Gender Differences Between Student–Student Relationship and Cyberbullying Perpetration: An Evolutionary Perspective

Abstract

With the development of Internet technology, cyberbullying has become a serious social issue and public concern in modern society. Based on the general aggression model and an evolutionary psychological perspective, the present study aimed to examine (a) whether student–student relationship would be significantly related to cyberbullying, (b) whether materialism would mediate the link between student–student relationship and cyberbullying, (c) whether boys would be more likely to engage in cyberbullying than girls, and (d) whether there would be gender differences among the links between student–student relationship and cyberbullying. The research hypotheses were tested among 712 Chinese middle school students (M age = 13.66 years, SD = 1.36; 50% of the participants were boys) with a moderated mediation model. The results showed that student–student relationship was negatively related to cyberbullying, with their link mediated by materialism. Furthermore, boys were more likely to engage in cyberbullying than girls. Moderated mediation analyses indicated that gender moderated the path between materialism and cyberbullying, with the effect being significant only among the male participants. Gender did not moderate the link between student–student relationship and materialism, and between student–student relationship and cyberbullying. This study highlighted the importance of uncovering the links between adolescents’ offline interpersonal relationships and cyberbullying, as well as the benefits of applying the evolutionary psychological perspective to study cyberbullying.

Keywords

student–student relationship materialism cyberbullying gender evolutionary adolescents

Introduction

With the development of Internet technology, cyberbullying has become a serious social issue and public concern worldwide (Kowalski, Giumetti, Schroeder, & Lattanner, 2014; X. Wang, Yang, Wang, & Lei, 2019; X. Wang, Yang, Yang, Wang, & Lei, 2017). Cyberbullying is often defined as aggressions that are repeatedly and intentionally implemented in an online context against others who often cannot defend themselves (Kowalski, Morgan, & Limber, 2012), and it may come in diverse forms, such as flaming, harassment, outing and tricking, exclusion, impersonation, and sexting (Kowalski et al., 2014; Willard, 2007). The media in which cyberbullying can take place are equally diverse, such as social networking sites, online games, email, text messages, digital images, and web pages (Kowalski et al., 2014). The easy access, anonymity, constant availability, and recordability of the Internet make cyberbullying easy to perpetuate (Kowalski, Limber, & Agatston, 2012). Cyberbullying can lead to a series of negative outcomes, such as anxiety, substance abuse, stress, low self-esteem, depression, decreased life satisfaction, physical symptoms, impaired school performance, and suicide ideation (Bauman, Toomey, & Walker, 2013; Kowalski et al., 2014). All these facts indicate that cyberbullying is a severe problem. Therefore, it is vital to uncover the potential antecedents of cyberbullying.

Prior research has identified a host of predictive factors for cyberbullying perpetration (Kowalski et al., 2014). A meta-analysis has indicated that the risk factors for cyberbullying include cyber victimization, traditional bullying, traditional victimization, moral disengagement, anger, and narcissism (Kowalski et al., 2014), whereas the protective factors for cyberbullying are empathy, parental monitoring, perceived social support, school climate, and school safety (Kowalski et al., 2014). These findings are of great importance in understanding cyberbullying. However, little empirical research has explored the link between student–student relationship and cyberbullying. Student–student relationship is a key element of peer relationship, representing the degree that the classmates care about, support, and unite with one another (G. R. Jiang, 2002; Wang, Wang, et al., 2019). Given that middle school students spend the majority of their time with their classmates, it is necessary to explore whether their offline relationships with their classmates will influence their cyberbullying perpetration (Aizenkot & Kashyrosenbaum, 2021; G. R. Jiang, 2002; Wang, Wang, et al., 2019).

Research regarding traditional bullying and cyberbullying indicates that incidence rates of bullying are particularly high among middle school students, as young people work to obtain their status in the social hierarchy (Calvete, Orue, Estévez, Villardón, & Padilla, 2010; Tokunaga, 2010; Varjas, Henrich, & Meyers, 2009). Empirical research shows that the prevalence rates of cyberbullying are 9% to 58% (Chen, Ho, & Lwin, 2017; Kowalski et al., 2014; Leung, Wong, & Farver, 2018), with some research even showing nearly 75% of the participants report being bullied online in the last year (Juvonen & Gross, 2008; Katzer, Fetchenhauer, & Belschak, 2009). Relevant to the present work, the rate of cyberbullying among adolescents in East Asia is higher compared with European countries (Shapka & Law, 2013). Therefore, it is also important to pay attention to middle school students from East Asian countries such as China. Moreover, the underlying mediating and moderating mechanisms between student–student relationship and cyberbullying are also largely unknown. Uncovering these mechanisms is vital because they can reveal a sophisticated and implicit correlation between student–student relationship and cyberbullying, which can enlighten future preventions and interventions in middle school students’ cyberbullying.

An evolutionary psychological perspective can inspire studies regarding Internet behavior (Piazza & Bering, 2009; Wyckoff, Buss, & Markman, 2018). Given that gender difference in aggression is one of the most important topics in evolutionary psychology (Bjorklund & Ellis, 2014; Buss, 2005; Cross, Copping, & Campbell, 2011), it is helpful to apply an evolutionary psychology perspective to the study of cyberbullying. To clarify these gaps, based on the general aggression model (GAM) and an evolutionary psychological perspective, the present study used a sample of Chinese adolescents to examine the following: (a) whether student–student relationship would be negatively related to materialism, (b) whether materialism would mediate the link between student–student relationship and cyberbullying, and (c) whether there would be gender differences among the links from student–student relationship to cyberbullying through materialism.

