SocioloiíkalFocus. 47: S4-\00.

20]4
Copyright © North Central Sociological Association I ^ y
ISSN: 0038-0237 print/2162-1128 online B % Taylor «.Francis Croup
OOI: 10.1080/00380237.2014.883604

Peer Bullying and Victimization among High School

Students in Kuwait

Amer Alsaleh
Kuwait University

This study is the first to examine gender differences and bullying in Kuwaiti schools, comparing
the level of peer bullying and victimization among male and female students based on a sample
of 840 cases drawn from 9th and 10th grade students in high schools in Kuwait. The sample was
divided into two groups. Descriptive analysis and t-tests showed that male students were signifi-
cantly more involved in direct bullying than females were, while female students were indirectly
victimized more than the males. Kuwaiti females scored more indirect bullying and indirect victim-
ization than males did. Finally, grade nine students had higher means in direct bullying than did
students in grade ten. This research adds to the comparative data on bullying in the schools. Future
researchers should investigate additional variables, including the effects of corporal punishment and
sibling relationships.

Bullying is a common type of peer aggression that often occurs in school settings, a univer-
sal phenomenon that can be observed in nearly all school classrooms (Smith and Brain 2000).
Researchers have generally categorized bullying by breaking it down into three broad kinds.
Olweus (1993), for example, described these three main types as physical, verbal, and social
exclusion. Both physical and verbal bullying can be observed by outsiders; therefore, these types
are generally accepted as direct bullying. Social exclusion is not always visible and is designated
as "indirect bullying." Rivers and Smith (1994) broke bullying into three similar categories: direct
physical, direct verbal, and indirect bullying. Direct physical aggression involves tangible behav-
iors, such as hitting, pushing, and kicking. Direct verbal aggression includes name-calling and
threats. Indirect aggression involves behaviors such as spreading rumors and telling tales. Another
name for indirect bullying is "relational bullying" (Crick and Bigbee 1998). Elliott (1997) further
classified bullying into more specific types, such as physical, verbal, social exclusion, emotional,
and sexual. Piskin and Ayas (2011) expanded the classifications for bullying for primary school
children into five categories: physical, verbal, isolation, spreading rumors, and harming property;
Piskin and Ayas (2007) used a sixth category for students in middle and high school: sexual
bullying.

Correspondence should be addressed to Amer Alsaleh. Department of Sociology and Social Work, Faculty
of Social Sciences, Kuwait University. Kaifan P.O. Box 68168, Kuwait City, 71962, State of Kuwait. E-mail:
amer66_99@ hotmail .com
 BULLYING AMONG HIGH SCHOOLERS IN KUWAIT 85

The present study, conducted on students in Kuwait, examines gender differences in bullying
others and in being bullied (victimization). Gender differences in Kuwaiti society suggest that
boys and girls in grades 9 and 10 will be involved in the bullying-victimization process in different
ways. We expect males to be more often involved in direet bullying (inflicting physical or verbal
harm on others) and in being victims of such bullying more often than girls. We expect that
girls, on the other hand, are more likely to bully others indirectly and to be victims of indirect
bullying—that is, to be isolated by others and to be the victims of gossip and the object of rumors.

Studies of Violence in Kuwait: Gender Expectations and Education

In 2000, the Ministry of Education surveyed a total of 100 male and female high school students
from each of the five school districts in Kuwait in an effort to collect information about the
amount and types of violence oecurring in the public high schools. The study indicated that
40 percent of male students were physically or verbally abused by other male students, while
34 percent of female students were verbally or physically abused by other female students. The
amount of violenee varied, depending upon which system of education the students were enrolled
in. The study indicated that violenee in the general system of education, in which students stay
in the same classroom, taking the same courses with the same teachers for the entire academic
year (two semesters), is higher than in the credit-related system, which was established in 1979.
In the credit-related system, which was extended to all sehool districts after the 1991 liberation of
Kuwait from the Iraqi invasion, students change classes, classrooms, and teachers each semester,
so that they are not consigned for an entire academic year to a class or teacher they might not like
or one in which they have no friends. Students have the option to choose either system.
Although the difference between male and female school violence is expected, due to the
social and traditional expectations that limit females' actions, the extent of the violence is a
major concern, because such behavior is culturally supposed to be out of character for Kuwaitis,
whose religion is meant to motivate them to be peaceful and helpful to others.
Gender expectations play a significant role for both students and those in the labor force.
While the government stresses the importance of education regardless of gender, most sehools
are segregated on the basis of gender after kindergarten. Both Kuwaiti custom and law enforce
a division of labor by gender. Unlike women in some Arabic countries, Kuwaiti women are
involved in various aspects of the labor force, although the percentage of women involved in
labor outside of the home is small. Few women are owners or managers of even small businesses.
Men and women do not have the same roles or status in Kuwaiti society, and there is tension
between traditional Kuwaiti Islamic values and the values of the West. Many women still go
veiled and wear the traditional black, while many girls in the younger generation follow the
dictates of Western fashion. Female students are a majority at Kuwait University, and women are
prominent in the country's commercial life and in the civil service. Women openly agitate for the
relaxation of social restrictions on females, for more rights for women, and for an increase in job
opportunities.
These differences in expectations for the genders are clearly seen in the sehools. All sehooling
for Kuwaitis is free, and between the ages of 6 and 14, attendance is compulsory. While the gov-
ernment stresses the importance of edueation regardless of gender, most schools are segregated
on the basis of gender after kindergarten.
86 SOCIOLOGICAL FOCUS

In many parts of the country, girls are still expected to prefer nurturing others to pursuing
personal accomplishments, and these different expectations play out in the ways that children
behave in school as well. Girls' antagonisms are expected to be expressed in gossip and in the
social isolation of peers; boys still take out their aggressions in fighting and bullying.
Bullying is only one kind of school violence currently being researched. General violence in
Kuwaiti high schools, for example, which is seen as severe, has recently drawn national attention.
Newspapers have carried articles highlighting this violence and the types of weapons students
bring to school. Statistics published by Kuwait's Ministry of Planning in 20(X) gave the total
Kuwaiti population as 2,228,363 and the total number of violent crimes as 14,322 (Ministry of
Planning 2001 ). The violent behavioral incidents registered in the record of Social Service Offices
in public schools during the 2000-2001 academic years were 15,123 single student cases, out of a
total student population of 264,408. Some students were involved in more than one case (Ministry
of Planning 2001:166). In other words, violent crimes in Kuwait are nine times more likely to
occur within the public schools' boundaries than in the outside community. Although violence
has been common in Kuwait throughout its history, researchers ask why violence happens more
often within the boundaries of public schools. There is also concern over new types of violence,
including using guns in fights and seeking immediate relatives' support in fights—all of which
raise questions about the levels and causes of such violence.
This study builds on the call for comparative data sounded by Benbenishty and Astor (2008)
who showed that the publication of data about bullying in Israel raised awareness of the prob-
lem and led to the creation of "policy, training, and interventions designed to reduce Israel's
prevalence rates" (2008:62). Such data will aid the Kuwaiti school system in planning better
interventions and will help researchers gain perspective on how widespread the current school
violence problem is.

LITERATURE REVIEW

In the last 20 years, bullying has been recognized as a serious problem in schools worldwide
(Olweus 2003; Smith 2004) and analysis of this trend is essential, since involvement in bully-
ing has repeatedly been shown to be related to other violence (Leary et al. 2003; Nansel et al.
2(X)3). Specifically, participation in bullying is a reliable predictor of carrying a weapon gener-
ally, carrying a weapon in school, being involved in frequent fighting, and in receiving frequent
injuries from fighting (Nansel et al. 2003). Patterns in bullying behaviors are complex and should
be interpreted from a socio-ecological perspective (Espelage and Swearer 2003).
Factors related to bullying may include a combination of interacting variables, including an
individual's characteristics, peers, family, school, and community (Ahmed and Braithwaite 1992;
Espelage and Swearer 2(X)3; Rigby 1993). A considerable number of researchers have demon-
strated the harmful effects of bullying on school children. In their meta-analysis of 20 years'
research. Hawker and Boulton (2000) found that victimization was strongly associated with
depression and moderately associated with loneliness and with low self-esteem, both global and
social.
Other studies also examined the emotional effects of bullying in decreasing self-esteem and
confidence (Besag 1989; Piskin and Ayas 2005b). Other researchers identified these related prob-
lems: Coie and Dodge ( 1998) and Crick and Grotpeter ( 1995) stated that bullies are more likely to
 BULLYING AMONG HIGH SCHOOLERS IN KUWAIT 87

experience social-psychological adjustment problems, such as depression, loneliness, and social

isolation. Berthold and Hoover (2000) reported that students who are the target of bullying are
also likely to avoid going to school because they fear for their safety. Problems multiply in the
long run: there is evidence that continued or severe bullying can contribute to problems years
later. For example, in his longitudinal research, Olweus (1991) found that boys who persistently
bullied others in adolescence were three to four times more likely to be involved in repeated anti-
social behavior and physical violence by their early twenties. Although most of the research has
been carried out among primary school students, some research has been conducted on the high
school level.
Numerous studies report high percentages of children engaged in bullying or in being victim-
ized. Dölek (2002) found that the victimization level among ninth grade students was 11 percent.
Piskin and Ayas (2005a) studied ninth to eleventh grade students and found that 20.5 percent of
the students were victims, and 28.2 percent of them were bullies. Akgiin's study (2005) of a high
school preparation class of ninth and tenth grade children found that the percentage of victims
was 8.2, and the percentage of bullies was 7.2. Giiltekin and Sayil (2005) found that the percent-
age of victimized students was 13.9. In their large-scale research (A' = 3519), Alikasifoglu and
colleagues (2007) examined Turkish students in the ninth, tenth, and eleventh grades and stated
that the percentage of victims was 22 percent, and the percentage of bullies was 9.2 percent.
Kepenekçi and Çinkir (2006) reported that 100 percent of the students were victimized at least
once in the academic year.
Many studies have pointed out that bullying and victimization incidences vary according to
gender and type of violence (the two broad categories are physical and verbal), although a handful
of studies found no significant gender differences (Kristensen and Smith 2003 studied physi-
cal aggression, taking and damaging others' belongings, and other attacks on property; Peskin,
Tortolero and Markham 2006 also studied physical bullying). With a somewhat different focus,
Beldean-Galea, Jurcau, and Tigan (2010), examined the spreading of rumors and other forms of
verbal bullying, and they found that girls tend to bully others more often than boys. When it comes
to gender differences and being victimized, the findings are diverse. Some researchers reveal
that the number of boys and girls being victimized is about the same (e.g., these two studies—
Beldean-Galea, Jurcau, and Tigan 2010; Fekkes, Pijpers, and Verloove-Vanhorick 2004—focused
on verbal bullying: Peskin, Tortolero, and Markham 2006, however, examined physical bullying),
while others have found that more boys are often victimized (e.g., O'Moore and Hillery 1989
examined physical bullying).
In general, these questions about gender differences in bullying behaviors have been exatnined
in a wide variety of nations. Due et al. (2009), in an international survey of 35 countries, found
that in all countries except Greenland, Hungary, Scotland, Ukraine, and Wales, more boys than
girls reported being victims of bullying, but in most countries gender differences were minor.
Some researchers state that more boys are bullies and that they were victimized more in forms
of direct bullying (such as physical bullying) than were girls (Card, Stucky, Sawalani, and Little
2008; Elliott 2002; Espelage, Bosworth, and Simon 2000; Olweus 1993; Rigby 2007; Smith and
Sharp 2003); girls are more often engaged in social/relational bullying as both bullies and victims
(Borntrager et al. 2009; Price 2004; Rigby 2007).
Research in Turkey generally indicates that boys are more likely to bully others than girls are
and that boys are often more victimized than girls (Dölek 2002; Pekel 2004; Piskin and Ayas
2005a; Takis 2(X)7). Some research conducted on secondary school children in Turkey, reporting
88 SOCIOLOGICAL FOCUS

only victimization results, indicated that boys bully others more often than girls (Alikasifoglu
et al. 2007; Malkoç and Ceylan 2010; Sahin and Sari 2010).
In Iran, Mahemmedkani (2002) reported that boys usually perform more physical bullying
and criminal activities than girls, whereas girls more often bully others verbally and by spreading
rumors. When researchers have examined patterns of bullying in different kinds of high schools,
the comparisons among general and vocational high school students are limited. Piskin and Ayas
(2005a) compared general high school students, female vocational high school students, and
male vocational high school students on levels of bullying and victimization in Turkey. The data
revealed that males in vocational high schools were significantly more victimized than were the
students of the other two schools, but the levels of bullying among females in vocational high
schools were significantly lower than those of students in the other two types of schools.

Defining Bullying

An amalgamated definition of bullying was created by Rigby (2001 ) and is composed of the fol-
lowing: the desire to hurt, engaging in hurtful actions, a power imbalance between the bully and
the victim, repetition, an unjust use of power, evident enjoyment on the part of the aggressor,
and the oppression of the victim. Bullying can occur verbally through threats, teasing, spreading
rumors, name calling, or belittling; physically through hitting, punching, kicking, pinching, or
restraining; and indirectly, through ignoring, excluding, or making inappropriate faces and ges-
tures (Kumpulainen and Räsänen, 2000; Nansel et al. 2001). Gender comparisons indicate that
physical bullying is more prevalent among males, while females report more verbal and relational
bullying (Farrington 1993; Nansel et al. 2001; Olweus 1993).

