internet safety research paper

• Research article
• Open access
• Published: 05 June 2013

Internet safety education for youth: stakeholder perspectives

• Megan A Moreno 1 , 4 ,
• Katie G Egan 2 ,
• Kaitlyn Bare 1 ,
• Henry N Young 3 &
• Elizabeth D Cox 1  

BMC Public Health volume  13 , Article number:  543 ( 2013 ) Cite this article

31k Accesses

28 Citations

1 Altmetric

Metrics details

Internet use is nearly ubiquitous among US youth; risks to internet use include cyberbullying, privacy violations and unwanted solicitation. Internet safety education may prevent these negative consequences; however, it is unclear at what age this education should begin and what group is responsible for teaching this topic.

Surveys were distributed to key stakeholders in youth safety education including public school teachers, clinicians, parents and adolescents. Surveys assessed age at which internet safety education should begin, as well as experiences teaching and learning internet safety. Surveys of adults assessed willingness to teach internet safety. Finally, participants were asked to identify a group whose primary responsibility it should be to teach internet safety.

A total of 356 participants completed the survey (93.4% response rate), including 77 teachers, 111 clinicians, 72 parents and 96 adolescents. Stakeholders felt the optimal mean age to begin teaching internet safety was 7.2 years (SD = 2.5), range 2-15. Internet safety was regularly taught by some teachers (20.8%), few clinicians (2.6%) and many parents (40.3%). The majority of teachers, clinicians and parents were willing to teach internet safety, but all groups surveyed identified parents as having primary responsibility for teaching this topic.

Conclusions

Findings suggest agreement among key stakeholders for teaching internet safety at a young age, and for identifying parents as primary teachers of this topic. Clinicians have a unique opportunity to support parents by providing resources, guidance and support.

Peer Review reports

While the internet has provided adolescents with numerous benefits, including increased social support, academic enrichment and worldwide cross-cultural interactions, there are concomitant risks to internet use [ 1 – 8 ]. The American Academy of Pediatrics’ (AAP) recent report on children’s social media use describes specific risks such as privacy violations and cyberbullying [ 9 ]. A previous study found that one-third of adolescents had given their internet password to friends and one-fourth were unaware that content uploaded online cannot be permanently deleted [ 1 ]. Cyberbullying, or internet harassment, impacts up to a third of youth and has been linked to a variety of health concerns, some as serious as suicidal ideation [ 10 – 15 ]. In addition, adolescents frequently display personal and identifiable information about themselves on the internet. These details may include their home location, revealing photographs, or descriptions of sexual behavior and substance use [ 16 – 18 ].

Internet safety is highly salient for today’s youth as they spend up to 10 hours a day using various forms of media [ 8 , 19 , 20 ]. The ever-increasing popularity of social media, including websites such as Facebook and Twitter, have contributed to youth’s time investment in the internet [ 7 ]. The vast majority of adolescents have internet access and most report daily use [ 21 , 22 ]. Several organizations, including the AAP, have offered expert advice regarding internet safety, but an evidence-based approach to educate youth about the dangers of being online does not currently exist [ 23 ]. Further, data to guide decisions about the age at which such education should begin, and who would have primary responsibility for teaching this topic are incomplete.

An ideal approach for teaching internet safety would likely involve a person or group who could reach most children in order to provide widespread dissemination of this knowledge. An ideal candidate would also have experience teaching about the internet or related safety issues, and be willing to invest in teaching this topic. Given that most US youth and adolescents attend public school, a first possibility is public school teachers. However, it is unclear at what grades and in which school subjects this material could be integrated into existing curricula. A second possibility is child health providers such as pediatricians or family medicine physicians. The AAP social media report argues that “pediatricians are in a unique position” to provide internet safety education [ 9 ]. Several resources exist to guide pediatricians in these discussions, but it is unclear whether pediatricians are comfortable in these discussions. Previous work has suggested that pediatrician’s performance of adolescent health behavior screening and prevention counseling regarding health risk behaviors is quite low [ 24 , 25 ]. A third potential candidate is the parent of the adolescent. While adults’ use of online media such as social networking sites continues to rise, data regarding parents’ comfort or experience with teaching internet safety remains elusive [ 26 ]. While all three groups undoubtedly should play a role in online safety education, it remains unclear which group is seen as holding primary responsibility among these stakeholders.

The purpose of this study was to investigate views of key stakeholders on internet safety education, including school teachers, clinicians who see children and adolescents, parents of adolescents, and adolescents themselves. Our goals were to investigate at what age internet safety education should begin, and to identify a primary candidate to teach this topic.

This study was conducted between July 1, 2009 and August 15, 2011 and received IRB approval from the University of Wisconsin Human Subjects Committee.

Setting and subjects

Participants in this study included public school teachers, health care providers who see children and adolescents, parents of adolescents, and adolescents themselves. School teachers were recruited from a summer continuing education conference within a public school district. This district includes 4 elementary schools, one middle and one high school. Inclusion criteria limited participants to teachers who taught kindergarten through 12 th grade within that public school district. Clinicians were recruited at a yearly regional continuing medical education conference; inclusion criteria limited participants to physicians (MDs and DOs), nurse practitioners (NPs), physician assistants (PAs), and nurses, all of whose practice included pediatric patients. Parents of adolescents were identified within a large general pediatric practice that includes 8 pediatric providers. Inclusion criteria for parents were that they had a child between the ages of 11 and 18 years. Adolescents (ages 11-18 years) were identified and recruited within this same large general pediatric practice. Most parents and teens were recruited as dyads. We did not exclude parents or teens who elected to participate in the study separately because we did not compare data between parents and teens.

Data collection and recruitment

In each recruitment setting, potentially eligible participants were approached by a research assistant. After explaining the study and obtaining consent, participants completed a paper survey. Survey respondents were provided a $5 gift card as compensation.

Survey design

The goals of the survey were to understand at what age internet safety education should begin, explore the experiences of adult participants in teaching online safety or the adolescents learning about this topic, and to identify a group who has primary responsibility for teaching this topic. Thus, we included all potential survey participants in the survey design process. Surveys were designed after a review of the literature and conversations with a panel of physicians, parents and researchers. Questions were pilot-tested first with a panel and then among teachers and adolescents. In the final survey items some words were modified to make the survey clear to all groups of participants. For example, among health care provider groups the question: “For how many years have you been in practice?” was changed for teacher groups to read: “For how many years have you been teaching?” All four surveys are included as Additional files 1 , 2 , 3 and 4 .

Data sources and variables

Participants provided demographic data including gender and age. Teachers were asked to disclose the grade levels they taught, subjects taught and years of teaching experience. Clinicians were asked to provide their training background (i.e. MD, NP), field of practice (Pediatrics, Family Practice) and years in practice. Parents provided their age, gender and the ages of their children. Adolescents were asked for their age, gender and grade in school.

Age to begin teaching internet safety

Teachers, clinicians, parents and adolescents were asked to provide at what age internet safety education should begin. An “other” option was presented for write-in answers.

Candidates to teach internet safety

In order to identify potential candidates to teach internet safety, participants were asked about previous experiences teaching or learning about internet safety. Then participants were asked for their own willingness to teach this subject and to identify an ideal primary candidate to teach this topic.

Experiences teaching internet safety

To describe experiences in providing internet safety education, teachers were asked how frequently they had ever taught internet safety education. Clinicians were asked how frequently they had ever counseled patients on this topic. Answer options included regularly, sometimes, never and never but plan to do so soon. Parents were asked about how frequently they talked with their child about internet safety: regularly, sometimes, never and never but plan to do so soon (Table  1 ).

Adolescents’ experiences learning about internet safety

Adolescents were asked ways in which they had learned about internet safety. A list of answer options was developed through review of the literature and the web and then piloted with several adolescents to ensure completeness. Answer options included learning from friends, siblings, parents, teachers and clinicians as well as learning by self-teaching. A write-in “other” option was also provided. Adolescents were allowed to choose all applicable answers from this list.

Willingness to teach internet safety

Teachers were asked whether or not they supported teaching internet safety education in public schools. Health care providers were asked whether or not they supported teaching internet safety education in provider offices (yes or no).

All groups, including teachers, clinicians, parents and adolescents were asked to select a candidate group whom they felt had primary responsibility for teaching internet safety to children and adolescents. Based on a review of current groups engaged in teaching this subject, answer options included churches, community groups, health care providers, law enforcement, parents and teachers. An “other” option was presented for write-in answers.

All statistical data analyses were conducted using STATA version 11.0 (Statacorp, College Station, TX). Descriptive statistics were calculated for survey responses. ANOVA was used to compare mean age to begin teaching between teachers, clinicians, parents and adolescents. Logistic regression was used to assess whether experience teaching internet safety was associated with years of career experience.

Participants

A total of 356 participants completed the survey (93.4% response rate), including 77 teachers, 111 clinicians, 72 parents and 96 adolescents. Teachers had an average of 14.8 (SD = 8.4) years of teaching experience. The subjects that teachers taught included: health, social studies, language arts/English, special education, health and technology/computer skills. Clinicians included 68 (61.3%) physicians, 16 (14.4%) nurse practitioners, 15 (13.5%) physician assistants and 8 (7.2%) nurses. Their practice background was mainly pediatrics (61.3%) and family practice (27.9%). Clinicians’ years of experience averaged 14.5 (SD = 10.1). Parents were 81% female. Adolescents were 62.5% female and had an average age of 15.1 (SD = 2.3). Please see Table  2 for further descriptive information.

The overall mean age at which stakeholders indicated for starting to teach internet safety was 7.2 years (SD = 2.5), range 2-15. Teachers reported that the average age at which internet safety should be taught was 6.9 years (SD = 2.1), while clinicians felt the average age to start teaching this topic should be 7.3 years (SD = 2.4). Parents felt that internet safety education should begin at age 6.6 years (SD = 2.3). There were no statistically significant differences between these groups regarding age to begin teaching internet safety (p = .2). Adolescents reported that internet safety education should begin at age 8.7 years (SD = 2.4). Please see Figure  1 for a summary of recommended ages to begin internet safety education.

Age to begin teaching internet safety to youth.

Among teachers, 16 (20.8%) reported currently teaching internet safety, 51 (66.2%) had never taught it, and 4 (7.8%) had never taught it but planned to soon. The number of years teaching was not significantly associated with the likelihood to have taught internet safety.

Among clinicians, 3.6% regularly and 55% sometimes counseled patients on internet safety. One-third of clinicians (33.3%) had never counseled or taught patients about internet safety and a few clinicians (8.1%) had no experience with this but planned to begin soon. The number of years in practice was not associated with the likelihood to have taught internet safety (p = .6).

All parents reported discussing online safety with their children either sometimes (58.3%) or regularly (40.3%).

Experiences learning internet safety

Adolescents were asked to identify ways in which they had learned about online safety. Adolescents were permitted to select all options that applied. Adolescents selected people including teachers (87.5%), parents (75%), friends (41.7%), siblings (27.1%) and clinicians (11.5%). Some adolescents indicated that they had learned internet safety by being self-taught (27.5%).

Teachers uniformly reported supporting online safety education in public schools (100%). Clinicians almost uniformly supported providing online safety education in clinicians’ offices (99.1%).

All groups selected parents as the primary candidate to teach internet safety. Among teachers, 97% ranked parents as their first choice candidate, and 3% ranked teachers as first choice. Among clinicians 97% ranked parents as first choice candidate, and 3% ranked teachers as first choice. Among parents, 96% ranked themselves as first choice candidate, and 4% ranked teachers as first choice. Among adolescents, there was more variety in answers. Most adolescents (74.7%) ranked parents as first choice candidate, 13.8% ranked teachers as first choice, 5.7% ranked law enforcement as first choice, 1.5% ranked community as first choice, 3% ranked churches as first choice and 3% wrote in answers of making a movie related to online safety and making a powerpoint regarding online safety.

The results of this study illustrate several key points regarding promoting safe internet use among youth. Findings suggest general agreement among key stakeholders for teaching internet safety at a young age, and for identifying parents as primary teachers of this topic.

First, our findings regarding the suggested age to begin teaching online safety may seem younger than expected. The suggested age range of 6 to 8 years identified by participants suggests that internet safety education could begin in early grade school, around 1 st or 2 nd grade. However, given our current society’s focus on technology, it is likely that children are being introduced to computers at ever-younger ages. Data from 2010 suggests that almost 20% of 8 to 10 year olds spend time on social networking sites daily, in the past three years it seems likely that this percentage has grown [ 20 ]. Timing safety education with the onset of internet use may allow for the concomitant development of computer skills and safety skills. As with many health teachings such as nutrition or sexual behavior, providing education to children before dangers can arise is a key strategy to help youth integrate these lessons into their lives and prevent negative consequences.

Second, our findings include a general agreement among key stakeholders that parents should hold the primary responsibility for internet safety education. These findings are supported by a recent study in which teachers felt that parents should have the primary role in teaching this topic [ 27 ]. Interestingly, we found that while parents all reported that they regularly or sometimes teach internet safety, only 75% of adolescents reported hearing from parents on this topic. These conflicting findings may be due to social desirability on the part of parents reporting their teaching efforts, or that teens may underreport their parents counseling efforts as they may not recognize parent attempts to discuss these difficult topics. Previous work has found a similar disconnect between parent and pediatrician reporting of counseling on risk behaviors [ 28 ].

Finally, our findings suggest that parents are willing teachers in providing internet safety education, and that many report some experience in this area. However, while parents may be candidates to guide their children’s digital lives, some parents may feel underprepared for the task of instructing their children who have grown up as “digital natives.” Thus, health care providers and public health educators may have an unique opportunity to support parents by providing resources, guidance and support. Pediatricians who see adolescent patients have the opportunity to serve an important and perhaps familiar role. As with many other topics of health supervision including safety, nutrition and fitness, parents are the primary source of education for their children. However, in many of these health topics, clinicians and health educators are trusted sources for parents on how to talk with their children about these issues. Some child health providers may feel untrained or unprepared to answer questions about internet safety or cyberbullying given that these are relatively recent health concerns about which much remains unknown. Pediatricians can use American Academy of Pediatrics guidelines to recommend parental supervision of internet activities, decreasing or eliminating isolated screen time (ie, moving the computer to a public space), and having open discussions about the potential dangers of electronic media [ 23 ]. Pediatricians and educators can also partner with schools or other community groups, such as law enforcement, to provide consistent and reinforced messages about internet safety.

