scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Journal ArticleDOI

Parenting behavior and the risk of becoming a victim and a bully/victim: a meta-analysis study.

01 Dec 2013-Child Abuse & Neglect (Elsevier)-Vol. 37, Iss: 12, pp 1091-1108
TL;DR: Positive parenting behavior is related to a moderate increase of risk for becoming a bully/victim and small to moderate effects on victim status at school, and intervention programs against bullying should extend their focus to include families and start before children enter school.
About: This article is published in Child Abuse & Neglect.The article was published on 2013-12-01 and is currently open access. It has received 416 citations till now. The article focuses on the topics: Parenting styles & Peer victimization.

Summary (1 min read)

Introduction

  • Both victims and those who both bully and are victims (bully/victims) were more likely to be exposed to negative parenting behavior including abuse and neglect and maladaptive parenting.
  • Positive parenting behavior including good communication of parents with the child, warm and affectionate relationship, parental involvement and support, and parental supervision were protective against peer victimization.

Search Strategy

  • The authors conducted a literature search for cross-sectional and longitudinal studies of the association between parenting behavior and peer victimization published between January 1970, when the influential work of Olweus on bullying appeared, and the end of December 2012.
  • The following electronic databases were searched: MEDLINE, PsychINFO, Eric and EMBASE.
  • Duplicate articles were excluded from subsequent searches and the final literature search included 11,741 articles .
  • Firstly, the study had to include measures of peer victimization at school and parenting behavior that was directly related to the child.
  • Secondly, the authors should report (or provide after request) sufficient statistical information (correlations, means and standard deviations, odds ratio, F or t values) in order to allow the use of meta-analytic techniques.

Selection of Parenting Behavior Variables and Coding

  • Two coders independently constructed categories for the parenting variables that were then jointly reviewed and decided with the help of a senior reviewer.
  • All discrepancies were discussed and resolved by the coders.
  • These variables (i.e. family problem solving, family general control and parental responsibility) were not classified into any of the suggested constructs and thus were not included in the analyses.
  • Please note study design was defined on the base of how the included articles analyzed the data; a longitudinal study analyzing data in a cross-sectional manner was deemed as cross-sectional Table 1: Summary of studies examining parenting behavior and peer victimization cont.

Data Analysis

  • Studies provided different data and Hedge’s g, a dimensionless effect size, defined as the difference between the means of the two compared groups (e.g., victims versus neutrals) divided by the pooled standard deviation, was used (Cooper & Hedges, 1994).
  • The distribution of effect sizes was examined using tests of heterogeneity.
  • Thirdly, Egger’s test was used to assess whether there is a tendency for selective publication of studies based on the nature and direction of results.

Potential Moderator Variables

  • The heterogeneity analyses for some of the categories were significant (see supplementary Table 3 and 4) indicating potential moderating.
  • The effects of parenting were found to be generally stronger for bully/victims than victims.
  • Differential psychosocial risk factors associated with adolescents involved in bullying and victimization, also known as Direct and indirect bully-victims.

Did you find this useful? Give us your feedback

Citations
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Victims of childhood bullying, including those that bullied others (bully-victims), were at increased risk of poor health, wealth, and social-relationship outcomes in adulthood even after the authors controlled for family hardship and childhood psychiatric disorders.
Abstract: Bullying is a serious problem for schools, parents, and public-policymakers alike. Bullying creates risks of health and social problems in childhood, but it is unclear if such risks extend into adulthood. A large cohort of children was assessed for bullying involvement in childhood and then followed up in young adulthood in an assessment of health, risky or illegal behavior, wealth, and social relationships. Victims of childhood bullying, including those that bullied others (bully-victims), were at increased risk of poor health, wealth, and social-relationship outcomes in adulthood even after we controlled for family hardship and childhood psychiatric disorders. In contrast, pure bullies were not at increased risk of poor outcomes in adulthood once other family and childhood risk factors were taken into account. Being bullied is not a harmless rite of passage but throws a long shadow over affected people's lives. Interventions in childhood are likely to reduce long-term health and social costs.

517 citations


Cites background from "Parenting behavior and the risk of ..."

  • ...In the present study, victims and, in particular, bully-victims differed from children who were not involved in bullying by growing up more often in deprived families (Lereya et al., 2013) and having more mental health problems in childhood....

    [...]

