小学生欺凌旁观者行为及其与家庭功能的关联

马郑豫; 苏志强; 杨圆圆

doi:10.16835/j.cnki.1000-9817.2024009

小学生欺凌旁观者行为及其与家庭功能的关联

doi: 10.16835/j.cnki.1000-9817.2024009

1.
长江师范学院教师教育学院，重庆 408100
2.
中山火炬高技术产业开发区中心小学心理健康教育指导与发展中心

基金项目:

2022年重庆市教育委员会人文社科研究重点项目 22SKGH399

重庆市社会科学规划委托课题 2019PY07

详细信息

作者简介:
马郑豫(1985-)，女，河南洛阳人，博士，副教授，主要研究方向为儿童的社会性发展及其家庭教育

通讯作者:
苏志强, E-mail: cqzhiqiangsu@163.com

利益冲突声明 所有作者声明无利益冲突。
中图分类号: G444 R179 G78
计量
- 文章访问数: 364
- HTML全文浏览量: 177
- PDF下载量: 50
- 被引次数: 0
出版历程
- 收稿日期: 2023-08-14
- 修回日期: 2023-11-10
- 网络出版日期: 2024-03-02
- 刊出日期: 2024-02-25

Bullying bystanders' behaviors among pupils and the correlation with family function

1.
Faculty of Teacher Education, Yangtze Normal University, Chongqing (408100), China

摘要

摘要: 目的研究小学生欺凌旁观者行为现状及其与家庭功能的关联，为校园欺凌的教育干预提供实证支撑。方法采用整群随机抽样方法，在2019年11月选取重庆市巫山县某小学1 145名小学生，采用小学生欺凌旁观者行为问卷和家庭亲密度与适应性量表开展问卷调查，采用χ²检验、Spearman相关分析和二元Logistic回归分析小学生不同欺凌旁观者行为的检出率以及与家庭功能的关联。结果有4.7%的小学生为潜在的促进欺凌者，92.1%的小学生为潜在的保护受害者，42.1%小学生为潜在的置身事外者；不同年级小学生在3种不同类型欺凌旁观者行为上的差异均有统计学意义(χ²值分别为21.45，7.98，27.48，P值均 < 0.05)。家庭功能及其分维度与不同类型的欺凌旁观者行为之间均相关(|r|=0.07~0.20，P值均 < 0.05)。二元Logistic回归分析显示，小学生家庭功能和年级对促进欺凌者行为、保护受害者行为和置身事外者行为的影响均有统计学意义(OR值分别为0.98，3.33；1.02，1.95；0.99，0.58，0.41，0.61，P值均 < 0.05)。结论小学生的欺凌旁观者行为与年级和家庭功能有关。学校应针对不同年级的小学生开展教育干预，并注重改善小学生的家庭功能状况，以促进积极旁观者行为的发生。
- 暴力 /
- 行为 /
- 家庭 /
- 精神卫生 /
- 回归分析 /
- 学生
Abstract: Objective To analyze the status of childhood bullying bystander's behaviors among pupils and the correlation with family function, so as to provide empirical support for educational intervention in campus bullying. Methods A questionnaire survey using the cluster random sampling method was administered to 1 145 pupils from a primary school in Wushan County within Chongqing City in November 2019, including Pupil Bullying Bystander Behavior Scale and Family Adaptability and Cohesion Evaluation Scale(FACES). The χ² test, Spearman related analysis and binary Logistic regression were used to determine the detection rate of different bullying bystander behaviors among pupils and the association with family function. Results The proportion of bullying promoters, bullying protectors, and bystanders were 4.7%, 92.1%, and 42.1%, respectively. There were statistically significant differences in the three types of bullying bystander's behaviors among the different grades pupils(χ²=21.45, 7.98, 27.48, P < 0.05). There were significant correlation between family function and its dimensions with different types of bullying bystander behavior (|r|=0.07-0.20, P < 0.05). Binary Logistic regression analysis showed that pupils' family function and grade had statistically significant impact on promoting bullying behavior, protecting victim behavior, and bystander behavior (OR=0.98, 3.33; 1.02, 1.95; 0.99, 0.58, 0.41, 0.61, P < 0.05). Conclusions The bullying bystander's behaviors of pupils are related to grade in school and family function. Schools should implement educational interventions for pupils of different grades and focus on improving pupils' family function to effectively promote the occurrence of positive bystanders' behaviors in pupils.
- Violence /
- Behavior /
- Family /
- Mental health /
- Regression analysis /
- Students
注释:

1) 利益冲突声明 所有作者声明无利益冲突。

HTML全文

表 1 不同组别小学生欺凌旁观者行为检出率比较

Table 1. Comparison of detection rates of bullying bystanders' behaviors among pupils with different groups

