Bullying explained

A REACTION PAPER ON A STUDY ENTITLED

Attachment Quality and Bullying Behavior in School-Aged Youth

By Laura M. Walden and Tanya N. Beran

Written by

Marcial I. Enginco

Submitted to

Grace Koo, PhD

Professor, EDFD 210

Human Development and Learning

University of the Philippines Diliman

College of Education

SUMMARY

The study entitled “Attachment Quality and Bullying Behavior in School-aged Youth” was conducted by Laura M. Walden and Tanya N. Beran to determine the relationship between students’ quality of attachment to their primary caregivers and the frequency with which they bully others and are the victims of bullying.  It covered 105 student respondents from Grade 4, Grade 6 and Grade 8 from a Canadian middle school located in the suburbs.  The respondents were required to submit a consent form signed by their parent or guardian before they were made to accomplish an Inventory of Parent and Peer Attachment (IPPA) questionnaire, which is a self-report instrument designed to measure students’ perceptions of the degree of mutual trust, quality of communication, and the extent of anger and alienation in their current relationships.

The study established that students who reported high-quality attachment with their caregivers are less likely to bully others or be bullied.  Students who reported an insecure relationship with their caregivers have shown the tendency to bully others, particularly those students who have experienced a high level of alienation from their caregivers.

NEW LEARNINGS

Bullying is nothing new.  It has been around since the Pharaohs of Egypt learned to throw their weight around unsuspecting, docile subjects, and stretches even far longer into written and oral history.  In fact, one of the earliest stories in the Bible is about bullying gone bad when Cain, Adam and Eve’s eldest son, bullied and eventually murdered his younger brother Abel, who was the first couple’s favorite.  Bullying, according to psychologists, may escalate into murderous tendencies if not addressed properly.

But as a new graduate student taking Educational Psychology and a former advertising professional with little or no knowledge about facts behind bullying behavior I have to admit that it is my first time to read, or is compelled to read, a research that attempts to explain its relational cause – Attachment Quality. 

Although the scope of the study is localized to a certain demographic sample in suburban Canada, I believe that its core finding carries a universal truth, and that certain results and implications arising from the said study may be applied, in varying degrees and permutations, to different cultures and demography such as ours – a developing nation with its own sets of dynamics in attachment qualities and caregiving conditions.

The study’s chief finding that poor attachment quality may lead a child to become either a bully or the bully victim or, in my case -- both -- is personally compelling and revealing.  While I did look up to my mother as my family’s pillar of strength, she was neither emotionally warm nor physically and verbally demonstrative of her feelings for her children (insecure attachment).  My father, on the other hand, was more demonstrative and vocal but, being an alcoholic, was not someone who engendered trust in a developing child (alienation).  So while I had a semblance of a strong attachment with my mother, the overall quality of my attachment with both my parents can be considered poor, leading me to be what the study suggests: Prone to either being a Bully or the Bullied.

When I was in elementary and high school, classmates who were physically smaller and mentally inferior tended to shy away from me for I was mischievous and habitually pulled off pranks and traps that would put them in either an embarrassing situation, in trouble, or at the butt of further jokes. I pulled away chairs when classmates were about to sit, tugged at the straps of girls’ trainer bras, rigged fights between unsuspecting protagonists, and accomplished many stunts that made victims more wary of my presence, and theirs.  But perhaps the worst form of bullying I did was letting a slow member of our class know how slow she really was.  Once, during a particularly tense class recitation where she was called to perform, I whispered to her a wrong and utterly inane answer that she was reduced to near tears after the class burst out in loud laughter when she finished repeating my misfeed.  She became more timid after that humiliating experience.   However, this did not stop me from doing more of the same to her and other “lesser” classmates.  I am aware that I scarred her for life because I did not see or hear from her after high school.  The only thing I know about her now is that she legally changed her name and moved out of the country, perhaps to start a new life away from the image that I helped mold for her.

But as the Bully Totem Pole goes, I was not on top of the pecking order for outside of my classroom was a physical bully – Julius Yago – who constantly threatened me with mayhem when I was in grade school.  I don’t recall how I became a favorite subject of his menace except that I remember making him look bad in a game of basketball where I was, in my school, considered a star.

