Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Literature review example on bullying
Psychology bullying research essay
Affects of social influences
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Literature review example on bullying
Ingroup bias is the tendency to favor one own’s group. It has very powerful effects on people, society and everyday life. If a person believes that someone else is involved with the same group as themselves, they will have positive views of them and treat them favorably compared to other groups. This is very common among boys and girls. Ingroup bias is particularly important because it affects your self-esteem. As humans, we build our self-esteem through belonging and connecting with people who have similar attributes. Having a close group in which one connects and feels a sense of belongingness can help to increase one’s self-esteem. Despite these positive factors, an ingroup bias may also create negative outcomes. This may include a group treating another in unfair ways, or perceiving the group as “bad” and “evil.” Ingroup bias can be both positive and negative, helping or hurting people in everyday life.
Gianluca Gini performed an experiment testing how students perception of a bullying episode may be influenced by ingroup bias. Four hundred and fifty five children read a story where the ingroup rule and teacher likeability were manipulated. Participants
…show more content…
were asked to evaluate their own group and an out-group. According to Gini (2006), “Data showed a strong participant in-group bias and a generalized tendency to favor the ingroup.” (p. 2). A clear gender effect was also shown through this experiment, in which boys accepted physical bullying more than girls. Ingroup favoritism is known as a central aspect of human behavior.
People usually will favor their own “in-group,” being more helpful to them than anybody else. It has been found that “in-group favoritism has been shown to occur based on real-world salient groupings, such as ethnicity, religiosity and political affiliation”(Fu et al., 2012). In some cases, it can be beneficial to act differently to members of different groups. This was shown in a recent behavioral experiment involving coordination games. Subjects chose a cultural group and an action in the game. They tended to change tag and action together, or to change neither. This created strong group membership, and then later showed that in-group favoritism was evolving. It was shown that subjects preferred to interact with members of their own
group. Bullying is a worldwide problem that many students and high schools are struggling with. According to Nansel (2001), “Psychological research has debunked several myths associated with bullying, including one that states bullies are usually the most unpopular students in school. Another myth is that the tough and aggressive bullies are basically anxious and insecure individuals who use bullying as a means of compensating for poor self-esteem.” Bullies tend to show characteristics including having a strong need to dominate other students, to get their own way, are easily angered, and aggressive towards parents and teachers. Research shows there are more boys than girls who bully others, and that a large percentage of girls are mainly bullied by boys. Physical bullying is less common among girls. They typically tend to use indirect ways of harassment such as leaving someone out, spreading rumors, or purposely ruining friendship to favor themselves. Overall, bullying is a popular problem faced by many and is highly common in high schools throughout the world.
Children in learning settings may come across various types of experiences like bullying, cyber-bullying, discrimination, etc. These types of experiences where perpetrator could also be a child or a group of children can disturb the process of learning. It also has long term effects on the child being bullied and the child/ group of children who are bullying.
When bullying is approached from a social conflict point of view statistical evidence such as surveys, interviews, and experiments are not only utilized to determine what groups of peopled are prone to bullying others but, they are also used to determine what group of people tend to be bullied. For example, 25% of African American students reported being bullied at school. “25% of African American students, 22% of Caucasian students, 17% of Hispanic students, and 9% of Asian students reported being bullied at school (National Center for Educational Statistics).” In other words, social conflict explains bullying in ways that is surrounded around the bullied or
When the word bullying is brought up, one always pictures in his or her mind a big angry boy, who picks on other small helpless children. What some don’t realize is that bullying comes hand in hand with popularity, likeability, and peer acceptance. Children are heavily influenced by other kids his or her age, as the old saying goes, “But mom Jimmy gets to stay up past 10, why can’t I?” According to Miranda Witvliet, to understand children’s peer group affiliation, you need to be able to examine children naturally occurring groups resemble each other on bullying, likeability, and perceived popularity. To be accepted by a popular group of kids, others would follow in his or her footsteps and will bully others, even if the child knew it were wrong. Schools around the country have constructed anti-bullying campaigns and have programs setup to teach students, teachers, and family members what to do to prevent bullying. In an article by Jennifer Dignan, she explains how Stomp Out Bullying and The National Center for Bullying Prevention are two organizations working to put an end to the epidemic. To help prevent bullying people need to understand how the victims and the bullies are affected by other peers.
Much of the research on false consensus has demonstrated that people tend to over project how many members of their in-group are likely to share their attitudes and behaviors. This effect diminishes when comparing to an out-group. It is thought that this occurs because people feel that people who they do not consider to share a group identity with will likely have different basic attitudes and behaviors than they.
This experiment was originally tested by Muzafer Sherif is a famous social psychologist who worked on understanding groups and their members. This experiment is to test his Realistic Conflict Theory. The Realistic Conflict Theory studies, “group conflict, negative prejudices, and stereotypes as being the result of competition between groups for desired resources” (McLeod). This study of group conflict and cooperation shows how groups favor their own members, and how in group conflict can be resolved by groups working together on a common task that neither group can complete without the help of the other group. This is proven in this experiment when two groups have to work together to solve a given problem.
The article, “RACE AND ETHNICITY- CHANGING SYMBOL IS OF DOMINANCE AND HIERARCHY IN THE UNITED STATES” by Karen I. Blu is an exceptional work that clearly expounds on the racial and ethnic groups especially in America. Racial and ethnic groupings are gradually becoming popular in the public arena, in which people are shifting their focus on classifying other people on the basis of racial groupings to rather classifying them on the basis of ethnicity. Moreover, race grouping is slowly submerging into ethnic grouping with Black activism being the role player in this (Blu, 1979). The following is a summary of the aforementioned article in how it relates to racial and ethnic groups and response regarding its views.
By comparing ourselves with other people we categorize and label those who are similar to us as the in-group and people who differ from our-self are categorized as the out-group (Duff & Peace, 2012). We act in ways to favor our in-group rather than out group, this is called in-group favoritism. In-groups and out-groups are evident in many social environments, for example, children form groups with those who like playing similar games to them. In a study that explains in-group favoritism, an experiment was conducted by allocating individuals into groups based on the result of a coin flip (Billing & Tajfel, 1973). After having been told their group members, the participants then had to allocate points to members of their own group (‘in-group’) and to the members of the other group (‘out-group’). These members of the in-group ...
. Sometimes groupthink does not always lead to bad decisions but over confident ones at that. one once noted the best way to avoid groupthink and contaminated thoughts it to assign a “devils advocate” to one person present in the group. With this, the person will be able to voice doubts about the wisdom of the groups decision thus reducing groupthink and resulting in better decisions. Research also suggests that the increasing number of racial diversity within said groups can contribute to better decisions being made. A further example is group polarization. Group polarization occurs when group discussions strengthens the dominant position hekd be an individual group member. This technique can be helpful if it in return leads to efffecient
There are two important parts to our self-concept: personal and social identity. Our social identities are extracted from the group we belong to. Social identity theory is the main reason we see ingroup biasing. Social identity is highly effected by self-esteem. So, naturally, we want to maintain a high level of self-esteem. When our group succeeds, we succeed as individuals and in return we “bask in the glory.” But, if our group’s self-esteem is threatened, we engage in ingroup biasing by thinking our group is better than another’s. “Individuals with high explicit self-esteem but low implicit self-esteem often lash out at others who threaten their fragile feelings of self-worth. At the same time,
When these values and goals conflict with another group’s values and goals this is when prejudice attitudes occur and conflict ensues. A key element of the conflict theory is the notion that groups fear their resources will be taken by another group, therefor, hostile attitudes arise. Resources in this sense can refer to a variety of things such as food, water, land or jobs. Whatever one group perceives as valuable to them can be a resource. Competition for these resources enhances prejudice and stereotypes. The conflict theory regarding prejudice refers specifically to the idea of in-groups and out-groups. Individuals view themselves on the inside looking out at individuals in an out group. The conflict theory relies on the idea of ‘threats’, if the in- group is threatened in some way or another by an out group this is when prejudice attitudes are engaged, the feeling of powerlessness drive these attitudes also. Frustration regarding the feeling of powerlessness can be the root of conflict between groups. Depending on whether an individual sees themselves as the in group or the out group can determine the level of frustration and powerlessness that they feel. The conflict theory suggests that individuals adopt the views of their group, meaning that in this theory prejudiced attitudes are thought to be a result of a group of people rather than personal individual choices.
In Social Psychology, the extensive body of research on intra-group behaviours and small-group processes led to the discovery of a phenomenon that was at first described by Stoner (1961) as the risky-shift. The risky-shift phenomenon refers to the tendency toward riskier alternatives occurring when individuals make decisions as members of a group, rather than when individuals make decisions alone. Moreover, it was observed that members of a group tend toward more extreme alternatives before engaging in group discussion; this tendency is known as group polarization (Stoner, 1961).
It is human nature for us to have a strong sense of belonging to a group. Humans get to experience a deeper commitment to a group when they make decisions and actions. This sense of ...
When someone first thinks of bullying, their perception of the bully may be someone who chooses to be mean or cruel to another due to their own low self-esteem. This concept however is one that may not be true at all. In fact, according to Jaana Juvonen, a professor of developmental psychology at UCLA, who has published multiple books and articles on this subject, a bully usually has a very high self-esteem and is usually from the group that one would consider being the “popular crowd”. [Lin]
In a CNN study by Chuck Hadad he states “That bullying is pervasive even though the schools have anti-bullying programs from kindergarten through 12th grade, assemblies throughout the year, and a peer-to-peer program where older students talk to younger students about the dangers of bullying” (Hadad). Robert Faris, a sociologist found that bullies and victims are generally the same person. Whe...
If I have already viewed the world in a positive or negative way, how can in-groups influence my views of the world. In-group sees the world the same way I do, because members of the in-group attracts others like themselves. In my opinion, I do believe out-groups have affected my views and the reason why is, in society I am categorized as an out-group. In some way it has affected my views, but it also made me aware of out-group. In-groups have enormous political and economic power; they are also the most often the majority in society. Despite the greater numbers that out-groups have, they still do not have power.