ArticlePDF Available

Abstract

Cyberbullying is the act of using unjustified aggression to harm or harass via digital devices. Currently regarded as a widespread problem, the phenomenon has attracted growing research interest in different measures of cyberbullying and the similarities and differences across countries and cultures. This article presents the Colombian validation of the European Cyberbullying Intervention Project Questionnaire (ECIPQ) involving 3,830 high school students (M = 13.9 years old, standard deviation = 1.61; 48.9 percent male), of which 1,931 were Colombian and 1,899 Spanish. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), content validation, and multigroup analysis were performed with each of the sample subgroups. The optimal fits and psychometric properties obtained confirm the robustness and suitability of the assessment instrument to jointly measure cyber-aggression and cyber-victimization. The results corroborated the theoretical construct and the two-dimensional and universal nature of cyberbullying. The multigroup analysis showed that cyberbullying dynamics are similar in both countries. The comparative analyses of prevalence revealed that Colombian students are less involved in cyberbullying. The results indicate the suitability of the instrument and the advantages of using such a tool to evaluate and guide psychoeducational interventions aimed at preventing cyberbullying in countries where few studies have been performed.
Validation of the European Cyberbullying Intervention
Project Questionnaire for Colombian Adolescents
Mauricio Herrera-Lo´ pez, PhD,
1,
*Jose´ A. Casas, PhD,
2
Eva M. Romera, PhD,
2
Rosario Ortega-Ruiz, PhD,
2,3
and Rosario Del Rey, PhD
4
Cyberbullying is the act of using unjustified aggression to harm or harass via digital devices. Currently regarded
as a widespread problem, the phenomenon has attracted growing research interest in different measures of
cyberbullying and the similarities and differences across countries and cultures. This article presents the
Colombian validation of the European Cyberbullying Intervention Project Questionnaire (ECIPQ) involving
3,830 high school students (M=13.9 years old, standard deviation =1.61; 48.9 percent male), of which 1,931
were Colombian and 1,899 Spanish. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), content validation, and multigroup
analysis were performed with each of the sample subgroups. The optimal fits and psychometric properties
obtained confirm the robustness and suitability of the assessment instrument to jointly measure cyber-
aggression and cyber-victimization. The results corroborated the theoretical construct and the two-dimensional
and universal nature of cyberbullying. The multigroup analysis showed that cyberbullying dynamics are similar
in both countries. The comparative analyses of prevalence revealed that Colombian students are less involved in
cyberbullying. The results indicate the suitability of the instrument and the advantages of using such a tool to
evaluate and guide psychoeducational interventions aimed at preventing cyberbullying in countries where few
studies have been performed.
Keywords: Colombia, cyberbullying, ECIPQ, Spain, validation
Introduction
The prevalent use of information and communications
technologies (ICTs) has significantly transformed in-
terpersonal relationships among adolescents.
1
Although ICTs
have certain benefits, they have also given rise to a complex
scenario of interactions that require new abilities and social
skills to navigate cyberspace successfully.
2
Research has also
shown that the use of ICTs has led to an increase in social
problems, including cyberbullying;
3
a phenomenon currently
regarded as a major public health issue in schools
4,5
given its
negative impact on the social and emotional development of
children and adolescents.
1,6,7
It is estimated that around 20
percent of young people aged from 10 to 18 have been cy-
berbullies or cybervictims;
8,9
with puberty and adolescence
increasing the risk of becoming involved in cyberbullying.
10
Cyberbullying is an aggressive, intentional act or act of
intimidation carried out using electronic media, which cre-
ates an imbalance of power between the bully and the vic-
tim.
11,12
Some authors regard this phenomenon as an indirect
form of harassment, as it is conceived within the definitional
framework of traditional bullying. Certain characteristics,
however, differentiate cyberbullying from traditional bully-
ing, such as the potential and, in some cases, frequent ano-
nymity of the perpetrator,
13,14
and the duration of an aggressive
act in cyberspace, where an image or other humiliating au-
diovisual material is freely accessible (is public) at any
time.
15
Insulting or threatening behavior through text mes-
sages or the Internet; spreading rumors about someone on
social networks; extracting, disclosing, or publishing personal
information; displaying or sending compromising photos of
someone; excluding or being excluded from a group or chat;
and online identity theft are all actions regarded as cyber-
bullying.
16
Moreover, it is important to highlight that both
bullying and cyberbullying constitute unjustified behavior
that involves a certain degree of immorality.
17
Although there have been notable advances in research on
cyberbullying over the last decade,important questions remain
with regard to the adequate assessment of the phenomenon.
This may be due to cyberbullying’s multiple manifestations,
1
Department of Psychology, University of Narin
˜o (UDENAR), San Juan de Pasto, Colombia.
2
Department of Psychology, University of Co
´rdoba (UCO), Co
´rdoba, Spain.
3
Department of Psychology, University of Sevilla, Sevilla, Spain.
4
Department of Psychology, Social Work and Counselling, University of Greenwich, London, United Kingdom.
CYBERPSYCHOLOGY,BEHAVIOR,AND SOCIAL NETWORKING
Volume 20, Number 2, 2017
ªMary Ann Liebert, Inc.
DOI: 10.1089/cyber.2016.0414
117
which render it difficult to develop and validate scales with
optimal psychometric properties.
18
A systematic review of
636 studies showed that most of the existing measurement
instruments do not take into account the properties and theo-
retical and structural factors involved, and of the 44 recognized
instruments, only 24 reported convergent validity.
19
Other
studies have shown that the scales used to measure cyberbul-
lying do not have the same factorial structure, unlike tradi-
tional instruments for assessing bullying.
20
In developing an
instrument to measure cyberbullying, Law et al.
21
found that
the items used to assess traditional bullying were clearly or-
ganized into two factors (victimization and aggression), while
items related to cyberbullying were organized into just one.
The same result was obtained by Menesini et al.,
22
who re-
ported a tendency for single factor grouping. In general, there
are few instruments that comprehensively identify and mea-
sure all the factors related to cyberbullying involvement.
18,23
Indeed, it is still very common to find studies that measure only
cyber-aggression
21,24
or cyber-victimization,
25
thus increas-
ing the propensity of biased measures.
26
The European Cyberbullying Intervention Project Ques-
tionnaire (ECIPQ)
18
was designed based on the studies of
Dooley et al.
27,28
This rigorous measurement instrument is
comparable to other international instruments, and it has
been validated in six European countries with optimal psy-
chometric results.
14–30
The ECIPQ includes new definitions
of cyberbullying, reflects its various manifestations and
recognizes the dynamic structure of the phenomenon by
measuring its two principal dimensions: aggression and
victimization. It also makes no distinction between digital
devices (mobile phones and PCs) and includes the criteria of
repetition and the imbalance of power as it assesses the do-
minion of technology in the aggression and the lack of se-
curity measures in victimization.
18
A recent worldwide review of cyberbullying studies has
shown that the articles published on the Web of Science are
mainly studies from North America (57 percent) and Europe
(28 percent), followed by Western Asia (8 percent) and
Australia (4 percent), which, and denoting an uneven geo-
graphical distribution, highlights the scarce scientific par-
ticipation of developing countries, such as those in Latin
America.
29
The small number of studies conducted in these
countries tend to report data on prevalence, primarily using
instruments lacking rigorous psychometric properties. Other
studies report on the type of harassment and the description
and characterization of cyberbullying,
30,31
while very few
examine the development or validation of instruments.
32–34
This situation, coupled with the scarcity of cross-cultural
research, represents important limitations for advancing in
the study of cyberbullying in regions such as Latin America,
where violence is considered to be even more exacerbated.
