Search

This environmental system is identified into five systems consisting of microsystems, mesosystems, exosystems, macrosystems and chronosystems. The phenomenon of bullying in education has interfered the process of individual development and is at risk of causing harm. This study focuses on how the five environmental systems toward the phenomenon of bullying in the world of education. In particular, the world of education in this study is represented in the setting of educational institutions through schools. The method used in this study is a systematic literature review. Based on this study, it is found that the 5 layers of the system are interconnected and influence each other in the escalation and resolution of bullying behavior problems. There are 5 key points that become the findings of bullying relationships at 5 layers, namely interpersonal interactions, social hierarchy in the school environment, regulation of the school climate, value acculturation gaps with policies, and dimensions of bullying. Then the key is in the educational institution through school, so that in an effort to handle it, interventions in the exosystem and macrosystem are crucial. The process by designing programs and safeguarding the interaction process in schools that are anti-bullying. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The relationship between top management team (TMT) members' learning behavior and the innovation strategy of technology ventures remains unclear, especially when complicated by social hierarchies within the team. We draw on organizational learning theory to theorize that diversity in TMT members' learning behavior has both positive and negative latent effects that produce an inverted U-shaped relationship between TMT learning diversity and a firm's radical innovation strategy. Building on the social hierarchy literature, we also suggest that CEO power moderates this relationship by altering the latent forces: structurally powerful CEOs neutralize the benefits of TMT learning diversity, turning the link between learning diversity and radical innovation strategy predominantly negative, whereas prestigiously powerful CEOs neutralize the costs of TMT learning diversity, turning its relationship with the firm's radical innovation strategy predominantly positive. Longitudinal, multi-source data from 77 TMTs support our model. The findings contribute to the research on learning and social hierarchies by illustrating how hierarchies rooted in different sources of power have different effects on the relationship between TMT learning diversity and innovation strategy. Plain English Summary: How can teams benefit from diversity? Two CEO approaches to power determine whether and when differences in learning behavior make SME top management teams more innovative. Top management teams (TMT) try to harness the power of diversity by combining team members who prioritize learning and constantly try to explore new areas with others who focus on implementing existing insights. This study investigates the effects of learning diversity in TMT on a firm's innovation strategy in the context of technology ventures. First, we found that a moderate level of diversity in learning behavior is linked to more radical innovations but that too much diversity hurts firm innovativeness. Moreover, we show that the power that CEOs wield plays a central role in these processes: if CEOs are prestigiously powerful (i.e., when they hold many other board appointments), they can guide their teams in ways that allow them to benefit from learning diversity. However, if CEOs are structurally powerful (i.e., they are also chairperson of the own board), their TMT will struggle to harness the power of diversity and end up seeing less radical innovation in their firm. These findings contribute to research by offering a novel theoretical account of diversity in learning behavior. Our study has implications for the design of TMTs, in the context where these teams' impact on firm innovation strategy is substantial. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Although extant research suggests that power without status, but not status without power, induces interpersonal conflict, we are yet to fully understand the asymmetric effects of holding power or status on psychological processes and group functioning. The present research attempts to fill this gap by arguing that holding power would heighten the motivation for status, whereas holding status may not necessarily have an equivalent effect on the motivation for power. We further proposed that power–status misalignment within a group would lead powerholders to be competitive toward statusholders due to heightened status motive and (upon failure to attain status) invest less in their group due to greater emotional distress. Across four (and one Supplemental) studies, we found support for our hypotheses. Our findings not only shed further light on the interactive effects of power and status, but also help better explain why power without status is particularly related to negative outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Social rank is formed through interactions with other individuals and experiences in the community. The existence of social rank helps animals avoid unnecessary conflicts, reduce energy costs spent in competing for limited resources, and secure comfortable living spaces. Thus, social rank has a profound impact on an individual' s survival, reproductive success, health, and other behaviors. Despite their importance to societies and individuals, the psychological and neurobiological mechanisms underlying social rank remain unclear. Oxytocin has received increasing attention for its role in social behaviors. Oxytocin is involved in a variety of social behavior, including pair-bonding, maternal behavior, aggression, social decision making, observational fear conditioning, and social recognition in many species. Oxytocin is emerging as a candidate pharmacological target for the treatment of mental disorders, especially those with social dysfunction, such as autism spectrum disorder, social anxiety disorder, and schizophrenia. Aims & Objectives: The causal relationship between oxytocin levels and social rank remains unclear. Here, we examined the effects of intraperitoneal administration of a blood-brain barrier penetrating oxytocin receptor antagonist, L-368,899, on various social behaviors. Method: First, we examined the effect of intraperitoneal injection of oxytocin receptor antagonist (10 mg/kg) on the tube test to examine the causal relationship between oxytocin and social rank. Second, we examined the effect of the oxytocin receptor antagonist (3 mg/kg and 10 mg/kg) on sex preference to validate the effect of the oxytocin antagonist on the discrimination of other individuals and on social interaction, and to rule out the possibility that the oxytocin receptor antagonist is not working. Third, we examined the effect of oxytocin antagonists (10 mg/kg) on a social preference task with unfamiliar male mice and direct dyadic interactions between familiar male mice in an open-field box. Results: In the tube test, injection of the oxytocin receptor antagonist did not affect first-rank mice, but caused fluctuation of the rank in second-rank mice, suggesting that the function of oxytocin in the maintenance of the social rank is rank-dependent. Second, injection of the oxytocin receptor antagonist dose- dependently impaired the sex preference of the male mice, confirming that oxytocin is essential in sexual behavior. Third, injection of the oxytocin receptor antagonist did not affect social preference and dyadic interaction between the male mice, suggesting that oxytocin is not necessary for direct social interaction. Discussion &ConclusionOur results demonstrate that the role of oxytocin in male mice is limited to a specific context of social behavior. Our findings pave the way to understanding the relationship between oxytocin receptors and social behavior. Discussion & Conclusion: Our results demonstrate that the role of oxytocin in male mice is limited to a specific context of social behavior. Our findings pave the way to understanding the relationship between oxytocin receptors and social behavior. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]