write a literature review about cyberbullying

• Architecture and Design
• Asian and Pacific Studies
• Business and Economics
• Classical and Ancient Near Eastern Studies
• Computer Sciences
• Cultural Studies
• Engineering
• General Interest
• Geosciences
• Industrial Chemistry
• Islamic and Middle Eastern Studies
• Jewish Studies
• Library and Information Science, Book Studies
• Life Sciences
• Linguistics and Semiotics
• Literary Studies
• Materials Sciences
• Mathematics
• Social Sciences
• Sports and Recreation
• Theology and Religion
• Publish your article
• The role of authors
• Promoting your article
• Abstracting & indexing
• Publishing Ethics
• Why publish with De Gruyter
• How to publish with De Gruyter
• Our book series
• Our subject areas
• Your digital product at De Gruyter
• Contribute to our reference works
• Product information
• Tools & resources
• Product Information
• Promotional Materials
• Orders and Inquiries
• FAQ for Library Suppliers and Book Sellers
• Repository Policy
• Free access policy
• Open Access agreements
• Database portals
• For Authors
• Customer service
• People + Culture
• Journal Management
• How to join us
• Working at De Gruyter
• Mission & Vision
• De Gruyter Foundation
• De Gruyter Ebound
• Our Responsibility
• Partner publishers

Your purchase has been completed. Your documents are now available to view.

Cyberbullying in adolescents: a literature review

Cyberbullying is a universal public health concern that affects adolescents. The growing usage of electronic gadgets and the Internet has been connected to a rise in cyberbullying. The increasing use of the Internet, along with the negative outcomes of cyberbullying on adolescents, has required the study of cyberbullying. In this paper author reviews existing literature on cyberbullying among adolescents. The concept of cyberbullying is explained, including definitions, types of cyberbullying, characteristics or features of victims and cyberbullies, risk factors or causes underlying cyberbullying, and the harmful consequences of cyberbullying to adolescents. Furthermore, examples of programs or intervention to prevent cyberbullying and recommendations for further studies are presented.

Research funding: None declared.

Author contributions: Author has accepted responsibility for the entire content of this manuscript and approved its submission.

Competing interests: Author states no conflict of interest.

Informed consent: Not applicable.

Ethical approval: Not applicable.

1. Ovigli, D, Colombo, P. Information and communication technologies (ICT) in educational research in science museums in Brazil. IJEDICT 2020;16:272–86. Search in Google Scholar

2. Eleuteri, S, Saladino, V, Verrastro, V. Identity, relationships, sexuality, and risky behaviors of adolescents in the context of social media. Sex Relatsh Ther 2017;32:354–65. https://doi.org/10.1080/14681994.2017.1397953 . Search in Google Scholar

3. Saladino, V, Eleuteri, S, Verrastro, V, Petruccelli, F. Perception of cyberbullying in adolescence: a brief evaluation among Italian students. Front Psychol 2020;11:1–7. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.607225 . Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

4. Beale, AV, Hall, KR. Cyberbullying: what school administrators (and parents) can do. Clearing House 2007;81:8–12. https://doi.org/10.3200/tchs.81.1.8-12 . Search in Google Scholar

5. Brody, N, Vangelisti, AL. Bystander intervention in cyberbullying. Commun Monogr 2016;83:94–119. https://doi.org/10.1080/03637751.2015.1044256 . Search in Google Scholar

6. Athanasiou, K, Melegkovits, E, Andrie, EK, Magoulas, C, Tzavara, CK, Richardson, C. Cross-national aspects of cyberbullying victimization among 14–17-year-old adolescents across seven European countries. BMC Publ Health 2018;18:800. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-018-5682-4 . Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

7. González-Cabrera, J, Tourón, J, Machimbarrena, JM, Gutiérrez-Ortega, M, Álvarez-Bardón, A, Garaigordobil, M. Cyberbullying in gifted students: prevalence and psychological well-being in a Spanish sample. Int J Environ Res Public Health 2019;16:2173. 10.3390/ijerph16122173 Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

8. Lee, C, Shin, N. Prevalence of cyberbullying and predictors of cyberbullying perpetration among Korean adolescents. Comput Hum Behav 2017;68:352–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.11.047 . Search in Google Scholar

9. Safaria, T. Prevalence and impact of cyberbullying in a sample of Indonesian junior high school students. The Turk Online J Educ Technol 2016;15:82–91. Search in Google Scholar

10. Lee, M-S, Wu, W, Svanström, L, Dalal, K. Cyber bullying prevention: intervention in Taiwan. PLoS One 2013;8:e64031. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0064031 . Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

11. Whittaker, E, Kowalski, RM. Cyberbullying via social media. J Sch Violence 2015;14:11–29. https://doi.org/10.1080/15388220.2014.949377 . Search in Google Scholar

12. Vaillancourt, T, Faris, R, Mishna, F. Cyberbullying in children and youth: implications for health and clinical practice. Can J Psychiatry 2016;62:368–73. https://doi.org/10.1177/0706743716684791 . Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

13. Nixon, C. Current perspectives: the impact of cyberbullying on adolescent health. Adolesc Health Med Ther 2014;5:143–58. https://doi.org/10.2147/ahmt.s36456 . Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

14. Heiman, T, Shemesh, D. Cyberbullying experience and gender differences among adolescents in different educational settings. J Learn Disabil 2013;48:146–55. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022219413492855 . Search in Google Scholar PubMed

15. Paris, S, Robert, D. Cyberbullying by adolescents: a preliminary assessment. Educ Forum 2006;70:21–36. 10.1080/00131720508984869 Search in Google Scholar

16. Patchin, JW, Hinduja, S. Bullies move beyond the schoolyard A preliminary look at cyberbullying. Youth Violence Juv Justice 2006;4:148–69. https://doi.org/10.1177/1541204006286288 . Search in Google Scholar

17. Kowalski, RM, Limber, SP. Electronic bullying among middle school students. J Adolesc Health 2007;41(6 Suppl 1):S22–30. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jadohealth.2007.08.017 . Search in Google Scholar PubMed

18. Raskauskas, J, Stoltz, AD. Involvement in traditional and electronic bullying among adolescents. Dev Psychol 2007;43:564–75. https://doi.org/10.1037/0012-1649.43.3.564 . Search in Google Scholar PubMed

19. Menesini, E, Nocentini, A, Palladino, BE, Frisén, A, Berne, S, Rosario, R. Cyberbullying definition among adolescents: a comparison across six European countries. Cyberpsychol Behav Soc Netw 2012;15:455–63. https://doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2012.0040 . Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

20. Dooley, JJ, Pyżalski, J, Cross, D. Cyberbullying versus face-to-face bullying: a theoretical and conceptual review. Z Psychol 2009;217:182–8. https://doi.org/10.1027/0044-3409.217.4.182 . Search in Google Scholar

21. Nocentini, A, Calmaestra, J, Anja, A, Scheithauer, H, Ortega, R, Menesini, E. Cyberbullying: labels, behaviours and definition in three European countries. Aust J Guid Counsell 2010;20:129–42. https://doi.org/10.1375/ajgc.20.2.129 . Search in Google Scholar

22. Aboujaoude, E, Savage, MW, Starcevic, V, Salame, WO. Cyberbullying: review of an old problem gone viral. J Adolesc Health 2015;57:10–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jadohealth.2015.04.011 . Search in Google Scholar PubMed

23. Ferrara, P, Ianniello, F, Villani, A, Corsello, G. Cyberbullying a modern form of bullying: let’s talk about this health and social problem. Ital J Pediatr 2018;44:14. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13052-018-0446-4 . Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

24. Smith, PK, Mahdavi, J, Carvalho, M, Fisher, S, Russell, S, Tippett, N. Cyberbullying: its nature and impact in secondary school pupils. JCPP (J Child Psychol Psychiatry) 2008;49:376–85. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-7610.2007.01846.x . Search in Google Scholar PubMed

25. Garett, R, Lord, LR, Young, SD. Associations between social media and cyberbullying: a review of the literature. mHealth 2016;2:46. https://doi.org/10.21037/mhealth.2016.12.01 . Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

26. Li, Q. Bullying in the new playground: research into cyberbullying and cyber victimisation. Australas J Educ Technol 2007;23:435–54. 10.14742/ajet.1245 Search in Google Scholar

27. Zeljka, D, Vesna, C, Rajkovača, I, Včev, A, Miskic, D, Miskic, B. Cyberbullying in early adolescence: is there a difference between urban and rural environment? Am J Biomed Sci Res 2019;1:191–6. 10.34297/AJBSR.2019.01.000542 Search in Google Scholar

28. Ybarra, ML, Mitchell, KJ, Wolak, J, Finkelhor, D. Examining characteristics and associated distress related to internet harassment: findings from the second youth internet safety survey. Pediatrics 2006;118:e1169–77. https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2006-0815 . Search in Google Scholar PubMed

29. Li, Q. Cyberbullying in schools: a research of gender differences. Sch Psychol Int 2006;27:157–70. 10.1177/0143034306064547 Search in Google Scholar

30. Ybarra, ML, Mitchell, KJ. Youth engaging in online harassment: associations with caregiver–child relationships, Internet use, and personal characteristics. J Adolesc 2004;27:319–36. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-1971(04)00039-9 . Search in Google Scholar

31. Dhond, V, Richter, S, McKenna, B, editors. Exploratory research to identify the characteristics of cyber victims on social media in New Zealand . Cham: Springer International Publishing; 2019. 10.1007/978-3-030-11395-7_18 Search in Google Scholar

32. Ybarra, ML, Mitchell, KJ. Prevalence and frequency of Internet harassment instigation: implications for adolescent health. J Adolesc Health 2007;41:189–95. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jadohealth.2007.03.005 . Search in Google Scholar PubMed

33. Zhong, J, Zheng, Y, Huang, X, Mo, D, Gong, J, Li, M. Study of the influencing factors of cyberbullying among Chinese college students incorporated with digital citizenship: from the perspective of individual students. Front Psychol 2021;12:621418. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.621418 . Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

34. Wong-Lo, M, Bullock, LM, Gable, RA. Cyber bullying: practices to face digital aggression. Emot Behav Difficulties 2011;16:317–25. https://doi.org/10.1080/13632752.2011.595098 . Search in Google Scholar

35. Barlett, C, Gentile, D. Attacking others online: the formation of cyberbullying in late adolescence. Psychol Popular Media Culture 2012;1:123–35. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0028113 . Search in Google Scholar

36. Mason. Cyberbullying: a preliminary assessment for school personnel. Psychol Sch 2008;45:323–48. 10.1002/pits.20301 Search in Google Scholar

37. Pratto, F, Stewart, AL, Zeineddine, F. When inequality fails: power, group dominance, and societal change. J Soc Polit Psychol 2013;1:132–60. https://doi.org/10.5964/jspp.v1i1.97 . Search in Google Scholar

38. Koski, JE, Xie, H, Olson, IR. Understanding social hierarchies: the neural and psychological foundations of status perception. Soc Neurosci 2015;10:527–50. https://doi.org/10.1080/17470919.2015.1013223 . Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

39. Walker, C, Sockman, B, Koehn, S. An exploratory study of cyberbullying with undergraduate university students. TechTrends 2011;55:31–8. 10.1007/s11528-011-0481-0 Search in Google Scholar

40. Pratto, F, Sidanius, J, Levin, S. Social dominance theory and the dynamics of intergroup relations: Taking stock and looking forward. Eur Rev Soc Psychol 2006;17:271–320. https://doi.org/10.1080/10463280601055772 . Search in Google Scholar

41. Sidanius, J, Pratto, F, Van Laar, C, Levin, S. Social dominance theory: its agenda and method. Polit Psychol 2004;25:845–80. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9221.2004.00401.x . Search in Google Scholar

42. Closson, LM. Aggressive and prosocial behaviors within early adolescent friendship cliques: what’s status got to do with it? Merrill-Palmer Q 2009;55:406–35. https://doi.org/10.1353/mpq.0.0035 . Search in Google Scholar

43. Salmivalli, C, Kärnä, A, Poskiparta, E. Counteracting bullying in Finland: the KiVa program and its effect on different forms of being bullied. IJBD (Int J Behav Dev) 2011;35:405–11. https://doi.org/10.1177/0165025411407457 . Search in Google Scholar

44. Chisholm, JF. Review of the status of cyberbullying and cyberbullying prevention. J Inf Syst Educ 2014;25:77–87. Search in Google Scholar

45. Bonanno, RA, Hymel, S. Cyber bullying and internalizing difficulties: above and beyond the impact of traditional forms of bullying. J Youth Adolesc 2013;42:685–97. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-013-9937-1 . Search in Google Scholar PubMed

46. Wolke, D, Copeland, WE, Angold, A, Costello, EJ. Impact of bullying in childhood on adult health, wealth, crime, and social outcomes. Psychol Sci 2013;24:1958–70. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797613481608 . Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

47. Foody, M, Samara, M, Carlbring, P. A review of cyberbullying and suggestions for online psychological therapy. Internet Interv 2015;2:235–42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.invent.2015.05.002 . Search in Google Scholar

