Neil Tippett Peter K. Smith Fran Thompson

An initial analysis of UK data

The DAPHNE project

Collaboration between four European partners: Italy (Bologna University);UK (Goldsmiths, University of London);Spain (Cordoba University) and Finland (Turku University)

Duration: February 2007 – February 2009

Aims of the project investigate new forms of bullying in adolescents

create new questionnaires to evaluate bullying, the group dynamics in bullying and the process of victimisation

investigate bullying in different contexts - although data will only be collected in school, behaviour outside school will also be investigated

explore the relationship between ordinary bullying and cyberbullying

evaluate the results in order to create new guidelines for the EU

create resources for schools (e.g. websites, DVDs, manuals; lesson plans etc)

MethodData discussed in this study investigates the incidence of cyberbullying in

UK schools, and the relationship to traditional forms of victimisation

Used a newly devised anonymous self-report questionnaire, adapted from questionnaires already used and validated in cyberbullying research

Questionnaires were carried out in a school setting, during school time and with teacher supervision

Provides information on potential predictors including age, gender, ethnicity, living location, parents socio economic status and computer/mobile phone use

Main section asks participants about their involvement with bullying and cyberbullying, and includes scales to measure self esteem and loneliness

The Questionnaire

Section 1: About you

Provided data on participants self esteem and loneliness. Questions were adapted from two existing questionnaires, translated from Italian into English.

Self esteem: Revised version of Melotti & Passini, 2002. Included six measures of self esteem: global, sport, school, body, peers and family.

Loneliness: Adapted from Melotti, 2006, included four measures of loneliness related to:Parents – closeness to familyPeers – closeness to friends, members of their peer groupAversion – how much participants like/dislike being aloneAffinity – how participants feel about being alone

Section 2: About your school

Series of questions relating to school safety and involvement

Section 3: About bullying and cyberbullying

Based on existing questionnaire developed by Smith et al (2005), shortened and adapted by Ortega (2006)

Includes questions on involvement in four types of bullying: direct, indirect, through mobiles and through the internet

Provides data on characteristics of mobile and internet bullying, including: relationship between victim and bully, length of bullying and victims response

Includes a section designed to measure attitudes of bystanders, adapted from participant role approach

Participants

* 8 participants did not provide data on age or gender

Selected from 11 secondary schools located in 3 English countiesMajority of participants white British or white European (68%), followed by Asian (20%), mixed/other (7%) or black British (5%)

Year 8 Year 10 Year 12 Total

Male 436 423 246 1105 (50%)

Female 409 426 279 1114 (50%)

Total 845 (38%) 849 (38%) 525 (24%) 2219

2227 Participants in total, aged 10 - 18

Rates of victimisation in the last two monthsOnce or twice

Several times a month

Once a week

Several times a week

Total

Direct bullying

11.6% 2.5% 2.0% 2.6% 18.7%

Indirect bullying

14.0% 2.2% 1.5% 2.5% 20.1%

Mobile phone bullying

2.1% 0.7% 0.5% 0.7% 4.1%

Internet bullying

4.0% 1.4% 0.7% 0.5% 6.6%

Characteristics of cyberbullyingMobile victims:Text messages most common (54% of victims) followed by phone calls

(44%) and multimedia texts (16%)

26% of victims did not know who bullied them, 61% of victims attended the same school as the person who bullied them

Internet victims:Most victims reported being bullied through Instant messaging (54%),

followed by social networking sites (30%), and email or chat rooms (20%)

22% of victims did not know who bullied them, 57% attended the same school as the bully

Characteristics of cyberbullying II

Mobile victims:Most incidents lasted 1 or 2 weeks (47%), 16% bullied for at least one year

Commonest reaction was telling a friend (28%), followed by telling a parent (22%) or ignoring what had happened (23%)

Internet victimsMost internet bullying lasted for 1 or 2 weeks (62%), 7 % of internet

victims had been bullied on the internet for a year of longer

Over a third reacted by blocking messages (37%) - remainder were most likely to ignore it or tell a friend (25%)

Comparisons by age and gender

Mobile VictimsYear group and gender showed no significant main effects regarding the

likelihood of being mobile bullied

Interaction was observed - males in year 10 (13-15) were significantly more likely to be victims of mobile bullying (F=3.066, p<0.05)

Internet victimsGender and year group had no significant effects on the likelihood of being

bullied on the internet.

No interactions observed

Rates of bullying others within the last two months

Once or twice

Several times a month

Once a week

Several times a week

Total

Direct bullying

6.6% 1.1% 0.9% 1.4% 9.9%

Indirect bullying

7.1% 1.2% 1.0% 0.9% 10.3%

Mobile phone bullying

1.0% 0.9% 0.4% 0.3% 2.5%

Internet bullying

1.5% 0.8% 0.5% 0.3% 3.1%

Comparisons by age and gender

Mobile BulliesGender showed a significant effect regarding involvement in mobile

bullying (F=7.784, p<0.05). Males significantly more likely to bully others through mobile phones than females.

No effect according to age, no interaction observed

Internet bulliesMales were also significantly more likely to bully other people using the

internet than females (F=5.181, p<0.05).

No effects were found regarding age, no interaction observed

Self esteem and victim status

Victims of only internet bullying scored significantly lower on all measures of self esteem, compared to those who had not been cyberbullied.

Children who had experienced both mobile and internet bullying also scored significantly lower on global, school, body and peer measures of self esteem

Self esteem and bully status

Children who bullied others either using just the internet, or using mobiles and the internet scored significantly lower on school and family measures of self esteem than those who had not taken part in cyberbullying.

Loneliness and victim status

Mobile, Internet and mobile/internet victims rated as significantly more lonely on parent and peer measures than non bullied children

Loneliness and bully status

Children who bullied others using both mobiles and the internet were significantly more lonely than non involved children on both parent and peer measures.

Summary of findings

Cyberbullying constitutes a quarter to a third of traditional bullying

Text messages, phone calls and instant messaging most commonly reported method

Mobile and internet forms of bullying show similarities but are responded to differently

Gender shows some effect, particularly males as cyberbullies

Self esteem and loneliness reveal significant differences

Areas for analysis and discussion

Slightly lower incidence of cyberbullying compared to previous studies: could results from sample, methodology or impact of intervention programmes

Examine differences between traditional and cyber forms of bullying, including effect, response of victim, and behaviour of bystanders

Deeper analysis required using self esteem and loneliness scales: including comparison with traditional victims/bullies

Examination of cyber bully-victims if sample size permits

Analyse the role of bystanders using adaptation of the participant role approach