Cyber Bullying - Literature review Example

dear client, please do not use this paper. I will upload the correct paper later or tomorrow Monday morning. Kindly ignore the ‘completed’ status of your order. I will return your order to ‘in progress’ later on. Thanks =) Bullying – “one of the most traumatic aspects of childhood” (American Association of School Administrators, 2009, p.10) – has been considered an age-old common problem for many children and adolescents anywhere; even in places where we thought, they could be safe, specifically in the school (Romain, 2008, p.3). Unfortunately, with the development of information technology, it has taken its new form into cyber bullying – known also as “electronic or digital bullying” (Aluede, Adeleke, Omoike & Afen-Akpaida, 2008, p. 151), which is “bullying through email, instant messaging, in a chat room, on a website or gaming site, or through digital messages or images sent to a cellular phone” (Kowalski, Limber, & Agatston 2007, as cited in Tippett, Thompson, & Smith, n.d., p.1). The pervasive and insidious character of cyber bullying enabling it to penetrate even the sanctuary of homes has increasingly worried parents as they know that the technology to which their children are largely exposed to is the same technology that cyber bullies anonymously manipulate to harm others (Mclaughlin, 2008, par.3). Statistical data on the extent of bullying vary. “However, the general consensus is that one out of three children are bullied at school, in the neighborhood, or online and that one out of three children bully others” (American Association of School Administrators, 2009, p.7). “Surveys indicate that as many as half of all children are bullied at some time during their school years, and at least 10% are bullied on a regular basis” (American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 2008, par.1). International studies revealed that, “bullying is common and affects anywhere from 9% to 54% of children” (Yale University 2008, par.6). “Nearly three in four teenagers say they were bullied online at least once during a recent 12-mont period” (University of California, 2008, par. 1). Californian researchers’ new study discovered that almost 90% of third graders to sixth graders experienced being bullied, while 56% admitted being bullies themselves (Harding, 2007, par. 1). Much had been documented about the effects of bullying. “An estimated 160,000 children miss school everyday out of fear of attack or intimidation by other students” (“Watch for warning signs,” 2006, par. 1). “Children who are bullied suffer more greatly from anxiety, depression, loneliness, and post-traumatic stress than do other children, and they have a heightened risk of suicide (Marini, Dane, Bosacki, & YLC-CURA 2006, as cited in Ibid). Worst, bullying had even caused the tragic deaths of youth bully victims (Mar & Fields 2000, as cited in Hymel & Swearer, n.d. p. 1).. And recently, research discovered that bullying, being bullied and suicide in children have an apparent connection (Yale University, 2008, par. 1). “Experts… agree that bullying can lead to serious violence, including murder and suicide” (Banks, 2001, sec.3, par. 3). “In the U. S., many have blamed bullying for spurring acts of violence, including the Columbine High School massacre” (Marini, et al. 2006, as cited in “Watch for warning signs, 2006, par.1). Other incidents of violent spree related to bullying include: In 1999, the killing of 13 people in Colorado by teenagers before committing suicide (Greenbaum 1991, as cited in Green, 2007, p. 333), and in the Spring of 2005, the killing rampage of a 16-year old student from Red Lake High School in Northern Minnesota resulting to the deaths of nine people: his grandfather, the school security guard, a teacher, five students, and the killer himself, who afterwards killed himself. Similar violent incidents also happen in other countries (Barone, 1997, as cited in Ibid)). In Norway, it was reported that in 1984 three middle school boys, who were extensively bullied by a group of peers, committed suicide. And in Japan, the government reported that a 13-year old, who had been similarly bullied by classmates and gang members in his school and neighborhood committed suicide by hanging himself (Green, 2007, p. 333). Various study also pointed out that the effect of bullying lasts for a lifetime. Research studies showed: “Spreading rumors and gossiping may not cause bruises or black eyes, but the psychological consequences of this social type of bullying could linger