EFFECT OF MOOD ON EMOTION RECOGNITION AND QUALITY

OF FRIENDSHIP AMONG SCHOOL BULLIES AND VICTIMS

Rabia Khawar

006-GCU-PHD-PSY-09

2009-2012

Department of Psychology
GC University Lahore, Pakistan
Effect of Mood on Emotion Recognition and Quality of Friendship among

School Bullies and Victims

A dissertation submitted to the

Department of Psychology, GC University Lahore, Pakistan

in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of

Doctor of Philosophy in Psychology

By

Rabia Khawar

006-GCU-PHD-PSY-09

2009-2012

Department of Psychology
GC University Lahore, Pakistan
 Dedicated to
My Beloved Family
 CONTENTS
Topics Page No.
List of Tables ………………………………………………………………………..........i
List of Figures ……………………………………………………………………………vii
List of Appendices ………………………………………………………………….........ix
Acknowledgements ………………………………………………………………………x
Abstract …………………………………………………………………………………..xiii

CHAPTER-I: INTRODUCTION ………………………………………………………..1

Background of the Bullying Phenomenon………………………………………………….2
Bullying: An Insight to the Dilemma……………………………………………………….2
Bully-Victim Status Types………………………………………………………….............5
Nature and Types of Bullying and Victimization………………………………………......9
Direct and Indirect Modes of Bullying…………………………………………………….10
Assessment of Bullying Behavior…………………………………………………………11
Prevalence of Bullying………………………………………………………………….......14
Theoretical Framework of Bullying…………………………………………………….. ..20
Antecedents/Factors of Bullying Behavior……………………………………………......28
Affective Processes and Social Cognition in Bullying………………………....................32
Peer Interactions………………………………………………………………………..... .39
Consequences/Effects of Bullying………………………………………………………. .42
Academic Achievement and Peer Interactions ….…………………………………….......45
Literature Review…………………………………………………………………….......46
Cultural Differences in Research on Bullying…………….................46
Bullying Statistics across the Global…………..……………………..48
Individual Differences and Demographic Trends……………………52
Assessment Issues in Bullying……………….....................................55
Bullying and the Affective-Cognitive Premise……...……………….57
The Friendship Buffer in Bullying Experience………………………67
Bullying and Student’s Academic Performance……………………..70
Friendship Quality and Students’ Academic Performance…………..71
Affective Competence and Academic Performance………………....72
Research on Bullying in Pakistan………………………………….....73
Rationale for the Study………………………………………………………………......75
Research Plan…………………………………………………………………………….81
CHAPTER-II: STUDY 1: TRANSLATION, ADAPTATION AND
VALIDATION OF THE MEASURES …………………………………..….......87
Objectives of the Study…………………………………………………………………....88
Section A: Olweus Bully/Victim Questionnaire ……………………………………........89

Results………………………………………………………………....102
Discussion……………………………………………………………..131
Section B. Friendship Qualities Scale…………………………………………………139
Results………………………………………………………………....147
Discussion……………………………………………………………. 171

CHAPTER-III: STUDY 2: PREVALENCE ESTIMATES OF

BULLYING AND VICTIMIZATION …………………………………….......176
Objectives of the Study……………………………………………......176
Hypotheses…………………………………………………….............177
Method………………………………………...……………………....178
Results……………………………………..…………………………..180
Discussion…………………………………………………...………...211

CHAPTER-IV: STUDY 3&4: SOCIO-AFFECTIVE ASPECTS OF

BULLYING/VICTIMIZATION…………………………………………............216

Section A: Study 3
Phase 1: Development of Mood Induction Procedures (MIPS)...................................217
Objectives of the Study………………………….................………….218
Hypotheses……………………………………..……………………...218
Method……………………………..………………………………….218
Result…………………………………………………………………..227
Discussion……………………………………………...……………...262

Phase 2: Effect of Mood on Emotion Recognition…………………………………….267

Objectives of the Study………………………………………………..268
Hypotheses…………………………………………………………….268
Method……………….………………………………………………..269
 Results……….………………………………………………………....277
Discussion……………………………………………………………...300

Section B: Quality of Friendship among School Bullies and Victims ……….……....304

Objectives of the study……………………………………………......304
Hypotheses………………………………………………...……….....304
Method………………………………………………………………..305
Results………………………………………………………………...306
Discussion…………………………………………………………….315

Section C: Unified Outcomes……………………………………………………….......317

Objectives ……………..……………………………………………..317
Results…………………………………………………………..........318
Discussion………………………………………………………........322

CHAPTER-V: GENERAL DISCUSSION………………………………………….....324

Implications and Recommendations……………................................330
Ethical Considerations……………………………….........................334
Limitations and Suggestions………………………………………....336
Conclusions…………………………………………………………..340
REFERENCES……………………………………………………………………..........342
APPENDICES………………………………………………………….......................... 407
 LIST OF TABLES

Table No. Page

No.
Table 2.1 Frequency of Alternate Urdu Words for ‘Bullying’ by Gender and 91
Grades
Table 2.2 Behaviors Identified by Students Corresponding to the 4 Urdu 93
Alternates for the word ‘Bullying’
Table 2.3 Frequency Distribution of Demographic Variables for the Study 103
Samples of Section A
Table 2.4 Inter-Item Correlation between English and the Urdu Versions of 105
OBVQ.
Table 2.5 Reliability Coefficients for English and Urdu Versions of OBVQ 106
Table 2.6 Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Test of Sampling Adequacy and Bartlett Test 108
of Sphericity for OBVQ
Table 2.7 Summary of Principal Component Analysis with Varimax Rotation 109
for OBVQ Urdu Version (N = 122)
Table 2.8 Descriptive and Item-Total Statistics of the Olweus Bully Victim 111
Questionnaire
Table 2.9 Descriptive Statistics and Reliability Estimates of the Olweus Bully 112
Victim Questionnaire (OBVQ) Urdu Version Subscales (N = 122)
Table 2.10 Inter-correlation Matrix for the OBVQ Urdu version Subscales (N = 113
122)
Table 2.11 Convergent and Discriminant Validity of the Olweus Bully Victim 114
Questionnaire (OBVQ)
Table 2.12 Missing Value Analysis of Items on Olweus Bully Victim 116
Questionnaire
Table 2.13 Descriptive Statistics for OBVQ Items Assessing Bullying and 117
Victimization
Table 2.14 Fit Indices of OBVQ Models 120
Table 2.15 Standardized Factor Loadings of CFA model for the OBVQ 121
Table 2.16 Reliability Coefficients for OBVQ-Urdu by Gender and Grades 122

i
Table 2.17 Descriptive Statistics for Bullying and Victimization Scales 122
Table 2.18 MANOVA showing Gender and Grade differences for total bullying 123
and victimization
Table 2.19 Post Hoc Comparisons among Grade Levels on Victimization and 126
Bullying
Table 2.20 Bullying Role Classification Following OBVQ and Teacher 128
Nomination Criteria
Table 2.21 Multinomial Logistic Regression Predicting Accuracy of Self- 129
reported Bullying and Victimization
Table 2.22 Demographic Characteristics of Samples for FQS. 147
Table 2.23 Inter-Item Correlation between English and the Urdu Versions of 149
FQS.
Table 2.24 Reliability Coefficients for English and Urdu Versions of FQS 150
(Sample I; N = 32)
Table 2.25 Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Test of Sampling Adequacy and Bartlett Test 151
of Sphericity for FQS
Table 2.26 Principal Component Analysis with Varimax Rotation for FQS Urdu 152
Version (N = 151).
Table 2.27 Shapiro-Wik Test for Normality 154
Table 2.28 Factor Matrix for FQS Urdu using Principal Axis Factoring (N = 155
151)
Table 2.29 Pattern Matrix of Principal Axis Factoring with Promax Rotation for 157
FQS Urdu Version
Table 2.30 Descriptive and Item-Total Statistics of the FQS Urdu Version (N = 159
151).
Table 2.31 Reliability Analysis of the Friendship Qualities Scale (FQS) Urdu 160
Version and Subscales Derived from EFA (N = 151).
Table 2.32 Inter-correlations and Convergent/Discriminant Validity of the 4 161
Factor FQS Urdu Version (N = 135)
Table 2.33 Missing Value Analysis for Items on FQS 163
Table 2.34 Descriptive Statistics for Items on FQS 164

ii
Table 2.35 Fit Indices of FQS Models 167
Table 2.36 Standardized Factor Loadings on CFA Model 2 for FQS 168
Table 2.37 Means, Standard Deviations and Alpha Coefficients for FQS 169
Subscales
Table 2.38 Inter-correlations among FQS Factors and the Total Score 170
Table 3.1 Distribution of Bully-Victim Groups according to the Type of 184
Schools
Table 3.2 Pearson Chi-Square for Bully-Victim Groups across Gender, Grades 185
and type of Schools
Table 3.3 Severity of Bullying Behavior by Bully-Victim Groups, Gender and 186
Grades
Table 3.4 Severity of Victimization Experience by Bully-Victim Groups, 187
Gender and Grades
Table 3.5 Categorical Distribution of Victimization Types across Gender and 188
Grade Level
Table 3.6 Pearson Chi-square for the Types of Victimization across Gender 189
and Grades
Table 3.7 Class Reported by Victims and Bully-Victims in which the Bullies 191
Study
Table 3.8 Number of Bullies Reported by Victims and Bully-Victims across 192
Gender and Grades
Table 3.9 Pearson Chi-square of Bully’s Class and Number across Gender and 193
Grades
Table 3.10 Duration of Victimization Reported by the Total Sample and Those 193
who had been Bullied (Victims and Bully-victims)
Table 3.11 Place of Bullying reported by Gender and Grade 195
Table 3.12 Frequency Distribution of the Boys and Girls and Students of 196
Different Grades about Disclosure of Bullying
Table 3.13 Proportion of Participants Bullying Others by Types of Bullying 198
Table 3.14 Summary of t-test for Boys and Girls on OBVQ Items (N = 817) 200
Table 3.15 One-Way ANOVA Showing Grade Differences on OBVQ Items (N =817) 201

iii
Table 3.16 One-Way ANOVA Showing Mean Differences on OBVQ Items (N 202
=817) across Bully-Victim Groups
Table 3.17 Means, Standard Deviation, Skewness and Kurtosis for Academic 203
and Demographic Variables for Total Sample
Table 3.18 ANOVA for Academic Variables across Gender and Bully/Victim 204
Groups
Table 3.19 Post Hoc Scheffe Test for Multiple Comparisons across 206
Bully/victim Groups for Academic Achievement
Table 3.20 Correlation of Socioeconomic Variables with Bullying and 208
Victimization
Table 3.21 Frequency, Percentages, Skewness and Kurtosis for Parental Level 209
of Education
Table 3.22 MANOVA for effect of Parental Education on Involvement in 210
Bullying and Victimization
Table 4.1a Descriptive Statistics for Ratings of Video Songs by Children (n = 228
15)
Table 4.2a Descriptive Statistics for Ratings of Instrumental Music by Children 229
(n = 15)
Table 4.3a Descriptive Statistics for Ratings of Sad Pictures by Judges (n = 10) 231
Table 4.4a Descriptive Statistics for Ratings of Happy Pictures by Judges (n = 232
10)
Table 4.5a Descriptive Statistics for Ratings of Neutral Pictures by Judges (n = 233
10)
Table 4.6a Characteristics of MIP Groups (N = 48). 235
Table 4.7a Descriptive Statistics for Mood Induction Trials within Positive MI 236
Group (n = 32)
Table 4.8a Descriptive Statistics for Mood Induction Trials within Negative MI 237
Group (n = 32)
Table 4.9a MANOVA for Valence of Techniques across MI Groups and 238
Gender
Table 4.10a MANOVA for Level of Arousal of Techniques across MI Groups 241

iv
 and Gender
Table 4.11a Mixed Factorial ANOVA for Mood Valence in Positive MI Group 245

Table 4.12a Paired Comparisons of Valence Scores for Happy MI Techniques 248
Table 4.13a Mixed Factorial ANOVA for Mood Arousal in Positive MI 249
Condition
Table 4.14a Paired Comparisons of Arousal Scores for Happy MI Techniques 253
Table 4.15a Mixed Factorial ANOVA for Evaluating Change in Valence in 254
Negative MI Condition
Table 4.16a Paired Comparisons of Valence Scores for Sad MI Techniques 257
Table 4.17a Mixed Factorial ANOVA for Evaluating Change in Arousal in 258
Negative MI Condition
Table 4.18a Paired Comparisons of Arousal Scores for Sad MI Techniques 261
Table 4.19a Gender Distribution across Bully/Victim Groups 277
Table 4.20a Distribution of Bully-Victims Groups in Four Mood Conditions 278
Table 4.21a Descriptive Statistics of FEEL Test and Individual Emotions 279
Table 4.22a Normality of Responses on Individual Emotions and FEEL Total 280
Score
Table 4.23a Between-Within ANOVA showing Effects of Mood Induction on 281
Subjective Mood Ratings across Conditions
Table 4.24a ANOVA showing Effects of Involvement in Bullying Behaviors and 284
Gender on Overall Emotion Recognition Ability
Table 4.25a Post Hoc Comparisons among Bully/Victim Groups for FEEL Test 287
Table 4.26a Between-Within ANOVA for Emotion Categories on FEEL for 289
Bully/Victim Groups, Mood Condition and Gender
Table 4.27a MANOVA showing Effect of Mood on Emotion Recognition 291
among Bully-Victim Groups
Table 4.28a Post Hoc Comparison among Bully/Victim Groups for Individual 293
Emotions on FEEL

Table 4.29a ANOVA showing Differences in Reaction Time across 297

Bully/Victim Groups and Mood Conditions

v
Table 4.30a Post Hoc Comparisons among Bully/Victim Groups for Reaction 298
Time on FEEL
Table 4.1b Distribution of Bully/Victim Groups across Gender (N = 672) 306
Table 4.2b Univariate Analysis of Variance of Friendship Quality for 307
Bully/Victim Groups, Gender and Grade
Table 4.3b Post Hoc Comparisons of Bully/Victim Groups for Quality of 308
Friendship
Table 4.4b MANOVA showing Main Effects and Interaction of Bully/Victim 312
Groups and Gender on FQS Subscales and Conflict
Table 4.1c Academic and Socioeconomic Correlates of Friendship Quality and 318
Emotion Recognition
Table 4.2c Correlation between Friendship Quality and Emotion Recognition 319
across Bully/Victim Groups
Table 4.3c Regression Analysis for Emotion Recognition Ability and 320
Friendship Quality on Global Victimization (N = 370)
Table 4.4c Regression Analysis for Emotion Recognition Ability and 321
Friendship Quality on Global Bullying (N = 370)

vi
 LIST OF FIGURES Page
Figure No. No.

Figure 1.1 Effect of Mood on Emotion Recognition with Reference to SIP 79

Figure 1.2 Illustration of the Present Study 80
Figure 1.3 The Research Plan 86
Figure 2.1 Confirmatory Factor Analysis of OBVQ 119
Figure 2.2 Mean Victimization Scores by Gender and Grades 124
Figure 2.3 Mean Bullying Scores by Gender and Grades 125
Figure 2.4 Final Four Factor Model for FQS Urdu Version (N = 672) 166
Figure 3.1 Distribution of Bully Victim Groups in the Sample (N = 817) 181
Figure 3.2 Bully victim Groups across Grades 182
Figure 3.3 Percentage of Boys and Girls in Bully/Victim Groups 183
Figure 3.4 Percentage of Students who Reported Being Bullied at Different 194
Places in School
Figure 3.5 Reporting Others about Bullying 197
Figure 3.6 Bully/Victim Profile of Academic Performance (Marks 205
Percentage)
Figure 3.7 Attendance Percentages of Bully/Victim Groups 207
Figure 4.1a Mood Induction Procedure 225
Figure 4.2a Mean Valence Scores of Positive and Negative MI Groups 239
Figure 4.3a Mean Valence Scores of MI Techniques across Gender 240
Figure 4.4a Mean Arousal Scores of Positive and Negative MI Groups 242
Figure 4.5a Mean Arousal Scores of Mood techniques across Gender 243
Figure 4.6a Means of Happy and Neutral Valence Scores across Mood 247
Techniques
Figure 4.7a Happy and Neutral Arousal across Mood Techniques 251
Figure 4.8a Happy and Neutral Arousal for Mood Techniques across Negative 252
MI Blocks
Figure 4.9a Mean Valence Scores of Four MI Techniques across Blocks 255
within Negative MI Group

vii
Figure 4.10a Sad and Neutral Valence Scores across Mood Techniques 256
Figure 4.11a Level of Arousal for Sad and Happy Mood Conditions across MI 259
Techniques
Figure 4.12a Mean Arousal Scores of Four MI Techniques across Blocks within 260
Negative MI Group
Figure 4.13a The Procedure of Random Assignment 273
Figure 4.14a The Experimental Process 275
Figure 4.15a FEEL Test Procedure 276
Figure 4.16a Pre and Post Induction Mood Ratings across three Mood 283
Conditions
Figure 4.17a Mean Scores of Bully/victim Groups on FEEL Test 285
Figure 4.18a Mean Scores of Boys and Girls on FEEL Test across Bully/victim 286
Groups
Figure 4.19a Mean differences of Bullly/Victim Groups on Anger across Mood 295
Conditions
Figure 4.20a Mean differences of Bullly/Victim Groups on FEEL across Mood 296
Conditions
Figure 4.21a Mean Reaction Time on FEEL across Bully/Victim Groups 299
Figure 4.1b Estimated Marginal Means of Friendship Quality across 309
Bully/Victim Groups
Figure 4.2b Mean Scores of Boys and Girls on FQS 310
Figure 4.3b Gender and Grade Interaction for Friendship Quality 311
Figure 4.4b Estimated Marginal Means of Conflict across Gender among 314
Bully/Victim

viii
 LIST OF APPENDICES

Contents Page No
App. Label

Appendix A Olweus Bully Victim Questionnaire (OBVQ) and Friendship 407

Qualities Scale (FQS) Urdu Version (Sample Pages)
Appendix B Confirmatory Factor Analysis of OBVQ 410
Appendix C Confirmatory Factor Analysis of FQS 416
Appendix D Demographic Information Form 425
Appendix E Permission from Schools, Information for Parents and Consent 427
Letter
Appendix F Sample Emotive Pictures (Mood Induction) 431
Appendix G Plagiarism Report 435

ix
 Acknowledgements

Thanks to Allah Almighty for enabling me to accomplish this exigent task.

Finally, 2015 marks the end of a long process and this would not have been possible

without help from some very important people who have facilitated and supported me

throughout this period of time.

First, and foremost, I would like to acknowledge my supervisor Prof. Dr. Farah

Malik. She has the genius to explore the novel avenues in the field of psychology in

Pakistan. Her enthusiasm, guidance, encouragement and faith in me helped me to go

through the difficult times of conceiving the project and collecting the data. Her skillful

guidance continued in conducting major analysis. I will be forever grateful to her for her

years of mentoring that evoked the insight and passion for research in me.

I would like to express my deepest gratitude to my co-supervisor, Dr. Syeda

Shahida Batool, for her valuable feedback, and constructive advice that provided me the

right direction to make this work to come to a good end. Her suggestions have refined

my communication skills, and her professional discipline and diligence inspire me to the

same. She has been very positive and generously gave of her valuable time and vast

knowledge.

My special thanks go to Dr. Syeda Salma Hassan, for her compassionate

cooperation, patient listening to the problems and unconventional support when I needed

it the most.

I am grateful to the Higher Education Commission Pakistan for providing

financial assistance that kept me going smoothly during the course of research. I also

have to thank the administration of GC University Faisalabad, the worthy Vice

x
Chancellor, the Registrar, the Dean of Social Sciences and Incharge Department of

Applied Psychology, for facilitating me to accomplish this goal.

I am obliged to the authors/co-authors/groups (Dr. Olwues, Dr. Bukowski, Dr.

Hoffmann, CSEAMedia) for providing and allowing me to use and translate the

instruments for my research.

I am also thankful to principals and teachers for allowing me do my research in

their schools. I am also obliged to all the students and their parents for sharing the

information. My special thanks are extended to The Punjab School Township, Lahore for

taking keen interest in the research and arranging special awareness campaign about

bullying at their school.

I appreciate the cooperation provided by the non-teaching staff of Psychology

Department, GCU Lahore especially Mr. Maroof, and all the others who always

facilitated me.

I am also indebted to my close friends Rabia Iftikhar and Nighat Zeeshan for all

the good times and critical reflections, love, support, and companionship especially

during tough times. My special thanks go to brotherly cooperation of Muhammad

Musaffa Butt for his invaluable suggestions and help. These friends have always been a

source of psychological assistance and strength for me.

I thank Allah Almighty for blessing me with the parents who have shown their

unconditional love and provision throughout my life. They have made substantial

sacrifices to help me attain my goals and I am unable to express the degree of my

appreciation of them. Thanks to my brother also for all the sharing and love. I can never

xi
forget my first teacher and mentor, my grandfather (late) who left me during my research.

He always believed in me and my ambitions that kept my spirits high. God bless his soul.

I would not have accomplished anything without continual and generous patience,

love, care, and support of my beloved husband, Dr. Zulfiqar Ali. I am blessed to have

you in my life. Thanks to my lovely kids Hassan and Hareem who deserve much of the

credit in helping me. Their laughter always eased my pains and relieved my worries and

brought me joys beyond my words.

Rabia Khawar

xii
 ABSTRACT

Literature has emphasized the role of affective component in explicating Social

Information Processing and Social Cognitive dimensions of bullying (Crick & Dodge,

1994; Lemerise & Arsenio, 2000; Sutton, 2000). Following the above mentioned

connotations, the current research endeavor mainly focused on effect of mood on emotion

recognition ability of school bullies and victims for its implications in SIP Model.

Besides estimating the occurrence of bullying in 4th, 5th and 6th graders, friendship quality

of bully/victim groups was also evaluated in view of the role played by peer relationships

in bullying. Four studies were carried out to achieve these objectives.

In the first study, Olweus Bully-Victim Questionnaire (OBVQ; Olweus, 1996)

and Friendship Qualities Scale (FQS; Bukowski, Hoza & Boivin, 1994) were translated

into Urdu and were evaluated for the construct validity. Consistent with the original

model, both Exploratory and Confirmatory Factor Analysis (EFA and CFA) afforded a

two factor (Bullying and Victimization) solution for OBVQ. Whereas, contrary to the

original 5 factor model of friendship quality, a four factor model (approval, intimacy,

help and conflict) was confirmed for FQS. The second study provided an account of

prevalence of bullying within a sample of 817 students (46.1% boys & 53.9% girls; Mage

= 10.89, SDage = 1.12). Only 34.6% students were found uninvolved in any kind of

bullying. Majority of the students were classified as bully-victims (28.8%) followed by

victims (19.3%) and bullies (17.3%).

Third study examined the effect of mood on emotion recognition among

bully/victim groups. As a prerequisite for the study, we first experimentally evaluated the

efficacy of four mood induction techniques Video songs followed by picture/music

xiii
combination were found more effective than other techniques and therefore considered

suitable for the main study. During the second phase, participants (N = 394; Mage = 10.77;

SDage = 1.07) were randomly assigned and primed with sad, happy and neutral mood.

Following the successful mood inductions, participants completed Facial Expressed

Emotion Labeling (FEEL) test of emotion recognition. Contrary to assumptions mood did

not affect recognition of emotions in a congruent manner. Yet victims in neutral

condition scored higher on FEEL test and recognized the anger more accurately than

those in sad or happy mood condition. Moreover students involved in various bullying

roles scored lower on FEEL than uninvolved group.

Fourth study identified differences in the friendship quality of bully/victim groups

(N = 672; Mage = 10.86; SDage = 1.08). ANOVA results showed that bully-victim group

had significantly poorer quality of friendship than other groups. Specifically, they

showed poorer conflict resolution and lesser intimacy as compared with uninvolved

students. Additionally, despite demonstrating better quality of friendship, girls were

significantly poorer in resolving conflict as compared with boys. With regard to academic

correlates, quality of friendship was significantly associated with presence at school.

Lastly we found a significant yet weaker relationship between friendship quality and

emotion recognition ability of students (r = .11, p < .05). Both of these variables proved

to be significant predictors of bullying and victimization. Findings are discussed for

implications to cognitive-affective processes and social scenario of bullying.

xiv
 1

Chapter-I

INTRODUCTION

Bullying has been acknowledged as a serious dilemma affecting mental health

and well-being of the students across different countries (Chibbaro, 2007; Thompson &

Cohen, 2005). Bullying is usually considered as a form of aggression characterized by

habitual and repeated behavior, meant to impose domination over the weaker individual.

Bullying behavior primarily revolves around coercion and intimidation with either direct

aggression such as slapping, name calling, pushing, swearing, and damaging among

disparate others or using indirect forms, for example gossiping, rumors and social

rejection which exercises immense influence and causes harm to the victims (Beran &

Lupart, 2009).

Bullying associated to different forms of violence and aggression can lead to high

profile incidents of escalated violence later in life (Ttofi, Farrington, & Losel, 2012). So

dealing with this issue at earlier stage can not only create safer and healthier school

environment but would also affect the community at large. At individual level, bullying

may result in physical, academic and psychological harm to those who are involved in it

as perpetrators, targets or bystanders (Fekkes, Pijpers, & Verloove-Vanhorick, 2004).

Researchers have highlighted the impact of bullying upon children’s cognitive, affective

and social development and competence (Arsenio & Lemerise, 2002; Wal, Wit, &

Hirasing, 2003; Wong, Lok, Lo, & Ma, 2008).The present study broadly intended to

identify nature and extend of bullying and its emotional and social repercussions among

elementary school students in Pakistan.

 2

Background of the Bullying Phenomenon

A considerable change has been observed in the term bullying over time. The first

reported account of bullying was the death of a soldier as a consequence, published by

‘The Times’ in 1862. Subsequently, Burk (1897) wrote the first noteworthy research

paper about teasing and bullying in youth. By the half of 20th century, researchers

considered aggression among school children as a combination of certain misbehaviors

mainly focusing physical assault. Later, Greenberg (1969) recognized psychological

element of misbehaviors while referring to carelessness, inattentiveness and lack of

concentration, deceitfulness, crookedness and smoking. The issue of bullying was

seriously taken up as a research matter in Scandinavia in mid1970s after Pikas (1975) and

Olweus (1978) made first systematic attempt to empirically investigate the problem. It

turned out to be a societal and official concern after a newspaper in 1982 reported suicide

of three Norwegian boys as a result of school bullying (Olweus 1993). Olweus defined

bullying as an aggressive act comprising both direct and indirect strategies deliberately

repeated over time by more powerful individuals to hurt weaker ones. Since then bullying

has become the focus of many investigators who had developed variety of approaches

and explored numerous dimensions of the phenomenon in various social contexts.

Bullying: An Insight to the Dilemma

Initial empirical investigation not only focused on discrimination between

aggression and bullying but also individual and group bullying/mobbing (Olweus, 1993),

a distinction that has been later overlooked. Besag (1989) emphasized the bullies'

proposition by viewing bullying as a behavior characterized by repeated physical, verbal,

social or psychological attacks by more power individuals, aimed to create distress

 3

among those who are powerless to resist, for some specific gain or gratification. Espelage

and Asidao (2001) discussed three dimensions that differentiate bullying from

aggression: bullying is an organized and purposeful act initiated by perpetrators by

picking on weaker and controllable targets to hurt them many times over by

systematically inflicting physical, verbal or psychological harm.

The most widely accepted definition of bullying had been offered by Olweus

(1993) who has described bullying as an intentional, recurring or enduring exposure to

negative actions performed by an individual or a group perceived to be more powerful

and stronger than the victim. Olweus (1994, 1999) distinguished bullying from ordinary

fight or quarrelling between two parties of equal strength by emphasizing the notion of

power imbalance. It’s a combination of certain direct and indirect negative actions

performed by one or more students repeatedly over time with an intention to harm weaker

students. Victims’ inability to defend him or her is another important feature of Olweus

definition.

Farrington (1993) defines bullying as repetitive oppression of weaker ones by

more powerful ones who intentionally inflict harm to them through physical, verbal and

psychological means.

Heald (1994) reported the British legal definition of bullying that describes it as

an individual or collective effort with a motivation to hurt, threaten or frighten another

person or put him under stress by conducting physical or psychological violence over an

extended time period. It brings feelings of insecurity to the victim as target is usually

unable to defend himself. This definition communicates a comprehensive significance of

the various aspects of bullying.

 4

According to Rigby (2001), bullying can be viewed as a wide range of long-

standing violent acts from low to high intensity that are planned by a stronger person to

hurt the vulnerable target. Rigby’s (2002) extensive discussion on defining bullying

concludes that it involves an urge to hurt followed by hurtful action which is taken in

cases where power imbalance exists between parties and the more powerful person

repeatedly uses his/her power in an unjust manner. Moreover the perpetrator manifests

enjoyment and pleasure while the target experiences a sense of being oppressed. Hence

two components are critical while defining bullying; a) the feeling on part of bully and b)

the victim‘s perception of intentionality and power imbalance.

Most recently Division of Violence Prevention, Centers for Disease Control and

Prevention (CDC; Gladden, Kantor, Hamburger & Lumpkin, 2014, pp 7), released a

comprehensive definition of bullying.

“Bullying is any unwanted aggressive behavior(s) by another youth or group of

youth who are not siblings or current dating partners that involves an observed or

perceived power imbalance and is repeated multiple times or is highly likely to be

repeated. Bullying may inflict harm or distress on the targeted youth including physical,

psychological, social, or educational harm”.

Literature has unraveled contradictory definitions of bullying behavior across

researchers (Swearer, Siebecker, Johnsen- Frerichs, & Wang, 2010). Yet, these

definitions commonly included following prominent features:

(a) Goal oriented-aggression with an intention to hurt the target

(b) Asymmetric power relationship

 5

(c) Long-standing and repetitive acts of direct and indirect aggression and

(d) Deleterious consequences

(Gini, 2004; James, 2010; Nansel etal., 2001; Olweus, 1993).

Bully-Victim Status Types

Bullying is complex social process and those who are involved in it play different

roles (Cohen, Garcia, Apfel & Master, 2006). Salmivalli, Lagerspetz, Björkvist,

Österman, and Kaukiainen (1996) had discussed six different participant roles (bullies,

victims, bully-victim, bully reinforces, bully assistants, defenders of victim, and the

outsiders) assumed by children involved in the bullying process. In general, researchers

distinguish among perpetrators as bullies, targets as victims, bully-victim and those who

are not identified in any of these three roles as not involved (Olweus, 1995; Solberg &

Olweus, 2003). Further variations have been rarely addressed in bullying investigation.

Bullies

Bullies, who frequently and diligently hurt others over a period of time, are often

recognized for exhibiting hostile yearnings and physical strength. They are considered

temperamental, impetuous, authoritative and imperious, somewhat insecure, and less

compassionate (Olweus, 1995). Olweus (1997) later described them as less anxious,

fairly secure and having normal levels of self-esteem. Additionally, children’s bullying

behavior is mostly found steady across contexts such as home and school (Lane, 1989).

Bullies are also more likely to exhibit oppositional propensities towards adults, described

as oppositional and rebellious toward adults, disruptive and antisocial, and often involved

in breaking school rules (Batsche & Knoff, 1994; Olweus, 1993, 1997).
 6

Students who bully others mostly do so to get noticed by their peers and enjoy the

sense of powerful status amongst them (Sullivan, 2000). They possess positive approach

towards violence and their bullying behavior is strengthened when it is not challenged by

peers or reported to the authorities. Bullies are usually unpopular but, unlike victims, may

be admired by a particular group of children (Olweus, 1997).Instrumental bullies are

more systematic and clever, thus maintain a popular status among peers and supposed to

perform well in academics and tend to be socially skilled and smart to influence others

according to their own will (Caravita , DiBlasio, & Salmivalli, 2009; Dijkstra, Wilgen,

Versteegen & Fleuren, 2009; Juvonen, 2014, Veenstra, Lindenberg, Munniksm, &

Dijkstra, 2010).Because they are equally popular among teachers and students, therefore

are often difficult to identify due to their tactful manipulation. Generally, they lack

empathy and are unable to take others perspective.

Victims

These students as the targets experience frequent bullying, for example two to

three times a month or more and are categorized as victims. They have been found to be

more anxious, alone, depressed, timid and apprehensive and physically weaker than

bullies. They tend o be less assertive, have low self-esteem, and lack confidence. These

attributes lead to poor social skills and consequently they become unable to react and

defend themselves (Olweus, 1995; 1997). They often exhibit more internalizing problems

compared to students in other bullying roles (Reijntes, et al., 2010). Low socioeconomic

status, distinct ethnic group, physical disabilities, learning difficulties and school shifting

are important correlates of victimization (Espelage, 2002).

 7

The targets that are usually recognized as passive or pure victim never initiate the

bullying act and remain unable to retaliate, while there is another group known as

provocative victims based on their reaction towards bullying experience (Camodeca,

Goossens, Terwogt, & Schuengel, 2002).

Bully/Victims

Olweus (1978) first identified this group named as provocative victims who make

unsuccessful efforts to fight back, when they are bullied. There are few who succeed in

their retaliation and have been referred to as bully-victims subsequently (Boulton &

Smith, 1994).Another term reactive bullying has emerged as a subtle form referring to the

bullies who initiate the discord and get attacked as a result of that strife. Such a bully is

an instigator who persistently teases and offends some students until that student is

provoked to respond aggressively. The reactive bully then blames the student for the

conflict (Smokowski & Kopasz, 2005). Bully-victim group may also comprise these

reactive bullies.

It is notable that actions of a bully are more planned, well-organized and

purposeful than those of a provocative victim (Schwartz, Proctor, & Chien, 2001).

Therefore nature and extent of aggression should be taken into account while addressing

the bully/victim group. This third group actually acts as both perpetrator and target of

bullying. They exhibit a combination of both anxious and aggressive behavior patterns,

and often being hyperactive and more self-destructive as compared to bullies or victims

(as cited in Olafsen &Viemerö, 2000). They are unpopular due to their irritability,

clumsiness and immaturity (Olweus, 2006).

 8

Uninvolved or Bystanders

Students who are not directly involved into active roles mentioned above had

either been classified as bystanders or the uninvolved group. Bystander of bullying

research has revealed three main types:

1. Those who do not initiate the activity but actively take part in bullying. They

join the perpetrators in bullying the targets. They are named as followers or

assistants of bullies.

2. There is another group which does not participate in bullying behavior, yet act

as supporters of bullies by reinforcing them either verbally or by covert means

as they may witness the act silently. They could also support the bullies by

cheering and laughing.

3. Defenders are the students who not only dislike bullying but also try to protect

or help the target by providing direct assistance to the victim by intruding the

situation, or obtaining adult support to resolve the issue. Defending is a pro

social behavior that is positively associated with high levels of empathy and

can play an important role in bullying prevention efforts (Caravita, Di Blasio

& Salmivalli, 2010; Gini, Albiero, Benelli, & Altoè, 2007; Juvonen, 2014).

Still there are few students who remain passive or completely irrelevant of the

scenario and considered uninvolved. They are called outsiders neither bully nor being

bullied by someone else (Thornberg & Jungert, 2013).

 9

Nature and Types of Bullying and Victimization

Bullying can take several forms such as physical, verbal, social or relational

(Smith & Ananiadou, 2003).

Physical

The term demonstrates the use of physical power by the offender against the

targeted youth. Examples involve:(a) physically injurious behaviors such as hitting,

punching, kicking, beating up, tripping, pushing and shoving; (b) damaging the

belongings of the victim for example snatching, stealing and wasting or destroying the

books, lunch, money or other goods; (c) pressurizing the target to perform an unwanted

action or exercising extortion is also a part of physical bullying sometimes (Gladden et

al., 2014; Selekman & Vessey, 2004).

Verbal

Verbal bullying involves abusive behaviors such as teasing, mocking, name-

calling, nasty comments, humiliation, threats and noxious remarks, ridiculing or

threatening gestural expression, and intimidating written communication involving notes

and drawings (Martinez-Criado, 2014). This is also the most common type of bullying,

yet goes unidentified owing to the ease and rapidity with which it occurs (Smokowski &

Kopasz, 2005). Verbal bullying often proceeds to other forms of bullying (Liepe-

Levinson & Levinson, 2005).

 10

Social/Relational

This type of bullying has been defined by behaviors that are intended to harm the

target’s social relationships and feelings by deliberately ignoring him or her or excluding

from the peer group (Crick & Grotpeter, 1995). This type also involves gossip, and false

rumor spreading about the victim that causes embarrassment and destroys the social

image and standing of the target (CDC, 2012; Schäfer, Werner, & Crick2002; Wolke,

Woods, Bloomfield, & Karstadt, 2000).

Cyberbullying

Cyber bullying has caught the attention of researchers in recent years. This

particular type of bullying is mediated by digital technology perpetrators use overt and

covert ways to harm their target (Kiriakidis & Kvoura, 2010). With the help of cell

phones, emails, chat rooms and social networking, youth is excessively getting involved

in physical, verbal and relational bullying. It can happen anywhere and any times and

usually characterized by hurtful posts in form of text, images or videos; intentionally

excluding others online, spreading rumors, distorting others image either through direct

remarks or using fake IDs (Hinduja & Patchin, 2010; Ybarra & Mitchell, 2004). It

endangers the social reputation of the victim and most adverse aspect is that the bully can

easily maintain anonymity, thus remains unidentified most often.

Direct and Indirect Modes of Bullying

These types can be broadly grouped together into two distinct modes of direct and

indirect bullying. Direct bullying acts are blunt, explicit, overt and straightforward, often
 11

demonstrated in the presence of the victim (Peskin, Tortolero, & Markham, 2006).

Indirect bullying is more covert and therefore mostly includes relational and cyber forms

of bullying (CDC, 2014). Direct bullying is often observable and includes physical

aggression (hitting, kicking), verbal aggression (teasing, racial or sexual comments), and

nonverbal aggression (threatening gestures). Relational bullying in direct mode involves

perpetrator’s attempts to isolate the target by forcefully keeping him or her away from

social activities. Indirect bullying can also be physical (instigating someone to attack

someone else), verbal (false gossiping), and nonverbal (excluding from a group or

activity) (Boulton & Underwood, 1992; Olweus, 2001; O’Moore & Kirkham, 2001;

Raskauskas & Stoltz, 2007). Cyber bullying in direct mode may include damage to

property such as deleting or distorting someone’s personal electronic communication or

forming bullying groups to directly assault someone. In its indirect mode it incorporates

attempts by the bully to socially isolate the victim using relational means in a systematic

manner.

Assessment of Bullying Behavior

Accurate assessment of bullying behavior is the basic step for a well-structured,

synchronized and the systematic bullying prevention program (Batsche, 1997; Ross,

1996). Time constraints, manpower and expenditure are some of the important features to

be considered while planning for assessment of school bullying.

A comprehensive assessment should not only include incidence and prevalence of

overall bullying, but also different forms, their intensity, frequency and duration, location

where bullying takes place most often, perception of the phenomenon and response

towards the problem by all stakeholders (i.e. students, parents, school staff, educationists
 12

and counselors). Several approaches and techniques are available to measure bullying

behavior of pupils at school including self-reports, peer and teacher nominations,

observation etc (Cornell, Sheras, & Cole, 2006; Crothers & Levinson, 2004). Following

is an outline of the methods most commonly used in assessing bullying behavior:

Self-reports

Student’s self-reports are one of the most widespread methods of assessing

bullying and victimization (Austin & Joseph, 1996; Borg, 1999) that provides precise and

comprehensive information (Kingery et al., 1998). Self-report instruments of bullying are

either anonymous or confidential and this secrecy enhances the reliability of information

provided by respondents who otherwise might be fearful of being exposed publically as a

bully or could suffer perpetrator’s retaliation in case of a victim (Pellegrini, 2001).

Moreover, most of the victims do not share their experiences with elders such as parents

or school staff, and bullying is not always overt, thus making it difficult to observe

(Menesi et al., 1997). Hence self-report measure serve as a useful source of accurate

information. However, self-reports may be subjective to social impression and

desirability on behalf of children as bullies mostly underestimate their misbehaviors and

violence to avoid social stigma while targets may either over estimate or deny their role

(Österman, Macduffie, Bjdrkqvist, & Kaukiainen 1994; Rigby, 1997; Salmivalli,

Lagerspetz, et al, 1996). A comparison of self-reports with peer nominations revealed

that children portray themselves pro-socially, for example as defenders of victims than

any other roles (Menesini & Gini, 2000; Sutton & Smith, 1999). Despite a few draw
 13

backs, self-report methods is preferred by researchers over other methods due to its

feasibility, cost-effectiveness and information on children’s direct experience of bullying.

Direct Observations

Naturalistic observations of pupils in school surroundings have been conducted

personally and/or by using audio/video recording techniques to explore the nature and

extent of bullying (Menesini, Melan, & Pignatti, 2000). Direct observations of bullying

permit an objective inspection of the child which is not affected by the internal group

dynamics (Hawkins, Pepler, & Craig, 2001). Conversely an observation includes

sampling issue, availability of resources, inadequacy of information on f covert strategies

of bullying and failing to come across the repetitive extent of behavior due to time

constraints (Crick, Werne, Casas & Ku, 1999).

Teacher Reports

Teachers have direct experience and observation of children’s behavior, so they

can provide valuable information about their involvement in bullying. Studies have found

that teachers tend to underestimate bullying due to different perception of bullying as

most of them do not consider relational aggression as bullying, unobserved acts of

bullying that are indirect and occur at place having lesser adult supervision than

classrooms (Hazler, Miller, Carney, &Green, 2001; Hunt, 2007; Pellegrini & Bartini,

2000; Shafer et al., 2002). Additionally reasonable convergence has been found between

students’ self-reports and teacher nominations of bullying and victimization (Beran &

Stewart, 2008).
 14

Peer Reports

Peer reports are obtained through peer nomination method that affords larger

judgments and offer minimum risk of bias due to multiple raters (Salmivalli et al., 1996).

Children have greater opportunity to observe bullying directly and thus may provide

reliable information on the bullying roles of their peers. Still there are certain limitations

to this method for example; their evaluation can be subjected to be influenced by peer

reputation or their own relationship with the individual being judged. Furthermore, their

opinion may reflect inconsistency due to their moods or some specific event (McNeilly-

Choque, Hart, Robinson, Nelson, & Olsen, 1996). Risk of stigmatization can also

impede the use of such nomination procedures. A meta-analysis by Cook, Williams,

Guerra & Kim, (2010) found that peer reports generated lower bully and victim rates in

comparison with self or teacher/parent report yet no variation was observed for

bully/victim rates.Nevertheless, peer ratings of bullying behavior have been considered to

be the only method to which all the others (i.e. observations and self-reports) are

significantly correlated (Pellegrini, 2001; Pellegrini & Bartini, 2000).

Furlong, Sharkey, Felix, Tanigawa, and Green (2010) have highlighted the

importance of using multiple assessment methods as this approach provides further

insights into the occurrences of bullying and may deal with the disadvantages of a

particular method. Yet this approach is subjected to the availability of resources.

Prevalence of Bullying

Diversities in the assessment and conceptual framework of bullying have

contributed to varying estimates of its prevalence among children and adolescents. A

 15

consistent finding across studies shows that a considerable number of students are bullied

by their peers at schools (Stassen & Berger, 2007). The initial studies were mainly

confined to Norway, (Olweus, 1973, 1978, 1991). It soon caught attention by researchers

in UK (Boulton & Underwood, 1992; Rivers & Smith, 1994; Whitney & Smith, 1993),

USA (Perry, Kusel, & Perry, 1988; Rodkin, Farmer, Pearl, & Van Acker, 2000; Nansel

et al., 2001), the Netherlands (Rutter, 1986; Junger, 1990), Australia (Rigby & Slee,

1991), Canada (Pepler, Craig, Zeigler, & Charach, 1993) and Japan (Morita, 1984; Taki,

2001a). Most of the findings are thus based on researches conducted in America and

Western European countries and a lot of variation had been found in occurrences of

bullying ranging from 18% (Carlyle & Steinman, 2007) to 82% (Gropper & Froschl,

1999). The official research initiated by the European Council in 2008 has acknowledged

that an average of 32% victimization rate varying between 25 to 45 percent from country

to country (as cited in Kukučionytė, Drąsutė, & Drąsutis, 2012). Cook et al. (2010)

reviewed 82 studies conducted in Europe, U.S and other parts of the world. The data was

largely based on self-reports followed by peer nominations and parent/teacher reports of

bullying. Meta-analysis revealed an average of 20% students involved in bullying others,

23% as being bullied and only 8% of bully-victims. Depending on the nature and design

of the study, the participants’ age and the region, the proportion of school children

repeatedly victimized ranges from 7.1 %to 70.2 % (Due & Holstein, 2008).

For overall prevalence, we can say that over 20 % children worldwide continue

to be at risk of being involved in any kind of bullying behavior as reported by National

Association of School Psychologists (NASP, 2012). As far the prevalence of different

forms are concerned, studies have confirmed that direct physical and direct verbal are the
 16

most frequently occurring types of bullying during elementary and middle school years,

while a significant number of students had been using or experiencing relational means of

bullying (Vettenburg, 1999; Martinez-Criado, 2014). Physical bullying had also been the

most frequent type at many places for example, Portugal (Pereira et al., 1996), and Japan

(Taki, 2001). Cyber bullying has emerged as a subtle form having high prevalence rates

among high school students (Ybarra & Mitchell, 2004). Recently, Modecki, Minchin,

Herbaugh, Guerra, and Runions (2014) found higher mean prevalence rates for traditional

bullying (35%) compared with cyber bullying (15%). The results were reported across 80

studies and the ratios were almost similar for both bullying and victimization. Further

investigations have elucidated that disparities in prevalence of different forms of bullying

could be attributed to age, grade and gender differences.

Grade Level and Age Trends in Bullying

Different types of bullying takes place at different grade levels. It has been

observed that physical bullying mostly occurs during elementary school years and verbal

and relational bullying occur in middle and high school years most often (Olweus, 1993;

Seals & Young, 2003). Researchers agree that victimization is peaked during primary

school, especially in grades four to six and that direct bullying rates decline as children

grow older and become mature to use more manipulative strategies such as indirect

bullying (Selekman & Vessey, 2004). This marked decline is usually associated with self-

reported victimization (Juvonen, Nishina, & Graham, 2000; Salmivalli, 2002) and hence

can be attributed to the egocentric nature of younger children who are more concerned

with what happens to them (Leff, Kupersmidt, Patterson, & Power, 1999). Most of the
 17

targets are victimized by same aged peers studying in their own class and fewer had been

bullied by older pupils studying in higher grades (Zindi, 1994). Considering the high risk

of bullying involvement during elementary grades, the present study focused on children

studying in fourth, fifth and sixth grades.

Gender Differences in Bullying and Victimization

In regards to gender differences in bullying involvement researchers have found

that bullying others is more frequently reported by males as compared to females who

report more victimization (Seals & Young, 2003). Results of a study by Currie et al.

(2008) could not verify the gender difference in prevalence of victimization. In Asian

countries more males than females have been found to be involved in bullying behaviors

(Kim, Koh, & Leventhal, 2004; 2005; Kshirsagar, Agarwal, & Bavedekar, 2007).

Gender-wise prevalence of different forms of bullying has indicated that boys are more

physically abusive and use direct mode for bullying compared to girls. Although some of

the studies could not confirm gender differences in relational bullying (Crick & Bigbee,

1998; Prinstein, Boergers, & Vernberg, 2001) some others found that girls were more

engaged in indirect means while bullying their peers (National Crime Victimization

Survey, 2009). The controversial gender scenario of bullying in existing literature

provided another avenue to be explored within Pakistani cultural context.

Location, Duration and Reporting of Bullying

All kinds of bullying occur in a variety of contexts and usually last over an

extended period of time. Physical, verbal, relational, and sexual bullying might happen
 18

over an extended period of time across different contexts, including the classroom,

hallways, playground, or traveling to and from school. Further, cyber bullying prolongs

ahead of the school day, through the use internet and digital devices.

According to a study quoted by the US Department of Health and Human

Services (US-DHHS, 2014) the highest occurrence of victimization was found in

classrooms (29.3%), closely followed by hallways and lockers (29%), at canteen/cafeteria

(23.4%), during gym class (19.5%), and even in bathrooms (12.2%). Bowen and Holcom

(2010) reported that primary school students were most often bullied in school yards

(55%) and class rooms (24%), while other places where students were bullied included

corridors (4%), bathrooms (13%) and cafeteria (12%). Cyber bullying rarely happens

inside school (Smith et al., 2008).

Duration of bullying has been associated with frequency of the behavior and the

outcome is more devastating (Sharp, Thompson & Arora, 2000). Short term bullying

usually includes indirect strategies, whereas long term bullying has been related to direct

forms especially verbal bullying. It can be concluded that nearly half of the victims are

bullied for some days or up to one months and a substantial number of them are bullied

for several months with a few experience bullying for years (Smith, 2014).

Although children mostly report their victimization experience to an adult,

especially their parents, yet a considerable number of parents remain unaware of the

issue. Teachers are the second choice of students while reporting being bullied (Fekkes,

Pijpers, & Verloove-Vanhorick, 2005). Unnever and Cornell (2004) found that almost

40% students do not share their victimization experience with adults. That is why, fewer

consensuses have been found between teachers and parent reports of bullying and
 19

students’ self-reports. Social support can play an important role in this regard inclining

victim to report their experiences (Holt, Kantor, & Finkelhor, 2009). The possibility of

reporting bullying experiences to parents reduces with age (Limber, Olweus, & Wang,

2012). It can be concluded that estimates of location and duration of bullying are

significant aspects to be assessed before planning and implementing bullying prevention

program in schools.

Teachers’ and Parents’ Attitudes and Perceptions toward Bullying

Assessment of attitude towards bullying was first emphasized by Rigby and Slee

(1991) who later developed Attitude to Victim Scale (Rigby, 1997). Since then, pro-

victim and pro-bully attitude has been studied in variety of context and a number of

factors have been identified that contribute towards this aspect.

Teachers, school staff and parents are important stakeholders in preventing

bullying. Their understanding, insight and attitude affect the way they address the issue

(Poulou & Norwich, 2002). Teachers sometimes consider it difficult to deal with such

issues and try to avoid (Tomal, 1998), yet those who are able to relate the psychosocial

well-being of the students to their learning and academic performance are more likely to

intervene (Siris & Osterman, 2004) and acknowledge their responsibility according to the

severity of situation (Rigby, 2002).

Studies have been unable to find strong evidence on relationship between parental

attitude to bullying and children’s behavior (Eslea & Smith, 2000; Hanif, Nadeem &

Tariq, 2011). Parents’ attitude is reflected in ways they discuss the problem with their

children.It has been observed that parents either would not chat about such issues with
 20

their children or often talk about being bullied than about bullying others. Moreover,

there is some evidence that parents of targeted female students were more likely than

parents of targeted boys to have a discussion with them about their experiences

(Houndoumadi & Pateraki, 2001). As far as parents’ active intervening role after being

aware of child’s involvement in bullying is concerned, a Dutch study (Fekkes et al.,

2005) of elementary school students suggests that intervening the situation often results

in reducing the frequency of bullying, or worsen it. Hence, it can be suggested that

parents’ acknowledgement of the issue, openness to sharing experiences with children,

teachers’ understanding and seriousness about the problem and vigilant adult supervision

can prevent peer victimization.

Theoretical Framework of Bullying

A brief overview of theoretical framework may provide further insight to the

underlying mechanisms of peer bullying and victimization.

A variety of personal characteristics like temperaments, personality, and several

other psychological aspects of individual have been examined within broader contexts

and the interaction has been well explained in terms of social-ecology of bullying

(Swearer, Espelage, & Nepolitano, 2009). Cognitive explanation of bullying behavior and

its affective domain is highlighted The context of peer interactions pertaining to bullying

dilemma has been discussed in the light of theories such as dominance theory by

Pellegrini (2002), attraction theory of Bukowski, Sippola, and Newcomb (2000) and the

homophily hypothesis discussed by Cairns and Cairns (1994) and Espelage, Holt, and

Henkel (2003).
 21

Dominance Theory

Bullying is known to be an intentional act used to achieve and maintain authority

and control over weaker individuals. Pellegrini (2002) has argued about the need to

redefine the domination and assertiveness status by students within new peer circles

formed as a result of transition to middle school. This is one explanation of peak bullying

experiences during early adolescence. The social dominance viewpoint therefore suggests

that individuals are arranged into a hierarchy where everyone is placed according to the

varying access to available resources such as number of friends and individual standing

amongst them. Pellegrini and Burndt (2001) have speculated that using aggressive

strategies may ascertain dominance within peer relationship and the peer group then

gradually acknowledges the individual in the role of superior status.

Attraction Theory

Early adolescence is the period of attempting more freedom and independence

rather than remaining dependent on parents. Attraction theory claims that these

youngsters urge to affiliate with age fellows who seem to enjoy more liberty and reflect

greater autonomy (e.g. showing aggression and assertiveness), and less complaisant

attitude (e.g., conforming, helping behavior; Bukowski et al., 2000; Moffitt, 1993).

Bukowski and colleagues (2000) used play characters in their research and identified that

children’s attraction to aggressive students increased upon the transition to middle school,

while appeal to peers who had high classroom competency (e. g. noble and pro-social)

decreased. It suggested that involvement in bullying behavior as perpetrator could result

from appeal towards an aggressive peer in order to gain similar status and power.
 22

Homophily Hypothesis

Peer groups are also formulated on the basis of shared characteristics of

individuals for example “homophily,” (Berndt, 1982; Kandel, 1978). These common

attributes may include demographic and behavioral characteristics (e.g., gender, race,

intellectual focus, misbehavior). Cairns and Cairns (1994) found support for homophily

hypothesis in relation to peer interactions and violent behavior during early adolescence.

Peers tend to associate themselves with students having comparable levels of aggression,

and they eventually persuade each other. In a study by Espelage et al., (2003) overall peer

aggression proved to be a precursor students’ individual level of verbal aggression over a

school term. The findings were consistent across gender. Although aggression is

considered as a stable tendency, yet its escalated amount during middle school years can

be attributed to the nature of peer relationships.

Social-ecology of Bullying

Among different theories pervading the literature, social- ecology of bullying has

been popular among researchers (Liu & Graves, 2011).

Numerous studies have outlined a social- ecological model of bullying behavior

based on Bronfenbrenner’s (1979) famous ecological theory. Ecological and socio-

ecological models of bullying behavior discuss the multifaceted interaction between

individual traits and their broader social set up across early childhood and adolescence

(Swearer et al., 2006). Bullying and victimization are reciprocally affected by personal

characteristics of the student, family background and socialization practices, school, peer
 23

group, neighboring community, society and culture. Individual predispositions and

previous experience of victimization may place children at risk to bullying, but the

ratification of behavior may subject to the context and situation that consequently

promote or restrain such behavior (Espelage & De La Rue, 2011). The ecological

perspective not only considers the immediate developmental scenario, such as the

emotional environment provided by parents or teachers, but also broader context, that

may not include contributors the directly yet exerts an influence on them (Barboza et al.,

2009).

Cognitive and Social-Cognitive Perspectives

Since neurobiological factor directly influence cognitive processes, theories

addressing cognitive aspects of bullying are linked to the findings from researches on

anatomical and functional neuro-deficits. While antisocial behavior patterns and

psychopathological tendencies has been linked with to emotional dys-regulation,

postulating the impacts to amygdale damage; disorganized behavioral patterns such as

impulsivity and hyperactivity have been related to brain dysfunction (i.e. frontal lobe

injuries) (Liu & Wuerker, 2005). Segun (2004) has also speculated that the structures

associated with violent and aggressive behaviors could also relate to bullying behavior.

The aspect of cognitive functioning in bullying has been discussed in terms Social

Information Processing (SIP) model (Crick & Dodge, 1994) and the Theory of Mind

(ToM) skills (Sutton, Smith, & Swettenham, 1999; Sutton & Keogh, 2001). Both models

differ in their view point regarding the interpretation of social information by aggressive

youth. While Crick and Dodge (1994) claimed for the social skill deficit related to
 24

aggression and bullying, Sutton and colleagues (1999) supported the notion of

Machiavellianism in bullying. SIP approach explains bullying behavior in terms of a

processing bias and impairment in some of the stages proposed in the model (See Figure

1.1). The first step includes encoding of sensory information within a particular social

context into fragments of knowledge, which is interpreted by the child during second step

(2) followed by goal clarification and selection (step 3). In the next step (4), child seeks

the response options or creates it on account of its assumed value and appraisal of

available resource. After selecting the most suitable option (step 5), the child finally

enacts the behavioral response (step 6).

Theory of Mind (ToM), by Sutton and colleagues (1999), is defined as children’s

capability to attribute mental states in terms of their own ideas, convictions, wishes and

intentions to themselves and others, and to employ that information to envisage and

comprehend behavior. Therefore, this approach proposes that many of the bullies at least

may have superior social skills rather than inadequate, provided that they are capable of

manipulating their peers and achieve their endeavor. Rather than considering all bullies

as incompetent in social skills and abilities, it has been proposed that several bullies

might be more accurate in perceiving their social worlds, and implement the facts for

their private benefits. This might be pertinent in the case of relational bullying, that

requires social intelligence so as to influence victims’ thinking by gossiping or spreading

rumors (Kaukiainen et al., 1999).

Nevertheless, these theories provide insight to the social cognitive perspective of

the phenomenon. Huesmann’s explanation of aggression within theoretical model of

social information processing (as cited in McMahon, Felix, Halpert, & Petropoulous,
 25

2009) has emphasized the role of normative beliefs and attitudes that serve as a filter

between observing aggression and demonstrating it likewise. Experiencing violence in

community violence can lead to development of more vengeful attitude and malicious

beliefs sustaining aggression in youth. Such circumstances result in developing low self-

efficacy and poor locus of control in turn leading to elevated levels of aggression

(McMahon et al., 2009). Findings suggest that not only cognitive discrepancies but

normative beliefs and attitudes also play an important role in understanding social

behaviors within environmental context. The view appears to support the social

information processing theory. Children having aggressive tendencies may perceive,

understand and opt for responses in a manner that enhances the probability of

involvement in aggressive behavior (Crick & Dodge, 1994).

In addition, the SIP model also submits the role of emotions, even though these

were not included in the earlier model (Crick & Dodge, 1994; Dodge, 1986) but

incorporated afterwards (Lemerise & Arsenio, 2000).

Interactive Models of Bullying

Researchers have evaluated various theoretical models explaining bullying

behavior and attempted to merge them within socio-ecological frame work by examining

microsystem (family environment, peers, and school environment), exosystem and

macrosystems (immigration, poverty) related to involvement in bullying.

Liu and Graves (2011) evaluated major theoretical constructs addressing the

correlates of bullying and grouped certain theories into single perspective. The peer

context has been discussed within ethological perspective. The ethological structure

observes bullying from the standpoint of its advantageousness, such as in the course of
 26

natural selection or Darwinian evolution. Dominance is related to the urge of being

powerful and it is characterized by both negative (e.g., fighting, showing aggression and

bullying peers) and positive behaviors (e.g., leadership, guidance, compromise, center of

attention). Such behaviors are used by persons to struggle for esteemed social resources

in the beginning of group organization as Pellegrini, (2002) has discussed in dominance

theory. Affiliation also relates to dominance at initial stages of group formation. Thus the

perspective also incorporates the standpoint offered by attraction theory and homophile

premise.

The authors have argued about the role of autonomic patterns explaining

aggressive behavior among youth and highlighted the role of genetic and biological

perspective affecting bullying behavior. Autonomic dys-regulation in combination with

environmental influences and hormonal imbalance are identified as risk factors related to

bullying. Liu and Graves (2011) considered ecological approach as not only an

explanation of contextual factors, rather an outlook of temporal facets of bullying

behavior. Social cognitive perspective takes into account the social-information

processing models explaining aggressive behavior and its neurological correlates. The

mediating role of normative beliefs while interpreting social behavior in the light of

cognitive abilities has also been discussed by the authors within the context of bullying.

Postigo, González, Montoya, and Ordoñez (2013) have presented an integrative

global framework of peer harassment that mainly takes into account the two well-

established theoretical perspectives. The contextual-ecological approach and transactional

developmental model have been merged along with certain other theoretical explanations
 27

of bullying and victimization. The reciprocal interaction and impact of different variables

has been elucidated by classifying them according to their underlying mechanisms.

Starting from individual dynamics of victims, active victims and bullies, the

authors move to the socialization agents and explain the aspects of familial and peer

group processes associated with bullying. This micro system incorporates specific

theories such as victimization has been explained in terms of learned helplessness, and

bullying with reference to the elements of social cognition such as shame management,

theory of mind, social information processing (SIP) and moral disengagement. Active

victims have been portrayed in the light of frustration-aggression process, theory of mind

and SIP. Notions of social learning and attachment theories better describe the family;

whereas peer group influences have been illustrated by social identity, dominance and

diffusion of responsibility.

Meso-system, the second part of the integrative model demonstrates the social

networks and school related aspects of bullying and victimization. Finally the macro

system has been explained with reference to the social groups and attitudes influenced by

social identity process and the broader effect of mass media described in terms of social

learning viewpoint.

The model best describes the relevance of each theory to specific stage and role

in bullying process. It also provides an insight to the interplay of various systems and

addresses all the stakeholders directly or indirectly related to peer harassment. Cultural

aspect should be taken into account while interpreting and employing the model to

empirical research.
 28

Antecedents/Factors of Bullying Behavior

Individual Characteristics

Genetic factor may contribute to the children’s victimization status although

findings from twin studies have found low support for it and created controversies

(Brendgren et al., 2008, 2011). The mechanisms of influence may operate through

temperaments, cognitive and affective capabilities and patterns of social interaction (Ball

et al., 2008; Farrington & Baldry, 2010). At individual level, children’s physical and

psychological disability and academic weakness may also be important reasons for which

they become the targets of bullying (Llewellyn, 2000).

Other individual factors may include their physical appearance such as color or

the clothes they wear, temperament and certain characteristics of personality. Perry,

Hodges & Egan (2001) discovered an association between poor self-concept and risk of

being bullied. These children have low levels of self-esteem, competence and find

themselves helpless in critical situations like bullying incident. Individual traits interact

with other factors such as family, environment, and community; that can be better

explained within social-ecological framework of bullying.

Family

Patterns of family socialization also play role in maintaining bullying and

victimization (Patterson et al., 1992). Living in over-protective and entangled family

creates a sense of insecurity, dependence and lack of confidence and these characteristics

adhere to victimization experience. Contrarily, children who bully others may belong to

families who lack warmth and affection, have conflicting disciplinary practices and are
 29

engaged in hostile and violent behavior. The bully-victim group may be nurtured in a

distressed or abusive family set up (Nickerson, Mele, & Osborne-Oliver, 2010). Over

criticizing the child, maltreatment and aggressive domestic atmosphere are also linked

with involvement in bullying (Holt et al., 2009).Parental negligence, lack of interest and

involvement in their behaviors may serve as a predictor of children’s involvement in

bullying as a perpetrator (Flouri & Buchanan, 2003). Lack of adult supervision during

childhood and adolescence can increase the risk of bullying (Espelage, Bosworth, &

Simon, 2000).

With respect to family structure and income, whereas school children in England

who belonged to non-intact families reported more bullying there was no association

between earnings and bullying (Flouri & Buchanan, 2003). Larger family size is also

considered an important correlate of bullying. Children living with more siblings are

more prone to bully others (Eslea & Smith, 2000).

Olweus (1980) in Scandinavia and DeVoe and Kaffenberger (2005) failed to

establish any association between family’s socioeconomic status and experiences of

bullying suggesting the similar distribution of bullies and victims across all level. On the

other hand, In Netherlands family’s poor socioeconomic status contributed more to the

risk of involvement in bullying behavior than school’s location in terms of disadvantaged

neighborhoods (Jansen et al., 2012).

School

School factors are characterized by school climate, school rules and policies and

implication of anti-bullying programs and teacher-student relationship (Troop-Gordon &

Quenelle, 2010).These factors exert a significant impact on the student and the learning
 30

environment. Benbenishty and Astor (2005) have presented a heuristic model addressing

the broader context of school violence and considered school related variables as central

and more important contributors than individual factors.

Unjust and imprecise rules and their incompatible and controversial

implementation may also result in boosting violent behaviors and misconduct.

Furthermore, disciplinary mismanagement, lack of coordination between teachers and

school administration and rigid attitude of teachers also encourage violence at school.

Structural features and physical environment of the school such as school size, class room

conditions, teacher-pupil ratio and surrounding community are also associated with

violence at school (Gottfredson et al., 2005).

Lack of interest by teacher in efforts to stop bullying has been widely documented

by researchers (Dupper & Meyer-Adams, 2002; Houndoumadi & Pateraki, 2001). This

belief is strengthened by reports on perception of students who mostly find the situation

hopeless and consider that teacher and their peers do not seriously attempt to stop

bullying at school (Adair, Dixon, Moore, & Sutherland, 2000; Unnever & Cornell, 2003).

School’s response to aggressive behaviors is also an important factor. In situations where

school staff and administration turn a blind eye and overlook the incidents of school

bullying, the students perceive the aggressive behavior as tolerable and ordinary.

Peer Group at School

Lack of social support at school such as fewer numbers of close and trust worthy

friends or having friends who are not weaker themselves can be a significant risk factor

of victimization. It has been observed that social rejection and ostracisms contributes a

great deal in being bullied by peers. Salmvalli (2010) found that bullying is sometimes
 31

aimed to enhance one’s popularity and social domination. Bystanders are important social

agents in bullying process. Those who have more pro-social behaviors like empathy and

also possess good social reputation can serve as effective and active defenders of victims

(Nickerson, Mele, & Princiotta, 2008; Caravita et al., 2009). Bullying may also result

from social identity process including in-group recognition and confirming to group

norms (Jones, Haslam, York, & Ryan, 2008; Jones, Livingstone, & Manstead, 2011,

2012).

Society and Culture

Neighborhood violence, financial conditions, overall ratio of violence in a culture,

media portrayal and economic inequality are some of the major reasons promoting

aggressive tendencies among school students. Pervasiveness of child abuse, delinquency,

hostility, and other externalizing behaviors in children and adolescents have been related

to community demographics (Coulton, Korbin, Su, & Chow, 1995; Jonson-Reid, 1998;

Plybon & Kliewer, 2001). Researchers to study society and community related variables

in the context of school bullying are sparse (Cox, 1997). A Swedish study of middle

school pupils identified that perpetrators of school bullying were equally involved in

aggressive and delinquent behaviors in the community. Being a target of violence at

community level can also lead to involvement in bullying at school (Andershed, Kerr, &

Stattin, 2001).