35
The validation and use of a common instrument with known
psychometric properties to compare the phenomenon of cy-
berbullying would allow us to get further insight into the
universality of the phenomenon and examine differences and
similarities between countries; additionally comparisons
between two different geographical regions, which share a
similar culture, history, and same language, are of particular
interest as they open up new lines of research into cyber-
bullying beyond cross-cultural, comparative studies among
European countries
18
or between the United States and
countries of Asia.
36
Owing to the limited availability of adequately validated
instruments for Latin American countries and the need for
internationally recognized instruments incorporating both
cyber-victimization and cyber-aggression, the main objec-
tive of this study was to validate the ECIPQ
18
scale in Co-
lombia. The second objective was to compare the prevalence
of involvement in cyberbullying in both countries (Colombia
and Spain) focusing on the following roles: bullies, victims,
bully-victims, and noninvolved students. Our hypothesis was
that the instrument would show a two-factor structure with
optimal psychometric properties and measurement homo-
geneity in the Spanish version, while Colombian students
would be less involved in cyberbullying based on the as-
sumption that technology is used to a lesser degree in the
country.
37
Methodology
Participants
The overall sample comprised 3,830 adolescent students
(48.9 percent male) aged 10 to 19 (M=13.95, standard de-
viation [SD]=1.61). The Colombian subgroup consisted of
1,931 students (46.9 percent male) of public and private
schools in the city of San Juan de Pasto, southern Colombia,
aged 10 -19 (M=14.9; SD =1.89); while the Spanish sub-
group consisted of 1,899 students (51 percent male) of public
and private schools in Andalucia, southern Spain, aged 11 -
18 (M=14.3; SD =1.81).
Instrument
We used the ECIPQ,
18
which comprises 22 items (11 for
cyber-victimization and 11 for cyber-aggression). The
ECIPQ uses a Likert-type scale with five response options
ranging from 0 =never, 1 =once or twice, 2 =once or twice a
month, 3 =about once a week, and 4 =more than one once a
week. An example of an item for cyber-victimization is
‘‘Someone said nasty things to me or called me names using
texts or online messages,’’ while ‘‘I spread rumours about
someone on the Internet’’ is an example of a cyber-
aggression item. The internal consistency of the original test
is optimal: a
cyber-victimization
=0.97; a
cyber-aggression
=0.93;
a
total
=0.96.
Procedure
We used a cross-sectional, ex post facto, retrospective, one
group, one measurement research design.
38
To ensure ethical
standards, we first obtained authorization from the school
officials and subsequently sent informed consent forms to the
students’ parents and/or legal guardians. After receiving
signed consent from the parents, we then visited the students
who had been authorized to take part in the study and asked
them to sign a consent form. Before administering the
questionnaire to the students, we informed them that par-
ticipation was anonymous and voluntary and explained the
objective of the study. The average time taken to complete
the questionnaire was 15 minutes. Convenience sampling
was performed owing to accessibility.
The scale content was validated by a panel of six Co-
lombian experts, who were given the Spanish version
translated from English to Castilian by Ortega-Ruiz et al.
39
with the parallel back-translation procedure.
40
The panel
118 HERRERA-LO
´PEZ ET AL.
assessed the compliance of criteria such as adequacy of vo-
cabulary, conceptual clarity, and the consistency and rele-
vance of each item. To this end, a 4-point scale was used
where 1 =noncompliance, 2 =low level of compliance,
3=moderate compliance, and 4 =high level of compliance.
Finally, a pilot test was conducted with 60 students to assess
their understanding of the items. Any words or terms in the
original Spanish text that were not clear to the students were
modified. For example, the item ‘‘Alguien me ha dicho pa-
labras malsonantes o me ha insultado usando el e-mail o
FIG. 1. CFA of the adapted
ECIPQ for Colombia
(*p<0.05). CFA, confirma-
tory factor analysis; ECIPQ,
European Cyberbullying
Intervention Project
Questionnaire.
VALIDATION OF THE ECIPQ FOR COLOMBIA 119
Table 1. Polychoric Correlation Matrix: European Cyberbullying Intervention Project Questionnaire
Items 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22
11
2 0.77 1
3 0.57 0.57 1
4 0.36 0.40 0.45 1
5 0.37 0.39 0.44 0.80 1
6 0.33 0.40 0.40 0.44 0.55 1
7 0.40 0.43 0.51 0.46 0.49 0.60 1
8 0.32 0.39 0.43 0.41 0.38 0.42 0.67 1
9 0.39 0.38 0.42 0.48 0.41 0.37 0.66 0.64 1
10 0.36 0.39 0.37 0.30 0.30 0.29 0.40 0.44 0.48 1
11 0.59 0.62 0.48 0.36 0.37 0.41 0.58 0.42 0.48 0.40 1
12 0.58 0.50 0.43 0.32 0.32 0.36 0.46 0.40 0.45 0.39 0.52 1
13 0.52 0.47 0.42 0.29 0.36 0.27 0.44 0.44 0.41 0.34 0.51 0.80 1
14 0.39 0.42 0.62 0.35 0.35 0.48 0.54 0.51 0.57 0.42 0.45 0.62 0.65 1
15 0.38 0.35 0.45 0.38 0.35 0.48 0.48 0.44 0.32 0.20 0.29 0.45 0.52 0.64 1
16 0.19 0.34 0.45 0.39 0.41 0.53 0.52 0.55 0.41 0.37 0.33 0.51 0.50 0.67 0.80 1
17 0.27 0.35 0.38 0.36 0.32 0.47 0.42 0.48 0.40 0.38 0.35 0.35 0.46 0.59 0.58 0.71 1
18 0.37 0.43 0.49 0.47 0.43 0.55 0.69 0.73 0.70 0.55 0.56 0.55 0.58 0.71 0.56 0.71 0.69 1
19 0.34 0.42 0.49 0.42 0.40 0.51 0.58 0.72 0.60 0.49 0.48 0.48 0.53 0.61 0.53 0.65 0.62 0.79 1
20 0.29 0.36 0.41 0.31 0.36 0.40 0.47 0.51 0.62 0.44 0.44 0.51 0.48 0.59 0.51 0.66 0.53 0.78 0.74 1
21 0.25 0.34 0.34 0.23 0.28 0.35 0.42 0.37 0.40 0.37 0.40 0.49 0.47 0.56 0.48 0.54 0.42 0.56 0.51 0.57 1
22 0.33 0.43 0.41 0.28 0.33 0.42 0.44 0.60 0.57 0.43 0.60 0.52 0.60 0.52 0.45 0.56 0.46 0.70 0.66 0.65 0.56 1
All correlations with p<0.01.
120
SMS’’ (Someone used bad words or insulted me using e-mail
or SMS) was substituted for ‘‘Alguien me ha dicho groserı
´as
o insultado por internet (e-mail, redes sociales, llamadas o
SMS)’’ (Someone made rude comments or insulted me on
Internet [e-mail, social networks, calls or SMS]). The
changes were then incorporated into the Colombian version
(Appendix Table A1).
To establish the different roles of involvement, we fol-
lowed the criteria established by the authors of the ECIPQ
scale.
18
For example, to determine the role of cybervictim we
took into account subjects with scores q2 (once a month) in
all the cyber-victimization items, and a score p1 (once or
twice) in all of the cyber-aggression items. Involvement in
the role of cyberbully was measured taking into account
subjects with scores q2 (once a month) in any of the cyber-
aggression items, and scores p1 (once or twice) in all the
cyber-victimization items. The degree of involvement in the
role of bully-victim was obtained with scores q2 (once a
month) in at least one of the cyber-aggression items and in at
least one of the cyber-victimization items. Finally, nonin-
volvement was measured using scores p1 (once or twice) in
all cyber-aggression and cyber-victimization items.
Data analysis
A confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was performed for
the structural validation of the scale. Maximum likelihood
(ML) estimation with robust correction
41
and polychoric
correlation were used, given the categorical nature of the
variables.
42
To assess the suitability of the instrument, we
used the Satorra-Bentler scaled chi-square test
43
(v
2
S-B
), chi-
square divided by its degrees of freedom (v
2
S-B
/df)(p5
acceptable p3 optimal), the comparative fit index (CFI), and
the non-normed fit index (NNFI) (whose values must be
q0.95).
44,45
We also took into account the root mean square
error approximation (RMSEA p0.05), the standardized root
mean square residual (SRMR p0.08 acceptable, p0.05
optimal),
45
and the Akaike information criterion (AIC),
which is used to compare models (the lowest value indicates
the best model). The analysis was performed using the EQS
6.2 program.
46
A McDonald’s Omega (O) test was performed to analyze
the internal consistency of the instrument given that the
variables were categorical and reflected the absence of
multivariante normality.
47
The analysis was performed using
the FACTOR 9.2 program.
48
To assess the degree of robustness of the factorial structure
and hence the degree of generalization of the model in the
two countries, a multigroup analysis was performed. This
analysis requires a series of sequential comparisons using
progressively restricted models starting with a Model 1 to
test the configurational invariance, conferring the same fac-
torial structure to the two subgroups. To analyze the mea-
surement invariance, we proposed three models: Model 2,
where the covariances in both sample groups were restricted;
Model 3, where the factor loadings were made equal; and
Model 4 in which the residuals were restricted.
49
After de-
veloping the models, the delta values (D) of the NNFI, CFI,
RMSEA, and SRMR measures of fit were obtained using a
variance of p0.01 as the cutoff point to accept the invariance
hypothesis.
50
The chi-square difference test (Dv
2
S-B
) was
also performed, where nonsignificant differences indicate
model invariance.
51
This multigroup analysis was performed
using the EQS 6.2 program.
46
To compare the differences between countries regarding
the roles of involvement included in the questionnaire, we
performed a chi-square test (v
2
), taking into account the
values of the adjusted standardized residuals greater than
1.96 (95 percent confidence interval [CI]) and 2.58 (99
percent CI).
The level of significance was 0.05.
Results
The validation of the ECIPQ
18
content for Colombia,
based on the assessment of the expert panel, showed an ad-
equate degree of agreement (r
k
=0.81).
The CFA performed with the Colombian subsample in-
dicated that the assumptions of multivariate normality
were not met, as a Mardia coefficient value =875.13 was
obtained. The original two-factor structure was confirmed by
the adequate fit indices (v
2
S-B
=644.97; v
2
S-B
/(208) =3.10;
p<0.001; NNFI =0.97; CFI =0.97; RMSEA =0.047 (90
percent CI [0.043, 0.052]); SRMR =0.080; AIC =228.96)
(Fig. 1 and Table 1). The total internal consistency and the
consistency of each factor were optimal (Ocyber-
aggression =0.94; Ocyber-victimization =0.91; Oto-
tal =0.95).
The CFA performed with the Spanish subsample con-
firmed the original two-factor structure (v
2
S-B
=563.07;
v
2
S-B
/(208) =2.71; p<0.001; NNFI =0.96; CFI =0.97;
RMSEA =0.031 (90 percent CI [0.028, 0.034]); SRMR =
0.079; AIC =147.07). The total internal consistency and the
internal consistency of each factor were also optimal (O
cyber-aggression =0.96, Ocyber-victimization =0.94, O
total =0.97).
The results of the multigroup analysis were within the
established cutoff values (Table 2). In addition, the chi-
square differences between models 1 and 2, 1 and 3, and
models 1 and 4 were not significant. These results
Table 2. Multigroup Analysis: Configuration and Measurement Invariance
Mod v
2
S-B
df p NNFI CFI RMSEA SRMR Dv
2
S-B
DpDdf DNNFI DCFI DRMSEA DSRMR
Mod 1 2,503.97 416 0.00 0.96 0.96 0.05 0.08
Mod 2 2,492.47 436 0.00 0.96 0.96 0.05 0.08 11.50 0.94 (ns) 20 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Mod 3 2,483.36 417 0.00 0.96 0.96 0.05 0.08 20.61 0.97 (ns) 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Mod 4 2,537.58 437 0.00 0.96 0.96 0.05 0.09 33.61 0.98 (ns) 21 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01
CFI, comparative fit index; Mod 1, no restrictions; Mod 2, loaded factorial restrictions; Mod 3, covariance factorial restrictions; Mod 4,
residual restriction; NNFI, non-normed fit index; ns, not significant; RMSEA, root mean square error approximation; SRMR, standardized
root mean square residual.
VALIDATION OF THE ECIPQ FOR COLOMBIA 121
demonstrate the existence of invariance in the factorial
structure of the scale, indicating an optimal degree of ro-
bustness.
The chi-square analysis of roles of involvement indicated
a statistically significant and directly proportional relation-
ship between the country and cyber-aggression, with the
Spanish students being the most involved in this role v
2
(1,
1,873) =21.006; p=0.000, and between the country and
noninvolvement v
2
(1, 1,901) =7.062; p=0.008, with the
Colombian students being the least involved (Table 3).
Discussion
The aim of this study was to validate the ECIPQ scale for
Colombia; an internationally recognized measurement in-
strument of proven psychometric quality.
18
The analysis
confirmed the original two-factor structure of the ECIPQ:
cyber-aggression and cyber-victimization. Optimal values
and fit indices, in addition to good internal consistency were
also obtained. These results support the theoretical construct
that cyberbullying consists primarily of cyber-aggression
and cyber-victimization and that both dimensions are clearly
defined as in traditional bullying.
11
The results for the configuration and measurement in-
variance obtained in the multigroup analysis between Co-
lombia and Spain show that (a) the factorial structural of the
scale presents good robustness, thus ensuring optimal and
rigorous properties, as well as the added benefit of being able
to jointly measure the two major dimensions of cyberbully-
ing, cyber-aggression and cyber-victimization,
36,39,52
and (b)
despite the differences found in the role of aggressor and no
involvement, the dynamics of cyberbullying could be simi-
lar. This similarity could be attributed, among other things,
to the shrinking technology gap.
53
Although this inference
should be taken with caution, it could be a new line of re-
search focused on comparing the cultural aspects and the use
of new information technologies.
A more detailed analysis of the factorial model validated
for Colombia regarding the high factor loadings and satu-
ration in the items relating to rumors (gossip) and misuse of
personal data (pictures and videos) as bully or victim suggest
both the high tendency to engage intimidating practices us-
ing digital devices and the need for more education targeted
at the prevention and management of the personal data that
adolescents divulge in cyberspace.
54,55
The second hypothesis of this study was confirmed by
comparing the prevalence of cyberbullying among Co-
lombian and Spanish students. The results show that the
former are less involved, particularly in the role of cyber-
bully. These results could be attributed to the lower use of
information technologies by Colombian youth. Also may be
due to specific values regarding attitudes, behaviors, and
habits of Colombian adolescents, related to the collectivist
and restrictive Colombian school culture,
54,56
characterized
by respect for the rules of the institutions, conformity, and
obedience.
57
On the contrary, Spanish school culture pro-
motes individualism and self-assertion,
58
which leads them
to greater use of social networks. It has been shown that a
high use increases the risk of involvement in cyberbully-
ing.
59
In conclusion, owing to its optimal psychometric proper-
ties and ability to measure cyber-victimization and cyber-
aggression in a comprehensive manner, the ECIPQ is a
valuable instrument for gaining greater knowledge of cy-
berbullying. It could also be of use in other comparative
studies on the possible differences in the prevalence of cy-
berbullying and associated variables or that assess the results
of interventions targeted at preventing and reducing cyber-
bullying.
This study has some limitations, such as the cross-
sectional nature of the analysis and the potential social desir-
ability bias common to self-reporting.
60
Moreover, although
the overall sample was large, the Colombian subsample was
not representative, which could limit the generalization of the
model. As a future line of research, the sample could include
other Latin American countries, which would allow for
broader cross-cultural studies.
Acknowledgments
We would like to thank members from the schools of San
Juan de Pasto, Colombia, and Andalusia, Spain, for partici-
pating in the study. This study was performed within the
framework of the following projects: Project PRY040/14
funded by the Fundacio
´nPu
´blica Andaluza Centro de Estu-
dios Andaluces, Project EDU2013-44627-P funded by the
Spanish National R&D Plan, and Project BIL/14/S2/163
funded by the Fundacio
´n Mapfre.
Author Disclosure Statement
No competing financial interests exist.
References
1. Kubiszewski V, Fontaine R, Potard C, et al. Does cyber-
bullying overlap with school bullying when taking modal-
ity of involvement into account? Computers in Human
Behavior 2015; 43:49–57.
2. Hymel S, Swearer SM. Four decades of research on school
bullying. An introduction. American Psychologist 2015;
70:293–299.
Table 3. Percentage of Involvement in Cyberbullying
Country
Involvement
Cyber-victimization Cyber-aggression Cyberbully-victim Not involved
Colombia 10.7% SR =0.4 2.5% SR =-4.6 5.5% SR =-1.3 81.0%** SR =2.7
Spain 9.3% SR =-0.4 5.3%*** SR =4.6 6.4% SR =1.3 78.6% SR =-2.7
**p<0.01; ***p <0.001.
SR, standardized residual.
122 HERRERA-LO
´PEZ ET AL.
3. Modecki KL Minchin J, Harbaugh AG, et al. Bullying
prevalence across contexts: a meta-analysis measuring cy-
ber and traditional bullying. Journal of Adolescent Health
2014; 55:602–611.
4. Aboujaoude E, Savage MW, Starcevic V, et al. Cyberbul-
lying: review of an old problem gone viral. Journal of
Adolescent Health 2015; 57:10–18.
5. Selkie EM, Kota R, Chan YF, et al. Cyberbullying, de-
pression, and problem alcohol use in female college stu-
dents: a multisite study. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and
Social Networking 2015; 18:79–86.
6. Brewer G, Kerslake J. Cyberbullying, self-esteem, empathy
and loneliness. Computers in Human Behavior 2015; 48:
255–260.
7. Casas JA, Del Rey R, Ortega-Ruiz R. Bullying and cy-
berbullying: convergent and divergent predictor variables.
Computers in Human Behavior 2013; 29:580–587.
8. Hinduja S, Patchin JW. Cyberbullying: neither an epidemic
nor a rarity. European Journal of Developmental Psychol-
ogy 2012; 9:539–543.
9. Shin N, Ahn H. Factors affecting adolescents’ involvement
in cyberbullying: what divides the 20% from the 80%?
Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking 2015;
18:393–399.
10. Kowalski RM, Giumetti GW, Schroeder AN, et al. Bullying
in the digital age: a critical review and meta-analysis of
cyberbullying research among youth. Psychological Bul-
letin 2014; 4:1073–1137.
11. Olweus D. Cyberbullying: an overrated phenomenon?
European Journal of Developmental Psychology 2012; 9:
520–538.
12. Smith PK. The nature of cyberbullying and what we can do
about it. Journal of Research in Special Educational Needs
2015; 15:176–184.
13. Baldry AC, Farrington D, Sorrentino A. ‘‘Am I at risk of
cyberbullying’’? A narrative review and conceptual
framework for research on risk of cyberbullying and cy-
bervictimization: the risk and needs assessment approach.
Aggression and Violent Behavior 2015; 23:36–51.
14. Wright MF. Predictors of anonymous cyber aggression:
the role of adolescents’ beliefs about anonymity, aggres-
sion, and the permanency of digital content. Cyberpsy-
chology, Behavior, and Social Networking 2014; 17:
431–438.
15. Menesini E, Nocentini A, Palladino BE, et al. Cyberbul-
lying definition among adolescents: a comparison across six
European countries. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and So-
cial Networking 2012; 15:455–463.
16. Perren S, Corcoran L, Cowie H, et al. Tackling cyberbul-
lying: review of empirical evidence regarding successful
responses by students, parents, and schools. International
Journal of Conflict and Violence 2012; 6:283–292.
17. Ortega-Ruiz R, Zych I. Cyber-behavior and educational
psychology: challenges and risks [in Spanish]. Psicologı
´a
Educativa 2016; 22:1–4.
18. Del Rey R, Casas JA, Ortega-Ruiz R, et al. Structural
validation and cross-cultural robustness of the European
Cyberbullying Intervention Project Questionnaire. Com-
puters in Human Behavior 2015; 50:141–147.
19. Berne S, Frise
´n A, Schultze-Krumbholz A, et al. Cyber-
bullying assessment instruments: a systematic review. Ag-
gression and Violent Behavior 2013; 18:320–334.
20. Schultze-Krumbholz A, Go
¨bel K, Scheithauer H, et al. A
comparison of classification approaches for cyberbullying
and traditional bullying using data from six European
countries. Journal of School Violence 2015; 14:47–65.
21. Law DM, Shapka JD, Hymel S, et al. The changing face of
bullying: an empirical comparison between traditional and
internet bullying and victimization. Computers in Human
Behavior 2012; 28:226–232.
22. Menesini E, Nocentini A, Calussi P. The measurement of
cyberbullying: dimensional structure and relative item se-
verity and discrimination. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and
Social Networking 2011; 5:267–274.
23. Palladino BE, Nocentini A, Menesini E. Psychometric prop-
erties of the Florence CyberBullying-CyberVictimization
Scales. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking
2015; 18:112–119.
24. Calvete E, Orue I, Este
´vez A, et al. Cyberbullying in ad-
olescents: modalities and aggressors’ profile. Computers in
Human Behavior 2010; 26:1128–1135.
25. Tynes BM, Rose CA, Williams DR. The development and
validation of the Online Victimization Scale for adolescents.
Journal of Psychosocial Research on Cyberspace 2010; 4:1–15.
26. Dempsey AG, Sulkowski ML, Nichols R, et al. Differences
between peer victimization in cyber and physical settings
and associated psychosocial adjustment in early adoles-
cence. Psychology in the Schools 2009; 46:962–972.
27. Dooley JJ, Py_
zalski J, Cross D. Cyberbullying versus face-
to-face bullying. Zeitschrift fu
¨r Psychologie/Journal of
Psychology 2009; 217:182–188.
28. Py_
zalski J. From cyberbullying to electronic aggression:
typology of the phenomenon. Emotional and Behavioural
Difficulties 2012; 17:305–317.
29. Zych I, Ortega-Ruiz R, Del Rey R. Scientific research on
bullying and cyberbullying: where have we been and where
are we going. Aggression and Violent Behavior 2015; 24:
188–198.
30. Del Rı
´o PJ, Bringue SX, Sa
´bada CC, et al. Cyberbullying: a
comparative analysis in students from Argentina, Brazil, Chile,
Colombia, Mexico, Peru and Venezuela [in Spanish]. In: V
Congre
´s Internacional Comunicacio
´I Realitat. Barcelona;
2010:307–316.
