A Profile of Bullying, Peer Aggression, and Victimization in Philippine Junior High School
A Profile of Bullying, Peer Aggression, and Victimization in Philippine Junior High School
A Profile of Bullying, Peer Aggression, and Victimization in Philippine Junior High School
Abstract
Bullying affects 50 percent of the Filipino school children. However, there is still the
lack of literature that discusses this problem in a Philippine setting. This paper employed
descriptive research technique to determine the profile of school bullying, peer aggression,
and victimization among junior high school students of the UP High School in Cebu. Results
of the survey revealed that bullying exists in the school with classmates as the perpetrators;
direct verbal and relational are the most common forms of bullying; gender is not a factor
in bullying and victimization, both sexes are involved in bullying and peer victimization, and,
there is a significant relationship between bullying and victimization. Results underscore the
need to implement a bullying prevention program focusing on awareness of the problem and
their long-term impact to students is highly recommended. There is a need for the school to
organize a peer counseling group to address the high rate of bullying cases reported only to
their peers instead of school officials.
*Correspondence: malaus1@up.edu.ph
Journal of Society & Technology Laus
adverse actions; 2) an intentional and cyber-bullying, the harassment can range from
repeated actions; and, 3) it involves power or simple sending messages containing threats,
strength differences between the bully and the sexual and racist comments, to ganging up in
victim. Bullying can also take on many forms public forums like group chats and social
such as making derogatory comments and bad media, and publishing blogs or posting false
names; social exclusion or isolation; being hit, statements aimed to embarrass the victims in
kick, shove, and spit upon; stealing or being web pages (Foxborough Regional Charter
asked to steal money or damage things of School).
others students; spreading lies and false Bullying and peer aggression expose
rumors, threatening or forcing others to do children, particularly the victim, to several
things; making racial and sexual remarks; and consequences such as depression, anxiety,
cyber-bullying (Halzeden Publishing, n.d.). loneliness, psychosomatic sickness, low
Bradshaw, Sawyer, and O’Brennan (2007) self-esteem, and absenteeism. The prevalence
also mentioned the same list of aggressive of bullying is quite high among kindergarten
behaviors but categorized them into three children and adolescents that are aging eight
groups. These are direct verbal, direct to 12 years old (O’Malley, 2014). Researchers
physical and indirect or relational bullying. defined peer victimization as the “physical,
Direct verbal includes name-calling, threats, verbal or psychological abuse of victims by
teasing and sexual comments or gestures. perpetrators who intend to cause them harm”
Direct physical covers actions like pushing or (Olweus, 1993; Graham, 2006; O’Malley,
shoving, hitting, slapping or kicking, and 2014). In short, it refers to the experience of
stealing belongings. Indirect or relational the victim or victims of being the target of
involves sending hurtful messages through persistent harassment by individuals who are
email, blogging, spreading rumors or lie, and, not siblings and usually not from the same
leaving out from social connections. age groups. Victimization differs from simple
peer conflict because of the presence of an
Peer Aggression imbalance power relation and the objective of
harming the other party.
Not all negative actions committed against O’Malley (2014) also noted that the victim
individuals or groups who are presumed to be or the bullied person might display
of weaker strength can be called bullying. provocative or passive roles or both. Victims
Aggressive behaviors are considered bullying of recurring aggression have the tendency to
when performed over and over and to a less exhibit emotional distress and loneliness and
influential person or group of individuals. are “submissive and unassertive” which made
Aggression that intends to cause injury, them more vulnerable to the potential
physical and emotional pain, including a offenders. Passive victims, however, are rarely
degree of fear or intimidation, is called peer passive, are sensitive, restless, fight back when
aggression. The nature and purpose of attacked, and, are observed as the one that
bullying and peer aggression are the same- to starts the trouble.
