Review article
Cyberbullying Prevalence Among US Middle and High School–Aged Adolescents: A Systematic Review and Quality Assessment

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jadohealth.2015.09.026Get rights and content

Abstract

Purpose

Cyberbullying (CB) has established links to physical and mental health problems including depression, suicidality, substance use, and somatic symptoms. Quality reporting of CB prevalence is essential to guide evidence-based policy and prevention priorities. The purpose of this systematic review was to investigate study quality and reported prevalence among CB research studies conducted in populations of US adolescents of middle and high school age.

Methods

Searches of peer-reviewed literature published through June 2015 for “CB” and related terms were conducted using PubMed, PsycINFO, CINAHL Plus, and Web of Science. Included manuscripts reported CB prevalence in general populations of US adolescents between the ages of 10 and 19 years. Using a review tool based on the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology statement, reviewers independently scored study quality on study methods, results reporting, and reported prevalence.

Results

Search results yielded 1,447 manuscripts; 81 manuscripts representing 58 unique studies were identified as meeting inclusion criteria. Quality scores ranged between 12 and 37 total points of a possible 42 points (mean = 26.7, standard deviation = 4.6). Prevalence rates of CB ranged as follows: Perpetration, 1%–41%; victimization, 3%–72%; and overlapping perpetration and victimization, 2.3%–16.7%.

Conclusions

Literature on CB in US middle and high school–aged students is robust in quantity but inconsistent in quality and reported prevalence. Consistent definitions and evidence-based measurement tools are needed.

Section snippets

Study design

Our goal was to conduct a systematic review of the peer-reviewed literature addressing CB literature, guided by the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement. Given the heterogeneity of CB measurement instruments used in the included studies, we did not feel that a meta-analysis to determine overall CB prevalence between studies was feasible.

Search strategy

In consultation with a health sciences librarian, searches were performed on four major databases of medical and social

Results

Our initial search yielded 1,447 nonduplicate manuscripts, of which, 1,260 were included in the initial review of English-language peer-reviewed publications (Figure 1). Further exclusion was made of 302 nonoriginal research manuscripts, 339 manuscripts that did not assess CB, 24 manuscripts that assessed only a special population, 64 manuscripts of participants outside middle and high school ages, 33 qualitative manuscripts, 254 manuscripts of CB studies conducted outside the United States,

Discussion

Our findings suggest a robust interest in the research community in studying CB prevalence among middle and high school–aged adolescents, with 81 manuscripts (58 studies) reporting prevalence among US adolescents in the last 12 years. We applied a quality review to manuscripts and found that manuscripts most often scored poorly using a validated measurement tool. Among these studies, we found varied prevalence of CB perpetration and victimization as well as variable terms used as outcomes

Acknowledgments

The funding source had no role in the design and conduct of the study; collection, management, analysis, and interpretation of the data; preparation, review, or approval of the manuscript; or decision to submit the manuscript for publication.

References (96)

  • K.J. Mitchell et al.

    Youth Internet victimization in a broader victimization context

    J Adolesc Health

    (2011)
  • A. Sengupta et al.

    Are social networking sites a source of online harassment for teens? Evidence from survey data

    Child Youth Serv Rev

    (2011)
  • M.G. Turner et al.

    Bullying victimization and adolescent mental health: General and typological effects across sex

    J Criminal Justice

    (2013)
  • T.E. Waasdorp et al.

    The overlap between cyberbullying and traditional bullying

    J Adolesc Health

    (2015)
  • J. Wang et al.

    School bullying among adolescents in the United States: Physical, verbal, relational, and cyber

    J Adolesc Health

    (2009)
  • J. Wang et al.

    Cyber and traditional bullying: Differential association with depression

    J Adolesc Health

    (2011)
  • J. Wang et al.

    Patterns of adolescent bullying behaviors: Physical, verbal, exclusion, rumor, and cyber

    J Sch Psychol

    (2012)
  • G.E. Barboza

    The association between school exclusion, delinquency and subtypes of cyber- and F2F-victimizations: Identifying and predicting risk profiles and subtypes using latent class analysis

    Child Abuse Negl

    (2015)
  • T.J. Holt et al.

    The impact of self control and neighborhood disorder on bullying victimization

    J Crim Justice

    (2014)
  • E. Messias et al.

    School bullying, cyberbullying, or both: Correlates of teen suicidality in the 2011 CDC youth risk behavior survey

    Compr Psychiatry

    (2014)
  • R.J. Steiner et al.

    Brief report: Associations between in-person and electronic bullying victimization and missing school because of safety concerns among U.S. high school students

    J Adolesc

    (2015)
  • J. Wang et al.

    Bullying victimization among underweight and overweight U.S. youth: Differential associations for boys and girls

    J Adolesc Health

    (2010)
  • M.L. Ybarra et al.

    Differentiating youth who are bullied from other victims of peer-aggression: The importance of differential power and repetition

    J Adolesc Health

    (2014)
  • R.M. Kowalski et al.