Limitations to this study include the regional focus of our data collection. Our study aimed to draw representation of populations of teachers, clinicians, parents and adolescents within our region, the excellent response rates and distribution of participants within each category support that our results are generalizable within our region. However, there are other groups who may engage in teaching internet safety that were not included in this study such as churches and community groups. Second, it is notable that our study did not provide data on what methods would be best to provide internet safety education, this is a logical next step for future study. Third, we did not specify in the context of this study whether online safety should include additional technologies such as cell phones or texting. Fourth, data was collected by self-report, thus recall bias or overestimation of experience or willingness could have impacted our findings. Based on the varied stakeholders included in this study, there was some variation in data collected from each group.

Technology is now an integral part of life, and thus, part of the health of our patients. Our findings illustrate consensus around several groups with experience and investment in working with children and adolescents that parents should have primary responsibility for teaching internet safety. Our study highlights an opportunity for pediatricians to play a collaborative role with parents, patients and teachers to address the critical topics towards improving internet safety. Given the importance of this topic for today’s youth, it is likely that collaborative efforts are needed to provide consistent education about safety in the digital world.

Authors’ information

MM is an adolescent medicine physician who conducts research on the intersection of technology and health. KE is a medical student interested in pediatrics. KB studied consumer science and is interested in ways to improve internet safety education for youth. HY is a pharmacist and researcher with interest in provision of education to patients and parents. EC is a pediatrician and researcher interested in improving health systems and communication.

Joiner R, et al: Gender, Internet identification, and Internet anxiety: correlates of Internet use. Cyberpsychol Behav. 2005, 8 (4): 371-378. 10.1089/cpb.2005.8.371.

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Anderson KJ: Internet use among college students: an exploratory study. J Am Coll Health. 2001, 50 (1): 21-26. 10.1080/07448480109595707.

Article   CAS   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Caplan SE: Preference for online social interaction - a theory of problematic Internet use and psychosocial well-being. Commun Res. 2003, 30 (6): 625-648. 10.1177/0093650203257842.

Article   Google Scholar  

Colley A, Maltby J: Impact of the Internet on our lives: male and female personal perspectives. Comput Hum Behav. 2008, 24 (5): 2005-2013. 10.1016/j.chb.2007.09.002.

Goold PC, Ward M, Carlin EM: Can the Internet be used to improve sexual health awareness in web-wise young people?. J Fam Plann Reprod Health Care. 2003, 29 (1): 28-30. 10.1783/147118903101196864.

Hunley SA, et al: Adolescent computer use and academic achievement. Adolescence. 2005, 40 (158): 307-318.

PubMed   Google Scholar  

Lenhart A, Madden M: Social Networking Sites and Teens: An Overview. 2007, Pew Internet and American Life Project, http://www.pewinternet.org/pdfs/PIP_SNS_Data_Memo_Jan_2007.pdf ,

Google Scholar  

Lenhart A, Madden M, Hitlin P: Teens and Technology: Youth are Leading the Transition to a Fully Wired and Mobile Nation. 2005, Pew Internet and American Life Project, http://www.pewinternet.org/pdfs/PIP_Teens_Tech_July2005web.pdf ,

O’Keeffe GS, et al: The impact of social media on children, adolescents, and families. Pediatrics. 2011, 127 (4): 800-804. 10.1542/peds.2011-0054.

Patchin JW, Hinduja S: Cyberbullying and self-esteem. J Sch Health. 2010, 80 (12): 614-621. 10.1111/j.1746-1561.2010.00548.x. quiz 622-4

Lenhart A: Cyberbullying and Online Teens. 2007, Pew Internet and American Life Project, http://www.pewinternet.org/pdfs/PIP%20Cyberbullying%20Memo.pdf ,

Ybarra ML, Espelage DL, Mitchell KJ: The co-occurrence of Internet harassment and unwanted sexual solicitation victimization and perpetration: associations with psychosocial indicators. J Adolesc Health. 2007, 41 (6 Suppl 1): S31-S41.

Perren S, et al: Bullying in school and cyberspace: associations with depressive symptoms in Swiss and Australian adolescents. Child Adolesc Psychiatry Ment Health. 2010, 4: 28-10.1186/1753-2000-4-28.

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Agatston PW, Kowalski R, Limber S: Students’ perspectives on cyber bullying. J Adolesc Health. 2007, 41 (6 Suppl 1): S59-S60.

Hinduja S, Patchin JW: Bullying, cyberbullying, and suicide. Arch Suicide Res. 2010, 14 (3): 206-221. 10.1080/13811118.2010.494133.

Hinduja S, Patchin JW: Personal information of adolescents on the Internet: A quantitative content analysis of MySpace. J Adolesc. 2008, 31 (1): 125-146. 10.1016/j.adolescence.2007.05.004.

Moreno MA, et al: Display of health risk behaviors on MySpace by adolescents: Prevalence and Associations. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 2009, 163 (1): 35-41. 10.1001/archpediatrics.2008.502.

Back MD, et al: Facebook profiles reflect actual personality, not self-idealization. Psychol Sci. 2011, 21 (3): 372-374.

Jones S, et al: US College Students’ Internet Use: Race, Gender and Digital Divides. J Comput-Mediat Commun. 2009, 14 (2): 244-264. 10.1111/j.1083-6101.2009.01439.x.

Rideout VJ, Foehr UG, Roberts D: Generation M2: Media in the lives of 8 to 18 year olds. 2010, Menlo Park: Kaiser Family Foundation

Lenhart A, Purcell K, Smith A, Zickhur K: Social media and young adults. 2010, Washington, DC: Pew Internet and American Life Project

Sun P, et al: Internet accessibility and usage among urban adolescents in Southern California: implications for web-based health research. Cyberpsychol Behav. 2005, 8 (5): 441-453. 10.1089/cpb.2005.8.441.

AAP: Media and Children. 2013, Available from: http://www.aap.org/en-us/advocacy-and-policy/aap-health-initiatives/Pages/Media-and-Children.aspx

Halpern-Felsher BL, et al: Preventive services in a health maintenance organization: how well do pediatricians screen and educate adolescent patients?. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 2000, 154 (2): 173-179. 10.1001/archpedi.154.2.173.

Mangione-Smith R, et al: The quality of ambulatory care delivered to children in the United States. N Engl J Med. 2007, 357 (15): 1515-1523. 10.1056/NEJMsa064637.

Lenhart A: Adults on Social Network Sites. 2009, Pew Internet and American Life Project, http://www.pewinternet.org/Infographics/Growth-in-Adult-SNS-Use-20052009.aspx ,

Zogby: The State of K-12 Cyberethics, Cybersafety and Cybersecurity Curriculum in the United States. 2011, The National Cyber Security Alliance, http://www.staysafeonline.org/download/…/2011_national_k12_study.pdf ,

Cheng TL, et al: Determinants of counseling in primary care pediatric practice: physician attitudes about time, money, and health issues. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 1999, 153 (6): 629-635.

Pre-publication history

The pre-publication history for this paper can be accessed here: http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2458/13/543/prepub

Download references

Acknowledgments

This project was supported by Award Number K12HD055894 from the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development. The funding organization had no role in the design, collection of data, analysis or interpretation on the data in this manuscript. The authors would like to acknowledge the contributions of Michael Swanson and Jay Farnsworth to this project.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

School of Medicine and Public Health, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI, USA

Megan A Moreno, Kaitlyn Bare & Elizabeth D Cox

School of Nursing, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI, USA

Katie G Egan

School of Pharmacy, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI, USA

Henry N Young

Seattle Childrens Research Institute, University of Washington, M/S CW8-6, PO Box 5371, Seattle, WA, 98145-5005, USA

Megan A Moreno

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Megan A Moreno .

Additional information

Competing interest.

The authors declare that they have no competing interest.

Authors’ contributions

MM conceived of the study, participated in its design and coordination, participated in analysis and wrote the manuscript. KE and KB participated in data collection and helped to draft the manuscript. HY and EC participated in analysis and helped to draft the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Electronic supplementary material

Additional file 1: survey given to teachers.(doc 28 kb), additional file 2: survey given to clinicians.(doc 29 kb), additional file 3: survey given to parents.(doc 31 kb), additional file 4: survey given to adolescents.(doc 28 kb), authors’ original submitted files for images.

Below are the links to the authors’ original submitted files for images.

Authors’ original file for figure 1

Rights and permissions.

This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 ), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Moreno, M.A., Egan, K.G., Bare, K. et al. Internet safety education for youth: stakeholder perspectives. BMC Public Health 13 , 543 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2458-13-543

Download citation

Received : 16 April 2012

Accepted : 17 May 2013

Published : 05 June 2013

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2458-13-543

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Internet safety
• Online safety
• Parent education
• Patient education
• Survey research

BMC Public Health

ISSN: 1471-2458

• General enquiries: [email protected]

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• Front Public Health

Cyberbullying Among Adolescents and Children: A Comprehensive Review of the Global Situation, Risk Factors, and Preventive Measures

Chengyan zhu.

1 School of Political Science and Public Administration, Wuhan University, Wuhan, China

Shiqing Huang

2 School of Medicine and Health Management, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, China

Richard Evans

3 College of Engineering, Design and Physical Sciences, Brunel University London, Uxbridge, United Kingdom

Associated Data

The original contributions presented in the study are included in the article/ Supplementary Material , further inquiries can be directed to the corresponding author/s.

Background: Cyberbullying is well-recognized as a severe public health issue which affects both adolescents and children. Most extant studies have focused on national and regional effects of cyberbullying, with few examining the global perspective of cyberbullying. This systematic review comprehensively examines the global situation, risk factors, and preventive measures taken worldwide to fight cyberbullying among adolescents and children.

Methods: A systematic review of available literature was completed following PRISMA guidelines using the search themes “cyberbullying” and “adolescent or children”; the time frame was from January 1st, 2015 to December 31st, 2019. Eight academic databases pertaining to public health, and communication and psychology were consulted, namely: Web of Science, Science Direct, PubMed, Google Scholar, ProQuest, Communication & Mass Media Complete, CINAHL, and PsycArticles. Additional records identified through other sources included the references of reviews and two websites, Cyberbullying Research Center and United Nations Children's Fund. A total of 63 studies out of 2070 were included in our final review focusing on cyberbullying prevalence and risk factors.

Results: The prevalence rates of cyberbullying preparation ranged from 6.0 to 46.3%, while the rates of cyberbullying victimization ranged from 13.99 to 57.5%, based on 63 references. Verbal violence was the most common type of cyberbullying. Fourteen risk factors and three protective factors were revealed in this study. At the personal level, variables associated with cyberbullying including age, gender, online behavior, race, health condition, past experience of victimization, and impulsiveness were reviewed as risk factors. Likewise, at the situational level, parent-child relationship, interpersonal relationships, and geographical location were also reviewed in relation to cyberbullying. As for protective factors, empathy and emotional intelligence, parent-child relationship, and school climate were frequently mentioned.

Conclusion: The prevalence rate of cyberbullying has increased significantly in the observed 5-year period, and it is imperative that researchers from low and middle income countries focus sufficient attention on cyberbullying of children and adolescents. Despite a lack of scientific intervention research on cyberbullying, the review also identified several promising strategies for its prevention from the perspectives of youths, parents and schools. More research on cyberbullying is needed, especially on the issue of cross-national cyberbullying. International cooperation, multi-pronged and systematic approaches are highly encouraged to deal with cyberbullying.

Introduction

Childhood and adolescence are not only periods of growth, but also of emerging risk taking. Young people during these periods are particularly vulnerable and cannot fully understand the connection between behaviors and consequences ( 1 ). With peer pressures, the heat of passion, children and adolescents usually perform worse than adults when people are required to maintain self-discipline to achieve good results in unfamiliar situations. Impulsiveness, sensation seeking, thrill seeking, and other individual differences cause adolescents to risk rejecting standardized risk interventions ( 2 ).

About one-third of Internet users in the world are children and adolescents under the age of 18 ( 3 ). Digital technology provide a new form of interpersonal communication ( 4 ). However, surveys and news reports also show another picture in the Internet Age. The dark side of young people's internet usage is that they may bully or suffer from others' bullying in cyberspace. This behavior is also acknowledged as cyberbullying ( 5 ). Based on Olweus's definition, cyberbullying is usually regarded as bullying implemented through electronic media ( 6 , 7 ). Specifically, cyberbullying among children and adolescents can be summarized as the intentional and repeated harm from one or more peers that occurs in cyberspace caused by the use of computers, smartphones and other devices ( 4 , 8 – 12 ). In recent years, new forms of cyberbullying behaviors have emerged, such as cyberstalking and online dating abuse ( 13 – 15 ).

Although cyberbullying is still a relatively new field of research, cyberbullying among adolescents is considered to be a serious public health issue that is closely related to adolescents' behavior, mental health and development ( 16 , 17 ). The increasing rate of Internet adoption worldwide and the popularity of social media platforms among the young people have worsened this situation with most children and adolescents experiencing cyberbullying or online victimization during their lives. The confines of space and time are alleviated for bullies in virtual environments, creating new venues for cyberbullying with no geographical boundaries ( 6 ). Cyberbullying exerts negative effects on many aspects of young people's lives, including personal privacy invasion and psychological disorders. The influence of cyberbullying may be worse than traditional bullying as perpetrators can act anonymously and connect easily with children and adolescents at any time ( 18 ). In comparison with traditional victims, those bullied online show greater levels of depression, anxiety and loneliness ( 19 ). Self-esteem problems and school absenteeism have also proven to be related to cyberbullying ( 20 ).

Due to changes in use and behavioral patterns among the youth on social media, the manifestations and risk factors of cyberbullying have faced significant transformation. Further, as the boundaries of cyberbullying are not limited by geography, cyberbullying may not be a problem contained within a single country. In this sense, cyberbullying is a global problem and tackling it requires greater international collaboration. The adverse effects caused by cyberbullying, including reduced safety, lower educational attainment, poorer mental health and greater unhappiness, led UNICEF to state that “no child is absolutely safe in the digital world” ( 3 ).

Extant research has examined the prevalence and risk factors of cyberbullying to unravel the complexity of cyberbullying across different countries and their corresponding causes. However, due to variations in cyberbullying measurement and methodologies, no consistent conclusions have been drawn ( 21 ). Studies into inconsistencies in prevalence rates of cyberbullying, measured in the same country during the same time period, occur frequently. Selkie et al. systematically reviewed cyberbullying among American middle and high school students aged 10–19 years old in 2015, and revealed that the prevalence of cyberbullying victimization ranged from 3 to 72%, while perpetration ranged from 1 to 41% ( 22 ). Risk and protective factors have also been broadly studied, but confirmation is still needed of those factors which have more significant effects on cyberbullying among young people. Clarification of these issues would be useful to allow further research to recognize cyberbullying more accurately.

