234 By Faye Mjshna
Children & Schools
Vol. 26, No. 4
October 2004
A Qualitative Study of Bullying
from Multiple Perspectives
This article describes a pilot study using qualitative methods
to investigate bullyingfrom tbe perspectives of the victimized
children, their parents, and educators. Interviews were
conducted with children in grades 4 and 5 wbo self-identified
as victi?ns, one parent, each child's teacher, and school
administrators. Two major themes emerged: difficulty
determining whether an incident is bullying; and bullying
among friends. Implications for practice are discussed.
Key words: bullying; children's friendships; children's
perspectives; bullying definition; peer victimization;
qualitative research
I he pervasiveness of peer victim-
ization or bullying among children is
well documented. The effects may
be far-reaching for bullies and vic-
tims, both of whom are at risk of
emotional, social, and psychiatric
problems that may persist into adult-
hood (Nansel etal., 2001; O'Connell,
Pepler, & Craig, 1999). A systems-
ecological framework, whereby the
dynamics are seen to extend beyond
the children involved as bullies or
victims, is crucial. Rather, individual
characteristics, social interactions,
and ecological and cultural condi-
tions contribute to social behavioral
patterns (Atlas & Pepler, 1998; Cairns
& Cairns, 1991; Germain & Bloom,
1999).
Recognition of the seriousness of
bullying has led to the accumulation
CCC Code: 1532-8759/04 $3.00 © 2004, National Association ot Social Workers, Inc.
of a large body of research (Olweus,
1994; Roland, 2000), using mainly
quantitative methods such as surveys,
with less use of observation tech-
niques. Studies have established the
effects of bullying on all areas of
children's lives—academic, social,
emotional, and physical health (Craig,
1998; Crick & Bigbee, 1998). Re-
search has established that victims
tend to be less accepted by peers, to
be more insecure and withdrawn
(Hodges & Perry, 1999; Hugh-Jones
& Smith, 1999), and to have internal-
izing problems such as depression
(Pellegrini, 1998). BuUies are apt to
be older and stronger (Ziegler &
Rosenstein-Manner, 1991) and to
have externalizing problems such as
delinquency (Nansel et al., 2001;
Olweus, 1997). Research has exam-
ined family relationships of bullies
and victims (Berdondini & Smith,
1996; Einnegan, Hodges, & Perry,
1998) and socioeconomic conditions
and societal attitudes toward violence
that foster victimization (Charach,
Pepler, & Ziegler, 1995; Smith, 1991).
Studies entailing videotaping students
on the school playground and in class-
rooms found that peers were involved
in 85 percent of the bullying episodes
(Craig & Pepler, 1997; O'Connell et
al., 1999). Other factors that affect
victimization include gender, race,
and exceptionalities and conditions
that affect appearance or mobility
(Hugh-Jones & Smith, 1999;Mishna,
2003; Thompson, Whitney, & Smith,
1994).
Considerably less research has
been conducted on children who are
victimized than on children who bully
(Prinstein, Boergers, & Vernberg,
2001). Furthermore, few qualitative
studies have examined the experiences
of victimized children or their par-
ents and teachers (Owens, Shute, &
Slee, 2000). In an exploratory study
on bullying and exclusion, del Barrio
and colleagues (1999) interviewed 36
children, youths, and young adults to
examine the process, context, conse-
quences, feelings, and coping meth-
ods of those involved. CuUingford
and Morrison (1995) interviewed 25
young offenders to explore their
school memories and to investigate
the link between bullying and crimi-
nality. A pervasive sense of aggres-
sion and bullying loomed large in the
youths' memories. Owens and col-
leagues conducted a qualitative study,
using focus groups and individual in-
terviews, to examine indirect aggres-
sion, which girls typically use. Al-
though key teachers, identified as
those to whom the girls turned for
support, were interviewed, the focus
was on the girls' perspectives. Among
other methods, Astor and Meyer
(1999) and Astor, Meyer, and Behre
(1999) used semistructured interviews
to examine violence in high schools
from the perspectives of students,
teachers, and principals.
Qualitative data complements
quantitative data (CuUingford &
Morrison, 1995) and privileges indi-
viduals' lived experience (VanManen,
1990). Increasing our understanding
of the views of children and adults is
key to developing effective interven-
tions (del Barrio et al., 1999). Smith
(1997) wrote that "the school bully-
ing work could make more use of 235
qualitative methods and case study A Qualitative study
material: given the overall volume of of Builying from
work, we know surprisingly little Muitipie Perspectives
about the dynamics of school bully-
ing relationships" (p. 251). It is vital
to have children's perspectives when
trying to identify the processes in-
volved in problematic peer relations
(Hymel & Franke, 1985). The adult-
child relationship affects children's
ability to manage in many areas, and
especially in bullying situations. In-
tegral to the bullying interaction is
the victim's inability to defend him-
self or herself and others' obHgadon
to intervene (Atlas & Pepler, 1998;
Olweus, 1991). Young children in
particular look to adults for help
(Charach et al., 1995). It has been Integral to the
found that parents' involvement is
highly correlated with program suc-
bullying
cess (Eslea & Smith, 2000), and teach- interaction is
ers are critical in implementing pro- the victim's
grams and interventions (Craig, inability to
Henderson, & Murphy, 2000). School defend himseif
administrators are rarely included in or herseif and
research, yet they are key individuals
in providing information on school others'
culture and attitudes (Astor et al., obligation to
1999). The study reported in this ar- intervene.
ticle, which was preparatory to a larger
study, addresses the lack of literature
on the effects of bullying from the
standpoint of victimized children and
the prime adults in their lives. A quali-
tative study was conducted to investi-
gate children's experiences of victim-
ization by bullying, compare the
children's perspectives with those of
their parents and educators, and ex-
plore the child-adult interactions re-
lated to peer victimization.
