Cyberbullying-Victimization, Acculturative Stress, and Depression Among International College Students

CYBERBULLYING-VICTIMIZATION, ACCULTURATIVE STRESS, AND DEPRESSION AMONG INTERNATIONAL COLLEGE STUDENTS

A dissertation submitted to the Kent State University College and Graduate School of Education, Health, and Human Services in partial fulfillment for the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy

Suleyman Akcil

August 2018

A dissertation written by

Suleyman Akcil

B.A., Marmara University, 2007

M.Ed., Kent State University, 2012

Ph.D., Kent State University, 2018

Approved by

______, Co-director, Doctoral Dissertation Committee Marty Jencius

______, Co-director, Doctoral Dissertation Committee John Steve Rainey

______, Member, Doctoral Dissertation Committee Jason Schenker

Accepted by ______, Director, School of Lifespan Development Mary Dellmann-Jenkins and Educational Sciences

______, Dean, College of Education, Health, and James C. Hannon Human Services

iii

AKCIL, SULEYMAN, Ph.D., August 2018 COUNSELOR EDUCATION AND SUPERVISION

CYBERBULLYING-VICTIMIZATION, ACCULTURATIVE STRESS, AND DEPRESSION AMONG INTERNATIONAL COLLEGE STUDENTS (125 pp.)

Co-Directors of Dissertation: Marty Jencius, Ph.D. John Steve Rainey, Ph.D.

The purpose of this study was to examine the relationship between cyberbullying-victimization, acculturative stress, and depression among international college students. The research questions guiding the analysis of this research were: (a)

Does cyberbullying-victimization predict acculturative stress? (b) Does cyberbullying-victimization have a direct effect on depression? (c) Does cyberbullying-victimization have an indirect effect on depression mediated by acculturative stress?

A total of 178 international college students participated in the study. The instrument data were analyzed using path analysis. Results suggested that cyberbullying-victimization significantly predicted acculturative stress among international college students. Results also suggested that cyberbullying-victimization had a direct effect on depression, as well as an indirect effect on depression mediated by acculturative stress.

The results are discussed in detail herein. Implications of the findings, as well as limitations of the study are presented. Recommendations of future research are also provided.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

There are so many people who have supported and encouraged me throughout this journey. Of the many people, my wife comes first as she has always stood by me with her unconditional support and endless encouragement. I, honestly, do not know whether there is a way that I can thank her. My precious children, Kaan and Lara, you two have no idea right now about what I have been doing, but I just want to let both of you know that this would have never been accomplished without you two. I love you two so much.

My dissertation advisors, Dr. Marty Jencius and Dr. Rainey, thank you so much for everything. I have always felt your support and encouragement throughout this process. You both have made me believe that I could finish this hard work. My outside member, Dr. Jason Schenker, thank you so much for your support, encouragement and tutoring about quantitative statistics.

I would also like to thank my father, my mother, my sisters, and my in-laws.

Thank you so much for your love, continued support, and patience. It has been a difficult

9 years, for all of us. We are finally coming back. Let’s open a new chapter in our lives.

A very special thank also goes to my friend Ilker Soyturk who have assisted me whenever I felt stuck, made himself available whenever I asked and provided invaluable feedback. I owe you one Hemşo. Shawn and Alma, you two are amazing. I feel so lucky that i met you guys. I will miss you both so much. Thanks for everything guys.

Finally, I would like thank to the Republic of Turkey, Ministry of National

Education for providing me the scholarship for my studies in the U.S. Without this scholarship, this dream would have never came true.

DEDICATION

Dedicated to my dear wife Fevziye,

my son Kaan Ege,

and my daughter Lara Aylin…

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ...... iv

DEDICATION ...... v

LIST OF FIGURES ...... ix

LIST OF TABLES ...... x

CHAPTER

I. INTRODUCTION AND LITERATURE REVIEW ...... 1 Purpose and Rationale...... 1 Research Questions ...... 3 Definition of Terms...... 3 Review of the Literature ...... 4 Technology Use ...... 5 Bullying ...... 6 Cyberbullying ...... 8 Types of Cyberbullying ...... 10 Traditional Bullying Versus Cyberbullying ...... 11 Prevalence of Cyberbullying ...... 12 Cyberbullying at the College Level ...... 14 Cyberbullying and Mental Health ...... 18 International Students and Mental Health ...... 20 Cyberbullying and International College Students ...... 21 Need for the Study ...... 22 Summary ...... 24

II. METHODOLOGY ...... 25 Research Questions ...... 25 Participants ...... 26 Procedure ...... 26 Instruments ...... 28 Acculturative Stress Scale for International Students (Sandhu & Asrabadi, 1994) ...... 28 Center for Epidemiological Studies-Depression Scale Short Form (Cole et al., 2004) ...... 30 Cyberbullying and Online Aggression Survey Instrument (Hinduja & Patchin, 2014) ...... 31 Demographic Data Form ...... 33 vi

Data Analysis ...... 33 Descriptive Statistics ...... 33 Factor Analysis ...... 34 Path Analysis ...... 35 Hypothesis One ...... 36 Hypothesis Two ...... 37 Hypothesis Three ...... 37 Summary ...... 37

III. RESULTS ...... 38 Descriptive Statistics ...... 39 Participants ...... 39 Gender and age ...... 40 Country of origin ...... 40 Grade level status, field of study and language...... 42 Cyberbullying Experiences ...... 43 In my lifetime, I have been cyberbullied ...... 44 In the last 30 days, I have been cyberbullied ...... 44 I have seen other people being cyberbullied ...... 45 Exploratory Factor Analyses...... 46 Exploratory Factory Analyses for Cyberbullying Victimization Subscale ...... 46 Exploratory Factor Analysis for Acculturative Stress Scale for International Students (ASSIS) ...... 49 Exploratory Factor Analysis for the CES-D Short Form...... 52 Path Analysis Results ...... 55 Summary ...... 60

IV. DISCUSSION ...... 61 Summary of the Current Study ...... 61 Interpretation of the Findings...... 62 Research Question 1 ...... 64 Research Question 2 ...... 65 Research Question 3 ...... 67 Implications...... 69 University Environment ...... 69 Acculturation ...... 69 Cyberbullying ...... 70 Counseling Field ...... 72 Acculturation ...... 72 Cyberbullying ...... 75 Limitations ...... 76 Recommendations for Future Research ...... 78 Conclusion ...... 80 vii

APPENDICES ...... 82 APPENDIX A. IRB APPROVAL ...... 83 APPENDIX B. RECRUITMENT EMAIL ...... 85 APPENDIX C. INFORMED CONSENT FORM ...... 87 APPENDIX D. PERMISSION TO USE THE ACCULTURATIVE STRESS SCALE FOR INTERNATIONAL STUDENTS ...... 91 APPENDIX E. ACCULTURATIVE STRESS SCALE FOR INTERNATIONAL STUDENTS ...... 94 APPENDIX F. PERMISSION TO USE THE CENTER FOR EPIDEMIOLOGICAL STUDIES-DEPRESSION SCALE SHORT FORM ...... 98 APPENDIX G. CENTER FOR EPIDEMIOLOGICAL STUDIES- DEPRESSION SCALE SHORT FORM ...... 101 APPENDIX H. PERMISSION TO USE CYBERBULLYING AND ONLINE AGGRESSION SURVEY INSTRUMENT ...... 103 APPENDIX I. CYBERBULLYING AND ONLINE AGGRESSION SURVEY INSTRUMENT ...... 106 APPENDIX J. DEMOGRAPHIC DATA FORM ...... 109

REFERENCES ...... 111

viii

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure Page

1. Path diagram of the variables ...... 36

2. Scree Plot ...... 47

3. Scree Plot ...... 49

4. Scree Plot ...... 54

5. Path analysis results ...... 56

LIST OF TABLES

Table Page

1. Gender and Age (N =178) ...... 40

2. Country of Origin (N =178) ...... 41

3. Grade Level Status, Field of Study, and Language (N =178) ...... 43

4. In my Lifetime, I Have Been Cyberbullied ...... 44

5. In the Last 30 Days, I Have Been Cyberbullied ...... 45

6. I Have Seen Other People Being Cyberbullied ...... 46

7. Principal Axis Factoring (PAF) With Direct Oblimin Rotation of the Cyberbullying Victimization Subscale (N =168) ...... 48

8. Descriptive Statistics for the Cyberbullying Victimization Scale (N =168) ...... 48

9. Principal Axis Factoring (PAF) of the ASSIS (N =137) ...... 50

10. Descriptive Statistics for the ASSIS (N =137) ...... 51

11. Principal Axis Factoring (PAF) with Direct Oblimin Rotation of the CES- D Short Form (N =164) ...... 53

12. Principal Axis Factoring (PAF) with Direct Oblimin Rotation of the CESD-SF (N =165) ...... 55

13. Descriptive Statistics for CESD-SF (N =165) ...... 55

14. Regression Weights ...... 57

15. Standardized Regression Weights ...... 57

16. Standardized Total Effects and Direct Effects of the Variables ...... 58

17. Standardized Indirect Effects ...... 60

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION AND LITERATURE REVIEW

Purpose and Rationale

Within the last decade, cyberbullying has become one of the hot topics receiving high level of attention by researchers not only in the United States, but all over the world.

The reason for this high level of attention to this subject is mainly the continuous advancements of technological tools and their link with mental health issues and increased suicide rates (Li, 2006; Schenk, Fremouw, & Keelan, 2013). To date, evidence has linked cyberbullying including but not limited to low self-esteem, depression, anxiety, and suicidal ideation (Hinduja & Patchin, 2010; Patchin & Hinduja, 2010;

Schenk & Fremouw, 2012; Schenk et al., 2013; Selkie, Kota, Chan, & Moreno, 2015; J.

A. Smith & Yoon, 2013).

Even though there is a high level of attention to this topic by researchers, the literature still remains limited. Over the past 10 years, most of the cyberbullying research has primarily focused on children and adolescents in K–12 (Crosslin & Crosslin 2014;

Hinduja & Patchin, 2015; J. A. Smith & Yoon, 2013; Walker, Sockman, & Koehn, 2011).

While there are some studies with college age students and young adults on this topic, there is no study so far specifically focusing on cyberbullying with international college students. Previous research has shown that 9% to 43% of the college age students experience cyberbullying (Akbulut & Eristi, 2011; Dilmac, 2009; Finn, 2004; Lindsay &

Krysik, 2012; Paullet & Pinchot, 2014; J. A. Smith & Yoon, 2013; Walker et al., 2011).

However, it is still not known whether the studies done with college students included

1 2 any international students and whether these numbers can reflect well enough the cyberbullying experiences of international students.

Considering the unique challenges related to adjustment and acculturative stress that international students face while adapting to the life in the U.S., their experiences with cyberbullying might be totally different than the native students of this country.

They may be involved with technological tools (e.g., smart phones, social media) more than their U.S. peers. Yet, one can assume that these students would engage more with the technology to communicate with their families and loved ones as well as to follow the latest news in their home countries. Thus, they might start to spend more time with technology than ever before since it is the easiest way to get connected with their home life. Nevertheless, spending more time with technology has some negative consequences as well. For instance, Li (2007), Aricak et al. (2008), and Hinduja and Patchin (2008) found positive correlations between cyberbullying and the amount of time spent with technological tools. Having no control mechanism to monitor or limit international college students’ involvement with technological tools may also increase their engagement in cyberbullying. Therefore, one can conclude that international students who spend more time with technology along with no monitoring are highly likely to experience cyberbullying as either a victim or offender. Additionally, since cyberbullying has positive association with mental health problems, international students who are the victims of cyberbullying may experience higher levels of mental health problems such as depression. Thus, the purpose of this study is to examine the

3 relationship between cyberbullying-victimization, acculturative stress, and depression among international college students.

Research Questions

The research questions guiding the analysis of this research were:

1. Does Cyberbullying-Victimization as measured by the Cyberbullying and

Online Aggression Survey Instrument (COASI) subscale predict the

Acculturative Stress as measured by Acculturative Stress Scale for

International Students (ASSIS)?

2. Does Cyberbullying-Victimization as measured by the Cyberbullying and

Online Aggression Survey Instrument (COASI) have a direct effect on

depression as measured by the Center for Epidemiological Studies-Depression

Scale Short Form (CESD-SF)?

3. Does Cyberbullying-Victimization as measured by the Cyberbullying and

Online Aggression Survey Instrument (COASI) have an indirect effect on

depression as measured by the Center for Epidemiological Studies-Depression

Scale Short Form (CESD-SF) mediated by Acculturative Stress as measured by

Acculturative Stress Scale for International Students (ASSIS)?

Definition of Terms

The following is a list of definitions that are central to this study:

Acculturative Stress. Acculturative stress is defined as “the psychological impact of adaptation to a new culture” (Smart & Smart, 1995)

Bullying/Traditional Bullying. Bullying is a repeated, aggressive, intentional harm towards others, which involves an imbalance of power (Olweus, 1993). Traditional bullying has three different types: verbal (using words to hurt others such as name calling), physical (using physical power to hurt others such as hitting), and relational (it is subtle and difficult to identify such as ignoring or exclusion; Coloroso, 2008).

Cyberbully/Offender. A cyberbully or offender is someone who uses technological tools to intentionally harass other people.

Cyberbullying. Cyberbullying is the “willful and repeated harm inflicted through the use of computers, cell phones, and other electronic devices” (Hinduja & Patchin,

2015).

Cybervictim. A cybervictim is someone who has been repeatedly harassed through technological tools.

International Student. Institute of International Education (2016) defined international student as “anyone studying at an institution of higher education in the

United States on a temporary visa that allows for academic coursework. These include primary holders of F (student) visas and J (exchange visitor) visas.”

Review of the Literature

This section investigates the existing body of literature related to cyberbullying with a specific focus on international college students in the United States. The section highlights scholarship including: (a) technology use, (b) bullying, (c) cyberbullying, (d) types of cyberbullying, (d) traditional bullying versus cyberbullying, (e) prevalence of cyberbullying, (e) cyberbullying in college level, (f) cyberbullying among international

5 students, (g) cyberbullying and mental health, and (h) international students and mental health. The review ends with the need for the study and a summary.

Technology Use

Technology is now an integral part of our lives. The unimaginable inventions and the rapid advancements in technology, especially within the last two decades, have made us more dependent on it (Hinduja & Patchin, 2015). The generation, especially those who were born and raised in the 21st century, probably cannot imagine living without technological devices such as Internet and cell-phones. Just like the invention of the telephone, revolutionizing interpersonal interaction in the 20th century, the new information technologies have changed and expanded the way we interact these days

(Hinduja & Patchin, 2015). Rather than face-to-face and telephone communication, most of the people now prefer to communicate and interact in an Internet-enabled world where instant reach is possible.

According to a recent data, there are more than 3.7 billion Internet users around the world meaning that around 40% of the world population has access to the Internet now (www.internetlivestats.com). Pew Research Center (PRC) has also been systematically tracking the Internet usage in the United States and the latest available data shows that 99% of the adults ages 18 to 29 use the Internet (PRC, 2016). On the other hand, 92% of teens between the ages 13 to 17 go online daily, with 24% using the

Internet “almost constantly.” Recent data also shows that nearly 75% of the same age group have or have access to smartphones, 87% of the same age group have or have access to a computer, 58% have or have access to a tablet, and 81% have or have access

6 to a game console (Lenhart, 2015). Additionally, 76% of teens use social media such as

Facebook, Instagram, snapchat, and so forth, and send and receive 30 messages a day through messaging apps or cell phones (Lenhart, 2015). The statistics above prove that technology is in our lives right now. This is particularly true for young people raised in this century. Hinduja and Patchin (2015) stated that these technologies are not just part of adolescents’ lives, “they are their lives” (p. 25). They live in a digital or online environment where almost everyone at their age group has access to technology. Being a part of this environment is crucial for them and any interruptions to access to their technology may cause several problems in their lives (Hinduja & Patchin, 2015).

Apart from several benefits of technology, including but not limited to fostering positive online interactions and healthy relationships, allowing instant information access, and extensive networking online for socialization, research, and projects, there are many negatives associated with it (Arslan, Savaser, Hallett, & Balci, 2012;

Phillips-Shyrock, 2014). One of the negative outcomes of maladaptive and inappropriate use of technology is cyberbullying. Since technology use is increasing among all ages, particularly among young people, the cyberbullying incidents will continue to increase with technology use (Hinduja & Patchin, 2011; Juvonen & Gross, 2008; Li, 2007).

Bullying

As cyberbullying is considered a type of bullying, a discussion on traditional bullying/bullying is warranted. Over the last 40 years, different researchers from different disciplines all around the world have studied bullying and reported that it is a significant problem not only in the United States but also countries in Europe and Asia as

7 well (P. K. Smith et al., 1999; Yilmaz, 2011). Although it has been proven that it is a problem among youth, research has also shown that it is also present among young adults and adults (Patchin & Hinduja, 2015; P. K. Smith & Brain, 2000). According to Bauman

(2011), the percentage of students in the U.S. who have been involved in school bullying in some way range from 20% to 30%. The more recent data from the National Crime

Victimization Survey in the U.S., which has been tracking bullying experiences of youth between the ages from 12 to 18 since 1989, shows that 20.8% of the students reported that they had been bullied at school (U.S. Department of Education, 2016). Although bullying percentages have been declining over the past 10 years, it is still a big problem as one out of every five students is being bullied in schools. To eliminate this problem in the U.S., each state has created its own laws against traditional bullying. According to

Bully Police USA (2017), as of March 2015, all 50 states have anti-bullying laws.

