早期欺负行为的影响因素及干预的原理和实践

黄翯青 刘肖岑 张 菁

欺负是对他人有意图的、反复的伤害，是攻击的一种形式。[注]Saracho, O. N. Bullying: Young children’s roles, social status, and prevention programs. Early Child Development & Care, 2016, 187(1): 1-12.由于欺负行为在青少年时期最为严重，目前对欺负的干预研究主要集中在这一时期。[注]Pouwels, J. L., Salmivalli, C., Saarento, S., van den Berg, Y. H., Lansu, T. A., & Cillessen, A. H. Predicting adolescents’ bullying participation from developmental trajectories of social status and behavior. Child Development, 2017, 89(4)：1-20.但很多研究者指出应当尽早实施对欺负行为的干预，[注]③ Fekkes, M., Pijpers, F. I., & Verloove-Vanhorick, S. P. Bullying: who does what, when and where? Involvement of children, teachers and parents in bullying behavior. Health Education Research, 2005, 20(1): 81-91.④ Kirves, L., & Sajaniemi, N. Bullying in early educational settings. Early Child Development & Care, 2012, 182(3-4): 383-400.⑤ Levine, E., & Tamburrino, M. Bullying among young children: Strategies for prevention. Early Childhood Education Journal, 2014, 42(4): 271-278.⑥ Saracho, O. N. Bullying: Young children’s roles, social status, and prevention programs. Early Child Development & Care, 2016, 187(1): 1-12.这不仅非常必要，也是可行的。一方面，尽早对欺负问题进行干预能够避免儿童长期受到欺负问题的消极影响；[注]Copeland, W. E., Wolke, D., Angold, A., & Costello, E. Adult psychiatric outcomes of bullying and being bullied by peers in childhood and adolescence. Jama Psychiatry, 2013, 70(4): 419-426.[注]Lereya, S. T., Winsper, C., Heron, J., Lewis, G., Gunnell, D., Fisher, H. L., & Wolke, D. Being bullied during childhood and the prospective pathways to self-harm in late adolescence. Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 2013, 52(6): 608-618.另一方面，早期干预是可行的、甚至是更为有效的。大量基础研究揭示出多方面的早期发展指标都能预测儿童之后的欺负行为，可以从这些因素入手对欺负行为进行干预。这些干预项目对于欺负和受欺负现象都具有一定的作用。[注]Ttofi, M. M., & Farrington, D. P. Effectiveness of school-based programs to reduce bullying: A systematic and meta-analytic review. Journal of Experimental Criminology, 2011, 7(1): 27-56.甚至有研究发现，幼儿期似乎是某些因素影响欺负行为的关键时期，[注]Hall, W. J. Initial development and validation of the bullyharm: the bullying, harassment, and aggression receipt measure. Psychology in the Schools, 2016, 53(9): 984-1000.[注]W. T. Social dominance, school bullying, and child health: What are our ethical obligations to the very young?. Pediatrics, 2015, 135 (suppl. 2): 24-30.很可能在幼儿期干预欺负效果要好于青春期。[注]Schonert-Reichl, K. A., Smith, V., Zaidman-Zait, A., & Hertzman, C. Promoting children’s prosocial behaviors in school: Impact of the “roots of empathy” program on the social and emotional competence of school-aged children. School Mental Health, 2012, 4(1): 1-21.

目前针对欺负行为的早期干预方兴未艾，但比较突出的一个问题是，对欺负行为机制的研究和干预的实践基本在两条轨道上运行。一方面大部分干预项目主要从经验出发，仅有少数干预研究从欺负的潜在影响因素出发进行设计；另一方面不少理论性的研究专注于对欺负的影响因素及作用机制的探讨，而对于如何从这些因素出发进一步设计和实施干预项目则缺乏关注。本文试图通过梳理早期欺负行为的有关影响因素和作用机制，一方面从对影响机制的理论性探讨的研究中抽取干预的要素，另一方面从一些成功的干预研究中反推有关影响因素的作用，从而尝试建立从机制研究到干预项目之间的桥梁。

一、早期欺负行为的特点及影响

(一)早期欺负行为的特点

关于欺负行为的发展起源是有争论的。3-5岁的幼儿间一般的攻击行为非常频繁，显著高于其他发展阶段，但早期研究者们认为这些攻击行为时间相对短暂，角色也不固定，带有较大偶然因素，不算真正意义上的欺负。[注]Hanish, L. G., & Guerra, N. G. Aggressive victims, passive victims, and bullies: Developmental continuity or developmental change?. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly: Journal of Developmental Psychology, 2004, 50(50): 17-38.但最近的研究则发现，4岁儿童中就有比较稳定的欺负者和被欺负者了，[注]Monks, C. P., Smith, P. K., & Swettenham, J. Psychological correlates of peer victimisation in preschool: Social cognitive skills, executive function and attachment profiles. Aggressive Behavior, 2010, 31(6): 571-588.幼儿当中攻击和欺负行为已经比较普遍。[注]Alsaker, F. D., & Nagele, C. Bullying in kindergarten and prevention. Journal of Neurological Surgery Part A Central European Neurosurgery, 2008, 75(5): 365-370.[注]Vlachou, M., Botsoglou, K., & Andreou, E. Assessing bully/victim problems in preschool children: A multimethod approach. Journal of Criminology, 2013, 2013(2013): 951-968.