Method
Sample
A survey was administered to 61
students in grades 4 and 5, followed
236 by individual semistructured inter-
Children & Schools views with selected children, a parent
Vol. 26, No. 4 of each child, the child's teacher and
October 2004 vice principal and principal. We re-
cruited children in these grades be-
cause they can reliably reflect on their
own and others' behavior and reac-
tions (Damon & Hart, 1982) and are
very concerned about inclusion by
peers (Paquette & Underwood, 1999).
Boys and girls were included to allow
preliminary comparisons of the expe-
riences of bullying related to gender.
Three steps were taken for sample
selection. First, the principal of an
urban multicultural public school in
a large Canadian city sent a letter
introducing the study to parents of
students in grades 4 and 5, with an
appended letter from the researcher
explaining the study. A sizeable per-
centage of the families were single
parents in the low socioeconomic
bracket living in subsidized housing.
A research assistant reviewed the
study with students during class time.
To obtain parental approval for chil-
dren to complete the survey, a con-
sent form was sent home. Of 105
students invited to participate, 61 (58
percent) received parental consent.
In the next step, a survey titled
My Life in School Checklist (Arora,
1987, cited in Sharp, Arora, Smith,
& Whitney, 1994) was administered
to students to evaluate bullying in
schools. Children responded to items
with "never," "once," and "more than
once." Not fully standardized, initial
reports suggest that internal reliabil-
ity coefficients range from .80 to .93
(Sharp et al.). Validity has been es-
tablished through comparisons with
similar research (Pepler, Craig,
Ziegler, & Charach, 1993; Rigby &
Slee, 1991). Two (3 percent) chil-
dren reported not being bullied in
the current school term, five (11 per-
cent) reported being bullied once.
and 54 (88 percent) reported being
bullied more than once.
Third, because the severity of bul-
lying experiences may contribute to
the impact of victimization (Olweus,
1991), and relational aggression, for
instance gossip or exclusion, should
be considered a distinct construct
apart from overt aggression (Crick &
Grotpeter, 1995), we used purposive
sampling to ensure that a range of
experiences was obtained (Lincoln &
Guba, 1985). We selected for inter-
views (from the 59 students who iden-
tified themselves as bullied during
the current school term) five chil-
dren who had a high or low score on
the physical, relational, and racial
items.
A letter was sent to the parents of
the five selected children, informing
them that a researcher would phone
them to invite the child and one par-
ent to participate in an individual in-
terview. Three parents and one child
declined interviews and were replaced
with children who gave similar re-
sponses on the survey about being
bullied. Fifteen interviews were held
with the five children, three teachers
(two of whom each taught two chil-
dren),fiveparents (one of each of the
five children), one vice principal and
one principal. Participants consisted
of one girl and one boy in grade 4 and
one girl and two boys in grade 5 (see
Table 1 for description of the sample).
Data Collection and Analysis
A trained doctoral student and I
conducted 1- to 1'/2-hour interviews
with each respondent. Interviews
were held in the school in a private
room and were tape-recorded and
transcribed. Respondents were asked
to define bullying, and then the in-
terviewer read a standard definition:
"We say a student is bullied when
another student or group of students
say nasty and mean tilings to him/her
or tease him/her a lot in a mean way.
It is also bullying when a student is
hit, kicked, threatened, locked inside
a room, and things like that. These
things may happen often, and it is
hard for the student being bullied to
defend him/herself. But it is not bul-
lying when two students of about the
same strength argue or fight" (Pepler
etal., 1993).
Children were asked about the fo-
cus (for example, appearance), type
(for example, direct or indirect), lo-
cation, and perpetrators of their vic-
timization, the effects and how they
coped, and whether and whom they
told about the incident or incidents.
The adults were asked about their
awareness of the child's victimization
and their interactions with the child
and were asked to evaluate their own
and others' responses.
The interviews were analyzed us-
ing grounded theory (Cresweil, 1998),
with NVivo qualitative software to
organize the data (Richards, 1999).
Data analysis consisted first, of the
constant comparative method to de-
velop groupings of similar concepts
about the participants' perspectives
on the impact and processes involved
in victimization (Cresweil, 1998).
Analysis of the text was undertaken to
develop categories and themes. Next,
selective coding consisted of com-
paring the groups of participants, to
determine commonalties and differ-
ences in themes. Measures to ensure
trustworthiness included prolonged
engagement, persistent observation,
and member checking (Lincoln &
Guba, 1985).
Findings
The prevailing pattern that
emerged is how difficult it is to define
bullying. Identifying an incident as
bulling can be complex and confus-
ing for children, parents, and teach- 237
ers. The complexity seemed related A Qualitative Study
to factors that influenced how each ot Buliying trom
individual viewed a particular inci- Multiple Perspectives
dent. In this overall pattern of com-
plexity, two themes emerged: (1) the
gap between an individual's cognitive
definition and calling an incident bul-
lying; and (2) bullying among friends.
Defining Bullying
Power Imbalance. The children
and adults highlighted the existence
of a power imbalance, which they ar-
ticulated according to their particu-
lar developmental level. Children
defined bullying as someone older or
stronger hurting someone younger
or weaker. For instance, one child
said, "Older kids think that they can Identifying an
overpower the little ones." The adults incident as
defined bullying as one or more indi-
viduals trying to exert power over or builying can be
take advantage of an individual or compiex and
individuals. confusing for
Intent to Hurt. Several children chiidren,
included hitting, threatening, and parents, and
being mean. One girl said that bullies teachers.
enjoy hurting and scaring others. One
child believed that name-calling is
bullying if the person "means it,"
whereas two others deemed it bully-
ing regardless of intent. One teacher
and parent felt that bullies might not
intend to bully, whereas another
teacher felt that bullying is inten-
donal. One teacher was more con-
cerned when children "deliberately
want to hurt somebody."
Nonphysical and Relational Inci-
dents. Respondents varied in whether
they deemed nonphysical or indirect
aggression bullying. Several children
included spreading stories, taking
someone's belongings or money, and
excluding others. In contrast, one boy
said that some children did not let
him join their play, which he main-
tained was not bullying. One teacher
238 had not considered nonphysical be- touch her chest," a mother suggested
Children & Schools havior bullying, but after reflecting that the boy liked her. The mother
Vol. 26, No, 4 on the definition, she shifted her view attributed benign meaning to actions
October 2004 but still felt that physical was more that distressed her daughter, because
serious. Other adults included physi- she thought this was a "normal part
cal and nonphysical incidents in their of growing up."
definitions. If the Incident Is Considered Se-
rious: Physical versus Nonphysical.
Complexity in Determining Nonphysical aggression was at times
Bullying deemed not serious and thus over-
If the Victimized Child Is Consid- looked. Several respondents used a
ered Responsible. Whether the child hierarchy. For instance, one girl con-
was viewed as a victim deserving of sidered behavior such as name-call-
support seemed to depend in part on ing less serious than physical aggres-
whether he or she was considered to sion, and one mother advised her
blame. As one teacher reflected, "It's daughter to ignore nonviolent bully-
hard to know whether somebody con- ing. A teacher, who had stated at the
stantly picked on is doing something start of the interview that physical
to cause it." Another believed, "In aggression was more serious than
A recurring some cases victims seem to thrive on nonphysical aggression, was shocked
being victims." The girls felt respon- that a boy in her class identified as a
theme was the
sible for their victimization, whereas victim, "because he has ftiends and is
struggle by the no boys felt responsible. liked." Although he told her that he
adults to If There Is a Power Imbalance. A was being called names, she did not
determine recurring theme was the struggle by consider this serious. The teacher was
whether an the adults to determine whether an visibly upset in the interview, which
incident entailed incident entailed a power imbalance. she attributed to her lack of aware-
a power This is illustrated by one teacher's ness that this boy was a victim. She
imbalance. remark that "it can be very hard to reconsidered her definition: "It is
decide whether it really is a bullying tricky because something you see as
situation, whether it's one up, one minor may be major to the kid." A
down, or 50-50." mother also shifted her view after
If the Meaning Given to the Inci- hearing the definition. She explained
dent Is Problematic. The meaning that it included behaviour of her
individuals attributed to bullying var- daughter's friend, such as gossip, that
ied. One teacher depicted bullying as until that time, she had not consid-
"part of growing up" and as a good ered bullying.
thing that helped victims learn to deal The degree of seriousness that an
with others who are controlling or individual ascribed to an incident was
manipulative. At times a child con- interwoven with whether the chil-
sidered a situation bullying, whereas dren disclosed their victimization,
the adult ascribed another meaning especially to adults. For instance, one
and concluded that it was not bully- boy explained that he did not tell his
ing. One teacher attributed this dis- parents or teacher about being bul-
crepancy to some children who "make lied for fear that they would go to
themselves victims by seeing bully- the principal, which he did not be-
ing where it isn't." In response to her lieve was warranted. This boy said
daughter's distress after a boy said he would only tell his teacher if it
hurtful things to her and "tried to was "very serious" and the child or
children continued to physically hurt about whether a child was a fi-iend 239
him. because of certain behavior. For in- A Qualitative Study
stance, one girl did not know if a boy of Bullying from
Disclosure: Do Children Tell? "is myfi-iend,"because he bullied her Multiple Perspectives
Whom Do They Tell? and "punched me and I had a bruise
All of the children reported telling for two weeks." A mother struggled
their friends that they were bullied, to sort out whether afi-iendwas bul-
whereas only some told their parents lying her daughter or whether the
or teachers. Some were adamant that behavior fit in the realm of "typical"
telling adults only makes it worse. conflict. She said that she had not
For instance, one boy claimed, "They considered it bullying but had
think that if I go to the principal's thought that her daughter "picks
office and tell him they won't do it manipulative friends, and it's an age
any more, but they'll do it more be- thing, I won't be your friend any-
cause you told on them." Likewise, a more if you don't do this."
