CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background of the Study

The act of physical or verbal aggression on somebody younger, smaller in size, lower position of

authority or power is defined as bullying (Juliana et al., 2016). Bullying is a form of aggressive

behaviour repeated overtime against one or more relatively powerless individuals (Monks et al.,

2009; Salmivalli, 2010). Bullying has become very prevalent in schools all over the world.

School bullying is generally characterized as physically and psychologically deliberate and

repetitive peer abuse, creating a power imbalance between a bully and a victim (Olweus, 1993).

Bullying is common among adolescents, and one out of every five students report being bullied

(National Centre for Educational Statistics in 2019).

Adolescents with high status among peers have more control and the potential to directly or

indirectly influence their peers (DeBruyn & Cillessen 2006; LaFontana & Cillessen 2002; Lease

et al. 2002). Twenty per cent of students in the United States in grades nine to twelve (ages 14-

18) report being bullied (Amy Morin, 2019). Research indicates that between 10% and 30% of

children and youth are involved in bullying, although prevalence rates vary significantly due to

how bullying was measured (Nansel et al., 2001; Solberg & Olweus, 2003). In Nigerian

secondary schools, bullying has also become prevalent. According to a study carried out by

Aluede et al. (2011) on Nigerian secondary school students in Benin, most respondents (62.4%)

were victims of bullying, while 29.6% of the respondents suggested that they bullied others

during the academic session.

1
The Federal Ministry of Education (2007) reported that physical violence and psychological

violence accounted for 85% and 50% of the majority of violence against children in schools,

respectively, in a national situational review study of school violence in Nigeria.

From a cultural perspective, seniors are held in very high esteem in secondary schools, especially

boarding houses in Nigeria. Some can even go as far as punishing a junior or beating them. This

goes to show that juniors are at risk of bullying because seniors are ascribed the power to

command and dictate. In Nigeria, where corporal punishment is common, it is tough to draw a

line between discipline or punishment and child abuse. How much of this has contributed to the

rate of bullying?

There are many factors associated with bullying behaviour, but numerous studies have reported

associations between family risk factors and school bullying behaviours of children (de Vries et

al., 2017). A variety of the family features are related to the perpetration of bullying, including

the inclusion of family members in gangs, inadequate parental oversight, harmful family

supervision, environment, parental dispute, domestic abuse, low contact between parents, lack of

emotional support for parents, authoritarian upbringing, lack of discipline, and neglect by parents

(Baldry, 2003; Barboza et al., 2009; Bowes et al., 2009; Cook et al., 2010; Espelage et al., 2000;

Espelage & Swearer, 2010; Ferguson et al., 2009; Pepler et al., 2008).

Children and adolescents who come from homes where parents provide little emotional support

to their children, neglect to control their actions or have little interest in their lives are at greater

risk of engaging in harassment. Parents' discipline styles are often related to abuse: an overly

permissive or unnecessarily harsh approach to discipline may increase the likelihood of

adolescent harassment.

2
Impaired social adjustment can be traced back to early parent-child attachments. Harassment and

victimization can both reflect dissatisfied interpersonal ties in development (Lereya et al., 2013).

For example, Georgiou and Stavrinides (2013) found that the parent-child conflict was positively

associated with the perpetration of bullying and victimization among adolescents.

According to the social cognitive theory by Bandura (1978, 1986), behaviour is learned by

interacting with the social environment via observation and modelling. This means that

behaviour is learned by watching and imitating the behaviour of others in one's social

environment. The first social environment a child is exposed to is the family. Relating family

risk factors and bullying behaviour to this theory suggests that if a child is exposed to violent and

aggressive behaviours, he/she is most likely to learn that behaviour and project it on others. A

child's exposure to violent and aggressive behaviour suggests child abuse. Child abuse is an

inability of a parent or caregiver to act or any recent act that results in death, significant physical

or emotional damage, sexual abuse or abuse, or an act or inability to act that poses an imminent

risk of serious harm (CAPTA 2010). In a study conducted in Enugu, Nigeria, participants (51.2%

male and 48.8% females) claimed to have been repeatedly struck with an implement. In that

same study, 10.2% admitted been coerced or convinced as adolescents to have sexual intercourse

against their wishes. In comparison, 16.8% admitted that their birth parents or other relatives

who brought them up manipulated them emotionally in one way or another (Chinawa et al.,

2013). This goes to show the extent and severity of child abuse in Nigeria.

Another factor that could be subtle to bullying is self-esteem. There are chances that children

who have low self-esteem are likely to seek an avenue to prove their capabilities and could end

up intimidating others while trying to prove themselves contrary to their perception.

3
Self-esteem is a possible mediating force that can shed light on the connection between

harassment, victimization and child violence. Self-esteem is characterized as a positive or

negative attitude towards self (Rosenberg, 1965) and is an internal expression of social

acceptance or rejection (Leary & Downs, 1995). Self-esteem is a significant part of adolescent's

self-understanding and is likely to play an essential role in their development (Wang, et al.,

2018).

Low self-esteem has been linked to violent and antisocial behaviour, as well as depression. There

has been a substantial body of research on the connection between self-esteem and bullying at

school. Self-esteem was adversely correlated with peer victimization and bullying perpetration in

a recent meta-analysis (Wang et al., 2018).

Although studies have shown that one of the effects of bullying is low self-esteem, many victims

of bullying end up having low self-esteem; however, studies on the relationship between bullying

perpetration and self-esteem contradict. Some studies said that low self-esteem is the reason why

some people bully. Other studies show that most bullies have high self-esteem. However,

findings on bullying perpetration and self-esteem have been less reliable. Earlier studies

(Olweus, 1990, 1994; Rigby & Slee, 1991; Salmivalli et al., 1999) identified higher self-esteem

among bullies, while more recent studies (Frisen et al., 2007; Jankauskiene et al., 2008; Yang et

al., 2006) found the reverse.

Although many people believe that bullies act hard to hide feelings of fear and self-loathing,

bullies tend to be confident and have high self-esteem (Nansel et al., 2001). Rigby (2008)

describes six of the most popular sources of power instigating bullying. First, it has to do with

physically harming others, mainly because they are superior in height, strength, or physical

capacity. Secondly, it involves being numerically superior, such as a group of three individuals

4
ganging up to one person. Thirdly, it is being more confident and assertive than others, which

may lead anyone to make fun of another person directly without thinking about how it would

affect themselves or their reputations. The fourth has to do with having superior social or

manipulative abilities, making it easier to turn people against others or exclude them. The fifth

involved being able to sophisticatedly intimidate or harm people, such as making fun of others in

a subtle way that goes unnoticed by adults in classrooms, allowing the abuse to continue. Lastly,

it has to do with high social status and control over others or access to embarrassing or private

information.

The impact of bullying on a child’s educational, psychological, and physiological development

necessitates continuous research on managing such occurrences. The present research thus

considered the tendency for weak parental control and low self-esteem to determine students’

involvement in the act of bullying. This study will help shed more light on the actual influences

of child abuse and self-esteem on bullying perpetration.

1.2 Statement of the Problem

Several factors contribute to a child's upbringing. The experiences during the early stages of

development go a long way in redefining the child’s personality, what the child believes in, and

the behavioural attributes. Most of the negativity observed in the present society, especially

among the youths (for example, thuggery, fraud, criminality act and sadistic tendencies of

kidnapping, suicide bombing, militant, etc.), could have been triggered by some childhood

experiences which were not adequately managed.

The perpetrators and victims of bullying in early school age have a significant effect on both

individuals involved when these occurrences are continuous with no reprimanding. For the

5
perpetrators, the turnout is primarily seen in their engagement in anti-social vices (Naveed et al.,

2020) and their perception of such behaviours as proper societal norms or acceptable ways of

life. This gives them a sense of high-rating within their immediate environs. For the victims, it

could lead to demoralised emotions, loss of efficacy towards significant aspects of life, and a

negative perception of life in general. In some instance, it increases their tendencies to display

similar act on others (Choi & Park 2018) or even decreases the value or desire that a child

develop for education since it is experienced in school.

There is growing evidence that the experience of being bullied contributes to general mental

health issues, including the internalization and externalization of symptoms (Klomek et al., 2015;

Moore et al., 2017; Reijntjes et al., 2010; Schoeler et al., 2018; Singham et al., 2017; van Lier et

al., 2012). Youth who bully others and are bullied themselves face the most severe repercussions

and are at higher risk for mental wellbeing and behavioural issues (Center for Disease Control,

2017). All these waterdown the expectations from educating a child and also affect the economic

development of that child via an upsurge of oppressive and destructive activities on social-

economic facilities.

About 70% prevalence of victimization through bullying was in multi-country research spanning

North America, Europe, and Israel (Gupta et al., 2020). Based on a meta-analysis, the prevalence

of bullying perpetration worldwide was 34.5%, and victimization was 36% (Modecki et al.,

2014). On a ration basis, the worldwide prevalence of bullying is estimated to be slightly more

than 1 in 3 students, aged between13 to 15 years. This shows that bullying has become rampant

among students at an alarming rate, which calls for detailed research into possible antecedence.

Adverse childhood experiences have been linked to various negative physical and psychological

outcomes throughout a person's life (Read & Bentall, 2012). Children abused at home are at an

6
increased risk of bullying perpetration and bullying victimization (Hong et al., 2017; Shetgiri et

al., 2012). Parenting has a significant impact on adolescent development, behaviour, and

socialization outside the home (Engels et al., 2002; Roh & Sim, 2004;). Also, adolescents tend to

observe and model their parents' behaviour and socialization (Bandura, 1977). Some studies had

considered the highlighted factors by looking at parenting style, attachment, and parents’

experience of marital conflicts as a determining factor. However, few researchers had considered

child abuse as a factor predisposing a child to bully.

Culturally wise, it is essential to note that the southwestern region of Nigeria has respect

embedded into the culture. Younger children do not address the elder ones by their first names

and are expected to obey instructions without question (Nwadiora, 1996; Fadipe, 1970). Though

this culture is gradually eroding, its impact still reflects and determine the relationship between

these concepts in the study setting. In some schools, students in the lower grades are expected to

defer to those in the upper grades and are not permitted to address their "seniors" (upper-grade

students) by their first names, especially in the boarding houses. This cultural difference and the

lack of school policy on bullying discourage reporting of bullying incidents and could also define

the norm of bullying. However, in an increasingly globalized world, it beholds us to be aware

and be proactive in responding to and addressing global concerns (Fenny, 2018).

Another factor that could predispose children to bully is self-esteem. It has been researched

severally; however, the outcomes were equivocal. Some researchers reported increased bullying

from those with low self-esteem, while others attributed high self-esteem to bullying. It is proper

to replicate this finding among Nigerian samples to relate it to students’ experience of child

abuse. Although many researchers are now giving attention to bullying, not many studies are

conducted on why students in Nigeria are involved in bullying perpetration. People are often

7
ignorant of the effects of bullying on both the victims and the bullies. This research will shed

more light on these issues. There are even fewer studies on the influences of child abuse or self-

esteem on the perpetuation of bullying.

1.3 Research Questions

The following research questions are to guide this study:

1. To what extent would child abuse influence bullying perpetration among secondary

school students?

2. To what extent would self-esteem influence bullying perpetration among secondary

school students?

3. Do child abuse and self-esteem jointly influence bullying perpetration among

secondary school students?

4. Does the boarding status of a student determine their experience of bullying in

secondary school?

1.4 Research Objectives

The primary objective of this study is to determine the influence of child abuse and self-esteem

on bullying behaviour among students (perpetration). Other objectives include:

i. To ascertain the extent to which child abuse will affect/influence bullying

perpetration among secondary school students.

ii. To determine the extent to which self-esteem would influence bullying perpetration

among secondary school students.

8
 iii. To examine how child abuse and self-esteem jointly influence bullying perpetration

among secondary school students.

iv. To determine whether the boarding status of students will determine their experience

of bullying in secondary school.

1.5 Justification of the Study

This study will help to shed light on the severity of bullying among adolescents. The results of

this study may be helpful to parents, students, and teachers to understand the influence of child

abuse and self-esteem on the perpetration of bullying. Findings from this study may also help to

improve parent-child relationships by showing the adverse effects of child abuse and bullying.

This study might also help policy-makers understand how they can prevent and punish the act of

bullying among adolescents.

1.6 Scope of the Study

Although there are many reasons for bullying perpetration, this study only focuses on child abuse

and self-esteem. The act of bullying is not restricted to a particular age group or academic range;

however, the study considered this behaviour among secondary school students. The sample size

is 350 students from four schools in Ile-Ife, Osun State.

9
1.7 Plan of the Study

For easy comprehension, this study plan has been divided into five chapters. Chapter one is the

introduction, which is divided into the background of the study, statement of the problem,

research questions, research objectives, study's justification, the study's scope, and plan of the

study. Chapter two covers the literature review and theoretical framework, including

conceptualization, empirical studies, conceptual framework, research hypotheses, and

operational definition of terms. Chapter three covers the research methodology, including

research design, study area and population, data collection technique, sampling procedure,

research instruments, data analysis, and ethical considerations. Chapter four focuses on the study

results, including the relationship among the study variables and hypotheses testing. Finally,

chapter five looks into discussion, conclusions, summary and recommendations.

