Bullying is a significant public health concern, and it has received considerable attention from the media and policymakers over the past decade, which has led some to believe that it is increasing. However, there are limited surveillance data on bullying to inform our understanding of such trends over the course of multiple years. The current study examined the prevalence of bullying and related behaviors between 2005 and 2014 and explored whether any such changes varied across schools or as a function of school-level covariates.
Youth self-reports of 13 indicators of bullying and related behaviors were collected from 246 306 students in 109 Maryland schools across 10 years. The data were weighted to reflect the school populations and were analyzed by using longitudinal hierarchical linear modeling to examine changes over time.
The covariate-adjusted models indicated a significant improvement over bullying and related concerns in 10 out of 13 indicators (including a decrease in bullying and victimization) for in-person forms (ie, physical, verbal, relational) and cyberbullying. Results also showed an increase in the perceptions that adults do enough to stop bullying and students’ feelings of safety and belonging at school.
Prevalence of bullying and related behaviors generally decreased over this 10-year period with the most recent years showing the greatest improvements in school climate and reductions in bullying. Additional research is needed to identify factors that contributed to this declining trend.
Comments
RE: Ten-Year Trends in Bullying
Waasdorp et al. reported a decrease over a ten-year period in the prevalence of 10 of 13 indicators of bullying and related behaviors. Although there is little reason to doubt that these decreases are indeed reflective of their sample, the authors fail to acknowledge in their limitations the fact that their study considers only a single school district in Maryland, and instead state that their “findings …contradict the public’s (mis)perceptions that bullying is increasing” -- suggesting that their findings are likely reflective of national trends.
Unfortunately, the authors fail to caution that their findings may not be generalizable beyond the single school district that they examined within the state of Maryland. Although the authors cite other studies that suggest that bullying rates do indeed seem to be decreasing nationally, they do not address whether there were any local or regional interventions that might explain the reductions observed in this one school district or whether there were credible data to suggest that the trends in Maryland are not indeed reflective of trends in other states.
Nationally representative data from the CDC’s Youth Risk Behavior Surveillance (YRBS) puts the findings reported by Wassdorp et al. in a broader context and different light. According to the YRBS surveys, there has been no overall decrease in the prevalence of high school students being bullied on school property in recent years. 1,2 In 2009, 19.9% of high school students in the US had been bullied on school property during the previous 12 months (21.2% females; 18.7% males). In 2015 (the most recent YRBS data available), the comparable figure was 20.2% (21.2% females; 18.7% males). Whereas the national prevalence did not decrease, Maryland did experience a decrease in high school students being bullied on school property over this same 6-year interval (2009-2015) – from 20.9% to 17.7%.1,2 In fact, of the 27 states for which the CDC reported state-specific prevalence data in both 2009 and 2015 for bullying on school property, Maryland had the second largest reduction in prevalence. (Indiana had the largest reduction.)
It is important to also note that the sample in this study excluded all students who were in alternative or special education settings – a group that has consistently been identified as being at increased risk for perpetration and victimization.3 Although exclusion of this vulnerable population does not invalidate the main findings reported by Waasdorp et al., it must be remembered that these prevalence figures are all likely underestimates of the true prevalence in the general population.
Although it is encouraging that the prevalence of bullying and related behaviors may indeed be decreasing in some communities, bullying remains a national pandemic that is associated with unacceptable morbidity and mortality.4 Moving forward, we agree with the accompanying commentary that it is important for schools to implement bullying prevention programs that have empirical evidence of effectiveness and can be feasibly implemented.5
References:
1. Eaton DK, Kann L, Kinchen S, et al. Youth Risk Behavior Surveillance — United States, 2009. MMWR Surveill Summ 2010;59(No. SS-5):1–142. Retrieved from: https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/ss5905a1.htm
2. Kann L, McManus T, Harris WA, et al. Youth Risk Behavior Surveillance — United States, 2015. MMWR Surveill Summ 2016;65(No. SS-6):1–174. Retrieved from: https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/65/ss/ss6506a1.htm
3. Rose CA, Monda-Amaya LE, Espelage DL. Bullying Perpetration and Victimization in Special Education: A Review of the Literature; Remedial and Special Education; 2011. 32 (2); 114 – 130.
4. Pham T, Adesman A. Teen victimization: prevalence and consequences of traditional and cyberbullying. Current Opinion in Pediatrics: 2015; 27 (6) 748–756.
5. Leff SS, Feudtner C. Tackling Bullying: Grounds for Encouragement and Sustained Focus; Pediatrics Jun 2017, 139 (6) e20170504; DOI: 10.1542/peds.2017-0504
RE: This Is Caused by Reduced Fertility of Girls of High Testosterone
I suggest this trend in reduced bullying results from reduced reproduction of women of higher testosterone. In the recent past other phenomena have also declined similarly with time within the population, for example obesity, early pregnancies, etc.
Women of higher testosterone exhibit reduced fertility. "in the absence of clinical signs of hyperandrogenism. In other words, increased testosterone may reduce fertility in women and girls without outward signs of excessive testosterone. "The mean level of free T [testosterone] was significantly higher (P less than 0.05) in anovulatory women when compared with ovulatory ones. .The results show that in infertile women determination of androgen levels, and especially free T [testosterone], is indicated in the absence of clinical signs of hyperandrogenism." (Human Reproduction 1988; 3: 437-439).
It is my hypothesis that the biological secular trend, the increase in size and earlier puberty of children is caused by increased testosterone within the population. This is driven by women / girls of higher testosterone which affects fetal, and subsequent, growth and development. I think this phenomenon periodically increases rapidly and our population, and others, world wide, and this increases the consequences such as increased obesity, type 2 diabetes, increased infection and cancer rates, etc. (This is derived from "Androgens in Human Evolution," Rivista di Biologia / Biology Forum 2001; 94: 345-362. If your library does not subscribe to "Rivista ... ," you may find this at: http://anthropogeny.com/Androgens%20in%20Human%20Evolution.htm .)
As testosterone levels increase, girls of higher testosterone begin to demonstrate the reduced fertility mentioned above. I suggest this slight reduction in fertility of higher testosterone girls accounts for the slight decrease in bullying, early pregnancies, etc. that are being noticed by epidemiology. These slight decreases in the negative consequences of the biological secular trend are hailed as "proof" of positive effects of social programs purportedly designed to ameliorate these various negative phenomena increasing within our population.