Affective and Stress Consequences of Cyberbullying
<p>The modified Cyberball schematic diagram used during the private session. The ball is passed between the participant and the computerized participant (private–inclusion), or the computerized participant bounces the ball back to the wall (private–exclusion).</p> "> Figure 2
<p>Social exclusion study experimental tasks. Each session included 50 throws, and every throw took 1.5 s separated by 1 to 2 s between throws. After the end of each session, the participants self-assessed their feelings using the Positive and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS), Dundee Stress State Questionnaire (DSSQ), and Coping Inventory for Stressful Situations (CITS) questionnaires.</p> "> Figure 3
<p>Social exclusion study: Subjective responses, calculated as the magnitude of changes from baseline scores (condition score—baseline score). Error bars indicate the 95% confidence interval standard error. Emotional responses were measured as factors of positive affect and negative affect using PANAS. PA indicates positive affect; NA indicates negative affect. Social exclusion showed a significant increase in NA and a significant reduction in PA, in contrast to social inclusion.</p> "> Figure 4
<p>Social exclusion study: Subjective responses, calculated as the magnitude of changes from baseline scores (condition score—baseline score). Error bars indicate the 95% confidence interval standard error. Stress responses, comprising factors of engagement, distress, and worry. Stress response was measured by DSSQ-3. Social exclusion was reported as a significant increase in distress and a reduction in engagement, in contrast to social inclusion.</p> "> Figure 5
<p>Social exclusion study: Subjective responses, calculated as the magnitude of changes from baseline scores (condition score—baseline score). Error bars indicate the 95% confidence interval standard error. Coping responses were reported as task-focused coping, emotion-focused coping, and avoidance. Coping was measured with CITS. Social exclusion, compared with social inclusion, resulted in a significant increase in the emotion-focused coping and the avoidance dimensions. No significant main were observed for the task-focused coping dimension.</p> "> Figure 6
<p>Verbal harassment study: Illustration of the sequence sentences presentation. The critical word, as used in Otten, Mann, van Berkum, and Jonas [<a href="#B32-symmetry-12-01536" class="html-bibr">32</a>], is in bold.</p> "> Figure 7
<p>Verbal harassment experimental sequence. Each session includes 25 sentences. At the end of every sentence, a fixation screen was set to last between 1 and 2 s. After the end of every ten trials, a 30-s break was given. At the end of each session, the participant’s feelings were assessed with the PANAS, DSSQ, and CITS questionnaires.</p> "> Figure 8
<p>Verbal harassment study: subjective responses were calculated as the magnitude of changes from baseline scores (condition score—baseline score). Error bars indicate the 95% confidence interval standard error. Emotional responses were measured as factors of positive affect and negative affect with PANAS. PA indicates positive affect; NA indicates negative affect. Impolite comments induced a significant increase in NA and a reduction in PA, in contrast to complimentary comments</p> "> Figure 9
<p>Verbal harassment study: subjective responses were calculated as the magnitude of changes from baseline scores (condition score—baseline score). Error bars indicate the 95% confidence interval standard error. Stress responses comprised factors of engagement, distress and worry. Stress response was measured by DSSQ-3. Coping response comprised task-focused coping, emotion-focused coping, and avoidance. Coping was measured with CITS. Impolite comments, compared with complimentary comments, resulted in significantly reduced task-focused coping, increased emotion-focused coping, and increased avoidance.</p> "> Figure 10
<p>Verbal harassment study: subjective responses were calculated as the magnitude of changes from baseline scores (condition score—baseline score). Error bars indicate the 95% confidence interval standard error. Coping response comprised task-focused coping, emotion-focused coping, and avoidance. Coping was measured with CITS. Impolite comments, compared with complimentary comments, resulted in significantly reduced task-focused coping, increased emotion-focused coping, and increased avoidance.</p> "> Figure 11
<p>Subjective responses between negative social interactions (social exclusion vs. verbal harassment via impolite comments) in both experiments. Error bars indicate 95% confidence interval standard error. Emotional response was measured as positive affect and negative affect with PANAS. PA indicates positive affect; NA indicates negative affect. Verbal harassment via impolite comments showed a significant increase in NA.</p> "> Figure 12
<p>Subjective responses between negative social interactions (social exclusion vs. verbal harassment via impolite comments) in both experiments. Error bars indicate 95% confidence interval standard error. Stress responses comprised engagement, distress, and worry. Stress response was measured by DSSQ-3. Impolite comments induced a near-significant increase in the distress dimension, a significant increase in the worry dimension, and a significant increase in engagement, as compared with complimentary comments.</p> "> Figure 13
<p>Subjective responses between negative social interactions (social exclusion vs. verbal harassment via impolite comments) in both experiments. Error bars indicate 95% confidence interval standard error. Coping responses comprised task-focused coping, emotion-focused coping, and avoidance. Coping was measured with CITS. No significant main effect difference was observed between impolite comments and social exclusion for all coping responses.</p> ">
Abstract
:1. Introduction
1.1. Theoretical Background
1.2. Emotional Responses
1.3. Cyberbullying and Stress
1.4. Cyberbullying and Coping
1.5. Types of Cyberbullying
1.5.1. Social Exclusion
1.5.2. Verbal Harassment
1.6. The Current Study
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Participants
2.2. Subjective Measures
2.3. Data Analysis
2.4. Study 1: Cyberbullying through Social Exclusion
2.4.1. Research Variables
2.4.2. Experimental Stimuli
2.4.3. Experimental Procedure
2.4.4. Results
2.5. Study 2: Cyberbullying through Verbal Harassment
2.5.1. Research Variables
2.5.2. Experimental Stimuli
- The non-critical word should be computed as 187 ms + number of letters * 27 ms.
- The maximum word length is 10.
- The critical word and the subsequent word should be displayed at a fixed rate of 346 ms.
- Between each word, the screen should be blank for 106 ms.
- The final word should be extended to at least 293 ms.
- At least a 1000-ms pause should be specified until the next sentence begins.
- All sentences should be roughly equal in length.
2.5.3. Experimental Procedure
2.5.4. Results
2.6. Verbal Harassment through Impolite Comments vs. Social Exclusion
3. Discussion and Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
Ethics Statement
References
- Burk, F.L. Teasing and Bullying. Pedagog. Semin. 1897, 4, 336–371. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Olweus, D. Aggression in the Schools: Bullies and Whipping Boys; Hemisphere: Oxford, UK, 1978. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Farley, S.; Coyne, I.; Sprigg, C.; Axtell, C.; Subramanian, G. Exploring the impact of workplace cyberbullying on trainee doctors. Med. Educ. 2015, 49, 436–443. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Gardner, D.; O’Driscoll, M.; Cooper-Thomas, D.H.; Roche, M.; Bentley, T.; Catley, B.; Teo, T.S.; Trenberth, L. Predictors of Workplace Bullying and Cyber-Bullying in New Zealand. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2016, 13, 448. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Navarro, R.; Yubero, S.; Larrañaga, E. Cyberbullying Across the Globe: Gender, Family, and Mental Health; Springer Science + Business Media: New York, NY, USA, 2015. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Willard, N. Cyber Savvy: Embracing Digital Safety and Civility; Corwin: Thousand Oaks, CA, USA, 2011; p. 176. [Google Scholar]
- Servance, R.L. Cyberbullying, cyber-harassment, and the conflict between schools and the first amendment. Wisconsin Law Rev. 2003, 2003, 1213–1244. [Google Scholar]
- Hazelwood, S.D.; Koon-Magnin, S. Cyber stalking and cyber harassment legislation in the United States: A qualitative analysis. Int. J. Cyber Criminol. 2013, 7, 155–168. [Google Scholar]
- Moy, J. Beyond ‘the schoolhouse gates’ and into the virtual playground: Moderating student cyberbullying and cyberharassment after Morse v. Frederick. Hastings Const. Law Q. 2009, 37, 565–590. [Google Scholar]
- Berger, K. Update on bullying at school: Science forgotten? Dev. Rev. 2007, 27, 90–126. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gendreau, P.L.; Archer, J. Subtypes of Aggression in Humans and Animals. In Developmental Origins of Aggression; Tremblay, R.E., Hartup, W.W., Archer, J., Tremblay, R.E., Hartup, W.W., Archer, J., Eds.; Guilford Press: New York, NY, USA, 2005; pp. 25–46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Johnson, J.M. The impact of cyber bullying: A new type of relational aggression. In Proceedings of the American Counseling Association Annual Conference and Exposition, Charlotte, NC, USA, 19–23 March 2009. [Google Scholar]
- Menesini, E.; Nocentini, A.; Palladino, B.E.; Frisén, A.; Berne, S.; Ortega-Ruiz, R.; Calmaestra, J.; Scheithauer, H.; Schultze-Krumbholz, A.; Luik, P.; et al. Cyberbullying Definition Among Adolescents: A Comparison Across Six European Countries. Cyberpsychol. Behav. Soc. Netw. 2012, 15, 455–463. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Nowosad, I.; Miłkowska, G.; Bąbka, J.; Cernova, E.; Daniela, L.; Döbert, H.; Havigerova, J.M.; Kalnina, D.; Karikova, S.; Kobylecka, E. A Child in School Setting; Wydawnictwo Adam Marszałek: Torun, Poland, 2011. [Google Scholar]
- Slaninova, G.; Haviger, J.; Novotna, L.; Sochorova, P.; Vackova, M. Relationship between cyberbullying and readiness for aggressive behavior in middle adolescence. Procedia Soc. Behav. Sci. 2011, 29, 567–573. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Slonje, R.; Smith, P.K. Cyberbullying: Another main type of bullying? Scand. J. Psychol. 2008, 49, 147–154. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sticca, F.; Perren, S. Is Cyberbullying Worse than Traditional Bullying? Examining the Differential Roles of Medium, Publicity, and Anonymity for the Perceived Severity of Bullying. J. Youth Adolesc. 2013, 42, 739–750. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Li, Q. Bullying in the new playground: Research into cyberbullying and cyber victimisation. Australas. J. Educ. Technol. 2007, 23, 435–454. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dooley, J.; Shaw, T.; Cross, D. The association between the mental health and behavioural problems of students and their reactions to cyber-victimization. Eur. J. Dev. Psychol. 2012, 9, 275–289. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kowalski, R.M.; Giumetti, G.W.; Schroeder, A.N.; Lattanner, M.R. Bullying in the digital age: A critical review and meta-analysis of cyberbullying research among youth. Psychol. Bull. 2014, 140, 1073–1137. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Elgar, F.J.; Napoletano, A.; Saul, G.; Dirks, M.A.; Craig, W.; Poteat, V.P.; Holt, M.; Koenig, B.W. Cyberbullying victimization and mental health in adolescents and the moderating role of family dinners. JAMA Pediatrics 2014, 168, 1015–1022. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Wang, W.; Xie, X.; Wang, X.; Lei, L.; Hu, Q.; Jiang, S. Cyberbullying and depression among Chinese college students: A moderated mediation model of social anxiety and neuroticism. J. Affect. Disord. 2019, 256, 54–61. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nansel, T.R.; Craig, W.; Overpeck, M.D.; Saluja, G.; Ruan, W. Cross-national consistency in the relationship between bullying behaviors and psychosocial adjustment. Arch. Pediatrics Adolesc. Med. 2004, 158, 730–736. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Jawaid, A.; Riby, D.M.; Owens, J.; White, S.W.; Tarar, T.; Schulz, P.E. ‘Too withdrawn’ or ‘too friendly’: Considering social vulnerability in two neuro-developmental disorders. J. Intellect. Disabil. Res. 2012, 56, 335–350. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liorent, V.J.; Ortega-Ruiz, R.; Zych, I. Bullying and cyberbullying in minorities: Are they more vulnerable than the majority group? Front. Psychol. 2016, 7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Ybarra, M.L.; Mitchell, K.J. Prevalence and Frequency of Internet Harassment Instigation: Implications for Adolescent Health. J. Adolesc. Health 2007, 41, 189–195. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- König, A.; Gollwitzer, M.; Steffgen, G. Cyberbullying as an Act of Revenge? Aust. J. Guid. Couns. 2012, 20, 210–224. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ybarra, M.L.; Mitchell, K.J. Youth engaging in online harassment: Associations with caregiver–child relationships, Internet use, and personal characteristics. J. Adolesc. 2004, 27, 319–336. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Dooley, J.; Pyżalski, J.; Cross, D. Cyberbullying versus face-to-face bullying: A theoretical and conceptual review. Z. Für Psychol. J. Psychol. 2009, 217, 182–188. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Pieschl, S.; Kuhlmann, C.; Porsch, T. Beware of Publicity! Perceived Distress of Negative Cyber Incidents and Implications for Defining Cyberbullying. J. Sch. Violence 2015, 14, 111–132. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Vasquez, E.A.; William, P.C.; Brad, B.J.; Nicholas, K.J.D.; Miller, N. Lashing Out after Stewing over Public Insults: The Effects of Public Provocation, Provocation Intensity, and Rumination on Triggered Displaced Aggression. Aggress. Behav. 2013, 39, 13–29. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Otten, M.; Mann, L.; van Berkum, J.J.A.; Jonas, K.J. No laughing matter: How the presence of laughing witnesses changes the perception of insults. Soc. Neurosci. 2016, 12, 182–193. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Williams, K.D.; Cheung, C.K.; Choi, W. Cyberostracism: Effects of being ignored over the Internet. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 2000, 79, 748–762. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Young, E.L.; Nelson, D.A.; Hottle, A.B.; Warburton, B.; Young, B.K. Relational aggression in schools: Information for educators. East West Highw. Suite 2010, 402, 24. [Google Scholar]
- Williams, K.; Jarvis, B. Cyberball: A program for use in research on interpersonal ostracism and acceptance. Behav. Res. Methods 2006, 38, 174–180. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Faulkner, S.; Williams, K.; Sherman, B.; Williams, E. The “silent treatment”: Its incidence and impact. In Proceedings of the 69th Annual Meeting of the Midwestern Psychological Association, Chicago, IL, USA, 8–10 May 1997. [Google Scholar]
- Alhujailli, A.; Karwowski, W. Emotional and Stress Responses to Cyberbullying. In Proceedings of the Advances in Design for Inclusion, Orlando, FL, USA, 21–25 July 2018; pp. 33–43. [Google Scholar]
- Chan, H.C.; Wong, D.S.W. Traditional school bullying and cyberbullying in Chinese societies: Prevalence and a review of the whole-school intervention approach. Aggress. Violent Behav. 2015, 23, 98–108. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Guo, S. A Meta-Analysis of The Predictors of Cyberbullying Perpetration and Victimization. Psychol. Sch. 2016, 53, 432–453. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hartgerink, C.H.J.; van Beest, I.; Wicherts, J.M.; Williams, K.D. The Ordinal Effects of Ostracism: A Meta-Analysis of 120 Cyberball Studies. PLoS ONE 2015, 10, e0127002. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Romero-Canyas, R.; Downey, G. Rejection Sensitivity as a Predictor of Affective and Behavioral Responses to Interpersonal Stress: A Defensive Motivational System. In The Social Outcast: Ostracism, Social Exclusion, Rejection, and Bullying; Psychology Press: New York, NY, USA, 2005; pp. 131–154. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Reijntjes, A.; Stegge, H.; Meerum Terwogt, M. Children’s coping with peer rejection: The role of depressive symptoms, social competence, and gender. Infant Child Dev. 2006, 15, 89–107. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Steele, A.K. Facebook’s effect on emotional reactivity to in-lab peer feedback manipulations. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX, USA, 2016. [Google Scholar]
- Joseph, B.W.; Kyle, P.D.A. The Impacts of Emoticons on Message Interpretation in Computer-Mediated Communication. Soc. Sci. Comput. Rev. 2001, 19, 324–347. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kleinginna, P.R.; Kleinginna, A.M. A categorized list of emotion definitions, with suggestions for a consensual definition. Motiv. Emot. 1981, 5, 345–379. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Brave, S.; Nass, C. Emotion in human-computer interaction. In The Human-Computer Interaction Handbook, 1st ed.; Julie, A.J., Andrew, S., Eds.; L. Erlbaum Associates Inc.: Hillsdale, NJ, USA, 2003; pp. 81–96. [Google Scholar]
- Watson, D.; Clark, L.A. Negative affectivity: The disposition to experience aversive emotional states. Psychol. Bull. 1984, 96, 465–490. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Watson, D.; Clark, L.A.; Tellegen, A. Development and validation of brief measures of positive and negative affect: The PANAS scales. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 1988, 54, 1063–1070. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hinduja, S.; Patchin, J.W. Bullying, Cyberbullying, and Suicide. Arch. Suicide Res. 2010, 14, 206–221. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gemzøe Mikkelsen, E.; Einarsen, S. Relationships between exposure to bullying at work and psychological and psychosomatic health complaints: The role of state negative affectivity and generalized self–efficacy. Scand. J. Psychol. 2008, 43, 397–405. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- George, J.M. Trait and state affect. In Individual Differences and Behavior in Organizations; Murphy, K.R., Ed.; Jossey-Bass Publishers: San Francisco, CA, USA, 1996; Volume 1, pp. 145–171. [Google Scholar]
- Lazarus, R.S.; Folkman, S. Stress, Appraisal, and Coping; Springer: New York, NY, USA, 1984. [Google Scholar]
- Jang, H.; Song, J.; Kim, R. Does the offline bully-victimization influence cyberbullying behavior among youths? Application of General Strain Theory. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2014, 31, 85–93. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Völlink, T.; Bolman Catherine, A.W.; Dehue, F.; Jacobs Niels, C.L. Coping with Cyberbullying: Differences Between Victims, Bully-victims and Children not Involved in Bullying. J. Community Appl. Soc. Psychol. 2013, 23, 7–24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Williams, K.D.; Carter-Sowell, A.R. Marginalization through social ostracism: Effects of being ignored and excluded. In Coping with Minority Status: Responses to Exclusion and Inclusion; Cambridge University Press: New York, NY, USA, 2009; pp. 104–122. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Giumetti, G.W.; Hatfield, A.L.; Scisco, J.L.; Schroeder, A.N.; Muth, E.R.; Kowalski, R.M. What a rude e-mail! Examining the differential effects of incivility versus support on mood, energy, engagement, and performance in an online context. J. Occup. Health Psychol. 2013, 18, 297–309. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Szalma, J.L.; Hancock, P.A. Noise effects on human performance: A meta-analytic synthesis. Psychol. Bull. 2011, 137, 682–707. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Michelle, K.; Duffy, A.; Daniel, C.; Ganster, A.; Milan Pagon, A. Social Undermining in the Workplace. Acad. Manag. J. 2002. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mohr, G.; Wolfram, H.-J.; Mohr, G.; Wolfram, H.J. Stress among managers: The importance of dynamic tasks, predictability, and social support in unpredictable times. J. Occup. Health Psychol. 2010, 15, 167–179. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hancock, P.A.; Warm, J.S. A Dynamic Model of Stress and Sustained Attention. J. Hum. Perform. Extrem. Environ. 2003, 7, 15–28. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Matthews, G.; Szalma, J.; Panganiban, A.R.; Neubauer, C.; Warm, J.S. Profiling task stress with the Dundee stress state questionnaire. In Psychology of Stress: New Research; Leandro Cavalcanti, S.A., Ed.; Nova Science Pub. Inc.: Hauppauge, NY, USA, 2013; Volume 1, pp. 49–90. [Google Scholar]
- Hobfoll, S.E. The Influence of Culture, Community, and the Nested-Self in the Stress Process: Advancing Conservation of Resources Theory. Appl. Psychol. 2001, 50, 337–421. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Aldwin, C.M. Stress, Coping, and Development: An Integrative Perspective, 2nd ed.; Guilford Press: New York, NY, USA, 2007. [Google Scholar]
- Mariana, K.; Fernando, P.; Cristina, Q.; Pedro, S. Stress Appraisal, Coping, and Work Engagement among Police Recruits: An Exploratory Study. Psychol. Rep. 2014, 114, 635–646. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lazarus, R.S. Emotion and Adaptation; Oxford University Press: New York, NY, USA, 1991. [Google Scholar]
- Lazarus, R.S.; Folkman, S. Transactional theory and research on emotions and coping. Eur. J. Personal. 1987, 1, 141–169. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lodge, J.; Frydenberg, E. Cyber-Bullying in Australian Schools: Profiles of Adolescent Coping and Insights for School Practitioners. Aust. Educ. Dev. Psychol. 2007, 24, 45–58. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Raskauskas, J.; Huynh, A. The process of coping with cyberbullying: A systematic review. Aggress. Violent Behav. 2015, 23, 118–125. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Catterson, J.; Hunter, S.C. Cognitive mediators of the effect of peer victimization on loneliness. Br. J. Educ. Psychol. 2010, 80, 403–416. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Chan, H.C.; Wong, D.S.W. Coping with cyberbullying victimization: An exploratory study of Chinese adolescents in Hong Kong. Int. J. Law Crime Justice 2017, 50, 71–82. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Baumeister, R.F.; Leary, M.R. The need to belong: Desire for interpersonal attachments as a fundamental human motivation. Psychol. Bull. 1995, 117, 497–529. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- van Beest, I.; Williams, K.D. When inclusion costs and ostracism pays, ostracism still hurts. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 2006, 91, 918–928. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Williams, K.D. Ostracism. Annu. Review Psychol. 2007, 58, 425–452. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ruggieri, S.; Bendixen, M.; Gabriel, U.; Alsaker, F. Cyberball: The impact of ostracism on the well-being of early adolescents. Swiss J. Psychol. 2013, 72, 103–109. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Eisenberger, N.I. Identifying the Neural Correlates Underlying Social Pain: Implications for Developmental Processes. Hum. Dev. 2006, 49, 273–293. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Williams, K.D.; Govan, C.L.; Croker, V.; Tynan, D.; Cruickshank, M.; Lam, A. Investigations into differences between social- and cyberostracism. Group Dyn. Theory Res. Pract. 2002, 6, 65–77. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Karwoski, J.B.; Summers, R.W. Conflict, Aggression, and Cyberbullying. In Social Psychology: How Other People Influence Our Thoughts and Actions [2 Volumes]; Summers, R.W., Ed.; Greenwood: Santa Barbara, CA, USA, 2016; pp. 161–186. [Google Scholar]
- Raskauskas, J. Text-Bullying: Associations With Traditional Bullying and Depression Among New Zealand Adolescents. J. Sch. Violence 2009, 9, 74–97. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Coolidge, F.L.; DenBoer, J.W.; Segal, D.L. Personality and neuropsychological correlates of bullying behavior. Personal. Individ. Differ. 2004, 36, 1559–1569. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Otten, M.; Jonas, K.J. Humiliation as an intense emotional experience: Evidence from the electro-encephalogram. Soc. Neurosci. 2014, 9, 23–35. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gendron, M.; Barrett, L.F. Reconstructing the Past: A Century of Ideas About Emotion in Psychology. Emot. Rev. 2009, 1, 316–339. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Kern, D.M. The Evolution of Social Pain: Understanding the Neural Network of Social Ostracism through Electroencephalography; Honors Projects Illinois Wesleyan University: Bloomington, IL, USA, 2011. [Google Scholar]
- Kassner, M.P.; Wesselmann, E.D.; Law, A.T.; Williams, K.D. Virtually Ostracized: Studying Ostracism in Immersive Virtual Environments. Cyberpsychol. Behav. Soc. Netw. 2012, 15, 399–403. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Cohen, G.; Prinstein, M.J. Peer contagion of aggression and health risk behavior among adolescent males: An experimental investigation of effects on public conduct and private attitudes. Child Dev. 2006, 77, 967–983. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
- Whitaker, V. Frontal Lobe Theta Activity in Socially Ostracized Individuals: Understanding Social Ostracism through EEG; Honors Projects Illinois Wesleyan University: Bloomington, IL, USA, 2014. [Google Scholar]
- Gardner, W.L.; Pickett, C.L.; Brewer, M.B. Social Exclusion and Selective Memory: How the Need to belong Influences Memory for Social Events. Personal. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 2000, 26, 486–496. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wolf, W.; Levordashka, A.; Ruff, J.R.; Kraaijeveld, S.; Lueckmann, J.-M.; Williams, K.D. Ostracism Online: A social media ostracism paradigm. Behav. Res. Methods 2015, 47, 361–373. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tran, V. Positive Affect Negative Affect Scale (PANAS). In Encyclopedia of Behavioral Medicine; Gellman, M.D., Turner, J.R., Eds.; Springer: New York, NY, USA, 2013; pp. 1508–1509. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Matthews, G.; Joyner, L.; Gilliland, K.; Campbell, S.; Falconer, S.; Huggins, J. Validation of a comprehensive stress state questionnaire: Towards a state big three. Personal. Psychol. Eur. 1999, 7, 335–350. [Google Scholar]
- Matthews, G.; Emo, A.; Funke, G. A short version of the Dundee Stress State Questionnaire. In Proceedings of the Twelfth Meeting of the International Society for the Study of Individual Differences, Adelaide, Australia, July 2005. [Google Scholar]
- Matthews, G.; Campbell, S.E. Task-Induced Stress and Individual Differences in Coping. Proc. Hum. Factors Ergon. Soc. Annu. Meet. 1998, 42, 821–825. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zadro, L.; Williams, K.D.; Richardson, R. How low can you go? Ostracism by a computer is sufficient to lower self-reported levels of belonging, control, self-esteem, and meaningful existence. J. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 2004, 40, 560–567. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rosenthal, R.; Rosnow, R.L. Artifacts in Behavioral Research: Robert Rosenthal and Ralph L. Rosnow’s Classic Books; Oxford University Press: New York, NY, USA, 2009. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wellsby, M.; Siakaluk, P.; Pexman, P.; Owen, W. Some Insults are Easier to Detect: The Embodied Insult Detection Effect. Front. Psychol. 2009, 1. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Van Berkum, J.J.A.; Koornneef, A.W.; Otten, M.; Nieuwland, M.S. Establishing reference in language comprehension: An electrophysiological perspective. Brain Res. 2007, 1146, 158–171. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Siakaluk, P.D.; Pexman, P.M.; Dalrymple, H.-A.R.; Stearns, J.; Owen, W.J. Some insults are more difficult to ignore: The embodied insult Stroop effect. Lang. Cogn. Process. 2011, 26, 1266–1294. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Guillory, J.; Spiegel, J.; Drislane, M.; Weiss, B.; Donner, W.; Hancock, J. Upset now?: Emotion contagion in distributed groups. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Vancouver, BC, Canada, May 2011; pp. 745–748. [Google Scholar]
- Chung, C.; Pennebaker, J. The Psychological Functions of Function Words. In Social Communication; Fiedler, K., Fiedler, K., Eds.; Psychology Press: New York, NY, USA, 2007; pp. 343–359. [Google Scholar]
- Wayne, H.; Iain, C. Understanding individual experiences of cyberbullying encountered through work. Int. J. Organ. Theory Behav. 2014, 17, 163–192. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Wright, M.F. Youths and Cyberbullying: Description, Theories, and Recommendations. In Handbook of Research on Human Development in the Digital Age; Bryan, V., Musgrove, A., Powers, J., Eds.; IGI Global: Hershey, PA, USA, 2017. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Garaigordobil, M.; Machimbarrena, J.M. Victimization and perpetration of bullying/cyberbullying: Connections with emotional and behavioral problems and childhood stress. Psychosoc. Interv. 2019, 28, 67–73. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Veenstra, R.; Lindenberg, S.; Oldehinkel, A.J.; De Winter, A.F.; Verhulst, F.C.; Ormel, J. Bullying and Victimization in Elementary Schools: A Comparison of Bullies, Victims, Bully/Victims, and Uninvolved Preadolescents. Dev. Psychol. 2005, 41, 672–682. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Waisglass, N. The Lasting Effects of Cyber Bullying on Well-Being; Brescia University College: London, ON, Canada, 2017. [Google Scholar]
- Šléglová, V.; Cerna, A. Cyberbullying in adolescent victims: Perception and coping. Cyberpsychol. J. Psychosoc. Res. Cyberspace 2011, 5. [Google Scholar]
- Hampel, P.; Manhal, S.; Hayer, T. Direct and Relational Bullying Among Children and Adolescents: Coping and Psychological Adjustment. Sch. Psychol. Int. 2009, 30, 474–490. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Machackova, H.; Cerna, A.; Sevcikova, A.; Dedkova, L.; Daneback, K. Effectiveness of coping strategies for victims of cyberbullying. Cyberpsychol. J. Psychosoc. Res. Cyberspace 2013, 7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tokunaga, R.S. Following you home from school: A critical review and synthesis of research on cyberbullying victimization. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2010, 26, 277–287. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Agarwal Upasna, A.; Rai, A. Exploring bullying among Indian managers: A grounded theory approach. J. Asia Bus. Stud. 2019, 13, 588–611. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bulutlar, F.; Öz, E.Ü. The Effects of Ethical Climates on Bullying Behaviour in the Workplace. J. Bus. Ethics 2009, 86, 273–295. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cooper-Thomas, H.; Gardner, D.; O’Driscoll, M.; Catley, B.; Bentley, T.; Trenberth, L. Neutralizing workplace bullying: The buffering effects of contextual factors. J. Manag. Psychol. 2013, 28, 384–407. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Samnani, A.-K.; Singh, P.; Ezzedeen, S. Workplace bullying and employee performance: An attributional model. Organ. Psychol. Rev. 2013, 3, 337–359. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bauman, S.; Newman, M.L. Testing assumptions about cyberbullying: Perceived distress associated with acts of conventional and cyber bullying. Psychol. Violence 2013, 3, 27–38. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lewis, M. Self-Conscious Emotions. Am. Sci. 1995, 83, 68–78. [Google Scholar]
- Pieschl, S.; Porsch, T.; Kahl, T.; Klockenbusch, R. Relevant dimensions of cyberbullying—Results from two experimental studies. J. Appl. Dev. Psychol. 2013, 34, 241–252. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhou, H.; Peng, J.; Wang, D.; Kou, L.; Chen, F.; Ye, M.; Deng, Y.; Yan, J.; Liao, S. Mediating effect of coping styles on the association between psychological capital and psychological distress among Chinese nurses: A cross-sectional study. J. Psychiatr. Ment. Health Nurs. 2017, 24, 114–122. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Berne, S.; Frisén, A.; Oskarsson, J. High school students’ suggestions for supporting younger pupils counteract cyberbullying. Scand. J. Psychol. 2019. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Alhujailli, A.M. A Study of EEG Signatures Associated with Emotional and Stress Responses Due to Cyberbullying; University of Central Florida: Orlando, FL, USA, 2018. [Google Scholar]
Exclusion | Inclusion | |
---|---|---|
Positive affect | −10.54 ± 6.36 | −7.35 ± 6.8 |
Negative affect | 1.45 ± 2.27 | 0.00 ± 2.04 |
Engagement | −5.5 ± 5.32 | −3.78 ± 5.16 |
Distress | 2.66 ± 4.8 | 0.76 ± 5.04 |
Worry | −1.76 ± 6.94 | −2.26 ± 6.83 |
Task focus | −3.09 ± 3.73 | −2.56 ± 3.18 |
Emotion focus | −4.35 ± 6.72 | −5.44 ± 5.78 |
Avoidance | 0.11 ± 4.21 | −1.02 ± 3.67 |
Factor | Friedman’s Test |
---|---|
Positive Affect | (Fr = 9.143, p < 0.01) |
Negative affect | (Fr = 9.000, p < 0.01) |
Engagement | (Fr = 4.481, p < 0.034) |
Distress | (Fr = 9.966, p < 0.01) |
Worry | (Fr = 0.000, p = 1) |
Task focus | (Fr = 0.143, p = 0.705) |
Emotion focus | (Fr = 5.538, p < 0.05) |
Avoidance | (Fr = 3.522, p = 0.061) |
(1) | (2) | (3) | (4) | (5) | (6) | (7) | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Positive affect | 1 | ||||||
Negative affect | −0.375 ** | 1 | |||||
Engagement | 0.596 ** | −0.271 ** | 1 | ||||
Distress | −0.409 ** | 0.512 ** | −0.521 ** | 1 | |||
Worry | −0.015 | 0.199 * | −0.247 ** | 0.323 ** | 1 | ||
Task focus | 0.393 ** | 0 | 0.455 ** | −0.208 * | 0.124 | 1 | |
Emotion focus | −0.096 | 0.282 ** | −0.134 | 0.343 ** | 0.251 ** | 0.235 * | 1 |
Avoidance | −0.351 ** | 0.370 ** | −0.470 ** | 0.325 ** | 0.161 | −0.089 | 0.323 ** |
Mean | −8.94 | 0.72 | −4.64 | 1.71 | −2.01 | −2.82 | −4.89 |
SD | 7.232 | 2.535 | 5.876 | 5.375 | 7.243 | 4.066 | 6.48 |
Impoliteness | Complimentary | |
---|---|---|
Positive affect | −8.64 ± 7.38 | −3.94 ± 6.51 |
Negative affect | 2.57 ± 3.25 | −0.5 ± 1.9 |
Engagement | −2.8 ± 4.17 | −1.47 ± 4.32 |
Distress | 4.28 ± 6.23 | −0.4 ± 4.47 |
Worry | 0.44 ± 6.47 | 0.07 ± 6.74 |
Task focus | −2.49 ± 4.14 | −1.75 ± 3.67 |
Emotion focus | −3.83 ± 6.28 | −6.99 ± 6 |
Avoidance | 0.07 ± 3.52 | −2.19 ± 3.07 |
Factor | Friedman’s Test |
---|---|
Positive Affect | (Fr = 6.259, p < 0.05) |
Negative affect | (Fr = 16.333, p < 0.01) |
Engagement | (Fr = 3.000, p < 0.083) |
Distress | (Fr = 12.448, p < 0.01) |
Worry | (Fr = 0.571, p = 0.450) |
Task focus | (Fr = 3.240, p = 0.072) |
Emotion focus | (Fr = 13.500, p < 0.01) |
Avoidance | (Fr = 8.167, p < 0.01) |
(1) | (2) | (3) | (4) | (5) | (6) | (7) | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Positive affect | 1 | ||||||
Negative affect | −0.479 ** | 1 | |||||
Engagement | 0.701 ** | −0.354 ** | 1 | ||||
Distress | −0.729 ** | 0.647 ** | −0.620 ** | 1 | |||
Worry | −0.205 * | 0.115 | −0.345 ** | 0.328 ** | 1 | ||
Task focus | 0.395 ** | 0.008 | 0.449 ** | −0.324 ** | −0.273 ** | 1 | |
Emotion focus | −0.188 * | 0.212 * | −0.093 | 0.128 | −0.167 | 0.093 | 1 |
Avoidance | −0.266 ** | 0.471 ** | −0.338 ** | 0.403 ** | 0.042 | 0.009 | 0.462 ** |
Mean | −6.28 | 1.03 | −2.13 | 1.94 | 0.25 | −2.11 | −5.41 |
SD | 7.815 | 3.187 | 4.62 | 6.094 | 6.78 | 4.071 | 6.513 |
Social Exclusion | Impoliteness | |
---|---|---|
Positive affect | −10.54 ± 6.36 | −8.64 ± 7.38 |
Negative affect | 1.45 ± 2.27 | 2.57 ± 3.25 |
Engagement | −5.5 ± 5.32 | −2.8 ± 4.17 |
Distress | 2.66 ± 4.8 | 4.28 ± 6.23 |
Worry | −1.76 ± 6.94 | 0.44 ± 6.47 |
Task focus | −3.09 ± 3.73 | −2.49 ± 4.14 |
Emotion focus | −4.35 ± 6.72 | −3.83 ± 6.28 |
Avoidance | 0.11 ± 4.21 | 0.07 ± 3.52 |
Factor | Friedman’s Test |
---|---|
Positive Affect | (Fr = 1.286, p < 0.257) |
Negative Affect | (Fr = 3.240, p < 0.072) |
Engagement | (Fr = 8.333, p < 0.004) |
Distress | (Fr = 1.000, p = 0.317) |
Worry | (Fr = 7.000, p < 0.001) |
Task focus | (Fr = 3.571, p = 0.059) |
Emotion focus | (Fr = 0.143, p = 0.705) |
Avoidance | (Fr = 1.000, p = 0.317) |
© 2020 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Alhujailli, A.; Karwowski, W.; Wan, T.T.H.; Hancock, P. Affective and Stress Consequences of Cyberbullying. Symmetry 2020, 12, 1536. https://doi.org/10.3390/sym12091536
Alhujailli A, Karwowski W, Wan TTH, Hancock P. Affective and Stress Consequences of Cyberbullying. Symmetry. 2020; 12(9):1536. https://doi.org/10.3390/sym12091536
Chicago/Turabian StyleAlhujailli, Ashraf, Waldemar Karwowski, Thomas T.H. Wan, and Peter Hancock. 2020. "Affective and Stress Consequences of Cyberbullying" Symmetry 12, no. 9: 1536. https://doi.org/10.3390/sym12091536