We report two studies that examine age differences in pupils' and parents' definitions of the term bullying, and possible reasons for these including the role of specific experiences. Study 1 compared definitions of bullying given by participants in four age groups; 4 to 6 years, 8 years, 14 years and adult. Participants were shown/read 17 different cartoon scenarios and were asked if each constituted an episode of bullying or not. Multidimensional scaling indicated that the groups differed in their definition of bullying. 4-to 6-year-olds and 8-year-olds used 1 dimension, a distinction between aggressive and non-aggressive acts, when differentiating cartoons; 14-year-olds and adults gave a 2-dimensional solution, also distinguishing between physical and non-physical (social/relational or verbal) acts. Study 2 further investigated definitions of bullying given by 99 children aged 4 to 6 years, and the role of experience. Just over half had some understanding of the term, but tended to be less concerned about power differences and repetition of actions. No significant differences in definitions were found between boys and girls, or between children in involved (aggressor, victim or defender) or not involved (bystander) roles; however, aggressors were more likely than other children to say that 11 of the 13 aggressive behaviours were not bullying. These findings are discussed in relation to age related changes in experiences of bullying and cognitive development. Implications for interventions and research are also raised.

No abstract

No abstract

Most research into peer victimisation has focussed on children aged 8 years and above and has included a study of the correlates of victimisation, including cognitive and social skills, and attachment profiles. Recent research has started to investigate aggression and victimisation in younger groups and has found that the nature of aggression differs from that in older children in terms of the types of victimisation involved and the stability of the roles. This study investigated some of the correlates of roles taken in victimisation in 104 children aged 4-6 years, using a cartoon methodology to elicit peer nominations for aggressor, victim, and defender. It examined the social cognitive abilities, executive function skills, and attachment profiles of aggressors, victims, and defenders. Victims did not exhibit poor performance on the social cognitive tasks or have insecure attachment qualities as has been found with victims during middle childhood. Aggressors did not perform highly on the social cognitive tasks in contrast to older aggressors and bullies. Defenders were found to perform above average (although not significantly different from other groups) on the social cognitive tasks. These findings are related to the nature of aggression and victimisation at this age, and a developmental change hypothesis is proposed to accommodate them. Aggr. Behav. 31:571-588, 2005. r

There is little research that has examined cyberbullying among children under the age of 11years. The current study explored the nature and extent of the phenomenon among primary school children aged 7- to 11-years-old (N = 220; 116 boys and 104 girls) and investigated their perceptions of the distress caused to victims, how victims would feel, and their recommendations to victims for coping strategies. Participants completed a modified version of Ortega, Calmaestra, and Mora-Merchán’s (2007) and Smith et al.’s (2008a) bullying and cyberbullying questionnaire. The results indicated that cyberbullying is used and experienced by some children in this age group, with some age and gender differences in these experiences. Cyberbullying is generally viewed negatively and children are aware that it may have a negative impact on the emotions of victims. There is some overlap between involvement in cyberbullying and traditional bullying; with children most likely to take the same role (i.e., traditional bully and cyberbully or traditional victim and cybervictim) across the two settings. The most commonly endorsed coping strategy for victims was to tell someone, which is in line with government guidance to schools. The findings are discussed in relation to research with secondary school pupils as well as addressing potential implications for interventions with this age group.

This study investigates the nature of unjustified aggression in Spanish preschool children aged 4 to 6 years. Children were assigned to roles in aggression (Aggressor, Victim, Defender, Supporter, and Bystander) on the basis of peer, teacher, and self-nominations. The roles taken in aggression were examined in relation to individuals' physical strength, social status, and social development. The coping strategies used by victims were also examined. Aggressive children were found to be socially rejected. Defenders were found to be the most popular children in the class, which may place them better to defend others without fear of reprisal or they may gain their status from the act of defending others. The findings also indicate that young victims do not exhibit the characteristics of older victims (e.g., social rejection and physical weakness), which confirms findings with 4-to 6-year-olds in England [Monks et al. 2002a[Monks et al. , 2002b. It is suggested that these findings relate to the instability of victimisation at this age. Aggr. Behav. 28:458-476, 2002. r

No abstract

Executive function (EF) has been implicated in childhood aggression. Understanding of the role of EF in aggression has been hindered, however, by the lack of research taking into account the function and form of aggression and the almost exclusive focus on cool EF. This study examined the role of cool and hot EF in teacher reported aggression, differentiating between reactive and proactive as well as physical and relational aggression. Children (N = 106) completed laboratory tasks measuring cool (inhibition, planning, working memory) and hot EF (affective decision-making, delay of gratification). Cool, but not hot, EF significantly contributed to understanding of childhood aggression. Inhibition was a central predictor of childhood aggression. Planning and working memory, in contrast, were significant independent predictors of proactive relational aggression only. Added to this, prosocial behaviour moderated the relationship between working memory and reactive relational aggression. This study therefore suggests that cool EF, particularly inhibition, is associated with childhood aggression across the different functions and forms.