31. Mura G, Diamantini D. Cyberbullying among Colombian
students: an exploratory investigation. European Journal of
Investigation in Health 2013; 3:249–256.
32. Buelga S, Cava MJ, Musitu G. Validation of the adolescent
victimization through mobile phone and internet scale [in
Spanish]. Revista Panamericana De Salud Pu
´blica/Pan
American Journal of Public Health 2012; 32:36–42.
33. Baquero CA, Avendan
˜o PBL. Design and psychometric
analysis of an instrument to detect the presence of cyber-
bullying in a school context [in Spanish]. Psychology,
Society, & Education 2015; 7:213–226.
34. Jime
´nez AE, Castillo VD, Cisternas LC. Validation of the
aggression among peers scale and virtual aggression Sub-
scale with Chilean students [in Spanish]. Revista Latinoa-
mericana de Ciencias Sociales, Nin
˜ez y Juventud 2012;
10:825–840.
35. Baek J, Bullock LM. Cyberbullying: a cross-cultural per-
spective. Emotional and Behavioural Difficulties 2014; 19:
226–238.
36. Barlett CP, Gentile DA, Anderson CA, et al. Cross-cultural
differences in cyberbullying behavior: a short-term longi-
tudinal study. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology 2014;
45:300–313.
37. Said-Hung E. Vulnerable young people and mobile parti-
cipation in Colombia: a study of the levels of citizen par-
VALIDATION OF THE ECIPQ FOR COLOMBIA 123
ticipation and appropriation among beneficiaries of social
programs [in Spanish]. Innovar 2014; 24:31–44.
38. Montero I, Leo
´n OG. A guide for naming research studies
in psychology. International Journal of Clinical and Health
Psychology 2007; 7:847–862.
39. Ortega-Ruiz R, Del Rey R, Casas JA. Assessing bullying
and cyberbullying: Spanish validation of EBIPQ and
ECIPQ [in Spanish]. Psicologı
´a Educativa 2016; 22:71–79.
40. Brislin RW. (1986) The wording and translation of research
instruments. In Lonner W, Berry J, eds. Field methods in
cross-cultural research. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage, pp. 137–
164.
41. Bryant FB, Satorra A. Principles and practice of scaled
difference chi-square testing. Structural Equation Model-
ing: A Multidisciplinary Journal 2012; 19:372–398.
42. Jo
¨reskog KG. On the estimation of polychoric correlations
and their asymptotic covariance matrix. Psychometrika
1994; 59:381–389.
43. Bentler PM, Bonett DG. Significance tests and goodness of
fit in the analysis of covariance structures. Psychological
Bulletin 1980; 88:588–606.
44. Satorra A, Bentler PM. A scaled difference chi-square test
statistic for moment structure analysis. Psychometrika
2001; 66:507–514.
45. Hu L, Bentler PM. Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in co-
variance structure analysis: conventional criteria versus
new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multi-
disciplinary Journal 1999; 6:1–55.
46. Bentler PM. (2005) EQS structural equations program
manual. Encino, CA: Multivariate Software.
47. Elosua OP, Zumbo BD. Reliability coefficients for ordered
categorical response scales [in Spanish]. Psicothema 2008;
20:896–901.
48. Lorenzo-Seva U, Ferrando PJ. FACTOR: a computer pro-
gram to fit the exploratory factor analysis model. Behavioral
Research Methods, Instruments and Computers 2006;
38:88–91.
49. Byrne BM, Shavelson RJ, Muthe
´n B. Testing for the
equivalence of factor covariance and mean structures: the
issue of partial measurement invariance. Psychological
Bulletin 1989; 105:456–466.
50. Dimitrov DM. Testing for factorial invariance in the con-
text of construct validation. Measurement and Evaluation in
Counseling and Development 2010; 43:121–149.
51. Bollen KA. (1989) Structural equations with latent vari-
ables. New York: Wiley.
52. Thomas HJ, Connor JP, Scott JG. Integrating traditional
bullying and cyberbullying: challenges of definition and
measurement in adolescents, a review. Educational Psy-
chology Review 2015; 27:135–152.
53. International Telecommunication Union (ITU). (2015)
Measuring the information society report 2015. Geneve:
ITU.
54. Almansa-Martı
´nez A, Fonseca O, Castillo-Esparcia A.
Social networks and young people. Comparative study of
Facebook between Colombia and Spain. Comunicar 2013;
20:127–135.
55. Festl R, Scharkow M, Quandt T. The individual or the
group: a multilevel analysis of cyberbullying in school
classes. Human Communication Research 2015; 41:535–
556.
56. Arango FG, Bringue
´SX, Sa
´daba CC. Interactive generation
in Colombia: teenagers before the internet, the cell phone,
and the videogames [in Spanish]. Anagrama 2010; 17:45–
56.
57. Lila M, Musitu G, Buelga S. Colombian and Spanish
adolescents: differences, similarities and relationships
between family socialization, self-esteem and values [in
Spanish]. Revista Latinoamericana de Psicologı
´a 2000;
32:301–319.
58. Arnett JJ. Broad and narrow socialization: the family in the
context of a cultural theory. Journal of Marriage and the
Family 1995; 57:617–628.
59. Romera EM, Herrera-Lo
´pez M, Casas JA, et al. Multi-
dimensional social competence, motivation, and cyberbul-
lying: a cultural approach with Colombian and Spanish
adolescents. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology. In press.
DOI: 10.1177/0022022116687854.
60. Stone AA, Turkkan J, Bacharach CA, et al. (1999) The
science of self report: implications for research and prac-
tice. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbawn Associates.
Address correspondence to:
Dr. Mauricio Herrera-Lo
´pez
University of Narin
˜o
Ciudad Universitaria Torobajo
Calle 18 N50-40
CP 520002 San Juan de Pasto (Narin
˜o)
Colombia
E-mail: mherrera@udenar.edu.co
Appendix
Appendix Table A1. European Cyberbullying Intervention Project Questionnaire for Colombia
Cyber-victimization
ECIPQ 1 Alguien me ha dicho groserı
´as o insultado por internet (e-mail, redes sociales, llamadas o sms)
[Someone said nasty things to me or called me names using texts or online messages]
ECIPQ 2 Alguien ha dicho a otros groserı
´as sobre mı
´usando internet o sms (mensajes de celular) [Someone
said nasty things about me to others either online or through text messages]
ECIPQ 3 Alguien me ha amenazado a trave
´s de internet o sms (mensajes de celular) [Someone threatened me
through texts or online messages]
(continued)
124 HERRERA-LO
´PEZ ET AL.
