Predictors of Bullying among Athletes in the Romanian Context

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Thanks to the authors for devoting their energies to this interesting research. The authors offer up-to-date research on the phenomenon of bullying in sport in a cultural context about which little is known.

The abstract is clear and contains all the main information. I suggest the authors add the socio-demographic information of the sample (gender and average age).

The introduction appears complete. Some changes can be made:
- Introduce the prevalence of bullying among young people on a global, European or more specifically in Romania. Or a comparison between Romania and the prevalence on a broader territorial basis.
- Argue with scientific data why it is important to take the phenomenon seriously. Insert this where you express in the text that you want to treat the topic seriously.
- I would remove the reference to video games. It does not seem fitting. And it seems reductive.
- Are there any rewards for participating in the research? Did you use the 'snowball' technique?
- The tools section needs to be completely reworked. You have to order the instruments as in a list specifying the characteristics of the instrument, especially the psychometric characteristics. Correlation coefficient. Modes of compilation and scoring. Whether you have used an original, adapted or validated version of the individual instruments.
- Better clarify in the introduction and discussion the steps that will lead you to use the masculinity scale. Also, why did you use an adolescent version?
- Did you conduct a power analysis to identify the minimum sample size?
- In the discussion I would like you to elaborate a little more on the gender differences, explaining the differences from a theoretical point of view. In addition, I would like something to emerge with respect to the culture.
- Very well the limits of the research. It would be desirable to add a section on the practical implications of the research.

.

Author Response

Dear reviewer, thank you very much for your recommendations regarding our paper. They have been very helpful in improving the text and we hope that we have managed to meet your expectations in this respect.

 

Thanks to the authors for devoting their energies to this interesting research. The authors offer up-to-date research on the phenomenon of bullying in sport in a cultural context about which little is known.

 

The abstract is clear and contains all the main information. I suggest the authors add the socio-demographic information of the sample (gender and average age).

 

We have added the socio-demographic information of the sample (gender and average age) in the abstract section.

 

The introduction appears complete. Some changes can be made:

- Introduce the prevalence of bullying among young people on a global, European or more specifically in Romania. Or a comparison between Romania and the prevalence on a broader territorial basis.

 

According to Antibullying Policies in Europe report, (Antibullying Policies in Europe, A Review and Recommendations for European Quality Assessment of Policies to Prevent Bullying in Schools, Available online at: https://www.gale.info/doc/project-abc/Dankmeijer-2020-Antibullying-Policies-in-Europe.pdf ) based in OECD who included in PISA analysis a battery of question about bullying the average of students reporting any type of bullying was in 2015 worldwide 18%, and in Europe 19,4% - 23,3% in 2025-2018. In 2018, the Netherlands scored lowest with 2% frequent bullying, and Lithuania scored highest with 23% frequent bullying with an average of 8,2% frequent bullying. For Romania OECD analysis have dates only for 2018, and the value is 12%, with 146% across the European average.

Fig. Share of students who reported being victims of any type of bullying act at least a few times a month in selected European countries in 2018

Source: https://www.statista.com/statistics/1092217/bullying-in-europe/

 

- Argue with scientific data why it is important to take the phenomenon seriously. Insert this where you express in the text that you want to treat the topic seriously.

 

According to OECD statistics situation in Romania, is relevant because with 34% of the people who participated at the survey who considered that they bullied in the education system, the relevance of this type of research in higher and in many cases the situation in performance sport is different because the pressure of the results correlated with the family's investments, the rigor of the coaches, the expectations of the managers and the spectators frequently generate bullying situations. One research realized by the Romanian organization “Save the children”, “nearly 50% of students have been victims of bullying in schools, 27% admit to being bullies themselves. 8 out of 10 students have witnessed a bullying situation at school”, or "82% of students (over 4 out of 5) have witnessed bullying situations in their school; nearly three-quarters of students (73%) report witnessing bullying incidents in the classroom.", or “more than a quarter of students (27%) admit that they have been in the position of being the perpetrators of bullying” (Save Children Romania Research, available online at: https://www.salvaticopiii.ro/sci-ro/media/Documente/Studiu-Peste-un-sfert-dintre-copii-au-fost-agresori,-jumatate-spun-ca-au-fost-victime-ale-bullying-ului.pdf

 

- I would remove the reference to video games. It does not seem fitting. And it seems reductive.

