2016
DOI: 10.1080/02643944.2015.1134631
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Cyberbullying and moral disengagement: an analysis based on a social pedagogy of pastoral care in schools

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
20
0
2

Year Published

2016
2016
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
7
2

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 36 publications
(22 citation statements)
references
References 13 publications
0
20
0
2
Order By: Relevance
“…In an overview of research on the types of cyberbullies (also cyberbullying perpetrators or predators), Kyriacou and Zuin (2016) identified five main categories, taking into account the psychological attributes (both personal and social) that underpin their behavior: the sociable cyberbully (cyberbullying for fun in order to entertain his/her friends without serious consideration of the victim's feelings); the lonely cyberbully (a relatively isolated cyberbully with no friends, spends his/her time by abusing others with whom s/he has little or no personal contact); the narcissistic cyberbully (a cyberbully demonstrating power by administering harm to another person); the sadistic cyberbully (a cyberbully enjoying causing distress, harm and suffering to another person); and the morally-driven cyberbully (a cyberbully feeling the victim is receiving justice for his/her actions). Additionally, in a survey research, Korean, You and Lim (2016) used a sample of 3449 middle school students and demonstrated a set of variables associated with more cyberbullying perpetration, particularly longer use of the Internet, more previous bullying and victim experiences, a higher aggression level, and lack of self-control.…”
Section: The Profiles Of the Main Actorsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In an overview of research on the types of cyberbullies (also cyberbullying perpetrators or predators), Kyriacou and Zuin (2016) identified five main categories, taking into account the psychological attributes (both personal and social) that underpin their behavior: the sociable cyberbully (cyberbullying for fun in order to entertain his/her friends without serious consideration of the victim's feelings); the lonely cyberbully (a relatively isolated cyberbully with no friends, spends his/her time by abusing others with whom s/he has little or no personal contact); the narcissistic cyberbully (a cyberbully demonstrating power by administering harm to another person); the sadistic cyberbully (a cyberbully enjoying causing distress, harm and suffering to another person); and the morally-driven cyberbully (a cyberbully feeling the victim is receiving justice for his/her actions). Additionally, in a survey research, Korean, You and Lim (2016) used a sample of 3449 middle school students and demonstrated a set of variables associated with more cyberbullying perpetration, particularly longer use of the Internet, more previous bullying and victim experiences, a higher aggression level, and lack of self-control.…”
Section: The Profiles Of the Main Actorsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…As Kyriacou and Zuin (2016) argue, social pedagogy has a congruence with education as its goal, that is a social element in which individuals would co-exist peacefully and promote a communal well-being, as a form of citizenry and cultural formation (pp. 37-38).…”
Section: Conclusion -Dimensions Of Mindfulness In Pastoral Carementioning
confidence: 99%
“…Th eir use has brought, in addition to many benefi ts, also various risks or threats, especially to children and youth (Borowska, T., 2009, Huk, T., 2012, Juszczyk, S., 2012. At present, a serious problem is the so-called cyber-bullying, i.e., electronic bullying (Kyriacou, Ch., Zuin, A., 2016). It is abuse of mobile phones and internet to send aggressive, hateful and harming messages or intimidate persons, as the case may be.…”
Section: School Social Pedagogue In the Slovak Republicmentioning
confidence: 99%