The ways in which child en app aise and cope wi h school bullying a e likely o in luence
he long- e m ou comes expe ienced. To examine his possibili y, 219 Spanish unde g adua e
s uden s (73 male, 146 emale) aged be ween 18 and 40, comple ed an adap ed e sion
o he Re ospec i e Bullying Ques ionnai e (RBQ; Schä e e al., 2004) and a dis ess
scale (Ri e s, 1999). Resul s indica ed ha nei he coping s a egies epo ed by ic ims
o bullying no he ma ch be ween con ol app aisal and coping s a egy in luenced le els
o dis ess expe ienced as adul s. Con ol, h ea and challenge app aisals did, howe e ,
in luence long- e m dis ess. Explana ions o hese e ec s a e discussed, and include he
possibili y ha app aisals may di ec ly in luence le els o dis ess and he quali y o
emo ions expe ienced by ic ims du ing he ac ual bullying episode. Ac i e s a egies
we e pe cei ed by s uden s o be e ec i e in dealing wi h bullying, whe eas hose cen e ed
on a oiding he con lic , o which in ol ed agg ession, we e conside ed ine ec i e.
Keywo ds: bullying, ic imiza ion, long- e m consequences, coping, app aisal
La o ma en que los niños a on an y esuel en los p oblemas de malos a os en e
compañe os/as escola es in luyen posiblemen e en los e ec os que és os expe imen an,
a la go plazo. Pa a examina es a posibilidad, hemos es udiado un g upo de 219
es udian es uni e si a ios españoles (73 chicos y 146 chicas) con edades comp endidas
en e 18 y 40 años, median e la aplicación de una e sión adap ada del Re ospec i e
Bullying Ques ionnai e (RBQ; Schä e e al., 2004) y una escala de es és (Ri e , 1999).
Los esul ados indican que ni las es a egias de a on amien o usadas espon áneamen e
po las íc imas, ni el con ol sob e ellas, eje cen in luencia sob e el es és expe imen ado
en la edad adul a. Sin emba go, sí eje ce in luencia sob e el es és a la go plazo la
alo ación que el suje o hace de la si uación iolen a, como un e o con olable o como
una amenaza que no puede se con olada. Se discu en posibles explicaciones,
incluyendo la posibilidad de que ales alo aciones quizás eje zan una in luencia di ec a
en el p opio ni el de es és, especialmen e en el ono emocional expe imen ado po
las íc imas du an e los episodios de iolencia. Las es a egias ac i as de a on amien o
son alo adas como e ec i as po los es udian es, mien as que las es a egias que
niegan el con lic o o incluyen espues a ag esi a se conside a on poco e icaces.
Palab as cla e: mal a o, ic imización, e ec os a la go plazo, a on amien o, alo ación
The Long-Te m E ec s o Coping S a egy
Use in Vic ims o Bullying
Simon C. Hun e 1, Joaquin Mo a-Me chan2, and Rosa io O ega3
1S a hclyde Uni e si y
2Uni e si y o Se ille
3Uni e si y o Co doba
The Spanish Jou nal o Psychology Copy igh 2004 by The Spanish Jou nal o Psychology
2004, Vol. 7, No. 1, 3-12 1138-7416
This esea ch was suppo ed by he T aining and Mobili y o Resea che s g an ERB-FMRX-CT97-0139, DG12, om he Eu opean
Commission.
Co espondence conce ning his a icle should be add essed o Rosa io O ega, Depa amen o de Educación. Uni e sidad de Có doba.
A . San Albe o Magno, s/n. Campus Menéndez Pidal. 14004 Có doba. E-mail: [email p o ec ed]
3
Bullying is a social and in e pe sonal p oblem ha
in ol es he epea ed, in en ional use o agg ession agains
a less powe ul o he (Whi ney & Smi h, 1993). Bullying
can ake di e en o ms, be i di ec (e.g., physical
agg ession), indi ec (e.g., exclusion, sp eading umo s), o
e bal (e.g., name-calling). P e alence s udies, using sel -
epo ques ionnai es, indica e ha app oxima ely 10% o
Spanish child en a e in ol ed in bully- ic im p oblems as
bullies, ic ims, o bo h o e app oxima ely a h ee mon h
pe iod (De enso del Pueblo, 2000; O ega & Angulo, 1998;
O ega & Le a, 2000; O ega & Mo a-Me chán, 1997, 1999).
Child en who a e ic ims o bullying a e mo e likely
han non- ic ims o expe ience p oblems such as dep ession,
anxie y, and low sel -es eem (Aus in & Joseph, 1996; C aig,
1998; S anley & A o a, 1998), and o engage in g ea e
le els o suicidal idea ion (Kal iala-Heino, Rimpela,
Ma unen, Rimpela, & Ran anen, 1999; Roland, 2002). In
ac , e ec s o ic imiza ion can pe sis beyond he ac ual
du a ion o he bullying episode (Kochende e & Ladd,
1996), and may endu e in o adul hood (Hugh-Jones & Smi h,
1999; Ma sui, Tsuzuki, Kakuyama, & Ongla co, 1996). These
indings sugges ha child en who a e ic imized expe ience
p oblems in coping wi h bullying, and ha hey may cope
in ways ha a e maladap i e.
Resea ch on bullying has p e iously used heo e ical
concep s such as social in o ma ion p ocessing (Schwa z,
Dodge, Pe i , & Ba es, 1997) and dynamic sys ems (Peple ,
C aig, & O’Connell, 1999). Howe e , when examining he
way ic ims cope wi h he p ac ical and emo ional p oblems
associa ed wi h bullying, p ocess heo ies o s ess and
coping seem mo e app op ia e (Laza us & Folkman, 1984).
These heo ies allow us o examine he way in which
maladap i e coping pa e ns may e ol e wi hin he bully-
ic im ela ionship (Hun e & Boyle, 2004).
Wi hin one o he mos widely esea ched ansac ional
coping heo ies (Laza us & Folkman, 1984), coping is
conside ed o ha e wo goals: o egula e dis essing emo ions
(emo ion- ocused coping) and o sol e he p oblem ha
causes dis ess (p oblem- ocused coping) (Folkman &
Laza us, 1985). O he heo is s ha e also emphasized he
impo ance o he dis inc ion be ween app oach and a oidance
s a egies, wi h he o me ocusing on he p oblem causing
dis ess, and he la e designed as a o m o escaping o
dis ac ing a en ion om he p oblem and no ac ually dealing
wi h i (Ro h & Cohen, 1986). Coping-s a egy use is guided
by he way he indi idual pe cei es, o app aises, he si ua ion
and app aisals a e, in u n, di ided in o wo ca ego ies: (a)
p ima y app aisal and (b) seconda y app aisal.