into early adulthood” (University of Florida, 2008, par. 1). And that: “Memories of childhood teasing are associated with high rates of social anxiety, pathological perfectionism, and greater neuroticism in adulthood” (Georgesen, Harris, Milich & Young 1999, Miller & Vaillancourt 2007, and Roth, Coles& Heimberg 2002, as cited in McDougall, Hymel & Vaillancourt, n.d., p.1). Bullying also worsens the health of obese children in a way that bullying frightens overweight children to play – a good physical activity for them to lose weight, as they are the favorite targets of bullies (Storch 2006 as cited in University of Florida, 2006, par. 1). With these alarmingly tragic effects of bullying, the world today begins to recognize bullying a serious problem needed to be addressed professionally discrediting the former belief that bulling is a natural “rite of passage” (Stewart, 2008, par. 6) of growing-up. Thus, research studies have delved on it exponentially. Bullied Children: The Weak, the Different, the socially withdrawn, and the Defenseless To better understand the predicament a bullied child undergoes and to better help him liberate himself from the nightmare of being bullied, we must first understand what bullying is. And since bullying takes two to tango, it is but necessary both for a guidance counselor and for the bullied child to understand the bully him/herself especially the underlying reasons of bully. Many defined bullying following Olweus’ (1994): “A person is being bullied when he or she is exposed, repeatedly and over time, to negative actions on the part of one or more other persons” (p. 98). Meaning, bullying is a behavior of aggression characterized by the (1) intention to cause harm on others; (2) repetitive aggression on the same target; and (3) imbalance of power (Olweus 1991, Roland & Munthe 1989 as cited in Strohmeier, n.d., par.1). In short, “bullying occurs when a person willfully and repeatedly exercises power over another with hostile or malicious intent (Aluede, et al., 2008, p. 151). Bullying, which blatantly disregards rules, violates others rights to peaceful and productive life, and threatens others security is intentionally done either in the direct form – “the (targeted) victim receives bodily harm from kicking, butting, pushing, or shoving” (Orpinas, Horne & Staniszewski 2003, as cited in Green, 2007, p. 333), which is commonly done by boys, or in the indirect form – “the (targeted) victim receives emotional or mental harm through name-calling, rejection, gossip, threats or insults” (Ibid), which on the other hand is commonly done by girls. Since bullying is a behavioral problem, it would not be surprising to know that children who usually turn bullies are those who were brought up in an uncaring, tormenting, violent, and unhealthy home-environment (Sirtle, 2006, par. 1-2). Thus, “the less supervision a child gets at home, the more likely he is to be a bully” (Aluede, et al., pa. 151). “Most bullies are male, popular, and often athletes… (with) excellent social skills, with the ability to attract many followers, and easily manipulate others” (Bosworth, Espelage and Simon 2001, as cited in Ibid). But most importantly “bullying behavior is self-reinforcing” (Ibid), which means the bully achieves the power, the attention, and the satisfaction he seeks through two ways: the misery of the victim and the approval of peers, who could both be the bully’s followers or the passive onlookers or bystanders. In order to achieve this, the bully naturally target victims whom he/she perceives are unlikely to retaliate and who in being different – as in very thin, very fat, lots of acne, nerd, very shy, etc, have no followings to defend them. In short, bullies target the weak and the defenseless. It takes two to bullying: the bully and the bullied called “the aggressor-victim relationship” (Card, n.d., p.1), which is attributable to four identifiable causes: (1) preconceived opinions -- “Aggressors hold specific beliefs about specific victims, and these beliefs predict patterns of aggression” (Hubbard, Dodge, Cillesen, Coie, & Schwartz 2001, as cited in Ibid,sec. 2, par. 2); (2) social/physical hierarchy – “Current studies shows that children who bully are physically stronger, more popular, and less anxious or depressed than their targeted victims” (Card & Hodges 2005, as cited in Ibid. sec. 2, par. 3); (3) mutual dislike – “… research has shown that children are about five times more likely to report that an enemy victimizes them than a friend or acquaintance” (Card & Hodges 2007, as