“with my phone i am not alone” by Mitchell Haindfield is licensed under CC BY 2.0.
Introduction：
Many new technological items are experiencing a fresh round of optimization and upgrading as a result of the advancement of modern science, technology, and mass media, entering the lives of millions of common people. As human society continues to advance, the age of big data has arrived. The widespread use of the Internet has in large part satiated people’s basic needs for adjusting to the new period, helping them to comprehend the world and guiding them to take practical steps to change the world. However, trans-spatiality and anonymity, which are supposed to facilitate communication among users, have become tools that give rise to cyber violence or cyberbullying. More individuals are utilizing the internet to express their anger and dissatisfaction than ever before, in addition to using it for jobs, learning, and socializing.
As a type of cybercrime, “cyberbullying” has recently drawn more attention from scholars and the public. Cyberbullying is sometimes described as repetitive, deliberate attacks against individuals in an internet setting who are unable to protect themselves. (Kowalski et al., 2012). Studies show that approximately 75% of school-aged children (Juvonen & Gross, 2008; Katzer, Fetchenhauer, & Belschak,2009) have encountered this type of aggression at least once in the previous year, according to many researchers, who also point out that cyberbullying is common among teenagers and adults. A few negative outcomes for people and organizations, such as schools, have been associated with exposure to cyberbullying, including anxiety, depression, substance abuse, sleep disturbances, worsening physical symptoms, poor academic performance, absenteeism and truancy, school expulsion, murder, and suicide (Beran & Li,2005; Mitchell, Ybarra, & Finkelhor, 2007; Privitera & Campbell, 2009; Ybarra, Diener-West, & Leaf, 2007).
“Pro Juventute – Stopp Cyber-Mobbing Kampagne © Pro Juventute_05” by Pro Juventute is licensed under CC BY 2.0.
Definition of cyberbullying
Cyber violence encompasses provocation (such as engaging in physical combat online), harassment (such as sending a target repeatedly offensive messages), acting in illegal activity (such as soliciting someone’s personal information and disclosing it electronically), engaging in conduct without their knowledge, exclusion (such as excluding someone from friend lists), and spoofing. Sexting is the act of sharing naughty pictures of another person without that person’s permission. Cyberstalking is the practice of tracking another person using electronic communications.
Equally various forms of media, such as email, websites, chat rooms, messages, social networking sites, digital photographs, and online games, can be used to perpetrate cyberbullying. Depending on the specific study being examined and the most popular digital communication channel being utilized at the moment by the sample participants, it will differ which of these media is used the most. Katzer et al. (2009) reported that 35% of adolescents had experienced cyberbullying while talking, and 69% of the adolescents used chat rooms as a means of communication at least once per week.
“Pro Juventute – Stopp Cyber-Mobbing Kampagne © Pro Juventute Plakat IT quer” by Pro Juventute is licensed under CC BY 2.0.
Cyberbullying vs traditional bullying:
Three main characteristics of traditional bullying and cyberbullying are shared: It is an aggressive act that takes place between people who have an unfair power dynamic, and it happens repeatedly (Hunter, Boyle, & Warden, 2007; Kowalski, Limber, & Agatston, 2012; Olweus, 1993, 2013; P. K. Smith, del Barrio, & Tokunaga, 2012).
Despite their similarities, traditional bullying and cyberbullying are fundamentally different behaviours. Cyberbullies frequently think of themselves as being anonymous. The anonymity present in many cyberbullying scenarios may give the victim a sense of helplessness (Dooley et al., 2009; Vandebosch & Van Cleemput, 2008). Compared to traditional bullying, the anonymity of cyberbullying significantly increases the number of potential offenders. For instance, those using cyberbullying need not be concerned about the victim’s feelings. Besides, An additional negative impact of anonymity. People who engage in face-to-face bullying can see how their actions affect the victim. Some bullies may refrain from engaging in more bullying conduct just by realizing they have injured their target. Because it takes place online, cyberbullies are unable to directly observe how their actions affect the victim. Thus, there is a dramatically decreased likelihood of empathy and regret (Sourander et al., 2010).
Additionally, unlike conventional offline bullying, cyberbullying occurs at different times. Bullying frequently takes place in little groups and the mornings among teenagers. Furthermore, cyberbullying may last a day, a week, or even longer. Because the network has memory, even if a user forgets something later, the network will keep a record of it in cyberspace. As a result, it last longer. Thus, it spreads further because abusers may publish things online at the same time. The “reward for engaging in cyberbullying is typically delayed compared to traditional bullying” because of the nature of the technology used. The victim of cyberbullying is not always directly affected by the bullies’ actions. The victim may wait until they are aware of the cyberbullying before responding in any way. They may have been completely unaware that they were being bullied until then.
Stand Up to Cyberbullying | Federal Trade Commission by FTCvideos. Retrieved from:
https://youtu.be/lN2fuKPDzHA
Help from a bystander:
Unlike traditional face-to-face bullying, due to the particularity of the Internet, cyberbullying will cover a larger area, which also means that it will have more bystanders. This involves bystanders significantly. Authorities（police officers, teachers, and parents） are frequently not present when bullying occurs, making them unable to step in, hence bystander interventions are crucial to take into account while discussing cyberbullying (Vossekuil et al., 2004). Online bullying may therefore continue or stop depending on how peer bystanders respond (by either de-escalating or intensifying the incident) (Allison and Bussey, 2016).
Active bystander intervention entails urging the bully to stop as well as consoling or assisting the victim. Bystanders, who remain passive and do not act, may decide to leave and abstain from the bullying occurrence. Bystanders are a prime target for treatments designed to lessen cyberbullying because when they speak up for bullied individuals, bullying becomes less common (Salmivalli et al., 2011).
Family’s education：
In addition to external bystander intervention, the family is an important part of dealing with cyberbullying. Bullying and the family management are closely related; teenagers with poor family management are more likely to participate in dangerous behaviours like bullying and violence (e.g., less parental supervision or unclear communication expectations)（Hemphill et al., 2014）.
A good family can influence a child’s character favourably through encouragement, communication, and praise. Young people who have positive family management are more likely to regard bullying as a mistake and to indicate they will actively intervene to help and protect victims of bullying. Examples of positive family management include positive communication or appreciation for positive behaviour (Mulvey et al., 2019).
“What has the Internet ever done for us?” by University of Salford is licensed under CC BY 2.0.
Conclusion:
In modern society where the network is popular, how maintaining the security of the network environment is undoubtedly important. And cyberbullying is the most obvious rise in cybersecurity issues. It is also an act of violence. It has many differences from traditional bullying. In many cases, it does not bring physical harm to the victim, but mental torture instead. Cyberbullying is a bloodless but never-ending slaughter. All we can do is act as a bystander to persuade the perpetrator on time while comforting and supporting the victim. In life, a good family environment can be an important factor in limiting cyber violence. The correct guidance of parents will become the standard for children to criticize events.
References:
Beran, T., & Li, Q. (2005). Cyber-harassment student survey. PsycTESTS Dataset. https://doi.org/10.1037/t70765-000
Dooley, J. J., Pyżalski, J., & Cross, D. (2009). Cyberbullying versus face-to-face bullying. Zeitschrift Für Psychologie / Journal of Psychology, 217(4), 182–188. https://doi.org/10.1027/0044-3409.217.4.182
Hemphill, S. A., Tollit, M., & Herrenkohl, T. I. (2013). Protective factors against the impact of school bullying perpetration and victimization on young adult externalizing and internalizing problems. Journal of School Violence, 13(1), 125–145. https://doi.org/10.1080/15388220.2013.844072
Hunter, S. C., Boyle, J. M., & Warden, D. (2007). Perceptions and correlates of peer-victimization and bullying. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 77(4), 797–810. https://doi.org/10.1348/000709906×171046
Juvonen, J., & Gross, E. F. (2008). Extending the school grounds?-bullying experiences in Cyberspace. Journal of School Health, 78(9), 496–505. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1746-1561.2008.00335.x
Katzer, C., Fetchenhauer, D., & Belschak, F. (2009). Cyberbullying: Who are the victims? Journal of Media Psychology, 21(1), 25–36. https://doi.org/10.1027/1864-1105.21.1.25
Kowalski, R. M., Morgan, C. A., & Limber, S. P. (2012). Traditional bullying as a potential warning sign of cyberbullying. School Psychology International, 33(5), 505–519. https://doi.org/10.1177/0143034312445244
Mulvey, K. L., Gönültaş, S., Goff, E., Irdam, G., Carlson, R., DiStefano, C., & Irvin, M. J. (2018). School and family factors predicting adolescent cognition regarding bystander intervention in response to bullying and victim retaliation. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 48(3), 581–596. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-018-0941-3
Privitera, C., & Campbell, M. A. (2009). Cyberbullying: The new face of workplace bullying? CyberPsychology & Behavior, 12(4), 395–400. https://doi.org/10.1089/cpb.2009.0025
Salmivalli, C., Voeten, M., & Poskiparta, E. (2011). Bystanders matter: Associations between reinforcing, defending, and the frequency of bullying behavior in classrooms. Journal of Clinical Child & Adolescent Psychology, 40(5), 668–676. https://doi.org/10.1080/15374416.2011.597090
Sourander, A., Brunstein Klomek, A., Ikonen, M., Lindroos, J., Luntamo, T., Koskelainen, M., Ristkari, T., & Helenius, H. (2010). Psychosocial risk factors associated with cyberbullying among adolescents. Archives of General Psychiatry, 67(7), 720. https://doi.org/10.1001/archgenpsychiatry.2010.79
Vossekuil, B. (2004). The final report and findings of the Safe School Initiative: Implications for the Prevention of school attacks in the United States. United States Secret Service.