Bullying and Students' Grade Levels

Overall, bullying trends suggest that as students progress through grade levels 1 through 6, the
number of students who are bullied decreases (Olweus 1993). Victimization from bullying is
twice as likely to occur in grades 2 through 6 than it is in grades 7 through 9; bullies most
often target younger students (Olweus 1993). Research on bullying has focused primarily on
middle school students (Kilpatrick and Malecki 2003; Nansel et al. 2001 ; Seals and Young 2003).
In grade levels 6 through 8, no differences were found regarding the likelihood of being bullied
(Kilpatrick and Malecki 2003). However, older middle school students are more likely to be
bullies—seventh graders are more likely to be bullies than sixth graders (Kilpatrick and Malecki
2003) and less likely to be bullies than eighth graders (Seals and Young, 2003). When considering
overall experiences throughout child development, bullying increases and peaks during early
adolescence and decreases during the high school years (Espelage and Swearer 2003).
This trend was confirmed by Nansel et al. (2001), who found that bullying occurred more fre-
quently in grades 6 through 8 than in grades 9 and 10. In elementary school, a nonlinear pattern
of victimization is evident. Being bullied occurs most often during second grade, when children
experience a shift in their social development and spend the majority of their time with peers
(Hanish and Guerra 2000). No differences were found among second and fourth grade students'
bullying behaviors (Wolke, Woods, Bloomfield, and Karstadt 2000). Researchers have found
 BULLYING AMONG HIGH SCHOOLERS IN KUWAIT 89

that aggressive first graders were typically victims of bullying, whereas in third grade, nonag-
gressive students were more commonly victimized (Coie and Koeppl 1991). Coie and Koeppl
(1991) concluded that reactive aggression is more socially acceptable among younger students
than among older students, since younger ones are trying to establish their dominance among
their peers. First graders were, therefore, involved in more overall aggressive episodes than were
third grade students. While peer rejection was related to an increase in instrumental aggression
among both grade levels, only third graders demonstrated a relationship between peer rejection
and both bullying and reactive aggression (Coie and Koeppl 1991). Bullies are likely to exhibit
externalizing behaviors, including hyperactivity, aggression, and antisocial behaviors (Kim et al.
2008; Kumpulainen, Räsänen, and Puura 2005; Veenstra et al. 2005).

Victims: Characteristics and Types

Victims of bullying are commonly male, submissive, and feel as though they do not belong to a
group (Demaray and Malecki 2003; Stein, Dukes, and Warren 2007). They are less powerful than
bullies and are fearful of being bullied (Rigby 2003).
Salmivalli, Karhunen, and Lagerspetz ( 1996) suggested that victims can respond to bullying in
three ways: they can fight back, using counter-aggression (aggressive victims); they can exhibit
helplessness; or they can meet bullying with nonchalance. Some researchers have identified a
group that combines the actions of both bullies and victims: "aggressive victims" are both bullies
and victims. They are most likely to use and be subjected to physical aggression rather than verbal
bullying (Unnever 2005). They are bullied more frequently than other victims, they respond to
bullying with counter-aggression, and they report no remorse for their actions (Dulmus 2006;
Salmivalli et al. 1996).
Based on this cluster of problems associated with both bullying and victimization, aggressive
victims are considered the most at-risk subgroup (Ahmed and Braithwaite 1992;Haynie et al.
2001 ; Kim et al. 2008; Nansel et al. 2001 ). They demonstrate both high internalizing and external-
izing behaviors, including anxiety, depression, hyperactivity, loneliness, and aggression (Olweus
1993; Kumpulainen and Räsänen 2000).
Compared to bullies and victims, aggressive victims exhibit lower self-control, the poorest
psychological health, the least engagement in school, the most social isolation, and the highest
levels of proactive and reactive aggression (Juvonen, Graham, and Schuster 2003; Salmivalli and
Nieminen 2002; Stein et al. 2007; Unnever 2005). They are the most likely to have conduct
problems, use drugs, engage in delinquent behaviors, report physical injuries, and are the most
likely to carry a weapon (Juvonen et al. 2003; Nansel et al. 2001).

Objectives of the Study and Hypotheses

The purpose of the study is to compare the level of peer bullying and victimization among male
and female high school students in grades 9 and 10 in Kuwait City. The research began with these
two questions: Are there any significant differences among male and female high school students
in the levels of bullying and victimization? And, are there any significant differences in the levels
of bullying and victimization between grades nine and ten? The hypotheses are:
90 SOCIOLOGICAL FOCUS

Hypothesis 1: Males are more likely to be involved in direct bullying (i.e., physically hurting,
calling others nasty names, and taking others ' belongings away) than are females.
Hypothesis 2: Females are more likely to be involved in indirect bullying behavior (i.e., spreading
rumors, isolating others) than are males.
Hypothesis 3: Males are more likely to be involved in direct victimization behavior (i.e., being
physically hurt, called nasty names, and having belongings taken away) than are
females.
Hypothesis 4: Females are more likely to be victims of indirect bullying (i.e., having rumors spread,
being isolated, or being shut out from talk) than are males.
Hypothesis 5: Ninth graders are more likely to be bullies and to be victimized than are tenth
graders.

METHODOLOGY

Sample

The population of this study was comprised of students in 136 high schools in Kuwait City (a total
of 67,951 students): 29,538 males and 38,413 females (Annual Statistical Abstract 2010).
The sample for the study was randomly selected from high sehool students, resulting in a total
number of 840 students from grades 9 and 10. The sample was divided into two groups: males
(n = 470) selected from seven high schools and females (n — 370) from seven high sehools. Care
was taken to represent a sample of the high school students in Kuwait City.
The random seleetion insures that every element in the population has an equal chance of being
included in the sample. This type of sampling was used beeause the sehools are classified into
six governorates: Alassima, AlFarwaniya, Aljahraa, Mubarak AlKabeer, AlAhmadi, and Hawalli
governorates. Eaeh governorate represents one area of Kuwait City.
To select one school in each governorate, the researcher wrote the names of schools on pieces
of papers, and then a sehool was randomly selected from these governorates, giving each school
an equal chance to be included in the sample. The mean age of respondents was 14.2 years (s.d. =
1.75). Parficipants were treated in aeeordanee with the "Ethical Principles of Psychologists and
Code of Conduct" (American Psychological Association 1992).

