نتایج مداخله مقابله با زورگویی برای بزرگسالان دارای معلولیت ذهنی
|کد مقاله||سال انتشار||مقاله انگلیسی||ترجمه فارسی||تعداد کلمات|
|35151||2010||5 صفحه PDF||سفارش دهید||3882 کلمه|
Publisher : Elsevier - Science Direct (الزویر - ساینس دایرکت)
Journal : Research in Developmental Disabilities, Volume 31, Issue 2, March–April 2010, Pages 376–380
Although existing research is scarce, evidence suggests that children and adults with intellectual disabilities may be at increased risk of being bullied (as they are for maltreatment generally) and possibly more likely than those without disabilities to also engage in bullying behavior. Despite significant clinical interest in bullying, we could find no published research on the outcomes of bullying intervention for individuals with intellectual disabilities. Adults with intellectual disabilities in three work center settings participated in one of two interventions for perpetrators and/or victims of bullying: (a) psychoeducational intervention with a cognitive behavioral orientation (n = 20), or (b) the same intervention but with additional involvement of community stakeholders such as parents, the police, and local schools (n = 22). A third work center (n = 18) acted as a waiting list control comparison. Pre-intervention, 43% of participants reported that they had been bullied within the preceding three months and 28% identified themselves as having bullied others. Reports of being bullied decreased significantly within the two intervention groups over time but not in the control group. There were no differences between the two intervention groups, and no statistically significant reduction in self-reported bullying behavior. Initial data on this intervention suggest that its effects might be clinically meaningful with an associated Numbers Needed to Treat for reduction in exposure to bullying of 5.55.
Bullying is not a new phenomenon, although it was not until the 1970s that it became a focus of scientific research, beginning with pioneering work in Norway (e.g., Olweus, 1978). Since then, there has been considerable research undertaken, both within the school environment (see Merrell, Gueldner, Ross, & Isava, 2008 for a recent meta-analytic review of school-based bullying interventions), and in the workplace (Nielsen et al., 2008 and Rayner et al., 2002). Definitions of bullying vary, but there is broad agreement that there are two forms of bullying: direct and indirect (Jenson and Dieterich, 2007 and Wolke et al., 2000). Direct bullying includes aggressive acts such as hitting, kicking, punching, name-calling, mobile telephone texting, taking possessions, and making threats. Indirect bullying refers to active social exclusion, malicious gossip, and withdrawal of friendships. Few researchers have examined bullying towards or by individuals with intellectual disability, but existing data suggest that a relatively high proportion of both children and adults are at risk of being bullied (Branstone et al., 1999, Mencap, 1999, Norwich and Kelly, 2004, O’Moore and Hillery, 1989 and Whitney et al., 1994). Bullying towards individuals with intellectual disability may also persist over long periods of time (Sheard, Clegg, Standen, & Cromby, 2001). These data on bullying are consistent with research in other areas suggesting increased risk of victimization of people with intellectual disabilities, including physical and sexual abuse (Petersilia, 2001, Sobsey et al., 1997 and White et al., 2003), and also data on exposure to life events including physical attacks by others (Owen et al., 2004). There is also a small body of research suggesting that individuals with an intellectual disability may be at an increased risk of being both a bully and a bully-victim—a bully who is also bullied by others (Dickson et al., 2005, Kaukiainen et al., 2002 and Nabuzoka et al., 1993).