Differential effects of the KiVa anti-bullying program on popular and unpopular bullies

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appdev.2013.10.004Get rights and content

Highlights

  • A sample of school bullies was divided into low-, medium-, and high-popularity groups.

  • The effectiveness of the anti-bullying program KiVa was tested on all groups.

  • KiVa decreased peer nominations for bullying for low- and medium-popular bullies.

  • KiVa did not decrease peer nominations for bullying for highly popular bullies.

Abstract

This study utilized data from the evaluation of the Finnish KiVa program in testing the prediction that school bullies' high perceived popularity would impede the success of anti-bullying interventions. Multiple-group structural equation modeling (SEM) analyses were conducted on a subsample of 911 third-, fourth-, and fifth-graders identified as perpetrators of bullying. They belonged to 77 Finnish schools, including 39 schools implementing the KiVa program and 38 control schools. Data on peer-reported bullying and perceived popularity were collected before program implementation and one year later. Controlling for sex, age, and initial levels of bullying, KiVa participation resulted in lower rates of bullying (indicated by fewer peer nominations) after one year for bullies of low and medium popularity. However, there was no significant effect for those high in popularity, suggesting that popular bullies are less responsive to anti-bullying interventions than less popular bullies.

Section snippets

Bullying brings coveted status rewards

Gaining social power among peers appears to be children's main motivation for bullying others (Olthof, Goossens, Vermande, Aleva, & van der Meulen, 2011). Interviews of early adolescents who had been excluded from school for causing bullying incidents reveal that initial bullying is a deliberate choice aimed at gaining recognition and respect, and subsequent bullying behaviors are then perpetuated to promote and maintain the reputation (Houghton, Nathan, & Taylor, 2012). Similarly, studies

High popularity facilitates aggression

There is evidence of a bi-directional association between popularity and aggression: aggression positively predicts future popularity, but the achievement of high popularity status also promotes aggression (Cillessen & Mayeux, 2004). Popular bullies may feel increased pressure to maintain their rank and thus resort to coercive means. Being in a powerful position in the peer group may also lead to a sense of entitlement causing school bullies to abuse their power without any fear of negative

Bullies' popularity and bystanders' behaviors

The perpetuation of bullying heavily depends on the behavior of bystanders in bullying situations: self-reported frequency of bullying was found to be lower in classrooms where children tend to defend the victim and avoid reinforcing the bully, as reflected by proportions of peer nominations for these two behaviors (Salmivalli, Voeten, & Poskiparta, 2011). High classroom rates of bully reinforcement and low rates of victim defending also increase the likelihood that anxious and rejected

The KiVa anti-bullying program

KiVa is a nationwide anti-bullying program in Finland. It was developed in 2006 at the request of the Finnish Ministry of Education, following the release of a World Health Organization (WHO) report revealing Finnish children's low liking of school. After an evaluation phase in 2007 and 2008 with a sample of 78 intervention and 78 control schools, the program was disseminated across the country in 2009. KiVa is based on the notion that the behavior of bystanders – reinforcing bullies, defending

Sample

Data were collected as part of a large randomized controlled trial designed to evaluate the effectiveness of the KiVa program. Of the 78 schools originally taking part in this evaluation in 2007 and 2008, one school had to drop out before the first assessment due to facility-related issues. The data analyzed in this study were collected at two time points: before program implementation, at the end of one school year in May 2007 (T1) and 9 months after implementation, at the end of the subsequent

Analytical strategy

We conducted multiple-group SEM analyses on the subsample of 911 bullies. A robust maximum-likelihood estimation method was used to account for the nested data structure (i.e., bullies nested in classrooms). Bullying at both time points was modeled as a latent factor, with correlated residuals estimated for corresponding indicators at T1 and T2. Prior to evaluating the effects of KiVa participation, we tested for measurement invariance across time (T1 and T2) and group (low, medium, high

Discussion

In line with our hypothesis, results show that a nine-month exposure to the KiVa anti-bullying program led to a decrease in peer nominations for bullying behavior for bullies of medium or low popular status but not for highly popular bullies. This suggests that KiVa may be less effective at reducing bullying among perpetrators enjoying high social power in the peer group in comparison to their less popular counterparts. The finding that popular bullies may be the most resistant to anti-bullying

References (65)

  • T.A. Brown

    Confirmatory factor analysis for applied research

    (2006)
  • S.C.S. Caravita et al.

    Agentic or communal? Developmental differences in the associations among interpersonal goals, popularity, and bullying

    Social Development

    (2012)
  • S.C.S. Caravita et al.

    Unique and interactive effects of empathy and social status on involvement in bullying

    Social Development

    (2009)
  • G.W. Cheung et al.

    Evaluating goodness-of-fit indexes for testing measurement invariance

    Structural Equation Modeling

    (2002)
  • R.B. Cialdini et al.

    Two indirect tactics of impression management: Basking and blasting

    Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

    (1980)
  • A.H.N. Cillessen et al.

    From censure to reinforcement: Developmental changes in the association between aggression and social status

    Child Development

    (2004)
  • J. Cohen

    Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences

    (1988)
  • G.L. Cohen et al.

    Peer contagion of aggression and health-risk behavior among adolescent males: An experimental investigation of effects on public conduct and private attitudes

    Child Development

    (2006)
  • C. Currie et al.

    Inequalities in young people's health. Health behaviour in school-aged children. International report from the 2005/2006 survey

  • E.H. de Bruyn et al.

    Associations of peer acceptance and perceived popularity with bullying and victimization in early adolescence

    Journal of Early Adolescence

    (2010)
  • J.K. Dijkstra et al.

    Basking in reflected glory and its limits: Why adolescents hang out with popular peers

    Journal of Research in Adolescence

    (2010)
  • B.J. Ellis et al.

    The evolutionary basis of risky adolescent behavior: Implications for science, policy, and practice

    Developmental Psychology

    (2012)
  • C.K. Enders

    Applied missing data analysis

    (2010)
  • R. Faris et al.

    Status struggles: Network centrality and gender segregation in same- and cross-gender aggression

    American Sociological Review

    (2011)
  • T.W. Farmer et al.

    Early adolescent peer ecologies in rural communities: Bullying in schools that do and do not have a transition during middle grades

    Journal of Youth and Adolescence

    (2011)
  • C.J. Ferguson et al.

    The effectiveness of school-based anti-bullying programs: A meta-analytic review

    Criminal Justice Review

    (2007)
  • A.D. Galinsky et al.

    Power and perspectives not taken

    Psychological Science

    (2006)
  • C.F. Garandeau et al.

    The social status of aggressive students across contexts: The role of classroom peer status hierarchy, academic achievement, and grade

    Developmental Psychology

    (2011)
  • C.F. Garandeau et al.

    Inequality matters : Classroom status hierarchy and adolescents’ bullying

    (2013)
  • J.W. Graham et al.

    How many imputations are really needed? Some practical clarifications of multiple imputation theory

    Prevention Science

    (2007)
  • D.H. Gruenfeld et al.

    Power and the objectification of social targets

    Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

    (2008)
  • A. Haataja et al.

    The KiVa antibullying curriculum and outcome: Does fidelity matter?

    (2013)
  • Cited by (0)

    View full text