P ima y app aisal e e s o he meaning assigned o an
e en , and he e a e h ee sepa a e classi ica ions. In he
app aisal o ha m o loss, he coping p io i y is o deal wi h
he epe cussions o he si ua ion. In con as , an app aisal
o h ea in ol es an icipa ed ha m o loss, and an app aisal
o challenge, while equally in ol ing an icipa ed ha m o
loss, emphasizes also he po en ial gains o ewa ds p o ided
by he si ua ion (Laza us & Launie , 1978). Seconda y
app aisal in ol es examina ion o one’s coping esou ces
and op ions, e alua ion o hei likelihood o success, and
e alua ion o one’s abili y o implemen s a egies (Laza us
& Folkman, 1984). Folkman (1984) s a ed ha si ua ional
app aisals o con ol e lec seconda y app aisal, as hey
e e o belie s abou one’s abili y o con ol a disc e e e en ,
and hence, e lec judgmen s abou he deg ee o which one’s
esou ces ma ch he p oblem a hand. Folkman, Laza us,
Dunkel-Sche e , DeLongis, and G uen (1986) ound ha
encoun e s app aised as modi iable we e associa ed wi h
p oblem- ocused coping-s a egy use, whe eas hose
app aised as being ou o one’s pe sonal con ol we e
associa ed wi h he use o a oidance s a egies.
Fou ne , Wilson, and Wallande (1998) sugges ed se e al
impo an dimensions when examining he long- e m
ou comes o coping, including (a) ma ch and (b) app oach
e sus a oidance coping-s a egy use.
Ma ch. This dimension is equi alen o he concep o
“goodness o i ” be ween app aisal and coping-s a egy use
(Folkman, Schae e , & Laza us, 1979), such ha coping
canno be conside ed e ec i e o ine ec i e independen ly
o he con ex in which i is used. Thus, o example, use
o coping s a egies ocused on changing he en i onmen
o changing onesel a e hough o be mos e ec i e when
he si ua ion is app aised as modi iable, and less so when
i is app aised as unable o be changed. The goodness-o -
i hypo hesis has been con i med in se e al adul samples
(Folkman e al, 1986; Fo sy he & Compas, 1987; Vi aliano,
DeWol e, Main o, Russo, & Ka on, 1990), al hough Pape
and A ias (1995) ailed o ind suppo o i in a sample o
emale ic ims o pa ne iolence. Compas, Malca ne, and
Fondaca o (1988) epo ed ha child en and adolescen s
who showed a good i epo ed ewe emo ional and
beha io al p oblems.
Fou ne e al. (1998) ound an inc ease in long- e m,
pa en - epo ed beha io p oblems in adolescen s displaying
goodness o i . They sugges ed ha his e ec migh be
due o he cul u al expec a ions placed on emales, so ha
be e i in emales ep esen s g ea e use o p oblem-
ocused coping s a egies, which may be iewed as
“inapp op ia e” emale beha io . Howe e , long- e m
consequences o goodness o i ha e no been esea ched
elsewhe e, and he e o e, he p esen s udy is o bo h
heo e ical and p ac ical ele ance.
App oach e sus a oidance coping-s a egy use.
App oach s a egies a e expec ed o be associa ed wi h mo e
adap i e coping compe ence (Fou ne e al., 1998); p oblem-
ocused coping (an app oach s a egy) has been nega i ely
co ela ed wi h dep ession in adul s (B ude -Ma son &
Ho ani z, 1990; Vinge hoe s & Van Heck, 1990; Vi aliano,
Russo, Ca , Maiu o, & Becke , 1985), and hese indings
ha e been eplica ed in adolescen samples (Dumon &
P o os , 1999; Unge , Kipke, Simon, Johnson, Mon gome y,
& I e son, 1998). In adul s, less equen use o a oidance
HUNTER, MORA-MERCHÁN, AND ORTEGA
4
coping s a egies was epo ed o p edic less emo ional and
physical dis ess (Holahan & Moos, 1986), while mo e
equen use o escape o a oidance coping s a egies was
associa ed wi h dep ession and emo ional dis ess (Aldwin
& Re enson, 1987; Billings & Moos, 1984; B ude -Ma son
& Ho ani z, 1990). In adolescen s, escape o a oidance
coping s a egies co ela ed posi i ely wi h s ess and
nega i ely wi h sel -es eem (Dumon & P o os , 1999).
When examining he ou comes o coping s a egies used
by ic ims o bullying, i is impo an ha hey a e examined
in espec o bullying pe se, since s a egies ha a e e ec i e
o young people in o he con ex s o si ua ions may no be
so when applied o bullying (Laza us & Folkman, 1984).
Se e al s udies ha e examined ou comes o coping s a egies
used by pupils when dealing wi h bullying, and hese ha e
ocused ei he on psychological/psychosocial ou comes
(Cassidy & Taylo , 2001; Kochende e -Ladd & Skinne ,
2002) o on whe he o no he bullying is s opped by he
coping s a egy (Eslea, 2001; Kochende e & Ladd, 1997;
Salmi alli, Kaukiainen, & Lage spe z, 1996; Smi h, Shu, &
Madsen, 2001; Wil on, C aig, & Peple , 2000).
Cassidy and Taylo (2001) examined he ou comes o
coping-s a egy use among adolescen ic ims o bullying
be ween 12 and 16 yea s old. They used a sel - epo
measu e o coping ha inco po a ed a numbe o di e en
concep s o p oduce a p oblem-sol ing s yle sco e. Highe
sco es on his scale p edic ed lowe le els o psychological
dis ess, sugges ing ha a coping s yle ha e lec s a less
helpless, mo e in con ol, mo e c ea i e, mo e con iden ,
mo e app oaching and less a oiding s yle, is adap i e.
Kochende e -Ladd and Skinne (2002) examined how
nine and en yea old child en coped wi h “a p oblem wi h
ano he kid a school”. Among boys, g ea e use o p oblem-
sol ing, and less use o social suppo , we e associa ed wi h
g ea e loneliness. Loneliness in gi ls, howe e , was
posi i ely associa ed wi h dis ancing.No coping s a egies
we e associa ed wi h anxie y o dep ession among gi ls.
