Relational Aggression and Bullying: It’S More Than Just a Girl Thing

WorkingWorking Paper Paper Series Series Working Paper Series

Relational Aggression and Bullying: It’s More Than Just A Girl Thing

Nancy Mullin-Rindler, M.Ed.

(2003) Paper No.408 Working Paper Series

The goal of the Wellesley Centers for Women Working Paper Series is to share information generated by the Centers’ research and action projects, programs, and staff and to do so expeditiously, without the usual delay of journal publication. All papers in the extensive Working Paper Series have been peer-reviewed.

The Wellesley Centers for Women

The Wellesley Centers for Women (WCW) conducts scholarly research and develops sound training and evaluation programs that place women’s experiences at the center of its work. WCW focuses on three major areas:

The status of women and girls and the advancement of their human rights both in the United States and around the globe; The education, care, and development of children and youth; and The emotional well-being of families and individuals.

Issues of diversity and equity are central across all the work as are the experiences and perspectives of women from a variety of backgrounds and cultures. Since 1974, WCW has influenced public policy and programs by ensuring that its work reaches policy makers, practitioners, educators, and other agents of change.

The Wellesley Centers for Women is the single organization formed in 1995 by combining the Center for Research on Women (founded 1974) and the Stone Center for Developmental Studies (founded 1981) at Wellesley College. For more information, please visit: www.wcwonline.org.

Ordering Information

Working Papers and other publications of the Wellesley Centers for Women (WCW) are available for purchase through the WCW Publications Office. For a complete list of current publications, visit our online catalog at: www.wcwonline.org/publications.

Publications Office - Wellesley Centers for Women Wellesley College, 106 Central Street, Wellesley, MA 02481 Phone: 781-283-2510 Fax: 781-283-2504

Unless otherwise noted, the authors hold the copyright to their WCW publications. Please note that reproducing a WCW publication without the explicit permission of the author(s) is a violation of copyright law. Relational Aggression and Bullying:

It’s More Than Just A Girl Thing

Nancy Mullin-Rindler, M. Ed. Director, Project on Teasing and Bullying Center for Research on Women

Suggested Citation:

Mullin-Rindler, Nancy (2003). Relational Aggression and Bullying: It’s More Than Just A Girl Thing, Center for Research on Women, Wellesley, MA. Wellesley Centers for Women Working Paper Series, 2003 Working Paper No. 408.

(C) 2003 Mullin, N. Portions of this paper appeared in “Relational Aggression: A Different Kind of Bullying,” in the May/June 2003 issue of Principal; a condensation of that version will appear in the Fall

2003 edition of The Education Digest (Volume 69).

Please do not use or quote from this paper without proper citation.

The author wishes to acknowledge that the term relational aggression is based in a field of study not affiliated with the work of Jean Baker Miller Training Institute or relational- cultural theory. AAAbstract

Recently, media attention and several popular books have focused on mean and aggressive girls. These sources would lead us to believe that this is a new unstudied phenomenon—the proverbial “new bully on the block”—and that it is on the rise. The spotlight has been on behaviors variably referred to as relational aggression, social cruelty, peer harassment, and relational bullying. Additionally, these behaviors are typically presented as part of a hidden culture that is allegedly unique to girls. Relational Aggression and Bullying: It’s More Than Just A Girl Thing looks at some of the recent assumptions that have been made about girls and relational aggression. Research suggests that relational aggression, like bullying, sexual harassment, and other forms of personal violence may be symptom- atic of a larger pattern of societal violence that nega- tively affects both boys and girls. This paper refutes both the premise that aggression among girls is a new phenomenon and the notion that relational aggression, is unique to girls. In addition, this paper offers concrete strategies based in research and developmentally appropriate practice which can be used to improve aspects of school climate that perpetuate relational aggression and reduce it’s prevalence in elementary and middle schools.

Background Page 7

What is Relational Aggression? Page 8

Relational Bullying and Gender Page 9

The Role of Friendship and Empathy Page 11

The Development of Friendships Page 11

The Impact of Empathy on Aggression & Relationships Page 12

The Effects of Relational Aggression on School Climate Page 14

Strategies for Improving School Climate Page 15

Conclusion Page 18

References Page 21 Mullin-Rindler

Background relational aggression and its effects. Furthermore, claims that relational aggression is a new Lately, mean, aggressive girls have come phenomenon or that it is a uniquely female increasingly under media scrutiny. We have been experience need to be deconstructed. Finally, we inundated with images such as the startling need to ask whether this trend represents Northbrook, Illinois videotapes of the powder something more insidious in our culture and puff hazing incident (Bellevue MAQ-TV, May whether this constellation of behaviors represents 2003), articles about mean girls (American School an inevitable right of passage—i.e. behavior that Board Journal, 2002; New York Times, February schools, parents, and girls have to accept as 2002, “Gamma Girls” (Newsweek, June 2002), normative. and a spate of books portraying self-absorbed teen girls obsessed with popularity and social status, In this post-Columbine era, schools have focused who torment their obsequious peers (Simmons, more closely on various types of aggressive 2002; Weisman, 2002; Gianetti & Sagarese, 2001). behavior as potential contributors to school We are led to believe that these behaviors violence, along with a host of negative outcomes represent a new unstudied phenomenon, and that for students. In response, school districts and it is on the rise. states across the country have rushed to mandate policies setting limits on aggression, and on The focal point of this media attention is a form of bullying behavior in particular. As we go to press, aggression variably referred to as social cruelty, fifteen states have adopted some sort of relational aggression, peer harassment and legislation1 about school bullying and others are relational bullying. The perpetrators of these considering following suit. It is important to note behaviors are characterized as popular and pretty that few of these states have bolstered their girls who possess a cold-hearted cruel streak that policies with specific guidelines or funding to can wither a peer’s self-esteem with just a word or help schools implement these directives. a look. These girls have been dubbed “Queen Bees” (Weisman, 2002) and identified as part of While many schools have implemented policies socially powerful “in” cliques. According to addressing at least some forms of physical numerous sources, everyone wants to be like aggression, few even acknowledge verbal them; or, at least to be liked by them. Yet most of assaults, name-calling, exclusion, or indirect forms this literature does not shed light on this of aggression. Unfortunately, indirect or covert phenomenon in a way that expands our aggression is the most common and insidious knowledge about the role relational aggression during the late elementary and middle school plays in girls’ lives, nor its significance to school years (Björkvist, 1994; Crick, et al, 2001). The climates. trend in education to hone in on physical forms of aggression is particularly concerning because, Attention to girlhood aggression raises several according to a Johnson Institute report (1996), important questions and red flags. One basic indirect forms of aggression are often precursors question is why this behavior is suddenly to, or indicators of, the potential for physical newsworthy? What societal issues are at play? violence in a school. While the National School Moreover, because the bulk of recent coverage has Safety Survey statistics (2002) indicate that not been based on solid research, we need to physical acts of aggression and assault have challenge some of the assertions raised about declined in recent years, the frequency of indirect

aggression has not been as well-documented. To What Is Relational Aggression? improve school climate as a whole, it is necessary to address all forms of aggression—the subtle, The following are actual examples of the way indirect along with the obvious direct, physical that relational aggression is expressed among acts (Olweus, 1993; Olweus & Limber, 1999). students in elementary and middle schools.

