Factors of Bullying

push around The identify technique and its major adventure factors Dr. Kasetchai Laeheem1, Dr. Metta Kuning2, Dr. Nittaya McNeil2 1. section of Educational Foundation, talent of bragging(a) Arts, Prince of Songkla University 2. Department of Mathematics and Computer Sciences, Faculty of Science and Technology, Prince of Songkla University. Abstract The purpose of this get was to select the technique for identifying blustery dis tight-fittingcomes, and to examine the essay factors associated with blustery deportment at Pattani autochthonic t distributivelys, southerly Thailand. A cross-section(a) survey was conducted among 1,440 pupils.Descriptive statistics, Pearsons chi-squ bed test, and logistic suffersliding were utilize for data analytic thinking. In this information, factor analysis and receivedized realise techniques were mapd to identify blusterous payoff. It was institute that 301 (20. 9%) students could be identified as a roughneck. Witnessing maternal forcible corrupt and preference for doing vignettes were major try factor for yob others. Students having provokeal corporeal roast experiences were more than than probably to bully others than were those who had neer witnessed enatic carnal affront (odds ratio 7. 11, 95% presumption intervals 5. 6-9. 60). Students who pet performance cartoons tended to bully more than did students who preferred waggery cartoons (odds ratio 2. 96, 95% confidence intervals 1. 99-4. 43). Key words browbeat, cartoon, factor analysis, enatic natural convolute, risk factors The second planetary assembly on humanities and kind Sciences April 10th, 2010 Faculty of progressive Arts, Prince of Songkla University Beliefs literature Lifestyle_002 1 1. Background and significance of problem Bullying conduct in unproblematic(a) instructs is considerably-knget to students, farms, t to each oneers and educational personnel. instruct day hector is a sombre problem which affects students quality of life, inflicting mental, emotional, and physical dam succession and occurs throughout the world. sweep up aim intimi project can be defined as any damaging motions repeatedly inflicted by a stronger student or student gang toward another(prenominal) student (Olweus, 1999). This disallow action must be deliberate and carried out with the intent of ca exploitation harm to the dupe (Farrington, 1993). Bullying faculty be classified in a variety of ways including physical assaults and psychological or emotional or verbal harassment.Beale (2001) explained that physical blustering(a) is action oriented and intended to intimidate or physically hurt the victim through reverseing, pushing, kicking, and hitting, while verbal intimidation is utilise words to debase or hurt some ones feelings through teasing, bruiseing, or grueling behaviour. The major reasons that electric razorren bully others are to enjoy exercising billet and placement o ver their victims, boredom, jealousy, attention seeking, showing off, anger, revenge, and selfprotection (Besag, 2006). In this way, bully eases the way for children to be drawn into a path of delinquency, vandalism and criminality (Junger, 1996).The object glasss or victims of check bullying are at risk of a variety of negative outcomes. They are more potential than nonvictimized children to become anxious, insecure, lonely, depressed, to be rejected by their peers, drop out of inform, feud, or decide to protect themselves by carrying guns/weapons to educate (Craig, 1998). there are many sources of bullying, such as domestic help strength (Baldry, 2003), preferring cartoon strength (Blumberg, et al, 2008), older students (Wolke et al, 2001), and boys (Mouttapa et al, 2004).Studies lease indicated that 38% of students in Netherlands (Veenstra, 2005), 30% in Nigeria (Egbochuku, 2007), 22% in Italy (Gini, 2008), 21% in Canada (Hawkins et al, 2001), 20% in Malaysia (Wan Sal wina et al, 2009) and 42% in Thailand (Tapanya 2006). This information aims to body of represent the technique for identifying bullying outcomes, to investigate the preponderance of bullying and the risk factors associated with bullying in Pattani primary naturalises, southern Thailand.By identifying students who are likely to bully others, educational administration can portray better strategies for reducing and preventing this problem. 2. Objectives 2. 1 To study the technique for identifying bullying outcomes 2. 2 To estimate the prevalence of bullies at primary schools in Pattani, southern Thailand 2. 