Cyberbullying through the lens of social influence: Predicting cyberbullying perpetration from perceived peer-norm, cyberspace regulations and ingroup processes
Open accessAbstract
Abstract In the present research we analyzed the social influence mechanisms that back the relation between peer group norms regarding cyberbullying behaviors and individual cyberbullying perpetration. In a sample of adolescents (N = 3511, age: M = 16.27, SD = 1.58), we showed that the relation between perceived peer-norm and cyberbullying perpetration was moderated by two distinct social influence mechanisms. Specifically, when individuals' lack of knowledge regarding appropriate behaviors in cyberspace (i.e., cyberspace regulations), levels of perceived peer-norm regarding cyberbullying behaviors positively influence the participants' engagement in cyberbullying perpetration (i.e., informational social influence). Moreover, we showed that the higher the support of perceived peer-norm regarding cyberbullying behaviors the higher the levels of cyberbullying perpetration, especially for the higher (vs. lower) levels of identification with peers as the ingroup; this relation was additionally enhanced at increasing levels of adolescents' ingroup prototypicality (i.e., referential informative social influence). The results demonstrated that the two social influence mechanisms work independently and likely contribute to predict participants’ engagement in cyberbullying perpetration. Results are discussed with respect to the current literature regarding the social influence mechanisms underlying cyberbullying. The implications of these findings for practical interventions are explored.
AI snapshot
Written from the paper’s full text.
TL;DR
This study recasts cyberbullying perpetration as a product of social influence, showing that perceived peer norms supporting cyberbullying predict greater perpetration, especially when adolescents know less about cyberspace regulations and when they identify strongly with, and feel prototypical of, their peer ingroup. The two social influence mechanisms—informational and referential informative—operated independently in a large Italian adolescent sample.
Key findings
- Perceived peer-norm positively predicted cyberbullying perpetration, and this relation was stronger at lower levels of cyberspace regulations: conditional β = .332 at 1 SD below the mean, β = .270 at the mean, and β = .208 at 1 SD above the mean (all p < .001).
- The peer-norm × ingroup identification effect varied by ingroup prototypicality. At high prototypicality, the peer-norm effect was β = .360 at high identification, β = .283 at mean identification, and β = .207 at low identification; at low prototypicality, the corresponding effects were β = .307, β = .231, and β = .154 (all p < .001).
- Prevalence in the sample: 34.2% reported bullying someone at least sometimes in the last year, 38.3% reported being bullied at least sometimes, and 77.1% reported witnessing cyberbullying at least sometimes.
- Control variables predicting cyberbullying perpetration included cyber-victim perspective (β = .221), gender (β = .176), cyber-bystander perspective (β = .167), Internet regulations (β = −.079), and daily smartphone/Internet use (β = .084), all p < .001. Ancillary analyses indicated the referential informative mechanism was stronger than the informational mechanism: the negative scenario subgroup showed 14% higher predicted perpetration, and the positive scenario subgroup showed 22% lower predicted perpetration.
Methods
- Cross-sectional anonymous self-report Web survey (SurveyMonkey) conducted in 19 high schools in north Italy; N = 3511 students, age 13–22 (M = 16.27, SD = 1.58); parental consent and university ethics approval were obtained.
- Measures included 5-item cyberbullying perpetration, cyber-victim, and cyber-bystander scales; 5-item perceived peer-norm; cyberspace regulations (legal knowledge plus anticipated seriousness); single-item ingroup prototypicality; ingroup identification (Inclusion of the Ingroup in the Self plus 8-item affective identification); and demographic and smartphone/Internet habit items.
- Multiple group path analyses were run in lavaan for R using full information maximum likelihood with robust standard errors and scaled test statistics; groups were formed by cyberspace regulations and ingroup prototypicality, with chi-square difference tests and conditional effect estimates.
Limitations
- Stated: generalization to other cultural and social contexts should be cautious, especially because laws regulating web usage may differ from Italy’s; self-report answers may be affected by social desirability and self-presentation, potentially underreporting cyberbullying; and the cross-sectional design cannot establish causal direction.
- Evident from the text: ingroup prototypicality and cognitive ingroup identification were each measured with a single item, which may limit construct coverage despite cited psychometric support; the sample came from high schools in northern Italy, so broader adolescent populations are not directly represented.
Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
0 of 27 cited sources checked · 0 supported · 0 flagged
- Findingown data
Legal knowledge of cyberbullying behaviors and anticipated seriousness of the outcome related to engaging in cyberbullying behaviors were positively and significantly correlated.
“The correlation between the legal knowledge of cyberbullying behaviors and the anticipated seriousness of the outcome related to engaging in cyberbullying behaviors as well as the correlation between the legal knowledge of Internet behaviors and the anticipated seriousness of the outcome related to engaging in Internet behaviors were positive and significant (see Table 2).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Findingown data
At higher levels of ingroup prototypicality, the positive association between perceived peer-norm and cyberbullying perpetration was stronger at higher ingroup identification (β=.360) than at mean (β=.283) or lower (β=.207) ingroup identification (all p<.001).
“As for the higher levels of ingroup prototypicality, again, the stronger the perceived peer-norm, the higher the frequency of cyberbullying perpetration at higher, = β ˆ.360, p < .001,compared to the mean, = β ˆ.283, p < .001,and to lower levels of ingroup iden- tification, = β ˆ.207, p < .001.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data
The beta coefficient for perceived peer-norm on cyberbullying perpetration significantly decreased from lower to higher levels of cyberspace regulations.
“Noteworthy, the beta coefficient magnitude was greater for the perceived peer-norm and significantly decreased from lower levels to higher levels of cyberspace regulations.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data
The positive association between perceived peer-norm regarding cyberbullying behaviors and cyberbullying perpetration is enhanced at increasing levels of ingroup prototypicality.
“this relation was additionally enhanced at increasing levels of adolescents' ingroup prototypicality (i.e., referential informative social influence).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data
34.2% of students reported that they had bullied someone at least sometimes in the last year.
“In general, 34.2% of the students reported that they had bullied someone at least sometimes in the last year, 38.3% of participants responded that they were bullied at least sometimes in the last year, and 77.1% of the students reported that they had witnessed cyberbullying behaviors at least sometimes in the last year.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
- Findingown data
The two social influence mechanisms (informational and referential informative) work independently in predicting cyberbullying perpetration.
“The results demonstrated that the two social influence mechanisms work independently and likely contribute to predict participants' engagement in cyberbullying perpetration.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data
38.3% of participants responded that they were bullied at least sometimes in the last year.
“In general, 34.2% of the students reported that they had bullied someone at least sometimes in the last year, 38.3% of participants responded that they were bullied at least sometimes in the last year, and 77.1% of the students reported that they had witnessed cyberbullying behaviors at least sometimes in the last year.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Findingown data
The two social influence mechanisms likely contribute to predict participants' engagement in cyberbullying perpetration.
“The results demonstrated that the two social influence mechanisms work independently and likely contribute to predict participants' engagement in cyberbullying perpetration.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data
When adolescents' knowledge of cyberspace regulations is low, perceived peer-norm regarding cyberbullying behaviors positively predicts cyberbullying perpetration (informational social influence).
“Specifically, when individuals' lack of knowledge regarding appropriate behaviors in cyberspace (i.e., cyberspace regulations), levels of perceived peer-norm regarding cyberbullying behaviors positively influence the participants' engagement in cyberbullying perpetration (i.e., informational social influence).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim- Rests on an assumption: The ad hoc cyberspace regulations measure validly assesses adolescents' knowledge of laws ruling the use of cyberspace.
