Department of Child Development and Education, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Research Priority Area Yield, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Prev Sci. 2023 Nov;24(8):1435-1446. doi: 10.1007/s11121-022-01387-z. Epub 2022 Jul 7.
The prevalence of bullying worldwide is high (UNESCO, 2018). Over the past decades, many anti-bullying interventions have been developed to remediate this problem. However, we lack insight into for whom these interventions work and what individual intervention components drive the total intervention effects. We conducted a large-scale individual participant data (IPD) meta-analysis using data from 39,793 children and adolescents aged five to 20 years (M = 12.58, SD = 2.34) who had participated in quasi-experimental or randomized controlled trials of school-based anti-bullying interventions (i.e., 10 studies testing nine interventions). Multilevel logistic regression analyses showed that anti-bullying interventions significantly reduced self-reported victimization (d = - 0.14) and bullying perpetration (d = - 0.07). Anti-bullying interventions more strongly reduced bullying perpetration in younger participants (i.e., under age 12) and victimization for youth who were more heavily victimized before the intervention. We did not find evidence to show that the inclusion of specific intervention components was related to higher overall intervention effects, except for an iatrogenic effect of non-punitive disciplinary methods-which was strongest for girls. Exploratory analyses suggested that school assemblies and playground supervision may have harmful effects for some, increasing bullying perpetration in youth who already bullied frequently at baseline. In conclusion, school-based anti-bullying interventions are generally effective and work especially well for younger children and youth who are most heavily victimized. Further tailoring of interventions may be necessary to more effectively meet the needs and strengths of specific subgroups of children and adolescents.
全球范围内欺凌现象普遍存在（联合国教科文组织，2018 年）。在过去几十年中，已经开发出许多反欺凌干预措施来解决这个问题。然而，我们并不清楚这些干预措施对哪些人有效，以及哪些干预组成部分驱动了总干预效果。我们使用了来自 39793 名 5 至 20 岁（M = 12.58，SD = 2.34）儿童和青少年的大规模个体参与者数据（IPD）元分析，这些参与者参加了基于学校的反欺凌干预的准实验或随机对照试验（即，10 项研究测试了 9 项干预措施）。多层次逻辑回归分析表明，反欺凌干预措施显著降低了自我报告的受害（d = -0.14）和欺凌行为（d = -0.07）。反欺凌干预措施在年龄较小的参与者（即 12 岁以下）和在干预前受到更严重受害的青少年中，对欺凌行为的减少作用更强。我们没有发现证据表明，除了非惩罚性纪律方法的医源性效应（对女孩的影响最强）外，特定干预组成部分的纳入与更高的总体干预效果有关。探索性分析表明，学校集会和操场监管可能对某些人产生有害影响，增加了那些在基线时已经频繁欺凌的青少年的欺凌行为。总之，基于学校的反欺凌干预措施通常是有效的，对受欺凌最严重的年幼儿童和青少年效果尤其好。可能需要进一步调整干预措施，以更有效地满足特定儿童和青少年亚组的需求和优势。
