Factors Causing Bullying in School Based Perceptions of Male and
Female Students in Lampung
Mujiyati Mujiyati and Sofwan Adiputra
Department of Education Psychology and Guidance, Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia, Bandung, Indonesia
Keywords: Bullying, Perception, Adolescent.
Abstract: Bullying is defined as the aggressive behavior of one or more people who deliberately try to harm others over
time, in situations of power imbalance. This study aims to reveal the factors causing bullying in schools from
the perceptions of male and female students. The research method using ex-post facto and the sample was 66
students of class X SMK K.H. Ghalib Pringsewu Lampung consisting of 33 male students and 33 female
students. The instrument used is a questionnaire about bullying. Data analysis technique used is a parametric
statistic with Manova test. The results showed that male students have a perception that broken home as a
factor causing the behavior of bullying, while female students have a perception that parents' parenting as a
factor causing the behavior of bullying. The results of this study are expected to be considered as a
consideration for teachers, parents, and communities when developing and implementing bullying prevention
programs in schools.
1 INTRODUCTION
One of the problems that develop in schools is the
tendency of students to engage in bullying behaviors.
Rodkin (2012) mentions that bullying is a kind of unequal
and destructive relationship. Olweus (1995) defines
bullying as a repetitive act of attack involving power
imbalances with a view to intimidating or causing damage
to the victim. Bullying involves unbalanced strength and
power so that the victim is in a state of powerlessness to
defend herself effectively against the negative actions.
Bullying always involves an imbalance of power, intent
to injure, the threat of further aggression, and terror
(Coloroso, 2007).
Students who become victims of bullying will suffer
physically, depressed, unable to concentrate well in
school, even withdraw from the social environment.
Victims of bullying are often looking for negative
impingement such as smoking, consume alcohol, do not
want to go to school and even revenge. Bullying does not
choose age or sex. The victim is generally a weak, shy,
quiet, disabled, covered, clever, beautiful child, or who
has certain body characteristics that are used as a
mockery.
A person may be said to be a victim of bullying if he
is treated negatively (intentionally making wounds,
inconveniences through physical contact, through words,
or by other means) either once or many times and
sometimes into a pattern repeatedly (Shafer and
Silverman, 2013). Ridicule, ridicule, and mockery for
some people may only seem as trivial and just part of the
joke. But in reality, it can be a slow weapon that can
destroy a child. Such negative actions are partly a form of
bullying behavior. It is a longstanding behavior and
threatens all aspects of most children living in the school,
at home, and in their neighborhoods.
While bullying actors are usually strong, dominant
and assertive. Usually, the perpetrator also shows
aggressive behavior toward parents, teachers, and other
adults. In addition, bullying practitioners are usually less
likely to get adult supervision at home, have a habit of
drinking alcohol, smoking or smoking tobacco, cheating
on exams (cheating) and carrying weapons when they go
to school (Olweus, 1995).
Engaging in bullying independently can have
negative consequences such as social, emotional or
psychological problems. Being a victim can be a trigger
for depression and anxiety, even suicide. While the
bullying actors are associated with antisocial behavior and
psychiatric disorders. Overall, bullying is now a common
problem among children and teenagers of all ages around
the world, especially in school environments. As a result,
bullying has become a concern for parents, teachers,
psychologists and health experts (Felipe, de Ossorno,
Babarro and Arias, 2011). Bullying behavior is a
Mujiyati, M. and Adiputra, S.
Factors Causing Bullying in School Based Perceptions of Male and Female Students in Lampung.
In Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Educational Sciences (ICES 2017) - Volume 2, pages 27-32
ISBN: 978-989-758-314-8
Copyright © 2018 by SCITEPRESS – Science and Technology Publications, Lda. All rights reserved
27

maladaptive behavior that should be reduced or
eliminated (Olweus, 1995) so that students who have the
tendency can realize that bullying is a negative thing that
can harm yourself or others.