3 To analyze the risk factors associated with bullying, in Pattani primary schools 3. Technical terms The second International multitude on liberal arts and complaisant Sciences April 10th, 2010 Faculty of Liberal Arts, Prince of Songkla University Beliefs Literature Lifestyle_002 Bullying has traditionally referred to a persons actions to cause physical or psychological harm to another person. Physical bullying is the well-nigh visible and easily identifiable form of bullying. It might use up the form of a kick, hit, bite, push, throw of something at someone, bite, or pinch. Psychological bullying includes name-calling, imperious the victims name, appearance, economic experimental condition, academic achievement, or parents concern, or making negative statements to the highest degree a victims physical disability. 4.Framework of the study Determinants indoctrinate factors School part School location Demographic factors Gender age group Environment factors enatic physical abuse Preference of cartoon showcase Number of nearly friends Outcome Bullying behaviour 5. Research ruleology 5. 1 drive design and sampling technique This study used a cross-sectional study design involving interviews and surveys of primary school students attending school surrounded by November 1, 2005 and March 31, 2006. The participants were selected by apply a multi- constitute sampling method.The first stage involve selecting school location by using goal-directed sampling, with the wipe out being a cluster of four types of school ( unrestricted school of fundamental Education Office (B. E. O. ), public school of municipalities, Islamic private school, and Chinese private school). Pattani City was selected as the urban location and Saiburi district as the rural one, because these were the only two districts that met the school-type cluster criterion. In the second stage, public schools were selected by simple random sampling and private schools were selected by purposive ampling (there was only one of each such school in each district). Finally, participants in each school run were selected by using a systematic sampling technique which was done proportionate to population coat across each class choosing every 4th seat progeny where there was a single class in a grade and every 6th seat number where there was more than one class in a grade. Sample size calculations followed an Italian study of bullying (Baldry, 2003) and were based on the main outcome and exposure to enatic personnel and non-exposure to parental violence.The prevalence of bullying by the Italian primary school students in the nonThe 2nd International Conference on Humanities and Social Sciences April 10th, 2010 Faculty of Liberal Arts, Prince of Songkla University Beliefs Literature Lifestyle_002 3 exposure to parental violence group was 45. 7%. This information was consequently used to portend the required judge size for this study, obtaining an estimate by substituting ? = 0. 05, 1-? = 0. 2, OR = 1. 344 so Z? /2 and Z? are 1. 96 and 0. 84 respectively, r = 1 (ratio of non bully to bully subjects), p2 = 0. 6 (prevalence of bullying in non exposure to parental violence group), p = 0. 50, p1 = 0. 53, into a formula for sample size given by the following (McNeil, 1996), namely ? ? Z? / 2 ? ? 1 ? 1? + Z? ?1 + ? ? r ? p (1 ? p ) ? 1 1 ? + p1 (1 ? p1 ) rp 2 (1 ? p 2 ) ? ? 2 n1 = (InOR) 2 Where p1 = p2 p + rp2 , and p = 1 p2 + (1 ? p2 ) / OR 1+ r This gives n1 = n2 = 719. It was thereby concluded that a minimum sample size of 1,438 was required for this study. 5. 2 Data collection Verbal consent to participate in the study was obtained from students after assurance of confidentiality was given to individuals and group administered.The collection assistants were teachers in target schools, who volunteered to participate and were studying for a Graduate Diploma in paid Teaching at Yala Islamic University. These teachers were trained in the interviewing techniques and the details of the questionnaire. They were asked to recede care not to rush through the questionnaire and also to record responses accurately. The teachers interviewed students in the classroom after permission was granted by the school principal. each(prenominal) individual was interviewed with grades 1 to 3 students. Interviewed lasted approximately 20 to 30 minutes.Group administered (narrated) surveys of grades 4 to 6 students took approximately 40 to 60 minutes. With older students, the interviewer read the instructions to them and then allowed the student to write their own responses. Most of these responses were uncomplicated and compound just ticking a box. 5. 