The Healthy Context Paradox:When Reducing Bullying comes at a Cost to Certain Victims

  1. Beatriz Lucas-Molina 1
  2. Alicia Pérez-Albéniz 2
  3. Eduardo Fonseca-Pedrero 2
  1. 1 Universitat de València
    info

    Universitat de València

    Valencia, España

    ROR https://ror.org/043nxc105

  2. 2 Universidad de La Rioja
    info

    Universidad de La Rioja

    Logroño, España

    ROR https://ror.org/0553yr311

Revista:
The Spanish Journal of Psychology

ISSN: 1138-7416

Año de publicación: 2022

Número: 25

Páginas: 1-10

Tipo: Artículo

DOI: 10.1017/SJP.2022.23 DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR lock_openAcceso abierto editor

Otras publicaciones en: The Spanish Journal of Psychology

Repositorio institucional: lockAcceso abierto Editor

Resumen

Bullying remains one of the most serious problems affecting school systems around the world. The negative consequences of bullying in the short and long term have been widely documented, showing that victimized students are at greater risk of suffering psychosocial distress. In this paper, we first summarize the current situation of bullying prevention, adopting a contextual perspective, and briefly highlighting the characteristics of the most effective prevention programs. Secondly, we address a disturbing phenomenon detected in classrooms where bullying has been reduced through interventions and which has been termed “the healthy context paradox”. In these healthier contexts, students who remain in a situation of victimization have been found to present poorer psychological adjustment after the intervention. Understanding the causes of this phenomenon may offer clues for the prevention of bullying. In this regard, we present three hypotheses recently proposed to explain the phenomenon. Finally, we offer some implications for the study and prevention of bullying derived from “the healthy context paradox”.

Información de financiación

Financiadores

  • Ministry of Science and Innovation of the Government of Spain
    • PID2021-127301OB-I00
  • Institute of Riojan Studies
    • BOR nº147, August 2, 2022

