--

Children Who GetVictimized at School:

What Is Known? WhatCan Be Done?

Laura.Hanish@asu.edu.

Al too often, children victimize other children at

school. This peer victimization can take diverse

forms and may range in severity from verbal (e.g.,name

calling, threatening, and taunting) and relational

assaults (e.g., gossiping, excluding from social interac-

tions, and destroying social relationships) to physical

assaults (e.g., hitting, kicking, and shoving) and weapon

use (Furlong, Sharma, & Rhee, 2000). A recent observa-

tional study of peer interactions in the classroom

revealed that children victimize their classmates approx-

imately two and one-half times an hour (Atlas & Pepler,

1998). This estimate is likely to be even higher in other

school settings in which adult monitoring is less consis-

tent than in the classroom such as playgrounds, hall-

ways, or restrooms (d., Whitney & Smith, 1993).

Peer victimization is a troubling problem for school

personnel because it can hinder teaching and learning in

numerous ways.Not onlydoes peer victimization causedisruptions in the classroom environment that directlyinterfere with instruction, but also the children who areinvolved in victimization, either as victims or perpetra-tors, are at risk for developing potentially severe social,emotional, behavioral, and academic problems that mayfurther hamper education (Furlong et al., 2000; Hanish,2000; Kochenderfer & Ladd, 1996;Schwartz, McFadyen-Ketchum, Dodge, Pettit, & Bates, 1998). For example,aggressive and victimized children may display disrup-tive and delinquent behaviors, inattention in the class-room, symptoms ofanxiety and depression, disruptedpeer relationships, reduced interest in and attachment toschool, and diminished academic achievement. These

Laura D. Hanish, Ph.D., is an

assista/1tprofessor,Department

of Family Resources and Human

Development, Arizona State

University, Tempe.

Nancy G. Guerra, Ph.D., is a

professor, Department of

Psychology, University of

California at Riverside.

Please address correspondence to

Laura D. Hanish, Department of

Family Resources and Human

Development, Arizona State

University, PO. Box 872502,

Tempe, AZ 85287-2502. E-mail:

ASCA . Professional School Counseling. 4:2 December 2000 113

~

.,IJ

behaviors can disrupt children's learn-ing by interfering with their participa-tion and engagement in schoolwork(e.g., Ladd, Birch, & Buhs, 1999). Thus,understanding and reducing schoolvictimization is crucial for creating aca-demic environments that facilitate

learning. In this article we explain whypeer victimization occurs and providerecommendations to school counselorsabout how to reduce it.

Why Do Children GetVictimized?At one time or another, most childrenare victimized by peers; however,some children are much more likelythan others to be victimized. On aver-age, approximately 1 in 10 children arerepeatedly and persistently victimizedby peers, although prevalence esti-mates vary considerably (Olweus,1994). The degree to which particular children are tar-geted for victimization by peers depends, in large part,on their personal characteristics and behaviors, thedynamics of the peer group, and the structure and cli-mate of the school environment.

Demographic CharacteristicsPrevalence estimates vary greatly and depend, in part,upon demographic characteristics-age, gender, andethnicity-that make some children more vulnerablethan others (Finkelhor & Asdigian, 1996; Hanish &Guerra, 2000). Age is an important risk factor for beingvictimized because younger children are less likelythan older children to have developed physical, cogni-tive, and social skills that can protect them from peerattacks (Finkelhor, 1995). Rates of peer victimizationare quite high among early elementary school-agedchildren, particularly for second graders who arebeginning to spend increasing amounts of time withpeers (Ellis, Rogoff, & Cromer, 1981; Hanish & Guerra,2000; Olweus, 1994;). At these early elementary schoolages, however, victimization is only minimally stableover time, and most young children experience victim-ization as relatively untargeted and transient (Hanish& Guerra, 2000). As children get older, however, thispattern changes. Victimization is less common amongolder children than among younger children, in partbecause older children have developed more self-pro-tection skills. When it occurs for older children,though, it tends to be quite stable over time (Hanish &Guerra, 2000; Olweus, 1978). Thus, older children arevictimized more selectively, and those who are tar-geted by peers tend to be victimized repeatedly overtime.

