Technology-enabled Bullying & Adolescent Non-reporting Breaking the Silence

Justin Connolly1 and Regina Connolly2 1Dublin City University, Dublin 9, Dublin, Ireland 2Dublin City University, Business School, Dublin 9, Dublin, Ireland

Keywords: Information and Communication Technologies, Technology-enabled Bullying, Cyberbullying.

Abstract: Although early research has pointed to the fact that the successful intervention and resolution of cyberbullying incidents is to a large degree dependent on such incidents being reported to an adult caregiver, the literature consistently shows that adolescents who have been bullied tend not to inform others of their experiences. However, the reasons underlying reluctance to seek adult intervention remain undetermined. Understanding the factors that influence adolescent resistance will assist caregivers, teachers and those involved in the formulation of school anti-bullying policies in their attempts to counter the cyberbullying phenomenonre should be a space before of 12-point and after of 30-point.

1 INTRODUCTION harmful behavior. Direct cyberbullying involves repeatedly sending offensive messages. More The problem of adolescent bullying has evolved in indirect forms of cyberbullying include tandem with the digitization of society. Bullying is disseminating denigrating materials or sensitive a problem that transcends social boundaries and can personal information or impersonating someone to result in devastating psychological and emotional cause harm (p.10).’ trauma including low self-esteem, poor academic As can be seen from the above definitions, there performance, depression, and, in some cases, are important distinctions between cyberbullying violence and suicide. In its traditional context, it has and bullying. The first distinction relates to the been described as being characterized by the nature of the bullying. Traditional forms of bullying following three criteria: (1) It is aggressive behavior are usually direct and bullies are visible, while or intentional 'harm doing' (2) which is carried out cyberbullying can be anonymous and bullies in repeatedly and over time (3) in an interpersonal cyberspace do not have to be physically stronger or relationship characterized by an imbalance of power. bigger than cyber-victims. Second, bullying occurs One might add that the bullying behavior often often at a particular time and place, whereas occurs without apparent provocation," and "negative cyberbullying can happen anytime, anywhere actions can be carried out by physical contact, by including in the home. Third, cyberbullying can words, or in other ways, such as making faces or spread exponentially faster (e.g. copy and paste a mean gestures, and intentional exclusion from a message and send it around the world) than group (Olweus 1999, pp.10-11). traditional forms of bullying. Fourth, cyberbullying Cyberbullying, which is bullying conducted can be preserved easily (such as saving messages on through the medium of electronic communication a phone, memory stick, disk, etc). Fifth, bullies tools (such as email, mobile phone, social usually have poor relationships with teachers but it networking sites, Personal Digital Assistants, instant has been noted that cyberbullies can have good messaging tools and the World Wide Web) has been relationship with teachers (Ybarra & Mitchell, defined by Willard (2007) as ‘… being cruel to 2004). Finally, on the one hand, bullying commonly others by sending or posting harmful material or happens on school property; cyberbullying, on the engaging in other forms of social cruelty using the other hand, frequently occurs outside school Internet or other digital technologies, such as cell property which makes identifying and combating phones. Young people may be the target of such behaviour much more difficult. cyberbullying from others or may engage in such

Connolly J. and Connolly R.. 381 Technology-enabled Bullying & Adolescent Non-reporting - Breaking the Silence. DOI: 10.5220/0004943903810386 In Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Web Information Systems and Technologies (WEBIST-2014), pages 381-386 ISBN: 978-989-758-023-9 Copyright c 2014 SCITEPRESS (Science and Technology Publications, Lda.) WEBIST2014-InternationalConferenceonWebInformationSystemsandTechnologies

