The Prevalence and Psychological Impact of Cyberbullying on Undergraduate Students at a Historically Black College and University

Abstract

Cyberbullying is a serious form of bullying and harassment that can be linked to dropout, physical and emotional illnesses, suicide, homicide and other acts of violence. Cyberbullying seems to have an impact on any age group and individual at any given time. Utilizing mixed methods research methodology, this project examined the prevalence and psychological impact among cyberbullying victims at a Historically Black College and University. The prevalence and psychological impact of cyberbullying was measured among 14 African American undergraduate students. In addition, 170 students completed a cyberbullying survey. The researchers predicted that cyberbullying would have an immense impact on undergraduate students. However, the students conveyed that they were marginally impacted psychologically. Also, the study showed that the students were indeed impacted, but in different distinctive ways. In addition to that, the study found a low prevalence rate for cyberbullying at this university.

Introduction

Smith and colleagues (2008, p.8) define cyberbullying as “an aggressive, intentional act carried out by a group or individual, using electronic forms of contact, repeatedly and over time against a victim who cannot easily defend him or herself.” Cyberbullying is a repetitive intentional act to harm another person through various forms of technology, including e-mail, text messages, social networking websites, chat rooms, and instant messaging (Mason 2008; Patchin and Hinduja 2006). According to Sadock and Sadock (2007), 1 in 17 children aged 10–17 years have experienced cyberbullying. In addition, Raskauskas and Stoltz (2007) report that 48.8% of 13- to 18-year-old U.S. adolescents report being cyberbullied, while 21.4% report cyberbullying others. Due to the growing accessibility and portability of the various modes of technology, cyberbullying incidents continue to occur. The most extreme consequence of cyberbullying, and perhaps the most well known is suicide. In September 2010, Rutgers University freshman, Tyler Clementi, jumped from the George Washington Bridge after his roommate streamed video of him and another male over the Internet (Pena 2011). On October 16, 2006, Megan Meier hung herself after receiving harassing messages about her worthlessness and urgings to kill herself (“ABC News, 2007”). On January 14, 2010, Phoebe Prince committed suicide as a result of being cyberbullied via texts messages and posts on social media websites (Johnson 2010). These are only a few examples of the cyberbullying phenomena. Because of the increasing incidents of cyberbullying, many states have adopted laws against cyberbullying (Hinduja and Patchin 2009).

One reason for the popularity of cyberbullying is due to the anonymous nature of cyberbullying, because when someone is cyberbullies, their attacker is not known. In fact, the cyberbullier has access to the victim 24 hour a day (Kowalski et al. 2008) due to the use of technology. Another reason for the increase in cyberbullying may be due to the disinhibition, which occurs when individuals engage in behaviors they would not do ordinarily if they could be identified, making it easier for the person to engage in it. In addition, the perpetrator is unable to see the negative effect of their bullying on the victim, making it unlikely for them to experience guilt or regret for their actions. Kolwalski and colleagues (2008) found, in their study of middle school students, that 50% of cyberbullying victims do not know the identity of their perpetrator.

There have been numerous studies on cyberbullying among middle and high school students. However, there are only a few studies who discuss the impact of bullying among college students. This population is avid users of the technologies used in perpetrating cyberbullying. Thus, the purpose of this study was to examine the prevalence and psychological impact of cyberbullying among undergraduate students. This article hopes to expand the scholarship on cyberbullying with this population.

Common types, forms, and methods of cyberbullies

Individuals engage in cyberbullying for various reasons. Researchers have identified four different types of cyberbullies (Aftab 2009; Ringrose 2006). The four types are described as follows: the vengeful angel, the power-hungry or revenge of the nerds, the mean girl, and the inadvertent cyberbully. The vengeful angel feels that he or she is keeping himself/herself as well as others safe from harm. In most cases, this type of cyberbully does not portray himself/herself as a bully. The power-hungry or revenge of the nerds is the common prey of the original bully. They often use their computer techniques to gain control over others and portray themselves as being strong online. The power hungry cyberbully's goal is to prove that they have the authority to force others to abide by them. The mean girl form of cyberbullying is not done alone. The group chooses to cyberbully as a form of amusement with no concern for others or their deviant behavior. In most cases, this type of cyberbully usually knows the victims as a former friend or associate or it could be a random person. The appearance of the mean girl cyberbullying is nothing new, but nevertheless, it depicts the complications of the various types of relationships between adolescent females. Finally, the inadvertent cyberbully reacts to others online without any rational thought. They reply in annoyance and hostility. Some do it just because they can.

Despite the reasons for cyberbullying, it is potentially harmful to others. Cyberbullies use numerous strategies to attack their victims. Any use of cyberbullying may lead individuals to feel frustrated, damaged, and ashamed or even fearful (National Crime Prevention Council 2006). According to the research conducted by Willard (2006), the director of the Center for Safe and Responsible Internet Use, the most common forms of cyberbullying include:

Flaming—sending rude messages to or about a person;

Harassment—includes aggressive or insulting messages that are constantly sent to a person;

Denigration—includes belittling comments or savage language about an individual, which is created to destroy friendships or demolish the reputation of the victim;

Impersonation—occurs when someone pretends to be someone else or the deliberate act of posing to be someone who creates and post material that causes damage to the victim in any way possible;

Outing—which is “flagrantly posting, sending or forwarding private information or images, especially harmful information that has the potential that could cause embarrassment” (Williard 2007, p.9); or trickery—when “the victim is manipulated into thinking that the information they are sending are private, when the cyberbully's goal is to deceive the victim into communicating or exposing something humiliating that will then be exposed to others or used as a threat” (p.9);

Excluding—intentional exclusion of a person from a particular online group; and

Cyber stalking—online tracking, intimidation, and threatening to harm another person.

Regardless of the type of cyberbullying, it is potentially harmful to its victims. It is also important to note that people who have been cyberbullied are likely to become cyberbullies themselves (Beran and Li 2007; Williams and Guerra 2007).

Individuals use several methods to engage in cyberbullying. Researchers assert that instant messaging is one of the most common methods used for cyberbullying (Kowalski et al. 2008). With instant messaging, cyberbullies typically send embarrassing messages or pictures to the victim or to someone else about the victim. Text messages are also a very popular medium for cyberbullying. With text messages, individuals may also send derogatory pictures or messages to or about someone (Hinduja and Patchin 2008; Kowalski et al. 2008). Facebook is also a popular method used to cyberbully. In addition to social media sites, chat rooms, blogs, websites, and dashboards have also been used for cyberbullying (Kowalski et al. 2008).

Prevalence of cyberbullying

Researchers found in the second Youth Internet Safety Survey, in 2004 (n = 1500), that the overall prevalence rate of Internet users, aged 10–17 years, was 9% (Ybarra et al. 2006). The study indicated a 50% increase in cyberbullying from the first Youth Internet Safety Survey that was given in 2000 (Ybarra and Mitchell 2004). Dehue and colleagues (2008) studied 1211 students in the final-year at primary schools and first year students at secondary schools in the Netherlands. Their study showed that 23% of students had been involved in cyberbullying others. Sixteen percent were involved in cyberbullying through Internet or text messages. At a Canadian middle school, students took a self-report survey dealing with cyberbullying (Li 2007). It was found that 24.9% of the 177 students being studied were indeed victims of cyberbullying, and 14.5% were cyberbullies. Students on the seventh grade level in both Canada and China completed the same survey. Out of the 461 students being studied, the results indicated that one in three students had been victims of cyberbullying, and one in five students was a cyberbully. Also, those who had experienced cyberbullying had been cyberbullied more than three times, while two out of three cyberbullies had harassed others four or more times. The results illustrated how often middle school-aged students experience cyberbullying as well as the age it may occur. The likelihood of an individual being victimized or becoming a perpetrator of cyberbullying is positively correlated with the amount of time someone spends on the Internet (Patchin and Hinduja 2008). Also, the older an adolescent becomes, the more likely it is for he or she to become cyberbullied due to the amount of privacy given to them.

The research on cyberbullying among college students is limited. Kraft and Wang (2010) studied cyberbullying and cyberstalking at a college in the United States. They found that out of the 471 participants, 10% had experienced cyberbullying, and 9% were victims of cyberstalking. Finn (2004), in his research study found that 10–15% of 339 students at the University of New Hampshire reported receiving repeated e-mail or instant messages that threatened, harassed, or insulted them. He also maintained that more than half the students reported receiving unwanted pornography. According to Dilmac (2009), 22.5% of the 666 students at Selcuk University in Turkey reported cyberbullying another person at least once, and 55.35% reported being a victim of cyberbullying at least once. Consequently, at Indiana State University, 22% of survey students stated that they had been cyberbullied, while 42% reported that they knew someone who had been cyberbullied (Pena 2011). In addition, MacDonald and Roberts-Pittman (2010) found that out of 439 participants surveyed, 38% of college students knew someone who had been cyberbullied, 21.9% had been cyberbullied, and 8.6% had cyberbullied others.

Impact of cyberbullying

In most cases, victims of cyberbullying are quite frequently negatively impacted due to being victimized. Research has shown that victims seem to be more isolated or closed off. They are less accepted by peers of their own age, and they may also manifest more internalized psychosocial behaviors. These behaviors include depression, anxiety, and being quiet or withdrawn (Conners-Burrow et al. 2009). Victims of cyberbullying respond in numerous ways. They show a tremendous increase in emotional distress (Ybarra and Mitchell 2004). They also experience frustration, anger, and sadness. Furthermore, the more cyberbullying a person experiences, the more offline problems victims will exhibit (Hinduja and Patchin 2009). Finkler and colleagues (2000) found that one third or (32%) of cyberbullying victims exhibit at least one symptom of stress, 31% were upset, 19% were afraid, and 18% were embarrassed. Overall, bullying via picture/video messaging was viewed as having a greater impact than traditional bullying and other forms of cyberbullying. All other kinds of cyberbullying can be seen as experiencing an equal impact on its victims.

The impact of cyberbullying on college students is very similar to the impact of traditional bullying. Cyberbullying and traditional bullying are associated with major health and psychological issues such as depression, emotional distress, low self-esteem, and poor academic achievement (Mason 2008). In addition, victims generally exhibit psychological problems such as depression, loneliness, low self-esteem, school phobias, and social anxiety (Greene 2003). In addition to that, cyberbullying is linked to low self-esteem, family problems, academic problems, school violence, and delinquent behavior (Patchin and Hinduja 2008).

Unfortunately, one of the negative consequences of cyberbullying is psychological distress in its victims. Hence, to understand the psychological impact of cyberbullying, it is imperative to examine the relevant diagnosis that relates to the causes and consequences of cyberbullying in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (Drogin and Young 2008). Posttraumatic stress disorder is linked to cyberbullying due to the potential of the victim having lifelong memories of the event (Kowalski et al. 2008). Bullying has been linked to Attention Deficit Disorder, personality disorders, anxiety, and Conduct Disorder (Kumpulainen 2008). Personality Disorders such as Child or Adolescent Antisocial Behavior is also utilized for diagnosis in incidents of cyberbullying when the child or adolescent's behavior is not ascribable to a mental disorder (American Psychiatric Association 2000). It has also been found that cyberbullying may be linked with major depression (Ybarra and Mitchell 2004), self-harm, and suicide (Hay and Meldrum 2010). It is important to consider these and other psychiatric diagnosis when treating victims of cyberbullying.

Technology use continues to grow, thus cyberbullying has the potential to continue to increase. Therefore, this study hopes to expand the information about cyberbullying among the college population. It is hoped that this examination of the prevalence and psychological impact of cyberbullying among undergraduate students will help colleges and universities to become aware of the issue and to develop methods to prevent and intervene when necessary.

Methods

Procedures

After Institutional Review Board permission was granted, e-mail addresses for undergraduate students were received from the University's office of Institutional Research. The cyberbullying survey was e-mailed to 6245 undergraduate students via Qualtrics online survey system. To obtain qualitative data, the researchers asked professors who teach undergraduate courses to announce a request for participation to undergraduate students who have experienced cyberbullying. Contact information was obtained from interested participants; the researchers then contacted students and scheduled an interview. Consent forms were given and collected during the time of the interviews. After obtaining consent forms, students were audiotaped and interviewed regarding their personal experiences with cyberbullying. The audiotaped interviews that lasted between 30 and 45 min were transcribed shortly after the interviews. The interviews began with a definition of cyberbullying and demographic questions.

Participants

A sample of 170 students completed the cyberbullying survey. In regard to gender, 45 were male, and 122 were females. Of these participants, 43 were freshman, 29 were sophomores, 48 were juniors, and 50 were seniors. The age ranges included 43% in 18–21 years, 27% in 21–25 years, and 30% in 25 years and older. In this sample, 87.06% identified as African Americans, 1.18% identified as Asian American, 0.59% identified as Mexican/Latino, 4.71% identified as white, and 6.47% identified as other. Fourteen African American students who have experienced cyberbullying were interviewed about their personal experiences with cyberbullying. The students included 3 males and 11 females. Out of the 14 students, there were 3 seniors, 1 junior, and 10 freshman. The students' ages ranged from 22 (1), 21 (2), 19 (3), 18 (7), and 17 (1).

Instruments

The cyberbullying survey adapted from Williard's (2006) CyberSavvy High School Survey was used to assess the prevalence of bullying among undergraduate students. The beginning section of the survey contained demographic data. The second part was the 17-item survey, and the third part provided a definition of cyberbullying as well as the location and hours of operation for campus counseling and security. To obtain qualitative data, an open-ended questionnaire designed by the researcher was used to interview participants who have experienced cyberbullying. Specifically, these audiotaped interviews examined each individual's personal experience with cyberbullying to ascertain the possible psychological impact.

Data analysis

Demographic data were collected and analyzed using descriptive statistics. Mean scores and standard deviation were computed on the cyberbullying survey to better understand the prevalence of cyberbullying experienced and perpetrated by undergraduate students. Data were analyzed through Qualtrics online survey system. The phenomenological approach was used to exemplify how each participant uniquely experienced and was affected psychologically by cyberbullying. The phenomenological approach describes the meanings individuals derive from common experiences about a particular phenomenon (Cresswell 2013). Specifically, the audiotaped interviews measuring the psychological impact of cyberbullying was analyzed by classifying, ranking, and coding data to identify emerging themes. Triangulation of the data was used to ensure trustworthiness and reliability of the data. Triangulation is the use of multiple methods of data collection and analysis to assist in confirming the research conclusions (Sheperis et al. 2010).

Results

Common types, forms, and methods of technology

The use of technology among college students is very prevalent. Technology innovations are needed and important to the everyday lives of people. Unfortunately, technology is frequently used to perpetrate or receive cyberbullying. The participants who participated in the cyberbullying survey reported that the most frequently used methods of technology were Facebook (52.80%), Instagram (27.95%), and Twitter (19.25%). The majority of the participants who were interviewed reported experiencing cyberbullying in the format of social media websites, including Facebook and Twitter. The other participants were cyberbullied via cell phones through text messaging.

Prevalence of cyberbullying

Overall, among participants in the quantitative portion of the study, the data suggest that cyberbullying is not highly prevalent among the participating college students, 22% reported rarely experiencing cyberbullying, while 93% of the participants reported rarely cyberbullying others.

The majority of the participants in the qualitative part of the study reported experiencing cyberbullying only a few times, whereas others reported experiencing it rarely or only once.

In addition, most of the students reported that they experienced cyberbullying in the forms of threats and harassment on social media websites, while others experienced harassment through text messaging.

Impact of cyberbullying

Many interviewed participants reported taking in an awareness of the harmfulness that social media can cause in their lives. Student 14 stated that the experience of cyberbullying has made her become more aware of accepting friend requests, whereas student 11 reported that it made her more careful of what to say on the Internet. Amazingly, the bulk of the participants reported that they were not academically impacted by cyberbullying, but student 12 said that it slowed down the pace of her learning. However, each student experienced a loss of trust in others. This loss of trust caused a negative impact on their friendships. Student 12 stated that this experience caused her not to talk to certain friends anymore, while student 8 reported realizing that some of her own friends anonymously attacked her online. On the contrary, student 11 asserted that it has allowed her the opportunity to be more direct and honest with friends and family.

In the study, surprisingly, the students seemed to have an improvement in their-esteem as a result of cyberbullying. Student 5 reported that it boosted her self-esteem so that she can be herself. On the contrary, student 2 said that it made him a little insecure.

Regrettably, some of the interviewed students experienced depression and poor concentration due to the effects of cyberbullying. In addition, others reported feeling an array of negative feelings after experiencing cyberbullying. The feelings described included empty and alone, nervous and confused, frustrated, irritated, sadness, anger, uncomfortable, and disappointed.

Discussion

This study's goal was to investigate the rate of occurrence and negative impact of cyberbullying among undergraduate students at a Historically Black College and University (HBCU). The incidents of cyberbullying experienced by participants occurred on social media sites and via text messages. These findings are consistent with research that asserts that social media sites and text messaging are commonly used for cyberbullying (Kowalski et al. 2008).

Amazingly, the majority of participants reported rarely experiencing cyberbullying. These findings are similar to research conducted at other universities. According to Finn (2004), 15% of 339 students at the University of New Hampshire reported receiving repeated e-mail or instant messages that threatened, harassed, or insulted them. Likewise, at Indiana State University, 22% of survey students reported experiencing cyberbullying, while 42% reported that they knew someone who had been cyberbullied (Pena 2011).

These findings were surprising to the researchers due to the high use of social media and texting among this population. Nevertheless, it must be considered that some individuals do not think that sending rude, negative texts, posts on Facebook, tweets, or derogatory pictures are a problem or considered as cyberbullying, especially since committing the previously mentioned acts are so common and accepted among people. However, many of the participants had cyberbullied others. As conveyed by Beran and Li (2007), victims of cyberbullying commonly become the perpetrator. Although the majority of participants reported no negative impact of cyberbullying, some interviewed students did report depression, poor concentration, and a host of negative emotions. These symptoms and emotions are of great concern due to the linkage of cyberbullying with depression, anxiety, and suicide (Ybarra and Mitchell 2004). Therefore, according to Drogin and Young (2008), it is extremely important to understand the relevant diagnosis that directly relates to the causes and the consequences of cyberbullying in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders. Consequently, being cyberbullied helped some students by boosting their self-esteem, teaching them problem solving skills, censoring, conversation skills, and relationship building skills since they report becoming more cautious in trusting others and selecting friends.

Despite the few lessons learned by students, the negative impact of cyberbullying greatly outweigh its positive impact.

Limitations and future directions

This study set out to determine the prevalence and psychological impact of cyberbullying among undergraduate students at an HBCU. As a pilot study, the data collected were limited to undergraduate students at one HBCU in Mississippi, and as such, they do not represent the complete diversity of other colleges and universities. In addition, the majority of the participants in the study were African Americans as the study was conducted at a predominantly African American HBCU. Furthermore, another limitation of the study was using an online survey, online surveys are limited in that they have a potential low response rate (Dillman 2007); however, due to the size of the population studied, it was the most cost effective method.

Future research should include a larger sample of universities. Researchers might also compare and contrast the prevalence and psychological impact among undergraduate students at HBCU's across the state of Mississippi or other states. Finally, further inquiry could also include the prevalence and psychological impact of traditional universities as well.

Conclusions

This study adds to the literature on the prevalence and negative impact of cyberbullying among the college population. Because of the widespread use and availability of technology among college students, cyberbullying is a serious problem. In this and similar studies, the prevalence rates vary, but it is proved that it does occur. With these occurrences come many negative effects, including depression, violence, suicide, and dropout. Because of the seriousness of the negative impacts of cyberbullying, research on this topic is important and widely needed. Moreover, it is imperative that colleges and universities address this phenomenon proved by research before it continues to fester into more forms of violence or harassment. Thus, it is recommended that in addition to continued research on the impact and prevalence of cyberbullying among college students, college campuses collaborate on prevention and intervention strategies to help combat this issue. Collaborations can occur between college and community counseling centers, counselor education, psychology, and social work programs, student affairs, and campus security. Education and awareness are the keys to decreasing cyberbullying on college campuses. Therefore, collaborators can come up with specific targeted campaigns to educate on the negative impact of cyberbullying as well as safe, friendly use of social media and texting.

Footnotes

Author Disclosure Statement

No competing financial interests exist.

References

ABC News. (2007, November 19). Parents: Cyberbullying led to teen's suicide. Retrieved from http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/story?id=3882520&page=1 (accessed January 10, 2017).

Aftab

. (2009). Stop cyberbullying: What methods work with the different kinds of cyberbullies? Retrieved from www.stopcyberbullying.org/parents/howdoyouhandleacyberbully.html (accessed January 10, 2017).

American Psychiatric Association. (2000). Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (4th edition revised). (American Psychiatric Association, Washington, DC.)

Beran

, Li

. (2007). The relationship between cyberbullying and school bullying. J Student Wellbeing. 1, 15–33.

Conners-Burrow

, Johnson

, Whiteside-Mansell

, et al. (2009). Adults matter: Protecting children from the negative impacts of bullying. Psychol Sch. 46, 593–604.

Cresswell

. (2013). Methodology and Research: Choosing Among Five Approaches. (Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA.)

Dehue

, Bolman

, Vollink

. (2008). Cyberbullying: Youngsters' experiences and parental perception. Cyberpsychol Behav. 11, 217–223.

Dilmac

. (2009). Psychological needs as a predictor of cyberbullying: A preliminary report on college students [Electronic Version]. Educ Sci Theory Pract. 9, 1307–1325.

Dillman

. (2007). Mail and Internet Surveys: The Tailored Design Method. (Wiley, Hoboken, NJ.)

10.

Drogin

, Young

. (2008). Forensic mental health aspects of adolescent “cyberbullying”: A jurisprudent science perspective. J Psychiatry Law. 36, 679–690.

11.

Finkler

, Mitchell

, Wolack

. (2000). Online Victimization: A Report on the Nation's Youth. National Center for Missing and Exploited Children. Retrieved from www.missingkids.com/missingkids/servlet/ResourceServlet?Languagecountry=en_USandPage Id = 869 (accessed January 10, 2017).

12.

Finn

. (2004). A survey of online harassment at a university campus [Electronic Version]. J Interpers Violence. 19, 468–481.

13.

Greene

. (2003). Counseling and climate change as treatment modalities for bullying in school. Int J Adv Couns. 25, 293–302.

14.

Hay

, Meldrum

. (2010). Bullying victimization and adolescent self-harm: Testing hypotheses from general strain theory. J Youth Adolesc. 39, 446–459.

15.

Hinduja

, Patchin

. (2008). Cyberbullying: An exploratory analysis of factors related to offending and victimization. Deviant Behav. 29, 129–156.

16.

Hinduja

, Patchin

. (2009). Bullying Beyond the Schoolyard: Preventing and Responding to Cyberbullying. (Corwin Press, Thousand Oaks, CA.)

17.

Johnson

. (2010, January 23). Bullying eyed in girl's death. Boston Herald. Retrieved from http://news.bostonherald.com/news/regional/view/20100123bullying_eyed_in_girls_deatj/srvc=home&position=also (accessed January 10, 2017).

18.

Kowalski

, Limber

, Agatston

. (2008). Cyberbullying: Bullying in the Digital Age. (Blackwell Publishing, Malden, MA.)

19.

Kraft

, Wang

. (2010). An exploratory study of the cyberbullying and cyberstalking experiences and factors related to victimization of students at a public liberal arts college. Int J Technol. 1, 74–91.

20.

Kumpulainen

. (2008). Psychiatric conditions associated with bullying. Int J Adolesc Med Health. 20, 121–132.

21.

. (2007). Bullying in the new playground: Research into cyberbullying and cyber victimisation. Australas J Educ Technol. 23, 435–454.

22.

MacDonald

, Roberts-Pittman

. (2010). Cyberbullying among college students: Prevalence and demographic differences. Procedia Soc Behav Sci. 9, 2003–2009.

23.

Mason

. (2008). Cyberbullying: A preliminary assessment for school personnel. Psychol Int. 27, 157–170.

24.

National Crime Prevention Council. (2006). Teens and Cyberbullying: Executive Summary of a Report on Research. (Harris Interactive, Arlington, VA.)

25.

Patchin

, Hinduja

. (2006). Bullies move beyond the schoolyard: A preliminary look at cyberbullying. Youth Violence Juv Justice. 4, 148–169.

26.

Patchin

, Hinduja

. (2008). Cyberbullying: An exploratory analysis of factors related to offending and victimization. Deviant Behav. 29, 129–156

27.

Pena

. (2011, November). Study finds cyberbullying a problem among college students. Saved the Racks. Retrieved from www.alligator.org/news/campus/article_7cb887a0-0902-11e1-8c39-001cc4c03286.html (accessed January 10, 2017).

28.

Raskauskas

, Stoltz

. (2007). Involvement in traditional and electronic bullying among adolescents. Dev Psychol. 43, 564–575.

29.

Ringrose

. (2006). A new universal mean girl: Examining the discursive construction and social regulation of a new feminine pathology. Feminism Psychol. 16, 405–424.

30.

Sadock

, Sadock

. (2007). Synopsis of Psychiatry (10th edition). (Lippincott, Williams & Wilkins, Philiadelphia, PA).

31.

Sheperis

, Young

, Daniels

. (2010). Counseling Research: Quantitative, Qualitative, and Mixed Methods. (Pearson, Boston, MA).

32.

Smith

, Mahdavi

, Carvalho

, et al. (2008). Cyberbullying: Its nature and impact in secondary school pupils. J Child Psychol Psychiatry. 49, 376–385.

33.

Williard

. (2006). Flame retardant. Sch Library J. 52, 54–56.

34.

Williard

. (2007). Cyberbullying and Cyberthreats: Responding to the Challenges of Online Social Aggression, Threats, and Distress. (Malloy, Inc., Champaign, IL).

35.

Williams

, Guerra

. (2007). Prevalence and predictors of Internet bullying. J Adolesc Health. 41, S14–S21.

36.

Ybarra

, Mitchel

. (2004). Online aggressor/targets, agressors, and targets: A comparison of associated youth characteristics. J Child Psychol Psychiatry. 45, 1308–1316.

37.

Ybarra

, Mitchell

, Wolak

, Finkelhor

. (2006). Examining characteristics and associated distress related to Internet harassment: Findings from the Second Youth Internet Safety Survey. Pediatrics. 118, e1169–e1177.