Are Bullying Perpetration and Victimization Associated with Adolescent Deliberate Self-Harm? A Meta-Analysis
Abstract
This study sought to appraise internationally published literature investigating bullying in its association with deliberate self-harm (DSH). A systematic review and series of meta-analyses using random effects models were conducted. A total of 68 effect sizes, analyzing data from 156,284 adolescents aged 11-19 years were examined. Results showed significant associations between both traditional bullying perpetration (OR 1.81, 95% CI [1.33, 2.47], p < .0001) and victimization (OR 2.34, 95% CI [1.89, 2.89], p < .0001) and DSH. Cyber-bullying victimization (OR 3.55, 95% CI [2.71, 4.65], p < .0001) and the co-occurrence of traditional and cyber-bullying victimization (OR 3.39, 95% CI [1.56, 7.37], p = .002) were also associated with DSH. Moderator analyses showed variation in results based on methodological- and sample-level variables. Findings suggested that exposure to bullying, either as perpetrators or victims, poses risks for DSH.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Heerde and Hemphill (2019) and Wang et al. (2022) found OR ranged from 1.98 to 2.34 for the relationship between bullying victimization and youth self-harm.
“The two reviews found that OR ranged from 1.98 to 2.34 for the relationship between bullying victimization and youth self-harm.”
From Risk and Protective Factors of Self-harm and Suicidality in Adolescents: An Umbrella Review with Meta-Analysis (2024) · cites this paper as Heerde and Hemphill (2019)
Heerde and Hemphill (2019) reported the association between cyberbullying victimization and risk of self-harm with a pooled OR of 3.55.
“Heerde and Hemphill (2019) explored traditional bullying and cyberbullying separately; they reported the association between cyberbullying victimization and risk of self-harm with a pooled OR of 3.55 (Table 3).”
From Risk and Protective Factors of Self-harm and Suicidality in Adolescents: An Umbrella Review with Meta-Analysis (2024) · cites this paper as Heerde and Hemphill (2019)
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 91 · Cited by 107
- Authors
- Heerde, J. A., & Hemphill, S. A.
- Affiliations
- The University of Melbourne (AU)
- Deakin University (AU)
- Corresponding author
- Heerde, Jessica A.
- Venue
- Archives of Suicide Research
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2018-11-16
- Volume
- 23
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 353-381
- ISSN
- 1381-1118 (ISSN-L)
- 1543-6136
- OpenAlex
- W2804209959
- Cited by
- 107
- References
- 91
- Citations by year
- 2026: 8 · 2025: 15 · 2024: 23 · 2023: 12 · 2022: 20 · 2021: 12 · 2020: 12 · 2019: 5
- FWCI
- 1.09
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Archives of Suicide Research (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Bullying, Victimization, and Aggression
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Suicide and Self-Harm Studies
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Death Anxiety and Social Exclusion
- Keywords
- bullying perpetration, bullying victimization, self-harm, adolescents, cyberbullying, suicide risk
- MeSH terms
- Cyberbullying, Adolescent, Adolescent Behavior, Child, Humans, Prevalence, Odds Ratio, Self-Injurious Behavior, Crime Victims, Young Adult, Bullying
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