Scandinavian researcher Dan Olweus, who has been considered the leading figure in bullying research, defined bullying as a repeated, aggressive, and intentional harm towards others which involves an imbalance of power (Olweus, 1993). The experts in the

U.S. from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the Department of Education, and the Health Resources and Services Administration have also worked together and developed a uniform definition of bullying as follows:

Bullying is any unwanted aggressive behavior(s) by another youth or group of

youths who are not siblings or current dating partners that involves an observed or

perceived power imbalance and is repeated multiple times or is highly likely to be

repeated. Bullying may inflict harm or distress on the targeted youth including

physical, psychological, social, or educational harm. (Gladden, Vivolo-Kantor,

Hamburger, & Lumpkin, 2014, p. 7)

Intention to harm the victim physically, psychologically, or socially, repetition of the aggressive behavior over time, and unbalanced physical, mental, and/or social power between the bully and the victim are considered some of the important characteristics of bullying (Francisco, Veiga Simão, Ferreira, & Martins, 2015).

The existing literature also discusses three types of traditional bullying: physical, verbal, and relational (Bauman; 2011; Coloroso, 2008). Physical bullying is the most visible type of bullying that includes hitting, kicking, biting, pushing, slapping, and so forth. On the other hand, verbal bullying is considered the most common type of bullying, which involves using words to hurt someone such as threatening, name calling, teasing, and so forth (Coloroso, 2008). Finally, the relational bullying is seen as subtle and more popular among middle school girls than boys that includes ignoring, spreading rumors, and exclusion (Coloroso, 2008). While physical and verbal bullying are considered as direct bullying, relational bullying is considered as indirect bullying.

According to Zacchilli and Valerio (2011), cyberbullying has some of the qualities of both verbal and relational bullying as it can be hidden easily and aims to harm relationships.

Cyberbullying

Over the past decade, the relatively new term cyberbullying has become one of the well-known words that people hear and use in daily life. The rapid advancements in technology and the popular media’s broad attention, especially after several suicidal

9 incidents, have made the term become more popular day by day. Even though the literature on cyberbullying has been growing extensively since the beginning of the

2000s, there is still no consensus on the definition (Kowalski, Limber, & Agatston,

2008). Researchers who are interested in cyberbullying either attempt to create their own definitions based on their research or accept the ones that have been offered by the pioneers of this topic. Many of them also offered the definition of cyberbullying by deriving from the definitions of traditional bullying (Tokunaga, 2010). The definitional inconsistencies of the term, however, are seen as the biggest problem for the future of this topic as they create different measurement tools to assess cyberbullying, which cause misinformation and confusion (Patchin & Hinduja, 2012). Researchers state that an integrative definition of cyberbullying is needed for both conceptual and operational clarity (Tokunaga, 2010).

In order to eliminate the definitional inconsistencies, a few necessary elements

(technology, harm, willful, repetition) must be included when defining cyberbullying

(Patchin & Hinduja, 2015). First of all, cyberbullying involves technology making it different than traditional bullying. It could be any type of information and communication technology that enables people to bully on different platforms. Cell phones, gaming consoles, computers, tablets, and so forth, are some of the most used technologies in cyberbullying. Secondly, cyberbullying involves harm. The incident causes harm that negatively affects the victim of cyberbullying psychologically, emotionally, socially, and so forth. Cyberbullying is also willful, meaning that the incident is not accidental. It is intentional and deliberate to harm the victim. Finally, it is

10 repeated. It is not just one single incident. It happens on different platforms by different people several times.

The definitions below are some of the examples that were selected purposefully as they cover all the necessary elements for cyberbullying. Bill Belsey (2017), who has been credited in many articles as the first person to use and define cyberbullying, defined the term as “the use of information and communication technologies to support deliberate, repeated, and hostile behavior by an individual or group that is intended to harm others” (www.cyberbullying.ca). Tokunaga (2010) also suggested the following definition: “Cyberbullying is any behavior performed through electronic or digital media by individuals or groups that repeatedly communicates hostile or aggressive messages intended inflict harm or discomfort on others” (p. 278). Hinduja and Patchin (2015) offered a very simple but also a reasonably comprehensive definition of cyberbullying as

“willful and repeated harm inflicted through the use of computers, cell phones, and other electronic devices” (p. 11).

Types of Cyberbullying

Nancy Willard, the director of Embrace Civility in the Digital Age, is one of the very first authors to have written a book on the topic of cyberbullying. In her book, she identified seven types of cyberbullying: Flaming, harassment, denigration, impersonation, outing and trickery, exclusion, and cyberstalking (Willard, 2007).

Flaming: Flaming is a short argument or interaction that includes offensive, rude,

and vulgar language between individuals or groups in public communication

environments such as online forums, chat rooms, discussion boards etc.

Harassment: Harassment is a one-sided activity that involves repeated and

ongoing sending offensive messages through personal communication

channels (emails, instant messaging) or public communication environments

(social media) to an individual target.

Denigration: Denigration is sending harmful, untrue, or cruel information about a

person to others through technology with the aim of damaging the reputation

of that person or to interfere with friendships.

Impersonation: Impersonation is pretending to be another person and sending or

posting material to damage a person’s reputation or relationships.

Outing and Trickery: Outing is publicly sharing confidential, sensitive, or

embarrassing information or material about a person through technological

tools. Trickery is also a part of outing that involves tricking a person to

provide personal information or material then disseminate to others without

any consent.

Exclusion: Exclusion is a deliberate and intentional action that excludes someone

from an online group.

Cyberstalking: Cyberstalking is when someone repeatedly sends intimidating or

offensive messages that involve threats of harm or extortion.

Traditional Bullying Versus Cyberbullying

Although traditional bullying and cyberbullying have many things in common, cyberbullying has some distinct features separating it from traditional bullying.

According to the previous research, traditional bullying mostly occurs on school grounds

12 and victims of bullying feel safe when they are home (Kowalski et al., 2008; Olweus,

1993). On the other hand, due to the advancement of new technological devices, cyberbullying can occur anywhere including but not limited to home, schools, playgrounds, and so forth, at any time (Dilmac, 2009; Molluzzo & Lawler, 2012).

Although traditional bullying mostly requires face to face interaction between the victim and the bully, the victim of cyberbullying may never know who bullies him or her due to the anonymity of the person (Willard, 2007). The cyberbully can easily hide himself or herself from the victim and contact him or her by using anonymous email accounts, by using pseudonyms, or by creating fake social media accounts (Paullet & Pinchot, 2014).

Additionally, the attacks on the victim may go viral on different technological platforms and the viewers may become involved in the bullying unintentionally (Dilmac, 2009).

Finally, as opposed to traditional bullying where the bully is usually bigger and stronger than the victim of bullying, the cyberbully does not have to have physical traits to bully others. The proficiency in using technology may give the bully enough power to cyberbully others online (Hinduja & Patchin, 2015). Interestingly, the victim of cyberbullying, who might be good at using technology, may become a cyberbully and bully the perpetrator or others as well.

Prevalence of Cyberbullying

When the term “cyberbully” was first used in a 1995 New York Times article written by Molly O’Neill, many people probably did not imagine that the term would impact millions of young people around the world so quickly. Researchers, who are interested in cyberbullying, have now agreed on the fact that cyberbullying is a growing

13 problem especially among children and adolescents not only in the United States but all over the world. The ease of accessing technological tools such as computers and cell phones and using them inappropriately have made cyberbullying a growing problem beyond school borders.

The prevalence figures reported on cyberbullying, however, have produced a wide range of rates so far (Bauman, 2011; Hinduja & Patchin, 2015; P. K. Smith, 2015).

While some studies reported very low cyberbullying rates such as 4% to 5% victimization and 2.5% to 3.2% perpetration, some studies reported high rates such as

72% victimization and 44.1% perpetration (Hinduja & Patchin, 2015; Juvonen & Gross,

2008; Kowalski & Limber, 2007; Olweus, 2012). A systemic review of the articles that were published between 2003 and 2015 has also proved this wide range of prevalence rates among adolescents as victimization 3% to 72%; perpetration 1% to 41%; and overlapping perpetration and victimization 2.3% to 16.7% (Selkie, Fales, & Moreno,

2016). Additionally, Hinduja and Patchin (2015) also reviewed the published research from 2002 to 2013 and found similar results as 2.3% to 72% (mean: 20.8%) for victimization and 1.2% to 44.1% (mean: 14.3%) for perpetration. The average across these studies were found consistent with their own research over the last 10 years and they reported that at least one out of every five teens experienced cyberbullying and about one out of six teens has cyberbullied others (Hinduja & Patchin, 2015).

Although the average mean scores for both victimization and perpetration across studies are relatively high, the reasons for this wide range of rates between studies are still being discussed. According to P. K. Smith (2015) and Hinduja and Patchin (2015)

14 some of the reasons to explain this huge variation include but are not limited to the definition of cyberbullying (e.g., was one definition provided? Did it include all the necessary elements), the frequency cut-off used to define being a victim or perpetrator, the nature and the age of the sample, the time reference period used (last month, last year, lifetime), the measurement tool, the data collection (through interviews, web-based surveys, paper-based surveys, etc.), and emphasis on specific technology. In addition, the difference between perpetrators and victims in their eagerness to report cyberbullying is another reason for this variation (Aboujaoude, Savage, Starcevic, & Salame, 2015).

Researchers stated that cyberbullying victimization rates may be more reliable, as perpetrators may underreport their cyberbullying behavior (Aboujaoude et al., 2015).

However, they also stated that victims of cyberbullying may also underreport due to the fear of losing access to technology, fear of the bully, or fear of being perceived as weak

(Aboujaoude et al., 2015).

Cyberbullying at the College Level

Since most of the cyberbullying research in the literature was done with middle and high school age students, few data, including prevalence information, exist at the college level. Recent studies, however, have proved that cyberbullying is present among college students with the prevalence rates ranging from 9% to 43.3% (Akbulut & Eristi,

2011; Dilmac, 2009; Finn, 2004; Lindsay & Krysik, 2012; Paullet & Pinchot, 2014; J. A.

Smith & Yoon, 2013; Walker et al., 2011).

One of the earliest studies on cyberbullying was done with 339 undergraduate students and the results showed that approximately 10% to 15% of students reported

15 experiencing online harassment either from strangers, an acquaintance, or a significant other (Finn, 2004). Only 6.8% of the students who had experienced online harassment reported to someone and half of those were not satisfied with the outcome.

MacDonald and Roberts-Pittman (2010) also surveyed 439 college students

(71.9% female, 28.1% male, 81.7% White) and found that 38% of the students reported knowing someone who had been cyberbullied, 21.9% reported having been cyberbullied, and 8.6% reported being a cyberbully. Of the male students, 37.4% reported knowing someone who had been cyberbullied, 21.9% reported being cyberbullied, and 11.4% reported being a cyberbully. Of the female students, 38.5% reported knowing someone who had been cyberbullied, 22% reported being a victim, and 7.6% reported being a cyberbully.

Another study was conducted with 120 college students (70 female and 50 male) and the results showed that 54% of the participants reported knowing someone who had been cyberbullied (Walker et al., 2011). Interestingly, all male participants indicated that they knew someone who had been cyberbullied. Eleven percent of the participants reported experiencing cyberbullying at the university. Of the students who reported being bullied at the time of the survey, 57% were bullied less than four times, 29% were four to 10 times, 14% were cyberbullied more than 10 times. The study also revealed that 50% of the victims were cyberbullied by a classmate, 57% reported someone outside of the university, and 43% reported not knowing the cyberbully.

Molluzzo and Lawler (2012) did their study with 121 (58% female) undergraduate students. Nine percent of the students indicated that they are aware of

16 cyberbullying incidents at their university. Seven percent of the students reported that they had been cyberbullied at the university. Additionally, 20% of the students reported being a victim of cyberbullying outside the university. Ten percent of the respondents admitted that they had consciously been a perpetrator of cyberbullying.

In another study, Schenk et al. (2013) surveyed a total of 799 college students

(71.6% female, 28.4% male) with the age range of 18 to 24. Their study showed that 60

(7.5%) of the participants cyberbullied someone else at least four times. This group consisted of 34 (56%) females and 26 (43.3) males. The second group consisted of 19

(11 female [57.9%] and 8 male [43.3%]) individuals who had cyberbullied someone else at least four times and had also been a victim of cyberbullying himself or herself at least four different times.

Additionally, J. A. Smith and Yoon (2013) did their study in a Midwestern post-secondary institution where 276 (186, 67.4% female and 240 87% White) students participated in their online survey and 9 volunteered to be interviewed. Of the participants, 51.8% reported their cyberbullying experiences as follows: 10.1% stated they were cyberbullied by another student; 2.9% reported that they had been cyberbullied by an instructor; 2.2% stated they had cyberbullied another student; 1.1% reported cyberbullying an instructor; 27.5% reported being a witness of cyberbullying from one student to another; 5.1% stated they witnessed an instructor being cyberbullied by a student; 2.9% reported being a witness of an instructor cyberbullying a student.

Crosslin and Crosslin (2014) also conducted a study among college students (N =

286) at a Texas University and found that at least two types of victimization were

17 experienced by around 32.4% of the participants and 16% admitted cyberbullying others by engaging in at least two cyberbullying activities.

Paullet and Pinchot (2014) also examined the perceptions of 168 college students about cyberbullying. The study revealed that 9% of the students were being cyberbullied.

Of the victims of cyberbullying, 57% of the victims were female and 43% were male.

According to the results of the study, females were found more likely to be the victims of cyberbullying than males. Moreover, 37% of the victims indicated that the cyberbully was a friend, 31% reported a former girlfriend or boyfriend as the bully, 29% knew the bully from school, and 3% knew the bully from work. Although 54% of the victims had reported the cyberbullying incident or told someone about it, 46% did not take any action.

Only 37% of the students who reported the cyberbullying incident received help. Of the

168 students, 66% responded knowing someone who had been cyberbullied. When students were asked about their normal response after witnessing cyberbullying, 64% reported reading the post related to cyberbullying but did not participate, 22% reported standing up to the bully, 21% said they would report and help the victim, 18% reported leaving the online environment, and 2% admitted joining in on the cyberbullying. In addition, almost 50% of the students indicated that cyberbullying has become a normal part of life.

Zalaquett and Chatters (2014) surveyed 613 college students and used 604 (459 females and 149 males, 5 didn’t report gender) students’ surveys in their study. Of the participants, 31.3% indicated being a victim of cyberbullying during high school and

19% of them were the victims during college. Twenty eight percent reported having a

18 friend who had currently experienced cyberbullying. Thirty percent of the cyberbully victims reported cyberbullying was based on sexuality, 10% reported based on race/ethnicity, and 62% chose the “other” category. Forty four percent reported being cyberbullied by a fellow friend, 42% reported being reported by friends, 22.6% by a boyfriend or girlfriend, 22.6% by someone they do not know, 5.3% reported by a co-worker.

According to available research to date, cyberbullying is present among college students with considerably high rates. It is, however, still unknown whether students coming from different countries experience cyberbullying while studying in the U.S.

Thus, this research is mainly focusing on this specific population to find out whether cyberbullying is something with which these students experience.

Cyberbullying and Mental Health

According to the existing literature, victims of traditional bullying have more social, emotional, behavioral, and academic problems than those who are not being bullied (Glew, Fan, Katon, Rivara, & Kernic, 2005). Depression, anxiety, low self- esteem, and suicidal ideation are some of the consequences of traditional bullying

(Chapell, Hasselman, Kitchin, & Lomon, 2006; Kowalski & Limber, 2013; Olweus,

1993; Walker et al., 2011). Cyberbullying, on the other hand, may have equal or more consequences than traditional bullying due to the broader audience and power of the

Internet (Gilroy, 2013). Additionally, some types of cyberbullying can be more harmful and may have long-term effects for the victims, and therefore, the importance of the

19 incident must be considered within the context in which it occurs and among the conditions surrounding it (Hinduja & Patchin, 2010).

Hinduja and Patchin (2018) stated that feelings of anger, frustration, sadness, and embarrassment are some of the emotional responses of the victims of cyberbullying.

Beran and Li (2005) also indicated that feeling angry and crying are the most frequent reactions of the victims. As traditional bullying, cyberbullying has also been associated with several clinical symptomologies such as depression, anxiety, low self-esteem, poor concentration, helplessness, avoidance, somatic symptoms, and substance use (Fauman,

2008; Hinduja & Patchin, 2015; Juvonen & Gross, 2008; Kowalski & Limber, 2013;

Schenk & Fremouw, 2012; Sourander et al., 2010; Thomas, 2006; Ybarra, 2004; Ybarra,

Mitchell, Wolak, & Finkelhor, 2006).

Moreover, what makes cyberbullying more popular and receive high level of attention from media and society is its relationship with suicide. After several completed suicide incidents in recent years, researchers started to focus more on this relationship especially among youth. Hinduja and Patchin (2010) did a study with 1,963 middle school students and found that youth who experienced traditional or cyberbullying either as victim or perpetrator had more suicidal thoughts and were more likely to attempt suicide than others who had not been bullied or cyberbullied. The results of another research with 699 college students showed that victims of cyberbullying had more suicidal ideations, planning, and attempts than others (Schenk & Fremouw, 2012).

Finally, Schenk et al. (2013) found that cyberbullies and cyberbully/victims of college students had more suicidal tendencies than other students.

International Students and Mental Health

Since the U.S. has an abundance of universities to which to apply with different opportunities of high quality education, most of the students who decide to go abroad prefer to study in the United States. The Institute of International Education (2016) defined international student as “anyone studying at an institution of higher education in the United States on a temporary visa that allows for academic coursework. These include primary holders of F (student) visas and J (exchange visitor) visas.” According to the recent data, there are over a million international students in the U.S. enrolled at colleges and universities, making up only 5% of overall U.S. college enrollment (Institute of International Education, 2016). Even though the percentage seems small, these students contributed nearly $33 billion to the economy and supported over 400,000 jobs in the U.S. last year (NAFSA, 2016).

