Next Article in Journal
Supporting Mathematics Instructors’ Transition to Equity-Minded Active Instruction Using a Community of Practice Framework
Previous Article in Journal
Comfort in the Role: The Core of Positive Veteran Teachers
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Education Sciences
Volume 14
Issue 9
10.3390/educsci14090999
education-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Association of High Levels of Bullying and Cyberbullying with Test Anxiety in Boys and Girls Aged 10 to 16 Years

by
Alba Rusillo-Magdaleno
1,
Manuel J. De la Torre-Cruz
2,*,
Alberto Ruiz-Ariza
1 and
Sara Suárez-Manzano
1
1
Department of Didactics of Musical, Plastic and Corporal Expression, University of Jaen, Campus Las Lagunillas s/n, 23071 Jaén, Spain
2
Department of Psychology, University of Jaen, Campus Las Lagunillas s/n, 23071 Jaén, Spain
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Educ. Sci. 2024, 14(9), 999; https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci14090999
Submission received: 16 July 2024 / Revised: 4 September 2024 / Accepted: 5 September 2024 / Published: 11 September 2024
(This article belongs to the Topic Diversity, Educational Inclusion, Emotional Intelligence, Coping, and Other Factors That Influence Psychological Health and Well-Being)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
The increase in cases of bullying and cyberbullying has raised concerns about its impact on the mental health of young people, particularly its relationship with test anxiety, underscoring the need to delve deeper into this issue. Therefore, the aim of this study was to examine whether suffering and perpetrating aggressive acts (bullying and cyberbullying) are related to different dimensions of test anxiety. A total of 912 Spanish students (girls 52.7%) aged between 10 and 16 years (13.43 ± 1.73) participated in this study. The European Bullying Intervention Project Questionnaire, the European Cyberbullying Intervention Project Questionnaire, and the Test Anxiety Questionnaire (CAEX-A) were used. The association between test anxiety and bullying/cyberbullying (as victims and aggressors) was calculated via analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) and binary logistic regression. All analyses were performed separately for boys and girls and adjusted for age, body mass index, maternal educational level, and academic performance. Students in bullying or cyberbullying contexts achieved significantly higher values in practically all anxiety factors analyzed (p < 0.05), especially in cognitive responses: 33.14% and 22.56% for bullying and cyberbullying victims, respectively, and 22.56% and 23.9% for aggressors. Victims of cyberbullying harassment had a high risk (OR: 8.311) of suffering diarrhoea, palpitations, chest tightness, nausea and fainting during exams, as well as avoidance behaviors (OR: 5.106) (both p < 0.001). The results, disaggregated by gender, showed that the relationship between feeling bullied in face-to-face interactions and experiencing test anxiety was only evident for girls, which seems to place them in a more vulnerable situation. Female victimization, although less frequent, could have lasting and harmful consequences. These findings highlight the need not only to implement intervention strategies in the school setting aimed at preventing and reducing bullying and cyberbullying but also to address anxiety and its physical and cognitive manifestations in both victims and aggressors.

1. Introduction

School harassment, commonly referred to as bullying, has been described as a form of mistreatment among peers that manifests through violent acts, whether physical or psychological, sustained over time [1]. These hostile behaviors can be exercised by an individual or a collective and be directed towards a person or a group that is in a vulnerable position, being unable to offer an effective defence [1]. According to data from the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization [2], almost one-third of adolescents have been bullied by their peers at least once in the past month. The repercussions of this phenomenon include significant episodes of anxiety, a tendency towards isolation, and a decrease in motivation towards learning [3]. In addition, over the last decade, digital transformation has facilitated the emergence of new forms of bullying. These actions, employing multiple channels of aggression, are even more contagious and pernicious and can far exceed the consequences of traditional bullying [4].
Cyberbullying is defined as the deliberate and repeated use of digital platforms, including social networks, communication applications, and websites, for the purpose of intimidating, denigrating, threatening or harming an individual [5,6]. A remarkable increase in this new mode of bullying has been observed on a global scale, becoming a focus of academic and social interest in the last decade [6]. A distinctive feature of cyberbullying is its ability to overcome geographical limitations, allowing perpetrators to victimize their targets at any time and from any location [7]. Among the forms of cyberbullying are the propagation of false information, the unauthorized disclosure of personal data, and the generation of fictitious identities in order to damage a person’s image [8,9]. These behaviors can be translated into different roles, where victims tend to exhibit behaviors of a passive nature, aggressors manifest a marked self-confidence, and bystanders witness acts of aggression without intervening in them [10]. At present, the distinction between traditional bullying and cyberbullying is relevant. A significant difference is the degree of anonymity that digital platforms provide, which translates into greater freedom to maintain the bullying behavior on the part of the aggressor, confident of the low probability of their facing consequences [11].
Involvement in bullying or cyberbullying, whether in the role of victim or perpetrator, has been associated with the mental health and psychological well-being of children and adolescents [12,13]. Findings from various studies suggest that victimization is associated with increased vulnerability to the presence of anxious-depressive symptomatology [12,14], isolation [15], and suicidal ideation [16] in school populations. Furthermore, the severity of such manifestations increases with time and the level of victimization [17]. In the last decade, Kowalski et al. [18], through their general model of aggression, ventured the possibility that the relationship between bullying and psychological difficulties is not direct. Instead, they suggested that the relationship might be mediated by the influence of cognitive-emotional variables or mechanisms. In this regard, the results of the studies by Irwin et al. [14] and Anderson et al. [12] showed that both the perception of guilt (positively) and attributed resilience (negatively) mediated the relationship between victimization and the presence of anxious symptomatology.
In this line of argument, several studies have examined the existence of gender differences in the perpetration or receipt of aggressive acts. While most findings suggest that boys are more likely than girls to be perpetrators and victims of aggressive acts, whether traditional or cyberbullying [19,20,21], authors such as Slonje and Smith [22] have suggested that boys and girls bully and are bullied equally. In a different vein, findings from research conducted by Markkanen et al. [23] showed that the highest number of cybervictimization episodes occurred among adolescent girls. Furthermore, while girls appear to be less likely to be involved in bullying, the effects of being victimized are more long-lasting and damaging than those experienced by their male peers [24].
On the other hand, school anxiety is a multifaceted construct that includes social anxiety, school discouragement, and test anxiety, among other factors [25]. Of these, test anxiety has been the most studied emotion in the last decade [20,26]. Test anxiety is characterized as a set of responses that accompany concerns about negative consequences or loss of competence when faced with an exam or demanding learning situation [27]. Traditionally, test anxiety consisted of both affective and physiological and cognitive components [28]. The physiological aspects of anxiety include automatic responses of the body such as accelerated heart rate, increased sweating, and reflex activation of the autonomic nervous system [29]. The physiological responses produced by test anxiety are characterized by an activation of the autonomic nervous system, manifested by symptoms such as diarrhoea, palpitations, chest tightness, nausea and fainting [30].
From a cognitive perspective, anxiety is characterized by persistent worries, negative expectations and biases in information processing, which contribute to maintaining alertness to potential dangers [31,32]. Students may experience difficulty concentrating [33] and intrusive thoughts that interfere with the ability to recall and process new information [34,35] and solve problems during exams [33]. Finally, the avoidance of certain behaviors in an attempt to avoid anxiety-provoking situations, although it reduces anxiety in the short term, perpetuates the disorder by preventing the person from facing and evaluating their fears in a realistic manner [36]. Students adopt avoidance behaviors to avoid facing the exam, a tactic that involves dodging preparation for anticipated events, as termed by Rudaz et al. [37] and Torrano et al. [38].
Studies consistently report that girls report higher levels of general anxiety as well as test anxiety compared to their male peers [20,25,30,39,40]. Similarly, Nyroos et al. [41] report cross-cultural differences in the manifestation of different components of test anxiety. In their study, Nordic adolescents stand out for their use of the avoidance component, while Eastern adolescents scored highest on the physiological response. There was also an interaction between gender and culture. Thus, Nordic girls scored highest on autonomic anxiety, while their Asian counterparts scored lowest. In addition, Chinese male students scored highest on the cognitive component. Previous studies have also found that cognitive and emotional maturity significantly influence the way people understand and handle stress and interact with their environment; therefore, age is considered another determinant factor to be taken into account in the analysis of bullying and cyberbullying processes [42].
For many teachers, taking exams is the gold standard by which to check academic performance and, therefore, possible interferences that may affect the process and execution can have very negative as well as unfair and discriminating consequences for young students [43]. As indicated in previous sections, test anxiety is higher in girls than in their male peers, and this anxiety is positively associated with the presence of other emotional problems [44,45], school dropout, and even suicidal ideation [26,46].
Often, sustained bullying and cyberbullying behaviors lead to stress levels incompatible with the concentration aptitude required for test-taking [47,48]. Although the issues of bullying and school anxiety are of great interest to teachers and educational administrators, there is a paucity of research that examines the possible relationships between bullying/cyberbullying and test anxiety in school populations. An exception is the recent work of Schlesier et al. [20]. The results of their study showed that higher levels of victimization were associated with higher levels of test anxiety, which, in turn, appeared to lead to a higher number of days of school absence.
Given the lack of research, the aim of the present study was to analyze the association between bullying and cyberbullying and test anxiety and the risk of victims and aggressors of bullying and cyberbullying suffering from test anxiety in schoolchildren and adolescents. As boys are more involved in bullying (both as perpetrators and victims), while girls report higher rates of test anxiety, such relationships were examined for all participants and separately by gender. In each case, a positive association was hypothesized between bullying/cyberbullying (particularly in the role of victim) and the physiological, cognitive, and behavioral manifestations of test anxiety. As physical activity and body mass index have been associated with bullying/cyberbullying [49,50], and maternal education level has been associated with attitudes towards school and children’s academic performance [51,52], these variables were used as confounders.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Design and Participants

