Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

> A further 2021 meta-analysis distinguished between three different kinds of peer involvement. It found "informal" peer strategies (such as general discussions in class) were associated with greater program effectiveness. However, actively encouraging peer bystanders to intervene (for example, as "upstanders") was associated with less effectiveness in reducing victimization.

Sone armchair psychology here, but this doesn't seem surprising to me:

One thing a bully needs is to feel strong and secure in their peer group: They feel they can get away with bullying the victim - or even gaining validation - because they believe the majority of the other students are "on their side" and the victim is socially isolated.

If a number of students stand up and call out the bully on their own, they signal to the bully that this is not the case - and that the bully might risk social isolation if they continue.

But if everyone just got an official lesson before to stand up to bullies, this signal falls flat - because it's obvious the students are just "acting on orders" of the school authorities and this is not their real opinion. So the bully might believe they're still "really" siding with them, no matter what they say openly.



> they believe the majority of the other students are "on their side" and the victim is socially isolated.

And most of the time they are right.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: