The current study used meta-regression to establish trends in bullying from 1998 to 2017, to identify factors that help explain variation in bullying trends, and to determine differences in the trends by gender and grade. This study focused on trends of face-to-face (FTF) bullying victimization and perpetration, cyberbullying victimization, relational bullying victimization, verbal bullying victimization, and physical bullying victimization, as well as characteristics of the youth involved. It also explored methodological and survey differences to help determine which factors contribute to variation from study to study. A systematic search found 91 studies reporting trends of bullying, from 1998 to 2017, that met predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria. The findings illustrate no significant time trend when looking at FTF bullying victimization, yet an increasing time trend for cyberbullying victimization. Additional trends begin to emerge when stratifying the findings by grade and gender, with FTF bullying victimization among boys declining, while FTF bullying victimization among girls is increasing. Across both FTF bullying victimization and cyberbullying victimization, younger adolescents report significantly more bullying than older adolescents, and this is consistent over time. Verbal and physical bullying victimization as well as FTF bullying perpetration have significantly declined over time. This study also identified key variables that contribute to the variation from trend study to trend study. The implications of these findings inform both policy and practice and provide insight into the overall scope of bullying within the United States.
*AustinG.HansonT.PolikJ.ZhengC. (2016). School climate, substance abuse, and student well-being in California, 2013-2015. Results of the fifteenth Biennial Statewide Student Survey, grades 7, 9, and 11. San Francisco, CA: WestEd Health & Human Development Program.
2.
*AustinG.SkagerR. (2011). Results of the 13th biennial California student survey, 2009–10, grades 7, 9, and 11: Compendium of tables. San Francisco, CA: WestEd Health & Human Development Program.
3.
BorensteinM.HedgesL. V.HigginsJ. P. T.RothsteinH. (2009). Introduction to meta-analysis. West Sussex, England: Wiley.
4.
BorensteinM.HedgesL. V.HigginsJ. P. T.RothsteinH. (2013). Comprehensive meta-analysis software Version 3 [Computer software]. Englewood, NJ: Biostat.
*Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2013). Methodology of the youth risk behavior surveillance system—2013(Morbidity and mortality weekly report: Recommendations and reports, Vol. 62, No. 1). Atlanta, GE: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
Chester KayleighL.CallaghanM.CosmaA.DonnellyP.CraigW.WalshS.MolchoM. (2015). Cross-national time trends in bullying victimization in 33 countries among children aged 11, 13, and 15 from 2002 to 2010. European Journal Public Health, 25, 61–64. doi:10.1093/eurpub/ckv029
11.
Data Point. (2016, July). Trends in bullying at school among students ages 12 to 18. Washington, DC: US Department of Education.
12.
*DevoeJ. F.KaffenbergerS.ChandlerK., & National Center for Education Statistics. (2005). Student reports of bullying: Results from the 2001 school crime supplement to the national crime victimization survey. A statistical analysis report (NCES 2005-310). U.S. Department of Education.
13.
*DevoeJ. F.MurphyC., & National Center for Education Statistics. (2011a). Student reports of bullying and cyber-bullying: Results from the 2007 school crime supplement to the national crime victimization survey (NCES 2011-316). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.
14.
*DevoeJ. F.MurphyC., & National Center for Education Statistics. (2011b). Student reports of bullying and cyber-bullying: Results from the 2009 school crime supplement to the national crime victimization survey (NCES 2011-336). U.S. Department of Education.
15.
*FinkelhorD.ShattuckATurnerH. A.HambyS. L. (2014). Trends in children’s exposure to violence, 2003 to 2011. JAMA Pediatrics, 168, 540–546. doi:10.1001/jamapediatrics.2013.5296
16.
HowardD. E.DebnamK. J.WangM. Q.GilchristB. (2012). 10-Year trends in physical dating violence victimization among U.S. adolescent males. The International Quarterly of Community Health Education, 32, 283–305. doi:10.2190/IQ.32.4.c
17.
*International Survey Associates dba Pride Surveys. (2012). 2012 Oregon student wellness survey. Portland: Oregon Health Authority, Addictions and Mental Health Division.
18.
*International Survey Associates dba Pride Surveys. (2014). 2014 Oregon student wellness survey. Portland: Oregon Health Authority, Addictions and Mental Health Division.
19.
JonesL. M.MitchellK. J.FinkelhorD. (2013). Online harassment in context: Trends from three youth Internet safety surveys (2000, 2005, 2010). Psychol Violence, 3, 53–69. doi:10.1037/a0030309
20.