girl said that because other children Adults' Advice and Intervention.
threatened to hurt her if she told the One girl did not know how to use her
teacher, she dealt with the bullying teacher's advice to stay away from a
on her own. Some children, however, boy who physically hurt her, "be-
found it helpful to tell their parents cause, we've been a little bit friends The issue of
or teachers. For example, one boy for a year." The girl seemed to be in
found that after he told the teacher a bind. It was hard to follow the
power emerged
and she gave out detentions or sent teacher's advice, yet she was aware as particularly
kids to the office, other students be- that the circumstance was problem- confounding
camefi-iendliertoward him. Another atic. This girl was reassured with an- when bullying
child awoke afraid each day and reas- other situation "when my mom says occurred among
sured herself that "the teachers are they'll be your friend tomorrow." In friends.
there, they can't do anything." This contrast to her daughter's depiction,
demonstrates the fear generated by the mother said that she encouraged
victimization and her confidence in her daughter not to let others "push
her teachers' ability to protect her. you around." Angry to see her daugh-
ter treated poorly, the mother did
Bullying among Friends not want to embarrass her daughter
A theme that emerged as signifi- by intervening and felt that she had
cant for two girls and one boy, as well to "bite my tongue, but she's got to
as one teacher and two parents, was learn for herself what makes a good
bullying by children who were con- friend and what doesn't."
sidered the children's fi-iends. The A father described a harrowing
issue of power emerged as particu- situation in which her friends bullied
larly confounding when bullying oc- his daughter. After the situation im-
curred among friends. For example, proved, his daughter remained fiiends
one father described a situation in with these girls. Because of the obvi-
which her friends bullied his daugh- ous damage, her parents monitored
ter and he and his wife's struggle "to their daughter's relationships with the
get a sense of is it 50-50 or is it more bullies, yet tried to allow her some
your fault or more their fault?" autonomy. Although they did not feel
Friend or Not Friend: Issues Re- that they could forbid their daughter
lated to Bullying among Friends. from being friends with these indi-
Some respondents were confused viduals, the parents "feel we must keep
240 an eye on her interactions with her which offers "transferability") (Lin-
Children & Schools friends." The father believed that coln & Guba, 1985).
Vol. 26, No. 4 these relationships would serve as The variation among participants
October 2004 templates for other relationships and regarding the definition, in particu-
that they had already contributed to lar which behaviors are considered
his daughter's fears of close relation- bullying, mirrors the literature. Dif-
ships and of making mistakes. In an- ferences across countries, cultures,
other case, a boy was adamant that developmental age groups and indi-
his friends would not bully him, viduals can radically influence re-
whereas his mother believed that they ported rates of prevalence and of in-
did. She stated, "They come to my tervention (Craig et al., 2000; Smith,
house and they take 'E's' turn, which Cowie, Olafsson, & Liefooghe, 2002).
bothers me." Despite this mother Research has found that teachers view
encouraging her son not to have nonphysical aggression, such as ex-
friends who treated him badly, he clusion or verbal aggression, as less
remained friends with these boys and serious because of the less apparent
insisted that they treated him well. damage (Batsche & Knoff, 1994;
Friends' Support. Children de- Stephenson & Smith, 1989). More-
scribed being bullied by peers they over, despite the inclusion of indi-
considered friends, but also reported rect, verbal, and social exclusionary
thatfriendshelped at times. Examples victimization in definitions (Hanish
were telling the bully to stop and & Guerra, 2000; Smith et al., 2002),
chasing the bully away. Several chil- some of the most common and hurt-
dren found these actions effective. ful forms of bullying—exclusion for
Children who reported that their example—are ofren not seen as bul-
friends' behavior did not stop the lying and thus their damage is over-
bullying still appreciated the support. looked (Cullingford & Morrison,
For instance, a boy who was laughed 1995).
