A systematic review of bullying definitions: how definition and format affect study outcome

Abstract

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to explore how varying definitions of bullying and formats of the definitions affect research study outcomes. Design/methodology/approach A systematic search of empirical studies within the following databases was conducted: PubMed, Scopus, Science Direct, Web of Science and Wiley Online Library. Empirical studies examining laypersons and researcher’s definitions of bullying or how differences in the format of the definition of bullying results in varied outcomes were eligible to be included in this review. As traditional forms of bullying differ from cyber-bullying research on the latter were excluded. Findings Only 17 of the 18,045 screened met the study eligibility criteria. In total, 12 of the screened studies explored how participants define bullying and five explored how the different presentation of the definition may lead to different reported prevalence. The findings showed that laypersons definitions of bullying are not only inconsistent but they rarely meet the criteria used by researchers. The varying presentations of the bullying definition also affected outcomes with the more detailed definitions leading to a better understanding of the behaviour. Research limitations/implications Researchers should always provide a definition of bullying to participants either in a written format or if possible in a more detail like an educational video that clearly highlights the five characteristics researchers used to define the behaviour. Originality/value This is the first paper that reviews empirical studies on the definition of bullying.