Research on the phenomenon of bullying in Indonesia
is done by Huneck (2007) which shows that 10-60% of
Indonesian students report getting mockery, scorn,
exclusion, beatings, kicks, or encouragement, at least once
a week. In addition, this study emphasizes the importance
of positive relationships between teachers and peers in
school. The basis for understanding deviant behavior is
provided along with a set of criteria for creating change in
schools. The main finding is the prevalence of bullying
behavior in Indonesian schools that is undetectable by
adults. In addition, research on bullying in three major
cities in Indonesia, namely: Yogyakarta, Surabaya, and
Jakarta conducted by Yayasan Semai Jiwa Amini (2008)
noted the occurrence of violence level of 67,9% in high
school (SMA) and 66,1% at junior high school level
(SMP). Violence committed among fellow students was
41,2% for junior high school and 43,7% for high school
level with the highest category of psychological violence
in the form of excommunication, subsequent verbal
violence (mocking) and last physical violence (hit). The
description of violence in junior high schools in three
major cities, namely: Yogyakarta: 77,5% (acknowledge
the violence); 22,5% (acknowledge no violence,
Surabaya: 59,8% (no violence), Jakarta: 61,1% (no
violence).
Another study of bullying by Riauskina, Djuwita,
and Soesetio (2005) indicates that the victim had a
perception that the perpetrator was bullying because of
tradition, revenge because he was treated the same
(according to the male victim), wanted to show power,
angry because the victim did not behave accordingly as
expected, gain satisfaction (according to female victim),
jealousy (according to female victim). The victim also
perceives himself to be a victim of bullying because of his
flashy appearance, not behaving appropriately,
disrespectful behavior, and traditions.
This shows that the experience that occurs in the
students so as to form students' perception to do bullying.
Perception itself is defined as the process of giving
meaning to the object of observation. Chaplin (1999)
views perception as the process of knowing or
recognizing objective objects and events with the aid of
the senses. Meanwhile, according to Walgito (2002)
perception is a process of how the individual can
recognize themselves and the surrounding circumstances
through the stimulus received, and the individual will
experience perception, the process is preceded by sensing
the process that tangible receipt of the stimulus by
individuals through the receptors, then stimulus
forwarded to the center the neural arrangement of the
brain, and the brain is a psychological process so that
individuals can perceive the stimulus it receives.
Sensations from the environment will be processed
together with things that have been previously learned
both in the form of expectations-harass, values, attitudes,
and memories. Students who experience bullying, they
will perceive the bullying according to what they feel and
they have been receiving in the environment based on
their experience.
Based on preliminary study results at SMK K.H.
Ghalib Pringsewu Lampung, found the percentage of
bullying in school as much as 30%. This is one of the
author reasons to examine the students' perceptions in the
school. Various efforts have been done by the school to
overcome the behavior of bullying, but the effort has not
run optimally. This is due to the lack of collaborative
efforts of school personnel in handling bullying issues.
Therefore, collaborative efforts should be made from
various parties (school personnel) in order to prevent
intensive bullying behavior.
This study aims to reveal the factors causing bullying
in schools from the perceptions of male and female
students. The results of this study are expected to be
considered as a consideration for teachers, parents, and
communities when developing and implementing
bullying prevention programs in schools.
2 METHOD
The research method used ex-post facto research. The
authors used this method because ex-post facto is
done to examine the events that have occurred and
then trace back to find out the factors that could cause
the incident (Cohen, Manion, and Morrison, 2007),
this is in line with the problem that will be
investigated by the author, the factors that cause
bullying behavior in schools seen from the perception
of male and female students.
The population of this study was 125 students of
class X SMK K.H. Ghalib Pringsewu Lampung
academic year 2015/2016. The sample in this study is
66 students of class X consisting of 33 male students
and 33 female students. The authors took samples
randomly so that the population had the same
opportunity to be a research sample. While the
number of 66 students from 125 existing students is
considered to be quite representative of the
population. The instrument used in the form of a
questionnaire about the statements that refer to the
factors causing the behavior of bullying based on the
concept developed by Sullivan, Cleary and Sullivan
(2005). Data analysis technique used is a parametric
statistic that is by Multivariate Analysis of Variance
ICES 2017 - 1st International Conference on Educational Sciences
28

(MANOVA) test. The reason for using Manova
analysis because this statistical method allows the
authors to do research on more than two variables
(analyze the influence of several variables on other
variables) simultaneously.
3 RESULTS
The result of different test analysis which was done
by Manova analysis obtained the data as follows:
Table 1: Test Analysis Different Perception of Bullying
Causes Factors in Schools by Sex.
Effect
Value
F
Hypoth
esis df
Error
df
Sig.
Gender
Pillai's
Trace
.563
15.490a
5.000
60.000
.000
Wilks'
Lambda
.437
15.490a
5.000
60.000
.000
Hotelling's
Trace
1.291
15.490a
5.000
60.000
.000
Roy's
Largest
Root
1.291
15.490a
5.000
60.000
.000
From Table 1 it is known that λ = 0.437; F (5, 60)
= 15.490; and p = 0.000 thus it can be concluded that
there is a significant difference between the
perception of male and female students on the causes
of bullying behavior in school.
Based on this results can be understood that there
are differences in perception that causes the behavior
of bullying between male students and female
students so it can be concluded that gender factors
form a different understanding of bullying.
To know the differences in perceptions of factors
causing bullying behavior between boys and girls can
be seen in Table 2 as follow:
Table 2: Bullying Causes Factors in Schools.
Source
Dependent
Variable
Type III
Sum of
Squares
Df
Mean
Square
F
Sig.
Gender
The difference
of Social
economy status,
ethnic, religion,
and gender
368.727
1
368.727
3.689
.059
Parental parent
4905.470
1
4905.470
60.675
.000
Broken home
1391.045
1
1391.045
11.138
.001
Seniority
280.242
1
280.242
1.892
.174
School situation
not harmonious
(Discriminative)
180.015
1
180.015
2.189
.144
Based on Table 2 above, the result of Manova test
analysis which has been done by writer to every factor
causing bullying It is found that there is no significant
difference of perception on different factor of
socioeconomic, ethnic, religion and gender status;
seniority; and discriminative school situation, but
there is significant difference in perception between
male and female student to parenting factor with p =
0,000 (< 0,05) and broken home factor with p = 0,001
(< 0,05).
From these results, it can be understood that
factors of socioeconomic, ethnic, religious, and
gender status; seniority; as well as the school situation
that is not harmonious (discriminatory), is not a factor
causing the occurrence of bullying. While parents
parenting factors and broken home factors is a factor
causing the occurrence of bullying.
3.1 Ancillary Analyzes
From the population, the sample determination is
adjusted to the existence of the problem and the type
of data to be collected. The sample in this study is 66
students of class X consisting
Different perceptions of parenting and broken
home parenting factors are presented in Table 3, as
follows:
Table 3: Differences in Perceptions between Male and
Female Students on Parenting Factors and Broken Home.
Aspect
Gender
Mean
Std.