at when he dyed his hair recalled that Recognizing and responding to
his friends' support made him feel bullying is complex for the children
good. This is in contrast to a girl who and the adults. The respondents' re-
said that her friend publicly agreed ported reactions in actual situations
with boys who verbally attacked her. did not necessarily coincide with their
own definitions. This suggests that
Discussion although a clear definition is required
This study provides one of the first for education, intervention, and re-
qualitative assessments of the percep- search purposes, it does not lead to
tions of victimized children and their consistent decisions about whether
parents and educators. The findings particular incidents constitute bully-
reveal that defining bullying and de- ing or to dependable actions. Several
ciding whether an incident consti- factors appear to influence a person's
tutes bullying are complex and over- decision about whether an incident is
lappingyet distinct processes. Bullying bullying. These include whether the
among friends is also confusing. Al- victimized child is considered respon-
though the findings are not general- sible, whether there is a perceived
izable because of the small sample power imbalance, whether the mean-
size, they illuminate themes worthy ing given to the incident is problem-
of further investigation. (Table 1 pro- atic, and whether the incident is con-
vides thick description of the sample. sidered serious. In deciding whether
Table 1 241
Characteristics of Boys and Girls in Grades 4 and 5 Interviewed about Bullying A Qualitative Study
of Builying trom
Form of Parent Multipie Perspectives
Gender Grade Ethnicity Bullying Family Status Interviewed
Boy 4 Father: African High relational Parents separated, Father
American; mother : High racial lives with father
Aboriginal Low physical
Girl 4 Romanian white High physical Lives with Mother
High relational mother and
High racial father
Girl 5 Canadian white Moderate physica 1 Parents separated, Mother
High relational lives with mother
Low racial
Boy 5 Canadian white High physical Lives with Father
Low relational mother and
Moderate racial father
Boy 5 Asian and High physical. Lives with Mother
Canadian white High relational. mother and
Low-moderate stepfather
racial

an incident is bullying, individuals they would react similarly (Landau,

seem to consider one or more factors
related to a particular episode, in com-
parison with their own criteria. The
more contingencies considered, the
more difficult it is to name the phe-
nomenon and decide how to respond.
Putting one's definition of bully-
ing into practice has received less at-
tention in the literature, but the find-
ing that operationalization is complex
receives some support. In a study of
parent and student attitudes, Eslea
and Smith (2000) found that an
individual's attitudes toward bully-
ing may in fact be incongruous, which
they attributed to the difficulty indi-
viduals have in condemning bullying
if they empathize with the bully. An-
other study that compared children's
responses to vignettes with those of
teachers in training found that the
children harshly judged children in
the vignette who became upset when
teased, although they reported that
Milich, Harris, & Larson, 2001). The
researchers ascribed this to the dif-
ference between a child's rational re-
sponse to others in a difficult situa-
tion and his or her own emotions
should they be in a similar position.
Thus, a child's emotional response
may thwart his or her ability to react
in an optimal way.
The finding that some children
did not tell an adult corresponds with
the troubling and stable finding that
reported victimization underesti-
mates the problem (Hanish &
Guerra, 2000; Sharp, 1996). The rea-
sons given by the children and hy-
pothesized by the parents parallel
those in the literature. These include
fear of retaliation and the children's
belief that they are to blame, that
they should handle the problem on
their own, and that telling adults sim-
ply will not help (Clarke & Kiselica,
1997; Smith & Myron-Wilson,
242 1998). Respondents described in-
Children & Schools stances when a child told a teacher to
Vol. 26, No. 4 no avail because the teacher did not
October 2004 respond or did not intervene effec-
tively, also consistent with the litera-
ture. Atlas and Pepler (1998) wrote
that teachers might do little to inter-
vene even when they are aware of
bullying, partly because they do not
know how to respond. Some research
has found that 25 percent of teachers
thought that ignoring the situation
might help (Batsche & Knoff, 1994).
A significant finding was that at
times adults did not consider certain
incidents bullying, whereas the child
did. The adult's conclusion infiuences
his or her response as well as the
child's reporting (Craig et al., 2000;
Teachers might Landau et al., 2001; Limper, 2000).
do little to When such discrepancies occurred
between children and adults, the
Intervene even adults minimized or did not validate
when they are the child's experience. Underestimat-
aware of ing the harm caused by some forms of
bullying, partly bullying, in particular nonviolent ag-
because they do gression, may lead to an inappropri-
not know how to ate response (Astor, 1995; Cullingford
& Morrison, 1995). Furthermore,
respond. Clarke and Kiselica (1997) argued that
when educators do not respond, "what
the children learn from the adults'
handling of bullying incidents must
be more frightening to them than the
individual bullying incidents" (p. 316).
Thefindingthat children who were
considered fi-iends bullied children
receives support in the literature. In a
study of middle school girls, for in-
stance, although respondents de-
scribed their best friends acting in
ways they considered bullying, they
remained friends (Casey-Cannon,
Hayward, & Gowen, 2001). In an-
other study, children in grades 3 and 4
were foxmd to be more likely to ask a
teacher for help when they did not
care about maintaining a friendship
with the child who was the aggressor.
evidence that children were aware that
telling a teacher could mean the end
of a friendship (Newman, Murray, &
Lussier,2001).Pellegrini(1998)wrote
that it is important to understand
friendship dynamics, "especially those
that are ambiguous and provocative
(for example, exploitative vs non-ex-
ploitative). Youngsters who interact
with each other in certain ways, such
as bully-victim patterns and rough-
and-tumble play, probably also have
a specific sort of relationship, maybe
even a close relationship" (p. 172).
This study's finding that bullying
among fi-iends can be confusing for
children is reflected in the literature.
On the one hand, Prinstein and col-
leagues (2001) recommended that
youths who are bullied should seek
support from their friends, because
of the buffering effect of friendships
(Hodges & Perry, 1999; Schwartz,
McFadyen-Ketchum, Dodge, Pettit,
& Bates, 1999). On the other hand,
they acknowledged the dilemma for
children "when both relational vic-
timization and social support occur
within the context of the same
friendship" (Prinstein et al., p. 489).
