Prevalence School Bullying and Relation with Academic Achievements Among Junior High School Students.
Research
Prevalence School Bullying and Relation with Academic Achievements Among
Junior High School Students
By
Made Ayu Cynthia Windasari
Supervisors:
Prof. dr. Soetjiningsih, Sp.A(K)
Dr. dr. I Gusti Ayu Trisna Windiani, Sp.A(K)
dr. I Gusti Agung Ngurah Sugitha Adnyana, Sp.A
dr. I Gusti Ayu Endah Ardjana, Sp.KJ (K)
CHILD HEALTH DEPARTMENT
MEDICAL FACULTY UDAYANA UNIVERSITY
SANGLAH GENERAL HOSPITAL
DENPASAR
2015
1
Prevalence School Bullying and Relation with Academic Achievements
Among Junior High School Students
Made Ayu Cynthia Windasari, Soetjiningsih, I Gusti Ayu Trisna Windiani,
I Gusti Agung Ngurah Sugitha Adnyana, I Gusti Ayu Endah Ardjana
Child health department, Medical faculty, Udayana University,
Sanglah Hospital, Denpasar
Abstract
Background: Bullying is any negative activity or aggresive behavior which is intended
to harm others. Children and adolescents are highly susceptible groups to this problem.
One of the bullying impact is low academic achievement. The data that displays on
prevalence bullying and relation between bullying and academic achievement for
adolescents in Bali is still limited.
Objectives: To know prevalence bullying and relation between bullying and academic
achievement for adolescents in Bali
Methods: This study was cross-sectional analytical study, conducted at 4 Junior High
School in Denpasar city on June 2015. Data were obtained from questionnaires which
fill by subjects. The Adolescent peer relations instrument (APRI) was used to determine
the involvement of bullying in this study. Subjects including groups involved in
bullying if the total score on each part of APRI > 18.
Results: One hundred and sixty Junior high school students participated in this study.
From total 160 subjects, 74 subjects (46.25%) are involve in bullying as bullies, victim,
also bullies and victim, 86 subjects (53.75%) are not involve in bullying. After analysis,
academic achievement from those who was involved in any bullying cases is
significantly lower (3.38 ± 0.09 SD) when compared with the group of students who
was involved in bullying cases (3.42 ± 0.12 SD).
Conclusions: The prevalence of bullying among junior high school students in
Denpasar obtained by 46.25%. Students involved in bullying have significantly lower
academic achievement compared with students who are not involved bullying.
keywords : bullying, youth, prevalence, academic achievement
2
Prevalensi Bullying dan Hubungannya dengan Prestasi Akademik
pada Siswa Sekolah Menengah Pertama
Made Ayu Cynthia Windasari, Soetjiningsih, I Gusti Ayu Trisna Windiani, I Gusti
Agung Ngurah Sugitha Adnyana, I Gusti Ayu Endah Ardjana
Bagian Ilmu Kesehatan Anak, Fakultas Kedokteran Universitas Udayana,
Rumah Sakit Sanglah Denpasar
Abstrak
Latar belakang: Bullying merupakan perilaku agresif negatif yang bertujuan untuk
menyakiti individu lain. Anak-anak dan remaja merupakan kelompok yang paling rentan
mengalami hal tersebut. Salah satu dampak bullying adalah prestasi akademik yang
rendah. Data tentang prevalensi bullying dan hubungan dengan prestasi akademik pada
remaja di Bali masih terbatas.
Tujuan: Mengetahui prevalensi bullying pada remaja serta hubungannya dengan
prestasi akademik remaja di Bali..
Metode: Penelitian potong lintang analitik dilaksanakan pada empat Sekolah Menengah
Umum Pertama (SMP) di Kotamadya Denpasar pada bulan Juni 2015. Adolescent peer
relations instrument (APRI) digunakan untuk mengetahui adanya keterlibatan bullying.
Subjek termasuk kelompok terlibat bullying apabila skor total pada tiap bagian dari
APRI > 18.
Hasil: Terdapat 160 pelajar SMP yang mengikuti penelitian. Tujuh puluh empat orang
(46.25%) terlibat bullying dan 86 orang (53,75%) tidak terlibat bullying. Prestasi
akademik pada siswa yang terlibat bullying lebih rendah (3,38±0,09 SD) bermakna
dibandingkan dengan siswa yang tidak terlibat bullying (3,42±0,12 SD).
Simpulan: Prevalensi bullying pada siswa SMP di Denpasar adalah 46,25%. Prestasi
akademik pada siswa yang terlibat bullying lebih rendah secara bermakna dibandingkan
dengan siswa yang tidak terlibat bullying.
Kata kunci : bullying, remaja, prevalensi, prestasi akademik
3
Introduction
Bullying is any negative activity or aggresive behavior which is intended to harm or
disturb others.1 This phenomenon refers to various kinds of physical aggression, verbal
and psychologycal performed repeatedly within a certain period of time and there is an
imbalance of power, with a more powerful person or group attacking a less powerful
one. Children and adolescents are highly susceptible groups to this problem.1,2
Worldwide it is expected as much as 15-30% students have been involved bullying.
Specifically, 13% students are reported as bullies, 11% as victims and 6% as bullies and
also victim.3 Most case of bullying in children and adolescents took place in schools and
its prevalence was increased every year. Studies by Olweus found an increasing number
of victims by 50% from 1983 to 2001 on 11.000 primary and secondary school student
in the United State of America.4
The incidence of bullying among students, increasing since elementary school, a
peak in Junior High School and thereafter tend to decline.1,3 Self-reported
questionnaires assessments method is a method for measuring a bullying behavior that
is widely used, by filling the questionnaire independently by the students. Adolescent
peer relations instrument (APRI) is one method to detect bullying behavior in
adolescents aged 12-17 years. This instrument consist of 36 questions with good
reliability (Cronbach alpha value of 0.95).5
Bullying among school-aged youth is increasingly being recognized as an
important problem affecting well-being and social functioning. The impact of bullying
include increased risk of having a mental disorder, antisocial behavior and low
academic achievement.2,6 The study by Holt et al 6, found an association between the
victims of bullying, psychological stress and low academic achievement in students in
America. Recent study held in Bali, found a negative correlation between bullying with
the victims’s academic achievement at elementary school level.7 But in other studies,
this correlation was not found to be consistent, where there are other studies that did not
find an relation or difference between those two. The data that displays on both of these
relation or difference for adolescents in Bali is still limited. Thus we need further study
to determine prevalence of bullying and relation with academic achievement among
junior high school students.
4
Materials and Methods
This study is a cross-sectional analytical study, conducted at 4 Junior High School
(SMP) in Denpasar city which consists of 2 public school, SMP Negeri 3 and SMP
Negeri 4 Denpasar, as well as two private school, SMP Dwijendra and SMP Harapan in
June 2015. This study was included private and public school, because of suggesting
prevalence difference between both of two. The election of SMP Negeri 3, SMP Negeri
4, SMP Dwijendra and SMP Harapan related on permission obtained from their
headmaster, their student have IQ test result, also their short distance and reachable
Based on Fischer formula with precision estimation set at 5%, the minimum
sample size required is 151 (rounded up to 160 students). In this study involve 40
students from each school. Sample selection is done by purposive sampling.
Determination of the initial samples in each school was done by random method with
dropping the tip of a pencil on a sheet of student attendance. The samples were then
selected based on the formula N/n of the population (N: number of students on each
grade in Junior High School and n: number of student required (40)). In accordance
with the order numbers attendance of students so each student to-n which satisfy the
eligibility criteria were included in the study.
Samples were students of SMP Negeri 3, SMP Negeri 4, SMP Dwijendra and
SMP Harapan Denpasar which meet the eligibility criteria. Inclusion criteria in the
study were junior high school students grades 1, 2 and 3 in SMP Negeri 3, SMP Negeri
4, SMP Dwijendra and SMP Harapan Denpasar on June 2015. The exclusion criterias
were if a student unwilling to participate in the study, did not sign the informed consent,
in a state of chronic disease and if the data on the questionnaire was incomplete.