2 NON-REPORTING 3 RESEARCH INSIGHTS

Although even early research in this field (e.g. Despite the fact that many studies have found that Olweus, 1993) has pointed to the fact that the adolescents do not report their bullying or successful intervention and resolution of bullying cyberbullying experiences, there is a dearth of incidents is to a large degree dependent on such empirical work examining the reasons for same. incidents being reported to an adult caregiver, the Two studies deserve particular mention. The first is extant literature consistently shows that adolescents a quantitative study by Holfeld and Grabe (2012), who have been bullied tend not to inform others of which replicated earlier descriptive research on the their experiences (e.g. Petrosino et al., 2010; Black, prevalence of cyberbullying and examined why Weinles and Washington, 2010; Mishna and students do not report cyberbullying. Using a Alaggio, 2005; Naylor and Cowie, 1999; Charach, sample of 383 students from four middle schools in Pepler and Ziegler, 1995). For example, Ybarra et al a North American city (with average student age of (2006) found that 33% of victims of cyberbullying 13.5 years), and using a subset of self developed in their study did not tell anyone about the incident. measures to capture non-reporting (4 questions in More recent work by Petrosino et al. (2010) is of relation to own experience and 3 questions in particular importance given that their data collection relation to reporting of peer experiences) , they involved a nationally representative sample from found that 16% of students reported being American schools and was based on figures from the cyberbullied in the previous year and of those 62% National Crime Victimization Survey School Crime were cyberbullied at least once or twice in the last Supplement (2007), which showed that 64% of 30 days. Only 11% of students reported adolescents between the age of 12 and 18 did not cyberbullying others at least once in their lifetime report their experience. and 9% in the last year. Cell phone cyberbullying Smith, et al.’s (2006) study of 92 students across was the method used most frequently. As a key the UK found that almost one-third of students who point of that study concerns the reporting aspects of acknowledged being targetted by cyberbullies chose cyberbullying, the findings show that almost 30% of not to speak about their experience when it students who were cyberbullied in the past year did happened. This figure is close to the findings of the not report the incident. When asked to explain their NCH (2005) study, which revealed that 28% of reporting behaviour, 57% of the responses those targetted by cyberbullies chose to remain silent comprised they didn’t feel it was a big deal or they rather than seek help in resolving the problem. felt they could handle it on their own. 29% of Slonje and Smith (2008) state: ‘Cybervictims most students considered that reporting would make it often chose to either tell their friends or no one at all worse or were scared to tell. Whilst this study about the cyberbullying, so adults may not be aware provides an empirical attempt to understand the of cyberbullying’ (p.147). issue of non-reporting in more depth, Holfeld and Compounding the problem is the fact that Grabe’s work is limited in the sense that the number variation appears to exist between cultures. For of questions used to capture non-reporting comprises example, a cross-cultural comparative study by Li a small number of self developed measures that are (2008) showed that 9% of Canadian students not validated or tested for reliability and the study reported their cyberbully experience to adults and was purely quantitative in nature and not followed less than one-fifth of those aware of a cyberbullying up by in depth exploration of the issue. It is likely incident reported the issue to an adult. In that our understanding of the factors that influence comparison, 66% of Chinese students who adolescent non-reporting would benefit from a experienced cyberbullying informed an adult and triangulated approach to data collection. 60% of ‘bystanders’ reported the phenomenon to an A second study that has sought to bring greater adult (p.7). The reason for this significant difference clarity to this issue is that of De Lara (2012). Using in reporting behaviours between both countries and a qualitative approach, she studied the non-reporting cultures may result from a combination of problem in four schools (two rural and two urban) in sociological and philosophical reasons deeply the New York region. The sample comprised twelve ingrained in the respective cultures. focus groups (3 in each school, comprising 97 students) and 51 individual interviews (with some cross-participation between students being involved in both focus group and individual interview) of which 52% were female and 48% male adolescents.

382 Technology-enabledBullying&AdolescentNon-reporting-BreakingtheSilence

A significant finding of the research is that the Whilst the work of De Lara (2012) is valuable in reasons for non-reporting appear to be multifactorial that it represents an attempt to examine the issue of with the results indicating that the adolescents in this non-reporting, it was limited to four schools (2 urban sample did not report their experiences due to the and 2 rural) within the New York region, the sample ubiquitous nature of bullying; a sense of was small and therefore the generalisability of its helplessness; concerns over inappropriate adult findings remain uncertain. It is possible that local action; self-reliance; shame; parental omniscience; and cultural factors may have impacted the reasons and a different definition of bullying than adults use for non-reporting behaviour. However, whether this (De Lara, 2012: 288). is the case can only be determined by additional Interestingly, students in the research considered research on this issue in other and broader contexts. bullying to be the norm or something to be expected Further study in an Irish context would be whilst witnesses to such behaviour also perceived it particularly valuable not only in providing insight as a normal rite of passage in school. They were into this issue in relation to the factors that predict despondent about the potential for successful adult Irish adolescent non-reporting, but also as a intervention, as they feared that parental intervention comparative measure to establish the culture could make things worse or, at the other extreme, independence of these factors. that adults would not take the concern seriously enough. It was of particular concern that some reported being told by teachers to deal with the 4 THE IRISH CONTEXT problem themselves – an obvious flaw in the duty of care by individual teaching staff. When adolescents Despite awareness of a considerable number of seek help from an adult and the bullying continues adolescent deaths in Ireland that have been related to unabated despite reporting the issue, the research cyberbullying (most notably Lara Burns, Erin shows that they are likely to withdraw from Gallagher, Ciara Pugsley and Leanne Wolfe), communicating the issue further to the adult empirical research on this issue remains remarkably caregiver (DeLara, 2008; Garbarino & DeLara, limited. The death by suicide in America of another 2002). This confirms the findings of Petrosino et al. Irish adolescent, Phoebe Prince, brought worldwide (2010) and Pepler et al. (2008) whose research attention to the gravity of the problem but the factors shows that between 40-65% of adolescents never linking cyberbullying and death by suicide need report their experience of bullying to an adult. deeper research. An indirect finding of DeLara’s work that may Whilst there is a dearth of empirical research on also provide insight as to the reasons for non- cyberbullying in Ireland, concern about this issue is reporting relates to the interpretive difference that widespread and would appear to be justified. For adolescents and adults attribute to the term example, a joint Irish Independent and 'Prime Time “bullying”. For example, she found that many of the Investigates' survey (Irish Independent, 2008) of students in her sample, when asked to define students found that approximately 30% of students bullying, described it as: ‘when someone is mean to have endured all types of bullying at secondary me’ [italics mine]. However, ‘mean’ behaviour – is schools within a 3-month period of 2008. It also not reflected in current descriptions of bullying in found that 1 in 5 schoolgirls had experienced the literature. This difference in interpretation was cyberbullying as compared to 1 in 8 boys. The previously highlighted by Smith, Cowie, Olaffson, research data provided by the Anti-Bullying and Liefooge (2002) who found that adolescent Research and Resource Centre at Trinity College perception of what constitutes bullying could differ Dublin in 2008 revealed an unsettling picture of the remarkably from that of adults. For example, a growth in online and mobile phone intimidation student experiencing sexual harassment may not be among secondary school pupils and showed that aware that they are being bullied. It follows, children as young as 12 are being targeted through therefore, that if students’ understanding of bullying mobile phone calls, text messages, e-mails, internet differs from adult understanding, the chances of forums, chat rooms and social networking sites. reporting and intervening in such bullying behavior Recent research on the prevalence and nature of are reduced. This is of significance in implementing cyberbullying was conducted by Cotter and anti-bullying policies, educating students as to what McGilloway (2011) and comprised a sample of 122 constitutes ‘bullying’ and thereby encouraging them adolescents from two secondary schools in the South to come forward to relate their experiences to a of Ireland. The findings showed that although significant caregiver. cyberbullying within that sample appeared to be less