--

Although both boys and girls getvictimized, boys' victimization takes adifferent form than does girls' victim-ization. In the school years, socialinteractions tend to be gender-segre-gated; boys interact predominantlywith boys, and girls interact predomi-nantly with girls. Moreover, socialinteraction styles .differ by gender.Boys tend to engage in physical activi-ties such as rough-and-tumble playand physical contests, but girls tend toengage in quieter and more intimatesocial activities (Maccoby, 1999). Notonly do girls and boys engage in dif-ferent forms of social interaction, butthey are differentially vulnerable tocertain forms of victimization such assexual victimization, because they aredifferentially reinforcing to perpetra-tors (Finkelhor & Asdigian, 1996). It isno surprise, then, that boys and girls

experience victimization differently. Boys are morelikely than girls to be physically victimized; they aremore often punched, kicked, and threatened with aweapon. Girls, in contrast, are more likely to be rela-tionally and sexually victimized; they are more oftengossiped about, intentionally excluded from socialactivities, and sexually harassed (Crick & Bigbee, 1998;Furlong et al., 2000).

Ethnicity also influences children's experiences ofbeing victimized. A recent study of elementary school-aged children living in moderately and highly disad-vantaged communities revealed that the risk of beingvictimized was higher for White and for African-American children than for Latino children (Hanish &Guerra, 2000). Moreover, whereas White children werelikely to be victimized in ethnically integrated schools,African-American were likely to be victimized in non-integrated, predominantly African-American schools.Latino children experienced low rates of victimizationin integrated as well as nonintegrated schools. Thus,not only is victimization more common for children ofsome ethnic groups than others, but the ethnic back-ground of schoolmates also influences children's likeli-hood of being attacked.

Behavioral Characteristics

Some children also display behaviors that increase therisk of being victimized. One reason that some chil-dren get victimized is that peers perceive them asunable to defend themselves. Indeed, some childrendevelop a reputation among their peers as easy targetsbecause they are physically weak, they submissivelyacquiesce to peers' demands, or they are rejected bythe peer group and have few friends who are able to

114 ASCA . Professional School Counseling. 4:2 December 2000

protect then.' (Hodges, Boivin, Vitaro,&Bukowski, 1999; Hodges, Malone, &Perry, 1997; Olweus, 1993; Schwartz,Dodge, & Coie, 1993). Such childrenare at increased risk of being victim-ized because peers experience littlestigma for victimizing them and,inStead, are reinforced by tangiblerewards, signs of distress, and lack ofretaliation (Perry, Williard, & Perry,1990).

. Anotherimportantreasonthatsome children get victimized is thatthey exhibit socially incompetentbehaviors that their peers interpret asaversive or deviant. Aggressive behav-ior is just such a behavior. Childrenwho are aggressive are more likely tobe victimized than their nonaggressivepeers (Hanish & Guerra, in press;Hodges et al., 1997; Olson, 1992;Schwartz, McFadyen-Ketchum,Dodge, Pettit, & Bates, 1999). Moreover, some forms ofaggressive behavior are particularly irritating to peers.Children who exhibit reactive aggression by respond-ing to real or perceived provocations with angry andretaliatory behaviors are at particularly high risk ofbeing victimized continuously over time (Kochender-fer & Ladd, 1997; Schwartz, Dodge et al., 1998). Thisseems to happen for two reasons (Hanish & Guerra, inpress). On the one hand, peers dislike and activelyreject children who display these behaviors. As aresult, there are few children in the peer group willingto support and defend them, thereby increasing thelikelihood that they will be seen as relatively accept-able targets by peers (Hodges et al., 1999; Perry et al.,1990). On the other hand, aggressive behavior can alsolead to victimization directly. Peers may perceiveaggressive behavior as annoying, directly provokingbullying from others. This second process seems to bemore important for boys than for girls (Hanish &Guerra, in press; Olweus, 1978).

Social withdrawal is another behavior that may beinterpreted by peers as deviant. Indeed, children whoare shy, withdrawn, and hesitant to join in social inter-actions tend to be victimized. However, being with-drawn does not seem to increase the risk forvictimization for all children. Research has found norelation between withdrawal and victimization for

early elementary school-aged children (Hanish &Guerra in press; Schwartz et al., 1999). This is not sur-prising because related research has demonstrated thatyoung children are not skilled at recognizing or distin-guishing subtle social behaviors, such as withdrawal(Younger & Boyko, 1987; Younger, Schwartzman, &Ledingham, 1985). Therefore, if young children do not

attend to social withdrawal, it isunlikely that they will use it as a cue toidentify victimization targets. In con-trast, older children, who are adept atidentifying social withdrawal and dis-criminating it from other social behav-iors (Younger & Boyko, 1987; Youngeret al., 1985), selectively victimize theirpeers on this basis. Thus, mid-to-lateelementary school-aged youngsters aremore likely to victimize those who aresocially withdrawn than those who arenot. This happens because childrenwho are withdrawn are disliked and

rejected by peers, thereby increasingthe likelihood that they will be seen bypeers as acceptable targets for victim-ization (Boivin & Hymel, 1997; Hanish& Guerra, in press).

Peer Group DynamicsAs the foregoing discussion implies,

peer group dynamics are important influences on peervictimization. That is, although children's individualcharacteristics may be risk factors for being victimized,it is peers' interpretations of these characteristics thatdrive peer victimization. Therefore, in explaining whyyoungsters get victimized, it is necessary to under-stand how peer group dynamics influence this process.Victimization functions as a group, rather than adyadic, process. Although only a small percentage ofchildren directly victimize others, peers are involved inmost instances of victimization (Atlas & Pepler, 1998).This participation may be active, by assisting or rein-forcing the bully, or passive, by avoiding or refusing tointervene (Salmi valli, Huttunen, & Lagerspetz, 1997).Both forms of peer involvement, however, support,rather than hinder, victimizing interactions. It is rela-tively rare for children to intervene to protect victim-ized children; estimates suggest that peer protectionoccurs in less than 15% of victimizing interactions(Atlas & Pepler, 1998). This is true despite the fact thatpeers are generally distressed by victimization andtheir intervention is often successful in interrupting theharassment (Boulton & Underwood, 1992; Hodges etal., 1999).

There are multiple reasons why children may vic-timize or facilitate others' victimizing actions. Victim-ization sometimes occurs as children vie for positionsof dominance within the social hierarchy. That is, chil-dren sometimes victimize others (or permit victimiza-tion to occur), in part, to maintain and achieve socialprominence within and across peer groups (Adler &Adler, 1995). Thus, peers sometimes victimize others toachieve positions of power and status among theirpeers.

ASCA .Professional School Counseling. 4:2 December 2000 115

1"

A second reason children maychoose to victimize others is because

they believe that their behavior islegitimate and acceptable (Guerra,Huesmann, & Hanish, 1995). Childrenwho are highly aggressive perceivetheir victimizing behavior as an effec-tive means of achieving valuedrewards such as high self-esteem, tan-gible resources, and peer approval(Boldizar, Perry, & Perry, 1989; Perry,Perry, & Rasmussen, 1986; Slaby &Guerra, 1988). They also devalue theirvictims by assuming that they deserveto be victimized and by minimizingtheir suffering (Perry et al., 1990; Slaby& Guerra, 1988). Such beliefs supportparticipation in victimization by maxi-mizing the perceived rewards andminimizing the perceived costs ofaggression.

In addition, children who victim-ize are often directly reinforced by their peers forharassing others. Aggressive children tend to havemoderate-sized friendship networks, and these friend-ship networks are typically populated by children whoendorse a similar set of values and behaviors (Cairns,Cairns, Neckerman, Gest, & Gariepy, 1988; Salmivalliet al., 1997). Indeed, the children in aggressors' peernetworks are often themselves aggressive. Moreover,those who are not, frequently facilitate aggressivebehavior by helping to find victims and by activelyencouraging victimization by cheering or laughing(Salmivalli et al., 1997). Thus, aggressive children fre-quently affiliate with peers who validate theirbehaviors.

School Structure InfluencesVictimization tends to occur in settings in which adultsare not directly monitoring children's interactions.Schools can afford many opportunities for children tocongregate relatively unseen. Thus, attacks on theplayground and in the hallways are common (Whitney& Smith, 1993). However, even in classrooms victim-ization is frequent during solitary or group activities,when teachers are less likely to be directing or super-vising children's interactions (Atlas & Pepler, 1998). Tocompound the fact that victimization is often con-cealed from adults, many victimized children reportthat they do not tell teachers or other adults abouttheir experiences for fear of reprisal from the bully(Smith & Thompson, 1991). Thus, teachers, counselors,and other school staff are often unaware of the extent

of peer victimization among their pupils and conse-quently are unable to intervene.

