Problem 1: Suffering from bullying:
v Bullying = targeted intimidation or humiliation – imbalance of power
• Usually done by physically stronger / more socially prominent person
• Power imbalance between the two => bullying (≠ conflict)
o 20-25% of youths are directly involved in bullying (perpetrator and/or victim)
o 4-9% frequently engage in bullying behaviours
o 9-25% are bullied
A) Too heavy a burden to bear:
1. What are the forms and consequences of bullying? What are causes of bullying?
v Direct & indirect forms of bullying:
• Direct confrontation à (e.g. physical aggression, threats, name-calling) – intimidating,
humiliating, belittling someone in from of an audience
• Indirect tactics à (e.g. spreading rumours, backstabbing, exclusion from group) – relational
manipulation – hurt the victim’s social reputation
• Age differences: no difference found between the use of both forms
o !! Different bullying within these groups differ with age (e.g. name calling vs physical
aggression) + some forms of aggression aren’t studied among young children (e.g.
spreading rumours)
• Gender differences: physical aggression more related to males & relational forms of
aggression more females (use it more than physical) à BUT no strong differences found in
use of relational aggression
o Boys = more physically aggressive than girls at every age group, across races/ethnicities,
social classes, cultures, national boundaries – decreases with age – turns into relational
aggression with age (physical is less socially acceptable)
o Girls = value relationships more than boys – evolutionary perspective (= better position to
compete for males when attack reputation of other girls)
• Correlation between direct & indirect = high (r = 0.76)
v Bullying and social dominance:
• Indirect form of aggression demands sophisticated social skills – most bullies don’t turn
into violent adults (bullying is short-lived)
• Cold, lack empathy, bully to dominate & control the behaviour of peers – want to be visible,
influential, admired
o Often have high social status (‘popular’) – aggression is a way to establish dominant
position within a group (= strategic behaviour)
§ Peak in early adolescence => during social reorganization & uncertainty – to remain
powerful – position in hierarchy
à !!! Can be due to environmental changes (e.g. transition from primary to middle school)
and/or developmental (e.g. puberty) => difficult to determine
v Inflated self-views & social cognitive biases of bullies:
• High perceptions of themselves for peer status but also in academics & athletic domains
(positive relation between aggression and high social status)
o Also rate themselves lower on depression, social anxiety, loneliness …
• Information-processing biases à see ambiguous situations as reflecting hostile peer intent
=> lack of emotional distress
1
,o Maintain positive self-view by blaming & aggressing against others instead of accepting
personal responsibility
o Also often receive positive social feedback from peers after bullying
o Bystanders don’t usually intervene even if they don’t agree with the bullying – some even
reinforces by smiling or laughing à often side with the bully to protect their own social
status, reputation, and physical safety
2
,2. What are risk factors & characteristics of victims and bullies?
v Victim subtypes:
• Victims usually suffer from adjustment problems (e.g. depressed mood, anxiety)
• Look for “safe” target
o Submissive victims = anxious, insecure, sensitive à internalizing problems + lack of
confidence in social interactions => increase risk of being bullied
o Proactive victims = resort to aggression – failed attempt to retaliate against more powerful
bullies – emotional response is rewarding for bullies (win?)
§ Often have emotion regulation & attention problems (ADHD)
v Individual & social risk factors:
• Non behavioural characteristics that increase risk à obesity, off-time pubertal maturation,
disabilities, LGBTQ (= anything that makes them stand out from others)
o “Social misfit” (Wright et al.) – unlikely to be supported by others
§ Experiment => camp with kids with behavioural problems – aggressive boys were
rejected when others didn’t use aggression & opposite when most of them were
aggressive
• Protection / not as emotionally touched = those with friends for emotional support
v Cyclical processes & consequences of peer victimization:
• Risk factors could also be consequences of victimization => no significant difference found
– probably a cyclical process (both)
o (!!) If this cycle is not interrupted -> likely to show psychosocial difficulties later in life –
higher prevalence of anxiety disorders (phobias, panic) + depression + suicide
v Mediating mechanisms underlying psychosocial problems:
• Causal perception of why they are mistreated – rely on internal & uncontrollable
hypothetical scenarios
o Self-blame (= consequence) – reputation – emotional distress
v Mechanisms underlying school difficulties & health problems:
• Bullied youths don’t do well in school (absent from school & receive low grades) à
emotional distress (anxious) + somatic complaints (headache)
o => Emotional & physical stress explain low grades
• More likely to suffer from physical health problems (HPA-axis) – different stress (cortisol)
levels compared to control group
o Higher cortisol immediately after stressor & lower 30 mins after => more health problems
– compared people not included in game to control
o Increased activity in dorsal anterior cingulate cortex (dACC) & subACC
§ Physiological responses => help understand emotional & physical pain
§ Bully + victim = depressed
3
, 3. What are contexts of bullying (online vs in person)?
v Cyber bullying:
• Electronically mediated bullying (texting, emailing, posting messages on social networks
…)
o Can be direct (e.g. threats) or indirect (e.g. malicious comments)
• What makes it different à spreads faster – anonymity
o Anonymity + poor social control => makes is easier for bully
v The school context:
• Influence of school characteristics (size, urbanicity, teacher quality, school climate)
• Racial/ethnic diversity à greater ethnic diversity leads to less bullying
o Study: 6th grade – experience of vulnerability (victimization, feeling unsafe, lonely, low
self-worth) – in 99 classrooms & 10 schools that varied in ethnic diversity
§ Greater diversity = lower sense of vulnerability among Latino, African American
§ Better power balance = no one stands out = lower bullying chances
• Organization of instruction à academic tracking leads to more bullying (especially in low
ability tracks)
o Academic teaming (groups of same level) = less exposed to other people at school
§ Social & academic benefits BUT increases level of victimization for those who were not
liked by their peers (= few opportunities to redefine their social identities)
• Deviation from classroom norms à students feel extra bad when different than others
(social misfits) – depressed / sad
o Worse outcome for victims in orderly classrooms (= social order, pro-social conduct)
o Higher self-blaming when victim of own ethnic group (= benefit of diverse ethnic groups)
4
