Bullying of ChildNCT04681209
Increasing Children's Defending Behaviors: Using Deviance Regulation
A study testing DRT Condition and Empathy Condition in people with Bullying of Child, run by Auburn University at 1 site in United States.
Trial summary
The National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD) has identified bullying as a significant public health concern. The research tests a novel approach to increase children's defending of victims of bullying. Previous research has shown that the presence of defenders leads to decreases in bullying. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Any ageHealthy volunteers can take part
- Conditions the study is for
- Bullying of Child
- What is being tested?
- DRT Condition and Empathy Condition
- Type of treatment
- Lifestyle or therapy programme
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 1,564 participants
- Where
- 1 siteUnited States
- Study dates
- 1 Sep 2017to 30 Jul 2020
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages Any age
- All sexes
- Healthy volunteers accepted
- Child, Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- Child in the fourth-grade or fifth-grade of participating schools
Who cannot join
- None.
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
About this study
The National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD) has identified bullying as a significant public health concern. The research tests a novel approach to increase children's defending of victims of bullying. Previous research has shown that the presence of defenders leads to decreases in bullying. Thus, promoting defending has become a critical component of anti-bullying interventions. However, how to best motivate defending has been relatively unstudied. Deviance Regulation Theory (DRT) provides a theoretical basis for motivating positive health and social behaviors. This theory proposes that individuals are motivated to behave in ways that differentiate them from others in a positive manner. Accordingly, individuals will be motivated to engage in a behavior if they believe the behavior occurs infrequently and will be viewed positively by others. As children report that few of their peers defend victims of bullying, the goal of this study is to increase defending by communicating to children that defenders possess traits valued by their peers (e.g., being popular, kind). Children in 4th-grade and 5th-grade classrooms received a DRT-based anti-bullying intervention or an anti-bullying intervention focused on increasing empathy for victims and strategies for defending peers. Data collection occurred three times during the school year: a) at baseline, two weeks prior to the intervention; b) 3 months post-intervention; and c) 6 months post-intervention. Findings showed that compared to the traditional anti-bullying intervention, the DRT-based intervention resulted in larger, more sustained gains in teacher-reported defending, but not peer-reported or self-reported defending. Contrary to expectations, gains in teacher-reported defending were greatest for children who viewed defending to be normative amongst their classmates. Increases in defending were also greatest among those children least likely to defend (i.e., those low in popularity and prosocial behavior, and those often bullied by peer). These findings have implications for the development of anti-bullying interventions and more broadly for understanding how to encourage important behavioral changes in childhood and adolescence. However, more research is needed to understand why increases were limited to only defending behaviors observable to teachers.
Read the detailed description
This study, conducted over the 2017-2018 and 2018-2019 school years examined whether a DRT-based intervention activity resulted in greater increases in defending behaviors in response to witnessed bullying than a more traditional, empathy-based activity. Thirteen schools were randomly assigned to receive either the DRT-based or empathy-based activity, and all fourth-grade and fifth-grade children were invited to participate. Defending behaviors were assessed approximately two weeks prior to participation in the activity and at three-month and six-month follow-ups. Data collected included peer-reports, teacher-reports, and self-reports. Also examined was whether popularity, peer acceptance, prosocial behavior, peer victimization, empathy, self-efficacy for defending, moral disengagement, or gender moderated intervention effects.
- Conditions
- Bullying of Child
- Being tested
- DRT Condition, Empathy Condition
- Keywords
- Peer Relationship, Bullying Prevention
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
DRT ConditionBehavioural
Children were asked to provide five descriptors of two children who each engaged in defending behaviors. Two weeks later they were told the top seven descriptors given by the hundreds of children participating in the project. This was followed by a brief discussion of how one could best help another kid who was getting bullied. Children then made posters to share with younger grades as to what "friendship heroes" are like, using the descriptor words shared with them, and how to be a friendship hero (i.e., how to help someone who is being bullied). Posters were hung for two-to-four months after the intervention activity.
Empathy ConditionBehavioural
Children in the empathy-based condition were asked to provide five descriptors of how two children who were bullied would fee. Two weeks later they were told the top seven descriptors given by the hundreds of children participating in the project. This was followed by a brief discussion of how one could best help another kid who was getting bullied. Children then made posters to share with younger grades as to what being bullied feels like, using the descriptor words shared with them, and how to be a friendship hero (i.e., how to help someone who is being bullied). Posters were hung for two-to-four months after the intervention activity.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| DRT-Condition | Experimental | This is the experimental group that engaged in the DRT-based intervention activity. Receives: Behavioral: DRT Condition |
| Empathy-Condition | Active comparator | This is the experimental group that engaged in the empathy-based intervention activity. Receives: Behavioral: Empathy Condition |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Changes in Peer-reported Defending across The School Year
Peer ratings of how often each participating classmate defended bullied peers
Measured: three-month follow-up; six-month follow-up
Changes in Self-reported Defending across the School Year
Children's ratings of how often they defended bullied peers
Measured: three-month follow-up; six-month follow-up
Changes in Teacher-reported Defending across the School Year
Teachers' ratings of how often each participating student defended bullied peers
Measured: three-month follow-up; six-month follow-up
Secondary outcomes (3)
Changes in Perceptions of Defenders across The School Year
Children's ratings of how much children who help others who are bullied are popular, kind, sensitive to other's feelings, leaders, well-liked, confident, and helpful. Higher scores reflected more positive perceptions of children who defend.
Measured: three-month follow-up; six-month follow-up
Changes in Peer Aggression across the School Year
Ratings participating children received from classmates on the items "calls other kids bad names or say mean things to them," "tell other kids they can't play with them or won't be friends with them," and "hit or push other kids." Ratings were made on a scale from never to a lot. Ratings received from participating classmates were averaged, and item scores were averaged to compute a composite aggression score with higher scores indicating higher levels of aggressive behavior.
Measured: three-month follow-up; six-month follow-up
Changes in Peer Victimization across the School Year
Ratings received from participating classmates on the items "get left out of things that kids are doing (kids don't let him or her play with them), "get hit or pushed," and "kids call [this child] bad names or say mean things to him or her." Items were rated on a scale from never to a lot. Ratings received from all participating classmates are averaged for each item, and item scores are averaged to create a composite peer victimization score. Higher scores indicated higher levels of peer victimization.
Measured: three-month follow-up; six-month follow-up
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted23 Dec 2020
- Study start1 Sep 2017
- Primary completion30 May 2019
- Study completion30 Jul 2020
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (1)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Bullying of ChildStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Basic science
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Model description
- Schools were randomly assigned to have their fourth-grade and fifth-grade classrooms participate in either a DRT-based intervention activity or a traditional (i.e., empathy-based) intervention activity.
- Masking
- Double blind
- Who is masked
- Participant, Outcomes assessor
- Enrolment
- 1,564 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Auburn University
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Wendy P. Gordon, Auburn University
- Investigators
- Wendy P Gordon, Principal investigator, Auburn University
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT04681209
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- AuburnUDRT
- Status last verified
- Dec 2020
- First submitted
- 14 Dec 2020
- Last updated
- 23 Dec 2020
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- Yes
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- No: Only de-identified data from all 1,564 participants will be shared
Publications
Troop-Gordon W, Frosch CA, Wienke Totura CM, Bailey AN, Jackson JD, Dvorak RD. Predicting the development of pro-bullying bystander behavior: A short-term longitudinal analysis. J Sch Psychol. 2019 Dec;77:77-89. doi: 10.1016/j.jsp.2019.10.004. Epub 2019 Nov 25.
PubMed 31837730
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 23 Dec 2020. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Increasing Children's Defending Behaviors: Using Deviance Regulation
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT04681209
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- AuburnUDRT
- Conditions
- Bullying of Child
- Keywords
- Peer Relationship, Bullying Prevention
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 1,564 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Auburn UniversityUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- 1 Sep 2017 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 30 May 2019 (actual)
- Study completion
- 30 Jul 2020 (actual)
- First posted
- 23 Dec 2020 (actual)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
The National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD) has identified bullying as a significant public health concern. The research tests a novel approach to increase children's defending of victims of bullying. Previous research has shown that the presence of defenders leads to decreases in bullying. Thus, promoting defending has become a critical component of anti-bullying interventions. However, how to best motivate defending has been relatively unstudied. Deviance Regulation Theory (DRT) provides a theoretical basis for motivating positive health and social behaviors. This theory proposes that individuals are motivated to behave in ways that differentiate them from others in a positive manner. Accordingly, individuals will be motivated to engage in a behavior if they believe the behavior occurs infrequently and will be viewed positively by others. As children report that few of their peers defend victims of bullying, the goal of this study is to increase defending by communicating to children that defenders possess traits valued by their peers (e.g., being popular, kind). Children in 4th-grade and 5th-grade classrooms received a DRT-based anti-bullying intervention or an anti-bullying intervention focused on increasing empathy for victims and strategies for defending peers. Data collection occurred three times during the school year: a) at baseline, two weeks prior to the intervention; b) 3 months post-intervention; and c) 6 months post-intervention. Findings showed that compared to the traditional anti-bullying intervention, the DRT-based intervention resulted in larger, more sustained gains in teacher-reported defending, but not peer-reported or self-reported defending. Contrary to expectations, gains in teacher-reported defending were greatest for children who viewed defending to be normative amongst their classmates. Increases in defending were also greatest among those children least likely to defend (i.e., those low in popularity and prosocial behavior, and those often bullied by peer). These findings have implications for the development of anti-bullying interventions and more broadly for understanding how to encourage important behavioral changes in childhood and adolescence. However, more research is needed to understand why increases were limited to only defending behaviors observable to teachers.