What Can SChoolCounselors Do?Peer victimization is a multilevel

process; factors at the level of the indi-vidual child, the peer group, and theschool jointly influence the occurrenceof peer victimization. Individual chil-dren are victimized by peer bullies asschoolmates look on or ignore, andschool staff are unaware. Thus, peervictimization operates at multiple eco-logical levels (Bronfenbrenner, 1979).Peer victimization is also a systemicprocess; the behaviors and interactionsof various participants influence oneanother. For instance, bullies' victimiz-ing actions may harm their victims. Atthe same time, schoolmates' failures todefend victimized children reinforcebullies' actions.

Therefore, school counselors'efforts to intervene must also take an

ecological and systemic approach. In other words,change must occur at all (i.e., individual, peer, andschool) levels simultaneously so that attempts to mod-ify one aspect of the problem are not thwarted by ten-dencies at other levels to maintain the status quo.Thus, we conceptualize peer victimization interven-tions as three-level interventions and suggest thatinterventions include components that are designed toassist victimized children, to reduce bullies' victimiz-ing behaviors, and to modify the structure and climateof the school so that opportunities for and reinforce-ment of victimization are reduced: In the followingsections, we discuss our intervention recommenda-tions and provide examples of existing programs thathave been designed to effect changes at each level.

Assisting Victimized ChildrenUsing ineffective social skills is a significant risk factorfor peer victimization. In particular, children whoexhibit aggressive behavior are at relatively high risk,because their behavior is bothersome to peers. Peersmay then victimize because they dislike such children,or they are provoked to attack by these irritatingbehaviors (Hanish & Guerra, in press). Providingsocial-skills training interventions that teach moreeffective and appropriate ways of interacting with oth-ers may decrease rates of victimization for thesechildren.

OUldren who are both aggressive and rejected,and thus at high risk for being victimized, tend torespond positively to such interventions. Lochman,Coie, Underwood, and Terry (1993) provided a social-relations training program to aggressive rejected andnonaggressive rejected African-American children.

116 ASCA . Professional School Counseling' 4:2 December 2000

--

Children received individual and group instructionandpractice in social-problem solving, positive playsJdlIs,group-entry skills, and managing negative emo-tioos.Although the intervention had no effect on thebehavior or social status of nonaggressive rejected chil-dren,it did improve both the behavior and social sta-tUSof aggressive, rejected children. Children who werebothaggressive and rejected demonstrated post-inter-vention reductions in teacher-rated aggressive behav-iorand rejection and increases in peer-rated socialacceptance compared with aggressive rejected childrenwho did not receive the intervention. Some of theseeffect"spersisted, and at a one-year follow up, aggres-siverejected children who participated in the interven-tiondisplayed less teacher-rated aggressive behaviorand more teacher-rated prosocial behavior than theiraggressive, rejected peers who did not receive theintervention. However, differences in social status had

disappeared over the follow-up period.Findings from this study and related studies

(Lochman et aI., 1993; Pepler, King, & Byrd, 1991)sug-gest that this kind of a social-skills training program ismodestly successful in improving children's socialbehaviors, showing short-term but not lastingimprovements when used in isolation. This suggeststhat simply providing social-skills training to childrenwho are being victimized due to their aggressive andineffective social behaviors is not enough to reducepeer victimization in the schools. Without simultane-ously modifying the behavior of the bullying childrenand other members of the school context, the processesthat contribute to peer victimization continue to oper-ate. Instead, this technique may be more effectivewhen it is combined with intervention strategies tar-geted toward additional levels of the peer victimiza-tion system. Thus, we recommend that schoolcounselors use it as one component in a multilevelintervention approach.

Reducing Bullies' Victimizing BehaviorsIt is also important for victimization interventions toinclude a component that targets bullies' victimizingand aggressive behaviors. As discussed, peer victim-ization occurs within social contexts. In these settings,the responses of others reinforce rather than inhibitvictimizing. Thus, counselors' intervention effortsmust also target the victimizing behaviors of perpetra-tors as well as the reinforcing behaviors of peers.

One example of such an intervention is the GoodBehavior Game (Dolan et al., 1993; Kellam, Rebok,Ialongo, & Mayer, 1994). In this intervention, all chil-dren in the class are assigned to teams that then canearn tangible rewards and privileges by exhibitingcooperative and nonaggressive behaviors. Becauseentire teams lose the rewards and privileges when asingle student misbehaves, this intervention changes

the contingencies for victimization-individuals'aggressive and victimizing behaviors no longer elicitpassive or active reinforcement from peers. Instead,peers encourage their classmates to inhibit victimiza-tion while simultaneously supporting and promotingmore positive peer behaviors.