cause harm, pain or injury, but the former is Psychologists view bullying as aggressive
committed in the context of repetition and behavior that works within relationships of
imbalance of power between the victim and power and abuse. According to Rodkin,
perpetrator (Cascardia, 2014). Espelage and Hanish (2015), bullying can be
The Anti-bullying Act of the Philippines cultivated by both the presence and absence
(2013) also takes into account harassment of the network of friends. Youth who bully
repeatedly expressed through ”the use of other children may either be socially
technology or any electronic means” as marginalized young people who are exposed to
bullying (Republic Act 10627, 2013). Termed violence and those who find temporary
23
Journal of Society & Technology Laus
24
Journal of Society & Technology Laus
Table 1: Frequency distribution of the respondents according to sex and grade level
Sex/ Grade Grade 7 Grade 8 Grade 9 Grade 10 TOTAL
Female 25 21 29 20 95
Male 14 18 10 14 56
TOTAL 39 39 39 34 151
Table 2: Distribution of the respondents per grade level according to their experience of being
bullied
Occurrence of
Grade 7 Grade 8 Grade 9 Grade 10 TOTAL
Bullying
Never been bullied 11 (28%) 24 (62%) 14 (36%) 14 (41%) 63 (42%)
Bullied/Victim 28 (72%) 15 (32%) 25 (64%) 20 (59%) 88 (58%)
TOTAL 39 (100%) 39 (100%) 39 (100%) 34 (100%) 151 (100%)
Table 3: Summary of the respondents’ ratings on their frequent involvement in bullying per
grade level
Number of Bullied Weighted Mean
Prevalence of Bullying
Respondents Rating
Grade 7 28 (32%) 2.14
Grade 8 15 (17%) 1.73
Grade 9 25 (28%) 1.88
Grade 10 20 (23%) 1.9
Overall 88 (100) 1.99
who were victimized by bullying, followed by reported of being bullied, but ”Seldom” did it
Grade 9 (64%) and Grade 10 (59%). This happen (only once or twice) in the past
result confirmed previous studies that peer months. On the other hand, 48 percent of the
victimization and bullying are more prevalent respondents admitted being bullied more than
among younger children than the older ones double in the past couple of month with 16
(Huang, 2013) because older children are percent of the respondents answered
more physically and psychologically developed ”Always,” 15 percent for “Often”, and 17
compared to the younger ones which made percent for ”Sometimes.” Solberg and Olweus
them more capable of protecting themselves described frequent bullying as aggression that
from peer victimization or bullying(Zhang, happened at least twice or more in the past
2002). semester (Solberg, 2003), and chronic
An act to be considered bullying must be bullying happened at least once a week to
repetitive in nature. The respondents were several times a week (Olweus, 1993).
also asked about the number of times did Table 3 summarizes the weighted mean of
they experienced being bullied in the past the respondents’ rating of their frequent
couple of months. Figure 1 reveals the overall involvement in bullying and victimization per
reported frequency of the students’ frequent grade level. Data in the said Table vividly
involvement in bullying. In Figure 1, it can shows that UPHSC students are frequently
be presumed that a good number of involved in bullying. The overall weighted
respondents have experienced “frequent” mean is 1.99 (Sometimes). Grade 7 has the
bullying in the past couple of months. highest weighted mean among the four classes
Fifty-two percent (46) of the subjects with 2.14 (Sometimes); followed by Grade 10
25
Journal of Society & Technology Laus
Figure 2: Common forms of bullying experienced by the respondents who were bullied in
school
26
Journal of Society & Technology Laus
children are verbal and indirect or relational. that in these places, there is an observed lack
Bradshaw (2007) also mentioned that verbal of adult supervision. Hence, bullying and
bullying was the most common form of peer victimization are more likely to occur.
victimization in US schools, and though there
is an increasing awareness about Duration of bullying
cyber-bullying, relatively few students have
reported being victimized by this method. Table 5 shows that on the overall, bullying
and victimization in UPHSC usually lasted for
about a month, with a weighted mean of
Involvement in the different forms of
2.01. Grade 7 had the highest weighted mean
bullying and victimization
with 2.29 (about a month) and followed by
Table 4 presents the summary of the Grade 10 and Grade 9 with 2.26 and 1.79
respondents’ ratings of their constant (about a month) weighted mean, respectively.
participation in the various forms of bullying The shortest duration of bullying and
and victimization. It shows that the top 3 victimization is among Grade 8 students with
most prevalent form of bullying in the school a weighted mean of 1.33 or it lasted about
is name calling, teasing or taunting with a one to two weeks only. Schaefer’s study on
weighted mean of 2.19 (Sometimes); bullying among college students linked
spreading rumors or lies with 1.68 (Seldom), duration and age of bullying and victimization
and, social exclusion with 1.56 (Seldom) to long-term psychological effects. Those
weighted mean. This result confirmed earlier students who reported being bullied during
findings that the most common form of their elementary and high school years
bullying and victimization was direct verbal exhibited greater physiological distress
bullying. Other types of bullying mentioned compared to those who were victimized only
are comments about gender (i.e., Bayot or in college (Schafer, 2010).