Howe e , o boys, he e was an in e ac ion be ween coping
and ic imiza ion: G ea e dis ancing and ex e nalizing led
o heigh ened dep ession and anxie y when he e we e high
le els o ic imiza ion, bu educed le els o dep ession and
anxie y when he e we e low le els o ic imiza ion.
Kochende e -Ladd and Skinne (2002) also examined
eache - a ed social compe encies. Boys’ use o p oblem-
sol ing s a egies was in e sely associa ed wi h social
compe encies. F equen ly- ic imized gi ls we e mos a isk
o social compe ency p oblems when hey showed high
le els o in e nalizing and low le els o social suppo .
Wi h ega d o which s a egies a e mos e ec i e o
s opping bullying, Eslea (2001) asked child en aged 11 o
15 yea s abou hei s a egy use and how e ec i e each
s a egy was o s opping bullying. Di e en s a egies we e
e ec i e o di e en ypes o bullying. Fo example, igh ing
back was he mos e ec i e s a egy o s op name-calling
and h ea s, and was also ai ly e ec i e in s opping umo s
om being sp ead, he , and physical agg ession. Igno ing
people was he mos e ec i e in esponse o he , bu was
also ai ly e ec i e wi h espec o physical a acks, name-
calling and umo s being sp ead. Telling someone was bes
o s opping physical agg ession, hough i was also qui e
e ec i e o p e en ing he ecu ence o he , h ea ening
beha io , name-calling and umo s being sp ead.
This pa e n was also p esen in Salmi alli e al.’s (1996)
s udy. These au ho s examined he ways in which indi idual
s a egies, used by 12 and 13 yea -old ic ims, clus e ed
oge he . They iden i ied h ee main ac o s: helplessness
coping, which included s a egies such as doing no hing,
elling eache and skipping school; coun e agg ession
coping, which included s a egies such as speaking up o
he bully, bullying o he s and p o oking he bully; and
nonchalance, which in ol ed beha io s such as emaining
calm and p e ending no o ca e. Among boys, g ea e
coun e agg ession coping was associa ed wi h less
con idence ha he bullying would s op. Howe e , his ac o
clea ly included a a ie y o beha io s, many o which we e
explici ly hos ile and p o oca i e, so ha hey could be
expec ed o be unhelp ul.
Wi h espec o he nonchalance ac o , mo e nonchalance
was associa ed wi h g ea e con idence ha he bullying
would s op, hough only among boys. I is unclea why his
was only help ul o boys, hough i may be pa ly explained
by he di e en ypes o bullying expe ienced by boys and
gi ls. Fo example, g ea e nonchalance and lesse coun e
agg ession may be mos e ec i e o di ec o ms o
bullying. I his is he case, boys may pe cei e hese ypes
o s a egy o be mo e help ul as hey a e mo e o en ic ims
o di ec bullying (Ahmad & Smi h, 1994; C ick &
G o pe e , 1996; G een, Richa dson, & Lago, 1996).
The helplessness coping ac o iden i ied by Salmi alli
e al. (1996) was in e sely associa ed wi h he likelihood
ha bullying would s op, hough only among gi ls. Thus, i
may be ha hese s a egies a e pa icula ly unhelp ul when
dealing wi h indi ec o e bal bullying, a ype o bullying
expe ienced mo e by gi ls han by boys (Bij ebie &
Ve ommen, 1998; Olweus, 1994; Whi ney & Smi h, 1993).
Smi h e al. (2001) examined he associa ions be ween
du a ion and equency o bullying and s a egies used. In
a c oss-sec ional s udy o pupils aged 10 o 14 yea s, esul s
indica ed ha I ough back and I igno ed hem we e
un ela ed o ei he du a ion o equency o bullying. I an
away was used mo e by he mos equen ly bullied child en,
and I old hem o s op, I asked an adul o help, I asked
iends o help, and I c ied we e all associa ed wi h mo e
equen and longe -las ing bullying. Al hough he g ea e
use o such s a egies by mo e se iously bullied pupils may
indica e ha hey a e ine ec i e, Smi h e al. (2001) no e
ha i is di icul o disen angle causes and e ec s in his
da a. Speci ically, g ea e ic imiza ion may simply p o ide
g ea e oppo uni y o use mo e s a egies, o he same
s a egies mo e o en.
LONG-TERM EFFECTS OF VICTIMS’ COPING STRATEGIES 5
Kochende e and Ladd (1997) examined a sample o
younge child en, aged be ween 4 and 6 yea s. Pupils sel -
epo ed hei le el o ic imiza ion in all and sp ing o
hei kinde ga en yea ; hei use o coping s a egies was
pee - epo ed in he all. Boys who epo ed being ic imized
a bo h da a-collec ion poin s we e signi ican ly mo e likely
o igh back, and we e signi ican ly less likely o ha e a
iend help, compa ed o boys who we e ic imized only a
he i s da a-collec ion poin . Boys did no di e in hei
use o c ies, ells eache , walks away o gi es some hing
up. Gi ls who we e bullied a bo h poin s and hose who
we e bullied only a he i s poin did no di e in hei use
o any coping s a egies.
One s udy ha examined ou comes o coping s a egies
was an obse a ional s udy ca ied ou by Wil on e al.
(2000). These au ho s obse ed 120 pupils om i s o six h
g ade du ing ee play. The au ho s a gued ha he coping
s yles o ic ims o bullying, in esponse o bullying, could
be cha ac e ized as ei he p oblem-sol ing s a egies o
agg essi e s a egies. The o me we e s a egies such as
igno ing, acquiescing, a oiding, and ins umen al coping,
and hese de-escala ed and helped esol e p oblems. In
con as , he second g oup o s a egies, including
physical/ e bal agg ession and en ing eelings, appea ed
o pe pe ua e he p oblem.
The p ima y aim o his s udy is o examine he in luence
o di e en coping s a egies used by ic ims o school
bullying on adul dis ess. Gi en he esea ch li e a u e ou lined
abo e, i is expec ed ha mo e asse i e s a egies, which
e lec an app oach o ien a ion owa d bullying, will p edic
lowe le els o adul dis ess, whe eas s a egies ha do no
ac i ely esol e he si ua ion will p edic highe le els o adul
dis ess. G ea e use o social suppo and less use o
agg ession a e also expec ed o p edic lowe le els o dis ess.
