This article was downloaded by: [University of Arizona]

On: 11 June 2011

Access details: Access Details: [subscription number 933127480]
Publisher Routledge
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-
41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Educational Psychology in Practice

Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:
http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/title~content=t713417121

The Support Group Approach to Bullying in Schools

Sue Young

To cite this Article Young, Sue(1998) 'The Support Group Approach to Bullying in Schools', Educational Psychology in
Practice, 14: 1, 32 — 39
To link to this Article: DOI: 10.1080/0266736980140106
URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0266736980140106

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.informaworld.com/terms-and-conditions-of-access.pdf

This article may be used for research, teaching and private study purposes. Any substantial or
systematic reproduction, re-distribution, re-selling, loan or sub-licensing, systematic supply or
distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden.

The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representation that the contents
will be complete or accurate or up to date. The accuracy of any instructions, formulae and drug doses
should be independently verified with primary sources. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss,
actions, claims, proceedings, demand or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly
or indirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of this material.
 The Support Group Approach
to Bullying in Schools
Sue Young

Summary review because it is similar to the Method of Shared

The Kingston upon Hull Special Educational Needs Concern (Pikas, 1989) and because the training
Support Service (SENSS) Anti-Bullying Project has materials are easily accessible to schools. The gen-
developed the support group approach to bullying, eral conclusion was that this type of approach may
Downloaded By: [University of Arizona] At: 19:11 11 June 2011

building particularly on the work of Maines and be worth trying.

Robinson (1991, 1992). This article reports on the Since the publication of the DfE pack, the No
outcome of this type of intervention. It provides Blame Approach has been reviewed in more detail
independent corroborative evidence of Maines and (Smith and Sharp, 1994). The results look promis-
Robinson's findings and outlines the theoretical ing to say the least: 45 out of 47 interventions in
framework that leads to an understanding of why secondary and 7 out of 7 interventions in primary
this approach is so successful. schools having been successful. However, it was con-
cluded that independent replication and further ra-
tionale on how or why the approach is effective
Introduction would be valuable.
The anti-bullying pack Bullying — don't suffer in si-
lence (DfE,1994), gave guidance to schools based on
research and practice developed by the Department Background
for Education (DfE) anti-bullying project in Sheffield. The Special Educational Needs Support Service in
It promoted the message that bullying is to be found Kingston upon Hull has an established anti-bullying
in all schools and that the.issue of bullying should project. One aspect of the work is to advise and
be addressed by developing whole school policies. support schools over individual referrals for bullying
One section, 'Working with pupils in bullying situa- situations. In the majority of cases there has been a
tions', reviewed the effectiveness across a range of long-standing problem. Concern has been expressed,
schools of different intervention strategies, including and ultimately complaints have been made, to the
the No Blame Approach. school, followed in some cases by the parent
The No Blame Approach to bullying, developed contacting the local education authority. With the
by Barbara Maines and George Robinson, was first head's approval, the referral may be passed to SENSS.
outlined in Educational Psychology in Practice By the very nature of the referral process, the
(1991) and published as a distance learning pack in complaints tend to be serious - indeed the police may
1992. The approach addresses bullying by forming have been involved, there may have been a medical
a support group of 'bullies' and/or bystanders. With- referral, the problem may have been going on for years
out apportioning blame, it uses a problem-solving and the child may be absent from school.
approach, giving responsibility to the group to solve Over a period of 2 years the service dealt with over
the problem and to report back at a subsequent re- 80 referrals that required active involvement beyond
view meeting. The authors are confident on the train- advice over the phone. In some referrals the support
ing video that this method is tried and tested and it group approach was not appropriate for a variety of
works. reasons: for example, a pupil not returning to the
The No Blame Approach had not been included same school, being on study leave, or actively not
in the Sheffield Project but was mentioned in the wishing any intervention to take place.