Literature Review and Hypotheses Development

Student–Student Relationship and Cyberbullying

Student–student relationship can be a protective factor for cyberbullying. As the GAM posits, personal and situational factors can influence an individual’s internal state, including cognitions, affections, and arousals, which can impact people’s appraisal and decision-making process that may lead to aggression (Anderson & Bushman, 2002). The GAM can also apply to the formation process of cyberbullying (Kowalski et al., 2014). As the GAM suggests, perceived support and school climate are key situational factors that can predict cyberbullying (Kowalski et al., 2014). Particularly, perceived social support from peers and a good school climate are both negatively related to cyberbullying. Empirical evidence supports this notion (Kowalski et al., 2014; Williams & Guerra, 2007). People who perceive the school climate as fair, trustworthy, and pleasant are less likely to engage in cyberbullying (Kowalski et al., 2014; Williams & Guerra, 2007), as a good school climate is less likely to create frustration and discomfort among students, which may trigger them to act aggressively online (Kowalski et al., 2014; Williams & Guerra, 2007).

Given that student–student relationship is an important element of the school climate and good student–student relationship can provide social support among students (G. R. Jiang, 2002; Wang, Zhao, et al., 2017; Williams & Guerra, 2007), it is reasonable to assume that student–student relationship can predict cyberbullying. In line with this notion, a longitudinal study has shown that perceived social support from peers can predict decreased engagement in cyberbullying (Fanti, Demetriou, & Hawa, 2012). A meta-analysis has shown that school climate and perceived social support are both negatively related to cyberbullying (Kowalski et al., 2014). However, no empirical research has explored the link between student–student relationship and cyberbullying.

Mediating Role of Materialism

Student–student relationship can be negatively related to materialism. Materialism is composed of a cluster of goals and values focused on possessions, wealth, image, and status (Kasser, 2016). It can be regarded as a coping strategy that people use to compensate for their psychological insecurity or escape their negative self-awareness (Dittmar, Bond, Hurst, & Kasser, 2014; Donnelly, Ksendzova, Howell, Vohs, & Baumeister, 2016). Given that peers are important sources of psychological well-being and emotional support, supportive peers can decrease individuals’ need to embrace material goods as a way to develop positive perceptions (Chaplin & John, 2010). Thus, it is reasonable to deduce that good student–student relationship can be negatively related to materialism. Empirical evidence supports this notion (Banerjee & Dittmar, 2008; Chaplin & John, 2010). A cross-sectional research has indicated that peer support is negatively associated with adolescent materialism (Chaplin & John, 2010). An experimental study has shown that social exclusion causes people to consume strategically, such as buying fancy items, to obtain affiliation (Mead, Baumeister, Stillman, Rawn, & Vohs, 2011). Similarly, two other experimental studies have shown that peer rejection can lead to greater materialism among adolescents (Banerjee & Dittmar, 2008; J. Jiang, Zhang, Ke, Hawk, & Qiu, 2015). Based on the above literature, it is logical to assume that poor student–student relationship can be positively associated with adolescent materialism. Nevertheless, no previous research has explored the link between student–student relationship and adolescent materialism.

Despite the scarce empirical evidence, we can presume materialism to be positively related to cyberbullying. According to the GAM and prior empirical research, personal values and perceptions, such as moral disengagement, are important personal factors that can predict cyberbullying (Anderson & Bushman, 2002; Kowalski et al., 2014). The majority of empirical research on materialism regards it as a value or goal that reflects the degree to which a person believes that acquiring money, possessions, appealing images, and high status is important in one’s life (Kasser, 2016; Kasser & Ryan, 1993; Richins & Dawson, 1992). Such ideas are often negatively associated with attitudes, behaviors, and experiences relevant to prosocial, community, environment protection, and other self-transcendent concerns (Kasser, 2016). Therefore, it is theoretically reasonable to posit that materialism will be related to antisocial behaviors, such as cyberbullying. According to empirical evidence, materialism often coexists with a set of negative outcomes, such as increased depression and anxiety, low life satisfaction, and poor social relationships (Dittmar et al., 2014), which are all typical factors connected to cyberbullying (Kowalski et al., 2014). Thus, it is logical to assume that materialism will be positively associated with cyberbullying.

In sum, it is possible that student–student relationship can be negatively associated with materialism, which, in turn, can be positively related to cyberbullying. That is, materialism will mediate the link between student–student relationship and cyberbullying. To our knowledge, no prior studies have examined this mediating effect.

Moderating Role of Gender

An evolutionary psychological perspective can provide a rich theoretical tradition in computer-mediated behavior studies (Piazza & Bering, 2009). Based on the natural selection perspective, gender difference has always been one of the most important topics in the field of evolutionary psychology (Buss & Schmitt, 2019), which has generated testable hypotheses and mini-theories that have led to fruitful findings in miscellaneous human phenomena (Buss, 2005; Buss & Schmitt, 2019). Gender difference in aggression and violence shows that boys have a higher tendency to engage in such behaviors (Bjorklund & Ellis, 2014; Buss, 2005; Cross et al., 2011). Recently, researchers have begun to apply the evolutionary perspective to explore and confirm gender differences regarding cyber aggression (Wyckoff et al., 2018). It is possible that gender differences exist among the aforementioned study variables. In other words, gender may moderate the links between student–student relationship and cyberbullying via materialism.