Procedure

Data were collected between September 18, 2011, and June 28, 2012, on site in each of these
schools through the administration of a survey that had been translated from English to Arabic,
the native language of Kuwaiti, and then from Arabic to English (back translation). To be sure
that the items' translation was accurate, the researcher asked for the assistance of a professor in
the English department at Kuwait University.
Parents of students in participating classrooms were informed about the study and their eon-
sent was requested. One week prior to the collection of data, students were given an envelope
with a signed letter informing parents about the study and asking them to sign the paper only if
they would not allow their child to take part in the study. The letter assured parents about the
anonymity of the answers and the confidentiality of the study. Only those students whose parents
 BULLYING AMONG HIGH SCHOOLERS IN KUWAIT 91

read about the study could take part in the study. Consent levels were greater than 90 percent
for all classrooms. Interested teachers volunteered their classrooms for inclusion in the study.
Each of the participating classrooms was a required class (i.e., not an elective), in order to reduce
the likelihood of self-selection bias. Each participant completed an anonymous survey that gath-
ered descriptive data about the students. The classroom teachers were trained to administer the
surveys, which were completed during one class period.
During the survey, students were asked to sit separately to insure that there was no conferring,
talking, or helping when students were completing the questionnaire. No time limit was imposed.
Students had to write down the date, the class, the name of the school, and to answer by circling or
crossing the box next to the option they chose. After completing the questionnaire, each student
had to seal it in an envelope and place it in a box. Students were assured of the anonymity and
confidentiality of the answers they provided, and they were told that all responses would be used
for research purposes only.

Measures

Descriptive analyses were first conducted for measuring the prevalence of bullying and victim-
ization in high schools by using SPSS version 20. Percentages of all bullies and victims were
cross tabulated. Also, independent sample i-tests were conducted to examine males and females
with total score means on the bully and victim scale analysis.
The "Bully-Victim Determination Scale—Adolescent Form" developed by Piskin and Ayas
(2007) was used. The scale consisted of the "Bullying Scale" and the "Victimization Scale." The
items in the scales are parallel, but the wording differs. In the Victimization Scale students were
asked how often they were victimized by other students, while on the Bullying Scale they were
asked how often they performed bullying actions towards other students. Students were asked
to indicate how often they bullied others or how often they had been victimized in the previous
four months. To measure direct bullying, students were asked how often they called others nasty
names, physically hurt others, or took belongings away. Another form of bullying, indirect bul-
lying, included spreading rumors, isolating others ("no one would stay with me during recess
time"), and "no one would talk." Respondents could choose one of the five following options
for each of the six types of bullying listed: "it never happened," "it happened once or twice,"
"it happened sometimes," "it happened once a week," or "it happened several times a week."
Overall, direct bullying was measured in this study by adding the scores obtained from each of
the six items measuring different types of direct or indirect bullying {a — .70). The reliability for
this study is consistent with other research studies, such as that of Piskin and Ayas (2007) who
found the Cronbach's alpha reliability coefficients for bullying scales are: total bullying scale,
0.92; physical bullying, 0.83; verbal bullying, 0.74; isolation, 0.75; rumor spreading, 0.66.
To measure direct victimization, students were asked how often they were called nasty names,
were physically hurt, and how often they had their belongings taken away. Indirect victimization
included being the object of rumors, agreeing that "no one would stay with me during recess time"
(isolation), and that "no one would talk." Again, students could choose one of the five following
options for each of the types of victimization listed: "it never happened," "it happened once or
twice," "it happened sometimes," "it happened once a week," or "it happened several times a
week." Students checking the different types of bullying or victimization ("at least sometimes,"
92 SOCIOLOGICAL FOCUS

including "once a week" and "several times a week") were scored as involved in that type of
behavior; those checking "it happened once or twice" or "it never happened" were classified
as "not involved in that type of behavior." Victimization was measured by adding together the
scores of the six items measuring different types of direct or indirect victimization (a — .73).
Comparable Cronbach's alpha reliability coefficients for the victimization scales have previously
been found by Piskin and Ayas (2007): total victimization scale, 0.93; physical victimization,
0.82; verbal victimization, 0.75; isolation, 0.77; rumor spreading, 0.75; harming property, .80.

STATISTICAL RESULTS

The results on the bullying and victimization for high school students are shown in Table 1.
Among the most interesting results are those pertaining to direct bullying scales. With the
exception of one item, males were more likely to engage in both direct and indirect bullying.
First, males have higher mean scores on calling others nasty names (2.83 versus 1.49 for
females), on physical hurts (3.07 versus 1.49 for females), and on taking belongings away
(3.19 versus 2.78 for females). Males were also more likely to be victims of direct bullying than
were females, having higher scores for all three items. But females have higher mean scores on
indirect victimization, such as in having rumors spread about them (3.48 versus 2.80 for males),
being isolated—"no one would stay with me" (3.54 versus 2.57 for males), and "no one would
talk" with me (3.39 versus 2.78 for males).

Bullying and Victimization between Males and Females

Table 2 shows the prevalence of bullying and victimization overall and with regard to gender dif-
ferences. Males reported significantly higher percentages than females for some types of bullying.

TABLE 1
Gender Comparisons of Bullying and Victimization

Type of behavior Males Females Significance

Direct: calling nasty names 2,83 1,49 .001"

Direct: inflicting physical hurts 3,07 1.49 .001*
Direct: taking belongings away 3,19 2.78 .001'
Indirect: spreading rumors 2,71 2.47 ,001*
Indirect: isolate others 2.67 3.57 .001*
Indirect: no talking 3,24 2.15 .0067"
Direct: victim of nasty names 3,70 2.26 .001*
Direct: victim of physical hurts 3,91 2.79 .001'
Direct: victim of having belongings taken away 3,98 2.51 ,001*
Indirect: victim of rumors 2,80 3.48 ,001*
Indirect: victim of isolation 2,57 3.53 .001*
Indirect: victim of no talking 2,78 3.39 .001*
N 470 370

'p < ,OOI.*'/7 < ,05,

 BULLYING AMONG HIGH SCHOOLERS IN KUWAIT 93

TABLE 2
Prevalence of Bullying and Victimization and Gender Comparisons between Male and Female

Male Female Asymp. Sig

T\'pe of behavior (N = 470) (N = .UO) Chi-Square (2-sided)

Direct: calling nasty names 71.1% 66.8% 16.81 .001*

Direct: inflicting physical hurts 51.9% 10.0% 163.37 .001*
Direct: taking belongings away 67.7% 56.8% 10.541 .001*
Indirect: spreading rumors 58.3% 38.1% 33.76 .001*
Indirect: isolating others 46.6% 81.4% 106.04 .001*
Indirect: no talking 67.0% 68.4% 4.174 .007**
Direct: victim of nasty names 78.5% 58.6% 38.71 .001*
Direct: victim of physical hurts 85.7% 50.8% 123.13 .001*
Direct: victim of having belongings taken away 87.9% 42.7% 194.03 .001*
Indirect: victim of rumors 53.8% 79.9% 61.23 .001*
Indirect: victim of isolation 46.2% 80.8% 104.84 .001*
Indirect: victim of no talking 55.3% 77.3% 43.95 .001*

*/> < .001, * > < .05.

such as 51.9 percent direct physical hurts (versus 10.0 percent for females), 71.1 percent calling
other students nasty names (versus 66.8 percent), 58.3 percent indirect spreading rumors among
students (versus 38.1 percent for females), and 67.7 percent direct taking belongings away (versus
56.8 percent for females).
In terms of victimization behaviors, females reported high significant indirect victimization:
79.9 percent in victims of having rumors spread about them (versus 53.8 percent for males),
80.8 percent being shunned (versus 46.2 percent for males), and 77.3 percent in "no one would
talk" (versus 55.3 percent for males). Gender differences showed that males reported more
episodes of direct victimization than females. For example, 78.5 percent of the students being
the direct victim of nasty names (versus 58.6 percent for females), 85.7 percent the direct victim
of physical hurt (versus 50.8 percent for females), and 87.9 percent had their belongings taken
away (versus 42.7 percent for females).

