Document

The societal impact of cyberbullying
What is Cyberbullying?
Cyberbullying is bullying that takes place using electronic technology. Electronic

technology includes devices and equipment such as cell phones, computers, and
tablets as well as communication tools including social media sites, text messages,
chat, and websites. Cyberbullying is similar to traditional bullying in many ways;
however, the main difference from traditional bullying, is that it doesn’t stop when
the child is in the safety of his/her own home. A child who is cyberbullied is likely to
be bullied at school as well. Cyberbullying can be relentless, prohibiting an escape
for the victim, which can severely damage a child’s mental health and negatively
affect self-esteem.
When a child is bullied at school or on the playground, he knows who his bully
is. The “anonymity” associated with cyberbullying often leaves the victim feeling
like he/she has no recourse. When explicit photographs or videos are uploaded to
social media websites as a form of bullying, it is extremely difficult to delete or make
this type of material disappear from the Internet. When combined with traditional
bullying, cyberbullying can be extremely detrimental to the victim and his/her
mental and physical well-being.
Where Does Cyberbullying Take Place?
Facebook and other social media websites can be used, and allow for “anonymous”
cyberbullying to occur. For example, there may be a private group chat or page set
up in which the child, who is the victim of the bullying is unaware of its existence.
These more private setups are usually eventually discovered, which then brings the
full weight of paranoia, embarrassment, and feelings of isolation on the victim. Text
messages and group chats have the same effect upon its victims. Forums, typically
gaming forums or other hobbyist forums, can also turn into cyberbullying arenas.
Reddit.com, which is one of the largest and most visited social websites, is a forum-
type of social media, and users there are nearly completely anonymous. This gives
cyberbullies less empathy for their victims, and allows them to continually attack.
Because the victim is not bullied at school or other areas where teachers are usually
present, responsible adults are not alerted to the bullying or able to observe the
usual tell-tale signs of bullying.
What are the Effects of Cyberbullying?
Cyberbullying usually has long-term detrimental effects on a victim. Truancy is quite

common when a victim is continually bullied both in-person and through
technology. Also, their grades may suffer, their self-esteem is hurt, depression can
set in, they may have increased health-related issues, abuse of alcohol and/or drugs
may begin, and many more negative effects can occur, depending on the child. With
children using technology at younger ages, the data collected in past years is
becoming less relevant. In 2010-2011, the School Crime Supplement reported 9% of
children in grades 6-12 are cyberbullied, but the increase in children that use
technology can result in a much higher number.
Some individuals groom children in hopes of initiating sexual contact with them.
Grooming usually happens in children with lower self-esteem and those children
who have issues of loneliness or isolation. In these instances, a targeted
cyberbullying campaign can also be a tool for a predator.
Cyberbullying should not be seen as any less of a threat as traditional bullying. Since
most cyberbullying is inflicted upon a child without the presence of adult
supervision, the consequences can be far reaching. Cyberbullying will evolve as new
technology is used and adapted, and so should methods to not only react against
cyberbullying, but also to be proactive and stop cyberbullying before it happens.
Cyberbullying involves the use of information and communication technologies to

support deliberate, repeated, and hostile behaviour by an individual or group that
is intended to harm others (Belsey, 2004).
Examples of cyberbullying include mean text messages or emails, rumours sent

by email or posted on social networking sites, and embarrassing pictures, videos,
websites, or fake profiles. There are different forms of cyberbullying. These forms
include harassment, impersonation, outing, trickery, exclusion, cyberstalking, and
cyber threats.
Victims of cyberbullying are bullied from the moment they wake up and check
their phone or laptop to the time they go to bed and shut off their devices. Ruairi
Quinn, TD, echoed this when he said ‘Things were bad enough when bullying
was confined to the playground, but now it can follow you home in your pocket’.
Cyberbullying is different from traditional bullying due to the anonymity that the
Internet can provide. People can post what they like, be who they want and all
behind a screen. The negative aspect about cyberbullying is that it is often
outside of the legal reach of schools and school boards since it often happens
outside of the school (Belsey, 2004).
This can have a devastating effect for many students across the country and
indeed the world. The result of a cyberbullying experience, long or short term
could also result in anxiety, depression, and fear which can cause decreased
school attendance, strained relationships with friends, extreme embarrassment,
school relocation, drug use and has even led to suicide.
The following figures have emerged in a global survey of almost 5,000

teenagers across 11 countries, including Ireland:
 Almost half of Irish teens said they felt helpless when cyberbullying happened to
them, with three in ten admitting to feeling completely alone.
 As many as 25%, one in four, of those who had been cyberbullied went so far as to
experience suicidal thoughts as a result.
 Nine in ten Irish teens said they would find it easier to cope with cyberbullying if
they received support from their friends on social media.
 However, four in ten admitted that they would find it hard to find the right words to
support a friend who was being bullied online.
Minister Frances Fitzgerald said “Bullying can have an absolutely terrible and
corrosive impact on our children and young people, on their confidence, their self-
esteem, and their mental health. It’s abusive of young people and desperately
damaging. We already have high suicide rates and it’s the most vulnerable that
will be hurt,” she added. Fitzgerald also said that cyber-bullying posed a
particular risk because parents “might be a bit slower to find out”.
However, cyberbullying doesn’t stop at children and teenagers. People in the

workplace can also be victimised through the use of technology by colleagues, as
well as all adults in their day to day lives.
It is shocking to think how cyberbullying can end an individual’s life or have such
a lasting impact on them but this is the reality of it. So with a new wave of
technology to be introduced in 2016 what can we do about cyberbullying and will
it ever end?
With an estimated 3 billion individuals on the planet utilising the Internet it is

crucial that research, communities, workplaces, parents, schools and colleges
are all informed and equipped with the information necessary to combat the
effects of cyberbullying.
In order to combat the problem, it is important to actively participate in people’s

lives, especially those of young people, ask questions about what they are doing
online and keep the lines of communication open. In a workplace, school or
college it is always imperative to have guidelines or a policy on internet safety
and correct use. It is all about the correct way to act online, encouraging ethical
behaviour and using technology for the good and not for the drastic situation that
has become cyberbullying.
TIPS ONLINE
 Think about what you write or photos you add.