Referencias bibliográficas

  • Arseneault, L. (2018). Annual Research Review. The persistent and pervasive impact of being bullied in childhood and adolescence: Implications for policy and practice. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 59(4), 405–421. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcpp.12841
  • Baier, D., Hong, J. S., Kliem, S., & Bergmann, M. C. (2019). Consequences of bullying on adolescents’ mental health in Germany: Comparing face-to-face bullying and cyberbullying. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 28(9), 2347–2357. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10826-018-1181-6
  • Bannink, R., Broeren, S., van de Looij-Jansen, P. M., de Waart, F. G., & Raat, H. (2014). Cyber and traditional bullying victimization as a risk factor for mental health problems and suicidal ideation in adolescents. PloS ONE, 9(4), Article e94026. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0094026
  • Bradshaw, C. P. (2015). Translating research to practice in bullying prevention. American Psychologist, 70(4), 322–332. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0039114
  • Bronfenbrenner, U. (1979). The ecology of human development. Harvard University Press.
  • Eisenberg, M. E., & Aalsma, M. C. (2005). Bullying and peer victimization: Position paper of the Society for Adolescent Medicine. Journal of Adolescent Health, 36(1), 88–91. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jadohealth.2004.09.004
  • Festinger, L. (1954). A theory of social comparison processes. Human Relations, 7(2), 117–140.
  • Gaffney, H., Farrington, D. P., & Ttofi, M. M. (2019). Examining the effectiveness of school-bullying intervention programs globally: A meta-analysis. International Journal of Bullying Prevention, 1(1), 14–31. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42380-019-0007-4
  • Gaffney, H., Ttofi, M. M., & Farrington, D. P. (2019). Evaluating the effectiveness of school-bullying prevention programs: An updated meta-analytical review. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 45, 111–133. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.avb.2018.07.001
  • Gaffney, H., Ttofi, M. M., & Farrington, D. P. (2021). What works in anti-bullying programs? Analysis of effective intervention components. Journal of School Psychology, 85, 37–56. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2020.12.002
  • Garandeau, C. (2021, October). Can positive environments have negative effects? Evidence of a healthy context paradox for victims of school bullying. INVEST Blog. https://blogit.utu.fi/invest/2021/06/10/can-positive-environments-have-negative-effects-evidence-of-a-healthy-context-paradox-for-victims-of-school-bullying/
  • Garandeau, C. F., Lee, I. A., & Salmivalli, C. (2018). Decreases in the proportion of bullying victims in the classroom: Effects on the adjustment of remaining victims. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 42(1), 64–72. https://doi.org/10.1177/0165025416667492
  • Garandeau, C. F., & Salmivalli, C. (2019). Can healthier contexts be harmful? A new perspective on the plight of victims of bullying. Child Development Perspectives, 13(3), 147–152. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdep.12331
  • Gini, G., Holt, M., Pozzoli, T., & Marino, C. (2020). Victimization and somatic problems: The role of class victimization levels. Journal of School Health, 90(1), 39–46. https://doi.org/10.1111/josh.12844
  • Gini, G., Pozzoli, T., Angelini, F., Thornberg, R., & Demaray, M. K. (2022). Longitudinal associations of social-cognitive and moral correlates with defending in bullying. Journal of School Psychology, 91, 146–159. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2022.01.005
  • Haataja, A., Sainio, M., Turtonen, M., & Salmivalli, C. (2016). Implementing the KiVa antibullying program: Recognition of stable victims. Educational Psychology, 36(3), 595–611. https://doi.org/10.1080/01443410.2015.1066758
  • Hase, C. N., Goldberg, S. B., Smith, D., Stuck, A., & Campain, J. (2015). Impacts of traditional bullying and cyberbullying on the mental health of middle school and high school students. Psychology in the Schools, 52(6), 607–617. https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.21841
  • Healy, K. L. (2020). Hypotheses for possible iatrogenic impacts of school bullying prevention programs. Child Development Perspectives, 14(4), 221–228. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdep.12385
  • Hensums, M., de Mooij, B., Kuijper, S. C., BIRC: The Anti-Bullying Interventions Research Consortium, Fekkes, M., & Overbeek, G. (2022). What works for whom in school-based anti-bullying interventions? An individual participant data meta-analysis. Prevention Science. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11121-022-01387-z
  • Herkama, S., Kontio, M., Sainio, M., Turunen, T., Poskiparta, E., & Salmivalli, C. (2022). Facilitators and barriers to the sustainability of a school-based bullying prevention program. Prevention Science, 23, 954–968. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11121-022-01368-2
