A systematic review and content analysis of bullying and cyber-bullying measurement strategies
Advanced Search
Select up to three search categories and corresponding keywords using the fields to the right. Refer to the Help section for more detailed instructions.

Search our Collections & Repository

All these words:

For very narrow results

This exact word or phrase:

When looking for a specific result

Any of these words:

Best used for discovery & interchangable words

None of these words:

Recommended to be used in conjunction with other fields



Publication Date Range:


Document Data


Document Type:






Clear All

Add terms to the query box

Query box

Clear All

A systematic review and content analysis of bullying and cyber-bullying measurement strategies

Filetype[PDF-568.24 KB]


  • Alternative Title:
    Aggress Violent Behav
  • Description:
    Bullying has emerged as a behavior with deleterious effects on youth; however, prevalence estimates vary based on measurement strategies employed. We conducted a systematic review and content analysis of bullying measurement strategies to gain a better understanding of each strategy including behavioral content. Multiple online databases (i.e., PsychInfo, MedLine, ERIC) were searched to identify measurement strategies published between 1985 and 2012. Included measurement strategies assessed bullying behaviors, were administered to respondents with ages of 12 to 20, were administered in English, and included psychometric data. Each publication was coded independently by two study team members with a pre-set data extraction form, who subsequently met to discuss discrepancies. Forty-one measures were included in the review. A majority used differing terminology; student self-report as primary reporting method; and included verbal forms of bullying in item content. Eleven measures included a definition of bullying, and 13 used the term "bullying" in the measure. Very few definitions or measures captured components of bullying such as repetition, power imbalance, aggression, and intent to harm. Findings demonstrate general inconsistency in measurement strategies on a range of issues, thus, making comparing prevalence rates between measures difficult.
  • Pubmed ID:
  • Pubmed Central ID:
  • Document Type:
  • Collection(s):
  • Main Document Checksum:
  • File Type:

You May Also Like

Checkout today's featured content at stacks.cdc.gov