Access to this full-text is provided by MDPI.
Content available from International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health (IJERPH)
This content is subject to copyright.
International Journal of
Environmental Research
and Public Health
Article
Doxing Victimization and Emotional Problems
among Secondary School Students in Hong Kong
Qiqi Chen 1, Ko Ling Chan 1, * and Anne Shann Yue Cheung 2
1Department of Applied Social Sciences, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hong Kong, China;
qchen2333@gmail.com
2Faculty of Law, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China; anne.cheung@hku.hk
*Correspondence: koling.chan@polyu.edu.hk; Tel.: +852-2766-5709
Received: 26 October 2018; Accepted: 25 November 2018; Published: 27 November 2018
Abstract:
Doxing is the searching for and intentional disclosure of private information about a
particular individual on the Internet without his or her consent, and is often used to exact punishment.
The aim of this study was to investigate the associations between doxing victimization and emotional
problems in secondary school students, paying particular regard to the impacts of different types of
doxed information, the relationship between the perpetrators and victims of doxing, and the nature
of the online platforms where doxing occurs. A sample of 2120 Hong Kong secondary school students
of differing socioeconomic backgrounds participated in the study. The results show that almost all
types of disclosed personal information result in negative feelings in victims, including depression,
anxiety, and stress. Girls were also found to be more likely than boys to be doxed. Significant
associations were found between emotional problems and the disclosure of mobile phone numbers
and personal photos and videos; doxing conducted by schoolmates and anxiety and depression,
and doxing through Instant Messenger and anxiety. Further exploration of integrated cyber violence
prevention programs and research on the details of doxing are recommended.
Keywords: doxing; victimization; depression; anxiety; stress; privacy
1. Introduction
The increasing use of social networking sites such as Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram has
significantly transformed our social interactions. Such sites have become an integral part of many
young people’s daily social lives [
1
], and yet awareness of the need to protect data privacy does not
seem to have kept pace with the sites’ development [
2
]. The disclosure of personal data, broadcasting
by adolescents of their own lives, and ability to leave comments on others’ posts have not only greatly
enabled the communication and dissemination of personal information but also severely undermined
privacy [
3
]. Individuals are at greater risk of violence, both online and off, when their personal
information is easily accessible [4].
Of the various types of problematic online behavior, doxing, which refers to “searching for and
publishing private or identifying information about a particular individual on the Internet, typically
with malicious intent,” is particularly worrying [
5
]. Doxed information may include such private or
even intimate data as an individual’s name, residential address, and academic or business record,
and personal photographs and videos [
5
]. Connections are often drawn and developed among
disparate pieces of information gathered from several sources, thereby enabling inferences to be made
about the victim’s identity and even physical location [
6
]. A recent systematic review revealed that
approximately 25% of adolescents in the United States have reported experiencing online harassment
and victimization, with 35% of harassment victims having received threatening posts and messages at
some point [7].
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2018,15, 2665; doi:10.3390/ijerph15122665 www.mdpi.com/journal/ijerph
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2018,15, 2665 2 of 8
The typical motives for doxing include holding the targeted individuals to account for their
wrongdoings, humiliating them for some reason, and online stalking [
5
]. The need to seek social
approval and status often intensifies information disclosure and other risk-taking behavior, and the
victims of real-world violence may also use Internet-based tools to seek revenge [
8
]. In contrast to
harassment in the physical world, doxing is generally done anonymously in cyberspace and can
happen to anyone. When doxing victims are identified by their name and address, it becomes easier
for other netizens to infer further identifiable information about them, which constitutes a breach of
victims’ right to data privacy [
5
]. Furthermore, the information disclosed is often shared and easily
accessed through blogs, social networking sites, email, and/or online forums, thereby facilitating
collective cyberbullying [9].
The current literature examining the demographic characteristics of doxing perpetrators and
victims is limited. With respect to gender variations, studies report that girls are more likely than boys
to be involved in relational aggression both in the physical world and in cyberspace as perpetrators
and victims, including, for example, spreading rumors and releasing private information about others,
excluding targeted individuals from one’s peer group, and encouraging group members to ostracize
victims through threats [
4
,
10
]. One study suggests that gender differences may depend on the channel
and form of perpetration; for example, girls are more frequently targeted via email, whereas boys are
more often bullied through text messaging [
3
]. Researchers have also revealed that prevalence rates of
cyberbullying peak during middle school, as adolescents manage to establish their place in the social
hierarchy and gain control over peers [
11
]. Doxing can have devastating consequences for its victims,
who fear being harassed physically in the real world and emotionally on the Internet, and abusive
doxing can last for years [8].