gay), body size (i.e., fat), blackmail, and
other indirect hurtful comments. It also Reporting bullying incidence in school
implies that this type of verbal bullying is the
most frequent among the forms of bullying or The data of the study (Figure 4) show that
has occurred at least twice in the past months most of the respondents (40%) preferred to
before the survey. This result affirmed the tell their friends about the bullying incidents
findings of Huang (2013) that most of the in school. Only 28 percent of the respondents
Chinese students (49.8%) were targeted of said that they report bullying incidents to
teasing and taunting. See also Table 4 details adults in school such as teachers other than
on other forms of bullying. the class adviser, principal, guidance counselor
or school staff. The homeroom teacher or
class adviser (20%) only ranked third in the
Location
list of persons whom victims are most likely to
Figure 3 reveals that the top 3 sites or places turn to when bullied. These data may imply
where bullying happens in school are that the victims of bullying are afraid of
playgrounds, athletic fields, open court or reporting the incidence because the bully may
stage (36%), locker (24%) and corridors, come after them.
stairways, lobby (22%). These findings The UPHSC Disciplinary Committee Report
affirmed previous studies which indicated that indicated a total of 11 student violations for
the frequently reported location of bullying is S.Y. 2014-15 (Table 6). A total of five
playgrounds and cafeteria (Bradshaw, 2007; bullying incidents have been reported to the
Olweus, 1993) and school building (Petrosino, Committee for the entire year. This number is
2010). Previous researchers have indicated only six percent of the total number of
27
Journal of Society & Technology Laus
Table 4: Summary of the respondents’ ratings on the common forms of bullying experienced
by the respondents who were bullied in school
Frequency (% Weighted
Forms of Bullying Description
of Total) Mean Rating
A. Direct Verbal 173 (41%)
· Name calling, teasing, taunting 88 (21%) 2.19 Sometime
· Racist remarks 46 (11%) 1.55 Seldom
· Sexual comments 39 (9%) 1.44 Seldom
C. Relational 149 (35%)
· Social exclusion or isolation 67 (16%) 1.56 Seldom
· Spreading rumors or lies 52 (12%) 1.68 Seldom
· Extorting money or other things 30 (71%) 1.24 Seldom
B. Direct Physical 65 (15%)
· Kicked, shoved, hit, slap, locked
33 (8%) 1.32 Seldom
indoors
· Threatened of forced to do bad things 32 (8%) 1.24 Seldom
D. Cyber-bullying 28 (7%) 1.12 Seldom
E. Others 7 (2%) 1.58 Seldom
Legend: 3.26-4:00, Always; 2.51-3.25, Often; 1.76-2.50, Sometimes; 1.00-1.76, Seldom
Figure 3: Frequency of the respondents’ responses to the location/ place where bullying
usually happens
28
Journal of Society & Technology Laus
Table 5: Summary of the respondents’ ratings of the duration of bullying and victimization
per grade level
Grade Frequency Weighted Mean Rating Description
7 21 2.29 About a month
8 9 1.33 One to two weeks
9 19 1.79 One to two weeks
10 19 2.26 About a month
Overall 68 2.01 About a month
Legend: 4.21- 5.00, Several years; 3.41-4.20, About a year; 2.61-3.40, About six months; 1.81-2.60,
About a month; One to two weeks
substantial numbers of bully-victims, but still (2013); and that of Espelage and Horne
lower in percentage compared to pure bullies (2008) and Kokkinos (2012), that the boys,
and pure victims (Olweus, 1991; Solberg & the more aggressive gender and are more
Olweus, 2003; Hymel, 2005; Petrosino, 2010). likely to be involved more in bullying
However, researchers also noted that the compared to girls. However, the results
bully-victims phenomenon is increasing in the contradicted Astor’s findings that in some
recent years (Benitez, 2006). cultures (i.e., Malaysia and Ethiopia) where
age and rank are vital, the older students are
Victim less likely to experience being bullied
compared to the younger ones(Asto, 2005).
The results show (Table 7) that most of the
respondents who were victims of bullying were
Bully
Grade 7 (32%), and the majority are female
(62%). Victimization was also high among Table 8 reveals that 75 (97%) respondents
Grade 9 (28%) and Grade 10 (23%) who were subjected to bullying identified their
respondents, while only 17% of the Grade 8 classmates as the perpetrators. Bullies are
respondents were victims of school bullying. usually composed of a group of two to three
These results confirmed the studies of Huang students (35 or 46 %%) and with both boys
29
Journal of Society & Technology Laus
30
Journal of Society & Technology Laus
31
Journal of Society & Technology Laus
be gleaned in Table 11 that the respondents as morally wrong despite the high incidence of
are “Seldom” afraid of bullying. The unreported (to school authorities) bullying
information found in Table 12 confirmed the and peer victimization in the school.
respondent’s perception towards the problem.
