Advertisement

Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology

, Volume 42, Issue 6, pp 981–991 | Cite as

Tackling Acute Cases of School Bullying in the KiVa Anti-Bullying Program: A Comparison of Two Approaches

  • Claire F. Garandeau
  • Elisa Poskiparta
  • Christina Salmivalli
Article

Abstract

Whether cases of bullying should be handled in a direct, condemning mode or in a manner that does not involve blaming the perpetrator is a controversial issue among school professionals. This study compares the effectiveness of a Confronting Approach where the bully is openly told that his behavior must cease immediately to a Non-Confronting Approach where the adult shares his concern about the victim with the bully and invites him to provide suggestions on what could improve the situation. We analysed 339 cases of bullying involving 314 children from grades 1 to 9 (mean age = 11.95). Cases were handled in 65 schools as part of the implementation of the KiVa anti-bullying program. In each school, a team of three teachers addressed cases coming to their attention by organizing discussions with the bullies using either a Confronting or a Non-Confronting Approach; schools were randomly assigned to one of the two conditions. Victims reported that bullying stopped in 78 % of the cases. Logistic regression analyses indicated that neither approach was overall more effective than the other, controlling for grade level, duration of victimization and type of aggression. The Confronting Approach worked better than the Non-Confronting Approach in secondary school (grades 7 to 9), but not in primary school (grades 1 to 6). The Confronting Approach was more successful than the Non-Confronting Approach in cases of short-term victimization, but not in cases of long-term victimization. The type of aggression used did not moderate the effectiveness of either approach.

Keywords

Bullying Intervention Victimization Anti-bullying program 

Notes

Acknowledgments

The research reported in this manuscript was supported by funding from the Finnish National Doctoral Program of Psychology to the first author and grants 134843 and 135577 from the Academy of Finland to the third author.

