Skip Navigation

Strengthening the evidence for maternal and child health programs

Find Established Evidence


Displaying records 1 through 10 (10 total).

Kärnä A, Voeten M, Little TD, Alanen E, Poskiparta E, Salmivalli C. Effectiveness of the KiVa antibullying program: Grades 1–3 and 7–9. J Educ Psychol. 2013;105(2):535.

Link: https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1007951

NPM: 9: Bullying
Intervention Components (click on component to see a list of all articles that use that intervention): YOUTH, Adult-led Support/Counseling/Remediation, Peer-led Mentoring/Support Counseling, PARENT/FAMILY, Notification/Information Materials (Online Resources, Information Guide), Presentation/Meeting/Information Session/Event, CLASSROOM, Adult-led Curricular Activities/Training, SCHOOL, Reporting & Response System, Teacher/Staff Training, Media Campaign (Print Materials, Public Address System, Social Media)

Intervention Results:

Victimization - Traditional Bullying

  • The intervention showed no statistically significant effects on self-reported victimization. \
  • The intervention reduced peer-reported victimization (p<0.001) with an interaction with age of student (p<0.01). Victimization decreased significantly for younger students (at or below the average for students in Grade 8), but did not have an effect for older students (at the average age for Grade 9) (p=0.670).

Perpetration/Aggression - Traditional Bullying

  • The intervention showed no statistically significant effects on self-reported bullying.
  • The intervention effect on peer-reported bullying was not statistically significant (p=0.854). Due to interaction effects, this result only applies to girls in classrooms with an average proportion of boys. At the student level, there was a significant interaction with gender (p<0.01), and the interaction was significantly stronger at the classroom than at the individual level (p=0.008). Through these interactions, bullying was found to be reduced for boys and the effect was stronger when the proportion of boys in the classroom was higher. Bullying was not reduced for girls, but the effect approached statistical significance when a girl was in a classroom with a high proportion of boys (p=0.060).

Cowie H, Olafsson R. The role of peer support in helping the victims of bullying in a school with high levels of aggression. Sch Psychol Int. 2000;21(1):79-95.

Link: http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0143034300211006

NPM: 9: Bullying
Intervention Components (click on component to see a list of all articles that use that intervention): YOUTH, Peer-led Mentoring/Support Counseling, SCHOOL, Assembly, Media Campaign (Print Materials, Public Address System, Social Media)

Intervention Results:

Victimization - Traditional Bullying

  • No significant changes were found in the incidence of bullying victimization (been bullied ‘sometimes’ or more this term; been bullied ‘once’ or more in the last 5 days) over the period when the intervention was in place.
  • The students’ average estimate of the number of victims (including self) in their own class was 2.64 (SD=2.13) before the intervention and 2.63 (SD=2.1) after the intervention (not significant).

Perpetration/Aggression - Traditional Bullying

  • Comparing post-intervention to preintervention, no significant change was found for the percentage of students reporting “bullied others ‘sometimes’ or more this term,” but there was a significant increase for “bullied others ‘once’ or more in the last 5 days” (p=0.03).
  • The students’ average estimate of the number of bullies (including self) in their own class was 2.39 (SD=2.41) before the intervention and 2.46 (SD=2.23) after the intervention (not significant).

Houlston C, Smith PK. The impact of a peer counselling scheme to address bullying in an all‐girl london secondary school: A short‐term longitudinal study. Br J Educ Psychol. 2009;79(1):69-86.

Link: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18435867

NPM: 9: Bullying
Intervention Components (click on component to see a list of all articles that use that intervention): YOUTH, Peer-led Mentoring/Support Counseling, CLASSROOM, Adult-led Curricular Activities/Training, SCHOOL, School Rules

Intervention Results:

Victimization - Traditional Bullying

  • Across all grade levels, there was no significant difference between pretest and posttest in the number of students who reported recent victimization (p=0.54).
  • Examining the results by grade level showed that reported recent victimization remained the same in year 7 (p=1), year 8 (p=0.24), and year 9 (p=0.82).

Perpetration/Aggression - Traditional Bullying

  • Across all grade levels, there was no significant difference between pretest and posttest in the number of students who reported recent bullying behavior (P<0.127).
  • Examining the results by grade level showed that reported recent bullying remained the same in year 7 (p=0.53) and year 9 (p=0.81), but increased significantly in year 8 (p<0.05).

Peterson L, Rigby K. Countering bullying at an Australian secondary school with students as helpers. J Adolesc. 1999;22(4):481-492.