He was not able to inflict actual physical harm on me but I do remember the terror I felt when he would loiter outside my classroom and make motions at me to come out as his henchboys tried to look their gangster best – crackling their knuckles and doing some strange stretching exercises as if they were preparing for some brisk action.  I was terrified for my life and I remember experiencing fear-induced fever, numbness and some sleepless nights.  I could not understand nor explain why someone I have no grudge against or ill-feelings for would like to beat me up good, as much as I did not understand and could not explain why I would try with gusto to embarrass and put in ridiculous situations classmates who had done me no wrong.  Belatedly, this study which zeroes in on early child-parent relationship quality partly explains why I, and perhaps Julius Yago, behaved the way we did when we were much younger.

STRENGTHS AND WEAKNESSES

With a sample size of 105 culled from a school that has basically a homogenous student population, this study can hardly be called extensive or exhaustive.  But what it lacks in breadth it makes up for in depth of purpose, which is to establish a link between the quality of a child’s early relationships with his parents vis-à-vis being a bully or a bully victim. 

I also believe that this study has successfully outlined a general truth that bullying behavior and being its victim is not a phenomenon that begins and ends in school but rather is a foundational flaw in the home that, unfortunately, regularly rears its ugly self in a school environment.

I think the rather small sample size and its homogeneity where respondents are predominantly white and, I suppose, coming from the same social bracket prevents  the results, conclusions, implications and recommendations arising  from the study to be generally applicable in situations where geographic, economic and social demographics vary, e.g. multi-ethnicity environment such as in International Schools, or in an urban locale where population is either dominated by white or black or any given race, as I would like to assume that while the tendency to bully may be inherent in a certain child because of his poor quality attachment values, the opportunity to act on it may be mitigated by other circumstances such as if he finds himself in the minority where  the budding bully may not be able to act on his impulses just as easily if he was in a more superior position, say in a majority.

And while I support the findings that there is a relationship between bullying or being a bully victim with the quality of attachment to primary caregivers, I believe that the Consent Form that the respondents’ parents/caregivers were made to sign to formalize the subjects’ inclusion to the study has somewhat weakened the intensity of the established link.  I think that it is in the nature and interest of a detached and/or uncaring parent/caregiver not to sign the Consent Form especially if it is made clear to him that the quality of his relationship with his child is going to be subject of a study.  Hence, I suspect that there is a greater number of parents/caregivers with poor relationships with their child who did not sign the consent form than those that actually did, thereby diluting the result.  If it was legally and ethically acceptable for the students to respond to the questionnaire mandatorily then I believe that the real score can be obtained.

IMPLICATIONS

For as long as children learn the push and pull, and the zig and zag of the dynamics of human relationships in the microcosm of school, solving the bullying menace is, I think, impossible as it is in the natural process of human development that such situations will inevitably arise when there is prolonged and sustained interaction between individuals of varying degrees of intelligence, strength, physical attributes and economic and social backgrounds.  What this study accomplishes however is that it points school administrators and psychologists in the right direction in better understanding and finding intervention programs that would mitigate the development of behavioral tendencies to bully or to be bullied, and up to a certain degree, limit its occurrence and prevalence in the educational system.

Programs that educate parents of the effects of poorly established relationships at home would be a good starting point, and so is establishing appropriate monitoring and guidance mechanisms for students who have been assessed to have bullying tendencies.  Likewise, teachers and school officials and staff may be instructed to pay more attention to students who have been victims of bullying so that they may be able to reestablish a certain degree of connection and trust with adults that would help them recover their self-esteem and make them less susceptible to bullying tactics.

Closer to home, it is interesting to find out how the results of this study apply to the realities of the Philippines where many families have either one or both parents working abroad; often leaving the caregiving responsibilities to relatives (grandparents, uncles, aunts) who may not be viewed by the child as an authoritative figure but merely as a guardian, or to the eldest child who despite being wanting in quality attachment himself,  takes on the mantle of a father and/or mother figure to younger siblings, or in some cases to househelp who neither have the influence nor the parental sensitivity to provide a secure and warm family environment to the youth.

I wonder then, is this present reality breeding an army of bullies and victims that would inevitably cross paths in the school, creating a situation that is alarming and constantly escalating?  If so, our schools might have some of the highest prevalence of bullying in the world.  Or is the proverbial ability of the Filipino to adapt and find a measure of normalcy under difficult circumstances limiting the incidence to manageable levels?  If so, I would like to imagine that extended families which include neighbors, ninongs and ninangs, alternative support systems such as parents of friends, and the ability of the Filipinos to utilize communication technology such as Facebook, Facetime and mobile phones to establish a de facto attachment with absentee parents all contribute to providing a child sources of emotional and psychological stability that would temper bullying tendencies or enhancing self-esteem that wards off bullying attempts.


This is my first graduate school paper.  Technical writing is not my forte but I'm working on it.