A total of 912 primary and secondary school students aged 10–16 years (mean age ± standard deviation: 13.43 ± 1.73 years; 52.7% girls and 47.3% boys) participated in this cross-sectional quantitative study. Students from seven educational centers in Andalusia (Spain) were surveyed. The centers were chosen by convenience, and the participants were distributed randomly and in proportion to the size of each class. Anthropometric and sociodemographic characteristics are detailed in Table 1. Boys were more physically active than girls (4.35 ± 1.75 vs. 3.64 ± 1.70; p < 0.001) and had a higher BMI (21.03 ± 3.99 vs. 20.45 ± 4.28, p = 0.034). Scores on physiological response (1.86 ± 0.76 vs. 1.57 ± 0.56; p < 0.001) and cognitive response to test anxiety (2.48 ± 0.97 vs. 1.96 ± 0.77; p < 0.001) were higher for girls.

2.2. Measures

Predictor/independent variables.
Bullying and cyberbullying.
The level of bullying was assessed using 14 items from Ortega-Ruiz et al.’s [53] Spanish version of the European Bullying Intervention Project Questionnaire. As an example, the following item will be shown (Someone has hit, kicked, or pushed me). On the other hand, the Spanish version of the European Cyberbullying Intervention Project Questionnaire (ECIPQ) [54] was used to assess cyberbullying. The second instrument includes 22 items (Someone has said bad words or insulted me using email, SMS, or WhatsApp). Reliability results are high for both bullying (Cronbach’s α victimization = 0.832; Cronbach’s α aggression = 0.811) and cyberbullying (Cronbach’s α cybervictimization = 0.869; Cronbach’s α cyberaggression = 0.875). Both questionnaires were administered individually and employ a Likert-type scale with a score ranging from 1 (never) to 5 (more than once a week). The items explore the frequency with which the described behaviors have occurred during the past two months. The averages of the individual questionnaires were calculated for further analysis.
Dependent variables.
Test anxiety.
The Examination Anxiety Questionnaire (CAEX-A) for compulsory education students [55] was used to measure test anxiety. This instrument includes 37 items and a factorial composition of three dimensions. Factor 1, physiological response, includes 20 items related to symptoms such as diarrhoea, palpitations, chest tightness, nausea, and fainting (During exams my hands sweat); factor 2, avoidance behaviors, employs three items, where the anxious motor response of flight to a test situation is analyzed (I get sick and make excuses for not taking a test); and factor 3, cognitive response, includes 14 items related to aspects such as difficulty concentrating and intrusive thoughts that interfere with the ability to process information, remember new information, and solve problems during exams (While I am taking the exam, I think I am doing very poorly). Responses are scored on a Likert-type scale with values ranging from 1 (not at all) to 5 (very much). An average was calculated for each of the factors included in the questionnaire. The reliability indices obtained using the Cronbach’s α statistic were as follows: physiological response, α = 0.897; avoidance behaviors, α = 0.823; and cognitive response, α = 0.792.
Confounding variables.
Age, mother’s education, BMI, weekly PA and academic performance.
The age and educational level of each participant’s mother were recorded using a sociodemographic data questionnaire. Academic performance was considered as the results for each student in the immediately preceding academic evaluation. BMI was calculated using the Quetelet formula: weight (kg)/height2 (m). To obtain weight and height measurements, an ASIMED® type B, class III digital scale and a SECA® 214 portable measuring rod (SECA Ltd., Hamburg, Germany) were used. Both measurements were taken in light clothing and without footwear. The level of weekly physical activity was assessed using the PACE+ Adolescent Physical Activity Measure [56]. This consists of two items that ask for the number of days on which the participants performed at least 60 min of MVPA during the last seven days and during a typical week (In the last 7 days, on how many of them did you do at least 60 min of physical activity?) The final score is obtained by averaging the two responses: (P1 + P2)/2). Its reliability index was Cronbach’s α = 0.751.

2.3. Procedure

Data collection was carried out during the corresponding academic period in the 2022/23 and 2023/24 academic years. The purpose and nature of the study were communicated verbally and in writing to students, parents and relatives/legal guardians. Authorization was obtained from the school management and physical education teachers. In order to preserve confidentiality and anonymity, the names of the participants were coded. Each student completed questionnaires on bullying, attitude towards exams, and a sociodemographic information table. During the completion of the questionnaires and weight and height measurements, a specialized researcher gave the instructions and controlled the time, while two research assistants responded to possible doubts and any possible disturbances (e.g., separation to guarantee the confidentiality of the answers, noise outside the classroom, operation of electronic tools or internet connection). Completion of all self-report measures required approximately 30 min. This study was approved by the Bioethics Commission of the University of Jaen (Spain) (reference NOV.22/2.PRY). The design took into account current Spanish legal regulations governing clinical research in humans (Royal Decree 561/1993 on clinical trials) as well as the fundamental principles established in the Declaration of Helsinki (2013, Brazil).

