en pl
en pl


Show issue
Year 12/2013 
Issue 20

Między głosem sumienia a więzami przyjaźni. Zachowanie świadków dręczenia (bullying) a struktura klasy szkolnej

Agata Komendant-Brodowska
Uniwersytet Warszawski

12/2013 (20) Decyzje

DOI 10.7206/DEC.1733-0092.12


The aim of this paper is to analyse the relation between the structure of a school-group and the problem of bullying. Bullying is a specific type of school violence, that occurs when a perpetrator or a group of perpetrators repeatedly attack a relatively helpless victim. This type of violence involves not only bullies and their victims, but also bystanders - other students who witness the process of bullying. Bullies’ behavior is planned and aimed at building social status in the group, and the suffering of the victims is not their main goal. Bystanders play a major role in the process, as their approval or disapproval can either encourage or discourage the bully. Behaviour of bystanders is analysed, with the use of a modifi ed structurally embedded coordination game, in order to show how the structure of the group can infl uence the process of bullying.


  1. Aronson, Elliot. 2002. Building Empathy, Compassion and Achievement in the Jigsaw Classroom. W: J.M. Aronson (red.) Improving Academic Achievement: Impact of Psychological Factors on Education. Academic Press. [Google Scholar]
  2. Aronson, Elliot. 1978. The Jigsaw Classroom. Beverly Hills: Sage Publications. [Google Scholar]
  3. Aronson, Elliot. 2000. Nobody Left to Hate. Teaching Compassion After Columbine. New York: W.H. Freeman. [Google Scholar]
  4. Aronson, Elliot, Timothy D. Wilson i Robin M. Akert. 2006. Psychologia Społeczna. Vol. 5 Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Zysk i S-ka. [Google Scholar]
  5. Batorski, Dominik. 2008. Metody analizy sieci i ich zastosowanie w Ewaluacji. W: A. Haber, [Google Scholar]
  6. M. Szalaj (red.) Środowisko i warsztat ewaluacji. Warszawa: Polska Agencja Rozwoju Przedsiębiorczości. [Google Scholar]
  7. Bendor, Jonathan i Piotr Swistak,. 1998. Evolutionary equilibria: Characterization theorems and their implications. „Theory and Decision” 45(2): 99-159. [Google Scholar]
  8. Binmore, Ken G. 2007. Playing for real. Oxford University Press. [Google Scholar]
  9. Cappadocia, M. Catherine, Debra Pepler, Joanne G. Cummings i Wendy Craig. 2012. Individual Motivations and Characteristics Associated with Bystander Intervention during Bullying Episodes among Children and Youth. „Canadian Journal of School Psychology” 27 (3): 201-216. [Google Scholar]
  10. Choi, Sumi i Young Il Cho. 2013. Infl uence of Psychological and Social Factors on Bystanders’ Roles in School Bullying among Korean-American Students in the United States. „School Psychology International” 34 (1): 67-81. [Google Scholar]
  11. Coleman, James S., Elihu Katz i Herbert Menzel. 1957. The Diffusion of an Innovation among Physicians. „Sociometry” 20 (4): 253-270. [Google Scholar]
  12. Coleman, James S. 1986. Social Theory, Social Research, and a Theory of Action. „American Journal of Sociology”: 1309-1335. [Google Scholar]
  13. Coloroso, Barbara. 2002. The Bully, the Bullied, and the Bystander. Nowy Jork: Quill. Harper Collins. [Google Scholar]
  14. Craig, Wendy, Yossi Harel-Fisch, Haya Fogel-Grinvald, Suzanne Dostaler, Jorn Hetland, Bruce Simons-Morton, Michal Molcho, Margarida Gaspar de Mato, Mary Overpeck, Pernille Due i William Pickett. 2009. A Cross-National Profi le of Bullying and Victimization among Adolescents in 40 Countries. „International Journal of Public Health” 54: 216-224. [Google Scholar]
  15. Darley, John M. i Bibb Latane. 1968. Bystander Intervention in Emergencies: Diffusion of Responsibility. „Journal of Personality and Social Psychology” 8 (4): 377-383. [Google Scholar]
  16. Dixit, Avinash K. i Susan Skeath. 1999. Games of Strategy. New York: Norton. [Google Scholar]
  17. Easley, David i Jon Kleinberg. 2010. Networks, Crowds, and Markets. Vol. 8 Cambridge University Press. [Google Scholar]
  18. Flannery, Daniel J. 1997. School Violence: Risk, Preventive Intervention, and Policy. Urban Diversity Series no. 109. New York: ERIC Clearinghouse on Urban Education [Google Scholar]
  19. Hawker, David S.J. i Michael J. Boulton. 2000. Twenty Years’ Research on Peer Victimization and Psychosocial Maladjustment: A Meta-Analytic Review of Cross-Sectional Studies. „Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry” 41 (4): 441-455. [Google Scholar]
  20. Jackson, Matthew O. 2008. Social and Economic Networks. Princeton University Press. [Google Scholar]
  21. Kärnä, Annti, Marinus Voeten, Todd D. Little, Elisa Poskiparta, Anne Kaljonen i Christina Salmivalli. 2011. A Large-Scale evaluation of the KiVa antibullying program: Grades 4–6. „Child Development” 82(1): 311-330. [Google Scholar]
  22. Kärnä, Annti, Marinus Voeten, Elisa Poskiparta i Christina Salmivalli. 2010. Vulnerable Children in Varying Classroom Contexts: Bystanders’ Behaviors Moderate the Effects of Risk Factors on Victimization. „Merrill-Palmer Quarterly” 56 (3): 261-282. [Google Scholar]
  23. Kochenderfer-Ladd, Becky i Wendy Troop-Gordon. 2010. Introduction to the Special Issue: Contexts, Causes, and Consequences. „Merrill-Palmer Quarterly” 56 (3): 221-230. [Google Scholar]
  24. Komendant-Brodowska, Agata. 2009. Grzech zaniechania. Świadkowie przemocy szkolnej w perspektywie teorii gier. „Decyzje” 11: 5-47. [Google Scholar]
  25. Komendant-Brodowska, Agata, Anna Baczko-Dombi i Anna Giza-Poleszczuk. 2011a. Przemoc w szkole. Raport z badań. www.szkolabezprzemocy.pl [Google Scholar]
  26. Komendant-Brodowska, Agata, Anna Baczko-Dombi i Anna Giza-Poleszczuk. 2011b. W jakich szkołach częściej, a w jakich rzadziej pojawia się przemoc? Raport z badań. www.szkolabezprzemocy.pl [Google Scholar]
  27. Lee, Chris. 2004. Preventing Bullying in Schools: A Guide for Teachers and Other Professionals Sage Publications Limited. [Google Scholar]
  28. Morris, Stephen. 2000. Contagion. „The Review of Economic Studies” 67 (1): 57-78. [Google Scholar]
  29. Nowak, Andrzej. 1996. Bąble nowego w morzu starego. W: Mirosława Marody, Ewa Gucwa-Leśny (red.). Podstawy życia społecznego w Polsce. Warszawa: Uniwersytet Warszawski [Google Scholar]
  30. Oh, Insoo i Richard J. Hazler. 2009. Contributions of Personal and Situational Factors to Bystanders’ Reactions to School Bullying. „School Psychology International” 30 (3): 291-310. [Google Scholar]
  31. Olweus, Dan. 1993. Bullying at School: What we Know and what we can Do. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers. [Google Scholar]
  32. Olweus, Dan. 2007. Mobbing. Fala przemocy w szkole. Jak ją powstrzymać? Warszawa: Jacek Santorski & Co. [Google Scholar]
  33. Pepler, Debra J. i Wendy M. Craig. 1995. A Peek Behind the Fence: Naturalistic Observations of Aggressive Children with Remote Audiovisual Recording. „Developmental Psychology” 31 (4): 548-553. [Google Scholar]
  34. Rigby, Ken. 2010. Przemoc w szkole. Jak ją ograniczać. Poradnik dla rodziców i pedagogów. Kraków: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Jagiellońskiego. [Google Scholar]
  35. Rogers, Everett M. 2010. Diffusion of Innovations. Free Press. [Google Scholar]
  36. Ryan, Bryce i Neal C. Gross. 1950. Acceptance and Diffusion of Hybrid Corn Seed in Two Iowa Communities. Agricultural Experiment Station, Iowa State College of Agriculture and Mechanic Arts. [Google Scholar]
  37. Salmivalli, Christina. 2010. Bullying and the Peer Group: A Review. „Aggression and Violent Behavior” 15 (2): 112-120. [Google Scholar]
  38. Salmivalli, Christina. 1999. Participant Role Approach to School Bullying: Implications for Interventions. „Journal of Adolescence” 22 (4): 453-459. [Google Scholar]
  39. Salmivalli, Christina, Kirsti Lagerspetz, Kaj Bjorkqvist, Karin Osterman i Ari Kaukiainen. 1996. [Google Scholar]
  40. Bullying as a Group Process: Participant Roles and their Relations to Social Status within the Group. „Aggressive Behavior” 22 (1): 1-15. [Google Scholar]
  41. Salmivalli, Christina i Marinus Voeten. 2004. Connections between Attitudes, Group Norms, and Behaviour in Bullying Situations. „International Journal of Behavioral Development” 28 (3): 246-258 [Google Scholar]
  42. Schelling, Thomas C. 1978. Micromotives and Macrobehavior. Nowy Jork: Norton. [Google Scholar]
  43. Straffi n, Philip D. 2006. Teoria gier. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Naukowe Scholar. [Google Scholar]
  44. Sutton, Jon, Peter K. Smith i John Swettenham. 1999. Bullying and ‘Theory of Mind’: A Critique of the „Social Skills Defi cit” View of Anti-Social Behaviour. „Social Development” 8 (1): 117-127. [Google Scholar]
  45. Swistak, Piotr. 2004. Ewolucyjne podstawy instytucji społecznych. „Decyzje” 1:11-35. [Google Scholar]
  46. Wasserman, Stanley i Katherine Faust. 1994. Social Network Analysis: Methods and Applications. Vol. 8 Cambridge University Press. [Google Scholar]
  47. Watts, Duncan J. i Peter Sheridan Dodds. 2007. Infl uentials, Networks, and Public Opinion Formation. „Journal of Consumer Research” 34 (4): 441-458. [Google Scholar]

Full metadata record

Cite this record

APA style

Komendant-Brodowska, Agata (2013). Między głosem sumienia a więzami przyjaźni. Zachowanie świadków dręczenia (bullying) a struktura klasy szkolnej. (2013). Między głosem sumienia a więzami przyjaźni. Zachowanie świadków dręczenia (bullying) a struktura klasy szkolnej. Decyzje, (20), 67-104. https://doi.org/10.7206/DEC.1733-0092.12 (Original work published 12/2013AD)

MLA style

Komendant-Brodowska, Agata. “Między Głosem Sumienia A Więzami Przyjaźni. Zachowanie Świadków Dręczenia (Bullying) A Struktura Klasy Szkolnej”. 12/2013AD. Decyzje, no. 20, 2013, pp. 67-104.

Chicago style

Komendant-Brodowska, Agata. “Między Głosem Sumienia A Więzami Przyjaźni. Zachowanie Świadków Dręczenia (Bullying) A Struktura Klasy Szkolnej”. Decyzje, Decyzje, no. 20 (2013): 67-104. doi:10.7206/DEC.1733-0092.12.