RELATIONAL AGGRESSION: UNDERSTANDING, IDENTIFYING, AND RESPONDING IN SCHOOLS

Relational aggression, harm through injury or manipulation of a relationship, has become fashionable, particularly in the popular press. Mental health professionals in schools can better serve students when they understand what is known about relational aggression, how it influences social behavior, and how it is related to children’s well-being. This article discusses the definition, identification, and consequences of relational aggression. Available intervention programs are introduced, and future directions for research, assessment, and intervention are addressed. © 2006 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Historically, concerns about school-based bullying or aggressive behaviors have emphasized externalizing behaviors and physical aggression. Effective anti-bullying programs have emphasized inhibiting physical aggression and increasing prosocial skills (Rys & Bear, 1997). Relational aggression, defined as harm that occurs through injury or manipulation of a relationship, has more recently emerged as a point of contrast to physical aggression and has received increased attention in the popular press and in scholarly journals. Yet, educational publications and contexts are just beginning to attend to the topic. Evidence is accumulating to suggest that relational aggression may create just as much, if not more, damage than physical aggression, but in a subtle and less visible way (Crick & Grotpeter, 1996). Indeed, failing to consider relational aggression limits the ability to identify peer-relationship difficulties among children. For example, if anti-bullying programs address only physical aggression, 60% of aggressive girls but only 7% of aggressive boys would fail to be identified (Henington, Hughes, Cavell, & Thompson, 1998). Additionally, if being a target of aggression is defined only in terms of physical victimization, a large percentage of victimized children will not be identified as targets. In particular, Crick and Nelson (2002) demonstrated that defining victimization within middle-childhood friendships would be limited by a sole focus on physical victimization. Failing to consider relational victimization would mean that 71.4% of girls victimized by friends and 21.1% of boys victimized by friends would have been excluded in this study. Similarly, in a preschool sample, targets of relational aggression were a fairly distinct group from the children who were targets of physical aggression (Crick, Casas, & Ku, 1999). Clearly, including relational aggression in the conceptualization of aggressive behaviors is a comprehensive approach that addresses the needs of both boys and girls who may be instigators and/or targets of aggressive behavior. The focus on physical aggression in previous research and intervention practice is understandable, given its overt nature and its marked consequences. When a student hits another student, it is clear to observers what just occurred; evidence of physical injury may exist to document the aggressive behavior, and it is often easily observed by adults and other children. In contrast, there tends to be little tangible evidence of harm when a student is the target of relational aggression. When a child is purposefully and cruelly excluded from a peer-group activity or is the target of rumors or gossip, identifying the source also may be difficult.