幼儿中已经存在多种类型的欺负形式。幼儿的欺负最初以直接的方式表现，以身体欺负和语言欺负更为常见，[注]Shahaeian, A., Razmjoee, M., Wang, C., Elliott, S. N., & Hughes, C. Understanding relational aggression during early childhood: an examination of the association with language and other social and cognitive skills. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 2017, 40(3): 204-214.儿童3岁的时候达到顶点，在5岁的时候则随着儿童语言能力、观点采择和情绪调节能力的发展呈现下降趋势。[注]Fekkes, M., Pijpers, F. I., & Verloove-Vanhorick, S. P. Bullying: who does what, when and where? Involvement of children, teachers and parents in bullying behavior. Health Education Research, 2005, 20(1): 81-91.随着儿童的发展，更加隐蔽和巧妙的关系欺负也逐渐出现并呈现增长的趋势。[注]Olweus, D., & Limber, S. Olweus bullying prevention program: Teacher guide. Center City, MN: Hazelden, 2007.[注]Swit, C., & Mcmaugh, A. Relational aggression and prosocial behaviours in australian preschool children. Australasian Journal of Early Childhood, 2012, 37(3): 30-34.Shahaeian等人发现3岁的幼儿已经能够进行简单的关系攻击。[注]Shahaeian, A., Razmjoee, M., Wang, C., Elliott, S. N., & Hughes, C. Understanding relational aggression during early childhood: an examination of the association with language and other social and cognitive skills. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 2017, 40(3): 204-214.早期的欺负行为已经具有显著的性别差异。女孩往往报告更多的学校的欺负，而男孩更倾向于报告家庭中兄弟姐妹的欺负；男孩更倾向于使用身体攻击，而女孩倾向于使用关系攻击。[注]Crick, N. R., Ostrov, J. M., & Kawabata, Y. Relational aggression and gender: An overview. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press, 2007.

(二)早期欺负行为的消极影响

欺负行为对于欺负者和被欺负者以及旁观者都会造成伤害，引发其认知、情感和心理健康等多方面的问题，[注]Pouwels, J. L., Salmivalli, C., Saarento, S., van den Berg, Y. H., Lansu, T. A., & Cillessen, A. H. Predicting adolescents’ bullying participation from developmental trajectories of social status and behavior. Child Development, 2017, 1-20.[注]Halpern, J., Jutte, D., Colby, J., & Boyce, W. T. Social dominance, school bullying, and child health: What are our ethical obligations to the very young?. Pediatrics, 2015, 135 (suppl. 2): 24-30.早期欺负行为对儿童发展更具消极影响。

首先，早期欺负行为对于未来的欺负行为具有较强的预测性。[注]Levine, E., & Tamburrino, M. Bullying among young children: Strategies for prevention. Early Childhood Education Journal, 2014, 42(4): 271-278.常常遭受欺负的幼儿在学龄早期也容易受欺负；[注]Kirves, L., & Sajaniemi, N. Bullying in early educational settings. Early Child Development & Care, 2012, 182(3-4): 383-400.此外，幼儿时期，个体的欺负或者被欺负情况还可以预测儿童中期、青少年期甚至成年之后的欺负行为。[注]Min, J. K., Catalano, R. F., Haggerty, K. P., & Abbott, R. D. Bullying at elementary school and problem behavior in young adulthood: a study of bullying, violence, and substance use from age 11 to age 21. Criminal Behaviour and Mental Health, 2011, 21(2): 136-144.

其次，早期发生的欺负行为更有可能引发后期的心理问题。[注]Camodeca, M., Caravita, S. C., & Coppola, G. Bullying in preschool: The associations between participant roles, social competence, and social preference. Aggressive Behavior, 2014, 41(4): 310-321.如，受欺负的幼儿长大后往往有低自尊、抑郁、焦虑和自伤性思维等问题，[注]Malecki, C., Demaray, M. K., Coyle, S., Geosling, R., Rueger, S. Y., Rueger Wheaton College, … Dekalb, B. Frequency, power differential, and intentionality and the relationship to anxiety, depression, and self-esteem for victims of bullying. Child & Youth Care Forum, 2015, 44 (1): 115-131.难以建立自己的领地范围(limits)并有效保护自己。[注]陈光辉：《儿童欺负/受欺负与同伴网络的关系:p*模型分析》，《心理发展与教育》 2014年第5期，第474-481页。欺负者也有较高的心理风险，他们往往具有更多的消极行为，[注]Verlinden, M., Jansen, P. W., Veenstra, R., Jaddoe, V. W. V., Hofman, A., Verhulst, F. C., … Tiemeier, H. Preschool attention deficit/hyperactivity and oppositional defiant problems as antecedents of school bullying. Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 2015, 54(7): 571-579.未来有更高的反社会性和犯罪行为。[注]Min, J. K., Catalano, R. F., Haggerty, K. P., & Abbott, R. D. Bullying at elementary school and problem behavior in young adulthood: a study of bullying, violence, and substance use from age 11 to age 21. Criminal Behaviour and Mental Health, 2011, 21(2): 136-144.尤其是那些既受欺负又实施欺负的儿童具有最强的攻击性和破坏性，[注]Salmivalli, C. Bullying and the peer group: A review. Aggression & Violent Behavior, 2010, 15(2): 112-120.他们往往有多种心理病理行为，[注]Kim, Y. S., Leventhal, B. L., Koh, Y. J., Hubbard, A., & Boyce, W. T. School bullying and youth violence. Archives of General Psychiatry, 2006, 63(9): 1035-1041.卷入欺负的时间最长，且在之后的发展阶段中更容易被同伴拒绝。[注]Sourander, A., Gyllenberg, D., Brunstein, K. A., Sillanmäki, L., Llola, A. M., & Kumpulainen, K. Association of bullying behavior at 8 years of age and use of specialized services for psychiatric disorders by 29 years of age. Jama Psychiatry, 2015, 73(2): 159.[注]Benedict, F. T., Vivier, P. M., & Gjelsvik, A. Mental health and bullying in the United States among children aged 6 to 17 years. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 2015, 30(5): 782-795.