Link: https://ac.els-cdn.com/S0140197199902427/1-s2.0-S0140197199902427-main.pdf?_tid=42708ad0-22ba-4c63-9dc0-ac1fb3308acc&acdnat=1526304288_73659ce9a58e06931208278d9153f069

NPM: 9: Bullying
Intervention Components (click on component to see a list of all articles that use that intervention): YOUTH, Adult-led Support/Counseling/Remediation, Peer-led Mentoring/Support Counseling, CLASSROOM, Peer-led Curricular Activities/Training, SCHOOL, Assembly, Reporting & Response System, Teacher/Staff Training, School Rules, Media Campaign (Print Materials, Public Address System, Social Media)

Intervention Results:

Overall, there was not a decline in reported victimization at posttest. However, for students in Grade 7, the mean Victim Score decreased significantly from pretest to posttest (p=0.05). For students in Grade 9, the mean score increased significantly from pretest to posttest (p<0.05). No significant changes in victimization were found for students in Grades 10 and 11.

Dellasega C, Adamshick P. Evaluation of a program designed to reduce relational aggression in middle school girls. J Sch Violence. 2005;4(3):63-76.

Link: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1300/J202v04n03_06

NPM: 9: Bullying
Intervention Components (click on component to see a list of all articles that use that intervention): Peer-led Mentoring/Support Counseling, YOUTH

Intervention Results:

Victimization - Traditional Bullying

  • On average, girls reported being hurt less by relational aggression in the week prior to survey administration (5.2 times preintervention and 3.04 times postintervention). Girls also reported seeing others hurt by relational aggression less (6.3 times pre-intervention and 4.8times post-intervention). However, these changes did not reach statistical significance.

Perpetration/Aggression - Traditional Bullying

  • On average, no change was observed; girls reported using relational aggression the same number of times pre- and postintervention (2.4 times) in the week prior to survey administration.

Perpetration/Aggression - Cyberbullying

  • Girls reported sending hurtful relational aggression messages via the computer fewer times post-intervention (0.76 times) compared to pre-intervention (1.1 times) in the week prior to survey administration. However, the change did not reach statistical significance.

Menesini E, Codecasa E, Benelli B, Cowie H. Enhancing children's responsibility to take action against bullying: Evaluation of a befriending intervention in Italian middle schools. Aggress Behav. 2003;29(1):1-14.

Link: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002/ab.80012

NPM: 9: Bullying
Intervention Components (click on component to see a list of all articles that use that intervention): YOUTH, Peer-led Mentoring/Support Counseling, CLASSROOM, Presentation/meeting/information Session (Classroom)

Intervention Results:

Victimization - Traditional Bullying

  • Although the Victim scale increased in value in the control group, and decreased in the intervention group, the effect did not reach significance (p=0.19).

Perpetration/Aggression - Traditional Bullying

  • The Bully Scale increased in value in the control group, while it decreased in the intervention group. The interaction between time and group was significant (p<0.05). The increase in the control group is due mainly to the boys (p<0.05).

Menesini E, Nocentini A, Palladino BE. Empowering students against bullying and cyberbullying: Evaluation of an Italian peer-led model. Int J Conf Violence. 2012;6(2):313-320.

Link: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/233944925_Empowering_Students_Against_Bullying_andCyberbullying_Evaluation_of_an_Italian_Peer-led_Model

NPM: 9: Bullying
Intervention Components (click on component to see a list of all articles that use that intervention): YOUTH, Peer-led Mentoring/Support Counseling, CLASSROOM, Presentation/meeting/information Session (Classroom), SCHOOL, Assembly, Media Campaign (Print Materials, Public Address System, Social Media), POPULATION-BASED SYSTEMS, COMMUNITY, Presentation/Meeting with Community Officials (School Boards, Administrators, Police), Event

Intervention Results:

Victimization - Traditional Bullying

  • Study 1: No significant main or interaction effects were found for victimization.
  • Study 2: For victimization, there was a significant interaction of time and group (p<0.01), showing a decrease over time in the intervention group as compared to the control group. Among all students in the intervention group, the intervention effect was found for both peer educators as well as other students in the intervention classes.

Victimization - Cyberbullying

  • Study 1: No significant main or interaction effects were found for cybervictimization.
  • Study 2: For cybervictimization, there was a significant interaction of time and group (p<0.05), showing a decrease over time in the intervention group as compared to the control group. Among all students in the intervention group, the intervention effect was found for both peer educators as well as other students in the intervention classes.

Perpetration/Aggression - Traditional Bullying

  • Study 1 No significant main or interaction effects were found for bullying.
  • Study 2: For bullying, there was a significant interaction of time and group (p<0.05), showing a decrease over time in the intervention group as compared to the control group. Among all students in the intervention group, the intervention effect was found for both peer educators as well as other students in the intervention classes.

Perpetration/Aggression - Cyberbullying

  • Study 1: Cyberbullying decreased significantly from pretest to posttest for the peer educator group only (not the awareness group or the control group) (p<0.05), and in particular for male peer educators (p<0.05).
  • Study 2: No significant intervention effect was found for cyberbullying.

