Do cyberbullies suffer too? Cyberbullies' perceptions of the harm they cause to others and to their own mental health

While it is recognised that there are serious correlates for students who are victims of cyberbullying including depression, anxiety, lower self-esteem and social difficulties, there has been little research attention paid to the mental health of students who cyberbully. It is known that students who traditionally bully report they feel indifferent to their victims, showing a lack of empathy and that they themselves are at increased risk for psychosocial adjustment. However, there is scant research on the mental health associations of students who cyberbully or their awareness of their impact on others. The current study sought to ascertain from Australian students who reported cyberbullying others in years 6 to 12 (10-19 years of age), their perceptions of their mental health and the harm they caused to and the impact their actions had, on their victims. Most students who cyberbullied did not think that their bullying was harsh or had an impact on their victims. They reported more social difficulties and higher scores on stress, depression and anxiety scales than those students who were not involved in any bullying. The implications of these findings for the mental health of the cyberbullies and for psychologists in schools who assist them, are dis-cussed.

Festival of Dangerous Ideas: ‘Are some Aboriginals more Aboriginal than others?’

"White Australia has always had a view on what makes a 'real' Aboriginal person. Andrew Bolt is the merely the latest in a long line of commentators who have put forward their views about 'black' and 'white' Aboriginals. Spread across a continent after 200 years of colonisation, Aboriginal people are diverse in a way that is at odds with media stereotypes of 'traditional' Aboriginal people living in troubled remote communities. At a crucial time for recognition and reconciliation, does 'white' or 'black' matter? Who speaks for Aboriginal people and defines who they are?"--Festivals, Talks & Ideas website

‘Works well with others’ : examining the different types of small group learning approaches and their implications for law student learning outcomes

In the current regulatory climate, there is increasing expectation that law schools will be able to demonstrate students’ acquisition of learning outcomes regarding collaboration skills. We argue that this is best achieved through a stepped and structured whole-of-curriculum approach to small group learning. ‘Group work’ provides deep learning and opportunities to develop professional skills, but these benefits are not always realised for law students. An issue is that what is meant by ‘group work’ is not always clear, resulting in a learning regime that may not support the attainment of desired outcomes. This paper describes different types of ‘group work', each associated with distinct learning outcomes. It suggests that ‘group work’ as an umbrella term to describe these types is confusing, as it provides little indication to students and teachers of the type of learning that is valued and is expected to take place. ‘Small group learning’ is a preferable general descriptor. Identifying different types of small group learning allows law schools to develop and demonstrate a scaffolded, sequential and incremental approach to fostering law students’ collaboration skills. To support learning and the acquisition of higherorder skills, different types of small group learning are more appropriate at certain stages of the program. This structured approach is consistent with social cognitive theory, which suggests that with the guidance of a supportive teacher, students can develop skills and confidence in one type of activity which then enhances motivation to participate in another.

A matter of style? Driver attributional 'style' in accounting for the driving of others as protective or as predisposing drivers towards retaliatory aggressive driving

Driver cognitions about aggressive driving of others are potentially important to the development of evidence-based interventions. Previous research has suggested that perceptions that other drivers are intentionally aggressive may influence recipient driver anger and subsequent aggressive responses. Accordingly, recent research on aggressive driving has attempted to distinguish between intentional and unintentional motives in relation to problem driving behaviours. This study assessed driver cognitive responses to common potentially provocative hypothetical driving scenarios to explore the role of attributions in driver aggression. A convenience sample of 315 general drivers 16–64 yrs (M = 34) completed a survey measuring trait aggression (Aggression Questionnaire AQ), driving anger (Driving Anger Scale, DAS), and a proxy measure of aggressive driving behaviour (Australian Propensity for Angry Driving AusPADS). Purpose designed items asked for drivers’ ‘most likely’ thought in response to AusPADS scenarios. Response options were equivalent to causal attributions about the other driver. Patterns in endorsements of attribution responses to the scenarios suggested that drivers tended to adopt a particular perception of the driving of others regardless of the depicted circumstances: a driving attributional style. No gender or age differences were found for attributional style. Significant differences were detected between attributional styles for driving anger and endorsement of aggressive responses to driving situations. Drivers who attributed the on-road event to the other being an incompetent or dangerous driver had significantly higher driving anger scores and endorsed significantly more aggressive driving responses than those drivers who attributed other driver’s behaviour to mistakes. In contrast, drivers who gave others the ‘benefit of the doubt’ endorsed significantly less aggressive driving responses than either of these other two groups, suggesting that this style is protective.

Attributing and denying humanness to others

We review a programme of research on the attribution of humanness to people, and the ways in which lesser humanness is attributed to some compared to others. We first present evidence that humanness has two distinct senses, one representing properties that are unique to our species, and the other—human nature—those properties that are essential or fundamental to the human category. An integrative model of dehumanisation is then laid out, in which distinct forms of dehumanisation correspond to the denial of the two senses of humanness, and the likening of people to particular kinds of nonhuman entities (animals and machines). Studies demonstrating that human nature attributes are ascribed more to the self than to others are reviewed, along with evidence of the phenomenon’s cognitive and motivational basis. Research also indicates that both kinds of humanness are commonly denied to social groups, both explicitly and implicitly, and that they may cast a new light on the study of stereotype content. Our approach to the study of dehumanisation complements the tradition of research on infrahumanisation, and indicates new directions for exploring the importance of humanness as a dimension of social perception.

Humanizing the self: Moderators of the attribution of lesser humanness to others

Three studies investigated moderators of the tendency to attribute greater humanness to the self than to others, an interpersonal counterpart of outgroup infra-humanization. Study 1 demonstrated that this self-humanizing effect is reduced when the other is the focus of comparison. Study 2 showed that the effect is reduced when the other is individuated. Study 3 indicated that empathy does not moderate self-humanizing: Self-humanizing failed to correlate negatively with dispositional empathy or perspective-taking. Study 3 also indicated that abstract construal moderates the self-humanizing effect using a temporal comparison. Participants rated their future self, but not their past self, as less human than their present self. Studies 1 and 3 also showed that selfhumanizing is greater for undesirable traits: People may view their failings as “only human.” All findings were distinct from those attributable to self-enhancement. Self-humanizing may reflect a combination of egocentrism, focalism, abstract representation of others, and motivated processes.

More human than you: Attributing humanness to self and others

People typically evaluate their in-groups more favorably than out-groups and themselves more favorably than others. Research on infrahumanization also suggests a preferential attribution of the “human essence” to in-groups, independent of in-group favoritism. The authors propose a corresponding phenomenon in interpersonal comparisons: People attribute greater humanness to themselves than to others, independent of self-enhancement. Study 1 and a pilot study demonstrated 2 distinct understandings of humanness—traits representing human nature and those that are uniquely human—and showed that only the former traits are understood as inhering essences. In Study 2, participants rated themselves higher than their peers on human nature traits but not on uniquely human traits, independent of selfenhancement. Study 3 replicated this “self-humanization” effect and indicated that it is partially mediated by attribution of greater depth to self versus others. Study 4 replicated the effect experimentally. Thus, people perceive themselves to be more essentially human than others.

‘Appreciate A Mate’ Helping others to feel good about themselves. Safe and Well Online: A report on the development and evaluation of a positive messaging social marketing campaign for young people.

This report describes the Year Two/Campaign Two processes, and articulates findings from the major project components designed to address the challenges noted above (see Figure 1). Three major components comprise the Safe and Well Online project: 1) A participatory design (PD) process involving young people and sector partners (UWS) for; 2) campaign development (Zuni & Digital Arts Network); and 3) a cohort study (University of South Australia) to evaluate campaign effectiveness and attitude and behaviour change. Each sub-study comprehensively considered the ethical requirements of conducting online research with minors. The theoretical and methodological framework for measuring campaign engagement and efficacy (Sub-studies 3, 4 and 5) drew on the Model of Goal Directed Behaviour (MGB) (Perugini & Bagozzi 2001) and Nudge Theory (Thaler & Sunstein, 2008). This report extends the findings and conclusions of the Year One Pilot Study ‘‘Keep it Tame’’ (Spears et.al, 2015), and details the development and evaluation of the second of four Safe and Well Online Campaigns—‘‘Appreciate A Mate’: Helping others feel good about themselves’.

Willy Tese Moses and others seated at an outdoor table; Chile Portraits Groups

Digital Image

Playing alone, playing with others: Differences in player experience and indicators of wellbeing

Video game play is becoming an increasingly social experience, yet we have little understanding of how social and solitary modes of play differ in terms of the player experience or interact with player wellbeing. An online survey (n = 446) collected data on players' current mode of play, their game play experience, social capital gained from game play and wellbeing. The results indicate that social and solitary players differ in terms of degree of autonomy, presence and relatedness experienced, while the different types of social play are associated with differences in relatedness and social capital experienced. Different predictors of wellbeing were also present across solitary and social player samples. People who play games on their own experience greater wellbeing when experiencing in-game autonomy. Social players experience greater wellbeing when playing with strangers, and when experiencing in-game bridging social capital. All players experienced increased wellbeing with age and decreased wellbeing with greater amounts of play.

Alfred Lichtenstein standing in front of a billboard advertising him and others; Berlin.

Digital Image

Family portrait with Alfred Lichtenstein, his first wife Gerda, unidentified others (maman, tante, oncle, soeur).

Digital Image

Heymann; Unidentified others on Beach; Swinemuende Portraits; Groups

Album 4