cited in Ibid, sec. 2, par. 4); and (4) peer influence – “… research has shown that friends often share the same targets for aggression” (Card & Hodges 2006, as cited in Ibid, sec. 2, par. 5). A plethora of research findings regarding the victims of bully could be summarized as: The victims of bully are the weak, the different, the socially withdrawn and the defenseless. They are physically, emotionally, and mentally weak because they are smaller than the bully; they project an unassertive personality; they are insecure and could be easily frightened. Their weakness in fact is better confirmed by their inability to overcome their experience of being bullied that some even resort to suicide. They are different from the rest of the class maybe because of color, of religious belief, of culture, of ways that are not understood or accepted by the class. This is further worsened by their shyness and their inability to make friends leaving them alone and defenseless. There are two types of victims however: The “passive or submissive victims and the provocative victims” (Olweus 1993, as cited in Beaty & Alexeyev, 2008, p. 1). The former are “generally insecure and non-assertive and react by withdrawing and crying when attacked… they are vulnerable to being victimized… bullies know (they)… will not retaliate” (Salmivalli, Karhunen, & Lagerspetz 1996, as cited in Ibid). The latter is the less common victim who “exhibits a combination of both anxious and aggressive traits and sometimes provokes classmates into victimizing them by their overactive and irritating behavior” (Olweus 1993, as cited in Ibid). Counseling Bullied Children First of all, bullying should not be seen simply as an individual problem – as in the problem of the bully and the victim, but as a social problem done collectively in a social setting that either ignores, tolerates or unwittingly encourages the behavior, be it at home, in the community or even in the school. In fact, the school should subject itself whether or not it tolerates or unwittingly encourages bullying in any way via the principal-teacher-student relationship, the values being promoted explicitly and implicitly in school activities, or the culture dominating the school, especially so that the ‘hidden curriculum’ leaves a stronger impact on the student. Thus, any counseling done with bullied children should be conducted in an atmosphere of “positive interpersonal relations throughout the school community” (Gibson 2001, as cited in Ryan, n.d., p.1), especially so that “bullying is more likely to occur in schools where teachers have poor classroom management skills and students are disrespectful towards staff” (Ryan, n.d., p.1). “Working with young children, teaching them the art of negotiation, conflict resolution, and simple courtesy can help to curb bullying at the elementary level and later in life” (Green, 2007, p. 333). With a positive school environment, supported by a healthy home environment, the victims of bullying will feel safer, will be convinced that bullying could be stopped and will be given a conducive opportunity to overcome their fears, insecurities, and weaknesses and be able to cope with the problem of bullying be its aftermath or potent threat. In short, the school and the family of the bullied child should work together to provide a support structure for the child to be able to overcome his/her anxieties. Remember, considering the very reason a child is being bullied, obviously points to the fact that the bullied child can not do it alone, he/she has to be protected and supported as he/she is being strengthened and developed physically, socially, and psychologically. According to mental health professionals, bullied children need: permission and support to tell what has happened to them and talk about their feelings; protection from continued bullying through adult supervision, consequence for the young people who bully, and adult’s taking of reports of bullying seriously; strong, positive relationship with adults and peers; assistance from peers in feeling that they belong; assistance in not blaming themselves for the bullying; … support with post-traumatic stress symptoms even after the bullying has been stopped. (Davis, 2005, p.1) Working within a positive school environment, counseling can now be started centering on strengthening his/her ability first to develop a positive strong personality and to develop a healthy social relationship with people around him/her for this would preempt bullies to pick him/her as victim, and second to train