Systematic review of empirical studies on cyberbullying in adults: What we know and what we should investigate

Highlights

• Cyberbullying in adult population is a barely studied matter.

• Most studies focused on university population and were developed in the US.

• Studies utilize different criteria to identify cyberbullied, cyberbullies, and bystanders.

• Adult cyberbullying may be as severe as with youth

• Long-term effects of cyberbullying are unknown given scarce longitudinal studies.

Abstract

Cyberbullying is a worldwide phenomenon and most of our knowledge comes from studies with adolescent and younger populations. Adult populations have received scarce attention. The present study is a systematic review of empirical academic papers on cyberbullying in the adult population. An online databases search (CINHAL, PsycInfo, ERIC, Medline, Pubmed, and Web of Science) identified 3986 references that, in successive steps, were reduced to 90 studies published between 2004 and 2016 that met the inclusion criteria. Each study was analyzed regarding topic, methods, ages, and other general characteristics. In addition, the measures used to assess cyberbullying, the impact of cyberbullying, and the different roles of those involved in the studies with adult population were explored. Results showed that there is a need for studies conducted in locations other than university settings and that the variety of measures, as well as the different criteria utilized to identify the cyberbullied, cyberbullies, and bystanders makes it difficult to compare findings. There is a need for longitudinal studies and for evidence-based practices to deal with these violent and aggressive behaviors.

Introduction

Cyberbullying, the use of technology to deliberately and repeatedly threaten, insult, harass or tease another, is a worldwide phenomenon. Five core components define cyberbullying: (1) it is a relational or interpersonal aggression; (2) intentional; (3) it occurs in asymmetrical situations; (4) it is repeated over time and is not a single event; (5) and is carried out via ICTs so that authorship is not always obvious (authors, in press). As Smith and Steffgen (2013) state, cyberbullying is in part a consequence of living in increasingly aggressive societies and there is greater potential for harm through diverse means. The chances of interpersonal conflicts increase with the anonymity that characterizes Internet exchanges (Ang, 2016).

Yet, most of our knowledge on cyberbullying comes from adolescent and younger populations. Such studies have been conducted for more than a decade and, while there are some controversies, there seems to be six main topics from previous systematic and literature reviews with younger populations that merit further analysis focused on adult populations. First, systematic studies have revealed significant inconsistencies in reported prevalence, with perpetration rates ranging from 1% to 41%, victimization rates ranging from 3% to 72%, and overlapping perpetration and victimization rates ranging from 2.3% to 16.7% (Garaigordobil, 2011, Selkie et al., 2016). It would be interesting to know if these inconsistencies are also found with adult populations and the reasons behind it.

Second, females, sexual minorities, and other ethnic minorities are seemingly at higher risk (Aboujaoude et al., 2015, Albdour and Krouse, 2014, ⁎Cassidy et al., 2014, Guan et al., 2016). Their perpetrators are more likely to be male (Aboujaoude et al., 2015), yet, gender differences remain inconsistent across studies (Slonje, Smith, & Frisén, 2013). Additional contributing factors are a non-supportive school environment (e.g., not feeling safe at school) and risky Internet behaviors (e.g., online communication with strangers) (Guan et al., 2016). The analysis of the situation of adult minorities and those who engage in at risk behaviors when using the Internet, will help confirm the generalization of current findings.

Third, interpersonal relationships are important variables for prevention and intervention purposes, not only in terms of the parent–adolescent relationship (Ang, 2015, Suzuki et al., 2012), but also in terms of teacher-student connectedness (Duong & Bradshaw, 2014), as well as in terms of peer support (Weber, Ziegele, & Schnauber, 2013). In this regard, identifying protective factors in adult population would be aligned with these purposes.

Fourth, in youth, several short- and long-term psychosocial, affective, and academic problems have been associated to cyberbullying (Tokunaga, 2010, Zych et al., 2015), with depression (Reed, Cooper, Nugent, & Russell, 2016) and suicidal ideation and attempts (Gini and Espelage, 2014, Jordan and Austin, 2012) being some of the most severe consequences. Yet, this violent behavior seems to have a differential impact that should also be investigated. Some studies suggest that the effects of cyberbullying are less intense as they do not require face to face interaction, (Hase et al., 2015, Kowalski and Limber, 2013). Other studies, however, indicate that, due to the difficulties of escaping such pervasive harassment, the impact on the victim is greater (Cross et al., 2015, Melioli et al., 2015). A further exploration of these issues in adult population will shed light to this phenomenon.

Fifth, the role of bullies and bystanders has received increasing attention in youth populations (Agatston et al., 2007, Conway et al., 2014, Holfeld, 2014), and the role of empathy and support is emphasized (Barlinska et al., 2013, Campbell et al., 2017, Navarro et al., 2015). Some studies suggest that bystanders experience negative psychological impact as well (Conway et al., 2014). Yet the studies are cross-sectional or focus on short-term impacts and there is a lack of studies on longer-term effects.

Six, there is a need for investigating the validity and reliability of most of the existing instruments and for resolving the conceptual and definition fluctuations related to cyberbullying (Berne et al., 2013, Zych et al., 2015). Because the studies use different methods and measurements, a comparison of the results is difficult (Katzer, 2009). For example, a recent review identified 41 measures, most of them aimed at assessing adolescent, high school students, and the like (Vivolo-Kantor, Martell, Holland, & Westby, 2014). The study revealed an absence of a clear definition of bullying and content validity limitations of many of the instruments, which indicates a need for further studies. The analysis of psychometric properties of measures utilized with adult population deserves the same attention.

The existing systematic reviews on cyberbullying are focused mostly on school age or youth populations (e.g., Barlett and Coyne, 2014, Kowalski et al., 2014, Zych et al., 2015). In adult populations, the phenomenon is only recently receiving research attention (Orel et al., 2017, ⁎Wozencroft et al., 2015).

Considering these shortcomings, this study aims to review the existing literature on cyberbullying in adult populations and to identify the main topics studied, the journals involved, the methods employed, and other general characteristics. In addition, we aim to further analyze the existing studies to increase our current knowledge on the previously mentioned six topics: prevalence, contributing factors, short- and long-term impact of cyberbullying, the role of bystanders, as well as validity, reliability and conceptual issues.