Our understanding of the scope and breadth of Allison, known to be the most popular girl in aggressive behavior among both boys and girls school, has agreed to be Nina’s friend and has been hampered to some degree by a lack of include her at lunch on the condition that communication and agreement across disciplines Nina starts a mean rumor about Leah, Nina’s regarding definitions, terminology, and the scope best friend from elementary school. and types of aggressive behaviors (Crick & Rose, 2000; Stein, 2001). Most of the research on Todd has lived next door to Pete, a popular relational aggression to date has been conducted athlete, for years. Pete has often picked on or by a small handful of individuals (such as Crick belittled Todd because he doesn’t perform well and colleagues) and has not made conceptual in sports. Recently, Pete’s teammate and new linkages to broader research about the sidekick Aaron has been taking Todd’s lunch sociological links to violence, to sexual money and other possessions in an effort to harassment, or even to bullying. impress Pete. Aaron has threatened to tell Recommendations that provide a practical Pete and other classmates that Todd is gay if perspective on research for school personnel has Todd “squeals” or refuses to comply with also been generally absent—leaving schools Aaron’s demands. either wondering what to do or grasping at advice based in misconceptions about what On any given day, incidents like these are played strategies are effective. Clearly, increased among students across the nation—and not just collaboration and additional research would among girls (Oliver, et al, 1994; Hazler, 1996; greatly improve our understanding of the roots Craig & Pepler, 2000; Crick, et al, 2001; Espelage of aggression in our culture, its influence on the & Asidao, 2001). These are trends that have behavior of youth in our society, and information existed for decades—vignettes such as these are about effective practice. so powerful because they can also bring to mind similar experiences from our own youth. Yet in spite of these limitations, there is currently research available to help us untangle the myths from facts about relational aggression and its Various behaviors can be grouped under the links to gender. This paper will differentiate rubric of aggression. These intentional negative relational aggression from direct and indirect acts perpetrated on others can occur among bullying. It will explore the role gender plays in individuals who are of equal status or among this behavior and describe how it affects peer individuals where there is an imbalance of relationships and school climate. Finally, it will power. Relational aggression, is characterized offer concrete suggestions about what can be by both intentionality and power imbalance done to ameliorate this pervasive problem in (Crick, et al, 2001). In spite of the similarities to schools. bullying, sexual harassment, and partner or

8 Wellesley Centers for Women Mullin-Rindler

rumors, manipulating friendships, or child abuse, it is essential to differentiate between intentionally excluding or isolating someone). these acts and relational aggression (Stein, 1999). Because relational aggression combines both Unlike sexual harassment, hazing, or assault, direct and indirect bullying strategies to achieve relational aggression is not governed or defined its goals; the term “relational bullying” might be a by legal statutes, unless these behaviors cross more apt descriptor (this new term will be used certain lines. For schools, this suggests the need interchangeably to relational aggression to develop alternative strategies, policies, throughout this paper). deterrents, and rewards systems to deal with these different types of aggressive behaviors. While definitions of bullying vary somewhat, all include some form of persistent negative Relational aggression is directed at someone with interaction characterized by a power imbalance the intent of damaging their relationships, between the bully and victim (Olweus, 1993). reputation, or sense of inclusion in a peer group This power imbalance, though not necessarily (Crick et al, 2001). obvious to us as adults, makes it difficult for the victim to defend himself or herself. Factors such One day, Abby calls Robert, a shy third grader, as age, size, appearance, abilities, gender, and “Loser” because he is overweight and wears who observes the bullying contribute to this “geeky” clothes. She convinces other kids in her power differential, as does the relative popularity, group not to speak to Robert until he shapes up. social class, ethnicity, and a host of other Three months later, he’s become known as “Mr. intangibles. These factors play an identical role in L.” Even a few teachers use this “nickname,” relational aggression. Like other forms of not realizing that it is meant as a put-down. bullying, relational aggression typically occurs in public and often involves groups of students who Strategies involve a combination of direct, readily gang up on the hapless victim(s) with friends observable behaviors, such as physical harm or against peers—further adding to the power name-calling, paired with subtle forms of imbalance and sense of shame and humiliation manipulation, threats, social pressure, or isolation the victim feels. In addition, relational aggression and may include impugning someone’s may be particularly insidious because victims reputation, verbal threats, spreading rumors often allow themselves to be subjected to these about someone’s sexual orientation, scapegoating, acts in silence—often out of a combined desire to forming intrigues, threatening social isolation if fit in and fear of further ostracization. It is the victim doesn’t act in certain ways, or stealing a essential that adults become aware and alert to romantic partner. These actions can be variously this dynamic in order to better understand and accomplished through direct confrontation and/ respond to this form of bullying. or the use of emissaries.

However, I propose that relational aggression be Relational Bullying and Gender recognized for what it really is—a form of bullying. Bullying encompasses both direct and indirect actions that define relational aggression Recent media attention on suicides, assaults, and (e.g. name calling, physical or verbal attacks, or hazing perpetrated by girls has attracted a lot of threatening gestures; spreading gossip and public notice. Why are aggressive girls of such

interest? Their culture has been portrayed as a Just as studies of strictly overt or physical frightening society where a few powerful girls aggression have failed to describe the experiences ride herd on less popular “wannabes” who will of as many as 70% of victimized girls and 15% of do anything to be accepted (Simmons, 2002; victimized boys (Crick & Bigbee, 1998), it is a Weisman, 2002). misconception and an over-simplification to assume that relational aggression is a uniquely Are these behaviors on the rise, or is there simply female phenomenon. Both boys and girls are more awareness about them? The concept of known to combine direct and indirect bullying relational aggression is not a new phenomenon, (i.e.,relational aggression) (Crick, et al, 2001; nor a recently discovered trend. Admittedly, Rodkin, et al, 2000; Salmivalli,et al, 1996; The initial studies about aggression and bullying, Oregonian, December 2002). In contrast to which began in earnest in the 1970’s, focused on previous assumptions that boys relied totally on direct and physical forms of aggression, and direct forms of bullying and girls on more indirect looked almost exclusively at males. Until the methods, research shows that although levels of 1980’s, most research about aggression focused on overt aggression are higher in males, levels of physical aggression typically perpetrated by boys. relational aggression are more equal across gender Research showed boys’ aggressiveness to be more lines (Björkvist et al, 1992). These same overt, visible, and physical. Gender differences researchers also found that, although this type of found in bullying behavior parallel gender bullying is exhibited earlier by girls, boys catch up patterns found in other forms of aggression as their verbal skills increase. Additionally, (Ahmad & Smith, 1994; Bandura, et al, 1961; Olweus (1993 and 2001) found that verbal Björkqvist, et al, 1992; Crick & Grotpeter, 1995; bullying (which can be direct or indirect) accounts Olweus, 1993; Owens, et al, 1999; to name a few). for most of the bullying perpetrated by both boys Findings have shown that gender differences exist and girls—and remains the most common form of in both the incidence and type of bullying boys bullying over time. This use of verbal put-downs and girls tend to engage in; specifically, boys tend is often aimed at damaging peers’ social standing to bully more often than girls, and tend to be more in a group. likely to use direct or physical strategies.

Several recent studies indicate additional factors Though our understanding about the nuances and are involved in peer aggression during the middle impact of girlhood aggression has certainly school years (Bosworth, et al, 1999; Bukowski et lagged behind the study of aggression in boys, a al, 2000; Nukulkij et al, 2000; Rodkin et al, 2000). body of research does exist. In the past ten to These studies theorize that as students move fifteen years, researchers in various fields have toward adolescence, they begin to view and value sought to expand our understanding of the role anti-social behavior more positively, become more that gender plays in aggression. This has led to attracted to aggressive peers, and seem to closer examination of the types of aggression and associate dominance and aggression with victimization common among girls as well as popularity. exploring the complexity of boys’ experiences— the study of relational aggression is part of that While gender differences exist at different ages movement. and stages of development, students seem to

10 Wellesley Centers for Women Mullin-Rindler

prefer strategies designed to elicit the maximum rightly assert that our society normalizes views effect within their peer groups. Research and about aggression and acting out, and they point anecdotal evidence indicate that boys and girls out the dangers of promoting attitudes about both perpetrate and fall victim to relational masculinity that value “power-over” behavior, aggression, including efforts to marginalize peers. taking pride in non-compliance and disrespect, While their motivations may differ, they rely on and devaluing feelings in favor of logic. Stein these behaviors to manipulate social dynamics (1997) also points out the links between bullying and to boost their status within their peer groups. and its “older cousin” sexual harassment and states that when “left unchecked and Although girls are commonly known to unchallenged, bullying may...serve as a fertile manipulate friendships, gossip or shun others as a practice ground for sexual harassment.” Indeed, means of jockeying for social position (Crick, et al, one might appropriately conclude that sexual 2001), boys also experience rumors, scapegoating, harassment, partner abuse and even child abuse and threats of isolation from their peers. For boys, might have roots in relational aggression. taunts often zero in on physical stature, lack of athletic ability, or sexual orientation and are delivered with direct physical harm or threats. The Role of Empathy and Friendship

Every day, Jason and his buddies corner Eric at Friendships contribute to a child’s sense of well- his locker and make him recite a chant: “I am a being and emotional health. The complexity of worthless c—, fit only to lick your a——.” If he these relationships depends upon the age of the fails to do this to their satisfaction, which is student and his or her developmental skills. frequently, they either stuff him into his locker Cultural stereotypes about aggression and gender or head-first into a trashcan. Afterwards, the can interfere with students’ efforts to make these other boys give Jason high-fives. essential connections with their peers. Having an understanding of how children develop This fact reinforces views put forth by Kimmel empathy and friendships provides us with (2000) and others (Stein, 1995 and 1999, Thorne, insights into how aggression and bullying can 1993) about the close connection between societal interfere with their relationships (Hartup, 1996; views about masculinity and aggression and Kaukiainen, et al, 1999). suggests that societal values which emphasize a traditional male model play a role and that we might expect girls will emulate and follow that The Development of Friendship power structure. Children’s first attachments are typically with Some anecdotal reports from teachers’ groups and family members and caretakers (Brazelton & other sources do seem to indicate that girls may Greenspan, 2000). These initial interactions set the be acting more aggressively, particularly stage for relationships with peers. Child care and behaving in ways more traditionally associated school experiences provide opportunities for with boys. Some experts suggest that societal children to expand their social circles and messages about masculinity feed into aggressive potential to form relationships with peers. It is behaviors such as bullying (Kimmel, 2000; Stein, not until late in the preschool years that children 1997 and 1999; and Dooley & Fedele, 1999). They tend to play more interactively. Preschoolers are

