Cited by 103Bullying, Victimization, and AggressionCybercrime and Law Enforcement StudiesImpact of Technology on Adolescents

Risky electronic communication behaviors and cyberbullying victimization: An application of Protection Motivation Theory

Doane, Ashley N., Boothe, Laura G., Pearson, Matthew R., Kelley, Michelle L.·2016·Computers in Human Behavior

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.chb.2016.02.010

Cites

24 of 24 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, 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
Doane, A. N., Boothe, L. G., Pearson, M. R., & Kelley, M. L.
Affiliations
  • Chowan University (US)
  • University of Virginia (US)
  • University of New Mexico (US)
  • Old Dominion University (US)
Corresponding author
Doane, Ashley N.
Venue
Computers in Human Behavior
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2016-07
Volume
60
Pages
508-513
ISSN
0747-5632 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2289031258
Cited by
103
References
24
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 54 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 1
FWCI
8.39
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Computers in Human Behavior (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Bullying, Victimization, and Aggression
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Cybercrime and Law Enforcement Studies
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Impact of Technology on Adolescents
Keywords
cyber victimization, protection motivation theory, risky online behavior, behavioral intention, perceived susceptibility, perceived severity, response efficacy, self-efficacy, university students, cyberbullying prevention

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