    Electronic bullying among middle school students

    J Adolesc Health

    (2007)
  • K.L. Modecki et al.

    Bullying prevalence across contexts: A meta-analysis measuring cyber and traditional bullying

    J Adolesc Health

    (2014)
  • M.L. Ybarra et al.

    Defining and measuring cyberbullying within the larger context of bullying victimization

    J Adolesc Health

    (2012)
  • A. Sourander et al.

    Psychosocial risk factors associated with cyberbullying among adolescents: A population-based study

    Arch Gen Psychiatry

    (2010)
  • S. Hinduja et al.

    Bullying, cyberbullying, and suicide

    Arch Suicide Res

    (2010)
  • S. Kessel Schneider et al.

    Cyberbullying, school bullying, and psychological distress: A regional census of high school students

    Am J Public Health

    (2012)
  • P.K. Smith et al.

    Cyberbullying: The nature and extent of a new kind of bullying, in and out of school. Handbook of bullying in schools: An international perspective

    (2010)
  • J.W. Patchin et al.

    Bullies move beyond the schoolyard: A preliminary look at cyberbullying

    Youth Violence Juv Justice

    (2006)
  • A. Liau et al.

    Parental awareness and monitoring of adolescent internet use

    Curr Psychol

    (2008)
  • F. Sticca et al.

    Is cyberbullying worse than traditional bullying? Examining the differential roles of medium, publicity, and anonymity for the perceived severity of bullying

    J Youth Adolesc

    (2013)
  • R. Gladden et al.

    Bullying surveillance among youths: Uniform definitions for public health and recommended data elements, version 1.0

    (2013)
  • K.P. Allen

    Off the radar and ubiquitous: Text messaging and its relationship to ‘drama’ and cyberbullying in an affluent, academically rigorous US high school

    J Youth Stud

    (2012)
  • J. Juvonen et al.

    Extending the school grounds?–Bullying experiences in cyberspace

    J Sch Health

    (2008)
  • M. Wells et al.

    How do high-risk youth use the Internet? Characteristics and implications for prevention

    Child Maltreat

    (2008)
  • R.W. Stewart et al.

    The development and psychometric investigation of the cyberbullying scale

    J Interpers Violence

    (2014)
  • R.M. Kowalski et al.

    Bullying in the digital age: A critical review and meta-analysis of cyberbullying research among youth

    Psychol Bull

    (2014)
  • L.M. Jones et al.

    Online harassment in context: Trends from three youth internet safety surveys (2000, 2005, 2010)

    Psychol Violence

    (2013)
  • Y.G. Ji et al.

    The influence of cultural differences on the use of social network services and the formation of social capital

    Int J Hum-Comput Int

    (2010)
  • E. von Elm et al.

    The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement: Guidelines for reporting observational studies

    Ann Intern Med

    (2007)
  • M.A. Moreno et al.

    Problematic internet use among us youth: A systematic review

    Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med

    (2011)
  • S. Bauman

    Cyberbullying in a rural intermediate school: An exploratory study

    J Early Adolesc

    (2010)
  • N.M. Connell et al.

    Badgrlz? Exploring sex differences in cyberbullying behaviors

    Youth Violence Juv Justice

    (2014)
  • S. Hinduja et al.

    Social influences on cyberbullying behaviors among middle and high school students

    J Youth Adolesc

    (2013)
  • F. Pergolizzi et al.

    Bullying in middle schools: Results from a four-school survey

    J Sch Violence

    (2009)
  • F. Pergolizzi et al.

    Bullying in middle school: Results from a 2008 survey

    Int J Adolesc Med Health

    (2011)
  • Cited by (206)

    • Sex, age and cyber-victimization: A meta-analysis.

      2023, Computers in Human Behavior
      Citation Excerpt :

      Sex is an inconsistent variable since, on the one hand, numerous studies point to the non-existence of significant differences (Simckes et al., 2017; Hemphill & Heerde, 2014; Holfeld & Mishna, 2019), while others point to differences that mostly affect women (Álvarez-García et al., 2015; Bauman et al., 2013; Buelga et al., 2017; Cuadrado-Gordillo & Fernández-Antelo, 2016; DeSmet et al., 2014; Extremera et al., 2018; González-Cabrera et al., 2017, 2018; Messias et al., 2014; Moreno-Ruiz et al., 2019). In terms of age, some authors find significant differences and others do not (Athanasiou et al., 2018; Holfeld & Mishna, 2019; Katz et al., 2019; Selkie et al., 2016; Shapka et al., 2018). Among those who advocate the role of age as a mediator are three different approaches:

    View all citing articles on Scopus

    Conflicts of Interest: The authors have no conflicts of interest or financial disclosures to report.

    1

    Present Address: University of Michigan, Pediatrics—Adolescent Medicine, 300 North Ingalls Building, 6C15A, SPC 5456, Ann Arbor, MI 48109.

    View full text