School Bullies’ Quest for Power: Implications for Group Dynamics and Intervention

Bullying is characterized by an inequality of power between perpetrator and target. Findings that bullies can be highly popular have helped redefine the old conception of the maladjusted school bully into a powerful individual exerting influence on his peers from the top of the peer status hierarchy. Study I is a conceptual paper that explores the conditions under which a skillful, socially powerful bully can use the peer group as a means of aggression and suggests that low cohesion and low quality of friendships make groups easier to manipulate. School bullies’ high popularity should be a major obstacle for antibullying efforts, as bullies are unlikely to cease negative actions that are rewarding, and their powerful position could discourage bystanders from interfering. Using data from the Finnish program KiVa, Study II supported the hypothesis that antibullying interventions are less effective with popular bullies in comparison to their unpopular counterparts. In order to design interventions that can address the positive link between popularity and aggression, it is necessary to determine in which contexts bullies achieve higher status. Using an American sample, Study III examined the effects of five classroom features on the social status that peers accord to aggressive children, including classroom status hierarchy, academic level and grade level, controlling for classroom mean levels of aggression and ethnic distribution. Aggressive children were more popular and better liked in fifth grade relative to fourth grade and in classrooms of higher status hierarchy. Surprisingly, the natural emergence of status hierarchies in children’s peer groups has long been assumed to minimize aggression. Whether status hierarchies hinder or promote bullying is a controversial question in the peer relations’ literature. Study IV aimed at clarifying this debate by testing the effects of the degree of classroom status hierarchy on bullying. Higher hierarchy was concrrently associated with bullying and predictive of higher bullying six months later. As bullies’ quest for power is increasingly acknowledged, some researchers suggest teaching bullies to attain the elevated status they yearn for through prosocial acts. Study V cautions against such solutions by reviewing evidence that prosocial behaviors enacted with the intention of controlling others can be as harmful as aggression.Siirretty Doriast

Differential effects of the KiVa anti-bullying program on popular and unpopular bullies

This study utilized data from the evaluation of the Finnish KiVa program in testing the prediction that school bullies' high perceived popularity would impede the success of anti-bullying interventions. Multiple-group structural equation modeling (SEM) analyses were conducted on a subsample of 911 third-, fourth-, and fifth-graders identified as perpetrators of bullying. They belonged to 77 Finnish schools, including 39 schools implementing the KiVa program and 38 control schools. Data on peer-reported bullying and perceived popularity were collected before program implementation and one year later. Controlling for sex, age, and initial levels of bullying, KiVa participation resulted in lower rates of bullying (indicated by fewer peer nominations) after one year for bullies of low and medium popularity. However, there was no significant effect for those high in popularity, suggesting that popular bullies are less responsive to anti-bullying interventions than less popular bullies.</p

Why does decreased likeability not deter adolescent bullying perpetrators?

This study examines why the lower likeability of bullying perpetrators does not deter them from engaging in bullying behavior, by testing three hypotheses: (a) bullying perpetrators are unaware that they are disliked, (b) they value popularity more than they value likeability, (c) they think that they have nothing to lose in terms of likeability, as they believe that their targets and other classmates would dislike them anyway, regardless of their behavior. The first two hypotheses were examined in Study 1 (1,035 Dutch adolescents, M age = 14.15) and the third hypothesis was examined in Study 2 (601 Dutch adolescents, M age = 12.92). Results from regression analyses showed that those higher in bullying were not more likely to overestimate their likeability. However, they were more likely than others to find being popular more important than being liked. Moreover, those higher in bullying were more likely to endorse the belief that the victimized student or the other classmates would have disliked a bullying protagonist (in vignettes of hypothetical bullying incidents) before any bullying started. These findings suggest that adolescent bullying perpetrators may not be deterred by the costs of bullying in terms of likeability, possibly because they do not value likeability that much (Hypothesis 2), and because they believe they hardly have any likeability to lose (Hypothesis 3).</p

Effects of the KiVa Anti-Bullying Program on Affective and Cognitive Empathy in Children and Adolescents

Objective: As empathy is an important predictor of both bullying and defending behavior, many anti-bullying interventions aim to increase empathy among students. However, little is known on whether these interventions enhance both affective and cognitive empathy, and whether some students are more responsive than others to empathy-raising efforts. This study examined the effects of the Finnish anti-bullying program KiVa on changes in self-reported affective and cognitive empathy and tested whether these effects varied depending on students’ gender, initial levels of empathy, peer-reported bullying, and peer-perceived popularity, as well as school type (primary versus secondary school) and classroom bullying norms.Method: Multilevel structural equation modeling analyses were conducted on pretest and posttest (1 year later) data from a sample of 15,403 children and adolescents (Mage = 13.4; 51.5% girls) in 399 control and 462 intervention classrooms from 140 schools participating in the evaluation of KiVa in 2007–2009.Results: KiVa had a positive effect on affective empathy, but not cognitive empathy. The effects of the program on both types of empathy did not depend on students’ gender, initial levels of empathy, bullying, or popularity, nor on school type or classroom bullying norms.Conclusion: Findings suggest that KiVa can raise students’ affective empathy regardless of students’ gender, status, initial empathy, or levels of bullying, and regardless of school type or classroom bullying norms.</p

Examining the Potential Mental Health Costs of Defending Victims of Bullying: A Longitudinal Analysis

It has been speculated that defending victims of bullying is stressful for youth, and may contribute to poor mental health among those who regularly intervene to defend their victimized peers. However, the extant literature is thus far primarily limited to correlational, single-informant studies. The current study examined the concurrent and prospective mental health costs (e.g., social anxiety, depressive symptoms) of peer-reported defending among 4085 youth (43.9% boys; Mage=14.56, SD =0.75). Moreover, we examined two potential moderators (victimization and popularity) of the association between defending and internalizing problems. Analyses revealed that there was no evidence of a direct, positive relationship between defending and internalizing symptoms. However, a positive, concurrent association was found between defending and social anxiety, but only among youth who reported that they were also victims – the association was negative among non-victimized youth. In addition, both peer-reported victimization and social status were found to moderate the longitudinal relationship between defending and later symptoms of depression. Specifcally, among low-status highly victimized youth, defending was associated with an increased risk of experiencing symptoms of depression, whereas high-status youth who were rarely seen as victims reported decreased symptoms of depression at T2 if they also had a reputation for defending others. The fndings suggest that defending others is likely not a risk factor for youth who are not already vulnerable and/or have the protection of high status, and may actually have a protective efect for these youth.</p

Classroom Popularity Hierarchy Predicts Prosocial and Aggressive Popularity Norms Across the School Year

This study examined the coevolution of prosocial and aggressive popularity norms with popularity hierarchy (asymmetries in students' popularity). Cross-lagged-panel analyses were conducted on 2,843 secondary school students (N-classrooms = 120; M-age = 13.18; 51.3% girls). Popularity hierarchy predicted relative change in popularity norms over time, but not vice versa. Specifically, classrooms with few highly popular and many unpopular students increased in aggressive popularity norms at the beginning of the school year and decreased in prosocial popularity norms at the end of the year. Also, strong within-classroom asymmetries in popularity predicted relatively higher aggressive popularity norms. These findings may indicate that hierarchical contexts elicit competition for popularity, with high aggression and low prosocial behavior being seen as valuable tools to achieve popularity

Bullying Prevention in Adolescence: Solutions and New Challenges from the Past Decade

Bullying among youth at school continues to be a global challenge. Being exposed to bullying may be especially hurtful in adolescence, a vulnerable period during which both peer group belonging and status become key concerns. In the current review, we first summarize the effectiveness of the solutions that were offered a decade ago in the form of anti-bullying programs. We proceed by highlighting some intriguing challenges concomitant to, or emerging from these solutions, focusing especially on their relevance during adolescence. These challenges are related to (1) the relatively weak, and highly variable effects of anti-bullying programs, (2) the complex associations among bullying, victimization, and social status, (3) the questions raised regarding the beneficial (or possibly iatrogenic) effects of peer defending, and (4) the healthy context paradox, that is, the phenomenon of remaining or emerging victims being worse off in contexts where the average levels of victimization decrease. We end by providing some suggestions for the next decade of research in the area of bullying prevention among adolescents.</p

Intention to Stop Bullying following a Condemning, Empathy-Raising, or Combined Message from a Teacher - Do Students' Empathy and Callous-Unemotional Traits Matter?

