Potential Biasing Factors of Self-Reports of Participant Roles in School Bullying: Respondent- and Context-related Variables
Abstract
In spite of its popularity, the self-report assessment of school bullying has been known susceptible to various biasing factors including respondents' individual characteristics and contextual variables. This study manipulated contextual variables (anonymous vs. confidential administration and time frames of reference) through written test instructions for 708 male and female middle school students in Korea and had them complete the self-report assessment instruments of respondents' characteristics, such as hostile attributional bias and social desirability, and participant roles in school bulling (bully, victim, follower, outsider, and defender) to explore the possibility that these respondent- and context-related variables function as potential biasing factors in self-reports of participant roles in school bullying. Correlational analyses revealed that respondent-related variables were significantly correlated with self-reports of all participant roles, while contextual variables were correlated with self-reports of only a few of the participant roles. Results of hierarchical regression analyses also showed that respondent-related variables significantly accounted for the variance in self-reports of all participant roles, controlling for the effect of gender, while contextual variables contributed only a small amount to the variance of self-reports of bulling and victimization with no contribution to self-reports of bystander roles. These findings were interpreted in the light of response biases in self-report assessment of bullying. Implications of this study for the improvement of self-report assessment practice of school bullying were discussed, and some suggestions for subsequent studies were provided.
- keywords
- 괴롭힘, 참여역할, 자기보고식 평가, 반응편향, bullying, participant roles, self-report assessment, response bias
Reference
교육부 (2014). 2014년 1차 학교폭력 실태조사분석결과 발표: 보도자료. http://moe.go.kr에서 2015년 5월 20일 자료 얻음.
김용석 (2010). 사회적 바람직성 척도의 개발. 한국사회복지행정학, 12(3), 1-39.
김은경 (2008). 학대받은 아동의 정서와 인지적편향이 우울과 공격성에 미치는 영향. 한양대학교 박사학위논문.
김은아, 이승연 (2011). 남녀 중학생의 또래괴롭힘 방어행동과 공감, 자기효능감, 학급규준에 대한 믿음의 관계. 한국심리학회지: 발달, 24(1), 59-77.
김현주 (2003). 집단 따돌림에서의 동조집단유형화 연구. 청소년복지연구, 5(2), 103-118.
서미정 (2008). 방관자의 집단 특성에 따른 또래 괴롭힘 참여 역할 행동. 한국아동학회지 29(5), 79-96.
송경희, 송주현, 백지현, 이승연 (2009). 남녀중학생의 정서적․인지적 특성, 부모의양육행동과 또래괴롭힘의 관계. 한국심리학회지: 발달, 22(2), 1-22.
신유림 (2006). 학령기 아동의 또래괴롭힘에서측정방법에 따른 심리사회적 부적응 차이: 자기보고법과 또래 지명법의 비교. 한국가정관리학회지, 24(4), 141-149.
심희옥 (2008). 또래 괴롭힘 참여자의 사회적지위 및 사회적 정서에 관한 연구: 성별을 중심으로. 한국 아동학회지, 29(3), 191-205.
오인수 (2010). 괴롭힘을 목격한 주변인의 행동에 영향을 미치는 심리적 요인: 공감과공격성을 중심으로. 초등교육연구, 23, 45-63.
이동형 (2014a). 학교 괴롭힘의 개념화와 자기보고식 평가: 현 쟁점 및 개선 방안 고찰을 중심으로. 한국심리학회지: 일반, 33(4), 737-763.
이동형 (2014b). 학교폭력의 평가와 진단. 이화여자대학교 학교폭력예방연구소 편 “학교폭력과 괴롭힘 예방: 원인진단과 대응” 중 10장. 서울: 학지사.
이승연 (2013). 또래괴롭힘: 주변인 개입과 사회적 맥락 변화의 필요성. 한국심리학회지: 학교, 10(1), 59-81.
이은정 (2015). 부모애착이 학령 후기 아동의 친사회적 행동에 미치는 영향: 공감과 도덕추론의 매개적 역할. 이화여자대학교 석사학위논문.
이종원, 윤상연, 김혜진, 허태균 (2014). 권위주의 성격과 인기도에 따른 학교괴롭힘의참여 역할. 한국심리학회지: 학교, 11(1), 109.
이지현 (2006). 집단괴롭힘 피해경험과 가해행동과의 관계에서 자동적 사고의 매개효과. 숙명여자대학교 대학원 석사학위논문.
정태연, 김인경, 김은정 (2001). 집단 따돌림의측정방법에 따른 행동평가의 차이: 자기평가와 동료평가의 비교. 한국심리학회지:발달, 14(1), 145-149.
청소년폭력예방재단 (2014). 전국 학교폭력 실태조사 연구. (재)푸른나무 청예단.
최보가, 임지영 (1999). 또래괴롭힘이 아동의외로움과 불안에 미치는 영향. 대한가정학회지, 37(5), 111-121.
최은숙 (1999). 집단따돌림 가해, 피해 경향과관련된 심리적 요인에 관한 일 연구. 서강대학교 교육대학원 석사학위논문.
최지영 (2008). 괴롭힘 상황에서의 아동의 가해 및 피해경험 측정방법 비교를 통한 심리적 특성 연구. 초등교육연구, 21(3), 339-358.
Anastasi, A., & Urbina, S. (1997). Psychological testing (7th edition). Upper Saddle River, NJ:Prentice-Hall.
Bell, K. M., & Naugle, A. E. (2007). Effects of social desirability on students' self-reporting of partner abuse perpetration and victimization. Violence and Victims, 22(2), 243-256.
Blake, B. F., Valdiserri, J., Neuendorf, K. A., & Nemeth, J. (2006). Validity of the SDS-17measure of social desirability in the American context. Personality and Individual Differences, 40, 1625-1636.
Bovaird, J. A. (2010). Scales and surveys: Some problems with measuring bullying behavior. In S. R. Jimerson, S. M. Swearer, & D. L. Espelage (Eds.), Handbook of bullying in schools:An international perspective (pp.277-292). New York, NY: Routledge.
Chan, H. F. J., Myron, R., & Crawshaw, M. (2005). The efficacy of non-anonymous measures of bullying. School Psychology International, 26, 443-458.
Cornell, D. G., & Cole, J. C. M. (2012). Assessment of bullying. In S. R. Jimerson, A. B. Nickerson, M. J. Mayer, & M. J. Furlong (Eds.), Handbook of school violence and school safety: International research and practice (pp. 289-303). New York, NY: Routledge.
Cornell, D. G., Sheras, P. L., & Cole, J. C. (2006). Assessment of bullying. In S. R. Jimerson &M. J. Furlong (Eds.), Handbook of school violence and school safety (pp.587-602). Mahwah, NJ:Erlbaum.
Crick, N. R., & Grotpeter, J. K. (1995). Relational aggression, gender, and social psychological adjustment. Child Development, 66, 710-722.
Crick, N. R., & Grotpeter, J. K. (1996). Children's treatment by peers: Victims of relational and overt aggression. Development and Psychopathology, 8, 367-380.
Furlong, M. J., Sharkey, J. D., Felix, E. D., Tanigawa, D., & Green, J. G. (2010). Bullying assessment: A call for increased precision of self-reporting procedures. In S. R. Jimerson, S. M. Swearer, & D. L. Espelage (Eds.), Handbook of bullying in schools: An international perspective (pp.329-345). New York, NY: Routledge.
Gini, G., Pozzoli, T., Horghi, F., & Franzoni, L. (2008). The role of bystanders in students'perception of bullying and sense of safety. Journal of School Psychology, 46, 617-638.
Greif, J. L., & Furlong, M. J. (2006). The assessment of school bullying: Using theory to inform practice. Journal of School Violence, 5, 33-50.
Morrison, G., & Furlong, M. J. (2002, June). Understanding the turning points in students' school discipline histories. Paper presented at Safe Schools for the 21st Century, National Conference of the Hamilton Fish Institute, Monterey, CA.
Nederhof, A. J. (1985). Methods of coping with social desirability bias: A review. European Journal of Social Psychology, 15, 263-80.
Olweus, D. (1993). Bullying at school: What we know and what we can do. Oxford, UK:Blackwell Publishers.
Olweus, D. (2007). The Olweus Bullying Questionnaire. Center City, MN: Hazelden.
Olweus, D. (2010). Understanding and researching bullying: Some critical issues. In S. R. Jimerson, S. M. Swearer, & D. L. Espelage (Eds.), Handbook of bullying in schools: An international perspective (pp.9-34). New York, NY: Routledge.
O’Malley, P. M., Johnston, L. D., Bachman, J. G., & Schulenberg, J. E. (2000). A comparison of confidential versus anonymous survey procedures: Effects on reporting of drug use and related attitudes and beliefs in a national study of students. Journal of Drug Issues, 30, 35-54.
Quiggle, N., Garber, J., Panak, W. F., & Dodge, K. A. (1992). Social-information processing aggressive and depressed children. Child Development, 63, 1305-1320.
Reynolds, W. M. (1982). Development of reliable and valid short forms of the Marlowe Crowne Social Desirability Scale. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 38, 119-125.
Reynolds, W. M. (2003). Reynolds Bully Victimization Scales. San Antonio, TX: The Psychological Corporation.
Salmivalli, C., Lagerspetz, K., Bjorkqvist, K., Osterman, K., & Kaukianinen, A. (1996). Bullying as a group process: Participant roles and their relations to social status within the group. Aggressive Behavior, 22, 1-15.
Saunders, D. G. (1991). Procedures for adjusting self-reports of violence for social desirability bias. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 6(3), 336-344.
Smith, P. K., Cowie, H., Olafsson, R. F., & Liefooghe, A. P. D. (2002). Definitions of bullying: A comparison of terms used, and age and gender differences, in fourteen-country international comparison. Child Development, 73, 1119-1133.
Solberg, M., & Olweus, D. (2003). Prevalence estimation of school bullying with the Olweus bully/victim questionnaire. Aggressive Behavior, 29, 239-268.
Stober, J. (2001). The Social Desirability Scale-17(SDS-17): Convergent validity, discriminant validity, and relationship with age. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 17(3), 222-232.
Sugarman, D. B., & Hotaling, G. T. (1997). Intimate violence and social desirability: A meta-analytic review: Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 12(2), 275-290.
Sveinsson, A. V., & Morris, R. J. (2007). Conceptual and methodological issues in assessment and intervention with school bullies. In J. E. Zins, M. J. Elias, & C. A. Maher (Eds.), Bullying, victimization, and peer harassment: A handbook of prevention and intervention (pp.9-26). New York, NY:Routledge.
Swearer, S. M., Espelage, D. L., & Napolitano, S. A. (2011). 괴롭힘의 예방과 개입: 학교에서어떻게 도울 것인가. (이동형, 이승연, 신현숙 공역). 서울: 학지사 (원전은 2009에 출판).
van de Mortel, T. F. (2008). Faking it: Social desirability response bias in self-report research. Australian Journal of Advanced Nursing, 25(4), 40-48.
- Downloaded
- Viewed
- 0KCI Citations
- 0WOS Citations