Cyber Bullying: Causes, Effects, and Impact on Youth

Introduction

Over the past decade, significant attention has been drawn to cyber bullying by both the media and researchers. Research on cyber bullying has covered various behavioral aspects, focusing mainly on demographic and personal factors of the individuals involved. In particular, research has targeted factors among adolescents, who account for a majority of cyber bullying cases. Nonetheless, it is important that other populations are studied as well — including adults, where cyber bullying may be less common — so that previous findings can be properly evaluated. Several personal factors linked to adolescent cyber bullying, such as level of self-esteem, have been noted to change as individuals age (Obins et al., 2002). It is therefore necessary to examine whether such factors remain linked to cyber bullying across groups of different ages. Moreover, while research on cyber bullying among adults is growing, it has largely been limited to identifying individuals as either cyber victims or cyber bullies (Zachilli & Valerio, 2011). By contrast, most research on adolescents distinguishes among various cyber bullying identities, which allows for a richer understanding of the behavior. This paper discusses four cyber identities — cyber bully, cyber victim, non-involved, and cyber bully/victim — among young adults, and explores how self-esteem is connected to each of the four identities (Brack & Caltabiano, 2014).

Smith et al. (2008) broadly describe cyber bullying as an intentional aggressive act carried out by an individual or group through electronic means, repeated over a period of time against a victim who cannot easily defend themselves (p. 366). This description parallels the definition given to traditional offline bullying and consists of three components that differentiate bullying from acts such as assault and harassment (Sevcikova & Smahel, 2009). Specifically, a bullying act must involve aggression, an identifiable power imbalance between the victim and the bully, and repetition over a given period of time (Newey & Magson, 2010). Nonetheless, applying this definition to cyber bullying raises questions about whether cyber bullying is simply an extension of traditional offline bullying sharing the same components (Beran & Li, 2005), or whether it is distinctly different with its own unique characteristics (Ybarra et al., 2007). Despite these debates, there is general agreement on the range of methods and activities associated with cyber bullying (Brack & Caltabiano, 2014).

Cyber bullying can occur across several technological platforms, including email, social media, text messaging, instant messaging, pictures and videos taken through phones and webcams, internet forums, chat rooms, and the comment sections of various websites (Smith et al., 2006). Further, cyber bullying is not limited to sending insulting or hurtful messages. It encompasses a range of behaviors, from revealing sensitive information about another person to creating a fake persona in order to obtain information or humiliate someone (Willard, 2005). Research also shows that there are many identities in cyber bullying beyond just cyber victims and cyber bullies. A number of identities — sometimes called typologies — describe the various roles individuals play in cyber bullying situations (Brack & Caltabiano, 2014).

The idea that different kinds of bullies exist was first introduced by Olweus (1997), who suggested that bullying should be evaluated on a scale that accounts for various groups of bullies, bystanders, and victims. The use of typology in classifying bullying has evolved since Olweus's initial categorization. It is now widely recognized in the literature that four types of people are involved in cyber bullying: pure cyber victims, pure cyber bullies, cyber bully/victims, and those who have been neither cyber bullied nor cyber bullies themselves (Florell & Wygant, 2013; Kowalski et al., 2013). Several studies have reported significant overlap between cyber victimization and cyber bullying compared to other aspects of offline bullying. While there is limited explanation for this in the literature, it is logical that certain characteristics of the cyber bully/victim group may encourage greater involvement in cyber bullying (Brack & Caltabiano, 2014).

Estimates of cyber bullying prevalence vary widely. Some studies report that 20–40% of school-age children and adolescents have experienced cyber bullying as a victim (Tokunaga, 2010), while approximately 2–21% have reported being cyber bullies themselves (Raskauskas & Stoltz, 2007). Although it has been suggested that cyber bullying decreases as people age (Sevcikova & Smahel, 2009), evidence indicates that cyber bullying increases among adolescents and then declines as they mature (Slonje & Smith, 2008). Studies involving adults have used different methodologies (Zachilli & Valerio, 2011) or have included much broader age ranges (Sevcikova & Smahel, 2009) compared to adolescent samples, making it difficult to evaluate these trends. For instance, among non-adolescents, Sevcikova and Smahel (2009) found that only 10.7% reported being cyber bullied in the workplace. Regarding cyber bullying perpetration, Zachilli and Valerio (2011) reported that only 3.6% of college students acknowledged involvement in a form of bullying at college, while approximately 20% of the broader adult sample reported cyber bullying behavior, with most being under 35. Although research on adult cyber bullying remains limited, it is clear that findings vary considerably across studies (Brack & Caltabiano, 2014).