Diese Seite wurde automatisch übersetzt und die Genauigkeit der Übersetzung wird nicht garantiert. Bitte wende dich an die englische Version für einen Quelltext.

Increasing Children's Defending Behaviors: Using Deviance Regulation

18. Dezember 2020 aktualisiert von: Wendy P. Gordon, Auburn University
The National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD) has identified bullying as a significant public health concern. The research tests a novel approach to increase children's defending of victims of bullying. Previous research has shown that the presence of defenders leads to decreases in bullying. Thus, promoting defending has become a critical component of anti-bullying interventions. However, how to best motivate defending has been relatively unstudied. Deviance Regulation Theory (DRT) provides a theoretical basis for motivating positive health and social behaviors. This theory proposes that individuals are motivated to behave in ways that differentiate them from others in a positive manner. Accordingly, individuals will be motivated to engage in a behavior if they believe the behavior occurs infrequently and will be viewed positively by others. As children report that few of their peers defend victims of bullying, the goal of this study is to increase defending by communicating to children that defenders possess traits valued by their peers (e.g., being popular, kind). Children in 4th-grade and 5th-grade classrooms received a DRT-based anti-bullying intervention or an anti-bullying intervention focused on increasing empathy for victims and strategies for defending peers. Data collection occurred three times during the school year: a) at baseline, two weeks prior to the intervention; b) 3 months post-intervention; and c) 6 months post-intervention. Findings showed that compared to the traditional anti-bullying intervention, the DRT-based intervention resulted in larger, more sustained gains in teacher-reported defending, but not peer-reported or self-reported defending. Contrary to expectations, gains in teacher-reported defending were greatest for children who viewed defending to be normative amongst their classmates. Increases in defending were also greatest among those children least likely to defend (i.e., those low in popularity and prosocial behavior, and those often bullied by peer). These findings have implications for the development of anti-bullying interventions and more broadly for understanding how to encourage important behavioral changes in childhood and adolescence. However, more research is needed to understand why increases were limited to only defending behaviors observable to teachers.

Studienübersicht

Status

Abgeschlossen

Bedingungen

Intervention / Behandlung

Detaillierte Beschreibung

This study, conducted over the 2017-2018 and 2018-2019 school years examined whether a DRT-based intervention activity resulted in greater increases in defending behaviors in response to witnessed bullying than a more traditional, empathy-based activity. Thirteen schools were randomly assigned to receive either the DRT-based or empathy-based activity, and all fourth-grade and fifth-grade children were invited to participate. Defending behaviors were assessed approximately two weeks prior to participation in the activity and at three-month and six-month follow-ups. Data collected included peer-reports, teacher-reports, and self-reports. Also examined was whether popularity, peer acceptance, prosocial behavior, peer victimization, empathy, self-efficacy for defending, moral disengagement, or gender moderated intervention effects.

Studientyp

Interventionell

Einschreibung (Tatsächlich)

1564

Phase

  • Unzutreffend

Kontakte und Standorte

Dieser Abschnitt enthält die Kontaktdaten derjenigen, die die Studie durchführen, und Informationen darüber, wo diese Studie durchgeführt wird.

Studienorte

  • Vereinigte Staaten
    • Alabama
      • Auburn, Alabama, Vereinigte Staaten, 36879-5402
        • Auburn University

Teilnahmekriterien

Forscher suchen nach Personen, die einer bestimmten Beschreibung entsprechen, die als Auswahlkriterien bezeichnet werden. Einige Beispiele für diese Kriterien sind der allgemeine Gesundheitszustand einer Person oder frühere Behandlungen.

Zulassungskriterien

Studienberechtigtes Alter

  • Kind
  • Erwachsene
  • Älterer Erwachsener

Akzeptiert gesunde Freiwillige

Nein

Studienberechtigte Geschlechter

Alle

Beschreibung

Inclusion Criteria:

  • Child in the fourth-grade or fifth-grade of participating schools

Exclusion Criteria:

  • None.

Studienplan

Dieser Abschnitt enthält Einzelheiten zum Studienplan, einschließlich des Studiendesigns und der Messung der Studieninhalte.

Wie ist die Studie aufgebaut?

Designdetails

  • Hauptzweck: Grundlegende Wissenschaft
  • Zuteilung: Zufällig
  • Interventionsmodell: Parallele Zuordnung
  • Maskierung: Doppelt

Waffen und Interventionen

Teilnehmergruppe / Arm
Intervention / Behandlung
Experimental: DRT-Condition
This is the experimental group that engaged in the DRT-based intervention activity.
Verhalten: DRT Condition
Children were asked to provide five descriptors of two children who each engaged in defending behaviors. Two weeks later they were told the top seven descriptors given by the hundreds of children participating in the project. This was followed by a brief discussion of how one could best help another kid who was getting bullied. Children then made posters to share with younger grades as to what "friendship heroes" are like, using the descriptor words shared with them, and how to be a friendship hero (i.e., how to help someone who is being bullied). Posters were hung for two-to-four months after the intervention activity.
Aktiver Komparator: Empathy-Condition
This is the experimental group that engaged in the empathy-based intervention activity.
Verhalten: Empathy Condition
Children in the empathy-based condition were asked to provide five descriptors of how two children who were bullied would fee. Two weeks later they were told the top seven descriptors given by the hundreds of children participating in the project. This was followed by a brief discussion of how one could best help another kid who was getting bullied. Children then made posters to share with younger grades as to what being bullied feels like, using the descriptor words shared with them, and how to be a friendship hero (i.e., how to help someone who is being bullied). Posters were hung for two-to-four months after the intervention activity.

Was misst die Studie?

Primäre Ergebnismessungen

Ergebnis Maßnahme
Maßnahmenbeschreibung
Zeitfenster
Changes in Peer-reported Defending across The School Year
Zeitfenster: three-month follow-up; six-month follow-up
Peer ratings of how often each participating classmate defended bullied peers
three-month follow-up; six-month follow-up
Changes in Self-reported Defending across the School Year
Zeitfenster: three-month follow-up; six-month follow-up
Children's ratings of how often they defended bullied peers
three-month follow-up; six-month follow-up
Changes in Teacher-reported Defending across the School Year
Zeitfenster: three-month follow-up; six-month follow-up
Teachers' ratings of how often each participating student defended bullied peers
three-month follow-up; six-month follow-up

Sekundäre Ergebnismessungen

Ergebnis Maßnahme
Maßnahmenbeschreibung
Zeitfenster
Changes in Perceptions of Defenders across The School Year
Zeitfenster: three-month follow-up; six-month follow-up
Children's ratings of how much children who help others who are bullied are popular, kind, sensitive to other's feelings, leaders, well-liked, confident, and helpful. Higher scores reflected more positive perceptions of children who defend.
three-month follow-up; six-month follow-up
Changes in Peer Aggression across the School Year
Zeitfenster: three-month follow-up; six-month follow-up
Ratings participating children received from classmates on the items "calls other kids bad names or say mean things to them," "tell other kids they can't play with them or won't be friends with them," and "hit or push other kids." Ratings were made on a scale from never to a lot. Ratings received from participating classmates were averaged, and item scores were averaged to compute a composite aggression score with higher scores indicating higher levels of aggressive behavior.
three-month follow-up; six-month follow-up
Changes in Peer Victimization across the School Year
Zeitfenster: three-month follow-up; six-month follow-up
Ratings received from participating classmates on the items "get left out of things that kids are doing (kids don't let him or her play with them), "get hit or pushed," and "kids call [this child] bad names or say mean things to him or her." Items were rated on a scale from never to a lot. Ratings received from all participating classmates are averaged for each item, and item scores are averaged to create a composite peer victimization score. Higher scores indicated higher levels of peer victimization.
three-month follow-up; six-month follow-up

Mitarbeiter und Ermittler

Hier finden Sie Personen und Organisationen, die an dieser Studie beteiligt sind.

Sponsor

Auburn University

Ermittler

  • Hauptermittler: Wendy P Gordon, Auburn University

Publikationen und hilfreiche Links

Die Bereitstellung dieser Publikationen erfolgt freiwillig durch die für die Eingabe von Informationen über die Studie verantwortliche Person. Diese können sich auf alles beziehen, was mit dem Studium zu tun hat.

Allgemeine Veröffentlichungen

Studienaufzeichnungsdaten

Diese Daten verfolgen den Fortschritt der Übermittlung von Studienaufzeichnungen und zusammenfassenden Ergebnissen an ClinicalTrials.gov. Studienaufzeichnungen und gemeldete Ergebnisse werden von der National Library of Medicine (NLM) überprüft, um sicherzustellen, dass sie bestimmten Qualitätskontrollstandards entsprechen, bevor sie auf der öffentlichen Website veröffentlicht werden.

Haupttermine studieren

Studienbeginn (Tatsächlich)

1. September 2017

Primärer Abschluss (Tatsächlich)

30. Mai 2019

Studienabschluss (Tatsächlich)

30. Juli 2020

Studienanmeldedaten

Zuerst eingereicht

14. Dezember 2020

Zuerst eingereicht, das die QC-Kriterien erfüllt hat

18. Dezember 2020

Zuerst gepostet (Tatsächlich)

23. Dezember 2020

Studienaufzeichnungsaktualisierungen

Letztes Update gepostet (Tatsächlich)

23. Dezember 2020

Letztes eingereichtes Update, das die QC-Kriterien erfüllt

18. Dezember 2020

Zuletzt verifiziert

1. Dezember 2020

Mehr Informationen

Begriffe im Zusammenhang mit dieser Studie

Schlüsselwörter

Zusätzliche relevante MeSH-Bedingungen

Andere Studien-ID-Nummern

  • AuburnUDRT

Plan für individuelle Teilnehmerdaten (IPD)

Planen Sie, individuelle Teilnehmerdaten (IPD) zu teilen?

Nein

Beschreibung des IPD-Plans

Only de-identified data from all 1,564 participants will be shared

Arzneimittel- und Geräteinformationen, Studienunterlagen

Studiert ein von der US-amerikanischen FDA reguliertes Arzneimittelprodukt

Nein

Studiert ein von der US-amerikanischen FDA reguliertes Geräteprodukt

Nein

Diese Informationen wurden ohne Änderungen direkt von der Website clinicaltrials.gov abgerufen. Wenn Sie Ihre Studiendaten ändern, entfernen oder aktualisieren möchten, wenden Sie sich bitte an register@clinicaltrials.gov. Sobald eine Änderung auf clinicaltrials.gov implementiert wird, wird diese automatisch auch auf unserer Website aktualisiert .

Klinische Studien zur Mobbing des Kindes

Klinische Studien zur DRT Condition

Suchen Sie nach ähnlichen Studien

Sponsoren und Mitarbeiter

Krankheiten

Drogeninterventionen

CROs by country

CROs in Serbia

Bedingungen

Seltene Krankheiten

Drogeninterventionen

Nahrungsergänzungsmittel

Sponsor / Mitarbeiter

Standorte

3
Abonnieren