The best track record is
associated with "whole school interventions," programs that battle
bullying on multiple fronts. Typically this includes adopting and enforcing
strict rules against bullying. It also includes training teachers, introducing
anti-bullying curricula in the classroom, sharing anti-bullying information
with parents, and offering individualized counseling to students .
But while "whole school
interventions" show more promise, they aren't terribly successful. Yes, a
few interventions have reported impressive, lasting effects. But most have not.
They've either failed show any effect, or had the effect of increasing bullying
among some students (Silva et al 2017).
Why haven't school-based programs
been more successful?
Maybe the ideas were good, but the
execution poor. In support of this idea, researchers who interviewed kids after one intervention found that students "sometimes misunderstood or misused
specific intervention skills, especially problem solving and empathy"
(Farrell et al 2015).
With better implementation, kids might have mastered these skills, and used them to prevent bullying.
But there is another possibility. Maybe the interventions are focused on the wrong activities.
For instance, some anti-bullying interventions seem to assume that
bullies will mend their ways if they are taught social skills, or conflict resolution
techniques, or self-confidence-building exercises.
The implication is that most bullies
misbehave out of ignorance or incompetence. They victimize others because they
don’t know how to make friends, and they have low self-esteem.
As we'll see, these assumptions may be
valid for some bullies. But research suggests that other bullies aren't lacking
in social savvy. They may be socially well-connected, and have high
self-confidence. The cause of their misconduct lies elsewhere.
So I think it's important to take a
closer look at the origins of bullying. If we want to know how to prevent
bullying, the first step is to understand what types of children are at risk
for becoming perpetrators.
Pure bullies and "bully-victims"
Research suggests there are at least two types of bully:
While they may share some traits in common, they are distinctive in other respects. Let's consider the similarities first.
What bullies have in common
Not surprisingly, children who
become bullies may show early tendencies to resort to aggression -- more than
is usual for children their age (van Dijk et al 2017). But there are other commonalities.
They may be less
adept at feeling the emotions of others -- what researchers call "affective empathy."Some of these kids might be good at a
kind of "cool" reasoning about another person's perspective (also known as "cognitive empathy"). But
studies indicate that many bullies fail to empathize on a more visceral level. Bullies -- especially male bullies -- are less
likely to score highly on tests of "emotional intelligence" or "emotional literacy." Coaching kids in these abilities may schools prevent bullying (Knowler and Frederickson 2013; Lomas et al 2012; Peachey et al 2017;
Lee et al 2015; Renati et al 2012).
They may have experienced aggression or bullying at home. Although bullies may come from a
variety of family backgrounds, they are more likely to have parents
who use authoritarian discipline, an approach that attempts to control through
fear and threats of harsh punishment (Espelage et al 2000). They are also more
likely to have experienced child abuse, or to have witnessed domestic partner
abuse (Baldry et al 2003; Bauer et al 2006). Kids who bully outside the
home are more likely to bully their siblings (Wolke and Samara 2004; Tippett and
Early behavior problems tend to increase a child's risk of subsequent trouble. Aggression, social deficits, and attention problems may set kids on a path towards bullying. Behavior problems can interfere with the development of normal peer relationships, and lead to ostracism. In response, some kids resort to aggression to get what they want. Others may give up, and turn inward. Either way, these kids get fewer opportunities to learn social skills. Alternatively, some kids might simply fall into a bad habit. They find their early experiences with aggression rewarding, and develop bullying tactics as they get older. Either way, early behavior is linked with later child outcomes. For example, when researchers tracked children over a decade, they found that kids demonstrating aggressiveness in preschool were more likely to get involved in bullying later in life -- both as bullies and as victims (Jansen et al 2011). Another long-term study has reported that British five-year-olds with poor mental perspective-taking skills were at higher risk for involvement in bullying at age 12 (Shakoor et al 2012).
Once they begin a pattern of bullying, perpetrators tend to endorse Machiavellian beliefs, and to rely heavily on mechanisms of moral disengagement to excuse their behavior (Perren et al 2012; Renati et al 2012; Oberman 2011). The Machiavellian beliefs are pretty easy to understand. Kids simply embrace the idea that the end justifies the means. As for the mechanisms of moral disengagement, these can be a bit more complex. They are the stories bullies tell themselves to justify behavior that might otherwise make them feel guilty. It was just a bit of fun. The victim deserves to be treated like that. It's not my fault because I was pressured into it. I didn't behave as badly as the other guy.
It appears that bullies get caught up in aggression more often because they are prone to assume that other people mean them harm. Compared to other kids, aggressive children are quick to attribute hostile intentions to other people (see Orobio de Castro et al 2002; Yaeger et al 2011).
Bullying can be a sign that a child is at risk for develop a psychiatric disorder, including anti-social personality, a condition that is sometimes called "sociopathy" or "psychopathy." In one study, researchers screened 8-year old boys for psychiatric symptoms. Among boys who acted daily as "pure" bullies, 80% screened positive for possible psychiatric disturbance. Among bully-victims, the number was 97% (Sourander et al 2007).
So much for the common risk factors and experiences. How
do bullies differ?
Pure bullies -- the bullies who
don't get victimized themselves -- tend to have good social skills, high self-esteem,
and high social status (Pallastri et al; Andrews et al 2017).
They be more careful and risk-aversive, characteristics that could help them avoid
getting caught by authority figures (Poon 2016). They may impress teachers as
being sociable, popular, and self-controlled. Teachers may fail to perceive
their aggressive tendencies (Dawes et al 2017).
And they don't seem to suffer difficulties
in the long-term, not if they are free of childhood psychiatric problems and
family hardship. In one study, child bullies meeting these criteria were no more likely to experience "poor outcomes in adulthood" (Wolke et al 2013).
But for bully-victims, things
Bully-victims -- the bullies who
also get victimized by other bullies -- are more likely than pure bullies to
have deficits in social skills and self-esteem. Peers are more likely to rate
them as unfriendly or unhelpful (van Noorden et al 2016).
As indicated above, bully-victims
may be at greater risk for developing a psychiatric condition. And the same may
be said for other psychological problems, including anxiety and clinically high
levels of arousal, which may make it harder for kids to learn in a typical
classroom setting (Juvonen et al 2003;
Graham et al 2006; Woods and White 2004).
Bully-victims tend to have
poorer adult outcomes (Wolke et al 2013), and they may develop particularly
cynical views. One survey found that bully-victims were much more likely than
other kids—including "pure" bullies—to endorse cheating (Glew et al
2005). Another study found that bully/victims reported the least faith in human
nature (Andreou 2004).
What does it all mean?
These aren't cheerful
discoveries. But they can help us understand why anti-bullying programs fail. Kids
bully for different reasons, and will probably respond differently to the same
If we look at what many bullies
have in common, it's clear that we need to teach children that bullying is
unacceptable. We need to induce empathy for victims. We need to confront
children's Machiavellian beliefs and mechanisms of moral disengagement. We need
to teach them new ways of thinking, so they don't assume that other people are
hostile. And we need to support children in their everyday lives -- help them
cope with family adversity, and screen them for psychological troubles.
But to prevent bullying, we must also avoid lumping together different types of children.
For some kids, the biggest
problem may be that they fly under the radar. They are well-adjusted in many
ways, and their bullying may go undetected by adults. They need to be
identified, and held accountable for changing their behavior. And their non-bullying peers need to get the message, too: Bullying must not be tolerated, no matter
how prestigious or powerful the perpetrator.
Other kids -- the bully-victims
-- may need a lot of additional help. They may benefit more from training in social
skills and conflict management. They may need support for attention problems,
hyperactivity, or anxiety. And they probably need help making friends.
How to prevent bullying: Evidence-based suggestions
1. Stop bullying
incidents in progress, and make it clear that bullying will not be tolerated.
Adults need to take a stand. Even kids can stop a bullying
incident in progress.
In one study, 57% of bullying incidents on an elementary
school playground ceased within 10 seconds of another child getting
involved—by either verbally or physically defending the victim (Hawkins et al 2001). To prevent bullying, all that was needed was a single act of solidarity.
2. Don't demonize the
bully. Focus on condemning the behavior.
As noted in the introduction, attempts to personalize the
condemnation don't appear to motivate bullies to change. This is consistent
with research on non-bullies. Most people don't respond well to being shamed.
They don't think "I will turn over a new leaf, and strive to behave
better." Instead, shaming tends to make people angry, resentful, or indignant.
If we shame children, we might also send the message that we think they are
intrinsically or innately bad. This can make kids feel that change isn't
If we want children to stop bullying, we're more likely to
succeed by distinguishing the behavior from the individual. The behavior is
bad, and won't be tolerated. The person can grow and change. For more evidence on this topic, see my article about correcting behavior.
3. Screen bullies for
psychiatric conditions and serious behavioral problems.
This is the recommendation of psychiatrist and bullying
researcher Andre Sourander (Sourander et al 2007). If bullies have psychiatric
problems, they should get the help of specialists trained to handle these
problems. Let's stop asking teachers to perform as therapists.
conversations about the experiences of victims.
Not every bully is ready to empathize. Some may suffer from
psychiatric problems that make empathy more difficult. But many bullies are
perfectly capable of feeling empathy for others, and research shows that
inducing empathy helps motivate them to change. For help, see these
evidence-based tips for teaching empathy.
5. Teach kids about
Bullies harbor anti-social beliefs and rationalizations that
make it easier for them to behave in cruel or callous ways. And everybody,
including kids and adult bystanders, might rely on mechanisms of moral
disengagement to avoid getting involved and speaking up for victims. For more
details, see my article about Machiavellian beliefs and implications for how to prevent bullying.
6. Help aggressive
kids re-interpret the apparently hostile intentions of others.
Research suggests that it can be done. For example, in a controlled,
experimental study, primary school boys were enrolled in a training program
designed to teach kids to avoid attributing hostile intentions to peers.
After the intervention, boys who had been identified as
aggressive showed marked improvements. Teachers rated them as less aggressive,
and, when tested, the boys were less likely to assume hostile intentions in
ambiguous situations (Hudley and Graham 1993).
More recent studies have reported similar results. Training
programs helped adolescents change their attitudes about aggression. For
instance, after training, kids said they were less likely to take offense if
someone bumped into them. They were more inclined to assume the collision was
accidental, and less likely to think they should retaliate (Yeager et al 2013). Read more about this and other tactics for handling child aggression here.
7. Teach stress
Research has identified effective relaxation therapies and
stress management techniques. Bully-victims with clinically high levels of
arousal might benefit from them.
8. Promote helpful
Authoritarian parenting seeks
to enforce a kind of unthinking obedience. It also features punishments that
may seem overly harsh or arbitrary.
By contrast, authoritative parenting encourages kids to regulate
their own behavior. It’s about setting clear limits, explaining the reasons
behind the rules, being responsive, and treating kids as independent, rational,
cooperative family members.
Studies show that children are less likely to bully if their
parents are warm, communicative, and involved. Kids who perceive their parents
as authoritative may be less likely to bully their peers (Rican et al 1993).
And a meta-analysis of studies published between 1970 and 2012 found
that warm, communicative, involved parenting had a small-to-moderate protective
effect against the development of bullying behavior (Lereya et al 2013).
9. Encourage family counseling.
Studies suggest that some forms of family
counseling—sessions that address how to improve communication between family
members—may help reform adolescents who bully. After 12 weeks of a program
called "brief strategic family therapy" (BSFT), kids report fewer acts of
bullying and less anger. They may even have changed their patterns of stress
hormone secretion (Nickel et al 2005; Nickel et al 2006).
10. Protect kids from trauma, abuse, and bullying at home.
The more kids get abused or experience other adverse life
events, the more likely they are to develop anti-social personalities.
So not only is protecting kids a matter of morality, it's
also a way to disrupt the cycle of violence.
More on how to prevent bullying
For more evidence-based information on this topic, see the following articles
Andreou E. 2004. Bully/victim problems and their association with
Machiavellianism and self-efficacy in Greek primary school children.
British Journal of Educational Psychology 74: 297-309.
Andrews NCZ, Hanish LD, Santos CE. 2017. Does an aggressor's
target choice matter? Assessing change in the social network prestige of
aggressive youth. Aggress Behav. 43(4):364-374.
C and Pritchard C. 1998. The reduction of program behaviours and school
exclusion in at-risk youth: AN experimental study of school social work
with cost-benefit analysis. Child Fam Soc Work 3: 219-226.
Baldry AC. 2003. Bullying in schools and exposure to domestic violence. Child Abuse Negl. 27(7):713-32.
NS, Herrenkohl TI, Lozano P, Rivara FP, Hill KG, and Hawkins JD. 2006.
Childhood bullying involvement and exposure to intimate partner
violence. Pediatrics. 118(2):e235-42
Bollmer JM, Milich R, Harris
MJ, and Maras MA. 2005. A friend in need: the role of friendship quality
as a protective factor in peer victimization and bullying. J Interpers
Dawes M, Chen CC, Zumbrunn SK, Mehtaji M, Farmer TW, Hamm
JV. 2017. Teacher attunement to peer-nominated aggressors. Aggress Behav.
DeRosier ME. 2004. Building relationships
and combating bullying: effectiveness of a school-based social skills
group intervention. J Clin Child Adolesc Psychol. 33(1):196-201.
DL, Bosworth K and Simon TR. 2000. Examining the social context of
bullying behaviors in early adolescence. Journal of Counseling and
Development 78: 326-333.
Farrell AD, Mehari K, Mays S, Sullivan TN, Le AT. 2015. Participants'
Perceptions of a Violence Prevention Curriculum for Middle School Students: Was
It Relevant and Useful? J Prim Prev. 36(4):227-46.
Garandeau CF, Vartio A, Poskiparta E, Salmivalli C. 2016. School
Bullies' Intention to Change Behavior Following Teacher Interventions: Effects
of Empathy Arousal, Condemning of Bullying, and Blaming of the Perpetrator. Prev
Georgiou SN, Fousiani K, Michaelides M, Stavrinides P. 2013.
Cultural value orientation and authoritarian parenting as parameters of
bullying and victimization at school. Int J Psychol. 48(1):69-78.
Glew GM, Fan MY, Katon W, Rivara FP, and
Kernic MA. 2005. Bullying, psychosocial adjustment, and academic
performance in elementary school. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med.
Houlston C and Smith PK. 2008. The impact
of a peer counselling scheme to address bullying in an all-girl London
secondary school: A short-term longitudinal study. Br J Educ Psychol.
2008 Apr 23. [Epub ahead of print]
Hudley C and Graham S. 1993.
An attributional intervention to reduce peer-directed aggression among
African-American boys. Child Dev. 64(1):124-38.
Jansen DE, Veenstra R, Ormel J, Verhulst FC, Reijneveld SA. 2011. Early
risk factors for being a bully, victim, or bully/victim in late
elementary and early secondary education. The longitudinal TRAILS study. BMC Public Health. 11:440.
Juvonen J, Graham S, Schuster MA. 2003. Bullying among young
adolescents: the strong, the weak, and the troubled. Pediatrics. 112(6 Pt
King KA, Vidourek
RA, Davis B, and McClellan W. 2002. Increasing self-esteem and school
connectedness through through a multidimensional mentoring program. J
Sch Health. 72(7):294-9.
Knowler C and Frederickson N. 2013. Effects of an emotional
literacy intervention for students identified with bullying behaviour. Educ
Psychol (Lond). 33(7):862-883.
Lee S, Kim CJ, Kim DH. 2015. A meta-analysis of the effect
of school-based anti-bullying programs. J Child Health Care. 19(2):136-53.
Loeber R and Stouthamer-Loeber M. 1986.
Family factors as correlates and predictors of juvenile conduct problems
and delinquency. In M Tonry and N Morris (eds): Crime and Justice: An
annual review of research. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
MK, Muehlbacher M, Kaplan P, Krawczyk J, Buschmann W, Kettler C, Rother
N, Egger C, Rother WK, Loew TK, and Nickel C. 2006. Influence of
family therapy on bullying behaviour, cortisol secretion, anger, and
quality of life in bullying male adolescents: A randomized, prospective,
controlled study. Can J Psychiatry. 51(6):355-62.
Luley J, Krawczyk J, Nickel C, Widermann C, Lahmann C, Muehlbacher M,
Forthuber P, Kettler C, Leiberich P, Tritt K, Mitterlehner F, Kaplan P,
Pedrosa Gil F, Rother W, and Loew T. 2006. Bullying girls - changes
after brief strategic family therapy: a randomized, prospective,
controlled trial with one-year follow-up. Psychother Psychosom.
Obermann ML1. 2011. Moral disengagement in self-reported and
peer-nominated school bullying. Aggress Behav.
Ohene SA, Ireland M, McNeely C, and Borowsky
IW. 2006. Parental expectations, physical punishment, and violence among
adolescents who score positive on a psychosocial screening test in
primary care. Pediatrics. 117(2):441-7
Olweus D. 1994. Bullying at
school: basic facts and effects of a school based intervention program.
J Child Psychol Psychiatry 35: 1171-1190.
Olweus D. 1980.
Familial and temperamental determinants of aggressive behavior in
adolescent boys: A causal analysis. Developmental Psychology 16(6):
Orobio de Castro B, Slot NW, Bosch JD, Koops W,
and Veerman JW. 2003. Negative feelings exacerbate hostile attributions
of intent in highly aggressive boys. J Clin Child Adolesc Psychol.
Orobio de Castro B, Veerman JW, Koops W,
Bosch JD, and Monshouwer HJ. 2002. Hostile attribution of intent and
aggressive behavior: a meta-analysis. Child Dev. 73(3):916-34.
Peachey AA, Wenos J, Baller S. 2017. Trait Emotional
Intelligence Related to Bullying in Elementary School Children and to
Victimization in Boys. OTJR (Thorofare N J). 37(4):178-187.
Perren S, Gutzwiller-Helfenfinger E, Malti T, Hymel S. 2012.
Moral reasoning and emotion attributions of adolescent bullies, victims, and
bully-victims. Br J Dev Psychol. 30(Pt 4):511-30.
Pollastri AR, Cardemil EV, O'Donnell EH. 2010. Self-esteem
in pure bullies and bully/victims: a longitudinal analysis. J Interpers
Poon K. 2016. Understanding Risk-taking Behavior in Bullies,
Victims, and Bully Victims Using Cognitive- and Emotion-Focused Approaches.
Front Psychol. 7:1838.
Renati R, Berrone C, Zanetti MA. 2012. Morally disengaged and
unempathic: do cyberbullies fit these definitions? An exploratory study.
Cyberpsychol Behav Soc Netw. 15(8):391-8
P, Klicperova M and Koucka T. 1993. Families of bullies and their
victims: A children’s view. Studia Psychologica 35: 261-266.
Shakoor S, Jaffee SR, Bowes L, Ouellet-Morin I, Andreou P, Happé F, Moffitt TE, and Arseneault L. 2012. A prospective longitudinal study of children's theory of mind and adolescent involvement in bullying. J Child Psychol Psychiatry. 2012 Mar;53(3):254-61.
A and Cicchetti D. 2001. Parental maltreatment and emotion
dysregulation as risk factors for bullying and victimization in middle
childhood. J Clin Child Psychol. 30(3):349-63.
Silva JLD, Oliveira WA, Mello FCM, Andrade LS, Bazon MR,
Silva MAI. 2017. Anti-bullying interventions in schools: a systematic
literature review. Cien Saude Colet. 22(7):2329-2340.
Jensen P, Rönning JA, Niemelä S, Helenius H, Sillanmäki L, Kumpulainen
K, Piha J, Tamminen T, Moilanen I, and Almqvist F. 2007b. What is the
early adulthood outcome of boys who bully or are bullied in childhood?
The Finnish "From a Boy to a Man" study. Pediatrics. 120(2):397-404.
Tippett N and Wolke D. 2015. Aggression between siblings:
Associations with the home environment and peer bullying. Aggress Behav. 41(1):14-24
van Dijk A, Poorthuis AMG, Malti T. 2017. Psychological
processes in young bullies versus bully-victims. Aggress Behav. 43(5):430-439.
van Noorden TH, Haselager GJ, Lansu TA, Cillessen AH,
Bukowski WM. 2016. Attribution of human characteristics and bullying
involvement in childhood: Distinguishing between targets. Aggress Behav. 42(4):394-403.
D and Samara MM. 2004. Bullied by siblings: association with peer
victimisation and behaviour problems in Israeli lower secondary school
children. J Child Psychol Psychiatry. 45(5):1015-29.
Wolke D, Copeland WE, Angold A, Costello EJ. 2013. Impact of
bullying in childhood on adult health, wealth, crime, and social outcomes.
Psychol Sci. 24(10):1958-70.
Yeager DS, Trzesniewski K, Tirri K, Nokelainen P, and Dweck
CS. 2011. Adolescents' implicit theories predict desire for vengeance:
Correlational and experimental evidence. Developmental Psychology: 47,
Yeager DS, Miu AS, Powers J, and Dweck CS. 2013. Implicit
theories of personality and attributions of hostile intent: a meta-analysis, an
experiment, and a longitudinal intervention. Child Dev. 84(5):1651-67.
Portions of this article are derived from an earlier piece, "How to prevent bullying: An evidence based guide."
Content of "How to prevent bullying" last modified 10/17/17
Image credits for "How to prevent bullying":
Image of boys making faces copyright Jani Bryson / istock
image of of masked boys by Cliff Parnell / istock
image of preschoolers by John Wilkinson / flickr
image of teen bully violence by Diego Grez of the Instituto Regional Federico Errázuriz / wikimedia commons