  • Herkama, S., Saarento, S., & Salmivalli, C. (2017). The KiVa antibullying program: Lessons learned and future directions. In Sturmey, P. (Ed.), The Wiley handbook of violence and aggression. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119057574.whbva124
  • Hodges, E. V. E., & Perry, D. G. (1999). Personal and interpersonal antecedents and consequences of victimization by peers. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 76(4), 677–685. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.76.4.677
  • Holt, M. K., Vivolo-Kantor, A. M., Polanin, J. R., Holland, K. M., DeGue, S., Matjasko, J. L., Wolfe, M., & Reid, G. (2015). Bullying and suicidal ideation and behaviors: A meta-analysis. Pediatrics, 135(2), e496–e509. https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2014-1864
  • Huitsing, G., Lodder, G. M. A., Oldenburg, B., Schacter, H. L., Salmivalli, C., Juvonen, J., & Veenstra, R. (2019). The healthy context paradox: Victims’ adjustment during an anti-bullying intervention. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 28(9), 2499–2509. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10826-018-1194-1
  • Huitsing, G., Snijders, T. A. B., van Duijn, M. A. J., & Veenstra, R. (2014). Victims, bullies, and their defenders: A longitudinal study of the coevolution of positive and negative networks. Development and Psychopathology, 26(3), 645–659. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0954579414000297
  • Hymel, S., & Swearer, S. M. (2015). Four decades of research on school bullying: An introduction. American Psychologist, 70(4), 293–299. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0038928
  • Johander, E., Turunen, T., Garandeau, C. F., & Salmivalli, C. (2021). Different approaches to address bullying in KiVa schools: Adherence to guidelines, strategies implemented, and outcomes obtained. Prevention Science, 22(3), 299–310. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11121-020-01178-4
  • Jungert, T., Piroddi, B., & Thornberg, R. (2016). Early adolescents’ motivations to defend victims in school bullying and their perceptions of student–teacher relationships: A self-determination theory approach. Journal of Adolescence, 53, 75–90. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adolescence.2016.09.001
  • Juvonen, J., Schacter, H. L., Sainio, M., & Salmivalli, C. (2016). Can a school-wide bullying prevention program improve the plight of victims? Evidence for risk × intervention effects. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 84(4), 334–344. https://doi.org/10.1037/ccp0000078
  • Katsaras, G. N., Vouloumanou, E. K., Kourlaba, G., Kyritsi, E., Evagelou, E., & Bakoula, C. (2018). Bullying and suicidality in children and adolescents without predisposing factors: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Adolescent Research Review, 3(2), 193–217. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40894-018-0081-8
  • Kaufman, T. M. L., Huitsing, G., Bloemberg, R., & Veenstra, R. (2021). The systematic application of network diagnostics to monitor and tackle bullying and victimization in schools. International Journal of Bullying Prevention, 3(1), 75–87. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42380-020-00064-5
  • Kaufman, T. M. L., Kretschmer, T., Huitsing, G., & Veenstra, R. (2018). Why does a universal anti-bullying program not help all children? Explaining persistent victimization during an intervention. Prevention Science, 19(6), 822–832. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11121-018-0906-5
  • Kaufman, T. M. L., Laninga‐Wijnen, L., & Lodder, G. M. A. (2022). Are victims of bullying primarily social outcasts? Person‐group dissimilarities in relational, socio‐behavioral, and physical characteristics as predictors of victimization. Child Development, 96, 1458–1474. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.13772
  • Kowalski, R. M., Giumetti, G. W., Schroeder, A. N., & Lattanner, M. R. (2014). Bullying in the digital age: A critical review and meta-analysis of cyberbullying research among youth. Psychological Bulletin, 140(4), 1073–1137. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0035618
  • Kowalski, R. M., & Limber, S. P. (2013). Psychological, physical, and academic correlates of cyberbullying and traditional bullying. Journal of Adolescent Health, 53(1), S13–S20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jadohealth.2012.09.018
  • Koyanagi, A., Oh, H., Carvalho, A. F., Smith, L., Haro, J. M., Vancampfort, D., Stubbs, B., & DeVylder, J. E. (2019). Bullying victimization and suicide attempt among adolescents aged 12–15 years from 48 countries. Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 58(9), 907–918. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaac.2018.10.018
  • Lee, S., Kim, C. J., & Kim, D. H. (2015). A meta-analysis of the effect of school-based anti-bullying programs. Journal of Child Health Care, 19(2), 136–153. https://doi.org/10.1177/1367493513503581
  • Lodder, G. M. A., Scholte, R. H. J., Cillessen, A. H. N., & Giletta, M. (2016). Bully victimization: Selection and influence within adolescent friendship networks and cliques. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 45(1), 132–144. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-015-0343-8