While the experience of coming to the United States to pursue their academic degrees is exciting, the transition to the U.S. life is not easy. According to Poyrazli,

Kavanaugh, Baker, and Al-Timimi (2004), international students experience academic, social, and emotional difficulties while they are adapting to the life in the U.S. Leong and Chou (2002) also estimated that 15% to 25% of all international students experience psychological and psychiatric problems in some ways. Although international students do not usually seek help regarding their mental health concerns due to several reasons such as cultural differences in beliefs about mental health, unfamiliarity with counseling services, stigma attached to it in their own culture, and a lack of information about available services, one of the top presenting concerns bringing them to the university

21 counseling centers is depression (Constantine, Okazaki, & Utsey, 2004; Mori, 2000;

Nilsson, Berkel, Flores, & Lucas, 2004; Yi, Lin, & Yuko, 2003). Several studies have proven that international students experience depression because of acculturative stress

(Constantine et al., 2004; Hovey, 1998, 2000). Relevant research has also shown that international students who come from non-Western countries experience more challenges than do their international peers from Western countries (Nilsson et al., 2004; Yeh &

Inose, 2003). Since Western countries such as Germany, France, Spain, and so forth, represent less than 10% of the total enrollment of international students, it is safe to say that most of the international students studying in the U.S. experience these challenges on higher levels. In fact, several studies have found that Asian, African, Middle Eastern, and Latino students experience higher levels of acculturative stress than their European peers (Poyrazli et al., 2004; Poyrazli, Thukral, & Duru, 2010; Yeh & Inose, 2003).

International students are also at risk of experiencing more psychological problems than their U.S. peers due to their acculturation process (Mori, 2000; Sandhu & Asrabadi,

1994). Overall, we may conclude that international students who come especially from non-western countries tend to experience higher levels of acculturative stress, which may result in experiencing higher levels of depression.

Cyberbullying and International College Students

As mentioned before there is no study in the literature so far regarding international students’ experiences with cyberbullying as either a victim or perpetrator.

In fact, only a few studies looked at whether cyberbullying has a relationship between ethnicity or race. The results of one study that was done with 613 college students

22 showed that Asian Americans experience cyberbullying four times or more frequently than African American, Hispanic American, or European American (Zalaquett &

Chatters, 2014). Another study with 4,400 middle and high school students also found that Hispanic students are more likely to be the victim of cyberbullying especially when they reported being cyberbullied in the last 30 days (Hinduja & Patchin, 2010). Wang,

Iannotti, and Nansel (2009) found similar results with a national study of 7,182 students from 6 to 10 grades. According to their data, Hispanic youth was also found more likely to be the victims of cyberbullying, and African Americans as the perpetrators of cyberbullying. Even though the literature is limited, these findings may suggest that the victims of cyberbullying are mostly the ones whose race, ethnicity, and culture are different than others. Therefore, we may conclude that international students who come from different countries and whose race, ethnicity, and culture are different than their

U.S. peers are more likely to experience cyberbullying.

Need for the Study

A study regarding this area with this specific population is required since the number of international college students in the U.S. has been growing each year consistently. According to the Institute of International Education (2016), there were

1,043,839 international students in the U.S. enrolled at colleges and universities. Even though the majority of these students come from China and India, students studying in the U.S. are from almost every country. As most of these students live thousands of miles away from their family and friends, they may find themselves engaging with technological tools (e.g., smart phones, emails, social networking websites) more than

23 their U.S. peers. In order to stay connected with their loved ones, they may start to spend more time with technology ever than before. Li (2007), Aricak et al. (2008) and Hinduja and Patchin (2008) have found positive correlations between being involved with cyberbullying and the amount of time spent with technological tools. Previous research has also argued that older adolescents are more likely to be involved in cyberbullying after they become more independent and their access to technological devices become less monitored (Schenk et al., 2013; Walrave & Heirman, 2011; Ybarra & Mitchell,

2004). Therefore, international college students’ involvement with technological tools along with less monitoring may increase their engagement in cyberbullying.

Negative outcomes of cyberbullying such as increased stress, decreased self-esteem, anxiety, depression, as well as suicide have been found among adolescents and young adults (Hinduja & Patchin, 2010; Patchin & Hinduja, 2010; Schenk et al.,

2013; Selkie et al., 2015; J. A. Smith & Yoon, 2013). International college students may also experience the negative consequences of cyberbullying in addition to other challenges during their acculturation process. Research has shown that international students experience academic, social, and emotional difficulties while adapting to life in the U.S. (Poyrazli et al., 2004). Even though studying in a different country is exciting for them, transition to this new life might not be as pleasant as it could be. The addition of cyberbullying on top of the challenges that are specific to international students may lead them to experience higher levels of depression. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to examine the relationship between cyberbullying-victimization, acculturative stress, and depression among international college students.

Summary

This chapter explained how cyberbullying is currently conceptualized in the literature. Definitions of bullying, cyberbullying, and their similarities and differences were explained. Additionally, prevalence of cyberbullying among different populations was presented. The connection between cyberbullying and mental health issues were also identified. Moreover, mental health problems of international students regarding their adaptation and acculturation to the U.S. life were emphasized. Finally, the significance of the study was discussed in detail. The following chapter elaborates on the methodology and research instruments utilized in this study.

CHAPTER II

METHODOLOGY

The methodology used to conduct this study is presented in this chapter. Research questions, participants, procedure, instruments, and data analysis used in this study are explained in detail.

Research Questions

The present study seeks to answer the following research questions:

1. Does Cyberbullying-Victimization as measured by the Cyberbullying and

Online Aggression Survey Instrument (COASI) subscale predict the

Acculturative Stress as measured by Acculturative Stress Scale for

International Students (ASSIS)?

2. Does Cyberbullying-Victimization as measured by the Cyberbullying and

Online Aggression Survey Instrument (COASI) have a direct effect on

depression as measured by the Center for Epidemiological Studies-Depression

Scale Short Form (CESD-SF)?

3. Does Cyberbullying-Victimization as measured by the Cyberbullying and

Online Aggression Survey Instrument (COASI) have an indirect effect on

depression as measured by the Center for Epidemiological Studies-Depression

Scale Short Form (CESD-SF) mediated by Acculturative Stress as measured by

Acculturative Stress Scale for International Students (ASSIS)?

25 26

Participants

The population of interest of this study included international college students enrolled in a university located in Northeast Ohio. The study involved only international undergraduate students with F-1 (self-support students) and J-1 (exchange students) visas. International graduate students and distance learners were excluded from the study. The students who chose to participate in the study had finished at least one semester in their academic programs. A total of 178 students participated in the study.

This sample included 91 female (51.1%) and 87 male (48.9%) college students.

Participants ranged in age between 18 and 25 years old and had a mean age of 21.26 (SD

= 2.006). The participants in the study were 22.5% college freshmen, 20.6% sophomores, 21.7% juniors, and 34.9% seniors.

Procedure

The Institutional Review Board (IRB) of the university approved the current study

(See Appendix A). The researcher then contacted the university’s Office of Global

Education to reach international college students on campus. The Office of Global

Education agreed to include the researcher’s recruitment email (See Appendix B) in their future International Student and Scholar Services’ (ISSS) weekly updates. Additionally, the researcher contacted the leaders of international student organizations (Association of

International Students in EHHS, Bangladesh Student Association at Kent State, Brazilian

Student Organization, Deutschlub Kent, International Student Council, Kent African

Student Association, Kent Indian Association, Kent State Korean Culture Club, KSU

International Women’s Group, Nepalese Student Association at Kent State University,

Omani Student Organization, Russian Club, Polski Club, Saudi Student Association,

Spanish and Latino Student Association) on campus and asked them to share the recruitment email with their members through their listservs.

The recruitment email received by international college students included a web link to the survey hosted by Qualtrics (www.kent.qualtrics.com). The first page of the web survey included an informed consent form (See Appendix C). The informed consent form noted the inclusion criteria to participate in the study as well as requiring the student to be at least 18 years of age and no more than 25 years of age. Participants were also notified that they could choose to skip any question that they did not wish to answer and they could withdraw from the study at any time without penalty or loss of benefits.

Participants had an opportunity to print out the informed consent prior to completing the survey. After reviewing the informed consent, participants were asked to click a box to indicate their consent. It was not possible to continue to the survey unless the agreement box was checked.

Participants who clicked on the box and agreed to be a part of the study were led to a survey which included the following instruments: Demographic Questionnaire,

Cyberbullying and Online Agression Survey Instrument (Hinduja & Patchin, 2015),

Center for Epidemiological Studies-Depression Scale Short Form (CES-D SF; Cole,

Rabin, Smith, & Kaufman, 2004) and Acculturative Stress Scale for International

Students (ASSIS; Sandhu & Asrabadi, 1994).

After finishing the survey, participants were offered the opportunity to enter into a drawing to win one of four $50 Visa gift cards as compensation for participating in the

28 study. Participants who were interested in participating in the raffle were led to a different survey created solely to collect the email addresses. At the end of the data collection, particapants’ email addresses were extracted to an Excel spreadsheet and the research bureau randomly selected four email addresses to receive one of four $50 Visa gift cards. Selected participants were notified through email with directions on how to access their gift cards. Selected participants also completed the Research Participant

Receipt 1 (RPR-1) form before receiving their gift cards. The RPR-1 forms were stored with the investigator’s research documents.

Instruments

For the purpose of this study, the following instruments were administered to the participants: Acculturative Stress Scale for International Students (ASSIS; Sandhu &

Asrabadi, 1994; See Appendix E), Center for Epidemiological Studies-Depression Scale

Short Form (CES-SF; Cole et al., 2004; See Appendix G), and Cyberbullying and Online

Agression Survey Instrument (Hinduja & Patchin, 2015; See Appendix I). Participants also competed the Demographic Questionnaire (See Appendix J) created specifically for this study.

Acculturative Stress Scale for International Students (Sandhu & Asrabadi, 1994)

Acculturative Stress Scale for International Students (ASSIS) was developed by

Sandhu and Asrabadi in 1994. The ASSIS is a 36 item scale designed to assess acculturative stress that international students might have experienced during their stay in a foreign country. The ASSIS consists of 7 subscales including Perceived Discrimination

(8 items), Homesickness (4 items), Perceived Hate (5 items), Fear (4 items), Stress Due

29 to Change/Culture Shock (3 items), Guilt (2 items), and Miscellaneous (10 items). Each item on this scale is rated on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to

5 (strongly agree). Sample items for each subscale include: Perceived Discrimination (“I am treated differently in social situations”), Homesickness (“Homesickness for my country bothers me”), Perceived Hate (“I feel rejected when others don’t appreciate my cultural values”), Fear (“I feel insecure here”), Stress Due to Change/Culture Shock (“I feel uncomfortable to adjust to new cultural values”), Guilt (“I feel guilty to leave family and friends behind”), Miscellaneous (“I feel nervous to communicate in English”). The sum of all items ranges from 36 to 180 with higher scores indicating increased levels of acculturative stress.

The reliability and validity of the ASSIS have been supported by numerous studies in the literature. The developers of the scale calculated the Cronbach’s coefficients alpha as .94 and Guttman split-half reliability as .96 for all the 36 items on the scale (Sandhu & Asrabadi, 1998). The validity of the scale was established by using factor analysis and the seven factors of the ASSIS accounted 69.7% of total population with alpha levels for each subscale as perceived discrimination (.90), homesickness (.89), perceived hate (.90), fear (.88), stress due to change (.79), guilt (.44), nonspecific (.84;

Sandhu & Asrabadi, 1998). Other studies have also found high internal consistency of the scale with the Cronbach coefficients alpha scores of .95 (Bai, 2016), .92 (Constantine et al., 2004), .94 (Poyrazli et al., 2010) .92 (Wei et al., 2007) and .94 (Yeh & Inose, 2003).

Constantine et al. (2004) used the ASSIS and the Center for Epidemiological

Studies-Depression Scale (CES-D) in their study to examine whether acculturative stress

30 is significantly predictive of depression among international college students. They found that the ASSIS was significantly corralated with the CES-D indicating that it assessed several dimensions or symptoms of depression. Therefore, construct validity of the ASSIS was supported by a positive association with depression (Constantine et al.,

2004). The validity of the ASSIS was also studied by Ansari (1996) and the researcher found a significant difference in acculturative stress between American and international students, F(7,96) = 5.59, p < .0001 (Sandhu & Asrabadi, 1998).

Center for Epidemiological Studies-Depression Scale Short Form (Cole et al., 2004)

The Center for Epidemiological Studies-Depression Scale (CES-D) was written and published by Radloff in 1977 in order to asses depressive symptomatolgy in the general population (Radloff, 1977). The CES-D is a public domain instrument and free to be used by researchers. The short form of the CESD (CESD-SF), which was developed by Cole and his colleagues in 2004, was used in this study. The CESD-SF was developed based on Rasch model and remained loyal to the original scale making no content changes. The short form of the scale is also free to use since the developers have no copyright claims on the instrument. Even though the CES-D has 20 items, the short form contains 10 of the 20 original self-report items. The items on the CESD-SF are rated on a four point Likert scale ranging from 0 point “rarely or none of the time (less than 1 day)” to 3 points “most or all of the time (5-7 days).” Sample items of the

CESD-SF include: “I felt my life had been a failure” and “I had trouble keeping my mind on what I was doing.” Two items on this short version of the scale were reverse coded and the total score of the items ranged from 0 to 30, with higher scores indicating higher

31 risk for depression (Cole et al., 2004). The CES-D has been reported to have good internal reliability across many studies (Cheung, Liu, & Yip, 2007; Cole et al., 2004;

Gryzwacz, Hovey, Seligman, Arcury, & Quandt, 2006; Rice, Ashby, & Slaney, 2007).

Cole et al. (2004) found the Cronbach’s coefficients alphas ranging from .75 (adult community residents) to .82 (college students; Cole et al., 2004). Gryzwacz et al. (2006) also stated that the CESD-SF was reliable in measuring depression with Cronbach’s coefficients alpha score of .719. Additionally, Cheung et al. (2007) stated that the

CESD-SF was reliable in detecting suicidal thoughts and suicidal attempts and found correlation coefficiant between the CESD-SF and Beck’s Hopelessnes Scale as r = .51.

Concurrent validity between the CESD-SF and the Beck Depression Inventory (BDI;

Beck, Ward, Mendelson, Mock, & Erbaugh, 1961) was also found to be high r = .74

(Cole et al., 2004).

Cyberbullying and Online Aggression Survey Instrument (Hinduja & Patchin,

2014)

The Cyberbullying and Online Agression Survey Instrument (COASI; Hinduja &

Patchin, 2015) was developed to assess individuals’ cyberbullying experiences as victims and perpetrators. The authors have continually refined the instrument since 2007 by collecting psychometric scores not only from their studies, but also from other researchers who have used their instrument (e.g., Phillips-Shyrock, 2014). The instrument consists of two subscales: Cyberbullying Victimization Scale and

Cyberbullying Offending Scale. The latest version of the instrument was released in 2014 and only the cyberbullying victimization subscale was used for the purposes of this study.

The definition of cyberbullying is provided at the beginning of the survey as

“Cyberbullying is when someone repeatedly harasses, mistreats, or makes fun of another person online or while using cell phones or other electronic devices” (Hinduja & Patchin,

2015, p. 241). The cyberbullying victimization subscale asks participants if they have been cyberbullied ever in their lifetime and whether or not it has happened to them in the past 30 days. Next, participants are asked if they have experienced any of the eight distinct behaviors over the past 30 days such as “Someone posted mean or hurtful comments about me online” and “Someone spreads rumors about me online.” The

Cyberbullying Victimization Scale also includes an item that asks about the online environments such as “Facebook” and “Twitter” that the participants have experienced cyberbullying in the last 30 days. The items on the instrument are rated on a five-point

Likert scale as follows: 0 Never, 1 Once, 2 A few times, 3 Several times, 4 Many times.

The total score of the items ranges from 0 to 36 for both subscales, with higher scores representing more experience as a victim of cyberbullying.

Since cyberbullying is a relatively new area of study, most of the researchers either create their own assessments to measure cyberbullying or use the ones that have been developed by the pioneers of the field. Even though COASI has been used in many studies, there is still limited research regarding its reliability and validity. According to

Hamburger, Basile, and Vivolo (2011), however, the instrument has shown strong construct validity and internal reliability across multiple studies. The COASI was pilot tested and refined in four studies between 2004 to 2007 and then utilized in seven studies from 2007 to 2015 with approximately 15.000 11- to 18-year-old students over 90

33 schools (Hinduja & Patchin, 2015). For the most recent six studies, the Cronbach’s coefficients alphas for Cyberbullying Victimization scale has ranged from .89 to .94 and the Cyberbullying Offending Scale has ranged from .94 to .97 (Hinduja & Patchin, 2015).

In order to establish construct validity, the owners of the scale have also used factor analysis (principal components extraction) and they found that all items loaded on one factor ranging from .749 to .949; Eigenvalue= 7.34 (Hinduja & Patchin, 2013).

Demographic Data Form

In order to assess participants’ characteristics, a brief questionnaire was developed for the current study. Demographic variables included age, gender, native country, language, participation in an English language program, reported college level status, major area of study, and number of years in the U.S.

Data Analysis

A quantitative methodology was utilized in this study. Descriptive analysis, factor analysis, and path analysis were utilized to analyze the data gathered from the participants. The following sections are the brief explanations of how the data wer4e analyzed in this study.

Descriptive Statistics

Descriptive statistics included the number of international students who took the survey, their ages, gender, country of origin, graduate level status, field of study, and language. The descriptive statistics in this study were analyzed by the researcher through the Statistical Package for the Social Science (SPSS).

Factor Analysis

Factor analysis is a statistical procedure assisting researchers to assess the psychometric characteristics of an instrument. It also helps researchers to determine the relationships between observed variables and whether these variables can be summarized in a small number of latent constructs and provide an indication of construct validity for tests (Thompson, 2004). Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) and Confirmatory Factor

Analysis (CFA) are the two types of factor analysis. Although all of the instruments that were used in this study, Cyberbullying-Victimization Subscale, Acculturative Stress

Scale for International Students, and the Center for Epidemiological Studies-Depression

Scale have already been tested for validity, it was decided to cross-validate them through the EFA. In order to conduct EFA, Principal Axis Factoring with Direct Obdimin was used to investigate the factor structure of the scales. Scree Plot Tests also helped the researcher determine the number of factors to extract. In this study, only factors with large eigenvalues were retained (eigenvalue > 1). Additionally, the Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin

(KMO) Measure of Sample Adequacy was examined for each scale. The KMO index ranged from 0 to 1, and scores equal or higher than .50 was considered acceptable

(Kaiser, 1974). The Bartlett’s Test Sphericity was also examined in each scale to see if the correlation matrix was not an identity matrix and the variables were factorable.

