Bullying and Strategies for Prevention

Bullying and Strategies for Prevention

Nearly 30% or approximately 5.7 million, of United States teenagers are estimated to have been involved in an incident of school related bullying either as the target, the bully or both. A recent national survey of students in grades 6 through ten reveal that nearly 13% of students reported bullying other children, 11% reported being victimized by bullies and an additional 6% indicated that they have been both the perpetrator and victim of bullying (Nansel, Overpeck, Pilla, Ruan, Simons-Morton, & Scheidt, 2001). Estimates indicate that once every seven seconds, a child is the victim of bullying in a United States school. 9% of all males and 7% of all females' ages 12-18, according to a study completed in 2001

reported experiencing bullying during the previous six months.

Additionally, according to the 2003 National Center for Education Statistics report on school violence indicated significant increases in the percentage of students that were victims of bullying in 2001 as compared to 1999. While in recent years, crime has declined, bullying is one of the few school related issues that has shown continual increase in intensity and prevalence (Ericson, 2001). During the same time period studied, the percentage of students who reported an increase in bullying was shown in all ethnic and racial groups with the exception of Black students. Approximately 6% of Black students in both 1999 and 2001 indicated they had been bullied. Moreover, between 1999 and 2001, the percentage of students bullied increased from 5 to 9% for Whites, from 4 to 8% for Hispanic, and from 3 to 7% for other non-Hispanic students (NCES, 2003). Since the time of these studies, the national rates of prevalence and incident have increased continuously and significantly.

Bullying

In order to understand the implications, efficaciousness, perceptions, and pervasiveness of bullying, it is important to identify and define the characteristics of this phenomenon in an effort to recognize shortcomings in bullying prevention and social-emotional education as well as current support initiatives. There have been various definitions of bullying posited by many theorists and researchers with commonalities across incommensurable definitions underscored by four relatively consistent variables: diversity of manifestation, intentionality, repetition, and imbalance of power (Schoen & Schoen, 2010). According to Schoen and Schoen in their article, "Bullying and Harassment in the United States," bullying has a purposed intent to embarrass, harm and/or offend the victim; involves repeated acts of aggression toward the victim individual or group; an imbalance of status or power whether perceived or realized; and the type of aggression changes and can vacillate from direct to indirect toward the victim(s) (p. 68). Direct bullying consists of verbal and physical assaults inclusive of scorning, humiliating, threatening hitting, kicking, and punching; whereas indirect bullying includes acts of intimidation through exclusion or gesturing. The spreading of rumors, and insults via email and text messaging have also been added as indirect forms of bullying (Schoen & Schoen, 2010). Although cyberbullying is considered a relatively new component to bullying, bullying through multimedia formats have the potential to produce profound psychological damage (Beally & Alexeyex, 2008). In summary, "bullying consists of a series of repeated, intentional cruel incidents between the same children who are primarily in the same bully and victim roles" (Hoover & Stenhjem 2003, p. 2).

The pervasiveness of bullying has reportedly been realized on all academic levels according to recent studies of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry (AACA, 2006; Schoen & Schoen, 2010) with verbal bullying demonstrated as a pervasive phenomenon in elementary, middle and high school, and incidents of physical bullying seen at greater proportions in middle school (Cohen & Cantor, 2003). Characteristics such as perceived helplessness, weakness and shyness have reportedly significantly correlated with victimization; however, the debate over risk and status of bullying persists (Khosropour & Walsh, 2001). In terms of rate with which incidents of bullying occur, researchers have identified rumors, exclusion, name-calling, racial slurs, material theft or damage, and physical aggression as the most frequent forms of bullying (Dixon, 2006). Researchers have noted gender differences as well in how bullying transpires and who enacts the offense. Olweus (2003) determined that girls were primarily bullied by both girls and boys, whereas boys were primarily victimized by other boys. Moreover, boys tend to be the recipients of more physical assault and aggression, while girls are primarily the victims of non-physical aggression. Overall, boys have been identified as the deliverer and object of bullying at a higher frequency than girls (Nansel et al., 2003).

Olweus (1993) posits that only physical weakness is consistently associated with those who are victimized; however, more recent empirical evidence suggests that 67% of children with special needs are bullied in mainstream settings as compared to their counterparts that are not physically handicapped (Beatty & Alexeyex, 2008). Nationally, bullying occurs across racial groups, socioeconomic backgrounds, as well as geographical locations (Nansel et al., 2003). According to Beatty and Alexeyex in their 2008 article, "The Problem of School Bullies: What the Research Tells Us," most often, victims are chosen from the chronological peer group of the bully, and researchers consider it reasonable that this selection process transpires in the manner in which it does, as it would follow that bullies target those with whom they have the most peer-to-peer interaction. Moreover, researchers suggest that bullying transpires most often in places with less supervision such as hallways, lavatories and lunchrooms, and tends to escalate on playgrounds and other informal settings. The emergences of victims in these settings are based on the profile of appearing more submissive or passive than others in the peer cohort (Olweus, 2003). The individuals who are targeted suggestedly present him or herself as more vulnerable to attack, exhibiting characteristics such as insecurity, unhappiness, and/or tendencies towards presenting as anxious, sensitive or withdrawn (Schoen & Schoen, 2010). According to Pepler and Craig, (1995), "victims of bullying tend to be victimized over time, entering a dangerous cycle of abuse" (p. 33).

Cyberbullying

Bullying is generally defined as the action of an aggressive child repeatedly victimizing a child less powerful with emotional and/or physical abuse (Olweus, 1993). Often bullying involves a larger or older child or children targeting their aggression toward a single child who they feel is incapable of adequately defending him or herself. Although many incidents of bullying go unreported, the most recent statistics on bullying indicate that acts of bullying occur once every seven minutes (Li, 2007). There is no specific age in which bullying begins or ends. Bullying has been found as early as preschool. During the early years, up until about the age of seven, researchers assert that the victim is often picked at random. However, as the bully ages, the victim(s) become much more specific and the acts of aggression and violence more deliberate. Moreover, empirical research indicates that bullying is not a phase of childhood that bullies grow out of; as often suggested by adults who have experienced this phenomenon in their own childhoods and considered a rite of passage. In a recent long-term study of more than 500 children at the University of Michigan, researchers determined that children who were seen as aggressive by their peers at the age of eight grew up to commit increasingly serious crimes as adults. Additionally, other scholarly research has indicated that as bullies move into adulthood, they also tend to abuse their children and spouses (Olweus, 1993).

Cyberbullying is generally defined as bullying that ours outside the traditional realm of face-to-face contact. Perpetrators of this kind of bullying tend to use technology as the medium by which verbal and visual threats and acts of aggression transpire. The National Crime Prevention Council defines cyberbullying as "use of the internet, cell phone or other devices to send or post text or images intended to hurt or embarrass another person" (NCPC, 2008). Cyberbullying can be difficult and insidious to manage and/or prosecute. Researchers and other authorities have also found cyberbullying difficult to operationalize. Given the accelerated evolution and complexity of new technologies, classification is often rendered obsolete. The different uses of technological devices across cultures can affect cultural meaning as well as the frequency in which behaviors transpire (David-Ferdon & Hertz, 2007). Moreover, specific characteristics such as the anonymity of the acts and the public/private nature of the attacks must be calculated as part of the definition.