10
 CHAPTER TWO

LITERATURE REVIEW

This portion of the study focuses on the analysis of literature. Starting up with conceptual

clarification of concepts. Primary constructs in the study are described and explain, given the

purpose of the research. After these, theories and models that could explain the variables under

study and the proposed association among these variables are explained using these theories and

models. Empirical related studies are also considered and used to buttress points revealing the

existing findings in such directions and the reasons for further research. Based on these, a

conceptual framework is generated. It is based on this that the research hypotheses are

formulated.

2.1 Conceptualisation

2.1.1 Bullying Perpetration

Bullying perpetration in schools has become a big problem many adolescents face, yet it is

difficult to identify by parents and teachers (Aurthor, 2012). Bullying among school children is

undoubtedly an ancient phenomenon (Olweus, 2010). A deep curiosity in the interpersonal

phenomena of abuse, referred to as ‘bullying’ ‘Mobbing’, started to take shape in Sweden in the

late 1960s and early 1970s (Harris & Petrie, 2003). Olweus is one of the first experts to shed

light on the concept of bullying. In his early studies, Daniel Olweus, a Scandinavian scholar

widely known today as the leading expert on abuse, started using the words “bully/victim” and

“whipping boy”.

Bullying is characterised as a sub-type of aggression that involves repeated exposure to negative

behaviour to cause adverse reactions, damage or pain and imbalance in control (e.g. physical,

11
psychological, cognitive) between the perpetrator and the Victim (Olweus, 1990, 1993). Cook et

al. (2010) identify bullies or perpetrators as experiencing various internalising and externalising

challenges. Partly, these challenges occur because they failed to interact adequately with their

surrounding environment (e.g. education, friends, and so on.) and partly because of their negative

self-reliant cognitions (e.g. low self-esteem).

The exposure of a student repeatedly and overtime to harmful actions on the part of one or more

other students is referred to as been bullied or victimized (Olweus, 1986, 1993). Harmful acts

may be carried out through physical touch, words, or other ways, such as making expressions or

mean gestures and deliberate removal from a party. To use the word bullying, there can also be

an imbalance in authority or strength (asymmetrical relationship) such that the student subject to

negative acts has trouble protecting themselves (Olweus, 2014).

Bullying has four significant characteristics:(1) it is intentional an activity, (2) it may cause

damage, (3) it includes a power imbalance, and (4) it happens over time. ( Tsaousis, 2016).

Although bullying research has dramatically increased in popularity over the years, some

confusion still exists regarding its conceptual model or operational definition. This is because

bullying is used to describe a person’s aggressive/violent behaviour against another person in

some cases. In some other cases, it is used to denote a person’s repeated exposure to peer

aggression. Some researchers, however, use the word “bullying perpetration” to refer to

aggressive/violent actions or activities towards a child (Chen & Wei, 2011; Gendron et al.,

2011). Researchers also use “peer victimisation” to describe violent or aggressive acts

perpetrated by other people.

12
Notably, the word bullying is used when referring to the practice in general, while the words

bullying perpetration and peer victimisation are used to indicate the respective instances of each

type of behaviour ( Tsaousis, 2016)

There is much focus on the victimisation of students, but for this research, the focus will be on

bullying perpetration and why students bully.

2.1.2 Child Abuse

According to the World Health Organization (WHO) study, child abuse (CA) is a significant

global concern. Child abuse encompasses sexual assault, physical abuse, mental abuse, and

neglect (Karbasi et al., 2019). Child abuse is the harassment or neglect of a child, resulting in

injury or damage. Abuse happens when the abuser can no longer cope with the parent/child

relationship (Bell, 1985). However, the perpetrators of child abuse are not limited to the parents.

Child abusers usually have immediate access to the child. They are relatives, guardians, teachers

and any other caretaker. Child abuse is usually unknown within a community because child

abuse is a largely hidden crime (Bell, 1985). In many cases, especially in Nigeria, the line

between discipline and child abuse is unclear, so the line is often crossed.

According to Gil (1975), there are three levels of child abuse manifestation. The first is the

circumstance of child neglect at home. The offenders are usually parents, permanent or

temporary parent substitutes, or those who reside in the child’s home daily or temporarily. The

second level is institutional, where child abuse offenders are daycare centres, classrooms,

prisons, detention institutions, child care agencies, etc. The third degree is the societal level. As a

direct or indirect result of social policy, millions of children live in poverty, have little or no

form of schooling, no health care, minor work prospects, etc. The societal level of child abuse is

13
the most extreme level of child abuse. All forms of CA are a severe threat to the health of

children throughout the world. According to the results of a recent meta-analysis, it was

estimated that the prevalence of CA in Iran varied from 9.7% to 67.5% for physical abuse, 17.9%

to 91.15% for emotional abuse, and 23.6 % to 80.18 % for neglect (Karbasi et al., 2019).

2.1.3 Self-Esteem

Morris Rosenberg (1965) defined self-esteem as one’s attitude toward oneself- a favourable or

unfavourable attitude toward the self. Self-esteem is primarily concerned with how we perceive

and value ourselves. Self-esteem appears to have a significant impact on people’s well-being and

their ability to form and maintain positive and healthy relationships with others (Darjan et al.,

2020). There are many terms used in place of self-esteem, such as Self-concept, Self-efficacy,

Self-belief and the likes. In a recent review of non-cognitive learning attributes, however,

Gutman and Schoon (2013) distinguish three discrete variables as follows: self-efficacy, which

they define as beliefs about one’s ability to succeed in specific tasks in the future (Bandura,

2001); global self-concept, which reflects an individual’s perceptions of one’s past achievements

in comparison to others; and domain-specific self-cognition.

Competence and worth are two distinct dimensions of self-esteem (Gecas, 1982; Gecas &

Schwalbe1983). The competence dimension (efficacy-based self-esteem) refers to how capable

and influential people perceive themselves to be. The worth dimension (worth-based self-esteem)

refers to the degree to which people believe they are valuable individuals. There are three levels

of self-esteem: low, high, and inflated (Darjan et al. 2020).

Hornstein (2002) classifies self-esteem into five categories based on the stability criterion: high

and stable self-esteem, high and unstable self-esteem, stable and low self-esteem, unstable and

14
low self-esteem, and inflated self-esteem. Ross (2020) proposed another type of self-esteem

classification: collapsed or low self-esteem, vulnerable or regular self-esteem, and solid or high

self-esteem.

People with inflated self-esteem have an unrealistic, seemingly undeniable, and inflated view of

their importance. To maintain this opinion of themselves, they must constantly demonstrate to

others and, more importantly, to themselves that they are better than everyone else, even if it

means underestimating everyone else and exerting excessive attention and admiration. An

inflated self-esteem is a negative and fragile self-esteem that can cause problems in many aspects

of life.

High self-esteem, also known as positive self-esteem, is characterised by accepting and valuing

oneself without arrogance or the need to feel better than others, thus diminishing the others. This

type of self-esteem fosters self-confidence and provides the courage to face problems and

maintain balance even in the face of adversity. However, even people with high self-esteem have

difficulty consistently maintaining a reasonable opinion about themselves, especially in

competitive situations that can trigger and exacerbate personal insecurities.

Low self-esteem is characterised by a lack of self-esteem and confidence, insecurity, and a fear

of failure. Because of their lack of self-confidence, people with low self-esteem have difficulty

defending their opinions or making decisions. We can distinguish between unstable low self-

esteem (situational and rapid changes in self-perception) and stable low self-esteem (mainly

marked by indecision. People with unstable low self-esteem are sensitive and easily influenced,

and their self-esteem fluctuates, ranging from euphoria to despair, depending on the

circumstances. People with stable low self-esteem have a near-permanent difficulty making

decisions and getting involved because they are afraid of not meeting expectations (Emler,

15
2001). Self-esteem influences children’s development and adjustment, as well as their

psychological and behavioural health and well-being (Tambelli et al., 2012; Neff, 2011), as well

as their academic achievement (Darjan et al., 2016; Joshi & Srivastava, 2009; Alves-Martins et

al., 2002; Tremblay et al., 2000).

2.2 Theoretical Framework

2.2.1. Social Learning Theory (Bandura 1977)

This theory is based on the notion that we benefit from our social experiences (Nabavi, 2012). In

other words, people learn behaviour by observing the behaviour of other people around them.

Through this, people develop similar attitudes. Many researchers regard the social learning

theory to bridge traditional learning theory and cognitive learning theory. According to Bandura

(1977), behaviour cannot be learned merely by punishment and reinforcement (Nabavi, 2012).

People learn behaviours by observation, imitation and modelling (Bandura 1977). The observed

people are referred to as models, and the learning process is referred to as modelling. (Nabavi,

2012).

The process of modelling can be associated with bullying and aggressive behaviours. When a

child is constantly being exposed to a violent or aggressive environment, that child is likely to

model that behaviour and project it on people around him/her. The social learning theory

addresses both child abuse and bullying/aggression. A model (usually parents, teachers or

guardians) who is constantly aggressive and violent towards a child can indicate child abuse. The

projection/repetition of this behaviour by the child towards other children in school indicates

bullying perpetration.

16
A good illustration of how modelling can influence people’s behaviours is Bandura’s Bobo doll

experiment in 1961. Bandura, Ross, and Ross (1961) tested 36 boys and 36 girls from the

Stanford University Nursery School aged between 3 to 6. The researchers pre-tested the children

on how hostile they were by evaluating the nursery children and assessed their aggressive actions

on four 5-point rating scales. This experiment emphasises the extent to which modelling can

affect a child’s behaviour. It also shows that children exposed to aggressive behaviour tend to

project that behaviour among their peers; hence, bullying perpetration.

2.2.2 Attachment Theory (John Bowlby 1958)

Children’s specific behaviours are associated with attachment, such as finding proximity to the

attachment figure when distressed or threatened (Bowlby, 1969). The first attachment theorist

was British psychologist John Bowlby, who described attachment as a permanent psychological

connectedness between human beings (Cherry, 2017). Attachment theory discusses how the

parent-child relationship evolves and how it impacts later development. When children are

scared, they seek comfort and care from their primary caregiver by being close to them (Cherry,

2017).

Attachment theory’s central theme is that primary caregivers accessible and attentive to an

infant’s needs help the child develop a sense of security. The baby recognises the caregiver as

trustworthy, which provides a safe foundation for the child to explore the world. Studies had

found that children with unstable avoidant attachment are more likely to display antisocial traits

and callous-unemotional characteristics, while children with stable attachment have lower levels

of violence (Nikiforou et al., 2013). It was also discovered that girls who had higher attachment

17
avoidance levels toward their mothers and higher attachment fear levels toward their fathers

were more likely to be physically aggressive (Williams & Kennedy, 2012).

The same research discovered that when boys had higher attachment anxiety levels toward their

fathers, they were more likely to participate in relational violence. Bowlby concluded that

children who do not form stable attachments with their caregivers are more likely to fear others

and have low empathy and compassion for others. As a result, these kids can struggle with a

variety of adjustment issues later in life. Bowlby’s claims were backed up by more recent

empirical research. Early dysfunctional attachment relationships are linked to a lack of social

skills, externalising behaviour issues, extreme antisocial behaviour, childhood violence, conduct

disorder, and delinquency (Nikiforou et al., 2013). Concluding on the research outcomes,

Nikiforou et al. (2013) summated that children’s poor attachment quality correlated significantly

with bullying and victimisation.

Poor attachment can also indicate emotional child abuse or neglect by parents or caregivers of a

child (Riggs, 2010). Children are likely to adopt insecure attachment strategies because they are

adaptive to their attachment figure’s behavioural responses. Dismissing caregivers, for example,

reject their infants’ requests for attention at home and have infants who exhibit avoidant (e.g.,

indifferent, overly self-reliant) attachment behaviours, which are effective in keeping the

attachment figure from turning away from the infant. A child’s preoccupied caregivers are erratic

or disruptive with their infants at home. Their infants typically display ambivalent (e.g., clingy,

nervous, angry) attachment behaviours that successfully obtain the caregiver’s attention (Riggs,

2010).

This theory also links child abuse and maltreatment to bullying perpetration. Children who are

poorly attached will engage in behaviours that also include/relate to bullying perpetration.

18
2.2.3. The Self Concept Theory of Bullying

Self-concept can be defined as individuals’ cognitive evaluations of themselves, thoughts,

beliefs, and attitudes (Hattie, 1992). The role of self-concept in bullies and victims may shed

light on why students bully and why they remain victims. The self-concept is a system of either

positive or negative self-evaluations and identification that motivates and structures behaviour

and aspirations. Staub (1999) proposed that bullies may lack the socially valued means of

gaining a positive self-concept through competence and good school performance. As a result,

they organise their self-esteem around physical strength, power, and superiority over others.

Harming others may become a way for students to reaffirm their self-identity and compensate for

frustration in other areas. They engage in behaviours to protect and enhance their self-concept

(Parada et al., 1999).

Marsh et al. (2001) discovered that aggressive school troublemakers (getting into physical fights,

getting into trouble, being perceived as a troublemaker, and being punished for getting into

trouble) and Victim (being threatened with harm, not feeling safe) factors were related to three

components of self-concept (General, Same-Sex Relations, and Opposite Sex Relations).