Influenced by factors such as previous negative experiences, the social environment in which they grow up

 

- Are there any rewards for participating in the research? Did you use the 'snowball' technique?

We didn’t use the 'snowball' technique, but the convenience sampling technique was used in this study, which means that only students who were approachable and available were included in the participant group. Furthermore, all participants signed an informed consent by which they voluntarily agreed to participate in this research.

 

- The tools section needs to be completely reworked. You have to order the instruments as in a list specifying the characteristics of the instrument, especially the psychometric characteristics. Correlation coefficient. Modes of compilation and scoring. Whether you have used an original, adapted or validated version of the individual instruments.

 

We have reorganised the tools section, emphasizing the psychometric properties of the instruments.

 

- Better clarify in the introduction and discussion the steps that will lead you to use the masculinity scale. Also, why did you use an adolescent version?

 

Several studies have indicated that dominance and aggression are salient components of masculine gender role norms in adolescent boys’ social groups (Kimmel &Mahler, 2003; Poynting & Donaldson, 2005; Stoudt, 2005; Klein, 2006; Phillips, 2007). On this dimension, we always have ingroup perspective, which means males perspective, and outgroup perspective, meaning female perspective. In this regard, we wanted to assess both male athletes' conformity to endorsement of male role norms and female athletes' perception of the importance of male athletes' level of conformity to endorsement of male role norms.

 

- Did you conduct a power analysis to identify the minimum sample size?

 

An a priori power analysis was conducted using G*Power version 3.1.9.7 (Faul et al., 2007) to

determine the minimum sample size required to test the study hypothesis. Results indicated the required sample size to achieve 80% power for detecting a medium effect, at a significance criterion of α = .05, was N = 84 for Correlation: Bivariate normal model. Thus, the obtained sample size of N = 383 is adequate to test the study hypothesis.

 

- In the discussion I would like you to elaborate a little more on the gender differences, explaining the differences from a theoretical point of view. In addition, I would like something to emerge with respect to the culture.

 

According to Hellstrom and Beckman, analysis of the focus group have one category “expectations and needs to fit the norm” and three subcategories “bullying to achieve power” (single girls don’t bully other girl but smaller girls group bullying each other or someone within the group, boys perceive themselves to use violence and to alleviate their aggression physically) “coping with bullying”( the group works as an important support system when coping with bullying) and “behavior expectations based on gender. (boys consider that boys, girls who like activities typically seen as masculine stand out in a negative way and girls, expect to the boys to be nice, calm, proper, neat and to care about their looks)” (Hellstrom, L., Beckman, L., Adolescents’ perception of gender differences in bullying, Scand J Psychol. 2020 Feb; 61(1): 90–96, doi: 10.1111/sjop.12523).  Other research, consider that the frequent forms of victimization are insults, followed by physical aggression more evident profile for boys and less assumed (talking about the other person) and more indirect forms of aggression seem to be more frequent among girls. (Silva, M.A.I, Pereira, B., Mendonca, D., Nunes, B., Abadio de Oliveira, W., The Involvement of Girls and Boys with Bullying: An Analysis of Gender Differences, Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2013 Dec; 10(12): 6820–6831, doi: 10.3390/ijerph10126820)

 

- Very well the limits of the research. It would be desirable to add a section on the practical implications of the research.