2.4. Statistical Analysis

Comparison of continuous and categorical variables between boys and girls was carried out using Student’s t-tests and χ2 tests, respectively (Table 1). The normality and homoscedasticity of the data were verified using the Kolmogorov-Smirnov and Levene tests, respectively. To study whether adolescents who had never been victims/offenders of bullying and cyberbullying presented lower levels of test anxiety than those participants who had been victims/offenders, an analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) was performed. Each dimension of test anxiety (physiological response, avoidance behaviors and cognitive response) was used as a dependent variable and bullying victimization, bullying aggression, cyberbullying victimization and cyberbullying aggression were entered as fixed factors. The bullying and cyberbullying values were dichotomized so that participants who stated that they had never been victims/offenders of bullying and/or cyberbullying (questionnaire score = 1) were labeled “never” and those who had been victims/offenders (questionnaire score = 2–5) were labeled “sometimes”. Because many comparison groups had different sample sizes, the effect size was calculated using Hedges’ ğ, where 0.2 was a small effect, 0.5 a medium effect, and 0.8 a large effect [57]. The percentage difference between groups was calculated as [(Large-measurement − small-measurement)/small-measurement] × 100. In order to examine the risk of being a victim or perpetrator of bullying and cyberbullying according to the scores obtained on the anxiety dimensions of the test, several binary logistic regression analyses were carried out. For the above, the dependent variables were dichotomized, taking the median as a reference, since there are several studies that use it for categorization, such as that by Kobel et al. [58]. Each dimension was classified as high ≥ median (risk group) vs. low < median (reference group). In all analyses, age, BMI, mother’s educational level, weekly MVPA, and academic performance were used as covariates. Analyses were performed separately for boys and girls. A 95% confidence level (p < 0.05) was used for all results. All calculations were performed with the statistical program SPSS, v. 25.0, for Windows (SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL, USA).

3. Results

3.1. Analysis of Covariance of Bullying and Cyberbullying Victimization with Respect to Test Anxiety (Physiological Response, Avoidance Behaviors, and Cognitive Response)

Young bullying victims (Figure 1a–c) showed significantly higher values than those students who had not been victims of bullying in physiological responses (diarrhoea, palpitations, chest tightness, nausea and fainting): 25.69% (1.44 ± 0.44 vs. 1.81 ± 0.74 a.u.) F(1, 714) = 36.563, p < 0.001, ğ = 0.531, 1-β = 0.999; and in cognitive responses (difficulty concentrating and thoughts interfering with the ability to process and solve problems): 33.14% (1.78 ± 0.672 vs. 2.37 ± 0.94 a.u.) F(1, 714) = 51.339, p < 0.001, ğ = 0.656, 1-β = 0.999 (Figure 1a–c). Results by gender showed that girls who were victimized by bullying had significantly higher values for all anxiety behaviors than those who were not victimized (all p < 0.004). No significant differences were found in any anxiety behavior in boys as a function of bullying victimization (all p > 0.05). On the other hand, cybervictimized adolescents showed higher scores than non-victims for all anxiety factors: physiological responses: 26.97% (1.52 ± 0.55 vs. 1.93 ± 0.76 a.u.) F(1, 714) = 66.815, p < 0.001, ğ = 0.606, 1-β = 0. 999; avoidance behaviors: 20.18% (1.14 ± 0.38 vs. 1.37 ± 0.73 a.u.) F(1, 714) = 25.211, p < 0.038, ğ = 0.381, 1-β = 0.999; and cognitive responses: 22.56% (1.95 ± 0.86 vs. 2.52 ± 0.91 a.u.) F(1, 714) = 76.576, p < 0.001, ğ = 0.489, 1-β = 0.999. Similarly, the results segmented by gender (boys and girls) were significant in all cases (all p < 0.001), except avoidance behaviors in girls (p = 0.067) (see Figure 1d–f).

3.2. Analysis of Covariance of Aggression in Bullying and Cyberbullying with Respect to Test Anxiety (Physiological Response, Avoidance Behaviors and Cognitive Response)

Boys and girls who reported committing aggression had higher scores than those who did not commit aggression on all dimensions of test anxiety: physiological responses: 21.05% (1.52 ± 0.48 vs. 1.84 ± 0.76 a.u.) F(1, 714) = 31.648, p < 0.001, ğ = 0.461, 1-β = 1.000; avoidance behaviors: 17.69% (1.13 ± 0.31 vs. 1.33 ± 0.68 a.u.) F(1, 714) = 13.849, p < 0.009, ğ = 0.333, 1-β = 0. 960; and cognitive responses: 22.56% (1.95 ± 0.83 vs. 2.39 ±0.93 a.u.) F(1, 714) = 38.950, p < 0.001, ğ = 0.487, 1-β = 1.000 (Figure 2a–c). The results, segmented by gender, showed that both male and female aggressors achieved higher scores on all anxiety dimensions with respect to their non-aggressor peers (all p < 0.032), except avoidance behaviors in girls (p = 0.126). Similarly, cyberbullying male and female aggressors presented higher values than non-aggressors in all anxiety factors: physiological responses: 22.64% (1.59 ± 0.57 vs. 1.95 ± 0.80 a.u.) F(1, 714) = 46.689, p < 0.001, ğ = 0.526, 1-β = 1.000; avoidance behaviors: 24.56% (1.14 ± 0.37 vs. 1.42 ± 0.78 a.u.) F(1, 714) = 33.932, p < 0.001, ğ = 0.472, 1-β = 1.000; and cognitive responses: 23.9% (2.05 ± 0.88 vs. 2.54 ± 0.92 a.u.) F(1, 714) = 52.709, p < 0.001, ğ = 0.545, 1-β = 1.000 (Figure 2d–f).

3.3. Binary Logistic Regression

Data showing the risk of exposure to bullying and cyberbullying victimization and aggression for test anxiety are set out in Table 2. Youths with high bullying victimization were 2.05 and 2.88 times more likely to have high physiological (odds ratio [OR] = 2.058, p < 0.001) and higher cognitive (OR = 2.884; p < 0.001) anxiety responses to exams, respectively, and were thus at greater risk than non-victims. The results, segmented by gender, showed that girls and boys with high bullying victimization had a higher risk of test anxiety in almost all factors, especially girls (OR = 2.22, OR = 1.68 and OR = 4.03), for physiological response, avoidance behaviors, and cognitive response, respectively (all p < 0.023). In turn, cyberbullying victims showed 8.31, 5.11, and 21.55 times higher risk than non-victims for high levels of physiological responding, avoidance behaviors, and cognitive responses to tests, respectively (OR = 8.311, OR = 5.106 and OR = 21.545) (all p < 0.001). The data also showed that boys and girls with high levels of cyberbullying victimization were, respectively, 20.03 and 41.45 times more at risk for cognitive responses involving difficulty concentrating and thoughts that interfere with the ability to process and solve problems (all p < 0.05).
For aggressors, the risk of exposure was also significantly higher in all dimensions of test anxiety for both bullying and cyberbullying: physiological response (OR = 1.724 and OR 6.560, respectively); avoidance behaviors (OR = 2.341 and OR = 6.479, respectively) and cognitive responses (OR = 2.580 and OR = 14.431, respectively) (in all cases, p < 0.001). The results, segmented by gender, showed that girls and boys with high levels of bullying aggression had a higher risk of test anxiety on all factors (OR = 1.892, p = 0.023 for the lowest). However, the highest risk for anxiety was achieved by male cyberbullying aggressors for both physiological and cognitive responses to exams (OR = 14.29 and OR = 26.91) and by female aggressors for cognitive responses (OR = 18.03) (all p < 0.001).

