Studies Reveal Why Kids Get Bullied and Rejected

Thelasko writes "I'm sure many here have been the victim of bullying at some point in their lives. A new study suggests why. '...now researchers have found at least three factors in a child's behavior that can lead to social rejection. The factors involve a child's inability to pick up on and respond to nonverbal cues from their pals.' The article sketches out some ways teachers and councilors are working with bullied kids to help them develop the missing social skills."

Comments

I could have told you that.

[Minwee]

Why are kids bullied and rejected?

Because sometimes, other kids are dicks. Next question?

Re:I could have told you that.

[Shadow of Eternity]

Some people can't be bought, bargained or reasoned with. Some people enjoy the suffering of other people purely because of what it is and for no other deep reasons beyond that.

Some people, quite simply, are the monsters little children think are under the bed.

Re:I could have told you that.

[Anonymous Coward]

Well the study seems to be saying fault lies with the victims of bullying. Imagine the study was a bit different and instead of blaming the victims of bullying it blamed a different sort of victim...

Studies Reveal Why Women Get Beaten and Raped

Women who get beaten and raped by men may be more likely to have problems in other parts of their lives, past studies have shown. And now researchers have found at least three factors in a woman's behavior that can lead to being violently abused.

The factors involve a woman's inability to pick up on and respond to nonverbal cues from men, as well as inability to listen and not knowing when to shut her mouth.

Re:I could have told you that.

[Millennium]

This, more or less. Blaming the victim only keeps the cycle going.

Re:I could have told you that.

[Le Marteau]

> And other kids are dicks because that's how you establish hierarchy. A lot of bullying is by lower-end youngsters terrified of becoming bottom themselves, and thus the main target

Some people, young and old, play the role of what I like to call the "sheepdog". They can't stand it when someone does not behave in ways society expects.

For whatever reason, they look for those that stray from the herd, and give them a bark to get them back in line.

Non-conformists know exactly what I mean.

Re:I could have told you that.

[j_w_d]

Bullies are scum. No 'if onlies,' no 'buts.' There's no reason why a kid with difficulty understanding social cues should spend grade school making sure an upper grade bully got fat off his lunch money. No one 'makes' a bully steal your stuff, throw tarred rocks at you or generally lurk around for a chance to otherwise make your life miserable. All understanding the social cues offers is the knowledge of whom to avoid. There's a reason so many bullies go by handles like "Chopper," "Dumbo" and "Buddy" (all ones that I knew personally) and it isn't because they're brightest bulbs in the lamp. However, my dad always said 'don't get mad, get even.' I expect that Buddy never did understand why when he stole my home work he still got D's, and I still got A's.

Re:I could have told you that.

[Anonymous Coward]

Some bullies are sociopaths. Sociopaths are scum. Other bullies simply need a better social environment (including home environment).

And yes, all blame should fall squarely on the aggressor. It's a teaching mechanism. It should be nothing more, nor less.

Amusing story, though.

Re:I could have told you that.

[Gorobei]

Yep, you can fix the bullying problem in a week by ending the "blaming the victim" mentality inherent in the people in charge.

The rule is really damn simple: you don't bully anyone. If you do, you get punished.

Good elementary school administrators do not tolerate bullying.
Good high-school administrators do not tolerate bullying.
Good college administrators do not tolerate bullying.
Good bosses at firms do not tolerate bullying.

If you want to suck as an administrator, go right ahead: you make the law, but pleased don't get too upset when we slash your tires and put sugar in your gas tank. You are making the rules and judging, we vote in the only ways we can vote in this situation.

Re:I could have told you that.

[corbettw]

Generally speaking, I agree with you. However, this isn't "blaming the victim". This is giving victims something that can do in their own lives to end or mitigate bullying. That isn't blame, that's empowerment.

Re:I could have told you that.

[Moridineas]

You know, I'm not going to defend those cretinous bullies at all, but I will add that there are more than just physical bullies. Kids can be jerks. Whether they're smart, dumb, geek, jock, whatever. I've seen some pretty cruel behavior amongst geeks. Perhaps not so overt as a "give me your lunch money now!" bully, but bullying just the same.

IMHO it's part of figuring out human society. Geeks/nerds/other may like to pretend that they're beyond the social ladder and the BS of others, but it's there in other ways. By the time one is 20, it should be about all figured out (hah)

Re:I could have told you that.

