The reliability and validity of self, peer and staff reports of bullying and victimisation in correctional and care institutions

Abstract

Connell and Farrington (1997) carried out the first study of the reliability and validity of reports of bullying and victimisation in correctional institutions, using individual interviews. The present research describes the second study on this topic using questionnaire measures of self, peer and staff reports of bullying and victimisation in one Children's Home (N=16 residents, 15 peers, 6 staff, making up to 1440 comparisons) and one Correctional Home (N=19 residents, 18 peers, 6 staff, making up to 2052 comparisons) in Croatia. The present study improved on the Connell and Farrington study by examining the test–retest stability of the questionnaire and using relative improvement over chance coefficients in assessing inter-rater reliability. Unlike in the Connell and Farrington study, self-reports of bullying and victimisation were collected in small groups rather than in individual interviews. Generally, there was significant agreement between residents, peers and staff in identifying bullies and victims, and the test–retest stability of the questionnaire was high. In line with the findings of Connell and Farrington, it is concluded that self-reports provide the most reliable and valid data about bullying amongst institutionalised youth.

Keywords:

• reliability
• validity
• bullying
• correctional and care institutions

Notes

1. In Ireland's (2002) original definition, time period for bullying was limited to the previous week. The main modification of the original definition, therefore, refers to a wider time period of 2–3 times a month used in this paper.