3 Data management and statistical analysis The data were analyzed using Webstat (a set of programs for graphical and statistical analysis of data stored in an SQL database, written in HTML and VBScript), and R program factor out analysis was first conducted to identify possible factors for future analysis.Descriptive statistics were calculated as measures of the prevalence of bulling. Pearsons chi-squared test was used to respect the associations between the outcome and the various categorical determinants. Logistic regression was used to estimate the relative odds of having bullied others, for risk factors. 6. Conclusions The 2nd International Conference on H umanities and Social Sciences April 10th, 2010 Faculty of Liberal Arts, Prince of Songkla University Beliefs Literature Lifestyle_002 4 6. Identifying bullying outcome The technique for identifying bullying outcome in this study is using statistical method factor analysis and standardized level as follows. The first method involved an exploratory factor analyses using maximum likelihood method with varimax rotation, eigenvalue greater than one, and item loadings greater than 0. 30. Factor analysis resulted in the identification of four types of bullying a sombre physical bullying factor comprising kick, hit, and bite, a minor hysical bullying factor comprising push, throw something at, beat, pinch and scold, a psychological bullying by maligning a parent factor comprising tease parents traffic, and insult parents name, and a psychological bullying by maligning the student factor comprising insult students appearance and insult students economic view, as listed in knock back 1. In the second method, the sensitive tons for four types of bullying were calculated by using discrete oodles to compare with the criteria that were adapted from a Likert rating scale loadings 0. 00-0. 25 scored as 0, 0. 26-0. 50 scored as 1, 0. 51-0. 5 scored as 2, and 0. 76-1. 00 scored as 3. The resulting new hemorrhoid were indeed as follows kick, hit, and bite 3, 3 and 1, respectively push, throw something at, beat, pinch and scold 3, 2, 2, 1 and 1, respectively insult parents occupation 3 and insult parents name 1 and insulting students appearance is 3 and insulting students economic status 1. The resulting new gobs are listed in plank 1. Factor loading Psychological Bullying behaviour categories Serious Minor bullying (Maligning physical Physical parent) bullying bullying Kick 0. 822 (3) Hit 0. 825 (3) Bite 0. 380 (1) Pinch 0. 783 (3) Beat 0. 587 (2) delegate something at 0. 07 (2) Push 0. 458 (1) Scold/ name-calling 0. 366 (1) Insult parents occupation 0. 878 (3) In sult parents name 0. 399 (1) Insult economic status Insult appearance Eigenvalue 1. 85 1. 77 1. 21 Variance explained 15. 4% 14. 7% 10. 1% Note Number in the ( ) is resulting new oodles for each type of bullying Psychological bullying (Maligning student) 0. 765 (1) 0. 448 (1) 1. 01 8. 4% add-in 1 Factor loading scores and resulting new scores for each type of bullying The 2nd International Conference on Humanities and Social Sciences April 10th, 2010 Faculty of Liberal Arts, Prince of Songkla University Beliefs Literature Lifestyle_002 In the third method, the integral scores for each type of bullying were calculated by using new scores for four types of bullying. The resulting total scores are thus as follows adept physical bullying (scores 0-7) (3*hit) + (3*kick) + bite minor physical bullying (scores 0-9) (3*pinch) + (2*beat) + (2*throw something at) + push + scold psychological bullying by maligning a parent (scores 0-4) (3*insult parents occupations) + insult parents name s and psychological bullying by maligning the student (scores 0-4) (3*insult students economic status) + insult students appearance.In the fourth method, the bullying scores were analyzed by combining the total scores for each type of bullying serious physical bullying (scores 0-7) + minor physical bullying (scores 0-9) + psychological bullying by maligning a parent (scores 0-4) + psychological bullying by maligning the student. The fifth method, transform the bullying scores into Z-scores (standardized to a mean of 0 and a standard deviation of 1). Finally, the students were identified into two categories for bullying, bullied or not bullied. The students who had a standardized score greater than 1 were identified as a bully. 6. Descriptive statistics of bullying and risk factors The distributions of seven determinants in this study involved half of students being from an urban school, 72. 2% were from public school, and 55. 4% were female. just roughly more than one third (34. 5%) were 8 years or less of age, 34. 0% were immemorial 9-10 years, and 31. 5% were 11 years old or more. Most of students (79. 7%) account that they had not witnessed physical abuse between their parents. Nearly half (48. 2%) of the students preferred mystery cartoons type, 26. 0% preferred action and 25. 8% comedy. Regarding number of close friends, 41. % had 3-5 close friends, 32. 2% had two close friends or fewer and 26. 4% had sextette close friends or more. In this study, bullying outcome was identified as a dichotomous variables not bullied others (1,139 students) and bullied others (301 students). The percentage of students reporting that they had bullied others in school was 20. 9%. 6. 3 Associations between bullying and risk factors The associations between the outcome and the seven study determinants are shown in Table 2. Bullied behaviour Determinants School type Private Public School location Urban unpolished Not bullied (1,139) 78. 2 80. 0 82. 5 77. Had bullied (30 1) 21. 8 20. 0 17. 5 22. 2 Total (1,440) 50. 0 50. 0 0. 7 27. 8 72. 2 0. 399 Chisquared 3. 9 p-value 0. 049* The 2nd International Conference on Humanities and Social Sciences April 10th, 2010 Faculty of Liberal Arts, Prince of Songkla University Beliefs Literature Lifestyle_002 6 Gender female potent Age group 8 yrs or less 9-10 yrs 11 yrs or more Parental physical abuse Not witnessed Witnessed vignette type preference Comedy Action Mystery Number of close friends 2 persons or less 3-5 persons 6 persons or more 31. 1 84. 5 72. 4 82. 9 79. 6 74. 4 87. 0 48. 1 86. 5 64. 5 83. 0 80. 6 80. 7 74. 7 15. 5 27. 17. 1 20. 4 25. 6 13. 0 51. 9 13. 5 35. 5 17. 0 19. 4 19. 3 25. 3 55. 4 44. 6 10. 3 34. 5 34. 0 31. 5 213. 5 79. 7 20. 3 66. 9 25. 8 26. 0 48. 2 5. 9 32. 2 41. 4 26. 4 0. 000** 0. 006** 0. 000** 0. 000** 0. 051 * p-value 0. 05 ** p-value 0. 01 Table 2 Associations between bullying and study determinants Table 2 shows that school type, gender, age group, parental physical abus e, and cartoon type were strongly associated with bullying. betting odds ratio plans of bullying categorized by five unalike risk factors are shown in Figures 1. Bullying behaviour (Bullying/Not bullying) (Public/ Private) (Male/ Female) School type Witness/ Not witness) Gender Parental physical abuse days Favorites cartoon type Age (group) Cartoon type Figure 1 Odds ratio plots of bullying categorized by four different risk factors The 2nd International Conference on Humanities and Social Sciences April 10th, 2010 Faculty of Liberal Arts, Prince of Songkla University Beliefs Literature Lifestyle_002 7 Figures 1 shows that the students from public schools account bullying others in-chief(postnominal)ly more often than did students from private schools (OR 1. 35, 95% CI 1. 01-1. 82). More males than females reported that they bullying others (OR 2. 07, 95% CI 1. 59-2. 69).The students who had witnessed physical abuse between their parents were more likely to be a bully than di d those who had never witnessed physical abuse between their parents (OR 7. 22, 95% CI 5. 39-9. 67). The students aged 11 years or more were more likely to bully others than students aged 9-10 years and 8 years or less, (OR 1. 49, 95% CI 1. 13-1. 95). The students who preferred action cartoons tended to bully more than students who preferred mystery or comedy cartoons (OR 2. 93, 95% CI 5. 39-9. 67). 6. 4 Logistic regression analysis of bullying Logistic regression was used to examine the association between bullying and risk factors.The results are shown in Table 3 and Figure 2. Table 3 shows the results of the logistic regression analysis after omitting determinants with p-values more than 0. 05 using backward elimination. In this reduced model the four factors least significantly associated with the bullying are omitted. The smallest p-values indicate the factors most strongly associated with the bullying were gender, age group, parental physical abuse and cartoon type. Determinan t Gender Female Male Age group 8 yrs or less 9-10 yrs 11 yrs or more Parental physical abuse Not witnessed Witnessed Cartoon type preference Comedy Action MysteryOR 0 1. 87 0 1. 29 1. 89 0 7. 11 0 2. 96 1. 33 (95% CI) p-value 0. 000 (1. 40,2. 50) 0. 000 0. 001 0. 160 0. 000 0. 000 0. 000 0. 000 0. 000 0. 147 (0. 90,1. 85) (1. 33,2. 69) (5. 26,9. 60) (1. 99,4. 43) (0. 90,1. 