What a Bully Idea! : A Comparative Study of the Concept of Bullying on Anti-Bullying Posters

秉持著圖像應該也被視為人類的溝通模態之一，本研究收集與檢視了來自台灣和美國的成人以及小孩的反霸凌海報，由海報中的兩種溝通模態：圖像和文字，所挾帶的資訊來作為語料，並以跨文化和跨年齡兩個面向比較人們對於霸凌態度的異同。 本研究提出一套適用於海報研究的視覺語法作為框架以進行分析。該語法建立於Kress和Leeuwen (1990,2006)的視覺語法理論之上，並加以修飾。Kress和Leewuen相信圖像就如同語言一樣可以攜帶語意，因而借用了語言學的功能語法理論，發展出一套系統性的視覺語法來分析圖像。唯該理論是以西方圖像為本，並針對圖像研究所設計，對於本研究的多模態海報語料，以及所涉及到的東西方文化比較造成矛盾與衝突，因此需針對這幾點進行修改。 從海報上擷取到的資訊分為兩個方向討論，第一為海報的互動意義(interpersonal meaning)，第二為海報的認知意義(ideational meaning)。前者主要探討海報如何和它的目標觀眾群互動，分析這些目標觀眾群的身分以及海報對他們所進行的行為為何；後者則檢視海報裡頭所呈現出來的圖像，並區分為敘述式(narrative representation)和概念式(conceptual representation)。 結果顯示台灣人和美國人對於霸凌的了解都深深地受到文化根本的集體主義和個人主義影響，而導致人們將霸凌的責任歸屬於不同的對象。台灣的反霸凌海報大部分沒有特定目標觀眾群，並多以群體作為指稱對象；反之，美國的反霸凌海報則有明確的目標觀眾，例如：霸凌者、旁觀者，或是受害者。研究也發現台灣的反霸凌海報和美國的反霸凌海報各自有關注受害者和關注霸凌者的傾向，並透過不同的海報行為和圖像呈現出來，例如：提供保護資訊給受害者，或是要求霸凌者停止霸凌等等。 然而，儘管在兩者文化間可以進行集體主義和個人主義、關注受害者和關注霸凌者的區分，當把焦點放在單一一個社會裡的成人與小孩時，他們對於霸凌卻不一定會有一致的態度和想法。研究就發現台灣小孩的海報遠比台灣成人的海報更沒有特定的目標觀眾群；而美國成人同時將霸凌歸咎於霸凌者和旁觀者身上，美國的小孩卻更多單一地著墨在霸凌者上頭。 這些發現揭示了一些兩者社會在實行反霸凌運動時所潛在的問題：台灣小孩對於霸凌責任的歸屬可能較沒有清楚的概念，或是美國的小孩也許對於旁觀者的角色和作用沒有太大的意識。而本研究期望透過這些分析和發現能夠為未來霸凌的預防方法提供一定的發展方向，以有效地遏止霸凌的發生。Being motivated by the claim that images should be regarded as one of human communication modes, this study aims to examine a collection of anti-bullying posters from adults and children of Taiwan and America. The information carried by both the images and verbal messages in these posters will be analyzed with a linguistic method to unfold how people’s attitudes towards bullying vary across and within socio-cultural backgrounds. A modified version of Kress and Leeuwen’s (1990, 2006) visual grammar is proposed to carry out the analysis. It is with the awareness that images can convey meaning as languages do that Kress and Leeuwen borrow the idea of grammar from linguistics and bring forth systematic rules for reading images, which are frequently adopted in previous poster researches. However, some modifications and adaptions are necessary complements to applying their visual grammar to poster studies, inasmuch as it is originally designed for images’ exclusive use, which contradicts posters’ involving two different modes of communication, namely images and verbal messages. With the adapted visual grammar, the gleaned information from the collected anti-bullying posters will be studied in two aspects, interpersonal meaning and ideational meaning. The former deals with the interactions between the posters and their viewers, identifying different groups of target viewers and the poster acts performed to them; the latter discusses what images in these posters are and whether they are presented in a narrative or conceptual manner. The results indicate that how Taiwanese and Americans understand bullying is deeply influenced by their culturally embedded ideologies, collectivism and individualism; Taiwanese tend to refer to an inclusive group of people in their anti-bullying posters, while Americans normally assign the responsibility of anti-bullying to an individual with a specific identity, like the bully, the bystander or the victim. Besides, they also show certain inclination to focusing on victims and focusing on bullies respectively by performing and visualizing different acts through the posters, such as offering support services to the victims, demanding the bullies to stop bullying, and so on. However, despite such general distinctions between these two cultures, the adults and children in a given society do not always have consistency in their attitudes towards bullying. It is found that Taiwanese children make their anti-bullying posters for non-specific target viewers much more frequently than adults do, and American adults ascribe the blame to both bullies and bystanders while most American children only impute bullying to the bullies. All these findings can provide some implications about the potential problems in both societies’ practice of anti-bullying programs: for instance, it is possible that Taiwanese children are ignorant of who should take the responsibility of anti-bullying, and American children may be unaware of the role of bystanders. Based on such analyses and findings, this study is expected to offer development directions for future bullying intervention and prevention approaches which can effectively halt the upward trend of its occurrence