Bullying and Cyberbullying in Adolescents: A Meta-analysis on the Effectiveness of Interventions



Bullying and cyberbullying are important risk factors for the mental health of adolescents. Bullying is defined as an intentional aggression, repeated on time, and characterized by a difference of powers between the victim and the aggressor. Cyberbullying is an aggression with the same characteristics of the bullying but carried out on the cyberspace. Despite the relevance of this problem, there is no meta-analysis that determines the effectiveness of interventions directed to reduce both problems. In this way, the objective of this book chapter is to present meta-analysis that addresses the effectiveness of interventions directed to reduce bullying, victimization, cyberbullying, and cybervictimization in adolescents. A systematic review of scientific papers published in Spanish, English, and Portuguese was conducted between 2000 and 2018. The databases included were as follows: SciELO, PubMed, JSTOR, Dialnet, EBSCO, Latindex, and PsycINFO. After the research, 16 articles were included in the traditional bullying meta-analysis, 14 articles were included in the traditional victimization meta-analysis, 11 articles were included in the cyberbullying meta-analysis, and finally 8 articles were included in the cybervictimization meta-analysis. The size of the effect of bullying and cyberbullying interventions was analysed to establish which one is more effective. Comparing bullying and cyberbullying, the results of the present study indicated that bullying programmes were a bit more effective than cyberbullying programmes, while the effect size of the intervention programme on victimization and cybervictimization were similar. Explanations about why interventions on bullying are more successful and implications of these findings are provided and analysed in the conclusion. Finally, suggestions for future studies are discussed.


Bullying Cyberbullying Victimization Cybervictimization Interventions Adolescents 


  1. 1.
    Card NA, Hodges EV. Peer victimization among school children: correlations, causes, consequences, and considerations in assessment and intervention. School Psychol Q. 2008;23:451–61. Scholar
  2. 2.
    Swearer S, Hymel S. Understanding the psychology of bullying: moving toward a social-ecological diathesis stress model. Am Psychol. 2015;70:344–53.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Olweus D. Bullying at school: what we know and what we can do. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell; 1993.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Olweus D. Norway. In: Smith PK, Morita Y, Junger-Tas J, Olweus D, Catalano R, Slee P, editors. The nature of school bullying: a cross-national perspective. London: Routledge; 1999. p. 205–43.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Olweus D. School bullying: development and some important challenges. Ann Rev Clin Psychol. 2013;9:751–80. Scholar
  6. 6.
    Hymel S, Swearer S. Four decades of research on school bullying: an introduction. Am Psychol. 2015;70:293–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Smith PK. Bullying: definition, types, causes, consequences and intervention. Soc Pers Psychol Compass. 2016;10(/9):519–32. Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kowalski R, Limber S. Psychological, physical, and academic correlates of cyberbullying and traditional bullying. J Adolesc Health. 2013;53:13–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Olweus D. Invited expert discussion paper: cyberbullying: an overrated phenomenon? Eur J Develop Psychol. 2012;9:520–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Patchin J, Hinduja S. Measuring cyberbullying: implications for research. Aggress Violent Behav. 2015;23:69–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Mehari K, Farrell A, Le A. Cyberbullying among adolescents: measures in search of a construct. Psychol Violence. 2014;4:399–415.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Sontag L, Clemans K, Graber JA, Lyndon S. Traditional and cyber aggressors and victims: a comparison of psychosocial characteristics. J Youth Adolesc. 2011;40:392–404. Scholar
  13. 13.
    Beran T, Li Q. Cyber-harassment: a study of a new method for an old behavior. J Edu Comput Res. 2005;32:265–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Slonje R, Smith PK. Cyberbullying: a new type of bullying? Scand J Psychol. 2008;49:147–54. Scholar
  15. 15.
    Hinduja S, Patchin J. Cyberbullying: an exploratory analysis of factors related to offending and victimization. Deviant Behav. 2008;29:129–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Juvonen J, Gross EF. Extending the school grounds? — Bullying experiences in cyberspace. J School Health. 2008;78:496–505.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Raskauskas J, Stoltz AD. Involvement in traditional and electronic bullying among adolescents. Dev Psychol. 2007;43:564–75.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Williams K, Guerra N. Prevalence and predictors of Internet bullying. J Adolesc Health. 2007;41:14–21. Scholar
  19. 19.
    Olweus D, Limber S. Some problems with cyberbullying research. Curr Opin Psychol. 2018;19:139–43.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Waasdorp TE, Bradshaw CP. The overlap between cyberbullying and traditional bullying. J Adolesc Health. 2015;56:483–8. Scholar
  21. 21.
    Ortega-Ruiz R, Del Rey R, Casas J. Nuevos riesgo de la convivencia escolar: el cyberbullying. In Ortega Ruiz R, ed. Convivencia y Ciberconvivencia. Madrid: Antonio Machado Libros; 2015. p. 99–117.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Dehue F, Bolman C, Völlink T. Cyberbullying: youngsters' experiences and parental perception. Cyber Psychol Behav. 2008;11:217–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Kubiszewski V, Fontaine R, Potard C, Auzoult L. Does cyberbullying overlap with school bullying when taking modality of involvement into account? Comput Human Behav. 2015;43:49–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Resett S, Gamez-Guadix M. Traditional bullying and cyberbullying: differences in emotional problems, and personality. Are cyberbullies more Machiavellians? J Adolesc. 2017;61:113–6.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Agatson P, Kowalski R, Limber S. Students’ perspectives on cyber bullying. J Adoles Health. 2007;41:59–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Kowalski R, Giumetti G, Schroeder A, Lattanner M. Bullying in the digital age: a critical review and meta-analysis of cyberbullying research among youth. Psychol Bull. 2014;140:1073–37. Scholar
  27. 27.
    Tokunaga R. Following you home from school: a critical review and synthesis of research on cyberbullying victimization. Comput Human Behav. 2010;26:277–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Li Q. New bottle but old wine: a research of cyberbullying in schools. Comput Human Behav. 2007;23:1777–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Patchin J, Hinduja S. Bullies move beyond the school yard: a preliminary look at cyberbullying. Youth Violence Juv Justice. 2006;4:148–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Calvete E, Orue I, Estévez A, Villardón L, Padilla P. Cyberbullying in adolescents: modalities and aggressors’ profile. Comput Human Behav. 2010;26:1128–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Law DM, Shapka J, Domene J, Gagné M. Are cyberbullies really bullies? An investigation of reactive and proactive online aggression. Comput Human Behav. 2012;28:664–72. Scholar
  32. 32.
    Law DM, Shapka J, Hymel S, Olson B, Waterhouse T. The changing face of bullying: an empirical comparison between traditional and internet bullying and victimization. Comput Human Behav. 2011;28:226–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Werner N, Bumpus M, Rock D. Involvement in Internet aggression during early adolescence. J Youth Adolesc. 2010;39:607–19. Scholar
  34. 34.
    Roh B, Yoon Y, Kwon A, Oh S, Lee S, Ha K, et al. The structure of co-occurring bullying experiences and associations with suicidal behaviors in Korean adolescents. PLoS One. 2015;10:1–14.Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Solberg M, Olweus D. Prevalence estimation of school bullying with the Olweus Bully/Victim Questionnaire. Aggress Behav. 2003;29:239–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Nansel T, Craig W, Overpeck M, Saluja G, Ruan W. Cross-national consistency in the relationship between bullying behaviours and psychosocial adjustment. Pediatr Adolesc Med. 2004;158:730–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Nansel T, Overpeck M, Pilla R, Ruan W, Simons-Martin B, Scheidt P. Bullying behavior among U.S. youth: prevalence and association with psychosocial adjustment. J Am Med Assoc. 2001;285:2094–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Ttofi M, Farrington DP. Effectiveness of school-based programs to reduce bullying: a systematic and meta-analytic review. J Exp Criminol. 2011;7:27–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Kljakovic M, Hunt C. A meta-analysis of predictors of bullying and victimization in adolescence. J Adolesc. 2016;49:134–45. Scholar
  40. 40.
    Juvonen J, Graham S, Schuster MA. Bullying among young adolescents: the strong, the weak, and the troubled. Pediatrics. 2003;112:1231–7. Scholar
  41. 41.
    Volk A, Craig W, Boyce W, King M. Adolescent risk correlates of bullying and different types of victimization. Int J Adolesc Med Health. 2006;18:375–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Bonanno R, Hymel S. Cyber bullying and internalizing difficulties: above and beyond the impact of traditional forms of bullying. J Youth Adolesc. 2013;42:685–97.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Patchin J, Hinduja S. Cyberbullying and self-esteem. J Sch Health. 2010;80:614–21. Scholar
  44. 44.
    Schenk AM, Fremouw WJ, Keelan CM. Characteristics of college cyberbullies. Comput Human Behav. 2013;29:2320–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Wong D, Chan H, Cheng C. Cyberbullying perpetration and victimization among adolescents in Hong Kong. Child Youth Serv Rev. 2014;36:133–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Fletcher A, Fitzgerald-Yau N, Jones R, Allen E, Viner RM, Bonell C. Brief report: cyberbullying perpetration and its associations with socio-demographics, aggressive behaviour at school, and mental health outcomes. J Adolesc. 2014;37:1393–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Bauman S, Toomey RB, Walker JL. Associations among bullying, cyberbullying, and suicide in high school students. J Adolesc. 2013;36:341–50.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Hinduja S, Patchin J. Bullying, cyberbullying, and suicide. Archi Suicide Res. 2010;14:206–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Olweus D. The Olweus Bullying Prevention Program: design and implementation issues and a new national initiative in Norway. In: Smith PK, Pepler D, Rigby K, editors. Bullying in schools: how successful can interventions be? Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2004. p. 13–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Bauer N, Lozano P, Rivara F. The effectiveness of the olweus bullying prevention program in public middle schools: a controlled trial. J Adolesc Health. 2007;40:266–74.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Limber S, Nation M, Tracy A, Melton G, Flerx V. Implementation of the Olweus Bullying Prevention Program in the southeastern United States. In: Smith PK, Pepler D, Rigby K, editors. Bullying in schools: how successful can interventions be? Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2004. p. 55–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Gaffney H, Ttofi M, Farrington DP. Evaluating the effectiveness of school-bullying prevention programs: an updated meta-analytical review. Aggress Violent Behav. 2018;
  53. 53.
    Kärnä A, Voeten M, Little TD, Alanen E, Poskiparta E, Salmivalli C. Effectiveness of the KiVa antibullying program: grades 1–3 and 7–9. J Edu Psychol. 2013;105:535–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Karna A, Voeten M, Little TD, Poskiparta E, Kaljonen A, Salmivalli C. A large-scale evaluation of the KiVa antibullying program: grades 4–6. Child Develop. 2011;82:311–30. Scholar
  55. 55.
    Gaffney H, Farrington DP, Espelage D, Ttofi M. Are cyberbullying intervention and prevention programs effective? A systematic and meta-analytical review. Aggress Violent Behav 2018. Available at:
  56. 56.
    Pearce N, Cross D, Monks H, Waters S, Falconer S. Current evidence of best practice in whole-school bullying intervention and its potential to inform cyberbullying interventions. Aust J Guidance Couns. 2011;21:1–21. Scholar
  57. 57.
    Perren S, Corcoran L, Cowie H, Dehue F, Garcia D, McGuckin C, et al. Tackling cyberbullying: review of empirical evidence regarding successful responses by students, parents, and schools. Int J Confl Violence. 2012;6:283–92.Google Scholar
  58. 58.
    Slonje R, Smith PK, Frisén A. The nature of cyberbullying, and strategies for prevention. Comput Human Behav. 2013;29:26–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Van Cleemput K, Vandebosch H, Bastiaensens S, Poels K, DeSmet A, De Bourdeaudhuij IA. Systematic review of studies evaluating anticyberbullying programs. Conference presented at ‘Etmaal van de Communicatiewetenschap’, 2010, February, Wageningen (NL), Netherlands.Google Scholar
  60. 60.
    Cantone E, et al. Interventions on bullying and cyberbullying in schools: a systematic review. Clin Pract Epidemiol Ment Health. 2015;11:58–76. Scholar
  61. 61.
    Wolfer R, Schultze-Krumbholz A, Zagorscak P, Jakel A, Gobel K, Scheithauer H. Prevention 2.0: targeting cyberbullying@ school. Prev Sci. 2014;15:879–87.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Chaux E, Velásquez AM, Schultze-Krumbholz A, et al. Effects of the cyberbullying prevention program media heroes (Medienhelden) on traditional bullying. Aggress Behav. 2016;42:157–65.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Garaigordobil M, Martinez-Valderrey V. Effect of the cyberprogram 2.0 on the reduction of victimization and the improvement of social competence in adolescents. Revista De Psicodidactica. 2014;19:289–305. Scholar
  64. 64.
    Del Rey R, Casas JA, Ortega R. The ConRed program, an evidence-based practice. Comunicar. 2012;39:129–37. Scholar
  65. 65.
    Ortega-Ruiz R, Del Rey R, Casas J. Knowing, building and living together on internet and social networks: the ConRed cyberbullying prevention program. Int J Conflict Violence 2012; 6: 302–312.Google Scholar
  66. 66.
    Baldry A, Farrington DP. Effectiveness of programs to prevent school bullying. Vict Offenders. 2007;2:183–204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. 67.
    Mishna F, Cook C, Saini M, et al. Interventions for children, youth, and parents to prevent and reduce cyber abuse [Internet]. Oslo: Campbell Systematic Reviews; 2009.Google Scholar
  68. 68.
    Espelage D, Hong J. Cyberbullying prevention and intervention efforts: current knowledge and future directions. Can J Psychiatr. 2016;62:374–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. 69.
    Barlett C, Chamberlin K, Witkower Z. Predicting cyberbullying perpetration in emerging adults: a theoretical test of the Barlett Gentile Cyberbullying Model. Aggress Behav. 2017;43:147–54. Scholar
  70. 70.
    Arnett JJ. Adolescent and emerging adulthood. a cultural approach. New Jersey: Prentice Hall; 2010.Google Scholar
  71. 71.
    Steinberg L. Adolescence. New York: McGraw-Hill; 2008.Google Scholar
  72. 72.
    Sercombe B, Donnelly H. Bullying and agency: definition, intervention and ethics. J Youth Stud. 2013;16:491–502.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. 73.
    Farrington DP, Baldry A., Kyvsgaard B, Ttofi M. Effectiveness of programs to prevent school bullying. Nordic Campbell Center: Swedish National Council on Crime Prevention; 2008.Google Scholar
  74. 74.
    Farrington DP, Ttofi M. School-based programs to reduce bullying and victimization. Campbell Syst Rev. 2009;6:22–45.Google Scholar
  75. 75.
    Aboujaoude E, Savage MW, Starcevic V, Salame WO. Cyberbullying: review of an old problem gone viral. J Adolesc Health. 2015;57:10–8. Scholar
  76. 76.
    Salmivalli C, Kärnä A, Poskiparta E. Counteracting bullying in Finland: the KiVa program and its effect on different forms of being bullied. Int J Behav Develop. 2011;35:405–11. Scholar
  77. 77.
    Huedo-Medina TB, Sánchez-Meca J, Marín-Martínez F, Botella J. Assessing heterogeneity in meta-analysis: Q statistic or I2 index? Psychol Methods. 2006;11(2):193–206. Scholar
  78. 78.
    Cowie H, Bauman S, Coyne I, Myers C, Pörhölä M, Almeida A. Cyberbullying amongst university students: an emergent cause for concern? Cyberbullying: research on coping with negative and enhancing positive uses of new technologies. In: Smith PK, Steffgen G, editors. Cyberbullying through the new media: findings from an international network. New York and London: Psychology Press; 2013. p. 165–77.Google Scholar
  79. 79.
    Smith PK, Cowie H, Olafsson R, Liefooghe A. Definitions of bullying: a comparison of terms used, and age and sex differences, in a 14-country international comparison. Child Develop. 2002;73:1119–33.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  80. 80.
    Smith PK, Kanetsuna T, Koo H. Cross-national comparison of ‘bullying’ and related Terms: Western and Eastern perspectives. Contemporary research on aggression: School violence. World Meeting of the International Society for Research on Aggression, 2007;3. p. 3–9.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Instituto de Filosofía, Universidad Austral - Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas (CONICET) - Universidad Argentina de la Empresa (UADE)Buenos AiresArgentina
  2. 2.Centro Interdisciplinario de Investigaciones en Psicología Matemática y Experimental (CIIPME)- Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones, Científicas y Técnicas (CONICET), Instituo de Filosofía, Universidad AustralPilarArgentina

Personalised recommendations