Types of bullying behaviour and their correlates

Bullying Experiences Among Children and Youth with Autism Spectrum Disorders

“…This is consistent with the bullying literature, as verbal and relational forms of bullying are consistently more prevalent than physical forms of bullying among children and youth Scheithauer, Hayer, Petermann, & Jugert, 2006;Woods & White, 2005). Verbal and social forms of bullying appear to become more common once children are old enough to realize that these forms are equally (or more) effective in hurting others and more covert than physical forms of bullying, which decrease with age (Rivers & Smith, 1994;Woods & White, 2005). Verbal and social forms of bullying are also less conspicuous and more likely to avoid detection from adults, compared to physical forms of bullying (Sutton, Smith, & Swettenham, 1999).…”

Older but wilier: In-group accountability and the development of subjective group dynamics.

“…Social understanding and related social-cognitive skills are especially important for indirect methods of bullying such as social exclusion within a group (Bjorkqvist, Lagerspetz, & Kaukainen, 1992), because the bully is likely to require some understanding of group dynamics. It is interesting to note that, in line with our age moderation effects, research suggests that indirect forms of bullying increase with age, whereas more direct methods decline (Rivers & Smith, 1994).…”

Peer and cyber aggression in secondary school students: the role of moral disengagement, hostile attribution bias, and outcome expectancies

“…It can be direct or indirect (Underwood, 2000) and it can vary in terms of intensity, duration and motives (Tattum, 1994). In general, boys engage in more physical forms of bullying and girls in more indirect/relational bullying (Rivers & Smith, 1994;Scheitauer, 2002).…”

“…It can be direct or indirect (Underwood, 2000) and it can vary in terms of intensity, duration and motives (Tattum, 1994). In general, boys engage in more physical forms of bullying and girls in more indirect/relational bullying (Rivers & Smith, 1994;Scheitauer, 2002).Bullies and victims suffer from, and are at risk of various psychosocial problems (Card, 2003;Haynie et al, 2001;Hawker & Boulton, 2000;Nansel, Overpeck, Saluja, & Ruan, 2004;Olweus, 1999;Picket et al, 2002).Those who are both bullies and victims, otherwise called aggressive victims, are at higher risk (Duncan, 1999;Wolke, Woods, Bloomfield, & Karstadt, 2000), because they are prone to both internalising and externalising behavioral problems (Berger, 2007;Haynie et al).Various theories of aggressive behavior have proposed cognitive mechanisms through which such behaviors are rationalized and justified, and have been applied to the area of school bullying.Social cognitive theory (Bandura, 1986(Bandura, , 1992(Bandura, , 1999 identifies moral disengagement (MD) as a cognitive process by which a person justifies his/her harmful or aggressive behavior, by loosening his/her inner self-regulatory mechanisms. These mechanisms are Bullying and Cyberbullying 4 4 guided by moral self-sanctions, such as feelings of guilt and shame, which keep behavior in line with personal standards.…”