Cited by 39Bullying, Victimization, and AggressionHate Speech and Cyberbullying DetectionWorkplace Violence and Bullying

Cross‐cultural similarities and differences in the theoretical predictors of cyberbullying perpetration: Results from a seven‐country study

Barlett, Christopher P., Seyfert, Luke W., Simmers, Matthew M., Hsueh Hua Chen, Vivian, Cavalcanti, Jaqueline Gomes, Krahé, Barbara, Suzuki, Kanae, Warburton, Wayne A. +3 more·2021·Aggressive Behavior

Abstract

The Barlett Gentile cyberbullying model (BGCM) posits that correlated anonymity perceptions and the belief in the irrelevance of muscularity for online bullying (BIMOB) predict positive cyberbullying attitudes to predict subsequent cyberbullying perpetration. Much research has shown the BGCM to be the only published theory that differentiates traditional and cyberbullying while validly predicting cyberbullying. So far, however, the cross‐cultural ubiquity has gone understudied. Thus, 1,592 adult participants across seven countries (USA, Australia, Brazil, China, Germany, Japan, and Singapore) completed measures germane to the BGCM. Supporting the BGCM, the variables were significantly correlated for the entire sample, participants from independent cultures, and participants from interdependent cultures. However, the relationship between BIMOB and positive cyberbullying attitudes as well as the relationship between positive cyberbullying attitudes and cyberbullying perpetration were stronger for independent cultures. These results suggest that the BGCM postulates are mostly universal, but several relations appear to be culturally different. Theoretical implications are discussed.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/ab.21923

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 38 · Cited by 39

Authors
Barlett, C. P., Seyfert, L. W., Simmers, M. M., Hsueh Hua Chen, V., Cavalcanti, J. G., Krahé, B., Suzuki, K., Warburton, W. A., Wong, R. Y. M., Pimentel, C. E., & Skowronski, M.
Affiliations
  • Gettysburg College (US)
  • Wee Kim Wee School of Communication and Information Nanyang Technological University Singapore
  • Universidade Estadual Paulista (Unesp) (BR)
  • University of Potsdam (DE)
  • University of Tsukuba (JP)
  • Macquarie University (AU)
  • University of Auckland (NZ)
  • Department of Psychology Federal University of Paraiba Brazil
Corresponding author
Barlett, Christopher P.
Venue
Aggressive Behavior
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2020-08-27
Volume
47
Issue
1
Pages
111-119
ISSN
  • 0096-140X (ISSN-L)
  • 1098-2337
OpenAlex
W3081626303
Cited by
39
References
38
Citations by year
2026: 8 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 5
FWCI
6.01
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Aggressive Behavior (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DR-NTU (Nanyang Technological University) (submittedVersion)
  • publish.UP (University of Potsdam) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Bullying, Victimization, and Aggression
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Hate Speech and Cyberbullying Detection
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Workplace Violence and Bullying
Keywords
cyberbullying perpetration, cross-cultural comparison, cyberbullying
MeSH terms
Cyberbullying, Adult, Australia, China, Cross-Cultural Comparison, Germany, Humans, Japan, Crime Victims, Bullying

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review