383 WEBIST2014-InternationalConferenceonWebInformationSystemsandTechnologies

prevalent than traditional bullying, the adolescents South of Ireland found that one quarter of victims concerned considered it to be worse than traditional did not confide in anybody. However, as only 25 bullying, with the exception of email. respondents answered the question about whether Whether individual factors such as age, gender, they would report their experience or not to another ethnicity, family cohesion (unity) or religious belief individual, a broader sample of respondents is influences cyberbullying remains undetermined. needed in order to have confidence that these results Equally, the influence of situational factors such as provide an accurate reflection of the general attendance at public or private school on adolescent response pattern in relation to reporting cyberbullying outcomes has not received adequate cyberbullying. attention. Understanding the influence of these The recently published HBSC report - 'Irish variables would contribute to parents and educators’ Health Behaviour in School-aged Children' (Kelly et insight into the problem and increase their ability to al, 2012) – found that statistically significant address it. (O’Higgins-Norman and Connolly, 2011). differences exist by gender and age group - with In order to understand the hesitance that predicts more boys reporting having being bullied compared adolescent non-reporting of bullying experiences, it to girls and younger children more likely to report is important that the views of those who experience ever being bullied as compared to older children. and witness such behaviour should be understood These findings are particularly concerning in light of and factored into any intervention or policy consistent evidence that girls tend to suffer more formulation processes. However as school policies cyberbullying experiences than boys and that are directed from government level and cyberbullying experiences tend to increase during implemented by individual school boards which are adolescence. Whilst valuable in that it highlights constituted by adults and therefore such policies are age and gender distinctions regarding the self- designed and implemented from an adult reporting of bullying experiences in general, the perspective. Therefore, in order to effectively HBSC measurement instrument does not provide the address the problem of bullying, it is imperative that level of granularity necessary to determine the research on this issue should consider the views of factors that are influencing adolescent resistance to the adolescents who actually experience the report their cyberbullying experiences. Similarly, behaviour. As DeLara (2012) states: whilst providing evidence of adolescent resistance to The preponderance of research on bullying tends report cyberbullying, O’ Moore and Minton’s (2011) to neither include the perceptions of students nor study does not provide insight as to the causal provide understanding about their reluctance to rely reasons for that resistance. The authors speculate on adults for intervention. Research has found that that the explanation for adolescent non-reporting students may not tell adults about bullying may be a perception of greater self-efficacy than experienced or witnessed despite repeated teacher efficacy in dealing with online problems or a encouragement and directives from adults (p.288). lack of confidence in the school’s abilities to deal with bullying (2011: 40). However, these are 4.1 Irish Non-reporting Behaviour merely speculations, they are not empirically derived and simply are the interpretation of the authors. In Ireland, the issue of non-reporting of Consequently, neither study progresses our cyberbullying behaviour was initially identified by understanding of the factors underlying Irish O' Moore & Minton (2011) who found that a distinct adolescents’ resistance to report cyberbullying contradiction exists between intent and actual experiences, nor provide insight as to whether practice in terms of Irish adolescents reporting their individual or situational characteristics influence that cyberbullying experiences to adults. For example, resistance. they reported that whilst 14.6% of pupils stated that As previously noted, adolescent resistance to they would inform an adult at school if they were reporting is equally prevalent in the traditional (face- cyberbullied, in reality, only 6% of these pupils had to-face) bullying context with evidence (Smith and actually reported their cyberbullying experience. Shu, 2000; Whitney and Smith, 1993) to show that Instead, the found that pupils were over twice as 30-50% of pupils do not inform a parent or teacher likely to do nothing at all, five times more likely to that they had been a target of bullies. The influence send an angry message back, and five times more of age on reporting behaviour is evident in Rigby likely to talk to a friend. and Slee’s (1993) study which found that whilst Recent research by Cotter and McGilloway approximately half of Australian students aged (2011) of 122 adolescents from 2 schools in the between 8 and 12 stated that they would like help

