Bullying is the intentional and repeated harassment of an individual through physical, psychological, or verbal means (Olweus, 2013). The adverse effects associated with bullying victimization include both physical problems such as headaches, sleep disturbances, stomachaches, depression and mental health problems such as anxiety disorders, psychological distress somatic disorders, and low psychological wellbeing (Eyuboglu et al., 2021; Fullchange and Furlong, 2016; Grinshteyn et al., 2021; Lin et al., 2020; Yosep et al., 2022). Bullying is often accompanied by derogatory language, and its typical goal is to demean the victim while trying to impress peers (Rose et al., 2017). This behavior is usually intended to cause harm or embarrassment to the victim. Bullying can manifest as physical, psychological, emotional, or cyber-based aggression perpetrated by students who use their power to harm more vulnerable peers (Helgeland and Lund, 2017; Siddiqui and Schultze-Krumbholz, 2023a). In addition, research has documented the negative impact of bullying on the academic trajectories of victimized students (Yosep et al., 2022). It is a significant social ill affecting educational institutions worldwide (Jones et al., 2023), including those in Pakistan (Batool, 2023; Razzaq et al., 2023; Srinivasan et al., 2022). There is an urgent need to develop interventions that focus on the root causes of the problem in order to mitigate it at its core (Siddiqui et al., 2023b), including the impact of moral disengagement beliefs and identifying the perceptions of the motivations behind bullying perpetration (Siddiqui and Schultze-Krumbholz, unpublished study)¹.

The bullying literature has increasingly focused on examining bullying behaviors and has identified four distinct types: pure bullies, pure victims, bully-victims, and neither-bully-nor-victim/non-responsive (Johnston et al., 2014). Most research has focused on pure bullies and pure victims (Johnston et al., 2014). However, this study not only examines the prevalence of different involvement groups among university students in Pakistan, but also explores the relationship between their characteristics and moral disengagement beliefs. It also examines differences in their perceptions of the motivations behind bullying perpetration. The prevalence, types of bullying, and involvement in different bullying roles reported by researchers vary across age groups, as found in studies conducted worldwide (Gini et al., 2014; Menesini and Salmivalli, 2017; Modecki et al., 2014; Runions et al., 2019; Siddiqui et al., 2021; Siddiqui and Schultze-Krumbholz, 2023a; Thornberg and Jungert, 2014; UNESCO, 2019). In addition, international research highlights differences in motivations for bullying perpetration across age groups and regions (Abbasi et al., 2018; Fluck, 2017; Jaber et al., 2023; Johnston et al., 2014; Tam and Taki, 2007; Tanrikulu and Erdur-Baker, 2021; Sarıçam and Çetinkaya, 2018; Schreiner, 2019; Van Cleave and Davis, 2006; van Dijk et al., 2017; Xiu et al., 2021). A longitudinal study by Zych et al. (2020) found that the roles of victim and bully tend to be unstable over time, while the role of bully-victim changes more significantly with age. However, the relationship between age and bullying motivations is relatively underexplored and varies across cultures. Nevertheless, a recent study by Siddiqui and Schultze-Krumbholz (unpublished study) reported that university students often engage in bullying for the thrill and excitement it provides.

Numerous international studies have found that individuals with higher levels of moral disengagement are more likely to engage in aggressive behavior, but their motivations for antisocial behavior vary widely (Killer et al., 2019; Romera et al., 2021; Teng et al., 2020; Thornberg et al., 2019). However, there is a lack of research on this topic in the Pakistani context. Furthermore, international research has extensively explored the role of teachers and peers in mitigating bullying incidents within institutions, but these studies primarily focus on younger students (Siddiqui and Schultze-Krumbholz, 2023b; Zambuto et al., 2020; Zhao and Chang, 2019). To address this gap, the present study examines the relationship between moral disengagement and perceptions of bullying motives, as well as the role of teachers and peers in bullying intervention at the university level.

