Although the Internet has transformed the way our world operates, it has also served as a venue for cyberbullying, a serious form of misbehavior among youth. With many of today's youth experiencing acts of cyberbullying, a growing body of literature has begun to document the prevalence, predictors, and outcomes of this behavior, but the literature is highly fragmented and lacks theoretical focus. Therefore, our purpose in the present article is to provide a critical review of the existing cyberbullying research. The general aggression model is proposed as a useful theoretical framework from which to understand this phenomenon. Additionally, results from a meta-analytic review are presented to highlight the size of the relationships between cyberbullying and traditional bullying, as well as relationships between cyberbullying and other meaningful behavioral and psychological variables. Mixed effects meta-analysis results indicate that among the strongest associations with cyberbullying perpetration were normative beliefs about aggression and moral disengagement, and the strongest associations with cyberbullying victimization were stress and suicidal ideation. Several methodological and sample characteristics served as moderators of these relationships. Limitations of the meta-analysis include issues dealing with causality or directionality of these associations as well as generalizability for those meta-analytic estimates that are based on smaller sets of studies (k < 5). Finally, the present results uncover important areas for future research. We provide a relevant agenda, including the need for understanding the incremental impact of cyberbullying (over and above traditional bullying) on key behavioral and psychological outcomes.

Existing research on workplace incivility has demonstrated an association with a host of negative outcomes, including increased burnout, turnover intentions, and physical symptoms. With the rise in Internet communication over the last decade, interpersonal mistreatment has spilled over to the Internet, but little is known about the impact of incivility communicated via e-mail on employee psychological and performance outcomes. The current study presents a within-subjects experiment wherein incivility and support were manipulated in a laboratory-based simulated workplace setting. Eighty-four participants completed a series of math tasks while interacting with either an uncivil or a supportive supervisor via e-mail. Data were collected on energy, cardiac activity, mood, task performance, and engagement. Findings indicate that participants reported higher levels of negative affect and lower levels of energy after working with the uncivil supervisor than with the supportive supervisor. Additionally, participants performed significantly worse on the math tasks and had lower engagement in the uncivil condition than the supportive condition, and these relationships were mediated by energy. No differences were found in cardiac activity between the two conditions. Results are discussed in terms of their implications for the 21st century world of work.

The current study was designed to extend the interpersonal deviance literature into the online domain by examining the incidence and impact of supervisor cyber incivility and neuroticism on employee outcomes at work. Conservation of Resources (COR) theory was used as the guiding framework because cyber incivility is thought to deplete energetic resources in much the same way that other stressors do, ultimately leading to negative outcomes like burnout. Results indicate that supervisor cyber incivility is positively related to burnout, absenteeism, and turnover intentions. Support was also found for the role of neuroticism as a moderator of the relationship between supervisor cyber incivility and outcomes. In general, the relations between cyber incivility and outcomes were stronger for those individuals reporting higher levels of neuroticism. Results are discussed in terms of COR theory, and possible mechanisms for the role of neuroticism in the stressor-strain relationship are discussed. The current study highlights the importance of understanding workplace online behavior and its impact on employee health and organizational well-being. Future research directions examining online interpersonal deviance are suggested.

No abstract

Heteroscedasticity refers to a phenomenon where data violate a statistical assumption. This assumption is known as homoscedasticity. When the homoscedasticity assumption is violated, this can lead to increased Type I error rates or decreased statistical power. Because this can adversely affect substantive conclusions, the failure to detect and manage heteroscedasticity could have serious implications for theory, research, and practice. In addition, heteroscedasticity is not uncommon in the behavioral and social sciences. Thus, in the current article, we synthesize extant literature in applied psychology, econometrics, quantitative psychology, and statistics, and we offer recommendations for researchers and practitioners regarding available procedures for detecting heteroscedasticity and mitigating its effects. In addition to discussing the strengths and weaknesses of various procedures and comparing them in terms of existing simulation results, we describe a 3-step data-analytic process for detecting and managing heteroscedasticity: (a) fitting a model based on theory and saving residuals, (b) the analysis of residuals, and (c) statistical inferences (e.g., hypothesis tests and confidence intervals) involving parameter estimates. We also demonstrate this data-analytic process using an illustrative example. Overall, detecting violations of the homoscedasticity assumption and mitigating its biasing effects can strengthen the validity of inferences from behavioral and social science data.