“…The majorities of the studies that have analyzed and compared traditional and cyber-victimization have based their conclusions about the similarities and differences between the two forms on the degree to which youth's scores in the different forms overlap (i.e., correlate) and, to a lesser extent, to what extent the correlates of traditional and cyber-victimization are the same (see Gini et al, 2018 for a meta-analysis). While this approach provides useful information, especially about the interindividual variations of the variables of interest (Molenaar & Campbell, 2009), authors in the field of peer victimization (e.g., Bradshaw, Waasdorp, & Brennan, 2013;Goldweber, Waasdorp, & Bradshaw, 2013), as well as of Internet use (e.g., Scott, Bay-Cheng, Prince, Nochajski, & Collins, 2017), are increasingly recommending the use of complementary approaches. It has been suggested, for example, that person-centered approaches enable researchers to capture "qualitatively different profiles of study variables that are not anchored on a linear or continuous scale" (Sturge-Apple, Davies, & Cummings, 2010, p. 1320, as is the case of different forms of victimization.…”