96) Table 3 Reduced model of association between bullying and risk factors Figure 2 shows the odds ratio plot of the results from fitting the final logistic regression model. It was found that witnessing parental physical abuse was clearly the most strongly associated determinant for bullying others.Students having witnessed parental physical abuse were more likely 7. 11 times to bully others than were those who had never witnessed parental physical The 2nd International Conference on Humanities and Social Sciences April 10th, 2010 Faculty of Liberal Arts, Prince of Songkla University Beliefs Literature Lifesty le_002 8 abuse (95% CI 5. 26-9. 60). Preference for action cartoons was also a major risk factor for bullying others students who preferred action cartoons tended to bully more than did students who preferred comedy cartoons (OR 2. 6, 95% CI 1. 99-4. 43). Among the age groups studied, older students (11+ years) were more likely to be a bully than did younger students (8 years or less) 1. 89 times (95% CI 1. 33-2. 69). Males were 1. 87 times (95% CI 1. 40-2. 50) more likely to have reported having bullied others than were females. Bullying others mystery Cartoon type action comedy Parental physical abuse yes no 11+ Age group 9-10 -8 boy Gender girl 1/8 1/4 1 2 4 8 Odds dimension Figure 2 Risk factors of bullying in logistic regression final model 7.Discussion In this study, factor analysis and standardized score techniques were used to identify bullying outcome a student with a standardized score more than 1 was identified as a bully. Using an exploratory factor analysis for divided type of bullying is in accordance with a study by Parada et al (2005) in which six factors were found of 36 items. Beran (2005) found four factors of 21 items. Carlyle and Steinman (2007) found two factors. Using a standardized score for identifying bullying in which a student with a standardized score more than 1 was identified as a bully (Scholte et al, 2007 Gini, 2008).In this study, the identifying techniques led to findings that witnessing parental physical abuse and cartoon type were major risk factors for bullying. Witnessing parental physical abuse was clearly the most strongly associated determinant linked to bullying than those who had never witnessed parental physical abuse (7. 11 times more likely). Exposure to parental family violence has been found to be related to negative behaviours of students the students who had witnessed parental physical abuse were more likely to bully others, when compared to those who had not itnessed parental physical abuse. This is in accor dance with the studies of Herrera et al (2001) and Baldry (2003) who all reported that parental modeling of aggression The 2nd International Conference on Humanities and Social Sciences April 10th, 2010 Faculty of Liberal Arts, Prince of Songkla University Beliefs Literature Lifestyle_002 9 and violence promotes the information of a childs negative behaviour the child might write the parents physical actions and might then become a bully to piss success in their own friendly interactions.Preference for action cartoons was also highly associated with bullying (2. 96 times more likely). This finding shows that the children who watch action cartoons or cartoon with superhero images were more likely to display aggressive or bullying behaviour. This was consistent with the studies of Kirsch (2006) and Blumberg et al (2008), who argued that cartoon violence may also influence young viewing audience to transfer violent acts from programs to realworld situations and has a significant additional effect in predicting bullying others.Students often copy the physical actions of parents or of action cartoon characters and so through their life experiences learn to be aggressive. By personally observing others acting acutely to achieve some goal the children might learn to act aggressively. With this modeling, the child might then become a bully to gain success in his or her own social interactions. This explanation is in line with finding by Larson (2003) and Williams (2007) who found that children use the same aggressive tactics that they observe they learn to act aggressively when they model the behaviour of violent acts.The children are more likely to copy someone they are looking at, and children have a greater aptness to imitate the modeling of those with whom they have the most contact (Cooke, 1993 Kirsch, 2006). 8. Recommendations 8. 