"شاید شما نمی خواهید با آن روبرو شوید" - دیدگاه دانشجویان در مزاحمت سایبری

Cyberbullying is a growing phenomenon in our society with the technological advances that are occurring. This type of bullying can transpire at all hours via text message, email, or social networking sites. According to several studies, college students are being affected by cyberbullying, with prevalence rates ranging from 8% to 21%. Many psychological ramifications exist as a result of cyberbullying among victims and bullies. It is crucial to learn more about how this phenomenon is affecting the social and learning environments in college, as well as how college students view cyberbullying. First and second-year students at a southern university were recruited to participate in this qualitative study. The researchers conducted six focus groups with 54 students. The participants reported reasons for cyberbullying in the college environment, such as retaliation in relationships. Independence and autonomy were discussed as reasons why college students do not report cyberbullying to others when it occurs. Participants discussed future interventions to reduce cyberbullying that included coping strategies, utilizing university services, and engaging in legal action. The authors recommend utilizing a multi-level Socio-Ecological approach to reduce cyberbullying rates. Additionally, evaluation research needs to be conducted on what works and what does not in the prevention of cyberbullying.

Cyberbullying is a growing phenomenon in our society with the technological advances that are occurring. While cyberbullying has been defined as repeated, unwanted harassment using digital technologies (Adams and Lawrence, 2011 and Kraft and Wang, 2010), there are several other definitions discussed in the literature focusing on threats of physical harm to online aggression to the use of specific technology such as web cams (Sabella, Patchin, & Hinduja, 2013). Although better consensus is needed for a clear definition, cyberbullying can have potentially long-lasting effects on victims and further research is needed to understand the context in which it occurs. Traditional bullying is often contained to the schoolyard; however, cyberbullying can occur at all hours via text message, email, or social networking sites. The frequency of victimization may be greater given the fact that our lives are intricately connected to technology and the permanency of what is written is an added consequence. 1.1. Emotional effects of cyberbullying Cyberbullying victims have reported effects such as emotional distress, anxiety, and isolation (Hinduja and Patchin, 2010, Kaminski and Fang, 2009, Roland, 2002 and Schenk and Fremouw, 2012). Unfortunately, suicide has occurred among some cybervictims and the media has highlighted certain cases, such as Tyler Clementi and Jessica Logan. For instance, Tyler’s college roommate recorded his sexual encounter with another man and this was streamed live on the Internet. Tyler subsequently committed suicide three days later (Foderaro, 2010). Similarly, Jessica Logan was cyberbullied via text message when her ex-boyfriend disseminated a nude picture of her to hundreds of adolescents. Jessica endured a great deal of harassment and name-calling before she ended her life (Wells, 2012). The fact that these lives were tragically impacted by the inappropriate use of technology warrants more data on why students are engaging in this type of behavior. Furthermore, given that these specific instances occurred among college-age students, this raises the important question of how older students are affected by cyberbullying. 1.2. College cyberbullying Because cyberbullying occurs in high school (Hinduja and Patchin, 2007, Hinduja and Patchin, 2010, Kaminski and Fang, 2009, Patchin and Hinduja, 2010 and Roland, 2002), as well as in the workplace (Privitera and Campbell, 2009 and Science Daily, 2012), it is logical to infer that college students also face these challenges. One study indicated that cyberbullying in high school may also lead to further cyberbullying in college (Kraft & Wang, 2010). The prevalence of college-level cyberbullying ranges from 8% to 21% (Kraft and Wang, 2010, McDonald and Roberts-Pittman, 2010 and Schenk and Fremouw, 2012) and may include receiving threatening text messages, sexually harassing messages, spreading rumors, and faking someone’s identity (Walker, Sockman, & Koehn, 2011). 1.3. Psychological states of victims and bullies To what extent are college students really impacted by cyberbullying, especially given their age and experience? Researchers have sought to describe the ramifications of college-level cyberbullying to better understand the mental health outcomes. In a recent study, the psychological state of college cybervictims was characterized by interpersonal sensitivity, depression, hostility, and psychotic behaviors when compared to controls (Schenk & Fremouw, 2012). On a behavioral basis, cybervictims became less trusting of people and avoided certain situations (Crosslin and Crosslin, 2014 and Schenk and Fremouw, 2012). Cybervictims were not the only ones affected, but cyberbullies themselves also displayed psychological effects as a result of the victimization. Interestingly, cyberbullies manifested many of the same symptoms as victims, but also reported increased aggression levels, violence, and drug crimes compared to controls (Schenk, Fremouw, & Keelan, 2013). 1.4. Qualitative research is needed – purpose Given the psychological states of students involved in cyberbullying, it is crucial to learn more about how this phenomenon is affecting the social and learning environments in college. When cyberbullying occurs in high school or in the work place, there are trusted people who can assist with these situations (e.g., parents, counselors, supervisors); however, college students may not have many resources at their disposal, particularly at a time when independence and autonomy is reinforced. Previous research has largely been quantitative to better describe the scope of the problem. Nevertheless, there are very few qualitative studies in the published literature about how college students perceive cyberbullying. Qualitative approaches are crucial to glean more in-depth descriptions of cyberbullying and to determine whether college students view cyberbullying as an issue. Furthermore, prevention programs are more effective when the social context is understood instead of relying solely on individual skills (Page & Page, 2011). Prevention requires understanding the factors that lead to cyberbullying, and the interplay of factors in social environments is often explained well with the Socio-Ecological Model (SEM) (Centers for Disease Control & Prevention [CDC], 2013). This includes levels of influence (i.e., individual, organizational, community, and policy) that impact cyberbullying attitudes and behaviors in college students. By applying the SEM, salient factors may be identified to guide multi-level interventions to prevent cyberbullying. The purpose of this study was to assess undergraduate students’ perceptions of cyberbullying by conducting several focus groups. Additionally, the authors sought to determine acceptable interventions to reduce cyberbullying in this population by applying the SEM.

This was one of the first qualitative studies that sought to identify how college students view cyberbullying in a social context. In-depth data, such as this, is very useful in generating theories and these results can be applied to future interventions to reduce cyberbullying in college students. Future recommendations include follow-up surveys with college level administrators at a variety of universities to gain further knowledge about their perceptions of cyberbullying and their view of the university role. In addition, all stakeholders, such as RAs, student life personnel, counselors, faculty, and students should be engaged to determine their perceptions of cyberbullying at the college level and how they have handled instances in the past. Schenk et al. (2013) discuss the importance of understanding cyberbullies and designing prevention programs that address the social factors at play. More research is needed to further examine those factors. Lastly, as Sabella et al. (2013) point out, much evaluation research needs to be conducted on “what works and what doesn’t” in the prevention of cyberbullying.