What is bullying? A theoretical redefinition
Introduction
Bullying is a centuries old term that, according to Merriam-Webster (2013), was first coined from German in 1538 and means one of three things: a fine chap, a hired ruffian, or a blustering browbeating person – especially one who is cruel to others who are weaker. The third definition is now most commonly used. However, there are some discrepancies between this popular dictionary definition and the definitions used by researchers. Within research circles, the most familiar and widely cited (4900 times) definition of bullying comes from Dan Olweus, originally proposed in the 1970s and reiterated in the now classic book “Bullying in School” (1993). He defines bullying as: “A student is being bullied or victimized when he or she is exposed, repeatedly and over time, to negative actions on the part of one or more other students.” He then further clarifies the components of this definition:
“It is a negative action when someone intentionally inflicts injury or discomfort upon another, basically what is implied in the definition of aggressive behavior. Negative actions can be carried out by physical contact, by words, or in other ways, such as making faces or mean gestures, and intentional exclusion from a group. In order to use the term bullying, there should also be an imbalance in strength (an asymmetric power relationship): the student who is exposed to the negative actions has difficulty defending him-/herself and is somewhat helpless against the student or students who harass. In my definition, the phenomenon of bullying is thus characterized by the following criteria: it is aggressive behavior or intentional ‘harm doing,’ which is carried out repeatedly and over time in an interpersonal relationship characterized by an imbalance of power” (Olweus, 1993, pp. 8–9; italics ours).
Decades later, this remains the predominant definition in bullying research, with Olweus recently reiterating its key components (Olweus, 2013). This definition has provided the foundation for the Olweus Bullying Victimization Questionnaire, which has been used to measure bullying among hundreds of thousands of adolescents across the world (Currie et al., 2012). It has also inspired numerous other bullying measures (e.g., Book et al, 2012, Craig, Pepler, 1997, Salmivalli et al, 1996). There are two key differences that emerge between this definition and the one from Merriam-Webster: the idea of intentionality and the repetitive nature of the behavior. In themselves, these discrepancies may be problematic to the extent that they can blur the criteria used implicitly by respondents completing self-report bullying questionnaires (Sawyer et al, 2008, Vaillancourt et al, 2008). However, these discrepancies may in fact reflect deeper underlying uncertainty about the conceptualization and measurement of bullying (Liu & Graves, 2011). Dozens of bullying researchers attending a recent Society for Research on Child Development symposium titled, “40 Years of Bullying Research: What We Know,” came to a general consensus that there is still no adequate definition of bullying (Hymel, Swearer, McDougall, Espelage, & Bradshaw, 2013, April). This is an alarming and surprising statement given the amount of research generated on bullying over the last two decades (Berger, 2007). If we do not yet have an adequate and uniformly applied definition of bullying, can we properly move forward in understanding and preventing the phenomenon (Aalsma, Brown, 2008, Hanish et al, 2013, Nansel, Overpeck, 2003, Pepler, Craig, 2009)?
One challenge has been reconciling emerging research with the traditional definition of bullying. For example, although the requirement that bullying must be repeated frequently has long been incorporated into both theoretical definitions and assessment measures (Berger, 2007, Crothers, Levinson, 2004), recent advances in research raise the question of whether it is a necessary feature of bullying. Investigators have recently noted that a single incident of cyber-bullying may be very harmful to the victim, given that the posting of embarrassing or hurtful material to the Internet may be accessed by many people for a long period of time (Slonje & Smith, 2008). Indeed, Olweus (2013) himself views this issue as needing clarification and requiring further research.
Confusion between public and academic definitions and confusion among academics suggest that it would be beneficial to re-examine the general definition of bullying, by integrating recent theory and empirical data (Barboza et al, 2009, Hong, Espelage, 2012, Volk et al, 2012a, Volk et al, 2012b). We therefore propose the following new theoretical definition of bullying: Bullying is aggressive goal-directed behavior that harms another individual within the context of a power imbalance. While we draw primarily upon adolescent research, our definition is intended to be equally applicable to bullying in both younger children and in adults. In the present paper, we examine empirical and theoretical support for the three major components of the proposed definition: (i) goal-directedness, (ii) power imbalance, and (iii) harm. Beyond establishing a definition based on theoretical and empirical foundations, we also wish to elucidate some aspects of how this definition can be applied to measurement and interventions (Nansel & Overpeck, 2003).
Section snippets
Goal-directedness
Olweus's (1993) definition states that bullying is intentional as opposed to accidental harm-doing, a position with which investigators of bullying generally agree (Greene, 2000), and which is consistent with the general definition of aggression (Dodge, Coie, & Lynam, 2006). However, it may be beneficial to define bullying more specifically as goal-directed behavior, to be consistent with theory and empirical research in the bullying literature, and because the greater specificity may afford
Imbalance of power
In the previous section, we reviewed theory and evidence indicating that bullying involves proactive rather than reactive aggression, without having addressed the question of what distinguishes bullying from proactive aggression. Whereas the goal-directed nature of bullying distinguishes it from reactive aggression, it is the assessment and measurement of the balance of power between the bully and victim that differentiates it from general proactive aggression.
Conceptually, almost all authors
Harm
Repetition is a key feature of most current definitions and measures of bullying (Berger, 2007). As previously stated, the original intent of requiring repetition as part of the definition of bullying was to avoid sampling trivial incidents of aggression (Olweus, 1993); in other words, repeated exposure to bullying serves as a proxy for greater harmfulness. This rationale is evident in Olweus's comment that “a single instance of more serious harassment can be regarded as bullying”, but bullying
Definitional challenges and implications
To summarize, we propose defining bullying based on three key attributes: goal-directed behavior, a power imbalance, and victim harm. The inclusion of each of these attributes in the definition is supported by theory and strong empirical evidence. They distinguish bullying from general aggression and are amenable to measurement and study. The concept of bullying is robust and applicable to a wide range of domains, ages, and behaviors.
There are, however, several challenging definitional issues
Conclusions
Bullying is a complex, heterogeneous phenomenon (Farrell, Della Cioppa, Volk, & Book, 2014). Decades of research have produced thousands of papers on the topic (Berger, 2007). In large part this research was stimulated by a definition provided by Olweus in 1993. Although that definition has proven to be tremendously useful as a catalyst for research, in the present paper we have proposed a revised definition that takes into account recent theoretical advances and empirical evidence. While our
References (137)
- et al.
What is bullying?
Journal of Adolescent Health
(2008) - et al.
The theoretical and empirical links between bullying behavior and sexual violence perpetration
Aggression and Violent Behavior
(2009) - et al.
Adolescent bullying and personality: an adaptive approach
Personality and Individual Differences
(2012) - et al.
Handgrip strength predicts sexual behavior, body morphology, and aggression in male college students
Evolution and Human Behavior
(2007) - et al.
From indirect aggression to invisible aggression: a conceptual view on bullying and peer group manipulation
Aggression and Violent Behavior
(2006) - et al.
Differential effects of the KiVa anti-bullying program on popular and unpopular bullies
Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology
(2014) - et al.
Childhood bullying: Current empirical findings and future directions for research
Aggression and Violent Behavior
(2004) The ontogenesis of social dominance: a strategy-based evolutionary perspective
Developmental Review
(1999)- et al.
A review of research on bullying and peer victimization in school: an ecological systems analysis
Aggression and Violent Behavior
(2012) - et al.
Peer involvement in bullying: Insights and challenges for intervention
Journal of Adolescence
(1999)
Bullying and the peer group: a review
Aggression and Violent Behavior
Animal behavior
Sex differences in aggression between hetereosexual partners: a meta-analytic review
Psychological Bulletin
Physical aggression as a function of perceived fighting ability and provocation: an experimental investigation
Aggressive Behavior
Studies of independence and conformity: I. A minority of one against a unanimous majority
Psychological Monographs: General and Applied
Observations of bullying in the classroom
The Journal of Educational Research
Individual characteristics and the multiple contexts of adolescent bullying: an ecological perspective
Journal of Youth and Adolescence
Sticks and stones
Update on bullying at school: science forgotten?
Developmental Review
Aggression: Its causes, consequences, and control
Victim strategies to stop bullying
Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice
Psychopathy, frustration, and reactive aggression: The role of ventromedial cortex
British Journal of Psychology
Voices from the classroom: pictorial and narrative representations of children's bullying experiences
Journal of Moral Education
The bioecological model of human development
Merriam-Webster's online dictionary
The aggression questionnaire
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology
Evolutionary psychology perspectives on sexual offending: from etiology to intervention
Aggression, social cognitions, anger and sadness in bullies and victims
Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, and Allied Disciplines
Bullying and victimization among school-age children: stability and links to.proactive and reactive aggression
Social Development
Women and aggression
Early adolescents’ participation in bullying: is ToM involved?
The Journal of Early Adolescence
Dating experiences of bullies in early adolescence
Child Maltreatment
Observations of bullying and victimization in the school yard
Canadian Journal of School Psychology
Relational aggression, gender, and social-psychological adjustment
Child Development
Assessment of bullying: a review of methods and instruments
Journal of Counselling and Development
Associations of peer acceptance and perceived popularity with bullying and victimization in early adolescence
Journal of Early Adolescence
Homicide
Cyberbullying: youngsters’ experiences and parental perception
CyberPsychology & Behavior
Social-information-processing factors in reactive and proactive aggression in children's peer groups
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology
Aggressionand antisocial behavior in youth
Self-reported violent offending: a descriptive analysis of juvenile violent offenders and their offending careers
Journal of Interpersonal Violence
Bullies and victims in rural African American youth: behavioral characteristics and social network placement
Aggressive Behavior
Bullying and victimization among native and immigrant adolescents in Norway: the role of proactive and reactive aggressiveness
Journal of Early Adolescence
Casualties of Social Combat School Networks of Peer Victimization and Their Consequences
American Sociological Review
Casualties of social combat: school networks of peer victimization and their consequences
American Sociological Review
Predicting bullying heterogeneity with the HEXACO model of personality
International Journal of Advances in Psychology
Lucifer goes to law school: towards explaining and minimizing law student peer-to-peer harassment and intimidation
Washburn Law Journal
Cited by (288)
The association between undergraduate nursing students' health literacy and bullying and cyberbullying victimization
2024, Journal of Professional NursingExperiences of bullying and victimization and adolescents' life satisfaction: A meta-analysis
2024, Aggression and Violent BehaviorAre bullying experiences and developmental assets associated with education outcomes for youth in foster care?
2023, Children and Youth Services ReviewBidirectional associations between self-esteem and relational aggression from 5th to 11th grade
2024, European Journal of Personality