48. Dredge, R, Gleeson, J, Garcia, X. Cyberbullying in social networking sites: an adolescent victim’s perspective. Comput Hum Behav 2014;36:13–20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.03.026 . Search in Google Scholar

49. Schenk, AM, Fremouw, WJ. Prevalence, psychological impact, and coping of cyberbully victims among college students. J Sch Violence 2012;11:21–37. https://doi.org/10.1080/15388220.2011.630310 . Search in Google Scholar

50. Burger, C, Bachmann, L. Perpetration and victimization in offline and cyber contexts: a variable- and person-oriented examination of associations and differences regarding domain-specific self-esteem and school adjustment. Int J Environ Res Publ Health 2021;18:10429. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph181910429 . Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

51. Price, M, Dalgleish, J. Cyberbullying: experiences, impacts and coping strategies as described by Australian young people. Youth Stud Aust 2010;29:51–9. Search in Google Scholar

52. Jang, H, Song, J, Kim, R. Does the offline bully-victimization influence cyberbullying behavior among youths? Application of General Strain Theory. Comput Hum Behav 2014;31:85–93. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2013.10.007 . Search in Google Scholar

53. Ybarra, ML, West, M, Leaf, PJ. Examining the overlap in internet harassment and school bullying: implications for school intervention. J Adolesc Health 2007;41(6 Suppl 1):S42–50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jadohealth.2007.09.004 . Search in Google Scholar PubMed

54. Mishna, F, Kassabri, M, Gadalla, T, Daciuk, J. Risk factors or involvement in cyber bullying: victims, bullies and bully–victims. Child Youth Serv Rev 2012;34:63–70. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2011.08.032 . Search in Google Scholar

55. Wong, DSW, Chan, HC, Cheng, CHK. Cheng. Cyberbullying perpetration and victimization among adolescents in Hong Kong. Child Youth Serv Rev 2014;36:133–40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2013.11.006 . Search in Google Scholar

56. Bauman, S, Toomey, RB, Walker, JL. Associations among bullying, cyberbullying, and suicide in high school students. J Adolesc 2013;36:341–50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adolescence.2012.12.001 . Search in Google Scholar PubMed

57. Fletcher, A, Yau, N, Jones, R, Allen, E, Viner, RM, Bonell, C. Brief report: cyberbullying perpetration and its associations with socio-demographics, aggressive behaviour at school, and mental health outcomes. J Adolesc 2014;37:1393–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adolescence.2014.10.005 . Search in Google Scholar PubMed

58. Kraft, EM, Wang, J. Effectiveness of cyber bullying prevention strategies: a study on students’ perspectives. Int J Cyber Criminol 2009;3:513. Search in Google Scholar

59. Williford, A, Elledge, LC, Boulton, AJ, DePaolis, KJ, Little, TD, Salmivalli, C. Effects of the KiVa antibullying program on cyberbullying and cybervictimization frequency among Finnish youth. J Clin Child Adolesc Psychol 2013;42:820–33. https://doi.org/10.1080/15374416.2013.787623 . Search in Google Scholar PubMed

60. Menesini, E, Zambuto, V, Palladino, BE. 10 - online and school-based programs to prevent cyberbullying among Italian adolescents: what works, why, and under which circumstances. In: Campbell, M, Bauman, S, editors. Reducing cyberbullying in schools . Cambridge: Academic Press; 2018:35–43 pp. 10.1016/B978-0-12-811423-0.00010-9 Search in Google Scholar

61. David, A, Rio, J, Pueyo, A, Calvo, G. Effects of a cooperative learning intervention program on cyberbullying in secondary education: a case study. Qual Rep 2019;24:2426–40. Search in Google Scholar

62. Leung, ANM, Wong, N, Farver, JM. Farver. Testing the effectiveness of an E-course to combat cyberbullying. Cyberpsychol Behav Soc Netw 2019;22:569–77. https://doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2018.0609 . Search in Google Scholar PubMed

63. Barón, J, Buelga, S, Ayllón, E, Ferrer, B, Cava, M. Effects of intervention program Prev@cib on traditional bullying and cyberbullying. Int J Environ Res Publ Health 2019;16:527. 10.3390/ijerph16040527 Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

64. Doane, A, Ehlke, S, Kelley, M. Bystanders against cyberbullying: a video program for college students. Int J Bull Prev 2020;2:41–52. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42380-019-00051-5 . Search in Google Scholar

© 2022 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston

• X / Twitter

Supplementary Materials

Please login or register with De Gruyter to order this product.

Journal and Issue

Articles in the same issue.

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings
• My Bibliography
• Collections
• Citation manager

Save citation to file

Email citation, add to collections.

• Create a new collection
• Add to an existing collection

Add to My Bibliography

Your saved search, create a file for external citation management software, your rss feed.

• Search in PubMed
• Search in NLM Catalog
• Add to Search

Cyberbullying in adolescents: a literature review

Affiliation.

• 1 Department of Health Education and Behavioral Sciences, Faculty of Public Health, Mahidol University, Bangkok 10400, Thailand.
• PMID: 35245420
• DOI: 10.1515/ijamh-2021-0133

Cyberbullying is a universal public health concern that affects adolescents. The growing usage of electronic gadgets and the Internet has been connected to a rise in cyberbullying. The increasing use of the Internet, along with the negative outcomes of cyberbullying on adolescents, has required the study of cyberbullying. In this paper author reviews existing literature on cyberbullying among adolescents. The concept of cyberbullying is explained, including definitions, types of cyberbullying, characteristics or features of victims and cyberbullies, risk factors or causes underlying cyberbullying, and the harmful consequences of cyberbullying to adolescents. Furthermore, examples of programs or intervention to prevent cyberbullying and recommendations for further studies are presented.

Keywords: adolescents; cyberbullying; literature review.

