Related Literature

The study investigates any connection between victim gender and abuse history in child molesters. It studied male adolescents and aduts in the Alberta Hospital Edmonton sex offender treatment programs by asking therapists to record information about offenders. Victim gender was not a good predictor, but an abusive childhood was. Sexual victimization rates where higher than physical victimization rates.

The study sought to create a profile of adolescent chat room users. A sample of 9th grad students was surveyed to compare chat room users and non-users. The analysis was run seperately for boys and girls. The study concluded that the use of chat rooms corosponded with psychological distress, difficult living environment, and more risky behaviors. The higher level of vulnerability in these children suggest that their internet use should be monitored.

This study shows the three ways in which sexual predators use the Internet, which are distribution of sexually abusive images of children, discussion with others who share a similar sexual interest in children, and creating or maintaining online pedophiliac networks. with all of these ways aiding in a sexual predators’ interests on the Internet, the dangers are discussed, as well as the new laws that were created. This article looks at the chance of these online predators acting out on their sexual fantasies in person, which is said to be very likely. This article greatly puts into perspective the dangers of the Internet, and how it is abused by those with deviant behaviors, such as sexual interest in children.

The study conducted a meta-analysis of 14 risk factors for posttraumatic stress disorder. In some groups, factors such as gender and age of trauma predicted PTSD. Childhood adversity was a very good predictor of PTSD. Stress also was a big risk factor because it was associated with a greater amount of PTSD.

This theory looks at the role that deception plays on interpersonal between two or more people. Through a study on deception, Buller and Burgoon were able to determine that deception is most successful among those with excellent communication skills and when the people involved have already established a close relationship. This theory is important to this research because it demonstrates the role of deception in communication, which is a tool often used by predators in order to build the trust of their victims.

The study attempts to understand how sex offenders respond to treatment, specifically comparing group and individual treatment outcomes. The researchers assessed 80 convicted child abusers for a 2 year period as well as a 1 and 2 year followup. Poor treatment response was connected to a history of sexual or violent offending and a history of childhood sexual offending. But only one had another sexual offense during the followup period for possesion of child pornography.

Research has found that 85-90% of sexual perpetrators are male, and a high percentage of those who molest children under 12 have psychiatric, substance abuse, and personality disorders. They are also mainly victims of sexual abuse when they were children as well. One quarter of online predators were women and 48% of were under 25. The youth targeted are usually physically attractive, yet insecure. Predators have numerous ways to get information on their victims through ways like trojan horses.

The article explores various court cases for child predators and the regulation used. It also suggests revisions to the regulation Section 2S3.2 such as the idea that there is no "coherent philosophy of punishment." It chooses to diferentiate between a victim, or someone under the age of 16, and a minor, or someone under 18. The article assures that with greater clarification, it will be easier to protect children online.

The article explores the different issues related to child victimization, such as the fact that younger children are more prone to become victims. This is directly related to the relationship they develop with with caretakers including teachers and babysitters. Abuse that occured during the preschool years affects the development of children in their disassociation with adult figures. Children do experience PTSD after certain traumatic incidents, such as a murder.

In this article, Gilgun focuses on the relationships between child sexual abuse perpetrators and their victims. Gilgun separates the relationships into 7 different typologies into which the perpetrators’ relationships with their victims can be categorized. It is also explained that at different times, perpetrators can fit their victims into different typologies, while also different victims of the same perpetrator can fill different relationship needs and typologies than others. This is important to my research because it will help to give insight into the actions of child sexual abusers and the methods they go to in order to create relationships with their victims. Their portrayal of themselves in these different typologies is also vital for me to understand, so that I can become aware of how the mind of a perpetrator works while in an abuse situation, specifically when conversing online, in regards to my research.

The study sought to compare the rates of recidivism of child molesters who offend against relatives. There were 400 men studied and the researchers followed up on their activities for up to 15 years after their conviction. The study found that men who had offended against aquaintances were more likely to reoffend than those against children or step-children.

The study sought to understand the similarities and differences between violent offenders, rapists and child molesters. The researchers studied 36 rapists, 23 child molesters and 32 violent offenders. Rapists and child molesters were found to be more introverted than violent offenders. Child molesters also had higher social desirablilty scores than the others and had a strong internal need to confess.

The study looked at the long-term recidivism of child molesters, a topic covered in very few studies. The researchers found that 42% of offenders were reconvicted within 31 years. Most recidivism occurred withing the first year, then decreased for the next 20 years. With treatment, offenders felt more in control of their lives and happier but there was no connection with recidivism.

The study sought to understand the attitudes of various types of sexual offenders on different situations. The offenders studied were child molesters, rapists, and violent offenders. The groups did not vary significantly in their loneliness styles and attachment, but rather by their attachment groups.

The article states that if the predator propositions the minor for sex but does not actually follow through, he or she may or may not be convicted. The undercover officer must not initiate any sexual advances, otherwise the case is not valid. All of the convicts examined were male and their ages ranged from 19 to 55. The article asserts that the police stings are important to protecting innocent children.

Entrapment is a difficult case to prove. In the case of Jacobson, the governement had information on a potential subject that they wanted to investigate. They sent him a brochure offering child pornography, an order he never received, and it was deemed entrapment. The governement induced the crime. In another case, a diferent subject voluntarily sought out a fake company with child pornography thus making it not entrapment.

This study gives an analysis on Internet predators and their behaviors online, such as their use of manipulation, and their search for control. Through a large use of figures and data, the study looks into the prevalence of Internet predators and why it is important to look at them specifically and not just the broader topic of sexual predators that is covered in most other studies. With three different case studies of online predators in this study, Marcum was able to begin to notice patterns in their behaviors, specifically that they “all used manipulation to lure their victims.” This study will be helpful in my research because it shows an example of an approach I can take while examining these Internet predators and to begin to find my own patterns in my assessment.

The article discusses how the internet is percieved as safer because people can communicate over a long distance. It also details the various types of predators and their styles for seducing children. Finally, it explores the different laws that have been put in place to limit online predation and how they may or may not infringe on the First Ammendment. The best regualtion in close to the child's home.

This article shoes how the Internet is used by sexual predators and obsessional harassers, in order to gain access to their victims in relation to forensic psychiatry. Since the Internet is becoming a new source of communication, these researchers felt it necessary to look at how these predators use the information available to them on the Internet to their advantage, and the privacy with which the Internet also allows them. This is important to the research in the current study because it demonstrates how these predators groom their victims online and use the Internet as a tool to harass others.

The article contains multiple studies. The first study found that males and females self-disclosed online similarly, which is contrary to previous study. The second study also stated that relationships that develop online are slightly more stable than those developed offline. The third study found that those who met someone online then in person liked the person significantly more after a period of time than those who met in person.

The researchers first surveyed state, county and local law enforcemtn angencies for their information on arrests made in Internet related child pornography or sexual exploitation cases. They also conducted interviews. The main consequences were incarceration, probation, fine, registry as a sex offender and restrictions on Internet use, access to pornography, etc, although many were released as well. The study concludes that policy makers should continue to support proactive investigations.

The study attempts to understand the association between online victimization and offline effects and victimization. The sample was a group of children between the ages of 10 and 17. Interpersonal victimization was frequently reported, although it was mostly offline.

The article explains that there is a growing problem with internet predation that the general public is unaware of. It is an expensive operation and requires a lot of manpower. One agent stated that there were not enough agents to get the work done.

In this study, the authors all proposed a theory called “Luring Communication Theory,” which looks closely at how perpetrators gain contact to their victims. This theory also looks at the development of the relationships between the perpetrators and the victims, and how they build trust in these types of situations. A major focus of this study is the idea of deceptive trust, which uses manipulative ways in order to “benefit the perpetrator’s own sexual interests.” The authors also discuss the three different stages of the entrapment cycle that they believe to be central to the Luring Communication Theory, which are grooming, isolation, and approach. This study is incredibly useful in my research, because it is the basis for a large majority of my understanding of the ways of sexual predators, as well as for the codebook that I will end up creating in order to assist myself in my research.

The study attempts to understand the atttitudes of adolscents towards intentional exposure to sexually explicit material, not accidental exposure. Over the course of 2 months, a survey was conducted online of Dutch children aged 13 to 18. They accounted for numerous variables, such as stage of puberty, gender, religion, etc. Contrary to the hypothesis, age was unrelated to the recreational attitudes towards sex. Males did percieve the online images to be more realistic than females did.

The article expresses the opinion of four different people. The people agree that the sexual exploitation of children is child abuse and a problem for law enforcement, health organizations, social services, and other groups.

The study sought to under stand disclosure rates and patters in a sample of adolescents who had reported sexual abuse. High school seniors were given a questionaire about their sexual experience, specifically their disclosure of sexual abuse. The study found that more girls than boys reported experiencing sexual abuse and had a higher disclosure rate. They were both more likely to report to a friend than a professional or authority figure. The study concluded that adolescents were not likely to turn to professionals, therefore a lot is hidden from the adult society.

An Indiana man was arrested for soliciting an undercover officer posing as an underage girl. At his trial, it was discovered that he had solicited two other underage girls who were also undercover officers. The governement was unaware of this until the trial.

The article discusses the issue with inforcing laws over the internet because of international boarders. There is even different regualation between states, such as enforcing the illegality of gambling in New York on online gambling sites. Obscenity such as pornography is considered especially important to monitor through network access. States can create blockades or boarders to block access to their websites.

This study examines the prevention methods used by communities and educators in schools in order to teach children about the dangers of sexual predators and sexual abuse. By looking at various samples and how different age groups learn in comparison to others on this subject, this study looked to suggest new ways of learning, as well as encourage parents to take initiative in educating their children as well as schools. This is important to online predator research, as well as the obscenity research being conducted, because when paired together, more efficient and up to date prevention methods can be created in the future to teach children.

The article debates online ageplay, or the manipulation of images to represent a minor. Ageplay can be representing oneself as a minor avatar or manipulating a photograph of an adult to look like a minor. For instance, one can argue that it is not covered by the obscenity law because it is the depiction of a sex act and not an actual action. This article argues that technically no child is abused and it is not child pornography, it is difficult to regulate. The atricle concludes that the person who fantasizes about being which children is usually not the same person who molests children, thus diferentiating the two.

The article summarizes the current situation of child pornography. It also draws a comparison between child pornography today and dial-a-porn in the 80s because both are equally difficult to regulate. Authorities have a difficult time tracking child pornography and many children do not get rescued or identified, so they also rely on outside assistance. There is also new software and other technology being developed to help track child pornography users.

This book describes the psychological side of the mind of the pedophile. While this book clearly states that not all sexual offenders that go after children as their victims are necessarily pedophiles, Seto does give a detailed and extended look into the reasons why certain sex offenders are interested in children. This book also touches upon Internet luring sex offenders, and discusses how the Internet has “increased the reach of potential offenders,” which has made it easier for them to fulfill their needs and interests. By understanding pedophilia, I will be able to get a better understanding of the mind of the Internet predators I will be studying, and will be able to make better conclusions about their portrayal of themselves when targeting their younger victims.

In this dissertation, Sharpe discusses how since the Internet is a new form of communication, not that much research has been done to understand the ways of Internet predators. Like other research out there, this looks at the luring methods that these predators use and how they groom their victims in order to set up potential meetings and simulate relationships online. This dissertation is an excellent source for me because of the amount of data it contains, as well as its expansive look into the techniques and manipulative tactics of the online predators.

According to the study, child molesters experienced more sexual abuse as children, saw more pornography, and had an earlier onset of masturbation than rapists. Both expressed similar exposure to violent media as children. They also both had greater detachment from their parents when growing up. Child sexual abusers' childhood developmental stories are more sexualized and rapists' had more violence.

The study reports that sexual victimization is more appearant in female than male youth. The female victimization also increases with age. A national survey reported that 8.1% of children ages 12 to 17 had been sexually assaulted. Older youth are more likely to report victimization, but the children between 8 and 12 are most vulnerable. The average age of the first abuse is 9 years old. The article suggests that education, prevention, and enforcement of legislation are the best courses to deal with the issue.

The researchers collected child pornography related content for analysis. They found that the a very small number of the query hits were actually related to child pornography, but peer to peer networks had the most hits. The median age was 13 and the majority were gender neutral. Of those that were not gender neutral, the vast majority were female.

The study examines predatory rape exclusively and interviews predatory rapists themselves by training other convicted felons as interviewers. Rapists tend to deny any involvement in rape, making it difficult to study. Young females are generally considered the "easiest prey." 66% of the rapists characterized their victims as "easy prey," meaning they may have been children or weaker women.

A survey was conducted, first of the parents of children between 10 and 17, then of the children if the parents gave permission. The first question asked, “Have you had a close friendship with someone you met on the Internet who you didn’t know in person? I mean someone you could talk online with about things that were real important to you?” The second one asked, “Have you had a romantic online relationship with someone you met on the Internet? I mean someone who felt like a boyfriend or girlfriend.” If the child answered "yes" to either question, he or she was considered to have established a close online relationship. The study found that 2/3 of relationships reported by girls were with boys, although they were rarely romantic. Seventy-nine percent of those reported by boys were with girls. One 16 year old girl reported feeling uncomfortable after meeting a man in his thirties because he requested that she spend the night in his hotel room. She declined.

A survey was conducted, first of the parents of children between 10 and 17, then of the children if the parents gave permission. The first question asked, “Have you had a close friendship with someone you met on the Internet who you didn’t know in person? I mean someone you could talk online with about things that were real important to you?” The second one asked, “Have you had a romantic online relationship with someone you met on the Internet? I mean someone who felt like a boyfriend or girlfriend.” If the child answered "yes" to either question, he or she was considered to have established a close online relationship. The study found that girls of high school age with high level of internet access were most likely to form close online relationships.

The study attempts to understand the transition from online to offline relationships between online predators and their victims. The researchers first sent a mail survey then did a telephone interview. Majority of predators found their victims in chat rooms for a variety of topics and most took time to get to know thier victims. Over half lied about some aspect of themselves, such as age or physical appearance, at some point in the relationship. The study concludes that youth are not forced into the relationship and usually meet the predator willingly knowing their intentions.

The study wanted to understand the impact of wanted and unwanted exposure to online pornography. The researchers used a telephone survey of youth between 10 to 17 years old. The study concluded that 42% of those surveyed had been exposed to online pornography and 66% of those had been only experienced unwanted exposure. Unwanted exposure was higher among teens who reported being harassed.

In this paper, the authors use current data, or lack thereof, to support or dispel popular myths relating to internet sex crimes involving cyber predators and underage persons. One such myth is the belief that internet sex offenders largely target prepubescent children while research shows that adolescent teens are more at risk of being exploited. Although this victimization ranges from rape to murder, oftentimes internet predators meet underage persons through consensual means resulting in a statutory rape offense. They also assert that social networking sites do not appear to increase victimization. The paper supports the idea (Young, 2005) that online sex offenders including those captured in undercover sting operations psychologically and motivationally differ from the typical pedophile with, for example, lower levels of violent and sadistic dispositions. The authors identify the characteristics of the most vulnerable youths, positing that girls and homosexual/questioning boys are more likely to experience coercive victimization. Along with implications for prevention and treatment of child sex offender and victim, a noteworthy section of future research needs is included.

This study is a collection of data and findings from the National Juvenile Online Victimization Study, which details the prevalence of online predators and arrests in the United States. In this report, there are many findings that are relevant to online predator research, including that the number of arrests has gone up significantly from the year 2000 to 2006. Also, more action has been taken by law enforcement in making these arrests, as well as posing as young adolescents online in attempts to catch these predators. This data is important in providing the necessary facts and figures to show why research on this subject is important because this is a large problem in the world today.

Based upon an analysis of 22 case studies that involve sex offenders whose deviancy arose from Internet use, Dr. Kimberly Young examines the role in which the Internet facilitates the evolution of virtual child sex offenders whom lack previous criminal histories. As a licensed psychologist, Young highlights the differences between the virtual sex offender and the classic pedophile, providing a useful framework on which to base future research in the area of profiling possible online offenders. The analysis of the 22 case studies showed that these first-time offenders used the internet in largely dissimilar ways than classic predators. She theorizes that the Internet is a capable vehicle of altering the mindset of certain vulnerable individuals through a sexual and emotional dependency on the erotic cove of cyberspace. Oftentimes, this dependency stems from a number of things including depression and sex addiction, not a true pedophilic tendency which often starts in a person’s adolescent years. Young calls for awareness of this common miscategorization and urges future research to address the role of the Internet in the development of the virtual sex offender.

173 third through seventh grade students participated in this study. The Peer Nomination Inventory was used to measure victimization, physical strength, and a variety of indexes of both externalizing and internalizing problems. Children checked off the names of same-sex peers in their grade who manifested the behavior described in each item.

Results: Internalizing problems, physical weakness, and peer rejection contributed uniquely to gains in victimization over a one year period. Peer rejection functioned as a contextual factor that governed the degree to which prior internalizing problems and physical weakness led to increased victimization by peers. Initial victimization predicted increases in later internalizing symptoms and peer rejection.

Discussion: Children who display internalizing difficulties—who are manifestly anxious, prone to crying and displays of sadness, and socially withdrawn—may be targeted for victimization, because their behaviors signal that they will be unable to defend themselves successfully against attacks.

144 9th grade adolescents at an urban parochial high school participated in the study. Adolescents’ experience of peer victimization was measured using the Social Experience Questionnaire—Self Report Form (SEQ-S [Crick and Grotpeter, 1996]).The questionnaire measured overt and relational victimization. The Social Anxiety Scale for Adolescents (SASA [La Greca and Lopez, 1998]) contains the following subscales: Fear of Negative Evaluation (FNE), Social Avoidance and Distress—New (SAD-New), and Social Avoidance and Distress—General (SAD-General). The Social Phobia and Anxiety Inventory for Children (SPAI-C [Beidel et al., 1995]) assess a range of physiological, cognitive, and behavioral symptoms of social phobia.

Results: Relational victimization predicted symptoms of social phobia one year later. Increases in social anxiety and social phobia symptoms, for boys, over time were positively associated with increases in relational victimization over time.

Discussion: Interventions must be developed that educate teachers about the nature and consequences of peer victimization. Socially anxious adolescents may benefit from social skills and assertiveness training that aid them in coping with aggressors.

Cyber bullies have the opportunity to victimize a greater number of people and in front of a larger audience than in traditional peer victimization.

Method: Participants included 1,684 students between the ages of 11 and 16 years from four public middle schools located in the southern United States. The Victimization of Self portion of the Revised Peer Experiences Questionnaire (RPEQ; Prinstein et al., 2001) contains nine items that assesses overt and relational victimization within the previous 30 days. For each item, participants were asked to report the frequency of being a victim of each behavior on a rating scale ranging from one (never) to five (a few times a week).

Four questions were added to each of the RPEQ victimization scales. The questions were: (1) a student sent me a text message or instant message that was mean or that threatened me; (2) a student posted a comment on my Web space wall that was mean or that threatened me; (3) a student sent me an e-mail that was mean or that threatened me; and (4) a student created a Web page about me that had mean or embarrassing information and/or photos. These questions assessed cyber victimization. The Social Anxiety Scale for Adolescents (SAS-A; La Greca, 1998), a 22-item measure of social anxiety, was used to assess overall anxiety related to social situations within the past 30 days. Respondents indicated the degree to which each item was true of them on a 5-point rating scale ranging 1 (not at all true) to 5 (true all the time). The Center for Epidemiology Studies Depression Scale (CES-D; Radloff, 1977) was utilized to assess depression. Respondents were prompted to rate the frequency of depressive symptoms experienced in the past week on a scale from 1 (less than once a day) to 4 (5-7 days a week).

Results: Fourteen percent of the students in the sample indicated that they had been victims of cyber bullying at least one time in the past 30 days. A weak relationship between cyber and overt and relational forms of victimization was found. Females reported greater frequency of relational and cyber victimization than did males, and males reported greater frequency of overt victimization than did females.

Discussion: Cyber victimization was only weakly associated with symptoms of social anxiety, not depression. Relational victimization was most highly associated with symptoms of social anxiety.

What is meant by Bullying? Bullying can be verbal such as threatening, taunting, teasing, and name calling, physical such as hitting, pushing, and kicking, and relational such as intentionally excluding someone from a group. Bullying can be carried out by one person or a group of people.

Bully/Victim problems in different grades: The percentage of students who are bullied decreases with higher grades. There is also less use of physical bullying in the higher grades.

Bullying among boys and girls: Boys are more exposed to bullying than girls, especially direct bullying. More boys have also participated in bullying, and bullying with physical means is more common among boys. On the other hand, girls use more indirect ways of bullying such as spreading rumors and manipulation of friendship relationships. Overall, boys were more often victims and perpetrators of direct bulling.

Supervision during recess and lunch time: It is of great importance to have a sufficient number of adults present among the students during breaks. The attitudes of teachers toward bullying and their behavior in bullying situations are significant for the extent of bullying problems in the school.

What role do external deviations play? The victims were physically weaker.

What characterizes the typical victims? The typical victims are more anxious and insecure; they are often cautious, sensitive, and quiet. Victims suffer from low self-esteem and have a negative view of their situation. They are also lonely and abandoned at school. Hyperactive students who also have concentration problems may be at risk for becoming victims.

What we can do about bullying? There are various measures at the school, class, and individual levels that can be used. For the school level, there can be a school conference day on bullying problems, better supervision during breaks, a more attractive school playground, parents meeting staff, teacher groups for the development of the school climate, and parent circles.
For the class level, there can be class rules against bullying: clarification, praise, and sanctions, regular class meetings, role playing, cooperative learning, and common positive class activities. For the individual level there can be serious talks with bullies, victims, and their parents, help from bystanders, help and support for parents, discussion groups for parents of bullies and victims, and change of class or school.

This emerging form of bullying, utilizing the Internet and other electronic devices, is called electronic bullying. Electronic bullying may have more impact on youth’s emotional development than traditional bullying because of a greater power imbalance created by the fact that many victims of electronic bullying never know the identity of their bully. Electronic bullying has been defined as a means of bullying in which peers use electronics to taunt, insult, threaten, harass, and/or intimidate a peer.

Method: The present study included 84 participants. All participants were adolescents between the ages of 13 and 18 years. The Internet Experiences Questionnaire included 28 self-report items asking students how often they had experienced each of the different forms of Internet bullying within the current school year. Traditional bullying items were based on the four-item scale by Kochenderfer and Ladd (1996). Adolescents that identified as electronic victims were prompted to answer open-ended questions asking whether they felt that electronic bullying had affected them and if so, how? They were also asked why they thought some adolescents committed bullying using the Internet and cell phones.

Results: More traditional victims were also electronic victims, and most electronic bullies were also traditional bullies. Traditional victim status emerged as a significant predictor of electronic victim status. Traditional bully status and age emerged as significant predictors of electronic bully status, with traditional bullies and older students more likely to identify as electronic bullies.

Discussion: A significant percentage of participants reported involvement in electronic bullying (48.8% victims, 21.4% bullies). Eighty-five percent of electronic victims were also classified as traditional victims, and 94% of electronic bullies were also traditional bullies.

Bullying is often directed repeatedly towards a particular victim who is unable to defend himself or herself. The victim may be less strong or psychologically confident. The bully intends to inflict harm on the victim. Certain features are similar across different countries. For example, there are sex differences with boys reporting more physical bullying and girls reporting more relational bullying. The study of bullying dates back from the 1970s with the work of Dan Olweus in the Scandinavian countries. In the 1980s, there was interest in Japan with the concept of Ijime, a term similar to bullying. In the 1990s, interest in bullying has spread to Europe, Canada, and the U.S. The increase of young people who have completed suicide and media interest has generated research interest amongst many countries.

France: In an increasing number of schools school bullying offenses have increased and are often committed by younger people. In France, the concept of school bullying is different from the United States. The French term violence has a much wider scope; school bullying mainly refers to faits de violence. Violence is defined by the French Penal Code. School bullying includes all the different kinds of misuse of power (crimes and offenses against people or against personal or school property), all the kinds of violence of the school, and all minor but frequent kinds of incivilities which disturb classroom atmospheres (impoliteness, noise, disorder, etc.). From 1988 to 1992, France had increases in racketeering, intimidation to get money, or to get someone to do tasks for you. Girls are less likely to be bullies or victims. Interventions should focus on the training of school personnel to solve conflicts and negotiate and the cohesion of the staff to build up a positive school climate.

Bullying is often directed repeatedly towards a particular victim who is unable to defend himself or herself. The victim may be less strong or psychologically confident. The bully intends to inflict harm on the victim. Certain features are similar across different countries. For example, there are sex differences with boys reporting more physical bullying and girls reporting more relational bullying. The study of bullying dates back from the 1970s with the work of Dan Olweus in the Scandinavian countries. In the 1980s, there was interest in Japan with the concept of Ijime, a term similar to bullying. In the 1990s, interest in bullying has spread to Europe, Canada, and the U.S. The increase of young people who have completed suicide and media interest has generated research interest amongst many countries.

France: In an increasing number of schools school bullying offenses have increased and are often committed by younger people. In France, the concept of school bullying is different from the United States. The French term violence has a much wider scope; school bullying mainly refers to faits de violence. Violence is defined by the French Penal Code. School bullying includes all the different kinds of misuse of power (crimes and offenses against people or against personal or school property), all the kinds of violence of the school, and all minor but frequent kinds of incivilities which disturb classroom atmospheres (impoliteness, noise, disorder, etc.). From 1988 to 1992, France had increases in racketeering, intimidation to get money, or to get someone to do tasks for you. Girls are less likely to be bullies or victims. Interventions should focus on the training of school personnel to solve conflicts and negotiate and the cohesion of the staff to build up a positive school climate.

The sample included 821 U.S. children in third, fifth, and sixth grades. Height and weight were measured during study visits in third, fifth, and sixth grades. Obesity was defined as a BMI ≥95th percentile and overweight as a BMI.

Results: The odds of being bullied in relation to weight status in were 1.85 for obesity and 1.26 for overweight. Being bullied in third grade was not associated with an increase in BMI z score in the subsequent 2 years.

Discussion: Obese 8- to 11-year-old US children were more likely to be bullied as compared with their non-overweight peers. Being obese, by itself, seems to increase the likelihood of being a victim of bullying. Interventions that address obesity at both the individual and community levels are needed.

Bullying involves an imbalance of strength, physical or psychological, a negative physical or verbal action, a deliberate intention to hurt someone else, and repetition over time.

Method: 546 children in grades five through eight participated in this study. A shortened version of the bully/victim questionnaire used by Olweus (1989) was used in this study. Two items were used for the bullying scale, “how often have you taken part in bullying others since the beginning of the term?’’ and “how often have you taken part in bullying others in the last five days?’’

Two items were used for the victimization scale, “how often have you been bullied since the beginning of the school term” and “about how many times have you been bullied in the last five days?’’ A classroom discussion and a definition from Olweus (1989) occurred prior to completing the survey. Social Anxiety was measured using 18 items from the Franke & Hymel (1984) Social Anxiety Scale. The Children’s Depression Inventory (Kovacs, 1985) was utilized to describe 26 depressive behaviors. The English version of the relational aggression and victimization scale (RAVS) (Lagerspetz et al., 1988) consisted of six scales assessing physical, verbal, and indirect aggression and victimization.

Results: Male bullies and bully/victims in the younger grades reported more physical aggression than comparison children. For males in the older grades, bullies reported more physical aggression than comparison children. For females in the older grades, bullies and victims reported more physical aggression than comparison children. Male bully/victims in the younger grades reported more verbal aggression than comparison children. For males in the older grades, bullies and victims reported more verbal aggression than comparison children. For females in the older grades, bullies and bully/victims reported more verbal aggression than comparison children. Males scored higher on physical aggression, and older children scored higher on verbal aggression. Females in the lower grades scored higher on depression and anxiety than males in the lower grades. Victims reported significantly higher anxiety than bullies and comparison children. Older children reported more depression than younger children.

Discussion: Male bullies reported more physical aggression than the comparison group. Male bully/victims in the younger grades reported more physical and verbal aggression than the comparison group. Male bullies and victims in the older grades reported more verbal aggression. In the older grades, female bullies reported more physical and verbal aggression than the comparison group.

A sample of roughly 400 adolescents from middle schools and high schools in the United States participated in this study. To assess the effects of bullying, two measures were used. The first was a 6-item measure that focused on physical and verbal harassment. Respondents indicated how often during the prior 12 months they were (a) the target of lies or rumors; (b) the target of attempts to get others to dislike them; (c) called names, made fun of, or teased in a hurtful way; (d) hit, kicked, or pushed by another student; (e) physically threatened by other students; and (f) picked on by others. The second measure was a 3-item scale that focused on cyberbullying. Respondents were asked to indicate how frequently during the previous 12 months they were (a) the target of “mean” text messages; (b) sent threatening or hurtful statements or pictures in an e-mail or text message; and (c) made fun of on the Internet. Externalizing delinquency was measured with a 5-item scale of offending during the prior 12 months. Respondents indicated how often they had (a) stolen something worth less than $50; (b) stolen something worth more than $50; (c) damaged, destroyed, or tagged property that did not belong to them; (d) entered a building or house without permission from the owner; and (e) hit, kicked, or struck someone with the idea of seriously hurting them. Two measures of internalizing behavior were used; the first was a measure of suicidal ideation in which respondents were asked how often “you think about killing yourself.” Self-harm was measured by asking respondents how often “you purposely hurt yourself without wanting to die,” with “cutting or burning” offered as examples.

Results: Cyber bullying had modestly higher effects than traditional bullying. For both types of bullying the effects were higher on self-harm and suicidal ideation than on delinquency. For traditional bullying, for example, the effect on suicidal ideation was nearly 80% higher than the effect on delinquency. The pattern was less extreme but still true for cyber bullying, which had an effect on suicidal ideation that was 24% higher than its effect on delinquency. The effects of cyber bullying on self-harm and suicidal ideation were significantly greater for males.

A total of 7,290 students (ages 13–18 years) from Canada participated in this study. Students were asked to complete a behavioral checklist on their involvement in 12 bullying behaviors during the last school year. Participants rated each item on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from never to a few times a day. One factor comprised four questions that focused on direct bullying behaviors, and the second factor focused on indirect bullying, consisting of four items. Victimization was assessed using the same procedure with two major factors, direct and indirect victimization. To measure social anxiety-fear of negative evaluation, seven items were utilized; participants responded on a 4-point Likert scale ranging from almost never to almost always. A 20-item questionnaire assessed the degree of depressive symptoms they may have experienced over the past 2 weeks; participants rated the extent to which they experienced each depressive item on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from none of the time to most of the time. The Rosenberg [1965] Self-Esteem Scale, a measure consisting of 10 questions, was used to measure feelings of self-worth. Peer Relational Problems was assessed using seven items. Parental Monitoring measured students’ perceptions of parental monitoring. The tracking measure included four items referring to questions parents ask about activities outside the home. The knowledge measure also included four items referring to how much knowledge parents really have of outside activities by their adolescents. Normative beliefs legitimizing antisocial behaviors consisted of 11 questions adapted from the Attitudinal Intolerance of Deviance Questionnaire [Jessor et al., 1995], examining adolescents’ general attitudes and beliefs about the degree to which antisocial acts and aggressive behaviors are right or wrong. Angry-externalizing coping strategies consisted of one question derived from a coping measure developed by Eisenberg et al. [1996], namely, ‘‘When things happen, I get angry and hit something or yell at someone.’’ Positive emotionality consisted of four items, and activity level consisted of three questions. Alienation included nine questions to measure maternal attachment. Trust and communication included eight questions related to maternal attachment.

Results: In reference to indirect bullying and victimization, bully-victims and victims reported a higher level of depression than did bullies and uninvolved adolescents. In regard to self-esteem, bully-victims had a lower level of self-esteem than bullies and uninvolved participants; victims and bully victims had more peer relational difficulties that did bullies and the uninvolved group. Bullies and bully-victims exhibited normative beliefs that were more tolerant of antisocial behavior than did victims and uninvolved students. With regard to angry-externalizing coping, bully-victims, bullies and victims reported more angry coping behaviors than did uninvolved students. Bully-victims and bullies reported less parental knowledge of their activities than did victims and uninvolved adolescents. Bullies, bully-victims and victims reported a greater level of maternal alienation than did uninvolved adolescents. Bully-victims and victims reported a lower level of positive emotionality than bullies and the uninvolved group. In reference to direct bullying and victimization, bully-victims and victims reported lower self-esteem and a higher level of depression than did uninvolved students. Normative beliefs of bullies and bully-victims legitimized antisocial behavior to a greater extent than those of victims and uninvolved adolescents. With regard to angry-externalizing coping, bullies and bully victims reported more angry-externalizing coping behaviors than did uninvolved participant. Bullies, bully-victims and victims reported a greater activity level and a lower degree of maternal attachment trust than did uninvolved adolescents.

Discussion: Clinical services should address not only the externalizing problems but also the internalizing issues of bully-victims.

Cyberbullying is the use of electronic communication devices to bully others.
Method: A total of 264 grade seven Canadian students completed a questionnaire created by the author. It included a total of 22 questions which collected information from two major areas: students’ demographic information and their experience related to cyberbullying.
Results: One in three adolescents was a cybervictim; one in five was a cyberbully. Males, compared to their female counterparts, were more likely to be cyberbullies. A student being cyberbullied was positively related to bullying.
Discussion: One important characteristic of cyberbullying is anonymity. In this study, close to half of the cyber victims did not even know who cyberbullied them. Educating cyber victims and bystanders may provide some key strategies in combating cyberbullying. Engagement in traditional bullying is a very strong predictor for both cyberbullying and cyber victimization.

Bullying and peer victimization in adolescents is correlated with adverse mental and physical health and engagement in other risky behaviors. Involvement in bullying behaviors is higher among girls and younger students. In addition, certain subgroups of adolescents such as gays and lesbians are more likely to be bullied than heterosexual youths.

Method: 1,082 middle school adolescents in Ohio completed the Middle School Youth Risk Behavior Survey instrument in 2009 and 2012. To measure suicide ideation, the participants were asked to provide a ‘‘yes’’ or a ‘‘no’’ response to the question:

‘‘have you ever seriously thought about killing yourself?’’ To measure suicide plan, the participants were asked to provide a ‘‘yes’’ or a ‘‘no’’ response to the question: ‘‘have you ever made a plan about how you would kill yourself?’’ The participants were also asked to respond to the question: ‘‘Have you ever been bullied on school property?’’ with a ‘‘yes’’ or a ‘‘no’’ response.

Results: Overall, 43.1% of participants reported ever being bullied in school, and 22.3% and 13.2% of the adolescents surveyed reported suicide ideation and planning. The prevalence of suicide ideation among adolescents reporting ever being bullied in school was 30.0% compared with 13.8% among those who did not report being bullied. The prevalence of suicide planning among adolescents reporting ever being bullied in school was 20.2% compared with 8.0% among those who did not report being bullied. Being bullied in school was significantly associated with suicide ideation and planning.

Discussion: More than 1 in 5 adolescents had ever thought about and more than 1 in 10 had ever seriously made a plan to kill themselves. Schools should identify at-risk individuals in middle school for targeted bullying and conduct suicide prevention programs in the schools.

The present study examined various terms used to define bullying in 14 countries.

Method: A series of 25 stick-figure cartoons, that showed different situations that may be bullying, was developed (Smith, 1999). Each cartoon had a caption in the native language. Different sets were used for males and females. 1,245 eight and fourteen year old children participated.

Results: The first cluster consisted of 19 terms, which were higher on physical, verbal, and social exclusion bullying variables than the physical aggression variable. This cluster was similar to the English term bullying. The second cluster consisted of six terms which was higher on social exclusion. The third cluster had seven terms, which were higher on the verbal variable than the physical and social exclusion bullying variables. The fourth cluster had 19 terms, which were weighed mostly on the verbal variable, moderately on the physical bullying cluster, and less on the social exclusion cluster. The fifth cluster weighed heavily on physical bullying. The sixth cluster, which had 13 terms, weighed highest on physical bullying but moderately on the other types of bullying. The French used the term violence to describe bullying.

Discussion: The results indicated that 8-year-olds has a less understanding of terms than the 14-year-olds. At eight years old, children are able to distinguish between nonaggressive and aggressive scenarios but not among different types of aggression. The age differences existed across the countries surveyed.