him/her how to defend him/herself. Helping “them develop positive connections with peers and a trusted adult… through establishing buddies, circles of support, peers and mentors, and by finding ways to highlight the victimized child’s talents for others to see” (Pepler & Craig, n.d, p.2) would boost the victim’s self-confidence and would strengthen his/her social skills – necessary to combat his/her defenselessness – the very trait that makes him/her a bully target. Without a child that could be victimized, bullying could be discouraged. A new kind of cyber bullying became known when Loft Drew exploited MySpace, the online social networking site, to bully Megan Meier in 2006. Megan is aged thirteen and what happened to her is one of a kind because her cyber bully was the mother of another young girl, or, in other words, was an adult. The cyber bullying started when Drew took advantage of MySpace to form a fake profile for a teenager ‘Josh Evans’ on the 20th of September 2006 (Meredith, 2010). It stopped several days afterward when Megan committed suicide in reaction to the remark of Josh that her existence only makes everything worse. According to Gaines and Miller (2011), aside from the fact that this case implicated an adult harassing a minor, this incident is special because Drew was criminally tried in federal court. Drew was charged of breaching the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA) because she took advantage of MySpace to form a fabricated profile with the intention of bullying another member of the social networking site. Although Drew was the adult offender involved in one of the severest cases of cyber bullying, the reality that criminal law does not particularly forbid cyber bullying does not give good reason for expanding the CFAA or endorsing new statutes that classify cyber bullying as a new criminal act (Meredith, 2010). Nevertheless, federal policy that fights cyber bullying through educational programs would have a favorable outcome. Taking into consideration the favorable and unfavorable impacts of the attempts to fight cyber bullying to date, this paper argues that deterrence through education will be the strongest approach. As argued by Kowalski and colleagues, because educational attempts do not involve the potential unfavorable outcomes of enforcing criminal anti-cyber bullying laws, enhanced Internet protection educational programs deal with cyber bullying constructively, by equipping teachers with the important instruments to educate parents and students how to utilize new technologies sensibly and securely. The common naïve and innocent character of minors, when merged with the Internet’s setting, builds a perfect venue for bullying, particularly because parents can be uninformed of their children’s actions and attitude and the risks involved. In explaining the actual impacts of these risks, the Staten Island chief of the computer and technology investigations division and district lawyer, stated, “[u]nfortunately, many people have trouble living by [the Golden] rule, and when being unkind is taken to the Internet, police and prosecutors are often called on to step in. Welcome to the world of cyber bullying” (Meredith, 2010, 311). Although the advantages of the Internet involve enhanced speed of communication, an exclusive and capably risky feature of this technology is its promotion of anonymity and tolerance (Meredith, 2010). Another risk is that Internet communication is chiefly accessible to younger or trusting users, and particularly adapted toward younger users in several instances. Although additional studies are needed on the motivations of children for cyber bullying, research has discovered that between 8% of adolescents and 18% of middle school pupils have fallen victim to this act. Cyber bullying appears to be most widespread among girls, both as victims and bullies, starting in the 6th and 7th grades (Meredith, 2010, 311). Although a quite contemporary trend, its impacts among victims involve “higher rates of absenteeism, low self-esteem, suicidal thoughts, drug and alcohol use and illness” (Meredith, 2010, 311). Cyber bullying, more serious than traditional bullying, has an especially persistent presence thus, “[f]or some kids who are targeted at school and out of school, it can be a nightmare. They don’t feel like they have a break,” (Meredith, 2010, 311) according to one of the authors of Cyber Bullying: Bullying in the Digital Age (2007), Patricia Agatston. Thirteen-year old Ryan Halligan, in one of the first publicly known cases of the perilous effects of cyber bullying, killed himself on the 7th of October 2003. He did so partly because several of his classmates performed a practical joke against him through cyber bullying. John Halligan, the father of Ryan, remembers that Ryan liked using the Internet but that he obeyed the house policies his father laid down about online security (Meredith, 2010). Ryan had been taunted and mocked at school and the months before he became an 8th grader when “a classmate pretended to be interested in him romantically [and] then forwarded his instant message responses to all of her friends” (Meredith, 2010, 312). Once classes started and he talked to her personally, “she told him he was just a loser and that she did not want anything to do with him” (Kowalski, Limber, & Agatston, 2007, x). Akin to house policies set by John Halligan for his son’s online activities, Tina, the mother of Megan Meier, regulated her daughter’s online activities. Even though reluctant because Megan confessed that she was not acquainted to ‘Josh Evans’ in any way Tina still permitted her to approve ‘Josh’s’ friend request at MySpace. Tina and Megan did not know the profile had in fact been fabricated by Lori Drew, the mother of one of the previous buddies of Megan, whose purpose was to find out what Megan was saying about her daughter online (Gaines & Miller, 2011). Once Megan approved Josh’s friend request, Drew exploited the fabricated profile to manipulate the young girl’s weaknesses and persuade her that Josh likes her. Megan believed it, but after a few weeks after it started, Josh said to her, “The world would be a better place without [her in it]” (Gaines & Miller, 2011, 186). On the 16th of October 2006, after reading that message, the clueless young girl hanged herself in her cabinet (Gaines & Miller, 2011). According to Meredith (2010), even though Megan had been counseled for depression prior to the cyber bullying incident, her mother holds cyber bullying culpable for ultimately weakening her daughter’s control over herself. Hail Ketchum, a California student, resolved a court case with Newport-Mesa Unified School District and Corona del Mar High School in January 2009 over a video uploaded on Facebook (Meredith, 2010). The video was uploaded by some of her schoolmates who vividly portrayed sexually violating her in the rear of a pickup truck. A vast number of students saw the video before it was finally deleted. Even though Ketchum saw the video itself upsetting although no real sexual violence took place, the court case emerged out of the fact that when informed of the cyber bullying, the school officials did not take the problem seriously. As portion of the agreement, the school district is obliged to set up discrimination- and harassment-prevention seminars for faculty and students as supervised by the Anti-Defamation League (Meredith, 2010). In addition, as explained further by Meredith (2010), the school district was obliged to make an apology to Ketchum, who was supported by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) in the court proceedings because the video posted on Facebook inflamed interests in homophobia and sexism characterizing Rent, the musical performance produced by the school district. The cases of Megan Meier, Ryan Halligan, and Hail Ketchum demonstrate diverse, although equally grave cases of harassment that was, perhaps, more severe because it took place online. The fact that large numbers of students were immediately able to see the video raping Ketchum, at the same time as numerous buddies of the bully of Ryan Halligan were able to receive the humiliating mails she sent, embody the magnitude and swiftness of online communications. Nevertheless, whether or not bullying is merely changing settings, these severe cases of cyber bullying have brought the problem to the apex of public concern. State legislation has been modified to deal with cyber bullying through different strategies, and federal ruling is presently hanging. Although this form of bullying runs the gamut from improper to morally blameworthy, the task of making a law that would envision and encompass all imminent cyber bullying offenses, without violating the provisions of the First Amendment, appears impossible to be surmounted (Gaines & Miller, 2011). As argued by Kowalski and colleagues (2007), it is crucial as well to take into account aspects like state versus federal legislation and cyber bullying perpetrated by young users as compared to that perpetrated by adults. In order to most successfully fight cyber bullying, policymaking and community programs have to place emphasis on informing parents and children on online security. Conclusions Cyber bullying is certainly a serious issue nowadays. To differing levels of harshness, it distresses children’s security and comfort. Nevertheless, bullying is a social issue that has apparently lived even in the earliest societies. As the severe cases of Ryan Halligan, Megan Meier, and Hail Ketchum illustrate, cyber bullying is unusually risky due to the broad reaches and capacities of online communications. According to Meredith (2010), although cyber bullying can be differentiated on that basis from other kinds of harassment and bullying, it is indefinite whether there has really been a quantifiable boost in the rate of harassment and bullying in our nation, or if the arrivals of sophisticated technologies only make it more noticeable or observable. Therefore, the goal of the government to safeguard the children and the youth from the threats of cyber bullying would be more practically fulfilled by policymaking that raises awareness and understanding of the threats related with the Internet. Not like criminal laws, education initiatives are simply flexible, and hence are more able to adapt to and integrate evolving technology and any related risks. Furthermore, the danger of expanding quite extensively in an education program is far lesser than implementing a very wide-ranging criminal law. References Aluede, Oyaziwo, Adeleke, Fajoju, Omoike, Don and Afen-Akpaida, Justina. (2008). “A review of the extent, nature, characteristics and effects of bullying in schools.” Journal of Instructional Psychology, 35 (2). 151+ American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry. (2008). “Bullying.” Retrieved 10 June 2009 from http://www.aacap.org/cs/root/facts_for_families/bullying American Association of School Administrators. (2009). “Bullying at school and online.” An Education.com Special Edition. Norton. Retrieved 12 June 2009 from: http://www.scribd.com/doc/13402686/Bullying-at-School-and-Online Banks, Ron. (2001). “Bullying: What parents and teachers should know.” ERIC/EECE Publications, Digests EDO-PS-97-17. Retrieved from http://www.focusas.com/Bullying.html Barone, J. (1997). “Bullying in school: It doesnt have to happen.” Phi Delta Kappan, 79 (1), 80-82. Beaty, Lee A. and Alexeyev, Erick B. (2008). “The problem of social bullies: What the research tells us.” Adolescence, 43 (43), 169, 1. Card, Noel. (n.d.). “It takes two: rethinking the aggressor-victim relationship.” Bullying Special Edition Contributor. Norton Family Resources. Retrieved from http://www.education.com/reference/article/bullying-aggressor-victim-relationship/?cid=50.400 Card, N. A., & Hodges, E. V. E. (2007). “Victimization within mutually antipathetic peer relationships.” Social Development, 16, 479-496. Card, N. A., & Hodges, E. V. E. (2006). “Shared targets for aggression by early adolescent friends.” Developmental Psychology, 42, 1327-1338. Card, N. A., & Hodges, E. V. E. (2005, April). “Power differential in aggressor-victim relationships.” Paper presented at the biennial meeting of the Society for Research in Child Development, Atlanta, GA. Davis, Stan. (2005). “Counseling young people who are bullied.” Stop Bullying Now.com. Retrieved from http://www.stopbullyingnow.com/Counseling%20young%20people%20who%20are%20bullied.pdf Georgesen, J.C., Harris, M.J., Milich, R., & Young, J. (1999). “Just teasing…”: Personality effects on perceptions and life narratives of childhood teasing. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 25, 1254-1267. Gibbs, J. (2001). Tribes: A new way of learning and being together. Windsor, CA: Center Source Green, Gregory. (2007). “Bullying: A concern for survival.” Education, 128 (2), 333+ Greenbaum, S. (1991). “What can we do about school yard bullying?” Principal, 67 (2), 21-24. Harding, Anne. (2007). “Most primary school children report being bullied.” Journal of Developmental and Behavioral Pediatrics. April. Reuters. Retrieved 10 June 2009 from http://www.reuters.com/article/healthNews/idUSARM37877320070503 Hubbard, J. A., Dodge, K. A., Cillessen, A. H. N., Coie, J. D., & Schwartz, D. (2001). The dyadic nature of social information processing in boys’ reactive and proactive aggression. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 80, 268-280. Systems. Kowalski, R. M., Limber, S. P., & Agatston, P.W. (2007) Cyber bullying: Bullying in the digital age. Malden, MA, Blackwell Publishing. ISBN 978-1-4051-5991-3 Marini, Z. A., Dane, A,V, Bosacki, S. L., & YLC-CURA. (2006). Direct and indirect bully-victims: different psychosocial risk factors associated with adolescents involved in bullying and victimization. Aggressive Behavior, 32(6), 551-569. Marr, N. & Fields, T. (2000).  