1 Implications of the study This study showed that bullying is a serious problem in Pattani primary schools. Witnessing pare ntal physical abuse and preferring action cartoons were the highest risk factors associated with bullying. Parents are the most important persons in providing leadership and direction for the successful prevention and noise of bullying.They should provide close attention and talk regularly with their children most their feelings and relationships with friends at school. They should work in partnership with the school to encourage positive behaviour. Moreover, they must have patience, try to avoid using violence, and closely advise and take hold the cartoon program viewing of their children. Findings from this study should help in the development of prevention and intervention policies in the primary schools and assist educational authorities to introduce better strategies for reducing the problem.School administrators and teachers are the next most important persons for preventing the prevalence of bullying in schools. The school purlieu should be safe, orderly, and bullyfree. T eachers have to provide positive and mature role-modeling in techniques to students and teach them how to interact with one another. They should develop a program that teaches The 2nd International Conference on Humanities and Social Sciences April 10th, 2010 Faculty of Liberal Arts, Prince of Songkla University Beliefs Literature Lifestyle_002 0 students about the dangers of bullying, develop school personnel in teaching bully-free practices and teach students about all forms of bullying verbal, emotional, psychological, and physical, as well as teach students about disadvantages of cartoon violence viewing and physical abuse between parents. 8. 2 Recommendations for future studies Results of our study reveal the extent of bullying in primary schools within Pattani obligation to be a serious problem.Future research could snap on comparing prevalence rates among different types of schools or in one special type of school across districts within Pattani province or nearby provin ces, such as Yala, Naratiwat, and Songkhla provinces. Results may give the required information to teachers and administrators responsible for improving existing awareness programs, as well as continuing to educate our children in the safest and best discipline environment possible.In order for bullying to be prevented or decreased in our schools, school personnel need to commit to the ideal that bullying is unacceptable, is serious, and should not be tolerated. Bullying is not a rite of passage that students must work out for themselves. When one incident of bullying occurs it is serious. Silence from students does not intimate acceptance. Teachers need training that will help them to identify students who suffer in silence. The training needs to include strategies for victims as well as bullies. School personnel need to intervene appropriately in order to gain the confidence of the students.To gain that confidence, teachers need to be aware that victims of bullying who tolerat e close will rarely take the initiative to tell teachers they are being bullied and would benefit from having someone pro-active and notice their circumstance and offer them help. There is also a large, silent majority of bystanders in our schools. These students are normally well-developed socially but they do not know how to reclaim the power from the bullies. Some of these students may be afraid to confront the issue and thus ignore or avoid bullying situations.If we can tap into this silent majority and teach these students the skills they need, we can create a positive school climate with this silent majority holding the power and helping to annoy the school safe and secure for all. Further research should examine specific teacher referrals after bullying incidents and whether there is a consistent method of reporting these incidents throughout the grade levels and among all teachers. The administration of disciplinary actions, when dealings with the types of bullying incide nts should consistent throughout the school.An increase in student learning is an overall goal of this study. If students feel safe at school, if they are not worried about the atmosphere in which they learn, then greater student achievements will be likely to The 2nd International Conference on Humanities and Social Sciences April 10th, 2010 Faculty of Liberal Arts, Prince of Songkla University Beliefs Literature Lifestyle_002 11 exist. In order to create and maintain a safe and orderly school environment, all stakeholders must take an active role in combating the bullying problem in Pattani primary schools today. . References Baldry, A. C. 2003. Bullying in schools and exposure to domestic violence. electric razor Abuse & Neglect, 27, 713732. Beale, A. 2001. Bully busters Using drama to empower students to take a stand against bullying behaviour. Professional School Counseling, 4, 300-306. Beran, T. 2005. A new perspective on managing school bullying Pre-service teachers attitu des. Journal of Social Science, 8 43-49. Besag, V. E. 2006. Understanding girls friendships, fights and feuds A practical approach to girls bullying. Milton Keynes Open University Press.Blumberg, F. C. , Bierwirth, K. P. 2008. Schwartz AJ. Does Cartoon craze Beget Aggressive Behavior in Real Life? An opponent View. Early Childhood Educ J. 2008 36101104. Carlyle, K. E. , and Steinman, K. J. 2007. Demographic differences in the prevalence, cooccurrence, and correlates of boyish bullying at school. Journal of School Health, 77 623-629. Cooke, P. 1993. TV causes violence? Says Who?. The New York Times. Craig, W. 1998. The relationship among bullying, victimization, depression, anxiety and aggression in elementary children.Personality and respective(prenominal) Differences, 24, 123-130. Egbochuku, E. O. 2007. Bullying in Nigerian schools preponderance study and implications for counselling, J. Soc. Sci. , 14(1) 65-71. Farrington, D. P. 1993. Understanding and preventing bullying. In M . Tonry & N. Morris (Eds. ), Crime and Justice (Vol. 17). Chicago University of Chicago Press. Gini, G. 2008. Associations between bullying behaviour, neurotic complaints, emotional and behavioural problems. Journal of Paediatrics and Child Health. 44 492 497. Hawkins, D. L. , Pepler D. J. , and Craig, W. M. 001. naturalistic observations of peer interventions in bullying. Social Development, 10 (4) 512-527. Herrera, V. M. , and McCloskey, L. A. 2001. Gender differences in the risk for delinquency among youth exposed to family violence. Child Abuse & Neglect, 25 10371051. Junger, T. J. 1996. youthfulness and violence in Europe. Studies on Crime and Crime Prevention, 5(1) 31-58. The 2nd International Conference on Humanities and Social Sciences April 10th, 2010 Faculty of Liberal Arts, Prince of Songkla University Beliefs Literature Lifestyle_002 12 Kirsch, S. 2006.Cartoon violence and aggression in youth. Aggression and Violent Behavior. 11 547557. Larson, M. S. 2003. Gender, R ace, and Aggression in Television Commercials That Feature Children. Sex Roles. 48 67-75. McNeil, D. 1996. epidemiological research methods. New York John Wiley & Sons. Mouttapa, M. , Valente, T. , Gallaher, P. , Rohrbach, L. A. , and Unger, J. B. 2004. Social network predictors of bullying and victimization. Adolescence, 39 315-336. Olweus, D. 1999. The nature of school bullying A cross-national perspective. London Routledge. Parada, R. H. , Marsh, H. W. and Craven, R. G. 2005. There and back again from bully to victim and victim to bully A multiplicative inverse effects model of bullying behaviours in schools. Sydney, Australia SELF Research Centre, University of westward Sydney. Scholte, R. J. , Engels, R. E. , Overbeek, G. , Kemp, R. T. , and Haselager, G. T. 2007. Stability in Bullying and Victimization and its Association. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 35 217-228. Tapanya, S. 2006. A survey of bullying problem of students in Thailand. Chiang-Mai Faculty of Medicine, Chiang-Mai University. Veenstra, R. , Lindenberg, S. Oldehinkel, A. J. , De Winter, A. F. , Verhulst, F. C. , and Ormel, J. 2005. Bullying and victimization in elementary schools A comparison of bullies, victims, bully/victims, and uninvolved preadolescents. Developmental Psychology, 41 672-682. Wan Salwina, W. I. , Susan, M. K. , Nik Ruzyanei, N. J. , Tuti Iryani, M. D. , Syamsul, S. , Aniza, A. , and Zasmani, S. 2009. School bullying amongst standard students attending primary national schools in the federal territory of Kuala Lumpur The prevalence and associated socio demographic factors, Malaysian Journal of Psychiatry, 18(1) 5-12.Williams, G. 2007. Gabriel Tarde and the Imitation of Deviance. Available at http//www. criminology. fsu. edu/crimtheory/ tarde. htm. Accessed date September 21, 2007. Wolke, D. , Woods, S. , Stanford, K. , and Schulz, H. 2001. Bullying and victimization of primary school children in England and Germany Prevalence and school factors. British Journal o f Psychology. 92 673696. The 2nd International Conference on Humanities and Social Sciences April 10th, 2010 Faculty of Liberal Arts, Prince of Songkla University Beliefs Literature Lifestyle_002 13