OBJECTIVES: To examine the relation between income inequality and school bullying (perpetration, victimisation and bully/victims) and explore whether the relation is attributable to international differences in violent crime. METHODS: Between 1994 and 2006, the Health Behaviour in School-aged Children study surveyed 117 nationally representative samples of adolescents about their involvement in school bullying over the previous 2 months. Country prevalence rates of bullying were matched to data on income inequality and homicides. RESULTS: With time and country differences held constant, income inequality positively related to the prevalence of bullying others at least twice (b = 0.25), victimisation by bullying at least twice (b = 0.29) and both bullied and victimisation at least twice (b = 0.40). The relation between income inequality and victimisation was partially mediated by country differences in homicides. CONCLUSIONS: Understanding the social determinants of school bullying facilitates anti-bullying policy by identifying groups at risk and exposing its cultural and economic influences. This study found that cross-national differences in income inequality related to the prevalence of school bullying in most age and gender groups due, in part, to a social milieu of interpersonal violence.
OBJECTIVES: To examine the relation between income inequality and school bullying (perpetration, victimisation and bully/victims) and explore whether the relation is attributable to international differences in violent crime. METHODS: Between 1994 and 2006, the Health Behaviour in School-aged Children study surveyed 117 nationally representative samples of adolescents about their involvement in school bullying over the previous 2 months. Country prevalence rates of bullying were matched to data on income inequality and homicides. RESULTS: With time and country differences held constant, income inequality positively related to the prevalence of bullying others at least twice (b = 0.25), victimisation by bullying at least twice (b = 0.29) and both bullied and victimisation at least twice (b = 0.40). The relation between income inequality and victimisation was partially mediated by country differences in homicides. CONCLUSIONS: Understanding the social determinants of school bullying facilitates anti-bullying policy by identifying groups at risk and exposing its cultural and economic influences. This study found that cross-national differences in income inequality related to the prevalence of school bullying in most age and gender groups due, in part, to a social milieu of interpersonal violence.
Authors: Pernille Due; Juan Merlo; Yossi Harel-Fisch; Mogens Trab Damsgaard; Bjørn E Holstein; Jørn Hetland; Candace Currie; Saoirse Nic Gabhainn; Margarida Gaspar de Matos; John Lynch Journal: Am J Public Health Date: 2009-03-19 Impact factor: 9.308
Authors: Michal Molcho; Wendy Craig; Pernille Due; William Pickett; Yossi Harel-Fisch; Mary Overpeck Journal: Int J Public Health Date: 2009-09 Impact factor: 3.380
Authors: Wendy Craig; Yossi Harel-Fisch; Haya Fogel-Grinvald; Suzanne Dostaler; Jorn Hetland; Bruce Simons-Morton; Michal Molcho; Margarida Gaspar de Mato; Mary Overpeck; Pernille Due; William Pickett Journal: Int J Public Health Date: 2009-09 Impact factor: 3.380
Authors: Luis Rajmil; Michael Herdman; Ulrike Ravens-Sieberer; Michael Erhart; Jordi Alonso Journal: Int J Public Health Date: 2013-06-23 Impact factor: 3.380
Authors: Frank J Elgar; Genevieve Gariepy; Melanie Dirks; Sophie D Walsh; Michal Molcho; Alina Cosma; Marta Malinowska-Cieslik; Peter D Donnelly; Wendy Craig Journal: JAMA Pediatr Date: 2019-07-01 Impact factor: 16.193
Authors: Marie Leiner; Alok Kumar Dwivedi; Maria Theresa Villanos; Namrata Singh; Dan Blunk; Jesus Peinado Journal: Front Pediatr Date: 2014-01-14 Impact factor: 3.418