- Findingown data
The positive association between perceived peer-norm regarding cyberbullying behaviors and cyberbullying perpetration is stronger at higher levels of identification with peers as the ingroup.
“Moreover, we showed that the higher the support of perceived peer-norm regarding cyberbullying behaviors the higher the levels of cyberbullying perpetration, especially for the higher (vs.lower) levels of identification with peers as the ingroup”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim- The authors state this as an assumption: The cognitive representation of the self can be socially expanded to other individuals.
- Findingown data
The interactive effect of perceived peer-norm and ingroup identification in predicting cyberbullying perpetration was significant at higher and moderate levels of ingroup prototypicality.
“Results revealed that the interactive effect of perceived peer-norm and ingroup identification in predicting cyberbullying perpetration was significant at higher and moderate levels of ingroup prototypicality.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data
At lower levels of ingroup prototypicality, the positive association between perceived peer-norm and cyberbullying perpetration was stronger at higher ingroup identification (β=.307) than at mean (β=.231) or lower (β=.154) ingroup identification (all p<.001).
“As far as the lower levels of ingroup prototypicality were concerned, the stronger the perceived peer-norm, the higher the frequency of cyberbullying perpetration, at higher, = β ˆ.307, p < .001,compared to the mean, = β ˆ.231, p < .001,and to lower levels of ingroup identification, = β ˆ.154, p < .001.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data
The peer-norm × cyberspace regulations interaction term could not be excluded from the model without loss of fit (χ2(2)=8.98, p=.011).
“In line with Hypothesis 1, peer-norm ×cyberspace regulations interaction term could not be excluded from the model without loss of fit, = χ (2) 8.98 d 2 , p = .011,and importantly, peer-norm ×cyberspace regulations interaction term can be constrained in the three groups of ingroup prototypicality, = χ (2) 0.29 d 2 , p = .865.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data
The peer-norm × cyberspace regulations interaction term can be constrained equal across the three groups of ingroup prototypicality (χ2(2)=0.29, p=.865).
“In line with Hypothesis 1, peer-norm ×cyberspace regulations interaction term could not be excluded from the model without loss of fit, = χ (2) 8.98 d 2 , p = .011,and importantly, peer-norm ×cyberspace regulations interaction term can be constrained in the three groups of ingroup prototypicality, = χ (2) 0.29 d 2 , p = .865.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data
The higher the levels of perceived peer-norm, the higher the levels of cyberbullying perpetration at decreasing levels of cyberspace regulations.
“In line with Hy- pothesis 1, results indicated that the higher the levels of the perceived peer-norm, the higher the levels of cyberbullying perpetration at decreasing levels of cyberspace regulations.”
- Also stated in: § 4. Discussion · plain
“First, in line with the informational social influence mechanism (Hypothesis 1), we found that the higher the levels of perceived peernorm, the higher the level of cyberbullying perpetration at decreasing levels of cyberspace regulations.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Also stated in: § 4. Discussion · plain
- Findingown data
Legal knowledge of Internet behaviors and anticipated seriousness of the outcome related to engaging in Internet behaviors were positively and significantly correlated.
“The correlation between the legal knowledge of cyberbullying behaviors and the anticipated seriousness of the outcome related to engaging in cyberbullying behaviors as well as the correlation between the legal knowledge of Internet behaviors and the anticipated seriousness of the outcome related to engaging in Internet behaviors were positive and significant (see Table 2).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Findingown data
Increasing levels of ingroup prototypicality enhanced the size of the moderating role of ingroup identification on the relation between perceived peer-norm and cyberbullying perpetration.
“It is worth noting that increasing levels of ingroup prototypicality enhanced the size of the moderating role of ingroup identification on the relation between perceived peer-norm and cyberbullying perpetration.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data
77.1% of students reported that they had witnessed cyberbullying behaviors at least sometimes in the last year.
“In general, 34.2% of the students reported that they had bullied someone at least sometimes in the last year, 38.3% of participants responded that they were bullied at least sometimes in the last year, and 77.1% of the students reported that they had witnessed cyberbullying behaviors at least sometimes in the last year.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Findingown data
Constraining equal effects on cyberbullying perpetration across cyberspace regulation groups showed a significant worst fit only for perceived peer-norm (χ2(2)=14.37, p<.001), whose coefficients varied substantially and significantly among cyberspace regulation groups.
“Among these nested models, constraining equal effects on cyberbullying perpetration across cyberspace regulation groups showed a significant worst fit only for perceived peer-norm, = χ (2) 14.37 d 2 , p < .001,whose coefficients varied substantially and significantly among cyberspace regulation groups.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data
The two measures of ingroup identification were significantly and positively correlated.
“Since the two measures of identification were significantly and positively correlated (see Table 2), and following the procedures outlined by Tuscherer and Hugenberg (2014), the scores obtained by the IIS and affective ingroup identification measures were z-transformed and then averaged together, forming a unique index of ingroup identification.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Tuscherer and Hugenberg (2014)
Not checked in the free run.
- Findingown data
The higher the levels of perceived peer-norm, the higher the levels of cyberbullying perpetration at increased levels of ingroup identification and ingroup prototypicality.
“Second, and according to the prediction derived from the referential informative social influence mechanism (Hypothesis 2), the higher the levels of perceived peer-norm, the higher the levels of cyberbullying perpetration at increased levels of ingroup identification and ingroup prototypicality.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data
Cyber-victim perspective was a positive predictor of cyberbullying perpetration (β=.221, p<.001).
“As regarding control variables, cyber-victim perspective was a positive predictor of cyberbullying perpetration, = β ˆ.221, p < .001.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Findingcitation
Habits regarding Smartphone and Internet use per day was positively and significantly associated with cyberbullying perpetration.
“Moreover, habits regarding Smartphone and Internet use per day was positively and significantly associated with cyberbullying perpetration.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Findingown data
Even at high levels of cyberspace regulations, the association between perceived peer-norm and cyberbullying perpetration was positive and statistically significant.
“It is worth noting that even at high levels of cyberspace regulations, the association between the perceived peer-norm and cyberbullying perpetration was positive and statistically significant.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingcitation
Being the victim of cyberbullying is associated with a high probability of engaging in cyberbullying perpetration.
“First, being the victim of cyberbullying is associated with a high probability of engaging in cyberbullying perpetration.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 3 sources checked- cites Walrave & Heirman, 2011
Not checked in the free run.
- cites Ybarra & Mitchell, 2004
Not checked in the free run.
- cites Olweus, 1997 source
Not checked in the free run.
- Findingown data
The amount of usage of Smartphone/Internet during the day was positively associated with cyberbullying perpetration (β=.084, p<.001).
“Finally, the amount of usage of Smartphone/Internet during the day was positively associated with the criterion, = β ˆ.084, p < .001.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Findingown data
The negative scenario subgroup in the referential informative social influence had 14% more predicted cyberbullying perpetration than the negative scenario subgroup in the informational social influence (β ratio=1.140, SE=0.153, p<.001).
“The comparison between the negative scenario subgroup in the referential informative social influence to the negative scenario subgroup in the informational social influence indicated an increased amount of predicted cyberbullying perpetration equal to 14% (β ˆsratio = 1.140,SE = 0.153, p < .001;see Fig. 3).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Findingown data
Internet regulations significantly reduced cyberbullying perpetration (β=-.079, p<.001).
“Internet regulations significantly reduced cyberbullying perpetration, = -β ˆ.079, p < .001.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data
The association between perceived peer-norm and cyberbullying perpetration was moderated by participants' level of ingroup identification and ingroup prototypicality.
“Said otherwise, the results showed that the higher the support of group peer norms to cyberbullying behaviors, the stronger the likelihood that participants would engage in cyberbullying perpetration, and this association was moderated by participants' level of ingroup identification and ingroup prototypicality.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data
The positive scenario subgroup in the referential informative social influence had 22% less predicted cyberbullying perpetration than the positive scenario subgroup in the informational social influence (β ratio=0.777, SE=0.227, p<.001).
“The comparison between the positive scenario subgroup in the referential informative social influence to the positive scenario subgroup in the informational social influence indicated a decreased amount of predicted cyberbullying perpetration equal to 22% (β ˆs ratio = 0.777, SE = 0.227, p < .001).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Findingown data
Parents' level of education was not a significant predictor of cyberbullying perpetration.
“Third, and as for parents' level of education, the current result did not find that this variable was a significant predictor of cyberbullying perpetration, as already reported by Makri-Botsari and Karagianni (2014).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Makri-Botsari and Karagianni (2014)
Not checked in the free run.
- Findingown data
Cyber-bystander perspective was a significant positive predictor of cyberbullying perpetration (β=.167, p<.001).
“The cyber-bystander perspective was also a significant predictor of cyberbullying perpetration, = β ˆ.167, p < .001.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data
No significant association was found between participants' age and cyberbullying perpetration.
“Second, no significant association was found between participants' age and cyberbullying perpetration, in line with previous research showing that participants' age was not a significant predictor of cyberbullying perpetration (Steffgen, König, Pfetsch, & Melzer, 2011), but contrary to evidence suggesting a significant link between the variables in question (DeHue et al., 2008;Hinduja & Patchin, 2”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 3 sources checked - Findingcitation
The cyber-bystander perspective was significantly and positively associated with cyberbullying perpetration.
“Second, the cyber-bystander perspective was significantly and positively associated with cyber bullying perpetration.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data
Participants with lower levels of ingroup identification and ingroup prototypicality were less sensitive to perceived peer-norm (β=.154, p<.001) than participants with higher levels (β=.360, p<.001).
“Specifically, participants with lower vs. higher levels of ingroup identification and ingroup prototypicality, the former being less sensitive to the perceived peer-norm (i.e., positive scenario subgroup, = β ˆ.154 s , p < .001)than the latter (i.e., negative scenario subgroup, = β ˆ.360 s , p < .001).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data
Participants with higher levels of cyberspace regulations were less sensitive to perceived peer-norm influence (β=.199, p<.001) than participants with lower levels (β=.315, p<.001).
“Specifically, participants with higher vs. lower levels of cyberspace regulations, the former being less sensitive to the perceived peer-norm influence (i.e., positive scenario subgroup, = β ˆ.199 s , p < .001)than the latter (i.e., negative scenario subgroup, = β ˆ.315 s , p < .001).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data
Compared to male adolescents, female adolescents were less likely to be involved in cyberbullying perpetration.
“First, compared to male adolescents, female adolescents were less likely to be involved in cyberbullying perpetration.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 3 sources checked- cites Palermiti et al., 2017 source
Not checked in the free run.
- cites Li, 2006
Not checked in the free run.
- cites Quintana-Orts & Rey, 2018
Not checked in the free run.
- Study design and conductown data
The cyberbullying perpetration measure had good reliability (α = 0.69).
“Participants' ratings on cyberbullying perpetration measure reached a good level of reliability: α = 0.69.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Study design and conductown data
Participants' ratings on affective ingroup identification reached a good level of reliability (α = .88).
“Furthermore, participants' ratings on the affective ingroup identification reached a good level of reliability (α = .88).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Premisenone given
The referential informative social influence is moderated by ingroup prototypicality and ingroup identification.
“The referential informative social influence is moderated by two psychological factors, namely ingroup prototypicality and ingroup identification.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Premisecitation
The peer group norm concerning cyberbullying behaviors shapes the proclivity of adolescents to engage in acts of cyberbullying.
“Together these findings suggested that the peer group norm concerning cyberbullying behaviors shapes the proclivity of adolescents to engage in acts of cyberbullying (Hinduja & Patchin, 2013;Sasson & Mesch, 2017).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 2 sources checked- cites Hinduja & Patchin, 2013
Not checked in the free run.
- cites Sasson & Mesch, 2017
Not checked in the free run.
- Study design and conductown data
The cyber-bystander perspective measure had good reliability (α = 0.77).
“Participants' ratings on cyberbystander perspective reached a good level of reliability: α = 0.77.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Study design and conductown data
The cyber-victim perspective measure had good reliability (α = 0.70).
“Participants' ratings on the cyber-victim perspective reached a good level of reliability: α = 0.70.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Premisecitation
Increased levels of ingroup identification are associated with stronger ingroup normative behaviors.
“Empirical evidence has shown that increased levels of ingroup identification are associated with stronger ingroup normative behaviors.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Premisecitation
The stronger the perceived support by the peer group to engage in cyberbullying, the higher the frequency of being involved in cyberbullying acts as perpetrators.
“Similarly, the stronger the perceived support by the peer group to engage in cyberbullying, the higher the frequency of being involved in cyberbullying acts as perpetrators (Pabian & Vandebosch, 2014).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Pabian & Vandebosch, 2014
Not checked in the free run.
- Premisecitation
Central ingroup members are more motivated than peripheral members to comply with and support ingroup norms by behaving accordingly.
“Central members, more so than peripheral members are motivated to comply with and thus support the ingroup norms by behaving accordingly (Hogg, 2007;Jetten et al., 1997).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 2 sources checked - Premisecitation
Adolescents who expect the peer group to condone rather than condemn cyberbullying display high levels of intention to engage in cyberbullying behaviors.
“Research addressing the relationship between social influence and cyberbullying behaviors has shown that adolescents who expect the peer group to condone, rather than condemn cyberbullying (i.e., peer group norm), also display high levels of intention to engage in cyberbullying behaviors (Heirman & Walrave, 2012;Hinduja & Patchin, 2013).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 2 sources checked- cites Heirman & Walrave, 2012
Not checked in the free run.
- cites Hinduja & Patchin, 2013
Not checked in the free run.
- Study design and conductown data
The perceived peer-norm measure had good reliability (α = 0.78).
“Participants' ratings on perceived peer-norm reached a good level of reliability: α = 0.78.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Premisecitation
At least two mechanisms-informational and referential informative social influence-could account for the impact of group norms on one's own behavior.
“Accumulated evidence in social psychology has demonstrated that at least two mechanisms could account for the impact of group norms on one's own behavior, namely the informational and referential informative social influence (Abrams & Hogg, 1990;Deutsch & Gerard, 1955).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 2 sources checked- cites Abrams & Hogg, 1990
Not checked in the free run.
- cites Deutsch & Gerard, 1955 source
Not checked in the free run.
- Interpretationreasoning
The relation between perceived peer-norm and cyberbullying perpetration is rooted in the importance that adolescents attributed to the ingroup as an identity-defining device and to the roles endorsed within ingroup dynamics.
“Indeed, the relation between the perceived peer-norm and cyberbullying perpetration is rooted in the importance that adolescents attributed to the ingroup as an identity-defining device as well as to the roles endorsed by the adolescents within the ingroup dynamics, these being either central or peripheral members.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Interpretationreasoning
Cyberbullying can be framed as a product of intragroup dynamics.