组别	选项	人数	统计值	促进欺凌者行为	保护受害者行为	置身事外者行为
性别	男	553		26(4.7)	507(91.7)	221(40.0)
	女	592		28(4.7)	547(92.4)	261(44.1)
			χ²值	0.01	0.20	2.00
独生子女	是	177		12(6.8)	158(89.3)	79(44.6)
	否	968		42(4.3)	896(92.6)	403(41.6)
			χ²值	1.98	2.22	0.55
年级	三	214		20(9.3)	202(94.4)	86(40.2)
	四	286		19(6.6)	271(94.8)	93(32.5)
	五	353		6(1.7)	317(89.8)	146(41.4)
	六	292		9(3.1)	264(90.4)	157(53.8)
			χ²值	21.45^**	7.98^*	27.48^**
留守类型	单留守	631		35(5.5)	578(91.6)	267(42.3)
	双留守	293		11(3.8)	276(94.2)	124(42.3)
	非留守	221		8(3.6)	200(90.5)	91(41.2)
			χ²值	2.16	2.75	0.10
注： P < 0.05，*P < 0.01；()内数字为检出率/%。

下载: 导出CSV

表 2 小学生欺凌旁观者行为与家庭功能的相关性分析(r值，n=1 145)

Table 2. Correlation analysis of bullying bystanders' behaviors and family function among pupils(r, n=1 145)

变量	促进欺凌者行为	保护受害者行为	置身事外者行为	亲密度	适应性
保护受害者行为	-0.23^**
置身事外者行为	0.10^**	-0.29^**
亲密度	-0.08^**	0.18^**	-0.08^**
适应性	-0.10^**	0.20^**	-0.07^*	0.81^**
家庭功能	-0.10^**	0.20^**	-0.08^**	0.96^**	0.95^**
注： P < 0.05，*P < 0.01。

下载: 导出CSV

表 3 小学生不同类型欺凌旁观者行为相关因素的二元Logistic回归分析(n=1 145)

Table 3. Binary Logistic regression analysis on the related factors of bullying bystanders' behaviors of different types among pupils(n=1 145)

自变量	选项	促进欺凌者行为			保护受害者行为			置身事外者行为
自变量	选项	β值	Wald χ²值	OR值(95%CI)	β值	Wald χ²值	OR值(95%CI)	β值	Wald χ²值	OR值(95%CI)
年级	四	1.20	8.42	3.33(1.48~7.51)^**	0.59	2.67	1.80(0.89~3.65)	-0.55	9.10	0.58(0.40~0.82)^**
	五	0.79	3.63	2.21(0.98~4.99)	0.67	4.02	1.95(1.02~3.76)^*	-0.89	26.20	0.41(0.29~0.58)^**
	六	-0.62	1.34	0.54(0.19~1.54)	-0.06	0.06	0.94(0.55~1.59)	-0.49	9.27	0.61(0.45~0.84)^**
家庭功能		-0.02	5.02	0.98(0.97~1.00)^*	0.02	13.05	1.02(1.01~1.03)^**	-0.01	7.45	0.99(0.98~1.00)^**
注： P < 0.05，*P < 0.01。

下载: 导出CSV

参考文献(23)

[1]	EYUBOGLU M, EYUBOGLU D, PALA S C, et al. Traditional school bullying and cyberbullying: prevalence, the effect on mental health problems and self-harm behavior[J]. Psychiatry Res, 2021, 297: 1-10.
[2]	李缘, 苏普玉. 校园欺凌事件旁观者不作为行为研究进展[J]. 中国学校卫生, 2022, 43(10): 1591-1595. doi: 10.16835/j.cnki.1000-9817.2022.10.035 LI Y, SU P Y. Research progress of bystander ignorance in school bullying[J]. Chin J Sch Health, 2022, 43(10): 1591-1595. (in Chinese) doi: 10.16835/j.cnki.1000-9817.2022.10.035
[3]	ARMITAGE R. Bullying in children: impact on child health[J]. BMJ Paediatr Open, 2021, 5(1): 1-8.
[4]	MOORE S E, NORMAN R E, SUETANI S, et al. Consequences of bullying victimization in childhood and adolescence: a systematic review and Meta-analysis[J]. World J Psychiatry, 2017, 7(1): 60-76. doi: 10.5498/wjp.v7.i1.60
[5]	WAASDORP T E, FU R, CLARY L K, et al. School climate and bullying bystander responses in middle and high school[J]. J Appl Dev Psychol, 2022, 80: 1-15.
[6]	PLODGE J, FRYDENBERG E. The role of peer bystanders in school bullying: positive steps toward promoting peaceful schools[J]. Theor Pract, 2005, 44(4): 329-336. doi: 10.1207/s15430421tip4404_6
[7]	王庆林, 武晨阳, 宫火良, 等. 初中生校园欺凌旁观者行为及其与共情和自我效能的关系[J]. 中国心理卫生杂志, 2021, 35(12): 1013-1018. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-ZXWS202112006.htm WANG Q L, WU C Y, GONG H L, et al. Relationships among behavior of bystanders in school bullying, empathy and self-efficacy in junior middle school students[J]. Chin Ment Health J, 2021, 35(12): 1013-1018. (in Chinese) https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-ZXWS202112006.htm
[8]	张文娟, 马晓春. 青少年早期欺负参与角色的基本特点及其与同伴网络的关系[J]. 教育科学研究, 2016(2): 38-43. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-JYKY201602010.htm ZHANG W J, MA X C. The basic characteristics of the bullying roles in early adolescents and its relationship with peer networks[J]. Educ Sci Res, 2016(2): 38-43. (in Chinese) https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-JYKY201602010.htm
[9]	李孟儒, 肖迪, 彭涛. 欺凌态度、共情和学校生活满意度与旁观者行为反应的相关性[J]. 中国健康心理学杂志, 2020, 28(8): 1257-1262. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-JKXL202008031.htm LI M R, XIAO D, PENG T. Research on bystander behavior related to bullying attitude, empathy and life satisfaction in school[J]. Chin J Health Psychol, 2020, 28(8): 1257-1262. (in Chinese) https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-JKXL202008031.htm
[10]	洪芳, 刘泓妤, 俞伟杰, 等. 中小学生欺凌参与行为与旁观者积极干预的关系[J]. 校园心理, 2022, 20(3): 209-214. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-YXXL202203010.htm HONG F, LIU H Y, YU W J, et al. Relationship between bullying participant behaviors and bystander intervention of students in primary and middle school[J]. J Campus life Ment Health, 2022, 20(3): 209-214. (in Chinese) https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-YXXL202203010.htm
[11]	段文婷, 江光荣. 计划行为理论述评[J]. 心理科学进展, 2008, 16(2): 315-320. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-XLXD200802019.htm DUAN W T, JIANG G R. A review of the theory of planned behavior[J]. Adv Psychol Sci, 2008, 16(2): 315-320. (in Chinese) https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-XLXD200802019.htm
[12]	LEEMAN J, CRANDELL J L, LEE A, et al. Family functioning and the well-being of children with chronic conditions: a Meta-analysis[J]. Res Nurs Health, 2016, 39(4): 229-243. doi: 10.1002/nur.21725
[13]	CHOI H J, LIM E S, YOO J H. A study on the relationship among family functioning, empathy, and aggression by high school students[J]. J Korean Acady Nurs, 2013, 24(4): 480-487.
[14]	CHILDS K K, BRADY C M, CAMERON A L, et al. The role of family structure and family processes on adolescent problem behavior[J]. Deviant Behav, 2022, 43(1): 1-16. doi: 10.1080/01639625.2020.1771128
[15]	YOO H, FENG X, DAY R D. Adolescents' empathy and prosocial behavior in the family context: a longitudinal study[J]. J Youth Adolesc, 2013, 42(12): 1858-1872. doi: 10.1007/s10964-012-9900-6
[16]	JENKINS L N, FREDRICK S S. Social capital and bystander behavior in bullying: internalizing problems as a barrier to prosocial intervention[J]. J Youth Adolesc, 2017, 46(4): 757-771. doi: 10.1007/s10964-017-0637-0
[17]	马境. 小学生校园欺凌旁观者的行为与共情、亲社会行为的关系研究[D]. 重庆: 重庆师范大学, 2018. MA J. Research on the relationship between bullying bystanders' behavior and empathy and prosocial behavior in school pupils[D]. Chongqing: Chongqing Normal university, 2018. (in Chinese)
[18]	费立鹏, 沈其杰, 郑延平, 等. "家庭亲密度和适应性量表"和"家庭环境量表"的初步评价[J]. 中国心理卫生杂志, 1991, 5(5): 198-202. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-ZXWS199105001.htm FEI L P, SHEN Q P, ZHENG Y P, et al. Preliminary evaluation of Chinese version of FACES Ⅱ and FES[J]. Chin Ment Health J, 1999, 5(5): 198-202. (in Chinese) https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-ZXWS199105001.htm
[19]	RIEFFE C, CAMODECA M. Empathy in adolescence: relations with emotion awareness and social roles[J]. Brit J Dev Psychol, 2016, 34(3): 340-353. doi: 10.1111/bjdp.12133
[20]	KAUFMAN M. How families facilitate the development of empathy in children: a family systems theory perspective[D]. Manhattan: Kansas State University, 2011.
[21]	POZZOLI T, GINI G, THORNBERG R. Getting angry matters: going beyond perspective taking and empathic concern to understand bystanders' behavior in bullying[J]. J Adolesc, 2017, 61: 87-95. doi: 10.1016/j.adolescence.2017.09.011
[22]	NICKERSON A B, MELE D, PRINCIOTTA D. Attachment and empathy as predictors of roles as defenders or outsiders in bullying interactions[J]. J Sch Psychol, 2008, 46(6): 687-703.
[23]	JAMBON M, MADIGAN S, PLAMONDON A, et al. Developmental trajectories of physical aggression and prosocial behavior in early childhood: family antecedents and psychological correlates[J]. Dev Psychol, 2019, 55(6): 1211-1225. doi: 10.1037/dev0000714