Knowing which intervention strategies work best and for which student is essential for teachers when they intervene in cases of bullying. The effects of teachers' (1) condemning, (2) empathy-raising, and (3) combined (including elements of both) messages on students' intention to stop bullying were tested in a between-subject experimental design. A total of 277 seventh grade students (M-age = 12.93, SD = 0.49; 47% female) were asked to imagine they had bullied a peer and were invited to a discussion with a teacher. They saw a video vignette with one of the above messages. Hierarchical regression analyses indicated that students' intention to stop bullying was highest among those who saw the combined message. Callous-unemotional traits were negatively, and affective and cognitive empathy positively associated with intention to stop bullying. Students' level of cognitive empathy moderated the relative effect of the condemning message on intention to stop bullying. At low levels of cognitive empathy, the condemning message was the least effective, whereas among those with high cognitive empathy, all messages were equally likely to lead to intention to stop bullying. Together, the findings suggest that for educators intervening in bullying among adolescents, an approach involving both condemning and empathy-raising messages is the 'best bet', most likely to lead to intention to stop bullying

Bidirectional Associations of Prosocial Behavior with Peer Acceptance and Rejection in Adolescence

As most studies on the link between peer status and prosocial behavior are cross-sectional, conducted with children, and operationalize status as the difference between acceptance and rejection, it remains unclear whether peer acceptance and rejection are consequences or prerequisites of prosocial behavior in adolescence. To fill this gap, this study examines the bidirectional associations of prosocial behavior with peer acceptance and peer rejection with data collected at 3 time points, 6 months apart, in a sample of 660 early Chilean adolescents (M = 12.94, SD = 0.62; 55.1% boys). Cross-lagged panel analyses showed that prosocial behavior positively predicted future peer acceptance, whereas peer acceptance had no significant effect on future prosocial behavior. The association between rejection and prosocial behavior was negative and bidirectional between Time 1 and Time 2. When a new academic year began, between Time 2 and Time 3, prosocial behavior negatively predicted rejection, whereas rejection in the previous grade level was positively associated with prosocial behavior at the beginning of the next grade. Multi-group panel analyses did not detect significant differences between boys and girls in the cross-lagged associations of prosociality with peer acceptance and peer rejection. The results suggest that acting prosocially can make adolescents better liked by their peers and highlight the possible importance of the transition to a new academic year for the prosocial behavior of previously rejected students. Implications for future research on peer relations are discussed.</p

Does Being Defended Relate to Decreases in Victimization and Improved Psychosocial Adjustment Among Victims?

School bullying is a clear violation of children’s rights to a safe education and is a major concern among school professionals and parents. Many antibullying interventions focus on enhancing peer defending of victims to combat bullying and to promote victims’ psychosocial functioning. However, longitudinal studies on the effects of being defended on (a) diminishing victimization and (b) enhancing victims’ psychosocial adjustment are lacking, and the role of the broader peer context has been largely unexplored. Therefore, this study examined whether being defended decreases victimization and improves victims’ psychosocial adjustment, and whether defending peer norms moderate these effects. Data were derived from a nationwide Dutch study on the effectiveness of antibullying interventions, with N = 5,415 students (Mage = 9.93; 48.3% girls) from 238 classrooms (54.2% control classrooms) in 68 elementary schools. Findings indicate that victims with at least one defender at the start of the school year (Time 1) experienced higher feelings of belonging at the end of the school year (Time 2) compared with nondefended victims, but experienced lower feelings of belonging compared with nonvictims. Defended victims did not differ from nondefended victims in self-esteem, depressive symptoms, and severity of victimization at Time 2. Nonvictims were significantly better adjusted than defended and nondefended victims regarding these outcomes. Descriptive and popularity norms for defending did not moderate the links between being defended and victims’ adjustment and severity of victimization at Time 2. Thus, being defended only partly relieves victims’ plight, irrespective of how normative defending behaviors are in classrooms. </p