Appendix Table AT1. (Continued)
ECIPQ 4 Alguien ha pirateado mi cuenta de correo y ha sacado mi informacio
´n personal (por ejemplo, a
trave
´s de e-mail o red social) [Someone hacked into my account and stole personal information
(e.g., through e-mail or social networking accounts)]
ECIPQ 5 Alguien ha pirateado mi cuenta y se ha hecho pasar por mı
´(a trave
´s de las redes sociales o e-mail)
[Someone hacked into my account and pretended to be me (e.g., through instant messaging or
social networking accounts)]
ECIPQ 6 Alguien ha creado una cuenta falsa en internet para hacerse pasar por mı
´(facebook, twitter,
whatsapp, e-mail, otra) [Someone created a fake account, pretending to be me (e.g., on Facebook
or MSN)]
ECIPQ 7 Alguien ha colgado informacio
´n personal sobre mı
´en internet [Someone posted personal
information about me online]
ECIPQ 8 Alguien ha colgado videos o fotos comprometedoras mı
´as en internet [Someone posted
embarrassing videos or pictures of me online]
ECIPQ 9 Alguien ha retocado fotos mı
´as que yo habı
´a colgado en internet [Someone altered pictures or
videos of me that I had posted online]
ECIPQ 10 He sido sacado (excluido) o ignorado de una red social o de chat [I was excluded or ignored by
others in a social networking site or Internet chatroom]
ECIPQ 11 Alguien ha difundido chismes (rumores) sobre mı
´por internet [Someone spread rumors about me
on the Internet]
Cyber-aggression
ECIPQ 12 He dicho groserı
´as o insultado a alguien usando mensajes por internet o sms (mensajes por celular)
[I said nasty things to someone or called them names using texts or online messages]
ECIPQ 13 He dicho groserı
´as sobre alguien a otras personas en mensajes por internet o sms [I said nasty things
about someone to other people either online or through text messages]
ECIPQ 14 He amenazado a alguien por internet o a trave
´s de mensajes de celular (sms) [I threatened someone
through texts or online messages]
ECIPQ 15 He pirateado (hackeado) la cuenta de correo o perfil de alguien y he robado su informacio
´n personal
(e-mail, red social) [I hacked into someone’s account and stole personal information
(e.g., through e-mail or social networking accounts)]
ECIPQ 16 He pirateado la cuenta o perfil de alguien y me he hecho pasar por e
´l/ella a trave
´s del chat, mensajes
o correos en las redes sociales [I hacked into someone’s account and pretended to be them
(e.g., through instant messaging or social networking accounts)]
ECIPQ 17 He creado una cuenta falsa para hacerme pasar por otra persona (por ejemplo en facebook, twitter,
chat, instagram u otra) [I created a fake account, pretending to be someone else (e.g., on
Facebook or MSN)]
ECIPQ 18 He colgado informacio
´n personal sobre alguien en internet (por ejemplo en redes sociales) [I posted
personal information about someone online]
ECIPQ 19 He colgado videos o fotos comprometedoras de alguien en internet [I posted embarrassing videos or
pictures of someone online]
ECIPQ 20 He retocado fotos o videos de alguien, que estaban colgados en internet [I altered pictures or videos
of another person that had been posted online]
ECIPQ 21 He excluido (sacado) o ignorado a alguien de una red social o de chat [I excluded or ignored
someone in a social networking site or Internet chatroom]
ECIPQ 22 He difundido rumores (chismes) sobre otras personas por internet [I spread rumors about someone
on the Internet]
ECIPQ, European Cyberbullying Intervention Project Questionnaire.
VALIDATION OF THE ECIPQ FOR COLOMBIA 125
... The design of the investigation instrument would need to be simple, comprehensive, and easy to understand. The cyberbullying research instruments used by Molluzzo et al. (2013), andHerrera-Lopez et al. (2017) could be modified to suit the needs of the university for the purpose of accomplishing this task. ...
Article
Full-text available
Cyberbullying problem has become a global concern in universities. In Nigerian universities, the concern appears to be blamed on the lack of cyberbullying prevention and management strategies. The purpose of this qualitative exploratory case study was to explore the policy decision makers’ recommendations for the development of cyberbullying management strategies for the staff and students of a Nigerian university. The three theories used to guide the study were Glasser’s (1998) choice theory, Bandura’s (1986) theory of moral disengagement, and Bronfenbrenner’s (1977) social ecological theory. Data for the study were obtained from three sources: interviews, documents, and archival records of the university. Seven participants, all members of the Committee of Provosts, Deans, and Directors (COPD), were used for the study. The constant comparative method was used to analyze the data. Three major themes emerged as findings in the study: cyberbullying awareness, cyberbullying situation in the university, and the university cyberbullying management policy. These findings may help to make university policy makers aware of the significance of cyberbullying policy in Nigerian universities. The findings may also help to make the university management leadership consider the development of research-based cyberbullying awareness raising training programs and cyberbullying management policy for the staff and students.
... Cyberbullying, which refers to intentional aggression perpetrated using electronic devices, is becoming an increasingly common problem among youth (Herrera-López et al., 2017;Katz et al., 2019;Li, 2007;Zych et al., 2016). Cyberbullying has two dimensions: cyber-aggression and cyber-victimization, with the former receiving much more research attention (Del Rey et al., 2015). ...
Conference Paper
Full-text available
Perfectionism, operationalized by the Frost Multidimensional Perfectionism Scale, consists of 6 factors: Concern over Mistakes, Organization, Parental Expectations, Personal Standards, Doubts about Actions, and Parental Criticism. The study aims to examine the predictor contribution of perfectionism factors to the occurrence of anxiety. The sample consisted of 189 subjects (37% with an anxiety disorder), aged 38 ± 9.3. The results revealed that only 2 predictors make a significant independent contribution (Concern over Mistakes and Doubts about Actions). The characteristics of anxious people are negative thoughts and preoccupation with oneself, reflected in Concern over Mistakes and Doubts about Actions. The results suggest that the influence of significant others isn't significant predictor to the onset of anxiety. These results imply that in psychotherapy, we should focus on the client's negative thoughts, self-confidence, and acceptance of his mistakes.
... Cyberbullying, which refers to intentional aggression perpetrated using electronic devices, is becoming an increasingly common problem among youth (Herrera-López et al., 2017;Katz et al., 2019;Li, 2007;Zych et al., 2016). Cyberbullying has two dimensions: cyber-aggression and cyber-victimization, with the former receiving much more research attention (Del Rey et al., 2015). ...
Conference Paper
Full-text available
How adolescents spend their leisure time has proven to be important for their well-being. The aim of this work was to determine if there are connections between certain patterns of leisure time behaviors and specific aspects of well-being. The sample included 1358 secondary school students. Seven leisure time patterns were extracted and latent variables interpreted as an orientation towards Pop Culture, Culture/Art/Music, Films/TV-Shows/Internet, Science/ Politics, Information Technologies, Going Out, and Sports. Well-being scales include the following five aspects: Engagement (E), Perseverance (P), Optimism (O), Connectedness (C), and Happiness (H).
... Cyberbullying, which refers to intentional aggression perpetrated using electronic devices, is becoming an increasingly common problem among youth (Herrera-López et al., 2017;Katz et al., 2019;Li, 2007;Zych et al., 2016). Cyberbullying has two dimensions: cyber-aggression and cyber-victimization, with the former receiving much more research attention (Del Rey et al., 2015). ...
Preprint
Full-text available
Perfectionism, operationalized by the Frost Multidimensional Perfectionism Scale, consists of 6 factors: Concern over Mistakes, Organization, Parental Expectations, Personal Standards, Doubts about Actions, and Parental Criticism. The study aims to examine the predictor contribution of perfectionism factors to the occurrence of anxiety. The sample consisted of 189 subjects (37% with an anxiety disorder), aged 38 ± 9.3. The results revealed that only 2 predictors make a significant independent contribution (Concern over Mistakes and Doubts about Actions). The characteristics of anxious people are negative thoughts and preoccupation with oneself, reflected in Concern over Mistakes and Doubts about Actions. The results suggest that the influence of significant others isn't significant predictor to the onset of anxiety. These results imply that in psychotherapy, we should focus on the client's negative thoughts, self-confidence, and acceptance of his mistakes.
... The growth of the internet worldwide has led to online platforms being misused as a new opportunity for teen bullying (Herrera-López et al., 2017). According to a 2019 United Nations survey covering 31 countries, one-third of young people reported exposure to cyberbully, and one-fifth of them skipped school because of it (Naftalin, 2019). ...