Deviation
N
The differences of social
economy status, ethnic,
religion, dan gender
Male
79.79
11.575
33
Female
84.52
8.121
33
Total
82.15
10.203
66
Parental parents
male
66.24
8.602
33
Female
83.48
9.365
33
Total
74.86
12.453
66
Broken home
Male
82.27
10.414
33
Female
73.09
11.888
33
Total
77.68
12.016
66
Seniorities
Male
80.91
13.298
33
Female
76.79
10.925
33
Total
78.85
12.253
66
School situation is not
harmonious
(Discriminative)
Male
81.21
11.299
33
Female
84.52
6.068
33
Total
82.86
9.152
66
From Table 3, it can be concluded that the male
students' perceptions on the causes of bullying
behavior are different from female students'
perceptions of parents' parenting and broken home
Factors Causing Bullying in School Based Perceptions of Male and Female Students in Lampung
29

factors. Male students had negative perceptions of
parenting patterns (x ̅ = 66.24, SD = 8.602) compared
with female students (x ̅ = 83.48, SD = 9.365),
whereas in the broken home factor, male students
have a positive perception that the broken home
factor has a large contribution as the cause of bullying
in school (x ̅ = 82.27, SD = 10.414) compared with
female students (x ̅ = 73,09; SD = 11,888).
Based on these results it can be understood that
male students assume that bullying behavior is caused
by broken home factors while female students claim
that bullying behavior is caused by parenting.
4 DISCUSSION
The result of the research shows that there is no
significant difference in perception between male and
female students so that it can be concluded that
gender factors form a different understanding about
bullying. In addition, there is no difference in
socioeconomic, ethnic, religious, and gender status
factors; seniority; and school situation is not
harmonious (discriminative) as the cause factor of
bullying behavior, but there are significant difference
of perception on parenting pattern factor and broken
home between male students and female students. In
other words, male students have a perception that
broken home as a factor causing bullying, while
female students have a perception that parenting as a
factor causing bullying.
The results of this study are in line with research
conducted by Saripah (2010) which states that
bullying is closely related to the background of school
and authoritative parenting. The majority of
perpetrators and victims of bullying come from an
authoritative family and seen from the victims and
perpetrators’ school background are relatively
balanced. The results showed that bullying actors are
characterized by high aggressiveness and inability to
empathize, while bullying victims do not have high
confidence and firmness. The researcher concludes
that cognitive behavioral counseling is effective to
improve empathy and decrease aggression of bullying
perpetrators, confidence and assertiveness of victims
of bullying and it is also effective for victims and
bullies based on parenting and based on school
background. While research Kalliotis (2000) states
that the oppression often occurs in the school
environment caused by the isolation made by peers
due to differences in social and economic level of
learners.
In places of education, there are usually controls
that are created to give students a penalty lesson.
These controls contribute to the creation of bullying.
Indirectly this bullying occurs because of the
education culture that has existed in a school
(Boyatzis, 2004). Another factor that affects the
behavior of oppression is the individual's mistake in
viewing the punishment given to the student. In
addition, bullying is also influenced by the support of
people who have power and authority (Boyatzis,
2004). According to research results Berthold and
Hoover (2000), the factors that trigger the occurrence
of bullying is the television show. In addition, the
level of status in schools is also a risk factor.
Researchers have found a number of common
characteristics of offenders and victims of bullying,
which can help to define theoretical frameworks and
design for prevention and intervention efforts.
According to Swearer (2011), risk factors students
become victims of bullying in each group seen from
minorities (religion, ethnicity, sexual orientation,
disability). In contrast, bullying actors are students
who need social attention and are more often boys
than girls. In addition, boys tend to overstep and are
more active while girls tend to be more passive
(Nansel, Overpeck, Pilla, Ruan, Simons, and Scheidt,
2001). Bullying perpetrators and victims are at risk of
problems such as low academic achievement, poor
social skills, low socioeconomic status, and family
disputes.
Carney, Hazier, and Higgins (2002) have
surveyed 251 teachers and counselors in an attempt to
identify common characteristics of perpetrators and
victims of bullying. The most common characteristic
of bullying victims is young age, having limbs
physically smaller and weaker than others, self-
blame, and low self-esteem. The most common act of
bullying perpetrators is controlling others through
verbal threats and physical actions, repeating
aggressive behavior, and becoming more irritable.