4. Discussion

The present study aimed to determine the association that bullying and cyberbullying victimization and aggression, along with their respective risk, have with test anxiety. The main results show that victims of bullying and cyberbullying have significantly higher physiological and cognitive responses, and, in the case of cyberbullying, they also demonstrate increased avoidance behaviors. Both bullying and cyberbullying perpetrators have higher values in all dimensions of test anxiety. In general, both victims and aggressors suffer a high risk of test anxiety, which is more pronounced in cyberbullying victims, particularly in terms of physiological and cognitive responses. Recent studies have highlighted the correlation between bullying and additional emotional problems such as depression, which could be exacerbating anxiety in these scenarios [59,60]. Overall, test anxiety not only decreases educational progress but also affects students’ mental health and wellbeing, impacting their ability to cope with assessments and their long-term academic performance [61,62].

4.1. Bullying and Cyberbullying Victimization and Test Anxiety

Our study evidences a significant increase in physiological symptoms (diarrhoea, palpitations or chest tightness) cognitive symptoms (such as problems concentrating and recalling information), and avoidance behavior in girls exposed to traditional forms of bullying. In the case of boys, no differences were observed in the different components of test anxiety according to their victimization status. A different pattern of results was obtained for the phenomenon of cybervictimization. In this domain, both boys and girls who reported being cybervictimized by their peers reported higher symptoms of test anxiety, with the exception of the avoidance component in the case of girls.
Specifically, cyberbullying victims experience a 26.97% increase in physiological responses. Girls face a 31-fold increased risk of suffering the described negative physiological effects in examination contexts compared to those who do not experience cyberbullying. Furthermore, cyberbullying victims, particularly boys, demonstrate an increase in these avoidance behaviors of 20.18%, with a risk percentage that is five times higher than that of non-victimized students. Finally, girls and boys affected by cyberbullying show a 22.56% increase in concentrating and recalling information compared to their unaffected peers.
Our findings are consistent with those of Anderson et al. [12] and Irwin et al. [14], who found that victimization during the school years is directly associated with vulnerability to a greater number of anxious–depressive symptoms [63,64]. This increased school anxiety has been linked to the presence of additional emotional problems [44,45], school disaffection and absenteeism [20], and suicidal ideation [26]. Thus, victimization via the aggressive acts of peers is directly associated with test anxiety, a fact that is of particular concern for girls who feel attacked in face-to-face interactions [20,26,39] as it could lead to the presence of more severe emotional and behavioral problems. This last finding contradicts the findings of Khong et al. [65] and Carvalho et al. [66], who found no significant differences between the two forms of bullying, suggesting that traditional bullying and cyberbullying have similar negative effects on victims. The observed differential relationship is of particular interest because, according to Stewart-Tufescu et al. [24], although girls are less involved in bullying, the effects of victimization are longer-lasting and more harmful than those experienced by their male peers.

4.2. Bullying and Cyberbullying Perpetration and Test Anxiety

Bullying and cyberbullying aggressors also show considerable increases in physiological responses (21.05% and 22.64%) and dysfunctional cognitive responses (22.56% and 23.9%), respectively, suggesting that anxiety and stress associated with aggressive behavior may also impair their academic performance. These results can be explained, in part, by the power dynamics and constant social tension that aggressors experience, the behavior of whom, while it may provide a temporary sense of dominance, also leads to stress and possible long-term psychological repercussions [67,68]. Previous studies corroborate our findings, reporting that stress associated with bullying can significantly disrupt cognitive function, impeding students’ ability to process and retain new information and solve problems effectively [69,70].
Anxiety generated by bullying can lead to intrusive thoughts, further interfering with cognitive abilities during exams [71,72]. In addition, other evidence suggests that bullies may experience internal conflict and anxiety due to dissonance between their aggressive behavior and social norms, potentially increasing their anxiety in evaluative contexts [73]. The manifestation of symptoms of a physiological and cognitive nature associated with bullying and cyberbullying perpetration must be analyzed with caution because additional factors, such as the type of exam, organization, study time management and the number of students present in the evaluative test must be taken into account [74].
On the other hand, only boys who were perpetrators of bullying were found to engage in significantly higher levels of avoidance than their uninvolved peers, while in the case of cyberbullying, both boys and girls showed an even higher percentage or risk increase in avoidance: about six times higher than that of non-aggressors. This differential relationship between traditional forms of aggression and avoidance behaviors as a function of gender may be due to girls being less involved in the perpetration of violent acts through direct interaction [19,20,21], or the fact that girls may feel more justified in their aggressive behavior towards peers, a justification that would act as a stress buffer or mitigator. In our study, the differential relationship was not observed when boys and girls bullied their peers using remote media.

4.3. Limitations and Strengths

The study presented here has a number of limitations. First, the use of a convenience sample (Andalusian primary and secondary school students aged 10–16) may limit the generalizability of the findings to older students or contexts. Second, the cross-sectional nature of the design limits our ability to infer causality between bullying and anxiety. Future research should consider longitudinal designs and expand the sample to different cultural contexts to deepen our understanding of these dynamics and test the universality of the findings. Third, the use of self-report measures may be considered an additional limitation as the information provided by the participant may not reflect their true behavior due to inaccurate recall or social desirability.
However, the strengths of this study include the large sample size (a total of 912 students in primary and secondary education) and the use of measures that have been shown to be reliable and valid in previous studies. The gendered examination of the relationships between traditional bully and cyberbullying and the dimensions that make up test anxiety can be considered a further strength given the limited amount of research that has addressed this issue. Finally, the inclusion of a number of confounding variables in the outcome analysis strategies (body mass index, maternal education level, physical activity, and academic performance) helps to make the observed relationships less ambiguous.

5. Conclusions

The present study highlights the impact of bullying and cyberbullying on test anxiety in Spanish primary and secondary school students. The results show that acts of cyberbullying, whether in the role of victim or perpetrator, are directly related to the different components of test anxiety, with the exception of avoidance reactions, regardless of the gender of the participant, as observed in previous studies [75,76]. Nevertheless, a different relationship was observed among victims of traditional bullying. In these circumstances, the relationship between feeling bullied and experiencing test anxiety was only evident among girls, which seems to place them in a situation of greater vulnerability. As indicated above, female victimization, although less frequent, has longer-lasting and harmful consequences.
Therefore, our findings highlight the need not only to implement intervention strategies in the school environment aimed at preventing and reducing bullying and cyberbullying but also to manage anxiety and its physical and cognitive manifestations in both victims and aggressors. To this end, it is suggested that educational institutions implement policies and protocols against bullying and cyberbullying, including specific surveillance and prevention measures to create safe environments and support both victims and aggressors [77].
Furthermore, efforts should focus on the acquisition and development of social and emotional skills in boys and girls. In this sense, Schlesier et al. [20] advocate the implementation of cognitive–behavioral interventions from a social information processing perspective, which include a set of guidelines (e.g., encoding behavior, interpreting signals, clarifying goals, deciding on the appropriate response, and implementing that response) to help students manage and cope with challenging situations such as bullying or anxiety. Table 3 shows some actions and recommendations that could contribute to the development and teaching of study and anxiety management strategies to support affected students and improve their academic performance.
Given the limited research that has examined the relationship between bullying and test anxiety, it is suggested that more research should be conducted on the relationship between bullying and test anxiety, including that of older students (prior to the start of university education). In addition, the inclusion of mediating variables such as resilience, mental toughness, self-esteem or perceived social support (from family, teachers or peers) would allow us to explore whether any of these cognitive-emotional mechanisms help to mitigate the detrimental effects of bullying on anxiety in educational contexts.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, A.R.-M. and A.R.-A.; methodology and formal analysis, A.R.-M. and M.J.D.l.T.-C.; data curation, A.R.-M. and A.R.-A.; writing—original draft preparation, A.R.-M., M.J.D.l.T.-C., A.R.-A. and S.S.-M.; writing—review and editing, A.R.-M., M.J.D.l.T.-C., A.R.-A. and S.S.-M.; supervision, M.J.D.l.T.-C. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was supported by funding from the Ministry of Science and Innovation of Spain (grant number: PID2022-137432OB-I00). Support was also received from the University Teacher Training Program, implemented by the Ministry of Education, Culture and Sport of the Government of Spain [reference: AP-2020-03217].