[Darkness404]

Problem is, how do you know what is bullying and what is not? Its pretty easy for someone to say they were verbally "harassed" by someone and have the backing of 2 or 3 friends to bully someone. A lot of remarks can simply be taken out of context and used against someone. Problem is, bullying is mostly hearsay and very subjective. What one person considers bullying is different than another person. Plus, things are different between friends, I know that some of the remarks I say around friends could be taken to a casual observer as bullying but of course its not. Even worse is when the other person denies it but they think that somehow the "bully" has manipulated the "victim" into not talking.

Re:I could have told you that.

[Jah-Wren Ryel]

Blaming the victim only keeps the cycle going.

You can piss and moan all you want about people being dicks and guess what - they will still be dicks. Its like those personal ads where the girl says things like "no jerks need reply" - like that would ever stop a jerk. The only person you have control over is yourself.

I would have KILLED for training in basic social mores and skills as a child - just rote, repetitive stuff the same as any other kind of training, so that what I did not know naturally I could at least fall back on manually learned behavior. We put kids who are slow in math and reading in classes that teach to their level - how about classes that teach social conventions and behaviorism for kids who are slow at that?

Re:I could have told you that.

[hey!]

Yes, but what you are talking about is a psychopath, not a bully. Psychopaths are, I suppose, a kind of bully, but they really ought to be treated as a special case. Thinking of all bullies as psychopaths is a bad idea, because it makes it harder to recognize and deal with garden variety bullying. Oh, my little Johnny can't be a bully, because he's not a monster. Well, the unfortunate and scary thing about human nature is that you don't have to be a monster to sometimes act like one.

Personally, and this is my own anecdotal observations, many bullies have a rather interesting common characteristic in common with their victims: vulnerability. Bullies pick on the vulnerable, which is not a behavior a secure person engages in. Bullies have a particular interest in marking somebody as being at the bottom of the social heap, because they know that's where they belong. They gain security and within limits, enhanced status by placing the weakest solidly at the bottom of the pecking order.

If you ever watch a clique, watch the dynamic between the top dog and the bottom-most one that is "in". The bottommost "in" person is nearly always the nastiest in the group toward outsiders, because he or she is hanging on by his teeth and can't afford to be displaced. The top dog can be more magnanimous, which reduces the security of the underlings and makes them more eager to please.

Re:I could have told you that.

[Anonymous Coward]

Could not agree more.

I was picked on mercilessly in my first period gym class for an entire semester my 8th grade year. To the point where I was miserable and depressed outside of school and dreaded going to school, but I never fought back because I had accepted the "fighting doesn't solve anything" BS that I have been told by teachers and other adults.

When I discovered that I had the same group of people in the same class in the same period for the next semester I realized that I really could not survive another semester, so I caught the first one of the group that I could alone and hit him until he curled up to protect himself.

The principal tried to lecture me on how I was wrong. I asked him what I should have done instead and he stopped talking and excused me.

I assumed that the rest of the group would catch me and beat me up, but none of them ever said another word to me.

Kids need to be taught to stand up for themselves. Violence should not be a person's first on only solution to problems, but there are people out there who are not going to respond to anything short of a fist in their face.

Re:I could have told you that.

[mdarksbane]

This study is more useful in determining which kids are chosen to be bullied than it is at explaining why *someone* is bullied. It's like lions attacking a herd of antelope - the lions attack because they're lions, but which antelope gets eaten is more dependent on the antelope.

I know, personally, that I failed to get along with other children until I understood social protocols enough to run them essentially on an emulation layer. Laugh here because it's supposed to be funny, be grossed out at this because it's supposed to be gross. Eventually it became second nature, and I can make small talk and fit in with a group comfortably. Normal children develop this social ability earlier and with less process. I can see a great deal of benefit in identifying the aspects of socialization that some children fail at and trying to teach them how to fake it until they can do it naturally.

Just like in rape cases, the fact that rape is caused by the rapist does not make walking alone and drunk through a bad neighborhood at night in a slutty dress a smart idea! Taking rapists off the street helps protect society in general, but calling a cab is more likely to help you specifically.

Re:I could have told you that.

[Trillian_1138]

I'm undoing moderation to post this, but I think your post is worth replying to.

Of course, suggesting that people in general, and women in particular, choose to ignore hints, cues, and clues that they are in danger isn't going to win any friends or respect. Especially among the women's rights activists.

Here's the thing: you're right, people who are the subject of violence can often (although certainly not always) do things to avoid being placed in a situation where violence is the end result. Pick up on the social cues bullies give off. Avoid dangerous streets or walking home alone. Don't wear such provocative clothing. And I say all that as a liberal, feminist, lesbian, intellectual, liberal arts major. That list could go on, but suffice it to say I am exactly the demographic who might be expected to dismiss or disagree with you, point blank. (And, indeed, I'm about to disagree with you. But I wanted to note that I don't totally disagree with you.)