still learning to master controlling their impulses, deeds done “accidentally” or “on purpose”) attending to social cues, initiating contact with (Coles, 1997; Eisenberg et al, 1997 & 1998; Hartup, peers, and using social skills to get along with 1996; & others). others. Because their boundaries about friendship are often linked to rigid and arbitrary rules, their From grades three through the middle school own needs and wishes tend to take precedent. years, students’ relationships with peers undergo For example, they may feel justified in retaliating tremendous growth and change. Their if someone hits or hurts them first (Coles 1997; relationships with peers become increasingly Eisenberg et al, 1998 & 1997; and others). more important over time. Concurrently, by the end of elementary school, students not only By the time they start school, most children have understand that retaliation is wrong, but they are gained the cognitive and emotional skills that able to make judgments about right and wrong allow them to take another person’s point of based on intent rather than damage done. This view—and thereby learn to negotiate conflicts. By change allows them to be somewhat more flexible the early elementary years, children’s friendships in responding to slights and conflicts—and to are fleeting and fickle. It’s not unusual, for employ assertive strategies rather than resorting example, for a kindergartener to announce, “You to aggression (Coles, 1997; Hartup, 1996; and aren’t my friend anymore!” or to associate a peer others). with a particular situation or activity. Developmentally, they may not see a conflict in By middle school, students’ friendships with their being friends with someone at home in their peers tend to be based on shared interests and neighborhood and not even acknowledging that mutual understanding. On one hand, they are same peer at school (Eisenberg & Strayer, 1987; motivated to treat peers kindly so that others will Zahn-Waxler, et al, 1979; Hastings, et al, 2000). like them and want to be friends with them. In Between first and second grade, most children are contrast, well defined social hierarchies and a able to use words instead of actions to negotiate a somewhat rigid desire to fit in and conform to the conflict (though they generally still need adult standards with a particular group may cause help with this process). This cognitive milestone them to treat a peer they view as lower in status moves them forward to being able to build poorly in order to improve their affiliations with friendships without the use of aggression to get the group and gain social status for themselves their needs met. (Crick & Grotpeter, 1995; Kaukiainen et al, 1999; Sabongui et al, 1998; and others). Adults play a key role in helping young students develop social rules that include motivators for The Impact of Empathy on Aggression and Relationships conduct and concrete ways to operationalize prosocial behaviors (e.g. I will share so others will want to play with me; I can be friendly by telling Educator Robert Coles (1997) describes empathy another child my name and asking them to play as “the ability to see the world through someone with me; friends apologize even when they hurt else’s eyes, and acting on that knowledge with someone by accident). At this age, adult kindness.” This ability to understand another intervention is best focused on modeling prosocial person’s feelings and thoughts requires thinking and friendship-making skills, helping children and feeling, as well as a response (i.e. an action distinguish intent (e.g., to differentiate between that is more in keeping with what the other

12 Wellesley Centers for Women Mullin-Rindler

person needs than what you might want or need relational bullying increase, becoming particularly at that moment). prevalent during the late elementary and middle school years. Students in grades 4 to 8 who report Empathy allows us to form healthy relationships bullying others say they do it to be cool or and to be resilient in the face of disappointment. popular, to fit in or be part of group, and to go It also helps us to respond to conflict without along with the crowd (Espelage & Asidao, 2001). being aggressive or intentionally hurting others. Further-more, these students use bullying as a In other words, when we understand at a visceral strategy for establishing social rank or reinforcing level the discomfort we cause by acting a position of power within their peer group (Crick aggressively, we are less likely to act that way. and Grotpeter, 1995). Failure to develop empathy during childhood can result in long-term negative effects. For example, Every day, Greg feels he must run a gauntlet individuals who lack empathy are more likely to through a group of older boys who cluster act in aggressive ways and to hurt others without around the entrance to the school. They used to regard for their feelings: by responding with just make cracks about his hair or clothes but aggression, bullying, abusive behavior, or other lately they have been cornering him at his forms of violence (Eisenberg & Fabes 1998; locker, pasting obscene words on his back and Eisenberg & Strayer, 1987; Olweus, 1993). locker and humiliating him in front of a girl he likes. A young child’s immature ability to control strong emotions and impulses can lead to higher rates of aggression. At this stage, adult intervention to As their relationships become more subject to provide support and positive behavior models are social pressures, bullying (including relational the most effective strategies for nurturing the aggression) increases. In a national poll of nine to development of empathic responses and thirteen year olds conducted by Widmeyer friendship-making skills. As students move Communications (2002), 33% rated bullying and through elementary and middle school, their peer students who verbally and physically threaten relationships are normally characterized by others as their number one concern. increased empathy, intimacy, trust, loyalty, and self-disclosure. Yet these same qualities can While social status within peer groups helps backfire and contribute to shifts in social status students establish and sort out their individual within the peer group and act as fodder for and social identities, shifts in status contribute to relational bullying. As a result, students continue the power imbalances and intrigue that plague to need adult support to model appropriate social this age group. Relational bullying can adversely behavior and to strengthen building blocks of affect students’ social standing by keeping them empathy—including expressing feelings in frozen in their roles through the creation of socially appropriate ways, interpreting body negative expectations that become difficult to language and social cues, reinforcing friendship- alter. When this happens, students tend to view a making skills, and supporting deepening of peer’s behavior filtered through negative relationships with others. expectations and consequently, the victim of relational aggression “cannot do anything right” Even though physical bullying tends to wane as (Thompson, 2001). children get older (Olweus, 1993), indirect and

Tina and Mari have been friends for years. academic outcomes and adjustment (Hartup, Now Mari has joined a new group of friends. 1992). Every time Tina tries to talk to Mari, she rolls her eyes and turns away, whispering and There is evidence that students may perceive or giggling with her new friends. Tina isn’t sure respond to different types of bullying in unique what she’s done wrong, but it seems like she ways related to their gender. However, social can’t do anything right. bullying is on par with physical bullying and intimidation in terms of its damaging effects on The ability to cope with these changing individual students, academic performance and relationships helps galvanize skills that can school climate as a whole (Olweus & Limber, predict how well students will cope with and 1999; see also Bukowski & Sippola, 2001). In adapt to social situations as adults. When addition, when bullying occurs at school, students students are not able to connect with peers, are report lowered satisfaction, difficulty paying aggressive or disliked, they risk developing attention in class (even if they are not the victim) difficulties in coping with social dilemmas and and may feel that adults don’t care and are not in with forming healthy relationships as adults control (Olweus, 1993, 2001a, 2001b). (Hartup, 1992). The effects of bullying are complex and vary according to the role each student plays in a given The Effects of Relational Aggression incident. Bullying, whether direct, indirect or on School Climate relational has an impact on everyone. Victims suffer higher rates of absenteeism, anxiety, depression, and are at risk for long-term mental Based on the latest statistics from the US health problems including thoughts of suicide Department of Education (Coy, 2001), bullying (Olweus, 1993; Owens, et al, 1999). Some studies constitutes a major discipline issue for schools show bullies to be more likely to become involved today. In addition, sources suggest that in illegal behaviors or to persist in conduct victimization by peers is an important variable in disordered forms of behavior into adulthood determining whether they may become violent— (Olweus, 1993). Relational bullies have difficulty the combination of aggressive behaviors and forming genuine friendships, except as a means to being victimized are thought to act as a stressor an end—i.e. friends offer a medium for control or and potential trigger for violent behaviors. Both a way to gather intelligence (Crick & Grotpeter, boys and girls are more likely to use relational 1995). In addition, because relational bullies are strategies to bully as they get older—with efforts skilled at orchestrating events to minimize peaking during the middle school years. Eighty discovery and blame, they may be even more percent of middle school students in several resistant to accepting responsibility for their studies (Espelage & Asidao, 2001) reported at least actions. one act of bullying in the past month and a substantial number reported bullying others even While attention is most often directed at the more frequently. These behaviors not only affect experiences and traits of aggressors and victims, students’ social and emotional well being, they the majority of students (75-80%) are bystanders. are also associated with school performance and These students play a key role in all types of