Longitudinal structural equation models for the same students in the 8th, 10th, and 12th grades

indicated that the troublemaker and victim constructs remained reasonably stable and positively

correlated over time. This lends credence to the finding that many students are both

troublemakers and victims.

Whereas the aggressive troublemaker factor was somewhat negatively correlated with self-

concepts, the troublemaker factor had a small positive effect on subsequent self-concepts. This

19
shows that poor self-concept may cause trouble-making behaviour in an attempt to improve

subsequent self-concept.

Bullies, in particular, may gain a personal sense of power and receive social reinforcement from

their peers for engaging in bullying behaviours that result in the intimidation of their victims.

Although boys had higher troublemaker and victim scores than girls, the effects of these

constructs on subsequent self-concept were similar for boys and girls. Victims were also likely to

have poor social self-concepts regarding considering themselves as socially competent or

acceptable by their peers. A negative loop developed for targets whereby being bullied led to

poorer self-concepts and maintained their target status within the group or school. According to

the findings, more aggressive individuals can have either solid or low self-concepts. For

example, Salmivalli (1998) found that adolescent bullies had positive social and physical self-

concepts but negative self-perceptions in other areas (e.g., academic; Salmivalli, 2001). These

findings suggest that bullies’ social and physical self-concepts may be reinforced by bullying,

while other aspects of self-concept remain low. In the same study, targets had low scores in the

majority of self-concept domains. There was, however, a group of bullied students who reported

high self-concept in the areas of family-related and behavioural self-concept.

The nature and role of self-concept in bullies are much more complicated and poorly understood.

According to Juvonen and Graham (2004), bullies perceive themselves positively, exhibiting too

optimistic self-views. There is, however, little consistent support for the direction of the

correlation between self-concept and bullying, which may differ depending on the specific

component of self-concept. In other words, bullies either have inflated self-esteem or have low

self-esteem and bully other people into hiding it and making themselves feel better. There is

evidence that low self-concept is a trigger for bullying to improve the bully’s self-concept or that

20
bullying may become a form of validating self-identity and compensating for frustration in other

areas. There has, however, been little research into the relationship between self-concept and

bullying. The studies that have been conducted thus far have all been cross-sectional, evaluating

relationships between variables at a single point in time.

To link the previous theories with the self-concept theory, children whom their parents are

abusing may hide their fear and low self-esteem by projecting modelled behaviour on other

children in school. According to The self-concept theory, bullies have been found to have a low

self-concept in some areas. The more they bully, the better they feel about themselves and

reinforcement from classmates and bystanders will make them continue these behaviours.

Child Abuse and Self Concept - Child abuse is known to cause low self-concept in children, who

develop a negative perspective of themselves (Kinard, 1980). Maltreatment experienced can

cause fundamental and severe changes in self-definition and self-regulation in the most extreme

situations (Fischer and Ayoub, 1994; Westen, 1994), including the development of dissociative

disorders. Other defects in maltreated children’s self-systems have also been observed. For

example, maltreated children’s negative attitudes about themselves and incapacity to talk about

their actions and states may impair their ability to engage in successful social connections.

Children who have been abused appear to be the most reluctant to discuss their unpleasant

interior emotions (Beeghly and Cicchetti, 1994). Several other researchers have found links

between a child’s exposure to maltreatment and unfavourable mental health outcomes such as

low self-esteem and depression (Briere, 1996; Heim and Nemeroff, 2001).

According to research carried out by Devi et al. (2013), physical abuse was discovered to be the

sole significant predictor of adolescent self-concept. Several studies have revealed that

maltreated children have lower positive self-concepts than non-maltreated children, as judged by

21
teacher ratings and child self-reports (Bolger et al., 1998; Kim & Cicchetti, 2006; Toth et al.,

2000).

2.2.4 The Social-Ecological Model of Bullying (Bronfenbrenner 1977)

Bullying and peer victimisation may be encouraged and discouraged when the social-ecological

model is used. This is due to the interrelationships across numerous contexts (Bronfenbrenner

1977). This framework is conceptualised as a holistic model and interactive set of systems that

create the context in which the individual experiences the phenomena. Furthermore, bullying and

victimisation are influenced by the reciprocal relationships between a young person’s biological

and psychological features, conduct, and environment (Espelage & De La Rue 2012).

Researchers have proposed various variables to explain the causes of bullying and victimisation,

including parental techniques, family traits, peer relationships, community environment, and

gender role socialisation. The sum of these things in your life, rather than any one of them,

affects peer relations in particular. A series of concentric structures - micro-, exo-, and

macrosystems - influence development directly and indirectly, with the individual youth serving

as the focal point of influence (Bruyere & Garbarino 2010; Garbarino 1992). More precisely, we

look at risk and protective factors at the microsystems (parents, peers, school, and community)

and exosystems (parental stress) for the purpose of this research.

Microsystems - According to Bronfenbrenner’s (1977, 1979) social-ecological framework, a

microsystem is defined as a pattern of activities, social roles, and interpersonal relationships

experienced by an individual or a group of individuals in a natural setting (e.g., home, school) in

which the individual is embedded. Persons or groups of individuals are continually shaped by the

interactions that occur inside the microsystem. Various microsystem level factors/contexts, such

22
as parents, peers, school, and community, can directly nurture or inhibit bullying and peer

victimisation among kids.

As adolescents spend a significant amount of time with their families, many elements that

nurture or impede bullying can be found within the home. Several familial factors have been

demonstrated to be positively connected with youth bullying behaviour. These traits include a

lack of parental participation, parental warmth, a lack of family cohesion, and single-parent

family structures. Furthermore, one study discovered that parental abuse (i.e., parents who slap

and beat their children regularly) is a significant predictor of physical bullying among African

American teenagers (Fitzpatrick et al., 2007). Childhood family situations also influence bullying

behaviour. Family violence, inconsistent discipline, bullying by siblings, and a father’s history of

bullying may all be factors. Family support has been linked to positive outcomes in children and

adolescents, including a higher likelihood of prosocial behaviour (Bean et al. 2003; Carlson et al.

2000) and higher school performance (Bean et al. 2003), as well as a lower likelihood of

psychological distress (Bean et al. 2006; Gray and Steinberg 1999), substance use (Parker and

Benson 2004; Willis et al. 2004).

Exosystem - Understanding the multiple influences of bullying and peer victimisation

necessitates looking at the individual as a part of larger social units. Exosystems are made up of

two or more interactions or settings, with only one directly affecting the individual

(Bronfenbrenner 1977). Some situations or events can influence a young person’s socialisation,

even if they have no direct involvement. The exosystem has an indirect effect on the youth

because it usually affects the youth through other people (e.g., caregivers) in the youth’s life

(Patton et al., 2013).

23
For example, parental stress caused by external factors (such as a lack of financial resources)

may not directly relate to individual youth. However, it can impact the youth's microsystem (e.g.,

parent-youth relationship). More specifically, mothers’ stress as a result of a lack of financial

resources, a lack of social support, and personal problems have been investigated in several

studies on African American children and adolescents and is significantly correlated with youth

psychosocial development (e.g., Brody et al., 1994; Caldwell et al., 2002).

Concerning the present study, children could develop bullying behaviours from their homes and

immediate environment, either directly or indirectly. These behaviours are projected in their

school environment, making them perpetrators of bullying. The act of bullying was also related

to parental care, thus revealing the possible association between child abuse and the perpetration

of bullying among school children.

2.2.5 A Social-Ecological Diathesis-Stress Model of Bullying

According to diathesis-stress models, psychological difficulties develop due to an individual’s

biological and cognitive vulnerabilities interacting with stressful life experiences. Bullying is

viewed as a stressful life event influenced by a variety of social stressors. However, social

stressors do not fully explain the emergence of psychological difficulties such as depression,

anxiety, and aggression. On the other hand, stressful life events can be exacerbated by biological

vulnerabilities and activate cognitive vulnerabilities, resulting in more significant, adverse

outcomes (Swearer et al., 2015). Hence the development of either positive or negative self-

concepts.

Beliefs about oneself, the world, and the future are formed due to early experiences, with stable

cognitive structures beginning to form around nine (Stark et al., 1996). By adolescence, abstract

24
thinking has advanced, allowing children to form more stable beliefs about themselves, the

world, and the future. Negative self-concept is an essential factor in predicting participation in

bullying and victimisation (Marsh et al., 2001). Peer victimisation can activate negative self-

schemas (e.g., “I am a loser; everyone hates me”). This could lead to perceptions of the self as

unlovable and worthless (outright self-blame; Graham & Juvonen, 1998), further leading to one

experiencing the world as hostile and developing a negative outlook on the future. All of these

increase one’s risk for depression (Stark et al., 1996). Likewise, bullying perpetration may result

from activating a threat schema (e.g., “Everyone is going to bully me”). This can promote

negative self–other beliefs (e.g., “I had better ruin her reputation before she ruins mine”), leading

the individual to become aggressive in social relationships to maintain power and control.

Individuals who bully others may also operate from hostile schemas about themselves or others

(e.g., “I deserve what I can take from others” or “Losers deserve what they get”). This could lead

to negative beliefs about others and a sense of entitlement, which supports the tendency to

disengage morally in the face of bullying.

The social-ecology model considers the interconnections in a child’s world. The diathesis-stress

model allows for understanding the complexities of stressors and risk/protective factors that

influence bullying engagement and intervention. Bullying involvement reflects developing

capacities for social engagement and explorations of power for many children and youth. For

these youth, bullying may be best addressed through educational efforts to improve the social

skills and awareness required for effective and positive interpersonal relationships.

25
2.3 Empirical Studies

The empirical studies discuss research summaries in order to shed more light on this literature. It

contains the author’s name, the date, the research topic, and a summary of the research or article.

According to research carried out by ( Hong et al., 2011 ), they studied the work of other

researchers to understand the potential mediators and moderators of the association between

child maltreatment and bullying perpetration and victimisation. Their research aims to improve

our understanding of the relationship between maltreatment and bullying perpetration and

victimisation by investigating various potential mediating factors explaining this association and

moderating factors that can exacerbate or reduce this association. Their research discovered that

although child maltreatment or abuse can lead to bullying perpetration, children who experience

child abuse are unlikely to become aggressive adults immediately (Grogan-Kaylor & Otis 2003;

Moffitt & Capsi 2001; Widom 1989). Instead, violence emerges in some children through

complex pathways, in which a developing child’s risk of violence increases with each additional

exposure to violence or misconduct, as well as continued exposure to deviant role models

(Bender, 2010; Moffitt & Caspi, 2001).

One of the mediating factors that link child abuse and bullying in this study is emotional

dysregulation, which is defined as the inability of an individual to recognise, understand, and

modulate their emotions and to match their emotions to the reality of the situation around them

(Gratz & Roemer, 2004; Keenan, 2000). Emotional dysregulation in children is recognised as a

significant outcome of abuse (Gil et al., 2009; Kelly 1992). Physical and emotional abuse and

neglect harm children’s physical, cognitive, social, and emotional development, compounding

over time.

26
Some studies link low self-esteem and emotional self-regulation. Another study by Gomez et al.

(2018) shows a link between high self-esteem and self-regulation. High self-esteem has been

linked to better coping mechanisms and higher standards for oneself (Baumeister et al., 2003).

Furthermore, low self-esteem has been linked to more aggressive behaviour (Donnellan et al.,

2005) due to an individual’s inability to regulate his/her emotions. The two research mentioned

above relates child abuse to the perpetuation of bullying. The first research linked it with other

moderating and mediating factors and not self-esteem, and the second links one of the mediating

factors with self-esteem. It is difficult to find research that directly links self-esteem, child abuse

and bully perpetration.

Bankole & Arowosegbe (2014) carried out a study on the influence of child abuse on the self-

esteem of secondary school students in Ekiti State, Nigeria. The study showed a significant

influence of child abuse on the self-esteem of the students. According to the study, the combined

influence of child abuse on self-esteem, including psychological, physical, and sexual abuse, will

significantly impact their self-esteem later in life. Based on the findings, the study also

confirmed that neglect and abuse by parents or caregivers significantly impact a child’s self-

esteem.

Rose et al. (2017) studied the relationship between bullying perpetration and self-esteem over

some time. The research was conducted to ascertain if constructs of bully perpetration and self-

esteem are metrically invariant and stable over time and if bully perpetration and self-esteem are

directly and significantly related. It was hypothesised that the structure of the constructs would

be stable, each individual construct would be associated, and a significant inverse relationship

would exist between bully perpetration and self-esteem over time. They studied 971 students

from a convenience sample of two rural middle schools in the Midwest United States. The

27
study’s findings suggest that the constructs are not directly related and cannot be used as

independent predictors. According to the study, bullying perpetration and self-esteem do not

have a stable relationship.

The result of this research agrees with various findings over time. Some researchers (Juvonen &

Graham, 2004; Darjan et al., 2020) said inflated self-esteem results in bullying perpetration. In

contrast, other researchers (Swearer et al., 2015) believe that negative self-concept and self-

esteem are the reason behind bullying perpetration.

This research project, unlike others, is to find out if there is a combined influence of child abuse

and self-esteem on bully perpetration since there are limited findings on this aspect of research.

This study will pay attention to the correlation between self-esteem and bully perpetration.

2.4 Conceptual Framework

The reviewed studies and theories show the possible tendencies for students’ bullying activities

to be triggered by certain identified elements. The conceptual framework explains the proposed

association among these concepts. This framework shows how different variables work hand in

hand to affect bullying perpetration among secondary school students. According to this

framework, two significant independent variables are hypothesised to influence bullying

perpetration. The two independent variables include child abuse and self-esteem.

28
Figure 1
Conceptual Framework Showing the Possible Association Between Child Abuse and Self-
esteem with Bullying Perpetration

From the socio-cultural perspective, there is a consideration for the boarding house factor on

bullying. The societal norm recognises forcefully making junior students comply with commands

from the senior ones based on class. The study seeks to determine the joint influence of child

abuse and self-esteem on bullying perpetration among secondary school students. The study also

seeks to understand the influence of the boarding house status on bullying perpetration. This is if

being in the boarding house influences or increases the chances of being a bully perpetrator. It is

based on the framework that the study hypotheses were generated.

29
2.5 Research Hypotheses

The research hypotheses establish the direction of research measurement and serve as the

foundation for the study’s analysis. The following are the research hypotheses for this study:

1. Child abuse will significantly influence bullying perpetration among secondary school

students.

2. Self-esteem would significantly influence bullying perpetration among students.

3. Child abuse and self-esteem have a significant joint influence on bullying perpetration

among secondary school students.

4. The boarding house status of students would significantly determine the extent to which

they bully their schoolmates.

2.6 Operational Definition of Terms

Bullying Perpetration: Bullying perpetration is the act of using one’s social status, power or

size to physically or emotionally put others who are not in the same social status, power or size

down. Simply put, bully perpetration is the act of bullying. Bullying perpetration will be

measured using Parada’s (2000) Adolescent Peer Relations Instrument. The measure was such

that scores from the norm and above indicates a high level of bullying.

Child Abuse: Child abuse is physical, emotional or sexual assault on children, especially by

adults in charge of those children. Ahad and Shah’s (2019) Child Abuse Questionnaire will be

used to measure child abuse, and it was interpreted such that the average and above is a yardstick

to explain the high experience of child abuse.

30
Self-Esteem: Self-esteem is an individuals perception or view of him/herself. General self-

esteem is a person’s sense of value and worth. Rosenberg Self Esteem Scale was adopted, and it

was interpreted such that individuals measuring above the mean indicated high self-esteem and

vice versa.

Boarding House Schooling: Boarding house schooling is when schools provide lodging and

feeding services for students. Students in boarding schools live and study in school during school

sessions and adhere to the strict rules and regulations provided by the school.

31
 CHAPTER THREE

METHODS

This chapter discussed data collection procedures and data analysis methods. It implored the

most appropriate research methods for data collection and presentation for the study to achieve

an objective outcome. A quantitative approach to the study was used as the best option to suit the

study's aims. This chapter provided detailed information regarding the methods employed to

evaluate the influence of child abuse and self-esteem on bullying perpetration among secondary

school students in Ile-Ife, Osun State. This chapter included information on the research design,

study area, study population, sampling methodology and size, research instruments, validity and

reliability testing for research instruments, data analysis, and ethical considerations.

3.1 Research Design

For this study, a cross-sectional research design was used. The survey method, which included

self-administered questionnaires and psychological tests, was utilized to investigate the influence

of child abuse and self-esteem on bullying perpetration among secondary school students in Ile-

Ife, Osun state. A primary reason for adopting the design was that the research data were

collected within a single period. The independent variables are child abuse and self-esteem,

while the dependent variable is bullying perpetration.

32
3.2 The Study Area

The study took place in one of the two local government areas in Ile-Ife Osun State, Nigeria, the

Ife Central Local Government Area. The Ife Central Local Government Area (LGA) is located in

Osun State, Southwest Nigeria, with its headquarters in the Ajebandele area of Ile Ife. Ife central

has 102,348 people and covers 111 square kilometres, with the Yoruba ethnic group being the

most numerous. The LGA is made up of districts such as Ilare, Iremo, Moore, Ojaja, Akarabata,

Aba Coker, Eleyele, Ilode, Okerewe, and Opa.

The study took place in four secondary schools in Ile-Ife Osun State, Nigeria. They include two

private secondary schools: Obafemi Awolowo University International School, Sought Out

College, and two public secondary schools: Moremi High School and Oluorogbo High School.

3.3 The Study Population

The study population included all secondary school students within Ife Central Local

Government Area. Both public and private schools were considered. The magnitude of the

research population could not be defined as the records of inflow-outflow transfer of students

were not generally updated in a centralized document in the education system, especially in

private schools. This made it difficult to get factual information about the population in figures.

Based on this, the study population was thus defined as infinite, and this was the yardstick with

which it was statistically evaluated for sample distribution.

3.4 Participants

The participants for the research were secondary school students in classes ranging from JSS2 to

SSS2 classes. The formula by Krejce and Morgan (1970) for determining sample size when the

33
unknown population was adopted, and a minimum sample size of 348 was arrived at. This was

approximated to 350 samples and utilised for the research purpose. After data collection, 324

sampled data were found valid for the research purpose. The socio-demographics of the sampled

participants were summarised in Table 3.1.

Table 3.1
Socio-Demographic Characteristics of Participants

Variables Number %
Male 129 39.8
Sex Female 195 60.2
Total 324 100.0
JSS2 86 26.5
JSS3 64 19.8
Class SSS1 97 29.9
SSS2 77 23.8
Total 324 100.0
Day Student 309 95.4
Boarding Status Border 15 4.6
Total 324 100.0
Single Parent 28 8.6
Parent’s Marital Status Separated 16 4.9
Married and Living 280 86.4
Together
Total 324 100.0
Who Do You Live Mother 36 11.1
With Father 44 13.6
Both Mother And Father 230 71.0
Relatives 11 3.4
Guardians 3 .9
Total 324 100.0
Age ranges between 10 – 18 (Mean=13.69 ; SD= 1.69)

The demographic characteristics of the sampled participants in the studied population are shown

in Table 3.1. They include the participant’s age, gender, class, boarding house status, parent’s

marital status, and living status. The results are revealed that 39.8% of the participants were

34
male, while 60.2% were females. Their ages range between 10 and 18 years (Mean=13.69; SD=

1.69). Those in JSS2 were 26.5%, 19.8% were in JSS3, 29.9% were in SSS1, while 23.8% were

in SSS2. The boarding status was such that 95.4% were day students, while very few were

boarders (4.6%). Other possible determining factors were parent’s marital status, and it was

noted that 8.6% were single parents, 4.9% were separated, while a majority (86.4%) were

married and living together. Lastly noted was how the child presently lived with and it was

indicated that 11.1% lived with only the mother, 13.6% lived with only the father, 71% lived

with both parents, 3.4% lived with relatives, while 0.9% lived with some form of a guardian.

3.5 Sampling Technique

A multi-stage sampling procedure was adopted. Firstly, a stratified sampling technique was

utilised to categories secondary schools in the study location into public and private secondary

schools. Furthermore, random sampling was then adopted to select two public and two private

schools within the setting. This was done through the utilisation of balloting. With a sample size

of 350, a proportionate sampling technique was adopted to distribute the samples into the various

selected schools based on their population. Then the classes of JSS 2 to SSS2 were purposively

selected because the JSS 1 would not likely perpetrate bullying. The SSS3 students had lots of

authorisation within the school system, which could be assumed or confused with bullying

perpetration. Proportionate sampling was again adopted to determine the number of

questionnaires distributed into the selected four classes (JSS2, JSS3, SSS1 and SSS2). Lastly,

simple random sampling was further utilised to select students within each class to participate in

the study.

35
3.6 Procedure

An identification and request letter was obtained from the researcher’s institution and addressed

to the selected secondary schools that were sampled in Ile-Ife to obtain approval to distribute the

research questionnaires. After receiving authorization from the school management, the

researcher proceeded to distribute the research instrument to the participants. Rapport was

established with the participants. They were made familiar with general knowledge about the

research, and the confidentiality of the information provided was guaranteed. The questionnaires

were to be filled out entirely by the participants immediately while the researcher waited to

retrieve them. The field work of this research span for three weeks since the researcher alone was

involved in the process. The total number of questionnaires administered were 350; those

retrieved were 339, while those found valid for the research purpose were 324. This made a

response rate of 92.6%.

3.7 Research Instruments

For data collection, a questionnaire (made of sections A to D) containing the social-demographic

information of the participants and three psychological scales was employed. Section A with the

social-demographic items includes; age, sex, class, boarding status, parent’s marital status and

how they lived with. The psychological scales that made up sections B, C and D are explained

below.

36
Child Abuse Scale (CAS)

This is a 13-item scale by Ahad and Shah (2019) that is used to assess the severity of child abuse.

Child Abuse Questionnaire is measured on a 7-point Likert scale ranging from 1-Never, 2-

Rarely, 3-Occasionally, 4-Sometimes, 5-Frequently 6-Usually to 7-Every time. It is divided into

three subscales, including; physical abuse (item 1-4), emotional abuse (item 5-9) and sexual

abuse (item 10-13). Sample items include, “I used to get physical injuries which lasted for days” –

physical abuse; “I was ignored by my parents/caregivers” – emotional abuse, and “An adult used to touch

me in a way which I did not like”- sexual abuse. The scale was interpreted using the mean scores, and

individuals that measured above the mean value have a high abuse level.

Reliability - The construct reliability for each of the subscales include; physical (0.77),

emotional (0.85) and sexual abuse (0.88). The construct's CR was calculated by dividing the

squared sum of standardized factor loadings by the squared sum of standardized factor loadings

plus the sum of indicator measurement error. The values are well above Peter's (1979) minimum

threshold of 0.60 to 0.70, indicating that construct reliability is high and satisfactory (Ahad &

Shah, 2019). The researcher’s obtained reliability for the construct’s composite score was

Chronbach’s Alpha coefficient value of 0.84, and this was also above the minimum threshold.

Validity - The discriminant validity of the child abuse dimensions was established as the

variances extracted for the constructs physical, emotional and sexual abuse, respectively

(0.47, .55, .55) are higher than the squared correlation between them. It is also evident that AVE

is well above the conventional threshold of 0.5, thus establishing the convergent validity, except

for physical abuse, but it is close enough to 0.05 (Ahad & Shah, 2019).

37
Self Esteem Scale SES)

The Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale (Rosenberg, 1965) is a popular self-report questionnaire for

assessing individual self-esteem. A 10-item scale that assesses overall self-worth by assessing

both positive and negative thoughts about oneself. The scale is thought to be one-dimensional.

All items are graded on a 4-point Likert scale, with answers ranging from strongly disagree - 1 to

strongly agree - 4. Five of the items include positively worded statements, whereas the other five

have negatively worded statements. Sample items include; “On the whole, I am satisfied with

myself”. The total score ranges from 10 to 40, with lower numbers indicating low self-esteem.

Reliability - The scale generally has high reliability: test-retest correlations are typically in the

range of .82 to .88, and Cronbach’s alpha for various samples are in the range of .77 to .88

(Blascovich and Tomaka, 1993, Rosenberg, 1986). The RSES presented high ratings in

reliability areas; internal consistency was 0.77, minimum Coefficient of Reproducibility was at

least 0.90 (M. Rosenberg, 1965, and personal communication, April 22, 1987).

A varied selection of independent studies, each using such samples as – parents, men over 60,

high school students, and civil servants – showed alpha coefficients ranging from 0.72 to 0.87

(all reasonably high). Test-retest reliability for the 2-week interval was calculated at 0.85, the 7-

month interval was calculated at 0.63 (Silber & Tippett, 1965; Whiteman & Shorkey 1978). The

RES is closely connected with the Coopersmith Self-Esteem Inventory. In the present study, a

Cronbach’s alpha coefficient of .60 was obtained.

Validity - The Convergent validity: Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale scores correlated with

depression (r=.65) and anxiety (r=.71) in an ABI population (Cooper-Evans et al., 2008).

Significant negative correlation with a positive view of self, measured using the Head Injury

38
Semantic Differential Scale-III (r=-.365), has been reported (Carroll & Coetzer, 2011).

Bullying Behaviour Scale (BBS)

The Adolescent Peer Relations Instrument (APRI) developed by Parada (2000) was adapted. It

has two sub-sections; one that measures bullying perpetration, the other measures bullying

victimization. For the sake of this research, however, only the section that measures bullying

perpetration was used. The APRI assesses three forms of bullying behaviours (physical, verbal,

and social). There were a total of 18 items used to assess bullying perpetration. All items were

scored on a six-point Likert scale (1 = Never, 2 = Occasionally, 3 = Once or twice a month, 4 =

Once a week, 5 = Several times a week, 6 = Every day). Sample items include; “Pushed or

shoved a student” – physical; “Made jokes about a student” – verbal; “Got other students to

ignore a student” – social. Responses closer to 1 indicated a low level of bullying, but scores

closer to 6 indicated a high level of bullying. Furthermore, individuals that score below the mean

indicated low perpetration of bullying.