A second aim o he p esen esea ch is o examine he
ma ch be ween app aisal and coping, and i s long- e m
ou comes among ic ims o bullying. We expec ha ic ims
who used coping s a egies app op ia e o hei app aisal o
he si ua ion (i.e., showing goodness o i ) would show
signi ican ly less long- e m dis ess han ic ims whose
coping-s a egy use did no ma ch hei app aisals.
Ou hi d aim is o examine he pe cep ions o uni e si y
s uden s in ega d o which coping s a egies hey belie e
we e mos e ec i e in dealing wi h bullying in he pas .
App oach s a egies a e expec ed o be pe cei ed as mo e
e ec i e han a oidance s a egies.
Me hod
Pa icipan s
Unde g adua e s uden s om he Uni e si y o Se ille
(N= 219, 73 male, 146 emale) we e ec ui ed om i e
acul ies (Psychology, n= 61; Media, n = 50; Chemis y, n
= 22; Economics, n = 38; and A chi ec u e, n = 48). They
we e aged be ween 18 and 40 yea s (M = 21.28, SD = 2.49).
Measu es
The Re ospec i e Bullying Ques ionnai e used was a
modi ied e sion o he one de eloped by Schä e e al.
(2004). This ques ionnai e con ains se e al sec ions, and
has a o al o 46 i ems. I begins by asking s uden s abou
hei expe iences in bullying, including di ec , indi ec , and
e bal bullying in p ima y school (nine i ems o al), how
long he bullying ypically las ed, and wha gende he
agg esso s we e. This is ollowed by an iden ical sec ion on
expe iences in seconda y school.
Following hese sec ions, he e a e mo e gene al
ques ions ela ed o bullying, including a sec ion examining
how pa icipan s ecall coping wi h being bullied. S uden s
we e asked o indica e which s a egies hey used om a
lis o 10 possibili ies (“I alked o he bullies,” “I ied o
make un o i ,” “I ied o a oid he si ua ion,” “I ied o
s ay away om school,” “I ied o igno e i ,” “I ough
back,” “I go help om iends,” “I go help om a eache ,”
“I go help om amily/pa en s,” and “I did no eally cope”).
We added an i em he e asking s uden s, “Which o he abo e
s a egies do you hink was he mos e ec i e in coping
wi h bullying?” Pa icipan s we e pe mi ed o epo mo e
han one s a egy.
We also added one i em abou he app aisals o h ea
and challenge made by he pa icipan s when being bullied.
This i em asked, “When you we e being bullied, wha
consequences did you hink bullying would ha e o you?”
A checklis o esponses was based on ou comes iden i ied
in p e ious esea ch (Hun e & Boyle, 2004), o example,
“I would lea n how o deal wi h bullying in he u u e”
(challenge) and “I would become socially isola ed” ( h ea ).
A single i em measu ing pe cei ed con ol was also added,
in which pa icipan s indica ed whe he o no hey el hey
could do some hing o change he si ua ion. Response
al e na i es we e “No,” “No wi hou help,” “Wi h a li le
help,” and “Yes, on my own.” P e ious esea ch wi h
child en has indica ed ha single-i em measu es o con ol
ha e disc iminan alidi y (Hun e & Boyle, 2002, 2004).
Following his sec ion was a gene al ques ion abou
whe he he pa icipan has e e hough abou “Hu ing
you sel o aking you own li e?” ( esponse op ions we e
“No, ne e ,” “Yes, once,” and “Yes, mo e han once”). A
i e-i em dis ess scale (adap ed om Ri e s, 1999) was
also included. This examined whe he pa icipan s cu en ly
expe ience any o he ollowing: dis essing memo ies,
nigh ma es, he eeling o e-li ing he bullying, lashbacks
o dis ess in simila si ua ions. Responses o he dis ess
scale we e measu ed on a i e-poin scale using esponse
al e na i es “No, ne e ,” “No o en,” “Some imes,” “O en,”
and “Always.” The mean o he i e esponses was used as
a summa y sco e o his scale.
HUNTER, MORA-MERCHÁN, AND ORTEGA
6
LONG-TERM EFFECTS OF VICTIMS’ COPING STRATEGIES 7
P ocedu e
Pa icipan s we e ec ui ed in class. They we e gi en a
b ie desc ip ion o he p ojec and assu ed ha all esponses
we e con iden ial. Filling ou he ques ionnai e ook
app oxima ely 30 minu es.
Da a Analysis
Pa icipan s we e ca ego ized as ic ims i hey indica ed
ha hey had been bullied in any way (physically, e bally,
o indi ec ly) “some imes” o mo e o en, i hey pe cei ed
he expe ience o be a leas “somewha se e e,” and i hey
epo ed ne e ha ing bullied o he s. O he possible
equency esponses we e “ne e ” and “ a ely,” bu p e ious
esea ch has usually only accep ed bullying occu ing
“some imes” o mo e o en as genuine bullying (e.g.,
Whi ney & Smi h, 1993). Pa icipan s we e ca ego ized as
bullies i hey indica ed ha hey had in any way bullied
o he child en (physically, e bally, o indi ec ly)
“some imes” o mo e o en, bu had ne e hemsel es been
ic ims o bullying. Finally, pa icipan s we e ca ego ized
as bully- ic ims i hey indica ed ha hey had been bullied
(physically, e bally, o indi ec ly) “some imes” o mo e
o en, i hey pe cei ed he expe ience o be a leas
“somewha se e e,” and i hey had also bullied o he
child en (physically, e bally, o indi ec ly) “some imes” o
mo e o en. Pa icipan s who had ne e bullied o he s and
who had ne e been ic ims we e classi ied as unin ol ed.
This allowed 211 o he 219 pa icipan s o be ca ego ized.
Fo he analysis on ma ch, coping-s a egy use was
ca ego ized as a oidance only (“a oiding he si ua ion,”
“igno ing he bullying,” and “s aying away om school”),
app oach only (“help om iends,” “help om amily,”
“help om eache ,” “ igh ing back,” “ alking o he bully,”
and “making un o he bullying”), o bo h. The
app oach–a oidance dis inc ion was based on he de ini ion
by Ro h & Cohen (1986). Con ol was dicho omized ei he
as high (people who said hey el hey could deal wi h he
bullying ei he on hei own, o wi h a li le help) o low
(people who said hey el hey could no deal wi h he
bullying, o no wi hou help). S uden s we e de ined as
displaying ma ch i hey had high con ol and used only
app oach s a egies, o had low con ol and used only
a oidance s a egies (n= 13: 4 males, 8 emales, 1
uniden i ied). Con e sely, hey we e de ined as displaying
no ma ch i hey had high con ol and used only a oidance
s a egies, o had low con ol and used only app oach
s a egies (n= 8: 5 males, 3 emales).
A single a iable was c ea ed o examine he challenge
and h ea app aisals. This e lec ed whe he he o e all
app aisal was posi i e (mo e challenge han h ea app aisals),
nega i e ( ewe challenge han h ea app aisals), o neu al
(equal numbe o each ype o app aisals).
Resul s
O e all, he la ges single ole was ha o unin ol ed,
ollowed by ic im, bully- ic im, and bully (see Table 1).
The e we e no s a is ically signi ican di e ences in ole
membe ship acco ding o sex,
c
2 (3, N= 206) = 2.99, p >
.05. The e was also no di e ence in he p opo ion o pupils
classi ied as ic ims o bully- ic ims acco ding o whe he
hey we e bullied in p ima y school, seconda y school, o
bo h,
c
2 (2, N= 94) = 5.15, p > .05, (see Table 2).
Table 1
Dis ibu ion o Pa icipan s Acco ding o Sex and Type o Bully-Vic im Role
Type
Sex Vic im Bully-Vic im Bully Unin ol ed
Male 25 8 9 27
Female 38 23 13 63
To al 63 31 22 90
No e. Six s uden s ailed o indica e sex. Hence N= 206 o Table 1 despi e 211 pa icipan s being ca ego ized in o he ou bully- ic im oles.
Table 2
Dis ibu ion o Vic ims Acco ding o School-S age
School-S age
Type P ima y Seconda y Bo h
Vic im 33 11 19
Bully- ic im 9 6 16
To al 42 17 35

HUNTER, MORA-MERCHÁN, AND ORTEGA
8
As shown in Table 3, in gene al, he wo s a egies
endo sed as mos e ec i e we e “ alking o he bully” and
“igno ing he bullying,” ollowed by h ee di e en o ms
o “help om o he s.” The s a egies endo sed as leas
e ec i e we e “s aying away om school,” “ igh ing back,”
“making un o he bullying,” and “a oiding he si ua ion.”
Expec ed cell equencies we e oo low o allow examina ion
o gende di e ences using chi-squa e, excep o he s a egy
“igno ing he bullying” (no sex di e ence,
c
2 (1, N= 40) =
0.31, p > .05). I was also possible o examine whe he males
o emales epo ed endo sing he use o social suppo by
collapsing he h ee help ca ego ies in o one. Again, he e
was no signi ican di e ence,
c
2 (1, N= 55) = 0.64, p > .05.
Examina ion o Table 3 e eals some ends by sex.
Female pa icipan s endo sed “help om iends” and “help
om amily” as mos e ec i e, whe eas male pa icipan s
endo sed “ alking o he bully,” “igno ing he bullying,” and
“help om iends” as mos e ec i e. “Figh ing back” was
conside ed he leas e ec i e by bo h male and emale
ic ims. None o he males and only wo emale ic ims
used “s aying away om school.” None o hem endo sed
i as a good s a egy. Male ic ims hough ha “a oiding
he si ua ion” was less help ul han did emale ic ims.
Wi h espec o he pe iod o ic imiza ion, as shown in
Table 4, we exclusi ely examined he da a om ic ims who
indica ed ha hey we e bullied only in p ima y school o
only in seconda y school, as he e was no way o de e mining
whe he s a egies we e used in p ima y o in seconda y
school when s uden s we e bullied in bo h. The di e ences
a e clea es in he s a egies “help om amily” and “igno ing
he bullying”: In he o me , all ic ims who used his s a egy
in seconda y school endo sed i as e ec i e, compa ed o
less han a hi d o hose bullied in p ima y school; in he
la e (“igno ing he bullying”), mo e han hal o p ima y
school ic ims endo sed his as an e ec i e s a egy, whe eas
only 17% o seconda y school ic ims did so. The e was a
b oade ange o s a egies bo h used and endo sed by he
p ima y school g oup, whe eas hose bullied only in
seconda y school used ewe s a egies, and endo sed h ee
main ypes o s a egies as e ec i e: “help om iends,”
“help om amily,” and “help om eache .” Di e ences
be ween p ima y and seconda y school could no be examined
due o low expec ed equencies in chi-squa e.
In o de o examine he e ec s o pas coping-s a egy
use on p esen dis ess, a s anda d mul iple- eg ession
analysis was ca ied ou . The mean dis ess sco e was used
as he c i e ion a iable, and each o he nine coping
s a egies we e p edic o a iables. The coping s a egies
accoun ed o a o al o 9.8% o he a iance in he dis ess
sco e (F9, 65 = 0.79, p> 0.05). Howe e , none we e
signi ican p edic o s o dis ess.
Chi-squa e analyses e ealed no sex di e ences in any
o he app aisals. The e we e no s a is ically signi ican
di e ences in o e all app aisal, depending on whe he
ic ims we e bullied only in p ima y school o only in
seconda y school. Howe e , a s a is ically signi ican
di e ence was obse ed in ic ims’ pe cei ed con ol, wi h
mo e p ima y school ic ims pe cei ing high con ol o e
he bullying han seconda y school ic ims,
c
2 (1, N= 45)
= 4.14, p< .05.
App aisals we e also examined o see i hey had di ec
e ec s on dis ess. S uden s epo ing high con ol, epo ed
signi ican ly lowe dis ess han s uden s wi h low con ol,
(68, N= 70) = 3.43, p< .01. A one-way ANOVA examining
he e ec o h ea and challenge app aisal was also
signi ican , (F2, 73 = 4.80, p< .05). Pos -hoc Tukey HSD
es s we e ca ied ou in o de o examine which means we e
di e en . I was ound ha s uden s wi h g ea e h ea han
challenge app aisals epo ed signi ican ly highe dis ess
han s uden s wi h g ea e challenge han h ea app aisals.