Based on the evolutionary psychological perspective, aggression and violence can provide more survival and reproductive advantages for boys than for girls (Bjorklund & Ellis, 2014; Buss, 2005). Therefore, it is possible that boys will engage in aggression, such as cyberbullying, more than girls. Empirical research is in support of this notion. Although a few studies have shown no gender differences or that females engage more in cyberbullying than males (Beckman, Hagquist, & Hellstrom, 2013; Keith & Martin, 2005), the majority of empirical evidence has shown that males are more likely to engage in cyberbullying (Erdur-Baker, 2010; Martinez-Pecino & Duran, 2019; Tosun, 2016). However, limited research has explored gender differences in cyberbullying in Chinese adolescents.

There can be gender differences among the links between student–student relationship, materialism, and cyberbullying. First, boys and girls vary in their scores of the aforementioned variables. For instance, studies have shown that males are more materialistic and more involved in cyberbullying than females (Erdur-Baker, 2010; Segal & Podoshen, 2013; Sun, Fan, & Du, 2016). Second, the influences of interpersonal relationships on males and females are different (Kendler & Gardner, 2014). Third, empirical research has found that the link between traditional bullying and cyberbullying is significant for male students but not for female students (Erdur-Baker, 2010). On the strength of the above literature, gender may moderate the links among the study variables. Therefore, the present study conducted an exploratory investigation to test for gender differences among the links between student–student relationship, materialism, and cyberbullying.

The Present Study

The present study had the following threefold objective: (a) to explore the influence of student–student relationship on cyberbullying; (b) to synthesize the relations among student–student relationship, materialism, and cyberbullying with a mediation analysis; and (c) to examine gender differences among the relations between these aforementioned variables. These research hypotheses were tested by a moderated mediation model (Figure 1) among Chinese adolescents. Based on the literature discussed above, the following hypotheses were established:

Figure 1.

The proposed moderated mediation model.

Hypothesis 1 (H1): Student–student relationship will be negatively associated with adolescent cyberbullying.

Hypothesis 2 (H2): Materialism will mediate the link between student–student relationship and adolescent cyberbullying.

Hypothesis 3 (H3): Boys will be more involved in cyberbullying than girls. Gender will moderate the links between student–student relationship and adolescent cyberbullying.

Method

Participants

The data for the present study were obtained from a survey conducted in June 2018. The participants were recruited in their classrooms; they were 720 middle school students from two middle schools in Hebei Province, China. Eight of the participants were excluded in the data processing because they did not report their gender. Half of the participants were boys, and the mean age of the participants was 13.66 years (SD = 1.36). The majority (95.3%) of the participants reported being urban residents; 76.8% of the participants were only children. No other demographic data were measured.

Measures

Student–student relationship

The variable student–student relationship was measured by a subscale of the My Class Scale (G. R. Jiang, 2002), which consists of eight items (e.g., “If anyone has concerns, other students will care for him or her”). The measurement tested the perceived quality of the relationship among the participants’ classmates. This scale has been widely used (P. Wang et al., 2020; Wang, Zhao, et al., 2017). Each item is rated on a 5-point Likert-type scale from 1 (completely not true) to 5 (completely true). Higher average scores indicate better quality of perceived relationships among the classmates. In the present study, this scale showed good reliability (Cronbach’s α = .89).

Materialism

Materialism was measured by a short form of the Materialism Values Scale (Richins, 2004), which consists of 15 items (e.g., “I try to keep my life simple, as far as possessions are concerned”). This scale contains three subscales, including the pursuit of happiness via acquisition, acquisition centrality, and possession-defined success. The Materialism Values Scale has been widely used as well (e.g., P. Wang et al., 2020). Each item is rated on a 5-point Likert-type scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). Higher average scores indicate a higher level of materialism. In the present study, this scale showed good reliability (Cronbach’s α = .79).

Cyberbullying

Cyberbullying was measured by the Chinese version of the Cyberbullying Scale (Wright, 2014; Wang, Yang et al., 2019), which consists of nine items (e.g., “How often do you spread bad rumors about another peer online or through text messages?”). Each item is rated on a 5-point Likert-type scale from 1 (never) to 5 (all the time). Higher average scores indicate more engagement in cyberbullying. In the present study, this scale showed good reliability (Cronbach’s α = .93).

Procedure

The present study was approved by the Research Ethics Committee of the corresponding author’s university. The research was conducted in two middle schools in June 2018. Experienced postgraduates were introduced to the students by their teachers. These postgraduates conducted the research with a manual of procedures to ensure the standardization of the data collection progress. Participants filled out paper-based questionnaires in their classrooms. The instruments were administered in a preformed order. The present study obtained adolescents’ assent and teachers’ consent. This survey did not acquire parental consent because it had a low risk (e.g., anonymous and confidential) and it could not be practically conducted with the requirement of parental consent (Collogan & Fleshman, 2005; Flicker & Guta, 2008). Informed consent from the teachers was more practicable; it could also protect adolescents from potential research risk (Santelli et al., 2003). The survey could be finished in about 30 min. The students were told that their participation was totally voluntary and that they could terminate their participation at any time. All of the students completed the survey. All of the participants were given a pen as an incentive after completing the survey.