 

The results of this research can help the coach understand and reduce/eliminate bullying actions towards the athlete/team. In sports activities, two types of coaches can be identified: coaches who were athletes (and have experienced bullying) and coaches who were athletes (but have not gone through bullying situations). This study supports both types of coaches, giving them the opportunity to learn and understand the phenomenon of bullying and its effects on athletes/team. There are two possible situations: i) if the coach has experienced bullying (when they were an athlete), they can now prevent and reduce this phenomenon among the athletes they train; ii) if the coach has not experienced bullying (when they were an athlete), they can now better understand the phenomenon, control it, and diminish its effects within the team. Knowledge of bullying behaviours (among athletes/team), understanding this phenomenon, reducing its impact on vulnerable athletes who may be subjected to bullying, can have positive feedback for the athlete/team, manifested through: improved performance, increased performance in training/official games, gaining self-confidence, and self-motivation. Furthermore, the coach's knowledge of the bullying phenomenon (and the results from this study) can help the athlete/team better navigate the challenges of the athlete's life: training, competitions, and the pressure of the audience, high-level competitions.

 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

I thank the authors for the effort made to write this manuscript, it is an interesting manuscript.

The comments are intended to guide the authors to improve their manuscript.

We recommend authors to better focus on the problem in the introduction, please use more recent and current sources. This will better focus the readers' interest.

Review the citations in the manuscript and follow the journal's citation guidelines. For example, in line 61 the authors say... Volk at all believes that the phenomenon of bullying appears in sports when the individual and team... It is not correct to cite like this and also do not write at all, write et al. and indicate the year. Please check the citations in your manuscript.

Do not state the hypotheses of your study in the theoretical framework. You have listed the hypotheses as sections of the theoretical framework.

Please put the hypotheses in the methodology section.

Why this sample and not another?

What are the proxy data for the sample?

What is the effect size?

How were the ethical aspects of this study addressed? How was the confidentiality of the data guaranteed? Was the Helsinki protocol followed in relation to the use and handling of the data? This should be indicated in the text, not only in the Institutional Review Board Statement. The authors state that the participants signed a consent form. When? How? Was it online? 

The authors should improve the discussion, they should argue better the explanation of the hypotheses raised based on the theoretical analysis. In the discussion, the authors only used arguments from 12 authors.

Extensive editing of the English language is recommended. Please, the paper should be reviewed by a native speaker.

Extensive editing of the English language is recommended. Please, the paper should be reviewed by a native speaker.

Author Response

Dear reviewer, thank you very much for your recommendations regarding our paper. They have been very helpful in improving the text and we hope that we have managed to meet your expectations in this respect.

 

• We recommend authors to better focus on the problem in the introduction, please use more recent and current sources. This will better focus the readers' interest

 

According to the USA Today Sport, coach Jim Foster "made an inappropriate comment regarding a female staff member, and spoke negatively about his staff to other staff members (Axson, S., Northwestern investigation of baseball team finds 'bullying, abusive behaviours' by coach, 2023, Available online at: https://eu.usatoday.com/story/sports/college/baseball/2023/07/11/northwestern-baseball-jim-foster-bullying-abusive-culture/70401883007/). News related to this topic is often found in sports newspapers. The participation of children in sports activities within various clubs implies that under the careful guidance of coaches, the risk of young people being subjected to abuse is reduced. However, bullying can take various forms – it can be overt or subtle, intentional, or accidental, and may involve psychological, physical, and sexual abuse. This also includes behaviors like hazing and neglect. Teammates or peers are typically the most common perpetrators of sexual violence, hazing, and bullying. (LaBotz, M., The Youth Athlete, A Practitioner' s Guide to Providing Comprehensive Sports Medicine Care, 2023, Academic Press, 978-0-323-99992-2, https://doi.org/10.1016/C2021-0-00329-1 ). Booth et al. (2023), use the concepts, bullying and banter, because in adolescent community football, bullying acts can be accidental and intentional, demonstrating synergies with micro-inequities and banter must be viewed as a ‘joke’ or ‘fun’, which are naturally attributable to micro-affirmations but are also inherently ambiguous terms. (Booth, R.J., Cope, E., Rhind D.J.A, Crossing the line: conceptualising and rationalising bullying and banter in male adolescent community football, Sport Educ. Soc.2023, , DOI: 10.1080/13573322.2023.2180498)

• Review the citations in the manuscript and follow the journal's citation guidelines. For example, in line 61 the authors say... Volk at all believes that the phenomenon of bullying appears in sports when the individual and team... It is not correct to cite like this and also do not write at all, write et al. and indicate the year. Please check the citations in your manuscript.

 

Line 61 Volk et al. (2014) believes that the phenomenon of bullying appears in sports when the indi-vidual and team

 

Line 69… Newman et al. (2021) consider that research on bullying in sport focused on two aspects: the experiences characterized in terms of the frequency of different types of aggressive

 

Line 146.. Steinfeldt et al. (2012) tries to answer this dilemma by stating that bullying in the case of male athletes is identified with traditional male role norms

 

Do not state the hypotheses of your study in the theoretical framework. You have listed the hypotheses as sections of the theoretical framework.

• Please put the hypotheses in the methodology section.

We have removed the hypotheses from theoretical background and for a better understanding we have written them compactly after introduction section.

 

- Why this sample and not another?

- What are the proxy data for the sample?

- What is the effect size?

An a priori power analysis was conducted using G*Power version 3.1.9.7 (Faul et al., 2007) to determine the minimum sample size required to test the study hypothesis. Results indicated the required sample size to achieve 80% power for detecting a medium effect, at a significance criterion of α = .05, was N = 84 for Correlation: Bivariate normal model. The convenience sampling technique was used in this study, which means that only athletes who were approachable and available were included in the participants group. In this regard, the obtained sample size of N = 383 is adequate to test the study hypothesis, being more than the minimum number of participants required for hypothesis testing.  

 

• How were the ethical aspects of this study addressed? How was the confidentiality of the data

guaranteed? Was the Helsinki protocol followed in relation to the use and handling of the data? This should be indicated in the text, not only in the Institutional Review Board Statement. The authors state that the participants signed a consent form. When? How? Was it online? 

 

              At the beginning of the research, students received an online informed consent by signing which they agreed to participate in this study. At the same time, they were assured of the anonymity and confidentiality of their responses and that they were free to withdraw from participation in the study at any time. We attach the informed consent form we used in this research.            

 

  The authors should improve the discussion, they should argue better the explanation of the hypotheses raised based on the theoretical analysis. In the discussion, the authors only used arguments from 12 authors.

 

The results of our study were consistent with previous scientific literature in the field of sport bulllying, and he data obtained supported the formulated hypotheses. We also found a larger number of previous studies with which our results are consistent.

Similar to other studies [18], [19], [20], [21], [22], [23], [24], [25], [26], [63], [64], we found a positive association between negative emotion (anxiety, sadness and anger) and bully behaviour with regard to the perpetration, meaning that Romanian athletes with high levels of anxiety, sadness and anger they will tend to get more involved in bully - per-petrator behaviours [27], [28], [29].

Our results were consistent with the scientific literature on this topic [31], [32], [33], [34], [35], [66].

It's about athletes' relationships with their coaches [43], [44], [45], [46], [48], [49], [67], [68] and teammates [69], [70]. Considering these facts, our data indicated that Romanian athletes who have a weaker connection with their coaches and teammates tend to de-velop a bully behaviour, both from the perspective of the victim and the perpetrator.

 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

This is an interesting article on an important topic.  It will benefit from some revision.

Throughout, English language needs attention.  For example line 68 (and elsewhere, line 191) ‘at all’ should be ‘et al.’. Line 85 ‘more’ not ‘ore’. Line 127 ‘From an age’ needs changing. Line 148 ‘learn’ not ‘learned’.

Line 91 avoid ‘his’ (one gender) unless justified by context.

Line 151 delete J.A. similarly line 156 no need for initials of authors in the text.

Line 156 ‘male’ not ‘man’.

Line 157 ‘vaguely’

Line 231 cost-benefit analysis

Line 265 - it is very perplexing to be told that 58.7% participants were male, and 14.3% female!  That makes 73% leaving 27% as ‘other’?!  Please explain/correct.

The MAMS was used for both males and females. It would help to have some assurance/discussion about its suitability for females.

Results – throughout, the text unnecessarily duplicates material in the Tables, especially actual detailed statistics. The point of a table is that it is unnecessary to repeat such detail in the text! The text can be used to summarize the main findings of interest to the reader, avoiding numbers in most cases.  All through the Results, this can be revised.

Figure 1 – the top left hand box should presumably say ‘athletes weaker connections with their coaches’ (as in the box below) – nevertheless this is confusing, as the Figure caption seems to refer to the mediation, i.e. the 3 lower boxes, so the relevance of the top 2 boxes is unclear.

Line 491 we are told of gender differences or not in some bully variables – but I could not find this anywhere in Results.  Not only should the number of male/female participants be clarified, but gender differences could be explained more – gender is not used as a variable in any of the tables.

Conclusions – more on practical implications, e.g. for coach training, would be helpful. Lines 521-530 just summarize the findings again.

Minor issues - noted in main report.

Author Response

Dear reviewer, thank you very much for your recommendations regarding our paper. They have been very helpful in improving the text and we hope that we have managed to meet your expectations in this respect.

 

Throughout, English language needs attention.  For example line 68 (and elsewhere, line 191) ‘at all’ should be ‘et al.’.

 

Volk et al. (2014) believes that the phenomenon of bullying appears in sports when the in

Newman et al. (2021) consider that research on bullying in sport focused on two aspects:

Steinfeldt  et al. (2012) tries to answer this dilemma

David and Brannon (1976) identified four key components

 

Line 85 ‘more’ not ‘ore’.

 

more bullied youth than non-bullied youth report having

 

Line 127 ‘From an age’ needs changing.  

 

are encouraged and learn to use coercion

 

Line 148 ‘learn’ not ‘learned’.

 

learn to use coercion, intimidation.

 

Line 91 avoid ‘his’ (one gender) unless justified by context.

 

, race, the way of behavior, which make them

 

Line 151 delete J.A. similarly line 156 no need for initials of authors in the text.

 

Steinfeldt  et al. (2012) tries to answer this dilemma

 

Line 156 ‘male’ not ‘man’.

 

David and Brannon (1976) identified four key components of male role: i) no „sissy stuff

 

Line 157 ‘vaguely’

 

anything vaguely feminine

 

Line 231 cost-benefit analysis

 

victims, witnesses, and bystanders of bullying in professional football, it is evident they go through a cost-benefit analysis.

 

• Line 265 - it is very perplexing to be told that 58.7% participants were male, and 14.3% female!

That makes 73% leaving 27% as ‘other’?!  Please explain/correct.

It was a transcription error from SPSS. I have checked, and the correct values are:  58.70% were male participants and 41.3 % were female participants.

 

• The MAMS was used for both males and females. It would help to have some assurance/discussion about its suitability for females.
•  

Several studies have indicated that dominance and aggression are salient components of masculine gender role norms in adolescent boys’ social groups (Kimmel &Mahler, 2003; Poynting & Donaldson, 2005; Stoudt, 2005; Klein, 2006; Phillips, 2007). On this dimension, we always have ingroup perspective, which means males perspective, and outgroup perspective, meaning female perspective. In this regard, we wanted to assess both male athletes' conformity to endorsement of male role norms and female athletes' perception of the importance of male athletes' level of conformity to endorsement of male role norms.

 

• Results – throughout, the text unnecessarily duplicates material in the Tables, especially actual

detailed statistics. The point of a table is that it is unnecessary to repeat such detail in the text! The text can be used to summarize the main findings of interest to the reader, avoiding numbers in most cases.  All through the Results, this can be revised.

 

In the results section we have removed from the text redundant statistical values (numbers), which are also found in the tables and which are not part of the reporting models that could facilitate the understanding of the statistical analyses.

 

• Figure 1 – the top left-hand box should presumably say ‘athletes’ weaker connections with their

coaches’ (as in the box below) – nevertheless this is confusing, as the Figure caption seems to refer to the mediation, i.e. the 3 lower boxes, so the relevance of the top 2 boxes is unclear. 

 

              We have also corrected the variable name in the box expressing the direct relationship between concepts. 

 

• Line 491 we are told of gender differences or not in some bully variables – but I could not find

this anywhere in Results.  Not only should the number of male/female participants be clarified, but gender differences could be explained more – gender is not used as a variable in any of the tables.

