Relational aggression

Relational aggression or alternative aggression[1] is a type of aggression in which harm is caused by damaging someone's relationships or social status.[2][3]

Although it can be used in many contexts and among different age groups, relational aggression among adolescents in particular, has received a lot of attention.

The attention relational aggression has received has been augmented by the help of popular media, including movies like Mean Girls and books like Odd Girl Out by Rachel Simmons (2002), Nesthäkchen and the World War by Else Ury (1916), and Queen Bees and Wannabes by R. Wiseman (2003).

Relational aggression can have various lifelong consequences. Relational aggression has been primarily observed and studied among girls, following pioneering research by psychologist Nicki R. Crick.[3]

Overview

A person's peers become increasingly significant in adolescence and are especially important for adolescents' healthy psychological development. Peers provide many new behavioral models and feedback that are essential for successful identity formation and for the development of one's sense of self.[4][5] Interactions with peers encourage positive practice of autonomy and independent decision-making skills.[6] They are also essential for healthy sexual development including the development of the capacity for intimate friendships and learning appropriate sexual behavior.[7] Peer relationships are also very important for determining how much adolescents value school, how much effort they put into it, and how well they perform in class.[8][9] However, quite frequently adolescents take part in peer relationships that are harmful for their psychological development. Adolescents tend to form various cliques and belong to different crowds based on their activity interests, music and clothing preferences, as well as their cultural or ethnic background.[10] Such groups differ in their sociometric or popularity status, which often create unhealthy, aggression-victimization based dynamics between groups. Different forms of aggression can also be used to control dynamics and sociometric status within a group. Sometimes aggression is directed to an individual rather than to any apparent social group. Primary reasons for victimization include looks and speech; adolescents are also frequently bullied because of a disability, particular ethnicity, or religion.[11][12]

Definition

Relational aggression is defined as a type of aggression that is "intended to harm others through deliberate manipulation of their social standing and relationships".[13] Relational aggression, according to Daniel Olweus[14] is a type of bullying. Bullying in general, is defined as physically or psychologically violent re-occurring and not provoked acts, where the bully and victim have unequal physical strength or psychological power.[15] These key conditions apply to all types of bullying: verbal, physical and relational.[14]

Types

Relational aggression may be either covert or direct, and is distinct from other forms of indirect aggression.[16] It can be proactive (planned and goal-oriented) or reactive (in response to perceived threats, hostility, or anger), and it can be, for instance, peer-directed or romantic.[16] Several studies have indicated substantive differences between proactive and reactive relational aggression. Reactive aggression is associated with a tendency to assume that others' intentions are hostile (hostile attribution bias).[16]

Most studies of relational aggression have involved children or adolescents; the study of relational aggression in adults presents problems.[16] Relational aggression is a common aspect of workplace bullying, and is a characteristic behaviour of psychopaths in the workplace, so it is commonplace amongst adults as well as children.

Manifestations

Manifestations of relational aggression include:[17]

  • Excluding others from social activities.
  • Damaging victim's reputations with others by spreading rumors and gossiping about the victim, or humiliating them in front of others.
  • Withdrawing attention and friendship.

Psychological manipulation and coercion can also be considered as a type of relational aggression.

Most recent research has been focusing on cyberbullying, which is a relatively new yet increasingly popular way of engaging in both verbal and relational aggression due to growing importance of various communication and technology devices in modern societies.[18] Some studies show that internet meanness is more common among girls than boys.[12]

Prevalence

Many studies in the U.S. and Europe show that at least 30% of students report having been bullied in one or another way. Some studies indicate even higher percentages of victimization.[11] Bullying in schools happens in all forms and at various ages, although peer bullying has the highest prevalence in 6th–8th grades.[19] The most common forms of bullying are verbal with relational, or various forms of ostracism, coming in second.[20]

Gender differences
See also: Female intrasexual competition § Competitor derogation

Although it can be used by both genders, relational aggression is more commonly associated with girls.[11] Findings of a study by Rivers and Smith[21] have shown that while verbal aggression occurs with similar frequency in both sexes, direct physical aggression is more common among boys and indirect aggression is more common among girls. In another study by Baldry[22] it was found that boys are more likely to engage in bullying behaviors such as threats, physical harm, rejection, and name-calling, while girls are most likely to use name-calling, teasing, rumors, rejection, and taking personal belongings. Based on these findings, girls do seem to use relational aggression more than boys.

In addition, recent international research shows that both genders tend to use relational aggression, but girls are more aware and distressed by it.[23][24][25] For example, a study by Horn[26] found that girls are more likely to say that it is morally wrong to exclude someone based on their crowd membership.

Some research shows that there are certain implications when boys and girls engage in gender-atypical aggression, as girls who are more physically aggressive or boys who are highly relationally aggressive are more maladjusted than their peers.[27]