 Ask yourself, could these words be picked up the wrong way or cause upset? Is
this photo suitable for lots of people to see?
 If you post something online and ‘comments’ or ‘chat’ becomes cruel, remove your
posts so you are not part of a negative situation.
 I always ask myself would I like this to be read about myself. It puts it into
perspective and avoids any type of negativity online.
 Always be careful online and remember that words don’t just hurt but can kill.
Sources
The poll was conducted by YouGov on behalf of telecoms company, Vodafone
for their #BeStrong initative.
Belsey, B. (2004). What is cyberbullying? Retrieved 5 November 2015
Willard, N .E. (2006). Educators guide to cyberbullying: Addressing the harm
caused by online social cruelty. Retrieved 6 November 2015
Amy dignam
Abstract
Investigations of cyberbullying are beginning to emerge in the scientific literature because of
their implications for child and adolescent development. In particular, cyberbullying
victimisation has been associated with similar negative consequences to traditional or face-to-
face bullying such as lower academic achievement, anxiety, and sometimes even suicide.
Research has also started to emerge investigating the impact of such incidences on the life of
adults. The literature in this area has been steadily growing over the last decade and this review
highlights the current situation in terms of relevant features and the psychological impact on
victims. The selection process consisted of a comprehensive search that was conducted in
January 2015 in the following databases: PsychInfo, ERIC, Web of Science and Medline. A total
of 19 papers were included. We conclude with suggestions for online psychological treatment for
victims and bullies as a means of coping with the distress caused from cyberbullying
experiences.
The Internet has provided us with infinite more possibilities than ever before.
Information, education, games, and social interactions can be easily accessed at any
time or place by simply going online. These possibilities are generally considered
advantageous for most people today, allowing them to access knowledge at a much
faster rate than previous generations. However, despite the wide breath of opportunities
the Internet has to offer, there has been concern about the potential for abuse (Slonje et
al., 2013). Recently, new means to harass others has emerged in tandem with the
widespread availability of online socialising and researchers across the globe are
concerned about the psychological impact on Internet users.
In a similar manner to traditional bullying (or face-to-face bullying including physical,
verbal and relational bullying), cyberbullying is believed to have negative consequences
for the psychological, social and physical health of both the bullies and victims involved
(Bauman et al., 2013, Tokunaga, 2010). In general, ambiguous laws and rapid
developments in information and communication technology (ICT) devices have let this
social risk go largely unnoticed for an extensive period of time (Hinduja and Patchin,
2011, Stewart and Fritsch, 2011). The word ‘cyberbullying’ did not even exist a decade
ago (Notar et al., 2013) and only recently have studies began to investigate its impact
and recognise it as a significant social problem. Despite the youth of this research, area
some literature reviews have emerged that describe the phenomenon in terms of its
definition, effects, and intervention strategies (Cassidy et al., 2013, Kiriakidis and
Kavoura, 2010, von Marées and Petermann, 2012). For example, one recent meta-
analysis conducted by Kowalski et al. (2014) used the general aggression model (GAM)
as a framework to consider the problematic behaviour and found that normative beliefs
regarding aggression and moral disengagement were associated with cyberbullying
perpetration.
The current article presents an up-to-date review of the available literature on
cyberbullying, in terms of relevant features and the psychological impact on victims of
all age groups. In addition, we will discuss the existing interventions and prevention
strategies currently available and purpose online access to psychological treatment as a
potentially efficient way to coping with the associated distress. There are relatively few
studies in this area and even less that have proposed interventions which deal
specifically with the alleviation of psychological symptoms for many individuals,
regardless of age.
1. What is cyberbullying?
Olweus, 1991, Olweus, 1993 described bullying behaviour as occurring when a student is
repeatedly exposed to negative actions by another person(s), creating an imbalance in
power between the perpetrator and victim. However, this definition is limited to school
samples and traditional bullying behaviours such as physical threats (punching, kicking
and hitting), verbal (e.g., name calling) and/or psychological relational bullying (e.g.,
peer exclusion). More recently, Tokunaga (2010) proposed the following definition of
cyberbullying “any behavior performed through electronic or digital media by
individuals or groups that repeatedly communicates hostile or aggressive messages
intended to inflict harm or discomfort on others” (p. 278).
Despite the recent emergence of investigations of cyberbullying, cross-national
comparisons are still lacking, as is a consensus on its definition (Tokunaga,
2010, Kiriakidis and Kavoura, 2010). A range of other terms has been used to describe
the phenomenon including: cyberharassment, cybervictimisation, online harassment
and electronic bullying (Beran et al., 2012, Brown et al., 2014, Fenaughty and Harré,
2013, Ybarra, 2004, Ybarra et al., 2007, Ybarra and Mitchell, 2004), while others have
labelled these as types or forms in which to bully (Notar et al., 2013). In addition, some
studies consider a cyberbullying incident as any action that happens once and does not
consider the repetitive aspect that is essential to the definition (Grigg, 2010).
Furthermore, although an individual might only engage in one act of cyberbullying, this
could be repeatedly viewed online and raises the question of whether or not this should
be considered repetitive bullying (Slonje et al., 2013).
Despite its various identifications, the emergence of cyberbullying has been mainly
attributed to rapid developments in ICT and the extensive penetration of internet
devices by teenagers and school aged children (Cassidy et al., 2013). This increased
usage of ICT as a means of communication through phones, tablets and laptops, has
created a situation where there is a “digital divide” (Pearce et al., 2011) between younger
generations and their elders. Means, methods and ‘locations’ (e.g., social networking
site) of bullying incidents are considered new to an older generation and often parents
are unaware of the dangers of technology for their children (Dehue et al., 2008). There
are a growing number of social networking sites such as Facebook and Twitter, as well
as chatrooms and email. Furthermore, new apps for mobile phones are emerging at an
increasing rate that some adults may not be aware of. For example, snapchat is a photo
messaging application that allows people to send each other text messages or videos that
are automatically deleted after viewing. However, this is not always the case and it is
possible to save the picture/video and use it again to subsequently harass someone.
One of the main distinguishing factors of cyberbullying is the anonymity of the crime,
which can be executed in front of a large audience and at the same time, allow the
perpetrator to remain unidentified (Sticca and Perren, 2013, von Marées and
Petermann, 2012). This is a crucial element of cyberbullying, which can be detrimental
to the victim, and encourage a sense of inhibition for the bully, as there is a greater
likelihood that they will evade punishment (Snakenborg et al., 2011). This was described
by Ybarra and Mitchell (2004) in the following quote: “the anonymity associated with
online interactions may strip away many aspects of socially accepted roles, leading
the Internet to act as a potential equalizer for aggressive acts.” (p. 332). Interestingly,
research has indicated that in many cases the victims are actually aware of whom the
bully is (Juvonen and Gross, 2008). Indeed, one study by Mishna et al. (2009) revealed
that students believed that the internet created possibilities for anyone to be a bully and
that students who are too timid to bully in “real life” might use the Internet as a medium
to bully.
Another distinguishing factor is the large space in which a cyber bully has to offend.
There are no limits, boundaries or even time constraints, so the victim can be targeted at
any time or place, including their own home and/or bedroom (Grigg, 2010, Sticca and
Perren, 2013). This also means that the cyber bully has more witnesses which could
result in the continuous spreading of the bullying incident with the potential to reach
audiences all over the world in a short timeframe (Snakenborg et al., 2011). Another
important element is the fact that the cyber bully does not instantly see her victim and
the effect her actions have on them. As such, the intention of the bully is sometimes
difficult to decipher, as is the extent to which they actually meant to cause harm
(Campbell et al., 2013).
2. Cyberbullying in children and adolescence
There is little consensus on the lifetime prevalence of cyberbullying worldwide with the
literature suggesting a figure between 2 and 35% (Diamanduros et al., 2008, Kowalski et
al., 2014, Låftman et al., 2013). This percentage varies greatly between countries. For
example, the figure for high school students in Canada was 10% (Cappadocia et al.,
2013) and was much lower to those in China (34.84%; Zhou et al., 2013). In Sweden, the
prevalence rate has been reported to be one of the lowest worldwide at approximately
5% (Låftman et al., 2013). Some researchers have suggested that differences in these
figures could be attributed to underreporting (Pettalia et al., 2013), while others have
noted the variance when different mediums of cyberbullying are considered. For
example, when investigating Facebook only, Kwan and Skoric (2013) found that more
than half of a sample of secondary school students in Singapore experienced at least one
incidence of cyberbullying in the previous year. In terms of devices, the most commonly
used means of harassment was with a cell phone (Beran et al., 2012). Furthermore,
other moderators of prevalence rates have been noted in the literature. For
example, Kowalski et al. (2014) discussed the importance of the definition and tools
used for measurement when discussing prevalence rates. Olweus (2012) stated that
prevalence rates are sometimes confounded when investigated in an isolated context
without considerations for traditional bullying.
Internet use has also been found to be positively related to cyberbullying experiences
such that the more teenagers are online, the most interaction with cyberbullying
incidences (Kwan and Skoric, 2013, Ybarra, 2004, Ybarra and Mitchell, 2004).
However, this has not been consistently demonstrated in the literature, for
example, Kwan and Skoric (2013) found only a small relationship between Facebook use
and Facebook victimisation and none for Facebook bullying. Cyberbullying can also
occur through various methods regardless of the device used. Such methods include:
cyber stalking, flaming, defamation, trolling, impersonation, and exclusion (Slonje et al.,
2013). In South Korea, cyberbullying in online game contexts was found to be common,
while Huang and Chou (2010) found that MSN was the technology where Taiwanese
teenagers were most likely to experience and/or witness cyberbullying. In another study
by Wong et al. (2014) teenage victims in Hong Kong most frequently reported having
pictures or videos of them or a relative uploaded online without their permission. The
same authors found that the least common method of victimisation was the posting of
personal information about the victim online.
Furthermore, the roles of age and gender have been extensively researched in the
literature (Kiriakidis and Kavoura, 2010). For example, there is evidence to suggest that
victimisation during adolescence continues into early adulthood (Beran et al., 2012). In
addition, some studies have reported a gender divide for cyberbullying behaviour. For
example, Wong et al. (2014) found that more males than females engaged in some form
of cyberbullying behaviour in a sample of adolescents from Hong Kong. However,
contrasting findings have been reported where Canadian girls were found to be more
actively involved in cyberbullying (Pettalia et al., 2013). Other studies have reported
similar rates for both genders, but have concluded that girls were more likely to report
being cyber victims (Cappadocia et al., 2013, Låftman et al., 2013, Sourander et al.,
2010). In general research suggests that individuals who engage in traditional bullying
also engage in cyberbullying (Dehue et al., 2008, Hinduja and Patchin, 2011, Kwan and
Skoric, 2013).
3. The psychological impact
We approached the literature review by searching the terms “cyberbullying, cyber
victimisation, cyber harassment, online harassment, online bullying and online
victimisation”. Subsequently, we also used these terms with the ‘AND’ search tool with
other relevant psychological terms (e.g., depression, anxiety) and behavioural measures
(e.g., school achievement and truancy) in the following electronic databases: PsychInfo,
ERIC, Web of Science and Medline. In addition, we manually searched the reference
sections of relevant papers. The review was conducted in the month of January 2015 and
only papers written in English were included. A total of 19 papers were included and no
exclusion criteria were followed.
Investigations of the impact of cyberbullying for bullies, victims and bully/victims have
emerged over the last decade and there is a clear and comprehensive set of studies
outlining the long-term negative effects for children and young people (see Table 1 for
an overview). Indeed, the psychological and emotional consequences of cyberbullying
represent the largest problem for the victim (Dredge et al., 2014, Jang et al., 2014).
Exposure to such incidences has been linked to depressive symptomology, suicidal
ideation, low self-esteem, anxiety and loneliness (Bauman et al., 2013, Bonanno and
Hymel, 2013, Cénat et al., 2014, Gámez-Guadix et al., 2013, Patchin and Hinduja,
2010, ŞAhİN, 2012, Schneider et al., 2012, Stapinski et al., 2014, Ybarra, 2004). One
study of Australian youths aged 10–25 years found that 3% of the sample had suicidal
thoughts after a cyberbullying incident and 2% of the same sample engaged in self-
harming behaviour (Price and Dalgleish, 2010). Other studies have linked suicide to a
direct consequence of cyberbullying incidences (Bauman et al., 2013). However, many
researchers have considered the complexity of suicidal behaviour and Kowalski and
Limber (2013), noted that involvement in bullying actually contributes to approximately
4–7% of the variance in suicidality.
Table 1. Overview of studies investigating psychological impacts of cyberbullying

for victims, bullies and victim/bullies.
Study Age N Country Status Impact
Bauman Grades 1491 United Bully Suicide in

et al. 9–12 States males only
(2013)
Bonanno 14.2 399 Canada Bully and Depressive

and (mean victim symptomology
Hymel years) & depression
(2013)
Cénat et 15.4 8194 Canada Victim Self esteem

al. (2014) (mean and
years) psychological
distress
Feinstein 18–42 565 United Victim Depressive

et al. (years) States symptomology
(2014) and rumination
Fletcher 12–13 1144 UK Bully Poor quality of

et al. (years) life and
(2014) psychological
difficulties
Gámez- 15.2 845 Spain Victim Depressive

Guadix et (mean symptoms
al. (2013) years)
Kowalski Grades 931 United Bully/victim Psychological

and 6–12 States health and
Limber academic
(2013) achievement
Mishna 13.85 2186 Canada Victim and School

et al. (mean bully aggression and
(2012) years) feeling unsafe
at school
Na et al. 18–25 121 United Victim Self esteem

(2015) (years) States
Patchin 10–16 1963 United Bully and Self esteem

and (years) States victim
Hinduja
(2010)
Hinduja 10–16 1963 United Bully and Suicidal

and (years) States victim thoughts and
Patchin more likely to
(2010) commit suicide
Price and 5–25 548 Australia Victim Self

Dalgleish (years) confidence,
(2010) self esteem,
anger and
sadness
ŞAhİN Not 389 Turkey Victim Loneliness

(2012) available
Schenk et 18–24 799 United Bullies Increased

al. (2013) (years) States depression,
paranoia,
phobic anxiety
and
psychoticism
Schneider Grades 20,406 United Victim Depressive

et al. 9–12 States symptomology,
(2012) suicide
ideation, self-
injury and
suicide attempt
Wong et 12–15 1917 Hong Bully Low self

al. (2014) (years) Kong efficacy, low
empathy level
and poor
psychological
well-being
Ybarra 10–17 1501 United Victim Depressive

(2004) (years) States symptomology
Ybarra et 10–15 1515 United Victim Truancy and

al. (2007) (years) States carrying a
weapon to
school
Zalaquett 21–59 613 United Victim Anger and

and (years) States stress
Chatters
(2014)
Cyberbullying can also have physical effects on victims such as weight loss or gain,
substance abuse, headache, abdominal pain and sleeping problems (Gámez-Guadix et
al., 2013, Jang et al., 2014). In addition, increased school difficulties have also been
reported such as school aggression, truancy, lower academic achievement and not
feeling safe in school (Cassidy et al., 2013, Mishna et al., 2012). Some researchers have
even reported that youths who were harassed online show more signs of school
aggression and were more likely to carry a gun to school (Mishna et al., 2012, Ybarra et
al., 2007). The type, nature of materials, and even extent to which the victimisation was
planned also influence the psychological impact it has on the victim. Some researchers
have found that incidences involving pictures or video clips were considered worse by
the victims (Menesini et al., 2011). In particular, Menesini et al. (2011) found that the
posting of embarrassing pictures was the worst form of cyberbullying for Italian
adolescents.
The experience of being a cyber bully has also been linked to poor psychological
functioning and external difficulties (Wong et al., 2014). For example, Fletcher et al.
(2014) found that cyber bullies had more psychological difficulties and poorer quality of
life despite having none such difficulties with peer or social interactions. Bauman et al.
(2013) found that cyberbullying perpetration was directly related to a suicide attempt in
males only. This link between being a cyber bully and suicide has been made elsewhere
in the literature for both males and females (Hinduja and Patchin, 2010). The
researchers suggested that these results demonstrate a lack of understanding for the
bullies in their own behaviour such that they possibly engaged in one act of online
bullying that quickly escalated and became a bigger problem than they anticipated. In
addition, school climate is believed to be an important risk factor where a poor sense of
belonging to the school has been linked to cyberbullying (Wong et al., 2014). The worst
psychological impact has been related to being a bully/victim. These individuals engage
in online bullying and at the same time are cyber victims. Similar to traditional
bully/victims, there is a consensus in the literature that the psychological impact is
heightened for this subgroup (Gámez-Guadix et al., 2013, Kowalski et al., 2012, Wolke
and Samara, 2004).
4. Cyberbullying in adults
Similar to traditional bullying, cyberbullying is also prevalent in adult populations
(Balakrishnan, 2015). One study found that individuals who were victims of
cyberbullying in high school were significantly likely to be victims in college (Zalaquett
and Chatters, 2014). Recent studies have focused on demonstrating prevalence rates in
college students and early adulthood (Crosslin and Golman, 2014, Francisco et al.,
2015, Gibb and Devereux, 2014, MacDonald and Roberts-Pittman, 2010, Privitera and
Campbell, 2009, Schenk and Fremouw, 2012). Consequently, research investigating the
psychological impact cyberbullying has on college samples is underdeveloped compared
to younger generations. However, one study did find increased depressive
symptomology and rumination after cybervictimisation experiences in a sample of 565
American undergraduate students (Feinstein et al., 2014). In other undergraduate
samples cyberbullying was associated with lower self-esteem (Na et al., 2015) and
feelings of anger and stress (Zalaquett and Chatters, 2014). Furthermore, Schenk et al.
(2013) found that college students who cyberbullied others scored higher on a range of
psychological measures including: depression, paranoia, phobic anxiety and
psychoticism, when compared to individuals who did not (see Table 1 for an overview).
There is a paucity of research in other adult populations and only a handful of studies
exist on workplace cyberbullying (Privitera and Campbell, 2009). Balakrishnan
(2015) investigated adults in Malaysia aged between 17 and 30 years and found that
39.7% of the sample had been cyberbullied in the previous six months. The results also
found that social networking sites (e.g., Facebook) were the primary tool for
cyberbullying. Another study found that bullying through electronic means (particularly
email and phone) existed in a randomly selected sample of members of the Australian
Manufacturing Workers' Union (AMWU), but the prevalence rate was much less than
traditional workplace bullying (10.7% compared to 34% for the latter; Askew et al.,
2012).
5. Who is responsible?
When considering children and young people, schools play an important role in
preventing cyberbullying, despite situations where bullying does not happen on school
grounds or during the school day (Paul et al., 2012). As such, in some countries, schools
are legally required to take action when aware of such an event (Hinduja and Patchin,
2011). For example, the Education and Inspections Act (2006) in England permits
schools to implement consequences for cyberbullying occurring outside of school
grounds but affecting life in school (Paul et al., 2012). The situation is different in the
US, and the legislation varies from state to state. However, many of these legislations
include directives to schools to adopt anti-bullying policies and to make explicit
provisions for cyberbullying in terms of prevention and intervention (U.S. Department
of Education, 2011).
Anti-bullying policies are the most commonly used preventative method for traditional
bullying in the UK (Smith et al., 2012) and most educators and researchers have
advocated for their inclusion in schools (Diamanduros et al., 2008, Smith et al., 2008).
However, it has been reported that schools can be slow to create these policies. In
particular, Smith et al. (2012) found that cyberbullying was inadequately mentioned in
school policies within the UK with only a 23% increase from 2002 to 2008 (from 8.5%
to 32%).
Aside from the role of the school, some researchers have argued that the community,
including the police, need to take a more active role in cyberbullying prevention
(Vandebosch et al., 2012). In terms of legislation, the situation is ever changing and
there are few examples of specific cyberbullying laws internationally. Normally such
offences fall under national criminal or cybercrime laws. For example, in Qatar, the
Cybercrime Prevention Law (2014) accounts for abuse through technological means.
For traditional bullying, there have been some successful bullying prevention
programmes worldwide such as the Olweus Bullying Prevention Program (OBPP) and
the KiVa anti-bullying programme (Salmivalli et al., 2013). Olweus (1991) was the first
to create a comprehensive and empirically valid intervention that has been replicated
and administered in schools around the world. The OBPP targets peer relationships to
decrease existing bullying relationships, prevent new ones and to increase peer social
relationships throughout the school (Olweus and Limber, 2010). Parents, teachers,
students and the community are encouraged to work together to reduce bullying rates.
The programme has been extensively researched over the last decade and has
demonstrated reductions in school bullying for different age groups across the globe
(e.g., Yaakub et al., 2010, Samara and Smith, 2008). For example, Olweus and Limber
(2010) reported a 5% reduction in school bullying in 56 schools (N = 8,299).
Furthermore, this study demonstrated that the reduced bullying rates continue over
time and as more cohorts in a school participated in the programme (Olweus and
Limber, 2010).
The KiVa anti-bullying programme is more recent and was developed in Finland in
2006. The programme is built on previous research that considers bystanders to be an
important element in exasperating bullying behaviour and influencing the impact on
victims (Salmivalli, 2010) As such, one main objective of the intervention is to target
bystanders and to increase their responsibility for intervening and reporting bullying
incidences (Garandeau et al., 2014). Several studies have demonstrated favourable
results for the programme in terms of reducing the psychological impact of traditional
bullying experiences on students (e.g., Williford et al., 2012). For example, Kärnä et al.
(2011) reported a reduction in peer and self-reported bullying in a sample of over 4000
Finish students.
In general, bystanders do little when they witness online bullying and for some teenage
bystanders, their attitudes are generally one of indifference (Huang and Chou, 2010).
The bystander experience for a cyberbullying incident is very unique because their
decision on how to react to the incident is not public like with traditional bullying
incidents (Wong-Lo and Bullock, 2014). Indeed this ambiguity could lead to digital
bystanders engaging in cyber harassment even more than traditional harassment. One
study by Barlińska et al. (2013) found that digital bystanders were more likely to actively
engage in cyber bullying (by forwarding pictures of a classmate) than offline bullying
incidents. As a result, intervention strategies which move this indifference to active
responses could help stop the spread of cyberbullying incidences and even create a
feeling of taboo around the subject (Huang and Chou, 2010). Although there is a paucity
of such interventions available, Dillon and Bushman (2015) did find the first step of the
Bystander Intervention Model (BIM; Latané and Darley, 1970) to have a positive impact
on the frequency of participants intervening in such incidents. This intervention strategy
has been commonly implemented in traditional bullying scenarios by using a five-step
process to engage the bystander and move them from awareness of the event to looking
for help.
In theory, anti-cyberbullying interventions in schools should cater for the individual
needs of the students, in addition to creating awareness of the problem (Jacobs et al.,
2014). Some researchers have called for a stronger role for the school psychologist in
implementing a cyberbullying prevention plan. This would make these staff members
responsible for assessing their students' online behaviours in order to identify potential
problems before they happen (Diamanduros et al., 2008). One meta-analysis conducted
by Ttofi and Farrington (2011) found that bullying was reduced after specific anti-
bullying interventions and it has been argued that these positive results could extend to
cyberbullying (Slonje et al., 2013). The school climate and communication between
students and staff have been highlighted as important factors in the implementation of
such programmes (O'Brennan et al., 2014).
For adults, most educational programmes are not relevant because they mostly used
schools to create awareness. To date there have been few awareness campaigns created
in universities or working environments aside from the traditional bullying strategies
such as conflict resolution and/or consultation with occupational psychologists.
Although in one study by Crosslin and Golman (2014), college participants (16.9% of the
sample) reported that information about cyberbullying could be administered on
campus such as through the counselling office or student organisations. However, these
do not attempt to deal with the psychological impact of cyberbullying that can be
exacerbated in adulthood because of different consequences such as time off from work,
financial loss, and impact on their children. To date there has been little research in this
area and even less in the service of finding a solution to the problem.
Furthermore, if an adult victim wishes to pursue action in terms of penalising the bully
they must have sufficient time and energy and be prepared for the case to become public
(Agate and Ledward, 2013). This stress can add to the psychological burden of the
experience especially when the issue of victim blaming is concerned (Gini, 2008).
Indeed, many researchers have noted that social support (as opposed to victim-blaming)
plays a genuine role in how individuals cope with cyberbullying incidents (Weber et al.,
2013). As such, anti-bullying policies and awareness campaigns are naturally limited
because the influence of social dynamics (e.g., social support and peer relationships etc.)
is not considered in the aftermath of such events.
It is important to make the distinction between preventative measures such as anti-
cyberbullying polices, education campaigns and community awareness, and
psychological interventions, which should be designed for alleviating the distress
associated with an event after it occurs. Indeed, there is a delay in the clinical research
community in recognising cyberbullying experiences as traumatic and life changing for
all parties involved. These experiences need to be considered an important risk factor
for developing mental health problems and urgent attention is needed to develop and
assess more online interventions. At present, anti-cyberbullying programmes are not
equipped to provide individualised psychological support to victims as they are normally
focused on children and adolescents only and in the form of a whole school approach
and/or standard care packages. One suggestion for future research is the investigation
of specific psychological interventions online for alleviating the suffering of cyber
victims and bullies.
6. Online psychological therapy as an intervention

Despite the positive results for some anti-bullying interventions (e.g., OBPP), there are a
limited number of interventions that are specific to cyberbullying, although some
educational programmes do exist for young people (for a review see Mishna et al., 2011).
Aside from these preventative strategies and those mentioned above for traditional
bullying, there are no known interventions for adult populations outside of school
settings.
For an intervention to be successful more research is needed to determine the common
coping responses of cyber victims and how (if at all) they differ from the experiences of
traditional victims. This is particularly important, as research has shown that young
victims are unlikely to look to adults for help in such situations (Juvonen and Gross,
2008, Smith and Samara, 2003) and often feel like they will misunderstand and/or will
loose access to the Internet as a result (Delara, 2012). Investigations of adult responses
and whether they seek support from others are non-existent. Instead, research indicates
that both cyber bullies and victims use the Internet as a coping mechanism in which
they try to escape or avoid their feelings of distress (Gámez-Guadix et al., 2013).
Considering that some Internet users are socially isolated and that they may look to the
Internet for help or solutions (Li, 2007, Mesch, 2009), an online intervention would
help victims deal with the psychological trauma of being cyberbullied. Cyberspace is the
perfect location to offer interventions for individuals struggling with the consequences
of a cyberbullying incident.
One such example for children and adolescents, is the web-based intervention Online
Pestkoppenstoppen (Stop Bullies Online/Stop Online Bullies) which aims to teach
victims effective ways of dealing with anxiety and depression associated with cyber
victimisation (Jacobs et al., 2014). These authors developed an online programme,
which specifically aims to promote wellbeing among cyber victims and to decrease some
of the associated internal and external behaviours such as school problems and truancy.
The intervention, which is entirely interactive in its design, teaches cyber victims how to
“recognize, dispute and replace irrational thoughts with rational thoughts” (p. 12). The
focus is to teach victims how to cope with their particular problematic psychological
content (e.g., negative thoughts about oneself) as well as providing information for
prevention. The therapeutic grounding is partly based on the concepts of Relational
Emotive Therapy (REBT; Ellis, 1995) which teaches victims how to notice the
connection between a thought, feeling and behaviour (Jacobs et al., 2014). While
the Online Pestkoppenstoppen is a promising approach to the problem, empirical
evidence is lacking and at present no randomised control trial (RCT) or effect sizes are
available to demonstrate its utility. Therefore, a worthwhile action would be to look at
current psychological interventions that have shown evidence for reductions in
psychopathology and incorporate their strategies and steps into a similar online
programme.
Psychological therapies have been consistently shown as effective in helping individuals
of all ages to deal with distress and in recent years, internet-based psychological
treatment is gaining momentum and showing positive affects for a range of clinical
populations (e.g., Hedman et al., 2011, Vernmark et al., 2010). Indeed, many common
behavioural therapies such as Cognitive Behavioural Therapy (CBT), Interpersonal
Psychotherapy (IPT) and Psychodynamic Psychotherapy (PDT) have been moved online
where consultation with a therapist takes place via mobile phones and/or email
(Andersson et al., 2014, Dagöö et al., 2014, Johansson et al., 2012). For
example, Andersson et al. (2014) conducted a meta-analysis of recent literature and
found that Internet-based CBT (ICBT) had similar positive affects to face-to-face CBT in
clinical populations. Indeed, numerous studies have found ICBT to be cost-effective and
to be a real means of promoting access to psychological therapies for the general public
(Carlbring and Andersson, 2006, Hedman et al., 2011).
Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT; Hayes et al., 2012) is another
psychological therapy that has shown positive results in a range of populations including
individuals suffering with depression, anxiety and psychosis (e.g., Arch et al., 2012, Bloy
et al., 2011, Hayes et al., 2010). Recent studies have also demonstrated the utility of
online ACT applications (e.g., Hesser et al., 2014, Ly et al., 2012). ACT includes a set of
behavioural principles whereby the client is encouraged to defuse from their
psychological content and to engage in values-oriented behaviours (Hayes et al., 2012).
Mindfulness techniques, goals clarification, and acceptance exercises are all integrated
together to move the client from avoidance behaviour to values-based actions even in
the presence of negative private events.
The design of the ACT package is distinct from other therapies because of the six core
processes that lend themselves to being manipulated easily into an online therapy.
These include: defusion, acceptance, contact with the present moment, self as context,
values and committed action (Hayes et al., 2006). These processes are directly relevant
to both cyber bullies and victims. For example, acceptance is a central component that
has shown utility in various populations such as reductions in anxiety and higher
tolerance of pain (McMullen et al., 2008, Stewart et al., 2002). In addition, self as
context exercise have been linked to perspective taking and decreased distress in
experimental settings (Foody et al., 2015). In a cyberbullying situation, self as context
exercises are necessary for victims to become aware of the impact harassment is having
on their psychological content and to then notice the extent to which their internal
world is influencing their behaviour. This is essential before an individual can take the
necessary steps to stop the bullying. Furthermore, values-based exercise is important for
this population when trying to engage bystanders and encourage them to take more
responsibility when witnessing a bullying incident online.
An extensive research agenda is needed to investigate an online ACT intervention and
determine which processes are effective for intervention and prevention respectively.
Again, the distinct feature of ACT is that its design (six psychological processes) lends
itself more readily to componential analyses. Each of the six ACT processes has been
demonstrated to be effective in terms of distress reduction in both clinical and
experimental contexts (Hayes et al., 2012). As such, they could be easily manipulated to
create an online intervention and to target specific psychological problems (e.g.,
negative self-thoughts and/or fear of going online).
Cyberbullying research is relatively new and there is a paucity of investigations of
psychological interventions. As such, the suggestions mentioned here need to be
investigated thoroughly in future research. For example, one research agenda could
compare online therapies (e.g., ICBT and IACT) to see which one has the biggest impact
in terms of distress alleviation, in addition to increasing valued behaviour. This latter
point is important, because these interventions also have the potential to act as
preventative measures for future cyberbullying incidences, by encouraging
responsibility in bystanders and reducing victim-blaming. Other factors such as age and
gender will need to be considered for future research. For example, educational and/or
awareness campaigns might be well suited to younger populations and the therapeutic
element may only be necessary in severe cases. Furthermore, the intervention might
need to be altered for others to account for specific behavioural issues like truancy or
work avoidance.
7. Conclusion
Despite the recent emergence of cyberbullying research, which is certainly growing in
recent years, there are still some limitations to the conclusions that can be drawn. Some
anti-bullying interventions (including anti-bullying polices) can have a positive impact
but the literature is still divided on their utility for cyberbullying. There is a need for
more access to individual psychological therapies and not just school or education-based
programmes. Investigations of ACT and CBT should be considered a crucial step
forward in cyberbullying research. Future research needs to investigate the processes at
work in these interventions, in addition to how they compare to each other.
Disclosure statement
The authors have declared that no conflict of interest exists.
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank Qatar National Research Fund (QNRF) a member of Qatar
Foundation Doha, Qatar, National Priority Research Programs (NPRP) grant (NPRP 5-1134-3-
240) for their support.
References
Agate and Ledward, 2013

J. Agate, J. LedwardSocial media: how the net is closing in on cyber bullies
Entertain. Law Rev., 24 (8) (2013), pp. 263-268
View Record in ScopusGoogle Scholar
Andersson et al., 2014
G. Andersson, P. Cuijpers, P. Carlbring, H. Riper, E. HedmanGuided Internet-based vs. face-to-

face cognitive behavior therapy for psychiatric and somatic disorders: a systematic review and
meta-analysis
World Psychiatry, 13 (3) (2014), pp. 288-295, 10.1002/wps.20151
CrossRefView Record in ScopusGoogle Scholar
Arch et al., 2012
J. Arch, G.H. Eifert, C. Davies, J.P. Vilardaga, R.D. Rose, M.G. CraskeRandomized clinical trial of
cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) versus acceptance and commitment therapy (ACT) for
mixed anxiety disorders
J. Consult. Clin. Psychol., 80 (5) (2012), pp. 750-765
Askew et al., 2012
D.A. Askew, P.J. Schuter, M.-L. Dick, P.M. Régo, C. Turner, D. WilkinsonBullying in the Australian
medical worksforce: cross sectional data from an Australian e-Cohort study
Aust. Health Rev., 36 (2012), pp. 197-204
Balakrishnan, 2015
V. BalakrishnanCyberbullying among young adults in Malaysia: the roles of gender, age and
Internet frequency
Comput. Hum. Behav., 46 (0) (2015), pp. 149-157, 10.1016/j.chb.2015.01.021
ArticleDownload PDFView Record in ScopusGoogle Scholar
Barlińska et al., 2013
J. Barlińska, A. Szuster, M. WiniewskiCyberbullying among adolescent bystanders: role of the

communication medium, form of violence, and empathy
J. Community Appl. Soc. Psychol., 23 (1) (2013), pp. 37-51, 10.1002/casp.2137
Bauman et al., 2013

S. Bauman, R.B. Toomey, J.L. WalkerAssociations among bullying, cyberbullying, and suicide in
high school students
J. Adolesc., 36 (2) (2013), pp. 341-350, 10.1016/j.adolescence.2012.12.001
Beran et al., 2012
T.N. Beran, C. Rinaldi, D.S. Bickham, M. RichEvidence for the need to support adolescents
dealing with harassment and cyber-harassment: Prevalence, progression, and impact
Sch. Psychol. Int., 33 (5) (2012), pp. 562-576, 10.1177/0143034312446976
Bloy et al., 2011
S. Bloy, J.E. Oliver, E. MorrisUsing Acceptance and Commitment Therapy with People with
Psychosis: A Case Study
Clinical Case Studies (2011)
Google Scholar
Bonanno and Hymel, 2013
R.A. Bonanno, S. HymelCyber bullying and internalizing difficulties: above and beyond the
impact of traditional forms of bullying
J. Youth Adolesc., 42 (5) (2013), pp. 685-697, 10.1007/s10964-013-9937-1
Brown et al., 2014
C.F. Brown, M.K. Demaray, S.M. SecordCyber victimization in middle school and relations to
social emotional outcomes
Campbell et al.,
2013
M.A. Campbell, P.T. Slee, B. Spears, D. Butler, S. KiftDo cyberbullies suffer too? Cyberbullies'
perceptions of the harm they cause to others and to their own mental health
Cappad
ocia et
al.,
2013
M.C. Cappadocia, W.M. Craig, D. PeplerCyberbullying: prevalence, stability, and risk factors
during adolescence
Can. J. Sch. Psychol., 28 (2) (2013), pp. 171-192, 10.1177/0829573513491212
C
a
r
l
b
r
i
n
g
a
n
d
A
n
d
e
r
s
s
o
n
,
2
0
0
6
P. Carlbring, G. AnderssonInternet and psychological treatment. How well can they be

combined?
C
a
s
s
i
d
y
e
t
a
l
.
,
2
0
1
3
W. Cassidy, C. Faucher, M. JacksonCyberbullying among youth: a comprehensive review of

current international research and its implications and application to policy and practice
J.M. Cénat, M. Hébert, M. Blais, F. Lavoie, M. Guerrier, D. DerivoisCyberbullying, psychological

distress and self-esteem among youth in Quebec schools
J. Affect. Disord., 169 (0) (2014), pp. 7-9, 10.1016/j.jad.2014.07.019

K. Crosslin, M. Golman“Maybe you don't want to face it” — college students' perspectives on
cyberbullying
J. Dagöö, R. Persson Asplund, H. Andersson Bsenko, S. Hjerling, A. Holmberg, S. Westh, L. Öberg,

B. Ljótsson, P. Carlbring, T. Furmark, G. AnderssonCognitive behavior therapy versus
interpersonal psychotherapy for social anxiety disorder delivered via smartphone and
computer: a randomized controlled trial
J. Anxiety Disord., 28 (2014), pp. 410-417
F. Dehue, C. Bolman, T. VöllinkCyberbullying: youngsters' experiences and parental perception
CyberPsychol. Behav., 11 (2) (2008), pp. 217-223, 10.1089/cpb.2007.0008
E.W. DelaraWhy adolescents don't disclose incidents of bullying and harassment
J. Sch. Violence, 11 (4) (2012), pp. 288-305, 10.1080/15388220.2012.705931

T. Diamanduros, E. Downs, S.J. JenkinsThe role of school psychologists in the assessment,
prevention, and intervention of cyberbullying
Psychol. Sch., 45 (8) (2008), pp. 693-704

K.P. Dillon, B.J. BushmanUnresponsive or un-noticed?: Cyberbystander intervention in an
experimental cyberbullying context
R. Dredge, J. Gleeson, X. de la Piedad GarciaCyberbullying in social networking sites: an

adolescent victim's perspective
A. EllisChanging rational-emotive therapy (RET) to rational, emotive behavior therapy (REBT)
J. Ration. Emot. Cogn. Behav. Ther., 13 (2) (1995), pp. 85-89

B.A. Feinstein, V. Bhatia, J. DavilaRumination mediates the association between cyber-
victimization and depressive symptoms
J. Interpersonal Violence, 29 (9) (2014), pp. 1732-1746, 10.1177/0886260513511534

J. Fenaughty, N. HarréFactors associated with young people's successful resolution of
distressing electronic harassment
Comput. Educ., 61 (0) (2013), pp. 242-250, 10.1016/j.compedu.2012.08.004
A. Fletcher, N. Fitzgerald-Yau, R. Jones, E. Allen, R.M. Viner, C. BonellBrief report: cyberbullying

perpetration and its associations with socio-demographics, aggressive behaviour at school,
and mental health outcomes

M. Foody, Y. Barnes-Holmes, D. Barnes-Holmes, L. Rai, C. LucianoAn empirical investigation of
the role of self, hierarchy, and distinction in a common act exercise
Psychol. Rec., 65 (2) (2015), pp. 231-243
S.M. Francisco, A.M. Veiga Simão, P.C. Ferreira, M.J.D.D. MartinsCyberbullying: the hidden side
of college students

M. Gámez-Guadix, I. Orue, P.K. Smith, E. CalveteLongitudinal and reciprocal relations of
cyberbullying with depression, substance use, and problematic internet use among
adolescents
J. Adolesc. Health, 53 (4) (2013), pp. 446-452, 10.1016/j.jadohealth.2013.03.030
C.F. Garandeau, I.A. Lee, C. SalmivalliDifferential effects of the KiVa anti-bullying program on
popular and unpopular bullies
J. Appl. Dev. Psychol., 35 (2014), pp. 44-50

Z.G. Gibb, P.G. DevereuxWho does that anyway? Predictors and personality correlates of
cyberbullying in college
G. GiniItalian elementary and middle school students' blaming the victim of bullying and
perception of school moral atmosphere
Elem. Sch. J., 108 (4) (2008), pp. 335-354

D.W. GriggCyber-aggression: definition and concept of cyberbullying
Aust. J. Guid. Couns., 20 (2) (2010), pp. 143-156, 10.1375/ajgc.20.2.143
S.C. Hayes, J. Luoma, F. Bond, A. Masuda, J. LillisAcceptance and commitment therapy: model,
processes, and outcomes
Behav. Res. Ther., 44 (1) (2006), pp. 1-25

L.L. Hayes, P.A. Bach, C.P. BoydPsychological treatment for adolescent depression:
perspectives on the past, present, and future
Behav. Chang., 27 (1) (2010), pp. 1-18
S.C. Hayes, K.D. Strosahl, K.G. WilsonAcceptance and Commitment Therapy: The Process and
Practice of Mindful Change
(2nd ed.), The Guilford Press, New York, NY (2012)
Google Scholar
E. Hedman, E. Andersson, B. Ljótsson, G. Andersson, C. Rück, N. LindeforsCost-effectiveness of
Internet-based cognitive behavior therapy vs. cognitive behavioral group therapy for social
anxiety disorder: results from a randomized controlled trial
Behav. Res. Ther., 49 (11) (2011), pp. 729-736, 10.1016/j.brat.2011.07.009
H. Hesser, V. Westin, G. AnderssonAcceptance as a mediator in internet-delivered acceptance

and commitment therapy and cognitive behavior therapy for tinnitus
J. Behav. Med., 37 (4) (2014), pp. 756-767, 10.1007/s10865-013-9525-6

S. Hinduja, J.W. PatchinBullying, cyberbullying, and suicide
Arch. Suicide Res., 14 (3) (2010), pp. 206-221, 10.1080/13811118.2010.494133
S. Hinduja, J.W. PatchinCyberbullying: a review of the legal issues facing educators
Prev. Sch. Fail., 55 (2) (2011), pp. 71-78, 10.1080/1045988X.2011.539433

Y.-Y. Huang, C. ChouAn analysis of multiple factors of cyberbullying among junior high school
students in Taiwan
N. Jacobs, T. Vollink, F. Dehue, L. LechnerOnline 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) (2014), p. 396
CrossRefGoogle Scholar
H. Jang, J. Song, R. KimDoes the offline bully-victimization influence cyberbullying behavior

among youths? Application of General Strain Theory

R. Johansson, S. Ekbladh, A. Hebert, M. Lindström, S. Möller, E. Petitt, S. Poysti, M. Holmqvist
Larsson, A. Rousseau, P. Carlbring, P. Cuijpers, G. AnderssonPsychodynamic guided self-help for
adult depression through the Internet: a randomised controlled trial
PLoS ONE, 7 (5) (2012), p. e38021, 10.1371/journal.pone.0038021
CrossRefGoogle Scholar
J. Juvonen, E.F. GrossExtending the school grounds?—Bullying experiences in cyberspace
J. Sch. Health, 78 (9) (2008), pp. 496-505, 10.1111/j.1746-1561.2008.00335.x
A. Kärnä, M. Voeten, T.D. Little, E. Poskiparta, A. Kaljonen, C. SalmivalliA large-scale evaluation

of the KiVa anti bullying program: grades 4–6
Child Dev., 82 (2011), pp. 311-330
S.P.P.M. Kiriakidis, A.P.M. KavouraCyberbullying: a review of the literature on harassment

through the internet and other electronic means
Fam. Community Health Violence Fam. Community Health, 33 (2) (2010), pp. 82-93
(April/June)
R.M. Kowalski, S. LimberPsychological, physical and academic correlates of cyberbullying and

traditional bullying
J. Adolesc. Health, 53 (2013), pp. S13-S20
R.M. Kowalski, C.A. Morgan, S.P. LimberTraditional bullying as a potential warning sign of
cyberbullying
R.M. Kowalski, G.W. Giumetti, A.N. Schroeder, M.R. LattannerBullying in the digital age: a
critical review and meta-analysis of cyberbullying research among youth
Psychol. Bull., 140 (4) (2014), pp. 1073-1137, 10.1037/a0035618
G.C.E. Kwan, M.M. SkoricFacebook bullying: an extension of battles in school
S.B. Låftman, B. Modin, V. ÖstbergCyberbullying and subjective health: a large-scale study of

students in Stockholm, Sweden
Child Youth Serv. Rev., 35 (1) (2013), pp. 112-119, 10.1016/j.childyouth.2012.10.020
B. Latané, J. DarleyThe Unresponsive Bystander: Why Doesn't He Help
Appleton-Century-Crofts, NY (1970)
Google Scholar
Q. LiNew bottle but old wine: a research of cyberbullying in schools
K.H. Ly, J.A. Dahl, P. Carlbring, G. AnderssonDevelopment and initial evaluation of a

smartphone application based on acceptance and commitment therapy
Springerplus, 1 (2012), 10.1186/2193-1801-1-11
Google Scholar
C.D. MacDonald, B. Roberts-PittmanCyberbullying among college students: prevalence and

demographic differences
Procedia Soc. Behav. Sci., 9 (0) (2010), pp. 2003-2009, 10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.12.436
J. McMullen, D. Barnes-Holmes, Y. Barnes-Holmes, I. Stewart, C. Luciano, A.

CochraneAcceptance versus distraction: brief instructions, metaphors, and exercises in
increasing tolerance for self-delivered electric shocks
Behav. Res. Ther., 46 (2008), pp. 122-129
E. Menesini, A. Nocentini, P. CalussiThe Measurement of cyberbullying: dimensional structure

and relative item severity and discrimination
CyberPsychol. Behav. Soc. Netw., 14 (5) (2011), pp. 267-274, 10.1089/cyber.2010.0002
G.S. MeschParental mediation, online activities, and cyberbullying

F. Mishna, M. Saini, S. SolomonOngoing and online: Children and youth's perceptions of cyber
bullying
F. Mishna, C. Cook, M. Saini, M.-J. Wu, R. MacFaddenInterventions to prevent and reduce cyber
abuse of youth: a systematic review
Res. Soc. Work. Pract., 21 (1) (2011), pp. 5-14, 10.1177/1049731509351988
F. Mishna, M. Khoury-Kassabri, T. Gadalla, J. DaciukRisk factors for involvement in cyber

bullying: victims, bullies and bully–victims
H. Na, B.L. Dancy, C. ParkCollege student engaging in cyberbullying victimization: cognitive

appraisals, coping strategies, and psychological adjustments
Arch. Psychiatr. Nurs. (2015), 10.1016/j.apnu.2015.01.008
Google Scholar
C.E. Notar, S. Padgett, J. RodenCyberbullying: a review of the literature
Univ. J. Educ. Res., 1 (1) (2013), pp. 1-9
L.M. O'Brennan, T.E. Waasdorp, C.P. BradshawStrengthening bullying prevention through

school staff connectedness
J. Educ. Psychol., 106 (3) (2014), pp. 870-880
D. OlweusBully ⁄ victim problems among schoolchildren: basic facts and effects of a school
based intervention program
D.J. Pepler, K.H. Rubin (Eds.), The Development and Treatment of Child-hood Aggression,
Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ (1991), pp. 411-448
Google Scholar
D. OlweusBullying at School: What We Know and What We Can Do
Blackwell Publishing, Malden, MA (1993)
Google Scholar
D. OlweusCyberbullying: an overrated phenomenon?
Eur. J. Dev. Psychol., 9 (5) (2012), pp. 520-538
D. Olweus, S. LimberBullying in school: evaluation and dissemination of the olweus bullying

prevention program
Am. J. Orthopsychiatry, 80 (1) (2010), pp. 124-134
J.W. Patchin, S. HindujaCyberbullying and self-esteem
J. Sch. Health, 80 (12) (2010), pp. 614-621, 10.1111/j.1746-1561.2010.00548.x
S. Paul, P.K. Smith, H.H. BlumbergInvestigating legal aspects of cyberbullying
Psicothema, 24 (4) (2012), pp. 640-645
N. Pearce, D. Cross, H. Monks, S. Waters, S. FalconerCurrent evidence of best practice in whole-

school bullying intervention and its potential to inform cyberbullying interventions
Aust. J. Guid. Couns., 21 (1) (2011), pp. 1-21, 10.1375/ajgc.21.1.1

J.L. Pettalia, E. Levin, J. DickinsonCyberbullying: eliciting harm without consequence
M. Price, J. DalgleishCyberbullying experiences, impacts and coping strategies as described by

Australian young people
Youth Stud. Aust., 29 (2) (2010), pp. 51-59
C. Privitera, M.A. CampbellCyberbullying: the new face of workplace bullying?
M. ŞAhİNThe relationship between the cyberbullying/cybervictmization and loneliness among

adolescents
C. SalmivalliBullying and the peer group: a review
Aggress. Violent Behav., 15 (2010), pp. 112-120
C. Salmivalli, E. Poskiparta, A. Ahtola, A. HaatajaThe Implementation and effectiveness of the

