Advertisement

On Technology Against Cyberbullying

  • Janneke M. van der ZwaanEmail author
  • Virginia Dignum
  • Catholijn M. Jonker
  • Simone van der Hof
Chapter
Part of the Information Technology and Law Series book series (ITLS, volume 24)

Abstract

Technology is one of the modalities to regulate antisocial online behavior such as cyberbullying. It is unknown what characteristics of effective technology against cyberbullying are and to what extent existing Internet safety technologies can be expected to protect against cyberbullying. Both these issues are addressed in this chapter. First, we propose a framework that consists of desired characteristics for technology against cyberbullying. The framework is derived from important topics that emerge from the literature on Internet safety technology and cyberbullying. Second, the framework is used to discuss the expected effectiveness of existing Internet safety technologies. The results indicate that existing Internet safety technologies are not effective against cyberbullying, mainly because they have been designed for other online risks than cyberbullying. Existing Internet safety technologies primarily target access to undesirable content. Their success in protecting against cyberbullying, which is mostly communication-based, is therefore limited.

Keywords

Online Activity Online Behavior Traditional Bully Persuasive Technology Sexual Solicitation 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Notes

Acknowledgments

This work is funded by NWO under the Responsible Innovation (RI) program via the project ‘Empowering and Protecting Children and Adolescents Against Cyberbullying’.