Kessel SchneiderS.O’DonnellL.SmithE. (2015). Trends in cyberbullying and school bullying victimization in a regional census of high school students, 2006–2012. Journal of School Health, 85, 611–620. doi:10.1111/josh.12290
21.
*LessneD.CidadeM., & National Center of Education Statistics. (2015). Student reports of bullying and cyber-bullying: Results from the 2013 school crime supplement to the national crime victimization survey (NCES 2015-056). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.
22.
*LessneD.HarmalkarS., & National Center for Education Statistics. (2013). Student reports of bullying and cyber-bullying: Results from the 2011 school crime supplement to the national crime victimization survey (NCES 2013-329). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.
23.
*LessneD.YanezC., & National Center for Education Statistics. (2016). Student reports of bullying: Results from the 2015 school crime supplement to the national crime victimization survey (NCES 2017-015). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.
24.
*LipseyM. W.WilsonD. B. (2001). Practical meta-analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
25.
Maine Department of Education and Maine Department of Health and Human Services. (2012a). 2011 Maine integrated youth health survey (MIYHS—methodological summary-all surveys). Portland: Maine Department of Education and Maine Department of Health and Human Services.
26.
*Maine Department of Education and Maine Department of Health and Human Services. (2012b). Summary reports, Maine, 2011 MIHYS high school report. Portland: Maine Department of Education and Maine Department of Health and Human Services.
27.
*Maine Department of Education and Maine Department of Health and Human Services. (2013). Detailed reports—Comparisons by gender, age, grade, race/ethnicity, sexual orientation, public health district, and county: Maine, 2013 MIHYS high school report. Portland: Maine Department of Education and Maine Department of Health and Human Services.
28.
*Maine Department of Education and Maine Department of Health and Human Services. (2014). 2013 Maine integrated youth health survey (MIYHS—Methodological summary-all surveys). Portland: Maine Department of Education and Maine Department of Health and Human Services.
29.
*Maine Department of Education & Maine Department of Health and Human Services. (2015a). Detailed reports—Comparisons by gender, age, grade, race/ethnicity, sexual orientation, public health district, and county: Maine, 2015 MIHYS high school report. Portland, ME: Maine Department of Education and Maine Department of Health and Human Services.
30.
*Maine Department of Education & Maine Department of Health and Human Services. (2015b). Detailed reports—Comparisons by gender, age, grade, race/ethnicity, sexual orientation, public health district, and county: Maine, 2015 MIHYS middle school report. Portland: Maine Department of Education and Maine Department of Health and Human Services.
31.
*Maine Department of Education and Maine Department of Health and Human Services. (2016). 2015 Maine integrated youth health survey (MIYHS—Methodological summary-all surveys). Portland: Maine Department of Education and Maine Department of Health and Human Services.
32.
*Maine Department of Education and Maine Department of Health and Human Services. (2017a). Detailed reports—Comparisons by gender, age, grade, race/ethnicity, sexual orientation, public health district, and county: Maine, 2017 MIHYS high school report. Portland: Maine Department of Education and Maine Department of Health and Human Services.
33.
*Maine Department of Education and Maine Department of Health and Human Services. (2017b). Detailed reports—Comparisons by gender, age, grade, race/ethnicity, sexual orientation, public health district, and county: Maine, 2017 MIHYS middle school report. Portland: Maine Department of Education and Maine Department of Health and Human Services.
*Minnesota Student Survey Interagency Team. (2007). 2007 Minnesota student survey statewide tables—Fall 2007. Roseville: Minnesota Department of Education, Minnesota Department of Health, Minnesota Department of Human Services, and Minnesota Department of Public Safety.
37.
*Minnesota Student Survey Interagency Team. (2010). 2010 Minnesota student survey statewide tables—Fall 2010. Roseville: Minnesota Department of Education, Minnesota Department of Health, Minnesota Department of Human Services, and Minnesota Department of Public Safety.
38.
*Minnesota Student Survey Interagency Team. (2013). 2013 Minnesota student survey statewide tables—Fall 2013. Roseville: Minnesota Department of Education, Minnesota Department of Health, Minnesota Department of Human Services, and Minnesota Department of Public Safety.
39.
*Minnesota Student Survey Interagency Team. (2016). 2016 Minnesota student survey statewide tables—Fall 2016. Roseville: Minnesota Department of Education, Minnesota Department of Health, Minnesota Department of Human Services, and Minnesota Department of Public Safety.
40.