Institutional Review Board Statement

This study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki and approved by the Ethics Committee of the University of Jaen (Spain) (protocol code: NOV.22/2.PRY; approved on 13 January 2023) for studies involving humans. Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in this study and from their guardians.

Informed Consent Statement

Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in this study.

Data Availability Statement

Data are unavailable due to privacy restrictions.

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank all participants and centers involved in this study.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. Armitaje, R. Bullying in children: Impact on child health. BMJ Paediatr. Open 2021, 5, e000939. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [PubMed Central]
  2. United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO). New Data Reveal That One Out of Three Teens Is Bullied Worldwide; UNESCO: Paris, France, 2019; Available online: https://www.unesco.org/en/articles/new-data-reveal-one-out-three-teens-bullied-worldwide (accessed on 25 April 2024).
  3. Wang, X.; Shi, L.; Ding, Y.; Liu, B.; Chen, H.; Zhou, W.; Yu, R.; Zhang, P.; Huang, X.; Yang, Y.; et al. School bullying, bystander behavior, and mental health among adolescents: The mediating roles of self-efficacy and coping styles. Healthcare 2024, 12, 1738. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Cretu, D.M.; Morandau, F. Bullying and cyberbullying: A bibliometric analysis of three decades of research in education. Educ. Rev. 2022, 1, 371–404. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Marín Suelves, D.; Rodríguez Guimeráns, A.; Romero Rodrigo, M.M.; López Gómez, S. Cyberbullying: Education Research. Educ. Sci. 2023, 13, 763. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Zhang, W.; Huang, S.; Lam, L.; Evans, R.; Zhu, C. Cyberbullying definitions and measurements in children and adolescents: Summarizing 20 years of global efforts. Front. Public Health 2022, 10, 1000504. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Sánchez-Domínguez, J.P.; Raymundo, L.M.; Terrero, J.Y.T. Características de ciberbullying en adolescentes escolarizados. Dilemas Contemp. Educ. Política Valores. 2022, 92. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Lareki, A.; Altuna, J.; Martínez-de-Morentin, J.I. Fake digital identity and cyberbullying. Media Cult. Soc. 2023, 45, 338–353. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Maftei, A.; Holman, A.C.; Merlici, I.A. Using fake news as means of cyber-bullying: The link with compulsive internet use and online moral disengagement. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2022, 127, 107032. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. González-González, E.N.; Peña-Ramos, M.O.; Vera-Noriega, J.Á. Validación de una escala de roles de víctimas y agresores asociados al acoso escolar. Electron. J. Res. Educ. Psychol. 2017, 15, 224–239. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Gómez-Nashiki, A. Cyberbullying. argumentos, acciones y decisiones de acosadores y víctimas en escuelas secundarias y preparatorias de Colima, México. Rev. Colomb. De Educ. 2021, 1, 1–23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Anderson, J.R.; Mayes, T.L.; Fuller, A.; Hughes, J.L.; Minhajuddin, A.; Trivedi, M.H. Experiencing bullying’s impact on adolescent depression and anxiety: Mediating role of adolescent resilience. J. Affect. Disord. 2022, 310, 477–483. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Arslan, G.; Allen, K.A. School victimization, school belongingness, psychological well-being, and emotional problems in adolescents. Child Indic. Res. 2021, 14, 1501–1517. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Irwin, A.; Li, J.; Craig, W.; Hollenstein, T. The role of shame in the relation between peer victimization and mental health outcomes. J. Interpers. Violence 2016, 34, 156–181. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Machimbarrena, J.M.; Álvarez-Bardón, A.; León-Mejía, A.; Gutiérrez-Ortega, M.; Casadiego-Cabrales, A.; González-Cabrera, J. Loneliness and personality profiles involved in bullying victimization and aggresive behavior. Sch. Ment. Health 2019, 11, 807–818. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Geoffroy, M.C.; Boivin, M.; Arseneault, L.; Turecki, G.; Vitaro, F.; Brendgen, M.; Côté, S.M. Associations between peer victimization and suicidal ideation and suicide attempt during adolescence: Results from a prospective population-based birth cohort. J. Am. Acad. Child Adolesc. Psychiatry 2016, 55, 99–105. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Zhong, M.; Huang, X.; Huebner, E.S.; Tian, L. Assocaition between bullying victimization and depressive symptoms in children: The mediating role of self-esteem. J. Affect. Disord. 2021, 294, 322–328. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  18. Kowalski, R.M.; Giumetti, G.W.; Schroeder, A.N.; Lattanner, M.R. Bullying in the digital age: A critical review and meta-analysis of cyberbullying research among youth. Psychol. Bull. 2014, 140, 1073–1137. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  19. Cosma, A.; Bjereld, Y.; Elgar, F.J.; Clive-Richardson, D.P.; Bilz, L.; Craig, W.; Augustine, L.; Molcho, M.; Malinowska-Cieslik, M.; Walsh, S.D. Gender differences in bullying reflect societal gender inequality: A multilevel study with adolescents in 46 countries. J. Adolesc. Health 2022, 71, 601–608. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Schlesier, J.; Vierbuchen, M.C.; Matzner, M. Bullied, anxious and skipping school? The interplay of school bullying, school anxiety and school absenteeism considering gender and grade level. Front. Educ. 2023, 8, 951216. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Wang, X.; Gao, Y.; Chen, B. Gender differences in cyberbullying tolerance, traditional bullying victimization and their associations with cyberbullying perpetration among Beijing adolescents. Child Fam. Soc. Work 2023, 1, 1–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Slonje, R.; Smith, P.K. Cyberbullying: Another main type of bullying? Scand. J. Psychol. 2008, 49, 147–154. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  23. Markkanen, I.; Välimaa, R.; Kannas, L. Forms of bullying and associations between school perceptions and being bullied among Finnish secondary school students aged 13 and 15. Int. J. Bullying Prev. 2021, 3, 24–33. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Stewart-Tufescu, A.; Salmon, S.; Taillieu, T.; Fortier, J.; Afifi, T.O. Victimization experiences and mental health outcomes among grades 7 to 12 students in Manitoba Canada. Int. J. Bullying Prev. 2021, 3, 1–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Wieczerkowski, W.; Nickel, H.; Janowski, A.; Fittkau, B.; Rauer, W.; Petermann, F. Angstfragebogen für Schüler (AFS), 7th ed.; Hogrefe: Göttingen, Germany, 2016. [Google Scholar]