This review aims to extend prior contributions and provide a comprehensive review of cyberbullying of children and adolescents from a global perspective, with the focus being on prevalence, associated risk factors and protective factors across countries. It is necessary to provide a global panorama based on research syntheses to fill the gaps in knowledge on this topic.

Search Strategies

This study strictly employed Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. We consulted eight academic databases pertaining to public health, and communication and psychology, namely: Web of Science, Science Direct, PubMed, Google Scholar, ProQuest, Communication & Mass Media Complete, CINAHL, and PsycArticles. Additional records identified through other sources included the references of reviews and two websites, Cyberbullying Research Center and United Nations Children's Fund. With regard to the duration of our review, since most studies on cyberbullying arose around 2015 ( 9 , 21 ), this study highlights the complementary aspects of the available information about cyberbullying during the recent 5 year period from January 1st, 2015 to December 31st, 2019.

One researcher extracted keywords and two researchers proposed modifications. We used two sets of subject terms to review articles, “cyberbullying” and “child OR adolescent.” Some keywords that refer to cyberbullying behaviors and young people are also included, such as threat, harass, intimidate, abuse, insult, humiliate, condemn, isolate, embarrass, forgery, slander, flame, stalk, manhunt, as well as teen, youth, young people and student. The search formula is (cyberbullying OR cyber-bullying OR cyber-aggression OR ((cyber OR online OR electronic OR Internet) AND (bully * OR aggres * OR violence OR perpetrat * OR victim * OR threat * OR harass * OR intimidat * OR * OR insult * OR humiliate * OR condemn * OR isolate * OR embarrass * OR forgery OR slander * OR flame OR stalk * OR manhunt))) AND (adolescen * OR child OR children OR teen? OR teenager? OR youth? OR “young people” OR “elementary school student * ” OR “middle school student * ” OR “high school student * ”). The main search approach is title search. Search strategies varied according to the database consulted, and we did not limit the type of literature for inclusion. Journals, conference papers and dissertations are all available.

Specifically, the inclusion criteria for our study were as follows: (a). reported or evaluated the prevalence and possible risk factors associated with cyberbullying, (b). respondents were students under the age of 18 or in primary, junior or senior high schools, and (c). studies were written in English. Exclusion criteria were: (a). respondents came from specific groups, such as clinical samples, children with disabilities, sexual minorities, specific ethnic groups, specific faith groups or samples with cross-national background, (b). review studies, qualitative studies, conceptual studies, book reviews, news reports or abstracts of meetings, and (c). studies focused solely on preventive measures that were usually meta-analytic and qualitative in nature. Figure 1 presents the details of the employed screening process, showing that a total of 63 studies out of 2070 were included in our final review.

PRISMA flow chart diagram showing the process of study selection for inclusion in the systematic review on children and adolescents cyberbullying.

Meta-analysis was not conducted as the limited research published within the 5 years revealed little research which reported odds ratio. On the other hand, due to the inconsistency of concepts, measuring instruments and recall periods, considerable variation could be found in research quality ( 23 ). Meta-analysis is not a preferred method.

Coding Scheme

For coding, we created a comprehensive code scheme to include the characteristics. For cyberbullying, we coded five types proposed by Willard ( 24 – 26 ), which included verbal violence, group violence, visual violence, impersonating and account forgery, and other behaviors. Among them, verbal violence is considered one of the most common types of cyberbullying and refers to the behavior of offensive responses, insults, mocking, threats, slander, and harassment. Group violence is associated with preventing others from joining certain groups or isolating others, forcing others to leave the group. Visual violence relates to the release and sharing of embarrassing photos and information without the owners' consent. Impersonating and account forgery refers to identity theft, stealing passwords, violating accounts and the creation of fake accounts to fraudulently present the behavior of others. Other behaviors include disclosure of privacy, sexual harassment, and cyberstalking. To comprehensively examine cyberbullying, we coded cyberbullying behaviors from both the perspectives of cyberbullying perpetrators and victims, if mentioned in the studies.

In relation to risk factors, we drew insights from the general aggression model, which contributes to the understanding of personal and situational factors in the cyberbullying of children and adolescents. We chose the general aggression model because (a) it contains more situational factors than other models (e.g., social ecological models) - such as school climate ( 9 ), and (b) we believe that the general aggression model is more suitable for helping researchers conduct a systematic review of cyberbullying risk and protective factors. This model provides a comprehensive framework that integrates domain specific theories of aggression, and has been widely applied in cyberbullying research ( 27 ). For instance, Kowalski and colleagues proposed a cyberbullying encounter through the general aggression model to understand the formation and development process of youth cyberbullying related to both victimization and perpetration ( 9 ). Victims and perpetrators enter the cyberbullying encounter with various individual characteristics, experiences, attitudes, desires, personalities, and motives that intersect to determine the course of the interaction. Correspondingly, the antecedents pertaining to cyberbullying are divided into two broad categories, personal factors and situational factors. Personal factors refer to individual characteristics, such as gender, age, motivation, personality, psychological states, socioeconomic status and technology use, values and perceptions, and other maladaptive behaviors. Situational factors focus on the provocation/support, parental involvement, school climate, and perceived anonymity. Consequently, our coders related to risk factors consisting of personal factors and situational factors from the perspectives of both cyberbullying perpetrators and victims.

We extracted information relating to individual papers and sample characteristics, including authors, year of publication, country, article type, sampling procedures, sample characteristics, measures of cyberbullying, and prevalence and risk factors from both cyberbullying perpetration and victimization perspectives. The key words extraction and coding work were performed twice by two trained research assistants in health informatics. The consistency test results are as follows: the Kappa value with “personal factors” was 0.932, and the Kappa value with “situational factors” was 0.807. The result shows that the coding consistency was high enough and acceptable. Disagreements were resolved through discussion with other authors.

Quality Assessment of Studies

The quality assessment of the studies is based on the recommended tool for assessing risk of bias, Cochrane Collaboration. This quality assessment tool focused on seven items: random sequence generation, allocation concealment, blinding of participants and personnel, blinding of outcome assessment, incomplete outcome data, selective reporting, and other sources of bias ( 28 ). We assessed each item as “low risk,” “high risk,” and “unclear” for included studies. A study is considered of “high quality” when it meets three or more “low risk” requirements. When one or more main flaw of a study may affect the research results, the study is considered as “low quality.” When a lack of information leads to a difficult judgement, the quality is considered to be “unclear.” Please refer to Appendix 1 for more details.

This comprehensive systematic review comprised a total of 63 studies. Appendices 2 , 3 show the descriptive information of the studies included. Among them, 58 (92%) studies measured two or more cyberbullying behavior types. The sample sizes of the youths range from several hundred to tens of thousands, with one thousand to five thousand being the most common. As for study distribution, the United States of America, Spain and China were most frequently mentioned. Table 1 presents the detail.

Descriptive information of studies included (2015–2019).

Prevalence of Global Cyberbullying

Prevalence across countries.

Among the 63 studies included, 22 studies reported on cyberbullying prevalence and 20 studies reported on prevalence from victimization and perpetration perspectives, respectively. Among the 20 studies, 11 national studies indicated that the prevalence of cyberbullying victimization and cyberbullying perpetration ranged from 14.6 to 52.2% and 6.3 to 32%, respectively. These studies were conducted in the United States of America ( N = 4) ( 29 – 32 ), South Korea ( N = 3) ( 33 – 35 ), Singapore ( N = 1) ( 36 ), Malaysia ( N = 1) ( 37 ), Israel ( N = 1) ( 38 ), and Canada ( N = 1) ( 39 ). Only one of these 11 national studies is from an upper middle income country, and the rest are from highincome countries identified by the World Bank ( 40 ). By combining regional and community-level studies, the prevalence of cyberbullying victimization and cyberbullying perpetration ranged from 13.99 to 57.5% and 6.0 to 46.3%, respectively. Spain reported the highest prevalence of cyberbullying victimization (57.5%) ( 41 ), followed by Malaysia (52.2%) ( 37 ), Israel (45%) ( 42 ), and China (44.5%) ( 43 ). The lowest reported victim rates were observed in Canada (13.99%) and South Korea (14.6%) ( 34 , 39 ). The reported prevalence of cyberbullying victimization in the United States of America ranged from 15.5 to 31.4% ( 29 , 44 ), while in Israel, rates ranged from 30 to 45% ( 26 , 42 ). In China, rates ranged from 6 to 46.3% with the country showing the highest prevalence of cyberbullying perpetration (46.30%) ( 15 , 43 , 45 , 46 ). Canadian and South Korean studies reported the lowest prevalence of cyberbullying perpetration at 7.99 and 6.3%, respectively ( 34 , 39 ).

A total of 10 studies were assessed as high quality studies. Among them, six studies came from high income countries, including Canada, Germany, Italy, Portugal, and South Korea ( 13 , 34 , 39 , 46 – 48 ). Three studies were from upper middle income countries, including Malaysia and China ( 37 , 43 ) and one from a lower middle income country, Nigeria ( 49 ). Figures 2 , ​ ,3 3 describe the prevalence of cyberbullying victimization and perpetration respectively among high quality studies.

The prevalence of cyberbullying victimization of high quality studies.

The prevalence of cyberbullying perpetration of high quality studies.

Prevalence of Various Cyberbullying Behaviors

For the prevalence of cyberbullying victimization and perpetration, the data were reported in 18 and 14 studies, respectively. Figure 4 shows the distribution characteristics of the estimated value of prevalence of different cyberbullying behaviors with box plots. The longer the box, the greater the degree of variation of the numerical data and vice versa. The rate of victimization and crime of verbal violence, as well as the rate of victimization of other behaviors, such as cyberstalking and digital dating abuse, has a large degree of variation. Among the four specified types of cyberbullying behaviors, verbal violence was regarded as the most commonly reported behaviors in both perpetration and victimization rates, with a wide range of prevalence, ranging from 5 to 18%. Fewer studies reported the prevalence data for visual violence and group violence. Studies also showed that the prevalence of impersonation and account forgery were within a comparatively small scale. Specific results were as follows.

Cyberbullying prevalence across types (2015–2019).

Verbal Violence

A total of 13 studies reported verbal violence prevalence data ( 15 , 26 , 34 , 37 – 39 , 42 , 43 , 47 , 48 , 50 , 51 ). Ten studies reported the prevalence of verbal violence victimization ranging from 2.8 to 47.5%, while seven studies claimed perpetration prevalence ranging from 1.5 to 31.8%. Malaysia reported the highest prevalence of verbal violence victimization (47.5%) ( 37 ), followed by China (32%) ( 43 ). China reported that the prevalence of verbal violence victimization ranged from 5.1 to 32% ( 15 , 43 ). Israel reported that the prevalence of verbal violence victimization ranged from 3.4 to 18% ( 26 , 38 , 42 ). For perpetration rate, Malaysia reported the highest level at 31.8% ( 37 ), while a study for Spain reported the lowest, ranging from 3.2 to 6.4% ( 51 ).

Group Violence

The prevalence of group violence victimization was explored within 4 studies and ranged from 5 to 17.8% ( 26 , 34 , 42 , 43 ), while perpetration prevalence was reported in three studies, ranging from 10.1 to 19.07% ( 34 , 43 , 47 ). An Israeli study suggested that 9.8% of respondents had been excluded from the Internet, while 8.9% had been refused entry to a group or team ( 26 ). A study in South Korea argued that the perpetration prevalence of group violence was 10.1% ( 34 ), while a study in Italy reported that the rate of online group violence against others was 19.07% ( 47 ).

Visual Violence

The prevalence of visual violence victimization was explored within three studies and ranged from 2.6 to 12.1% ( 26 , 34 , 43 ), while the perpetration prevalence reported in four studies ranged from 1.7 to 6% ( 34 , 43 , 47 , 48 ). For victimization prevalence, a South Korean study found that 12.1% of respondents reported that their personal information was leaked online ( 34 ). An Israel study reported that the prevalence of outing the picture was 2.6% ( 26 ). For perpetration prevalence, a South Korean study found that 1.7% of respondents had reported that they had disclosed someone's personal information online ( 34 ). A German study reported that 6% of respondents had written a message (e.g., an email) to somebody using a fake identity ( 48 ).

Impersonating and Account Forgery

Four studies reported on the victimization prevalence of impersonating and account forgery, ranging from 1.1 to 10% ( 15 , 42 , 43 ), while five studies reported on perpetration prevalence, with the range being from 1.3 to 9.31% ( 15 , 43 , 47 , 48 , 51 ). In a Spanish study, 10% of respondents reported that their accounts had been infringed by others or that they could not access their account due to stolen passwords. In contrast, 4.5% of respondents reported that they had infringed other people's accounts or stolen passwords, with 2.5% stating that they had forged other people's accounts ( 51 ). An Israeli study reported that the prevalence of being impersonated was 7% ( 42 ), while in China, a study reported this to be 8.6% ( 43 ). Another study from China found that 1.1% of respondents had been impersonated to send dating-for-money messages ( 15 ).

Other Behaviors

The prevalence of disclosure of privacy, sexual harassment, and cyberstalking were also explored by scholars. Six studies reported the victimization prevalence of other cyberbullying behaviors ( 13 , 15 , 34 , 37 , 42 , 43 ), and four studies reported on perpetration prevalence ( 34 , 37 , 43 , 48 ). A study in China found that 1.2% of respondents reported that their privacy had been compromised without permission due to disputes ( 15 ). A study from China reported the prevalence of cyberstalking victimization was 11.9% ( 43 ), while a Portuguese study reported that this was 62% ( 13 ). In terms of perpetration prevalence, a Malaysian study reported 2.7% for sexual harassment ( 37 ).

Risk and Protective Factors of Cyberbullying

In terms of the risk factors associated with cyberbullying among children and adolescents, this comprehensive review highlighted both personal and situational factors. Personal factors referred to age, gender, online behavior, race, health conditions, past experiences of victimization, and impulsiveness, while situational factors consisted of parent-child relationship, interpersonal relationships, and geographical location. In addition, protective factors against cyberbullying included: empathy and emotional intelligence, parent-child relationship, and school climate. Table 2 shows the risk and protective factors for child and adolescent cyberbullying.

Risk and protective factors of cyberbullying among children and adolescents.

In terms of the risk factors associated with cyberbullying victimization at the personal level, many studies evidenced that females were more likely to be cyberbullied than males ( 13 , 26 , 29 , 38 , 43 , 52 , 54 , 55 , 58 ). Meanwhile, adolescents with mental health problems ( 61 ), such as depression ( 33 , 62 ), borderline personality disorder ( 63 ), eating disorders ( 41 ), sleep deprivation ( 56 ), and suicidal thoughts and suicide plans ( 64 ), were more likely to be associated with cyberbullying victimization. As for Internet usage, researchers agreed that youth victims were probably those that spent more time online than their counterparts ( 32 , 36 , 43 , 45 , 48 , 49 , 60 ). For situational risk factors, some studies have proven the relationship between cyberbullying victims and parental abuse, parental neglect, family dysfunction, inadequate monitoring, and parents' inconsistency in mediation, as well as communication issues ( 33 , 64 , 68 , 73 ). In terms of geographical location, some studies have reported that youths residing in city locations are more likely to be victims of cyberbullying than their peers from suburban areas ( 61 ).

Regarding the risk factors of cyberbullying perpetration at the personal level, it is generally believed that older teenagers, especially those aged over 15 years, are at greater risk of becoming cyberbullying perpetrators ( 55 , 67 ). When considering prior cyberbullying experiences, evidence showed that individuals who had experienced cyberbullying or face-to-face bullying tended to be aggressors in cyberbullying ( 35 , 42 , 49 , 51 , 55 ); in addition, the relationship between impulsiveness and cyberbullying perpetration was also explored by several pioneering scholars ( 55 , 72 , 80 ). The situational factors highlight the role of parents and teachers in cyberbullying experiences. For example, over-control and authoritarian parenting styles, as well as inharmonious teacher-student relationships ( 61 ) are perceived to lead to cyberbullying behaviors ( 74 , 75 ). In terms of differences in geographical locations, students residing in cities have a higher rate of online harassment than students living in more rural locations ( 49 ).

In terms of the protective factors in child and adolescent cyberbullying, scholars have focused on youths who have limited experiences of cyberbullying. At the personal level, high emotional intelligence, an ability for emotional self-control and empathy, such as cognitive empathy ability ( 44 , 55 ), were associated with lower rates of cyberbullying ( 57 ). At the situational level, a parent's role is seen as critical. For example, intimate parent-child relationships ( 46 ) and open active communication ( 19 ) were demonstrated to be related to lower experiences of cyberbullying and perpetration. Some scholars argued that parental supervision and monitoring of children's online activities can reduce their tendency to participate in some negative activities associated with cyberbullying ( 31 , 46 , 73 ). They further claimed that an authoritative parental style protects youths against cyberbullying ( 43 ). Conversely, another string of studies evidenced that parents' supervision of Internet usage was meaningless ( 45 ). In addition to conflicting roles of parental supervision, researchers have also looked into the role of schools, and posited that positive school climates contribute to less cyberbullying experiences ( 61 , 79 ).

Some risk factors may be protective factors under another condition. Some studies suggest that parental aggressive communication is related to severe cyberbullying victims, while open communication is a potential protective factor ( 19 ). Parental neglect, parental abuse, parental inconsistency in supervision of adolescents' online behavior, and family dysfunction are related to the direct or indirect harm of cyberbullying ( 33 , 68 ). Parental participation, a good parental-children relationship, communication and dialogue can enhance children's school adaptability and prevent cyberbullying behaviors ( 31 , 74 ). When parental monitoring reaches a balance between control and openness, it could become a protective factor against cyberbullying, and it could be a risk factor, if parental monitoring is too low or over-controlled ( 47 ).

Despite frequent discussion about the risk factors associated with cyberbullying among children and adolescents, some are still deemed controversial factors, such as age, race, gender, and the frequency of suffering on the internet. For cyberbullying victims, some studies claim that older teenagers are more vulnerable to cyberbullying ( 15 , 38 , 52 , 53 ), while other studies found conflicting results ( 26 , 33 ). As for student race, Alhajji et al. argued that non-white students were less likely to report cyberbullying ( 29 ), while Morin et al. observed no significant correlation between race and cyberbullying ( 52 ). For cyberbullying perpetration, Alvarez-Garcia found that gender differences may have indirect effects on cyberbullying perpetration ( 55 ), while others disagreed ( 42 , 61 , 68 – 70 ). Specifically, some studies revealed that males were more likely to become cyberbullying perpetrators ( 34 , 39 , 56 ), while Khurana et al. presented an opposite point of view, proposing that females were more likely to attack others ( 71 ). In terms of time spent on the Internet, some claimed that students who frequently surf the Internet had a higher chance of becoming perpetrators ( 49 ), while others stated that there was no clear and direct association between Internet usage and cyberbullying perpetration ( 55 ).

In addition to personal and situational factors, scholars have also explored other specific factors pertaining to cyberbullying risk and protection. For instance, mindfulness and depression were found to be significantly related to cyber perpetration ( 76 ), while eating disorder psychopathology in adolescents was associated with cyber victimization ( 41 ). For males who were familiar with their victims, such as family members, friends and acquaintances, they were more likely to be cyberstalking perpetrators than females or strangers, while pursuing desired closer relationships ( 13 ). In the school context, a lower social likability in class was identified as an indirect factor for cyberbullying ( 48 ).

This comprehensive review has established that the prevalence of global childhood and adolescent victimization from cyberbullying ranges from 13.99 to 57.5%, and that the perpetration prevalence ranges from 6.0 to 46.3%. Across the studies included in our research, verbal violence is observed as one of the most common acts of cyberbullying, including verbal offensive responses, insults, mocking, threats, slander, and harassment. The victimization prevalence of verbal violence is reported to be between 5 and 47.5%, and the perpetration prevalence is between 3.2 and 26.1%. Personal factors, such as gender, frequent use of social media platforms, depression, borderline personality disorder, eating disorders, sleep deprivation, and suicidal tendencies, were generally considered to be related to becoming a cyberbullying victim. Personal factors, such as high school students, past experiences, impulse, improperly controlled family education, poor teacher-student relationships, and the urban environment, were considered risk factors for cyberbullying perpetration. Situational factors, including parental abuse and neglect, improper monitoring, communication barriers between parents and children, as well as the urban environment, were also seen to potentially contribute to higher risks of both cyberbullying victimization and perpetration.

Increasing Prevalence of Global Cyberbullying With Changing Social Media Landscape and Measurement Alterations

This comprehensive review suggests that global cyberbullying rates, in terms of victimization and perpetration, were on the rise during the 5 year period, from 2015 to 2019. For example, in an earlier study conducted by Modecki et al. the average cyberbullying involvement rate was 15% ( 81 ). Similar observations were made by Hamm et al. who found that the median rates of youth having experienced bullying or who had bullied others online, was 23 and 15.2%, respectively ( 82 ). However, our systematic review summarized global children and adolescents cyberbullying in the last 5 years and revealed an average cyberbullying perpetration rate of 25.03%, ranging from 6.0 to 46.3%, while the average victimization was 33.08%, ranging from 13.99 to 57.5%. The underlying reason for increases may be attributed to the rapid changing landscape of social media and, in recent years, the drastic increase in Internet penetration rates. With the rise in Internet access, youths have greater opportunities to participate in online activities, provided by emerging social media platforms.

Although our review aims to provide a broader picture of cyberbullying, it is well-noted in extant research that difficulties exist in accurately estimating variations in prevalence in different countries ( 23 , 83 ). Many reasons exist to explain this. The first largely relates poor or unclear definition of the term cyberbullying; this hinders the determination of cyberbullying victimization and perpetration ( 84 ). Although traditional bullying behavior is well-defined, the definition cannot directly be applied to the virtual environment due to the complexity in changing online interactions. Without consensus on definitions, measurement and cyberbullying types may vary noticeably ( 83 , 85 ). Secondly, the estimation of prevalence of cyberbullying is heavily affected by research methods, such as recall period (lifetime, last year, last 6 months, last month, or last week etc.), demographic characteristics of the survey sample (age, gender, race, etc.), perspectives of cyberbullying experiences (victims, perpetrators, or both victim and perpetrator), and instruments (scales, study-specific questions) ( 23 , 84 , 86 ). The variety in research tools and instruments used to assess the prevalence of cyberbullying can cause confusion on this issue ( 84 ). Thirdly, variations in economic development, cultural backgrounds, human values, internet penetration rates, and frequency of using social media may lead to different conclusions across countries ( 87 ).

Acknowledging the Conflicting Role of the Identified Risk Factors With More Research Needed to Establish the Causality

Although this review has identified many personal and situational factors associated with cyberbullying, the majority of studies adopted a cross-sectional design and failed to reveal the causality ( 21 ). Nevertheless, knowledge on these correlational relationships provide valuable insights for understanding and preventing cyberbullying incidents. In terms of gender differences, females are believed to be at a higher risk of cyberbullying victimization compared to males. Two reasons may help to explain this. First, the preferred violence behaviors between two genders. females prefer indirect harassment, such as the spreading of rumors, while males tend toward direct bullying (e.g., assault) ( 29 ) and second, the cultural factors. From the traditional gender perspective, females tended to perceive a greater risk of communicating with others on the Internet, while males were more reluctant to express fear, vulnerability and insecurity when asked about their cyberbullying experiences ( 46 ). Females were more intolerant when experiencing cyberstalking and were more likely to report victimization experiences than males ( 13 ). Meanwhile, many researchers suggested that females are frequent users of emerging digital communication platforms, which increases their risk of unpleasant interpersonal contact and violence. From the perspective of cultural norms and masculinity, the reporting of cyberbullying is also widely acknowledged ( 37 ). For example, in addition, engaging in online activities is also regarded as a critical predictor for cyberbullying victimization. Enabled by the Internet, youths can easily find potential victims and start harassment at any time ( 49 ). Participating in online activities directly increases the chance of experiencing cyberbullying victimization and the possibility of becoming a victim ( 36 , 45 ). As for age, earlier involvement on social media and instant messaging tools may increase the chances of experiencing cyberbullying. For example, in Spain, these tools cannot be used without parental permission before the age of 14 ( 55 ). Besides, senior students were more likely to be more impulsive and less sympathetic. They may portray more aggressive and anti-social behaviors ( 55 , 72 ); hence senior students and students with higher impulsivity were usually more likely to become cyberbullying perpetrators.

Past experiences of victimization and family-related factors are another risk for cyberbullying crime. As for past experiences, one possible explanation is that young people who had experienced online or traditional school bullying may commit cyberbullying using e-mails, instant messages, and text messages for revenge, self-protection, or improving their social status ( 35 , 42 , 49 , 55 ). In becoming a cyberbullying perpetrator, the student may feel more powerful and superior, externalizing angry feelings and relieving the feelings of helplessness and sadness produced by past victimization experiences ( 51 ). As for family related factors, parenting styles are proven to be highly correlated to cyberbullying. In authoritative families, parents focus on rational behavioral control with clear rules and a high component of supervision and parental warmth, which have beneficial effects on children's lifestyles ( 43 ). Conversely, in indulgent families, children's behaviors are not heavily restricted and parents guide and encourage their children to adapt to society. The characteristics of this indulgent style, including parental support, positive communication, low imposition, and emotional expressiveness, possibly contribute to more parent-child trust and less misunderstanding ( 75 ). The protective role of warmth/affection and appropriate supervision, which are common features of authoritative or indulgent parenting styles, mitigate youth engagement in cyberbullying. On the contrary, authoritarian and neglectful styles, whether with excessive or insufficient control, are both proven to be risk factors for being a target of cyberbullying ( 33 , 76 ). In terms of geographical location, although several studies found that children residing in urban areas were more likely to be cyberbullying victims than those living in rural or suburban areas, we cannot draw a quick conclusion here, since whether this difference attributes to macro-level differences, such as community safety or socioeconomic status, or micro-level differences, such as teacher intervention in the classroom, courses provided, teacher-student ratio, is unclear across studies ( 61 ). An alternative explanation for this is the higher internet usage rate in urban areas ( 49 ).

Regarding health conditions, especially mental health, some scholars believe that young people with health problems are more likely to be identified as victims than people without health problems. They perceive health condition as a risk factor for cyberbullying ( 61 , 63 ). On the other hand, another group of scholars believe that cyberbullying has an important impact on the mental health of adolescents which can cause psychological distress consequences, such as post-traumatic stress mental disorder, depression, suicidal ideation, and drug abuse ( 70 , 87 ). It is highly possible that mental health could be risk factors, consequences of cyberbullying or both. Mental health cannot be used as standards, requirements, or decisive responses in cyberbullying research ( 13 ).

The Joint Effort Between Youth, Parents, Schools, and Communities to Form a Cyberbullying-Free Environment

This comprehensive review suggests that protecting children and adolescents from cyberbullying requires joint efforts between individuals, parents, schools, and communities, to form a cyberbullying-free environment. For individuals, young people are expected to improve their digital technology capabilities, especially in the use of social media platforms and instant messaging tools ( 55 ). To reduce the number of cyberbullying perpetrators, it is necessary to cultivate emotional self-regulation ability through appropriate emotional management training. Moreover, teachers, counselors, and parents are required to be armed with sufficient knowledge of emotional management and to develop emotional management capabilities and skills. In this way, they can be alert to the aggressive or angry emotions expressed by young people, and help them mediate any negative emotions ( 45 ), and avoid further anti-social behaviors ( 57 ).

For parents, styles of parenting involving a high level of parental involvement, care and support, are desirable in reducing the possibility of children's engagement in cyberbullying ( 74 , 75 ). If difficulties are encountered, open communication can contribute to enhancing the sense of security ( 73 ). In this vein, parents should be aware of the importance of caring, communicating and supervising their children, and participate actively in their children's lives ( 71 ). In order to keep a balance between control and openness ( 47 ), parents can engage in unbiased open communication with their children, and reach an agreement on the usage of computers and smart phones ( 34 , 35 , 55 ). Similarly, it is of vital importance to establish a positive communication channel with children ( 19 ).

For schools, a higher priority is needed to create a safe and positive campus environment, providing students with learning opportunities and ensuring that every student is treated equally. With a youth-friendly environment, students are able to focus more on their academic performance and develop a strong sense of belonging to the school ( 79 ). For countries recognizing collectivist cultural values, such as China and India, emphasizing peer attachment and a sense of collectivism can reduce the risk of cyberbullying perpetration and victimization ( 78 ). Besides, schools can cooperate with mental health agencies and neighboring communities to develop preventive programs, such as extracurricular activities and training ( 44 , 53 , 62 ). Specifically, school-based preventive measures against cyberbullying are expected to be sensitive to the characteristics of young people at different ages, and the intersection of race and school diversity ( 29 , 76 ). It is recommended that school policies that aim to embrace diversity and embody mutual respect among students are created ( 26 ). Considering the high prevalence of cyberbullying and a series of serious consequences, it is suggested that intervention against cyberbullying starts from an early stage, at about 10 years old ( 54 ). Schools can organize seminars to strengthen communication between teachers and students so that they can better understand the needs of students ( 61 ). In addition, schools should encourage cyberbullying victims to seek help and provide students with opportunities to report cyberbullying behaviors, such as creating online anonymous calls.