Children's friendships are critical for
the acquisition of skills and compe-
tencies (Newcomb & Bagwell, 1995)
and may be models for later rela-
tionships such as romantic partners
(Laursen & Bukowski, 1997).
Newcomb and Bagwell observed that
friendships are typically described "as
a universal good marked by some in-
terpersonal confiict" (p. 306). It is
vital, however, to consider prob-
lematic issues and their effect in
friendships (Bagwell, Newcomb, &
Bukowski, 1998).
Implications for Practice
It is critical to recognize that even
when individuals have a clear defini-
tion of bullying, other factors impede
their ability to be guided by their own
definition. Thus, it is necessary to
identify and provide education on fac-
tors that influence individuals' deci-
sions about whether incidents consti-
tute bullying. Interventions must
address ambiguous situations that
confuse children and adults in recog-
nizing bullying and lead to differ-
ences among individuals in determin-
ing whether an instance constitutes
bullying. Children and adults must
first be helped to recognize discrep-
ancies between the attitudes they es-
pouse and the ways in which they
react and then be helped to alter their
attitudes, reactions, and behavior.
Interventions must be built on the
assumption that it may be difficult to
follow definitions and guidelines be-
cause of the emotions that bullying
episodes arouse.
Social workers can play an impor-
tant role in helping parents and edu-
cators understand and respond to the
children's perspectives and feelings.
They can help teachers, parents, and
other adults become cognizant not
only of their OWTI views and attitudes,
but also of the possibility that the
child's viewpoint may differ from
their own and that the child's distress
may be greater than the adult antici-
pates (Landau et al., 2001). If a child
turns to an adult who does not con-
sider the situation bullying, the adult
must respond in a way that does not
invalidate the child's perspective of
the situation. If children are not lis-
tened to and validated, they may
doubt their OVVTI feelings and views
and may stop telling adults about their
victimization.
A significant theme that emerged
is bullying by friends, which furdher
confounds the complexity of identi-
fying and responding to bullying.
Respondents were more reticent to
judge behavior as bullying when it
occurred among friends, even when 243
the behavior fit bullying criteria. A Qualitative Study
Without information to the contrary, of Buliying from
adults might believe that leaving chil- Multipie Perspectives
dren to their own devices in navigat-
ing the friendship fosters growth.
Social workers can work with the
adult to intervene.
Programs aimed at bullying do not
address the dynamics and attachment
issues inherent in friendships. Inter-
ventions must be tailored to bullying
among friends, targeting the children,
their parents, and educators. Because
conflict is inevitable in close relation-
ships (Newcomb & Bagwell, 1995),
the management and resolution of
conflict are important to developing
and maintaining friendships. As form-
ing and maintaining friendships re- If Children are
quire skills in addition to those needed
not listened to
to improve peer relationships, social
skills training must specifically target and validated,
these skills (Asher, Parker, & Walker, they may doubt
1996). their own
The respondents were not neces- feelings and
sarily aware of the processes through views and may
which they determined, classified, stop teiiing
and responded to bullying situations. aduits about
An unanticipated effect of the re-
their
search interview was the shift made
by some respondents in their per- victimization.
spectives. Thus, the research process
offered evidence of the ability of in-
dividuals to change their attitudes
through refiection. Because recog-
nizing bullying depends in part on
beliefs and attitudes, this provides
further support for examining atti-
tudes toward bullying. An important
implication is the need to develop
interventions to help individuals be-
come more aware of their own
reasoning. •
About the Author
FayeMishna, PhD, is associate profes-
sor. Faculty of Social Work, University
244 of Toronto, 246 Bloor Street West, 2003, Washington, DC. The author ac-
Ctiiidren & Schools Toronto, Ontario M5S lA 1 Canada; e- knowledges support by Dr. Debra Pepler
Vol. 26, No. 4 mail f.mishna@utoronto.ca. An earlier and Dr. Judith Wiener (co-investiga-
October 2004 version of this article was presented at tors in the full study), the Connaught
the annual meeting of the Society for Fund, and the Social Sciences and Hu-
Social Work and Research, January manities Research Council of Canada.

References
Asher, S. R., Parker, J. G., & Walker, D. L. (1996). Distinguishing
friendship from acceptance: Implications for intervention and
assessment. In W. M. Bukowski, A. F. Newcomb, & W. W. Hartup
(Eds.), The company they keep: Friendship in childhood and adolescence (pp.
366-405). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Astor, R. A. (1995). School violence: A blueprint for elementary school
interventions. Social Work in Education, 17, 101-115.
Astor, R. A., & Meyer, H. A. (1999). Where girls and women won't go:
Female students', teachers', and social workers' views of school safety.
Social Work in Education, 21, 201-219.
Astor, R. A., Meyer, H. A., & Behre, W. J. (1999). Unowned places and
times: Maps and interviews about violence in high schools. American
Educational Research Journal, 36{\), 3-42.