KiVa antibullying program in Finland
Eur. Psychol., 18 (2) (2013), pp. 79-88, 10.1027/1016-9040/a000140
M. Samara, P.K. SmithHow schools tackle bullying, and the use of whole school policies:
changes over the last decade
Educ. Psychol., 28 (6) (2008), pp. 663-676

A.M. Schenk, W.J. FremouwPrevalence, psychological impact, and coping of cyberbully victims
among college students
J. Sch. Violence, 11 (1) (2012), pp. 21-37, 10.1080/15388220.2011.630310
A.M. Schenk, W.J. Fremouw, C.M. KeelanCharacteristics of college cyberbullies
S.K. Schneider, L. O'Donnell, A. Stueve, R.W.S. CoulterCyberbullying, school bullying, and

psychological distress: a regional census of high school students
Am. J. Public Health, 102 (1) (2012), pp. 171-177, 10.2105/AJPH.2011.300308
R. Slonje, P.K. Smith, A. FrisénThe nature of cyberbullying, and strategies for prevention
P.K. Smith, M. SamaraEvaluation of the DfES anti bullying pack
Research Brief No: RBX06-03, DfES, London (2003)
Google Scholar
P.K. Smith, J. Mahdavi, M. Carvalho, S. Fisher, S. Russell, N. TippettCyberbullying: its nature and
impact in secondary school pupils
J. Child Psychol. Psychiatry, 49 (4) (2008), pp. 376-385, 10.1111/j.1469-7610.2007.01846.x

P.K. Smith, A. Kupferberg, J.A. Mora-Merchan, M. Samara, S. Bosley, R. OsbornA content
analysis of school anti-bullying policies: a follow-up after six years
Educ. Psychol. Pract., 28 (1) (2012), pp. 47-70, 10.1080/02667363.2011.639344
l., 2011
J. Snakenborg, R. Van Acker, R.A. GableCyberbullying: prevention and intervention to protect

our children and youth
Prev. Sch. Fail., 55 (2) (2011), pp. 88-95, 10.1080/1045988X.2011.539454
der et al., 2010
A. Sourander, A. Brunstein Klomek, M. Ikonen, J. Lindroos, T. Luntamo, M. Koskelainen, T.

Risktkari, H. HeleniusPsychosocial risk Factors Associated With Cyberbullying Among
Adolescents: A Population-based Study
Arch. Gen. Psychiatry, 67 (7) (2010), pp. 720-728
Stapinski et al., 2014
L.A. Stapinski, L. Bowes, D. Wolke, R.M. Pearson, L. Mahedy, K.S. Button, R. ArayaPeer
victimization during adolescence and risk for anxiety disorders in adulthood: a prospective
cohort study
Depress. Anxiety, 31 (7) (2014), pp. 574-582, 10.1002/da.22270
Stewart and Fritsch, 2011
D.M. Stewart, E.J. FritschSchool and law enforcement efforts to combat cyberbullying
Prev. Sch. Fail., 55 (2) (2011), pp. 79-87, 10.1080/1045988X.2011.539440
Stewart et al., 2002
S.H. Stewart, M.J. Zvolensky, G.H. EifertThe relations of anxiety sensitivity, experiential
avoidance, and alexithymic coping to young adults’ motivation for drinking
Behav. Modif., 26 (2002), pp. 274-296
Sticca and Perren, 2013

F. Sticca, S. PerrenIs cyberbullying worse than traditional bullying? Examining the differential
roles of medium, publicity, and anonymity for the perceived severity of bullying
J. Youth Adolesc., 42 (5) (2013), pp. 739-750, 10.1007/s10964-012-9867-3
Tokunaga, 2010
R.S. TokunagaFollowing you home from school: a critical review and synthesis of research on
cyberbullying victimization
Ttofi and Farrington, 2011
M. Ttofi, D. FarringtonEffectiveness of school-based programs to reduce bullying: a systematic

and meta-analytic review
J. Exp. Criminol., 7 (1) (2011), pp. 27-56, 10.1007/s11292-010-9109-1
U.S. Department of Education, 2011
U.S. Department of EducationAnalysis of State Bullying Laws and Policies
U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC (2011)
Google Scholar
Vandebosch et al., 2012
H. Vandebosch, L. Beirens, W. D'Haese, D. Wegge, S. PabianPolice actions with regard to

cyberbullying: the Belgian case
Psicothema, 24 (4) (2012), pp. 646-652
Vernmark et al., 2010
K. Vernmark, J. Lenndin, J. Bjärehed, M. Carlsson, J. Karlsson, J. Öberg, G. AnderssonInternet

administered guided self-help versus individualized e-mail therapy: a randomized trial of two
versions of CBT for major depression
Behav. Res. Ther., 48 (5) (2010), pp. 368-376, 10.1016/j.brat.2010.01.005
von Marées and Petermann, 2012
N. von Marées, F. PetermannCyberbullying: an increasing challenge for schools

Weber et al., 2013
M. Weber, M. Ziegele, A. SchnauberBlaming the victim: the effects of extraversion and

information disclosure on guilt attributions in cyberbullying
CyberPsychol. Behav. Soc. Netw., 16 (4) (2013), pp. 254-259, 10.1089/cyber.2012.0328
Williford et al., 2012
A. Williford, A. Boulton, B. Nolan, T.D. Little, A. Kärnä, C. SalmivalliEffects of the KiVa anti-
bulliyng program on adilescents' depression, anxiety, and perception of peers
J. Abnorm. Child Psychol., 40 (2) (2012), pp. 289-300
Wolke and Samara,

2004
D. Wolke, M. SamaraBullied by siblings: association with peer victimisation and behaviour

problems in Israeli lower secondary school children
J. Child Psychol. Psychiatry Allied Discip., 45 (5) (2004), pp. 1015-1029
Wong et al.,
2014
D.S.W. Wong, H.C. Chan, C.H.K. ChengCyberbullying perpetration and victimization among
adolescents in Hong Kong
Wong-
Lo and
Bullock,
2014
M. Wong-Lo, L.M. BullockDigital metamorphosis: examination of the bystander culture in

cyberbullying
Aggress. Violent Behav., 19 (4) (2014), pp. 418-422, 10.1016/j.avb.2014.06.007

Y
a
a
k
u
b
e
t
a
l
.
,
2
0
1
0
N.F. Yaakub, F. Haron, G.C. LeongExaming the efficacy of the Olweus prevention programme in
reducing bullying: the Malaysian experience
Precedia Soc. Behav. Sci., 5 (2010), pp. 595-598
ArticleDownload PDFGoogle Scholar
Y
b
a
r
r
a
,
2
0
0
4
M.L. YbarraLinkages between depressive symptomatology and internet harassment among

young regular Internet users
CyberPsychol. Behav., 7 (2) (2004), pp. 247-257, 10.1089/109493104323024500
Y
b
a
r
r
a
a
n
d
M
i
t
c
h
e
l
l
,
2
0
0
4
M.L. Ybarra, K.J. MitchellYouth engaging in online harassment: associations with caregiver–
child relationships, Internet use, and personal characteristics
M.L. Ybarra, M. Diener-West, P.J. LeafExamining the overlap in Internet harassment and school
bullying: implications for school intervention
J. Adolesc. Health, 41 (6, Supplement) (2007), pp. S42-S50, 10.1016/j.jadohealth.2007.09.004

C.P. Zalaquett, S.J. ChattersCyberbullying in college: frequenct, characteristics, and practical

implications
SAGE Open, 4 (2014), pp. 1-8

Z. Zhou, H. Tang, Y. Tian, H. Wei, F. Zhang, C.M. MorrisonCyberbullying and its risk factors
among Chinese high school students
CrossRefView Record in
Internet Interventions
Volume 2, Issue 3, September 2015, Pages 235-242
by Ana Phyllis Isla
Rose, 16 years old & currently a 3rd year high school student in Baguio city, likes posting photos of
herself on Facebook. One afternoon, when she checked her profile page, she found some very offensive
comments from a particular group of her classmates. She decided to brush it off as she wasn’t friends
with any of them but the same thing happened again after she updated her status and again when she
posted another photo. “Nagets ko kagad na hindi nila ako lulubayan” (“It didn’t take me that long to realize
that they weren’t planning on stopping any time soon,”) she said.
Peter K. Smith and Sonia Sharp explained that bullying is a systematic abuse of power. It is a repetitive
and aggressive behaviour carried out by a person or a group of people against an individual who cannot
readily defend themselves. According to StopBullying.gov, bullying is a frequent and serious problem but
the rise of technology also gave rise to a new and more potent method to the abuse – Cyberbullying.
Dr. Sameer Hinduja and Dr. Justin Patchin of the Cyberbullying Research Center described the
Cyberbullying phenomena as “wilful and repeated harm inflicted through the use of computers, cell
phones, and other electronic devices.” It has been also defined as a situation when an individual is
repeatedly tormented, threatened, harassed, humiliated, embarrassed or otherwise targeted by another
person using text messages using the Short Messaging System (SMS), e-mails, or any other type of
digital technology.
Here in the Philippines, Filipinos are definitely enjoying the perks that technology brings. In fact, we are
often dubbed as the “Texting Capital of the World” as Filipinos send billions of SMS messages per year.
Also, according to the report released by the SocialBakers.com, an analytics and statistics monitoring web
page, as of February 2012, the Philippines ranks eighth in the most number of Facebook users in the
world, with approximately 27, 720, 300 Filipino Facebook users. Facebook’s penetration in the Philippines
is about 27.75% of the country’s total population, with the youth, ages 13 – 17, comprising about 20% of
the Philippine Facebook population.
Technology and the Internet have improved the lives of people, communication is easier and
entertainment can be achieved in just a few clicks. However, the advent of the ‘modern world’ also brings
with it adverse effects. Although Social Networking sites such as Twitter & Facebook were created to
‘bridge the gaps between people’, they have been an ideal, ‘virtual playground’ for cyberbullies. According
to a survey by the Cyberbullying Research Center, about 20 percent of students from ages 11 to 18
surveyed last year said they’d been cyberbullied at some point in their lives. According to the National
Crime Prevention Center, over 40% of all teenagers with Internet access have reported being bullied
online on 2008.
acebook has opened many opportunities as a communication tool, however, it also paved a new way for
abusers to expand the reach and the extent of the harm they do. As many as the ‘fan pages’ that runs
rampant through the Facebook groups feature are the ‘hate’ groups or the ‘Anti-’ groups of such pages.
One example is 16-year-old Chienna Filomeno’s “We hate Chienna Filomeno” group. Her hate group’s
posts are always derogatory to young Chienna and the comments even more so. The moderator of the
hate group would post pictures of her in compromising positions and encourage the commenters to post
their opinions, which are usually mean and unforgiving. Chienna Filomeno is a cosplayer from a
prominent high school in Manila and sometimes people claiming to be her schoolmates would post there
and say thing like, “Ay! Kilala ko yan sa school! Malandi talaga yan!” (Oh! I know her from our school! She
really is promiscuous!) One of the posts on the group showed Chienna on a bed with her former
boyfriend, followed by a post of her former boyfriend implying that Chienna is no longer a ‘virgin’. There
were no holds barred on the virtual audience. Many were calling her names and questioning even her
parent’s values, some pitied her and tried to vindicate her actions but they were soon met with malicious
replies enough for them to give up.
There are many detrimental outcomes of cyberbullying. Many targets of cyberbullying report feeling
depressed, sad, angry, and frustrated. And some victims who experience cyberbullying are also afraid or
embarrassed to go to school. Victims of cyberbullying also tend to develop low self-esteem. Research
also shows that there are links between cyberbullying and family problems, academic problems, school
violence, and delinquent behaviour. And while the cyberbully rarely inflicts physical harm to their victims,
the psychological damage they cause, if bad enough, can compel the cybervictims to inflict physical harm
on themselves. In fact, there have already been a number of young people around the world taking their
own lives due to cyberbullying.
Derrick, a 14-year-old highschool student, confessed that ever since he realized his gender preference in
Elementary, he has long since accepted the fact that there would always be people who would be critical
of him. However, he still gets pretty upset whenever some people call him names online. Some even text
him using a number he doesn’t recognize and slams him for being a homosexual. He said that he is not
sure about the identity of his attackers and that the sense of not knowing who his attackers are has
developed into some sort of paranoia. “Paminsan-minsan hindi ko na kilala kung sino ang mga kaibigan ko at
sino ang mga kaaway ko.” (Sometimes I don’t even know who my friends are and who my enemies are.)
One time, the abuse got so bad that he refused to go to school for two days. His parents were worried but
he never told his parents about what he was going through because he was afraid that they would not
understand his situation. Also, he thinks that telling them won’t do anything good anyway.
Cyberbullying can be much worse than the ‘traditional’ bullying as it has more vicious characteristics.
First, of course, is the anonymity of the cyberbully. Although in reality the victims of cyberbullying may
actually know who their attacker is, it will just be lost behind the cloak of anonymous email addresses,
pseudonymous screen names, or private cellphone numbers. The very small likelihood of tracing where
the message came from actually encourages the negative behaviour. It strips the cyberbully of his
inhibitions and frees him from the constraints of consequences. It can be very easy to be cruel with the
use of technology. A study by Michele L. Ybarra and Kimberly J. Mitchell, which examined youth
engaging in online harassment, found that adolescents who would not act aggressively in the traditional
bullying scenario might feel less constrained on-line. The “anonymity associated with online interactions
may strip away many aspects of socially accepted roles, leading the Internet to act as a potential
equaliser for aggressive acts”. As communication is no longer bound by time or space, a cyberbully can
send an untraceable offensive message from any computer in any café or private laptop or cellphone at
whatever time of day or night.
In today’s world where communication is 24/7, it is becoming more and more difficult to be separated from
your own mobile device. It has come to the point where not owning one can lead to ostracism. As Hinduja
& Patchin has observed, the youth has completely embraced interactions via cellphones and
computers. And since the victims themselves cannot be parted from their own handheld gadget, they
become more vulnerable to the abuse. They always have the option of leaving their mobile gadget off but
then it isolates them from the incoming messages that are actually of some importance or relevance.
Mario, a 3rd year high school student here, said, “Paano ‘pag biglang tumawag si mama? Paano ‘pag
emergency? ‘Pag naiwan ko wallet ko sa bahay, ok lang sa’kin kasi pwede naman ako mangutang sa mga
kaibigan ko. Pero ‘pag cellphone ko na yung naiwan…kulang na lang liparin ko yung bahay namin.” (What if my
mother calls? What if there’s an emergency? I’m okay with accidentally leaving my wallet at home
because I can always borrow some money from my friends but if I leave my cellphone at home…I have to
go back even if I need to fly home.)
In the Philippines, we often hear celebrities like Sarah Geronimo being victims of cyberbullying.
Celebrities are often the victims of identity theft as people use their names and pictures to create an
account for their personal use. But even from the stars themselves, there are cyberbullies. Ampalaya
Anonymous is a clique formed by popular actresses who recently gained popularity for reportedly bullying
a fellow actress via Twitter. And although she has vehemently denied it, Kim Chiu and her group of
friends were put on a spot for reports of cyberbullying. University of the Philippines Diliman Sociology and
Anthropology professor, Dr. Virgilio Binghay, explained that the rampant identity stealing and cyber-
bullying is a form of crab mentality. Cyberbullies pull other people down for their own personal agenda.
Kasi, Ate, alam mo yung Gossip Girl? Parang ganun yun feeling,”(Ate, do you know Gossip Girl? That’s what it
feels like,) Apple, a 15-year-old high school student, replied when asked why she was posting rumours
about her on classmates on Facebook. She said that her classmates go to her ‘Gosssip Girl’ page to
know what other people’s dirty laundry are. She said that she doesn’t think she’s doing anything wrong
because she’s just simply posting the things that everyone’s saying. “Pinaguusapan naman ng lahat sa
school, nilalagay ko lang naman sa FB.” (Everyone’s talking about it at school anyway. I’m merely posting
the stuff on FB.)
Gossip Girl is an American TV series that revolves around a virtual entity called ‘Gossip Girl’ who posts
rumours in a blog about Manhattan’s Upper East Side. After the show launched in 2007, it also started
the trend of internet ‘Gossip Blogs’ where you can find rumours about the ‘people in your neighbourhood’.
Perhaps there is no single answer as to why people act as cyberbullies. As James Lehman points out,
some people simply bully other people because it solves their social problems. It might satisfy their need
for attention or it might be the one gaining them respect. In adolescents, bullying is a means to finding
one’s identity and establishing their place in their clique. But of course, bullying is never right.
In various parts of the world, many governments are acting to criminalise cyberbullying. There are also
efforts to do the same here in the Philippines. Last year, Senator Miriam Defensor-Santiago had filed
Senate Bill no. 2677, or the Anti-Bullying School Policy Act. In an explanatory note, she acknowledged
the existence of cyberbullying and its long-term threats. The Anti-Bullying School Policy Act would require
all schools to create policies that would address and increase the awareness on the issues of bullying
and cyberbullying in their school. “A direct correlation with the reduction of bullying incidents is the
increase in awareness and concern among school administrators of these incidents, and the positive
action of providing venues for parents, faculty and school officials to report such incidents to authorities,”
she said.
Cyberbullying here in the Philippines doesn’t get much attention as there are no official reported cases
about it. But just because it remains unreported doesn’t mean that it is not happening. Interviews with the
local high school students here show that the youth are aware that cyberbullying is a serious issue.
However, most of them do not know how to react when faced with those kinds of situations. Majority of
the students just keeps mum about it because they think that it is a ‘normal’ part of the ‘online
experience’. Cyberbullying affects many adolescents on a daily basis and while it may be difficult to stop,
it is not impossible. Everyone can help stop Cyberbullying by making other people, especially the youth,
aware about the real deal on Cyberbullying. The first step is to educate the youth on what can be
classified as cyberbullying and that cyberbullying is wrong and is not a ‘normal’ behaviour or experience.
It is also good to encourage victims of cyber bullying to talk to adults or other people when they are
experiencing cyberbullying instead of merely putting up with it. Of course, the youth themselves also have
to be more responsible with what information they post online. As a user of a social networking site, what
the content of their site would be on their own jurisdiction. However, they should be more aware on what
could be considered as inappropriate content. As a campaign of a local media here in the Philippines say:
Think before you click.
1 in 3 young people have been victims of cyberbullying: UNICEF

ABS-CBN News
Posted at Sep 04 2019 10:42 PM
MANILA - One third of young people in 30 countries said they have been a victim of online
bullying, a new poll released Wednesday by UNICEF showed.
The survey also showed one in five young people said they skipped school due to cyberbullying
and violence.
In the Philippines, the National Baseline Survey on Violence Against Children (NBS-VAC) in
2016 showed cyberviolence affects almost half of children aged 13 to 17.
The prevalence of cyberviolence for males (44 percent) and females (43 percent) is almost the
same.
The study also showed one-third of cyberviolence experienced by Filipino children are in the
form of verbal abuse over the internet or through cellphones, while a fourth are through sexual
messages.
More females received messages of sexual nature or content than males. Twice as many males
than females, however, reported having their nude body or sexual activities, whether real or
falsified, shown on the internet or cellphone.
In the UNICEF U-Report poll conducted in June 2019, almost three-quarters of young people
from 30 countries said that social networks including Facebook, Instagram, Snapchat and Twitter
are the most common platforms for online bullying.
This means that school no longer ends once a student leaves class, and neither does bullying.
The U-Report also revealed 32 percent of respondents believe the government is mainly
responsible in addressing online bullying, 31 percent said that young people are responsible,
while 29 percent said internet companies are responsible.
These show opinions are divided in terms of who should be responsible for ending online
bullying. It also highlights the need to involve children and young people in the shared
responsibility.
All forms of violence against children, including bullying or cyberbullying, have devastating
effects on the physical and emotional well being of young people that can create lasting
emotional and psychological scars.
UNICEF is calling for urgent action to implement policies that will protect children and young
people both from online and offline bullying.
UNICEF is also urging social media and social networking service companies to improve ethical
standards and practices in collecting and managing information of children.
Unicef: Cyber bullying affects 70% of youth

By
Pia Lee-Brago (The Philippine Star)
2019
MANILA, Philippines — Online violence, cyber bullying and digital harassment

affect over 70 percent of young people globally, according to the United Nations
Children’s Fund (UNICEF), as it called on internet users to “be kind online” and
prevent this form of violence.
A recent one-million-strong UNICEF poll of 15- to 24-year-olds from more than

