Tiers 2 & 3

Interventions for
Bullying Behaviors
Strategy Brief, October, 2013.
Jenna Strawhun, Scott Fluke & Reece L. Peterson, University of Nebraska-Lincoln.

Programs that are designed to reduce bullying are most effective

Tier when bullying is addressed from both a prevention and inter-

Inte 2 & 3
vention standpoint. In other words, these programs produce the
best results when schools incorporate three tiers of increasingly
rve more intensive intervention (Espelage & Swearer, 2008). Uni-
ntio versal interventions are designed to be offered to all students,
n while targeted or secondary interventions are geared towards
students who are at-risk for demonstrating, or have already
started to demonstrate, bullying or aggressive behaviors. This
strategy brief focuses on interventions for students who are at
risk or who have already been identified as engaging in bullying behavior. Another strategy
brief addresses bullying prevention and intervention more generally, and focusing more particu-
larly on preventing bullying, and the discussion which follows assumes that bullying prevention
strategies are also in place.

Identifying Students for Bullying Intervention

Identifying students at risk for involvement in

bullying is difficult because there is no “bully personal-
ity.” However, environmental factors and peer group
factors can be used to predict involvement in bullying
(Barboza et al., 2009). Students who lack strong support
systems, whether from their parents, friends, or teach-
ers, are more likely to engage in bullying (Barboza et
al., 2009). Additionally, students who have been bullied
previously themselves are more likely to engage in bul-
lying (Barboza et al., 2009). Additionally, students who
are transitioning into a new social environment often use
bullying as a means of moving up the social ladder (Pelli-
grini & Long, 2002). Schools should therefore pay par-
ticular attention to students during transition years, such
as freshmen coming into high school. Students who are
involved in peer groups that have positive attitudes to-
wards bullying may also be more likely to engage in bully-
ing in order to better affiliate with their peers (Salmivalli,
2010).

In most cases, in order to recommend a student for

 Interventions for Bullying Behavior 2

interventions, schools often require documentation that prevention efforts (i.e., consistent
behavioral expectations, universal prevention programs) were tried first, but that they were not
effective for this student. Additionally, administering a comprehensive bully survey and holding
staff and student focus groups that highlight the needs of youth involved in bullying can help
identify students involved in bullying (American Educational Research Association, 2013).

What Are Targeted Interventions for Bullying?

Targeted interventions are usually delivered in a classroom, small group (e.g., counseling
group, psychoeducational group) format and usually include role plays, discussions, and ex-
ample scenarios (Horne, Stoddard, & Bell, 2007). Small group, targeted interventions for bul-
lies and victims are the most prevalent type of bullying intervention implemented in a school
setting due to the cost-effectiveness of these interventions over school-wide approaches (Bell,
Raczynski, & Horne, 2010; Newman-Carlson & Horne, 2004).

These small group interventions for students are sometimes coupled with parent-training
and teacher-training groups that address how to implement the bullying interventions with
fidelity (Horne et al., 2007). Small group interventions may also be appropriate for bullies and
victims with more chronic mental health prob-
lems that are at-risk for developing clinical
levels of depression, anxiety, or anger issues
(Swearer, Espelage, & Napolitano, 2009). Still,
Biggs, Vernverg, Twemlow, Fonagy, and Dill
(2008) report that when bullying intervention
programs are implemented in a stand-alone
fashion, teachers view them as another task
to complete, feel that they are not adequately
trained, and are not motivated to implement
the curriculum with fidelity if they are not cer-
tain of the effectiveness. Thus, although this
brief presents evidence-based interventions
and curricula for bullying intervention, no one
program will be effective without supplemen-
tal school-wide efforts that seek to adequately
train staff in not only specific programming,
but also how to improve the overall school
climate.

What is the goal of this intervention?

Students who qualify for supplemental

bullying interventions may be those who have
been involved in bullying, and the involve-
ment does not decrease following primary
intervention. A common supplemental inter-
vention consists of small group interventions
 Interventions for Bullying Behavior 3

designed to build social skills, empathy, and

conflict resolution strategies, among others.
These interventions are often referred to
as psychoeducational group interventions
and provide students with awareness, an
open forum to ask questions, and guidance
for generalization of these techniques to
other settings. Small group interventions
do not generally focus on rehabilitation,
which would be more appropriate for an
individualized intervention (see Project Tar-
get Bullying Intervention Program strategy
brief). Another intervention at this level may
involve a group role playing with bullies and/
or victims on how to problem-solve peer
conflicts. These small groups are often led
by teachers, administrators, and counselors
and usually include specific lesson plans and
objectives (Horne et al., 2007). Many small
group interventions for bullying also contain
parental involvement components (Swearer
et al., in press).

Examples of Targeted Bullying

populations (e.g. ethnic groups, age, type
Interventions
of bullying). Additionally, none of these
programs are likely to be effective without
Several bullying intervention programs
careful implementation and without being
have been developed that include services
monitored to ensure that they are being
for students who do not respond to preven-
implemented as designed (American Edu-
tion efforts, including Bully Busters, Bully-
cation Research Association, 2013). More
proofing Your School, The Peaceful Schools
specific information on several bullying
Project, and Steps to Respect. When choos-
intervention programs is available in the Ex-
ing an intervention, schools should consider
amples of Bullying Preventions and Interven-
the unique components and targeted skills
tion Programs Resource Brief.
of each instead of adopting a “one size fits
all” approach. Readers are directed to the
Behavioral approaches. Ross and
National Registry of Programs and Practices,
Horner (2009) created and investigated a
Blueprints for Healthy Youth Development,
behaviorally-based bullying intervention
and the Model Programs Guide resources
designed to be used for bullies. They hy-
at the end of this brief as aids when choos-
pothesized that a large portion of bullying
ing evidence-based interventions. Although
behaviors are maintained by social atten-
many programs have now been deemed
tion. The investigators taught bystanders
“evidence-based,” these programs still vary
and victims to ask the bully to stop, then
in effectiveness and are designed for specific
 Interventions for Bullying Behavior 4

walk away, and if necessary, tell an adult. cases in which children are experiencing
This decreased the amount of social at- bullying, victimization, or both (Swearer
tention that was delivered to bullies. Their et al. ,2009. Before targeting family, peer,
results showed the expected decrease in and community interventions, it may be
both bullying behaviors and unwanted most appropriate to start with interven-
bystander behaviors (e.g., cheering the bully tions that address individual level variables
on, laughing). The researchers noted that that are linked with bullying behaviors.
bullying behaviors that are not maintained Individual counseling may be able to target
by peer attention will likely be unaffected mental health problems experienced by
by this intervention. These findings suggest individuals experiencing long-term bullying
a need for even more focused interven- involvement. During individual counseling,
tions for students whose negative behaviors it is imperative to stress the goals of the
remain even after secondary supports are intervention, expectations for therapy, and
implemented. Moreover, many small group consequences for deviations from expecta-
interventions may be unsuccessful for bul- tions with the student. It is recommended
lies due to deviant talk (see Target Bullying that students should be taught emotional
Intervention Program Strategy Brief). regulation skills, including how to identify
maladaptive emotions, negative thoughts,
Individual Interventions to Reduce and how they connect to bullying behaviors.
Bullying
Therapists often encourage students
Although school-wide bullying to track the situations they experience and
prevention programming is necessary and the accompanying thoughts and emotions
beneficial, school-wide approaches may not through a diary or worksheet with the end
be effective for the most extreme or chronic goal being to challenge and reframe mal-
adaptive thoughts or cognitive distortions
(e.g., “Aggression is an effective way to
handle conflict”) that contribute to bullying
involvement. Thought records can also aid
in decreasing hostile attribution biases (i.e.,
tendencies to misinterpret social cues as
overly aggressive) or blaming others for bul-
lying involvement. Anger management may
also be addressed in an individual therapeu-
tic or counseling setting by helping students
identify anger triggers and problem-solving
(Swearer et al., 2009). In addition, it may be
beneficial for students to engage in em-
pathy training that emphasizes how bully-
ing may affect victims (e.g. mental health
problems, physical health problems, school
refusal, family issues). The Target Bullying
Student Draw-a-Bully drawings in this Intervention Program (T-BIP; Swearer &
document are courtesy of Susan Swear-
Givens, 2006; see T-BIP Strategy Brief) is a
er’s Empowerment Initiative.
http://empowerment.unl.edu/. three-hour, individual cognitive-behavioral
intervention that aims to reduce bullying (as
measured by office disciplinary referrals and
 Interventions for Bullying Behavior 5

suspensions) that takes advantage of many suggests that once the function(s) of bul-
of these strategies. lying have been defined, students should
be reminded of behavioral expectations at
Conclusion the beginning of the day, be consistently
and actively monitored, receive immediate
The effectiveness of these targeted performance feedback throughout the day,
programs are all contingent upon the use of and check out with an adult at the end of
accurate data collection, efficient progress the day, if possible. (See Bullying Prevention
monitoring tools, competent school person- and Intervention Strategy Brief and Behav-
nel, ongoing and embedded professional de- ior Monitoring Strategy Brief for a more
velopment, and formal coaching and coordi- thorough review of the aforementioned bul-
nation supports (Sugai, Horner, & Algozzine, lying prevention programs and monitoring
2011, p. 3). As stated previously, students strategies). Overall, effective bullying inter-
who qualify for additional supports should vention should expand upon school-wide
not receive “more of the same” techniques prevention efforts, and should be reserved
or programs that have proved ineffective for for students for whom those prevention
them. Instead, targeted efforts should try to efforts have been deemed unsuccessful. In
be tailored across the social ecology (e.g., this way, a school’s limited resources can be
school, family, community) and consider the most efficiently used to provide supports for
function of the bullying behaviors (i.e., to students who need them most.
receive peer or adult attention, to escape an
activity). Even if students are participating
in individual counseling or groups to provide
education about bullying, Sugai et al. (2011)

Resources on Bullying Prevention and Intervention

For further information about specific bullying prevention and intervention programs, see the
Strategy Briefs listed here. The first focuses more on prevention programs or programs which
address both prevention and intervention, while the second provides an overview of several
well-known bullying intervention programs, and the third focuses on one specific bully interven-
tion, the Target Bullying Intervention:

• Bullying prevention and intervention. Strategy brief.

• Examples of bullying prevention and intervention programs. Resource brief.
• The Target Bullying Intervention Program. Program Brief.
All of these are available at: http://k12engagement.unl.edu.

Recommended Citation for this Brief:

Strawhun, J., Fluke, S. M., & Peterson, R. L. (2013, October). Interventions for bullying behav-
iors. Strategy brief. Lincoln, NE: Student Engagement Project, University of Nebraska-
Lincoln and the Nebraska Department of Education. http://k12engagement.unl.edu/
bullying-intervention-bullies-and-victims.
 Interventions for Bullying Behavior 6

Interventions for Bullying Behavior References

American Educational Research Association. (2013). Prevention of bullying in schools, colleges, and universities:
Research report and recommendations. Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.
Barboza, G. E., Schiamberg, L. B., Oehmke, J., Korzeniewski, S. J., Post-Lori, A. & Heraux, C. G. (2009). Individual
characteristics and the multiple contexts of adolescent bullying: An ecological perspective. Journal of
Youth and Adolescence, 38(1), 101-121. doi: 10.1007/s10964-008-9271-1
Bell, C. D., Raczynski, K. A., & Horne, A. M. (2010). Bully Busters abbreviated: Evaluation of a group-based bully
intervention and prevention program. Group Dynamics, Theory, Research, and Practice, 14, 257-267.
Biggs, B. K., Vernberg, E. M., Twemlow, S. W., Fonagy, P., & Dill, E. J. (2008). Teacher adherence and its relation to
attitudes and student outcomes in an elementary school-based violence prevention program. School Psy-
chology Review, 37(4), 533-549.
Espelage, D. L., & Swearer, S. M. (2008). Current perspectives on linking school bullying research to effective pre-
vention strategies. In T. W. Miller (Ed.), School violence and primary prevention (pp. 335-353). New York,
NY: Springer.
Horne, A. M., Stoddard, J. L., & Bell, C. D. (2007). Group approaches to reducing aggression and bullying in school.
Group Dynamics, Theory, Research, and Practice, 11, 262-271.
Newman-Carlson, D., & Horne, A. M. (2004). Bully Busters: A psychoeducational intervention for reducing bullying
behavior in middle school students. Journal of Counseling and Development, 82, 259-267.
Pellegrini, A. D., & Long, J. D. (2002). A longitudinal study of bullying, dominance, and victimization during the tran-
sition from primary to secondary school. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 20, 259-280.
Ross, S. W., & Horner, R. H. (2009). Bully prevention in positive behavior support. Journal of Applied Behavior Analy-
sis, 42, 747-759. doi: 10.1901/jaba.2009.42-747
Salmivalli, C. (2010). Bullying and the peer group: A review. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 15, 112-120.
Sugai, G., Horner, R., & Algozzine, B. (2011). Reducing the effectiveness of bullying behavior in schools. Retrieved
from http://www.pbis.org/common/pbisresources/publications/PBIS_Bullying_Behavior_Apr19_2011.pdf
Swearer, S. M., Espelage, D. L., & Napolitano, S. A. (2009). Bullying prevention and intervention: Realistic strategies
for schools. New York, NY: Guilford.
Swearer, S. M., & Givens, J. E. (2006). Designing an alternative to suspension for middle school bullies. Paper pre-
sented at the annual convention of the National Association of School Psychologists, Anaheim, CA.
Swearer, S. M., Wang, C., Collins, A., Strawhun, J., & Fluke, S. (in press). The prevention of bullying: A school mental
health perspective. In M. Weist, N. Lever, C. Bradshaw, & J. Owens (Eds.), The handbook of school mental
health (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Springer.

Building & Sustaining

Student Engagement http://k12engagement.unl.edu.
© 2013 Reece L. Peterson, Barkley Center, University of Nebraska-Lincoln, Lincoln, NE 68583-0732; engagement@unl.edu.
Supported by Nebraska Department of Education Project 94-2810-248-1B1-13 (USDE Grant #HO27A110079).
Contents do not necessarily represent the policy of NDE or USDE, and no endorsement should be assumed.
Permission to duplicate is granted for non-commercial use by school personnel working in school settings.