© 2022 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

• [A cyberbullying study: Analysis of cyberbullying, comorbidities and coping mechanisms]. Rémond JJ, Kern L, Romo L. Rémond JJ, et al. Encephale. 2015 Sep;41(4):287-94. doi: 10.1016/j.encep.2014.08.003. Epub 2014 Sep 17. Encephale. 2015. PMID: 25240939 French.
• Cyberbullying and adolescent mental health: systematic review. Bottino SM, Bottino CM, Regina CG, Correia AV, Ribeiro WS. Bottino SM, et al. Cad Saude Publica. 2015 Mar;31(3):463-75. doi: 10.1590/0102-311x00036114. Cad Saude Publica. 2015. PMID: 25859714 Review.
• Longitudinal impact of the Cyber Friendly Schools program on adolescents' cyberbullying behavior. Cross D, Shaw T, Hadwen K, Cardoso P, Slee P, Roberts C, Thomas L, Barnes A. Cross D, et al. Aggress Behav. 2016 Mar-Apr;42(2):166-80. doi: 10.1002/ab.21609. Epub 2015 Sep 9. Aggress Behav. 2016. PMID: 26351263 Clinical Trial.
• An Exploratory Analysis of Different Problematic Internet Use Profiles in Cybervictims, Cyberbullies, and Cyberbully Victims. Machimbarrena JM, González-Cabrera J, Montiel I, Ortega-Barón J. Machimbarrena JM, et al. Cyberpsychol Behav Soc Netw. 2021 Oct;24(10):664-672. doi: 10.1089/cyber.2020.0545. Epub 2021 Feb 22. Cyberpsychol Behav Soc Netw. 2021. PMID: 33606563
• Cyberbullying Prevention and Intervention Efforts: Current Knowledge and Future Directions. Espelage DL, Hong JS. Espelage DL, et al. Can J Psychiatry. 2017 Jun;62(6):374-380. doi: 10.1177/0706743716684793. Epub 2016 Dec 19. Can J Psychiatry. 2017. PMID: 28562094 Free PMC article. Review.
• Antecedents and outcomes of cyberbullying among Chinese university students: verification of a behavioral pathway model. Ye JH, Yang X, Nong W, Wang M, Lee YS. Ye JH, et al. Front Public Health. 2024 Apr 2;12:1359828. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2024.1359828. eCollection 2024. Front Public Health. 2024. PMID: 38628849 Free PMC article.
• Adverse childhood experiences and early adolescent cyberbullying in the United States. Nagata JM, Trompeter N, Singh G, Raney J, Ganson KT, Testa A, Jackson DB, Murray SB, Baker FC. Nagata JM, et al. J Adolesc. 2023 Apr;95(3):609-616. doi: 10.1002/jad.12124. Epub 2022 Nov 28. J Adolesc. 2023. PMID: 36443937 Free PMC article.
• The Role of Parenting, Dysregulation and Self-Esteem in Adolescents' Problematic Social Network Site Use: A Test of Parallel and Serial Mediation Models in a Healthy Community Sample. Costantini A, Semeraro C, Musso P, Cassibba R, Coppola G. Costantini A, et al. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2022 Oct 13;19(20):13154. doi: 10.3390/ijerph192013154. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2022. PMID: 36293735 Free PMC article.
• Ovigli, D, Colombo, P. Information and communication technologies (ICT) in educational research in science museums in Brazil. IJEDICT 2020;16:272–86.
• Eleuteri, S, Saladino, V, Verrastro, V. Identity, relationships, sexuality, and risky behaviors of adolescents in the context of social media. Sex Relatsh Ther 2017;32:354–65. https://doi.org/10.1080/14681994.2017.1397953 . - DOI
• Saladino, V, Eleuteri, S, Verrastro, V, Petruccelli, F. Perception of cyberbullying in adolescence: a brief evaluation among Italian students. Front Psychol 2020;11:1–7. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.607225 . - DOI
• Beale, AV, Hall, KR. Cyberbullying: what school administrators (and parents) can do. Clearing House 2007;81:8–12. https://doi.org/10.3200/tchs.81.1.8-12 . - DOI
• Brody, N, Vangelisti, AL. Bystander intervention in cyberbullying. Commun Monogr 2016;83:94–119. https://doi.org/10.1080/03637751.2015.1044256 . - DOI

Publication types

• Search in MeSH

LinkOut - more resources

Full text sources.

• MedlinePlus Health Information

• Citation Manager

NCBI Literature Resources

MeSH PMC Bookshelf Disclaimer

The PubMed wordmark and PubMed logo are registered trademarks of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). Unauthorized use of these marks is strictly prohibited.

• Get new issue alerts Get alerts
• Submit a Manuscript

Secondary Logo

Journal logo.

Colleague's E-mail is Invalid

Your message has been successfully sent to your colleague.

Save my selection

Cyberbullying: A Narrative Review

Grover, Sandeep; Raju, V. Venkatesh

Department of Psychiatry, Post Graduate Institute of Medical Education and Research, Chandigarh, India

Address for correspondence: Dr. Sandeep Grover, Department of Psychiatry, Post Graduate Institute of Medical Education and Research, Chandigarh - 160 012, India. E-mail: [email protected]

This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 4.0 Unported, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Background: 

With the rapidly expanding digital world over the past decade and more to the current context of the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic, where online activities have replaced most of the offline activities, it is important to understand bullying, which has crossed from its traditional domain of offline to online and is understood as cyberbullying.

This review aims to assess the concept, types of cyberbullying, prevalence, risk and protective factors, conceptual models explaining cyberbullying, psychological impact, and preventive strategies for cyberbullying.

Methodology: 

Internet sources (PubMed and Google Scholar) were searched for the available literature, and a narrative review was synthesized. Different types of cyberbullying are defined in the literature. The prevalence rates vary depending on the time frame of assessment being considered. The mean prevalence of victimization is 10%–40%, and the prevalence of perpetration is 3%–20%.

Results: 

Different risk and protective factors have been identified for being a victim of cyberbullying and becoming a cyberbully. Cyberbullying can have a significant negative psychological impact on the victims. Prevention of cyberbullying involves guidance for parents, advice for schools, and guidance for the health-care providers. Cyberbullying is becoming a major issue for many teenagers, resulting in unforeseen deviances and negative effects in their lives.

Conclusions: 

Efforts should be taken to successfully avoid and respond to it, as well as to provide kids with tools to lessen their own risk of victimization.

I NTRODUCTION

Bullying has traditionally been defined as undesirable, aggressive behavior among children with an actual or perceived power imbalance. Further, it is understood by its repetitive nature or potential of repetition over time. Bullying is defined by three key characteristics of behavior. To begin with, the behavior must be aggressive; second, there must be an power imbalance, meaning that bullies use their power, which could be in the form of physical strength, knowledge of potentially humiliating information, or popularity, to exert control over or injure others; and third, bullying behaviors must be repeated, meaning that they must occur more than once or have the potential to occur more than once. [ 1 ] Bullying is known to be existing for a long time, but with the advent of technology, it has changed its traditional way. Bullying victimization is believed to affect anywhere between 10% and 35% of teenagers, [ 2 ] and another meta-analytical review found mean prevalence rates of 35% for traditional bullying involvement. [ 3 ] However, over recent years, access to handheld devices and newer technologies among school-going children has led to the emergence of the concept of cyberbullying. According to the American Academy of Pediatrics, the introduction of portable technologies, such as cellular phones, digital cameras, and personal digital assistants, as well as simple access to social networking websites, has resulted in the emergence of technology-assisted bullying behavior, also known as “cyberbullying.” [ 4 ] After the beginning of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic and changes in the functioning of schools and the education system, the rates of traditional bullying have reduced. In contrast, the data on cyberbullying report an increase, which is slight to a significant level, due to obvious changes to online education implemented worldwide. [ 5–8 ]

