Cyber - bullying: The Culprits & The Motivations Behind Their Actions
The Motivations Underlying Cyber - bullies
Because cyber-bullying is a relatively new phenomenon, little research has been done to understand the mechanisms that motivate individuals to use technology as a weapon to intentionally harm others. Many of the studies that have been performed to understand the factors that influence cyber-bullying have suggested that it shares many of the same risk factors as more traditional forms of peer aggression (Barlett & Gentile, 2012). Low and Espelage (2012) conducted a longitudinal study of over a thousand Midwestern middle
school students, grades five through seven, to examine the relationship between
individual and family predictors of cyber-bullying. They found that like traditional bullying, hostility, depressive symptoms, alcohol or drug use, and a lack of empathy were all individual personality traits that predicted cyber-bullying. They
also found that family conflict (both physical and emotional) and the level of parental supervision and awareness also presented significant risk factors for adolescents.
But the very nature of cyber-bullying differentiates it from bullying that takes place in the physical world.
Cyber-bullying is not limited to the playground or the locker room or the classroom. The accessibility of the
internet makes it possible for bullies to attack their victims at anytime and from virtually any location (presuming they have internet access…which in today’s technologically driven world they probably do…especially when you take into account that McDonald’s has free WiFi…and Starbucks…and pretty much everywhere else). Cyber-bullies do not need to be physically stronger or faster than their victims, and the potential anonymity the internet provides makes it possible for them to strike without fear of repercussions. Both the fact that the internet negates the need for a strength imbalance between bully and victim and the fact that cyber-bullies can remain anonymous if they so choose can help to positively reinforce cyber-bullying(Barlett & Gentile, 2012).
The General Learning Model (GLM; Gentile et al., 2009) proposes that continued experiences with a stimulus leads to the formation of attitudes, and learning is more likely to occur when a behavior is positively reinforced
and positive attitudes about it are endorsed. Cyber-bullying is repetitive in nature. It is not just a single
attack on an individual, but a repeated victimization that takes place over time. The more an individual is
involved with cyber-bullying, the more likely the behavior is to be repeated and reinforced. Raskauskas and Stoltz
(2007), surveyed adolescents on their involvement in cyber-bullying. Some of the reasons provided by the adolescents they surveyed that reported themselves as engaging in aggressive online behavior were because
cyber-bullying was fun, they did it to get back at someone, and because they were bored. Other studies have
indicated that cyber-bullying is related to popularity (Barlett & Gentile, 2012; Katzer et al., 2009)
Research suggests that cyber-bullies are motivated by many of the same things that influence traditional bullies. Hostility, depression, drug use, and family problems may all play a role in the perpetuation of internet aggression. However, because cyber-bullying takes place on an entirely different frontier, other factors also play a role in predicting cyber-bullying behavior. The anonymity the internet provides and the general lack of supervision
or any kind of authority online gives cyber-bullies an avenue to unleash their aggression with little fear of consequences. When combined with the fact that the virtual world negates the need for physical strength, anyone can become a cyber-bully.
Culprits
Most of the research conducted on cyber-bullying has relied on predominantly Caucasian participants and has been more concerned with gender rather than racial differences (Low & Espelage, 2012). In addition some of the earlier studies on gender differences with regards to cyber-bullying have been conflicting. Williams and Guerra (2007), did not find any significant gender differences between males and females, while Wang et al. (2009) found that boys were more likely to be cyber-bullies than girls. Successive studies have seemed to indicate that there are few differences between males and females when it comes to cyber-bullying (Barlett & Gentile, 2012; Jackson & Cohen, 2012). However, this in itself is interesting and indicates another way that cyber-bullying differs from traditional bullying. It would seem that cyber-bullying is an equal opportunity employer and that girls are just as
likely as boys to engage in hostile online behavior.
In a rare longitudinal study designed to address both racial and gender commonalities involved with cyber-bullying, Low and Espelage (2012), did find some interesting trends. They found that African American adolescents engaged in higher levels of cyber-bullying than White adolescents at wave one, but maintained less stability in cyber-bullying than white adolescents when retested a year later. They also found that bullying behavior was correlated with feelings of depression among African American males and feelings of hostility among White males. They also found that cyber-bullying remained the most stable among White females, which may indicate that they view cyber-bullying as a more acceptable behavior over time than any of the other groups.
Numerous studies have shown a correlation between traditional bullies and victims and cyber-bullies and cybervictims (Jackson & Cohen, 2012; Raskauskas & Stoltz, 2007). The roles individuals play in traditional bullying seem to transfer into the virtual world in that adolescents who are traditional bullies are more likely to be cyber-bullies and adolescents who are the victims of traditional bullying are more likely to be the victims of cyber-bullying. With regards to gender differences in cybervictimization, research suggests that girls are more likely to be the target of cyber-bullies and report more instances of internet aggression than boys, but this could be a result of cultural differences as other studies have indicated no differences in the rate of victimization among males and females (Ortega et al., 2009).
Because cyber-bullying is a relatively new phenomenon, little research has been done to understand the mechanisms that motivate individuals to use technology as a weapon to intentionally harm others. Many of the studies that have been performed to understand the factors that influence cyber-bullying have suggested that it shares many of the same risk factors as more traditional forms of peer aggression (Barlett & Gentile, 2012). Low and Espelage (2012) conducted a longitudinal study of over a thousand Midwestern middle
school students, grades five through seven, to examine the relationship between
individual and family predictors of cyber-bullying. They found that like traditional bullying, hostility, depressive symptoms, alcohol or drug use, and a lack of empathy were all individual personality traits that predicted cyber-bullying. They
also found that family conflict (both physical and emotional) and the level of parental supervision and awareness also presented significant risk factors for adolescents.
But the very nature of cyber-bullying differentiates it from bullying that takes place in the physical world.
Cyber-bullying is not limited to the playground or the locker room or the classroom. The accessibility of the
internet makes it possible for bullies to attack their victims at anytime and from virtually any location (presuming they have internet access…which in today’s technologically driven world they probably do…especially when you take into account that McDonald’s has free WiFi…and Starbucks…and pretty much everywhere else). Cyber-bullies do not need to be physically stronger or faster than their victims, and the potential anonymity the internet provides makes it possible for them to strike without fear of repercussions. Both the fact that the internet negates the need for a strength imbalance between bully and victim and the fact that cyber-bullies can remain anonymous if they so choose can help to positively reinforce cyber-bullying(Barlett & Gentile, 2012).
The General Learning Model (GLM; Gentile et al., 2009) proposes that continued experiences with a stimulus leads to the formation of attitudes, and learning is more likely to occur when a behavior is positively reinforced
and positive attitudes about it are endorsed. Cyber-bullying is repetitive in nature. It is not just a single
attack on an individual, but a repeated victimization that takes place over time. The more an individual is
involved with cyber-bullying, the more likely the behavior is to be repeated and reinforced. Raskauskas and Stoltz
(2007), surveyed adolescents on their involvement in cyber-bullying. Some of the reasons provided by the adolescents they surveyed that reported themselves as engaging in aggressive online behavior were because
cyber-bullying was fun, they did it to get back at someone, and because they were bored. Other studies have
indicated that cyber-bullying is related to popularity (Barlett & Gentile, 2012; Katzer et al., 2009)
Research suggests that cyber-bullies are motivated by many of the same things that influence traditional bullies. Hostility, depression, drug use, and family problems may all play a role in the perpetuation of internet aggression. However, because cyber-bullying takes place on an entirely different frontier, other factors also play a role in predicting cyber-bullying behavior. The anonymity the internet provides and the general lack of supervision
or any kind of authority online gives cyber-bullies an avenue to unleash their aggression with little fear of consequences. When combined with the fact that the virtual world negates the need for physical strength, anyone can become a cyber-bully.
Culprits
Most of the research conducted on cyber-bullying has relied on predominantly Caucasian participants and has been more concerned with gender rather than racial differences (Low & Espelage, 2012). In addition some of the earlier studies on gender differences with regards to cyber-bullying have been conflicting. Williams and Guerra (2007), did not find any significant gender differences between males and females, while Wang et al. (2009) found that boys were more likely to be cyber-bullies than girls. Successive studies have seemed to indicate that there are few differences between males and females when it comes to cyber-bullying (Barlett & Gentile, 2012; Jackson & Cohen, 2012). However, this in itself is interesting and indicates another way that cyber-bullying differs from traditional bullying. It would seem that cyber-bullying is an equal opportunity employer and that girls are just as
likely as boys to engage in hostile online behavior.
In a rare longitudinal study designed to address both racial and gender commonalities involved with cyber-bullying, Low and Espelage (2012), did find some interesting trends. They found that African American adolescents engaged in higher levels of cyber-bullying than White adolescents at wave one, but maintained less stability in cyber-bullying than white adolescents when retested a year later. They also found that bullying behavior was correlated with feelings of depression among African American males and feelings of hostility among White males. They also found that cyber-bullying remained the most stable among White females, which may indicate that they view cyber-bullying as a more acceptable behavior over time than any of the other groups.
Numerous studies have shown a correlation between traditional bullies and victims and cyber-bullies and cybervictims (Jackson & Cohen, 2012; Raskauskas & Stoltz, 2007). The roles individuals play in traditional bullying seem to transfer into the virtual world in that adolescents who are traditional bullies are more likely to be cyber-bullies and adolescents who are the victims of traditional bullying are more likely to be the victims of cyber-bullying. With regards to gender differences in cybervictimization, research suggests that girls are more likely to be the target of cyber-bullies and report more instances of internet aggression than boys, but this could be a result of cultural differences as other studies have indicated no differences in the rate of victimization among males and females (Ortega et al., 2009).