Abstract

Acting as disciplinary committee members, participants listened to a school bullying case that varied in terms of type (relational or verbal), degree of harm (low or high), and academic level of the victim and defendant (high school or university). Participants’ judgments (e.g., verdict, recommended sentence, seriousness, perceptions of both students) generally favored the victim when he experienced more rather than less harm, regardless of bullying type, and when the incident took place in a high school rather than a university. Additionally, women’s judgments supported the victim more than men’s. We propose that previous results suggesting that observers downgrade relational bullying occurred because no harm was specified. Moreover, we contend that observers relied on a “bullying schema” that includes the component that bullying occurs in primary and secondary schools, which led them to make less punitive judgments in the university case.

Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.