Corrigendum: Toward an Understanding of the Characteristics of Secondary School Cyberhate Perpetrators

The results of this review revealed small to moderate associations between cyberhate and school bullying and small associations between cyberhate and cyberbullying.

“The results of this review revealed small to moderate associations between cyberhate and school bullying (Blaya & Audrin, 2019; Blaya et al., 2020) and small associations between cyberhate and cyberbullying (Wachs et al., 2019).”

Four definitions referred to out-groups.

“Four definitions referred to out-groups (Blaya & Audrin, 2019; Lehmann, 2019; 2020; Räsänen et al., 2016).”

Five publications, related to three studies, reported items with reference periods of 6 months or less.

“Five publications, related to three studies, reported items with reference periods of 6 months or less (e.g., Blaya & Audrin, 2019; Blaya et al., 2020; Oksanen et al., 2014; Räsänen et al., 2016; Tynes, 2005).”

Only Blaya & Audrin (2019) and Blaya et al. (2020) narrowed down the group features exclusively to ethnic or religious backgrounds.

“Only Blaya & Audrin (2019) and Blaya et al. (2020) narrowed down the group features exclusively to ethnic or religious backgrounds.”

The idea that the perpetration of hate speech could have positive effects such as benefitting one's in-group was prevalent in only four definitions.

“The idea that the perpetration of hate speech could have positive effects such as benefitting one’s in-group (by attracting new members, through in-out-grouping dynamics, building of group identities, or enforcing vertical group relations) was prevalent in only four definitions (Blaya & Audrin, 2019; Lehmann, 2020; Vaught, 2012; Wachs et al., 2021a).”

Only a minority of definitions considered the harmfulness of hate speech in terms of a given community or social group.

“Only a minority of definitions (Blaya et al., 2020; Blaya & Audrin, 2019; Räsänen et al., 2016; Wachs et al., 2021a) considered the harmfulness of hate speech in terms of a given community or social group (e.g., disintegration of social cohesion, advocacy of hatred, rejection, violence, or hostility).”

Aspects of perpetration that refer to a person-centered basis of hate speech behavior-such as prejudice, bias, a devaluating attitude, hatred, or, most often, the purpose, aim or intention to harm-were mentioned in nine definitions.

“Aspects of perpetration that refer to a person-centered basis of hate speech behavior—such as prejudice, bias, a devaluating attitude, hatred, or, most often, the purpose, aim or intention to harm—were mentioned in nine definitions (Blaya et al., 2020; Blaya & Audrin, 2019; Oksanen et al., 2014; Räsänen et al., 2016; Vaught, 2012; Wachs et al., 2019, 2020, 2021a).”

Prevalences based on specific hate-speech characteristics were reported only in six publications.

“Prevalences based on specific hate-speech characteristics were reported only in six publications, namely: forms (Wachs et al., 2021a); locations (Blaya & Audrin, 2019; Oksanen et al., 2014; Tynes, 2005); targets (Elpus & Carter, 2016; Oksanen et al., 2014; Räsänen et al., 2016; Tynes, 2005); and perpetrators of hate material (Blaya & Audrin, 2019).”

This review found only two publications, based on two studies, that reported frequencies for exposure, victimization, and perpetration together.

“In terms of perspectives covered, this review found only two publications, based on two studies, that reported frequencies for exposure, victimization, and perpetration together (Blaya & Audrin, 2019; Wachs & Wright, 2018).”

Seven studies, related to 14 publications, reported quantitative data for hate speech victimization.

“Seven studies, related to 14 publications, reported quantitative data for hate speech victimization (Blaya et al., 2020; Blaya & Audrin, 2019; Elpus & Carter, 2016; Lehmann, 2019, 2020; Oksanen et al., 2014; Räsänen et al., 2016; van Dorn, 2004; Wachs et al., 2019, 2020, 2021a, Wachs & Wright, 2018, 2019, 2020).”

The specific target group was not identified in items used by Blaya et al. (2020) and Blaya & Audrin (2019).

“The specific target group was not identified in items used by Blaya et al. (2020) and Blaya & Audrin (2019).”

The prevalence of hate speech was generally studied and reported in online contexts.

“The prevalence of hate speech was generally studied and reported in online contexts (Blaya et al., 2020; Blaya & Audrin, 2019; Oksanen et al., 2014; Räsänen et al., 2016; Tynes, 2005; Wachs et al., 2019b, 2019a, 2020, 2021a, Wachs & Wright, 2018, 2019, 2020).”

Locations mediated by ICT were referred to either globally or with items pointing to specific Internet sites, social media tools, or technologies.

“Locations mediated by ICT (e.g., sites on the Internet) were referred to either globally (e.g., Wachs et al., 2021a) or with items pointing to specific Internet sites, social media tools, or technologies (e.g., Blaya & Audrin, 2019; Blaya et al., 2020; Oksanen et al., 2014; Räsänen et al., 2016).”

The remaining publications reported exposure rates within this range.

“The remaining publications reported exposure rates within this range (Blaya et al., 2020; Blaya & Audrin, 2019; Lehmann, 2019, 2020; Oksanen et al., 2014; Räsänen et al., 2016; Tynes, 2005; van Dorn, 2004; Wachs et al., 2019; Wachs & Wright, 2018).”

Only two studies, related to four publications, assessed whether online hate posts were searched for deliberately or not.

“Only two studies, related to four publications, assessed whether online hate posts were searched for deliberately or not (Blaya & Audrin, 2019; Blaya et al., 2020; Oksanen et al., 2014; Räsänen et al., 2016).”

Four studies, related to ten publications, reported frequencies of online hate speech perpetration.

“Four studies, related to ten publications, reported frequencies of online hate speech perpetration (Blaya et al., 2020; Blaya & Audrin, 2019; Oksanen et al., 2014; Räsänen et al., 2016; Wachs et al., 2019b, 2019a, 2021a, Wachs & Wright, 2018, 2019, 2020).”

The means and contexts in which both phenomena become apparent were also regarded as being similar.

“The means and contexts in which both phenomena become apparent were also regarded as being similar (Blaya & Audrin, 2019; Blaya et al., 2020).”

In 12 publications bullying was the concept that was seen to most closely overlap with hate speech and online or cyberhate.

“In 12 publications bullying was the concept that was seen to most closely overlap with hate speech and online or cyberhate (Blaya et al., 2020; Blaya & Audrin, 2019; Elpus & Carter, 2016; Lehmann, 2019, 2020; Oksanen et al., 2014; Räsänen et al., 2016; Wachs et al., 2019a, 2019, 2020, Wachs & Wright, 2018, 2019).”

Other authors connect hate speech and bullying via the perpetrator's intention to harm a person or group.

“Other authors connect hate speech and bullying via the perpetrator’s intention to harm a person or group (e.g., Blaya et al., 2020; Blaya & Audrin, 2019; Lehmann, 2020; Räsänen et al., 2016; Wachs et al., 2019, 2020; Wachs & Wright, 2019).”

The main group difference reported in terms of personal characteristics was gender.

“The main group difference reported in terms of personal characteristics was gender (Blaya & Audrin, 2019; Elpus & Carter, 2016; Räsänen et al., 2016; Wachs et al., 2019a, 2019, 2020, Wachs & Wright, 2018, 2019).”

Findings on empirical associations between bullying and online hate speech were reported in four publications.

“Findings on empirical associations between bullying and online hate speech were reported in four publications (Blaya et al., 2020; Blaya & Audrin, 2019; Lehmann, 2019; Wachs et al., 2019).”

In Western European countries, perpetration rates varied from 5.2% in France to 11.3% in Germany.

“In Western European countries, perpetration rates varied from 5.2% in France (Blaya & Audrin, 2019; Blaya et al., 2020) to 11.3% in Germany (Wachs et al., 2019a, 2019, Wachs & Wright, 2018, 2019, 2020).”