Cyberbullying: An overrated phenomenon?

By D. Olweus. 2012

639 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Artificial Intelligence, Education, Social Psychology

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/8d307a5fd2c506c140155c27095e215af1241f3d

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Artificial Intelligence

In Education

In Social Psychology

Citations in the corpus

Gender Differences in the Association Between Cyberbullying Victimization and Perpetration: The Role of Anger Rumination and Traditional Bullying Experiences (2020, background): “According to previous studies, the most common response to CB is anger (Camodeca et al. 2002; Ortega et al. 2012).”
Cyberbullying among youth: A comprehensive review of current international research and its implications and application to policy and practice (2013, background): “While some researchers like Dan Olweus (2012a, 2012b), Smith (2012a), and Hinduja & Patchin (2012a) claim that the rate of cyberbullying has not increased since it first emerged as a problem in the middle of the last decade, other researchers (e.g. Cassidy, Brown, & Jackson, 2011; Kowalski et al., 2”
Anonymously hurting others online: The effect of anonymity on cyberbullying frequency. (2015, background): “This would imply that anonymity should increase CB behavior; however, research has shown that traditional bullying is more common than CB (Olweus, 2012), and traditional bullies can harm others using covert aggressive tactics (e.g., gossiping, rumor spreading).”
Moral Disengagement About Cyberbullying and Parental Monitoring: Effects on Traditional Bullying and Victimization via Cyberbullying Involvement (2018, background): “…involved in cyberbullying are the same as those involved in traditional bullying, in that those who are aggressive in cyber contexts tend to also bully their peers in person (Dempsey, Sulkowski, Dempsey, & Storch, 2011; Monks et al., 2012; Olweus, 2012; Perren & Gutzwiller-Helfenfinger, 2012).”
A Comparison of Classification Approaches for Cyberbullying and Traditional Bullying Using Data From Six European Countries (2015, background): “Classification of Cyberbullying Involvement Contrary to previous beliefs that cyberbullying is a subtype of traditional bullying (Olweus, 2012) and in line with studies showing structural differences to traditional bullying (Law et al., 2012; Menesini et al., 2011) we did not find a four-class…”
A review of cyberbullying and suggestions for online psychological therapy (2015, background): “Olweus (2012) stated that prevalence rates are sometimes confounded when investigated in an isolated contextwithout considerations for traditional bullying.”
Does empathy predict (cyber) bullying perpetration, and how do age, gender and nationality affect this relationship? (2016, background): “Estimated prevalence of traditional bullying lies between 5 and 10% (Olweus, 2012; Solberg & Olweus, 2003; Smith, 2014).”
Online Harassment in Context: Trends From Three Youth Internet Safety Surveys (2000, 2005, 2010) (2013, background): “The data from several studies ( Beran & Li , 2007 ; Juvonen & Gross , 2008 ; Olweus , 2012 ; Raskauskas & Stoltz , 2007 ; Ybarra , Diener - West , & Leaf , 2007 ) suggests that online harassment is often an extension of offline peer problems , with dis - agreements expanding into a more public…”
Cyberbullying: Challenges and opportunities for a research program—A response to Olweus (2012) (2012, neutral): “A response to Olweus (2012)”