With the rapid progress of technology and the Internet, the popularity of social media among youth as a preferred form of communication has grown exponentially. In addition to many of the challenges youth face in real life, much of their identity and development now occurs in online spaces as well. Traditional bullying has evolved into cyberbullying, which has been labeled a public health issue. Though both forms of bullying share similar characteristics, risk factors, and potential consequences, research on cyberbullying has revealed the need for new and novel interventions aimed at mitigating its negative impact on youth mental health.
Key points
- •
Cyberbullying has been identified as a public health issue among children and adolescents.
- •
Definitions of cyberbullying vary depending on the study but all include the use of technology to carry out an intentional act of aggression and/or harm to another.
- •
Risk factors for cyberbullying victims and perpetrators include gender, age, socioeconomic status, and excessive or problematic social media use.
- •
Cyberbullying has a significant negative impact on both victims and perpetrators, resulting in deterioration in physical and mental health.
- •
Prevention programs, particularly in a school setting, show promise as potential interventions to reduce cyberbullying and mitigate negative consequences.
Introduction
As digital technology advances allow for easier access to the Internet, youth are spending more and more time online. This was amplified by the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, during which social distancing and virtual classes increased screen time for all children and adolescents. In many cases, youth are engaging with popular social media (SM) platforms such as Instagram, Snapchat, TikTok, YouTube, and Facebook to communicate and connect with peers. According to Pew Research Center, about 24% of teens in their 2014 to 2015 survey reported “almost constant” Internet use. By 2023, 46% of teens had reported the same amount of time spent.
Minoritized teens spend more time than their White counterparts, as do those with lower socioeconomic status (SES). Girls spend more time on SM, while boys are more likely to use streaming platforms. With youth having access to the Internet through various forms of technology—smartphones, tablets, desktop and laptop computers, and gaming consoles—excessive screen use and problematic behaviors have since been identified. One such area of concern is cyberbullying.
While traditional bullying is well recognized as having a harmful impact on youth mental health, cyberbullying has grown into a major issue. One of the first documented cases occurred in 1998 in Pennsylvania, where the state Supreme Court ruled to uphold the school expulsion of the 14 year old perpetrator. Over the years, more cases have been brought to public attention, particularly those involving deaths by suicide that occurred after experiencing cyberbullying.
Though now a widely recognized phenomenon, research into the topic is still relatively new. Most of the studies on cyberbullying have occurred from 2007 to 2020, with inconsistent, sometimes contradictory, results. Nonetheless, all of them agree that the negative impact cyberbullying has on the victims is significant and persistent, with deteriorations in both mental and physical health. As such, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has deemed it a serious public health threat and provided warnings and safeguards to the public at large.
Definitions
One of the major factors contributing to the lack of consistent information on cyberbullying is its definition. The CDC refers to cyberbullying as “electronic aggression,” defining it as “any type of harassment or bullying that occurs through e-mail, a chat room, instant messaging, a Web site (including blogs), or text messaging.”
Other terms utilized by scholars include “cyberstalking,” “online aggression,” “cyber harassment,” “Internet harassment,” “Internet bullying,” and “cyber victimization.”
Each identifies a specific aspect of cyberbullying, including
- •
The use of technology
- •
The intention to harm
- •
The hostile nature of the act
- •
Repetition over time
However, repetition can be indirect or unintentional, such as when a single act shared by a larger group achieves viral status due to its content or identified victim. Alternately, given the lack of understanding many youths have regarding the permanence of online information, past acts may re-emerge at a later point, resulting in renewed harm.
As such, Tokunaga suggested a more encompassing definition, describing cyberbullying as “any behavior performed through electronic or digital media by individuals or groups that repeatedly communicates hostile or aggressive messages intended to inflict harm or discomfort on others.” ,
Other research has raised the concept of power imbalance, suggesting that a disparity between victim and perpetrator is a crucial component of cyberbullying. When combined with cultural factors, the definition of cyberbullying becomes more complex, as differences appear in what is considered aggressive behavior, and the terms used to describe it, vary among countries and cultures.
Prevalence
Prevalence rates for cyberbullying, like its definition, have been difficult to ascertain. Rates of victimization vary by country, gender, and age group. For studies that considered victimization, perpetration, or both, it was found that between 4% and 72% of children and adolescents were affected. Much of the variation is attributed to the lack of a consistent definition, the difference in methodologies, and the heterogeneity of the study samples. Another potential reason for the variation is the willingness of victims and perpetrators to report cyberbullying. The former might avoid doing so over fear of their parents removing their technology, retaliation by the perpetrator, or embarrassment over being victimized. Perpetrators are likely to underreport to avoid consequences or prevent themselves from being seen in a negative light. In addition, cyberbullying acts are easier to hide and trace, resulting in underestimation of true prevalence. However, the majority of studies conducted estimates the rates of cyberbullying victimization to be around 20% to 40%. , ,
A recent study by Nagata and colleagues looked at the social epidemiology of cyberbullying in early adolescence. Their study of 9429 ethnically diverse 11 to 12 year olds found a lifetime prevalence of cyberbullying victimization of 9.6%, with 65.8% occurring in the past 12 months. Lifetime prevalence of perpetration was 1.1%, with 59.8% occurring in the past 12 months. Their conclusion was that 1 in 10 early adolescents had already experienced cyberbullying victimization in their lifetime.
When evaluating cyberbullying around the world, prevalence rates also vary widely. Studies conducted in European countries on 14 to 17 year old adolescents, specifically Romania, Greece, Germany, and Poland, revealed rates between 21.5% and 37.3%. In Spain, a study of 9 to 18 year olds reported 25.1% as victims, while 3.9% were reported as perpetrators. A study in South Korea of 4000 students’ grades 7 to 12 found 14.6% were victims and 6.3% were perpetrators. In contrast, a study of 102 Indonesian 12 to 13 year old students found 80% reported being victimized sometime in their life.
Types of cyberbullying
While its exact definition is still up for debate, cyberbullying can be separated into several distinctive types that distinguish it from traditional physical bullying.
- 1.
Flaming—angry or vulgar messages
- 2.
Harassment—consistent stream of offensive messages
- 3.
Denigration—damaging messages about the victim are sent to those known to them
- 4.
Masquerading—stealing victim’s identity to create harmful or damaging messages
- 5.
Trickery—deceiving the victim for personal or financial information
- 6.
Exclusion—ostracization from a social group
- 7.
Stalking—obtaining personal information from SM profiles (such as location or associates) or hacking
- 8.
Blackmailing—using anonymous emails, phone calls, and private messages to solicit money or actions from the victim
Additionally, studies by Palasinski and others include a ninth type, “happy slapping,” in which traditional bullying meets cyberbullying through a victim being subjected to various forms of violence as humiliation and recorded on video for posting online.
Some scholars argue certain forms of harassment should be viewed in a distinctive and separate light. Copp and colleagues note that some definitions of cyberbullying include behaviors that constitute sexual harassment, such as sending unwanted sexual content or asking someone to do something sexual. However, as sexual harassment is recognized as a form of gender-based violence, they suggest online sexual harassment should be independently studied for prevalence, risk factors, and potential consequences and viewed somewhat separately from other forms of cyberbullying.
In many cases, what may start out as one form of cyberbullying will evolve to include the others. An example can be a perpetrator initially stalking their victim’s SM profiles looking for damaging information, and then utilizing it to blackmail, flame, and denigrate them.
Causes and contributing factors
While many theories have been put forth regarding potential causal factors of cyberbullying, problematic SM use is one of the most strongly and consistently associated for both victimization and perpetration. A study by Craig and colleagues utilized contemporary social theories to provide frameworks to link problematic SM use to cyberbullying, including
- 1.
Frequent and intense SM use exposes adolescents to aggressive behavior, including cyberbullying
- 2.
Repeated exposure to online aggression can normalize and make the behavior seem more acceptable through role modeling and reinforcement
- 3.
Witnessing social rewards of aggression or cyberbullying (increased status) reinforces behavior and conforming to group norms
- 4.
Lack of face-to-face cues hides negative consequences, encouraging repetition of acts
A study by Ho and colleagues suggests that the leading factors for perpetration are the presence of normative thinking, involvement in aggressive peer groups, and peer pressure. In addition, youth with low self-control and difficulty with moral identity are more vulnerable to being influenced. As their peer group normalizes aggressive behavior, including cyberbullying, the youth will then view the behavior as acceptable even if it contradicts known values.
Additionally, there are several other factors that have been posited as contributing to cyberbullying. The first is anonymity. Digital technology and SM platforms allow for perpetrators to hide their identity through fake profiles or throwaway accounts. They can also, as previously mentioned, masquerade as someone else (ie, the victim) by hacking into their account or creating a new one. Many times, youth perpetrators believe deactivating or simply deleting their posts or messages will prevent them from being discovered or held responsible. The lack of immediate, visible reaction from their victim also enforces the perpetrator’s disinhibition.
While more research needs to be completed on the effect of poor interpersonal relationships in cyberbullying, one study associated lack of parental involvement and communication as contributing to increased occurrences. For victims, the lack of support makes them more vulnerable to attack, as they may suffer from loneliness, anxiety, or depression, and do not have the coping mechanisms to handle personal attacks. For perpetrators, the lack of monitoring generates more opportunities to offend, and cyberbullying may serve as an outlet for unresolved anger and aggression toward the parents or others.
A review conducted by Santre also points at social dominance theory as a potential contributor. The theory proposes people belong either to a subordinate group or to a dominant group. Two types of behavior will determine one’s peer group rank: those that increase social prominence and those that increase social dominance (control and power). Much the same as traditional bullying, cyberbullying can be used to obtain or sustain a higher rank in the social group. This is often seen with more popular or rebellious youth. The former may utilize it to exercise control over their friend group and eliminate competition, and the latter to incite fear in those they feel judge them and generate an “infamous” persona.
Meanwhile, causal factors for victimization include individual behavior, sense of self, and the environment. Many youths who prefer digital communication may also be from more vulnerable backgrounds, including those with psychosocial issues. Being online excessively may positively affect their mood, but the lack of social resources and skills to defend themselves puts them at risk of being victimized. Studies looking into the social behaviors of those reporting cyberbullying found an associated tendency to post indiscreet information and content on SM without security. This allows their content to be shared or manipulated without permission, and their profiles or accounts hacked or used for negative gain.
Facial features have also been found to contribute to a higher risk of being cyberbullied. A study by Rudert and colleagues found many ostracized victims were those whose faces were viewed as cold (unfriendly) or incompetent. Though youth who are not conventionally attractive are likely to become targets, those who are considered pretty or handsome may also be victimized by a jealous perpetrator.
Characteristics of cyberbullying victims and perpetrators
Though any individual has the potential to become victimized or to perpetrate cyberbullying, some trends have been noted by researchers. In a study conducted by Ybarra and Mitchell using a telephone survey of 1500 individuals aged 10 to 17 years in the United States found that perpetrators often suffered from a wide range of psychosocial issues as well, including mental, social, and behavioral problems. They were noted to be more likely to act aggressively in nature, to engage in rule breaking, complain about parental relationships, and to have themselves experienced victimization both online and offline.
The association between age and cyberbullying is up for debate. In a systematic review conducted by Aboujaoude and colleagues, most studies did not find a significant association, though a few suggested that as the age increased, so did the rate of victimization. The possibility was raised that the rate is nonlinear; in fact, several studies suggest the rate of victimization might be low in childhood, rise in early adolescence, and then fall again when they mature into adulthood. This theory is supported by a study on traditional bullying across late childhood and early adolescence, where the rates declined overall across the transition from primary school to secondary school.
In the study by Nagata, boys reported higher odds of perpetration and lower odds of victimization compared to girls. This gender separation has been confirmed through multiple other studies, revealing that girls are victimized more frequently than boys. Another study suggested adolescent female individuals are victimized at the highest rates, with 18% at the age of 13 years, 15% at the age of 14 years, 24% at the age of 15 years, and 21% at the age of 16 years. This continued in college, where 44% of female students have reported experiencing some degree of cybervictimization. Meanwhile, Craig and colleagues found that girls had higher rates of both perpetration and victimization as it related to their problematic SM use. A higher amount of time spent online, exposure to aggression, and frequent contact with strangers were identified as likely reasons for this finding.
As previously noted, Pew Research Center found that youth in lower SES households spent more time online than their higher SES counterparts. This is supported by a 31 country study by Soares and colleagues, which reported the same increased screen time, leading to greater exposure to cyberbullying and eventual risk of both victimization and perpetration. In the Nagata study, their findings additionally revealed youth from lower household incomes had 1.62 higher odds of cyberbullying than those from higher income households. While none of the studies focused on possible explanations for this disparity, factors could include reduced parental supervision, safety concerns outside the home, and communication problems related to culture or stigma.
Interestingly, the evidence surrounding ethnic minorities and risk of cyberbullying has been mixed. Some studies have pointed at a higher rate of cyberbullying in majority (White) youth, while others have found the opposite. Barlett and Wright found a significant relationship between cyberbullying victimization and perpetration in majority youth only, but not for minoritized youth. However, Kowalski and colleagues reported similar cyberbullying victimization and perpetration behaviors between Black and White respondents in their study. In a 2022 study looking at anti-Asian hate and discrimination against Asian Americans, the prevalence of cyberbullying rose during the COVID-19 pandemic, but mental health outcomes did not differ when compared to their Latinx and White counterparts. Further research is necessary to further examine the impact of ethnic minority status on cyberbullying.
With regards to sexual minority youth, however, the research is clearer. A review of the literature by Abreu and Kenny on LGBTQIA+ youth in 5 countries found that sexual minority and gender expansive youth reported more exposure to anonymous forms of cyberbullying than their heterosexual counterparts. In addition, it is consistently ranked the highest form of prejudice, affecting 28% to 48.95% of sexual minority youth. Other results from their review included
- •
Students who identified as a sexual minority reported more cyberbullying (9.7%) than traditional bullying (8.2%)
- •
Sexual minority youth were harassed for both their biological sex and their gender identity or expression
- •
Cisgender nonheterosexual female individuals, transgender, and youth with “other” genders reported more cyberbullying than cisgender gay and bisexual male individuals
- •
Bisexual youth may be more susceptible to cyberbullying than other sexual minorities
- •
Bisexual female students experienced more cyberbullying than lesbian counterparts
- •
Gay male individuals were more likely to be bullied than bisexual male individuals
Additional studies noted the findings regarding bisexual students may demonstrate a gender difference when it comes to cyberbullying. As with cisgender study findings, race and ethnicity did not seem to significantly impact the rates in this population.
Though limited, some studies have focused on the prevalence and correlates of cyberbullying victimization and perpetration in adolescents and youth adults with disabilities. Kowalski and Toth found that regardless of disability status, the participants reported victimization, with the highest rates among individuals with disabilities, while there was no significant difference for perpetration. In a retrospective study by Nicolai and colleagues, young adults who stuttered and were cyberbullied as adolescents exhibited greater levels of depression and other long-term consequences compared to those who were not victimized.
Impact of cyberbullying on health and well-being
Regardless of definition or population, all studies found exposure to cyberbullying has significant negative impact on physical and mental well-being. As previously mentioned, perpetrators are often found to have low psychological well-being, struggle with parental relationships, and exhibit increased externalizing behaviors. These negative feelings have been reported as providing moral “justification” for attacking others. One study found comorbidities such as conduct problems, hyperactivity, alcohol use, and tobacco use in cyberbullies. A subset of perpetrators, termed “bully-victims,” cyberbully others to deal with their negative emotions or in retaliation to those who harmed them. They have been found to be more troubled than perpetrators or victims, with more interpersonal and conduct problems and higher suicide risk. ,
Multiple studies have shown victims experience significant adverse outcomes from cyberbullying. They may exhibit headaches, disordered eating, weight changes, gastrointestinal distress, and sleep disturbance. This is directly related to the low self-esteem and self-image, avoidant or fearful behavior, depression, and social anxiety they develop from cyberbullying. This in turn leads to low academic performance, substance use, suicidal ideation, and most concerning, suicide attempts. ,
One meta-analysis noted that peer victimization resulted in 2.23 higher odds for suicidal ideation and 2.55 higher odds for suicide attempts. The same analysis revealed that cyberbullying was more strongly linked than traditional bullying to suicidal ideation. These rates are even higher when considering minoritized youth. Duong and Bradshaw found that the risk of attempted suicide was 4.72 times greater for sexual minority youth who had experienced cyberbullying, and those who had been victimized through traditional bullying as well had 8.30 times greater risk. Of additional concern, the review by Santre found suggested linkage of victimization with increased school aggression and higher risk of bringing a weapon to school.

Stay updated, free articles. Join our Telegram channel

Full access? Get Clinical Tree