Reliability - Parada (2000) found good internal consistency (α = .93) for the instrument, and a

Cronbach alpha of .95 was found by Rawlings (2016). The Bullying factors (Bullying Physical,

Bullying Verbal, Bullying Social) had adequate alpha coefficients. Cronbach’s alpha reliabilities

ranged from good to excellent for the three bullying factors: physical, verbal and social (alpha

coefficients .82 to .92) (Newey 2016). A Cronbach’s alpha coefficient of 0.91 was found for the

18-item scale in the current research.

Validity - In a study by (Gascón-Cánovas et al. 2017), all items had high factor loadings

ranging from .92 to .56; the assumed correlation between factors was demonstrated by an R

coefficient of .77 between items (P<.001).

39
3.8 Data Analysis

Frequency and percentages were used to source the social-demographic characteristics of the

respondents. Pearson Product Moment Correlation was used to test for the relationship existing

among the study variables. Hypothesis 1 – 3 were tested utilizing multiple regression analysis,

while an independent sample t-test was used to test hypothesis 4. All analysis was conducted

using SPSS v.21)

3.9 Ethical Consideration

All research ethics, according to the American Psychology Association guidelines, were put into

consideration. The participants were informed of the reason for the research. Participants were

requested to participate voluntarily. They were assured that the data and results gotten from this

research were used for academic purposes. Also, all research ethics from the Department of

Behavioural Studies, Redeemers University, Ede's ethical board was adhered to.

40
 CHAPTER FOUR
RESULTS

This study examines the influence of child abuse and self-esteem on bullying perpetration among

secondary school students in Ile-Ife Osun State. This chapter thus focuses on the analysis, presentation,

and interpretation of the results derived from the study's final data analysis to determine whether or not

the data collected to support the research hypotheses.

The first section of the chapter presents the test of relationships among the study variables. This creates

bases for the test of hypotheses while revealing the extent and directions of relationship among the study

variables. The remaining section was the test of hypotheses using appropriate tools.

4.1 Test of Relationship

Table 4.1:
Multiple Correlation Analysis showing relationships among the Study Variables

Variables 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
1. Sex 1
2. Age .13* 1
3 Class .06 .59** 1
4. Boarding Status .06 -.06 .04 1
5. Self-esteem -.12* -.12* .20 .07 1
6. Child Abuse -.09 .19** -.03 -.04 -.12* 1
7. Bullying Perpetration -.04 .11* .13* .11 -.03 .42** 1
Mean - 13.69 - - 29.28 20.78 28.85
SD - 1.69 - - 4.02 9.62 13.08
Note: ** p < 0.01, * p < 0.05, N=324

The result in Table 4.1 showed the relationship among the study variables. This establishes

grounds for the test of hypotheses and also revealed the variables that could relate to the

dependents factor in the study. It was noted that self-esteem did not correlate with bullying

perpetration [r (322) = -.03, p>.05]. However, child abuse has a significant relationship with

bullying perpetration [r (322) = .42, p< .01]. This was because as child abuse increases, there

41
also tends to be an increase in bullying perpetration. The relationship between child abuse and

self-esteem was negatively significant [r (322) = -.12, p< .05]. This implies that the higher the

child abuse, the lower the student's self-esteem tend to be. Among the sociodemographic factors,

sex showed no significant relationship with bullying perpetration [r (322) = -.04, p> .05].

However, age and class show a significant correlation with bullying perpetration. This means

that the older the student, the higher their tendency to bully their peers [r (322) = .11, p< .05].

Also, senior students have a significantly higher tendency to bully others based on the results [r

(322) = .13, p< .05]. Boarding status of the students showed no significant relationship with

bullying perpetration [r (322) = .11, p< .05].

4.2 Test of Hypotheses 1 - 3

In order to test the formulated hypotheses 1 to 3, multiple regression analysis was conducted,

showing the influence of child abuse and self-esteem on bullying perpetration. The results are

summarised in Table 4.2.

Table 4.2
Multiple Regression showing Child abuse and Self-esteem Predicting Bullying Perpetration

Variables β t p R R2 df F
.42 .18 2, 321 33.96**
Child Abuse .42 .82** < .01
Self-Esteem .02 .42 > .05
Note: ** p < .01, N= 324

Table 4.2 shows that child abuse independently predicted bullying perpetration among secondary

school students in Ile-Ife, Osun State [β = .42, t = .82, p<.01]. This means that the experience of

abuse by students determines the extent to which they would perpetrate bullying among fellow

students. The result confirmed hypothesis 1, and it was accepted. However, self-esteem did not

42
independently predict bullying perpetration among secondary school students in Ile-Ife, Osun

State [β = .02, t = .42, p>.05]. It implied that the self-esteem of secondary school students do not

determine the extent to which they would perpetrate bullying. This negated hypothesis 2, and it

was rejected.

The result further shows that child abuse and self-esteem are joint predictors of bullying

perpetration among secondary school students in Ile-Ife, Osun State [F (2, 321) = 33.96, p<.01,

R2 = .18]. This outcome signified that 18% of the variance observed in bullying perpetration

could be attributed to child abuse and self-esteem among students. However, this variance could

be attributed to child abuse since self-esteem did not independently predict child abuse.

4.3 Test of Hypothesis 4

To further determine whether day students or boarders will have a higher tendency of bully

perpetration, an independent t-test analysis was conducted. This tested for the formulated

hypothesis 4.

Table 4.3
Summary of Independent T-Test showing Influence of Boarding Status on Bullying
Perpetration

Boarding
Status N Mean SD df t p
Bullying Day Student 309 28.55 12.75 322 -1.89 > .05
Perpetration Boarder 15 35.07 18.05

It was indicated in Table 4.3 that boarding status had no significant influence on bullying

perpetration among secondary school students in Ile-Ife, Osun State [t (324) = -1.89, p > .05].

This means that day students (M= 28.55; SD=12.75) do not differ from borders (M=35.07; SD=

43
18.05) in their perpetration of bullying. This negated the formulated hypothesis 4, and it was

rejected.

44
 CHAPTER FIVE

DISCUSSION, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

5.1 Discussion

This study investigated the influence of child abuse and self-esteem on bullying perpetuation

among secondary school students in Ile-Ife, Osun State. This study also looked into the influence

of boarding status on the perpetration of bullying, i.e. if boarders tend to bully their peers more

than day students.

In accordance with the first hypothesis that said child abuse would significantly influence

bullying perpetration among secondary school students in Ile-Ife, Osun State. The result revealed

that students whose parents or caregivers had abused had a higher tendency to be bully

perpetrators than children who had not been abused. This result is consistent with research

carried out by (Hong et al., 2011). Their research discovered that child maltreatment or abuse

could lead to bullying perpetration.

Within the present study, self-esteem did not independently predict bullying, therefore, negating

hypothesis two. Other research has revealed contradicting results. Some researchers (Juvonen &

Graham 2004, Darjan et al. 2020) found inflated self-esteem results in bullying perpetration. In

contrast, other researchers (Swearer et al., 2015) believe that negative self-concept and self-

esteem are the reason behind bullying perpetration. According to another study by ( Rose et al.,

2017), bullying perpetration and self-esteem do not have a stable relationship. The differences in

outcomes can be because some bullies are high in self-esteem while others are not. This is

consistent with a study by Rodkin et al. (2015) that claims that the profiles of bully perpetrators

differ, with some being socially maladjusted and others being socially skilled. Bully perpetration

45
may be reinforced in each case through social interactions and environmental conditions, further

conditioning youth to engage in bully perpetration. It could also be argued that self-esteem and

bully perpetration levels are essential in understanding the interaction between the two

constructs.

However, in the results of this research, it was revealed that child abuse and self-esteem

negatively correlate. This means that children who had been abused had lower self-esteem.

Confirming hypothesis 3, it was found that child abuse and self-esteem jointly predicted bullying

perpetration among the secondary school students. It could also conclude that since child abuse

had a negative correlation with self-esteem, children who have been abused will have a lower-

esteem and also have the tendency to become bully perpetrators. Child abuse is known to cause

low self-concept in children, who develop a negative perspective of themselves (Kinard, 1980).

This means a cycle is developed where children who are abused and have low self-esteem have a

higher tendency to be bully perpetrators.

It was also revealed in this study that the boarding status of the students did not predict bullying

perpetration among the students. This result could have been because the boarders who

participated in this research were 4.6% of the total population (only 15 boarders out of the total

population of 324 students). It could be said that the population of boarders was too small to

make a conclusion based on these results.

46
5.2 Conclusion

The present study examined the influence of child abuse and self-esteem on bullying perpetration

among secondary school students in Ile-Ife, Osun State. Correlation analysis indicated that child

abuse had a significant correlation with bullying perpetration, and self-esteem did not

significantly correlate with bullying perpetration. However, child abuse and self-esteem had a

negative correlation; thereby, abused children had lower self-esteem than children who were not

abused.

The regression analysis further proved that child abuse influenced bullying perpetration among

secondary school students while self-esteem did not. However, child abuse and self-esteem

jointly influenced bullying perpetration.

This means that although self-esteem did not independently influence bullying perpetration, child

abuse had a significant independent prediction on bullying perpetration. Children who were

abused had strong tendencies to be bully perpetrators.

5.3 RECOMMENDATIONS

Parents and caretakers should be sensitized on the influences of abuse on their children and

wards. In this part of Nigeria, where corporal punishment is encouraged, parents should be made

to see when to draw the line between corporal punishment and child abuse. Caretakers and

parents should be educated on other effective methods of discipline that do not involve any form

of aggression or violence. The government should also enforce policies that address and punish

any form of child abuse.

47
Children usually model aggression and violence. The more they are exposed to the behaviour,

the more they practice the behaviour. The government should also obligate teachers and school

heads to report and investigate violent behaviour exhibited by any of the students in the schools.

Teachers should also be encouraged to report any suspected case of child abuse to the

appropriate authorities.

Bullying perpetration should be handled appropriately by the school authorities so that the

students understand that there are consequences for violent behaviours. To address the issue of

self-esteem, seminars and self-esteem workshops can help to increase student’s self-esteem.

Students who have healthy self-esteem are more likely to have positive experiences (Darjan,

Negru &Dan. 2020)

Despite the identified relevance of this research work, there are identified shortcomings. Students

who participated in this research, especially the students in the public schools, did not seem to

understand some words in the questionnaire. This could lead to them inaccurately answering

some of the questions concerning this research correctly. In addition, the sample size could be

increased to enhance the strength of generalizing the outcome of such research. Another

shortcoming in this research was the number of participants who were in the boarding house. Out

of the 324 participants of this research, only 15 students were boarders. This could have

contributed to the lack of correlation between the boarding status and bullying perpetration of the

participants as there were not enough students to conclude on. The researcher recommends that

for future research, the population of boarders in each school should be considered to get more

in-depth information on bullying perpetration among boarding house students.

48
For further research, it is also recommended that more schools in Nigeria should be investigated

on the bullying behaviours of students; both victims and perpetrators. School teacher’s

contributions to bullying perpetration can also be investigated.

49
 References

Ahad, R., & Shah, S. A. (2019). Psychometric properties of child abuse questionnaire.
International Journal of Research in Engineering, IT and Social Sciences, 9(1), 42–47.

Aluede, O., Fajoju, & Adeleke, S. (2011). Bullying behaviour among secondary school students
in the benin metropolis of nigeria. Zimbabwe Journal of Educational Research, 23(2), 102–
119. https://www.africabib.org/query_a.php?pe=!055857523!&SR=3

Alves-Martins, M., Peixoto, F., Gouveia-Pereira, M., Amaral, V., & Pedro, I. (2002). Self-
esteem and academic achievement among adolescents. Educational Psychology, 22(1), 51–
62. https://doi.org/10.1080/01443410120101242

Arthur, S. (2012) Bullying (1950 - 2010): The bully and the bullied". Dissertations. 381.
Reteieved from https://ecommons.luc.edu/luc_diss/381

Baldry, A. C. (2003). Bullying in schools and exposure to domestic violence. Child Abuse &
Neglect, 27(7), 713–732. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0145-2134(03)00114-5

Bandura, A. (1978). Cognitive theory and social casework. Social Work. Published.
https://doi.org/10.1093/sw/23.5.361

Bandura, A. (2001). Social cognitive theory: An agentic perspective. Annual Review of

Psychology, 52(1), 1–26. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.52.1.1

Bandura, Albert (1977). Social learning theory. Englewood Cliffs, N.J: Prentice Hall

Bankole, E. T., & Arowosegbe, C. K. (2014). Effect of child abuse on Self-Esteem among
secondary schools students in ekiti state (case study of iworoko community high school).
International Journal of Humanities Social Sciences and Education, 1(12), 133–140.

