Effects of the cyberbullying prevention program media heroes (Medienhelden) on traditional bullying

Abstract

There is considerable debate over whether cyberbullying is just another form of bullying, or whether it is a problem distinct enough to require specific intervention. One way to explore this issue is to analyze whether programs designed to prevent traditional bullying help prevent cyberbullying, and whether programs designed to prevent cyberbullying prevent traditional bullying. The main goal of the current study was to analyze the spillover effects of the cyberbullying prevention program Media Heroes (Medienhelden) on traditional bullying. Media Heroes promotes empathy, knowledge of risks and consequences, and strategies that allow bystanders to defend victims from cyberbullying. Mixed ANOVAs were conducted comparing pretest and post-test (6 months after intervention) measures of 722 students (ages 11-17) assigned to a long (15 sessions) intervention, a short (1 day) intervention, and a control group. In addition to confirming the previously reported effects on cyberbullying, Media Heroes was found to reduce traditional bullying. Effects were larger for the long-version of the program than for the short 1-day version. No effects were found on victimization by either cyberbullying or traditional bullying. Strategies to complement traditional and cyberbullying prevention efforts are discussed. Aggr. Behav. 42:157-165, 2016. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Cyberbullying: A narrative review

“…However, the effects were only short-term. In a program called Media Heroes 722 students were assigned to a long intervention (15 sessions) or a short program (1 day) [56]. The program was designed to give bystanders strategies to defend victims from being cyberbullied by promoting empathy and knowledge of risks and consequences of cyberbullying.…”

The efficacy of the Friendly Attac serious digital game to promote prosocial bystander behavior in cyberbullying among young adolescents: A cluster-randomized controlled trial

“…Systematic reviews on bullying interventions showed that to date few programs existed that target cyberbullying (Cantone et al, 2015;Mishna, Cook, Saini, Wu, & MacFadden, 2011;Van Cleemput et al, 2013), and that effects were often limited to increasing Internet safety knowledge (Mishna et al, 2011). Since these reviews, however, several new intervention and prevention studies against cyberbullying among adolescents have been published (Chaux, Velasquez, Schultze-Krumbholz, & Scheithauer, 2016;Cross et al, 2016;Del Rey, Casas, & Ortega, 2016;Gradinger, Yanagida, Strohmeier, & Spiel, 2016;Palladino, Nocentini, & Menesini, 2016;Schultze-Krumbholz, Schultze, Zagorscak, W€ olfer, & Scheithauer, 2016). All these studies showed significant reductions in cyberbullying involvement despite variations in design and focus.…”

“…All these studies showed significant reductions in cyberbullying involvement despite variations in design and focus. The design of these studied interventions varied from extensive school-based programs (Chaux et al, 2016; and whole-school programs (Cross et al, 2016;Del Rey et al, 2016;Gradinger et al, 2016) to peer-led education programs (Palladino et al, 2016). Some focused mainly on traditional bullying (Gradinger et al, 2016), others on cyberbullying (Chaux et al, 2016;Cross et al, 2016;Del Rey et al, 2016;, and some on both (Palladino et al, 2016).…”

“…The design of these studied interventions varied from extensive school-based programs (Chaux et al, 2016; and whole-school programs (Cross et al, 2016;Del Rey et al, 2016;Gradinger et al, 2016) to peer-led education programs (Palladino et al, 2016). Some focused mainly on traditional bullying (Gradinger et al, 2016), others on cyberbullying (Chaux et al, 2016;Cross et al, 2016;Del Rey et al, 2016;, and some on both (Palladino et al, 2016). Some research showed that effects of programs designed for traditional bullying extended to cyberbullying (Williford et al, 2013), and vice versa (Chaux et al, 2016), indicating some shared mechanisms between these phenomena.…”

“…Some focused mainly on traditional bullying (Gradinger et al, 2016), others on cyberbullying (Chaux et al, 2016;Cross et al, 2016;Del Rey et al, 2016;, and some on both (Palladino et al, 2016). Some research showed that effects of programs designed for traditional bullying extended to cyberbullying (Williford et al, 2013), and vice versa (Chaux et al, 2016), indicating some shared mechanisms between these phenomena. Only few cyberbullying interventions specifically targeted a change in the behavior of bystanders, who witnessed the cyberbullying incident (Palladino et al, 2016;Williford et al, 2013), despite the general agreement that cyberbullying is a social phenomenon and that bystanders can play an important role in encouraging or discouraging cyberbullying (Salmivalli, 2010;Slonje, Smith, & Fris en, 2013).…”