Research on relationship between socioeconomic status and bullying encompasses

mixed outcomes. While a Whitney and Smith (1993) confirmed a strong inverse

relationship between these two variables, Sourander, Helstelä, & Helenius, (2000) failed
 32

to demonstrate any significant link between bullying and SES. A recent meta- analysis of

studies in US during past two decades concluded that adolescents belonging to poor

socioeconomic status were more likely to experience severe kinds of bullying (Fu, Land,

& Lamb, 2012).

A review of these factors accounting for students’ involvement in bullying have

led us to conclude that differences in psychosocial competencies and maladaptive peer

relationships should be investigated to understand the nature of bullying and

victimization. It is also noteworthy as how pupils differ in their emotional capabilities

and social skills that increase the likelihood of being a bully or a victim. Keeping in view

the bullying associated with social and psychological difficulties (Alikasifoglu et al.,

2007), it is essential to study these aspects in relation to the theoretical approaches which

map the underlying mechanisms and elucidate the process of bullying. Therefore, we

shall have a closer look on the following important dimensions by that could contribute to

bullying.

1. Affective Processes

2. Peer Interactions

Affective Processes and Social Cognition in Bullying

Affect is a broad term covering a wide range of feelings that individuals may

experience. It’s an inclusive concept that comprises both emotions and moods (George,

1996). Emotions are profound feelings that are aimed at someone or something (Farijda,

1993). Emotions are usually associated with particular situation and are considered more

transient than moods. Additionally, emotions are more vivid and expression is revealed

by non-verbal behavior e.g. facial expression Moods are feelings likely to be less
 33

powerful than emotions and mostly occur without a contextual spur (Weiss &

Cropanzano, 1996). Moods are regarded to be more cognitive and may impel us to

ponder or speculate before taking an action, whereas emotion are thought to be more

action-oriented leading towards prompt response (Ekman & Davidson, 1994). Studies

admit that emotions and moods are mutually influenced by each other.

Reber and Reber (2001) defined emotions as specific labels referring to the affect-

laden states and the process of assigning them to a distinct category correctly from

categories available in specific culture is referred to as emotion recognition. Emotion

recognition tasks mainly focus on response accuracy in identifying labels and associated

time to assess performance of the respondents. Researchers may use different sensory

modalities (e.g. vision, audition), yet most of the studies have examined non-verbal cues

of emotions such as facial expressions, body postures and gestures.

Relationship between children’s social inadequacy and mechanisms of social

cognition can be potentially mediated by affective processes (Lemerise & Arsenio, 2000).

Lemerise and Arsenio (2000) incorporated emotions into each step of the SIP model. The

emotions articulated by other peers, for example, may persuade the encoding (step 1) and

interpretation (step 2) of social indications, in addition to mood, which also affects the

other steps. People not only vary in encoding and expressing their own emotions, but also

understanding and decoding the emotions of other people and such variations have been

linked to social competence (Burks, Laird, Dodge, Pettit, & Bates, 1999). Moreover,

children’s mood states may also affect the interpretation of social situations and they

differ in ability to regulate these immersed emotions. Therefore, children preoccupied

 34

with certain mood may incorrectly identify the emotions of their peers thus increasing the

likelihood of maladjusted social situation and aggressive behaviors.

Facial Affect Recognition

Facial expressions present precise information that allows the perceiver to

differentiate between a number of negative and positive emotions (Ekman & Oster,

1979). The cognitive stance of emotion recognition argues the existence of contextual

and social influences (Fox, 2004). In order to understand aggression in children aside

from social skill deficit, we shall have to look more systematically into the role of

affective processes in social competence, (e.g. social reasoning and behavior).

Researchers have not only studied the disruptive impacts of emotions, but also

highlighted the importance of emotion recognition accuracy and emotional

responsiveness as mechanism of defense against bullying and reactive aggression

(Eisenberg & Fabes, 1992; Lemerise & Arsenio, 2000). Blair (1999) suggested that,

high levels of psychopathy in children and adolescents was associated with emotion

recognition deficits specifically sadness and fear. These two emotions are considered to

facilitate aggression inhibition. Other investigations demonstrated that those who are

abandoned ignored and named aggressive by their peers made more errors in recognizing

others’ emotions and interpreting relevant contextual precursors of the situation than

popular children (Bilello, Casiglia, Lo Coco, & Miceli, 1995; Ciucci, Tomada, De

Domini, & Tassi, 1993).

Researchers have employed SIP model in understanding bullying mechanism

especially with reference to relational bullying and reactive proactive aggression (Arsenio
 35

and Lemerise, 2001; Camodeca, Goossens, Schuengel, & Terwogt, 2003). Studies have

demonstrated emotion recognition deficits in relation to involvement in bullying as well

(Woods, Wolke, Nowicki, & Hall, 2009), yet there is controversy regarding bully/victim

groups. Like aggressive and delinquent children, bullies might have an inability to

perceive the expressions of other student’s emotions accurately that could result in

violent behavior. Using the framework offered by Sutton et al. (1999) we can expect

bullies to recognize emotions as accurately as uninvolved students. Victims on the other

hand might not be able to interpret the social/emotional cues in a threatening situation

and thus remain unable to avoid or defend themselves. Such tendency is likely to be

thrived by pre-existing mood state which may hamper the cue encoding and interpretation

stage of SIP (Schmid & Schmid Mast, 2010). Therefore studying mood states might have

practical implications for investigating emotion recognition abilities of bully/victim

groups.

Mood Congruent Attentional Bias

It has been suggested that 'mood congruence' takes place when an individual

displays a positive association between his or her mood and the variable measured;

basically, any increase or decrease in mood strength reflects into the change in the

performance on dependent variable correspondingly. On the contrary, 'mood

incongruence' requires the individual to demonstrate an inverse relationship between

mood and the outcome variable; consequently, mood elevation results in decrease in

performance and vice versa. Mood cognition agenda (Bower, 1987) accentuates that

temporary moods result in the favored processing of information compatible to these

 36

moods. Consequently, sad mood amplifies negative cognitions regarding the self, brings

about negative world view, and thereby turn out in persistent negative affect (Beck,

1967).

Affect Infusion Model (AIM)

Active engagement in certain mood and affect laden information persuades the

evaluation process finally results in shaping the judgments and decision making (Forgas,

1995). The phenomenon is called affect infusion model (AIM) that has been studied in

the context of experimental mood induction and its significant impact on social cognition

in different age groups. It suggests that positive moods are linked to top-down processing

strategies (Gasper, 2003); negative moods, on contrary, are related to more in-depth,

bottom-up processing strategies (Gasper, 2003; Martin & Clore, 2001).

Participants in a study by Tamir and Robinson (2007) tend to focus more on

positive words when induced with happy mood, yet there has been less support to mood

related attentional bias for negative induction. Although Bradley, Mogg, & Lee, (1997)

provided evidence for mood congruency effect under negative mood induction, other

studies could not demonstrate similar effect (Chepenik, Cornew, & Farah, 2007;

Gallardo, Baños, Belloch, & Rupierez, 1999; McCabe, Gotlib, & Martin, 2000). There is

also a tendency to label indistinct facial expressions as sad when individuals are in sad

mood (Bouhyys, Bloem, & Groothuis, 1995; Lee, Ng, Tang, & Chann, 2008). Positive

and negative moods may also hamper the identification of mood-incongruent

expressions; the recognition of mood congruent expressions was not affected by moods.
 37

To study the effect of mood on any of the stages of Social information Processing

(SIP), an effective mood induction technique and reliable procedure is required. The

present research focuses on school bullying especially the students studying in

elementary grades; it is important to have an overview of the procedures available for

mood priming in child samples.

Mood Induction Procedures for Children

The trajectories of children’s affective development have shown that the skill to

manage emotional experiences rapidly increases during middle childhood (Meerum

Terwogt, 1984, 1986; Meerum Terwogt, & Olthof, 1989). Hence it can be supposed that

the ability to counteract negative mood outcome will develop consequently. Therefore, a

6-year-old child is likely to exhibit a stronger negative mood bias as compared to a 10

year old, while the strength of a positive mood bias is not affected by age (as cited in

Stegge, Terwogt, & Koops, 1994).

Mood induction techniques provide a valuable means to explore emotions inside

the laboratory setting, when measurement in ecologically-valid situations seems

impractical or unfeasible. Numerous investigations have been conducted to study

children’s emotions and mood induction procedures (Erber & Erber, 1994; Harper,

Lemerise, & Caverly, 2010). Several mood induction procedures exist for inducing mood

states as described earlier in introduction. Studies have offered conflicting findings

regarding the effectiveness of different brief and elaborated techniques. Researchers

should be more cautious and careful while manipulating mood among child samples.

Methods of mood induction stab to generate an emotion that is closer to the original
 38

within the laboratory set up. Researchers have speculated that certain provoked moods

such as happy, sad, and neutral are suitable analogues of naturally-arousing emotions in

children (Barden, Garber, Duncan, &Masters, 1981). Even though a few researchers

suggested that emotions in induced form are not as much of deep and strong than

emotions that occur naturally, induced emotions are still considerably significant (Martin,

1990). Despite mixed findings regarding the efficacy of mood induction procedures

among children, it is yet very important to explore emotions and mood states in young

ones during their middle childhood and early adolescence because of the importance of

early investigation of affective processes (Forgas et al., 1988).

Brenner (2000) has evaluated a number of mood induction procedures for

children using experimenter behavior and instructions, guided imagery, written and

verbal scripts, suggestive videos, feedback about performance, material rewards, musical

excerpts, autobiographical recall, social situations and watching faces. Video-based mood

priming proved to be more advantageous as compared to other techniques for its

convenient use and enduring outcomes. These methods were found to be equally useful

for inducing certain positive and negative affect states such as happiness, sadness, anger

and fear. Moreover, these techniques minimize the risk of demand characteristics due to

standardized administration procedures (Pagliaccio et al., 2012).

Authors have suggested that effects of pleasant mood manipulations is more long

lasting than unpleasant ones and therefore should be conducted at the end (Carlson &

Masters, 1986). Furthermore, experimenter should address and effectively deal with the

impacts of negative mood inductions as an ethical concern. Mood manipulation check is

another important issue while dealing with child samples. A variety of procedures are
 39

available, some of which assess the dimensional aspect of affect (e.g. positive and

negative), and others measure the specific type of emotion intended to induce (e.g.

happiness, sadness). It has been observed that simple forced choice task yield significant

and consistent results for children as compared to adults (Kratus, 1993). Dolgin and

Adelson (1990) found considerable variations when more alternatives were offered, and

when the responses were evaluated on the basis of accuracy. Both visual analogue scales

and verbal response format have been used by researchers as mood manipulation checks

(Cunningham, 1988; Robazza, Pellizzari, & Hanin, 1994).

Peer Interactions

Children’s social development, emotional adjustment and well-being have been

frequently associated with their peer relations especially during pre-adolescence

(Bagwell, 2004; Dunn, 2004; Schneider, 2000). Children’s activities and practices during

peer interactions have been associated with their social skills and competence (Zeller,

Vannatta, Schaffer, & Noll, 2003) that mostly result in greater adjustment in family

relationships, attachment and intimacy (Doğan, Karaman, & Çoban, 2012; Field,

Diegoi, & Sanders, 2002), academic performance (Rabaglietti & Ciairano, 2008),

personal well-being and satisfaction and success (Çevik Büyükşahin, 2007; Keefe &

Berndt, 1996; Ladd, Kachenderfer, & Coleman, 1996).

The Quality of Friendship

Researchers have distinguished between group-based and dyadic forms of

interactions and relationships; and friendship is the most comprehensively investigated

 40

construct at dyadic level (Bukowski, Newcomb, & Hartup, 1996). Friendship is a close,

reciprocal and voluntary bond and affection that is mainly characterized by positive

features (Berndt, 2002; Schmidt & Bagwell, 2007). In his influential effort on studying

relationships throughout the lifespan, Sullivan (1953) used the term chumpkins to

describe close, same-sex friendships that he considered to be predominantly significant

during middle childhood and early adolescence (Berndt, 2004). Children become more

aware and conscious about long-term relationships during this phase of life (Parker &

Seal, 1996).

Role of Friendship Quality in Bullying Experience

Friendship is usually evaluated in terms of its quality. Friendship quality is a

multifaceted phenomenon comprising both positive and negative attributes. Friendship

quality can be determined by certain inter linked positive (e.g., care, companionship,

trust, self-disclosure, help and guidance, closeness, commitment, warmth, support,

conflict resolution) characteristics and a few negative features for example conflict,

jealousy, deception, and rivalry (Parker & Asher, 1993; Berndt, 1998; Rubin, Bukowski

& Laursen, 2009) associated with it. Yet, a high quality friendship incorporates more

positive features; friendships are thought to be high in quality when they have high levels

of positive features and low levels of negative features (Berndt, 2002; Schmidt &

Bagwell, 2007). Berndt (2002) further discussed that actually positive features contribute

to high and low dimension of friendship quality. On the other hand, overlapping in

positive features may affect the assessment of friendship quality as argued by Thien and

Nordin (2012).
 41

Friendship often serves the purpose of being a pro protective buffer against

various negative factors that occur in individual’s life. Thereby, it is considered as one of

the factors that can prevent the process of bullying. Individuals that have low level

quality of friendship express tendencies towards both bullying and victimization (Berndt,

2002). In this case, the quality of friendship is a determining factor towards its protective

capacity. If the children involved in the process of bullying do not have friends that

would support them, they are more likely to be victimized (Bollmer, Milich, Harris, &

Maras, 2005). On the other hand, if there are friends that are able to support the victim or

to oppose the process of bullying, it is more likely not to occur again.

There are also many studies that classify the victimized children as the group that

demonstrate more feelings of isolation and a fewer number of friends as compared to

other groups involved in bullying behavior (Didaskalou, Andreou, & Vlachou, 2009;

Forero, 2013; Juvonen et al., 2003; Storch, Brassard, & Masia-Warner, 2003). According

to other findings, bullies are more socially competent in making friends, and report lesser

seclusion or rejection (Nansel et al., 2001). Whether the friendship quality is influenced

by involvement in bullying or it serves as a buffer influence alongside is an issue to be

addressed with caution.

The researches show that the children with high quality friendship are less likely

to express patterns of bullying behavior or to be the bystanders in the process. Regardless

of the patterns of behavior, the existence of friendship positively influences one’s social

interactions (Berndt, 2002). However, if the person expresses the qualities associated

with bullying behavior, they are less likely to obtain the high-quality friendship.
 42

It can be concluded that besides social-cognitive discrepancies, children involved

in bullying behaviors demonstrate maladaptive peer relationships. In addition, affective

processes and patterns of peer interactions influence the short and long term emotional

adjustment and aspects of social development that significantly contributes to children’s

overall wellbeing.

Consequences/Effects of Bullying

Bullying bears poor behavioral, social, emotional and cognitive outcomes at

personal level. These consequences of bullying are deleterious and touch not only

offenders and victims (Gini & Pozzoli, 2009) but also the bystanders (Nishina &

Juvonen, 2005). Nevertheless, the toll is greater for those who are directly involved in it

as offenders and sufferers than those who are indirectly associated with bullying or

remain uninvolved. At larger level, negative outcomes of bullying influence the school‘s

quality, learning and social environment (Osterman, Björkqvist, & Kaukiaine, 1998) and

contribute to the prevalence of criminal behavior in society. Long- term effects include

mental health issues in adulthood (Smokowiski & Kopasz, 2005; Ttofi, Farrington, Losel,

& Loeber, 2011), antisocial, legal convictions (Farrington, 1993; Olweus 1992).

Effects on Victims

Students who experience victimization, often report seclusion, low self-esteem,

poor academic performance, fewer number of close friends, have a cynical view of

school, face health issue both physical and psychological. They are also more prone

towards psychosomatic complaints such as sleep disturbances and bed wetting (Due, et

al., 2005). They usually remain upset and anxious about what happens to them at school
 43

(Ybarra, Boyd, Korchmaros, & Oppenheim, 2012). In general, maladaptive outcomes of

victimization mainly comprise internalizing problems. Victims tend to be apprehensive

and fretful, alone, sad, depressed, insecure, reserve and overly compliant (Frost, 1991;

Hawker & Boulton, 2000; Olweus, 1989).

School adjustment is another issue faced by victims. Their apprehension of the

bullying incidence results in school avoidance and absenteeism that ultimately affects

their academic performance (Kochendrfer & Ladd, 1996; Juvonen et al, 2001). Low

achievement at school and poor performance are variedly associated with bullying. Some

researchers have linked it to victimization (Myerd & Joseph, 1997) while others have

found it within bully-victim group or the perpetrators of bullying (Nansel et al., 2001).

Victims also show poorer problem-solving skills than those who have not been bullied.

Effects on Bullies

Behavioral correlates of bullying perpetration include risk-taking behavior,

smoking, drug use (Berthold & Hover, 2000; Nansel, et al., 2001) and other problems

mostly externalizing in nature. It has been found that involvement in bullying as offender

strengthened antisocial and violent attitude as school bullies were frequently involved in

criminal activities as adults (Olweus, 1992). Bullies are penalized for disciplinary issue,

may harm others outside the school as well engage in self-destructive behaviors (as cited

in Dake, Price, & Telljohann, 2003).

Bullies also face problems in school adjustment that affects their academic

achievement adversely (Nansel et al., 2001). Perpetrators of bullying are exposed to

disrupted academic and social life at school that may result in delinquency and conduct
 44

problems in later life (Farrington &Welsh, 2005). As compared to victim and bully-

victim groups, bullies are less likely to experience internalizing problems, such as

depression, anxiety, psychosomatic complaints and other health problems(Duck, 2005;

Kokkinos & Panayiotou, 2004). Whereas Brunstein-Klomek, Marrocco, Kleinman,

Schonfeld and Gould (2007) demonstrated that perpetrators are as likely as maltreated

children to report these kinds of symptoms.

Effects on Bully-Victim Group

Studies have suggested that bully-victim group may show the poorest functioning

as they experience both internalizing and externalizing problems and health related issues

as compared to pure bullies or pure victims (Nansel, Craig, Overpeck, Saluja, & Ruan

2004; Veenstra et al., 2005). Nansel, Overpeck et al. (2001) have also demonstrated

similar kind of findings that students who experience and perpetrate bullying are more

likely to demonstrate maladjustment across social and affective domains in comparison

with bullies. Wolke, William, Adrian, and Costello (2013) have discussed the devastating

outcomes of being a victim and bully simultaneously that exhibits in feelings of

helplessness and social deficits continue to influence the individual in adulthood as well.

Bully-victims may also suffer financially as adults as they are less consistent at their jobs

like pure bullies (Wolfe et al., 2001). Involvement in bullying at school as both offender

and target is associated with the probability of worst mental health outcomes and illegal

behaviors later in adulthood.

Researchers have asserted that bullying may result in academic failure, health

issues, loss of social relations and a variety of cognitive, affective and behavioral
 45

problems (Duncan, 1999; Sullivan, 2000; Selekman & Vessey, 2004). A number of

factors have been associated with bullying and its consequences. In fact certain

individual, family, school, and societal aspects have been found to interact reciprocally in

determining bullying behavior or explaining its outcomes. Regarding detrimental

repercussions of bullying, we shall mainly focus on academic performance of students

since the academic toll of both being bullied and bullying others is high (Juvonen, Wang,

& Espinoza, 2011).

Academic Achievement and Peer Interactions

Studies have emphasized the importance of children and adolescents’ academic

competencies and identified several psychosocial correlates. Ma and colleagues (2009)

defined academic competence has been defined as skills and capabilities considered

necessary for success in school which is specified by concrete or perceived academic

achievement (i.e. grade point average). High levels of perceived social support from

family and peer has been linked to higher grades in exams (Ma, Phelps, Lerner, & Lerner,

2009; Rosenfeld, Richman, & Bowen, 2000).Research has also demonstrated that the

majority of students, who have positive peer interactions and intimate dyadic

relationships such as friendship, do well academically (Fantuzzo, Sekino, & Cohen,

2004). This salience of peer factors in academic performance of students is evident and

requires further exploring of the context and elements of this relationship. Breaking it

down to positive and negative dimensions, both quality of friendship and bullying has

been found to affect students’ academic performance (Erath, Flanagan, & Bierman, 2008;

Juvonen, Nishina, & Graham, 2000). Veronneau and Dishion (2011) suggested that

behavioral problems and friendship could interact to influence academic performance of

 46

students. Friendship provides a buffer against social and academic pressures (e.g.

victimization and poor performance). There is need to uncover the connections and the

present study aimed to fulfill that need studying both friendship quality and bullying and

their relationship with academic functioning of students.

Literature Review

Aggressive behavior that was once viewed naughtiness or misadventure as a

typical part of childhood has now emerged as a serious social and ethical issue at schools

and it is important to understand the cultural concerns of bullying phenomenon before

investigating any of its aspects, correlates, determinants and outcomes.

Cultural Differences in Research on Bullying

Cross-national discrepancy in defining bullying is subjected to different factors

such as behavioral inconsistencies, societal dissimilarities (individual /collective),

organizational structure of schools, and availability of suitable words from vocabulary

(Smith & Monks, 2008). According to APA database, researches dealing with the issue

of peer harassment and victimization could also be classified as bullying (as cited in

Postigo et al., 2013). Various terms have been used to describe the construct of

bullying across countries; therefore an insight to the indigenous aspect is crucial

before studying other components of the phenomenon (Carrera et al., 2011; Lee,

2011).

Smith and Monks, (2008) have emphasized the cautious use of words referring to

bullying experiences in various countries. It is very difficult to find a word corresponding

 47

bullying while translating the term in other languages that encompass the actual sense of

bullying. Inconsistencies have been found even across English speaking countries, for

example using victimization is more common in United States compared to bullying in

UK. A term rarely equals bullying in its meaning when translated into another language

as Smith and Monks (2008) had suggested.

The word that represents bullying in a certain language corresponds to the nature

of bullying behaviors that actually occur in a particular culture. Linguistic differences can

be avoided by emphasizing observed behaviors in a translation process; yet may not prove

to be very useful in translating bullying. “Ijime” has received much attention most recently

as the Japanese term for bullying; although it emphasizes more on psychological and

collective nature of the attack (Morita et al., 1999).

While reviewing the nature and extent of bullying and victimization in South

Korean schools Koo, Kwak, and Smith (2008) have identified some distinctive features.

Unlike Western countries, most of the Korean school students were involved in bullying as

perpetrators and the role was mostly reported by girls as compared to boys. The construct

of bullying named as ‘Wang ta’ in Korea was found to be less physical in nature, rather

verbal and relational forms were more common among students. For the sake of

international comparison, it is important to identify the most suitable replacement of word

bullying in some culture. Hence authors have emphasized to take the indigenous

perspective into account and conceptualize the phenomenon accordingly. The study used

senior version of Olweus Bully Victim Questionnaire after translation and adaptation for

Korean population of school aged children. With specific reference period and term Wang

Ta, Korean students were less likely to report victimization (5%) compared to previous
 48

studies (24% and 30 %) (Parken et al., 1999). The concept of Wang Ta and the associated

findings were consistent with findings on bullying explained by the term Ijmi in closely

related culture of Japan (Morita et al, 1999). In the light of their findings, authors have

postulated that nature of bullying is more collective in Asian countries as a result; verbal

assaults and social exclusions are more prevalent in Korea and Japan.

Among several other researchers attempting to define bullying; Smith and Monks

(2008) reflected upon the concept of bullying in its developmental and cultural context.

By extensively reviewing the fact from its origin through various transitions and

modifications in the definitions; they followed to a fuller explanation of bullying

suggested by Rigby (2002). It emphasized seven characteristics of bullying act being

purposeful, harmful, repetitive and unfair, including power differential, sense of pleasure

on behalf of perpetrator and feelings of oppression at victim’s end.

Bullying Statistics across the Globe

Prevalence estimates drawn from large scale national surveys in U.S during last 5

to ten years demonstrated various prevalence rates for school bullying, ranging from 11%

(Iannotti, 2012) to 20% (Eaton et al., 2012). Robers, Kemp, and Truman (2013) however

have established a rate of 28% as a result of School Crime Supplement reports. In another

study by Swearer, Espelage, Vailancourt, and Hymel (2010) prevalence estimates range

from 13 to 75 percent for U.S schools.

According to the most recent reports of U.S. Department of Health and Human

Services’ (DHHS, 2014) anti-bullying website, Stopbullying.gov, twenty percent of U.S.

students in grades 6-12 purportedly have experienced bullying. More than 70% students
 49

have reported witnessing bullying at their schools and nearly 30% youth confessed to be

involved in bullying others.

Earlier studies in Canada, nearly 15% of children reported bullying others; while

fewer (5%) students were found to be victimized (5%) of children reported bullying

others in school at younger age level (Charach, Pepler, & Ziegler, 1995; Craig, Peters &

Konarski, 1998). Later investigation by World Health Organization representing a

national sample found 5-13 % students as bullies and 9-21% as victims (Currie et al.,

2008).

While reporting the results from 40 European countries based on the Health

Behavior in School-Aged Children (HBSC) survey for year 2005-2006, Craig et al.

(2009) established prevalence estimates with a range of 8.6 % to 45.2 % for boys, and 4.8

% to 35.8 % for girls. In general, prevalence rates of bullying were lower in Scandinavian

countries as compared to other European regions that demonstrate the successful

intervention efforts especially the Olweus program. They observed a clear decline in

bullying among boys while age-related patterns were inconsistent for girls.

Results of a government survey in England have reported that 18% students

claimed that they had been bullied frequently at school during one month period

(Chamberlain, George, Golden, Walker & Benton, 2010). Jansen et al (2012) revealed a

more optimistic picture in the Netherlands by finding only 4% elementary school students

reported being bullied. On the other hand 17 % admitted themselves as bullies and 13%

reported as being bully victim. However, another recent finding from a large scale sample

representing all provinces, confirmed high victimization rates (31.8%) among students
 50

(Oldenburg et al, 2014). Alikasifoglu, et al. (2004) found that almost 30% students

reported victimization at Turkish schools.

Situation is not different in Australia where reports show a victimization rate of

27%, 32%, and 20% respectively especially in elementary schools (Cross et al, 2009;

Rigby, 2007).

Research in African countries also present the a bit different picture with almost

45% reports of students who had been bullied at least once in a month. Restricting the

criteria up to 10 days a month depicted decrease up to 7% (Brown, Riley, Butchart, &

Kann, 2008). High rates of bullying (16-61%) have been reported in South African

middle and high schools by different investigators (Mlisa, Ward, Flisher, & Lombard,

2008; Neser, Ovens, van der Merwe, Morodi, & Ladikos, 2003; Townsend, Flisher,

Chikobvu, Lombard, & King, 2008).

Bullying prevalence estimates from 36 countries in East Asia and Pacific region

have been discussed in the section of peer violence in a systematic review of research on

child maltreatment. Findings of studies recorded prevalence estimates of perpetration

ranging from 10.2% to 32.9 percent within probability samples whereas lower rates had

been reported within convenient samples (2.7% to 16.9%). Of these studies, 21 are

drawn from some type of probability sample and 12 are of school-based and convenience

samples with the remainder being qualitative studies. Victimization reports ranged from

5.8% to 35.5 % for probability samples and higher incidence (up to 70%) was recorded

within convenient samples. In addition the highest estimates of peer violence (70 % to

98%) had been reported in Mangolian sample (UNICEF, 2012).

 51

Asian countries except Japan recognized the problem later as compared to

Western countries. This region mostly comprises collectivistic culture and wide range of

diversity has been found for example admittance to the role of a perpetrator varied from

10.2% in Korea to nearly 33% in Thailand (Laeheem & Baka, 2009). Children who

reported themselves as targets of bullying were only 5.8% in Korea (Koo et al., 2008) and

35.5% in Philippines (Rudatsikira & Siziya, 2008). Kim, et al. (2004) had demonstrated a

bit higher rates for bullying (17%) and victimization (14%) in Korean schools. Around

20% Chinese middle school students experienced peer victimization during a period of 30

days (Hazemba, Siziya, Muula, & Rudatsikira, 2008). Japanese students are at greater

risk of bullying and victimization compared with American or South African students

(Dussich & Maekoya, 2007).

Solomon, Solomon, Toumbourou, and Catalan (2013) in a cross cultural study,

found lesser peer victimization rates among Indian students (25-31%) compared to the

Australian sample (41-45%). Another study by Kshirsagar, Agarwal, and Bavedekar

(2007) established the same trend in Indian schools (31%) with more reports of verbal

bullying followed by physical from. Results from a survey by World Health Organization

have depicted the worst picture in Pakistani schools by reporting an overall prevalence of

42% (Sheikh, 2013). Another recent source has established a rate of almost 20 to 24% for

children in 6th grade (Shujja, Atta, & Shujjat, 2014).

Statistics on bullying from different parts of the world indicate that bullying has

become a serious problem for school aged children that can be addressed by

implementing effective anti-bullying strategies.

 52

Individual Differences and Demographic Trends

Frequency and nature of bullying also varies according to children’s age and

grade level. Older children choose more subtle and indirect tactics for bullying others,

whereas younger children studying in elementary grades are more often involved in direct

forms of bullying (Craig et al., 2009). Bullying has usually been found to be most

common among middle school students (Nansel et al., 2001); however, studies have

recommended that bullying peaks during the time of school shifting such as elementary

to middle and middle to high school. Opposed to the findings of bullying peaked during

8th grade (Espelage, Holt, & Henkel, 2003), Olweus (1991) had reported higher incidence

among elementary grades. Reynolds (2003) found the bullying curve peaked during 6th,

8th and 12th grades and hypothesized these spikes to be associated with school transition

periods. This has been considered a critical period characterized by formation of new

groups bullying serves as a mean of achieving peer domination and control (Pellegrini et

al., 2011).

Being described as gendered concept (Rodkin & Berger, 2008), bullying needs to

be examined by underlying processes that account for the differences and similarities in a

given context. Studies found support for boys’ over-involvement in bullying perpetration

and victimization as compared to girls (Nansel et al., 2001; Pepler, Jiang, Craig &

Connolly, 2008). While arguing about such gender disparities, Underwood and Rosen

(2011) have emphasized to consider different forms of aggression used in the act of

bullying. Evidence clearly supported boys were overly involved in more direct forms of

aggression (verbal and physical) whereas the differences were less clear for relational
 53

aggression (Card, Stucky, Sawalani, & Little, 2008). Hence the authors have elucidated

the fact by using a broader term “social aggression” (previously discussed by

Underwood, 2003) comprising both direct and indirect, verbal and non-verbal dimensions

of relationship damage intended in such kind of bullying. They have discussed the role of

gender-stereotyping in explaining gender differences in traditional bullying according to

the type of aggression.

Underwood and Rosen (2011) have also analyzed how boys and girls conceive the

construct by providing empirical evidence from a large scale investigation including

countries from Asia and Europe (Smith, Cowic, Olaffson, & Lefooghe, 2002). Children

are able to distinguish among various forms of bullying during middle school years. The

findings reported no significant gender differences in conceptualization of bullying

phenomenon. Conversely, Vaillancourt et al. (2008) found that social aggression was

highlighted within definitions of bullying provided by girls. The authors have attempted

to unfold the social processes underlying bullying while reporting the contradictions

found in gender literature on bullying. There had been evidence for girls remaining either

uninvolved or assuming the role of defender against bullying while boys mostly acted as

perpetrators or reinforcers of bullying (Salmivalli, Lagerspetz et al., 1996; Espelage &

Holt, 2007). In contrary, results from an observational study on bullying intervention by

Hawkins, Pepler and Craig (2001) suggested that both boys and girls effectively

intervened within same gender discord. Yet the nature of intervention by girls was more

verbal as compared to boys.

The findings on gender differences in traditional bullying have been further

extended for cyber bullying reports that is considered a more subtle form of bullying.
 54

Since the rates of cyber bullying using various technologies have risen during recent

years, it is important to discuss if the gender based relational bullying hypothesis sought

approval or rejection in these investigations. Having stronger verbal abilities, girls have

been reported to be involved in cyber bullying more often than boys (Hertz & David-

Ferdon, 2008; Hinduja & Patchins, 2009; Kowalski, Limber, & Agatston, 2008).

However contradictions continue to persist about mean differences in cyber bullying

reports (Li, 2006; Raskauskas & Stoltz, 2007). It is truly the time to move beyond mere

averages as suggested by Underwood and Rosen (2011) for extending the investigations

to the core factors and course of action to explicate such inconsistencies that are more

likely to be attributed to conceptual and methodological issues. Finally, the authors have

stressed the cautious implementation of gender sensitive anti-bullying strategies.

Socioeconomic status (SES) is a potential risk factor in both bullying and

victimization. Findings have advocated the relationship between lower socioeconomic

status (SES) and risk of being bullied and suggested that these victims used to experience

more adverse psychosocial outcome as compared to the victims who belong to more

affluent social set up (Due, Damsgaard, Lund, & Holstein, 2009). Not only family’s

social status but the school neighborhood is also associated with bullying.

Jensen et al. (2012) explored how several indicators of SES are related to school

bullying and victimization in elementary grades. Parental education, employment status

and type and earnings indicated family SES, while school neighborhood SES was

confirmed by matching postal codes of school area to Netherlands’ official record of

SES. Socioeconomic gradient demonstrated noticeable diversity in prevalence of

different types of bullying and victimization. Consistent with prior findings, results
 55

showed association between family’s social disadvantages (e.g. parents’ younger age,

single status and lower level of education) and involvement in bullying perpetration.

Victimization was linked to parental education only. Socioeconomic status of family

predicted engagement in different bullying roles independently, yet school neighborhoods

did not prove to be an independent predictor of involvement in bullying. Considering the

impact of socioeconomic status in bullying research, present study has also investigated

role of SES in bullying estimates and its outcomes.

Assessment Issues in Bullying

Most of the studies rely on self-report measure of bullying that can be classified

into two categories: definition based questionnaires and behavior based questionnaires.

Behavior based self-reports do not use the word bullying in the questionnaires (Espelage

& Holt, 2001; Reynolds, 2003). On the other hand Olweus (1996) and Ma (2002) have

referenced the word bully or bullying in their measures. Researchers have argued the

potential issues related to the response pattern affected by social desirability among older

age groups while referring to the term bullying in self-report (Espelage & Holt, 2001).

Olweus and Solberg (2003) have mentioned that anonymity can prevent the students to

portray them in a socially desirable manner. Other researchers have also included the

term bullying and its definition while assessing the construct (Salmivalli et al., 1996).

The definition adds to the clarity and unanimous comprehension of the term bullying for

all the participants (Olweus & Solberg, 2003).

Olweus Bully/Victim Questionnaire (OBVQ) is the most widely used

comprehensive self-report instrument for middle and high school students with strong
 56

psychometric properties (Austin & Joseph, 1996; Kyriakides, Kaloyirou, & Lindsay,

2006; Olweus, 1997; Pellegrini, Bartini, & Brooks, 1999). It is equally applicable to

primary school students with clear instruction and cautions suggested by authors. It not

only covers the incidence of overall bullying and its forms but also investigates the

friendships, location, duration, reporting, feelings, attitudes and reaction towards

bullying, and general satisfaction with school (Olweus & Solberg, 2003). It introduces

the concept of bullying by providing a standardized definition to be read aloud to the

participants. The word bullying, bullied and being bullied has been used several times in

the questionnaire. It is therefore, very important to translate the word ‘Bulling’

appropriately. Despite definitional controversy, majority of researchers prefer using

Olweus Bully/Victim Questionnaire or a subset of questions from it and the measure has

been successfully standardized across different cultures (Schwartz et al., 2001). Whatever

measure we use, vocabulary and sentence structure should merit special considerations

during translation and adaptation process.

Teacher nomination procedures are also helpful and Olweus (1993) regarded

these procedures as accurate source of information. The teacher is either asked to focus

on the students in the class and behavior ratings are obtained for pupils (Leff et al., 1999;

Monks, Smith, & Swettenham, 2003), or they have to assign the students in a list into

different bullying roles. Though pointing to the issue of personal bias in teacher ratings of

bullying behavior, Pellegrini and Bartini (2000) have confirmed the relationship between

teacher ratings and peer nominations. Adult (e.g. teacher) reports were found to be

associated with self- reports and peer nominations (Smith, 2004). Despite several

limitations, many researchers continue to use teacher reports for assessing bullying roles
 57

particularly in junior school settings (Jenson et al., 2012; Perren & Alsaker, 2006). Multi-

method approach is suggested by experts to obtain more reliable findings about bully-

victim status (Crother & Levin, 2004; Smith, 2004).

Bullying and the Affective-Cognitive Premise

Do the bullying behaviors precede cognitive and affective consequences or does

the cognitive and affective incapability precede the bullying? Regardless of this

unrequited sequential relationship, these factors tend to persuade an individual’s

experience with involvement bullying.

Emotional competence and affective processes play an important role in

appropriate social behavior. People’s response to emotion-eliciting situation largely

depends on their ability to discern and understand other’s emotions, and the awareness of

their own emotional state. These abilities are also helpful in regulating interpersonal

exchanges (Saarni, 1990). Denham, von Salisch, Olthof, Kochanoff and Caverly (2002)

suggested that understanding the emotions of others is fundamental aspect of emotional

competence and is necessary for smooth interpersonal interactions. It is not only

restricted to recognizing other’s emotions from verbal and non-verbal cues, but also

implies the awareness of antecedents and consequences of elicited emotion. This concept

is also an integral part of theory of mind and self-control (Dunn & Cutting, 1999). Both

emotion recognition and theory of mind skills are thought to be the main components of

social cognition. The present study focuses on the ability to recognize facial expressions

of emotions that provide the first signal of change in emotions and serves as a foundation
 58

upon which is based the understanding of emotion and theory of mind skills (Denham,

1998).

Recognizing emotions. The present study investigated the emotion recognition

ability by following traditional paradigm of presenting neutral and emotional face

expression of six basic emotions i.e. anger, fear, sadness, disgust and happiness (Ekman,

1973). There has been evidence that face expression recognition skills are subject to some

developmental change with maturity (Kolb, Wilson, & Taylor, 1992).

Developmental trajectories have demonstrated that the ability to differentiate and

recognize happy faces is evident at the age of 7 months (Ludemann & Nelson, 1988).

Nelson (1987) found that infant can discriminate valence in emotions by 12 months of

age. Darwinian (1965) approach proposed that affection recognition ability from facial

cues emerges as infant begins to respond to mother’s smile or frown. These non verbal

gestures are the first indicators of social interaction at 3-5 weeks of age as the first social

smile appears (Izard, 2001). Reaching the ages of 3 to 5 years; children are capable of

recognizing original and posed facial expressions of emotions (Camras & Allison, 1985).

This understanding and awareness enhances upon child’s admission to school and he/she

becomes able to make assumptions about other’s judgment in the light of their prior

reactions. Such complexity in comprehension of affective phenomenon flourishes rapidly

during early to middle childhood (Gnepp, 1989). Considerable improvement in emotion

recognition arises prior to the onset of adolescence especially at 11 years of age (Tonks,

Williams, Frampton, Yates, & Slater, 2007).

By this time, patterns of peer interactions also change ardently and children feel

more connected to the peer group than family. Children also form and understand the
 59

need of intimate peer relationship and hence the friendship becomes a source of sharing

emotions with one another (Denham, Mitchell-Copeland, Strandberg, Auerbach, & Blair

1994). This stage of childhood has also been considered crucial for experiencing peer

victimization and displaying aggressive tendencies. Dunn and Cutting (1999) discovered

that emotion understanding in early childhood was positively associated with healthy and

less conflicting social interactions. Contrarily, children with low emotional competence

may experience disrupted social relationships and more likely to show negative and

maladaptive behavior patterns (Holder & Kirkpatrick, 1991; Izard, 2001).

Bully-victim problem indicates maladaptive patterns of social interaction and

hence the emotional component can be studied to explicate the underlying cognitive and

affective processes of the phenomenon. Significant amount of literature is available

across deviant child behaviors (e.g. conduct disorders, anti social behavior) and

aggression being associated with emotion recognition deficit or advantage (Leist &

Dadds, 2009); however research pertaining to bullies and victims is scarce. Poor emotion

recognition ability may account for the poor social skills of students involved in bullying

behavior. Moreover, maltreated children demonstrate an anger bias in facial emotion

recognition tasks, signifying the role of negative social relationships in biased affective

processing (Pollak, Cicchetti, Hornung, & Reed, 2000).

Researchers have argued that detecting facial expressions of emotions correctly

can help perpetrators to identify the targets’ weaknesses and thus they might use this

information to sophistically manipulate their social relationships in a successful manner

(Lemerise & Arsenio, 2000). This approach counters the typical model of social skill

deficit (Crick & Dodge, 1994), while confirms the explanation by Sutton (2001).
 60

An empirical investigation of emotion recognition ability of school bullies and

victims has been conducted by Woods, Wolke, Nowicki, and Hall (2009). Children’

ability to understand the affective component has been studied in relation to their

experience of different forms of victimization such as verbal, physical and relational. In

general, Woods et al. (2009) found highest error rates for recognizing angry faces and

least errors were found for recognition of happy faces. Consistent with the prior findings,

the study showed significant gender differences as girls’ outperformed boys. Results also

depicted that students who were subjected to relational bullying only and those who

experienced both relational and physical forms (overlap) consistently showed higher

mean errors in recognizing angry and fearful faces as compared to the neutral group and

bullies. Their general ability of emotion recognition was also poorer than neutrals. Study

could not demonstrate any relationship between empathy and bullying roles however

boys exhibited lower levels of empathy than girls. The results provide partial support to

the SIP model in explaining social processing of relational victims whose

misinterpretation of affective cues and incorrect judgments lead them to faulty behavior

decisions (Camodeca et al., 2003).

Since fewer researches have directly examined the relation between bullying and

emotion recognition, it is likely to believe that poorer recognition ability may lead to

being victimized and likewise, that complications may occur as a result of being

persistently victimized. Wood et al. (2009) elucidated that the global recognition deficit,

especially for angry and fearful expression, of children experiencing relational bullying

might be one rationale for why they were frequently targeted by offenders. Mahady-

Wilton, Craig, and Pepler (2000) have also suggested the same that victims are at risk of
 61

being targeted repeatedly due to problematic understanding of others’ emotions. They

have reasoned that experience of social isolation as a result of rejection and victimization

prevents them to be involved in social interactions and thus leads to enhanced social

inappropriateness in response patterns. Contrary to this deficit assumption, the

enhancement proposition argues that victimized children may possess better emotion

recognition ability than non-victimized. It suggests that children’s accuracy of identifying

certain emotions is improved a result of negative peer interactions. Yet the later

explanation mostly held true for abused children.

Most recently Irwin (2014) examined differences in detection of six basic

emotions represented in partial and full expression successively, in a sample of 12 to

17years old victimized and non-victimized. Overall accuracy was same for groups

whereas, recognition of sadness and anger was different across victimization status.

Victims were less accurate than non-victims. Thus the deficit hypothesis is usually

supported partially (i.e. for specific emotions) in researches. Irwin also added the aspect

of chronicity to the existing research framework with a sample of 10-14 years old early

adolescents. The findings reported no significant differences in overall accuracy and

responses across six emotion categories between non-victims and frequently victimized

students. However as the study used the previous paradigm of resenting emotions in

segments in varying portrayal of expression, results indicated improved performance for

chronic victims in 2nd segment thus lending some support to enhancement hypothesis.

Mood dependent attention bias in emotion recognition. As explained

previously, Lemerise and Arsenio (2000) introduced the affective component to

information processing (SIP) model. They suggested that affective processes including
 62

moods and emotions can influence all the stages of SIP in distinctive manner i.e. from

cue encoding and interpretation to utilizing previous social knowledge in goal persuasion

and response decisions. Children get into the social scenario of school with a preceding

mood that might be irrelevant of that situation, such as anxiety about some domestic

affair. They also differ in ways they regulate their pre-existing emotions. Inability to

regulate such affective predispositions has been linked to SIP patterns associated with

higher levels of aggression among school children. Garaham, Hudley, and Williams

(1992) had also explained how mood states had influenced encoding and interpretation of

cues during processing of social information.

In a study by Orobio de Castrro et al. (2003) children having negative mood states

showed increased hostile attribution moderated by level of aggression. When aggressive

children were exposed to mild or moderate emotional arousal, they made more social

information processing errors of hostile intent attributions and preferred instrumental

goals over relational goals more than their non-aggressive peers. The rejected-aggressive

children have been found to be more reactive to emotional signals and this reactivity may

influence their cognitive style. These results, combined with Eisenberg and Fabes (1992)

view about individual differences in children’s emotionality and the ability to interpret

other’s emotions, suggest that emotions are important component to integrate into SIP to

better understand social adjustment. This includes the emotions experienced by the actors

as well as reactions to perceived emotions of others. Moreover, chronicity, type of

aggression and affective state might explicate the SIP mechanism.

Schmid and Mast (2010) established the effect of mood on emotion recognition in

a sample of young adults (51 women and 42 men) having an average age of 23 years.
 63

Film scenes were used for sad and happy mood priming, whereas a screen saver provided

the neutral condition. Subjects then performed an emotion recognition task using happy

and sad facial expressions of varying intensities. It is important to note that the authors

used to play happy and sad instrumental music during emotion recognition task

performance to sustain the effect of mood. Manipulation check showed efficacy of mood

priming in all the three conditions. Results of mixed model ANOVA supported the

typical gender bias in emotion recognition as women made lesser errors than men.

Findings further revealed non-significant main effect of mood on overall emotion

recognition. Results however confirmed a negative bias in attention referring to the

congruence found for participants in sad mood who recognized sad faces better than

happy faces. Mood incongruence was reported for happy condition. When others’

emotions are not consistent with our own mood states, we may find it difficult to identify

and understand their emotions and situation can lead to disturbed social interaction.

Similar findings have been reported by Lee et al. (2008), who studied the impact

of temporary mood states on emotion recognition among Chinese young adults. They

used cheerful film clip, a documentary on tsunami, and anti-smoking campaign for

inducing happy, sad and neutral mood respectively. The subjects went through emotion

recognition task using a blend of facial expressions to generate morphed images.

Participants in negative mood interpreted faces as more sad compared to participants in

happy or neutral mood conditions. Confirming the negative attention bias in emotion

recognition, authors have discussed the visual organization and attentional system

regulation. People in sad moods may exaggerate the pre-existing interpersonal

disturbances.
 64

Contextual cues can lower or enhance the information processing rate and also

contribute to emotional arousal (Bower, 1981). Paying less attention to mood incongruent

information and misinterpreting others’ emotions have certain implications for peer

relationships in school setting. Emotion recognition skill has been found to be a precursor

to emotion regulation and the quality of social relationships. Existing findings in this

regards are quite contradictory. In a study, victims demonstrated better emotion

recognition abilities than non-victims. Studies have established link between negative

mood and elaborate processing (bottom up) during cognitive task performances (Deddin,

Deveney, Kim, Casas, & Best, 2001).

People in sad mood are more sensitive to small details as compared to those in

happy mood states who are shown to use top down approach and process the upshot of

the information (Gasper & Clare, 2002). Hills, Werno, and Lewis (2011) have discussed

about the reduced holistic processing and attention overload during sad moods. On the

other hand cognitive overload in happy mood states may hamper the recognition

accuracy. Therefore people in sad mood should be more accurate in interpersonal

recognition of affect. Nature of cognitive involvement and task complexity can affect the

congruence hypothesis. A series of experiments by Hills et al. (2011) investigated this

aspect. Mood congruent attention bias was found for sad moods in simple tasks for

example old/new face recognition. Although participants in sad mood were more accurate

in recognizing all types of facial expressions, yet mood congruency was found for

participants of happy mood condition. In memory-based experiment of facial emotion

recognition, they found minimal support for the effect of mood on performance in all the
 65

three conditions. It suggests that certain confounding may influence the result such as

intentional learning strategies (Jerman, Van der Linden, & Agernbeaus, 2008).

Chepenik et al. (2007) have also found sad mood incongruence in affect

recognition accuracy. Schmid, Mast, Bombari, Mast, and Lobmaier (2011) have

emphasized the role of configural information in recognition of facial expressions of

emotions with an exception of happy face; thus supporting the typical happy face

advantage paradigm described by Leppänen, Milders, Bell, Terriere, and Hietanen

(2004). Studies have established the relationship between attention bias to threat and

patterns of social and emotional functioning, mostly in the case of anxiety (Bar-Haim,

Lamy, Pergamin, Bakermans-Kranenburg, & IJzendoorn, 2007; Pine, Helfinstein, Bar-

Haim, Nelson, & Fox, 2009). Pérez-Edgar et al. (2011) addressed this issue by representing

connections among temperament, attention bias to threat, and social functioning in a large

sample of 5 years old children. Measured during toddlerhood, behavior inhibition proved

to be a precursor to social withdrawal in early childhood and the association was

moderated by attention bias to threat. There has also been evidence for attention bias in

children and adolescents prone towards psychopathology as a result of maternal

depression as compared to healthy controls (Kujawa, Kucharczyk, Mamcarz, Żarski, &

Targońska, 2011; Joormann, Talbot, & Gotlib, 2007).

Studies on mood affecting accuracy of emotion recognition among children

include a prominent contribution by Rennels and Cummings (2013). They used affect

laden stories to induce positive and negative moods and a list of table manners produced

neutral condition. Results showed that children more correctly identified the emotions in

a label-based task of facial expression as compared to context-based questions about

 66

vignettes. Yet these differences were evident for younger children (5-7 years) compared

those entering their middle childhood (8 years old). Analysis demonstrated that provided

with the contextual enquiry, children’s accuracy was higher for negative emotions.

Furthermore, happy mood enhanced the response speed than negative mood, albeit the

accuracy was not affected by mood state. Overall findings elucidate that task complexity

influences recognition ability for specific types of emotions.

While talking about cultural differences in processing of emotional information,

Kelley, Liu, Rodger, Miellet, and Caldara (2011) recognized that people from Asian

countries (e.g. China) tend to use more holistic approach than people from Western

countries who are more likely to use deliberate processing. A cross-cultural sample of

children (7-12 years old) from England and China was concurrently assessed to explicate

the effectiveness of this claim. Findings revealed that children’s patterns of face

processing were similar to the adults in respective cultures. It was further suggested that

children mainly focus the internal features during face processing than external ones.

Given the support to attention bias and mood congruence in cognitive processes

among children with behavioral and emotional problems, it would be interesting to

investigate this endeavor with reference to school bullying and victimization. Observing

how children infer the expressive meaning of others' facial expressions gives information

for how children interpret the objectives and intentions of others in interpersonal

exchanges. The skill is essential for developing and sustaining healthy and smooth social

relationships (Dwyer, Forsyth, King, & Seetaram, 2010).

 67

The Friendship Buffer in Bullying Experience

During middle childhood and early adolescence, peer relationships become a

major concern and priority providing the individual a platform to address their identity

issues (Noller, Feeney, & Peterson, 2001). Peer interactions occupy 30% of child’s

socialization in middle childhood (Rubin, Bukowski, & Parker, 1998). Hartup and

Abecassis (2002) suggested that almost 85% children admit to have friends during middle

childhood. Making and sustaining the intimate peer relations entail a range of

psychosocial skills, including theory of mind, emotion recognition, communicative

proficiency, self-regulation, perceiving the intention, needs, and idea in others, social

information processing skills and problem solving approaches, among others. These

abilities develop and nurture during childhood, and nature and prospect of friendship

change in manifestation (Rubin et al., 1998). Children’s’ friendship preferences and

patterns are subject to developmental changes and become more stable and reciprocated

with the passage of time.

Peer relationships have been contemplated and explored in a number of different

ways. Research has manifested that friendship is a multifaceted phenomenon, delineated

by positive attributes, which appear to construe warmth, support, closeness,

companionship as well as negative features, such as conflict and competition, jealousy,

and contentiousness (Bukowski et al., 1996; Furman, 1996). Despite contentions about

potential bias in self-report, investigators agree that children’s personal insight and

opinion of their friendships may provide the best source of evaluation; because no one

else can better describe the extent of shared emotional acquaintance (Furman, 1996;

Smith & Brownell, 2003). Children are usually asked to rate how regularly specific kinds
 68

of exchanges occur with a particular friend (e.g., conflict, pro-social behavior, and self-

disclosure), or how precisely particular descriptions represent the nature of friendship

(Parker & Asher, 1993). While Berndt (2002) has used two dimensional approaches

pertaining to positive and negative characteristics; Bukowski et al. (1994) have preferred

to employ multi factorial approach in assessing friendship quality measured in form of

self-report. Friendship Quality Scale (FQS; Bukowski et al., 1994), the measure used to

assess friendship quality in the current study, contains subscales measuring

companionship, help, security, closeness and conflict resolution.

Studies have indicated that closer friendship relation for example best friend may

exert greater impact on children’s adjustment as compared to other friends or the broad

peer circle (Berndt, 1999). Berndt (2002) documented that high quality of friendship is

presumed to be more influential in positive or negative ways. Other studies have

recommended that negative friendship qualities can play more salient role than do

positive attributes (La Greca & Harrison, 2005). Quality of friendship is linked with

psychosocial outcome among school children.

Bullying not only comprises violent actions involving offenders and targets, it is

relatively a dynamic issue pertaining to the social relationships of youth (Swearer et al.,

2009). Children’s experience of peer rejection and victimization is largely influenced by

the network of friends and interactions with best friend. The degree of support afforded

by these relationships is also important in this regard as lack of support is associated with

risk of being bullied easily (Cook, Williams, Guerra, & Kim, 2010; Espealage &

Swearer, 2003).
 69

It is therefore assumed that friendships can buffer the negative cost of

maltreatment at school. Rothen, Head, Klineberg, and Stansfeld (2011) found that social

support from friends was more valuable as a protective dynamic than social support from

the family. Moreover, there was evidence that a high level of support from friends could

protect the targeted youth from poor achievement at school. Social support from family,

peers and school was associated with reduced internalizing distress resulted from

victimization experience. Surprisingly, close friend’s support did not moderate the

relationship. Moreover, social support did not protected victims from externalizing

distress.

Bollmer et al. (2005) investigated the friends’ relationship quality of bullies and

victims. The study confirmed the previous findings that friendship quality played a

moderating role in peer victimizing and internalizing problems. Additionally it suggested

that children having a higher quality best friendship will involve in bullying behavior less

often than children with a lower quality best friendship. High quality friendship not only

protected children from being targets of bullying, it also prevented children from

engaging in bullying perpetration.

A recent study however depicted a different picture. Shin (2012) studied

friendship characteristics and pro-social behaviors in relation to bully-victim roles in a

sample of Korean elementary school children. Results regarding quality of friendship

revealed that bully-victims did not differ from uninvolved children with respect to

conflict resolution, closeness and security, yet help was not considered to be significant

in preventing victimization. It implies that not all the dimensions and features of

friendship quality serve as a guard against bullying; therefore investigators should look
 70

for the dynamics. Research has provided evidence in this regard as victimization is

associated with low levels of support and companionship within friendships (Hodges,

Boivin, Vitaro, & Bukowski, 1999; Rigby, 2000). Moreover the interpersonal risk of

victimization in relation to friendship quality should take into account the aspect of

reciprocity to deal with the discrepant findings (Rodkin & Hodges, 2003).

Bullying and Student’s Academic Performance

Extensive literature has documented the relationship between peer victimization

and students’ academic performance. Recently, Espelage, Hong, Rao, and Low (2013)

reviewed both cross-sectional and longitudinal studies in order to identify patterns of this

association and the related moderating factors. Peer victimization proved to be an

important predictor of decreased school grades and lower class room engagement during

middle school years. Not only chronic victims, but those who experience short-term

bullying episodes also reported impaired academic performance (Juvonen, Wang, &

Espinoza, 2011). The impact of bullying is not restricted to individual achievement.

Schools representing better grade averages had lower rates of bullying incidence that

indicates the value of improving school climate (Hanson, Austin, & Zheng, 2010).

Although most of studies have supported the association between victimization

and academic performance, Nakamoto and Schwartz (2010) pointed out some

discrepancies as well. Woods and Wolke (2004) demonstrated that both of the variables

are not associated to each other. Espelage et al. (2013) concluded that internalizing

behavior patterns particularly depressive tendencies used to play mediating role in this

relationship. Quality of friendship, perceived social support and school related issues
 71

have also been regarded as moderating variables in relation to peer victimization and

academic performance (Erath et al., 2008; Schwartz, Gorman, Dodge, Pettit, & Bates,

2008; Simons-Morton, 2003; Wang, Iannotti, & Luk, 2011). Mechanism that account for

the link between victimization and academic performance may have practical

implications for intervention strategies.

Friendship Quality and Students’ Academic Performance

Relevance of peer relationship and academic functioning has been discussed by

researchers (Scharphorn & Laura, 2013; Nelson & DeBacker, 2008). Urberg,

Degirmencioglu, and Pilgrim (1997) investigated how intimate friendship during

adolescence influence individuals academic performance and health related behaviors

(e.g. smoking and alcohol use) friendship in groups. They found more insightful findings

about academic achievement that was associated with close friendship. A study by

Altermatt and Pomerantz (2005) also supported the notion that friendship plays a positive

role in the context of middle school students’ academic achievement. Other studies found

that children who connect with friends who reject school are more apt to achieve poorly

in academics (Veronneau, Vitaro, Pedersen, & Tremblay, 2008). Juvonen and Wentzel

(1996) looked into the social relationship processes counting interpersonal interactions to

understand an adolescent’s inspiration to succeed academically. It would be interesting to

observe how positive and negative qualities of friendship and the overall magnitude of

friendship quality might contribute to academic performance of students involved in

bullying behaviors. Fostering positive peer interaction can have an impact on school

grades.
 72

Affective Competence and Academic Performance

Association between academic achievement and emotional adjustment has been

well documented literature (Goetz, Frenzel, Pekrun, & Hall, 2005; Kyllonen, Lipnevich,

Burrus, & Roberts, 2010).In this vein, most of the studies focused on the relationship

between emotional intelligence and academic achievement (Barchard, 2003). Several

Pakistani studies have also confirmed the existence of positive relationship between

emotional intelligence and academic achievement (Adnan, Chaudhry, & Malik, 2012;

Farooq, 2003; Malik & Shujja, 2013).

Researchers have also acknowledged that the capability to process emotional

information can improve cognitive and social functioning (Mayer & Salovey, 1997;

Salovey & Mayer, 1990).Yet this ability largely depends on accurate identification of

emotional information. Accuracy in identification of facial affect has been found to be

associated with performance on Ravens’ Colored and Standard Progressive Matrices in a

cross sectional sample of children, adolescents, and adult age groups for a Pakistani

sample (Khawar, Malik, Maqsood, Tallat, & Habib, 2014). Score on Ravens’ matrices is

known to be a significant predictor of academic achievement (Heavens & Ciarrochi,

2012).

Facial affect recognition abilities therefore underpin emotional and general

intelligence. As the both of the latter variables have been recognized as a precursor to

academic success, the plausible association between emotion recognition of facial

expression and academic performance is worth exploring. Emotion recognition ability

could be one of the numerous potential pathways by which affective component persuade

academic achievement and may provide a new avenue for further investigations.
 73

Research on Bullying in Pakistan

The issue of bullying recently caught attention of researchers in Pakistan. The

empirical investigations in this regard provide divergent results due to heterogeneous

samples and inconsistent methods. No significant documentation about the construct of

bullying is available beyond 5 to 6 years. Ahmer et al. (2008) raised the issue in medical

college students while finding a high rate of 63% students having faced the problem

during college years. Verbal assaults were the common form of bullying. Yet the study

was not limited to within-student bullying relationship.

The first prominent effort about school bullying was made by Hanif (2008) by

carrying out a cross-cultural comparison between Pakistani and English adolescents (14-

16years) about their perceptions and attitudes towards bullying and school social climate.

Survey questionnaires were administered to sample of 200 secondary school students

from both countries. Results suggested that culture played no significant role in

association among school climate, attitudes and perception towards bullying. School

social climate served a significant precursor to pupils’ perception and attitudes towards

bullying among samples of both countries. However English students perceived bullying

as more crucial issue and reported higher rates as compared to Pakistani students. In a

later investigation; Hanif, Nadeem, and Tariq (2011) found that attitudes of teachers,

parents and children unanimously exhibited sympathetic attitudes towards victims.

Surprisingly the sympathy was not less pronounced for bullies. Such pr-bully attitude

may hinder the implementation of anti-bullying strategies. Teachers showed better

understanding of the phenomenon than parents. Lack of awareness about bullying in

Pakistani schools may account for these types of findings

 74

Ahmed, Hussain, Ahmed, Ahmed, and Tabassum (2012) studied the effect of

bullying experience on academic performance of primary school students. Bullying

estimates were obtained through teacher reports, according to which 74% teachers

acknowledged bullying as an issue in their school while remaining denied the fact. Nearly

similar ratios were obtained about students’ reporting of bullying experience to their

teachers. Most of the teachers (85%) favored anti bullying intervention. Verbal bullying

was perceived to be the most common form.

Sheikh (2013) in his letter to the editor of Journal of Pakistan Medical

Association has revealed some facts regarding school bullying in Pakistan. The findings

were based on data from an internationally collaborated research project by ministry of

health that had been in 2009. A large sample of 4647 students of grades 8 to 10 reported

their victimization experience during past month. More than 40 percent students were

found involved in bullying and victimization and boys outnumbered girls. Victims were

more likely to experience somatic complaints, internalizing problems and sleep

disturbances.

Only one study to date has empirically investigated the issue through self-report

(Illinois Bullying Scale) using behavioral descriptions about bullying, victimization and

fighting (Shujja, Atta, & Shujjat, 2014). The sample consisted of 836 students of 6th

grade from both public and private schools. Using a time frame of one month, almost

equal number of children reported bullying other or being bullied (23.2% & 24.1%)

respectively. Almost twenty percent students engaged into fighting with each other. All

the three aspects of bullying were more prevalent in public school. Interestingly

socioeconomic status did not predict involvement in bullying, yet it accounted for more
 75

aggression among students. Gender differences were not prominent in prevalence yet

mean differences found that boys scored higher on bullying others, experiencing

victimization and engaging into fights.

Rationale for the Study

The dearth of investigation in the vital aspect of bullying has left gaps that may

account for prevailing violence in Pakistani society. The researcher therefore decided to

evaluate the current prevalence, understanding and dimensions of bullying and

victimization among the most vulnerable age groups (9-12 years old) as suggested by

existing literature (Due et al., 2005).This particular age group mostly studies in

elementary school (4th and 5th grades) and also includes beginners of middle school

(6thgraders). During the transition from elementary school to middle school, students

come into a new set up where the nature of peer groups are changing, academic work

becomes more rigorous, and biological changes start occurring within the individual

(Swearer et al., 2006).

Earlier research has demonstrated that involvement in bullying could be linked to

certain social and emotional deficits which might be explained by underlying cognitive

mechanism for example mood states (Lemerise & Arsenio, 2001). Mood state seems to

be a plausible contextual factor that can influence face perception. How mood state

manipulates attentional distribution in face perception; and if it hampers or promotes

holistic processing is inconclusive. The underlying social information processing

mechanism has also produced inconsistent findings regarding mood congruency and

affect infusion paradigm (Schmid & Mast, 2010; Chepenik et al., 2007). Taking the

fundamental significance of cognitive and affective skills to smooth relationships and

 76

interactions into consideration, the current study primarily intended to explore how mood

regulates emotion recognition ability in school bullies and victims.

Putting the emotion recognition into the perspective of SIP, we can speculate that

recognizing emotions in a peer interaction represents the first two stages of the model:

cue encoding and interpretation. Inaccuracy in interpreting facial cues of emotional

expressions may lead to misleading evaluation and biased attribution of a peer’s intend

which makes the situation and goals ambiguous and unclear. It further results in dys-

regulated arousal and angry appraisal, following which a child makes a faulty decision

and opts for an inappropriate action (Camodeca et al., 2003). Predisposed mood of

students may also exert an effect on recognition of facial expressions of emotions as it

represents the child’s mental state at that time (see Figure 1.1).

Moreover in contrast with the popular stereotype of bullies as lacking in social

skills and understanding, some investigators have emphasized that some bullies would

need good social cognition in order to perpetrate negative actions against victims and to

maintain a dominant status within the group. Thus, like theory of mind skills, emotion

recognition ability could be a prerequisite to social competence among bullies (Suuton et

al., 1999; 2001).

In general, limited evidence is available explaining emotion recognition deficits in

bullies, victims, bully-victims and uninvolved students, and that too reflects

contradictions. Present study is designed to investigate this particular perspective by

assuming better emotion recognition ability among bullies as compared to victims and

other children. However we have followed SIP model in explain the affective processes

in bullying as it is more comprehensive and offers decomposing complex process into

 77

parsimonious steps which could be easily assessed. Moreover explanation by Sutton and

colleagues might complement the general social information processing approach to

some extent (Camodeca et al., 2003).

Peer relationships play a significant role in socio-emotional development during

middle childhood, Friendship quality is an imperative feature related to the social

mechanisms of bullying and victimization that was taken into account in present study.

In literature it emerged as a guard against being bullied by peers. Moreover, friendship

with highly positive features also facilitates emotional competencies (Bollmer, Mirchi,

Harris, & Maras, 2005). Therefore we intended to investigate how bully/victim groups

would differ in their positive and negative aspects of friendship quality. Additionally, we

aimed to establish the possible link between friendship quality and emotion recognition

abilities of bully/victim groups. This particular aspect has not been studied by

researchers.

Despite having well documented literature (based on the research in Western

countries) regarding the adverse impact of bullying on school achievement of students,

no significant data is available in Pakistan. For that reason, we also opted to study the

effects of involvement in bullying on students’ academic performance. Besides,

friendship quality and emotion recognition ability were also studied in relation to

academic performance of students.