早期欺负行为是非常复杂的，既受到个体自身特点的影响，也受环境因素的影响。我们将从个体和环境两个视角入手，分析这些因素是如何影响到个体的欺负行为，并介绍有关的欺负干预项目。

二、个体因素对早期欺负行为的影响及干预方案

不论是欺负者还是被欺负者都有一些自身特征，已有研究从行为层面、认知层面、情绪反应三个方面探讨了个体自身与欺负行为有关的因素，并揭示了这些影响因素的作用机制，这些研究对于欺负的干预实践具有重要的启示。

(一)行为层面的因素

欺负者和被欺负者都具有明显的行为特征。

一方面，行为问题和幼儿欺负卷入之间有密切的关系，尤其是多动和对立违抗性(oppositional defiant disorder)等问题行为能够显著地预测幼儿卷入欺负行为。Verlinden等人的大数据研究发现，3岁幼儿的多动行为和违抗对立行为的水平均和儿童学龄后成为欺负者或者欺负-受欺负者的几率有显著正相关。[注]Verlinden, M., Jansen, P. W., Veenstra, R., Jaddoe, V. W. V., Hofman, A., Verhulst, F. C., … Tiemeier, H. Preschool attention deficit/hyperactivity and oppositional defiant problems as antecedents of school bullying. Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 2015, 54(7): 571-579.幼儿的问题行为会在很大程度上对环境秩序造成破坏或者骚扰和影响他人，这很可能直接激怒他人从而引起他人的攻击，或者引发家长、同伴和教师等人的负反馈，从而增加儿童之后对欺负行为的易感性。[注]Verlinden, M., Jansen, P. W., Veenstra, R., Jaddoe, V. W. V., Hofman, A., Verhulst, F. C., … Tiemeier, H. Preschool attention deficit/hyperactivity and oppositional defiant problems as antecedents of school bullying. Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 2015, 54(7): 571-579.这些结果提示那些有行为问题的儿童是欺负行为的高危对象，他们有更高的实施欺负和被欺负的倾向，因此在预防和干预项目中应当给予其更多的关注。此外，父母和幼儿教师都应重视幼儿早期表现出来的问题行为并进行合理干预。

另一方面，研究指出，不论是对于欺负儿童还是被欺负儿童，亲社会行为都是一个重要的保护性因素。首先，很多干预项目通过培养个体的亲社会行为来抑制其欺负行为。研究发现幼儿的关系攻击和亲社会行为之间有显著负相关。[注]Swit, C., & Mcmaugh, A. Relational aggression and prosocial behaviours in australian preschool children. Australasian Journal of Early Childhood, 2012, 37(3): 30-34.[注]Farina, E., & Belacchi, C. The relationship between emotional competence and hostile/prosocial behavior in albanian preschoolers: An exploratory study. School Psychology International, 2014, 35(5): 475-484.根据演化心理学的观点，欺负行为本质上是个体实现生存目标的策略，如通过欺负行为获得物质资源和群体地位。因此，很多干预研究试图通过培养亲社会行为来替代欺负行为，以此干预和降低欺负行为。[注]Ellis, B. J., Volk, A. A., Gonzalez, J. M., & Embry, D. D. The meaningful roles intervention: An evolutionary approach to reducing bullying and increasing prosocial behavior. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 2016, 26(4): 1-16.此外，还有一些干预项目通过培养儿童的亲社会行为来保护受欺负者。研究发现，那些亲社会的儿童往往较少受到同伴的拒绝。[注]Ellis, B. J., Volk, A. A., Gonzalez, J. M., & Embry, D. D. The meaningful roles intervention: An evolutionary approach to reducing bullying and increasing prosocial behavior. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 2016, 26(4): 1-16.这可能是因为亲社会行为能促进同伴间的积极互动，提升个体的同伴接纳，因此亲社会行为是抵抗同伴拒绝的保护性因素，能够帮助儿童在同伴中建立社会地位。[注]Wang, C., Couch, L., Rodriguez, G. R., & Lee, C. The bullying literature project: Using children’s literature to promote prosocial behavior and social-emotional outcomes among elementary school students. Contemporary School Psychology, 2015, 19(4): 320-329.

其中“和平建设者的表扬贴士”项目[注]Embry, D. D., Flannery, D. J., Vazsonyi, A. T., Powell, K. E., & Atha, H. Peacebuilders: A theoretically driven, school-based model for early violence prevention. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 1996, 12(Suppl. 5): 91-100.(Peace Builders’ Praise Notes Project)和有意义角色项目[注]Ellis, B. J., Volk, A. A., Gonzalez, J. M., & Embry, D. D. The meaningful roles intervention: An evolutionary approach to reducing bullying and increasing prosocial behavior. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 2016, 26(4): 1-16.(Meaningful Roles Project)是通过亲社会行为来干预欺负行为的代表项目。“和平建设者的表扬贴士”项目鼓励儿童使用表扬贴士对他人的亲社会行为进行表扬。表扬贴士会公开展示于教室、走廊或者学校网站上，以此对儿童的亲社会行为进行强化。这一方法有助于增强亲社会儿童在群体中的影响力，从而对学校的文化产生积极的影响。“有意义角色项目”则为学生提供一系列被称之为“有意义角色”的亲社会机会，如给低年级同学辅导数学、帮助老师解决电脑和网络技术问题等。当儿童有机会通过亲社会行为获得他人的认同和尊重，在同伴中树立地位时，他们的欺负行为就会受到抑制。上述两个项目主要针对中小学生，而著名的“早期儿童友谊项目”[注]Ostrov, J. M., Massetti, G. M., Stauffacher, K., Godleski, S. A., Hart, K. C., Karch, K. M., …Ries, E. E. An intervention for relational and physical aggression in early childhood: A preliminary study. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 2009, 24(1): 15-28.(Early Childhood Friendship Project)则是针对3-6岁幼儿的班级干预项目，该项目包含一系列促进儿童学习合作、帮助、安慰等亲社会行为的方法和策略，干预研究结果指出该项目能够比较有效地降低幼儿的欺负行为。

(二)心理层面的因素

1.认知能力和过程

已有研究发现，儿童的认知能力或者认知加工的过程缺陷，可能会增加儿童卷入欺负行为的风险。[注]Crick, N. R., Ostrov, J. M., & Kawabata, Y. Relational aggression and gender: An overview. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press, 2007.[注]Verlinden, M., Veenstra, R., Ghassabian, A., Jansen, P. W., Hofman, A., Jaddoe, V. V., … Tiemeier, H. Executive functioning and non-verbal intelligence as predictors of bullying in early elementary school. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 2014, 42(6): 953-966.

首先，认知能力和欺负之间的关系已经得到了大量研究的证实。其中，智力就是和欺负有显著关系的认知指标之一，很多研究都指出智商和犯罪行为[注]Zajenkowski, M., & Zajenkowska, A. Intelligence and aggression: the role of cognitive control and test related stress. Personality & Individual Differences, 2015, 81, 23-28.、一般的攻击行为[注]Hall, W. J. Initial development and validation of the bullyharm: The bullying, harassment, and aggression receipt measure. Psychology in the Schools, 2016, 53(9): 984-1000.之间都有显著负相关，低智商能够显著地预测个体卷入欺负行为。尤为重要的是，低智商影响个体欺负行为主要出现在8岁前，而欺负行为又会对儿童后续的智力和欺负行为产生进一步的消极影响[注]Hall, W. J. Initial development and validation of the bullyharm: the bullying, harassment, and aggression receipt measure. Psychology in the Schools, 2016, 53(9): 984-1000.。Verlinden等人的大数据研究考察了儿童6岁时的非言语智力和小学初期的欺负卷入之间的关系，结果发现，非言语智力和儿童欺负及被欺负现象均有显著负相关。[注]Verlinden, M., Veenstra, R., Ghassabian, A., Jansen, P. W., Hofman, A., Jaddoe, V. V., … Tiemeier, H. Executive functioning and non-verbal intelligence as predictors of bullying in early elementary school. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 2014, 42(6): 953-966.此外，执行功能(Executive function)也是一种典型的智力因素，执行功能中的多个成分，尤其是抑制控制成分，都和欺负及被欺负倾向有不同程度的负相关。[注]Ellis, M. L., Weiss, B., & Lochman, J. E. Executive functions in children: Associations with aggressive behavior and appraisal processing. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 2009, 37(7): 945-956.如幼儿和学龄儿童的抑制控制和攻击之间有负相关。[注]Medeiros, W., Torro-Alves, N., Malloy-Diniz, L. F., & Minervino, C. M. Executive functions in children who experience bullying situations. Frontiers in Psychology, 2016, 7(899): 1-9.幼儿4岁时的抑制控制能够显著预测其小学1-2年级时卷入欺负中的不同角色的风险程度。[注]Verlinden, M., Veenstra, R., Ghassabian, A., Jansen, P. W., Hoffman, A., Jaddoe, V. V., … Tiemeier, H. Executive functioning and non-verbal intelligence as predictors of bullying in early elementary school. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 2014, 42(6): 953-966.更具体的研究发现，同伴游戏中执行功能较差的学龄前儿童常表现出愤怒和反社会的行为[注]Hughes, C., White, A., Sharpen, J., & Dunn, J. Antisocial, angry, and unsympathetic: “Hard-to-manage” preschoolers’ peer problems and possible cognitive influences. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 2000, 41(2): 169-179.和破坏团队活动的倾向[注]Camodeca, M., Caravita, S. C., & Coppola, G. Bullying in preschool: The associations between participant roles, social competence, and social preference. Aggressive Behavior, 2014, 41(4): 310-321.。尤其是欺负-被欺负型儿童的抑制控制缺陷更为明显。[注]Toblin, R. L., Schwartz, D., Gorman, A. H., & Abouezzeddine, T. Social-cognitive and behavioral attributes of aggressive victims of bullying. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 2005, 26(3): 329-346.执行功能中的其他成分，如欺负者和被欺负者的计划能力[注]Monks, C. P., Smith, P. K., & Swettenham, J. Psychological correlates of peer victimisation in preschool: Social cognitive skills, executive function and attachment profiles. Aggressive Behavior, 2010, 31(6): 571-588.、组织能力及元认知[注]Coolidge, F. L., Denboer, J. W., & Segal, D. L. Personality and neuropsychological correlates of bullying behavior. Personality & Individual Differences, 2004, 36(7): 1559-1569.、工作记忆[注]Medeiros, W., Torro-Alves, N., Malloy-Diniz, L. F., & Minervino, C. M. Executive functions in children who experience bullying situations. Frontiers in Psychology, 2016, 7(899): 1-9.等，也都与儿童卷入欺负行为有显著负相关。因此，一些干预项目试图通过改善儿童的执行功能和问题解决能力来改善其欺负卷入。典型的项目如“最初的朋友”[注]Randall, K. D. First friends——a social-emotional preventive intervention program: The mediational role of inhibitory control. Victoria, Canada: University of Victoria, 2011.(First Friends)等，该项目在其八周的课程方案中涉及执行功能中的多种成分，如抑制控制、计划和组织能力等的训练。

