Bullying and Marsh Et Al Essay

Everyday thousand of teens wake up panicked of attending school day. About one in seven schools, a child is either a tough or a victim of swashing. Bullying is simply defined as a type of warring behaviour that involves intent to cause harm and a power imbalance (Olweus, 1999). Bullying fuck run anywhere from mental, physical (involving kicking and punching), verbal or cyber abuse. Bullying among children can be considered as a form of abuse (0-). It has been get beforehand that bullying is a division of aggressive behavior and has been seed along characterized as repetitive and an inability on behalf of the victim to defend him or herself (Farrington, 1993, cited it Sapouna, 2008). We learn from Sapouna (2008) that bullying can take the form of verbal (name c every last(predicate)ing), physical (hitting, kicking) or relational (deliberate exclusion from a group, spreading of catty rumors). After extensive research in Scandinavia, Olweus(1993, cited in Kumpulainen et a l.,1998) proposed that bullying can be carried out by one or more adolespennys and usually occurs on repeated occasions, and to some extent, it occurs in all schools. belatedly bullying amongst young people has gain nonoriety in the press due to the extreme results it has had on certain young individuals. An example of this is Sian Yates, a 13 year old girl who committed self-destruction after repeated bullying (Daily Mail, 2007). Despite the press attention given to these cases, the extreme consequence of suicide does not occur in the majority of cases. Victims can suffer from a range of harmful personal effects such as humiliation, anxiety, depression, difficulty with interpersonal relationships, and emotional instability. This lead to the finding of Kumpulainen et al., (1998) that bullying is a greenness phenomenon among children who are psychologically disturbed. The writer went on to say that there are higher rates of psychological distress among both bullies and victims tha n those not involve. However, the literature is consistent in noting that the bullied victims are the most troubled of the bully, victim, bully victim triad (Juvonen et al., 2003 Ma, 2001 Pellegrini, 2002 Pellegrini et al., 1999Salmivalli & Nieminen, 2002, cited in Cunningham, 2007).Should these lead agencies to focus more on protecting the victim? any(prenominal) schools have decided that the way forward is to have zero tolerance policies. This may include all students who bully. However, if certain researchers numbers are correct it could mean excluding from school, forty percent of the school aged population. Given the widespread nature of the problem can zero tolerance really mean, zilch tolerance? We learn from the NHS website teens for health (2008) that anyone can be singled out by bullies. The NSPCC found that 31 per cent of children had been bullied at some point (Teens for health, 2008). This being the case, can anyone be bullied? Black and Jackson (2007) have put forwar d that there lies and an imbalance of power between the parties involved in bullying. The bully is stronger through accessible status, physical prowess, age, cognitive abilities or skill. Is this imbalance of power the same across the genders?There is an extensive dust of literature that suggests that boys are more likely than girls to be bullies as well as victims (Nansel et al.2001 Boulton & Smith, 1994 Boulton & Underwood, 1992, cited in Marsh, Parada, Craven, &Finger, 2004). This doesnt mean girls cannot be bullies. Stephenson and Smith (1989, cited in Kumpulainen et al., 1998) found that girls as well as boys fitted into the five main groups of people involved in bullying. These are dominating bullies, anxious bullies, bully-victims, classical victims, and provocative victims. These traits were overly found by Sourander,Helstel, Helenius and Piha (2000) to have clinical implications. Sourander et al., (2000) noted that Bullying is especially associated with aggressive and a nti brotherly behavior while victimization is associated with internalizing problems.Whitney and Smith, (1989, cited in Kumpulainen et al., 1998) found bullies to be more prone to have savage convictions subsequent in life, and more likely to be involved in serious, recidivist crime. Are criminal convections later in life a fair punishment for their actions? Or should something be done to attend the bully? This leads to the question as what is the nature of these young people that make them prone to being a victim or a bully. In the search for a personality construct, many researchers have come to the agreement that bullies are deficient in social information processing or may be intellectually disadvantaged (Besag, 1989, cited in Marsh et al., 2004). The work of Crick and Dodge (1994, cited in Marsh et al., 2004) beg offed that bullies responses to social situations are being met with a filtration process.This cognitive filter is based on an aggressive individual translation n eutral or ambiguous cues as hostile and therefore, making them more likely to engage in aggressive behaviors (Marsh et al., 2004). This was also seen to be the case in Bosworth, Espelage, and Simon (1999, cited in Marsh et al., 2004) when a sample of jejune high school students showed that misconduct, anger, and beliefs supportive of violence were significantly related to bullying behaviors. Although bullying is an aggressive act, this does not imply that bullies and aggressive or conduct-disordered individuals are a homogenous group. Sutton et al (1999, cited in Marsh, 2004) put forward that bullies were part of a complex environment where they are require to negotiate and attribute mental states to themselves and others to explain or predict their behavior. This idea contravenes the notion that bullies are cognitively inept or simple in their interactions with peers (Sutton et al 1999, cited in Marsh, 2004).ReferencesBullying. Violence Prevention. 1 Dec. 2012http//www.violencepre ventionworks.org/public/olweus_history.pageDawkins, J. L. (1996). Bullying, physical disability and the pediatric patient. developmental Medicine and Child Neurology, 38 603-612.Espelage, D. L., Holt M. K., & Henkel, R. R. (2003). Examination of peer group contextuals effects on aggressive behavior during early adolescence. Child development, 74, 205-220.Pelligrini, A. D. (2002) Bullying and victimization in schools A Dominance relations perspective . educational Psychologist, 37, 151-163.