Social media users often feel uncertain about and uncomfortable with what they share owing to
the unpredictable nature of online audiences, and are therefore cautious about the content and posts
they share with others [
12
]. Consequently, when trusted others disclose personal information without
consent, the result may be social-related anxiety and exaggerated fear, with the user-victims becoming
worried about being the focus of unwanted attention and the target of unwelcome evaluation [
13
].
However, both the victims and perpetrators of cyberbullying are found to be at greater risk of
depressive symptoms, anger, low self-esteem, self-harm, and suicidal ideation [
14
], as well as academic
difficulties and problems with peer relations [
15
,
16
]. Social networkers in Eastern cultures may
also experience stress over the potential loss of face arising from personal privacy leakages [
13
].
Doxing-assisted harassment may increase the risk of victims being physically harmed or cyberbullied
when personal information is used to locate and abuse them [5].
The psychological effects of doxing seem to cause as much as or more emotional harm
than real-world bullying owing to the users’ reliance on networking interactions, wider audience,
and potentially devastating impacts of harassment and stalking in cyberspace [
17
]. However, no study
to date has examined the impact of specific types of doxed information or specific types of doxing
perpetrators on the specific form of emotional problems suffered by doxing victims. Our hypothesis
in the study reported herein was that doxing is positively associated with psychological problems in
adolescents and that the negative effects on adolescents vary with the type, form, and/or perpetrator of
the doxing behavior. This analysis is the first in this area of research, and its aim is to further scholarly
understanding of the impacts of doxing on adolescents’ mental health.
2. Methods
2.1. Study Design and Sampling
The study employed data from a school survey covering different types of schools and students of
differing socioeconomic backgrounds in Hong Kong. One class from each Secondary 2 to Secondary 5
grade, equivalent to grades 8 to 11 in the US, was randomly sampled in each school, and all students in
the four sampled classes were invited to participate in the survey. A total of 2120 students participated
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2018,15, 2665 3 of 8
in the survey. The participants signed informed consent forms and completed questionnaires with
self-report questions on their lifetime doxing victimization experience and past-week psychological
feelings regarding victimization at school under the instruction of trained interviewers. There were
slightly more male participants (n= 1123, 52.97%) than female (n= 997, 47.03%), and the average age
was 15.11 (SD = 1.45). The Institutional Review Board of the University of Hong Kong granted ethical
approval for the survey (Ethical Code: EA1602044).
2.2. Measures
2.2.1. Demographic Characteristics
Participants’ demographic and socioeconomic characteristics were collected using a
self-constructed questionnaire including items on their age, gender, education level, and the education
level of their father and mother.
2.2.2. Experiences of Doxing Victimization
The participants’ experiences of having their personal information disclosed by others without
their consent were assessed by three self-constructed items on the type of information disclosed,
the person who had made the disclosure, and the platform on which the disclosure had been made.
All three items were multiple-selection items requiring participants to check all responses that applied
in their case. The types of personal information disclosed without consent were also assessed by the
number of times such disclosures had taken place, with the possible responses including never, 1–2,
3–6, 7–10, 11–15, and over 15 times. For descriptive analysis of the prevalence, the results were recoded
as 1 (yes) if participants selected any number of times that such doxing had occurred and as 0 if they
chose “never.”
2.2.3. Depression, Anxiety, and Stress
The 21-item Depression Anxiety Stress Scale (DASS-21) is the short form of the 42-item self-report
DASS [
18
]. It was employed in this study to assess depression, anxiety, and stress in the participating
doxing victims. The participants were asked about their feelings if they had learnt that their personal
information had been disclosed without their consent. The items were divided into three dimensions,
and rated as (Never), 1 (Sometimes), 2 (Often), and 3 (Always). Total scores were determined by
summing the scores for the relevant severity dimensions, including 1(Normal), 2 (Mild), 3 (Moderate),
4 (Severe) and 5 (Extremely Severe), with a specific cut-off score set for each dimension. The DASS-21
achieved good reliability, with a total Cronbach’s alpha of 0.93, and Cronbach’s alphas of 0.88, 0.82,
and 0.90 for the Depression, Anxiety, and Stress scales, respectively.
2.3. Statistical Anzalysis
Participants’ demographic characteristics and the prevalence rates of doxing victimization were
computed using descriptive statistics and divided by gender. Spearman’s coefficient values were
presented to indicate the degree of associations between doxing victimization and the DASS total and
subscale scores. p< 0.05 was considered statistically significant, and SPSS version 25.0 (SPSS Inc.,
Chicago, IL, USA) was used to perform all of the statistical analyses in this study.
3. Results
3.1. Types of Personal Information Disclosed and Associations with DASS Scores
Table 1shows the prevalence of the various types of personal information being doxed without
consent and comparison of each type by gender. Overall, 15–31% of participants reported that their
personal information or data has been disclosed by others without their consent, including their
personal photos or videos (31.4%), name (29.9%), birthday (24.2%), and mobile phone number (15.1%).
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2018,15, 2665 4 of 8
Girls were more likely than boys to report doxing victimization with respect to all types of information
except their Hong Kong ID number (all p< 0.05). Almost all personal information doxed without
consent lead to victims’ emotional problems, among which the most significant associations were
between mobile phone number and emotional problems (Spearman’s rs ranging from 0.125 to 0.148,
p< 0.001
), private conversation with stress (r= 0.129, p< 0.001), personal and embarrassing photos
and videos and depression (rs ranging from 0.123 to 0.124, all p< 0.001).
Table 1.
Associations between types of personal information doxed (disclosed without consent) and
DASS scores of victims (n= 2120).
Types of Doxed Information
Prevalence DASS Correlation
Male
(%)
Female
(%)
Total
(%) Chi-Square Depression Anxiety Stress
Personal photos or videos 27.7 35.5 31.4 34.811 *** 0.124 *** 0.108 *** 0.118 ***
Name 24.4 36.0 29.9 52.886 *** 0.101 ** 0.086 ** 0.074 *
Birthday 18.8 30.0 24.2 44.818 *** 0.106 *** 0.096 ** 0.100 **
Mobile phone number 12.4 18.1 15.1 28.667 *** 0.148 *** 0.146 *** 0.125 ***
School name 10.5 19.5 14.8 47.820 *** 0.109 *** 0.117 *** 0.107 ***
Academic performance 7.1 12.1 9.5 30.035 *** 0.089 ** 0.084 ** 0.082 **
Locations 7.7 11.0 9.3 13.655 * 0.090 ** 0.097 ** 0.099 **
Private internet or text conversation 5.2 13.4 9.1 55.864 *** 0.123 *** 0.119 *** 0.129 ***
Embarrassing photos or videos 6.5 11.4 8.8 18.399 ** 0.107 *** 0.111 *** 0.124 ***
Personal email address 6.8 9.2 8.0 8.300 0.096 ** 0.083 ** 0.089 **
Relationship status 4.2 9.1 6.6 25.169 *** 0.121 *** 0.115 *** 0.113 ***
Odd habits 3.6 7.2 5.4 18.065 0.105 *** 0.090 ** 0.096 **
Parents’ names 4.6 4.2 4.4 3.250 0.113 *** 0.085 ** 0.117 ***
Intimate photos or videos 3.3 5.3 4.3 7.073 0.085 ** 0.085 ** 0.102 ***
Student card 4.2 4.1 4.2 2.829 0.108 *** 0.092 ** 0.102 **
Home telephone number 3.9 4.0 3.9 3.354 0.085 ** 0.068 * 0.081 **
Home address 4.3 2.5 3.5 7.523 0.097 ** 0.080 ** 0.106 ***
Sexual orientation 2.4 3.4 2.9 4.108 0.120 *** 0.113 *** 0.115 ***
Usernames and passwords of online accounts
2.2 2.7 2.5 7.187 0.076 * 0.080 ** 0.085 **
Religious beliefs 2.6 1.7 2.2 6.122 0.041 0.041 0.050
Passport number 2.5 1.3 1.9 7.496 0.062 * 0.042 0.074 *
Racial or ethnic origin 1.6 1.3 1.4 4.962 0.030 0.027 0.041
Political opinions 1.6 0.8 1.2 4.540 0.038 0.043 0.055
Obscene or indecent photos or videos 0.7 1.4 1.0 8.122 0.078 ** 0.069 * 0.100 **
Sexual life 1.1 0.9 1.0 2.732 0.098 ** 0.091 ** 0.099 **
ID card number 1.0 0.9 1.0 17.710 ** 0.024 0.005 0.045
Medical records 1.1 0.4 0.7 4.737 0.077 ** 0.052 0.081 **
Bank account numbers 0.6 0.6 0.6 3.470 0.083 ** 0.067 * 0.082 **
Note: * p< 0.05, ** p< 0.01, *** p< 0.001.
3.2. Doxing Perpetrators and Associations with DAS
As shown in Table 2, over half the participants named classmates as the individuals who had
perpetrated the doxing in question (50.7%, p< 0.05). All five perpetrator groups were familiars of
the victims, including fellow students in the same grade (30.3%) or school (28.3%), other people they
knew (26.2%), friends outside school (25.7%), and parents/family members (24.6%). With respect
to victims’ DAS, the most significant associations were between doxing perpetrated by students in
the same school and anxiety (r= 0.109, p< 0.001) and depression (r= 0.091, p< 0.01), and doxing by
other people personally known to victims was also significantly associated with depression (r= 0.086,
p< 0.01).
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2018,15, 2665 5 of 8
Table 2. People who conducted the doxing and associations with DAS of victims (n= 2120).
People Who Conducted Doxing
Prevalence DASS Correlation
Male
(%)
Female
(%)
Total
(%) Chi-Square Depression Anxiety Stress
Parents/family members 20.8 28.0 24.6 7.84 ** 0.038 0.033 −0.006
Classmates 46.5 54.3 50.7 6.26 * 0.045 0.058 * 0.015
Other students in the same grade 28.8 31.6 30.3 0.60 0.078 ** 0.067 * 0.048
Other students in your school 26.5 29.9 28.3 1.55 0.091 ** 0.109 *** 0.059 *
Teacher/Tutor 2.7 3.2 2.9 0.27 0.019 0.031 0.026
Friends outside your school 20.6 30.2 25.7 13.18 *** 0.028 0.037 0.038
People you personally know 21.7 30.0 26.2 10.04 ** 0.086 ** 0.074 * 0.055
Internet friends 3.8 6.2 5.1 3.18 0.029 0.009 0.034
Strangers 3.5 4.6 4.1 1.24 0.019 0.038 0.029
Note: * p< 0.05, ** p< 0.01, *** p< 0.001.
3.3. Doxing Platforms and Associations with DAS
The platforms on which participants had been doxed are reported in Table 3. Over half of all
personal information had been released through Instant Messenger (61.3%) and social networking
sites (54.9%), with girls reporting much higher rates of disclosure on these two platforms than boys
(all p< 0.001). Boys were more likely to be doxed on the other platforms considered: email (4.9%),
online forums (0.4%), and blogs (0.4%). The most significant associations with respect to DAS were
those between being doxed via Instant Messenger and anxiety (r= 0.087, p< 0.01) and depression
(
r= 0.083
,p< 0.01). Doxing victimization on social networking sites was also associated more with
victims’ emotional problems (rs ranging from 0.63 to 0.68, all p< 0.05).
Table 3. Platforms of doxing and associations with DAS of victims (n= 2120).
Platforms of Doxing Prevalence DASS Correlation
Male (%) Female (%) Total (%) Chi-Square Depression Anxiety Stress
Instant Messenger 53.7 67.8 61.3 21.91 *** 0.083 ** 0.087 ** 0.068 *
Social networking site 44.7 63.7 54.9 36.94 *** 0.063 * 0.068 * 0.066 *
Chatroom 9.7 8.8 9.2 0.05 0.049 0.050 0.018
Email 6.2 3.6 4.9 3.33 0.031 0.047 0.051
Video-sharing website 2.9 1.7 2.2 0.18 0.030 0.059 * 0.062 *
Webpage 1.5 1.5 1.5 0.00 0.022 0.029 0.016
Forum 0.7 0.2 0.4 2.17 0.032 0.027 0.049
Blog 0.5 0.3 0.4 0.33 0.032 0.027 0.047
Note: * p< 0.05, ** p< 0.01, *** p< 0.001.