Conclusively the current study was designed as a multifaceted endeavor

questioning the inconsistencies in cognitive, affective, social and academic dynamics of

bullying and victimization by comparing children who engage in a variety of bullying

behaviors. These facets of bullying have never been studied in Pakistan; where violence
 78

and intolerance among youth is rapidly increasing. No large scale anti-bullying efforts

have been made so far neither any statistics is available officially. Present research would

provide the academicians and mental health professionals with a baseline to proceed with

such strategies.
 79

Figure 1.1

Model of Social Information Processing and Effect of Mood on Emotion Recognition

General Problem
solving
Strategies

Formulate Response
Social Goals Decision
Child’s Mental
State
 Social experiences
 Social
expectancies
 Knowledge of
social rules
 Emotionality
Enacting the
Interpret Social Mood Response
Cues

Peer Evaluation
Emotion
and Response
Recognition
Encode Social
Cues
 80

Figure 1.2

An Illustration of the Present Study

• Mood States
Affect = Bully
Mood +
Emotions
• Emotion
Recognition Involvement
in Academic
Performance
Bullying

• Quality of Victim
Peer Friendship
Relationships
 81

Research Plan

The current research was carried out to determine the effect of mood on emotion

recognition and quality of friendship among school bullies and victims (see Figure 1.2).

To fulfill this purpose four studies were conducted. Each study served distinct objectives,

used separate samples for investigation, and followed diverse techniques and methods.

That is why they are presented separately in upcoming chapters.

Chapter II. Study 1: Translation, Adaptation, Validation of Measures

The first study was conducted to accomplish one of the prerequisites for the main

study. Since no indigenous measure was available, both bullying and quality of friendship

had to be assessed by Olweus Bully-Victim Questionnaire (OBVQ) and Friendship

Qualities Scale (FQS) respectively. So it was mandatory to translate and validate these

instruments for use with school students. Therefore this study was carried out to translate

the measures into Urdu and determine their suitability for further use. This aim was

achieved in three steps for each of the measures; first a rigorous and standardized

procedure of translation was completed and secondly initial psychometric properties were

determined for OBVQ and FQS. Lastly the construct validity was confirmed for larger

samples. These steps are explained in three phases for both Olweus Bully/Victim

Questionnaire and the Friendship Qualities Scale. All the findings are summarized in the

2nd Chapter of this dissertation.

 82

Section A. Olweus Bully Victim Questionnaire (OBVQ; Olweus, 1996)

Phase 1: The measure was translated and adapted into Urdu .

Phase 2: Linguistic equivalence of the Urdu version was determined using a

bilingual sample of 36 students (Sample 1).The translated version of OBVQ was then

evaluated for initial psychometric properties and suitability for Pakistani sample. In this

regard, Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) was conducted and reliability estimates were

obtained along with providing initial evidence for convergent and discriminant validity of

the Urdu version on a sample of 122 students (Sample 2). Lastly, data for the main

studies (2, 3 & 4) were collected. Initial psychometric properties were further validated

using Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) on the larger sample of 817 students (Sample

3). The results of self-report (OBVQ) were also cross validated with teacher nominations.

Section B. Friendship Qualities Scale (FQS; Bukowski et al., 1994)

Phase 1: This measure was also translated and adapted into Urdu.

Phase 2: Linguistic equivalence was determined on a bilingual sample of 32

students (sample 1). The translated version of FQS was analyzed for initial psychometric

properties and suitability for Pakistani sample using EFA with 151 participants (Sample

2). Reliability estimates were also obtained and initial evidence for convergent and

discriminant validity of the Urdu version was provided. At the end FQS was further

validated for the larger sample (Sample 3; N = 672) using CFA.

Chapter III. Study 2: Prevalence of Bullying/Victimization

Study 2 was carried out to obtain one of the key objectives of the present research

that was prevalence estimates of bullying and victimization. The results are based on the
 83

data obtained in the 3rd phase of study 1(Section A). Findings of this study are based on

OBVQ. Results are summarized in two sections of Chapter 3.

Section A. In this section we evaluated this data to establish the prevalence of

bullying and victimization across gender and three grades (4 th, 5th and 6th) in both public

and private sector schools of Lahore. Results for types, severity, duration, location and

disclosure of bullying/victimization were also reported.

Section B. This section included the details about demographic and academic

variables obtained for bully/victim groups. Monthly income, family size, parent’s

education, average marks in last two exams, average attendance percentages of last two

month were compared for bully/victim groups.

Chapter IV: Socio-Affective Aspects of Bullying/Victimization

This chapter was further divided into three sections.

Section A. Study 3: Mood and Emotion Recognition

Study 3 was conducted to determine the effect of mood on emotion recognition

among school bullies and victims. This was not possible without an effective and

indigenously appropriate technique and procedure for inducing sad, happy and neutral

mood states in children. Therefore we first developed and evaluated mood induction

procedures for children and then proceeded with the main study. Hence the findings are

reported in two phases.

Phase 1: Development of Mood Induction Procedure for Children. The aim of

this phase was developing and standardizing mood induction technique for children. This

area had never been taken into account in Pakistan, so there was a need to generate an age
 84

appropriate experimental mood induction procedure (MIP). Several options were

empirically investigated in this regard for example instrumental music, video song,

emotive pictures and a combination of emotive pictures with background instrumental

music. These four techniques were separately evaluated for happy, sad and neutral

condition by following both independent and repeated measures design and

randomization procedures.

Phase 2: Effect of Mood on Emotion Recognition among School Bullies and

Victims. This phase employed experimental procedures on a sub set of the sample drawn

from schools during study 1. It dealt with the randomization of sample for mood

conditions (happy, sad, and neutral) and mood priming using MIP from the first phase of

study 3, followed by computerized emotion recognition task. Current mood of the

participants was evaluated pre and post induction of positive, negative or neutral mood.

Thus a mixed factorial design was followed for the current study. Emotion recognition

ability of the bullies, victims, bully-victims and uninvolved students was examined.

Moreover, relationship between emotion recognition ability and academic performance

was examined.

Section B. Study 4: Friendship Quality of Bully/Victim Groups.

The sample for this study (N = 672) was the same that was evaluated for CFA in

the third phase of section B in first study. It was also a subset of the larger sample of

bully/victims identified during study 1(N = 817). Besides investigating gender and grade

differences in students’ friendship quality, the study established the relationship between

friendship quality and bullying. In addition, relevance of friendship quality and bullying

with academic performance of students and demographic variables was also examined. It
 85

was a combination of comparative and correlational methods that were statistically

analyzed by using a variety of techniques.

Section C. Unified Outcomes

In the end, all the findings were integrated. The sample of bully/victim groups

having scores on emotion recognition task, quality of friendship and academic variables

were analyzed for possible relationships, effects and interactions. Meaningful conclusions

were drawn.

The above mentioned research plan and organization of the dissertation is illustrated

below in figure1.3.
 86

Figure 1.3

The Research Plan

Chapter II Chapter III Chapter IV

Translation, Prevalence of Socio-Affective

Adaptation and Bullying & Aspects of Bullying
Validation of the Victimization
Measures A
Study 2 Study 3
Study 1 s
A S Phase 1: Development
A
OBVQ ss of Mood Induction
Frequency, Severity, Procedure (MIP)
Phase 1: s
The translation Types, Duration, (N = 64)
Location of S
process Phase 2: Effect of
Phase 2: Bullying/Victimization st Mood on Emotion
Linguistic equivalence (N = 817) u Recognition among
&
Psychometric evaluation d School Bullies and
Sample 1; Bilingual y Victims
(N = 36) (N = 394)
Sample 2; EFA, (N = 122) B 3
Sample 3; CFA (N = 817)
Demographic and B Study 4
Academic Correlates
B FQS
of Friendship Quality of
Phase 1: Bullying/Victimization Bully/Victim Groups)
The translation process (N = 672)
Phase 2: (Monthly Income,
Linguistic equivalence Family Size, Parental
& Education, Marks
Psychometric evaluation Percentage,
Sample 1; Bilingual Attendance C Unified Outcome
(N = 32)
Percentage)
Sample 2; EFA, (N = 151) Emotion Recognition,
Sample 3; CFA (N = 672) Friendship Quality and
Academic Performance
 87

Chapter-II

STUDY 1: TRANSLATION, ADAPTATION AND VALIDATION OF THE

MEASURES

The process of translation and adaptation of a psychological assessment tool is a

rigorous exercise. Numerous guidelines and procedures have been offered in this regard.

Analysis of 47 studies addressing the translation and cross-cultural validation of research

measures acknowledged that there is a lot of diversity in the techniques and their worth

(Maneesriwongul & Dixon, 2004). A consensus has been found in the initial steps

forward and backward translation by at least two bilingual experts independently,

followed by a committee review and pilot study of the both versions or at least the target

language version of the measure on a small sample (Beaton, Bombardier, Guillemin &

Ferraz, 2000). After making necessary amendments, the final translated version is then

assessed for its psychometric properties with a larger sample, e.g. at least 5 participants

against each item on a scale in exploratory factor analysis (Nunnally & Bernstein, 1994).

Other steps for example cognitive debriefing or focus group can be taken into account

before conducting a pilot study if these experts cannot achieve consensus or suggest

deliberate empirical investigation of some particular dilemma that requires in depth

cultural consideration (Beaton, et al., 2000; Chavez & Canino, 2005; Hilton &

Skrutkowsky, 2002; Sousa & Rojjanasrirat, 2010). Considering all these guidelines, the

present study incorporates a five step procedure during first phase of the translation

process to achieve the cultural equivalence for Olweus Bully Victim Questionnaire and

Friendship Qualities Scales.

 88

Thus the first phase of the translation process included forward translation and

synthesis, back translation and synthesis, cognitive debriefing, committee review and

preliminary testing with bilingual sample. The second phase comprised of establishing

the psychometric properties of the translated versions including exploratory factor

analysis, reliability coefficients, construct validity and the descriptive statistics. It was

mainly conducted to fulfill following objectives.

Objectives of the Study

1. To translate and adapt the Olweus Bully Victim Questionnaire (OBVQ) and Friendship

Qualities Scale (FQS) into Urdu.

2. To explore the structure of OBVQ and FQS Urdu versions using EFA in order to check

the suitability of the instrument for main study.

3. To confirm the factor structure obtained from EFA on a larger sample (of main study)

3. To determine the psychometric properties of the Urdu versions of OBVQ and FQS.

Authors of the Olweus Bully/Victim Questionnaire and the Friendship Qualities

Scale provided the measures on researcher’s personal request and allowed to translate and

adapt them for Pakistani sample. The translation process and evaluation of psychometric

properties of both the scales was carried out independently at different time periods with

different samples. The process and findings are presented in two sections.

Section A: Olweus Bully Victim Questionnaire

Section B: Friendship Qualities Scale

 89

Section A: Olweus Bully/Victim Questionnaire (OBVQ; Olweus, 1996)

Olweus Bully/Victim Questionnaire consists of 39 items responded in a Likert

type format by selecting from a response set having two to six possible options. OBVQ

begins with asking students’ like/dislike about their school, their gender and the number

of friends they have. The measure then provides a definition of bullying as purposive,

repeated and persistent, hurtful behavior that takes place within the context of an

interpersonal relationship having power imbalance. It also clarifies the distinction

between friendly, ordinary fights and the act of bullying. It provides the reference period

that is considered to represent a normal memory unit for the students (e.g. ‘‘in the past

couple of months,’ approximately representing the time period from the beginning of

school after the summer or winter vacation up to the day of the questionnaire

administration). This duration leads to more accurate recall of bullying experiences and

has been recommended by the author (Olweus, 1993), Most of the questions have clear

spatial reference, asking about experiences happening “at school”.

Two global questions (4 and 24) about involvement in victimization (being

bullied) and bullying (bullying others) along with 9 types each (assessing verbal,

physical, relational, racial and sexual and cyber bullying) can be answered on a 5 point

scale with ‘‘I haven’t been bullied/bullied other students at school in the past couple of

months,’’ coded as 1 and “several times a week” coded as 5. These global questions

determine the participant’s role in bullying behavior. Other questions include information

regarding pupils’ exposure to bullying, class/gender of bullies and nature of perpetration

(individual or group), duration, location, attitudes and reactions towards bullying.

 90

The questionnaire has shown good internal consistency (Cronbach’s α = .80 to

.90) and was designed to be administered in a group setting (Solberg & Olweus, 2003).

Moreover, it can produce clear factors for items assessing bullying and victimization

(Bendixen & Olweus, 1999; Woods & Wolke, 2004). It has also demonstrated good

construct validity (Olweus, 2001). The OBQV is significantly associated with measures

of social disintegration, self-esteem, and depressive tendencies (Solberg & Olweus,

2003).

Phase 1: The Translation Process

The authors’ permission to translate the questionnaire into Urdu was sought. The

translation process followed the five steps procedure including a qualitative inquiry of the

term bullying in order to find the most suitable Urdu alternate.

1. Forward translation and synthesis. Two professionals who were doing

PhD in child and educational psychology and having fluency in Urdu and English

languages were approached and instructed to translate the English OBVQ into Urdu by

emphasizing the intentions of original version and clarity of concepts during Urdu

translation. Both translations were evaluated by a committee of three experts in the field

of psychological assessment and a synthesized version was produced. It is important to

note that no consensus was made for translating the word bullying as both translators

provided two to three words corresponding bullying. The committee decided to

investigate the phenomenon empirically among the target population.

2. Brief qualitative investigation of bullying phenomenon. This investigation

was carried out in two steps as a part of translation procedure.

 91

Step 1. Sixty students (30 boys and 30 girls) between 9-12 years (M = 10.63, SD =

1.05) studying in three private tuition centers (after school evening study centers) were

included in this investigation. Researcher enlisted all the behaviors and actions

corresponding bullying according to the Olweus Questionnaire and asked the participants

to name the phenomenon.

Table 2.1

Frequency of Alternate Urdu Words for ‘Bullying’ by Gender and Grades

Gender Grade

Words Boys Girls Total 4th 5th 6th Total

(n = 30) (n = 30) (n = 60) (n = 20) (n = 20) (n = 20) (n = 60)

Badmashi 16 4 20 4 5 11 20

Bohat tang krna 9 10 19 8 6 5 19

Gunda gardi 14 4 18 2 6 10 18

Sataana 6 11 17 6 7 4 17

Robe dalna 5 7 12 2 6 4 12

Dhouns jamana 3 6 9 0 2 7 9

Larae jhagra 1 5 6 4 2 0 6

Zulm karna 3 3 6 3 2 1 6

Fasaad 2 3 5 0 2 3 5

Dehshat gardi 3 0 3 0 1 2 3

A total of 10 terms were identified. Six of these terms having greater frequencies

were presented to the expert committee for discussion. Two of the identified terms
 92

“badmashi and gunda gardi (hooligan)” though reported frequently were excluded due to

ethical reasons. Experts considered them inappropriate and sensitive to be used with

young children. Moreover, these terms were more likely to be reported by boys than girls.

Remaining four terms (Bohat tang karna, Sataana, Robe dalna and Dhouns jamana) were

considered for further empirical evaluation to arrive at final decision.

Step2. To further investigate the meaning of these 4 terms identified through

above mentioned procedure, recall method was employed (Smith & Monks, 2008).

Another sample of 20 students (10 boys and 10 girls) (M = 10.45, SD = 1.09) was drawn

from a private tuition centre. They were presented with the list of 4 identified terms

representing bullying, and were asked to express them each in detail by recalling their

experiences at school. They were instructed to describe behaviors relevant to the listed

terms one by one. They were encouraged to report whatever comes to their mind after

reading each term. Table 2.2 shows the frequency of different types of behaviors,

categorized according to the types and nature of harmful actions described within each of

the four terms.

Step3. The results were analyzed by the expert committee and two most

comprehensive and suitable words were chosen as an alternate term for bullying and were

incorporated in the Urdu version of OBVQ (i.e. “Had say ziyada tang karna” and

“Dhouns jamana”). Both of these words were incorporated to the synthesized Urdu

version.
 93

Table 2.2

Behavioral Descriptions of the Terms Corresponding the Word ‘Bullying’

Type of Had se Robe Sataana Dhouns Total

Harm Behaviors Ziyada Jamana Jamana
Inflicted Tang Karna
Direct Mar kutai, pitai, thappar marna, 18 13 15 12 58
Physical thokren marna, dhakay dena, pakar k
Harm ghaseetna, chot lgana, bal nochna,
kapray khenchna, kamray me bund kar
dena, bandh dena
Intimidation darana, dhamkiyan dena, blackmail 16 20 15 20 71
karna,
Verbal Harm Gali dena, awazen kasna, ultay nam 20 17 18 19 74
lena, mazak urana, cheekhna chillana,
gussa dikhana, kisi k ghar walon ko
bura bhala kehna
Harm to Chezen chori karna, cheen lena, 17 11 17 14 59
Property chupana, tor dena ya phenk dena,
lunch kha lena ya zaya kar dena or iska
maza lena
Social Harm Sath na khilana, jhoti shikayat lagana, 12 9 14 12 47
ghalat ilzam lagana, chugli krna, kisi
ko phanasany k liye galat mansoobay
bnana, kisi ko ehmiyat na dena, board
pe bachon k ghalat nam likhna ya
shaklien bnana, image khrab krna ya
badnam krney ki koshish karna,
dosron ki nazron me girana
Psychological Bilawajah pareshan karna, takleef 16 10 14 13 53
Harm dena, sakht dukh punhchana, bar bar
dil dukhana, dosron ki takleef ka maza
lena, sakoon se na rehnay dena
Power & Apni taqat ki numaish karna, Dosron 10 12 9 14 45
Coercion ko haqeer samajhna, Khud ko hero
samajhna, Zor zabardsati krna, har bar
apni taqat ka najaiz faida uthana
Repetition Har bar apni taqat ka najaiz faida 7 3 3 9 22
uthana, Bar bar dil dukhana
Sexual Harm Zabardasti kapray khenchna, Gandi 1 0 2 2 5
batien karna
Others Naak me dum kar dena, 3 0 2 0 5
Total Behaviors reported under one category 120 95 109 115 431
 94

3. Backward translation and synthesis. Two bilingual experts with cross-

cultural background and experience independently translated the Urdu version of the

questionnaire back into English. The expert committee again reviewed both translations

and came up with a converged version of reverse translation that was further compared to

the original version and was found identical and acceptable in terms of semantic

equivalence.

4. Cognitive debriefing and expert review. A sample of 8 students of

private and public sector schools studying in an academy in the evening was drawn and

the translated version was administered to them. They were encouraged to reflect upon

ach item with practical suggestions. Their insight, comprehension and understanding of

the measure were thought to be important for achieving the pragmatic and semantic

equivalence of both source and target language. The review committee again modified a

few statements and words to obtain parsimony by using language that could make the

items clearer to the children for example the term sexual typically translated as jinsi was

replaced with gandi baten (in item numbers 12 and 32 of OBVQ) as a result of cognitive

debriefing phase. Moreover, part of OBVQ item 18 which requires to mention the place

where bullying occurred was adapted culturally. Thus a pre-final Urdu version was

produced.

5. Preliminary testing with bilingual sample. The purpose of this pilot

study was to empirically evaluate the OBVQ Urdu version for a sample of students

studying in 4th, 5th and 6th grades. Another aim was to determine the concurrent validity

of the OBVQ-Urdu version and to serve this purpose; responses from the original English
 95

OBVQ version were compared with those from the translated Urdu version using

bilingual respondents. The details are presented below in 2nd phase.

Phase2. Linguistic Equivalence and Psychometric Properties of OBVQ

We explored the linguistic and content equivalence of the OBVQ and examined

the psychometric properties of the OBVQ Urdu version. Structure of OBVQ was

explored using exploratory factor analysis (EFA) that was later confirmed with CFA.

Reliability estimates were obtained and convergent/divergent validity was established.

Three samples were drawn separately from schools to achieve these aims.

Linguistic equivalence.

Sample I. Three English medium schools were contacted and informed about the

purpose of study for obtaining a sample of bilingual students. Only one school agreed to

participate. Finally, a sample of 36 students, 18 girls and 18 boys studying in 4 th, 5th and

6th grades was drawn with the age ranging between 9 to 12 years (M = 10.53, SD = 1.1).

Measures. Both the original Olweus Bully Victim Questionnaire in English and

the pre final Urdu Version had been used.

Procedure. After the school authority allowed for data collection, researcher

contacted the class teachers to provide a list of 45 students (15 students from each class)

whom they considered to be fluent in Urdu and English reading, writing and expressing.

They identified 36 students who were gathered to a separate room. The participants were
 96

also informed about the confidentiality of data and their right to withdraw during the

study, despite their previous consent. The participants first completed the Urdu version of

OBVQ during 40 minutes session of regular school hours. The definition of bullying was

read aloud to them and they were asked to complete the instrument by keeping this

definition in mind. One week later, the same participants completed the English version

of the instrument. The items in both versions were presented in a different order.

Exploratory Factor Analysis and psychometrics properties. This part of the

study includes exploratory factor analysis and the initial psychometric evaluation of

OBVQ Urdu version such as internal consistency, scale-item characteristics and

convergent/divergent validity. These psychometric properties were established on a

separate sample (sample II).

Sample II. The sample for the empirical evaluation of psychometric properties of

the measures included 122 students (Mage = 11.13, SD = 1.1) studying in 4th, 5th and 6th

grades. Girls (n = 70) and boys (n = 52) were drawn from two private schools of Lahore.

Their mothers were also approached with the help of school administration, who rated

their children on anxious/depressed and aggressive behavior subscales of Child Behavior

Checklist (Achenbach, 1991).

Measures. Following measures were used in this stage.

1. Olweus Bully Victim Questionnaire Urdu Version. First three questions

and two set of items measuring victimization (item 4-12a) and bullying (24-32a) were

used in the current investigation.

 97

2. Aggressive Behavior and Anxious/Depressed subscale of CBCL. Child

Behavior Checklist (Achenbach, 1991) measures severity of various behavior problems in

children and adolescents. The present study assessed the Anxious/Depressed Domain and

Aggressive Behavior Domain for establishing the construct validity of the OBVQ. The

measure has already been translated into Urdu. The translated version has been used in

several investigations which have reported adequate psychometric properties (Anjum &

Malik, 2010).

Procedure. After obtaining formal permission from the principals of the schools,

the consent letters were sent to the parents of students seeking permission for assessing

their children. Mothers were also requested to fill the enclosed questionnaire. It included

questions pertaining to anxious/depressed and aggressive behavior domains of CBCL.

Out of 140 requests, 18 were turned down thus the final sample constituted of 122

students and their mothers. Olweus Bully/Victim Questionnaire was administered to the

students in their regular class rooms. The seating plan was roll number wise that has been

arranged by the class teacher as per researcher’s instruction. After instructing the students

about filling the questionnaire, they were asked to answer the first two questions. The

definition included in the questionnaire was read aloud to them. They were asked to

mention any difficulty while answering the questions. It took only 15 minutes to

complete this brief version of OBVQ. Students reported no difficulty in comprehending

the questions. The questionnaire was filled anonymously and the information provided by

mothers was matched to the student data by code numbers mentioned on both of the

measures and also against the list of students provided by class teacher.
 98

Confirmatory Factor Analysis and reliability estimates. This part includes the

Confirmatory Factor Analysis of Olweus Bully Victim Questionnaire (OBVQ). CFA was

computed in order to examine as how well the present data for main study (obtained from

sample III) fitted to the 2 factor structure of the questionnaire. It is a common practice in

psychological research to evaluate the exploratively obtained factor structure through

CFA (Prooijen & Kloot, 2001). This step deemed important in current study due to the

cultural diversity of populations. Cronbach’s alpha wase also computed to determine the

reliability of the instrument. In this section, gender and grade differences were also

observed in bullying and victimization subscales. Lastly, bullies, victims, bully-victims

and uninvolved students were identified with the help of global items of Olweus

Bully/Victims Questionnaire (Urdu Version) and teacher nominations were also obtained

for these students.

Sample III. The sample consisted of 817 students studying in 4th, 5th and 6th

grades of both public and private sector schools of Lahore. Girls (n = 440) and boys (n =

377) with an age range between 9-14 years (M = 10.89, SD = 1.12) completed the

Revised Olweus Bully Victim Questionnaire-Urdu version during school hours. Total 12

schools participated in this study and the 6-16 students were randomly selected from the

classes depending on the class size. Exclusion criteria included failure to complete the

majority of the questionnaires, and not indicating age or grade. Overall data of 817

students was finalized for the current study.

Class teachers of these students were later asked to nominate them in one of the

four bullying roles: bully, victim, bully/victim and uninvolved. A total of 76 teachers
 99

participated in the nomination procedure (M = 29.79, SD = 4.8). All the teachers had been

teaching the same class for at least last four months.

Measures. Following instruments have been used in this study.

Revised Olweus Bully Victim Questionnaire-Urdu version. The present study

utilized an Urdu version of the Revised Olweus Bullying/Victim Questionnaire (OBVQ).

A full questionnaire was administered to the participant, yet items measuring different

forms of traditional bullying (25-32) and victimization (5-12) were evaluated using CFA.

Global items were excluded being separate indicators and the criterion for involvement in

bullying and victimization (Solberg & Olweus, 2003). Cyber bullying and victimization

related items (32a and 12a) were also excluded from the proposed model.

Teacher nominations of students’ bullying roles. A brief measure was developed

using definition of bullying from Revised Olweus Bully Victim Questionnaire. Teachers

were instructed to read the definition of bullying carefully followed by the description of

all the bullying roles: bully, victim, bully/victim and uninvolved. They were then

presented with the list of randomly selected students from their classes and were asked to

assign them to one of the four bullying roles based on their past three months observation

of student’s behavior, complaints reported by peers or indiscipline recorded by school

authority. The teachers were instructed not to share or discuss this information in the

class or with anyone else in the school. The measure was pilot tested with 5 teachers who

reported no difficulty in comprehending the questions and provided the required

information within 10 minutes. The nomination method was preferred over rating

procedure due to parsimony and time effectiveness.

 100

Procedure. A total of 30 (15 public and 15 private sector) schools from different

area of Lahore city were invited to participate in the study. Finally 12 schools; 6 public

sector schools and 6 private sector schools provided their consent for participation in the

current investigation. Detailed information was provided to the schools, however they

did not allow the researcher to visit regular classes or administer the questionnaire to the

whole class considering it a disturbance in school routine; rather 10-16 students were

randomly selected from each class. Permission was sought from the parents of these

children as well through passive consent procedure.

Olweus Bully Victim Questionnaire follows the whole class approach, so despite

many restrictions by most of the schools, nearly 1000 detailed informed consents were

sent to the parents with the help of class teachers. They were first given one week to

return the consents that was later extended to one more week. However, unfortunately the

turnover was very poor (28%) especially for public sector schools (19%). The reason

could be low level of parental education or the students/parents misplaced the form and

verbally reported their consent. In the view of this experience passive consent was

obtained that is used as an alternate to active informed consent especially in school

settings. Parental refusal in active consent is considered if parents refuse to allow

participation in research in writing or do not send the form back. Under passive consent

procedure, parents are requested to report in writing only if they do not want to allow the

child to participate (Baker, Yardley, & McCaul 2001; Ellickson & Dawson, 1989). This

procedure is opted to avoid underrepresentation of specific groups such as students of

public sector schools in the present study. It contained all the necessary information about

the study and briefly described the procedures. Demographic sheet was also attached to
 101

it. Parents were given two weeks’ time to report their concerns. Only 102 refusals were

received during two weeks, leaving 898 potential participants for the current study.

Following the exclusion criteria (mentioned above), data of 817 participants was used for

CFA and prevalence of bullying.

Each school provided a set time for students to take the survey during school.

They were gathered to separate rooms assigned by administration for questionnaire

administration. OBVQ was administered to a group of maximum 30 students during

school hours over a 45 minutes session. Students were encouraged to reflect upon their

school life during the last two to three months. Researcher read a set of standardized

instructions to the respondents about filling the questionnaire. They were also provided

with a definition of bullying for similar understanding of bullying phenomenon. All the

items of the questionnaire were read aloud for students in 4th and 5th grades for their better

comprehension. The next day, teachers were also provided with the list of students drawn

from their classes and they were requested to nominate them into one of the four bullying

roles. They first read the definition of bullying (based on OBVQ) and then the general

criteria for involvement and un-involvement in bullying. For this purpose four status

types (pure bullies, pure victims, bully-victims and the completely uninvolved) were

defined in the light of Olweus criteria of two to three times a month. Data from teachers

was mostly collected during break time. Bully-victim status as a result of self-report was

not shared with teachers.

 102

Results

First phase of section A demonstrates the results of item correlation coefficients

obtained from bilingual sample (Sample I). Second phase includes the results of

exploratory factor analysis, convergent and discriminant validity of OBVQ, the reliability

coefficients and mean scores for two set of items representing bullying and victimization

(Sample II). Later we presented findings of CFA and further support to internal

consistency obtained from sample III.

Following Table (2.3) presents the demographic characteristics of the samples

used in empirical evaluation of the translated version of OBVQ.

 103

Table 2.3

Frequency Distribution of Demographic Variables for the Study Samples of Section A

Variables Sample I Sample II Sample II

(N= 36) (N = 122) (N = 817)

f (%) f (%) f (%)

Age

9 -10 18 (50) 28 (22.95) 300 (36.7)

11-12 18 (50) 72 (59.01) 500 (61.2)

13-14 22 (18.03)
17 (2.1)
Gender

Girls 18 (50) 52 (42.6)

440 (53.9)
Boys 18 (50) 70 (57.4)
377 (46.1)
Grade

4th 8 (22.2) 42 (34.4) 205 (25.1)

5th 15 (41.6) 47 (38.5) 213 (26.1)

6th 13 (36.1) 33 (27) 399 (48.8)

Total 36 122 817

Table 2.3 shows the frequency distribution of samples used to establish the

linguistic and semantic equivalence of OBVQ and the initial psychometric properties of

Urdu version. The bilingual sample of school students (sample I; N = 36) was fairly

distributed across gender as 50% were boys and 50% were girls. Majority of the students

belonged to 5th and 6th grades. It consisted of 42.6% girls and 57.4% boys with 34.4%
 104

students studying in 4th grade, 38.5% students in 5th grade and 27% were studying in

grade six. Differences in age of both samples are due to the type of schools from which

they were drawn. Sample I was drawn exclusively from a private school, whereas sample

II was recruited from both public and private schools. Sample III consisted of 53.9% girls

and 46.1% boys between the ages of 9-14.Greater proportion of the sample (48.8%)

studied in 6th grade while 26.1% studied in 5th grade and 25.1% used to study in grade 4.

Comparison of English and Urdu Versions of OBVQ

First of all inter-item correlation was computed between English and Urdu

versions of the OBVQ. There was one week gap between the administrations of both

versions. Results are presented in table 2.4.

 105

Table 2.4

Inter-Item Correlation between English and Urdu Versions of OBVQ

Items r Items r

Item 1 .79*** Item 21 .85***

Item 2 1*** Item 22 .79***
Item 3 .84*** Item 23 .71***
Item 4 .82*** Item 24 .90***
Item 5 .80*** Item 25 .89***
Item 6 .87*** Item 26 .81***
Item 7 .91*** Item 27 .86***
Item 8 .83*** Item 28 .85***
Item 9 .82*** Item 29 .96***
Item 10 .91*** Item 30 .78***
Item 11 .89*** Item 31 .83***
Item 12 .78*** Item 32 .85***
Item 12a .90*** Item 32a .84***
Item 13 .79*** Item 33 .67***
Item 14 .78*** Item 34 .89***
Item 15 .88*** Item 35 .91***
Item 16 .81*** Item 36 .84***
Item 17 .89*** Item 37 .89***
Item 18 .66*** Item 38 .93***
Item 19 .78*** Item 39 .85***
Item 20 .89***
***p < 0.001

Table 2.4 shows the inter-item correlations between the English and translated

Urdu version of Olweus Bully Victim Questionnaire. Results indicate that some of the

items (7, 10, 12a, 24, 29, 35 & 38) showed very high correlations (r > .90). Strength of
 106

correlation was still quite strong (r > .80) for most of the items (3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 9, 11, 15, 16,

17, 20, 21, 25, 26, 27, 28, 31, 32, 32a, 34, 36, 37 & 39) whereas a few items (1, 12, 13,

14, 19, 22, 23, & 30) were moderately correlated (r > .70). Relationship strength of only

two items (18, 33) was slightly below .70, yet all the correlations were highly significant

(p < .001). Item number 2 showed perfect correlation as it indicates the gender. To

summarize, we can say that all the items in the OBVQ Urdu version were comparable to

those in English version of the questionnaire.

Table 2.5

Reliability Coefficients for English and Urdu Versions of OBVQ (Sample I)

Scale No of items K α

OBVQ Total Urdu version 39 .84

OBVQ Total English version 39 .83

Results in Table 2.5 show that both English and Urdu versions of OBVQ yielded

high reliability coefficients nearly matching each other.

Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) for OBVQ Urdu version.

There has been lot of argument about factor analyzing techniques when the

questionnaires are translated and adapted cross-culturally. Although a confirmatory factor

analysis (CFA) is preferred when the population of interest is the same, yet one should

not ignore the cultural diversity of population when a translated measure is administered

in a different country. Thompson (2004) has suggested a three step procedure that
 107

includes meaningfully reducing the number of items using Principal Component Analysis

(PCA) first of all and then extracting the latent variables using true Exploratory Factor

Analysis (EFA). Lastly he recommended using CFA to verify the existing factor

structure. In this section, we opted to use EFA that was followed by a CFA computed for

the main study data in Phase III.

Besides the exploratory/confirmatory debate, types of methods used to extort the

factor structure have also been contentious (Pett, Lackey, & Sullivan, 2003). Researchers

have suggested that factor analysis is preferable to principal components analysis which

only reduces the data set (Floyd & Widaman, 1995; MacCallum & Tucker, 1991).

Common factor models intend to understand the underlying latent unobserved) variables

that explain relationships among the variables measured. Rotation is also considered

important to simplify and clarify the data structure (Costello & Osborne, 2005).

Orthogonal methods (varimax, quartimax, and equamax) are most widely used by

researchers to avoid complexity, yet these methods do not address the correlation among

factors that are best explained by oblique methods (direct oblimin, quartimin, and

promax) (Fabrigar, Wegener, MacCallum, & Strahan 1999). The present study was

conducted to see if the set of items in OBVQ measuring bullying and victimization

represent two distinct behavior patterns that could further distinguish the students into

different bullying roles. Prinicipal Component Analysis (PCA) with varimax method of

rotation was used for current data set.

Sample size is another critical issue in EFA. Fabrigar et al. (1999) found that a

most of the studies (75.7%) reported variable to-factor ratios of at least 4:1. To check the
 108

sampling adequacy, The Kaiser-Mayer-Olkin (KMO) and Bartlett’s Test of Sphericity

were computed.

Table 2.6

Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Test of Sampling Adequacy and Bartlett Test of Sphericity for OBVQ

Measure KMO Bartlett’s Test df p

of Sphericity
Measures

OBVQ Urdu .86 1733.3 190 .001

Version

KMO was found to be .86 that exceeds the minimum value of .50 suggested by

(Field, 2005) and Bartlett’s Test of Sphericity yielded highly significant findings (χ2

(190) = 1733.3, p < .001), which showed the appropriateness of the data for factor

analysis.

Since SPSS has limited options for factor retaining methods, we relied on

typically retaining factors with Eigen values greater than 1.0 (Kaiser, 1956). Eigen values

not only indicate the significance of specific factor but also demonstrate the amount of

variance in a set of items accounted for by that particular factor. Scree plots were also

obtained to make the best choice in this regard. It is also important to select the

significance level for loadings. Tabachnick and Fidell (2001) suggested .32 as a good

criterion for the minimum loading of an item, which is equal to about 10% overlapping

variance with the other items in that factor. Here we chose minimum of .35 as loading

standard for an item that is recommended by Stevens (as cited in Field, 2005).
 109

Table 2.7

Summary of Principal Component Analysis with Varimax Rotation for OBVQ Urdu

Version (N = 122)

Factor 1 Factor 2 Factor 3

Items (V) (B) (CBV)

OBVQ item 6 .839

OBVQ item 5 .831
OBVQ item 4 .827
OBVQ item 8 .827
OBVQ item 11 .827
OBVQ item 12 .825
OBVQ item 9 .822
OBVQ item 10 .819
OBVQ item 7 .781
OBVQ item 26 .848
OBVQ item 31 .842
OBVQ item 25 .809
OBVQ item 27 .802
OBVQ item 29 .778
OBVQ item 28 .762
OBVQ item 24 .760
OBVQ item 30 .698
OBVQ item 32 .680
.826
OBVQ item 32a
.780
OBVQ item 12a

Eigen values 7.506 4.419 1.509

% of Variance 37.53 22.09 7.547

Cumulative %
37.53 59.62 67.17
Loadings > .35
 110

Table 2.7 shows the factor loadings of 20 items from OBVQ Urdu version. These

items measure the bullying and victimization status of the students by asking about

general and specific behaviors that are often linked to bullying. The results showed high

communalities for all the items. A principal component analysis with varimax rotation

resulted in factor solution that converged in 3 iterations and high ladings ranging from

.68 to .84. The three factor solution showed Eigen values greater than 1 and the extraction

was confirmed by scree plots. The items indicating the global question about being

bullied (item 4) and different types of traditional bullying experienced (5-12) by students

made the first factor named Victimization (V). It had the highest Eigen value (7.50)

explaining the largest part (37.53%) of the total variance. Similarly, set of items asking

general question about bullying others (item 24) and related types of traditional

perpetration of bullying (items 25-32) resulted in the second factor that is called Bullying

(B). Factor II showed Eigen value of 4.41 which explained 22.09 % of variance. This was

an expected depiction except for two items that accounted for the third factor (item 32

and 12 a) having an Eigen value merely crossing one (1.50) and accounting for minimal

variance (7. 54%) of the total. Both of these items represent the cyber bullying and

victimization respectively. The third factor itself may not be meaningful having low

indices yet we decided to retain both its items as they measure an important aspect of

bullying and results can be subjected to smaller sample size. The total amount of variance

explained by three factors was 67.17%.

Scale item characteristics. This portion includes the reliability coefficients and

descriptive statistics of the extracted factors and total set of items. Additionally, it
 111

presents means and standard deviations for each item, item total correlation and

Cronbach’s alpha if the particular item is deleted.

Table 2.8

Descriptive and Item-Total Statistics of the Olweus Bully Victim Questionnaire

Item # Mean SD Item-total correlation Alpha if item deleted

Item 4 2.75 1.381 .579 .906
Item 5 2.59 1.514 .540 .907
Item 6 2.39 1.463 .611 .905
Item 7 2.13 1.426 .619 .905
Item 8 2.40 1.458 .689 .903
Item 9 2.25 1.410 .648 .904
Item 10 2.21 1.427 .748 .901
Item 11 2.25 1.441 .669 .903
Item 12 2.07 1.484 .733 .901
Item 12a 1.09 .364 .016 .914
Item 24 .15 .475 .670 .903
Item 25 2.35 1.408 .412 .910
Item 26 1.75 1.101 .446 .909
Item 27 1.86 1.235 .532 .907
Item 28 1.84 1.282 .521 .907
Item 29 1.70 1.140 .507 .908
Item 30 1.72 1.137 .569 .906
Item 31 1.84 1.195 .563 .906
Item 32 1.88 1.244 .480 .908
Item 32a 1.69 1.172 .086 .913

Item total correlations were computed to evaluate each item in order to confirm

whether all the items significantly measure the bullying phenomenon. Table 2.8 displays
 112

that deletion of any individual item changes alpha values to range between .90 and .91.

Item to total scale correlations ranged between .41 to.74, except for two items measuring

cyber victimization (12a) and cyber bullying (32a) showing correlation of .01 and .08

respectively. However we decided to retain the items for final Urdu version, considering

the sample size constraints for current findings. Mean scores of victimization items (4-

12) were greater than items measuring bullying (24-32).

Table 2.9

Descriptive Statistics and Reliability Estimates of the Olweus Bully Victim Questionnaire

(OBVQ) Urdu Version Subscales (N = 122)

Measure & Subscales K M (SD) α

Being Bullied 9 21.05 (10.78) .943

Bullying Others 9 16.63 (8.56) .803

Cyber Bullying/Victimization 2 2.14 (.638) .785

Total 20 .911

k = No of items, M (SD) = Mean (Standard Deviation), α = Cronbach’s alpha

The subscale of Bullying shows a mean of 21.05 and a standard deviation 10.78,

and the Victimization subscale shows a mean of 16.63 and a standard deviation of 8.56.

Both of the factors showed high estimates of reliability coefficient. Reliability of Cyber

bullying and victimization factor was also moderately high and mean scores were quite

low (M = 2.14, SD = .63) subjected to fewer number of items. Overall internal

 113

consistency of the 20 set of items measuring bullying and victimization aspect of OBVQ

was also very high with alpha coefficient of .91.

Table 2.10

Inter-correlation Matrix for the OBVQ Urdu version Subscales (N = 122)

Subscales 1 2 3

1. Bullying - .267** .040

2. Victimization
- - .046

3. Cyber Bullying/Victimization - - -

**p < 0.01

Table 2.10 illustrates that bullying and victimization scales that represent

traditional nature of bullying experience are significantly correlated with each other (r =

.26, p < .01), yet the magnitude of this relationship is not so strong. Cyber bullying and

victimization is not related to the bullying and victimization scales.

Convergent and discriminant validity of OBVQ Urdu version. The construct

validity of a questionnaire is ascertained by computing convergent and divergent validity

of the measure. To fulfill this purpose, two subscales of Child Behavior Checklist

(CBCL) (Aggressive Behavior and Anxious/depressed) were used.

 114

Table 2.11

Convergent and Discriminant Validity of the Olweus Bully Victim Questionnaire (OBVQ)

CBCL Subscales

OBVQ Subscales Aggressive Behavior Anxious/Depressed

Bullying .780*** .416***

Victimization .153 .497***

***p < .001.

Table 2.11 depicts a significant positive correlation among the subscales of

OBVQ and CBCL. Bullying subscale despite being correlated with anxious/depressed

dimension of CBCL exhibited stronger relationship with aggressive behavior (r = .78, p <

.001 vs. r =.41, p < .001). Similarly victimization was significantly related to anxious

depressed tendency (r = .49, p < .001) while showed no relationship with aggressiveness

(r = .15, p = ns). The nature of relationship provides some support to the convergent and

discrminant validity of these OBV subscales.

Above mentioned psychometric properties suggest that the translated Urdu

version of Olweus Bully Victim Questionnaire is a reliable and valid measure of

identifying bullies and victims among Pakistani school students.

 115

Confirmatory Factor Analysis and further validation of OBVQ.

The data of 817 students on OBVQ was submitted to CFA. As a prerequisite we

analyzed the data for missing values and normality.

The process of cleaning and screening data included inconsistency checks and

missing responses has been considered an important step before conducting sophisticated

statistical analysis (Luck & Rubin 1987; Malhotra 1999). First section presents the

Confirmatory Factor Analysis on data for types of victimization and bullying. Items of

Olweus Bully Victim Questionnaire assessing global victimization and bullying (4 and

24) and subsequent set of items representing the types of victimization and bullying were

analyzed for missing values and descriptive statistics. Results are presented in Tables

2.12 and 2.13.

 116

Table 2.12

Missing Value Analysis of Items on Olweus Bully Victim Questionnaire

Missing No. of Extremesb

Items N Count Percent Low High
Item4 817 0 .0 0 0
Item5 817 0 .0 0 0
Item6 817 0 .0 0 103
Item7 817 0 .0 0 65
Item8 817 0 .0 0 116
Item9 817 0 .0 0 66
Item10 817 0 .0 0 67
Item11 817 0 .0 0 105
Item12 817 0 .0 0 94
item12a 817 0 .0 0 0
Item24 817 0 .0 0 0
Item25 817 0 .0 0 0
Item26 817 0 .0 0 72
Item27 817 0 .0 0 51
Item28 817 0 .0 0 68
Item29 817 0 .0 0 0
Item30 816 1 .1 0 0
item31 817 0 .0 0 59
Item32 817 0 .0 0 0
Item32a 817 0 .0 0 0

Missing values were found for only one variable (.1%) that was replaced with

mean. It is not unusual to obtain extreme values due to the nature of construct being

measured.
 117

Table 2.13

Descriptive Statistics for OBVQ Items Assessing Bullying and Victimization

Skewness Kurtosis

N Min Max M SD Statistic SE Statistic SE

I4 817 1.00 5.00 2.5214 1.30697 .493 .086 -.800 .171

I5 817 1.00 5.00 2.1346 1.34820 1.032 .086 -.177 .171
I6 817 1.00 5.00 1.8519 1.21019 1.351 .086 .733 .171
I7 817 1.00 5.00 1.5973 1.04817 1.873 .086 2.719 .171
I8 817 1.00 5.00 1.9278 1.25672 1.247 .086 .397 .171
I9 817 1.00 5.00 1.6059 1.01767 1.834 .086 2.671 .171
I10 817 1.00 5.00 1.5838 1.03048 1.855 .086 2.614 .171
I11 817 1.00 5.00 1.8384 1.21705 1.416 .086 .895 .171
I12 817 1.00 5.00 1.7442 1.16081 1.574 .086 1.434 .171
I12a 817 1.00 5.00 1.2375 .71051 3.526 .086 12.966 .171
I24 817 1.00 5.00 2.3953 1.25406 .477 .086 -.791 .171
I25 817 1.00 5.00 2.0171 1.16934 .935 .086 -.128 .171
I26 817 1.00 5.00 1.6977 1.05622 1.490 .086 1.345 .171
I27 817 1.00 5.00 1.5985 .96908 1.579 .086 1.673 .171
I28 817 1.00 5.00 1.5643 1.03070 1.870 .086 2.574 .171
I29 817 1.00 5.00 1.3831 .85684 2.434 .086 5.380 .171
I30 816 1.00 5.00 1.4240 .87170 2.228 .086 4.396 .171
I31 817 1.00 5.00 1.5239 .96748 1.894 .086 2.731 .171
I32 817 1.00 5.00 1.4333 .90113 2.300 .086 4.841 .171
I32a 817 1.00 5.00 1.1995 .62865 3.825 .086 15.829 .171
 118

Table 2.13 indicates that data on the items of OBVQ was fairly normally

distributed except for items 12a and 32a that measure cyber victimization and bullying

respectively. Kline (1998; 2005; 2011) has suggested that skew value greater than 3.00

and kurtosis value greater than 8 can be problematic and may distort the results of

subsequent analysis such as CFA or inferential statistics. Considering the above

mentioned descriptive statistics, two items (12a and 32a) were not included in the

following CFA model.

CFA

A confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was performed using Analysis of Moment

Structures (AMOS), Version 20.0. CFA is a structural equation modeling technique that

is used to evaluate the goodness of fit between a theoretical model and the sample data

(Hu & Bentler, 1999). Global items were also not included in the model as we intended

to check if the set of items assessing different types of victimization and bullying had

resulted in distinct patterns within this sample that could differentiate bullies and

victims.

CFA model yielded acceptable indices however taking modification indices in

view (see App. B), model was repeated with addition of relationship path between items

25 and 27 of bullying subscale. Table 2.14 presents the fit indices for both models.
 119

Figure 2.1

Confirmatory Factor Analysis of OBVQ

 120

Table 2.14

Fit Indices of OBVQ Models

Model CMIN/DF RMSEA CFI TLI PCLOSE

1 3.24 .05 .93 .92 .26

2 2.99 .04 .94 .93 .56

A poor fit was suggested by the chi square value being significant, χ2 (103) =

333.59, p < .05. Yet the CMIN/df value (CMIN/DF = 3.24) was found approximately

acceptable (Schumacker & Lomax, 2004). We also considered RMR for not being

influenced by chi-square or sample size (Kline, 2013) that was found within acceptable

for model fit (.045). Rest of the indices that have been considered for assessing the

degree of fit between the hypothesized two factor model and the sample resulted in a

good model fit after necessary changes in 2nd model.

Tucker Lewis Index and the Comparative Fit Index were found to be acceptable

having values .92 and .93 respectively for model 1 (Tucker & Lewis, 1973; Bentler,

1990; Hu & Bentler, 1999). Root Mean Square Error of Approximation yielded a score of

.05 that had been considered excellent (Brown & Cudeck, 1993). Considering

modification indices we allowed items 25 and 27 to co-vary. It decreased the CMIN/DF

to 2.99 and increased the TLI and CFI up to one point each (.93 and .94 respectively).

PLCOSE value was .26 that adds to the support of good model fit. RMSEA decreased

(.04) and PCLOSE was improved (.56). Thus we obtained a well fitted model of OBVQ.
 121

Table 2.15

Standardized Factor Loadings of CFA model for the OBVQ

Factor 1 Factor 2
Items (V) (B)
Factor 1: Victimization (V)

OBVQ item 5 .60

OBVQ item 6 .58
OBVQ item 7 .61
OBVQ item 8 .60
OBVQ item 9 .60
OBVQ item 10 .61
OBVQ item 11 .70
OBVQ item 12 .71

Factor 2: Bullying (B)

OBVQ item 25 .54

OBVQ item 26 .61
OBVQ item 27 .65
OBVQ item 28 .62
OBVQ item 29 .62
OBVQ item 30 .64
OBVQ item 31 .61
OBVQ item 32 .58

Factor loadings for victimization scale range from .54 to .71, and items on

bullying scale also showed high loadings ranging between .54 and .65. Moreover,

moderate correlation between (r = .50) the two factors, provided further evidence that

they each reflected related yet distinct constructs.

 122

Table 2.16

Reliability Coefficients for OBVQ-Urdu by Gender and Grade

Boys Girls 4th 5th 6th Total

Scales k α α α α α α

Victimization 9 .86 .87 .88 .88 .86 .87

Bullying 9 .85 .86 .84 .84 .85 .86

Total 18 .87 .89 .88 .88 .88 .88

Cronbach’s alpha coefficients for victimization and bullying dimensions ranged

from .81 to .86 on the OBVQ-Urdu Version. Overall, the reliability estimate for 18 items

was high (α = .88). It is concluded that internal consistency of OBVQ-Urdu version,

based on Cronbach’s Alpha, is also uniformly high across gender and grade level.

Table 2.17

Descriptive Statistics for Bullying and Victimization Scales

Skewness Kurtosis

N Min Max M SD Statistics SE Statistics SE

Victimization 817 8.00 40.00 14.2827 6.37951 1.025 .086 .402 .171

Bullying 816 8.00 40.00 12.6262 5.22958 1.250 .086 1.352 .171

Descriptive statistics shows that students reported victimization (M = 16.81, SD =

7.40) more than reports of bullying (M = 15.02, SD = 6.22). Statistics for skewness and
 123

kurtosis were approximately within acceptable range demonstrating that data were

approximately normally distributed.

Table 2.18

MANOVA showing Gender and Grade Differences for Total Bullying and Victimization

Source DVs SS df MS F p η2

Gender Victimization 265.27 1 265.28 6.71 .010 .008

Bullying 58.62 1 58.62 2.18 .140 .003

Grade Victimization 752.16 2 376.08 9.51 .001 .023

Bullying 344.42 2 172.21 6.41 .002 .016

Gender * Grade Victimization 117.83 2 58.91 1.49 .226 .004

Bullying 68.42 2 34.21 1.27 .281 .003

Error Victimization 32021.16 810 39.53

Bullying 21769.32 810 26.88

Total Victimization 199514 816

Bullying 152377 816

Multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) showed significant gender

differences in victimization scores, (F (1, 810) = 6.71, p < .01, η2 =.008). Boys scored

significantly higher (M = 17.52, SD = 7.42) than girls (M = 16.19, SD = 7.35) on the

Victimization subscale. No significant differences on the bullying subscale, (F (1, 810) =

2.18, p = .14, η2 = .003) were observed across gender. MANOVA results provided
 124

evidence for significant difference in victimization scores of three grade levels, (F (2,

810) = 9.51, p < .001, η2 = .023). Students in three grades (4th, 5th, and 6th) also

significantly differed in reporting perpetration of bullying, (F (2, 810) = 6.41, p < .01, η2

= .016). Interaction of gender and age did not significantly affected bullying, (F (2, 810)

= 1.27, p < .281, η2 = .003) and victimization scores, (F (2, 810) = 1.49, p < .226, η2 =

.004).

Figure 2.2

Mean Victimization Scores by Gender and Grades

 125

Figure 2.3

Mean Bullying Scores by Gender and Grades

 126

Table 2.19

Post Hoc Comparisons among Grade Levels on Victimization and Bullying

95% CI

DVs (I) Grade (J) Grade M.diff (I-J) SE p LL UL

Victimization 4th 5th 1.627 .615 .008 .420 2.835

6th 2.341 .540 .001 1.280 3.402

5th 4th -1.627 .615 .008 -2.835 -.420

6th .713 .533 .182 -.334 1.761

6th 4th -2.341 .540 .001 -3.402 -1.280

5th -.713 .533 .182 -1.761 .334

Bullying 4th 5th 1.068 .507 .036 .072 2.063

6th 1.614 .445 .001 .740 2.489

5th 4th -1.068 .507 .036 -2.063 -.072

6th .546 .440 .215 -.317 1.410

6th 4th -1.614 .445 .001 -2.489 -.740

5th -.546 .440 .215 -1.410 .317

LSD post hoc comparisons among three grades revealed that students in 4th grade

scored significantly higher on the Bullying subscale while there were no significant

differences between students in 5th and 6th grades. Similar results were found on the

Victimization subscale.
 127

Bully/Victim Groups

In order to see concordance between teacher nominations and self-

reported bullying/victimization on OBVQ, it was important to distinguish and

classify students into bully/victim groups.

Students were identified as uniquely bullies (n = 141), uniquely victims (n = 158),

and bully-victims (n = 235). The rest were grouped together as uninvolved (n = 283). To

serve this purpose, following criteria was considered:

(1) The cases of the children that were involved in bullying others for two to

three times a month or more on global item of bullying (item 24) and at least one of the 8

subsequent forms of bullying, but had not been victims of bullying were classified as

bullies.

(2) The cases of the children that were bullied two to three times a month as

measured by global item of victimization (item 4) along with at least one of the 8 ways,

but had not been involved in bullying others, were categorized as victims.

(3) The cases of the children that had been bullying others and been bullied two to

three times a month or more on both global items and at least one of the 8 corresponding

items for bullying and victimization were distinguished as bully-victims.

Comparison between OBVQ Results and Teacher Nominations

Data from the teacher estimates of students’ involvement in bullying served as a

check on the accuracy of the self-report. The estimated number of class bullies (and
 128

victims) was compared to the total number of students who reported being bullies (and

victims).

Table 2.20

Bullying Role Classification Following OBVQ and Teacher Nomination Criteria

Teacher Nominations OBVQ Bullying Status

Bully Victim Bully-Victim Uninvolved Total

Bully 132 11 26 18 187

Victim 1 136 7 11 155

Bully-Victim 5 6 198 13 222

Uninvolved 3 5 4 241 253

Total 141 158 235 283 817

Total of 87 % of the original grouped cases as a result of self-report (OBVQ-

Urdu) has been correctly classified as evidenced by teacher nominations. Cohen’s κ was

conducted to determine the level of agreement between teacher nominations and self-

reported bullying classification for 817 students. Kappa showed high correspondence

between the two classification, κ = .82, p < .001.

The majority of the students (95.3%) labeled as uninvolved as a result of OBVQ

received the same status in teacher nominations. High level of agreement (89.1%) was

found between teacher nominations of students as bully-victim and self-reports. Most of

 129

the self-reported victims were accurately classified (87.7%) by teachers into the same

role. Although, substantial number of students nominated as bullies by teachers

acknowledged their role in self-report (70.6%), some of them were identified as bully-

victims (13.9%), and victims (5.9%). A few (9.6%) reported them as uninvolved.

Subsequently, we performed multinomial logistic regression to observe the effects

of independent variables (Two global items of OBVQ assessing bullying and

victimization) on a nominal dependent variable (the teacher nominated groups of bullies,

victims, bully/victims, and uninvolved students).

Table 2.21

Multinomial Logistic Regression Predicting Accuracy of Self-reported Bullying and

Victimization

95% CI

TN OBVQ B SE Wald OR LL UL

Bully
victimization .31 .18 2.98 1.37 .96 1.95
bullying 2.33 .19 155.63* 10.28 7.13 14.82
Victim
victimization 2.38 .19 154.4* 10.75 7.39 15.63
bullying -.14 .21 .43 .87 .58 1.32
Bully -Victim
victimization 1.89 .19 102.61* 6.61 4.59 9.53
bullying 2.18 .19 125.09* 8.81 6.02 12.89
*p < .05.
 130

Children who scored high on global bullying item (24) of OBVQ were more

likely to be designated as bullies by the teachers. Similarly self-reported victimization on

global item (4) of OBVQ significantly predicted teacher nominations for victims. Teacher

nominated bully/victim group scored higher on both of the items respectively. The results

maintain the correspondence between teacher nominations and self-reported victimization

and bullying.
 131

Discussion

The translation process of OBVQ produced fruitful outcomes while finding the

alternate to the word bullying. That is why it would be discussed in detail.

Definitional issues are directly related to assessment of bullying and peer

victimization (Espelage & Swearer, 2003). OBVQ provides a standardized definition of

bullying and the word is repeatedly used in the questionnaire. While translating OBVQ

into Urdu, term Bullying raised some questions and contradictions. Therefore a brief

qualitative examination was preferred to answer this question. Smith and Monks (2008)

have also argued that finding a suitable equivalent for the word bullying while translating

self-report questionnaires needs careful and thorough investigation. He also mentioned

two basic methods for such an investigation, recognition and recall. Recognition method

that is based on cartoon task has been widely used across countries for this purpose and

has provided appropriate alternates to bullying in Japan and Korea (e.g. Ijmi and Wang ta

respectively). Since it was not a main objective of the study, recall method was used for

identifying suitable alternate of bullying. This is one of the methods mentioned by Smith

and Monks (2008) to study the bullying conceptualization and perception.

Additionally, researchers have recommended that in view of the debatable

definitions of bullying, investigator should be very precise about what is intended by

bullying while inquiring students to report how often they bully others or are bullied

(Vaillancourt et al., 2008). Therefore this exploration was considered necessary before

finalizing the translated version of OBVQ. It brought about meaningful insight to the

phenomenon as the children provided the account themselves. The top listed terms

‘Badmashi’ and ‘Ghunda gardi’ were not retained due to ethical issues.
 132

Students’ responses for the four terms ‘Had se zayada tang karna’, Robe jamana’,

‘Sataana’ and ‘Douns Jamana’ were evaluated. This process also resulted in a definition

of bullying provided by Pakistani school students which reflects some of the aspects

included in famous definitions provided by researchers (Olweus, 1996; Rigby, 2002)

such as power imbalance, repetition and intentionality. Direct physical harm,

intimidation, verbal harm, harm to property, social and psychological harm, sexual harm,

power exhibition, and coercion were distinctly recognized as essential components of the

four terms described above. Previous studies on students’ perception of bullying

documented that majority of the pupils had been unable to identify ‘Imbalance of power’

as a component of bullying; rather ‘intent to hurt’ was acknowledged as the core feature

of bullying (Gordillo, 2011; Vaillancourt et al., 2008). Though present study was not

basically focused on investigating the perception of students about bullying, therefore

gender, age and grade-wise data of this part was not taken into account. However

findings draw somewhat similar conclusions that intention to harm was the main focus

described into physical, verbal, social, psychological and sexual types. Power and

repetition were less frequently reported.

In this investigation, ‘Dhouns Jamana’ most closely related to the defining

characteristics of bullying was considered suitable yet faced the issue of complexity.

Students in grades four and five (mostly below 10 years) might not understand the word.

Therefore the final Urdu version incorporated both ‘Dhouns jamana’ and ‘Had say

zayada tang karna” (see App. A). It was further suggested to use Dhouns Jamana or

Ghunda Gardi for adolescent version of the questionnaire after investigating their

understanding of the phenomenon. The investigation was beneficial and provided suitable
 133

alternate to include in the self-report OBVQ where bullying is frequently embedded

within sentences.

Furthermore, discussions with two eminent experts also lend support to the

present findings (personal communication, R. Hanif, May, 28, 2011; P. K. Smith,

December, 24, 2014). Most recently, Smith et al. (in press) evaluated data obtained from

cartoon task (recognition method) from different parts of the word including Pakistan.

Similar terms (i.e. Ghunda Pan, Tang karna and Dhamkana) emerged from the study.

Further investigation with regard to the perception of the terms identified in this study

and the study conducted by Smith and colleagues in Pakistan could explain the

similarities and discrepancies.

Psychometric evaluation.

Results from bilingual sample demonstrated highly significant correlations

between original and translated versions of OBVQ. It also provides the ground for

concurrent validity of the questionnaire.

Exploratory Factor Analysis. Exploratory factor analysis typically resulted in 3

factor solution. Item for being bullied and bullying other were separately loaded which

demonstrates that the measure is suitable for identifying students involved in bullying. It

can clearly differentiate between bullies and victims in schools. However, items

measuring cyber bullying and victimization were loaded distinctively on a separate factor

indicating that the students who were involved in bullying others using cyber technology

had also been victim to it. Cyber bullying has gained attention of the researchers recently

and has been linked to traditional bullying (Hinduja, & Patchin, 2010; Ybarra & Mitchell,
 134

2004). It is noteworthy that students in present sample had an average age of 11. 13 years

and the sample size were also small. Children at this age usually have access to mobile

phones and internet under adult supervision especially in the context of Pakistani culture.

Therefore, further inquiry with larger sample size is required to confirm the factor

structure obtained from present sample.

The internal consistencies of the OBVQ total scores and for the subscales were

computed using Cronbach’s α coefficient. Results showed higher reliability estimates for

victimization and the total score (> .90), still good internal consistency for bullying

subscale (.80) and moderate reliability for items measuring cyber bullying and

victimization (.78). It also proved to be reliable across grades and gender. Previous

literature on psychometric properties of translated versions of OBVQ has provided

similar evidence (Papacostaab, Paradeisiotiab, & Lazarou, 2014). However further

investigation with larger sample was required to confirm the findings. Moreover current

Urdu version was found suitable for elementary school children. Separate Urdu version

must be used using with adolescents or high school and college students after

incorporating more precise translation of the word bullying.

Nearly all the item-total correlations were above .40 demonstrating that these

items should be retained for questionnaire. Only two items (12a and 32a) showed below

average correlations. However considering the distinct nature of cyber bullying (as it also

emerged as a separate factor) and minimal impact on overall internal consistency of the

measure (.90 to .91), both of the items were retained in the final Urdu version.

Additionally, construct validity of the questionnaire was determined by

computing the relationship between bullying victimization and two important subscales
 135

of Child Behavior Checklist (CBCL) that were Anxious/Depressed and Aggressive

behavior. Each of these subscales represented internalizing and externalizing dimensions

of behavior respectively. Both of these scales were significantly correlated with bullying

and victimization scales of OBVQ. Yet the nature of relationship was stronger between

bullying and aggressive behavior; victimization and anxious or depressive tendencies.

Both of the global items (4 and 24) were used as indicators of victimization and bullying

respectively. A number of existing studies have supported this association. Solberg and

Olweus (2003) reported that students who scored higher on global item of victimization

showed significant inclination towards depression. The discriminant value of global item

assessing bullying was demonstrated by significant differences between bullies and non-

bullies on level of aggression and antisocial behavior. Other earlier and recent studies

have demonstrated consistent support for positive association between peer victimization

and internalizing symptoms such as depression and anxiety and also strong relationship

between bullying and externalizing behaviors (Boivin, Hymel, & Bukowski, 1995;

Reijntjes et al, 2010). The directionality of the relationship is however questionable and

future investigations should determine the predictive strength of this relationship.

Confirmatory Factory Analysis. The confirmatory factor analysis model for the

current sample yielded acceptable to excellent values on all the fit indices except for chi

square that was found significant. It is not uncommon to obtain a significant chi square

value for model with larger sample size that results in overstating the lack of fit (Furr,

2011; Leach et al. 2008); so the overall adequacy of the model should be interpreted with

caution by taking other fit indices into account after dismissal of chi square (Goffin,

2007; Jackson, Gillapsy Jr, & Stephenson, 2009; Markland, 2007). Model could be
 136

interpreted as good fit because of acceptable values (CFI = .93 , TLI = .92, and RMSEA

= .05) and supporting parameter estimates that present high loading on both the factors;

yet CMIN/Df was slightly higher (.32) than accepted range (< 2 and in some cases up to

3) interpret our model as a good fit. Only one change pertaining to modification indices

(correlating the errors of items 25 and 27) markedly made the difference in CMIN/DF

(2.99) and also provided better fit values on CFI and TLI (.94 and .93 respectively). The

correlation suggested that those who bully other verbally were also likely to bully their

peers by relational means (social exclusion).

The gender and grade-wise reliability estimates of both bullying and victimization

scales were high. Reliability of the scales was also high for the total sample. These results

are comparable to the existing reliability coefficients reported in different studies

(Solberg & Olweus, 2003; Kyriakides, Kaloyirou, & Lindsay, 2006; Panayiotis et al.,

2010). Initial concurrent validity evidence has been provided following the procedure

described by Shaw, Dooley, Cross, Zubrick and Waters (2013) that is high correlation for

single global item and its subsequent forms.

Gender and grade differences were observed for overall involvement in bullying

and victimization. MANOVA result suggested that boys and girls were equally involved

in bullying as perpetrators while boys reported more victimization than girls. Gender

differences have emerged as controversial issue in bullying with some researches

reporting over-involvement of male compared to female students and others suggest less

pronounced gender differences. Gender differences are more likely to be associated with

different forms of bullying for example boys involve more in direct forms as compared to

girls who are subjected to indirect forms of bullying (Rueger & Jenkins, 2014; Selekman
 137

& Vessey, 2004). Additionally, students in 4th grade were more prone towards bullying

others and being bullied compared to 5th and 6th graders. The results are in line with the

previous findings which reported bullying as more prevalent in lower grades (Salmivalli,

2002; Seals and Young, 2003). It is important to mention that only a few of studies have

used the composite scale scores on OBVQ to determine overall gender and age

differences in bullying and victimization (Panayiotis et al., 2010; Pellegrini, 2001).

Probably the extent to which a student might be bullied lies on a continuum, rather than

being an all-or-nothing experience.

Researchers have argued about the accuracy of OBVQ cut off for identifying

bullying and victimization. The standard cut-off suggested by Solberg and Olweus (2003)

has been considered to be too strict for classifying bullies and victims (Lee & Cornell,

2009). On contrary, others have offered more stringent criteria to cater the element of

repetition in bullying definition (Scheithauer, Hayer, Petermann & Juger, 2006). Since it

was the first study using Olweus questionnaire in Pakistan, we followed standard Olweus

criteria of “2 to 3 times a month” on both global items along with involvement in at least

one form of bullying or victimization. According to this criterion, 17 % students were

classified as bullies, 19 % victims and 28 % students were identified as bully-victims.

Only 34.6 % remained uninvolved.

We also examined concordance of the OBVQ with the teacher nominations to

determine if the two methods identified the same students in different bullying roles. The

results demonstrated that the teachers detected almost 87% of respondents accurately into

bullying roles who reported on the OBVQ; however, they also identified almost 30% of

respondents as having been bullied, who actually did not report bullying on the BVQ.
 138

Percent agreement across two methods for classification of victim, bully victim and

uninvolved group was high. There is more support for self-reported victimization than

bullying. Hence the social desirability can be the reason for low reported bullying by

students as noticed by researchers (Swearer & Cary, 2003).

As another indicator of conformity between the OBVQ and teacher nominations,

we conducted a logistic regression using the two OBVS global items to predict teacher

nominations. Results showed that respondents endorsing the OBVQ item for being

bullied were over 10.8 times more likely to be designated as victims by teachers than

those who did not endorse this The same was true for bullies with an odd ratio of 10.2.

Students who responded above the cut off level on both global items were more likely to

be nominated as bully-victim by their teachers. Existing studies have found only low to

moderate support to convergence between self-report and teacher nomination of bullying

(Beran & Stewart, 2008); whereas, current study has indicated moderate to high

correspondence between the two methods.

The study provides strong evidence to the psychometric properties of the Olweus

Bully Victim Questionnaire Urdu version. The questionnaire can be used in identifying

Pakistani children and adolescents’ involvement in different bullying roles. The

information obtained from OBVQ data provides guidelines to the researchers and school

psychologists for implementing suitable intervention strategies in educational institutions.

 139

Section B. Friendship Qualities Scale (FQS; Bukowski, Hoza & Boivin, 1994)

FQS is a 23 item multidimensional instrument that assesses the perceived quality

of children’s best friendship (Bukowski et al., 1994). Five factors of friendship include

mostly positive dimensions such as companionship, help, security, closeness; and one

negative aspect namely conflict. The participants rate the accuracy of each statement

about their friendship with the close nearest friend on a 5 point scale. The

Companionship subscale includes four statements that represent those activities which

friends do together. The Help subscale is consisted of 5 items and assesses how much the

dyad facilitates each other. The Security subscale comprises 5 items that address how

friends protect each other in different situations such as victimization. The Closeness

subscale refers to intimacy of relationship and perception of each other’s’ feelings

measured by 5 items. The conflict subscale identifies the level of disagreement between

friends.

The FQS is a widely used measure having sound psychometric properties with

reliabilities ranging from .71 to .86 (Bukowski et al., 1994) and .66 to .89 for the sub

scales (as cited in Demmings, 2009; Demir & Urberg, 2004). It has been translated and

adapted cross-culturally and studies have either confirmed the basic 5 factor structure

(Atik, Cok, Coban, Dogan & Karaman, 2014) or resulted in a two dimensional model

with positive and negative characteristics distinctively loading on domains (Rabbiglietti

& Ciairano, 2008).

 140

Phase 1: The Translation Process of FQS.

I contacted the authors who provided me with the scale and allowed to me use it for

research purpose after translating it into Urdu.

1. Forward translation and synthesis. Two independent bilingual

translators (PhD scholar Psychology and PhD in Urdu), whose mother language was

Urdu, translated the English version into Urdu language. They were instructed to translate

the scale for children and adolescents while considering the conceptual similarity. They

generated two translated versions including words and sentences that cover both the

psychological meanings and the culturally spoken tone of language. Both the translations

were reviewed by a committee of three bilingual experienced researchers in the field of

psychological assessment. The wording of items interpreted as complicated in terms of

understanding or communicating the ideas poorly, was modified. Discrepancies and

similarities were identified and the format and instructions were first finalized.

2. Backward translation and synthesis. Back-translation was done to

ensure fidelity of meaning. The synthesized scale was then given to two more

independent bilingual translators for backward translation. Each of them was enrolled in

PhD in Psychology and English Linguistics respectively in United Kingdom and had not

been involved in the earlier procedure of forward translation. Their cross-cultural

experience proved helpful in providing content equivalence. Expert committee initially

compared the directions, sentences and answer format of the two back-translations with

the original Friendship Qualities Scale regarding layout, language, and grammatical
 141

structure of the statements. Similarity in connotation, and relevance was sought for items

and variations were discussed to achieve the pre-final version of the scale.

3. Cognitive debriefing. The pre final Urdu version of FQS was pilot tested

for clarity with a sample of 10 students recruited from the target population i.e. 9-12

years old studying in 4th, 5th and 6th grades of public and private sector schools. The

participants were read each question and were asked to 'think aloud' as they consider

what their answer was. This procedure was used to provide additional support to the

conceptual and semantic equivalency of the FQS Urdu version. It helped in improving the

sentence structure for easy understanding by the target population for example item

numbers 14 and 20 were revised as a result of feedback during this procedure. They also

reported that item number 18 (‘If my friend or I do something that bothers the other one

of us we can make up easily’; ‘agar mera dost ya mein koe esa kam kren jo hum dono me

say kisi k liye bhe pareshani ka baais ho to hum usay mil kar thik kar letay hain’) was

difficult to understand due to its length. But when they read it twice, they figured it out

easily.

4. Committee review. Finally the expert panel including experts of

psychological assessment, two bilingual forward translators and the researcher evaluated

the outcome of cognitive debriefing, resolved inconsistencies, made necessary

amendments and finalized the Urdu version of FQS. The word “Lunch” in item 14 had

been translated as “dopehar ka khana” but students preferred to use ‘lunch’ as being more

familiar in that context. So we kept as it was. Translation of the word “disagree” in item

20 “My friend and I disagree about many things” was also revised. Urdu word “Ikhtilaf”
 142

was difficult for children to understand; therefore it was replaced with “Ittifaq-e-raey

nahe rakhtay”. It coveys that same meaning and is more explanatory.

5. Preliminary testing with bilingual sample. This rarely used step was

considered for the current translation as a pre-field test among students who were fluent

in both Urdu and English languages.

Phase2. Linguistic Equivalence and Psychometric Properties of FQS Urdu Version

We explored the linguistic and content equivalence of the FQS and examined the

psychometric properties of the FQS Urdu version. Structure of FQS was explored using

exploratory factor analysis (EFA) that was later confirmed with CFA. Reliability

estimates were obtained and convergent/divergent validity was established. Three

samples were drawn separately from schools to achieve these aims.

Linguistic equivalence.

Sample I. Thirty two students studying in 4th, 5th and 6th grades (Mage = 10.21, SD

= .97) participated in this try field test. The sample size was smaller than recommended

due to the reason of unavailability of the bilingual students as a result of strict policies by

quality English medium schools that do not allow data collection to the researcher.

Moreover the data were collected during summer vacations; therefore I contacted two

private English medium schools offering summer camp. Only one school agreed to

participate in the study.

 143

Mesures. English and Urdu versions of FQS were used in the present

investigation.

Procedure. School administration provided the attendance register and researcher

randomly selected 40 students and consent letters were distributed to them. Parents of 21

students provided their consent. Data were collected during school hours. The

participants were gathered to a separate classroom to avoid any disturbance. Remaining

13 students were approached in an evening tuition center. All of these children had been

studying in English medium schools and provided parental consent for participating the

research.

The FQS starts with naming the best friend as a prerequisite. Many students asked

if they could name more than one friend. They were instructed to think about their very

best friend for a while and then write down one name only. The instructions were read

aloud to them and they were encouraged to think about their best friend, whom they had

named on the first page, while answering the questions. The students completed the Urdu

version of the Friendship Qualities Scale in first session. One week later, the same

students were asked to complete the English version of the scale. All students who

participated in the Urdu version administration were present that day. Only two students

in school setting expressed difficulty in answering the English version and showed

unwillingness to continue. They were thanked and sent back to their classes. More than

40% information was missing for another student, who was excluded from the final

sample eventually. Rest of the students did not report any reading or comprehension

problem. Finally 32 students comprised the sample for this trial.

 144

Items of the original FQS were presented in a mixed order to appear in a different

way from that of the items of the FQS Urdu version. Responses on both versions of the

measure were then evaluated to determine criterion equivalency. This step also

establishes the preliminary technical equivalence and confirms the conceptual, semantic,

and content validity of the translated version of an instrument before conducting full

psychometric field testing (Sousa & Rojjanasrirat, 2010).

Exploratory Factor Analysis and psychometrics. Prior to administering the

Urdu version to the sample of main study, we evaluated the suitability of the scale by

exploring the factor structure on a sample of 151 students and also determined the initial

psychometric properties.

Sample II. One hundred and fifty one students (Mage = 10.79; SDage = 1.08)

including 70 boys and 81 girls participated in this study. They were drawn from 4 th, 5th

and 6th grades of three private schools in Lahore.

Measures. Following measures were used in the current investigation.

FQS Urdu version. The translated Urdu version of Friendship Qualities scale was

used for this study.

Social Competence Subscale. To determine the construct validity of the FQS, a

subscale of an indigenous measure of children’s social competence scale was used. The

Social Competence Scale for Children SCSC) is 40 item measure of social competence

for children in middle childhood or early adolescence. It includes 6 factors that have been
 145

labeled as Self-control, Empathy and Helping Behavior, Social Skills and Obedience,

Antisocial Behavior, Assertiveness and Communications Skills. The subscales used in the

present study were ‘Empathy and Helping Behavior’ (12 items) and Self-

control/Aggressive Behavior (8 items). Both subscales demonstrated adequate reliability

coefficients having Cronbach Alpha of .74 and .75 respectively (Malik & Shujja, 2011).

Procedure. The data were collected from two private academies during summer

vacations. Permission was sought from the academy staff and the parents of students. I

distributed consent letters to 200 students, of which 151 approvals were received. The

students were provided with both the scales in a single session. They were instructed to

complete the set, however, 16 students did not complete the social competence subscales.

Friendship qualities scale followed the same instructions as described previously.

Students were thanked for their participation.

Confirmatory Factor Analysis and reliability estimates. This step was

considered essential for confirming the results of EFA obtained in the previous portion of

the study (Prooijen & Kloot, 2001).

Sample III. Sample for this part of study was derived from the main study sample

of 817 students (mentioned in the previous part). It consisted of 672 students (Mage =

10.86; SDage = 1.08). There were 319 boys and 353 girls.

Measure. Followed measure was administered.

 146

Friendship Qualities Scale. Based on the findings of EFA, we used a 21 item

FQS rather than 23 item scale. Urdu version yielded adequate reliability estimates (α =

.77).

Procedure. The sample which was assessed for OBVQ in last segment was also

assessed for the quality of their friendship. Friendship Qualities Scale was administered

the next day of assessment of self-reported bullying as the school administration spared

the students only for an hour each day. Moreover, two of the schools could not be

approached for the second session with students. Therefore 684 students completed FQS

following the procedure described in previous segment. Twelve students left the scale

incomplete (more than 3 items were left unanswered). Therefore we evaluated a sample

of 672 students for CFA and their quality of friendship.

 147

Results

Early psychometrics obtained for bilingual sample (Sample I) presented first.

Later phase illustrates the results of exploratory factor analysis which ensured the

dimensionality and internal consistency of the adapted version of FQS Urdu version

along with evidence for convergent and divergent validity (Sample II). Results of

convergent and divergent validity of FQS Urdu version have also been included in this

section. Lastly Results of confirmatory factor analysis are presented (Sample III).

Table 2.22 presents the demographic characteristics of the samples used in

empirical evaluation of the translated version of FQS.

Table 2.22

Demographic Characteristics of Samples for FQS

Variables Sample I Sample II Sample II

(N= 32) (N = 151) (N = 672)
f (%) f (%) f (%)
Age
9 -10 21 (65.6) 59 (39.1) 251 (37.3)
11-12 11 (34.4) 80 (53) 418 (62.2)
13-14 12 (7.9) 3 (.4)
Gender
Girls 17 (53.1) 81 (53.6) 353 (52.5)
Boys 15 (46.9) 70 (46.4) 319 (47.5)
Grade
4th 6 (18.8) 40 (26.5) 179 (26.6)
5th 14 (43.7) 51 (33.8) 178 (26.5)
6th 12 (37.5) 60 (39.7) 315 (46.9)
 148

Table 2.22 shows the frequency distribution of samples used to establish the

linguistic and semantic equivalence of FQS and the initial psychometric properties of

Urdu version. The bilingual sample of school students (Sample I; N = 32) comprised of

53.1 % girls and 46.9% boys. Majority of the students belonged to 5th (43.7%) and 6th

(37.5%) grades. Most of the students (65.5%) were 9 to 10 years old. The age of students

in sample II (N = 122) ranged from 9-14 years. It consisted of 53.6% girls and 46.4%

boys with 26.5% students studying in 4th grade, 33.8% students in 5th grade and 39.7%

were studying in grade six. Differences in age of both samples are due to the type of

schools from which they were drawn. Sample I was drawn exclusively from a private

school; whereas sample II and II were recruited from both public and private schools.

Comparison of English and Urdu version administration of FQS.

Inter-item correlations were computed between English and Urdu versions of the

OBVQ. There was one week gap between administrations of both the versions.
 149

Table 2.23

Inter-Item Correlation between English and the Urdu Versions of FQS

Items r Items r

Item 1 .74*** Item 12 .93***

Item 2 .78*** Item 13 .74***

Item 3 .91*** Item 14 .70***

Item 4 .83*** Item 15 .82***

Item 5 .79*** Item 16 .84***

Item 6 .79*** Item 17 .81***

Item 7 .83*** Item 19 .79***

Item 8 .76*** Item 20 .64***

Item 9 .86*** Item 21 .83***

Item 10 .85*** Item 22 .78***

Item 11 .76*** Item 23 .84***

***p < 0.001

Table 2.23 shows the inter-item correlations between the English and translated

Urdu version of Friendship Qualities Scale. Results indicate two items (3 &12) showed

very strong correlations (r > .90). Most of the items (4, 7, 9, 10, 15, 16, 17, 21 & 22)

demonstrated high correlations (r > .80), whereas others (1, 2, 5, 6, 8, 11, 13, 14, 19 &

22) were moderately correlated (r > .70). Relationship strength of only one item (20) was

below .70, yet all the correlations were highly significant (p < .001). To sum up, we can
 150

say that all the items in the FQS Urdu version were comparable to those in English

version of the questionnaire.

Table 2.24

Reliability Coefficients for English and Urdu Versions of FQS (Sample I; N = 32).

Scale K k α

FQS Total Urdu version 23 .66

FQS Total English version 23 .64

Results in Table 2.24 illustrate that both English and Urdu versions of FQS yield

moderate reliability coefficients nearly matching each other.

Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) for FQS Urdu version.

Friendship Qualities Scale is originally based on a five factor model including

companionship, help, security, closeness and conflict. Items on conflict subscale were

reverse scored to convert it as a conflict resolution. Item number 15 (from security

subscale) is also reversed scored. First of all data were reduced to factors using Principal

Component Analysis (PCA) with varimax rotation. For this purpose, sampling

sufficiency of the data also computed.

 151

Table 2.25

Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Test of Sampling Adequacy and Bartlett Test of Sphericity for FQS

Measure KMO Bartlett’s Test df p

of Sphericity
Measures

OBVQ Urdu .79 886.88 253 .001

Version

KMO was found to be .79 that exceeds the minimum value of .50 suggested by

(Field, 2005) and Bartlett’s Test of Sphericity yielded highly significant findings (χ2

(253) = 886.88, p < 0.001), which showed the suitability of the data for factor analysis.
 152

Table 2.26

Principal Component Analysis with Varimax Rotation for FQS Urdu Version (N = 151).

Factor Factor Factor Factor Factor Factor

Variables 1 2 3 4 5 6
Factor A
20. “My friend would help me if I....” .748
14. “If I forgot my lunch or needed...” .653
23. “I feel happy when I am with.......” .621
18. “If there is something bothering...” .598
19. “If my friend or I do something....” .519 .451
9. “I think about my friend even........” .465
Factor B
15. “If I said I was sorry after I had a” .735
13. “My friend can bug or annoy me” .708
10. “I can get into fights with my........” .675
17. “My friend and I can argue a lot.” .642 -.375
Factor C
6. “If my friend had to move away.....” .756
22. “If my friend and I have a fight.....” .401 .671
3. “If other kids were bothering me....” .533 .407
7. “When I do a good job at................” .507 .412
Factor D
1. “My friend and I spend a lot of our” .838
2. “My friend and I do things together” .648
Factor E
12. “If I have a problem at school or...” .576
8. “Sometimes my friend does things.” .567
11. “My friend would stick up for.......” .437 .517
21. “My friend and I disagree about....” .430 -.509
5. “My friend helps me when I am.....” .430
Factor F
16. “My friend and I go to each.........” .735
4. “Sometimes my friend and I just.....” .437 -.518
Eigen Values 5.29 2.68 1.38 1.34 1.17 1.09
% of Variance 23 10.73 6.01 5.84 5.12 4.74
Cumulative % 23 33.73 39.75 45.5 50.71 55.45
Loadings > .35
 153

Table 2.26 depicts the factor loadings of 23 items from FQS Urdu version. These

items measure the positive and negative aspects of friendship quality. The analysis

showed high communalities for all the items. A principal component analysis with

varimax rotation resulted in 6 factor solution that converged in 7 iterations and loadings

ranged from .37 to .83. The first factor included items (20, 14, 23, 18, 19 & 9) indicating

the aspects of help and sharing and intimacy. Item 9 loaded on both first and fourth

factors. This factor had the highest Eigen value (5.9) and accounted for the largest

proportion (23%) of the total variance. Items representing the conflict in friendship (15,

13, 10 & 17) made the second which accounted for of 10.73% variance with an Eigen

value of 2.68. One of the items (Item No. 17) also loaded on 4th factor; however the

difference was large enough to consider it integrated in 2nd factor. Rest of the matrix was

rather ambiguous with many cross loadings and factors explaining less than 6% variance

for the measure. Eigen values of these factors merely crossed 1. This mixed picture was

quite different from the original 5 factor model of friendship quality.

Keeping in view the vague factor structure obtained by PCA and assumed

relationship of latent variables, true factor analyzing models (principal axis, maximum-

likelihood, unweighted least squares, etc.) were supposed to be used. In case of fairly

normally distributed data, maximum likelihood is the top preference. If the assumption of

multivariate normality is violated then principal factor methods (i.e. principal axis factors

in SPSS) are suggested (Fabrigar et al., 1999). Therefore, data were first checked for

normality assumption.
 154

Table 2.27

Shapiro-Wilk Test for Normality

Range M (SD) Shapiro-Wilk

Friendship
Quality 51-105 83.755 (.92) .981*

*p < .05.

Quality of friendship total score ranged from 51 to 105 with a mean score of

83.75 and standard deviation was equal to .92. Shapiro-Wilk test that is recommended to

be used for smaller sample sizes was significant.

Considering the value of Shapiro-Wilk test that demonstrated a deviation from

normality, principal factor axis with promax method of rotation was used. It is a

combination method that first provides orthogonally rotated (varimax) solution followed

by oblique rotation, resulting in more precise solution. This Exploratory Factor Analysis

produces the basic factor matrix and the pattern matrix. Findings are presented below.
 155

Table 2.28

Factor Matrix for FQS Urdu using Principal Axis Factoring (N = 151)

Factor Loadings

Factor 1 Factor 2 Factor 3 Factor 4 Factor 5

Items

FQS item 7 .592

FQS item 14 .589
FQS item 8 .584 .351
FQS item 3 .582
FQS item 18 .582
FQS item 19 .548
FQS item 9 .535
FQS item 23 .529
FQS item 22 .529
FQS item 6 .517 -.422
FQS item 5 .486
FQS item 11 .484
FQS item 12 .472
FQS item 20 .470
FQS item 4 .441
FQS item 2 .432
FQS item 13 .626
FQS item 15 .618
FQS item 10 .539
FQS item 17 .505
FQS item 21 .418
FQS item 1 .453 .718
FQS item 16
Eigen values 5.29 2.46 1.38 1.34 1.17
% of Variance 23 10.73 6.01 5.84 5.12
Cumulative % 23 33.73 39.75 45.59 50.71
Loadings > .35

Table 2.29 shows that proximal factor analysis resulted in an obvious 2 factor

solution. These two factors represent the two basic features of friendship quality. Items

that originally represent companionship, help, closeness and security are combined as

positive indicators of friendship quality that can be named as friendship support. There
 156

are only two cross loadings (item 3 & item 6), yet the first one barely met the loading

criteria (.35) and the second one yields a negative value on 4th factor that contains no

other values. The second factor retained items closer to the original factor of FQS named

as conflict. This factor comprises all the items that are scored reversely. Item 16 did not

load on any of the factors, whereas item 1 has shown cross loadings and appears to have

an insignificant contribution.

Now the results of pattern matrix are presented that are obtained after promax

rotation.
 157

Table 2.29

Pattern Matrix of Principal Axis Factoring with Promax Rotation for FQS Urdu Version

Factor Factor Factor Factor Factor Factor

Variables 1 2 3 4 5 6
Factor 1: Support
.770
20. “My friend would help me if.......”
14. “If I forgot my lunch or needed.......” .623
18. “If there is something bothering........” .580
23. “I feel happy when I am with my......” .501
11. “My friend would stick up for me.....” .484
9. “I think about my friend even when....” .392
19. “If my friend or I do something........” .391
12. “If I have a problem at school or.......” .373
Factor 2: Intimacy
6. “If my friend had to move away..........” .659
8. “Sometimes my friend does things......” .602
7. “When I do a good job at something...” .477
5. “My friend helps me when I am..........” .442
21. “My friend and I disagree about........” -.367
3. “If other kids were bothering me.........” .356
Factor 3: Conflict
15. “If I said I was sorry after I had a...... .653
13. “My friend can bug or annoy me......” .608
17. “My friend and I can argue a lot.” .573
10. “I can get into fights with my friend.” .545
Factor 4: Companionship
1. “My friend and I spend a lot of our.....” .926
2. “My friend and I do things together.” .401
Factor 5
22. “If my friend and I have a fight.........” .749
Factor 6:
4. “Sometimes my friend and I just sit....” -.430
16. “My friend and I go to each other's..”. .425
Eigen Values 5.29 2.68 1.38 1.34 1.17 1.09
% of Variance 23 10.73 6.01 5.84 5.12 4.74
Cumulative % 23 33.73 39.75 45.5 50.71 55.45
Loadings > .35
 158

The pattern matrix reveals 6 factors, of which 3 factors can be clearly extracted as

the basic model of friendship quality among Pakistani children and preadolescents. Factor

4 and 6 have only two items each, yet personify the important aspect of the original

model that is companionship. Hence the first factor is a blend of items from closeness,

security and help subscales of original FQS. It can be named as Support. The second

factor is also a mixture of 3 items from closeness (6, 7 & 8), two items from help (3 & 5)

and surprisingly one item from conflict subscale (21). Yet the loading for this item is not

so high and contains a negative value. These items jointly portray the aspect of

acknowledgment of each other’s’ presence, and help and hence named as Intimacy. The

third factor typically retained items of the Conflict dimension of friendship quality model

by Bukowski, et al. (1994). Items featuring companionship did not load on a single

factor, rather distributed across two factors (4 & 6). However, only factor 4 can be

retained for having higher factor loadings and more meaningful grouping. Item 22 also

emerged in a distinct manner (alone constituting a factor with high loading).

The factorial structure on the current sample appeared to be atypical of the

theoretical model posited by original Friendship Qualities Scale. However the distinction

between positive and negative attributes was pretty clear which provides support for

using it with Pakistani population.

Scale-item characteristics of FQS. Further evidence for psychometric properties

of FQS Urdu version is provided by explaining the items, total scale and subscales’

reliability estimates, correlation coefficients and the descriptive statistics.

 159

Table 2.30

Descriptive and Item-Total Statistics of the FQS Urdu Version (N = 151).

Item # M SD item-total correlation Alpha if item

deleted
Item 1 3.821 1.386 .333 .761
Item 2 4.000 1.171 .318 .762
Item 3 4.238 1.141 .498 .752
Item 4 4.139 1.222 .332 .761
Item 5 4.443 .9138 .320 .763
Item 6 4.271 1.160 .365 .759
Item 7 4.430 .955 .501 .754
Item 8 4.158 1.120 .449 .755
Item 9 4.238 1.117 .454 .755
Item 10 3.397 1.501 .288 .764
Item 11 4.337 1.038 .465 .755
Item 12 3.940 1.327 .287 .764
Item 13 3.450 1.656 .226 .769
Item 14 4.139 1.306 .496 .750
Item 15 3.417 1.650 .175 .773
Item 16 2.821 1.689 .052 .783
Item 17 3.211 1.606 .014 .784
Item 18 4.066 1.324 .452 .753
Item 19 4.086 1.154 .482 .753
Item 20 4.205 1.261 .431 .755
Item 21 2.821 1.549 -.033 .787
Item 22 4.324 1.203 .465 .753
Item 23 4.582 .911 .445 .757

Table 2.30 illustrates that items depicting conflict dimension and scored in reverse

had lower mean scores as compared to other items. Besides these, item 1 and 16 also had
 160

lower mean values. Item to total correlation was very low for items 16 (r = .05), 17 (r =

.01) and item number 21 (r = -.03). It suggests elimination of these items as it would also

increase the reliability of the full scale.

Cronbach’s alpha coefficients were obtained for the set of items obtained from factor

matrix (21 items; 2 subscales) and the pattern matrix (20 items; 4 subscales).

Table 2.31

Reliability Analysis of the Friendship Qualities Scale (FQS) Urdu Version and Subscales

Derived from EFA (N = 151).

Measure & Subscales K M SD α

Support 8 29.39 5.25 .78

Intimacy 6 24.36 3.67 .49

Conflict 4 13.47 4.56 .59

Companionship 2 7.82 2.17 .61

FQS Total 20 79.25 10.83 .76

Note: k = No of items, M (SD) = Mean (Standard Deviation), α = Cronbach’s alpha

The results from rotated factor analysis demonstrate high to moderate internal

consistency for Support (α = .78) and the total score (α = .76). Despite having 2 items

companionship scale demonstrated acceptable alpha value (α = .61). However poor

reliability estimates were found for Conflict (α = .59) and Intimacy (α = .49) subscales.
 161

Keeping in view the above mentioned results of exploratory factor analysis and

item statistics, we decided to exclude item numbers 4, 16 and 22 from the Final Urdu

version of FQS. Thus the final translated scale appeared to be a 20 item measure of

friendship quality having good internal consistency (α = .76). Smaller sample size could

be the reason for such distinct factor pattern. These factors may yield better reliability

estimates for larger sample.

Convergent/Divergent validity of FQS Urdu version.

Two subscales of children’s social competence scale were used. Those were

Empathy and Helping Behavior, and Self-control/aggression. Data was available for 135

students. Both factorial structures were evaluated for construct validity.

Table 2.32

Inter-correlations and Convergent/Discriminant Validity of the 4 Factor FQS Urdu

Version (n = 135)

1 2 3 4 5 6

Em_Hb - .439** .329** .267* .109 .09

Support - - .517** .365** .027 -.02

Intimacy - - - .389** .100 -.02

Companionship - - - - -.053 .04

Conflict - - - - - -.04

Sc-Agg - - - - - -

*p < .01., **p < .001.

 162

Table 2.32 shows that all the positive aspects of friendship quality, support,

intiumacy and companionship were significantly correlated with empathy and helping

behavior. They were also significantly interrelated. However, all of these subscales did

not demonstrate relationship with conflict subscale despite being scored in reverse and

portraying the component of conflict resolution. The results afford support to the

construct validity of the measure. Moreover support for convergent validity was found as

none of the FQS subscales were significantly correlated with Self-control/Aggressive

behavior subscale. Rather an inverse relationship was found demonstrating that positive

features of friendship quality were associated with lower levels of aggression and more

self-control.
 163

Confirmatory Factor Analysis of FQS Urdu version.

We first analyzed the data for missing values and normality.

Table 2.33

Missing Value Analysis for Items on FQS

Missing No. of Extremesb

N Count Percent Low High
f1 672 0 .0 0 0
f2 672 0 .0 77 0
f3 672 0 .0 62 0
f5 672 0 .0 56 0
f6 672 0 .0 86 0
f7 672 0 .0 56 0
f8 672 0 .0 4 0
f9 672 0 .0 46 0
f10 672 0 .0 0 0
f11 672 0 .0 52 0
f12 672 0 .0 0 0
f13 672 0 .0 0 0
f14 672 0 .0 86 0
f15 672 0 .0 0 0
f17 672 0 .0 0 0
f18 672 0 .0 76 0
f19 672 0 .0 2 0
f20 672 0 .0 41 0
f21 672 0 .0 0 0
f22 672 0 .0 56 0
f23 672 0 .0 . .

Table 2.33 shows that none of the values were missing however extremely low

values were observed for most of the data. Further analysis was done to check normal

distribution of data.
 164

Table 2.34

Descriptive Statistics for Items on FQS

Skewness Kurtosis
N Min Max M SD Statistic SE Statistic SE
f1 672 1.00 5.00 4.0119 1.29880 -1.033 .094 -.241 .188
f2 672 1.00 5.00 4.1994 1.15896 -1.408 .094 1.015 .188
f3 672 1.00 5.00 4.3274 1.13866 -1.936 .094 3.286 .188
f5 672 1.00 5.00 4.3438 1.03558 -1.734 .094 2.477 .188
f6 672 1.00 5.00 4.1845 1.18304 -1.347 .094 .762 .188
f7 672 1.00 5.00 4.4107 1.03489 -1.799 .094 2.347 .188
f8 672 1.00 5.00 4.1116 1.13908 -1.221 .094 .778 .188
f9 672 1.00 5.00 4.3676 1.01422 -1.773 .094 2.683 .188
f10 672 1.00 5.00 3.3080 1.57440 -.326 .094 -1.442 .188
f11 672 1.00 5.00 4.4048 1.02713 -1.898 .094 3.120 .188
f12 672 1.00 5.00 3.9583 1.34332 -1.026 .094 -.305 .188
f13 672 1.00 5.00 3.6057 1.59568 -.617 .094 -1.256 .188
f14 672 1.00 5.00 4.2381 1.22316 -1.546 .094 1.270 .188
f15 672 1.00 5.00 2.5253 1.65666 -.449 .094 -1.479 .188
f17 672 1.00 5.00 3.1443 1.63831 -.131 .094 -1.598 .188
f18 672 1.00 5.00 4.2098 1.20568 -1.488 .094 1.130 .188
f19 672 1.00 5.00 4.1042 1.19407 -1.234 .094 .554 .188
f20 672 1.00 5.00 4.4315 .96962 -1.857 .094 3.096 .188
f21 672 1.00 5.00 2.9673 1.56493 .075 .094 -1.505 .188
f22 672 1.00 5.00 4.4375 1.08188 -2.055 .094 3.452 .188
f23 672 1.00 5.00 4.6131 .92281 -2.708 .094 7.172 .188

Table 2.34 illustrates that all the data on all the items of Friendship Qualities

Scale was not problematic in terms of normal distribution as the skew and kurtosis values

did not exceed absolute values of 3.00 and 8.00 respectively (Kline, 1998; 2011).
 165

The CFA. We tested the 4 factor model which yielded acceptable values for

model fitting, yet the issue of multicollinearity was observed there for two factors. It is

important to note that reversed scored item 21 (from original conflict scale) which

actually loaded on factor 2 (Intimacy) with negative value in EFA pattern matrix, was

placed in its original scale for CFA (conflict).

Although acceptable model fit was obtained (CFI = .92; TLI = .90), yet keeping in

view the existing evidence and suggestions (Kline, 2005; Schumckar & Lomax, 2004),

we re-specified the model and collapsed the factor 2 and 4 (See App. C). In view of

modification indices, three items (11, 14 and 3) which previously embedded in support

and intimacy were separated to create a new factor. It reduced the multicollinearity

among the factors. Additionally, errors of item 11 and 14 were allowed to covary as

suggested by Lagranian multiplier (Bentler & Dijkstra, 1985; Garson, 2015). Items 2 and

12 were also eliminated because of nuisance it used to create in the model (suggested by

modification indices). Item After these adjustments we ran CFA (Figure 2.4). It

improved the result and model fitted well to the data (CFI = .95; TLI = .94). Hence we

renamed the factors as items for support were separated as another factor, the rest of

items were named as approval. Finally approval, intimacy, help and conflict constituted

the Friendship Qualities Scale. The details of fit indices and the final model are presented

below.
 166

Figure 2.4

Final Four Factor Model for FQS Urdu Version (N = 672)

 167

Table 2.35

Fit Indices of FQS Models

Model CMIN/DF RMSEA CFI TLI PCLOSE

1 2.18 .04 .92 .90 .98

2 1.75 .03 .95 .94 .10

Table 2.35 clearly illustrates that model 2 was an excellent fit to the data as

compared with model 1 (also see App. C for model 1 and modification indices). Allowing

item numbers 14 and 11 to correlate, increased the CFI and TLI values, decreased

CMIN/DF and RMSEA. Additionally RMR was found .06 for both models. Goodness of

fit index (GFI) also increased from .94 to .96 (model 1 and 2 respectively).
 168

Table 2.36

Standardized Factor Loadings on CFA Model 2 for FQS

Factor Factor Factor Factor

Variables 1 2 3 4
Factor 1: Approval
.61
20. “My friend would help me if.......”
18. “If there is something bothering........” .54
23. “I feel happy when I am with my......” .56
9. “I think about my friend even when....” .53
19. “If my friend or I do something........” .48
Factor 2: Intimacy
6. “If my friend had to move away..........” .58
8. “Sometimes my friend does things......” .56
7. “When I do a good job at something...” .57
5. “My friend helps me when I am..........” .61
1. “My friend and I spend a lot of our.....” .38
Factor 4: Support
3. “If other kids were bothering me.........” .55
11. “My friend would stick up for me.....” .67
14. “If I forgot my lunch or needed.......” .48
Factor 3: Conflict
15. “If I said I was sorry after I had a...... .54
13. “My friend can bug or annoy me......” .61
17. “My friend and I can argue a lot.” .49
10. “I can get into fights with my friend.” .56
21. “My friend and I disagree about........” .43

Item loaded high on than their respective factors. FQS total score was computed

by adding the scores of approval, intimacy and help. High score on combination of these

factors was regarded as good quality of friendship. Conflict scale being distinctively apart

was treated separately. Internal consistency and inter-correlations among factors and the

FQS total scores was computed. Results are presented in the following tables.
 169

Table 2.37

Means, Standard Deviations and Alpha Coefficients for FQS Subscales

K M SD α

Approval 5 21.72 3.511 .67

Intimacy 5 21.06 3.704 .66

Support 3 12.97 2.541 .61

Conflict 5 16.48 5.215 .66

FQS 18 55.75 8.153 .82

Internal consistency of the subscales was within acceptable range as all the alpha

values exceeded .60 (Nunnally, 1967). Mean score for conflict scale was lower than

others. Reliability of FQS total score measuring positive aspects of friendship quality was

high (α = .80).
 170

Table 2.38

Inter-correlation among FQS Factors and the Total Score

Trust Support Intimacy Conflict FQS

Approval 1 .510** .569** .015 .848**

Support .510** 1 .533** .041 .774**

Intimacy .569** .533** 1 -.019 .866**

Conflict .015 .041 -.019 1 .011

FQS .848** .774** .866** .011 1

**p < .01.

All the three factors were highly correlated with the total score on FQS. Conflict

score was not significantly correlated to any of the other factors or the total score. Among

other three factors, highly significant correlations were found. Yet all of these were

below .60, which indicates they were uniquely measuring separate dimensions of

friendship quality.
 171

Discussions

Urdu version was obtained using standardized translation procedure and the no in-

depth investigation was required as with the case of OBVQ. Results from bilingual

sample demonstrated highly significant correlations between original and translated

versions of FQS. We shall discuss the results of EFA, CFA and other psychometric

properties of the FQS Urdu Version.

Exploratory Factor Analysis. The study explored the factor structure of FQS

after translating it into Urdu. The measure has already been translated and adapted into

different languages; it was considered important for exploring significant aspect of peer

relationship that demonstrates maladaptive patterns in bullying experience. Results from

bilingual sample yielded strong relationship between items of both versions which

affirms the language equivalence. Internal consistency of both the Urdu and English

versions was also fair.

Nevertheless, Principal Component Analysis (PCA) resulted in unclear findings.

Seven items showed cross loadings and the internal structure failed to convey some

meaningful outcome. For that reason, exploratory factor analysis was conducted using

principal axial factoring as PCA does not account for underlying correlation of latent

variables. Analysis was also performed with promax rotation and results of both factor

and pattern matrices were compared. The structure indicated the presence of a two main

factors. Items loading on these factors depicted positive and negative dimension of

friendship quality. Twenty three percent of the variance was accounted for by positive

friendship quality named as Support. The findings are in line with the Italian version of
 172

FQS which also found Affect and Conflict dimensions as main factors pertaining to

friendship quality (Fonzi, Schneider, Tani, & Schneider, 1997).

Pattern matrix yet presented a different picture by delineating multidimensional

nature of friendship quality. Three factors explained the positive features of friendship

quality and were named as Support, Intimacy and Companionship. Conflict exhibited the

same structure as illustrated in the original version (Bukowski et al., 1994). This pattern

is slightly different than those reported in most of the studies that supported the original

five factor model (Atik et al., 2014). Findings are yet consistent with some of the

previous ones. A study of friendship quality in Malaysia presented an adapted version of

Bukowski ‘s (1991) model and yielded similar kind of findings. Friendship quality was

perceived by students as associated to social and emotional approval, assurance and

facilitation offered by the friend (Thein, Rzaq & Jamil, 2012).

The coefficients for factors resulted from pattern matrix were mostly low except

for Support (.78). These values are comparable to those obtained in the original scale

development study (Bukowski et al., 1994) and the Italian version (Fonzi, et al., 1997).

Reliability of the scale increased after deleting item 16 which did not distinctively load

on a factor and also showed poor item-total correlation. The Turkish adaptation study

also excluded this item (Atik, et al., 2014). The item is about going each other’s’ house

during free time. The reason for being inappropriate is evident considering our cultural

scenario. Children especially girls of this age are usually not allowed by parents to visit

each other’s’ house. Friend may not necessarily live in neighborhoods and hence it is

difficult to meet after school hours. Items 15, 17 and 21 also showed poor item-total
 173

correlation (< .20). However considering the importance of the items and appropriate

factor loadings, these items were retained for final Urdu version of FQS.

Initial construct validity was established by determining the convergent and

divergent validity of the measure. Support, Intimacy and Companionship resulting from

rotated matrix were significantly correlated with empathy and helping behavior while

showed inverse relationship with aggressive behavior. Conflict dimension remained

unrelated to empathy and helping behavior and also with the positive friendship features

(Support). Results offer adequate evidence for the construct validity of the FQS Urdu

version; however a detailed investigation of construct and concurrent validity would

finally determine the soundness of psychometric properties of the Urdu version. Earlier

findings have also established connections between friendship quality and empathy as

both are important elements of interpersonal competence among youth (Chow, Ruhl, &

Buhrmester, 2013). French, Lee and Pidada (2006) have discussed the disparities in the

perception friendship quality construct and its assessment and in their work on peer

relationships in cultural context. These differences can be attributed to measurement error

and unreliable source of information in studies of social development (Patterson, Reid &

Dishion, 1992). Using multiple methods and multiple sources may resolve the issue.

It is difficult to draw to final conclusions about the factor structure of the FQS

Urdu version. Both of the proposed models are subjected to further evaluation with lager

sample and confirmatory factor analysis. We retained 4 factor model for further

evaluation It affords more parsimony (Sethi & King, 1991), though consistency and

interpretability (Leader & Sethi, 1992) are compromised somewhat. Finally, using a 20
 174

item Urdu version of Friendship Qualities Scale was considered suitable to use for the

main study.

In the final stage of this section, we executed CFA to confirm the EFA four factor

model for the data of main study. Results of confirmatory factor analysis initially

provided support to exploratively obtained model of friendship quality. Though CFI and

TLI values fell within acceptable ranges of a less stringent criterion (>.90) however

modification indices suggested valuable changes which could decrease the CMIN/DF and

increase the baseline comparison indices (Schreiber et al.., 2006). Employing these

suggestions we added a new variable (support) for strong theoretical reasons. Three items

(3, 11 & 14) belonged to the subscale Help from original FQS model, and covariance was

also found amongst them. Doing so increased the construct validity of the measurement

model and decreased the multicollinearity found among factors in model 1. Lagranian

multiplier further suggested some covariance in error parameters of item numbers 2 and

12 with items in conflict scale. We incorporated the suggestion and found notable

changes in fit values. Re-specified model provided an excellent fit (CFI = .95; TLI = .94,

RMSEA = .03, CMIN/DF = 1.7). All the factor loadings were greater than .35 and

reasonable covariance among factors was found (< .85; Kline, 2005) which indicated that

each factor distinctly measured different aspect of friendship quality. Although such

changes might compromise the parsimony of the model, however a strong theoretical

ground, cultural diversity of adapted version and significant increase in fit indices are

enough to explain the logic behind these adjustments (Schumcka & Lomax, 2004). We

carefully executed this process by not allowing correlations of errors from two different

factors and only larger indices were considered for change. Experts support such
 175

revisions until a good fit is achieved. Moreover, there is evidence to combine the

categories if they demonstrate poor discriminant validity (as found in model 1) (Toe, Tsai

& Yang, 2013, Garson, 2015).

The modified pattern of item structure assessed constructs of approval, intimacy,

support and conflict. Factor other than conflict were strongly correlated and were found

either unrelated or inversely related with conflict scale. Therefore total score of

friendship quality was computed for three factors while conflict scale was treated

separately. Reliability estimates for all the subscales were acceptable (.60 to .70)

(Nunnally, 1967). Moreover it is not unusual to obtain poorer reliability and different

pattern of reverse scored items than normally scored items. Sometimes, respondents

overlook the negative item and maintain same response style. Excluding them or dealing

them separately is a better idea to maintain the reliability of the measure (Conard et al.,

2004). These variations in present study could be subjected to younger age group of

children and also the grade level. Students in 4th and 5th grade might not be mature

enough to resolve their conflicts, yet still appreciate the positive aspects of the

relationship. While students in 6th grade go through school transition phase and

friendships are still at early stages and later could become stronger.

The findings of study 1 present good support for the internal consistency and

validity for the two measures.

 176

Chapter-III

STUDY 2: PREVALENCE ESTIMATES OF BULLYING AND

VICTIMIZATION

Study 2 was divided into following sections.

Section A. The first second section provides prevalence estimates of bullying and

peer victimization across gender and grades. Prevalence and differences for different

types of victimization and bullying across gender and grade were reported. Data on

remaining parts of OBVQ (i.e. severity, location, duration, place and reporting of

bullying, and students’ reactions toward bullying) were also evaluated to portray a

comprehensive picture of bullying in Pakistani schools.

Section B. Second section includes comparison of bully/victim groups on

measures of academic performance that are exam marks and school attendance

percentages of the students. Differences are also observed for demographic variables such

as monthly income, family size and parental education.

Objectives of the Study

1. To determine the prevalence estimates of bullying and victimization in Pakistani

public and private sector schools.

2. To identify frequently occurring forms of bullying in Pakistani public and private

sector schools.

3. To see the impact of bullying and victimization on academic performance of

students.
 177

4. To investigate the demographic (e.g. gender, grade, type of school, monthly

income and family size) correlates of bullying at schools.

Hypotheses

In view of the extant literature, following hypotheses were formulated.

1. Patterns of bullying and victimization will differ across gender.

2. Prevalence of bullying and victimization would be higher in students of lower

grades.

3. Prevalence of verbal and physical bullying and victimization would be higher as

compared to other types among school students.

4. Boys would report more direct form of bullying/victimization (e.g. verbal and

physical) as compared with girls.

5. Girls would be more frequently involved in relational bullying/victimization

(rumor spreading and social exclusion) as compared with boys.

 178

Method

Participants

For sample details, see sample III, phase 2, section A of the study 1. Demographic

details are presented in section of the current study.

Measures

Revised Olweus Bully Victim Questionnaire-Urdu version. The present study

utilized an Urdu version of the Revised Olweus Bullying/Victim Questionnaire (OBVQ)

Initial empirical investigation of the Urdu version had resulted in acceptable

psychometric properties with being bullied and bullying others dimensions yielding

Chronbach Alpha of 0.79 and 0.82 respectively. The concurrent validity using original

and the translated version with a sample of 36 bilingual students had also demonstrated

significant correlation coefficients ranging from 0.77 to 0.94. The current study further

evaluated the reliability and validity of the two sets of items measuring bullying and

victimization with a larger sample.

Most of the earlier studies have used the cutoff point of ‘‘2 or 3 times a month’’

to classify a student as involved or uninvolved in bullying or victimization and the

subsequent forms (Glew et al, 2005; Kristensen & Smith, 2003) as per recommendations

by Solberg and Olweus (2003). However some researchers have used a bit less strict

criteria by considering a single incident enough to account for involvement in bullying

(Vieno, Gini & Santinello, 2011). This standard can be followed especially for cyber

bullying (Monks, Ortega-Ruiz & Rodr´ıguez-Hidalgo, 2008; Raskauskas & Stoltz, 2007)

However, we chose the cutoff point of ‘‘2 or 3 times a month’’ for all items except for
 179

cyber bullying that followed the “once or twice a month”. So, for overall involvement

and each type of bullying a student was classified as (a) exclusively involved in bullying

others (bully only), (b) exclusively involved in being bullied (victim only), (c) involved

in both bullying others and being bullied (bully-victims), and (d) completely not involved

in overall and any of the different forms of bullying (uninvolved).

Demographic Data Sheet.

Although we employed a passive consent procedure; yet the consent letter

included a demographic sheet. Information regarding parent’s occupation, education,

number of total family members and monthly household income was enquired (see App.

D).

Academic Record

Academic record included average of last two exams and average class attendance

of last two months. Most of the schools did not cooperate to provide this information. As

three schools totally refused to share the record while several reminders were sent to

other schools for providing the required details. Three schools (one private, one semi-

government and a public sector school) gave direct access to their record.

Procedure

Since the data were obtained from the same sample used previously, consult the

last segment (CFA Sample III) in 2nd phase of section A of the first study.
 180

Results

Results for study 2 are presented by two sections. First section includes the

prevalence estimates of bullying and victimization and related information obtained

through OBVQ. Second section reveals demographic information and academic

outcomes.

Section A: Prevalence of Bullying and Victimization

This section mainly aimed at describing prevalence of bullying and victimization, the

types, and other relevant information among bully/victim groups. Olweus Bully Victim

Questionnaire provides abundance of such information but more pertinent aspects have been

reported in the dissertation. For those who reported being bullied as victims or bully-victims,

data on class and number of bullies, severity and duration of bullying, the place where

bullying occurred and to whom they reported the occurrences of bullying was analyzed as

being valuable for intervention and prevention measures. On part of those who reported

bullying others as bullies and bully-victims, Data were analyzed for frequencies, percentages

and non parametric statistics was mostly employed.

 181

Figure 3.1

Distribution of Bully Victim Groups in the Sample (N = 817)

The Figure (3.1) indicated that relatively smaller percentage of the total sample

acknowledged that they were just bullies, never victims (17.3%). Students classified as

victims were 19.3%. Most of the students were involved both in perpetration and

victimization as bully-victim group constituted 28.8% percent of the sample. Uninvolved

groups made 34.6% of the total sample indicating that 65% students were involved in

bullying behaviors.
 182

Figure 3.2

Bully victim Groups across Grades

Figure 3.2 showed that greater proportion of bullies (19.2%) was in 5th grade

while 14.6% belonged to 4th grade and 17.5% bullies were studying in 6th grade. Lowest

proportion of victims (16.9%) was also found in 5th grade. Students in grade 4 were most

often recognized as victims (23.9%), whereas 18.3% victims studied in grade 6. A large

proportion of bully-victim group belonged to 4th grade; while 26.8% studied in grade 5

and 2.1% bully-victims were students of grade 6. Uninvolved group constituted 25.4% 4th

graders, 37.1% 5th graders and 38.1% students studying in 6th grade.
 183

Figure 3.3

Percentage of Boys and Girls in Bully/Victim Groups

Figure 3.3 illustrated that equal number of boys (17.2%) and girls (17.3%) were

identified as bullies. Slightly higher numbers of boys (20.2%) were classified as victims

as compared to girls (18.6%). More boys (31.2%) were classified as bully-victims than

girls (25.9%). Uninvolved group mostly included girls (38.2%) as compared to boys

(30.5%).
 184

Table 3.1

Distribution of Bully-Victim Groups according to the Type of Schools

Type of School Bully Victim Bully-Victim Uninvolved Total

Public 69 (17.2%) 74 (18.5%) 134 (33.5%) 123 (30.8%) 400

Private 49 (17.9%) 53 (19.3%) 71 (25.9%) 101 (36.9%) 274

Semi-Govt 23 (16.1%) 31 (21.7%) 30 (21.0%) 59 (41.3%) 143

Total 141 (17.3% 158 (19.3%) 235 (28.8%) 283 (34.6%) 817

Table 3.1 indicated that proportion of bullies was almost equal in public and

private schools (17.2% and 17.9% respectively). The ratio was relatively lower in semi-

government schools (16.1%). However victims were most often found in semi-

government schools (21.7%). Hence again public and private schools had minor

differences in prevalence of victimization (18.5%) and (19.3%) respectively. Most of the

students identified as bully-victims used to study in public sector schools (33.5%),

followed by private (25.9%) and semi-government schools (21%). Most of the students

studying in semi-government schools remained uninvolved in bullying (41.65%),

whereas fewer students in public sector schools were identified as uninvolved (30.8%).
 185

Table 3.2

Pearson Chi-Square for Bully-Victim Groups across Gender, Grades and type of Schools

χ2 df p

Gender 6.400 3 .094

Grade 16.387 6 .012

Type of School 11.580 6 .072

N of Cases 817

Chi-square test revealed that the relationship between gender and bully–victim

status type differences was non-significant. It showed that boys and girls were equally

distributed into bully-victim groups, χ2 (3) = 6.4, p = .09. Pearson chi square test for

independence showed significant differences among for involvement in bully-victim

groups by grade levels, χ2 (6) = 16.38, p < .01. Chi square results were non-significant

for type of schools.

Severity of Bullying and Victimization across Bully/Victim Groups

Following tables compare bullies and victims with bully-victim group for frequent

involvement in bullying behaviors. The standard cut off (two to three times a month) is

represented as occasional bullying. The last two response options (once a week, several

times a week) were categorized together as frequent bullying. This category represents

the severity of bullying behavior.

 186

Table 3.3

Severity of Bullying Behavior by Bully-Victim Status Types, Gender and Grade

Variables Groups Occasional Frequent Total

f (%) f (%) N

Bully/Victim Status [χ2 (1) = .62, p = ns]

Bully 88 (61.7%) 53 (38.3%) 141

Bully-Victim 137 (56.2%) 98 (43.4%) 235

Gender [χ2 (1) = .483, p = ns]

Boys 108 (58.1%) 78 (41.9%) 186

Girls 117(61.6%) 73 (38.4%) 190

Grade [χ2 (2) = 2.32, p = ns]

4th 57 (54.8%) 47 (45.2%) 105

5th 64 (65.3%) 34 (34.7%) 98

6th 104 (59.8%) 70 (40.2%) 174

 187

Table 3.4

Severity of Victimization Experience by Bully-Victim Status Types, Gender and Grade

Variables Groups Occasional Frequent Total

f (%) f (%) N

Bully/Victim Status [χ2 (103) = .132, p = ns]

Victim 89 (56.3%) 69 (43.7%) 158

Bully-Victim 128 (54.5%) 107 (45.5%) 235

Gender [χ2 (103) = .317, p = ns]

Boys 106 (53.8%) 91(46.2%) 197

Girls 111(56.6%) 85 (43.4%) 196

Grade [χ2 (103) = 1.85, p = ns]

4th 62 (50.4%) 61 (49.6%) 123

5th 55 (59.1%) 38 (40.9%) 93

6th 100 (56.5%) 77 (43.5%) 177

Tables 3.3 and 3.4 demonstrated that frequency of occasional/moderate to severe

or more frequent bullying and victimization among perpetrators and victims in three

different roles did not differ significantly. Severity of bullying and victimization yielded

no significant differences in proportion by gender, grade and bully-victim groups.

 188

Prevalence of Victimization Types and Related Questions on OBVQ

Follow analysis were only performed with regard to students who reported being

bullied either as victims or bully-victims. With reference to these 393 students (158 victims

and 235 bully-victims) who had certainly experienced some form of bullying in general,

further investigation was conducted to determine the frequency in which various incidents of

bullying occurred. Thus, the focus was the frequency of these incidents differed for the three

grades and gender.

Table 3.5

Categorical Distribution of Victimization Types across Gender and Grade Level

Gender Grade

Types of Victimization Boys Girls 4th 5th 6th Total

f (%) f (%) f (%) f (%) f (%) f (%)

Called mean names, teased 124(32.8) 113(25.6) 69(33.7) 63(29.6) 105(26.3) 237(29)

Sexual comments 76(20.6) 71(16.1) 57(38.8) 36(24.5) 54(26.7) 147(18)

Ethnic, racial comments 92(24.4) 81(18.4) 58(33.5) 51(29.5) 64(37) 173(21.2)

Hit, kicked, pushed 63(16.7) 64(14.5) 44(34.6) 34(26.8) 49(36.8) 127(15.5)

Threatened, forced action 58(15.3) 65(14.8) 38(30.9) 36(29.3) 49(39.8) 123(15.1)

Money taken, damage 58(15.3) 58(15.3) 45(38.8) 29(25) 42(36.2) 116(14.2)

Subject of rumor 88(23.3) 110(25) 75(37.9) 44(22.2) 79(39.9) 198(24.2)

Excluded or ignored 78(19.3) 110(25) 72(38.3) 41(21.8) 75(39.9) 188(23)

Cyber 72(19.2) 29(6.6) 24(11.7) 21(9.9) 56(14.1) 101(12.4)

 189

The percentages for being bullied by types demonstrate the highest prevalence

estimate (29%) for verbal victimization that is characterized by name calling and teasing

in hurtful manner followed by being subject of rumor (24.2%) and excluded or ignored

by others (23%). Having money or possessions taken or damaged (14.2%) was least

reported. Thus direct verbal and relational types of peer victimization have been found

common among Pakistani preadolescents.

Table 3.6

Pearson Chi-square for the Types of Victimization across Gender and Grades

Questions Gender Grade

χ2 p χ2 p

Verbal 5.124 .024 .359 .166

Exclusion 2.129 .145 22.674 .001

Physical .908 .341 8.196 .017

Rumor .304 .581 22.789 .001

Damage .809 .369 14.590 .001

Threat .059 .807 4.912 .086

Racial 4.37 .037 13.503 .001

Sexual 2.227 .136 18.924 .001

Cyber 24.933 .001 1.757 .415

Table 3.6 indicated that more boys than girls were teased and called mean names

with harm, χ2 (1) = 5.124, p < .05; were exposed to ethnic and racial comments, χ2 (1) =

4.37, p < .05, and cyber victimization, χ2 (1) = 24.93, p < .001. Students especially girls
 190

were less frequently bullied by cyber means. Social exclusion that is typically

experienced by girls showed the same pattern for the current sample. Other types were

almost equally distributed across gender.

Verbal victimization seemed to be associated more with lower grade levels yet

this association was not found significant, χ2 (2) = .59, p < .166; while students in higher

grades tended to experience more physical victimization, χ2 (2) = 8.19, p < .01. Both of

the indicators of relational victimization i.e. exclusion and rumor were different across

grade levels, χ2 (2) = 22.67, p < .001and χ2 (2) = 22.78, p < .001. Furthermore damage to

property, χ2 (1) = 14.59, p < .001, racial χ2 (1) = 13.50, p < .01 and sexual victimization,

χ2 (1) = 18.92, p < .001 experiences also differed across grade levels. Students especially

girls were less frequently bullied by cyber means yet this variation was not significant, χ2

(1) = 1.75, p = ns

Moreover victims and bully-victim groups were compared for their experience of

various types of victimization. Chi square tests of independence were computed for this

purpose. The only significant difference between pure victim and bully-victim group was

found for being threatened, χ2 (1) = 11.75, p < .001 as almost 72% of victims within this

type belonged to bully-victim group.

Who is bullying?

Item numbers14 and 16 were evaluated to check the information provided by victims’

about those who bully them. This portion is also includes only the responses of students

who mentioned that they had been bullied (victims and bully-victims).
 191

Table 3.7

Class Reported by Victims and Bully-Victims in which the Bullies Study

Gender Grade

Boys Girls 4th 5th 6th

Class of Bully(ies) f (%) f (%) f (%) f (%) f (%) Total

My own Class 131(39.5) 201(60.5) 85(25.6) 88(26.5) 159(47.9) 332

Another Section 37(47.4) 41(52.6) 22(28.2) 24(30.8) 32(41) 78

Next Class 49(63.6) 28(36.4) 31(40.3) 14(18.2) 32(41.6) 77

Previous Class 11(61.1) 7(38.9) 6(33.3) 7(38.9) 5(27.8) 18

Different Classes 44(64.7) 22(35.3) 11(16.2) 14(20.6) 43(63.2) 18

Table 3.7 indicated that most of the victims were bullied by their own class fellows.

Boys and girls seem to differ in this regard. Inter class discords are more prominent among

boys while girls were mostly bullied by their own class mates. Grade differences can also be

observed. Within class victimization was reported mostly by students of 6th grade. Students

of 4th and 6th grades were more likely to be bullied by seniors and many of the 6th grade

students were bullied by pupils of different classes.

 192

Table 3.8

Number of Bullies Reported by Victims and Bully-Victims across Gender and Grades

Gender Grade
No. of Boy Girl 4th 5th 6th Total
Bullies
Only One 103(36.8%) 177(63.2%) 82(29.3%) 73(26.1%) 125(44.6%) 280

2 to 3 96(48.8%) 103(51.2%) 51(25.4%) 54(26.9%) 96(47.8%) 201

4 to 9 36(69.2%) 16(30.8%) 14(26.9%) 11(21.2%) 27(51.9%) 52

More than 9 15(83.3%) 3(16.7%) 7(38.9%) 3(16.7%) 8(44.4%) 18

Different 20(74.1%) 7(25.9%) 7(25.9%) 4(14.8%) 16(59.3%)

27
Classes

Table 3.8 demonstrated that most of the bullying was done by either a single

individual or the small group of 2 to 3 students. Single person bullying was more often

reported by girls while most of the boys experienced it by groups. Grade differences were

also noticeable as students in 6th grade outnumbered others in reporting about number of

students who bullied them.

 193

Table 3.9

Pearson Chi-square of Bully’s Class and Number across Gender and Grade

Questions Gender Grade

χ2 p χ2 p

Class of Bullies 27.51 .001 23.66 .009

No. of Bullies 40.53 .001 13.37 .204

Table 3.9 confirms that above mentioned differences in proportion of students

reporting about bully’s class and number were significant except for number of bullies

reported by different grades.

Duration of bullying

Table 3.10

Duration of Victimization Reported by the Total Sample and Those who had been Bullied

(Victims and Bully-victims)

Groups 1-2 weeks About 1 month About 6 months 1 to several year Total

Total 339 (41.5%) 123 (15.1%) 33 (34%) 78 (9.5%) 573

Victim 78 (49.4%) 47 (29.7%) 10 (6.3%) 19 (12.1%) 158

Bully-victim 118 (50.2%) 57 (24.3%) 16 (6.8%) 39 (16.6%) 235

Bullying mostly lasted for one to two weeks (41.5 %) as reported by the total

sample. There appears no difference reported by victim and bully-victim groups in

 194

shorter duration of victimization. Long term victimization was experienced more by

bully-victim group (16.6%) compared to victims only (12.1%).

Place where bullying occurred

Figure 3.4

Percentage of Students who Reported Being Bullied at Different Places in School

60

50

40

30

20

10

Figure 3.4 showed that playgrounds (53.2%) and class room (45%) in the absence

of class teacher were the most sensitive areas in schools as most of the bullying was

reported to occur at these places. Bullying also occurred frequently at canteen and in the
 195

class even in the presence of teacher. It rarely happened in the vehicle (bus, van, rikshaw)

while going to or coming from the school.

Table 3.11

Place of Bullying reported by Gender and Grades

Locations Gender Grade

χ2 p χ2 p

Playground 8.28 .005 6.48 .039

Hall/Stairs .157 .781 1.62 .443

Classroom (teacher present) 1.46 .239 2.37 .306

Classroom (teacher absent) .122 .761 12.42 .002

Bathroom 1.56 .458 3.91 .419

Another class 1.01 .601 7.09 .131

Canteen/Cafeteria 1.04 .789 4.83 .565

On the Way 4.23 .238 11.08 .086

Van/bus Stop 5.01 .082 8.55 .073

Vehicle to School .368 .680 7.29 .026

As far as grade was concerned, significant differences were found regarding two

places where bullying takes place, namely playground and in class (teacher absent). Students

in 4th (61.8%) and 5th (53.8%) were more often bullied in playgrounds compared to grade 6

students (49.6%). Students in grade 6 were more frequently bullied in class in the absence of

teacher (54.8%). With respect to gender, significant differences occurred regarding

 196

playground only (60.4% boys; 45.9% girls), while no significant differences were found with

respect to any other of the locations.

Disclosure of bullying

Table 3.12

Frequency Distribution of the Boys and Girls and Students of Different Grades about

Disclosure of Bullying

Grade Gender
Complain th th th Boys Girls
4 5 6 Total
f (%) f (%) f (%) f (%) f (%) f (%)
Did not Report 35(28.5) 19(20.4) 55(31) 63(32) 46 (23.5) 109(27.7)

Reported to Someone 88(71.5) 74(79.6) 122(68.9) 134(68) 150(76.5) 284(72.3)

Total 123 93 177 197 196 393

Most of the students disclosed information about being bullied to someone (72.3%).

Still nearly one fourth (27.7%) did not share their experience with anyone. It was further

investigated whether, in terms of the gender and grade, the students who had been bullied

told someone about the incident(s). With regard to grade (χ2 (2) = 3.49, p = ns) and gender

(χ2 (1) = 3.55, p = ns), no significant results were found.

 197

Figure 3.5

Reporting Others about Bullying

50

45

40

35

30

25

20

15

10

0
Class teacher Parents school staff Sibling Friends

Figure 3.5 indicated that most of the students (46.1%) reported to the school staff

about their experience of victimization. Many of the students shared their experience of being

bullied with friends (32.8%) and also told the class teacher (32.3%). Siblings were the second

last preference of students about reporting that bullying occurred (24.7%). Fewer victims or

bully-victims complained to their parents (11.2%) regarding victimization.

 198

Prevalence of Different Types of Bullying

Data on OBVQ item 24 to 32a were analyzed to identify the most frequently

occurring type of bullying across gender and grade.

Table 3.13

Proportion of Participants Bullying Others by Types of Bullying

Gender Grade

Types of Bullying Boys Girls 4th 5th 6th Total

f (%) f (%) f (%) f (%) f (%) f (%)

Called mean names, teased 133(35.3) 115(26.1) 62(30.2) 68(31.9) 118(29.6) 248(30.4)

Sexual comments 52(13.8) 43(9.8) 33(16.1) 27(12.7) 35(8.8) 95(11.6)

Ethnic, racial comments 70(18.6) 50(11.4) 35(17.1) 30(14.1) 55(13.8) 120(14.7)

Hit, kicked, pushed 84(22.3) 62(14.1) 45(22) 43(20.2) 58(14.5) 146(17.9)

Threatened, forced action 45(11.9) 46(10.5) 38(18.5) 20(9.4) 33(8.3) 91(11.1)

Money taken, damage 42(11.1) 45(10.2) 34(16.6) 20(9.4) 33(8.3) 87(10.6)

Subject of rumor 51(13.5) 75(17) 43(21) 29(13.6) 54(13.5) 126(15.4)

Excluded or ignored 59(15.6) 99(22.5) 48(23.4) 41(19.2) 69(17.3) 158(19.3)

Cyber 63(16.9) 30(6.8) 27(13.3) 16(7.5) 50(12.6) 93(11.4)

Total 377 440 205 213 399 817

As with overall victimization, prevalence of reporting being a bully for verbal

type remained highest among all types of bullying followed by exclusion and physical

types. Boys were more verbally abusive compared to girls. Girls were typically more
 199

involved in relational bullying i.e. excluding others and spreading rumors, as compared to

boys. Bullying appears to decrease with increasing grade level.

Pure bullies and bully-victim group were alike for involvement in most types of

bullying except for the occurrences of threatening and forced action that were

significantly higher, χ2 (1) = 14.15, p < .001, in bully-victim group (79.1%) as compared

to pure bullies (20.9%).

Information regarding School, Friends and Students’ Reaction and Perception

about Bullying

This portion analyzed responses on different items of OBVQ with the help of

independent sample t-test to check the gender differences and one way ANOVA to

evaluate differences across grades.

 200

Table 3.14

Summary of t-test for Boys and Girls on OBVQ Items (N = 817)

95% CI

Items t df LL UL Cohen’s d
1. School liking -2.845** 815 -.332 -.061 -.198

2. No. of Friends 1.594 815 -.031 .298 .111

23. Empathy -2.036* 815 -.274 -.004 -.142

36. Joining bullying -2.108* 814 -.517 -.018 .147

37. Own reaction -2.310* 814 -.644 -.052 .161

38. Being Afraid 1.106 814 -.108 .386 .077

39. Class teacher -.962 813 -.329 .112 .067

*p < .05; **p < .01

The Table 3.14 demonstrated significant gender differences for school liking, t

(815) = -2.845, p < .01; empathy towards victims, t (815) = -2.036, p < .05; willingness to

join bullying, t (815) = -2.108, p < .05; and students’ own reaction towards the act of

bullying, t (815) = -2.310, p < .05. Girls (M = 4.5, SD = .89) tend to like their school

more than boys (M = 4.3; SD = 1.07). Both boys and girls had almost equal number of

friends as they showed no significant differences. Higher score on items related to

empathy, joining in bullying and own reaction indicates pro-victim attitude. Girls showed

more pro-victim attitude as compared to boys. Boys and girls did not differ in being

afraid of bullying at school and their perception of class teacher’s efforts to stop bullying.
 201

Table 3.15

One-Way ANOVA Showing Grade Differences on OBVQ Items (N =817)

4th 5th 6th

Variables M (SD) M (SD) M (SD) SS df MS F p

School liking 4.45 (1.04) 4.44 (1.03) 4.44 (.94) .019 2 .009 .010 .990

No. of Friends 3.45 (1.19) 3.42 (1.16) 3.27 (1.12) 4.531 2 2.266 1.581 .206

Empathy 3.51 (.91) 3.43 (.97) 3.39 (1.01) 2.154 2 1.077 1.123 .326

Join bullying 3.83 (1.71) 3.91 (1.83) 3.81 (1.85) .999 2 .499 .152 .859

Own reaction 3.81 (2.24) 3.90 (2.06) 4.13 (2.14) 16.352 2 8.176 1.768 .171

Being Afraid 2.30 (1.5) 2.02 (1.37) 2.20 (2.09) 8.880 2 4.440 1.379 .252

Class teacher 3.22 (1.62) 3.23 (1.63) 3.39 (1.57) 4.002 2 2.001 .778 .460

No significant grade differences emerged for the above mentioned variables.

 202

Table 3.16

One-Way ANOVA Showing Mean Differences on OBVQ Items (N =817) across Bully-

Victim Groups

Bully Victim Bully- Uninvolved

Victim

M (SD) M (SD) M (SD) M (SD) SS df MS F p

School liking 4.41(.97) 4.41(1.1) 4.30(1.1) 4.60(.83) 12.01 3 4.01 4.13 .006

No. of Friends 3.48(1.2) 3.12(1.3) 3.24(1.2) 3.46(1.1) 16.37 3 5.46 3.84 .010

Empathy 3.24(1.1) 3.53(.95) 3.4(.92) 3.49(.95) 7.88 3 2.63 2.76 .041

Joining bullying 3.29(1.7) 3.86(1.8) 3.38(1.6) 4.48(1.7) 207.59 3 69.19 22.73 .001

Own reaction 4.19(2) 3.55(2.3) 4.05(2.1) 4.10(2.1) 40.69 3 13.56 2.95 .032

Being Afraid 2.17(1.5) 2.19(1.4) 2.89(1.6) 1.66(2.1) 166.68 3 55.56 18.34 .001

Class teacher 3.44(1.6) 3.06(1.7) 3.17(1.5) 3.56(1.6) 35.05 3 11.68 4.60 .003

Uninvolved group showed more positive attitude towards school (M = 4.60, SD =

.83), greater number of friends (M = 4.60, SD = .83), more liking for school (M = 4.60,

SD = .83) and was less afraid of bullying at school (M = 4.60, SD = .83). They also

acknowledged the efforts of class teacher in preventing bullying behavior (M = 4.60, SD

= .83).
 203

Section B. Academic and Socioeconomic Correlates of Bullying and Victimization

Table 3.17

Means, Standard Deviation, Skewness and Kurtosis for Academic and Demographic

Variables for Total Sample

Variables N Min Max M SD Skewness Kurtosis

Marks % 571 20.00 98.60 61.44 16.80 .02 -.74

Attendance 363 55.80 100.00 87.26 9.47 -.55 -.32

Monthly Income 347 4000 400000 32415.4 35678.48 5.16 42.18

Family Size 330 3.00 22.00 7.55 3.11 1.54 2.81

No. of Siblings 416 1 10 3.83 1.47 .997 2.05

Birth Order 348 1 9 2.44 1.39 1.46 3.34

All variables were approximately normally distributed except for monthly income

which presented great variation ranging from 4000 to 400000. Variation was also found

in family size.

All these variables were not coded and were treated as continuous variables.

Being outcome of bullying, academic variables (marks percentage and attendance) were

evaluated for differences across gender and bully/victim groups using 4X2 Univariate

ANOVA. Socioeconomic variables such as monthly income, family size, number of

siblings and birth order were analyzed for association with victimization (OBVQ item 4;

global victimization) and bullying (OBVQ item 24; global bullying).

 204

Table 3.18

ANOVA for Academic Variables across Gender and Bully/Victim Groups

Dependent

Source Variable SS df MS F p η2

Gender Exam Marks 120.61 1 120.61 .440 .507 .001

Attendance .006 1 .006 .001 .994 .001

B/V Groups Marks 12188.57 3 4062.85 14.831 .001 .111

Attendance 362.80 3 120.93 1.341 .261 .011

Gender × B/V Marks 437.84 3 145.95 .533 .660 .004

Attendance 118.47 3 39.49 .438 .726 .004

Error Marks 97247.66 355 273.93

Attendance 32010.31 355 90.17

Total Marks 1578961.39 363

Attendance 2796804.77 363

B/V = Bully Victim

There was no significant main effect of gender on exam marks percentage and

attendance percentage of students. However significant main effect of bully/victim group

was demonstrated F (3, 355) = 14.83, p < .001, η2 = .11. Gender and group interaction

was also insignificant.

 205

Figure 3.6

Bully/Victim Profile of Academic Performance (Marks Percentage)

 206

Table 3.19

Post Hoc Scheffe Test for Multiple Comparisons across Bully/victim Groups for

Academic Achievement

95% CI
(I) Bully/Victim (J) Bully/Victim

Status Status M.diff (I-J) SE p LL UL

bully victim -.09327 2.24345 1.00 -6.3837 6.1971

bully victim 1.76252 1.96296 .848 -3.7414 7.2665

uninvolved -9.39923* 1.87939 .001 -14.6688 -4.1296

victim bully .09327 2.24345 1.00 -6.1971 6.3837

bully victim 1.85579 2.09931 .854 -4.0305 7.7420

uninvolved -9.30597* 2.02138 .001 -14.9737 -3.6382

bully victim bully -1.76252 1.96296 .848 -7.2665 3.7414

victim -1.85579 2.09931 .854 -7.7420 4.0305

uninvolved -11.16175* 1.70473 .001 -15.9417 -6.3818

uninvolved bully 9.39923* 1.87939 .001 4.1296 14.6688

victim 9.30597* 2.02138 .001 3.6382 14.9737

bully victim 11.16175* 1.70473 .001 6.3818 15.9417

All the bully/victim groups significantly differed than uninvolved group in their

academic performance in terms of average marks percentage of two consecutive exams.

Involvement in bullying adversely affected academic performance of these students with

 207

bully-victim group showing the least scores, though the difference was found

insignificant in comparison with bullies and victims.

Though there were no significant differences among bully/victim groups for their

average monthly school attendance (see table 3.19), however the profile presents quite

insightful picture.

Figure 3.7

Attendance Percentages of Bully/Victim Groups

 208

Figure 3.7 depicts that victims followed by bully-victim group had relatively

lower attendance percentages as compared to bullies and uninvolved student whose ratios

were alike.

Table 3.20

Correlation of Socioeconomic Variables with Bullying and Victimization

Variables Victimization Bullying

Monthly Income -.03 -.02

Family Size -.04 .03

Birth Order -.004 .06

No. of Siblings .02 .09

None of these variables were significantly correlated with bullying or victimization.

 209

Table 3.21

Frequency, Percentages, Skewness and Kurtosis for Parental Level of Education

Father’s Mother’s

Education Education

Educational Level f % f %

illiterate 17 5.1 48 14.3

middle and below 32 9.5 102 30.4
secondary and higher
111 33.0 103 30.7
secondary
graduation and above 176 52.4 83 24.7
Total 336 100.0 336 100.0
Skewness -1.18 -.127
Kurtosis .736 -1.71

Data was coded and parents who never went to school were categorized as

illiterate, those having education up to or below 8th grade were labeled as middle and

below. Those who completed more than middle standard yet less than 14 years of

education were put under the category of secondary and higher secondary. Those who

completed more than 14 years of education were classified into group of graduation and

above. Father’s level of education was better than mothers’ educational level. Data were

fairly normally distributed across sample. Only 41.1% participants provided this

information.
 210

The impact of parental level of education on students’ involvement in bullying

and victimization was explored using MANOVA. Two global items representing

victimization and bullying were entered as dependent variables.

Table 3.22

MANOVA for effect of Parental Education on Involvement in Bullying and Victimization

Dependent

Source Variable SS df MS F p η2

ME Victimization 12.758 3 4.253 2.199 .088 .020

Bullying 5.068 3 1.689 1.040 .375 .010

FE Victimization 8.703 3 2.901 1.500 .214 .014

Bullying 8.949 3 2.983 1.836 .140 .017

ME * FE Victimization 7.625 6 1.271 .657 .684 .012

Bullying 6.614 6 1.102 .679 .667 .012

Error Victimization 624.576 323 1.934

Bullying 524.749 323 1.625

Total Victimization 2841.00 336

Bullying 2664.00 336

ME = Mother’s Education; FE = Father’s Education

Mother’s and father’s level of education had no significant impact on students’

involvement in bullying and victimization.

 211

Discussion

Findings of the both sections (A and B) are discussed.

Section A. Prevalence of Bullying/Victimization

The findings for prevalence study showed that 65% students were involved in

some kind or another in bullying. Amongst them 17.3% reported being a bully, 19.3%

reported being the victim, while a larger proportion (28.8%) admitted that they were

involved in bullying others and were also victimized by their peers, constituting the

bully-victim group. Around 35 % students were found uninvolved in any kind of

bullying. The percentage of students affected by bullying (65%) is alarmingly high

compared with prevalence reported in other studies. Nansel, et al. (2001) found that as

much as thirty percent of students had been influenced by bullying in some way.

Panayiotis et al. (2010) used Cyprotic version of OBVQ and reported a rate of 17% as

involved in bullying. Some recent reports across the world found 5 to 45 % students

involved in different roles (Laeheem & Baka, 2009; Kashirsagar et al., 2007). Yet these

results are comparable to large scale studies (UNICEF, 2012) according to which low

income regions (e.g. African countries) were at greater risk (20% to more than 80%) of

involvement in bullying. However cautious interpretation of the findings of present study

is suggested as the whole class approach was not followed. Additionally, prevalence rates

are always subjected to participant’s age, assessment method, demographic

characteristics and several other variables. Greater proportion of bully-victim group in

current sample suggests that most of the students were at high risk for harmful outcomes

(Haynie et al., 2001).

 212

With regard to classification in bullying roles, no significant differences were

found for gender or types of schools. Grade differences emerged as students in lower

grades (4th) were mostly categorized as bully-victims and victims than other two

categories. Greater proportion of bullies was studying in 5th grade. It provides

justification for result of grade 4. Being senior most in elementary section, students of

grade 5 are less likely to be bullied, while more likely to become perpetrators and their

targets could be students of grade 4, who either become submissive victims or reactive

ones (Frey et al., 2005). . Another reason could be more truthful reporting by younger

students who are less subjected to demand characteristics. This trend of lower reported

victimization in higher grades is consistent with earlier reports (Selekman & Vessey,

2004).

Severity of bullying in terms of more strict criteria was investigated by merging

last two response alternatives of two global items corresponding bullying and

victimization. Comparisons across bullying roles, gender and grade did not find any

significant differences for proportion of occasional and more frequently involved

students. Yet it was found that students reported more exposure to frequent victimization

than bullying. Experience of being bullied usually lasted for one or two weeks followed

by the duration of one month. More than forty percent students have been experiencing

victimization for more than 6 months that adds to the sensitivity and seriousness of the

bullying problems in Pakistani schools that immediately needs initiation of prevention

efforts.
 213

Prevalence for the types of bullying revealed findings consistent with the previous

ones as verbal bullying and victimization were the most commonly reported form across

genders and also grades (especially elementary grades) (Coloroso, 2004). For the present

sample, verbal bullying accounted for 29% of the reported victimization. Rumor

spreading and excluding from group were also found common as more girls and students

in grade 6 reported being bullied by these means. The results support the earlier studies

(Baldry, 2004). Boys reported being bullied by cyber means more often than girls. It was

also found that bully-victim group reported being threatened more as compared with

victims. These threats might evoke them to react aggressively. With reference to bullying

others, again high prevalence was found for verbal bullying followed by social exclusion

and physical bullying, having boys involved more in both of the direct modes (verbal and

physical) and girls typically were found involved in relational types (excluding others and

rumor spreading) (Underwood & Rosen, 2011). In accordance with the finding about

victimization, bully-victim group was involved more in threatening others and also

damaging the property compared with bullies.

Most of the bullying took place in small group of 2 to 3 persons was done by a

single individual. Bullying by group was more common among boys and students in

higher grades were bullied by larger groups. Bullying was most likely to occur in less

supervised area such as play ground (53 %) as reported in earlier studies (Craig, Pepler,

& Atlas, 2000), however occurrence rate in classroom was also high (45%). Students

mostly reported the incidents to school staff friends and parents. High prevalence

indicates that the issue has not been taken seriously and friends were less able to lend
 214

support to the victimized peer. Additionally, girls showed more pro-victim attitude

compared with boys (Almeida, Caurcel, Machado, 2006; Rigby & Slee, 1991).

Findings mostly adhere to the existing evidence regarding grade and gender

differences with some exception (Carlyle & Steinman, 2007). An overall decrease has

been observed in rates of bullying especially by physical means (Molcho et al, 2009).

Timely efforts and awareness can produce fruitful results in decreasing bullying.

Section B. Academic and Socioeconomic Variables

Most of the data on academic and socio-economic variables was found missing.

From the available data set we evaluated average percentage of last two (consecutive)

exams and average percentage of class attendance (last two months) as academic

outcomes of bullying and victimization. MANOVA results showed that involvement in

bullying adversely affected percentage of marks in exams. Bullies, victims and bully-

victims were equally affected and performed significantly poor in exams compared with

uninvolved students. Although no significant differences were found with regard to

school attendance, yet the tendency of being absent from school was more prominent

among victim and bully-victim groups. Academic cost of bullying has been reported in

earlier studies as well (Sheridan, 2010).

None of the socioeconomic variables such as monthly income, family size, birth

order, parent’s education was found associated with bullying. Findings are conflicting to

most of the literature pertaining to socioeconomic correlates of bullying in Pakistan

(Shujja et al., 2014). Findings also oppose the stereotype that bullying is associated with

socioeconomic status and victims come from economically disadvantaged families or less

educated parents (Bowes et al., 2009; Jansen et al., 2012; Nordhagen, Nielsen, Stigum,
 215

Kohler, 2005). Recently findings of a meta-analysis found weak association between

bullying and socioeconomic status (Tippett & Wolke, 2014). However the current result

could be subjected to the assessment of these variables. As it was not the main focus of

the study, we did not determine any socioeconomic classes; rather data were treated as

continuous variable and some important links could have been missing. Moreover

monthly income reported for the sample varied a lot. It restricts the generalizability of the

findings.
 216

Chapter-IV

SOCIO-AFFECTIVE ASPECTS OF BULLYING/VICTIMIZATION

Literature review has offered insight t to various theoretical frameworks in

explaining bullying and victimization. Several factors and aspects have also been

discussed in detail. Researchers have agreed that bullying behavior could be influenced

by personal dispositions and social scenarios. Among numerous psychosocial dynamics,

affective component of social information processing and nature of peer relationships

have been acknowledged as the essential elements accounting for the process of bullying

(Cook et al., 2010; Woods et al., 2009). In this view the present research empirically

evaluated two important socio-affective aspects of bullying. Mood based emotion

recognition and the quality of friendship have been examined in two studies (study 3 and

4 respectively). This chapter provides an account of both the studies and integrates the

findings in the end with regard to demographic trends and academic cost of poor

emotional and social skills.

This chapter is outlined as following.

Section A. Study 3: Effect of mood on Emotion Recognition among School bullies and

victims (Study 3)

Phase 1: Development of Mood Induction Procedure for Children.

Phase 2: Effect of Mood on Emotion Recognition among School Bullies and

Victims.

Section B. Study 4: Friendship Quality of Bully/Victim Groups.

Section C. Unified outcomes

 217

Section A: Study 3

Effect of Mood on Emotion Recognition among School Bullies And Victims

Phase 1: Development of Mood Induction Procedures (MIPS)

One of the foremost objectives of the main study was to determine the effect of

mood on emotion recognition among school bullies and victims. Therefore, a

standardized mood induction procedure was required appropriate for the participants’

age. Extensive literature review provided support to several mood induction procedures

being widely used with children and early adolescents; autobiographical recall, story or

vignette based mood induction following Velten procedure, music mood induction, and

mood induction via video are to name a few (Brenner, 2000). Web-based pictures with

emotional content have also emerged to be effective in inducting mood states (Goritz,

2007; Goritz & Moser, 2006). Keeping in view the time constrains and availability of

materials in accordance with Pakistani culture, we opted for a tryout of four methods of

mood induction (i.e. Instrumental music, Video songs, Emotive pictures and a

combination of emotive pictures and background instrumental music. So the current

phase examined the magnitude of change in valence and arousal reported after mood

induction through four different MIPs.

Current study was a prerequisite for the main study. It was divided into two parts.

Firstly, mood suggestive materials pertaining to all the four mood induction techniques

(instrumental music, video song, emotive pictures and pictures with music combination)

were collected and rated by the judges for the magnitude of positive or negative affect

they could produce. Materials rated high on emotionality in respective mood dimensions
 218

were selected for final evaluation by a sample of 64 children. In the next step

effectiveness of these techniques was evaluated in inducing the desired mood (i.e. happy,

sad and neutral).

Objectives of the Study

1. To develop a standardized mood induction procedure (MIP) for children

2. To identify the differences in efficacy of four mood induction techniques in terms of

valence and arousal.

Hypotheses

Video song would be more effective in suggesting the desired mood as compared to three

other techniques.

Method

Participants

Total 64 participants (Mage = 10.79; SD = 1.08; 55 boys) from one private and two

public sector schools (one girls school, one boys school) participated in this study.

Initially 72 students were randomly selected from the attendance list of grades 4th (n =

24), 5th (n = 24) and 6th (n = 24). Four of them refused to participate. Three participants

were not available at the given time due to participation in sports, and one student

discontinued during the experiment. Thus the final sample of the present study consisted

of 64 participants from 4th (n = 20), 5th (n = 23) and 6th (n = 21) grades.

Measures

Measure included three mood induction techniques and a manipulation check.

 219

Manipulation check. Self-Assessment Manikin (SAM; Bradley & Lang, 1994)

was used for assessing valence and arousal at baseline and after each induction. It

consists of three non-verbal picture-based scales to evaluate the three dimensions

of mood (i.e. pleasure, arousal and dominance). It is a 9 point Likert type scale

presenting five pictures with four spaces in between. The pictures are cartoon type

manikins. Pleasant or valence dimension is represented by a happy figure gradually

changing to an unhappy figure, and arousal dimension ranges from an excited, wide-eyed

figure to a relaxed, sleepy figure. In the current study, paper and pencil version of two

scales were used. SAM figures used in present study progressed in valence and arousal

from right to left direction. Hence the highest valence/arousal is scored as 1and the

lowest as 9. Thus the scale rated for valence scoring from one (happy) to nine (sad) and

the second scale, rated for arousal being scored from one (calm) to nine (excited).

However this may not affect the results necessarily and similar scoring has also been used

earlier (Ong, Carde, Gross & Manber, 2011). The procedure was self-paced as there was

no time limit for rating. Earlier studies have successfully used the SAM with child

samples (Backs, Silva & Han, 2005; Sharp, Goosen & Goodyer, 2006). SAM has

typically been used in combination with International Affective Picture System (IAPS;

Lang, Bradley, & Cuthbert, 1997) for rating emotive pictures. It has also been widely

used for rating other mood and emotion evoking materials such as sounds or videos for

rating pleasure/displeasure, arousal and dominance (Bradely, 1994).

Music mood induction techniques. Researchers (Gerrards-Hesse, Spies, and

Hesse, 1994; Westermann, Spies, Stahl, & Hesse,. 1996) have confirmed the superiority

of music mood induction procedures to other methods of induction. Classical melodies,

 220

instrumental music and music with lyrics and visual effects had been effectively used in

different mood induction experiments (Fairclough, van der Zwaag, Spiridon, &

Westerink, 2014; Trambakolous, 1997). Since no standardized method of music mood

induction was available within our cultural context, different options were evaluated

using multi-sensory genres for present investigation.

The material for this technique was finalized in two steps. The first step included the

selection of audio, video and instrumental music. These selections were then rated by

sample of students from the target population of the main study using an 11 point single

item Ottawa Georgia Mood Scale (Cheng & Ward, 2005). It ranges from zero (extremely

sad to ten (extremely happy).

Music selection. The first step involved the preselecting of a piece of music for use

with all subjects to ensure its effectiveness at eliciting sad and happy mood for all the

participants; a common practice in music mood induction procedure (Lundqvist,

Carlsson, Hilmersson, & Juslin, 2009; Paquette, Peretz, & Belin, 2013). Three individuals

(all doing PhD in Psychology) participated in producing the list of music excerpts

including audio/video songs and instrumental music. Five video songs referring to a

happy mood state and five indicating sad mood were listed on the basis of perceived

effect. The list was developed keeping the age range of the participants in view and

considering all ethical issues as the videos were based on different movie songs. All

songs were available in DVD format.

Five happy and five sad songs without video were also included in the trial. Lists

were produced in same manner. Similarly five pieces of music (instrumental) pertaining

to happy mood state and five instrumental music pieces eliciting sad mood were also
 221

listed after extensive internet surfing. Each musical excerpt and audio songs were

downloaded from the Internet in the form of an MP3 file that was converted into a

standard audio format and recorded onto a CD for use in a standard CD player. All the

music was cheerful, familiar and age-appropriate as compared to the typical classical

music used with adults in the light of recommendation by Schellenberg, Nakata, Hunter,

and Tamoto (2007). Moreover a neutral instrumental tone (downloaded from internet,

Anonymus, n.d) that was mutually selected by members in selection committee was also

included in try out.

Music ratings. Thirty children (50% boys; Mage = 10.56, SD = 1.04) drawn from a

private evening tuition center were divided into two groups based on random allocation

(according to 2 types of music; video song, instrumental music). Each participant in both

groups (song and instrumental) was presented with sad and happy music excerpts in a

counter balanced order. Neutral excerpt was included in instrumental condition only. The

stimuli were presented one at a time through the headphones. They listened to these

preselected pieces of video, and instrumental music and rated them according to how

likely that piece of music could help people to feel sad or happy on an 11 point scale

ranging from 0 (extremely sad) to 10 (extremely happy). A neutral mood was represented

by the central point (5). Music was played at an appropriate volume, which subjects could

hear clearly and comfortably. The list of five music excerpts was presented to them by

asking them to listen to at least 1 minute of each piece. The pieces of music were,

however, long so they were allowed to move onto the next piece at any point after a

minute. Two video songs and two instrumental music excerpts, each representing happy
 222

or sad moods and the neutral piece of instrumental music were finalized on the basis of

mean mood ratings obtained from this sample.

Pictorial mood induction technique. The display of mood-suggestive photographs

belongs to a group of procedures that present emotive material without explicit

instructions for getting into the target mood. Studies have shown the effectiveness of

visual images in inducing desired mood (Brunyé, Mahoney, Augustyn, & Taylor, 2009;

Lang, Bradley, & Uthbert, 1995). Pictures suggesting happy, sad and neutral mood were

collected and then rated by judges in a pilot test.

Picture selection. A total of 174 pictures, assumed to exercise a mood-lifting (happy)

or depressing (sad) effect on the viewer, were gathered from the internet. Happy set of

pictures was based on the pleasant themes like happy children, attachment with parents,

play, fun and enjoyment, cuddly animals, leisure time, success at sports or exams,

celebrations and festivals. The sad set included unpleasant scenes such as destruction,

disasters and victims, crying children, poverty, accidents, grieved people, illness etc.

Neutral pictures illustrated non-emotive scenes for example silent crowd, traffic on the

road, people busy in routine affairs, buildings, house hold goods etc.

Picture ratings. In a pilot test, 10 judges rated these pictures on an 11 point Likert

scale with 0 indicating extremely sad, 5 as neutral and 10 as extremely happy. Two

separate orders of these pictures were constructed to balance order of presentation. Each

subject was randomly assigned to view pictures in one of these orders. For ethical

reasons, people assigned to rate the negative photographs were informed beforehand that

some of the photographs were graphic, and if they did not want to see the negative

photographs they may shift to positive pictures. Yet none of the judges did so.
 223

Participants viewed the pictures as a power point presentation. No time limit was fixed

and they were allowed to see each picture as long as they wanted before rating. Finally 30

pictures with the lowest mean score were used for the sad and the 30 with the highest

score for happy mood induction. Pictures with mean scores around 5 were included in

neutral set. The neutral clip did not generate any emotions to a notable degree. For ethical

reasons, 3 sad pictures marked as extremely sad by at least 4 judges were excluded from

the final set.

Combined mood induction technique

Previously, Baumgartner, Lutz, Schmidt, and Jäncke (2006) explored how musical

stimuli could improve the feeling of affective pictures. Mayer, Allen, and Beauregard

(1995) also employed this combination successfully in their mood induction study.

Following the same method, pictures were combined with congruent emotional musical

excerpts (instrumental pieces). The set of happy, sad and neutral pictures and

instrumental music were those selected in pilot study of these techniques.

Experimental Design

The study followed a mixed factorial design with 7 trials repeated within 2

randomized blocks in each of the two independent mood induction groups.

Procedure

After obtaining baseline mood and arousal ratings on SAM, participants were

randomly assigned to one of the two mood groups named as Positive Mood Induction

(PMI) group and Negative Mood Induction (NMI) group. During experimental session,
 224

participants in each group received seven trials of inductions using four induction

techniques (i.e. instrumental music, video song, pictorial stimuli and pictures with

background music combination). At first they were primed to induce the desired mood

state (e.g., happy or sad), followed by neutral induction to reinstate their mood back to

neutral.

Total four randomized blocks (PMI-A, PMI-B, NMI-A & NMI-B) were created

for positive and negative MI group. In positive MI group, block A was presented with

instrumental music first (Trial 1 & 2) followed by video song (Trial 3), pictures (Trial 4

& 5) and the combination technique (Trial 6 & 7). Block B saw the emotive pictures

first, then video song, instrumental music and combination of pictures and music at the

end. Negative MI group was divided into similar blocks.

The neutral induction was incorporated in each block for serving as a control

condition for each mood induction procedure and to restoring participants’ mood state

back to neutral before the next induction technique was administered to avoid ceiling

effects. Additionally, it provided a pre-induction rating of mood for the next induction

technique, and also ensured that participants might not leave the room in an altered mood

state. Identical instructions were given to happy, sad, and neutral inductions to account

for demand characteristics. It is important to note that ratings on an 11 point Likert scale

were obtained for affective valence and arousal of mood after each induction.

The experimental procedure is illustrated below.

 225

Figure 4.1a

Mood Induction Procedure

Mood Induction (MI)

(N = 64)

Positive Mood Induction (PMI) Negative Mood Induction (NMI)

(n = 32) (n = 32)

PMI Block A PMI Block B NMI Block A NMI Block A

(n = 16) (n = 16) (n = 16) (n = 16)

Instrumental First Picture First Instrumental First Picture First

Trial 1 Trial 1 Trial 1 Trial 1

Inst Happy Pic Happy Inst Sad Pic Sad

Trial 2 Trial 2 Trial 2 Trial 2

Inst Neutral Pic Neutral Inst Neutral Pic Neutral

Trial 3 Trial 3 Trial 3 Trial 3

Song Happy Song Happy Song Sad Song Sad

Trial 4 Trial 4 Trial 4 Trial 4

Pic Neutral Inst Neutral Pic Neutral Inst Neutral

Trial 5 Trial 5 Trial 5 Trial 5

Pic Happy Inst Happy Pic Sad Inst Sad

Trial 6 Trial 6 Trial 6 Trial 6

Com Neutral Com Neutral Com Neutral Com Neutral

Happy

Trial 7 Trial 7 Trial 7 Trial 7

Com Happy Com Happy Com Sad Com Sad

 226

The files for blocks were already saved on the desk top in folders. All the

participants were able to use the laptop either due to earlier familiarity and practice or the

current practice trial, therefore none of the participants reported any difficulty in handling

it. They were verbally instructed upon their arrival at the experimental room. Mood

rating was obtained after practice trial. Relevant folder for the block was open when they

sat in front of the screen. Following the instructions, they opened files one by one and

received inductions. Ratings were followed after each induction. Participants listened to

all kinds of music via headphones, whereas pictorial induction was administered via a

Microsoft PowerPoint presentation. The slideshow automatically changed to the next

slide every seven seconds to ensure exposure to each picture for the allotted time. In

video song and combination techniques, they wore headphones and watched the visuals

on the screen.

Participants in negative MI group viewed happy video song at the end of

experiment to deal with the sad mood carry over effects. One packet of potato chips and a

chocolate was given to each participant as a token of thanks at the end of experiment.

All four affect induction methods were successful in inducing three mood states

(i.e. happy, sad and neutral) pleasant and unpleasant affective states. The viewing image

with music and video song were most effective in enhancing the affect.
 227

Results

Results of the present study are divided into two sections. First section depicts the

ratings obtained from judges and children for different mood priming materials i.e. video

songs, instrumental music and mood suggestive pictures. Descriptive statistics for these

ratings was computed to select the most suitable and effective pieces of music and set of

pictures for sad, happy and neutral mood conditions. Second section presents results of

empirical investigation of manipulation efficacy of the selected materials in a child

sample. For analysis, the baseline ratings were entered as the first trial serving as pre-

induction for the first MI technique. Thus a 4 × 2 within subject factor resulted in total 8

combinations (1 baseline and the 7 induction trials). Two blocks (A & B) in each of the

positive and negative MI groups were added as between subject factor. Thus two separate

mixed factorial ANOVAs (4 × 2 × 2) were computed for valence ratings obtained from

four mood techniques (MT) for happy and neutral mood conditions (MC) in two blocks

(B) of both Positive and negative MI groups. Similarly 2 mixed factorial ANOVAs were

computed with arousal ratings. Succeeding paired sample t-test provided comparison

amongst four mood techniques for efficacy in inducing anticipated mood state.

Ratings and Selection of Mood Induction Materials

Selection of video songs, instrumental music and pictures was based on the mean scores.
 228

Table 4.1a

Descriptive Statistics for Ratings of Video Songs by Children (n = 15)

95% CI

Mood Songs
M SD LL UL
Happy

1.Chanda chmky 6.86 .83 6.40 7.32

2.Koe to wajah 7.73 .59 7.40 8.06

3.Bum bum boly 8.53 1.18 7.87 9.19

4.Chlo dildar chlo 7.60 .91 7.09 8.10

5.Tarara rum 7.86 .91 7.35 8.37

Sad

1.Maa 1.66 .89 1.16 2.16

2.Janay kub hun 1.66 .61 1.32 2.00

3.Tanhaai 2.86 .74 2.45 3.27

4.Chitti na koe 2.46 .74 2.05 2.87

5.Meri zaat zarra 2.06 .70 1.67 2.45

The table showed mean scores of ratings for happy and sad video songs. Bum

Bum Bolay was selected from the happy list as it showed the highest mean score (M =

8.53, SD = 1.18). Song 1 (M = 1.66, SD = .89) and song 2 (M = 1.66, SD = .61) were
 229

equally rated as the most sad songs, however Maa (song 1) was selected being more

relevant and appropriate for use with child sample.

Table 4.2a

Descriptive Statistics for Ratings of Instrumental Music by Children (n =15).

95% CI

Mood Instrumental
M SD LL UL
Happy

1.Abdulqadirya 8.46 .83 8.00 8.92

2.Doraemon 8.86 .99 8.31 9.41

3.Chor bazari 7.33 .61 6.99 7.67

4.Jingle bells 8.33 .81 7.88 8.78

5.Pehla nasha 7.46 .74 7.05 7.87

Sad

1.Hum ko humi 2.20 .86 1.72 2.67

2.Kal ho na ho 2.00 .75 1.58 2.41

3.PTVsad violin 1.73 .79 1.29 2.17

4.Jug soona soona 2.66 .72 2.26 3.06

5.Do pal ruka 2.86 .63 2.51 3.22

Table 4.2a demonstrates the means and standard deviations for ratings of happy

and sad instrumental music within 95% confidence interval. Sound track of Doraemon
 230

and PTV sad instrumental music were selected as being most significantly effective in

inducing happy (M = 8.86, SD = .99) and sad mood (M = 1.73, SD = .79) respectively.

All the musical excerpts significantly differed in emotionality. Selection of happy

music was based on the highest rating obtained, and the sad music was chosen on the

basis of lowest mean scores. The neutrality of the pre-selected instrumental music piece

was validated by all the children (n = 30) who rated it on the same eleven point Likert

scale. The musical excerpt was rated near 5 ranging from 4 to 6 points.
 231

Table 4.3a

Descriptive Statistics for Ratings of Sad Pictures by Judges (n = 10)

No Min Max M SD No Min Max M SD

1 2 5 2.8 .91 30 3 6 3.7 1.05
2 1 4 2.2 .91 31 3 5 3.7 .82
3 2 4 3.3 .67 32 2 4 3.1 .99
4 3 6 4.6 1.07 33 1 4 2.3 .94
5 1 9 3.2 2.20 34 1 5 3.4 1.17
6 2 5 3.8 .78 35 0 3 1.6 .84
7 1 5 2.7 1.15 36 1 3 2.1 .73
8 0 1 .20 .42 37 2. 5 3.7 .94
9 2 5 3.3 1.05 38 2 3 2.2 .42
10 2 5 4.1 .87 39 1 3 1.6 .84
11 1 3 2.0 .66 40 1 4 2.3 .94
12 2 4 2.6 .69 41 1 4 2.1 .87
13 1 4 2.9 .87 42 6 8 6.8 .63
14 1 3 2.2 .91 43 2 4 3.3 .82
15 2 5 3.7 .82 44 1 2 1.2 .42
16 1 4 2.4 .96 45 2 4 2.7 .67
17 2 5 3.7 .82 46 1 3 2.3 .67
18 0 1 .20 .42 47 1 4 2.1 .87
19 0 1 .60 .51 48 2 4 3.3 .82
20 0 2 1.0 .66 49 1 4 2.4 .96
21 1 3 1.6 .69 50 1 3 2.0 .81
22 3 5 4.4 .69 51 2 3 2.5 .52
23 1 4 2.8 1.13 52 2 4 2.6 .69
24 2 6 4.2 1.13 53 0 2 1.3 .67
25 1 3 2.0 .81 54 3 6 3.7 1.05
26 2 5 3.7 .82 55 3 5 3.7 .67
27 2 5 3.8 .78 56 2 4 3.1 .99
28 2 6 4.4 1.07 57 1 4 2.3 .94
29 1 5 3.7 1.33 58 1. 5 3.4 1.17
 232

Table 4.4a

Descriptive Statistics for Ratings of Happy Pictures Judges (n = 10)

No Min Max M SD No Min Max M SD

1 5 9 6.7 1.1 30 6 9 7.2 .91
2 7 9 7.6 .84 31 7 9 7.3 .67
3 6 10 8.4 1.34 32 6 8 6.7 .67
4 6 8 6.7 .67 33 6 8 7.1 .56
5 6 8 7.2 .63 34 7 8 7.5 .52
6 8 10 8.7 .82 35 7 9 8.2 .63
7 6 10 8.3 1.05 36 6 8 6.8 .78
8 7 9 7.9 .73 37 7 8 7.6 .51
9 6 9 7.2 1.1 38 7 8 7.6 .51
10 6 9 7.4 .96 39 6 7 6.8 .42
11 7 9 7.7 .67 40 7 8 7.5 .52
12 7 8 7.6 .51 41 7 8 7.3 .48
13 7 9 7.9 .87 42 6 8 6.8 .63
14 6 8 6.8 .63 43 6 7 6.6 .51
15 7 8 7.3 .48 44 7 9 7.9 .73
16 7 9 7.6 .69 45 6 9 7.9 1.12
17 6 8 7.1 .56 46 6 9 7.7 .87
18 6 9 7.8 1.03 47 5 7 6.3 .64
19 6 8 6.8 .78 48 7 9 8.3 .82
20 6 8 7.1 .73 49 6 8 6.8 .78
21 5 7 6.2 .63 50 6 9 7.6 1.07
22 7 8 7.5 .52 51 7 9 8.1 .73
23 7 9 7.5 .70 52 7 8 7.5 .52
24 7 10 8.2 .91 53 7 8 7.7 .48
25 6 10 7.1 1.3 54 7 10 8.3 .94
26 6 10 7.7 1.3 55 7 8 7.7 .48
27 6 8 7.0 .66 56 7 9 8.0 .81
28 6 9 7.5 .84 57 7 10 8.2 1.03
29 6 7 6.5 .52 58 7 9 8.1 .56
 233

Table 4.5a

Descriptive Statistics for Ratings of Neutral Pictures Judges (n = 10)

No Min Max M SD No Min Max M SD

1 4 5 4.9 .31 29 5 6 5.1 .31
2 2 6 4.8 1.1 30 5 5 5.0 .00
3 5 5 5.0 .00 31 6. 7 6.6 .51
4 5 6 5.1 .31 32 4 5 4.9 .31
5 4 5 4.8 .42 33 5 6 5.1 .31
6 2 5 4.3 1.05 34 4 5 4.9 .31
7 5 6 5.1 .31 35 4 5 4.8 .42
8 4 5 4.8 .42 36 5 5 5.0 .00
9 5 6 5.5 .52 37 5 6 5.1 .31
10 5 5 5.0 .00 38 5 6 5.1 .31
11 4 5 4.8 .42 39 5 6 5.1 .42
12 5 7 5.3 .67 40 2 4 2.6 .69
13 4 5 4.9 .31 41 4 5 4.8 .42
14 5 8 6.2 .78 42 5 6 5.1 .42
15 4 5 4.9 .31 43 5 6 5.1 .31
16 5 5 5.0 .00 44 4 6 4.9 .56
17 5 5 5.0 .00 45 5 5 5.0 .00
18 5 5 5.0 .00 46 5 6 5.2 .42
19 5 6 5.4 .51 47 4 5 4.8 .42
20 5 5 5.0 .00 48 4 5 4.7 .48
21 5 7 6.0 .66 49 3 5 4.4 .69
22 4 5 4.9 .31 50 4 5 4.7 .48
23 2 6 4.6 1.19 51 3 5 4.7 .67
24 4 5 4.9 .31 52 5 6 5.1 .31
25 4 5 4.8 .42 53 5 5 5.0 .00
26 5 5 5.0 .00 54 5 7 5.3 .67
27 5 6 5.2 .42 55 5 6 5.1 .31
28 4 5 4.8 .42 56 4 5 4.6 .51
 234

Results of Table 4.3a indicated that pictures having mean score of less than 3

were categorized as sad. However three pictures that obtained a zero rating by more than

3 judges were excluded from the final set being extremely traumatic and thus sensitive to

be used with children. Thirty pictures having lowest mean scores were selected for the

final set. According to the results in Table 4.4a, initially, pictures having a mean score of

greater than 7 were identified as happy. Yet the final set included 30 pictures with highest

mean scores and all of them are greater than 7.5. Table 4.5a presents the neutrality of the

pictures that was judged on the basis of mean scores closer to the central point of the

rating scale (4.8 to 5.2). However 30 pictures mostly ranging from 4.9 to 5.1 comprised

the final set of thirty pictures in neutral condition.

Based on the above mentioned criteria, three set of pictures were finalized: happy

(30), sad (30) and neutral (30) (see App. F for sample pictures).

Empirical Evaluation of MIPs

The data were analyzed to examine changes in arousal and valence as a function

of watching video song, listening instrumental music, watching pictures alone and in

combination with instrumental music for happy, sad and neutral mood conditions.

Negative group participants listened to sad and neutral music, and positive group

participants listened to happy and neutral music presented in a counterbalanced order.

Mixed factorial ANOVAs were followed by paired comparisons.

 235

Table 4.6a

Characteristics of MIP Groups

Negative MIP Group Positive MIP Group

(n = 32) (n = 32) Total

Variables NA NB PA PB (N = 64)
(n = 16) (n = 16) (n = 16) (n = 16)

M (SD) M (SD) M (SD) M (SD) M (SD)

Age 10.75(1.2) 11.12(1.1) 10.87(1.2) 10.68(1.1) 10.85(1.1)

BLM 5(.81) 5.06(.85) 4.93 (.85) 5(.63) 5(.77)

BLA

Gender (%)

Boys 8(50%) 8(50%) 8(50%) 8(50%) 32(50%)

Girls 8(50%) 8(50%) 8(50%) 8(50%) 32(50%)

NA: Negative Block A; NB: Negative Block B; PA: Positive Block A; PB: Positive Block B. BLM: Baseline Mood. BLA:

Baseline Arousal

Participants in condition NA and PA first listened to instrumental music, then

watched the video song, followed by picture presentation and combined MIP. For

participants in NB and PB, instrumental music and picture presentation were

interchanged to ascertain the counterbalancing. MIP groups did not differ in age, F (3,

63) = 0.85, p = ns and baseline mood, F (3, 63) = 0.67, p = .ns. Gender distribution was

also equal across groups (50%). Age differences within gender groups were also non-

significant, χ2 (4) = 8.49, p = ns.

 236

Valence and arousal of techniques across MI groups and gender. Tables 4.7a

and 4.8a present the descriptive statistics for valence and arousal in positive and negative

MI groups.

Table 4.7a

Descriptive Statistics for Mood Induction Trials within Positive MI Group (n = 32)

Skewness Kurtosis
Trials Min Max M SD Statistic S.E Statistic S.E
BLM 3 7 4.968 .739 .050 .414 2.041 .809

InstHV 2 3 2.468 .507 .131 .414 -2.119 .809

InstNV 3 6 4.468 .761 -.122 .414 -.202 .809

VidHV 1 4 2.093 .734 .371 .414 .255 .809

PicNV 4 6 4.906 .588 .007 .414 .108 .809

PicHV 1 3 2.437 .564 -.314 .414 -.861 .809

ComNV 3 6 4.687 .644 -.380 .414 .422 .809

ComHV 1 3 2.031 .537 .035 .414 .862 .809

BLM = Baseline Mood, HV = Happy Valence, NV = Neutral Valence, Inst = Instrumental, Vid = Video,

Pic = Picture, Com = Combination

Baseline mood rating of the positive MI group showed neutral mood tendency (M

= 4.96, SD = .73). Happy mood was more effectively induced by video song (M = 2.039,

SD = .73) and combination MIP (M = 4.96, SD = .73) as compared to other techniques.

Neutral mood was most successfully induced through picture presentation (M = 4.90, SD

= .58). Kurtosis and skew values of valence for mood stimuli were within acceptable

ranges except for happy video song, set of happy pictures and neutral combination
 237

techniques that showed minor increases from typical standard suggested (3.00 for

Skewness and 8.00 for kurtosis) by Kline (1998).

Table 4.8a

Descriptive Statistics for Mood Induction Trials within Negative MI Group (n = 32)

Skewness Kurtosis
Trials Min Max M SD Statistic S.E Statistic S.E
BLM 3 7 5.031 .822 -.431 .414 1.628 .809

InstSV 6. 9 7.343 .827 -.011 .414 -.492 .809

InstNV 3 7 5.062 .877 .179 .414 .552 .809

VidSV 7 9 8.031 .646 -.028 .414 -.416 .809

PicNV 4 6 4.968 .400 -.286 .414 4.161 .809

PicSV 6 9 7.218 .608 .786 .414 1.589 .809

ComNV 4 7 5.125 .659 1.302 .414 3.146 .809

ComSV 7 9 8.000 .622 .000 .414 -.178 .809

BLM = Baseline Mood, SV = Sad Valence, NV = Neutral Valence, Inst = Instrumental, Vid = Video, Pic =

Picture, Com = Combination

Mean scores indicated that baseline mood of negative MI group was neutral (M =

5.03, SD = .82). Highest valence scores were obtained for video song (M = 8.03, SD =

.64) and combination MIP (M = 8, SD = .62) which indicated that both of these

techniques were more successful in inducing sad mood. All the neutral MI techniques

depicted valence scores near the central point (5) which shows the neutrality of the

stimuli.
 238

The data were analyzed for differences in mean valence and arousal across two

Mood Induction (MI) groups and gender.

Table 4.9a

MANOVA for Valence of Techniques across MI Groups and Gender

Source DV SS df MS F η2

Groups InstH/SV 380.25 1 380.25 804.05*** .931

VidH/SV 564.06 1 564.06 1172.3*** .951
PicH/SV 365.76 1 365.76 1067.3*** .947
ComH/SV 570.01 1 570.01 1748.3*** .967
Gender InstH/SV .25 1 .25 .529 .009
VidH/SV .25 1 .25 .519 .009
PicH/SV .01 1 .01 .046 .001
ComH/SV 1.26 1 1.26 3.882* .061
Groups × Gender InstH/SV .56 1 .56 1.189 .019
VidH/SV .56 1 .56 1.169 .019
PicH/SV .76 1 .76 2.234 .036
ComH/SV .14 1 .14 .431 .007
Error InstH/SV 28.37 60 .47
VidH/SV 28.87 60 .48
PicH/SV 20.56 60 .34
ComH/SV 19.56 60 .32

***p < .001.

MANOVA result demonstrated significant differences between positive and

negative MI groups in ratings of valence for instrumental music, F (1, 60) = 804.05, p <
 239

.001, η2 = .931; video song, F (1, 60) = 1172.3, p < .001, η2 = .951; pictures, F (1, 60) =

1067.3, p < .001, η2 = .947, and combination, F (1, 60) = 1748.3, p < .001, η2 = .967

techniques. Boys and girls perceived the stimuli in similar manner as no significant

gender differences were found for valence of most of the techniques overall and as a

function of positive or negative group. The only significant difference across gender was

observed for combination technique, F (1, 60) = 388.2, p < .05, η2 = .061.

Figure 4.2a

Mean Valence Scores of Positive and Negative MI Groups

 240

Figure 4.2a shows clear differences in valence of all mood induction techniques

across positive and negative mood induction groups in an expected direction. Mood

induction stimuli presented to positive MI group was rated lower on Self-Assessment

Manikin (SAM) indication happier mood while negative MI group rated the stimuli

higher on SAM indicating sad mood.

Figure 4.3a

Mean Valence Scores of MI Techniques across Gender

There appeared no prominent gender differences in valence ratings of four mood

induction techniques except for combination technique.

 241

Table 4.10a

MANOVA for Level of Arousal of Techniques across MI Groups and Gender

Source DV SS df MS F η2

Groups InstH/SA 248.06 1 248.06 434.56*** .879

VidH/SA 435.76 1 435.76 717.55*** .923

PicH/SA 221.26 1 221.26 311.91*** .839

ComH/SA 462.25 1 462.25 986.13*** .943

Gender InstH/SA .56 1 .56 .98 .016

VidH/SA 1.26 1 1.26 2.08 .034

PicH/SA 1.26 1 1.26 1.78 .029

ComH/SA .06 1 .06 .13 .002

Groups × Gender InstH/SA .06 1 .06 .10 .002

VidH/SA .01 1 .01 .02 .000

PicH/SA .14 1 .14 .19 .003

ComH/SA .56 1 .56 1.20 .020

Error InstH/SA 34.25 60 .57

VidH/SA 36.43 60 .60

PicH/SA 42.56 60 .70

ComH/SA 28.12 60 .46

***p < .001

 242

MANOVA results showed that happy and sad MI techniques significantly

differed in level of arousal. Positive and negative groups significantly differed in arousal

ratings of instrumental music, F (1, 60) = 434.56, p < .001, η2 = .879; video song, F (1,

60) = 717.55, p < .001, η2 = .923; pictures, F (1, 60) = 311.91, p < .001, η2 = .839 and

combination technique, F (1, 60) = 968.13, p < .05, η2 = .943 on SAM. Main effect of

gender on arousal level and its interaction with MI groups was found insignificant.

Figure 4.4a

Mean Arousal Scores of Positive and Negative MI Groups

 243

Differences in level of arousal across positive and negative groups for mood

induction techniques are apparent (Figure 4.4a). It indicates high arousal (low scores) for

positive and low arousal (high scores) for negative condition.

Figure 4.5a

Mean Arousal Scores of Mood techniques across Gender

Figure 4.5a depicts that level of arousal for positive and negative MI techniques

was perceived similarly by boys and girls.

 244

Effectiveness of Positive MIPs. Validity of the mood induction was assessed

by observing the extent to which the valence and arousal scores changed across baseline

mood and 7 subsequent trials which include neutral materials serving as pre-MI and

happy/sad content serving as post MI time-points.

We first computed a series of mixed factorial ANOVAs to determine the within

subjects effect of mood techniques (4) and mood types (2); and between subject effects of

blocks within Positive and Negative MI groups for valence and arousal. It followed

paired t-test to identify that which of the techniques produced more desirable outcomes.
 245

Table 4.11a

Mixed Factorial ANOVA for Mood Valence in Positive MI Group

Source SS MS df F p η2

Within subject effects

MT 9.26 3.08 3 8.035*** .001 .211

MT × B .14 .04 3 .122 .947 .004

Error 34.59 .38 90

MC 400 400 1 1116.3*** .001 .974

MC × B .250 .25 1 .698 .410 .023

Error 10.75 .35 30

MT × MC .65 .21 3 .521 .669 .017

MT × MC× B .53 .17 3 .421 .738 .014

Error 37.81 .42 90

Between subject effects

B .39 .39 1 .666 .421 .022

Error 17.59 .58 30

MT: Mood Techniques; MC: Mood Condition; B: Mood Blocks

Mauchly’s Test of Sphericity showed that the sphericity proposition had not been

violated, χ2 (2) = 0.701, p = ns, and therefore, all statistics are reported with sphericity

assumed.
 246

A 4 × 2 × 2 between-within ANOVA for valence scores of positive MI was

conducted with MI techniques (4; instrumental, video, pictures, combination) and mood

conditions (2; happy, neutral) as within subject factors, and blocks (2; instrumental MI

first vs. picture MI first) of randomized trials as between subject factor. Initial baseline

mood and 7 subsequent trials alternating for happy and neutral moods were entered as

within subject factors resulting from combination of 4 × 2. Significant main effects have

been found for four type of mood induction techniques, F (1, 30) = 8.035, p < .001, η2=

.211. Valence of happy and neutral MIP also differed significantly within subjects, F (1,

30) = 1166.3, p < .001, η2= .974, which indicates the efficacy of MIPs in producing

desirable affect. None of the interactions could yield significant effects. Results of

between subject effects also indicated no significant difference in valence scores across

positive MI blocks, F (1, 30) = .666, p = ns, η2= .022.

 247

Figure 4.6a

Means of Happy and Neutral Valence Scores across Mood Techniques

Figures shows that first (Instrumental music) and third (Picture only) mood

techniques had higher mean scores on Self Assessment Manikin as compared to second

(Video song) and fourth (Combination) technique. Lower scores on SAM refer to higher

positive valence, whereas higher scores indicate negative valence. Happy (Type 2) and

neutral (Type 1) mood conditions seem to vary in valence as neutral mood valence is

ranging from 4.5 to 5, and happy mood valence is clustered around 2-2.5. Neutral mood

condition was assessed initially as baseline mood (1), then mood induced by instrumental

music (2), picture presentation (3) and the combination technique (4). Neutral condition

did not involve video based mood induction. Both mood conditions illustrate the similar

trend in valence across techniques.

 248

Table 4.12a

Paired Comparisons of Valence Scores for Happy MI Techniques

95% CI Cohens’

Pairs df t p LL UL d

1 InstHV - VidHV 31 2.10 .044 .01 .37 .37

2 InstHV - PicHV 31 .27 .786 -.20 .03 .03

3 InstHV - ComHV 31 2.94 .006 .13 .43 .43

4 VidHV - PicHV 31 -2.24 .032 -.65 -.34 -.34

5 VidHV - ComHV 31 .52 .601 -.17 .06 .06

6 PicHV - ComHV 31 3.04 .005 .13 .40 .40

Subsequent pair wise comparisons were performed through paired sample t-test.

Analysis revealed significant differences in instrumental and video based happy mood

valence scores, t (31) = 2.10, p < .05, as video song induced more happiness (M = 2.09,

SD = .734) as compared to instrumental music (M = 2.46, SD = .507). Emotive pictures

(M = 2.43, SD = .564) and instrumental excerpt did not differ in valence and induced

happy mood to the same extent, t (31) = .27, p = ns. Instrumental music significantly

differed with combination method (M = 2.03, SD = .537) in inducing happy mood, t (31)

= 2.94, p < .01. Emotional pictures presented alone were found less effective in

suggesting happy mood state as compared to video song, t (31) = -2.24, p < .05, and

combination method was found more effective than pictures, t (31) = 3.04, p < .01. Video

song and combined MIP did not differ significantly in inducing happy mood state.
 249

A second 4 × 2 × 2 between-within ANOVA evaluated the changes in arousal

level of participants as a function of mood induction techniques and mood conditions in

positive MI group.

Table 4.13a

Mixed Factorial ANOVA for Mood Arousal in Positive MI Condition

Source SS MS df F p η2

Within subject effects

MT 100.64 33.54 3 49.13 .001 .621

MT × B .40 .13 3 .198 .897 .007

Error 61.45 .68 90

MC 1097.26 1097.26 1 1421.3 .001 .979

MY × B .06 .06 1 .081 .778 .003

Error 23.17 .77 30

MT × MC 108.26 36.08 3 66.77 .001 .690

MT × MC× B .59 .19 3 .366 .778 .012

Error 48.64 .54 90

Between subject effects

B .25 .25 1 .462 .502

Error 16.23 .54 30

MT: Mood techniques; MY: Mood Type; B: Mood Blocks

Mauchly’s Test of Sphericity indicated that the assumption of sphericity had not

been violated, χ2 (2) = 0.701, p = ns, and therefore, all statistics are reported with

sphericity assumed.
 250

Four types of happy mood techniques were significantly different in arousing the

desired mood, F (1, 30) = 49.13, p < .001, η2= .621. Similarly level of arousal was

significantly different across happy and neutral mood conditions, F (1, 30) = .666, p = ns,

η2= .022. These results suggested that happy MI techniques produced higher arousal level

as compared to neutral techniques (see Figure 4.6). Different mood techniques resulted in

arousal differences across happy and neutral types of MIP, F (1, 30) = 66.77, p < .001,

η2= .690. Both of the randomized blocks (Instrumental MI first vs. picture MI first)

within negative MI group did not differ significantly in arousal level, F (1, 30) = .25, p =

ns, η2= .502.

 251

Figure 4.7a

Happy and Neutral Arousal across Mood Techniques

Figure 4.7a shows that level of arousal is different across happy and neutral mood

conditions, yet the magnitude of difference is less clear for instrumental music technique.
 252

Figure 4.8a

Happy and Neutral Arousal for Mood Techniques across Negative MI Blocks

Both of the blocks (Instrumental music first vs. picture first) were alike in

perceived arousal levels across four MIPs.

 253

Table 4.14a

Paired Comparisons of Arousal Scores for Happy MI Techniques

95% CI

Pairs df t p LL UL

1 InstSV - VidSV 31 3.219 1.071 .240 1.071

2 InstSV - PicSV 31 -3.856 -.338 -1.098 -.338

3 InstSV - ComSV 31 3.056 1.042 .207 1.042

4 VidSV - PicSV 31 -6.891 -.968 -1.781 -.968

5 VidSV - ComSV 31 -.190 .305 -.367 .305

6 PicSV - ComSV 31 7.575 1.705 .981 1.705

Four types of mood induction techniques did not significantly differ with each

other in arousing mood.

Effectiveness of Negative MIPs. Third 4 × 2 × 2 mixed factorial ANOVA was

computed for evaluating the techniques and types of mood in blocks of negative MI

group.
 254

Table 4.15a

Mixed Factorial ANOVA for Evaluating Change in Valence in Negative MI Condition

Source SS MS df F p η2

Within subject effects

MT 11.262 3.754 3 9.091 .001 .233

MT × B .199 .066 3 .161 .922 .005

Error 37.164 .413 90

MC 433.160 433.160 1 1365.3 .001 .978

MC × B .191 .191 1 .603 .444 .020

Error 9.523 .317 30

MT × MC 6.668 2.223 3 5.624 .001 .158

MT × MC× B .387 .129 3 .326 .806 .011

Error 35.570 .395 90

Between subject effects

B .004 1 .004 .003 .956 .000

Error 37.93 30 1.264

MT: Mood techniques; MC: Mood Conditions; B: Mood Blocks

Mauchly’s Test of Sphericity indicated that the assumption of sphericity had not

been violated, χ2 (2) = 0.701, p = ns, and therefore, all statistics are reported with

sphericity assumed.
 255

Level of arousal was different across techniques F (1, 30) = 9.09, p < .001, η2=

.233. Arousal differences were also found significant for sad and happy mood conditions

F (1, 30) = 1365.3, p < .001, η2= .978 and the interaction between mood techniques and

mood conditions F (1, 30) = 5.624, p < .001, η2= .158. Negative MI blocks yielded non

significant results F (1, 30) = .003, p = ns, η2= .000

Figure 4.9a

Mean Valence Scores of Four MI Techniques across Blocks within Negative MI Group

Performance of participants in both blocks within negative MI group was similar.

 256

Figure 4.10a

Sad and Neutral Valence Scores across Mood Techniques

Mean valence scores of four MI techniques were higher for sad condition than

lower scores of neutral condition. It demonstrates that sad materials induced sad mood

effectively and neutral materials were also successful in suggesting neutral mood. Second

(Video song) and fourth (Combination) were more effective as compared to first

(instrumental music) and third (picture only) technique.

 257

Table 4.16a

Paired Comparisons of Valence Scores for Sad MI Techniques

95% CI Cohens’

Pairs df t p LL UL d

1 InstSV - VidSV 31 -4.984 .001 -.968 -.406 -.687

2 InstSV - PicSV 31 .780 .442 -.201 .451 .125

3 InstSV - ComSV 31 -3.699 .001 -1.018 -.294 -.656

4 VidSV - PicSV 31 5.601 .001 .516 1.10 .812

5 VidSV - ComSV 31 .226 .823 -.250 .313 .031

6 PicSV - ComSV 31 -5.577 .001 -1.066 -.495 -.781

Additionally, paired t-tests measuring differences in the magnitude of mood

change across four types of MI techniques were computed. Instrumental music and

Emotive Picture MIPs, t (31) = .780, p = ns, as well as the Video song and combination

MIPs, t (31) = .226, p = ns, partial, also yielded non-significant results. All the other pairs

were significantly different in sad mood valence.

 258

Table 4.17a

Mixed Factorial ANOVA for Evaluating Change in Arousal in Negative MI Condition

Source SS MS df F p η2

Within subject effects

MT 121.812 40.604 3 72.814 .001 .708

MT * B 1.250 .417 3 .747 .527 .024

Error(MT) 50.187 .558 90

MC 95.062 95.062 1 131.499 .001 .814

MC * B .000 .000 1 .000 1.000 .000

Error(MC) 21.688 .723 30

MT * MC 50.625 16.875 3 28.421 .001 .486

MT * MC * B .187 .062 3 .105 .957 .003

Error(MT*MC) 53.438 .594 90

Between subject effects

B .062 .062 .1 .073 .789 .002

Error 25.68 .856 30

MT: Mood techniques; MC: Mood Conditions; B: Mood Blocks

Mixed factorial ANOVA showed that different mood techniques aroused

participants in significantly different manner, F (3, 90) = 72.81, p < .001, η2= .708.

Similarly main effects of mood conditions, F (1, 30) = 5.624, p < .001, η2= .158 and
 259

interaction of mood condition and techniques, F (1, 30) = 5.624, p < .001, η2= .158 was

also significant.

Between subjects effects showed that the two blocks were not significantly

different in arousal levels as a result of mood induction, F (1, 30) = .073, p = .789, η2=

.002.

Figure 4.11a

Level of Arousal for Sad and Happy Mood Conditions across MI Techniques
 260

Estimated marginal means of arousal across sad and neutral condition were

different for instrumental music and picture only techniques. However video song and

combination techniques were less arousing across both sad and neutral conditions.

Figure 4.12a

Mean Arousal Scores of Four MI Techniques across Blocks within Negative MI Group

Arousal levels for four MI techniques were the same in both blocks of negative MI group.
 261

Table 4.18a

Paired Comparisons of Arousal Scores for Sad MI Techniques

95% CI

Pairs df t p LL UL

1 InstSV - VidSV 31 -3.898 .001 -.951 -.298

2 InstSV - PicSV 31 -3.521 .001 -.789 -.210

3 InstSV - ComSV 31 -4.003 .001 -1.226 -.398

4 VidSV - PicSV 31 .680 .501 -.249 .499

5 VidSV - ComSV 31 -.924 .363 -.601 .226

6 PicSV - ComSV 31 -1.621 .115 -.705 .080

Subsequent t-test paired comparisons that Video song, t (31) = .780, p = ns,

Picture only, t (31) = .780, p = ns and Combination, t (31) = .780, p = ns techniques were

more arousing than instrumental music. Pictures alone and in combination with

background music along with video song did not differ in arousing mood level of

participants of negative MI group.

To sum up, analysis of the scores on the mood valence and arousal rating scales

showed that the proposed effect of the all the four MIPs was obtained across happy, sad

and neutral conditions However, video song and combination of pictures and background

instrumental music were more effective than instrumental only and picture only

techniques
 262

Discussion

The study presented a comparison of four mood induction techniques

(instrumental music, video song, emotive pictures alone and emotive pictures combined

with background instrumental music) in order to determine their efficacy for inducing

happy, sad and neutral mood states in elementary school children. Mood suggestive

materials for each of the four techniques were first selected and rated by independently

judges and school children in a pilot study.

Studies using music mood induction procedures (MMPI) have mostly relied on

classical instrumental music excerpts that had been producing robust induction effects on

mood states of people (Vastfjall, 2002). Similarly emotion laden photographs also have

powerful evidence in altering mood state (Goritz, 2006; 2007). However most of such

studies are conducted in Western countries and the materials are selected from

standardized data bases that may not fit to Pakistani cultural context. Therefore music

(instrumental and video) pieces were selected mostly from familiar and famous film

content of Pakistan and India as music across borders is equally understandable and

popular due to language comprehension and the use of same genres and instruments. To

Limited number of songs and instrumental music was selected to avoid ambiguity for

child raters. Hunter et al. (2008) have followed same kind of approach with child sample

by using only five musical stimuli for particular affect category rather than presenting a

long list as often done with adult samples. Following the criteria used by several

researchers in selection of emotion provoking materials, video song and instrumental

excerpt with highest mean rating was selected for further evaluation. Hence we relied on

mood scores only that were provided by two groups of children who independently
 263

listened to the list of each type of music. Highest mean scores were obtained for Bum

Bum Bolay (TZP, 2007) from list of happy songs. The music of this song follows a high

arousing cheerful tempo, and the videos portrays children singing and dancing in a

classroom as their teacher motivates them to do so by participating with them. It’s a

wonderful blend of joy and excitement that made children feeling happier while listening

to it as compared to other songs. Researchers suggested that elementary school children

were fond of high and fast tempo music (Montgomery, 1996). From the list of sad songs,

Maa and Janay Kub Hongay Kum were equally rated with lowest scores (indicating

greater sadness) than other three songs. Maa was selected being more comparable to

happy song (Bum Bum Bole), as it is from the same movie (TZP, 2007) and depicts a

child being sent to a boarding school where he missed his family especially mother. The

findings are in line with the previous studies that reported of children s’ preference for

age appropriate and popular music (Brittin, 2000; Demorest & Schultz, 2004). None of

video songs was considered to be neutral in music selection phase of the study as song’s

visual and verbal content always suggests some kind of emotion.

As far as instrumental music is concerned, movie and television sound tracks have

been claimed to be more popular and preferred form of music by children in a study by

Roulstone (2006). We therefore opted for soundtracks of popular cartoon series and

movie songs, and a few playbacks of television for eliciting sad and happy mood. A piece

of instrumental music employing a blend of high and low tempo was selected as the only

neutral excerpt. Judges in selection phase considered it boring and not arousing. Sound

track of Doraemon (the most famous cartoon series) evoked more happiness and an

unknown musical piece (usually played back of tragedy clips on Pakistani television
 264

channels) that was downloaded from internet was regarded as the saddest instrumental

excerpt. The aspect of familiarity was evident in ratings which confirms that age and

cultural context influences the music preferences (LeBlanc et al., 1997).

Mood suggestive pictures were rated by judges for sad, happy and neutral affect.

Here too, top rated pictures comprised happy set, which mostly included pictures of

happy children in different settings such as with family, friends or at play. It indicates

that pleasant and intimate social interactions are considered as source of happiness.

Cheerful pictures of infants were also rated high for evoking happiness. Pictures of

nature’s beauty, celebrations and festivals were also rated high on positive affect. The

lowest rated pictures comprised sad set of pictures. Pictures of illness, death, destruction,

accidents, misery and poverty portrayed with intensity were rated high on negative affect.

Pictures rated closer to the center point were categorized as neutral. These pictures

illustrated unemotional content such as a busy or empty road, building, furniture, routine

life of people. Mood induction studies have widely used pictures for mood priming, and

International Affective Picture System (IAPS, Lang et al., 1997) is the most extensively

used standardized set of pictures. It is also based on similar emotional themes as selected

in our study, yet the content is based on virtual reality paradigm. Yet we preferred to

collect culture relevant and age apt pictures capturing natural and original scenarios.

All the four techniques were evaluated for effectiveness in inducing sad, happy

and neutral mood in a repeated measures experimental procedure using randomized

blocks for positive and negative mood induction groups. Results assured that participants

of both groups did not differ significantly from each other before the mood manipulations
 265

commenced. The experiment was designed carefully so that it could be easily replicated

by other studies.

Findings confirm that the techniques overall were effective in altering mood states

in desired manner. Subsequently, the relative efficacy of the four techniques was

observed with a separate analysis of valence and arousal. For positive MI group,

watching and listening to video song and viewing evocative pictures while listening to

music were found more powerful mediums in inducing both happy and sad moods. A

simple explanation is that watching and listening combined can attract more attention as

compared to only listening or only watching the content especially for children.

Therefore both video song and picture music combo evoked pleasant affect and were

highly arousing in positive MI group. Whereas sad video song and picture combined with

music elicited unpleasant affect and low levels of arousal. Extant of evidence suggest that

materials perceived to express happiness induce higher arousal and positive affect, while

those depicting sad impressions induce states of lower arousal and negative affect (e.g.

Schellenberg, 2012).

Neutral content of pictures was stronger in evoking proposed mood than neutral

piece of music. It produced lower arousal and affect. Valence and arousal both are

important dimensions of a specific mood. Previous section of rating materials missed the

dimension of arousal as Self Assessment Manikin was not available at that time and it

was difficult for children to rate the arousal dimension with verbal label. Therefore later

section addressed both of the dimensions. Between subjects analysis revealed

insignificant differences in randomized blocks of both positive and negative MI groups

which shows that experimental design yielded fair results. The result for mood induction
 266

is comparable to findings in the existing literature. Brenner (2000) suggested that video-

mediated affect inductions were more advantageous as compared to the other techniques

due to the ease of administration and more enduring effects to mood states. Both of the

techniques found most effective in the current study could relate to this type method.

Music enhances the effect of image-base stimuli, either static or moving. Picture-based

induction materials have been combined with music in different studies to study the

impact of mood changes on health-related behaviors (Conklin & Perkins, 2005; Perkins

et al., 2008) and emotion perception (Baumgartner et al., 2006). Although movie songs or

video songs other than movies have not been directly studied with reference to mood

induction especially with children however a combination of film and music had been

used to study the influence of mood on social appraisals and categorization (Halberstadt

& Niedenthal, 1997; Innes-Ker & Niedenthal, 2002).

The study contributed to the extant literature on mood induction and was first of

its kind in South Asian region especially Pakistan. Based on the findings of present study

both video song and emotive pictures combined with music can be used as an effective

method of mood induction with children. Further investigation is needed to evaluate the

music characteristics and appraisal of each picture included in MI set for valence and

arousal. Conducting the experiment in laboratory under more controlled conditions and

sophisticated software may yield more valid and reliable outcomes.

 267

Phase 2: Effect of Mood on Emotion Recognition

Affective competence plays significant role in social interactions as it serves

communicative functions. Nonverbal cues of emotions such as facial expressions are

important source of information for observers (Van Kleef et al., 2009), whereas mood

offers a subjective source of information (Schwarz & Clore, 1983). This information

might have an impact on reactions as people in different mood states derive different

meanings by observing facial expressions. So the student’s mood state and their appraisal

of other’s emotions may influence the likelihood of involvement in different bullying

behaviors. Moreover, literature provides empirical evidence for association between

emotional competencies and quality of relationships such as friendship (Lopes et al.,

2004). Hence the emotion recognition ability could also be linked to quality of friendship

among students involved in bullying behaviors.

The present study mainly addressed the core question of the current endeavor that

is related to the two disparate theoretical connotations explaining bullying and

victimization (Crick & Dodge, 1994; Sutton et al., 1999). Attentional bias as result of

mood congruence has also been explored. Additionally, possible links between emotion

recognition ability and quality of friendship in bully/victim groups were also explored.

The sample for the current study was a subset of participants identified already as bullies,

victims, bully-victims and uninvolved students in study 3.

The study was divided into two sections. The first section was based on

experimentally induced mood followed by a computerized emotion recognition task.

Based on the findings of study 2, two mood induction techniques were utilized for

priming the participants with sad, happy and neutral mood states. Those were video song
 268

and emotive pictures with background music. Both of these methods had demonstrated

efficacy in eliciting desired mood states.

Second section included additional findings obtained from analyzing the

relationship between emotion recognition ability and the quality of friendship among

bully-victim groups. Demographic and academic correlates of emotion recognition ability

of bully/victim groups were also evaluated. For this purpose, data from study 3 (section

3) had been used.

Objectives of the Study

Following are the main objectives of the 2nd phase of study 3.

1. To examine the emotion recognition ability of bullies, victims, bully-victims and

uninvolved students.

2. To identify gender differences in emotion recognition ability of bullies, victims, bully-

victims and uninvolved students.

3. To examine whether happy and sad moods boost or hinder the recognition of mood

congruent and mood-incongruent faces compared to neutral moods.

4. To investigate how mood (positive or negative), processing of facial expression, and

bullying behavior affect one another.

Hypotheses

1. Bully group will perform better than victims and bully-victims, on emotion

recognition task.
 269

2. Boys and girls will differ in their ability to recognize facial expressions of

emotions.

3. Mood shall affect the ability to recognize facial expressions of emotions in

congruent direction.

a. Participants primed with happy mood would be more accurate in

recognizing happy expressions (a positive bias)

b. Participants primed with sad mood would be more accurate in recognizing

sad expressions (a negative bias).

4. Mood congruency effect would differ across bullies, victims and bully-victims.

Method

Participants

Participants were 394 students (M = 10.77, SD = 1.07; 45.7 % boys) from 4th to

6th grade in 15 schools of Lahore. All 9 to 12 years old students who participated in the

third phase were invited to take part in this experimental phase. Authorities of three

schools refused to participate further. Only 470 showed their willingness to participate.

Thus an informed parental consent was obtained from these 470 available students. We

received 46 refusals. Thus the experimental phase was scheduled with 424 students from

9 schools. Fourteen of these 424 participants were absent on the day of experimental task

administration at their schools. One student discontinued during emotion recognition

task, while three participants reported discomfort during mood induction procedure and

left the study. Three participants who did not display mood that was consistent with their

assigned condition were also excluded from the final data set. Pre-induction valence

ratings of 2 participants in the picture with music condition and 1 in video-based music
 270

condition were outside of the normal range (three standard deviations) and therefore were

removed. Four participants completed the experimental procedures but their data was lost

unfortunately, leaving 394 students’ complete data sets.

Measures

Two experimental tasks and a manipulation check pre and post mood induction

were administered to the participants.

1. Mood state assessment. Children by the age of 4 to 5 years are able to report on

their basic emotions correctly (Luby et al., 2007). Single question self-reports offer the

most accurate account of the emotions experienced by children and being the least liable

to demand characteristics have been strongly recommended for child samples (Brenner,

2000). Therefore, the Ottawa-Georgia Mood Scales (Cheng & Ward, 2005) for children

and youth were considered to evaluate mood states before and after manipulation. It

consist of a series of scales designed to quantitatively measure children’s subjective

feelings around mood (from sad to happy), anxiety (from confident to scared), and anger

(from calm to angry). I have used one of the scales to rate happy, sad and neutral mood

states, pre and post mood induction treatment.

2. Mood induction techniques. As both vi.deo song and emotive pictures combined

with background music demonstrated highest efficacy, we decided to use both of these

techniques successively to present sample in a counterbalanced order for happy, sad and

neutral conditions. Thus half of the participants in each condition were supposed to watch

the video first and then take the picture/music task. Other half first experienced

picture/music followed by video song. The decision was made in order to induce more
 271

enduring mood state as participants had to undergo the emotion recognition task that

approximately takes 15 minutes for completion by children. Using this threefold

combination would facilitate the participants to maintain the mood state with which they

had been primed while performing FEEL test.

Happy song (Bum Bum Bolay from the movie Tare Zameen Par) was 5 minutes long.

Sad song (Maa from Tare Zameen Par) was also of similar length. Three sets of 30

pictures for each mood condition were presented through Microsoft power point along

with mood congruent back ground music. Picture/music task was approximately three

minutes long as each picture automatically changed after 5 seconds. Length of

background music was also adjusted accordingly after editing. Thus MIP lasted for 8-9

minutes approximately.

3. Emotion recognition task. Ability to recognize facial expressions of emotions

was measured with the help of Facially Expressed Emotion Labeling Test (Kessler,

Bayerl, Deighton, & Traue, 2002). The test has manifested good internal consistency

having Cronbach’s alpha approximating .77. It has been translated into Urdu (Malik,

Khawar, Chaudhry & Humphreys, 2010) and also validated for Pakistani population

across different age groups including children (Khawar, Malik, Maqsood, Yasmin &

Habib, 2012); for which it proved to be a reliable measure (Cronbach’s alpha, α = .74) for

the current study. This is a computer program in which color photographs of neutral faces

followed by the same faces expressing a certain basic emotion appears on the screen, and

subjects have to identify the adequate emotion shown. Response options are presented in

forced choice paradigm. The pictures used by the FEEL test are taken from JACFEE

(Japanese and Caucasian Facial Expression of Emotion) series (Matsumoto & Ekman,
 272

1988). The six displayed basic emotions include: anger, sadness, fear, disgust, happiness,

and surprise. The task consists of 42 pictures (7 pictures for emotion) that are presented

on a computer screen. Thus the scores based on response accuracy ranges from 0 to 42.

Reaction time is also measures in terms of average time a subject takes to recognize an

emotional expression. Presentation of the stimulus and selection of the emotion scene

proceeds in the same way for all 42 pictures.

Procedure

First of all an informed consent form was distributed amongst the students

previously assessed for OBVQ and FQS in third phase. After enlisting all the students

who provided the written parental consent for this study; date, time and location of the

experiment was scheduled with the help of school administration. The experimental study

was conducted in computer labs of the respective schools to ensure the controlled and

consistent conditions. On specific day scheduled for the experiment, the participants were

first assessed for their current mood state using Ottawa Geogia Mood scales. Bullies,

victims, bully-victims and uninvolved students were then randomly assigned to one of the

three mood induction conditions (happy, sad and neutral). As we decided to use both

video songs and pictures combined with background music being presented successively,

the order of the presentation was counterbalanced across bully/victim groups. All the

participants in neutral condition received the same stimuli that were set of neutral

pictures with background music. The experiment was conducted individually. Before

staring the experiment, two practice trials were used to familiarize the child to the laptop.

Subjects opened my computer from desktop and moved to the desired folder by

him/herself.
 273

Figure 4.13a

The Procedure of Random Assignment

Study 3 (1)
(N = 817)
Sample

Study 4
(N = 394)

Mood Conditions Happy Sad Neutral

(Random Assignment) n = 133 n = 132 n = 129

MIP S/P P/S S/P P/S

P
(Random Assignment) n = 66 n = 67 n = 66 n = 66

The participants were first assessed for current mood state with the help of Ottawa

Georgia Mood Scale. After getting primed with happy, sad, or neutral moods they were

again assessed for mood state. They had to indicate on a scale (from sad passing through

neutral to happy) how sad, or happy it made them feel. Then they were briefly instructed

to perform emotion recognition task. All subjects could read and understand the six labels

presented after 500 ms of the stimulus picture. For each one of the six emotions, eight

pictures were displayed. In a warm-up round the subjects saw six example faces (one for

each emotion) and were asked to indicate the displayed emotion by pressing the
 274

appropriate computer key. They got feedback on whether their decisions were correct or

incorrect. This warm-up was designed to make the subjects familiar with the testing

procedure. There remain 42 pictures for the main test (six emotions with seven pictures

each) which were presented in the same manner without providing any feedback. First a

picture of a neutral face was displayed on the computer screen for 1.5 seconds with a

short beep to attract the attention of the subject. Then there is one-second break during

which the screen is gray. After that short break the stimulus itself is presented on the

screen for exactly 300 ms. The stimulus is a picture of the same person as seen before

with a neutral face this time displaying one of the six basic emotions. First showing the

neutral and then the emotional face imitates natural conditions where the emotion often

evolves from the neutral face.

The participants in sad mood condition were provided with opportunity to

undergo happy mood induction in order to repair the negative affect. Twenty two

participants availed this option. All of them were thanked for their cooperation.
 275

Figure 4.14a

The Experimental Process

• Pre Induction Assessment of Mood

• Ottawa Georgia Mood Scale
Baseline

• Mood Induction Procedure

• Video Song, Emotive Pictures with Background Music (8 minutes)
Treatment

• Post Induction Assessment of Mood

• Ottawa Georgia Mood Scale
Mood Ratings

Emotion • Facially Expressed Emotion Labeling (FEEL) Test

Recogntion
 276

Figure 4.15a

FEEL Test Procedure

 277

Results

Results of the final phase, (Phase IV) reveal the experimental outcome evaluated

with the help of independent samples and repeated measures analysis of variance Main

effects, interactions and effect sizes were calculated for main variables. Post hoc tests

were carried out to elaborate group differences.

Table 4.19a

Gender Distribution across Bully/Victim Groups

Gender

BVG Boys Girls Total χ2 p

Bully 44 47 91 .809 .847

Victim 36 46 82

Bully victim 54 60 114

Uninvolved 46 61 107

Total 180 214 394

BVG = Bully Victim Groups

Table 4.19a shows that bully/victim groups did not differ in terms of gender

distribution, χ2 (3) = .809, p = ns.

 278

Table 4.20a

Distribution of Bully-Victims Groups in Four Mood Conditions

Mood Conditions

BVG Happy Sad Neutral Total χ2 p

Bully 32 26 33 91 4.941 .551

Victim 22 33 27 82

Bully victim 37 39 38 114

Uninvolved 42 34 31 107

Total 133 132 129 394

BVG = Bully Victim Groups

Table 4.20a shows that bully/victim groups were equally distributed to three

mood induction condition, χ2 (6) = 4.941, p = ns.

Descriptive Statistics

Descriptive statistics were computed to present an outline of data related

information that could further guide the analyses. The distribution of variables was

assessed by using skew and kurtosis.

 279

Table 4.21a

Descriptive Statistics of FEEL Test and Individual Emotions

Missing No. of Extremes

Variables N M SD Count Percent Low High

Anger 394 4.30 2.126 0 .0 0 0

Sadness 394 4.78 2.028 0 .0 0 0

Disgust 394 4.46 2.206 0 .0 0 0

Surprise 394 4.37 2.248 0 .0 0 0

Happiness 394 6.54 .960 0 .0 18 0

Fear 394 2.86 1.944 0 .0 0 0

FEEL 394 27.3173 7.50866 0 .0 0 0

Table 4.21a shows the mean accuracy scores for the FEEL and individual

emotions. Highest accuracy was found for happy facial expressions (M = 6.54, SD = .96).

Therefore a few cases that scored lower on this emotion category were identified as

extremes. Facial expression of fear was least accurately recognized by the total sample

(M = 2.86, SD = 1.94). Score on overall emotion recognition ability was also not so high

for the total sample (M = 27.31, SD = 7.51).

 280

Table 4.22a

Normality of Responses on Individual Emotions and FEEL Total Score

Skewness Kurtosis

N Min Max Statistic SE Statistic SE

Anger 394 0 7 -.377 .123 -.941 .245

Sadness 394 0 7 -.703 .123 -.464 .245

Disgust 394 0 7 -.473 .123 -1.012 .245

Surprise 394 0 7 -.480 .123 -.947 .245

Happiness 394 1 7 -3.017 .123 10.686 .245

Fear 394 0 7 .188 .123 -.916 .245

FEEL 394 6.00 41.00 -.496 .123 -.175 .245

Valid N 394

The data on FEEL test were approximately normally distributed except for happy

emotion recognition as most of the participants scored high on this category. Kline (1998,

2005) has suggested that skewness value below 3.0 and kurtosis below an absolute value

of 8.0 could be considered fairly distributed and were not problematic.

 281

Manipulation Check

Two way ANOVA with three mood induction condition (sad, happy and neutral)

as the independent variable and participants’ pre and post mood ratings as the within

subjects dependent variable was employed to test if mood induction worked adequately.

SPSS does not provide sphericity estimates for within subject variable having less than

three levels. Greenhouse-Geisser value in such cases is mostly 1 (Field, 2013). Similar

results were obtained for the present study suggesting that assumption of sphericity had

been met.

Table 4.23a

Between-Within ANOVA showing Effects of Mood Induction on Subjective Mood Ratings

across Conditions

Sources SS df MS F η2

Within-Subjects

MR 7.07 1 6.047 6.047** .015

MR × MC 2310.98 2 1155.49 988.36*** .835

Error 457.11 391 1.17

Between-Subjects

MC 2135.007 2 1067.50 8.33*** .787

Error 587.29 391 1.48

**p < .01, ***p < .001; MR = Mood Ratings, MC = Mood Conditions
 282

The main effect of mood as within subject variable was significant, F (1, 391) =

6.047, p <.014, η2 = .015, which indicated that all the subjects significantly differed

between their pre and post mood ratings. Interaction effect of mood and conditions was

also significant, F (2, 391) = 988.357, p <.001, η2 = .835. Analyses showed that

participants in all the three mood conditions significantly differed in their pre and post

mood ratings. Participants felt significantly happier after going through happy mood

induction (M.diff = -3.90), t (132) = -27.34, p < .001; sad after sad mood induction

(M.diff = 4.44), t (131) = 31.82, p < .001; and that neutral mood induction successfully

maintained neutral mood in participants (M.diff = .038), t (131) = .337 p = ns.

Between subjects mood effect were also found significant, F (2, 391) = 2135.007,

p < .001, η2 = .787 which indicated that participants in each mood condition (sad, happy,

neutral) reported different mood states.

 283

Figure 4.16a

Pre and Post Induction Mood Ratings across three Mood Conditions

The Figure (4.16a) clearly shows the elevated scores after happy mood induction,

decreased trend after sad mood induction and a stable pattern after neutral mood

induction. It demonstrates that all the mood induction procedures were effective in

inducing desired mood states.

 284

Emotion Recognition Ability of the Participants

A variety of ANOVAs were employed to check differences in the participants’

ability to recognize facial expressions of emotions. Firstly, FEEL total score was

analyzed for possible, gender and Bully/victim group differences using Univariate

ANOVA.

Table 4.24a

ANOVA showing Effects of Involvement in Bullying Behaviors and Gender on Overall

Emotion Recognition Ability

Source SS df MS F p η2

BVS 1017.52 3 339.17 5.86 .001 .044

GN 14.37 1 14.37 .248 .619 .001

BVS× GN 443.68 3 147.89 2.55 .055 .019

Error 22357.39 386 57.92

Total 319516 394

BVS = Bully Victim Status; GN = Gender

Bully/victim group showed significant main effects on FEEL total score, F (3,

386) = 5.86, p < .001, η2 = .044. Gender could not yield any significant effect on overall

emotion recognition ability, F (1, 386) = .248, p = ns, η2 = .001. However, significant

differences were found for accuracy responses on FEEL as a result of gender and

bully/victim group interaction, F (3, 386) = 8.33, p < .05, η2 = .019.

 285

Figure 4.17 a

Mean Scores of Bully/victim Groups on FEEL Test

Figure illustrates that uninvolved participants scored higher on FEEL (M = 29.95,

SD = 6.68) as compared to the participants were involved in bullying as perpetrators (M =

27.109, SD = 7.84), victims (M = 26.5, SD = 7.86) and bully-victims (M = 25.59, SD =

7.12). Further, emotion recognition ability of bully-victim group was poorer as compared
 286

to victims and bullies. Bullies seemed to perform relatively better on FEEL test. These

differences were evaluated in post hoc.

Figure 4.18 a

Mean Scores of Boys and Girls on FEEL Test across Bully/victim Groups

The figure demonstrates clear gender differences in victim group. Bullies and

bully-victim did not seem to differ

 287

Table 4.25a

Post Hoc Comparisons among Bully/Victim Groups for FEEL Test

95% CI

(I) Status (J) Status M.diff (I-J) SE p LL UL

bully victim .2075 1.15881 .858 -2.0709 2.4858

bully victim 1.5485 1.06984 .149 -.5550 3.6519

uninvolved -2.8434* 1.08527 .009 -4.9772 -.7096

victim bully -.2075 1.15881 .858 -2.4858 2.0709

bully victim 1.3410 1.10201 .224 -.8257 3.5077

uninvolved -3.0508* 1.11699 .007 -5.2470 -.8547

bully victim bully -1.5485 1.06984 .149 -3.6519 .5550

victim -1.3410 1.10201 .224 -3.5077 .8257

uninvolved -4.3919* 1.02440 .001 -6.4060 -2.3778

uninvolved bully 2.8434* 1.08527 .009 .7096 4.9772

victim 3.0508* 1.11699 .007 .8547 5.2470

bully victim 4.3919* 1.02440 .001 2.3778 6.4060

Table 4.25a shows that students classified as bullies, victims and bully-victims

did not differ in recognizing facial expression of emotions, yet these three actively

participating groups of bullying performed significantly worse on FEEL test as compared

to the uninvolved group of participants.

 288

A mixed-design ANOVA with three between-subjects variables (Bully/victim

groups, Mood condition and Gender) and one within-subjects variable (six different facial

expressions of emotions) was performed on FEEL Test to determine if participants had

any inconsistencies in processing any specific facial expressions of emotion. Results are

shown in Table 6.6.

 289

Table 4.26a

Between-Within ANOVA for Emotion Categories on FEEL for Bully/Victim Groups,

Mood Condition and Gender

Source SS df MS F p η2

Within-Subjects

EM 2633.756 5 526.751 191.521 .001 .341

EM×BVG 105.566 15 7.038 2.559 .001 .020
EM×MC 5.495 10 .550 .200 .996 .001
EM×GN 9.906 5 1.981 .720 .608 .002
EM×BVG×MC 83.108 30 2.770 1.007 .455 .016
EM×BVG×GN 41.220 15 2.748 .999 .453 .008
EM×MC×GN 12.297 10 1.230 .447 .923 .002
EM×BVG×MC×GN 93.154 30 3.105 1.129 .288 .018
Error 5088.151 1850 2.750

Between-Subjects

BVG 157.468 3 52.489 5.972 .001 .046

MC 1.396 2 .698 .079 .924 .000
GN .542 1 .542 .062 .804 .000
BVG×MC 103.149 6 17.191 1.956 .071 .031
BVG×GN 52.424 3 17.475 1.988 .115 .016
MC×GN 24.958 2 12.479 1.420 .243 .008
BVG×MC×GN 48.058 6 8.010 .911 .487 .015
Error 3252.296 370 8.790

EM = Emotions; BVG = Bully/Victim Groups; MC = Mood Condition; GN = Gender

 290

Analysis of FEEL data for 6 emotion types revealed significant main effect for

Bully/Victim groups as between subject factor, F (3, 370) = 5.97, p < .001, η2 = .046, and

emotions, F (5, 1850) = 191.52, p < .001, η2 = .341, as within subject factor. The

interaction between Bully/Victim groups and accuracy score on types of emotions was

also found significant, F (15, 1850) = 2.55, p < .001.

All the other main effects for variables (Mood Condition and Gender) and their

interaction as a function of both within and between subjects were found insignificant.

However, for between groups, interaction of bully victim groups and mood conditions

indicated some differences though not found significant. The data were further evaluated

using MANOVA for possible main effects and interaction of mood conditions across

bully/victim groups.
 291

Table 4.27a

MANOVA showing Effect of Mood on Emotion Recognition among Bully-Victim Groups

Dependent
Source Variable SS df MS F p η2
MC Anger 2.128 2 1.064 .246 .782 .001
Sadness 2.402 2 1.201 .295 .745 .002
Disgust .025 2 .012 .003 .997 .000
Surprise 1.135 2 .568 .119 .888 .001
Happiness .408 2 .204 .219 .804 .001
Fear .505 2 .252 .068 .935 .000
FEEL 4.968 2 2.484 .047 .954 .000
BVS Anger 31.358 3 10.453 2.415 .066 .019
Sadness 42.037 3 14.012 3.443 .017 .026
Disgust 60.927 3 20.309 4.274 .006 .032
Surprise 110.073 3 36.691 7.670 .001 .057
Happiness 1.975 3 .658 .706 .549 .006
Fear 26.243 3 8.748 2.340 .073 .018
FEEL 1024.500 3 341.500 6.415 .001 .048
MC × BVS Anger 80.599 6 13.433 3.104 .006 .046
Sadness 17.167 6 2.861 .703 .647 .011
Disgust 29.564 6 4.927 1.037 .401 .016
Surprise 40.711 6 6.785 1.418 .206 .022
Happiness 2.901 6 .484 .519 .794 .008
Fear 27.446 6 4.574 1.224 .293 .019
FEEL 682.830 6 113.805 2.138 .048 .032
Error Anger 1653.372 382 4.328
Sadness 1554.723 382 4.070
Disgust 1815.366 382 4.752
Surprise 1827.478 382 4.784
Happiness 356.217 382 .933
Fear 1428.110 382 3.739
FEEL 20334.362 382 53.231
MC = Mood Condition; BVG = Bully/Victim Groups
 292

Main effects of mood condition were not found significant. Participants in three

mood conditions (happy, sad and neutral) equally recognized all the emotions showing no

congruence effect of mood. Recognition of three basic emotions and total FEEL score

was significantly different across bully/victim groups except for anger recognition.

Significant main effects were found for sadness, F (3, 382) = 3.44, p < .01, η2 = .026;

disgust, F (3, 382) = 4.27, p < .01, η2 = .032; and surprise, F (3, 382) = 7.67, p < .001, η2

= .057. Bully/victims group did not differ in recognizing anger, happiness and fear.

Interaction of mood conditions and bullying involvement was also found insignificant for

emotion categories except for anger, F (1, 58) = 8.33, p < .001, η2 = .046. Interaction

effect was also significant for total FEEL score, F (1, 58) = 8.33, p < .001, η2 = .032.

Bully/victim groups were further evaluated using LSD Post Hoc comparisons. Interaction

effects are illustrated in figures 6.6 and 6.7.

 293

Table 4.28a

Post Hoc Comparison among Bully/Victim Groups for Individual Emotions on FEEL

95% CI

DVs (I) BVS (J) BVS M.diff (I-J) SE p LL UL

Anger Uninvolved Bully .81* .297 .007 .22 1.39

bully victim .66* .280 .019 .11 1.21

Sadness Bully victim bully .64* .284 .026 .08 1.19

Uninvolved .84* .272 .002 .30 1.37

Disgust Uninvolved Bully .92* .311 .003 .31 1.53

Victim .80* .320 .013 .17 1.43

bully victim .99* .293 .001 .41 1.57

Surprise bully victim Bully -1.13* .307 .001 -1.73 -.52

Victim -.67* .317 .035 -1.29 -.05

Uninvolved -1.36* .294 .001 -1.94 -.78

uninvolved Victim .68* .321 .033 .05 1.32

Fear uninvolved Bully .58* .276 .036 .04 1.12

Victim .73* .284 .011 .17 1.28

Note: only significant results are reported

Significant mean differences were found for anger recognition among bullies,

bully-victims and uninvolved students. Recognition accuracy was higher for uninvolved
 294

students as compared to bullies and bully-victims. Victims and uninvolved students were

alike in recognizing anger expressions. Bully-victim group showed poorer recognition for

sad expressions as compared to bullies and uninvolved students. Recognition accuracy

for disgust was higher for uninvolved group as compared to the other three groups

(bullies, victims, and bully-victims). Bully-victim group significantly scored lower in

recognition of surprise as compared to other three groups. Victims also demonstrated

poorer recognition ability for surprise as compared to uninvolved group. Fear was better

recognized by uninvolved group as compared to bullies and victims.

 295

Figure 4.19a

Mean differences of Bullly/Victim Groups on Anger across Mood Conditions

Figure indicates that victims in neutral condition recognized anger more

accurately as compared to those who underwent sad or happy mood induction. Lowest

accuracy was found for victims in sad mood condition.

 296

Figure 4.20a

Mean differences of Bullly/Victim Groups on FEEL across Mood Conditions

Mood significantly affected victims’ ability to recognize emotion as neutral group

performed better than victims in happy and sad mood states. Contrarily, uninvolved

group in neutral mood condition scored lower on FEEL test as compared to participants

in happy and sad mood.

 297

The analysis was repeated by adding IQ score of participants. MANCOVA was

run with the following two independent variables: Involvement in bullying (as bully,

victim, bully/victim and uninvolved) and Mood conditions (happy, sad and neutral). All

the emotions and total FEEL score were the dependent variables. Participants’ full score

on Colored Progressive Matrices (Raven’s CPM) was included as a covariate, due to the

earlier finding of group differences on this factor.

Average Reaction Time on FEEL

Table 4.29a

ANOVA showing Differences in Reaction Time across Bully/Victim Groups and Mood

Conditions

Source SS df MS F p η2

BVG 29.358 3 9.786 3.900 .009 .030

MC 2.398 2 1.199 .478 .621 .003

BVG×MC 17.809 6 2.968 1.183 .314 .018

Error 955.936 381 2.509

Total 9861.455 393

Only main effect of Bully/Victim group was found significant, F (3, 381) = 3.9, p

< .01, η2= .03. Mood induction and bully/victim groups in different mood condition

could not yield significant differences in reaction time.

 298

Table 4.30a

Post Hoc Comparisons among Bully/Victim Groups for Reaction Time on FEEL

95% CI

(I) BVG (J) BVG M.diff (I-J) SE p LL UL

uninvolved bully -.6880* .22588 .002 -1.1322 -.2439

victim -.6301* .23248 .007 -1.0872 -.1730

bully victim -.5404* .21366 .012 -.9605 -.1203

Only significant results are reported

LSD Post Hoc comparisons among bully/victim groups revealed that students

uninvolved in bullying significantly took lesser time in completing the FEEL tests as

compared to bullies (M.diff = -68, p < .01), victims (M.diff = -63, p < .01) and bully-

victims (M.diff = -54, p < .01).

 299

Figure 4.21a

Mean Reaction Time on FEEL across Bully/Victim Groups

Figure 4.21a illustrates a discernable pattern of reaction time indicating that

uninvolved group responded quickly to the stimuli as compared to the other three groups.

Bullies took more time in identifying an emotional expression.

 300

Discussion

The study was conducted to check the assumption based on the argument between

social cognitive model of Sutton et al (1999) and social skill deficit model offered by

Crick and Dodge (1994) if bullies would have better emotion recognition ability as

compared to victims. Considering affect as information (Forgas, 1995), and putting

Lemerise and Arsenio’s (2001) account for the role of emotions in SIP, we empirically

evaluated if mood would affect the emotion recognition skill in a congruent manner.

Boys and girls were also expected to differ in recognizing facial expressions of emotions.

The above mentioned postulations were not mainly supported by the findings of

present study. Though the results suggested significant differences among bully/victim

groups for emotion recognition accuracy, however bullies were equally deficient in

decoding facial expressions of emotions as victims and bully-victim groups. These three

groups performed equally worse on FEEL test, supporting an overall deficit in relation to

bullying, a finding that was found consistent with SIP literature and aggression (Orobio

de Castro et al., 2003). The results did not favor the notion offered by Sutton et al. (1999)

that competent social cognitive skills could cause incompetent behaviors, rather they are

consistent with Crick and Dodge’s (1999) connotations. Uninvolved group showed

significantly higher accuracy scores than other three groups. Though not significant yet

the bully-victim group was found to be less accurate in discerning emotional expressions

as compared to those who were victimized or bullied others. These results should be

interpreted with results for reaction time. FEEL measures average reaction time for

recognizing each emotion and findings compliment the previous result of our study.

Uninvolved group took significant lesser time to choose the response option as compared
 301

with groups directly involved in bullying. Students who bully others consumed slightly

more time than other two groups, yet the difference was not found significant.

Contrary to the stereotype of better socio-emotional competence of girls in terms

of emotion recognition accuracy (Woods et al., 2009), no gender differences were

observed in the present research. Perhaps, these differences emerge later in life as

participants ranged between 9 to 12 years. As far as overall emotion recognition

accuracy is concerned, happy and sad expression were recognized better than others. Fear

followed by anger was least accurately recognized emotions by total sample. This general

deficit in recognition of anger and fear could also be explained by younger age of the

participants. It can be suggested that this inaccuracy in recognition of two basic threat

related cues contribute to maladaptive peer relationships and behavior patterns (Eisenberg

& Fabes, 1992). The ability to accurately recognize, evaluate and appreciate the

emotional expressions of others has been considered a basic prerequisite for good social

interactions (Saarni, 1999). The results are in line with those found by Woods et al.

(2009) who also reported least accuracy in recognizing angry expression. They also

found higher mean errors in recognizing angry and fearful expression by those who had

been bullied either by relational or physical means. This inability to identify fear and

anger leads children to misinterpret situational cues that could facilitate in aggression

inhibition (Blair, 1999). The findings could be further associated with the type of

aggression and mode of bullying (e.g. reactive-proactive and direct-indirect).

Results showed that mood was effectively induced and this adds to the reliability

of the techniques developed in the first phase of this study. However, mood congruence

could not be observed in general. Overall effect of mood on emotion recognition was
 302

found non-significant however interaction effect of mood and bully/victim groups led to

the conclusion that victimized children under neutral mood condition used to recognized

the angry facial expressions better than when they were in sad or happy mood states. This

was also found true with general ability to interpret emotional expression (total FEEL

scores). Thus first three assumptions were not accorded. However partial support was

found for the fourth hypothesis.

Therefore the present results are in accordance with the view that victimized

children’s recognition of facial expressions is directed by their perceptual sensitivity and

thus facilitated access to representations of, anger when they were not influenced by pre-

existing mood. This ability to use partial information about a facial expression of anger

early on in affective signaling may confer an adaptive benefit to children living in

circumstances where the incidence of threat and the chances of injury are elevated

(Woods et al., 2009). The finding is further supported by another result of the present

study, as uninvolved group was significantly found more accurate in recognizing anger as

compared with bully and bully-victim group. No significant differences were found

between uninvolved and victimized children. The results are somewhat consistent with

previous studies in explaining that victims are not deficient in recognizing all kinds of

expressions (Camodeca et al., 2003). However it remains a question as why victims could

not take benefit of this better recognition and avoid the conflicting situation.

Additional results on individual emotion categories revealed interesting findings.

Bullies and bully-victim were also less accurate in identifying sad expressions while

victim and uninvolved group showed no significant differences. The results emphasized

further investigation by associating with findings with theory of mind skills and cognitive
 303

affective empathy in order to explain the role of this deficit in aggressive behavior of

students involved in bullying. Unlike victims and bullies, bully-victim group did not

differ than uninvolved students in recognizing fearful expression. Despite the being most

deficient in general emotion recognition ability, better recognition of fear related cues

could explain why these students are involved in bullying. This might facilitate them in

approaching the potential target (Marsh, Ambady, & Kleck, 2005). Further studies should

consider as why children filter and select some environmental cues over others. What is

attended to by the child would determine what kind of reaction he/she may opt. Finally

the results showed that irrespective of existing mood, bullying was related to less

sensitivity in detecting another’s facial expressions of emotions.

 304

Section B: Quality of Friendship among School Bullies and Victims

Being an important predictor of involvement in bullying a potential protector

against victimization (Bollmer et al., 2005), we sought to investigate the quality of

friendship among bully-victim groups identified in study 1.

Objectives of the Study

Following objectives were outlined for the current study.

1. To identify the differences in quality of friendship among bully/victim groups

2. To identify gender differences in quality of friendship.

3. To observe age and grade differences in student’s quality of friendship.

Hypothesis

On the grounds provided by extant literature, following postulations were formulated.

1. Students involved in bullying as bullies, victims and bully-victims would show

poorer quality of friendship as compared with uninvolved students.

2. Girls would have better quality of friendship as compared with boys.

3. There would a positive relationship between age and the quality of friendship.

4. Friendship quality of students studying in higher grades would be better as

compared with those studying in lower grade levels.

 305

Method

Participants

Students (N = 672; 319 boys, 353 girls, Mage = 10.8 years, SD = 1.08, age range:

9–14 years) were recruited from different schools of Lahore. Details of the sample are

described in section B (sample III) of study 1.

Measure and Procedure

Friendship Qualities Scale (Bukowski et al., 1994)

Friendship Qualities Scale Urdu version (18 item scale) that fitted well to the

present data set (see section B; study 1) was used for analyzing the results. The final

Urdu version included four subscales namely, Trust (5 items), Intimacy (5 items),

Support (3 items) and Conflict (5 items). Each having acceptable reliabilities (see section

B, study 1). However we computed the total FQS score by adding scores on Trust,

Intimacy and Support being significantly correlated with each other and found unrelated

with Conflict subscale. Although the items in Conflict subscale were reverse scored and

thus represent conflict resolution dimension, however it adding it emerged in a distinct

pattern, adding which would have decreased the reliability of the measure. Therefore

while referring to FQS in results portion we meant the sum of three subscales mentioned

above. Conflict scale was separately analyzed.

 306

Results

Table 4.1b

Distribution of Bully/Victim Groups across Gender (N = 672)

Bully/Victim Status

Gender
Bully Victim Bully Victim Uninvolved Total
Boys 59 69 103 88 319

Girls 66 69 100 118 353

Total 125 138 203 206 672

Group Differences in Quality of Friendship

We computed 4 (bully/victim groups) × 2 (Gender) × 3 (Grade), Univariate analysis of

variance (ANOVA) on mean scores of FQS.

 307

Table 4.2 b

Univariate Analysis of Variance of Friendship Quality for Bully/Victim Groups, Gender

and Grade

Source SS df MS F p η2

B/V Groups 498.28 3 166.094 2.649 .048 .012

Gender 1212.68 1 1212.684 19.339 .001 .029

Grade 38.88 2 19.444 .310 .733 .001

B/V × Gender 89.16 3 29.723 .474 .700 .002

B/V × Grade 373.17 6 62.196 .992 .430 .009

Gender × Grade 436.11 2 218.056 3.477 .031 .011

B/V × Gender × Grade 366.16 6 61.027 .973 .442 .009

Error 40633.05 648 62.705

Total 2133890 672

B/V Group = Bully/Victim groups

Results indicated a univariate main effect for bully/victim groups, F (3, 648) =

2.649, p < .05, η2= .012. It was evaluated later for multiple comparisons in post hoc

analysis. There was also a main effect for gender, F (1, 648) = 19.33, p < .001, η2= .029.

Girls reported significantly higher quality of friendship (M = 57.35, SD = 7.90) than boys

reported (M = 53.98, SD = 8.06). There were no significant main effects of grade on

friendship quality, F (2, 648) = .31, p = ns, η2= .002. Gender and grade interaction on

friendship quality was yet found significant with a marginal effect size, F (2, 648) = 3.47
 308

p < .05, η2= .008. This interaction is illustrated in figure 4.3b. All other interactions

remained insignificant.

Table 4.3b

Post Hoc Comparisons of Bully/Victim Groups for Quality of Friendship

95% CI

(I) B/V (J) B/V M.diff (I-J) SE p LL UL

Uninvolved bully 1.4822 .90216 .441 -1.0463 4.0106

victim 1.8971 .87531 .196 -.5561 4.3503

bully victim 2.5489* .78693 .015 .3433 4.7544

Note: Only significant results are reported.

Table 4.3b indicated that only bull-victim group significantly differed than

uninvolved students for quality of friendship. Quality of friendship for bullies, victims

and uninvolved students was not found significantly different across groups.
 309

Figure 4.1 b

Estimated Marginal Means of Friendship Quality across Bully/Victim Groups

The figure indicates that bully-victim group scored lowest on quality of

friendship. Friendship quality of uninvolved students seems better than other groups.
 310

Figure 4.2 b

Mean Scores of Boys and Girls on FQS

Figure 4.2 b indicates that friendship quality of girls was better than boys
 311

Figure 4.3b

Gender and Grade Interaction for Friendship Quality

There is marked difference on friendship between boys and girls studying in grade

6. Friendship quality of boys was poor.

 312

Finding significant effects of bullying and gender on friendship quality, we

further explored the main effects and interaction of these variables on subscales of FQS

and the conflict scale. For this purpose a 4 × 2 Multivariate Analysis of Variance was

conducted.

Table 4.4b

MANOVA showing Main Effects and Interaction of Bully/Victim Groups and Gender on

FQS Subscales and Conflict

Source DV SS df MS F p η2
B/V Groups Approval 56.385 3 18.795 1.555 .199 .007
Intimacy 151.481 3 50.494 3.935 .008 .017
Help 25.511 3 8.504 1.334 .262 .006
Conflict 471.199 3 157.066 6.039 .001 .027
Gender Approval 142.904 1 142.904 11.820 .001 .017
Intimacy 472.983 1 472.983 36.863 .001 .053
Help 52.521 1 52.521 8.239 .004 .012
Conflict 55.097 1 55.097 2.118 .146 .003
B/V × Gender Approval 27.760 3 9.253 .765 .514 .003
Intimacy 30.813 3 10.271 .801 .494 .004
Help 6.083 3 2.028 .318 .812 .001
Conflict 434.380 3 144.793 5.567 .001 .025
Error Approval 8027.708 664 12.090
Intimacy 8519.613 664 12.831
Help 4232.963 664 6.375
Conflict 17269.701 664 26.009
Total Approval 325478.000 672
Intimacy 307326.000 672
Help 117384.000 672
Conflict 200942.000 672
 313

Results indicated main effect for bully/victim groups on intimacy, F (3, 664) =

3.93, p < .01, η2= .01, and conflict (resolution), F (3, 664) = 6.03, p < .001, η2= .027. It

was later analyzed for group comparisons. Significant main effects of gender were found

on approval, F (1, 664) = 11.82, p < .001, η2= .017; intimacy. F (1, 664) = 6.86, p < .001,

η2= .053 and help, F (1, 664) = 8.22, p < .001, η2= .012. Girls reported significantly

higher quality of friendship on these subscales than boys. Gender and Bully/victim group

interaction on conflict (resolution) was found significant, F (2, 664) = 5.56 p < .001, η2=

.25.

Scheffe’s post hoc analysis revealed that intimacy in the friendship was

significantly worse among bully-victim group of students as compared with uninvolved

students.
 314

Figure 4.4b

Estimated Marginal Means of Conflict across Gender among Bully/Victim

Groups

Girls who were not involved in bullying demonstrated better conflict resolution

than boys. When involved in bullying, girls scored lower on the scale compared with

boys.
 315

Discussion

In light of above mentioned results two of our hypotheses were supported. Girls

significantly scored higher on FQS than boys. Bully-victim groups had significantly

poorer quality of friendship as compared with other three groups who did not differ in

overall friendship quality. Grade differences were found non-significant.

Bully-victim group was at greater risk of having poor friendship quality explained

by intimacy of relationship and conflict resolution. Potential protective mechanism of

friendship against victimization needs further empirical evaluation as friendship quality

of victims and bullies was not different than uninvolved group. It has been recognized

that bully-victim groups could suffer from severe psychosocial aftermaths of bullying.

They were regarded as clumsy, immature and irritable (Olweus, 2006). Lack of good

quality of friendship in terms of intimacy indicates poor understanding of each other’s

intentions and lack of confidence in the relationship and thus being unable to resolve the

conflicts. These mechanisms increase the risk of aggressive behavior and decrease the

chances of being defended by peers. Aggressive acts further affect the relationship and

thus we can say that poor quality of friendship could be a predictor of victimization and

an outcome of being a bully as well. Over all the results were found somewhat

contradictory of the findings (Shin, 2012) who found that bully-victims did not differ

than uninvolved students in their friendship quality. We suggest that not all the aspects

of friendship quality could prove to be a guard against bullying and victimization.

Studying friendship dyads by taking reciprocity of friendship could offer insightful

findings.
 316

Grade differences in friendship quality were found insignificant. With regard to

gender, most of the findings are in line with the existent literature as girls generally

tended to show better friendship quality than boys (Gresham & Elliot, 1990). Furman

(1996) found that girls had the benefit of more cooperation by their close friend(s) as

compared with boys. High rates of bullying and victimization in boys could be explained

by these gender differences in friendship quality.

Interventions should consider these findings while dealing with bully-victim

group especially. Good quality of close friendship may be the doorway for an unpopular

student to the social world of accepted and well-adjusted peers. This may reduce the

distress of being involved in bullying as friendship quality has also proved to be a

moderator of bullying and psychopathological outcomes (Bollmer et al., 2005).

Results of the current study (non-significant difference in friendship quality of

bullies, victims and uninvolved students) are also valuable as Brendgen, Vitaro, and

Bukowski, (2000) found that bullies might have same kind of friends in their circle who

possess anti-social tendencies and thus encourage the aggressive behavior. Victims on the

other hand could have friendship that were equally likely to be bullied and thus were

unable to offer the protective buffer, though intimacy and sharing still existed in the

relationship.
 317

Section C: Unified Outcomes

This section includes the academic and demographic correlates of emotion

recognition and quality of friendship. Data on student’s marks percentages, attendance,

monthly income and family size was evaluated in this section by analyzing their

relationship with emotion recognition accuracy scores and quality of friendship. Lastly

the data were analyzed for possible relationships among study variables. Participants,

who were identified into different bullying roles, performed on FEEL test and had also

been assessed for qualities of friendship were evaluated in this section for relationship in

scores of FEEL test and FQS.

Objectives

The current section sought to determine:

1. The association between socioeconomic and academic variables, emotion recognition

ability and friendship quality.

2. The association between emotion recognition ability and friendship quality of bullies,

victims, bully-victims and uninvolved students.

 318

Results

Table 4.1c

Academic and Socioeconomic Correlates of Friendship Quality and Emotion

Recognition

Variables N FQ N ER

Exam marks 459 .094* 348 .322**

Attendance 293 .131* 208 .06

Monthly income 314 -.01 263 .231**

Family size 299 .02 255 -.05

No. of siblings 380 .06 337 -.122*

Birth order 318 .01 311 -.002

*p < .05; **p < .001.

FQ = Friendship Quality; ER = Emotion Recognition

Quality of friendship (r = .09, p < .05) and emotion recognition (r = .32, p < .001)

were found to be significantly correlated with performance in exams. However the

strength of relationship was stronger between emotion recognition and exam marks.

Better friendship quality was significantly associated (r = .13, p < .05) with school

attendance. Significant positive relationship (r = .23, p < .001) was found between

monthly income and emotion recognition ability (FEEL scores). There was also

significant yet inverse relationship between number of siblings and emotion recognition

skill (r = -.12, p < .05).

 319

Considering the previous results (study 3, section A & B), we examined the

relationship between friendship quality and emotion recognition that was found weak yet

significant (r = .15, p < .05). This relationship was further evaluated among bully/victim

groups. We then analyzed which of these two variables was more potential predictor of

bullying and victimization in the current sample. Data on both of the variables was available

for 364 students.

Table 4.2c

Correlation between Friendship Quality and Emotion Recognition across Bully/Victim

Groups

Groups N r p

Bully 83 .15 .15

Victim 76 -.03 .78

Bully-victim 104 .215 .02

Uninvolved 101 -.026 .79

Total 364 .15 .05

Although FQS and FEEL total scores were found to be significantly correlated (r

= .15, p < .05), most of this relationship was explained by correlation between friendship

quality and emotion recognition of the bully-victim group (r = .21, p < .05).
 320

Table 4.3c

Regression Analysis for Emotion Recognition Ability and Friendship Quality on Global

Victimization (N = 370)

Model B SE β t p

Constant 4.039 .498 8.117 .001

FQ -.010 .006 -.086 -1.667 .096

FEEL -.029 .009 -.157 -3.055 .002

R 2 = .035; Adjusted R2 = .030. F = 6.616. **p < .01

Table 4.3c showed that FEEL score significant predicted experience of victimization

(global item 4 of OBVQ) accounting for 3% of variance [R2 = .030. F (367) = 6.616, p < .01].

The direction was negative indicating that poorer emotion recognition ability was associated

with higher levels of victimization. Friendship quality (FQS score) however could not prove

to be a significant precursor to victimization experience.

 321

Table 4.4c

Regression Analysis for Emotion Recognition Ability and Friendship Quality on Global

Bullying (N = 370)

Model B SE β t p

Constant 4.175 .485 8.607 .001

FQ -.013 .006 -.111 -2.157 .032

FEEL -.026 .009 -.149 -2.891 .004

R 2 = .038; Adjusted R2 = .032.

Table 6.12 demonstrated that friendship quality negatively predicted bullying

involvement causing 3.2% of variance (R2 = .032. F (367) = 7.183, p < .001). It showed

that good friendship quality was linked to fewer chances of involvement in bullying

others. FEEL score also significantly predicted involvement in bullying behavior and the

direction was negative suggesting that poor emotion recognition ability accounted for

increase in bullying
 322

Discussion

The final section of study 3 bore valuable findings with reference to Socio-

demographic and academic correlates of emotion recognition of friendship quality. Lack

in friendship quality and emotion recognition ability was significantly associated with

academic performance of students in terms of marks obtained in last two exams.

Attendance was also significantly associated with friendship quality indicated that those

who had more positive friendship relation were less likely to avoid the school. Social and

emotional competencies had been previously found associated with academic success by

researchers (Goetz et al., 2005; Veronneau & Dishion, 2012.

Emotion recognition and friendship quality of bully-victim group were significant

associated with each other. In literature, bully-victim has been found to be controversial

group. They had been reported as more irritable rejected while exhibited high self-

0esteem and confidence like bullies (Seixas, Coeelho & Nicolas-Fischer, 2013). They

actually possess a combination of characteristics that make them more prone towards

maladaptive outcomes. Lastly emotion recognition strongly predicted victimization as

compared to friendship quality which did not predict victimization. Bullying was

significantly predicted by both of the factors.

These findings suggest that bullying and victimization is a complex phenomenon

associated with several psychosocial repercussions and dynamics. Relationships between

variables (bullying, emotion recognition, emotion recognition and academic

performance) used to emerged in the current research can be antecedents of interpersonal

relationships in adulthood. In the light of present findings, further investigation is suggested to

 323

analyze the social- ecological theory of emotional perception, and experiences that account for

bullying process.

Thisstudy has the uniqueness of combining bullying, social information

processing and friendship quality. The importance of detecting the ways in which

students involved in bullying interpret social scenarios can provide a basis for

intervention programs which help the students to develop quality peer interactions in

order to facilitate social information processing by appreciating the mutual understanding

in friendship relation, to think about more reasonable response options, to make use of

socially proficient responses, and, mainly, to process social information in a more

competent way.
 324

Chapter V

GENERAL DISCUSSION

The present research work is an empirical examination of affective and social

aspects of bullying and victimization in relation to self-reported experiences of school

students. The general aim of this dissertation was to investigate the effect of mood on

emotion recognition among bully/victim groups, taking the arguments offered by social

information processing (SIP) approach, social cognitive perspective and mood

congruence hypothesis in explaining SIP. Appreciating the significance of peer

interactions, we also discovered the role of friendship quality in relation to peer

victimization and bullying perpetration. We also investigated the educational outcome of

involvement in bullying with reference to students’ average exam marks and school

attendance. We also examined as how the determinants of bullying and victimization

(emotion recognition ability and friendship quality) could relate to the academic

performance of students. In addition to identifying gender and grade differences for the

main study variables, other demographic variables (e.g. monthly income, family size and

parental education) were also taken into account.

Results from the four studies revealed valuable information and emancipated

novel avenues for future research. In this last chapter, studies are summarized and

important results are discussed. Limitations are also presented and suggestions are

outlined to handle them in future studies. The implications of the findings are also for

theory, for interventions in bullying and for further research are suggested.

Employing standardized translation procedures, we obtained Urdu versions of

Olweus Bully Victim Questionnaire (OBVQ) and Friendship Qualities Scale (FQS). Both
 325

of the versions were empirically evaluated for their content validity using three different

samples for each measure. Results from the bilinguals’ samples (for OBVQ and FQS)

demonstrated highly significant and strong correlations between Urdu and English

versions of both the scales. We then proceeded with establishing the initial psychometric

properties for OBVQ and FQS using two distinct samples of 122 and 151 students

respectively.

Results of exploratory factor analysis for OBVQ were in line with the original

structure and the existing literature on adapted versions of the scale (Schwartz et al.,

2001; Solberg & Olweus, 2003). Items assessing bullying and victimization distinctly

loaded on two factors and both the subscales showed good reliability (Bullying: α = .80;

Victimization: α = .94). Consistent with the extant literature, (Cook et al., 2010), bullying

strongly correlated with aggressive behavior subscale of CBCL (r = .78, p < .001), which

personifies the externalizing behavior. Though it was also found related with

anxious/depressed subscale of OBVQ, however the magnitude of relationship was lower

than aggressive behavior dimension (r = .41, p < .001). Studies have also reported that

bullies used to exhibit some internalizing behavior symptoms. The reason is that some

bullies also experience victimization and are named as reactive bullies or bully-victims.

They tend to show both kind of symptoms and are at higher risk of psychopathology

(Glew, Fan, Katon, & Rivara, 2008). Being bullied or victimization was strongly

associated with anxious/depressed dimension (r = .49, p < .001), and showed non-

significant relationship with aggressive behavior (r = .15, p = ns). Findings lend support

to the convergent and divergent validity of OBVQ Urdu version. Finally on a sample of
 326

817 students, OBVQ yielded adequate fit indices (CFI = .94; TLI = .92; RMSEA = .05)

resulting from confirmatory factor analysis.

Despite limited agreement found between self-reports and teacher nominations (as

cited in Smith, 2014), present study found high concordance between OBVQ and teacher

nominations (ĸ = .82, p < .001). It provided additional support to the construct and

concurrent validity, yet we suggest a careful interpretation of the result as we did not use

the whole class approach while administering self-report.

For Friendship Qualities scale, we conducted PCA followed by EFA through

principal axis factoring using promax method of rotation. Pattern matrix suggested four

factors with almost adequate (Yong, Hua, & Mei, 2007) internal consistency (α >

.60).The picture was different from the 5 factor model of friendship quality offered by the

authors of FQS (Bukowski et al;, 1994). Smaller sample size (N = 151) could explain the

variations. Later, original 5 factor model and the four factor model emerged from EFA in

current study, were submitted to confirmatory factor analysis on a sample of 672

students. On the basis of optimal fit indices (RMR = .06, GFI = .96, CFI = .95, TLI = .94,

RMSEA = .03) and higher reliability estimates (all α values > .60), we retained the CFA

of exploratively obtained model after necessary modifications in view of Lagranian

multiplier (Toe et al., 2013). FQS Urdu version presented a distinctive pattern of four

subscales (Approval, Intimacy, Help and Conflict) compared with existing evidence from

original and translated versions (Fonzi et al., 1997). Younger age group (Mage= 10.86;

SDage = 1.08) of the current sample and cultural context may account for the diversity in

results.
 327

Findings of study 2 (Chapter II) imply the details acquired from the full Olweus

Bully Victim Questionnaire (OBVQ). Most importantly, the prevalence estimates of

bullying and victimization and its different types across gender and three grades (4th, 5th

and 6th) have been delineated. With regard to bully/victim roles only 34.6 % remained

uninvolved and majority of others (28.8%) were found as both perpetrators and the

targets of bullying (bully-victims). The findings accentuate the nature of aggression

(reactive/proactive) to be studied further. Overall boys reported more victimization than

girls while previous findings reported an opposite trend (Seals & Young, 2003). Students

in lower grade (4th) reported being victimized more often than others (5th or 6th graders).

Results comply with the available reports on grade differences (Salmivalli, 2002).Verbal

and relational (exclusion and rumor spreading) were the most frequently occurring forms

of both bullying perpetration and victimization as found by other researchers (Coloroso,

2004). Gender differences in types of bullying were found comparable to the existing

research (Card et al., 2008) as relational bullying (social exclusion/rumor spreading) was

more commonly reported by girls as compared with boys who reported being involved in

more direct (verbal, physical, damage to property) forms. Among other important results,

bullying mostly occurred in play grounds, perpetrated by an individual or a small group

(2 to 3 students), usually lasted for a couple of weeks, and was most often reported to

school staff. Girls showed more pro-victim attitude compared with boys. Findings should

be considered while planning intervention for students.

Section B of 2nd study unraveled academic consequences and demographic

differences pertaining to bullying and victimization. Confirming the results of previous

 328

studies (Glew et al., 2008) we found that students who were part of the bullying process

were more likely to have academic issues.

While searching for the resources with reference to mood induction procedure

(MIP) for children; no indigenous protocol was found and available techniques employed

stimuli that could be culturally incompatible. This led us to develop indigenous MIP

using suitable stimuli (study 4; section A: phase I). It was essentially required before

conducting the main study on effect of mood on emotion recognition of bullies and

victims. Four techniques (Video song, Instrumental music, Emotive pictures, and

Picture/music combination) were evaluated after a thorough process of stimulus selection

for each technique. These techniques were then empirically tested on a student sample

following between-within experimental design. Findings of mixed factorial (4×2×2)

ANOVA found that the all the techniques produced significant changes in existing mood

in an enviable way. Pre and post manipulation results revealed that video song was the

most efficient technique in both happy and sad condition followed by a combination of

pictures presented with background music as compared with music and pictures alone.

Findings are consistent with earlier studies suggesting significant mood change as a result

of music and emotive pictures (Goritz & Moser, 2006; Pagliaccio et al., 2012). In the

subsequent section phase (II) of section A, we extracted a sample of bully/victim groups

(N = 394) from the main sample of study 2. Mood priming (using video song along with

picture/music combination) proved successful for sad, happy and neutral conditions. The

study failed to support the mood congruency hypothesis in general. Yet performance of

victimized students was significantly different across mood conditions suggesting

“mood-as-information effect” (Forgas,1995) on general emotion recognition and

 329

detecting the angry expressions. Observing the error profiles of victimized students could

explain the information processing in sad and happy moods. Although all the students

involved in bullying process showed poorer emotion recognition than uninvolved

students, deficits were evident for bully-victim and victim groups. Results compliment

the deficit model of SIP with regard to bullying (Crick & Dodge, 1994). Prospective

studies should address emotional processing at different levels during information

processing to see if there is a stable pattern of deficits for children who are victimized.

Consistent with the previously published work on friendship and bullying

(Espeealage & Swearer, 2003), results of study 4 (Chapter 3; section B) revealed that

poor friendship quality may increase the likelihood of involvement in bullying.

Comparison among bully/victim groups demonstrated that uninvolved students had

significantly better friendship relation than bullies, victims and especially bully-victims

who scored lowest on FQS. Major differences emerged for conflict resolution and

intimacy subscales. Over all girls demonstrated better quality of friendship than boys.

There is need to develop quality peer support networks not only to prevent bullying but

also to minimize the harmful consequences of victimization.

While discussing the unified outcomes pertaining to emotion recognition and

friendship quality as important precursors to bullying and victimization, this section (C)

of chapter 3 presents results for academic performance and demographic variables.

Academic cost of being involved in bullying is evident (Juvonen et al., 2011) and

supported in study 2. Poor emotion recognition skills also predicted educational outcome

in terms of exam marks. Poor friendship quality proved to be a significant marker of

school avoidance (low attendance percentages). The results are grounded on extant
 330

literature (Altermatt & Pomerantz, 2005; Goetz et al., 2005). Monthly income was

significantly correlated with emotion recognition yet not with friendship quality.

Additionally, friendship quality and emotion recognition ability were correlated though

not strongly (r = .15, p < .05); might explain the mechanisms that link the individual

capacities and processes with the ways in which the social experiences become embedded

in the individual.

Although current research has not further addressed these important links, yet we

suggest that children possess complex cognitive and social abilities that, particularly

when applied to affective information received from the environment, may provide

insight into both behavioral adaptation and mal-adaptation. Finally, the present work is an

important area to advance, as shown by recent attempts to clarify the role of emotion in

existing theoretical frameworks and the growing recognition of their importance in social

interactions generally (Halberstadt, Denham, & Dunsmore, 2001).

Implications and Recommendations

The studies presented in the thesis contribute to our knowledge in the field of

bullying at school and fill certain gaps identified in our review of literature. Here we

place of our findings within the theoretical framework and prospect research.

Besides adding a standardized tool of measurement for bullying to the

psychological assessment database in Pakistan, the rigorous process of translating OBVQ

resulted in functional characteristics of the phenomenon. Students were able to take into

concern the basic elements of power imbalance, repetition, harmful intention and various

forms of aggression involved in bullying. Research on bullying in Pakistan is still in its

 331

embryonic stage; therefore a deliberate insight offered by the first section of study 1

guides the researchers to be cautious while assessing the construct of bullying. It also

adds useful information to the growing body of the cultural context of bullying that has

been recently highlighted by researchers (Smith & Monks, 2008; Smith, 2014).The study

supports the use of definition based measure which may distinguish bullying from other

forms of aggression.

Convergence with anxious/depressed domain for both bullying and victimization

has serious mental health implications (Stagg & Sheridan, 2010). These

psychopathological consequences; especially anxiety can lead health risks (Aluedo,

Adeleke, Omoike, and Afen-Akpaida (2008). Tendency for increased somatic complaints

can add to the stress and expose the students to serious illness (Aluede, 2006). A detailed

examination of psychopathological consequences of bullying is required along with

physical health status. Not only bully/victim groups, the bystanders may also feel

insecurity and discomfort as a result of witnessing violent behavior (Polanin, Espelage, &

Pigot, 2012) Schools should not take the issue for granted and adapt the measures for

safer school climate.

Majority of our sample involved in bullying were bully-victims and more boys

reported being bullied. We later found that bully-victim was more vulnerable to socio-

affective repercussions (poor friendship quality and emotion recognition skills). Bully-

victims have been thought to be a distinct and high risk group by researchers having more

mental health and behavior issues, and reporting greater difficulty in peer relationships

(Andreou, Valochou & Didaskalou, 2005; Renda, Vassallo, & Edwards, 2011). This

distinct group could be studied in detail for further clarity of processes that account for
 332

their pro-bully attitude and peer rejection aspects. Moreover being girls equally involved

in overall bullying and more prone towards relational bullying needs further reflections

on affective and cognitive empathy that might serve as moderator to this relationship

(Topcu & Erdur-Baker, 2012).

There appears an overall lack of awareness regarding bullying as we noticed

during data collection, that most of the teachers were unfamiliar to the word ‘bullying’.

Awareness itself can prevent bullying as teachers and peers would be more vigilant to the

incidents of bullying. Rather than considering it an every issue of peer relationship

(especially in playgrounds), close supervision and implementation disciplinary measures

can address the issue besides a carefully planned anti-bullying strategy. Studies have also

recommended collaborative efforts between parents and teachers in order to help the

victims and snub bullying (Ahmed & Braithwaite, 2004). It is important for teachers to

communicate and note the awareness of the parents in bullying behaviors or victimization

of their children. Moreover, children who act as uninvolved could also be trained to

become defenders. This research can be an initiative to nip the evil in the bud by

identifying the potential source of violence at initial level, which later could be harmful

for the society at large.

Generally, facial emotion expressions are considered the first communication

margin that, when accurately processed, can lead to an empathic response. In this regard,

both internal and external dispositions may persuade the understanding of contextual

cues. Overall findings of the present research (in study 3) did not support the existing

evidence for effects of positive or negative mood on social perceptions and judgments

(e.g. emotion recognition) as an important step in social information processing(Suzuki,

 333

et al. (2007). Thus neither mood congruence nor incongruence was found significant

while differences in emotion recognition skills were not regulated by mood states.

However interestingly, affect-laden happy or sad states negatively influenced anger

recognition of victimized students relative to those experiencing neutral mood states.

Nevertheless it becomes difficult to generate convincing theoretical grounds for such

diverse findings; however the results afford implications for cognition-affect interface

which discusses the role of mood for processing evidence related to interpretation of

emotional cues in a social situation. Furthermore, basic model of mood congruency for

cognition and emotion interplay could be insufficient in capturing the full richness of the

issue. Variations can be explained by more deliberate studies including eye trackers,

fMRIs or other imaging techniques. In addition, deficient groups may entail more

perceptual information as compared with others to recognize facial expressions of

emotions.

Intervention plan should incorporate programs to enhance emotional competence

of students. Knowing the nature of emotion recognition deficits in bully/victim group can

guide be a helpful in designing such programs. Emotion recognition skill can be learnt

and facilitated (Bauminger, 2002). Media-based measures like “Emotional Trainer”

(Silver & Oakes, 2001) and smart phone applications (Lamm et al., 2014) that have been

used to teach emotion recognition skills to autistic children can also be used with

bully/victims who suffer from the deficit. Such innovative technology can also be used to

detect bullying in school (Ye, Ferdinando, Sepanen, & Alaasarela, 2014).

Along with cognitive and emotional issues, there are also social problems related to

bullying and victimization. Based on our finding from study 1, we suggest that patterns of
 334

peer interactions could be culturally determined as Pakistani sample afforded a structure

different from the original framework of friendship quality. Moreover, findings of study 4

appreciated the buffering role of friendship quality in preventing involvement in bullying.

Childhood peer relations have certain implications for optimistic outcomes in for social

competence in later life. Implementing peer networks that assist peer interactions and

enhance positive dimensions in relationships can be helpful in combating bullying

(Cowie & Olafsson, 2000).Taking the relationship between friendship quality and

emotion recognition into account, emotional knowledge can help in improving positive

social behaviors. Creating dyadic links between bullies and victims by means of work

groups can prompt compassion, sensitivity to understand each other’s emotions,

cooperation and pro-social behavior.

This is the first known study to discuss a variety of aspects of bullying behavior

among Pakistani preadolescents, including prevalence of overall bullying, its types,

gender and grade differences, cognitive-affective and social facets and the academic

corollaries. While the research filled some gapes, it left some anomalies as well. The

topic can be expanded to other steps of SIP and reciprocal peer interaction with special

reference to verbal, relational and physical forms of bullying.

Ethical Considerations

This research accommodated the responsibilities to protect the interests of the

participants and users. With regards to the ethical considerations, the present research

adhered to the APA guidelines about research and assessment.

 335

1. Permission was sought from the authors of OBVQ and FQS to use and

translate the measures into Urdu. Permission was also obtained from the

authors of FEEL test to publish the FEEL Procedure Illustrated in Figure

6.3.

2. The research was formally approved from the Research Board of

Advanced Studies (AS&RB) GC University Lahore.

3. School authorities were approached for permission to collect data from

their schools. Objectives were explained to them and the researcher took

the responsibility for not violating the rules during data collection. Some

schools discontinued after few sessions and did not share their academic

records or attendance. They were not forced in this regard and their rights

were revered (see App. E).

4. All the participants were informed about the aims and objectives of the

studies. Consent was sought from parents, however students were not

forced to respond to the measures; however they were encouraged to

provide truthful answers (see App. E).

5. The respondents were told of their rights to withdraw their participation at

any stage. They were free from deception or stress that might arise from

their participation in this research.

6. The respondents were also assured protection through privacy and all

information that may disclose their identity would remain confidential.

Names were replaced with codes while entering the data to SPSS.
 336

7. During mood induction students were informed that they would be

watching some materials and if they found it uncomfortable they could tell

the experimenter about this and might discontinue at any time. Moreover

participants of sad mood condition were provided an opportunity to go

through happy MIP. Mood repair after emotion recognition task had been

completed.

8. Counseling services were offered by the researcher and parents were also

invited to discuss the matters of concern. Contact details were also

provided to the school authorities and the parents to consult further about

any participant. Some of the schools celebrated anti bullying week at their

schools.

Limitations and Suggestions

There is no study without limitations and the present research also encountered a

few. Most of these limitations came from the sources of time and consent. Here are some

issues that may restrict generalizability and comparability of the results.

1. The data were not obtained from the whole class(es) as 80% of the participant

schools did not allow for this. Although the students were randomly selected from

the classes, whole class administration might have resulted different prevalence

estimates. Gathering a few students separately in a room might have biased their

response behavior and we cannot ignore the aspect of social desirability.

However, teacher nominations were also obtained for these students that showed

high concordance with self-reports. Researchers are suggested to use whole class

approach while administering OBVQ.

 337

2. Another limitation regarding OBVQ in the present research was not following the

recommended anonymous administration due to certain reasons. Based on the

experience in study 1, that administered OBVQ anonymously, we noted that

many of the students still mentioned their names on the questionnaire, which

reflected that they were not concerned of being exposed to others or reluctant any

way to report their identification. Another reason was that participants of study 4

were recruited from the sample of study 3. Therefore and coding procedure was

avoided that might had created confusions resulting in mismatch of data sets.

Nevertheless the students were assured of the confidentiality of the data and the

names were replaced with codes while entering the data to SPSS.

3. Later research can define the uninvolved group more explicitly in terms of their

role as defenders of victims, supporters of bullies, and bystanders.

4. Only two subscales of Child Behavior Checklist (CBCL; Achenbach, 1991) were

used to determine convergent and discriminant validity as the study only

investigated initial psychometric properties of the measure. CBCL full scale could

yield better account of the construct validity of OBVQ in terms of internalizing

and externalizing behavior problems. Similarly Social competence full scale and

other measures of peer relationship quality could have yielded clearer picture of

convergent and discriminant validity of the Friendship Qualities Scale (FQS).

5. Factor structure of FQS represented a distinct pattern for FQS Urdu version. This

variation could be attributed to smaller sample size as larger samples yield better

model fitting indices on confirmatory factor analysis.

 338

6. Nature of friendship could not be assessed in terms of reciprocity as it is usually

done using FQS. The questionnaires were administered to the whole class and

only a few randomly selected students completed the scales, therefore friendship

dyads could not be taken into account.

7. Experiments were not conducted in laboratory as it was not possible to bring all

the children to university. Parents also did not allow for this. Security issues and

safety of children was another reason for conducting experimental procedures at

the schools. Moreover, children feel more comfortable at familiar places.

Although we tried to maintain consistency across situations yet it might had

contributed to error and variability.

8. We employed two MIPs which is not unusual for mood induction researches, and

that too proved to be very effective in terms of altering mood states. Yet this

might influenced mood congruence. Future researchers can use alternate methods

such as film clips. Additionally, pictures and music excerpts should have been

assessed for both valence and arousal at selection stage.

9. Data on FEEL were analyzed only for accuracy scores and reaction time. Separate

profiles of error patterns for each of the bully/victim groups could better elucidate

the reasons and biases in attention.

10. FEEL test only measures recognition for static and basic emotions. Presenting

scenarios from original life including dynamic and more complex emotions such

as shame, guilt, etc could bear more fruitful results and implicate for intervention

strategies using social and emotional skills. Moreover, Nature of aggression

(reactive/proactive) underlying bullying could explain the deficits in emotion

 339

recognition ability of perpetrators. Future studies should relate emotion

recognition abilities to further aspects of social cognition and social information

processing.

11. IQ should have been assessed as it is an important covariate of emotion

recognition. Initially we tried using Children Progressive Matrices, and obtained

data from almost 200 participants, yet it proved very time consuming and

disturbed the schedules of experimental session at school. It is noteworthy here

that only few schools agreed to participate in study 4 and they too offered a tight

schedule that had to be met before annual exams. Keeping in view the time

constraints we stopped assessing IQ and had to exclude this variable from main

analysis.

12. General mood could serve as a moderator in determining the effect of induced

mood on emotion recognition; therefore future researchers must consider it while

testing mood congruence hypothesis.

13. Though we found an indication of relationship between emotion recognition and

friendship quality, the issue is left unexplained in the current research and needs

further investigation for the implications to the problem of bullying.

14. Data on certain demographic variables such as family income, parent’s education

and occupation, family size etc was missing as participants did not provided

required information despite reminders. Similarly, some of the schools refused to

share academic records (marks and attendance) resulting in limited data on these

variables.
 340

15. This study was cross-sectional. Longitudinal studies are required to explain

developmental trajectories of bullying and victimization and related cognitive,

affective and social determinants and outcomes.

Conclusions

Despite a substantial data on social information processing and quality of

friendship interactions, research in bullying studying these dynamics simultaneously is

scant. Present research concurrently addressed these dynamics in four studies. Each study

contributed precise information with regards to diverse aspects of bullying.

The research provided validated Urdu versions of two widely used instruments

(OBVQ and FQS) for measuring maladaptive and positive aspects of peer relationships:

bullying and the quality of friendship respectively. A standardized mood induction

protocol using familiar and age appropriate stimuli is another addition to the rarely

executed experimental studies in Pakistan. Results have shown that involvement in

bullying was related to less sensitivity in recognizing peer’s facial expressions of

emotions and the existing mood hampered the emotion recognition accuracy of

victimized students. Findings further indicated that poor quality of friendship could

increase the risk of bullying and victimization.

Cognitive, affective and social dynamics of bullying addressed in the present

research predominantly emphasize the need for emotional and social skill training for

bullies, victims and particularly bully-victim group. Increased awareness of the

phenomenon could enhance the likelihood of anti-bullying and pro-social attitude among

students and also school staff.

 341

High prevalence estimates of bullying at elementary and initial middle school

level are contemplative for all the stakeholders. For students, it is imperative to realize

their role and possible effects of bullying on themselves and others. School authorities

should create healthier school climate and better academic outcomes. Parents must

acknowledge the issue and address it timely in order to prevent psychosocial aftermaths.

Mental health professionals ought to investigate the underlying mechanism and

determinants of bullying; and most importantly for government agencies must establish

and implement violence prevention and intervention programs for schools.

 342

REFERENCES

Achenbach, T. M. (1991). Manual for Child Behavior Checklist/ 4-18 and 1991 Profile.

Burlington, VT: University of Vermont, Deptartment of Psychiatry.

Adair, V. A. Dixon, R. S., Moore, D. W., & Sutherland, C. M. (2000). Ask your mother not

to make yummy sandwiches: Bullying in New Zealand secondary schools.

Journal of Education Studies,35(2), 207-221.

Adnan, A., Chaudhry, A. A., &Malik, M. I. (2012). Emotional Intelligence and Students

Academic Performance: A Study Conducted in Pakistan and Afghanistan.

Science Series,4(3), 61-69.

Ahmed, M., Hussain, I., Ahmed, M., Ahmed, S., & Tabassum, R. (2012). Impact of Bullying

On the Performance of the Students at Primary Level in Sindh. Journal of Education,

3, 13-22.

Ahmed, E., & Braithwaite, V. (2004). Bullying and victimization: Cause for concern for both

families and schools. Social Psychology of Education, 7(1), 35- 54.

Ahmer, S., Yousafzai, A. W., Bhutto, N., Alam, S., Sarangzai, A. K., & Iqbal A. (2008).

Bullying of medical students in Pakistan: a cross-sectional questionnaire survey.

Plos One, 3(12), 17-19.

Almeida, A., Caurcel, M. J.,& Machado, J. C. (2006). Perceived characteristics of

victims according to their victimized and nonvictimized peers. Electronic Journal

of Research in Educational Psychology, 4(2), 371-396.

Alikasifoglu, M., Erginoz, E., Ercan, O., Uysal, O., & Albayrak-Kaymak, D. (2007).

Bullying behaviours and psychosocial health: Results from a cross-sectional survey

among high school students in Istanbul, Turkey. European Journal of Pediatrics, 166,

1253-1260.

Alikasifoglu, M., Erginoz, E., Ercan, O., Uysal, O., Albayrak-Kaymak, D., &Iiter, O. (2004).
 343

Violent behaviour among Turkish high school students and correlates of physical

fighting. European Journal of Public Health, 14, 173–177.

Altermatt, E. R., & Pomerantz, E. M. (2005). The implications of having high-achieving

versus low-achieving friends: A longitudinal analysis. Social Development, 14, 61-

81.

Aluedo, O., Adeleke, F., Omoike D., & Afen-Akpaida, J. (2008) A review of the extent,

nature, characteristics, and effects of bullying behaviour in schools. Journal of

Instructional Psychology, 35 (2), 151-158.

Aluede, O. (2006). Bullying in schools: A form of child abuse in schools. Educational

Research Quarterly, 30 (1), 37-49.

Andershed, H., Kerr, M., & Stattin, H. (2001). Bullying in school and violence on the streets:

Are the same people involved. Journal of Scandinavian Studies in Criminology and

Crime Prevention, 2, 31-49.

Andreou, E., Vlachou, A., & Didaskalou, E. (2005). The roles of self-efficacy, peer

interactions and attitudes in bully— victim incidents. School Psychology

International, 26, 545–562.

Anjum, N., & Malik, F. (2010). Parinting Practices in Mother of Children with ADHD: Role

of Stress and Behavioral Problems in Children. Pakistan Journal of Social and

Clinical Psychology, 8(1), 18-38.

Arsenio, W. F., Lemerise, E. A. (2002). Varieties of childhood bullying: values, emotion

processes, and social competences. Social Development, 10, 59–73.

Atik, E., Cok, F., Coban, F., Dogan, A., & Karaman, G. N. (2014). The Turkish Adaptation

of the Friendship Qualities Scale: A Validity and Reliability Study. Educational

Sciences: Theory & Practice, 14(2), 440-446. doi: 10.12738/estp.2014.2.1778.

 344

Austin, S., & Joseph, S. (1996). Assessment of bully/victim problems in 8 to 11 year-olds.

British Journal of Educational Psychology, 66 (4), 447-56.

Backs, R.W., Silva, S.P., & Han, K. (2005). A comparison of younger and older adults’ self-

assessment manikin ratings of affective pictures. Experimental Aging

Research, 31, 421-440.

Bagwell, K. (2004). Using problem-based learning with victims of bullying behavior.

Professional School Counseling, 9, 231-237.

Baker, J. R., Yardley, J. K., & Mccaul, K. (2001). Characteristics of Responding-,

Nonresponding- and Refusing parents In an Adolescent Lifestyle Choice Study.

Evaluation Review, 25(6), 605-618.

Baldry, A. (2004). The impact of direct and indirect bullying on the mental and physical

health of Italian youngsters.Aggressive Behavior, 30,343–355.

Ball, H. A., Arseneault, A., Taylor, A., Maughan, B., Caspi, A., &Moffitt, T. E. (2008).

Genetic and environmental influences on victims, bullies and bully-victims in

childhood. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry and Allied Disciplines, 49,

104-112.

Barboza, G. E., Schiamberg, L. B., Oehmke, J., Korzeniewski, S. J., Post, L. A., & Heraux,

C. G. (2009). Individual characteristics and the multiple contexts of adolescent bully

ing: An ecological perspective. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 38, 101–121.

Barchard, K. A. (2003). Does emotional intelligence assist in the prediction of academic

success. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 63 (5), 840-858. doi:

10.1177/0013164403251333.

Barden, R. C., Garber, J., Duncan, S. W., &Masters, J. C. (1981). Cumulative effects of

induced affective states in children: Accentuation, inoculation, and remediation.

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 40, 750-760.

 345

Bar-Haim, Y., Lamy, D., Pergamin, L., Bakermans-Kranenburg, & IJzendoorn, M. H. (2007).

Threat-related attentional bias in anxious and non-anxious individuals: a meta-

analytic study. Psychological Bulletin, 133, 1–24.

Barnett, M. A., King, L. M., & Howard, J. A. (1979). Inducing affect about self or other:

Effects on generosity in children. Develogmental Psychology, 13, 164-167.

Batsche, G. M., & Knoff, H. M. (1994). Bullies And Their Victims: Understanding a

Pervasive Problem in the Schools. School Psychology Review, 23, 165 – 175.

Batsche, G. (1997). Bullying: Development and Implications. Children's needs:

Psychological Perspectives-II. Journal of School Violence, 7, 97-118.

doi:10.1080/15388220801973912.

Baumgartner, T., Lutz, K., Schmidt, C. & Jäncke, L. (2006). The emotional power of music:

How music enhances the feeling of affective pictures. Brain Research, 1075(1),151-

164.

Bauminger, N. (2002). The Facilitation of Social-Emotional Understanding and Social

Interaction in High-Functioning Children with Autism: Intervention Outcomes. Journal

of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 32, 283-98.

Beaton, D. E., Bombardier, C., Guillemin, F., & Ferraz, M. B. (2000). Guidelines for the

process of cross-cultural adaptation of self-report measures. Spine, 25(24), 3186-

3191.

Beck, A. T. (1967). Depression: Clinical, experimental, and theoretical aspects.

Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press. Retrieved April, 2014 from

http://www. cyberbullying.us/cyberbullying_girls_victimization.pdf.

Benbenishty, R., & Astor, R. A., (2005). School violence in context: Culture, neighborhood,

family, school and gender. New York: Oxford.Gottfredsons.

 346

Bendixen, M., & Olweus, D. (1999). Measurement of antisocial behaviour in early

adolescence and adolescence: Psychometric properties and substantive findings.

Criminal Behaviour and Mental Health, 9, 323–354.

Bentler, P. M. (1990). Comparative Fit Indexes in Structural Models. Psychological Bulletin,

107(2), 238-46.

Bentler, P. M., & Dijkstra, T. K. (1985). Efficient estimation via linearization in structural

models. In P. R. Krishnaiah (Ed.), Multivariate analysis VI (pp. 9–42). Amsterdam:

North-Holland.

Bentley, K.M. & Li, A. K. F. (1995). Bully and victim problems in elementary schools and

students' beliefs about aggression. Canadian Journal of School Psychology, 11, 153-

165.

Berndt, T. J. (2002). Children’s friendships: Shifts over a Half-Century in perspectives on

their development and their effects. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 50, 206-223.

Berndt, T. J. (1999). Influences of friends and friendships on adjustment to junior high

school. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 45, 13–41.

Beran, T. N., & Lupart, J. (2009).The Relationship between School Achievement and Peer

Harassment in Canadian Adolescents. School Psychology International, 30(1), 75-91.

doi:10.1177/014303430810185.

Beran, G., & Stewat, S. (2008). Children’s experience of loneliness at school and its relation

to bullying and the quality of teacher interventions. The Qualitative Report, 9, 483-

499.

Berndt, T. J. (2004). Children’s friendships: Shifts over a half-century in perspectives on

their development and their effects. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 50, 206-223.

 347

Berndt, T. J. (2002). Children’s friendships: Shifts over a Half-Century in perspectives on

their development and their effects. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 50, 206-223.

Berndt, T. J. (1998). The features and effects of friendship in early adolescence. Child

Development, 53, 1447-1460.

Berndt, T. J. (1982). Children’s perceptions of friendships as supportive relationships.

Developmental Psychology, 22, 640 – 648.

Bernstein, I. H. (1988). Applied multivariate analysis. New York: Springer-Verlag.

Berthold, K., & Hover, J. (2000). Correlates of bullying and victimization among

intermediate students in the Midwestern USA. School Psychology International

21(1), 65-78.

Besag, V. (1989). B ullies and Victims in Schools by Valerie Besag. 232, McGraw-Hill.

Blair, R. J. R. (1999). Responsiveness to distress cues in the child with psychopathic

tendencies. Personality and Individual Differences, 27, 135–145.

Bilello, M., Casiglia, A. C., Lo Coco, A., & Miceli, S. (1995). Il Ruolo Della Competenza

Sociale Nelle Relazioni Tra ParI. Eta evolutiva, 50, 31-39.

Boivin, M., Hymel, S., & Bukowski, W. M. (1995). The roles of social withdrawal, peer

rejection, and victimization by peers in predicting loneliness and depressed mood in

childhood. Development & Psychopathology, 7, 765–785.

Bollen, K., & Long, J. (1993). Testing Structural Equation Models. Sage Publications,

Thousand Oaks, CA.

Bollmer, J. M., Milich, R., Harris, M. J., & Maras, M. A. (2005). A friend in need: the role of

friendship quality as a protective factor in peer victimisation and bullying. Journal of

Interpersonal Violence, 20, 701-712.

 348

Borg, S. (1999). Studying teacher cognition in second language grammar teachinSystem.

British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 27(1) 19-31.

Borg, M. G. (1998). The Emotional Reactions of School Bullies and their

Victims.Educational Psychology, 18(4), 433-444. doi: 10.1080/0144341980180405.

Bouhyys, A. L., Bloem, G. M., & Groothuis, T. G. (1995). Induction of depressed and elated

mood by music influences the perception of facial emotional expressions in healthy

Subjects. Journal of Affective Disorders, 33(4), 215-26.

Boulton, M. J. (1997). Teachers’ views on bullying: Definitions, attitudes and ability to cope.

British Journal of Educational Psychology, 67, 223-233.

Boulton, M. J., & Smith, P. K. (1994). Bully/victim problems in middle-school children:

Stability, self-perceived competence, peer perceptions and peer acceptance

British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 12(3), 315–329.doi: 10.1111/j.2044-

835X.1994.tb00637.x.

Boulton, M. J., & Underwood, A. (1992). Bully/victim problems among middle school

children. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 62 (1),73-87.

Bowen, G. L., & Holcom, J. M. (2000). Social support networks and school outcomes: The

centrality of the teacher. Child & Adolescent Social Work Journal, 17(3), 205-226.

Bower, G. H. (1987). Mood effects on person perception judgements. Journal of Personality

and Social Psychology, 53, 53-60. doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.53.1.53.beck

Bower, G. H. (1981). Mood and memory. American Psychologist. 36, 129-148.

Bowers, D. Blonder, L. X., &Heilman, K. M.(1999). Florida Affect Battery: Impact on

health profile. Center forNeuropsychological Studies Cognitive Neuroscience

Laboratory University of Florida

Bowes, L., Arseneault, L., Maughan, B., Taylor, A., Caspi, A.,& Moffitt, T. E. (2009).

School, neighborhood and family factors are associated with children’s bullying
 349

involvement : a nationally-representative longitudinal study. Journal of the American

Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry 48, 545–553.

Bracken, B. A., & Barona, A. (1991). State of the art procedures for translating, validating

and using psychoeducational tests in cross-cultural assessment. School Psychology

International, 12, 119-132.

Bradley, B. P., & Mogg, K., & Lee, S. C. (1997). Attentional biases for negative information

in induced and naturally occurring dysphoria. Behaviour Research and Therapy,

35(10), 911-927.

Bradley, M. M. (1994). Emotional memory: A dimensional analysis. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Bradley, M. M., & Lang, P. J. (1994). Measuring Emotion: The Self-Assessment Manikinand

the Semantic Differential. Journal of Behavior Therapy and Experimental Psychiatry,

25(1), 49-59.

Brendgren, M., Barker, E. D., Boivin, M., Fontaine, N., Arseneault, L., Vitaro, F.,

Bissonnette, C., & Trembley, R. E. (2011). Predictive Validity and Early Predictors

of Peer- Victimization Trajectories in Preschool. Archieves of General Psychiatry,

65(10), 1185- 1192.

Brendgen, M., Boivin, M., Vitaro, F., Girard, A., Dionne, G., & Pérusse, D. (2008). Gene-

environment interaction between peer victimization and child aggression.

Development and Psychopathology, 20, 455-471.

Brendgen, M., Vitaro, F., & Bukowski, W. M. (2000). Stability and variability of adolescents

affiliation with delinquent friends: Predictors and consequences. Social

Development, 9, 205–225.

Brendgen, M., Vitaro, F., & Bukowski, W. M. (2000). Deviant friends and earlyadolescents’

emotional and behavioral adjustment. Journal of Research onAdolescence, 10, 2,

173–189.
 350

Brenner, E. (2000). Mood induction in children: Methodological issues and clinical

implications. Review of General Psychology, 4, 264-283. doi:10.1037/1089-

2680.4.3.264.

Brislin, R.W. (1970). Back-Translation for Cross-Cultural Research. Journal of Cross-

Cultural Psychology, 1, 185-216.

Brittin, R. V. (2000). Children’s preference for sequenced accompaniments: The influence of

style and perceived tempo. Journal of Research in Music Education, 48, 237-248.

Bronfenbrenner, U. (1979). The ecology of human development: Experiments by nature

and design. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Brunstein-Klomek, A., Marrocco, F., Kleinman, M., Schonfeld, I., & Gould, M. (2007).

Bullying, depression, and suicidality in adolescents. Journal of the American

Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 46(1), 40-49.

Brown, D. W., Riley, L., Butchart, A., & Kann, L. (2008). Bullying among youth from eight

African countries and associations with adverse health behaviors. Pediatric Health,

2(3), 289-299.

Browne, M. W., & Cudeck, R. (1993). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. In: K. A. B

ollen & J. S. Long (Eds.), Testing structural equation models (pp. 136-162).

Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

Brunye, T. T., Mahoney, C. R., Augustyn, J. S., & Taylor, H. A. (2009). Emotional state and

local versus global spatial memory. Acta Psychologica, 130, 138-146.

Bukowski, W. M., Sippola, L. K., & Newcomb, A. F. (2000). Variations in pattems of

attraction to same- and other-sex peers during early adolescence. Developmental

Psychology, 36, 147-154.

Bukowski, W. M., Hoza, B.. & Boivin, M. (1996). The company they keep: Friendship in

childhood and adolescence. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

 351

Bukowski, W. M., Newcomb, T., &Hartup, L. (1996). Judgments of the features of

friendship among early adolescent boys and girls. The Journal of Early Adolescence,

6, 331-338. doi: 10.1177/0272431686064004.

Bukowski, W.M., Hoza, B., & Boivin, M. (1994). Measuring friendship quality during pre-

and early adolescence: The development and psychometric properties of the

Friendship Qualities Scale. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 11, 471-

484.

Bukowski, W. M., Hoza, B., & Newcomb, A. F. (1991). Friendship, popularity, and the 'self'

during early adolescence. Unpublished manuscript. Concordia University:

Department of Psychology.

Burks, V. S., Laird, R. D., Dodge, K. A., Pettit, G. S., & Bates, J. E. (1999). Knowledge

structures, social information processing, and children's aggressive behavior. Social

Development, 8, 220–236.

Burk, F.L. (1897). Teasing and bullying. Pedagogical Seminary, 4, 336 -371

Cairns, R. B., & Cairns, B. D. (1994). Lifelines and risks: Pathways of youth in our time.

New York: Harvester Wheatsheaf.

Camodeca, M., Goossens, F. A., Schuengel, C., & Terwogt, M. M. (2003). Links between

social informative processing in middle childhood and involvement in bullying.

Aggressive Behavior, 29(2), 116–127.

Camodeca, M., Goossens, F. A., Terwogt, M., & Schuengel, C. (2002). Bullying and

victimization among school-age children: Stability and links to proactive and reactive

aggression. Social Development, 11, 332–345.

Camras, L. A. & Allison, K. (1985). Children's understanding of emotional facial

expressions and verbal labels. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 9, 84-94.

Caravita, S. C. S., Di Blasio, P., & Salmivalli, C. (2010). Early adolescents' participation in
 352

bullying: Is To May involved?. Journal of Early Adolescence, 30(1), 138-170. doi:

10.1177/0272431609342983.

Caravita, S. C. S., DiBlasio, P., & Salmivalli, C. (2009).Unique and interactive effects of

empathy and social status on inovlvement in bullying. Social Development, 18, 140–

163.

Card, N. A., Stucky, B. D., Sawalani, G. M., & Little, T. D. (2008). Direct and indirect

aggression during childhood and adolescence: A meta-analytic review of gender

differences, intercorrelations, and relations to maladjustment. Child Development,

79(5), 1185–1229.

Carlson. A., & Masters, M. (1986). Promoting Species Establishment in a Phragmites-

Dominated Great Lakes Coastal Wetland. Natural Areas Journal, 29(3), 263-280.

doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.3375/043.029.0306.

Carlyle, K. E., & Steinman, K. J. (2007). Demographic differences in the prevalence, co-

occurrence, and correlates of adolescent bullying at school. Journal of School Health,

77, 623-629.

Carrera-Bastos, P., Fontes-Villalba, M., James, H. O., Keefe, E., Lindeberg, S., & Cordain,

L. (2011). The western diet and lifestyle and diseases of civilization. Research

Reports in Clinical Cardiology, 2, 15-35.

doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/RRCC.S16919.

Center for Disease Control and Prevention (2014). Suicide prevention: youth suicide.

Retrieved from http://www.cdc.gov/ violenceprevention/pub/youth_suicide.html.

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2012). Youth Risk Behavior Surveillance

United States,. MMWR 61 (No. SS-4), 1-162.Reterived from

www.cdc.gov/mmwr/pdf/ss/ss6104.pdf.

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2011). Youth risk behavior surveillance—
 353

United States, MMWR Surveillance Summaries 2012; 61(no. SS-4). Reterived from

www.cdc.gov/mmwr/pdf/ss/ss6104.pdf.

Center for Disease Control (2010). Leading cause of death reports 1999-2007 [data file].

Available from http://webappa.cdc.gov/sasweb/ncipc/leadcaus10.html.

Chamberlain, T., George, N., Golden, S., Walker, F., & Benton, T. (2010). Tellus 4 National

Report DCSF Research Report DCSF RR218. Retrieved from

http://publications.education.gov.uk/eOrderingDownload/DCSF-RR218.pdf.

Charach, A. Pepler, D., & Ziegler, S. (1995). Bullying at School. Education Canada, 5. 81-

95.

Chavez, L. M., & Canino, G. (2005). Toolkit on translating and adapting instruments.

Cambridge, MA: Human Services Research Institute.

Cheng, M., & Ward, J. (2004). The Ottawa-Georgia Mood Scales. Retrieved from

http://www.docstoc.com/docs/88073630/Ottawa-Georgia-Mood-Scales.

Chepenik, L. G., Cornew, L. A., & Farah, M. J. (2007). The Influence of Sad Mood on

Cognition. Psychological Association, 7(4), 802–811. doi: 10.1037/1528-

3542.7.4.802.

Chibbaro, J. S. (2007). School Counselors and the Cyberbully: Interventions and

Implications. Professional School Counseling, 11, 65-68. doi: 10.5330/PSC.n.2010-

11.65.

Chow, C., Ruhl, H., & Buhrmester, D. (2013). The mediating role of interpersonal

competence between adolescents' empathy and friendship quality: A dyadic

approach. Journal of Adolescence, 36, 191-200.

Coloroso, B. (2004). The bully, the bullied, and the bystander. New York, NY: Harper

Collins Publishers Inc.

Ciarrochi, J., & Heaven, P. C. L. (2012). Religious Values and the Development of Trait
 354

Hope and Self-Esteem in Adolescents. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion,

51(4), 676–688. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-5906.2012.01675.x.

Ciucci, E., Smorti, A., Fonzi, A. (1997). II rapporto bullo-vittima in soggetti di scuola media:

differenze di contesti ecologici.Ricerche di psicologia, 21 (2), 33-51.

Cohen, G. L, Garcia, J., Apfel, N., &Master, A. (2006). Reducing the Racial Achievement

Gap: A Social-Psychological Intervention. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology,

313(5791)1307-1310. doi: 10.1126/science.1128317.

Cook, C. R., Williams, K. R., Guerra, N. G., & Kim, T. E. & Sadek, S. (2010). Predictors of

bullying and victimization in childhood and adolescence: A meta-analytic investigation.

School Psychology Quarterly, 25(2), 65-83. doi.org/10.1037/a0020149.

Conklin, C. A., & Perkins, K. A. (2005). Subjective and reinforcing effects of smoking

during negative mood induction. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 20(114), 153–164.

Conrad, K. J., Wright, B. D., McKnight, P., McFall, M., Fontana, A., & Rosenheck, R.

(2004). Comparing traditional and Rasch analyses of the Mississippi PTSD Scale:

revealing limitations of reverse-scored items. Journal of Applied Measurement, 5(1),

15-30.

Cornell, C. M., Sheras, P., & Cole, M. (2006). Identification of School Bullies by Survey

Method. Professional School Counseling, 9(4), 305-313.

Costello, A. B. & Osborne, J. (2005). Best practices in exploratory factor analysis: four

recommendations for getting the most from your analysis. Practical Assessment

Research & Evaluation, 10(7).19-21.

Coulton, C. J., Korbin, J. E., Su, M., & Chow, J. (1995). Community level factors and child

maltreatment rates. Child Development, 66, 1262-1276.

 355

Cowie, H. (2000). Bystanding or standing by: Gender issues in coping with bullying in

English schools. Aggressive Behavior, 26, 85–97

Cox, A. D. (1997). Preventing child abuse; a review of community-based projects 1:

Intervening on processes and outcomes of reviews. Child Abuse Review, 6, 243-256.

Craig, E. W., Jasmine, E. S., Warwick, F., Vincent, C., John, P., Smold, L., & Oceanogr.

(2009). Lakes and reservoirs as sentinels, integrators, and regulators of climate

change. American Society of Limnology and Oceanography, 54, 2273–2282.

Craig, W. M., Pepler, D., & Atlas, R. (2000). Observations of bullying in the playground and

in the classroom [Special Issue: Bullies and victims]. School Psychology

International, 21, 22–36.

Craig, E. W., Peters, R. and Konarski, R. (1998). Bullying and Victimization Among anadian

School Children. TheWorking Paper Series for the Applied Research Branch, Human

Resources Development, Canada.

Craig, W. & Pepler, D. (1997). Observations of bullying and victimization in the schoolyard.

Canadian. Journal of School Psychology, 2, 41-60.

Crick, N.R., & Dodge, K.A. (1999). Superiority in the eye of the beholder: A comment on

Sutton, Smith and Swettenham. Social Development, 8, 128–131.

Crick, N. R., Werne, A., Casas, J. F., & Ku, H. C. (1999). Relational and physical forms of

peer victimization in preschool. Developmental Psychology, 35(2), 376−385.

Crick, N. R., & Bigbee, M. A. (1998). Relational and overt forms of peer victimization: A

multiinformant approach. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 66, 337–

347.

Crick, N. R., & Grotpeter, J. K. (1995). Relational aggression, gender, and social-

psychological adjustment. Child Developement, 66(3), 710-22.

Crick, N. R., & Dodge, J. K. (1994). Relational aggression, gender, and social–psychological
 356

adjustment. Child Development, 66, 710–722.

Crothers, L.M., & Levinson, E. M. (2004). Assessment of Bullying: A Review of Methods

and Instruments. Journal of Counseling & Development, 82(4), 496–503.

doi: 10.1002/j.1556-6678.2004.tb00338.x.

Cross, D., Shaw, T., Hearn, L., Epstein, M., Monks, H., & Lester, L., (2009). Australian

Covert Bullying Prevalence Study (ACBPS). Child Health Promotion Research

Centre, Edith Cowan University, Perth. Retrieved from

www.deewr.gov.au/Schooling/NationalSafeSchools/Pages/research.aspx.

Cummings, A. J., & Rennels, J. L. (2013). How Mood and Task Complexity Affect

Children's Recognition of Others' Emotions. Social Development, 23(1), 80–99.

doi: 10.1111/sode.12038.

Cunningham, J. G. (1988). Developmental change in the understanding of affective meaning

in music. Motivation and Emotion, 12, 399–413.

Currie, C., Nic-Gabhainn, S., Godeau, E., Roberts, C., Smith, R., & Currie, D. (2008).

Inequalities in young people's health: HBSC international report from the 2005/06

Survey. Health Policy for Children and Adolescents, No. 5, WHO Regional Office for

Europe, Copenhagen, Denmark.

Dake, J., Price, J., & Telljohann, S. (2003). The na- ture and extent of bullying at school. The

Journal of School Health, 73(5), 173–201.

Darwin, C. (1965). The expression of the emotions in man and animals. University of

Chicago Press, Chicago.

Deldin, P. J., Deveney, C. M., Kim, A. S., Casas, B. R., & Best, J. L. (2001). A slow wave

investigation of working memory biases in mood disorders. Journal of Abnormal

Psychology, 110, 267–281.

 357

Deming, D. (2009). Early Childhood Intervention and Life-Cycle Skill Development:

Evidence from Head Start. American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, 1(3),

111–134.

Demir, M., & Urberg, K. A. (2004). Friendship and adjustment among adolescents.

Journal Experimental Child Psychology, 88(1), 68-82.

Demmings, J. L. (2009). Examining Ethnic Identity and Friendship Quality among High

School aged same-sex Interracial Friendship Dyads. Kent State University.

Demorest, S. M., & Schultz S. J. M. (2004). Children's Preference for Authentic versus

Arranged Versions of World Music Recordings. Journal of Research in Music

Education, 52(4) 300-313.

Denham, S. A., Von Salisch, M., Olthof, T., Kochanoff, A., & Caverly, S. (2002).

Emotions and peer relationships. In C. Hart & P. K. Smith (Eds.), Handbook of child

social development (pp. 22-25). NY: Blackwell Publishers.

Denham, S. (1998). Emotional development in young children. New York: Guilford Press.

Denham, S. A, Mitchell-Copeland, J., Strandberg K, Auerbach S, Blair K. (1994) Parental

contributions to preschoolers’ emotional competence: Direct and indirect effects.

Motivation and Emotion. 21, 65–86.

Department of Health and Human Services. (2009). Obesity in children: New prevention

methods. Washington, DC: Author.

DeVoe, J., & Kaffenberger, S. (2005). Student Reports of Bullying: Results from the 2001

School Crime Supplement to the National Crime Victimization Survey. Statistical

Analysis Report. NCES 2005-310. American Institutes for Research, Washington,

DC.

Dijkstra, P. U., Wilgen, C. P., Versteegen, G. L., & Fleuren, M. J. T. (2009). Chronic pain
 358

and severe disuse syndrome: Long-term outcome of an inpatient multidisciplinary

cognitive Behavioural programe. Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine, 41(3), 122-128.

Doğan, T., Karaman, N. G., Coban, W. (2012). A Long-term study of the counseling needs of

Turkish University Students. Journal of Counseling and Development, 90, 91-96.

Dodge, J. P. (1986). Mood and judgment: The Affect Infusion Model (AIM). Psychological

Bulletin, 116, 39–66.

Dolgin, K. G., & Adelson, E. H. (1990). Age changes in the ability to interpret affect in sung

andinstrumentally-presented melodies. Psychology of Music, 18, 87–98.

Due, P., Damsgaard, M.T., Lund, R., & Holstein, B. E. (2009). Is bullying equally harmful

for rich and poor children. European Journal of Public Health, 19(5), 464-469.

Due, P., &Holstein, B. E. (2008). Bullying victimization among 13 to 15-year-old

school children: results from two comparative studies in 66 countries and

regions. Internal Journal of Adolescent Medicine Health, 20(2), 209–221.

Due, P., Holstein, E. B., Lynch, J., Diderichsen, F., Gabhain, S. N., Scheidt, P., &Currie, C.

(2005). Bullying and symptoms among school-aged children: international

comparative cross sectional study in 28 countrie. Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine,

39, 128-132. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/eurpub/cki105.

Duck, L. (2005). Publishing models and article dates explained. International Journal of

Testing, 8(1), 90-110. doi:10.1080/15305050701808680.

Duncan., R. D. (1999). Peer and Sibling Aggression: An Investigation of Intra- and Extra-

Familial Bullying. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 14(8), 871-886,

doi: 10.1177/088626099014008005J.

Dunn, J. A. (2004). Anxiety, stress, and the performance of complex intellectual task: A new

look at an old question. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 32, 669-673.
 359

Dunn, J. A., & Cutting, A. L. (1999). Understanding Others, and Individual Differences in

Friendship Interactions in Young Children. Social Development, 8(2), 201–219.

doi: 10.1111/1467-9507.00091.

Dupper, D. R.. & Meyer-Adams, N. (2002). Low-level violence: A neglected aspect of school

culture. Urban Education, 37,350-64.

Dussich, J. P. J., & Maekoya, C. (2007). Physical child harm and bullying-related behaviors:

A comparative study in Japan, South Africa and the United States. International

Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 51, 495-509.

Dwyer, P., Forsyth, B., King, L., & Seetaram, N. (2010). Migration Related Determinants of

Australian Inbound and Outbound Tourism Flows. Sustainable Tourism Cooperative

Research Centre, Gold Coast, Qld.

Eaton, D. K., Kann, L., Kinchen, S., Shanklin, S., Flint, K. H., Hawkins, J., Wechsler, H.

(2012). Youth risk behavior surveillance: United States, 2011. Morbidity and

Mortality Weekly Report, 61(4), 1-162.

Eisenberg, N., & Fabes, R. A. (1992). Emotion, regulation, and the development of social

competence. In Review of Personality and Social Psychology. Emotion and Social

Behavior, 14, 119–50.

Ekman, P., & Davidson, R. J. (1994). The nature of emotion: Fundamental questions. New

York: Oxford University Press.

Ekman, P. & Oster, H. (1979). Facial expressions of emotions. Annual Review of

Psychology, 30, 527-530.

Ekman, A. (1973). Cross culture study of facial expression, In P. Ekmon (Ed), Darwin and

facial expression, (pp.169-199). New York: Acadic Press.

Ellickson, P. L., & J. A. Hawes-Dawson. (1989). An assessment of active verses passive

 360

methods for obtaining parental consent. Evaluation Review, 13, 45-55.

Erath, S. A., Flanagan, K. S., & Bierman, K. L. (2008). Early adolescent school adjustment:

Associations with friendship and peer victimization. Social Development, 17, 853-

870.

Erber, R., & Erber, M. W. (1994). Mood and processing: A view from a self-regulation

perspective. Mahwah, 8, 63–84.

Eslea, M., & Smith, P. K. (2000). Pupil and parent attitudes towards bullying in primary

schools. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 15(2), 207- 219.

Espelage, D. L., Low, S., Rao, M. A., & Hong, J. S., (2013). Family violence, bullying,

fighting, and substance use among adolescents: A longitudinal transactional model.

Journal of Research on Adolescence, 52 (4), 233-240.

Espelage, D. L., & De La Rue, S. R. (2011). Homophobic teasing, psychological outcomes,

and sexual orientation among high school students: What influence do parents and

schools have. School Psychology Review, 37, 202-216.

Espelage, D. L., & Holt. (2007). Willingness to intervene in bullying episodes among middle

school students: Individual and peer-group influences. Journal of Early Adolescence,

32, 776–801.

Espelage, D. L., Holt, M. K., & Henkel, R. R. (2003). Examination of peer-group

contextual effects on aggression during early adolescence. Child Development, 74(1),

205-220.doi: 10.1111/1467-8624.00531.

Espelage, D. L. & Swearer, S.M. (2003). Bullying prevention and intervention. Full-day

workshop sponsored by University of Nebraska – Lincoln Division of Academic

Conferences, Omaha, Nebraska.

Espelage, D. L. (2002). Bullying in early adolescence: The role of the peer group. ERIC
 361

Digest.Champaign, IL: ERIC Clearinghouse on Elementary and Early Childhood

Education.(ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED471912).

Espelage, D. & Holt, M. (2001). Bullying and victimization during early adolescence: Peer

influences and psychosocial correlates. Journal of Emotional Abuse, 2, 123-142.

Espelage, D. L., & Asidao, E. (2001). New Perspectives on Bullying Prevention: Why are

Current Programs Not Working?. Educational Psychology, 5(2), 502-520.

Espelage, D. L., Bosworth, K., & Simon, T. R. (2000). Examining the social context of

bullying behaviors in early adolescence. Journal of Counseling and Development, 78,

326-333.

Ellickson, P. L., & Hawes-Dawson, J. A. (1989). An assessment of active verses passive

methods for obtaining parental consent. Evaluation Review, 13, 45-55.

Fabrigar, L. R., Wegener, D. T., MacCallum, R. C., & Strahan, E. J. (1999). Evaluating the

use of exploratory factor analysis in psychological research. Psychological Methods,

4(3), 272-299.

Fantuzzo, J., Sekino, Y., & Cohen, H.L. (2004). An examination of the contributions of

interactive peer play to salient classroom competencies for urban head start children.

Psychology in the Schools, 41, 323 –336.

Fantuzzo, J., Perry, M. A., & McDermott, P. (2004). Preschool approaches to learning and

their relationship to other relevant classroom competencies for low-income children.

School Psychology Quarterly, 19(3), 212–230.

Farijda, R. A., (1993). Victimization by peers: Associations with children’s reports of x

their relationship to other relevant classroom competencies for low-income children.

School Psychology Quarterly, 19(3), 212–230.

 362

Fairclough, S. H. Van der Zwaag, M., Spiridon, E., & Westerink, J. (2014). Effects of mood

induction via music on cardiovascular measures of negative emotion during simulated

driving. Physiological Behavior, 22, 129-173. doi: 10.1016/j.physbeh.2014.02.049.

Farooq, A. (2003). Effect of Emotional Intelligence on Academic Performance. Unpublished

Thesis, Institute of Clinical Psychology, University of Karachi, Pakistan.

Farrington, D., & Baldry, A. (2010). Individual risk factors for school bullying. Journal of

Aggression, Conflict and Peace Research, 2, 4-16.

Farrington, D. P. & Welsh, B. C. (2005). Family-based prevention of offending: A meta-

15 analysis. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Criminology, 36, 127-15.

Farrington, D. P. (1993). Understanding and preventing bullying Crime and Justics, 17, 381-

458.

Fekkes, M., Pijpers, F. I. M., & Verloove-Vanhorick, S. P. (2005). Bullying: who

doeswhat,when and where? Involvement of children, teachers and parents in bullying

behavior.Health Education Research, 20(1), 81-91. doi: 10.1093/her/cyg100.

Fekkes, M., Pijpers, F. I. M., & Verloove-Vanhorick, S. P. (2004). Bullying behavior and

associations with psychosomatic complaints in victims. Journal of Pediatrics, 144,

17–22.

Field, A. (2013). Discovering Statistics using IBM SPSS Statistics. University of Sussex.

SAGE Publications Ltd.

Field, A. (2005). Discovering statistics using SPSS.London: Sage.

Field, T., Diego, M., & Sanders, C. (2002). Adolescents' parent and peer relationship.

Adolescence, 37,121-122.

Fitzpatrick, K. M., Dulin, A. J.,& Piko, B. F. (2007). Not just pushing and shoving: School

bullying among African American adolescents. Journal of School Health, 77(1), 16-

22.
 363

Flouri, F., & Buchanan, A. (2003). The Role of Mother Involvement and Father Involvement

in Adolescent Bullying Behavior. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 18(6), 634-644.

doi: 10.1177/0886260503251129.

Floyd, F. J., & Widaman, K. F. (1995). Factor analysis in the development and refinement of

clinical assessment instruments. Psychological Assessment, 7(3), 286-299.

Fonzi, S., Schneider, B. H., Tani, F., & Tomada, G. (1997). Predicting children’s friendship

status from their dyadic interaction in structured situations of potential conflict. Child

Development, 68, 496-506.

Forero, R. (2013). Bullying behaviour and psychosocial health among school students in New

South Wales, Australia: Ross sectional survey. British Medical Journal, 319, 344-34.

Forgas, J. P. (1995). Mood and judgment: The Affect Infusion Model (AIM). Psychological

Bulletin, 116, 39–66.

Forgas, J. P., Burnham, D. & Trimboli, C. (1988). Mood, memory and social judgments in

children. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 697-703.

Fox, C. (2004). Evaluating the effectiveness of a social skills training programmer for

victims of bullying. Educational Research, 45, 231-247.

French, D. C., Bae, A., Pidada, S., & Lee, O. (2006). Friendships of Indonesian, S. Korean

and U.S. college students. Personal Relations, 13, 69-81.

French, D. C., Lee, O., & Pidada, S. U. (2006). Friendships of Indonesian, South Korean and

I.S.Youth. In X. Chen, D. French, C. & B. H., Schneider (Eds.), Peer Relationships

inCultural Context (pp. 379–402). New York: Cambridge University Press.

Frey, K. S., Hirschstein, M. K., Snell, J. L., Edstrom, L., Van Schoiack, L., MacKenzie, E. P.,

& Broderick, C. J. (2005). Reducing playground bullying and supporting beliefs: An

experimental trial of the steps to respect program. Developmental Psychology, 41,

479–491.
 364

Frost, L. (1991). A primary school approach-what can be done about the bully.In: Elliot,

Bullying. Essex: Longman.

Fu, Q., Land, K. C., & Lamb, V. L., (2012). School Bullying, Socioeconomic Status and

Behavioral Characteristics of 12th Graders in the United States. Department of

Sociology, Duke University, Durham, NC, 27708, USA.

Furlong, M. J., Sharkey, J. D., Felix, E., Tanigawa, D., & Greif-Green, J. (2010). Bullying

assessment: A call for increased precision of self-reporting procedures. The

international handbook of school bullying. New York: Routledge

Furman, W. (1996). The measurement of children and adolescent’s perceptions of

friendships: conceptual and methodological issues. In W. M.Bukowski, A.F.

Newcomb, & W.W. Hartup (Eds). The copany they keep: Friendship in childhood and

adolescence (pp. 41-65). Combridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.

Gasper, K. (2003). When necessity is the mother of invention: Mood and problem solving.

Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 39, 248-262.

Gasper, K., & Clore, G. L. (2002). Attending to the big picture: Mood and global versus local

processing of visual information. Psychological Science, 13, 33-39.

Gallardo, P., Baños, R., Belloch, F. M., & Rupierez, A. (1999). Attentional biases and

vulnerability to depression, The Spanish Journal of Psychology, 2(1), 11-19.

George, T. P. (1996). Friendship networks of unpopu- lar, average, and popular children.

Child Development, 67, 2301–2316.

Gerrards-Hesse, A., Spies, K., & Hesse, F. W. (1994). Experimental inductions of emotional

statesandtheireffectiveness:areview. British Journal of Psychology, 85, 55–78.

Glew, G. M., Fan, M., Katon, W., & Rivara, F. P. (2008). Bullying and school safety. The

Journal of Pediatrics, 152 (1), 123-128.

Gifford-Smith, M. E., & Brownell, C. A. (2003). Childhood peer relationships: Social

 365

acceptance, friendships, and peer networks. Journal of School Psychology, 41, 235-

284.

Gini, G., & Pozzoli, T. (2009). Association between bullying and psychosomatic problems:

Ameta-analysis. Personality and Individual Differences, 48(5), 1059-1065.

Gini, G, Albiero, P., Benelli, B., &Altoè, G. (2007). Does empathy predict adolescents'

bullying and defending behavior. Aggressive Behavior 33(5), 467 – 476.

Gini, G. (2004). Bullying in Italian schools: An overview of intervention programmes. School

Psychology International, 25, 106 -116.

Gladden, R. M., Vivolo-Kantor, A. M., Hamburger, M. E., & Lumpkin, C. D. (2014).

Bullying Surveillance Among Youths: Uniform Definitions for Public Health and

Recommended Data Elements, Version 1.0. Atlanta, GA; National Center for Injury

Prevention and Control, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and U.S.

Glew, G. M., Fan, M., Katon, W., & Rivara, F. P. (2008). Bullying and school safety. The

Journal of Pediatrics, 152 (1), 123-128.

Glew, G. M., Fan, M., Katon, W., Rivara, F. P., & Kernic, M. A. (2005). Bullying,

psychosocial adjustment, and academic performance in elementary school. Archives

of Pediatric Adolesscent Medicine, 159(1), 026-1,031.

Gnepp, J. (1989). Personalized inferences of emotions and appraisals: Component processes

and correlates. Developmental Psychology, 25(2), 277-288. doi.org/10.1037/0012-

1649.25.2.277.

Goetz, T., Frenzel, A. C., Pekrun, R., & Hall, N. (2005). Emotional intelligence in the context

of learning and achievement. In R. Schulze & R. D. Roberts (Eds.), Emotional

 366

intelligence: An international Handbook (pp. 233-253). Cambridge, MA: Hogrefe &

Huber Uublishers.

Goffin, R. D. (2007). Assessing the adequacy of structural equation models: Golden rules and

editorial policies. Personality and Individual Differences, 42, 831-839.

Gordillo, I. C. (2011). Repetition, Power Imbalance, and Intentionality: Do These Criteria

Conform to Teenagers, Perception of Bullying? A Role-Based Analysis.

Children and Youth Services Review, 33(9), 1608–1615. doi:

10.1177/0886260511431436.

Gorman, A.H., Dodge, K.A., &Bates, J.E. (2008). Friendships with peers who are low or

high in aggression as moderators of the link between peer victimization and declines

in academic functioning. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 36(5), 719-730.

Göritz, A.S. (2007). The induction of mood via the WWW. Motivation and Emotion, 31, 35–

47.

Göritz, A.S., & Moser, K. (2006). Web-based mood induction. Cognition and Emotion, 20,

887–896.

Gottfredson, G.D., Gottfredson, D.C., Payne, A., & Gottfredson, N.C. (2005). School

climate predictors of school disorder: Results from national delinquency prevention in

school.Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 42(4), 421-444.

Graham, S., Hudley, C., & Williams, E. (1992). Attributional and emotional determinants of

aggression among African American and Latino young adolescents. Developmental

Psychology, 28, 731–740.

Greenberg, B. (1969). School vandalism: A national dilemma. California: Menlo Park.

Gresham, F. M., & Elliott, S. N. (1990). Social skills rating system. Circle Pines, Minnesota:

American Guidance Service.

Gropper, N. & Froschl, M. (1999). Fostering friendships, curbing Bulling . Educational

 367

Pediatrics, Leadership, 56(8), 72-75.

Halberstadt, J. B., & Niedenthal, P. M. (1997). Emotional state and the use of stimulus

dimensions in judgment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72, 1017–

1033.

Hanif, R., Nadeem, M., & Tariq,S. (2011). Bullying in Schools: Attitudes of Children,

Teachers and Parents Interdisciplinary, Journal of Contemporary Research in

Business, 3(8), 1055-1060.

Hanif, R. (2008). Perceptions and Attitudes towards Bullying and School Social Climate: A

Cross-Cultural Comparison. Research report. Goldsmiths, University of London

(UK).

Hanson, T., Austin, G., & Zheng, H. (2010). Academic performance and school well-being in

California. California Healthy Students Research Project Research Brief. No. 1. San

Francisco,CA: WestEd.

Harper, B. D., Lemerise, E. A., & Caverly, S. L. (2010). The effect of induced mood on

children's social information processing: Social goals and response evaluation.

Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 38, 575-586.

Hartup, W. W., & Abecassis, S. (2002). Friends and enemies: Their significance in child

development. In P. Smith & Hart (Eds), Handbook of social development (pp.285-

307). London: Blackwell.

Hawkins, D. L., Pepler, D., & Craig, W. M. (2001). Peer interventions in playground

bullying. Social Development, 10, 512-527.

Hawker, D. S. J.,&Boulton, M. J. (2000). Twenty Years' Research on Peer Victimization

and Psychosocial Maladjustment: A Meta-analytic Review of Cross-sectional Studies.

Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 41(4) 441–455.

doi: 10.1111/1469-7610.00629.
 368

Haynie, D. L., Nansel, T., Eitel, P., Davis Crump, A., Saylor, K., Yu, K., & Simmons-

Morton, B. (2001). Bullies, victims, and bully/victims: Distinct groups of youth at

risk. Journal of Early Adolescence, 21, 29 – 49.

Hazemba, A., Siziya, S., Muula, A. S., & Rudatsikira, E. (2008). Prevalence and correlates

of being bullied among in-school adolescents in Beijing: results from the 2003 Beijing

Global School-Based Health Survey. Annals General Psychiatry, 7, 6-9.

doi:10.1186/1744-859X-7-6.

Hazler, R. J., Miller, D. L., Carney, J. V., Green, S. (2001). Adultre cognition of school

bullyingsituations. Educational Research, 43, 133-14.

Heald, T. R. (1994). Judgement in the case between R. H. Walker and Derbyshire County

Council. London: High Court Publication.

Heaven, P. C. L. & Ciarrochi, J. (2012). When IQ is not everything: Intelligence, personality,

and academic performance at school. Personality and Individual Differences, 54,518-

522.

Halberstadt, A. G., Denham, S. A., & Dunsmore, J. (2001). Affective social competence.

Social Development, 10, 79-119.

Hertz, M. F., David-Ferdon, C. (2008). Electronic media and youth violence: A CDC issue

brief for educators and caregivers. Centers for Disease Control, 6, 1-22.

Hills, P. J., Werno, M. A., & Lewis, M. B. (2011). Sad people are more accurate at face

cognition than happy people. Consciousness and Cognition, 20(4), 1502-1517

Hilton, A., & Skrutkowski, M. (2002). Translating instruments into other languages:

development and testing processes. Cancer Nursing, 25(1), 1-7.

Hinduja, S., & Patchin, J. W. (2010). Bullying, Cyberbullying, and Suicide. Archives of

Suicide Research 14(3),206-221. doi:10.1080/13811118.2010.494133.

 369

Hinduja, S., & Patchins,W. P. (2009). Cyberbullying reesearch Summary Cyberbullying and

Suicide. Archives of Suicide Research, 14 (3), 206-221.

Hodges, E. V. E., Boivin, M., Vitaro, F., & Bukowski, W. M. (1999). The power of

friendship: Protection against an escalating cycle of peer victimization.

Developmental Psychology, 35, 94–101.

Holder, H. B., & Kirkpatrick, S. W. (1991). Interpretations of emotion from facial

expressions in children with and without learning disabilities. Journal of Learning

Disabilities, 28, 170- 177.

Holt, M. K., Kantor, D., & Finkelhor, G. (2009). Parent/child concordance about bullying

involvement and family characteristics related to bullying and peer victimization.

Journal of School Violence, 8, 42-63.

Houndoumadi, A., & Pateraki, L. (2001). Bullying and bullies in Greek elementary schools:

Pupils’ attitudes and teachers’/parents’ awareness. Educational Review, 53, 19-26.

Hu, L.T., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff Criteria for Fit Indexes in Covariance Structure

Analysis: Conventional Criteria Versus New Alternatives. Structural Equation

Modeling, 6 (1), 1-55.

Hunter, P. G., Schellenberg, E. G., & Schimmack, U. (2008). Mixed affective responses to

music with conflicting cues. Cognition and Emotion, 22, 327–352.

Hunt, C. (2007). The Effect of an Education Program on Attitudes and Beliefs about Bullying

and Bullying Behaviour in Junior Secondary School Students, Child and Adolescent

Mental Health, 12(1), 21–26, doi: 10.1111/j.1475-3588.2006.00417.x.

Innes-Ker, Å., & Niedenthal, P. M. (2002). Emotion concepts and emotional states in social

judgment and categorization. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83, 804–
 370

816.

Irwin, J. R. (2014). Development of an audiovisual speech perception app for children with

autism spectrum disorders. Clinical Linguistics & Phonetics, 1(8), 100-103.

Izard, C. E. (2001). Emotional intelligence or adaptive emotions. Emotion, 1, 249-257.

Garson, G. D. (2015). Structural Equation Modeling.President Statistical Publishing

Associates, USA. North Carolina, State University.

Gladden, R. M., Vivolo-Kantor, A. M., Hamburger, M. E., & Lumpkin, C. D. (2014).

Bullying surveillance among youth: Uniform definitions for public health and

recommended data elements, version 1.0. Atlanta, GA: National Center for Injury

Prevention and Control, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and U.S.

Department of Education.

Gorman, A. H., Dodge, K. A., &Bates, J. E. (2008). Friendships with peers who are low or

high in aggression as moderators of the link between peer victimization and declines

in academic functioning. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 36(5), 719-730.

Jackson, D. L., Gillapsy, J. A., & Stephenson, P. (2009). Reporting Practices in Confirmatory

Factor Analysis: An Overview and Some Recommendations.Psychological Methods,

14(1), 6-23.

James, A. (2010). School Bullying Research Briefing. Retrieved from

www.nspcc.org.uk/inform.

Jansen, P. W., Verlinden, M., Dommisse-van A. B., Mieloo, C., Ende, J. V. D., Veenstra, R.,

Verhulst,F. C., Jansen, W., & Tiemeier. H. (2012). Prevalence of bullying and

victimization among children in early elementary school: Do family and school

neighbourhood socioeconomic status matter?. BMC Public Health, 12,494 -499.

doi:10.1186/1471-2458-12-494.
 371

Jansen, P. W., Verlinden, M., Dommisse-van, B. A., Mieloo, C., van der Ende, J., &

Veenstra, R. (2012). Prevalence of bullying and victimization among children in

early elementary school: Do family and school neighbourhood socioeconomic status

matter? Bmc Public Health, 12(1),494- 495.

Jerman, P.G., Van der, L., & Agernbeaus, D. (2008). Heterogeneous inhibition process

nvoloved in different facets of self-reported impulsitivity: Evidence from a

community sample. Acta Psychologica, 129(3), 332-33.

Jones, S. E., Manstead, A., & Livingstone, A. (2012). Birds of a feather perpetrator together:

Group processes and children’s responses to bullying. British Journal of

Developmental Psychology, 27(4), 853–873. doi:10.1348/026151008X390267.

Jones, S. E., Manstead, A., & Livingstone, A. (2011). Ganging up or sticking together?

Group processes and children’s responses to text-message bullying. British Journal of

Psychology, 102, 71–96.

Jones, S. E., Haslam, S. A., York, L., & Ryan, M. K. (2008). Rotten apple or rotten barrel?

Social identity and children’s responses to bullying. British Journal of Developmental

Psychology, 26, 117–132. doi:10.1348/026151007X200385.

Jonson-Reid, M. (1998). Youth violence and exposure to violence in childhood: An

ecological review. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 3, 159-179.

Joormann, J., Talbot, L., & Gotlib, I.H. (2007). Biased processing of emotional information

in girls at risk for depression.Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 116, 135-143.

Junger-Tas, J., & Van Kesteren, J. (1999). Bullying and delinquency in a Dutch school

Population.Theory & Practice, 20 (1), 81–91.

Junger, M. (1990). Intergroup bullying and racial harrassment in the Netherlands. Sociology

and Social Research, 74(2), 65–72.

Juvonen, J. (2014). Bullying in school: The power of bullies and the plight of the
 372

victims. Annual Review of Psychology, 65, 159–185.

Juvonen, J., Wang, Y., & Espinoza, G. (2011). Bullying experiences and compromised

academic performance across middle school grades. Journal of Early Adolescence,

31(1), 152 – 173.

Juvonen, Jaana, Graham, Sandra, & Schuster, Mark. (2003). Bullying among young

adolescents:The strong, the weak, and the troubled. Pediatrics, 112(6), 1231-1237.

Juvonen, J., Nishina, A., & Graham, S. (2000). Peer harassment, psychological adjust-ment,

and school functioning in early adolescence. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92,

349-359.

Juvonen, J., & Wentzel, K. R. (1996). Social motivation: Understanding children's school

adjustment. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Kaiser, H. F. (1956). The varimax methods of factor analysis. Unpublished doctoral

dissertation, University of California, Berkeley.

Kandel, D. (1978). Homophily, selection, and socialization in adolescent friendships. X

dissertation, University of California, Berkeley.

Kaukiainen, A., Bjorkqvist, K., Lagerspetz, K., Osterman, K., Salmivalli, C., & Rothberg, S.

(1999). The relationships between social intelligence, empathy, and three types of

aggression.Aggressive Behavior, 25, 81–89.

Keefe, K., & Berndt, T. J. (1996). Relations of friendship quality to self-esteem in early

adolescence. Journal of Early Adolescence, 16(1), 110-129. doi:

10.1177/0272431696016001007.

Kessler, H., Bayerl, P., Deighton, R. M., & Traue, H. C. (2002). Facially Expressed Emotion

Labeling (FEEL): PC-gestützer Test zur Emotionserkennung. Verhaltenstherapie und

Verhaltensmedizin, 23(3), 297-306.

Kelly, D., Liu, S., Rodger, H., Miellet, S., Ge, L., & Cal- dara, R. (2011). Developing
 373

Cultural Differences in Face Processing. Developmental Science, 14 (5), 1176-1184.

Khan, A. (Producer), Khan, A., Gupte, A., Madhvani, R. (Director). (2007). Taare Zameen

Par [video file]. India.

Khawar, R., Malik, F., Maqsood, S., Yasmin, T., & Habib, S. (2012). Age and Gender

Differences in Emotion Recognition Ability and Intellectual Functioning. Journal of

Behavioural Sciences, 23(3), 120-126.

Kim, Y. S., Koh, Y. J. & Leventhal, B. (2005). School Bullying and Suicidal Risk in

Korean Middle School Students. Pediatrics, 115 (2),357-363.

Kim, Y. S., Koh, Y-J. & Leventhal, B. L. (2004). Prevalence of school bullying in Korean

middle school students. Arch. Pediatr. Adolesc. Med., 158, 737-741.

Kiriakidis, S. P., & Kavoura, A. (2010). Cyberbullying: A review of the literature on

harassment through the Internet and other electronic means. Family & Community

Health. Journal of Health Promotion & Maintenance, 33(2), 82‐93.

Khine, M. S. (2013). Application of Structural Equation Modeling in Educational Research

and Practice. The Netherlands: The Sense Press.

Kline, R. B. (2011). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. New York: The

Guilford Press.

Kline, R. B. (2005). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. New

York: The Guilford Press.

Kline, R. B. (1998). Principles and practices of structural equation modeling. New York:

The Guilford Press.

Kochanska, G., & Ladd, K., (1996). Inhibitory control in young children and its role in

emerging internalization. Child Development, 67, 490–507.

Kokkinos, C. M., & Panayiotou, G. (2004). Associations with disruptive behavior disorders.

Aggressive Behavior, 30(6), 520–533. doi: 10.1002/ab.20055.

 374

Koo, H., Kwak, K., & Smith, P. K. (2008). Victimization in Korean Schools: The Nature,

Incidence, and Distinctive Features of Korean Bullying or Wang-Ta. Journal of School

Violence, 7(4), 119-139.

Koo, H. (2007). A time line of the evolution of school bullying in differing social contexts.

Asia Pacific Education Review, 8(1), 107-116.

Kolb, B., Wilson, B., & Taylor, L. (1992). Developmental changes in the recognition and

comprehension of facial expression: Implications for frontal lobe function. Brain and

Cognition. 20, 74–84.

Kowalski, R. M., Limber, S. P., & Agatston, P. W. (2008). Cyber bullying: Bullying in the

digital age. Malden, MA: Blackwell.

Kratus, J. (1993). A developmental study of children’s interpretation of emotion in music.

Psychology of Music, 21, 3–19.

Kristensen, S. M., & Smith, P. K. (2003). The use of coping strategies by Danish children

classed as bullies, victims, bully/victims, and not involved, in response to different

(hypothetical) types of bullying. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 44, 479-488.

Kshirsagar, V. Y, Agarwal, R., &Bavdekar, S. B. (2007). Bullying in schools:

prevelance and short-term impact. Indian Paediatrics, 44, 25-28.

Kupersmidt, J. B., Griesler, P. C., DeRosier, M. E., Patterson, C. J., & Davis, P. W. (1995).

Childhood aggression and peer relations in the context of family and neighborhood

factors. Child Development, 66, 360-375.

Kukučionytė, R., Drąsutė, V., & Drąsutis, S. (2012). The dissemination of best practices:

activelearning methods in vocational training. Retrieved from

http://www.ceeol.com/aspx/getdocument.aspx?logid=5&id=295A0352-CF95-4C18-

9686-59250C8ED9B9.
 375

Kujawa, R., Kucharczyk, D., Mamcarz, A., Żarski, D., &Targońska, K. (2011). Artificial

spawning of common tench Tinca tinca (Linnaeus, 1758), obtained from wild and

domestic stocks. Aquacult, 19, 513-521.

Kyllonen, P. C., Lipnevich, A. A., Burrus, J., & Roberts, R. D. (2010). Personality,

motivation, and college readiness: A prospectus for assessment and development.

Educational Testing Service Research Report No: RR-10-xx. Princeton, NJ:

Educational Testing Service.

Kyriakides, L., Kaloyirou, C., & Lindsay, G. (2006). An analysis of the Revised Olweus

Bully/Victim Questionnaire using the Rasch measurement model. British Journal of

Educational Psychology, 76(4), 781–801. doi: 10.1348/000709905X53499.

Ladd, G. W., Kochenderfer, B. J., & Coleman, C. C. (1996). Friendship quality as a predictor

of young children’s early school adjustment. Child Development, 67, 1103-1118. doi:

bu10.1111/j.1467-8624.1996.tb01785.x.

Laeheem, K., & Baka, D. (2009). Risk factors related to youths’ violence behaviors in the

three southern border provinces of Thailand. Songklanakarin Journal of Social

Sciences and Humanities, 15(6), 897–911.

La Greca, A. M. & Harrison, H. M. (2005). Adolescent peer relations, friendships, and

romantic relationships: do they predict social anxiety and depression?. Journal of

Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology, 34(1), 49-61.

Lamm, C., Lambert, L. L., Wolfe, J., Gray, J., Barber, A., & Edwards, G. (2014). improving

Socialization and Emotion Recognition for Children with Autism Using a Smartphone

App.In Silton, N. R. Innovative Technologies to Benefit Children on the Autism

Spectrum, (pp.128).

Lang, P., Bradley, M. M., & Cuthbert, B. N. (1997). Motivated attention:Affect, activation,
 376

and action. In P. Lang, R. F. Simons, & M. Balaban (Eds) Attention and orienting:

Sensory and motivational processes (pp. 97–136). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Leach, C. W., Van Zomeren, M., Zebel, S., Vliek, M. L. W., Pennekamp, S. F., Doosje, B.,&

Spears, R. (2008). Group-level self-definition and self-investment: A hierarchical

(multicomponent) model of in-group identification. Journal of Personality and Social

Psychology, 95(1), 144-165. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.95.1.144

Leader, A. L., & Sethi, V. (1992). Root causes of strategic information systems planning

implementation problems. Journal of Management Information Systems, 9, 25-45.

LeBlanc, A., Jin, Y. C., Obert, M., & Siivola, C. (1997). Effects of audience on music

performance anxiety. Journal of Research in Music Education, 45(3), 480-496.

Lee, W. (2011). Neural Substrates Of Intrinsic Motivation: Fmri Studies. University of Iowa,

America.

Lee, T., & Cornell, D. (2009).Concurrent Validity of the Olweus Bully/Victim Questionnaire.

Journal of School Violence, 9(1), 56-73. 10.1080/15388220903185613

Lee, T. M. C., Ng, E. H. H., Tang, S. W., & Chan, C. C. H. (2008). Effects of sad mood on

facial emotion recognition in Chinese people. Psychiatry Research, 159(1-2), 37-43.

Leff, S. S., Kupersmidt, J. B., Patterson, C. J., & Power, T. J. (1999). Factors influencing

teacher identification of peer bullies and victims. School Psychology Review, 2, 505-

517.

Lemerise, E., & Arsenio, W. F. (2000). An integrated model of emotion processes

and cognition in social information processing. Child Development, 7, 107 -118.

Leppänen, J. M., Milders, M., Bell, J. S., Terriere, M., & Hietanen, J. K. (2004). Depression

biases the recognition of emotionally neutral faces. Psychiatry Research, 128,123-

133.
 377

Leist, T., & Dadds, M. R. (2009). Adolescents’s ability to read different emotional faces

relates to their history of maltreatment and type of Psychopathology. Clinical Child

Psychology and Psychiatry,14(2), 237-50.

Lopes, P. N., Brackett, M. A., Nezlek, J., Schu¨tz, A., Sellin, I., & Salovey, P.

(2004).Emotional intelligence and social interaction. Personality and Social

Psychology Bulletin, 30(10),18–1034.

Li, Q. (2006). Computer-mediated communication: A meta-analysis of male and female

attitudes and behaviors. International Journal on E-Learning,5(4), 525-570.

Liepe-Levinson & Levinson. (2005). A General Semantics Approach to School-

Age Bullying. School Psychology Review, 9, 105-115.

Limber, S. P., Olweus, D., & Wang, W. (2012). What we are learning about bullying: trends

in bullying over 5 years. Paper presented at the meeting of the International Bullying

Prevention Association. Kansas City, MO.

Liu, J., & Graves, N. (2011). Childhood bullying: A review of constructs, concepts and

nursing implications. Public Health Nursing, 28(6), 556-568. doi: 10.111/j.1525-

1446.2011.00972.x.

Liu, J., & Wuerker, A., (2005). Biological bases of aggressive and violent behavior-

impications for nursing studies. Retrieved from

ScienceDirect.com:http://www.sciencedirect.com.mimas.calstatela.edu/science.

Llewellyn, A. (2000). Perceptions mainstreaming: A systems approach.

Developmental Medicine & Child Neurology, 42, 106-115.

Luby, J. L., Belden, Andy, Sullivan, Jill, & Spitznagel, Edward. (2007). Preschoolers'

contribution to their diagnosis of depression and anxiety: Uses and limitations of

young child self-report of symptoms. Child Psychiatry and Human Development, 38,

321-338. doi:10.1007/s10578-007-0063-8.
 378

Ludemann, P. M., & Nelson, C. A. (1988). The categorical representation of facial

expressions by 7-month-old infants. Developmental Psychology, 24, 492–501.

Lundqvist, L. O., Carlsson, F., Hilmersson, P., & Juslin, P. N. (2009). Emotional responses to

music: Experience, expression and physiology.Psychology of Music, 37, 61-90.

Luck, D. J., & Rubin, R. S. (1987). Marketing Research.Prentice Hall College Div.

Malhotra, Y. (1990). Knowledge Management for Organizational White Waters: An

EcologicalFramework in Knowledge Management. UK.

Ma, X. (2002). Bullying in middle school: Individual and school characteristics of victims

and offenders. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 13, 63 – 89.

Ma, L., Phelps, E., Lerner, J. V., & Lerner, R. M. (2009). Academic competence for

adolescents who bully and who are bullied: Findings from the 4-H study of positive

youth development. Journal of Early Adolescence, 29(6), 862-897.

MacCallum, R. C., & Tucker, L. R. (1991). Representing Sources of Error in the Common-

Factor Model - Implications for Theory and Practice. Psychological Bulletin, 109(3),

502-511.

Mahady-Wilton, M. M., Craig, W. M., & Pepler, D. J. (2000). Emotional regulation and

display in classroom victims of bullying: Characteristic expressions of affect, coping

styles and relevant contextual factors.Social Development. 9, 226–245.

Malik, F., & Shujja. S. (2013). Emotional Intelligence and Academic Achievement:

Implications for children’s Performance in Schools. Journal of the Indian Academy of

AppliedPsychology, 39 (1), 65-73.

Malik, F., & Shujja, S. (2011). Initial validation and reliability analysis of social competence

scale for children: A cultural perspective. Journal of Behavioral Sciences, 2(1), 13-43.
 379

Malik, F., Khawar, R., Chaudhry, H. R. & Humphreys, G. W. (2010). Emotion recognition

and duration of untreated first episode psychosis among patients in Pakistan. East

Asian Archives of Psychiatry, 20(1), 31-38.

Maneesriwongul, W., &Dixon, J. K. (2004). Instrument translation process: a methods

review. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 48(2), 175-86.

Markland, D. (2007). The golden rule is that there are no golden rules: A commentary on

Paul Barrett’s recommendations for reporting model fit in structural equation

modelling. Personality and Individual Differences, 42, 851-858.

Marsh, A. A., Ambady, N., & Kleck, R. E. (2005). The effects of fear and anger facial

expressions on approach- and avoidance-related behaviors. Emotion, 5, 119–124.

Martinez-Criado, G. (2014). The world of bullying: An overview and reflexion. Coolabah,

13,61-73. doi: 10.1002/pssa.201300303.

Camodeca, M., Goossens, S. A., Terwogt, M. M., & Schuengel, C. (2002).

Social Development, 11(3) 332–345. doi: 10.1111/1467-9507.00203.

Martin, L. L. & Clore, G. L. (2001). Theories of Mood and Cognition: A User's Guidebook.

Mahwah, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Martin, M. E. (1990). Cyber-Bullying: Creating a Culture of Respect in a Cyber World.

Journal of Social Psychology, 128, 117-124.

Matsumoto, D. & Ekman, P. (1988). Japanese and Caucasian facial expressions of emotion

(IACFEE) [Slides]. San Francisco, CA: Intercultural and Emotion Research

Laboratory, De- partment of Psychology, San Francisco State University.

Mayer, J. D., & Salovey, P. (1997). What is emotional intelligence? In P. Salovey & D.

Sluyter (Eds). Emotional development and emotional intelligence: Implication for

educators (pp.3-31). New York: Basic Books.

 380

Mayer, J. D., Allen, J., & Beauregard, K. (1995). Mood inductions for four specific moods:

procedure employing guided imagery vignettes with music. Journal of Mental

Imagery,19, 133-150.

McCabe, S. B., Gotlib, I. H., & Martin, R. A. (2000). Cognitive vulnerability for depression:

Deployment of attention as a function of history of depression and current mood state.

Cognitive Therapy and Research, 24, 427-444.

McMahon, S. D., Felix, E.D., Petropoulos, L.A.N., & Halpert, J. (2009). Community

violence exposure and aggression among urban adolescents: Testing a cognitive

mediator model. Journal of Community Psychology, 37, 895-910.

McNeilly-Choque, M., Hart, C. H., Robinson, C. C., Nelson, L. J., & Olsen, S. F. (1996).

Overt and relational aggression on the playground: Correspondence among different

informants. Journal of Research in Childhood Education, 11, 47–67.

Meerum Terwogt, M., & Olthof, T. (1989). Awareness and self-regulation of emotion in

youngChildren. Understanding of emotion, 5, 209-234.

MeerumTerwogt, M. (1986). Affective states and task performance in naïve and prompted

Children. European journal of psychology of education, 1, 31-40.

Meerum Terwogt, M., (1984). Colors and emotions: Preferences and combinations. Journal

of General Psychology, 122, 5-17.

Menesini E., Melan E., & Pignatti B., (2000). Interactional styles of bullies and victims

observed in a competitive and cooperative setting. In The Journal of Genetic

Psychology, 161, 3, 261-281.

Menesini, E., & Gini, G. (2000). Il bullismo come processo di gruppo:adattamento x

evalidazione del questionarioRuoli dei partecipanti” alla popolazione italiana

Bullying as a group process: Adaptationand validation of the Participant Role

Questionnaire to the Italian population, EtàEvolutiva, 66, 18 –32.

 381

Menesini, E., Eslea, M., Smith, P. K., Genta, M. L., Fonzi, A., & Costabile, A.

(1997). Crossnational comparison of children’s attitudes towards bully/victim

problems in school. Aggressive Behavior, 23, 245-257.

Modecki, K. L., Minchin, J., Herbaugh, A. G., Guerra, N. G., & Runions, K. C. (2014).

Bullying prevalence across contexts: a meta-analysis measuring cyber and traditional

bullying. The Journal of Adolescent Health, 55(5), 602-11. doi: 10.1016/j.jadohealth.

Montgomery, A. P. (1996). Effect of tempo on music preferences of children in elementary

and middle school. Journal of Research in Music Education, 44, 134-146.

Moffitt, T. E. (1993). Adolescence-limited and life-course-persistent antisocial

behavior: a developmental taxonomy.Psychology Review, 100(4), 674-701.

Molcho, M., Craig, W., Due, P, Pickett, W., Harel-Fisch, Y., Overpeck, M., & the HBSC

Bullying Writing Group (2009). Cross-national time trends in bullying behavior

1994– 2006: findings from Europe and North America. International Journal of

Public Health, 54, S1-S10.

Monks, C., Ortega-Ruiz, R., & Rodriguez-Hidalgo, A. J. (2008). Peer victimization in

multicultural schools in Spain and England. European Journal of Developmental

Psychology, 5,507-535. doi:10.1080/17405620701307316.

Monks, T. E., Smith, P. K., & Swettenham, M. (2003). The nature of school bullying and the

effectiveness of school-based interventions. Journal of Psychoanalytic Studies, 5(2),

189-209.

Morita, Y., Soeda, H., Soeda, K., & Taki, M. (1999). Japan. In P. K. Smith, Y. Morita, J.

Junger-Tas, D. Olweus, R. Catalano, & P. Slee (Eds.), The nature of school bullying:

a cross-national perspective, (pp. 309-323). London: Routledge.

Mlisa, L.M., Ward, C.L., Flisher, A.J., & Lombard, C. (2008). Bullying at rural high schools
 382

in the Eastern Cape Province, South Africa: Prevalence and risk and protective factors

at school and in the family. Journal of Psychology in Africa, 18(2), 261-268.

Mynerd, H., & Joseph, S. (1997). Bull/victim problems and their association with

Eyscnk’s personality demention in8 to 13 years old. British Journal of Educational

Psychology, 67(1), 51-54.

Nakamoto, J., & Schwartz, D. (2010). Is peer victimization associated with academic

achievement? A meta-analytic review. Social Development, 19, 221–242.

National Crime Victimization Survey. (2009). Student Victimization in U.S. Schools. U.S.

Department of Education. Retrieved from http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2012/2012314.pdf.

Nesdale, W., Durkin, N., Maass, A., Kiesner, J., & Griffiths, J. A. (2008). Effects of Group

Norms on Children's Intentions to Bully. Social Development, 17(4), 889–907.

Neser, J. J., Ovens, M., van der Merwe, E., Morodi, R., & Ladikos, A. (2003). Peer

victimisation in schools: The victims. Retrieved from http://www. crisa. X

org.za/victismsp.pdf.

Nansel, T. R., Craig, W., Overpeck, M. D., Saluja, G., & Ruan, W. J. (2004). The Health

Behavior in School-Aged Children Bullying Analyses Working Group. Cross-national

consistency in the relationship between bullying behaviors and psychosocial

adjustment. Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine, 158, 730 –736.

Nansel, T. Overpeck, M., Pilla, R.S., Ruan,W. J., Simmons-Morton, B., & Schmidt, P.

(2001). Bullying behaviors among US youth. Journal of American Medical

Association, 285,2094-2100.

National Association of School Psychologists. (2012). Bullying prevention and intervention

in schools [Position statement]. Bethesda, MD: Author.

 383

National Association of School Psychologists (2010). Principles for professional ethics.

Retrieved from http://www.nasponline.org/ standards/2010standards.aspx

Neil Tippett and Dieter Wolke. (2014). Socioeconomic Status and Bullying: A Meta-analysis.

American Journal of Public Health, 104(6), 48-59.

Nelson, M. & deBacker, T. (2008). Achievement motivation in adolescents: the role of peer

climate and best friends. The Journal of Experimental Education, 76, 170- 189.

Nelson, C.A. (1987). Neural correlates of in- fants’ visual responsiveness to facial

expressions of emotion. Developmental Psychobiology, 29, 577–595.

Nickerson, A. Mele, D., & Osborne-Oliver, K. M. (2010). Parent-child relationships and

bullying. Handbook of bullying in schools, 187-197. New York: Routledge.

Nickerson, A. B., Mele, D., & Princiotta, D. (2008). Attachment and empathy as predictors of

roles as defenders or outsiders in bullying interactions. Journal of School Psychology,

46, 687–703.

Nishina, A., & Juvonen, J. (2005). Daily reports of witnessing and ex- periencing peer

harassment in middle school. Child Development, 76, 435–450.

Noller, P., Feeney, J., & Peterson, C. C. (2001). Personal Relationships Across the Lifespan

Patricia Noller, Judith Feeney, Candida Clifford Peterson. Psychology Press.

Nordhagen, R., Nielsen, A., Stigum, H., & Köhler, L. (2005). Parental reported bullying

among Nordic children: A population-based study. Child-Care, Health and

Development, 31(6), 693-701.

Nunnally, J. C., & Bernstein, I. H. (1994). Psychometric theory. New York: McGraw-

Hill.

Nunnally, J. C. (1967).Psychometric Theory. New York: McGraw Hill.

Olafsen, R. N., & Viemerö, V. (2000). Bully/victim problems and coping with stress in
 384

school among 10- to 12-year-old pupils in Åland, Finland. Aggressive Behavior,

26(1), 57–65, doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1098-2337(2000)26:1<57::AID-AB5>3.0.CO;2-I.

Oldenburg, B., Marijtje, D., Miranda, S., Gijs H., Rozemarijn P., Christina, S., &

René V. (2014). Teacher Characteristics and Peer Victimization in Elementary

Schools: A Classroom-Level Perspective. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 43,

33–44. doi:10.1007/s10802-013-9847-4.

O’Moore, M., & Kirkham, C. (2001). Self-esteem and its relationship to bullying behavior.

Aggressive Behavior, 27(4), 269–283. doi: 10.1002/ab.1010.

O’Moore, M., Kirkham, C., & Smith, M. (1997). Bullying behaviour in Irish schools: A

nationwide study. Irish Journal of Psychology, 18, 141-169.

Osterman, K., l., Björkqvist, K., & Kaukiaine, A. (1998). Social intelligence − empathy

aggression?. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 6(2), 191–200.

doi:10.1016/S1359-1789(98)00029-9.

Österman, P. Pil, F., Macduffie, J. P., Bjdrkqvist K., Kaukiainen, A. (1994). The

development of direct and indirect aggressive strategies in males and females. 176-

96.Academic Press, Uk.

Olweus, D. (2006). The Revised Olweus Bully/Victim Questionnaire. University Bergen,

Norway.

Olweus, D., & Solberg, M. E. (2003). Prevalence estimation of school bullying with the

Olweus Bully/Victim Questionnaire.Aggressive Behavior, 29(3), 239–268.

doi: 10.1002/ab.10047.

Olweus, D. (2001). Peer harassment: A critical analysis and some important issues, Peer

harassment in school.New York: Guilford Publications.

 385

Olweus, D. (1999). Sweden. In P.K. Smith, Y. Morita, J. Junger-Tas, D. Olweus, R.

Catalano & P. Slee (Eds.), The nature of school bullying: A cross-national

perspective, (pp. 2-27). London & New York, Routledge.

Olweus, D., & Endresen, I. M. (1998). The importance of sex-of-stimulus object: Age trends

and sex differences in empathic responsiveness. Social Development, 7, 370–388.

Olweus, D. (1997). Bully/victim problems in school: Knowledge base and an effective

ntervention program. Irish Journal of Psychology, 18(2), 170-190

Olweus, D. (1996). Bully/victim problems in school.Prospects, 26,331-359.

Olweus, D. (1995). Annotation: Bullying at school: Basic facts and effects of a school based

intervention programme. Journal ofChild Psychology and Psychiatry, 35, 1171-1190.

Olweus, D. (1994). Bullying at School: Basic Facts and Effects of a School Based

Intervention Program. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 35(7), 1169–

1341. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-7610.1994.tb01229.x.

Olweus, D. (1993). Bullying at school: What we know and what we can do. American

Psychologist, 53(1), 754-760. doi:10.1002/pits.10114.

Olweus, D. (1992). Bullying among schoolchildren: Intervention and prevention. In

Aggression and Violence Throughout the Life Span. Sage. Newbury Park, CA.

Olweus, D. (1991). Bully/victim problems among schoolchildren: Basic facts and effects of a

school based intervention program. In The Development and Treatment of Childhood

Aggression. Development. Psychology, 34, 294-300.

Olweus, D. (1989) Bully/Victim Questionnaire for Students. (Circular No. 2001/10) Bergen,

Nor,Department of Psychology, University of Bergen.

Olweus, D. (1980). Familial and temperamental determinants of aggressive behavior

in adolescent boys: A causal analysis. Development Psychology, 16, 644-660.

 386

Olweus, D. (1978). Aggression in the schools.Bullies and whipping boys. Washington, DC:

Hemisphere Press (Wiley).

Olweus, D. (1973). Personality and aggression. In J. K. Coie & D. D. Jensen (Eds.),

Nebraska symposium on motivation, 1972 (pp. 261-321). Lincoln: University of

Nebraska Press.

Orobio de Castro, B., Merk, W., Koops, W., Veerman, J.W., & Bosc Orobio de Castro, B.,

Merk, W., Koops, W., Veerman, J.W., & Bosch, J.D. (2003). Emotions in social

information processing and their relations with reactive and information processing

and their relations with reactive and proactive aggression in referred proactive

aggression in referred aggressive behavior in context. Aggressive and Violent

Behavior, 5, 467-490.

Merk, W., Koops, W., Veerman, J.W., & Bosch, J.D. (2003). Emotions in social information

processing and their relations with reactive and information processing and their

relations with reactive and proactive aggression in referred proactive aggression in

referred aggressive behavior in context. Aggressive and Violent Behavior, 5, 467-

490.

Pagliaccio, D., Luby, B., Gaffrey, M., Beldenb, A., Botteronb, K., Ian, H. G., Deanna, M.,

& Barcha, B. (2012). Anomalous functional brain activation following negative mood

induction in children with pre-school onset major depression. Developmental

Cognitive Neuroscience, 2, 256–267.

Panayiotis, S., Anna, P., Charalambos, T., & Chrysostomos, L. (2010). Prevalence of

bullying among Cyprus elementary and high school students. International Journal of

Violence and School, 11, 114-128.

 387

Papacosta, E. S., Paradeisioti, A.,&Lazarou, C. (2014). Bullying phenomenon and

preventive programs in Cyprus's school system. International Journal of Mental

Health Promotion, 16, 1, 67-80, doi: 10.1080/14623730.2014.888894.

Paquette, S., Peretz, I., & Belin, P. (2013) . The Musical Emotional Bursts": a validated set of

musical affect bursts to investigate auditory affective processing. Frontiers in

Psychology, 4, 509-510.

Parker, J. G., & Seal, J. (1996). Forming, losing, renewing, and replacing friendships:

Applying temporal parameters to the assessment of children’s friendship experiences.

Child Development, 67, 2248–2268.

Parker, J. G., & Asher, S. R. (1993). Peer relations and later personal adjustment: Are low-

accepted children at risk? Psychological Bulletin, 102, 357–389.

Patterson, G. R., Reid, J. B., & Dishion, T. J. (1992). Antisocial boys. Eugene,

Oregon: Castalia.

Pepler, D., Jiang, D., Craig, W., & Connolly, J. (2008). Developmental trajectories of

bullying and assfociated factors. Child Development, 79, 325-338.

Pellegrini, A. D., Long, J. D., Solberg, D., Roseth, C., DuPuis, D., Bohn, C., & Hickey, M.

(2011). Bullying and social status during school transitions. In S.R. Jimerson, S.M.

Swearer, & Espelage, L. (Eds.), Handbook of bullying in schools: An international

perspective (pp. 199-210). New York: Routledge.

Pellegrini, A. D. (2002). Bullying and victimization in middle school: A dominance relations

perspective. Educational Psychologist, 37, 151-163.

Pellegrini, A. D. (2001). Bullying and victimization in middle school: A dominance relations

perspective. Educational Psychologist, 37, 151-163.

Pellegrini, A. D., & Burndt, M. (2001). Dominance in early adolescence boys: Affiliate

aggressive detentions and possible functions. Merrill–Palmer Quartery, 47, 14-160.

 388

Pellegrini, A. D., &Bartini, M. (2000). A Longitudinal Study of Bullying, Victimization, and

Peer Affiliation During the Transition From Primary School to Middle School,

Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 19, 82-89.

Pellegrini, A., Bartini, M., Y., &Brooks, F. (1999). School Bullyes, Victims and Aggressive

Victims. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91, 216-224.

Pepler, D. J., Craig, W. M., Ziegler, S. & Charach, A. (1993). A school-based anti-bullying

intervention: Preliminary evaluation. Understanding and managing bullying, 6, 76-91.

Perkins, K. A., Lerman, C., Grottenthaler, A., Ciccocioppo, M., Milanak, M., Conklin, C. A.,

Bergen, A. W., & Benowitz, N. L. (2008). Dopamine and opioid gene variants are

associated with increased smoking reward and reinforcement due to negative mood.

Behavioral Pharmacology, 19, 641–649.

Pereira, B., Mendonc¸a, D., Netto, C., Almeida, A., Valente, L., & Smith, P. K. (1996). Facts

and gures of the rst survey on bullying in Portugese schools. Paper presented at the

European Conference on Educational.

Pérez-Edgar, K., Reeb-Sutherland, B. C., McDermott, J. M., White, L. K., Henderson, H. A.,

Degnan, K. A., Hane, A. A., Pine, D. S., & Fox, N. A. (2011). Attention biases to

threat link behavioral inhibition to social withdrawal over time in very young

children. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 39, 885-895.

Perren, S., & Alsaker, F. D. (2006). Social behavior and peer relationships of victims, bully-

victims, and bullies in kindergarten. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry,

47(1), 45-57.

Perry, D. G., Hodges, E. V. E., & Egan, S. K. (2001). Determinants of chronic victimization

by peers: A review and new model of family influence. Peer harassment in school:

The plight of the vulnerable and victimized, New York: Guilford Press.
 389

Perry, G. D., Kusel, S. J., & Perry, C. L. (1988). Victims of peer aggression. Developmental

Psychology, 24, 807–814.

Peskin, M. F., Tortolero, S. R., & Markham, C. M. (2006). Bullying and victimization among

black and Hispanic adolescents. Adolescence, 41(163), 467-484. 48.

Pett, M., Lackey, N. & Sullivan, J. (2003).Making sense of factor analysis. Thousand Oaks:

Sage Publications, Inc.

Pikas, A. (1975). Sa Stoppar Vi Mobbing. Stockholm: Prisma.

Pine, D. S., Helfinstein, S. M., Bar-Haim, Y., Nelson, E., & Fox, N. A. (2009). Challenges in

developing novel treatments for childhood disorders: Lessons from research on

anxiety. Neuropsychopharmacology, 34, 213-228.

Polanin, J. R., Espelage, D. L., & Pigott, T. D. (2012). A meta-analysis of school-based

bullying prevention programs’ effects on bystander intervention behavior. School

Psychology Review, 41 (1), 47-65.

Plybon, L. E., & Kliewer, W. (2001). Neighborhood types and externalizing behavior in

urban school-age children: Tests of direct, mediated and moderated effects. Journal of

Child and Family Studies, 10, 419-437.

Pollak, S. D., Cicchetti, D., Hornung, K., & Reed, A. (2000). Recognizing emotion in faces:

Developmental effects of child abuse and neglect. Developmental Psychology, 36,

679–688.

Postigo, R. G., González, S., Montoya J., & Ordoñez G. (2013). Theoretical proposals in

bullying research. Anales de psicología, 29(2), 413-425.

doi.org/10.6018/analesps.29.2.148251 .

Poulou, M., & Norwich, B. (2002). Cognitive, emotional and behavioral responses to

students with emotional and behavioural difficulties: A model of decision-making.

British Educational Research Journal, 28 (1), 111-138.

 390

Prooijen, J. W. V., & Kloot, W. A. V. (2001). Confirmatory Analysis of Exploratively

Obtained Factor Structures. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 61(5),

2001 777-792.

Prinstein, P., Boergers, S., & Vernberg, E. M. (2001). Preliminary report of the Topeka

Peaceful Schools Project. Topeka, KS: Menninger Clinic.

Rabbiglietti, E., & Ciairano, S. (2008).Quality of Friendship Relationships and

Developmental tasks in Adolescence. Romanian Association for Cognitive Science.

7(2), 183-203.

Raskauskas, J., & Stoltz, A. D. (2007). Involvement in traditional and electronic bullying

among adolescents. Developmental Psychology, 43, 564–575.

Reber, A. S., &Reber, E. S. (2001). Dictionary of psychology. London, Penguin/Viking.

Reijntes, A., Albert, B., Kamphuis,J. H. ,Prinzie, K., Peter, P., & Michael, J.(2010). Peer

victimization and internalizing problems in children: A meta-analysis of longitudinal

studies. Child Abuse & Neglect, 34, 244-252.

Renda, J., Vassallo, S., & Edwards, B. (2011). Bullying in early adolescence and its

association with anti-social behaviour, criminality and violence 6 and 10 years

later. Criminal Behaviour and Mental Health, 21, 117-127.

Rennels, J. L., &Cummings, A. J. (2013). Sex differences in facial scanning: Similarities and

dissimilarities between infants and adults. International Journal of Behavioral, 23(1),

80-99. doi: 10.1177/0165025412472411.

Reynolds, W.M. (2003). Bully Victimization: Reynolds Scales for Schools. San Antonio,

TX: The Psychological Corporation.

Rigby, K.(2007). Bullying in schools and what to do about it, ACER, Melbourne.

Rigby, K. (2002). Consequences of bullying in school. Canadian Journal of Psychiatry, 48,

 391

583-590.

Rigby, K. (2001). Stop the Bullying: A Handbook for Schools. Australian Council for

Educational Research, Melbourne.

Rigby, K. (1997). Bullying in schools - and what to do about it. British Edition, London,

Jessica Kingsley.

Rivers, I. & Smith, P. K. (1994). Types of bullying behaviour and their correlates. Aggressive

Behavior, 20, 359-368.

Rigby, K., & Slee, P.T. (1991). Bullying among Australian school children: reported

behaviour and attitudes to victims. Journal of Social Psychology, 131,615-622.

Robazza, C., & Pellizzari, M., & Hanin, Y. (1994). Emotion self-regulation and athletic

performance: An application of the IZOF model. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 5,

379-404.

Robers, S., Kemp, J., and Truman, J. (2013). Indicators of School Crime and Safety: 2012

(NCES 2013-036/ NCJ 241446). National Center for Education Statistics, U.S.

Department of Education, and Bureau of Justice Statistics, Office of Justice Programs,

U.S. Department of Justice. Washington, DC.

Rodkin, P., & Berger, E. (2008). Bullies and victims in the peer ecology: Four questions for

psychologists and school professionals. School Psychology Review, 32, 384–400.

Rodkin, P. C., & Hodges, E. V. (2003). Bullies and victims in the peer ecology: Four

questions for psychologists and school professionals. School Psychology Review,

32(3), 384-400.

Rodkin, P. C., Farmer, T. W., Pearl, R., & Van Acker, R. (2000). Heterogeneity of popular

boys: Antisocial and prosocial configurations. Developmental Psychology, 36, 14-24.

 392

Rosenfeld, L. B., Richman, J. M., & Bowen, G. L. (2000). Social support networks andschool

outcomes: The centrality of the teacher. Child and Adolescent Social Work Journal,

17(3), 205-226.

Ross, D. (1996). Review of literature, variety of strategies for guidance counselors and

others. Childhood Bullying and Teasing, 5(10), 13-20.

Rothen, C. Head, J., Klineberg, E., & Stansfeld, S. (2011). Can social support protect bullied

adolescents from adverse outcomes? A prospective study on the effects of bullying on

the educational achievement and mental health of adolescents at secondary schools in

East London. Journal of Adolescence, 34(3), 579–588.

Roulston, K. (2006). Qualitative investigation of young children's music

preferences. International Journal of Education & the Arts, 7(9). Retrieved

from http://www.ijea.org/v7n9/.

Rubin, K. H., Bukowski, C. S. L., & Laursen,, N. A. (2009). Emotion regulation, parenting,

and the display of social reticence in preschoolers. Early Education and Development,

12, 97–115.

Rubin, K.H., Bukowski, W., & Parker, J. (1998). Peer interactions, relationships, and groups.

In N. Eisenberg (Eds), Handbook of Child Psychology (5th edition): Social,

emotional, and personality development. (pp. 619-700). New York: Wiley.

Rudatsikira, E., Muula, A. S., & Siziya, S. (2008). Variables associated with physical fighting

among US High-school students. Clinical Practice Epidemiology Mental Health, 4,

16-17.

Rueger, S. Y., & Jenkins, L. N. (2014). Effects of peer victimization on psychological and
 393

academic adjustment in early adolescence. School Psychology Quarterly, 29, 77-88.

doi: 10.1037/spq0000036.

Rutter, M. (1986). Child psychiatry: The interface between clinical and developmental

research. Psychological Medicine, 16, 151–169.

Saarni, C. (1999). The development of emotional competence. New York: Guilford.

Saarni,C. (1990), emotional competence: how emotions and relationships become integrated.

Social and emotional Developmental, 36, 115-182.

Salmivalli, C. (2010). Bullying and the peer group: A review. Aggression and Violent

Behavior, 15, 112-120. doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1098-2337(1996)22:1<1::AID-

AB1>3.0.CO;2-T.

Salmivalli, C. (2002). Proactive and reactive aggression among school bullies, victims, and

bully-victims. Aggressive Behavior, 28(1), 30–44. doi: 10.1002/ab.90004.

SalmivallI, C., Lagerspetz, K., Björkqvist, K., Österman, K.,&Kaukiainen, A. (1996).

Bullying as a group process: Participant roles and their relations to social status within

the group. Aggressive Behavior, 22(1), 1–15. doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1098-2337.

Salovey, P., & Mayer, J. D. (1990). Emotional Intelligemce. Imagination, Cognition and

Personality, 9, 185-211.

Scharphorn, A., & Laura, D. P. (2013). Between and Within- Child Associations of

friendship Quality and Social Funcyioning ans Academic Achivement throught

middle Childhood. Doctoral dissertation. University of Pittsburgh.

Schäfer, M., Werner, N. E., & Crick, N. R. (2002). A comparison of two approaches to the

study of negative peer treatment: General victimization and bully/victim problems

among German schoolchildren. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 20(2),

281–306. doi: 10.1348/026151002166451.

 394

Scheithauer, H., Hayer, T., Petermann, F. & Jugert, G. (2006). Physical, verbal and relational

forms of bully‐ ing among students from Germany: Gender‐, age‐differences and

correlates. Aggressive Behavior, 32, 261‐275.

Schmid, P. C., Schmid Mast, M, Bombari, D., Mast, F. W. &Lobmaier, J.S. (2011). How

Mood States Affect Information Processing During Facial Emotion Recognition: An

Eye Tracking Study. Swiss Journal of Psychology, 70 (4), 223-231.

Schmid, P. C., &Schmid Mast, M. (2010). Mood effects on emotion recognition. Motivation

and Emotion. 34, 288-292.

Schwartz, D., Gorman, A. H., Duong, M. T., & Nakamoto, J. (2008). Peer relationships and

academic achievement as interacting predictors of depressive symptoms during

middle childhood. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 117, 289–299.

Schwartz, D., Proctor L. J., & Chien, D. H. (2001). The aggressive victim of bullying:

Emotional and behaviouraldysregulation as a pathway to victimization by peers, New

York: Guilford Press.

Seals, D., & Young, J. (2003). Bullying and victimization: prevalence and relationship to

gender, grade level, ethnicity, self-esteem, and depression. Archives of Pediatrics &

AdolescentMedicine, 38(152), 735-47.

Segun, P. (2004). Parental maltreatment and emotion dysregulation as risk factors for

bullying and victimization in middle childhood. Journal of Clinical Child Psychology,

30, 349-363.

Seixas, S. R., Coeelho, J. P., & Nicolas-Fischer, G. (2013). Bullies, Victims and Bully-Victims

Impact on Health Profile. Retrieved from

http://www.fpce.up.pt/ciie/sites/default/files/05.SoniaRaqueletal.pdf.

Seixas, S. R., Coelho, J. P., & Nicolas-Fischer, G. (2013). Bullies, Victims And Bully-.

Victims. Educação, Sociedade & Culturas, 38, 2013, 53-75

 395

Selekman, A., & Vessey, J. A. (2004). Teasing and bullying experiences of middle school

students. Journal of the American Psychiatric Nurses Association, 10, 165-172.

Sethi, V., & King, W. R. (1991). Construct measurement in information systems research: An

illustration in strategic systems. Decisions Sciences, 22, 455-472.

Shin, J. C. (2012). Higher Education in korea: Western University Ideas, Confusion

Tarnation and Economic Development, Higher Education, 64(1), 59-72.

Schmid, P. C., & Mast, M. (2010). Interpersonal behavior and social perception in a

hierarchy: The Interpersonal Power and Behaviour Model. European Review of Social

Psychology, 21, 1-33.

Schmidt, M. E. & Bagwell, C. L. (2007). The protective role of friendships in overtly

and relationally victimized boys and girls. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 53, 439-460.

Schneider, W. (2000). Controlled and automatic human information processing: II.

Perceptual learning, automatic attending, and a general theory. Psychological Review,

84, 127-190.

Schellenberg, E. G. (2012). Cognitive performance after listening to music: a review of

the Mozart effect. In R. MacDonald, G. Kreutz, & L. Mitchell (Eds.), Music, health,

and wellbeing (pp. 324-338). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

Schellenberg, E. G., Nakata, T., Hunter, P. G., & Tamoto, S. (2007). Exposure to music and

cognitive performance: Tests of children and adults. Psychology of Music, 35, 5–19.

Schumacker, R. E., & Lomax, R. G. (2004). A beginner’s guide to structural equation

Modeling. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Schuster, B. (1999). Outsiders at school: The prevalence of bullying and its relation with

social status. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 2, 175–190.

Schwarz, N., & Clore, G. L. (1983). Mood, misattribution, and judgments of well-being:

Informative and directive functions of affective states. Journal of Personality and

 396

Social Psychology, 45, 513-523.

Sharp, C., Fonagy, P., & Goodyer, I. (2006). Imagining your child’s mind: Psychosocial

adjustment and mothers’ ability to predict their children’s attributional response

styles. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 24, 197–214.

Sharp, S., Thompson, D., & Arora, T. (2000). How long before it hurts? School Psychology

International, 21, 37-46.

Shaw, T., Dooley, J. J., Cross, D., Zubrick, S. R., & Waters, S. (2013). The Forms of

Bullying Scale (FBS): Validity and reliability estimates for a measure of bullying

victimization and perpetration in adolescence. Psychological Assessment. 25(4),

1045-1057. doi: 10.1037/a0032955.

Shear, M. K. (2011). Lifting the fog: Complicated grief and its treatment. Paper presented at

APAA Annual Meeting, Honolulu, HI.

Sheridan, J. W., (2010). Short and long term effects of bullying- the victim & the bully.

Retrieved from: http://ezinearticles.com/?expert=John_W_Sheridan

Shujja, S., Atta, M., & Shujjat, S. (2014). Translation and Validation of Illinois Bullying

Scale for Pakistani Children and Adolescents, Pakistan Journal of Social and Clinical

Psychology, 9, 79-82.

Silver, M., & Oakes, P. (2001). Evaluation of a new computer intervention to teach people

with autism or asperger syndrome to recognize and predict emotions in others.

Autism, 5, 229-316.

Simons -Morton, D. G. (2003). Student-school bonding and adolescent problem behaviour.

Health Education Research. Theory and Practice, 14, 99-107.

Simon-Morton, B., Crump, T. R., Haybie, M. O., & Saylor, P. H. (1998). Bullying
 397

Behaviors among US Youth Prevalence and Association With Psychosocial

Adjustment Free. Jama, 285(16), 2094-2100. doi:10.1001/jama.285.16.2094.

Smith, P. K. (2014). Understanding School Bullying: Its Nature and Prevention Strategies.

200-240, University of London,UK.

Smith, P. K., & Monks, C. P. (2008). Concepts of bullying: Developmental and cultural

aspects. I Nternational.Journal of Adolescent Medicine and Health, 20(2), 101-112.

International Comparison. Child Development, 73(4), 1119–1133.

Smith, P. K. (2004). Bullying: Recent Developments. Child and Adolescent Mental Health,

9(3), 98–103. doi: 10.1111/j.1475-3588.2004.00089.x.

Smith, P. K., & Ananiadou, K. C. H. (2003).Interventions to reduce school bullying.

Canadian Journal of Psychiatry, 48(9), 591-9.

Smith, P. K., Cowie, H., Olafsson, R., & Liefooghe, A. (2002). Definitions of bullying: a

comparison of terms used, and age and sex differences, in a 14-country international

comparison.Child Development, 73, 4, 1119-1133. doi: 10.1111/1467-8624.00461 C.

Smith, P. K., & Sharp, S. (1994). School bullying: Insights and perspectives. London:

Routledge.

Siris, K. & Osterman, K. (2004). Interrupting the cycle of bullying and victimization in the

elementary classroom. Phi Delta Kappan, 86(4), 288-292.

Smokowski, P. R., & Kopasz, K. H. (2005). Bullying in School: An Overview of Types,

Effects, Family Characteristics, and Intervention Strategies, Children & Schools,

27(2), 101-110.

Solberg, M. E., & Olweus, D. (2003).Prevalence estimation of school bullying with the
 398

Olweus Bully/Victim Questionnaire. Aggressive Behavior, 29(3), 239–268.

doi: 10.1002/ab.10047.

Solberg, M., Soderstrom, H. S., Salmon, G., James, A., Cassidy, E. L., & Javoloyes, M. A.

(2000). Bullying--A review: Presentations to an adolescent psychiatric service and

within a school for emotionally and behaviorally disturbed children. Clinical Child

Psychology and Psychiatry, 5, 563- 579.

Solomon, R. J., Solomon, S., Toumbourou, J. W., & Catalan, R. F. (2013). A cross-national

comparison of adolescent bullying victimization. Social Development Research

Group, School of Social Work, University of Washington. Retrieved from

http://iussp.org/sites/default/files/event_call_for_papers/A%20cross-

national%20comparison%20of%20adolescent%20bullying%20victimization%20in%

20Mumbai%20India,%20Melbourne%20Australia%20and%20Seattle%20US.pdf

Sousa, V., & Rojjanasrirat, W. (2010). Translation, adaptation and validation of instruments

or scales for use in cross-cultural health care research: A clear and user friendly

guideline. Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice, 17(2), 268-274.

Sourander, A., Helstelä, L., &Helenius, H. (2000). Persistence of bullying from childhood

to adolescence a longitudinal 8-year follow-up study. Child Abuse & Neglect, 24(7),

873–881.

Stagg, S., & Sheridan, D. (2010). Effectiveness of bullying and violence prevention

programs: A systematic review. AAOHN Journal, 58(10), 419-424.

Stassen Berger, K. (2007) Update on bullying at school: science forgotten. Developmental

Review, 27. 90-126.

Stegge, H., Terwogt, M., & Koops, W. (1994). Positive and negative mood effects in

children: The mediating influence of task characteristics. journal of General

psychology, 121, 333-344.

 399

Stephenson, P., & Smith, D. (1989). Bullying in the junior school. In D. P. Tattum & D. A.

Lane (Eds.), Bullying in schools (pp. 45-57). Stoke-on-Trent: Trentham Books.

Stern, S. B., & Smith, C. A. (1995). Family processes and delinquency in an ecological

context. Social Sevice Review, 69, 730-731.

Storch, W. M., Brassard, D., &Masia-Warner, J. (2003). Identifying and targeting risk for

involvement in bullying and victimization. Canadian Journal of Psychiatry, 48(9),

577- 582.

Sullivan, K. (2000). The Anti-Bullying Handbook. United Kingdom: Oxford University Press.

Sullivan, H. S. (1953). The interpersonal theory of psychiatry. New York: Norton.

Sutton, J., Smith, P. K., & Swettenham, J. (1999). Bullying and theory of mind: A

critique of the social skills deficit” view of anti -social behaviour. Social

Development, 8(1), 117 -134.

Sutton, J., & Colleagues, P. K. (1999). Bullying as a group process: An adaptation of the

participant role approach. Aggressive Behaviour, 25, 97-111.

Sutton, J. & Keogh, E. (2001). Social competition in school: Relationships with bullying,

Machiavellianism and personality. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 70,

443–456.

Sutton, J., Smith, P. K., & Swettenham, J. (2001). Social cognition and bullying: social

inadequacy or skilled manipulation. British Journal of Developmental Psychology,

17(3), 74-78.

Suzuki, A., Hoshino, T., Shigemasu, K., & Kawamura, M. (2007). Decline or improvement?

Age-related differences in facial expression recognition. Biological Psychology, 74,

75–84.

Swearer, S., Espelage, D., Vailancourt, T., & Hymel, S. (2010). What can be done about
 400

school bullying? Linking esearch to educational practice. Educational Researcher,

39(1), 38–47.

Swearer, S. M., Espelage, D. L., Merrell, K.W., & Napolitano, S. A. (2009). Bullying

prevention and intervention: Essential strategies for school psychologists. Full-day

workshop presented at the National Association of School Psychologists conference.

Boston, MA.

Swearer, S. M., Espelage, D. L., & Napolitano, S. A. (2009). Bullying Prevention and

Intervention: Realistic Strategies for Schools. New York: Guilford.

Swearer, S. M., Peugh J., Espelage D. L., Siebecker A. B., Kingsbury W. L., &

Bevins K. S. (2006). A Socioecological Model for Bullying Prevention and

Intervention in Early Adolescence: An Exploratory Examination. Clinical Child

Psychology and Psychiatry, 8, 257-273.

Swearer, S. M. & Cary, P. T. (2003). Attitudes toward bullying in middle school youth: A

developmental examination across the bully/victim continuum. Journal of

AppliedSchool Psychology, 19(2), 63-79.

Syed, E. U., Hussein, S. A., Azam, S. I., Khan, A. G. (2009). Comparison of Urdu version of

the strengths and difficulties questionnaire (SDQ) and the Child Behaviour Checklist

(CBCL) amongst primary school children in Karachi. Journal of College of

Physicians Surgereon Pakistan, 19(6), 375–379.

Tabachnick, B.G., & Fidell, L. S. (2001). Using Multivariate Statistics. Boston: Allyn and

Bacon.

Thien, L. M., Razak, N. A., & Jamil, H.(2012). School of Educational Studies, Universiti

Sains Malaysia, Penang. Joint AARE APERA International Conference, Sydney .

Taki, M. (2001). Relation among bullying, stress and stressor: A follow-up survey using
 401

panel data and a comparative survey between japan and Australia. Japanese Society,

5, 25-40.

Tamir, M., & Robinson, M. D. (2007). The happy spotlight: Positive mood and selective

attention to rewarding information. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 33,

1124- 1136.

Thien, L. M., & Nordin, A. R. (2012). Academic Coping, Friendship Quality and Student

Engagement Associated with Student Quality of School Life. Social Indicators

Research, 22, 507-518. doi:10.1007/ss11205- 012-0077-x.

Thompson, M., & Cohen, L. (2005).When the bullied must adjust. Educutional Digest, 70(6),

16-19.

Thompson, B. (2004). Exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis: Understanding

concepts and applications. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

Tippett, N., &Wolke, D. (2014). Socioeconomic status and bullying: a meta-analysis.

American Journal of Public Health, 04(6), 48-59. doi: 10.2105/AJPH.2014.301960.

Toe, T., Tsai, T., & Yang, C. C. (2013). Applying Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) in

Educational Research: An Introduction. Application of Structural Equation Modeling

in Educational Research and Practice. In M. S. Khine (Eds.), (pp. 3-22).Application of

Structural Equation Modeling in Educational Research and Practice. The

Netherlands: The Sense Press.

Tomal, D. R. (1998). A five-styles teacher discipline model. Paper presented at the annual

meeting of the Mid-western Educational Research Association.

Tonks, J., Williams, H., Frampton, I., Yates, P.J., &Slater, A. (2007). Assessing emotion

recognition in 9 to 15 year olds: preliminary analysis of abilities in reading emotion

from Face, voice and eyes. Brain Injury, 7, 731-739.

Townsend, L., Flisher, A.J., Chikobvu, P, Lombard, C., & King, G. (2008). The relationship
 402

between bullying behaviours and high school dropout in Cape Town, South Africa.

South African Journal of Psychology, 38(1), 21-32.

Ttofi, M., M., Farrington, D. P., & Lӧsel, F. (2012). School Bullying as a Predictor of

Violence Later in Life: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Prospective

Longitudinal Studies. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 17(5), 405–418.

Ttofi, M. M., Farrington, D. P., Lösel. F., & loeber, B. B. (2011), Editorial: school bullying

and later criminal offending. Criminal Behaviour and Mental Health, 21, 77-79.

Trambakoulos, J.(1997). The Endorsment of DysfunctionalAttitrvks Following a

Nagative Mood Induction in Vuln"abk Individuals. Unpublished manuscript,

Psychology Department, Universiry of New York.

Troop-Gordon, W. & Quenelle, M. D., (2010). How does cognitive control reduce anger and

aggression? The role of conflict monitoring and forgiveness processes. Journal of

Personality and Social Psychology, 98, 830-840.

Tucker, L. R., & Lewis, C. (1973). A reliability coefficient for maximum likelihood factor

analysis. Psychometrika, 38(1), 1–10.

Topcu, C. & Erdur-Baker, O. (2012). Affective and cognitive empathy as mediators of gender

differences in cyber and traditional bullying. School Psychology International, 33,

550-561. doi:10.1177/0143034312446882

Underwood, C. K., & Rosen, L. H. (2011). Gender and Bullying: Moving Beyond Mean

Differences to Consider Conceptions of Bullying, Processes by which Bullying

Unfolds, and Cyber Bullying. Health, 27, 170–178.

Underwood, M.K. (2003). Social aggression among girls. New York: Guilford

United Nations Children’s Fund (2012). Measuring and Monitoring Child Protection

Systems: Proposed Core Indicators for the East Asia and Pacific Region,

Strengthening Child Protection. Bangkok.

 403

Unnever, D. J., & Cornell, D. G. (2004). Middle school victims of bullying: Who reports

being bullied. Journal of School Violence, 7, 70-83. doi: 10.1002/ab.20030.

Unnever, D. J. & Cornell, D. G. (2003). Bullying, self-control, and ADHD. Journal of

Interpersonal Violence, 18(2), 129-147.

U.S. Department of Health & Human Services. (2014). What is bullying: Bullying

definitions. Retrieved from http://www.stopbullying.gov/what-is-bullying/

Urberg, K. A., Degirmencioglu, S. D., & Pilgrim, C. (1997). Close friend and group influence

on adolescent cigarette smoking and alcohol use. Developmental Psychology, 7, 118-

119.

Vaillancourt, T, McDougall, P., Hymel, S., Krygsman, A., Miller, J., Stiver, K., & Davis, C.

(2008). Bullying: Are researchers and children/youth talking about the same thing?

International. Journal of Behavioral Development, 32, 486-495.

Van Kleef, G. A., Homan, A. C., Beersma, B., van Knippenberg, D., van Knippenberg, B., &

Damen, F. (2009). Searing sentiment or cold calculation: The effects of leader

emotional displays on team performance depend on follower epistemic motivation.

Academy of Management Journal, 52, 562–580.

Vastfjall, D. (2002). Emotion induction through music: A review of the musical mood

induction procedure. Musicae Scientiae, Special issue, 5, 173-211.

Veenstra, R., Lindenberg, S., Munniksm, A., & Dijkstra, J. K. (2010). The Complex Relation

Between Bullying, Victimization, Acceptance, and Rejection: Giving Special

Attention to Status, Affection, and Sex Differences. Child development, 81(2) 480–

486.
 404

Veenstra, R., Lindenberg, S., Oldehinkel, A. J., De Winter, A. F., Verhulst, F. C., & Ormel, J.

(2005). Prosocial and antisocial behavior in pread-olescence. Unpublished

manuscript.

Vettenburg, N. (1999). Violence in Schools. Awareness-raising, Prevention, Penalties.

General Report, in Council of Europe, Violence in Schools, Awareness-raising,

Prevention. Penalties, Council of Europe Publishing, Strasbourg.

Véronneau, M-H., & Dishion, T. J. (2012). Friendship interactions as mediators of the link

between parental monitoring in high school and educational attainment by age 25.

Poster presented at the biennial meeting of the Society for Research in Child

Development, Montréal, Quebec, Canada.

Veronneau, M.-H., Vitaro, F., Pedersen, S., &Tremblay, R. E.(2008). Do peers contribute to

the likelihood of secondary school graduation among disadvantaged boys?. Journal

of Educational Psychology, 100, 429–442.

Vieno, A., Gini, G., & Santinello, M. (2011). Different forms of bullying and their

association to smoking and drinking behavior in Italian adolescents. Journal of

School Health, 81, 393-399.

Wang, J., Iannotti, R., & Luk, J. W. (2011). Peer victimization and academic adjustment

among early adolescents: Moderation by gender and mediation by perceived

classmate support. Journal of School Health. 81, (7), 386-392.

Weiss, H. M., & Cropanzano, R. (1996). Affective events theory: A theoretical discussion of

the structure, causes, and consequences of affective experiences at work. Research in

Organizational Behavior, 18, 1-74.

Westermann, R., Spies, K., Stahl, G., & Hesse, F. W. (1996). Rela- tive effectiveness and
 405

validity of mood induction procedures: A meta-analysis. European Journal of Social

Psychology, 26, 557-580. doi:10.1002/(SICI)1099-0992.

Whitney, I., & Smith, P. K. (1993). A survey of the nature and extent of bullying in primary

and secondary schools. Educational Research, 35, 34-39.

Wal, M. F., Wit, C. M., & Hirasing, R. A. (2003).Psychosocial Health among Young Victims

and Offenders of Direct and Indirect Bullying. Pediatrics, 111(6), 1312 -1317.

William F. Arsenio, W. F., & emeries, E. A. (2001). Varieties of Childhood Bullying:

Values, Emotion Processes, and Social Competence. Social Development, 10(1), 59–

73. doi: 10.1111/1467-9507.00148.

Wolfe, D. A., Scott, K., Reitzel-Jaffe, D., Wekerle, C., Grasley, C., &Straatman, A. L.

(2001). Development and validation of the Conflict in Adolescent Dating

Relationships Inventory. Psychoogical Assessment, 13(2), 277-93.

Wolke. D., William. E. C., Adrian, A. & Costello, E. J. (2013). Impact of Bullying in

Childhood on Adult Health, Wealth, Crime, and Social Outcomes. Association for

Psychological Science. SAGE Publications.

Wolke D, Woods S, Bloomfield L, & Karstadt L. (2000). The association between direct and

relational bullying and behaviour problems among primary school children.

Journal of Child Psychology Psychiatry, 41(8), 989-1002.

Woods, S., Wolke, D., Nowicki, S. & Hall, L. (2009) Emotion recognition abilities and

empathy of victims of bullying. Child Abuse & Neglect, 33(5). 307-311.

Woods, S., & Wolke, D. (2004). Direct and relational bullying among primary school

children and academic achievement. Journal School Psychology, 42(2). 135-

155.

Wong, D. S., Lok, D. P., Lo, T. W., & Ma, S. K. (2008). School bullying among Hong
 406

Kong Chinese primary schoolchildren. Youth & Society, 40(1), 35-54.

Yardley, B.,& McCaul, K. (2001). Characteristics of Responding-, Nonresponding- and

Refusingparents In An Adolescent Lifestyle Choice Study. Evaluation Review, 25(6),

605-618.

Ybarra, M.L. & Mitchell, K.J. (2004). Online aggressors, victims, and aggressor/victims: A

comparison of associated youth characteristics. Journal of Child Psychology &

Psychiatry, 45(7), 1308-1316.

Ye, L., Ferdinando, H., Seppänen, T., & Alasaarela, E. (2014). Physical violence detection

for preventing school bullying. Advances in Artificial Intelligence. Retrieved from

http://http://www.hindawi.com/journals/aai/2014/740358/.

Yong, T., Hua, M., & Mei, G. (2007). Empirical study on impact of logistics operations

capability on supply chain performance. Paper presented at the International

conference on wireless communications, networking and mobile computing,

Shanghai, China.

Zeller, M. H., Vannatta, K., Schafer, J., & Noll, R. B. (2003). Behavioral reputation: A

cross-age perspective. Developmental Psychology, 39(1), 129–139.

Zindi, F. (1994). Bullying at boarding school: A Zimbabwe study. Research in Education, 51,

23-32.
 407

Appendix A
(Sample Items from OBVQ and FQS Urdu Version)
408
409
 410

Appendix B
(CFA of OBVQ)
411
 412

Covariances: (Group number 1 - Default model)

M.I. Par Change
e12 <--> e11 5.788 .075
e13 <--> e11 26.472 .144
e15 <--> e11 20.374 -.114
e16 <--> e11 17.589 -.106
e16 <--> e15 12.706 .063
e17 <--> e11 9.290 .088
e18 <--> e12 10.876 -.078
e2 <--> B 8.943 -.061
e2 <--> e11 6.532 .102
e2 <--> e16 6.898 -.074
e3 <--> e12 4.246 .065
e4 <--> e16 10.854 .072
e4 <--> e18 12.310 .082
e4 <--> e3 9.182 .094
e5 <--> e13 5.573 .068
e5 <--> e18 8.439 -.082
e5 <--> e3 4.855 .082
e5 <--> e4 14.565 -.121
e6 <--> e11 5.693 -.072
e7 <--> B 27.071 .080
e7 <--> V 6.508 -.062
e7 <--> e13 8.022 -.067
e7 <--> e14 4.584 .054
e7 <--> e15 8.762 .063
e7 <--> e16 11.227 .071
e7 <--> e4 4.238 .053
e8 <--> e18 6.120 -.062
e8 <--> e4 10.124 -.090
e8 <--> e5 6.246 .086
e8 <--> e7 9.972 -.088
e9 <--> B 4.096 -.032
e9 <--> e3 6.139 -.078
e9 <--> e8 14.275 .108
 413

Regression Weights: (Group number 1 - Default model)

M.I. Par Change
O25 <--- O27 13.686 .136
O25 <--- O29 11.336 -.140
O25 <--- O30 9.389 -.126
O25 <--- O31 5.337 .085
O25 <--- O6 4.171 -.060
O25 <--- O7 4.459 -.072
O25 <--- O9 6.042 -.086
O26 <--- O32 6.729 -.089
O27 <--- O25 17.690 .099
O27 <--- O10 6.842 -.070
O29 <--- O25 13.596 -.078
O29 <--- O30 6.819 .075
O29 <--- O10 6.380 .061
O30 <--- O25 11.747 -.073
O30 <--- O29 7.113 .078
O30 <--- O7 10.555 .077
O30 <--- O10 10.797 .080
O31 <--- O25 6.196 .060
O32 <--- O26 6.187 -.063
O32 <--- O7 11.436 .087
O5 <--- B 6.055 -.204
O5 <--- O28 5.417 -.089
O5 <--- O29 5.355 -.106
O5 <--- O30 11.147 -.151
O5 <--- O31 5.824 -.098
O6 <--- O7 5.309 .079
O7 <--- O30 8.229 .100
O7 <--- O32 10.079 .107
O7 <--- O6 5.607 .060
O7 <--- O8 8.586 -.071
O7 <--- O11 4.505 -.053
O8 <--- O32 6.864 -.107
O8 <--- O7 8.427 -.102
O10 <--- B 18.332 .270
O10 <--- O25 5.468 .060
O10 <--- O28 16.196 .117
O10 <--- O29 21.375 .161
O10 <--- O30 24.230 .169
O10 <--- O31 11.516 .105
O10 <--- O32 8.533 .097
O10 <--- O11 4.438 -.052
O11 <--- O32 6.451 -.093
O11 <--- O7 5.899 -.076
 414

M.I. Par Change

O11 <--- O10 5.771 -.077
O11 <--- O12 6.066 .070
O12 <--- O30 5.565 -.084
O12 <--- O11 6.445 .065

Model Fit Summary

CMIN
Model NPAR CMIN DF P CMIN/DF
Default model 33 334.242 103 .000 3.245
Saturated model 136 .000 0
Independence model 16 3918.822 120 .000 32.657

RMR, GFI
Model RMR GFI AGFI PGFI
Default model .047 .949 .933 .719
Saturated model .000 1.000
Independence model .330 .424 .347 .374

Baseline Comparisons
NFI RFI IFI TLI
Model CFI
Delta1 rho1 Delta2 rho2
Default model .915 .901 .939 .929 .939
Saturated model 1.000 1.000 1.000
Independence model .000 .000 .000 .000 .000

Parsimony-Adjusted Measures
Model PRATIO PNFI PCFI
Default model .858 .785 .806
Saturated model .000 .000 .000
Independence model 1.000 .000 .000

RMSEA
Model RMSEA LO 90 HI 90 PCLOSE
Default model .052 .046 .059 .252
Independence model .197 .192 .202 .000

AIC

ECVI
Model ECVI LO 90 HI 90 MECVI
Default model .490 .427 .563 .492
 415

Model ECVI LO 90 HI 90 MECVI

Saturated model .333 .333 .333 .340
Independence model 4.842 4.596 5.097 4.843

HOELTER
HOELTER HOELTER
Model
.05 .01
Default model 312 341
Independence model 31 34
 416

Appendix C
(CFA of FQS)
 417

FQS CFA Model !

 418

Modification Indices (Group number 1 - Default model)

Covariances: (Group number 1 - Default model)
M.I. Par Change
e12 <--> Compn 12.552 .132
e12 <--> Con 7.879 -.144
e1 <--> e12 10.230 .179
e17 <--> Supp 13.014 -.104
e17 <--> Compn 4.072 .094
e17 <--> e12 9.240 -.213
e17 <--> e2 13.926 .230
e3 <--> e15 6.133 -.144
e7 <--> e21 5.945 -.124
e8 <--> e3 6.568 -.099
e6 <--> Int 4.683 .049
e6 <--> e1 8.064 -.134
e6 <--> e8 4.270 .080
e19 <--> e2 6.571 -.113
e19 <--> e10 4.635 -.127
e9 <--> e3 7.137 -.093
e9 <--> e6 4.080 .071
e11 <--> Con 4.179 .074
e11 <--> Int 6.066 .049
e11 <--> e10 5.226 .107
e11 <--> e3 13.555 .122
e23 <--> Compn 4.779 -.055
e23 <--> e2 5.915 -.081
e23 <--> e3 8.132 -.091
e23 <--> e6 6.730 .083
e23 <--> e9 11.651 .097
e23 <--> e11 4.295 -.056
e18 <--> Con 4.711 -.098
e18 <--> e17 5.431 -.144
e18 <--> e19 7.916 .124
e14 <--> e6 6.309 -.107
e14 <--> e11 23.118 .172
e14 <--> e23 5.982 -.084
e20 <--> e13 5.281 .102
e20 <--> e3 8.665 .094
e20 <--> e6 6.102 -.079
e20 <--> e23 9.155 .078
 419

Variances: (Group number 1 - Default model)

M.I. Par Change

Regression Weights: (Group number 1 - Default model)

M.I. Par Change
f12 <--- Con 10.630 -.205
f12 <--- f1 9.383 .110
f12 <--- f10 5.348 -.068
f12 <--- f17 14.532 -.108
f12 <--- f13 4.158 -.059
f12 <--- f21 5.739 -.071
f2 <--- f17 9.800 .078
f2 <--- f19 5.344 -.079
f2 <--- f23 4.571 -.094
f1 <--- f12 8.009 .098
f1 <--- f6 5.518 -.093
f10 <--- f3 5.416 .112
f10 <--- f11 5.888 .129
f10 <--- f14 4.158 .091
f17 <--- Supp 4.010 -.224
f17 <--- f12 11.985 -.150
f17 <--- f2 6.851 .132
f17 <--- f18 8.222 -.139
f3 <--- f15 4.064 -.047
f3 <--- f8 4.209 -.070
f3 <--- f11 9.332 .116
f3 <--- f23 4.388 -.088
f3 <--- f20 6.625 .103
f21 <--- f7 5.830 -.132
f7 <--- f21 4.603 -.047
f8 <--- f3 4.409 -.071
f6 <--- f1 7.370 -.082
f6 <--- f14 6.014 -.079
f6 <--- f20 5.303 -.093
f19 <--- f2 5.365 -.083
f19 <--- f18 5.348 .080
f9 <--- f3 4.896 -.067
f9 <--- f23 8.081 .107
f11 <--- f10 7.088 .056
f11 <--- f3 10.901 .096
f11 <--- f14 16.320 .109
f23 <--- f2 4.857 -.060
f23 <--- f15 4.811 .042
 420

M.I. Par Change

f23 <--- f3 5.211 -.063
f23 <--- f6 4.205 .055
f23 <--- f9 8.061 .089
f23 <--- f14 4.207 -.053
f23 <--- f20 5.399 .076
f18 <--- Con 4.115 -.112
f18 <--- f17 7.487 -.068
f18 <--- f21 4.472 -.055
f18 <--- f19 5.878 .083
f14 <--- f6 4.986 -.079
f14 <--- f11 12.693 .146
f14 <--- f23 4.148 -.093
f20 <--- f13 6.137 .049
f20 <--- f3 6.017 .068
f20 <--- f23 6.367 .087

Model Fit Summary

CMIN
Model NPAR CMIN DF P CMIN/DF
Default model 46 358.017 164 .000 2.183
Saturated model 210 .000 0
Independence model 20 2625.869 190 .000 13.820

RMR, GFI
Model RMR GFI AGFI PGFI
Default model .067 .949 .934 .741
Saturated model .000 1.000
Independence model .289 .543 .495 .491

Baseline Comparisons
NFI RFI IFI TLI
Model CFI
Delta1 rho1 Delta2 rho2
Default model .864 .842 .921 .908 .920
Saturated model 1.000 1.000 1.000
Independence model .000 .000 .000 .000 .000

Parsimony-Adjusted Measures
Model PRATIO PNFI PCFI
Default model .863 .745 .794
Saturated model .000 .000 .000
Independence model 1.000 .000 .000
 421

NCP
Model NCP LO 90 HI 90
Default model 194.017 143.191 252.585
Saturated model .000 .000 .000
Independence model 2435.869 2273.995 2605.104

FMIN
Model FMIN F0 LO 90 HI 90
Default model .534 .289 .213 .376
Saturated model .000 .000 .000 .000
Independence model 3.913 3.630 3.389 3.882

RMSEA
Model RMSEA LO 90 HI 90 PCLOSE
Default model .042 .036 .048 .988
Independence model .138 .134 .143 .000

AIC
Model AIC BCC BIC CAIC
Default model 450.017 452.989 657.489 703.489
Saturated model 420.000 433.569 1367.154 1577.154
Independence model 2665.869 2667.161 2756.074 2776.074

ECVI
Model ECVI LO 90 HI 90 MECVI
Default model .671 .595 .758 .675
Saturated model .626 .626 .626 .646
Independence model 3.973 3.732 4.225 3.975

HOELTER
HOELTER HOELTER
Model
.05 .01
Default model 366 392
Independence model 58 61
 422

CFA Respecified Model of FQS

 423

Model Fit Summary

CMIN
Model NPAR CMIN DF P CMIN/DF
Default model 43 224.130 128 .000 1.751
Saturated model 171 .000 0
Independence model 18 2259.918 153 .000 14.771

RMR, GFI
Model RMR GFI AGFI PGFI
Default model .060 .963 .951 .721
Saturated model .000 1.000
Independence model .287 .571 .520 .511

Baseline Comparisons
NFI RFI IFI TLI
Model CFI
Delta1 rho1 Delta2 rho2
Default model .901 .881 .955 .945 .954
Saturated model 1.000 1.000 1.000
Independence model .000 .000 .000 .000 .000

Parsimony-Adjusted Measures
Model PRATIO PNFI PCFI
Default model .837 .754 .798
Saturated model .000 .000 .000
Independence model 1.000 .000 .000

NCP
Model NCP LO 90 HI 90
Default model 96.130 58.381 141.740
Saturated model .000 .000 .000
Independence model 2106.918 1956.834 2264.374

FMIN
Model FMIN F0 LO 90 HI 90
Default model .334 .143 .087 .211
Saturated model .000 .000 .000 .000
Independence model 3.368 3.140 2.916 3.375
 424

RMSEA
Model RMSEA LO 90 HI 90 PCLOSE
Default model .033 .026 .041 1.000
Independence model .143 .138 .149 .000

AIC
Model AIC BCC BIC CAIC
Default model 310.130 312.637 504.072 547.072
Saturated model 342.000 351.966 1113.254 1284.254
Independence model 2295.918 2296.967 2377.103 2395.103

ECVI
Model ECVI LO 90 HI 90 MECVI
Default model .462 .406 .530 .466
Saturated model .510 .510 .510 .525
Independence model 3.422 3.198 3.656 3.423

HOELTER
HOELTER HOELTER
Model
.05 .01
Default model 466 504
Independence model 55 59
 425

Appendix D
(Demographic Information Sheet)
426
 427

Appendix E
(Permission from Schools, Information for Parents and Consent Letters)
428
429
430
 431

Appendix F
(Sample Emotive Pictures for Mood Induction)
 432

Sample Pictures (Happy)

 433

Sample Pictures (Sad)

 434

Sample Pictures (Neutral)

 435

Appendix G
(Plagiarism Report)