Conclusions and Limitations

The comprehensive study has reviewed related research on children and adolescents cyberbullying across different countries and regions, providing a positive understanding of the current situation of cyberbullying. The number of studies on cyberbullying has surged in the last 5 years, especially those related to risk factors and protective factors of cyberbullying. However, research on effective prevention is insufficient and evaluation of policy tools for cyberbullying intervention is a nascent research field. Our comprehensive review concludes with possible strategies for cyberbullying prevention, including personal emotion management, digital ability training, policy applicability, and interpersonal skills. We highlight the important role of parental control in cyberbullying prevention. As for the role of parental control, it depends on whether children believe their parents are capable of adequately supporting them, rather than simply interfering in their lives, restricting their online behavior, and controlling or removing their devices ( 50 ). In general, cyberbullying is on the rise, with the effectiveness of interventions to meet this problem still requiring further development and exploration ( 83 ).

Considering the overlaps between cyberbullying and traditional offline bullying, future research can explore the unique risk and protective factors that are distinguishable from traditional bullying ( 86 ). To further reveal the variations, researchers can compare the outcomes of interventions conducted in cyberbullying and traditional bullying preventions simultaneously, and the same interventions only targeting cyberbullying ( 88 ). In addition, cyberbullying also reflects a series of other social issues, such as personal privacy and security, public opinion monitoring, multinational perpetration and group crimes. To address this problem, efforts from multiple disciplines and novel analytical methods in the digital era are required. As the Internet provides enormous opportunities to connect young people from all over the world, cyberbullying perpetrators may come from transnational networks. Hence, cyberbullying of children and adolescents, involving multiple countries, is worth further attention.

Our study has several limitations. First, national representative studies are scarce, while few studies from middle and low income countries were included in our research due to language restrictions. Many of the studies included were conducted in schools, communities, provinces, and cities in high income countries. Meanwhile, our review only focused on victimization and perpetration. Future studies should consider more perspectives, such as bystanders and those with the dual identity of victim/perpetrator, to comprehensively analyze the risk and protective factors of cyberbullying.

Data Availability Statement

Author contributions.

SH, CZ, RE, and WZ conceived the study and developed the design. WZ analyzed the result and supervised the study. CZ and SH wrote the first draft. All authors contributed to the article and approved the submitted version.

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Supplementary Material

The Supplementary Material for this article can be found online at: https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpubh.2021.634909/full#supplementary-material

• Internet Safety 101 ®
• Project Wilberforce
• EIE Campaigns
• About Donna Rice Hughes
• History of EIE
• Accomplishments
• Letters of Support
• Sponsors & Partners
• Press Releases
• Media Coverage
• TV and Broadcast Interviews
• EIE News & Updates
• Commentaries
• Graphics Gallery
• Spokespersons
• 101 National launch
• Report Cybercrime
• Resource Center
• Quick Guides
• TAKE ACTION

Research by Category

• Internet Safety
• Pornography
• Predation, Trafficking, Child Porn
• Cyberbullying
• Social Media
• Additional Topics

Related Information:

Internet safety research.

• Bark's Annual Report: 2022 Research on Kids and Technology
• Overuse of devices and social media top parent concerns (C.S. Motts Children's Hospital, August 21, 2023)
• AFRAID, UNCERTAIN, AND OVERWHELMED: A Survey of Parents on Online Sexual Exploitation of Children
• Online Grooming: Examining risky encounters amid everyday digital socialization (Thorn, April 2022)
• Annual Report: 2021 Research on Kids and Technology | Bark
• Managing the Narrative Young People’s Use of Online Safety Tools (Family Online Safety Institute, November 2021)
• Tools for Today’s Digital Parents The role of parental controls in the digital lives of American parents and children . (Family Online Safety Institute, November 2020)
• Essential Facts About the Video Game Industry (Entertainment Software Association, 2020) 
• Association of Screen Time and Depression in Adolescence   (JAMA Pediatrics. Published online July 15, 2019)
• Online Safety Across the Generations - Executive Summary (Family Online Safety Institute, 2018)
• Global Kids Online: Research Synthesis 2015-2016
• Keeping Up with Generation App: NCSA Parent/Teen Online Safety Survey - National Cyber Security Alliance (June 2016)
• C.S. Mott Children's Hospital National Poll on Children's Health (2014).
• 2014 Teen Internet Safety Survey (Cox Communications, 2014)
• Youth Internet Safety: Risks, Responses, and Research Recommendations (Center for Technology Innovation at Brookings, October 2014)
• In Their Own Words:What Bothers Children Online? (EU Kids Online, February 2013)
• Anonymity, Privacy, and Security Online (Pew Internet & American Life Project, September 2013)
• Study of Self - Generated Sexually Explicit Images & Videos (International Watch Foundation, 2012)
• McAfee and NCSA Cyber Security Study (November, 2011)
• Who Needs Parental Controls?: A Survey Of Awareness, Attitudes, And Use Of Online Parental Controls (Hart Research Associates, Family Online Safety Institute, September 2011)
• Teens and Mobile Phones: Exploring Safety Issues as Mobile Phones Become the Communications Hub for American Teens (Pew Internet & American Life Project, November 9, 2010)
• Adolescence, Mobile Technology & Culture (Pew Internet & American Life Project, November 8, 2010)
• Use of Social Networking Sites in Online Sex Crimes Against Minors: An Examination of National Incidence and Means of Utilization(http://www.jahonline.org/article/S1054-139X (Journal of Adolescent Health, Volume 47, Issue 2, Pages 183-190, August 2010)
• Millennials will make online sharing in networks a lifelong habit (Pew Internet & American Life Project, July 9, 2010)
• The Secret Lives of Online Teens (McAffee, June 24, 2010)
• Teens and Mobile Phones (Pew Internet & American Life Project, April 20, 2010)
• Generation M2: Media in the Lives of 8- to 18-Year-Olds (A Kaiser Family Foundation Study, January 2010).
• Sex & Tech: Results from a Survey of Teens and Young Adults (The National Campaign to Prevent Teen and Unplanned Pregnancy with CosmoGirl.com, January, 2009)
• Enhancing Child Safety and Online Technologies: Final Report of the Internet Safety Technical Task Force to the Multi-State Working Group on Social Networking of State Attorneys General of the United States (Internet Safety Technical Task Force, Berkman Center for Internet & Society at Harvard University, December, 2008).
• 2008 National Cyberethics, Cybersafety, and Cybersecurity Baseline Study (Davina Ptuitt-Mentle, Ph.D., Educational Technology, Policy, Research and Outreach, October, 2008)
• Teens Viewing Drug and Alcohol-Related Videos Online (Custom Study for the Office of National Drug Control Policy, Nielson Online, October, 2008)
• Study of the Internet and Youth "At Risk Behaviors" (Rochester Institute of Technology, September, 2008)
• Cox Communications Teen Internet Safety Survey, Wave II--in Partnership with the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children and John Walsh (2007)

E-safety in Web 2.0 Learning Environments: A Research Synthesis and Implications for Researchers and Practitioners

• Conference paper
• First Online: 08 June 2017
• Cite this conference paper

• Antigoni Parmaxi 15 ,
• Kostantinos Papadamou 15 ,
• Michael Sirivianos 15 &
• Makis Stamatelatos 16  

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNISA,volume 10295))

Included in the following conference series:

• International Conference on Learning and Collaboration Technologies

2765 Accesses

2 Citations

This study explores the research development pertaining to safety and security in Web 2.0 learning environments, as well as a review of web-based tools and applications that attempt to address security and privacy issues in Online Social Networks. Published research manuscripts related to safety and security in collaborative learning environments have been explored, and the research topics with which researchers and practitioners deal with are discussed, as well as implications for researchers and practitioners. This paper argues that Web 2.0 learning environments entail threats and challenges in the safety of both students and instructors, and further research needs to take place for handling and protecting the privacy of all involved stakeholders.

You have full access to this open access chapter,  Download conference paper PDF

Similar content being viewed by others

Global Triumph or Exploitation of Security and Privacy Concerns in E-Learning Systems

Security in online web learning assessment

Security and Privacy in E-learning

• Social media
• Social networking sites
• Literature review

1 Introduction

The advancement of Web 2.0 tools offers a rewarding source of knowledge sharing, interaction and socialization. Web 2.0 is considered “a catch-all term to describe a variety of developments on the web and a perceived shift in the way the web is used. This has been characterised as the evolution of web use from passive consumption of content to more active participation, creation and sharing – to what is sometimes called the ‘read/write’ web” [ 1 , p. 9]. This term encompasses technologies that emphasize social networking, collaboration and media sharing such as Facebook, Twitter, Snapchat and MySpace. Amongst the benefits reported in the use of these tools include the development of 21st century skills such as creativity, innovation, team building, critical thinking, information sharing, higher academic achievement and improvement of ICT skills and competences [ 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 ]. Despite the popularity of Web 2.0 technologies, they still receive concerns by students and teachers with regard to their ability to support learning in a secure environment. Being present in online social networking sites presents particular risks such as exposure to cyberbullying, child abuse, inappropriate material and contact with dangerous strangers. Social Web can facilitate abuse of children by adults - being in place to assume fake identities online, a possible “danger” can intrude a child’s private zone leading to violence or even sex crimes [ 6 ]. The risks and threats that minors encounter on the internet can be classified under the following five categories [ 7 , 8 , 9 ]: (a) content risks: instances or events in which children are exposed to illegal harmful or age inappropriate content and harmful advice; (b) contact risks: instances or events in which children have direct interaction with other children or adults. Frequent threats under this category are cyber-grooming (i.e. adults trying to develop relationships of trust with children with the aim of having sexual intercourse with them) and cyberbullying; (c) Children targeted as consumers: instances or events in which children face the risk of being treated as consumers of products and/or services designed only for adults; (d) Economic risks: instances or events in which children spent money in gambling and other online games; (e) Online privacy risks: instances or events in which children share personal data with inappropriate audience.

A fundamental dilemma that practitioners need to address when considering the use of Web 2.0 tools for minors relates to e-safety and privacy. The question is timely in light of current upsurge of Web 2.0 technologies in educational environments, where researchers and/or instructors attempt to integrate such tools in the learning environment without violating students’ safety and personal rights. The question has attracted researchers and practitioners attention as it is evident from research papers and conferences (cf. Special issue of Computers & Security Journal on trust in cyber, physical and social computing). Some studies have been guided by the wish to understand students and teachers’ concerns in incorporating Web 2.0 technologies in the classroom (cf., for example, [ 10 ]) and some by the wish to identify methods for handling e-safety in a cost-effective way (cf., for example, [ 11 ]).

This paper provides the state-of-the-art regarding e-safety in the use of online collaborative environments delineating tools and threats dominant in Web 2.0 learning environments; methods and tools for handling these threats, as well as implications for researchers and practitioners.

2 Methodology

With an eye to synthesizing the findings of research regarding e-safety in Web 2.0 learning environments, we followed a three-step approach as demonstrated in Fig.  1 . Our approach included: (a) compilation of the e-safety corpus which included research manuscripts related to e-safety from manual search in scientific databases; (b) refinement of the e-safety corpus and (c) synthesis of the research papers.

Flow diagram of the methodology adopted for exploring scholarly activity in e-safety in online collaborative environments.

The methodology of this review was informed by previous studies such as Parmaxi, Zaphiris, Papadima-Sophocleous and Ioannou [ 4 ] who reviewed recent research development in Computer-Assisted Language Learning and Parmaxi and Zaphiris [ 5 ] who reviewed the use of Web 2.0 tools in Computer-Assisted Language Learning.

2.1 Development of E-safety Corpus

In order to capture scholarly activity in e-safety in Web 2.0 learning environments, we started by selecting appropriate resources which compiled the e-safety corpus. Appropriate articles for inclusion were selected via manual keyword search in manuscripts’ title, abstract and given keywords. The keywords for searching were “security”, “safety”, “e-safety”, “social media”, “education”, “learning”, “threat”, “Web 2.0” in the following databases: ERIC, Education Research Complete, Academic Search Complete, Computers & Applied Sciences Complete, Springer Link, Research Starters, Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection, Food Science Source, Taylor & Francis Group. The keyword search returned 26 manuscripts which comprised the preliminary e-safety corpus of this review.

2.2 Refinement of E-safety Corpus

The corpus was then refined in order to meet the objectives of this review. Each manuscript was scanned in order to elucidate the aim of each study. This stage facilitated the optimization of the e-safety corpus, as we excluded articles that were incorrectly selected in the search process (false positives) as well as articles reporting on non-empirical studies. The final e-safety corpus included 16 manuscripts.

2.3 Synthesis

Each paper in the e-safety corpus was then examined in depth, extracting information related to the following pre-defined aspects: (1) threats dominant in online learning environments; (2) methods for handling threats in online learning environments and; (3) implications for researchers and practitioners.

Recent debates about students’ activities with Web 2.0 technologies strive between their perceived benefits and their potential threats. The social web is seen to have the capacity to foster formal and informal learning, yet students, teachers and parents demonstrate increased concern about the online risks and threats, often related to child sex abusers, and bullying, as well as concerns related to the safe presence of a school community in Online Social Networks (OSNs). Concerns about online safety fit within a broader agenda related to students’ e-safety, recognizing the need to develop the skills and competences needed for taking advantage of the benefits that ICTs can provide. Figure  2 provides an overview of e-safety in Web 2.0 learning environments as derived from the e-safety corpus. The classification of the e-safety corpus demonstrated four categories that can be summarized as follows: (a) students’ and teachers’ attitudes and experiences towards e-safety in OSN, (b) e-safety actions, practices and policies in OSNs, (c) evaluation of schools’ e-safety regulations in OSNs and (d) internet safety education.

Overview of e-safety in Web 2.0 learning environments as derived from the e-safety corpus.

3.1 Students’ and Teachers’ Attitudes and Experiences Towards E-safety in OSNs

This category entails manuscripts that deal with students’ and teachers’ attitudes and experiences towards e-safety in the use of OSN. For example, Sharples, Graber, Harrison, and Logan [ 10 ] report results of a study that explored children’s, teachers’, parents’, managers’ and technical staff’s understanding of Web 2.0 activities and concerns. Findings demonstrated that a high percentage of the children surveyed (74%) have used social networking sites (SNS), whilst a substantial minority interacted regularly online with people they have not met face-to-face. Although teachers demonstrated the desire to take advantage of the benefits of Web 2.0 for creative and social learning, they reported being limited by a need to show a duty of care that prevents worst-case risk to children, to restrict access to SN sites. The respondents also reported concerns about Internet bullying and exam cheating. Finally, a Policy Delphi process voiced the need for schools to allow access to Web 2.0 sites, but educate children in responsible and creative learning.

3.2 E-safety Actions, Practices and Policies in OSNs

In this category, researchers engage in online safety actions, practices and policies. For example, Searson, Hancock, Soheil, and Shepherd [ 12 ] describe the need for developing informed policies and practices that would involve a wide range of sectors of the society. Such practices would inform technology integration in educational settings addressing the following factors: national and local policies, bandwidth and technology infrastructure, educational contexts, cyber-safety and cyberwellness practices and privacy accountability. Two organizations offer examples and set guidelines for digital citizenship in educational settings, that is ISTE ( https://www.iste.org/explore/ArticleDetail?articleid=101 ) and iKeepSafe ( http://ikeepsafe.org/ ). On the same line, Waters [ 11 ] highlight the multifarious security challenges that school districts encounter, using as a stepping stone the example of a high school’s page that has been hijacked by a former student. The manuscript concludes by suggesting two web browser add ons -Firesheep and BlackSheep- for users on unsecured WiFi networks to identify the social networking sessions of others on that Network. Similarly, the Parent Teacher Association demonstrates its action in educating children and parents about Internet Safety [ 13 ]. On the same line, Ramnath [ 14 ] discusses how school administrators can protect students’ safety while integrating technological advancements in teaching and learning. The study engages in topics such as cyberbullying and cyberstalking, the use of social networking sites for collaboration and the use of Mobile Device Management for the safety of mobile devices within and outside the school network. Similarly, Campbell-Wright [ 15 ] examine e-safety in e-learning, the benefits and dangers of online interaction and guidelines for preparing organizations to handle e-safety. Similarly, Wespieser [ 16 ], upon a survey distributed in 14,309 young people in London, demonstrated the high percentage of internet usage and social network sites, as well as issues of bullying and exposure to inappropriate material. The British Educational Communications and Technology Agency (BECTA) investigated the use and impact of Web 2.0 technologies in and out of school [ 10 ]. Findings demonstrated that at Key Stages 3 and 4, students harness extensively Web 2.0 outside of school, and for social purposes. The major challenge for schools in considering the usage of Web 2.0 technologies is how to support children to engage productively and creatively in social learning while protecting them from potential risk. Most learners demonstrated awareness of internet dangers, though many performed poorly in e-safety (e.g. in practice around password security). Whilst parents are generally positive in the use of technology for learning, yet concerns about e-safety exist. The paper concludes with indicating schools’ responsibility in raising children’s awareness on safe engagement with Web 2.0 and the internet in general. Triggered by educators’ fear to adopt social networking in their teaching, Blazer [ 17 ] sets off to review the opportunities and challenges associated with education-based social networking, providing recommendations for schools when they are establishing social networking policies. Despite the risks that schools encounter when exposing students in social networking sites, their use in the classroom can promote academic learning and increase student engagement. Recommendations provided include the formulation of strong policies that address harmful online interactions and provide educators and students with guidance in the use of OSNs. Moreover, non-commercial sites are available and can monitor access to social media. Crook and Harrison [ 1 ] also capture the importance to distinguish the current fears of society from evidence of actual risk to children. They demonstrate that the majority of learners in Key stages 3 and 4 are aware of online safety, yet, they demonstrate the need for schools and teachers to have a key role in students’ e-safety. Experts participating in the study favored the empower and manage approach, i.e. schools to allow free students’ access to public Web 2.0, but children need to be educated on how to use Web 2.0 activities for responsible and creative learning. Children’s web activity needs to be monitored for action to be taken against threatening or unsafe online behavior. Similarly, Sutton [ 18 ] provides 7 things to know right about campus security: (a) address sexual assaults on campus; (b) develop a social-media network for resources and campus security officials; (c) increase awareness of law enforcement in the higher ed community; (d) provide Web training on current topics; (e) develop crime prevention programs that are customizable; (f) put into place adequate social-media policing policies; (g) understand what the new Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) requirements mean for your campus.

3.3 Evaluation of Schools’ E-safety Regulations in OSNs

Being in place to understand and evaluate schools’ e-safety regulations is an issue that attracts high interest from researchers. On this line, Lorenz, Kikkas, and Laanpere [ 19 ] analyzed the types and sources of safety incidents, the solutions offered, the students’ reactions from these incidents and the solutions suggested by students. Findings demonstrated that many students do not understand what e-safety is, assuming that they are not involved in any way in an e-safety episode, even if they have suffered from an online attack. The awareness training about “stop-block-tell” does not work as it is radically different from the way students think and act in real life situations. Blocking unwanted material is the least successful solution for the students, even if current typical awareness training is focusing on it. As findings demonstrated, students seem to be passive reactors to any malicious behavior, thus training focusing on stop-block-tell” or “don’t click everywhere” seems unsuccessful. The solution provided by authors “is to include more technical and other practical aspects in the awareness training and distribute step-by-step, common-language how-to-s like how to set one’s privacy settings, how to report a page, picture, video or how to behave when someone is being bullied, or what to do when one becomes a victim of fraud or slander. The awareness in these areas is also needed for the adults who are setting the standard how their students or children behave and deal with the problems in the future” [ 19 , p. 336]. Ultimately, it is of major importance for schools to develop policies, strategies and solutions that address the core issues of children.

Following a similar path, Lorenz, Kikkas, and Laanpere [ 20 ] explored 201 e-safety related stories presented by students (age 12–16), parents, teachers, school IT managers and police. Through the stories, typical behavioral patterns were mapped, beliefs, regulations and limitations regarding the use of social networks in schools in Estonia. The results demonstrated that few schools hold an explicit policy for e-safety issues. Yet, even these few school-level policy documents fall behind in tackling the topics which were most frequently mentioned in students’ stories. Safety incidents related to cyberbullying or exposure to illegal material remain unsolved or even undetected. Schools delegate any safety incidents to parents who in turn look to schools for assistance. As a principle, e-safety policies should focus on topics with which all stakeholder groups agree being important: gaming, fraud, password, harassment, pornography and meeting strangers. Emphasis should be placed in assessing e-safety risks and how they can influence online learning activities. Similarly, Cranmer [ 21 ] reports on excluded young people’s experiences of e-safety, demonstrating that the strategies they employ to manage their online safety are primitive and insufficient, thus pointing the need for developing further their online strategies and ultimately their digital literacy.

3.4 Internet Safety Education

Internet safety education is a topic that attracts researchers’ interest, as advancement of technological systems calls for schools to teach children to protect themselves on the web. Whilst internet safety was introduced with some “special occasion” events or a dedicated “Internet Safety Day”, yet these actions seem to serve no purpose and have no real learning impact [ 22 ]. On this line, Naidoo, Kritzinger, and Loock [ 23 ] present a cyber –safety awareness framework that introduces cyber safety awareness education to primary school children in the South African community. The cyber safety awareness framework offers multifarious benefits for bridging the lack of cyber safety awareness both in schools and in communities. The framework proposes that schools are grouped into clusters, with a cluster coordinator as its head. Cyber safety awareness information is expected to be disseminated through workshops attended by teacher representatives of these school clusters, and distributed back to parents, children, other teachers and ultimately to their communities. On the same line, Orech [ 22 ] elaborates on the Digital Citizenship Project that aimed at integrating Internet Safety in the educational curriculum. Through the programme, students learned about cyberbullying and prevention as well as strategies for protecting themselves in case of a cyber-insult. The project had successfully employed social media for engaging middle school teachers and students to discuss about netiquette, digital citizenship, cyber crime prevention and managing digital footprint. Ultimately, sophomore students and teachers become cybermentors engaging in conversations about cyberbullying prevention and protection. Following a somewhat similar path, Moreno, Egan, Bare, Young, and Cox [ 24 ] consider internet safety education of vital importance for youth in US, thus they surveyed at what age should such education begin and what group is held responsible for teaching it. Having distributed their survey to 356 teachers, clinicians, parents and adolescents they demonstrated that the optimal age for internet safety education is 7.2 years (SD = 2.5), whilst parents were identified as the stakeholder with the primary responsibility in teaching this topic. Clinician’s role was also recognised as vital in providing resources, guidance and support.

3.5 Implications for Researchers and Practitioners

As the usage of Web 2.0 technologies advances, the more instructors and students engage with these technologies in and out of school. Internet usage has changed the way literacy is perceived and taught, raising the crucial need not only for information literacy, but also for digital literacy and specifically e-safety education. In this endeavour, the question of how parents and educators can accommodate children’s behaviour on the net still needs to be further investigated. Prohibiting the use of OSNs, blocking the use of unwanted material or even blocking the use of internet in the school environment is the least successful solution. As noted by Lorenz, Kikkas, and Laanpere, [ 19 ] there is a need for more technical training; as well as more automated solution that would set one’s privacy settings, instructing on how to report a page, picture, video or how to react when someone is being bullied. Taking into consideration the high percentage of internet usage and social network sites, there is a strong need in engaging children productively, responsibly and creatively in social learning while protecting them from potential risks. Whilst children are aware of internet dangers but perform poorly in applying e-safety, rises schools’ responsibility in raising children’s awareness by providing cyber-safety and cyberwellness practices. Thus, providing online and on-site training for both teachers and parents for confronting the challenges of the new digital era with practical guidelines on e-safety and privacy is vital. With this in mind the next section provides a review of existing web-based tools and mobile applications that attempt to address security and privacy issues in Online Social Networks.

3.6 Security and Privacy Enhancing Web-Based Tools Review

This section provides a review of existing web-based tools and mobile applications that attempt to address the security and privacy issues in Online Social Networks. The tools below are of particular interest to parents and teachers.

Qustodio ( https://www.qustodio.com/en/ ) is a parental/educator control software available in most of the platforms [ 25 ]. It enables parents/educators to monitor and manage their kids’ web and offline activity on their devices. It also allows parents/educators to track with whom their children is communicating in OSNs and manage their whole OSN activity. In addition, Qustodio can be used as a sensitive content detection and protection tool.

Avira SocialShield ( http://www.avira.com/ ) is a Social Network Protection application developed by Avira [ 26 ]. It is a monitoring tool that inform parents/educators of their children’s online activities. It monitors and checks their child’s social network accounts for any comments, photos etc. that may influence the child’s reputation in a negative way or may indicate that the child is in danger. Furthermore, SocialShield is able to protect the children from cyberbullying, to prevent them from participating in online discussions with inappropriate content and it is also able to verify the identities of the child’s online friends.

Web of Trust (WoT; https://www.mywot.com/ ) is a safe browser extension for website reputation rating that helps users to make informed decisions about whether to trust a website or not when browsing online [ 27 ]. In order to provide its users an extra layer of security against malicious links posted by malicious users, Facebook uses WoT’s reputation data to inform users about low reputation links.

WebWatcher ( https://www.webwatcher.com/ ) is a parental/educator control, cross-platform compatible, monitoring software [ 28 ]. It is able to capture the content of emails and instant messages in OSNs, as well as actual keystrokes and screenshots. It assists parents/ educators in keeping their children safe online by viewing what is captured in their child’s screen from everywhere.

Cloudalc WebFilter Pro ( http://www.cloudacl.com/ ) is a cloud-based content filtering application [ 29 ]. Cloudacl monitors billion of web pages to protect families and especially kids from malicious attacks and threats and to ensure a safer Internet surfing. It blocks web pages, spam servers and adult material.

Abuse User Analytics (AuA) is an analytical framework aiming to provide information about the behavior of OSN users [ 30 ]. This framework processes data from users’ activities in the online social network with the goal to identify deviant or abusive activities through visualization.

FoxFilter - THE Parental control for Firefox ( https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/foxfilter/ ) is a free browser add-on produced by Mozilla and is known as the parental control for Firefox browser [ 31 ]. It is a personal content filter that helps blocking pornographic and other inappropriate content. A user can block content for an entire site or enter custom keywords filters that will be used to block content for any site that contains these keywords.

Parental Control and Web Filter from MetaCert is a parental control browser add-on that blocks pornography, malware and spyware [ 32 ]. It protects kids and adults across multiple categories. It allows users to choose among two main categories (extra strong for kids and strong for adults) while also allows to define the specific categories that you prefer to be protected (such as Bullying, Drugs, Aggressive behavior, Gambling, Sex etc.).

MetaCert Security API ( https://metacert.com/ ) is a Security REST API [ 33 ]. It provides a layer of security on top of web applications so the application can protect users from Phishing, Malware and Pornography.

eSafely ( http://www.esafely.com/ ) is a parental/educator control browser add-on that provides kid-safe access to popular web resources, free of adult content [ 34 ]. Generally, it offers the following: (a) Kid Safe Facebook that protects children against threat of cyber-bullying by replacing harassing messages with friendly icons in Facebook chat; (b) Kid Safe Images that when a site is identified as hosting adult content it replaces the images with images more suitable for children; (c) Kid Safe YouTube; and (d) Kid Safe Search.

ReThink ( http://www.rethinkwords.com/ ) is an non-intrusive, patented software product that stops Cyberbullying before the damage is done [ 35 ]. When a user tries to post an offensive message on social media, ReTHink uses patented context sensitive filtering to determine whether or not it is offensive and gives the adolescent a second chance to reconsider their decision.

PureSight Multi ( http://puresight.com/ ) is a monitoring and filtering cross-platform software that allows children to use the internet without fearing bullies or harassment and keeps parents/educators in the know [ 36 ]. It features Facebook/Cyberbullying protection, Web filtering, Reports and alerts, file sharing control and parent/educator portal.

MM Guardian Parental Control app ( http://www.mmguardian.com/ ) is a mobile application that allows you to block incoming calls and texts, monitor alarming texts and control which apps on the device can be used and when on a children’s’ smartphone [ 37 ]. It also allows the parent/educator to locate and lock his childrens’ mobiles with a text message, as well as to set time restrictions to limit their use.

Funamo Parental Control app ( https://www.funamo.com/ ) is a mobile applications that allows parents/educators to monitor their childs’ mobile devices [ 38 ]. Contacts, calls, SMS, browser history, applications and locations will automatically be logged and history data is uploaded to Funamo server each day. It also allows parents/educators to enable safe search engines in the web.

Kids Place is a mobile application that allows parents/educators to choose what their children can do with their mobile device [ 39 ]. It requires from the parent/educator to set up a pin when he first login to Kids Place that is then needed to exit the app. This make sure that the kids are restricted to only use apps chosen by the parent/educator. In addition, allows the parent/educator to block incoming calls and disable all wireless signals when the app is running.

AppLock is a parental/educator control mobile application for android platforms [ 40 ]. It allows parents/educators to lock SMS, contacts, Gmail, Facebook and any other application to protect their privacy. It also allows them to lock specific photos or videos meaning that they can only access them with a code.

Screen Time Parental Control app is a parental control mobile application that empowers parents to monitor and manage the time spent on their children devices and to set time limits on selected apps, as well as a bedtime curfew, lights out and school time curfews [ 41 ]. The app runs in the background of the mobile device and it can be controlled via any web browser.

4 Conclusion

As the Internet and Communication Technologies expand rapidly in many everyday activities, concerns are raised with regard to the safety of a vulnerable group such as children on the web. As noted by O’Brien, Budish, Faris, Gasser, and Lin [ 42 ], cybersecurity incidents are reported each year sitting at the top of government policy and boardroom agendas. Our findings demonstrate that recent research activity related to safety in Web 2.0 technologies pertains to: (a) students’ and teachers’ attitudes and experiences towards e’-safety in OSNs, (b) e-safety actions, practices and policies in OSNs, (c) evaluation of schools’ e-safety regulations in OSNs and (d) internet safety education.

The incorporation of OSNs in the classrooms confronts educators with new opportunities and challenges as there is an increasing need for educating children on productive, creative, safe and responsible engagement in the use of OSNs. More work is needed in the provision of online and on-site training of both teachers and parents for confronting the challenges of the new digital era and for putting together a comprehensive e-safety framework in order to include practical guidelines on e-safety and privacy. Blocking the use of OSNs in the school environment provides only a shallow solution to the problem; there is a need for providing students the skills for managing potential risks on the web by properly setting their privacy settings, reporting inappropriate material and reacting to cyber threats.

Moreover, there is an urgent need for designing effective measures against internet risks and threats, as well as for understanding minors’ activities online. Most of the existing parental/educational control software rely on monitoring and parent/educator review to detect any abnormal activity. Some of them search for keywords to create alerts, while some others block the usual list of websites. Cyber-bullying, cyber-grooming, and exchange of sensitive content is not intelligently detected by existing web-based tools and this has a negative social effect on the children i.e. they are monitored to an excessive degree and this will probably lead them to find alternative ways to go online. Existing Internet filtering techniques for protecting minors online need to be redesigned and reapplied in a smarter way, by incorporating more sophisticated techniques such as data analytics, advanced content analysis and data mining techniques that could allow for OSN fake account identification and sexual content detection.

5 Limitations

The limitation of the e-safety corpus to the specific databases meant that some manuscripts that relate to e-safety were not included. The aim of this study in not to provide an exhaustive review of the literature pertaining to e-safety in OSNs. The results and implications derive from this particular corpus; however, findings may also reflect both present and future trends.

Crook, C., Harrison, C.: Web 2.0 technologies for learning at key stages 3 and 4: summary report (2008). http://dera.ioe.ac.uk/1480/1/becta_2008_web2_summary.pdf

Wright E.R., Lawson A.H.: Computer-mediated communication and student learning in large introductory sociology courses. In: Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Sociological Association, Hilton San Francisco & Renaissance Parc 55 Hotel, San Francisco, CA (2004). http://citation.allacademic.com/meta/p_mla_apa_research_citation/1/0/8/9/6/pages108968/p108968-1.php

Green H., Hannon C.: TheirSpace: Education for a Digital Generation. Demos, London (2007). http://dera.ioe.ac.uk/23215/1/Their%20space%20-%20web.pdf

Parmaxi, A., Zaphiris, P., Papadima-Sophocleous, S., Ioannou, A.: Mapping the landscape of computer-assisted language learning: an inventory of research. Interact. Technol. Smart Educ. 10 (4), 252–269 (2013). doi: 10.1108/ITSE-02-2013-0004

Article   Google Scholar  

Parmaxi, A., Zaphiris, P.: Web 2.0 in computer-assisted language learning: a research synthesis and implications for instructional design and educational practice. Interact. Learn. Environ., 1–13 (2016). doi: 10.1080/10494820.2016.1172243

Wolak, J., Finkelhor, D., Mitchell, K.J., Ybarra, M.L.: Online ‘predators’ and their victims: myths, realities and implications for prevention and treatment. Am. Psychol. 63 , 111–128 (2008)

Dooley, J., Cross, D., Hearn, L., Treyvaud, R.: Review of existing australian and international cyber-safety research. Child Health Promotion Research Centre, Edith Cowan University, Perth (2009)

Google Scholar  

OECD: The Protection of Children Online: Risks Faced by Children Online and Policies to Protect Them. OECD Digital Economy Papers, No. 179. OECD Publishing, Paris (2011). http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/5kgcjf71pl28-en

Tsirtsis, A., Tsapatsoulis, N., Stamatelatos, M., Papadamou, K., Sirivianos, M.: Cyber security risks for minors: a taxonomy and a software architecture. In: 2016 11th International Workshop on Semantic and Social Media Adaptation and Personalization (SMAP), pp. 93–99. IEEE, November 2016

Sharples, M., Graber, R., Harrison, C., Logan, K.: E-safety and web 2.0 for children aged 11–16. J. Comput. Assist. Learn. 25 (1), 70–84 (2009)

Waters, J.K.: Social networking: keeping it clean. THE J. 38 (1), 52 (2011)

Searson, M., Hancock, M., Soheil, N., Shepherd, G.: Digital citizenship within global contexts. Educ. Inf. Technol. 20 (4), 729–741 (2015)

A Safer Digital World. Our Child. 39 (5), 5 (2014). ISSN 10833080

Ramnath, S.: How schools can keep students safe, and on Facebook. eSchool News 18 (4), 16 (2015)

Campbell-Wright, K.: E-safety. NIACE (2013)

Wespieser, K.: Young People and E-safety: The Results of the 2015 London Grid for Learning E-safety Survey. National Foundation for Educational Research (2015)

Blazer, C.: Social Networking in Schools: Benefits and Risks; Review of the Research; Policy Considerations; and Current Practices. Information Capsule, vol. 1109. Research Services, Miami-Dade County Public Schools (2012)

Sutton, H.: Review the top 7 things to know right now about campus security. Campus Secur. Rep. 12 (4), 1–5 (2015)

Lorenz, B., Kikkas, K., Laanpere, M.: Comparing children’s E-safety strategies with guidelines offered by adults. Electron. J. e-Learn. 10 (3), 326–338 (2012)

Lorenz, B., Kikkas, K., Laanpere, M.: Social networks, e-Learning and Internet safety: analysing the stories of students. In: Proceedings of the 10th European Conference on e-Learning ECEL-2011: 10th European Conference on e-Learning ECEL-2011, Brighton, UK, pp. 10–11, November 2011

Cranmer, S.: Listening to excluded young people’s experiences of e-safety and risk. Learn. Media Technol. 38 (1), 72–85 (2013)

Orech, J.: How it’s done: incorporating digital citizenship into your everyday curriculum. Tech. Learn. 33 (1), 16–18 (2012)

Naidoo, T., Kritzinger, E., Loock, M.: Cyber safety education: towards a cyber-safety awareness framework for primary schools. In: International Conference on e-Learning, p. 272. Academic Conferences International Limited (2013)

Moreno, M.A., Egan, K.G., Bare, K., Young, H.N., Cox, E.D.: Internet safety education for youth: stakeholder perspectives. BMC Public Health 13 (1), 543 (2013)

Qustodio: Protect, understand and manage your kids internet activity with Qustodio (2016). https://www.qustodio.com/en/

The Windows Club: SocialShield: Avira Social Network Protection for your child (2016). http://www.thewindowsclub.com/socialshield-review

WOT: Know which sites to trust (2016). https://www.mywot.com/

Awareness Technologies Computer & Mobile monitoring software (2016). http://www.webwatcher.com/?refID=lnkshr&siteID=Cty0dj6o3sgGHtU.M9eT5Zlm7qQ5Ms1ig

Cloudacl: Web Security Service (2013). http://www.cloudacl.com/webfilter/

Squicciarini, A.C., Dupont, J., Chen, R.: Online abusive users analytics through visualization. In: Proceedings of the 23rd International Conference on World Wide Web, pp. 155–158. ACM, April 2014

Mozilla add-on: The Parental control for Firefox (2014). https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/foxfilter/

Chrome web store: Parental Controls & and Web Filter (2016). https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/parentalcontrols-web-fil/dpfbddcgbimoafpgmbbjiliegkfcjkmn

MetaCert: MetaCert Security API (2009–2016). https://metacert.com/

Esafely: eSafely protects you where your Web filter doesn’t (2014). http://www.esafely.com/

ReThink: ReThink (2016). http://www.rethinkwords.com/

Puresight: PureSight Online child safety (2010–2011). http://puresight.com/puresight-prevents-cyberbullying.html

Pervasive Group: MM Guardian Parental Control (2016). https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.mmguardian.childapp

Funamo: Funamo Parental Control (2015). https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=funamo.funamo

General Solutions and Services, LLC: Kids Place - Parental Control (2012). https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.kiddoware.kidsplace

doMobile: AppLock (2016). https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.domobile.applock

ScreenTime Labs: Screen Time Parental Control (2016). https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.screentime.rc&hl=en_GB

O’Brien, D., Budish, R., Faris, R., Gasser, U., Lin, T.: Privacy and Cybersecurity Research Briefing (2016)

Download references

Acknowledgments

This research has been fully funded by the European Commission as part of the ENCASE project (H2020-MSCA-RISE of the European Union under GA number 691025).

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Cyprus University of Technology, Limassol, Cyprus

Antigoni Parmaxi, Kostantinos Papadamou & Michael Sirivianos

Innovators Ltd., Athens, Greece

Makis Stamatelatos

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Antigoni Parmaxi .

Editor information

Editors and affiliations.

Panayiotis Zaphiris

Andri Ioannou

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 Springer International Publishing AG

About this paper

Cite this paper.

Parmaxi, A., Papadamou, K., Sirivianos, M., Stamatelatos, M. (2017). E-safety in Web 2.0 Learning Environments: A Research Synthesis and Implications for Researchers and Practitioners. In: Zaphiris, P., Ioannou, A. (eds) Learning and Collaboration Technologies. Novel Learning Ecosystems. LCT 2017. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 10295. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-58509-3_20

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-58509-3_20

Published : 08 June 2017

Publisher Name : Springer, Cham

Print ISBN : 978-3-319-58508-6

Online ISBN : 978-3-319-58509-3

eBook Packages : Computer Science Computer Science (R0)

Share this paper

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Publish with us

Policies and ethics

• Find a journal
• Track your research

• Get started with computers
• Learn Microsoft Office
• Apply for a job
• Improve my work skills
• Design nice-looking docs
• Getting Started
• Smartphones & Tablets
• Typing Tutorial
• Online Learning
• Basic Internet Skills
• Online Safety
• Social Media
• Zoom Basics
• Google Docs
• Google Sheets
• Career Planning
• Resume Writing
• Cover Letters
• Job Search and Networking
• Business Communication
• Entrepreneurship 101
• Careers without College
• Job Hunt for Today
• 3D Printing
• Freelancing 101
• Personal Finance
• Sharing Economy
• Decision-Making
• Graphic Design
• Photography
• Image Editing
• Learning WordPress
• Language Learning
• Critical Thinking
• For Educators
• Translations
• Staff Picks
• English expand_more expand_less

Internet Safety  - Introduction to Internet Safety

Internet safety  -, introduction to internet safety, internet safety introduction to internet safety.

Internet Safety: Introduction to Internet Safety

Lesson 1: introduction to internet safety, introduction to internet safety.

There's almost no limit to what you can do online. The Internet makes it possible to access information quickly, communicate around the world, and much more. Unfortunately, the Internet is also home to certain risks , such as malware , spam , and phishing . If you want to stay safe online, you'll need to understand these risks and learn how to avoid them.

Adopting a safer mindset

Computers can often give us a false sense of security . After all, no one can physically harm you through a computer screen. But to stay safe online, you'll want to take a more cautious approach. Here's one way to think about it: Treat the Internet as you would a shopping mall .

Most people don't consider a mall to be an especially dangerous place. You can go there to shop and meet up with friends. But there are also small things you may do to stay safe, even if you don't think about them very often. For example, you probably wouldn't leave your car unlocked or give your credit card number to a stranger.

Apply this same mindset whenever you're online. You shouldn't be afraid to use the Internet, but remember that it comes with many of the same risks you'd face in the real world. Throughout this tutorial, we'll show you how to prepare for these risks so you can be online without putting yourself in danger.

So what are you waiting for? Let's get started!

/en/internetsafety/creating-strong-passwords/content/

• OII >  
• News & Events >  
• News >  

Internet use statistically associated with higher wellbeing, finds new global Oxford study

Links between internet adoption and wellbeing are likely to be positive, despite popular concerns to the contrary, according to a major new international study from researchers at the Oxford Internet Institute, part of the University of Oxford.

• Study of over two million individuals’ psychological wellbeing from 2006-2021 across 168 countries, in relation to internet use and psychological well-being
• Across 33,792 different statistical models and subsets of data, 84.9% of associations between internet connectivity and wellbeing were positive and statistically significant

The study analysed data from two million individuals aged 15 to 99 in 168 countries, including Latin America, Asia, and Africa and found internet access and use was consistently associated with positive wellbeing.

Assistant Professor Matti Vuorre , Tilburg University and Research Associate, Oxford Internet Institute and Professor Andrew Przybylski , Oxford Internet Institute carried out the study to assess how technology relates to wellbeing in parts of the world that are rarely studied.

Professor Przybylski said: “Whilst internet technologies and platforms and their potential psychological consequences remain debated, research to date has been inconclusive and of limited geographic and demographic scope. The overwhelming majority of studies have focused on the Global North and younger people thereby ignoring the fact that the penetration of the internet has been, and continues to be, a global phenomenon.

“We set out to address this gap by analysing how internet access, mobile internet access and active internet use might predict psychological wellbeing on a global level across the life stages. To our knowledge, no other research has directly grappled with these issues and addressed the worldwide scope of the debate.”

The researchers studied eight indicators of well-being: life satisfaction, daily negative and positive experiences, two indices of social well-being, physical wellbeing, community wellbeing and experiences of purpose.

Commenting on the findings, Professor Vuorre said, “We were surprised to find a positive correlation between well-being and internet use across the majority of the thousands of models we used for our analysis.”

Whilst the associations between internet access and use for the average country was very consistently positive, the researchers did find some variation by gender and wellbeing indicators: The researchers found that 4.9% of associations linking internet use and community well-being were negative, with most of those observed among young women aged 15-24yrs.

Whilst not identified by the researchers as a causal relation, the paper notes that this specific finding is consistent with previous reports of increased cyberbullying and more negative associations between social media use and depressive symptoms among young women.

Adds Przybylski, “Overall we found that average associations were consistent across internet adoption predictors and wellbeing outcomes, with those who had access to or actively used the internet reporting meaningfully greater wellbeing than those who did not”.

“We hope our findings bring some greater context to the screentime debate however further work is still needed in this important area.  We urge platform providers to share their detailed data on user behaviour with social scientists working in this field for transparent and independent scientific enquiry, to enable a more comprehensive understanding of internet technologies in our daily lives.”

In the study, the researchers examined data from the Gallup World Poll, from 2,414,294 individuals from 168 countries, from 2006-2021.  The poll assessed well-being with face-to-face and phone surveys by local interviewers in the respondents’ native languages.  The researchers applied statistical modelling techniques to the data using wellbeing indicators to test the association between internet adoption and wellbeing outcomes.

Watch the American Psychological Association (APA) video highlighting the key findings from the research.

Download the paper ‘ A multiverse analysis of the associations between internet use and well-being ’ published in the journal Technology, Mind and Behaviour, American Psychological Association.

Notes for Editors: For more information and briefings, please contact:  Sara Spinks/Roz Pacey, Media and Communications Manager. T: 01865 280528 E: [email protected]

About the Research   The researchers analysed secondary data from the The Gallup World Poll. The work by Matti Vuorre and Andrew. K. Przybylski was supported by the Huo Family Foundation which had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the article.  The study was approved by the University of Oxford Central University Research Ethics Committee.  (SSH_OII_CIA_21_084).

Related People

Professor Andrew Przybylski

Professor of Human Behaviour and Technology

Professor Przybylski is a psychologist who studies how online social media and video games platforms influence users’ mental health. His research focuses on how data from these platforms can inform regulation, policymaking, and expert advice.

Dr Matti Vuorre

Research Associate

Matti Vuorre is an experimental psychologist. He applies his expertise in cognitive psychology and Bayesian modelling as a postdoctoral researcher in the Programme on Adolescent Well-Being in the Digital Age.

Related Project

Programme on Adolescent Well-Being in the Digital Age

This programme addresses the assumptions that the overall mental well-being of young people is undergoing a pronounced period of decline and that digital technologies might be driving this trend.

Related Topics

• Privacy Overview
• Strictly Necessary Cookies
• Google Analytics

This website uses cookies so that we can provide you with the best user experience possible. Cookie information is stored in your browser and performs functions such as recognising you when you return to our website and helping our team to understand which sections of the website you find most interesting and useful.

• moove_gdrp_popup -  a cookie that saves your preferences for cookie settings. Without this cookie, the screen offering you cookie options will appear on every page you visit.

This cookie remains on your computer for 365 days, but you can adjust your preferences at any time by clicking on the "Cookie settings" link in the website footer.

Please note that if you visit the Oxford University website, any cookies you accept there will appear on our site here too, this being a subdomain. To control them, you must change your cookie preferences on the main University website.

This website uses Google Tags and Google Analytics to collect anonymised information such as the number of visitors to the site, and the most popular pages. Keeping these cookies enabled helps the OII improve our website.

Enabling this option will allow cookies from:

• Google Analytics - tracking visits to the ox.ac.uk and oii.ox.ac.uk domains

These cookies will remain on your website for 365 days, but you can edit your cookie preferences at any time via the "Cookie Settings" button in the website footer.

Please enable Strictly Necessary Cookies first so that we can save your preferences!

Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.

To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to  upgrade your browser .

Enter the email address you signed up with and we'll email you a reset link.

• We're Hiring!
• Help Center

Youth Internet Safety: Risks, Responses, and Research Recommendations

Related Papers

Pertanika - Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities

Adamkolo M Ibrahim

The internet has come along with a myriad of positive and negative challenges. One of the positive developments is the increased access for all age categories, especially people of young ages; however, it is not without a side effect. A cyberbullying threat has become interesting areas of research over the years because of the importance of the concepts toward understanding children's online behaviours and making the internet safe again for the kids to surf. Thus, this article seeks to provide a further understanding of the phenomenon by reporting the findings of a study performed in Selangor, a state of Malaysia. A questionnaire was administered to 375 respondents selected using stratified random sampling from a population of 6,671 primary and secondary school pupils aged 9 to 16 years. The key findings revealed that most children had been involved in the act of cyberbullying. Interestingly, most of them were aware of online threats but did not know that it was bad behaviour. However, most of them were rarely involved in a sex-related cyberbullying incident. A collective approach to guarantee the internet

Damian Maher

3rd Malaysia – International Conference on Social Science & Humanities (ICSSH), 27-28 December 2019 The Regency Scholar’s Hotel, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia (UTM), Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia

Despite progresses made in the research on the array of dangers and threats that children are exposed to on the internet in Malaysia, this article seeks to provide further understanding on the incidence of the phenomenon by reporting the findings of a study performed in the Malaysian state of Selangor to determine the level and types of cyberbullying incidents prevalent among schoolchildren. A questionnaire was administered to 375 respondents selected using stratified random sampling from a population of 6,671 primary and secondary school pupils aged 9 to 16 years. Factor analysis was employed, and the key findings revealed that most children have been involved in cyberbullying; most of them were aware of online threats but did not know that it is a bad behaviour; and, most of them were rarely involved in a sex-related cyberbullying incident. A collective approach to guarantee the internet safety of children and balance their online prospects and risks is recommended to ensure children’s online safety.

Catherine McLoughlin

Ryan Schaaf

Digital Seige

Serdar Tunçer , NİLÜFER SEZER

Cyberbullying refers to the behaviour of inflicting harm upon a certain individual or group by using information or communication technologies. Although it originally became a topic of discussion in Europe and North America, it has now become a worldwide issue. Bullying is not a new phenomenon but 'conventional bullying' is now being replaced by cyberbullying. With the increasing use of the Internet, mobile devices and particularly the spread of social media, the number of individuals vulnerable to cyberbullying is on the rise. In this context, angry or offensive messages, those mocking, teasing, intimidating, acquiring private information by means of fake accounts or attempts to spread such information may all be considered as examples of cyberbullying. While conventional bullying may occur at a certain place or time, cyberbullying emerges anytime and anywhere people may have access to the Internet. Additionally, factors such as cyberbullying's capacity to spread more quickly and simultaneously to a larger number of people, its long-lasting effects and the perpetrator's perception of concealing his/her identity enhance the need for multidimensional scholarly studies on this subject.

Jose R. Agustina

In just a few years, technological changes have transformed how people interact and communicate with each other, in particular among so-called digital adolescents. The impact of technology on routine activities and mainstream culture has led to an increase in young peoples’ exposure to psychological and criminological risks. As a result of this new psychosocial trend, new educational challenges are appearing and it is becoming more necessary to react to these challenges on the basis of an adequate diagnosis of psychology and pedagogy relating to adolescents. Criminological theories and research have tried to identify risk and protection factors to understand victimisation processes in more depth and improve prevention strategies. In this context, it is necessary to develop educational programs that consider personal, familial, and situational vulnerabilities and weaknesses in order to foster resilient individuals who can successfully confront the risks inherent to cyberspace. By ana...

National Coalition against Bullying National …

Sheri Bauman

Handbook of Research on School Violence in American K-12 Education

Michael Pittaro

The advent of the internet has revolutionized the way individuals conduct business, socialize, and search for information on any topic imaginable at any time. Nevertheless, with all its benefits, the internet also has a darker side for which new criminal opportunities have emerged and some traditional crimes have evolved and multiplied. One area of concern that has emerged since the advent of the internet is that of cyberbullying, a distinct type of deviant behavior that has attained worldwide attention from practitioners and scholars. This chapter examines cyberbullying as associated with the age, gender, race, and urbanicity of the victims versus the extent to which traditional face-to-face bullying took place within these same groups. Cyberbullying remains an elusive social problem for all because cyberbullying has been associated with school shootings, suicides, and other violence among adolescents. Discussion of the implications for practitioners and scholars will be included i...

Australasian Journal of Information Systems

Chintha Kaluarachchi

Cyberbullying has become a major challenge for authorities, parents, guardians and schools in particular, especially in the era of the digital world. This paper reviews available empirical research to examine the issues such as the responsible use of technology amongst young people, parents and schools responsibility to protect against Cyberbullying. The analysis revealed that the responsible use of technology provides better practices to encourage comparisons because of these new digital technologies. Parents and educators are the key to Cyber ethics, therefore teaching the responsible use of technology whilst focusing on Cyber ethics at the start of young people’s exposure to technology use may be an excellent strategy to reduce the growth and impact of Cyberbullying. The paper will also review good practices for young people, school communities and parents to prevent and manage Cyberbullying and unethical behaviours online. These claims are examined using current literature to en...

RELATED PAPERS

Noel Livingstone

Neuro-Oncology

Lalitha Nayak

Encyclopaedia of Mathematical Sciences

Corrado De Concini

Histoire de l’éducation

Boris Nogues

BMGN - Low Countries Historical Review

B. de Pater

Volume 8: Microturbines, Turbochargers, and Small Turbomachines; Steam Turbines

Soichiro TABATA

Micaela Baldoni

Open Access Macedonian Journal of Medical Sciences

Muhammad Fachry Husada

Journal of Current Biomedical Research

ISA HUSSAINI

Tropical gastroenterology : official journal of the Digestive Diseases Foundation

Tryambak Samanta

SVOA Microbiology

ScienceVolks Open Access

Colorectal Disease

Tommaso Fontana

International Journal of Applied Pharmaceutics

Hamdy Mohamed Mahmoud Dawaba

Anthony O'Neill

Frontiers in Microbiology

Fabio Olivares

Early Childhood Education Journal

Tiffany Landau Rowland

Carolina Digital Repository (University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill)

Sylvain Chamberland

在线购买田纳西大学毕业证 utk毕业证硕士学历证书留信网认证原版一模一样

Nasywa Aprilia

•   We're Hiring!
•   Help Center
• Find new research papers in:
• Health Sciences
• Earth Sciences
• Cognitive Science
• Mathematics
• Computer Science
• Academia ©2024

Internet access linked to higher wellbeing, study finds

I nternet access and use is consistently associated with positive wellbeing, a new study of data from 168 countries by the Oxford Internet Institute (OII) suggests .

In many parts of the world, including the EU and UK, concerns about online harms have prompted new laws.

The OII says some of its findings are "consistent" with reported links between social media use and depressive symptoms among young women.

But it concludes the overall benefits of being online show regulators contemplating tougher laws should rely on data and not be "guided by anecdote."

"I anticipate that this work will be in some ways seen in contrast to the kind of the current social conversation surrounding tech," said professor Andrew Przybylski, of Oxford University, who led the research.

"If we’re going to make the online world safe for young people, we can’t just go in guns blazing with strong beliefs and a one size fits all solution - we really need to make sure that we’re sensitive to having our minds changed by data," he said.

The study did not look specifically at social media - which is what much of the most heated debate around online safety is focussed on - but took a broader approach to assessing access to the internet.

Researchers analysed data gathered between 2006 and 2021 from two million individuals aged 15 to 99 worldwide, including from countries in Latin America, Asia, and Africa

They found that people who had internet access or actively used the internet reported greater levels of life satisfaction and social wellbeing.

Statistician professor Kevin McConway said it was very "broad brush" research, but useful nonetheless.

"It’s a starting point, and if nothing else it casts very serious doubt on the view, held by some people, that the Internet is bad for us all," he wrote.

Young women

The researchers studied eight indicators of wellbeing including life satisfaction, daily negative and positive experiences and community wellbeing.

They looked at a "multiverse" of nearly 34,000 different statistical models and subsets of data.

In 85% of cases these showed associations between internet connectivity and wellbeing that were positive and statistically significant.

But 5% of associations linking internet use and community wellbeing were negative, with most of those observed among young women aged 15 to 24.

While this does not prove that internet access causes them unhappiness, the paper notes that it is "consistent with previous reports of increased cyberbullying and more negative associations between social media use and depressive symptoms among young women".

Dr Ruth Plackett, Senior Research Fellow at University College London, said it was important to understand the limitations in what the research could reveal - for example the fact it looked at the "average" person about in a given country.

"For instance it doesn't isolate social media use", she told the BBC.

"We do know young people can be exposed to harmful content on these platforms which may give more negative associations with internet use".

However, she told the BBC she welcomed calls for a more nuanced discussion about the use of the internet.

Simone Vibert, head of policy and research at Internet Matters, which offers online safety advice, said their research similarly showed that being online came with many benefits but there were also negatives.

"There is a clear need for an evidence-based approach, making evidence such as this and further research vital."

'Letting families down'

The researchers also acknowledge the study has limits, notably not being able to prove cause and effect.

For example, the authors could not entirely discount the possibility that increases in incomes, which were also linked to rises in internet access, were behind people feeling better.

But it had clear lessons for policy makers looking at increasing protections for young people online, Prof Przybylski said.

He pointed to a lack of peer-reviewed studies on the subject, and the fact the majority of the research that had been carried out focussed on English-speaking, wealthier nations.

“We really do want the best for our kids," he explained, but said that meant following the data.

"If our policy and if our resources are guided by anecdote we’re going to be letting a lot of families down”.

Previous OII work carried out by Prof Przybylski found there was no evidence that the global spread of Facebook was linked to widespread psychological harm.

Like Prof Przybylsk's earlier research, this work, carried out with co-author Professor Matti Vuorre, is based on information from the Gallup World Poll, a survey of millions of people around the world.

The study will be published in the peer-reviewed journal Technology, Mind and Behavior.

Related internet links

• Tech firms told to hide 'toxic' content from children
• Facebook study finds no link to psychological harm
• How can you keep children safe online?

A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.

A lock ( ) or https:// means you've safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

• Guidelines and Guidance Library
• Core Practices
• Isolation Precautions Guideline
• Disinfection and Sterilization Guideline
• Environmental Infection Control Guidelines
• Hand Hygiene Guidelines
• Multidrug-resistant Organisms (MDRO) Management Guidelines
• Catheter-Associated Urinary Tract Infections (CAUTI) Prevention Guideline
• Tools and resources
• Evaluating Environmental Cleaning

What to know

This guideline provides recommendations for isolation precautions in healthcare settings.

Guideline for Isolation Precautions: Preventing Transmission of Infectious Agents in Healthcare Settings (2007)

Print Version of Guidelines

Updates‎, infection control.

CDC provides information on infection control and clinical safety to help reduce the risk of infections among healthcare workers, patients, and visitors.

For Everyone

Health care providers, public health.