Citation

Ireland JL. Aggressive Behav. 2005; 31(4): 359-373.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2005, International Society for Research on Aggression, Publisher John Wiley and Sons)

DOI

unavailable

PMID

unavailable

Abstract

The current study explored the perceptions of staff and patients concerning how patient-to-patient bullying should be defined and what behaviours it should include. Participants were randomly selected from the Personality Disorder Unit of a maximum secure hospital. A total of sixty interviews were conducted (30 staff and 30 patients). Problems in attempting to utilise definitions of bullying developed for use in other contexts, i.e., schools, were identified. Patients and staff presented with similar views about how it should be defined: both felt that aggression did not have to be repeated or severe in order to be classed as bullying, that bullying could be accidental, that the power imbalance between perpetrator and victim was not always explicit and, finally, that victims could provoke bullies unintentionally. Indirect (i.e. covert) forms of aggression were less likely to be considered bullying than direct (i.e. overt) forms. A number of differences were found between staff and patients regarding how bullying was conceptualised. Staff were more likely than patients to hold the belief that some patients liked being bullied, and appeared to acknowledge a broader definition of bullying than patients, accounting for a wider range of aggressive behaviours. A number of similarities between the current study and previous prison-based research were found. The implications of these findings for current research and the value in attending to prison-based research are highlighted.