14 Wellesley Centers for Women Mullin-Rindler

bullying situations. Bystanders tend to feel Adults need to become actively engaged to try to anxious and afraid, and report that bullying stop it. interferes with their own learning (Froschl, Sprung, & Mullin-Rindler, 1997). Finnish What can be done to improve this situation? The researchers Salmivalli, et al (1996) found that 87% following strategies, based in research and of student bystanders had a specific role as developmentally appropriate practice, may be assistant, outsider, reinforcer, defender, etc. useful for school personnel. Bullying expert Olweus has also outlined similar roles (1999). While a Canadian study (Pepler, et al, 1993) found that 90% of students reported Strategies for Improving School observing bullying was unpleasant, as many as Climate 65% of bystanders don’t actively get involved (Olweus & Limber, 1999). Students reported that they failed to act because they felt the incident Most school personnel agree that students need was none of their business or were uncertain opportunities to resolve social conflicts on their about what to do. own. However, schools often inadvertently promote bullying and violence (Conoley, et al, Although students may argue that not getting 1998). All cases of bullying require adult support involved is safer, Hazler (1996) found their and intervention to compensate for the power inaction results in bystanders experiencing imbalance between bully and victim. Even feelings of anxiety and powerlessness similar to students in middle school and high school may that of victims (see also Jeffrey, et al, 2001). As a require adult help to deal with intense or complex result of their passive or complicit participation in social dilemmas. Students of all ages may feel bullying, bystanders may have a tendency to convinced that adult intercession will make justify, rationalize or minimize their role. Studies bullying matters worse—and unfortunately this also show that over time, bystanders’ sense of perception is often borne out by adults’ ineffective empathy for the victim of bullying is diminished, or inappropriate responses to bullying behavior which tends to lead them to side with the bully (Mullin-Rindler, 2003). It is a common myth that (Olweus, 2001b). these behaviors occur when adults aren’t around. Although students are skilled at timing or Overall, these factors work collectively to create a manipulating bullying acts so they are not caught, climate of fear and disrespect where learning is no most bullying happens in the presence of adults longer the primary concern of students. We know (Pepler & Craig, 2000). Due to its more covert from various research studies both internationally nature, it may be easier to miss or minimize signs and more recently in the US, that at least 10% of of relational aggression, though we may be more all students are bullied on a regular basis aware of the resulting distress. However, adults (Olweus, 1993;Nansel et al, 2001). Because its can substantially reduce bullying by becoming outcome is less visible and direct, the incidence of more attuned and vigilant to it in all its forms and relational aggression may be even higher. to recognize and acknowledge its seriousness. Though this behavior is pervasive for students between fourth and eighth grades, it need not be While opinions about best practices to handle considered a normal right of passage for them. relational aggression vary, it (like other forms of

bullying) won’t subside without direct involvement and intervention from adults. Here climate. However, zero tolerance is not are some suggestions to help a school respond the answer to stopping bullying. more effectively. Rather, policies that provide escalating and developmentally appropriate consequences, which provide positive • Identify factors that contribute to rewards for prosocial behaviors, as well bullying and relational aggression: as sanction aggression with negative Pinpoint potential situations, times or consequences are more effective. areas where victims are likely to be viewed as easy targets and improve supervision to minimize problems. • Involve all adults: Resolving bullying Identify values or assumptions that requires a team effort. Evaluate might put particular students at risk supervision plans and responses at “hot (e.g., do victims tend to be new students spots” and be aware of students who or those seen as non-traditional in lack friends or who are chronically left terms of socially prescribed gender out. Leadership from administrators roles?). and faculty is vital, as is involving parents and key community leaders in • Improve adult connection with tackling the problem. Offer training, students: Emotional warmth and a ongoing information and support. Raise relationship with at least one caring awareness in “feeder” schools (so adult have been shown to be key intervention begins with students in earlier elements in reducing bullying (Olweus, grades who will move up into your school). 1993). Making sure each student is personally greeted each day and • Discuss bullying openly: Bringing identifying an adult contact for every the issue of bullying out into the open and student is one effective way to approach making it a high-profile concern among this. staff, students and parents does not reflect poorly on the character of the school. On • Establish clear rules and policies about the contrary, when the issue approached indirect as well as direct forms of directly, adults are more in control, and bullying and aggression: As long as students get the message that this isn’t bullying behaviors are considered normal accepted behavior. Continue to be alert to and accepted, they persist. Identifying trouble spots, power imbalances, and naming bullying behavior is an friendships and alliances. Be sure that important first step. Creating rules bullying is neither ignored nor accepted. against exclusion, ignoring, disrespecting, or making comments • Bring the discussion into the about someone’s reputation or character classroom through structured meetings or can help students get out of the habit of lessons. Engaging students is an essential acting in these ways. The result is the element in this undertaking. Involving all creation of a more positive school students—not just victims or bullies, but

16 Wellesley Centers for Women Mullin-Rindler

the majority of students who are structured same-gender discussion groups bystanders, too. To be successful, the focus with prosocial peers (i.e. selected groups of of stopping relational and other forms of all boys or all girls) to build positive bullying needs to move beyond individual solidarity and discuss common issues like interventions to changing the climate that anger and aggression, social pressures and allows bullying to continue. Change expectations, appropriate ways of requires finding ways to mobilize and interacting with the opposite sex, etc. reinforce active participation on the part of bystanders. Good programs don’t simply • Use “teachable moments” more stop bad behavior; they also encourage effectively to intervene whenever bullying prosocial behavior. Strengthen your efforts occurs. Although follow-up with by using literature, academic themes, and individual students is not realistic for every role plays to analyze power imbalances, set incident of bullying, adults can respond new norms, practice options and empower immediately at the heat of the moment in bystanders. Explore ways that bystanders ways that are more effective. Provide can realistically work together to help stop support for victims in a way that helps bullying. them maintain emotional control and save face publicly. Be firm but matter-of-fact- • Provide therapeutic intervention for with bullies. Include bystanders and individual students at risk for being bullied provide guidance and clear expectations or for bullying others. Students who are rather than dismissing them from the scene. chronically excluded or picked on respond well to group situations where they can get • Help students develop empathy emotional support and can expand their and friendship skills and strategies for opportunities for social contacts with other resolving conflicts assertively: Students of students who might become friends. all ages need help setting limits and dealing Encourage involvement in activities outside directly but kindly with someone they of school so these students have don’t like, dealing constructively with opportunities to interact with different anger, and acting assertively rather than groups of peers and to participate in new aggressively. They also need help learning kinds of activities (e.g., so the focus of how to be a good friend: e.g. relational relationships is not just on popularity). By give-and-take; the difference between contrast, students who bully should be seen friendship and popularity; and the qualities individually, rather than in groups. The of being a friend. Middle school students focus for these students should be to in particular need assistance balancing establish firm limits on their behavior, individuality with conformity, and encourage ways to make amends, and exploring boundaries and unwritten rules ultimately to redirect their aggressive that determine where peers “belong” or fit tendencies. Help them identify roles where in. Adults at home and school can lay power and leadership are constructive (e.g. groundwork for students to learn and invest energies into causes they care about, practice ways of successfully negotiating express feelings through theater, etc.). At- social situations. Responses and risk students may also benefit from