The said Table listed bullying as the least
(Rank 6 of 6) of the identified causes students
Conclusion and
failure in UPHSC. Furthermore, though a Recommendations
substantial number of respondents would
prefer to report bullying to their friends rather Bullying and peer victimization exist among
than their teachers or any adult in school, students of UP High School Cebu. The profile
many still tried to help the victims. This of bullying and victimization may imply that
result may imply that many of the students the problem is not as severe compared to the
still considers bullying and peer victimization schools in the West. However, there is a high
incidence of bullying unreported to school
32
Journal of Society & Technology Laus
authorities which involve students of the same campaign and integrating the topic in
grade levels, and, the significant number of classroom discussions. Second, a peer
respondents who are bully-victims exposed the counselor program must also be set-up under
students to possible and long-term mental and the supervision of School Guidance Specialist
psychological problems such as depression, to ensure that the problem is addressed and
anxiety, lack of self-confidence and aggressive appropriately reported to school authorities.
behavior. If not addressed immediately, Third, training on how to deal with bullying
bullying may lead to more serious problems should be conducted so that the students will
such as absenteeism, violence, involvement in know how to avoid being bullied, where and
crime and moral separation among the to whom they should report bullying cases in
students. These findings also confirmed the school. And lastly, further studies of bullying
Group Relational Theory, which states that and victimization, its causes and impact
the bullies are usually not alone but by a should be made to better understand this
group or groups of friends. social concern.
33
Journal of Society & Technology Laus
Asto, R. B. (2005). Making the Case for an Cho, Y. &.-B. (2011). A Mediated
International Perspective on School Moderation of Conformative Peer
Violence: Implication for Theory, Bullying. Journal of Child and Family
Research, Policy and Assessment. Studies, 520-529.
International Perspectives , 103-117.
Dake, J. P. (2003). The Nature and Extent of
Atlas, R. &. (1998). Observations of bullying Bullying at School. Journal of School
in the classroom. Journal of Educational Health, Vol. 73, No. 5, 173-180.
Research, 92 , 1-86.
Dewar, G. (2008). When bullies get bullied by
Baldry, A. F. (1999). Types of Bullying others: Understanding bully-victims.
among Italian school children. Journal Parenting Science.
Adolescence, 423-426.
Diaz, J. (2015, September 28). 31 bullying
Benitez, J. &. (2006). Bullying: description incidents take place daily in schools. The
and analysis of the phenomenon. Journal Philippine Star.
of Research in Educational Psychology,
No. 9, Vol 4(2), 151-170. EDC. (2008). Eyes on Bullying. Retrieved
May 22, 2016, from eyesonbullying.org
Bradshaw, C. P. (2007). Bullying and Peer
Victimization at School: Perceptual Espelage, D. H. (2008). School violence and
Differences Between Students and School bullying prevention: From research-based
Staff. School Psychology Review, 361. explanation to empirical based solution.
Bradshaw, C. P. (2007). Bullying and In S. &. Brown, Handbook of counselling
Peer Victimization at School: Perceptual psychology, 4th edition (pp. 588-606).
Differences Between Students and School NJ: Wiley.
Staff. School Psychology Review, 2007,
361.
34
Journal of Society & Technology Laus
Haynie, D. L.-C. (2001). Bullies, victims, and Olweus, D. (1993). Bullying at School. What
bully/victims: Distinct groups of at-risk we know and what we can do. Oxford,
youth. Journal of Early Adolescence, 21, England: Blackwell.
29–49.
Olweus, D. (2007). Olweus Bullying
Huang, H. J. (2013). Understanding Factors Questionnaire Standard School Report.
Associated with Bullying and Peer Minneapolis, Minnesota: Halzeden
Victimization in Chinese Schools Within Publishing.
Ecological Context. J. Child and Family
Study, 880-892. O’Malley, M. D. (2014). Prevailing
Interventions to Address Peer
Hymel, S. N.-H. (2005). Moral Victimization at school: A Study of
Disengagement: A Framework for California School Psychologist. The
Understanding Bullying Among California School Psychologist, Volume 14
Adolescents. Journal of Social Sciences, Issue 1, 47-57.
Special Issue No. 8 1-11, 1-11.
Petrosino, A. G. (2010). What characteristics
Kokkinos C.M. & Kipritsi, E. (2102). The of bullying, bullying victims, and schools
relationship between bullying, are associated with increased reporting of
victimization, trait emotional intelligence, bullying to school officials? Washington,
self-efficacy, and empathy among DC.: Institute of Education Science.
preadolescents. Social Psychology
35
Journal of Society & Technology Laus
36