Cyberbullying: New Approaches for School Counselors

Jesse E. Florang
University of Nebraska-Kearney
 2

Abstract

Cyberbullying has become a well-documented problem plaguing the mental health and

safety of teenagers in schools. An examination of the literature that includes other

complex social/emotional issues provides a framework for more effective cyberbullying

prevention and intervention strategies. This article examines current research, highlights

existing misconceptions, and re-frames misguided intervention efforts that have

prevented school counselors from effectively addressing cyberbullying. Considering

these past mistakes and current misconceptions, this article provides a new philosophy

with fresh approaches to cyberbullying for school counselors to accurately and

appropriately intervene in schools.

Keywords: adolescents, cyberbullying, mental health, prevention, intervention,

schools, school counselors

 3

Cyberbullying: New Approaches for School Counselors

Cyberbullying has become a well-documented problem plaguing teenagers in

schools across America. For example, one study has shown that cyberbullying impacts

as many as one in four students (Romera, Cano, García-Fernández, & Ortega-Ruiz,

2016). In another study of 20,406 adolescents, researchers found that only one-fifth of

cyberbullied victims report incidents to school officials (Schneider, O'Donnell, Stueve, &

Coulter, 2012). Kessel Schneider, O'Donnell, and Smith (2015) analyzed data from four

surveys completed from 2006 to 2012 and reported that although many youth never

report being a victim of cyberbullying to an adult, only one-third (n = 16,000) of youth

who experience cyberbullying seek help from an adult at school.

Cyberbullying can be defined as “peer victimization that occurs via the Internet or

other forms of electronic media” (Landoll, La Greca, Lai, Chan & Herge, 2015, p. 78).

Cyberbullying can be perpetrated through a variety of electronic methods. For example,

Barlińska, Szuster, and Winiewski (2013) identified different forms of cyberbullying to

include online harassment, intimidation, and blackmail. Olenik-Shemesh, Heiman, and

Eden (2012) added deliberate threats and attempts to hurt or humiliate another person

as additional forms of cyberbullying.

For students who already have social and emotional deficits, cyberbullying can

be devastating. Cyberbullying affects adolescents during a time of social and emotional

development where there is a limited ability to self-regulate (Hamm et al., 2015).

Current research suggests, “Cyberbullying disproportionately affects youths who are

already vulnerable to mental health and behavioral health disparities including members

of sexual minorities, girls, and racial minorities” (Rice et al., 2015, p. 66). O'Keeffe and
 4

Clarke-Pearson (2011) highlighted the limited capacity for self-regulation and

susceptibility to peer pressure among adolescents, which amplifies the risk from

negative social media interactions. As school counselors continue to work with students

to help identify their social and emotional needs, they can no longer neglect the fact that

much of their social and emotional development is occurring online.

In addition to social and emotional development, recent research has shown that

cyberbullying has also been associated with several other psychological problems

among adolescents, which may include social anxiety (Juvonen & Gross, 2008).

Additionally, Mitchell, Ybarra, and Finkelhor (2007) found adolescents (n = 1,501) who

reported being cyberbullied to be 2.5 times more likely to experience depression

symptoms, 2.2 times more likely to report delinquency, and two times more likely to

report substance use than participants who were not cyberbullied. Suzuki, Asaga,

Sourander, Hoven, and Mandell (2012) indicated that cyberbullying also significantly

disrupts school performance. Furthermore, Hinduja and Patchin (2010) found that

cyberbully victims had higher levels of suicidal thoughts and attempts than adolescents

who were not cyberbullied. Suzuki et al. (2012) also discussed long-term ramifications

for victims, which may include depression and trauma.

School counselors must be aware of and acknowledge the negative impact that

cyberbullying has on students and the disruption it can place on the learning

environment. Unlike traditional bullying, cyberbullying is often more difficult to avoid and

can be anonymous (Litwiller & Brausch, 2013). As a result, the safety of one’s home no

longer protects individuals from cyberbullying due to the inability to escape. To cause

additional anguish, cyberbullying can be permanently archived through online social

 5

media. Although traditional bullying may come to an end, cyberbullying has the unique

ability to create a feeling of hopelessness rooted in fear that there may be no end in

sight. As discussed by Florang (2019), living in a constant sense of unescapable fear

directly interferes with obtaining the universal human need of safety, as defined by

Maslow’s hierarchy of needs. Furthermore, the unique complexity of the fear related to

cyberbullying goes against all inborn fear responses, commonly known as fight, flight, or

freeze.

If basic human needs are not met, adolescents are unable to reach their full

potential. If students are afraid, unable to fight, unable to run away, and unable to freeze

(because it only amplifies the anxiety of what is being said online), then adolescents are

not going to be successful without developing new skills, new supportive people, and

new plans to ensure safety from cyberbullying. Unfortunately, past attempts at

addressing cyberbullying in the school setting have led to unintended negative

consequences, which did little to reduce or prevent the impact it had on students and in

some cases, inadvertently made the situation worse for the victims.

Positive Intentions with Negative Consequences

School counselors and educators can directly intervene in cases of traditional

bullying; however, there are few resources and regulations to monitor or intervene with

cyberbullying (Suzuki et al., 2012). Unlike traditional bullying, which mostly occurs in

school, cyberbullying occurs outside of school, which complicates the role of adult

intervention further (Smith et al., 2008). Regrettably, many previous attempts at

cyberbullying intervention and prevention had positive intentions, with unintended

negative consequences. In the past, several misconceptions and policy loopholes about
 6

how to respond to cyberbullying have stalled school counselors’ ability to effectively

intervene. In some cases, responses to cyberbullying have inadvertently fueled the

helplessness many teenagers feel daily.

According to Olenik-Shemesh et al. (2012), cyberbully victims may feel hopeless

to stop cyberbullying, and believe adults are less likely to understand and more likely to

take away access to social media. The fear of losing social media access if

cyberbullying is reported to adults and the inability of victims to find an escape from the

attacks makes cyberbullying a unique problem that requires further attention (Olenik-

Shemesh et al., 2012). Deplorably, many past interventions have inadvertently punished

the victim instead of creating a safe environment to protect teenagers from negative

online interactions. Instead of fostering safe environments to address cyberbullying,

adults have isolated victims from all social interactions. Although face-to-face interaction

is still possible, “a large part of this generation’s social and emotional development is

occurring while on the Internet and on cell phones” (O'Keeffe & Clarke-Pearson, 2011,

p.800). If school counselors are going promote social and emotional growth, isolating

adolescents from these situations, is only going to create resentment and stall potential

growth.

In addition to the fear of losing Internet access, adolescents are reluctant to

report cyberbullying due to the lack of knowledge or understanding that adults have with

the new technology (Besag, 2010). The lack of understanding is evident in the harmful

messages that adults have repeatedly instilled in adolescents regarding cyberbullying.

For example, hearing adults ignore or minimize the impact of cyberbullying, because

they don’t understand it, or hearing someone say “just ignore it” may only cause more
 7

distress. Although these situations may not fit the definition of crisis in the adult world,

these negative interactions can be detrimental to adolescents. A lack of understanding

and the fear of punishment make it obvious why so many teenagers choose not to

report cyberbullying and feel hopeless that anything can be done to stop it.

Additional harmful messages have also been instilled among the adolescent

population which include, “don’t post anything negative on social media because it will

follow you forever.” Of course, statements like these are intended to keep teenagers

from posting inappropriate messages or pictures online, but what if someone else posts

the embarrassing, revealing, or derogatory comments online? The message is still the

same – anything posted online remains in perpetuity. Without any research supporting

these statements and with cyberbullying being such a new phenomenon, we don’t know

whether anything posted on social media will have these types of lifelong

consequences. School counselors should never convey the message that one online

mistake (or someone else’s mistake) would last forever.

History also provides some important lessons on how school counselors can help

educate teenagers through this complex period of social and emotional development.

When reviewing other complex experiences associated with adolescence, history has

shown that using scare tactics or maximizing potential consequences does very little to

protect students. For example, many early intervention drug and alcohol educational

interventions aimed to disseminate information to adolescents before they are exposed

to tobacco, drugs, and alcohol. According to Botvin and Griffin (2007), “many of these

approaches provided information in ways that dramatized the dangers associated with

substance use in an attempt to evoke fear (p. 610).” Furthermore, this type of
 8

intervention may change attitudes but does very little to change behavior (Botvin &

Griffin, 2007). As school counselors, we want to not only change attitudes toward

cyberbullying, but also change behavior by creating a safe environment, without

dramatizing the dangers of having something negative posted online.

Similarly, previous attempts at sex education has also provided some important

information for how school counselors should approach cyberbullying. Educators now

accept that ignoring, minimizing, or teaching abstinence as the only solutions were not

appropriate interventions and may have created more harm for students attempting to

navigate adolescence. According to Stanger-Hall and Hall (2011), abstinence-only

education was not only ineffective in preventing teen pregnancy, but also may have

contributed to high pregnancy rates among teenagers. Like drugs, alcohol, and sex,

many people initially labeled cyberbullying as a problem that happens outside of school,

thus making it a parental problem and not a school problem. Thankfully, current

educational systems now recognize that teenagers need help understanding these

complex periods of adolescence and they are now addressed in most school

curriculums. Cyberbullying has become the new “uncomfortable discussion” plaguing

teenagers that can no longer be ignored, minimized, or left for someone else to

address.

New Approaches for Schools

Teen tragedies have been highly publicized in the media related to cyberbullying.

Unfortunately, many of these heartbreaking stories have ended in suicide. Instead of

relying on Internet usage contracts, which place accountability on students and parents,

schools must become actively involved in identifying and intervening in cyberbullying,

 9

whether it is at school or outside of school (Ford, 2009). Morrow and Downey (2013)

suggested that school personnel should reevaluate current cyberbullying policies to

address and clarify the definition and consequences of cyberbullying from a school

perspective and highlighted the importance of establishing consequences at school, for

a behavior that was once seen as a problem that happened primarily outside of school.

According to Smith et al. (2008), schools must adopt specific cyberbullying policies,

provide direct cyberbullying training to teachers, and provide education to students.

Crepeau-Hobson (2013) emphasized that all school staff members are required

by laws and ethics to not only recognize the mental health needs of their students, but

also appropriately respond to ensure student safety. Cyberbullying can clearly be

categorized as both a potential mental health issue and a student safety concern, thus

requiring immediate attention from school personnel. With this new understanding,

school counselors have a responsibility to advocate for a new approach, where all

school staff are encouraged to take an all-inclusive approach to change the culture,

update policies, and teach proper online social and coping skills.

Due to the social and emotional consequences associated with cyberbullying,

school counselors must advocate for systemic awareness, training, and a collaborative

approach to cyberbullying intervention strategies. Walrave and Heirman (2011)

recommended a proactive school preventative approach directed at the entire student

population. It is recommended that schools create a positive climate (Patchin & Hinduja,

2012), where pro-social tendencies are encouraged and adolescents are empowered to

act upon negative feelings related to cyberbullying (Macháčková, Dedkova, Sevcikova,

& Cerna, 2013). Specifically, Green (2013) highlighted how systems may benefit from
 10

delegating teaching responsibility to all school employees, in a multidisciplinary

approach, which may include a nurse, counselor, teacher, or administrator. School

stakeholders must implement programs of support and intervention to address negative

online experiences, in addition to supporting the mental health of students (Rose &

Tynes, 2015).

In addition to school personnel, Patchin and Hinduja (2012) recommended that

parents, students, and law enforcement officers all play an active role in creating a

positive environment that discourages cyberbullying. Effective anti-bullying programs

include several different elements: community involvement, an assessment of the

school climate, a consensus on the definition of bullying, student and parent

engagement, professional development for faculty and staff, and ongoing program

evaluation (Jones & Augustine, 2015). Additional cyberbullying prevention strategies

include building awareness, reporting online issues, and linking parental involvement

and the home environment (Irvine, 2012).

