The absence of a widely accepted definition of cyberstalking has resulted in studies operationalizing it in various ways, reducing the comparability and generalizability of findings. The present work examined the most common behaviors and criteria used to operationalize cyberstalking within the quantitative literature. The definitions employed by the studies were evaluated in respect of (a) whether they included a minimum requirement for the number of times the behaviors needed to be repeated in order to be considered “cyberstalking”; (b) whether victim fear was required for the behaviors to be considered “cyberstalking”; (c) the timeframe within which the cyberstalking behavior needed to have occurred; and (d) the behaviors identified as indicating cyberstalking. The results demonstrated considerable variation in the specificity of criteria used. Of the 33 studies examined, 45% specifically defined a minimum number of behavioral repetitions required to classify the behaviors as “cyberstalking,” although there were some discrepancies in the number of behaviors specified across studies. Only 30% of studies included victim fear as a criterion and 70% of studies did not include specific timeframe requirements in which the behaviors needed to have occurred within. The number and description of behaviors included within scales used to measure “cyberstalking” varied widely. Some instruments utilized as many as 24 different items, whilst others identified cyberstalking through the use of two items. A series of recommendations are advanced aimed at providing criteria for defining and operationalizing cyberstalking that can be employed by future studies, with the ultimate aim of allowing greater comparability between results. From this a consistent knowledge base can be developed, and with it a deeper understanding of cyberstalking and how to counter it.

In recent years the body of literature on cyberstalking has expanded rapidly. The present work aimed to summarize the current state of the literature on cyberstalking perpetration and victimization in a scoping review. Forty-one quantitative and qualitative studies that examined variables relating to cyberstalking victimization and perpetration were collated. Following the methodology of Arksey and O’Malley (2005), an in-depth thematic analysis of the articles was undertaken. Prevalence of victimization and perpetration rates were compared and key themes synthesized. Despite examining similar young adult populations, the prevalence of victimization was found to range considerably from 0.7% (Reyns & Engelbrecht, 2010) to 85.2% (Strawhun et al., 2013) across studies. Themes were divided into two overarching classifications, factors relating to victimization and factors relating to perpetration. Deviant peer association, low self-control, previous harassment experiences and personality traits were some of the factors most frequently examined in relation to perpetration; whilst online exposure, online disclosure and guardianship were some of the factors most frequently examined in relation to victimization. Within these themes, deviant peer association and low self-control were found to consistently correlate with an increase in both cyberstalking victimization and perpetration. Guardianship and confidence online demonstrated inconsistent results. This review has summarized what is currently known and has been validated within cyberstalking research pertaining to victimization and perpetration, and has identified gaps and potential areas of future development.

This position paper sets out the need and rationale for systemic change in STEM learning and teaching as a means of retaining and supporting the success of underrepresented cohorts in STEM. Efforts in recruiting and retaining these students in STEM higher education degrees and subsequently, STEM careers, will continue to be undermined, if we are unable to provide them with a supportive learning environment that recognises and mitigates the inherent disparities that they have historically faced and continue to face. We propose that rather than focusing on an individual equity group and how to best support them, which may lead to perpetuation of a deficit mindset for faculty, we instead propose a project that considers the biases inherent in our current pedagogical practices and the ways in which we can build awareness of the inequities that these entrench. We intend for the outcomes of this project to support the ongoing efforts for individual equity groups as well as mitigating against future inequities by empowering faculty to create inclusive learning experiences.