384 Technology-enabledBullying&AdolescentNon-reporting-BreakingtheSilence

prevent others being bullied, as they increased in Cornell D. and Brockenborough, K. (2004). Identification age, they became more reluctant to confide in or of bullies and victims: A comparison of methods. seek seeking adult intervention. However, the Journal of School Violence 3(2-3). reasons underlying adolescents’ reluctance to seek Cotter, P. and McGilloway, S. (2011). Living in an ‘Electronic Age’: Cyberbullying among Irish adult intervention or discuss the bullying Adolescents. The Irish Journal of Education 39 (44- experiences remain undetermined. Similarly, the 56). degree to which gender, age or other variables apply DeLara, E. (2008). Developing a philosophy about in the case of Irish adolescents’ resistance to report bullying and sexual harassment: Cognitive coping cyberbullying experiences has yet to be established. strategies among secondary school students. Journal of School Violence, 7, 72–96. DeLara, E., (2012): Why Adolescents Don't Disclose Incidents of Bullying and Harassment, Journal of 5 CONCLUSIONS School Violence, 11:4, 288-305. DES (Department of Education and Science), (n.d.). Anti- The literature on cyberbullying is embryonic and as bullying policy. a consequence many deficits exist in relation to our Available at: http://www.education.ie/en/Publications/ understanding of the phenomenon. A growing body Education-Reports/Action-Plan-On-Bullying- of evidence points to the fact that many adolescents 2013.pdf. who have been the target of cyberbullying behaviour Garbarino, J., & DeLara, E. (2002). And words can hurt forever: How to protect ado- lescents from bullying, choose to confide in peers rather than adult harassment, and emotional violence. New York, NY: caregivers or teachers, despite having previously Simon & Schuster /The Free Press. stated their intention to inform the latter should they Goodstein, A. (2007). Totally wired: What teens and themselves become the target of such behaviour. As tweens are really doing online. New York: St. a result, this behaviour remains unchecked and its Martin’s Griffin. impact unaddressed. The literature provides Holfeld, B. & Grabe, M. (2012). An examination of the evidence that this chasm between reporting intention history, prevalence, characteristics, and reporting of and actual behavioral outcome is consistent cyberbullying in the United States. In Q. Li, D. Cross regardless of national differences. Despite this fact, & P.K. Smith (Eds.). Cyberbullying in the global playground: Research from international perspectives. remarkably little attention has been paid to Blackwell. understanding the factors underlying this resistance Irish Independent (2008). 'Cyberbullying "widespread" but and the ensuring silence on the part of adolescents parents kept in the dark’ by Louise Hogan [Online]. regarding their experiences of cyberbullying. Such Available at: http://www.independent.ie/national- insights are necessary if parents, teachers and those news/cyber-bullying-widespread-but-parents-kept-in- involved in the formulation of anti-bullying school the-dark-1380630.html. policies are to be successful in their attempts to Juvonen, J., & Gross, E. (2008). Extending the school counter and eliminate cyberbullying behaviour. grounds? Bullying experiences in cyberspace. The Research on the factors underlying adolescent Journal of School Health, 78(9), pp. 496-505. Kelly, C., Gavin, A., Molcho, M. & Nic Gabhainn, S. resistance-to-report is therefore urgently mandated. (2012). The Irish Health Behaviours in School-aged Children (HBSC) study 2010.Dublin: Department of Health. REFERENCES Li, Q. (2008). A cross-cultural comparison of adolescents’ experience related to. cyberbullying. Educational Research Vol. 50, No. 3, Aftab, P. (2008). 'What methods work with the different September 2008, 223–234. kinds of cyberbullies?' [Online]. Available at: Li, Q. (2007). New bottle but old wine: A research on http://www.stopcyberbullying.org/educators/howdoyo cyberbullying in schools. Computers and Human uhandleacyberbully.html. Accessed December 29th Behaviour, 23(4), 1777-1791. 2013. Li, Q. (2006). Cyberbullying in Schools: A Research of Agatston, P. W., Kowalski, R. & Limber, S. (2007). Gender Differences. School Psychology International, Students' perspectives on cyber bullying. Journal of 27(2), 157-170. Adolescent Health, 41, 59-60. Naylor, P., & Cowie, H. (1999). The effectiveness of peer Black, S., Weinles, D. and Washington E. (2010). Victim support systems in challenging school bullying: The strategies to stop bullying. Youth Violence and perspectives and experiences of teachers and pupils. Juvenile Justice. 8(2), 138-147. Journal of Adolescence, 22, 467–479. Charach, A., Pepler, D., & Ziegler, S. (1995). Bullying at NCH (2005). Putting U in the picture – mobile phone school: A Canadian perspective. Education Canada bullying survey 2005. Available at: (Spring, 1995).

385 WEBIST2014-InternationalConferenceonWebInformationSystemsandTechnologies

http://www.nch.org.uk/uploads/documents/Mobile_bul Tannen, D. (2004). He Said, She Said: Gender, Language lying_%20report.pdf. and Communication. [Video]. Narrated by Deborah Olweus, D. (1993). Bullying at School: What we know Tannen. California: Modern Scholar. and what we can do. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing. Tannen, D. (1995). Talking from Nine to Five: Women Olweus, D. (1999). Sweden. In Smith, P.K., Morita, Y., and Men in the Workplace: Language, Sex and Power. Junger-Tas, J., Olweus, D., Catalano, R., Slee, P. New York: Harper Collins. (Eds.), The Nature of School Bullying: A cross- Tannen, D. (1991). You Just Don't Understand: Women cultural perspective. London: Routledge. and Men in Conversation. New York: Ballantine O’Higgins-Norman, J & Connolly, J. (2011). Mimetic Books. Theory and Scapegoating in the Age of Cyberbullying: Trach, J., et al. (2012). To Bully or Not to Bully, That Is The Case of Phoebe Prince. Pastoral Care in Not the Question: Western Australian Early Education: Vol.29: Issue 4. London: Routledge. Adolescents' in Search of a Reputation. Journal of O’Moore, A. M. & Minton, S. J. (2011). Cyber-Bullying: Adolescent Research July 1, 2012 27: 498-522. The Irish Experience. New York: Nova Science Trach, J. Hymel, S., Waterhouse, T., & Neale, K. (2010). Publishers, Inc. Age Differences in Bystander Responses to School Palfrey, J. & Gasser, U. (2008). Born Digital: Bullying: A Cross-Sectional Investigation. Canadian Understanding the First Generation of Digital Journal of School Psychology, 25 (1), 114-130. Natives. New York: Basic Books. Trolley B., Hanel C. and Shields L. (2006). Demystifying Pellegrini, A. and Bartini, M. (2000). A Longitudinal & Deescalating Cyber Bullying in the Schools: A Study of Bullying, Victimizatioin, and Peer Affiliation Resource Guide for Counselors, Educators & Parents. During The Transistion From Primary School To Book Locker, Bangor, ME. Middle School, American Educational Research Wall Street Journal (2007). Article: In Study, Facebook Journal 37(3): 699–725. Users Share with Stranger. August 14th. Pepler, D., Jiang, D., Craig, W., & Connolly, J. (2008). http://online.wsj.com/article/SB11870598778049. Developmental trajectories of bullying and associated Whitney, I. & Smith, P. K. (1993). A survey of the nature factors. Child Development, 79, 325–338. and extent of bullying in junior/middle and secondary Petrosino, A., Guckenburg, S., DeVoe, J., & Hanson, T. schools. Education Research, 35, 3-25. (2010). What characteristics of bullying, bullying Willard, N. (2007). Cyberbullying and cyberthreats: victims, and schools are associated with increased Responding to the challenge of online social reporting of bullying to school officials? (Issues & aggression, threats, and distress. Illinois: Research Answers Report, REL 2010, No. 092). Washington, Press. DC: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Ybarra, M. L., Mitchell, K. J., Wolak, J., Finkelhor, D. Education Sciences, National Center for Education (2006). Examining Characteristics and Associated Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Regional Distress Related to Internet Harassment: Findings Educational Laboratory Northeast and Islands. From the Second Youth Internet Safety Survey. Rigby, K. and Slee, P.T. (2008). Interventions to reduce Pediatrics 2006; 118;1169-1177. bullying, International Journal of Adolescent Medicine Ybarra, M., & Mitchell, K. (2004). Youth engaging in and Health, 20,165-183. online harassment: associations with caregiver-child Shariff, S. (2008). Cyberbullying: Issues and solutions for relationships, Internet use, and personal the school, the classroom and the home. New York: characteristics. Journal of Adolescence, 27(3), 319- Routledge. 336. Slonje, R. and Smith, P.K. (2008). Cyberbullying: Another main type of bullying? Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 49(2), pp. 147-154. Smith, P. K., Mahdavi, J., Carvalho, M., Fisher, S.,Russell, S., Tippett N. (2008). Cyberbullying: its nature and impact in secondary school pupils. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry 49:4 (2008), pp 376–385. Smith, P., et al. (2006). UK Report: An investigation into cyberbullying, its forms, awareness and impact, and the relationship between age and gender in cyberbullying. Research Brief No. RBX03-06. London: DfES. Smith, P. K. and Shu, S. (2000). 'What Good Schools Can Do About Bullying: findings from a survey in English schools after a decade of research and action', in 'Childhood', Vol 7 (2).

386