Cyberbullying has been described as a type of electronic bullying and has recently been subjected to intense media scrutiny largely due to a number of high profile and tragic cases of teen suicide. Despite the media attention relatively little is known about the nature of cyberbullying. This is, at least in part, due to a lack of theoretical and conceptual clarity and an examination of the similarities and differences between cyberbullying and face-to-face bullying. This paper reviews the limited theoretical and empirical literature addressing both cyberbullying and face-to-face bullying, using some specific examples from a qualitative study for illustration. We compare and contrast individual factors common to cyber and face-to-face bullying. We then examine social information processing factors associated with face-to-face bullying and present a discussion of the similarities and differences that may characterize cyberbullying.

BackgroundCyber-bullying (i.e., bullying via electronic means) has emerged as a new form of bullying that presents unique challenges to those victimised. Recent studies have demonstrated that there is a significant conceptual and practical overlap between both types of bullying such that most young people who are cyber-bullied also tend to be bullied by more traditional methods. Despite the overlap between traditional and cyber forms of bullying, it remains unclear if being a victim of cyber-bullying has the same negative consequences as being a victim of traditional bullying.MethodThe current study investigated associations between cyber versus traditional bullying and depressive symptoms in 374 and 1320 students from Switzerland and Australia respectively (52% female; Age: M = 13.8, SD = 1.0). All participants completed a bullying questionnaire (assessing perpetration and victimisation of traditional and cyber forms of bullying behaviour) in addition to scales on depressive symptoms.ResultsAcross both samples, traditional victims and bully-victims reported more depressive symptoms than bullies and non-involved children. Importantly, victims of cyber-bullying reported significantly higher levels of depressive symptoms, even when controlling for the involvement in traditional bullying/victimisation.ConclusionsOverall, cyber-victimisation emerged as an additional risk factor for depressive symptoms in adolescents involved in bullying.

The study of bullying behavior and its consequences for young people depends on valid and reliable measurement of bullying victimization and perpetration. Whilst numerous self-report bullying-related measures have been developed, robust evidence of their psychometric properties is scant and several limitations inhibit their applicability. The Forms of Bullying Scale (FBS), with versions to measure bullying victimization (FBS-V) and perpetration (FBS-P), was developed based on existing instruments, for use with 12-15 year old adolescents to economically yet comprehensively measure both bullying perpetration and victimization. Measurement properties were estimated. Scale validity was tested using data from two independent studies of 3,496 Grade 8 and 783 Grade 8-10 students respectively.Construct validity of scores on the FBS was shown in confirmatory factor analysis. The factor structure was not invariant across gender. Strong associations between the FBS-V and FBS-P and separate single item bullying items demonstrated adequate concurrent validity.Correlations, in directions as expected with social-emotional outcomes (i.e., depression, anxiety, conduct problems and peer support), provided robust evidence of convergent and discriminant validity. Responses to the FBS items were found to be valid and concurrently reliable measures of self-reported frequency of bullying victimization and perpetration, as well as being useful to measure involvement in the different forms of bullying behaviors.

BackgroundSchool climate has often been described as the “quality and character of school life”, including both social and physical aspects of the school, that can positively promote behaviour, school achievement, and the social and emotional development of students.MethodsThe current study examined the relationship between students’ mental and emotional wellbeing and factors pertaining to school climate, focussing on the domains of safety, social relationships and school connectedness, during the last year of their primary schooling (age 11–12 years) and their first 2 years of secondary school. Data was collected using a self-completion questionnaire, four times over 3 years from 1800 students’ aged 11–14 years. Multilevel modelling was used to determine the strongest school climate predictor of students’ mental and emotional wellbeing at each time point.ResultsIn the last year of primary school, peer support was the strongest protective predictor of wellbeing, while feeling less connected and less safe at school predicted mental wellbeing. Feeling safe at school was the strongest protective factor for student wellbeing in the first year of secondary school. In the second year of secondary school, peer support was the strongest protective factor for mental wellbeing, while feeling safe at school, feeling connected to school and having support from peers were predictive of emotional wellbeing.ConclusionsSchool climate factors of feeling safe at school, feeling connected to school, and peer support are all protective of mental and emotional wellbeing over the transition period while connectedness to teachers is protective of emotional wellbeing. Primary school appears to be an important time to establish quality connections to peers who have a powerful role in providing support for one another before the transition to secondary school. However, school policies and practices promoting safety and encouraging and enabling connectedness are important during the first years of secondary school.Recommendations for effective school policy and practice in both primary and secondary schools to help enhance the mental and emotional wellbeing of adolescents are discussed.