Article E7 PDF
Article E7 PDF
Article E7 PDF
In today’s society, there are several ways in which people are victimized by
bullying. Some of the traditional face-to-face encounters of bullying usually start in
neutral social settings such as playgrounds, classrooms, and schoolyards. These settings
have been at the forefront of studies for quite some time; however, cyberbullying is a new
form of bullying that has emerged and virtually caused a tidal wave of despair.
Cyberbullying, bullying via electronic media, is a growing problem in middle and high
schools across the United States (Beran & Li, 2005; Brydolf, 2007). However,
cyberbullying does not end at high school graduation, and it continues onto college
campuses. Cyberbullying is also defined as the intentional act of online or digital
intimidation, embarrassment, or harassment (Beran & Li, 2005). Many of these acts
primarily involve name-calling, threats, spreading rumors, sharing another person’s
private information, social isolation, and exclusion. It may be more subtle and covert and
can be perpetrated faster and in more environments than traditional forms of bullying
(Beran & Li, 2005).
Effects of Cyberbullying
2
Ideas and Research You Can Use: VISTAS 2016
reported over 3.5 billion Web links, news stories, blog posts, notes, and photos shared
each week by its more than 350 million users. These sites are intended to provide a
positive outlet for social networking and recreation. Despite this fact, individuals are
victimized and most victims have no knowledge of the person or persons responsible for
their acts. With the capability of cyberbullying occurring anywhere, jurisdictional laws
make disciplining cyberbullies extremely difficult. School officials have had a difficult
time monitoring online activities, knowing when to report this abuse to law enforcement,
and distinguishing first amendment rights of freedom of expression from harassment
(Shariff & Hoff, 2007; Willard, 2007).
Method
Participants
A total of 170 undergraduate students (43 freshman, 29 sophomores, 48 juniors,
and 50 seniors) at Jackson State University (total enrollment 9,134) volunteered to
participate in the study. Participants were 122 females and 45 males. However, prior to
conducting analyses, three subjects who did not complete the entire survey were deleted,
leaving 167. All outliers were deleted, leaving 167 undergraduate college students.
Participants’ ages were 18–21 years old (n = 72), 21–25 years old (n = 45), and 25+ years
(n = 50).
Instrument
Nancy Willard’s Cyber Savvy High School Survey was adapted for use in this
study. The researchers gained permission from the author to use the survey. The amended
survey was reviewed by professors at Jackson State University and Alcorn State
University. The three parts of the survey contained demographic data, the 17-item survey,
3
Ideas and Research You Can Use: VISTAS 2016
and a definition of cyberbullying as well as the location and hours of operation for the
campus counseling center and the security office.
Data Collection
After Institutional Review Board permission was granted, e-mail addresses of the
study participants were obtained from Jackson State University’s Office of Institutional
Research. Surveys were e-mailed to approximately 6,245 undergraduate students through
the Qualtrics Online Survey system three times. The three e-mail attempts yielded 170
responses; however, three identified outliers were deleted. One limitation of using an
online survey is the potential low response rate (Dillman, 2007); however, due to the size
of the population, it was the most cost efficient method. Informed consent was obtained
from all participants. Data was analyzed through the Qualtrics Online Survey system. The
study was a preliminary analysis of the data, and only descriptive statistics were used.
Results
Victims
The survey also asked participants if they were victims of cyberbullying. The
findings revealed that 73.62% (n = 121) reported that they never have been victims of
cyberbullying; 21.47% (n = 35) reported that they were rarely victims of cyberbullying;
2.45% (n = 4) reported that they were often victims of cyberbullying; and 2.45% (n = 4)
reported that they were victims of cyberbullying sometimes.
Experiencing Cyberbullying
When asked about their behaviors when experiencing cyberbullying, 61.59% (n =
102) reported that they would block the aggressor from communicating with them;
15.24% (n = 25) reported that they would just ignore the aggressor; 9.76% (n = 16)
reported that they would file an abuse report; 3.66% (n = 6) reported that they would
inform an adult or person of authority about the abuse; and 9.76% (n = 16) reported that
4
Ideas and Research You Can Use: VISTAS 2016
they would inform an adult or person of authority, even if the abuse stopped, just to
prevent others from being targeted.