“Indeed, as cyberbullying can be framed as a product of intragroup dynamics, interventions that take advantage of central members to promote anti-cyberbullying behaviors (i.e., peer education) could be successful in revising the peer norms regarding cyberbullying, and ultimately deflect the likelihood of engaging in such behaviors.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Interpretationown data
More frequent daily on-line activity, as testified to by Smartphone and Internet usage, increased the likelihood of performing cyberbullying acts.
“Indeed, more frequent daily on-line activity, as testified to by Smartphone and Internet usage, increased the likelihood of performing cyberbullying acts (for similar results, see Mishna et al., 2012;Rice et al., 2015).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 2 sources checked - Interpretationown data
The pattern of findings provides evidence in favor of framing cyberbullying as a byproduct of a social identity-related process.
“This pattern of findings provides evidence in favor of framing cyberbullying as a byproduct of a social identity-related process.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Interpretationown data
The findings attest to two types of social influence mechanisms, informational and referential informative social influence, at work independently in shaping adolescents' cyberbullying behaviors.
“Together these findings attest to the two types of social influence mechanisms, informational and referential informative social influence at work independently in shaping adolescents' cyberbullying behaviors.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Interpretationown data
Knowledge about appropriate behaviors in cyberspace is not effective enough to prevent/reduce cyberbullying behaviors.
“However, our study also demonstrates that the knowledge about the appropriate behaviors in cyberspace is not effective enough to prevent/reduce cyberbullying behaviors.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Interpretationcitation
Witnessing cyberbullying episodes enhanced the likelihood of engaging in cyberbullying behaviors.
“Specifically, witnessing cyberbullying episodes enhanced the likelihood of engaging in cyberbullying behaviors, thus confirming the significant role played by the bystander perspective in shaping cyberbullying behaviors (Barlińska, Szuster, & Winiewski, 2013;Bastiaensens et al., 2016;Kowalski, 2008).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 3 sources checked- cites Barlińska, Szuster, & Winiewski, 2013
Not checked in the free run.
- cites Bastiaensens et al., 2016 source
Not checked in the free run.
- cites Kowalski, 2008
Not checked in the free run.
- Interpretationown data
The referential informative social influence is stronger than the informational social influence in both positive and negative effects.
“Indeed, at least in our sample, subgroups characterized as positive and negative based on the two models of social influence showed that the referential informative social influence is stronger than the informational social influence in both positive and negative effects.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
- May combine two claims. 4
- The quote only partly states this claim. 1
- Classified as probably not a substantial claim. 3
May combine two claims.
Findingown dataThe conditional effect of perceived peer-norm on cyberbullying perpetration was β=.332 at 1SD below mean cyberspace regulations, β=.270 at mean, and β=.208 at 1SD above mean (all p<.001).
“The user defined parameter estimates feature found in the lavaan package allowed us to estimate the conditional effect of perceived peer-norm on cyberbullying perpetration as a function of cyberspace regulations levels (1SD below the mean: = β ˆ.332, p < .001,at the mean: = β ˆ.270, p < .001,and 1SD above the mean: = β ˆ.208, p < .001;see Fig. 1).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimMay combine two claims.
Findingown dataThe interaction between peer-norm and ingroup identification as a function of ingroup prototypicality could neither be constrained (χ2(3)=10.98, p=.012) nor neutralized (χ2(3)=46.64, p<.001).
“As regarding Hypothesis 2, the estimated change in the interaction term between peer-norm and ingroup identification as a function of ingroup prototypicality could neither be constrained, = χ (3) 10.98 d 2 , p = .012,nor neutralized, = χ (3) 46.64 d 2 , p < .001.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimThe quote only partly states this claim.
Findingown dataIn a sample of Italian adolescents (N = 3511, age M = 16.27, SD = 1.58), the relation between perceived peer-norm regarding cyberbullying behaviors and cyberbullying perpetration was moderated by two distinct social influence mechanisms.
“In a sample of adolescents (N = 3511, age: M = 16.27,SD = 1.58), we showed that the relation between perceived peer-norm and cyberbullying perpetration was moderated by two distinct social influence mechanisms.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimClassified as probably not a substantial claim.
PremisecitationParticipants' behavioral intentions are more aligned with perceived ingroup norms when participants display high compared to low levels of ingroup identification.
“For instance, Terry and Hogg (1996) showed that participants' behavioral intentions are more aligned with the perceived ingroup norms (i.e., frequency of physical exercise per week), when participants display high, compared to low levels of ingroup identification (for similar results, see also Schmitt & Branscombe, 2001).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 2 sources checked- cites Terry & Hogg, 1996 source
Not checked in the free run.
- cites Schmitt & Branscombe, 2001
Not checked in the free run.
Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).
Study design and conductown dataParticipants' ratings of anticipated seriousness of cyberbullying behaviors and Internet behaviors reached a reasonable level of reliability (α = 0.71 for both).
“Participants' ratings of the level of anticipated seriousness of the outcome related to engaging in cyberbullying behaviors (α = 0.71) as well as to Internet behaviors (α = 0.71) reached a reasonable level of reliability.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimMay combine two claims.
Interpretationown dataHigher levels of cyberspace regulations weaken but do not eliminate the association between perceived peer-norm and cyberbullying perpetration.
“This pattern of results indicates that higher levels of cyberspace regulations weaken but do not eliminate the association between perceived peernorm and cyberbullying perpetration.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimProbably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable), S3 (load-bearing).
InterpretationreasoningGeneralization of the current results to other cultural and social contexts should be made with caution.
“First, despite the sample size of our research being relatively large and representative of the geographic area in which the research was carried out, generalization of the current results to other cultural and social contexts should be made with caution.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimMay combine two claims.
Interpretationown dataThe diffusion of the cyberbullying phenomenon in the context under investigation appears to be worrisome, as more than one-third of participants reported bullying someone and more than one-third reported being bullied at least sometimes.
“In line with our results, the diffusion of the cyberbullying phenomenon in the context under investigation appears to be worrisome, as more than one-third of the participants reported that they bullied someone, and more than one-third of participants responded that they were bullied at least sometimes.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
The authors state this as an assumption.
The cognitive representation of the self can be socially expanded to other individuals.
“The rationale that backs this measure is that the cognitive representation of the self can be socially expanded to other individuals (Aron, Aron, Tudor, & Nelson, 1991).”
“This assumption has been further elaborated by social psychologists working in the SIT (Tajfel & Turner, 1979) and SCT (Turner et al., 1987).”
The paper relies on this without support.
The ad hoc cyberspace regulations measure validly assesses adolescents' knowledge of laws ruling the use of cyberspace.
“Hence, we ad hoc created the cyberbullying regulations measure.”
“we assessed participants' knowledge to correctly detect illegal cyberbullying behaviors (i.e., content-based component) and the anticipated seriousness of the outcome related to engaging in such behaviors (evaluative components).”
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?
Previous research with adolescents indicates that social norms can predict intention and engagement in cyberbullying perpetration.
“Previous research with adolescents indicates that social norms can predict intention and engagement in cyberbullying perpetration (111, 112).”
From A thematic analysis of adolescents’ perceptions of cyberbullying and cyberaggression: definitional distinctions and educational gaps (2026) · cites this paper as [112]
Cites
R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing
R Core Team (2000) · doi:10.32614/r.manuals · Cited by 355,706 · see citing works
Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1999) · Structural Equation Modeling A Multidisciplinary Journal · doi:10.1080/10705519909540118 · Cited by 108,788 · see citing works
<b>lavaan</b> : An <i>R</i> Package for Structural Equation Modeling
Rosseel, Y. (2012) · Journal of Statistical Software · doi:10.18637/jss.v048.i02 · Cited by 27,955 · see citing works
A heteroskedasticity-consistent covariance matrix estimator and a direct test for heteroskedasticity
White, H. (1980) · Econometrica · doi:10.2307/1912934 · Cited by 25,861 · see citing works
Comparative fit indexes in structural models.
Bentler, P. M. (1990) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.107.2.238 · Cited by 25,266 · see citing works
An Integrative Theory of Intergroup Conflict
Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (2000) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/oso/9780199269464.003.0005 · Cited by 12,620 · see citing works
Hu, L.-T., & Bentler, P. M. (1998) · Psychological Methods · doi:10.1037/1082-989x.3.4.424 · Cited by 12,298 · see citing works
The Social psychology of intergroup relations
Austin, W. G., & Worchel, S. (1979) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 11,577 · see citing works
Schermelleh-Engel, K., Moosbrugger, H., & Müller, H. (2003) · Department of Psychology - University of Koblenz-Landau · doi:10.23668/psycharchives.12784 · Cited by 8,975 · see citing works
Rediscovering the Social Group: A Self‐Categorization Theory
REID, F. J. M. (1987) · British Journal of Social Psychology · doi:10.1111/j.2044-8309.1987.tb00799.x · Cited by 8,139 · see citing works
Rediscovering the Social Group: A Self-Categorization Theory.
Willer, D., Turner, J. C., Hogg, M. A., Oakes, P. J., Reicher, S. D., & Wetherell, M. S. (1989) · Contemporary Sociology A Journal of Reviews · doi:10.2307/2073157 · Cited by 7,189 · see citing works
A scaled difference chi-square test statistic for moment structure analysis
Satorra, A., & Bentler, P. M. (2001) · Psychometrika · doi:10.1007/bf02296192 · Cited by 5,282 · see citing works
Inclusion of Other in the Self Scale and the structure of interpersonal closeness.
Aron, A., Aron, E. N., & Smollan, D. (1992) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.63.4.596 · Cited by 5,157 · see citing works
A study of normative and informational social influences upon individual judgment.
Deutsch, M., & Gerard, H. B. (1955) · The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/h0046408 · Cited by 4,819 · see citing works
(1967) · Project Euclid (Cornell University) · Cited by 4,720 · see citing works
French, J. R. P., & Raven, B. H. (1986) · University of Pittsburgh Press eBooks · doi:10.2307/jj.12381759.38 · Cited by 4,544 · see citing works
Cyberbullying: Its nature and impact in secondary school pupils
Smith, P. K., Mahdavi, J., Carvalho, M., Fisher, S., Russell, S., & Tippett, N. (2008) · Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry · doi:10.1111/j.1469-7610.2007.01846.x · Cited by 3,639 · see citing works
Kowalski, R. M., Giumetti, G. W., Schroeder, A. N., & Lattanner, M. R. (2014) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/a0035618 · Cited by 3,266 · see citing works
Ensuring Positiveness of the Scaled Difference Chi-square Test Statistic
Satorra, A., & Bentler, P. M. (2009) · Psychometrika · doi:10.1007/s11336-009-9135-y · Cited by 2,725 · see citing works
Tokunaga, R. S. (2010) · Computers in Human Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.chb.2009.11.014 · Cited by 2,566 · see citing works
Influence: The Psychology of Persuasion
Cialdini, R. B. (1993) · Cited by 2,563 · see citing works
Statistically based tests for the number of common factors
Steiger, J. H. (1980) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 2,413 · see citing works
School bullying among adolescents in the United States: Physical, verbal, relational, and cyber
Wang, J., Iannotti, R. J., & Nansel, T. R. (2009) · Journal of Adolescent Health · doi:10.1016/j.jadohealth.2009.03.021 · Cited by 2,045 · see citing works
Close relationships as including other in the self.
Aron, A. P., Aron, E. N., Tudor, M., & Nelson, G. (1991) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.60.2.241 · Cited by 1,938 · see citing works
Social Identity Theory: Constructive and Critical Advances.
Billig, M. S., Abrams, D. J., & Hogg, M. A. (1991) · Contemporary Sociology A Journal of Reviews · doi:10.2307/2076221 · Cited by 1,582 · see citing works
Electronic Bullying Among Middle School Students
Kowalski, R. M., & Limber, S. P. (2007) · Journal of Adolescent Health · doi:10.1016/j.jadohealth.2007.08.017 · Cited by 1,580 · see citing works
Cyberbullying: An Exploratory Analysis of Factors Related to Offending and Victimization
Hinduja, S., & Patchin, J. W. (2008) · Deviant Behavior · doi:10.1080/01639620701457816 · Cited by 1,497 · see citing works
Group norms and the attitude-behavior relationship: A role for group identification
Terry, D. J., & Hogg, M. A. (1996) · Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin · doi:10.1177/0146167296228002 · Cited by 1,444 · see citing works
Social categorization and the self-concept: A social cognitive theory of group behavior.
Turner, J. C. (2010) · Cited by 1,386 · see citing works
Research on School Bullying and Victimization: What Have We Learned and Where Do We Go From Here?
Espelage, D. L., & Swearer, S. M. (2003) · School Psychology Review · doi:10.1080/02796015.2003.12086206 · Cited by 1,250 · see citing works
Bullying Prevalence Across Contexts: A Meta-analysis Measuring Cyber and Traditional Bullying
Modecki, K. L., Minchin, J., Harbaugh, A. G., Guerra, N. G., & Runions, K. C. (2014) · Journal of Adolescent Health · doi:10.1016/j.jadohealth.2014.06.007 · Cited by 1,216 · see citing works
Prevalence and Predictors of Internet Bullying
Williams, K. R., & Guerra, N. G. (2007) · Journal of Adolescent Health · doi:10.1016/j.jadohealth.2007.08.018 · Cited by 1,010 · see citing works
Hogg, M. A. (2007) · Advances in experimental social psychology · doi:10.1016/s0065-2601(06)39002-8 · Cited by 990 · see citing works
New bottle but old wine: A research of cyberbullying in schools
Li, Q. (2005) · Computers in Human Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.chb.2005.10.005 · Cited by 978 · see citing works
Li, Q. (2006) · School Psychology International · doi:10.1177/0143034306064547 · Cited by 953 · see citing works
Cyberbullying: Youngsters' experiences and parental perception
Dehue, F., Bolman, C., & Völlink, T. (2008) · CyberPsychology & Behavior · doi:10.1089/cpb.2007.0008 · Cited by 802 · see citing works
Peer involvement in bullying: insights and challenges for intervention
O'CONNELL, P., Pepler, D. J., & Craig, W. (1999) · Journal of Adolescence · doi:10.1006/jado.1999.0238 · Cited by 754 · see citing works
Ybarra, M. L., & Mitchell, K. J. (2004) · Journal of Adolescence · doi:10.1016/j.adolescence.2004.03.007 · Cited by 737 · see citing works
Bully/victim problems in school: Facts and intervention
Olweus, D. (1997) · European Journal of Psychology of Education · doi:10.1007/bf03172807 · Cited by 724 · see citing works
Willard, N. E. (2006) · Cited by 712 · see citing works
Cyberbullying in adolescents: Modalities and aggressors’ profile
Calvete, E., Orue, I., Estévez, A., Villardón, L., & Padilla, P. (2010) · Computers in Human Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.chb.2010.03.017 · Cited by 686 · see citing works
Defining Cyberbullying: A Qualitative Research into the Perceptions of Youngsters
Vandebosch, H., & Van Cleemput, K. (2008) · CyberPsychology & Behavior · doi:10.1089/cpb.2007.0042 · Cited by 663 · see citing works
Observations of Bullying in the Playground and in the Classroom
Craig, W., Pepler, D. J., & Atlas, R. (2000) · School Psychology International · doi:10.1177/0143034300211002 · Cited by 638 · see citing works
Risk factors for involvement in cyber bullying: Victims, bullies and bully–victims
Mishna, F., Khoury-Kassabri, M., Gadalla, T., & Daciuk, J. (2012) · Children and Youth Services Review · doi:10.1016/j.childyouth.2011.08.032 · Cited by 622 · see citing works
Ingroup Identification as the Inclusion of Ingroup in the Self
Tropp, L. R., & Wright, S. C. (2001) · Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin · doi:10.1177/0146167201275007 · Cited by 597 · see citing works
Participant role approach to school bullying: implications for interventions
Salmivalli, C. (1999) · Journal of Adolescence · doi:10.1006/jado.1999.0239 · Cited by 587 · see citing works
Racial stereotypes: The contents of their cognitive representations
Dovidio, J. F., Evans, N., & Tyler, R. B. (1986) · Journal of Experimental Social Psychology · doi:10.1016/0022-1031(86)90039-9 · Cited by 568 · see citing works
The Social Identity Perspective
Hogg, M. A., Abrams, D., Otten, S., & Hinkle, S. (2004) · Small Group Research · doi:10.1177/1046496404263424 · Cited by 564 · see citing works
Ybarra, M. L., Mitchell, K. J., Wolak, J., & David Finkelhor, B. (2006) · PEDIATRICS · doi:10.1542/peds.2006-0815 · Cited by 540 · see citing works
The Relationship between Cyberbullying and School Bullying
Beran, T., & Li, Q. (2008) · The Journal of Student Wellbeing · doi:10.21913/jsw.v1i2.172 · Cited by 538 · see citing works
White, K. M., Smith, J. R., Terry, D. J., Greenslade, J. H., & McKimmie, B. M. (2009) · British Journal of Social Psychology · doi:10.1348/014466608x295207 · Cited by 527 · see citing works
Social desirability biases in self-reported alcohol consumption and harms
Davis, C. G., Thake, J., & Vilhena, N. (2010) · Addictive Behaviors · doi:10.1016/j.addbeh.2009.11.001 · Cited by 524 · see citing works
A developmental approach to cyberbullying: Prevalence and protective factors
Kowalski, R. M., Limber, S. P., & McCord, A. (2019) · Aggression and Violent Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.avb.2018.02.009 · Cited by 497 · see citing works
Cyberbullying among Turkish Adolescents
Arıcak, O. T., Siyahhan, S., Uzunhasanoglu, A., Saribeyoglu, S., Ciplak, S., Yilmaz, N., & Memmedov, C. (2008) · CyberPsychology & Behavior · doi:10.1089/cpb.2007.0016 · Cited by 493 · see citing works
A longitudinal study of cyberbullying: Examining riskand protective factors
Fanti, K. A., Δημητρίου, Α., & Hawa, V. V. (2012) · European Journal of Developmental Psychology · doi:10.1080/17405629.2011.643169 · Cited by 469 · see citing works
Cyberbullying, self-esteem, empathy and loneliness
Brewer, G., & Kerslake, J. (2015) · Computers in Human Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.chb.2015.01.073 · Cited by 459 · see citing works
Problematic computer game use among adolescents, younger and older adults
Festl, R., Scharkow, M., & Quandt, T. (2013) · Addiction · doi:10.1111/add.12016 · Cited by 420 · see citing works
Cyberbullying: Labels, behaviours and definition in three European countries
Nocentini, A., Calmaestra, J., Schultze-Krumbholz, A., Scheithauer, H., Ortega, R., & Menesini, E. (2010) · Australian Journal of Guidance and Counselling · doi:10.1375/ajgc.20.2.129 · Cited by 405 · see citing works
Prevalence, Psychological Impact, and Coping of Cyberbully Victims Among College Students
Schenk, A. M., & Fremouw, W. J. (2012) · Journal of School Violence · doi:10.1080/15388220.2011.630310 · Cited by 405 · see citing works
Rey, R. D., Casas, J. A., Ruiz, R. O., Schultze‐Krumbholz, A., Scheithauer, H., Smith, P. K., Thompson, F., Barkoukis, V., Tsorbatzoudis, H., Brighi, A., et al. (2015) · Computers in Human Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.chb.2015.03.065 · Cited by 402 · see citing works
Cyberbullying: The Challenge to Define
Langos, C. (2012) · Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking · doi:10.1089/cyber.2011.0588 · Cited by 393 · see citing works
Traditional Bullying and Cyberbullying
Gradinger, P., Strohmeier, D., & Spiel, C. (2009) · Zeitschrift für Psychologie · doi:10.1027/0044-3409.217.4.205 · Cited by 366 · see citing works
Gaffney, H., Farrington, D. P., Espelage, D. L., & Ttofi, M. M. (2019) · Aggression and Violent Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.avb.2018.07.002 · Cited by 363 · see citing works
Baker, R. K., & White, K. M. (2010) · Computers in Human Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.chb.2010.06.006 · Cited by 359 · see citing works
Overlap of Self, Ingroup, and Outgroup: Pictorial Measures of Self-Categorization
Schubert, T. W., & Otten, S. (2002) · Self and Identity · doi:10.1080/152988602760328012 · Cited by 353 · see citing works
Pozzoli, T., & Gini, G. (2010) · Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology · doi:10.1007/s10802-010-9399-9 · Cited by 343 · see citing works
Cyberbullying: Predicting Victimisation and Perpetration
Walrave, M., & Heirman, W. (2009) · Children & Society · doi:10.1111/j.1099-0860.2009.00260.x · Cited by 343 · see citing works
A scoping review on studies of cyberbullying prevalence among adolescents
Brochado, S., Soares, S., & Fraga, S. (2017) · Trauma, Violence, & Abuse · doi:10.1177/1524838016641668 · Cited by 307 · see citing works
Hasebrink, U., Livingstone, S., & Haddon, L. (2008) · London School of Economics and Political Science Research Online (London School of Economics and Political Science) · Cited by 304 · see citing works
Barlińska, J., Szuster, A., & Winiewski, M. (2013) · Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology · doi:10.1002/casp.2137 · Cited by 296 · see citing works
Parental mediation, peer norms and risky online behavior among adolescents
Sasson, H., & Mesch, G. S. (2014) · Computers in Human Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.chb.2013.12.025 · Cited by 259 · see citing works
Jadambaa, A., Thomas, H. J., Scott, J. G., Graves, N., Brain, D., & Pacella, R. (2019) · Australian & New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry · doi:10.1177/0004867419846393 · Cited by 249 · see citing works
Cyberbullying Definition and Measurement
Menesini, E., & Nocentini, A. (2009) · Zeitschrift für Psychologie · doi:10.1027/0044-3409.217.4.230 · Cited by 247 · see citing works
Heirman, W., & Walrave, M. (2012) · PubMed · Cited by 246 · see citing works
Baldry, A. C., Farrington, D. P., & Sorrentino, A. (2015) · Aggression and Violent Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.avb.2015.05.014 · Cited by 238 · see citing works
Are Cyberbullies Less Empathic? Adolescents' Cyberbullying Behavior and Empathic Responsiveness
Steffgen, G., Konig, A. S., Pfetsch, J. S., & Melzer, A. (2011) · Cyberpsychology Behavior and Social Networking · doi:10.1089/cyber.2010.0445 · Cited by 235 · see citing works
Schema-triggered Affect: Applications to Social Perception
Fiske, S. T. (2014) · doi:10.4324/9781315802756-9 · Cited by 207 · see citing works
Internet Prevention Messages: Targeting the Right Online Behaviors
Ybarra, M. L., Mitchell, K. J., Finkelhor, D., & Wolak, J. (2007) · Archives of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine · doi:10.1001/archpedi.161.2.138 · Cited by 206 · see citing works
Bhat, C. S. (2008) · Australian Journal of Guidance and Counselling · doi:10.1375/ajgc.18.1.53 · Cited by 205 · see citing works
Hamilton, K., & White, K. M. (2008) · Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology · doi:10.1123/jsep.30.1.56 · Cited by 203 · see citing works
From cyberbullying to electronic aggression: typology of the phenomenon
Pyżalski, J. (2012) · Emotional and Behavioural Difficulties · doi:10.1080/13632752.2012.704319 · Cited by 201 · see citing works
Schmitt, M. T., & Branscombe, N. R. (2001) · Journal of Experimental Social Psychology · doi:10.1006/jesp.2001.1476 · Cited by 200 · see citing works
Determinants of Self-Reported Bystander Behavior in Cyberbullying Incidents Amongst Adolescents
DeSmet, A., Veldeman, C., Poels, K., Bastiaensens, S., Cleemput, K. V., Vandebosch, H., & Bourdeaudhuij, I. D. (2013) · Cyberpsychology Behavior and Social Networking · doi:10.1089/cyber.2013.0027 · Cited by 194 · see citing works
Peer Groups, Social Identity, and Children's Bullying Behavior
Duffy, A. L., & Nesdale, D. (2008) · Social Development · doi:10.1111/j.1467-9507.2008.00484.x · Cited by 190 · see citing works
Contributions of Personal and Situational Factors to Bystanders' Reactions to School Bullying
Oh, I., & Hazler, R. J. (2009) · School Psychology International · doi:10.1177/0143034309106499 · Cited by 190 · see citing works
Kiriakidis, S. P., & Kavoura, A. (2010) · Family & Community Health · doi:10.1097/fch.0b013e3181d593e4 · Cited by 183 · see citing works
Morality, values, traditional bullying, and cyberbullying in adolescence
Menesini, E., Nocentini, A., & Camodeca, M. (2011) · British Journal of Developmental Psychology · doi:10.1111/j.2044-835x.2011.02066.x · Cited by 182 · see citing works
Cyberbullying perpetration and victimization among middle-school students
Rice, E., Petering, R., Rhoades, H., Winetrobe, H., Goldbach, J., Plant, A., Montoya, J., & Kordic, T. (2015) · American Journal of Public Health · doi:10.2105/ajph.2014.302393 · Cited by 180 · see citing works
Cyberbullying and Cyber Aggression
Smith, P. K. (2012) · doi:10.4324/9780203841372-15 · Cited by 180 · see citing works
Predictors of victimisation across direct bullying, indirect bullying and cyberbullying
Brighi, A., Guarini, A., Melotti, G., Galli, S., & Genta, M. L. (2012) · Emotional and Behavioural Difficulties · doi:10.1080/13632752.2012.704684 · Cited by 177 · see citing works
Cyberbullying and subjective health
Låftman, S. B., Modin, B., & Östberg, V. (2013) · Children and Youth Services Review · doi:10.1016/j.childyouth.2012.10.020 · Cited by 172 · see citing works
Cyberbullying and self-esteem: An Italian study
Palermiti, A. L., Servidio, R., Bartolo, M. G., & Costabile, A. (2017) · Computers in Human Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.chb.2016.12.026 · Cited by 163 · see citing works
Baroncelli, A., & Ciucci, E. (2014) · Journal of Adolescence · doi:10.1016/j.adolescence.2014.05.009 · Cited by 160 · see citing works
Liu, Q., Fang, X., Deng, L., & Zhang, J. (2012) · Computers in Human Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.chb.2012.02.010 · Cited by 159 · see citing works
Kiesner, J., Cadinu, M., Poulin, F., & Bucci, M. (2002) · Child Development · doi:10.1111/1467-8624.00400 · Cited by 159 · see citing works
White, K. M., Hogg, M. A., & Terry, D. J. (2002) · Basic and Applied Social Psychology · doi:10.1207/s15324834basp2402_2 · Cited by 154 · see citing works
Social Pressures in Informal Groups.
Jr. Canter Ralph, R. (1951) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/h0050900 · Cited by 153 · see citing works
9. Structural Equation Modeling with Robust Covariances
Yuan, K., & Bentler, P. M. (1998) · Sociological Methodology · doi:10.1111/0081-1750.00052 · Cited by 146 · see citing works
Bastiaensens, S., Pabian, S., Vandebosch, H., Poels, K., Van Cleemput, K., DeSmet, A., & De Bourdeaudhuij, I. (2016) · Social Development · doi:10.1111/sode.12134 · Cited by 140 · see citing works
Different forms of bullying and victimization: Bully-victims versus bullies and victims.
Yang, A., & Salmivalli, C. (2013) · European Journal of Developmental Psychology · doi:10.1080/17405629.2013.793596 · Cited by 126 · see citing works
Pabian, S., & Vandebosch, H. (2013) · European Journal of Developmental Psychology · doi:10.1080/17405629.2013.858626 · Cited by 120 · see citing works
The prevalence of cyberbullying among adolescents: A case study of middle schools in Serbia
Popović-Ćitić, B., Djurić, S., & Cvetković, V. M. (2011) · School Psychology International · doi:10.1177/0143034311401700 · Cited by 119 · see citing works
The Role of Parental Mediation and Peer Norms on the Likelihood of Cyberbullying
Sasson, H., & Mesch, G. S. (2016) · The Journal of Genetic Psychology · doi:10.1080/00221325.2016.1195330 · Cited by 115 · see citing works
Cyberbullying in Greek Adolescents: The Role of Parents
Makri‐Botsari, E., & Karagianni, G. (2014) · Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences · doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.01.742 · Cited by 114 · see citing works
Jetten, J., & Spears, R. (2003) · European Review of Social Psychology · doi:10.1080/10463280340000063 · Cited by 109 · see citing works
Online Harassment and Cyberbullying in the Czech Republic
Ševčíková, A., & Šmahel, D. (2009) · Zeitschrift für Psychologie · doi:10.1027/0044-3409.217.4.227 · Cited by 109 · see citing works
Schultze‐Krumbholz, A., Göbel, K., Scheithauer, H., Brighi, A., Guarini, A., Tsorbatzoudis, H., Barkoukis, V., Pyżalski, J., Plichta, P., Rey, R. D., et al. (2014) · Journal of School Violence · doi:10.1080/15388220.2014.961067 · Cited by 105 · see citing works
Lobe, B., Livingstone, S., Ólafsson, K., & Vodeb, H. (2011) · London School of Economics and Political Science Research Online (London School of Economics and Political Science) · Cited by 97 · see citing works
Louis, W. R., Taylor, D. M., & Douglas, R. L. (2005) · Group Processes & Intergroup Relations · doi:10.1177/1368430205056465 · Cited by 94 · see citing works
STI Research: Recruiting an Unbiased Sample
Reed, J. L., Thistlethwaite, J. M., & Huppert, J. S. (2007) · Journal of Adolescent Health · doi:10.1016/j.jadohealth.2007.02.010 · Cited by 86 · see citing works
Cyberbullying experiences on-the-go: When social media can become distressing
Görzig, A., & Frumkin, L. A. (2013) · Cyberpsychology Journal of Psychosocial Research on Cyberspace · doi:10.5817/cp2013-1-4 · Cited by 86 · see citing works
Uncovering the Structure of and Gender and Developmental Differences in Cyber Bullying
Griezel, L., Finger, L. R., Bodkin‐Andrews, G., Craven, R. G., & Yeung, A. S. (2012) · The Journal of Educational Research · doi:10.1080/00220671.2011.629692 · Cited by 79 · see citing works
Easterbrook, M. J., & Vignoles, V. L. (2013) · European Journal of Social Psychology · doi:10.1002/ejsp.1972 · Cited by 76 · see citing works
Brighi, A., Menin, D., Skrzypiec, G., & Guarini, A. (2019) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01467 · Cited by 68 · see citing works
Arnarsson, Á. M., Nygren, J., Nyholm, M., Torsheim, T., Augustine, L., Bjereld, Y., Markkanen, I., Schnohr, C., Rasmussen, M., Nielsen, L., et al. (2019) · Scandinavian Journal of Public Health · doi:10.1177/1403494818817411 · Cited by 66 · see citing works
Predicting Condom Use Attitudes, Norms, and Control Beliefs in Hispanic Problem Behavior Youth
Malcolm, S., Huang, S., Córdova, D., Freitas, D. M., Arzon, M., Jimenez, G. L., Pantin, H. M., & Prado, G. J. (2012) · Health Education & Behavior · doi:10.1177/1090198112440010 · Cited by 58 · see citing works
Quintana‐Orts, C., & Rey, L. (2017) · Computers in Human Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.chb.2017.12.021 · Cited by 56 · see citing works
Campfield, D. C. (2008) · The Mathematics Enthusiast · Cited by 55 · see citing works
Research Into Cyberbullying: Context
Li, Q., Smith, P. K., & CROSS, D. S. (2012) · doi:10.1002/9781119954484.ch1 · Cited by 53 · see citing works
Longitudinal patterns of involvement in cyberbullying: Results from a Latent Transition Analysis
Festl, R., Vogelgesang, J., Scharkow, M., & Quandt, T. (2016) · Computers in Human Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.chb.2016.09.027 · Cited by 52 · see citing works
Behavior during cyberbullying episodes: Initial validation of a new self‐report scale
Pozzoli, T., & Gini, G. (2019) · Scandinavian Journal of Psychology · doi:10.1111/sjop.12517 · Cited by 45 · see citing works
Horizons – Cyberbullying: Abusive Relationships in Cyberspace
Genta, M. L., Brighi, A., & Guarini, A. (2009) · Zeitschrift für Psychologie · doi:10.1027/0044-3409.217.4.233 · Cited by 38 · see citing works
Subtyping and social consensus: the role of the audience in the maintenance of stereotypic beliefs
Carnaghi, A., & Yzerbyt, V. Y. (2006) · European Journal of Social Psychology · doi:10.1002/ejsp.402 · Cited by 34 · see citing works
Self-citationSelf-Typicality and Group Identification: Evidence for their Separateness
Kashima, E. S., Kashima, Y., & Hardie, E. A. (2000) · Group Processes & Intergroup Relations · doi:10.1177/1368430200031006 · Cited by 28 · see citing works
Ubertini, M. (2010) · ProQuest LLC eBooks · Cited by 18 · see citing works
Obst, P. L., White, K., Mavor, K. I., & Baker, R. K. (2011) · Psychology · doi:10.4236/psych.2011.25066 · Cited by 18 · see citing works
Carnaghi, A., & Yzerbyt, V. Y. (2006) · European Journal of Social Psychology · doi:10.1002/ejsp.265 · Cited by 16 · see citing works
Self-citationGroup norms, intra-group position and children's aggressive intentions
Duffy, A. L., & Nesdale, D. (2010) · European Journal of Developmental Psychology · doi:10.1080/17405620903132504 · Cited by 15 · see citing works
Espelage, D. L., & Napolitano, S. M. S. (2003) · Lincoln (University of Nebraska) · Cited by 15 · see citing works
Positive peer pressure: Priming member prototypicality can decrease undergraduate drinking
Goode, C., Balzarini, R. N., & Smith, H. J. (2014) · Journal of Applied Social Psychology · doi:10.1111/jasp.12248 · Cited by 14 · see citing works
Bereavement-related depression: Treatment implications
Hensley, P. L., & Clayton, P. J. (2008) · Cited by 8 · see citing works
Protective Factors on Perpetration of Bullying and Cyberbullying
Guarini, A., Passini, S., Melotti, G., et al. (2012) · Cited by 3 · see citing works
Tuscherer, T., & Hugenberg, K. (2013) · Journal of Experimental Social Psychology · doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2013.12.002 · Cited by 2 · see citing works
Social Influences on Cyberbullying Behaviors Among Middle and High School Students
Hinduja, S., & Patchin, J. (2013) · Journal of Youth and Adolescence · doi:10.1007/s10964-012-9902-4
Jetten (1997) · doi:10.1002/(sici)1099-0992(199709/10)27:5
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 3
- Genta, 2009, European project on bullying and cyberbullying granted by Daphne II programme, Zeitschrift für Psychologie Journal of Psychology, 217, 233
- Kowalski, 2008, Cyber bullying: Recognizing and treating victim and aggressor, Psychiatric Times, 25, 45
- Méndez, 2007, When metaperceptions are affected by intergroup processes, International Journal of Psychology and Psychological Therapy, 7, 237
Cited by
Sorted by citations
The sense of agency in emerging technologies for human–computer integration: A review
Cornelio, P., Haggard, P., Hornbaek, K., Georgiou, O., Bergström, J., Subramanian, S., & Obrist, M. (2022) · Frontiers in Neuroscience · doi:10.3389/fnins.2022.949138 · Cited by 75 · see citing works
Smith, E. J., Rai, R., Scase, M. O., & Wilson, A. D. (2026) · Frontiers in Psychiatry · doi:10.3389/fpsyt.2026.1746672
“Previous research with adolescents indicates that social norms can predict intention and engagement in cyberbullying perpetration (111, 112).”
- Authors
- Piccoli, V., Carnaghi, A., Grassi, M., Stragà, M., & Bianchi, M.
- Affiliations
- University of Trieste (IT)
- Iscte – Instituto Universitário de Lisboa (PT)
- Corresponding author
- Piccoli, Valentina
- Venue
- Computers in Human Behavior
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2020-01
- Volume
- 102
- Pages
- 260-273
- ISSN
- 0747-5632 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2971938578
- Semantic Scholar
- e796937fde53dd5358294df31d07b6dd03e1265d
- Cited by
- 71
- References
- 135
- Citations by year
- 2026: 10 · 2025: 13 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 12
- FWCI
- 9.12
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Update notices
- erratum (2024-02-01)
- Open access
- Licence
- Locations
- Computers in Human Behavior (publishedVersion)
- ArTS Archivio della ricerca di Trieste (University of Trieste https://www.units.it/) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- Repositório do ISCTE-IUL (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- Funders
- Regione Autonoma Friuli Venezia Giulia
- 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, cyberbullying perpetration, social influence, informational influence, peer norms, cyberspace regulation, ingroup identification, adolescents, cyberbullying intervention
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.
Claims read by deepseek-v4.1-flash under definition version 3 (extract-v3) on 2026-10-08.
Classified by jev-1.13-20260917 (gold-guideline-v0.2) on 2026-10-08.
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