32 Educational Psychology in Practice Vol 14, No 1, April 1998

 Inevitably, each referral has its own individual 9. A disproportionate number of children referred
characteristics. Although no referral is typical, some have special educational needs, such as learning
features, while not occurring in every case, occur difficulties or speech problems (Whitney et al,
frequently enough to be called typical. 1994).
10. Frequently parents report bed wetting as a
problem at home, also nightmares, mood swings,
The parents' perspective temper tantrums, uncharacteristic disobedience
The parent(s) of the bullied child are often the first and aggression, withdrawn behaviour and
people with whom the problem is discussed: complaints of illness before school such as tummy
upsets and headaches.
1. They are very often worried, upset and frustrated
because they feel powerless to defend their child, The parents may have wanted severe punishment
frightened to intervene directly because this of the bully in the first instance but this is because
might make things worse, or indeed having they know of no other approach that could be
intervened, they have made things worse. They successful. Incidentally the term 'No Blame' is not
often become distressed when talking about their used, since parents may take this to imply that the
child being bullied and about their frustration bullying is condoned, which is not the case. The
with not being able to act effectively. support group approach is outlined to the parents
and the reasons why this approach may be
Downloaded By: [University of Arizona] At: 19:11 11 June 2011

2. They often say that no-one at the school will

appropriate in their case.
listen to them, that they are not taken seriously,
that they are told they are over-reacting or are Often the child may want to change schools,
over-protective. although we indicate that it is possible that they
3. They are often considering changing schools, may find themselves being bullied again. A change
perhaps not for the first time.The parents may of school, moreover, would not stop the bullying
be asking for advice on transfer and can be quite round the home, whereas in our experience support
adamant that their child is not returning to their groups operate outside school as well as in. We can
present school. assure parents that this type of approach has a high
4. Occasionally they say the school has done all it success rate, and with immediate effectiveness,
can, but the bullying continues and the bully although a change of school can still be an option
ought to be expelled, since they cannot think of if necessary.
any alternative solution.
5. Parents often report that non-physical bullying Teachers' perspective
has preceded physical bullying. The fact that
bullying seems to be taken less seriously if it is Although parents may have said that 'nothing has
not physical, notwithstanding that verbal been done', this is rarely the case. Teachers have
bullying can be extremely hurtful, may be one usually taken various steps along the line of punish-
reason that more referrals involve boys, since ment, but very often have found difficulty in getting
we know that boys are more likely to bully in to the bottom of incidents. School staff, however,
a physical way (Smith and Sharp, 1994, p 16). may not have told the parent what has been done,
6. Sometimes bullying has started to happen and if the bullying continues the parent assumes that
outside school. nothing was done. Once teachers have tried various
7. Parents can also be quite defensive about their strategies such as counselling, punishment and, per-
complaint. They think that they may be judged haps, contacting the parents of the 'bullies', and if the
to be wanting in the way they have brought up bullying does not stop, there appears to be a shift in
their child. They may be concerned that they sympathy away from the victim. Some victims and
cannot afford to buy fashionable, expensive their families are seen as problems themselves in the
clothes and shoes. school:
8. By way of corroboration, they often say that the 1. The victim or their siblings may be disruptive.
school has lots of bullying and that various people 2. Their parents may indeed be overprotective or
were concerned about it - it wasn't just their child even aggressive.
being picked on. The fact that brothers or sisters 3. Signs of distress and anxiety may not be apparent
do not have difficulties, or that other children in in the school and the child's expressed fears are
the school do, is also cited in their defence. sometimes dismissed as attention seeking.

Educational Psychology in Practice Vol 14, No 1, April 1998 33

 4. Occasionally a teacher will say that a victim mine the victim's confidence and are unnecessary.
'frankly deserves all they get'. As long as it is The victim is told that the bullies will not be in trou-
seen as somehow acceptable to bully some ble so there will be no problems that they will 'get
children, regardless of the reason, there is him/her for it later'. Without this assurance, the vic-
implicit permission to bully in that school. tim may be reluctant to give any names. The pur-
pose of this interview is to reassure the victim that
We recommend using the support group approach
the problem can be solved and find out:
to teachers as a better solution because:
• who are the main threatening figures, the 'bullies'
• no sanctions are used and therefore no one can
• who are present although they may not actively
be unfairly punished
join in the bullying, the 'bystanders'
• school staff would be seen to be taking action
• who the victim finds supportive or, if he has no
following DfEE guidance
supporters, whom he would like to have as
• the children would be involved in a positive
friends.
approach; they would enjoy it
• it has proved to be effective in similar cases The victim is told that the group will be asked to
before help make him/her happier in school.
• a member of staff is present if the co-ordinator
is leading the intervention so that the strategy is
Step 2
Downloaded By: [University of Arizona] At: 19:11 11 June 2011

demonstrated; otherwise there is a possibility

that teachers do not feel they can operate this From these names a support group is made up, ideally
approach for themselves. 6-8 pupils. All the main bullies are included with some
bystanders and supporters. The support group often
Teachers are sometimes sceptical that the parents needs reassurance at the beginning that they are not in
will accept this type of approach, thinking that the trouble. The pupils are often unsure of why they have
parents are bent on punishment for the bullies. In been selected, since they are not all 'bullies' or 'friends'.
fact, parents have been generally quite ready to It is important that no child is labelled by their selection
accept that this might work, as it is not usually for the group and having a truly mixed group facilitates
punishment but effectiveness they are after. this. The group is seen separately from the victim. The
group is told that X is unhappy in school, and they have
been chosen because they are all able to help. Group
Intervening with the support group ap- members seem to accept the rationale that they can all
proach help; indeed this is what they have in common. At this
The support group approach has been identified point the term bullying is avoided since this suggests a
separately because it contains some features which judgement has been made on the nature and causes of
differ from Maines and Robinson but the same step- the problem. It is equally important, as with the inter-
by-step description of the strategy fs used for ease of view with the victim, that a non-judgemental atmosphere
reference. Where divergencies from the No Blame is maintained. However, very often the group members
Approach occur these are printed in italics. use the term anyway. Once the reason for the group is
clear and they do not feel threatened, they can be remark-
ably open about what is happening.
Step 1
The victim is interviewed first, sometimes at home if
they are away from school. Concentrating on the Step 3
kind of things that have been happening rather than Empathy for the victim is heightened by asking if
particular incidents, the victim is allowed to to talk they have ever been unhappy in school. Usually
about whatever they think needs to be known. This there are at few who will admit to this and say a lit-
might include the whole history of the problem, or tle about it. The feelings of the victim are not relayed
very little about it. All that is said is accepted in a to the group, as Maines and Robinson suggest.
non-judgemental way, without questioning its valid- Rather, we discuss briefly the feelings of members of
ity. We do not concentrate on the feelings of the vic- the group that have been unhappy in school and say
tim or request a picture or piece of writing to that 'X must be feeling very like that'. This is an
illustrate them. Questions such as 'What did you effective means of raising empathy without breach-
do to make him do that to you?' or similar under- ing confidentiality.

34 Educational Psychology in Practice Vol 14, No 1, April 1998

 Step 4 powerful single feature of the approach. Inevitably,
sometimes, this initial meeting goes better than
It is explained that no one should feel unhappy in
others but it is curious that no matter how it is seen
school and because they know X they probably
subjectively, this does not appear to be reflected at
know better than anyone why and when he or she
all in the outcome.
is unhappy. Members of the group often volunteer
information that can be very illuminating at this
point. If anyone mentions a name, they are gently Step 7
interrupted and told there is no need for any names,
At the review the victim is seen first to see how things
in order to maintain the non-judgemental
have gone. Generally, things are fine. This review
atmosphere. Again all that is said can be accepted, usually takes about 2-5 minutes. The victim is
since no punitive action will follow as a result of this complimented on things going well; attention is not
discussion. withdrawn because there is no trouble or a
provocative victim may be inadvertently encouraged.
The support group members are then seen together
Step 5 and asked how things are going. Usually they are
The group is asked to make suggestions. Because aware the victim is happier although they may
they know what goes on they are the best people occasionally report on an incident not involving
to suggest what can be done to make the situation
Downloaded By: [University of Arizona] At: 19:11 11 June 2011

members of the support group. Many times they

better for X. We wait for suggestions from them. express the improvement in terms of 'He/she is better
This part of the process is very variable; some now', as if they view the problem as lying within the
groups are full of ideas, others are very vague or victim. They are encouraged to say how they have
there may be some resentful silence. Simply ignor- helped although their efforts are not matched with
ing resentment and praising any suggestions from the suggestions made at the previous meeting, unless
members of the group usually ensures that most will individuals wish to do so. They are also
either have made a suggestion of their own or will complimented and thanked for their help. Then they
take up a suggestion that someone else has made so are asked if they are willing to continue for another
that all have a role. The actual suggestions are not week. No one has ever refused to do this in our
in themselves significant except insofar as they dem- experience. On one occasion a group member was
onstrate a commitment to the group goal. Mem- unwilling to come to the review meeting and
bers say things such as 'I will bring him/her some apparently tried to persuade two others to refuse to
sweets', 'I will watch out for her/him at break to come but by the following week the other two were
make sure s/he is not alone', 'I will help him/her in eager to come and the dissenter, who was one of the
class'. The only suggestion that has to be gently re- identified bullies, had not bullied the victim further.
jected is of the kind — 'If I see anyone hurting her/ A new review is arranged as before. Reviews can
him I'll beat them up'! They are not asked to make be continued for as long as necessary but usually two
any promises and are not given jobs. The plan must reviews have been sufficient. This avoids creating a
be owned by the group. If suggestions are not false sense of dependency. Individuals can be
forthcoming, which has happened occasionally, reinforced informally from then on. It is usually
exploring further the circumstances when upset oc- arranged for the whole group, victim as well as
curs generally gets ideas flowing. supporters, to receive an appropriate reward to
reinforce the new status. They may get a certificate
or a letter home to parents. Having their photograph
Step 6 taken is very rewarding to primary pupils and it can
Group members are thanked for their support and go up in their classroom or a notice board. In
told that it looks like they have a good plan that secondary school of course the reinforcement needs
will make all the difference to X. Then they are to be more subtle.
told that they can report back all they have The parents are asked for their views on how
managed to do in a week's time. In other words, things are going and value being kept informed after
the responsibility is passed to the group at this each review. When they feel involved and therefore
point. The shift of ownership of the plan and the not frustrated this can often help rebuild the
transfer of the responsibility for its implementation relationship with the school which was usually
to the whole group is crucial. This is the most strained beforehand.

Educational Psychology in Practice Vol 14, No 1, April 1998 35

 Evaluation of the support group ap- return to school at all and one transferred to another
proach school early during intervention. On this basis the
support group approach appears to be an effective
Over the 2 year period, in 55 cases (over 70 per cent intervention at secondary level, and subsequent referrals
of referrals), the support group approach was used, continue to reinforce this view. When choosing the
usually by the SENSS anti-bullying co-ordinator or support group in a secondary school an additional
occasionally by the school. These referrals are check needs to be made whether there are members of
predominantly from primary schools - 51 primary the support group in every set or grouping to which the
and four secondary. The approach has been pupil belongs that he/she finds a problem.
successful in the great majority of cases - to be
The confidence of Maines and Robinson has been
precise, the bullying stopped completely or the victim
substantiated in our experience, so much so that now
no longer felt in need of support. Table 1 shows the
SENSS advises the schools to adopt this approach,
results for primary school only, because this is where
unless there are compelling and usually obvious
the weight of our experience is to date.
reasons why it would not be appropriate.
Table 1. Support group approach
Why does the support group approach
Number of work?
Cases 51
Downloaded By: [University of Arizona] At: 19:11 11 June 2011

An approach so successful deserves to be better

Not known and more widely used. Perhaps one of the
completed 1 Child excluded reasons it appears not to be widely accepted is
implicit in Smith and Sharp's review (1994), when
Immediate success 40 (80%) they suggest that it is not known why it works.
Maines and Robinson only begin to give any
Successful 50 (100%) Success delayed 7 (14%) rationale.
Although Smith and Sharp (1994) draw attention
Limited success 3 (6%) to the No Blame Approach in the DfE anti-bullying
pack for schools, it is with a certain tentativeness.
They suggest that this type of approach may used in
The cases have been further sub-divided in order to less serious cases of bullying (DfE, 1994, p 18-19).
clarify the criteria by which they have been judged. Their suggestion that the No Blame Approach needs
'Immediate success' is where, from the time the group independent verification also sounds a note of
was set up, the victim reported little or no difficulties, caution. Why are they are so cautious in the light of
the support group agreed, and the parents of the available evidence? Trying to understand the causes
victim (when involved) were happy that the bullying of behavioural change is not always a 'common
had stopped. Leaving aside the one case not able to sense' pursuit. Despite knowing that a reprimand
be completed, 80 per cent of cases fell into this can in some circumstances reward disruptive pupils,
category. However, in a minority of cases, identified it is still difficult to practice this in the classroom. It
as 'success delayed' in the table, the victim was not takes practice and considerable restraint for a teacher
entirely happy at the first review, or the support group to avoid reinforcing misbehaviour.
thought things were not satisfactory. In these cases the Teachers also often have difficulty rewarding a de-
situation improved over the following 3 to 5 weekly crease in misbehaviour, thinking that it is somehow not
reviews, until it appeared to be stable with no bullying right that a child is rewarded for behaviour that in other
taking place. In a small minority of cases the victim pupils is expected and taken for granted. Maines and
continued to mention incidents that bothered him/her, Robinson (1992) indicate that there is a 'natural' de-
although there had been considerable improvement. sire to punish the bully and that it is often asked what
In these cases, identified as 'limited success' in the • the parents of the victim think of the strategy proposed,
table, the intervention was monitored until there was with the implication that they will be dissatisfied with
stability at a 'tolerable' level for the victim but the a non-punitive response. In one of our referrals, teach-
victim was re-referred subsequently for being bullied ers objected to the bullies being given any reward. No
by different pupils. parent has ever objected — they are only too happy their
Of the four cases in secondary school during the same nightmare has ceased. While there is no clear, rational
period, two were immediate successes, one child did not explanation for the approach working, and where

36 Educational Psychology in Practice Vol 14, No 1, April 1998

 schools have tried to address the problem with little addressed and will be solved by focusing, for
success, it does seem unbelievable that a relatively low- example, on what happens when the problem is not
key approach will have any impact. If the strategy is there. When the 'miracle' has happened (de Shazer,
"not open to plausible explanation it is unlikely to gain 1985;1988), what will be going on? Brief therapy
widespread adoption. is solution-, rather than problem- focused; future-
However, we have turned to 'brief therapy' and rather than past-oriented.
social psychology, especially group psychology, to give Several brief therapy techniques can be recognised
us insights into why and how the strategy works. In in the support group approach. For example, one of
the Kingston upon Hull Anti-Bullying project the the apparently contradictory principles of brief therapy
original Maines and Robinson approach has been is that the solution has nothing to do with the prob-
developed. The differences are small and we fully lem. Indeed, there is no need to even know what the
acknowledge the No Blame Approach as our starting problem is to find a solution. Using the support group
point. However, it is believed that the following approach as outlined above, although we allow par-
exposition demonstrates the changes are significant. ents to tell their complaint in whatever detail they
think necessary, it does not in fact matter what the
details of the complaint are. Equally the victim may
Brief therapy be forthcoming or may be very reticent but again it
The support group approach can be viewed as an does not matter, since the solution is independent of
Downloaded By: [University of Arizona] At: 19:11 11 June 2011

example of applied brief therapy. Brief therapy has the problem. In order to use a solution-focused sup-
been developed in the USA over the last 20 years in port group it is necessary only to find out the names
particular, and recently by practitioners in this country of those in the child's social system who are involved
(Budman et al, 1992). It is recognised not only for in maintaining the problem. Although teachers are
its powerful effect in clinical settings but for its often anxious to say what they have done to address
application to situations such as in education. It is the problem, again it does not matter what they say,
pre-eminently associated with de Shazer (1985; 1988). in the sense that it has no impact on the solution. In
Brief therapy originally developed from a mood of this way the support group is a 'skeleton key' (de
dissatisfaction with traditional psychoanalysis that Shazer, 1985), a solution that fits rather than matches,
tends to be long-term. Moreover, the number of and is all the more powerful for that, because it can
sessions of therapy began to be limited by the health unlock a wide range of individual problem circum-
insurance available in the USA so that long-term stances. Creating 'virtuous circles' relies on the sug-
therapy was only available to the rich. Reducing the gestions from the group, to break the 'vicious circle'
number of sessions available for the therapist to work, of the problem and initiate a process of continued
initially thought of as a necessary evil, led to a change for the better.
realisation that better and more successful therapeutic As in brief therapy, the means to a solution are
sessions could be developed. not found in the knowledge or expertise of the leader
It was also recognised that many clients only attended of the group or how well the staff understand the
the first session of psychotherapy. In order to be situation, or whether we actually know what has
effective, brief therapists took account of this and been going on but in the group members themselves.
developed a concentrated structure of questions to move They make the suggestions of what they think will
clients towards the solution, rather than'concentrating make the difference.
on the feelings and experiences within the problem. The process changes perceptions of behaviour,
When working to manipulate a system, small creating new 'stories' for the protagonists that
changes can lead to profound changes. Indeed, any enhance their own self-esteem and are, therefore, self-
changes in a system will inevitably lead to further reinforcing of the change taking place. Added to
change. Solving the problem, therefore, concerns this, the leader gives feedback of compliments in such
making the small difference that makes all the a way that creates the likelihood that the action will
difference, creating a virtuous instead of vicious circle be implemented - what is called 'cheering on change'
(Wender, 1971). Brief therapy takes a direct route (George et al, 1990).
to a solution, eliciting from the client those crucial Molnar and Lindquist (1989) were the first to
small differences that will bring about the necessary recognise and provide models for applying brief
changes that solve the problem. therapy to classroom management of children with
From the beginning the therapist is positive, behaviour problems. They refer to their ideas as an
convincing and optimistic - the problem can be 'ecosystemic' approach. As they put it, 'Sometimes

Educational Psychology in Practice Vol 14, No 1, April 1998 37

 these changes seemed to occur instantaneously, as if • have been asked to help and have agreed
by magic' and, 'Since ecosystemic ideas are intended • know the need for action is unambiguous, they
to to help change problem situations instead of to are not left in any doubt
diagnose or "treat" a particular type of problem, they • have been given some responsibility to act
can be used in a large number of very different • have individual responsibility
problem situations in schools' (page xiv). Molnar and • know that their action is appropriate
Lindquist do not however address a bullying problem • have witnessed harm even if they were not
in their many case studies (see also Rhodes and Ajmal, directly involved
1995; Durrant, 1993). • have their empathy aroused
The support group approach to bullying is such an • know that they will receive feedback of
ecosystemic approach. It is powerful and effective but outcomes
gentle - just as an anti-bullying response should be. • have a specific assigned task
In the best tradition of conflict resolution the strategy • feel guilty.
provides a win-win outcome.
In addition, the above research shows that working
There is, of course, evidence that using a peer
as part of a group enhances this pro-social affect
support group in the same manner could help children
because:
through a variety of difficulties. Newton et al (1996),
for example, have recognised the power of the peer • each knows their suggestion for action has been
Downloaded By: [University of Arizona] At: 19:11 11 June 2011

group that is empowered to intervene appropriately accepted

and effectively to support a classmate. The benefits to • even if only one member helps initially, the
the members of the group themselves are enormous. others are likely to follow
• they have made their commitment to action
'public'
Social psychology • anonymity of any action is reduced
The reason the support group approach appears to • identifying with a successful group increases self-
work is not only because it is effective and immedi- esteem
ate but also because the solution develops outside the • continuance of unhelpful behaviour becomes
direct influence of the teacher. It is the dynamics of unacceptable to the group
the support group acting both as a group and as in- • in an interdependent group, mutually beneficial
dividuals in interaction with the victim that gives the behaviour is encouraged
strategy force. Maines and Robinson suggest that • commitments made during group discussion lead
raising empathy for the victim of bullying is a key to high levels of co-operation
component of the No Blame Approach. Indeed, • defection from a group goal is less likely when
they concentrate on the feelings of the victim as an the group expects reward.
important part of the procedure. They suggest that
relaying to the support group how the victim feels We can infer what is happening during intervention,
raises this empathy. However, we have come to con- even though the action is outside our direct
centrate less on the victim's feelings without jeopard- observation. It can be suggested that the main
ising the success of the intervention. We do not need purpose of bullying is not so much the effect it
to relay any other information to the group other produces in the victim but rather its effect on the
than that the victim is unhappy. , bystanders. The support group as a whole has a
Social psychologists have studied in depth how purpose that transcends any one member. For the
'bystanders' react - what factors motivate people to group to be successful, the individuals depend not only
help and also what may make people unwilling to on their own actions but also on other members of the
intervene to support others. Looking at this research group. Before a support group is formed it can be
together with work on the psychology of groups assumed that the individuals have mixed motives. For
provides insight into why anti-bullying support example, the friend may wish to help, the bully may
groups are so effective. wish to continue to bully. But the group as a whole
The research informs us (Brewer and Crano, 1994; is given the responsibility for helping. So the bully has
Deaux et al, 1993; Baron et al, 1992) that the factors to choose either to continue bullying, bolstering his/
below enhance the likelihood of help being given (all her dominant position in the wider peer group, or stop
of them are present in the support group approach). bullying and thereby allow the support group to
Individuals are more likely to help when they: succeed and maintain a leading position.

38 Educational Psychology in Practice Vol 14, No 1, April 1998

 In more general terms, people are aroused by the Acknowledgement
needs of others and then decide whether to intervene The author wishes to thank Dez Allenby (Head of
by weighing the costs and rewards of helping. If we SENSS) for his encouragement and support as well as
look at the roles of the people involved in the practical help during the drafting of this article.
bullying situation we can see how a support group
approach can alter the balance so that the rewards References
for helping the victim outweigh the costs. Baron, R. S., Kerr, N. L. and Miller, N. (1992) Group
The costs of helping will differ for individuals Process, Group Decision, Group Action, Buckingham:
Open University Press.
depending on their former roles.
Brewer, M. B. and Crano, W. D. (1994) Social Psychology.
A bully will lose the excitement associated with Minneapolis: West.
aggression and may lose (or expect to lose) the peer Budman, S. H., Hoyt, M. F. and Friedman, S. (eds) (1992)
group's recognition of their power over others. A The First Session in Brief Therapy, New York, Guildford.
bystander loses the excitement and arousal of Deaux, K., Dane, F. C., Wrightsman, L. S. and Sigelman,
watching bullying and risks becoming a target for the C. K. (1993) Social Psychology in the 90s, 6th Edition.
bully. A friend may just risk becoming a target him/ California: Brooks/Cole.
herself. Department for Education (1994) Bullying - don't suffer in
All support group members participate in a range silence. An anti bullying pack for schools. London, HMSO.
of rewards including de Shazer, S. (1985) Keys to Solution in Brief Therapy.
New York: Norton,
Downloaded By: [University of Arizona] At: 19:11 11 June 2011

• recognition that they belong to a successful de Shazer, S. (1988) Clues: Investigating Solutions in Brief
group Therapy. New York: Norton.
• freedom from various levels of guilt Durrant, M. (1993) Creative Strategies for School
• feeling good about their own altruism Problems. Norton, New York.
• the esteem of other group members or at least George, E., Iveson, C. and Ratner, H. (1990) Problem to
Solution. London: Brief Therapy Press.
not rejection
Maines, B. and Robinson, G. (1991) 'Don't beat the bullies!'.
• recognition and reinforcement from a member Educational Psychology in Practice, 7(3),168-172.
of staff guiding the group. Maines, B. and Robinson, G. (1992) The No Blame
Approach. Bristol: Lucky Duck.
Conclusion Molnar, A. and Lindquist, B. (1989) Changing Problem
Behaviour in Schools. California: Jossey Bass Inc.
One special educational needs co-ordinator, who was
Newton, C., Taylor, G. and Wilson, D. (1996) 'Circles of
initially sceptical of the outcome, watched the process friends', Educational Psychology in Practice, 11(4), 41-48.
and declared it was magic. It sometimes appeared that Pikas, A. (1989) 'The common concern method for the
way when I first used the strategy. However, with treatment of mobbing'. In Munthe, E. and Roland, E.
further experience the underlying processes at work (eds) Bullying, an International Perspective. London:
have become clearer. The approach appears to work at David Fulton.
varying levels and in a variety of ways, each Rhodes, J. and Ajmal, Y. (1995) Solution Focused Thinking
complementing the other. These act as 'back-up' systems in Schools. London: Brief Therapy Press.
in case of failure of any one aspect or level, making the Smith, P. K. and Sharp, S. (eds)(1994) School Bullying:
support group approach extremely powerful. Insights and Perspectives. London, Routledge.
Wender, P. H. (1971) 'Vicious and virtuous circles: the role
Aspects of social psychology help to explain why
of deviation amplifying feedback in the origin and
a support group approach works. An awareness of • perpetuation of behaviour'. In Barton, H. H. (ed) Brief
these factors helps develop practice that reinforces the Therapies. New York: Behavioural Publications Inc.
power of the intervention. Moreover, recognising Whitney, I., Rivers, I., Smith, P. K. and Sharp, S. (1994)
that the support group approach is an application of 'The Sheffield Project: methodology and findings'. In
brief therapy also helps point the way to strengthen- Smith, P. K. and Sharp, S. (eds) School Bullying: Insights
ing intervention by using further strategies from that and Perspectives. London: Routledge.
field, such as using future-focused questions and the
Sue Young is Anti-Bullying Coordinator, with
effective use of compliments.
Kingston upon Hull Special Educational Needs
It is intended that this independent corroboration Support Service, The Education Centre, Coronation
and explanation of the rationale behind the support Road North, Kingston upon Hull, HUS 5RL.
group approach will lead to effective practice being
promoted to help reduce bullying problems in our This article was accepted for publication in January
schools. 1998.

Educational Psychology in Practice Vol 14, No 1i April 1998 39