Abstract
This study examines the use of polling students to improve conditions of learning in their school. Students from three schools (N = 2,006) in Grades 5, 6, 7, and 8 completed an online poll about how cyberbullying affects their personal lives. Principals’ impressions about the benefits of student polling are explained along with the Cyberbullying Poll outcomes. Principals concluded that student input is an important contribution for consideration in development of continuous improvement planning for their school.
Providing a safe environment is a national priority that includes new challenges as they arise. There are efforts to prevent child abuse, violence against partners, harassment at work, and coercion by government and religious officials. Rejection of such offenses and demands by the public that misconduct result in punishment are signs of progress toward respecting human rights. Bullying is the most common form of mistreatment suffered by students who describe their ordeal as producing fear, worry, helplessness, loneliness, inability to concentrate, and a reluctance to attend school (Espelage & Swearer, 2010).
Anti-Bully Legislation
The nation’s most comprehensive Anti-Bullying Bill of Rights was enacted by the New Jersey legislature (Anti-Bullying Bill of Rights Act, State of New Jersey, 2011). Faculty are obligated to report bully incidents the same day as they become aware of a complaint. A formal investigation must begin within one school day of an episode and be completed within 10 days, resulting in a resolution. Every school district appoints and trains an anti-bully coordinator and a specialist for each school to lead the safety team consisting of a principal, a teacher, and a parent charged with the task of reviewing each complaint. Superintendents report twice a year about their district schools to the state department of education. Each school will be assigned an annual grade and ranked by efficiency in combating harassment and intimidation.
The New Jersey law is considered a game changer. In the past, students who used swear words at school got into more trouble than if they called a classmate fat, gay, ugly, or retarded. Yet, which comments cause greater harm? The tradition has been that principals are responsible for the social climate of their school. However, the new law removes discretion of principals to ignore something that could be harmful. This change also empowers faculty who previously may have turned a blind eye to episodes knowing their principal would not take action. Perhaps this unprecedented policy will be found to have flaws but it promises to confront cruel behavior that has often been considered normal and acceptable.
The extraordinary school reform of New Jersey was motivated by a bully-related suicide of an 18-year-old freshman at Rutgers University whose roommate secretly videotaped his relationship with another man and put it on Twitter. Studies have consistently shown that students who depart from norms are most frequently targeted for harassment (Coloroso, 2009; Espelage & Swearer, 2010). When 6,200 middle school and high school students were surveyed, 86% who identified themselves as being gay or lesbian reported being verbally abused during the past year and 44% described physical mistreatment (Meyer, 2010). A website called It Gets Better Project was established to prevent suicide of gay and lesbian youth by assuring them they can have a positive future if they can get through their teenage years when persecution is disapproved but permitted (Savage, 2010; Savage & Miller, 2011).
Schools should be more inclusive in recognizing groups that have shaped American history. Students become more accepting of differences when lessons show how minorities targeted for abuse have benefitted the nation (Wise, 2012). In the 1950s and 1960s, schools started to acquaint students with African Americans who were previously unrecognized even though their initiatives had done much to improve quality of life. During the 1970s, Latinos were first portrayed for the public in a way that acknowledged contributions by leaders in their population. The California FAIR (Fair, Accurate, Inclusive, and Respectful) Education Act (California Senate Bill 48, 2011) mandates that schools address gaps that still exist in current textbooks by drawing attention to commendable lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender figures, advocates for disability rights, racial justice organizations, and other groups that have shaped history yet were left out of the curriculum intended to chronicle evolution of society.
Students should also be taught to recognize that fear is a valuable emotion when it motivates cautious behavior that protects us from harm. People are wise to be guided by fear of consuming illegal drugs, chatting with online predators, or traveling with drunk drivers. These kinds of dangers warrant consideration because they have the potential to threaten self-preservation. On the other hand, fear of groups whose behavior departs from the norm does not serve a survival purpose, compromise safety, place general welfare at risk, or undermine freedom to pursue a lifestyle of our choosing. The fact is that fear of differences can only be sustained by perpetuation of misinformation that becomes the basis to justify abuse of certain groups (R. Strom & Strom, 2011).
Participation of Underage Friends
The cyber experiences of children require adult supervision. Internet observers warn about an increase in the population of vulnerable students online. Because involvement with social networks has universal appeal, children lie about their age to participate on Facebook. A ConsumerReports.Org (2011) survey found over 7 million active users of this popular social network site were under the minimum required age of 13 years. Furthermore, more than 5 million users were 10 years old or younger. Not only are children lying about their age but apparently do so with support of their parents. In the United States, a parent must either fax in a signature or have a credit card and verify that they want their child to sign up. Identification of students who lie about being underage is a complicated task. Nevertheless, Facebook reports that it removes 20,000 people each day, a small fraction of 800 million subscribers worldwide (Zuckerberg, 2011).
Many parents appear unconcerned about involvement of their underage child. Parents of the youngest participants suppose their age group is less likely to engage in risk taking. Only 18% of parents of preteen users made their child a Facebook friend. In comparison, 62% of parents with 13- to 14-year-olds made their child a Facebook friend because they recognize this is the time to become concerned about risks (ConsumerReports.Org, 2011). The federal Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act of 1998 established the minimum age of 13 years for users of social network sites and prohibited sites from knowingly disclosing personal information on children that could lead to exploitation.
A National Polling Project
School improvement efforts are heavily based on adult observations. However, adults are not the only observers of how well schools perform. Students also have insights based on their daily school experiences. They are able to describe the educational experiences they value and possibilities that are missing. Inviting their opinions can make known the forms of instruction they prefer, obstacles they encounter, and factors that promote or inhibit their motivation. When the opinions of students and adults are given consideration, their combined insights can more accurately detect needs for improvement. Everyone can gain from the adoption of an intergenerational perspective (R. Strom & Strom, 2011).
A national polling project began by convening middle school and high school student focus groups to assist in identification of suitable topics for standardized polls and online procedures for use in schools. Students read and reacted to polls each containing 15 to 20 multiple-choice items, including an “open-end” other response for personal opinions not represented by the given options. After several rounds of feedback from students, polls were revised and checked for readability level. The 12 poll topics include Internet Learning, Tutoring Practices, Time Management, Career Exploration, Cheating, Peer Support, Cyberbullying, Attention, Stress, Boredom, Frustration, and School Dress Code (P. Strom & Strom, 2009). Field-testing of the polls and procedures was followed by independent studies with over 10,000 culturally diverse students (P. Strom, Strom, & Beckert, 2011; P. Strom, Strom, Walker, Sindel-Arrington, & Beckert, 2011; P. Strom, Strom, & Wing, 2008; P. Strom, Strom, Wing, & Beckert, 2009).
National polling organizations such as Gallup, Harris, Roper, and Rasmussen, caution that their results generalize to some larger population within a specified margin of error, typically 3% to 5% (Gallup, 1948). In contrast, the purpose of school polling is to assess student opinion about the conditions of learning at their school. Consequently, results apply only to the student population invited to complete polls at that school. This narrow scope obviates concerns regarding generalizability to students attending other institutions. Principals can apply the information for continuous improvement planning because the information relates directly to their own school. The goals of the present study were to examine student responses to the online Cyberbullying Poll and outcomes for three separate schools within a single district across types of school structure, grade, age, gender, and ethnicity.
Method
This exploratory study used a descriptive design with poll responses of students attending junior high, intermediate school, and the upper grades in elementary school. The sample was composed of 10- to 14-year-olds because cyberbullying is believed to originate at this age (Kowalski, Limber, & Agatston, 2008). This section describes participants, poll measure, online administration procedures, and analysis of data.
Participants
Three schools from the same district of a metropolitan complex in the southern United States participated in this study. These sites included a junior high school (n = 962, Grades 7 and 8), intermediate school (n = 457, Grades 5 and 6), and elementary school (n = 587, Grades 5 and 6). The district from which school samples were drawn educates students from mixed socioeconomic backgrounds. Each school has maintained a consistently Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) record as “excelling” the highest possible status. Students were in Grade 5 (n = 665), Grade 6 (n = 384), Grade 7 (n = 454), and Grade 8 (n = 503). The primarily White (n = 1,348) and Black (n = 428) poll participants included females (n = 1,021) and males (n = 973). The entire population of the chosen grades at all three schools (N = 2,442) was invited to take the poll. The 2,006 students who completed the task represented a response rate of 82%.
Students from the three schools differed in their class schedule. Those attending junior high and intermediate school moved from class to class through the day and received instruction from multiple teachers. In contrast, elementary students remained in place with one teacher providing all the instruction. The proportion of students that reported spending no time daily on the Internet was 6% in junior high as contrasted with 13% for intermediate. Spending 1 or more hours per day on the Internet was the case for 67% of junior high students, 57% of intermediate, and 53% of elementary.
Poll Measure
Each principal selected one or more polls from a list of 12 that they considered most relevant for conditions at their school. All three administrators chose the Cyberbullying Poll that had been developed earlier in collaboration with focus groups of middle school and high school students (P. Strom et al., 2008). Readability level of the poll items was checked for comprehension by fifth graders, the youngest age participants in this project. Principals and teachers confirmed that the poll was easily read and understood by the fifth graders. The purpose of the Cyberbullying Poll is to allow students to report their experiences with online harassment. Poll directions define cyberbullies as persons who rely on cell phones, instant messaging, texting, chat rooms, or e-mail to cause humiliation, worry, and helplessness in victims. Besides age, grade, ethnicity, gender, and school information, the 26 items include
Reasons for cyberbullying at this school
Content of messages from the bullies
Personal experience as basis of opinion
Preferred ways to respond to harassment
Advice from friends, parents, and teachers
Family/school dialogue about cyberbullies
Incidence of exposure to bullying online
Experience in intimidating others online
Alleged cyber cases reported by friends
Assessment of severity of cyberbullying
Orientation for parents and for students
Amount of time daily on the Internet and cell phone
Procedure
Student polling was scheduled in the computer laboratory of each school over a 2-week period. Teachers gave directions to students about self-administering the 10- to 15-minute poll. Each student received the school code and randomly assigned individual code to ensure anonymity and prevent multiple voting. Every computer in the school lab had the poll URL on the screen so students simply clicked a link that took them to the poll entry page. Principals encouraged participation in announcements during the polling schedule and had daily access to results indicating how many students had completed the poll.
Analysis of Data
The first eight items on the poll allow for multiple responses that students feel apply to them. For example, Item 5 states, “If someone tried to cyberbully me, I would (a) tell a teacher or parent, (b) ignore it, (c) tell the bully to stop, (d) change my screen name, (e) block the message, and (f) other” (this open-ended option permits the respondents to type in their own answer when it is not covered by selected options a, b, c, d, or e). Because students can choose more than a single response on Items 1 to 8, each option had a separate data field representing binary responses for analysis. This allows for the determination of relationships between poll responses and the variables of age, grade, gender, ethnicity, and school location for each of the response options.
The remaining 18 items required selection of only one among several options and were analyzed as individual questions for reporting frequencies and percentages. For example, Item 17 states, “In my opinion, cyberbullying is (a) worse than face-to-face bullying, (b) about the same as face-to-face bullying, (c) less damaging than face-to-face bullying, and (d) a worse problem than any other.”
For Items 1 through 8, the open-ended “other” poll responses were compiled for each school (by grade) and placed in a Word file with actual statements from students. These responses were rephrased to eliminate any association with comments made at school that could link students with responses. Themes emerged from numerous responses and were divided into concept maps for visual representation of item responses. “Other” options were provided to the principals by concept maps, separately from the item bar graph percentages.
Results
This section describes relationships between student responses across the demographic variables. Table 1 presents chi-square statistics for variables with a significant difference, using a two-tailed test with an a priori p value of <.05. Data in the vertical columns can be compared to assess the magnitude of differences. All reported responses show significant differences between the expected and actual frequencies. School location (78% of items were statistically significant) and grade level (78% of items were statistically significant) had the greatest relationship to student perceptions about cyberbullying. Age was similar in number of significant items response options (72%) to grade level and school location while slightly over one half (53%) of the items were statistically significant for gender. Ethnicity was least related to student responses (25% of items were statistically significant).
Relationships Between Cyberbullying Poll Item Responses and Student Age, Grade, Gender, Ethnicity, and School (N = 2,006)
Source. P. Strom and R. Strom (2006), Cyberbullying poll (http://www.learningpolls.org). Copyright © 2006 P. Strom and R. Strom
p < .05. **p < .01. ***p < .001.
After the polling was over, each principal received a report that showed overall student responses for their school by percentages on items and options. Separate breakdowns were also provided for grade, gender, age, and ethnicity. The student answers were depicted with a bar graph so stakeholders could consider reforms based on specific responses from their students. Feedback included student comments for each question under the “other” option. To protect anonymity of students who might be identified by their comments, the responses were rephrased before they were presented in the form of concept maps to the principals.
Discussion and Implications
Principals were able to view polling results daily online. Administrators expressed surprise about the extent of cyberbullying at their school. They liked using Internet polls because of (a) worthwhileness of data about student experiences with cyberbullying; (b) ease of polling procedures for students; (c) methods ensuring anonymity; (d) speed of viewable results throughout the process; (e) summary, including recommendations for consideration; and (f) simplicity of interpreting results.
The optimal benefits of polling depend on how results are communicated to the stakeholders, including students, parents, faculty, school improvement committee, and community. Stakeholder communication is one of the responsibilities for the principals. All of them shared poll results within the school but expressed reluctance to distribute information to outsiders. They felt that it was important to protect the district from any negative publicity or misinterpretation, even though none of the results was alarming. Unfortunately, as is often the case, whenever an institution performs a study, outsiders may conclude, “There must be a problem so they’re doing a study.” Seldom is a study looked upon as an additional source of insight about how to improve safety of students.
Use of the Cyberbullying Poll outcomes for purposes of school reform was minimized because it was administered near the end of the school year, some principals were changing positions and did not want to implicate their replacement administrator, and older students were graduating to join another school in the district. Principals concluded that there was need for an administrative agenda to fit school poll results into the district’s mandated continuous improvement plan. This view reflected their position that soliciting student opinions can support school improvement.
After receiving the poll results, principals reported about their recommendations and initiatives to bolster cyberbully prevention. The improvements included (a) sending a flyer about cyberbullying to parents and students at the beginning of the school year, (b) adding a link on the school website for adults and adolescents to access further cyberbully information, (c) orienting teachers to methods used by cyberbullies at their school, (d) providing faculty in-service training for incorporating results of polls into the continuous improvement plan, (e) continuing polling to learn more about student perceptions of their school, and (f) sharing poll outcomes with the next higher level institution in the district so that insights gathered from feeder schools can be taken into account as the students transition. These initiatives can reduce misconduct and support mental health.
Table 2 presents a summary of results that can be used to develop continuous improvement plans for each of the three schools. Differences in student responses are presented by school even though, during the project, each school received their own results only. There are demographic similarities for the total student population (N = 2,006) in terms of ages 10 to 14 years, Grades 5 to 8, and location within the same district. A visual, like Table 2, or a similar graphic description that displays key findings can draw the attention of stakeholders to the severity of cyberbullying at their school, reasons for cyber abuse, messages of cyberbullies, and contexts for school-specific improvement.
Cyberbullying Poll Summary of Implications for 2,006 Students in Junior High School, Elementary School, and Intermediate School
Severity of Cyberbullying
Table 2 indicates that a majority of the students at each of the three schools reported cyberbullying as a problem to some degree. The greatest proportion (68%) is recorded at junior high school. Responses also showed that bully reliance on cell phones and text messaging were reported significantly more often (p < .001) by students in junior high (68%) than students in Grades 5 and 6 (47%). Some differences might be attributed to the statement, “I don’t use a cell phone” reported by 19% of junior high (Grades 7-8), 36% of intermediate, and 42% of elementary students (Grades 5-6). Similarly, the proportion of students who reported being on their cell phone 1 or more hours per day was twice as great for junior high, 62%, than for elementary students, 31%.
Cyberbullying is seen as serious as or worse than face-to-face bullying by two thirds of the students at all three schools, with intermediate school respondents reporting the greatest proportion (74%). Other investigators have discovered that, in comparison with students, adults underestimate the scope of bullying, consider schools to be safe, and judge cases of abuse to be less serious (Willard, 2007).
Reasons for Cyberbullying
Boyfriend/girlfriend breakup
Most students agreed that the main motivation for cyberbullying is breakup between boyfriends and girlfriends. Rejection and related jealousy was identified by 70% of junior high students, a significantly greater proportion (p < .001) than reported by elementary students (47%). Some lessons early adolescents should learn about dating ought to occur at school where they can benefit from teacher-guided discussions with classmates. Boys and girls need to understand that roles such as driving a car, going to school, playing on a sports team, and dating include important rights and responsibilities. The Washington State Office of the Attorney General (2008) describes 10 rights and 10 responsibilities that can be dating guidelines for students in Grades 5 to 8.
Olivia, an eighth grader, reported she had an argument with her boyfriend. She told him that she would not be seeing him anymore. The boy was angry and wanted to get even. The devious method he chose was to post Olivia’s contact numbers, including e-mail address, cell phone number, and address at home on sex-oriented websites and blogs. For months, Olivia was hounded by instant messages, prank callers, and car horns of insensitive people who drove by in order to see whether they could catch a glimpse of her. In this case, Olivia’s cyberbully, her former boyfriend, was quickly caught. Nevertheless, this did not end Olivia’s embarrassment and sense of helplessness. She still had to deal with public attention.
Most early adolescents have questions about dating, and they want to do what is necessary to avoid being mistreated. Seventh grader Michelle wrote, “I thought that my boyfriend must really love me when he started to call me a lot on my cell phone. Now he wants to know where I am just about all the time. Is this normal?” The boyfriend demonstrated possessiveness as shown by efforts to control Michelle. A possessive individual does not want a partner to share time or to give attention to anyone else. A controlling attitude is evident when a person rules a relationship and insists on making all the decisions. The dominated person’s view is ignored. Often, a controlling person tells the partner how to dress, who to talk to, where to go, and what they cannot do. Frequent calling on the cell phone is one way to maintain control, keeping tabs on activities and whereabouts. If a girl finds herself in this predicament, she should inform her parent or a teacher (Ben-Ze’ev & Goussinsky, 2008).
Being picked on for being different
Another cyberbully motivation reported more often at junior high (54%) than in elementary (36%) or intermediate school (43%) is being picked on for not acting or looking like other people. David attended Grade 6 at the intermediate school. When his gym period was over, David got dressed in what he supposed was privacy of the changing room. However, a classmate who sought to ridicule David for being overweight used a cell phone to photograph him. Within seconds, pictures of the naked boy were sent by instant messaging for many students to see. By the time David finished dressing and went to his next class, he was the laughing stock of the school and became a prime target for teasing.
Some cases of being picked on involve more than one bully and a single victim. They implicate a group of bullies involved in persecuting multiple parties. This occurs when students respond to established online trash polling sites. These websites invite people to name specific individuals they believe qualify for unflattering characteristics, such as the most obese student at school, boys most likely to be gay, and girls who have slept with the most partners (Assuras, 2007). The consequent humiliation of this treatment can cause victims to feel that their life has no value.
Revenge for being mistreated
Table 2 shows that payback is a motive of cyberbullies in junior high (42%), intermediate (34%), and elementary school (32%). When students report their physical abuse, adults typically comfort them. However, those who report being teased online sometimes are given a less sympathetic response by people who suppose teasers lack motivation to harm, and they would stop if the person being made fun of showed disapproval (P. Strom et al., 2011). This means a victim may be urged to “suck it up,” view the incident as an aspect of life with which everyone must learn to cope, and consider their ordeal as an opportunity to develop character and resilience. Research on adolescent teasing has found that two thirds of cases involve being mistreated by name-calling (Agliata, Tantleff-Dunn, & Renk, 2007).
There is a need for greater recognition of the suffering that occurs when students call one another undesirable names. Name callers are seldom identified as bullies even though students report that being teased is very stressful and undermines their mental health. When some victims eventually respond by resorting to violence, their motivation for revenge implicates teasing more often than being physically mistreated (Watchler, 2005). Teenage murderers who report they could no longer bear being called nasty names identify ridicule as the main reason for their destructive retaliation (Vossekuil, Fein, Reddy, Borum, & Modzeleski, 2004).
Messages of Cyberbullies
Lies, threats, and exposure of secrets
Cyberbullies in junior high (69%) tell lies and spread rumors about their victims significantly more often (p < .001) than bullies at intermediate school (52%). In contrast, threatening to hurt someone is more common at intermediate school (57%) than in junior high (51%) and occurs significantly more often (p < .001) than in elementary school (38%). The messages that cyberbullies send least often at all three schools involve exposing secrets to an audience.
Being a victim of lies and rumors can produce enormous stress. Donna is a sixth grader who traveled to Chicago with her mother to visit a grandmother recuperating from cancer surgery. When Donna returned home a week later, some cyberbully had spread a rumor on the Internet that, while in Chicago, Donna had contacted SARS (severe acute respiratory syndrome). Her girlfriends were afraid to be around her, unwilling to get together, send messages, or talk on the phone. At school, her friends moved away whenever Donna came near them. Undermining friendships is a high cost for the victim.
Contexts for Improvement
Students identified contexts they believe can improve conditions of safety. Family discussions about cyberbullies were experienced by only 50% of intermediate students. Even less frequent conversations at home occurred at junior high (41%) and elementary (35%) schools. Although most cyberbullying takes place outside the school, a majority of teachers at each school discussed the problem with students far more often than did the parents. Specifically, 84% of junior high teachers led discussions about cyberbullying compared with 41% of parents; 68% of intermediate school teachers guided discussions in contrast with 50% of parents; and 38% of elementary teachers compared with 35% of parents.
Students expressed the view that cyberbullying solutions can be more effective if schools provide parents with a comprehensive orientation to peer mistreatment. A high rate of agreement among junior high (77%), intermediate (83%), and elementary (77%) students reflects a belief that safety is more probable when there is an informed support system at home. Students recognized that they also need the school to orient them so they can be better equipped to deal with cyberbullies. Specifically, 83% of junior high, 84% of intermediate, and 78% of elementary students are receptive to learning how to improve their safety online.
The attainment of school and family cooperation can nurture development of healthy social norms that motivate students to treat others with fairness and respect (Willard, 2007; Worthen, 2007). Table 3 presents 15 Peer Support Practices recommended for use by teachers and principals to decrease bullying and increase concern for others.
Peer Support Practices to Decrease Bullying and Increase Concern for Others
Source. Copyright © 2011 P. Strom and R. Strom.
Limitations of the Study
Most exploratory descriptive studies require caution in generalizing the results. This study was conducted to determine the opinions of students in Grades 5 to 8 about cyberbullying experiences at their schools only. This narrow scope of inquiry obviates concerns about generalization to student populations attending other schools. A high proportion, 82%, of invited students completed the Cyberbullying Poll. This response rate means the results reflect whole-school impressions. However, opinions of the remainder 18% of students who did not complete the poll cannot be known because the process ensures anonymity of respondents.
Conclusion
In the past, children learned civil behavior and social etiquette by being taught rules they were expected to follow and would be reinforced by observing mature adults (Post, Post, Post, & Senning, 2011). This is not the way students today learn how to treat others in cyber space. Adolescents communicate mostly with their own age group and prefer to seek advice from one another (Rosen, 2010). One reason for the increasing reliance on peers in adolescence is their awareness that adults grew up before the advent of social networking and online relationships. Viewing the current situation from this vantage, the inclination to more often turn to peers for direction seems understandable. One disadvantage is that cell phone use, guidelines for texting, rules for instant messaging, e-mail courtesies, and general lessons about etiquette to guide interaction are not being taught. This partially explains why abuse of others in cyber space is becoming more common. Creative initiatives are needed to ensure that adults remain a source of guidance valued by adolescents instead of their being gradually replaced by peers.
Listening to adolescents is essential to understand the challenges they face and encourage them to share their experiences. Paying attention to the views of youth can enable adults to propose relevant suggestions for adolescent consideration. Schools have a role in this process by the introduction of online student polling. This strategy provides new insights for stakeholders so better decisions can be made about school reforms. In the presented study, principals and teachers at three sites became more informed about cyberbullying involving their school because they chose to poll students. The proportion of invited students that completed the poll was 82%, much greater than the usual voter turnout of adults participating in local, state, and national elections. The high rate of student response indicates they were willing to acquaint the adults with their views. Students reported cyberbullying to be a serious problem, most often caused by boyfriend/girlfriend jealousy, harassment for looking or behaving differently from the dominant group, and seeking revenge. There was agreement that schools should orient parents and students about ways to prevent cyber abuse and motivate responsible behavior. The poll outcomes enabled administrators to implement student-recommended changes to limit cyberbullying and improve safety. Principals concluded that student input is needed to devise the continuous improvement plans for their schools.
Footnotes
The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.