Bullying as a group process: Participant roles and their relations to social status within the group

Bullying was investigated as a group process, asocial phenomenon taking place in a school setting among 573 Finnish sixth-grade children (286 girls, 287 boys) aged 12-13 years. Different Participant Roles taken by individual children in the bullying process were examined and related to a) self-estimated behavior in bullying situations, b) social acceptance and social rejection, and c) belongingness to one of the five sociometric status groups (popular, rejected, neglected, controversial, and average). The Participant Roles assigned to the subjects were Victim, Bully, Reinforcer of the bully, Assistant of the bully, Defender of the victim, and Outsider. There were significant sex differences in the distribution of Participant Roles. Boys were more frequently in the roles of Bully, Reinforcer and Assistant, while the most frequent roles of the girls were those of Defender and Outsider. The subjects were moderately well aware of their Participant Roles, although they underestimated their participation in active bullying behavior and emphasized that they acted as Defenders and Outsiders. The sociometric status of the children was found to be connected to their Participant Roles..

[1]  M. Hoffman,et al.  Sex differences in empathy and related behaviors. , 1977, Psychological bulletin.

[2]  K. Lagerspetz,et al.  Group aggression among school children in three schools , 1982 .

[3]  K. Lagerspetz,et al.  Bullies and victims: Their ego picture, ideal ego picture and normative ego picture , 1982 .

[4]  K. Dodge,et al.  Dimensions and types of social status: A cross-age perspective. , 1982 .

[5]  K. Dodge,et al.  Behavioral antecedents of peer social status. , 1983 .

[6]  A. Eagly.  Sex differences in social behavior : a social-role interpretation , 1987 .

[7]  D. French.  Heterogeneity of peer-rejected boys: aggressive and nonaggressive subtypes. , 1988, Child development.

[8]  D. G. Perry,et al.  Victims of Peer Aggression. , 1988 .

[9]  S. Vaughn,et al.  Relation Between Types of Aggression and Sociometric Status: Peer and Teacher Perceptions , 1989 .

[10]  Social roles and aspirations of bullies and victims , 1989 .

[11]  Maijaliisa Rauste-von Wright.  Physical and Verbal Aggression in Peer Groups Among Finnish Adolescent Boys and Girls , 1989 .

[12]  K. Dodge,et al.  Peer group behavior and social status. , 1990 .

[13]  D. French.  Heterogeneity of Peer‐rejected Girls , 1990 .

[14]  D. Olweus.  Bully/victim problems among schoolchildren: Basic facts and effects of a school based intervention program. , 1991 .

[15]  Peter K. Smith,et al.  Practical Approaches to Bullying , 1991 .

[16]  K. Björkqvist,et al.  Bullying as a group-process , 1993 .

[17]  Peter K. Smith,et al.  A Survey of the Nature and Extent of Bullying in Junior/Middle and Secondary Schools. , 1993 .

[18]  M. Boulton,et al.  Bully/Victim Problems Among Middle School Children , 1993 .

[19]  K. Rigby,et al.  Dimensions of interpersonal relation among Australian children and implications for psychological well-being. , 1993, The Journal of social psychology.

[20]  D. Olweus.  Bullying at School , 1994 .

[21]  M. Boulton,et al.  Bully/victim problems in middle-school children: Stability, self-perceived competence, peer perceptions and peer acceptance , 1994 .

[22]  D. Olweus,et al.  Bullying in School , 2017 .

[23]  K. Lagerspetz,et al.  Indirect Aggression in Boys and Girls , 1994 .

[24]  F. Boer.  Friendship and Peer Relations in Children , 1994 .

[25]  K. Lagerspetz,et al.  Peer and Self‐Estimated Aggression and Victimization in 8‐Year‐Old Children From Five Ethnic Groups , 1994 .