除了和认知能力有关，欺负行为还和儿童的认知加工的过程有关。社会加工模型(Social Information Process)认为欺负等社会行为是通过识别信息、解释线索、选择目标、产生解决方案和决策等一系列社会信息加工步骤形成的。[注]Crick, N. R., & Dodge, K. A. A review and reformulation of social information-processing mechanism in children’s social adjustment. Psychological Bulletin, 1994, 115: 74-101.欺负型和受欺负型的儿童与其他同伴相比，几乎所有的社会信息加工步骤都不一样。[注]Camodeca, M., & Goossens, F. A. Aggression, social cognitions, anger and sadness in bullies and victims. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 2005, 46(2): 186-197.首先，他们存在识别信息和解释线索方面的偏差，使得这些幼儿理所当然地实施、旁观或接受欺负行为。[注]Saracho, O. N. Bullying: Young children’s roles, social status, and prevention programs. Early Child Development & Care, 2016, 187(1): 1-12.这种偏差在欺负型儿童身上表现得尤为清晰，这些儿童一方面往往会高估他人的敌意，[注]Camodeca, M., & Goossens, F. A. Aggression, social cognitions, anger and sadness in bullies and victims. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 2005, 46(2): 186-197.认为欺负行为是解决问题的有效方法，[注]Ellis, M. L., Weiss, B., & Lochman, J. E. Executive functions in children: Associations with aggressive behavior and appraisal processing. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 2009, 37(7): 945-956.[注]Salmivalli, C. Bullying and the peer group: A review. Aggression & Violent Behavior, 2010, 15(2): 112-120.或者认为欺负那些和自己不一样的“奇怪”的同伴是理所应当的。[注]Thornberg, R. Schoolchildren’s social representations on bullying causes. Psychology in the Schools, 2010, 47(4): 311-327.对欺负型儿童进行访谈发现，幼儿和小学儿童欺负他人的常见原因是：对方和自己不一样，显得很奇怪，包括奇怪的外表(穿奇怪的衣服，太胖或太瘦)、奇怪的行为(和其他同伴不太一样的行为)、奇怪的性格(性格比较怪异或者笨拙)和能力缺陷(往往是残疾)。改变这些偏差的方式之一是提升儿童对于差异化的包容性和接受性。不少干预研究借助绘本来提升幼儿的包容度。[注]Freeman, G. G. The implementation of character education and children’s literature to teach bullying characteristics and prevention strategies to preschool children: An action research project. Early Childhood Education Journal, 2014, 42(5): 305-316.[注]Oppliger, P. A., & Davis, A. Portrayals of bullying: a content analysis of picture books for preschoolers. Early Childhood Education Journal, 2016, 44(5): 515-526.绘本中包含了大量幼儿生活的情景，通过阅读绘本，既可以增加幼儿对欺负行为的了解，也能促使孩子对多样化的同伴和环境产生好奇，从而提升他们对差异性的接纳。此外，被欺负的儿童和旁观者也有识别信息和解释线索的偏差。他们不了解欺负行为的特征，不知道自己正在遭遇欺负，或者认为自己做错了，应该受到他人攻击。因此，一些幼儿干预项目通过告诉儿童欺负行为的特征以及减轻孩子自我责备的倾向，来干预这些理所当然受欺负的情况。[注]Levine, E., & Tamburrino, M. Bullying among young children: Strategies for prevention. Early Childhood Education Journal, 2014, 42(4): 271-278.

2.情绪和情感特征

卷入欺负的儿童具有显著的情绪风格和特征。

首先，卷入欺负行为中的儿童具有一定的情绪风格。如，受欺负者往往是比较顺从的、不安全型的儿童，[注]Salmivalli, C. Bullying and the peer group: A review. Aggression & Violent Behavior, 2010, 15(2): 112-120.有更多的焦虑、抑郁倾向及低自尊的特征。[注]Malecki, C., Demaray, M. K., Coyle, S., Geosling, R., Rueger, S. Y., Rueger Wheaton College, … Dekalb, B. Frequency, power differential, and intentionality and the relationship to anxiety, depression, and self-esteem for victims of bullying. Child & Youth Care Forum, 2015, 44 (1): 115-131.

其次，包括情绪识别、理解、调节在内的有关情绪能力也可负向预测幼儿卷入欺负行为。欺负者的情绪调节能力有明显损伤，他们无法有效调节情绪冲动。[注]Espelage, D. L., & Low, S. School rampage shootings and other youth disturbances: Early preventative interventions. New York, NY: Routledge/Taylor & Francis Group, 2012.因此，通过训练儿童的情绪调节能力来干预幼儿的欺负行为是干预欺负的一种常见策略，如情绪调节技能和果断性训练，研究表明该项目对降低攻击和欺负行为有一定的作用，尤其是对那些既是欺负者又是受欺负者的个体。[注]Salmivalli, C. Bullying and the peer group: A review. Aggression & Violent Behavior, 2010, 15(2): 112-120.此外被欺负的幼儿也具有情绪调节方面的障碍。当面对欺负的时候，如果个体以高情绪化的方式做出反应，容易引发对方进一步的欺负行为，而采用平静、果断的反应方式则有助于降低后续暴力行为的可能性。[注]Schwartz, D., Dodge, K. A., & Coie, J. D. The emergence of chronic peer victimization in boys’ play groups. Child Development, 1993, 64(6): 1755-1772.而具有较好的情绪能力的个体不仅卷入欺负和攻击的可能性更低，而且在冲突发生之后有更多的和解的行为。[注]Liao, Z., Li, Y., & Su, Y. Emotion understanding and reconciliation in overt and relational conflict scenarios among preschoolers. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 2014, 38(2): 111-117.对此有项目设计了一系列 “脚本”(scripts)，通过情境演练的方法来训练被欺负型儿童提升自我调节能力，培养平静、果断的反应方式。[注]Syaodih, E., & Handayani, H. Developing assertive ability of young children as a countermeasure effort for bullying behavior. Advances in Social Science, Education and Humanities Research, 2017, 58(3): 163-168.

最后，共情也是和欺负卷入密切相关的一个情绪因素。大量研究指出共情或共情的某些成分有缺陷，与个体实施和旁观欺负行为有一定关系。[注]Pellegrini, A. D., & Long, J. D. A longitudinal study of bullying, dominance, and victimization during the transition from primary school through secondary school. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 2002, 20(2): 259-280.因此，一些研究者们试图通过培养儿童的共情来降低其欺负行为的水平，最典型的就是“共情的根”项目(The Roots of Emapthy)，该项目旨在通过训练个体的情绪共情(让同伴感同身受受害同伴的情绪感受)和认知共情(推理同伴情绪的原因和结果)来降低儿童的攻击和欺负。[注]Schonert-Reichl, K. A., Smith, V., Zaidman-Zait, A., & Hertzman, C. Promoting children’s prosocial behaviors in school: Impact of the “roots of empathy” program on the social and emotional competence of school-aged children. School Mental Health, 2012, 4(1): 1-21.不过相比大一些的青少年，该项目似乎对较小的孩子具有更好的效果。[注]Yeager, D. S., Fong, C. J., Lee, H. Y., & Espelage, D. L. Declines in efficacy of anti-bullying programs among older adolescents: Theory and a three-level meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 2015, 37(1): 36-51.此外，前述“最初的朋友”项目也涉及情绪能力的多个方面，如情绪理解、情绪调节和共情。

三、环境因素对早期欺负行为的影响及干预方案

欺负行为和现象是非常复杂的。从社会生态学的视角来看，儿童生活在包括同伴、家庭、学校、社会和文化环境在内的多重嵌套的系统中，包括欺负和受害在内的行为都是各种因素相互影响的结果。[注]Bronfenbrenner, U. Ecological models of human development. M. Gauvain, & M. Cole, New York, NY: Freeman, 1994.儿童自身也是这个复杂系统的一部分，其行为也会影响周围环境。[注]Espelage, D. L., & Low, S. School rampage shootings and other youth disturbances: Early preventative interventions. New York, NY: Routledge/Taylor & Francis Group, 2012.[注]Espelage, D. L., & Swearer, S. M. Bullying in American Schools: A Social-Ecological Perspective on Prevention and Intervention. London, England: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 2004.

(一)教师

学校是欺负行为发生最典型和最频繁的环境。欺负以及被欺负现象都是个体和环境复杂交互作用的结果。教师是学校因素和学生互动的中间桥梁，教师处于学校这个小生境[注]Super, C.M., Harkness, S. The developmental niche: A conceptualization at the interface of childand culure[J]. Internatinal Journal of Behavioral Development. 1986, (95):45-69.(niche)的核心，他们对于欺负的反应不仅会影响学生的后续的欺负行为，[注]Yoon, J., & Bauman, S. Teachers: A critical but overlooked component of bullying prevention and intervention. Theory into Practice, 2014, 53(4): 308-314.还会影响旁观者干预欺负行为的程度；[注]Hektner, J. M., & Swenson, C. A. Links from teacher beliefs to peer victimization and bystander intervention: Tests of mediating processes. The Journal of Early Adolescence, 2012, 32(4): 516-536.此外，教师的应对策略和学生后续的欺负行为程度、水平均有显著关联。[注]Troop-Gordon, W., & Ladd, G. W. Teachers’ victimization-related beliefs and strategies: Associations with students’ aggressive behavior and peer victimization. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 2015, 43(1): 45-60.因此，很多幼儿欺负的预防干预项目都将教师纳入到项目中来，对教师的培训和指导给予了极大的重视。如著名的“两步走”项目[注]Espelage, D. L., Low, S., Polanin, J. R., & Brown, E. C. Clinical trial of second step middle-school program: impact on aggression and victimization. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 2015, 37(1): 52-63.(Second Step)中的重要内容是训练教师使用三种特定的策略来降低幼儿的攻击行为和增加亲社会行为。[注]Frey, K. S., Hirschstein, M. K., & Guzzo, B. A. Second step: Preventing aggression by promoting social competence. Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders, 2000, 8(2): 102-112.目前，该项目已经发展了针对幼儿的课程(Second Step Early Learning, 简称SSEL)[注]Upshur, C. C., Heyman, M., & Wenz-Gross, M. Efficacy trial of the second step early learning (ssel) curriculum: preliminary outcomes. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 2017, 50(3): 15-25.，依然将教师培训作为项目的核心。此外，“提升早教机构同伴互动项目”(Fostering Peer Interaction in Early Childhood Settings，简称FPIECS)[注]Kwon, K. A., Elicker, J., & Kontos, S. Social IEP objectives, teacher talk, and peer interaction in inclusive and segregated preschool settings. Early Childhood Education Journal, 2011, 39(4): 267-277.也突出教师的重要作用，该项目不涉及儿童课程和游戏，而是全部通过训练教师如何使用语言策略在游戏情境中培养幼儿积极的同伴互动。

(二)父母

家庭是和儿童联系最紧密的微环境，父母是儿童最重要的他人，对于儿童卷入欺负行为有重要影响。首先，家庭教养方式和幼儿卷入欺负行为有密切关系。研究发现，儿童的欺负卷入和消极的家庭教养方式(独裁或者溺爱型)有正相关，而和权威型家庭教养方式呈负相关；其次，学龄前儿童的关系攻击行为可能还会受到早期和父母互动经验的影响。[注]Rajendran, K., Kruszewski, E., & Halperin, J. M. Parenting style influences bullying: a longitudinal study comparing children with and without behavioral problems. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 2016, 57(2): 188.

因此，对父母的教养方式、语言方式等进行干预也是一种有效的干预手段。Ttofi和Farrington的元分析研究指出，父母干预欺负行为和学校系统干预欺负行为有着基本相同的效果，通过为父母提供有效的信息和培训等方式，指导家庭干预子女的欺负行为和被欺负的情况，能使儿童欺负者的人数降低20%-23%，使欺负-受欺负者的人数下降17%-20%。[注]Ttofi, M. M., & Farrington, D. P. Effectiveness of school-based programs to reduce bullying: A systematic and meta-analytic review. Journal of Experimental Criminology, 2011, 7(1): 27-56.越来越多的干预项目都将父母的有关因素包括进来。前述提及的很多项目，如“共情的根项目”就非常重视家长的作用，项目的督导会在连续9周的时间对家长和孩子的互动进行干预和指导。

(三)同伴和旁观者

同伴是儿童社会化成长过程中的重要因素。同伴本身是儿童归属感的来源，也是儿童社会技能学习的最主要渠道。

首先，欺负就其本质来说就是一种人际关系的问题，不仅仅是一个儿童欺负人，另一个儿童被欺负，还意味着关系和角色的固化。[注]Pouwels, J. L., Salmivalli, C., Saarento, S., van den Berg, Y. H., Lansu, T. A., & Cillessen, A. H. Predicting adolescents’ bullying participation from developmental trajectories of social status and behavior. Child Development, 2017, 1-20.因此，改变欺负的状况要从更大的人际关系网络着手进行“同伴动力学(peer dynamics)”干预[注]Pepler, D., Craig, W., & O’Connell, P. Handbook of bullying in schools: An international perspective. S. R. Jimerson, S. M. Swearer, & D. L. Espelage, New York, NY: Routledge/Taylor & Francis Group, 2010.[注]陈光辉：《儿童欺负/受欺负与同伴网络的关系:p*模型分析》，《心理发展与教育》 2014年第5期，第474-481页。。研究者们发展了旨在通过改善同伴关系的项目来干预幼儿的欺负行为。如“你不能说，你不能玩”[注]Paley, G.V. You can’t say you can’t play. Cambridge, Massachusetts, US: Harvard University Press, 1992.[注]Harrist, A. W., & Bradley, K. D. You can’t say you can’t play: Intervening in the process of social exclusion in the kindergarten classroom. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 2003, 18(2): 185-205.项目，就是以儿童图书 “你不能说，你不能玩”为基础材料展开的专门针对幼儿的教学干预，其重点是塑造幼儿同伴群体和班级氛围，教会孩子不要使用社会排斥。

其次，那些在欺负行为发生时扮演旁观者角色的个体也会对欺负行为产生重要影响。超过80%的欺负情境中都有旁观者；[注]Polanin, J. R., Espelage, D. L., & Pigott, T. D. A meta-analysis of school-based bullying prevention programs’ effects on bystander intervention behavior. School Psychology Review, 2012, 41(1): 47-65.同伴的旁观会显著增加对欺负者的关注，从而强化欺负行为。如果欺负发生时，旁观的同伴采取措施对欺负行为进行干预，往往具有很好的效果。但是这些旁观的同伴往往不知道如何处理。因此一些干预项目从旁观者的反应入手来干预欺负行为，如告诉儿童如何清晰地报告他们看到的欺负行为，模拟和演练如何面对欺负行为(如，练习说“别这样，你这是欺负人”)。Polanin等人的元分析综合分析了之前12个使用旁观者方式干预欺负行为的项目的效果，结果证实了旁观者干预的有效性。[注]Polanin, J. R., Espelage, D. L., & Pigott, T. D. A meta-analysis of school-based bullying prevention programs’ effects on bystander intervention behavior. School Psychology Review, 2012, 41(1): 47-65.

(四)社会经济地位

儿童卷入欺负行为还会受到个体的社会经济地位影响，很多研究都发现欺负者的社会经济地位往往更高，[注]Due, P., Merlo, J., Harel-Fisch, Y., Damsgaard, M. T., Holstein, B. E., Hetland, J., … Lynch, J. Socioeconomic inequality in exposure to bullying during adolescence: A comparative, cross-sectional, multilevel study in 35 countries. American Journal of Public Health, 2009, 99(5): 907-914.[注]Jansen, D. E., Veenstra, R., Ormel, J., Verhulst, F. C., & Reijneveld, S. A. Early risk factors for being a bully, victim, or bully/victim in late elementary and early secondary education. The longitudinal TRAILS study. BMC Public Health, 2011, 11(1): 1-7.而低社会经济地位的青少年往往更容易受欺负。[注]Nordhagen, R., Nielsen, A., Stigum, H., & Kohler, L. Parental reported bullying among Nordic children: A population-based study. Child: Care, Health and Development, 2005, 31(6): 693-701.[注]Jansen, D. E., Veenstra, R., Ormel, J., Verhulst, F. C., & Reijneveld, S. A. Early risk factors for being a bully, victim, or bully/victim in late elementary and early secondary education. The longitudinal TRAILS study. BMC Public Health, 2011, 11(1): 1-7.

儿童所在的学校和社区的社会经济地位也能负向预测儿童的欺负行为。[注]Jansen, P. W., Verlinden, M., Berke, A. D., Mieloo, C., Ende, J., Veenstra, R., … Tiemeier, H. Prevalence of bullying and victimization among children in early elementary school: Do family and school neighbourhood socioeconomic status matter?. BMC Public Health, 2012, 12(1): 494-503.这种影响在儿童幼年时期尤为显著，Halpern等人的研究发现，5岁前处于不利社会经济地位的幼儿之后成为受欺负者的概率明显更高。[注]Halpern, J., Jutte, D., Colby, J., & Boyce, W. T. Social dominance, school bullying, and child health: What are our ethical obligations to the very young?. Pediatrics, 2015, 135 (suppl. 2): 24-30.该结果提示我们，欺负的早期干预要尤其关注那些处于不利社会经济地位的儿童。

四、小结

上述个体因素和环境因素相互影响，以动态方式、通过多重通路影响幼儿对欺负行为的卷入。如图1所示，可能是社会、情绪能力缺陷引发了幼儿的问题行为；[注]Espelage, D. L., & Low, S. School rampage shootings and other youth disturbances: Early preventative interventions. New York, NY: Routledge/Taylor & Francis Group, 2012.而这些问题行为又会对学校、家庭和社区等一系列儿童的环境系统产生影响，使幼儿产生同伴拒绝或者学校不适应等问题，这些问题可能通过多条通路导致儿童欺负行为的卷入，而卷入欺负行为又将恶化儿童的社会生存环境，进一步削弱他们的社会支持。[注]Pellegrini, A. D., Long, J. D., Solberg, D., Roseth, C., Dupuis, D. N., Bohn-Gettler, C. M., & Hickey, M. Handbook of Bullying in Schools: An International Perspective. S. R. Jimerson, S. M. Swearer, & D. E. Espelage, New York: Routledge, 2010.欺负行为也可能发源于外部，如社会经济地位或者环境中具有较强攻击性个体的存在很可能会引发欺负行为，而欺负行为又会引起个体认知和情绪能力发展的问题。[注]Sciberras, E., Ohan, J., & Anderson, V. Bullying and peer victimization in adolescent girls with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder. Child Psychiatry and Human Development, 2012, 43(2): 254-270.未来对于幼儿欺负的干预需要重视三个方面的问题：

首先，应采取综合和多角度的干预方式。尽管不同的干预项目有不同的理论出发点和侧重点，但干预行为不可能仅从某一个角度出发并获得成功。我们既要从幼儿的发展特征、情感社会能力和行为特点出发，也要考虑欺负者、受欺负者、教师、同伴和旁观者等各个因素，还要将幼儿的生理易感性、生活经历和更大的社会文化情景集合在一起，共同考察其卷入欺负行为的具体原因，并进行综合干预。[注]Dodge, K., & Petit, G. A biopsychosocial model of the development of chronic conduct problems in adolescence. Developmental Psychology, 2003, 39(2): 349-371.

图1 个人因素和环境因素对儿童卷入欺负行为的影响

其次，发展针对幼儿的专门干预。幼儿心理特征和同伴交往特征不同于其他年龄阶段的个体，其欺负行为发生发展的一般规律和影响因素也都有所不同。因此，针对幼儿的欺负干预项目往往使用更为具体和可视化的方法来进行，以帮助幼儿更好地理解欺负的含义和应对的方法。以“儿童早期友谊项目”[注]Ostrov, J. M., Massetti, G. M., Stauffacher, K., Godleski, S. A., Hart, K. C., Karch, K. M., …Ries, E. E. An intervention for relational and physical aggression in early childhood: A preliminary study. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 2009, 24(1): 15-28.为代表的大多数幼儿欺负干预项目[注]Saracho, O. N. Bullying: Young children’s roles, social status, and prevention programs. Early Child Development & Care, 2016, 187(1): 1-12.都非常注重干预过程的游戏性，如在干预课程中使用玩偶剧或故事的方式来开展干预。

最后，家、校、社区生态化干预。从生态学观点来看，如果个体在学校参与欺负行为，他/她在家庭和社区也可能遇到类似问题，[注]Swearer, S. M., Espelage, D. L., Vaillancourt, T., & Hymel, S. What can be done about school bullying? Linking research to educational practice. Educational Researcher, 2010, 39(1): 38-47.该理论表明，欺负的干预可以在多个场合互通。因此当前的干预项目强调在干预过程中进行家校合作、社区-学校合作甚至三方面的合作。常用的方式是将学校、家庭和社区中的关键个体纳入到干预团队中。如MC项目将教师和家长都纳入干预流程中。[注]Fraser, M. W., Day, S. H., Galinsky, M. J., Hodges, V. G., & Smokowski, P. R. Conduct problems and peer rejection in childhood: A randomized trial of the making choices and strong families programs. Research on Social Work Practice, 2004, 14(5): 313-324.一个项目是否能够整合在学校和社区当中，也是决定这个项目能否持续下去的关键因素。[注]Leff, S. S., Gullan, R. L., Paskewich, B. S., Abdul-Kabir, S., Jawad, A. F., Grossman, M., … Power, T. J. An initial evaluation of a culturally-adapted social problem solving and relational aggression prevention program for urban african american relationally aggressive girls. Journal of Prevention & Intervention in the Community, 2009, 37(4): 260-274.

总之，幼儿的欺负卷入有着复杂的内部机制和外部表现，幼儿欺负的规律还有很多疑问有待揭示，理论和干预实践相联系的路径也还需要在大量研究中进行验证，还需要来自不同领域的研究者们不断通过分析和整合去勾画问题的全貌，并找到干预的关键枢纽。