Childhood bullying: Current empirical findings and future directions for research

https://doi.org/10.1016/S1359-1789(03)00033-8Get rights and content

Abstract

This review provides an examination of the current empirical literature on the topic of childhood bullying. In order to illustrate the theoretical background from which the construct of bullying has developed, a brief discussion of the general construct of aggression is first provided and subtypes of aggression described. Bullying is characterized as a subset of proactive aggressive behavior. Various definitions of terms as well as approaches to the measurement of bullying are described. Prevalence estimates, characteristics of bully subtypes (e.g., passive, provocative), and related psychological findings (e.g., internalizing and externalizing disorders) are offered. Limitations of current research methodology are identified, and future recommendations for research and intervention are provided.

Introduction

Bullying research is a relatively new area of empirical focus subsumed under the broad category of aggression research. Aggressive behavior patterns characterize various psychological disorders such as oppositional defiant disorder, conduct disorder, and antisocial personality disorder, as described in the fourth edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders [DSM-IV; American Psychological Association (APA), 1994]. Aggressive behavior is currently the most common reason for child and adolescent referrals to psychiatric services (Carlson, 1995). A study utilizing an adolescent sample referred for psychiatric services in the United Kingdom found that victimization in bullying interactions was a significant contributing factor for referral, with 70% of these cases resulting in a diagnosis of depression (Salmon, James, Cassidy, & Javaloyes, 2000). Researchers have concluded that aggressive behavior in childhood is predictive of later aggression and conduct problems (e.g., Coie et al., 1992, Miller-Johnson et al., 2002, Miller-Johnson et al., 1999). Bullying has been correlated with loneliness, poor social and emotional adjustment, greater risk of drug or alcohol use, poor academic achievement, and a lack of close peer relationships (Nansel et al., 2001). Victimization has been correlated with anxiety and depression (Craig, 1998), social maladjustment and loneliness (Crick & Grotpeter, 1995), and lack of close peer relationships (Nansel et al., 2001). Further empirical work is needed in conjunction with the development of effective intervention strategies.

This review will serve to define and describe the construct of bullying and its subtypes and will include an overview of developmental trends related to age and gender based on empirical findings. Common assessment methods and instruments will be presented as well as suggestions for future research.

Review of the current aggression literature reveals that varying definitions of aggression exist. One concise definition of the construct was presented by Anderson and Bushman (2002): “Human aggression is any behavior directed toward another individual that is carried out with the proximate (immediate) intent to cause harm…accidental harm is not aggressive because it is not intended” (pp. 28–29).

Aggression research encompasses several different subcategories, including reactive, proactive, overt, and relational aggression. Price and Dodge (1989) noted that the concept of reactive aggression was originally derived from the frustration–aggression model of aggression. Thus, reactive aggression is thought to be “a defensive reaction to a perceived threatening stimulus and is accompanied by some visible form of anger (e.g., angry facial gesture or verbalizations)” (Price & Dodge, 1989, p. 456). Reactive aggression is typically portrayed in the literature as being a fairly impetuous, immediate response to perceived threat, without the component of cognitive evaluation of a situation.

Price and Dodge (1989) described proactive aggression as “unprovoked aversive means of influencing or coercing another person and is more goal-directed than reactive aggression” (p. 456). From a social learning perspective, proactive aggression is likely learned to be an effective means of accomplishing goals (e.g., coerce others, possess an object) based on previous successes in using this approach. Two subtypes of proactive aggression include instrumental aggression (often characterized by an attempt to claim an object, such as a toy) and bullying (usually in the form of aggression directed toward another individual in an effort to dominate or intimidate).

Overt (or direct) aggression is characterized by openly confrontational behavior toward others, such as physical attacks or threats of harm. Overt aggression includes physical assault, verbal threats, property destruction (which is often described as explosive or impulsive), and self-injurious behavior (Connor, 1998). Overt aggression has been shown to be stable across time and to be associated with higher incidents of residential treatment and out-of-home placement for children (Connor, 1998).

Relational (or covert, or indirect) aggression does not involve a direct confrontation between the aggressor and victim. Relational aggression may comprise exclusion or rejection from a social group, the spreading of rumors, keeping of secrets, or embarrassment in a social setting. Although the effects of relational aggression may be as equally damaging as overt aggression, relational aggression has become prevalent in psychosocial research only during the last decade. The progression of research in this area has led to the examination of various subcategories of aggressive behavior, including a focus on the specific construct of bullying.

Section snippets

Definition of bullying

Bullying is considered to be a subset of the overarching concept of aggression. This section will serve to illustrate the ways in which bullying and aggression are interrelated yet have distinct constructs. Rigby (2002) observed that “to some it may seem like splitting hairs to make a distinction between aggression and bullying, and it is evident that some writers have been reluctant to embrace the term ‘bullying’, preferring the term ‘aggression’—a term more familiar to researchers…” (p. 30).

References (66)

  • S Austin et al.

    Assessment of bully/victim problems in 8 to 11 year-olds

    British Journal of Educational Psychology

    (1996)
  • J.Y Bernstein et al.

    Children who are targets of bullying

    Journal of Interpersonal Violence

    (1997)
  • L Bond et al.

    Does bullying cause emotional problems? A prospective study of young teenagers

    BMJ. British Medical Journal

    (2001)
  • K Bosworth et al.

    Factors associated with bullying behavior in middle school students

    Journal of Early Adolescence

    (1999)
  • M Camodeca et al.

    Bullying and victimization among school-age children: Stability and links to proactive and reactive aggression

    Social Development

    (2002)
  • G.A Carlson

    Commentary: National plan for research on child and adolescent mental health disorders

    Archives of General Psychiatry

    (1995)
  • A.G Carney et al.

    Bullying in schools: Perspective on understanding and preventing an international problem

    School Psychology International

    (2001)
  • J.D Coie et al.

    Predicting early adolescent disorder from childhood aggression and peer rejection

    Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology

    (1992)
  • G Colvin et al.

    The school bully: Assessing the problem, developing interventions, and future research directions

    Journal of Behavioral Education

    (1998)
  • N.R Crick et al.

    Social information-processing mechanisms in reactive and proactive aggression

    Child Development

    (1996)
  • N.R Crick et al.

    Relational aggression, gender, and social–psychological adjustment

    Child Development

    (1995)
  • K.A Dodge et al.

    Social information-processing factors in reactive and proactive aggression in children's peer groups

    Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

    (1987)
  • M Eslea et al.

    At what age are children most likely to be bullied at school?

    Aggressive Behavior

    (2001)
  • D.L Espelage et al.

    Bullying and victimization during early adolescence: Peer influences and psychosocial correlates

    Journal of Emotional Abuse

    (2001)
  • D Glover et al.

    Bullying in 25 secondary schools: Incidence, impact and intervention

    Educational Research

    (2000)
  • M.B Greene

    Bullying and harassment in schools

  • J.N Hughes et al.

    The role of relational aggression in identifying aggressive boys and girls

    Journal of School Psychology

    (1998)
  • K.M Lagerspetz et al.

    Group aggression among school children in three schools

    Scandinavian Journal of Psychology

    (1982)
  • S Miller-Johnson et al.

    Peer rejection and aggression and early starter models of conduct disorders

    Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology

    (2002)
  • S Miller-Johnson et al.

    Relationship between childhood peer rejection and aggression and adolescent delinquency severity and type among African American youth

    Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders

    (1999)
  • T.R Nansel et al.

    Bullying behaviors among U.S. youth: Prevalence and association with psychosocial adjustment

    Journal of the American Medical Association

    (2001)
  • G.K Natvig et al.

    School-related stress experience as a risk factor for bullying behavior

    Journal of Youth and Adolescence

    (2001)
  • P Naylor et al.

    Coping strategies of secondary school children in response to being bullied

    Child Psychology and Psychiatry Review

    (2001)
  • Cited by (243)

    • School psychologists’ decisions regarding bullying as related to research and professional development

      2021, Current Research in Behavioral Sciences
      Citation Excerpt :

      Furthermore, it would be important to know how the training school psychologists receive relates to their understanding. Given the differences in definitions of bullying, prevalence rates are difficult to measure (Bradshaw et al., 2013; Finkelhor, et al., 2016; Griffin and Gross, 2004). According to Griffin and Gross (2004), a vague definition of bullying can lead to over classification and incorrect self-reports.

    View all citing articles on Scopus
    View full text