CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 25Bullying, Victimization, and AggressionImpact of Technology on AdolescentsHate Speech and Cyberbullying Detection

Theoretical perspectives of parental influence on adolescent cyber behaviour: A bi-national Instagram-based study

Open access
Achuthan, Krishnashree, Muthupalani, Sharanya, Kolil, Vysakh Kani, Madathil, Kapil Chalil·2022·Heliyon
DOI 10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e11813PMC PMC9703604
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

An increase in adolescent social media use has exacerbated cyberbullying globally. Instagram has the highest percentage of adolescent users experiencing cybervictimisation. While past research has delved into self-driven or peer-driven motivations of cyberbullying, theory-driven research characterising external factors is integral to understanding the psyche of cyberbullies, victims, or bystanders. Examining factors moderating cyberbullying in the broader social context of family in addition to peers is vital to mitigate cyberbullying. This paper explores factors related to parent and adolescent behaviours and relationships using the theory of planned behaviour. Two Instagram-specific instruments were designed, developed, and validated. Statistical analysis and comparisons were made between participants from two countries, i.e., India and Singapore. Results showed that perceived parental control, parental behavioural intention, subjective norms, and gender were significant predictors of adolescents' cyber behaviour. While past studies have concluded that theoretical perspectives are integral to studying cyberbullying behaviours, our study gives insight on how determinants of the theory of planned behaviour (TPB) predict actual intentions to cyberbully in adolescents. Further, the theoretical perspective and structural equation modelling (SEM) allows us to explore the effects of deeply held attitudes (Singapore: β = .590, p < .01; India: β = .659, p < .01), perceived parental control (Singapore: β = .068, p < .01; India: β = .192, p < .01) and subjective norms (Singapore: β = .745, p < .01; India: β = .295, p < .01) in proximal factors such as parents and their behavioural intentions. While TPB has only been used to study individual behavioural intentions in the past, the statistical analysis gives us the chance to delve into how individual behavioural intentions in family settings may affect adolescents' social media behaviour.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e11813

Cites

11 of 11 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Parental involvement contributes to the formation of subjective norms and perceptions of safety.

    “In addition, parental involvement contributes to the formation of subjective norms and perceptions of safety (Achuthan et al., 2022).”

    From Surfing Online Safety: Assertiveness and Parental Involvement in Adolescents’ Attitudes Toward Cyber Grooming (2025) · cites this paper as Achuthan et al., 2022

    The Introduction (Present study; page unavailable) links parents’ values and subjective norms to adolescents’ online behaviour, and the Results (Parental social media behaviour; page unavailable) say parents expect children to respect those values. But the paper does not establish that parental involvement forms subjective norms or perceptions of safety; its discussion of online safety concerns protection and cybervictimisation, not perceived safety. (LLM, conf=0.78)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

1 retracted

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 35

  1. [1]McGuire L. O’Higgins Norman J. Norman J.O. Parents coping with cyberbullying: a bioecological analysis Campbell M. Bauman S. Reducing Cyberbullying in Schools 2018 Elsevier 61 72
  2. [3]Dughyala N. Potluri S. Sumesh K.J. Pavithran V. Automating the detection of cyberstalking Proc. 2nd Int. Conf. Electron. Sustain. Commun. Syst. ICESC 2021 887 892
  3. [4]K. C and V. P. P. Trolls to cyber mob: the virtual rape through facebook Indian J. Mass Commun. Journal. 1 1 May 2021 [Online]. Available: https://www.ijmcj.latticescipub.com/portfolio-item/a1002091121/
  4. [7]Wang C.W. ‘i felt angry, but i couldn’t do anything about it’: a qualitative study of cyberbullying among Taiwanese high school students BMC Publ. Health 19 1 2019 1 11 PMC6540411 31138175
  5. [8]Mak K.-K. Epidemiology of internet behaviors and addiction among adolescents in six Asian countries Cyberpsychol., Behav. Soc. Netw. 17 11 2014 720 728 25405785
  6. [9]Charalampous K. The effect of parental style on bullying and cyber bullying behaviors and the mediating role of peer attachment relationships: a longitudinal study J. Adolesc. 64 2018 109 123 29448185
  7. [11]Wilmshurst L. Abnormal Child Psychology: A Developmental Perspective first ed. 2008 Routledge
  8. [20]DeSmet A. Determinants of self-reported bystander behavior in cyberbullying incidents amongst adolescents Cyberpsychol., Behav. Soc. Netw. 17 4 2014 207 215 24359305
  9. [22]Sasson H. Mesch G. The role of parental mediation and peer norms on the likelihood of cyberbullying J. Genet. Psychol. 178 1 Jan. 2017 15 27 27391950
  10. [25]Gravili G. Sharing knowledge through social media: the influence of national cultures Proceedings of the 2016 International Conference on Artificial Intelligence: Technologies and Applications 2016 135 139
  11. [26]Bradshaw C.P. The role of families in preventing and buffering the effects of bullying JAMA Pediatr. 168 11 2014 991 993 25178737
  12. [27]Khasawneh A. Factors contributing to adolescents’ and young adults’ participation in web-based challenges: survey study JMIR Pediatr. Parent. 4 1 2021 1 14 PMC8078707 33595450
  13. [37]Hayashi Y. Tahmasbi N. Psychological predictors of bystanders’ intention to help cyberbullying victims among college students: an application of theory of planned behavior J. Interpers Violence 2021 0886260521992158 33554727
  14. [38]Elsaesser C. Russell B. Ohannessian C.M. Patton D. Parenting in a digital age: a review of parents’ role in preventing adolescent cyberbullying Aggress. Violent Behav. 35 2017 62 72
  15. [39]Doane A.N. Pearson M.R. Kelley M.L. Predictors of cyberbullying perpetration among college students: an application of the theory of reasoned action Comput. Hum. Behav. 36 2014 154 162
  16. [40]Heirman W. Walrave M. Predicting adolescent perpetration in cyberbullying: an application of the theory of planned behavior Psicothema 24 4 2012 614 620 23079360
  17. [42]C. Zhu, S. Huang, R. Evans, and W. Zhang, “Cyberbullying among adolescents and children: a comprehensive review of the global situation, risk factors, and preventive measures,” Front. public Heal., vol. 9, 2021. PMC8006937 33791270
  18. [45]Wright M.F. Peer attachment and cyber aggression involvement among Chinese, Indian, and Japanese adolescents Societies 5 2 2015 339 353 [Online]. Available: https://www.mdpi.com/2075-4698/5/2/339
  19. [53]Smith P.K. Mahdavi J. Carvalho M. Fisher S. Russell S. Tippett N. Cyberbullying: its nature and impact in secondary school pupils J. Child Psychol. Psychiatry 49 4 2008 376 385 18363945
  20. [54]Gómez-Ortiz O. Romera E.M. Ortega-Ruiz R. Del Rey R. Parenting practices as risk or preventive factors for adolescent involvement in cyberbullying: contribution of children and parent gender Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 15 12 2018 2664 30486401 PMC6313627
  21. [64]Gómez-Ortiz O. Romera E.M. Ortega-Ruiz R. Parenting styles and bullying. The mediating role of parental psychological aggression and physical punishment Child Abuse Negl 51 Jan. 2016 132 143 26598076
  22. [65]Smetana J.G. Campione-Barr N. Metzger A. Adolescent development in interpersonal and societal contexts Annu. Rev. Psychol. 57 2006 255 284 16318596
  23. [67]González-Cabrera J.M. León-Mejia A. Machimbarrena J.M. Balea A. Calvete E. Psychometric properties of the cyberbullying triangulation questionnaire: a prevalence analysis through seven roles Scand. J. Psychol. 60 2 2019 160 168 30690725
  24. [68]Buelga S. Postigo J. Martínez-Ferrer B. Cava M.-J. Ortega-Barón J. Cyberbullying among adolescents: psychometric properties of the CYB-AGS cyber-aggressor scale Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 17 9 Apr 2020 3090 32365502 PMC7246589
  25. [70]Robert F. DeVellis, Scale Development Theory and Applications (Applied Social Research Methods) 6 2012 Sage Publications, Inc Los Angeles
  26. [76]Zurcher J.D. Holmgren H.G. Coyne S.M. Barlett C.P. Yang C. Parenting and cyberbullying across adolescence Cyberpsychology, Behav. Soc. Netw. 21 5 2018 294 303 29762067
  27. [79]Grunin L. Yu G. Cohen S.S. The Relationship between youth cyberbullying behaviors and their perceptions of parental emotional support Int. J. Bullying Prev. 3 3 2021 227 239 33005875 PMC7465883
  28. [80]Wang L. Ngai S.S. Understanding the effects of personal factors and situational factors for adolescent cyberbullying perpetration: the roles of internal states and parental mediation J. Adolesc. 89 2021 28 40 33845339
  29. [81]Mesch G.S. Parental mediation, online activities, and cyberbullying Cyberpsychol. Behav. 12 4 2009 387 393 19630583
  30. [84]Nocentini A. Fiorentini G. Di Paola L. Menesini E. Parents, family characteristics and bullying behavior: a systematic review Aggress. Violent Behav. 45 2019 41 50
  31. [86]Jenkins L.N. Fredrick S.S. Social capital and bystander behavior in bullying: internalizing problems as a barrier to prosocial intervention J. Youth Adolesc. 46 4 2017 757 771 28130693
  32. [88]Prabhakar A.S. Maris E. Medhi Thies I. Toward understanding the cultural influences on social media use of middle class mothers in India Extended Abstracts of the 2021 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems 2021 1 7
  33. [92]Chen Q. Zhu Y. Chui W.H. A meta-analysis on effects of parenting programs on bullying prevention Trauma, Violence, Abus. 22 5 2021 1209 1220 32242506
  34. [97]Andrews D. Alathur S. Chetty N. Kumar V. Child online safety in Indian context 2020 5th International Conference on Computing, Communication and Security 2020 ICCCS) 1 4
  35. [102]Kowalski R.M. Limber S.P. Agatston P.W. Cyberbullying: Bullying in the Digital Age second ed. 2012 John Wiley & Sons

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Achuthan, K., Muthupalani, S., Kolil, V. K., & Madathil, K. C.
Affiliations
  • Amrita Vishwa Vidyapeetham (IN)
  • Clemson University (US)
Corresponding author
Achuthan, Krishnashree
ORCID
Venue
Heliyon
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2022-11
Volume
8
Issue
11
Pages
e11813
ISSN
2405-8440 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e11813
PMC
PMC9703604
OpenAlex
W4309730070
Cited by
25
References
11
Citations by year
2026: 8 · 2025: 14 · 2024: 3
FWCI
4.02
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Heliyon (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Bullying, Victimization, and Aggression
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Impact of Technology on Adolescents
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Hate Speech and Cyberbullying Detection
Keywords
cyberbullying, adolescents, parental influence, theory of planned behavior, Instagram, social media use, perceived parental control, subjective norms, gender differences, cross-national comparison, India, Singapore, cyber victimization

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