4. Discussion
Our study is the first to estimate the associations between doxing victimization and depression,
anxiety, and stress suffered by adolescent victims. Employing a large school sample, the study
contributes to our understanding of the impacts on victims’ emotional status of different types of
doxing victimization, different types of doxing perpetrators, and different doxing platforms.
The results suggest that girls are more likely than boys to be doxed across the major types of
information and doxing perpetrators. With respect to doxing platforms, the girls in this study reported
much higher rates of doxing via Instant Messenger and social networking sites than boys, which is
consistent with the findings of previous studies [
19
] reporting girls to be more likely than boys to be
involved in indirect aggression. This could be explained by previous findings that compared with
talking in person, girls are more comfortable interacting with others on social networking sites or
through text messages than boys do [
20
]. However, some studies report equal amounts of victimization
in cyberspace for boys and girls [3].
Our findings also revealed the disclosure of almost all types of information subject to doxing
to be significantly associated with such negative emotional states as depression, anxiety, and stress.
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2018,15, 2665 6 of 8
These results are in line with those of previous findings that cyber-victimization can be the catalyst
of impaired mental health, distress, and fear and can even increase the risk of suicidal ideation [
21
].
The disclosure of such personal information as one’s name, address, or mobile phone number makes
one easily identifiable, thereby provoking anxieties over identity theft or harassment, and the sharing
of location-based information can also expose people to the risk of being physically harmed [22].
In addition to the foregoing potential risks that cause doxing victims to fear for their own personal
safety or the safety of those close to them, victims may also worry about the unpredictable but
largely negative social evaluation and judgment that unauthorized information disclosure exposes
them to. Private information or data, such as one’s personal and embarrassing photos or videos,
relationship status, and private Internet or text conversations, which are sometimes surprising or even
embarrassing, can also be used for “cyber-lynching” and personal revenge [
23
]. These situations are
likely to induce depression and stress in those being doxed, as the uncomfortable judgment of the
unknown masses very often leads to serious repercussions for doxing victims [13].
We found that over half the information doxed in our study had been disclosed by the victims’
classmates, and participants who reported being doxed by schoolmates reported the most significantly
negative emotional feelings. Compared with strangers and Internet friends, students have more
frequent interactions with their classmates, who therefore have more opportunities to obtain personal
information about them. Self-efficacy and outcome expectations are closely related to an individual’s
selection of activities, and therefore people with a higher degree of social anxiety tend to avoid
social disclosure [
24
]. Doxing victims may worry about receiving undesirable evaluations from
their schoolmates, whose gossip and/or negative judgments bring social pressure and can cause
misunderstandings to spiral out of control. The experience of being victimized can cause emotional
harm to students, and those with negative feelings about themselves are also more likely to be further
targeted for victimization [25].
Significant associations were found in our study between unauthorized disclosure via Instant
Messenger, social networking sites and feelings of depression, anxiety, and stress in victims. Social
networking sites and online chatting have become increasingly important alternatives to face-to-face
interactions, particularly for socially anxious individuals, who may struggle to maintain relationships
and integrate into social groups [
26
,
27
]. Self-disclosure is linked to concerns over privacy and
trust, and people generally share intimate information only if they are sure that the recipients are
trustworthy [
28
]. Social media allow users to post information about others, and may thus disrupt
people’s control over their own self-presentation and conflict with individual impression management.
A fruitful direction for future studies would be to explore and make comparisons among the social,
personality, and psychological impacts of doxing victimization.
A variety of educational strategies have been implemented by schools globally in recent years to
raise young people’s awareness of online risks and reduce their exposure to the associated negative
experiences, with the I-SAFE Internet Safety Curriculum in the U.S. [
29
] and Cyber Friendly Schools
Project [
30
] in Australia being notable examples. Further exploration of integrated cyber violence
prevention programs is therefore strongly recommended for schools with regard to preventing doxing
victimization. The study reported herein constitutes an initial step toward comparing the negative
psychological impacts of various forms of doxing victimization, but further explorations are required
to unravel the details of the relationship between doxing and emotional problems and to obtain more
up-to-date information on online doxing. The participants recruited for this study were secondary
school students in one city in East Asia, and they may not be representative of students from other
cities, countries, or cultures. It is recommended that future researchers recruit samples with a greater
variety of demographic characteristics, including participants with different types of personality,
socioeconomic status, and family background, to compare the relationship between psychological
reactions and doxing victimization.
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2018,15, 2665 7 of 8
5. Conclusions
The present study contributes to our understanding of the negative emotional impacts of doxing
victimization in adolescents by taking into account the impacts of various doxing information
types, perpetrators, and platforms. Although the unauthorized disclosure of most types of personal
information on the Internet causes psychological suffering in victims, the associations with symptoms
of anxiety, depression, and stress are most significant when the doxing is perpetrated by schoolmates
via webpage and social networking sites. Female students are more vulnerable to doxing victimization
than their male counterparts, regardless of the type of information disclosed. Awareness of healthy
online communication and privacy protection are of great importance to reducing such detrimental
activities as harassment, cyberbullying, and even physical harm in the real world.
Author Contributions:
Conceptualization, A.S.Y.C. and K.L.C.; Methodology, K.L.C.; Formal Analysis, Q.C.;
Writing—Original Draft Preparation, Q.C.; Writing—Review & Editing, K.L.C. and A.S.Y.C.; Supervision, K.L.C.
and A.S.Y.C.; Project Administration, A.S.Y.C.; Funding Acquisition, A.S.Y.C.
Funding:
The work described in this paper was fully supported by a grant from the Research Grants Council of
the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, China (HKU 17623016).
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.
References
1.
Kwan, G.C.E.; Skoric, M.M. Facebook bullying: A extension of battles in school. Comput. Hum. Behav.
2013
,
29, 16–25. [CrossRef]
2.
Joinson, A.N.; Reips, U.D.; Buchanan, T.; Schofield, C.B.P. Privacy, trust, and self-disclosure online.
Hum. Comput. Interact. 2010,25, 1–24. [CrossRef]
3.
Hinduja, S.; Patchin, J.W. Personal information of adolescents on the internet: A quantitative content analysis
of MySpace. J. Adolesc. 2008,31, 125–146. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
4.
Hong, J.S.; Lee, J.; Espelage, D.L.; Hunter, S.C.; Patton, D.U.; Rivers, T., Jr. Understanding the correlates of
face-to-face and cyberbullying victimization among US adolescents: A social-ecological analysis. Violence Vict.
2016,31, 638–663. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
5. Douglas, D.M. Doxing: A conceptual analysis. Ethics Inf. Technol. 2016,18, 199–210. [CrossRef]
6.
Khanna, P.; Zavarsky, P.; Lindskog, D. Experimental analysis of tools used for doxing and proposed new
transforms to help organizations protect against doxing attacks. Procedia Comput. Sci.
2016
,94, 459–464.
[CrossRef]
7.
Wolak, J.; Mitchell, K.J.; Finkelhor, D. Does online harassment constitute bullying? An exploration of online
harassment by known peers and online-only contacts. J. Adolesc. Health
2007
,41, S51–S58. [CrossRef]
[PubMed]
8.
Smith, P.K.; Mahdavi, J.; Carvalho, M.; Fisher, S.; Russell, S.; Tippett, N. Cyberbullying: Its nature and impact
in secondary school pupils. J. Child Psychol. Psychiatry 2008,49, 376–385. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
9.
Snyder, P.; Doerfler, P.; Kanich, C.; McCoy, D. Fifteen minutes of unwanted fame: Detecting and characterizing
doxing. In Proceedings of the 2017 Internet Measurement Conference, London, UK, 1–3 November 2017;
pp. 432–444.
10.
Wang, J.; Iannotti, R.J.; Nansel, T.R. School bullying among adolescents in the United States: Physical, verbal,
relational, and cyber. J. Adolesc. Health 2009,45, 368–375. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
11.
Kowalski, R.M.; Giumetti, G.W.; Schroeder, A.N.; Lattanner, M.R. Bullying in the digital age: A critical
review and meta-analysis of cyberbullying research among youth. Psychol. Bull.
2014
,140, 1073. [CrossRef]
[PubMed]
12.
Kauer, S.D.; Mangan, C.; Sanci, L. Do online mental health services improve help-seeking for young people?