C ONCEPT AND D EFINITION

Although the concept of cyberbullying stems from traditional bullying, it is understood differently. It is considered as an umbrella term and is related to constructs such as “online bullying,” “cyber aggression,” “cyber violence,” “electronic aggression,” and “Internet harassment.” There is no consensus on definition of cyberbullying, and it is defined differently by different authors. [ 9 ] In the world of technology, i.e., the virtual world, defining cyberbullying is difficult because of various reasons or conceptual issues such as type of technology involved, the purpose of use of technology, what is said to whom and with what effect (intent), ambiguity with perception (teasing), from whom the content is being assessed, and the confusions surrounding the ages of individuals involved (cyberstalking/cyberharassment). [ 10 ]

In simple words, cyberbullying is defined as an indirect way of bullying involving technology. [ 11 ] Cyberbullying is also understood as “ using information and communication technologies (ICT) to repeatedly and intentionally harm, harass, hurt, and/or embarrass a target .” [ 12 ] Others have defined it as “ an aggressive, intentional act carried out by a group or individual, using electronic forms of contact, repeatedly and overtime against a victim who cannot easily defend themselves .” [ 13 ] According to another definition, it is understood as “ willful and repeated harm inflicted through computers, cell phones, or other electronic devices , [ 14 ] or as “the use of electronic communication technologies to bully others .” [ 15 ] Although there is no consensus on the definition of cyberbullying, there is an agreement on its components, which include the use of electronic media, deliberate acts to cause harm/harassment (intentional), aggression, repetition, a relationship marked by a power imbalance, anonymity (or the appearance of anonymity), and public exposure (i.e., it is in front of many audiences and for the majority of the time (due to its 24/7 nature). [ 9 , 11 , 12 , 14 ]

Cyberbullying differs from cyberstalking or cyberharassment by the age of the individual. When an adolescent is involved as a victim, the term used is cyberbullying, but it is known as cyberstalking or cyberharassment when a major is engaged. Some argue that there is no legal distinction between the two, other than that of age, and that cyberstalking is a form of cyberbullying. [ 10 , 16–18 ]

C YBERBULLYING V ERSUS T RADITIONAL B ULLYING

Cyberbullying differs from traditional bullying on some of the vital points. [ 19 ] To begin with, there is anonymity in that the offenders are not concerned with power imbalances. Furthermore, there is no direct way to determine the victim’s reaction. Empathy and remorse have a far lower chance of occurring. Second, the victim is accessible most of the time, i.e., 24 h a day, 7 days a week, 365 days a year, and the audience is broad. A message or any single act of online bullying remains accessible to the majority of the public until it is being removed by the perpetrator or removed or blocked by regulatory bodies. Hence, one act can have a long-lasting impact. Finally, the escape is more complex than the traditional bullying [ 3 , 15 , 20 ] [ Table 1 ].

T YPES /F ORMS OF C YBERBULLYING

Before understanding types of cyberbullying, it is essential to understand the various types of traditional bullying. Broadly, there are three types of traditional bullying, i.e., physical, verbal, and social or psychological bullying. [ 21 , 22 ] When someone’s body or goods are hurt, this is referred to as physical bullying. This form of behavior includes hitting, kicking, pinching, spitting, tripping, pushing, taking or damaging someone’s belongings, and using offensive or rude hand gestures. Malicious mocking, name-calling, improper sexual comments, taunting, threatening to hurt, and other forms of verbal bullying are all examples of verbal bullying. Bullying that is social or psychological, also known as relational bullying, involves harming someone’s reputation or relationships. It includes things such as purposefully leaving someone out of social situations, manipulating social relationships (asking other kids not to be friends with someone), spreading rumors about someone, publicly humiliating someone, blackmailing, or intimidating someone. [ 21 , 22 ]

The various types or forms of cyberbullying include flaming, harassment, cyberstalking, exclusion or ostracism, impersonation or masquerading, catfishing, trolling, fraping, sexting, and outing or trickery. [ 23 , 24 ] Flaming is understood as using hurtful language in E-mails, text messages, or chat rooms against an individual, i.e., an online fight or a brief, heated exchange between two or more individuals that occurs via any communication technology. [ 23 , 24 ]

Harassment is defined as the transmission of insulting or hurtful, hateful, and/or threatening messages on a regular basis. [ 23 ] Cyberstalking entails following someone online and sending them E-mails or texts in an attempt to scare, injure, or intimidate them. [ 23 ] Exclusion or ostracism is intentionally excluding someone from a group and making derogatory remarks/messages about him/her. [ 23 ] Impersonation, also known as masquerading, is the use of a fictitious identity to harm someone’s reputation by publicly publishing correct or misleading information about them. [ 23 ] Catfishing is a sort of deceitful action, in which a person develops a sock puppet social networking presence, or a false identity on a social networking account, with the intent of abusing, deceiving, or defrauding a specific victim. [ 23 ] Trolling is when someone purposefully harms another person by making derogatory or offensive comments. [ 23 ] Framing is understood as destroying a person’s reputation by exploiting their social networking accounts to post inappropriate content. [ 23 ] Sexting is the act of sending, receiving, or sharing sexually explicit messages, photographs, or images of oneself to others using mobile devices. Using a computer or other digital device could also be included. [ 25 ] Trickery is defined as deceiving someone into disclosing personal information and then sharing it with others. [ 23 , 24 ]

T HE M AGNITUDE OF THE P ROBLEM

Prevalence and incidence of cyberbullying victimization/perpetration are highly variable across studies because of factors such as a lack of consensus definition of cyberbullying, differences in ages and locations, reporting time frames (e.g., lifetime, 2 months, 6 months, etc.), the rate at which a person is labeled as a perpetrator or a victim, and the measurement used (single item vs. multi-items). [ 18 ]

Prevalence in previous year

Extensive sample size studies report average annual cyber victimization rates between 14% and 21%. [ 26 ] According to the US Department of Health and Human Services’ Center for Disease Control, 14.9% of high school students had been cyberbullied in the previous year. [ 27 ]

Prevalence in lifetime

A thorough review of the literature, which included data from 234 papers, showed an average lifetime incidence of cybervictimization to be 21% and an average lifetime incidence of cyberbullying perpetration to be 13%. [ 28 ]

