Home > PJ > Onlooker

Return to PJ Online Home Page

The Pharmaceutical Journal Vol 267 No 7178 p868
15 December 2001

This article
Reprint
Photocopy

Onlooker

Tackling the bully [more]
The eyes have it [more]
Arthur the elusive [more]


Tackling the bully

There seems to be a growing body of literature on bullying. Most bullying goes on in schools, but it is by no means restricted to our educational establishments. It happens in commercial organisations and in offices of all kinds.

Individuals do not readily admit to being bullied by those set over them or those in a parallel situation, since to do so introduces the unwelcome idea of personal inferiority. Moreover, if you grow conscious of suffering as a victim of a bully, what do you do about it? Telling anyone else is more likely than not to intensify the victimisation, and in schools, in particular, it creates tensions which do not assist the precious pursuit of education. To become known as a teller of tales about one's peers is a sure path to trouble.

Some psychologists believe that an aggressive streak tends to make a child disliked and even feared. But some children manage to exercise a moderately aggressive character without attracting any strong disapproval from their contacts, and are labelled "controversial". Indeed, they may show the quality of leadership among their peers and achieve a social status that they find satisfying to their ego. Nevertheless, a high degree of aggressiveness without the social skill to turn it to advantage is bound to render a child unpopular. Aggression may take the form of physical assault or taunting with words or gestures.

Circumstances within the home are important in deciding subsequent antisocial patterns of behaviour and how much aggression a child suffers or inflicts. Academic weakness may intensify these. Bullying in schools is the source of much distress for its victims and may be organised by a single child or by a group or gang. It tends to be concentrated on individuals who are exceptionally susceptible and who are unable from physical weakness or a strong feeling of inferiority to retaliate.

It has been found that primary school bullies are as a rule healthier and mentally more vigorous than their victims. In a recent study of more than 1,600 children aged six to nine, those who bullied others but were not themselves victimised were least likely to suffer problems of physical or mental health. It is alarming to note that some 40 per cent of children questioned claimed to have been repeatedly bullied at school. These victims suffered more minor health problems such as colds, coughs, nausea and aches and pains than others. The dominance of the bullies, it is suggested, probably depends upon a constitution that gives them an advantage over potential victims. Curiously enough, bullies often seem not to appreciate what effect they have upon other children.

A paper by paediatricians from Australia, published in the British Medical Journal for 1 September, states that bullying occurs in all schools, but its relevance to health and wellbeing is uncertain. There is a stronger association with depression than with anxiety, loneliness or self-esteem in general. In a study group of some 3,000 students, about one half admitted to having been victims of bullies, and these reported symptoms of depression or anxiety. The effect was clearer in girls than in boys, and it is desirable to take measures to protect them, to reduce later emotional problems.

Similar findings have been reported from the United States, where it has been recommended that children be taught to report bullying to teachers and parents, so that the proper authorities can be informed. However desirable this may be in theory, there are serious practical difficulties. Parents are regarded askance if they tell a school that their child is being bullied, and if the story leaks out there may be repercussions on the child from fellow students, who belong to a culture where "telling tales" is regarded as a cardinal sin. Parents and teachers alike face a dilemma, and no solution to the problem is in sight.

Back to Top


The eyes have it

Psychologists recognise four distinct facial expressions — anger, disgust, sadness and happiness. Continually changing expressions of interest or emotion may however introduce some confusion. The face remains the most important channel for conveying emotion, with lesser roles being played by body posture, limb movements and other attitudinal changes.

The effect of a face upon brain activity of a viewer may be subtle, as is described by two London neuroscientists in Nature for 11 October. Studies have shown that perceived attractiveness or interest in an unfamiliar face increases nervous activity in the brain of an observer who meets someone's gaze. This activity decreases when the gaze is seen to be directed away. The phenomenon is connected with dopaminergic stimuli, which are linked to the expectation of reward or otherwise in the shape of a social interaction.

Facial attractiveness in itself apparently fails to activate brain activity, but the direction of gaze towards the subject of the investigation shows a positive correlation with attractiveness. If the subject perceives that gaze has been averted, activity in the ventral striatum is reduced. The response is not simply related to the gender of observed and observer. These observations indicate that the social interactions of individuals depend very largely upon the pleasure or displeasure arising from both eye contact and avoidance of such contact, by turning of the head for example. At the base of this reaction lies an instinctive expectation of reward, or relief from an unwelcome encounter.

Back to Top


Arthur the elusive

Arthur of Britain, who was no mere legend but flourished in the sixth century, has given rise to many tales that show great discrepancies, in particular regarding the regions in which he was active during his lifetime.

There can be no doubt that all early reference to the mystery leader come from Celtic sources. Geoffrey of Monmouth in the 12th century and Thomas Malory in the 15th made substantial contributions to Arthurian folklore. And many places, such as Arthur's Seat overlooking Edinburgh, Arthur's Quoit near Trethevy in Cornwall, and Arthur's Stone in Hereford, not to mention his supposed birthplace, Tintagel, and his supposed last appearance at Dozmary Pool and Looe Pool in Cornwall, have added to the confusion.

Not long ago an academic from the United States insisted that Arthur's sphere of activity was in Scotland. This seems to have been a revival of the idea put forward in 1869 by the antiquary Stuart Glennie that Arthur was active in southern Scotland. Now another historian, Stuart McHardy, has identified the mystic isle of Avalon, where Arthur was reputed to have ended his days, with the Isle of May in the Firth of Forth near Edinburgh. McHardy insists that the hero died there in the year 539 after a battle at Falkirk where he received his fatal wound, and that he was in life a Scottish tribal warlord.

The traditional view remains that Arthur was born in Tintagel and came to be buried in Glastonbury, where the Abbey monks claimed in 1191 that they had disinterred the relics of Arthur and his wife Guinevere. These were removed and transferred in 1278 to a black marble tomb in the Abbey church. In 1539, during the iconoclastic surge, this shrine was destroyed.

Camelot has been identified in several locations, but this name and its concept was probably invented by the French medieval poets, Chrétien de Troyes in particular. The antiquary John Leland in the 16th century referred to Cadbury Castle in Somerset as "Camellate", which introduced further confusion. Meanwhile, those interested in promoting tourism in these islands have no hesitation over choosing their favourite version of the Arthurian legend.

Back to Top



Home | Journals | News | Notice-board | Search | Jobs  Classifieds | Site Map | Contact us

©The Pharmaceutical Journal