From cyberbullying to electronic aggression: typology of the phenomenon

Factors Affecting Adolescents' Involvement in Cyberbullying: What Divides the 20% from the 80%?

“…First, the scope and number of factors examined in the study are limited, which might have resulted in a relatively low explanatory power (7.1%, Nagelkerke R 2 = 0.071) of the variance in cyberbullying involvement. Future studies should continue exploring personal and situational factors, such as the level of empathy, 45 self-esteem, 31,32 moral disengagement, 5 and relationships with family members 17,20,44 to deepen the understanding of adolescents who get involved in cyberbullying. Second, as this study is concerned with selected students from South Korea, the generalizability of the findings to adolescents in other cultures could also be limited.…”

“…In some studies, schoolrelated factors such as students' positive attitudes toward club activities in school had to do with lower participation in cyberbullying. 20 Also, students' positive recognition of school climate and peer support were related to low likelihood of physical, verbal, and Internet bullying. 9 In other studies, however, students' perceptions of support staff 21 and school safety 22 had nothing to do with cyberbullying perpetration or victimization.…”

The Trouble with Bullying – Deconstructing the Conventional Definition of Bullying for a Child‐centred Investigation into Children's Use of Social Media

“…We have opted for the terms ‘childhood bullying’ or simply ‘bullying’ rather than the more common ‘school bullying,’ and ‘online bullying’ rather than ‘cyberbullying’. Terminology can limit the view of a phenomenon, as seen in research where ‘school bullying’ results in a focus on peer interactions only in the classroom or school setting (Pyżalski, ). ‘Childhood bullying’ identifies the life stage of interest without restricting research to a specific setting.…”

Dealing with misuse of personal information online – Coping measures of children in the EU Kids Online III project

“…This article uses the labels proposed by Parris and colleagues (2012) of reactive and preventive coping 2 while acknowledging the awareness about possible overlaps noticed by Šléglová, and Černá (2011). Supported by the need to distinguish between types of cyberbullying and the actors involved (Pyzalski, 2012), the present study proposes a similar attempt to differentiate between several types of problematic situations related to privacy and misuse of personal information online.…”

“…Children themselves in the EU Kids Online qualitative data collection (2013) spoke about a wide range of problematic situations they face online in connection to privacy and personal data misuse, and also about the measures they take to deal with those situations. As others have argued for the case of distinguishing between different types of bullying (Pyzalski, 2012;Völlink et al, 2013), namely done by close friends, by known people from the offline peer group, by known people from the online groups, and by former romantic partners, distinctions among perpetrators are important also for privacy issues and misuse of personal information online. Given the links between the two types of misconduct, the present study builds on the literature on young people's general coping and cyberbullying-specific coping to reflect on children's coping with several types of situations involving privacy issues, misuse of personal information online, and on the possibility of proposing an alternative, more inclusive coping typology that could accommodate a wider variety of problems young people face online.…”