Article
Full-text available
The debate over teenagers’ exposure to cyberbullying has aroused broad public concern, but there are few nationwide empirical studies on teen cyberbullying in China. Based on social cognitive theory, this study analyzes the current state of cyberbullying among Chinese teenagers using a questionnaire survey ( N = 1,538) distributed to teenagers in eastern, central, and western regions of China. The results suggest that 18.1% ( N = 279) of respondents reported having bullied someone and 54.6% ( N = 839) reported having been bullied online, and that age, gender, individual school performance, and risky online behaviors may predict different cyberbullying behaviors. Enhancing teenagers’ awareness of the importance of protecting their personal information is critical, along with implementing social protective measures to contain cyberbullying.
... En cuanto a la forma en que se ha estudiado el cyberbullying, se han considerado las siguientes variables: constatación de su presencia en las aulas, a partir de la opinión de los estudiantes -con el uso de encuestas- (Coelho y Sousa, 2018;Herrera-López et al., 2017;Zhen y Yuanyuan, 2019), rasgos que prevalecen en los acosadores y víctimas (Herrera-López et al., 2018); daños inmediatos y repercusiones a largo plazo que manifiestan los estudiantes (Hamal et al., 2019); medios que se emplean: páginas web, chats, foros y mensajes instantáneos (Aftab, 2006); el uso de diferentes dispositivos: teléfonos móviles, computadoras y tablets (Domínguez-Alonso et al., 2017); los tipos de agresiones más frecuentes (Adorjan y Ricciardelli, 2019); riesgos y daños al que están expuestos los niños y jóvenes, tanto en las aulas como fuera de la escuela (Lehman, 2020); la edad de los protagonistas (Paez, 2018;Redondo-Pacheco et al., 2018); el género, como factor para explicar el tipo de acoso entre agresores y víctimas (Donoso-Vázquez et al., 2017;Warwick y Purdy, 2019); las características del agresor y la víctima: motivaciones y percepciones (Campbell et al., 2018), así como los tipos de daño psicológico que sufren las víctimas (Miller, 2017); efectos socioemocionales que tiene sobre los sujetos: persecución, paranoia, angustia, miedo, soledad (Baeza et al., 2010;Wagner, 2019) y conductas autodestructivas registradas por las víctimas: depresión e ideas suicidas (Barzilay, 2017;Hinduja y Patchin, 2018). ...
Article
Full-text available
El artículo de investigación analiza el fenómeno del cyberbullying en seis escuelas secundarias y cuatro preparatorias públicas y privadas. Se realizaron entrevistas con acosadores, víctimas, estudiantes y docentes, además de la recuperación de fotos, imágenes, videos, mensajes escritos y de voz utilizados en los 25 casos en donde se presentó este tipo de acoso. Desde las bases de la teoría del poder, caracterizamos la relación asimétrica que prevalece entre los involucrados, las amenazas y contra amenazas que se registran, así como los distintos recursos que se movilizan (coacción, fuerza y violencia), con la finalidad de lograr la obediencia, lo que genera diversas consecuencias y daños sobre la víctima. Entre los principales hallazgos están los siguientes: a) acosadores: buscan el control total de las acciones de la víctima; la crueldad de algunos actos están relacionados con el poder que el agresor quiere que se le reconozca; un acosador ejerce violencia a más de una víctima; justifican sus acciones como parte de la cultura escolar que se da entre pares; b) víctimas: el miedo paraliza y anula su capacidad de respuesta, no denuncian por temor a sufrir agresiones; padecen un maltrato permanente que se traduce en sufrimiento, deterioro en su identidad y deseos de abandonar la escuela; las mujeres padecen más acoso de tipo sexual; c) los docentes no saben cómo proceder y demandan capacitación para su atención. El cyberbullying se manifiesta de diversas maneras y crece aceleradamente en las escuelas, genera subculturas delictivas que promueven individuos o grupos que legitiman sus acciones como una forma para reafirmar su poder.
... Another study conducted with Polish primary and secondary education students (Twardowska-Staszek et al., 2018) found that 6.5% reported perpetration, 31% victimization and 33% being a bully/victim. Compared to research using the same instrument in other countries such as Spain and Colombia (Herrera-López et al., 2017), prevalence rates of bullying in Poland were higher. ...
Article
Full-text available
Bullying and cyberbullying have been intensively studied in many countries, and research on the topic has been fruitful. Nevertheless, it is still necessary to advance knowledge on bullying and cyberbullying in many geographical areas and to discover their risk and protective factors. The objective of this study was to describe and compare the involvement in different bullying and cyberbullying roles in Spain and Poland, identifying risk and protective factors such as moral disengagement, social and emotional competencies, moral emotions and empathy. This study was carried out with a sample of 2535 primary and secondary school students from Spain and Poland. More bullying and cyberbullying involvement were found in Poland in comparison with Spain. Different moral disengagement mechanisms were found to be risk factors for involvement in bullying and cyberbullying in both countries. Low moral emotions were a risk factor for bullying and cyberbullying perpetration in Spain and Poland. Different social and emotional competencies were protective against bullying and cyberbullying in both countries. These results suggest the need to design and implement more programs to promote social, emotional and moral competencies in Spain and Poland to protect children against bullying and cyberbullying.
Article
Objectives: The global spread of electronic devices has made cyberbullying and problematic social media use (PSMU) emerging public health concerns. This study aimed to investigate the prevalence of cyberbullying and PMSU among adolescents in northwestern Italy. We also explored the association between cyberbullying and PSMU and whether this association was moderated by social support. Study design: Data were collected as part of the Italian 2018 Health Behaviour in School-aged Children (HBSC) study in the Piedmont region; 186 school classes participated, comprising 3022 children aged 11, 13 and 15 years. The prevalence of cyberbullying and PSMU were estimated in subgroups of age and gender. Multivariate logistic regression was used to investigate the association between cyberbullying and PSMU, before and after taking into account social support. Results: Girls reported higher cyber-victimisation and PSMU than boys (9.1% vs 6.0% and 10.2% vs 6.1%, respectively), and the risk of cyber-victimisation was higher in the presence of PSMU. This risk was attenuated in the presence of social support. Conclusions: PSMU is an important driver of cyberbullying, although social support can mediate these behaviours. Public health interventions are needed to guide adolescents how to use social media appropriately and to prevent cyberbullying and the mental health problems they can provoke.
Article
Full-text available
The purpose of this work is to present the content validation process of the Cyberbullying Questionnaire de-signed in Ireland by Corcoran and Mc Guckin (2014). In this instrumental study, 15 judges with expertise and experience in the subject participated, who quantitatively and qualitatively weighted the questionnaire. Regarding the qualitative analysis, all contributions were taken into account. The quantitative data were systematized using Aiken's V coefficient supplemented with the use of confidence intervals. The results indicate a wide degree of agreement among the judges, as they present confidence intervals greater than .50. Therefore, it is concluded that the Cyber-aggression Questionnaire is an adequate tool to measure this construct in school-going adolescents in Argentina. This study offers the first valid instrument in Spanish to measure this phenomenon.
Article
Full-text available
International research on the risk and protective factors of cyberbullying focus on individual personality variables and the use of technological devices. However, it is necessary to examine in greater depth the interpersonal context as a factor that may influence cyberbullying and the possible differences between cultures. The objective of this article was to analyze the relationship of influence of two interpersonal variables, multidimensional social competence and social motivation, on cyberaggression and cybervictimization through a cultural study of Spain and Colombia, which will permit generalizing the influence of interpersonal variables on cyberbullying in different cultural settings. The sample consisted of 3,830 secondary school students (50.4% Colombian and 49.6% Spanish). Self-reporting measurement instruments validated with different European samples were used. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) and structural equation modeling (SEM) were performed. A model of mutual influence revealing the inverse relationship of normative adjustment and the direct relationship of popularity goals in cyberaggression was obtained. Cybervictimization was explained by the direct influence of prosocial behaviors and avoidance goals and the inverse influence of perceived social efficacy, development goals, and social and normative adjustment. As conclusion, this study demonstrates the homogeneity of the Colombian and Spanish models and the important role that the face-to-face context plays in cyberbullying involvement. This article highlights and supports the design of cyberbullying prevention programs, which requires the inclusion of multidimensional social competence and social goals.