In field trials, this intervention has significantlyreduced aggressive and victimizing behaviors for themost aggressive children, particularly boys, and theseeffects have lasted for several years (Dolan et aI., 1993;Kellam et al., 1994). This suggests that taking a class-room approach to reducing children's victimizingbehaviors is effective. By including all members of theclassroom (i.e., all participants in victimization), theentire peer group is modified, creating a more favor-able classroom climate. Thus, all peers rather than sim-ply the bullies are reinforced for discouragingvictimization. Such an approach epitomizes the trulyecological nature of peer victimization.

Modifying School Climate and StructureAttempts to reduce peer victimization in the schoolsmust recognize that the school environment signifi-cantly affects peer victimization. Often, teachers andother school personnel are unaware that victimizationis occurring, and even when they are aware, theysometimes do not intervene. Thus, it is crucial forschool counselors to provide the staff with assistancein recognizing, preventing, and stopping victimizationwhen it occurs.

One effective approach has focused on modifyingschool policies related to victimization by providinginformation and developing and implementing school-wide policies for managing victimization (Olweus,1992). In doing so, school personnel are instructedabout the problem of peer victimization in general aswell as the prevalence and severity of the problem intheir particular school. Such instruction is designed toincrease teacher and staff awareness of the extent of

the problem. In addition, a set of policies is developedand implemented that create a warm and positiveenvironment for children coupled with close monitor-ing of children's interactions and consistent sanctionsfor victimizing behaviors. This often involvesincreased supervision of children, increased discussionof rules regarding victimization and enforcement ofconsequences for violating such rules, enhancement ofteacher and peer intervention in victimization, andcooperative learning activities for children.

This school-wide intervention has been shown to

be effective in decreasing victimization on, but not off,campus (Olweus, 1992). Moreover, children attendingschools that have participated in this program havereported improved peer relationships and greaterinterest and involvement in school (Olweus, 1992).This intervention modifies the school environment by

ASCA . Professional School Counseling. 4:2 December 2000 117

--

substituting existing policies and prac-tices that inadvertently facilitate vic-timization with those that directlyinhibit victimization. By doing so, thisintervention directs change towardmultiple aspects of the school andclassroom structure.

ConclusionPeer victimization occurs in schools

because of interacting risk factors thatexist at multiple levels. Individual chil-dren's personal characteristics orbehaviors may signal particular vul-nerabilities that peers interpret asweaknesses or differences. Peers oftentarget their attacks toward these chil-dren, and their victimizing is fre-quently reinforced by the responses ofother children as well as their ownbelief systems. Moreover, teachers' rel-ative lack of awareness of the problemfurther encourages this behavior. Thus, peer victimiza-tion in the schools is a systemic problem that requiresthat school counselors adopt a systemic and compre-hensive solution. Anything less is likely to be only par-tially effective.

We recommend that school counselors simultane-

ously provide multiple interventions that are targetedtoward different aspects of the peer victimization prob-lem, including assisting victimized children in interact-ing with peers, reducing peers' engagement in andreinforcement of victimizing behaviors, and increasingteacher and staff awareness and intervention. We dis-

cuss samples of programs that been developed to tar-get each level of the problem. Each of these forms ofintervention has been shown to reduce some victimiza-tion-related behaviors; however, when used in isola-tion, none effect change in all relevant aspects ofvictimization. Using them in combination, though, islikely to produce more comprehensive and systemicchanges. Although all three types of intervention com-ponents have not yet been tested together, relatedintervention research demonstrates that comprehen-sive, multicomponent, multilevel, ecological interven-tions tend to be more effective in reducing systemicand ecological problems than simple, single-compo-nent interventions (Henggeler, Schoenwald, & Munger,1996). Thus, we suggest that school counselors useeach of these types of intervention in combination toreduce peer victimization at school. .

ReferencesAdler, P. A., & Adler, P. (1995). Dynamics of

inclusion and exclusion in preadolescentcliques. Social Psychology Quarterly, 58,145-162.

Atlas, R. S., & Pepler, D. J. (1998). Observationsof bullying in the classroom. Journal of Educa-tional Research, 92, 86-99.

Boivin, M., & Hymel, S. (1997). Peer experienceand social self-perceptions: A sequentialmodel. Developmental Psychology, 33,135-145.

Boldizar, J. P., Perry, D. G., & Perry, L. C. (1989).Outcome values and aggression. Child Devel-opment, 60, 571-579.

Boulton, M. J., & Underwood, K. (1992).Bully / victim problems among middle schoolchildren. British Journal of Educational Psychol-ogy, 62, 73-87.

Bronfenbrenner, U. (1979). The ecology of humandevelopment: Experiments by nature and design.Cambridge, MA: Harvard University.

Cairns, R. 8., Cairns, B. D., Neckerman, H. J.,Gest, S. D., & Gariepy, J.-L. (1988). Social net-works and aggressive behavior: Peer supportor peer rejection? Developmental Psychology,24, 815-823.

Crick, N. R, & Bigbee, M. A. (1998). Relational and overt forms ofpeer victimization: A multi-informant approach. Journal ofCon-sulting and Clinical Psychology, 66, 337-347.

Dolan, L. J., Kellam, S. G., Brown, C. H., Werthamer-Larsson, L.,Rebok, G. W, Mayer, L. S., Laudolff, J., & Turkkan, J. S. (1993).The short-term impact of two classroom-based preventive inter-ventions on aggressive and shy behaviors and poor achieve-ment. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 14, 317-345.

Ellis,S., Rogoff, B., & Cromer, C. C. (1981). Age segregation in chil-dren's social interactions. Developmental Psychology, 17,399-407.

Finkelhor, D. (1995). The victimization of children: A developmentalperspective. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 65, 177-193.

Finkelhor, D., & Asdigian, N. G. (1996). Risk factors for youth victim-ization: Beyond a lifestyles/routine activities theory approach.Violenceand Victims, 1,3-19.

Furlong, M. J., Sharma, B., & Rhee, S. S. (2000). Defining school vio-lence victim subtypes: A step toward adapting prevention andintervention programs to match student needs. In D. S. Sandhu& C. B. Aspy (Eds.), Violence in American schools:A practical guidefor counselors (pp. 67-87). Alexandria, VA: American CounselingAssociation.

Guerra, N. G., Huesmann, L. R, & Hanish, L. D. (1995). The role ofnormative beliefs in children's social behavior. In M. Clark

(Series Ed.) & N. Eisenberg (Vol. Ed.), Review of personality andsocial psychology: Vol. 15. Social development (pp. 140-158). Thou-sand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Hanish, L. D. (2000, March). Patterns of adjustment following peer vic-timization. Poster presented at the Eighth Biennial Meeting ofthe Society for Research on Adolescence, Chicago, IL.

Hanish, L. D., & Guerra, N. G. (2000). The roles of ethnicity andschool context in predicting children's victimization by peers.American Journal of Community Psychology, 28, 201-223.

Hanish, L. D., & Guerra, N. G. (in press). Predictors of peer victim-ization among urban youth. Social Development.

Henggeler, S. W, Schoenwald, S. K., & Munger, R L. (1996). Farnili~ Iand therapists achieve clinical outcomes, systems of care medi-

ate the process. Journal of Child and Family Studies,S, 177-183. iHodges, E. V. E., Boivin, M., Vitaro, F., & Bukowski, W M. (1999).

The power of friendship: Protection against an escalating cycleof peer victimization. Developmental Psychology,35,94-101.

118 ASCA . Professional School Counseling. 4:2 December 2000

--- --

Hodges, E. V. E., Malone, M. J., & Perry, D. G. (1997). [ndividual riskand social risk as interacting detenninants of victimization inthe peer group. Developmental Psychology, 33, 1032-1039.

Kellam, S. G., Rebok, G. w., lalongo, N., & Mayer L. S. (1994). Thecourse and malleability of aggressive behavior from early first

grade into middle school: Results of a developmental epidemio-logically-based preventive trial. Journal of Child Psychology andpsychiatry and Allied Disciplines, 35, 259-281.

Kochenderfer, B.J., & Ladd, G. W. (1996). Peer victimization: Causeor consequence of school maladjustment? Child Development, 67,1305-1317.

Kochenderfer, B.J., & Ladd, G. W. (1997). Victimized children'sresponses to peers' aggression: Behaviors associated withreduced versus continued victimization. DevelopmentandPsy-chopathology, 9, 59-73.

