WJEC A Level Psychology Bullying Behaviours Exam Questions

About WJEC A Level Psychology Bullying Behaviours

Bullying behaviours sits among the six WJEC Unit 3 behaviours, three of which you choose for the Section A structured essays. You define bullying, explain it from social psychological, individual differences and biological perspectives, and evaluate the two named school programmes for effectiveness, ethics and social implications. Here the social explanations come first, because group processes such as moral disengagement and in-group loyalty explain why bullying often happens in front of an audience. WJEC essays benefit from naming specific studies, contrasting reactive and proactive aggression, and linking ideas to the Unit 1 approaches, for example social learning and the evolutionary assumption of the biological approach.

What you need to know

• Defining bullying Aggression that is deliberate, repeated over time and aimed at someone with less power. Forms include physical, verbal, relational (exclusion and rumours) and cyberbullying, and roles include ringleaders, assistants, reinforcers, defenders and outsiders.
• Moral disengagement Bandura described cognitive tricks that switch off self-condemnation, such as blaming the victim, minimising harm and diffusing responsibility across the group. Gini (2006) found children who bullied scored higher on moral disengagement than defenders.
• Group and cultural factors Social identity theory (Tajfel and Turner) predicts favouritism to one's own group and hostility towards out-groups, so pupils seen as different are targeted. Smith et al. (2002) showed that terms and definitions for bullying differ across languages and countries, which complicates international comparisons.
• Thinking and personality Children with a hostile attribution bias read accidental bumps as deliberate and retaliate, which fits reactive bullying. Baumeister's threatened egotism idea links narcissism (inflated, fragile self-regard) to aggression when that image is challenged. Sutton, Smith and Swettenham (1999) found ringleader bullies scored highly on theory of mind tasks.
• Biological explanations Twin data from the E-Risk study (Ball et al., 2008) suggested both bullying and being bullied are substantially heritable. Volk et al. (2012) argued bullying may be an evolved strategy for gaining status, resources and mates. Hormones such as testosterone and cortisol have been linked to aggression and to the stress of victimisation.
• Olweus Bullying Prevention Programme Developed in Norway after the 1983 national campaign, it works at school level (questionnaire survey, coordinating committee, better supervision), class level (rules and regular class meetings) and individual level (talks with bullies, victims and parents).
• CAPSLE Twemlow and colleagues' Creating A Peaceful School Learning Environment treats bullying as a power struggle involving the whole school, with emphasis on bystanders. Fonagy et al. (2009) ran a randomised controlled trial in US primary schools and reported reductions in aggression and victimisation.

Common mistakes in Bullying Behaviours

• Treating relational aggression as less serious or not real bullying. Exclusion and rumour spreading meet the definition when repeated and intentional, and can be very harmful.
• Using hostile attribution bias to explain every bully. It fits reactive, hot-headed aggression better than planned, proactive bullying by socially skilled ringleaders.
• Implying an evolutionary explanation excuses bullying. Explaining why a behaviour may have been adaptive is not the same as saying it is acceptable.
• Describing CAPSLE as counselling for victims. It is a whole-school programme that changes the climate and especially the role of bystanders.
• Saying moral disengagement means bullies have no moral standards. They usually know the rules but use justifications to avoid feeling guilty.

Try three Bullying Behaviours exam-style questions