Barboza, G. E., Schiamberg, L. B., Oehmke, J., Korzeniewski, S. J., Post, L. A., & Heraux, C. G.
(2008). Individual characteristics and the multiple contexts of adolescent bullying: An
ecological perspective. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 38(1), 101–121.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-008-9271-1

Baumeister, R. F., Campbell, J. D., Krueger, J. I., & Vohs, K. D. (2003). Does high Self-Esteem
cause better performance, interpersonal success, happiness, or healthier lifestyles?
Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 4(1), 1–44. https://doi.org/10.1111/1529-
1006.01431

Bean, R. A., Barber, B. K., & Crane, D. R. (2006). Parental support, behavioral control, and
psychological control among african american youth. Journal of Family Issues, 27(10),
1335–1355. https://doi.org/10.1177/0192513x06289649

Bean, R. A., Bush, K. R., McKenry, P. C., & Wilson, S. M. (2003). The impact of parental
support, behavioral control, and psychological control on the academic achievement and

50
 Self-Esteem of african american and european american adolescents. Journal of Adolescent
Research, 18(5), 523–541. https://doi.org/10.1177/0743558403255070

Beeghly, M., & Cicchetti, D. (1994). Child maltreatment, attachment, and the self system:
Emergence of an internal state lexicon in toddlers at high social risk. Development and
Psychopathology, 6(1), 5–30. https://doi.org/10.1017/s095457940000585x

Bell, A. (1985). Child abuse: The optometric considerations. Clinical and Experimental
Optometry, 68(6), 228–231. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1444-0938.1985.tb01007.x

Bender, K. (2010). Why do some maltreated youth become juvenile offenders? Children and
Youth Services Review, 32(3), 466–473. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2009.10.022

Bolger, K. E., Patterson, C. J., & Kupersmidt, J. B. (1998). Peer relationships and Self-Esteem
among children who have been maltreated. Child Development, 69(4), 1171–1197.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.1998.tb06166.x

Boulton, M. J., Smith, P. K., & Cowie, H. (2010). Short-Term longitudinal relationships between
children’s peer Victimization/Bullying experiences and Self-Perceptions. School Psychology
International, 31(3), 296–311. https://doi.org/10.1177/0143034310362329

Bowes, L., Arseneault, L., Maughan, B., Taylor, A., Caspi, A., & Moffitt, T. E. (2009). School,
neighborhood, and family factors are associated with children’s bullying involvement: A
nationally representative longitudinal study. Journal of the American Academy of Child &
Adolescent Psychiatry, 48(5), 545–553. https://doi.org/10.1097/chi.0b013e31819cb017

Bowlby, J. (1969). Attachment and loss, v 1 (Printing ed.). Harper.

Briere, J. (1996). A self-trauma model for treating adult survivors of severe child abuse. In J.
Briere, L. Berliner, J. A. Bulkley, C. Jenny, & T. Reid (Eds.). The APSAC handbook on
child maltreatment, 140–157. Sage Publications, Inc.

Brody, G. H., Stoneman, Z., Flor, D., McCrary, C., Hastings, L., & Conyers, O. (1994).
Financial resources, parent psychological functioning, parent Co-Caregiving, and early
adolescent competence in rural Two-Parent African-American families. Child Development,
65(2), 590. https://doi.org/10.2307/1131403

Bronfenbrenner, U. (1977). Toward an experimental ecology of human development. American

Psychologist, 32(7), 513–531. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066x.32.7.513

Bronfenbrenner, U. (1979). The ecology of human development: Experiments by nature and

design (Revised ed.). Harvard University Press

Brown, B. B., Mounts, N., Lamborn, S. D., & Steinberg, L. (1993). Parenting practices and peer
group affiliation in adolescence. Child Development, 64(2), 467.
https://doi.org/10.2307/1131263

51
Bruyere E., & Garbarino J. (2010) The ecological perspective on the human rights of children.
In: S.B. Kamerman., S. Phipps., & A. Ben-Arieh (Ed.). From Child Welfare to Child
Well-Being. Children’s Well-Being: Indicators and Research, 1, 137–154. Springer,
Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-3377-2_9

Bullying Facts, Statistics, Prevention & Effects. (2019). Retrieved from: MedicineNet.
https://www.medicinenet.com/bullying/article.htm

Bullying Statistics. (2020). National Bullying Prevention Center. Retrieved from:

https://www.pacer.org/bullying/info/stats.asp

Caldwell, C. H., Zimmerman, M. A., Bernat, D. H., Sellers, R. M., & Notaro, P. C. (2002).
Racial identity, maternal support, and psychological distress among african american
adolescents. Child Development, 73(4), 1322–1336. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-
8624.00474

Carlson, D. S., Kacmar, K., & Williams, L. J. (2000). Construction and initial validation of a
multidimensional measure of Work–Family conflict. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 56(2),
249–276. https://doi.org/10.1006/jvbe.1999.1713

Carroll, E., & Coetzer, R. (2011). Identity, grief and self-awareness after traumatic brain injury.
Neuropsychological Rehabilitation, 21(3), 289–305.
https://doi.org/10.1080/09602011.2011.555972

Center for Disease Control, National Center for Injury Prevention And Control. (2017).
Preventing bullying |violence Prevention|Injury Center|CDC. Center for Disease Control and
Prevention. Retrieved from:
https://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/youthviolence/bullyingresearch/fastfact.html.

Chen, J. K., & Wei, H. S. (2010). The impact of school violence on Self-Esteem and depression
among taiwanese junior high school students. Social Indicators Research, 100(3), 479–498.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-010-9625-4

Cherry, K. (2017). How attachment theory works. Verywell Mind.

https://www.verywellmind.com/what-is-attachment-theory-2795337

Chinawa, J. M., Aronu, A. E., Chukwu, B. F., & Obu, H. A. (2013). Prevalence and pattern of
child abuse and associated factors in four secondary institutions in Enugu, Southeast
Nigeria. European Journal of Pediatrics, 173(4), 451–456. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00431-
013-2191-4

Choi, B., & Park, S. (2018). Who becomes a bullying perpetrator after the experience of bullying
victimization? The moderating role of self-esteem. Journal of Youth and Adolescence,
47(11), 2414–2423. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-018-0913-7

Cook, C. R., Williams, K. R., Guerra, N. G., Kim, T. E., & Sadek, S. (2010). Predictors of
bullying and victimization in childhood and adolescence: A meta-analytic investigation.
School Psychology Quarterly, 25(2), 65–83. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0020149

52
Cooper-Evans, S., Alderman, N., Knight, C., & Oddy, M. (2008). Self-esteem as a predictor of
psychological distress after severe acquired brain injury: An exploratory study.
Neuropsychological Rehabilitation, 18(5–6), 607–626.
https://doi.org/10.1080/09602010801948516

Darjan, I., Luștrea, A., & Predescu, M. (2016). Rolul școlii în promovarea rezilienței copiilor cu
dificultățide învățare, în Crașovan, M. (coord). Educatie-evaluare-integrare, Timisoara: Ed.
Universității de Vest, 232-245.

Darjan, I., Negru, M., & Dan, I. (2020). Self-esteem – the decisive difference between bullying
and asertiveness in adolescence? Journal of Educational Sciences, 41(1), 19–34.
https://doi.org/10.35923/jes.2020.1.02

de Bruyn, E. H., & Cillessen, A. H. N. (2006). Popularity in early adolescence: Prosocial and
antisocial subtypes. Journal of Adolescent Research, 21(6), 607–627.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0743558406293966

de Vries, E. E., Verlinden, M., Rijlaarsdam, J., Jaddoe, V. W. V., Verhulst, F. C., Arseneault, L.,
& Tiemeier, H. (2017). Like father, like child: Early life family adversity and children’s
bullying behaviors in elementary school. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 46(7),
1481–1496. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10802-017-0380-8

Devi, R., Anand, S., & Shekhar, C. (2013). Abuse and neglect as predictors of self concept
among below poverty line adolescents from India. International Journal of Psychology and
Counselling, 5(6), 122–128. https://doi.org/10.5897/IJPC2013.0213

Dijkstra, J. K., Lindenberg, S., & Veenstra, R. (2008). Beyond the class norm: Bullying behavior
of popular adolescents and its relation to peer acceptance and rejection. Journal of Abnormal
Child Psychology, 36, 1289. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10802-008-9251-

Donnellan, M. B., Trzesniewski, K. H., Robins, R. W., Moffitt, T. E., & Caspi, A. (2005). Low
Self-Esteem is related to aggression, antisocial behavior, and delinquency. Psychological
Science, 16(4), 328–335. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0956-7976.2005.01535.x

Dorcas, O. F. (2015). Bullying in Nigerian secondary schools: Strategies for counseling

intervention. Educational Research and Reviews, 10(4), 435–443.
https://doi.org/10.5897/err2012.239

Elmer, N. (2001). Self-esteem: The costs and causes of low self-worth (intervention initiative
programme). Joseph Rowntree Foundation.

Engels, R. C. M. E., Deković, M., & Meeus, W. (2002). Parenting practices, social skills and
peer relationships in adolescence. Social Behavior and Personality: An International
Journal, 30(1), 3–17. https://doi.org/10.2224/sbp.2002.30.1.3

Espelage, D. L., & de la Rue, L. (2012). School bullying: Its nature and ecology. International
Journal of Adolescent Medicine and Health, 24(1). https://doi.org/10.1515/ijamh.2012.002

53
Espelage, D. L., & Swearer, S. M. (2010). Bullying in North American schools (2nd ed.).
Routledge.

Espelage, D. L., Bosworth, K., & Simon, T. R. (2000). Examining the social context of bullying
behaviors in early adolescence. Journal of Counseling & Development, 78(3), 326–333.
https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1556-6676.2000.tb01914.x

Fadipe, N. A. (1970). The sociology of the Yoruba. Ibadan University Press.

Fenny, O. A. (2018, May). Bullying in Nigerian Secndary Schools: A Test of Gottfredson and
Hirschi's General Theory of Crime (Thesis). The University of Texas at Dallas. Https://Utd-
Ir.Tdl.Org/Bitstream/Handle/10735.1/5845/Etd-5608-012-Fenny-7868.84.Pdf?Sequence=
6&Isallowed=Y

Ferguson, C. J., San Miguel, C., Garza, A., & Jerabeck, J. M. (2009). A longitudinal test of video
game violence influences on dating and aggression: A 3-year longitudinal study of
adolescents. Journal of Psychiatric Research, 46(2), 141–146.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpsychires.2011.10.014

Finger, L. R., Yeung, A. S., Craven, R. G., Parada, R. H., & Newey, K. (2008). Adolescent peer
relations instrument: Assessment of its reliability and construct validity when used with
upper primary students. Australian Association for Research in Education. Retrieved from:
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/314361513_Adolescent_Peer_Relations_Instrume
nt_Assessment_of_its_Reliability_and_Construct_Validity_when_used_with_Upper_Primar
y_Students

Fischer, K. W., & Ayoub, C. (1994). Affective splitting and dissociation in normal and
maltreated children: Developmental pathways for self in relationships. In D. Cicchetti & S.
L. Toth (Eds.), Disorders and dysfunctions of the self, 149–222. University of Rochester
Press.

Fitzpatrick, K. M., Dulin, A. J., & Piko, B. F. (2007). Not just pushing and shoving: School
bullying among african american adolescents. Journal of School Health, 77(1), 16–22.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1746-1561.2007.00157.x

Fredstrom, B. K., Adams, R. E., & Gilman, R. (2010). Electronic and School-Based
victimization: Unique contexts for adjustment difficulties during adolescence. Journal of
Youth and Adolescence, 40(4), 405–415. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-010-9569-7

Frisén, A., Jonsson, A. K., & Persson, C. (2007). Adolescents' perception of bullying: who is the
victim? Who is the bully? What can be done to stop bullying? Adolescence, 42(168),749-
761.

Garbarino, J. (1992). Children and families in the social environment (modern applications of
social work) by james garbarino (1992–12-31). Aldine Transaction.

Gascón-Cánovas, J. J., Russo De León, J. R., Cózar Fernandez, A., & Heredia Calzado, J. M.
(2017). Cultural adaptation to Spanish and assessment of an adolescent peer relationships

54
 tool for detecting school bullying: Preliminary study of the psychometric properties. Anales
de Pediatría (English Edition), 87(1), 9–17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anpede.2015.12.008

Gecas, V. (1982). The self-concept. Annual Review of Sociology, 8, 1–33.

https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.so.08.080182.000245

Gecas, V., & Schwalbe, M. L. (1983). Beyond the Looking-Glass self: Social structure and
Efficacy-Based Self-Esteem. Social Psychology Quarterly, 46(2), 77.
https://doi.org/10.2307/3033844

Gendron, B. P., Williams, K. R., & Guerra, N. G. (2011). An analysis of bullying among
students within schools: Estimating the effects of individual normative beliefs, Self-Esteem,
and school climate. Journal of School Violence, 10(2), 150–164.
https://doi.org/10.1080/15388220.2010.539166

Georgiou, S. N., & Stavrinides, P. (2013). Parenting at home and bullying at school. Social
Psychology of Education, 16(2), 165–179. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11218-012-9209-z

Gil, A., Gama, C. S., de Jesus, D. R., Lobato, M. I., Zimmer, M., & Belmonte-de-Abreu, P.
(2009). The association of child abuse and neglect with adult disability in schizophrenia and
the prominent role of physical neglect. Child Abuse & Neglect, 33(9), 618–624.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chiabu.2009.02.006

Gil, D. G. (1975). Unraveling child abuse. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 45(3), 346–
356. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1939-0025.1975.tb02545.x

Graham, S., & Juvonen, J. (1998). Self-blame and peer victimization in middle school: An
attributional analysis. Developmental Psychology, 34(3), 587–599.
https://doi.org/10.1037/0012-1649.34.3.587

Gratz, K. L., & Roemer, L. (2004). Multidimensional assessment of emotion regulation and
dysregulation: Development, factor structure, and initial validation of the difficulties in
emotion regulation scale. Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment, 26(1),
41–54. https://doi.org/10.1023/b:joba.0000007455.08539.94

Grills, A. E., & Ollendick, T. H. (2002). Peer victimization, global Self-Worth, and anxiety in
middle school children. Journal of Clinical Child & Adolescent Psychology, 31(1), 59–68.
https://doi.org/10.1207/s15374424jccp3101_08

Grogan-Kaylor, A., & Otis, M. D. (2003). The effect of childhood maltreatment on adult
criminality: A tobit regression analysis. Child Maltreatment, 8(2), 129–137.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1077559502250810

Gupta, M., Rana, M., Malhi, P., Grover, S., & Kaur, M. (2020). Prevalence and correlates of
bullying perpetration and victimization among school-going adolescents in Chandigarh,
North India. Indian Journal of Psychiatry, 62(5), 531.

55
Gutman, L. M., & Schoon, I. (2013). The impact of non-cognitive skills on outcomes for young
people (pp. 1-5). London: Education Endowment Foundation. Leading Education and Social
Research.

Harris, S. L., & Petrie, G. F. (2003). Bullying: The bullies, the victims, the bystanders. Lanham,
MD: Scarecrow Press

Hattie, J. (1992). Self-concept. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.

Healy, K. L., Sanders, M. R., & Iyer, A. (2015). Facilitative parenting and children’s social,
emotional and behavioral adjustment. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 24(6), 1762-
1779.doi: 10.1007/s10826-014-9980-x

Heim, C., & Nemeroff, C. B. (2001). The role of childhood trauma in the neurobiology of mood
and anxiety disorders: Preclinical and clinical studies. Biological Psychiatry, 49(12), 1023–
1039. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0006-3223(01)01157-x

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

Hong, J. S., Espelage, D. L., Grogan-Kaylor, A., & Allen-Meares, P. (2011). Identifying
potential mediators and moderators of the association between child maltreatment and
bullying perpetration and victimization in school. Educational Psychology Review, 24(2),
167–186. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-011-9185-4

Hong, J. S., Kral, M. J., & Sterzing, P. R. (2014). Pathways from bullying perpetration,
victimization, and bully victimization to suicidality among school-aged youth. Trauma,
Violence, & Abuse, 16(4), 379–390. https://doi.org/10.1177/1524838014537904

Hornstein, L. (2002). Narcisismo/ narcissism: Autoestima, identidad, alteridad/ Self-Esteem,

identity and alterity (biblioteca de psicologia profunda) (spanish edition). Paidos Iberica
Ediciones S A.

Jankauskiene, R., Kardelis, K., Sukys, S., & Kardeliene, L. (2008). Associations between school
bullying and psychosocial factors. Social Behavior and Personality: An International
Journal, 36(2), 145–162. https://doi.org/10.2224/sbp.2008.36.2.145

Jordan, M. (2021, May 21). Purposive sampling 101 | SurveyGizmo blog. Alchemer. Retrieved
from:https://www.alchemer.com/resources/blog/purposivesampling101/#:
%7E:text=Purposive%20 sampling%20enables%20researchers%20to,findings%20have
%20on%20the%20population

Joshi, S., & Srivastava, R. (2009). Self-esteem and academic achievement of adolescents.
Journal of the Indian Academy of Applied Psychology, 35(spec iss), 33–39.

56
Juvonen, & Graham. (2004). Research-based interventions on bullying. Bullying implications for
the classroom. Educational Psychology, 229–255. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-012617955-
2/50016-3

Karbasi, Z., Kadivar, M., Safdari, R., Shahmoradi, L., Zahmatkeshan, M., Zakerabasali, S.,
Abhari, S., & Sayarifard, A. (2019). Better monitoring of abused children by designing a
child abuse surveillance system: Determining national child abuse minimum data set. The
International Journal of Health Planning and Management, 35(4), 843–851.
https://doi.org/10.1002/hpm.2935

Keenan, K. (2000). Emotion dysregulation as a risk factor for child psychopathology. Clinical
Psychology: Science and Practice, 7(4), 418–434. https://doi.org/10.1093/clipsy.7.4.418

Kelly, L. (1992). The connections between disability and child abuse: A review of the research
evidence. Child Abuse Review, 1(3), 157–167. https://doi.org/10.1002/car.2380010305

Kim, J., & Cicchetti, D. (2006). Longitudinal trajectories of Self-System processes and
depressive symptoms among maltreated and nonmaltreated children. Child Development,
77(3), 624–639. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.2006.00894.x

Kinard, E. M. (1980). Emotional development in physically abused children. American Journal

of Orthopsychiatry, 50(4), 686–696. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1939-0025.1980.tb03332.x

Klomek, A. B., Sourander, A., & Elonheimo, H. (2015). Bullying by peers in childhood and
effects on psychopathology, suicidality, and criminality in adulthood. The Lancet
Psychiatry, 2(10), 930–941. https://doi.org/10.1016/s2215-0366(15)00223-0

Krejcie, R. V., & Morgan, D. W. (1970). Determining sample size for research activities.
Educational and Psychological Measurement, 30(3), 607–610.
https://doi.org/10.1177/001316447003000308

LaFontana, K. M., & Cillessen, A. H. N. (2002). Children’s perceptions of popular and

unpopular peers: A multimethod assessment. Developmental Psychology, 38(5), 635–647.
https://doi.org/10.1037/0012-1649.38.5.635

Leary M. R., & Downs D. L. (1995) Interpersonal functions of the self-esteem motive. In: kernis
m.h. (eds) efficacy, agency, and self-esteem. The Springer Series in Social Clinical
Psychology. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4899-1280-0_7

Lease, A. M., Musgrove, K. T., & Axelrod, J. L. (2002). Dimensions of social status in
preadolescent peer groups: Likability, perceived popularity, and social dominance. Social
Development, 11(4), 508–533. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9507.00213

Lereya, S. T., Samara, M., & Wolke, D. (2013). Parenting behavior and the risk of becoming a
victim and a bully/victim: A meta-analysis study. Child Abuse & Neglect, 37(12), 1091–
1108. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chiabu.2013.03.001

57
Luk, J. W., Patock-Peckham, J. A., Medina, M., Terrell, N., Belton, D., & King, K. M. (2016).
Bullying perpetration and victimization as externalizing and internalizing pathways: a
retrospective study linking parenting styles and self-esteem to depression, alcohol use, and
alcohol-related problems. Substance Use & Misuse, 51(1), 113–125.
https://doi.org/10.3109/10826084.2015.1090453

Marsh, H. W., Parada, R. H., Yeung, A. S., & Healey, J. (2001). Aggressive school
troublemakers and victims: A longitudinal model examining the pivotal role of self-concept.
Journal of Educational Psychology, 93(2), 411–419. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-
0663.93.2.411

Modecki, K. L., Minchin, J., Harbaugh, A. G., Guerra, N. G., & Runions, K. C. (2014). Bullying
prevalence across contexts: A meta-analysis measuring cyber and traditional bullying.
Journal of Adolescent Health, 55(5), 602–611

Moffitt, T. E., & Capsi, A. (2001). Childhood predictors differentiate life-course persistent and
adolescence-limited antisocial pathways among males and females. Development and
Psychopathology, 13(2), 355–375. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0954579401002097

Monks, C. P., Smith, P. K., Naylor, P., Barter, C., Ireland, J. L., & Coyne, I. (2009). Bullying in
different contexts: Commonalities, differences and the role of theory. Aggression and
Violent Behavior, 14(2), 146–156. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.avb.2009.01.004

Morin, A. (2019). The truth about how many people are bullied at school and at work. Verywell
Family. https://www.verywellfamily.com/bullying-statistics-to-know-4589438

Nabavi, R. T. (2012). Bandura’s social learning theory & social cognitive learning theory.
Retrieved from ://www.researchgate.net/publication/267750204.

Nansel, T. R., Overpeck, M., Pilla, R. S., Ruan, W. J., Simons-Morton, B., & Scheidt, P. (2001).
Bullying behaviors among US youth. JAMA, 285(16), 2094.
https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.285.16.2094

National Policy on Education (2007). National Policy on Education.Lagos: Federal Government

Press. Retrieved from: https://education.gov.ng/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/national-
policy-on-education.pdf

Naveed, S., Waqas, A., Shah, Z., Ahmad, W., Wasim, M., Rasheed, J., & Afzaal, T. (2020).
Trends in Bullying and Emotional and Behavioral Difficulties Among Pakistani
Schoolchildren: A Cross-Sectional Survey of Seven Cities. Frontiers in Psychiatry, 10.
https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyt.2019.00976

Neff, K. D. (2011). Self-Compassion, Self-Esteem, and Well-Being. Social and Personality

Psychology Compass, 5(1), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1751-9004.2010.00330.x

Newey (2016). Bullying embraces the virtual world: elucidating the psychosocial determinants
and correlates of traditional vs. Cyberbullying types. School of social sciences and
psychology western Sydney

58
 university.Https://researchdirect.westernsydney.edu.au/islandora/object/uws:
38439/datastream/pdf/view

Nikiforou, M., Georgiou, S. N., & Stavrinides, P. (2013). Attachment to Parents and Peers as a
Parameter of Bullying and Victimization. Journal of Criminology, 1–9.
https://doi.org/10.1155/2013/484871

Nwadiora, E. (1996). Therapy with African families. Western Journal of Black Studies.
Published. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ550197

O’Moore, A. M., & Hillery, B. (1989). Bullying in Dublin schools. The Irish Journal of
Psychology, 10(3), 426–441. https://doi.org/10.1080/03033910.1989.10557759

O’Moore, M., & Kirkham, C. (2001). Self-esteem and its relationship to bullying behaviour.
Aggressive Behavior, 27(4), 269–283. https://doi.org/10.1002/ab.1010

Olweus D. (1994) Bullying at school. In: L.R. Huesmann. (eds) Aggressive Behavior. The
Plenum Series in Social/Clinical Psychology. Springer, Boston, MA.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4757-9116-7_5

Olweus, D. (1989). Peer relationship problems: Conceptual issues and a successful intervention
program against bully/victim problems. Paper presented at the biannial meeting of the
Society for Research in Child Development, Kansas City, U.S.A.

Olweus, D. (1993). Bullying at school: What we know and what we can do (1st ed.). Wiley-
Blackwell.

Olweus, D. (1993). Bullying at school: What we know and what we can do. Malden, MA:
Blackwell publishing. Psychology in the Schools, 40(6), 699–700.
https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.10114

Olweus, D. (2010). Understanding and researching bullying: Some critical issues. Handbook of
bullying in schools: An International Perspective. 9-33.

Olweus, D. (2014). Bullying in schools: Facts and intervention. Research Gate. Published.

Olweus, D. (1990). Bully/victim problems among schoolchildren: Basic facts and effects of a

school based intervention program. In K. Rubin, Pepler, & D. Hillsdale (Eds). The
development and treatment of children's aggression., Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc.

O'Moore, A. M. (1997). What do teachers need to know? In a practical guide to coping for
schools, Edited by: Elliot, M. London: Pitman Publishing.

O'Moore, A. M., & Hillery B. (1991). What do teachers need to know. In: Elliott M, editor. A
practical guide to coping for schools. London: Longman. 56–59

59
Parada, R. H., Marsh, H. W., & Yeung, A. S. (1999). Bullying in schools: Can self-concept
theory shed any light? Paper presented at the AARE -NZARE Annual Conference,
Melbourne Conference Centre, Victoria, Australia November 29th-December 2nd, 1999.

Parada, R. H., Marsh, H. W., Craven, R. G., & Papworth, B. A. (2005). Bullying in schools:
What can we glean from self-concept theory? (No. PAR05324). SELF Research Centre,
University of Western Sydney, Australia.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/314361528_Bullying_in_Schools_What_Can_We
_Glean_from_Self-concept_Theory

Park, J. Y., & Park, E. Y. (2019). The Rasch analysis of Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale in
individuals with intellectual disabilities. Frontiers in Psychology, 10(1).
https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01992

Parker, J. S., & Benson, M. J. (2004). Parent-adolescent relations and adolescent functioning:
self-esteem, substance abuse, and delinquency. Adolescence, 39(155), 519–530.

Patton, D. U., Hong, J. S., Williams, A. B., & Allen-Meares, P. (2013). A review of research on
school bullying among African American youth: An ecological systems analysis.
Educational Psychology Review, 25(2), 245–260. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-013-9221-
7

Pearce, J. B., & Thompson, A. E. (1998). Practical approaches to reduce the impact of bullying.
Archives of Disease in Childhood, 79(6), 528–531. https://doi.org/10.1136/adc.79.6.528

Pepler, D., Jiang, D., Craig, W., & Connolly, J. (2008). Developmental trajectories of bullying
and associated factors. Child Development, 79(2), 325–338. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-
8624.2007.01128.x

Predescu, M. (2012) The incidence of cases at risk of emotional behavioral disorder (EBD) in
schools from Timisoara, in Tomita, M. (2012). Violence amongst adolescences. The 3rd
International Conference on Social Work, Bologna: Medimond International Proceedings,
95-98.

Rawlings. (2016). Middle school students’ perceptions of bullying. Bulletin of the Council for
Research in Music Education, 209(7). https://doi.org/10.5406/bulcouresmusedu.209.0007

Read, J., & Bentall, R. P. (2012). Negative childhood experiences and mental health:
Theoretical, clinical and primary prevention implications. British Journal of Psychiatry,
200(2), 89–91. https://doi.org/10.1192/bjp.bp.111.096727

Reijntjes, A., Kamphuis, J. H., Prinzie, P., & Telch, M. J. (2010). Peer victimization and
internalizing problems in children: A meta-analysis of longitudinal studies. Child Abuse &
Neglect, 34(4), 244–252. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chiabu.2009.07.009

Rigby, K., & Cox, I. (1996). The contribution of bullying at school and low self-esteem to acts of
delinquency among Australian teenagers. Personality and Individual Differences, 21(4),
609–612. https://doi.org/10.1016/0191-8869(96)00105-5

60
Rigby, K., & Slee, P. T. (1991). Bullying among Australian school children: Reported behavior
and attitudes toward victims. The Journal of Social Psychology, 131(5), 615–627.
https://doi.org/10.1080/00224545.1991.9924646

Riggs, S. A. (2010). Childhood emotional abuse and the attachment system across the life cycle:
What theory and research tell us. Journal of Aggression, Maltreatment & Trauma, 19(1), 5–
51. https://doi.org/10.1080/10926770903475968

Rijlaarsdam, J., Cecil, C. A. M., Buil, J. M., van Lier, P. A. C., & Barker, E. D. (2021) Exposure
to bullying and general psychopathology: A prospective, longitudinal study. Research on
Child and Adolescent Psychopathology, 49(6), 727–736. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10802-
020-00760-2

Rodkin, P. C., Espelage, D. L., & Hanish, L. D. (2015a). A relational framework for
understanding bullying: Developmental antecedents and outcomes. American Psychologist,
70(4), 311–321. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0038658

Roh, K. S., & Sim, H. O. (2004). Bullying and victimization with perception of parenting
behaviors among elementary school children. Korean Association of Child Studies, 25, 241-
257

Rose, C. A., Simpson, C. G., & Preast, J. L. (2016). Exploring psychosocial predictors of
bullying involvement for students with disabilities. Remedial and Special Education, 37(5),
308–317. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741932516629219

Rose, C. A., Slaten, C. D., & Preast, J. L. (2017). Bully perpetration and Self-Esteem: Examining
the relation over time. Behavioral Disorders, 42(4), 159–169.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0198742917715733

Rosenberg, M. (1965). Society and the adolescent self-image. Princeton, NJ: Princeton
University Press.

Rosenberg, M. (1986). Conceiving the Self. In FL. Malabar, E. Silber, & J Tippett (Eds). Self-
esteem: Clinical assessment and measurement validation, 1017-1071. Psychological
Reports.

Ross, M. (2020). The self-esteem map (1st ed., Vol. 1). Independently published.

Salmivalli, C. (2001). Feeling good about oneself, being bad to others? Remarks on self-esteem,
hostility, and aggressive behavior. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 6(4), 375–393.
https://doi.org/10.1016/s1359-1789(00)00012-4

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., Kaukiainen, A., Kaistaniemi, L., & Lagerspetz, K. M. J. (1999). Self-evaluated
self-esteem, peer-evaluated self-esteem, and defensive egotism as predictors of adolescents’

61
 participation in bullying situations. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 25(10),
1268–1278. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167299258008

Salmivalli, C., Lappalainen, M., & Lagerspetz, K. M. J. (1998). Stability and change of behavior
in connection with bullying in schools: A two-year follow-up. Aggressive Behavior, 24(3),
205–218.

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), 1229–1246.
https://doi.org/10.1037/bul0000171

Shetgiri, R., Lin, H., Avila, R. M., & Flores, G. (2012). Parental characteristics associated with
bullying perpetration in U.S. children aged 10 to 17 years. American Journal of Public
Health, 102(12), 2280–2286. https://doi.org/10.2105/ajph.2012.300725
Silber, E., & Tippett, J. S. (1965). Self-Esteem: Clinical assessment and measurement validation.
Psychological Reports, 16(3_suppl), 1017–1071.
https://doi.org/10.2466/pr0.1965.16.3c.1017

Singham, T., Viding, E., Schoeler, T., Arseneault, L., Ronald, A., Cecil, C. M., McCrory, E.,
Rijsdijk, F., & Pingault, J. B. (2017). Concurrent and longitudinal contribution of exposure
to bullying in childhood to mental health. JAMA Psychiatry, 74(11), 1112.
https://doi.org/10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2017.2678

Slee, P. T. (1995). Peer victimization and its relationship to depression among Australian
primary school students. Personality and Individual Differences, 18(1), 57–62.
https://doi.org/10.1016/0191-8869(94)00114-8

Solberg, M. E., & Olweus, D. (2003). Prevalence estimation of school bullying with the Olweus
Bully/Victim questionnaire. Aggressive Behavior, 29(3), 239–268.
https://doi.org/10.1002/ab.10047

Staub, E. (1999). The roots of evil: Social conditions, culture, personality, and basic human
needs. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 3(3), 179–192.
https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327957pspr0303_2

Swearer, S. M., & Hymel, S. (2015). Understanding the psychology of bullying: Moving toward
a social-ecological diathesis–stress model. American Psychologist, 70(4), 344–353.
https://doi.org/10.1037/a0038929

Sweeting, J. A., Garfin, D. R., Holman, E. A., & Silver, R. C. (2020). Associations between
exposure to childhood bullying and abuse and adulthood outcomes in a representative
national U.S. sample. Child Abuse & Neglect, 101, 104048.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chiabu.2019.104048

62
Tambelli, R., Laghi, F., Odorisio, F., & Notari, V. (2012). Attachment relationships and
internalizing and externalizing problems among italian adolescents. Children and Youth
Services Review, 34(8), 1465–1471. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2012.04.004

The Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act CAPTA (2010). The CAPTA reauthorization act
of 2010: what advocates should know. Retrieved from
https://www.childwelfare.gov/pubpdfs/about

The Truth About How Many People Are Bullied at School and at Work. (2019). Verywell
Family. Retrieved from: https://www.verywellfamily.com/bullying-statistics-to-know-
4589438

Toth, S. L., Cicchetti, D., MacFie, J., Maughan, A., & Vanmeenen, K. (2000). Narrative
representations of caregivers and self in maltreated pre-schoolers. Attachment & Human
Development, 2(3), 271–305. https://doi.org/10.1080/14616730010000849

Tremblay, M. S., Inman, J. W., & Willms, J. D. (2000). The relationship between physical
activity, Self-Esteem, and academic achievement in 12-Year-Old children. Pediatric
Exercise Science, 12(3), 312–323. https://doi.org/10.1123/pes.12.3.312

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

U.S. Department of Health and Human Serv, & Gateway, C. W. I. (2013). Definitions of Child
Abuse and Neglect. BiblioGov. https://www.childwelfare.gov/pubPDFs/define.pdf

van der Ploeg, R., Steglich, C., & Veenstra, R. (2020). The way bullying works: How new ties
facilitate the mutual reinforcement of status and bullying in elementary schools. Social
Networks, 60, 71–82. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socnet.2018.12.006

van Lier, P. A. C., Vitaro, F., Barker, E. D., Brendgen, M., Tremblay, R. E., & Boivin, M.
(2012). Peer victimization, poor academic achievement, and the link between childhood
externalizing and internalizing problems. Child Development, 83(5), 1775–1788.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.2012.01802.x

Wang, X., Zhang, Y., Hui, Z., Bai, W., Terry, P., Ma, M., Li, Y., Cheng, L., Gu, W., & Wang,
M. (2018). The Mediating Effect of Regulatory Emotional Self-Efficacy on the Association
between Self-Esteem and School Bullying in Middle School Students: A Cross-Sectional
Study. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 15(5), 991.
https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph15050991

Westen, D. (1994). The impact of sexual abuse on self structure. In D. Cicchetti & S. L. Toth
(eds.). Rochester symposium on developmental psychopathology: Disorders and
Dysfunctions of the Self. New York: University of Rochester Press 5:223-250.

63
Widom, C. S. (1989). Child abuse, neglect, and adult behavior: Research design and findings on
criminality, violence, and child abuse. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 59(3), 355–
367. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1939-0025.1989.tb01671.x

Williams, K., & Kennedy, J. H. (2012). Bullying behaviors and attachment styles. North
American Journal of Psychology, 14(2), 321–338.

Wills, T. A., Resko, J. A., Ainette, M. G., & Mendoza, D. (2004). Role of parent support and
peer support in adolescent substance use: A test of mediated Effects. Psychology of
Addictive Behaviors, 18(2), 122–134. https://doi.org/10.1037/0893-164x.18.2.122
Whiteman, V. L., & Shorkey, C. T. (1978). Validation testing of the rational behavior inventory.
Educational and Psychological Measurement, 38(4), 1143–1149.
https://doi.org/10.1177/001316447803800435

Yang, S. J., Kim, J. M., Kim, S. W., Shin, I. S., & Yoon, J. S. (2006). Bullying and victimization
behaviors in boys and girls at South Korean primary schools. Journal of the American
Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 45(1), 69–77.
https://doi.org/10.1097/01.chi.0000186401.05465.2c

64
 APPENDIX I

REDEEMER’S UNIVERSITY
Faculty of Social Sciences, Department of Behavioral Studies,
Ede Osun State
I am a final year student of the Redeemer’s University, Ede, Osun State carrying out a research on social
behaviours of students at home and in school. This research is strictly for academic purpose; as part of the
requirement for the award of a Bachelor of Science (BSc.) in psychology. Your honest response to the
under listed questions will be well appreciated and treated in absolute confidentiality.

Section A (Socio Demographics)

This section helps to understand a little about you. All information given will be treated with utmost
confidentiality.
Fill the blank spaces and tick where appropriate
1. Gender: Male ( ) Female ( )
2. Age: ………………….
3. Class: ………………….
4. Boarding Status: Day Student ( ) Boarder ( )
5. Parent’s marital status: Single Parent ( ) Both parents are separated ( ) Married and living
together ( )
6. Who do you live with: Mother ( ) Father ( ) Both father and mother ( ) Others (please specify)
…………

Section B (CAS)
The following questions relate to the forms of treatment gotten from parents and caretakers. Note:
caretakers are the people whom you reside with (parents, relatives, grandparents and so on)
Tick appropriately, the option closest to your answer. The response options are:
Never – 0, Rarely – 1, Occasionally – 2, Sometimes – 3, Frequently – 4, Usually – 5, Every
time – 6
S/N 0 1 2 3 4 5 6
1. I have been physically ill-treated by my parents/caregivers or other
adults
2. My parents/caregivers used to attack me like hitting, burning etc.
3. I had been beaten so hard by my parents/caregivers that it left marks
s I used to get physical injuries which lasted for days

65
 5. My parents/caregivers used to scream at me
6. I was ignored by my parents/caregivers
7. I feel like my parents/caregivers didn’t understand my needs
8. They use to call me by names which I didn’t like (dumb, lazy etc.).
9. My parents/caregivers used to threaten me that they will hit me, and
that made me feel I might get hurt.
10. I was sexually mistreated by a known person in my childhood
11. An adult used to touch me in a way which I didn’t like
12. I was forced to get involved in sexual activities which I was unable
to comprehend
13. The person that did such as described in 10 – 12 above used to
threaten me not to tell about this to anyone.

Section C (SES)
Instructions: below is a list of statement dealing with your general feelings about yourself. Kindly
indicate by ticking the specific number that represents your opinion.
Response options:
Strongly Disagree – 1, Disagree – 2, Agree – 3, Strongly Agree – 4

S/ 1 2 3 4
N
1. On the whole, I am satisfied with myself
2. At times, I think I am no good at all
3. I feel that I have a number of good qualities
4. I am able to do things as well as most other people
5. I feel I do not have much to be proud of
6. I certainly feel useless at times
7. I feel that I’m a person of worth, at least on an equal plane with others
8. I wish I could have more respect for myself
9. All in all, I am inclined to feel that I am a failure
10. I take a positive attitude toward myself

Section D (BBS)
Answer honestly if you have done any of the following actions to any student(s) this session since you’ve
been in school. TICK the option closest to your answer. Response options:
Never – 0, Sometimes – 1, Once/ twice a Month –
2,
Once a week – 3, Several times a day – 4, Everyday - 5

S/N 0 1 2 3 4 5
1 Teased other students by saying things to them
2 Pushed or shoved a student
3 Made rude remarks at a student
4 Got my friends to turn against a student

66
5 Made jokes about a student
6 Crashed into a student on purpose as they walked by
7 Picked on a student by swearing at them
8 Told my friends things about a student to get them into trouble
9 Got into a physical fight with a student because I didn't like them
10 Said things about their looks they didn’t like
11 Got other students to start a rumor about a student
12 I slapped or punched a student
13 Got other students to ignore a student
14 Made fun of a student by calling him/her names
15 Threw something at a student to hit him/her
16 Threatened to physically hurt or harm a student
17 Left them out of activities or games on purpose
18 Kept a student away from me by giving them mean looks

67