A systematic review. J. Med. Internet Res. 2014,16, e66. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
13.
Li, L.; Lin, T.T. Examining Weibo posting anxiety among well-educated youth in China: A qualitative
approach. Inf. Dev. 2016,32, 1240–1252. [CrossRef]
14.
Gámez-Guadix, M.; Orue, I.; Smith, P.K.; Calvete, E. Longitudinal and reciprocal relations of cyberbullying
with depression, substance use, and problematic internet use among adolescents. J. Adolesc. Health
2013
,53,
446–452. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2018,15, 2665 8 of 8
15.
Daine, K.; Hawton, K.; Singaravelu, V.; Stewart, A.; Simkin, S.; Montgomery, P. The power of the web:
A systematic review of studies of the influence of the internet on self-harm and suicide in young people.
PLoS ONE 2013,8, e77555. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
16.
Kowalski, R.M.; Limber, S.P. Psychological, physical, and academic correlates of cyberbullying and traditional
bullying. J. Adolesc. Health 2013,53, S13–S20. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
17.
Chen, Q.Q.; Lo, C.K.; Zhu, Y.; Cheung, A.; Chan, K.L.; Ip, P. Family poly-victimization and cyberbullying
among adolescents in a Chinese school sample. Child Abuse Negl. 2018,77, 180–187. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
18.
Lovibond, P.F.; Lovibond, S.H. The structure of negative emotional states: Comparison of the Depression
Anxiety Stress Scales (DASS) with the Beck Depression and Anxiety Inventories. Behav. Res. Ther.
1995
,33,
335–343. [CrossRef]
19.
Fanti, K.A.; Demetriou, A.G.; Hawa, V.V. A longitudinal study of cyberbullying: Examining risk and
protective factors. Eur. J. Dev. Psychol. 2012,9, 168–181. [CrossRef]
20.
Pierce, T. Social anxiety and technology: Face-to-face communication versus technological communication
among teens. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2009,25, 1367–1372. [CrossRef]
21.
Lindsay, M.; Krysik, J. Online harassment among college students: A replication incorporating new internet
trends. Inf. Commun. Soc. 2012,15, 703–719. [CrossRef]
22.
Lyon, D. Under my skin: From identification papers to body surveillance. In Documenting Individual
Identity: The Development of State Practices in the Modern World; Caplan, J., Torpey, J.C., Torpey, J., Eds.;
Princeton University Press: Princeton, NJ, USA, 2001; Volume 1, pp. 291–310. ISBN 9780691009124.
23. Chua, S.V.; de la Cerna Uy, K.J. The psychological anatomy of gossip. Am. J. Manag. 2014,14, 64–69.
24.
Green, T.; Wilhelmsen, T.; Wilmots, E.; Dodd, B.; Quinn, S. Social anxiety, attributes of online communication
and self-disclosure across private and public Facebook communication. Comput. Hum. Behav.
2016
,58,
206–213. [CrossRef]
25.
Egan, S.K.; Perry, D.G. Does low self-regard invite victimization? Dev. Psychol.
1998
,34, 299–309. [CrossRef]
[PubMed]
26.
Li-Barber, K.T. Self-disclosure and student satisfaction with Facebook. Comput. Hum. Behav.
2012
,28,
624–630.
27.
Quinn, S.; Oldmeadow, J. The martini effect and social networking sites: Early adolescents, mobile social
networking and connectedness to friends. Mob. Media Commun. 2013,1, 237–247. [CrossRef]
28.
Mesch, G.S. Is online trust and trust in social institutions associated with online disclosure of identifiable
information online? Comput. Hum. Behav. 2012,28, 1471–1477. [CrossRef]
29.
Harshman, K.L. Assessing Effectiveness of Age-Appropriate Curriculum on Internet Safety Education and
Cyberbullying Prevention. Ph.D. Thesis, Grand Canyon University, Phoenix, AZ, USA, 2014.
30.
Cross, D.; Lester, L.; Barnes, A.; Cardoso, P.; Hadwen, K. If it’s about me, why do it without me? Genuine
student engagement in school cyberbullying education. Int. J. Emot. Educ. 2015,7, 35–51.
©
2018 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access
article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution
(CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Available via license: CC BY 4.0
Content may be subject to copyright.