MitchellK. J.JonesL. M.TurnerH. A.ShattuckA.WolakJ. (2016). The role of technology in peer harassment: Does it amplify harm for youth. Psychol Violence, 6, 193–204. doi:10.1037/a0039317
41.
ModeckiK. L.MinchinJ.HarbaughA. G.GuerraN. G.RunionsK. C. (2014). Bullying prevalence across contexts: A meta-analysis measuring cyber and traditional bullying. Journal of Adolescent Health, 55, 602–611. doi:10.1016/j.jadohealth.2014.06.007
42.
MolchoM.CraigW.DueP.PickettW.Harel-FischY.OverpeckM., & HBSC Bullying Writing Group. (2009). Cross-national time trends in bullying behaviour 1994-2006: Findings from Europe and North America. International Journal Public Health, 54, S225–S234. doi:10.1007/s00038-009-5414-8
43.
*Oregon Health Authority. (2015). 2015 Oregon healthy teens survey (2015 OHT State Report). Portland: Oregon Health Authority.
44.
*Oregon Health Authority. (2018). 2017 Oregon healthy teens survey (2017 OHT state report). Portland: Oregon Health Authority.
45.
PerlusJ. G.Brooks-RussellA.WangJ.IannottiR. J. (2014). Trends in bullying, physical fighting, and weapon carrying among 6th- through 10th-grade students from 1998 to 2010: Findings from a national study. American Journal Public Health, 104, 1100–1106. doi:10.2105/AJPH.2013.301761
46.
PolaninJ. R.EspelageD. L.PigottT. D. (2012). A meta-analysis of school-based bullying prevention programs’ effects on bystander intervention behavior. School Psychology Review, 41, 47–65.
47.
RingroseJ. (2006). A new universal mean girl: Examining the discursive construction and social regulation of a new feminine pathology. Feminism Psychology, 16, 405–424. doi:10.1177/0959353506068747
48.
ShetgiriR.LinH.FloresG. (2013). Trends in risk and protective factors for child bullying perpetration in the United States. Child Psychiatry Human Development, 44, 89–104. doi:10.1007/s10578-012-0312-3
49.
SteffensmeierD.SchwartzJ.ZhongH.AckermanJ. (2005). Assessment of recent trends in girls’ violence using diverse longitudinal sources: Is the gender gap closing. Criminology, 43, 355–406. doi:10.1111/j.0011-1348.2005.00011.x
50.
TaubJ. (2001). Evaluation of the second step violence prevention program at a rural elementary school. School Psychology Review, 31, 186–200.
51.
*University of Colorado Denver Community Epidemiology and Program Evaluation Group. (2014). Healthy kids Colorado survey 2013: High school executive summary. Denver: Colorado Department of Education, Colorado Department of Human Services, and Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment.
52.
*University of Colorado Denver Community Epidemiology and Program Evaluation Group. (2014). Middle school overview of 2013 data: Healthy kids Colorado survey. Denver: Colorado Department of Education, Colorado Department of Human Services, and Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment.
53.
*University of Colorado Denver Community Epidemiology and Program Evaluation Group. (2015). 2015 Healthy kids Colorado survey: High school executive summary. Denver: Colorado Department of Education, Colorado Department of Human Services, and Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment.
54.
VoyerD.VoyerS. D. (2014). Gender differences in scholastic achievement: A meta-analysis. Psychology Bulletin, 140, 1174–1204. doi:10.1037/a0036620
55.
WaasdorpT. E.BradshawC. P. (2015). The overlap between cyberbullying and traditional bullying. Journal Adolescent Health, 56, 483–488. doi:10.1016/j.jadohealth.2014.12.002
56.
WaasdorpT. E.PasE. T.ZablotskyB.BradshawC. P. (2017). Ten-year trends in bullying and related attitudes among 4th to 12th graders. Pediatrics, 139, e20162615. doi:10.1542/peds.2016-2615
57.
WangJ.IannottiR. J.NanselT. R. (2009). School bullying among adolescents in the United States: Physical, verbal, relational, and cyber. Journal of Adolescent Health, 45, 368–375. doi:10.1016/j.jadohealth.2009.03.021
58.
YbarraM. L.MitchellK. J.KorchmarosJ. D. (2011). National trends in exposure to and experiences of violence on the Internet among children. Pediatrics, 128, e1376–e1386. doi:10.1542/peds.2011-0118
59.
YeagerD. S.FongC. J.LeeH. YEspelageD. L. (2015). Declines in efficacy of anti-bullying programs among older adolescents: Theory and a three-level meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 37, 36–51. doi:10.1016/j.appdev.2014.11.005
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