Table 3
S a egies and Vic ims, by Sex, who Used (n) and Endo sed (% o n) he Use o Each S a egy
Sex To al
Male Female
nwho used % o nwho nwho used % o nwho nwho used % o nwho
S a egy s a egy endo sed s a egy s a egy endo sed s a egy s a egy endo sed s a egy
Talking o bully 5 80 7 43 12 58
Igno ing he bullying 13 62 27 41 40 48
Help om iends 10 60 15 47 25 52
Help om amily 6 33 15 47 21 43
Help om eache 2 50 7 29 9 33
A oiding he si ua ion 14 14 19 26 33 21
Making un o he bullying 5 20 13 15 18 17
Figh ing back 40307 0
S aying away om school — — 2 0 2 0
O he s — — 4 100 4 100
LONG-TERM EFFECTS OF VICTIMS’ COPING STRATEGIES 9
Finally, ma ch was examined (see abo e o explana ion
o g oups). Pupils who epo ed ma ch be ween con ol
app aisals and coping-s a egy use we e compa ed o hose
who did no epo ma ch. These wo g oups did no di e
in he ex en o which hey epo ed expe iencing dis ess
as adul s, (18, N= 20) = –0.71, p> .05.
Discussion
The i s aim o his s udy was o examine wha in luence
coping s a egies used by child and adolescen ic ims o
bullying ha e upon dis ess expe ienced as an adul . Resul s
indica ed ha he s a egies examined he e did no in luence
he dis ess epo ed by adul “su i o s” o school bullying.
The second aim, which sough o examine whe he a ma ch
be ween con ol app aisals and coping-s a egy use in luenced
subsequen dis ess, also e ealed no signi ican di e ences.
Howe e , an unexpec ed e ec o app aisal on dis ess was
ound. Speci ically, heigh ened pe cep ions o con ol we e
associa ed wi h less dis ess, as we e app aisals e lec ing
mo e challenge han h ea . Rega ding ou hi d aim,
app oach s a egies we e gene ally pe cei ed o be he mos
e ec i e o coping wi h bullying, while agg essi e and
a oidance s a egies we e pe cei ed as less e ec i e.
Wi h ega d o p e alence, he da a sugges s ha 48%
o Spanish boys and 45% o gi ls expe ience some o m o
bullying du ing hei schooling. Gi en he psychological
p oblems associa ed wi h ic imiza ion, hese le els o
bullying highligh he impo ance o e ec i e in e en ion.
Con a y o ou expec a ions, none o he coping
s a egies measu ed in his s udy signi ican ly p edic ed he
le el o dis ess expe ienced by pa icipan s. This sugges s
ha s a egies which a e spon aneously used by child en
and adolescen s in esponse o bullying do no se e any
p o ec i e long- e m unc ion, a leas wi h ega d o u u e
dis ess as measu ed he e. Kochende e -Ladd and Skinne
(2002) also ailed o ind any p o ec i e unc ion in coping-
s a egy use o gi ls in ela ion o dep ession and anxie y
(al hough s a egies did in luence mo e psycho-social
adjus men , such as in social compe ence and loneliness).
Howe e , hese au ho s ound ha in e nalizing and
ex e nalizing s a egies we e ela ed o adjus men among
boys. Al hough Cassidy and Taylo (2001) examined simila
s a egies o hose in he cu en s udy, hey combined hem
wi h measu es e lec ing app aisal (e.g., con ol and
c ea i i y), so ha i is di icul o de e mine which o he
elemen s hey measu ed we e mos impo an in educing
dis ess (a poin e u ned o below). The p esen s udy did
no examine s a egies such as in e nalizing and ex e nalizing,
and u u e esea ch should examine whe he such s a egies
a e de imen al in he long- e m.
F om he poin o iew o de eloping mo e e ec i e
in e en ion s a egies, ou indings we e disappoin ing. None
o he s a egies examined he e seem o cons i u e s a egies
ha could be ecommended o bullied pupils as a way o
p o ec ing agains u u e dis ess. Howe e , hese esul s do
emphasize he need o e ec i e in e en ion, since wi hou
help, pupils a e a isk o de eloping p oblems in la e li e.
The long- e m e ec s o ma ch we e also a odds wi h
ou expec a ions: Vic ims’ ma ch be ween coping and
app aisals had no in luence on he deg ee o dis ess
expe ienced in adul li e. This inding may need o be
in e p e ed wi h cau ion, gi en he low numbe o pupils
in ol ed in he analysis. Ou analysis also e ealed ha
ic ims who epo ed a low pe cep ion o con ol o e
bullying, epo ed highe le els o dis ess han ic ims who
el mo e in con ol. Fu he mo e, bullied s uden s whose
app aisals e lec ed mo e challenge han h ea also epo ed
less dis ess.
Table 4
S a egies and Vic ims, by Time Pe iod, Who Used (n) and Endo sed (% o n) he Use o Each S a egy
Time Pe iod
P ima y School Seconda y School To al
nwho used % o nwho nwho used % o nwho nwho used % o nwho
S a egy s a egy endo sed s a egy s a egy endo sed s a egy s a egy endo sed s a egy
Help om iends 12 58 5 60 17 59
Help om amily 7 29 4 100 11 55
Help om eache 2 50 2 50 4 50
Igno ing he bullying 21 57 6 17 27 48
Talking o bully 7 43 — — 7 43
A oiding he si ua ion 15 27 5 0 20 20
Making un o he bullying 10 20 4 0 14 14
Figh ing back 20103 0
S aying away om school 1 0 — — 1 0
O he s 2 100 1 100 3 100
These esul s a e in e es ing, conside ing he ideas o
Pape and A ias (1995) who also epo ed ha nei he coping
no ma ch p edic ed psychological dis ess in emale ic ims
o pa ne iolence, ye pe cep ions o high con ol we e
associa ed wi h educed dis ess. These au ho s sugges ed
ha app aisal and coping-s a egy use may be a ec ed by
su p ise, con usion and anxie y caused by iolen e en s,
leading o he subsequen eliance on cha ac e is ic app aisal
and coping-s a egy use. They u he hypo hesized ha ,
al hough his pe cep ion o con ol may be illuso y, i s e ec
on educing dis ess ac ually ein o ces i . O he esea ch
on ma ch (Folkman e al., 1986; Fo sy he & Compas, 1987;
Vi aliano e al., 1990) has no ocused speci ically on
ic imized popula ions.
Ou s udy di e s om ha o Pape and A ias (1995) in
ha he ou comes measu ed a e long- e m e ec s and no
concu en measu es o dis ess, and he pa icipan s in ol ed
a e ic ims o pee agg ession a he han pa ne agg ession.