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The prevalence, age and gender differences, and various types of bullying, as well as why it happens and how long it lasts, are discussed, starting from the large surveys carried out in western countries and to a lower extent in low- and middle-income countries.
Abstract: During the school years, bullying is one of the most common expressions of violence in the peer context. Research on bullying started more than forty years ago, when the phenomenon was defined as 'aggressive, intentional acts carried out by a group or an individual repeatedly and over time against a victim who cannot easily defend him- or herself'. Three criteria are relevant in order to define aggressive behaviour as bullying: (1) repetition, (2) intentionality and (3) an imbalance of power. Given these characteristics, bullying is often defined as systematic abuse of power by peers. It is recognised globally as a complex and serious problem. In the present paper, we discuss the prevalence, age and gender differences, and various types of bullying, as well as why it happens and how long it lasts, starting from the large surveys carried out in western countries and to a lower extent in low- and middle-income countries. The prevalence rates vary widely across studies; therefore, specific attention will be devoted to the definition, time reference period and frequency criterion. We will also focus on risk factors as well as short- and long-term outcomes of bullying and victimisation. Finally, a section will be dedicated to review what is known about effective prevention of bullying.

398 citations


Cites background from "Parenting behavior and the risk of ..."

  • ...They often come from the most adverse home environments, characterised by maltreatment and neglectful parenting (Cook et al., 2010; Lereya et al., 2013)....

    [...]

  • ...A meta-analysis by Lereya, Samara, and Wolke (2013) found support for both overprotection and abuse/neglect in the family: the former was more strongly related to being a pure victim, whereas the latter was more strongly associated with the bully-victim status....

    [...]

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: SES provides little guidance for targeted intervention, and all schools and children, not just those with more socioeconomic deprivation, should be targeted to reduce the adverse effects of bullying.
Abstract: We examined whether socioeconomic status (SES) could be used to identify which schools or children are at greatest risk of bullying, which can adversely affect children's health and life. We conducted a review of published literature on school bullying and SES. We identified 28 studies that reported an association between roles in school bullying (victim, bully, and bully-victim) and measures of SES. Random effects models showed SES was weakly related to bullying roles. Adjusting for publication bias, victims (odds ratio [OR] = 1.40; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.24, 1.58) and bully-victims (OR = 1.54; 95% CI = 1.36, 1.74) were more likely to come from low socioeconomic households. Bullies (OR = 0.98; 95% CI = 0.97, 0.99) and victims (OR = 0.95; 95% CI = 0.94, 0.97) were slightly less likely to come from high socioeconomic backgrounds. SES provides little guidance for targeted intervention, and all schools and children, not just those with more socioeconomic deprivation, should be targeted to reduce the adverse effects of bullying.

390 citations


Cites background from "Parenting behavior and the risk of ..."

  • ...Experiencing violence or abuse at home can impact on children’s ability to form and maintain peer relationships (63, 64), and both victims and bully-victims have been found to have experienced harsher parenting (65), abuse (66, 67) and sibling violence (68, 69) more often than children not involved in bullying....

    [...]

  • ...bullying (65, 66), the association between low SES and victims or bully-victims was weak according to statistical conventions (70), suggesting that the results may not reflect a direct association between bullying and SES, but rather an indirect relationship which is mediated by the child’s home environment....

    [...]

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this article, a systematic review of systematic reviews and meta-analyses on the topic of bullying and cyberbullying is presented, showing that one of every three children is involved in some forms of bullying.

298 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The evidence for an independent contribution of childhood bullying victimisation to the development of poor outcomes throughout the life span, including mental, physical and socioeconomic outcomes, is reviewed, and the implications for policy and practice are discussed.
Abstract: Background We have known for some time that being bullied was associated with children's and adolescents’ adjustment difficulties and well-being. In recent years, we have come to recognise that the impact of childhood bullying victimisation on the development of mental health problems is more complex. This paper aims to review the evidence for an independent contribution of childhood bullying victimisation to the development of poor outcomes throughout the life span, including mental, physical and socioeconomic outcomes, and discuss the implications for policy and practice. Findings Existing research indicates that (a) being bullied in childhood is associated with distress and symptoms of mental health problems. This large body of evidence supports actions aimed at reducing the occurrence of bullying behaviours; (b) the consequences of childhood bullying victimisation can persist up to midlife and, in addition to mental health, can impact physical and socioeconomic outcomes. These new findings indicate that interventions should also focus on supporting victims of bullying and helping them build resilience; (c) research has identified some factors that predispose children to be targeted by bullying behaviours. These studies suggest that public health interventions could aim at preventing children from becoming the target of bullying behaviours from an early age. Conclusions It is a truism to emphasise that further work is needed to understand why and how young people's aspirations are often cut short by this all too common adverse social experience. In parallel, we must develop effective strategies to tackle this form of abuse and its consequences for the victims. Addressing bullying in childhood could not only reduce children's and adolescents’ mental health symptoms but also prevent psychiatric and socioeconomic difficulties up to adulthood and reduce considerable costs for society.

242 citations

References
More filters
Book
01 Dec 1969
TL;DR: The concepts of power analysis are discussed in this paper, where Chi-square Tests for Goodness of Fit and Contingency Tables, t-Test for Means, and Sign Test are used.
Abstract: Contents: Prefaces. The Concepts of Power Analysis. The t-Test for Means. The Significance of a Product Moment rs (subscript s). Differences Between Correlation Coefficients. The Test That a Proportion is .50 and the Sign Test. Differences Between Proportions. Chi-Square Tests for Goodness of Fit and Contingency Tables. The Analysis of Variance and Covariance. Multiple Regression and Correlation Analysis. Set Correlation and Multivariate Methods. Some Issues in Power Analysis. Computational Procedures.

115,069 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
13 Sep 1997-BMJ
TL;DR: Funnel plots, plots of the trials' effect estimates against sample size, are skewed and asymmetrical in the presence of publication bias and other biases Funnel plot asymmetry, measured by regression analysis, predicts discordance of results when meta-analyses are compared with single large trials.
Abstract: Objective: Funnel plots (plots of effect estimates against sample size) may be useful to detect bias in meta-analyses that were later contradicted by large trials. We examined whether a simple test of asymmetry of funnel plots predicts discordance of results when meta-analyses are compared to large trials, and we assessed the prevalence of bias in published meta-analyses. Design: Medline search to identify pairs consisting of a meta-analysis and a single large trial (concordance of results was assumed if effects were in the same direction and the meta-analytic estimate was within 30% of the trial); analysis of funnel plots from 37 meta-analyses identified from a hand search of four leading general medicine journals 1993-6 and 38 meta-analyses from the second 1996 issue of the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews . Main outcome measure: Degree of funnel plot asymmetry as measured by the intercept from regression of standard normal deviates against precision. Results: In the eight pairs of meta-analysis and large trial that were identified (five from cardiovascular medicine, one from diabetic medicine, one from geriatric medicine, one from perinatal medicine) there were four concordant and four discordant pairs. In all cases discordance was due to meta-analyses showing larger effects. Funnel plot asymmetry was present in three out of four discordant pairs but in none of concordant pairs. In 14 (38%) journal meta-analyses and 5 (13%) Cochrane reviews, funnel plot asymmetry indicated that there was bias. Conclusions: A simple analysis of funnel plots provides a useful test for the likely presence of bias in meta-analyses, but as the capacity to detect bias will be limited when meta-analyses are based on a limited number of small trials the results from such analyses should be treated with considerable caution. Key messages Systematic reviews of randomised trials are the best strategy for appraising evidence; however, the findings of some meta-analyses were later contradicted by large trials Funnel plots, plots of the trials9 effect estimates against sample size, are skewed and asymmetrical in the presence of publication bias and other biases Funnel plot asymmetry, measured by regression analysis, predicts discordance of results when meta-analyses are compared with single large trials Funnel plot asymmetry was found in 38% of meta-analyses published in leading general medicine journals and in 13% of reviews from the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews Critical examination of systematic reviews for publication and related biases should be considered a routine procedure

37,989 citations

01 Jan 1986
TL;DR: In this article, models of Human Nature and Casualty are used to model human nature and human health, and a set of self-regulatory mechanisms are proposed. But they do not consider the role of cognitive regulators.
Abstract: 1. Models of Human Nature and Casualty. 2. Observational Learning. 3. Enactive Learning. 4. Social Diffusion and Innovation. 5. Predictive Knowledge and Forethought. 6. Incentive Motivators. 7. Vicarious Motivators. 8. Self-Regulatory Mechanisms. 9. Self-Efficacy. 10. Cognitive Regulators. References. Index.

21,686 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
19 Apr 2000-JAMA
TL;DR: A checklist contains specifications for reporting of meta-analyses of observational studies in epidemiology, including background, search strategy, methods, results, discussion, and conclusion should improve the usefulness ofMeta-an analyses for authors, reviewers, editors, readers, and decision makers.
Abstract: ObjectiveBecause of the pressure for timely, informed decisions in public health and clinical practice and the explosion of information in the scientific literature, research results must be synthesized. Meta-analyses are increasingly used to address this problem, and they often evaluate observational studies. A workshop was held in Atlanta, Ga, in April 1997, to examine the reporting of meta-analyses of observational studies and to make recommendations to aid authors, reviewers, editors, and readers.ParticipantsTwenty-seven participants were selected by a steering committee, based on expertise in clinical practice, trials, statistics, epidemiology, social sciences, and biomedical editing. Deliberations of the workshop were open to other interested scientists. Funding for this activity was provided by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.EvidenceWe conducted a systematic review of the published literature on the conduct and reporting of meta-analyses in observational studies using MEDLINE, Educational Research Information Center (ERIC), PsycLIT, and the Current Index to Statistics. We also examined reference lists of the 32 studies retrieved and contacted experts in the field. Participants were assigned to small-group discussions on the subjects of bias, searching and abstracting, heterogeneity, study categorization, and statistical methods.Consensus ProcessFrom the material presented at the workshop, the authors developed a checklist summarizing recommendations for reporting meta-analyses of observational studies. The checklist and supporting evidence were circulated to all conference attendees and additional experts. All suggestions for revisions were addressed.ConclusionsThe proposed checklist contains specifications for reporting of meta-analyses of observational studies in epidemiology, including background, search strategy, methods, results, discussion, and conclusion. Use of the checklist should improve the usefulness of meta-analyses for authors, reviewers, editors, readers, and decision makers. An evaluation plan is suggested and research areas are explored.

17,663 citations


"Parenting behavior and the risk of ..." refers methods in this paper

  • ...The present meta-analysis was conducted according to the MOOSE guidelines for systematic reviews of observational studies (see supplementary Table 1; Brugha et al., 2012; Stroup et al., 2000)....

    [...]

Frequently Asked Questions (9)
Q1. What are the contributions in this paper?

Copyright and reuse: The Warwick Research Archive Portal ( WRAP ) makes the work of researchers of the University of Warwick available open access under the following conditions. Copyright © and all moral rights to the version of the paper presented here belong to the individual author ( s ) and/or other copyright owners. 

Associations between caregiver support, bullying, and depressive symptomatology among sexual minority and heterosexual girls: Results from the 2008 Boston youth survey. 

supervisioncategory showed moderating effects according to continent (Qb = 16.862; p < 0.001) withEuropean studies finding less supervision for victims (Mean ES = -0.311; p < 0.001; N = 1). 

Cheng et al., 2010 China 9015 -0.18 -0.27 -0.10 -4.22 0.000 Demanet & Van Houtte, 2012 Belgium 11872 -0.02 -0.09 0.05 -0.56 0.579 Demaray & Malecki, 2003 US 499 -0.36 -0.63 -0.09 -2.57 0.010 Fanti, Demetriou, Hawa, 2012 Cyprus 1416 -0.40 -0.47 -0.33 -11.46 0.000 Franic et al., 2011 Croatia 803 -0.30 -0.44 -0.17 -4.31 0.000 Holt & Espelage, 2007 US 784 -0.38 -0.60 -0.16 -3.44 0.001 Ma, 2001 Canada 13751 -0.01 -0.02 0.01 -0.71 0.480 Marini et al., 2006 Canada 7290 -0.28 -0.35 -0.21 -7.84 0.000 Murray-Harvey & Slee, 2010 Australia 888 -0.22 -0.30 -0.15 -5.66 0.000 Perren & Hornung, 2005 Switzerland 1107 -0.24 -0.54 0.07 -1.54 0.125 

In the linear regression analysis, theintercept value provides a measure of asymmetry; the larger its deviation from zero, the morepronounced the asymmetry (Egger, Smith, Schneider, & Minder, 1997). 

Bully-victims: Parental involvement and support showed significant moderator effectsaccording to the assessment method (Qb = 7.03; p < 0.05) suggesting that children who self-reported victimization (Mean ES = -0.35; p < 0.001; N = 8) were less likely to have parentswho are involved and supportive. 

The reasonbehind developing such problems may be partly due to exposure to harsher parenting ratherthan being a bully and victim simultaneous. 

if small studies with controversial results were lesslikely to be published, the correlation between variance and effect size would be high. 

70 studies (N=119 samples for victims; N=55 samples for bully/victims)were included in the meta-analysis and are shown in Table 1.