The Move from Traditional Bullying to Cyberbullying

Traditional bullying has been a longstanding area of concern in the school environment affecting nearly 30% of children in United States (Nansel, Overpeck, Pilla, et al., 2001). More traditional forms of bullying include social harm that happens over time toward another person judged to be less aggressing, with intentional verbal and/or physical harm. The transition has come; however, with children and adolescents' often unsupervised use of the Internet and phone text messaging for social communication, and as such, the phenomenon of cyberbullying has become increasingly more prevalent (Twyman, Conway, Taylor & Comeaux, 2010). Although results vary, recent empirical studies have indicated that an estimated 4% to 15% of children participate in cyberbullying with more cases reported in latter middle and high school (Kowalski & Limber, 2007). More and more children are becoming victims of cyberbullying with an estimated range of between 19% and 42% being bullied online at least one time (Wolak, Mitchell & Finkelhor, 2006). Reports also indicate that children who participated in traditional bullying are becoming increasingly more involved in cyberbullying; reflecting very high percentages of those children acting as cyber bullies (Kowalski & Limber, 2007).

In a recent study of 177 seventh grade students, studies revealed that an estimated 54% were victims of traditional bullying and 17% were bullied online (Li, 2007). Of those 31% who acknowledged participating in traditional bullying, 30% had also bullied someone online and another 27% were victims of online bullying (Li, 2007). Research has also reflected that children who are victims of traditional or cyberbullying are more likely to retaliate virtually than in person (Willard, 2007).

Which is more harmful?

Twyman, Conway, Taylor & Comeaux (2010) posit that there are minimal differences between traditional and cyberbullying that would make cyberbullying a more serious issue (p. 196). Willard in his 2007 article "Cyberbullying and cyber-threats: responding to the challenge of online social aggression, threats, and distress" indicates that because cyberbullying can occur at any time, day or night, victims feel trapped and unable to get away from his or her victimizers. When bullying took place primarily on the school grounds, when school was over, on the weekends, holidays and summer breaks, victims had some respite from their victimization. With cyberbullying, victims may be harassed every time they go on the internet or answer their cellular phone. There is no safe haven as with traditional bullying.

Although neither is preferred, with traditional bullying the victims' exposure to bystanders and others who may bear witness to their victimization, was primarily limited to the event, that particular school or a given neighborhood. If reports of the bullying travelled outside of those particular conditions, it would take a relatively long period of time to get from person to person. However, with cyberbullying, messages and pictures can be disseminated on a much larger scale faster, increasing the numbers of bystanders and witnesses to the victimization (Willard, 2007). Anonymity is another factor in cyberbullying that is decidedly different from traditional forms of bullying. Often, being anonymous facilitates reduced accountability by the aggressor which may encourage more intense levels of inappropriate behavior online (Li, 2007). Many individuals engage in cyberbullying because the find it entertaining, with less likelihood of consequences or repercussions; not realizing the sometimes severe negative impact it has on the victims (Smith, Mahdavi, Carvalho et al., 2001).

Many studies have examined the characteristics of those children who have been exposed to cyberbullying. Both cyberbullies and victims of cyberbullying are reported to be very intense users of social media forums and the internet, averaging more than 4 days per week and who rate themselves as expert in their online abilities, consider the internet to be very important, and report rare or infrequent parental monitoring, while those that are victim only spend less time online and are decidedly less confident (Ybarra & Mitchell, 2004).

Cyberbullying effects are very similar to that of traditional bullying, including lower or decreased academic performance, increased stress levels, low self-esteem, depression and changes in interests (National Crime Prevention Council, 2007). Preliminary research has suggested the reported effects of cyberbullying may be comparable or even worse than the effects identified with traditional bullying (Ybarra & Mitchell, 2004). As such, there is an ever increasing need to identify individual s that may be potentially vulnerable to victimization by cyberbullies and to identify potential risk to cyberbullying. Moreover, protective factors for cyberbullying must also be identified and must be capable of keeping up with technological advances (Twyman, Conway, Taylor & Comeaux, 2010).

There has been increasing debate as to whether those who are perpetrators of cyberbullying should be held accountable or responsible for the negative and derogatory messages that are left online. There are those that argue on both sides of this issue. The reality, unfortunately, is because of the level of anonymity often used in cyberbullying, as well as the lack of ability to adequately track and explicitly determine the source and recipient of the information via technology holding someone accountable can prove extremely difficult. However, this is not to suggest that law enforcement, policy makers and other community stakeholders should not continue to pursue every possible avenue in order to confront those who bully online just as they would an individual who participated as an aggressor in more traditional forms of bullying (NCPC, 2007). The legal or responsibility system has to play catch up with the high tech tools cyberbullies use to extort their acts of aggression on victims.

Long-Term Consequences of Bullying

Teen bullying, specifically, is regarded as a warning sign that those particularly involved as perpetrators may be heading for increased troubles and greater risk for violence in later life. Boys, particularly, who bully are more likely to engage in other delinquent and antisocial behaviors such as drug use, truancy, vandalism, and shoplifting to name a few. These individuals are four times as likely as their non-bullying peer cohorts to be convicted of serious crimes by the age of 24, with 60% of those bullying having at least one criminal conviction (Swearer, Song, Cary, Eagle & Mickelson, 2001).

Empirical research indicates that bullying can have long lasting negative effects on children; however, careful implementation of school programs can substantially reduce the incidents of bullying (Swearer et al., 2001; Rigby & Slee, 1999; Olweus, 1994). A recent study of 2,300 middle school children found that students who had been victimized had significantly lower grade point averages (lower than expected for their previously demonstrated skills and abilities) than non-victimized students (Goodwin, 2011). Researchers conclude that 'peer victimization cannot be ignored when trying to improve educational outcomes" (Goodwin 2011, p. 1).

The acts of bullying tend to leave an indelible impression on those who are victimized. Whether the effects manifest as an altered self-concept, psychosomatic symptoms, addictive behavior, health problems or psychologically traumatic consequences victims of bullying are significantly affected (Houbre, Tarquinio, Thullier, & Hergott, 2006). With regard to self-concept, questions have been raised as to how identity might be related to a child's status or role in the bullying process. Victims of bullying see themselves, invariably, as socially 'incompetent' and are most often unpopular among their peers, unstable, anxiety ridden, and display minimal self-confidence (Khatri, Kupersmidt & Patterson, 2000).

Concerning health, most of the scholarly literature has focused on the health implications for victims. A number of studies have found a causal link between victimization and psychosomatic effects of the aggressiveness of bullying on students' health (Forero, McLellan, Rissel, & Bauman, 1999). Particularly, victims were found to be suffering from bedwetting, headaches, sleep disorders, feelings of unhappiness, and stomachaches to name a few (Williams, Chambers, Logan & Robinson, 1996). Naturally, symptoms vary according to the victim's gender. Boys' symptomology manifested more in backaches and headaches, whereas girls expressed symptoms of sleep disorders and nervousness. Moreover, the greater the exposure to bullying the more and varied symptoms victims reported experiencing. The level of social support the children received also was a mitigating factor in symptomology (Houbre, Tarquinio, Thullier & Hogett, 2006). In addition, the number of symptoms experienced by the victims was contingent upon the level of distress. When less support was provided, symptomology increased (Natvig, Albreksten & Qvarnstrom, 2001).

Physical manifestations are not the only long-term effects evidenced in children who have been victims of bullying behavior. Depression, anxiety, isolation, loneliness, as well as fear of going to school, have been demonstrated as behavioral and emotional disorders in children who have been bullied (Boulton & Underwood, 1992).

Given the aforementioned information, for many scholars and health professionals, victimization is seen as a precursor to mental health disorders; although some note that these same disorders can be the cause and not the consequence of bullying (Hodges & Perry, 1999), which results in a two directional link. Bullies, themselves, can be seen as anxious and dominating (Lagerspetz, Bjorkqvist, Berts & King, 1982). Although many bullies are popular, they are often rejected by their peers (Boulton & Underwood, 1992). Bully/victims differ from those that are solely victims or solely bullies in their personality. They reportedly often obtain elevated scores on psychotic and neurotic scales, are at the bottom of the social acceptance ranking (Pagerspetz et al., 1982; Hodges & Perry, 1999), and face rejection on a variety of levels. Those who are both bully and victim or are predominantly bullies are subject to hyperactivity and manifested externalized behaviors such as the need to should, inability to sit still and extraversion. Contrastingly, victims' exhibit more internalized behaviors such as introversion and withdrawal (Natvig, Albreksten & Qvarnstrom, 2001).

Addictive behavior has also been associated with bullying. Research in this area is limited, although the studies that are available on the issues of substance abuse and the causal link to aggressive acts and stressful events can be determined very early. Accordingly, if a child is noted as increasingly aggressive at 8 years of age, then they are almost twice as likely to drink alcohol and twice as likely to smoke or try other illicit substances (Lynskey & Ferguson, 1995). At the age of 13, those children with a propensity for aggression differ from their non-aggressive peer cohorts with greater manifestation of the aforementioned behavior. With those victimized by bullies, alcohol and drugs can be problematic as well. Substance use is considered responsive and adaptive behavior, and as a means of coping with the abuse experienced at the hands of bullies.

Although there are a number of documented ways the effects of bullying can manifest themselves, another noted consequence of bullying is traumatic impact; a state characterized by slow onset of the disorder, irritability and nightmares (Houbre, Tarquinio, Thullier & Hogett, 2006). The DSM IV posits six criteria of post traumatic stress that include: (a) the individual has witnessed, experienced or was confronted with an event or a series of events that involved the actual or threatened serious injury or death, or a threat to the physical integrity of themselves or others, and the persons response involves intense fear, horror, helplessness; (b) the traumatic event is repeatedly re-experienced through flashbacks, dreams, or physiological reactivity; (c) persistent avoidance of the situation or stimuli associated with the trauma and diminished responsiveness in school, work and family; (d) persistent symptoms of increased arousal such as difficulty concentrating or irritability; (e) the length of time of the disturbance is more than one month; and (f) the disturbance causes distress that is clinically significant, impairment in occupational, social, or other important areas of functioning (Terr, 1991). Although professionals can be hesitant to diagnose children, particularly under the age of 6 with post traumatic stress disorder, the symptomology that many victims of bullying experience are commensurate with those of an individual clinically diagnosed with post traumatic stress disorder.

Strategies for Preventing Bullying

All forms of bullying are not overt and readily obvious. Bullying can transpire in very subtle ways. As such, educators can become laxed under the false pretense that bullying is not problematic in their school environment (Goodwin, 2011). This is easy to do because school personnel typically see only about 4% of the incidents of bullying that transpire in their schools (Kazdin & Rotella, 2009). When students are asked, however, they report a much different picture than what teachers and school administrators report. In a recent survey of 40,000 high school students, nearly 50% admitted to bullying other students within the past 12 months, and another 47% said they had been the victim of bullying by way of taunting, teasing, in a way that caused them to be seriously and visibly upset (Josephson Institute, 2010).

Moreover, many of the anti-bullying programs fail to consider children who have disabilities. Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1975, the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act are required to provide equal educational opportunities to all students, despite disability or limitation. Although there have been few scholarly articles or empirical studies that deal with the issue of children with disabilities and the impact of bullying, research indicates that disabled children have an increased likelihood of being bullied than their peer cohorts without disabilities (Pivik, McComas, & LaFlamme, 2002). The increased levels of bullying with regard to this special population may be due in part to the isolative nature special education classes are with regard to general education classes and students, limiting those children in special education classes from having sufficient opportunity to learn social skills with their non-disabled peer cohorts (Mishna, 2003) and establish a protective group of peers (Morrison & Furlong, 1994).

Victim reporting has always been considered an intricate and troubling component of bullying as with many forms of abuse (Goodwin, 2011). Victims are frequently reluctant to report because they too often see themselves as failures and feel ashamed, stupid and unattractive (Olweus, 1993). A recent national survey of U.S. youth found that approximately 1/3 or 36% of victims report being victimized by a bully, most often subsequent to repeated incidents or physical injury (Petrosino, Guckenburg, DeVoe, & Hanson, 2010).