References

  1. Ahmad, Y., & Smith, P. K. (1990). Behavioral measures: bullying in schools. Newsletter of the Association for Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 12, 26–27.Google Scholar
  2. American Psychological Association Zero Tolerance Task Force. (2008). Are zero tolerance policies effective in the schools? An evidentiary review and recommendations. American Psychologist, 63, 852–862.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bauman, S., Rigby, K., & Hoppa, K. (2008). U.S. teachers’ and school counsellors’ strategies for handling school bullying incidents. Educational Psychology, 28, 837–856.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bradshaw, C. P., Sawyer, A. L., & O’Brennan, L. M. (2007). Bullying and peer victimization at school: perceptual differences between students and school staff. School Psychology Review, 36, 361–382.Google Scholar
  5. Braithwaite, J. (2004). Restorative justice and de-professionalization. The Good Society, 13, 28–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Cillessen, A. H. N., & Mayeux, L. (2007). Expectations and perceptions at school transitions: the role of peer status and aggression. Journal of School Psychology, 45, 567–586.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Dalal, D. K., & Zickar, M. J. (2012). Some common myths about centering predictor variables in moderated multiple regression and polynomial regression. Organizational Research Methods, 15, 339–362.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Davis, M. H., & Franzoi, S. (1991). Stability and change in adolescent self-consciousness and empathy. Journal of Research in Personality, 25, 70–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Fekkes, M., Pijpers, F. I. M., & Verloove-Vanhorick, S. P. (2005). Bullying: who does what, when and where? Involvement of children, teachers and parents in bullying behavior. Health Education Research, 20, 81–91.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Fields, B. A. (2003). Restitution and restorative justice. Youth Studies Australia, 22, 44–51.Google Scholar
  11. Garandeau, C. F., & Cillessen, A. H. N. (2006). From indirect aggression to invisible aggression: a conceptual view on bullying and peer group manipulation. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 11, 612–625.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Gini, G., Albiero, P., Benelli, B., & Altoe, G. (2007). Does empathy predict adolescents’ bullying and defending behavior? Aggressive Behavior, 33, 467–476.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Gini, G., Pozzoli, T., & Hauser, M. (2011). Bullies have enhanced moral competence to judge relative to victims, but lack moral compassion. Personality and Individual Differences, 50, 603–608.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Haataja, A., Sainio, M., Turtonen, M., & Salmivalli, C. (2013). Implementing the KiVa antibullying program: Predicting recognition of victimized students. Manuscript submitted for publication.Google Scholar
  15. Hanish, L. D., & Guerra, N. G. (2002). A longitudinal analysis of patterns of adjustment following peer victimization. Development and Psychopathology, 14, 69–89.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Hawkins, D. L., Pepler, D. J., & Craig, W. M. (2001). Peer interventions in playground bullying. Social Development, 10, 512–527.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Hoffman, M. L. (2000). Empathy and moral development: Implications for caring and justice. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Jackson, N. (2006, February 23). Bullying? It’s got to be punished…Tony Blair’s attack on the ‘No-Blame’ approach to bullying—once supported by Whitehall—has angered its advocates. The Independent. Retrieved from http://www.independent.co.uk/news/education/education-news/bullying-its-got-to-be-punished-467400.html
  19. Kärnä, A., Voeten, M., Little, T., Alanen, E., Poskiparta, E., & Salmivalli, C. (2011a). Going to scale: a nonrandomized nationwide trial of the KiVa antibullying program for comprehensive schools. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 79, 796–805.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Kärnä, A., Voeten, M., Little, T., Poskiparta, E., Kaljonen, A., & Salmivalli, C. (2011b). A large-scale evaluation of the KiVa anti-bullying program: grades 4–6. Child Development, 82, 311–330.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Leff, S. S., Waasdorp, T. E., & Crick, N. R. (2010). A review of existing relational aggression programs: strengths, limitations, and future directions. School Psychology Review, 39, 508–535.PubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Maines, B., & Robinson, G. (1992). The no blame approach. Bristol: Lucky Duck.Google Scholar
  23. O’Connell, P., Pepler, D. J., & Craig, W. M. (1999). Peer involvement in bullying: insights and challenges for intervention. Journal of Adolescence, 22, 437–452.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Olweus, D. (1988). Critical views on the Pikas method. Unpublished paper.Google Scholar
  25. Olweus, D. (1993). Bullying at school: What we know and what we can do. Cambridge: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  26. Pikas, A. (1989). The common concern method for the treatment of mobbing. In E. Roland & E. Munthe (Eds.), Bullying, an international perspective. London: Fulton.Google Scholar
  27. Pikas, A. (2002). New developments of the Shared Concern Method. School Psychology International, 23, 307–336.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Reijntjes, A. H. A., Kamphuis, J. H., Prinzie, P., & Telch, M. J. (2010). Peer victimization and internalizing problems in children: a meta-analysis of longitudinal studies. Child Abuse & Neglect, 34, 244–252.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Rigby, K., & Barnes, A. (2002). To tell or not to tell: the victimized student’s dilemma. Youth Studies, 21, 33–36.Google Scholar
  30. Rigby, K., & Bauman, S. (2010). How school personnel tackle cases of bullying: A critical examination. In S. Jimerson, S. Swearer, & D. L. Espelage (Eds.), The handbook of school bullying: An international perspective (pp. 455–468). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  31. Rigby, K., & Griffiths, C. (2010) Applying the method of shared concern in Australian schools: An evaluative study (Canberra, Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relation). Available online at http://www.deewr.gov.au/Schooling/NationalSafeSchools/Documents/covertBullyReports/MethodOFSharedConcern.pdf
  32. Robinson, G., & Maines, B. (2008). Bullying: A complete guide to the Support Group Method. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  33. 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, 1–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Smith, P. K. (2010). Bullying in primary and secondary schools: Psychological and organizational comparisons. In S. R. Jimerson, S. M. Swearer, & D. L. Espelage (Eds.), The handbook of bullying in schools: An international perspective (pp. 137–150). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  35. Smith, P. K., & Sharp, S. (1994). School bullying: Insights and perspectives. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Smith, P. K., & Shu, S. (2000). What good schools can do about bullying: findings from a survey in English schools after a decade of research and action. Childhood, 7, 193–212.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Smith, P. K., Cowie, H., & Sharp, S. (1994). Working directly with pupils involved in bullying situations. In P. K. Smith & S. Sharp (Eds.), School bullying: Insights and perspectives (pp. 193–212). London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Smith, P. K., Howard, S., & Thompson, F. (2007). Use of the Support Group Method to tackle bullying, and an evaluation from schools and local authorities in England. Pastoral Care in Education, 25, 4–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Sullivan, K., Cleary, M., & Sullivan, G. (2004). Bullying in secondary schools: What it looks like and how to manage it. London: Paul Chapman.Google Scholar
  40. Sutton, J., Smith, P. K., & Swettenham, J. (1999). Social cognition and bullying: social inadequacy or skilled manipulation? British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 17, 435–450.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Ttofi, M. M., & Farrington, D. P. (2011). Effectiveness of school-based programs to reduce bullying: a systematic and meta-analytic review. Journal of Experimental Criminology, 7, 27–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Vartio, A. (2013). Bullying students’ experiences of a confronting versus a non-confronting approach. Unpublished master’s thesis, Åbo Akademi, Turku, Finland.Google Scholar
  43. Whitney, I., & Smith, P. K. (1993). A survey of the nature and extent of bullying in junior/middle and secondary schools. Educational Research, 35, 3–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Claire F. Garandeau
    • 1
  • Elisa Poskiparta
    • 1
    • 3
  • Christina Salmivalli
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of PsychologyUniversity of TurkuTurkuFinland
  2. 2.Edith Cowan UniversityPerthAustralia
  3. 3.Center for Learning Research and Department of PsychologyUniversity of TurkuTurkuFinland

Personalised recommendations