Monday, December 24, 2018

Pre Viva Slide Presentation of PhD

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1R5X7kMQAfCv3FvDAbd0J9FTC0v2EIr9W/view?usp=sharing

Pre Viva Slide Presentation of PhD

Birth Order and Your Place in Life Write to be Read BBS 1st Year Chapter 1

Write to be Read

BBS 1^st Year

Chapter 1

Birth Order and Your Place in Life

1. Some psychologists criticize birth order theory as wrong and unscientific. What is your position? Do you find the birth order theory believable? Explain.

Ans: Some psychologists criticize birth order theory as wrong and unscientific. I also support their thought because I also find birth order theory as wrong and unscientific. To believe in birth order is like to believe in astrology. Our parents, family environment, society heredity etc. are responsible for how we are and how we shall be in the future but not birth order. A child can be parental, capable, dependent, independent, good natured, bad natured, happy, gloomy, calm due to the influences of parents, family environment, heredity, society and by birth quality but not due to birth order.

I don’t find birth order theory believable. I am the oldest in my family. The birth order theory and that the oldest is parental, responsible, a high achiever, serious, independent. But although I am the oldest, I don’t have all these qualities. My youngest brother has taken the responsibility of our family. I don’t need to play parental role for my younger siblings according to the birth order theory, I should be a high achiever and independent since I am the oldest. But my youngest brother has done better in many sectors than me.

Thus, I don’t find birth-order theory believable in modern families of modern societies. The children are different beyond their certain birth order position. So, as some psychologist, I also find birth order theory as wrong and unscientific.

2. People with which birth order seem to have the easiest life? The most difficult one? The happiest one? The most appealing one? Choose one and describe it by telling what makes those lives easy difficult, happy or attractive.

Ans: Birth order affects in marital matches. The oldest child may be happiest with youngest child or an only child. The oldest sister of brothers matches with youngest brother of sisters. Similarly the oldest brother of sisters matches with youngest sister of brothers. The worst match is with another oldest since the two will be to sovereign to share a household comfortably.

The best match for a idle child is often with another middle child since both are tactful and normally not aggressive. The only child best matches with the oldest. The only child with only child is most difficult one. The youngest brother of brothers matches best with an oldest or middle sister of brothers. The youngest sister of brothers matches best with the oldest brother of sisters. The youngest brother of sisters matches best with oldest sister of brothers.

3. Choose a couple with know well. How successful is their relationship? Use birth order theory to explain and support your observation about their relationship.

Ans: One of my friends got married last year. He is the oldest of sisters. So, he is easygoing, fun loving, and very fond of women. He is good at pleasing the females. He got married to the youngest sister of brothers. My friend’s wife is often a tomboy and flirt (romantic). She easily understands the feelings and desires of her husband. My friend also knows how to please his wife. They never seem to be quarreling. Both husband and wife try to keep each other happy. There is no any misunderstanding between them. Their married life is going on well. I hope they will spend their married life happily in the future, too. Here Wither’s birth order theory applies well.

4. Adding phrases and dependent clauses to independent clause.

Read each independent clause below. Add one or both of the phrases/ dependent clauses in parentheses to make a more complete and more logical sentence. You can add to the beginning or end of the independent clause. Do not add a phrase clause if it if not logical. Then write your new sentence.

a. The Egyptian family is often an extended family.

(……… which includes other relatives/ ……….. with no adults other than the parents living there)

Ans: The Egyptian family is often an extended family, which includes other relatives.

b. In Egypt relative are more likely to live with a family.

(……. Who don’t really like the family/ …… than they are in many western countries.)

Ans: In Egypt relative are more likely to live with a family than they are in many western countries.

c. There may be more resources for the children.

(…… like attention and affection/ with other adult relative in the household.)

Ans: There may be more resources like attention and affection for the children with other adult relative in the household.

d. This extended family configuration probably changes the effect.

(because it results in smaller families ……/ …… of birth order).

Ans: This extended family configuration probably changes the effect of birth order.

e. There may be less competition among siblings.

(…… for the parents affection/ when then are fewer adults in the house ……)

Ans: There may be less competition for the parents affection among siblings.

f. It should be surprising however.

(…… if none of the ideas about birth order were correct for Egypt/ ……. To most of us)

Ans: It would be surprising to most of us, however if none of the ideas about birth order were correct for Egypt.

g. We would still expect the oldest child to be more responsible.

(for example, ……/ …… in comparison with brothers and sisters)

Ans: For example, we would still expect the oldest child to be more responsible in comparison with brothers and sisters.

5. Correcting Fragments

Rewrite the entire item, correcting the fragments.

a. Two only children who marry each other may have problems.

Because both are used to a lot of attention and approval.

Ans: Two only children who marry each other may have problems

Because both are used to a lot of attention and approval.

b. An oldest child may find that another oldest is not a good marriage match. An oldest may be happier with an only child. Or with a youngest child.

Ans: An oldest child may find that another oldest is not a good marriage match. An oldest may be happier with an only child or with a youngest child.

c. A younger sister of sisters matches best with an oldest brother. Who will appreciate her charm. Also tolerate her manipulation.

Ans: A younger sister of sisters matches best with an oldest brother who will appreciate her charm and tolerate her manipulation.

d. The best match for a middle child is often another middle child. Since both are tactful. And normally not aggressive.

Ans: The best match for a middle child is often another middle child since both ar tactfuland normally not aggressive.

e. Although only children find it easier to make good matches. There are bad matches for them. Such as another only.

Ans: Although only children find it easier to make good matches, there are bad matches for them such as another only.

6. Editing for Fragments.

Rewrite the whole paragraph, correcting the fragments by connecting them to other sentences or by adding the necessary words to make them independent clauses. [TU 2073 for 10 marks]

Critics of birth- order theory say that is not scientific. Because one cannot prove it. And because it is like astrology. Interesting, perhaps, but not to be taken seriously. Supporters of birth-order theory admit that it alone does not determine what kind of people we are. Our parents and society, for example, are strong influences. Whether we are happy or gloomy, calm or nervous, or good-natured or bad-tempered people. However, birth order does play a role. Determining the degree to which a child is happy, calm, and good natured, for example. It plays another role. In determining how a child uses his or her happiness, calmness, and good-naturalness in dealing with other people.

Ans: Critics of birth- order theory say that is not scientific because one cannot prove it. Also it is like astrology that it is Interesting, perhaps, but not to be taken seriously. Supporters of birth-order theory admit that it alone does not determine what kind of people we are. Our parents and society, for example, are strong influences. Whether we are happy or gloomy, calm or nervous, or good-natured or bad-tempered people. However, birth order does play a role. Determining the degree to which a child is happy, calm, and good natured, for example. It plays another role in determining how a child uses his or her happiness, calmness, and good-naturalness in dealing with other people.

Sunday, December 2, 2018

A sample power point of Bullying, Victimization, Self-Esteem and Narcissism

A Sample of PhD Thesis (Quantitative Analysis)

BULLYING, VICTIMIZATION, SELF-ESTEEM AND NARCISSISM AMONG NEPALESE SCHOOL ADOLESCENTS

Thesis

Submitted to

Dr.K.N. Modi University

For the degree of

Doctor of Philosphy

(Education)

Submitted by

Mr. ….

(September 2011 Batch)

1191100..

Supervised by

Prof. Dr. …

2016

Prof. Dr. … Tribhuvan University

Date:

CERTIFICATE

This is to certify that the thesis entitled “BULLYING, VICTIMIZATION, SELF-ESTEEM AND NARCISSISM AMONG NEPALESE SCHOOL ADOLESCENTS” submitted for the award of degree of “Doctor of Philosophy” in Education is a genuine record of the bonafide research work carried out by “…” under my guidance and supervision. No part of the thesis has been submitted for any other degree or diploma elsewhere. He has worked on this subject for a minimum period of 24 months from the date of registration as required under ordinance of Dr. K. N. Modi University, Newai, Rajasthan

Prof. Dr. …

Supervisor

DECLARATION

I hereby declare that this thesis is compiled by me in its original form and that it has not been submitted anywhere for any award of the degree or diploma of other similar degree, with any other institute of higher education.

…

(Research Scholar)

CONTENTS

Page No.

Preface 1

Chapter One 6

Introduction 6

Chapter Two 27

Review of Literature 27

Chapter Three 70

Material and Methods 70

Chapter Four 96

Observations 96

Chapter Five 116

Discussion 116

References 131

Appendices 151

Publications 174

List of Tables

Table 1: Gender distribution of respondents

Table 2: Age and Ethnicity Crosstabulation

Table 3: Bullying and victimization sub-scales

Table 4: Demographic information of respondents

Table 5: Gender-wise mean scores of physical bullying

Table 6: Gender-wise mean scores of physical victimization

Table 7: Gender-wise mean scores of verbal bullying

Table 8: Gender-wise mean scores of verbal victimization

Table 9: Gender-wise mean scores of indirect bullying

Table 10: Gender-wise mean scores of indirect victimization

Table 11: Gender-wise mean scores of global personal self-esteem

Table 12: Gender-wise mean scores of narcissism

Table 13: Grade-wise mean scores of physical bullying, verbal bullying, indirect bullying, physical victimization, verbal victimization and indirect victimization

Table 14: Grade level-wise mean scores of global personal self-esteem

Table 15: Grade level-wise mean scores of narcissism

Table 16: Correlation of ethnicity with reference to bullying, victimization, global personal self-esteem and narcissism

List of Figures

Figure 1: Philosophical worldviews

Figure 2: Conceptual framework

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I would like to express my sincere acknowledgements to all the respondents of public and private school students of Kathmandu district for their willingness to participate in my study, school heads who provided me good environment. My sincere gratitude goes to my thesis supervisor Prof. Dr. … for his able guidance, valuable suggestions and proper comments during this research work. My sincere thanks also go to Prof. Dr. … and Prof. Dr. …, who heartily helped me and gave valuable suggestions during the study period. Besides that, I would like to give vote of thanks to the Dr. KN Modi University, Newai, Rajasthan, India who gave me valuable guidelines and continue support in University process.

I am also grateful to my all PhD Scholars who encouraged me to complete my work in time. I like to thank Mrs. … for her support in data analysis. Likewise, I would like to thank my family members.

……………………..

…

Preface

Introduction and objectives: This study was carried out in order to explore the prevalence rate of bullying, victimization, global personal self-esteem and narcissism with reference to gender, grade level and ethnicity among Nepalese school adolescents, and to find out the correlation between demographic components (gender, grade level and ethnicity) and students’ behaviours (bullying, victimization, global personal self-esteem and narcissism). In the international level, many more studies have been done on these problems. However, in the context of Nepal it has been in the preliminary stages. Thus, this study was also one step of those preliminary stages.

Methodology: This study was based on postpositivist philosophy, it is also reductionism; testing selected variables that constitute hypothesis and research questions, so it is based on careful observation and measurement of the objective reality in the world. The present study applied the deductive research approach. The design of the main study was correlational. It employed a pen and paper self-report survey. The survey had four separate instruments. The four instruments were bullying, victimization, personal self-esteem and narcissism scales. The total participants of the study were 936 from 15 government funded schools and 15 private schools of Kathmandu District, Nepal. Kathmandu district was selected due to being the capital city that represents the nature of almost population of Nepal. Among the total participants boys were 469 (50.1%) and girls 467 (49.9%).

Results: A series of analysis of covariance (ANOVA) tests was performed to test the hypotheses. The hypotheses were set on the basis of gender, grade level and ethnicity with reference to bullying, victimization, personal self-esteem and narcissism. In the case of physical bullying, boys reported higher mean scores than girls (boys M=13.750 and girls M=10.910). Regarding the gender and physical victimization, boys reported 14.3390 mean scores of physical victimization. Whereas, girls reported 11.5000 mean scores of physical victimization. Boys reported significantly higher mean scores of physical victimization than girls. In terms of the relationship between gender and verbal bullying, boys had 10.3667 mean scores and girls had 9.2056 mean scores. Boys reported significantly higher mean scores of verbal bullying than girls. In terms of the relationship between gender and verbal victimization, boys had 11.7036 mean scores and girls had 10.1178 mean scores. Boys reported significantly higher mean scores of verbal victimization than girls. The result related about gender and indirect bullying showed that the mean scores of boys was 22.5032 and girls 20.0471. Boys reported higher mean scores of indirect bullying than girls. In terms of indirect victimization, results showed that mean scores of boys was 25.5970 and girls was 23.4356. It showed that boys are more indirectly victimized than girls. Regarding correlation between gender and global personal self-esteem results showed that mean scores of boys was 22.5846 and girls was 22.6832. There is no significant positive correlation between gender and global personal self-esteem (p>0.05, i. e. 0.756). In terms of gender and narcissism, results showed that mean scores of boys was 62.0968 and girls was 62.5773. The p value of the results is 0.021, which is <0.05. It shows that there is significant correlation between gender and narcissism.

Regarding the grade level, and bullying, victimization, personal self-esteem and narcissism, grade 10 students had higher mean scores of physical bullying than grade 8 students. It shows that higher the grade levels, higher the amount of physical bullying. In the case of physical victimization, grade 10 students achieved 13.0474 mean scores and grade 8 students achieved 12.8025 mean scores. It shows that higher class students be more victimized than lower class students. Similarly, grade 10 students achieved 10.2710 mean scores of verbal bullying and grade 8 achieved 9.3100 mean scores. It also shows that higher class students report significantly higher mean scores of verbal bullying than lower class students. In the case of grade level and verbal victimization, grade 10 students achieved 11.3290 mean scores and grade 8 achieved 10.5011 mean scores. It explores that higher class students are more verbally victimized than lower class students. The results in the case of indirect bullying, grade 8 students achieved 20.6030 mean scores and grade 10 achieved 21.9613 mean scores. It shows that lower class students report significantly lower mean scores of indirect bullying than higher class students. Likewise, grade 8 students achieved 23.7702 mean scores of indirect victimization and grade 10 achieved 25.5198. It also explores that lower class students report significantly lower mean scores of indirect victimization than higher class students. The results of global personal self-esteem showed that mean scores of grade 10 was 22.7797 and grade 8 was 22.4893. The scored p value was 0.361 (p>0.05). It shows that there is no significance correlation between global personal self-esteem and grade level. In terms of narcissism with reference to grade level, results showed that mean scores of grade 10 was 62.3137 and grade 8 was 62.3570. The scored p value was 0.905 (p>0.05). It shows that there is no significant correlation between narcissism and grade level.

In terms of correlation between ethnicity and bullying, the results showed that there was no significant correlation between Brahmin/Chhetri and indigenous with reference to total bullying. The scored p value was 0.996 (p>0.05), it showed that there was almost nil correlation. However, there is significant correlation between Brahmin/Chhetri and Dalit with reference to total bullying. Dalit are bullied more than Brahmin/Chhetri and Indigenous group. The results showed that there was no significant correlation between Brahmin/Chhetri and indigenous with reference to total victimization. The scored p value was 0.999 (p>0.05), it showed that there was almost nil correlation. However, there was significant correlation between Brahmin/Chhetri and Dalit with reference to total bullying. Dalit are bullied more than Brahmin/Chhetri and Indigenous group. The results showed that p value of victimization between Brahmin/Chhetri and Dalit was 0.083, which is >0.05. As well as between Indigenous and Dalit was 0.067 which is also >0.05. Hence, it shows that there is significant negative correlation between ethnicity and victimization. The results showed that there is strongly significant correlation between Brahmin/Chhetri and Dalit, and Indigenous and Dalit with reference to global personal self-esteem. The p value of the previous was 0.002 (p<0.05), it showed that there was strongly correlation between Brahmin/Chhetri and Dalit with reference to global personal self-esteem. Similarly, the p value of the later was 0.006 (p<0.05), it also showed that there is strongly correlation between Indigenous and Dalit with reference to global personal self-esteem. Dalit feel that they are inferior to other upper castes.

The results showed that there is no significant correlation between Brahmin/Chhetri and Dalit, and Indigenous and Dalit with reference to narcissism. The p value of Brahmin/Chhetri and Dalit was 0.087 (p>0.05), it shows that there is no correlation. Similarly, the p value of Indigenous and Dalit was 0.149 (p>0.05), it showed that there is no significant correlation between Indigenous and Dalit with reference to narcissism.

Conclusion: This study had undertaken to explore the trends and relations of bullying, victimization, global personal self-esteem and narcissism with reference to gender, grade level and ethnicity roles among Nepalese school adolescents from public and private schools of Kathmandu district. Boys are more bullies and victims than girls. There is no significant positive correlation between gender role and global personal-self-esteem. However, there is significant positive correlation between narcissism and gender. Higher class students have higher trends of physical bullying, physical victimization, verbal bullying, verbal victimization, indirect bullying and indirect victimization than lower class students. There is no significance positive correlation between grade level and global personal self-esteem. Similarly, there is also no significance positive correlation between grade level and narcissism. Likewise, there is no significant positive correlation between Brahmin/Chhetri and indigenous with reference to total bullying, there is significant positive correlation between Brahmin/Chhetri and Dalit with reference to total bullying, there was almost nil correlation between Brahmin/Chhetri and Indigenous to total victimization, there is significant positive correlation between Brahmin/Chhetri and Dalit with reference to total victimization. The trends of victimization to Dalit is more than Brahmin/Chhetri and Indigenous.

There is strongly significant correlation between Brahmin/Chhetri and Dalit, and Indigenous and Dalit with reference to global personal self-esteem, there is strongly correlation between Brahmin/Chhetri and Dalit with reference to global personal self-esteem. Similarly, there is strongly correlation between Indigenous and Dalit with reference to global personal self-esteem. There was no significant correlation between Brahmin/Chhetri and Dalit, and Indigenous and Dalit with reference to narcissism. There is no significant correlation between Indigenous and Dalit with reference to narcissism. However, the in depth studies of causes and effects of bullying, victimization, global personal self-esteem and narcissism among Nepalese school adolescents is needed.

Keywords: bullying, ethnicity, gender, grade level, narcissism, self-esteem, victimization

Chapter One

Introduction

1.1 Defining Bullying

1.2 Correlates of Bullying and Victimization

1.3 Different Types of Bullying

1.4 Gender, Grade Level (Age) and Aggression

1.2 Statement of Problem

…

So, regarding to the problem related with the prevalence of bullying, victimization, self-esteem and narcissism among Nepalese school adolescents, following research questions were raised to meet the objectives of research study:

· What is the prevalence rate of bullying, victimization, global personal self-esteem and narcissism with reference to gender in school level?

· What is the prevalence rate and correlation of bullying, victimization, global personal self-esteem and narcissism with reference to grade level in school level?

· What is the correlation of bullying, victimization, global personal self-esteem and narcissism with reference to ethnicity in school level?

1.3 Significance of the study

1.4 Objectives

The over-all aim of this research is to explore the relationship between bullying, victimization, self-esteem and narcissism with response to gender, grade level and ethnicity among Nepalese school adolescents.

The specific objectives of this research are described as:

· To empirically explore the prevalence rate of bullying, victimization, global personal self-esteem and narcissism with reference to gender in school level.

· To empirically explore the prevalence rate and correlation of bullying, victimization, global personal self-esteem and narcissism with reference to grade level in school level.

· To empirically explore the correlation of bullying, victimization, global personal self-esteem and narcissism with reference to ethnicity in school level.

1.5 Hypotheses

Gravetter and Forzano (2003) mention that before a research idea can be assessed, it needs to be converted into hypotheses. These hypotheses are statements about the relationship between variables. The hypotheses of this study are as follow:

1. Gender role would be significant in bullying, victimization, global personal self-esteem and narcissism.

a. Boys would report significantly higher mean scores of physical bullying than girls.

b. Boys would report significantly higher mean scores of physical victimization than girls.

c. Boys would report significantly higher mean scores of verbal bullying than girls.

d. Boys would report significantly higher mean scores of verbal victimization than girls.

e. Girls would report significantly higher mean scores of indirect bullying than boys.

f. Girls would report significantly higher mean scores of indirect victimization than boys.

g. There would be a significant positive correlation between gender and global personal self-esteem.

h. There would be a significant positive correlation between gender and narcissism.

2. Grade level factor would be significant in bullying, victimization, global personal self-esteem and narcissism.

a. There would be a significant negative correlation between physical bullying and grade level.

b. There would be a significant negative correlation between physical victimization and grade level.

c. There would be no significant relationship between verbal bullying and age.

d. There would be no significant relationship between verbal victimization and grade level.

e. There would be a significant positive correlation between indirect bullying and grade level.

f. There would be a significant positive correlation between indirect victimization and grade level.

g. There would be a significant positive correlation between grade level and global personal self-esteem.

h. There would be a significant positive correlation between grade level and narcissism.

3. Ethnic roles would have significant positive and negative correlation between bullying, victimization, global personal self-esteem and narcissism.

a. There would be a significant positive correlation between bullying and ethnicity.

b. There would be a significant negative correlation between victimization and ethnicity.

c. There would be a significant positive correlation between global personal self-esteem and ethnicity.

d. There would be a significant positive correlation between narcissism and ethnicity.

1.6 Philosophical Worldviews

“Worldview refers to the culturally-dependent, generally subconscious, fundamental organization of the mind. This organization manifests itself as a set of presuppositions or assumptions, which predispose one to feel, think, and act in predictable patterns (Cobern & W.W., 1991)”. Worldview is defined as "a basic set or belief that guides action" (Guba, 1990, p. 17). Worldviews are overall orientation about the world and the nature of research that a researcher holds. These worldviews are shaped by the discipline area of the student, the beliefs and advisers and faculty in a student‘s area, and past research experiences. The types of beliefs held by individual researchers will often lead to embracing a qualitative, quantitative or mixed methods approach in their research. Four different worldviews are discussed: post-positivism, constructivism, and advocacy/participatory, and pragmatism.

Figure 1: Philosophical worldviews

Postpositivism

- Determination

- Reductionism

- Empirical observation and measurement

- Theory verification

Constructivism

-Understanding

-Multiple participant meanings

-Social and historical construction

-Theory generation

Philosophical Worldviews

Advocacy/Participatory

-Political

-Power and justice oriented

-Collaborative

-Change-oriented

Pragmatism

-Consequences of actions

-Problem-centered

-Pluralistic

-Real-world practice oriented

Source: (Creswell W. J., 2003)

The study was based on postpositivism because the researcher observed the problems empirically and applied quantitative method. “Postpositivism is more cautious concerning strong and one-sided interpretations and restrained regarding the too extensive (or obsessive) use of (quantitative) data and methods (Adam, 2014, p. 5)”.

1.7 Theoretical Framework

1.8 Conceptual Framework

Figure 2: Conceptual framework

Theoretical Linkage

Study Variables

Research Methodology

General Strain Theory

Group Relation Theory

Social Learning Theory

Ecological Theory

Independent Variables

Dependent Variables

Gender

Grade Level

Ethnicity

Bullying

Victimization

Self-esteem

Narcissism

Research Design: exploratory & Correlational

Study Unit: Grade 8 & 10 students

Instruments: Questionnaire survey

Analysis: Hypotheses Testing

Analysis and Findings

The present study has three independent variables: gender, grade level and ethnicity. The dependent variables of the present study are bullying, victimization, self-esteem and narcissism. To explore the prevalence rate of those dependent variables and to show the correlation between independent variables and dependent variables, questionnaire survey was done among grade 8 and 10 school students. The results were analysed on the basis of given theories.

1.9 Definition of Key Terms

1.10 Delimitations and Limitations

1.11 Chapter Plan

Chapter Two

Literature Review

2.1 Outline

2.2 Aggression

2.2.1 Aggression: Definition and Forms

2.2.2 Bullying: Definitions and types

2.2.3 Bullying prevalence in schools

2.2.4 Roles of bullying participant

2.2.5 Consequences of bullying

2.2.6 Aggression and Bullying: Types

2.2.7 Aggression and Gender Difference

2.2.8 Gender and Indirect Aggression

2.2.9 Developmental Changes in Aggression

2.3 Self-Esteem

2.3.1 Self-Esteem and Aggression

2.3.2 Global Self-Esteem and Victimization

2.3.3 Global Self-Esteem, Aggression, and Bullying

2.4 Narcissism

2.4.1 Narcissism, Aggression, and Bullying

2.5 Ethnic Minority, Bullying, Self-esteem and Narcissism

2.6 Drawing Together Self-Esteem, Narcissism, and Aggression and Bullying

CHAPTER THREE

Materials and Methods

This chapter describes how the study was conducted. The purpose of this quantitative study was to obtain statistical, quantitative results from a selected sample. This study used quantitative methods in order to test the above stated hypotheses. A cross-sectional design was used to collect data with self-administered surveys. This chapter presents information about the method that was used for data collection and analysis. Information about sampling, the research design, the survey method, reliability, validity, weaknesses and strengths of the research design, and data analysis are included.

3.1 Research Approaches

There are mainly two research approaches: deductive and inductive. The deductive approach – known as testing a theory, in which the researcher develops a theory or hypotheses and designs a research strategy to test the formulated theory. The inductive approach – known as building a theory, in which the researcher starts with collecting data in an attempt to develop a theory. The present study has applied the deductive research approach.

3.2 Design

The design of the main study was correlational. It employed a pen and paper self-report survey. The survey had four separate instruments. The four instruments were bullying, victimization, personal self-esteem and narcissism. There are a number of research designs. Among them why the researcher chose the correlational one is that especially in the quantitative type of research where two or more than two variables are existed correlational design is suitable (Thompson, Diamond, McWilliam, Synder, & Synder, 2005). Secondly, why the researcher chose the survey method is that the nature of the study is quantitative. It provides numeric description of trends, attitudes or opinions of population by studying a sample of that population (Creswell J. W., 2011).

Among a number of methodological considerations, consent procedure is one of them. Those children who are under 18 are taken consent from their parents or caretakers (Tisdall, Davis, & Gallagher, 2009). Thus, first step towards survey was consent to a child’s or young person’s participation in research from the parent or guardian. The consent to the parent was attached with information cover letter. The detailed of the cover letter and consent are given in Appendices. There are two types of consent processes: an opt-in process and opt-out process. The researcher chose the second one. The process requires that parents or guardians must sign and return a form if consent is not given for their children to participate. The next step was of letter to the head teachers or principals of the concerned schools. The sample of the letter is in appendix.

3.2 Participants

The total participants of the study were 936 from 15 government funded schools and 15 private schools of Kathmandu District, Nepal. Kathmandu is the capital city that represents the nature of almost population of Nepal. Among the total participants boys were 469 (50.1%) and girls 467 (49.9%). The following table no. 3.1 shows the gender wise participants.

3.3.1 Demographic Information

3.3.2 Bullying and Victimization

3.3.3 Personal self-esteem

3.3.4 Narcissism

3.4 Procedure

CHAPTER FOUR

Observations

This chapter presents the results of the data collected from the sampled school children of grades 8 and 10 from Kathmandu districts, Nepal. The study purposed to aim to examine the relationship between the degree of bullying and victimization with reference to gender, grade level and ethnicity as well as self-esteem and narcissism. All the collected data were entered into SPSS. The results of this study are presented by hypotheses.

Table 4: Demographic information of respondents

		Gender
		Male	Female
		Count	Count
Age	12	13	21
	13	71	101
	14	117	122
	15	139	126
	16	103	81
	17	25	13
	18	1	3
Ethnicity	Brahmin/Chhetri	211	207
	Indigenous	225	210
	Dalit	33	50
Grade	8	228	243
Grade	10	241	224

Sample

Hypotheses Testing

Hypothesis No. 1. Gender role is significant in bullying, victimization, global personal self-esteem and narcissism.

Hypothesis No. 2. Grade level factor would be significant in bullying, victimization, global personal self-esteem and narcissism.

Hypothesis No. 3. Ethnic role would have positive and negative significant in bullying, victimization, global personal self-esteem and narcissism.

Chapter- Five

Discussion

5.1 Summary of study

Hypothesis No. 1. Gender role is significant in bullying, victimization, global personal self-esteem and narcissism.

Hypothesis No. 2. Grade level factor would be significant in bullying, victimization, global personal self-esteem and narcissism.

Hypothesis No. 3. Ethnic role would have positive and negative significant in bullying, victimization, global personal self-esteem and narcissism.

5.2 Key Findings of the present study

5.2.1 Demographic status of Respondents

5.2.2 Findings related with Hypothesis No. 1. Gender role is significant in bullying, victimization, global personal self-esteem and narcissism.

5.2.3 Findings related with Hypothesis No. 2. Grade level factor would be significant in bullying, victimization, global personal self-esteem and narcissism.

5.2.4 Findings related with Hypothesis No. 3. Ethnic role would have positive and negative significant in bullying, victimization, global personal self-esteem and narcissism.

5.3 Conclusion of study

5.4 Recommendation for future research

Following recommendations are made on the basis of results obtained from the study:

References

(2013, August 27). Retrieved from Wikipedia, Free Encyclopedia : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics

(2013). Action Plan on Bullying: Report of the AntiBullying Working Group to the Minister for Education and Skills January 2013. Ministery of Education and Skills, Ireland.

Adam, F. (2014). Methodological and Epistemic Framework: From Positivism to Post-positivism. In F. Adam, Measuring National Innovation Performance (pp. 5-7). London: Springer Briefs Economics. doi: 10.1007/978-3-642-39464-5_2

Almeida, A. (1999). The nature of school bullying: Across-national perspective. (P. M.-T. Smith, Ed.) London: Routledge.

American Psychiatric Association. (2000). Diagnostic and statiscal manual of mental disorders (4th text rev ed.). Washington, DC: Author.

Anderson, C. A., & Bushman, B. J. (2002). Human aggression. Annual Review of Psychology, 53, 27-51.

Anderson, E. (1994). The code of the streets. Atlantic Monthly, 273, 80-90.

Anderson, E. (1994, May). The code of the streets. Atlantic Monthly, 273, 80-90.

Andreou, E. (2001). Bully/victim problems and their association with coping behaviour in conflictual peer interactions among school-age children. Educational Psychology, 21, 59-66.

Archer, J. (2001). A strategic approach to aggression. Social Development, 10, 267-271.

Archer, J. (2004). Sex differences in aggression in real world settings: A meta-analytic review. Review of General Psychology, 8, 291-322.

Archer, J. (2004). Sex differences in aggression in real-world settings: A meta-analytic review. Review of General Psychology, 8, 291-322.

Archer, J. (2009). The nature of human aggression. International Journal of Law and Psychiatry, 32, 202-208.

Archer, J., & Coyne, S. M. (2005). An integrated review of indirect, relational, and social aggression. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 9, 212-230.

Austin, S., & Joseph, S. (1996). Assesment of bully/victim problems in 8 to 11 year-olds. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 66, 447-456.

Austin, S., & Joseph, S. (1996). Assessment of bully/victim problems in 8 to 11 year-olds. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 66, 447-456.

Bajracharya, Y. (2013, February 27). Bullying in schools: A sad reality. Kathmandu: The Republica. Retrieved July 31, 2013, from http://www.myrepublica.com/portal/index.php?action=news_details&news_id=50651

Baldry, A. C. (2004). The impact of direct and relational bullying on the mental and physical health of Italian youngsters. Aggressive Behavior, 30, 343-355.

Bandura, A. (1973). Aggression: A social psychological analysis. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Barboza, G., Schiamberg, L., Oehmke, J., K. S., Post, L., & Heraux, C. (2009). Individual Characteristics and the Multiple Contexts of Adolescent Bullying: An Ecological Perspective. Journal of Youth Adolescence, 38, 101-121.

Bauer, M., & Gaskell, G. (2008). Social representation theory: A progressive research programme for social psychology. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 38, 335-353.

Baumeister, R. F., & Sommer, K. L. (1997). What do men want? Gender differences and two spheres of belongingness: Comment on Cross and Madsen (1997). Psychological Bulletin, 122, 38-44.

Baumeister, R. F., Bushman, B. J., & Campbell, W. K. (2000). Self-esteem, narcissism, and aggression: Does violence result from low self-esteem of from threatened egotism? Current Direction in Psychological Science, 9, 26-29.

Baumeister, R. F., Smart, L., & Boden, J. (1996). Relation of threatened egotism to violence and aggression: The dark side of high self-esteem. Psychological Review, 103, 5-33.

Baumeister, R. F., Smart, L., & Boden, J. M. (1996). Relation of threatened egotism to violence and aggression: The dark side of high self-esteem. Psychological Review, 103, 5-33.

Bazelon, E. (2013, March 11). Defining Bullying Down. New Heaven. New York, USA: The New York Times. Retrieved from www.nytimes.com/2013/03/12/opinion/defining-bullying-down.html

Bettencourt, B. A., & Miller, A. (1996). Gender diferences in aggression as a function as provocation: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 119, 422-447.

Bettencourt, B., & Miller, N. (1996). Gender differences in aggression as a function of provocation: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 119, 422-447.

Bjorkqvist, K. (1994). Sex differences in physical, verbal and indirect aggression: A review of recent research. Sex Role, 30, 177-188.

Bjorkqvist, K. (2001). Different names, same issu. Social Development, 10, 270-274.

Björkqvist, K. (2001). Different names, same issue. Social Development, 10, 272-274.

Björkqvist, K., & Niemelä, P. (1992). New trends in the study of the female aggression. In K. Björkqvist, & P. Niemelä, Of mice and women : Aspects of female aggression (pp. 3-16). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.

Björkqvist, K., & Österman, K. (1998). Scales for research on interpersonal relations. In K. Björkqvist, & K. Österman (Eds.). Vasa, Finland: Abo Akademi University.

Bjorkqvist, K., & Osterman, K. (2000). Social intelligence - empathy = aggression? Aggression and Violent Behavior, 5, 191-200.

Bjorkqvist, K., Lagerspetz, K. M., & Kaukiainen, A. (1992). Do girls manipulate and boys fight? Developmental trends in regard to direct and indirect aggression. Aggressive Behavior, 18, 117-127.

Bjorkqvist, K., Lagerspetz, K. M., & Osterman, K. (1992). Direct and Indirect Aggression Behavior (DIAS). VASA, Finland: Department of Social Sciences. Abo Akademi University.

Bjorkqvist, K., Lagerspetz, K., & Osterman, K. (1992). Direct and Indirect Aggression Scales (DIAS). Vasa, Finland: Department of Social Sciences, Abo Akademi University.

Björkqvist, K., Österman, K., & Kaukiainen, A. (1992). The development of direct and indirect aggressive strategies in males and females. In K. Björkqvist, & P. Niemelä (Eds.), Of mice and women: Aspects of female aggression (pp. 51-64). San Diego: CA: Academic Press.

Bosworth, K., Espelage, D., & Simon, T. (1999). Factors associated wih bullying behavior in middle school students. Journal of Early Adolescence, 19, 341-362.

Boulton, M. J., & Smith, P. K. (1994). Bully/victim problems in middle school children: Stability, self-perceived competence, peer perceptions and peer acceptance. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 12, 315-329.

Boulton, M. T. (2002). Associations between secondary school pupils' definitions of bullying, attitudes towards bullying, and tendencies to engage in bullying: Age and sex differences. Educational Studies, 28, 353-370.

Boulton, M., & Underwood, K. (1992). Bully/victim problems among middle school children. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 62, 73-87.

Brown, J. D. (1998). The self. Boston: MA: M'Graw Hill.

Bushman, B. J., & Anderson, C. A. (2001). Is it time to pull the plug on the hostile versus instrumental aggression dichotomy? Psychological Review, 108, 273-279.

Cairns, R. B., Caims, B. D., Neckerman, H. J., Ferguson, L. L., & Gariepy, J. L. (1989). Growth and aggression: Childhood to early adolescence. Developmental Psychology, 25, 320-330.

Charach, A., & Pepler, D. &. (1995). Bullying at school: A Canadian perspective. Education Canada, 35, 12-18.

Cobern, & W.W. (1991). Worldview Theory and Science Education Research: Fundamental Epistemological Structure as a Critical Factor in Science Learning and Attitude Development. NARST Monograph, 3, 1-25.

Collins, W. A., & Repinski, D. J. (1994). Relationships during adolescence: Continuity and change in interpersonal perspective. In R. MOntemayor, G. R. Adams, & T. P. Gullotta (Eds.), Personal relationships during adolescence (pp. 7-36). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Coopersmith, S. (1967). The antecedents of self-esteem. San Francisco: W. H. Freeman & Co.

Creswell, J. W. (2011). Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative and Mixed Methods Approaches (3rd ed.). New Delhi: SAGE Publication India Pvt Ltd.

Creswell, W. J. (2003). The Selection of a Research Approach. In Creswell, & J. W., RESEARCH Design: Qualitative,Quantitative and Mixed Methods Approaches (SECOND ed., pp. 3-23). London: SAGE Publications.

Crick, N. R., & Dodge, K. A. (1996). Social information processing mechanisms in reactive and proactive aggression. Child Development, 67, 993-1002.

Crick, N. R., & Grotpeter, J. K. (1995). Relational aggression, gender, and social-psychological adjustment. Child Development, 66, 710-722.

Crick, N. R., Wemer, N. E., Casas, J. F., O'Brien, K. M., Nelson, D. A., & Grotpeter, J. K. (1998). Childhood aggression and gender: A new look at an old problem. In D. Bernstein (Ed.), Nebraska Symposium on Motivation (pp. 75-141). Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press.

Cross, D., Hall, M., Hamilton, G., Pintabona, Y., & Erceg, E. (2004). Australia: The Friendly Schools project. In P. K. Smith, D. Pepler, & K. Rigby (Eds.), Bullying in schools: How successful can interventions be? (pp. 187-210). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Davies, M., & Cunningham, G. (1999). Adolescent parasuicide in the Foyle area. Irish Journal of Psychiatric Medicine, 16, 9-12.

Davison, G. C., & Neale, J. M. (1998). Abnormal psychology (7th ed.). New York: Wiley.

Dettinger, S., & Hart, G. (2007). The Relationship Between Self-Esteem and Indirect Aggression In The Workplace. Journal of Psychiatry & Psychology, 1.

Doty, J., & Fenlason, J. (2013). Narcissim and Toxic Leaders. Military Review, 55-60.

Dulmus, C. N., Theriot, M. T., Sowers, K. M., & Blackburn, J. A. (2004). Student reports of peer bullying victimization in a rural school. Stress, Trauma, and Crisis, 7, 1-16.

Eaggly, A., & Wood, W. (1999). Explaining sex differences in social behavior: A meta-analytic perspective. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 67, 306-316.

Eagly, A. (1987). Sex differences in social behavior: A social role interpretation. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Egan, S. K., & Perry, D. G. (1998). Does low self-regard invite victimization? Developmental Psychology, 34, 299-309.

Emler, N., & Ohana, J. (1993). Studying social representations in children: Just old win in new bottles? In G. M. Breakwell, & D. V. Canter (Eds.), Empirical approaches to social representations (pp. 63-89). New York: Clarendon Press.

Feshbach, N. D. (1969). Sex differences in children's modes of aggressive responses toward outsiders. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 15, 249-258.

Francine Delany. (2013). Parent Handbook. Retrieved November 22, 2014, from fdnsc.net/parents/parent-handbook

Galen, B. R., & Underwood, M. K. (1997). A developmental investigation of social aggression among children. Developmental Psychology, 33, 589-600.

Gladden, R. M., Vivolo-Kantor, A. M., Hamburger, M. E., & Lumpkin, C. D. (2014). BULLYING SURVEILLANCE AMONG YOUTHS:UNIFORM DEFINITIONS FOR PUBLIC HEALTH AND RECOMMENDED DATA ELEMENTS. Atlanta, Georgia: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Retrieved March 22, 2015, from http://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/pdf/bullying-definitions-final-a.pdf

Glover, D., Gough, G., Johnson, M., & Cartwright, N. (2000). Bullying in 25 secondary schools: Incidence, impact and intervention. Educational Research, 42, 141-156.

Gravetter, F., & Forzano, L. (2003). Research methods for the bevavioural sciences. California: Wadsworth/Thomson Learning, Inc.

Griffin, R. S., & Gross, A. M. (2004). Childhood bullying: Current empirical findings and future directions for research. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 9, 379-400.

Grotpeter, J. K., & Crick, N. R. (1996). Relational aggression, overt aggression, and friendship. Child Development, 67, 2328-2338.

Haney, P., & Durlak, J. (1998). Changing self-esteem in children and adolescents: A meta-analytic review. Journal of Clinical Child Psychology, 27, 423-433.

Haney, P., & Hennessy, J. A. (1998). Changing self-esteem in children and adolescents: A meta-analytic review. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 27, 423-433.

Hanish, L., & Guerra, N. (2000). The roles of ethnicity and school context in predicting children.s victimization by peers. American Journal of Community Psychology, 28, 201-223.

Harré, R., & Lamb, R. (1983). The encyclopedic dictionary of psychology. Oxford: Basil Backwell.

Harter, S. (1979). Perceived Competence Scale for Children . Manual Denver:CO: University of Denver.

Harter, S. (1985). The Self-Perception Profile for Children: Revision of the Perceived Competence Scale for Children. Manual Denver, CO: University of Denver.

Hawker, D., & Boulton, M. (2000). Twenty years' research on peer victimization and psychosocial maladjustment: A meta-analytic review of cross-sectional. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 41, 441-455.

Haynie, D. L., Nansel, T., Eitel, P., Crump, A. D., Saylor, K., & Yu, K. (2001). Bullies, vistims and bully/victims: Distinct groups of at-risk youth. Journal of Early Adolesence, 21, 29-49.

Hayward, S. M., & Fletcher, J. (2003). Relational aggression in an Australian sample: Gender and age differences. Australian Journal of Psychology, 55, 129-134.

Hoyle, R. H., Kernis, M. H., Leary, M. R., & Baldwin, M. W. (1999). Selfhood: Identity, esteem, regulation. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.

Huesmann, L. R., Guerra, N. G., Zelli, A., & Miller, L. (1992). Differing normative beliefs about aggression for boys and girls. In K. Bjorkqvist, & P. Niemela (Eds.), Of mice and women: Aspects of female aggression (pp. 77-87). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.

John, O. P., & Robins, R. W. (1994). Accuracy and bias in self-perception: Individual differences in self-enhancement and the role of narcissism. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 66, 206-219.

Jones, G. P., & Dembo, M. H. (1989). Age and sex role differences in intimate friendships during childhood and adolescence. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 35, 445-462.

Karatzias, A., & Power, K. G. (2002). Bullying and victimisation in Scottish secondary schools: Same or separate entities? Aggressive Behavior, 28, 45-61.

Kaukiainen, A., Salmivalli, C., Lagerspetz, K., Tamminen, M., Vauras, M., & Maki, H. (2001). Learning difficulties, social intelligence, and self-concept: Connection to bully/victim problems. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 43, 269-278.

Keith, L. K., & Bracken, B. A. (1996). Self-concept instrumentation: A historical and evaluative review. In B. A. Bracken, Handbook of self-concept: Developmental, social, and clinical considerations (pp. 91-170). New York: Wiley.

Kumpulainen, K., Rasanen, E., & Puura, K. (2001). Psychiatric disorders and the use of mental health service among children involved in bullying. Aggressive Behavior, 27, 102-110.

Lagerspetz, K. M., Bjorkqvist, K., & Peltonen, T. (1988). Is indirect aggression typical of females? Gender differences in aggressiveness in 11 to 12 year-old children. Aggressive Behavior, 14, 403-414.

Lagerspetz, K. M., Bjorkqvist, K., Berts, M., & King, E. (1982). Group aggression among school children in three schools. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 23, 45-52.

Lagerspetz, K., Bjorkqvist, K., Berts, M., & King, E. (1982). Group aggression among school children in three schools. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 23, 45-52.

Land, D. (2003). Teasing apart secondary students' conceptualizations of peer teasing, bullying and harassment. School Psychology International, 24, 147-165.

Lane, D. (1989). Bullying in school: The need for an integrated approach. School Psychology International, 10, 211-215.

Levy, K. (1997). The condition of self-concept in the etiology of adolescent deliquency. Adolescence, 32(127), 671-686.

Luhtanen, R., & Crocker, J. (1992). A collective self-esteem scale: Self-evaluation of one's social identity. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 18, 302-318.

Maccoby, E. E., & Jacklin, C. N. (1974). The psychology of sex differences. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

Marsee, M., Weems, C. F., & Taylor, L. K. (2008). Exploring the association between aggression and anxiety in youth: A look at aggressive subtypes, gender, and social cognition. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 17, 154-168.

McKenney, K., Pepler, D., Craig, W., & Connolly, J. (2006). Peer victimization and psychosocial adjustment: The experiences of Canadian immigrant youth. Electronic Journal of Research in Educational Psychology,, 9, 239-264.

Mihai, C., Ioan, I., & Beatrice, A. (2009). School bullying: definition, characteristics,. Review of research and social intervention, 26, 7-29. Retrieved June 16, 2013, from http://www.rcis.ro/images/documente/rcis26_01.pdf

Mpofu, E., Thomas, K., & Chan, F. (2004). Social competence in Zimbabwean multicultural schools: Effects of ethnic and gender differences. International Journal of Psychology, 39, 169-178.

Nansel, T. R., Overpeck, M., Pilla, R. S., Ruan, W. J., Simons-Morton, B., & Scheidt, P. (2001). Bullying bevaviors among US youth: Prevalence and association with psychosocial adjustment. JAMA: Journal of the American Medical Association, 285, 2094-2100.

Nguy, L., & Hunt, C. J. (2004). Ethnicity and bullying: A study of Australian high school students. Educational and Child Psychology, 21, 78-94.

O'Connell, P., Pepler, D., & Craig, W. (1999). Peer Involvement in bullying: Insights and challenges for intervention. Journal of Adolescence, 22, 437-452.

Olweus, D. (1980). Familial and temperamental determinants of aggressive behavior in adolesent boys: A causal analysis. Developmental Psychology, 16, 644-660.

Olweus, D. (1991). Bully/victim problems among schoolchildren: Basic facts and effects of a school based intervention program. In D. Pepler, & K. Rubin (Eds.), The development and treatment of childhood aggression (pp. 411-448). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Olweus, D. (1991). Bully/victim problems among schoolchildren: Basic fcats and effects of a school based intervention program. The development and treatment of childhood aggression, 411-448. (D. Pepler, & K. Rubin, Eds.) Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Olweus, D. (1999b). Sweden. In P. Smith, Y. Morita, J. Junger-Tas, D. Olweus, R. Catalano, & P. Slee (Eds.), The nature of school bullying: A cross-national perspective (pp. 7-27). London: Routledge.

O'Moore, M., & Kirkham, C. (2001). Self-esteem and its relationship to bullying behavoiur. Aggressive Behavior, 27, 269-283.

Osterman, K., Bjorkqvist, K., Lagerspetz, K. M., Kaukiainen, A., Heusmann, L. R., & Fraczek, A. (1994). Peer and self-estimited aggression and victimization in 8- year-old children from five ethnic groups. Aggression Behavior, 20, 411-428.

Osterman, K., Bjorkqvist, K., Lagerspetz, K. M., Kaukiainen, A., Landau, S. F., & Fraczek, A. (1998). Cross-cultural evidence of female aggression. Aggressive Behavior, 24, 1-8.

Owens, L. D. (1996). Sticks and stones and sugar and spice: Girls' and boys' aggression in schools. Australian Journal of Guidance and Counselling, 6, 45-55.

Owens, L., & MacMullin, C. E. (2005). Gender differences in aggression in children and adolescents in South Australian schools. International Journal of Adolescence and Youth, 6, 21-35.

Owens, L., Daly, A., & Slee, P. (2005). Sex and age differences in victimization and conflict resolution among adolescents in a South Australian school. Aggressive Behavior, 31, 1-12.

Owens, L., Shute, R., & Slee, P. (2005). "In the eye of the beholder..." Girls', boys' and teachers' perceptions of boys' aggression to girls. International Education Journal, 5(5), 124-151.

Papps, B. P., & O'Carroll, R. E. (1998). Extremes of eslf-esteem and narcissism and the experience and expression of anger and aggression. Aggressive Behavior, 24, 421-438.

Paquette, J. A., & Underwood, M. K. (1999). Gender differences in young adolescents' experiences of peer victimization: Social and physical aggression. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 45, 242-266.

Parsons, L. (2005). Bullied Teacher, Bullied Student: How to Recognize the Bullying Culture in Your School and What to Do about It. Canada: Pembroke Publishers.

Pellegrini, A. D. (2002). Bullying, victimization, and sexual harassment during the transition to middle school. Educational Psychologist, 37, 151-163.

Pellegrini, A. D., & Long, J. D. (2002). A longitudinal study of bullying, dominance, and victimization during the transition from primary school through secondary school. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 20, 259-280.

Pellegrini, A., & Smith, P. (1998). Physical activity play: The nature and function of a neglected aspect of play. Child Development, 69, 577-598.

Pickard, J. D., Barry, C. T., Wallace, M. T., & Zeigler-Hill, V. (2013). Ethnicity, Ethnic Identity, and Adolescent Narcissism. Self and Identity, 12(5), 489-503. doi:10.1080/15298868.2012.693258

Quiroz, H. C., Arnette, J. L., & Stephens, R. D. (2006). What is school bullying? In H. C. Quiroz, J. L. Arnette, & R. D. Stephens, Bullying In Schools: Fighting the Bully Battle (pp. 1-3). California: National School Safety Center.

Rana, N. (2012, June 6). Women Lead. Retrieved from Women Lead Nepal: http://womenleadnepal.wordpress.com/2012/06/06/inspiring-nepalese-women-blog-series-dr-niti-rana/

Raskin, R., & Hall, C. S. (1981). The Narcissistic Personality Inventory: Alternate form reliability and further evidence of construct validity. Journal of Personality Assessment, 45, 159-162.

Raskin, R., & Novacek, J. (1989). An MMPI description of the narcissistic personality. Journal of Personality Assessment, 53, 66-80.

Raskin, R., & Terry, H. (1988). A principle-components analysis of the Narcissistic Personality Inventory and further evidence of its construct validity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 890-902.

Reber, A. S. (1995). The Penguin dictionary of psychology (2nd ed.). London: Penguin.

Rigby, A. (1996). Bullying in Schools: And what to do about it. Melbourne: Australian Councils for Educational Research.

Rigby, K. (1996). . Bullying in schools: And what to do about it. Melbourne: Australian Council for Educational Research.

Rigby, K. (2001). Health consequences of bullying and its prevention in schools. In J. Juvonen, & S. Graham (Eds.), Peer harassment in schools: The plight of the vulnerable and victimized (pp. 310-331). New York: Gulford Press.

Rigby, K. (2001). Health consequences of bullying and its prevention in schools. (J. Juvonen, & S. Graham, Eds.) New York: Guilford Press.

Rigby, K. (2008). Children and bullying: How parents and educators can reduce bullying at school. Victoria: Blackwell Publishing.

Rigby, K., & Cox, I. (1996). The contribution of bullying at school and low self-esteem to acts of deliquency among Australian teenagers. Personality and Individual Differences, 21, 609-612.

Rigby, K., & Slee, P. T. (1991). Dimensions of interpersonal relation among Australian children and implications for psychological well-being. The Journal of Social Psychology, 133, 33-42.

Rigby, K., & Slee, P. T. (1993). Dimensions of interpersonal relation among Australian children and implications for psychological well-being. Journal of Social Psychology, 133, 33-42.

Rivers, I. (2004). Recollections of bullying at school and then long-term implications for lesbians, gay men, and bisexuals. Crisis: The Journal of Crisis Intervention and Suicide Prevention, 25, 169-175.

Rivers, I., & Smith, P. K. (1994). Types of bullying behaviour and their correlates. Aggressive Behavior, 20, 359-368.

Rosenberg, M. (1979). Conceiving the self . New York: Basic Books.

Rosenberg, M., Schooler, C., & Schoenbach, C. (1989). Self-esteem and adolescent problems: Modeling reciprocal effects. American Sociological Review, 54(6), 1004-1018.

Rubin, M., & Hewstone, M. (1998). Social identity theory's self-esteem hypothesis: A review and some suggestions for clarification. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 2, 40-62.

Salmivalli, C. (1999). Participant role approach to school bullying: Implications for interventions. Journal of Adolescence, 22, 453-459.

Salmivalli, C. (2001). Feeling good about oneself, being bad to others? Remarks on self-esteem, hostility, and aggression behavior. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 6, 375-393.

Salmivalli, C., & Kaukiainen, A. (2004). "Female Aggression" revisited: Variable- and person-centered approaches to studying gender differences in different types of aggression. Aggressive Behavior, 30, 158-163.

Salmivalli, C., & Nieminen, E. (2002). Proactive and reactive aggression among school bullies, victims, and bully-victims. Aggression Behavior, 28, 30-44.

Salmivalli, C., Kaukiainen, A., Kaistamemi, L., & Lagerspetz, K. M. (1999). Self-evaluated self-esteem, peer-evaluated self-esteem, and defensive egotism as predictors of adolescents participation in bullying situations. Personality and Psychology Bulletin, 25, 1268-1278.

Salmivalli, C., Lagerspetz, K., Bjorkqvist, K., Osterman, K., & Kaukianen, A. (1996). Bullying as a group process: Participant roles and their relations to social status within the group. Aggressive Behavior, 22, 1-15.

Sawyer, A., Bradshaw, C., & O‟Brennan, L. (2008). Examining ethnic, gender, and developmental differences in the way children report being a victim of “Bullying” on self-report measures. Journal of Adolescent Health, 43, 106-114.

Sedikides, C., Rudich, E. A., Greg, A. P., Kumashiro, M., & Rusbult, C. (2004). Are Normal Narcissists Psychologically Healthy? : Self-Esteem Matters. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 87(3), 400-416. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.87.3.400

Shute, R., & Charlton, K. (2006). Anger or compromise? Adolescents' conflict resolution strategies in relation to gender and type of peer relationship. International Journal of Adolescence and Youth, 13, 55-69.

Skaalvik, E. (1990). Gender differences in general academic self-esteem and in success expectations on defined academic problems. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82, 593-598.

Smith, J. D., Cousins, J. B., & Stewart, R. (2005). Antibullying Interventions in Schools: Ingredients of Effective Programs. Canadian Journal of Education, 28(4), 739-762. Retrieved 5 31, 2013, from : http://www.jstor.org/stable/4126453

Smith, P. K. (2004). Bullying: Recents developments. Child and Adolescent Mental Health, 9, 98-103.

Smith, P. K., & Brain, P. (2000). Bullying in schools:Lessons from two decades of research. Aggressive Behavior, 26, 1-9.

Smith, P. K., Madsen, K. C., & Moody, J. C. (1999). What causes age decline in reports of being bullied at school? Towards a developmental analysis of risks of being bullied. Educational Research, 41, 267-285.

Stephenson, P., & Smith, D. (1989). Bullying in the junior school. In D. Tattum, & D. Lane (Eds.), Bullying in Schools (pp. 45-57). Stoke-on-Trentham Books.

Sutton, J., & Keogh, E. (2000). Social competition and bullying: Relationships with bullying, Machiavellianism and personality. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 70, 443-456.

Sutton, J., Smith, P. K., & Swettenham, J. (1999). Social cognition and bullying: Social inadequacy or skilled manipulation? British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 17, 435-450.

Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1986). The social identity theory of intergroup behavior. In W. Worchel, & W. G. Austin (Eds.), Psychology of intergroup relations (pp. 7-24). Chicago: Nelson-Hall.

Tapper, K., & Boulton, M. J. (2004). Sex differences in levels of physical, verbal, and indirect aggression amongst primary school children and their associations with beliefs about aggression. Aggressive Behavior, 30, 123-145.

Tarrant, M., North, A. C., Edridge, M. D., Kirk, L. E., Smith, E. A., & Turner, R. E. (2001). Social Identity in adolescence. Journal of Adolescence, 24, 597-609.

Thomas, D. (2012). Narcissism - Behind the Mask. Brighton: Book Guild Ltd.

Thompson, B., Diamond, K. E., McWilliam, R., Synder, P., & Synder, S. W. (2005). Evaluating the Quality of Evidence from Correlational Research for Evidence-Based Practice. Exceptional Children, 71(2), 181-194.

Tisdall, E., Davis, J., & Gallagher, M. (2009). Researching with Children and Young . London: SAGE.

Todlos, M. P. (2005). Sex and age differences in self-estimated physical, verbal and indirect aggression in Spanish adolescents. Aggressive Behavior, 31, 13-23.

Underwood, M. K., & Galen, B. R. (2001). Hopes rather than fears, admirations rather than hostilities: A response to Archer and Bjorkqvist. Social Development, 10, 275-280.

Underwood, M. K., Galen, B. R., & Paquette, J. A. (2001). Top ten challenges for understanding gender and aggression in children: Why can't we all just get along? Social Development, 10, 248-266.

Underwood, M., Galen, B., & Paquette, J. (2001). Top ten challenges for understanding gender and aggression in children: Why can't we all just get along? Social Development, 10, 248-266.

UNESCO. (2015). School-related gender-based violence is preventing the achievement of quality education for all. School-related gender-based violence is preventing the achievement of quality education for all. UNESCO.

Verkuyten, M. (2003). Ethnic in-group bias among minority and majority early adolescents: The perception of negative peer behaviour. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 21, 543-564.

Verkuyten, M., & Thijs, J. (2001). Peer victimization and self-esteem of ethnic minority group children. Journal of Community and Applied Social Psychology, 11, 227-234.

Verkuyten, M., & Thijs, J. (2002). Racist victimization among children in The Netherlands: The effect of ethnic group and school. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 25, 301-331.

Verkuyten, M., & Thijs, J. (2004). Global and Ethnic Self-Esteem in School Context: Minority and Majority Groups in the Netherlands. Social Indicators Research, 67(3), 253-281.

Verkuyten, M., Kinket, B., & van der Wielen, C. (1997). Preadolescents. understanding of ethnic discrimination. The Journal of Genetic Psychology, 158, 97-112.

Whitney, I., & Smith, P. K. (1993). A survey of the nature and extent of bullying in junior/middle and secondary schools. Educational Research, 35, 3-25.

WIKIPEDIA. (2015, January 20). Narcissism. Retrieved from Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Narcissism

Wood, W., & Eagley, A. H. (2001). A cross-cultural analysis of the behavior of women and men: implications for the origins of sex differences. Psychological Bulletin, 128(5), 699-727.