Psychological Distress and Its Mediating Effect on Experiences of Online Risk: The Case for Vulnerable Young People

Abstract

There is strong evidence showing that vulnerable children and adolescents, such as children who are carers for their family, in care themselves, or who have a physical disability or special educational needs, are at greater risk of mental health problems and poor social wellbeing. Recent research indicates this heterogenous but vulnerable group is also disadvantaged online and may be at greater risk of harm. This study aimed to examine participants’ vulnerability (vulnerable vs. non-vulnerable), psychological distress, parental e-safety support, and online lives, specifically their experiences of online risk. The roles of psychological distress and parental e-safety support were explored as possible mediators and moderators, respectively, for the relationship between vulnerability and online risk. Survey data was collected from 15,278 participants (11–17 years old; M = 12.60, SD = 1.44), 46.6% identified as females, 46.6% identified as males and 6% identified as “other”. Participants were recruited from schools/colleges in different parts of England, of whom 3,242 were categorised as vulnerable. Using Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) the results showed that, when compared to the non-vulnerable participants, the vulnerable groups (single or multiple vulnerabilities) experienced more psychological distress and online risks. They also received less e-safety support from parents or carers. Furthermore, mediation and moderated mediation analysis showed that the relationship between vulnerability and online risk was significantly and partially mediated by psychological distress. Parental e-safety support was found to moderate the relationship between psychological distress and online risk and between vulnerability and online risk. In conclusion, the results demonstrated that vulnerability offline is mirrored online. Psychological interventions and parental e-safety support are required to navigate the internet safely. Children’s services and practitioners should consider online risks in their assessments and interventions.

Online Child Sexual Exploitation and Abuse of Children and Adolescents with Disabilities: A Systematic Review

“…Two reviewers (GÁ-G and KKG) assessed the quality of the studies, and a third reviewer was also consulted (ML) to resolve any conflicts. Five studies were rated [17][18][19][20][21] as a high risk of bias, and eight were rated as a low risk of bias [4,13,[22][23][24][25][26][27]. The characteristics of included studies are included in Table 2.…”

“…A diverse range of victim ages is evident in the context of OCSEA, all of which are under the age of 18 [24], typically commencing as early as 6-7 years old and extending through to early adolescence to mid-adolescence [23]. Three studies specifically mentioned early adolescence, encompassing children and adolescents aged 12-15 [4] and 11-13 years [19].…”

“…Several studies mention that children and adolescents with disabilities are identified as vulnerable to online victimization [4,20,23]. Specific disabilities are mentioned, including autism spectrum disorder (ASD) [17,26,27], Williams Syndrome [17,26], intellectual disabilities [22,26,27], 22q11 deletion syndrome (which involves developmental delays and may face mild intellectual disability or learning disabilities) [26], and physical disabilities [23,25] including deafness [18], and chronic health problems [25]. However, it should be noted that this does not imply that these specific groups of children have a higher likelihood of experiencing OCSEA, but they were identified as victims in the studies reviewed.…”

“…In the case of the types of the perpetrators based on the types of offences, the following categories were identified: grooming [4,19,27], cyber-bullying [13], cyber-stalking [13], sextortion [13], or revenge porn [13]. In terms of the relationship to the victim, perpetrators included family members [23,24], educators [23,24], religious individuals [23,24], peers [23,24], neighbors [23,24], trusted individuals [23,24], and people met online as groomers [4,17,25] and cyber-bullies [13,26]. Grooming was highlighted in the studies; this is a tactic employed by offenders that involves harming children and adolescents through OCSEA [4,19].…”

“…Individuals who committed OCSEA used different tactics such as deception, coercion, corruption, and captivation to manipulate their victims [4]. In addition, the studies analyzed reveal that perpetrators employ various techniques, such as manipulation [23,27], cyberstalking [13], coercion [27], providing gifts to victims [23], cyber-threats [13,21,23,26,27], cyber-harassment [13,26], sexting [13,21], sextortion [13], grooming [4,13,19,27], and digital alteration of images [21].…”