160 countries prompted the agency’s call, along with a series of student-led
#ENDviolence Youth Talks held globally, which examined what parents,
teachers and policymakers could do to keep youths safe.
“We’ve heard from children and young people from around the globe and what
they are saying is clear: the internet has become a kindness desert,” UNICEF
executive director Henrietta Fore said during the observance of Safer Internet
Day on Tuesday.
The proportion of children and adolescents affected by cyberbullying ranges

from five percent to 21 percent, with girls at higher risk than boys, according to
data from the UN Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization.
“Cyberbullying can cause profound harm as it can quickly reach a wide

audience, and can remain accessible online indefinitely, virtually ‘following’ its
victims online for life,” the UNICEF said.
It added that bullying and cyberbullying also feed each other, forming “a
continuum of damaging behavior.”
Victims of cyberbullying are more likely to abuse drugs and alcohol, skip school,
receive poor grades and experience low self-esteem and health problems. In
extreme situations, it has even led to suicide.
On Safer Internet Day, celebrated globally on Feb. 5, the UNICEF reminded

everyone that “kindness – both online and off – is a responsibility that begins
with each of us.”
In honor of the UN child-rights convention, which turns 30 this November,
UNICEF is also calling for renewed urgency and cooperation to put children’s
rights at the forefront of digital efforts.
“Thirty years after the adoption of the Convention on the Rights of the Child and
the creation of the World Wide Web, it is time for governments, families,
academia and the private sector to put children and young people at the center
of digital policies,” Fore added.
“By protecting them from the worst the internet has to offer and expanding
access to its best, we can each help tip the balance for good,” the UNICEF chief
said.
The UNICEF stressed that “in the end, kindness stood out as one of the most
powerful means to prevent bullying and cyberbullying.”
“That’s why on this Safer Internet Day, UNICEF is inviting everyone, young and
old, to be kind online, and calling for greater action to make the internet a safer
place for everyone,” Fore stressed.
The youth, regardless of income level, has become a mainstay of the internet.
The UN International Telecommunications Union said 94 percent of 15- to 24-

year-olds in developed countries are online, and more than 65 percent of their
developing country counterparts are well ahead of the pace of internet usage
among the general population. – With Janvic Mateo
FROM HUMILIATION TO THREATS
80% of young teens in PHL experience

cyberbullying –survey
Published March 30, 2016 5:05pm
By RIE TAKUMI, GMA News
Eighty percent of teenagers aged 13 to 16 have been cyberbullied through social

media, according to a 2015 survey by child-care nonprofit Stairway Foundation
Inc.
The survey, the results of which were released Wednesday, was the second study
carried out by SFI "to address a gap in data concerning Child Online Protection
(COP) in the Philippines."
About 1,268 school children aged 7 to 12 and 1,143 aged 13 to 16 were covered
in the survey conducted in the National Capital Region; Silang, Cavite;
Zamboanga Sibugay; Bayawan City, and Bacolod City, Negros; Cebu City; and Tiu,
Batangas.
While 80 percent of teenagers are cyberbullied through social media, 60 percent

of their counterparts in the 7 to 12 age bracket suffered the same abuse.
The survey also showed that 30 percent of children aged 7 to 12 and 40 percent
of 13 to 16 were aware of peers who endured cyberbullying
The survey also said three out of 10 children aged 7 to 12 were bullied through
threats, two were oppressed through photo editing, one were humiliated or had
their private conversations exposed, and three were either excluded or
impersonated through fake accounts.
In teenagers, photo editing had affected three out of 10 students, while two out of
10 were either humiliated or threatened. One out of 10 also said they were
bullied by having their secret conversations exposed, while two suffered
impersonation or had experienced exclusion.


advertisement
Filtered By: Lifestyle
LIFESTYLE
FROM HUMILIATION TO THREATS
80% of young teens in PHL experience

cyberbullying –survey
Published March 30, 2016 5:05pm
By RIE TAKUMI, GMA News
Eighty percent of teenagers aged 13 to 16 have been cyberbullied through social

media, according to a 2015 survey by child-care nonprofit Stairway Foundation Inc.
The survey, the results of which were released Wednesday, was the second study
carried out by SFI "to address a gap in data concerning Child Online Protection (COP)
in the Philippines."
About 1,268 school children aged 7 to 12 and 1,143 aged 13 to 16 were covered in the
survey conducted in the National Capital Region; Silang, Cavite; Zamboanga
Sibugay; Bayawan City, and Bacolod City, Negros; Cebu City; and Tiu, Batangas.
While 80 percent of teenagers are cyberbullied through social media, 60 percent of

their counterparts in the 7 to 12 age bracket suffered the same abuse.
The survey also showed that 30 percent of children aged 7 to 12 and 40 percent of 13
to 16 were aware of peers who endured cyberbullying.
The survey also said three out of 10 children aged 7 to 12 were bullied through
threats, two were oppressed through photo editing, one were humiliated or had their
private conversations exposed, and three were either excluded or impersonated
through fake accounts.
In teenagers, photo editing had affected three out of 10 students, while two out of 10
were either humiliated or threatened. One out of 10 also said they were bullied by
having their secret conversations exposed, while two suffered impersonation or had
experienced exclusion.
SFI notes that cyberbullying is "particularly repugnant and complicated" as the
Internet "magnifies the problem in almost every aspect" and invades safe spaces.
"We must make children understand that cyberbullying shouldn't be ignored, and that
it is never the victim's fault... We should also know that cyberbullying is a school
concern," it wrote.
Trust for security
If pressed, only 60 percent of children aged 7 to 12 would confide to their parents

while only 34 percent of 13 to 16-year-olds would tell their mothers or fathers of their
negative experiences.
The Anti-Bullying Act of 2013 (RA 10627)
This law finds applicability in school-related bullying, student-student bullying in particular,
which covers those uttered in social media. “Bullying”, as defined, refers to any severe or
repeated use by one or more students of a written, verbal or electronic expression, or a physical
act or gesture, or any combination thereof, directed at another student that has the effect of
actually causing or placing the latter in reasonable fear of physical or emotional harm or damage
to his property; creating a hostile environment at school; infringing on the rights of another; or
materially or substantially disrupting the education process. (Sec. 2, RA 10627) These acts are
collectively called “cyber bullying” when committed online. (Sec. 2-D, RA 10627) This covers
social bullying aiming to belittle another individual or group or gender-based bullying that
humiliates another on the basis of perceived or actual sexual orientation and gender identity.
(Sec. 3, B-1, RA 10627, Implementing Rules).
The Revised Penal Code and the Cybercrime Prevention Act
One who publicly or maliciously imputes to another a crime, vice, defect, real or imaginary, or
any act, omission, condition, status or circumstance tending to cause the dishonor, discredit or
contempt of a natural or juridical person, or blacken the memory of one who is dead may be
liable for libel under this Code. (Art. 353, RPC) These acts are more severely punished when
done online in addition to the civil action for damages which may be brought by the offended
party. (Sec. 4(c-4), RA 10175) Cyberlibel holds liable only the original author of the post (Sec.
5(3), Implementing Rules of RA 10175). Likers or sharers of a post cannot be held liable under
this law.
Slander may also be applicable to one who, in heat of anger, utters statements that are highly
defamatory in character. (Art. 358, RPC) Intriguing Against Honour may also find applicability
when the principal purpose is to blemish the honour or reputation of a person. (Art. 364, RPC)
However, the requirement is that the post be directed to a specific person. Hence, a blind item is
not as actionable as a named-post in social media.
The Civil Code on Damages
One who is aggrieved by a defamatory post in social media may find refuge in the provisions of
the Civil Code on Damages. (Art. 2176, Civil Code) One who posts in social media, causing
damage to the reputation of another may be liable to the subject for damages and this can be a
valid cause of action under the law. Such posts must tend to pry to the privacy and peace of mind
of another, meddle or disturb the private life or family relations of another, intrigue to cause
another to be alienated from his friends or vex or humiliate another on account of his religious
beliefs, lowly station in life, place of birth, physical defect or other personal condition. (Art. 26,
Civil Code)
The Labour Code on Just Causes for Termination
An employee who spreads rumors or intrigues against a co-worker or his superior or vice versa,
or who does any act similar to cyberlibel, slander, intriguing against honour or even prying into
the privacy of another may be a just cause for termination if embodied in the company policy in
addition to all other causes of action available to him under the laws mentioned. (Sec. 5.2(g),
D.O 147-15)
However, all these will only be a valid cause of action to one who is the subject of the post and
who is aware of the post directed to him.
Freedom of speech must not be infringed but this right is not without any limitations. In the end,
it is always best to devote the stroke of our fingers and the clicks of our mouse to intellectual
discourse that matter rather than risk being held liable under the law. After all, the power of our
minds should be
Cyndy p. Dela Cruz 2017

Document

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Document

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Document

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

What are the different forms of cyberbullying mentioned?

What are the different forms of cyberbullying mentioned?

What are some of the effects of cyberbullying mentioned in the document?

What are some of the effects of cyberbullying mentioned in the document?

The societal impact of cyberbullying

Cyberbullying is bullying that takes place using electronic technology. Electronic

Where Does Cyberbullying Take Place?

What are the Effects of Cyberbullying?

Cyberbullying usually has long-term detrimental effects on a victim. Truancy is quite

Cyberbullying involves the use of information and communication technologies to

Examples of cyberbullying include mean text messages or emails, rumours sent

The following figures have emerged in a global survey of almost 5,000

However, cyberbullying doesn’t stop at children and teenagers. People in the

With an estimated 3 billion individuals on the planet utilising the Internet it is

In order to combat the problem, it is important to actively participate in people’s

 Think about what you write or photos you add.

Table 1. Overview of studies investigating psychological impacts of cyberbullying

Study Age N Country Status Impact

Bauman Grades 1491 United Bully Suicide in

Bonanno 14.2 399 Canada Bully and Depressive

Cénat et 15.4 8194 Canada Victim Self esteem

Feinstein 18–42 565 United Victim Depressive

Fletcher 12–13 1144 UK Bully Poor quality of

Gámez- 15.2 845 Spain Victim Depressive

Kowalski Grades 931 United Bully/victim Psychological

Mishna 13.85 2186 Canada Victim and School

Na et al. 18–25 121 United Victim Self esteem

Patchin 10–16 1963 United Bully and Self esteem

Hinduja 10–16 1963 United Bully and Suicidal

Price and 5–25 548 Australia Victim Self

ŞAhİN Not 389 Turkey Victim Loneliness

Schenk et 18–24 799 United Bullies Increased

Schneider Grades 20,406 United Victim Depressive

Wong et 12–15 1917 Hong Bully Low self

Ybarra 10–17 1501 United Victim Depressive

Ybarra et 10–15 1515 United Victim Truancy and

Zalaquett 21–59 613 United Victim Anger and

6. Online psychological therapy as an intervention

Agate and Ledward, 2013

Entertain. Law Rev., 24 (8) (2013), pp. 263-268

View Record in ScopusGoogle Scholar

Andersson et al., 2014

G. Andersson, P. Cuijpers, P. Carlbring, H. Riper, E. HedmanGuided Internet-based vs. face-to-

World Psychiatry, 13 (3) (2014), pp. 288-295, 10.1002/wps.20151

CrossRefView Record in ScopusGoogle Scholar

Arch et al., 2012

J. Consult. Clin. Psychol., 80 (5) (2012), pp. 750-765

CrossRefView Record in ScopusGoogle Scholar

Askew et al., 2012

Aust. Health Rev., 36 (2012), pp. 197-204

View Record in ScopusGoogle Scholar

Comput. Hum. Behav., 46 (0) (2015), pp. 149-157, 10.1016/j.chb.2015.01.021

ArticleDownload PDFView Record in ScopusGoogle Scholar

Barlińska et al., 2013

J. Barlińska, A. Szuster, M. WiniewskiCyberbullying among adolescent bystanders: role of the

J. Community Appl. Soc. Psychol., 23 (1) (2013), pp. 37-51, 10.1002/casp.2137

CrossRefView Record in ScopusGoogle Scholar

Bauman et al., 2013

J. Adolesc., 36 (2) (2013), pp. 341-350, 10.1016/j.adolescence.2012.12.001