Topics: Bullying, Aggression, Factor analysis Pages: 21 (7387 words) Published: January 16, 2013
Computers in Human Behavior 28 (2012) 226–232

Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect

Computers in Human Behavior
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/comphumbeh

The changing face of bullying: An empirical comparison between traditional and internet bullying and victimization Danielle M. Law a,⇑, Jennifer D. Shapka a, Shelley Hymel a, Brent F. Olson a, Terry Waterhouse b a b

Faculty of Education, The University of British Columbia, 2125 Main Mall, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada V6T 1Z4 Criminology and Criminal Justice, The University of the Fraser Valley, 33844 King Road, Abbotsford, British Columbia , Canada V2S 7M8

a r t i c l e

i n f o

a b s t r a c t
Electronic aggression, or cyberbullying, is a relatively new phenomenon. As such, consistency in how the construct is defined and operationalized has not yet been achieved, inhibiting a thorough understanding of the construct and how it relates to developmental outcomes. In a series of two studies, exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses (EFAs and CFAs respectively) were used to examine whether electronic aggression can be measured using items similar to that used for measuring traditional bullying, and whether adolescents respond to questions about electronic aggression in the same way they do for traditional bullying. For Study I (n = 17 551; 49% female), adolescents in grades 8–12 were asked to what extent they had experience with physical, verbal, social, and cyberbullying as a bully and victim. EFA and CFA results revealed that adolescents distinguished between the roles they play (bully, victim) in a bullying situation but not forms of bullying (physical, verbal, social, cyber). To examine this further, Study II (n = 733; 62% female), asked adolescents between the ages of 11 and 18 to respond to questions about their experience sending (bully), receiving (victim), and/or seeing (witness) specific online aggressive acts. EFA and CFA results revealed that adolescents did not differentiate between bullies, victims, and witnesses; rather, they made distinctions among the methods used for the aggressive act (i.e. sending mean messages or posting embarrassing pictures). In general, it appears that adolescents differentiated themselves as individuals who participated in specific mode of online aggression, rather than as individuals who played a particular role in online aggression. This distinction is discussed in terms of policy and educational implications. Ó 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Article history: Available online 2 October 2011 Keywords: Internet aggression Cyberbullying Bullying Aggression

1. Introduction Despite the prevalent use of Information Communication Technologies (ICTs) in the lives of adolescents, we are only beginning to understand how the internet or cell phones are influencing adolescents’ communication skills and social relationships. Research shows that adolescents use the internet to seek out opportunities to interact with school-based peers (Gross, Juvonen, & Gable, 2002), overcome shyness, and facilitate social relationships (Maczewski, 2002; Valkenburg, Schouten, & Peter, 2005). In conjunction with this, however, it also appears that adolescents use the internet as an arena for bullying (Li, 2007; Raskauskas & Stoltz, 2007). As cyberbullying, or internet aggression increase in prominence (e.g., Hinduja & Patchin, 2008; Ybarra & Mitchell, 2004), it becomes important to determine exactly what this form of aggression is, as well as how and why it manifests. ⇑ Corresponding author. Address: Educational and Counselling Psychology and Special Education, Faculty of Education, 2125 Main Mall, Vancouver, BC, Canada V6T 1Z4. Tel.: +1 778 327 8679; fax: +1 604 822 3302. E-mail address: dalaw@interchange.ubc.ca (D.M. Law). 0747-5632/$ - see front matter Ó 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2011.09.004

The construct of bullying/aggression that occurs online has yet to be...

References: Arora, C. M. J. (1996). Defining bullying: Towards a clearer general understanding and more effective intervention strategies. School Psychology International, 17, 317–329. Atlas, R. S., & Pepler, D. J. (1998). Observations of bullying in the classroom. The Journal of Educational Research, 92, 86–99. Beran, T., & Li, Q. (2005). Cyber-harassment: A study of a new method for an old behavior. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 32, 265–277. Browne, M. W., & Cudeck, R. (1993). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. In K. A. Bollen, & J. S. Long (Eds.), Testing structural equation models (pp. 136–162). Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Burns, S., Maycock, B., Cross, M., & Brown, G. (2008). The power of peers: Why some students bully others to conform. Qualitative Health Research, 18(12), 1704–1716. Comrey, A. L., & Lee, H. B. (1992). A first course in factor analysis (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers. Craig, W. M., Pepler, D., & Atlas, R. (2000). Observations of bullying in the playground and in the classroom. School Psychology International, 21, 22–36. Crick, N. R., & Dodge, K. A. (1996). Social information-processing mechanisms in reactive and proactive aggression. Child Development, 67, 993–1002. Dodge, K. A., & Coie, J. D. (1987). Social information processing factors in reactive and proactive aggression in children’s peer groups. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 53, 1146–1158. Dodge, K. A., Coie, J. D., Pettit, G., & Price, J. (1990). Peer status and aggression in boys’ groups: Developmental and contextual analyses. Child Development, 61, 1289–1309. Dooley, J. J., Pyzalski, J., & Cross, D. (2009). Cyberbullying versus face-to-face bullying: A theoretical and conceptual review. Journal of Psychology, 217(4), 182–188. Gradinger, P., Strohmeier, D., & Spiel, C. (2009). Traditional bullying and cyberbullying: Identification of risk groups for adjustment problems. Journal of Psychology, 217(4), 205–213. Gross, E. F., Juvonen, J., & Gable, S. L. (2002). Internet use and well-being in adolescence. Journal of Social Issues, 58, 75–90. Haynie, D. L., Nansel, T., Eitel, P., Davis Crump, A., Saylor, K., Yu, K., et al. (2001). Bullies, victims, and bully/victims: Distinct groups of at-risk youth. Journal of Adolescence, 21, 29–49. Hazler, R. J., Miller, D. L, Carney, J. V., & Green, S. (2001). Adult recognition of school bullying situations. Educational Research, 43, 133–146. Hinduja, S., & Patchin, J. W. (2008). Cyberbullying.us. Retrieved November 2008. Joreskog, K. G., & Sorbom, D. (1993). LISREL 8: User’s reference guide. Chicago: Scientific Software International. Kaukiainen, A., Slamivalli, C., Lagerspetz, K., Tamminen, M., Vauras, M., & Poskiparta, E. (2002). Learning difficulties, social intelligence, and self-concept: Connections to bully-victim problems. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 43(3), 269–278. Kowalski, R. M., & Limber, S. P. (2007). Electronic bullying among middle school students. Journal of Adolescent Health, 41, 22–30. Kowalski, R. M., Limber, S. P., & Agatston, P. W. (2008). Cyberbullying. Malden, MA: Blackwell. Li, Q. (2007). New bottle but old wine: A research of cyberbullying in schools. Computers in Human Behavior, 23(4), 1777–1791.
D.M. Law et al. / Computers in Human Behavior 28 (2012) 226–232 Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2001). Using multivariate statistics (4th ed.). MA: Allyn & Bacon. Twemlow, S. W., Fonagy, P., Sacco, F. C., & Hess, D. (2001). Chapter 10 in caring classrooms/intelligent schools: The social emotional education of young children. In J. Cohen (Ed.), Improving the social and intellectual climate in elementary schools by addressing bully-victim-bystander power struggles. New York: Teachers College Press. Underwood, M. K. (2003). Social aggression among girls. New York: Guildford Press. Vaillancourt, T., Hymel, S., & McDougall, P. (2003). Bullying is power: Implications for school intervention programs. Journal of Applied School Psychology. Vaillancourt, T., McDougall, P., Hymel, S., Krygsman, A., Miller, J., Stiver, K., et al. (2008). Bullying: Are researchers and children/youth talking about the same thing? International Journal of Behavioral Development, 32(6), 486–495. doi:10.1177/ 0165025408095553. . Valkenburg, P. M., Schouten, A. P., & Peter, J. (2005). Adolescents’ identity experiments on the Internet. New Media and Society, 7, 383–402. Viegas, F. B. (2005). Bloggers’ expectations of privacy and accountability: An initial survey. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 10. Retrieved Aug, 2011 . Walther, J. B. (2007). Selective self-presentation in computer-mediated communication: Hyperpersonal dimensions of technology, language, and cognition. Computers in Human Behavior, 23, 2538–2557. Ward, C., & Tracey, T. J. G. (2004). Relation of shyness with aspects of online relationship involvement. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 21, 611–623. Werner, N. E., & Bumpus, M. F. (2010). Involvement in internet aggression during early adolescence. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 39, 607–619. Werner, N. E., & Crick, N. R. (2004). Peer relationship influences on the development of relational and physical aggression during middle childhood: The roles of peer rejection and association with aggressive friends. Social Development, 13, 495–513. Werner, N. E., Bumpus, M. F., & Rock, D. (2010). Involvement in internet aggression during early adolescence. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 39(6), 607–619. Ybarra, M. L., Diener-West, M., & Leaf, P. J. (2007). Examining the overlap in internet harassment and school bullying: Implications for school intervention. Journal of Adolescent Health, 41, 42–50. Ybarra, M. L., & Mitchell, K. J. (2004). Online aggressor/targets, aggressors, and targets: A comparison of associated youth characteristics. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 45, 1308–1316.
MacCallum, R. C., Browne, M. W., & Sugawara, H. M. (1996). Power analysis and determination of sample size for covariance structure modeling. Psychological Methods, 1, 130–149. Macklem, G. L. (2003). Bullying and teasing: Social power in children’s groups. New York: Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers. Maczewski, M. (2002). Exploring identities through the Internet: Youth experiences online. Child and Youth Care Forum, 31, 111–129. Olweus, D. (1991). Bully/victim problems among school children: Basic facts and effects of a school based intervention program. In Rubin & D. Pepler (Eds.), The development and treatment of childhood aggression. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. Olweus, D. (1993). Bulling at school. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell. Patterson, G. R., Dishion, T. J., & Yoerger, K. (2000). Adolescent growth in new forms of problem behavior: Macro- and micro-peer dynamics. Prevention Science, 1, 3–13. Pelligrini, A. D. (2001). The roles of dominance and bullying in the development of early heterosexual relationships. In R. A. Geffner, M. Loring, & C. Young (Eds.), Bullying behaviour: Current issues, research, and interventions (pp. 63–73). New York: The Haworth Press, Inc. Pellegrini, A. D., & Bartini, M. (2001). Dominance in early adolescent boys: Affiliative and aggressive dimensions and possible functions. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 47, 142–163. Peter, J., Valkenburg, P. M., & Schouten, A. P. (2005). Developing a model of adolescent friendship formation on the Internet. CyberPsychology and Behavior, 8, 423–430. Randall, P. (1996). A community approach to bullying. Stoke-on-Trent, UK: Trentham Books. Raskauskas, J., & Stoltz, A. D. (2007). Involvement in traditional and electronic bullying among adolescents. Developmental Psychology, 43, 564–575. Rigby, K. (2008). Children and bullying: How parents and educators can reduce bullying at school. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing. Salmivalli, C., Kaukiainen, A., & Lagerspetz, K. (2000). Aggression and sociometric status among peers – Do gender and type of aggression matter? Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 41(1), 17–24. Salmivalli, C., Lagerspetz, K., Bjorkqvist, K., Osterman, K., & Kaukiainen, A. (1996). Bullying as a group process: Participant roles and their relations to social status within the group. Aggressive Behavior, 22, 1–15. Smith, P. K. (2009). Cyberbullying, abusive relationships in cyberspace. Journal of Psychology, 21(4), 180–181. Smith, P. K., & Boulton, M. (1990). Rough and tumble play, aggression, and dominance: Perception and behavior in children’s encounters. Human Development, 33, 271–282.
Continue Reading

Please join StudyMode to read the full document

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Bullying Report Essay
  • bullying Essay
  • Essay about Gender and Age Differences in Bullying
  • Bullying and Aggression: an Assignment in Social Psychology Essay
  • Bullying: Kids Will Be Kids Essay
  • Bullying in the 21st Century. Examining the Causes, Effects and Solutions. Research Paper
  • Bullying Essay
  • Essay on Bullying

Become a StudyMode Member

Sign Up - It's Free