The long-term effects of coping strategy use in victims of bullying

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.