Statistical Analyses

First, responses with missing data (e.g., age or gender not reported) were excluded from the data processing. Second, we calculated descriptive statistics and correlations among the variables in this study. Third, we used the PROCESS macro for SPSS (Model 4) to analyze the mediation effect of materialism in the link between student–student relationship and cyberbullying (Hayes, 2013). Finally, we used the PROCESS macro (Model 59) to examine the moderating effect of gender in the links between student–student relationship and cyberbullying via materialism. We used bootstrap confidence intervals (CIs) to determine whether the effects were significant based on 1,000 resamples (Hayes, 2013); an effect was regarded as significant when the CIs did not contain zero. The variables were mean-centered in the moderated mediation analyses.

Results

The main purposes of the present study were examined in the following steps.

Preliminary Analyses

Table 1 presents the means, standard deviations, and correlations of the study variables. Adolescents with better student–student relationship were less likely to engage in cyberbullying (r = −.26, p < .001) and more likely to have a low level of materialism (r = −.27, p < .001). Those with a higher level of materialism were more likely to engage in cyberbullying (r = .32, p < .001). Therefore, H1 was supported. Meanwhile, gender (boys = 1, girls = 0) was positively related to cyberbullying (r = .13, p < .001), indicating that boys were more likely to engage in cyberbullying than girls.

Table 1.

Descriptive Statistics and Correlations of the Study Variables.

Variables	M	SD	1	2	3	4
1. SSR	3.88	0.81	1
2. Materialism	2.61	0.60	−.26***	1
3. Cyberbullying	1.50	0.68	−.27***	.32***	1
4. Gender	0.50	0.50	−.05	−.02	.13***	1

Note. N = 712, boys = 1, girls = 0. SSR = student–student relationship.

***

p < .001.

Testing for Mediation Effect

H2 assumed that materialism would mediate the link between student–student relationship and cyberbullying. We examined this hypothesis with Model 4 of the PROCESS macro (Hayes, 2013). As presented in Table 2, student–student relationship was negatively related to materialism (b = −.19, p < .001), which in turn was positively related to cyberbullying (b = .30, p < .001). That is, materialism mediated the link between student–student relationship and cyberbullying (indirect effect = −.06, CI = [–.08, –.04]). The mediation effect accounted for 26% of the total effect. Thus, H2 was supported.

Table 2.

Testing the Mediation Effect of Student–Student Relationship on Cyberbullying via Materialism.

Predictors	Model 1 (Materialism)				Model 2 (Cyberbullying)
Predictors	Coefficient	SE	LLCI	ULCI	Coefficient	SE	LLCI	ULCI
SSR	−.19***	0.03	−.25	−.14	−.17***	.03	−.23	−.11
Materialism					.30***	.04	.22	.39
R ²	.07				.14
F	53.32***				57.94***

Note. N = 712. The beta values are unstandardized coefficients. Each column is a regression model that predicts the criterion at the top of the column. LLCI = lower limit of the 95% confidence interval; ULCI = upper limit of the 95% confidence interval; SSR = student–student relationship.

***

p < .001.

Testing for Moderated Mediation Effect

H3 presumed differences among the links between student–student relationship and cyberbullying via materialism. This assumption was tested with Model 59 of PROCESS macro (Hayes, 2013). As presented in Table 3, gender moderated the link between materialism and cyberbullying (β = .23, p < .001). For clarity, we plotted materialism on cyberbullying separately for boys and girls (Figure 2). Simple slope analyses showed that the effect between materialism and cyberbullying was positive and significant among boys (β_simple = .39, p < .001) but not among girls (β_simple = −.07, p > .05). Meanwhile, gender did not moderate the other two links between student–student relationship and cyberbullying (i.e., student–student relationship → materialism, student–student relationship → cyberbullying). The index of moderated mediation was significant (β = −.09, SE = .03, CI = [–.16, –.03]). Therefore, H3 was partially supported.

Table 3.

Testing the Moderated Mediation Effect of Student–Student Relationship on Cyberbullying.

Predictors	Model 1 (Materialism)				Model 2 (Cyberbullying)
Predictors	Coefficient	SE	LLCI	ULCI	Coefficient	SE	LLCI	ULCI
SSR	−0.21***	.05	−.32	−.11	−0.13*	.05	−.23	−.02
Gender	−0.07	.07	−.22	.07	0.25***	.07	.12	.39
SSR × Gender	−0.09	.07	−.24	.04	−0.10	.07	−.24	.04
Materialism					0.16**	.05	.06	.26
Materialism × Gender					0.23**	.07	.09	.37
R ²	.07				.17
F	18.60***				29.78***

Note. N = 712. The beta values are standardized coefficients; thus, they can be compared to determine the relative strength of different variables in the model. LLCI = lower limit of the 95% confidence interval; ULCI = upper limit of the 95% confidence interval; SSR = student–student relationship.

p < .05. **p < .01. ***p < .001.

Figure 2.

Gender moderates the relationship between materialism and cyberbullying.

Discussion

Few empirical studies have explored the link between student–student relationship and adolescent cyberbullying. As such, the mediating mechanisms underlying this correlation have remained largely unknown. Gender differences among the links between these variables have likewise not been clarified. The present study applied a moderated mediation model to examine whether there would be a significant correlation between student–student relationship and cyberbullying, whether materialism would mediate the link between student–student relationship and cyberbullying, and whether there would be gender differences among the links in this mediation process. The results indicated that boys were more likely to engage in cyberbullying compared with girls. Student–student relationship showed a negative correlation to adolescent cyberbullying and materialism. Moreover, materialism mediated the link between student–student relationship and cyberbullying. Last, gender moderated the relation between materialism and cyberbullying. All of the findings are discussed in the sections below.

