BACKGROUND: Bullying is common in schools and has negative consequences. It can be assessed using a self-reported instrument. AIM: To validate a Spanish self-reporting tool called "Survey of High School Bullying Abuse of Power" (MIAP). MATERIAL AND METHODS: The instrument has 13 questions, of which 7 are multiple choice, rendering a total of 49 items. It was applied to 2.341 children of seventh and eighth grade attending private, subsidized and municipal schools in the city of Concepción, Chile. Expert judge analysis and estimated reliability using the Cronbach Alpha were used to validate the survey. RESULTS: The instrument obtained a Cronbach Alpha coefficient of 0.8892, classified as good. This analysis generated four scales that explained 30.9% of the variance. They were called "Witness Bullying" with 18 items, accounting for 11.4% of the variance, "Bullying Victim" with 12 items, accounting for 7.5% of the variance, "Bullying Perpetrator and Severe bullying Victim", with 10 items explaining 6.4% of the variance and "Aggressor Bullying" with 6 items accounting for 5.7% of the variance. CONCLUSIONS: The MIAP can recognize four basic factors that facilitate the analysis and understanding of bullying, with good levels of reliability and validity. The remaining questions also deliver valuable information.
BACKGROUND: Bullying is common in schools and has negative consequences. It can be assessed using a self-reported instrument. AIM: To validate a Spanish self-reporting tool called "Survey of High School Bullying Abuse of Power" (MIAP). MATERIAL AND METHODS: The instrument has 13 questions, of which 7 are multiple choice, rendering a total of 49 items. It was applied to 2.341 children of seventh and eighth grade attending private, subsidized and municipal schools in the city of Concepción, Chile. Expert judge analysis and estimated reliability using the Cronbach Alpha were used to validate the survey. RESULTS: The instrument obtained a Cronbach Alpha coefficient of 0.8892, classified as good. This analysis generated four scales that explained 30.9% of the variance. They were called "Witness Bullying" with 18 items, accounting for 11.4% of the variance, "Bullying Victim" with 12 items, accounting for 7.5% of the variance, "Bullying Perpetrator and Severe bullying Victim", with 10 items explaining 6.4% of the variance and "Aggressor Bullying" with 6 items accounting for 5.7% of the variance. CONCLUSIONS: The MIAP can recognize four basic factors that facilitate the analysis and understanding of bullying, with good levels of reliability and validity. The remaining questions also deliver valuable information.
Authors: Jorge Gaete; Daniela Valenzuela; María Inés Godoy; Cristian A Rojas-Barahona; Christina Salmivalli; Ricardo Araya Journal: Front Psychol Date: 2021-04-12