Howe e , he simila i y o esul s sugges s ha a pe cep ion
o high con ol may ac as a p o ec i e ac o in ic imized
popula ions. This may also help o explain why Cassidy and
Taylo (2001) ound hei coping s yle measu e o be a
signi ican p edic o o dis ess. Thei measu e inco po a ed
pe cep ions o con ol and helplessness, pe cep ions which
may ha e accoun ed o he educ ion in dis ess hey epo .
Fu he mo e, he associa ion be ween posi i e app aisals
and educed long- e m dis ess in ou s udy implies ha he
pe cep ion o bullying as a challenge a he han a h ea
also educes long- e m dis ess.
The p ocesses by which hese app aisals educe long-
e m dis ess a e unclea . I concu en measu es o app aisal
in he ic ims o bullying a e co ela ed wi h concu en
measu es o dis ess, hen he educ ion in long- e m e ec s
may be pa ially explained, because he o e all expe ience
should be pe cei ed as less s ess ul. Howe e , u u e
esea ch is equi ed o examine his possibili y.
Ano he po en ial explana ion conce ns he emo ions ha
ic ims expe ience when being bullied. Hun e , Boyle and
Wa den (in p ess) epo ha h ea app aisals p edic ea
and o he emo ions associa ed wi h a ha med sel -image
(e.g., guil , shame), whe eas challenge app aisals do no .
Thus, i is possible ha nega i e emo ions expe ienced while
being bullied a e he cause o u u e dis ess. I his is indeed
he case, in e en ions designed o p e en bullying may be
s eng hened by inco po a ing some kind o “a e -ca e.”
Fo example, ex- ic ims may need help, o counseling, o
deal wi h he emo ions and dis ess hey expe ience while
being bullied.
The coping s a egies pe cei ed o be mos e ec i e we e
“ alking o he bully,” “igno ing he bullying,” and “ge ing
help om iends/ eache / amily.” Gene ally, his suppo s
he hypo hesis ha s a egies designed o deal ac i ely wi h
he p oblem a e mo e e ec i e han hose aimed a a oiding
i , al hough he p esence o “igno ing he bullying” (an
a oidance s a egy) con adic s ou expec a ion. Howe e ,
while ic ims who igno e child en who a e easing hem a e,
acco ding o he de ini ion o Ro h & Cohen (1986), using
an a oidance s a egy, hey may be dealing ac i ely wi h he
p oblem by showing he bully ha hey a e no bo he ed by
he easing, in he hope ha he bullying will cease.
The s a egies pe cei ed o be leas e ec i e we e
“ igh ing back,” “s aying away om school,” “making un
o he bullying,” and “a oiding he si ua ion.” Al hough
“ igh ing back,” is an app oach s a egy, i is also an
agg essi e s a egy, and Fou ne e al. (1998) sugges ed ha
i is poo ly sui ed o long- e m adap i e compe ence,
compa ed o non-agg essi e s a egies. Agg essi e s a egies
may lead o mo e p oblems han hey sol e, especially i
agg ession is used mo e ex ensi ely o deal wi h p oblems,
as Ola sen and Vieme ö (2000) epo ed in he case o male
bully- ic ims. In addi ion, he imbalance o powe be ween
bully and ic im may mean ha agg essi e s a egies a e
almos ce ain o ail om he ou se . “A oiding he si ua ion”
and “s aying away om school” a e bo h a oidance s a egies,
mo e so han “igno ing he bullying” because, in bo h o
hem, he p oblem is a oided comple ely. Hence, whe eas
igno ing he bullying may ac ually con ibu e owa d s opping
i (by showing indi e ence), a oiding si ua ions whe e one
migh be bullied does no eally deal wi h he p oblem i sel ,
since he implica ion is ha when hese si ua ions a e
encoun e ed again, he p oblem will s ill exis . “Making un
o he bullying” was pe cei ed o be ine ec i e. This may
be because he ic im, al hough upse , ac ually gi es he
imp ession ha he o she inds he si ua ion unny. This leads
bullies o hink hei beha io is ha mless, he e o e, hey
pe sis . In addi ion, i may also educe he possibili y o
“de ende s” in e ening, as he ic im appea s o be engaging
in, and indeed enjoying, ha mless pee in e ac ion.
I is also in e es ing ha “ge ing help om amily” was
conside ed o be e ec i e by all pa icipan s who used i o
deal wi h bullying in seconda y school, whe eas less han
a hi d o hose using i in p ima y school endo sed i
(al hough i is impo an o no e ha small numbe s o pupils
we e in ol ed in i s use). P e ious esea ch wi h child en
and adolescen s (Hun e & Boyle, 2004; Kliewe , 1991;
Rossman, 1992) epo s ha , as child en ma u e, hey seek
less social suppo om o he s. Thus, assuming ha p ima y
school pupils o en seek help, hei amilies may suspec
ha he p oblems hey epo a e no e y se e e, whe eas
adolescen s’ amilies ake p oblems mo e se iously because
help is sough less equen ly.
The use o e ospec i e sel - epo da a is one limi a ion
o ou s udy. Clea ly, speci ic cogni ions and beha io s
ela ing o e en s ha occu ed 10 o e en 20 yea s ago may
no be en i ely accu a e. Howe e , no all au ho s ag ee ha
e ospec i e epo s o childhood s ess a e inhe en ly
un eliable (see B ewin, And ews, & Go lieb, 1993).
Fu he mo e, in he absence o longi udinal da a, e ospec i e
designs a e an e ec i e way o begin examining he e ec s
ha ic imiza ion may ha e on adul adjus men .
HUNTER, MORA-MERCHÁN, AND ORTEGA
10
LONG-TERM EFFECTS OF VICTIMS’ COPING STRATEGIES 11
A second limi a ion is ha some conclusions a e d awn
using da a om small g oups. Fo example, he e ec s o
ma ch a e based on he esponses o jus 21 ic ims. Fu u e
esea ch should add ess his p oblem by ec ui ing mo e
pa icipan s.
In sum, he e appea o be se e al s a egies ha s uden s
eel a e e ec i e in dealing wi h bullying. “Talking o
bullies,” “Igno ing he bullying,” and “Ge ing help om
someone else” we e all conside ed good s a egies. “Figh ing
back” was no conside ed e ec i e, and nei he was “A oiding
he si ua ion,” pe haps because a oiding he p oblem means
a oiding i s solu ion. In addi ion, “Making un o he
si ua ion” was also conside ed ine ec i e, and we sugges ed
his migh be because i encou ages bullies o con inue, o
educes he possibili y ha de ende s will in e ene.
