Persistent intimidation of others through strength or influence is an age-old social phenomenon, but school bullying has reached disturbing heights in recent years. Negative repercussions of decreased self-worth, depression, loss of concentration, and other serious emotional and mental issues may result from the practices (Chapell et al.). As a reaction to the seriousness of the situation, there are 43 states in America with legislation addressing various forms of bullying (Kueny and Zirkel 23). Educators at all levels have a responsibility to be aware of the signs of different types of bullying in order to take steps to offer remedies. In the present paper, five articles are discussed regarding inappropriate intimidation of students by other students. The hypothesis is that by careful observation of specific indications, it is possible to detect bullying in the student body in order to address it and the following article reviews will attempt to support and demonstrate the concept.
As early as 2005, Darby Dickerson published “Cyberbullies on Campus” in The University of Toronto Law Review. Dickerson states that through the use of blogs, websites, and text messaging, incivilities are imposed on both students and instructors. While his attention is placed on law school campuses, Dickerson’s ideas are applicable to other teaching facilities. The author states that bullies are often popular, have moderate to high self-esteem, and have little respect for the educational process, so do not hesitate to disrupt it. Cyberbullies have the ability to unsettle a classroom with emails or text messages that discourage participation of other students. The victims of bullying are generally passive introverts that blame themselves for personal difficulties. They demonstrate insecurity and anxiety, and have neither the skills for retaliation nor the ability to solicit help from peers. They may even exhibit irritating behavior that invites the attention of bullies. Educators should be aware that excessive class absence may indicate avoidance of bullying. Although intercepting electronic communications may prove difficult, the participation of students who are bystanders may assist in identifying cyberbullies. Instructors that are alert to the personalities and behavior of bullies and their victims have the opportunity to recognize intimidation tactics. An additional advantage is being “tech savvy” so as to be able to tap into blogs and other types of communications that are a venue for cyberbullying. Also, promoting peer support in the detection of cyberbullies in order to have a safe and respectful learning environment may be effective. While Dickerson discussed the traits and characteristics of cyberbullies on the campus of law schools, the next article investigates the behavior among undergraduate university students.
Walker, Sockman, and Koehn wrote “An Exploratory Study of Cyberbullying With Undergraduate University Students” for Techtrends in 2011. To a large extent, the article deals with statistics related to the incidences of bullying at various educational levels, adding that a significant number of victims eventually become bullies themselves. The authors did, however, pull information from studies that indicated the psychological needs of the bully predict his behavior; these needs are to hurt others and obtain support (Walker, Sockman and Koehn 262). The authors conducted a study addressing the experiences of undergraduate cyberbullying, gender influence, the form of technology used, and how often it occurs. Surveys were administered to 131 students. There were three relevant results for this paper’s hypothesis. First is that 54 percent of the participants knew someone who had been bullied and 100 percent of the male participants knew someone who had been bullied (265). This supports the ability to use bystanders to detect cyberbullying. The other result is that participants that reported bullying of themselves, half of the acts were by classmates, 57 percent by someone outside the school, and 43 percent did not know (265). The percentages equal more than 100 percent, indicating there is more than one source. The third pertinent result is that males know more victims than females, indicating gender is a factor in cyberbullying. The information presented by Walker, Sockman, and Koehn is supported by the statistics offered in “Toward a More Comprehensive Understanding of Bullying in School Settings” (Carrera, DePalma, and Lameriras).
Educational Psychology Review published the article by Maria Victoria Carrera, Renee DePalma, and Maria Lameriras in 2011. Personality traits demonstrated by students who experience bullying were found to include overt sensitivity and lack of apparent aggression (482). As presented by Dickerson, they also show low levels of self-esteem, blame themselves for their circumstances, have problems resolving conflict, lack motivation and the ability to rely on themselves, and depression. They do not have many friends and avoid coming to school. They do not usually participate in school activities, are poorly accepted, and are low achievers. Victims may be very close to their parents, but may also be abused. Bullies direct their actions toward someone they know and seek the support of others in the behavior. He is impulsive, lacks guilty feelings, unsympathetic, and seeks social prestige. The home life of aggressive students reflects insecure and non-trusting relationships with the parents; another factor is a large number of siblings, intimating the need for competitiveness within the structure of the family. Boys are more often the perpetrators than girls, although girls are often victims of bullying by both males and females.
Similar observations were made in the article "The Progression of Bullying from
Elementary School to University" written by Curwen, McNichol and Sharpe for International Journal of Humanities and Social Science in 2011. While their study did not focus on characteristics of bullies and their victims, they did report that age influence the traits. Citing numerous sources, they stated that physical bullying decreases with age while verbal bullying increases (Curwen, McNichol and Sharpe 51). They did, however, report that adult bullies vary their targets outside the group of younger victims who are passive and vulnerable although the characteristics of bullies remain as they grow older.
Bülent Dilmac wrote "Psychological Needs as a Predictor of Cyber Bullying: A Preliminary Report on College Students" in 2009 supporting the observations of the previous authors. However, he suggests that the traditional characteristics of victims are not longer pertinent in the age of cyberbullying (Dilmac 1309). Dilmac concurs that bullies demonstrate lack of self-control, low empathy, and high emotionality (1309-1310). Victims exhibit social anxiety, loneliness, phobias centered on school, a negative attitude toward violence, and have overprotective parents (1310). Dilmac conducted a study that dealt with incidence of bullying rather than characteristics.
Finally, John M. Deirmenjian published "Stalking in Cyberspace" in 1999 for the Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry Law. In an interesting presentation of case studies concerning cyberstalking, he discussed that a cyberstalker is a loner who is emotionally disturbed and more likely to be intelligent, older, and educated (Deirmenjian 410). Most cyberstalkers are males with previous criminal mental disorders and a history of drug and alcohol abuse. He is computer literate and able to afford subscription services online. While the characteristics loosely fit established traits for bullies, the anonymity of cyberstalkers precludes the need for support or a relationship with the victim.
As a final discussion of the information found in the five articles on bullying, cyberbullying, and cyberstalking, the personality traits for perpetrators and victims are closely in agreement. In order for educators to detect and address bullying in educational facilities, they should be aware of behavior and social patterns in their student bodies in and out of the classroom. While the use of the internet presents a challenge for detection, there are ways to circumvent the difficulties. Teachers have the ability to recognize susceptible personalities and monitor them for suspected bullying behavior.
Works Cited
Carrera, M., DePalma, R., & Lameiras, M. (2011). Toward a More Comprehensive
Understanding of Bullying in School Settings. Educational Psychology Review, 23(4), 479-499. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10648-011-9171-x
Chapell, M.S. et al. "Bullying In Elementary School, High School, and University". Adolescence
41.164 (2016): 633-648. Web.
Curwen, Tracey, Jessica S. McNichol, and Glynn W. Sharpe. "The Progression of Bullying from
Elementary School to University". International Journal of Humanities and Social
Science 1.13 (2011): 47-54. Web.
Dickerson, D. (2005). Cyberbullies on Campus. University Of Toledo Law Review, 37, 51-74. Web.
Deirmenjian, John M. "Stalking In Cyberspace". Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry
Law 27.3 (1999): 407-413. Web.
Dilmac, Bülent. "Psychological Needs as a Predictor of Cyber Bullying: A Preliminary Report
on College Students". Eğitim Danışmanlığı ve Araştırmaları İletişim Hizmetleri Tic. Ltd.
Şti. (2009): 1307-1325. Web.
Kueny, M. & Zirkel, P. (2012). An Analysis of School Anti-Bullying Laws in the United States.
Middle School Journal, 43(4), 22-31. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00940771.2012.11461817
Walker, C., Sockman, B., & Koehn, S. (2011). An exploratory study of cyberbullying with
undergraduate university students. Techtrends, 55(2), 31-38. Retrieved from
http://www.aect.org/pdf/proceedings10/2010/10_31.pdf