Ladd, G. W., Birch, S. H., & Buhs, E. S. (1999). Children's social andscholastic lives in kindergarten: Related spheres of influence?Child Development, 70, 1373-1400.

Lor;1unan,J. E., Coie, J. D., Underwood, M. K., & Terry, R. (1993).Effectiveness of a social relations intervention program foraggressive and nonaggressive, rejected children. Journalof Con-sulting and Clinical Psychology,61, 1053-1058.

Maccoby,E.E. (1999).Thetwo sexes:Growing up apart,comingtogether.Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of Harvard University.

Olson, S. L. (1992). Development of conduct problems and peerrejection in preschool children: A social systems analysis. Jour-nal of AbnormalChild Psychology,20,327-350.

Olweus,D. (1978).Aggressionin theschools:Bulliesandwhippingboys.Washington, DC: Hemisphere.

Olweus, D. (1992). Bullying among schoolchildren: Intervention andprevention. In R. D. Peters, R. J. McMahon, & V. L. Quinsey(Eds.), Aggressionandviolencethroughoutthe lifespan(pp.100-125). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Olweus, D. (1993). Victimization by peers: Antecedents and long-term outcomes. In K. H. Rubin &J. B.Asendorpf (Eds.),Socialwithdrawal, inhibition, and shynessin childhood(pp. 315-341).Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Olweus, D. (1994).Annotation: Bullyingat school:Basicfactsandeffects of a school based intervention program. JournalofChildPsychologyandPsychiatry,35,1171-1190.

Pepler, D. J., King, G., & Byrd, W. (1991). A social cognitively basedsocial skills training program for aggressive children. [n D. J.Pepler & K. H. Rubin (Eds.), The development and treatment ofchildhood aggression (pp. 361-379). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

---

Perry, D. G., Perry, L. c., & Rasmussen, P. (1986). Cognitive sociallearning mediators of aggression. Child Development,57,700-711.

Perry, D. G., Williard, J. c., & Perry, L. C. (1990). Peers' perceptions

of the consequences that victimized children provide aggres-sors. Child Development,61, 1310-1325.

SalmivaIli, c., Huttunen, A., & Lagerspetz, K. M. J. (1997). Peer net-works and bullying in schools. Scandinavian Journalof Psychol-ogy, 38, 305-312.

Schwartz, D., Dodge, K. A., & Coie, J. D. (1993). The emergence ofchronic peer victimization in boys' play groups. Child Develop-ment,64,1755-1m.'

Schwartz, D., Dodge, K. A., Coie, J. D., Hubbard, J. A., Cillessen, A.H. N., Lemerise, E. A., & Bateman, H. (1998). Social-cognitiveand behavioral correlates of aggression and victimization inboys' play groups. Journalof AbnormalChild Psychology,26,431-440.

Schwartz, D., McFadyen-Ketchum, S. A., Dodge, K. A., Pettit, G. S.,& Bates, J. E. (1998). Peer group victimization as a predictor ofchildren's behavior problems at home and in school. Develop-mentandPsychopathology,10, 87-99.

Schwartz, D., McFadyen-Ketchum, S., Dodge, K. A., Pettit, G. S., &Bates, J. E. (1999). Early behavior problems as a predictor oflater peer group victimization: Moderators and mediators in thepathways of social risk. JournalofAbnormal Child Psychology,27,191-201.

Slaby, R. G., & Guerra, N. G. (1988). Cognitive mediators of aggres-sion in adolescent offenders: I. Assessment. Developmental Psy-chology,24,580-588.

Smith, P. K., & Thompson, D. (1991). Dealing with bully/victimproblems in the UK [n P. K. Smith & D. Thompson (Eds.),Practicalapproachesto bullying (pp. 1-12). London: David Foul-ton.

Whitney, I., & Smith, P. K. (1993). A survey of the nature and extentof bullying in junior / middle and secondary schools. EducationalResearch,35, 3-25.

Younger, A. J., & Boyko, K. A. (1987). Aggression and withdrawal associal schemas underlying children's peer perceptions. ChildDevelopment, 58, 1094-1100.

Younger, A. J., Schwartzman, A. E., & Ledingham, J. E. (1985). Age-related changes in children's perceptions of aggression andwithdrawal in their peers. Developmental Psychology, 21, 70-75.

ASCA .Professional School Counseling. 4:2 December 2000 119

Iii

'

i'II

I't'

Ij

t[.

IN'"

fl