no question.)

2. What do the authors conclude?

3, How good is the data used as support for this conclusion? In
particulari what do yotr think about the strong reļiance on
į
self-report cĮata?
4. The authors state that their main aim is to "investigate the
prevalence of brrlĮies and victims ancl the types of bullying
and places of bullying in a sample of schooļ children in Rome'''
Have they achieved their goal? Why or why not?

5. The authors used the following definition of bullying:

"Students bully weaker peeTs at schooļ by deliberateĮy and
repeatedly hurting and upsetting them in several ways; by
calling them names, hitting or tlrreatening them and piaying
nasty garnes. It is not bullying when two stuclents of about, the
same strerrg;th qtrarrel or have a fi.glrt." Ī)o Ytrrr. tļrinlr tļris
definition is adequate?
How rniglrt the resrrlts differ if the atrtļrors ļrad cįefirred
bullying in this way: "Perst.sfenrl, of'fensive, abu.sive,
intinridating or irrsultirrg.behaviouų abuse of power or urrfair
penaĮ sanctions which malres the r'ecipierrt feel tlpset,
ol vtrĮnelable, wlriclr trrr.cįelmines tlreir'
tlrre aten ecĮ, hunriļi atecį
seļf-confi<įence arrd wlriclr ļllay cause them i;o suffer'stress'l
(ļrttp ://www. būllyonļine' or g/workbulļy/defns. ļrtrn )'/

6. The autlrors state tļrat "rnost students wer'e clir'ectly victimizecį

by being called nasty rįaļlles or beirrg plrvsicall.y lrurt, or were
indirectly victirnizecĮby beirrg rejectecl or havirrg ļ'ļĮ1īoLrrs
spreacl about therņ." To wlrich sttrdents ar'e tlre autļrors
referring-most of the 238 students in tlre stucly or only Lhose
tlrat had been btrlļiecį?
7. Table wouļd seenr to strggest tļrat buļļyirrg is a ser'iotrs
1
problem irr tlre sclrool. Do yotr tldrrļ< tlris is i;lre case? Wlry
or why not?

8' In tlre Discttssion section ]row weļļ lrave the authors coļ}lpaĪecį
their restrlts witļr those of otlrer strrdies?
9. ĪVhat are the lirnitations of tlre sttrcĮy, if arry?
10. The authors provide tro recomrttendations for acĮclr'essing the
bullying problerrr irr tļre school. Sļrorrļcį tliey have? Why or
why not?