 

In this research, we have conducted two regression analyses, one selecting only male participants (N = 224 - Table 4. Summary of Stepwise Regression Analysis for Variables predicting bully - perpetrator behaviour in male athletes), and one selecting only female participants (N = 158, Table 5. Summary of Stepwise Regression Analysis for Variables predicting bully - perpetrator behaviour in female athletes). We strongly believed that the predictors used in the research will explain differently bully - perpetrator behaviour for male and female athletes.  Our hypothesis has been confirmed. In this respect, we can certainly talk about gender differences in explaining bully - perpetrator behaviour at Romanian athletes.

 

• Conclusions – more on practical implications, e.g. for coach training, would be helpful. Lines 521-530 just summarize the findings again.

 

The results of this research can help the coach understand and reduce/eliminate bullying actions towards the athlete/team. In sports activities, two types of coaches can be identified: coaches who were athletes (and have experienced bullying) and coaches who were athletes (but have not gone through bullying situations). This study supports both types of coaches, giving them the opportunity to learn and understand the phenomenon of bullying and its effects on athletes/team. There are two possible situations: i) if the coach has experienced bullying (when they were an athlete), they can now prevent and reduce this phenomenon among the athletes they train; ii) if the coach has not experienced bullying (when they were an athlete), they can now better understand the phenomenon, control it, and diminish its effects within the team. Knowledge of bullying behaviours (among athletes/team), understanding this phenomenon, reducing its impact on vulnerable athletes who may be subjected to bullying, can have positive feedback for the athlete/team, manifested through improved performance, increased performance in training/official games, gaining self-confidence, and self-motivation. Furthermore, the coach's knowledge of the bullying phenomenon (and the results from this study) can help the athlete/team better navigate the challenges of the athlete's life: training, competitions, and the pressure of the audience, high-level competitions.

 

• Lines 521-530 just summarize the findings again.

 

Additionally, the present study has found perception of male gender normativity, connections with coaches, and anger as being the most important predictors of bully - perpetrator behaviour. Putting these constructs in the light of gender differences, we discovered that Romanian male athletes were perception gender normativity, anger, and connections with coaches are engaged significantly more in bully - perpetrator behaviour in comparison to Romanian female athletes (anger didn't play an important role, as much as connections with coaches and perception of gender normativity). As for predictors included in regression equation models, the findings have shown differences in power explanation of bully - perpetrator behaviour.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Dear Authors,

thank you very much for your valuable review! In my opinion, you paper can be publeshed in this current forms

Author Response

Dear reviewer

Thank you very much for your agreement.

Authors!

Reviewer 2 Report

I thank the authors for their efforts to adapt the manuscript to the proposals and changes suggested by the reviewers.

The manuscript is now more adequate 

The authors have aborted the changes correctly.

Minor revision needed

Author Response

Dear reviewer

Thank you very much for your agreement.

Authors!

Reviewer 3 Report

This is an interesting article on an important topic.  It has benefitted from revision but some more (minor) revisions are needed.

Throughout, English language needs attention. 

Abstract:

predictive model of

change ‘it was the author’s intention’ to ‘we aimed’

delete ‘from all the respondents’

give date (year) when data was collected (2023?)

change ’14.3%’ to ’41.3%’

next line, delete ‘of the participants’

On p.3, Figure 1 is data from another report and seems unnecessary. There is adequate coverage in the text, so this Figure can be taken out.

On p.7, section 3.2., again give the date (year) when data was collected.

p.15 line 676  DEV REV needs correcting.

 

Throughout, English language needs attention. 

 

 

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

Thank you very much for your recommendations regarding our study.

We've made changes to all your recommendations. So, we have corrected the abstract, regarding the writing of some sentences and added the year when data was collected.

In the body of the text, we removed the figure 1, also added the year when the current research was conducted, and, in the end, we corrected the references.

Last but not least, we have reviewed the whole text from an English language perspective.

With the hope that we have met all your recommendations, we look forward to your response.

Best wishes!

Authors!

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf