Dissertation Proposal
Dissertation Proposal: An investigation of empathy and social problem solving among different bullying groups: A study of male prisoners.
A. Formulation of Research Question
‘What works’ research suggests that cognitive behavioural interventions produce the most effective recidivism results among offender populations. Therefore, it would be just to suggest that this type of intervention would be beneficial when reducing bullying and victimisation within the same population.
Cognitive deficits that are related to offending attitudes and behaviour include social problem solving (Freedman, Rosenthal, Donahoe, Schlindt and McFall, 1978), and empathy (Covell and Scalora, 2002) among others.
As bullying is an interaction with others, it seems appropriate that social problem solving and empathy would be related to bullying behaviour. Ireland (1998, 1999) identified four distinct bullying groups using the Direct and Indirect Prisoner Behaviour Checklist (DIPC): ‘pure bullies’- those reporting bullying behaviour; ‘pure victims’- those reporting being bullied; ‘bully/victims’- those reporting bullying others and being bullied’ and ‘not involved’- those reporting no bullying or victimisation.
Although broad guidelines have been suggested highlighting specific interventions such as ‘anti-bullying units’ (Home Office, 1999) there has been limited research into creating and implementing effective interventions for bullies and victims within secure settings. At HMP (name of institution) needs-analysis research indicated a rise in bullying over the last year, suggesting a need for effective interventions.
Therefore, the hypothesis is that there will be significant differences in the scores on empathy and social problem solving between the four bullying groups.
B. Participants
Proportionate sampling will be employed ensuring a sufficient representation from each wing is obtained, enabling results to be generalised. A systematic random sample of all
A. Formulation of Research Question
‘What works’ research suggests that cognitive behavioural interventions produce the most effective recidivism results among offender populations. Therefore, it would be just to suggest that this type of intervention would be beneficial when reducing bullying and victimisation within the same population.
Cognitive deficits that are related to offending attitudes and behaviour include social problem solving (Freedman, Rosenthal, Donahoe, Schlindt and McFall, 1978), and empathy (Covell and Scalora, 2002) among others.
As bullying is an interaction with others, it seems appropriate that social problem solving and empathy would be related to bullying behaviour. Ireland (1998, 1999) identified four distinct bullying groups using the Direct and Indirect Prisoner Behaviour Checklist (DIPC): ‘pure bullies’- those reporting bullying behaviour; ‘pure victims’- those reporting being bullied; ‘bully/victims’- those reporting bullying others and being bullied’ and ‘not involved’- those reporting no bullying or victimisation.
Although broad guidelines have been suggested highlighting specific interventions such as ‘anti-bullying units’ (Home Office, 1999) there has been limited research into creating and implementing effective interventions for bullies and victims within secure settings. At HMP (name of institution) needs-analysis research indicated a rise in bullying over the last year, suggesting a need for effective interventions.
Therefore, the hypothesis is that there will be significant differences in the scores on empathy and social problem solving between the four bullying groups.
B. Participants
Proportionate sampling will be employed ensuring a sufficient representation from each wing is obtained, enabling results to be generalised. A systematic random sample of all
References: Covell, C.N and Scalora, M. J. (2002). Empathic deficits in sexual offenders: An integration of affective, social and cognitive constructs. Aggression and Violent Behaviour, 7 (3), 251-270. Davis, M.H. (1980). A multidimensional approach to individual difference in empathy. JSAS Catalog of Selected Documents in Psychology, 51, 67-184. Freeman, B.J., Rosenthal, L., Donahoe, C.P,. Schlindt, D. G, and McFall, R.M (1978). A social behavioural analysis of skill deficits in delinquent and non-delinquent boys. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 46, 1448-1462. Home Office (1999). Home Office Statistical Bulletin. London: HMSO. Ireland, J. L. (1995). Descriptive analysis of bullying in male and female prisoners. BSc Dissertation. University of Central Lancashire. Lancashire. UK. Ireland, J. L. (1997). Bullying amongst prisoners: A study of gender differences, provictim attitudes and empathy. MSc Dissertation. The Manchester Metropolitan University. Manchester. UK. Ireland, J. L. (1998). Direct and Indirect Prisoner Behaviour Checklist (DIPC). University of Central Lancashire. Lancashire. UK. Ireland, J. L. (1999). Bullying behaviours among male and female prisoners: A study of adult and young offenders. Aggressive Behaviour, 25 (3), 162-178. Ireland, J.L. and Archer, J. (1996). Descriptive analysis of bullying in male and female adult prisoners. Journal of Community and Applied Social Psychology, 6, 35-47. Rigby, K and Slee, P.T. (1991). Bullying among Australian school children: reported behaviour and attitudes to victims. Journal of Social Psychology, 131, 615-627.