Sociometric status

Sociometric status, commonly referred as popularity, is one of the most significant predictors of victimization or bullying as differences in popularity can be associated with differences in social power. It is commonly believed that aggressive adolescents belong to rejected social groups. However, some research shows that they can be popular among their peers.[28][29] Rodkin et al. (2000),[30] for example, describes two types of popular boys: "model" boys, who are "physically and academically competent, friendly and neither shy nor aggressive."[17] Second type is described as "tough" and such adolescents are "aggressive, physically competent, and average or below average in friendliness, academic competence, and shyness."[17] Usually the more popular aggressive adolescents use instrumental aggression and not reactive aggression.[31][32] Instrumental aggression is defined as behavior that is deliberate and planned while reactive aggression is unplanned and impulsive.[17] Relational aggression can be greatly instrumental for maintaining the popularity status of a group among other groups, as well specific relationship and status dynamics inside a group. Ojala and Nesdale (2004)[33] found that both victims and bullies normally come from rejected groups. Bullies chose to bully students, who are members of their social out-groups that are similar to their own in-group as a result of threatened distinctiveness. Hence, the need to maintain a unique social identity and status can be one of the causes to engage in bullying. Using relational aggression to maintain a particular social order inside the group has been mostly observed in girl groups: if some member of the group becomes too popular and this causes imbalance in the group, other members might start rumors about the overly popular girl to diminish her status.[34] Amanda Rose (2004)[35] claims that the main purpose of using relational aggression in first place is to enhance or maintain one's social status. Many skills that are needed to be popular are also essential for being "successful" at employing relational aggression, e.g. ability to "read" people and adjust one's behavior accordingly, etc.[17] The researcher suggests that some aggressive boys are popular because they are also good at using relational aggression, and, therefore, their primary reason for popularity is not their physical but relational aggression.

Different participation roles

Research shows that there are three types of rejected or unpopular adolescents who are very likely to be involved in bullying behavior.[36][37][38][39][40][41] First type includes adolescents who are overly aggressive: they tend to get into fights, get involved in antisocial activities, and are often involved in bullying; second type includes adolescents who are withdrawn or timid and exceedingly shy and inhibited and who are more likely to be victims; third aggressive-withdrawn-type adolescents tend to have trouble controlling their hostility, but they are also very shy and nervous about initiating friendships. The latter are likely to be bully-victims. Other students- bystanders can also choose between several roles: victim-defender, bully-reinforcer or assistant, and outsiders.

Victims

Victims or the unpopular withdrawn children are excessively anxious, lack social skills needed to initiate new contacts or break into a group activity.[42] Their lack of confidence combined with submissiveness make them perfect targets for bullying.[43][44] Some of the most common underlying reasons for bullying include low socioeconomic status, disability, and obesity.[45][46][47] Research shows that in comparison with other adolescents victims often use worse problem solving strategies.[48] They often score less than their bullies and defenders in the tests of moral competence and theory of mind.[49] Moral competence refers to the ability to carefully consider both the consequences and prior beliefs in determining how morally right or wrong one's actions are. Victims seemed to focus primarily on the outcomes and not being as good in integrating the moral beliefs. They have difficulties in social skills, and social problem solving, as well as emotional regulation.[50] And because of their lack of social competence, victims score low on peer acceptance and popularity.[51][52] Victims are often overly sensitive to being rejected, which might originate in their relationships with parents.[53]

Bullies

Bullies, despite being quite morally competent, tend to engage in morally wrong behaviors because of several reasons, including a lack of moral compassion.[49] In general, bullies seem to engage in a kind of cold cognition and have a good theory of mind. They also have an average to good social intelligence.[49] These skills seem to be especially important in order to use relational aggression in an instrumental manner—for achieving specific social goals. As mentioned previously, male and female bullies usually score differently on sociometric measures. Male bullies often fall in the socially rejected category[51][52] while female bullies tend to fall in the controversial category. They can be popular yet not liked.[51]

Hostile attributional bias

Many unpopular aggressive kids seem to engage in hostile attributional bias when analyzing the actions of others: they are more likely to interpret other children's behavior as hostile while it is not,[54][55] which can cause the perpetuation of their aggressive behaviors.

Bully-victims

Bully-victims are people who have both experienced aggression directed towards them and have themselves engaged in bullying. They often choose to be bully assistants or reinforcers.[56] Seeing others victimized can serve as a buffer against some psychological problems, for which these people are at risk (see consequences of victimization below). In comparison to all other groups, bully-victims are the worst off regarding their psychological adjustment and problems. They are least liked among the peers.[11]

Bystanders

Although early research has mostly focused on victims and bullies, currently more and more attention has been given to the roles of other students, or bystanders: bully-reinforcer's and assistants, victim-defenders, and outsiders.[51]

Bully-reinforcers and assistants

Bully-reinforcers and assistants do not normally initiate aggressive actions themselves, but they support, reinforce, and assist the bully. They often have rather large friendship networks when compared to outsiders, victims, and their defenders.[51] These individuals are similar to bullies in regards of their personal characteristics. Female bully-reinforcers and assistants usually score low on social acceptance and high on rejection by their peers while male bully assistants have average scores on both and bully-reinforcers are often quite popular among their peers.[51] The characteristic that is common among all these individuals across both genders is low level of empathy.[56]

Victim-defenders

Victim-defenders are individuals who stand up for the victim. They are usually popular among their peers,[49][51] although occasionally rejected and victimized adolescents take on the defender's role.[51] Defenders like to befriend other defenders and usually belong to the smallest social network of all other previously mentioned groups.[51] Defenders have both advanced moral competence and high level of compassion. They also score high on the theory of mind tests. They are usually very morally engaged, have a high sense of responsibility, and self-efficacy.[49] They are also good at emotion regulation.[57]

Outsiders

Outsiders are adolescents who like to stay away from the conflict situations, participate in spreading rumors, or actively support either side. They usually befriend other outsiders. Both male and female outsiders usually score below average on both social acceptance and rejection by their peers.[51] In general, the best predictor for whether an adolescent will choose to be a defender or an outsider in a particular situation is their relationship to the victim or bully.[56] Occasionally, adolescents will feel more comfortable to intervene if they are friends of the offender.[58] However, in general they will take the side of the bully or victim based on who they know better.[59] Bullies are more likely to be friends of other bullies, as well as their reinforcers, and assistants, while victims befriend other victims.

Consequences of victimization
Main article: Victimization

There are serious negative consequences associated with being involved in any aggressive behaviors. And while problems with peers might be a result of one's poor social skills and maladjustment, difficulty making friends, and regular experience of aggression can also be a cause of many short and long term negative consequences on one's mental health and academic and professional achievements.[60][61][62] Experience of relational aggression, peer rejection, and unpopularity are shown to be linked to various problems in adolescence, which are listed below:[63][64][65][66]

  • depression;
  • behavior problems;
  • poor social skills;
  • lack of close peer relationships;
  • difficulties in academic performance;
  • low school engagement;
  • undermined feelings of competence;
  • low self-esteem;
  • occasionally distress due to victimization can also result in physical symptoms such as wetting, abdominal pain, and headaches.[67]

Some negative effects persist into adulthood. In a longitudinal study, Dan Olweus (2003)[43] found that young adults, who were victims of bullying in adolescence, had more symptoms of depression and lower self-esteem than did their non-victimized peers. Victims are also much more likely to engage in heavy smoking later in life.[68] Decreased academic engagement due to victimization can have some long term consequences as victim's lower educational attainment in adulthood leads to lower earnings.[69]

Differences in consequences of victimization for victims and bully-victims

There are differences in consequences among the children who are rejected and aggressive, also known as bully-victims, and children who are rejected and withdrawn, also referred to as simply victims. Aggressive individuals often have conduct problems and are involved in antisocial activity.[38][70][71][72][73] Withdrawn children feel exceedingly lonely, at risk of low self-esteem, depression, and diminished social competence.[72][74] Adolescents, who are both aggressive and withdrawn, are at greatest risk for various mental and behavioral problems.[41][75][76]

Suicide ideation and attempts

Although victims respond to bullying in various ways, some of the most common ways include avoidance or escape behaviors, such as not going to school and running away from home. However, in some extreme cases, suicide attempts might occur.[77] Compared to non-victims, victims exhibit increased levels of suicidal ideation.[12][78][79] and are more likely to have attempted suicide.[12][80][81][82] Researcher Y.S. Kim (2005)[81] found that there are some gender differences as victimized female but not male students were at significantly greater risk for suicidal ideation. Further research has shown that increased risk for suicidal ideation and attempts depend on a specific interaction between gender, frequency, and type of aggression. Relational or indirect aggression was found to be associated with depression and suicidal ideation among both genders.[83] According to Brustein and Klomek (2007),[12] victimization at any frequency increased the risk of depression, ideation, and attempts among girls, while only frequent victimization increased the risk of depression and ideation among males; yet, Katliala-Heino et al. (1999)[84] found that severe ideation was associated with frequent victimization only among girls.

Environmental buffers and prevention programs

Some adolescents are more resilient to victimization due to their personal characteristics, but there are some environmental factors such as having a best friend or great family support can decrease the risk for many negative consequences associated with victimization.[85] In addition, research shows that support from teachers can be a significant environmental factor for higher academic achievement and school engagement. It can also increase general well-being in the classroom.[86] Teacher attitudes towards bullying were found to moderate the extent to which victims internalize and feel distressed and express it by avoiding school and similar behavior.[87] Close teacher-student relationship moderates perceived safety in the classroom, and higher perceived safety is directly linked to better classroom concentration and improved coping strategies.[88] Therefore, supportive friends, family, and teachers can be great buffers for victimized students against all negative effects of victimization. Witnessing the harassment of others can also reduce some harmful effects of being victimized:[89] victims-only feel more humiliated and angry than victims-witnesses on the same day. Being singled out and picked on feels worse than being one of many victimized students. This explains why in ethnically diverse schools victimized students experience worse psychological outcomes when their ethnic group is in majority, because then they are more likely to attribute it to their personal shortcomings and not to their group membership.[90]

Prevention programs

There are many prevention programs, which have been designed to improve social skills of the unpopular and victimized adolescents. Prevention programs usually focus on one of the three strategies:

  1. teaching social skills like self-expression, leadership, and questioning of others about themselves;[91][92]
  2. have unpopular adolescents participate in group activities together with the popular adolescents under supervision of psychologists;
  3. some programs focus on training on how to combine and use one's cognitive and behavioral abilities, including social problem solving.[93][94]

Different types of programs have shown to have somewhat different effects: the first type seems to best improve adolescent's ability to get along with others while the second type has shown to improve adolescents' self-conceptions and their acceptance by others.[95] One of the examples of the programs using the third approach is PATHS (Promoting Alternative Thinking Strategies) teaches skills needed for successfully analyzing social situations, controlling one's negative emotions, and making more rational social decisions. It has been shown to successfully reduce behavioral problems among elementary school children.[96] However, it is difficult to prevent relational aggression from happening as often adolescents who use it are seen to be more popular among their peers.[35]

See also

References
  1. Simmons, Rachel (2002). Odd Girl Out: The Hidden Culture of Aggression in Girls. New York, New York: Mariner Books. pp. 8–9. ISBN 0547520190. Retrieved 2016-11-02.
  2. McGrath, Mary Zabolio (2006). School Bullying: Tools for Avoiding Harm and Liability. Thousand Oaks, Calif: Corwin Press. p. 21. ISBN 1-4129-1571-6. Retrieved 2008-09-04.
  3. Marion K. Underwood (2003). Social Aggression among Girls (Guilford Series On Social And Emotional Development) . New York: The Guilford Press. ISBN 1-57230-865-6. Retrieved 2008-09-04
  4. Brown, B. B.; Clasen, D. R.; Eicher, S. A. (1986). "An adolescent's peers also have a large impact on peer pressure, peer conformity, dispositions, and self-reported behavior". Developmental Psychology. 22 (4): 521–530. doi:10.1037/0012-1649.22.4.521.
  5. Brown, B. (2004) Adolescents' relationships with peers. In R. Lerner and L. Steinberg (Eds.), Handbook of adolescent psychology. New York: Wiley.
  6. Hill, J. & Holmbeck, G. (1986) Attachment and autonomy during adolescence. In G. Whitehurst (Ed.), Annals of child development. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press
  7. Sullivan, H. S. (1953a) The interpersonal theory of psychiatry. New York: Norton.
  8. Epstein, J. (1983b) The influence of friends on achievement and affective outcomes. In J. Epstein & N. Karweit (Eds.), Friends in school. New York: Academic Press.
  9. Ryan, A.M. (2001). "The peer group as a context for the development of young adolescent motivation and achievement". Child Development. 72 (4): 1135–1150. doi:10.1111/1467-8624.00338. PMID 11480938.
  10. Brown, B., & Mounts, N. (1989, April). Peer groups structures in single versus multiethnic high schools. Paper presented at the biennial meetings of the Society for Research on Adolescence, San Diego
  11. Nansel, Tonja R.; et al. (2001). "Bullying behaviors among US youth: Prevalence and association with psychosocial adjustment". JAMA. 285 (16): 2094–2100. doi:10.1001/jama.285.16.2094. PMC 2435211. PMID 11311098.
  12. Klomek, A. B.; Marrocco, F.; Kleinman, M.; Schonfeld, I. S.; Gould, M. S. (2007). "Bullying, Depression, and Suicidality in Adolescents". Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry. 46 (1): 40–49. doi:10.1097/01.chi.0000242237.84925.18. PMID 17195728.
  13. Steinberg, Laurence D.; Reyome, Nancy Dodge; Bjornsen, Christopher A. (2001). Study Guide for Use with Adolescence. McGraw-Hill Higher Education. p. 100. ISBN 9780072414615. relational aggression – intended to harm others through deliberate manipulation of their social standing and relationships
  14. Olweus, D. (1991). Bully/victim problems among schoolchildren: Basic facts and effects of a school based intervention program. In D. J. Pepler & K. H. Rubin (Eds.), The development and treatment of childhood aggression (pp. 441-448). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum
  15. Olweus, D. (1999). Sweden. In P. K. Smith, Y. Morita, J. Junger-Tas, D. Olweus, R. Catalano, & P.Slee (Eds.), The nature of school bullying: A cross-national perspective (pp. 7-27). New York:Routledge.
  16. Murray-Close, Diana; Ostrov, Jamie M.; Nelson, David A.; Crick, Nicki R.; Coccaro, Emil F. (2009). "Proactive, reactive, and romantic relational aggression in adulthood: Measurement, predictive validity, gender differences, and association with Intermittent Explosive Disorder". Journal of Psychiatric Research. 44 (6): 393–404. doi:10.1016/j.jpsychires.2009.09.005. PMC 2849926. PMID 19822329.
  17. Steinberg, L. (2008). Adolescence, 8th ed. 101. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill
  18. http://www.cyberbullying.org/
  19. Jankauskiene, R.; Kardelis, K.; Sukys, S.; Kardeliene, L. (2008). "Associations between school bullying and psychosocial factors". Social Behavior and Personality. 36 (2): 145–162. doi:10.2224/sbp.2008.36.2.145.
  20. Valeckiene, D. (2005). Priekabiavimo kaip vienos dazniausiai naudojamos agresijos formos mokykloje raiSkos analiz (The analysis of bullying as one of the most prevalent form of aggression at schools). Sveikatos ir socialiniu mokslu taikomieji tyrimai: sandura ir saveika, 1, 49-65
  21. Rivers, I; Smith, PK (1994). "Types of bullying behaviour and their correlates". Aggressive Behavior. 20 (5): 359–368. doi:10.1002/1098-2337(1994)20:5<359::aid-ab2480200503>3.0.co;2-j.
  22. Baldry, AC (1998). "Bullying among Italian middle school students". Sch Psychol Int. 19 (4): 361–374. doi:10.1177/0143034398194007. S2CID 144994143.
  23. French, D. C.; Jansen, E. A.; Pidada, S. (2002). "United States and Indonesian children's and adolescents' reports of relational aggression by disliked peers". Child Development. 73 (4): 1143–1150. doi:10.1111/1467-8624.00463. PMID 12146739.
  24. Galen, B. R.; Underwood, M. K. (1997). "A developmental investigation of social aggression among children". Developmental Psychology. 33 (4): 589–600. doi:10.1037/0012-1649.33.4.589. PMID 9232374.
  25. Paquette, J. A.; Underwood, M. K. (1999). "Gender differences in young adolescents' experiences of peer victimization: Social and physical aggression". Merrill-Palmer Quarterly: Journal of Developmental Psychology. 45 (2): 242–266.
  26. Horn, S.S. (2003). "Adolescents' reasoning about exclusion from social groups". Developmental Psychology. 39 (1): 71–84. doi:10.1037/0012-1649.39.1.71. PMID 12518810.
  27. Crick, Nicki R (1997). "Engagement in gender normative versus nonnormative forms of aggression: Links to social–psychological adjustment". Developmental Psychology. 33 (4): 610–617. doi:10.1037/0012-1649.33.4.610. PMID 9232376.
  28. Bowker, A.; Bukowski, W. M.; Hymel, S.; Sippola, L. K. (2000). "Coping with daily hassles in the peer group during early adolescence: Variations as a function of peer experience". Journal of Research on Adolescence. 10 (2): 211–243. doi:10.1207/SJRA1002_5.
  29. Bukowski, W. M.; Sippola, L. K.; Newcomb, A. F. (2000). "Variations in patterns of attraction of same- and other-sex peers during early adolescence". Developmental Psychology. 36 (2): 147–154. doi:10.1037/0012-1649.36.2.147.
  30. Rodkin, P. C.; Farmer, T. W.; Pearl, R.; Van Acker, R. (2000). "Heterogeneity of popular boys: Antisocial and prosocial configurations". Developmental Psychology. 36 (1): 14–24. doi:10.1037/0012-1649.36.1.14. PMID 10645741.
  31. Little, T. D.; Brauner, J.; Jones, S. M.; Nock, M. K.; Hawley, P. H. (2003). "Rethinking aggression: A typological examination of the functions of aggression. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly". Journal of Developmental Psychology. 49 (3): 343–369. doi:10.1353/mpq.2003.0014. S2CID 3907321.
  32. Prinstein, M. J.; Cillessen, A. H. N. (2003). "Forms and functions of adolescent peer aggression associated with high levels of peer status". Merrill-Palmer Quarterly. 49 (3): 310–342. doi:10.1353/mpq.2003.0015. S2CID 13690341.
  33. Ojala, K.; Nesdale, D. (2004). "Bullying and social identity: The effects of group norms and distinctiveness threat on attitudes towards bullying". British Journal of Developmental Psychology. 22 (1): 19–35. doi:10.1348/026151004772901096.
  34. Merten, D (1997). "The meaning of meanness: Popularity, competition, and conflict among junior high school girls". Sociology of Education. 70 (3): 175–191. doi:10.2307/2673207. JSTOR 2673207.
  35. Rose, A. J.; Swenson, L. P.; Waller, E. M. (2004). "Overt and Relational Aggression and Perceived Popularity: Developmental Differences in Concurrent and Prospective Relations". Developmental Psychology. 40 (3): 378–387. doi:10.1037/0012-1649.40.3.378. PMID 15122964. S2CID 5324343.
  36. Bierman, K. L.; Wargo, J. B. (1995). "Predicting the longitudinal course associated with aggressive-rejected, aggressive (nonrejected), and rejected (nonaggressive) status". Development and Psychopathology. 7 (4): 669–682. doi:10.1017/S0954579400006775.
  37. Coie, J.; Terry, R.; Lenox, K.; Lochman, J.; Hyman, C. (1998). ""Childhood peer rejection and aggression as predictors of stable patterns of adolescent disorder": Erratum". Development and Psychopathology. 10 (3): 587–588. doi:10.1017/S095457949800176X.
  38. French, D. C.; Conrad, J.; Turner, T. M. (1995). "Adjustment of antisocial and nonantisocial rejected adolescents". Development and Psychopathology. 7 (4): 857–874. doi:10.1017/S095457940000688X.
  39. Hatzichristou, C.; Hopf, D. (1996). "A multiperspective comparison of peer sociometric status groups in childhood and adolescence". Child Development. 67 (3): 1085–1102. doi:10.2307/1131881. JSTOR 1131881. PMID 8706511.
  40. Hymel, S.; Bowker, A.; Woody, E. (1993). "Aggressive versus withdrawn unpopular children: Variations in peer and self-perceptions in multiple domains". Child Development. 64 (3): 879–896. doi:10.2307/1131224. JSTOR 1131224. PMID 8339701.
  41. Parkhurst, J. T.; Asher, S. R. (1992). "Peer rejection in middle school: Subgroup differences in behavior, loneliness, and interpersonal concerns". Developmental Psychology. 28 (2): 231–241. doi:10.1037/0012-1649.28.2.231.
  42. Rubin, K., LeMare, L., & Lollis, S. (1990). Social withdrawal in childhood: Developmental pathways to peer rejection. In S. Asher & J. Coie (Eds.), Peer rejection in childhood, pp. 217-249. New York: Cambridge University Press.
  43. Olweus, D., (2003) Victimization by peers: Antecedents and long-term outcomes. In K. Rubin & J. Asendorf (Eds.), Social withdrawal, inhibition, and shyness in childhood. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum
  44. Salmivalli, C; Lappalainen, M; Lagerspetz, KM (1998). "Stability and change of behavior in connection with bullying in schools". Aggressive Behavior. 24: 205–218. doi:10.1002/(sici)1098-2337(1998)24:3<205::aid-ab5>3.0.co;2-j.
  45. Griffiths, L. J.; Wolke, D.; Page, A. S.; Horwood, J. P.; Study Team, Alspac (2006). "Obesity and bullying: Different effects for boys and girls". Archives of Disease in Childhood. 91 (2): 121–125. doi:10.1136/adc.2005.072314. PMC 2082670. PMID 16174642.
  46. Janssen, I.; Craig, W. M.; Boyce, W. F.; Pickett, W. (2004). "Associations between overweight and obesity with bullying behaviors in school-aged children". Pediatrics. 113 (5): 1187–1194. doi:10.1542/peds.113.5.1187. PMID 15121928. S2CID 2462267.
  47. Singer, E (2005). "The strategies adopted by Dutch children with dyslexia to maintain their self-esteem when teased at school". Journal of Learning Disabilities. 38 (5): 411–423. doi:10.1177/00222194050380050401. PMID 16329442. S2CID 27315421.
  48. Cassidy, T (2009). "Bullying and victimisation in school children: the role of social identity, problem-solving style, and family and school context". Social Psychology of Education. 12 (1): 63–76. doi:10.1007/s11218-008-9066-y. S2CID 145768054.
  49. Gini, G.; Pozzoli, T.; Hauser, M. (2011). "Bullies have enhanced moral competence to judge relative to victims, but lack moral compassion". Personality and Individual Differences. 50 (5): 603–608. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2010.12.002.
  50. Champion, K.; Vernberg, E.; Shipman, K. (2003). "Nonbullying victims of bullies: Aggression, social skills, and friendship characteristics". Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology. 24 (5): 535–551. doi:10.1016/j.appdev.2003.08.003.
  51. Salmivalli, C.; Lagerspetz, K.; Bjorkqvist, K.; Osterman, K.; et al. (1996). "Bullying as a group process: Participant roles and their relations to social status within the group". Aggressive Behavior. 22 (1): 1–15. doi:10.1002/(SICI)1098-2337(1996)22:1<1::AID-AB1>3.0.CO;2-T.
  52. Boulton, M. J.; Smith, P. K. (1994). "Bully/victim problems in middle-school children: Stability, self-perceived competence, peer perceptions and peer acceptance". British Journal of Developmental Psychology. 12 (3): 315–329. doi:10.1111/j.2044-835x.1994.tb00637.x.
  53. Downey, G.; Lebolt, A.; Rincon, C.; Freitas, A. L. (1998). "Rejection sensitivity and children's interpersonal difficulties". Child Development. 69 (4): 1074–1091. doi:10.2307/1132363. JSTOR 1132363. PMID 9768487.
  54. Crick, N. R.; Dodge, K. A. (1994). "A review and reformulation of social information-processing mechanisms in children's social adjustment". Psychological Bulletin. 115 (1): 74–101. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.115.1.74.
  55. Dodge, K. A.; Coie, J. D. (1987). "Social-information-processing factors in reactive and proactive aggression in children's peer groups". Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 53 (6): 1146–1158. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.53.6.1146. PMID 3694454.
  56. Oh, I.; Hazler, R. J. (2009). "Contributions of personal and situational factors to bystanders' reactions to school bullying". School Psychology International. 30 (3): 291–310. doi:10.1177/0143034309106499. S2CID 145299446.
  57. Maede, 2004
  58. Tisak, M. S.; Tisak, J. (1996). "Expectations and judgments regarding bystanders' and victims' responses to peer aggression among early adolescents". Journal of Adolescence. 19 (4): 383–392. doi:10.1006/jado.1996.0036. PMID 9245292.
  59. Chaux, E (2005). "Role of Third Parties in Conflicts Among Colombian Children and Early Adolescents". Aggressive Behavior. 31 (1): 40–55. doi:10.1002/ab.20031.
  60. Bagwell, C.; Newcomb, A.; Bukowski, W. (1998). "Preadolescent friendship and peer rejection as predictors of adult adjustment". Child Development. 69 (1): 140–153. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8624.1998.tb06139.x. PMID 9499563.
  61. Brendgen, M.; Vitaro, F.; Bukowski, W. M. (2000). "Deviant friends and early adolescents' emotional and behavioral adjustment". Journal of Research on Adolescence. 10 (2): 173–189. doi:10.1207/SJRA1002_3.
  62. Buhrmester, D., &Yin, J., (1997) A longitudinal study of friends' influence on adolescent's adjustment. Paper presented at biennial meetings of Society for Research in Child Development, Washington, DC.
  63. Morison, P.; Masten, A. S. (1991). "Peer reputation in middle childhood as a predictor of adaptation in adolescence: A seven-year follow-up". Child Development. 62 (5): 991–1007. doi:10.2307/1131148. JSTOR 1131148. PMID 1756670.
  64. Parker, J. G.; Asher, S. R. (1987). "Peer relations and later personal adjustment: Are low-accepted children at risk?". Psychological Bulletin. 102 (3): 357–389. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.102.3.357. PMID 3317467. S2CID 36327753.
  65. Wentzel, K (2003). "Sociometric status and adjustment in middle school: A longitudinal study". Journal of Early Adolescence. 23 (1): 5–28. doi:10.1177/0272431602239128. S2CID 145493402.
  66. Patterson, G. R.; Stoolmiller, M. (1991). "Replications of a dual failure model for boys' depressed mood". Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology. 59 (4): 491–498. doi:10.1037/0022-006X.59.4.491. PMID 1918551.
  67. Twemlow, S. W.; Fonagy, P.; Sacco, F. C.; Brethour, J. R. (2006). "Teachers Who Bully Students: A Hidden Trauma" (PDF). International Journal of Social Psychiatry. 52 (3): 187–198. doi:10.1177/0020764006067234. PMID 16875191. S2CID 9158504.
  68. Niemelä, S.; Brunstein-Klomek, A.; Sillanmäki, L.; Helenius, H.; Piha, J.; Kumpulainen, K.; Sourander, A. (2011). "Childhood bullying behaviors at age eight and substance use at age 18 among males. A nationwide prospective study". Addictive Behaviors. 36 (3): 256–260. doi:10.1016/j.addbeh.2010.10.012. PMID 21146319.
  69. Macmillan, R.; Hagan, J. (2004). "Violence in the transition to adulthood: Adolescent victimization, education, and socioeconomic attainment in later life". Journal of Research on Adolescence. 14 (2): 127–158. doi:10.1111/j.1532-7795.2004.01402001.x.
  70. Feldman, S. S.; Rosenthal, D. R.; Brown, N. L.; Canning, R. D. (1995). "Predicting sexual experience in adolescent boys from peer rejection and acceptance during childhood". Journal of Research on Adolescence. 5 (4): 387–411. doi:10.1207/s15327795jra0504_1.
  71. Laird, R. D.; Pettit, G. S.; Dodge, K. A.; Bates, J. E. (2005). "Peer relationship antecedents of delinquent behavior in late adolescence: Is there evidence of demographic group differences in developmental processes?". Development and Psychopathology. 17 (1): 127–144. doi:10.1017/S0954579405050078. PMC 2747367. PMID 15971763.
  72. Rubin, K. H.; Chen, X.; McDougall, P.; Bowker, A.; et al. (1995). "The Waterloo Longitudinal Project: Predicting internalizing and externalizing problems in adolescence". Development and Psychopathology. 7 (4): 751–764. doi:10.1017/S0954579400006829.
  73. Underwood, M. K.; Kupersmidt, J. B.; Coie, J. D. (1996). "Childhood peer sociometric status and aggression as predictors of adolescent childbearing". Journal of Research on Adolescence. 6 (2): 201–223.
  74. Hoza, B.; Molina, B. S. G.; Bukowski, W. M.; Sippola, L. K.; et al. (1995). "Peer variables as predictors of later childhood adjustment". Development and Psychopathology. 7 (4): 787–802. doi:10.1017/S0954579400006842.
  75. Morison, P.; Masten, A. S. (1991). "Peer reputation in middle childhood as a predictor of adaptation in adolescence: A seven-year follow-up". Child Development. 62 (5): 991–1007. doi:10.2307/1131148. JSTOR 1131148. PMID 1756670.
  76. Rubin, K., LeMare, L., & Lollis, S. (1990). Social withdrawal in childhood: Developmental pathways to peer rejection. In S. Asher & J. Coie (Eds.), Peer rejection in childhood, pp. 217-249. New York: Cambridge University Press.
  77. Batsche, G. M.; Knoff, H. M. (1994). "Bullies and their victims: Understanding a pervasive problem in the schools". School Psychology Review. 23 (2): 165–174. doi:10.1080/02796015.1994.12085704.
  78. Holt, M. K.; Finkelhor, D.; Kantor, G. K. (2007). "Multiple victimization experiences of urban elementary school students: Associations with psychosocial functioning and academic performance". Child Abuse & Neglect. 31 (5): 503–515. doi:10.1016/j.chiabu.2006.12.006. PMID 17537507.
  79. Rigby, K.; Slee, P. (1999). "Suicidal ideation among adolescent school children, involvement in bully–victim problems, and perceived social support". Suicide and Life-Threatening Behavior. 29 (2): 119–130. PMID 10407965.
  80. Eisenberg, M. E., Neumark-Sztainer, D., & Story, M. (2003). Associations of weight-based teasing and emotional well-being among adolescents. Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine, Î51, 733-738.
  81. Kim, Y. S., Koh, Y. J., & Leventhal, B. (2005). School bullying and suicidal risk in Korean middle school students. Pediatrics, IIS, .Í57-363.
  82. Mills, C; Guerin, S.; Lynch, E.; Daly, L.; Eitzpatrick, C. (2004). "The relationship between bullying, depression and suicidal thoughts/behaviour in Irish adolescents". Irish Journal of Psychological Medicine. 21 (4): 112–116. doi:10.1017/s0790966700008521. PMID 30308740.
  83. van der Wal, M. F.; de Wit, C. A.; Hirasing, R. A. (2003). "Psychosocial health among young victims and offenders of direct and indirect bullying". Pediatrics. 111 (6): 1312–1317. doi:10.1542/peds.111.6.1312. hdl:2066/63227. PMID 12777546.
  84. Kaltiala-Heino, R; Rimpela, M; Marttunen, M; Rimpela, A; Rantanen, P (1999). "Bullying, depression, and suicidal ideation in Finnish adolescents: school survey". BMJ. 319 (7206): 348–351. doi:10.1136/bmj.319.7206.348. PMC 28187. PMID 10435954.
  85. Hodges, E. V. E.; Boivin, M.; Vitaro, F.; Bukowski, W. M. (1999). "The power of friendship: Protection against an escalating cycle of peer victimization". Developmental Psychology. 35 (1): 94–101. doi:10.1037/0012-1649.35.1.94. PMID 9923467. S2CID 31909937.
  86. Brewster, A. B.; Bowen, G. L. (2004). "Teacher Support and the School Engagement of Latino Middle and High School Students at Risk of School Failure". Child & Adolescent Social Work Journal. 21 (1): 47–67. doi:10.1023/b:casw.0000012348.83939.6b. S2CID 144622726.
  87. Flaspohler, P. D.; Elfstrom, J. L.; Vanderzee, K. L.; Sink, H. E.; Birchmeier, Z. (2009). "Stand by me: The effects of peer and teacher support in mitigating the impact of bullying on quality of life". Psychology in the Schools. 46 (7): 636–649. doi:10.1002/pits.20404.
  88. Boulton, M. J.; Duke, E.; Holman, G.; Laxton, E.; Nicholas, B.; Spells, R.; Woodmansey, H. (2009). "Associations between being bullied, perceptions of safety in classroom and playground, and relationship with teacher among primary school pupils". Educational Studies. 35 (3): 255–267. doi:10.1080/03055690802648580. S2CID 144466590.
  89. Nishina, A.; Juvonen, J. (2005). "Daily Reports of Witnessing and Experiencing Peer Harassment in Middle School". Child Development. 76 (2): 435–450. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8624.2005.00855.x. PMID 15784092.
  90. Graham, S.; Bellmore, A.; Nishina, A.; Juvonen, J. (2009). ""It must be me": Ethnic context and attributions for peer victimization". Journal of Youth and Adolescence. 38 (4): 487–499. doi:10.1007/s10964-008-9386-4. PMID 19636723.
  91. Kelley, J., & de Armaa, A. (1989). Social relationships in adolescence: Skill development and training. In J. Worell & F. Danner (Eds.), The adolescent as decision-maker. San Diego: Academic Press.
  92. Repinski, D., & Leffert, N. (1994, February). Adolescents' relations with friends: The effects of a psychoeducational intervention. Paper presented in the biennial meetings of the Society for Research on Adolescence, San Diego.
  93. Kusche, C. A. & Greenberg, M. T. (1994, 2011, 2012). The PATHS Curriculum. South Deerfield, MA: Channing-Bete Co.
  94. Weissberg, R. P.; Caplan, M.; Harwood, R. L. (1991). "Promoting competent young people in competence-enhancing environments: A systems-based perspective on primary prevention". Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology. 59 (6): 830–841. doi:10.1037/0022-006X.59.6.830. PMID 1774368.
  95. Bierman, K. L.; Furman, W. (1984). "The effects of social skills training and peer involvement on the social adjustment of pre-adolescents". Child Development. 55 (1): 151–162. doi:10.2307/1129841. JSTOR 1129841. PMID 6705617.
  96. Conduct Problems, Prevention Research Group (1999). "Initial impact of the Fast Track Prevention Trial for Conduct Problems, II: Classroom effects". Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology. 67 (5): 648–657. doi:10.1037/0022-006X.67.5.648. PMC 2761630. PMID 10535231.

Further reading

Books
  • Kupkovits, Jamie, Relational Aggression in Girls (2008)
  • Randall, Kaye & Bowen, Allyson A., Mean Girls: 101​1⁄2 Creative Strategies for Working With Relational Aggression (2007)

Academic articles
  • Carpenter, E.M.; Nangle, D.W. (2006). "Caught between stages: Relational aggression emerging as a developmental advance in at-risk preschoolers". Journal of Research in Childhood Education. 21 (2): 177–188. doi:10.1080/02568540609594587. S2CID 144317085.
  • Casas, J.F.; Weigel, S.M.; Crick, N.R.; Ostrov, J.M.; Woods, K.E.; Jansen Yeh, E.A.; Huddleston-Casas, C.A. (2006). "Early parenting and children's relational and physical aggression in the preschool and home contexts". Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology. 27 (3): 209–2227. doi:10.1016/j.appdev.2006.02.003.
  • Coyne, S.; Archer, J.; Eslea, M. (2006). "'We're not friends anymore! Unless...': The frequency and harmfulness of indirect, relational, and social aggression". Aggressive Behavior. 32: 294–307. doi:10.1002/ab.20126.
  • Crain, M.M.; Finch, C.L.; Foster, S.L. (2005). "The Relevance of the Social Information Processing Model for Understanding Relational Aggression in Girls". Merrill-Palmer Quarterly. 51 (2): 213–242. doi:10.1353/mpq.2005.0010. S2CID 143726437.
  • Crick, N.R.; Grotpeter, J.K. (1995). "Relational aggression, gender, and social-psychological adjustment". Child Development. 66 (3): 710–722. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8624.1995.tb00900.x. PMID 7789197.
  • Crick, N.R. (1996). "The role of overt aggression, relational aggression, and prosocial behavior in the prediction of children's future social adjustment". Child Development. 67 (5): 2317–2327. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8624.1996.tb01859.x. PMID 9022243.
  • Crick, N.R.; Casas, J.F.; Mosher, M. (1997). "Relational and overt aggression in preschool". Developmental Psychology. 33 (4): 579–588. doi:10.1037/0012-1649.33.4.579. PMID 9232373.
  • Crick, N.R.; Ostrov, J.M.; Werner, N.E. (2006). "A longitudinal study of relational aggression, physical aggression and children's social-psychological adjustment". Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology. 34 (2): 131–142. doi:10.1007/s10802-005-9009-4. PMID 16741683. S2CID 7792122.
  • Crick, N.R.; Werner, N.E. (1998). "Response decision processes in relational and overt aggression". Child Development. 69 (6): 1630–1639. doi:10.2307/1132136. JSTOR 1132136. PMID 9914643.
  • Grotpeter, J.K.; Crick, N.R. (1996). "Relational aggression, overt aggression, and friendship". Child Development. 67 (5): 2328–2338. doi:10.2307/1131626. JSTOR 1131626. PMID 9022244.
  • Ostrov, N.R. Stauffacher; Crick, J.M. (2006). "Relational aggression in sibling and peer relationships during early childhood". Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology.
  • Stauffacher, K. & DeHart, G.B. "Crossing social contexts: Relational aggression between siblings and friends during early and middle childhood." Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology
  • Tomada, G.; Schneider, B.H. (1997). "Relational aggression, gender, and peer acceptance: Invariance across culture, stability over time, and concordance among informants". Developmental Psychology. 33 (4): 601–609. doi:10.1037/0012-1649.33.4.601. PMID 9232375.
This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike. Additional terms may apply for the media files.