Atlas, R. S., & Pepler, D. J. (1998). Observations of bullying in the
chssroom. Journal of Educational Research, 92(2), 86-99.
Bagwell, C. L., Newcomb, A. F., & Bukowski, W. M. (1998).
Preadolescent friendship and peer rejection. Child Development, 69,
140-153.
Batsche, G. M., & Knoff, H. M. (1994). BuUies and their victims:
Understanding a pervasive problem in the schools. School Psychology
Review, 23, 165-174.
Berdondini, L., & Smith, P. K. (1996). Cohesion and power in the famihes
of children involved in bully/victim problems at school: An Italian
replication. Journal of Family Therapy, 18, 99—102.
Cairns, R. B., & Cairns, B. D. (1991). Social cognition and social
networks: A developmental perspective. In D. Pepler & K. Rubin
(Eds.), The development and treatment of childhood aggression (pp. 249-
278). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Casey-Cannon, S., Hayward, C , & Gowen, K. (2001). Middle-school
girls' reports of peer victimization: Concerns, consequences, and
impliczaons. Professional School Counseling, 5, 138-147.
Charach, A., Pepler, D., & Ziegler, S. (1995, Spring). Bullying at school: A
Canadian perspective. Education Canada, pp. 12-19.
Clarke, E. A., & Kiselica, S. (1997). A systematic counseling approach to
the problem of bulljnng. Elementary School Guidance and Counseling,
5/, 310-325.
Craig, W. M. (1998). The relationship among bullying, victimization,
depression, anxiety, and aggression in elementary school children.
Personality and Individual Differences, 24, 123-130.
Craig, W. M., Henderson, K., & Murphy, J. G. (2000). Prospective 245
teachers' attitudes toward bullying and victimization. School Psychology . Q aitative'studv
International—Special Issue: Bullies and Victims, 21(1), 5-21. of Bullying from
Craig, W. M., & Pepler, D. J. (1997). Observations of bullying and Multiple Perspecfives
victimization in the school yard. Canadian Journal of School Psychology,
13(2), 41-60.
Creswell, J. W. (1998). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing
among five traditions. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Crick, N . R., & Bigbee, M. A. (1998). Relational and overt forms of peer
victimization: A multiinformant approach. Journal of Consulting and
Clinical Psychology, 66, 337-347.
Crick, N . R., & Grotpeter, J. K. (1995). Relational aggression, gender, and
social-psychological adjustment. Child Development, 66, 710-722.
Cullingford, C , & Morrison, J. (1995). Bullying as a formative influence:
The relationship between the experience at school and criminality.
British Educational Research Journal, 21, 547-560.
Damon, W., & Hart, D. (1982). T h e development of self-understanding
from infancy through adolescence. Child Development, S3, 841-864.
del Barrio, C , Gutierrez, H., Hoyos, O., Barrios, A., van der Meulen, K.,
& Smkotri, A. (1999). The use ofsemistructured interviews and
qualitative methods for the study ofpeer bullying. Retrieved January
2003, from http://www.gold.ac.uk/tmr/reports/aim2_madridl.
html#TOP
Eslea, M., & Smith, P. K. (2000). Pupil and parent attitudes towards
bullying in primary schools. European Journal of Psychology of
Education, 75,207-219.
Finnegan, R. A., Hodges, E.V.E., & Perry, D. G. (1998). Victimization
by peers: Associations with children's reports of mother-child
intencxion.. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 15, 1076-
1086.
Germain, C. B., & Bloom, M. (1999). Human behavior in the social
environment: An ecological view (2nd ed.). New York: Columbia
University Press.
Hanish, L. D., & Guerra, N . G. (2000). Children who get victimized at
school: What is known? What can be done? Professional School
Counseling, 4(2), 113-119.
Hodges, E.V.E., & Perry, D. G. (1999). Personal and interpersonal
antecedents and consequences of victimization by peers. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 16, 611-685.
Hugh-Jones, S., & Smith, P. K. (1999). Self-reports of short- and long-
term effects of bullying on children who stammer. British Journal of
Educational Psychology, 69, 141-158.
Hymel, S., & Franke, S. (1985). Children's peer relations: Assessing self-
perceptions. In B. H. Schneider, K. H. Rubin, & J. E. Ledingham
(Eds.), Children's peer relations: Issues in assessment and intervention (pp.
75-91). New York: Springer-Verlag.
Landau, S., Milich, R., Harris, M. J., & Larson, S. E. (2001). "You really
don't know how much it hurts": Children's and preservice teachers'
reactions to childhood teasing. School Psychology Review, 30, 329-343.
246 Laursen, B., & Bukowski, W. M. (1997). A developmental guide to the
Children & Schools organization of close relationships. International Journal of Behavioral
Vol. 26, No. 4 Development, 21, 747-770.
October 2004 Limper, R. (2000). Cooperation between parents, teachers, and school
boards to prevent bullying in education: An overview of work done in
the Netherlands. Aggressive Behavior, 26, 125-134.
Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Beverly Hills, CA:
Sage Publications.
Mishna, F. (2003). Learning disabilities and bullying: Double jeopardy.