Palladino BE, Nocentini A, Menesini E. Evidence‐based intervention against bullying and cyberbullying: Evaluation of the NoTrap! program in two independent trials. Aggress Behav. 2016;42(2):194-206.

Link: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26879897

NPM: 9: Bullying
Intervention Components (click on component to see a list of all articles that use that intervention): YOUTH, Peer-led Mentoring/Support Counseling, CLASSROOM, Presentation/meeting/information Session (Classroom), Peer-led Curricular Activities/Training, SCHOOL, Assembly, Media Campaign (Print Materials, Public Address System, Social Media), POPULATION-BASED SYSTEMS, COMMUNITY, Presentation/Meeting with Community Officials (School Boards, Administrators, Police), Event

Intervention Results:

Victimization - Traditional Bullying

  • Trial 1: Compared to the control group, the intervention group showed a significant decrease in victimization (p<0.001). The reduction was stable 6 months after the intervention ended.
  • Trial 2: Compared to the control group, the intervention, the intervention group showed a significant decrease in victimization (p<0.001). No significant interaction effect was found for time*group*gender (p=0.59).

Victimization - Cyberbullying

  • Trial 1: Compared to the control group, the intervention group showed a significant decrease in cybervictimization (p<0.001). The reduction was stable 6 months after the intervention ended.
  • Trial 2: Compared to the control group, the intervention group showed a significant decrease in cybervictimization (p<0.001). No significant interaction effect was found for time*group*gender (p=0.62).

Perpetration/Aggression - Traditional Bullying

  • Trial 1: Compared to the control group, the intervention group showed a significant decrease in bullying (p<0.001). The reduction was stable 6 months after the intervention ended.
  • Trial 2: Compared to the control group, the intervention, the intervention group showed a significant decrease in bullying (p<0.001). A significant interaction effect was found for gender. A significant decrease was found for both boys (p<0.001) and girls (p<0.001) in the intervention group, while the boys in the control group showed a significant increase (p<0.004) and the girls in the control group (p=0.12) did not change significantly.

Perpetration/Aggression - Cyberbullying

  • Trial 1: Compared to the control group, the intervention group showed a significant decrease in cyberbullying (p<0.001). The reduction was stable 6 months after the intervention ended.
  • Trial 2: Compared to the control group, the intervention, the intervention group showed a significant decrease in cyberbullying (p=0.02). No significant interaction effect was found for time*group*gender (p=0.18).

Palladino BE, Nocentini A, Menesini E. Online and offline peer led models against bullying and cyberbullying. Psicothema. 2012;24(4):634-639.

Link: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23079363

NPM: 9: Bullying
Intervention Components (click on component to see a list of all articles that use that intervention): YOUTH, Peer-led Mentoring/Support Counseling, CLASSROOM, Presentation/meeting/information Session (Classroom), SCHOOL, Assembly, Media Campaign (Print Materials, Public Address System, Social Media), POPULATION-BASED SYSTEMS, COMMUNITY, Presentation/Meeting with Community Officials (School Boards, Administrators, Police), Event

Intervention Results:

Victimization - Traditional Bullying

  • In comparison to the control group, the intervention group decreased significantly in victimization (p<0.01).
  • Among all students in the intervention group, the intervention effect was found for both peer educators as well as other students in the intervention classes.

Victimization - Cyberbullying

  • In comparison to the control group, the intervention group decreased significantly in cybervictimization (p<0.05).
  • Among all students in the intervention group, the intervention effect was found for both peer educators as well as other students in the intervention classes.

Perpetration/Aggression - Traditional Bullying

  • In comparison to the control group, the intervention group decreased significantly in bullying (p<0.05).
  • Among all students in the intervention group, the intervention effect was found for both peer educators as well as other students in the intervention classes.

Perpetration/Aggression - Cyberbullying

  • Comparing the intervention group to the control group, no significant effect was found for cyberbullying.

Boulton, M. J., & Boulton, L. (2017). Modifying self-blame, self-esteem, and disclosure through a cooperative cross-age teaching intervention for bullying among adolescents. Violence and victims, 32(4), 609-626.

Link: https://doi.org/10.1891/0886-6708.VV-D-15-00075

NPM: 9: Bullying
Intervention Components (click on component to see a list of all articles that use that intervention): YOUTH, Peer-led Mentoring/Support Counseling, CLASSROOM, Peer-led Curricular Activities/Training

Intervention Results:

CATS led to a significant improvement on all 3 dependent variables and changes in self-blame, and separately changes in self-esteem, mediated the positive effect of the intervention on help-seeking.
   

This project is supported by the Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA) of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) under grant number U02MC31613, MCH Advanced Education Policy, $3.5 M. This information or content and conclusions are those of the author and should not be construed as the official position or policy of, nor should any endorsements be inferred by HRSA, HHS or the U.S. Government.