School psychologists’ decisions regarding bullying as related to research and professional development

Abstract

• School psychologists identified student conflicts as more severe when they include a power imbalance and repeated harm. • Conflicts were identified as bullying, more severe, and requiring intervention when they included repeated harm and a power imbalance. • Degrees of professional development did not seem to impact identifying bullying or degree adult intervention was required. This aims of this study were to understand if school psychologists use research literature to guide their conceptualizations of bullying and necessity of adult intervention and whether professional development aids in this conceptualization. A sample of 151 school psychologists read conflicts between students and rated the degree to which the conflict was bullying, how severe the conflict was, and the degree to which adult intervention was necessary. Conflicts were either reflective of bullying as defined within the research (causes harm, is repetitive, and has a power imbalance) or a variation of these features and therefore reflective of a non-bullying conflict. Bivariate analyses indicated that participants that correctly identified bullying scenarios rated these scenarios as more severe. Paired sample t -tests indicated that school psychologists adhere to the research-based definition of bullying for both conceptualization of bullying and determining adult intervention. Finally, mixed ANOVAS indicated that professional development was unrelated to school psychologists’ decision making. Implications for school psychologists are discussed.