Cited by 133Bullying, Victimization, and AggressionHate Speech and Cyberbullying DetectionImpact of Technology on Adolescents

Understanding the overlap between cyberbullying and cyberhate perpetration: Moderating effects of toxic online disinhibition

Wachs, Sebastian, Wright, Michelle F., Vazsonyi, Alexander T.·2019·Criminal Behaviour and Mental Health

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Problem behaviour theory postulates that different forms of norm violations cluster and can be explained by similar antecedents. One such cluster may include cyberbullying and cyberhate perpetration. A potential explanatory mechanism includes toxic online disinhibition, characterised by anonymity, an inability to empathise and to recognise and interpret social cues. The current study to develop a better understanding of the relationship between cyberhate and cyberbullying to inform effective intervention and prevention efforts. AIMS: To test the link between cyberbullying and cyberhate and whether this relationship was moderated by toxic online disinhibition. METHODS: Self-report questionnaires on cyberbullying, cyberhate, and toxic online disinhibition were completed by 1,480 adolescents between 12 and 17 years old (M = 14.21 years; SD = 1.68). RESULTS: Increases in cyberbullying perpetration and toxic online disinhibition were positively related to cyberhate perpetration. Furthermore, cyberbullies reported more cyberhate perpetration when they reported higher levels of toxic online disinhibition and less frequent cyberhate perpetration when they reported lower levels of toxic online disinhibition. CONCLUSION: The current study provides evidence of a possible link between cyberbullying and cyberhate perpetration, moderated by toxic online disinhibition. This suggests that, to be effective, prevention and intervention programmes should (i) consider the co-occurrence of varying forms of cyberaggression and (ii) consider potential effects of the online environment on aggressive online behaviour among young people.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/cbm.2116

Cites

28 of 28 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Wachs, S., Wright, M. F., & Vazsonyi, A. T.
Affiliations
  • University of Potsdam (DE)
  • Pennsylvania State University (US)
  • University of Kentucky (US)
Corresponding author
Wachs, Sebastian
Venue
Criminal Behaviour and Mental Health
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2019-06
Volume
29
Issue
3
Pages
179-188
ISSN
  • 0957-9664 (ISSN-L)
  • 1471-2857
OpenAlex
W2955694336
Cited by
133
References
28
Citations by year
2026: 17 · 2025: 22 · 2024: 22 · 2023: 24 · 2022: 22 · 2021: 15 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 2
FWCI
15.07
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Criminal Behaviour and Mental Health (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • 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 › Impact of Technology on Adolescents
Keywords
cyberbullying, online aggression, adolescents, online anonymity, empathy, cyberbullying prevention
MeSH terms
Problem Behavior, Cyberbullying, Adolescent, Aggression, Child, Female, Germany, Hate, Humans, Inhibition, Psychological, Male, Crime Victims, Internet, Self Report

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