  26. Aydin, U. Test anxiety: Do gender and school-level matter? Eur. J. Educ. Res. 2017, 6, 187–197. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Mazzone, L.; Ducci, F.; Scoto, M.C.; Passaniti, E.; D’Arrigo, V.G.; Vitiello, B. he role of anxiety symptoms in school performance in a community sample of children and adolescents. BMC Public Health 2007, 7, 347. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Liebert, R.M.; Morris, L.W. Cognitive and emotional components of test anxiety: A distinction and some initial data. Psychol. Rep. 1967, 20, 975–978. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  29. Bian, W.; Zhang, X.; Dong, Y. Autonomic nervous system response patterns of test-anxious individuals to evaluative stress. Front. Psychol. 2022, 13, 824406. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Pittig, A.; Boschet, J.M.; Glück, V.M.; Schneider, K. Elevated costly avoidance in anxiety disorders: Patients show little downregulation of acquired avoidance in face of competing rewards for approach. Depress. Anxiety 2021, 38, 361–371. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Castañeda, A.E.; Tuulio-Henriksson, A.; Marttunen, M.; Suvisaari, J.; Lönnqvist, J. A review on cognitive impairments in depressive and anxiety disorders with a focus on young adults. J. Affect. Disord. 2008, 106, 1–27. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Tobias, M.R.; Ito, T.A. Anxiety increases sensitivity to errors and negative feedback over time. Biol. Psychol. 2021, 162, 108092. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Putwain, D.W.; Von der Embse, N.P. Cognitive–behavioral intervention for test anxiety in adolescent students: Do benefits extend to school-related wellbeing and clinical anxiety. Anxiety Stress Coping 2021, 34, 22–36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  34. Gustavson, D.E.; du Pont, A.; Whisman, M.A.; Miyake, A. Evidence for transdiagnostic repetitive negative thinking and its association with rumination, worry, and depression and anxiety symptoms: A commonality analysis. Collabra Psychol. 2018, 4, 13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Owens, M.; Stevenson, J.; Hadwin, J.A.; Norgate, R. When does anxiety help or hinder cognitive test performance? The role of working memory capacity. Br. J. Psychol. 2014, 105, 92–101. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Gordon, D.; Heimberg, R.G.; Tellez, M.; Ismail, A.I. A critical review of approaches to the treatment of dental anxiety in adults. J. Anxiety Disord. 2013, 27, 365–378. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Rudaz, M.; Ledermann, T.; Margraf, J.; Becker, E.S.; Craske, M.G. The moderating role of avoidance behavior on anxiety over time: Is there a difference between social anxiety disorder and specific phobia? PLoS ONE 2017, 12, e0180298. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Torrano, R.; Ortigosa, J.M.; Riquelme, A.; Méndez, F.J.; López-Pina, J.A. Test anxiety in adolescent students: Different responses according to the components of anxiety as a function of sociodemographic and academic variables. Front. Psychol. 2020, 11, 612270. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  39. Cunha, M.; Paiva, M.J. Text anxiety in adolescents: The role of self-criticism and acceptance and mindfulness skills. Span. J. Psychol. 2012, 15, 533–543. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  40. Schodt, K.B.; Quiroz, S.I.; Wheeler, B.; Hall, D.L.; Silva, Y.N. Cyberbullying and mental health in adults: The moderating role of social media use and gender. Front. Psychiatry 2021, 12, 674298. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Nyroos, M.; Korhonen, J.; Peng, A.; Linnanmäki, K.; Svens-Liavag, C.; Bagger, A.; Sjöberg, G. Cultural and gender differences in experiences and expression of test anxiety among Chinese, Finnish, and Swedish grade 3 pupils. Int. J. Sch. Educ. Psychol. 2015, 3, 37–48. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. El Zaatari, W.; Maalouf, I. How the Bronfenbrenner bio-ecological system theory explains the development of students’ sense of belonging to school? SAGE Open 2022, 12, 1–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Evensen, M. Adolescent mental health problems, behaviour penalties, and distributional variation in educational achievement. Eur. Sociol. Rev. 2019, 35, 474–490. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Camacho-Morles, J.; Slemp, G.R.; Pekrun, R.; Loderer, K.; Hou, H.; Oades, L.G. Activity achievement emotions and academic performance: A meta-analysis. Educ. Psychol. Rev. 2021, 33, 1051–1095. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Zhu, G.; Zheng, J.; Ratner, K.; Li, Q.; Estevez, M.; Burrow, A.L. How trait and state positive emotions, negative emotions, and self-regulation relate to adolescents’ perceived daily learning progress. Contemp. Educ. Psychol. 2024, 77, 102275. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Raknes, S.; Pallesen, S.; Himle, J.A.; Bjaastad, J.F.; Wergeland, G.J.; Hoffart, A.; Dyregnov, K.; Haland, A.T.; Mowatt-Hagland, B.S. Quality of live in anxious adolescents. Child Adolesc. Psychiatry Ment. Health 2017, 11, 33. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Boulton, M.J.; Macaulay, P.J. Does authentic self-esteem buffer the negative effects of bullying victimization on social anxiety and classroom concentration? Evidence from a short-term longitudinal study with early adolescents. Br. J. Educ. Psychol. 2023, 93, 500–512. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Cañas, E.; Estévez, E.; Martínez-Monteagudo, M.C.; Delgado, B. Emotional adjustment in victims and perpetrators of cyberbullying and traditional bullying. Soc. Psychol. Educ. 2020, 23, 917–942. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. García-Hermoso, A.; Hormazábal-Aguayo, I.; Oriol-Granado, X.; Fernández-Vergara, O.; del Pozo Cruz, B. Bullying victimization, physical inactivity and sedentary behavior among children and adolescents: A meta-analysis. Int. J. Behav. Nutr. Phys. Act. 2020, 17, 1–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Lee, B.; Jeong, S.; Roh, M. Association between body mass index and health outcomes among adolescents: The mediating role of traditional and cyber bullying victimization. BMC Public Health 2018, 18, 674. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Weis, M.; Trommsdorff, G.; Muñoz, L.; González, R. Maternal education and children’s school achievement: The roles of values, parenting, and behavior regulation. J. Child Fam. Stud. 2023, 32, 691–703. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Yu, S. The influence of mothers’ educational level on children’s comprehensive quality. J. Educ. Humanit. Soc. Sci. 2023, 8, 1264–1272. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Ortega-Ruiz, R.; Del Rey, R.; Casas, J.A. Evaluar el bullying y el cyberbullying validación española del EBIP-Q y del ECIP-Q. Psicol. Educ. 2016, 22, 71–79. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Del Rey, R.; Casas, J.A.; Ortega-Ruiz, R.; Schultze-Krumbholz, A.; Scheithauer, H.; Smith, P.; Thompson, F.; Barkoukis, V.; Tsorbatzoudis, H.; Brighi, A.; et al. Structural validation and cross-cultural robustness of the European Cyberbullying Intervention Project Questionnaire. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2015, 50, 141–147. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Torrano-Martínez, R.; Ortigosa-Quiles, J.M.; Riquelme-Marín, A.; López-Pina, A.J. Propiedades psicométricas de un cuestionario para la evaluación de la ansiedad ante los exámenes en adolescentes. Behav. Psychol. 2020, 28, 245–263. [Google Scholar]
