PJ LEVEL 4literature Review Sample 2
PJ LEVEL 4literature Review Sample 2
PJ LEVEL 4literature Review Sample 2
Cyberbullying:
Tyler Maxwell
INTRODUCTION - Cyberbullying 3
Since the beginning of time people have always had to deal with bullies. Just
like anything else, however, things tend to evolve with technology. With the evolution
of social media and technology some adolescence as well as adults are simply unable to
escape harassment from their peers in school and in the workplace. This social
(2004) there are eight different forms of cyberbullying, which include Flaming (online
impersonation, outing (sharing peoples secrets), trickery (tricking someone into sharing
This study is going to include extensive research into the motivations to cyberbully
as well as its influence on the aggressors and victims and the relationships between the
two. We will also examine the different techniques cyberbullies employ as well as the
Prevelance of Cyberbullying
today’s society. It can often times leave students unable to escape their bullies and leave
them feeling alone and helpless. Faucher, Jackson, and Cassidy(2014) performed a study
on 1925 students across four Canadian universities that found 24.1 percent of students
had been the victims of cyberbullying over the last twelve months. These shocking
numbers show that nearly one in every four people have been the victims of this
phenomenon. This statistic is interesting however because when compared to studies that
were done amongst younger age students you see that the numbers are drastically
different. Wegge, Vandebosch, and Eggermont(2014) found that among 1,458 13-14
year old students that considerably less students reported being cyberbullied. This is very
similar to what Vanderbosch and Van Cleemput (2009) found among 2052 students in
the 12-18 ranges which concluded that 11.1 percent of students had been victims of
in students as they get older. Wegge et al. (2014) also noted that 30.8 percent had been
This raises the question as to why it seems to be less prevalent among younger students. Is it
possible that they simply don’t have as much access to the tools of
Cyberbullying 5
cyberbullying that students at the university level have, or they possibly aren’t as
technologically advances as their older peers? It continues to raise questions about the
issue of cyberbullying as well as what classifies the perpetrators as well as what are
cyberbullying is trying to understand the types of people who are the aggressors. The first
thing that needs to be discussed when analyzing this is the simple matter of gender when
it comes to who is generally the aggressor. Slonje and Smith (2008) found that when it
comes to cyberbullying males are more often than not the aggressors with males being
reported as the cyberbully far more often than females. Slonje et al (2008) also found that
36.2 percent of students were unaware of the gender of their aggressors. This is
intriguing because for one its is the same percentage as the number of males who bullied,
but most importantly because it shows that over 1 in 3 students don’t actually know who
is bullying them, which adds to the fear and stigma that is related to cyberbullying and
The types of people who are victims. Researchers have also conducted various
studies on the types of people who are cyberbullied, or what is often referred to as “cybervictomology”.
Abeele and Cock (2013) conducted a study, which concluded that the gender of victims varied greatly
depending on the form of cyberbullying. Abeele et al. (2013) found that males are more likely to be on the
receiving end of direct cyberbullying while females are more likely to be the victims of indirect
cyberbullying such as online gossip among peers. These findings appear to remain true to social social
norms where males are viewed as more confrontational and females are often stereotyped as gossipers.
Cyberbullying 6
While not many studies look at the gender of the victims many studies do research
things such as the characteristics of the victims. Faucher et al. (2014) found that there
were numerous reasons that people felt they were the victims of cyberbullying such as
about their views. Davis, Randall, Ambrose, and Orand (2015) also conducted a study
about victims and their demographics, which looked at the reasons people, were
cyberbullied. Some of the results in the Davis et al. (2015) study addressed other reasons
for being bullied in which they found that 14 percent of victims had been bullied because
These are all very important because it fits the profile of the traditional bully that
many people envision but it shows that it transfers over into the cyber world as well. This
leads on further questions about the relationship between the two and how the
The relationship between bully and victim. The relationship between aggressor
and victim is also something that has been heavily research among professionals. Beran and Li (2007)
conducted a study that involved 432 middle school students and concluded that just under half of the
studnets had been victims of cyberbullying as well as traditional bullying. This is true across multiple
studies. Wegge et al. (2014) also concluded that people who were bullied in traditional manners had a
much higher likelihood to become victims of cyberbullying. Another interesting relationship between
bully and victim is that studies have also shown that people who are victims are likely to become
aggressors in the online world. Beran et al. (2007) confirms this by stating, “students who are bullied
Faucher et al. (2014) also found similar results claiming that male and female
students decided to bully people online because they were bullied first.
Research has also been done that looks at how the bullies find their victims.
Wegge et al. (2014) studied the perpetrators preferences in victims and found that 27
percent were in the same grade, 14.2 percent were in different grades and a staggering
49.6 percent were not schoolmates of the bullies. This evidence somewhat contradicts
that of the other studies that state victims are generally bullied at school and at home
because it shows that nearly half of the bullies prefer to bully people they don’t go to
school with and possibly have do not know at all. This continues to build and add to the
idea of cyberbullying in that it allows bullies to create their own personas and images
in order to try and intimidate and influence others without actually providing a physical
intimidation factor.
Effects of Cyberbullying
The first part of this literature review focused on the demographics of the bullies and their
victims, but now we will focus on the lasting effects and the trauma it brings to the victims as well as the
different forms of cyberbullying. While the platforms used are different the lasting effects that the
bullying has on the victims are very similar. Faucher et al. (2014) concluded that one of the main effects
that cyberbullies had on university students was that they were unable to accomplish some of their
school assignments. While many people think of effects of bullying to be simply depression or low self
esteem this study brought light to a much different more unexpected issues. Beran et al. (2007) also
found similar responses from victims of cyberbullying claiming that they often didn’t achieve the same
findings indicate that the lasting impact that a cyberbully has on their victims is
often more harmful than what most people can see on the surface.
generally were less distressed during the second confrontation with a cyberbully. This
desensitized to the aggression over time lessening the effects of the bullying.
Victims coping techniques. When being faced by a bully it is important that victims
learn to cope and move on from their experiences in order to prevent them from suffering in their
personal and professional life like some of the victims in previous studies. Davis et al. (2014) conducted a
study on victim coping techniques where they broke the techniques into two distinct categories, which
were behavioral and cognitive strategies. Davis et al. (2014) found that 74 percent of participants
preferred behavioral strategies and of those 74 percent, 69 percent of those people found the strategies
to be effective. These behavioral strategies included seeking social support, making a creative outlet, or
ignoring and blocking the bully. Because of the growing trend of cyberbullying there have been people
who have developed different programs to help raise awareness for cyberbullying as well as offer help to
the victims. One of these programs is known as Cyberprogram 2.0. Garaigordobil and Martinez-Valderrey
(2015) conducted a study testing the effectiveness of this program and found that it was effective in
decreasing the amount of traditional as well as cyberbullying, but also and more importantly it raised
empathy among classmates towards the victims of these actions. This is a big step in combatting bullying
because peers are constantly influencing each other. If the general consensus among the class is that
empathize with the victims than it can go a long way in changing the social norm. If the
attention is not longer given to the bully by classmates and victims it could potentially
With that being said it raises the question instead of trying to cope, why not just
remove yourself from the situation all together and not give the bully what they desire?
Arntfield (2005) discussed the risk associated with using social media and concluded
that “intrinsic rewards that were not tied directly to winning as much as they were to
fantasies of power, celebrity, sexuality, and elevated social status that came with
participating, win or lose.”. This conclusion is one that is very accurate and relevant to
the way adolescence as well as university level students think in today’s society. The fact
of the matter is in order to fit in and be considered “cool” amongst your peers you need
to be on social media to understand many of the things that are talked about amongst
students. Whether it be trending hashtags, viral videos, or popular memes these are all
things that are commonly shared and talked about between peers. While students may
run the risk of being bullied on these sites, they also run the risk of being bullied for not
choose from when it comes to how exactly they want to intimidate their victims which may be why it is
often easier for them to carry out the act. Of all the different ways to cyberbully Faucher et al. (2014)
found the most common platforms for cyberbullying to be social media, text messaging, and email which
were used to bully students about half of the time followed up by blogs forums and chat rooms which
were 25 percent. This is no surprise that social media is the most common platform for cyberbullying
because it
Cyberbullying 10
can allow for the bully to remain completely anonymous to your average victim. This
allows people who may not fit the mold of your average bully to create a fake account
and build their own persona in order to bully others. Multiple studies also address a
critical factor of using social media or the Internet to bully others, which is that; the
photos or hurtful comments, can remain in cyberspace virtually forever. Davis et al.
(2014) mentions how they received viewed several responses that talked about “how
their traditional bullying experience would have been magnified if they had occurred in
todays digital era”. Faucher et al. (2014) also talk about how cyberbullying has a longer
“shelf life” than your average bullying. This plays such a huge role because with the
aggressive material on the internet it can often be revisited and the pain can constantly be
brought back to light for the victims making the experience that much more traumatic.
Social media is very prevelant among cyberbullies but there is also extensive
research done on cell phones and the role they play in the act of cyberbullying. Abeele et
al. (2013) studied various aspects of mobile phone bullying and found that the most
prevalent type was gossiping via text message, followed by gossiping over the phone,
and concluded with threatening others over text message. Abeele et al. (2013) also found
that girls were more often than not the perpetrators of gossiping while boys made slightly
more threats via cell phone. This numbers tend lean towards the stereotype of females
being more of gossipers and males generally being more aggressive and physical. This is
also interesting because shows that that society’s stereotypes appear to remain true even
in a cyberworld.
REFERENCES
1. Abeele, M., & Cock, R. (2013). Cyberbullying by mobile phone among adolescents:
The role of gender and peer group status. Communications: The European Journal
3. Beran, T., & Li, Q. (2007). The relationship between cyberbullying and school bullying.
4. Davis, K., Randall, D. P., Ambrose, A., & Orand, M. (2015). ‘I was bullied too’:
51. doi:10.7334/psicothema201478
Cyberbullying 14
7. Pieschl, S., Porsch, T., Kahl, T., & Klockenbusch, R. (2013). Relevant
doi:10.1016/j.appdev.2013.04.002
doi:10.1111/j.1467-9450.2007.00611.x
profiles of bullies and victims. New Media & Society, 11(8), 1349-1371.
doi:10.1177/1461444809341263
10. Wegge, D., Vandebosch, H., & Eggermont, S. (2014). Who bullies whom online: A
doi:10.1515/commun-2014-0019
References
Abeele, M., & Cock, R. (2013). Cyberbullying by mobile phone among adolescents:
The role of gender and peer group status. Communications: The European Journal
Beran, T., & Li, Q. (2007). The relationship between cyberbullying and school bullying.
Davis, K., Randall, D. P., Ambrose, A., & Orand, M. (2015). ‘I was bullied too’:
Faucher, C., Jackson, M., & Cassidy, W. (2014). Cyberbullying among University
doi:10.7334/psicothema201478
Cyberbullying 14
Pieschl, S., Porsch, T., Kahl, T., & Klockenbusch, R. (2013). Relevant dimensions
doi:10.1111/j.1467-9450.2007.00611.x
profiles of bullies and victims. New Media & Society, 11(8), 1349-1371.
doi:10.1177/1461444809341263
Wegge, D., Vandebosch, H., & Eggermont, S. (2014). Who bullies whom online: A
doi:10.1515/commun-2014-0019