The results show that the offender tends to have
characteristics such as "family problems, lack of
models of parental roles, physical and emotional
abuse at home and inappropriate understanding of the
intentions of others' actions" (Carney, Hazier, and
Higgins, 2002). In addition, offenders and victims
have the following characteristics: vulnerable,
socially isolated, low self-concept, and ineffective
social skills. Given these similarities, interventions
can be designed to meet the needs of both groups
simultaneously.
The Pozzoli, Gini and Thornberg (2016)
conducted a study of bullying has highlighted the role
of morality in explaining the different behaviors of
students during bullying. However, this study is
limited to an analysis of the explicit actions of moral
ICES 2017 - 1st International Conference on Educational Sciences
30

characteristics and moral reasoning only, while
implicit steps have not been fully considered.
Furthermore, Contreras, Elacqua, Martinez, and
Miranda (2016) studies on the relationship between
bullying, individual identity, and school performance
in Chile show that an offender or victim of bullying
increases the likelihood of becoming a student with
lower academic achievement. While anti-bullying
policies in schools seek to promote the identity of
students associated with higher academic
achievement.
The study, conducted by Gordillo (2011) on the
perception of children and adolescents on bullying
and the influence of frequency factor of aggression on
perception and using cross-sectional design shows
that conceptually and identification, the victim's
perception of bullying emphasizes the criterion of
'intention to harm'. While the perception of the
bullying offender is emphasizing the criterion of
'power imbalance' rather than 'intention to harm'. The
results also show that both aggressors and victims
tend to legitimize various modes of bullying as a form
of social interaction with peers. While research
conducted by Mujiyati (2015) states students who
have low self-esteem tends to become victims of
bullying for friends who feel more senior and strong.
From an instrumental perspective, bullying
practitioners tend to have studied the behavior of a
person or a place and even earlier the perpetrator is
the victim of bullying itself, therefore, the perpetrator
retains the bullying behavior (Allen, 2009). Reviewed
some studies by finding responses that punishment
for bullying offenders is not effective in changing
behavior because punishment tends to reinforce the
negative behavior with other negative behaviors.
Thus, it seems necessary to have a creative program
for the prevention and intervention of bullying
behavior (Reid, Monsen, and Rivers, 2004).
This study has limitations because it only looks at
indicators causing bullying behavior without
providing an intervention as a prevention or further
handling of bullying behavior in schools. So
hopefully this research can be a reference in the effort
of future bullying behavioral intervention.
5 CONCLUSIONS
Based on the results of the study, it can be concluded
that the complexity of family problems such as
parenting, and parental divorce are factors that cause
significant bullying. Thus, further research can
investigate interventions for bullying behaviors that
can be applied in schools based on the factors causing
bullying behavior.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The writers would like to express their gratitude to the
Indonesian government especially the Indonesian
Directorate General of Higher Education (DIKTI),
Indonesia Endowment Fund for Education (LPDP) in
funding this research and Indonesia University of
Education (UPI) for permitting them to conduct a
development research in education field.
REFERENCES
Allen, K. P. 2009. A bullying intervention system:
Reducing risk and creating support for aggressive
students. Preventing School Failure: Alternative
Education for Children and Youth, 54(3), 199-209.
Berthold, K. A., Hoover, J. H. 2000. Correlates of bullying
and victimization among intermediate students in the
midwestern USA. Journal of School Psychology
International, 21, 65-78.
Boyatzis, R. E. 2004. Self-Directed Learning Lead with
emotional intelligence. Executive Excellence, 21(2),
11-12.
Carney, J. V., Hazier, R. J., Higgins, J. 2002.
Characteristics of school bullies and victims as
perceived by public school professionals. Journal of
School Violence, 1 (3), 91–106.
Chaplin, J.P. (1999). Kamus Lengkap Psikologi. (Edisi 5).
Jakarta: PT Raja Grafindo Persada.
Cohen, L., Manion, L., Morrison, K. 2007. Research
Methods in Education. New York: Routledge.
Coloroso, B. 2007. Stop bullying (Memutus Rantai
Kekerasan Anak Dari Prasekolah Hingga SMU).
Jakarta: PT. Serambi Ilmu Semesta.
Contreras, D., Elacqua, G., Martinez, M., Miranda, A.
2016. Bullying, identity, and school performance:
Evidence from Chile. International Journal of
Educational Development 51, 147–162.
Felipe, M. T., de Ossorno García, S., Babarro, J. M., Arias,
R. M. 2011. Social Characteristics in bullying
Typology: Digging deeper into description of bully-
victim. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 29,
869-878.
Gordillo, I. C. 2011. Divergence in aggressors' and victims'
perceptions of bullying: A decisive factor for
differential psychosocial intervention. Children and
Youth Services Review 33, 1608–1615.
Huneck, A. 2007. Bullying: A cross-cultural comparison of
one American and one Indonesian elementary school.
Union Institute and University.
Factors Causing Bullying in School Based Perceptions of Male and Female Students in Lampung
31

Kalliotis, P. 2000. Bullying as a special case of aggression:
Procedures for cross-cultural assessment. School
Psychology International, 21(1), 47-64.
Mujiyati. 2015. Peningkatan Self Esteem Siswa Korban
Bullying Melalui Teknik Assertive Training. Jurnal
Fokus Konseling, 1(1), 1-12.
Nansel, T. R., Overpeck, M., Pilla, R. S., Ruan, W. J.,
Simons-Morton, B., Scheidt, P. 2001. Bullying
behaviors among US youth: Prevalence and association
with psychosocial adjustment. Jama, 285(16), 2094-
2100.
Olweus, D. 1995. Bullying at school: What we know and
what we can do. 1993. Malden: Blackwell Publishing
Google Scholar.
Pozzoli, T., Gini, G., Thornberg, R. 2016. Bullying and
defending behavior: The role of explicit and implicit
moral cognition. Journal of School Psychology 59, 67–
81.
Reid, P., Monsen, J., Rivers, I. 2004. Psychology’s
contribution to understanding and managing bullying
within schools. Educational Psychology in Practice, 20
(3), 241–258.
Riauskina, I. I., Djuwita, R., Soesetio, S. R. 2005. ”Gencet-
Gencetan” di Mata Siswa/Siswi Kelas I SMA: Naskah
Kognitif Tentang Arti Skenario, dan Dampak” Gencet-
Gencetan”. Jurnal Psikologi Sosial, 12(01),1-13.
Riauskina, I. I., Djuwita, R., Soesetio, S. R. 2005. Gencet-
gencetan” di mata siswa/siswi kelas 1 SMA: Naskah
kognitif tentang arti, skenario, dan dampak” gencet-
gencetan”. Jurnal Psikologi Sosial, 12(01), 1-13.
Rodkin, P. C. 2012. Bullying and children's peer
relationships. Colleagues, 8(2), 4.
Saripah, I. 2010. Model Konseling Kognitif Perilaku Untuk
Menanggulangi Bullying Siswa. In International
Confrence on Teacher Education: Join Conference.
Shafer, K. S., Silverman, M. J. 2013. Applying a social
learning theoretical framework to music therapy as a
prevention and intervention for bullies and victims of
bullying. The Arts in Psychotherapy, 40(5), 495-500.
Sullivan, K., Cleary, M., Sullivan, G. 2005. Bullying in
Secondary School: What it looks like and how to
manage it. California: Corwin Press.
Swearer Napolitano, S. M. 2011. Risk factors for and
outcomes of bullying and victimization.
Walgito, B. 2002. Pengantar Psikologi Umum. Yogyakarta:
Andi Offset.
Yayasan Semai Jiwa Amini. 2008. Bullying: Mengatasi
Kekerasan di Sekolah dan Lingkungan Sekitar Anak.
Jakarta: Grasindo.
ICES 2017 - 1st International Conference on Educational Sciences
32