  56. Prochaska, J.J.; Sallis, J.F.; Long, B. A physical activity screening measure for use with adolescents in primary care. Arch. Pediatr. Adolesc. Med. 2001, 155, 554–559. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Martínez-López, E.J.; De La Torre-Cruz, M.J.; Suarez-Manzano, S.; Ruiz-Ariza, A. Analysis of the effect size of overweight in muscular strength tests among adolescents. Reference values according to sex, age and BMI. J. Strength Cond. Res. 2017, 32, 1404–1414. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Kobel, S.; Wartha, O.; Amberger, J.; Dreyhaupt, J.; Feather, K.E.; Steinacker, J.M. Is adherence to physical activity and screen media guidelines associated with a reduced risk of sick days among primary school children? J. Pediatr. Perinatol. Child Health 2022, 6, 401–425. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Eyuboglu, M.; Duman, S.; Özgür, H. Bullying involvement, anxiety, and depression in adolescence: A cross-sectional study. J. Adolesc. Health 2021, 69, 100–108. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Martínez-Monteagudo, M.C.; Delgado, B.; Díaz-Herrero, Á.; García-Fernández, J.M. Cyberbullying, depressive symptoms, and academic performance in secondary education students: A longitudinal study. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2020, 111, 106402. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Jerrim, J. Test anxiety: Is it associated with performance in high-stakes examinations? Oxf. Rev. Educ. 2023, 49, 321–341. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Roick, J.; Ringeisen, T. Self-efficacy, test anxiety, and academic success: A longitudinal validation. Int. J. Educ. Res. 2017, 83, 84–93. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Martínez-Monteagudo, M.C.; Delgado, B.; García-Fernández, J.M.; Ruíz-Esteban, C. Cyberbullying in the university setting. Relationship with emotional problems and adaptation to the university. Front. Psychol. 2020, 10, 510698. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  64. Martínez-Monteagudo, M.C.; Delgado, B.; Inglés, C.J.; Escortell, R. Cyberbullying and social anxiety: A latent class analysis among Spanish adolescents. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, 406. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  65. Khong, J.Z.; Tan, Y.R.; Elliott, J.M.; Fung, D.S.S.; Sourander, A.; Ong, S.H. Traditional victims and cybervictims: Prevalence, overlap, and association with mental health among adolescents in Singapore. Sch. Ment. Health 2020, 12, 145–155. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Carvalho, M.; Branquinho, C.; de Matos, M.G. Cyberbullying and bullying: Impact on psychological symptoms and well-being. Child Indic. Res. 2021, 14, 435–452. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Pedditzi, M.L.; Fadda, R.; Striano Skoler, T.; Lucarelli, L. Mentalizing emotions and social cognition in bullies and victims. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19, 2410. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Santoyo, D.; Frías, S. Acoso escolar en México: Actores involucrados y sus características. Rev. Latinoam. 2014, 44, 3–41. [Google Scholar]
  69. Menken, M.S.; Isaiah, A.; Liang, H.; Rivera, P.R.; Cloak, C.C.; Reeves, G.; Lever, N.A.; Chang, L. Peer victimization (bullying) on mental health, behavioral problems, cognition, and academic performance in preadolescent children in the ABCD Study. Front. Psychol. 2022, 13, 925727. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Palamarchuk, I.S.; Vaillancourt, T. Integrative brain dynamics in childhood bullying victimization: Cognitive and emotional convergence associated with stress psychopathology. Front. Integr. Neurosci. 2022, 16, 782154. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Klug, K.; Tolgou, T.; Schilbach, M.; Rohrmann, S. Intrusions in test anxiety. Curr. Psychol. 2021, 40, 2290–2300. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Kollárik, M.; Heinzel, C.V.; Miché, M.; Lieb, R.; Wahl, K. Exam-related unwanted intrusive thoughts and related neutralizing behaviors: Analogues to obsessions and compulsions. PLoS ONE 2022, 17, e0270692. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Kilag, O.K.; Diano Jr, F.; Bravante, D.; Blanco, G.M.; Abendan, C.F.; Gepitulan, P.M. Understanding the perception of bullying: A study of high school students’ discourse on peer aggression. Excell. Int. Multi-Discip. J. Educ. 2023, 1, 106–117. [Google Scholar]
  74. Álvarez-Hernández, J.; Aguilar-Parra, J.M.; Fernández-Campoy, J.M.; Salguero-García, D.; Pérez-Gallardo, E.R. El estrés ante los exámenes en los estudiantes universitarios. Propuesta de intervención. Int. J. Dev. Educ. Psychol. 2013, 2, 179–187. [Google Scholar]
  75. Esquivel, F.A.; López, I.L.D.L.G.; Benavides, A.D. Emotional impact of bullying and cyber bullying: Perceptions and effects on students. Rev. Caribeña Cienc. Soc. 2023, 12, 367–383. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. Eyuboglu, M.; Eyuboglu, D.; Pala, S.C.; Oktar, D.; Demirtas, Z.; Arslantas, D.; Unsal, A. Traditional school bullying and cyberbullying: Prevalence, the effect on mental health problems and self-harm behavior. Psychiatry Res. 2021, 297, 113730. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. Cembreros-Castaño, D.; Moraleda-Ruano, Á.; Nieto-Márquez, N.L. Parental perceived usefulness on a school-integrated app to prevent bullying and eating disorders. Educ. Sci. 2024, 14, 230. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  78. Foody, M.; Samara, M. Considering mindfulness techniques in school-based anti-bullying programmes. J. New Approaches Educ. Res. 2018, 7, 3–9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. Coelho, V.A.; Marchante, M.; Romao, A.M. Adolescents’ trajectories of social anxiety and social withdrawal: Are they influenced by traditional bullying and cyberbullying roles? Contemp. Educ. Psychol. 2022, 69, 102053. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Gohal, G.; Alqassim, A.; Eltyeb, E.; Rayyani, A.; Hakami, B.; Al Faqih, A.; Hakami, A.; Qadri, A.; Mahfouz, M. Prevalence and related risks of cyberbullying and its effects on adolescent. BMC Psychiatry 2023, 23, 39. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  81. Paulmony, R.; Vasanthakumari, S.; Singh, B.; Almashaqbeh, H.A.; Kumar, T.; Ramesh, P. The impact of bullying on academic performance of students in the case of parent communication. Int. J. Early Child. Spec. Educ. 2022, 14, 2325–2334. [Google Scholar]
  82. Schneider, J.; King, R. The effects of mindfulness-based interventions on students’ mindfulness, anxiety, and stress according to a range of self-report scales. Mindfulness 2018, 9, 466–478. [Google Scholar]
  83. Marshall, S.L.; Parker, P.D.; Ciarrochi, J.; Sahdra, B.; Jackson, C.J.; Heaven, P.C.L. Self-compassion protects against the negative effects of low self-esteem: A longitudinal study in a large adolescent sample. Personal. Individ. Differ. 2019, 143, 36–42. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  84. Xia, T.; Liao, J.; Deng, Y.; Li, L. Cyberbullying victimization and social anxiety: Mediating effects with moderation. Sustainability 2023, 15, 9978. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  85. Zhou, J.; Zhao, H.; Zou, Y. Cyberbullying and traditional bullying victimization, depressive symptoms, and suicidal ideation among Chinese early adolescents: Cognitive reappraisal and emotion invalidation as moderators. Soc. Sci. Comput. Rev. 2023, 1, 512–534. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Education 14 00999 g001
Figure 1. Means and error bars for all participants and differentiated by gender in the dimensions that compose test anxiety (physiological response, avoidance behavior and cognitive response). (a–c) distinguish between victims and non-victims of traditional bullying. (d–f) distinguish between victims and non-victims in cyberbullying.
Figure 1. Means and error bars for all participants and differentiated by gender in the dimensions that compose test anxiety (physiological response, avoidance behavior and cognitive response). (a–c) distinguish between victims and non-victims of traditional bullying. (d–f) distinguish between victims and non-victims in cyberbullying.
Education 14 00999 g001
Education 14 00999 g002aEducation 14 00999 g002b
Figure 2. Means and error bars for all participants and differentiated by gender in the dimensions that compose test anxiety (physiological response, avoidance behavior and cognitive response). (a–c) distinguish between perpetrators and non-perpetrators of traditional bullying. (d–f) distinguish between perpetrators and non-perpetrators in cyberbullying.
