I have not focused much attention here lately due to preoccupation with another writing project. I am working with a grad student to author a book chapter on cyberbullying in the United States. My interest in this topic originally resulted from the realization that schools may block students from using many of the participatory web resources I felt had such great potential. In attempting to understand the threats from predators and cyberbullies, I concluded that filtering was not the proper reaction to either threat. Anyway, in attempting to become involved in the literature on cyberbullying and collecting some data with a graduate student who works with me I have become a good deal more knowledgeable and moved past the issue of what schools block useful opportunities.
Two initial observations:
1) research on cyberbullying is far less mature than research on bullying
2) assuming that cyberbullying is an outgrowth of bullying may limit the perspective on many researchers.
Here a few comments on observation #1.
In reviewing literature for the chapter project, it seemed that the terminology applied in addressing online or phone-based aggression and victimization was more variable than that applied to face to face aggression and victimization. What was not always evident were reasons that might account for this difference? Perhaps bullying has been studied more extensively and for a longer period of time allowing for greater standardization. There seems to be agreement on a relatively small number of characteristics that define “face to face” bullying. With perhaps the addition or elimination of a characteristic, this list seems to include:
a) the targeting of an individual or small number of individuals,
b) experiences that are defined as negative and damaging by the victim,
c) repetition of these experiences, and
d) a power differential making it difficult to terminate or escape the negative experiences.
Establishing such a set of characteristics allows bullying to be differentiated from other forms of interpersonal violence and makes it easier to identify the perpetrators and victims involved.
Much of the research on cyberbullying fails to focus on events that meet this set of standards.
1) Often victims are defined based on a single incident
2) Often victims are not “distressed” by the experiences
3) Often victims can handle events (they know what to do online to discourage attackers) implying that they are not at a power disadvantage
Bad things can happen as the result of a single experience. Those who attempt to bother others have issues that must be addressed. The label applied does not mean that these realities do not exist. However, as a topic of research, some focus needs to be brought to this area so that the journals get beyond publishing the results of conflicting survey studies.
Tags: cyberbully
