Abstract
This study examined the heterogeneity of bullying among adolescents. It was hypothesized that bullying behavior serves different social functions and, depending on these functions, bullies will differ in their skills, status and social behavior. In a total sample of 806 8th graders, 120 adolescents (52 boys, 68 girls) were identified as bullies based on peer nominations. An additional group of 50 adolescents (25 boys, 25 girls) served as the non-bully comparison group. Cluster analysis revealed three corresponding bully subtypes for boys and girls: a popular-socially intelligent group, a popular moderate group, and an unpopular-less socially intelligent group. Follow-up analyses showed that the clusters differed significantly from each other in physical and verbal aggression, leadership, network centrality, peer rejection, and self-perceptions of bullying. The results confirm the heterogeneous nature of bullies and the complex nature of bullying in the adolescent peer group.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Andreou, E. (2004). Bully/victim problems and their association with Machiavellianism and self-efficacy in Greek primary school children. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 74, 297–309.
Archer, J. (2001). A strategic approach to aggression. Social Development, 10, 267–271.
Arsenio, W. F., & Lemerise, E. A. (2001). Varieties of childhood bullying: Values, emotion process, and social competence. Social Development, 10, 59–73.
Bartsch, K., & Wellman, H. (1989). Young children’s attribution of action to beliefs and desires. Child Development, 60, 946–964.
Björkqvist, K., Lagerspetz, K. M. J., & Kaukiainen, A. (1992). Do girls manipulate and boys fight? Developmental trends regarding direct and indirect aggression. Aggressive Behavior, 18, 117–127.
Björkqvist, K., Österman, K., & Kaukianen, A. (2000). Social intelligence − empathy = aggression? Aggression and Violent Behavior, 5, 191–200.
Bonacich, P. (1987). Power and centrality: A family of measures. American Journal of Sociology, 92, 1170–1182.
Borgatti, S. P., Everett, M. G., & Freeman, L. C. (2002). UCINET for windows: Software for social network analysis. Harvard, MA: Analytic Technologies.
Camodeca, M., Goossens, F. A., Schuengel, F. E., & Terwogt, M. M. (2003). Links between social information processing in middle childhood and involvement in bullying. Aggressive Behavior, 29, 116–127.
Caravita, S. C. S., Di Blasio, P., & Salmivalli, C. (2008). Unique and interactive effects of empathy and social status on involvement in bullying. Social Development, 18, 140–163.
Christie, R., & Geis, F. L. (1970). Studies in machiavellianism. New York: Academic Press.
Cillessen, A. H. N., & Borch, C. (2006). Developmental trajectories of adolescent popularity: A growth curve modelling analysis. Journal of Adolescence, 29, 935–959.
Cillessen, A. H. N., & Mayeux, L. (2004). From censure to reinforcement: Developmental changes in the association between aggression and social status. Child Development, 75, 147–163.
Cillessen, A. H. N., & Rose, A. J. (2005). Understanding popularity in the peer system. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 14, 102–105.
Cillessen, A. H. N. (2009). Sociometric methods. In K. H. Rubin, W. M. Bukowski, & B. Laursen (Eds.), Handbook of peer interactions, relationships, and groups (pp. 82–99). New York: Guilford.
Cillessen, A. H. N., van IJzendoorn, H. W., van Lieshout, C. F. M., & Hartup, W. W. (1992). Heterogeneity among peer-rejected boys: Subtypes and stabilities. Child Development, 63, 893–905.
Coie, J. D., Dodge, K. A., & Coppotelli, H. (1982). Dimensions and types of social status: A cross-age perspective. Developmental Psychology, 18, 557–570.
Coie, J. D., Dodge, K. A., Terry, R., & Wright, V. (1991). The role of aggression in peer relations: An analysis of aggression episodes in boys’ play groups. Child Development, 62, 812–826.
Crick, N. R., & Dodge, K. A. (1994). A review and reformulation of social information-processing mechanisms in children’s social adjustment. Psychological Bulletin, 115, 74–101.
Crick, N. R., & Dodge, K. A. (1999). “Superiority” is in the eye of the beholder: A comment on Sutton, Smith, and Swettenham. Social Development, 8, 128–131.
de Bruyn, E. H., & Cillessen, A. H. N. (2006). Heterogeneity of girls’ consensual popularity: Academic and interpersonal behavioral profiles. Journal of Adolescence, 35, 435–445.
Dodge, K. A., Coie, J. D., & Brakke, N. P. (1982). Behavior patterns of socially rejected and neglected preadolescents: The roles of social approach and aggression. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 10, 389–410.
Eder, D. (1985). The cycle of popularity: Interpersonal relations among female adolescents. Sociology of Education, 58, 154–165.
Estell, D. B., Cairns, R. B., Farmer, T. W., & Cairns, B. D. (2002). Aggression in inner-city early elementary classrooms: Individual and peer-group configurations. Merrill -Palmer Quarterly, 48, 52–76.
Estell, D. B., Farmer, T. W., & Cairns, B. D. (2007). Bullies and victims in rural African American youth: Behavioral characteristics and social network placement. Aggressive Behavior, 33, 145–159.
Farmer, T. W., Estell, D. B., Bishop, L., O’Neal, K. K., & Cairns, B. D. (2003). Rejected bullies or popular leaders? The social relations of aggressive subtypes of rural African American early adolescents. Developmental Psychology, 99, 992–1004.
French, D. C. (1990). Heterogeneity of peer-rejected girls. Child Development, 61, 2028–2031.
Garandeau, C. F., & Cillessen, A. H. N. (2006). From indirect aggression to invisible aggression: A conceptual view on bullying and peer group manipulation. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 11, 612–625.
Gini, G. (2006). Social cognition and moral cognition in bullying: What’s wrong? Aggressive Behavior, 32, 528–539.
Gini, G., Albiero, P., Benelli, B., & Altoè, G. (2007). Does empathy predict adolescents’ bullying and defending behavior? Aggressive Behavior, 33, 467–476.
Hair, J. F., & Black, W. C. (2000). Cluster analysis. In L. G. Grimm & P. R. Yarnold (Eds.), Reading and understanding more multivariate statistics (pp. 147–205). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
LaFontana, K. M., & Cillessen, A. H. N. (in press). Developmental changes in the priority of perceived status in childhood and adolescence. Social Development.
Meijs, N., Cillessen, A. H. N., Scholte, R. H. J., Segers, E., & Spijkerman, R. (in press). Social intelligence and academic achievement as predictors of adolescent popularity. Journal of Youth and Adolescence.
Nansel, T. R., Overpeck, M., Pilla, R. S., Ruan, W. J. K., Simons-Morten, B., & Scheidt, P. (2001). Bullying behaviors among US youth: Prevalence and association with psychosocial adjustment. Journal of the American Medical Association, 285, 2094–2100.
Olweus, D. (1989). The Olweus bully/victim questionnaire. Mimeo, Bergen, Norwegen.
Olweus, D. (1994). Bullying at school: Basic facts and effects of a school based intervention program. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 35, 1171–1190.
Parkhurst, J. T., & Hopmeyer, A. (1998). Sociometric popularity and peer perceived popularity: Two distinct dimensions of peer status. Journal of Early Adolescence, 18, 125–144.
Pellegrini, A. D., Bartini, M., & Brooks, F. (1999). School bullies, victims, and aggressive victims: Factors related to group affiliation and victimization in early adolescence. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91, 216–234.
Pellegrini, A. D., & Long, J. D. (2002). A longitudinal study of bullying, dominance, and victimization during the transition from primary school through secondary school. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 20, 259–280.
Putallaz, M., Grimes, L. C., Foster, J. K., Kupersmidt, J. B., Coie, J. D., & Dearing, K. (2007). Overt and relational aggression and victimization: Multiple perspectives within the school setting. Journal of School Psychology, 45, 523–547.
Rodkin, P. C., Farmer, T. W., Pearl, R., & van Acker, R. (2000). Heterogeneity of popular boys: Antisocial and prosocial configurations. Developmental Psychology, 36, 14–24.
Salmivalli, C. (1999). The participant role approach to school bullying: Implications for interventions. Journal of Adolescence, 22, 453–459.
Salmivalli, C., & Kaukiainen, A. (2004). Female aggression revisited: Variable- and person-centered approaches to studying gender differences in different types of aggression. Aggressive Behavior, 30, 158–163.
Salmivalli, C., Kaukiainen, A., & Lagerspetz, K. (2000). Aggression and sociometric status among peers: Do gender and type of aggression matter? Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 41, 17–24.
Salmivalli, C., Kaukiainen, A., & Voeten, M. (2005). Anti-bullying intervention: Implementation and outcome. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 75, 465–487.
Salmivalli, C., Lagerspetz, K., Björkqvist, K., Österman, K., & Kaukiainen, A. (1996). Bullying as a group process: Participant roles and their relations to social status within the group. Aggressive Behavior, 22, 1–15.
Salmivalli, C., & Nieminen, E. (2002). Proactive and reactive aggression among school bullies, victims and bully-victims. Aggressive Behavior, 28, 30–44.
Sentse, M., Scholte, R., Salmivalli, C., & Voeten, M. (2007). Person-group dissimilarity in involvement in bullying and its relation with social status. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 35, 1009–1019.
Silvera, D. H., Martinussen, M., & Dahl, T. I. (2001). The Tromsø social intelligence scale: A self-report measure of social intelligence. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 42, 313–319.
Solberg, M. E., & Olweus, D. (2003). Prevalence estimation of school bullying with the Olweus bully/victim questionnaire. Aggressive Behavior, 29, 239–268.
Sutton, J., & Keogh, E. (2000). Social competition in school: Relationships with bullying, machiavellianism and personality. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 70, 443–456.
Sutton, J., & Keogh, E. (2001). Components of machiavellian beliefs in children: Relationships with personality. Personality and Individual Differences, 30, 137–148.
Sutton, J., Smith, P. K., & Swettenham, J. (1999a). Social cognition and bullying: Social inadequacy or skilled manipulation? British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 17, 435–450.
Sutton, J., Smith, P. K., & Swettenham, J. (1999b). Bullying and “theory of mind”. A critique of the “social skills deficit” view of antisocial behavior. Social Development, 8, 117–127.
Sutton, J., Smith, P. K., & Swettenham, J. (1999c). Socially undesirable need not be incompetent: A response to Crick and Dodge. Social Development, 8, 132–134.
Sutton, J., Smith, P. K., & Swettenham, J. (2001). It’s easy, it works, and it makes me feel good. A response to Arsenio and Lemerise. Social Development, 10, 74–78.
Vaillancourt, T., Hymel, S., & McDougall, P. (2003). Bullying is power: Implications for school-based intervention strategies. Journal of Applied School Psychology, 19, 157–176.
Xie, H., Swift, D. J., Cairns, B. D., & Cairns, R. B. (2002). Aggressive behaviors in social interaction and developmental adaptation: A narrative analysis of interpersonal conflicts during early adolescence. Social Development, 11, 205–224.
Acknowledgments
This research was supported by a Master’s Research Grant from the Behavioural Science Institute to the first author. The authors are grateful to the students who participated in this study. Special thanks are also due to the teachers and administrators of the Valuas College, Venlo and the BBC College, Panningen, The Netherlands who made this research possible.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Peeters, M., Cillessen, A.H.N. & Scholte, R.H.J. Clueless or Powerful? Identifying Subtypes of Bullies in Adolescence. J Youth Adolescence 39, 1041–1052 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-009-9478-9
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-009-9478-9