Personality and family relations of children who bully
Introduction
Significant associations have been reported between the tendency to bully others and poor family psycho-social health (Rigby, 1993). Stephenson and Smith (1987) found that children involved in bullying are three times more likely to have problems in the home. Family therapists have long regarded positive and effective communication in families as a critical determinant of healthy family functioning among adolescents (Duhl & Duhl, 1981). Family factors associated with childhood aggression are absence of a father, loss of a parent through divorce rather than death, a depressed mother, an irritable parent and marital discord (Wolff, 1985). Research indicates children who bully have a negative paternal and maternal relationship, which appears to play a part in the maladjustment of a child (Olweus, 1980). A fundamentally negative or rejecting attitude from the parent creates strong aggressive tendencies and hostility in a child (Bandura and Walters, 1959). Parents of very aggressive boys and delinquents have been characterised by a combination of lax mothers and hostile fathers (Andry, 1960).
Psychoanalysts have laid great emphasis upon the emotional attitudes of parents, especially mothers in the formation of the characters of their children. A cold and rejecting attitude on the part of the mother referred to as “silent violence” have been correlated with the bullying behaviour of the son (Olweus, 1980). Young children who harass or bully others in school tend to have over controlling and dominating home environments, indicating that this type of dysfunctional family doesn't produce empathy in a child (Manning, Heron, & Marshall, 1978). Paternal absence seems to affect boys more than girls, making the boys less aggressive when young, but more aggressive during adolescence (Zigler & Child, 1969).
Adolescents who experience low levels of emotional support and whose families are unsympathetic, are more likely to bully their peers (Rigby, 1994). However, it is not just a matter of parental attitude but the family situation in total. The ability of the family as a whole in sustaining positive and effective communication is seen as a vital component in the development of positive coping, social and personal skills. Adolescents who bully are more likely to come from families who are deficient in such skills. Bullies perceive their family as lacking in cohesion, they see their fathers as more powerful than mothers, and siblings as more powerful than themselves (Bowers, Smith, & Binney, 1992). In a study of young male bullies Olweus (1980) found that their home environments are often violent. The fathers often used violent methods of punishing their children that may be related to the fact that the boy uses violence towards others. Parents who often use physical punishment and power assertive child rearing methods, frequently have aggressive sons. Behaviour towards peers is seen as resulting from a failure in bonding with a parent figure, giving rise to chronic insecurity and a suspicious nature.
The personality of an individual plays a large role in the presence or absence of bullying behaviour. The characteristics of children who bully include aggression (Olweus, 1993) lack of empathy, a strong need to dominate others and a positive attitude towards violence (Olweus, 1978). Bullying behaviour has also been associated with unhappiness, a dislike of school, depression (Slee, 1993) and low self-esteem (Mynard and Joseph, 1997, O'Moore, 2000). A child's personality is greatly influenced by their upbringing and experiences. Therefore the experiences of children who come from less cohesive, or dysfunctional homes may be related to their personality type. A personality based explanation of bullying was favoured by Olweus (1984). At the same time he acknowledged the role of early child rearing practices in bullying. Aggressive children are reported to lack internal controls such as guilt and anxiety over aggressive behaviour and empathy, and that these are an important determinant of whether aggressive behaviour will occur or not (Megargee, 1971, Staub and Conn, 1973).
Insufficient ego development may also point towards impulsivity, the inability to delay gratification and poor behaviour control often observed in aggressive and anti-social individuals. Thomas and Chess (1977) showed that a child's temperament may have an influence on behaviour. Children who are irregular in their eating and sleeping habits, intense in their emotional responses, aggressive, irritable, and who adapt slowly to new situations and show a great deal of negative mood are those most likely to develop behavioural problems. Children who demonstrated these characteristics from birth onwards were reported to push, hit and fight more in nursery school (Billman & McDevitt, 1980) and to have “Difficult Child Syndrome” (Graham, Rutter, & George, 1973). As parents become more assertive in discipline and punishment, the child responds more aggressively which can play a part in the development of a bully (Randall, 1991, Sroufe, 1988).
Interestingly, Eysenck's theory of criminality (Eysenck & Eysenck, 1964) and theory of anti-social behaviour (Eysenck, 1977), suggests that such conduct could be found more frequently in people with high scores on extraversion, neuroticism and psychoticism. Some research has also indicated high psychoticism scales (Slee & Rigby, 1993b) and high neuroticism scales (Byrne, 1994) in children who bully. It is suggested that extraverts are more prone to crime and anti-social behaviour, because they pursue rewards without fear of consequences, and are impatient and impulsive. Extraversion is not the only personality predictor of delinquency and anti-social behaviour. The relationship is usually stronger when high levels of neuroticism are also involved and a high psychoticism level is an even stronger predictor. The high neuroticism scorer has been described as anxious, moody, often depressed and having strong emotional reactions. Neurotic tendencies are believed to intensify emotional reactions. High psychoticism scorers are typical of people who are solitary, lacking in feeling, cruel, hostile and enjoy upsetting others. They seldom feel guilty (Eysenck, 1977). These personality dimensions contain many characteristics of those found in children who bully (O'Moore, 1995, Slee, 1995). Thus, the aim of the present study is to examine further the personality and family relationships of children who bully.
