Risky Business

Englander, Elizabeth

doi:10.1016/j.chc.2017.11.010

Cited by 7 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 35 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…We know that virtually all adolescents have continuous access to, and almost continuously use, digital communications . Even among children as young as 8 years, research suggests that almost half carry cell phones . US youths spend many hours every day in front of screens .…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Back to the Drawing Board With Cyberbullying

Englander

2019

JAMA Pediatr

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The concept of bullying is a clinically useful one. When a patient reports that they are being bullied, a practitioner can assess the presence or absence of 3 welldefined criteria: intentional harm, repetitive acts, and a notable power imbalance. Bullying involves a repeated, malicious attack against a less powerful target who, because of this power differential, is unable to defend themselves. The repetitive nature of the attack means that not only must a target endure cruelty, they must also anticipate that it will continue, perhaps indefinitely. Certainly, any conflict that involves even 1 of these characteristics can still be quite harmful. An attack against a weaker peer, even if only committed once, can still cause great damage. A sustained and repeated fight between 2 friends of relatively equal power can certainly result in emotional and social harm. But when all 3 characteristics are present, the patient is significantly more likely to experience a series of negative outcomes, including trauma, social rejection, depression, anxiety, and academic problems. Children who experience chronic bullying are at higher risk for violence, including suicide. Careful screening and appropriate referrals to behavioral and mental health professionals can help avoid serious outcomes.The introduction of the term cyberbullying into this system has significantly complicated the clinical care of youths. First, while the degree of influence that digital technology exerts on modern children is undeniable, the nature of that influence is less clear. We know that virtually all adolescents have continuous access to, and almost continuously use, digital communications. 1 Even among children as young as 8 years, research suggests that almost half carry cell phones. 2 US youths spend many hours every day in front of screens. 3 But screen use is not a uniform activity. Sending photographs represents certain types of potential harm (eg, sending unauthorized nude photographs or embarrassing a peer in a silly photograph); posting content on social media is very different (eg, a user may rightly fear broad exposure). A threat might be sent through text messaging without any exposure to others; a false website or identity might impersonate another user. Screen use also displaces other activities, such as play or sleep, and the effect of that displacement is only now beginning to be studied. These issues all represent distinct and different types of digital problems.Sometimes these digital conflicts might be bullying; at other times they may not be. But while the word cyberbullying is often used to describe digital types of social cruelty, there is in fact no agreed-on definition for the word. 4 The term itself suggests the existence of the 3 characteristics outlined here, albeit in cyberspace. Kowalski et al 5 defined it in 2014 as "the use of electronic communications to bully others." 5 But problems with using the traditional concept of bullying in digital interac-VIEWPOINT

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Back to the Drawing Board With Cyberbullying

Englander

2019

JAMA Pediatr

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Although the definition of sexting varies, it refers to the sending, receiving, or forwarding of sexually explicit images, videos, or messages [2]. Sexting may represent a normal expression of sexuality among young people [3], with some researchers highlighting that sexting may be “the new first base” [4]. Despite this, it attracts concern from parents, teachers, policy makers, and organizations working with young people [5].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sexting, Web-Based Risks, and Safety in Two Representative National Samples of Young Australians: Prevalence, Perspectives, and Predictors

Milton¹,

Gill²,

Davenport³

et al. 2019

JMIR Ment Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background The rapid uptake of information and communication technology (ICT) over the past decade—particularly the smartphone—has coincided with large increases in sexting. All previous Australian studies examining the prevalence of sexting activities in young people have relied on convenience or self-selected samples. Concurrently, there have been recent calls to undertake more in-depth research on the relationship between mental health problems, suicidal thoughts and behaviors, and sexting. How sexters (including those who receive, send, and two-way sext) and nonsexters apply ICT safety skills warrants further research. Objective This study aimed to extend the Australian sexting literature by measuring (1) changes in the frequency of young people’s sexting activities from 2012 to 2014; (2) young people’s beliefs about sexting; (3) association of demographics, mental health and well-being items, and internet use with sexting; and (4) the relationship between sexting and ICT safety skills. Methods Computer-assisted telephone interviewing using random digit dialing was used in two Young and Well National Surveys conducted in 2012 and 2014. The participants included representative and random samples of 1400 young people aged 16 to 25 years. Results From 2012 to 2014, two-way sexting (2012: 521/1369, 38.06%; 2014: 591/1400, 42.21%; P=.03) and receiving sexts (2012: 375/1369, 27.39%; 2014: 433/1400, 30.93%; P<.001) increased significantly, not sexting (2012: 438/1369, 31.99%; 2014: 356/1400, 25.43%; P<.001) reduced significantly, whereas sending sexts (2012: n=35/1369, 2.56%; 2014: n=20/1400, 1.43%; P>.05) did not significantly change. In addition, two-way sexting and sending sexts were found to be associated with demographics (male, second language, and being in a relationship), mental health and well-being items (suicidal thoughts and behaviors and body image concerns), and ICT risks (cyberbullying others and late-night internet use). Receiving sexts was significantly associated with demographics (being male and not living with parents or guardians) and ICT risks (being cyberbullied and late-night internet use). Contrary to nonsexters, Pearson correlations demonstrated that all sexting groups (two-way, sending, and receiving) had a negative relationship with endorsing the ICT safety items relating to being careful when using the Web and not giving out personal details. Conclusions Our research demonstrates that most young Australians are sexting or exposed to sexting in some capacity. Sexting is associated with some negative health and well-being outcomes—specifically, sending sexts is linked to suicidal thoughts and behaviors, body image issues, and ICT safety risks, including cyberbullying and late-night internet use. Those who do sext are less likely to engage in many preventative ICT safety behaviors. How the community works in partnership with young people to address this needs to be a multifaceted approach, where sexting is positioned within a wider proactive conversation about gender, culture, psychosocial health, and respecting and caring for each other when on the Web.

show abstract

Sexting—Prevalence, Age, Sex, and Outcomes

Englander

McCoy

2018

JAMA Pediatr

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Sexting, an activity in which an individual uses digital technology to send nude or sexualized photos, videos, and/or text to peers, has demonstrated a unique ability to catalyze adult anxiety when children and adolescents engage in it. Yet there is not a great deal of research examining sexting, its prevalence, its causes, and its repercussions. A 2014 systematic review article by Klettke et al 1 found a few dozen studies, many with significant limitations. The article tentatively concluded that sexting appears to be neither universal nor rare and that age appears to be positively correlated with increased involvement in sexting at least through young adulthood. Importantly, prevalence reports were noted to be somewhat inconsistent. For example, estimates of the frequency of sexting ranged from 5% of the population 2 to 44% or more. 3 Most estimates ranged between 10% and 40% of the population with clustering between 12% and 25%. 1 The research on differences by sex was also unclear. The evidence that either males or females sext more frequently was too mixed in 2014 to permit firm conclusions. [4][5][6] In this issue of JAMA Pediatrics, Madigan et al 7 contribute to the field by conducting an updated meta-analysis of studies examining the prevalence of multiple kinds of sexting behaviors, and by comparing the ages, sexes, geographical locations, and method of sexting of study participants. Studies examined in this new review are limited to those with participants younger than 18 years and those that reported prevalence of sexting behaviors. A total of 39 studies with a total of 110 380 participants met these criteria and were included for analysis. Most studies examined sending or receiving a sext (N = 34 and 20, respectively); a few studies examined the prevalence of unauthorized distribution or forwarding of sexts (n = 5 and 4, respectively), as reported by recipient and sender.Overall, Madigan et al 7 found that the mean prevalence for sending sexts was 14.8% and the mean prevalence for receiving them was 27.4%. This suggests that the conclusions of Klettke et al 1 about prevalence were generally accurate. The review by Madigan et al also similarly concludes that older adolescents are more likely to sext; that prevalence appears to be increasing over time; and that much more sexting occurs on mobile devices than computers. Mean prevalence of distributing a sext without consent was 12%, and 8.4% of participants reported that a sext that they had produced had been distributed without their authorization. The article correctly points out, however, that research on nonconsensual sexting is lacking and that more studies need to be conducted to examine attitudes, motivations, and consequences of sexting.

show abstract

Risky Business

Cited by 7 publications

References 35 publications

Back to the Drawing Board With Cyberbullying

Back to the Drawing Board With Cyberbullying

Sexting, Web-Based Risks, and Safety in Two Representative National Samples of Young Australians: Prevalence, Perspectives, and Predictors

Sexting—Prevalence, Age, Sex, and Outcomes

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About