Because you're also right that saying so won't win you points among many women's rights circles. And here's why: the ultimate responsibility for wrongdoing lies with the one committing the immoral act.

Bullies are responsible for bullying. Thieves are responsible for theft. Rapists are responsible for rape. Murderers are responsible for murder.

The point the grandparent was making was that there is a fine line between acknowledging ways to reduce one's risk and crossing over into victim-blaming. Likewise, it's really easy to leap from "kids can take specific actions to lesson the chance of being bullied" to "any child who was being bullied must have not taken proper action to avoid it!" And I believe that your argument is drifting in that direction

Had you stuck with saying that "people in general sometimes make poor decisions, which in turn can contribute to their being the victims of others" I wouldn't disagree for a second. But in your phrasing, you imply that "people in general, and women in particular" are all making these choices that result in bad things happening to them. Because, apparently, no child has ever been bullied, even though he did everything 'right.' No one has ever been walking home with a group of friends, in a well-lit area, not late at night, and still been mugged. No woman has had the poor misfortune of being assaulted or raped simply because of bad luck.

But even if that weren't the case - even if people were only bullied or raped after exhibiting clear, identifiable, preventable behavior - it still wouldn't excuse bullying, rape, or victim-blaming!

Again, I agree that people can often take steps to lesson their chances of being victims.

But ultimately, bullies cause bullying. Rapists cause rape.

-Trillian

Re:I could have told you that.

[StrategicIrony]

And the simple lesson here is:

bullying tends to be human nature, not some isolated behavior of socially ignorant cretens.

Re:I could have told you that.

[Alex Belits]

I'm pretty sure there is a strong fundamental need to establish dominance.

You, sir, are an idiot.

People (and animals) have a drive to achieve dominance, however evolution developed it to be just strong enough to make sure that positions of power are not occupied by individuals vastly inferior to the rest of the group. Make it slightly higher, and the amount of infighting will destroy the group from the inside before environment and enemies will get to it. Make is slightly lower, and packs/tribes/... will be led by leaders incapable of making reasonable decisions, communicating with the rest of the group and organizing common activities.

The culture of modern American society already elevated this competitiveness to dangerous levels, and this is why you are being led by sociopaths. Telling people that they "need" to dominate others, plays exactly into the hands of those sick leaders -- it imposes pathological behavior onto the rest of society, and makes it impossible to recognize the disease in those who have it.

Re:I could have told you that.

[malkavian]

Ok, I think the broken teeth from having the face smashed into a wall, the scars on the forehead from having a half brick thrown at me, and the scars on my torso and arms from sharp objects (broken glass, usually) used to slice me count as bullying.
My social skills were fine. I could pick up on the "non verbal cues" very accurately, and to this day, I'm considered highly adept at that.
Basically, this research is saying "We'll find ways to make sure you follow the crowd", rather than being a little different (hey, I read Lord of the Rings at 5 years old, and loved physics and cosmology; yes, I was "different").
What happened with all this bullying? Well, the do gooders simply said "You have to understand them; they come from a deprived background. They're having a hard time at home".
Bzzt. Wrong answer. This attitude got me a nervous breakdown by the time I was 11 amidst all the school's hand wringing over how they could improve the lot of a bunch of yobs who wanted to do nothing more than talk about football all day, and beat up anyone who didn't want to do that.

Interestingly, I once had a client who'd worked out a way to pretty much cut bullying out. He was an explorer, who'd settled for a while in England and set up a company. This company used the knowledge he'd picked up across a goodly many expeditions, and allowed him to set up a whole host of challenges in 'adventure grounds', so there were the rope bridges, rope climbs, climbing walls etc; all the stuff to challenge the physically oriented kids, who went out and proved how physically gifted they were, and got real respect for achieving something. Places that contracted him to install the grounds had an 80%+ reduction in bullying across the board, and classroom results had a marked improvement.
However, in the early 2000s, Health and Safety got their teeth into this, and said the ground were "too risky", and disallowed further installations, while shooting up the insurance premiums on schools that had them. End result, the grounds were removed from places that had them, bullying went up and grades went down. But it was cheaper.

There are those that bully because they need to prove themselves, and grounds like that will cater to them. And there are those that bully because they're nasty. Those need to be weeded out and taught hard lessons early.
It is NOT due to some kid not picking up on non-verbal clues. We pride ourselves on being an enlightened and accepting society, so why is it that some kid who may be far brighter than the rest (I've noticed that those tend to act and perceive the world in a different way) needs to suddenly understand the ways of kids far less enlightened? Why not hold the lowest denominator to higher standards?

Re:I could have told you that.

[Anonymous Coward]

the ultimate responsibility for wrongdoing lies with the one committing the immoral act.

The victim has the will to stop the abuse but lacks the power, the abuser has the power but lacks the will to stop.

Until such time as the abusers of the world agree to stop voluntarily (only a portion will ever do so) the other available response is to empower the victim. Whether your chosen method of empowerment is more cautious behaviour, increased social skills, improved/legal/justice system response or the personal carry of firearms I leave to your judgement. If you do nothing, though, you are relying on people who have chosen evil to instead do good, a very risky proposition.

From the Article

[timeOday]

"The number one need of any human is to be liked by other humans"

Admit it.

Re:I was bullied constantly until...

[QuantumG]

First year in high school I was bullied, struck back, and then was labeled as a hot head. Every other hot head considered me one of them and assumed the only way to solve disagreements with me was with violence. It took a while to shake that.

Just a reminder that fighting back has its own consequences.

Awesome, Blame the victim

[h4rr4r]

In other news,

Studies Reveal Why People Get Beaten and Mugged
The factors involve a persons inability to pick up on and respond to nonverbal cues from muggers.

Studies Reveal Why People Get Prison Raped
The factors involve a persons inability to pick up on and respond to nonverbal cues from rapists.

Studies Reveal Why People Get Prison Murdered
The factors involve a persons inability to pick up on and respond to nonverbal cues from murderers.

Re:Awesome, Blame the victim

[capologist]

Studies Reveal Why People Get Beaten and Mugged The factors involve a persons inability to pick up on and respond to nonverbal cues from muggers.

A better analogy would be, "Studies Reveal Why People Get Beaten and Mugged: The factors involve walking alone through dark alleys in crime-ridden neighborhoods." Identifying and addressing factors that increase risk of being mugged doesn't exonerate the mugger, it just makes you less likely to get mugged. That's all this is. It isn't "blaming the victim" like so many people are shouting. It's simply a matter of identifying factors that increase the risk of becoming a victim and addressing those factors in order to reduce such risks. I only wish this study had been done 40 years ago. I have Asperger's Syndrome (only recently diagnosed) and was bullied a lot as a kid. If my parents had been armed with the information in this study, maybe I would have been bullied less.

Re:Awesome, Blame the victim

[hey!]

Seriously, though, how you act makes a huge difference to how likely you are to be mugged. It's actually quite useful knowledge: the places to avoid, how to act if you're in a strange place, how to react when potential muggers interact with you to gauge how safe a target you are, what to do if you are being mugged (e.g., never believe what a mugger says when he tries to get you to do something, especially if it involves going someplace where he'll find more private).

It's fine to say "muggers are bad people" -- we know they are. But that doesn't get you far in the area of self-protection. "Make all the people in the world good" is not a viable strategy.

I see

[pydev]

<sarcasm>Who would have guessed? Those poor bullies are really the victims of the kids they beat up, because the kids being beaten up are practically asking the bullies to commit violence against them. I mean, obviously, if anybody doesn't want to conform to social norms or has interests other than those that the popular kids have, they are abnormal and hence need to be cured!</sarcasm>

Re:I was bullied constantly until...

[Idiomatick]

Words of a coward :/

Fighting has little to NOTHING to do with who is tough/bigger/stronger. If you are remotely physically fit even if the guy is twice your size. You can win in a fight. Fights have EVERYTHING to do with who is willing to put it out there. If you can bite back the pain of a punch, even if you are smaller you can inflict damage back. And the one that wins is the one that is willing to continue. Bullies want to show dominance, they want to show how tough they are to others. But they rarely are willing to take an elbow to the throat for it.

Let's blame the victim!

[lanner]

Uh, it's pretty clear to me that there is an overtone in this article that it's victim's fault that they are not well liked or have social problems.

While I accept that this may be true in some cases, and a contributing factor in many instances, it's shocking and abhorrent to me that someone might suggest that it's the victim's fault that they get physically assaulted, mentally abused, pressured to do drugs, etc.

The common attribute to bullying is bullies. They are the source of the problem (as often a single link in a chain of abuse) and it would be wise to focus on identifying, exposing, and properly reacting to their abusive behavior against others.

I don't want to attack the entire study based on my perception of this article, and I'll support that having poor social skills can contribute to the likelihood of being a bully victim, but WTF?

In the real world...

[voss]

People who beat up other people GO TO JAIL. They do not get peer mediation, they dont get 3 day suspensions.
Police do not tell victims "Suck it up, be a man, stop living in a fantasy world", they arrest the thug and put him in jail
for an extended period of time. They do not force victims to stay in proximity with their perpetrators.

We do not tolerate it when husbands batter wives and when parents batter children, we dont allow thugs to extort money from people
on city streets or to beat up people as a means of social dominance. Why do we tolerate physical violence by peers?

Re:I was bullied constantly until...

[catsidhe]

Words of someone who got lucky.

So it worked for you. Huzzah.

How many other kids do you think tried that sort of thing, and got seven kinds of shit beaten out of them? And then got it worse afterwards for daring to stand up?

What happens when you get someone who is willing to risk an elbow to the throat? And/or is simply better than you at head-kicking?

How about you try to think of a way of addressing this problem which doesn't hold the victim responsible for their own victimisation?

Which TFA did you read?

[n dot l]

The TFA I read discussed social rejection, and noted that bullies often focus on the socially rejected. This isn't about using your social skills to charm the bully (lol), it's about using them to get friends and hoist yourself out of the immediate target population, or at least get yourself on a better footing to fight back (most bullies have their own social issues - if you can sort yours out that's an automatic advantage).

I've been bullied. I watched other kids get bullied too. I got rid of my bullies by not behaving like the other victims, not by beating anybody up (as if I could). I realized that the only targets were people who were isolated from the main social group and unwilling to fight back (in most cases by their own low self-esteem) and made an effort to not be one of them. I learned to control my emotions so I could think clearly in social situations that weren't going how I wanted. I learned to actually pay attention and read other people's body language properly. I learned the social rules. I made friends outside my usual circle.

The guys that spent 5 minutes between classes laughing at me in the halls every day (not hardcore bullying but hardly pleasant, I assure you)? Most of them weren't being sarcastic or mean like I thought. They were confused by how incongruously I acted. I was the one that was too stupid to read their expressions correctly. Once I clued in, I stopped escalating simple misunderstandings (I actually thought I was sticking up for myself) and quickly made friends with many of them. I had no trouble ignoring the few asshole opportunists (most of who were doing it due to their own self esteem issues) in the lot who were jumping in with a nasty quip just because they saw they had a chance to get a laugh at my expense. Over the next few weeks I got rid of a good two thirds of the grief I'd get at school (the low grade harassment) in this way. I'd say fixing this one mistake of mine is probably where I started to really build my self-confidence.

The scary looking thug (huge muscles, tattoos, scars, rumors that he's done nasty things - seriously scary fucker) that went around threatening people into giving him free shit? The confidence I'd gained making some friends was enough to keep me calm around him. Calm enough to see his insecurity screaming through every little gesture (fucked up home life, he had a lot to be insecure about). Flat-out told him "no" when he punched me and told me to give him my CD collection. He was stunned, I don't think he'd ever seen someone calmly stand up to him before (I admit, it freaked me out afterwards - he had opened up with a punch). He wandered off as though nothing had happened and didn't bother me again.

The asshole who'd steal my shit, trip me, shove my head into my locker, heckle me in class (WTF teachers, how did that shit ever fly?), throw things at me, etc every single chance he got? I was his favorite victim until a few months after I started turning myself around. He turned out to be desperately afraid he'd lose his friends' respect if he didn't act all tough. Getting the courage to go and talk to them (his friends) and find out that they didn't really like him was the key to getting rid of him. Desperate fuckers turn out to be easy to bait, and I only had to get myself seen with his buddies regularly for a few weeks before he freaked out about them ditching him and did something stupid enough to get them to actually ditch him. He never bothered me again. I'd actually been hoping to get something out of them that I could blackmail him with, but I'm not one to complain if a problem takes care of itself.

So I disagree that TFA's conclusion is some bullshit way to avoid having to actually punish bullies. We're social creatures, and learning how to navigate the social web (rather than hovering helplessly around the edges) is definitely empowering. I certainly wouldn't argue with anyone that would just beat the shit out of a bully, but it's hardly the only way to deal with things (and I've seen a couple of guys that did that get shunned even more for being "dangerous" hotheads).

Re:not an unreasonable policy

[Dr Damage I]

Yet punishing both the victim and the aggressor remains a bad solution to this problem. It rewards the bully by punishing his (or her) victim twice: once at the hands of the bully, once at the hands of the authorities. The fact that meting out actual justice is difficult is not an excuse to discard the notion in favor of simple and brutal solutions.