Finally, the internal consistency reliability for each scale was examined through

Cronbach’s Coefficient Alphas. The values of the Cronbach’s Alpha range from 0.00 to

1.00 with values closer to 1.00 indicating higher level of reliability (Cronbach, 1951).

The Cronbach’s Coefficient Alpha levels of each scale are explained under the results section.

Path Analysis

SPSS with Analysis of a Moment Structure (AMOS) was used to analyze the data collected from the participants. This specific software is specifically designed to perform structural equation modeling, path analysis, and confirmatory factor analysis. SPSS

AMOS allows researchers to create models to test hypotheses and confirm relationships among observed and unobserved variables (IBM, 2015). Path analysis was used in this study to show the relationship between variables and whether or not they effected each other directly or indirectly. SPSS AMOS enabled the researcher to analyze minimization history, standardized estimates, squared multiple correlations, and direct, indirect, and total effects of the data. The analyses were considered significant at a p value of .001 or lower.

Figure 1 was created by the researcher to represent the relationships between variables. In this figure, it was assumed that cyberbullying-victimization and acculturative stress were correlated with each other. In addition, both cyberbullying-victimization and acculturative stress were assumed to have causal effects on depression. It was also assumed that there are additional variables (e1) to have an effect on acculturative stress but to be uncorrelated with either cyberbullying-victimization or depression. Finally, it was also assumed that there are other variables (e2) to have an effect on depression but to be uncorrelated with either cyberbullying-victimization or acculturative stress.

Based on the research questions, three hypotheses were tested to aid in the investigation of cyberbullying victimization, acculturative stress, and depression among international college students.

Figure 1. Path diagram of the variables. CBV = Cyberbullying-Victimization, AS = Acculturative Stress, DP = Depression, e1 = unobserved variable 1, e2 = unobserved variable 2

Hypothesis One

Cyberbullying victimization as measured by the Cyberbullying and Online

Aggression Survey instrument (COASI) will be significantly positively predictive of

37 acculturative stress as measured by Acculturative Stress Scale for International Students

(ASSIS).

Hypothesis Two

Cyberbullying victimization as measured by the Cyberbullying and Online

Aggression Survey instrument (COASI) will have a direct effect on depression as measured by the Center for Epidemiological Studies-Depression Scale Short Form

(CESD-SF).

Hypothesis Three

Cyberbullying victimization as measured by the Cyberbullying and Online

Aggression Survey instrument (COASI) will have an indirect effect on depression as measure by the Center for Epidemiological Studies-Depression Scale Short Form

(CESD-SF) mediated by acculturative stress as measure by Acculturative Stress Scale for

International Students (ASSIS).

Summary

In this chapter the researcher outlined the methodology of the current study that examined whether cyberbullying and acculturative stress predict depression among international college students. The researcher used a quantitative research design to address the research questions. The chapter started by identifying the research questions and participants. Afterwards, the researcher discussed the methods, procedures, and the instruments in detail. Finally, the chapter ended with the data analysis. In Chapter 3, the findings of the current study are offered.

CHAPTER III

RESULTS

The specific methodology of this study was outlined in the previous chapter. This study investigated the relationship between cyberbullying-victimization as measured by the

Cyberbullying and Online Aggression Survey Instrument (COASI), acculturative stress as measured by Acculturative Stress Scale for International Students (ASSIS), and depression as measured by the Center for Epidemiological Studies-Depression Scale Short Form

(CES-D Short Form) among international college students.

The three research questions that guided this study are:

1. Does Cyberbullying-Victimization as measured by the Cyberbullying and

Online Aggression Survey Instrument (COASI) subscale predict the

Acculturative Stress as measured by Acculturative Stress Scale for International

Students (ASSIS)?

2. Does Cyberbullying-Victimization as measured by the Cyberbullying and

Online Aggression Survey Instrument (COASI) have direct effect on depression

as measured by the Center for Epidemiological Studies-Depression Scale Short

Form (CESD-SF)?

3. Does Cyberbullying-Victimization as measured by the Cyberbullying and

Online Aggression Survey Instrument (COASI) have indirect effect on

depression as measured by the Center for Epidemiological Studies-Depression

Scale Short Form (CESD-SF) mediated by Acculturative Stress as measured by

Acculturative Stress Scale for International Students (ASSIS)?

38 39

This chapter outlines the results of the investigation, which was divided into four sections. Section one includes the descriptive statistics for the study participants. Section two includes the results of the exploratory factor analysis. Section three includes the results of path analysis. Section four includes a summary of the findings.

Descriptive Statistics

Descriptive data of this study were presented in four categories. The first category of the data included participants’ age and gender. The second category included participants’ country of origin. The third category included grade level status, field of study, and language. Finally, the fourth category included participants’ cyberbullying experiences.

Participants

A total of 227 participants began the survey. Of the 227 participants, two responded “No” to the consent to participate question. Of the 227 participants, 23 responded “Yes” to the consent to participate question but left more than 50% of the questions unanswered. The responses from these 25 participants were eliminated from the final analysis. Additionally, data from two participants were removed from analyses as they stated that their country of origin was the United States. Furthermore, data from 22 participants were also removed from the analyses as they failed to meet the inclusion criteria of age. A total of 49 responses were excluded from the analyses, which left a final total of 178 participants.

Gender and age. The final sample consisted of 178 international college students. This sample included 91 female (51.1%) and 87 male (48.9%) individuals. In terms of age, participants ranged from 18 to 25 years with a mean of 21.26 (SD = 2.006).

Fifteen (8.4%) participants were 18 years old, 22 (12.4%) participants were 19 years old,

36 (20.2%) participants were 20 years old, 27 (15.2%) participants were 21 years old, 25

(14%) participants were 22 years old, 27 (15.2%) participants were 23 years old, 12 (6.7%) participants were 24 years old, and 14 (7.9%) participants were 25 years old. The results of this data can be found in Table 1.

Table 1

Gender and Age (N = 178)

Variable n %

Gender Male 87 48.9 Female 91 51.1

Age 18 15 8.4 19 22 12.4 20 36 20.2 21 27 15.2 22 25 14.0 23 27 15.2 24 12 6.7 25 14 7.9

Country of origin. Individuals who participated in this study came from 43 different countries (see Table 2). These countries include but are not limited to Albania,

Bermuda, Jamaica, Nepal, Turkey, Vietnam, and so forth. The most common four

Table 2

Country of Origin (N = 178)

Country n %

Albania 1 .6 Antigua and Barbuda 1 .6 Australia 1 .6 Austria 1 .6 Bangladesh 3 1.7 Bermuda 1 .6 Brazil 5 2.8 Burkina Faso 1 .6 China 27 15.2 Cyprus 1 .6 Egypt 2 1.1 Georgia 2 1.1 Ghana 2 1.1 Honduras 1 .6 Hong Kong 1 .6 India 23 12.9 Indonesia 3 1.7 Iran 2 1.1 Iraq 1 .6 Italy 1 .6 Jamaica 2 1.1 Japan 1 .6 Jordan 1 .6 Kuwait 2 1.1 Libya 1 .6 Malaysia 1 .6 Nepal 5 2.8 Nigeria 5 2.8 Oman 18 10.1 Poland 1 .6 Russia 1 .6 Saudi Arabia 42 23.6 South Korea 4 2.2 Spain 1 .6 Sudan 1 .6 Syria 1 .6 Taiwan 1 .6 Turkey 2 1.1 Venezuela 2 1.1 Vietnam 4 2.2 Yemen 1 .6 Zambia 1 .6

42 countries of origin included Saudi Arabia (23. 6%, n = 42), China (15.2%, n = 27), India

(12.9%, n = 23), Oman (10.1%, n = 18).

Grade level status, field of study and language. Of the participants, 34.3 (n =

61) reported being in their senior year of college. The remainder of the participants reported being: 22.5% (n = 40) freshmen, 20.2% (n = 36) sophomores, and 21.3% (n = 38) juniors. Additionally, most of the individuals who participated in this study reported that they study in Business and Management (27%, n = 48), followed by Engineering (10.7%, n

= 19), Health Professions (8.4%, n = 15), Computer and Information Services (8.4%, n =

15), Physical Sciences (7.3%, n = 13), Social Sciences (6.7%, n = 12), and Education

(3.4%, n = 6). Furthermore, 25.8% (n = 46) of the participants reported that they study in

“Other” fields such as Fashion Design, Pre-Med, Visual Communication Design, and so forth. Regarding learning English as a second language, 61.8% (n = 110) of the participants reported that they learned English as a second language in their native country.

Of the participants, 27% (n = 48) reported they learned English as a second language in the

U.S. and 11.2% (n = 20) reported that English was their native language. The results of this data can be found in Table 3.

Table 3

Grade Level Status, Field of Study, and Language (N = 178)

Variable n %

Grade Level Status Freshman 40 22.5 Sophomore 36 20.2 Junior 38 21.3 Senior 61 34.3

Field of Study Business and Management 48 27.0 Computer and Information Services 15 8.4 Education 6 3.4 Engineering 19 10.7 Health Professions 15 8.4 Physical Sciences 13 7.3 Social Sciences 12 6.7 Humanities 4 2.2 Other 46 25.8

Language English is my native Language 20 11.2 I learned English as a second language in my native country 110 61.8 I learned English as a second Language in the U.S. 48 27.0

Cyberbullying Experiences

Cyberbullying experiences of the international students were assessed with three survey questions. The first two questions regarding their own cyberbullying experiences were as follows: “In my lifetime, I have been cyberbullied” and “In the last 30 days I have been cyberbullied.” The third question, “I have seen other people being cyberbullied,” was related to these students’ observations on other people’s cyberbullying experiences.

Descriptive statistics of these questions are shown below.

In my lifetime, I have been cyberbullied. Of the international students, 46.5%

(n = 81) reported they have been cyberbullied in their lifetimes once to many times. More specifically, 18.5% (n = 33) of the international students have been cyberbullied once,

19.7% (n = 35) of the international students have been cyberbullied a few times, 6.7% (n =

12) of the international students have been cyberbullied several times, and 0.6% (n = 1) of the international students have been cyberbullied many times in their entire lives. The results can be found in Table 4.

Table 4

In my Lifetime, I Have Been Cyberbullied

n %

Never 95 53.4 Once 33 18.5 A few times 35 19.7 Several times 12 6.7 Many times 1 0.6 Total 176 98.9 Missing 2 1.1 Total 178 100.0

In the last 30 days, I have been cyberbullied. Of the international students,

20.7% (n = 37) reported that they have been cyberbullied in the last 30 days once to many times. More specifically, 11.8% (n = 21) of the international students have been cyberbullied once, 5.6% (n = 10) of the international students have been cyberbullied a few times, 2.2% (n = 4) of the international students have been cyberbullied several times, and

1.1% (n = 2) of the international students have been cyberbullied many times in the last 30 days. The results can be found in Table 5.

Table 5

In the Last 30 Days, I Have Been Cyberbullied

n %

Never 139 78.1 Once 21 11.8 A few times 10 5.6 Several times 4 2.2 Many times 2 1.1 Total 176 98.9 Missing 2 1.1 Total 178 100.00

I have seen other people being cyberbullied. Of the international college students, 74.1% (n = 132) reported seeing someone being cyberbullied once to many times.

More specifically, 10.1% (n = 18) of the international students have seen other people being cyberbullied once, 39.3% (n = 70) have seen other people being cyberbullied a few times, 12.4% (n = 22) have seen other people being cyberbullied several times, and 12.4%

(n = 22) have seen other people being cyberbullied many times. The results can be found in

Table 6.

Table 6

I Have Seen Other People Being Cyberbullied

n %

Never 45 25.3 Once 18 10.1 A few times 70 39.3 Several times 22 12.4 Many times 22 12.4 Total 177 99.4 Missing 1 0.6 Total 178 100.0

Exploratory Factor Analyses

Exploratory Factor Analyses were conducted for Cyberbullying Victimization

Subscale, Center for Epidemiological Studies-Depression Scale Short Form, and

Acculturative Stress Scale for International Students to assess the factor structure of these scales.

Exploratory Factory Analyses for Cyberbullying Victimization Subscale

In order to determine the factorability, the Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) Measure of

Sample Adequacy and Bartlett’s Test of Sphericity were examined. The KMO index ranges from 0 to 1, with a magnitude equal or higher than .50 considered acceptable

(Kaiser, 1974). The KMO test result had a value of .897, which can be considered as acceptable. The Bartlett’s Test Sphericity was also found significant (χ2 = 1110.158, df =

36, p < .001) indicating that the correlation matrix was not an identity matrix and the variables were factorable. The sample size was also adequate for analysis of the 9-item scale. Additionally, the eigenvalues and scree plot (see Figure 2) suggested extracting

47 unidimensional factor structure for this scale (see Table 4). The scree plot shows that one factor explains most of the variability on this scale. Furthermore, the EFA results also produced one general acceptability factor accounting for 58.89% of the total variance (See

Table 7).

Additionally, the reliability analysis showed the internal consistency of the

Cyberbullying-Victimization Subscale was .920. The Coefficient Alpha for the

Cyberbullying-Victimization Scale produced evidence of a high level of internal consistency. Furthermore, the item means range was from .14 to .39 (see Table 8) and inter item correlations were moderate and statistically significant between all pairs of items (p <

.01).

Figure 2. Scree Plot. Figure 2 presents the scree plot associated with the analysis of the 9 items and suggested one factor.

Table 7

Principal Axis Factoring (PAF) With Direct Oblimin Rotation of the Cyberbullying Victimization Subscale (N = 168)

Items (N = 9) Factor 1

9. Someone pretended to be me online and acted in a way that was mean or hurtful to me. .884 5. Someone created a mean or hurtful web page about me. .865 3. Someone posted a mean or hurtful picture online of me online. .847 7. Someone threatened to hurt me through a cell phone text message. .847 6. Someone spread rumors about me online. .770 8. Someone threatened to hurt me online. .762 2. Someone posted mean or hurtful comments about me online. .699 4. Someone posted a mean or hurtful video online of me. .660 1. I have been cyberbullied. .487

Table 8

Descriptive Statistics for the Cyberbullying Victimization Scale (N = 168)

Items (N = 9) M SD

1. I have been cyberbullied. .32 .753 2. Someone posted mean or hurtful comments about me online. .39 .725 3. Someone posted a mean or hurtful picture online of me online. .24 .652 4. Someone posted a mean or hurtful video online of me. .14 .546 5. Someone created a mean or hurtful web page about me. .15 .589 6. Someone spread rumors about me online. .26 .726 7. Someone threatened to hurt me through a cell phone text message. .22 .687 8. Someone threatened to hurt me online. .21 .639 9. Someone pretended to be me online and acted in a way that was mean or .18 .616 hurtful to me.

Exploratory Factor Analysis for Acculturative Stress Scale for International Students

(ASSIS)

The same procedures were used for the Acculturative Stress scale for International

Students (ASSIS) as well. Even though eigenvalues suggested that the ASSIS had six subscales, Scree Plot (see Figure 3) showed that the ASSIS had unidimensional factor structure. The scree plot suggests that one factor explains most of the variability on this scale. Therefore, the EFA analysis was run again by forcing the data to extract unidimensional factor structure.

Figure 3. Scree Plot. Figure 3 presents the scree plot associated with the analysis of the 36 items and suggested unidimensional factor structure.

The second EFA analysis by forcing one factor solution showed that the

Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sample Adequacy had a value of .928, which was considered acceptable. The Bartlett’s Test of Sphericity was also significant (χ2 =

3862.116, df = 630, p < .001), which indicated that the correlation matrix was not an identity matrix and the variables were factorable. Additionally, the scree plot once again showed that one factor explains most of the variability on this scale. According to the EFA results, one general acceptability factor emerged accounting for 48.36% of the total variance and factor loadings were presented in Table 9.

Additionally, the internal consistency reliability of the Acculturative Stress Scale for International Students scale was examined. The Coefficient Alpha indicated the evidence of a high level of internal consistency (α = .969). Additionally, the item means range was from 1.85 to 3.39 (see Table 10) and inter item correlations were moderate and statistically significant between all pairs of items (p < .01).