The Adolescent peer relations instrument was used to determine the involvement
of bullying in this study. The questionnaire has been translated into Indonesian language
as permission of the author, Roberto Parada from the University of Western Sydney.
While the questionnaire was used to determine the presence of emotional and behavioral
disorders such as attention disorders, internalizing or externalizing disorder was the
Pediatric Symptom Checklist (PSC) for youth who have also been translated into
Indonesian language as permission of the author, Jelinek from Massachusette Hospital.
Questionnaire translation process through the "backward translation" (translate from
English into Indonesian language, then translate again into English language by
5
different person). Backward translation conducted by researcher and English lecturer at
Udayana University under the supervision of the Pediatric Growth and Development
Division of Medical Faculty in Udayana University. Psychometric analysis performed
before questionnaire used (APRI and PSC-Y questionnaire) through reliability
assessment. Instrument test conducted on 30 Harapan junior high school students and
produce good reliability (Cronbach's α 0.98 for APRI and Cronbach's α of 0.97 for the
Y-PSC).
One day before sample participated in this study, they reminded to looking back
their IQ test result (IQ test has already done at the beginning of their school years) and
also their academic achievement. At starting data collection, the researchers explain the
objective of this study, how to fill out the questionnaire, as well as informed consent to
the students. Students who agree to get involved to this study and signed an informed
consent sheet then included in the study. Students instructed to fill identity form first
(without write their name) which include age, sex, type of school, IQ test result, parent’s
income, parent’s education, study hour at home per day and academic achievement.
Then they answer APRI and PSC-Y questionnaires. Every student who has completely
answered the questionnaire, immediately submit the questionnaires to the researcher.
There are 36 questions on APRI to determine the involvement of bullying
experienced by students in the last 1 year. The questions are divided into two parts,
namely the 18 questions in section A for student involvement as bullies and 18
questions in section B to determine the involvement of students as victims. There are 6
scale of measurement in it, which are 1 (never); 2 (sometimes); 3 (once or twice a
month); 4 (once a week); 5 (several times a week); 6 (every day). Cut off point is 18 on
each section. If the total score on each section > 18, the student is included in the groups
involved bullying. If the total score on each part ≤ 18, the students in the group were not
involved in bullying. The type of bullying can be assessed based on APRI which are
physical, verbal and social bullying. Bullies can be categorized as performing physical
bullying when the total score of questions section A number 2, 6, 9, 12, 15, 16 equals to
> 6, categorized as performing verbal bullying when total score of the question section
A number 1, 3, 5, 7, 10, 14 equals to > 6 and categorized perform social bullying if total
score of the question section A number 4, 8, 11, 13, 17, 18 equals to > 6. Victims can
also be categorized according to the type of bullying. Victims are categorized as
6
experiencing physical bullying when total score of the question section B number 2, 5,
8, 10, 15, 16 equals to > 6, categorized as experiencing verbal bullying if total score of
the question section B number 1, 4, 7, 11, 13, 18 equals to > 6 and categorized as having
social bullying when total score of the question section B number 3, 6, 9, 12, 14, 17
equals to> 6.5 Physical bullying, or bullying with aggressive physical intimidation,
involves repeated hitting, kicking, tripping, blocking, pushing, and touching in
unwanted and inappropriate ways. Verbal bullying, or bullying with cruel spoken
words, involves ongoing name-calling, threatening, and making disrespectful comments
about someone's attributes such as appearance, religion, ethnicity and disability. Social
bullying involves spreading rumors about another person, purposely leaving someone
out of an activity or embarrassing a person in public.4
While the PSC for youth consists of 35 questions with 3 measurement scale is 0
(never); 1 (sometimes); 2 (often). If the total score ≥ 30, students was categorized as
having emotional and behavioral disorders. The PSC assessment has three subscales
which are attention, internalization and externalization. The attention subscale is
reflected in the question number 4, 7, 8, 9, 14, revealed having attention problem if the
total score > 7. The internalization subscale reflected in the question number 11, 13, 19,
22, 27, revealed having internalization problem when the total score > 5. The
externalization subscale reflected in the question number 16, 29, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35
otherwise having externalization problem if the total score > 7.8
Academic achievement was the learning results obtained by students which
expressed in symbols or numbers in a particular period stated in the value (point) in
report cards or raport. Academic achievement in this study will be measured based on
the mean point reached by the students and are listed in the point of the last semester
report cards or raport before the study was conducted.7 Chronic disease was a systemic
disease or disease attack certain organs, symptoms and require treatment for more than
3 months.
Economic level was a condition or status of a socially regulated and assign a
person in a particular position in the structure of society based on income. Economic
level in this study was categorized into high, medium and low based on the average
parent’s income earned in 1 month. This category was used in Badan Pusat Statistik
(BPS) Indonesia.9 The border of low income category was related to regional salary in
7
Denpasar city which describe in upah minimum regional (UMR , Rp.1.561.000).10 Low
economic level when the average income of the parents Rp. 2,500,000 per month.9
The mean hours of home-study per day refers to a specific time a student
assigns for himself or herself to study in order to acquire knowledge, beyond the time
spent in school and in a tutoring/course.11 Intelligence Quotient (IQ) is a value of
intellectual ability, analysis, logic, and the ratio of a person who is classified into a low
IQ level or mental retardation if the value of IQ 0-79; low IQ levels were still within the
normal ranges when IQ score 80-90; normal IQ level or average when the value of IQ
91-110; High IQ level when the value of IQ 111-120; superior IQ level when the value
of IQ 120-130, and very superior IQ level or genius when IQ scores 131 or more.12
The data analysis of this study using computer program. The normality of data
was assessed using Kolmogorov-Smirnov test. Comparison of academic achievement
among students who do involved bullying and who do not was assessed by independent
T test, if the independent T test requirements are fulfilled, a P value 3 hour, n, %
IQ level
Average, n, %
High, n, %
Superior, n, %
Very Superior, n, %
Emotional and behavioral problem
Yes, n, %
No, n, %
Involvement in Bullying
Involved (N=74) Not Involved (N=86)
40 (54)
34 (46)
40 (46.5)
46 (53.5)
42 (56.7)
32 (43.3)
34 (39.5)
52 (60.5)
6 (8.1)
12 (16.3)
19 (25.6)
37 (50)
0 (0)
12 (13,9)
21 (24,5)
53 (61,6)
4 (5,4)
51 (69)
19 (25,6)
2 (2.3)
67 (78)
17 (19.7)
41 (55.4)
31 (41.9)
2 (2.7)
2 (2.3)
67 (78)
17 (19.7)
12 (16.2)
19 (25.7)
36 (48.6)
7 (9.5)
21(24.5)
19 (22)
34 (39.5)
12 (14)
8 (10.8)
66 (89.1)
6 (6.9)
80 (93.1)
n: number of subject
Based on the total score on each part of APRI questionnaire, involvement of
bullying distinguished by bullies, victim, or both bullies and victim. At the subscale
ratings of parts A and B from APRI questionnaires, categorizing types of bullying
experiences also conducted among students. Characteristics sample which involved in
bullying listed in Table 2.
9
Table 2. Characteristics Subject which Involved in Bullying
Variable
N=74
Bullying status
Bullies, n, %
Victim, n, %
Bullies and victim, n, %
24 (32.4)
22 (29.7)
28 (37.8)
Type of bullying
Physical, n, %
Verbal, n, %
Social, n, %
19 (25.6)
31(41.8)
24 (32.4)
n: number of subject
The number of samples in the study amounted to more than 50 people; there
were 160 people to be exact. The data normality test used was the Kolmogorov-Smirnov
test. Data distribution of all variables were normal, except for variable academic
achievement. Academic achievement that reflected in the value report was not normal;
then data transformed by log function to normalize the data distribution. As academic
achievement data that has been transformed, normality test obtained p> 0.05 thus
concluded that the data were normally distributed.