Bullying and Victimization between Grades Nine and Ten

Among the most interesting differences in Table 3 are those pertaining to direct bullying and
victimization scales. First, students in grade 9 have higher mean scores than students in grade
10, particularly in direct bullying, such as calling nasty names, inflicting physical hurts, and
taking away belongings (2.61, 2.71, and 3.34, respectively). On the other hand, scores in level of
indirect victimization for tenth graders are higher than those of ninth graders, such as "victim of
spreading rumors,"" no one would stay with me," and "no one would talk" (3.46, 3.44, and 3.50,
respectively).

Independent Sannple T-tests for Two Groups

The two-sample (independent groups) r-test is used to determine whether the unknown of two
populations differ from each other based on independent samples from each population. If the two
94 SOCIOLOGICAL FOCUS

TABLE 3
Bullying and Victimization in Grades 9 and 10

Grude 9 Grade 10 Sif^nificance

Direct: calling nasty names 2.6104 1.8207 .001*

Direct: inflicting physical hurts 2.7162 1.9924 .001*
Direct: taking belongings away 3.3468 2.6288 .001*
Indirect: spreading rumors 2.6869 2.5101 .002*'
Indirect: isolating others 2.9505 3.1919 .001*
Indirect: no talking 2.9459 2.5530 .001*
Direct: victim of nasty names 3.3784 2.7096 .002"
Direct: victim of physical hurts 3.6149 3.1995 .001*
Direct: victim of having belongings taken away 3.6689 2.9470 .000*
Indirect: victim of rumors 2.7748 3.4697 .001*
Indirect: victim of isolation 2.5811 3.4495 .001*
Indirect: victim of no talking 2.6419 3.5025 .001*

Note. Grade 9: iV = 444, Grade W.N = 396.

*p< .001, * > < .05.

TABLE 4
Mean Differences between Male and Female Students' Bullying and Victimization Scales

Male Female Sigmjicance level

Direct bully scale 9.1919 8.4784 .000*

Indirect bully scale 8.6149 9.0703 .001*
Direct victim scale 11.5872 8.2135 .001*
Indirect victim scale 8.1511 10.3973 .000*

Note. Male N = 470, female N = 370.

• p < .00!,**»< .05.

sample means are sufficiently different from each other, then the population means are declared to
be different. Tables 4 and 5 show differences on mean scores between male and female bullying
and victimization scales.
Levene's test for the direct bully scale is (F = 1.423, sig .233) and assumes that the variances
are approximately equal; in this case, we see the results of the independent sample T-test, which
is (i — 6.918, p = .000). Therefore, there is a significant difference between the two groups. Thus,
males have higher scores on the direct bullying scale (9.7979) than females (8.4787). For the indi-
rect bullying scale, the results indicated that there are statistically significant differences between
the mean scores of indirect bullying for males and females {t = -3.154, p — .002). In other
words, females have a statistically significantly higher mean score on the indirect bullying scale
(9.0703) than males do (8.6149).
In addition, Levene's test for the direct victim scale {F = 44.092, p = .000) assumes that the
variances are approximately not equal; in this case, we see the results of the independent sample
T-test, which is (i = 19.491, p = .000). Therefore, there is a significant difference between the
two groups. Thus, males have higher scores on the direct victim scale (11.5872) than females do
(8.2135). Finally, tLevene's test for the indirect victim scale is {F — .284,/? = .594) assumed that
 BULLYING AMONG HIGH SCHOOLERS IN KUWAIT 95

TABLE 5
Independent Sample Test of Male and Female Students and Bullying and Victimization Scales

Independent Samples Test

Levene 's Test for

Equality of Variances t-testfor Equality of Means

Six.
F Sig. T Df (2-taile<l)
Direct bully scale Equal variances assumed 1.423 .233 6,918 838 .000*
Equal variances not assumed 6.884 776.996 .000*
Indirect bully scale Equal variances assumed 8.150 .004 -3.154 838 .002*
Equal variances not assumed -3.206 829.367 .001*
Direct victim scale Equal variances assumed 44.092 .000 20.017 838 .000*
Equal variances not assumed 19.491 693.532 .000*
Indirect victim scale Equal variances assumed .284 .594 -10.188 838 .000*
Equal variances not assumed -10.197 794.767 .000*

Note. F = Levene's Test. T = independent samples t-tests, Df = degree of freedom.

*/j < .00 !,**/)< .05.

the variances are approximately equal: in this case, we see the results of the independent sample
r-test, which is (f = -10.188, /? = .000). Therefore, there is a significant difference between
the two groups. Thus, females have higher scores of indirect victim scale (10.3973) than males
(8.1511).

DISCUSSION

This study contributes the first quantitative examination of gender differences in bullying and
victimization in Kuwaifi sehools and adds to the body of research in delinquency and crime. The
present study compares the level of peer bullying and victimization among male and female high
sehool students, particularly in grades 9 and 10, in Kuwait City. The sample was drawn from high
sehool students; 840 cases were selected randomly in Kuwait City. The sample was divided into
two groups—males (n = 470), who were selected from six high schools, and females (ti - 370),
who were selected from six high schools. The "Bully-Victim Determination Scale Adole.scent
Form" was used. Descriptive analysis and independent sample i-tests were conducted to examine
the students with total score means of bullying and victimization scale analysis. The study was
limited by being conducted only in the public high schools—no data were gathered from students
in private schools. Because of the large sample and random process, the sample of the study was
representative of the large population in Kuwait City.
All the hypotheses of this research were eonsistent with previous studies, and they were
clearly supported with the data analysis using SPSS. To clarify this point, the results revealed
that Kuwaiti male students were significantly more directly bullying than females; this result is
consistent with the findings of numerous researchers who have reported that boys are more likely
than girls to bully other students (Fekkes et al. 2004; Nansel et al. 2001; Nordhagen et al. 2005;
96 SOCIOLOGICAL FOCUS