Figure 2. Means and error bars for all participants and differentiated by gender in the dimensions that compose test anxiety (physiological response, avoidance behavior and cognitive response). (a–c) distinguish between perpetrators and non-perpetrators of traditional bullying. (d–f) distinguish between perpetrators and non-perpetrators in cyberbullying.
Education 14 00999 g002aEducation 14 00999 g002b
Table 1. Biometric characteristics, the sociodemographic data of participants, mean MVPA, bullying and cyberbullying variables, physiological response to anxiety, avoidance behaviors, and cognitive responses to anxiety segmented by gender.
Table 1. Biometric characteristics, the sociodemographic data of participants, mean MVPA, bullying and cyberbullying variables, physiological response to anxiety, avoidance behaviors, and cognitive responses to anxiety segmented by gender.
All
(n = 912)		Boys
(n = 431)		Girls
(n = 481)
VariablesMeanSDMeanSDMeanSDp
Age (years)13.431.7313.431.7513.431.710.964
BMI (kg/m2)20.724.1521.033.9920.454.280.034
Mother’s school level (%) 0.030
 No studies5.4%5.2%5.6%
 Primary studies (EGB)13.5%13.9%13.2%
 Secondary studies (BUP)14.4%11.6%16.8%
 Professional training13.2%12.1%14.1%
 University studies32.5%30.7%34.1%
 N/C21%26.5%16.2%
Mean MVPA3.971.764.351.753.641.70<0.001
Academic performance6.861.616.761.596.941.520.123
Bullying victimization 1.800.781.770.781.830.790.211
Bullying aggression1.520.641.550.651.490.630.148
Cyberbullying victimization 1.260.471.260.471.270.480.628
Cyberbullying aggression 1.210.471.220.461.210.470.672
Physiological response to anxiety1.710.691.570.561.860.76<0.001
Avoidance behaviors1.240.571.230.571.250.580.688
Cognitive response to anxiety2.240.921.960.772.480.97<0.001
Values are presented as means and standard deviations, or percentage. BMI = body mass index; SD = standard deviation; MVPA = moderate vigorous physical activity.
Table 2. OR and 95% CI for levels of victimization/aggression in bullying and cyberbullying according to dimensions of test anxiety. Physiological responses, avoidance behaviors, and cognitive responses were included in the regression as categorical variables (low vs. high). OR was adjusted for age, body mass index, mother’s educational level, average weekly physical activity, and average academic performance. OR: odds ratio; CI: confidence interval.
Table 2. OR and 95% CI for levels of victimization/aggression in bullying and cyberbullying according to dimensions of test anxiety. Physiological responses, avoidance behaviors, and cognitive responses were included in the regression as categorical variables (low vs. high). OR was adjusted for age, body mass index, mother’s educational level, average weekly physical activity, and average academic performance. OR: odds ratio; CI: confidence interval.
All (912)Boys (431)Girls (481)
NpOR95%CINpOR95%CINpOR95%CI
Bullying victimization
Physiological responseLow438 1Referent244 1Referent194 1Referent
High452<0.0012.0581.636–2.5881740.0132.0551.485–2.844278<0.0012.2251.579–0.133
Avoidance behaviorsLow696 1Referent333 1Referent363 Referent
High2160.0631.1310.866–1.543980.3311.1340.822–1.6331180.0231.6830.217–2.326
Cognitive responseLow450 1Referent269 1Referent181 Referent
High447<0.0012.8842.234–3.7241550.0391.5221.165–1.968292<0.0014.0392.633–0.197
Bullying aggression
Physiological responseLow438 1Referent244 1Referent194 Referent
High452<0.0011.7241.325–2.243174<0.0012.1331.452–3.1332780.0231.8921.241–0.883
Avoidance behaviorsLow696 1Referent333 1Referent363 Referent
High216<0.0012.3411.780–3.07998<0.0012.1481.471–3.136118<0.0012.7331.791–4.169
Cognitive responseLow450 1Referent269 1Referent181 Referent
High447<0.0012.5801.908–3.489155<0.0012.8651.885–4.354292<0.0014.776 2.644–8.624
Cyberbullying victimization
Physiological responseLow438 1Referent244 1Referent194 Referent
High452<0.0018.3114.610–14.983174<0.00115.4296.111–38.957278<0.0015.7242.585–12.673
Avoidance behaviorsLow696 1Referent333 1Referent363 Referent
High216<0.0015.1063.358–7.76698<0.0015.3412.829–10.084118<0.0014.0223.815–7.959
Cognitive responseLow450 1Referent269 1Referent181 Referent
High447<0.00121.5459.842–47.164155<0.00120.0307.154–56.080292<0.00141.4529.628–78.463
Cyberbullying aggression
Physiological responseLow438 1Referent244 1Referent194 Referent
High452<0.0016.5603.617–11.899174<0.00114.2965.757–35.684278<0.0015.0432.115–12.026
Avoidance behaviorsLow696 1Referent333 1Referent363 Referent
High216<0.0016.4793.922–10.70298<0.0018.2853.854–17.808118<0.0013.7071.380–9.309
Cognitive responseLow450 1Referent269 1Referent181 Referent
High447<0.00114.4316.455–32.263155<0.00126.9128.504–85.162292<0.00118.0344.567–71.212
Table 3. Study and anxiety management strategies to support affected students and improve their academic performance.
Table 3. Study and anxiety management strategies to support affected students and improve their academic performance.
NumberAction or Treatment Focused on Test AnxietyScientific Citation
1Implement school programs that integrate the teaching of relaxation and mindfulness techniques before exams for students affected by bullying and cyberbullyingFoody and Samara [78]
2Develop digital education programs for parents and students that include strategies for managing anxiety related to cyberbullyingCoelho, Marchante, and Romao [79]
3Offer workshops on stress management and self-help techniques to improve test stress resilience in affected studentsEyuboglu et al. [77]
4Create school activities that promote resilience and help students develop coping skills in the face of stressful testing situationsGohal et al. [80]
5Establish reporting and support systems that allow students to communicate their concerns about bullying anonymously and receive counseling to manage anxiety before examsMartínez-Monteagudo et al. [60]
6Launch awareness campaigns that educate students about the effects of bullying and cyberbullying on test anxiety and how to address itPaulmony et al. [81]
7Provide workshops for families on how to support students in managing test anxiety, especially in the context of bullyingSchneider and King [82]
8Encourage the use of emotion journals for students to document their experiences and emotions related to exams, allowing for better follow-up and supportMarshall et al. [83]
9Implement rapid action protocols in schools to address bullying incidents and reduce victims’ immediate anxiety before examsXia et al. [84]
10Offer psychological recovery programs that include cognitive behavioral therapy to address both bullying and test anxiety in victims and perpetratorsZhou et al. [85]
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Rusillo-Magdaleno, A.; De la Torre-Cruz, M.J.; Ruiz-Ariza, A.; Suárez-Manzano, S. Association of High Levels of Bullying and Cyberbullying with Test Anxiety in Boys and Girls Aged 10 to 16 Years. Educ. Sci. 2024, 14, 999. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci14090999

AMA Style

Rusillo-Magdaleno A, De la Torre-Cruz MJ, Ruiz-Ariza A, Suárez-Manzano S. Association of High Levels of Bullying and Cyberbullying with Test Anxiety in Boys and Girls Aged 10 to 16 Years. Education Sciences. 2024; 14(9):999. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci14090999

Chicago/Turabian Style

Rusillo-Magdaleno, Alba, Manuel J. De la Torre-Cruz, Alberto Ruiz-Ariza, and Sara Suárez-Manzano. 2024. "Association of High Levels of Bullying and Cyberbullying with Test Anxiety in Boys and Girls Aged 10 to 16 Years" Education Sciences 14, no. 9: 999. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci14090999

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop