Forms of Fighting - A Micro-Social Analysis of Bullying and In-School Violence

Oct 15, 2026

Current empirical research on youth bullying rarely elicits students’ own accounts of violent encounters, leading to conflation of aggression types with distinct features. This qualitative study analyzes retrospective interviews with high school youth to examine in-school violence experience and social dynamics. The analysis confirms five violence types—bullying, scapegoating, peer-to-peer honour contests, group fights, and retaliatory violence—by testing offender–victim status and aggressor-to-victim ratios. Results show mapping variability across types, warning that prevention policies may prolong conflict when differences are ignored.

LanguageEnglish

CategoryResearch & Report

FormatPDF

Pages29

Reading Time1 h 13 min

AccessFree to download

Introduction

Violence definitions and research gaps

Qualitative analysis approach

Five types of in-school violence

Forms of Fighting: A Micro-Social Analysis of Bullying and In-School Violence Nicole Malette University of British Columbia Abstract Current empirical research on youth bullying rarely asks students to describe their violent encounters. This practice conflates incidents of aggression that may actually have different forms and features. In this article I provide the results of a qualitative analysis of retrospective interviews with high school youth about their experiences of in-school violence. I test for and confirm the occurrence of five types of violence: bullying, scapegoating, peer-to-peer honour contests, group fights, and retaliatory violence. My testing method involves analyzing whether the social dynamics, such as offender–victim social status and the ratio of aggressors to victims, identified in theoretical work, occur empirically. I show that there is variability in the social dynamics that map onto the five types of violence, listed above. In ignoring these differences, violence prevention policy and practice runs the risk of prolonging student conflict. Keywords: in-school violence, bullying, micro-social qualitative methods Canadian Journal of Education / Revue canadienne de l’éducation 40:1 (2017)©2017 Canadian Society for the Study of Education/ Société canadienne pour l’étude de l’éducation [www.cje-rce.ca](www.cje-rce.ca) Résumé Les recherches empiriques actuelles sur l’intimidation se penchent rarement sur la façon dont les élèves décrivent les incidents de violence qu’ils ont vécus. Cette pratique amalgame des agressions qui ont peut-être en réalité des formes et des caractéristiques différentes. Dans cet article, je présente les résultats d’une analyse qualitative d’entrevues rétrospectives menées auprès de jeunes du secondaire au sujet de leurs expériences de la violence à l’école. Je teste et je confirme l’occurrence de cinq types de violence: intimidation, recherche de boucs émissaires, compétitions entre pairs pour défendre son honneur, batailles de groupe et violence motivée par la vengeance. Ma méthode detest consiste à analyser si la dynamique sociale, tels le statut social de l’agresseur et dela victime et le ratio agresseurs-victimes, identifiée dans des théories, est présente dans les faits. Ma recherche démontre une variation dans la dynamique sociale eu égard aux cinq types de violence énumérés plus haut. En faisant abstraction de ces différences, les politiques et pratiques en matière de prévention de la violence risquent de prolonger les conflits entre les élèves. Mots-clés : violence à l’école, méthodes qualitatives microsociales Canadian Journal of Education / Revue canadienne de l’éducation 40:1 (2017) [www.cje-rce.ca](www.cje-rce.ca) Introduction We now know that the occurrence of in-school bullying behaviour is the highest among students in Grades 6–8, with physical violence decreasing in frequency as students grow up (Dake, Price, & Telljohann, 2003; Nansel et al., 2001) . The use of verbal and psychological torment also tends to continue throughout their high school years (Dakeet al., 2003), and can have devastating effects on students’ social and emotional development (Gendron, Williams, & Guerra, 2011; Golmaryami et al., 2016; Haynie et al., 2001; Juvonen & Graham, 2014; MacMillan, 2001; Olweus, 1994, 1997, 2013) . Bullying behaviour at any point in an individual’s childhood or adolescence is linked to higher levels of psychiatric disorders, such as depression, anxiety, antisocial personality disorder, substance use, and suicidal tendencies (Copeland, Wolke, Angold, & Costello, 2013; Takizawa, Maughan, & Arseneault, 2014; Lereya, Copeland, Costello, & Wolke, 2015). Longitudinal studies have found that disorders resulting from bullying behaviour and victimization also tend to continue into adulthood (Bender & Lösel, 2011; Copeland et al., 2013; Ouellet-Morin et al., 2013; Sourander, 2010; Wolke, Copeland, Angold, & Costello, 2013). Youth violence is both a pe

FAQs

Why does existing research sometimes conflate bullying with other forms of aggression?

Because many studies do not ask students to describe their violent encounters, they treat aggression incidents as if they share the same form and features. This practice merges different types of violence in research measurement.

What five types of violence does the qualitative analysis confirm?

The study confirms bullying, scapegoating, peer-to-peer honour contests, group fights, and retaliatory violence based on interview accounts from high school youth.

How does the study test differences between violence types?

It examines whether social dynamics identified in theoretical work—such as offender–victim social status and the ratio of aggressors to victims—also occur empirically across violence types.

Oct 15, 2026

Uploaded by Well Done