O'Moore and Hillery 1989). Gender differences for bullying were even more evident: all types of
direct bullying, but also "spreading rumors," were significantly more often reported by boys than
by girls. Boys were more likely to report direct physical aggression with the intent of causing
physical harm, threats, or verbal aggression. With regard to victimization, as previously reported
by Baldry and Farrington (1999) and Lagerspetz, Björkqvist, and Peltonen (1988), boys reported
higher levels of direct victimization compared to girls, especially in the case of "threatened" and
"physically hurt," but also being "called nasty names." Girls more often than boys reported that
no one would talk to them, which is in line with findings from Owens, Shute, and Slee (2000),
who indicated that girls are more likely to inflict indirect forms of aggression with the intent of
psychologically harming, even if this gender difference is not extremely high.
In addition, the Kuwaiti male students had significantly higher scores means in direct victim-
ization than females. This result is consistent with other research on victims of bullying studies,
which commonly state that they feel as though they do not belong to a group (Demaray and
Malecki 2003; Stein et al. 2007).
Moreover, Kuwaiti females scored more indirect bullying and indirect victimization than
males did. Some researchers have revealed that the number of boys and girls being bullying and
victimized are about the same (e.g., Beldean-Galea, Jurcau and Tigan 2010; Fekkes et al. 2004;
Peskin, Tortolero and Markham 2006). Finally, ninth grade students have higher mean scores in
direct bullying than tenth grade students, but tenth grade students have higher levels in indirect
victimization than ninth grade students. This finding is consistent with previous research studies
(Akgün 2005; Giiltekin and Sayil 2005; Kepenekçi and Çinkir 2006; Piskin and Ayas 2005a).
Research on bullying and grades is somewhat contradictory. Hanish and Guerra (2000) found
that due to increased peer interaction, being bullied is most prevalent in second grade, when stu-
dents are learning how to engage in social relationships. Future research should further investigate
the relationship between the type of bullying (physical, verbal, and indirect) and other variables,
such as positive parenting, parental involvement, family disagreement, age, gender, and ethnic-
ity. Future studies should investigate additional familial variables, including the use of corporal
punishment, sibling relationships, and the amount of quality time families spend together.
School is a complex human organization that brings together several interacting groups—
students, teachers, other staff (e.g., secretaries, guards), the principal, parents, and other relevant
constituents in the community. Each of these groups may have a unique perspective on what is
happening in the school, including how violent the school is. The similarities and differences
between these perspectives may add important insights on schools and the national educational
systems. Major differences in perceptions may be quite informative about differences in aware-
ness of the issues and degree of consensus in addressing them. When students report that they
are being victimized and experience fear in school, but the educational establishment claims that
there is no violence in the schools, one can expect that little would be done to change the situa-
tion. For instance, Benbenishty and Astor (2007) found that the discrepancies between the views
of students, teachers, and principals were the largest in schools that had higher student reports of
victimization.
Monitoring will provide important information to each of the participating countries, as well as
creating a shared data base to facilitate comparisons. Furthermore, we would like to suggest that
systematic monitoring of school violence become an important element within the educational
systems of each of the partner countries. Benbenishty and Astor developed a comprehensive
methodological and technological framework that can underlie monitoring school violence (Astor
 BULLYING AMONG HIGH SCHOOLERS IN KUWAIT 97

et al. 2006; Benbenishty and Astor, 2007; Benbenishty, Astor and Zeira, 2003). Such monitoring
can be conducted on multiple levels—school, district, nation, internationally—and the insights
from all levels can be integrated to support prevention efforts. Thus, an international study such as
this one can serve as a major impetus to develop monitoring systems in many countries, making
direct contributions to the efforts of schools and countries to prevent school violence on the basis
of local data.
Researchers who deal with bullying and peer victimization should investigate additional vari-
ables, including the effects of corporal punishment and sibling relationships. The multiple and
different forms of bullying identified should be investigated as they relate to victimization and
perpetration among individual students and between student groups (e.g., between racial groups
in school). Further, future studies should also investigate victimization in the context of student-
staff relationships. Finally, there is a clear need to initiate an ongoing world-wide study of school
violence and bullying to directly compare data from participating countries. Future collaborative
study will bring together researchers and policy makers from across the globe and employ meth-
ods and instruments that will help further theory and practical global efforts to reduce school
violence and bullying.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

Anier Alsaleh is Associate Professor of Sociology at Kuwait University. He specializes in social

research methods and family sociology. His most recent work has appeared in the Journal of
Social Service Research and African Asian Studies.

REFERENCES

Ahmed. Eliza and Valerie Braithwaite, 1992, "Bullying and Victimization: Cause for Concem for Both Families and
Schools," Social Psychology of Educati¡m 7:35-54,
Akgün, S, 2005, "Assessment of Peer Bullying with Relation to Parent Attitude and Parent-Adolescent Relationships,"
Master's thesis. Hacettepe University, Istanbul, Turkey,
Alikasifoglu, M,. E, Erginoz, O, Ercan, Ö, Uysal. and D, Albayrak-Kaymak, 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,
American Psychological Association, 1992, "Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of Conduct," American
Psychologist 47:1597-1611,
"Annual Statistical Abstract," 2010, Kuwait City, State of Kuwait: Central Statistical Bureau,
Astor, R, A,, R, Benbenishty. R, Marachi, and H, Meyer, 2006. "The Social Context of Schools: Monitoring and Mapping
Student Victimization in Schools," Pp, 255-288 in Handbook of School Violence and School Safety: From Research
to Practice, edited by S,R, Jimerson & M, J. Furlong, Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Eribaum Publishers,
Baldry, Anna C, and David P, Farrington, 1999. "Bullies and Delinquents: Personal Characteristics and Parental Styles,"
Journal of Community and Applied Social Psychology 10:17-31,
Beldean-Galea, I. E,, N, Jurcau, and S, I, Tigan, 2010, "Frequency of Bullying Behaviours in Secondary Schools in
Cluj-napoca." Applied Medical Informatics 27:66-66,
Benbenishty. R, and R, A, Astor, 2007, "Monitoring Indicators of Children's Victimization in School: Linking National-,
Regional-, and Site-level Indicators," Social Indicators Research 84(3):333-348,
Benbenishty, R. and R, A, Astor, 2008. "School Violence in an International Context: A Call for Global Collaboration in
Research and Prevention," International Journal of Violence and Schools 7:59-80,
98 SOCIOLOGICAL FOCUS

Benbenishty, R.. R. A. Astor, and A. Zeira. 2003. "Monitoring School Violence on the Site Level: Linking National-,
District-, and School-level Data over Time." Journal of School Violence 2(2):29-50.
Berthold, Karen A. and John H. Hoover. 2000. "Correlates of Bullying and Victimization among Intermediate Students
in the Midwestern USA." School Psychology International 2\.65-1%.
Besag, Valerie E. 1989. Bullies and Victims in Schools. London: Open University Press.
Bomtrager, C , J. L. Davis, A. Bernstein, and H. Gorman. 2009. "A Cross-national Perspective on Bullying." Child Youth
Care Forum ^&.\2\-\M.
Card, Noel A., Brian D. Stucky, Gita M. Sawalani. and Todd D. Little. 2008. "Direct and Indirect Aggression during
Childhood and Adolescence: A Meta-analytic Review of Gender Differences. Inter-correlations, and Relations to
Maladjustment." Child Development 79:1185-1229.
Coie, J. D. and K. A. Dodge. 1998. "Aggression and Anti-social Behavior." Pp.779-862 in Handbook of Child
Psychology: Vol. .1 Social. Emotional and Personality Development. 5th ed., edited by W. Damon and N. Eisenberg.
New York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc.
Coie, J. D. and G. K. Koeppl. 1991. "Adapting Intervention to the Problems of Aggressive and Disruptive Children."
Pp. 309-337 in Peer Rejection in Childhood, edited by S. R. Asher and J. D. Coie. New York: Cambridge University
Press.
Crick, N. R. andM. A. Bigbee. 1998. "Relational and Overt Forms of Peer Victimization: A Multi Informant Approach."
Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology 66:337- 347.
Crick, N. R. and J. K. Grotpeter. 1995. "Relational Aggression, Gender, and Social Psychological Adjustment." Child
Development 66:710-22.
Demaray. M. K. and C. K. Malecki. 2003. "Perceptions of the Frequency and Importance of Social Support by
Students Classified as Victims, Bullies, and Bully/Victims in an Urban Middle School." School Psychology Review
32:471-489.
Döiek, N. 2002. "An Investigation of Bullying Behaviors among Elementary and High School Students and the Effect of
Programs to Prevent Bullying Attitudes." Doctoral dissertation, Marmara University, Istanbul, Turkey.
Due, P., J. Merlo, Y. Harel-Fisch, M. T. Damsgaard, B. E. Holstein, J. Hetland, and J. Lynch. 2009. "Socioeconomic
Inequality in Exposure to Bullying during Adolescence: A Comparative, Cross-sectional, Multilevel Study in
35 Countries." American Journal of Public Health 99:907-914.
Dulmus. C. N. 2006. Children Witnessing Family Violence. Juristat, Canada: Statistics.
Elliott, Michèle. 1997. 101 Ways to Deal with Bullying. London: Hodder Children's Book.
Elliott, Michèle. 2002. "Bullies and Victims." Pp. 1-11 in Bullying: A Practical Guide to Coping for Schools, edited by
Michèle Elliott. Upper Saddle River. NJ: Pearson Education Limited.
Espelage, Dorothy L., Kris Bosworth, and Thomas R. Simon. 2000. "Examining the Social Context of Bullying Behaviors
in Early Adolescence." Journal of Counseling and Development 78:326-333.
Espelage, Dorothy L. and Susan M. Swearer. 2003. "Research on School Bullying and Victimization: What Have We
Learned and Where Do We Go from Here?" School P.mhology Review 32:355-383.
Farrington, David P. 1993. "Understanding and Preventing Bullying." Crime and Justice 17:381 458.
Fekkes, M., F. Pijpers, and S. P. Verloove-Vanhorick. 2004. "Bullying Behavior and Associations with Psychosomatic
Complaints and Depression in Victims." The Journal of Pediatrics 144:17-22.
Gültekin, Z. and M. Sayil. 2005. [A Study of the Reliability and Validity of the Peer Victimization Scale]. Tiirk Psikotoji
KJZ 8:47-61.
Hanish, L. D. and N. G. Guerra. 2000. "The Roles of Ethnicity and School Context in Predicting Children's Victimization
by Peers."/tmericü/i Journal of Comnnniity Psychology 28:201-223.
Hawker, David S. J. and Michael J. Boulton. 2000. "Twenty Years' Research on Peer Victimization and Psychosocial
Maladjustment: A Meta-analytic Review of Cross-sectional Studies." Journal of Child P.'iychology and Psychiatry
41:441^55.
Haynie, D. L., T. Nansel, P. Eitel, A. D. Crump, K. Saylor, K. Yu, and B. Simons-Morton. 2001. "Bullies, Victims, and
Bully/Victims: A Distinct Group of At-risk Youth." Journal of Early Adolescence 21:29^9.
Juvonen, J., S. Graham, and M. A. Schuster. 2003. "Bullying among Young Adolescents: The Strong. Weak, and the
Troubled." Pediatrics 772: 1231-1237.
Kepenekçi, Y. and H. Çinkir. 2006. "Bullying among Turkish High School Students." Child Abuse and Neglect
30:193-204.
Kilpatrick, Michelle and Christine Kerres Malecki. 2003. "Beyond Parental Control and Authoritarian Parenting Style:
Understanding Chinese Parenting through the Cultural Notion of Training." Child Development ()5:\ 111 — 1119.
 BULLYING AMONG HIGH SCHOOLERS IN KUWAIT 99

Kim, Y S., B. L. Leventhal. Y Koh. A. Hubbard. and W. T. Boyce. 2008. "School Bullying and Youth Violence." Archive.^
of General Psychiatry 63:1035-1041.
Kristensen Sandie M. and Peter K. Smith. 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." Scandiiuniuii
Jininial of Psycholoi>y 44:479-488.
Kumpulainen, Kirsti and Eila Räsänen. 2000. "Children Involved in Bullying at Elementary School Age: Their Psychiatric
Symptoms and Deviance in Adolescence: An Epidemiological Sample." Child Abuse and Nenlect 24:1567-1577.
Kumpulainen. Kirsti, Eila Räsänen. and Kaija Puura. 2005. "Psychiatric Disorders and the Use of Mental Health Services
among Children Involved in Bullying." Anj^ressive Behavior 27:102-110.
Lagerspetz, Kirsti M. J.. Kaj Björkqvist, and Tarja Peltonen. 1988. "Is Indirect Aggression More Typical of females?
Gender Differences in Aggressiveness in 11- to 12-Year-Old Children."/\^'^'r«.Hrf Behavior 14:403-414.
Leary. Mark R., Robin M. Kowalski, Laura Smith, and Stephen Phillips. 2003. "Teasing, Rejection, and Violence: Case
Studies of School Shootings."/l^',i,'rí'.wii'f Behavior 29: 202-214.
Maheinmedkani. P. 2002. Peer Bullying among Iranian Schools. Retrieved October 30. 2012 (http://www.e-coniniunity
Journal.com).
Malkoç, T. and Ceylan, F. 2010. "Bullying among 9th and 10th Grade Children and the Importance of Music Education in
Coping with Bullying." Presented at the International Conference on New Trends in Education and Their Implications.
November 11-13, Antalya, Turkey.
Ministry of Planning. 2QQ\. Annual Statistical Abstract. 37th ed. Kuwait: Statistics and Information Sector.
Nansel, T R.. M. D. Overpeck. D. L. Haynie. W. J. Ruan. and PC. Scheidt. 2003. "Relationships between Bullying and
Violence among US ^oxAh." Archives of Pediatrics And Adolescent Medicine 157:348-353.
Nansel, T R., M. Overpeck. R. S. Pilla, W.J. Ruan, B. Simons Morton, and P Scheidt. 2001. "Bullying Behaviors among
US Youth: Prevalence and Association with Psychosocial Adjustment." Journal of the American Medical Association
285:2094-2100.
Nordhagen, R., A. Nielsen, H. Stigum, and L. Köhler. 2005. "Parental Reported Bullying among Nordic Children: A
Population-based Study." Child Care Health and Development 31:693-701.
Olweus, D. 1991. "Bully/Victim Problems among Schoolchildren: Basic Facts and Effects of a School-based Intervention
Program." Pp. 411^8 in The Development and Treatment of Childhood Agfiression. edited by D. J. Peplerand K. H.
Rubin. Hillsdale. NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Olweus. D. 1993. Bullyinn al School: What We Know and What We Can Do. Oxford. UK: Blackwell.
Olweus, D. 2003. "Peer Harasstnent: A Critical Analysis and Some Important Issues." Pp. 3-20 in Peer Harassment in
Sch<iol: The Plight of the Vulnerable and Victimized, edited by J. Juvonen and S. Graham. New York: Guilford Press.
O'Moore, A. M. and B. Hillery. 1989. "Bullying in Dublin Schools."/W.ç/i Jouraa/()/7'.V>'I7Í<)/Í);I,'>' 10:426-441.
Owens, Laurence, Rosalyn Shute. and Phillip Slee. 2000. "'Guess What I Just Heard!' Indirect Aggression among
Teenage Girls in Australia." Aggressive Behavior 26:67-83.
Pekel, N. 2004. An Investigation of Sociometric Status. Loneliness and Academic Achievement among Peer Bullying
Groups. Unpublished master's thesis. Hacettepe University. Ankara. Turkey.
Peskin, M. F., S. R. Tortolero. and C. M. Markham. 2006. "Bullying and Victimization among Black and Hispanic
Adolescents." Adolescence 41:467-484.
Piskin. M. and T. Ayas. 2005a. "Investigation of Peer Bullying among Different Type of High Schools". Presented at the
8th National Counseling and Guidance Congress. September 21. Marmara University. Istanbul. Turkey.
Piskin, M. and T. Ayas. 2005b. "Investigation of Shyness, Introvertedness and Self esteem among Bully and Victim
Students." Presented at the 8th National Counseling and Guidance Congress. September 21, Marmara University,
Istanbul. Turkey.
Piskin. M. and T. Ayas. 2007. "Akran Zorbal, Belirleme Olçe,i Ergen Formunun geli, tirilmesi (Development of Peer
Bullying Scale -Adolescent Form)." Presented at the 9th National Counseling and Guidance Congress. October 17.
Dokuz Eylul University. Izmir. Turkey,
Piskin. M. and T Ayas. 2011. "Akran Zorbal. Olçei: Çocuk Formu (Peer Bullying Scale: Child Form)." Akademik Buk
Dergi.ú 2y.\-\2.
Price. D. A. 2004. "No Need to Fear: Ending Bullying in U.S. Schools." Presented at the International Policy and Research
Conference on School Bullying and Violence, September 6, Stavanger, Norway.
Rigby, Ken. 1993. "School Children's Perceptions of Their Families and Parents as a Function of Peer Relations." Journal
of Genetic Psychology 154:501-514.
100 SOCIOLOGICAL FOCUS

Rigby. Ken. 2001. "What Is Bullying? Defining Bullying: A New Look at an Old Concept." Retrieved October 2. 2008
(http://www.education.unisa.edu.au/bullying/define.html).
Rigby. Ken. 2003. "Consequences of Bullying in Schools." Canadian Journal of Psychiatry 48:583-590.
Rigby. Ken. 2007. Bullying in School: And What to Do About It. Camberwell. Australia: ACER Press.
Rivers. I. and P. K. Smith. 1994. "Types of Bullying Behavior and Their Correlates." A!;f;ressi\e Behavior 20:.359-368.
Sahin. M. and S. V. Sari. 2010. "Ergenlerde görülen zorbalik egiliminin bilissel çarpitmalar ve fonksiyonel olmayan
tutumlarla iliskisi (A Comparison of Peer Bullying among High School Students in Iran and Turkey)." Akademik
Bakis Derfiisi 20:\-\4.
Salmivalli. Christina. Jarkka Karhunen. and Kirsti M. J. Lagerspetz. 1996. "How Do the Victims Respond to Bullying?"
Afii^ressive Behavior 22:99-109.
Salmivalli. Christina, and E. Nieminen. 2002. Proactive and Reactive Aggression among School Bullies. Victims, and
Bully/Victims. Agf^ressive Behavior 28:30-44.
Seals. D. and J. Young. 2003. "Bullying and Victimization: Prevalence and Relationship to Gender. Ethnicity. Self-esteem,
and Depression." Adolesi em e 38:735-747.
Smith. Peter. 2004. "Bullying: Recent Developments." Child and Adolescent Mental Health 9:98—103.
Smith, Peter K. and Paul F. Brain. 2000. "Bullying in Schools: Lessons from Two Decades of Research." Afmressive
Behavior 26:\-9.
Smith. P. K. and S. Sharp. 2003. School Btillyinn: Insight and Perspectives. London: Routledge.
Stein. J. A.. R. L. Dukes, and J. I. Warren. 2007. "Adolescent Male Bullies. Victims, and Bully/Victims: A Comparison
of Psychosocial and Behavioral Characteristics." Journal of Pédiatrie Psychology 32:273-282.
Takis. Ö. 2007. "Orta Ögretim Kurumlar lCNçin Gelistirilen Zorbaca Davransalarla Bas Edebilme (Investigating the
Effectiveness of Bullying Intervention Program Developed for High School Students)." Master's thesis. The Social
Care Institute of Excellence. Ankara University. Ankara. Turkey.
Unnever, J. D. 2005. "Bullies. Aggressive Victims, and Victims: Are They Distinct Groups?" A¡>!>ressive Behavior
31:153-171.
Veenstra. R.. S. Lindenberg. A. Oldehinkel. A. F DeWinter. F. C. Verhulst. and J. Ormel. 2005. "Bullying
and Victimization in Elementary School: A Compari.son of Bullies.Victims. Bully/Victims, and Uninvolved
Préadolescents." Developntental Psycholo.i;y 41: 672-682.
Wolke. D.. S. Woods. L. Bloomfield. and L. Karstadt. 2000. "The Association between Direct and Relational Bullying
and Behavior Problems among Primary School Children." The Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry and Allied
Disciplines A\:99,9-\m2.
Copyright of Sociological Focus is the property of Routledge and its content may not be
copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's
express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for
individual use.