school problems and participation in other problematic offline behaviors [6e8]. It is also .... School Climate 2.0: Reducing teen technology misuse by reshaping ...
Journal of Adolescent Health 53 (2013) 431e432
www.jahonline.org Editorial
Cyberbullying Among Adolescents: Implications for Empirical Research
Research into the causes and consequences of cyberbullying among adolescents has exploded in the past 5 years [1]. However, much of the literature is largely descriptive in nature and/or suffers from methodological limitations associated with accessing and studying young people who are engaged in constantly changing high-tech behaviors. These challenges notwithstanding, a clearer picture is beginning to emerge detailing the social and psychological maladies linked to experiences with cyberbullying. Youth who experience cyberbullying, both as victims and as offenders, report lower self-esteem [2,3], higher depression and suicidal ideation [3e5], and increased school problems and participation in other problematic offline behaviors [6e8]. It is also true that traditional bullying still occurs with more frequency than cyberbullying [3], although the gap could be narrowing [9]. In this issue of the Journal, Gámez-Guadix and colleagues [10] further advance our understanding of the correlates of cyberbullying by examining its connection to psychological and behavioral problems using longitudinal datada rarity in adolescent research generally and bullying research specifically. Results from this analysis comport with findings from existing cross-sectional research: namely, that youth who experience cyberbullying are also going through a host of other personal challenges. While Gámez-Guadix et al give us more confidence about the nature of those relationships, many questions remain unanswered. Their use of structural equation modeling to examine relationships using longitudinal data better ensures that the hypothesized temporal ordering exists in practice, but it is possible that the associations observed were simply spurious. Moreover, even though research has linked cyberbullying to depression, it remains unclear whether youth who experience cyberbullying become depressed, or if those who are depressed make good targets for cyberbullying. Do teens experiencing depression behave in ways online that expose themselves as good marks? Similarly, do teens who are being cyberbullied turn to illicit substances to self-medicate or engross themselves in problematic online behaviors to distract themselves from the torment, or are drug-using and Internetmisbehaving youth good targets for harassment? Additional data points would be necessary to more accurately confirm the reciprocal nature of these relationships. If the relationships
truly are what Gámez-Guadix et al [10] purport them to be, then multiple data points across time should depict a close correlation across varying levels of experience with cyberbullying and its consequences. Another persistent problem across cyberbullying studies (which limits our ability to compare and synthesize) is the failure of researchers to use a consistent definition and operationalization strategy. Some research involves broad definitions of cyberbullying that include every experience with any type of harassment that can occur online. Other authors focus on specific forms such as humiliation or physical threats, without including other forms such as insults and hateful speech. Along similar lines, some discrepancy exists across the research as it relates to the media and venues asked about. For example, cyberbullying can occur over webcambased software or in online gaming networks, but these are regularly omitted in data collection efforts (mostly because it is difficult to enumerate every possibility). With all of this in mind, it is understandable that definitional and measurement-related variations lead to inconsistencies in accurately explaining the scope, prevalence, and frequency of cyberbullying. At best, this provides an incomplete picture of exactly what is going on. At worst, it leads to misinformation and confusion. Even though almost all definitions of bullying (whatever its form) state that the behavior is repetitive, many researchers (including Gámez-Guadix et al [10]) combine single experiences with multiple ones in a way that makes it impossible to disaggregate the two. An adolescent who receives a single insulting online message is treated the same as one who is humiliated online dozens of times over the course of several months. But are these two cases really synonymous, and should we expect the correlates and consequences to be analogous? It is also true that some youth are better equipped than others to brush off some minor experiences with online aggression; yet, little is known, let alone controlled for, about what personal protective characteristics might be salient. Finally, variability also exists across studies with respect to the time frame respondents are asked to consider when reflecting on experiences with cyberbullying. Some studies ask teens to report what they have experienced in the previous 30 days or 6 months, whereas others ask about the current school year or longer. Gámez-Guadix et al [10] asked students to report whether they had “ever” experienced cyberbullying. The
See Related Article p. 446 1054-139X/$ e see front matter Ó 2013 Society for Adolescent Health and Medicine. All rights reserved. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jadohealth.2013.07.030
432
Editorial / Journal of Adolescent Health 53 (2013) 431e432
problem with this strategy is that unless the wording of the measures was changed at Time 2 to reflect more recent experiences, students could have been reporting the same incident(s) at Time 1 and Time 2, thereby confounding the results and subsequent interpretation. Once again, the complexities of studying human behavior via rigorous social science methodologies render it difficult to arrive at an ideal approach and clearly interpretable, unequivocal findings. Public attention to the problem of cyberbullying is at an alltime high. As such, good research is necessary to more precisely elucidate the nature and extent of this behavior, along with its associated causes and consequences. The science of cyberbullying must continue to advance by improving methodological standards, including the use of validated measures, representative samples, and, where possible, longitudinal data. Supplementing quantitative findings with those from detailed qualitative inquiries will also help to better understand the precise nature of some of these relationships. With these considerations in mind, scholarship will be better able to inform the public conversation about cyberbullying in a way that equips educators, parents, policy makers, and others with the information they need to make a positive difference in the lives of adolescents, online and offline. Justin W. Patchin, Ph.D. Department of Political Science University of Wisconsin-Eau Claire Eau Claire, Wisconsin
Sameer Hinduja, Ph.D. School of Criminology and Criminal Justice Florida Atlantic University Jupiter, Florida
References [1] Patchin JW, Hinduja S. Cyberbullying: An update and synthesis of the research. In: Patchin J, Hinduja S, eds. Cyberbullying Prevention and Response: Expert Perspectives. New York: Routledge; 2012. p. 13e35. [2] Patchin JW, Hinduja S. Cyberbullying and self-esteem. J Sch Health 2010; 80:616e23. [3] Kowalski RM, Limber SP. Psychological, physical, and academic correlates of cyberbullying and traditional bullying. J Adolesc Health 2013;53: S13e20. [4] Bauman S, Toomey RB, Walker JL. Associations among bullying, cyberbullying, and suicide in high school students. J Adolescence 2013;36: 341e50. [5] Hinduja S, Patchin JW. Bullying, cyberbullying, and suicide. Arch Suicide Res 2010;14:206e21. [6] Hinduja S, Patchin JW. Offline consequences of online victimization: School violence and delinquency. J Sch Violence 2007;6:89e112. [7] Hinduja S, Patchin JW. Cyberbullying: An exploratory analysis of factors related to offending and victimization. Deviant Behavior 2008; 29:1e29. [8] Hinduja S, Patchin JW. School Climate 2.0: Reducing teen technology misuse by reshaping the environment. Thousand Oaks (CA): Sage; 2012. [9] Jones LM, Mitchel KJ, Finkelhor D. Online harassment in context: Trends from three youth Internet safety surveys (2000, 2005, 2010). Psychol Violence 2012;3:53e69. [10] Gámez-Guadix M, Orue I, Smith PK, Calvete E. Longitudinal and reciprocal relations of cyberbullying with depression, substance use, and problematic Internet use among adolescents. J Adolesc Health 2013;53:446e52.