After normality test, Levene test was performed to know the homogenecity of
variance and normal data variance obtained. Table 3. show relation variables with
academic achievement. Relation academic achievement to variable bullying
involvement, type school and presence emotional & behavioral problem were analyzed
with independent sample T-test , while others variables were analyzed with Anova test.
10
Table 3. Relation Variables with Academic Achievement
Variables
Bullying involvement
Involved
Not involved
School
Public
Private
Parent’s education
Elementary school graduate
Junior High school graduate
Senior High school graduate
Bachelor degree
Economic Status
Low
Middle
High
Daily study hours
< 2 hour
2-3 hour
> 3 hour
IQ level
Average
High
Superior
Very Superior
Emotional & behavioral problem
Yes
No
Academic Achievement
Mean
Standar
deviation
P
0.017
3.38
3.42
0.09
0.12
3.42
3.39
0.12
0.10
0.290
3.39
3.40
3.39
3.41
0.08
0.11
0.08
0.12
0.839
3.43
3.40
3.39
0.81
0.11
0.12
3.35
3.40
3.41
0.14
0.12
0.10
0.604
0.728
0.909
3.40
3.41
3.40
3.40
0.10
0.12
0.10
0.13
3.39
3.41
0.10
0.12
0.067
Further analyzed among the group of students who was involved in bullying,
showed that victims have the lowest academic achievement (3.34 ± 0.06 SD) compared
with bullies (3.41 ± 0.09 SD) and both bullies and victim (3.39 ± 0.09 SD).
Discussion
The research took place from June 10th 2015 until June 30th 2015 at four Junior High
School in Denpasar, which is two public school, SMP Negeri 3 Denpasar and SMP
Negeri 4 Denpasar, as well as two private school namely SMP Dwijendra and SMP
Harapan. Forty students grade 1 and 2 from each school participated in the study. All
11
data on the questionnaire was complete so that samples studied amounted to 160
students with male subject were comparable with female. The age range of the subjects
was 12 years to 15 years. Subject’s parents mostly have high education, graduated from
college. More than half of the subjects were classified in moderate economic status.
In our study, 46.25% of the subjects involved in bullying, either as bullies,
victim, or both bullies and victim. Number of bullies and victim groups was higher
(37.8%) compared with the bullies alone (22.4%) and victims alone (29.7%). Study
before 2010 reported worldwide bullying was expected as much as 15-30% students
have been involved bullying. Specifically, 13% students were bullies, 11% were victims
and 6% were reported as bullies and also victim. Research in the United States showed
the prevalence of bullying in elementary and junior high school students reached 30%. 3
Results of a survey in Australia showed that 20% of students experience bullying at
least once a week. Most cases occur in teenager at grade 8 and 9 and was done more
often by boys.13 Studies in England showed the prevalence of bullying range around 419%, while the prevalence of bullies and victims in Japan around 10% and 15%.14
Recent studies showed incidence of bullying become higher. The prevalence range of
victimization at the middle school was 41-60% in the Africa and Middle East.15 Study
by Flisher16 in 2012, bullying has been reported to be as high as 61% in high school
students in Tshwan. Study in Northen Ireland in 2010 reported 40% primary school
students had been bullied.17
Violence in the media may contribute to bullying. Violence in the media,
whether it is reflected in music, games, cartoons, television shows or movies, may
desensitizes children to the effects of violence, legitimizes and glorifies violence and
can increase aggressive behavior or increases tolerance and acceptance of violent and
abusive behavior. Nowadays online bullying is a widespread and growing phenomenon,
and offline bullying has always been and continues to be a problem. 16 Cyberbullying is a
growing problem among middle and high school aged students. Around the world there
are alarming reports of Internet overuse and overdependence and severe online gaming
use. Teenagers often spend too much time in front of a computer screen. Spending
countless hours a day, every day, on the internet can interfere with young people's
emotional, physical, intellectual and spiritual development. 2,16
12
In this studied, the most common type of bullying was verbal bullying,
followed by social and physical bullying. There are three type of bullying, physical,
verbal and social bullying. Physical bullying, or bullying with aggressive physical
intimidation, involves repeated hitting, kicking, tripping, blocking, pushing, and
touching in unwanted and inappropriate ways. Verbal bullying, or bullying with cruel
spoken words, involves ongoing name-calling, threatening, and making disrespectful
comments about someone's attributes such as appearance, religion, ethnicity and
disability. Social bullying involves spreading rumors about another person, purposely
leaving someone out of an activity or embarrassing a person in public. 4,17 Based on
Olweus4, the most common form of bullying in school is a mockery, followed by
beatings, threats, and the spread of rumors. Veiskarami, et al17 study showed that boy
more than girls become victims in direct form of bullying, including verbal and physical
bullying. This finding consistent with other research by Cheragi, et al18 which reported
rate of verbal victimization in first and secondary high school significantly higher. Study
of Canadian children in grade 4 to 12 found that 21% of children reported being
physically bullied; 48%, verbally bullied and 30% socialy bullied.1 In most
cultures,male have more freedom to express their feelings and use of direct and overt
aggression and bullying. While girls are taught to avoid direct and aggressive behaviors,
so they show those negativities in other indirect bullying such as gossip and social
isolation.17
In the United States, male are more involved in bullying than female with a
prevalence of about 14% of boys and 9% of girls.15 Among youth participant in Canada
bullying research, found that 42% were males and 34% were females.1 Our study
found that males were more involved in bullying than females. In general, it is said that
males were more frequently involved in bullying than females. Most research on
aggression has found that males showed significantly higher levels of aggression than
females. However, gender differences in bullying is less consistent.13,14
This study showed prevalence of bullying was higher in public school than in
private school. Actually bullying in private schools, is just as much a problem as
bullying in public schools.15 Private schools were not governed by the same laws as
public schools. Private schools have their own criteria, and their own way of handling
social problems. At private schools, there were generally more teachers per student and
13
that would lead to a higher probability of bullying being detected. Private schools also
have more resources and programs to help students stay out of trouble. Studies by the
National Center for Education Statistics showed that bullying was less prevalent in
private schools than in public schools.14,16
Our study found that students who were involved in bullying have significant
lower academic achievements than student who were not involved in bullying. A study
conducted in British among adolescents aged 8-13 years found a significant but weak
correlation between student bullied by level of academic competence (r = -0.41) and
also found a significant weaker correlation (r = -0.27), between bullies with levels of
academic competence.13 Research by Juvonen et al19 among 12-15 year old students
(middle school) found a significant relationship between the students involved in
bullying with lower grade point average (GPA). Another study by Schwartz, et al20,
reported students who were both bullied and victimized suffered lower academic
competence of the same magnitude as bullies. This study was not in line with research
by Nansel et al which found no significant association between involvement as a victim
or bully/victim with academic achievement. However a significant relationship emerged
for bullies. They were 1.8 times more likely to have lower academic achievement.3
Lower academic achievement is attributed to low school adjustment, low school
bonding, high school alienation, avoidance of school and often absent in school.
Students involved in bullying have low levels of school adjustment (doing well on
school work, following the rules, doing homework) and school bonding (desire to do
well at school, being happy at school, taking school seriously). This relationship was
significantly stronger among students who are involved as bullies and victims group,
followed by bullies and weakest relationship but meaningful obtained on victims. 20
Natvig et al on his study get school alienation (opposite of school bonding) related to
victim group. Bullies obtained 2.1 times higher on school alienate.22 Juvonen et al found
significant correlation (r = 0.16) between bullying with student absenteeism at school,
with the victim absent more often than the bullies.19
Academic achievement is influenced by many factors, including the IQ level,
average study hours/day, socioeconomic status, education level of parents, the presence
of chronic diseases and presence of emotional and behavioral problem. Millones, et al23
found negative correlation between behavioral problem with academic achievement
14
among students in Peru. Study in Nigeria showed that there was a significant difference
between the long and short study time behaviour student’s academic performance.
