Samenvatting
2.7C Challenges in Education & Development summary
- Instelling
- Erasmus Universiteit Rotterdam (EUR)
I got an 8.2 in the exam
[Meer zien]Voorbeeld 4 van de 75 pagina's
Voorbeeld 4 van de 75 pagina's
In winkelwagengesponsord bericht van onze partner
Voorbeeld van de inhoud
PROBLEM 1: the Burden of Being BulliedBullying Behavior at school— by Juvonen and Graham
➔ Goal: monograph; studying the behavior of bullies and the plight of victims
➔ Bullying
◆ purposeful intimidation or humiliation
◆ power imbalance→ differentiates from regular conflict
◆ not clear if repetition is required→ single traumatic event might raise
expectations of continued abuse
◆ in both children and adults
◆ 20-25% adolescents→ directly involved in bullying
● 4-9% of adolescents→ bullies
● 9-25%→ victims
◆ only 5-10% of adolescents are chronic bullies
◆ many childhood bullies grow up→ but physical aggression might be replaced by
other forms of bullying
◆ stronger stability within one year
◆ direct bullying→ physical aggression, name calling, belittling, intimidation,
threats
◆ indirect (relational) bullying→ exclusion, spreading gossip, trying to
underhandedly hurt someone’s status
● no age differences found in the type engaged→ only physical bullying
decreases with age
● previously believed girls preferred indirect bullying→ no gender
difference found
◆ bullies do not lack emotional regulation or social skills→ instead they try to
establish social dominance
◆ inflated self-image
◆ positive reinforcement when bystanders don’t intervene
◆ information processing biases of bullies
● attributional bias→ perceive peers’ ambiguous behaviors as reflecting
hostile intentions
● maintain positive self-beliefs by blaming others instead of accepting
responsibility
➔ Characteristics of victims
, ◆ experience depression, academic problems, psychosomatic problems
(headaches, abdominal pain etc.) and so on→ directionality not clear, might be
the cause or outcome of bullying
◆ submissive victim→ insecure, anxious, sensitive, low self-confidence; increases
the risk of being bullied
◆ provocative victim→ aggressive; but it’s ineffective as they don’t have the bullies’
social status
◆ risk factors→ being over or underweight, early or late puberty, LGBTQ, physical
or mental disabilities, lack of friends…
◆ relationship between risk factors and consequences of bullying is cyclical
◆ attributional style→ more likely to use internal & uncontrollable attributions→
increase in internalizing problems & self-blame→ increased victimization
◆ school→ more absence and lower grades
◆ health→ psychosomatic problems as a result of altered cortisol levels & changes
in HPA axis
◆ brain→ increased dACC activation when feeling socially excluded (physical pain
region)
➔ school factors
◆ need to be studied more
◆ greater racial/ethnic diversity→ buffering effect; less bullying
◆ deviation from classroom norms→ increased bullying
◆ group assignments (academic teaming)→ stronger victim experience
◆ school climate→ most consistent correlate
➔ Cyberbullying
◆ can be direct (e.g. threatening messages) or indirect (e.g. distributing pictures of
the victim)
◆ overlaps with traditional bullying
◆ differences→ anonymity, fast and wide spread of information, fewer social cues
➔ school-wide interventions
◆ sees bullying as a systemic social problem
◆ raising awareness, increased monitoring, consistent response to bullying
behavior
◆ usually small impact
◆ Olweus Bullying Prevention Program (OBPP)
● Norway
, ● Increased awareness of the nature of the problem, heightened
monitoring, and systematic and consistent responses to incidents of
bullying
● Students asked to create own rules for bullying
● Given strategies for dealing with bullying
● Outcomes:
○ decreases in self-reports & peer and teacher reports of bullying
and victimization
○ increases in students’ perceptions of a positive school climate
○ Meta-analysis shows the effects to be modest at best
● Discussion:
○ no random assignment or control groups etc.
