BULLYING:Psychopathology Human Nature or

Part of Growing Up?

The Prevention of Bullying:

Building an Alberta Research Agenda March 23-23, 2006Calgary, AB

Shelley HymelUniversity of British Columbia

KASSERIAN INGERA

How are our children?

1 in 5 youth display significant mental health problems that warrant social services

11.4% of Canadian youth drop out of school early

7% of BC students in grades 7-12 reported attempting suicide at least oncein the past 12 months; about 10% of girls and 17% of boys considered suicide. (McCreary AHS, 1998)

8-10% of students report that they are bullied and harassed by peers on a regular (daily/weekly) basis

Disliked and socially rejected children are at particular risk for later mental health problems, criminality and early school withdrawal

6-12% of students report that they do not feel safe at school

• Norway early 1980’s• Japan early 1990’s• North America late 1990’s

Jason Lang, aged 17

shot and killed at

W.R. Myers High School

Taber, Alberta

April 20, 1999

Recent Surveys of Secondary Students

Only 62 – 75% of students across different high schools agree that bullying behaviors are actually criminal offenses.

Emmett Fralick

Age 14

Grade 9

St. Agnes School

Halifax Nova Scotia

Took his own life

8April 2002

Travis Sleeva

Age 16

Grade 11

Canora, Saskatchewan

Shot himself in 2004 in response to peer bullying

“A person is being bullied when he or she is exposed, repeatedly and over time, to negative actions on the part of one or more other persons.” Olweus, 1991

Three critical components: Intentionality Repetition Power Differential

Bullying is about power…..(Vaillancourt, Hymel & McDougall, 2003)

• Power comes in many forms…• Physical (larger, older)• Numbers (mobbing, scapegoating)• Social (more popular, more competent)

• Over time, the power imbalance between the bully and victim becomes more established

• Children who are victimized are powerless to stop the bullying on their own

Involvement in Bully-Victim Incidents

70-80%

8-10%

8-12%

1-5%Victims

Bullies

Bully-Victims

Witnesses

Incidence RatesSample of nearly 500 students, grades 8-10

• How often have you been bullied in school [this year]?o 31% report that they have NOT been bulliedo 56% report being bullied a “few times” or “once in a while”o 12% report being bullied once a week or many times a week

• How often have you taken part in bullying others?o 33% report that they have NOT bullied otherso 54% report bullying others a “few times” or “once in a while”o 13% report bullying others once a week or many times a week

• How often have you watched others being bullied at school?o only 5% report that they have not seen others bulliedo 52% report that they see others bullied a “few times” or “once in a while”o 42% report that they see other bullied once a week or many times a week

How often have you been bullied in school this term?

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Slovak republicEnglandSweden

ScotlandWales

Rep. of IrelandNorthern Ireland

PolandNorwayGreece

HungaryUSA

FinlandBelgium -

FranceCanadaRussia

PortugalIsrael

AustriaEstonia

DenmarkCzech republic

LatviaSwitzerland

GreenlandGermanyLithuania

Percent distribution

Sometimes >= Once a week

USA

CANADA

How often have you taken part in bullying

other students?

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

England

Wales

Scotland

Poland

Sweden

Northern Ireland

Slovak republic

Greece

Rep. of Ireland

Portugal

Hungary

Israel

Norway

USA

Russia

Finland

Czech republic

Estonia

Canada

Belgium - Flemish

France

Latvia

Greenland

Switzerland

Denmark

Lithuania

Germany

Austria

Percent distribution

Sometimes >= Once a week

CANADA

USA

Bullying takes many forms…

Physical Bullying pushing, spitting, shoving, hitting, kicking, threatening with a weapon, defacing property, stealing

Verbal Bullying mocking, teasing, name-calling, dirty looks, intimidating phone calls, racist,sexist, homophobic taunts, verbal threats, coercion, extortion

Social Bullying gossiping, setting up for embarrassment, spreading rumors, exclusion from group, inciting hatred, racist, sexist, homophobic alienation setting other up to take the blame, public humiliation

Cyber Bullying using internet, email or text messages to threaten, hurt, single out, embarrass, spread rumors or reveal secrets about others

Frequent Victims (once a month or more)

0102030405060708090

Gr 4 Gr 5 Gr 6 Gr 7 Gr 8 Gr 9 Gr 10 Gr 11 Gr 12

physically bulliedverbally bulliedsocially bulliedelectronically bullied

Long Term Consequences Bullying• externalizing problems• antisocial problem behaviour• mental health problems• dating aggression • sexual harassment• arrests for child/spousal abuse• depression • anxiety • suicide • delinquency and criminality• moral disengagement

Victimization• academic difficulties• school truancy/avoidance• increased absenteeism• somatic complaints

(e.g., headaches, stomachaches)

• stress-related illness, physical health problems

• low self-esteem• depression• social withdrawal/isolation • social anxiety, loneliness• suicide• aggressive behaviour

WHY?

Three possibilitiesThree possibilities• PsychopathologyPsychopathology• Part of growing up Part of growing up • Human natureHuman nature

Why?

Psychopathology?

CHARACTERISTICS OF BULLIES AND VICTIMS

Bullies externalizing problems & hyperactivity

(e.g., Khatri et al., 2000; Kumpulainen et al. 1999)

antisocial & physically aggressive behavior (e.g., Craig, 1998)

empathy (e.g., Espelage & Mebane in press; Funke 2003;

Roberts & Morotti, 2000; Olweus 1993, 1997) anxiety (e.g., Craig, 1998; Olweus, 1993)

Victims depression & anxiety (e.g., Boivin et al., 2001; Craig, 1998;

Olweus, 1993,1997; Sourander et al., 2000)

Personality and neuropsychological correlates of bullying behavior(Coolidge, DenBoer & Segal, 2004)

Bullies > ControlsAxis 1 Syndromes:• Conduct Disorder• Oppositional Defiant Disorder• ADHD• Depressive Disorder

Axis II Personality Disorders• Passive-Aggressive Disorder

% of bully group with “clinically elevated scores”

46% 49% 51% 49%

Prevalence of Mental Disorders in Children and Youth (Waddell & Shepherd, 2002)

Children (age 4-17) diagnosed with specific mental health disorders

Estimated # in AB (given est. 590,000 K-12 students)

Anxiety 6.4% 37,776Conduct Disorders 4.2% 24,789ADHD 4.8% 28,320Depression 3.5% 20,650Substance Abuse 0.8% 4,720PDD 0.3% 1,770OCD 0.2% 1,180Tourettes 0.1% 590Eating Disorders 0.1% 590Schizophrenia 0.1% 590Bipolar <0.1% <590

Total diagnosed (any disorder) 14.3% or 811,5000 children across Canada

Why?

Part of Growing Up?

The Priority of Human Relationships

• Belonging is a basic human need

• We have a fundamental, biologically-based human drive to form emotional bonds and attachments with others (attachment theory)

Two Social Worlds of Childhood (Hartup, Piaget)

ADULT

(PARENT)

CHILD

CHILD CHILD

Cultural Trends Promoting Attachment to Peers rather than Adults (Neufeld & Maté, 2004)

• loss of extended families• dual parent work/careers• increased work week

(less family time)• increased divorce rates

(reconstituted families, competing attachments)

• secularization of society• early child proximity to peers

(daycare)• daycares poorly funded

(not enough adults)• increasing age-segregation • larger schools, larger classes

(primary peer affiliation)• electronic transmission of

culture

Domains of Social Development

• Social Participation• Perspective-taking• Friendship

conceptions• Empathy• Prosocial Reasoning

• Brain Development• Identity Development• Moral Development

Causes and Contributing Factors

Child Characteristics

Family Characteristics

School Policies & Practices

Media (TV & Video Games)

Peer Group Contributions

Societal and Cultural Norms

SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT

Why?

Human Nature?

Group Socialization Theory(Harris, 1995, 1998)

BETWEEN GROUPS WITHIN GROUPS

•group contrast effects

•group differences widen

•ingroup favoritism/ outgroup discrimination

ASSIMILATION

•self- categorization

•adopt group norms

•increased similarity

DIFFERENTIATION

•social comparisons

•status hierarchies

•dominance, power

Olweus’ Bullying Circle

Victimized

Child

Child Bullying

Followers

Supporters

Passive supporters Disengaged

onlookers

Possible defenders

Defenders

A

B

C

D E

F

G

Bullying in school is a group phenomenon in which most children have a definable participant role (Salmivalli et al., 1996, 1997)

0

5

10

15

20

25

Bully Assistant Reinforcer Defender Victim Outsider

Distribution of Finnish children across the various participant roles with respect to bullying episodes in 6th grade (adapted from Salmivalli et al., 1996)

Boys Girls

%

8.2%

6.8%

19.5%

17.3%

11.7%

23.7%

Craig & Pepler: The role of peers in bullying

Peers…• are present as observers in 85% of bullying episodes• intervened on behalf of victim only 11% of the time • spent 53% of the time passively watching • spent 22% of the time helping the bully • shift the affect of the bullying child when they

support bullying and/or join in, creating• more excitement• more happiness • more aggression

Peer solutions

Although peers were witnesses in 85% of bullying incidents:

• they only spent 25% of their time helping the victim.• they only intervened in 19% of bullying episodes.• most peer interventions (57%) were effective in

stopping bullying within 10 seconds.• peers intervened prosocially (53%) or aggressively

(47%) • Aggressive to bullying child • Prosocial to victimized child

• intervention was more likely from same-sex peers.

Student Attitudes and Beliefs

Range Across Secondary Schools

Bullies are losers. 78% yes

Bullies have power. 49-66% yes

You get what you want from kids if you are a bully. 29-49% yes

Some of the coolest kids in school are bullies. 33-60% yes

Bullies are popular. 35-61% yes

Student Attitudes and BeliefsBeliefs about Victims

Empathy for Victims

It bothers me that other kids get picked on by bullies. 70-81% yes

It bothers me when someone is left out because of bullies. 67-82% yes

Perceptions of Victims

Some kids get bullied because they deserve it. 40-71% yes

Most students who get bullied bring it on themselves. 37-58% yes

If certain kids didn’t whine or given in so easily,

they wouldn’t get bullied so much. 58-72% yes

Victims should fight back. 66-70% yes

If you refuse to fight, other kids will think you’re a loser. 55-63% yes

Student Attitudes and BeliefsJustifying Bullying

Sometimes it’s okay to bully other people. 16-31% yes

Bullying gets grudges out in the open. 65-72% yes

Getting bullied helps make people tougher. 29-44% yes

Some kids need to be picked on just to teach them a lesson. 36-51% yes

Bullying gets kids to understand what is important to the group. 20-34% yes

Bullying can be a good way to solve problems. 10-21% yes

Moral Disengagement(Bandura,1999; 2001; Bandura, Caprara, Barbaranelli, Pastorelli, & Regalia, 2001)

Four major categories:

1) Cognitive restructuring 2) Minimizing one’s agentive role

3) Disregarding or distorting negative impact

4) Blaming and dehumanizing the victim

Attitudes that Predict Bullying

• Sometimes it’s okay to bully other people.• In my group of friends, bullying is okay.• Kids get bullied because they are different.• Some kids get bullied because they deserve it.• Some kids get bullied because they hurt other kids.

“Disengagement practices will not instantly transform considerate persons into cruel ones. Rather, the change is achieved by progressive disengagement of self-censure Initially, individuals perform mildly harmful acts they can tolerate with some discomfort. After their self-reproof has been diminished through repeated enactments, the level of ruthlessness increases, until eventually acts originally regarded as abhorrent can be performed with little anguish or self-censure. Inhumane practices become thoughtlessly routinized. The continuing interplay between moral thought, affect, action, and its social reception is personally transformative. People may not even recognize the changes they have undergone as a moral self.”

Albert Bandura, 2001

BYSTANDER HELPLESSNESS

It’s okay to report bullying to school authorities. 70-82% yes

It is my responsibility to do something when I see bullying. 45-72% yes If you tell on a bully, people will think you are a “tattle tale” or loser. 58-86% yes

Kids who tell on bullies are often the next victims. 76-87% yes

Across schools….20-36% agree that it is “better not to get involved.”26-38% believe that there is “nothing I can do to stop it”.28-33% admit that they are “too frightened to intervene.”51-67% agree that they are “just glad it’s not me”.

Why do people bully?

• Child psychopathology • The gradual social development

of our children • The nature of human beings

Implications

• Bullying is a social problem that requires an understanding of human relationships in order to adequately address it.

• We need to purposefully promote positive social development in our youth.

• All children involved in bullying incidents -- perpetrators, victims and bystanders - must be included and considered in bullying interventions.

• We need to intervene at multiple levels if we are to effect real changes in bullying in our society.

Levels of Intervention

Targeted or individualized intervention

Universal or school-based interventionEvery individual has the right to be spared from oppression and repeated, intentional humiliation. It is a fundamental democratic right to not be victimized in school. Dan Olweus, 1991

Societal level intervention

• Bullying as a teaching moment rather than a discipline problem (Rocke-Henderson, 2002)

• Something is better than nothing• Nonintervention is typically interpreted as acceptance and tolerance

• Three targets of intervention• BULLIESChildren who bully require formative consequences:

• VICTIMS Children who are victimized require safety and support to develop positive connections with peers.

• WITNESSES All children involved in bullying incidents -- perpetrators, victimized youth, and bystanders -- must be included in bullying interventions.

School-Based Initiatives:Intervening in the Bullying Processes

Evidence-Based Practice

A Recent Review of Bullying Prevention

•The majority of programs were successful at reducing bullying and victimization at school.

•Of the 46 studies:

• 26 (56%) reported only positive reductions in bullying/victimization;

• 7 (15%) reported only negative results; • 6 (13%) reported mixed results (some positive,some negative effects);

• 3 (7%) reported no change; • 4 (9%) programs are ongoing and there are no results to date.

The Norway Project (Olweus)

School Level better recess supervision

contact telephonemeeting of school staff & parentsteacher groups to develop “school climate”parent circles/discussion groups

Classroom Level regular class meetings

cooperative learningmeetings among teachers, parents & studentscommon positive activitiesrole playing and literature about bullyingexplicit class rules against bullying

Individual Level serious talks with both bullies and victims

help from “neutral” studentsadvice to parents (brochure)change of class or school if necessary“discussion” groups with parents of bullies &

victims

Percent reduction following the intervention

Percentage change due to

Program Location Date -10 0 10 20 30 40 50 60

Finland (Kempele) 1992 xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxNorway (Bergen) 1985 xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxFinland (Helsinki) 2000 xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Norway (Oslo) 1999 xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxNorway (Bergen 2)1997 xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxIreland (Donnegal) 2000 xxxxxxxxxxxxxNorway (S Norway)1994 xxxxxxxxxxEngland (Sheffield) 1994 xxxxxxxxxxxSwitzerland(Geneva) 1994 xxxxxxxxxAustralia (W.A) 2001 xxxxxxGermany (Holstein) 1996 xxxBelgium (Flanders) 2001 xCanada (Toronto) 1994 xUSA (S Carolina) 1997 xNorway (Rogaland) 1986 xxxxxx

Reported variations in outcomes between schools for the Schleswig Holstein Program

Different interventions can yield

similar results (Rigby, 2005)

• Oslo study Olweus program emphasizing discipline, rules, consequences, and sanctions

• Turku study Salmivalli et al. program emphasizing problem-solving methods (e.g., Pikas Method of Shared Concern)

Both report 42% reduction in victimization

Essential Elements of a Successful Social Program

• theory driven• developmentally based • consider protective as well as risk

factors (resilience based)• systemic• individual as well as universal• ongoing evaluation (including process

as well as outcome)

People support best that which they help to create

Blanchard and Bowles“Gung Ho”

Evidence-Based Practice

Selecting Interventions that have been proven effective

But …

proven effectiveness elsewhere is no guarantee of success

(e.g., Smith, Schneider, Smith & Anadiadou, 2004)

And…

don’t discourage efforts to develop new approaches

Accountability:

Evaluating whether or not your intervention works

CANDADIAN INITIATIVES

Saskatchewan: Diane Gossen’s Restitution Self DisciplineOntario: Mary Gordon’s Roots of EmpathyQuebec: Mrs. Twinkle Rudberg’s Leave Out ViolencE (L.O.V.E.)British Columbia: Anita Robert’s SafeteenIshu Ishiyama’s Anti-Discrimination Response Training (A.R.T.)Bonnie Leadbeater’s W.I.T.S. program

COLLABORATIVE FOR ACADEMIC SOCIAL AND EMOTIONAL LEARNING

casel.org

Levels of Intervention

Targeted or individualized intervention

Universal or school-based interventionEvery individual has the right to be spared from oppression and repeated, intentional humiliation. It is a fundamental democratic right to not be victimized in school. Dan Olweus, 1991

Societal level intervention

Canadian Initiative for the Prevention of Bullying

The CIPB’s mission is to develop a national strategy to reduce bullying and victimization among Canadian youth by

–Providing education and information on bullying and victimization; –Creating assessment and evaluation tools; –Disseminating information on effective intervention strategies –Promote policy development to ensure sustained attention to problems of bullying

All that is needed for evil to prosper is for people of good will to do nothing.

-Edmund Burke

In conclusion, there is no conclusion to what children who are bullied live with. They take it home with them at night. It lives inside them and eats away at them. It never ends. So neither should our struggle to end it.

Sarah, age 17

Shelley HymelFaculty of EducationUniversity of British Columbia2125 Main MallVancouver, BC, V6T 1Z4

shelley.hymel@ubc.ca