Table 9

Principal Axis Factoring (PAF) of the ASSIS (N = 137)

Factor Items (N = 36) 1

15. People from some ethnic groups show hatred toward me nonverbally. .824 24. People from some other ethnic groups show hatred towards me through their actions. .807 23. I feel that my people are discriminated against. .803 30. I feel sad to consider my people’s problems. .777 31. I generally keep a low profile due to fear from other ethnic groups. .769 28. I don't feel a sense of belonging (community) here. .767 12. I feel angry that my people are considered inferior here. .763 25. I feel that my status in this society is low due to my cultural background. .760 26. I am treated differently because of my race. .760 9. Others are biased toward me. .754 14. I feel that I receive unequal treatment. .751 32. I feel some people don’t associate with me because of my ethnicity. .750

17. I am denied what I deserve. .731 13. I feel overwhelmed that multiple pressures are placed upon me after my migration to this .730 society. 27. I feel insecure here. .715 20. I feel rejected when others don’t appreciate my cultural values. .714 29. I am treated differently because of my color. .713 4. I feel rejected when people are sarcastic toward my cultural values. .708 33. People from some other ethnic groups show hatred toward me verbally. .705 8. I feel intimidated to participate in social activities. .705 16. It hurts when people don’t understand my cultural values. .704 10. I feel guilty to leave my family and friends behind. .702 22. I feel uncomfortable to adjust to new cultural values. .686 11. Many opportunities are denied to me. .685 34. I feel guilty that I am living a different lifestyle here. .675 7. I fear for my personal safety because of my different cultural background. .659 19. I feel low because of my cultural background. .656 3. I am treated differently in social situations. .639 6. I feel sad living in unfamiliar surroundings here. .612 2. I feel uncomfortable to adjust to new and/or to new eating habits. .601 18. I have to frequently relocate for fear of others. .592 36. I worry about my future for not being able to decide whether to stay here or to go back. .564 35. I feel sad leaving my relatives behind. .557 1. Homesickness for my country bothers me. .544 21. I miss the country and people of my national origin. .501 5. I feel nervous to communicate in English. .454

Table 10

Descriptive Statistics for the ASSIS (N = 137)

Items (N = 36) M SD

1. Homesickness for my country bothers me. 3.07 1.276 2. I feel uncomfortable to adjust to new and/or to new eating habits. 2.64 1.143 3. I am treated differently in social situations. 2.79 1.172 4. I feel rejected when people are sarcastic toward my cultural values. 2.58 1.246 5. I feel nervous to communicate in English. 2.60 1.309 6. I feel sad living in unfamiliar surroundings here. 2.22 1.103 7. I fear for my personal safety because of my different cultural background. 2.19 1.185 8. I feel intimidated to participate in social activities. 2.47 1.138 9. Others are biased toward me. 2.58 1.089 10. I feel guilty to leave my family and friends behind. 2.26 1.213 11. Many opportunities are denied to me. 2.46 1.213 12. I feel angry that my people are considered inferior here. 2.64 1.283 13. I feel overwhelmed that multiple pressures are placed upon me after my 2.52 1.255 migration to this society. 14. I feel that I receive unequal treatment. 2.34 1.094 15. People from some ethnic groups show hatred toward me nonverbally. 2.28 1.180

16. It hurts when people don’t understand my cultural values. 2.72 1.310 17. I am denied what I deserve. 2.30 1.101 18. I have to frequently relocate for fear of others. 1.88 .916 19. I feel low because of my cultural background. 1.91 .999 20. I feel rejected when others don’t appreciate my cultural values. 2.45 1.176 21. I miss the country and people of my national origin. 3.39 1.324 22. I feel uncomfortable to adjust to new cultural values. 2.20 1.077 23. I feel that my people are discriminated against. 2.51 1.237 24. People from some other ethnic groups show hatred towards me through their 2.18 1.066 actions. 25. I feel that my status in this society is low due to my cultural background. 2.39 1.171 26. I am treated differently because of my race. 2.38 1.207 27. I feel insecure here. 2.20 1.051 28. I don't feel a sense of belonging (community) here. 2.47 1.219 29. I am treated differently because of my color. 1.97 .954 30. I feel sad to consider my people’s problems. 2.55 1.283 31. I generally keep a low profile due to fear from other ethnic groups. 2.08 1.099 32. I feel some people don’t associate with me because of my ethnicity. 2.58 1.327 33. People from some other ethnic groups show hatred toward me verbally. 1.85 .928 34. I feel guilty that I am living a different lifestyle here. 2.20 1.189 35. I feel sad leaving my relatives behind. 2.77 1.379 36. I worry about my future for not being able to decide whether to stay here or to 2.93 1.441 go back.

Exploratory Factor Analysis for the CES-D Short Form

The same procedures were also used for the CESD-SF scale. Principal Axis

Factoring (PAF) with Direct Oblimin was selected to investigate the underlying factor structure of the scale. The KMO test result was acceptable, with the value of .894. The

Bartlett’s Test of Sphericity was also significant (χ2 = 641.960, df = 45, p < .001). The results indicated that the correlation matrix was not an identity matrix and the variables were factorable. Investigation of the scree plot indicated two-factor solution; however, second factor had only Item 3 and Item 6 (see Table 11). According to Costello and

Osborne (2005) and Raubenheimer (2004), a factor should have at least three items.

Therefore, these two items were eliminated from the analysis and EFA analysis was run again.

Table 11

Principal Axis Factoring (PAF) with Direct Oblimin Rotation of the CES-D Short Form (N = 164)

Items (N = 10) Factor 1 2

1. I was bothered by things that usually don’t bother me. .808 2. I felt that I could not shake off the blues even with the help from my .800 friends or family. 8. I felt fearful. .771 9. I felt lonely. .759 4. I had trouble keeping my mind on what I was doing. .668 7. I felt my life had been a failure. .640 10. People were unfriendly. .538 5. I felt that everything I did was an effort. .462 3. I felt that I was just as good as other people. .827 6. I felt hopeful about the future. .515

After eliminating these two items, EFA was conducted again with PAF extraction and Direct Oblimin (δ = 0). Eigenvalues and Scree Plot identified a unidimensional factor solution (see Figure 4) meaning that one factor explains most of the variability on this scale. The KMO Measure of Sample Adequacy had a value of .903, which was above the

.90, and is considered adequate (Kaiser, 1974). Also, Bartlett’s Test of Sphericity was significant (χ2 = 551.698, df = 28, p < .001) indicating the correlation matrix is not an identity matrix. Also, one general acceptability factor emerged accounting for 48,51% of the total variance and factor loadings were presented in Table 12.

Figure 4. Scree Plot. Figure 4 presents the scree plot associated with the analysis of the 8 items suggesting a single factor.

Finally, the internal consistency reliability of the CESD-SF was examined. The

Coefficient Alpha for remaining 8 items after EFA analysis indicated the evidence of a high level of internal consistency (α = .877). Additionally, the item means ranged from .52 to 1.18 (see Table 13) and inter item correlations were moderate and statistically significant between all pairs of items (p < .01).

Table 12

Principal Axis Factoring (PAF) with Direct Oblimin Rotation of the CESD-SF (N = 165)

Items (N = 8) Factor 1

9. I felt lonely. .769 2. I felt that I could not shake off the blues even with the help from my friends or family. .763 8. I felt fearful. .762 1. I was bothered by things that usually don’t bother me. .724 4. I had trouble keeping my mind on what I was doing. .723 7. I felt my life had been a failure. .676 10. People were unfriendly. .566 5. I felt that everything I did was an effort. .549

Table 13

Descriptive Statistics for CESD-SF (N = 165)

Items (N = 8) M SD

1. I was bothered by things that usually don’t bother me. .66 .753 2. I felt that I could not shake off the blues even with the help from my friends or .53 .754 family. 4. I had trouble keeping my mind on what I was doing. 1.00 .883 5. I felt that everything I did was an effort. 1.18 .937 7. I felt my life had been a failure. .52 .746 8. I felt fearful. .80 .945 9. I felt lonely 1.01 .988 10. People were unfriendly. .67 .828

Path Analysis Results

The data collected from the participants was analyzed with the Statistical Package for the Social Science (SPSS) with Analysis of a Moment Structure (AMOS). Path analysis was chosen to analyze the data specifically, as it enables researchers to show the

56 relationship between variables and whether or not they effected each other directly or indirectly. The analyses in this study were considered significant at a p value of .001 or lower.

The saturated model, as shown in Figure 5, illustrates the relationship between (a) cyberbullying victimization and depression, (b) cyberbullying victimization and acculturative stress, and (c) acculturative stress and depression. The results are further explained in Tables 14 and 15.

Figure 5. Path analysis results. Numeric numbers are Standardized Regression Weights. (p < .001)

Table 14

Regression Weights

Variables Estimate S.E. C.R P

AS <--- CBV 2.622 .493 5.320 *** DP <--- CBV .315 .082 3.854 *** DP <--- AS .060 .014 4.418 ***

Table 15

Standardized Regression Weights

Variables Estimate

AS <--- CBV .418 DP <--- CBV .293 DP <--- AS .351

The results showed that the relationship between Cyberbullying-Victimization and

Acculturative Stress was significant with a standardized regression coefficient of .418. The relationship was positive. The relationship between Cyberbullying-Victimization and

Depression was also significant with a standardized regression coefficient of .293. This relationship was also found to be positive. Additionally, Acculturative stress was found to have a significant positive correlation with Depression with standardized regression coefficient of .351.

Based on the results above we can answer the research question number 1, which was asking if Cyberbullying-Victimization as measured by the Cyberbullying and Online

Aggression Survey Instrument (COASI) subscale predicts the Acculturative Stress as measured by Acculturative Stress Scale for International Students (ASSIS). The results showed that Cyberbullying-Victimization has a significant positive correlation with

Acculturative Stress with standardized regression coefficient of .418. This result suggested that if Cyberbullying-Victimization increases, acculturative stress also increases. In other words, international students who experience higher levels of cyberbullying as victims are highly likely to experience higher levels of acculturative stress.

Both direct and indirect (mediated) effects of the variables were also examined.

(see Table 16)

Table 16

Standardized Total Effects and Direct Effects of the Variables

Variables CBV AS

Total Direct Total Direct Effects Effects Effects Effects

AS .418 .418 .000 .000

DP .440 .293 .351 .351 p = .001

The second research question of the study asked whether the Cyberbullying and

Online Aggression Survey Instrument (COASI) have a direct effect on depression as measured by the Center for Epidemiological Studies-Depression Scale Short Form

(CESD-SF). The results showed that the beta coefficient of the direct effect of cyberbullying-victimization on depression was .293 (p < 0.001). This significant positive

59 relationship fits the expected direction of relationship in the model, with higher scores of cyberbullying-victimization relating to higher scores of depression. In other words, international students who have higher scores on cyberbullying-victimization scale are more likely to experience higher levels of depression.

Finally, the third question asked whether cyberbullying-victimization as measured by the Cyberbullying and Online Aggression Survey Instrument (COASI) have an indirect effect on depression as measured by the Center for Epidemiological Studies-Depression

Scale Short Form (CESD-SF) mediated by Acculturative Stress as measured by

Acculturative Stress Scale for International Students (ASSIS). The results have shown that

Acculturative Stress mediates the effect of cyberbullying-victimization on depression with the value of .147, which was statistically significant (p < .001). (See Table 17.) Although the mediating factor of Acculturative Stress does reduce the effect of cyberbullying-victimization on depression, it does not reduce it to zero. In other words, international students’ cyberbullying experiences have a significant effect on their acculturative stress, which in turn these experiences have also significant effect on their depression.

Table 17

Standardized Indirect Effects

Variables CBV AS

Indirect Effects Indirect Effects

AS .000 .000

DP .147 .000

Summary

This chapter outlined the results of this study. The descriptive statistics, factor analysis, and path analysis provided some very useful insights about the relationships between the variables involved in this study. It was found that participants who reported higher scores on cyberbullying-victimization are highly likely to have higher scores on acculturative stress. It was also found that cyberbullying-victimization had a direct effect on depression, as well as indirect effect on depression mediated by acculturative stress.

The next chapter provides a more detailed discussion of the results. The limitations of this research are also presented. The implications for the field of counselor education and clinical practice are also discussed. Finally, recommendations for future research are presented.

CHAPTER IV

DISCUSSION

In this chapter, the researcher provides a brief summary of the current study, followed by a section discussing the major findings regarding the research questions.

The limitations of the study are then examined. Finally, the implications for both the university environment and the counseling field and recommendations for future research are presented.

Summary of the Current Study

The purpose of this study was to investigate the relationship between cyberbullying-victimization, acculturative stress, and depression among international college students currently studying in the United States. For the purpose of this study, the following instruments were administered to the participants: Cyberbullying and

Online Agression Survey Instrument (Hinduja & Patchin, 2015), Center for

Epidemiological Studies-Depression Scale Short Form (CES-D SF; Cole et al., 2004), and the Acculturative Stress Scale for International Students (ASSIS; Sandhu &

Asrabadi, 1994). Participants also completed the Demographic Questionnaire created specifically for this study. The sample comprised of 178 international students (51.1% female, 48.9% male) studying in a university located at Northeast Ohio. Participants’ ages ranged from 18 to 25 with a mean age of 21.26. The results of the present study supported the first hypothesis that there is a significant relationship between cyberbullying-victimization and acculturative stress among international college students.

More specifically, it was found that international students who experience cyberbullying-

61 62 victimization on higher levels also experience higher levels of acculturative stress. The results of the current study also supported the second hypothesis that cyberbullying- victimization has a direct effect on depression. International students who experience cyberbullying-victimization are more likely to experience depression as well. Finally, the third hypothesis was also supported by the findings that cyberbullying victimization has an indirect effect on depression mediated by acculturative stress. More specifically, it was found that cyberbullying-victimization has a significant effect on international students’ acculturative stress, which in turn significantly affects their depression.

Interpretation of the Findings

The purpose of the study was to investigate the relationship between cyberbullying-victimization, acculturative stress, and depression among international college students. This specific group of college students was selected purposefully, because whereas previous research showed that cyberbullying is present among college students with prevalence rates ranging from 9% to 43.3%, there was no research found in the literature on cyberbullying with this unique college population (Akbulut & Eristi,

2011; Dilmac, 2009; Finn, 2004; Lindsay & Krysik, 2012; Paullet & Pinchot, 2014; J. A.

Smith & Yoon, 2013; Walker et al., 2011). The results of this study showed that 20.7%

(n = 37) of the international students have been cyberbullied in the last 30 days once to many times. The results are consistent with the previous research showing that cyberbullying is present among college students in the United States (Finn, 2004;

MacDonald & Roberts-Pittman, 2010; Molluzzo & Lawler, 2012; J. A. Smith & Yoon,

2013; Walker et al., 2011). This study shows that international students coming to study in the United States also experience cyberbullying as victims in college.

The descriptive results of this study also showed that international students experience cyberbullying in their lifetime with higher number of rates. Of the international students, 45.5% (n = 81) reported that they had been cyberbullied in their lifetimes once to many times. Since the results are higher compared to international students’ cyberbullying experiences in the last 30 days, we can assume that most of these students experienced cyberbullying in middle and high school in their home country and they have not experienced cyberbullying during their studies in the United States. It can also be assumed that these students experienced cyberbullying during the first months or years of their stay in the United States and then they either learn how to deal with cyberbullying or the cyberbullying stops after a certain amount of time.

Furthermore, the results also showed that international students had seen other people being cyberbullied with even higher rates. Of the international college students,

74.1% (n = 132) reported seeing someone being cyberbullied. In addition, 64.1% (n =

114) witnessed other people being cyberbullied more than once. Previous research had similar results. For instance, MacDonald and Roberts-Pittman (2010) and Walker et al.

(2011) found 38% and 54%, respectively, of college students knew someone who had been cyberbullied. Therefore, the results of this study might help us to conclude that international college students are aware of the cyberbullying problem and know that other people experience cyberbullying in college as well. This is an important finding as it might mean that cyberbullying is more prevalent than it was previously estimated.

Research Question 1

Does Cyberbullying-Victimization as measured by the Cyberbullying and Online

Aggression Survey Instrument (COASI) subscale predict the Acculturative Stress as measured by Acculturative Stress Scale for International Students (ASSIS)?

International students come to the United States from different countries across the world to get a high quality of education. Although it is exciting for them to study in a different country, they usually face a number of problems during their acculturation to the

U.S. life. According to Berry (2003) acculturative stress occurs, when international students experience problems caused by acculturation. Bai (2016) defined acculturative stress as the “negative side effect of acculturation” (p. 94). Previous research has identified several factors predicting acculturative stress among international students such as perceived support, age, English proficiency, and so forth (Bai, 2016; Constantine et al.,

2004; Kuo & Roysircar, 2004). This study also aimed to determine whether cyberbullying-victimization is another factor that predicts acculturative stress among international students.

A path analysis was used to analyze the relationship between cyberbullying-victimization and acculturative stress. The results showed that the relationship between cyberbullying-victimization and acculturative stress was significant with a standardized regression coefficient of .418. The results suggested that if cyberbullying-victimization increases, acculturative stress also increases. More specifically, international students who experience higher levels of cyberbullying are more likely to experience higher levels of acculturative stress.

This is an important finding as no studies were found so far investigating the relationship between cyberbullying-victimization and acculturative stress among international college students. As it was proved in this study, international students can become the targets of cyberbullies on college campuses. Their cyberbullying experiences, however, may have completely different negative consequences than their

American peers, since these students have already been dealing with unique problems related to their acculturation process. Being a victim of cyberbullying will make these students’ acculturation to this country more difficult. The higher levels of cyberbullying-victimization that these students experience will result in higher levels of acculturative stress. Their transition to this country and culture may also become more difficult than their international peers who are not cyberbullied. Additionally, their academic achievement may be negatively impacted due to cyberbullying and acculturative stress. Their studies may be interrupted, or they may even have to end their education and go back to their countries. Thus, more research is needed in order to understand whether cyberbullying-victimization and acculturative stress have relationships with other variables such as academic achievement.

Research Question 2

Does Cyberbullying-Victimization as measured by the Cyberbullying and Online

Aggression Survey Instrument (COASI) have direct effect on depression as measured by the Center for Epidemiological Studies-Depression Scale Short Form (CESD-SF)?

Although traditional bullying has been linked with different mental health problems such as depression, anxiety, and low self-esteem, cyberbullying may also have

66 equal or more negative consequences due to the broader audience and power of the internet (Chapell et al., 2006; Gilroy, 2013; Kowalski & Limber, 2013; Olweus, 1993;

Walker et al., 2011). In fact, previous studies have shown that the victims of cyberbullying experience several mental health problems such as depression (Fauman,

2008; Juvonen & Gross, 2008; Kowalski & Limber, 2013; Schenk & Fremouw, 2012;

Sourander et al., 2010; Thomas, 2006; Ybarra, 2004; Ybarra et al., 2006). This study also aimed to determine whether cyberbullying-victimization had a direct effect on depression among international students.

In order to find the answer to the second research question, the researcher used the path analysis designed specifically for this study. The results of the path analysis showed that the beta coefficient of the direct effect of Cyberbullying-Victimization on

Depression was .293 (p < 0.001). This significant positive relationship fits the anticipated direction of relationship in the model, with higher scores of cyberbullying-victimization relating to higher scores of depression. In other words, international students who have higher scores on the cyberbullying-victimization scale are more likely to experience higher levels of depression.

The results are consistent with previous research on college students showing that there is a positive relationship between cyberbullying and depression. For instance, J. A.

