Abstract
AbstractThis study examined similarities and differences between adolescent involvement in cyberbullying and in-person violence from a socio-ecological perspective. It explored the associations between individual (gender, age, religiosity, and impulsivity), family (parental support, monitoring, and conflict), and contextual factors (commitment to school, affiliation with delinquent peers and exposure to community violence), on the one hand, and four types of violence: cyberbullying and three subtypes of in-person violence—severe and moderate physical violence and indirect violence—on the other. The sample included 3178 Arab students in grades 7–11 in Israel, who completed a structured survey. “In-person bullying” or face-to face violence was found to be significantly and positively associated with involvement in cyberbullying, and both bullying behaviors were found to share common predictors. Of the four types of violence, involvement in severe physical violence and cyberbullying and was the lower (28.4% and 14.1% and of students, respectively), with significantly higher rates for indirect and moderate violence (65.7% and 47.3%, respectively). The general trend found in the study was one of similarities between cyberbullying and in-person violence, especially of the severe physical type. We conclude that protecting youth against involvement in violent acts can be most effectively achieved by buffering the impact of situational and personal risk factors.
Funder
Israel Science Foundation
Hebrew University of Jerusalem
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference100 articles.
1. Abu-Baker, K. (2016). Gender policy in family and society among Palestinian citizens of Israel: Outside and inside influences. In E. Ben-Rafael, J. H. Shoeps, Y. Sternberg, & O. Glöckner (Eds.), Handbook of Israel: Major debates (pp. 453–474). De Gruyter.
2. Archer, J., & Coyne, J. C. (2005). Why are girls more socially aggressive than boys? An integrated review of indirect, relational, and social aggression. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 9(3), 212–230.
3. Arnarsson, A., Nygren, J., Nyholm, M., Torsheim, T., Augustine, L., Bjereld, Y., Markkanen, I., Schnohr, C. W., Rasmussen, M., Nielsen, L., & Bendtsen, P. (2020). Cyberbullying and traditional bullying among Nordic adolescents and their impact on life satisfaction. Scandinavian Journal of Public Health, 48(5), 502–510.
4. Asterhan, C. & Bouton, E. (2017). Secondary school peer-to-peer knowledge sharing through social network technologies. In B. K. Smith, M. Borge, E. Mercier, & K. Y. Lim (Eds.), Making a difference: prioritizing equity and access in CSCL, 12th International Conference on Computer Supported Collaborative Learning (CSCL), Volume 1. International Society of the Learning Sciences.
5. Benbenishty, R. (2003). School violence in Israel in 2001/2002: summary of findings. Hebrew University of Jerusalem (Hebrew).