MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7117146977 · doi:10.3390/bs16010036

Time Trends in Peer Violence and Bullying Across Countries and Regions of Europe, Central Asia, and Canada Among Students Aged 11, 13, and 15 from 2013 to 2022

2025· article· en· W7117146977 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Gabriele Prati

Bibliographic record

VenueBehavioral Sciences · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicBullying, Victimization, and Aggression
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPoison controlPandemicHuman factors and ergonomicsSuicide preventionInjury preventionPeer group

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on temporal trends in peer violence and bullying deserves closer scrutiny. The aim of the present study was to examine temporal trends in peer violence and bullying among school-aged children before and after the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: Data from the Health Behaviour in School-aged Children (HBSC) surveys (2013/2014-2021/2022) were analyzed to track changes in peer violence and bullying over time. The sample encompassed over 700,000 students aged 11, 13, and 15 from more than 40 countries across Asia, Europe, and North America. RESULTS: Traditional (school) bullying perpetration and victimization did not change significantly over time. A significant decreasing trend in engagement in physical fighting between the 2013/2014 and 2021/2022 surveys was observed among male participants aged 15. In contrast, a significant increasing trend in engagement in physical fighting was observed among female participants aged 11 and 13 years. Following the pandemic, increases in cyberbullying perpetration and victimization were observed among students aged 11 and 13, a trend not evident among 15-year-olds. CONCLUSION: Except for cyberbullying, the pandemic did not appear to influence trends in peer violence and bullying, which remained largely stable or reflected trajectories that had begun prior to the pandemic.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.132
Threshold uncertainty score0.461

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.020
GPT teacher head0.339
Teacher spread0.319 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBehavioral SciencesSame topicBullying, Victimization, and AggressionFrench-language works237,207