Student–Student Relationship and Adolescent Cyberbullying

The present study showed that student–student relationship was negatively associated with cyberbullying. Although prior research has identified some interpersonal factors for adolescent cyberbullying, such as parenting (Zurcher, Holmgren, Coyne, Barlett, & Yang, 2018), limited research has explored the link between peer relationship and cyberbullying. Given that peers are an important interpersonal or situational factor in adolescents’ daily lives and psychological development (Deci & Ryan, 2000; Ettekal & Ladd, 2014), our finding elucidated the influence of adolescents’ offline relationships with peers on their online deviant behaviors, particularly cyberbullying. This finding is in line with a prior study that has shown that student–student relationship is significantly related to adolescents’ online deviant behavior, such as smartphone addiction (Wang, Zhao, et al., 2017). Moreover, this finding is also in line with the GAM and prior empirical research (Anderson & Bushman, 2002; Kowalski et al., 2014), which suggest that situational factors such as poor student–student relationship can be important predictive factors for an individual’s offline and online bullying. Given that the accumulation of multiple risk factors often have more negative influences on adolescent development compared with a single factor (Evans, Li, & Whipple, 2013), this finding can provide a more comprehensive understanding of the predictive factors for adolescent cyberbullying, thereby contributing to inspire both researchers and potential prevention and intervention efforts.

Mediating Role of Materialism

The present study found that materialism mediated the link between student–student relationship and cyberbullying among adolescents. That is, materialism may be one of the explanatory factors for why adolescents with poor offline student–student relationship are more likely to engage in online deviant behavior such as cyberbullying. To our knowledge, our study is the first to report such a finding in this area, extending prior studies by certifying that adolescents’ offline relationships with their classmates can impact their online cyberbullying via materialism. Thus, the importance of the school climate and peer relationships on adolescents’ development cannot be stressed enough. In prior research regarding adolescent cyberbullying, school psychologists have mainly focused on the influences of school climate, such as peer relationships, whereas developmental psychologists have emphasized personal psychological status (Kowalski et al., 2014). These two fields have developed separately without linking the potential associations between the factors from their respective fields, such as student–student relationship (school climate) and materialism (personal value or trait) (Kowalski et al., 2014). The present study integrated factors from both fields to explore the antecedents of adolescent cyberbullying. Factors from an adolescent’s offline context, such as poor student–student relationship, can shape a negative personal value such as high materialism, which can eventually increase the probability of engaging in cyberbullying.

Each of the independent links in this mediation model is worth discussing. For the link between student–student relationship and materialism, the results in our study supported the notion that good interpersonal relationship is a protective role in the formation of adolescent materialism (Chaplin & John, 2010). Adolescents with poor interpersonal relationships with their peers are more likely to adopt high materialism to compensate for their insecurity or impaired psychological status (Chaplin & John, 2010; Dittmar et al., 2014). This finding highlights the importance of helping adolescents form good interpersonal relationships with their peers, which can be vital in preventing them from becoming more materialistic in this consumerist society.

For the link between materialism and cyberbullying, the results indicated that materialism is positively associated with adolescent cyberbullying in general. As far as we know, our study is the first to report this finding in literature. Given that materialism is a self-centered value, which may lead to antisocial behaviors, such as ecologically destructive behaviors (Kasser, 2016), it is logical to find that adolescents with a high level of materialism are more likely to engage in cyberbullying. Given that the youth are becoming more materialistic than before (Chaplin, John, Rindfleisch, & Froh, 2018; Schaefer, Hermans, & Parker, 2004; Twenge & Kasser, 2013), and that materialism is found to be a proximal factor for cyberbullying in our research, it is important for researchers and practitioners to make efforts to reduce adolescents’ materialism. Effective interventions aimed at reducing materialism include encouraging self-transcendent/intrinsic values/goals, increasing perceived personal security, and/or blocking materialistic messages from the external environment (Kasser, 2016). It will be helpful to implement these policies, which can, in turn, reduce adolescents’ cyberbullying.

Gender Differences

One aim of the present study was to examine whether boys engaged in cyberbullying more compared with girls. The results confirmed that boys were more likely to engage in this kind of online aggression. This finding is consistent with the evolutionary psychological perspective, which suggests that males are prone to aggression because it gives them more survival and reproductive advantages (Bjorklund & Ellis, 2014; Buss, 2005). This result is of great importance because it suggests that although the online environment (e.g., reduced cues and anonymity) is different from the offline environment in which humans evolved, people’s online behaviors, such as cyberbullying, are still influenced by the profound impacts of natural selection. Prior researchers have suggested that it will be helpful to apply an evolutionary perspective to the research of Internet behavior in four domains, namely, mating and sexual competition, parenting and kinship, trust and social exchange, and personal information management (Piazza & Bering, 2009). The present study suggests the benefits to future researchers of applying an evolutionary perspective to study cyberbullying, given that evolutionary psychology has also provided a rich theoretical and empirical background in explaining human aggression (Bjorklund & Ellis, 2014; Buss, 2005).

