Longitudinal predictors of cyberbullying perpetration: Evidence from Korean middle school students

Cyberbullying, Aggressiveness, and Emotional Intelligence in Adolescence

“…Therefore, in the total sample, the data confirm an increased probability of being either a victim, aggressor or victim-aggressor as the physical aggressiveness and anger increase, thus maintaining hypothesis 1 of this study. The data corroborate past studies that suggest that student aggressiveness may be a risk factor for being an aggressor [17][18][19][20][21], victim [22][23][24][25][26][27][28] or aggressive victim of cyberbullying [29,30]. Garaigordobil [47], using a sample of 3026 students aged between 12 and 18, found that adolescents with high antisocial behavior scores were significantly more involved in situations of bullying and cyberbullying in all of their roles (victims, aggressors, aggressive victims, and observers) and used more aggressive strategies as interpersonal conflict resolution techniques.…”

“…Aggressive adolescents attempt to demonstrate their power by dominating their classmates through force or intimidation, in this case, using technological resources to do so. In this sense, You and Lim [21], using logistic regression, found associations between high levels of aggressiveness and an increased probability of engaging in cyberbullying. The authors used a sample of 3449 adolescents, aged 12 to 14.…”

“…Numerous studies have found that anger and hostility are the most relevant predictors of cyberbullying during adolescence [14]. Therefore, past research has shown that aggressiveness is one of the personal characteristics having the closest relationship with school violence, indicating that it is a major predictor of traditional forms of bullying [15,16] and cyberbullying [17][18][19][20][21], especially with respect to aggressors. Aggressive adolescents attempt to demonstrate their power by dominating their classmates through force or intimidation, in this case, using technological resources to do so.…”

From risk factors to detection and intervention: a practical proposal for future work on cyberbullying

“…There is a lack of research on the bully-victim group (persons being bullied and also bullying others) whilst a potential causal link is alarming and warrants further investigation (Does bullied person become a bully and under what conditions?). For example, in their survey research, You and Lim (2016) found that previous offline bullying and victim experiences were associated with more cyberbullying. Similarly, Mishna et al (2012) argued that the cyberspace offers easy venue for -revenge‖ or -payback‖ with high prevalence of bully-victim behavior (26%) in a sample of 2186 participants (Mishna et al, 2012).…”

“…In an overview of research on the types of cyberbullies (also cyberbullying perpetrators or predators), Kyriacou and Zuin (2016) identified five main categories, taking into account the psychological attributes (both personal and social) that underpin their behavior: the sociable cyberbully (cyberbullying for fun in order to entertain his/her friends without serious consideration of the victim's feelings); the lonely cyberbully (a relatively isolated cyberbully with no friends, spends his/her time by abusing others with whom s/he has little or no personal contact); the narcissistic cyberbully (a cyberbully demonstrating power by administering harm to another person); the sadistic cyberbully (a cyberbully enjoying causing distress, harm and suffering to another person); and the morally-driven cyberbully (a cyberbully feeling the victim is receiving justice for his/her actions). Additionally, in a survey research, Korean, You and Lim (2016) used a sample of 3449 middle school students and demonstrated a set of variables associated with more cyberbullying perpetration, particularly longer use of the Internet, more previous bullying and victim experiences, a higher aggression level, and lack of self-control.…”