Nei he coping s a egies no ma ch in luenced long-
e m dis ess, bu app aisals did. Explana ions o his may
be ela ed o he e ec s app aisals migh ha e on le els o
dis ess, and he quali y o emo ions expe ienced by ic ims
du ing he ac ual bullying episode.
Re e ences
Ahmad, Y., & Smi h, P.K. (1994). Bullying in schools and he issue
o sex di e ences. In J. A che (Ed.), Male iolence (pp. 70-
83). London: Rou ledge.
Aldwin, C.M., & Re enson, T.A. (1987). Does coping help? A
eexamina ion o he ela ion be ween coping and men al heal h.
Jou nal o Pe sonali y and Social Psychology, 53, 337-348.
Aus in, S., & Joseph, S. (1996). Assessmen o bully/ ic im
p oblems in eigh o ele en yea olds. B i ish Jou nal o
Educa ional Psychology, 66, 447-456.
Bij ebie , P., & Ve ommen, H., (1998). Coping wi h pee
a gumen s in school age child en wi h bully/ ic im p oblems.
B i ish Jou nal o Educa ional Psychology, 68, 387-394.
Billings, A.G., & Moos, R.H. (1984). Coping, s ess, and social
esou ces among adul s wi h unipola dep ession. Jou nal o
Pe sonali y and Social Psychology, 46, 877-891.
B ewin, C.R., And ews, B., & Go lieb, I.H. (1993).
Psychopa hology and ea ly expe ience: A eapp aisal o
e ospec i e epo s. Psychological Bulle in, 113, 82-98.
B ude -Ma son, S.F., & Ho ani z, C.A. (1990). Coping and
a ibu ional s yles as p edic o s o dep ession. Jou nal o
Clinical Psychology, 46, 557-565.
Cassidy, T., & Taylo , L. (2001, Ma ch). Bullying, coping and
psychological dis ess in olde child en. Pos e session p esen ed
a he B i ish Psychological Socie y Cen ena y annual
con e ence, SECC, Glasgow, UK.
Compas, B.E., Malca ne, V.L., & Fondaca o, K.M. (1988). Coping
wi h s ess ul e en s in olde child en and young adolescen s.
Jou nal o Consul ing and Clinical Psychology, 56, 405-411.
C aig, W.M. (1998). The ela ionship among bullying, ic imiza ion,
dep ession, anxie y, and agg ession in elemen a y school
child en. Pe sonali y and Indi idual Di e ences, 24, 123-130.
C ick, N.R., & G o pe e , J.K. (1996). Child en’s ea men by
pee s: Vic ims o ela ional and o e agg ession. De elopmen
and Psychopa hology, 8, 367-380.
De enso del Pueblo (2000). Violencia escola : el mal a o en e
iguales en la enseñanza secunda ia obliga o ia. Mad id:
Publicaciones del De enso del Pueblo.
Dumon , M., & P o os , M.A. (1999). Resilience in adolescen s:
P o ec i e ole o social suppo , coping s a egies, sel -es eem,
and social ac i i ies on expe ience o s ess and dep ession.
Jou nal o You h and Adolescence, 28, 343-363.
Eslea, M. (2001, Ma ch). School bullying: Se e i y, dis ess and
coping. Pape p esen ed a he B i ish Psychological Socie y
Cen ena y annual con e ence, SECC, Glasgow, UK.
Folkman, S. (1984). Pe sonal con ol and s ess and coping
p ocesses: A heo e ical analysis. Jou nal o Pe sonali y and
Social Psychology, 46, 839-852.
Folkman, S., & Laza us, R.S. (1985). I i changes i mus be a
p ocess: S udy o emo ion and coping du ing h ee s ages o
a college examina ion. Jou nal o Pe sonali y and Social
Psychology, 48, 150-170.
Folkman, S., Laza us, R.S., Dunkel-Sche e , C., DeLongis, A., &
G uen, R.J. (1986). Dynamic o s ess ul encoun e : Cogni i e
app aisal, coping, and encoun e ou comes. Jou nal o
Pe sonali y and Social Psychology, 50, 992-1003.
Folkman, S., Schae e , C., & Laza us, R.S. (1979). Cogni i e p ocesses
as media o s o s ess and coping. In V. Hamil on & D.M.
Wa bu on (Eds.), Human s ess and cogni ion: An in o ma ion
p ocessing app oach (pp. 265-298). London, UK: Wiley.
Fo sy he, C.J., & Compas, B.E. (1987). In e ac ion o cogni i e
app aisals o s ess ul e en s and coping: Tes ing he goodness
o i hypo hesis. Cogni i e The apy and Resea ch, 11, 473-
485.
Fou ne , D.L., Wilson, K.L., & Wallande , J.L. (1998). G owing
o jus ge ing along? Technical and adap i e compe ence in
coping among adolescen s. Child De elopmen , 69, 1129-1144.
G een, L.R., Richa dson, D.R., & Lago, T. (1996). How do
iendship, indi ec , and di ec agg ession ela e? Agg essi e
Beha io , 22, 81-86.
Holahan, C.J., & Moos, R.H. (1986). Pe sonali y, coping, and
amily esou ces in s ess esis ance: A longi udinal analysis.
Jou nal o Pe sonali y and Social Psychology, 51, 389-395.
Hugh-Jones, S., & Smi h, P.K. (1999). Sel - epo s o sho - and
long- e m e ec s o bullying on child en who s amme . Jou nal
o Educa ional Psychology, 69, 141-158.
Hun e , S.C., & Boyle, J.M.E. (2002). Pe cep ions o con ol in
he ic ims o school bullying: The impo ance o ea ly
in e en ion. Educa ional Resea ch, 44, 323-336.
Hun e , S.C., & Boyle, J.M.E. (2004). Coping and app aisal in
ic ims o school bullying. B i ish Jou nal o Educa ional
Psychology, 74 (1), 83-107.
Hun e , S.C., Boyle, J.M.E., & Wa den, D. (in p ess). Help seeking
amongs child and adolescen ic ims o pee -agg ession and
bullying: The in luence o school-s age, gende , ic imiza ion,
app aisal and emo ion. B i ish Jou nal o Educa ional
Psychology.