Section snippets
Subjects
There were 228 students who took part in the study. The sample comprised of 107 girls and 121 boys ranging from 6 to 16 years of age, from seven schools, four of which were primary and three post-primary. A modified version of Bankside Boys’ School and Lamont's Girl's schools questionnaire (Keise, 1992) was distributed in group form. On the basis of the questionnaire the participants were categorized into either a bully group or a control group. There were 115 students who were classified as
Family relations
From Table 1 it can be seen that there were significant differences (P<0.05) produced in the Nobody category across each of the four response groups of the Family Relations Test. The bully group assigned less negative and more positive emotions to Nobody. This indicated that the bully group, more than the control group, inhibited the expression of positive emotions towards or from their family members as well as exhibiting more negative feeling to their family. It can further be seen in the
Discussion
The children who bullied in the present study placed more positive and less negative cards in the Nobody box than did the controls. This indicates a greater inhibition among children who bully to express their emotions freely towards the various members of their families. Frost (1969) found that delinquents attributed more negative items to the Nobody box than any other group though the difference was only significant in the Outgoing category. The bully group in the present study also placed
References (39)
Peer victimization and its relationship to depression among Australian primary school students
Personality and Individual Differences
(1995)Delinquency and parental pathology
(1960)- et al.
Assessment of bully/victim problems in 8 to 11 year-olds
British Journal of Educational Psychology
(1996) - et al.
Adolescent aggression
(1959) - et al.
Manual for Family Relations Test
(1957) - et al.
Convergence of parent and observer ratings of temperament with observations of peer interaction in nursery schools
Child Development
(1980) - et al.
Bully/victim problems among middle school children
British Journal of Educational Psychology
(1992) - et al.
Cohesion and power in the families of children involved in bully/victim problems
Journal of Family Therapy
(1992) Bullies and victims in a school setting with reference to some Dublin schools
The Irish journal of Psychology
(1994)- et al.
Integrative family therapy
(1981)
Crime and personality
The Manual of the Eysenck Personality Inventory
Manual of the Eysenck Personality Questionnaire
Family relations test:a normative study
Journal of Projective Techniques and Personality Assessment
Temperamental characteristics as predictors of behaviour problems in children
American Journal of Orthopsychiatry
Styles of hostility and social interactions at nursery, at school and at home
The role of inhibition in the assessment and understanding of violence
Bully/victim problems and their association with Eysenck's personality dimension in 8 to 13 year olds
British Journal of Educational Psychology
Cited by (115)
Bullying and cyberbullying: Do personality profiles matter in adolescence?
2023, Telematics and Informatics ReportsBeyond grades: A meta-analysis of personality predictors of academic behavior in middle school and high school
2022, Personality and Individual DifferencesCitation Excerpt :Highlighting its importance as a facet of academic performance, aggression in the classroom has been examined in connection with and found to be related to outcomes like rejection, substance abuse, and school failure (Pope & Bierman, 1999). Past research has indicated that personality is predictive of academic dishonesty in college students (Lee et al., 2020) and of aggression and bullying behavior in adolescents (Connolly & O'Moore, 2003). Unlike previous outcomes, here we expect Agreeableness to be the most important predictor, since the negative pole of Agreeableness is often conceptualized as aggression, and rule-breaking behavior is generally antithetical to the cooperative and altruistic nature of Agreeableness.
Dark Triad and instigated incivility: The moderating role of workplace spirituality
2020, Personality and Individual DifferencesThe role of psychoticism in the relationship between attachment to parents and homophobic bullying: A study in adolescence
2020, SexologiesCitation Excerpt :The results are also in line with the Eysenck's theory (1977), that suggested how individuals with traits of psychoticism may also be prone to aggressive behaviours. Therefore, the two mediation models are in line with the more complex perspective in the literature, that adequate primary relationships with the mother and the father can be important protective factors for the adolescent's psychological health, because they provide adequate internal operating models in relations with their own and others (Bowlby, 1979; Thompson, 2008), and how mental health, connoted by problems related to psychoticism (social withdrawal, avoidance, dissociative experiences), can then lead to deviant behaviour (Connolly and O’Moore, 2003; D’Urso et al., 2020). In an ecological perspective (Bronfenbrenner, 1977, 1979), also, the internal frustration experienced by the adolescent can lead to episodes of manifest aggression towards the one who is considered culturally different.