Bullycide: Death at Playtime. United Kingdom: Success Unlimited Publishers. McDougall, Patricia, Hymel, Shelley and Vaillancourt, Tracy. (n.d.) “What happens over time to those who bully and thos who are victimized?” Bullying Speical Edition Conytributor. Norton Family Resources. Retrieved from http://www.education.com/reference/article/Ref_What_Happens_Over/?cid=50.400 McLaughlin, Drew. (2008). “Bullying prevention: At school and online.” National Crime Prevention Council. Retrieved 12 June 2009 from http://www.education.com/reference/article/school-bullying-prevention/?cid=50.400 Miller, J. & Vaillancourt, T. (2007). The relation between childhood peer victimization and adult perfectionism: Are victims of indirect aggression more perfectionistic? Aggressive Behavior, 33, 1-12. Olweus, Dan. (1994). “Bullying at school: Long-term outcomes for the victims and an effective school-based intervention program,” (pp. 97-130) in L. R. Huesmann (ed.). Aggressive Behavior: Current Perspectives. New York: Plenum. Olweus, D. O. (1993). Bullying at school. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishers. Olweus, Dan. (1991). Bully / victim problems among schoolchildren: Basic facts and effects of a school based intervention program. In D. J. Pepler & K. H. Rubin (Eds.), The development and treatment of childhood aggression (pp. 411-448). Hillsdale: Erlbaum. Orpinas, P., Horne, A. M. & Staniszewski, D. (2003). School bullying: Changing the problem by changing the school. School Psychology Review, 32 (3). Retrieved from http://web23.epnet.com Roland, E., & Munthe, E. (1989). Bullying: An international perspective. London: David Fulton. Romain, Trevor. (208). Bullies are a pain in the brain. United States: ReadHowYouWant. Retrieved from http://www.scribd.com/doc/14586200/Bullies-Are-a-Pain-in-the-Brain-Large-Print Roth, D.A., Coles, M.E., & Heimberg, R.G. (2002). The relationship between memories for childhood teasing and anxiety and depression in adulthood. Journal of Anxiety Disorders, 16, 149-164. Ryan, Wendy. (n.d.) “Tribes: A way to improve school climate and reduce bullying?” Bullying Special Edition Contributor. Norton Family Resources. Retrieved from http://www.education.com/reference/article/positive-school-climate-reduces-bullying/ Salmivalli, C., Karhunen, J., & Lagerspetz, K. M. J. (1996). “How do victims respond to bullying?” Aggressive Behavior, 22, 99-109. Sirtle, Alphonso. (2006, April 1). “Why do children bully?” Article Click. Retrieved 12 June 2009 from http://www.articleclick.com/Article/Why-Do-Children-Bully-/956476 Stewart, Charlina. (2008, June 1). “When kids are being bullied.” Suite101.c0m. Retrieved from http://earlychildhood.suite101.com/article.cfm/when_kids_are_being_bullied Strohmeier, Dagmar. (n.d.). “Bullying and its underlying mechanisms.” Bullying Special Edition Contributor. Norton Family Resources. Retrieved from http://www.education.com/reference/article/reasons-for-bullying/?cid=50.400 Tippett, Neil, Thompson, Fran, and Smith, Peter K. (n.d.). “Research on cyberbullying: Key findings and practical suggestions.” Bullying Special Edition Contributor. Norton Family Resources. Retrieved 12 June 2009 from http://www.education.com/reference/article/cyberbullying-research/?cid=50.400 University of California - Los Angeles (2008, October 3). Bullying Of Teenagers Online Is Common, UCLA Psychologists Report. ScienceDaily. Retrieved June 10, 2009, from http://www.sciencedaily.com­ /releases/2008/10/081002111425.htm University of Florida (2008, April 23). Social Form Of Bullying Linked To Depression, Anxiety In Adults. ScienceDaily. Retrieved June 10, 2009, from http://www.sciencedaily.com­ /releases/2008/04/080422143529.htm University of Florida (2006, April 20). Bullying Keeps Overweight Kids Off The Field. ScienceDaily. Retrieved June 10, 2009, from http://www.sciencedaily.com­ /releases/2006/04/060420233356.htm "Watch for warning signs of children being bullied". Oakland Tribune. FindArticles.com. 10 Jun, 2009. http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4176/is_20061022/ai_n16799740/ Yale University. (2008, July 19). Bullying And Being Bullied Linked To Suicide In Children, Review Of Studies Suggests. ScienceDaily. Retrieved June 10, 2009 from http://www.sciencedaily.com­ /releases/2008/07/080717170428.htm Read More