Bullying in School: An Overview of Types, Effects,

Family Characteristics, and Intervention Strategies

Paul R. Smokowski and Kelly Holland Kopasz

Bullying represents a significant problem in U.S. schools, affecting approximately one in three

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/cs/article-abstract/27/2/101/485292 by guest on 07 October 2018

children. The authors discuss the dynamics, types, characteristics, and consequences of school
bullying. Risk factors for engaging in bullying, being bullied, and becoming both a bully and a
victim are discussed. Research indicates that bullying has serious long-term negative effects on
bullies, victims, and victims who turn to bullying as a coping strategy. Longitudinal
relationships between childhood bullying and victimization and adult mental health outcomes
such as anxiety, depression, substance use, and conduct disorders are outlined. Prevention
programs, and their relative efficacy from empirical evaluations, are also presented. Finally,
implications for school-based prevention services are provided.

KEY WORDS: bullying; victimization; violence prevention; youth violence

O
ver the past 30 years, clinicians and re- of which behavior is chosen, bullying is marked by
searchers have come to understand that intense intimidation that creates a pattern of hu-
bullying is a serious threat to healthy child miliation, abuse, and fear for the victim (Roberts,
development and a potential cause of school vio- 2000).
lence (Olweus, 1978).The recent school shootings Bullying represents a significant problem in our
in the United States have prompted many profes- nation’s schools. The National School Safety Cen-
sionals to consider bullying and its impact on stu- ter (NSSC) called bullying the most enduring and
dents. In working with children and adolescents, underrated problem in U.S. schools (Beale, 2001).
school psychologists and social workers need to be One study found that approximately 10 percent of
aware of bullying behaviors, their potentially dam- children in the United States experienced extreme
aging consequences for victims, and school-based victimization by bullying (Perry, Kusel, & Perry,
interventions for preventing bullying, coercion, and 1988). In a more recent national study, nearly 30
violence. percent of the students surveyed reported being
Bullying is usually defined as a form of aggression involved in bullying in the current term as either a
in which one or more children intend to harm or perpetrator or a victim (Nansel et al., 2001). This
disturb another child who is perceived as being translates to 3,708,284 students reporting bullying
unable to defend himself or herself (Glew, Rivara, and 3,245,904 students reporting victimization
& Feudtner, 2000). Typically, a power imbalance (Nansel et al.).
exists between the bully and the victim, with the Bullying can be considered the most prevalent
bully being either physically or psychologically more form of youth violence and may escalate into ex-
powerful (Nansel et al., 2001). Often, the perpetra- tremely serious forms of antisocial behavior. For
tor uses bullying as a means to establish dominance example, the surgeon general’s task force on youth
or maintain status (Pellegrini, Bartini, & Brooks, violence examined several longitudinal surveys of
1999; Roberts, 2000). In addition, bullying behav- violent offending.They reported about 30 percent
iors tend to occur repeatedly (Nansel et al.). Such to 40 percent of male and 16 percent to 32 percent
behaviors include name calling, physically assault- of female youths committed a serious violent of-
ing, threatening, stealing, vandalizing, slandering, fense by age 17 (U.S. Department of Health and
excluding, and taunting (Beale, 2001). Regardless Human Services [DHHS], 2001).The most chronic

Smokowski
CCC and Kopasz
Code: 1532-8759/05 /
$3.00 ©2005 Bullying in School: of
National Association AnSocial
Overview
Workers 101
form of criminal offending appears to derive from In this article we discuss risk factors for engag-
an early-onset trajectory of aggressive behavior in ing in bullying, being bullied, and becoming both a
childhood (DHHS). Bullying peers can clearly be bully and a victim. We also outline longitudinal
considered one component of this early-onset tra- relationships between childhood bullying and vic-
jectory. A study by Brockenbrough and colleagues timization, family dynamics, and adult mental health
(2002) also helps to link bullying and violence.These outcomes. Prevention programs and implications
authors conducted a survey of nearly 11,000 sev- for school personnel are presented.
enth-, ninth-, and eleventh-grade students and
found that one-third of bullying victims had ag- BULLIES
gressive attitudes. The group of victims with ag- Characteristics of Bullies

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/cs/article-abstract/27/2/101/485292 by guest on 07 October 2018