○ Rely heavily on self-reports
○ Increased consciousness about bullying as an aim of the program
might mask treatment effects
○ Norwegian schools→ norm is a small classroom, well-trained
teacher, homogenous student population
➔ targeted interventions
◆ only addresses the students who are involved in bullying
◆ addresses dysfunctional thoughts (e.g. hostile attribution bias) and behaviors in
bullies
◆ positive effects found in short-term; long-term research needed
◆ interventions to change conditions in victims don’t exist
➔ Future research
◆ longitudinal effects on victims
◆ stigmatized social identities & victimization
◆ risk & protective factors in schools
The Support Group Approach in Dutch KiVa Anti-harassment programme– by van der Ploeg et
al.
➔ Goal: intervention study; assessing the effectiveness of support group approach; in
terms of reducing victimization, increasing defense (=more people supporting the
victim) and improving the victim’s school welfare
➔ Programme
, ◆ bullying is seen as a group phenomenon with different roles, instead of an
isolated incident between bully and victim
◆ addresses persistent bullying situations
◆ no punishments
◆ support groups of 6-8 children→ the bully, accomplices, defenders of the victim,
prosocial classmates, NOT the victim
◆ aims to create concern for the victim’s wellbeing and encourage bully to change
behavior
➔ Method
◆ 66 Dutch elementary schools
◆ n=38 victims with a support group were matcher d to victims without a support
group (n=571)
◆ victims with a support group + KiVa training
◆ victims with only KiVa training
◆ control group with no intervention
➔ Results
◆ reduced victimization in short-term, but not in long-term
◆ victim’s wellbeing also not improved in long-term
◆ victims with a support group had more defenders at the end of the school year
◆ effectiveness of the intervention decreases over time
➔ Limitation
◆ small sample size
◆ interview & questionnaire→ social desirability bias
◆ works better for some victims→ should be investigated
The Effectiveness of Anti-bullying school programmes– by Jimenez-Barbero et al.
➔ Goal: meta analysis of the effectiveness of anti-bullying school programme
➔ Method:
◆ very strict inclusion criteria, limiting the number of studies included but high
methodological quality
◆ 2000-2015
◆ 14 studies
◆ interventions that targeted students directly
Voordelen van het kopen van samenvattingen bij Stuvia op een rij:
Verzekerd van kwaliteit door reviews
Stuvia-klanten hebben meer dan 700.000 samenvattingen beoordeeld. Zo weet je zeker dat je de beste documenten koopt!
Snel en makkelijk kopen
Je betaalt supersnel en eenmalig met iDeal, creditcard of Stuvia-tegoed voor de samenvatting. Zonder lidmaatschap.
Focus op de essentie
Samenvattingen worden geschreven voor en door anderen. Daarom zijn de samenvattingen altijd betrouwbaar en actueel. Zo kom je snel tot de kern!
Veelgestelde vragen
Wat krijg ik als ik dit document koop?
Je krijgt een PDF, die direct beschikbaar is na je aankoop. Het gekochte document is altijd, overal en oneindig toegankelijk via je profiel.
Tevredenheidsgarantie: hoe werkt dat?
Onze tevredenheidsgarantie zorgt ervoor dat je altijd een studiedocument vindt dat goed bij je past. Je vult een formulier in en onze klantenservice regelt de rest.
Van wie koop ik deze samenvatting?
Stuvia is een marktplaats, je koop dit document dus niet van ons, maar van verkoper gg12121. Stuvia faciliteert de betaling aan de verkoper.
Zit ik meteen vast aan een abonnement?
Nee, je koopt alleen deze samenvatting voor €15,16. Je zit daarna nergens aan vast.
Is Stuvia te vertrouwen?
4,6 sterren op Google & Trustpilot (+1000 reviews)
Afgelopen 30 dagen zijn er 53022 samenvattingen verkocht
Opgericht in 2010, al 14 jaar dé plek om samenvattingen te kopen