Journal of Learning Disabilities, 36, 336-347.
Nansel, T. R., Overpeck, M., Pilla, R. S., Ruan, W. J., Simons-Morton, B.,
& Scheidt, P. (2001). Bullying behaviors among US youth:
Prevalence and association with psychosocial adjustment. JAMA,
2^5,2094-2100.
Newcomb, A. F., & Bagwell, C. L. (1995). Children's friendship relations:
A meta-analytic review. Psychological Bulletin, 111, 306-347.
Newman, R. S., Murray, B., & Lussier, C. (2001). Confrontation with
aggressive peers at school: Students' reluctance to seek help from the
t&2ich&r. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93, 398-410.
O'Connell, P., Pepler, D., & Craig, W. (1999). Peer involvement in
bullying: Insights and challenges for intervention. Journal of
Adolescence, 22, 437-452.
Olweus, D. (1991). Bully/victim problems among school children: Basic
facts and effects of a school based intervention program. In D. Pepler
& K. Rubin (Eds.), The development and treatment of childhood
aggression (pp. 411-448). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Olweus, D. (1994). Annotation: Bullying at school: Basic facts and effects
of a school based intervention program. Journal of Child Psychology and
Psychiatry and Allied Disciplines, 35, 1171-1190.
Olweus, D. (1997). Bully/victim problems in school: Facts and interventions.
European Journal of Psychology of Education, 12{^), 495-510.
Owens, L., Shute, R., & Slee, P. (2000). "Guess what I just heard!":
Indirect aggression among teenage girls in Australia. Aggressive
Behavior, 26(1), 67-83.
Paquette, J. A., & Underwood, M. K. (1999). Gender differences in young
adolescents' experiences of peer victimization: Social and physical
aggression. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 45, 242-266.
Pellegrini, A. D. (1998). Bullies and victims in school: A review and call for
v&sezrch.. Journal ofApplied Developmental Psychology, 19, 165-176.
Pepler, D. J., Craig, W. M., Ziegler, S., & Charach, A. (1993). A school-
based anti-bullying intervention: Preliminary evaluation. In D.
Tattum (Ed.), Understanding and managing bullying {^^. 76-91).
Oxford, England: Heinemann.
Prinstein, M. J., Boergers, J., & Vernberg, E. M. (2001). Overt and
relational aggression in adolescents: Social-psychological adjustment
of aggressors and vicxims. Journal of Clinical Child Psychology, 30, 479-
491.
Richards, L. (1999). Using NVivo in qualitative research. Bundoora,
Australia: Qualitative Solutions and Research Pty. Ltd.
Rigby, K., & Slee, P. T. (1991). Bullying among Australian school 247
children: Reported behavior and attitudes towards victims. Journal of . Qualitative'studv
Social Psychology, 131, 615-627. of Bullying from
Roland, E. (2000). Bullying in school: Three national innovations in Multiple Perspectives
N o r w e g i a n schools in 15 years. Aggressive Behavior, 26, 135-143.
Schwartz, D., McFadyen-Ketchum, S., Dodge, K. A., Pettit, G. S., &
Bates, J. E. (1999). Early behavior problems as a predictor of later
peer group victimization: Moderators and mediators in the pathways
of social risk. Jojimal ofAbnormal Child Psychology, 27(3), 191-201.
Sharp, S. (1996). The role of peers in tackling bullying in schools.
Educational Psychology in Practice, 11{^), 17-22.
Sharp, S., Arora, T., Smith, P. K., & Whitney, I. (1994). How to measure
bullying in your school. In S. Sharp & P. K. Smith (Eds.), Tackling
bullying in your school i^^. 7-21). London: Routledge.
Smith, P. K. (1991). The silent nightmare: Bullying and victimisation in
school peer groups. Psychologist: Bulletin of the British Psychological
Society, 4, 243-248.
Smith, P. K. (1997). Bullying in life-span perspective: What can studies of
school bullying and workplace bullying learn from each other?
Joumalof Community and Applied Social Psychology, 7, 249-255.
Smith, P. K, Cowie, H., Olafsson, R. E., & Liefooghe, A.P.D. (2002).
Definitions of bullying: A comparison of terms used, and age and
gender differences in a fourteen-country international comparison.
Child Development, 73, 1119-113 3.
Smith, P. K., & Myron-Wilson, R. (1998). Parenting and school bullying.
Clinical Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 3, 405-417.
Stephenson, P., & Smith, D. (1989). Bullying in the junior school. In D. P.
Tattum & D. A. Lane (Eds.), Bullying in schools (pp. 45-57). Stoke-
on-Trent, England: Trentham Books.
Thompson, D., Whitney, I., & Smith, I. (1994). Bullying of children with
special needs in mainstream schools. Support for Leaming, P(3), 103-
106.
Van Manen, M. (1990). Researching lived experience: Human science for an
action sensitive pedagogy. London, Ontario: Althouse Press and State
University of New York Press.
Ziegler, S., & Rosenstein-Manner, M. (1991). Bullying at school: Toronto in
an international context. Toronto: Toronto Board of Education,
Research Services.

Accepted February 22, 2004