Perpetuation

A critical review and meta-analysis of cyberbullying research among the youth showed a prevalence of perpetration to be 3%–20%. [ 18 ]

Opinions of the victims and parents

A study done on middle and high school children regarding their opinion, experiences, and response to cyberbullying showed that 44.5% of them were exposed to cyberbullying at least one time, 22.5% had exhibited actions that constituted as cyberbullying, and 53.2% became a witness of such actions at least once. [ 29 ] A study from the United States reported prevalence rates of cybervictimization to be 95% and that of cyberaggression to be 94% during the previous 2 months among the adolescents admitted to inpatient psychiatric hospitals. The study also showed that females were more often cybervictims and also exhibited cyberaggression. [ 30 ] According to an online poll, one (12%) in ten parents globally claim that their child has been the victim of cyberbullying, and one (24%) in four agreed that they know a child in their community who has been the victim of cyberbullying. [ 31 ] Another study revealed that 15% of children and young people reported being harassed or bullied online, 14% reported being harassed or bullied offline, and 71% reported no experience of either in the previous month. When they were asked to report their experience over the last year, the figures for online and offline bullying were 27% and 26%, respectively. When lifetime experience was considered, the figures were 39% and 49%, respectively. [ 32 ] Accordingly, it can be said that the prevalence of cyberbullying is influenced by the time frame being considered.

Impact on coronavirus disease 2019 on cyberbullying

After the COVID-19 pandemic, there has been increased talk about cyberbullying, but only a few studies have evaluated the same. A population-based study from Canada evaluated the impact of COVID-19 on bullying prevalence rates. It included 6578 students of class 4–12 and reported far higher rates of bullying involvement before the pandemic than during the pandemic in all forms of bullying (general, physical, verbal, and social), with the exception of cyberbullying, where differences in rates were less pronounced. [ 5 ] Another study of online search data for real-time tracking of bullying trends found that as schools transitioned to remote learning in 2020, school bullying and cyberbullying searches dropped by 30%–35%. The gradual restoration to in-person education resulted in a return to prepandemic levels of bullying searches. The scientists theorized that this unusually positive effect could explain some of the recent conflicting results on the pandemic’s effects on students’ mental health and well-being. [ 7 ]

Data from India

There are limited data on the prevalence of cyberbullying in the Indian context. A survey by Forbes in 2018 that involved around 20 thousand adults from 28 countries reported that around 37% of parents from India reported that their child has experienced cyberbullying, which was the highest among the 28 countries. It was followed closely by Brazil (29%) and the United States (27%). [ 27 ] According to a survey conducted in Chandigarh, one out of every four adolescents in the city suffers from bullying at school, and the prevalence of cyberbullying was 2.7%. [ 33 ] As such, there is not much data on the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on cyberbullying in children and adolescents in the Indian context. One study that surveyed 256 students before the pandemic and 118 students during the lockdown reported that the pandemic has affected susceptibility to cyberbullying. [ 8 ]

P LACE OF O CCURRENCE OF C YBERBULLYING

As stated in the definition, cyberbullying occurs through the use of ICT, such as social media (Facebook, Instagram, Snapchat, Twitter, and so on), cellular network short message service text messages, instant message services (WhatsApp, Facebook Messenger, I-message, and so on), E-mail, and so on. [ 34 ]

When a comparison of different types of social media platforms used by young people was studied, it was seen that more than half of the participants reported having been bullied in chat rooms (55%), followed by Flickr (44%), Tumblr (40%), and other instant messaging app (40%) and then followed by other platforms such as live gaming (33%), Twitter (33%), Facebook (32%), Snapchat (32%), YouTube (31%), Instagram (31%), and WhatsApp (27%). [ 32 ] It was also seen that the chances of cyberbullying increased with more time spent on social media. Only 3% of children and young people reported having been cyberbullied in the last year when their time on social media was <1 h/day. However, this figure increased to 19% when the time spent was 1–2 h/day, 24% when the time spent was 2–3 h/day, and 34% when the time spent on social media was more than 4 h/day. [ 32 ] An online poll involving more than 18,000 adults in 24 countries, 6,500 of whom were parents, reported that social networking sites such as Facebook are by far the most commonly reported platform for cyberbullying, with 60% mentioning them, and mobile devices and online chat rooms were a distant second and third, each with around 40%. [ 35 ] According to an Indian study, stalking is the most common type of cyberbullying (71.2%), followed by making insulting remarks (64.4%), leaking or sharing pictures/videos online (41.7%), and online harassment (22%). Furthermore, the majority of people who were subjected to cyberbullying experienced more than one type of cyberbullying. [ 8 ]

Individual’s use of social media to cyberbully varies according to their age. Online gaming (which allows players to communicate by headset and in-game text) has been identified as the most common method for elementary school students to engage in cyberbullying. [ 36 , 37 ] Cyberbullying is particularly widespread in teens on social media, with Twitter and Facebook being the most commonly utilized platforms. Public and private comments, status updates, and postings are the most prevalent ways in young adults. [ 38 ]

R ISK F ACTORS AND P ROTECTIVE F ACTORS

Various risk and protective factors have been identified for perpetuating cyberbullying and being a victim of cyberbullying [Tables 2 and 3 ]. [ 15 , 36 , 39–41 ]

W HY S OMEONE B ECOME A C YBERBULLY

Available literature suggests that various factors [ Table 4 ] propel youth to become a cyberbully. [ 42–46 ] As discussed earlier, anonymity is one of the essential factors contributing to cyberbullying. It is also conceptualized as a coping mechanism to deal with low self-esteem. Other factors contributing to becoming a cyberbully include lack of parental supervision, lack of information about the risks, peer pressure, and lack of knowledge about the punishment. [ 42–46 ]

T HEORIES OR M ODELS OF C YBERBULLYING

Different authors have proposed different models for understanding the phenomenon of cyberbullying. The commonly described models include Barlett and Gentile Cyberbullying Model, General Aggression Model, I-Cubed Theory, social-ecological diathesis–stress model, and conceptual model. [ 9 , 40 ]

Barlett and Gentile Cyberbullying Model

According to this model, anonymity in cyberspace and belief that one’s physical size does not contribute to a power imbalance online account for cyberbullying. [ 47 ] This paradigm, however, has been criticized for being overly basic. This approach also ignores individual-specific characteristics (such as self-control, moral disengagement, and technology use) as well as context-specific factors (e.g., monitoring of technology by the parents and lack of explicit policies on consequences for cyberattacks in the school). [ 9 ]

Generalized Aggression Model

According to this model, repeatedly playing violent games or being exposed to violent media content causes the learning, rehearsal, and reinforcement of aggression-related knowledge structures such as aggressive belief and attitude, aggressive perceptual schemata, aggressive expectation schemata, aggressive behavior scripts, and aggressive desensitization, all of which lead to an increase in aggressive personality. [ 48 ] Person-specific factors such as demographic variables and aggressive personality, as well as situation-specific factors such as social situation, peer group (e.g., presence of bystanders), and school climate influence current internal states via elements such as cognition, affect, and arousal system; which then influence appraisal and decision-making processes, leading to cyberbullying outcome behaviors. [ 9 ]

I-cubed Theory

This theory was developed by Slotter and Finkel, [ 49 ] which defines cyberbullying in terms of three major forces linked to violent behavior: instigating force, impelling force, and inhibiting force. [ 49 ] Situational events or circumstances that may normatively incite or arouse individuals to act aggressively are defined as instigating force; impelling force is defined as dispositional or situational factors that increase individuals’ likelihood to act aggressively, and inhibiting force is defined as dispositional or situational factors that increase individuals’ likelihood to override their urge to aggress, thereby reducing aggressive acts. [ 49 ] Victimization from cyberbullying and a sense of online disinhibition can increase a person’s inclination to engage in cyberbullying. [ 9 ]

Social-ecological diathesis–stress model

According to this model, the dynamic interplay of biological, social, and environmental elements helps in understanding bullying perpetration. This model takes into consideration the interaction of environmental factors (e.g., family, school, and neighborhood), child’s genetic vulnerabilities (e.g., temperament and personality), and individual risk and protective factors. [ 50 ] A child’s predisposition for aggression (due to genetic vulnerability, moral disengagement, etc.), prior experiences with bullying (environmental factors), moderating factors related to cyberspace (e.g., the strength of the disinhibition effect and one’s technological efficacy), and parental factors (e.g., parent–child relationships and monitoring of technology use by the child), influence cyberbullying. [ 9 ]

Conceptual model

This model explains cyberbullying through the ‘Five Cs,’ which include context (the online) where adolescents spend time (e.g., Instagram, chat rooms); contacts (i.e., online social relationships) they make; confidentiality (the level of confidentiality/privacy that is maintained); conduct (online technical skills and self-regulation); and the content they upload, use, and access. [ 51 ]

P SYCHOLOGICAL I MPACT OF C YBERBULLYING

Cyberbullying can have several negative psychological and behavioral impacts on children and adolescents [ 13 , 21 , 27 , 30 , 32 , 52–56 ] [ Table 5 ]. There is a dose–response relationship between being cyberbullied and the severity of the consequences in terms of negative psychological and behavioral effects. [ 52 ] The youth who are bullied the most are the most affected. [ 18 , 57 ] When the link between cyberbullying and mental health was investigated, it was noted that 60% of children and young people who had previously experienced a mental health problem reported being bullied online in the previous year, whereas 70% of children and young people who were currently suffering from a mental health problem reported being bullied online in the previous year. [ 57 ]

P REVENTION OF C YBERBULLYING

Prevention of cyberbullying is of paramount importance.

Guidance for parents

Parents should monitor their children’s screen time and make sure that they engage in much more offline activities than a computer, online game, or smartphone addiction. [ 13 , 24 , 31 , 58–64 ] Parents should encourage their children to turn off technology at set times, such as family meals or after a particular hour at night. Parents should be aware of their children’s Internet usage, online activities, and the apps and digital media they utilize. Parents should teach their children about safe Internet use practices, such as not sharing usernames or passwords with others, not disclosing personal information in profiles, chat rooms, or to others, not to respond to threatening messages without instantaneously informing an adult, and turning off gadgets if they receive threatening messages. Parents should teach their children how to make a strong password, not reveal passwords to anyone except a parent, or write it down where the parent can access it. The child must be aware that individuals they communicate with online may not be whom they claim they are, and also, the materials posted online may not be secure. Parents should discourage bullying others online by telling their children not to send mean or damaging messages or suggestive pictures and messages. Parents should earmark common areas for devices such as making sure that the child’s computer/laptop/tablet is kept in a shared space like the family room, and Internet access in the privacy of the child’s room should not be allowed. Parents should wait until their child is in high school to have their E-mail and other social media accounts. Even after giving these facilities, parents should know their child’s passwords. They should make it clear to their child that they reserve the option of accessing their accounts. Parents should encourage their children to use technology responsibly by teaching them to stop from sending personal or improper images of themselves or others. [ 13 , 24 , 31 , 58–64 ]

Parents should also teach their children that a post creates a permanent imprint that cannot be reversed. Parents should also tell the child to inform an adult about untoward events without having to be concerned about losing access to their technologies. Parents should also tell the child that if they indulge in the perpetuation of cyberbullying, strict punishments, such as confiscating cell phones and revoking privileges, for breaking the rule will be implemented. Parents should be aware and make their children aware of the functioning of social media platforms. Reporting, blocking, filtering software, and human and automatic detection systems are all available on most social media platforms to prevent and intervene in cyberbullying. To detect instances of cyberbullying, automatic detection using engineering features analyzes numerous properties of posts (e.g., language and emoticons). Because human moderators may perceive nuances in a language such as sarcasm or context-specific aggressiveness, automatic detection algorithms may be less effective. [ 22 , 24 , 58 , 64 ] [ Table 6 ].

Guidance for schools

Schools should foster a healthy school atmosphere and foster ties between students and their families. Schools should have clear, proactive Internet use and cyberbullying rules, procedures, and practices. Faculty, staff, and students should all be encouraged to develop social-emotional abilities. [ 65–68 ] Social-emotional character development is regarded as a key component of effective antibullying initiatives. [ 9 , 69 ] Teachers should be trained to recognize, respond to, and report cases of cyberbullying to the appropriate school channels. Workshops against cyberbullying should be held in schools. Parents should be educated on how and why children should not be allowed to use electronic communication devices as toys. [ 24 , 61 , 65–68 ]

There are various cyberbullying prevention programs across the world like, “Program IMPACT,” which is an interdisciplinary model of countering aggression and technological cyberbullying. “KiVa” is another program in Finland, which is a universal school-based program that addresses cyberbullying at school by working with teachers. “ConRed” program in Spain and “Surf-fair” program in Germany are also school-based programs. Other programs include “Cyber Friendly Schools” program in Australia, “The No Trap!” Program in Italy and “Tabby project” in Greece. [ 70 , 71 ]

Guidance for health-care providers

Questions concerning cyberbullying (either directly or by survey) should be asked by health-care practitioners at the initial assessment of children and adolescents and encourage parents to talk to children about limiting technology. [ 65 , 72 ] Health-care workers should increase awareness about safe cyber practices and disseminate information about early warning signs. They should teach children life skills to deal with the situations effectively. [ 9 ]

I DENTIFICATION AND I NTERVENTION

Early identification of cyberbullying is essential for early intervention to prevent further complications. It also avoids the child’s psychological, behavioral, and social problems. [ 58 , 73–76 ] There are few warning signs [ Table 7 ], and active surveillance of the same can help identify cyberbullying. [ 58 , 73–76 ] The parents should observe the child’s activities, emotions, and behaviors.

When parents observe any of the warning indicators, they should respond quickly. [ 61 ] They should gently engage in a conversation with the child, gain the child’s trust, and try to learn what is going on, when it began, and who is involved. [ 77 , 78 ] They should provide emotional support to the child and seek expert treatment if necessary. They should track down and block the bully’s phone number, so that he or she cannot send messages. [ 9 , 60 , 61 ] Parents should try to keep track of their children’s online activities, saving all of the bully’s chats, posts, and E-mails as evidence, taking screenshots of any offensive or harmful content or post, and reporting the bully’s phone number/account details to the service providers (many social networking platforms have this feature).

Most social media networks have explicit reporting standards for cyberbullying, and they frequently assist in getting the abusive message taken down. If the bullying persists or becomes severe, such as the child getting sexual or physical threats, or if there is a suspicion of illegal conduct or criminality, parents should file a complaint with the local police’s cybercrime unit. [ 9 , 60 ] In India, to report cyberbullying, parents can send their complaint to [email protected] . [ 77 , 78 ] There are no unique anticyber bullying laws in India yet, but some of the Information Technology Act and Indian Penal Code sections can be used against cyberbullying [ Table 8 ]. [ 77 , 79 , 80 , 81–83 ] If there is any sort of sexual cyberbullying, the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO Act) can be used to protect children under the age of 18 years from sexual harassment, sexual assault, and pornography. [ 80 ]

Besides dealing with cyberbullying activity, it is crucial to address issues and various psychological and behavioral effects of cyberbullying with psychotherapeutic interventions such as cognitive behavioral therapy, assertiveness training, and transactional analysis in victim and anger management, problem-solving, and empathy skills in perpetrator. [ 53 ] In case of severe problems, pharmacological measures can be employed depending on the problem faced. [ 53 ]

E VIDENCE FOR P REVENTION AND I NTERVENTION S TRATEGIES FOR C YBERBULLYING

A systematic review that included 17 cyberbullying intervention programs identified education on cyberbullying for adolescents, enhancing adaptive coping skills, empathy training, peer mentors, communication and social skills, and digital citizenship as the most commonly used interventions. Changing attitudes, teamwork, teaching legal repercussions, teacher involvement, self-efficacy, norms, moral disengagement, behaving sensibly, and talking to an adult were also mentioned. [ 83 ] Cyberbullying education for parents was also vital, and it was incorporated in programs with considerable benefits. Lectures, discussion groups, role-playing, and group projects were among the intervention formats utilized in various studies, with program lengths ranging from 1 day to a complete school year. [ 83 ]

Another systematic review of cyberbullying intervention in the United States found 11 publications on cyberbullying interventions that were exclusively implemented in schools or on the Internet. Most studies focused on attitudes and intentions toward cyberbullying rather than actual cyberbullying activity. Despite the serious concerns about cyberbullying and its potentially harmful consequences, the author found that there appears to be a lack of effective evidence-based initiatives in place in the United States. [ 84 ] Another systematic review and meta-analysis included 24 articles (15 randomized controlled trials [RCTs] and nine studies with quasi-experimental design with before and after measures) published between 2000–2017. [ 55 ] The results suggested that cyberbullying intervention programs effectively reduce both cyberbullying perpetrations by around 10%–15% and victimization by around 14%. The effect sizes were more significant for RCTs than quasi-experimental study designs. [ 55 ]

R OLE OF P ROFESSIONAL B ODIES AND G OVERNMENT AND O THER O RGANIZATIONS IN C YBERBULLYING

The professional bodies, especially those involving mental health professionals, should work toward increasing the awareness of the schools, students, and parents about the cyberbullying and the provisions which are available to counter the same. They can also help in formulating policies which can help curb cyberbullying. Professional bodies can also help in managing the victims of cyberbullying by extending services to the needy victims and also to the perpetuators. The governments should come up with the more stringent laws against the perpetuators. Other organizations can also help in bringing together all the stakeholders and educate them about cyberbullying, how to identify the same, and the preventive measures.

C ONCLUSIONS AND F UTURE D IRECTION

Cyberbullying is emerging as a significant problem for many teens, leading to unexpected deviances and adverse outcomes in their life domains. Cyberbullying is not going away soon and is expected to increase due to rapid digitalization. Cyberbullying can have a significant negative impact on the mental health of the victims. Hence, it is important to make all the stakeholders aware of this menace. Efforts must be made to make all the children and adolescents aware about the legal provisions and how indulging in cyberbullying can land them in conflict with law. The victims of the cyberbullying should be enabled to report the same at the earliest and they should be educated as to how to protect themselves from further cyberbullying. The parents and teachers should focus on the certain behavior which may be indicative of being a victim or a perpetuator in the cyberspace. The parents and teachers should teach children and adolescents about safe behavior in the cyberspace. All efforts should be made to successfully avoid and respond to it, as well as to provide children and adolescents with tools to lessen their own risk of victimization. The elimination of cyberbullying risks will necessitate a coordinated and collaborative effort among diverse youth advocates.

Many aspects of cyberbullying are still not well researched and there is a need to further research in this area. There is a need to develop a universal definition and have methodologically sound research in this field, which can help formulate policies. Research should also focus on the long-term mental health implications of being a victim and a perpetuator of cyberbullying. Future research should incorporate techniques such as machine learning and artificial intelligence to understand the epidemiology, to detect the victims and perpetuators, and improve surveillance for cyberbullying.

Financial support and sponsorship

Conflicts of interest.

There are no conflicts of interest.

R EFERENCES

• Cited Here |
• PubMed | CrossRef
• View Full Text | PubMed | CrossRef

Cyberbullying; digital; online

• + Favorites
• View in Gallery

Readers Of this Article Also Read

Models of consultation-liaison psychiatry: a scoping review, “once a smoker, always a smoker: primary care physicians” views on integrating..., emotional intelligence, coping strategies, and perceived stress among doctors..., psychiatric morbidity and its impact on quality of life in patients of chronic..., trauma-informed care for psychiatric patients presenting to emergency setting:....