2010
DOI: 10.1016/j.chb.2010.06.005
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

An analysis of multiple factors of cyberbullying among junior high school students in Taiwan

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

22
237
7
33

Year Published

2012
2012
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 363 publications
(299 citation statements)
references
References 26 publications
22
237
7
33
Order By: Relevance
“…Previous studies report inconsistent results regarding gender differences. This result is in line with authors who claim that girls are more likely to be victims of cyberbullying (Beckman et al, 2013;Connell et al, 2013;Garaigordobil & Aliri, 2013;Lee & Shin, 2017;Stewart et al, 2014), but it does not match those indicating that there are more male victims (Gá-mez-Guadix et al, 2014;Huang & Chou, 2010;Pelfrey & Weber, 2013;Popovic-Citic et al, 2011;Yang et al, 2014). This may be due to the fact that more women use the Internet for communication than men (Fundación Telefónica, 2016) or because girls tend to be more involved in cases of indirect bullying .…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 71%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Previous studies report inconsistent results regarding gender differences. This result is in line with authors who claim that girls are more likely to be victims of cyberbullying (Beckman et al, 2013;Connell et al, 2013;Garaigordobil & Aliri, 2013;Lee & Shin, 2017;Stewart et al, 2014), but it does not match those indicating that there are more male victims (Gá-mez-Guadix et al, 2014;Huang & Chou, 2010;Pelfrey & Weber, 2013;Popovic-Citic et al, 2011;Yang et al, 2014). This may be due to the fact that more women use the Internet for communication than men (Fundación Telefónica, 2016) or because girls tend to be more involved in cases of indirect bullying .…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 71%
“…For cyberbullying, in the various studies undertaken, the data obtained differs substantially in relation to gender (Connell, Schell-Busey, Pearce, & Negro, 2013). Thus, in some studies, women suffer more harassment than men (Beckman et al, 2013;Connell et al, 2013;Garaigordobil & Aliri, 2013;Lee & Shin, 2017;Stewart, Drescher, Maack, Ebesutani, & Young, 2014), while in others, the opposite is the case, with men being the most victimised (Gámez-Guadix, Villa-George, & Calvete, 2014;Huang & Chou, 2010;Pelfrey & Weber, 2013;Popovic-Citic, Djuric, & Cvetkovic, 2011;Yang, Lin, & Chen, 2014). There are other examples where no differences between the sexes have been found (Coelho, Sousa, Marchante, Bras, & Romao, 2016;Fletcher et al, 2014;Palermiti, Servidio, Bartolo, & Costabile, 2017).…”
Section: Gender Differencesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, studies in Asia tend to agree that boys are more involved in cyberbullying than girls. In a recent review on the moderating role of culture on risk factors of cyberbullying, most studies under review have found that male teenagers tend to cyberbully and be cyberbullied more than their female counterparts (e.g., Huang & Chou, 2010;Wong, Chan, & Cheng, 2014;Yang et al, 2013;Zhou, Tang, Tian, Wei, Zhang, & Morrison, 2013). Moreover, among the 26 studies reviewed, none found evidence that girls perpetrate more than boys in cyberbullying (Wong, in press).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…An early research focus in this area was on 'flaming' or the deliberate use of hostile textual communication (e.g., aggressive language, negative comments) and specific linguistic formats (e.g., mixed of fonts, capitalisation, colours) to express hostility 2,14 , Spears, Postmes, Lea and Wolbert 15 found that anonymity in online interactions led to more flaming incidents than F2F communication. Flaming and aggressive communications have been identified as common behaviours in a variety of online environments (e.g., YouTube, gaming sites) 16,17,18 . This is consistent with research suggesting that lack of F2F interaction and perceived anonymity in the online environment encourages young people to behave in ways that would not be acceptable offline (e.g., harassment, bullying) 19,20 .…”
Section: Anonymity and Disinhibitionmentioning
confidence: 99%