Students who study for long hours tend to perform better than those who study for short
study time.11 Anees, et al12 reported a significant positive correlation between
intelligence and academic achievement with correlation coefficient of 0.70 among high
school students in Aligarh. Many factor, including internal and external factor show
significant correlation with academic achievement, but this finding was not
consistence.24 In this study found no significant difference in academic achievement
between student with difference IQ scores, daily study hours, economic status, presence
of behavioral disorder and parental education level. Although students with high IQ
typically perform well in school, we cannot decide conclusively that their high
achievement is actually the result of their intelligence. Intelligence probably does play
an important role in school achievement, but many other factors for instance motivation,
school climate, family resources, parental support, and peer group expectations may
also influence. The longer the time interval between two measures of intelligence, the
greater the fluctuation in IQ, especially when initial measures were taken in the early
years. IQ scores and other measures of cognitive ability often increase over time when
children are highly motivated, independent learners and when adults provide stimulating
activities and a variety of reading materials.12,24
Children with any psychological disorder such as conduct disorder were
more likely to have bullied other children. 23 A conduct disorder is any behavior that is
repeated on the part of the child exhibiting the behaviors, and includes any behaviors in
the range of what are considered to be “antisocial type behaviors in childhood or
adolescence.” Children or adolescents with conduct disorder have behaviors like
defiance, disruptiveness, delinquent behaviors (physical violence, property destruction,
law-breaking, reckless thrill-seeking) and antisocial behaviors (disrespect of others,
irresponsibility, and dishonesty).19,21
This study generates important epidemiological data include data regarding the
prevalence of bullying in junior high school students in Denpasar, characteristics and
differences in academic achievement between students involved in bullying and those
who did not. The strength of this study lies in the narrow range of the confidence
interval. It reflects the power on considerable research (95%) as well as an adequate
15
number of samples. In the data collection process, the questionnaire used did not
include the name or the name of the school. It was conducted to maintain confidentiality
and the convenience sample in filling the questionnaire.
The limitations of this study, first, this study design was cross-sectional.
Variables measurement in each subjects performed only one time, there was no followup procedure. Second, the data obtained through questionnaires filled directly by the
sample which is strongly influenced by openness, honesty, feelings, and emotions while
filling the questionnaire. Third, this study did not examine all factors that may affect the
academic achievement such as learning motivation and school climate. These factors
were difficult to measure and very personal, that measurement of these parameters
should be done through in-depth interviews and felt more appropriate. Fourth, this study
did not measure the decline in student achievement, where the variable is more
appropriate to compare the effects of bullying. The research carried out after the first
semester, before the second semester, so students only have one value report cards that
were included as research data. The results are expected to be useful primarily as a
baseline for future research. Based on some of the weaknesses of this study, further
research needs to be conducted with a prospective study design, involving a larger
number of samples, as well as collecting data through in-depth interviews to gain a
better research results.
Conclusion
The prevalence of bullying among junior high school students in Denpasar obtained by
46.25%. Most of students experienced verbal bullying. Students involved in bullying
have significantly lower academic achievement compared with students who were not
involved bullying.
Acknowledgement
I would like to thank Professor Roberto Parada for permission using Adolescent peer
relations instrument and Professor Jelinek for permission using Pediatric Symptom
Checklist for youth. Thank to Headmaster of SMP Negeri 3 Denpasar, SMP Negeri 4
Denpasar, SMP Dwijendra, SMP Harapan and all student who were participated in this
study.
16
REFFERENCES
1. Lemstra M, Rogers M, Redgate L, Garner M, Moraros J. Prevalence, risk
indicators and outcomes of bullying among on-reserve first nations youth. Can J
Public Health. 2011;102:462-6.
2. Kowalski RM and Limber SP. Psychological, physical, and academic correlates
of cyberbullying and traditional bullying. J adolesc health. 2013;53:13-9.
3. Nansel TR, Overpeck M, Pilla RS, Ruan J, Morton BM, Scheidt P. Bullying
behaviors among US youth: prevalence and association with psychosocial
adjustment. JAMA. 2001;285:2094-100.
4. Olweus D and Solberg ME. Prevalence estimation of school bullying with the
olweus bully/victim questionnaire. Willey-Liss inc. 2003;29:239-68. Available
from: URL: http://www. interscience.wiley.com. Accessed March 15, 2015.
5. Jamir T, Devi NP, Lenin RK, Roshan L, Sameeta N. The relationship between
bullying victimization, self–esteem and depression among school going
adolescents. IJMSS. 2014;12:477-89.
6. Holt MK, Finkelhor D and Kantor GK. Multiple victimization experiences of
urban elementary school students: associations with psychosocial functioning
and academic performance. Psych J. 2007;31:1-5.
7. Dwipayanti IAS and Indrawati KR. Hubungan antara tindakan bullying dengan
prestasi belajar anak korban bullying pada tingkat sekolah dasar. Jurnal
psikologi udayana. 2014;1:251-60.
8. Gall G, Pagano ME, Desmond MS, Perrin JM, Murphy JM. Utility of
psychosocial screening at a school-based health center. J Sch Health.
2000;70:292–8.
9. Anonym. Sosial dan kependudukan. Available from: URL: http://www.
bps.go.id. Accessed March 15, 2015.
10. Antara. Upah minimum regional kota denpasar. Available from: URL:
http://www. republika.co.id. Accessed March 15, 2015.
11. Ukpong DE and George IN. Length of Study-Time Behaviour and Academic
Achievement of Social Studies Education Students in the University of Uyo.
International Education Study. 2013; 6;172-178.
12. Anees A. A study of academic Achievement in relation to intelligence of class
VII students. Excellence International Journal Of Education And Research.
2013;1:238-49.
13. Dake JA, Price JJH, Telljohann SK. The nature and extent of bullying at school.
J Sch Health. 2003;73:173-80.
14. Glew GM, Frey KS, Walker WO. Bullying update:are we making any progress?.
Peds in review J. 2010;31:68-74.
15. Fleming LC and Jacobsen KH. Bullying among middle-school students in low
and middle income countries. Health promotion international advance.
2010;25:73-84.
16. Ndebele C and Msiza D. An analysis of the prevalence and effects of bullying at
a remote rural school in eastern cape province of south Africa: lessons for school
principals. Stud tribes tribals. 2014;12:113-24.
17. Veiskarami HA, Zangiabadi M, Hosseini SSA, Salimy H, Jozayi K.
Comparative analysis of verbal victimization among male and female high
school students in Iran. International Journal of life science. 2015;9:13-7.
17
18. Cheragi A and Piskin M. A comparation of peer bullying among high school
students in iran and turkey. Procedia social and behavioral sciences. 2011;15:
2510-20.
19. Juvonen J, Nishina A, Graham S. Peer harassment, psychological adjustment
and school functioning in early adolescence. J educ psychol. 2000;92:349-59.
20. Schwartz D, Dodge KA, Pettit GS, Bates JE. Friendship as a moderating factor
in the pathway between early harsh home environment and later victimization in
the peer group. Dev psycho. 2000;36:646-62.
21. Haynie D, Nansel T, Eitel P. Bullies, victims and bully/victims: distinct groups
of at risk youth. J early adolesc. 2001;21:29-49.
22. Natvig GK, Albrektsen G, Qvarnstrom U. School-related stress experience as a
risk factor for bullying behavior. J youth adolesc. 2001;30:561-75.
23. Millones DLM, Leeuwen KV, Ghesquiere P. Associations between psychosocial
functioning and academic achievements: the Peruvian case. 2013.
Javeriana;12:725-37.
24. Najimi A, Sharifirad G, Meftagh SD. Academic failure and student viewpoint:
the influence of individual, internal and external organizational factors. J educ
health promot. 2013;2:1-19.