The primary objectives of this study were to identify the prevalence of different bullying roles among university students, to examine differences in perceptions of bullying motives by bullying roles, and to analyze the association of moral disengagement with perceptions of motives. In addition, other characteristics of bullying situations were also examined, such as the frequency of group bullying, the tendency to perpetuate, the role of teachers and peers in bullying incidents, and students’ fear of attending school. This study used descriptive statistics to explore the status of teacher and peer interventions in the university context in Pakistan. The final section of this study is dedicated to gender differences in these dynamics.

This study represents the first comprehensive attempt in Pakistan to explore the different roles that students play in bullying and the differences in their perceived motivations. As universities are also educational institutions, which moreover have so far often been neglected in bullying research, the authors chose to focus on university students to gain a deeper understanding of this particular age group, given their impending transition into professional roles. It has also been reported that students involved in bullying during their education often transition into adult bullying roles in the workplace (Reknes et al., 2021). It is therefore crucial to target this age group during this final stage of education, as it provides a crucial opportunity to guide potential perpetrators to avoid bullying behavior and to empower victims to stand up for themselves. In professional careers, opportunities for behavior change and improvement are severely limited. This study is of paramount importance because it not only assists higher education institutions in determining the prevalence of bullying, victimization, and bully-victim dynamics, but also elucidates the underlying motivations. This insight can assist faculty and counselors in developing more effective prevention strategies (Johnston et al., 2014; Siddiqui and Schultze-Krumbholz, unpublished study). This research is particularly novel in the Pakistani context, where bullying research is still in its infancy.

This research addresses several key questions regarding bullying involvement among university students in Pakistan:

This research study used a cross-sectional survey method and quantitative research design. The study aimed to determine the prevalence of bullying, moral disengagement beliefs, and perceptions of university students regarding the motivations behind the perpetration of bullying in educational institutions in Pakistan. Students were categorized into different bullying involvement groups based on their responses to the bullying and victimization items. In addition, demographic data (particularly gender differences) were used to examine differences in levels of moral disengagement and perceptions among different bullying groups. SPSS version 27 and AMOS 24 were used for analysis.

School bullying, a pervasive international problem, has received considerable attention from the global research community. Scholars worldwide have focused on various aspects of bullying, including interventions, anti-bullying policies, measurement of school bullying, and its association with related variables (Wong et al., 2013). In line with this, the current research aims to identify factors that contribute to bullying and propose effective interventions based on an understanding of the core causes of antisocial behavior. This study examines university students’ perceptions of the motivations behind bullying perpetration and the correlation of moral disengagement beliefs on various perceived motivations. It also examines the prevalence of bully roles among university students in Pakistan, as well as differences in their moral disengagement beliefs and perceptions of the motivations behind bullying perpetration. This study aimed to identify differences in the perceptions of students across four categories: bullies only, victims only, bully-victims, and non-involved. Johnston et al.’s (2014) study suggested that bully-victims’ motivations for bullying were similar to those of bully only individuals. In this line, the current study did not identify any significant differences in motivations between bullies and bully-victims. However, a notable difference was found between students categorized as victims only and those categorized as bully-victims, which will be discussed in the following section.

The study seeks to determine students’ perceptions of the motivations behind bullying. The results contrast with those of Siddiqui and Schultze-Krumbholz (unpublished study), who reported that teachers perceived the primary motivation for bullying to be the demonstration of power or strength, followed by frustration causes aggression. Conversely, students believe that those who bully are primarily motivated by frustration and view bullying as a way to vent their frustration on others. When the data were analyzed descriptively for all students combined (including bullies only, victims only, bully-victims, and non-responders), it was found that the majority believed that frustration was the primary motivation for bullying. Further analysis to see the differences in the beliefs of the groups revealed that victims, more than bullies and bully-victims, strongly believed that frustration was the main reason for bullying. This suggests that victims, despite being targets, may perceive that those who bully are dealing with negative circumstances, which drives their bullying behavior. This suggests that victims perceive bullies as frustrated individuals, which may foster a sense of sympathy and deter them from seeking revenge or engaging in bullying themselves. In contrast, bully-victims, who hold a weaker belief in frustration as a motivation, do not view bullies as merely frustrated individuals and are more inclined to replicate bullying behaviors as a form of retaliation for their own victimization. However, it is important to note that the sample size for the “bullies only” students was much smaller than the other two groups. As a result, despite the differences observed, statistical significance was not reached for the bully only group. Researchers have identified several factors that contribute to increased frustration within higher education institutions, including financial burdens, academic pressures, and parental academic expectations (Gulzar et al., 2012). In addition, students have been reported to be upset by rising inflation, unemployment, and uncertainty about the future (Khalid et al., 2021).

The collective data analysis revealed that overall university students also believe that the second most common reason for bullying in Pakistani educational institutions is a display of power, with bullies feeling superior, essentially reflecting a power imbalance. Some differences were observed when further analyzing the differences in perceptions of the different bullying groups. Specifically, it was found that students who were exclusively victimized had a stronger belief that the primary motivation for bullying was a power imbalance, in contrast to students who were both victimized and involved in bullying others and pure bullies. This pattern suggests that victimized students have resigned themselves to the belief that they are powerless against the bully due to the perceived power imbalance. Perpetrators of bullying typically externalize blame, attributing responsibility to others, whereas victims tend to internalize blame, often perceiving themselves as the cause of their victimization (Morrison, 2006). This internalization can lead victims to develop a belief in their own powerlessness, accept their victimization as a consequence of their perceived mistakes, and resign themselves to their fate. Conversely, bully-victims, who reject the notion of power imbalance or the superiority of bullies, retaliate by bullying others to demonstrate their own strength. The phenomenon of bullying as a means of demonstrating power and superiority in Pakistani society can be traced back to historical and cultural practices (Khan and Wazir, 2011; Siddiqui and Schultze-Krumbholz, unpublished study). Social class distinctions, established historically by figures such as maharajas and rajas (kings and great rulers), and in modern times by landlords, military personnel, bureaucrats, high-ranking officials, and even general male hegemony, have been reinforced through both acceptable and unacceptable behaviors, ensuring unquestioned compliance (Khan and Wazir, 2011; George et al., 2020; Hinduja et al., 2023). Caste, religion, and race are also significant factors contributing to differences and bullying behavior (Javed et al., 2023; Qamar et al., 2023). Shah et al. (2022) conducted a qualitative study showing that violence is often driven by caste or ethnic differences, with dominant and powerful castes (e.g., Chaudaries in Punjab) perpetrating violence against those perceived to belong to lower castes or ethnicities. In Pakistan, success is often equated with power, which may explain why some students engage in bullying to assert dominance and gain an advantage. The powerful and disciplined military and bureaucratic institutions that have historically looked down upon the political leadership of the newly formed state in contempt have also contributed to this power imbalance (Khan and Wazir, 2011).

The third most common reason students reported for bullying others was sensation seeking, entertainment, or sadism. It was also found that the bully only group was less likely than the other two groups (victims only and bully-victims) to believe that their bullying behavior was driven by power imbalance and frustration. The results suggest that most bullies believe that the driving forces behind their behavior are sensation seeking, entertainment, and a sadistic approach. However, due to the small sample size of the “bullies only” group, these differences did not reach statistical significance. These findings are consistent with the views of university teachers in Pakistan who believe that university students often bully others for thrills and entertainment (Siddiqui and Schultze-Krumbholz, unpublished study). This motivation has also been recognized by other international researchers (Fluck, 2017; Jaber et al., 2023; Schreiner, 2019). However, the current study shows that these beliefs vary among students depending on their specific bullying roles. One possible explanation for this behavior is that students have the privilege of attending university; to make their academic journey more exciting and thrilling, they inject an element of hostility into their interactions. Abdullah (2023) elaborates on this behavior by linking it to peer pressure. According to Abdullah (2023), university students experience significant peer pressure, which leads to sensation-seeking behaviors that are often expressed through bullying. Another possible reason for these behaviors is the lack of supervision and accountability for students’ actions at universities, which allows them to engage in such behaviors with minimal consequences. In addition, university curricula focus more on skill development than on the moral or ethical development of students. Therefore, it is crucial to address moral disengagement beliefs in interventions to guide youth and emphasize that such behaviors are unacceptable and have long-term consequences for victims.

The results of the study also contrast with the study conducted by Pšunder and Kozmus (2020), which posited that bullying is an act of revenge. In contrast, the current study shows that many students do not perceive bullying as an act of retaliation for previous victimization. This discrepancy may be attributed to Muslim students’ belief in karma, which leads them to refrain from seeking revenge because they believe that Allah (God) will provide the best retribution. In addition, the religious teachings, which advocate forgiveness over revenge, may influence this perspective.

In the current study, the number of victims was slightly less than twice the number of bullies, suggesting that victims are less likely to seek revenge or retaliation. This may be due to their religious beliefs and the concept of karma, which discourage them from retaliating or becoming perpetrators.

Another goal of the study was to determine the relationship of moral disengagement beliefs on various perceived motivations of bullying. Numerous studies have found a relationship between moral disengagement and bullying perpetration (Teng et al., 2020). The findings of the present study are consistent with previous research indicating that children and young adults with higher levels of moral disengagement are primarily motivated to engage in bullying perpetrations in order to assert dominance and gain pleasure (Fluck, 2017; Siddiqui and Schultze-Krumbholz, unpublished study). In contrast to the findings of Siddiqui and Schultze-Krumbholz (unpublished study), this study also suggests that moral disengagement influences frustration as a cause of bullying. This implies that students with weak moral convictions are more likely to rationalize antisocial behavior as acceptable when experiencing frustration.

The results of the current study indicate that university students are most often categorized as non-involved, followed by victims only, bully-victims, and then bullies only. These findings contrast with the study by Khawar and Malik (2016), which found that bully-victims were the most common group among school students. One possible explanation for this discrepancy is that school children, who are more energetic and confident, are more likely to seek revenge, a tendency that decreases as students mature as explained by Allemand and Olaru (2021). Consequently, university students appear to be more susceptible to victimization and less likely to engage in bullying as a response to their own victimization. It is also noteworthy that approximately 14% of students were classified as bully-victims. Among all individuals involved in bullying perpetration, bully-victims have the poorest psychosocial outcomes (Jaber et al., 2023). They have been found to be at higher risk for depression and suicidal ideation (Pranjic and Bajraktarevic, 2010), as well as non-suicidal self-injury (Espositon et al., 2019). Therefore, it is imperative that this group of students receive special attention in intervention programs.

Previous research has shown that adolescents who are involved in bullying generally have a higher tendency toward moral disengagement beliefs compared to non-involved adolescents (Gini et al., 2014; Runions et al., 2019; Thornberg and Jungert, 2014). These studies reported that moral disengagement was prevalent among both pure bullies and bully-victims compared to students who either did not report involvement in bullying or only reported being victims (Runions et al., 2019). However, in the current study, no significant differences were found among the four categories of students reported (victims only, bullies only, bully-victims, or non-responders). These findings are unexpected given that the majority of the population recognizes the moral wrongness of bullying based on religious beliefs and cultural teachings. Possible reasons for not finding differences in moral disengagement beliefs may be related to the items used in the newly developed questionnaire, which reflect generally morally acceptable practices in Pakistani society, even though they may be considered morally wrong in other cultures. For example, one item categorized passive bystander behavior as morally disengaged, yet this behavior is often justified by the belief that it is not the bystander’s responsibility to intervene and protect the victim from bullying. Adults often instruct individuals to avoid getting involved in conflicts or problems under the guise of helping others. While not intervening in such situations is considered morally wrong internationally, it is often accepted in Pakistani society, where bystanders typically avoid involvement to protect themselves from potential trouble. This perception is widespread in society, which may explain why bystanders do not intervene, as noted by Siddiqui and Schultze-Krumbholz (2023a,b). Future studies should compare moral disengagement items with previously tested, validated, and reliable questionnaires to identify and improvise these items to truly measure moral disengagement beliefs and differences among different groups. Nevertheless, bullying persists, suggesting that individuals may dissociate from their moral values in order to engage in such behavior. Further research is recommended to clarify these discrepancies.

Descriptive statistics from the ROBVQ shed light on the prevalence of bullying in higher education institutions, the role of teachers and peers in intervention, and the extent to which bullying induces anxiety in students about attending university. Although this was not the primary objective of the research, a brief discussion is warranted to underscore the complexity of this issue in a country where bullying research is still in its infancy. The results showed that a significant proportion of students (24%) reported experiencing victimization at their university. These findings show both congruence and divergence with previous studies conducted in Pakistan. For example, Musharraf and Anis-ul-Haque (2018) reported that more than 60% of university students engaged in bullying perpetration, while Ayub et al. (2022) found that approximately 70% of postgraduate trainees encountered bullying at their institution. Similarly, Saleem et al. (2021) reported that approximately 90% of university students experienced bullying. The comparatively lower prevalence in the current study may be due to the strict criteria used (victimization occurring at least twice in 6 months). In addition, Bjereld (2018) noted that victims often avoid being labeled, may be in denial, or may perceive bullying as an everyday problem. Some victims may be embarrassed to disclose their experiences and therefore refrain from reporting victimization, while others may be unsure whether the bully’s behavior constitutes true bullying or mere pranks. Despite assurances of anonymity in the current study, it is plausible that students were reluctant to reveal their true suffering, resulting in a lower incidence of reported victimization. A similar conclusion can be drawn from the approximately 22% of students who regularly fear attending their university because of the risk of victimization. In addition, there is a notable difference in the fear of attending university, which is more prevalent among female students. These numbers are alarming, especially in a country where nearly half of the population is illiterate (Rehman et al., 2015). If a quarter of the student population feels unsafe attending educational institutions, the literacy rate is likely to decline further. It is noteworthy that while both male and female students are equally victimized, there is a significant difference in perpetration, with male students more likely to be involved in bullying others. A similar finding has been reported by other researchers in Pakistan, showing that male participants were significantly more involved in bullying others compared to females (Abid et al., 2017; Khawar and Malik, 2016; Shahzadi et al., 2019). Comparable findings have been documented across cultures, indicating that perpetrator behaviors are more prevalent among male students than female students (Pšunder and Kozmus, 2020). This finding highlights the patriarchal nature of Pakistani society, where female victimization is more common and male participants are more likely to perpetrate on others, as highlighted by Hinduja et al. (2023). As a result, female students often feel more insecure about attending university for fear of victimization.

The study also highlights the role of faculty and bystanders in intervening in bullying incidents. Researchers found that nearly a quarter of students reported that bullying was prevalent, but university administrators and teachers did not act to control or intervene in such behaviors. Shamsi et al. (2019) reported that more than half of the teachers in Pakistan lacked adequate knowledge to address bullying issues, which are prevalent in educational institutions. This suggests that university teachers may also be untrained or lack the confidence to address such issues with students. In addition, university students tend to solve their problems independently (Siddiqui et al., 2023a), which may contribute to the lack of teacher involvement in addressing antisocial behavior in higher education institutions. The study also highlighted the role of passive bystanders, with nearly a quarter of students reporting that bystanders typically do not intervene in bullying incidents. In addition, a small number reported participating in bullying incidents by accompanying the perpetrator or enjoying such incidents. These findings are consistent with the study by Siddiqui and Schultze-Krumbholz (2023a), who found that students in Pakistani educational institutions are often reluctant to intervene. Siddiqui and Schultze-Krumbholz (2023a) attribute this behavior to several factors, including fear of victimization for reporting or intervening, lack of knowledge about how to respond, being instructed to avoid involvement, and moral disengagement beliefs. Further research is recommended to determine the reasons for the lack of intervention.

The results also suggest that the majority of students experienced bullying perpetrated by a small group of peers. This observation is consistent with the findings of Siddiqui and Schultze-Krumbholz (2023b), who reported that most students identified their bullies as a small group of 2–3 individuals.

Bullying is a complex phenomenon that has been addressed through a variety of strategies. Previous researchers (Gini et al., 2014; Runions et al., 2019; Siddiqui et al., 2023b) and the authors of the current study have advocated for the inclusion of moral disengagement interventions in anti-bullying intervention programs. While not explicitly designed to alter moral disengagement, the innovations in the programs aim to assess whether individual and collective moral disengagement influences bullying perpetration and mediates changes in such behaviors in schools. Identifying the fundamental underlying mechanisms that drive behavioral change away from bullying remains a central goal of bullying prevention and intervention efforts.

Researchers have also developed different taxonomies of the motivations behind violence and bullying. For example, instrumental violence is also considered a motivation when the perpetrator attacks the victim to achieve a goal that cannot be achieved through nonviolent means (Fluck, 2017). In such cases, bullies often blackmail their victims into giving them money or valuable items. Another motive cited by Fluck (2017) is an ideological belief, which refers to in-group or out-group phenomena that lead to violence against people that students perceive as out-group members. When it comes to bullying, the characteristics that increase the likelihood of becoming a victim appear to be psychological (e.g., low self-esteem, shyness, introversion) rather than variables such as ethnicity, social status, physical appearance, sexual orientation, religious affiliation, and other obvious characteristics that differentiate the individual from the majority. It is therefore reasonable to assume that ideological reasons play a rather minor role. However, little is known about whether these motives play a significant role, and it is recommended that further research be conducted on these motives to find out whether or not this motivation is also prevalent in the general Pakistani society.

The purpose of the study was not only to determine the overall prevalence, but also to determine the percentage of students involved in different bullying roles and the differences in their perceptions. This highlights that the motivations and beliefs of different bullying roles differ, suggesting that interventions should be tailored based on these perceptions. It also leads to the recommendation that intervention programs should first establish a baseline to determine the prevalence of bullying roles, and then be adjusted and tailored according to the specific beliefs of those roles.

Researchers adhered to basic ethical principles and followed the APA Code of Ethics. Participants gave informed consent via an online forum, which is equivalent to written consent. After reading details about the purpose of the study, anonymity, voluntary participation, planned use of data, and the right to withdraw without consequence, participants gave their explicit consent by clicking the “I agree” button at the beginning of the survey. This ensured informed consent in accordance with ethical guidelines and federal law. The study, which involved human participants, did not require ethical review and approval according to local laws and institutional requirements. The research was conducted as a survey rather than an experimental design, with the goal of gathering participants’ perceptions and beliefs about the motivations behind bullying. As a result, the study had no adverse effects on the participants. The second author’s research team reviewed and confirmed that the study adhered to basic ethical principles and ensured that no potential harm was caused to participants. The review team found no potential conflicts of interest, harm to participants, or activities that deviated from ethical codes of conduct.

This study focused exclusively on university students and is cross-sectional in nature. It is recommended that future research includes additional age groups, such as high school and college students, to further explore differences in perceived and real bullying motivations and their relationship to moral disengagement across educational levels. In addition, a longitudinal study should be designed to assess changes in bullying roles and perceptions of bullying motivations. Some of the results are purely descriptive, and more advanced statistical models, such as structural equation modeling, will be necessary in the future to explore the complex interrelationships in greater depth. It is important to note that this study captured students’ perceived reasons for bullying, including those who were not directly involved in bullying episodes, such as bystanders or uninvolved students. These perceptions may differ from the actual reasons for bullying. One contributing factor is the limited number of students classified as bullies or bully-victim, probably due to the self-report nature of the questionnaire. To address this, future studies could involve teachers or peers to help identify students in the role of bully or bully-victim. Gathering opinions about motives directly from these identified groups could provide a more accurate understanding of the true motivations behind bullying. Therefore, it is recommended that future research incorporates data triangulation to accurately identify bullies and capture their true motivations.