Educational Psychology: Understanding Bullying in Educational Systems Notes PDF

Educational psychology: understanding bullying in educational systems Important field of study: pressing issue with long lasting effects and huge impacts - Definitions of bullying and prevalence across ages and systems - The potential implications of bullying and how it might be explained -...

Educational psychology: understanding bullying in educational systems Important field of study: pressing issue with long lasting effects and huge impacts - Definitions of bullying and prevalence across ages and systems - The potential implications of bullying and how it might be explained - Information about sources of welfare support if you feel you/ someone you know is being bullied How can we identify bullying? What forms does it take? Children on average attend school for 18,000 hours: extreme amount of time for negative experiences IMPACT: - Continuous effects even when child is removed from bullying environment - Carry over effect - Impact onto emotional wellbeing - Many individuals who suffer from anxiety and depression have experienced bullying; profound mental health effect - Impacts school drop out rates; those who are persistently bullied are more likely to drop out - Impact on their future life chances - Not only because of this loss of education but also social engagement and learning Rigby (2003): longitudinal studies suggest that bullying can lead to long lasting lowered health and wellbeing, as well as antisocial and violent behaviours. - Being a bully is also a risk factor for poor psychological health (suggests that there is a bully -- victim cycle) -- more likely to underachieve in school, the workplace and experience substance abuse in later life (copeland 2013) 1. Low psychological wellbeing (unhappiness, unpleasant states of mind) 2. Poor social adjustment (averse to ones own social environment) 3. Psychological distress (anxiety, depression, suicidal thinking) 4. Physical unwellness Men who were identified as bullies at school were more likely to have children who behaved aggressively (Farrington 1993)- generational continuity (supports bandura idea of social learning theory) Marr and Field (2001) : at the end of the school year 16 families will be bereaved due to the loss of a loved one from school bullying Steven Shepard (1967): britains first recorded "bullycide" : tormented by class mates (e.g. urinated in his shoes, broke his arm, named him "uneven steven" due to his limp) - Articles are slightly outdated: date back to 20+ years prior: need to take more up to date research into account (notice the effects of awareness, preventions) - e.g. PACER- initiated national bullying prevention month in 2006: more widespread recognition - Doesn't matter: bullying has actually increased: HSBC data: 8% of pupils reported bullying in 2002 & 18% in 2022 - Cyberbullying: committee for children reports: cyberbullying allows for more widespread effects - May actually be more distressing : linked with depression, social anxiety, poor academic performance, reduced self esteem - Greater power imbalance- often anonymous, can occur at any time of the day & means that home is no longer a safe environment- putting victims on consistent edge - Should ensure laws are enforced and clearly defined: advocating for prohibiting these bullying behaviours and implementing consequences - Schools should adopt a zero tolerance policy -- calling for exclusions from school - Children should be taught safety procedures with passwords, phone numbers and access to their technology -- also be made aware of who to contact Lu (2015): bullying is the main cause of death in Japanese teenagers STATISTICS: Lewis -- 2014 - 30% of children aged 6-15 have reported bullying in the past 12 months - 87% of children experienced it at school - 1/5 bullied on social media - 56% do not know who to ask for help Impacts: low self esteem, problems forming relationships -- continues into adulthood - 50% more likely to develop anxiety and depression BUT there is also a 30% increase in mental health problems for adults who bullied others as children Equality act 2010: criminal offence to harass or victimise individuals based on protective characteristics ( e.g. gender, disability, age, race) Bullying sometimes becomes normalised/ stigmatised -- don't want to tell friends, parents or teachers -- suffer in silence & issues are exacerbated DEFINITIONS OF BULLYING: A social phenomena: Differs from aggression -- aggression can be competitive and done without harm (e.g. team sports) Bullying instead has an intentional purpose of harm and is a repeated act 1. Done on several time on purpose (STOP) 2. Not an odd fight/ quarrel (Sharp and smith 1994) 3. Aggressive, intentional act, behaviour which repeatedly and deliberately (whitney and smith and sharp 1993) 4. Harms others (hazler 1996) 5. Against victims that cannot defend themselves (Olweus 1999) -- power dimension Double IR: Orpinas And Horne 2006 - Imbalance of power : victim is unable to stop behaviour - Intentional - Repeated over time Complex social phenomena that involves power relations: *"subtype of aggressive behaviour in which the perpetrators exerts power over a weaker victim"* -- Vaiilancourt, Hymel and McDougall 2003 - Issue of power is a key - Often aggressive behaviour but it is these added elements that make it bullying Often takes place within a context (e.g. school) if this context is removed it could stop (e.g. moving schools) DIFFERENT FORMS: Measured through different means -- e.g. questionnaires (my life in schools: children rates how safe they feel, if they enjoy school, feel bullied) DIRECT PHYSICAL: kicking, hitting, pushing, taking belongings etc DIRECT VERBAL: name calling, taunting, mocking, making threats INDIRECT RELATIONAL: excluding people from groups, deliberate ignoring, gossiping, spreading rumours CYBERBULLYING: new, recent form Observed gender disparities: boys are more likely to take up direct physical bullying to their cohort Girls tend to display more verbal and indirect relational - Due to socialisation differences (e.g. boys play sports but girls chat) PREVALENCE Rivers and soutter 1996: verbal and relational forms occur more often than physical bullying Craig and pepler 1997: verbal bullying is twice as common as physical Crick and nelson 2002: relational bullying is more common among girls Peak in physical bullying around year 7 -- entry into secondary school - Shift in social dynamic: no longer a social striatum and children are in competition for social status Physical bullying dissipates into adulthood- more verbal and relational CYBERBULLYING Electronic communication: presents specific dangers -- 24 hour access -- faceless and permanent - Repeated acts of aggression/ wilful harm inflicted on others through technological communication (Hinduja and patchin 2012) - Happening at even younger ages: younger children have phones for safety reasons - At primary school age: main bullying comes from verbal abuse - At secondary school age: majority of children have phones (for safety reasons) -- even more persistent and damaging as they cannot escape this harassment -- even greater concern with the advancement of technology (e.g. AI videos) Wang (2022): meta analysis to look at the combined effects of traditional bullying, alongside cyberbullying - Roughly 1/3 of those affected by traditional bullying had this carry over into cyber bullying - Depression, suicidal ideations ,self harm and suicide attempt rates were highest for those affected by TB and CB - Those affected alone by CB had higher rates of depression ""\^ than those affected by TB alone 2018: 95% of teens aged 13-17 had constant access to smartphones and 45% were online almost constantly (Anderson et al) Hamm et al 2015: increase in internet use is associated with increased frequency of CB Arguably more dangerous: anonymous, disseminated through messages making the perpetrator feel less guilty -- can be more violent and harsh (cannot see the impact on the individual) Longitudinal study of young people in England (2015) -- Year 9 and 10 Females experiences more: - Overall - Relational bullying - Cyberbullying Men experience less bullying in all sectors except for threats of violence (socialisation differences?) Dorothy et al (2003): stereotypical consensus that boys are more aggressive than girls but this is entirely context dependent Historically research was biased towards men; focus on the antisocial behaviour and aggression of boys Crick and Grotpeter (1995): relational aggression: characterised by females as a non physical means to hurt others through reputational damage -\> while they may have lower rates of antisocial behaviour -- there's greater risk for psychological maladjustment These patterns are just trends; interventions shouldn't assume this as a constant for all cases of bullying PSYCHOLOGICAL THEORIES OF BULLYING Paradigms which look at the general consensus of reasonings behind bullying PERSONALITY - Cognitive deficits - Lack of empathy ECOLOGICAL SYSTEMS THEORY Systemic paradigm (how systems interact to influence behaviour) - Too simplistic to look at personality as a single variable: complex nature isn't taken into account - Bullying isn't a fixed, typified characteristic; different contexts which influence this- e.g. violent homes -- project this onto peers (bully-victim) Information processing -- not a set personality to being a bully -- only stereotypical representations (e.g. bully beef and chip) Cognitive dimension -- bullies are deficient in understanding the mental states of others or making judgements - Hostile attribution bias' affects encoding and interpretations - Victims of bullying -- can become numb to social cues/ show negative social processing style -- impedes positive social interactions - Victimisation theory: e.g. accidentally hit with a ball but believe this is intentional and fight back Reasons young people believe they are a target for bullying: Highest for both men and female : looks Society has been moved to be more inclusive: celebrate different identities (only 3% overall believed it to be due to race, homosexuality or disability) Affective dimension -- theory of mind Theory of mind develops around the age of 3 when children can separate reality from their imagination -- useful for prosocial and antisocial behaviour - However there is evidence for theory of mind deficits in some cases -- e.g. longitudinal twin study: assessed 12 year olds on levels of bullying and found relationship with earlier measures of TOM at 5 years (shakoor et al 2012) - Sutton et al 1999 instead suggests that theory of mind studies indicate that bullies have greater socio-cognitive reasoning skills ; instead it is the victims that are deficient in these skills (Smith (2017) Crick and Dodge (1994): social information processing around stimulus and response Encoding and interpretation- goal selection, constructing responses, choosing and excluding responses (social skills deficit model) - Can negative thinking styles affect attributions and lead to repeated victimisation? - Impairments in social problem solving is implicated in aggression; aggressive individuals are more likely to possess encoding problems -- hostile attribution error & cannot infer the mental states of others - Does this account for all types of aggression? E.g. relational forms such as lying and spreading rumours is much more meticulously planned -- indicates evidence of social understanding - Sutton et al (1999): instead propose an argument based on theory of mind: some bullies possess this ability to attribute the mental states of others; target vulnerable children that tolerate victimisation - Strong theory: girls are more likely to be involved in relational bullying \^ & have a superior theory of mind (compared to boys) in adolescence (baron-cohen and hammer 1996) bul\_115\_1\_74\_fig2a.gif Ecological perspectives: familial modelling Bullying behaviour is shaped in the individuals social context; this should be examined from a range of perspectives - Behaviour is shaped through social modelling and reinforcement (Bandura 1977) - If a parent uses physical violence to resolve conflicts they will imitate this (view them as role models) - ALSO the only conflict resolution behaviour that we know - May be praised by parents: motivated to act aggressively (e.g. team sports- then manifests itself into peer interactions) Social learning theory : bandura 1963 - Individuals learn behaviours by observing others and adopting these behaviours as our own - E.g. parents: peers: violent tv/ video games: TV shows - E.g. reality TV : twice the number of aggressive acts as dramas/ comedies (e.g. keeping up with the kardashians, Geordie shore, love island) - Psychologist Sarah Coyne : short term concepts of aggression are activated when watching these shows -- primed to behave aggressively: twuce as likely to be aggressive - 78% of girls who watched reality TV thought gossip was a normal part of females relationships (54% of those who did not) - Maintained through vicarious reinforcement: these TV celebrities are rewarded with money, praise and fame Georgiou (2008): parenting techniques (harsh and inconsistent punishments) led to child aggression, especially in boys Are there genetic dispositions that could cause aggressive behaviours? -- Kohlberg: may be done out of intrinsic interest: may be this internal need for control/ power Is it appropriate to make the bully out to be the villain? They are a victim of their own circumstance -- shouldn't be punished but rather intervened Does shed important light onto intervention techniques: parents should be taught to socialise their children into prosocial behaviours Teachers and school counsellors must see this as a daily behaviour management issue - Nearly impossible to globally implement? Rose tinted glasses that all homes are functional Peer culture Homophily (within group similarity): similar children will form peer groups: this identification creates self concepts - Identify with children similar to ourselves (gender, looks, race)- self affirming "in group": those that differ from this are isolated Peer group membership is particularly important in late childhood and early adolescence; formed on similar propinquity , gender and race but also behavioural dimensions (e.g. smoking, academia) Hierarchical linear modelling: used to determine extent to which peers influenced bullying - Support the notion that peer groups influence each other (effects were stronger for bullying \> fighting -- bigger role for low level aggression) - Students would hang around with others who bullied at similar frequencies - Those who hung around with those who bullied others increased in bullying behaviours - Normative social influence & imitation (bandura -- social learning theory: look up to our peers : within our in group) Attraction theory: bullies may become popular- associated with more masculine traits (aggression, dominance) Adolescents want to separate themselves from their parents and become attracted to these independent traits (delinquency and aggression) "child like" (obedience, compassion) traits are stigmatised Bukowksi et al 2000: aggression became more attractive to boys and girls with their entry to secondary school Pellegrini and Bartini 2001: at the end of middle school -- girls would nominate "dominant" boys as their dates to a hypothetical party Dominance theory: as children enter secondary school social hierarchies shift; social stratification takes place -- social leaders are chosen; bullying peaks : Pellegrini (2002): this transition requires students to renegotiate their dominance relationships; bullying is used to attain dominance in a newly formed peer group - Bullying is more likely to be used by boys as a means of targeted aggression during this transition period Dorothy et al (2003): as children enter adolescence aggression is viewed less negatively by peers (Bukowski et al 2000); boys adopt a more positive view of bullying (crick and Werner 1998) - These changes emerge at the transition of primary -\> secondary Social dominance theory Bullying is a social phenomenon: impacted by individual and group processes - Social goals of individuals - Social competence and perceptions - Group behaviour - Social environment Dominance displays: social stratification and friendship groups - Little cross gender bullying - More of a fight for dominance within groups Peer group/ peer culture (O'connell et al 1990) - Peers involved in 85% of playground bullying - 54% of peers time spent reinforcing bullying by passively watching - Bystander effect - 21% of peers time was spent actively supporting bullies - E.g. laughing: active support for the bully - 25% of peers time was spent intervening on behalf of victims & 75% of these peer interventions were successful in stopping bullying Social goals: aggression is embedded in the goals/ values of the peer group (crick and Grotpeter 1995) This differs for males/ females Males- themes of instrumentality and physical dominance is important (Block 1983) = physical bullying Girls- strive for close, intimate connections with others (block 1983) = relational bullying Roles in bullying - Bully - Assistant: joins in an assists - Reinforcer: doesn't actively attack the victim but provides positive feedback to the bully (bystander) - Defender: shows anti bullying behaviour: comforts the victim and active in preventing bullying - Often rare but has a significant impact - Outsider: stays away not taking sides with anyone -- silent approval of bullying - Victim Responses: - ***Aggressive:*** escalates the problem - Fighting back - Could work (stops the bullying) but often gets the victim into trouble - ***Passive unconstructive:*** ignores the behaviour but meets the bully's demands - May not even realise it is bullying (must make sure the child is educated on bullies behaviours - ***Passive constructive:*** exiting quickly from a bullying situation and seeking support from peers (may disable a victim) - Constructive but attacks often continue - ***Assertive:*** a pupil calmly refuses to comply with demands and fails to reinforce bullying behaviour (most successful) \[Difficult in cyber context\]. - Most effective: tells bully the behaviour isn't acceptable - May be difficult if the bullying is online The bystander effect - Person who doesn't actively help a situation where someone is in need - Diffusion of responsibility: individuals become less inclined to help as the group size becomes bigger (others could have but they haven't) -- Latane and Darley 1970 - Normative social influence - The invisible engine in the cycle of bullying -- Twemlow 2001 - An audience provides positive reinforcement ; increases arousal which can encourage others to become involved - Fear of being bullied themselves leads to a lack of action  Brofenbrenner 1979: appreciated that we are affected by all these different things: ripple effects from macro and exosystems - **Microsystem**: patterns of social relating where child is directly involved - **Mesosystem**: relationships between different systems where a child inhabits- e.g. home and schools - **Exosystem**: indirect influence upon child's experience -- e.g. school policies - If school policies don't address bullying responses then the school is likely to be passive - **Macrosystem**: wider cultural, societal context - Behave according to norm -- if bullying occurs in different outlets its normalised Cant change the whole of society but small changes can make big differences that have a wider effect Relational bullying: continues to have an effect into college age students; distinct construct that plays a role in psychosocial adjustment (werner and crick 1999) \+ can have harmful in romantic relationships (Linder et al 2002) Relational aggression requires enhanced cognitive abilities (need to manipulate social environment) -- requires enhanced theory of mind & explains why this is not observed in younger children & when they do it is more simple, immediate and direct confrontative behaviours Relational bullying can often cause the most harm: goes unnoticed by teachers (Bauman 2008) Dorothy 2003: Important implications to policies: schools and staff encouraged to survey students themselves so that they can tailor interventions to their unique ecology Bullying should be assessed in a multidimensional manner: lots of powerful influences -