interventions should be adapted to a Be good role models for positive social student’s developmental needs and ability behavior (e.g. don’t engage in gossip or to use words to describe feelings, to read backstabbing). body language and social cues, to initiate interactions with peers in pleasing ways, to demonstrate kindness and empathy, and to Conclusion deal with conflicts. Bear in mind that students are ready to learn these skills and may even be able to talk about “the right When relational aggression is viewed as a form of thing to do” well before they are able to put bullying that impinges on the social and emo- skills into practice or to master them. tional development of boys and girls alike, we can more completely understand and effectively • Make more effective use of group respond to it. When we ascribe this problem only learning situations to build or strengthen to girls, we ignore the serious impact this behav- new social alliances: Make the process of ior has on all students. The purpose of highlight- forming the group part of the assignment. ing the existence of gender differences in bullying Define and assign alternative types of roles is not to characterize either girls or boys as being (e.g. questioner, problem-stater, meaner or nastier, but to begin examining more communicator, information gatherer, closely the roots of these behaviors. If we fail to synthesizer, etc.) that aid in building group see its connection to the broader context of our collaboration and teamwork. society’s value and acceptance of violence and aggression, we will not be able to address these behaviors when they progress to more dangerous • Provide activities at a school-wide forms of aggression. In short, relational aggres- level that promote team building and sion, as other forms of bullying, when practiced connection: School-wide events, large scale over time, may be linked to behaviors such as team projects, cross-grade activities, or sexual harassment and partner abuse. other activities that emphasize collaboration and connection rather than competition. Activities which challenge One crucial element is to address the negative students to examine implicit boundaries impact all forms of bullying have on school (such as Teaching Tolerance’s “Mix it up culture as a whole, not just focus on its effects on Day”© or weekly seating lotteries in the individual students. There are many ways that cafeteria) can be used to address problems schools inadvertently promote violence in schools in specific trouble spots. Some schools find (Conoley, et al, 1998). Suggestions such as those that having anti-bullying mottos or included in this paper can assist schools in taking contracts helps to formalize student a broader view of bullying prevention and commitment to the process. promoting elements that help create a positive climate for students where bullying is less likely • Improve adult awareness of the problem: to occur. Look at adult examples of bullying within your workplace and discuss behaviors you To date, work on relational aggression has come want to see changed. Practice intervening. predominantly from developmental psychologists

18 Wellesley Centers for Women Mullin-Rindler

and from a clinical perspective focused on the ways that schools can work towards positive specific traits of victims and aggressors. We outcomes is needed to provide interventions would benefit from learning more about the that go beyond reducing bullying and balance between environmental and individual victimization and that focus on school climate risk factors, as well as protective factors. In as a whole. addition, more focus on practical and realistic

1 State Statutes: CA, CO, CT, GA, IL, NH, NJ, NY, OK, OR (1/04), RI, VT, WA (8/03), WV. States with Program Initiatives: ME, MA, PA. Mullin-Rindler

References

Ahmad, Yvette and Smith, Peter K. (1994). Bullying in schools and the issue of sex differences. In J. Archer (Ed.) Male Violence (70-83). New York: Routledge.

Bandura, Albert, Ross, Dorothea, and Ross, Shiela (1961). Transmission of aggression through imitation of aggressive models. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 63, 575-582.

Bernstein, Judith and Watson, Malcom (1997). Children who are targets of bullying: A victim pattern. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, Vol. 12:4, 483-98.

Björkvist, Kaj (1994). Sex differences in physical, verbal, and indirect aggression: A review of recent research. Sex Roles: A Journal of Research, 30 (3-4), 177-188.

Björkvist, Kaj, Lagerspaetz, K. and Kaukiainen, Ari (1992). Do girls manipulate and boys fight?: Developmental trends in regard to direct and indirect aggression. Aggressive Behavior (18), 117-127.

Bosworth, Kenneth, Espelage, Dorothy L., and Simon, T.R. (1999). Factors associated with bullying behavior in middle school students. Journal of Early Adolescence, 19: 341-362.

Boulé, Margie (2002) Slam site an eye-opening look at cruelty of middle-schoolers. The Oregonian, December 12. 2002.

Brazelton, T. Berry MD and Greenspan, Stanley, MD (2000). The Irreducible Needs of Children: What Every Child Must Have to Grow, Learn, and Flourish. Cambridge, MA: Perseus Publishing.

Bukowski, William, Sippola, Lorrie, Hozza, Betsy, and Newcomb, Andrew F. (2000). Pages from a sociometric notebook: An analysis of nomination and rating scale measures of acceptance, rejection and social preference. In Cillesson, Antonius H. N. and Bukowski, William (Eds.) Recent Advances in the Measurement of Acceptance and Rejection in the Peer System. New Directions for Child and Adolescent Development #88. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass

Bukowski, William, Sippola, Lorrie (2001). Groups, individuals, and victimization: A view of the peer system. In Juvonen, Jaana and Graham, Sandra (Eds.) (2001). Peer Harassment in School: The Plight of the Vulnerable and Victimized. New York: The Guilford Press. p 355-377.

Coles, Robert (1997) The Moral Intelligence of Children. New York: Random House.

Conoley, Jane C., Hindmand, Reed, Jacobs, Yvonne and Gagnon, Wendy A.(1998). How Schools Promote Violence. Family Futures, vol1:1.

Coy, Doris Rhea (2001). Bullying. ERIC Digest 459405.