Article
Full-text available
El ciberacoso es un fenómeno relacionado con internet, reconocido y en crecimiento. Aunque el enfoque de la investigación en este campo está expandiéndose rápidamente, la mayoría de las investigaciones se centraron en las experiencias de adolescentes en países industrializados, como los de Europa occidental o países anglosajones. Pero, los jóvenes de los países en desarrollo ¿están expuestos a los mismos riesgos? Para responder a esta pregunta, este trabajo presenta una parte de los resultados de un proyecto más amplio, y centra su atención en la incidencia de episodios de ciberacoso entre los estudiantes de secundaria en Colombia. Los datos se recogieron sobre una muestra de 359 estudiantes, 64.1% varones y 35.9% mujeres, entre los 13 y los 19 años de edad, utilizando un cuestionario entregado en horario escolar. El análisis demuestra que los episodios de ciberacoso están bastante extendidos en el grupo de la muestra; teniendo en cuenta que más del 60% de los jóvenes entrevistados estuvo involucrado (ya sea como víctima o como acosador) en al menos 2 episodios en los 6 meses anteriores a la investigación. Las diferencias entre los sexos han sido analizadas, pero no han dado resultados significativos. En conclusión este estudio pone en evidencia la necesidad de una investigación más profunda y amplia del ciberacoso, tanto entre la población masculina como entre la femenina, de los así llamados "países en desarrollo", porque parece que la difusión de éste fenómeno está afectando también a la juventud de éstos países.
Article
Full-text available
The objective of this research was to design an instrument to detect cyberbullying in a school context and analyze its psychometric properties. Participants were 299 adolescents (54.2% female and 45.8% male) with a mean age of 15 years, belonging to the lower stratum (22.1%) and middle layer (78%). A quantitative study with a non-experimental design instrumental and the cross section was performed. Under the classical test theory, adequate internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha α = .864) and convergent validity with other measures was obtained. Confirmatory factor analysis in SPSS version 21, which resulted in three factors was performed. From item response theory, INFIT found that the items ranged from 0.73 and 1.23 and between 0.74 and 1.24 OUTFIT. Based on the favorable results of psychometric analysis, we conclude that the instrument can be used for detection of cyberbullying in a school context.
Article
Full-text available
This study explores the level of appropriation and the citizen participation model, trough cellular phones, of Colombian young people under condition of vulnerability, registered in the National System of Possible Beneficiaries (Sisbén) in levels 1 and 2. With this objective, 383 surveys were applied in Barranquilla during the first semester of 2010. The findings show that despite of high penetration of mobile phones, relation between young people and social organizations through these devices is still incipient. The paper concludes explaining that participation is still hold in traditional scenarios and predominant communication model of young with vulnerabilities is referred to passive receiver.
Article
The aim of this research work was to analyze the existing relationships between the socialization processes, family, values and self-esteem in adolescents, from a cross-cultural perspective. Participants were 706 adolescents (424 Spanish, 282 Colombians), of both sexes (382 females, 324 males), 14 to 18 years old. All participants were high school students. Instruments were the Scale of Family Socialization (soc 30), Self-esteem Scale (AUT 30) and two scales obtained from the Rokeach Values Survey: The Scale of Terminal Values and the Scale of Instrumental Values. Results were analyzed using correlational techniques, and especial emphasis was placed on the variable culture. Some significant differences were found: More physical and academic self-esteem in Colombian adolescents, more perception of punishment, and higher scores in compliance, than in Spain adolescents. The importance of doing research concerning the influence of the sociocultural context on family socialization, self-esteem, and values, is pointed out.
Article
Cyberbullying is a type of bullying, which in turn is a type of aggression. This paper gives a brief history of research, and discusses definitional issues around cyberbullying, and three challenges facing researchers; it then reviews some basic findings about prevalence, age and gender differences, predictors of involvement, and effects and correlates of involvement. It concludes with evidence as to whether cyberbullying is getting worse, on coping strategies, and on resources, guidance and intervention.
Article
Despite some variations among cyberbullying studies, about 20% of the youth population surveyed appears to be involved in cyberbullying. Coincidentally, the current study found that exactly 20% of the students surveyed were involved in cyberbullying as bullies (7.8%), victims (7.5%), and bully/victims (4.7%). What divides those 20% from the 80% of noninvolved students? This study aimed to produce a parsimonious and accurate model that can predict the occurrence of involvement in cyberbullying among youth. Data were collected from a questionnaire survey administered to 1,036 students enrolled in secondary schools in South Korea. Stepwise logistic regression (SLR) was carried out to predict the dichotomous dependent variable (involved/noninvolved) with 10 independent variables grouped into three categories: (a) demographic, (b) media-related, and (c) school and psychology factors. The result of the SLR analysis yielded a four-step model including the variables of cyber-confidence, weekday game time, mobile activities, and age as being significant in explaining the 20/80 division (model χ(2)=34.306, df=4, p<0.001, Nagelkerke R(2)=0.071). This finding suggests that younger students who spend more time playing games on weekdays while being more confident in cyberspace and active in using mobile phones are more likely to be involved in cyberbullying than other students. In particular, the construct of cyber-confidence calls for further elaboration and research, given its controversial function with respect to adolescents' involvement in cyberbullying. Also, this study may bring about insights into practical considerations needed for concerned researchers, teachers, and parents to identify who is inside the group involved in cyberbullying so as to help the participating adolescents escape from the circle of cyberbullying.
Article
Despite being relatively new, cyberbullying is now well recognized as a serious public health problem affecting children and adolescents. Scientific exploration has lagged media attention, but a synthesis of studies across several disciplines permits an understanding of its epidemiology, phenomenology, mental health dimensions, and management tools. To assess current knowledge of cyberbullying, we searched the MEDLINE, PubMed and PsycINFO databases for articles on "cyberbullying" and related designations. The Google search engine was used to capture otherwise unpublished legislative, governmental, and community response data and to help identify relevant books and book chapters. A significant proportion of children and adolescents (20%-40%) have been victims of cyberbullying, with females and sexual minorities seemingly at higher risk. Perpetrators are more likely to be male. By nature of the electronic platform, there seems to be an easier path to the bully-victim phenomenon (victims who become bullies or vice versa) than that in traditional bullying. A nonlinear relationship with age is suggested, but demographic data overall are preliminary. Accompanying psychopathology, including an increasingly well-established link to suicidality, is common. Several prevention and management approaches have been proposed to help prevent cyberbullying or mitigate its effects. Cyberbullying's seeming ubiquity, its disproportionate toll on vulnerable populations (e.g., children and sexual minorities), the link with suicidality, and the expected continued rise in Internet penetrance and connectivity make confronting it an urgent matter. A multipronged approach is most likely to succeed and would include: educational media campaigns; school-based programs; parental oversight and involvement; legislative action; and screening and evidence-based interventions by health care providers, especially pediatricians and mental health professionals. More research is needed into cyberbullying, but available data suggest a serious problem whose consequences are real and should not be dismissed as a "virtual" by-product of an increasingly digitalized childhood and adolescence. Copyright © 2015 Society for Adolescent Health and Medicine. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.