Cited by 125Bullying, Victimization, and AggressionStalking, Cyberstalking, and HarassmentCybercrime and Law Enforcement Studies

Multiple online victimization of Spanish adolescents: Results from a community sample

Open access
Montiel, Irene, Carbonell, Enrique, Pereda, Noemí·2016·Child Abuse & Neglect

Abstract

Little is known about online victimization of Spanish adolescents. The present study aims to determine the past-year prevalence of online victimization in a community sample of Spanish adolescents. The final sample consisted of 3,897 adolescents between 12 and 17 years old (M=14.45, SD=1.59), 1,836 males and 2,049 females, recruited from 39 secondary schools in the east of Spain. The Cuestionario de victimización juvenil mediante internet y/o teléfono móvil (hereinafter, Juvenile Online Victimization Questionnaire, JOV-Q, Montiel & Carbonell, 2012) was applied for the assessment of eight types of online victimization grouped in two major domains: sexual (sexual coercion, sexual pressure, online grooming by an adult, unwanted exposure to sexual content and violation of privacy); and nonsexual victimization (online harassment, happy slapping, pressure to obtain personal information). Sixty-one percent of adolescents reported online victimization during the last year. Online sexual victimization was reported by 39.5% of adolescents and nonsexual victimization by 53.4% of them, whereas 31% of youth reported having experienced online victimization in both domains. The highest prevalence rates were recorded for online harassment (50%), unwanted exposure to sexual content (24.4%), pressure to obtain personal information (18.4%) and online grooming by an adult (17.2%), and the lowest for sexual coercion (6.7%) and happy slapping (2.2%). Thirty-five percent of the adolescents were considered online polyvictims and most of them experienced victimization in both sexual and nonsexual domains (88%). This study illustrates that Spanish adolescents experience high levels of online victimization and that multiple online victimization appears to be the norm among cybervictims.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.chiabu.2015.12.005

Cites

44 of 44 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

1 of the 45 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Montiel, I., Carbonell, E., & Pereda, N.
Affiliations
  • Universitat de València (ES)
  • Universitat de Barcelona (ES)
Corresponding author
Montiel, Irene
Venue
Child Abuse & Neglect
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2016-02
Volume
52
Pages
123-134
ISSN
0145-2134 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2216641730
Cited by
125
References
45
Citations by year
2026: 14 · 2025: 12 · 2024: 15 · 2023: 23 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 18 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 12 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 2
FWCI
9.83
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Child Abuse & Neglect (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Redalyc (Universidad Autónoma del Estado de México) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Bullying, Victimization, and Aggression
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Stalking, Cyberstalking, and Harassment
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Cybercrime and Law Enforcement Studies
Keywords
cyber victimization, adolescents, sexual victimization, online harassment, happy slapping, online grooming, privacy violations, polyvictimization, prevalence, Spanish adolescents
MeSH terms
Harassment, Non-Sexual, Adolescent, Child, Cross-Sectional Studies, Female, Humans, Male, Spain, Incidence, Sexual Harassment, Age Distribution, Sex Distribution, Crime Victims, Internet

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