Detailed description
This study, conducted over the 2017-2018 and 2018-2019 school years examined whether a DRT-based intervention activity resulted in greater increases in defending behaviors in response to witnessed bullying than a more traditional, empathy-based activity. Thirteen schools were randomly assigned to receive either the DRT-based or empathy-based activity, and all fourth-grade and fifth-grade children were invited to participate. Defending behaviors were assessed approximately two weeks prior to participation in the activity and at three-month and six-month follow-ups. Data collected included peer-reports, teacher-reports, and self-reports. Also examined was whether popularity, peer acceptance, prosocial behavior, peer victimization, empathy, self-efficacy for defending, moral disengagement, or gender moderated intervention effects.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Basic science
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Double blind (participant, outcomes assessor)
- Number of arms
- 2
- Model description
- Schools were randomly assigned to have their fourth-grade and fifth-grade classrooms participate in either a DRT-based intervention activity or a traditional (i.e., empathy-based) intervention activity.
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| DRT-Condition | Experimental | Behavioral: DRT ConditionThis is the experimental group that engaged in the DRT-based intervention activity. |
| Empathy-Condition | Active comparator | Behavioral: Empathy ConditionThis is the experimental group that engaged in the empathy-based intervention activity. |
Who may qualify
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Accepted
- Age groups
- Child, Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (1 listed)
- Child in the fourth-grade or fifth-grade of participating schools
Key exclusion criteria (1 listed)
- None.
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| DRT ConditionChildren were asked to provide five descriptors of two children who each engaged in defending behaviors. Two weeks later they were told the top seven descriptors given by the hundreds of children participating in the project. This was followed by a brief discussion of how one could best help another kid who was getting bullied. Children then made posters to share with younger grades as to what "friendship heroes" are like, using the descriptor words shared with them, and how to be a friendship hero (i.e., how to help someone who is being bullied). Posters were hung for two-to-four months after the intervention activity. | Behavioural | DRT-Condition |
| Empathy ConditionChildren in the empathy-based condition were asked to provide five descriptors of how two children who were bullied would fee. Two weeks later they were told the top seven descriptors given by the hundreds of children participating in the project. This was followed by a brief discussion of how one could best help another kid who was getting bullied. Children then made posters to share with younger grades as to what being bullied feels like, using the descriptor words shared with them, and how to be a friendship hero (i.e., how to help someone who is being bullied). Posters were hung for two-to-four months after the intervention activity. | Behavioural | Empathy-Condition |
Primary outcome
Changes in Peer-reported Defending across The School Year
Time frame: three-month follow-up; six-month follow-up
Peer ratings of how often each participating classmate defended bullied peers
Changes in Self-reported Defending across the School Year
Time frame: three-month follow-up; six-month follow-up
Children's ratings of how often they defended bullied peers
Changes in Teacher-reported Defending across the School Year
Time frame: three-month follow-up; six-month follow-up
Teachers' ratings of how often each participating student defended bullied peers
3 secondary outcomes
Changes in Perceptions of Defenders across The School Year
Time frame: three-month follow-up; six-month follow-up
Changes in Peer Aggression across the School Year
Time frame: three-month follow-up; six-month follow-up
Changes in Peer Victimization across the School Year
Time frame: three-month follow-up; six-month follow-up
Results and safety
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 23 Dec 2020.
- Results publication: PubMed 31837730Troop-Gordon W, Frosch CA, Wienke Totura CM, Bailey AN, Jackson JD, Dvorak RD. Predicting the development of pro-bullying bystander behavior: A short-term longitudinal analysis. J Sch Psychol. 2019 Dec;77:77-89. doi: 10.1016/j.jsp.2019.10.004. Epub 2019 Nov 25.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: No. Only de-identified data from all 1,564 participants will be shared
Related trials for Bullying of Child
Active, not recruiting
Methodology of Super-Early Training of Developer Engineers and Leading Analysts With a Diagnosis of ADHD/ASD for Ensuring the Engineering Sovereignty of the State: Time Horizon: 2026-2038-2050
Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD)
Not yet recruiting
REThink for Mental Health of Youths in Romania
Bullying Victimisation, Bullying of Child
Active, not recruiting
Group Social Work Intervention in Improving Peer Relationships
Bullying
Not yet recruiting
Motivational Interviewing-Based Training
Social Exclusion, Aggression
Active, not recruiting
Prevention Workshop to Address Bullying Behaviors in Schools
Bullying of Child, Child Behavior Disorders
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Wendy P Gordon principal investigator
Auburn University
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing DRT Condition and Empathy Condition in people with Bullying of Child, run by Auburn University at 1 site in United States.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 1 inclusion and 1 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 23 Dec 2020. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in United States. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Changes in Peer-reported Defending across The School Year (time frame: three-month follow-up; six-month follow-up). The study lists 3 primary outcomes in all. It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT04681209, which also lists 1 linked publication.
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 23 Dec 2020.