Cyberbullying: Youngsters' experiences and parental perception
Abstract
This paper describes a survey on the prevalence and nature of cyberbullying of and by youngsters and the parental perceptions. Two questionnaires, one for youngsters and one for their parents, were sent to 1,211 final-year pupils of primary schools and first-year pupils of all levels of secondary schools and their parents. Pupils completed the questionnaires in their classroom, and parents completed them at home. The results show that about 16% of the youngsters had engaged in bullying via the Internet and text messages, while about 23% of the youngsters had been victims of cyberbullying. Cyberbullying seems to be a rather anonymous, individualistic activity, which primarily takes place at home. The most frequently used nature of harassment were name-calling and gossiping. Youngsters mostly react to cyberbullying by pretending to ignore it, by really ignoring it, or by bullying the bully. Most parents set rules for their children about the way to they should use the Internet but are not really conscious of the harassments. They underestimate their own children's bullying behavior and have insufficient notion of their children as victims of bullying.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Individuals who engage in traditional bullying also engage in cyberbullying.
“In general research suggests that individuals who engage in traditional bullying also engage in cyberbullying (Dehue et al., 2008;Hinduja and Patchin, 2011;Kwan and Skoric, 2013).”
From A review of cyberbullying and suggestions for online psychological therapy (2015) · cites this paper as Dehue et al., 2008
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”
From Cyberbullying through the lens of social influence: Predicting cyberbullying perpetration from perceived peer-norm, cyberspace regulations and ingroup processes (2020) · cites this paper as DeHue et al., 2008
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 9 · Cited by 802
- Authors
- Dehue, F., Bolman, C., & Völlink, T.
- Affiliations
- Open University of the Netherlands (NL)
- Venue
- CyberPsychology & Behavior
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2008-04
- Volume
- 11
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 217-223
- ISSN
- 1094-9313 (ISSN-L)
- 1557-8364
- OpenAlex
- W2029022908
- Cited by
- 802
- References
- 9
- Citations by year
- 2026: 12 · 2025: 16 · 2024: 26 · 2023: 39 · 2022: 40 · 2021: 39 · 2020: 114 · 2019: 46 · 2018: 61 · 2017: 62 · 2016: 70 · 2015: 63 · 2014: 62 · 2013: 41 · 2012: 46
- FWCI
- 28.11
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- CyberPsychology & Behavior (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- DSpace (Open University in the Netherlands) (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, cyberbullying victims, parental attitudes, name-calling, gossip, prevalence of cyberbullying, primary and secondary school students
- MeSH terms
- Adolescent, Aggression, Attitude, Humans, Parents, Surveys and Questionnaires, Social Perception, 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