Smith and Yoon (2013) asked college students whether or not cyberbullying affected their learning and life and 13.2% reported that they experienced depression due to cyberbullying. Similarly, Schenk and Fremouw (2012) found that students who experienced cyberbullying in college had higher scores on depression than other students

67 who were not cyberbullied. Finally, Na, Dancy, and Park (2015) found that the avoidance of coping strategies was associated positively with depression in college students. Based on the results of these studies and the current study findings, we can conclude that college students in general and international students in particular experience depression due to cyberbullying. Higher levels of cyberbullying-victimization also result in higher levels depression in international college students.

Research Question 3

Does Cyberbullying-Victimization as measured by the Cyberbullying and Online

Aggression Survey Instrument (COASI) have indirect effect on depression as measured by the Center for Epidemiological Studies-Depression Scale Short Form (CESD-SF) mediated by Acculturative Stress as measured by Acculturative Stress Scale for

International Students (ASSIS)?

According to the American College Health Association (2017), almost 18% of the students who study in college reported being diagnosed with or treated by a professional for depression within the last year. Although there are a number of reasons why college students experience depression, previous studies as well as this study have shown that cyberbullying-victimization has a positive relationship with depression (Na et al., 2015; J.

A. Smith & Yoon, 2013; Schenk & Fremouw, 2012). Students who are involved with cyberbullying are more likely to experience depression in college. This study has also proven that international students particularly can become the victims of cyberbullying and their cyberbullying experiences have a direct effect on depression.

The third question guiding this research aimed to determine whether or not cyberbullying-victimization had an indirect effect on depression mediated by acculturative stress. The same path analysis model was used to answer this question.

However, in order to investigate the mediating effect of acculturative stress on the relationship between cyberbullying-victimization and depression, the researcher first needed to know the relationship between cyberbullying-victimization and acculturative stress and the relationship between acculturative stress and depression. As mentioned previously, cyberbullying victimization had a significantly positive correlation with acculturative stress. The results suggested that cyberbullying-victimization had a direct effect on acculturative stress. It was also found that acculturative stress had a significantly positive correlation with depression. In their study, Liu et al. (2016) found a positive relationship between acculturative stress and depression among international students in China. Thus, we can conclude that acculturative stress also had a direct effect on depression. In other words, international students who experience higher levels of acculturative stress are more likely to experience higher levels of depression.

In order to find the mediating effect of acculturative stress on the relationship between cyberbullying-victimization and depression, direct effect scores of cyberbullying to acculturative stress and acculturative stress to depression were multiplied. The results showed that Acculturative Stress mediated the effect of Cyberbullying-Victimization on

Depression. Although cyberbullying victimization had a direct effect on depression, the mediating factor of Acculturative Stress reduced the effect of cyberbullying-victimization on depression, but it did not reduce it to zero. Therefore, we can conclude that

69 cyberbullying-victimization has a significant effect on international students’ acculturative stress, which in turn significantly affects their depression.

Implications

The results of this study showed that international students coming from different countries to study in the United States experience cyberbullying in college.

Unfortunately, these students’ cyberbullying experiences have some negative consequences as well. According to the results of this study international students who are cyberbullied are more likely to experience acculturative stress and depression. These findings have implications for professionals in the university environment and in the counseling field who serve the international college student population. The following sections address these implications for these professionals.

University Environment

The results of this study have numerous implications in the university environment regarding acculturation and cyberbullying.

Acculturation. Although all students face similar challenges in college, international students face additional challenges such as acculturative stress while adapting to an entirely new culture (Poyrazli et al., 2010). Making these students feel at home and ease their acculturation to this new academic and social life should be seen as one of the major responsibilities of the universities. Therefore, universities should plan ahead and reach international students even before they arrive on campus. Universities can contact international students through different channels and provide conferences, webinars, or short videos on topics such as campus life, academic and social services, and

U.S. culture online. Information packages on different topics can also be sent to these students through email and mail as well. These efforts might help international students feel more comfortable before they arrive at their host countries.

Universities’ international student services should also take more active roles in helping these students’ adaptation once they arrive on campus. They should design more comprehensive orientation programs for international students to help them better adjust to both academic and social life in the United States. The international student services should also provide different educational seminars or workshops to the university staff and faculty in order to help them better understand the international students’ needs.

Finally, universities can also develop educational programs specifically for international students to facilitate their acculturation to the U.S. life. All of these might help international students experience lower levels of acculturative stress while transitioning to their new lives in the United States.

Cyberbullying. Previous research has shown that students experience cyberbullying either as victims or offenders and their experiences have negative consequences such as depression, anxiety, and so forth (Akbulut & Eristi, 2011; Dilmac,

2009; Finn, 2004; Lindsay & Krysik, 2012; Paullet & Pinchot, 2014; J. A. Smith &

Yoon, 2013; Walker et al., 2011). The current study has also indicated that cyberbullying is present among international college students, and their experiences have positive relationships with acculturative stress and depression. Since cyberbullying has also some serious consequences such as life endangerment, it has to be taken very seriously by universities (Zalaquett & Chatters, 2014). According to J. A. Smith and Yoon (2013),

71 information system administrators and university staff are responsible for monitoring electronic resources and providing reporting tools to protect the students. Therefore, universities should create a reporting system/tool where the students can report cyberbullying incidents. This reporting system/tool, however, should be anonymous and easily accessed by the students (Paullet & Pinchot, 2014). Making the system/tool anonymous will help the international students report cyberbullying incidents more freely and comfortably.

Additionally, international college students may not know what cyberbullying really is or their cyberbullying understanding might be completely different than their

U.S. peers. Therefore, formally discussing cyberbullying in required courses or integrating it into undergraduate introductory courses such as freshman seminars might help students understand this phenomenon better (Molluzzo & Lawler, 2012; Zalaquett &

Chatters, 2014). These courses might help both international and American students develop healthier ways to communicate with each other in online and classroom settings as well.

Furthermore, universities’ international student services play a very crucial role in international students’ lives as they assist their adjustment to their new academic and social environments in their host universities. These services aim to create a more welcoming atmosphere by designing different orientation programs. Although these programs are mostly about the American culture, American education system, health services, and so forth, they can also incorporate cyberbullying into these programs.

Different workshops and educational programs on cyberbullying can be provided for international students as well. By attending these programs, international students may learn what to do and how to act when they encounter cyberbullying or when they see somebody is experiencing cyberbullying. Moreover, internationals student services may also collaborate with different student organizations to create awareness programs in order to raise students’ attention on this topic.

Finally, in order to promote prevention, intervention, and enforcement of cyberbullying, universities can also work collaboratively with nationally known cyberbullying organizations such as “End to Cyberbullying” and “Stop Cyberbullying”

(Paullet & Pinchot, 2014). Professionals from these organizations can be invited to provide training, education, or workshops to both international and American college students. Students who attend these programs may become more aware of the risks of this phenomenon and learn how to cope with its negative consequences.

Counseling Field

The results of this study have several implications in the counseling field regarding acculturation and cyberbullying.

Acculturation. There are over a million international students at colleges and universities in the United States (Institute of International Education, 2016). Although it is thrilling for these students to study in this country, they experience different challenges during their adaptation process as well. In fact, studies have shown that international students experience several mental health problems while studying in the United States such as depression, anxiety, or acculturative stress (Constantine et al., 2004; Hovey,

1998, 2000; Mori, 2000; Poyrazli et al., 2004). Therefore, professionals in the counseling field need to pay more attention to this unique population of college students and their mental health needs. These professionals, however, must also remember that international students rarely seek help regarding their mental health problems. Cultural differences related to mental health, unfamiliarity with counseling services, stigma attached to it in their home country, and lack of information about available services, are some of the reasons international students do not ask for help (Constantine et al., 2004;

Mori, 2000; Nilsson et al., 2004; Yi et al., 2003). Thus, instead of waiting for these students to take action regarding their mental health, professionals such as college counselors should try to reach them first.

One of the ways to reach international students on campus is to collaborate with international student services (Mori, 2000). These professionals are usually the ones that these students go to for help with their problems. Although these professionals can help international students solve basic problems such as opening a bank account or renting a house, they cannot help with their mental health needs. They, however, can refer these students to the appropriate services on campus such as counseling centers. Maintaining a close communication with these professionals can help counselors find international students with mental health needs more easily and quickly.

Another way to reach international students on campus is to take an active role with different programs such as new student orientation (Mori, 2000). Counselors can attend these programs to meet with international students individually or in groups. They can also plan short informative sessions on what counseling is, what counselors do, and

74 how counselors help students if they have any problems related to mental health. They can also prepare handouts, brochures, or posters to provide more information about how international students can benefit from counseling. Additionally, mental health professionals can also work with international student organizations on campus and provide information regarding different mental health topics in counseling.

One of the topics that mental health professionals can work with international students is acculturative stress. Previous studies have shown that international students experience acculturative stress while adapting to the new life in the United States (Mori

2000; Poyrazli et al., 2010; Sandhu & Asrabadi, 1994). According to Poyrazli et al.

(2004), one way that counselors can help international students deal with acculturative stress is to provide opportunities to interact with American students. Collaborating with international student services and developing a peer program in which international students are matched with American students might help these students to feel more accepted and valued (Duru & Poyrazli, 2011).

Mori (2000) also suggested four types of knowledge and skills that are crucial for international students’ successful adjustment. Stress management techniques/skills such as breathing, imagery, and meditation, assertive communication skills, effective study skills, and career and life planning skills are some of the areas that counselors can work with international students both in individual or group settings (Mori, 2000). Addressing these skills in counseling might help these students to feel lower levels of acculturative stress.

Cyberbullying. Cyberbullying is another topic with which mental health professionals can work with international students. This may become an important topic for international students, as it was indicated in this study that these students experience cyberbullying in college and their experiences have negative mental health consequences.

Because of the negative consequences of this phenomenon, professionals in counseling field should educate international students about the psychological impact of cyberbullying through different workshops or educational seminars (Zalaquett &

Chatters, 2014). A school-based group workshop is recommended for the victims of cyberbullying to lessen and/or prevent the negative consequences of cyberbullying as well (Na et al., 2015). By attending these workshops international students may become more aware of this problem and learn effective ways to cope with it in the future.

Na et al. (2015) also recommended that campus health services should assess cyberbullying on college campuses regularly in order to identify both the victims of cyberbullying and those victims who are at risk of experiencing the negative consequences of cyberbullying such as depression, anxiety and self-esteem. College counselors can also conduct these types of assessments regularly to assess whether international students are being cyberbullied. The results of these assessments may help counselors to identify both the victims and the perpetrators of cyberbullying ahead of time and take appropriate actions before it becomes a significant issue for these students.

College counselors can also work with the victims of cyberbullying in individual or group settings. Group counseling, however, may be more beneficial for international students as most of these students have no or limited experience with counselors. Being

76 in an environment with other students who have similar experiences may help international students feel more comfortable in counseling. Researchers also stated that working with international students in different group settings such as support groups or psychoeducational groups may be more beneficial for them to solve their academic, social, and psychological problems (Chalungsooth & Faris, 2009; Dipeolu, Kang, &

Cooper, 2007; Tsai & Wong, 2010). Thus, working with international students on this specific topic may help them to better understand their problems and learn effective ways to deal with them.

Limitations

Although this study is the only investigation of cyberbullying in international student population in the United States, it is not without limitations. The first limitation of this study was the sampling procedure. The international students who participated in this study were all selected from a university located in Northeast Ohio using a convenience sample. Therefore, international students who live in different geographical regions or study in different institutions might have different experiences than the ones who participated in this study. Additionally, although the participation criteria for the study was advertised in the recruitment email and informed consent such as being at least

18 to 25 years of age or being an international student, due to the anonymous nature, it cannot be known whether all participants met the requirements to participate.

The second limitation of the study is the self-report method of data collection. All the instruments used in this study were self-report. Althought self-report instuments are the easiest way of collecting data, they usually come with reliability and internal validity

77 issues. It should be remembered that the items on the self-report instruments might be understood or interpreted differently by each participant. In self-report instruments, it is also possible that the participants might mislead the researchers by providing incorrect answers in order to make them believe that they are on the side of the researchers.

The third limitation of the study might be the participants’ English literacy.

Although all international students must provide proof of English language proficiency

(A minimum TOEFL score of 71 in four different areas including speaking, writing, listening, and reading) before entering a program at a university, it is still possible that some students might have misunderstood or misinterpreted the items on the instruments due to their English literacy.

The fourth limitation of the study was to have unequal number of participants from different countries. A total of 178 international students from 42 different countries participated in this study. Although the number of countries that the students came from was high, the number of participation from each country was not as high as anticipated.

Most of the students who participated in this study were from Saudi Arabia (n = 42),

China (n = 27), India (n = 23), and Oman (n = 18). On the other hand, 23 countries including but not limited to Malaysia, Russia, Zambia, only had 1 participant each. The results of this study may not be generalized well to individuals from these countries.

Therefore, recruiting an equal or close number of participants from different countries might provide more meaningful results.

Finally, whereas the Cyberbullying and Online Agression Survey scale has two subscale, for the purpose of this study only the cyberbullying-victimization subscale was

78 used. Using the whole scale might have provided more insight in the relationship between cyberbullying, acculturative stress, and depression among international college students.

Recommendations for Future Research

This was one of the first empirical studies examining the relationship between cyberbullying-victimization, acculturative stress, and depression among international college students; therefore the researcher came up with several areas for future research involving cyberbullying, acculturative stress, depression, and international college students.

First, the participants of this study all came from one institution located in

Northeast Ohio. These students’ college experiences might be entirely different than other international students studying colleges at other locations in the United States.

Therefore, it may be beneficial in future research studies to include international college students from different colleges located in different geographical regions. This might help researchers increase the diversity of international students and understand this phonemeneon in colleges across the nation and to make more valid comparisons between students from different countries.

Second, one of the inclusion requirements of this study was to be at least 18 years of age and no more than 25 years of age. After analyzing the initial data, it was found that a considerable number of international students (n = 22) were over the age of 25 and still studying at college level. These students might have started their college education late. Possible reasons include cultural restrictions, early marriage, war, poverty, and so

79 forth. Their college education might have also been interrupted or started late due to visa or political issues between their countries and the United States. Therefore, it may be beneficial for future researchers to extend the inclusion criteria of age from 18–25 to

18-30. This may allow researchers to reach more international college students.

Additionally, future studies should consider including international graduate students in order to see if they also experience cyberbullying after college and whether or not their experiences have any relationship with mental health issues such as depression, and so forth.

Third, this was a quantitative research study and the data were collected through different instruments online. Participants had to choose the answers from a standard set of options. They were not given any opportunity to explain their own decisions or express their real-life experiences. Future studies may use different types of qualitative data collection methods such as interviews to better understand the participants’ perspectives regarding these important mental health issues. More meaningful results might be gathered in future studies if the quantitative findings are accompanied by qualitative information.

Fourth, although the Cyberbullying and Online Agression Survey had two subscales, for the purpose of this study, the researcher only used the cyberbullying-victimization subscale. It might be beneficial for future researchers to use the cyberbullying-offending subscale to see if it has any relationship between cyberbullying-victimization, acculturative stress, and depression among international college students. Additionally, researchers should consider using the whole

80 cyberbullying scale in future studies, as it might impact the outcome of the studies using the same variables.

Fifth, while it is now known that international college students experience cyberbullying, we do not know whether these students are cyberbullied by American students, other international students, or people from their own countries. Because of the anonymous nature of this phenomenon, the victims of cyberbullying may never know who their bullies are. Adding a question regarding the perpetrators of cyberbullying may provide more meaningful results.

Finally, it might be beneficial for researchers to explore additional variables such as social support, psychological well-being, religion, or hopefulness that may be helpful in developing counseling and university programs to support international college students who are dealing with mental health issues caused by cyberbullying. Future studies should also consider exploring factors such as Internet accesibility, time spent on the Internet, devices owned for Internet connection, and so forth, to better understand these students’ experiences of cyberbullying.

Conclusion

The purpose of this study was to investigate the relationship between cyberbullying-victimization, acculturative stress, and depression among international students. This was the first study to have explored the relationship between these variables with this unique population of college students. Although the existing literature proves that cyberbullying exists in middle, high, and college level American students, with the help of this study, it is now known that it is also present among international

81 college students as well. The findings of the present study suggested that cyberbullying victimization has a significant positive relationship with mental health problems such as acculturative stress and depression. Although more research is needed to validate these findings, it is apparent that international college students who come to the United States from different countries to study are negatively impacted by their experiences of cyberbullying as victims. This study may help counselors and university personnel better understand this specific population’s needs, and assit them in addressing their experiences of cyberbullying and teach them how to cope.

APPENDICES

APPENDIX A

IRB APPROVAL

Appendix A

IRB Approval

APPENDIX B

RECRUITMENT EMAIL

Appendix B

Recruitment Email

Email Sent to listserv

Dear International Student,

I am conducting a study investigating the relationship between cyberbullying-victimization, acculturative stress and depression. What we learn from this study may help us to better understand how international college students experience cyberbullying and whether it has relationships with acculturative stress and depression.

This study has been approved by the Kent State University IRB (Protocol #17-576). The primary investigators are willing to answer any questions you may have about this study. Participation is voluntary, refusal to take part in the study involves no penalty or loss of benefits to which participants are otherwise entitled, and participants may withdraw from the study at any time without penalty or loss of benefits to which they are otherwise entitled.

You are eligible to participate in the study if you are an international college student between the ages of 18 and 25.

The survey should take approximately 15-20 minutes to complete. Please click on the link below if you would like to participate: https://kent.qualtrics.com

If you have any questions about this study, the researcher may be contacted by email at [email protected] (Suleyman Akcil). You may also feel free to contact the faculty advisors, Dr. Marty Jencius at [email protected] and Dr. John Rainey at [email protected].

Your participation in this study is most sincerely appreciated.

Sincerely, Suleyman Akcil Ph.D. Candidate Kent State University

Marty Jencius, PhD Associate Professor Counselor Education and Supervision Kent State University

John Rainey, PhD Assistant Professor Counselor Education and Supervision Kent State University

APPENDIX C

INFORMED CONSENT FORM

Appendix C

Informed Consent Form

Kent State University Informed Consent to Participate in a Research Study

Study Title: Cyberbullying-victimization, Acculturative Stress, and Depression Among International College Students

Principal Investigator(s): Dr. Marty Jencius,

Co-investigator(s): Dr. Steve Rainey, Suleyman Akcil

You are being invited to participate in a research study. This consent form will provide you with information on the research project, what you will need to do, and the associated risks and benefits of the research. Your participation is voluntary. Please read this form carefully. It is important that you ask questions and fully understand the research in order to make an informed decision. You are encouraged to print a copy of this document to keep with you.

Purpose: The purpose of this study is to investigate the relationship between cyberbullying-victimization, acculturative stress and depression. This research study may help us to better understand the cyberbullying experiences of international college students and whether or not their experiences have any relationships with acculturative stress and depression.

Procedures: To be able to participate in this study you have to be an international student holding either F1 or J1 visa status. You also have to be at least 18 and maximum 25 years of age. Participation in the study typically takes 15-20 minutes. You will begin the study by answering a series of survey questions regarding demographic data, cyberbullying-victimization, acculturative stress and depression.

Benefits: Although there may be no direct benefit to you for participation in the study, your participation will help us to better understand how international college students experience cyberbullying and whether it has relationships with acculturative stress and depression.

Risks and Discomforts: There are no anticipated risks beyond those encountered in everyday life. However, some of the questions we ask may be upsetting, or you may feel 88 89 uncomfortable answering them. If you do not wish to answer a question, you may skip it and go to the next question. Below also a list of resources you may find helpful for support:

• The Counseling Center (325 White Hall, Kent, OH, 44240 Phone: 330-672-5396) • Psychological Services (1500 Eastway Dr. Kent, OH, 44240 Phone: 330-672- 2487) • http://counseling.org (American Counseling Association) • http://multiculturalcounseling.org (Association for Multicultural Counseling and Development)

Privacy and Confidentiality: All data obtained from participants will be kept confidential and will only be reported in an aggregate format (by reporting only combined results and never reporting individual ones). No one other than the primary investigator and the co-investigators will have access to the data. This is a confidential online survey. Encryption (SSL) will be activated and no names or IP addresses will be collected. Although we will not collect any direct identifiers such as names, you should be aware that due to the combination of questions we ask and the size of participants pool there is a possibility that you may be identifiable. The data will be stored in the Qualtrics- secure database and on a secure computer. All data will be stored on a password and firewall-protected computer. Once the investigators have downloaded the data from the password protected server, the data will be deleted.

Compensation: We are raffling off four $50 Visa gift cards. If you would like to be part of the raffle, please enter your email address at the end of the survey. Your email address will not be linked to the survey results.

Voluntary Participation: Taking part in this research study is entirely up to you. You may choose not to participate or you may discontinue your participation at any time without penalty or loss of benefits to which you are otherwise entitled.

Contact Information: If you have any questions or concerns about this research, you may contact (Suleyman Akcil) at (330-217-9303) or you may contact his dissertation advisors (Dr. Marty Jencius) at (330-672-0699) and (Dr. Steve Rainey) at (330-672- 0694). This project has been approved by the Kent State University Institutional Review Board (Pending). If you have any questions about your rights as a research participant or complaints about the research, you may call the IRB at 330.672.2704.

Your completion of this survey indicates your consent to participate in this research study.

I have read, understood, and printed a copy of the above consent form and desire of my own free will to participate in this study.

o Yes o No

APPENDIX D

PERMISSION TO USE THE ACCULTURATIVE STRESS SCALE FOR

INTERNATIONAL STUDENTS

Appendix D

Permission to use The Acculturative Stress Scale for International Students

Dear Suleyman Akcil,

Thank you for your interest in my research and publications. As requested, you have my written permission to use my Acculturative Stress Scale for International Students to complete your dissertation research. I also grant you the necessary permission to use ASSIS in an online survey hosted by Qualtrics, (www.kent.qualtrics.com). If you wish, please feel free to add a copy of my scale as a part of your dissertation.

To facilitate your doctoral dissertation research, I am attaching a copy of my ASSIS scale with the personal data sheet and instructions. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at [email protected]. I can also be reached at (502) 931-2158. With my best wishes. Sincerely, Dr. Daya Singh Sandhu, Ed.D., NCC, NCCC, NCSC, LPCC Director of Research and Professor of Counselor Education and Supervision School of Professional Counseling Office Goodin Building 233 210 Lindsey Wilson Street Lindsey Wilson College Columbia, KY 42728 (270) 384-8583 or (502) 931-2158 (cell) [email protected] or [email protected] Fulbright Senior Research Scholar (2002), Punjab University Fulbright-Nehru Senior Research Scholar (2010)Guru Nanak Dev Uni Fellow: American Counseling Association Diplomate: American Mental Health Counselors Association President: Association of Multicultural Counseling and Development Hind Rattan: NRI Society and Govt. of India (2014)

92 93

From: Dr. Daya Singh Sandhu [email protected] Subject: Permission to Use ASSIS for Doctoral Dissertation Research Date: October 8, 2016 at 11:09 PM To: Akcil, Suleyman [email protected]

Dear Suleyman Akcil, Thank you for your interest in my research and publications. As requested, you have my written permission to use my Acculturative Stress Scale for International Students to complete your dissertation research. I also grant you the necessary permission to use ASSIS in an online survey hosted by Qualtrics,(www.kent.qualtrics.com). If you wish, please feel free to add a copy of my scale as a part of your dissertation.

With my best wishes.

Sincerely,

Dr. Daya Singh Sandhu, Ed.D., NCC, NCCC, NCSC, LPCC Director of Research and Professor of Counselor Education and Supervision School of Professional Counseling Office Goodin Building 233 210 Lindsey Wilson Street Lindsey Wilson College Columbia, KY 42728 (270) 384-8583 or (502) 931-2158 (cell) [email protected] or [email protected] Fulbright Senior Research Scholar (2002), Punjab University Fulbright-Nehru Senior Research Scholar (2010)Guru Nanak Dev Uni Fellow: American Counseling Association Diplomate: American Mental Health Counselors Association President:Association of Multicultural Counseling and Development Hind Rattan: NRI Society and Govt.of India (2014)

ASSIS- Final (1).doc

APPENDIX E

ACCULTURATIVE STRESS SCALE FOR INTERNATIONAL STUDENTS

Appendix E

Acculturative Stress Scale for International Students

Directions:

As foreign students have to make a number of personal, social, and environmental changes upon arrival in a strange land, this cultural-shock experience might cause them acculturative stress. This scale is designed to assess such acculturative stress you personally might have experienced. There are no right or wrong answers. However, for the data to be meaningful, you must answer each statement given below as honestly as possible.

For each of the following statements, please circle the number that BEST describes your response.

1 = Strongly disagree, 2 = disagree, 3 = not sure, 4 = agree, 5 = strongly agree

Because of my different cultural background as a foreign student, I feel that:

1. Homesickness for my country bothers me. 1 2 3 4 5

2. I feel uncomfortable to adjust to new foods and/or to new 1 2 3 4 5 eating habits

3. I am treated differently in social situations. 1 2 3 4 5

4. I feel rejected when people are sarcastic toward my 1 2 3 4 5 cultural values.

5. I feel nervous to communicate in English. 1 2 3 4 5

6. I feel sad living in unfamiliar surroundings here. 1 2 3 4 5

7. I fear for my personal safety because of my different 1 2 3 4 5 cultural background.

8. I feel intimidated to participate in social activities. 1 2 3 4 5

9. Others are biased toward me. 1 2 3 4 5

10. I feel guilty to leave my family and friends behind. 1 2 3 4 5 95 96

11. Many opportunities are denied to me. 1 2 3 4 5

12. I feel angry that my people are considered inferior here. 1 2 3 4 5

13. I feel overwhelmed that multiple pressures are placed 1 2 3 4 5 upon me after my migration to this society.

14. I feel that I receive unequal treatment. 1 2 3 4 5

15. People from some ethnic groups show hatred toward 1 2 3 4 5 me nonverbally.

16. It hurts when people don’t understand my cultural values. 1 2 3 4 5

17. I am denied what I deserve. 1 2 3 4 5

18. I have to frequently relocate for fear of others. 1 2 3 4 5

19. I feel low because of my cultural background. 1 2 3 4 5

20. I feel rejected when others don’t appreciate my cultural 1 2 3 4 5 values.

21. I miss the country and people of my national origin. 1 2 3 4 5

22. I feel uncomfortable to adjust to new cultural values. 1 2 3 4 5

23. I feel that my people are discriminated against. 1 2 3 4 5

24. People from some other ethnic groups show hatred 1 2 3 4 5 toward me through their actions.

25. I feel that my status in this society is low due to my 1 2 3 4 5 cultural background.

26. I am treated differently because of my race. 1 2 3 4 5

27. I feel insecure here. 1 2 3 4 5

28. I don't feel a sense of belonging (community) here. 1 2 3 4 5

29. I am treated differently because of my color. 1 2 3 4 5

30. I feel sad to consider my people’s problems. 1 2 3 4 5

31. I generally keep a low profile due to fear from other 1 2 3 4 5 ethnic groups.

32. I feel some people don’t associate with me because of my 1 2 3 4 5 ethnicity.

33. People from some other ethnic groups show hatred 1 2 3 4 5 toward me verbally.

34. I feel guilty that I am living a different lifestyle here. 1 2 3 4 5

35. I feel sad leaving my relatives behind. 1 2 3 4 5

36. I worry about my future for not being able to decide 1 2 3 4 5 whether to stay here or to go back.

APPENDIX F

PERMISSION TO USE THE CENTER FOR EPIDEMIOLOGICAL STUDIES-

DEPRESSION SCALE SHORT FORM

Appendix F

Permission to use the Center for Epidemiological Studies- Depression Scale Short Form

Hi Suleyman,

Please note that the CESD was written and published by Radloff as part of a government project and thus, to my knowledge, is a public domain instrument. My short form of the CESD encompasses no content changes to it and therefore I have no claim to any copyright on the instrument.

Jason C. Cole, Ph.D.

99 100

10/8/2016 Messaging | LinkedIn

Search for people, jobs, companies, and more... Advanced

H ome Profile My Netw ork Learning Jobs Interests Business Services Try Premium for free

MS in Business Analytics Develop careerready analytics skills w/ a top rated online MS program. | Ad

Search Yesterday

Jason C. Col… Yesterday Hi Dr. Cole, I am a doctoral candidate at Kent State University. I I need your permission to use CES-D Short form in my You: Thank you very dissertation but can't reach you in anywhere. Could you please much Dr. Cole. accept my invitation so that i can send you a message about it? Thanks in advance.

- Suleyman Akcil 1:28 PM

Jason C. Cole, PhD accepted your invitation.

Hi Dr. Cole,

My name is Suleyman Akcil. I am a doctoral candidate at Kent State University currently working on my dissertation. I am interested in using Center for Epidemiological Studies- Depression Scale Short Form (CES-D SF) in my research and requesting your permission

1. to use it in my dissertation 2. to use it in an online survey hosted by Qualtrics (www.kent.qualtrics.com) 3. to include it in my dissertation.

Could you please let me know if you give me your permission to use your scale? It would be great if you also send me a copy of the scale?

My email address is [email protected]

Thanks in advance for your time and attention!

Respectfully,

Suleyman Akcil 3:16 PM

Hi Suleyman,

Today

Thank you very much Dr. Cole. 9:33 PM

CWlricitke hyeoruer tmo erespsalyg oer… forw ard

press enter to send Send

https://www.linkedin.com/messaging/thread/6190211044095381506 1/1

APPENDIX G

CENTER FOR EPIDEMIOLOGICAL STUDIES-DEPRESSION SCALE SHORT

FORM

Appendix G

Center for Epidemiological Studies-Depression Scale Short Form

The questions in this scale ask you about your feelings and thoughts during the last week. For each item, choose the number that best describes you by clicking one of the choices.

0 – Rarely or non of the time (less than 1 day) 1 – Some or a little of the time (1-2 days) 2 – Occasionally or a moderate amount of time (3-4 days) 3 - Most or all of the time (5-7 days)

1. I was bothered by things that usually don’t bother me. 2. I felt that I could not shake off the blues even with the help from my friends or family. 3. I felt that I was just as good as other people. 4. I had trouble keeping my mind on what I was doing. 5. I felt that everything I did was an effort. 6. I felt hopeful about the future. 7. I felt my life had been a failure. 8. I felt fearful. 9. I felt lonely. 10. People were unfriendly.

102

APPENDIX H

PERMISSION TO USE CYBERBULLYING AND ONLINE AGGRESSION

SURVEY INSTRUMENT

Appendix H

Permission to use Cyberbullying and Online Aggression Survey Instrument

Hi Suleyman,

You have our permission to do as you have stated. Good luck and no problem. Please see attached for our latest version. I'm also attaching some of our papers which may help. Please cite appropriately, as I am sure you will. Thanks! Sameer

------Sameer Hinduja, Ph.D. Co-Director, Cyberbullying Research Center Professor of Criminology and Criminal Justice Florida Atlantic University 5353 Parkside Drive Jupiter, Florida 33458-2906 Phone: (561) 510-1008 http://www.hinduja.org http://www.cyberbullying.org

104 105

From: Sameer Hinduja [email protected] Subject: RE: Permission to Use Cyberbullying and Online Aggression Survey Instrument Date: October 7, 2016 at 5:18 PM To: Akcil, Suleyman [email protected]

Hi Suleyman, You have our permission to do as you have stated. Good luck and no problem. Please see attached for our latest version. I'm also attaching some of our papers which may help. Please cite appropriately, as I am sure you will. Thanks! Sameer

-----Original Message----- From: Akcil, Suleyman [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Friday, October 7, 2016 12:09 PM To: Sameer Hinduja Subject: Permission to Use Cyberbullying and Online Aggression Survey Instrument

Hi Dr. Hinduja,

Hope you are doing well. I have contacted you before about using the Cyberbullying and Online Aggression Survey Instrument in my dissertation and you said yes but my dissertation committee advised me to speciﬁcally get your permission for the following items.

Could you please let me know if you give me your permission

1. to use your scale in my dissertation? 2. to use your scale in an online survey hosted by qualtrics? 3. to include your scale in my dissertation?

It would be great if you also send me a copy of the scale?

Thanks in advance for your time and attention!

Respectfully,

Suleyman Akcil=

2015_cyberbully Implications for Journal of Offline Patchin & ing_sur…res.doc Empiri…13.pdf School…H....pdf Conse…c....pdf Hinduj…v....pdf

Preliminary Look Social Strain and Ch2 - Ch10 - at Cyb…....pdf Influen…13.pdf Gender…i....pdf Cyberb…sis.pdf Cyberb…ent.pdf

APPENDIX I

CYBERBULLYING AND ONLINE AGGRESSION SURVEY INSTRUMENT

Appendix I

Cyberbullying and Online Aggression Survey Instrument

Cyberbullying Victimization

Cyberbullying is when someone repeatedly harasses, mistreats, or makes fun of another person online or while using cell phones or other electronic devices.

I have seen other people being cyberbullied. Never; Once; A few times; Several times; Many times

In my lifetime, I have been cyberbullied. Never; Once; A few times; Several times; Many times

In the last 30 days, I have been cyberbullied. Never; Once; A few times; Several times; Many times

In the last 30 days, I have been cyberbullied in these ways... Never; Once; A few times; Several times; Many times

Someone posted mean or hurtful comments about me online Someone posted a mean or hurtful picture online of me Someone posted a mean or hurtful video online of me Someone created a mean or hurtful web page about me Someone spread rumors about me online Someone threatened to hurt me through a cell phone text message Someone threatened to hurt me online Someone pretended to be me online and acted in a way that was mean or hurtful to me

In the last 30 days, I have been cyberbullied in these online environments... Never; Once; A few times; Several times; Many times In a chat room Through email Through computer instant messages Through cell phone text messages Through cell phone PictureMail or VideoMail On MySpace (removed in 2013 version) On Facebook On a different social networking web site On Twitter On Snapchat (added in 2015 version) On YouTube 107 108

On Instagram (added in 2013 version) In virtual worlds such as Second Life, Gaia, or Habbo Hotel While playing a massive multiplayer online game such as World of Warcraft, Everquest, Guild Wars, or Runescape While playing online with Xbox, Playstation, Wii, PSP or similar device

APPENDIX J

DEMOGRAPHIC DATA FORM

Appendix J

Demographic Data Form

Please complete each of the following items. Information will be held in confidence and maintained anonymously. Gender: ______Male ______Female

Age: ______

Native Country______

What is your current academic standing ______Freshman ______Sophomore

______Junior ______Senior

Please check below your major area of study in the United States:

______Business and Management

______Computer and information Services

______Education

______Engineering

______Health Professions

______Physical Sciences

______Social Sciences

______Humanities

______Other

Language/s

______English is my native language

______I learned English as a second language in my native country

______I learned English as a second language in the U.S.

How long have been living in the U.S? ______years ______months

110

REFERENCES

Aboujaoude, E., Savage, M. W., Starcevic, V., & Salame, W. O. (2015). Cyberbullying:

Review of an old problem gone viral. Journal of Adolescent Health, 57(1), 10-18.

Akbulut, Y., & Eristi, B. (2011). Cyberbullying and victimization among Turkish

university students. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 27(7),

1155-1170.

American College Health Association. (2016). Spring 2016 reference group executive

summary. Retrieved from http://www.acha-ncha.org/docs/NCHA-

II%20SPRING%202016%20US%20REFERENCE%20GROUP%20EXECUTIV

E%20SUMMARY.pdf

American College Health Association. American College Health Association-National

College Health Assessment II: Reference Group Executive Summary. (Fall 2017).

Hanover, MD: American College Health Association.

Ansari, F. P. (1996). Assessing the validity of the Acculturative Stress Scale for

International Students (ASSIS) (Unpublished master’s thesis). Middle Tennessee

State University, Murfreesboro, TN.

