Peer involvement in bullying: insights and challenges for intervention.

The purpose of this research was to examine the peer processes that occur during bullying episodes on the school playground. These processes were examined from a social learning perspective, allowing us to consider the effects of various types of reinforcement among bullies, victims, and peers. Fifty-three segments of video tape were examined. Each segment contained a peer group (two or more peers) that viewed bullying on the school playground. Peers were coded for actively joining or passively reinforcing the bully, and for actively intervening on behalf of the victim. On average, four peers viewed the schoolyard bullying, with a range from two to 14 peers. Averaged across all episodes, peers spent 54% of their time reinforcing bullies by passively watching, 21% of their time actively modelling bullies, and 25% of their time intervening on behalf of victims. Older boys (grades 4-6) were more likely to actively join with the bully than were younger boys (grades 1-3) and older girls. Both younger and older girls were more likely to intervene on behalf of victims than were older boys. The results were interpreted as confirming peers' central roles in the processes that unfold during playground bullying episodes. We discuss the results in terms of the challenges posed to peer-led interventions. Peers' anti-bullying initiatives must be reinforced by simultaneous whole-school interventions.

[1]  D. Pepler,et al.  Naturalistic Observations of Peer Interventions in Bullying , 2001 .

[2]  C. Salmivalli,et al.  Bullying as a group process: Participant roles and their relations to social status within the group , 1998 .

[3]  D. Pepler,et al.  Observations of Bullying and Victimization in the School Yard , 1998 .

[4]  D. Pepler,et al.  Prevalence of Bullying and Victimization among Canadian Elementary and Middle School Children. , 1997 .

[5]  Roger Bakeman,et al.  Analyzing Interaction: Sequential Analysis with SDIS and GSEQ , 1995 .

[6]  D. Pepler,et al.  A Peek behind the Fence: Naturalistic Observations of Aggressive Children with Remote Audiovisual Recording. , 1995 .

[7]  N. Crick,et al.  Relational aggression, gender, and social-psychological adjustment. , 1995, Child development.

[8]  David W. Johnson,et al.  Teaching Students to Be Peacemakers: Results of Five Years of Research , 1995 .

[9]  Peter K. Smith,et al.  School Bullying: Insights and Perspectives , 1994 .

[10]  P. Blatchford,et al.  Breaktime and the School: Understanding and Changing Playground Behaviour , 1994 .

[11]  M. Boulton.  Proximate causes of aggressive fighting in middle school children. , 1993, The British journal of educational psychology.

[12]  D. Farrington.  Understanding and Preventing Bullying , 1993, Crime and Justice.

[13]  K. Björkqvist,et al.  New trends in the study of female aggression. , 1992 .

[14]  K. Lagerspetz,et al.  Do Girls Manipulate and Boys Fight? Developmental Trends in Regard to Direct and Indirect Aggression , 1992 .

[15]  K. Björkqvist,et al.  Of Mice and Women: Aspects of Female Aggression , 1994, Politics and the Life Sciences.

[16]  K Rigby,et al.  Bullying among Australian school children: reported behavior and attitudes toward victims. , 1991, The Journal of social psychology.

[17]  Kenneth H. Rubin,et al.  The development and treatment of childhood aggression. , 1991 .

[18]  Anatol Pikas,et al.  A Pure Concept of Mobbing Gives the Best Results for Treatment , 1989 .

[19]  Cummings Em,et al.  Responding to anger in aggressive and nonaggressive boys: a research note. , 1989 .

[20]  P. Klaczynski,et al.  Responding to anger in aggressive and nonaggressive boys: a research note. , 1989, Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry and Allied Disciplines.

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

[22]  K. Lagerspetz,et al.  Is Indirect Aggression Typical of Females? Gender Differences in Aggressiveness in 11- to 12-Year-Old Children , 1988 .

[23]  L. Eron.  The development of aggressive behavior from the perspective of a developing behaviorism. , 1987, The American psychologist.

[24]  Ann S. Masten,et al.  A revised class play method of peer assessment. , 1985 .

[25]  S. M. Miller,et al.  Altrusim in children: A naturalistic study of reciprocation and an examination of the relationship between social dominance and aid-giving behavior , 1981 .

[26]  Nina L. Colwill,et al.  The psychology of sex differences , 1978 .

[27]  Margaret H. Thomas,et al.  Desensitization to portrayals of real-life aggression as a function of television violence. , 1977 .

[28]  A. Bandura.  Social learning theory , 1977 .

[29]  J. Darley,et al.  Do groups always inhibit individuals responses to potential emergencies? , 1973, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[30]  B. Latané,et al.  Group inhibition of bystander intervention in emergencies. , 1968, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[31]  B. Latané,et al.  Bystander intervention in emergencies: diffusion of responsibility. , 1968, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[32]  G R Patterson,et al.  Assertive behavior in children: a step toward a theory of aggression. , 1967, Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development.

[33]  Jacob Cohen.  A Coefficient of Agreement for Nominal Scales , 1960 .