Title:
Peer Victimisation Scale (PVS).
Authors:
Neary and Joseph.
Variable:
Victimization from bullying behaviours in schools.
Description:
The Peer Victimisation Scale (PVS; Neary & Joseph, 1994) is designed to assess
victimization from bullying behaviours at school. It consists of 6-forced choice items,
three of which relate to victimization from negative physical actions (e.g., hit and
pushed, picked on, bullied) and three relating to victimization from negative verbal
actions (e.g., teased, horrible names, laughed at). The rationale for the development
of the scale was to attempt to overcome some of the inherent problems with assessing
such behaviours in schools. For example, Austin and Joseph (1996) report that whilst
many children are reluctant to admit to being a victim of such negative behaviours
(e.g., Rigby & Slee, 1990; Smith, 1991; Tattum, 1988), most questionnaire studies of
bullying behaviours are conducted on a class basis (e.g., Whitney & Smith, 1993)
which may inadvertently lead to socially desirable responding from the children once
the nature of the study has been made known to the children. The reasoning for this is
that despite assurances of anonymity from the researcher, any bully in the class group
may subtly manipulate the situation and impede any disclosure of victimization. As
such, the argument is that the issue of bullying and victimization should not be made
known to the class. To further this aim, the Peer Victimisation Scale was designed by
Neary and Joseph (1994) to be immersed within Harter’s (1985) 36-item SelfPerception Profile for Children (SPPC) so as to reduce the saliency of the items
concerning victimization. Responses are scored according to the scoring instructions
for scoring the SPPC sub-scales (i.e., sum of six items divided by six).
Sample
Neary and Joseph (1994) do not recommended the PVS for use with children under 8
years of age as it is recommended that it be administered in conjunction with the
SPPC, which stipulates that 8 years is the appropriate cut-off age.
Reliability
The scale has been found to exhibit satisfactory levels of internal reliability. Austin
and Joseph (1996) report a Cronbach’s alpha of .83 for the PVS.
Validity
Neary and Joseph (1994) report that when the PVS was used in conjunction with the
SPPC, it was able to discriminate well between bullied and non-bullied children on
the basis of self and peer-reports. This finding was replicated by Callaghan and
Joseph (1995), thus confirming the convergent validity of the PVS with self- and
peer-reports of bullying behaviours.
Neary and Joseph (1994) also reported that higher scores on the PVS were associated
with lower scores on all of the SPPC sub-scales, except for athletic competence, and
higher scores on the Birleson Depression Inventory (BDI; Birleson, 1981). In a
replication of this work, Austin and Joseph (1996) found that higher scores on the
PVS were associated with lower scores on all of the SPPC sub-scales and higher
scores on the BDI for both boys and girls.
Location
Neary, A., & Joseph, S. (1994). Peer victimization and its relationship to self-concept
and depression among schoolchildren. Personality and Individual Differences, 16,
183-186.
Comments
Although other questionnaires, such as the Bully/Victim Questionnaire (Olweus,
1978, 1991, 1993) are available to researchers interested in childhood bullying, the
strength of the PVS is in its brevity and structure. By being designed to slot into the
SPPC, this not only helps to reduce possible manipulation of testing situations by
bullies, but reduces the saliency of the items and allows for less socially desirable
responding from the children. A further strength is that when used in conjunction
with the Bullying-Behaviour Scale (BBS; Austin & Joseph, 1996), which is similarly
designed, assessments of categories of bullies and victims may be readily made.
Overall, the PVS is a useful instrument for any researcher attempting to assess
accurately the levels of victimization in large samples of children. Although other
instruments may be useful in assessing the extent and frequency of bullying
behaviours in schools, the PVS addresses a real need for a discreet measure of the
extent of peer victimization from bullying behaviours.
Publications
Austin,S., & Joseph, S. (1996). Assessment of bully/victim problems in 8 to 11 yearolds. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 66, 447-456.
Birleson, P. (1981). The validity of depression disorder in childhood and the
development of a self-rating scale: a research report. Journal of Child Psychology and
Psychiatry, 22, 73-88.
Callaghan, S., & Joseph, S. (1995). Self-concept and peer victimization among
schoolchildren. Personality and Individual Differences, 18, 161-163.
Harter, S. (1985). The Self-Perception Profile for Children: Revision of the Perceived
Competence Scale for Children - Manual. Denver, CO: University of Denver.
Olweus, D. (1978). Aggression in the Schools: Bullies and Whipping Boys.
Washington, DC: Hemisphere.
Olweus, D. (1991). Bully/victim problems among schoolchildren: basic facts and
effects of a school based intervention program. In D.Pepler & K. Rubin (Eds.), The
Development and Treatment of Childhood Aggression, (pp. 411-448). Hillsdale, NJ:
Erlbaum.
Olweus, D. (1993). Bullying at School: What We Know and What We Can Do.
Oxford: Blackwell.
Rigby, K., & Slee, P.T. (1990). Victims and bullies in school communities. Journal of
the Australian Society of Victimology, 1, 23-28.
Smith, P.K. (1991).The silent nightmare: bullying and victimization in school peer
groups. The Psychologist, 14, 243-248.
Tattum, D.P. (1988). Violence and aggression in schools. In D.P. Tattum & D.A.
Lane (Eds.), Bullying in Schools. Stoke-on-Trent: Trentham Books.
Whitney, I., & Smith, P.K. (1993). A survey of the nature and extent of bullying in
junior/middle and secondary schools. Educational Research, 35, 3-25.
Reviewer
Conor McGuckin, Christopher Alan Lewis, School of Psychology and Communication,
University of Ulster at Magee College, Londonderry, Northern Ireland, BT48 7JL, U.K.
CA.LEWIS@ULST.AC.UK