Another important goal of the present study was to uncover gender differences among the links between the study variables. The results showed that gender moderated the link between materialism and cyberbullying, with the effect being significant only among the boys. To be specific, the effect between materialism and cyberbullying was positive and significant for boys, but not significant for girls. That is, male adolescents with a high level of materialism were more likely to engage in cyberbullying. As discussed above, materialism is a self-centered value that often leads to antisocial behaviors (Kasser, 2016), and boys/men are prone to engage in aggression (Bjorklund & Ellis, 2014; Buss, 2005). Thus, it is logical to find this effect. Based on the evolutionary psychological perspective, given that girls and women are prone to fostering good interpersonal relationships with others and are less likely to attack others in general (see Buss, 2005), they are more likely to buy beautiful things instead of bullying others online if they have a high level of materialism.

Contrary to our assumption, gender did not moderate the link between student–student relationship and cyberbullying. One possible explanation is the universal role of peer relationships in adolescents’ development; relatedness is a universal and fundamental need for human beings (Deci & Ryan, 2000). If this basic need is not fulfilled, then people are likely to engage in deviant behaviors, such as cyberbullying, regardless of whether they are boys or girls. In addition, gender did not moderate the link between student–student relationship and adolescent materialism. This can also be explained by the powerful impact of interpersonal relationships in adolescents’ psychological development (Deci & Ryan, 2000). Materialism can be regarded as a strategy that people use to compensate for unsatisfied emotional support needs (Chaplin & John, 2010). Therefore, adolescents with poor student–student relationship would have a high level of materialism regardless of their gender.

Implications

The current findings have several important implications. First, this study showed that student–student relationship represents a protective factor for adolescent cyberbullying. Given that middle school students spend the bulk of their time with their classmates (Aizenkot & Kashyrosenbaum, 2021; G. R. Jiang, 2002; Wang, Wang, et al., 2019), it is important for educators to make efforts to maintain the good relationships among students. Second, the results indicated that boys are more likely to engage in cyberbullying, and that the effect between materialism and cyberbullying is only significant among boys. Thus, it is necessary for prevention and intervention programs aimed at reducing cyberbullying to pay more attention to boys. Third, the results showed that materialism is a proximal factor for cyberbullying among boys, which means that interventions targeting the reduction of materialism can reduce cyberbullying among boys.

Limitations and Future Directions

The present study provided a basis for exploring the influences of adolescents’ offline interpersonal relationships on their online bullying behavior. The following linkage was confirmed: interpersonal factors (e.g., student–student relationship) → internal psychological status, like value (materialism) → cyberbullying. To understand the influences of online/offline interpersonal relationships on adolescents’ cyberbullying, more research effort is needed. The current work included student–student relationship as an index of peer relationships, but other offline interpersonal factors can be included, such as teacher–student and parent–child relationships. Indeed, there may be other important mediators in this correlation. For both academic and practical purposes, it will be beneficial to uncover other mediating factors. In addition, testing multiple factors, using a sample with different cultural backgrounds, will help researchers establish a more integrated model to uncover how different interpersonal factors and internal psychological status can jointly impact adolescent cyberbullying.

Another direction will be a focus on confirming the causal relationships among the factors tested in this research. Given the cross-sectional nature of the data, the study can fall subject to the criticism that no causation can be implied. Distinguishing effect and cause is difficult for simple correlations between two factors. Systems of relations found in a more complex model often reduce this concern. For instance, the results in our study indicated that worse offline peer relationship (i.e., student–student relationship) → higher materialism → higher cyberbullying. It will be conceptually improbable to deduce that higher cyberbullying → higher materialism → offline peer relationship (i.e., student–student relationship). Nevertheless, longitudinal data are necessary and vital for confirming causal relationships.

Moreover, the present study indicated that a broader theoretical perspective, such as an evolutionary psychological perspective, will be helpful in both building research hypotheses and explaining findings in the field of online aggression, particularly cyberbullying. Future research in cyberbullying can benefit from applying an evolutionary psychological perspective to build hypotheses and explain their findings.

Meanwhile, the limitations of the present study should be considered. For one, it is important to note that this study only collected data from Chinese middle school students. Therefore, the generalizability of the results is limited. For another, the data in this study were self-reported. It is beneficial for future research to collect data from diverse information sources, such as participants’ classmates or parents.

Conclusion

In summary, the present study showed that good student–student relationship can be a protective factor for adolescent cyberbullying. The mediation analysis indicated that materialism can be a possible explanatory factor underlying this relationship. Moreover, boys were confirmed to be more likely to engage in cyberbullying compared with girls. Moderated mediation analyses revealed that gender moderated the link between materialism and cyberbullying, with the effect being significant only among the male adolescents. To be specific, high materialism can be a harmful factor for cyberbullying among male adolescents as they seem to be at elevated risk of engaging in cyberbullying. It will be beneficial to use an evolutionary perspective to study cyberbullying.

Footnotes

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: The present study was supported by the Outstanding Innovative Talents Cultivation Funded Programs 2017 of Renmin University of China.

ORCID iDs

Pengcheng Wang

Xingchao Wang

Author Biographies

Pengcheng Wang is a PhD candidate in the Center of Internet + Social Psychology, Department of Psychology, Renmin University of China, China. His research interests are in cyberpsychology and adolescent development.

Xingchao Wang is a professor in the School of Educational Science, Shanxi University, China. His research interests are in adolescents’ cyberbullying perpetration, aggression, bullying, moral disengagement, and parental phubbing.

Li Lei is a professor in the Center of Internet + Social Psychology, Department of Psychology, Renmin University of China, China. His research interests are in adolescents’ cyberbullying perpetration and social networking sites addiction.

References

Aizenkot

Kashyrosenbaum

(2021). Cyberbullying victimization in WhatsApp classmate groups among Israeli elementary, middle, and high school students. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 36(15-16), NP8498-NP8519. doi:10.1177/0886260519842860

Anderson

C. A.

Bushman

B. J.

(2002). Human aggression. Annual Review Psychology, 53, 27-51.

Banerjee

Dittmar

(2008). Individual differences in children’s materialism: The role of peer relations. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 34, 17-31.

Bauman

Toomey

R. B.

Walker

J. L.

(2013). Associations among bullying, cyberbullying, and suicide in high school students. Journal of Adolescence, 36, 341-350.

Beckman

Hagquist

Hellstrom

(2013). Discrepant gender patterns for cyberbullying and traditional bullying: An analysis of Swedish adolescent data. Computers in Human Behavior, 29, 1896-1903.

Bjorklund

D. F.

Ellis

B. J.

(2014). Children, childhood, and development in evolutionary perspective. Developmental Review, 34, 225-264.

Buss

D. M.

(Ed.). (2005). Handbook of evolutionary psychology. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley.

Buss

D. M.

Schmitt

D. P.

(2019). Mate preferences and their behavioral manifestations. Annual Review of Psychology, 70, 77-110.

Calvete

Orue

Estévez

Villardón

Padilla

(2010). Cyberbullying in adolescents: Modalities and aggressors’ profile. Computers in Human Behavior, 26, 1128-1135.

10.

Chaplin

L. N.

John

D. R.

(2010). Interpersonal influences on adolescent materialism: A new look at the role of parents and peers. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 20, 176-184.

11.

Chaplin

L. N.

John

D. R.

Rindfleisch

Froh

J. J.

(2018). The impact of gratitude on adolescent materialism and generosity. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 14, 502-511.

12.

Chen

S. S.

Lwin

M. O.

(2017). A meta-analysis of factors predicting cyberbullying perpetration and victimization: From the social cognitive and media effects approach. New Media & Society, 19, 1194-1213.

13.

Collogan

Fleshman

(2005). Adolescent research and parental permission. In Kodish

(Ed.), Ethics and research with children: A case-based approach (pp. 77-99). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

14.

Cross

C. P.

Copping

L. T.

Campbell

(2011). Sex differences in impulsivity: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 137, 97-130.

15.

Deci

E. L.

Ryan

R. M.

(2000). The “what” and “why” of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry, 11, 227-268.

16.

Dittmar

Bond

Hurst

Kasser

(2014). The relationship between materialism and personal well-being: A meta-analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 107, 879-924.

17.

Donnelly

G. E.

Ksendzova

Howell

R. T.

Vohs

K. D.

Baumeister

R. F.

(2016). Buying to blunt negative feelings: Materialistic escape from the self. Review of General Psychology, 20, 272-316.

18.

Erdur-Baker

(2010). Cyberbullying and its correlation to traditional bullying, gender and frequent and risky usage of Internet-mediated communication tools. New Media & Society, 12, 109-125.

19.

Ettekal

Ladd

G. W.

(2014). Developmental pathways from childhood aggression-disruptiveness, chronic peer rejection, and deviant friendships to early-adolescent rule breaking. Child Development, 86, 614-631.

20.

Evans

G. W.

Whipple

S. S.

(2013). Cumulative risk and child development. Psychological Bulletin, 139, 1342-1396.

21.

Fanti

K. A.

Demetriou

A. G.

Hawa

V. V.

(2012). A longitudinal study of cyberbullying: Examining risk and protective factors. European Journal of Developmental Psychology, 9, 168-181.

22.

Flicker

Guta

(2008). Ethical approaches to adolescent participation in sexual health research. Journal of Adolescent Health, 42, 3-10.

23.

Hayes

A. F.

(2013). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach. New York, NY: Guilford Press.

24.

Jiang

G. R.

(2002). Research on classroom social ecology environment. Wuhan: Central China Normal University Press.

25.

Jiang

Zhang

Hawk

S. T.

Qiu

(2015). Can’t buy me friendship? Peer rejection and adolescent materialism: Implicit self-esteem as a mediator. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 58, 48-55.

26.

Juvonen

Gross

E. F.

(2008). Extending the school grounds? Bullying experiences in cyberspace. Journal of School Health, 78, 496-505.

27.

Kasser

(2016). Materialistic values and goals. Annual Review of Psychology, 67, 489-514.

28.

Kasser

Ryan

R. M.

(1993). A dark side of the American-dream: Correlates of financial success as a central life aspiration. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65, 410-422.

29.

Katzer

Fetchenhauer

Belschak

(2009). Cyberbullying: Who are the victims? Journal of Media Psychology, 21, 25-36.

30.

Keith

Martin

M. E.

(2005). Cyber-bullying: Creating a culture of respect in a cyber world. Reclaiming Children and Youth, 13, 224-228.

31.

Kendler

K. S.

Gardner

C. O.

(2014). Sex differences in the pathways to major depression: A study of opposite-sex twin pairs. American Journal of Psychiatry, 171, 426-435.

32.

Kowalski

R. M.

Giumetti

G. W.

Schroeder

A. N.

Lattanner

M. R.

(2014). Bullying in the digital age: A critical review and meta-analysis of cyberbullying research among youth. Psychological Bulletin, 140, 1073-1137.

33.

Kowalski

R. M.

Limber

S. E.

Agatston

P. W.

(2012). Cyberbullying: Bullying in the digital age (2nd ed.). Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.

34.

Kowalski

R. M.

Morgan

C. A.

Limber

S. P.

(2012). Traditional bullying as a potential warning sign of cyberbullying. School Psychology International, 33, 505-519.

35.

Leung

A. N. M.

Wong

Farver

J. M.

(2018). Cyberbullying in Hong Kong Chinese students: Life satisfaction, and the moderating role of friendship qualities on cyberbullying victimization and perpetration. Personality and Individual Differences, 133, 7-12.

36.

Martinez-Pecino

Duran

(2019). I love you but I cyberbully you: The role of hostile sexism. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 34, 812-825.

37.

Mead

N. L.

Baumeister

R. F.

Stillman

T. F.

Rawn

C. D.

Vohs

K. D.

(2011). Social exclusion causes people to spend and consume strategically in the service of affiliation. Journal of Consumer Research, 37, 902-919.

38.

Piazza

Bering

J. M.

(2009). Evolutionary cyber-psychology: Applying an evolutionary framework to Internet behavior. Computers in Human Behavior, 25, 1258-1269.

39.

Richins

M. L.

(2004). The material values scale: Measurement properties and development of a short form. Journal of Consumer Research, 31, 209-219.

40.

Richins

M. L.

Dawson

(1992). A consumer values orientation for materialism and its measurement: Scale development and validation. Journal of Consumer Research, 19, 303-316.

41.

Santelli

J. S.

Rogers

A. S.

Rosenfeld

W. D.

DuRant

R. H.

Dubler

Morreale

. . . Schissel

(2003). Guidelines for adolescent health research: A position paper of the society for adolescent medicine. Journal of Adolescent Health, 33, 396-409.

42.

Schaefer

A. D.

Hermans

C. M.

Parker

R. S.

(2004). A cross-cultural exploration of materialism in adolescents. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 28, 399-411.

43.

Segal

Podoshen

J. S.

(2013). An examination of materialism, conspicuous consumption and gender differences. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 37, 189-198.

44.

Shapka

J. D.

Law

D. M.

(2013). Does one size fit all? Ethnic differences in parenting behaviors and motivations for adolescent engagement in cyberbullying. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 42, 723-738.

45.

Sun

Fan

(2016). Cyberbullying perpetration: A meta-analysis of gender differences. International Journal of Internet Science, 11, 61-81.

46.

Tokunaga

R. S.

(2010). Following you home from school: A critical review and synthesis of research on cyberbullying victimization. Computers in Human Behavior, 26, 277-287.

47.

Tosun

(2016). Cyberbully and victim experiences of pre-service teachers. European Journal of Contemporary Education, 15, 136-146.

48.

Twenge

J. M.

Kasser

(2013). Generational changes in materialism and work centrality, 1976-2007: Associations with temporal changes in societal insecurity and materialistic role modeling. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 39, 883-897.

49.

Varjas

Henrich

C. C.

Meyers

(2009). Urban middle school students’ perceptions of bullying, cyberbullying, and school safety. Journal of School Violence, 8, 159-176.

50.

Wang

Nie

Wang

Zhao

Xie

. . . Ouyang

(2020). How are smartphones associated with adolescent materialism? Journal of Health Psychology, 25(13-14), 2406-2417. doi:10.1177/1359105318801069

51.

Wang

Nie

Zeng

Liu

Wang

. . . Lei

(2019). Envy and problematic smartphone use: The mediating role of FOMO and the moderating role of student-student relationship. Personality and Individual Differences, 146, 136-142.

52.

Wang

Zhao

Wang

Xie

Wang

Lei

(2017). Peer relationship and adolescent smartphone addiction: The mediating role of self-esteem and the moderating role of the need to belong. Journal of Behavior Addictions, 6, 708-717.

53.

Wang

Yang

Wang

Lei

(2019). Childhood maltreatment, moral disengagement, and adolescents’ cyberbullying perpetration: Fathers’ and mothers’ moral disengagement as moderators. Computers in Human Behavior, 95, 48-57.

54.

Wang

Yang

Wang

Lei

(2017). Trait anger and cyberbullying among young adults: A moderated mediation model of moral disengagement and moral identity. Computers in Human Behavior, 73, 519-526.

55.

Willard

N. E.

(2007). Cyberbullying and cyberthreats: Responding to the challenge of online social aggression, threats, and distress. Champaign, IL: Research Press.

56.

Williams

K. R.

Guerra

N. G.

(2007). Prevalence and predictors of Internet bullying. Journal of Adolescent Health, 41(6), S14-S21.

57.

Wright

M. F.

(2014). Longitudinal investigation of the associations between adolescents’ popularity and cyber social behaviors. Journal of School Violence, 13, 291-314.

58.

Wyckoff

J. P.

Buss

D. M.

Markman

A. B.

(2019). Sex differences in victimization and consequences of cyber aggression: An evolutionary perspective. Evolutionary Behavioral Sciences, 13, 254-264.

59.

Zurcher

J. D.

Holmgren

H. G.

Coyne

S. M.

Barlett

C. P.

Yang

(2018). Parenting and cyberbullying across adolescence. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 21, 294-303.