Resiliencein ‘Adolescent Bullying Victims’: A Case Study in

Pesantren

Solicha

, Rena Latifa

and Siti Khusnul Chotimah

The Faculty of Psychology,UIN SyarifHidayatullah Jakarta, Banten, Indonesia

Keywords: Adolescent resilience, bullying victim, pesantren

Abstract: This research explores the formation of resilience in adolescent bullying victims. We predict personality,

social support, gender, kinds of bullying and school type as factors contribute to resilience formation. The

participants are 186 pesantren students in East Java, Indonesia. The result showed that there was a

significant influence on personality, social support, gender, kinds of bullying and school type toward

resilience. It also indicated that peer support in pesantren has a higher influence than parental support.

Related to the gender, we found that boys are more resilient than girls.

1 INTRODUCTION

Bullying is a common social problem among school

children. According to Krahe (2005), almost every

child may have experienced an unpleasant form of

treatment from another older or more powerful

people. Students who experience bullying will find it

difficult to adapt socially and psychologically, find it

difficult to get along with schoolmates, and even feel

lonely (in The American Medical Association,

2002). For bullying victims, schools can be an

unpleasant and dangerous place. Their fears can lead

to depression, low self-esteem, and frequent

absences at school (Glew, R., &Feudtner, M.,

2000).Khalid Al Raqqad, et.al (2017) concluded that

school bullying affect student’s academic

achievement either victims or the bullies of bullying.

According to Alison (2016) bullying is considered as

global problem in the world that affect emotional,

social, and physical wellbeing of school-age children

worldwide.

Some of them failed academically but some

could be revive or bounce back. Wherein victims of

bullying can brace up and have the ability to survive

from the conditions or difficulties experienced. One

of them by trying to continue to have positive

thoughts and confidence to connect with others. This

is demonstrated by his endurance ability in the face

of an unpleasant trial of life, which in psychological

terms is called resilience.

Resilience is the ability of a person to judge,

overcome, and improve himself or change himself

from adversity or misery in life (Grotberg in Schoon,

2006). According to ReivichandShatte (2002)

resilience is one's ability to survive, come up, and

adjust to difficult conditions. Resilience is defined as

the capacity to respond soundly and productively

when faced with misery or trauma, which is

necessary to manage the stresses of every day of life.

Resilience is a stable personality trait characterized

by the individual's ability to rise from a negative

experience and adaptability to change the continuous

life (Connor, 2006; Everal, Altrows and Paulson.,

2006; Frederickson et al., 2003; Kindt, 2006).

Flores, Cicchetti, and Rogosch (2005) as well as

Everal, Altrows and Paulson (2006) explained that

resilience is a dynamic process that affects a person's

capacity to adapt and succeed in overcoming chronic

pressures and misery. Windle (2011) defined

resilience as such the process of negotiating,

adapting, or managing a significant source of stress

or traumaeffectively. The assets and resources

within individuals, their lives, and environments

facilitate the capacity for adaptation or "bounce

back" in the face of adversity (Windle, 2011, p.163).

Bennet (2010) operationalizes resilience using the

following criteria: participants view their current

lives positively; participateactively in life; return or

maintain a meaningful life or satisfaction; overcome

and not depressed.

With resilience can turn a victim into a stronger

and encourage people to thrive and become better

1394

Solicha, ., Latifa, R. and Chotimah, S.

Resiliencein ‘Adolescent Bullying Victims’: A Case Study in Pesantren.

DOI: 10.5220/0009928313941401

In Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Recent Innovations (ICRI 2018), pages 1394-1401

ISBN: 978-989-758-458-9

(Reivich and Shatte, 2002). Cole, E., Eiseman, M.,

and Popkin, J.S. (2005) found that individual

characteristics help children deal with the stress they

experience. Resilient children have a high self-

efficacy and have a positive relationship with

parents, teachers, and friends. Resilient children are

also aware of the dangers that surround them and

devise ways to deal with them, such as moving away

from certain areas of danger. Another literature

study on adolescent competence conducted by Hair,

C. E., Jager, J., and Garrett, S. (2001) found that

children who have good relationships with their

social environment have better academic results and

psychological happiness.

The various factors affecting resilience are: hope

(Pienaar et al, 2011; gratitude (Chung, 2008;

Gomez, 2013), optimism (Carver & Connor-smith,

2010; Tusaie-Mumfrod, 2001; Saboripour et al.

2015), personality type (Nakaya, 2006), self-esteem

(Sapouna, 2013; Salahuddin, 2011), religiosity

(Stephen, 2007), etc. The external factors include the

warmth of siblings and families (Bowes, 2010)

environmental factors of residence (Cohen, 2009,

Challenge and Simons, 2012), family atmosphere

(Bowes, 2010), social support (Saboripour, 2015),

culture and environment (Wong & Wong, 2006).

Social alienation and a number of close friends

(Sapouna, 2013). Herman, Stewart, Diaz-Granados,

Berger, Jackson, and Yuen (2011) suggest that there

are three sources can build resilience in individuals,

namely: personal factors (personality traits,

spirituality, intellectual function, emotional

regulation, self-efficacy, and optimism), biological

factors (development of brain structures, functions

and systems of existing neurotransmitters), and

environmental-systemic factors (social support,

family stability, culture, and services obtained from

organizations or agencies outside of the family).

As Herman, et al (2011) suggests, this research will

also be conducted to explore the influence of

honesty-humility as a dimension of a HEXACO

Personality, social support, gender, kinds of bullying

and school type toward resilience on bullying victim

in pesantren.

Pervin and Cervone (2010) defined personality

as a person's characteristic that leads to the

consistency of feelings, thoughts, and behaviors.

Feist and Feist (2008) express personality is a

pattern of nature (character) and a unique character,

which provides consistent as well as individuality

for one's behavior. Honesty-Humility as one of the

new personality factors in HEXACO inventory

hardly used to be examined as a resistance

antecedent among santris in Pesantren. Additional

dimensions of Honesty-Humilityis one of the

important characteristics of Lee and Ashton's

proposed HEXACO model (2004) and represents the

great progress of The Big Five. The adjective words

specifically illustrate the factors of Honesty-

Humility such as honest, sincere, fair, and humble

contrary to greed, arrogance, lying, and showing off;

previously only a peripheral element in

Agreeableness in the Big Five model (Lee &

Ashton, 2004). It can be mean that higher in

honesty-humility personality more resilience they

are.

Another factor which influence resilience is

social support. It encompasses social support from

their friend, family, and significant others. This can

be broadly divided into instrumental (financial or

physical assistance), information (giving advice and

guidance), and emotional support (empathy,

validation, and caring) (Cohen, 2004).The benefit of

social support for the resilience of bullying victims

according to Sarason (1987) is that generally the

available perceptions of individuals can reflect

relatively stable circumstances and general

acceptance. Sarason also said that basically, the

surrounding environment that is supportive in

everyday life can cause two things that reduce the

anxiety level of the individual and increase the sense

of acceptance (sense of acceptance). Social support,

in general, can strengthen resilience to face stress

(Burcusa, 2007). This is important because the

individual may fail to be tough if the community not

facilitating opportunities to adapt (Ungar,

2011).According to Hafferon and Boniwell (2011),

social can also affect individual efforts.Social

support enables individuals to build and expand

social networks, resulting in higher levels of

interpersonal competence and satisfaction with

others.

Li, Martin, and Yeung (2017) determined that

there is a school influence on the level of academic

resilience and consequent academic achievement.

The difference is supporting students from pesantren

girls. Learners from male dormitories were found to

have the lowest academic survival scores. This may

indicate that the learning experience in male

boarding schools does not adequately encourage the

development and use of academic resilience,

instrumental factors in determining academic

achievement. It can also imply that boys in pesantren

are not well equipped to effectively use resilience

factors, at the individual level as well as at the

environmental level.

Based on these explanations, the researchers

hypothesize that there is the influence of trait

Resiliencein ‘Adolescent Bullying Victims’: A Case Study in Pesantren

1395

humility, social support, age, gender, type of school

bullying and the type of the resilience of victims of

bullying.

2 RESEARCH METHODS

Sampling

The sample of this study was 186 participants,

102 participants were male and 84 were female.

They were all student of Islamic Boarding School

(Pesantren) in East Java. The sample was taken by

purposive sampling technique. The subjects of the

study were from Madrasah

MualliminMuallimat/MMA (35 students),

Vocational High School (SMK: 82 students) and

Madrasah Aliyah/MA (Islamic Senior High School:

69 students)

Measurements

Demographic data. Participants completed a

brief demographic questionnaire which asked

respondents to describe themselves (age, gender,

educational background, school level, and school

type).

The researchers also asked whether the

respondent had experienced bullying in the

pesantren or not, whether verbal or psychic.

In order to know their resilience, personality and

who does give them support, the researchers give

some questionaires in the Likert scale form to them.

They are:

Resilience Scale: Adolescent Resilience Scale

(ARS) was used to measure the student resilience.

The ARS has 21 item scales consisting of 5 points

Likert scale models (1-5) covering three dimensions:

novelty seeking, emotional regulation, positive

future orientation. ARS is proposed by Oshio,

Kaneko &Nakaya (2003).

Personality Scale. We usehonesty-

humilitydimensionin this research, defined as the

tendency of the individual to be fair and sincere in

working together, in cooperation with others he may

be exploited but he is not motivated to take revenge.

Someone who has a high level of honesty-humility

has advantages that decrease risk exploited by others

(Aston & Lee, 2007). In this study, Brief HEXACO

Inventory (BHI) scale on the dimensions of honesty-

humility was used. It developed by deVries, R.E

(2013) which is a total of 24 items. Each category of

HEXACO was measured by 4 items model of

statements presented at a Likert Scale.

Perceived social support scale. It measured

using a Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social

Support, developed by Zimmet, et al (1998). This

scale is based on 12 items of each statement. There

are 7 choices of responses with emotional and

instrumental support, emphasizing three sources of

social support perception of family, friends and

significant others.

Data Analysis. Multiple regression analysis was the

statistical procedure employed on the scores of

participants resilience, personality, and social

support. We use SPSS version 21 to analyze the

data.

3 RESULTS

The findings presented in the tables below:

Table 1.Coefficient of determination

odel R R

Squ

are

Adjust

ed R

Square

Std.

Error of

the

Estimate

Change Statistics

Square

Chang

df1 df2 Sig. F

Change

.705

.497 .471 6.04813 .497 19.314 9 176 .000

Based on the table 1, it can be seen that the

acquisition of R square is 0.497 or 49.7 %%. This

means that the proportion of variance of resilience

described by humility personality, the perception of

social support (family, friends, special person) and

gender, type of bullying and school type in the study

is 49.7%, while the remaining 50.3% is influenced

by other variables outside the study.

Based on the F test in table 2,it can be seen that

the p-value (Sig.) In the rightmost column is p =

0.000 with p-value <0.05.Then the null hypothesis

that states no significant influence of all independent

variables on resilience is rejected. That is, there are

significant influences from humility personality, a

perception of social support (family, friends, special

person) and gender, type of bullying and type of

school (MA and MMA) in predicting resilience of

bullying victims.

a. Dependent Variable: resilience

b. Predictors: (Constant), significantothers,

age, MA, MMA,kindsofbullying, humility,

gender, friends, family

Table 2

ANOVA

Model Sum of

Squares

df Mean

Square

F Sig.

Regression 6358.569 9 706.508 19.314 .000

Residual 6438.055 176 36.580

Total 12796.624 185

ICRI 2018 - International Conference Recent Innovation

1396

Model Unstandardized

Coefficients

Standa

rdized

Coeffi

cients

t Sig.

B Std.

Error

Beta

(Constant)

48.91

12.12

4.034 .000

HUMILITY 1.235 .241 .307 5.130 .000

FRIENDS 1.205 .287 .320 4.196 .000

FAMILY -.010 .256 -.003 -.039 .969

SIGNIFICANTOTHE

.374 .239 .119 1.562 .120

AGE .112 .681 .011 .164 .870

GENDER -2.596 1.147 -.149 -2.263 .025

KINDS_OF_BULLYI

.548 .573 .054 .957 .340

MA -.735 1.035 -.042 -.710 .479

MMA -4.435 1.248 -.209 -3.552 .000

The regression coefficient of each independent

variable to resilience can be seen in table 3.

1. The ‘honesty-humility’personality variable has a

regression coefficient value of 1.235 with a

significance of 0.000. This means that honesty-

humility affects significantly predict resilience. The

positive direction shows that thehigher the value of

honesty-humility the higher the resilience value.

2. Social support variables from friends have a

regression coefficient value of 1.205 with a

significance of 0.000. This means that social support

from friends affects significantly predict resilience.

3. Social support variable from family has a

regression coefficient value equal to -0.010 with a

significance equal to 0.969. This means that the

social support from the family does not significantly

affect resilience.

4. Social support variables from significant other

has a regression coefficient value of 0.374 with a

significance of 0.120. This means that social support

from significant other does not affect significantly to

resilience.

5. Age variabel has a regression coefficient value of

0.112 with a significance of 0.870. It means that age

does not significantly affect resilience.

6.The gender variable has a regression coefficient

value of -2.596 with a significance of 0.025. This

means that gender significantly affects resilience.

7. Variable kinds of bullying have regression

coefficient value of -0.548 with a significance of

0.340. This means that kinds of bullying does not

significantly affect resilience.

8. Variable type of school (MA) has regression

coefficient value of -0.735 with a significance of

0.479. This means that MA does not significantly

affect resilience when compared to Vocational High

School (SMK)

9.Variable type of school (MMA) has a regression

coefficient value of -4.435 with a significance of

0.000. This means that the type of school (MMA)

affects resiliencenegatively and significantly when

compared to Vocational High School (SMK).

4 DISCUSSION AND

RECOMMENDATIONS

From the result above, it can be seen that the

‘honesty-humility personality’ variable significantly

affects the resilience of bullying victims, so that the

more students (santri) have the honest and humble

personality, and the santri will be more resilient.

According to Ashton & Lee (2007), honesty-

humility that contains the traits of honesty, fairness,

sincerity, humility, and lack of greed represents a

tendency to be fair and sincere in dealing with

others; in the sense of cooperating with others

despite the opportunity to take advantage of without

retaliation. Based on the definition, honesty-humility

personality is the traits of a person who represents a

tendency to be fair and sincere in cooperating or

dealing with others. The honesty-humility domain

loads facet sincerity, fairness, greed-avoidance, and

modesty (Ashton, Lee, & de Vries, 2014). The

sincerity, fairness, greed-avoidance, and modesty

make it easier for a student to adapt to the

environment and to face stress. It makes them more

resilience. In vice versa, that lower respondents in

Honesty-Humility are more likely to be involved in

open retaliation because of friends incivility, while

those who are higher in Honesty-Humility take

different paths and show a tendency to engage in

covert revenge by reducing their involvement in

behavior organizational citizens (Thompson, et. al.

2016)

Next, social support variables from friends are

positive and significant. This is supported by

previous studies which also found similar results. As

the research conducted by Sabouripour, F &Roslan

S.B, (2015) found that a significant positive effect

between social support for resilience. Someone who

has high social support, then the level of resilience

will also be high.

In accordance with the opinion put forward by

Sarafino and Smith (2011) that social support can

help a person in the face of pressure and also can

prevent the development of problems arise. Thus,

higher the social support, higher the level of

individual resilience. If the study of Bowes (2010)

says family support is a very significant effect on the

Resiliencein ‘Adolescent Bullying Victims’: A Case Study in Pesantren

1397

resilience of victims of bullying, then the reverse in

this study found that support from friends is very

significant compared with family support, and

significant others. This is because the children in

boarding schools more often interact with his friends

and have limited time to meet with the family. A

people who has a good friend's support will feel

accepted by his social environment. With the

resultthat the individual will not feel lonely in the

face of the pressures that arise. It can also become

have a high level of resilience of him.

Strengthen this study, Santrock (2005) suggests

that one of the most important functions of peers is

to provide information sources outside the family

about the world, such as receiving feedback about

their abilities and learning about what they do is not

good, just as good, or better than their peers.Papalia,

Old, and Feldman (2009) also explained that peers

are sources of affection, understanding, sympathy,

andmoral demands, used as a place to experiment as

well as a means to achieve independence and

autonomy from parents. Peer social support is a gift

of help or support provided peers who can be

perceived by the individual (perceived support)

when needed so that individuals feel loved and

appreciated by the surrounding environment. Taylor

(2017), explains that peer social support is the help

of peers both instrumental, informational, and

emotional from peers that make students feel

appreciated and cared for.

This research also found that gender affects

resilience significantly. Especially for girls, bullying

persecution has a later peak of male bullying,

because of the level of socio-cognitive sophistication

present in the form of relational bullying

(Remillard& Lamb, 2005). Women's experiences

with relational aggression and indirect intimidation

are often ignored in intimidation because of the

studied population or methodological approach

(Remillard& Lamb, 2005). However, the

investigators assert that relational and indirect

aggression predict similar psychological problems

compared to "traditional" bullying, such as physical

and verbal bullying (Arseneault et al., 2010;

Smokowski et al., 2014).

According to Mancini and Bonano (2006) that

men are more resilient compared to women. The

results of this study are also in line with the results

of Barends (2004), and Bonano, Rennicke, and

Dekel (2007). Barends (2004) suggests that

demographic factors include age, sex, language,

race, indigenous and outsider, income has a

significant relationship with resilience. Bonano,

Galea, Buciarelli and Vlahov(2007) in their research

found that the factors that affect resilience are

gender, age, race, education, level of trauma,

income, social support, a frequency of the chronic

disease, the pressures of past and present life.

The results of

Karanci, Alkan, Aksit, Sucuoglo, &

Balta

(1999) study of the ability to adapt to

earthquakes found that men often used a problem-

solving approach and had an optimistic attitude than

women, while women used patterns of helplessness

compared to man. In line with that, according to

Einsenberg et al (2003), high resilient individuals

(males) are able to adapt to a variety of conditions to

change circumstances and be flexible in solving

problems, whereas individuals with low resilience

(women) have flexibility small adaptive, unable to

react to changing circumstances, tend to be hard-

hearted or become chaotic when faced with changes

or pressures, as well as having difficulty adjusting

again after experiencing traumatic experience.

Differences in male self-adjustment and women

are affected by biologicalcircumstancesm, too. This

can be seen from the differences physical between

men and women. The biological state affects

differences in behavior between the sexes.According

to the theory of natural selection, the division role

tends to push the different behavior based on the

biological state. Every trait is brought since birth

determine that men be aggressive and free, and

women behave as a nanny, and stayat home, while

the opposite nature male passivity, female

aggressiveness, pressed deep (see Calhoun

&Acocella, 1990).

Moreover, that both men and women have

different views to feel risk. Women behave more

putting affective aspects in taking risks, while men

more priority consideration cognitive in view of risk

and danger as from the living part. As Karanci, et.,

al. (1999) found about the ability to adapt to

earthquakes that men often use a problem-solving

approach and have an optimistic attitude compared

women, while women use pattern of helplessness.

WhileBarends (2004) indicates that men have faith

in troubleshooting and believe in his ability

(competence) to master the task or situation which is

harder, more positive than with women.

Power-based approaches to resilience emphasize

certain individual behaviors, attitudes, and

competencies as a component of general resilience.

In particular, most of these components are

primarily developed in schools (Knight, 2007;

Cassidy, 2016). Researchers pay more attention to

how the type of school affects students' academic

resilience. A general argument from recent research

is that the type of school has to do with school

ICRI 2018 - International Conference Recent Innovation

1398

resources, which is a predictor of students' academic

outcomes. The level of school resources can have a

direct impact on student learning, their involvement

in what is taught, their level of motivation, sense of

well-being, ownership, and interaction with teachers

(Mallick & Kaur, 2016). Based on this, we argue

that the type of school can make the prime student to

be tough or not.

Some previous studies reinforce the results of

this study that school type affects resilience. In a

study of Sarwar, Inamullah, Khan, and Anwar

(2010) explained that in Pakistani urban and rural

students were no different in their endurance. In

contrast, a descriptive study by Mallick and Kaur

(2016) found that in India, urban students have

higher levels of academic resilience than their rural

high school counterparts. In Uganda, Kyoshaba

(2009) found that school type can increase resilience

and academic achievement. This is in accordance

with Kenyan research on the relationship between

school type and academic performance. Such studies

have found that school type is an important factor in

student completion and performance at school

(Ejakait, Mutisya, Ezeh, Oketch, &Ngware, 2011;

Ndura, 2013).

In addition, age factors did not affect resilience

significantly. This is likely due to the variation in

age variables. the subjects in this study were all in

the same development range, namely adolescents.In

line with age, this type of bullying does not have a

significant effect on resilience. This is also likely

due to the lack of variation in the type of bullying.

From three schools (SMK, MA and MMA), it was

found that the type of bullying received by the

research subjects was verbal bullying.

Based on the results of the study, the researchers

suggested that the pesantren were expected to be

able to understand how muchthe importance of

resilience to students especially whenexperience a

decrease or decline in learning andalso during

activities within the boarding school. Thenby giving

them an attention and affectionfrom all parties in

pesantrencan help the psychological recovery

process. Another way, pesantren can campaign anti

bullying continuously and make regulations that can

minimize the incidence of bullying in pesantren. An

anti-bullying strategy is a significant approach to

dealing with bullying in pesantren.

REFERENCES

Ashton, M. C., & Lee, K. 2007. Empirical, theoretical, and

practical advantages of the HEXACO model of

personality structure. Personality and Social

Psychology Review: An Official Journal of the Society

for Personality and Social Psychology, Inc, 11(2),

150–166. doi:10.1177/1088868306294907

Ashton, M. C., Lee, K., & de Vries, R. E. 2014. The

HEXACO honesty-humility, agreeableness, and

emotionality factors: A review of research and theory.

Personality and Social Psychology Review, 18(2),

139–152. doi:10.1177/1088868314523838

Barends, M.S. 2004. Overcoming adversity: An

investigation of the role of resilience constructs in the

relationship between socioeconomic and demographic

factors and academic coping

http://ww3.uwc.ac.za/docs/%20Library/Theses/Theses

% 202005%201st%20Grad/Barends_m_ s.pdf

download in August 2018.

Bernard, B. 1991. Fostering resilience inkids: Protective

factors in the family, school, and community. Portland,

OR: Northwest Regional Education Laboratory.

Bishop, G. D. 1997. Health psychology: Integrating mind

and body. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

Bowes, L., Maughan, B., Caspi, A., Moffitt, T. E., &

Arseneault,L.2010. Families promote emotional and

behavioral resilience to bullying: Evidence of an

environmental effect. Journal of Child Psychology

and Psychiatry, 51, 809–817.

Burcusa, S. L., &Iacono, W. G. 2007. Risk for recurrence

in depression. Clinical psychology review, 27(8), 59-

985.Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cpr.2007.02.005

Calhoun, J.F., and Acocella, J.R. 1990.Psychology of

adjusment and human relationship. McGraw-Hill

Publishing New York

Carver, C. S., Scheier, M. F., & Segerstrom, S. C. 2010.

Optimism.Clinical Psychology Review, 30. 879–889.

Doi: 10, 1016/j. cpr. 2010. 01. 006.

Cassidy, S. 2016.The AcademicResilience Scale (ARS-

30): A new multidimensional construct measure.

Frontirs in Psychology. 7:1787.

Doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01787

Chung, Feng. H. 2008. Resiliency and character strengths

amongcollegestudents. Dissertation: TheUniversity of

Arizona.1-183

Cohen, S. (2004). Social Relationships and Health.

American Psychologist, 59(8), 676– 684.

http://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.59.8.676

Cohen, S., & Wills, T. A. 1985.Stress, Social Support, and

The Buffering Hypothesis. Psychologycal Bulletin,

98(2), 310-357

Cohen, Mccabe, Michelli, &Pickeral. 2010. School

climate research summary. School Climate

BriefCenter for Social and Emotional Education, 1(1).

1-6

Connor, M.K. 2006. Assesment of resilience in the

aftermath trauma. Journal of Clinical Psychiatry,67 pp

46-49

Resiliencein ‘Adolescent Bullying Victims’: A Case Study in Pesantren

1399

Constantine, N.A. &Benard, B. 2001.California healthy

kids survey resilience assessment module.

TechnicalReport. Berkeley, CA: Public Health

Institute.

Cutrona,C.E.1984. Social support and stress in the

transition to parenthood. Journal of abnormal

Psychology,93(4), 378-390.1(1). 1-6

Dawson, M., & Pooley, J. A. 2013. Resilience: The role of

optimism, perceived parental autonomy support and

Perceived Social Support in First Year University

Students.Journal of Education and Training

Studies,1(2), 38-49.

http://dx.doi.org/10.11114/jets.v1i2.137

Eisenberg, N., Valiente, C., Fabes, A.R., Smith, L.C.,

Reiser, M., Shepard, A.S., Losoya, H.S., Guthrie, K.I.,

Murphy, C.B., and Cumberland, J.A. 2003. The

reaction of effortfull control and ego control to

children’s resilience and social

functioning.Developmental Psychology 39. 761-776.

Ejakait, E., Mutisya, M., Ezeh, A., Oketch, M., &Ngware,

M. 2011.Factors associated with low achievement

among students from Nairobi’s urban informal

neighborhoods.Urban Education 46,

1056.https://doi.org/10.1177/0042085911400323

Garmezy, N.1991. Resilience in childern’s adaptation to

negative life event and sressed environments.

Pediatric Annuals, 20(9),(462-466)

Goldstein S., dan Brooks R. B., 2005, Handbook of

Resilience in Children Second Edition. Springer Link.

Gomez, M., Vincent, A., Toussaint, L.2013. Corellates of

resilience in adolescents and adult. International

Journal of Clinical Psychiatry and Reflection, 8. 1-39

Grotberg, E. H. 1995. A Guide to Promoting Resilience In

Children. Benard Van Leer Foundation.

Grotberg, E. H. 1999. Tapping your inner strength: how to

find the resilience to deal with anything. Canada: New

Harbinger Publication, Inc.

Heller,K., Swindle, R,W.,&Dosenbury,L. 1981.

Component social support processes: Comments and

integration. Journal of consulting and clinical

psychology, 54 (4), 466-470

Holaday, Morgot. 199. Resilience and severe burn.Journal

of Counseling And Development.75.346-357.

Hefferon, K., & Boniwell, I. (2011). Positive psychology

Theory, research and applications. London McGraw-

Hill.

Isaacson, B. 2002. Characteristics.and Enhancement of

Resiliency in Young People. A Research Paper (Pdf

Versions. Downloaded at November 10

, 2017, pp.

69-75 the University of Winsconsin-Stout website:

http:// www.uwstout.

ede/lib/thesis/2002/2002isaacsonb .pdf.

Karanci, N.A., Alkan, N., Aksit, B., Sucuoglo, H., &Balta,

E. 1999. Gender differences in psychological distress,

coping, social support, and related variables following

the 1995 Dinar (Turkey) earthquake.North America

Journal of Psychology,1. 189-204.

Knight, C. 2007.A resilience framework: Perspectives for

educators", Health Education, 107 (6) ,543-555.

https://doi.org/10.1108/09654280710827939

Korantang C., Simons, B., 2012. Residents perception of

the built environment quality in an orphanage.

Advances in Applied Science Research. 3 (1).19-30

Kumfer, K. 2002. Chapternine: Factors and process

contributting to resilience: The resilience framework

in Glantz M. D..,&Jhonson J.L (ed). Resilience and

Development Positif Life Adaptation. Newyork:

Kluwer Academic Publisher

Kyoshaba,M. 2009. Factors affecting academic

performance of undergraduate students at Uganda

Christian University (Unpublished Master’s Thesis),

Makerere University, Uganda.

Lee, K., & Ashton, M. C. 2004. Psychometric properties

of the hexaco personality inventory. Multivariate

Behavioral Research, 39(2), 329–358.

doi:10.1207/s15327906mbr3902_8

Lia, H., Martin, A. J., &Yeung,W.J. 2017. Academic risk

and resilience for children and young people in Asia.

Educational Psychology, 37(8), 921–

929.https://doi.org/10.1080/01443410.2017.133197

Lopez, & Snyder, C.R. 2003. Positive psychological

assessment: A handbook of models & measures.

Washington. DC: APA

Mallick, M.K., &Kaur,S.2016. Academic resilience

among senior secondary school students: Influence of

learning environment. Rupkatha Journal on

Interdisciplinary Studies in Humanities, 8(2),20-27.

http://dx.doi.org/10.21659/rupkatha.v8n2.03

Mancini, D.A., &Bonano, A.G. 2006. Resilience in the

face of potential trauma: Clinical practices and

illustrations.Journal of Clinical Psychology, 62(8),

971-985.DOI:10.1002/jclp.20283

Masten, A. S., Best, K., &Garmezy, N. 1990. Resilience

and development: Contributions from the study of

children who overcame adversity. Development and

Psychopathology, 2, 425-444.

Masten , A. S., & Gewirtz, A. H. 2006. Resilience in

development: The importance of early

childhood.Encyclopedia on Early Childhood

Development.

Matsumoto D., 2009 The Cambridge dictionary of

psychology. New York: Cambridge University press

McCaskill, J.W. &Lakey, B. 2000.Perceived support,

social undermining, and emotion. Personality and

Social Psychology Bulletin, 26(7). 820-832

Nakaya, M, Oshio, A & Kaneko, H. 2006. Correlations for

adolescent resilience scale with big five personality

traits. Psychological Reports, 98, 927-930.

DOIlO.2466/PRO.98.3.927-930

Ndura, M. 2013. Resilience in school.Master's Capstone

Projects. Paper 26. Center for International Education

Retrieved from

http://scholarworks.umass.edu/cie_capstones/26

Oshio, A., Kaneko, H., Nagamine, S., &Nakaya, M.

(2003) Construct validity of the Adolescent

Resilience Scale. Psychological Reports, 93, 12 17-

1222

Papalia,D.E.,Old,S.W.,

Fieldman,,R.D.2008.HumandDevelopment.Perkemban

ICRI 2018 - International Conference Recent Innovation

1400

ganmanusia. Translated by AK. Anwar. Jakarta:

SalembaHumanika.

Pienaar, A., Swanepoel, Z., Rensburg, H., Heunis , C.

2011 . A qualitative exploration of resilience in pre-

adolescent AIDS orphans living in a residential care

facility.Journal of Social Aspect of HIV/AIDS

Research Alliance, 8 (3),128-137

Reich, J.W. 2010. Handbook of adult resilience. New

York: Guilford Press.

Reivich, K &Shatte, A. 2002. The resilience factor: 7

skills for overcoming life’s inevitable obstacles. New

York: Random House, Inc.

Rigby, Ken. 2002. New Perspective on bullying. Jesica

Kingsley Publishers: London.

River, Poteat, Noret& Ashurst. 2009. Observing bullying

atsSchool: The mental health implications of witness

status. School Psychology Quarterly,24(4), 211–223.

Sabouripour, F., &Roslan, S. B. 2015. Resilience,

optimism and social support among international

students. Asian Social Science, 11(15), 159-170.

DOI: 10.5539/ass.v11n15p159

Santrock, J, W. 2005. Adolescence.10th Ed.. New York:

McGraw-Hill.

Sapouna& Wolke. 2013. Resilience to bullying

victimization: The role of individual, family and peer

characteristics. Elsevier, Child Abuse & Neglect

37(11), 997–1006.doi: 10.1016/ j.chiabu. 2013.05.009

Sarafino, E.P. & Smith, T.W. 2011. Health psychology:

Biopsychososial Interaction.7

edition. New York:

John Wiley & Sons Inc.

Sarason, B.R.,Shearin, Pierce, E.N., Sarason, G.R. Irwin

G., 1987. Interrelations of social support measures:

Theoritical and practical implications. Journal of

Personality and Social Psychology. 52(4). 813-832

Sarason, I. G., Levin, H.M., Basham, R. B., &Sarason,

B.R. 1983. Assessing social support: The social

support questionnaire. Journal of Personality and

Social Psychology, 44 (1),127-139

Sarason,B,R., Sarason, I.G., & Pierce, G.R. 1990.Social

support: An interactional view.

Wasington.J.Wilet&Sons.

https://trove.nla.gov.au/version/20467227

Sarwar, M., Inamullah, H., Khan, N.,Anwar,

N.2010.Resilience and academic achievementof male

and female secondary level students in

Pakistan.Journal of College Teaching &

Learning,7(8), 19-

24.https://doi.org/10.19030/tlc.v7i8.140

Siebert, A. 2005. The Resiliency Advantage: Master

Change, Thrive Under Pressure, and Bounce Back

from Setbacks.Berrett-Koehler Publishers, Inc.

Smokowski, P. R.&Kopasz, K.H. 2004. Bullying in

school: An overview of types, effects, family

characteristics, and intervention strategies. Children

Schools, 27(2):101-110

https://doi.org/10.1093/cs/27.2.101

Southwick, S.M.,Vythilingam M, & Charney DS2005.

The Psychobiology of depression and resilience to

stress: Implication for prevention and treatment.

Annual Review of Clinical Psychology, 1(1): 255-291

Taylor, S. E. 2017. Health psychology (10th Ed.). New

York: Mc Graw-Hill Higher Education.

Thompson, M.J., Carlson, D., Hunter, E. & Whitten, D.

2016. We all seek revenge: The role of honesty-

humility in reactions to incivility. Journal of

Behavioral and Applied Management. Pp. 50-65.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/315816251

Tusaie, K. 2001. Psychosocial resilience in rural

adolescents: Optimism. perceived social support and

gender differences. American Journal of Psychiatry,

160, 496–503.

Vaux, A.,Riedel.S.,& Stewart, D. 1987. Modes of social

support: The social support behaviors (SS-B) scale.

American Journal of Community Psychology 15(2),

209-232.

Wagnild, Gail M. & Young, Heather M. 1993.

Development and psychometric evaluation of

resilience. Journal of Nursing Measurement, 1(2),

165-178

Wong, P. T. P., Wong, L. C. J., & Scott, C. 2006. The

positive psychology of transformation: Beyond stress

and coping. In Wong, P. T. P., & Wong, L. C. J.

(Eds.), Handbook of multicultural perspectives on

stress and coping. New York, NY: Springer.

Zimmet, G.D, Dahlem, N. W., Zimmet, S.G., & Farley,

G.K. 1988. The multidimensional scale of Perceived

social support. Journal of Personality Assessment,

52(1),30-41.

https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327752jpa5201_2

Resiliencein ‘Adolescent Bullying Victims’: A Case Study in Pesantren

1401