School-Based Programs to Reduce Bullying and Victimization

By David P. Farrington, Maria M. Ttofi. 2012

436 citations recorded by the source corpus.

School bullying has serious short-term and long-term effects on children’s physical and mental health. Various anti-bullying programs have been implemented world wide and, more rarely, evaluated. Previous narrative reviews, summarizing the work done on bullying prevention, as well as previous meta-analyses of anti-bullying programs, are limited. The definition of school bullying includes several key elements: physical, verbal, or psychological attack or intimidation that is intended to cause fear, distress, or harm to the victim; an imbalance of power (psychological or physical), with a more powerful child (or children) oppressing less powerful ones; and repeated incidents between the same children over a prolonged period. School bullying can occur in school or on the way to or from school. It is not bullying when two persons of the same strength (physical, psychological, or verbal) victimize each other. This report presents a systematic review and meta-analysis of the effectiveness of programs designed to reduce school bullying perpetration and victimization (i.e. being bullied). The authors indicate the pitfalls of previous reviews and explain in detail how the present systematic review and meta-analysis addresses the gaps in the existing literature on bullying prevention.

Subfields: Clinical Psychology, Developmental and Educational Psychology, Social Psychology

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/0037cfc0d2eba672907836debd5add42a47d1bf8

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Clinical Psychology

In Developmental and Educational Psychology

In Social Psychology

Citations in the corpus

The Role of Social-Emotional Learning In Bullying Prevention Efforts (2013, background): “…school-based bullying prevention that complement SEL include clear bullying-related school rules and policies and improved supervision of students (Farrington & Ttofi, 2009), as well as staff training to increase staff intervention in bullying incidents through improved staff awareness and skill…”
The Personality Trait of Environmental Sensitivity Predicts Children’s Positive Response to School-Based Antibullying Intervention (2018, background): “The more effective programs feature multiple components and are based on universal actions such as improving whole-school and classroom climate, introducing schoolwide rules related to bullying, and providing specific training for teachers and parents (Farrington & Ttofi, 2009).”
Bully/Victim Problems Among Preschool Children: a Review of Current Research Evidence (2011, background): “meta-analysis review show that prevention programs have a bigger impact on bullying for older children (age 11 or older) than for younger ones (Farrington and Ttofi 2009).”
Limitations of focussing on homophobic, biphobic and transphobic ‘bullying’ to understand and address LGBT young people's experiences within and beyond school (2015, neutral): “Bullying is widely understood (at least in the UK) to consist of physical and/or verbal actions between children that are intended to cause fear, distress or harm, and that are persistently repeated over a period of time (DfE, 2010; Farrington and Ttofi, 2009).”
Mental health promotion and problem prevention in schools: what does the evidence say? (2011, background): “, 2004) No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes ** (Farrington and Ttofi, 2009) Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes *** (Gansle, 2005) Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes *** (Garrard and Lipsey, 2007) Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes *** (Green et al.”
Advancing the Science and Practice of Social and Emotional Learning (2016, background): “A number of studies demonstrated the positive association between teacher training, including the amount of time and the intensity of the training, and the effectiveness of bullying prevention programs (Bradshaw, 2015; Farrington & Ttofi, 2009).”
Preventing Bullying through Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports (PBIS): A Multitiered Approach to Prevention and Integration (2013, background): “These data can identify potential areas for intensive training for school staff, which is an essential element of successful bullying prevention efforts (Farrington & Ttofi, 2009).”
The Healthy Context Paradox: Victims’ Adjustment During an Anti-Bullying Intervention (2018, background): “In the past decades, a large number of anti-bullying programs have been developed and implemented (see for overviews: Evans et al. 2014; Farrington and Ttofi 2009; Yeager et al. 2015).”
A large-scale evaluation of the KiVa antibullying program: grades 4-6. (2011, methodology): “In addition, Baldry and Farrington (2007) proposed that the inconsistent findings may be associated with variations in assessment methods and evaluation designs (see also Farrington & Ttofi, 2009; Vreeman & Carroll, 2007).”
The effectiveness of school-based bullying prevention programs: A systematic review (2014, neutral): “Farrington and Tto ﬁ (2009) found that studies using more rigorous designs produced lower effect estimates.”