1. What is known about bullying behaviour?
Sarah Woods
Dieter Wolke
University of Hertfordshire
Psychology Department - DWRU

3. What is Bullying?
Direct Bullying: “ A Student is being bullied or victimised when he or she is exposed repeatedly and over time to negative action on the part of one or more others students (Olweus, 1991)
Relational Bullying: “The purposeful damage and manipulation of peer relationships and feelings of social exclusion.
(Crick & Grotpeter, 1995)

4. Types of Bullying
Physical: Hitting, kicking, taking belongings.
Verbal: Name calling, cruel teasing, taunting, threatening.
Relational/Psychological: Social exclusion, malicious rumour spreading, deliberate withdrawal friendship.
Gender Differences have been found for different types of bullying

5. Bullying Sub-groups ‘Pure’ Bullies ‘Pure’ Victims Bully/victims
Neutrals
22/09/2019

6. Precursors of Bullying Behaviour
No special models
Lack of longitudinal studies
Adapted from conduct disorder
Speculative

7. Participation in Antisocial Behaviour: Three groups
% of antisocial behaviour

8. Antisocial Behaviour (persistent)
5-6% of offenders commit >50% of crime.
life-persistent antisocial group often in contact with law before adolescence.
Remain with anti-social personality disorder.
To differentiate life-persistent from adolescence onset – need to know pre-adolescent behaviour.

9. Bullying Behaviour and Antisocial Behaviour
Bullying: different antecedents for group: V; B/V; B
General Antisocial: focuses solely perpetrator

10. Bullying and victimisation
% of antisocial behaviour

11. Bullying Behaviour and Antisocial Behaviour
Both are dependent on Social Context: Behaviour Tendencies and Opportunities
Bullying: Class & School context
General Antisocial: Beyond School: Family, Neighbourhood

12. Characteristics Bully Sub-Groups and Risk Factors
Some Findings
from our Research

13. How widespread is bullying in schools cross-culturally? Germany
Consistent Estimations across studies.
Over 6mths – 1yr: Children generally reported 1-2 acts of bullying others (e.g. Schaefer, 1996).
At least once week: Prevalence rates in the range of 4%-12% for bullying others and between 5%-16% for being victims of bullying (e.g. Schaefer, 1996; Tillmann et al., 1996).

14. How widespread is bullying in schools cross-culturally? Portugal
Few studies have been carried out in Portugal regarding bullying behaviour. One large scale study involving 6200 students aged 6-15 yrs (Tomas de Almeida & Smith).
3 or more times over school term: 15%-20% of children said that they bullied others, 21%-22% said that they were victims of bullying.
Physical bullying was more prevalent among primary school pupils and verbal among secondary pupils.

15. How widespread is bullying in schools cross-culturally? U.K.
Widespread studies carried out in the U.K. among primary and secondary school children
Sometimes or more often: 12%-17% of children reported bullying others, 17%-27% of children reported being victimised.
Once a week or more often: 4%-10% reported bullying others, 8-23% reported being victimised.

16. Universities of Hertfordshire and Munich Psychology Department - DWRU
BULLYING & VICTIMISATION IN ENGLAND & GERMANY: PREVALENCE & SCHOOL FACTORS
Dieter Wolke Henrike Schulz
Sarah Woods Katherine Stanford
Universities of Hertfordshire and Munich
Psychology Department - DWRU

17. RESEARCH QUESTIONS
Are there differences in the prevalence & characteristics of bullying & victimisation experienced by English & German primary school children?
What is the relationship of social and school factors to bullying & victimisation in the UK & Germany?

18. VICTIMISATION
P < 0.001

19. BULLYING OTHERS
P < 0.001

20. BULLYING CLASSIFICATION
P < 0.001

21. SCHOOL RELATED FACTORS
GERMANY:
None of the school and social factors were related to bullying behaviour.
U.K.:
School size
Class size all related to bullying bullying
Urban/rural
School & Social factors were trichotomised by country.

22. Bullying and Behaviour Problems among Primary School Children
Dieter Wolke Linda Bloomfield
Sarah Woods Lyn Karstadt
University of Hertfordshire
Psychology Department - DWRU

23. Research Questions
What is the extent of behaviour problems for children involved in direct or relational bullying?
Are there any differential effects of direct and relational bullying on behaviour problems?
Do those children involved in both types of bullying have the most behaviour problems?

24. Average Total Difficulties scores from the SDQ for direct & relational bullying

25. Average Prosocial Behaviour scores from SDQ for direct & relational bullying

26. RESULTS
Direct and relational bullying and behaviour problems in the clinical range.

27. Total Difficulties scores in the clinical range (> 90th percentile) for direct and relational bullying sub-groups
***
***

28. RESULTS
Involvement in both types of bullying (direct & relational) and behaviour problems.

29. Total Difficulties in the clinical range for direct bullying only, relational bullying only and both types of bullying

30. Bullying and Health Problems among Primary School Children
Dieter Wolke Sarah Woods Lyn Karstadt
University of Hertfordshire
Psychology Department - DWRU

31. Research Questions
What is the extent of health problems for children involved in direct or relational bullying?
Are there any differential effects of direct and relational bullying on health complaints?
Do those children involved in both types of bullying have the most health complaints?

32. RESULTS Direct bullying and total physical health problems.
No significant differences between relational bullying and total physical health problems.

33. Average Total Physical Health problems for Direct Bullying

34. RESULTS Direct bullying and total Psychosomatic health problems.
No significant differences between relational bullying and total Psychosomatic health problems.

35. Average Total psychosomatic Health problems for Direct Bullying

36. Is bullying behaviour related to academic achievement at school?
Dieter Wolke
Sarah Woods
University of Hertfordshire
Department of Psychology, Hatfield, UK

37. Background
Uncertainty surrounding whether bullying behaviour at school has a negative impact on academic achievement at school.
Past research suggests that the aggressive behaviour of bullies has a negative impact on school performance and others suggest that victimisation results in poor grades.

38. Research Questions
Is there any relationship between direct and relational bullying on SATs test results and teacher assessments?
What school factors predict SATs test results and teacher assessments?
Does children’s performance on SATs tests contribute to involvement in bullying behaviour?

39. Results: What predicts relational bullying?
95% CI for Exp (B)
Odds ratio
Sig (P)
Lower
Upper
SATS TR
Avg/above avg)
5.74
0.08
0.77
42.72
Gender (boys)
0.42
0.02
0.21
0.86
Class Size
(small)
0.48
0.05
0.23
0.99
Emotional hlth probs (at least 1 prob)
0.50
0.25

40. Results
No relationship between direct bullying and academic achievement was revealed.
Relational bullies had significantly higher SATs test results and Teacher Assessment results compared to victims and neutral children.
Having average or above average academic achievement in year 2 contributed to bullying being a bully in year 4.

41. Conclusions & Implications
No support generated for the theory that under achievement and frustration at school leads to direct bullying behaviour.
Educational professionals need to be aware of the characteristics of relational bullies including good academic achievement, competent social skills, good school attendance and healthy individuals.

43. Background: Anti-Bullying Intervention Programmes
Some Schools still do not have anti-bullying policies.
Only recently schools were provided with guidelines on how to devise comprehensive anti-bullying policies.
Only 4 studies have carried out evaluations of whole school anti-bullying interventions. These revealed inconsistent & inconclusive findings.

44. Research Question
Does the detail of anti-bullying policies tell us anything about bullying rates in British primary schools?

45. Anti-Bullying Scores & Direct Bullying Sub-GroupsNS

46. Anti-Bullying Scores & Relational Bullying Sub-Groups

47. Future Directions
Distinction between efficacy versus effectiveness studies needed.
More attention on early intervention at primary school level required.
Issue of relational bullying & policies needs more careful consideration.
Increase in liaison with teachers, governors & community as a whole to develop new initiatives.

48. Characteristics Bully Sub-Groups
Individual Differences
Social Cognition
Sociometric Status
Family Functioning

49. Characteristics of Victims
INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCES: withdrawn, anxious, low self-esteem, unassertive, upset easily, boys physically weak.
SOCIAL COGNITION: negative attitude to violence, poor social understanding, poor in conflict resolution strategies.
SOCIOMETRIC STATUS: low social impact, few or no friends (lonely), rejected or neglected.
FAMILY FUNCTIONING: over protective mothers, enmeshed family (abused by siblings?) or father often distant, cold, no role model.

50. Characteristics of Bully/victims
INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCES: irritable, angry and hot tempered, impulsive, hyperactive, short attention.
SOCIAL COGNITION: +ive attitude to aggression, misinterpret hostile intentions (ambiguous provocation), low-mod social understanding.
SOCIOMETRIC STATUS: moderate to high social impact, few friends, highly rejected by peers, reinforcer or assistant.
FAMILY FUNCTIONING: experiences of violence in family, inconsistent discipline & parenting, often marital conflict, father often absent, dysfunctional.

51. Characteristics of Bullies
INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCES: little anxiety, good self-esteem, well regulated, physically strong boy
SOCIAL COGNITION: uses aggression to dominate, ‘cool cognition’, good understanding of social situations; little empathy.
SOCIOMETRIC STATUS: high social impact, no. of friends, ring leader, popular & rejected (controversial).
FAMILY FUNCTIONING: harsh discipline, but no violence, disengaged family structure, -ive sibling relations, father to have been bully himself.

52. Consequences of Bullying: Victims
Truancy or overadaptation (to teacher)
Decrease in Academic Achievement or high academic achievement (learning niche)
Psychological Symptoms: anxiety, depression, low self-esteem

53. Consequences of Bullying: Victims
Physical Health Problems
Problems in later adult life: work bullying victim; lost of trust, love shyness, avoidance of romantic relationships
SUICIDE

54. Consequences of Bullying: Bully/Victims
Truancy
Decrease in Academic Achievement;
School dropout
Psychological Symptoms: depression, low self-esteem, conduct problems, dangerous pursuits (attention seeking)

55. Consequences of Bullying: Bully/Victims
Offending, drug use
Problems in later adult life: unemployment, frequent job changes, association deviant partner

56. Consequences of Bullying: Pure Bullies
Good Academic Achievement?
Group Leader; e.g. healthy, good sport achievement?
Psychological Symptoms: lack of empathy, high self-esteem?

57. Consequences of Bullying: Pure Bullies
Manager – cool operator? Or leader in antisocial group?

58. What is the link between bullying & VICTEC?
Intervention studies to date have had mixed success rates.
An innovative approach for tackling bullying problems in schools is required.
Using Virtual Learning Environments could be an innovative and novel way of dealing with bullying problems.

59. Why use Virtual Environments?
They should be fun and attractive to interact with.
They provide a safe environment for children to try out different ways of dealing with bullying behaviour.
Children can look closely and understand more fully the different roles and perspectives involved in bullying behaviour.

60. What is the ultimate goal of VICTEC?
Should be able to use virtual learning environments as a means of dealing with bullying experiences.
Ultimately, would be beneficial to use VLE for other social problems such as workplace bullying, general anti-social behaviour etc.

62. Average Conduct Problem Scores from SDQ for direct & relational bullying

63. Average Hyperactivity scores from SDQ for direct & relational bullying

64. Average Peer Problem scores from SDQ for direct & relational bullying