Witnessing Cyberbullying
When asked about their behaviors when witnessing cyberbullying, 17.58% (n =
29) reported they would file an abuse report; 18.18% (n = 30) reported that they would
help the person being targeted figure out what to do; 17.58% (n = 29) reported that they
would reach out and be kind to the person being targeted; 14.55% (n = 24) reported that
they would ignore the situation; 12.12% (n = 20) reported that they would tell an adult
who can help; 7.27% (n = 12) reported that they would publicly post messages urging the
abuse to stop; 3.03% (n = 5) reported that they would privately confront the aggressor
and ask him/her to stop; 7.88% (n = 13) reported that they read the material but do
nothing else; and 1.82% (n = 3) reported that they would tell others about the situation
but do nothing else.
Frequency
The survey further examined the frequency of cyberbullying perpetrated by
participants. The findings revealed that 93.29% (n=154) reported that they never
cyberbullied others; 4.88% (n = 8) reported that they have cyberbullied others less than
once a month; and 1.22% (n = 2) reported that they have cyberbullied others once a
month.
Social Media
Lastly, the survey asked participants about which social media source they use the
most, 52.80% (n = 87) reported that they use Facebook; 27.95% (n = 46) reported that
they use Instagram; and 19.25% (n = 32) reported that they use Twitter.
Discussion
5
Ideas and Research You Can Use: VISTAS 2016
Limitations
Since this study was a pilot study, the data collected was limited to undergraduate
students at one HBCU in Mississippi; thus, caution should be used in generalizing results
to other colleges and universities. Additionally, the majority of the participants in the
study were African American as the study was conducted at a predominantly African
American HBCU. Another limitation of the study was using an online survey. Online
surveys are limited in that they typically have a low response rate (Dillman, 2007);
however, due to size of the population, this method was the most efficient. An additional
limitation is that survey responses are sometimes not generally accurate predictors of
actual behaviors.
6
Ideas and Research You Can Use: VISTAS 2016
References
Beran, T., & Li, Q. (2005). Cyber-harassment: A study of a new method for an old
behavior. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 32(3), 265–277.
Brydolf, C. (2007). Minding MySpace: Balancing the benefits and risks of students’
online social networks. Education Digest, 73(2), 4–8.
CTIA-The Wireless Association. (2010, June). Wireless quick facts. Retrieved from
http://www.ctia.org/your-wireless-life/how-wireless-works/wireless-quick-facts
Dillman, D. A. (2007). Mail and internet surveys: The tailored design method (2nd ed.).
New York, NY: Wiley.
Facebook. (2010). Press room. Retrieved from http://www.facebook.com/
press/info.php?statistics
Facebook. (2015). Facebook reports second quarter 2015 results. Retrieved from
http://investor.fb.com/releasedetail.cfm?ReleaseID=924562
Finn, J. (2004). A survey of online harassment at a university campus. Journal of
Interpersonal Violence, 19(4), 468–481.
Juvonen, J., & Gross, E. F. (2008). Extending the school grounds: Bullying experiences
in cyberspace. Journal of College and University Law, 26(4), 615–643.
Kowalski, R. M., & Agatston, P. W. (2008). Cyber bullying: A prevention curriculum for
Grades 6–12. Center City, MN: Hazelden.
Kraft, E., & Wang, J. (2010). An exploratory study of the cyberbullying and
cyberstalking experiences and factors related to victimization of students at a
public liberal arts college. International Journal of Technologies, 1(4), 74–91.
MacDonald, C. D., & Roberts-Pittman, B. (2010). Cyberbullying among college students:
Prevalence and demographic difference. Procedia - Social and Behavioral
Sciences, 9, 2003–2009.
Patchin, J. W., & Hinduja, S. (2008). Cyberbullying: An exploratory analysis of factors
related to offending and victimization. Deviant Behavior, 29(2), 129–156
Pena, J. (2011, November). Study finds cyberbullying a problem among college students.
Retrieved from www.alligator.org/news/campus/article_7cb887a0-0902-11e1-
8c39-001cc4c03286.html
Shariff, S., & Hoff, D. L. (2007). Cyberbullying: Clarifying legal boundaries for school
supervision in cyberspace. International Journal of Cyber Criminology, 1(1), 76–
118.
Stover, D. (2006). Treating cyberbullying as a school violence. Education Digest, 72(4),
40–42.
Strom, P. S., & Strom, R. D. (2005). When teens turn cyberbullies. Education Digest:
Essential Readings Condensed for Quick Review, 71(4), 35–41.
Wang, J., Iannotti, R. J., & Nansel, T. R. (2009). School bullying among adolescents in
the United States: Physical, verbal, relational, and cyber. Journal of Adolescent
Health, 45, 368–375.
7
Ideas and Research You Can Use: VISTAS 2016
Note: This paper is part of the annual VISTAS project sponsored by the American Counseling Association.
Find more information on the project at: http://www.counseling.org/knowledge-center/vistas