Aricak, T., Siyahhan, S., Uzunhasanoglu, A., Uzunhasanoğlu, A., Sarıbeyoglu, S.,

Cıplak, S., . . . Memmedov, C. (2008). Cyberbullying among Turkish adolescents.

CyberPsychology & Behavior, 11(3), 253-261.

Arslan, S., Savaser, S., Hallett, V., & Balci, S. (2012). Cyberbullying among primary

school students in Turkey: Self-reported prevalence and associations with home

112 113

and school life. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 15(10), 527-

533.

Bai, J. (2016). Perceived support as a predictor of acculturative stress among

international students in the United States. Journal of International Students, 6(1),

93.

Bauman, S. (2011). Cyberbullying: What counselors need to know. New York, NY: John

Wiley & Sons.

Beck, A. T., Ward, C. H., Mendelson, M., Mock, J., & Erbaugh, J. (1961). An inventory

for measuring depression. Archives of General Psychiatry, 4(6), 561-571.

Belsey, B. (2017). The world’s first definition of “cyberbullying.” Retrieved from

http://www.cyberbullying.ca/10.11.2017

Beran, T., & Li, Q. (2005). Cyber-harassment: A study of a new method for an old

behavior. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 32(3), 265-277.

Berry, J. W. (2003). Conceptual approaches to acculturation. In K. M. Chun, P. B.

Organista, & G. Marin (Eds.), Acculturation: Advances in theory, measurement,

and applied research (pp. 17-37). Washington DC: American Psychological

Association.

Bully Police USA. (2017). A watch-dog organization: Advocating for bullied children

and reporting on state anti bullying laws. Retrieved on October 12, 2017, from

http://www.bullypolice.org/

114

Chalungsooth, P., & Faris, A. S. (2009). The development and implementation of a

psychoeducational support group for international students. Human Services

Today, 6(1).

Chapell, M. S., Hasselman, S. L., Kitchin, T., & Lomon, S. N. (2006). Bullying in

elementary school, high school, and college. Adolescence, 41(164), 633.

Cheung, Y. B., Liu, K. Y., & Yip, P. S. (2007). Performance of the CES‐D and its Short

Forms in Screening Suicidality and Hopelessness in the Community. Suicide and

Life-Threatening Behavior, 37(1), 79-88.

Cole, J. C., Rabin, A. S., Smith, T. L., & Kaufman, A. S. (2004). Development and

validation of a Rasch-derived CES-D short form. Psychological Assessment,

16(4), 360.

Coloroso, B. (2008). The bully, the bullied, and the bystander. New York, NY: Harper

Collins.

Constantine, M. G., Okazaki, S., & Utsey, S. O. (2004). Self-concealment, social self-

efficacy, acculturative stress, and depression in African, Asian, and Latin

American international college students. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry,

74(3), 230.

Costello, A. B., & Osborne, J. W. (2005). Best practices in exploratory factor analysis:

Four recommendations for getting the most from your analysis. Practical

Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 10(7), 1-9.

Cronbach, L. J. (1951). Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests.

Psychometrika, 16(3), 297-334.

115

Crosslin, K. L., & Crosslin, M. B. (2014). Cyberbullying at a Texas University—A

mixed methods approach to examining online aggression. Texas Public Health

Journal, 66(3), 26-31.

Dilmac, B. (2009). Psychological needs as a predictor of cyber bullying: A preliminary

report on college students. Educational Sciences: Theory and Practice, 9, 1307-

1325.

Dipeolu, A., Kang, J., & Cooper, C. (2007). Support group for international students: A

counseling center's experience. Journal of College Student Psychotherapy, 22(1),

63-74.

Duru, E., & Poyrazli, S. (2011). Perceived discrimination, social connectedness, and

other predictors of adjustment difficulties among Turkish international students.

International Journal of Psychology, 46(6), 446-454.

Fauman, M. A. (2008). Cyber bullying: Bullying in the digital age. American Journal of

Psychiatry, 165(6), 780-781.

Finn, J. (2004). A survey of online harassment at a university campus. Journal of

Interpersonal Violence, 19, 468-483.

Francisco, S. M., Veiga Simão, A. M., Ferreira, P. C., & Martins, M. J. das D. (2015).

Cyberbullying: The hidden side of college students. Computers in Human

Behavior, 43, 167–182.

Gilroy, M. (2013). Guns, hazing, and cyberbullying among top legal issues on campuses.

The Education Digest, 78(8), 45.

116

Gladden, R. M., Vivolo-Kantor, A. M., Hamburger, M. E., & Lumpkin, C. D. (2014).

Bullying surveillance among youths: Uniform definitions for public health and

recommended data elements, version 1.0. Retrieved from

https://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/pdf/Bullying-Definitions-FINAL-a.pdf

Glew, G. M., Fan, M. Y., Katon, W., Rivara, F. P., & Kernic, M. A. (2005). Bullying,

psychosocial adjustment, and academic performance in elementary school.

Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine, 159(11), 1026-1031.

Grzywacz, J. G., Hovey, J. D., Seligman, L. D., Arcury, T. A., & Quandt, S. A. (2006).

Evaluating short-form versions of the CES-D for measuring depressive symptoms

among immigrants from Mexico. Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences, 28(3),

404-424.

Hamburger, M. E., Basile, K. C., & Vivolo, A. M. (2011). Measuring bullying

victimization, perpetration, and bystander experiences: A compendium of

assessment tools. Atlanta, GA: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention,

National Center for Injury Prevention and Control.

Hinduja, S., & Patchin, J. W. (2008). Cyberbullying: An exploratory analysis of factors

related to offending and victimization. Deviant Behavior, 29(2), 129-156.

Hinduja, S., & Patchin, J. W. (2010). Bullying, cyberbullying, and suicide. Archives of

Suicide Research, 14(3), 206-221.

Hinduja, S., & Patchin, J. W. (2013). Social influences on cyberbullying behaviors

among middle and high school students. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 42(5),

711-722

117

Hinduja, S., & Patchin, J. W. (2015). Bullying beyond the schoolyard: Preventing and

responding to cyberbullying (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Hinduja, S., & Patchin, J. W. (2018). Cyberbullying fact sheet: Identification, prevention,

and response. Cyberbullying Research Center. Retrieved May 14, 2018, from

https://cyberbullying.org/Cyberbullying-Identification-Prevention-Response-

2018.pdf

Hovey, J. D. (1998). Acculturative stress, depression, and suicidal ideation among

Mexican-American adolescents: Implications for the development of suicide

prevention programs in schools. Psychological Reports, 83(1), 249-250.

Hovey, J. D. (2000). Acculturative stress, depression, and suicidal ideation in Mexican

immigrants. Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology, 6(2), 134.

Institute of International Education. (2016). Top 25 Places of Origin of International

Students, 2014/15-2015/16. Open Doors Report on International Educational

Exchange. Retrieved from http://www.iie.org/opendoors

Juvonen, J., & Gross, E. F. (2008). Extending the school grounds? Bullying experiences

in cyberspace. Journal of School Health, 78(9), 496-505.

Kaiser, H. F. (1974). An index of factorial simplicity. Psychometrika, 39, 31-36.

Kowalski, R. M., & Limber, S. P. (2007). Electronic bullying among middle school

students. Journal of Adolescent Health, 41(6), S22-S30.

Kowalski, R. M., & Limber, S. P. (2013). Psychological, physical, and academic

correlates of cyberbullying and traditional bullying. Journal of Adolescent Health,

53(1), S13-S20.

118

Kowalski, R. M., Limber, S. P., & Agatston, P. W. (2008). Cyber bullying: Bullying in

the digital world. Malden, MA: Blackwell.

Kuo, B. C., & Roysircar, G. (2004). Predictors of acculturation for Chinese adolescents in

Canada: Age of arrival, length of stay, social class, and English reading ability.

Journal of Multicultural Counseling and Development, 32(3), 143-154.

Lenhart, A. (2015). Teen, social media and technology overview 2015. Pew Research

Center. Retrieved from http://www.pewinternet.org/2015/04/09/teens-social-

media-technology-2015/

Leong, F.T.L., & Chou, E.L. (2002). Counseling international students. In P. B. Pedersen,

J. G. Draguns, W. J. Lonner, & J. E. Trimble (Eds.), Counseling across cultures

(5th ed., pp. 185-207). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Li, Q. (2006). Cyberbullying in schools: A research of gender differences. School

Psychology International, 27(2), 157-170.

Li, Q. (2007). Bullying in the new playground: A research into cyberbullying and cyber

victimization. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 23, 435-454.

Lindsay, M., & Krysik, J. (2012). Online harassment among college students.

Information, Communication, & Society, 15, 703-719.

Liu, Y., Chen, X., Li, S., Yu, B., Wang, Y., & Yan, H. (2016). Path analysis of

acculturative stress components and their relationship with depression among

international students in China. Stress and Health, 32(5), 524-532.

119

MacDonald, C. D., & Roberts-Pittman, B. (2010). Cyberbullying among college students:

Prevalence and demographic differences. Procedia-Social and Behavioral

Sciences, 9, 2003-2009.

Molluzzo, J. C., & Lawler, J. (2012). A study of the perceptions of college students on

cyberbullying. Information Systems Education Journal, 10(4), 84.

Mori, S. C. (2000). Addressing the mental health concerns of international students.

Journal of Counseling & Development, 78(2), 137-144.

Na, H., Dancy, B. L., & Park, C. (2015). College student engaging in cyberbullying

victimization: Cognitive appraisals, coping strategies, and psychological

adjustments. Archives of Psychiatric Nursing, 29(3), 155-161.

NAFSA (2016). NAFSA international student economic value tool. Retrieved from

www.nafsa.org/economicvalue

Nilsson, J. E., Berkel, L. A., Flores, L. Y., & Lucas, M. S. (2004). Utilization rate and

presenting concerns of international students at a university counseling center:

Implications for outreach programming. Journal of College Student

Psychotherapy, 19(2), 49-59.

O’Neill, M. (1995). The lure and addiction of life on line. Retrieved from

http://www.nytimes.com/1995/03/08/garden/the-lure-and-addiction-of-life-on-

line.html?pagewanted=all

Olweus, D. (1993). Bullying at school: What we know and what we can do. Malden, MA:

Blackwell.

120

Olweus, D. (2012). Cyberbullying: An overrated phenomenon? European Journal of

Developmental Psychology, 9(5), 520-538.

Patchin, J. W., & Hinduja, S. (2006). Bullies move beyond the schoolyard: A preliminary

look at cyberbullying. Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice, 4(2), 148-169.

Patchin, J. W., & Hinduja, S. (2010). Cyberbullying and self-esteem. Journal of School

Health, 80(12), 616-623.

Patchin, J. W., & Hinduja, S. (Eds.). (2012). Cyberbullying prevention and response:

Expert perspectives. New York, NY: Routledge.

Patchin, J. W., & Hinduja, S. (2015). Measuring cyberbullying: Implications for research.

Aggression and Violent Behavior, 23, 69-74.

Paullet, K., & Pinchot, J. (2014). Behind the screen where today’s bully plays :

Perceptions of college students on cyberbullying. Computer and Information

Systems, 25(1), 63–70.

Pew Research Center. (2016). Internet/Broadband Fact Sheet. Retrieved on May 14,

2018, from http://www.pewinternet.org/fact-sheet/internet-broadband/

Phillips-Shyrock, S. (2014). A mixed methods study of cyberbullying: Student, educator,

and parent/guardian perspectives and implications for prevention and

intervention (Doctoral dissertation, Indiana University of Pennsylvania). Indiana,

PA.

Poyrazli, S., Kavanaugh, P. R., Baker, A., & Al‐Timimi, N. (2004). Social support and

demographic correlates of acculturative stress in international students. Journal of

College Counseling, 7(1), 73-82.

121

Poyrazli, S., Thukral, R. K., & Duru, E. (2010). International students race-ethnicity,

personality and accultrative stress. International Journal of Psychology and

Counselling, 2(2), 25-32.

Radloff, L. S. (1977). The CES-D scale: A self-report depression scale for research in the

general population. Applied Psychological Measurement, 1(3), 385-401.

Raubenheimer, J. (2004). An item selection procedure to maximize scale reliability and

validity. SA Journal of Industrial Psychology, 30(4), 59-64.

Rice, K. G., Ashby, J. S., & Slaney, R. B. (2007). Perfectionism and the five-factor

model of personality. Assessment, 14(4), 385-398.

Sandhu, D. S., & Asrabadi, B. R. (1994). Development of an acculturative stress scale for

international students: Preliminary findings. Psychological Reports, 75(1), 435-

448.

Sandhu, D. S., & Asrabadi, B. R. (1998). An acculturative stress scale for international

students: A practical approach to stress management. Evaluating Stress: A Book

of Resources, 2, 1-33.

Schenk, A. M., & Fremouw, W. J. (2012). Prevalence, psychological impact, and coping

of cyberbully victims among college students. Journal of School Violence, 11(1),

21-37.

Schenk, A. M., Fremouw, W. J., & Keelan, C. M. (2013). Characteristics of college

cyberbullies. Computers in Human Behavior, 29(6), 2320–2327.

122

Selkie, E. M., Fales, J. L., & Moreno, M. A. (2016). Cyberbullying prevalence among US

middle and high school–aged adolescents: A systematic review and quality

assessment. Journal of Adolescent Health, 58(2), 125-133.

Selkie, E. M., Kota, R., Chan, Y.-F., & Moreno, M. (2015). Cyberbullying, depression,

and problem alcohol use in female college students: A multisite study.

Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 18(2), 79–86.

Smart, J. F., & Smart, D. W. (1995). Acculturative stress: The experience of the Hispanic

immigrant. The Counseling Psychologist, 23(1), 25-42.

Smith, J. A., & Yoon, J. (2013). Cyberbullying presence, extent, & forms in a

Midwestern post-secondary institution. Information Systems Education Journal,

11, 52-78.

Smith, P. K. (2015). The nature of cyberbullying and what we can do about it. Journal of

Research in Special Educational Needs, 15(3), 176-184.

Smith, P. K., & Brain, P. (2000). Bullying in schools: lessons from two. Aggressive

Behavior, 26, 1-9.

Smith, P. K., Morita, Y., Junger-Tas, J., Olweus, D., Catalano, R., & Slee, P. (Eds.).

(1999). The nature of school bullying: A cross-national perspective. New York,

NY: Routledge.

Sourander, A., Klomek, A. B., Ikonen, M., Lindroos, J., Luntamo, T., Koskelainen, M.,

. . . & Helenius, H. (2010). Psychosocial risk factors associated with

cyberbullying among adolescents: A population-based study. Archives of General

Psychiatry, 67(7), 720-728.

123

Thomas, S. P. (2006). From the editor—The phenomenon of cyberbullying. Issues in

Mental Health Nursing, 27(10), 1015-1016.

Thompson, B. (2004). Exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis: Understanding

concepts and applications. Washington, DC: American Psychological

Association.

Tokunaga, R. S. (2010). Following you home from school: A critical review and

synthesis of research on cyberbullying victimization. Computers in Human

Behavior, 26(3), 277-287.

Tsai, P. C., & Wong, Y. J. (2012). Chinese and Taiwanese international college students’

participation in social organizations: Implications for college counseling

professionals. Journal of College Counseling, 15(2), 144-156.

U.S. Department of Education. (2016). Students reports of bullying: Results from the

2015 school crime supplement to the national crime victimization survey.

Retrieved from https://nces.ed.gov/pubs2017/2017015.pdf

Walker, C. M., Sockman, B. R., & Koehn, S. (2011). An exploratory study of

cyberbullying with under graduate university students. TechTrends: Linking

Research and Practice to Improve Learning, 55, 31-38.

Walrave, M., & Heirman, W. (2011). Cyberbullying: Predicting victimisation and

perpetration. Children and Society, 25(1), 59-72.

Wang, J., Iannotti, R. J., & Nansel, T. R. (2009). School bullying among adolescents in

the United States: Physical, verbal, relational, and cyber. Journal of Adolescent

Health, 45(4), 368-375.

124

Wei, M., Heppner, P. P., Mallen, M. J., Ku, T. Y., Liao, K. Y. H., & Wu, T. F. (2007).

Acculturative stress, perfectionism, years in the United States, and depression

among Chinese international students. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 54(4),

385.

Willard, N. E. (2007). Cyberbullying and cyberthreats: Responding to the challenge of

online social aggression, threats, and distress. Champaign, IL: Research Press.

Ybarra, M. L. (2004). Linkages between depressive symptomatology and Internet

harassment among young regular Internet users. CyberPsychology & Behavior,

7(2), 247-257.

Ybarra, M. L., & Mitchell, K. J. (2004). Online aggressor/targets, aggressors, and targets:

A comparison of associated youth characteristics. Journal of Child Psychology

and Psychiatry, 45(7), 1308–1316. Retrieved from

http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.469- 7610.2004.00328.x.

Ybarra, M. L., Mitchell, K. J., Wolak, J., & Finkelhor, D. (2006). Examining

characteristics and associated distress related to Internet harassment: findings

from the Second Youth Internet Safety Survey. Pediatrics, 118(4), e1169-e1177.

Yeh, C. J., & Inose, M. (2003). International students’ reported English fluency, social

support satisfaction, and social connectedness as predictors of acculturative stress.

Counselling Psychology Quarterly, 16(1), 15-28.

Yi, K. J., Lin, J. C. G., & Yuko, K. (2003). Utilization of counseling services by

international students. Journal of Instructional Psychology, 30(4), 333.

125

Yilmaz, H. (2011). Cyberbullying in Turkish middle schools: An exploratory study.

School Psychology International 32(6), 645-654.

Zacchilli, T. L., & Valerio, C. Y. (2011). The knowledge and prevalence of cyberbullying

in a college sample. Journal of Scientific Psychology, 5, 12-23.

Zalaquett, C. P., & Chatters, S. J. (2014). Cyberbullying in college: frequency,

characteristics, and practical implications. Sage Open, 4(1), 2158244014526721.