According to Beale and Hall (2007), schools should use focus groups, class

meetings, or surveys to gather information from teachers, parents, and students to

ensure that school personnel are providing an atmosphere that is free from harassment,

intimidation, and fear. Furthermore, Twyman, Saylor, Taylor, and Comeaux (2010)

suggested that parents should be educated on how to appropriately intervene in

cyberbullying situations, while simultaneously creating an environment conducive to

open communication regarding online experiences. Additionally, mental health

professionals, school counselors, and school administrators must work together to

improve supportive environments and facilitate meaningful connections for the

 11

adolescents they serve (Duong & Bradshaw, 2014). School counselors may serve as

the link between students, teachers, parents, community resources, and law

enforcement. “School personnel and parental training are needed to increase

awareness of what cyberbullying is, how to prevent it, and how to deal with

cyberbullying that has already occurred” (Chang et al., p.461, 2013).

As more technology is utilized in the classroom, the more likely students and

teachers are going to be involved with cyberbullying. Teachers must acquire more

knowledge about technology in order to understand cyberbullying better (Ayas &

Horzum, 2011). Due to the immediate risk cyberbullying may pose to the student

population, school counselors may be the highest qualified individual in the school who

may provide some of this very important education, training, and new awareness to

other staff members. In addition to advocating for system changes and providing

education, there are also specific interventions that school counselors can directly

implement to help students overcome negative online experiences.

School counselors’ beliefs, attitudes, and response to cyberbullying need a

complete overhaul. School counselors must work to provide a new message about

cyberbullying, teach new skills to teachers and students, and instill a new hope that

cyberbullying can be stopped. Advocating, teaching, and modeling this shift will instill

hope to the students who experience cyberbullying on a daily basis. School counselors

must actively work to change the negative messages that have become ingrained in the

adolescent population. Adolescents deserve to have adults who understand

cyberbullying, don’t minimize the impact, don’t punish the victim, and teach the skills
 12

necessary to overcome cyberbullying. It is time that the passive reactionary approach to

cyberbullying is replaced with aggressive prevention and intervention strategies.

To advocate for a new systemic philosophy that addresses the impact of

negative online interactions, school counselors may work to educate and promote new

holistic approaches to address cyberbullying in schools. The first step in stopping

cyberbullying is to ask about it and acknowledge that it is occurring (Carpenter &

Hubbard, 2014). Sahin (2012) suggested parents, schools, teachers, and other

educational institutions must work together to prevent cyberbullying. Before school

counselors can start to address these issues directly and begin to solve this problem,

schools must first acknowledge that cyberbullying is indeed a school problem and rebuff

the assumptions that schools cannot become involved in issues that arise online or

outside of school.

Practical Strategies for School Counselors

As mentioned previously, the first step is to acknowledge that cyberbullying is

happening. Due to the potential health risks that cyberbullying may pose to the student

population, school counselors need to update risk assessments and safety screening

tools to include direct questions about cyberbullying, and to accurately and

appropriately identify the students who are impacted by cyberbullying (Sourander et al.,

2010). Updating current prevention and intervention strategies will increase early

identification of adolescents who are at risk, thus helping to minimize negative

consequences (Hyunjoo, Dancy, & Chang, 2015). Furthermore, incorporating new

strategies will ensure school counselors and professionals appropriately identify and

intervene during cyberbullying incidents, which may include contacting parents and
 13

administering consequences, regardless of whether the incident happened at school

(Patchin & Hinduja, 2012).

New Message, New Skills, New Hope

School counselors may directly teach students the skills necessary to cope with

cyberbullying and advocate for updated school policy, improved school culture, and

provide education to teachers, administrators, and parents. Improving communication

and educating adolescents about cyberbullying will also help reduce the negative effect

of cyberbullying. Ramos and Bennett (2016) recommended continued education,

assessment of past-experiences, screening tools, and social skills training to improve

current cyberbullying prevention and intervention strategies.

At times, educators have falsely assumed that students already have the ability

to understand empathy, fairness, and the ability to aid victims, when in reality these

skills need to be taught to reduce bullying in schools (Jones & Augustine, 2015). Sahin

(2012) stressed the importance of supporting the mental health of adolescents through

emotional and social skill development. Landoll, La Greca, and Lai (2013) suggested

interventions designed to help adolescents cope with negative experiences with

thoughtful, nonaggressive, and assertive responses to reduce the likelihood of

experiencing adjustment difficulties. School counselors already work with students to

develop appropriate coping and social skills, so incorporating the skills necessary to

successfully respond to cyberbullying should not be problematic.

“Programs for adolescents should focus on strengthening social networks, social

skills, and peer support in order to prevent a sense of loneliness and depressive mood,

and to help build a ‘social protection layer’ against becoming cyberbullying victims”
 14

(Olenik-Shemesh et al., p. 372, 2012). Romera et al. (2016) found that cyber victims

reported having less peer support or friends than other victims, which school counselors

can help remedy through psychoeducational support groups and school-based social

group referrals. Furthermore, Jones, Mitchell, and Turner (2015) suggested that school

counselors and educators should help adolescents develop better bystander and

response skills that specifically target all adolescents who might witness or experience

cyberbullying.

School counselors should be prepared to deliver direct interventions and

teaching methods related to online communication and relationships. Fridh, Lindström,

and Rosvall (2015) highlighted the importance of strengthening communication and

relationship skills to help reduce the negative effects of cyberbullying on adolescents. In

addition, Hyunjoo et al. (2015) detailed the importance of providing individualized

interventions designed to help individuals who have already experienced cyberbullying

and are at risk of depression. School counselors should play an active role in reducing

the negative consequences related to cyberbullying by supporting individualized

interventions and systemic prevention programs.

Direct interventions may take a variety of forms; however, Floros, Siomos,

Fisoun, Dafouli, and Geroukalis (2013) suggested providing adolescents with skills

necessary to regulate online impulsiveness through role-playing. Additional teaching

techniques useful to reduce the impact of cyberbullying include increasing self-

awareness, guided practice, modeling, and implementing coping skills (Jacobs et al.,

2014). Furthermore, Schmidt (2008) identified other methods designed to help

individuals learn appropriate skills, which included, teaching, doing, developmental

 15

environment, and providing support. Schools already utilize many of the identified

educational methods throughout the school day and school counselors could work to

incorporate these techniques to help adolescents cope with cyberbullying as well.

Future Research

As technology continues to develop and evolve, prevention programs must

remain flexible in order to appropriately reduce the effects of cyberbullying (Walrave &

Heirman, 2011). Future research is necessary to aid in the development and the

consistent reevaluation of individualized programs to confirm that interventions are still

beneficial to the individual student population that they are intended to help.

Additionally, research should not only focus on victims, but should also focus on

adolescents who are the cyber aggressors or those students who may witness cyber

aggression on a regular basis. Parris, Varjas, and Meyers (2014) suggested utilizing

input from adolescents to develop strategies, policies, and suggestions based on their

own experiences to help develop policies and psycho-educational interventions.

Similarly, Cunningham et al. (2015) highlighted the benefit of acquiring information from

college students who recommended education, prevention, anonymous reporting, and

logical consequences as key practices to reduce involvement in cyberbullying. By

focusing on the school community as a whole and utilizing student input in the

development of prevention and intervention strategies, school counselors can

implement unique strategies, which address the needs of the student population.

Summary

Current research highlights the negative impact that cyberbullying has on the

mental health and safety of the adolescent student population. Previous attempts to
 16

classify cyberbullying as a “home issue,” have only fueled the negative consequences

and hopeless feelings that teenagers face daily in the school setting. School counselors

must be prepared to support policy changes, advocate for proactive approaches to

prevention and intervention, model changes in philosophy, provide education to

students, teachers, and parents, and most importantly help directly instill the positive

coping and social skills necessary to help adolescents appropriately respond to

cyberbullying. Until adolescents and educators have the awareness, education, and

skills necessary to combat cyberbullying, school counselors must provide a safe

environment where students receive some form of relief from the multifaceted

consequences associated with being cyberbullied.

If school counselors continue to ignore or minimize the negative impact that

cyberbullying has on the student population, schools may experience harmful

consequences, resulting in an overall increase in cyberbullying occurrences and an

overall decrease in student mental health. If school counselors do not spend

considerable time investing in focused direct proactive approaches to decrease the

incidents of cyberbullying, there is a likelihood that school counselors will be forced to

react to more and more teen tragedies related to cyberbullying. School counselors

cannot afford to repeat history and wait for someone else to address this intricate issue

or hope that adolescents will navigate this complicated segment of social development

on their own. Like drugs, alcohol, and sex, cyberbullying has been shown to potentially

become a life and death situation, where even one more suicide is too many.
 17

References

Ayas, T., & Horzum, M. (2011). Exploring the teachers' cyberbullying perception in

terms of various variables. International Online Journal of Educational Sciences,

3(2), 619-640.

Barlińska, J., Szuster, A., & Winiewski, M. (2013). Cyberbullying among adolescent

bystanders: Role of the communication medium, form of violence, and empathy.

Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology, 23(1), 37-51.

Beale, A. V., & Hall, K. R. (2007). Cyberbullying: What school administrators (and

parents) can do. Clearing House, 81(1), 8-12.

Besag, V. (2010). Cyberbullying: Bullying in the digital age. Child & Adolescent Mental

Health, 15(2), 127.

Botvin, G. J., & Griffin, K. W. (2007). School-based programmes to prevent alcohol,

tobacco and other drug use. International review of psychiatry, 19(6), 607-615.

Carpenter, L. M., & Hubbard, G. B. (2014). Cyberbullying: Implications for the

psychiatric nurse practitioner. Journal of Child & Adolescent Psychiatric Nursing,

27(3), 142-148. doi:10.1111/jcap.12079

Chang, F., Lee, C., Chiu, C., Hsi, W., Huang, T., & Pan, Y. (2013). Relationships among

cyberbullying, school bullying, and mental health in Taiwanese adolescents.

Journal of School Health, 83(6), 454-462. doi:10.1111/josh.12050

Crepeau‐Hobson, F. (2013). An exploratory study of suicide risk assessment practices

in the school setting. Psychology in the Schools, 50(8), 810-822.

Cunningham, C. E., Chen, Y., Vaillancourt, T., Rimas, H., Deal, K., Cunningham, L. J.,

& Ratcliffe, J. (2015). Modeling the anti-cyberbullying preferences of university

 18

students: Adaptive choice-based conjoint analysis. Aggressive Behavior, 41(4),

369-385.

Duong, J., & Bradshaw, C. (2014). Associations between bullying and engaging in

aggressive and suicidal behaviors among sexual minority youth: The moderating

role of connectedness. Journal of School Health, 84(10), 636-645. doi:10.1111/

josh.12196

Florang, J. E. (2019). Caring for adolescents experiencing cyberbullying. Nursing Made

Incredibly Easy, 17(3), 34-41.

Floros, G. D., Siomos, K. E., Fisoun, V., Dafouli, E., & Geroukalis, D. (2013).

Adolescent online cyberbullying in Greece: The impact of parental online security

practices, bonding, and online impulsiveness. Journal of School Health, 83(6),

445-453. doi:10.1111/josh.12049

Ford, A. (2009). School liability: Holding middle schools liable for cyber-bullying despite

their implementation of Internet usage contracts. Journal of Law & Education,

38(3), 535-543.

Fridh, M., Lindström, M., & Rosvall, M. (2015). Subjective health complaints in

adolescent victims of cyber harassment: moderation through support from

parents/friends – a Swedish population-based study. BMC Public Health, 15(1),

1-11. doi:10.1186/s12889-015-2239-7

Green, R. (2013). Application of the self-care deficit nursing theory: The community

context. Self-Care, Dependent-Care & Nursing, 20(1), 5-15.

Hamm, M. P., Newton, A. S., Chisholm, A., Shulhan, J., Milne, A., Sundar, P., ...

Hartling, L. (2015). Prevalence and effect of cyberbullying on children and young

 19

people: A scoping review of social media studies. JAMA Pediatrics, 169(8), 770-

777. doi:10.1001/jamapediatrics.2015.0944

Hinduja, S., & Patchin, J. (2010). Bullying, cyberbullying, and suicide. Archives of

Suicide Research, 14(3), 206-221 16p. doi:10.1080/13811118.2010.494133

Hyunjoo, N., Dancy, B. L., & Chang, P. (2015). College student engaging in

cyberbullying victimization: Cognitive appraisals, coping strategies, and

psychological adjustments. Archives of Psychiatric Nursing, 29(3), 155-161.

doi:10.1016/j.apnu.2015.01.008

Irvine, J. M. (2012). 6 steps to fight successfully against cyberbullying. Tech & Learning,

32(12). Retrieved from https://www.techlearning.com/news/6-steps-to-fight-

successfully-against-cyber-bullying

Jacobs, N. C., Völlink, T., Dehue, F., Lechner, L., & Jacobs, N. L. (2014). Online

pestkoppenstoppen: Systematic and theory-based development of a web-based

tailored intervention for adolescent cyberbully victims to combat and prevent

cyberbullying. BMC Public Health, 14(1), 396. doi:10.1186/1471-2458-14-396

Jones, J. R., & Augustine, S. M. (2015). Creating an anti-bullying culture in secondary

schools: Characteristics to consider when constructing appropriate anti-bullying

programs. American Secondary Education, 43(3), 73-83.

Jones, L. L., Mitchell, K. K., & Turner, H. H. (2015). Victim reports of bystander

reactions to in-person and online peer harassment: A national survey of

adolescents. Journal of Youth & Adolescence, 44(12), 2308-2320.

 20

Juvonen, J., & Gross, E. (2008). Extending the school grounds?—Bullying experiences

in cyberspace. Journal of School Health, 78(9), 496-505 10p. doi:10.1111/j.1746-

1561.2008.00335.x

Kessel Schneider, S., O'Donnell, L., & Smith, E. (2015). Trends in cyberbullying and

school bullying victimization in a regional census of high school students, 2006‐

2012. Journal of school health, 85(9), 611-620.

Landoll, R. R., La Greca, A. M., & Lai, B. S. (2013). Aversive peer experiences on social

networking sites: Development of the social networking‐peer experiences

questionnaire (SN‐PEQ). Journal of Research on Adolescence, 23(4), 695-705.

Landoll, R. R., La Greca, A. M., Lai, B. S., Chan, S. F., & Herge, W. M. (2015). Cyber

victimization by peers: Prospective associations with adolescent social anxiety

and depressive symptoms. Journal of Adolescence, 4277. doi:10.1016/j.

adolescence.2015.04.002

Litwiller, B., & Brausch, A. (2013). Cyberbullying and physical bullying in adolescent

suicide: The role of violent behavior and substance use. Journal of Youth &

Adolescence, 42(5), 675-684

Macháčková, H., Dedkova, L., Sevcikova, A., & Cerna, A. (2013). Bystanders' support

of cyberbullied schoolmates. Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology,

23(1), 25-36. doi:10.1002/casp.2135

Mitchell, K., Ybarra, M., & Finkelhor, D. (2007). The relative importance of online

victimization in understanding depression, delinquency, and substance use.

Child Maltreatment, 12(4), 314-324.

 21

Morrow, A., & Downey, C. A. (2013). Perceptions of adolescent bullying: Attributions of

blame and responsibility in cases of cyber-bullying. Scandinavian Journal of

Psychology, 54(6), 536-540.

O'Keeffe, G. S., & Clarke-Pearson, K. (2011). The impact of social media on children,

adolescents, and families. Pediatrics, 127(4), 800-804.

Olenik-Shemesh, D., Heiman, T., & Eden, S. (2012). Cyberbullying victimisation in

adolescence: Relationships with loneliness and depressive mood. Emotional and

Behavioural Difficulties, 17(3-4), 361-374.

Parris, L. N, Varjas, K., & Meyers, J. (2014). ‘‘The Internet is a Mask’’: High School

Students’ Suggestions for Preventing Cyberbullying. Western Journal of

Emergency Medicine: Integrating Emergency Care with Population Health, 15(5).

http://dx.doi.org/10.5811/westjem.2014.4.20725

Patchin, J. W., & Hinduja, S. (2012). School-based efforts to prevent cyberbullying.

Prevention Researcher, 19(3), 7-9.

Ramos, M. C., & Bennett, D. C. (2016). Cyberbullying: Who hurts, and why. Psychiatric

Times, 33(1), 20-25.

Rice, E., Petering, R., Rhoades, H., Winetrobe, H., Goldbach, J., Plant, A., ... Kordic, T.

(2015). Cyberbullying perpetration and victimization among middle-school

students. American Journal of Public Health, 105(3), e66-72. doi:10.2105/

AJPH.2014.302393

Romera, E., Cano, J., García-Fernández, C., & Ortega-Ruiz, R. (2016). Cyberbullying:

Social competence, motivation and peer relationships. Comunicar, 24(48), 71-79.

 22

Rose, C. A., & Tynes, B. M. (2015). Longitudinal associations between

cybervictimization and mental health among US adolescents. Journal of

Adolescent Health, 57(3), 305-312.

Sahin, M. (2012). The relationship between the cyberbullying/cybervictimization and

loneliness among adolescents. Children and Youth Services Review, 34(4), 834-

837.

Schneider, S. K., O'Donnell, L., Stueve, A., & Coulter, R. S. (2012). Cyberbullying,

school bullying, and psychological distress: A regional census of high school

students. American Journal of Public Health, 102(1), 171-177.

Schmidt, N. (2008). Guided imagery as internally oriented self-care: A nursing case.

Self-Care, Dependent-Care & Nursing, 16(1), 41-48.

Smith, P. K., Mahdavi, J., Carvalho, M., Fisher, S., Russell, S., & Tippett, N. (2008).

Cyberbullying: Its nature and impact in secondary school pupils. Journal of Child

Psychology & Psychiatry, 49(4), 376-385.

Sourander, A., Klomek, A. B., Ikonen, M., Lindroos, J., Luntamo, T., Koskelainen, M., ...

Helenius, H. (2010). Psychosocial risk factors associated with cyberbullying

among adolescents: A population-based study. Archives of general psychiatry,

67(7), 720-728.

Stanger-Hall, K. F., & Hall, D. W. (2011). Abstinence-only education and teen

pregnancy rates: Why we need comprehensive sex education in the US. PloS

one, 6(10), e24658. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0024658

 23

Suzuki, K., Asaga, R., Sourander, A., Hoven, C. W., & Mandell, D. (2012).

Cyberbullying and adolescent mental health. International Journal of Adolescent

Medicine & Health, 24(1), 27-35. doi:10.1515/ijamh.2012.005

Twyman, K., Saylor, C., Taylor, L. A., & Comeaux, C. (2010). Comparing children and

adolescents engaged in cyberbullying to matched peers. Cyberpsychology,

Behavior & Social Networking, 13(2), 195-199.

Walrave, M., & Heirman, W. (2011). Cyberbullying: Predicting victimisation and

perpetration. Children & Society, 25(1), 59-72. doi:10.1111/j.1099-

0860.2009.00260.x
 24

Biographical Statement

Dr. Jesse E. Florang resides in Kearney, Nebraska and serves as an adjunct

graduate lecturer in the University of Nebraska-Kearney graduate school of counseling

and school psychology. He is also an adjunct faculty advisor for Franklin University,

where he works with doctoral students in the Doctor of Healthcare Administration

program, with an emphasis on mental health. He is also the behavior interventionist for

Kearney Public Schools, serving students who are verified with social, emotional, or

behavioral disabilities. Dr. Florang has a passion for mental health and education, as

evidenced by his commitment to serving students of all ages from kindergarten to

doctoral level. His research interests include adolescent mental health, cyberbullying,

and systemic improvements for schools and inpatient health care settings.