gressive attitudes was more likely than other vic- Although bullies may differ in the type of aggres-
tims or bullies to report that they had carried sion they use, most bullies share common charac-
weapons to school, used alcohol, and engaged in a teristics. According to the NSSC, bullies are overly
physical fight at school. These highly troubled ag- aggressive, destructive, and enjoy dominating other
gressive victims may be at significant risk of be- children (Carney & Merrell, 2001; NSSC, 1995).
coming school shooters or engaging in serious long- They also tend to be hot-tempered, impulsive, and
term delinquent behavior. have a low tolerance for frustration (Olweus, 1993).
The majority of bullying incidents occur in or Bullies tend to have difficulty processing social in-
close to school; playgrounds and hallways are two formation and often interpret other’s behaviors as
of the most common sites for altercations (Beale, being antagonistic, even when they are not (Dodge,
2001; Glew et al., 2000). Generally, bullying occurs 1991; McNamara & McNamara, 1997). Although
in areas where adult supervision is minimal.Whereas peers generally dislike bullies in adolescence, bul-
some studies show that bullying peaks during the lies tend to be popular with other aggressive chil-
middle school years, others show that the percent- dren in earlier grades (Pellegrini, 1998). In fact, one
age of students who are bullied is greatest around study found that bullies reported greater ease in
the second grade and declines steadily through the making friends than did other children (Nansel et
ninth grade (Banks, 1999; Olweus, 1993). al., 2001). The link between bullying and peer so-
Generally, researchers identify four types of bul- cial status requires further clarification. Some re-
lies (Beale, 2001). Well-known in schools, physical searchers have identified popular aggressive and
bullies are action-oriented and use direct bullying unpopular aggressive bully subtypes (Farmer et al.,
behaviors such as hitting and kicking. This is the 2002). Popular aggressive bullies socialize with
least sophisticated type of bullying because of the other popular children and do not appear to en-
ease in identifying these bullies. Physical bullies are counter significant social stigma stemming from
most commonly boys. Over time, physical bullies their aggression. Unpopular aggressive bullies are
become more aggressive and may continue to mani- typically rejected or neglected by other children
fest bullying behaviors into adulthood.Verbal bul- and may use aggression as a way to get attention.
lies, on the other hand, use words to hurt or hu- However, with their teachers and other adults, both
miliate their victims. Bullying by this type of bully types of bullies tend to act aggressively and may
happens rapidly, making it difficult to detect and actually frighten some of these adults because of
intervene. Although there are no visible scars, this their physical strength and defiant attitude (Olweus,
type of bullying can have devastating effects. The 1993).
third type is called relational bullies. Relational Most bullies have a positive attitude toward vio-
bullies convince their peers to exclude certain chil- lence, particularly as a means to solve problems or
dren.This type of bullying happens most often with get what they want (Carney & Merrell, 2001; Glew
girls and can lead to feelings of rejection at a time et al., 2000). Often, bullies are “rewarded” with ciga-
when social connection is critical (Crick & rettes, money, and prestige as a result of their ag-
Grotpeter, 1995). The final type, reactive bullies, gression (Olweus, 1993). They also use bullying
can be the most difficult to identify. These bullies behaviors to gain or maintain dominance and tend
tend to be impulsive, taunting others into fighting to lack a sense of empathy for their victims (Beale,
with them. Reactive bullies will fight back, but then 2001). Many bullies do not realize the level of their
claim self-defense. aggression (NSSC, 1995). Researchers have also

102 Children & Schools Volume 27, Number 2 April 2005

found that bullies are more likely to be involved Short and Long-Term Effects of Bullying
with other problem behaviors, such as drinking and Many bullies experience mental health difficulties.
smoking (Nansel et al., 2001). In addition, bullies One study found that, among bullies, nearly one-
usually lack problem-solving skills and tend to ex- third had attention-deficit disorder, 12.5 percent
ternalize their problems as a means of coping had depression, and 12.5 percent had oppositional-
(Andreou, 2001). They also show poorer school conduct disorder (Kumpulainen, Rasanen, & Puura,
achievement and demonstrate a dislike of the school 2001; see also, Kaltiala-Heino, Rimpela, & Rimpela,
environment, particularly in middle school (Nansel 2000).Also, highly aggressive bullies have been found
et al.; also see DHHS, 2001). to possess personality defects such as having a posi-
Finally, a debate exists in the literature as to tive attitude toward physical aggression (Andreou,

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/cs/article-abstract/27/2/101/485292 by guest on 07 October 2018