  • Lucas-Molina, B., Giménez-Dasí, M., Fonseca-Pedrero, E., & Pérez-Albéniz, A. (2018). What makes a defender? A multilevel study of individual correlates and classroom norms in explaining defending behaviors. School Psychology Review, 47(1), 34–44. https://doi.org/10.17105/SPR-2017-0011.V47-1
  • Lucas-Molina, B., Pérez-Albéniz, A., Solbes-Canales, I., Ortuño-Sierra, J., & Fonseca-Pedrero, E. (2022). Bullying, cyberbullying and mental health: The role of student connectedness as a school protective factor. Psychosocial Intervention, 31(1), 33–41. https://doi.org/10.5093/pi2022a1
  • Lucas‐Molina, B., Williamson, A. A., Pulido, R., & Pérez‐Albéniz, A. (2015). Effects of teacher–student relationships on peer harassment: A multilevel study. Psychology in the Schools, 52(3), 298–315. https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.21822
  • Martín Babarro, J. (2014). Assessment and detection of peer-bullying through analysis of the group context. Psicothema, 26, 357–363. https://doi.org/10.7334/psicothema2014.85
  • Menesini, E., & Salmivalli, C. (2017). Bullying in schools: The state of knowledge and effective interventions. Psychology, Health & Medicine, 22(Suppl. 1), 240–253. https://doi.org/10.1080/13548506.2017.1279740
  • Moore, S. E., Norman, R. E., Suetani, S., Thomas, H. J., Sly, P. D., & Scott, J. G. (2017). Consequences of bullying victimization in childhood and adolescence: A systematic review and meta-analysis. World Journal of Psychiatry, 7(1), 60–76. https://doi.org/10.5498/wjp.v7.i1.60
  • Morin, H. K., Bradshaw, C. P., & Kush, J. M. (2018). Adjustment outcomes of victims of cyberbullying: The role of personal and contextual factors. Journal of School Psychology, 70, 74–88. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2018.07.002
  • Olweus, D. (1973). Hackkycklingar och översittare: Forskning om skolmobbning [Whipping boys and bullies: Research on bullying at school]. Almqvist & Wiksell.
  • Pan, B., Li, T., Ji, L., Malamut, S., Zhang, W., & Salmivalli, C. (2021). Why does classroom‐level victimization moderate the association between victimization and depressive symptoms? The “healthy context paradox” and two explanations. Child Development, 92(5), 1836–1854. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.13624
  • Peets, K., Pöyhönen, V., Juvonen, J., & Salmivalli, C. (2015). Classroom norms of bullying alter the degree to which children defend in response to their affective empathy and power. Developmental Psychology, 51(7), 913–920. http://doi.org/10.1037/a0039287
  • Polanin, J. R., Espelage, D. L., & Pigott, T. D. (2012). A meta-analysis of school-based bullying prevention programs’ effects on bystander intervention behavior. School Psychology Review, 41(1), 47–65. https://doi.org/10.1080/02796015.2012.12087375
  • Pouwels, J. L., Salmivalli, C., Saarento, S., van den Berg, Y. H. M., Lansu, T. A., & Cillessen, A. H. N. (2018). Predicting adolescents’ bullying participation from developmental trajectories of social status and behavior. Child Development, 89(4), 1157–1176. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.12794
  • Pouwels, J. L., Lansu, T. A. M., & Cillessen, A. H. N. (2016). Participant roles of bullying in adolescence: Status characteristics, social behavior, and assignment criteria. Aggressive Behavior, 42, 239-253. https://doi.org/10.1002/ab.21614
  • Rambaran, J. A., Dijkstra, J. K., & Veenstra, R. (2020). Bullying as a group process in childhood: A longitudinal social network analysis. Child Development, 91(4), 1336–1352. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.13298
  • Reijntjes, A., Vermande, M., Olthof, T., Goossens, F. A., Aleva, L., & van der Meulen, M. (2016). Defending victimized peers: Opposing the bully, supporting the victim, or both? Aggressive Behavior, 42(6), 585–597. https://doi.org/10.1002/ab.21653
  • Saarento, S., Kärnä, A., Hodges, E. V., & Salmivalli, C. (2013). Student–, classroom–, and school–level risk factors for victimization. Journal of School Psychology, 51, 421–434. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2013.02.002
  • Sainio, M., Herkama, S., Kontio, M., & Salmivalli, C. (2019). KiVa anti-bullying programme. In Smith, P. K. (Ed.), Making an impact on school bullying: Interventions and recommendations (pp. 45–66). Routledge. http://doi.org/10.4324/9781351201957-3
  • Sainio, M., Herkama, S., Turunen, T., Rönkkö, M., Kontio, M., Poskiparta, E., & Salmivalli, C. (2020). Sustainable antibullying program implementation: School profiles and predictors. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 61(1), 132–142. https://doi.org/10.1111/sjop.12487
  • Salmivalli, C. (2010). Bullying and the peer group: A review. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 15(2), 112–120. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.avb.2009.08.007
  • Salmivalli, C. (2018). Peer victimization and adjustment in young adulthood: Commentary on the special section. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 46(1), 67–72. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10802-017-0372-8
  • Salmivalli, C., Laninga‐Wijnen, L., Malamut, S. T., & Garandeau, C. F. (2021). Bullying prevention in adolescence: Solutions and new challenges from the past decade. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 31(4), 1023–1046. https://doi.org/10.1111/jora.12688