18
Prevalence School Bullying and Relation with Academic Achievements Among
Junior High School Students
By
Made Ayu Cynthia Windasari
Supervisors:
Prof. dr. Soetjiningsih, Sp.A(K)
Dr. dr. I Gusti Ayu Trisna Windiani, Sp.A(K)
dr. I Gusti Agung Ngurah Sugitha Adnyana, Sp.A
dr. I Gusti Ayu Endah Ardjana, Sp.KJ (K)
CHILD HEALTH DEPARTMENT
MEDICAL FACULTY UDAYANA UNIVERSITY
SANGLAH GENERAL HOSPITAL
DENPASAR
2015
1
Prevalence School Bullying and Relation with Academic Achievements
Among Junior High School Students
Made Ayu Cynthia Windasari, Soetjiningsih, I Gusti Ayu Trisna Windiani,
I Gusti Agung Ngurah Sugitha Adnyana, I Gusti Ayu Endah Ardjana
Child health department, Medical faculty, Udayana University,
Sanglah Hospital, Denpasar
Abstract
Background: Bullying is any negative activity or aggresive behavior which is intended
to harm others. Children and adolescents are highly susceptible groups to this problem.
One of the bullying impact is low academic achievement. The data that displays on
prevalence bullying and relation between bullying and academic achievement for
adolescents in Bali is still limited.
Objectives: To know prevalence bullying and relation between bullying and academic
achievement for adolescents in Bali
Methods: This study was cross-sectional analytical study, conducted at 4 Junior High
School in Denpasar city on June 2015. Data were obtained from questionnaires which
fill by subjects. The Adolescent peer relations instrument (APRI) was used to determine
the involvement of bullying in this study. Subjects including groups involved in
bullying if the total score on each part of APRI > 18.
Results: One hundred and sixty Junior high school students participated in this study.
From total 160 subjects, 74 subjects (46.25%) are involve in bullying as bullies, victim,
also bullies and victim, 86 subjects (53.75%) are not involve in bullying. After analysis,
academic achievement from those who was involved in any bullying cases is
significantly lower (3.38 ± 0.09 SD) when compared with the group of students who
was involved in bullying cases (3.42 ± 0.12 SD).
Conclusions: The prevalence of bullying among junior high school students in
Denpasar obtained by 46.25%. Students involved in bullying have significantly lower
academic achievement compared with students who are not involved bullying.
keywords : bullying, youth, prevalence, academic achievement
2
Prevalensi Bullying dan Hubungannya dengan Prestasi Akademik
pada Siswa Sekolah Menengah Pertama
Made Ayu Cynthia Windasari, Soetjiningsih, I Gusti Ayu Trisna Windiani, I Gusti
Agung Ngurah Sugitha Adnyana, I Gusti Ayu Endah Ardjana
Bagian Ilmu Kesehatan Anak, Fakultas Kedokteran Universitas Udayana,
Rumah Sakit Sanglah Denpasar
Abstrak
Latar belakang: Bullying merupakan perilaku agresif negatif yang bertujuan untuk
menyakiti individu lain. Anak-anak dan remaja merupakan kelompok yang paling rentan
mengalami hal tersebut. Salah satu dampak bullying adalah prestasi akademik yang
rendah. Data tentang prevalensi bullying dan hubungan dengan prestasi akademik pada
remaja di Bali masih terbatas.
Tujuan: Mengetahui prevalensi bullying pada remaja serta hubungannya dengan
prestasi akademik remaja di Bali..
Metode: Penelitian potong lintang analitik dilaksanakan pada empat Sekolah Menengah
Umum Pertama (SMP) di Kotamadya Denpasar pada bulan Juni 2015. Adolescent peer
relations instrument (APRI) digunakan untuk mengetahui adanya keterlibatan bullying.
Subjek termasuk kelompok terlibat bullying apabila skor total pada tiap bagian dari
APRI > 18.
Hasil: Terdapat 160 pelajar SMP yang mengikuti penelitian. Tujuh puluh empat orang
(46.25%) terlibat bullying dan 86 orang (53,75%) tidak terlibat bullying. Prestasi
akademik pada siswa yang terlibat bullying lebih rendah (3,38±0,09 SD) bermakna
dibandingkan dengan siswa yang tidak terlibat bullying (3,42±0,12 SD).
Simpulan: Prevalensi bullying pada siswa SMP di Denpasar adalah 46,25%. Prestasi
akademik pada siswa yang terlibat bullying lebih rendah secara bermakna dibandingkan
dengan siswa yang tidak terlibat bullying.
Kata kunci : bullying, remaja, prevalensi, prestasi akademik
3
Introduction
Bullying is any negative activity or aggresive behavior which is intended to harm or
disturb others.1 This phenomenon refers to various kinds of physical aggression, verbal
and psychologycal performed repeatedly within a certain period of time and there is an
imbalance of power, with a more powerful person or group attacking a less powerful
one. Children and adolescents are highly susceptible groups to this problem.1,2
Worldwide it is expected as much as 15-30% students have been involved bullying.
Specifically, 13% students are reported as bullies, 11% as victims and 6% as bullies and
also victim.3 Most case of bullying in children and adolescents took place in schools and
its prevalence was increased every year. Studies by Olweus found an increasing number
of victims by 50% from 1983 to 2001 on 11.000 primary and secondary school student
in the United State of America.4
The incidence of bullying among students, increasing since elementary school, a
peak in Junior High School and thereafter tend to decline.1,3 Self-reported
questionnaires assessments method is a method for measuring a bullying behavior that
is widely used, by filling the questionnaire independently by the students. Adolescent
peer relations instrument (APRI) is one method to detect bullying behavior in
adolescents aged 12-17 years. This instrument consist of 36 questions with good
reliability (Cronbach alpha value of 0.95).5
Bullying among school-aged youth is increasingly being recognized as an
important problem affecting well-being and social functioning. The impact of bullying
include increased risk of having a mental disorder, antisocial behavior and low
academic achievement.2,6 The study by Holt et al 6, found an association between the
victims of bullying, psychological stress and low academic achievement in students in
America. Recent study held in Bali, found a negative correlation between bullying with
the victims’s academic achievement at elementary school level.7 But in other studies,
this correlation was not found to be consistent, where there are other studies that did not
find an relation or difference between those two. The data that displays on both of these
relation or difference for adolescents in Bali is still limited. Thus we need further study
to determine prevalence of bullying and relation with academic achievement among
junior high school students.
4
Materials and Methods
This study is a cross-sectional analytical study, conducted at 4 Junior High School
(SMP) in Denpasar city which consists of 2 public school, SMP Negeri 3 and SMP
Negeri 4 Denpasar, as well as two private school, SMP Dwijendra and SMP Harapan in
June 2015. This study was included private and public school, because of suggesting
prevalence difference between both of two. The election of SMP Negeri 3, SMP Negeri
4, SMP Dwijendra and SMP Harapan related on permission obtained from their
headmaster, their student have IQ test result, also their short distance and reachable
Based on Fischer formula with precision estimation set at 5%, the minimum
sample size required is 151 (rounded up to 160 students). In this study involve 40
students from each school. Sample selection is done by purposive sampling.
Determination of the initial samples in each school was done by random method with
dropping the tip of a pencil on a sheet of student attendance. The samples were then
selected based on the formula N/n of the population (N: number of students on each
grade in Junior High School and n: number of student required (40)). In accordance
with the order numbers attendance of students so each student to-n which satisfy the
eligibility criteria were included in the study.
Samples were students of SMP Negeri 3, SMP Negeri 4, SMP Dwijendra and
SMP Harapan Denpasar which meet the eligibility criteria. Inclusion criteria in the
study were junior high school students grades 1, 2 and 3 in SMP Negeri 3, SMP Negeri
4, SMP Dwijendra and SMP Harapan Denpasar on June 2015. The exclusion criterias
were if a student unwilling to participate in the study, did not sign the informed consent,
in a state of chronic disease and if the data on the questionnaire was incomplete.
The Adolescent peer relations instrument was used to determine the involvement
of bullying in this study. The questionnaire has been translated into Indonesian language
as permission of the author, Roberto Parada from the University of Western Sydney.
While the questionnaire was used to determine the presence of emotional and behavioral
disorders such as attention disorders, internalizing or externalizing disorder was the
Pediatric Symptom Checklist (PSC) for youth who have also been translated into
Indonesian language as permission of the author, Jelinek from Massachusette Hospital.
Questionnaire translation process through the "backward translation" (translate from
English into Indonesian language, then translate again into English language by
5
different person). Backward translation conducted by researcher and English lecturer at
Udayana University under the supervision of the Pediatric Growth and Development
Division of Medical Faculty in Udayana University. Psychometric analysis performed
before questionnaire used (APRI and PSC-Y questionnaire) through reliability
assessment. Instrument test conducted on 30 Harapan junior high school students and
produce good reliability (Cronbach's α 0.98 for APRI and Cronbach's α of 0.97 for the
Y-PSC).
One day before sample participated in this study, they reminded to looking back
their IQ test result (IQ test has already done at the beginning of their school years) and
also their academic achievement. At starting data collection, the researchers explain the
objective of this study, how to fill out the questionnaire, as well as informed consent to
the students. Students who agree to get involved to this study and signed an informed
consent sheet then included in the study. Students instructed to fill identity form first
(without write their name) which include age, sex, type of school, IQ test result, parent’s
income, parent’s education, study hour at home per day and academic achievement.
Then they answer APRI and PSC-Y questionnaires. Every student who has completely
answered the questionnaire, immediately submit the questionnaires to the researcher.
There are 36 questions on APRI to determine the involvement of bullying
experienced by students in the last 1 year. The questions are divided into two parts,
namely the 18 questions in section A for student involvement as bullies and 18
questions in section B to determine the involvement of students as victims. There are 6
scale of measurement in it, which are 1 (never); 2 (sometimes); 3 (once or twice a
month); 4 (once a week); 5 (several times a week); 6 (every day). Cut off point is 18 on
each section. If the total score on each section > 18, the student is included in the groups
involved bullying. If the total score on each part ≤ 18, the students in the group were not
involved in bullying. The type of bullying can be assessed based on APRI which are
physical, verbal and social bullying. Bullies can be categorized as performing physical
bullying when the total score of questions section A number 2, 6, 9, 12, 15, 16 equals to
> 6, categorized as performing verbal bullying when total score of the question section
A number 1, 3, 5, 7, 10, 14 equals to > 6 and categorized perform social bullying if total
score of the question section A number 4, 8, 11, 13, 17, 18 equals to > 6. Victims can
also be categorized according to the type of bullying. Victims are categorized as
6
experiencing physical bullying when total score of the question section B number 2, 5,
8, 10, 15, 16 equals to > 6, categorized as experiencing verbal bullying if total score of
the question section B number 1, 4, 7, 11, 13, 18 equals to > 6 and categorized as having
social bullying when total score of the question section B number 3, 6, 9, 12, 14, 17
equals to> 6.5 Physical bullying, or bullying with aggressive physical intimidation,
involves repeated hitting, kicking, tripping, blocking, pushing, and touching in
unwanted and inappropriate ways. Verbal bullying, or bullying with cruel spoken
words, involves ongoing name-calling, threatening, and making disrespectful comments
about someone's attributes such as appearance, religion, ethnicity and disability. Social
bullying involves spreading rumors about another person, purposely leaving someone
out of an activity or embarrassing a person in public.4
While the PSC for youth consists of 35 questions with 3 measurement scale is 0
(never); 1 (sometimes); 2 (often). If the total score ≥ 30, students was categorized as
having emotional and behavioral disorders. The PSC assessment has three subscales
which are attention, internalization and externalization. The attention subscale is
reflected in the question number 4, 7, 8, 9, 14, revealed having attention problem if the
total score > 7. The internalization subscale reflected in the question number 11, 13, 19,
22, 27, revealed having internalization problem when the total score > 5. The
externalization subscale reflected in the question number 16, 29, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35
otherwise having externalization problem if the total score > 7.8
Academic achievement was the learning results obtained by students which
expressed in symbols or numbers in a particular period stated in the value (point) in
report cards or raport. Academic achievement in this study will be measured based on
the mean point reached by the students and are listed in the point of the last semester
report cards or raport before the study was conducted.7 Chronic disease was a systemic
disease or disease attack certain organs, symptoms and require treatment for more than
3 months.
Economic level was a condition or status of a socially regulated and assign a
person in a particular position in the structure of society based on income. Economic
level in this study was categorized into high, medium and low based on the average
parent’s income earned in 1 month. This category was used in Badan Pusat Statistik
(BPS) Indonesia.9 The border of low income category was related to regional salary in
7
Denpasar city which describe in upah minimum regional (UMR , Rp.1.561.000).10 Low
economic level when the average income of the parents Rp. 2,500,000 per month.9
The mean hours of home-study per day refers to a specific time a student
assigns for himself or herself to study in order to acquire knowledge, beyond the time
spent in school and in a tutoring/course.11 Intelligence Quotient (IQ) is a value of
intellectual ability, analysis, logic, and the ratio of a person who is classified into a low
IQ level or mental retardation if the value of IQ 0-79; low IQ levels were still within the
normal ranges when IQ score 80-90; normal IQ level or average when the value of IQ
91-110; High IQ level when the value of IQ 111-120; superior IQ level when the value
of IQ 120-130, and very superior IQ level or genius when IQ scores 131 or more.12
The data analysis of this study using computer program. The normality of data
was assessed using Kolmogorov-Smirnov test. Comparison of academic achievement
among students who do involved bullying and who do not was assessed by independent
T test, if the independent T test requirements are fulfilled, a P value 3 hour, n, %
IQ level
Average, n, %
High, n, %
Superior, n, %
Very Superior, n, %
Emotional and behavioral problem
Yes, n, %
No, n, %
Involvement in Bullying
Involved (N=74) Not Involved (N=86)
40 (54)
34 (46)
40 (46.5)
46 (53.5)
42 (56.7)
32 (43.3)
34 (39.5)
52 (60.5)
6 (8.1)
12 (16.3)
19 (25.6)
37 (50)
0 (0)
12 (13,9)
21 (24,5)
53 (61,6)
4 (5,4)
51 (69)
19 (25,6)
2 (2.3)
67 (78)
17 (19.7)
41 (55.4)
31 (41.9)
2 (2.7)
2 (2.3)
67 (78)
17 (19.7)
12 (16.2)
19 (25.7)
36 (48.6)
7 (9.5)
21(24.5)
19 (22)
34 (39.5)
12 (14)
8 (10.8)
66 (89.1)
6 (6.9)
80 (93.1)
n: number of subject
Based on the total score on each part of APRI questionnaire, involvement of
bullying distinguished by bullies, victim, or both bullies and victim. At the subscale
ratings of parts A and B from APRI questionnaires, categorizing types of bullying
experiences also conducted among students. Characteristics sample which involved in
bullying listed in Table 2.
9
Table 2. Characteristics Subject which Involved in Bullying
Variable
N=74
Bullying status
Bullies, n, %
Victim, n, %
Bullies and victim, n, %
24 (32.4)
22 (29.7)
28 (37.8)
Type of bullying
Physical, n, %
Verbal, n, %
Social, n, %
19 (25.6)
31(41.8)
24 (32.4)
n: number of subject
The number of samples in the study amounted to more than 50 people; there
were 160 people to be exact. The data normality test used was the Kolmogorov-Smirnov
test. Data distribution of all variables were normal, except for variable academic
achievement. Academic achievement that reflected in the value report was not normal;
then data transformed by log function to normalize the data distribution. As academic
achievement data that has been transformed, normality test obtained p> 0.05 thus
concluded that the data were normally distributed.
After normality test, Levene test was performed to know the homogenecity of
variance and normal data variance obtained. Table 3. show relation variables with
academic achievement. Relation academic achievement to variable bullying
involvement, type school and presence emotional & behavioral problem were analyzed
with independent sample T-test , while others variables were analyzed with Anova test.
10
Table 3. Relation Variables with Academic Achievement
Variables
Bullying involvement
Involved
Not involved
School
Public
Private
Parent’s education
Elementary school graduate
Junior High school graduate
Senior High school graduate
Bachelor degree
Economic Status
Low
Middle
High
Daily study hours
< 2 hour
2-3 hour
> 3 hour
IQ level
Average
High
Superior
Very Superior
Emotional & behavioral problem
Yes
No
Academic Achievement
Mean
Standar
deviation
P
0.017
3.38
3.42
0.09
0.12
3.42
3.39
0.12
0.10
0.290
3.39
3.40
3.39
3.41
0.08
0.11
0.08
0.12
0.839
3.43
3.40
3.39
0.81
0.11
0.12
3.35
3.40
3.41
0.14
0.12
0.10
0.604
0.728
0.909
3.40
3.41
3.40
3.40
0.10
0.12
0.10
0.13
3.39
3.41
0.10
0.12
0.067
Further analyzed among the group of students who was involved in bullying,
showed that victims have the lowest academic achievement (3.34 ± 0.06 SD) compared
with bullies (3.41 ± 0.09 SD) and both bullies and victim (3.39 ± 0.09 SD).
Discussion
The research took place from June 10th 2015 until June 30th 2015 at four Junior High
School in Denpasar, which is two public school, SMP Negeri 3 Denpasar and SMP
Negeri 4 Denpasar, as well as two private school namely SMP Dwijendra and SMP
Harapan. Forty students grade 1 and 2 from each school participated in the study. All
11
data on the questionnaire was complete so that samples studied amounted to 160
students with male subject were comparable with female. The age range of the subjects
was 12 years to 15 years. Subject’s parents mostly have high education, graduated from
college. More than half of the subjects were classified in moderate economic status.
In our study, 46.25% of the subjects involved in bullying, either as bullies,
victim, or both bullies and victim. Number of bullies and victim groups was higher
(37.8%) compared with the bullies alone (22.4%) and victims alone (29.7%). Study
before 2010 reported worldwide bullying was expected as much as 15-30% students
have been involved bullying. Specifically, 13% students were bullies, 11% were victims
and 6% were reported as bullies and also victim. Research in the United States showed
the prevalence of bullying in elementary and junior high school students reached 30%. 3
Results of a survey in Australia showed that 20% of students experience bullying at
least once a week. Most cases occur in teenager at grade 8 and 9 and was done more
often by boys.13 Studies in England showed the prevalence of bullying range around 419%, while the prevalence of bullies and victims in Japan around 10% and 15%.14
Recent studies showed incidence of bullying become higher. The prevalence range of
victimization at the middle school was 41-60% in the Africa and Middle East.15 Study
by Flisher16 in 2012, bullying has been reported to be as high as 61% in high school
students in Tshwan. Study in Northen Ireland in 2010 reported 40% primary school
students had been bullied.17
Violence in the media may contribute to bullying. Violence in the media,
whether it is reflected in music, games, cartoons, television shows or movies, may
desensitizes children to the effects of violence, legitimizes and glorifies violence and
can increase aggressive behavior or increases tolerance and acceptance of violent and
abusive behavior. Nowadays online bullying is a widespread and growing phenomenon,
and offline bullying has always been and continues to be a problem. 16 Cyberbullying is a
growing problem among middle and high school aged students. Around the world there
are alarming reports of Internet overuse and overdependence and severe online gaming
use. Teenagers often spend too much time in front of a computer screen. Spending
countless hours a day, every day, on the internet can interfere with young people's
emotional, physical, intellectual and spiritual development. 2,16
12
In this studied, the most common type of bullying was verbal bullying,
followed by social and physical bullying. There are three type of bullying, physical,
verbal and social bullying. Physical bullying, or bullying with aggressive physical
intimidation, involves repeated hitting, kicking, tripping, blocking, pushing, and
touching in unwanted and inappropriate ways. Verbal bullying, or bullying with cruel
spoken words, involves ongoing name-calling, threatening, and making disrespectful
comments about someone's attributes such as appearance, religion, ethnicity and
disability. Social bullying involves spreading rumors about another person, purposely
leaving someone out of an activity or embarrassing a person in public. 4,17 Based on
Olweus4, the most common form of bullying in school is a mockery, followed by
beatings, threats, and the spread of rumors. Veiskarami, et al17 study showed that boy
more than girls become victims in direct form of bullying, including verbal and physical
bullying. This finding consistent with other research by Cheragi, et al18 which reported
rate of verbal victimization in first and secondary high school significantly higher. Study
of Canadian children in grade 4 to 12 found that 21% of children reported being
physically bullied; 48%, verbally bullied and 30% socialy bullied.1 In most
cultures,male have more freedom to express their feelings and use of direct and overt
aggression and bullying. While girls are taught to avoid direct and aggressive behaviors,
so they show those negativities in other indirect bullying such as gossip and social
isolation.17
In the United States, male are more involved in bullying than female with a
prevalence of about 14% of boys and 9% of girls.15 Among youth participant in Canada
bullying research, found that 42% were males and 34% were females.1 Our study
found that males were more involved in bullying than females. In general, it is said that
males were more frequently involved in bullying than females. Most research on
aggression has found that males showed significantly higher levels of aggression than
females. However, gender differences in bullying is less consistent.13,14
This study showed prevalence of bullying was higher in public school than in
private school. Actually bullying in private schools, is just as much a problem as
bullying in public schools.15 Private schools were not governed by the same laws as
public schools. Private schools have their own criteria, and their own way of handling
social problems. At private schools, there were generally more teachers per student and
13
that would lead to a higher probability of bullying being detected. Private schools also
have more resources and programs to help students stay out of trouble. Studies by the
National Center for Education Statistics showed that bullying was less prevalent in
private schools than in public schools.14,16
Our study found that students who were involved in bullying have significant
lower academic achievements than student who were not involved in bullying. A study
conducted in British among adolescents aged 8-13 years found a significant but weak
correlation between student bullied by level of academic competence (r = -0.41) and
also found a significant weaker correlation (r = -0.27), between bullies with levels of
academic competence.13 Research by Juvonen et al19 among 12-15 year old students
(middle school) found a significant relationship between the students involved in
bullying with lower grade point average (GPA). Another study by Schwartz, et al20,
reported students who were both bullied and victimized suffered lower academic
competence of the same magnitude as bullies. This study was not in line with research
by Nansel et al which found no significant association between involvement as a victim
or bully/victim with academic achievement. However a significant relationship emerged
for bullies. They were 1.8 times more likely to have lower academic achievement.3
Lower academic achievement is attributed to low school adjustment, low school
bonding, high school alienation, avoidance of school and often absent in school.
Students involved in bullying have low levels of school adjustment (doing well on
school work, following the rules, doing homework) and school bonding (desire to do
well at school, being happy at school, taking school seriously). This relationship was
significantly stronger among students who are involved as bullies and victims group,
followed by bullies and weakest relationship but meaningful obtained on victims. 20
Natvig et al on his study get school alienation (opposite of school bonding) related to
victim group. Bullies obtained 2.1 times higher on school alienate.22 Juvonen et al found
significant correlation (r = 0.16) between bullying with student absenteeism at school,
with the victim absent more often than the bullies.19
Academic achievement is influenced by many factors, including the IQ level,
average study hours/day, socioeconomic status, education level of parents, the presence
of chronic diseases and presence of emotional and behavioral problem. Millones, et al23
found negative correlation between behavioral problem with academic achievement
14
among students in Peru. Study in Nigeria showed that there was a significant difference
between the long and short study time behaviour student’s academic performance.
Students who study for long hours tend to perform better than those who study for short
study time.11 Anees, et al12 reported a significant positive correlation between
intelligence and academic achievement with correlation coefficient of 0.70 among high
school students in Aligarh. Many factor, including internal and external factor show
significant correlation with academic achievement, but this finding was not
consistence.24 In this study found no significant difference in academic achievement
between student with difference IQ scores, daily study hours, economic status, presence
of behavioral disorder and parental education level. Although students with high IQ
typically perform well in school, we cannot decide conclusively that their high
achievement is actually the result of their intelligence. Intelligence probably does play
an important role in school achievement, but many other factors for instance motivation,
school climate, family resources, parental support, and peer group expectations may
also influence. The longer the time interval between two measures of intelligence, the
greater the fluctuation in IQ, especially when initial measures were taken in the early
years. IQ scores and other measures of cognitive ability often increase over time when
children are highly motivated, independent learners and when adults provide stimulating
activities and a variety of reading materials.12,24
Children with any psychological disorder such as conduct disorder were
more likely to have bullied other children. 23 A conduct disorder is any behavior that is
repeated on the part of the child exhibiting the behaviors, and includes any behaviors in
the range of what are considered to be “antisocial type behaviors in childhood or
adolescence.” Children or adolescents with conduct disorder have behaviors like
defiance, disruptiveness, delinquent behaviors (physical violence, property destruction,
law-breaking, reckless thrill-seeking) and antisocial behaviors (disrespect of others,
irresponsibility, and dishonesty).19,21
This study generates important epidemiological data include data regarding the
prevalence of bullying in junior high school students in Denpasar, characteristics and
differences in academic achievement between students involved in bullying and those
who did not. The strength of this study lies in the narrow range of the confidence
interval. It reflects the power on considerable research (95%) as well as an adequate
15
number of samples. In the data collection process, the questionnaire used did not
include the name or the name of the school. It was conducted to maintain confidentiality
and the convenience sample in filling the questionnaire.
The limitations of this study, first, this study design was cross-sectional.
Variables measurement in each subjects performed only one time, there was no followup procedure. Second, the data obtained through questionnaires filled directly by the
sample which is strongly influenced by openness, honesty, feelings, and emotions while
filling the questionnaire. Third, this study did not examine all factors that may affect the
academic achievement such as learning motivation and school climate. These factors
were difficult to measure and very personal, that measurement of these parameters
should be done through in-depth interviews and felt more appropriate. Fourth, this study
did not measure the decline in student achievement, where the variable is more
appropriate to compare the effects of bullying. The research carried out after the first
semester, before the second semester, so students only have one value report cards that
were included as research data. The results are expected to be useful primarily as a
baseline for future research. Based on some of the weaknesses of this study, further
research needs to be conducted with a prospective study design, involving a larger
number of samples, as well as collecting data through in-depth interviews to gain a
better research results.
Conclusion
The prevalence of bullying among junior high school students in Denpasar obtained by
46.25%. Most of students experienced verbal bullying. Students involved in bullying
have significantly lower academic achievement compared with students who were not
involved bullying.
Acknowledgement
I would like to thank Professor Roberto Parada for permission using Adolescent peer
relations instrument and Professor Jelinek for permission using Pediatric Symptom
Checklist for youth. Thank to Headmaster of SMP Negeri 3 Denpasar, SMP Negeri 4
Denpasar, SMP Dwijendra, SMP Harapan and all student who were participated in this
study.
16
REFFERENCES
1. Lemstra M, Rogers M, Redgate L, Garner M, Moraros J. Prevalence, risk
indicators and outcomes of bullying among on-reserve first nations youth. Can J
Public Health. 2011;102:462-6.
2. Kowalski RM and Limber SP. Psychological, physical, and academic correlates
of cyberbullying and traditional bullying. J adolesc health. 2013;53:13-9.
3. Nansel TR, Overpeck M, Pilla RS, Ruan J, Morton BM, Scheidt P. Bullying
behaviors among US youth: prevalence and association with psychosocial
adjustment. JAMA. 2001;285:2094-100.
4. Olweus D and Solberg ME. Prevalence estimation of school bullying with the
olweus bully/victim questionnaire. Willey-Liss inc. 2003;29:239-68. Available
from: URL: http://www. interscience.wiley.com. Accessed March 15, 2015.
5. Jamir T, Devi NP, Lenin RK, Roshan L, Sameeta N. The relationship between
bullying victimization, self–esteem and depression among school going
adolescents. IJMSS. 2014;12:477-89.
6. Holt MK, Finkelhor D and Kantor GK. Multiple victimization experiences of
urban elementary school students: associations with psychosocial functioning
and academic performance. Psych J. 2007;31:1-5.
7. Dwipayanti IAS and Indrawati KR. Hubungan antara tindakan bullying dengan
prestasi belajar anak korban bullying pada tingkat sekolah dasar. Jurnal
psikologi udayana. 2014;1:251-60.
8. Gall G, Pagano ME, Desmond MS, Perrin JM, Murphy JM. Utility of
psychosocial screening at a school-based health center. J Sch Health.
2000;70:292–8.
9. Anonym. Sosial dan kependudukan. Available from: URL: http://www.
bps.go.id. Accessed March 15, 2015.
10. Antara. Upah minimum regional kota denpasar. Available from: URL:
http://www. republika.co.id. Accessed March 15, 2015.
11. Ukpong DE and George IN. Length of Study-Time Behaviour and Academic
Achievement of Social Studies Education Students in the University of Uyo.
International Education Study. 2013; 6;172-178.
12. Anees A. A study of academic Achievement in relation to intelligence of class
VII students. Excellence International Journal Of Education And Research.
2013;1:238-49.
13. Dake JA, Price JJH, Telljohann SK. The nature and extent of bullying at school.
J Sch Health. 2003;73:173-80.
14. Glew GM, Frey KS, Walker WO. Bullying update:are we making any progress?.
Peds in review J. 2010;31:68-74.
15. Fleming LC and Jacobsen KH. Bullying among middle-school students in low
and middle income countries. Health promotion international advance.
2010;25:73-84.
16. Ndebele C and Msiza D. An analysis of the prevalence and effects of bullying at
a remote rural school in eastern cape province of south Africa: lessons for school
principals. Stud tribes tribals. 2014;12:113-24.
17. Veiskarami HA, Zangiabadi M, Hosseini SSA, Salimy H, Jozayi K.
Comparative analysis of verbal victimization among male and female high
school students in Iran. International Journal of life science. 2015;9:13-7.
17
18. Cheragi A and Piskin M. A comparation of peer bullying among high school
students in iran and turkey. Procedia social and behavioral sciences. 2011;15:
2510-20.
19. Juvonen J, Nishina A, Graham S. Peer harassment, psychological adjustment
and school functioning in early adolescence. J educ psychol. 2000;92:349-59.
20. Schwartz D, Dodge KA, Pettit GS, Bates JE. Friendship as a moderating factor
in the pathway between early harsh home environment and later victimization in
the peer group. Dev psycho. 2000;36:646-62.
21. Haynie D, Nansel T, Eitel P. Bullies, victims and bully/victims: distinct groups
of at risk youth. J early adolesc. 2001;21:29-49.
22. Natvig GK, Albrektsen G, Qvarnstrom U. School-related stress experience as a
risk factor for bullying behavior. J youth adolesc. 2001;30:561-75.
23. Millones DLM, Leeuwen KV, Ghesquiere P. Associations between psychosocial
functioning and academic achievements: the Peruvian case. 2013.
Javeriana;12:725-37.
24. Najimi A, Sharifirad G, Meftagh SD. Academic failure and student viewpoint:
the influence of individual, internal and external organizational factors. J educ
health promot. 2013;2:1-19.
18