Craig, Wendy, Pepler, Debra J. , and Atlas, R. (2000). Observations of bullying in the playground and in the classroom. School Psychology International, 21, 22-36.

Craig, Wendy and Pepler, Debra J. (1997). Understanding bullying at school: What can we do about it? paper on Internet from York University, Toronto

Crick, Nicki R. and Bigby, Maureen (1998). Relational and overt forms of peer victimization: A multi-informant approach. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology. Vol. 66, No 2,

Crick, Nicki R. and Grotpeter, Jennifer K (1995). Relational aggression, gender, and social-psychological

adjustment. Child Development, 66, 710-722

Crick, Nicki R. and Rose, Amanda (2000). Toward a gender-balanced approach to the study of social emotional development: A look at relational aggression. In Miller, P.H. and Scholnick, E.K. (Eds.) Toward a Feminist Development Psychology. New York: Routledge. p153-168.

Crick, Nicki R., Nelson, David, Morales, Julie, Cullerton-Sen, Crystal, Casas, Juan, and Hickman, Susan (2001). Relational victimization in childhood and adolescence: I hurt you through the grapevine. In Juvonen, Jaana and Graham, Sandra (Eds.) (2001). Peer Harassment in School: The Plight of the Vulnerable and Victimized. New York: The Guilford Press. p196-214.

Cowie, Helen and Sharp, Sonja (1994). Empowering pupils to take positive action against bullying. In P.K. Smith and S. Sharp (Eds.) School Bullying; Insights and Perspectives. London: Routledge

Dooley, Cate and Fedele, Nikki (1999). Mothers and sons: Raising relational boys. Working Paper # 84, Wellesley, MA: Wellesley College Stone Center.

Eisenberg, Nancy and Fabes, Richard A. (1998). Prosocial development. Handbook of Child Psychology . 5th ed., Vol. 3, pp. 701-778. New York: Wiley and Sons.

Eisenberg, Nancy and Strayer, J. (Eds.) (1987). Empathy and Its Development. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Eslea, Michael and Smith, Peter K. (1998). The long-term effectiveness of anti-bullying work in primary schools. Educational Research, 40,203-218.

Espelage, Dorothy and Asidao, Christine (2001). Conversations with middle school students about bullying and victimization: Should we be concerned? In Geffner, Robert, Loring, Marti, and Young, Corinna (Eds.) Bullying Behavior: Current Issues, Research and Interventions. Binghamton, NY: Haworth Press.

Froschl, Merle, Sprung, Barbara, Mullin-Rindler, Nancy (1998). Quit it! A Teacher’s Guide on Teasing and Bullying for Use with Students in Grades K-3. Wellesley, MA: Wellesley College Centers for Women.

Giannetti, Charlene and Sagarese, Margaret (2001). Cliques: 8 Steps to Help Your Child Survive the Social Jungle. New York: Broadway Books.

Greener, Susan and Crick, Nicki R. (1999) Normative beliefs about prosocial behavior In middle childhood: What does it mean to be nice? Social Development, 8, 3 351-363

Gropper, Nancy and Froschl, Merle (April, 2000). The role of gender in young children’s teasing and bullying behavior. Equity and Excellence in Education. Vol. 33, N0 1, 48-56.

Hartup, Willard (1992). Having friends, making friends, and keeping friends: Relationships as educational contexts. ERIC Digest # ED 345854

Hartup, Willard (1996). The company they keep: Friendships and their developmental significance. Child Development, 67, 1-13.

Hastings, Paul, Zahn-Waxler, Caroline, Robinson, JoAnn, Usher, Barbara, and Bridges, Dana (2000). The development of concern for others in children with behavior problems. Developmental Psychology. Vol. 36, 5, 531-546

22 Wellesley Centers for Women Mullin-Rindler

Hazler, Richard. (Fall 1996). Bystanders: An overlooked factor in peer on peer abuse. Journal for the Professional Counselor, 11, 2, 11-19.

Hubbard, Julie. A., Dodge, Kenneth, Cillessen, Antonius, Coie, John, and Schwartz, David (2000). The dyadic nature of social information processing in boys’ reactive and proactive aggression. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 80 (2) p268-280.

Jeffrey, Linda, Miller, DeMond, and Linn, Margaret (2001). Middle school bullying as a context for the development of passive observers to the victimization of others. In Geffner, Robert, Loring, Marti, and Young, Corinna (Eds.) Bullying Behavior: Current Issues, Research and Interventions. Binghamton, NY: Haworth Press.

Johnson Institute (1996). Respect and Protect: Violence Prevention and Intervention Program. Minneapolis, MN: QVS.

Juvonen, Jaana and Graham, Sandra (Eds.) (2001). Peer Harassment in School: The Plight of the Vulnerable and Victimized. New York: The Guilford Press.

Kaukiainen, Ari, Björkqvist, Kaj, Lagerspetz, K., Österman, Karin, Salmivalli, Christina, Rothberg, S. & Ahlbom, A. (1999). The relationships between social intelligence, empathy, and three types of aggression. Aggressive Behavior 25: 81-89.

Kimmel, Michael (2000) The Gendered Society. London: Oxford University Press.

Kriedler, William J. (1996) Smart ways to handle kids who pick on others. Instructor 105 (2) 70-74.

LaFontana, Kathryn and Cillessen, Antonius (2002). Children’s perceptions of popular and unpopular peers: A multi-method assessment. Developmental Psychology, 38 (5) p 635-647)

Meadows, Susannah (2002). In defense of teen girls: Meet the gamma girls. Newsweek, June 3, 2002.

Mullin-Rindler, Nancy (2003). Unpublished findings from the Massachusetts Bullying Prevention Initiative. Wellesley College Centers for Women.

Nansel, Tonja, Overpeck, Mary, Pilla, Ramani S., Ruan, W. June, Simons-Morton, Bruce, and Scheidt, Peter. (2001). Bullying behaviors among US youth: prevalence and association with psychosocial adjustment. Journal of the American Medical Association, 285:2094-2100.

Nukulkij, P., Cillessen, A.H.N., Bellmore, A.D., Whitcomb, M.E., and Burke, J.D. (2000). Sociometric status in early adolescence: Stability and behavioral correlates. Manuscript submitted for publication. University of Connecticut, Storrs.

Oliver, Ronald, Hoover, John H., and Hazler, Richard (1994). The perceived role of bullying in small-town Midwestern schools. Journal of Counseling and Development, 72,416-421.

Olweus, Dan (2001). Peer harassment: A critical analysis and some important issues. In Juvonen, Jaana and Graham, Sandra (Eds.) (2001). Peer Harassment in School: The Plight of the Vulnerable and Victimized. New York: The Guilford Press. P3-19.

Olweus, Dan (2001b). Olweus’ Core Program Against Bullying and Antisocial Behavior: A Teacher Handbook. University of Bergen, Norway.

Olweus, Dan (1993). Bullying At School: What We Know and What We Can Do. Oxford: Blackwell.

Olweus, Dan and Limber, Susan (1999). Blueprints for Violence Prevention: Bullying Prevention Program. Boulder, CO: University of Colorado Institute of Behavioral Science.

Owens, Laurence, Slee, Phillip, and Shute, Rosalyn (1999). Victimization among teenage girls: What can be done about indirect harassment? In Juvonen, Jaana and Graham, Sandra (Eds.) (2001). Peer Harassment in School: The Plight of the Vulnerable and Victimized. New York: The Guilford Press. p 215-241

Pepler, Debra J. and Craig, Wendy (2000). Making a Difference in Bullying. LaMarsh Research Report #60, Toronto, Ontario, York University.

Pepler, Debra J. , Craig, Wendy, Ziegler, S. and Charach, A. (1993). A school-based anti-bullying intervention: Preliminary evaluation. In D. Tattum (Ed.) Understanding and Managing Bullying. Oxford: Heinemann Books.pp. 76-91.

Pepler, Debra J. and Rubin, Kenneth (Eds.) (1991). The Development and Treatment of Childhood Aggression. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Earlbaum Associates.

Pepler, Debra J. and Sedighdeilami, Farrokh (1998) Aggressive Girls in Canada. Human Resources Development Canada: vwww.hrdc-drhc.gc.ca, #W-98-30E (First Edition), October, 1998.

Pollack, William (1998). Real boys: Rescuing our sons from the myths of boyhood. New York: Random House.

Resnick, M., Bearman, P., Blum, R., Bauman, K., Harris, K., Jones, J., Tabor, J., Beuhring, T., Sieving, R., Shew, M., Ireland, M., Bearinger, L., Udry, R. (1997). Protecting adolescents from harm: Findings from the National Longitudinal Study on Adolescent Health. Journal of the American Medical Association, 278,10, 823-32.

Rodkin, Philip, Farmer, Thomas, Pearl, Ruth, and Van Acker, Richard. (2000). Heterogeneity of popular boys: Antisocial and prosocial configurations.Developmental Psychology, 36, 1, p14-24.

Sabongui, Amir G., Bukowski, William, and Newcomb, Andrew (1998). The peer ecology of popularity: The network embeddedness of a child’s friend predicts the child’s subsequent popularity. In Bukowski, William and Cillessen, Antonius H. (Eds.) Sociometry Then and Now: Building on Six Decades of Measuring Children’s Experiences with the Peer Group. New Directions for Child Development. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. p 83-92.

Salmivalli, Christina, Lagerspetz, K., Björkvist, Kaj, Österman, Karin and Kaukiainen, Ari (1996). Bullying as a group process: Participant roles and their relations to social status within the group. Aggressive Behaviour, 22, 1, p1-15.

Shem, Samuel and Surrey, Janet (1998). We Have to Talk. New York: Basic.

Slaby, Ron; Roedell, Wendy C; Arezzo, Diana; Hendrix, Kate (1995) Early Violence Prevention:Tools for Teachers of Young Children. Washington D.C.: NAEYC

Simmons, Rachel (2002) Odd Girl Out: The Hidden Culture of Aggression in Girls. New York: Harcourt.

Stein, Nan (2001). Introduction. In Geffner, Robert, Loring, Marti, and Young, Corinna (Eds.) Bullying Behavior: Current Issues, Research and Interventions. Binghamton, NY: Haworth Press.

24 Wellesley Centers for Women Mullin-Rindler

Stein, Nan (1999). Classrooms and Courtrooms: Facing Sexual Harassment in K-12 Schools. New York: Teachers College Press

Stein, Nan (1997). Bullying and sexual harassment in elementary schools: It’s not just kids kissing kids. Working Paper # 284. Wellesley, MA: Wellesley College Center for Research on Women.

Stein, Nan (1995). When Girls Get Raunchy: The Intersection Between the First Amendment and Sexual Harassment in K-12 Schools. Luncheon Seminar #43.Wellesley, MA: Wellesley College Center for Research on Women.

Straus, Murray A., Sugarman, David B., Giles-Sims, Jean (Aug. 1997). Spanking by parents and subsequent antisocial behavior of children. Archives of Pediatric and Adolescent Medicine, Vol. 151.

Sutton, J. and Smith, Peter K. (1999). Bullying as a group process: An adaptation of the participant role approach. Aggressive Behavior, 25 (2), 97-111.

Talbot, Margaret (2002). Girls just want to be mean. The New York Times on the Web (www.nytimes.co, 2/ 24/02, 13 pg); cover story of the Sunday Magazine section.

Thompson, Allison (2001). Adolescent aggression linked to victimization, psychologist says. (interview with Antonius Cillessen). Advance on the Web.University of Connecticut (www.advance.uconn.edu/ 010402.html , 4/2/2001)

Thorne, Barrie (1993). Gender play: Girls and boys in school. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.

Vail, Kathleen (2002). How girls hurt. American School Board Journal 189 (8), cover story.

Wheeler, Edyth J. (1994). Peer conflicts in the classroom. ERIC Digest ED 372874.

Weisman, Rosalind (2002). Queen Bees and Wannabes: Helping Your Daughter Survive Cliques, Gossip, Boyfriends and Other Realities of Adolescence. New York : Crown Publishers

Widmeyer Communications (Nov. 25, 2002, Press release) New Survey Suggests Parents Underestimate the Bullying Kids Face; Serves as a ‘Wake-Up Call’ to Modern Tween Reality, Researchers Say. Washington D.C

Zahn-Waxler, Carolyn, Radke-Yarrow, Marion, and King, R.A. (1979). Childrearing and children’s’ prosocial initiations towards victims of distress. Child Development. 50, 2, 319-330.

____, Antisocial behavior in girls persists into adulthood (1999). Brown University Child and Adolescent Behavior Letter, 15 (5), 1, 7.

____ (2002) The continuation of education 2002. U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics (NCES 2002-025). Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office. (Also available at http://nces.ed.gov/).