ABSTRACT
Secure bullying research, namely that applied to prisons and secure psychiatric units, continues to remain an area of research populated by few researchers (Ireland, Ireland & Power, 2016) and affords limited attention to empirically informed management approaches. Regarding the latter, although there have been policies in place for the management of violence between residents (e.g., prisoners, patients), they tend to be limited in scope, operate using a narrow definition of aggression and continue to apply a categorical approach towards those involved, seemingly focusing solely on the roles of ‘victim’ and ‘perpetrator’ (e.g., HM Prison Service, Anti-Bullying Strategy, PSI 62/1999; HM Prison Service, PSO 2750 Violence Reduction). There is an absence of attention to the most well-recognised group empirically – perpetrator/victims (bully/victims) – and a failure to account for the other potentially influential groups, such as those not involved in bullying either as a victim or as a perpetrator (Ireland, 2005a). There also remains an absence of recognition regarding the damaging aspects of indirect bullying, namely the bullying that occurs when a perpetrator’s identity is unknown and/or their aggressive intention unclear (i.e., subtle bullying). Indirect bullying is, nevertheless, damaging to victims, particularly within closed environments where they are offered no escape from the abuse (Ireland, 2012).