  • Schmidt, M. E., & Bagwell, C. L. (2007). The protective role of friendships in overtly and relationally victimized boys and girls. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 53, 439–460. https://doi.org/10.1353/mpq.2007.0021
  • Schoeler, T., Duncan, L., Cecil, C. M., Ploubidis, G. B., & Pingault, J. B. (2018). Quasi-experimental evidence on short- and long-term consequences of bullying victimization: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 144(12), 1229. https://doi.org/10.1037/bul0000171
  • Sentse, M., Dijkstra, J. K., Salmivalli, C., & Cillessen, A. H. N. (2013). The dynamics of friendships and victimization in adolescence: A longitudinal social network perspective. Aggressive Behavior, 39, 229–238. https://doi.org/10.1002/ab.21469
  • Sentse, M., Scholte, R., Salmivalli, C., & Voeten, M. (2007). Person–group dissimilarity in involvement in bullying and its relation with social status. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 35(6), 1009–1019. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10802-007-9150-3
  • Sentse, M., Veenstra, R., Kiuru, N., & Salmivalli, C. (2015). A longitudinal multilevel study of individual characteristics and classroom norms in explaining bullying behaviors. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 43(5), 943–955. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10802-014-9949-7
  • Sijtsema, J. J., Rambaran, A. J., & Ojanen, T. J. (2013). Overt and relational victimization and adolescent friendships: Selection, de-selection, and social influence. Social Influence, 8(2–3), 177–195. https://doi.org/10.1080/15534510.2012.739097
  • Sjögren, B., Thornberg, R., Wänström, L., & Gini, G. (2021). Bystander behaviour in peer victimisation: Moral disengagement, defender self-efficacy and student-teacher relationship quality. Research Papers in Education, 36(5), 588–610. https://doi.org/10.1080/02671522.2020.1723679
  • Smith, P. K. (2019). Introduction. In Smith, P. K. (Ed.), Making an impact on school bullying: Interventions and recommendations (pp. 1–22). Routledge.
  • Tsaousis, I. (2016). The relationship of self-esteem to bullying perpetration and peer victimization among schoolchildren and adolescents: A meta-analytic review. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 31, 186–199. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.avb.2016.09.005
  • Thornberg, R., Wänström, L., & Pozzoli, T. (2017). Peer victimisation and its relation to class relational climate and class moral disengagement. Educational Psychology, 37, 524–536. https://doi.org/10.1080/01443410.2016.1150423
  • Thornberg, R., Wegmann, B., Wänström, L., Bjereld, Y., & Hong, J. S. (2022). Associations between student–teacher relationship quality, class climate, and bullying roles: A Bayesian multilevel multinomial logit analysis. Victims & Offenders. https://doi.org/10.1080/15564886.2022.2051107
  • 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. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11292-010-9109-1
  • van Geel, M., Goemans, A., Zwaanswijk, W., Gini, G., & Vedder, P. (2018). Does peer victimization predict low self-esteem, or does low self-esteem predict peer victimization? Meta-analyses on longitudinal studies. Developmental Review, 49, 31–40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dr.2018.07.001
  • Weiner, B. (1986). An attribution theory of motivation and emotion. Springer-VerlagInc. http://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4612-4948-1
  • Wright, J. C., Giammarino, M., & Parad, H. W. (1986). Social status in small groups: Individual–group similarity and the social “misfit”. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 50(3), 523–536. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.50.3.523
  • Yeager, D. S., Fong, C. J., Lee, H. Y., & Espelage, D. L. (2015). Declines in efficacy of anti-bullying programs among older adolescents: Theory and a three-level meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 37, 36–51. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appdev.2014.11.005
  • Young-Jones, A., Fursa, S., Byrket, J. S., & Sly, J. S. (2015). Bullying affects more than feelings: The long-term implications of victimization on academic motivation in higher education. Social Psychology of Education, 18(1), 185–200. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11218-014-9287-1
  • Yun, H.-Y. (2020). New approaches to defender and outsider roles in school bullying. Child Development, 91(4), e814–e832. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.13312
  • Yun, H.-Y., & Graham, S. (2018). Defending victims of bullying in early adolescence: A multilevel analysis. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 47(9), 1926–1937. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-018-0869-7
  • Yun, H.-Y., & Juvonen, J. (2020). Navigating the healthy context paradox: Identifying classroom characteristics that improve the psychological adjustment of bullying victims. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 49(2203–2213). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-020-01300-311