whether bullies suffer from low self-esteem. Some 2001; Olweus, 1978). Furthermore, one study found
researchers suggested that bullies have either aver- that bullies tend to engage in frequent excessive
age or lower-than-average levels of insecurity (Glew drinking and other substance use more often than
et al., 2000). In contrast, other studies showed that victims or bully–victims (Kaltiala-Heino et al.).
bullies of both primary and post-primary school Research has found that, as adults, bullies often dis-
age had significantly lower global self-esteem scores play externalizing behaviors and hyperactivity
than children who had not bullied others (O’Moore (Kumpulainen & Rasanen, 2000). Finally, being a
& Kirkham, 2001). bully has been associated with antisocial develop-
ment in adulthood (Kaltiala-Heino et al.; Olweus,
Family Background 1994; Pulkkinen & Pitkanen, 1993).
Research suggests that the families of bullies are Children who bully others often experience
often troubled (Olweus, 1994). Generally, bullies’ long-term effects and consequences as a result of
parents are hostile, rejecting, and indifferent to their their bullying. According to NSSC, a dispropor-
children.The father figure in these homes is usually tionately high number of bullies underachieve in
weak, if present at all, and the mother tends to be school and later perform below potential in em-
isolated and may have a permissive parenting style ployment settings (Carney & Merrell, 2001; NSSC,
(Curtner-Smith, 2000; Olweus, 1978); thus, super- 1995). In addition, studies have found that by age
vision of the children’s whereabouts or activities 30 bullies were likely to have more criminal con-
tends to be minimal (Roberts, 1988).When parents victions and traffic violations than their less-aggres-
are aware of their child’s aggressive behaviors, many sive peers (Roberts, 2000). A 1991 study found that
dismiss them as a rite of passage or as “boys being 60 percent of boys who were labeled as bullies in
boys” (McNamara & McNamara, 1997). Research grades 6 through 9 had at least one criminal con-
suggests that the bully’s level of aggression will in- viction by age 24 and 35; 40 percent of these boys
crease if the caretaker continues to tolerate aggres- had three or more convictions by this time (Glew
sive behaviors toward the child’s peers, siblings, and et al., 2000; Olweus, 1995). These adults were also
teachers (Olweus, 1993). more likely to have displayed aggression toward their
Discipline in these homes is usually inconsistent spouses and were more likely to use severe physical
(Carney & Merrell, 2001). Parents of bullies tend to punishment on their own children (Roberts, 2000).
use power-assertive techniques to manage behavior In addition, research suggests that adults who were
(Pellegrini, 1998; Schwartz, Dodge, & Coie, 1993). bullies as children tend to have children who be-
Punishment is often physical or in the form of an come bullies (Carney & Merrell; NSSC).Thus, ag-
angry, emotional outburst and is often followed by gressive behaviors may continue from one genera-
a long period of time in which the child is ignored tion to the next.
(Roberts, 2000). As a result, these children learn that
aggression can be used as a means to an end. Bullies VICTIMS
imitate the aggressive behaviors they see at home to Characteristics of Victims
obtain their goals (Patterson, Capaldi, & Bank, 1991; Victims, in contrast to bullies, are the recipients of
Roberts, 2000). Some researchers refer to this coer- peer abuse.The majority of bullying victims, about
cive cycle of violence to explain the “continuous, two-thirds, are passive or submissive; the remaining
intergenerational perpetuation of aggressive behav- one-third appear to have aggressive attitudes
ior” (Carney & Merrell, p. 370). (Brockenbrough et al., 2002). Physically, victims tend

Smokowski and Kopasz / Bullying in School: An Overview 103

to be small in stature, weak, and frail compared with cause they realize that the child is anxious and in-
bullies; thus, victims are often unable to protect secure. As a result, parents may avoid conflict be-
themselves from abuse (McNamara & McNamara, cause they believe their child would not be able to
1997). These physical characteristics are particu- cope. However, by avoiding conflict parents fail to
larly poignant for placing boys at risk of victimiza- teach their child appropriate conflict resolution skills
tion. In addition, victims may have “body anxiety,” (McNamara & McNamara, 1997). Many parents
fear getting hurt, and have a negative attitude to- become overly involved in their child’s activities to
ward violence. They also may be unsuccessful at compensate for their child’s social deficiencies.
sports or other physical activities (Olweus, 1993). Researchers believe that the family’s tendency to
When attacked, many victims react by crying or shelter their child may serve as both a cause and a

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/cs/article-abstract/27/2/101/485292 by guest on 07 October 2018

withdrawing, especially those in lower elementary consequence of bullying (Olweus, 1993).
school grades.
Victims also tend to be more quiet, cautious, Short-Term Effects of Victimization
anxious, insecure, and sensitive than most other Victims may gradually see themselves as outcasts
children and have rather poor communication and and failures. Studies suggest that victimization has a
problem-solving skills (Glew et al., 2000). As a re- significant positive correlation with several inter-
sult, these children tend to initiate conversation less nalizing disorders, such as anxiety and depression
than other children and lack assertiveness skills (Brockenbrough et al., 2002; Kaltiala-Heino et al.,
(Schwartz et al., 1993). Consequently, many vic- 2000). This link between victimization and inter-
tims are abandoned by other children, have few to nalizing disorders is particularly strong for adoles-
no friends, and are often found alone on the play- cent girls and may contribute to the development
ground or at lunchtime (Olweus, 1993). One study of eating disorders (Bond, Carlin, Thomas, Rubin,
found that victims of bullying demonstrated poorer & Patton, 2001). One study found that attention-
social and emotional adjustment, greater difficulty deficit disorder was common among victims
making friends, fewer relationships with peers, (Kumpulainen et al., 2001). This connection with
and greater loneliness (Nansel et al., 2001). An- attention-deficit disorder is understandable consid-
other study found that many victims relate better ering that these children may feel the need to con-
to adults such as parents and teachers than their stantly monitor their environment, anxiously an-
own peers (Olweus, 1993). ticipating the next victimization episode.
In addition, victims tend to suffer from poor self- Victims of bullying often suffer from one or
esteem (O’Moore & Kirkham, 2001). They often more of the following: chronic absenteeism, re-
see themselves as failures—unattractive, unintelli- duced academic performance, increased apprehen-
gent, and insignificant. Because of these negative sion, loneliness, feelings of abandonment, and sui-
cognitions, victims may wrongly blame themselves cidal ideation (Beale, 2001; Roberts & Coursol,
for the bullying (Carney & Merrell, 2001). Lacking 1996). Because the bullying most often occurs at
sufficient self-esteem and assertiveness to stand up school, many victims are reluctant or afraid to go
for themselves, victims are usually not willing to to school and may develop psychosomatic symp-
report the bullying. This unwillingness to disclose toms such as headaches or stomach pains in the
their victimization may act as a signal for bullies morning. One study found that 7 percent of U.S.
and may cause these victims to be targeted repeat- eighth graders stayed home at least one day a
edly. Academically, victims may perform average or month because of bullying (Foltz-Gray, 1996).
better in elementary school, but usually tend to be Other researchers reported that more than one in
less successful than other children in middle school five middle school students said that they avoid
(Olweus, 1993). This deterioration in academic restrooms at school out of fear of being bullied,
performance may be due to the negative impact of and another study suggested that at least 20 per-
the bullying experience on the victim’s sense of cent of all students are frightened during much of
bonding or engagement with school. their school day (Glew et al., 2000; Hazler, Hoover,
& Oliver, 1992).
Family Background Victims may also experience physical injury
Generally, victimized children come from families (bruises, cuts, and scratches), torn clothing, and dam-
that tend to be overprotective and sheltering be- aged property as a result of the bullying.To appease

104 Children & Schools Volume 27, Number 2 April 2005

bullies and avoid injury, victims may request or steal dents indicate that these children both start fights
extra money from family members. At night vic- and are picked on (Schwartz, Dodge, Pettit, & Bates,
tims may experience difficulty sleeping and have 1997). This group of children is often victimized,
nightmares (McNamara & McNamara, 1997).Vic- but also tends to tease or provoke bullies (Glew et
tims are more likely than non-victims to bring al., 2000). When bullies respond to this provoca-
weapons to school to feel safe or to retaliate tion, a physical fight may occur between the chil-
(Brockenbrough et al., 2002). It is more common, dren. Bully–victims fight, but then claim self-de-
however, for victims to internalize their problems. fense (Beale, 2001). Although this has been
Unfortunately, victims sometimes attempt suicide described as a common scenario for bully–victim
(Olweus, 1993). interactions, it is only one of a number of possible

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/cs/article-abstract/27/2/101/485292 by guest on 07 October 2018

altercations that might characterize aggressive
Long-Term Effects of Victimization bully–victims. Another bully–victim scenario may
Victims also experience negative long-term effects be that of the humiliated school shooter who ex-
as a result of childhood bullying. Because victims plodes in a burst of violence when he can no longer
tend to miss many days of school, their achieve- cope.
ment level tends to be lower than their peers and Bully–victims can be difficult to identify. Olweus
many do not achieve their academic potential (1995) found that only a minority of victims could
(McNamara & McNamara, 1997). In addition, at be identified as bully–victims. However, a U.S. study
age 23, former victims tend to be more depressed found that if a child is a victim, he or she has an
and have poorer self-esteem than non-victimized equal chance of being a passive victim or a bully–
young adults (Olweus, 1993). Hugh-Jones and victim (Perry & Perry, 1988). Brockenbrough and
Smith (1999) found that one-half of former vic- colleagues (2002) surveyed 10,909 students in grades
tims reported long-term effects of being bullied as 7 through 11 and reported that approximately 30
a child, mostly affecting their personal relationships percent of bullying victims had aggressive attitudes
in adulthood. Researchers have indicated that male (that is, were bully–victims). They found that this
victims experience psychosocial difficulties such as group reported carrying weapons, using alcohol,
inhibition with women during adulthood and may and engaging in physical fights more often than
have problems in their sexual relationships nonaggressive victims or non-victims.
(Gilmartin, 1987). In extreme cases, former vic- Bully–victims are often hyperactive and have
tims have carried out acts of retribution, including attention problems. In the classroom they tend to
murder, against former bullies (Carney & Merrell, annoy other students and regularly cause aggrava-
2001). tion (Carney & Merrell, 2001). Bully–victims are
When former victims have their own children, often labeled as “hot-tempered” and may react with
they may overreact to behaviors that they perceive hostility toward students who accidentally provoke
as bullying, contributing to an intergenerational them (for example, bumping into the bully–victim
cycle of overprotection (McNamara & McNamara, may precipitate unwarranted retaliation, Pellegrini,
1997). This may inhibit the development of con- 1998). Not surprising, these children usually elicit
flict resolution skills in their children, placing the negative reactions from other children and are not
children at heightened risk of becoming the next socially accepted by their peers (Andreou, 2001).
generation of victims.The risk of victimization may Furthermore, many teachers do not like bully–vic-
be transferred by genetic predisposition for a small tims and may give the message to the class that
body, by the perpetuation of overprotective these children deserve to be victims if they initiate
parenting, and by negative cognitions that children negative interactions (McNamara & McNamara,
internalize. 1997). Most bully–victims have low self-esteem,
high neuroticism, and serious deficits in problem-
BULLY–VICTIMS solving abilities (Andreou; Mynard & Joseph, 1997).
Characteristics of Bully–Victims One study found that bully–victims viewed them-
Also called reactive bullies or provocative victims, selves as more troublesome, less intellectual, less
these children both bully others and are bullied physically attractive, more anxious, less popular, and
themselves. Bully–victims are characterized by anx- unhappier than pure bullies (O’Moore & Kirkham,
ious and aggressive behavior (Olweus, 1995). Stu- 2001).

Smokowski and Kopasz / Bullying in School: An Overview 105

Family Background levels. Interventions for youth violence are also
Bully–victims usually come from troubled homes. noteworthy. These interventions commonly have
These children frequently describe their parents as multiple components that address family and school
inconsistent (overprotective and neglectful) and contexts.
sometimes abusive (Bowers, Smith, & Binney, 1994).
Bully–victims claim that their families are low in Bullying Prevention Programs
warmth and lack parental management skills The Olweus Bullying Prevention Program. The
(Pellegrini, 1998).There is some evidence that the Olweus Bullying Prevention Program (Olweus &
parents of bully–victims use power-assertive tech- Limber, 2000) is a comprehensive intervention and
niques with their children (Pellegrini). Research is probably the most widely recognized program

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/cs/article-abstract/27/2/101/485292 by guest on 07 October 2018

suggests that bully–victims learn hostile behaviors for addressing bullying. The program targets stu-
at home and use these schemas to view the rest of dents in elementary and middle school and relies
the world as antagonistic and untrustworthy (Bowers on teachers and school staff for implementation.
et al.). The program prompts school personnel to create a
school environment that is characterized by warmth
Short and Long-Term Effects of Bullying and involvement, has firm limits on unacceptable
and Victimization behavior, consistently applies non-hostile conse-
Most bully–victims suffer from low self-esteem and quences to violations of rules, and allows adults to
have a negative self-image.The frequency of bully- act as both authority figures and role models.
ing and victimization episodes appears to predict Initially implemented in Norway, researchers
feelings of self-worth (O’Moore & Kirkham, 2001). reported that the program was associated with sub-
Among bully–victims in one study, 21.5 percent stantial reductions, by 50 percent or more, in the
had oppositional-conduct disorder, 17.7 percent had frequency with which students reported being bul-
depression, and 17.7 percent had attention-deficit lied and bullying others (Olweus & Limber, 2000).
disorder (Kumpulainen et al., 2001). These bully– In addition, Olweus (1993) reported significant
victim rates for oppositional-conduct disorder and reductions in students’ reports of general antisocial
depression were higher than the rates for these dis- behavior and significant improvements in the so-
orders in children who were bullies only. Another cial climate of the school. Program effects appeared
study found that bully–victims, compared with to be cumulative, with some effects stronger at 20
bullies or victims, had the greatest risk of depres- months follow-up than at eight months
sive symptoms, anxiety, psychosomatic symptoms, postintervention. Program replications (Melton et
eating disorders, and co-occurring mental health al., 1998; Olweus & Limber;Whitney, Rivers, Smith,
problems (Kaltiala-Heino et al., 2000). In addition, & Sharp, 1994) also reported positive results. Al-
bully–victims were at significant risk of drinking though reductions in bullying were significant,
and substance use as adolescents. Children who are decreasing 16 percent to 35 percent, these effects
bully–victims at younger ages not only have more were smaller than those found in the original study.
psychiatric symptoms when compared with other The Bullying Project. The Bullying Project (Davis,
children, but also have more psychiatric symptoms 2002) is based on the Olweus research in Norway.
later in life (Kumpulainen & Rasanen, 2000). In addition to adopting a schoolwide zero toler-
Because research on bully–victims is still in its ance policy on bullying, students are taught how to
infancy and this is a relatively small group of chil- stand up to bullies, how to get adult help, and how
dren, researchers are still trying to understand the to reach out in friendship to students who may be
full range of bully–victim behaviors and relation- involved in bullying situations. This project also
ship dynamics. includes interventions for both the bully and the
victim.With the bully, counseling is suggested, with
INTERVENTIONS AND IMPLICATIONS FOR sessions that focus on acknowledging actions, em-
CLINICAL PRACTICE IN SCHOOLS pathy development, or restitution. For the victim,
Several strategies exist for intervening in bullying. various forms of support are suggested—physical
Some programs focus on intervening with either protection, support group participation with other
the victim or the bully; others take a systemic ap- victims, or individual therapy. Expressive arts thera-
proach, addressing bullying behavior at multiple pies are recommended so that victims can write,

106 Children & Schools Volume 27, Number 2 April 2005

act out, draw, or talk about their experiences. It is can make and maintain one friendship with a peer,
critical for victimized children to articulate their the painful consequences of bullying would mark-
thoughts and feelings so that internalized negative edly decrease and long-term loss of self-esteem may
messages can be countered with positive ones. No be avoided. Psychologists or social workers might
formal program evaluation data is available for the also try pairing the victim with an older, support-
Bullying Project. ive peer in a big brother or buddy program to break
Bullybusters. Bullybusters (Beale, 2001) is an the victim’s sense of isolation and loneliness. This
antibullying campaign geared to elementary and may also provide some protection and possibly some
middle school students.The main focus of the cam- social status for the victim. Outreach is a critical
paign is the performance of the play “Bullybusters.” component because of the nature of bullying. It is

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/cs/article-abstract/27/2/101/485292 by guest on 07 October 2018

Students act out short skits about common bully- not exaggerating to say that the school psychologist’s
ing situations in schools to begin classroom discus- or social worker’s efforts to be a friendship broker
sions. After the skits, the principal explains to the at this critical time may have a significant impact
students that the school has a zero tolerance policy on this vulnerable child’s life that reaches well into
for bullying and asks the students to take positive adulthood. Generally, interventions for victims
steps to alleviate bullying in the school. Bullybusters should focus on supporting the victim, providing
has not been formally evaluated, but teachers in the counseling, and building friendships between the
schools where the program was implemented re- victim and supportive peers.
ported that students seemed to be more willing to Bullying prevention has linkages to youth vio-
report bullying behaviors. Administrators in charge lence prevention programming. The research lit-
of student discipline also reported a 20 percent re- erature on youth violence prevention makes clear
duction of bullying incidents during the first year that focusing only on the behavior to be elimi-
of the program (Beale) nated is less effective than having a simultaneous
focus on constructing a positive context that is in-
Additional Intervention Strategies consistent with bullying and coercion. Multicom-
Behavioral contracts and social skills training may ponent interventions that focus on the child, his or
be helpful for some bullies (Morrison & Sandowicz, her family, the school, and the community appear
1995). Also, bullies must be aware of school policies to be particularly efficacious.A number of longitu-
on bullying and should be held accountable if a dinal investigations have empirically tested multi-
rule is broken. Because bullying is often commit- component interventions (see for example, Con-
ted by a group of children against a single victim, duct Problems Prevention Research Group, 1999;
each child in the bullying group may need a chance Hawkins, Catalano, Kosterman, Abbott, & Hill, 1999;
to speak, seek support, and receive help to change Tremblay, Pagani-Kurtz, Masse,Vitaro, & Pihl, 1995).
his or her behavior. Bullies often need long-term The Surgeon General’s Report on Youth Violence
counseling services (Roberts & Coursol, 1996). (DHHS, 2001) is an excellent guide that classifies
Interventions for victims are less common. Many ineffective, promising, and model intervention pro-
victims cope by trying their best to be invisible. grams based on empirical evidence.
School psychologists and social workers should seek In the school environment, psychologists and
out children who may be victims of bullying. This social workers are often in the best position to in-
is extremely important because most victims will tervene at multisystem levels. School psychologists
not come forth and ask for help. For most victims, and social workers may detect bullying more eas-
being bullied is shameful and frightening. Victims ily than other school personnel because they un-
typically want to hide and do not want to discuss derstand the signs and symptoms of aggressive be-
this issue. For some victims, coming to talk about havior and victimization that signal a bullying
being bullied may cause embarrassment. Social problem.Teachers might refer children who are in-
workers and psychologists, therefore, need to be volved in bullying situations to school psycholo-
gentle and sensitive with victims, normalize the gists and social workers for other reasons (for ex-
experience, and make sure the session is not hu- ample, conduct problems, depression, and sudden
miliating for the child. drops in academic performance). School psy-
The school psychologist or social worker should chologists and social workers are also in a good
work to break the victim’s isolation. If the victim position to help put policies into place that take a

Smokowski and Kopasz / Bullying in School: An Overview 107

comprehensive, schoolwide approach to prevent- from low self-esteem, loneliness, depression, anxi-
ing bullying. ety, absenteeism, and academic difficulties. Some
The key ingredient in many bullying interven- victims may resort to violence as a response to bul-
tions is maintaining a zero tolerance policy with lying, either by taking their own lives or harming
swift and serious consequences for engaging in other students. Bullies also experience long-term
bullying.This policy makes a strong statement about problems such as low academic achievement, men-
what the school, as a community, is willing to en- tal health difficulties, substance abuse, and crimi-
dure. All other strategies sit on this foundation. nality later in life. In addition, students not directly
Overall, psychologists and social workers should involved in bullying may witness these behaviors.
target the atmosphere of the school to ensure that This large, silent majority may not feel safe at school

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/cs/article-abstract/27/2/101/485292 by guest on 07 October 2018

students feel safe. Of utmost importance is con- and this, in turn, may negatively affect the learning
structing a culture of respect and recognition where process for many students.
bullying is not only not tolerated but is not neces- Many interventions have been developed to deal
sary. In such a context, everyone works to ensure with bullying in the school environment. How-
that there are no social payoffs for bullying and that ever, most of these interventions have not been
consequences for bullying behaviors are clear, di- formally evaluated. The most prominent interven-
rect, and immediate. In addition, those who have tion is the Olweus Bullying Prevention Program.
previously been involved in bullying can be guided This program takes a comprehensive approach to
to discover alternative forms of personal power and bullying, has been evaluated in multiple studies, and
more effective ways to obtain recognition or vent has demonstrated impressive results in reducing
their frustrations. bullying behaviors. Although they are not focused
The following proven strategies can help fash- on bullying exclusively, youth violence prevention
ion a school culture that promotes respect, recog- efforts, especially multicomponent ones, also ad-
nition, learning, safety, and positive experiences for dress important concerns (for example, social skills
all students: training, conflict resolution, and parenting train-
ing) associated with bullying, coercion, and aggres-
• Reach out to victims. sion.There are excellent resources, such as the Sur-
• Set and enforce clear rules and consequences geon General’s Report onYouthViolence (DHHS, 2001),
for bullying behaviors. to guide the selection of interventions.
• Supervise students during breaks, especially When bullying is tolerated, the whole school
on playgrounds, in restrooms, and in busy environment is tainted and students are unable to
hallways. learn, grow, and interact in a safe, positive atmo-
• Engage classes in discussion and activities sphere. School psychologists and social workers can
related to bullying so that students who might help reduce bullying by implementing effective
otherwise watch passively become empow- interventions and working to create a school envi-
ered to intervene and victims are allowed to ronment that prioritizes respect, recognition, secu-
have a voice without shame. rity, and growth for all students.
• Encourage active participation by parents
and other adults, making this a community REFERENCES
issue that is addressed by community ac- Andreou, E. (2001). Bully/victim problems and their
association with coping behaviour in conflictual
tion. peer interactions among school-age children.
Educational Psychology, 21, 59– 66.
Banks, R. (1999). Bullying in school. Moravia, NY:
CONCLUSION
Chronicle Guidance Publications.
Bullying is a serious threat not only to those in- Beale, A.V. (2001). Bullybusters: Using drama to empower
volved, but also to the entire school environment. students to take a stand against bullying behavior.
Professional School Counseling, 4, 300–306.
With 30 percent of children reporting involvement Bond, L., Carlin, J. B., Thomas, L., Rubin, K., & Patton,
in a bullying situation, it is obviously an urgent G. (2001). Does bullying cause emotional problems:
A prospective study of young teenagers. British
problem that negatively affects the lives of many Medical Journal, 323, 480–483.
children (Nansel et al., 2001; Olweus, 1993). Bully- Bowers, L., Smith, P. K., & Binney,V. (1994). Perceived
ing creates short- and long-term consequences for family relationships of bullies, victims, and bully/
victims in middle childhood. Journal of Social and
both the victim and the bully. Victims may suffer Personal Relationships, 11, 215–232.

108 Children & Schools Volume 27, Number 2 April 2005

Brockenbrough, K. K., Cornell, D. G., & Loper, A. B Smith (Eds.), Anger, hostility, and aggression: Assessment,
(2002). Aggressive attitudes among victims of prevention, and intervention strategies for youth (pp. 345–
violence at school. Education & Treatment of Children, 392). Brandon, VT: Clinical Psychology.
25, 273–287. Mynard, H., & Joseph, S. (1997). Bully victim problems
Carney, A. G., & Merrell, K. W. (2001). Bullying in and their association with Eysenck’s personality
schools: Perspectives on understanding and dimensions in 8 to 13 year-olds. British Journal of
preventing an international problem. School Educational Psychology, 67, 51–54.
Psychology International, 22, 364–382. Nansel, T. R., Overpeck, M., Pilla, R. S., Ruan, W. J.,
Conduct Problems Prevention Research Group. (1999). Simons-Morton, B., & Scheidt, P. (2001). Bullying
Initial impact of the Fast Track prevention trial for behaviors among US youth: Prevalence and
conduct problems: II. Classroom effects. Journal of association with psychosocial adjustment. JAMA,
Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 67, 648–657. 285, 2094–2110.
Crick, N. R., & Grotpeter, J. K. (1995). Relational National School Safety Center. (1995). School bullying and
aggression, gender, and social–psychological victimization. Malibu, CA: Author.

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/cs/article-abstract/27/2/101/485292 by guest on 07 October 2018

adjustment. Child Development, 66, 710–722. Olweus, D. (1978). Aggression in the schools: Bullies and
Curtner-Smith, M. E. (2000). Mechanisms by which whipping boys. London: Hemisphere.
family processes contribute to school-age boys’ Olweus, D. (1993). Bullying at school: What we know and
bullying. Child Study Journal, 30, 169–187. what we can do. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell.
Davis, S. (2002). Stop bullying now. Retrieved February 8, Olweus, D. (1994). Annotation: Bullying at school: Basic
2002, from http://stopbullyingnow.com facts and effects of a school based intervention
Dodge, K. A. (1991). Emotion and social information program. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry
processing. In J. Garber & K. A. Dodge (Eds.), The and Allied Disciplines, 35, 1171–1190.
development of emotion regulation and dysregulation Olweus, D. (1995). Bullying or peer abuse in school: Fact
(pp 159–181). New York: Cambridge University and intervention. Current Directions in Psychological
Press. Science, 4, 196–200.
Farmer, T. W., Leung, M-C., Pearl, R., Rodkin, P. C., Olweus, D., & Limber, S. (2000). Bullying prevention
Cadwallader, T. W., & Van Acker, R. (2002). Deviant program. Boulder, CO: Center for the Study and
or diverse groups? The peer affiliations of aggressive Prevention of Violence.
elementary students. Journal of Educational Psychology, O’Moore, M., & Kirkham, C. (2001). Self-esteem and its
94, 611–620. relationship to bullying behavior. Aggressive Behavior,
Foltz-Gray, D. (1996). The bully trap: Young tormentors 27, 269–283.
and their victims find ways out of anger and Patterson, G. R., Capaldi, D., & Bank, L. (1991). An early
isolation. Teaching Tolerance, 5, 18–23. starter model for predicting delinquency. In D. J.
Gilmartin, B. G. (1987). Peer group antecedents of severe Pepler & K. H. Rubin (Eds.), The development and
love-shyness in males. Journal of Personality, 55, 467– treatment of childhood aggression (pp. 139–168).
489. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Glew, G., Rivara, F., & Feudtner, C. (2000). Bullying: Pellegrini, A. D. (1998). Bullies and victims in school: A
Children hurting children. Pediatrics in Review, 21, review and call for research. Journal of Applied
183–190. Developmental Psychology, 19, 165–176.
Hawkins, J. D., Catalano, R. F., Kosterman, R., Abbott, R., Pellegrini, A. D., Bartini, M., & Brooks, F. (1999). School
& Hill, K. G. (1999). Preventing adolescent health- bullies, victims, and aggressive victims: Factors
risk behaviors by strengthening protection during relating to group affiliation and victimization in
childhood. Archives of Pediatric and Adolescent early adolescence. Journal of Educational Psychology,
Medicine, 153, 226–234. 91, 216–224.
Hazler, R., Hoover, J., & Oliver, R. (1992). What children Perry, D., Kusel, S., & Perry, L. (1988).Victims of peer
say about bullying. Executive Educator, 14, 20–22. aggression. Developmental Psychology, 24, 807–814.
Hugh-Jones, S., & Smith, P. K. (1999). Self-reports of Pulkkinen, L., & Pitkanen, T. (1993). Continuities in
short- and long-term effects of bullying on children aggressive behavior from childhood to adulthood.
who stammer. British Journal of Educational Psychology, Aggressive Behavior, 19, 249–264.
69, 141–158. Roberts, M. (1988, February). Schoolyard menace.
Kaltiala-Heino, R., Rimpela, P. R., & Rimpela, A. (2000). Psychology Today, pp. 53–56.
Bullying at school: An indicator of adolescents at Roberts, W. B. (2000). The bully as victim. Professional
risk for mental disorders. Journal of Adolescence, 23, School Counseling, 4, 148–156.
661–674. Roberts, W., & Coursol, D. (1996). Strategies for
Kumpulainen, K., & Rasanen, E. (2000). Children intervention with childhood and adolescent victims
involved in bullying at elementary and school age: of bullying, teasing, and intimidation in school
Their psychiatric symptoms and deviance in setting. Elementary School Guidance and Counseling,
adolescence. Child Abuse & Neglect, 24, 1567–1577. 30, 204–212.
Kumpulainen, K., Rasanen, E., & Puura, K. (2001). Schwartz, D., Dodge, K. A., & Coie, J. D. (1993). The
Psychiatric disorders and the use of mental health emergence of chronic peer victimization in boys’
services among children involved in bullying. play groups. Child Development, 64, 1755–1772.
Aggressive Behavior, 27, 102–110. Schwartz, D., Dodge, K. A., Pettit, G. S., & Bates, J. E.
McNamara, B., & McNamara, F. (1997). Keys to dealing (1997). The early socialization of aggressive victims
with bullies. Hauppauge, NY: Barron’s. of bullying. Child Development, 68, 665–675.
Melton, G. B., Limber, S. P., Cunningham, P., Osgood, D. Tremblay, R. E., Pagani-Kurtz, L., Masse, L. C.,Vitaro, F.,
W., Chambers, J., Flerx,V., Henggeler, S., & Nation, & Pihl, R. O. (1995). A bimodal preventive
M. (1998). Violence among rural youth (Final Report intervention for disruptive kindergarten boys: Its
to the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency impact through mid-adolescence. Journal of
Prevention). Charleston, SC: Author. Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 63, 560–568.
Morrison, G. M., & Sandowicz, M. (1995). Importance of U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. (2001).
social skills in the prevention and intervention of Youth violence: A report of the surgeon general.
anger and aggression. In M. J. Furlong & D. C. Rockville, MD: Author.

Smokowski and Kopasz / Bullying in School: An Overview 109

Whitney, I., Rivers, I., Smith, P., & Sharp, S. (1994). The
Sheffield project: Methodology and findings. In P.
Smith & S. Sharp (Eds.), School bullying: Insights and
perspectives (pp. 20–56). London: Routledge.

Paul R. Smokowski, PhD, MSW, is assistant professor,

School of Social Work, University of North Carolina at
Chapel Hill, 301 Pittsboro Street, CB 3550, Chapel Hill,
NC 27599-3550, e-mail: smokowsk@email.unc.edu.
Kelly Holland Kopasz, MSW, is a school social worker in
Fort Mill, SC. Send correspondence concerning this article to

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/cs/article-abstract/27/2/101/485292 by guest on 07 October 2018

Dr. Smokowski.
Accepted March 22, 2004

110 Children & Schools Volume 27, Number 2 April 2005