Approximately 2,000 students from 30 middle schools in the United States participated in this study. Suicidal ideation was measured by four yes/no questions; they included have you ever felt so sad or hopeless almost every day for two weeks or more in a row that you stopped doing some usual activities, have you ever seriously thought about attempting suicide, have you ever made a specific plan about how you would attempt suicide, and have you ever attempted suicide. Traditional bullying victimization represented the respondent’s experience in the previous 30 days as a victim of 10 different forms of bullying. Traditional bullying offending represented the respondent’s experience in the previous 30 days as an offender of 10 different forms of bullying. Cyberbullying victimization represented the respondent’s experience in the previous 30 days as a victim of nine different forms of online aggression. Lastly, cyberbullying offending represented the respondent’s participation in the previous 30 days with five different forms of online aggression.

Results: With regard to traditional bullying, prevalence rates ranged from 6.5% to 27.7% for offending and from 10.9% to 29.3% for victimization. With regard to cyberbullying, prevalence rates ranged from 9.1% to 23.1% for offending and from 5.7% to 18.3% for victimization. With respect to bullying, all forms were significantly associated with increases in suicidal ideation and suicidal attempts among respondents.

Discussion: The findings suggest that a suicide prevention and intervention component is essential within comprehensive bullying response programs implemented in schools.

Among youth who experienced traditional harassment in the past several months, about 18% also experienced cyber-victimization during that time and among cyber victims, about 95% had experienced traditional victimization (Wang, Iannotti, Luk, & Nansel, 2010).

Method: Telephone interviews with a sample of 791 youth in the United States ages 10–20 were conducted as part of the Technology Harassment Victimization (THV) Study. Interviewers read the following statement before asking questions about harassment: Now I am going to ask you about some mean things that some people do to others. We are not talking about things done in a joking way. For now, I am only going to ask you about things that happen online, or that involve the Internet or a cell phone in some way. When we say online, this could include things like pictures or videos posted online or through text messages, comments made about you online or through text messages or on social networking sites. The types of things I want you to think about are: When kids call someone mean names, make fun of them, or tease them in a hurtful way; when kids exclude or ignore someone, or get others to turn against them; when kids spread false rumors about someone, or share something that was meant to be private (like something they wrote or a picture of them) as a way to make trouble for them; or when kids hit, kick, push, shove or threaten to hurt someone. Think about the past year and only about incidents involving the Internet or a cell phone in some way. Did anyone other than a family member do something like this to you? If respondents said yes, they were asked “Did something like this happen more than once in the past year?” Interviewers then asked all youth about harassment incidents that did not involve technology, using the same preamble and format but specifying, “Now I am going to ask you about some mean things that some people do to others that do not happen online, or involve the Internet or a cell phone in any way.” Interviewers also asked youth about the perpetrator of the harassment (e.g., number of perpetrators, age, gender, relationship to respondent), duration and location of the event, and type of harassment. Youth were asked a series of questions aimed at assessing the emotional impact of the bullying; they were asked whether the incident made them feel upset, afraid, embarrassed, worried, angry, sad, or unsafe.

Results: Thirty-four percent of youth reported harassment incidents in the past year. 54% of incidents involved no technology (in-person only), 15% involved only technology (technology only), and 31% involved both technology and in-person elements (mixed incidents). Youth reporting in-person– only incidents were significantly younger than those in the other two categories and more likely to be boys. Technology-only incidents involved similar proportions of boys and girls, with more girls in mixed incidents. Almost half of all harassment incidents involved two or more perpetrators and sixty-five percent of perpetrators were male. Technology-only incidents were less likely than in-person– only incidents to result in injury, involve a social power differential, and occur a series of times. Mixed episodes were more likely than technology-only episodes to happen a series of times, last for one month or longer, and involve physical injury. Compared with in-person incidents, technology-only incidents were less likely to involve multiple episodes and power imbalances. They were seen by victims as easier to stop and had significantly less emotional impact. Mixed incidents had the most emotional impact.

Discussion: Victims of mixed harassment were the least likely to say they could get away or remove themselves from the situation quickly; this could be related to the fact that they were being victimized across multiple environments. Perpetrators of mixed incidents were also more intimately connected to victims as current or past friends and romantic partners. The results suggest that those seeking to prevent the most detrimental forms of bullying should focus less on cyberbullying and instead focus on traditional bullying and victims of mixed incidents.

Bullying usually occurs before an audience of peers and on the school playground (Craig & Pepler, 1997; Olweus, 1993). Researchers consider bullying to be exposure, repeatedly and over time, to negative actions on the part of one or more students (Olweus, 2003). These negative actions are considered intentional, whereby individuals inflict injury or discomfort upon someone else (Olweus, 2003). Cyberbullying involves the use of information and communication technology such as mobile phones, video cameras, e-mails, and web pages to post or send harassing or embarrassing messages to another person (Ybarra & Mitchell, 2004). Different types of cyberbullying have been reported ranging from flaming to cyberstalking. Flaming is sending angry, rude, vulgar messages about a person to an online group or to that person via email or other text messaging. Online harassment is repeatedly sending offensive messages via email or other text messaging to a person. Cyberstalking is online harassment that includes threats of harm. Denigration is sending harmful, untrue, or cruel statements about a person to other people or posting such material online. Masquerade is pretending to be someone else and sending or posting material that makes that person look bad. Outing is sending or posting material about a person that contains sensitive, private, or embarrassing information, including forwarding private messages or images. Exclusion is cruelly excluding someone from an online group. Previous research has shown that children who are bullied at school suffer internalizing problems such as anxiety, loneliness, sadness, and insecurity (Frost, 1991; Hawker & Boulton, 2000; Olweus, 1989). Children who are bullied may display externalizing problems such as impulsiveness and hyperactivity (Camodeca et al., 2003; Johnson et al., 2002). In a national sample of American youth, 30% reported feeling extremely upset and 24% frightened as a result of receiving harassing on-line messages (Finkelhor et al., 2000).

Method: Participants included 432 students in grades 7–9 in Canadian schools. To determine whether students experienced cyberbullying they were first read the standard definition of bullying developed by Olweus (1996): Harassment occurs when a student, or several students, says mean and hurtful things or makes fun of another student or calls him or her mean and hurtful names, completely ignores or excludes him or her from their group of friends or leaves him or her out of things on purpose, tells lies or spreads false rumors about him or her, sends mean notes and tries to make other students dislike him or her, and other hurtful things like that. When we talk about harassment, these things happen repeatedly, and it is difficult for the student being harassed to defend himself or herself. We also call it harassment, when a student is teased repeatedly in a mean and hurtful way. But we don’t call it harassment when the teasing is done in a friendly and playful way. Also, it is not harassment when two students of about equal strength or power argue or fight. To determine the relationship between cyberbullying and school bullying, students were asked ‘Do the people who harassed you by using technology also harass you in other ways (not using technology)?’ Students were then asked: ‘Do you use technology to harass others?’ To determine whether bullying is related to difficulties at school, students were asked if they missed school, had difficulty concentrating, or if their marks dropped because of bullying.

Results: 58% had experienced cyberbullying once or twice or more often whereas 26% reported bullying others in cyberspace once or twice or more often. Also, more than a third of students reported being bullied both in cyberspace and at school once or twice or more often. Students who were bullied in cyberspace were likely to bully others in cyberspace and be bullied at school. Students who were cyberbullied were likely to miss school, obtain low marks, and have poor concentration. These difficulties were also reported by students who experienced both cyberbullying and school bullying. For those students who admitted bullying others in cyberspace, no difficulties at school other than poor concentration were reported.

Discussion: More than half of the students in the sample had experienced some cyberbullying, and more than a quarter of students reported bullying others in cyberspace at least once. Also, more than a third had been bullied both in cyberspace and at school. These forms of bullying are interrelated. Students who are bullied through technology are likely to use technology to bully others. It is possible that children who are bullied retaliate against the aggressor. Considering that the majority of bullying occurs before peer witnesses, their role must be considered to be a key component in intervention programs.

Cyberbullying: Cyberbullying is one of the online risks youth face and the one they are most likely to encounter more often from someone they know than from a stranger (Kowalski et at., 2012a).

Comparing face-to-face bullying with cyberbullying: Olweus (1993, 1999) defines bullying as intentional harm to a victim, a repetition of harmful behaviors, and a power imbalance between the victim and the perpetrator(s) of the bullying behavior. Traditional bullying and cyberbullying both may cause considerable distress to the victims, often result in part from a lack of supervision, and usually start at school and have an impact on the school day (Agatston et al., 2012; Cassidy et al., 2011; Cassidy, Jackson, & Brown, 2009; Hinduja & Patchin, 2012a, 2012b; Kowalski et al., 2012a; Olweus, 2012a;Tokunaga, 2010). Cyberbullying has been referred to as covert psychological bullying (Sharitf & Gouin, 2005). Rumors, gossip, exclusion, and attacks against reputations and relationships are common forms of both relational aggression and cyberbullying (Jackson, Cassidy, & Brown, 2009b). In cyberbullying, there is no capacity for the perpetrator to see the victim's immediate reaction to his or her behavior (Smith, 2012b. This allows for disinhibition and deindividuation (Agatston et at., 2012; Davis & Nixon, 2012; Patchin & Hinduja, 2011; von Marees & Petermann, 2012). There is also the possibility of anonymity in cyberbullying. While anonymous messages may be perceived as more threatening and more fear- and anxiety-inducing, cyberbullying by known and/or trusted persons can also be very damaging (Dooley et al., 2009; Nocentini et al., 2010). Girls may be more involved as both victims and perpetrators in cyberbullying. The definition of cyberbullying which appears to have the greatest degree of adherence is that of Smith and his colleagues (2008, p. 376): 'an aggressive, intentional act carried out by a group or individual, using electronic forms of contact, repeatedly and over time against a victim who cannot easily defend him or herself.

Varieties of impact (On the victim): Some effects of cyberbullying are depression, poor self-esteem, anxiety, suicidal ideation and psychosomatic problems like headaches and sleep disturbances' (Olweus, 2012a, p. 532; see also Kowalski et al., 2012b; Menesini & Nocentini, 2012; Smith 2012b). Some research participants view cyberbullying worse than traditional bullying, whereas some find them equally as deleterious (Kowalski et al., 2012a; Menesini & Nocentini, 2012; Monks, Robinson, & Worlidge, 2012; Sakellariou, Carroll, & Houghton, 2012; Smith, 2012a, 2012b; Smith & Slonje, 2010). Some feel anonymous messages are worse than those from someone you know however others argue that being cyberbullied by someone you know is more damaging. The breadth of the potential audience in cyberbullying can also act to aggravate the victims' feelings of humiliation (Menesini & Nocentini, 2012; Nocentini et al., 2010). Cyberbullying can result in reduced concentration, school avoidance, increased school absences, isolation, lower academic achievement, negative perceptions of school climate, not feeling safe at school, and a greater likelihood for carrying weapons to school (Hinduja & Patchin, 2007; 2008; Marczak & Coyne, 2010; Ybarra, Diener-West, & Leaf, 2007). There also have been many effects of cyberbullying on the mental health of victims, including depression, low self-esteem, helplessness, social anxiety, and suicidal ideation (Agatston et al., 2012; Kowalski et al., 2012a; Marczak & Coyne, 2010; Menesini & Nocentini, 2012; Patchin & Hinduja, 2012a; Smith, 2012b; Sourander et al., 2010; Tokunaga, 2010; von Marees & Petermann, 2012). There is also research linking cyberbullying victimization to maladaptive behaviours such as aggressive behaviour, externalizing behaviours, deviant behaviours, more alcohol and drug use/abuse and smoking, and delinquency (shoplifting, property damage, physical assaults, weapons) (Agatston et al., 2012; Marczak & Coyne, 2010; Menesini & Nocentini, 2012; Patchin & Hinduja, 2012a; Sourander et al., 2010). Girls reported with greater frequency that they felt their reputation was affected by the cyberbullying they experienced, that their concentration was affected, that it influenced their ability to make friends, and that it induced suicidal thoughts.

Varieties of impact (On the bully): Cyberbullying is associated with hyperactive behavior, conduct problems, and less prosocial peer group behavior (von Marees & Petermann, 2012). Cyberbullies are more likely to report illicit substance use and participation in delinquent behaviour (Hinduja & Patchin, 2008; Ybarra & Mitchell, 2004).Campbell, Slee, Spears, Butler, and Kift (2013) found that cyberbullies had higher rates of social difficulties, stress, depression, and anxiety than youths uninvolved in bullying.

Coping strategies (for victims): According to Perren et al. (2012), social support is probably the coping strategy with the best indicators of success.

Coping strategies (for schools): Middle and high school students have recommended the development of programs to teach about cyberbullying and its effects (Cassidy et at., 2011). In a related study (Cassidy, Brown, & Jackson, 2012a), parents also strongly recommended that school personnel develop lessons on cyberbullying and its effects and that students be given the opportunity to engage with the issues through discussion. Additionally, the curriculum should include an emphasis on fostering empathy and positive self-esteem. Positive bystander behavior should be taught and reinforced (Agatston et al., 2012). Jager et al. (2010) suggest that a training manual for educators include information about the basics of cyberbullying, information about training skills and strategies for diagnosis and intervention, and multimedia resources. It is recommended that schools find ways to make reporting easier (Agatston et al., 2012; Marczak & Coyne, 2010). Youth are more inclined to report to adults in schools with a positive climate (Hinduja & Patchin, 2012b).

Coping strategies (for parents): Patchin (2012) states that parents should be involved and receive training alongside educators to be able to work collaboratively with school personnel and their children to find effective solutions.

Role of educators In relation to cyberbullying: Psychological service providers must inform themselves about the issues youth face in relation to cyberbullying and consult with parents, staff, and other care-takers. Hinduja and Patchin (2012b) suggest that cyberbullying can be reduced through measures aimed at improving school climate such as learning students' names so they do not feel anonymous, community-building through recognizing and rewarding good behavior, staying technologically-contemporary to know what students are interested in, setting and communicating clear limits, encouraging student participation in decision-making, and encouraging reporting of inappropriate behaviors.

Role of students in relation to cyberbullying: Peer-led interventions have been found to be effective, especially when the peers receive extensive training (Agatston et al., 2012; Cross, Campbell, & Spears, 2012a; Menesini & Nocentini, 2012; Van Kaenel-Flatt & Douglas, 2012).

According to Olweus, bullying is characterized by aggressive behavior or intentional harm-doing that is carried out repeatedly over time in an interpersonal relationship characterized by an imbalance of power. This aggressive behavior may be verbal, physical, or relational. Whereas verbal aggression is common among girls and boys, physical aggression and taking of personal belongings tend to occur more frequently among boys, and rejection or isolation is more common among girls.

Method: The HBSC Study was used to collect data on health-related behaviors from students at average ages of 11.5, 13.5, and 15.5 years in 25 countries. Measures for this study were obtained from a self-report questionnaire containing 84 core questions and additional country-specific items. Participants were provided with a standard definition of bullying and asked to report how frequently they had been bullied at school during the current school term and how frequently they had bullied others at school during the current term. Psychosocial adjustment was assessed by five composite measures: health problems, emotional adjustment, school adjustment, relationship with classmates, and alcohol use. Weapon carrying was an optional item assessed in 6 countries.

Results: The average prevalence of victims across countries was 11%. With respect to bullying others, the overall average was 10%. Bully-victims averaged 6%. Across all countries, involvement in bullying was associated with poorer psychosocial adjustment for bullies, victims, and bully-victims. Youth involved in bullying consistently reported significantly higher levels of health problems, poorer emotional adjustment, and poorer school adjustment than noninvolved youth. Victims and bully-victims also consistently reported significantly poorer relationships with classmates than noninvolved youth. Bullies and bully-victims consistently reported significantly more frequent alcohol use. In all countries, victims showed poorer emotional adjustment than bullies. In contrast, bullies reported poorer school adjustment. Bully-victims reported levels of emotional adjustment, relationships with classmates, and health problems similar to those of victims, with levels of school adjustment and alcohol use similar to those of bullies. In the United States, bullies and bully victims across countries showed significantly greater odds of weapon carrying than noninvolved youth.

Discussion: Significant differences in the overall prevalence of bullying among countries, as well as the proportion of victims, bullies, and bully-victims, were observed. However, consistent findings were discovered regarding the relationship between bullying and psychosocial adjustment. Bully-victims exhibited the poorest psychosocial adjustment overall. Given the wide range of associated social and emotional correlates, influencing not only individual development but also success in the peer group and academic context, a comprehensive, systemic approach is needed to address bullying.

Verbal and physical abuse and systematic social exclusion might be seen as peer maltreatment and are often described as bullying or peer victimization. Bullying is characterized by repetitive aggressive behavior engaged in by an individual or peer group with more power than the victim. Being bullied is reported to have adverse effects, including physical or mental health problems such as anxiety, depression, an increased risk of self-harm, and attempt or completion of suicide. Results from recent studies also show that being bullied can modify stress responses.

Method: The Great Smoky Mountains Study in the USA (GSMS) was conducted with 1420 children, aged 9, 11, and 13 years, recruited from 11 counties in western North Carolina. Maltreatment and bullying were repeatedly assessed with annual parent and child interviews between ages 9 and 16 years. Lifetime occurrence of physical and sexual abuse was assessed at every interview, whereas harsh parental discipline was assessed in the 3 months immediately preceding the interview. Maltreatment was present if the child or parent reported that the child had been physically abused, sexually abused, or the target of harsh parental discipline. The child and their parent reported on whether the child had been bullied in the 3 months before the interview as part of the Child and Adolescent Psychiatric Assessment (CAPA). ICD-10 diagnoses of anxiety and depression at age 18 years were obtained from a computerized version of the Clinical Interview Schedule (CIS-R). Self-harm was assessed at 18 years from the CIS-R, with the following two questions: “Have you ever hurt yourself on purpose in any way (eg, by taking an overdose of pills, or by cutting yourself)?” If yes, “How many times have you harmed yourself in the last year?” (not in the past year versus once, two-to-five times, six-to-ten times, or more than ten times). The researchers measured any DSM-IV anxiety disorder, depression, and suicidality with the Young Adult Psychiatric Assessment (YAPA). Scoring programs combined information about the date of onset, duration, and intensity of each symptom to create diagnoses according to the DSM-IV.

Results: 18% of young adults in the sample had overall mental health problems. 12% were classified as having anxiety, 6% as having depression, and 7% as having reported self-harm in the past year. 15% of children were exposed to only maltreatment, 16% to only bullying, and 10% to both maltreatment and bullying. Maltreated children were more often bullied than those not maltreated. Children who were only bullied by peers were significantly more likely to have all mental health problems than were children who did not experience maltreatment or bullying. Those who were both maltreated and bullied were more likely to have overall mental health problems, anxiety, and depression. Being bullied only was a higher risk for overall mental health problem than was being maltreated only. Children who were bullied were more likely to have anxiety as adults than children who were maltreated by adults.

Discussion: The results showed an increased risk of young adult mental health problems in children who were bullied by peers whether or not they had a history of maltreatment by adults. Maltreatment by itself did not increase the risk of any mental health problem except for depression. Maltreatment mainly had adverse effects on mental health problems when the children had also been bullied. Experience of other forms of victimization might create susceptibility for being bullied. The effects of maltreatment on young adult mental health may be at least partly due to being bullied. A recent study showed that the relationship between maltreatment and depression was mediated by overt and relational peer victimization.

According to Olweus (1989), “a student is being bullied or victimized when he or she is exposed, repeatedly and over time, to negative actions on the part of one or more students.” Bullying has three specific characteristics: frequency, the intention to hurt, and an asymmetric relationship between the bully and the victim. This kind of aggression can be direct or indirect; it can be expressed in words, physical contact or by way of social relations (Berkowitz, 1993; Dodge & Coie, 1987; Olweus, 1984; Smith & Sharp, 1994). Victims of bullying are generally unpopular among peers, are more anxiety-ridden and unstable, and display little self-confidence (Craig, 1997; Kahtri, Kupersmidt, & Patterson, 2000; Olweus, 1989; Perry, Kusel, & Perry, 1988; Slee, 1995). High scores on certain victimization scales are often associated with low scores in scholastic competence, social acceptance, athletic competence, physical appearance, and global self-worth (Andreou, 2000; Boulton & Smith, 1994). Victims tend to have more negative self-concepts than individuals in the other two groups involved in bullying (Boulton & Underwood, 1992; Largerspets, Björkqvist, Berts, & King, 1982; Olweus, 1978, 1984). Rigby (1999) showed that severe victimization was often associated with poor physical health; victims were found to suffer more from sleep disorders, bedwetting, headaches, stomachaches, and feeling unhappy (Williams, Chambers, Logan, & Robinson, 1996). Boys tended to have more headaches and backaches, and to be more irritable than girls, who were more nervous and had more sleep disorders. The number of symptoms appears to be dependent on the social support provided by the teacher for girls and by peers for boys. Bully victims obtain high scores on neurotic and psychotic scales, are at the bottom of the social acceptance ranking (Mynard & Joseph, 1997), and are rejected by peers (Bower, Smith, & Binney, 1992). Studies have shown that children who play a bully/victim or bully “role” are subject to hyperactivity and manifest many externalization behaviors – extraversion, inability to sit still, need to shout, etc. By contrast, victims exhibit mainly internalization behaviors – withdrawal, introversion, etc. (Kumpulainen et al., 1998; Laukkanen, Shemeikka, Notkola, Koivumaa-Honkanen, & Nissinen, 2002). If children exhibit behavioral problems at the age of 8, then they are 1.9 times more likely to drink alcohol and twice as likely to smoke or take drugs (Lynskey & Ferguson, 1995).

Method (Study 1): The sample was composed of 116 pupils ages 9 to 12 in fourth or fifth grade from schools in France. Harter’s (1982) Self-Perception Profile for Children (SPPC) was administered; the areas covered are school, social competence, athletic competence, appearance, conduct, and global self-worth. The second questionnaire included two subscales, the “Peer Victimization Scale” and the “Bullying Behavior Scale”, published by Austin and Joseph (1996). Each subscale is composed of six items scored on a four-point scale. The child had to pick which group of children he/she resembled the most. Before filling in the questionnaires, the children were given a definition of bullying: “We say a pupil is being bullied, or picked on, when another pupil, or group of pupils, say nasty and unpleasant things to him or her. It is also bullying when a pupil is hit, kicked, threatened, locked inside a room, sent nasty notes, when no one ever talks to them or things like that. These things can happen frequently, and it is difficult for the pupil being bullied to defend himself or herself. It is also bullying when a pupil is teased repeatedly in a nasty way. But it is not bullying when two pupils of about the same strength have the odd fight or quarrel (Piers, 1984).”

Results (Study 1): 38.8% of the pupils were involved in bullying; victims were the most numerous (15.52%), followed by bullies (12.93%) and then children who were both victims and bullies (10.34%). Girls were less involved in bullying than boys, and most of the involved girls were victims. Boys primarily played the “role” of aggressor. Bully/victims obtained the lowest scores on dimensions related to self-control, social competence, physical appearance, and global self-worth. Concerning the victims, they obtained higher scores than the bully/victims but lower ones than the bullies. Concerning the bullies, they were the ones who had the best self-concepts, the highest opinions of their physical appearance, and the most global self-worth.

Discussion (Study 1): Bullying is likely to affect a pupil’s identity on both the cognitive (self-concept) and affective (self-worth) levels.

Method (Study 2): The sample was composed of 291 subjects, 148 fourth graders and 143 fifth graders. The pupils ranged in age between 9 and 12 and were attending schools in France. A 44-itme psychosomatic symptom scale was utilized to assess cognitive difficulties (trouble concentrating, memory problems), neurovegetative disorders, part 1 (dizziness, vision problems, tingling sensations), sleep disorders, digestive disorders, neurovegetative disorders, part 2 (heart palpitations, trouble breathing), somatic pain, eating disorders, skin conditions (itching, pimples), vegetative symptoms and dysuria (dry mouth, perspiration, feeling tense), and diarrhea and constipation. Each item was scored on a scale ranging from 0 (never) to 4 (every day). The Inventory of youth behavioral problems was utilized. The social-competence scale includes an activity subscale, a social subscale, and a school subscale. The behavioral-problem scale consists of 119 forced-choice items to which the child has to answer “not true” (0), “somewhat or sometimes true” (1), or “very true or often true” (2).

Results (Study 2): 48.8% of the children were involved in bullying. For the set of all children involved in bullying, 60% had more than 15 symptoms. Among these, 78% were bully/victims, 68% were victims, and 40% were bullies. Pupils who were victims and bullies obtained the highest score on every dimension (except for cognitive problems, where victims scored higher). Victims had higher means than bullies in all other areas except digestive and neurovegetative disorders part 2. The lowest score on the social dimension was obtained by the bully/victims, and the highest score by the bullies. The bully/victims gave themselves the highest mean rating on behavioral problem. The more behavioral problems the children had, the greater the number and frequency of psychosomatic problems. We also found a negative link with the social dimension: the lower the social score, the greater the psychosomatic symptoms.

Discussion (Study 2): Bullies had low scholastic competence. Many studies have found a positive link between failure in school and aggressive behavior (Baranger, 1999; Dornbush, Mounts, Lamborn, & Steinberg, 1991).

Discussion: Bully/victims seem were the most highly affected (mainly by neurovegetative disorders, digestive problems, somatic pain, and skin conditions). Victims, on the other hand, seem to suffer in particular from cognitive difficulties; bullies have digestive and neurovegetative disorders.

Particularities of the French approach to school violence: In French schools, there are two types of psychologists, school psychologists in elementary school, and career counsellors-psychologists in the upper grades. The concern for improving the social and psychological life of the students became the goal of the psychologist. The practice of counselling receives very little institutional support in France. The French elementary schools have no psychological services offering a place where students and their families can be received (Guillemard, 1982).

Who are the French experts on school violence? : In French universities, psychologists who study the development and education of children and adolescents are less interested in the problems of school violence. Most often, social aspects are treated from a sociological point of view by specialists from that discipline. In terms of the emotional aspects, it is the psychiatrists and psychologists/psychopathologists who do the work. Secondary-school counselling psychologists are much better prepared to confront the problems of school violence. The counselling psychologist also serves a teaching function in the area of knowledge about individuals and school environments. These teaching functions sometimes consist of running workshops with teachers and other educators.

It is more the adult than the student who is considered the victim. In 72% of the cases, the aggressor is either a student or parent, and in 65% of the cases, the victim is a member of the national education system (a teacher or principal). An investigation by the Ministry of National Education (MEN, 1998) on violence in junior high schools and high schools over the course of the 1996–1997 school years indicates that 92.5% of the perpetrators of school violence are students; however, personnel from the National Education system are the victims in only 17% of the cases, while students are the victims in 67% of the cases. Other studies confirm the fact that many students claim to be victims of school violence. For example, in a questionnaire-based study conducted by Carra and Sicot (1997) using students between the ages of 12 and 15, 47.8% claimed themselves to be victims of a lack of respect, 27.7% of destruction of their personal property, 23.7% of stealing, 15.8% of blackmail, 15.6% of being hit or kicked, 9.7% of racism, 4.3% of bullying, and 2.8% of aggression or sexual harassment.

An internationally atypical institutional approach to school violence: According to most studies, the efficient treatment of bullying necessitates the active joint participation of children or adolescents, parents, and school personnel together. Thus, for Olweus (1997), it is necessary to create “a school environment characterized by (a) warmth, positive interest, and involvement from adults, on the one hand, and (b) firm limits to unacceptable behavior, on the other. Third (c), in cases of violations of limits and rules, non-hostile, non-physical sanctions should be consistently applied . . . Finally (d), adults, both at school and at home, should act as authorities, at least in some respects” (p. 504). Olweus (1997) insists on the role of teachers, who must “take responsibility for the children’s total situation, not only their learning, but also their social relationships” (Olweus, 1997, p. 505).

Combating school violence through adult counselling: Horenstein and Voyron- Lemaire (1997), two psychiatrists who treated teachers who had mental problems following school aggression, observed that the most frequent symptom is socially evasive behavior. The interviews conducted by Boumard and Marchat (1993) reveal that a perpetually rowdy class usually allows the teacher to feel overwhelmed with feelings of guilt and failure. Boulton (1993) observed that in many cases women see aggressive behavior where men see playful behavior. A significantly greater proportion of teachers than pupils viewed specific behaviors such as hitting, pushing, and kicking as bullying.

Training aimed to ameliorate adjustment of teachers to school violence: Adults were provided with specific knowledge about working with adolescents and were encouraged to reflect together on their professional experience and jointly develop an educational approach to better confront school violence. The first day was dedicated to a series of conferences on the psychosociology of aggression and adolescent psychology and was directed by psychologists specialized in these areas. The second session consisted of a case study documented by Olweus (1996, p. 29): “Over the course of two years, X, a boy of 13, calm, relatively unobtrusive in class, was the scapegoat for some of his classmates. The adolescents hit him, forced him to eat grass and drink milk laced with detergent. When asked about this harassment, X’s torturers said they persecuted their victim because it was fun”. The trainees were asked to verbally react to this situation and eventually to propose a solution to the problem.

Conclusion: In order to act with the personnel so that they can act more effectively with the students, one must have a maximum of staff participation. The potential success of this training is directly proportionate to the number of adults from the same school who participate. It is important that the staff be willing to undertake this kind of work. This is especially true of the teachers, because of their greater number and prolonged contact with the students. Two factors that contribute to the development of school violence are teachers more interested in their academic subject than adolescent psychology and the lack of solidarity between colleagues.

In 1989, the Centers for Disease control in Atlanta defined the highest priority risk behaviors associated with intentional injuries among youth as involvement in physical fights, being injured in a fight, and carrying any type of weapon. The Europeans attempted to prevent bullying behavior in schools. New strategies emerged to reduce bullying in schools showing dramatic changes in bullying rates. During the late 80s and early 90s, Americans were ignoring daily violence like bullying while focusing more on weapon carrying and gang violence. During this time, Europeans focused on bullying and its effects on school perceptions and well-being. The topic of bullying at school has been included in the mandatory part of the Health Behavior for School-aged Children survey (HBSC) since the late 80s; it includes measures of the frequency of bullying others and being victimized at school. In 1995, the U.S. had the first US-HBSC survey. In Western Europe, high rates of bullying occur. France and Canada had a little higher rate of students being bullied at school at least once during the term than the U.S. France had a greater higher rate of students bullying someone else at least once during the term than Canada and the U.S. All countries that have implemented during the past decade national systematic programs or strategies to reduce youth violence or to improve adolescent health had low rates of bullying. However, high rate countries had not yet implemented national multi-disciplinary programs to address this issue. In 1994, the U.S. implemented a national program to reduce youth violence. In 1998, the U.S. had significantly lower rates of youth violence. The American Youth Study shows a strong protective effect of connectedness with parent with risk-taking behaviors.

Bullying is a specific type of aggression in which (1) the behavior is intended to harm or disturb, (2) the behavior occurs repeatedly over time, and (3) there is an imbalance of power, with a more powerful person or group attacking a less powerful one. This asymmetry of power may be physical or psychological, and the aggressive behavior may be verbal, physical, or psychological. Bullies and those bullied demonstrate poorer psychosocial functioning than their noninvolved peers. Youth who bully others tend to demonstrate higher levels of conduct problems and dislike of school, whereas youth who are bullied generally show higher levels of insecurity, anxiety, depression, loneliness, unhappiness, and low self-esteem.

Method: The Health Behavior of School-aged Children (HBSC) was utilized by 15,686 students in grades 6 through 10. Questions about bullying were preceded with the following explanation. We say a student is being bullied when another student, or a group of students, say or do nasty and unpleasant things to him or her. It is also bullying when a student is teased repeatedly in a way he or she doesn’t like. But it is not bullying when two students of about the same strength quarrel or fight. Participation in bullying was assessed by two parallel questions that asked respondents to report the frequency with which they bullied others/being bullied in school and away from school during the current term. Response categories were “I haven’t …,” “once or twice,” “sometimes,” “about once a week,” and “several times a week.” Additional questions asked respondents to report the frequency with which they were bullied in each of 5ways—belittled about religion/race, belittled about looks/speech, hit/slapped/pushed, subject of rumors or lies, and subject of sexual comments/gestures. Measures of psychosocial adjustment included questions about problem behaviors, social/emotional well-being, and parental influences. Alcohol use was measured by three items. The frequency of smoking, fighting, and truancy were assessed by one item each. Academic achievement was assessed by an item querying perceived school performance. Three items queried the frequency of feeling lonely, feeling left out, and being alone because others at school did not want to spend time with the person. One item assessed ease of making friends. Three items were used to assess relationship with classmates: “enjoy being together,” “are kind and helpful,” and “accept me.” School climate was measured by seven items related to the respondent’s perception of the school and teachers. Three items measured parental involvement in school, and one item assessed respondents’ perceptions about their parents’ attitudes toward teen drinking.

Results: 10.6% of the sample reported bullying others “sometimes” (moderate bullying) and 8.8% admitted to bullying others once a week or more (frequent bullying). Experiencing bullying was reported with similar frequency with 8.5% bullied “sometimes” and 8.4% bullied once a week or more. 29.9% reported some type of involvement in moderate or frequent bullying, as a bully (13.0%), a target of bullying (10.6%), or both (6.3%). Males bullied others and were bullied significantly more often than females. The frequency of bullying was higher among 6th through 8th-grade students than among 9th- and 10th-grade students. Hispanic youth reported marginally higher involvement in moderate and frequent bullying of others, whereas black youth reported being bullied with significantly less frequency overall. Males reported being bullied by being hit, slapped, or pushed more frequently than did females. Females more frequently reported being bullied through rumors or sexual comments. Being bullied through negative statements about one’s religion or race occurred with the lowest frequency for both sexes. Anyone involved in bullying demonstrated poorer psychosocial adjustment than noninvolved youth. Fighting was positively associated with all 3 outcomes. Alcohol use was positively associated with bullying and negatively associated with being bullied. Smoking and poorer academic achievement were associated with both bullying and bullying/being bullied; poorer perceived school climate was related only to bullying. Poorer relationships with classmates and increased loneliness, on the other hand, were associated with both being bullied and bullying/being bullied. Ability to make friends was negatively related to being bullied and positively related to bullying. A permissive parental attitude toward teen drinking was associated only with bullying/being bullied, while increased parental involvement in school was related to being bullied and bullying/being bullied.

Discussion: Verbal bullying through derogatory statements about one’s religion or race occurred infrequently for both sexes. This finding may reflect stronger social norms among adolescents against such behavior. That is, it may be more socially acceptable for a youth to taunt peers about their appearance than to make derogatory racial statements. Youth who are socially isolated and lack social skills may be more likely targets for being bullied. This is consonant with the finding by Hoover and colleagues that the most frequent reason cited by youth for persons being bullied is that they “didn’t fit in.” At the same time, youth who are bullied may well be avoided by other youth, for fear of being bullied themselves or losing social status among their peers. Those youth who reported both bullying and being bullied demonstrated poorer adjustment across both social/emotional dimensions and problem behaviors. Olweus found former bullies to have a 4-fold increase in criminal behavior at the age of 24 years, with 60% of former bullies having at least 1 conviction and 35% to 40% having 3 or more convictions. Conversely, individuals formerly bullied were found to have higher levels of depression and poorer self-esteem at the age of 23 years.

According to Rigby, Smith and Pepler (2004), the most tragic outcome of peer victimization is suicide. According to several researchers, bullying has been identified as a problem in many countries, including the United States, Canada, and France and has taken a front seat in the research arena in many of these countries (Smith, et al., 1999). Victims and those who passively witness the attacks or threats tend to become anxious and distressed as well (Davies, 1986) Researchers have defined the phenomenon encompassing varied aspects such as physical, behavioral, psychological and social. According to Hazler (1992), most adults and even some educators have indicated that verbal harassment should not be considered bullying and are not as severe as physical forms. Some researchers use Olweus’s (1986) definition, “a student is being bullied or victimized when he is exposed repeatedly and over time to negative actions on the part of one or more other students.’’ This definition stresses the behavioral aspect of bullying. According to this researcher, negative action is when someone intentionally inflicts injury or discomfort upon another. On the other hand, Besag’s (1989) definition of bullying “the repeated attack by those in a position of power, on those who are powerless to resist, with the intention of causing distress for their own gain or gratification” (p. 4), lays emphasis on psychological domination and power structures existing amongst individuals or groups. Bjorkquist, Ekman and Lagerspetz (1982) note that bullying is “a special case of aggression which is social in nature” thereby implying that the phenomenon encompasses wider interactions involving society or community. Overall, three factors are implicit in any bullying activity: (a) it must occur over a prolonged period of time rather than being a single aggressive act; (b) it must involve an imbalance of power, the powerful attacking the powerless; and (c) it can be verbal, physical or psychological in nature.

School bullying has been identified as a problematic behavior among adolescents, affecting school achievement, prosocial skills, and psychological well-being for both victims and perpetrators. Bullying is usually defined as a specific form of aggression, which is intentional, repeated, and involves a disparity of power between the victim and perpetrators. Previous studies have found that boys have a higher prevalence of bullying perpetration than girls and bullying behavior tends to peak in middle school and then decrease. In a nationally-representative sample of adolescents in the United States, Nansel and colleagues reported that the prevalence of frequent involvement in school bullying in the past 2 months was 29.9%, which included 13.0% as bullies, 10.6% as victims, and 6.3% as both. In the U.S. sample, compared to Caucasian adolescents, Hispanic adolescents were involved in more frequent bullying perpetration, while African-American adolescents were less likely to be bullied. Adolescent bullying may take many forms, such as physical, verbal, and relational or social. Physical bullying and verbal bullying are considered to be direct, while relational bullying refers to an indirect form of bullying, such as social exclusion and spreading rumors. Boys are more involved in direct bullying, while girls are more involved in indirect bullying. Cyber bullying is emerging as a new form of bullying. Cyber bulling can be defined as a form of aggression that occurs through personal computers or cell phones. Kowalski and Limber reported that among their sample of middle school students in the United States, 22% reported involvement in cyber bullying, including 4% as bullies, 11% as victims, and 7% as both. In a study of Canadian adolescents in 7th grade, boys were more likely to be cyber bullies than girls. Previous studies showed that positive parental practices, such as parental warmth or support, could protect adolescents from involvement in bullying perpetration and victimization.

Method: Self-report data on bullying were collected from 7,508 adolescents in the 2005/2006 Health Behavior in School-aged Children (HBSC) study in the United States. The items assessing physical, verbal, and relational bullying were based on the Olweus Bully/Victim Questionnaire. For each item, two parallel questions asked how often participants had either bullied others or been bullied in the past 2 months at school. Two new items were added using the same format to measure cyber bully/victim. Physical bullying was measured by one item - hitting, kicking, pushing, shoving around, or locking indoors. Verbal bullying was measured by three items - calling mean names, making fun of, or teasing in a hurtful way; calling mean names about race; and calling mean names about religion. Relational bullying was measured by two items - socially excluding others; and spreading rumors. Cyber bullying was measured by two items - “bullying using a computer or email messages or pictures”; and “bullying using a cell phone”. Response options were “none”, “only once or twice”, “2 or 3 times a month”, “about once a week”, and “several times a week”. Parental support was measured by four items from the Parental Bonding Instrument, which were included in the HBSC survey. The students were asked if their parent or guardian 1) helps them as much as they needed; 2) is loving; 3) understands their problems and worries; and 4) makes them feel better when they were upset. Response options were “almost never”, “sometimes”, and “almost always’. Two items asked about how many male or female friends the student had. Response options ranged from “0” to “3 or more”.

Results: At the item level, the two most common types of bullying behaviors were calling someone mean names and social isolation. The two most common types of victimization were being called mean names and having rumors spread about them. 13.3% reported that they had bullied others at least once in the last 2 months physically, 37.4% verbally, 27.2% socially, and 8.3% electronically. The prevalence rates of victimization were 12.8% for physical, 36.5% for verbal, 41.0% for relational, and 9.8% for cyber forms. Compared to girls, boys were likely to be more involved in physical and verbal forms. For cyber bullying, boys were more likely to be bullies, whereas girls were more likely to be victims. Compared to 6th graders, 9th/ 10th graders were less involved in bullying for all types of bullying. Compared to Caucasian adolescents, African-American adolescents were more involved in bullying perpetration but less involved in victimization. Hispanic adolescents were more likely to be physical bullies or cyber bully-victims. Adolescents from more affluent families were less likely to be physical victims but more likely to be cyber victims. Higher parental support was negatively associated with involvement in bullying across all four forms. Number of friends was related to involvement in all three traditional forms but was not related to cyber bullying. For physical, verbal, and relational bullying, adolescents with more friends were more likely to be bullies but less likely to be victims.

Discussion: The negative relations between having more friends and victimization in physical, verbal, and relational forms supports the “friendship protection hypothesis” suggesting that friendship protects adolescents from being selected as targets of bullies. The positive relation between having more friends and bullying reflects a need among adolescents to establish social status, especially during transition into a new group, and may explain the peaking of prevalence rates of bullying in all four forms during 7th grade or 8th grade, a period of transition to middle school. Results indicate that cyber bullying has a distinct nature from traditional bullying.

Olweus (1993) identified three criteria to define bullying: 1) it is an aggressive behavior that is intentional; 2) it is repetitive; and 3) it is an interpersonal relation characterized by a systematic imbalance of power and domination. In schools, bullying can manifest itself either in direct behaviors, be they physical or verbal, or in indirect attacks (Stassen-Berger, 2007). The advances in technology have brought some deleterious social interactions such as cyberbullying (Kowalski & Limber, 2007). Cyberbullying is defined as intentional aggressive behavior that takes place via new technologies, during which groups or individuals hurt classmates who cannot easily defend themselves (Kowalski & Limber, 2007; Law, Shapka, & Olson, 2010; Slonje, Smith, & Frisén, 2013).Cyberbullying can occur via cellphones or computers, by means of text messages, e-mails, online social networks, chatrooms or blogs (Kowalski & Limber, 2007). In a study by Raskauskas and Stoltz (2007), 94% of cyberbullies were also school bullies, and 85% of cyber victims were victims at school. It also appears that being a cyber-victim and being a victim of school bullying are both significant predictors of social anxiety (Juvonen & Gross, 2008). However, Ybarra, Diener-West, and Leaf (2007) demonstrated that most victims of cyberbullying are not victims at school. Wang, Nansel, and Iannotti (2011) found a differential association of depression with school bullying and cyberbullying; in school bullying, victims and bully-victims had higher levels of depression than bullies, whereas in cyberbullying, only cyber victims exhibited higher levels of depression. Moreover, in a study by Ortega et al. (2009), victims were revealed to be less emotionally affected in cases of cyberbullying than in cases of school bullying.

Method: Adolescents from three junior high schools and two high schools in France took part in this study. The final sample consisted of 1422 students (boys = 57%) from 10 to 18 years. The revised Bully/Victim Questionnaire (rBVQ; Solberg & Olweus, 2003) was utilized; students were asked to think of bullying events that have occurred at school in the last 2-3 months. The responses are: ‘‘I haven’t bullied/been bullied by other students’’, ‘‘I have bullied/been bullied by other students only once or twice’’, ‘. . .. . .2-3 times a month’’, ‘‘. . .. . .about once a week’’, and ‘‘. . .. . .several times a week’’. Students who reported that they had both been bullied and had bullied other students 2-3 times a month or more were identified as bullies/victims. The cyberbullying questionnaire contained the items of the Electronic Bullying Questionnaire by Kowalski and Limber (2007). Perceived social disintegration was measured using six items developed by Solberg and Olweus (2003). There were six possible responses to these statements: Doesn’t apply at all, Doesn’t really apply, Applies somewhat, Applies fairly well, Applies well, and Applies exactly. Students’ psychological distress (depression tendencies and low self-esteem) was assessed by means of 11 items taken from two scales by Alsaker and Olweus (Alsaker, Dundas, & Olweus, 1991; Alsaker & Olweus, 1986).The aggression scale was developed by Solberg and Olweus (2003) with six items. Students were asked eight questions developed by Bendixen and Olweus (1999) to assess antisocial behavior; the response options were: Seldom or never, Sometimes, Fairly often, Often, and Very often.

Results: 15% were victims of school bullying, 8% were school bullies, and 3% were bullies/victims. Regarding cyberbullying 18% were cyber victims, 4% were cyberbullies, and 5% were cyberbully-victims. School bullying and cyberbullying overlapped very little; in the majority of cases, adolescents involved in cyberbullying were not the same as those involved in school bullying. Students involved in any type of bullying were associated with psychosocial problems unlike the non-involved students. Victims of school bullying had greater internalizing problems than cyber victims, while school bullies were more aggressive than cyberbullies. School victims and those who were subjected to both forms of aggression (cyber & school) had significantly higher levels of perceived social disintegration than cyber-victims and noninvolved students. Concerning psychological distress, school and cyber & school victims had significantly higher scores. For bullies, who are engaged in school and in cyber & school bullying, aggression scores were significantly higher than cyberbullies and noninvolved students. Concerning antisocial behaviors, cyber & school bullies had the highest scores and noninvolved students the lowest ones.

Discussion: Cyberbullying represents just as much a public health problem as school bullying. More than one in four were involved in each type of bullying. Cyberbullies appeared to be less aggressive than school bullies, but with comparable levels of antisocial behavior.

Bullying has been defined as deliberate and repeated long-term exposure to negative acts performed by a person or group of persons regarded of higher status or greater strength than the victim (Harel, 1998; Olweus, 1993; Scheidt & Harel, 2001). It implies an imbalance of power (physically or psychologically) between the bully and the victims (Olweus, 1991) and may involve verbal acts such as threats, insults and nicknames, physical acts such as assault or theft or social acts such as exclusion from the peer group (Due et al., 2005). Bullying affects the health of young people, resulting in psychological distress, such as depression, bad temper,nervousness, loneliness and helplessness (Haynie et al., 2001; Kaltiala-Heino, Rimpela, Marttunen, Rimpela, & Rantanen, 1999; Peskin, Tortolero, Markham, Addy, & Baumler, 2007; Salmon, James, Cassidy, & Javaloyes, 2000) and long term patterns of problem behavior, such as aggression, violence, problem drinking and substance use (Farrington, 1989; Kaltiala-Heino, Rimpelae, Rantanen, & Rimpelae, 2000). While bullies have been shown to exhibit higher levels of externalizing behavior and victims as showing higher levels of internalizing behavior, those who are classified as both bullies and victims have been shown to exhibit higher levels of both and lower levels of functioning (Hanish & Guerra, 2004; Menesini, Modena, & Tani, 2009; Nansel et al., 2004).A participative life in school and the perception of safety in schools, a feeling of belonging and bonding with teachers and pupils, are relevant factors in well-being (Bonny, Britto, Klostermann, Hornung, & Slap, 2000; Gonçalves & Matos, 2007; Matos, 2005; Matos et al., 2008; Simões, 2007). Many existing studies show that negative school perceptions among youth predict higher likelihood of involvement in various risk behaviors, such as substance use, problem drinking, truancy and involvement in school bullying, fighting and weapon carrying (Harel, 1999; Kasen et al., 2004). Bullying is associated with poorer grades, more absenteeism and lower school attendance (Eisenberg, Neumark-Sztainer, & Perry, 2003; Juvonen, Nishina, & Graham, 2000; Nishina, Juvonen, & Witkow, 2005; Pekel-Uludagli & Ucanok, 2005).

Method: This study contains data from the 2002 and the 2006 World Health Organization Health Behavior in School-Aged Children (HBSC) cross-national surveys conducted in 40 countries. The HBSC surveys school children aged 11, 13 and 15 in 40 countries in Europe and North America. The HBSC questionnaire includes 17 measures describing various dimensions of school perceptions; six of these items are mandatory and were included in all 40 countries in 2006. An additional 11 items were offered optionally in the 2002 survey, and were included by 12 of the 40 countries. In total, the 2006 survey was comprised of 197,502 students, and the 2002 data included 57,007 students from 12 countries. To measure bullying two questions were asked, how often have you been bullied at school in the past couple of months and how often have you taken part in bullying another student at school in the past couple of months? Response options were: 1- I haven’t been bullied/been involved in bullying in school in the past couple of months; 2- it has only happened once or twice; 3- 3 times a month; 4- about once a week; and 5- several times a week. School perceptions included six mandatory items in three areas, academic achievement, student social relationships and general school perception. The 11 optional questions were related to three areas as well, rules and regulations, teacher–pupil relations, and general school perceptions. For all questions a five point Likert scale was given ranging from ‘strongly agree’ to ‘strongly disagree’. Two scales of Cumulative Negative School Perceptions (CNSP) were created. One scale was based on the six mandatory items, and the second scale was based on all 17 items.

Results: The findings suggest that each of the negative school perceptions is significantly related to all three groups involved in bullying (bully, victim and bully-victim). However, strong relationships were found between being bullied and student social relationship variables such as students being together, students being kind and helpful , and students accepting me and for general school perception variables such as feeling safe and feeling that I belong. Strong relationships were also found between bullying others and lower academic achievement, general school perception variables such as liking school, feeling I belong, and feeling safe, teacher–pupil relation variables such as teacher encourages students to express views, teacher treats students fairly, and teachers give extra help when needed, and rules and regulations variables such as rules are fair and students are treated too severely/strictly. Strong relationships were found between bully-victims and lower academic achievement, general school perception variables, teacher–pupil relation variables, rules and regulations variables and student social relationship variables. For all three groups, the odds of being involved in bullying increase significantly for each unit in the CNSP scale with the bully-victim group showing a greater number of high odds ratios amongst individual negative school perceptions. The effect of CNSP on bullying is stronger for girls than it is for boys. The higher the number of negative perceptions, the higher the odds of being involved in bullying. These strong relationships between the cumulative number of negative school perceptions and the involvement in bullying are universal across almost all 40 countries. In the majority of countries, having only three negative school perceptions was associated with twice the odds of being involved in bullying, as compared to students with no negative perceptions.

Discussion: Negative perceptions of the school experience were strongly and consistently associated with bullying, with being a victim of bullying and being a bully-victim. The more that a child feels a sense of belongingness, liking, and safety, the less chance they will be involved in bullying, either as perpetrator or victim (Ahmed & Braithwaite, 2004; Eisenberg et al., 2003; Laufer & Harel, 2003a; Rigby & Slee, 1993). This can be utilized to reduce bullying involvement by means of improvement of school experience. While victimization is significantly related to variables of fellow–student relationships, being a perpetrator of bullying is related more to the teacher–student relationship items and to the variables related to rules and regulations. Interestingly, being a bully-victim was significantly associated with the greatest number of negative school perceptions in different areas. Poor relationships with students lead to a child being chosen as a victim for bullying. Children who feel that they are being treated badly or unfairly by teachers, may in turn treat other children badly, either as a way of relieving their hurt or frustration or as a way of re-taking a sense of relationship control through the construction of a relationship where they have power and control. In order to reduce bullying in schools, we need to understand how the “bully” perceives their relationships with teachers and their place in the school environment.

Although there have been some variations in the way bullying has been defined, a general consensus has emerged in which it is seen as a form of aggressive behavior in which there is an imbalance of power favoring the perpetrator(s) who repeatedly seek to hurt or intimidate a targeted individual. Some studies have focused upon the effectiveness of anti-bullying programs in reducing school bullying (Rigby & Slee 2008; Merrell et al. 2008; Farrington & Ttofi 2009). These studies have suggested that some programs have been effective in reducing the prevalence of bullying. Farrington and Ttofi (2009) identified 17 out of 44 programs as significantly reducing peer victimization among school children. They concluded that on average anti-bullying programs reduce bullying by approximately 20%. With the development and increased accessibility of electronic technology, the opportunities for peer victimization have greatly increased. The term ‘cyberbullying’ has been defined as bullying using electronic means of contact (Smith et al. 2008).

Method: This study examined evidence regarding changes over time in the prevalence of bullying from data published from the 1990s up to 2009.They reported first on research undertaken in specific countries in which relevant repeated surveys have been undertaken. Subsequently they examined the findings provided for a collection of 27 countries from Europe and North America as reported by Molcho et al. (2009). Finally, they examined findings from two studies that focused specifically on trends in the prevalence of cyberbullying.

Results: Finkelhor et al. (2009) examined data from two similar national surveys conducted five years apart, in 2003 and 2008. Both surveys provided information through randomized telephone interviews relating to abusive behavior experienced by children between the ages of 2 and 17 years. Caregivers answered questions about children under the age of 11 years; older children were interviewed directly. For the 2003 survey, data were obtained for 2,030 children; for the 2008 survey from 4,046 children. Indices of abusive behavior were derived from interview reports of physical assaults, sexual assaults and peer and sibling victimization, classified as either physical or emotional. Overall, the authors reported a reduction in abusive behavior experienced by children between 2003 and 2008.With respect to bullying, they noted a ‘large drop’ in physical bullying, from 21.7% reporting having been physically attacked by a peer or sibling to 14.8%. Emotional bullying also decreased significantly, but less steeply. On changes in rates of bullying, they suggest that changes have come about as a result of very notable increases in attention being applied to bullying in school anti-bullying policies and initiatives.

The international data set was based on multiple surveys conducted in 27 countries in Western and Eastern Europe and North America (Molcho et al. 2009). Data were collected from students aged 11–15 years between 1993/94 and 2005/06 at 4 year intervals. Students were asked to indicate how often they had been bullied during ‘this term’. Victimization was defined as ‘chronic’ if it was reported as occurring more than twice during the term and ‘occasional’ if occurring ‘once or more’ compared with ‘never’. Among boys, for the 27 country samples significant decreases in occasional and chronic victimization were reported in 19 countries. Among girls, significant decreases were reported in occasional victimization in 13 countries and chronic victimization in 18 countries. 19 countries reported a decrease in occasional victimization and 21 in chronic victimization. The prevalence of chronic bullying showed a decline on average from 19.3% in 1993/1994 to 10.6% in 2005/2006, a reduction of 45%.

Wolke et al. (2006) reported data from the first and second Youth Internet Safety Surveys (YISS-1 and YISS-2), each with N = 1,500. YISS-1 was conducted in 1999–2000, and YISS-2 in 2005. Both were telephone interviews with a nationally representative sample of U.S. internet users, aged 10–17 years. Cyberbullying was defined as ‘threats or other offensive behavior sent online to the youth or posted online about the youth for others to see’. The comparison of the two surveys showed an increase in reports of harassment from 6 to 9%, and of distressing harassment from 2 to 3%. The proportions who said that they had ‘made rude or nasty comments to someone on the Internet’ doubled, from 14 to 28%, and ‘used the Internet to harass or embarrass someone they were mad at’ jumped from 1 to 9%.

Discussion: In a large majority of cases the data suggest that the prevalence of bullying did not increase. In the international data set of 27 countries, only 3 showed a significant increase in occasional victimization and only one in chronic victimization. 19 of the 27 reported cases showed a significant decrease in occasional victimization and 21 in chronic victimization. The study on cyberbullying suggests that there were some increases in the prevalence of cyberbullying during the period 1999–2006.

Previous studies have demonstrated a number of adverse health outcomes associated with bullying such as psychological maladjustment, psychosomatic health problems, absenteeism from school, impaired academic performance, and physical injury. Bullying behavior is also associated with involvement in a range of other risk behaviors such as drinking, smoking and drug use. The effects of bullying are not only acute, but may also persist into later adolescence and adulthood for victims as well as perpetrators. The current study examines cross-national trends in the occurrence of bullying examines.

Method: The HBSC study collects data from nationally representative samples of 11-, 13- and 15-year old schoolchildren every four years in each country. The current study utilized data collected from 21 countries from the 1993/1994 survey, and from 27 countries from each of the 1997/1998; 2001/2002 and 2005/2006 surveys. Sample sizes were 102,799 in 1993/94; 125,732 in 1997/98; 129,240 in 2001/02; and 133,981 in 2005/06. In the 1993/94 and 1997/98 surveys, the question for bullying was phrased “How often have you taken part in bullying other students in school this term?” with response options ‘I haven’t bullied others in school this term’, ‘once or twice’, ‘sometimes’, ‘about once a week’, ‘several times a week’. In 2001/02 and 2005/06 a slightly different phrasing was used: “How often have you taken part in bullying other students at school in the past couple of months?” with response options ‘I haven’t bullied other students in the past couple of months’, ‘it has only happened once or twice’, ‘two or three times a month’, ‘about once a week’, ‘several times a week’. The question on bullying victimization was changed between 1997/98 and 2005/06 from “How often have you been bullied in school this term?” with response options ‘I haven’t been bullied in school this term’, ‘once or twice’, ‘sometimes’, ‘about once a week’, ‘several times a week’, to “How often have you been bullied at school in the past couple of months?” with response options ‘I haven’t been bullied in the past couple of months’, ‘it has only happened once or twice’, ‘two or three times a month’, ‘about once a week’, ‘several times a week’.

Results: The prevalence of occasional bullying behavior decreased in most countries. In Canada, occasional bullying behavior decreased among boys but increased among girls. In France, occasional bullying behavior decreased among boys and girls. In the U.S., occasional bullying behavior decreased among boys and girls but not a lot among girls. Decreases in occasional victimization were evident in most countries. In Canada, occasional victimization increased in boys and girls but more among the girls. In France, occasional victimization decreased among boys and girls. In the U.S., occasional victimization decreased among boys and girls but more among boys. Overall, the percentage of children involved chronically in the bullying of others decreased over the years. In Canada, France, and the U.S., chronic bullying decreased among boys and girls but decreased more among boys in the U.S. Significant decreases in chronic victimization were reported in 21 countries. In Canada, chronic victimization decreased among boys and increased among girls. In France chronic victimization decreased significantly among boys and girls. In the U.S., chronic victimization decreased among both genders but more among boys. With respect to geographic patterns, decreases in bullying behavior were reported over time in countries from the following areas: Scandinavia, Eastern Europe, most of Western Europe, and the Baltic countries.

Discussion: Bullying and associated victimization are common in almost all participating countries. A third of the children in the overall sample report occasional bullying or victimization, and around 1 in 10 children report chronic involvement in bullying, either as a perpetrator or as a victim. In most countries involvement in bullying behavior is decreasing over time. All of the Western European countries reported consistent decreases for each of the four measures of bullying. The reported decreases could be a consequence of ongoing efforts to address school bullying, the result of the increased awareness, or both.

The Encarta World English Dictionary defines a bully as an aggressive person who intimidates or mistreats weaker people. Bullying is directed often repeatedly toward a particular victim who is usually unable to defend him/herself. Victimized children may be younger, weaker, or less psychologically confident. The bully gains psychological gratification, status in the peer group, and sometimes financial gain.

Historical Origins of the Study of Bullying: Olweus defined bullying as repeated oppression of a less powerful person by a more powerful person; it is a desire to hurt someone repeatedly. Early work on bullying mentioned only physical and verbal types. In the 1990s, relational forms of bullying took effect. In the 2000s, cyberbullying started to occur. Another recent term is bias bullying or prejudice-driven bullying. This is bullying based on group characteristics and would include racial harassment, faith-based bullying, sexual harassment, and homophobic bullying.

Assessing Definitions, the Criteria Used, and the Cartoon Task: Whatever definition researchers decide on, children and adults may not necessarily agree on that meaning. Two main approaches have been used in the study of how bullying is defined outside the research community, recall and recognition tasks. In recall tests, people are asked to define bullying and give examples. In recognition tasks, a participant is given a vignette and asked if it is bullying. A particular methodology is the cartoon task, a universal approach. 25 cartoons illustrate different social situations that may or may not be bullying. The situations vary in type of aggression, number of bullies, repetition, and negative effect on the victim. Little gender difference was found; however, age changes and cultural differences were seen.

Age Changes Understanding Bullying: Such changes may be developmental or historical. Until around eight or nine years, children use the term bullying broadly to cover all kinds of nasty behavior even when no imbalance of power is involved. For 8 year old children, the cartoon task showed two clusters, non-aggressive and aggressive items. For the 14 year olds, five clusters occurred, non-aggressive, physical aggression (even handed dispute or provoked retaliation), physical bullying (power difference), verbal, and social exclusion. Adults are less likely to consider social or relational aggression as bullying; this could be in part due to their definition of bullying growing up, when bullying was mainly viewed as verbal or physical.

Age Changes Behaviors Related to Bullying: Some children behave aggressively early on; they can be physically, verbally, or relationally aggressive. However, they often use direct, confrontational methods. Indirect bullying is often done by older children and adolescents. Young children’s aggression differs from bullying as observed in older students in terms of repetition. Although the aggressive behavior of young children shows some stability over time, with the same children behaving aggressively toward their peers, such children do not repeatedly target the same person. They tend to target different children on different occasions. These behaviors are defined as peer victimization instead of bullying. However, they me be the precursors to bullying behavior. The widespread victimizing can be the aggressor trying to identify the most susceptible victims within a new peer group. Young children may also find it hard to identify susceptible victims. It can also be a reflection of a less-fixed social hierarchy.

Cultural Differences Terms used for Bullying: In France the word violence is used for bullying. In the United States, victimization has been used. Six clusters were identified, terms higher on physical, verbal, and social bullying that were closest to the definition of bullying, terms that are higher on social exclusion, terms higher on verbal bullying, higher on verbal but moderately on physical bullying, higher on physical bullying, and highest on physical bullying but moderately on verbal and/or social exclusion.

Cultural Differences Behavioral Differences in Bullying: Boys are more often bullies than victims and more likely to engage in physical bullying. The rates of being a victim declines with age.

Bullying is defined as a deliberate, repeated, or long-term exposure to negative acts performed by a person or group of persons regarded of higher status or of greater strength than the victim. Bullying may be verbal, physical, or social acts. The prevalence of bullying decreases with age, and bullying is strongly associated with physical and psychological health outcomes. Victims have difficulty in establishing social relationships with their peers, and some react by bullying others, creating a vicious cycle that can be hard to end.

Method: Two internationally surveys were utilized, the Health Behavior in School-aged Children survey among 13 and 15 year olds in samples of schools from Europe, North America, and Israel, and the Global School-based Health Student survey. 218,104 students participated. In the Health Behavior in School-aged Children survey, bullying was measured by the item: ‘How often have you been bullied at school in the past couple of months?’ The responses were I haven’t been bullied at school the past couple of months, it has only happened once or twice, 2 or 3 times a month, about once a week, and several times a week. In the Global School-based Health Student survey, bullying was measured by the item: ‘During the past 30 days, on how many days were you bullied?’ The responses were 0, 1-2, 3-5, 6-9, 10 to 19, 20-29, and all 30 days.

Results: 32.1% of children were bullied at school at least once within the past 2 months in countries involved in the HBSC survey, and 37.4% of children were bullied at least once with the past 30 days in countries involved in the GSHS survey. A large variation in prevalence was seen across countries. Canada, France, and the United States all used the HBSC survey. In Canada, there was a larger bullying prevalence among boys (37% vs. 33.2%). In the United States, it was similar with boys having a prevalence rate of 35.4% vs. 31.2% for girls. However, in France girls had a higher rate of bullying (35.6%) than boys (33%). Overall, prevalence was highest among boys (39.4% in the GSHS study and 33% in the HBSC study) but only slightly smaller among girls (33% in the GSHS and 29.2% in HBSC). In France the difference of bullying for boys was more than 10% higher than for girls.

Discussion: Overall, bullying was highly prevalent in most of the countries surveyed. On average, every third child has been exposed to bullying within the past months. A recent study involving Japan, South Africa, and the U.S. suggest that physical child harm in the families may be related to bullying behavior. Children who were not physically harmed by a family member in their childhood had the lowest risk of being involved in bullying as children.

Studies have found that anywhere from 9% to 40% of students are victims of cyberbullying and most suggest that online victimization is less prevalent than school bullying. Cyberbullying has several unique characteristics that distinguish it from school bullying. Technology allows cyberbullying perpetrators to maintain anonymity and give them the capacity to post messages to a wide audience. In addition, perpetrators may feel reduced responsibility and accountability when online compared with face-to-face situations. Studies suggest that from about one third to more than three quarters of youths bullied online are also bullied at school. Some studies have found that girls are more likely to be victims of cyberbullying, yet other studies have found no gender differences. Some studies suggest that cyberbullying victimization increases during the middle school years, and others have found no consistent relationship between cyberbullying and age.

Method: The MetroWest Adolescent Health Survey was utilized by 20,406 9th through 12th grade students in Massachusetts. Students were asked about cyberbullying victimization and school bullying victimization in the past 12 months. Cyberbullying was measured with the following question: ‘‘How many times has someone used the Internet, a phone, or other electronic communications to bully, tease, or threaten you?’’ School bullying was measured by the following question: ‘‘During the past 12 months, how many times have you been bullied on school property?’’ with bullying defined as ‘‘being repeatedly teased, threatened, hit, kicked, or excluded by another student or group of students.’’ Responses from these questions were categorically grouped into 4 categories of bullying victimization: cyberbullying victim only, school bullying victim only, both cyber and school bullying victim, and neither. Depressive symptoms, suicidal ideation, and suicide attempts were measured using items about behavior in the past 12 months. Self-injury was assessed by the item ‘‘How many times did you hurt or injure yourself on purpose?’’ School attachment was measured using a 5-item scale from the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health.

Results: Overall, 15.8% of students reported cyberbullying, and 25.9% reported school bullying in the past 12 months. The overlap between cyberbullying and school bullying was substantial: 59.7% of cyberbullying victims were also school bullying victims, and 36.3% of school bullying victims were also cyberbullying victims. One third of all students were bullying victims: 6.4% were victims of cyberbullying only, 16.5% of students were victims of school bullying only, and 9.4% were victims of both school and cyberbullying. Reports of cyberbullying were higher among girls than among boys, whereas reports of school bullying were similar for both genders. Although cyberbullying decreased slightly from 9th grade to 12th grade, school bullying decreased by nearly half. Non-heterosexually identified youths were far more likely than were heterosexually identified youths to report cyberbullying and school bullying. Youths who reported lower school performance and lower school attachment were more likely to be victimized with cyberbullying only. Youths who were in lower grades and non-heterosexually identified youths were more likely to be victims of one or both types of bullying, as were students who reported lower grades and lower levels of school attachment. Bullying victimization was consistently associated with an increased likelihood of psychological distress across all measures from depressive symptoms and suicidal ideation to reports of self-injury and suicide attempts. Furthermore, the relationship between victimization and distress was strongest among students who were victims of both cyber and school victimization.

Discussion: Efforts to increase student engagement in school, connectedness to peers and teachers, and academic success may promote a climate in which school and cyberbullying are less likely to occur. There is also a clear need for anti-bullying programs to address and protect students who identify as gay, lesbian, or bisexual or who may be questioning their sexual orientation.

Being involved with bullying has been recognized as a health problem for school children because of its association with a range of adjustment problems, including poor mental health and violent behavior. Large studies suggest that 20% to 30% of students are frequently involved in bullying as perpetrators and/or victims. Bullying includes a range of behaviors that result in an imbalance of power between the aggressor and the victim. Such behaviors include not only physical aggression but also verbal harassment and public humiliation. Studies that rely solely on self-report suggest that bullies, victims, and bully-victims all share psychosocial adjustment difficulties such as depression and psychosomatic problems. Other studies have found that bullies are more likely to manifest defiant behavior, negative attitudes toward school, and use drugs. Victims, in turn, report feeling more insecure and lonely than bullies.

Method: Participants were 6th-grade students in 11 public middle schools in the greater in Los Angeles. All the schools were in low-income communities, and three of the schools consisted primarily of black students, three were mostly Latino, and five had no majority group. The final sample consisted of 1985 students. The racial/ethnic distribution was 45% Latino, 26% black, 10% white, 11% Asian, and 8% other. Youth involved in bullying were classified by using peer nominations whereby students listed up to 4 classmates from a class roster who fit descriptions for bullying (“starts fights and pushes other kids around,” “puts down and makes fun of others,” and “spreads nasty rumors about others”) and victimization (“gets pushed around,” “is put down or made fun of,” and “about whom nasty rumors are spread”). Three indicators of self-reported psychological distress were utilized. Depression was measured with the 10-item Children’s Depression Inventory Short Form. For each of the 10 items, respondents were asked to choose the option that best described how they had been feeling during the past 2 weeks. Social anxiety was assessed with a combination of two subscales from the Social Anxiety Scale for Adolescents measuring fear of negative evaluation and social avoidance. Each of the 12 items was rated on a 5-point scale from “not at all” to “all the time.” Lastly, a 16-item loneliness measure had a 5-point scale from “not true at all” to “always true.” Peer nominations were used to assess social adaptation within the peer group. Respondents nominated up to 4 classmates they considered the “coolest” kids in their class (indicating social status or rank) and up to 4 they did not like to hang out with (indicating avoidance). Teachers with daily classroom contact rated students on behavior by using 11 interpersonal competence items with a 7-point scale with item-specific anchors. These items yielded 3 subscales with 3 items each: internalizing problems (sad, worries, cries a lot); conduct problems (starts fights, argues, and gets in trouble); and popularity (popular with boys, popular with girls, and have lots of friends).Teachers also rated school engagement with 6 items from the Teacher Report of Engagement Questionnaire.

Results: Twenty-two percent of the sample was classified as involved in bullying as perpetrators (7%), victims (9%), or both (6%). Boys were twice as likely as girls to be classified as bullies, three times as likely to be classified as bully-victims, and almost twice as likely to be classified as victims. Black and other youth were most likely and Asian least likely to be classified as bullies. Other and white were more likely and Latino least likely to be classified as victims. Black youth were most likely to be classified as bully-victims. Bullies reported the lowest and victims reported the highest levels of depression, social anxiety, and loneliness. Bully-victims generally fell in between, with elevated levels of depression and loneliness but average levels of social anxiety. Bullies were regarded as the highest and victims the lowest in social status. However, classmates avoided both bullies and victims and especially bully-victims more than they avoided other classmates. Teachers rated victims as displaying more internalizing problems (eg, sadness or anxiety) than bullies or bully-victims. Teachers ranked bully-victims as manifesting by far the most conduct problems. All three groups of students involved with bullying, especially bully-victims, were rated as more disengaged in school than their classmates.

Discussion: Among youth involved in bullying in a community sample of ethnically diverse students, we found that bullies manifest the fewest number of adjustment problems. Bullies are psychologically stronger than classmates not involved in bullying. Bully-victims are by far the most socially ostracized by their peers, most likely to display conduct problems, and least engaged in school, and they also report elevated levels of depression and loneliness. The superior mental health of bullies can in part be understood in light of the social prestige that they enjoy among their classmates. Developmental research shows that in early adolescence, social status is one of the strongest predictors of positive self-views and psychological well-being.

Nearly one third of 6th through 10th graders in the United States report moderate or frequent involvement in bullying, whether as a bully (13.0%), a victim (10.6%), or both (6.3%; Nansel et al., 2001). Although bullying behavior declines as children get older (Olweus, 1991), it is still a prevalent problem among high school students (e.g., Kaltiala-Heino et al., 1999; Nansel et al., 2001). Harris (2005) found that 20% to 30% of the students in grades 8 through 12 report frequent involvement in bullying incidents as either a victim or a bully. In studies examining the relationship between bullying and depression, victims were found to manifest more depressive symptoms and psychological distress than nonvictims (Hawker and Boulton, 2000; Kumpulainen and Rasanen, 2000; Kumpulainen et al., 1998; Mills et al., 2004; Neary and Joseph, 1994; Slee, 1995; van der Wal et al., 2003; Williams et al., 1996). Some studies did not find an association between being a bully and depression (Camodeca and Goossens, 2005; Fekkes et al., 2004; Juvonen et al., 2003), whereas other studies have found that bullies, not just victims, report high levels of depression (Forero et al., 1999; Kaltiala-Heino et al., 1999; Kaltiala-Heino et al., 2000; Kumpulainen et al., 2000; Roland, 2002; Salmon et al., 1998). Those who are both victims and bullies are usually found to be at the highest risk for depression (Fekkes et al., 2004; Kaltiala-Heino et al., 1999; Kaltiala-Heino et al., 2000).Victims manifest higher levels of suicidal ideation than nonvictims (Rigby and Slee, 1999; van der Wal et al., 2003). They are also more likely to attempt suicide (Cleary, 2000; Eisenberg et al., 2003; Mills et al., 2004). The purpose of this study was to examine the association between bullying behavior and depression, suicidal ideation, and suicide attempts among high school students. The researchers hypothesized that greater exposure to bullying behavior would increase the risk of depression, suicidal ideation, and suicide attempts.

Method: The study targeted adolescents 13 through 19 years of age who were enrolled in 9th through 12th grades in six high schools in New York. This study included 2,341 students, and 58.1% of the students were boys. A self-report questionnaire assessed depression, suicidal ideation, suicide attempts, and involvement in bullying behavior both as a bully and as a victim. The Beck Inventory (BDI-IA; Beck and Steer, 1993) assessed cognitive, behavioral, affective, and somatic components of depression. Each response ranged from 0 (‘‘symptoms not present’’) to 3 (‘‘symptom is severe’’), with a maximum total score of 60. The Suicide Ideation Questionnaire (SIQ-JR) is a 15-item survey that uses a 7-point Likert-type scale, ranging from 0 (‘‘I never had this thought’’) to 6 (‘’This thought was in my mind almost every day’’), assessing the frequency of specific suicidal thoughts during the past month. Suicidal ideation was considered serious if the adolescent scored 31 or higher on the SIQ-JR, scored 5 or 6 on two or more of the six ‘‘critical’’ SIQ-JR items (Reynolds, 1988), or responded with either of the two most serious response options of the BDI suicide item. Seven questions asking about lifetime and recent suicide attempts were derived from the depression module of the Diagnostic Interview Schedule for Children (Shaffer et al., 2000). Several questions regarding bullying behavior were derived from the World Health Organization study on youth health (Nansel et al., 2001). Questions about bullying were preceded with the following explanation: ‘‘We say a student is being bullied when another student or group of students says or does nasty and unpleasant things to him or her. It is also bullying when a pupil is teased repeatedly in a way he or she doesn`t like. But it is not bullying when two students of about the same strength quarrel or fight.’’ Victimization was assessed by two questions, ‘‘How often have you been bullied in school in the past four weeks?’’ and ‘‘How often have you been bullied away from school in the past four weeks?’’ The frequency items were coded on a five-point scale ranging from not at all to most days. Respondents were classified as ‘‘never victimized,’’ ‘‘victimized less than weekly,’’ or ‘‘victimized frequently (at least three to four times in the past 4 weeks). Similarly respondents were classified as ‘‘never bullying,’’ ‘‘bullying less than weekly,’’ or ‘‘bullying frequently.’’

Results: Victimization was more prevalent in school compared with away from school. Approximately 20% of the students reported being victims in school. Significantly fewer (10.4%) reported being victims away from school. Similarly, around 25% of the students reported bullying in school, whereas significantly fewer (around 15%) reported bullying away from school. Boys were significantly more likely than girls to be victims in school and to be bullies in and away from school. Students, who were involved in bullying behavior in or out of school, whether as a victim or a bully, were at significantly higher risk for depression, serious suicidal ideation, and suicide attempts compared with students who were never victims or bullies. The more frequent the involvement in bullying behavior was, the more likely the student was depressed, had SSI, or had attempted suicide; they were seven times more likely to be depressed compared with students who were never victims. Students who were victims were two to three times more likely to be depressed. Students who frequently bullied others were three times more likely to be depressed. Students who bullied others infrequently were two times more likely to be depressed. Frequently victimized boys were more likely to be depressed, have SSI, and attempt suicide than boys who were never victimized; boys who were infrequently victimized were more likely to attempt suicide but were not more likely to be depressed or have SSI than boys who were never victimized. Boys who bullied others frequently were more likely to be depressed and have SSI but were not more likely to attempt suicide compared with boys who never bullied others. Boys who bullied others infrequently were not at a higher risk for depression, SSI, or suicide attempts. Among girls, any involvement in bullying behaviors was associated with a higher risk for depression, SSI, and suicide attempts. Girls who bullied others frequently were at significantly higher risk for depression and suicide attempts than comparable boys. Among boys, 2.5 % were bully-victims, 6.1% were frequently victims only, 10.4% were frequently bullies only, and 28.1% were infrequently bullies or victims. Among girls, nearly 1% were frequently bully-victims, 4.5% were frequently victims only, 4.4% were frequently bullies only, and 22.1% were infrequently bullies or victims. A significantly greater proportion of girls (nearly 70%) than boys (52.8%) were neither bullies nor victims. Boys who were frequently bully-victims were more likely to be depressed and have SSI than boys who were not involved in bullying behavior. Girls who were frequently bully-victims were 32 times more likely to be depressed and 10 to 12 times more likely to have SSI or to attempt suicide compared with girls who were not involved in bullying behavior.

Discussion: Our findings are consistent with reports that bullies, not just victims, are at higher risk of depression, ideation, and attempts (Forero et al., 1999; Kaltiala-Heino et al., 1999; Kaltiala-Heino et al., 2000; Kumpulainen et al., 2000; Roland, 2002; Seals and Young, 2003; Wolke et al., 2001). Moreover, our findings replicate reports that the most disturbed group is the bully-victims (Austin and Joseph, 1996; Juvonen et al., 2003; Kaltiala-Heino et al., 1999; Kim et al., 2005).

One of the most widely used definition of bullying is provided by Olweus-“A person is bullied when he/she is exposed, repeatedly and over time, to negative actions on the part of one or more persons.’’ Bullying predicts concurrent and future psychiatric symptoms into adulthood. The prevalence of bullying ranges from 9% to 54%. The current study aims to estimate the prevalence of self-reported bullying among a sample of school-aged children, to identify the correlates of bullying, and to examine the parent-reported health care services’ use.

Method: 99 schools in France were selected to participate with 25 children (6-11 years old) per school. The Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire was given to the parents, and the Dominic Interactive was given to the students. The Dominic Interactive is a self-report survey for young children based on 91 cartoons, which generate probability diagnosis for seven mental health disorders: specific phobia, major depressive disorder, separation anxiety disorder, generalized anxiety disorder, ADHD, oppositional defiant disorder, and conduct disorder. To assess the bullying, three additional drawings with three questions were used; have you ever been physically attacked, have you ever had your belongings taken away by force, and do you fear being attacked? were the questions utilized. Four categories were derived: assaulted and scared (yes to 1 or 2, yes to 3), assaulted and not scared (yes to 1 or 2, no to 3), scared not assaulted (no to 1 or 2, yes to 3), and not scared not assaulted (no to 1 or 2, no to 3). Child psychopathology was assessed by parents using the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire. Children’s contacts with mental health professionals and physicians in the past year were assessed with the questionnaire of the parents.

Results: The prevalence of children being bullied was 21% whereas the prevalence of children of being assaulted, not scared, or scared, not assaulted was 19.6% and 19.7%. Young age (6-8), male gender, low family income and parental education, parental unemployment, urban setting, and disadvantaged school area were the main characteristics significantly associated with peer victimization. The correlates for being bullied were 6-8 years old, chronic illness, internalizing psychopathologies, and peer relationship difficulties. Mental health professional were accessed by 11.2% of children. Access to physicians was less frequent for those who were bullied.

Discussion: Peer victimizations starts at a really young age. A study by Kim et al. suggested that psychopathology, including social problems, aggression, and externalizing problems was a consequence of bullying. Victim-perpetrator children have a greater risk of developing multiple psychopathologies, including those with conduct and anxiety disorders. Despite its correlates with mental health, bullying was not associated with higher mental health services.

Recent research regarding bullying suggests that bullying by peers is a common experience during adolescence (Cash, 1995; Crick & Grotpeter, 1996; Hoover, Oliver, & Hazier, 1992; Olweus, 1994). Most middle-school children report having experienced victimization, with attacks happening more frequently at school than elsewhere (Clarke & Kiselica, 1997). School counselors have an obligation to assess whether bullying is a problem for their students, to intervene appropriately, and to be proactive in preventing bullying behavior (Smith, 1991). As many as 81% of school-aged males and 72% of school-aged females report having been bullied, with younger children (ages 10 to 13) experiencing greater levels of victimizing behavior (Cash, 1995; Hazier et al., 1992). Crick and Grotpeter (1996) found that both boys and girls report similar levels of victimization; however, boys report significantly more overt victimization than do girls, and girls report significantly more relational victimization than do boys (Crick, Casas, & Ku, 1999; Crick & Grotpeter, 1995). One explanation for girls reporting higher levels of relational victimization may be the importance girls place on social relationships as compared to boys. Adolescent girls tend to be more relational and invest a tremendous amount of energy into social comparisons and peer acceptance (Gilligan, 1982; Harter, 1990; Steiner-Adair, 1986). The current study aimed to learn more about the experience of relational victimization in a sample of adolescent girls.

Method: Participants were drawn from a large sample of 7th grade girls in a school-based assessment of peer relationships, body image, and pubertal timing. The public school drew from a large area of predominantly lower to middle class families with a large representation of ethnic minority students. The Social Experience Questionnaire by Crick and Grotpeter (1996) was chosen as to address the hypothesis that relational victimization was more prevalent than overt victimization for this sample. It consists of three subscales that measure relational victimization, overt victimization, and prosocial attention. Responses are provided to questions about "how often" the adolescent experienced these behaviors using a 5-point Likert scale (1 = "Never"; 5 = "All the time"). Higher scores on the overt and relational victimization subscales reflected greater reported frequency of victimization. Higher scores on the prosocial support subscale reflected greater levels of peer support. Interviews of victimization experiences were also utilized; each girl was asked the following: “We are wondering if there's ever been a time when someone who was your age, or a little younger or a little older, has been really mean, nasty, or rude to you." An additional set of 12 open-ended questions assessed (a) details or characteristics of the event(s) (e.g., location, duration); (b) perceptions of the relationship with the perpetrator, including perceived reasons for the aggression; and (c) emotional and behavioral coping responses.

Results: One year prior to the follow-up interviews, girls reported more relational victimization than overt victimization with many girls reporting a lack of prosocial treatment. Most common forms of relational victimization-being excluded from a peer group, having lies told about you, and being left out-included the above. Most common for overt victimization was being yelled at or called derogatory names. Results of the prosocial treatment scale indicate that several participants endorsed "never" or "a little" having "friends that make me happy" or "tell me they care." Girls indicated that victimization experiences occurred regularly. The vast majority indicated feeling sad, unhappy, hurt, or rejected as a reaction to peer victimization. A few girls noted that they cried as a result of the teasing, and others were scared to emotionally react for fear of more teasing. Some girls acknowledged that being bullied impacted the way they felt about themselves. Often these girls internalized the insults that were directed at them, even when they knew that the insult was not true or that the insult was intended to harm them in some way. Other girls indicated victimization reinforced negative feelings that they already had of themselves.

Discussion: Consistent with the literature, these results suggest that both relational and overt victimization is common for many girls and the details of the event and associated feelings remain salient over time (Crick et al., 1999; Crick & Grotpeter, 1995; Hazler et al., 1992; Hoover et al., 1992). Overall, participants reported more verbal and relational aggression with less frequent reports of overt physical aggression (Crick & Grotpeter, 1996). Participant descriptions support the findings that victimization is hurtful and damaging (Hazier et al., 1992; Sharp, 1996). The fact that victimization was common yet few participants identified involving an adult speaks to the need for accessible resources and support for students feeling victimized. Based upon the literature, school counselors can serve as advocates for students and catalysts for improvement to policies regarding victimization assessment, intervention, and prevention (Clarke & Kiselica, 1997). Counselors can use their familiarity with students' experiences to work with teachers and administration to respond appropriately and structure classroom experiences that promote kindness, cooperation, and communication (Olweus, 1993). Counselors can do assessment through observation, by taking notice of student interactions and being aware of students who may be marginalized by these behaviors. Counselors might also consider conducting a student survey and needs assessment; it might assess types of victimization and levels of distress related to these behaviors (Ray & Berg, 2000; Roberts & Coursol, 1996). Intervention efforts should include being supportive of the victim and responding in a consistent way to both victims and perpetrators. Roberts and Coursol (1996) reminded us that "victims must be heard and given a chance to tell their stories" (p. 208) so that supporting adults may understand fully the student's point of view. Counselors can support students in becoming better equipped in social interactions, more assertive in dealing with aggressive students, and better able to cope when problems do arise (Clarke & Kiselica, 1997; Roberts & Coursol, 1996). Clarke & Kiselica (1997) advocated that schools should establish codes of conduct that send a clear message that "no bullying will be tolerated, ever" (p. 318). Rules should include those that prohibit bullying and identify consequences for such behaviors (Clarke & Kiselica, 1997; Olweus, 1993). Nuttall and Kalesnik (1987) described a structured learning group and interpersonal problem-solving program that includes modeling, role playing, and student-to-student feedback around social skills. These programs have been found to be effective for reducing the frequency of aggressive and violent behaviors.

Suicide is the second leading cause of death for Canadian youth aged 10–24. Experience of bullying is one of many possible determinants of suicidal ideation and behaviors. Cyberbullying has been defined as the use of email, cell phones, text messages, and Internet sites to threaten, harass, embarrass, or socially exclude; it is more pervasive than traditional bullying. The inability for victims to have any control over acts of cyberbullying may result in feelings of powerlessness in the victim. As a result, the damage experienced in cyberbullying may be largely social and emotional in nature. Several studies have shown that traditional bullying among youths is associated with depression and suicidal ideation, and several correlates have been identified among victims of cyberbullying, such as increased depression, suicidal ideation, and suicide attempts. The purpose of the current study was to examine the association between cyberbullying and school bullying victimization with suicidal ideation, plans and attempts among middle and high school students and test whether the presence of depression mediates these associations. The researchers hypothesized that cyberbullying and school bullying victimization results in higher likelihood of suicidal ideation, plans and attempts, and that depression would mediate these relationships.

Method: The data collected between November 2010 and March 2011 from the Eastern Ontario Youth Risk Behavior Survey (YRBS), a regional cross-sectional school-based survey, was utilized in this study. A total of 3,509 students in grades 7 to 12 were the target population of the survey (54.9% females). 49 schools participated in the survey. Students were asked about school bullying and cyberbullying victimization in the past 12 months by the following questions: ‘‘During the past 12 months, have you ever been bullied or threatened by someone while on school property?’’ and ‘‘During the past 12 months, have you ever experienced cyberbullying, that is, being bullied by email, text messaging, instant messaging, social networking or another website?’’ Responses included ‘‘Yes’’ (coded as 1) or ‘‘No’’ (coded as 0). Depression was assessed by the following question: ‘‘During the past 12 months, did you ever feel so sad or hopeless almost every day for 2 weeks or more in a row that you stopped doing some usual activities?’’ (Yes or No). Suicidal ideation, plans, and attempts were measured by the following questions, asked of all students: (1) ‘‘During the past 12 months, did you ever seriously consider attempting suicide?’’ (Yes or No); (2) ‘‘During the past 12 months, did you make a plan about how you would attempt suicide?’’ (Yes or No); and (3) ‘‘If you attempted suicide during the past 12 months, did any attempt result in injury, poisoning, or overdose that had to be treated by a doctor or nurse?’’ Response options included ‘‘I did not attempt suicide during the past 12 months’’ (coded as 0), Yes (equates to‘‘attempted suicide that required medical attention’’; coded as 1) or No (equates to ‘‘attempted suicide that did not require medical attention’’; coded as 1).

Results: 17.4% of students were victims of cyberbullying and 25.2% were victims of school bullying. Girls were twice as likely to experience cyberbullying victimization as boys, and students who were in lower grades were more likely to be victims of school bullying. Participants who reported spending a lot of time on the computer reported cyberbullying victimization more often than those who used computers for less time. The prevalence of suicidal ideation, plans and attempts was 10.5%, 10.7%, and 10.9%; girls were more likely to report suicidal ideation and plan than boys. Victims of cyberbullying and school bullying incurred a significantly higher risk of suicidal ideation, plans, and attempts compared to those who were not victims. Effects of cyberbullying victimization on suicidal ideation, plans and attempts were fully mediated by depression. Depression also fully mediated the relationship between school bullying victimization and suicide attempts, but partially mediated the relationship between school bullying victimization and both suicidal ideation and plans.

Discussion: These findings suggest that cyberbullying and school bullying victims are at risk of psychological distress, suicidal ideation and suicidal behavior. Mishna et al. reported a significant lack of knowledge regarding Internet safety among youths. Enhancing awareness among schoolchildren is therefore a crucial step towards preventing cyberbullying victimization. This could be tackled by parents and schools discussing Internet safety and cyberbullying with children. The mediating role of depression justifies the need for addressing depression among victims of both forms of bullying to prevent the risk of subsequent suicidal behaviors. It is crucial to provide suicide prevention training to teachers and parents to help them identify symptoms or changes in behavior related to depression. Girls may have experienced more cyberbullying due to the fact that cyberbullying is text-based, and girls communicate more often using text messaging than boys.

Bullying is a form of aggressive behavior distinguished by repeated acts against weaker victims who cannot easily defend themselves (Lorion, Feinberg, Settanni, & Faunce, 2004; Olweus, 1993). Bullying behaviors can be overt (such as direct physical or verbal aggression) or covert (such as secretly encouraging other children to ignore a specific classmate). Researchers are also studying cyberbullying, a form of bullying made possible by technology (Li, 2006; Slonje & Smith, 2008; Wade & Beran, 2011). Bullying can involve one child or groups of children and can be witnessed or influenced by other children, bystanders (O’Connell, Pepler, & Craig, 1999). Its consequences are severe, especially for those victimized over long periods of time. Victims of bullying experience poorer psychological adjustment than individuals not involved in bullying (Nabuzoka, Ronning, & Handegard, 2009; Nansel et al., 2001). Craig and Harel (2004) have reported in a review of international bullying research that one in every three students indicates having been victimized at least once during the previous few months. According to Craig and Harel (2004), boys and girls are victimized at about equal rates. Research by Craig et al. (2007) has shown that most students who are victimized feel a sense of helplessness that increases over time.

An intervention that can be implemented in the schools is ‘bullyproof’ having the school personnel articulate and implement a clear policy against bullying behavior; some authors refer to this as the direct approach to anti-bullying intervention (Galloway & Roland, 2004). The intent of the direct approach is to create a school in which bullying is not tolerated anywhere. A school characterized by a positive atmosphere, with cohesive interpersonal relationships, where the teaching staff believes in the students’ potential, where academics are taken seriously, and where students feel a sense of belonging is a school less prone to bullying. Recent research by Zullig, Huebner, and Patton (2011) has shown that school climate variables, such as positive student-teacher relationships, school connectedness, academic support, order and discipline, and academic satisfaction, significantly predict students’ school satisfaction. Lorion et al. (2004) emphasize the role of teachers in regulating the level of bully-victim problems among their pupils. Flaspohler, Elfstrom, Vanderzee, Sink, and Birchmeier (2009) found that pupils who indicated low levels of support by teachers and peers reported that they were more frequently the victims of bullies. These pupils also reported low levels of satisfaction with life in general. In a study of 2,327 students within nine middle schools and ten high schools, Wilson (2004) found links between victimization and school climate, as defined by variables such as feelings and attitudes toward school, knowledge and fairness of discipline policies, student-teacher relationships, and student-peer relationships. Galloway and Roland (2004) conducted an intervention in which teachers were offered professional development in the following areas: Quality of care for individual pupils; implementation of routines and maintaining a focus on academic tasks; monitoring students’ behavior and progress; and intervening appropriately when problems occur. Pupils in the schools receiving the intervention reported an 18% reduction in experiences of being victimized by bullies.

School violence has been a problem in France for a long time. Nationwide surveys revealed that 70% of the incidents of school violence occur in middle school. Most of the acts of violence were found to occur in schools which are primarily located in underprivileged neighborhoods. Of the incidents reported, 29.3% are severe acts of violence against persons conducted without using a weapon and 23% represent some form of verbal aggression; these percentages were found to remain very stable over successive school years (Ministe`re de l’E´ducation Nationale, 2003). School principals have reported that 36% of the incidents involve violence between pupils (Ministe`re de l’E´ ducation Nationale, 2008), with 8% characterized by verbal aggression.

The main purpose of the present study was to identify the aspects of school climate that are linked specifically to the problem of bullying. The researchers hypothesized that children in schools with more favorable social climates (including stronger student teacher relationships, better sense of school bonding, and greater staff collaboration) would report fewer bullying episodes.

Method: The participants were 18,222 students (85% Caucasian with French as first language), 701 teachers, and 478 principals from a nationally representative sample of 478 schools in France. All variables in this study were measured using a questionnaire developed by Dauphin and Trosseille (2004) for a national study of a random sample of French children. Students answered three items describing verbal and relational bullying (‘Other students have insulted me verbally’, ‘I have been rejected, isolated or excluded by a group of students’, and, ‘Other students have said bad things about me behind my back’) and three items describing physical bullying (‘Other students have physically assaulted me,’ and ‘Other students have threatened to hurt me if I did not give them something that they wanted’) on a five-point scale ranging from 1 (never) to 5 (more than ten times this year). Some items assessing the quality of a school’s social climate were answered by students and others were answered by teachers. The rating scale for each of the items varied from 1 (not at all) to 5 (absolutely). The variable safe school comprised three items that measured the students’ perception of the safety of their schools. The variable school bonding comprised five items that measured the quality of students’ emotional attachment to their schools. The variable academic press comprised three items that measured students’ motivation for school work. Lastly, the variable student-teacher relationships comprised five items that measured the quality of student-teacher relationship. The variable clean school comprised two items that measured teachers’ satisfaction with the cleanliness of their school. The variable staff collaboration comprised six items that measured to what extent teachers worked well together. The variable behavior problems in class comprised ten items that measured the amount of behavior problems in each teacher’s class. Lastly, the variable academically on track consisted of the percentage of students per school who were considered by their school principal to be at their expected level academically.

Results: Students who did not have French as their first language reported being victims of physical bullying to a greater extent than others. Students reporting greater social and academic anxiety, impulsivity, and friendship conflict also reported being victims of physical and verbal/relational bullying to a larger extent than other participants. Peer acceptance and positive friendship quality were negatively associated with both verbal/relational and physical bullying. Finally, students with higher academic achievement reported less physical victimization and more verbal/relational victimization than their lower achieving schoolmates. Globally, there was less bullying in schools that are perceived as safer, that have higher achieving students, and that have more positive student-teacher relationships.

Discussion: The results imply that there is a link between positive social climate within schools and reduced incidence of bullying behaviors. School psychologists can be instrumental in fostering positive school climate, and they should be proactive in this endeavor (Lehr & Christenson, 2002). School psychologists should visit the classrooms of the schools in which they work in order to derive an understanding of the climate of the schools in which they work and play an active role in disseminating and evaluating bullying-prevention programs and interventions aimed at improving school climate. In at least one study (Hertz-Lazarowitz & Od-Cohen, 1992), classroom and small-group discussions facilitated by school psychologists have been shown to increase positive social climate within the classroom. In Peterson and Ray’s (2006) study, 67% of gifted 8th-graders reported having been bullied, mostly verbally. Recent research by Rothon, Head, Klineberg, and Stansfeld (2010) suggests that social support from family and friends help protect bullied adolescents against declining academic achievement, but not against mental health issues.

According to the World Health Organization, there are an estimated 450 million people in the world who are afflicted by some sort of mental, neurological, or behavioral problem. These problems often begin in adolescence and persist through to adulthood. Strong connections between emotional health and bullying have been found across several countries. A negative school climate has been found to be predictive of negative emotional health. On the other hand, school support may be predictive of decreased risk of poor emotional health and of decreased involvement in bullying. The purpose of the current study was to examine the extent to which school climate could predict adolescents ‘emotional health and bullying and investigate if these relationships were consistent across countries.

Method: Over 120,000students aged 11, 13, and 15 from 26 European countries, Canada, the United States and Israel completed the 1997/98 Health Behavior in School aged Children (HBSC) survey. Nationally/regionally representative samples of approximately 1,500 students at each age group were drawn, and participants were selected using cluster sampling with school as the sampling unit. The school climate scale (with scores ranging from 6 to 30) was derived from six items, including “Our school is a nice place to be” and “I feel I belong at this school.” The school pressure scale (with scores ranging from 4 to 20) consisted of four items. A sample item was “My parents expect too much of me at school.” Academic achievement was measured with a single item. The question for academic achievement was “In your opinion, what does your class teacher(s) think about your school performance compared to your classmates?” with four possible responses “below average,” “average,” “good,” and “very good.” The peer support scale consisted of three items, and the teacher support scale consisted of four items. The scale, emotional well-being, consisted of five items where higher scores represented better emotional health. An example of emotional well-being item was “In general, how do you feel about your life at present?” The scale, psychosomatic symptoms, was derived from eight items where higher scores were associated with poorer outcomes. There was also an item to measure bullying; the item asked how often the student had engaged in bullying as a victim.

Results: The students in the low climate, high pressure atmosphere reported the most negative experiences of school and significantly lower academic achievement. They also reported slightly lower levels of emotional well-being, more psychosomatic symptoms, and more bullying. The students in the medium climate, low pressure atmosphere indicated slightly better emotional health in terms of increased emotional well-being and fewer psychosomatic symptoms. They also reported fewer incidents of bullying. France and Canadian schools had a medium climate, low pressure environment, whereas the United States had a low climate, high pressure atmosphere.

Discussion: Students in the cluster having the most positive relationships to school outcomes, including academic achievement, teacher and peer support, also had the most positive emotional health and the lowest incidence of bullying. Similarly, those in the poorest cluster in terms of school also had the poorest outcomes in terms of emotional health and bullying. This shows that schools may have a small role in supporting children’s emotional well-being and ameliorating the presence of bullying.

Bullying occurs when an individual intentionally inflicts verbal, physical, or relational pain or discomfort on another person repeatedly over time, and involves an imbalance in mental and/or physical strength (Olweus, 1991, 1993; Smith et al., 1999). Bullying victims and bullies are at risk of a number of mental health, social, and interpersonal problems. Bullying victims may experience depression, low self-esteem, poor grades, and suicidal ideation, and bullies are more likely to get into fights, steal, receive poor grades, and vandalize property (Olweus, 1999). Bullying is a predictor for later delinquency, violence, and other adult anti-social behaviors (Bender & Losel, 2011; Vaughn et al., 2010). Research indicates that the prevalence of bullying tends to be higher among middle-school-aged students compared with high school students (Nansel et al., 2001; Olweus, 1993).Recent technological advances have resulted in the emergence of a new form of bullying known as cyber bullying—the use of technologies (e.g., cell phones, social networking sites) to cause discomfort and/or harm to another person (Kowalski & Limber, 2007).

Verbal bullying actions include threatening, taunting, teasing, and name-calling while physical bullying can involve hitting, pushing, kicking, pinching, or restraining another person against their will. Relational aggression is non-verbal and/or non-physical and may entail making faces or dirty gestures or intentionally excluding someone from a group (Olweus, 1993). Traditional bullying is usually contained to school grounds and often stops once the child has gone home. In contrast to traditional bullying, cyber bullying is neither overtly physical nor verbal. Cyber bullying can occur using a variety of devices in a variety of environments (Mishna, Saini, & Solomon, 2009). Some researchers argue that cyber bullying is more psychologically harmful compared with traditional bullying because it can be long lasting and may prevent children from feeling safe in multiple arenas (Raskauskas & Stoltz, 2007). Another important difference between cyber and traditional bullying is that cyber bullying can be conducted anonymously. Nearly half of youth who report being cyber-bullied does not know their attacker (Kowalski & Limber, 2007; Li, 2007). Between 14 and 49 % of youth report being victims of cyberbullying (Li, 2007; Mishna, Cook, Gadalla, Daciuk, & Solomon, 2010; Raskauskas & Stoltz, 2007; Wang, Iannotti, & Nansel, 2009). However, rates of cyber bullying in rural samples are relatively low (e.g., 9 %; Bauman, 2009). Approximately half of students who experience cyber bullying also report experiencing traditional bullying (Ybarra, Diener-West & Leaf, 2007).

Traditional bullying can have both short- and long-term effects. Victims of bullying are more likely to report feelings of anxiety and depression compared with non-victims (Bond, Carlin,Thomas, Rubin, & Patton, 2001). Bond et al. (2001) found that females exhibited more severe feelings of internalizing behaviors compared with males. Victims of bullying may also exhibit chronic absenteeism, reduced academic performance, increased apprehension, loneliness, abandonment from peers, and suicidal ideation (Beale, 2001). Compared with non-victims, individuals who are victims of bullying are more likely to have low self-esteem, long-term depression (Olweus, 1993), relationship problems in adulthood (High-Jones & Smith, 1999), and difficulty sleeping (Smokowski & Kopasz, 2005). In general, victims of cyber bullying tend to exhibit similar negative behaviors as victims of traditional bullying (e.g., Hinduja & Patchin 2010). For example, Beran and Li (2007) found that both victims of traditional and cyber bullying reported more difficulties at school and feelings of anger and sadness compared with non-victims. Ybarra et al. (2007) found that victims of cyber bullying were more likely to have detentions or suspensions and were more likely to skip school compared with non-victims. Research also indicates that both victims and offenders of cyber bullying have significantly lower self-esteem and report more suicidal ideation than those who had little or no experience with cyber bullying (Hinduja & Patchin, 2010; Patchin & Hinduja, 2010). Haynie et al. (2001) found that those who were both victims and perpetrators of bullying scored less favorably on all of the psychosocial and behavioral variables examined in the study (e.g., depression) compared with those who were only victims or bullies.

The present study examined cyberbullying and its prevalence, its relationship with traditional bullying, and the relationship between bullying, anxiety, and depression in a sample of rural and ethnoracially diverse youth.

Method: Participants in the current study were 211 youth in grades 6 (61 %) and 7 (39 %) from a public middle school in a rural and ethnically diverse community in Hawaii. The majority of youths who participated identified as Multiethnic (74.8 %), which primarily included at least two of the following: Chinese (44.6 %), Filipino (52.9 %), Japanese (56.7 %), Native Hawaiian (59.9 %), or Caucasian (54.8 %). Youth who identified with only one ethnicity indicated Japanese (9.5 %), Caucasian (4.3 %), Filipino (4.3 %), Marshallese (2.4 %), Native Hawaiian (1.4 %), or other (3.5 %) ancestry.

The Revised Olweus Bully/Victim Questionnaire (R-OBVQ; Olweus, 1996), a 39-item self-report questionnaire designed to assess traditional bullying experience(s) in youth, was given to the students. Items from this measure are used to determine whether or not a child is a victim and/or bully using composite scores of items that comprise ‘‘bullying others’’ and ‘‘being victimized’’ scales (Olweus, 1997). The questionnaire addresses the type of traditional bullying the child was exposed to, where the bullying occurs, when the bullying occurs, and whether a child has informed other(s) about being bullied. A student was considered a victim/bully if he/she responded to any relevant scale item that he/she engaged in the activity 2 or 3 times a month or more. The Cyber/Victim Questionnaire, was created for this study; it included 38 self-report items designed to assess whether or not a child was cyber victim and/or cyber bully. Each scale includes 11 items that assess for the frequency at which cyber bully/victimization behaviors occur and the type of technological devices used for bullying behavior. The Revised Child Anxiety and Depression Scale (RCADS; Chorpita, Yim, Moffitt, Umemoto, and Francis, 2000) is a 47-item, youth self-report questionnaire used to assess a variety of anxiety and depression problems in youth. It contains a Total Anxiety Scale (sum of the five anxiety subscales) and a Total Internalizing Scale (sum of all six subscales).

Results: 33% of students reported being a victim of some type of traditional bullying; 7 % of students qualified as cyber victims. Victims of all three forms of traditional bullying had significantly higher scores on the total anxiety and depression scales of RCADS than non-victims; victims of cyber bullying also reported significantly higher levels of anxiety and depression compared with non-victims. More than half of youths who qualified as traditional bullies and cyberbullies had clinically significant anxiety scores and clinically significant depression.

Discussion: While cyber bullying does occur in rural communities, it often co-occurs with traditional bullying. Cyberbullying rates in the present study were low (7 %) relative to the majority of cyber bullying research. However, in one study that examined a rural sample of children, prevalence rates were also relatively low (9 %; Bauman, 2009). Both studies collected data from impoverished communities (U.S. Census Bureau, 2010). Therefore, it is possible that due to limited income and rural life conditions, students had little access to in-home technology due to competition over technological devices (Bauman, 2009).

Recent studies have suggested that bullying is a precursor for health problems in childhood; for example, Bond, Carlin, Thomas, Rubin, and Patton (2001) found victimization to predict onset of emotional problems. Tragic violent incidents in schools in several countries have pointed at violent behavior as an important issue of concern among school children. The current study by Due et al. (2005) examined the prevalence of bullying among adolescents from 28 countries and the associations between levels of bullying and twelve psychological symptoms.

Method: The researchers in the current study used data from 28 countries from the 1997/1998 Health Behaviour in School-aged Children (HBSC) survey, a standardized, international WHO collaborative survey. Each national study included students in the relevant age groups (11, 13 and 15 year olds) from a random sample of schools. In total, the study comprised 123,227 students. Bullying was measured by the item: ‘During this term, how often have you been bullied at school? ’The responses were recoded into three levels: (1) never/once or twice, (2) sometimes, and (3) about every week/all the time. Mental health status was measured by self-reported frequency of 12 symptoms. ‘Loneliness’ was dichotomized into very often/ rather often versus sometimes/never. ‘Tired in the morning’ was dichotomized into once a week or more versus less. The two remaining symptoms, ‘feeling left out of things’ and ‘feeling helpless’ were dichotomized into always/often versus sometimes /rarely/never.

Results: The proportion of students who reported being bullied at least sometimes during the term showed large variations across countries. 17.5% of boys versus 16.2% of girls reported experiencing bullying at least sometimes during the term in France. For Canada, 17% of boys compared to 12.3% of girls reported experiencing bullying at least sometimes during the term. Lastly, in the United States 16% of boys compared with 11.3% of boys reported experiencing bullying at least sometimes. The prevalence of bullying decreased with age in all countries, except Scotland. In all countries except Hungary and Russia more boys than girls were victims of bullying, but in most countries sex differences were small. The prevalence of symptoms and the prevalence of bullying across countries were uncorrelated (r for boys =-0.03, n =28, p= 0.0624; r for girls =-0.08, n=28, p=0.6800). For both boys and girls a graded association between experience of bullying and the prevalence of each of the symptoms occurred. The relationship was stronger for psychological symptoms such as feeling left out, bad temper, feeling helpless, feeling nervous and low, difficulties in getting to sleep, morning tiredness, and loneliness than for physical symptoms. The prevalence of each of the symptoms increased by frequency of bullying with only one exception: among adolescents in Greenland.

Discussion: The study by Due et al. (2005) showed great variation in bullying and symptom prevalence across countries, but between-country differences in the prevalence of bullying were unrelated to international variation in the prevalence of psychological symptoms. Despite this, within all countries, the researchers discovered a consistent pattern of graded associations of symptoms with bullying with high levels of mental health symptoms for both boys and girls. Exposure to bullying may cause poorer physical and psychological health in adolescents. This will influence not only the well-being of the adolescent, but possibly also their academic and social development. Adolescence is a developmental period that is strongly influenced by relationships with family and peers; adolescents may therefore be especially susceptible to the mental health effects of negative social interactions or bullying. Bullying not only has a wide range of contemporary effects for the victims but also has serious long-term effects on health and well-being later in life. Intervention programs have demonstrated an effect on diminishing bullying within the school environment. The most comprehensive work in this area has been performed by Olweus, who has pointed out the importance of intervening at different levels to successfully diminish the level of bullying in the school environment. It is recommended that it be made harder to actually perform the behavior by increasing inspection in breaks and at other occasions, when bullying is likely to occur. It is important to create mutual behavioral norms among the group of children by letting the pupils themselves define rules for acceptable social behavior in the group. Regular discussions in the group on how these rules are observed are essential.

Students are expiencing more and more cyberbullying. One girl reported serious health issues, such as the development of an ulcer, after being severely bullied. Her mother said it was to the point that the girl could only cry because of the pain. Some bullying is an extension of personal issues, such as one girl who was bullied after dating her friends previous prom date. The article goes on to suggest open conversation between parents and children as well as monitoring of online practices is important in controling it.

The study sought to create a profile of adolescent chat room users. A sample of 9th grad students was surveyed to compare chat room users and non-users. The analysis was run seperately for boys and girls. The study concluded that the use of chat rooms corosponded with psychological distress, difficult living environment, and more risky behaviors. The higher level of vulnerability in these children suggest that their internet use should be monitored.

Victims of bullying remain victims for a long time after the bullying ends. The article states that there are characteristics that either develop in the child or are naturally part of their character that makes them prone to bullying. Both bullies and victims have specific characteristics that contribute to their bullying. Bullies and victims also do not have any different physical characteristics. Family life contributes to their development.

The study conducted a meta-analysis of 14 risk factors for posttraumatic stress disorder. In some groups, factors such as gender and age of trauma predicted PTSD. Childhood adversity was a very good predictor of PTSD. Stress also was a big risk factor because it was associated with a greater amount of PTSD.

Both boys and girls are victimized, but boys are more overtly victimized than girls. After conducting interviews with middle school girls, they discovered that social exclusion is one of the more powerful tools used by bullies. They also used physical force and lies to manipulate victims. Often if victims reported the interactions to teachers, they did not recieve much attention.

The study attempts to understand the association between online victimization and offline effects and victimization. The sample was a group of children between the ages of 10 and 17. Interpersonal victimization was frequently reported, although it was mostly offline.

While growing up, children face pressure to conform to what others are doing, including bullying. Bullies represent 7 to 15% of the school aged population. Victims are between 2 to 10%. Bullies are often friends with other aggressive friends. The study also found that those with agressive friends were less likely to be victimized.

The article discusses the issue with inforcing laws over the internet because of international boarders. There is even different regualation between states, such as enforcing the illegality of gambling in New York on online gambling sites. Obscenity such as pornography is considered especially important to monitor through network access. States can create blockades or boarders to block access to their websites.

The authors describe their use of a variety of natural language processing techniques to identify bullying traces (a new concept that refers to online references that can be bullying instances themselves or online references that refer to offline instances of bullying). They also use sentiment analysis features to identify bullying roles and Latent Dirichlet Analysis to identify topics/themes. The paper is designed to set baselines for a variety of tasks pertaining to bullying detection and a call for other researchers to improve upon these baseline techniques. The training data is available at: http://research.cs.wisc.edu/bullying.

Most studies on suicidal behaviors have findings from a psychologic, sociologic and a cultural point of view, and present statistics that could explain why people commit suicide. However, Trautman’s concern is not why people attempt to commit suicide, but rather what goes through their minds, what lead them to the act and what overpowers the instinct of self-preservation and the fear of death.

Method: This study only focuses on one type of diagnosis category of suicide; patients who acted out under a severe emotional excitement and distress. Another requirement for this study was that all patients examined had attempted suicide in the same manner, with almost identical motivations and were from the same socioeconomic position. Out of the 131 patients who were admitted to the Lincoln Hospital in New York after attempting suicide between 1957 and 1958, 38 American born patients were excluded from the study for the sake of uniformity. The remaining 93 Puerto Rican patients were then interviewed multiple times, and a psychiatric examination was done as well. Family members and close friends were also interviewed to obtain more information of their day-to-day behavior.

Results: 76 out of the 93 patients were female. The consumption of cleaning chemicals, an overdose of sleeping pills or other toxic substances were the tactics used for the act of committing suicide of all cases. 58 of the females showed effects of ingesting poison such as deep coma, drowsiness, semiconscious state, stomach and vomit symptoms. A report of symptoms and effects on male were not reported in this study. 62% of the women indicated that the cause of the suicide act was a fight with their spouse/lover, 14% (majority were under 19 of age) argument with their mothers and 12% dealt with depression due to financial issues, homesickness, and others similar problems. Among 14 males, 11 reported the act to be caused by a fight with their spouse/lover or family member, 2 were due to loosing their jobs and 1 was because of a foreclosure of his home.

All patients showed a consistent trend of an instinctive urge to escape from overwhelming pain and find refuge in oblivion, also known as emotional death. The interviews confirmed that all patients had limited concept of death, meaning that their reason of consuming toxic substances was not because their objective was to die, but because they wanted to get rid of the pain and get away from their issues. Studies show that all patients were glad they survived and expressed regret of such act. The majority also showed optimism to improve their current situation and make changes in their lives, while others remained hopeless. None of these cases were severe enough to be transferred to a psychiatric ward. According to this study, these patterns (suicidal fit) were mostly found among young women from the ages of 15 to 26 (with a peak at 18-20). Due to the low number of cases from males, there was not a define conclusion. Though, they do indicate a peak between the ages of 27 and 29.

Discussion: Trautman defines the suicidal patterns shown on the results of this study as a suicidal fit, an intense impulse of escape without a conscious motivation of death. The suicidal fit however do not happen out of nowhere; there are phases that lead to suicide behaviors:
1) Basic emotional disturbance- emotional distress or depression caused by a variety of situations arising.
2) Suicidal atmosphere- the start of suicidal thoughts, but not the decision to act.
3) Antisuicidal barrier- the instinct of rational thinking and the fear of death.
4) Precipitating cause- the antisuicidal barrier breaks down.

Another study in 1958 uncovers that the majority of women examined after suicide behaviors were in menstrual conditions during the time of the act, suggesting the possibility of them never attempting suicide if they were not in their menstrual cycle. Thus, Trautman concludes that the menstrual cycle may have played a role in these cases of suicidal fit as well. He also discusses that since these cases of suicidal fit never had a the initial goal of death, another possible reason behind the act of a suicidal fit could have been to create guilt feelings in others, or a desperate way for longing for love and sympathy from family and loved ones.

Cyber bullies have the opportunity to victimize a greater number of people and in front of a larger audience than in traditional peer victimization.

Method: Participants included 1,684 students between the ages of 11 and 16 years from four public middle schools located in the southern United States. The Victimization of Self portion of the Revised Peer Experiences Questionnaire (RPEQ; Prinstein et al., 2001) contains nine items that assesses overt and relational victimization within the previous 30 days. For each item, participants were asked to report the frequency of being a victim of each behavior on a rating scale ranging from one (never) to five (a few times a week). Four questions were added to each of the RPEQ victimization scales. The questions were: (1) a student sent me a text message or instant message that was mean or that threatened me; (2) a student posted a comment on my Web space wall that was mean or that threatened me; (3) a student sent me an e-mail that was mean or that threatened me; and (4) a student created a Web page about me that had mean or embarrassing information and/or photos. These questions assessed cyber victimization. The Social Anxiety Scale for Adolescents (SAS-A; La Greca, 1998), a 22-item measure of social anxiety, was used to assess overall anxiety related to social situations within the past 30 days. Respondents indicated the degree to which each item was true of them on a 5-point rating scale ranging 1 (not at all true) to 5 (true all the time). The Center for Epidemiology Studies Depression Scale (CES-D; Radloff, 1977) was utilized to assess depression. Respondents were prompted to rate the frequency of depressive symptoms experienced in the past week on a scale from 1 (less than once a day) to 4 (5-7 days a week).

Results: Fourteen percent of the students in the sample indicated that they had been victims of cyber bullying at least one time in the past 30 days. A weak relationship between cyber and overt and relational forms of victimization was found. Females reported greater frequency of relational and cyber victimization than did males, and males reported greater frequency of overt victimization than did females.

Discussion: Cyber victimization was only weakly associated with symptoms of social anxiety, not depression. Relational victimization was most highly associated with symptoms of social anxiety.

This emerging form of bullying, utilizing the Internet and other electronic devices, is called electronic bullying. Electronic bullying may have more impact on youth’s emotional development than traditional bullying because of a greater power imbalance created by the fact that many victims of electronic bullying never know the identity of their bully. Electronic bullying has been defined as a means of bullying in which peers use electronics to taunt, insult, threaten, harass, and/or intimidate a peer.

Method: The present study included 84 participants. All participants were adolescents between the ages of 13 and 18 years. The Internet Experiences Questionnaire included 28 self-report items asking students how often they had experienced each of the different forms of Internet bullying within the current school year. Traditional bullying items were based on the four-item scale by Kochenderfer and Ladd (1996). Adolescents that identified as electronic victims were prompted to answer open-ended questions asking whether they felt that electronic bullying had affected them and if so, how? They were also asked why they thought some adolescents committed bullying using the Internet and cell phones.

Results: More traditional victims were also electronic victims, and most electronic bullies were also traditional bullies. Traditional victim status emerged as a significant predictor of electronic victim status. Traditional bully status and age emerged as significant predictors of electronic bully status, with traditional bullies and older students more likely to identify as electronic bullies.

Discussion: A significant percentage of participants reported involvement in electronic bullying (48.8% victims, 21.4% bullies). Eighty-five percent of electronic victims were also classified as traditional victims, and 94% of electronic bullies were also traditional bullies.

A sample of roughly 400 adolescents from middle schools and high schools in the United States participated in this study. To assess the effects of bullying, two measures were used. The first was a 6-item measure that focused on physical and verbal harassment. Respondents indicated how often during the prior 12 months they were (a) the target of lies or rumors; (b) the target of attempts to get others to dislike them; (c) called names, made fun of, or teased in a hurtful way; (d) hit, kicked, or pushed by another student; (e) physically threatened by other students; and (f) picked on by others. The second measure was a 3-item scale that focused on cyberbullying. Respondents were asked to indicate how frequently during the previous 12 months they were (a) the target of “mean” text messages; (b) sent threatening or hurtful statements or pictures in an e-mail or text message; and (c) made fun of on the Internet. Externalizing delinquency was measured with a 5-item scale of offending during the prior 12 months. Respondents indicated how often they had (a) stolen something worth less than $50; (b) stolen something worth more than $50; (c) damaged, destroyed, or tagged property that did not belong to them; (d) entered a building or house without permission from the owner; and (e) hit, kicked, or struck someone with the idea of seriously hurting them. Two measures of internalizing behavior were used; the first was a measure of suicidal ideation in which respondents were asked how often “you think about killing yourself.” Self-harm was measured by asking respondents how often “you purposely hurt yourself without wanting to die,” with “cutting or burning” offered as examples.

Results: Cyber bullying had modestly higher effects than traditional bullying. For both types of bullying the effects were higher on self-harm and suicidal ideation than on delinquency. For traditional bullying, for example, the effect on suicidal ideation was nearly 80% higher than the effect on delinquency. The pattern was less extreme but still true for cyber bullying, which had an effect on suicidal ideation that was 24% higher than its effect on delinquency. The effects of cyber bullying on self-harm and suicidal ideation were significantly greater for males.

Cyberbullying is the use of electronic communication devices to bully others.

Method: A total of 264 grade seven Canadian students completed a questionnaire created by the author. It included a total of 22 questions which collected information from two major areas: students’ demographic information and their experience related to cyberbullying.

Results: One in three adolescents was a cybervictim; one in five was a cyberbully. Males, compared to their female counterparts, were more likely to be cyberbullies. A student being cyberbullied was positively related to bullying.

Discussion: One important characteristic of cyberbullying is anonymity. In this study, close to half of the cyber victims did not even know who cyberbullied them. Educating cyber victims and bystanders may provide some key strategies in combating cyberbullying. Engagement in traditional bullying is a very strong predictor for both cyberbullying and cyber victimization.

Approximately 2,000 students from 30 middle schools in the United States participated in this study. Suicidal ideation was measured by four yes/no questions; they included have you ever felt so sad or hopeless almost every day for two weeks or more in a row that you stopped doing some usual activities, have you ever seriously thought about attempting suicide, have you ever made a specific plan about how you would attempt suicide, and have you ever attempted suicide. Traditional bullying victimization represented the respondent’s experience in the previous 30 days as a victim of 10 different forms of bullying. Traditional bullying offending represented the respondent’s experience in the previous 30 days as an offender of 10 different forms of bullying. Cyberbullying victimization represented the respondent’s experience in the previous 30 days as a victim of nine different forms of online aggression. Lastly, cyberbullying offending represented the respondent’s participation in the previous 30 days with five different forms of online aggression.

Results: With regard to traditional bullying, prevalence rates ranged from 6.5% to 27.7% for offending and from 10.9% to 29.3% for victimization. With regard to cyberbullying, prevalence rates ranged from 9.1% to 23.1% for offending and from 5.7% to 18.3% for victimization. With respect to bullying, all forms were significantly associated with increases in suicidal ideation and suicidal attempts among respondents.

Discussion: The findings suggest that a suicide prevention and intervention component is essential within comprehensive bullying response programs implemented in schools.

Cyberbullying is bullying through the use of electronic communications; it can be characterized by aggressive, repeated, and intentional acts that involve an imbalance of power between the bully and victim. It can be transmitted anonymously.

Method: Participants included hundreds of 5th and 6th grade Canadian students. To assess cyberbullying, participants reported the frequency of engagement in the past 30 days on a 5-point scale (0=never, 1=once or twice, 2= a few times, 3= many times, 4= every day) for four behaviors (“Have you ever sent someone a text message on your cellphone to make them angry or to make fun of them?’’; “Have you posted something online about someone else to make other people laugh?”; “Have you started a rumor online about another person?’’; and “Have you posted or shared a picture of someone that they wouldn’t want everyone to see?’’) To assess cyberbullying victims, participants reported the frequency of experiences in the past 30 days on a 5-point scale for four experiences (“Have you received a text message on your cellphone that made you upset or uncomfortable?’’; “Has someone posted something on your online page or wall that made you upset or uncomfortable?’’; “Have you been afraid to go online?’’; Has anyone posted or shared a message about you online that you didn’t want others to see?’’). Peer victimization was assessed using the Social Experience Questionnaire (Crick & Grotpeter, 1996). Five items asked participants about relational victimization and five items asked about physical victimization. Physical bullying behavior was assessed using the Early School Behavior Rating Scale for teachers (Caldwell & Pianta, 1991) and the Behavior Assessment System for Children for parents (Reynolds & Kamphaus, 2004).

Results: Cyberbullying and victimization were positively correlated with physical and relational victimization. Bullying was positively associated with cyberbullying and victimization. Cyberbullying behaviors were more frequent for 6th grade students compared with 5th grade students. More than one fourth of students reported cyberbullying victimization experiences. Cyberbullying victimization was more frequent for 6th grade students compared with 5th grade students. Girls were more likely to report cyberbullying victimization experiences compared with boys.

Discussion: Rates of cyber victimization were higher for girls. Cyberbullying behaviors and experiences were greater for older children. Education and understanding how others may be affected by their behavior may help reduce cyberbullying.

Among youth who experienced traditional harassment in the past several months, about 18% also experienced cyber-victimization during that time and among cyber victims, about 95% had experienced traditional victimization (Wang, Iannotti, Luk, & Nansel, 2010).

Method: Telephone interviews with a sample of 791 youth in the United States ages 10–20 were conducted as part of the Technology Harassment Victimization (THV) Study. Interviewers read the following statement before asking questions about harassment: Now I am going to ask you about some mean things that some people do to others. We are not talking about things done in a joking way. For now, I am only going to ask you about things that happen online, or that involve the Internet or a cell phone in some way. When we say online, this could include things like pictures or videos posted online or through text messages, comments made about you online or through text messages or on social networking sites. The types of things I want you to think about are: When kids call someone mean names, make fun of them, or tease them in a hurtful way; when kids exclude or ignore someone, or get others to turn against them; when kids spread false rumors about someone, or share something that was meant to be private (like something they wrote or a picture of them) as a way to make trouble for them; or when kids hit, kick, push, shove or threaten to hurt someone. Think about the past year and only about incidents involving the Internet or a cell phone in some way. Did anyone other than a family member do something like this to you? If respondents said yes, they were asked “Did something like this happen more than once in the past year?” Interviewers then asked all youth about harassment incidents that did not involve technology, using the same preamble and format but specifying, “Now I am going to ask you about some mean things that some people do to others that do not happen online, or involve the Internet or a cell phone in any way.” Interviewers also asked youth about the perpetrator of the harassment (e.g., number of perpetrators, age, gender, relationship to respondent), duration and location of the event, and type of harassment. Youth were asked a series of questions aimed at assessing the emotional impact of the bullying; they were asked whether the incident made them feel upset, afraid, embarrassed, worried, angry, sad, or unsafe.

Results: Thirty-four percent of youth reported harassment incidents in the past year. 54% of incidents involved no technology (in-person only), 15% involved only technology (technology only), and 31% involved both technology and in-person elements (mixed incidents). Youth reporting in-person– only incidents were significantly younger than those in the other two categories and more likely to be boys. Technology-only incidents involved similar proportions of boys and girls, with more girls in mixed incidents. Almost half of all harassment incidents involved two or more perpetrators and sixty-five percent of perpetrators were male. Technology-only incidents were less likely than in-person– only incidents to result in injury, involve a social power differential, and occur a series of times. Mixed episodes were more likely than technology-only episodes to happen a series of times, last for one month or longer, and involve physical injury. Compared with in-person incidents, technology-only incidents were less likely to involve multiple episodes and power imbalances. They were seen by victims as easier to stop and had significantly less emotional impact. Mixed incidents had the most emotional impact.

Discussion: Victims of mixed harassment were the least likely to say they could get away or remove themselves from the situation quickly; this could be related to the fact that they were being victimized across multiple environments. Perpetrators of mixed incidents were also more intimately connected to victims as current or past friends and romantic partners. The results suggest that those seeking to prevent the most detrimental forms of bullying should focus less on cyberbullying and instead focus on traditional bullying and victims of mixed incidents.

Bullying usually occurs before an audience of peers and on the school playground (Craig & Pepler, 1997; Olweus, 1993). Researchers consider bullying to be exposure, repeatedly and over time, to negative actions on the part of one or more students (Olweus, 2003). These negative actions are considered intentional, whereby individuals inflict injury or discomfort upon someone else (Olweus, 2003). Cyberbullying involves the use of information and communication technology such as mobile phones, video cameras, e-mails, and web pages to post or send harassing or embarrassing messages to another person (Ybarra & Mitchell, 2004). Different types of cyberbullying have been reported ranging from flaming to cyberstalking. Flaming is sending angry, rude, vulgar messages about a person to an online group or to that person via email or other text messaging. Online harassment is repeatedly sending offensive messages via email or other text messaging to a person. Cyberstalking is online harassment that includes threats of harm. Denigration is sending harmful, untrue, or cruel statements about a person to other people or posting such material online. Masquerade is pretending to be someone else and sending or posting material that makes that person look bad. Outing is sending or posting material about a person that contains sensitive, private, or embarrassing information, including forwarding private messages or images. Exclusion is cruelly excluding someone from an online group. Previous research has shown that children who are bullied at school suffer internalizing problems such as anxiety, loneliness, sadness, and insecurity (Frost, 1991; Hawker & Boulton, 2000; Olweus, 1989). Children who are bullied may display externalizing problems such as impulsiveness and hyperactivity (Camodeca et al., 2003; Johnson et al., 2002). In a national sample of American youth, 30% reported feeling extremely upset and 24% frightened as a result of receiving harassing on-line messages (Finkelhor et al., 2000).

Method: Participants included 432 students in grades 7–9 in Canadian schools. To determine whether students experienced cyberbullying they were first read the standard definition of bullying developed by Olweus (1996): Harassment occurs when a student, or several students, says mean and hurtful things or makes fun of another student or calls him or her mean and hurtful names, completely ignores or excludes him or her from their group of friends or leaves him or her out of things on purpose, tells lies or spreads false rumors about him or her, sends mean notes and tries to make other students dislike him or her, and other hurtful things like that. When we talk about harassment, these things happen repeatedly, and it is difficult for the student being harassed to defend himself or herself. We also call it harassment, when a student is teased repeatedly in a mean and hurtful way. But we don’t call it harassment when the teasing is done in a friendly and playful way. Also, it is not harassment when two students of about equal strength or power argue or fight. To determine the relationship between cyberbullying and school bullying, students were asked ‘Do the people who harassed you by using technology also harass you in other ways (not using technology)?’ Students were then asked: ‘Do you use technology to harass others?’ To determine whether bullying is related to difficulties at school, students were asked if they missed school, had difficulty concentrating, or if their marks dropped because of bullying.

Results: 58% had experienced cyberbullying once or twice or more often whereas 26% reported bullying others in cyberspace once or twice or more often. Also, more than a third of students reported being bullied both in cyberspace and at school once or twice or more often. Students who were bullied in cyberspace were likely to bully others in cyberspace and be bullied at school. Students who were cyberbullied were likely to miss school, obtain low marks, and have poor concentration. These difficulties were also reported by students who experienced both cyberbullying and school bullying. For those students who admitted bullying others in cyberspace, no difficulties at school other than poor concentration were reported.

Discussion: More than half of the students in the sample had experienced some cyberbullying, and more than a quarter of students reported bullying others in cyberspace at least once. Also, more than a third had been bullied both in cyberspace and at school. These forms of bullying are interrelated. Students who are bullied through technology are likely to use technology to bully others. It is possible that children who are bullied retaliate against the aggressor. Considering that the majority of bullying occurs before peer witnesses, their role must be considered to be a key component in intervention programs.

Cyberbullying: Cyberbullying is one of the online risks youth face and the one they are most likely to encounter more often from someone they know than from a stranger (Kowalski et at., 2012a).

Comparing face-to-face bullying with cyberbullying: Olweus (1993, 1999) defines bullying as intentional harm to a victim, a repetition of harmful behaviors, and a power imbalance between the victim and the perpetrator(s) of the bullying behavior. Traditional bullying and cyberbullying both may cause considerable distress to the victims, often result in part from a lack of supervision, and usually start at school and have an impact on the school day (Agatston et al., 2012; Cassidy et al., 2011; Cassidy, Jackson, & Brown, 2009; Hinduja & Patchin, 2012a, 2012b; Kowalski et al., 2012a; Olweus, 2012a;Tokunaga, 2010). Cyberbullying has been referred to as covert psychological bullying (Sharitf & Gouin, 2005). Rumors, gossip, exclusion, and attacks against reputations and relationships are common forms of both relational aggression and cyberbullying (Jackson, Cassidy, & Brown, 2009b). In cyberbullying, there is no capacity for the perpetrator to see the victim's immediate reaction to his or her behavior (Smith, 2012b. This allows for disinhibition and deindividuation (Agatston et at., 2012; Davis & Nixon, 2012; Patchin & Hinduja, 2011; von Marees & Petermann, 2012). There is also the possibility of anonymity in cyberbullying. While anonymous messages may be perceived as more threatening and more fear- and anxiety-inducing, cyberbullying by known and/or trusted persons can also be very damaging (Dooley et al., 2009; Nocentini et al., 2010). Girls may be more involved as both victims and perpetrators in cyberbullying. The definition of cyberbullying which appears to have the greatest degree of adherence is that of Smith and his colleagues (2008, p. 376): 'an aggressive, intentional act carried out by a group or individual, using electronic forms of contact, repeatedly and over time against a victim who cannot easily defend him or herself.

Varieties of impact (On the victim): Some effects of cyberbullying are depression, poor self-esteem, anxiety, suicidal ideation and psychosomatic problems like headaches and sleep disturbances' (Olweus, 2012a, p. 532; see also Kowalski et al., 2012b; Menesini & Nocentini, 2012; Smith 2012b). Some research participants view cyberbullying worse than traditional bullying, whereas some find them equally as deleterious (Kowalski et al., 2012a; Menesini & Nocentini, 2012; Monks, Robinson, & Worlidge, 2012; Sakellariou, Carroll, & Houghton, 2012; Smith, 2012a, 2012b; Smith & Slonje, 2010). Some feel anonymous messages are worse than those from someone you know however others argue that being cyberbullied by someone you know is more damaging. The breadth of the potential audience in cyberbullying can also act to aggravate the victims' feelings of humiliation (Menesini & Nocentini, 2012; Nocentini et al., 2010). Cyberbullying can result in reduced concentration, school avoidance, increased school absences, isolation, lower academic achievement, negative perceptions of school climate, not feeling safe at school, and a greater likelihood for carrying weapons to school (Hinduja & Patchin, 2007; 2008; Marczak & Coyne, 2010; Ybarra, Diener-West, & Leaf, 2007). There also have been many effects of cyberbullying on the mental health of victims, including depression, low self-esteem, helplessness, social anxiety, and suicidal ideation (Agatston et al., 2012; Kowalski et al., 2012a; Marczak & Coyne, 2010; Menesini & Nocentini, 2012; Patchin & Hinduja, 2012a; Smith, 2012b; Sourander et al., 2010; Tokunaga, 2010; von Marees & Petermann, 2012). There is also research linking cyberbullying victimization to maladaptive behaviours such as aggressive behaviour, externalizing behaviours, deviant behaviours, more alcohol and drug use/abuse and smoking, and delinquency (shoplifting, property damage, physical assaults, weapons) (Agatston et al., 2012; Marczak & Coyne, 2010; Menesini & Nocentini, 2012; Patchin & Hinduja, 2012a; Sourander et al., 2010). Girls reported with greater frequency that they felt their reputation was affected by the cyberbullying they experienced, that their concentration was affected, that it influenced their ability to make friends, and that it induced suicidal thoughts.

Varieties of impact (On the bully): Cyberbullying is associated with hyperactive behavior, conduct problems, and less prosocial peer group behavior (von Marees & Petermann, 2012). Cyberbullies are more likely to report illicit substance use and participation in delinquent behaviour (Hinduja & Patchin, 2008; Ybarra & Mitchell, 2004).Campbell, Slee, Spears, Butler, and Kift (2013) found that cyberbullies had higher rates of social difficulties, stress, depression, and anxiety than youths uninvolved in bullying.

Coping strategies (for victims): According to Perren et al. (2012), social support is probably the coping strategy with the best indicators of success.

Coping strategies (for schools): Middle and high school students have recommended the development of programs to teach about cyberbullying and its effects (Cassidy et at., 2011). In a related study (Cassidy, Brown, & Jackson, 2012a), parents also strongly recommended that school personnel develop lessons on cyberbullying and its effects and that students be given the opportunity to engage with the issues through discussion. Additionally, the curriculum should include an emphasis on fostering empathy and positive self-esteem. Positive bystander behavior should be taught and reinforced (Agatston et al., 2012). Jager et al. (2010) suggest that a training manual for educators include information about the basics of cyberbullying, information about training skills and strategies for diagnosis and intervention, and multimedia resources. It is recommended that schools find ways to make reporting easier (Agatston et al., 2012; Marczak & Coyne, 2010). Youth are more inclined to report to adults in schools with a positive climate (Hinduja & Patchin, 2012b).

Coping strategies (for parents): Patchin (2012) states that parents should be involved and receive training alongside educators to be able to work collaboratively with school personnel and their children to find effective solutions.

Role of educators In relation to cyberbullying: Psychological service providers must inform themselves about the issues youth face in relation to cyberbullying and consult with parents, staff, and other care-takers. Hinduja and Patchin (2012b) suggest that cyberbullying can be reduced through measures aimed at improving school climate such as learning students' names so they do not feel anonymous, community-building through recognizing and rewarding good behavior, staying technologically-contemporary to know what students are interested in, setting and communicating clear limits, encouraging student participation in decision-making, and encouraging reporting of inappropriate behaviors.

Role of students in relation to cyberbullying: Peer-led interventions have been found to be effective, especially when the peers receive extensive training (Agatston et al., 2012; Cross, Campbell, & Spears, 2012a; Menesini & Nocentini, 2012; Van Kaenel-Flatt & Douglas, 2012).

School bullying has been identified as a problematic behavior among adolescents, affecting school achievement, prosocial skills, and psychological well-being for both victims and perpetrators. Bullying is usually defined as a specific form of aggression, which is intentional, repeated, and involves a disparity of power between the victim and perpetrators. Previous studies have found that boys have a higher prevalence of bullying perpetration than girls and bullying behavior tends to peak in middle school and then decrease. In a nationally-representative sample of adolescents in the United States, Nansel and colleagues reported that the prevalence of frequent involvement in school bullying in the past 2 months was 29.9%, which included 13.0% as bullies, 10.6% as victims, and 6.3% as both. In the U.S. sample, compared to Caucasian adolescents, Hispanic adolescents were involved in more frequent bullying perpetration, while African-American adolescents were less likely to be bullied. Adolescent bullying may take many forms, such as physical, verbal, and relational or social. Physical bullying and verbal bullying are considered to be direct, while relational bullying refers to an indirect form of bullying, such as social exclusion and spreading rumors. Boys are more involved in direct bullying, while girls are more involved in indirect bullying. Cyber bullying is emerging as a new form of bullying. Cyber bulling can be defined as a form of aggression that occurs through personal computers or cell phones. Kowalski and Limber reported that among their sample of middle school students in the United States, 22% reported involvement in cyber bullying, including 4% as bullies, 11% as victims, and 7% as both. In a study of Canadian adolescents in 7th grade, boys were more likely to be cyber bullies than girls. Previous studies showed that positive parental practices, such as parental warmth or support, could protect adolescents from involvement in bullying perpetration and victimization.

Method: Self-report data on bullying were collected from 7,508 adolescents in the 2005/2006 Health Behavior in School-aged Children (HBSC) study in the United States. The items assessing physical, verbal, and relational bullying were based on the Olweus Bully/Victim Questionnaire. For each item, two parallel questions asked how often participants had either bullied others or been bullied in the past 2 months at school. Two new items were added using the same format to measure cyber bully/victim. Physical bullying was measured by one item - hitting, kicking, pushing, shoving around, or locking indoors. Verbal bullying was measured by three items - calling mean names, making fun of, or teasing in a hurtful way; calling mean names about race; and calling mean names about religion. Relational bullying was measured by two items - socially excluding others; and spreading rumors. Cyber bullying was measured by two items - “bullying using a computer or email messages or pictures”; and “bullying using a cell phone”. Response options were “none”, “only once or twice”, “2 or 3 times a month”, “about once a week”, and “several times a week”. Parental support was measured by four items from the Parental Bonding Instrument, which were included in the HBSC survey. The students were asked if their parent or guardian 1) helps them as much as they needed; 2) is loving; 3) understands their problems and worries; and 4) makes them feel better when they were upset. Response options were “almost never”, “sometimes”, and “almost always’. Two items asked about how many male or female friends the student had. Response options ranged from “0” to “3 or more”.

Results: At the item level, the two most common types of bullying behaviors were calling someone mean names and social isolation. The two most common types of victimization were being called mean names and having rumors spread about them. 13.3% reported that they had bullied others at least once in the last 2 months physically, 37.4% verbally, 27.2% socially, and 8.3% electronically. The prevalence rates of victimization were 12.8% for physical, 36.5% for verbal, 41.0% for relational, and 9.8% for cyber forms. Compared to girls, boys were likely to be more involved in physical and verbal forms. For cyber bullying, boys were more likely to be bullies, whereas girls were more likely to be victims. Compared to 6th graders, 9th/ 10th graders were less involved in bullying for all types of bullying. Compared to Caucasian adolescents, African-American adolescents were more involved in bullying perpetration but less involved in victimization. Hispanic adolescents were more likely to be physical bullies or cyber bully-victims. Adolescents from more affluent families were less likely to be physical victims but more likely to be cyber victims. Higher parental support was negatively associated with involvement in bullying across all four forms. Number of friends was related to involvement in all three traditional forms but was not related to cyber bullying. For physical, verbal, and relational bullying, adolescents with more friends were more likely to be bullies but less likely to be victims.

Discussion: The negative relations between having more friends and victimization in physical, verbal, and relational forms supports the “friendship protection hypothesis” suggesting that friendship protects adolescents from being selected as targets of bullies. The positive relation between having more friends and bullying reflects a need among adolescents to establish social status, especially during transition into a new group, and may explain the peaking of prevalence rates of bullying in all four forms during 7th grade or 8th grade, a period of transition to middle school. Results indicate that cyber bullying has a distinct nature from traditional bullying.

Olweus (1993) identified three criteria to define bullying: 1) it is an aggressive behavior that is intentional; 2) it is repetitive; and 3) it is an interpersonal relation characterized by a systematic imbalance of power and domination. In schools, bullying can manifest itself either in direct behaviors, be they physical or verbal, or in indirect attacks (Stassen-Berger, 2007). The advances in technology have brought some deleterious social interactions such as cyberbullying (Kowalski & Limber, 2007). Cyberbullying is defined as intentional aggressive behavior that takes place via new technologies, during which groups or individuals hurt classmates who cannot easily defend themselves (Kowalski & Limber, 2007; Law, Shapka, & Olson, 2010; Slonje, Smith, & Frisén, 2013).Cyberbullying can occur via cellphones or computers, by means of text messages, e-mails, online social networks, chatrooms or blogs (Kowalski & Limber, 2007). In a study by Raskauskas and Stoltz (2007), 94% of cyberbullies were also school bullies, and 85% of cyber victims were victims at school. It also appears that being a cyber-victim and being a victim of school bullying are both significant predictors of social anxiety (Juvonen & Gross, 2008). However, Ybarra, Diener-West, and Leaf (2007) demonstrated that most victims of cyberbullying are not victims at school. Wang, Nansel, and Iannotti (2011) found a differential association of depression with school bullying and cyberbullying; in school bullying, victims and bully-victims had higher levels of depression than bullies, whereas in cyberbullying, only cyber victims exhibited higher levels of depression. Moreover, in a study by Ortega et al. (2009), victims were revealed to be less emotionally affected in cases of cyberbullying than in cases of school bullying.

Method: Adolescents from three junior high schools and two high schools in France took part in this study. The final sample consisted of 1422 students (boys = 57%) from 10 to 18 years. The revised Bully/Victim Questionnaire (rBVQ; Solberg & Olweus, 2003) was utilized; students were asked to think of bullying events that have occurred at school in the last 2-3 months. The responses are: ‘‘I haven’t bullied/been bullied by other students’’, ‘‘I have bullied/been bullied by other students only once or twice’’, ‘. . .. . .2-3 times a month’’, ‘‘. . .. . .about once a week’’, and ‘‘. . .. . .several times a week’’. Students who reported that they had both been bullied and had bullied other students 2-3 times a month or more were identified as bullies/victims. The cyberbullying questionnaire contained the items of the Electronic Bullying Questionnaire by Kowalski and Limber (2007). Perceived social disintegration was measured using six items developed by Solberg and Olweus (2003). There were six possible responses to these statements: Doesn’t apply at all, Doesn’t really apply, Applies somewhat, Applies fairly well, Applies well, and Applies exactly. Students’ psychological distress (depression tendencies and low self-esteem) was assessed by means of 11 items taken from two scales by Alsaker and Olweus (Alsaker, Dundas, & Olweus, 1991; Alsaker & Olweus, 1986).The aggression scale was developed by Solberg and Olweus (2003) with six items. Students were asked eight questions developed by Bendixen and Olweus (1999) to assess antisocial behavior; the response options were: Seldom or never, Sometimes, Fairly often, Often, and Very often.

Results: 15% were victims of school bullying, 8% were school bullies, and 3% were bullies/victims. Regarding cyberbullying 18% were cyber victims, 4% were cyberbullies, and 5% were cyberbully-victims. School bullying and cyberbullying overlapped very little; in the majority of cases, adolescents involved in cyberbullying were not the same as those involved in school bullying. Students involved in any type of bullying were associated with psychosocial problems unlike the non-involved students. Victims of school bullying had greater internalizing problems than cyber victims, while school bullies were more aggressive than cyberbullies. School victims and those who were subjected to both forms of aggression (cyber & school) had significantly higher levels of perceived social disintegration than cyber-victims and noninvolved students. Concerning psychological distress, school and cyber & school victims had significantly higher scores. For bullies, who are engaged in school and in cyber & school bullying, aggression scores were significantly higher than cyberbullies and noninvolved students. Concerning antisocial behaviors, cyber & school bullies had the highest scores and noninvolved students the lowest ones.

Discussion: Cyberbullying represents just as much a public health problem as school bullying. More than one in four were involved in each type of bullying. Cyberbullies appeared to be less aggressive than school bullies, but with comparable levels of antisocial behavior.

Cultural aspects can play a role in the definition of cyberbullying since countries might use different words to describe bullying. During recent years researchers have debated whether the three criteria proposed by Olweus for defining conventional bullying, namely, intentionality, repetition, and imbalance of power, also applies to cyberbullying. Two additional criteria have been proposed that might be specific to cyberbullying: anonymity, and public versus private. Anonymity may intensify negative feelings in the victim, such as powerlessness. Young people consider the attack as more serious when an embarrassing picture is uploaded public than when something nasty is written privately, because of the potentially large audience. The researchers investigated the role of five definitional criteria for cyberbullying, in six European countries. These criteria (intentionality, imbalance of power, repetition, anonymity, and public vs. private) were combined through a set of 32 scenarios, covering a range of four types of behaviors (written-verbal, visual, exclusion, and impersonation).

Method: Participants were 2,257 adolescents from middle to high schools across six European countries: Italy, Spain, Germany, Sweden, Estonia, and France. A set of 32 scenarios was created combining the presence or absence of the criteria. In addition, four types of behavior were covered: written-verbal, visual, exclusion, and impersonation, giving a total number of 128 cyberbullying scenarios. Eight versions of questionnaire were created, each comprising 16 scenarios. Participants were asked of each scenario, whether it was cyberbullying or not. Preliminary focus groups, carried out before the construction of the scenarios, were conducted in each country to find the best term to label cyberbullying. In France cyberbullying was referred to cyber violence.

Results: The highest levels were characterized by imbalance of power followed by intentionality and at a lower level, anonymity. For all of these scenarios, exclusion showed lower percentages as compared with the other types of behavior. In terms of country differences, French participants more often perceived the scenarios as cyberbullying as compared with those in other countries.

Discussion: When adolescents evaluate a scenario as cyberbullying they mainly consider the presence of the traditional bullying criteria with an exception: the criterion of repetition. The strongest criterion needed to define cyberbullying is imbalance of power. The second dimension that emerged is intentionality. Finally, another criterion seems to define the second dimension together with intentionality: the anonymity. When the imbalance of power is not present, we have a higher probability to perceive it as cyberbullying if the attack is intentional and nonanonymous. Nocentini et al. showed that although anonymity can raise insecurity and fear—if the perpetrator is familiar and he/she is someone who can be trusted—this can hurt the victim more. Public versus private criterion did not show any relevance for the definition of cyberbullying; it seems that an act is defined as cyberbullying regardless of the fact that it is spread to a large audience or not. The French language does not have a direct translation of the term bullying and the term violence is generally used. During 2010, a massive media campaign about school violence and cyber violence was disseminated at the school level in France. Also cyber violence is very broad and can include a wider range of behaviors than the other terms used.

Although there have been some variations in the way bullying has been defined, a general consensus has emerged in which it is seen as a form of aggressive behavior in which there is an imbalance of power favoring the perpetrator(s) who repeatedly seek to hurt or intimidate a targeted individual. Some studies have focused upon the effectiveness of anti-bullying programs in reducing school bullying (Rigby & Slee 2008; Merrell et al. 2008; Farrington & Ttofi 2009). These studies have suggested that some programs have been effective in reducing the prevalence of bullying. Farrington and Ttofi (2009) identified 17 out of 44 programs as significantly reducing peer victimization among school children. They concluded that on average anti-bullying programs reduce bullying by approximately 20%. With the development and increased accessibility of electronic technology, the opportunities for peer victimization have greatly increased. The term ‘cyberbullying’ has been defined as bullying using electronic means of contact (Smith et al. 2008).

Method: This study examined evidence regarding changes over time in the prevalence of bullying from data published from the 1990s up to 2009.They reported first on research undertaken in specific countries in which relevant repeated surveys have been undertaken. Subsequently they examined the findings provided for a collection of 27 countries from Europe and North America as reported by Molcho et al. (2009). Finally, they examined findings from two studies that focused specifically on trends in the prevalence of cyberbullying.

Results: Finkelhor et al. (2009) examined data from two similar national surveys conducted five years apart, in 2003 and 2008. Both surveys provided information through randomized telephone interviews relating to abusive behavior experienced by children between the ages of 2 and 17 years. Caregivers answered questions about children under the age of 11 years; older children were interviewed directly. For the 2003 survey, data were obtained for 2,030 children; for the 2008 survey from 4,046 children. Indices of abusive behavior were derived from interview reports of physical assaults, sexual assaults and peer and sibling victimization, classified as either physical or emotional. Overall, the authors reported a reduction in abusive behavior experienced by children between 2003 and 2008.With respect to bullying, they noted a ‘large drop’ in physical bullying, from 21.7% reporting having been physically attacked by a peer or sibling to 14.8%. Emotional bullying also decreased significantly, but less steeply. On changes in rates of bullying, they suggest that changes have come about as a result of very notable increases in attention being applied to bullying in school anti-bullying policies and initiatives.

The international data set was based on multiple surveys conducted in 27 countries in Western and Eastern Europe and North America (Molcho et al. 2009). Data were collected from students aged 11–15 years between 1993/94 and 2005/06 at 4 year intervals. Students were asked to indicate how often they had been bullied during ‘this term’. Victimization was defined as ‘chronic’ if it was reported as occurring more than twice during the term and ‘occasional’ if occurring ‘once or more’ compared with ‘never’. Among boys, for the 27 country samples significant decreases in occasional and chronic victimization were reported in 19 countries. Among girls, significant decreases were reported in occasional victimization in 13 countries and chronic victimization in 18 countries. 19 countries reported a decrease in occasional victimization and 21 in chronic victimization. The prevalence of chronic bullying showed a decline on average from 19.3% in 1993/1994 to 10.6% in 2005/2006, a reduction of 45%.

Wolke et al. (2006) reported data from the first and second Youth Internet Safety Surveys (YISS-1 and YISS-2), each with N = 1,500. YISS-1 was conducted in 1999–2000, and YISS-2 in 2005. Both were telephone interviews with a nationally representative sample of U.S. internet users, aged 10–17 years. Cyberbullying was defined as ‘threats or other offensive behavior sent online to the youth or posted online about the youth for others to see’. The comparison of the two surveys showed an increase in reports of harassment from 6 to 9%, and of distressing harassment from 2 to 3%. The proportions who said that they had ‘made rude or nasty comments to someone on the Internet’ doubled, from 14 to 28%, and ‘used the Internet to harass or embarrass someone they were mad at’ jumped from 1 to 9%.

Discussion: In a large majority of cases the data suggest that the prevalence of bullying did not increase. In the international data set of 27 countries, only 3 showed a significant increase in occasional victimization and only one in chronic victimization. 19 of the 27 reported cases showed a significant decrease in occasional victimization and 21 in chronic victimization. The study on cyberbullying suggests that there were some increases in the prevalence of cyberbullying during the period 1999–2006.

Studies have found that anywhere from 9% to 40% of students are victims of cyberbullying and most suggest that online victimization is less prevalent than school bullying. Cyberbullying has several unique characteristics that distinguish it from school bullying. Technology allows cyberbullying perpetrators to maintain anonymity and give them the capacity to post messages to a wide audience. In addition, perpetrators may feel reduced responsibility and accountability when online compared with face-to-face situations. Studies suggest that from about one third to more than three quarters of youths bullied online are also bullied at school. Some studies have found that girls are more likely to be victims of cyberbullying, yet other studies have found no gender differences. Some studies suggest that cyberbullying victimization increases during the middle school years, and others have found no consistent relationship between cyberbullying and age.

Method: The MetroWest Adolescent Health Survey was utilized by 20,406 9th through 12th grade students in Massachusetts. Students were asked about cyberbullying victimization and school bullying victimization in the past 12 months. Cyberbullying was measured with the following question: ‘‘How many times has someone used the Internet, a phone, or other electronic communications to bully, tease, or threaten you?’’ School bullying was measured by the following question: ‘‘During the past 12 months, how many times have you been bullied on school property?’’ with bullying defined as ‘‘being repeatedly teased, threatened, hit, kicked, or excluded by another student or group of students.’’ Responses from these questions were categorically grouped into 4 categories of bullying victimization: cyberbullying victim only, school bullying victim only, both cyber and school bullying victim, and neither. Depressive symptoms, suicidal ideation, and suicide attempts were measured using items about behavior in the past 12 months. Self-injury was assessed by the item ‘‘How many times did you hurt or injure yourself on purpose?’’ School attachment was measured using a 5-item scale from the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health.

Results: Overall, 15.8% of students reported cyberbullying, and 25.9% reported school bullying in the past 12 months. The overlap between cyberbullying and school bullying was substantial: 59.7% of cyberbullying victims were also school bullying victims, and 36.3% of school bullying victims were also cyberbullying victims. One third of all students were bullying victims: 6.4% were victims of cyberbullying only, 16.5% of students were victims of school bullying only, and 9.4% were victims of both school and cyberbullying. Reports of cyberbullying were higher among girls than among boys, whereas reports of school bullying were similar for both genders. Although cyberbullying decreased slightly from 9th grade to 12th grade, school bullying decreased by nearly half. Non-heterosexually identified youths were far more likely than were heterosexually identified youths to report cyberbullying and school bullying. Youths who reported lower school performance and lower school attachment were more likely to be victimized with cyberbullying only. Youths who were in lower grades and non-heterosexually identified youths were more likely to be victims of one or both types of bullying, as were students who reported lower grades and lower levels of school attachment. Bullying victimization was consistently associated with an increased likelihood of psychological distress across all measures from depressive symptoms and suicidal ideation to reports of self-injury and suicide attempts. Furthermore, the relationship between victimization and distress was strongest among students who were victims of both cyber and school victimization.

Discussion: Efforts to increase student engagement in school, connectedness to peers and teachers, and academic success may promote a climate in which school and cyberbullying are less likely to occur. There is also a clear need for anti-bullying programs to address and protect students who identify as gay, lesbian, or bisexual or who may be questioning their sexual orientation.

Suicide is the second leading cause of death for Canadian youth aged 10–24. Experience of bullying is one of many possible determinants of suicidal ideation and behaviors. Cyberbullying has been defined as the use of email, cell phones, text messages, and Internet sites to threaten, harass, embarrass, or socially exclude; it is more pervasive than traditional bullying. The inability for victims to have any control over acts of cyberbullying may result in feelings of powerlessness in the victim. As a result, the damage experienced in cyberbullying may be largely social and emotional in nature. Several studies have shown that traditional bullying among youths is associated with depression and suicidal ideation, and several correlates have been identified among victims of cyberbullying, such as increased depression, suicidal ideation, and suicide attempts. The purpose of the current study was to examine the association between cyberbullying and school bullying victimization with suicidal ideation, plans and attempts among middle and high school students and test whether the presence of depression mediates these associations. The researchers hypothesized that cyberbullying and school bullying victimization results in higher likelihood of suicidal ideation, plans and attempts, and that depression would mediate these relationships.

Method: The data collected between November 2010 and March 2011 from the Eastern Ontario Youth Risk Behavior Survey (YRBS), a regional cross-sectional school-based survey, was utilized in this study. A total of 3,509 students in grades 7 to 12 were the target population of the survey (54.9% females). 49 schools participated in the survey. Students were asked about school bullying and cyberbullying victimization in the past 12 months by the following questions: ‘‘During the past 12 months, have you ever been bullied or threatened by someone while on school property?’’ and ‘‘During the past 12 months, have you ever experienced cyberbullying, that is, being bullied by email, text messaging, instant messaging, social networking or another website?’’ Responses included ‘‘Yes’’ (coded as 1) or ‘‘No’’ (coded as 0). Depression was assessed by the following question: ‘‘During the past 12 months, did you ever feel so sad or hopeless almost every day for 2 weeks or more in a row that you stopped doing some usual activities?’’ (Yes or No). Suicidal ideation, plans, and attempts were measured by the following questions, asked of all students: (1) ‘‘During the past 12 months, did you ever seriously consider attempting suicide?’’ (Yes or No); (2) ‘‘During the past 12 months, did you make a plan about how you would attempt suicide?’’ (Yes or No); and (3) ‘‘If you attempted suicide during the past 12 months, did any attempt result in injury, poisoning, or overdose that had to be treated by a doctor or nurse?’’ Response options included ‘‘I did not attempt suicide during the past 12 months’’ (coded as 0), Yes (equates to‘‘attempted suicide that required medical attention’’; coded as 1) or No (equates to ‘‘attempted suicide that did not require medical attention’’; coded as 1).

Results: 17.4% of students were victims of cyberbullying and 25.2% were victims of school bullying. Girls were twice as likely to experience cyberbullying victimization as boys, and students who were in lower grades were more likely to be victims of school bullying. Participants who reported spending a lot of time on the computer reported cyberbullying victimization more often than those who used computers for less time. The prevalence of suicidal ideation, plans and attempts was 10.5%, 10.7%, and 10.9%; girls were more likely to report suicidal ideation and plan than boys. Victims of cyberbullying and school bullying incurred a significantly higher risk of suicidal ideation, plans, and attempts compared to those who were not victims. Effects of cyberbullying victimization on suicidal ideation, plans and attempts were fully mediated by depression. Depression also fully mediated the relationship between school bullying victimization and suicide attempts, but partially mediated the relationship between school bullying victimization and both suicidal ideation and plans.

Discussion: These findings suggest that cyberbullying and school bullying victims are at risk of psychological distress, suicidal ideation and suicidal behavior. Mishna et al. reported a significant lack of knowledge regarding Internet safety among youths. Enhancing awareness among schoolchildren is therefore a crucial step towards preventing cyberbullying victimization. This could be tackled by parents and schools discussing Internet safety and cyberbullying with children. The mediating role of depression justifies the need for addressing depression among victims of both forms of bullying to prevent the risk of subsequent suicidal behaviors. It is crucial to provide suicide prevention training to teachers and parents to help them identify symptoms or changes in behavior related to depression. Girls may have experienced more cyberbullying due to the fact that cyberbullying is text-based, and girls communicate more often using text messaging than boys.

Bullying occurs when an individual intentionally inflicts verbal, physical, or relational pain or discomfort on another person repeatedly over time, and involves an imbalance in mental and/or physical strength (Olweus, 1991, 1993; Smith et al., 1999). Bullying victims and bullies are at risk of a number of mental health, social, and interpersonal problems. Bullying victims may experience depression, low self-esteem, poor grades, and suicidal ideation, and bullies are more likely to get into fights, steal, receive poor grades, and vandalize property (Olweus, 1999). Bullying is a predictor for later delinquency, violence, and other adult anti-social behaviors (Bender & Losel, 2011; Vaughn et al., 2010). Research indicates that the prevalence of bullying tends to be higher among middle-school-aged students compared with high school students (Nansel et al., 2001; Olweus, 1993).Recent technological advances have resulted in the emergence of a new form of bullying known as cyber bullying—the use of technologies (e.g., cell phones, social networking sites) to cause discomfort and/or harm to another person (Kowalski & Limber, 2007).

Verbal bullying actions include threatening, taunting, teasing, and name-calling while physical bullying can involve hitting, pushing, kicking, pinching, or restraining another person against their will. Relational aggression is non-verbal and/or non-physical and may entail making faces or dirty gestures or intentionally excluding someone from a group (Olweus, 1993). Traditional bullying is usually contained to school grounds and often stops once the child has gone home. In contrast to traditional bullying, cyber bullying is neither overtly physical nor verbal. Cyber bullying can occur using a variety of devices in a variety of environments (Mishna, Saini, & Solomon, 2009). Some researchers argue that cyber bullying is more psychologically harmful compared with traditional bullying because it can be long lasting and may prevent children from feeling safe in multiple arenas (Raskauskas & Stoltz, 2007). Another important difference between cyber and traditional bullying is that cyber bullying can be conducted anonymously. Nearly half of youth who report being cyber-bullied does not know their attacker (Kowalski & Limber, 2007; Li, 2007). Between 14 and 49 % of youth report being victims of cyberbullying (Li, 2007; Mishna, Cook, Gadalla, Daciuk, & Solomon, 2010; Raskauskas & Stoltz, 2007; Wang, Iannotti, & Nansel, 2009). However, rates of cyber bullying in rural samples are relatively low (e.g., 9 %; Bauman, 2009). Approximately half of students who experience cyber bullying also report experiencing traditional bullying (Ybarra, Diener-West & Leaf, 2007).

Traditional bullying can have both short- and long-term effects. Victims of bullying are more likely to report feelings of anxiety and depression compared with non-victims (Bond, Carlin,Thomas, Rubin, & Patton, 2001). Bond et al. (2001) found that females exhibited more severe feelings of internalizing behaviors compared with males. Victims of bullying may also exhibit chronic absenteeism, reduced academic performance, increased apprehension, loneliness, abandonment from peers, and suicidal ideation (Beale, 2001). Compared with non-victims, individuals who are victims of bullying are more likely to have low self-esteem, long-term depression (Olweus, 1993), relationship problems in adulthood (High-Jones & Smith, 1999), and difficulty sleeping (Smokowski & Kopasz, 2005). In general, victims of cyber bullying tend to exhibit similar negative behaviors as victims of traditional bullying (e.g., Hinduja & Patchin 2010). For example, Beran and Li (2007) found that both victims of traditional and cyber bullying reported more difficulties at school and feelings of anger and sadness compared with non-victims. Ybarra et al. (2007) found that victims of cyber bullying were more likely to have detentions or suspensions and were more likely to skip school compared with non-victims. Research also indicates that both victims and offenders of cyber bullying have significantly lower self-esteem and report more suicidal ideation than those who had little or no experience with cyber bullying (Hinduja & Patchin, 2010; Patchin & Hinduja, 2010). Haynie et al. (2001) found that those who were both victims and perpetrators of bullying scored less favorably on all of the psychosocial and behavioral variables examined in the study (e.g., depression) compared with those who were only victims or bullies.

The present study examined cyberbullying and its prevalence, its relationship with traditional bullying, and the relationship between bullying, anxiety, and depression in a sample of rural and ethnoracially diverse youth.

Method: Participants in the current study were 211 youth in grades 6 (61 %) and 7 (39 %) from a public middle school in a rural and ethnically diverse community in Hawaii. The majority of youths who participated identified as Multiethnic (74.8 %), which primarily included at least two of the following: Chinese (44.6 %), Filipino (52.9 %), Japanese (56.7 %), Native Hawaiian (59.9 %), or Caucasian (54.8 %). Youth who identified with only one ethnicity indicated Japanese (9.5 %), Caucasian (4.3 %), Filipino (4.3 %), Marshallese (2.4 %), Native Hawaiian (1.4 %), or other (3.5 %) ancestry.

The Revised Olweus Bully/Victim Questionnaire (R-OBVQ; Olweus, 1996), a 39-item self-report questionnaire designed to assess traditional bullying experience(s) in youth, was given to the students. Items from this measure are used to determine whether or not a child is a victim and/or bully using composite scores of items that comprise ‘‘bullying others’’ and ‘‘being victimized’’ scales (Olweus, 1997). The questionnaire addresses the type of traditional bullying the child was exposed to, where the bullying occurs, when the bullying occurs, and whether a child has informed other(s) about being bullied. A student was considered a victim/bully if he/she responded to any relevant scale item that he/she engaged in the activity 2 or 3 times a month or more. The Cyber/Victim Questionnaire, was created for this study; it included 38 self-report items designed to assess whether or not a child was cyber victim and/or cyber bully. Each scale includes 11 items that assess for the frequency at which cyber bully/victimization behaviors occur and the type of technological devices used for bullying behavior. The Revised Child Anxiety and Depression Scale (RCADS; Chorpita, Yim, Moffitt, Umemoto, and Francis, 2000) is a 47-item, youth self-report questionnaire used to assess a variety of anxiety and depression problems in youth. It contains a Total Anxiety Scale (sum of the five anxiety subscales) and a Total Internalizing Scale (sum of all six subscales).

Results: 33% of students reported being a victim of some type of traditional bullying; 7 % of students qualified as cyber victims. Victims of all three forms of traditional bullying had significantly higher scores on the total anxiety and depression scales of RCADS than non-victims; victims of cyber bullying also reported significantly higher levels of anxiety and depression compared with non-victims. More than half of youths who qualified as traditional bullies and cyberbullies had clinically significant anxiety scores and clinically significant depression.

Discussion: While cyber bullying does occur in rural communities, it often co-occurs with traditional bullying. Cyberbullying rates in the present study were low (7 %) relative to the majority of cyber bullying research. However, in one study that examined a rural sample of children, prevalence rates were also relatively low (9 %; Bauman, 2009). Both studies collected data from impoverished communities (U.S. Census Bureau, 2010). Therefore, it is possible that due to limited income and rural life conditions, students had little access to in-home technology due to competition over technological devices (Bauman, 2009).

Cyberbullying is intentional, aggressive, and repetitive behavior perpetrated by a more powerful individual against someone more vulnerable through the use of technology (Kowalski et al., 2012). The Internet offers greater disinhibition that makes perpetrators of cyberbullying more aggressive.This study by Cénat et al. (2014) aims to explore the contribution of cyberbullying victimization among youths to the prediction of psychological distress and low self-esteem.

Method: The Quebec Youths' Romantic Relationships Survey (QYRRS) was utilized by participants. Participants were recruited through a sampling of 34 Quebec high schools; the sample included 8194 students (56.3% were girls) aged 14-20 years. The survey included two questions measuring cyberbullying victimization using the internet and other forms of bullying. Respondents quoted both on a 4-point-scale: Never (0), 1 to 2 times(1),3 to 5 times(2)and 6 times and more(3). Psychological distress was assessed using the Kessler Psychological Distress Scale (Kessler et al., 2002). This scale encompasses 10 items rated on a 5-point scale ranging from 1(never) to 5(always) with a score ranging from 10 to 50. A score of 20 and higher was represented a clinical score of severe psychological distress (Donker et al., 2010). The researchers used the four items version of Self-Description Questionnaire to measure one's self-esteem (Marsh & O’Neill, 1984). Responses varied from 0(false) to 4 (true) with a score varying from 0 to 16.

Results: Overall, 22.9% of teenagers experienced cyberbullying in the past year. Girls had a significantly higher prevalence of cyberbullying, psychological distress, and low self-esteem than boys. There was a substantial overlap between cyberbullying and psychological distress (57.6%) and low self-esteem (42.9%); similar results were obtained for other forms of bullying, 53.7% and 39.6% for psychological distress and low self-esteem. Sex and cyberbullying victimization significantly predicted psychological distress and low self-esteem.

Discussion: The results showed a greater prevalence of psychological distress and low self-esteem among victims of cyberbullying than non-victims. This study also revealed that youths bullied via technology had a slightly higher prevalence of psychological distress and low self-esteem compared to victims of other forms of bullying.

Cyber bullies have the opportunity to victimize a greater number of people and in front of a larger audience than in traditional peer victimization.

Method: Participants included 1,684 students between the ages of 11 and 16 years from four public middle schools located in the southern United States. The Victimization of Self portion of the Revised Peer Experiences Questionnaire (RPEQ; Prinstein et al., 2001) contains nine items that assesses overt and relational victimization within the previous 30 days. For each item, participants were asked to report the frequency of being a victim of each behavior on a rating scale ranging from one (never) to five (a few times a week). Four questions were added to each of the RPEQ victimization scales. The questions were: (1) a student sent me a text message or instant message that was mean or that threatened me; (2) a student posted a comment on my Web space wall that was mean or that threatened me; (3) a student sent me an e-mail that was mean or that threatened me; and (4) a student created a Web page about me that had mean or embarrassing information and/or photos. These questions assessed cyber victimization. The Social Anxiety Scale for Adolescents (SAS-A; La Greca, 1998), a 22-item measure of social anxiety, was used to assess overall anxiety related to social situations within the past 30 days. Respondents indicated the degree to which each item was true of them on a 5-point rating scale ranging 1 (not at all true) to 5 (true all the time). The Center for Epidemiology Studies Depression Scale (CES-D; Radloff, 1977) was utilized to assess depression. Respondents were prompted to rate the frequency of depressive symptoms experienced in the past week on a scale from 1 (less than once a day) to 4 (5-7 days a week).

Results: Fourteen percent of the students in the sample indicated that they had been victims of cyber bullying at least one time in the past 30 days. A weak relationship between cyber and overt and relational forms of victimization was found. Females reported greater frequency of relational and cyber victimization than did males, and males reported greater frequency of overt victimization than did females.

Discussion: Cyber victimization was only weakly associated with symptoms of social anxiety, not depression. Relational victimization was most highly associated with symptoms of social anxiety.

The survey was administered to 36,254 students in grades 7 through 12 of Minnesota public schools. The Adolescent Health Survey contained 148 https://www.cialispascherfr24.com/

questions, which included five items pertaining to different dimensions of sexual orientation, consisting of sexual fantasy, sexual behaviors with males and females, attractions and intended behaviors, and sexual orientation self-identification. The last dimension was chosen for this study; in this question, students were asked to rate their sexual feelings on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 100% homosexual to 100% heterosexual or as unsure. The survey also included two questions pertaining to suicide risk. An original item inquired about any attempts to kill oneself in the past year or previously, and responses were coded as "ever" or "never." A second item from the Beck Depression Inventory asked about thoughts and wishes about suicide in the past month and intentions to carry them out.

Results: Bisexual/homosexual males and females had similarly high rates of reported suicide attempts and intent. Bisexual/homosexual males and females were more likely than heterosexual respondents of the same gender to report each dimension of suicidality. A bisexual/homosexual orientation in males was significantly associated with suicidal intent and suicide attempts.

Discussion: There is a need for prospective longitudinal studies to elucidate the evolving risk for both attempted and completed suicide across the lifespan of bisexual/homosexual persons. Results show that bisexuality/homosexuality is a risk factor for attempted suicide in male adolescents.

What is meant by Bullying? Bullying can be verbal such as threatening, taunting, teasing, and name calling, physical such as hitting, pushing, and kicking, and relational such as intentionally excluding someone from a group. Bullying can be carried out by one person or a group of people.

Bully/Victim problems in different grades: The percentage of students who are bullied decreases with higher grades. There is also less use of physical bullying in the higher grades.

Bullying among boys and girls: Boys are more exposed to bullying than girls, especially direct bullying. More boys have also participated in bullying, and bullying with physical means is more common among boys. On the other hand, girls use more indirect ways of bullying such as spreading rumors and manipulation of friendship relationships. Overall, boys were more often victims and perpetrators of direct bulling.

Supervision during recess and lunch time: It is of great importance to have a sufficient number of adults present among the students during breaks. The attitudes of teachers toward bullying and their behavior in bullying situations are significant for the extent of bullying problems in the school.

What role do external deviations play? The victims were physically weaker.

What characterizes the typical victims? The typical victims are more anxious and insecure; they are often cautious, sensitive, and quiet. Victims suffer from low self-esteem and have a negative view of their situation. They are also lonely and abandoned at school. Hyperactive students who also have concentration problems may be at risk for becoming victims.

What we can do about bullying? There are various measures at the school, class, and individual levels that can be used. For the school level, there can be a school conference day on bullying problems, better supervision during breaks, a more attractive school playground, parents meeting staff, teacher groups for the development of the school climate, and parent circles. For the class level, there can be class rules against bullying: clarification, praise, and sanctions, regular class meetings, role playing, cooperative learning, and common positive class activities. For the individual level there can be serious talks with bullies, victims, and their parents, help from bystanders, help and support for parents, discussion groups for parents of bullies and victims, and change of class or school.

Bullying is often directed repeatedly towards a particular victim who is unable to defend himself or herself. The victim may be less strong or psychologically confident. The bully intends to inflict harm on the victim. Certain features are similar across different countries. For example, there are sex differences with boys reporting more physical bullying and girls reporting more relational bullying. The study of bullying dates back from the 1970s with the work of Dan Olweus in the Scandinavian countries. In the 1980s, there was interest in Japan with the concept of Ijime, a term similar to bullying. In the 1990s, interest in bullying has spread to Europe, Canada, and the U.S. The increase of young people who have completed suicide and media interest has generated research interest amongst many countries.

France: In an increasing number of schools school bullying offenses have increased and are often committed by younger people. In France, the concept of school bullying is different from the United States. The French term violence has a much wider scope; school bullying mainly refers to faits de violence. Violence is defined by the French Penal Code. School bullying includes all the different kinds of misuse of power (crimes and offenses against people or against personal or school property), all the kinds of violence of the school, and all minor but frequent kinds of incivilities which disturb classroom atmospheres (impoliteness, noise, disorder, etc.). From 1988 to 1992, France had increases in racketeering, intimidation to get money, or to get someone to do tasks for you. Girls are less likely to be bullies or victims. Interventions should focus on the training of school personnel to solve conflicts and negotiate and the cohesion of the staff to build up a positive school climate.

Bullying is often directed repeatedly towards a particular victim who is unable to defend himself or herself. The victim may be less strong or psychologically confident. The bully intends to inflict harm on the victim. Certain features are similar across different countries. For example, there are sex differences with boys reporting more physical bullying and girls reporting more relational bullying. The study of bullying dates back from the 1970s with the work of Dan Olweus in the Scandinavian countries. In the 1980s, there was interest in Japan with the concept of Ijime, a term similar to bullying. In the 1990s, interest in bullying has spread to Europe, Canada, and the U.S. The increase of young people who have completed suicide and media interest has generated research interest amongst many countries.

France: In an increasing number of schools school bullying offenses have increased and are often committed by younger people. In France, the concept of school bullying is different from the United States. The French term violence has a much wider scope; school bullying mainly refers to faits de violence. Violence is defined by the French Penal Code. School bullying includes all the different kinds of misuse of power (crimes and offenses against people or against personal or school property), all the kinds of violence of the school, and all minor but frequent kinds of incivilities which disturb classroom atmospheres (impoliteness, noise, disorder, etc.). From 1988 to 1992, France had increases in racketeering, intimidation to get money, or to get someone to do tasks for you. Girls are less likely to be bullies or victims. Interventions should focus on the training of school personnel to solve conflicts and negotiate and the cohesion of the staff to build up a positive school climate.

Bullying involves an imbalance of strength, physical or psychological, a negative physical or verbal action, a deliberate intention to hurt someone else, and repetition over time.

Method: 546 children in grades five through eight participated in this study. A shortened version of the bully/victim questionnaire used by Olweus (1989) was used in this study. Two items were used for the bullying scale, “how often have you taken part in bullying others since the beginning of the term?’’ and “how often have you taken part in bullying others in the last five days?’’

Two items were used for the victimization scale, “how often have you been bullied since the beginning of the school term” and “about how many times have you been bullied in the last five days?’’ A classroom discussion and a definition from Olweus (1989) occurred prior to completing the survey. Social Anxiety was measured using 18 items from the Franke & Hymel (1984) Social Anxiety Scale. The Children’s Depression Inventory (Kovacs, 1985) was utilized to describe 26 depressive behaviors. The English version of the relational aggression and victimization scale (RAVS) (Lagerspetz et al., 1988) consisted of six scales assessing physical, verbal, and indirect aggression and victimization.

Results: Male bullies and bully/victims in the younger grades reported more physical aggression than comparison children. For males in the older grades, bullies reported more physical aggression than comparison children. For females in the older grades, bullies and victims reported more physical aggression than comparison children. Male bully/victims in the younger grades reported more verbal aggression than comparison children. For males in the older grades, bullies and victims reported more verbal aggression than comparison children. For females in the older grades, bullies and bully/victims reported more verbal aggression than comparison children. Males scored higher on physical aggression, and older children scored higher on verbal aggression. Females in the lower grades scored higher on depression and anxiety than males in the lower grades. Victims reported significantly higher anxiety than bullies and comparison children. Older children reported more depression than younger children.

Discussion: Male bullies reported more physical aggression than the comparison group. Male bully/victims in the younger grades reported more physical and verbal aggression than the comparison group. Male bullies and victims in the older grades reported more verbal aggression. In the older grades, female bullies reported more physical and verbal aggression than the comparison group.

A sample of roughly 400 adolescents from middle schools and high schools in the United States participated in this study. To assess the effects of bullying, two measures were used. The first was a 6-item measure that focused on physical and verbal harassment. Respondents indicated how often during the prior 12 months they were (a) the target of lies or rumors; (b) the target of attempts to get others to dislike them; (c) called names, made fun of, or teased in a hurtful way; (d) hit, kicked, or pushed by another student; (e) physically threatened by other students; and (f) picked on by others. The second measure was a 3-item scale that focused on cyberbullying. Respondents were asked to indicate how frequently during the previous 12 months they were (a) the target of “mean” text messages; (b) sent threatening or hurtful statements or pictures in an e-mail or text message; and (c) made fun of on the Internet. Externalizing delinquency was measured with a 5-item scale of offending during the prior 12 months. Respondents indicated how often they had (a) stolen something worth less than $50; (b) stolen something worth more than $50; (c) damaged, destroyed, or tagged property that did not belong to them; (d) entered a building or house without permission from the owner; and (e) hit, kicked, or struck someone with the idea of seriously hurting them. Two measures of internalizing behavior were used; the first was a measure of suicidal ideation in which respondents were asked how often “you think about killing yourself.” Self-harm was measured by asking respondents how often “you purposely hurt yourself without wanting to die,” with “cutting or burning” offered as examples.

Results: Cyber bullying had modestly higher effects than traditional bullying. For both types of bullying the effects were higher on self-harm and suicidal ideation than on delinquency. For traditional bullying, for example, the effect on suicidal ideation was nearly 80% higher than the effect on delinquency. The pattern was less extreme but still true for cyber bullying, which had an effect on suicidal ideation that was 24% higher than its effect on delinquency. The effects of cyber bullying on self-harm and suicidal ideation were significantly greater for males.

Cyberbullying is the use of electronic communication devices to bully others.

Method: A total of 264 grade seven Canadian students completed a questionnaire created by the author. It included a total of 22 questions which collected information from two major areas: students’ demographic information and their experience related to cyberbullying.

Results: One in three adolescents was a cybervictim; one in five was a cyberbully. Males, compared to their female counterparts, were more likely to be cyberbullies. A student being cyberbullied was positively related to bullying.

Discussion: One important characteristic of cyberbullying is anonymity. In this study, close to half of the cyber victims did not even know who cyberbullied them. Educating cyber victims and bystanders may provide some key strategies in combating cyberbullying. Engagement in traditional bullying is a very strong predictor for both cyberbullying and cyber victimization.

Cyberbullying is bullying through the use of electronic communications; it can be characterized by aggressive, repeated, and intentional acts that involve an imbalance of power between the bully and victim. It can be transmitted anonymously.

Method: Participants included hundreds of 5th and 6th grade Canadian students. To assess cyberbullying, participants reported the frequency of engagement in the past 30 days on a 5-point scale (0=never, 1=once or twice, 2= a few times, 3= many times, 4= every day) for four behaviors (“Have you ever sent someone a text message on your cellphone to make them angry or to make fun of them?’’; “Have you posted something online about someone else to make other people laugh?”; “Have you started a rumor online about another person?’’; and “Have you posted or shared a picture of someone that they wouldn’t want everyone to see?’’) To assess cyberbullying victims, participants reported the frequency of experiences in the past 30 days on a 5-point scale for four experiences (“Have you received a text message on your cellphone that made you upset or uncomfortable?’’; “Has someone posted something on your online page or wall that made you upset or uncomfortable?’’; “Have you been afraid to go online?’’; Has anyone posted or shared a message about you online that you didn’t want others to see?’’). Peer victimization was assessed using the Social Experience Questionnaire (Crick & Grotpeter, 1996). Five items asked participants about relational victimization and five items asked about physical victimization. Physical bullying behavior was assessed using the Early School Behavior Rating Scale for teachers (Caldwell & Pianta, 1991) and the Behavior Assessment System for Children for parents (Reynolds & Kamphaus, 2004).

Results: Cyberbullying and victimization were positively correlated with physical and relational victimization. Bullying was positively associated with cyberbullying and victimization. Cyberbullying behaviors were more frequent for 6th grade students compared with 5th grade students. More than one fourth of students reported cyberbullying victimization experiences. Cyberbullying victimization was more frequent for 6th grade students compared with 5th grade students. Girls were more likely to report cyberbullying victimization experiences compared with boys.

Discussion: Rates of cyber victimization were higher for girls. Cyberbullying behaviors and experiences were greater for older children. Education and understanding how others may be affected by their behavior may help reduce cyberbullying.

Among youth who experienced traditional harassment in the past several months, about 18% also experienced cyber-victimization during that time and among cyber victims, about 95% had experienced traditional victimization (Wang, Iannotti, Luk, & Nansel, 2010).

Method: Telephone interviews with a sample of 791 youth in the United States ages 10–20 were conducted as part of the Technology Harassment Victimization (THV) Study. Interviewers read the following statement before asking questions about harassment: Now I am going to ask you about some mean things that some people do to others. We are not talking about things done in a joking way. For now, I am only going to ask you about things that happen online, or that involve the Internet or a cell phone in some way. When we say online, this could include things like pictures or videos posted online or through text messages, comments made about you online or through text messages or on social networking sites. The types of things I want you to think about are: When kids call someone mean names, make fun of them, or tease them in a hurtful way; when kids exclude or ignore someone, or get others to turn against them; when kids spread false rumors about someone, or share something that was meant to be private (like something they wrote or a picture of them) as a way to make trouble for them; or when kids hit, kick, push, shove or threaten to hurt someone. Think about the past year and only about incidents involving the Internet or a cell phone in some way. Did anyone other than a family member do something like this to you? If respondents said yes, they were asked “Did something like this happen more than once in the past year?” Interviewers then asked all youth about harassment incidents that did not involve technology, using the same preamble and format but specifying, “Now I am going to ask you about some mean things that some people do to others that do not happen online, or involve the Internet or a cell phone in any way.” Interviewers also asked youth about the perpetrator of the harassment (e.g., number of perpetrators, age, gender, relationship to respondent), duration and location of the event, and type of harassment. Youth were asked a series of questions aimed at assessing the emotional impact of the bullying; they were asked whether the incident made them feel upset, afraid, embarrassed, worried, angry, sad, or unsafe.

Results: Thirty-four percent of youth reported harassment incidents in the past year. 54% of incidents involved no technology (in-person only), 15% involved only technology (technology only), and 31% involved both technology and in-person elements (mixed incidents). Youth reporting in-person– only incidents were significantly younger than those in the other two categories and more likely to be boys. Technology-only incidents involved similar proportions of boys and girls, with more girls in mixed incidents. Almost half of all harassment incidents involved two or more perpetrators and sixty-five percent of perpetrators were male. Technology-only incidents were less likely than in-person– only incidents to result in injury, involve a social power differential, and occur a series of times. Mixed episodes were more likely than technology-only episodes to happen a series of times, last for one month or longer, and involve physical injury. Compared with in-person incidents, technology-only incidents were less likely to involve multiple episodes and power imbalances. They were seen by victims as easier to stop and had significantly less emotional impact. Mixed incidents had the most emotional impact.

Discussion: Victims of mixed harassment were the least likely to say they could get away or remove themselves from the situation quickly; this could be related to the fact that they were being victimized across multiple environments. Perpetrators of mixed incidents were also more intimately connected to victims as current or past friends and romantic partners. The results suggest that those seeking to prevent the most detrimental forms of bullying should focus less on cyberbullying and instead focus on traditional bullying and victims of mixed incidents.

Cyberbullying: Cyberbullying is one of the online risks youth face and the one they are most likely to encounter more often from someone they know than from a stranger (Kowalski et at., 2012a).

Comparing face-to-face bullying with cyberbullying: Olweus (1993, 1999) defines bullying as intentional harm to a victim, a repetition of harmful behaviors, and a power imbalance between the victim and the perpetrator(s) of the bullying behavior. Traditional bullying and cyberbullying both may cause considerable distress to the victims, often result in part from a lack of supervision, and usually start at school and have an impact on the school day (Agatston et al., 2012; Cassidy et al., 2011; Cassidy, Jackson, & Brown, 2009; Hinduja & Patchin, 2012a, 2012b; Kowalski et al., 2012a; Olweus, 2012a;Tokunaga, 2010). Cyberbullying has been referred to as covert psychological bullying (Sharitf & Gouin, 2005). Rumors, gossip, exclusion, and attacks against reputations and relationships are common forms of both relational aggression and cyberbullying (Jackson, Cassidy, & Brown, 2009b). In cyberbullying, there is no capacity for the perpetrator to see the victim's immediate reaction to his or her behavior (Smith, 2012b. This allows for disinhibition and deindividuation (Agatston et at., 2012; Davis & Nixon, 2012; Patchin & Hinduja, 2011; von Marees & Petermann, 2012). There is also the possibility of anonymity in cyberbullying. While anonymous messages may be perceived as more threatening and more fear- and anxiety-inducing, cyberbullying by known and/or trusted persons can also be very damaging (Dooley et al., 2009; Nocentini et al., 2010). Girls may be more involved as both victims and perpetrators in cyberbullying. The definition of cyberbullying which appears to have the greatest degree of adherence is that of Smith and his colleagues (2008, p. 376): 'an aggressive, intentional act carried out by a group or individual, using electronic forms of contact, repeatedly and over time against a victim who cannot easily defend him or herself.

Varieties of impact (On the victim): Some effects of cyberbullying are depression, poor self-esteem, anxiety, suicidal ideation and psychosomatic problems like headaches and sleep disturbances' (Olweus, 2012a, p. 532; see also Kowalski et al., 2012b; Menesini & Nocentini, 2012; Smith 2012b). Some research participants view cyberbullying worse than traditional bullying, whereas some find them equally as deleterious (Kowalski et al., 2012a; Menesini & Nocentini, 2012; Monks, Robinson, & Worlidge, 2012; Sakellariou, Carroll, & Houghton, 2012; Smith, 2012a, 2012b; Smith & Slonje, 2010). Some feel anonymous messages are worse than those from someone you know however others argue that being cyberbullied by someone you know is more damaging. The breadth of the potential audience in cyberbullying can also act to aggravate the victims' feelings of humiliation (Menesini & Nocentini, 2012; Nocentini et al., 2010). Cyberbullying can result in reduced concentration, school avoidance, increased school absences, isolation, lower academic achievement, negative perceptions of school climate, not feeling safe at school, and a greater likelihood for carrying weapons to school (Hinduja & Patchin, 2007; 2008; Marczak & Coyne, 2010; Ybarra, Diener-West, & Leaf, 2007). There also have been many effects of cyberbullying on the mental health of victims, including depression, low self-esteem, helplessness, social anxiety, and suicidal ideation (Agatston et al., 2012; Kowalski et al., 2012a; Marczak & Coyne, 2010; Menesini & Nocentini, 2012; Patchin & Hinduja, 2012a; Smith, 2012b; Sourander et al., 2010; Tokunaga, 2010; von Marees & Petermann, 2012). There is also research linking cyberbullying victimization to maladaptive behaviours such as aggressive behaviour, externalizing behaviours, deviant behaviours, more alcohol and drug use/abuse and smoking, and delinquency (shoplifting, property damage, physical assaults, weapons) (Agatston et al., 2012; Marczak & Coyne, 2010; Menesini & Nocentini, 2012; Patchin & Hinduja, 2012a; Sourander et al., 2010). Girls reported with greater frequency that they felt their reputation was affected by the cyberbullying they experienced, that their concentration was affected, that it influenced their ability to make friends, and that it induced suicidal thoughts.

Varieties of impact (On the bully): Cyberbullying is associated with hyperactive behavior, conduct problems, and less prosocial peer group behavior (von Marees & Petermann, 2012). Cyberbullies are more likely to report illicit substance use and participation in delinquent behaviour (Hinduja & Patchin, 2008; Ybarra & Mitchell, 2004).Campbell, Slee, Spears, Butler, and Kift (2013) found that cyberbullies had higher rates of social difficulties, stress, depression, and anxiety than youths uninvolved in bullying.

Coping strategies (for victims): According to Perren et al. (2012), social support is probably the coping strategy with the best indicators of success.

Coping strategies (for schools): Middle and high school students have recommended the development of programs to teach about cyberbullying and its effects (Cassidy et at., 2011). In a related study (Cassidy, Brown, & Jackson, 2012a), parents also strongly recommended that school personnel develop lessons on cyberbullying and its effects and that students be given the opportunity to engage with the issues through discussion. Additionally, the curriculum should include an emphasis on fostering empathy and positive self-esteem. Positive bystander behavior should be taught and reinforced (Agatston et al., 2012). Jager et al. (2010) suggest that a training manual for educators include information about the basics of cyberbullying, information about training skills and strategies for diagnosis and intervention, and multimedia resources. It is recommended that schools find ways to make reporting easier (Agatston et al., 2012; Marczak & Coyne, 2010). Youth are more inclined to report to adults in schools with a positive climate (Hinduja & Patchin, 2012b).

Coping strategies (for parents): Patchin (2012) states that parents should be involved and receive training alongside educators to be able to work collaboratively with school personnel and their children to find effective solutions.

Role of educators In relation to cyberbullying: Psychological service providers must inform themselves about the issues youth face in relation to cyberbullying and consult with parents, staff, and other care-takers. Hinduja and Patchin (2012b) suggest that cyberbullying can be reduced through measures aimed at improving school climate such as learning students' names so they do not feel anonymous, community-building through recognizing and rewarding good behavior, staying technologically-contemporary to know what students are interested in, setting and communicating clear limits, encouraging student participation in decision-making, and encouraging reporting of inappropriate behaviors.

Role of students in relation to cyberbullying: Peer-led interventions have been found to be effective, especially when the peers receive extensive training (Agatston et al., 2012; Cross, Campbell, & Spears, 2012a; Menesini & Nocentini, 2012; Van Kaenel-Flatt & Douglas, 2012).

Results from studies conducted in the USA and Canada have shown that homophobic bullying is widespread among sexual minority youths. Up to 87% of lesbian, gay, bisexual, trans identified, or questioning (LGBTQ) youths have been victims of at least one form of homophobic bullying. Although homophobic bullying can take various forms (e.g. psychological or verbal, physical, sexual, etc.), some studies have suggested that psychological or verbal bullying is the most common form of homophobic bullying. Among LGBQ senior high school students, humiliation and/or teasing, damage to reputation, and exclusion and/or rejection are the three most common forms of homophobic bullying. Many studies suggest that sexual minority boys are more likely to report verbal homophobic bullying compared to their female counterparts. As they get older, youths tend to report lower rates of both physical and verbal homophobic bullying. As a consequence of bullying, youths may experience a feeling of exclusion and a deterioration of their perceived relational value, resulting in lower self-esteem. LGBT reporting homophobic bullying are more likely to report lower self-esteem. Lower self-esteem has been associated to physical dating violence victimization among males, suicidal ideation, suicidal attempt, and criminal convictions.

Method: Data for this study was drawn from the Quebec Youths’ Romantic Relationships survey. This survey was given to 300 youths aged 14 to 22 through a web-based survey targeting Quebec LGBTQ youths. Trans identity was defined using the following item: When their sex at birth and their gender identity (sense of belonging to one sex) do not match. Psychological/verbal homophobic bullying was based on the Chamberland et al. study. The question was: During the last 6 months, how frequently did you experience the following situations because people think that you might be gay/lesbian/bisexual or trans or because you are gay/lesbian/bisexual or trans? Three forms of homophobic bullying were covered: exclusion and rejection, humiliation, and damage to the reputation. Self-esteem was evaluated with four items from the Self-Description Questionnaire. Participants had to choose the answer that best describes how they feel concerning the following statements: Overall, I have a lot to be proud of, in general, I like myself the way I am, I like the way I look, and when I do something, I do it well. Response options were: False (0), mostly false (1), sometimes false/sometimes true (2), mostly true (3), and true (4). Internalized homophobia was measured with four items from the Lesbian, Gay, and Bisexual Identity Scale. The four items were: I would rather be straight if I could, I wish I were heterosexual, I am glad to be an LGB person, and my life would be more fulfilling if I were heterosexual. The response options were: strongly disagree (1), disagree (2), somewhat disagree (3), somewhat agree (4), agree (5), strongly agree (6).

Results: 73.7% of the participants described themselves as homosexual, 15.3% as bisexual, 7.7% as predominantly heterosexual attraction, and 3.3% as unsure. 13% of the participants identified themselves as transgender. About half of the participants suffered from damage to reputation or reported at least one episode of humiliation, and a third has felt excluded or rejected. Sixty-one percent of the sample reported at least one form of verbal/psychological homophobic bullying. Among youths who reported at least one episode of homophobic bullying, 7.6 to 11.2% indicated that they were “often” or “always” victimized. The model explained 29% of the variance of self-esteem, 19.6% of the variance of internalized homophobia and only 5.3% of the homophobic bullying. The total effect of homophobic bullying on self-esteem was negative and significant. The model suggests that the relationship between homophobic bullying and self-esteem is partially mediated by internalized homophobia among sexual minority youths. Internalized homophobia was higher among women and trans identified compared to men.

Discussion: Homophobic bullying impacts self-esteem both directly and indirectly through internalized homophobia. Homophobic bullying is likely to generate a general signal of rejection and of threat regarding one’s relational value and thus decreases self-esteem, independently of the internalization of the homophobic stigma. Youths who were bullied because of sexual minority status may have interpreted prejudices as signs of societal disapproval and condemnation of sexual minority behaviors, thus internalizing the anti- LGBTQ stigma.

According to Olweus (1989), “a student is being bullied or victimized when he or she is exposed, repeatedly and over time, to negative actions on the part of one or more students.” Bullying has three specific characteristics: frequency, the intention to hurt, and an asymmetric relationship between the bully and the victim. This kind of aggression can be direct or indirect; it can be expressed in words, physical contact or by way of social relations (Berkowitz, 1993; Dodge & Coie, 1987; Olweus, 1984; Smith & Sharp, 1994). Victims of bullying are generally unpopular among peers, are more anxiety-ridden and unstable, and display little self-confidence (Craig, 1997; Kahtri, Kupersmidt, & Patterson, 2000; Olweus, 1989; Perry, Kusel, & Perry, 1988; Slee, 1995). High scores on certain victimization scales are often associated with low scores in scholastic competence, social acceptance, athletic competence, physical appearance, and global self-worth (Andreou, 2000; Boulton & Smith, 1994). Victims tend to have more negative self-concepts than individuals in the other two groups involved in bullying (Boulton & Underwood, 1992; Largerspets, Björkqvist, Berts, & King, 1982; Olweus, 1978, 1984). Rigby (1999) showed that severe victimization was often associated with poor physical health; victims were found to suffer more from sleep disorders, bedwetting, headaches, stomachaches, and feeling unhappy (Williams, Chambers, Logan, & Robinson, 1996). Boys tended to have more headaches and backaches, and to be more irritable than girls, who were more nervous and had more sleep disorders. The number of symptoms appears to be dependent on the social support provided by the teacher for girls and by peers for boys. Bully victims obtain high scores on neurotic and psychotic scales, are at the bottom of the social acceptance ranking (Mynard & Joseph, 1997), and are rejected by peers (Bower, Smith, & Binney, 1992). Studies have shown that children who play a bully/victim or bully “role” are subject to hyperactivity and manifest many externalization behaviors – extraversion, inability to sit still, need to shout, etc. By contrast, victims exhibit mainly internalization behaviors – withdrawal, introversion, etc. (Kumpulainen et al., 1998; Laukkanen, Shemeikka, Notkola, Koivumaa-Honkanen, & Nissinen, 2002). If children exhibit behavioral problems at the age of 8, then they are 1.9 times more likely to drink alcohol and twice as likely to smoke or take drugs (Lynskey & Ferguson, 1995).

Method (Study 1): The sample was composed of 116 pupils ages 9 to 12 in fourth or fifth grade from schools in France. Harter’s (1982) Self-Perception Profile for Children (SPPC) was administered; the areas covered are school, social competence, athletic competence, appearance, conduct, and global self-worth. The second questionnaire included two subscales, the “Peer Victimization Scale” and the “Bullying Behavior Scale”, published by Austin and Joseph (1996). Each subscale is composed of six items scored on a four-point scale. The child had to pick which group of children he/she resembled the most. Before filling in the questionnaires, the children were given a definition of bullying: “We say a pupil is being bullied, or picked on, when another pupil, or group of pupils, say nasty and unpleasant things to him or her. It is also bullying when a pupil is hit, kicked, threatened, locked inside a room, sent nasty notes, when no one ever talks to them or things like that. These things can happen frequently, and it is difficult for the pupil being bullied to defend himself or herself. It is also bullying when a pupil is teased repeatedly in a nasty way. But it is not bullying when two pupils of about the same strength have the odd fight or quarrel (Piers, 1984).”

Results (Study 1): 38.8% of the pupils were involved in bullying; victims were the most numerous (15.52%), followed by bullies (12.93%) and then children who were both victims and bullies (10.34%). Girls were less involved in bullying than boys, and most of the involved girls were victims. Boys primarily played the “role” of aggressor. Bully/victims obtained the lowest scores on dimensions related to self-control, social competence, physical appearance, and global self-worth. Concerning the victims, they obtained higher scores than the bully/victims but lower ones than the bullies. Concerning the bullies, they were the ones who had the best self-concepts, the highest opinions of their physical appearance, and the most global self-worth.

Discussion (Study 1): Bullying is likely to affect a pupil’s identity on both the cognitive (self-concept) and affective (self-worth) levels.

Method (Study 2): The sample was composed of 291 subjects, 148 fourth graders and 143 fifth graders. The pupils ranged in age between 9 and 12 and were attending schools in France. A 44-itme psychosomatic symptom scale was utilized to assess cognitive difficulties (trouble concentrating, memory problems), neurovegetative disorders, part 1 (dizziness, vision problems, tingling sensations), sleep disorders, digestive disorders, neurovegetative disorders, part 2 (heart palpitations, trouble breathing), somatic pain, eating disorders, skin conditions (itching, pimples), vegetative symptoms and dysuria (dry mouth, perspiration, feeling tense), and diarrhea and constipation. Each item was scored on a scale ranging from 0 (never) to 4 (every day). The Inventory of youth behavioral problems was utilized. The social-competence scale includes an activity subscale, a social subscale, and a school subscale. The behavioral-problem scale consists of 119 forced-choice items to which the child has to answer “not true” (0), “somewhat or sometimes true” (1), or “very true or often true” (2).

Results (Study 2): 48.8% of the children were involved in bullying. For the set of all children involved in bullying, 60% had more than 15 symptoms. Among these, 78% were bully/victims, 68% were victims, and 40% were bullies. Pupils who were victims and bullies obtained the highest score on every dimension (except for cognitive problems, where victims scored higher). Victims had higher means than bullies in all other areas except digestive and neurovegetative disorders part 2. The lowest score on the social dimension was obtained by the bully/victims, and the highest score by the bullies. The bully/victims gave themselves the highest mean rating on behavioral problem. The more behavioral problems the children had, the greater the number and frequency of psychosomatic problems. We also found a negative link with the social dimension: the lower the social score, the greater the psychosomatic symptoms.

Discussion (Study 2): Bullies had low scholastic competence. Many studies have found a positive link between failure in school and aggressive behavior (Baranger, 1999; Dornbush, Mounts, Lamborn, & Steinberg, 1991).

Discussion: Bully/victims seem were the most highly affected (mainly by neurovegetative disorders, digestive problems, somatic pain, and skin conditions). Victims, on the other hand, seem to suffer in particular from cognitive difficulties; bullies have digestive and neurovegetative disorders.

Bullying is a specific type of aggression in which (1) the behavior is intended to harm or disturb, (2) the behavior occurs repeatedly over time, and (3) there is an imbalance of power, with a more powerful person or group attacking a less powerful one. This asymmetry of power may be physical or psychological, and the aggressive behavior may be verbal, physical, or psychological. Bullies and those bullied demonstrate poorer psychosocial functioning than their noninvolved peers. Youth who bully others tend to demonstrate higher levels of conduct problems and dislike of school, whereas youth who are bullied generally show higher levels of insecurity, anxiety, depression, loneliness, unhappiness, and low self-esteem.

Method: The Health Behavior of School-aged Children (HBSC) was utilized by 15,686 students in grades 6 through 10. Questions about bullying were preceded with the following explanation. We say a student is being bullied when another student, or a group of students, say or do nasty and unpleasant things to him or her. It is also bullying when a student is teased repeatedly in a way he or she doesn’t like. But it is not bullying when two students of about the same strength quarrel or fight. Participation in bullying was assessed by two parallel questions that asked respondents to report the frequency with which they bullied others/being bullied in school and away from school during the current term. Response categories were “I haven’t …,” “once or twice,” “sometimes,” “about once a week,” and “several times a week.” Additional questions asked respondents to report the frequency with which they were bullied in each of 5ways—belittled about religion/race, belittled about looks/speech, hit/slapped/pushed, subject of rumors or lies, and subject of sexual comments/gestures. Measures of psychosocial adjustment included questions about problem behaviors, social/emotional well-being, and parental influences. Alcohol use was measured by three items. The frequency of smoking, fighting, and truancy were assessed by one item each. Academic achievement was assessed by an item querying perceived school performance. Three items queried the frequency of feeling lonely, feeling left out, and being alone because others at school did not want to spend time with the person. One item assessed ease of making friends. Three items were used to assess relationship with classmates: “enjoy being together,” “are kind and helpful,” and “accept me.” School climate was measured by seven items related to the respondent’s perception of the school and teachers. Three items measured parental involvement in school, and one item assessed respondents’ perceptions about their parents’ attitudes toward teen drinking.

Results: 10.6% of the sample reported bullying others “sometimes” (moderate bullying) and 8.8% admitted to bullying others once a week or more (frequent bullying). Experiencing bullying was reported with similar frequency with 8.5% bullied “sometimes” and 8.4% bullied once a week or more. 29.9% reported some type of involvement in moderate or frequent bullying, as a bully (13.0%), a target of bullying (10.6%), or both (6.3%). Males bullied others and were bullied significantly more often than females. The frequency of bullying was higher among 6th through 8th-grade students than among 9th- and 10th-grade students. Hispanic youth reported marginally higher involvement in moderate and frequent bullying of others, whereas black youth reported being bullied with significantly less frequency overall. Males reported being bullied by being hit, slapped, or pushed more frequently than did females. Females more frequently reported being bullied through rumors or sexual comments. Being bullied through negative statements about one’s religion or race occurred with the lowest frequency for both sexes. Anyone involved in bullying demonstrated poorer psychosocial adjustment than noninvolved youth. Fighting was positively associated with all 3 outcomes. Alcohol use was positively associated with bullying and negatively associated with being bullied. Smoking and poorer academic achievement were associated with both bullying and bullying/being bullied; poorer perceived school climate was related only to bullying. Poorer relationships with classmates and increased loneliness, on the other hand, were associated with both being bullied and bullying/being bullied. Ability to make friends was negatively related to being bullied and positively related to bullying. A permissive parental attitude toward teen drinking was associated only with bullying/being bullied, while increased parental involvement in school was related to being bullied and bullying/being bullied.

Discussion: Verbal bullying through derogatory statements about one’s religion or race occurred infrequently for both sexes. This finding may reflect stronger social norms among adolescents against such behavior. That is, it may be more socially acceptable for a youth to taunt peers about their appearance than to make derogatory racial statements. Youth who are socially isolated and lack social skills may be more likely targets for being bullied. This is consonant with the finding by Hoover and colleagues that the most frequent reason cited by youth for persons being bullied is that they “didn’t fit in.” At the same time, youth who are bullied may well be avoided by other youth, for fear of being bullied themselves or losing social status among their peers. Those youth who reported both bullying and being bullied demonstrated poorer adjustment across both social/emotional dimensions and problem behaviors. Olweus found former bullies to have a 4-fold increase in criminal behavior at the age of 24 years, with 60% of former bullies having at least 1 conviction and 35% to 40% having 3 or more convictions. Conversely, individuals formerly bullied were found to have higher levels of depression and poorer self-esteem at the age of 23 years.

School bullying has been identified as a problematic behavior among adolescents, affecting school achievement, prosocial skills, and psychological well-being for both victims and perpetrators. Bullying is usually defined as a specific form of aggression, which is intentional, repeated, and involves a disparity of power between the victim and perpetrators. Previous studies have found that boys have a higher prevalence of bullying perpetration than girls and bullying behavior tends to peak in middle school and then decrease. In a nationally-representative sample of adolescents in the United States, Nansel and colleagues reported that the prevalence of frequent involvement in school bullying in the past 2 months was 29.9%, which included 13.0% as bullies, 10.6% as victims, and 6.3% as both. In the U.S. sample, compared to Caucasian adolescents, Hispanic adolescents were involved in more frequent bullying perpetration, while African-American adolescents were less likely to be bullied. Adolescent bullying may take many forms, such as physical, verbal, and relational or social. Physical bullying and verbal bullying are considered to be direct, while relational bullying refers to an indirect form of bullying, such as social exclusion and spreading rumors. Boys are more involved in direct bullying, while girls are more involved in indirect bullying. Cyber bullying is emerging as a new form of bullying. Cyber bulling can be defined as a form of aggression that occurs through personal computers or cell phones. Kowalski and Limber reported that among their sample of middle school students in the United States, 22% reported involvement in cyber bullying, including 4% as bullies, 11% as victims, and 7% as both. In a study of Canadian adolescents in 7th grade, boys were more likely to be cyber bullies than girls. Previous studies showed that positive parental practices, such as parental warmth or support, could protect adolescents from involvement in bullying perpetration and victimization.

Method: Self-report data on bullying were collected from 7,508 adolescents in the 2005/2006 Health Behavior in School-aged Children (HBSC) study in the United States. The items assessing physical, verbal, and relational bullying were based on the Olweus Bully/Victim Questionnaire. For each item, two parallel questions asked how often participants had either bullied others or been bullied in the past 2 months at school. Two new items were added using the same format to measure cyber bully/victim. Physical bullying was measured by one item - hitting, kicking, pushing, shoving around, or locking indoors. Verbal bullying was measured by three items - calling mean names, making fun of, or teasing in a hurtful way; calling mean names about race; and calling mean names about religion. Relational bullying was measured by two items - socially excluding others; and spreading rumors. Cyber bullying was measured by two items - “bullying using a computer or email messages or pictures”; and “bullying using a cell phone”. Response options were “none”, “only once or twice”, “2 or 3 times a month”, “about once a week”, and “several times a week”. Parental support was measured by four items from the Parental Bonding Instrument, which were included in the HBSC survey. The students were asked if their parent or guardian 1) helps them as much as they needed; 2) is loving; 3) understands their problems and worries; and 4) makes them feel better when they were upset. Response options were “almost never”, “sometimes”, and “almost always’. Two items asked about how many male or female friends the student had. Response options ranged from “0” to “3 or more”.

Results: At the item level, the two most common types of bullying behaviors were calling someone mean names and social isolation. The two most common types of victimization were being called mean names and having rumors spread about them. 13.3% reported that they had bullied others at least once in the last 2 months physically, 37.4% verbally, 27.2% socially, and 8.3% electronically. The prevalence rates of victimization were 12.8% for physical, 36.5% for verbal, 41.0% for relational, and 9.8% for cyber forms. Compared to girls, boys were likely to be more involved in physical and verbal forms. For cyber bullying, boys were more likely to be bullies, whereas girls were more likely to be victims. Compared to 6th graders, 9th/ 10th graders were less involved in bullying for all types of bullying. Compared to Caucasian adolescents, African-American adolescents were more involved in bullying perpetration but less involved in victimization. Hispanic adolescents were more likely to be physical bullies or cyber bully-victims. Adolescents from more affluent families were less likely to be physical victims but more likely to be cyber victims. Higher parental support was negatively associated with involvement in bullying across all four forms. Number of friends was related to involvement in all three traditional forms but was not related to cyber bullying. For physical, verbal, and relational bullying, adolescents with more friends were more likely to be bullies but less likely to be victims.

Discussion: The negative relations between having more friends and victimization in physical, verbal, and relational forms supports the “friendship protection hypothesis” suggesting that friendship protects adolescents from being selected as targets of bullies. The positive relation between having more friends and bullying reflects a need among adolescents to establish social status, especially during transition into a new group, and may explain the peaking of prevalence rates of bullying in all four forms during 7th grade or 8th grade, a period of transition to middle school. Results indicate that cyber bullying has a distinct nature from traditional bullying.

LGB youths have higher odds of reporting suicidal thoughts, plans, and attempts; studies show that when youths attend schools with cultures that are more likely to stigmatize LGB youths, their mental health outcomes are worse. Of the gay, lesbian, bisexual, or transgender 6th- to 12th-grade students from the 2011 National School Climate Survey of the Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network, 55% reported some form of electronic harassment. Additionally, estimates indicate that between 80% and 91% of LGBT students reported being the victim of name calling and verbal harassment in the school setting, and at least 40% have been physically harassed. Whether the harassment is online or in person does not change the negative effects victimization can have on adolescents’ mental health. Youths who are bullied are more likely to report depression, low self-esteem, poor school performance, and suicide attempts. Previous research suggests that males are more likely than females to report being bullied and that white adolescents are more likely than black adolescents to report being bullied. The Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network 2011 National School Climate Survey found that Black LGBT students were less likely to report physical or verbal harassment because of their sexuality than their white, Hispanic, or multiracial LGBT peers. Hispanic LGBT youths appear to experience equally levels of harassment with their white peers: 62% of Hispanic LGBT youths felt unsafe at school because of their sexual orientation compared with 65% of white LGBT youths. In terms of gender differences, Russell et al. (2014) found that bisexual boys reported more experiences of victimization than did other groups of sexual minority and majority youths. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC) recent report found that female adolescents report suicide ideation, plans, and attempts more frequently than male adolescents do. Hispanic females have the highest prevalence of suicide attempts (17.6%) followed by black females (13.9%) and white females (13.7%). This study examines how race/ethnicity, gender, and sexual orientation shape adolescents’ likelihood of being bullied and vulnerability to suicide ideation.

Method: This study used state and local data from the 2009 and 2011 Youth Risk Behavior Survey to assess race/ethnicity, gender, and sexual orientation variation in being bullied and suicide ideation. To assess suicide ideation, adolescents were asked, “During the past 12 months, did you ever seriously consider attempting suicide?” Bullying was represented in two contexts, school and Internet. “During the past 12 months, have you been bullied on school property?” and “During the past 12 months, have you ever been electronically bullied?” were used to assess bullying. Sexual orientation was assessed with the following question: “Which of the following best describes you?” Results included “heterosexual,” “gay or lesbian,” “bisexual,” and “not sure.” Respondents were also asked to identify their race; the researchers constructed three categories: non-Hispanic White, non-Hispanic Black, and Hispanic/Latino/Latina.

Results: Black and Hispanic heterosexual males were less likely than white heterosexual males to report being bullied. However, white and Hispanic gay and bisexual males were significantly more likely than white heterosexual males to report being bullied. Black and Hispanic heterosexual females were less likely than white heterosexual females to report being bullied. However, white lesbian and bisexual females and Hispanic bisexual females were more likely than their white heterosexual peers to report being bullied. Sexual minority males and females regardless of their race were significantly more likely than their white heterosexual peers to report suicidal ideation. For both males and females, being bullied significantly increased the likelihood that respondents would report suicidal ideation. Black heterosexual females were significantly more likely to report suicidal ideation than their white heterosexual peers.

Discussion: The results found imply that being bullied is associated with higher odds of suicidal ideation, regardless of an adolescent’s gender, race/ethnicity, or sexual orientation. Regardless of race/ethnicity or gender, sexual minorities are more vulnerable to poor mental health outcomes than are sexual majorities.

The survey was administered to 36,254 students in grades 7 through 12 of Minnesota public schools. The Adolescent Health Survey contained 148 (https://www.cialispascherfr24.com/) questions, which included five items pertaining to different dimensions of sexual orientation, consisting of sexual fantasy, sexual behaviors with males and females, attractions and intended behaviors, and sexual orientation self-identification. The last dimension was chosen for this study; in this question, students were asked to rate their sexual feelings on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 100% homosexual to 100% heterosexual or as unsure. The survey also included two questions pertaining to suicide risk. An original item inquired about any attempts to kill oneself in the past year or previously, and responses were coded as "ever" or "never." A second item from the Beck Depression Inventory asked about thoughts and wishes about suicide in the past month and intentions to carry them out.

Results: Bisexual/homosexual males and females had similarly high rates of reported suicide attempts and intent. Bisexual/homosexual males and females were more likely than heterosexual respondents of the same gender to report each dimension of suicidality. A bisexual/homosexual orientation in males was significantly associated with suicidal intent and suicide attempts.

Discussion: There is a need for prospective longitudinal studies to elucidate the evolving risk for both attempted and completed suicide across the lifespan of bisexual/homosexual persons. Results show that bisexuality/homosexuality is a risk factor for attempted suicide in male adolescents

Results from studies conducted in the USA and Canada have shown that homophobic bullying is widespread among sexual minority youths. Up to 87% of lesbian, gay, bisexual, trans identified, or questioning (LGBTQ) youths have been victims of at least one form of homophobic bullying. Although homophobic bullying can take various forms (e.g. psychological or verbal, physical, sexual, etc.), some studies have suggested that psychological or verbal bullying is the most common form of homophobic bullying. Among LGBQ senior high school students, humiliation and/or teasing, damage to reputation, and exclusion and/or rejection are the three most common forms of homophobic bullying. Many studies suggest that sexual minority boys are more likely to report verbal homophobic bullying compared to their female counterparts. As they get older, youths tend to report lower rates of both physical and verbal homophobic bullying. As a consequence of bullying, youths may experience a feeling of exclusion and a deterioration of their perceived relational value, resulting in lower self-esteem. LGBT reporting homophobic bullying are more likely to report lower self-esteem. Lower self-esteem has been associated to physical dating violence victimization among males, suicidal ideation, suicidal attempt, and criminal convictions.

Method: Data for this study was drawn from the Quebec Youths’ Romantic Relationships survey. This survey was given to 300 youths aged 14 to 22 through a web-based survey targeting Quebec LGBTQ youths. Trans identity was defined using the following item: When their sex at birth and their gender identity (sense of belonging to one sex) do not match. Psychological/verbal homophobic bullying was based on the Chamberland et al. study. The question was: During the last 6 months, how frequently did you experience the following situations because people think that you might be gay/lesbian/bisexual or trans or because you are gay/lesbian/bisexual or trans? Three forms of homophobic bullying were covered: exclusion and rejection, humiliation, and damage to the reputation. Self-esteem was evaluated with four items from the Self-Description Questionnaire. Participants had to choose the answer that best describes how they feel concerning the following statements: Overall, I have a lot to be proud of, in general, I like myself the way I am, I like the way I look, and when I do something, I do it well. Response options were: False (0), mostly false (1), sometimes false/sometimes true (2), mostly true (3), and true (4). Internalized homophobia was measured with four items from the Lesbian, Gay, and Bisexual Identity Scale. The four items were: I would rather be straight if I could, I wish I were heterosexual, I am glad to be an LGB person, and my life would be more fulfilling if I were heterosexual. The response options were: strongly disagree (1), disagree (2), somewhat disagree (3), somewhat agree (4), agree (5), strongly agree (6).

Results: 73.7% of the participants described themselves as homosexual, 15.3% as bisexual, 7.7% as predominantly heterosexual attraction, and 3.3% as unsure. 13% of the participants identified themselves as transgender. About half of the participants suffered from damage to reputation or reported at least one episode of humiliation, and a third has felt excluded or rejected. Sixty-one percent of the sample reported at least one form of verbal/psychological homophobic bullying. Among youths who reported at least one episode of homophobic bullying, 7.6 to 11.2% indicated that they were “often” or “always” victimized. The model explained 29% of the variance of self-esteem, 19.6% of the variance of internalized homophobia and only 5.3% of the homophobic bullying. The total effect of homophobic bullying on self-esteem was negative and significant. The model suggests that the relationship between homophobic bullying and self-esteem is partially mediated by internalized homophobia among sexual minority youths. Internalized homophobia was higher among women and trans identified compared to men.

Discussion: Homophobic bullying impacts self-esteem both directly and indirectly through internalized homophobia. Homophobic bullying is likely to generate a general signal of rejection and of threat regarding one’s relational value and thus decreases self-esteem, independently of the internalization of the homophobic stigma. Youths who were bullied because of sexual minority status may have interpreted prejudices as signs of societal disapproval and condemnation of sexual minority behaviors, thus internalizing the anti- LGBTQ stigma.

Bullying behavior is defined by three features: intent to harm the victim, a social or physical power imbalance between the bully and the victim, and repetition (Olweus, 1993). In addition, bullying can be classified into four behavioral categories: physical, verbal teasing and name calling in oral or written form, relational behaviors, such as spreading rumors to damage the victim’s reputation and relationships, and property damage, including stealing (Gladden, Vivolo-Kantor, Hamburger, & Lumpkin, 2014). For victims, repeated exposure to these forms of bullying has been associated with increased rates of depression, anxiety, loneliness, suicidal ideation, and decreased self-esteem (Juvonen, Graham, & Schuster, 2003; Kaltiala-Heino, Rimpelä, Marttunen, Rimpleä, & Rantanen, 1999; Olweus, 1993). Based on studies dating from 2001, current bullying victimization estimates for youth in middle and high school range from 10% to 28% (Nansel et al., 2001; Robers, Kemp, Truman, & Snyder, 2013; Wang, Iannotti, & Nansel, 2009). Rates are particularly high in rural areas with estimates ranging from 33% to 82% (Dulmus, Theriot, Sowers, & Blackburn, 2004; Price, Chin, Higa-McMillan, Kim, & Frueh, 2013; Stockdale, Hangaduambo, Duys, Larson, & Sarvela, 2002). Youth are often bullied for looking or acting differently than their peers, and victims are targeted for physical characteristics such as weight, size, color, or ethnicity as well as hairstyle and clothing choices (Geiger & Fischer, 2006). Bias-based bullying refers to bullying motivated by prejudice toward the victim’s real or perceived group membership (Mishna, 2012; Poteat, Mereish, DiGiovanni, & Scheer, 2013). Examples of targeted groups include racial, ethnic, and religious groups (Eslea & Mukhtar, 2000; Graham, 2006; Stein, Dukes, & Warren, 2007) as well as gender (Timmerman, 2003), disability status (Farmer et al., 2012; Rose, Espelage, & Monda-Amaya, 2009; Whitney, Smith, & Thompson, 1994), and sexual orientation (Elze, 2003; Poteat & Espelage, 2005). As compared with heterosexual youth, those who identified as being gay, lesbian, or bisexual were more likely to report they had been bullied (Berlan et al., 2010). Among a sample of males in Grades 9 through 11, those who reported they were bullied by use of gay as a verbal epithet reported worse psychological outcomes, including increased rates of depression and anxiety and more negative perceptions of school than males who were bullied by being called other names or by other means (Swearer, Turner, Givens, & Pollack, 2008).

Method: Data came from a survey administered to a sample of 3,379 elementary-, middle-, and high-school students in a rural school district in the United States. The survey consisted of 33 questions about bullying perpetration (e.g., frequency, type, and reasons) and bullying victimization (e.g., frequency, type, location, reasons, adult responses, and student responses). The first item asked participants “Have you ever been bullied at school?” Response options were never, sometimes (1 or 2 times a month), regularly (1 or 2 times a week), and every day. The second survey item asked students to describe which bullying behaviors they experienced by providing yes/no response options to 12 items: “I have been teased and called names,” “I have been hit, kicked, or punched,” “Others leave me out of groups,” “Others do not choose to sit by me or talk to me,” “Others phone me at home and say they will hurt me,” “Others phone me at home and say they will hurt my family,” “I have been called gay, lesbian, or queer,” “I have been bullied through e-mail or MySpace/Facebook,” and “I have been bullied through a cell phone/texting.” The social bullying variable comprised three items: teased/called names, others do not sit with or talk to me, and others leave me out of groups. The cyber/electronic bullying variable comprised four items: bullied on the Internet, bullied on cell phone, threatened on the phone, and family threatened on the phone. The item “I have been hit, kicked, or punched” was labeled as Physical and the item “I have been called gay, lesbian, or queer” was labeled as LGB.

Results: More than half of the sample reported never having been bullied whereas 41% reported being bullied. The most frequent form of bullying was teasing, which was reported by 39% of the sample. Social Victims consisted of students with a high probability of reporting they were bullied but a low probability of reporting either physical bullying, electronic bullying, or bullying by LGB name calling.

Discussion: The second-largest group was referred to as the Social Victims group (37%) because these youth had a high probability of reporting social victimization. The All Victims group had a high probability of reporting all forms of victimization, a 100% probability of reporting that they were bullied by being called gay, lesbian, or queer, and a 90% probability of labeling their experiences as bullying. Bullying programs are developed with the aim of addressing all forms of bullying rather than targeting biases toward particular populations that might be at greatest risk of experiencing bullying. The current research points to the need for creating comprehensive interventions with a focus on promoting acceptance of LGB youth and discouraging homophobic name calling.

Cyberbullying has become a serious health issue among youth, showing prevalence varying from 20% to 40% and exceeding 70% annually in some cases (Burton et al., 2013; Meyer, 2003; Roberto et al., 2014). Cyberbullying rates appear to be higher than the rates of other forms of bullying (Collier et al., 2013; Schneider et al., 2012). The aggressive nature of cyberbullying is associated with the fact that the bullies experience disinhibition as they are hidden behind their keyboards (Hinduja & Patchin, 2014). The uncontrollable nature of the Internet, particularly the high spread of information, can create a feeling of overexposure and make victims more vulnerable to psychological distress (Hinduja & Patchin, 2010).Previous studies have shown that sexual-minority youth(SMY),are repeatedly victims of cyberbullying (Blais et al., 2013). While sexual-minority boys are more often victims of physical bullying, sexual-minority girls are more often subjected to insults on the Internet (Chamberland et al., 2013). Victims of cyberbullying are likely to experience negative consequences such as high psychological distress, low self-esteem, depressive symptoms, suicidal ideations and suicide attempts (Bauman et al., 2013; Goebert et al., 2011; Hinduja & Patchin, 2010; Trickett, 2009). This study aims to explore the prevalence of cyberbullying, homophobic bullying and bullying at school or elsewhere and their association with psychological distress, low self-esteem and suicidal ideations for each sexual minority youth group.

Method: The Quebec Youths' Romantic Relationships Survey (QYRRS) targeted high school students in Quebec, Canada; participants were recruited through a sampling of 34 Quebec high schools. The sample included 8,194 students (56.3% were girls) aged 14-20 years. The questionnaire included measures of three different kinds of bullying occurring in the past year: cyberbullying “How many times has someone bullied you using the Internet’’, homophobic “How many times has someone bullied you because of your sexual orientation”, and bullying in school or elsewhere “How many times has someone bullied you at school or elsewhere except via the Internet”. Respondents rated each question on a 4-point-scale: Never (0), 1–2 times (1), 3–5 times (2) and 6 times or more (3). Suicidal ideations were assessed using a yes/no question: “Have you ever seriously thought of committing suicide?’’ Self-esteem was assessed using a short version of Self-Description Questionnaire (Marsh & O’Neill, 1984). Responses of this 5-item scale range from 0(false) to 4(true); low self-esteem was a score of 10 or less. The 10-item Kessler Psychological Distress Scale was used to measure psychological distress over the week prior to the survey (Kessler et al., 2002). Participants responded on a five-point scale ranging from 0(never) to 4(always).

Results: In the past year, participants reported 26.1%, 22.9%, and 3.6% of bullying at school or elsewhere, cyberbullying victimization and homophobic bullying. Overall, heterosexual and bisexual boys were more likely than their female counterparts to report cyberbullying. However, bisexual girls and boys were more likely than their heterosexual counterparts to report cyberbullying experiences. The prevalence of homophobic bullying was high among gay and lesbian teens (29.4%), with a proportion almost three times higher among gay boys (46.9%) compared to lesbian girls (16.5%). Regarding bullying at school or elsewhere, bisexual girls and boys and gay and questioning boys reported higher prevalence than heterosexuals (24.5%). Bisexual respondents reported a higher prevalence of psychological distress and low self-esteem than heterosexual youths. Bisexual youth also reported almost two times more suicidal ideations than heterosexuals. There was also a higher prevalence of suicidal ideations among gay, lesbians, and questioning youth when compared to heterosexuals. Overall, bullying victims report higher levels of psychological distress, low self-esteem, and suicidal ideations. Overall, girls and sexual-minority youth were more likely to experience cyberbullying and other forms of bullying as well as psychological distress, low self-esteem and suicidal ideations.

Discussion: Mental health challenges were up to two times more prevalent among sexual-minority youth who have experienced cyberbullying or homophobic bullying. For example, while 55.6% of lesbian youths who have been victims of cyberbullying have reported suicidal ideations, only 24.7% have reported so among those who have not experienced cyberbullying. For homophobic bullying, 94.4% of victimized lesbians reported suicidal ideations against 20.9% among the non-victimized. Bisexual girls were more likely to report psychological distress, low self-esteem, and suicidal ideation associated with cyberbullying and homosexual bullying than other sexual-minority youth. The results highlight the relevance of taking into account gender and sexual orientation variations in efforts to prevent bullying and its consequences.

LGB youths have higher odds of reporting suicidal thoughts, plans, and attempts; studies show that when youths attend schools with cultures that are more likely to stigmatize LGB youths, their mental health outcomes are worse. Of the gay, lesbian, bisexual, or transgender 6th- to 12th-grade students from the 2011 National School Climate Survey of the Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network, 55% reported some form of electronic harassment. Additionally, estimates indicate that between 80% and 91% of LGBT students reported being the victim of name calling and verbal harassment in the school setting, and at least 40% have been physically harassed. Whether the harassment is online or in person does not change the negative effects victimization can have on adolescents’ mental health. Youths who are bullied are more likely to report depression, low self-esteem, poor school performance, and suicide attempts. Previous research suggests that males are more likely than females to report being bullied and that white adolescents are more likely than black adolescents to report being bullied. The Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network 2011 National School Climate Survey found that Black LGBT students were less likely to report physical or verbal harassment because of their sexuality than their white, Hispanic, or multiracial LGBT peers. Hispanic LGBT youths appear to experience equally levels of harassment with their white peers: 62% of Hispanic LGBT youths felt unsafe at school because of their sexual orientation compared with 65% of white LGBT youths. In terms of gender differences, Russell et al. (2014) found that bisexual boys reported more experiences of victimization than did other groups of sexual minority and majority youths. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC) recent report found that female adolescents report suicide ideation, plans, and attempts more frequently than male adolescents do. Hispanic females have the highest prevalence of suicide attempts (17.6%) followed by black females (13.9%) and white females (13.7%). This study examines how race/ethnicity, gender, and sexual orientation shape adolescents’ likelihood of being bullied and vulnerability to suicide ideation.

Method: This study used state and local data from the 2009 and 2011 Youth Risk Behavior Survey to assess race/ethnicity, gender, and sexual orientation variation in being bullied and suicide ideation. To assess suicide ideation, adolescents were asked, “During the past 12 months, did you ever seriously consider attempting suicide?” Bullying was represented in two contexts, school and Internet. “During the past 12 months, have you been bullied on school property?” and “During the past 12 months, have you ever been electronically bullied?” were used to assess bullying. Sexual orientation was assessed with the following question: “Which of the following best describes you?” Results included “heterosexual,” “gay or lesbian,” “bisexual,” and “not sure.” Respondents were also asked to identify their race; the researchers constructed three categories: non-Hispanic White, non-Hispanic Black, and Hispanic/Latino/Latina.

Results: Black and Hispanic heterosexual males were less likely than white heterosexual males to report being bullied. However, white and Hispanic gay and bisexual males were significantly more likely than white heterosexual males to report being bullied. Black and Hispanic heterosexual females were less likely than white heterosexual females to report being bullied. However, white lesbian and bisexual females and Hispanic bisexual females were more likely than their white heterosexual peers to report being bullied. Sexual minority males and females regardless of their race were significantly more likely than their white heterosexual peers to report suicidal ideation. For both males and females, being bullied significantly increased the likelihood that respondents would report suicidal ideation. Black heterosexual females were significantly more likely to report suicidal ideation than their white heterosexual peers.

Discussion: The results found imply that being bullied is associated with higher odds of suicidal ideation, regardless of an adolescent’s gender, race/ethnicity, or sexual orientation. Regardless of race/ethnicity or gender, sexual minorities are more vulnerable to poor mental health outcomes than are sexual majorities.

Specific subgroups of students, including sexual minority (i.e., gay, lesbian, or bisexual) students are at increased risk for school violence and bullying. Sexual minority youth may experience short- and long-term health problems because of school violence and bullying, including increased risk for suicide and other mental health problems, cigarette smoking, alcohol and other drug use, and unsafe sexual behaviors. The purpose of this study is to establish the prevalence of school violence and bullying among homosexual and heterosexual students.

Method: This study used two data sets: one created by combining Youth Risk Behavior Survey data from 10 states and the other created by combining data from 10 districts. Each of these states and districts included a question on sexual identity in their YRBS questionnaire and had weighted data in the 2009 and/or 2011 cycle. Each site used independent samples designed to generate data representative of public school students in grades 9 through 12 in their jurisdiction. Most sites assessed sexual identity using the question “Which of the following best describes you?” with the response options “heterosexual (straight),” “gay or lesbian,” “bisexual,” and “not sure.” Five items were used to measure school violence and bullying on school property. Physical fighting on school property and being threatened or injured with a weapon on school property were assessed with the questions “During the past 12 months, how many times were you in a physical fight on school property?”and “During the past 12 months, how many times has someone threatened or injured you with a weapon such as a gun, knife, or club on school property?”. Being bullied on school property was assessed with one item, “During the past 12 months, have you ever been bullied on school property?” with the response options “yes” or “no.” The YRBS questionnaire also uses two questions to assess race and ethnicity. Ethnicity was classified as white, non-Hispanic, black, non-Hispanic, and Hispanic or Latino.

Results: In the state data set, 66.4% of the students were white compared with 12.5% of the students in the district data set. In the state data set, 94.0% of the male students were heterosexual, 1.8% were gay, 2.1% were bisexual, and 2.1% were unsure, and 89.4% of the female students were heterosexual, 1.3% were lesbian, 6.5% were bisexual, and 2.8% were unsure. Similarly, in the district data set, 91.7% of the male students were heterosexual, 2.7% were gay, 2.7% were bisexual, and 3.0% were unsure, and 84.6% of the female students were heterosexual, 2.0% were lesbian, 9.3% were bisexual, and 4.1% were unsure. All school violence and bullying behaviors were strongly associated with sexual identity for male and female students in both data sets. Male students compared with female students across all types of sexual identity generally had at least equal, if not significantly higher, prevalence rates for all behaviors. In the state data set, being bullied on school property among gay (43.1%) and bisexual (35.2%) male students was the most commonly reported behavior. In contrast, 18.3% of heterosexual male students reported this behavior. About one quarter (26.1%) of bisexual male students had been in a physical fight on school property compared with 11.3% of heterosexual male students. Similarly, about one quarter of gay (24.8%) and bisexual (23.1%) male students had been threatened or injured with a weapon on school property compared with 7.8% of heterosexual male students.

In the district data set, being in a physical fight on school property (33.6%) and being bullied on school property (33.2%) among bisexual male students were the most commonly reported behaviors. In contrast, among heterosexual male students, 16.3% had been in a physical fight on school property and 11.4% had been bullied on school property. About one quarter of gay students had been in a physical fight on school property (24.7%), threatened or injured with a weapon on school property (25.0%), and been bullied on school property (25.7%), and 25.8% of bisexual male students had been threatened or injured with a weapon on school property. In contrast, among heterosexual male students, 16.3% had been in a physical fight on school property, 9.0% had been threatened or injured with a weapon on school property, and 11.4% had been bullied on school property.

In the state data set, gay male students were more likely than heterosexual male students to have been threatened or injured with a weapon on school property and been bullied on school property. Bisexual male students were more likely than heterosexual male students to have experienced all five school violence and bullying behaviors. Compared with heterosexual male students, gay students were about three times more likely to have been threatened or injured with a weapon on school property. Lesbian and bisexual female students were more likely than heterosexual female students to have experienced all five school violence and bullying behaviors, although the increased risks were generally not as high among bisexual female students as they were for lesbian students. Compared with heterosexual female students, lesbian students were about three times more likely to have been in a physical fight on school property, about four times more likely to have been threatened or injured with a weapon on school property, and about six times more likely to have carried a weapon on school property.

In the district data set, gay male students and bisexual male students were more likely than heterosexual male students to have experienced all five school violence and bullying behaviors. Compared with heterosexual male students, bisexual male students were about three times more likely to have carried a weapon and been bullied on school property. Lesbian and bisexual female students were more likely than heterosexual female students to have been in a physical fight on school property, been threatened or injured with a weapon on school property and carried a weapon on school property. Bisexual female students were also more likely to have been bullied at school.

Discussion: The results of this study imply that sexual minority students routinely experience increased school violence and bullying compared with their heterosexual counterparts. These results may increase the risk for suicide and other mental health problems, including depression and lowered self-esteem, and poor academic performance among sexual minority adolescents. These related risks are associated with long-term negative health outcomes. School bullying has been linked to school climate; a positive school climate, defined as “individual perceptions that school was a good place to be, where students and teachers could be trusted, students were treated with respect, and rules were fair” (p. 307), is negatively associated with bullying victimization.

Further, in schools where teachers endorse attitudes that are dismissive of bullying occurrence, victimization rates are high, and a negative environment has been linked to increased risk for suicide attempts among sexual minority youth. Anti-bullying policies that specifically address sexual minority students may benefit all students and reduce peer victimization. Gay-straight alliances (GSAs) are another way to improve school climate for sexual minority students. The presence of GSAs in schools has been shown to reduce truancy, violent incidents, and health risk behaviors including cigarette smoking, drinking alcohol, suicide attempts, and having sex with casual partners among all students, but these results were more pronounced among sexual minority students.

NBC News, August 21, 2012

Huffington Post, August 8, 2012

NBC, July 31, 2012.
Link is to Microsoft News.

NBC News, August 4, 2012
Link is to Microsoft News.

CBS News, June 18, 2002

Rochester, NY: June 17, 2012

U.S. News: June 13, 2012

CNN: June 8, 2012

Reuters: May 31, 2012

ABC News: March, 19, 2012

ABC News: February 21, 2012

Ynet News: August 4, 2011

CBS News: March 29, 2010

New York Times: November 26, 2008

Choo uses current literature to extensively discuss the role in which the Internet and social networking sites play in the online grooming of children by sexual predators. The report also mentions ways in which predators and traffickers can and likely will exploit technological changes to commit harmful child grooming. It calls for further study of online grooming techniques used by perpetrators to understand how children are being sexually exploited through on and off-line contact. This will help to further create and refine technological tools designed to intervene in the grooming process. A large amount of the report is set aside to illustrate the psychology and history of both the average child and predator, information which can be used to identify vulnerable individuals. He encourages cooperation between governmental agencies, research institutions, and academia to create investigative tools that will help locate, prevent, and report online child sexual exploitation.

International researcher Donna Hughes discusses the linear relationship between the rise of new communication technologies and the sexual exploitation of women and children through the use of pornography and trafficking around the globe. Hughes details the evolution of the child porn industry aided and disguised by the use of new technologies, such as peer-to-peer networks, live video chat, and blatant and underground internet forums. The author uses a couple of case studies to demonstrate how crafty predators use the internet to attract and exploit young children and women. While some experts at the time believed that child sexual exploitation was declining, Hughes argues that new technologies have escalated the severity and volume of the problem, with the number of internet-related child porn cases doubling in less than a few years from the later 90s and the early 2000s. Hughes’s research has been backed by a number of credible sources, including the National Science Foundation and the U.S. State Department.

Using data collected from ten field study assessments from around the United States, the authors provide a comprehensive report on domestic minor sex trafficking that defines and explains the business of this widespread trade. It details the way traffickers and pimps use emotional manipulation to recruit and retain vulnerable (and oftentimes troubled) youth, asserting that these same grooming practices are comparable to the tactics of online child predators. The report notes that the use of technology such as the Internet has presented one of the biggest challenges for law enforcement due to falsified personal information and misleading images placed in advertisements. Craigslist is pointed out to be greatly involved, with nine of the ten field assessments documenting its use in facilitating child trafficking.

In this report, the author lists the online methods used by traffickers and child predators to further their exploitation of women and children in Europe, the legal and technical efforts of other states and nations combatting this issue, and the most promising ways to fight illegal internet recruitment. It sites employment advertisements, such as modeling jobs, as the main mode of recruitment for traffickers. However, marriage agency, escort, chat and dating sites were mentioned to have also been used by traffickers to attract new victims. The author calls for an increase in awareness of the problem, the development of Internet technology to detect and assist victims of trafficking, and a comprehensive map of the sites and channels used by traffickers and predators in order to detect the flow of illegal human traffick. The author affirms Hughes’s (cited above) assertion that the Internet has greatly enhanced the predator’s ability to exploit his or her victims online and on the ground.

Bullying is a specific type of aggression in which (1) the behavior is intended to harm or disturb, (2) the behavior occurs repeatedly over time, and (3) there is an imbalance of power, with a more powerful person or group attacking a less powerful one. This asymmetry of power may be physical or psychological, and the aggressive behavior may be verbal, physical, or psychological. Bullies and those bullied demonstrate poorer psychosocial functioning than their noninvolved peers. Youth who bully others tend to demonstrate higher levels of conduct problems and dislike of school, whereas youth who are bullied generally show higher levels of insecurity, anxiety, depression, loneliness, unhappiness, and low self-esteem.

Method: The Health Behavior of School-aged Children (HBSC) was utilized by 15,686 students in grades 6 through 10. Questions about bullying were preceded with the following explanation. We say a student is being bullied when another student, or a group of students, say or do nasty and unpleasant things to him or her. It is also bullying when a student is teased repeatedly in a way he or she doesn’t like. But it is not bullying when two students of about the same strength quarrel or fight. Participation in bullying was assessed by two parallel questions that asked respondents to report the frequency with which they bullied others/being bullied in school and away from school during the current term. Response categories were “I haven’t …,” “once or twice,” “sometimes,” “about once a week,” and “several times a week.” Additional questions asked respondents to report the frequency with which they were bullied in each of 5ways—belittled about religion/race, belittled about looks/speech, hit/slapped/pushed, subject of rumors or lies, and subject of sexual comments/gestures. Measures of psychosocial adjustment included questions about problem behaviors, social/emotional well-being, and parental influences. Alcohol use was measured by three items. The frequency of smoking, fighting, and truancy were assessed by one item each. Academic achievement was assessed by an item querying perceived school performance. Three items queried the frequency of feeling lonely, feeling left out, and being alone because others at school did not want to spend time with the person. One item assessed ease of making friends. Three items were used to assess relationship with classmates: “enjoy being together,” “are kind and helpful,” and “accept me.” School climate was measured by seven items related to the respondent’s perception of the school and teachers. Three items measured parental involvement in school, and one item assessed respondents’ perceptions about their parents’ attitudes toward teen drinking.

Results: 10.6% of the sample reported bullying others “sometimes” (moderate bullying) and 8.8% admitted to bullying others once a week or more (frequent bullying). Experiencing bullying was reported with similar frequency with 8.5% bullied “sometimes” and 8.4% bullied once a week or more. 29.9% reported some type of involvement in moderate or frequent bullying, as a bully (13.0%), a target of bullying (10.6%), or both (6.3%). Males bullied others and were bullied significantly more often than females. The frequency of bullying was higher among 6th through 8th-grade students than among 9th- and 10th-grade students. Hispanic youth reported marginally higher involvement in moderate and frequent bullying of others, whereas black youth reported being bullied with significantly less frequency overall. Males reported being bullied by being hit, slapped, or pushed more frequently than did females. Females more frequently reported being bullied through rumors or sexual comments. Being bullied through negative statements about one’s religion or race occurred with the lowest frequency for both sexes. Anyone involved in bullying demonstrated poorer psychosocial adjustment than noninvolved youth. Fighting was positively associated with all 3 outcomes. Alcohol use was positively associated with bullying and negatively associated with being bullied. Smoking and poorer academic achievement were associated with both bullying and bullying/being bullied; poorer perceived school climate was related only to bullying. Poorer relationships with classmates and increased loneliness, on the other hand, were associated with both being bullied and bullying/being bullied. Ability to make friends was negatively related to being bullied and positively related to bullying. A permissive parental attitude toward teen drinking was associated only with bullying/being bullied, while increased parental involvement in school was related to being bullied and bullying/being bullied.

Discussion: Verbal bullying through derogatory statements about one’s religion or race occurred infrequently for both sexes. This finding may reflect stronger social norms among adolescents against such behavior. That is, it may be more socially acceptable for a youth to taunt peers about their appearance than to make derogatory racial statements. Youth who are socially isolated and lack social skills may be more likely targets for being bullied. This is consonant with the finding by Hoover and colleagues that the most frequent reason cited by youth for persons being bullied is that they “didn’t fit in.” At the same time, youth who are bullied may well be avoided by other youth, for fear of being bullied themselves or losing social status among their peers. Those youth who reported both bullying and being bullied demonstrated poorer adjustment across both social/emotional dimensions and problem behaviors. Olweus found former bullies to have a 4-fold increase in criminal behavior at the age of 24 years, with 60% of former bullies having at least 1 conviction and 35% to 40% having 3 or more convictions. Conversely, individuals formerly bullied were found to have higher levels of depression and poorer self-esteem at the age of 23 years.

School bullying has been identified as a problematic behavior among adolescents, affecting school achievement, prosocial skills, and psychological well-being for both victims and perpetrators. Bullying is usually defined as a specific form of aggression, which is intentional, repeated, and involves a disparity of power between the victim and perpetrators. Previous studies have found that boys have a higher prevalence of bullying perpetration than girls and bullying behavior tends to peak in middle school and then decrease. In a nationally-representative sample of adolescents in the United States, Nansel and colleagues reported that the prevalence of frequent involvement in school bullying in the past 2 months was 29.9%, which included 13.0% as bullies, 10.6% as victims, and 6.3% as both. In the U.S. sample, compared to Caucasian adolescents, Hispanic adolescents were involved in more frequent bullying perpetration, while African-American adolescents were less likely to be bullied. Adolescent bullying may take many forms, such as physical, verbal, and relational or social. Physical bullying and verbal bullying are considered to be direct, while relational bullying refers to an indirect form of bullying, such as social exclusion and spreading rumors. Boys are more involved in direct bullying, while girls are more involved in indirect bullying. Cyber bullying is emerging as a new form of bullying. Cyber bulling can be defined as a form of aggression that occurs through personal computers or cell phones. Kowalski and Limber reported that among their sample of middle school students in the United States, 22% reported involvement in cyber bullying, including 4% as bullies, 11% as victims, and 7% as both. In a study of Canadian adolescents in 7th grade, boys were more likely to be cyber bullies than girls. Previous studies showed that positive parental practices, such as parental warmth or support, could protect adolescents from involvement in bullying perpetration and victimization.

Method: Self-report data on bullying were collected from 7,508 adolescents in the 2005/2006 Health Behavior in School-aged Children (HBSC) study in the United States. The items assessing physical, verbal, and relational bullying were based on the Olweus Bully/Victim Questionnaire. For each item, two parallel questions asked how often participants had either bullied others or been bullied in the past 2 months at school. Two new items were added using the same format to measure cyber bully/victim. Physical bullying was measured by one item - hitting, kicking, pushing, shoving around, or locking indoors. Verbal bullying was measured by three items - calling mean names, making fun of, or teasing in a hurtful way; calling mean names about race; and calling mean names about religion. Relational bullying was measured by two items - socially excluding others; and spreading rumors. Cyber bullying was measured by two items - “bullying using a computer or email messages or pictures”; and “bullying using a cell phone”. Response options were “none”, “only once or twice”, “2 or 3 times a month”, “about once a week”, and “several times a week”. Parental support was measured by four items from the Parental Bonding Instrument, which were included in the HBSC survey. The students were asked if their parent or guardian 1) helps them as much as they needed; 2) is loving; 3) understands their problems and worries; and 4) makes them feel better when they were upset. Response options were “almost never”, “sometimes”, and “almost always’. Two items asked about how many male or female friends the student had. Response options ranged from “0” to “3 or more”.

Results: At the item level, the two most common types of bullying behaviors were calling someone mean names and social isolation. The two most common types of victimization were being called mean names and having rumors spread about them. 13.3% reported that they had bullied others at least once in the last 2 months physically, 37.4% verbally, 27.2% socially, and 8.3% electronically. The prevalence rates of victimization were 12.8% for physical, 36.5% for verbal, 41.0% for relational, and 9.8% for cyber forms. Compared to girls, boys were likely to be more involved in physical and verbal forms. For cyber bullying, boys were more likely to be bullies, whereas girls were more likely to be victims. Compared to 6th graders, 9th/ 10th graders were less involved in bullying for all types of bullying. Compared to Caucasian adolescents, African-American adolescents were more involved in bullying perpetration but less involved in victimization. Hispanic adolescents were more likely to be physical bullies or cyber bully-victims. Adolescents from more affluent families were less likely to be physical victims but more likely to be cyber victims. Higher parental support was negatively associated with involvement in bullying across all four forms. Number of friends was related to involvement in all three traditional forms but was not related to cyber bullying. For physical, verbal, and relational bullying, adolescents with more friends were more likely to be bullies but less likely to be victims.

Discussion: The negative relations between having more friends and victimization in physical, verbal, and relational forms supports the “friendship protection hypothesis” suggesting that friendship protects adolescents from being selected as targets of bullies. The positive relation between having more friends and bullying reflects a need among adolescents to establish social status, especially during transition into a new group, and may explain the peaking of prevalence rates of bullying in all four forms during 7th grade or 8th grade, a period of transition to middle school. Results indicate that cyber bullying has a distinct nature from traditional bullying.

LGB youths have higher odds of reporting suicidal thoughts, plans, and attempts; studies show that when youths attend schools with cultures that are more likely to stigmatize LGB youths, their mental health outcomes are worse. Of the gay, lesbian, bisexual, or transgender 6th- to 12th-grade students from the 2011 National School Climate Survey of the Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network, 55% reported some form of electronic harassment. Additionally, estimates indicate that between 80% and 91% of LGBT students reported being the victim of name calling and verbal harassment in the school setting, and at least 40% have been physically harassed. Whether the harassment is online or in person does not change the negative effects victimization can have on adolescents’ mental health. Youths who are bullied are more likely to report depression, low self-esteem, poor school performance, and suicide attempts. Previous research suggests that males are more likely than females to report being bullied and that white adolescents are more likely than black adolescents to report being bullied. The Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network 2011 National School Climate Survey found that Black LGBT students were less likely to report physical or verbal harassment because of their sexuality than their white, Hispanic, or multiracial LGBT peers. Hispanic LGBT youths appear to experience equally levels of harassment with their white peers: 62% of Hispanic LGBT youths felt unsafe at school because of their sexual orientation compared with 65% of white LGBT youths. In terms of gender differences, Russell et al. (2014) found that bisexual boys reported more experiences of victimization than did other groups of sexual minority and majority youths. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC) recent report found that female adolescents report suicide ideation, plans, and attempts more frequently than male adolescents do. Hispanic females have the highest prevalence of suicide attempts (17.6%) followed by black females (13.9%) and white females (13.7%). This study examines how race/ethnicity, gender, and sexual orientation shape adolescents’ likelihood of being bullied and vulnerability to suicide ideation.

Method: This study used state and local data from the 2009 and 2011 Youth Risk Behavior Survey to assess race/ethnicity, gender, and sexual orientation variation in being bullied and suicide ideation. To assess suicide ideation, adolescents were asked, “During the past 12 months, did you ever seriously consider attempting suicide?” Bullying was represented in two contexts, school and Internet. “During the past 12 months, have you been bullied on school property?” and “During the past 12 months, have you ever been electronically bullied?” were used to assess bullying. Sexual orientation was assessed with the following question: “Which of the following best describes you?” Results included “heterosexual,” “gay or lesbian,” “bisexual,” and “not sure.” Respondents were also asked to identify their race; the researchers constructed three categories: non-Hispanic White, non-Hispanic Black, and Hispanic/Latino/Latina.

Results: Black and Hispanic heterosexual males were less likely than white heterosexual males to report being bullied. However, white and Hispanic gay and bisexual males were significantly more likely than white heterosexual males to report being bullied. Black and Hispanic heterosexual females were less likely than white heterosexual females to report being bullied. However, white lesbian and bisexual females and Hispanic bisexual females were more likely than their white heterosexual peers to report being bullied. Sexual minority males and females regardless of their race were significantly more likely than their white heterosexual peers to report suicidal ideation. For both males and females, being bullied significantly increased the likelihood that respondents would report suicidal ideation. Black heterosexual females were significantly more likely to report suicidal ideation than their white heterosexual peers.

Discussion: The results found imply that being bullied is associated with higher odds of suicidal ideation, regardless of an adolescent’s gender, race/ethnicity, or sexual orientation. Regardless of race/ethnicity or gender, sexual minorities are more vulnerable to poor mental health outcomes than are sexual majorities.

Bullying occurs when an individual intentionally inflicts verbal, physical, or relational pain or discomfort on another person repeatedly over time, and involves an imbalance in mental and/or physical strength (Olweus, 1991, 1993; Smith et al., 1999). Bullying victims and bullies are at risk of a number of mental health, social, and interpersonal problems. Bullying victims may experience depression, low self-esteem, poor grades, and suicidal ideation, and bullies are more likely to get into fights, steal, receive poor grades, and vandalize property (Olweus, 1999). Bullying is a predictor for later delinquency, violence, and other adult anti-social behaviors (Bender & Losel, 2011; Vaughn et al., 2010). Research indicates that the prevalence of bullying tends to be higher among middle-school-aged students compared with high school students (Nansel et al., 2001; Olweus, 1993).Recent technological advances have resulted in the emergence of a new form of bullying known as cyber bullying—the use of technologies (e.g., cell phones, social networking sites) to cause discomfort and/or harm to another person (Kowalski & Limber, 2007).

Verbal bullying actions include threatening, taunting, teasing, and name-calling while physical bullying can involve hitting, pushing, kicking, pinching, or restraining another person against their will. Relational aggression is non-verbal and/or non-physical and may entail making faces or dirty gestures or intentionally excluding someone from a group (Olweus, 1993). Traditional bullying is usually contained to school grounds and often stops once the child has gone home. In contrast to traditional bullying, cyber bullying is neither overtly physical nor verbal. Cyber bullying can occur using a variety of devices in a variety of environments (Mishna, Saini, & Solomon, 2009). Some researchers argue that cyber bullying is more psychologically harmful compared with traditional bullying because it can be long lasting and may prevent children from feeling safe in multiple arenas (Raskauskas & Stoltz, 2007). Another important difference between cyber and traditional bullying is that cyber bullying can be conducted anonymously. Nearly half of youth who report being cyber-bullied does not know their attacker (Kowalski & Limber, 2007; Li, 2007). Between 14 and 49 % of youth report being victims of cyberbullying (Li, 2007; Mishna, Cook, Gadalla, Daciuk, & Solomon, 2010; Raskauskas & Stoltz, 2007; Wang, Iannotti, & Nansel, 2009). However, rates of cyber bullying in rural samples are relatively low (e.g., 9 %; Bauman, 2009). Approximately half of students who experience cyber bullying also report experiencing traditional bullying (Ybarra, Diener-West & Leaf, 2007).

Traditional bullying can have both short- and long-term effects. Victims of bullying are more likely to report feelings of anxiety and depression compared with non-victims (Bond, Carlin,Thomas, Rubin, & Patton, 2001). Bond et al. (2001) found that females exhibited more severe feelings of internalizing behaviors compared with males. Victims of bullying may also exhibit chronic absenteeism, reduced academic performance, increased apprehension, loneliness, abandonment from peers, and suicidal ideation (Beale, 2001). Compared with non-victims, individuals who are victims of bullying are more likely to have low self-esteem, long-term depression (Olweus, 1993), relationship problems in adulthood (High-Jones & Smith, 1999), and difficulty sleeping (Smokowski & Kopasz, 2005). In general, victims of cyber bullying tend to exhibit similar negative behaviors as victims of traditional bullying (e.g., Hinduja & Patchin 2010). For example, Beran and Li (2007) found that both victims of traditional and cyber bullying reported more difficulties at school and feelings of anger and sadness compared with non-victims. Ybarra et al. (2007) found that victims of cyber bullying were more likely to have detentions or suspensions and were more likely to skip school compared with non-victims. Research also indicates that both victims and offenders of cyber bullying have significantly lower self-esteem and report more suicidal ideation than those who had little or no experience with cyber bullying (Hinduja & Patchin, 2010; Patchin & Hinduja, 2010). Haynie et al. (2001) found that those who were both victims and perpetrators of bullying scored less favorably on all of the psychosocial and behavioral variables examined in the study (e.g., depression) compared with those who were only victims or bullies.

The present study examined cyberbullying and its prevalence, its relationship with traditional bullying, and the relationship between bullying, anxiety, and depression in a sample of rural and ethnoracially diverse youth.

Method: Participants in the current study were 211 youth in grades 6 (61 %) and 7 (39 %) from a public middle school in a rural and ethnically diverse community in Hawaii. The majority of youths who participated identified as Multiethnic (74.8 %), which primarily included at least two of the following: Chinese (44.6 %), Filipino (52.9 %), Japanese (56.7 %), Native Hawaiian (59.9 %), or Caucasian (54.8 %). Youth who identified with only one ethnicity indicated Japanese (9.5 %), Caucasian (4.3 %), Filipino (4.3 %), Marshallese (2.4 %), Native Hawaiian (1.4 %), or other (3.5 %) ancestry.

The Revised Olweus Bully/Victim Questionnaire (R-OBVQ; Olweus, 1996), a 39-item self-report questionnaire designed to assess traditional bullying experience(s) in youth, was given to the students. Items from this measure are used to determine whether or not a child is a victim and/or bully using composite scores of items that comprise ‘‘bullying others’’ and ‘‘being victimized’’ scales (Olweus, 1997). The questionnaire addresses the type of traditional bullying the child was exposed to, where the bullying occurs, when the bullying occurs, and whether a child has informed other(s) about being bullied. A student was considered a victim/bully if he/she responded to any relevant scale item that he/she engaged in the activity 2 or 3 times a month or more. The Cyber/Victim Questionnaire, was created for this study; it included 38 self-report items designed to assess whether or not a child was cyber victim and/or cyber bully. Each scale includes 11 items that assess for the frequency at which cyber bully/victimization behaviors occur and the type of technological devices used for bullying behavior. The Revised Child Anxiety and Depression Scale (RCADS; Chorpita, Yim, Moffitt, Umemoto, and Francis, 2000) is a 47-item, youth self-report questionnaire used to assess a variety of anxiety and depression problems in youth. It contains a Total Anxiety Scale (sum of the five anxiety subscales) and a Total Internalizing Scale (sum of all six subscales).

Results: 33% of students reported being a victim of some type of traditional bullying; 7 % of students qualified as cyber victims. Victims of all three forms of traditional bullying had significantly higher scores on the total anxiety and depression scales of RCADS than non-victims; victims of cyber bullying also reported significantly higher levels of anxiety and depression compared with non-victims. More than half of youths who qualified as traditional bullies and cyberbullies had clinically significant anxiety scores and clinically significant depression.

Discussion: While cyber bullying does occur in rural communities, it often co-occurs with traditional bullying. Cyberbullying rates in the present study were low (7 %) relative to the majority of cyber bullying research. However, in one study that examined a rural sample of children, prevalence rates were also relatively low (9 %; Bauman, 2009). Both studies collected data from impoverished communities (U.S. Census Bureau, 2010). Therefore, it is possible that due to limited income and rural life conditions, students had little access to in-home technology due to competition over technological devices (Bauman, 2009).

http://www.danah.org/researchBibs/sns.php