References

  1. Chawla NV, Japkowicz N, Kotcz A (2004) Editorial: special issue on learning from imbalanced data sets. SIGKDD Explor Newsl 6(1):1–6CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Dehue F, Bolman C, Völlink T (2008) Cyberbullying: youngsters’ experiences and parental perception. Cyberpsychol Behav 11(2):217–223CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Eurobarometer (2007) Safer internet for children, qualitative study in 29 European countries, national analysis, The Netherlands. http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/activities/sip/surveys/qualitative/index_en.htm
  4. Finkelhor D, Mitchell KJ, Wolak J (2000) Online victimization: a report on the nation’s youth. www.unh.edu/ccrc/pdf/Victimization_Online_Survey.pdf
  5. Fogg B J (2002) Persuasive technology: using computers to change what we think and do, chapter computers as persuasive social actors. ACM, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  6. Hinduja S, Patchin JW (2009) Bullying beyond the schoolyard: preventing and responding to cyberbullying. Corwin Press, Thousand OaksGoogle Scholar
  7. Hunter CD (2000) Internet filter effectiveness (student paper panel): testing over and underinclusive blocking decisions of four popular filters. In: CFP’00: Proceedings of the tenth conference on computers, freedom and privacy, pp 287–294, ACMGoogle Scholar
  8. Internet Safety Technical Task Force (2008) Enhancing child safety and online technologies: final report of the internet safety technical task force to the multi-state working group on social networking of state attorneys general of the United States. Technical report. http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/pubrelease/isttf/
  9. Kontostathis A, Edwards L, Leatherman A (2009) Chatcoder: toward the tracking and categorization of Internet predators. In: Proceedings of the 7th text mining workshopGoogle Scholar
  10. Kowalski RM, Limber SP (2007) Electronic bullying among middle school students. J Adolesc Health 41(6, Supplement 1):22–30Google Scholar
  11. Kowalski RM, Limber SP, Agatston PW (2008) Cyber bullying: bullying in the digital age. Wiley Blackwell, MaldenGoogle Scholar
  12. Lessig L (2000) Code and other laws of cyberspace. Basic Books, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  13. Lessig L (2006) Code: and other laws of cyberspace, version 2.0. Basic Books, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  14. Lewis DD, Yang Y, Rose TG, Li F (2004) RCV1: a new benchmark collection for text categorization research. J Mach Learn Res 5:361–397Google Scholar
  15. Li Q (2007) New bottle but old wine: a research of cyberbullying in schools. Comput Hum Behav 23(4):1777–1791CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Livingstone S, Haddon L, Görzig A, Ólafsson K (2010) Risks and safety on the internet: the perspective of European children. Initial findings. http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/33731/
  17. Mesch GS (2009) Parental mediation, online activities, and cyberbullying. Cyberpsychol Behav 12(4):387–393CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Mishna F, Saini M, Solomon S (2009) Ongoing and online: children and youth’s perceptions of cyber bullying. Child Youth Serv Rev 31(12):1222–1228CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Mishna F, Cook C, Saini M, Wu MJ, MacFadden R (2010) Interventions to prevent and reduce cyber abuse of youth: a systematic review. Res Soc Work Pract 21(1):5–14CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Olweus D (1999) The nature of school bullying: a cross-national perspective, chapter Sweden. Routledge, London, pp 7–27Google Scholar
  21. Paiva A, Dias J, Sobral D, Aylett R, Woods S, Hall L, Zoll C (2005) Learning by feeling: evoking empathy with synthetic characters. Appl Artif Intell Int J 19(3):235–266CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Patchin JW, Hinduja S (2006) Bullies move beyond the schoolyard: a preliminary look at cyberbullying. Youth Violence Juv Justice 4(2):148–169CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Pendar N (2007) Toward spotting the pedophile telling victim from predator in text chats. In: ICSC’07: Proceedings of the international conference on semantic computing. IEEE Computer Society, pp 235–241Google Scholar
  24. Sapouna M, Wolke D, Vannini N, Watson S, Woods S, Schneider W, Enz S, Hall L, Paiva A, Andre E, Dautenhahn K, Aylett R (2010) Virtual learning intervention to reduce bullying victimization in primary school: a controlled trial. J Child Psychol Psychiatry 51(1):104–112CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Shariff S (2008) Cyber-bullying: issues and solutions for the school, the classroom and the home. Routledge, LondonGoogle Scholar
  26. Smith PK, Mahdavi J, Carvalho M, Fisher S, Russell S, Tippett N (2008) Cyberbullying: its nature and impact in secondary school pupils. J Child Psychol Psychiatry 49(4):376–385CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Szwajcer E, Ebbers W, Oostdijk M, Wartena C, Hulsebosch B (2009) Kinderen en nieuwe media—technische and socio-technische oplossingsmogelijkheden voor gevaren in de online wereld. www.novay.nl/medialibrary/documenten/originelen/Eindrapportage_kinderen_en_nieuwe_media.pdf
  28. The Gallup Organisation (2008) Towards a safer use of the Internet for children in the EU—a parents’ perspective. http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/flash/fl_248_en.pdf
  29. Thierer AD (2009) Five online safety task forces agree: education, empowerment & self-regulation are the answer. Progress & freedom foundation progress on point paper, vol 16, issue no. 13Google Scholar
  30. Tokunaga RS (2010) Following you home from school: a critical review and synthesis of research on cyberbullying victimization. Comput Hum Behav 26(3):277–287CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Van den Hoven J, Koops B-J, Romijn H, Swierstra T, Doorn N (2013, forthcoming) Responsible innovation volume 1: innovative solutions for global issues. Springer, DordrechtGoogle Scholar
  32. Van der Zwaan JM, Dignum V, Jonker CM (2010) Simulating peer support for victims of cyberbullying. In: Proceedings of the 22st Benelux conference on artificial intelligence (BNAIC 2010)Google Scholar
  33. Van der Zwaan JM, Geraerts E, Dignum V, Jonker CM (2012) User validation of an empathic virtual buddy against cyberbullying. Stud Health Technol Inform 181:243–247Google Scholar
  34. Vandebosch H, Cleemput KV (2008) Defining cyberbullying: a qualitative research into the perceptions of youngsters. Cyberpsychol Behav 11(4):499–503CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Wolak J, Mitchell KJ, Finkelhor D (2006) Online victimization of youth: five years later. www.unh.edu/ccrc/pdf/CV138.pdf
  36. Ybarra ML, Mitchell KJ (2004) Youth engaging in online harassment: associations with caregiver-child relationships, Internet use, and personal characteristics. J Adolesc 27(3):319–336CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Ybarra ML, Mitchell KJ, Wolak J, Finkelhor D (2006) Examining characteristics and associated distress related to internet harassment: findings from the second youth internet safety survey. Pediatrics 118(4):1169–1177CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Ybarra ML, Diener-West M, Leaf PJ (2007) Examining the overlap in internet harassment and school bullying: implications for school intervention. J Adolesc Health 41(6, Supplement 1):42–50Google Scholar
  39. Yin D, Xue Z, Hong L, Davison BD, Kontostathis A, Edwards L (2009) Detection of harassment on web 2.0. In: CAW 2.0’09: Proceedings of the 1st content analysis in web 2.0 workshopGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© © T.M.C. Asser Press, The Hague, The Netherlands, and the author(s) 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Janneke M. van der Zwaan
    • 1
    Email author
  • Virginia Dignum
    • 1
  • Catholijn M. Jonker
    • 1
  • Simone van der Hof
    • 2
  1. 1.Delft University of TechnologyDelftThe Netherlands
  2. 2.Center for Law in the Information SocietyLeiden UniversityLeidenThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations