Bullying of autistic children by their peers is prevalent. This is a significant concern, given research linking childhood bullying with adverse mental health outcomes, in both autistic and neurotypical groups.

The first section of this thesis is a scoping review, which aimed to establish what interventions have been developed to reduce the bullying of autistic children. The second section reports an investigation of the feasibility of examining the relationship between bullying victimisation and psychosis-like experiences (PLEs) in autistic children. Following a systematic literature search 10 studies were identified for inclusion in the scoping review. Broadly, interventions focussed either upon skills-development for autistic children, or the promotion of contact between autistic children and neurotypical peers. There was heterogeneity in the research designs used and outcome measures employed.

Overall, the evidence base is in its infancy and there is a need to develop and evaluate multicomponent interventions involving autistic children, neurotypical peers, staff and schools. A quantitative cross-sectional design was used to investigate the feasibility of testing the relationship between bullying victimisation and PLEs in autistic children, and to test the preliminary hypothesis of association between these variables. Parents completed a battery of online questionnaires about their children (N=53). Hierarchical multiple regression was used to test the relationship between the variables of interest, while controlling for: age, sex, family history of psychosis and internalising difficulties.

It was found that there is a lack of suitable questionnaires for measuring PLEs in autistic children, and that recruiting a large sample via a clinical service may not be feasible. Preliminary hypothesis testing failed to establish a statistically significant relationship between bullying victimisation and PLEs in autistic children. However, this should not preclude future work in this area.

This study arises from two contextualised problems faced by the students at the Faculty of Applied Sciences (FAS) of a small university in Sri Lanka. These problems are: students’ lecture comprehension difficulties and limited oral language proficiency in their second language (i.e. English). The ideas developed in this study are based on the argument that dialogic lecturer student interaction, which enables students to take a more active role in discussions compared to the use of recitation scripts (questions-answers evaluations) developed in non-dialogic interactions, is likely to be beneficial for students’ content and language development. Although there have been studies at primary level, there has so far been little research into dialogic interaction in tertiary-level L1 Science classes, and none yet carried out in the L2 context. Therefore, this study investigates the extent of dialogic interaction practised at FAS, in conjunction with a thorough consideration of the factors that influence interaction between lecturers and students. This study, involving 30 students and 4 lecturers, was undertaken as a pioneer study in this context in Asia by analysing L2 lectures given at FAS. Data were collected from lecturer and student questionnaires, lecturer interviews, student group interviews, observations of 24 lectures and audio recordings. Of the observed lectures, a total of 12 from Biotechnology, Animal Physiology, Physics and Statistics were transcribed verbatim and analysed using an analytical framework, which was especially designed to analyse the FAS lecture discourse. This framework was also used to locate these lectures on a scale from monologic to dialogic. The study revealed the complexity of the perception-practice dynamic, and the multi-faceted sub-set of factors which influenced students’ and lecturers’ behaviour in class, and their perception of that behaviour. Students’ lecture comprehension problems and classroom interaction were influenced by their language proficiency, though the students considered the lecturers’ lecture delivery style to be more important than their own language proficiency. In this study it was revealed that a culturally embedded behaviour perpetuated by senior students, known as ragging (a kind of bullying), restricted the classroom interaction of the students. In terms of lecture delivery style, of all the observed lectures only two contained some interactional episodes in addition to monologic segments, while the others were found to be highly or mostly monologic. Students were also found not to be cooperating with lecturers in classroom interaction, despite stating a preference for learning through interaction. The students asked only very few questions in all the observed lectures, and answered in a limited number of lectures. The lecturers asked more knowledge testing questions than any other kind, while there were only a few concept development questions – the type which can help develop dialogic interaction. Overall, this investigation, which demonstrates the importance of combining studies of perception with detailed analysis of the discourse itself, indicates limited lecturer student interaction as well as a clear lack of dialogic interaction in English-medium Science lectures at this particular university. In addition, it is argued that the innovative analytical framework designed to analyse the lectures delivered in the English Medium Instruction (EMI) context of the present study can be useful for other lectures which are commonly delivered as monologic in both L1 and L2 contexts. Finally, it also stresses the importance of investigating the influence of cultural and behavioural factors, such as ragging, on classroom learning.

This research explores – in depth – critical drivers and outcomes of engagement as perceived by individual employees in Australia. This research also looks at employee engagement from a reverse perspective by exploring critical drivers and outcomes of disengagement. In addition, the impact of psychological contract violation on employees’ disengagement is explored. The theoretical framework subsequently includes employee engagement (from academic and practice perspectives) and psychological contract violation. The objective of this sociological study is to advance our understanding of the (dis) engagement phenomenon as a process including critical drivers and outcomes as generically perceived by individual employees. As part of the empirical inquiry investigating the (dis) engagement phenomenon within its real-life context, this study has involved researching 131 participants across three Australian case studies through face-to-face interviewing (82 participants) and focus groups interviewing (49 participants). Acknowledging this study’s sociological inquiry at the micro-level of organisation, it does consider the perceptions of participants to be potentially representative of the larger scale macro- levels of social organisation. The first main finding suggests that critically perceived drivers of engagement are recognition and flexible working. The second main finding suggests that psychological contract violation can be a critical driver of disengagement. The final main finding suggests that potential (toxic) outcomes of disengagement can be counterproductive behaviours at work exemplified through bullying, fraud, lying, breaches of confidentiality, and non-compliance of organisational rules and processes

The overarching aim of the thesis was to identify and explore a behavioural typology of the use of reactive and proactive aggression in a sample of 9-14 year-old English children and adolescents. To date, few studies have employed a person centred approach to investigate behavioural patterns of the use of both reactive and proactive aggression. Of these only two have investigated the behaviour of community, rather than specialised or clinical participant samples (Crapanzano, Frick and Terranova 2010; Mayberry and Espelage 2007). However, these two studies employed methods which raise questions regarding the reliability and/or generalisability of the results obtained. For example, neither study asked participants whether they had actually engaged in the behaviours of interest; rather they asked children to report on how likely they felt they were to react in the same way as described in a list of aggressive scenarios presented to them. As such the studies did not actually record engagement in aggressive behaviour, rather the participants’ perceived likelihood that they would behave in a certain way. Furthermore, neither study was conducted in the UK, leading to questions of generalisability between participant samples. Both research and school policy in England and Wales has focused on exploring the use of proactive forms of aggression (including bullying) in schools, and reactive aggression has to date been neglected. However, it is essential that we identify the prevalence and patterns of the use of both reactive and proactive forms of aggression as both are prevalent in schools and place children and adolescents at risk of harm. Employing a mixed methodological approach, a two-phased data collection procedure was followed to identify and explore a behavioural typology of the use of reactive and proactive aggression and differences in associated demographic, behavioural and socio-cognitive risk factors between the behavioural groups identified. In Phase 1, focus groups were conducted with 57 (20 males, 37 females) children and adolescents aged 9 – 18 years, in order to understand how they define terminology utilised across the research literature to describe acts of negative interpersonal behaviour. Across three data collection sites participants reported consistent definitions of the terms provided to them and differentiated between the terms aggression, violence and bullying. Social representations of the reasons they believed people engaged and avoided engaging in interpersonal aggression also emerged from their talk. These related to the role of taking the perspective, or empathising with others and the perception of a level of justification for certain types of behaviour, enacted under certain conditions. In Phase 2 a survey design was used to collect both qualitative and quantitative data from 658 children and adolescents aged 9-14 years (302 males, 356 females). The aim of Phase 2 was to identify a behavioural typology of the use of reactive and proactive aggression based on self-report data collected using a modified version of the Reactive-Proactive Aggression Questionnaire (RPAQ; Raine et al 2006). Once the behavioural subtypes were identified, associations between subtype and, involvement in bullying relationships, demographic (age and gender) and social-cognitive characteristics (empathy, perceived acceptance of behaviour and social representations of why people become involved in negative interpersonal interactions) were examined. Cluster analysis of the RPAQ data identified three distinct behavioural groups characterised by lower than the sample median use of both types of behaviour (Low Aggression: characterising 57.1% of the sample), Moderate-high reactive and Low-moderate proactive aggression (characterising 34.4% of the sample), and finally a group indicating frequent use of both reactive and proactive aggression (High Aggression: characterising 8.5% of the sample). The only age and gender related differences within the clusters were found in the low frequency aggression cluster. Specifically, there were a greater proportion of females compared to males in this cluster. The only age related difference found was a greater percentage of primary school children compared to 13-14 year olds in the Low aggression cluster. Group membership was found to be associated with self-reported bullying as measured by the Peer Victimization and Bullying Scale (Mynard and Joseph 2000). The High frequency aggression cluster contained a significantly higher percentage of those indicating being a bully or a bully-victim compared to the other two clusters. Whereas the Low frequency cluster contained a significantly higher percentage of those indicating not being involved in bullying compared to the other two clusters. However, reporting being a victim of bullying was not associated with any one of the three clusters. Of the socio-cognitive variables, a significant incremental increase was found in the perceived acceptance of both reactive and proactive aggression as the reported frequency of the use of both types of behaviour increased across the three behavioural groups (as measured by a modified version of the RPAQ; Raine et al 2006). Conversely, an incremental decrease was observed between the frequency of the use of aggression and reported affective empathy (as measured by the Basic Empathy Scale; Jolliffe and Farrington 2006), with a significant difference being found between the Low and High frequency aggression groups. No significant differences between the groups in self-reported cognitive empathy were found. Finally, participants were asked two open-ended questions relating to their perception of why people are ‘picked on’, or ‘pick on’ others. Thematic Analysis identified a number of social representations held across the participant sample, with a further content analysis identifying that there were no significant differences in the extent to which these representations were endorsed by the three behavioural groups. The findings of the current research have important implications for our understanding of the developmental pathways for the use of reactive and proactive aggression. They identify that both types of behaviour co-occur, suggesting that the risk factors for the development of these two types of behaviour may not be so distinct and/or the risk factors associated with each are likely to co-occur. Consequently, school behaviour policies need to include strategies for addressing both forms of aggression. Interventions to reduce/prevent this behaviour need to be designed to address the risk factors which are promoting the specific motivations of both reactive and proactive behaviour.