This thesis describes two separate but related studies. The first, study 1 investigated age and gender differences in participants’ perceptions of the concept of bullying. 159 participants were individually interviewed. Approximately 20 males and 20 females were in each of the following age groups: 5- 6, 9- 10, 15 – 16, 18 – 29 years of age. Interviews began with the participants giving their definition of bullying. Once this had been completed, 26 hypothetical scenarios were presented, containing various features involved in bullying. Participants were asked whether they believed bullying had occurred or not and the reasons for their response. Later 4 open ended questions were asked. Finally, participants were asked to give their definition of bullying again. Findings from study 1 indicate that though different from that of older participants, children as young as 5 and 6 years of age have a comprehensive understanding of bullying. Many age related differences were found in study 1, however few gender differences were found. These findings will be presented and their practical implications for teachers and for future research into the extent and prevention of bullying will be discussed. Study 2 investigated parent versus teacher conceptions of bullying. This study employed 80 participants; 40 teachers and 40 parents, balanced for gender. A modified, shorter version of the study 1 interview was used. Various parent – teacher differences were found. These differences will be discussed in reference to how they may affect parent-teacher liaison when dealing with issues of school bullying. Finally, pupil responses in study 1(5 – 6, 9 – 10, and 15 – 16 year olds) will be compared to parent and teacher responses in study 2. Differences revealed will be considered in relation to their practical implications for intervening in bullying situations.

The study of bullying at work has received little attention in the UK beyond incidence studies (e.g. UNISON, 1997), and has only addressed negative behaviour. In the UK around 80% of ‘bullies’ are reported to be managers. This study reports on a census survey which explored treatment of subordinates by managers within two UK organisations. One aim of the study was to identify ‘bullies’ and their characteristics. In order to identify the ‘bullies’, reports about manager behaviour from subordinates were collated to provide a data set on each manager. Managers were labelled according to the level of group agreement and the (relative) level of negative behaviour reported. As subordinate respondents were not asked to label themselves as ‘bullied’ or not, only ‘tough managers’ were identified. Managers were labelled on a continuum from ‘Tough managers’ through to ‘Angelic managers’ -the latter exhibiting extremely low levels of negative behaviour. Managers completed a battery of pre-validated measures that included the Hogan Personality Inventory, a management style questionnaire and the Occupational Stress Indicator ‘mental health’ and ‘stress’ measures. Few full data-sets (i.e. manager and subordinate data) were achieved. No significant correlations were found between the manager labels and the measures from the HPI, OSI and management style. Qualitative analysis revealed that using personality profiles of managers was ineffective in predicting labels. The only qualitative relationship appeared to be the manager’s lack of satisfaction with their own achievement and a ‘tough manager’ label. Due to the small sample size, the findings were inconclusive. The study also aimed to test out whether behaviour that had previously been thought of as bullying (by researchers) actually did bother people. The whole subordinate sample (n= 626) was used. Respondents were asked separately whether they experienced behaviours and whether that experience had bothered them. A very strong relationship was found which adds validity to previous studies, although the full domain of behaviours may not be covered. People who reported negative behaviours were found to have an external locus of control, although the direction of cause and effect is unknown. This relationship was particularly salient for those who were unusual in their reports of considerable negative behaviour as compared to other people in the same work group who reported average activity. Similar tests for personality revealed less conclusive findings. The discussion includes a critique of the study. Principle amongst the outcomes of the study was that a methodology for labelling ‘tough managers’ had been developed which could be extended to labelling ‘bullies’. In addition, the author asserts that it is useful to investigate a wide range of behaviours in the study of bullying at work, not just negative behaviour. Some interesting differences in subordinates were revealed at the work group level and this may be an area for more specialist research where the manager and staff profiles could be examined using qualitative techniques.

This research investigated the levels of being bullied and bullying for 8-15 year old pupils in school. Various studies showed that pupils’ own reports of being bullied and bullying differed from teacher and to a lesser degree peer nominations of pupils who are victims or perpetrators of bullying. Analyses of data examined the consistency of the results from two questionnaires, the ‘Life in Schools’ booklet and a questionnaire on bullying designed by Dan Olweus. Both questionnaires were evaluated for their usefulness in identifying levels of being bullied. In addition interview measures were also compared with reports from the anonymous questionnaire (Olweus questionnaire). Results showed that although there was consistency between the two measures, pupils were more likely to admit to bullying in the anonymous questionnaire than during interviews. Interview data was also collected at two time points. Study 1 investigated types of bullying, pupils’ understanding of what bullying is, and feelings of being bullied and bullying. Study 2 investigated types of bullying and who bullied whom in different ethnic/racial groups. The interview data led to the Olweus definition of bullying and questionnaire to be modified on two occasions to accommodate different types of bullying, that of indirect bullying and racial abuse. Data was also analysed to determine whether ‘ethnic minority’ pupils were more likely to be bullied or engaged in bullying compared to ‘white’ pupils. Results showed that there was no significant difference between the two groups. Further analyses of sex differences in being bullied and bullying showed that females used more indirect means of bullying compared to males although male levels of bullying were higher than that of female pupils. A Survey Service was also designed and implemented so that schools could carry out their own survey to investigate levels of bully/victim problems in schools. The Survey Service provided a package of information and a quota of questionnaires for teachers to administer to pupils in their schools. Results were then analysed by the University researcher and a portfolio returned to schools giving a breakdown by sex and class of pupils who have been bullied and bullying. The final analysis investigated the effectiveness of using a bully court in one middle school. Results showed that in the intervention classes levels of bullying declined and in the non-intervention classes bullying increased. The outcome of the results is discussed in relation to its effectiveness and the ethics of using this type of intervention.

In this thesis, I explore the construction of lesbian and gay parenting in psychology (Part 1), in the media (Part 2), and in lesbian and gay parents’ talk (Part 3). My research brings together a diverse range of influences and ideas from lesbian and gay psychology, feminist psychology, and constructionist and discursive research. I draw on varied data sources: the psychological and lesbian feminist literature on lesbian (and gay) parenting, television talk shows, documentaries and newspaper articles, and research interviews with lesbian and gay parents. These data are analysed within a feminist constructionist framework, using discourse analysis. The thesis is divided into three parts. In Part 1.1 present my analysis of the psychological and lesbian feminist literature on lesbian (and gay) parenting. In this part of the thesis, I treat the literature as data and explore what it reveals about the social construction of lesbian and gay parenting. First, I provide a historical overview of the literature on lesbians and parenting over the last one hundred years. Then, I focus in detail on how discourses of sameness and difference and discourses of science inform the construction of lesbian (and gay) parenting in the literature. In Part 2, I analyse media constructions of lesbian and gay parenting. First, I identify arguments against lesbian and gay parenting in talk shows and in newspaper articles. Second, I focus specifically on talk show debates and analyse how these debates are constructed and identify the key themes informing pro-lesbian/gay parenting discourse on talk shows. In Part 3, I focus in detail on lesbian and gay parents’ talk about two issues that significantly inform psychological and media debates about their fitness to parent: homophobic bullying and male role models. I explore how lesbian and gay parents engage with anti-lesbian/gay claims about homophobic bullying and male role models, and the ways in which they construct bullying and role models in the process of discursively managing their identity as ‘bad’ parents. In the final chapter, I discuss the contributions and implications of my research, and indicate some future developments for research on lesbian and gay parenting and for lesbian and gay psychology.