The Role of Online Communication in Long-Term Cyberbullying Involvement Among Girls and Boys
Digital media, especially mobile communication technologies, enable adolescents to explore and experiment with each other with only limited adult control. Conflicts between peers can be easily staged since nearly everybody can be reached at any time under the radar of authorities. Therefore, involvement in conflicts and bullying might depend on how adolescents use and behave online. In the present study, we provide a comprehensive picture of the role aspects of online communication play in long-term involvement in cyberbullying. We focused on a gender-specific perspective, as girls and boys were found to differ not only according to their online communication but also in their cyberbullying involvement. Using a two-wave panel survey of 1817 adolescents between 13 and 17 years (56 % female), we found that girls’ cyberbullying involvement (perpetration and victimization) could be traced back to more intensive online social activities and a higher amount of online contact with strangers. In contrast, for boys, only higher exposure to antisocial media content predicted higher levels of victimization over time. The findings indicate that certain patterns of online communication increase the cyberbullying risk over time. However, it needs to be noted that these risk factors vary between girls and boys.
KeywordsCyberbullying Online communication Online risk behavior Adolescence Panel survey
We would like to thank the participating students and schools.
The research leading to these results has received funding from the German Research Foundation (DFG) under Grant agreement no. QU 260/9-1.
RF participated in the study design, conducted the field phase of the study, performed the measurement and the statistical analyses, and guided the interpretation of the data, as well as the coordination and drafting of the manuscript; TQ authored the funding application, participated in the design of the study and the interpretation of the data, and revised the manuscript for important intellectual content. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Before recruiting the schools, we checked that the study design and the questionnaire complied with valid ethical guidelines for school surveys and received approval from the federal Ministry of Education.
Informed consent was obtained from parents as well as students. Students were informed about the aims of the questionnaire and that they could withdraw from participation at any time without negative consequences.
- Arbuckle, J. L. (1996). Full information estimation in the presence of incomplete data. In G. A. Marcoulides & R. E. Schumacker (Eds.), Advanced structural equation modeling (pp. 243–277). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc.Google Scholar
- Finney, S. J., & DiStefano, C. (2006). Non-normal and categorical data in structural equation modeling. In G. R. Hancock & R. O. Mueller (Eds.), Structural equation modeling. A second course (pp. 269–314). Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing Inc.Google Scholar
- Gauntlett, D. (2008). Media, gender and identity. An introduction. Abingdon, UK: Routledge.Google Scholar
- Heirman, W., & Walrave, M. (2008). Assessing concerns and issues about the mediation of technology in cyberbullying. Cyberpsychology: Journal of Psychosocial Research on Cyberspace, 2(2), article 1. Retrieved from http://cyberpsychology.eu/view.php?cisloclanku=2008111401&article=1.
- Jessor, R. (1987). Problem-behavior theory, psychosocial development, and adolescent problem drinking. British Journal of Addiction, 82(4), 435–446.Google Scholar
- Kopecký, K. (2011). Sexting among Czech preadolescents and adolescents. New Educational Review, 28(2), 39–48.Google Scholar
- Kowalski, R. M., Giumetti, G. W., Schroeder, A. N., & Lattanner, M. R. (2014). A meta-analysis of factors predicting cyberbullying perpetration and victimization: From the social cognitive and media effects approach. Psychological Bulletin, 140(4), 1073–1137. doi: 10.1037/a0035618.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Lenhart, A., Duggan, M., Perrin, A., Stelper, R., Rainie, L., & Parker, K. (2015). Teens, social media & technology overview 2015: Smartphones facilitates shifts in communication landscape for teens. http://www.pewinternet.org/files/2015/04/PI_TeensandTech_Update2015_0409151.pdf. Accessed 9 May 2015.
- Livingstone, S., Haddon, L., Görzig, A., & Olafsson, K. (2011). Risks and safety on the internet: The perspective of European children. Full Findings. London: EU Kids Online.Google Scholar
- Livingstone, S., Hasebrink, U., & Görzig, A. (2012). Towards a general model of determinants of risk and safety. In S. Livingstone, L. Haddon, & A. Görzig (Eds.), Children, risk and safety on the Internet: Research and policy challenges in comparative perspective (pp. 323–338). Bristol: Policy Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Rosseel, Y. (2011). Lavaan: An R package for structural equation modeling. Journal of Statistical Software, 48(2), 1–36.Google Scholar
- Schultze-Krumbholz, A., Göbel, K., Scheithauer, H., Brighi, A., Guarini, A., Tsorbatzoudis, H., et al. (2015). A comparison of classification approaches for cyberbullying and traditional bullying using data from six European countries. Journal of School Violence, 14(1), 47–65. doi: 10.1080/15388220.2014.961067.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Wolak, J., & Finkelhor, D. (2011). Sexting: A typology. Crimes Against Children Research Center. http://www.unh.edu/ccrc/pdf/CV231_Sexting%20Typology%20Bulletin_4-6-11_revised.pdf. Accessed 9 May 2015.