Content uploaded by Sofia Oliveira
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Sofia Oliveira on Apr 09, 2021
Content may be subject to copyright.
Cite this article as: Pereira, N., Ferreira, P., Veiga Simão, A. M., Paulino, P., Oliveira, S., & Mora-Merchán, J. A. (2021). Aggressive communication style as predictor of cyberbullying,
emotional well-being, and personal moral beliefs in adolescence.
Psicología Educativa.
Ahead of print. https://doi.org/10.5093/psed2021a11
ISSN: 1135-755X/© 2021 Colegio Oficial de la Psicología de Madrid. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
Psicología Educativa (2021) xx(x) xx-xx
Psicología Educativa
https://journals.copmadrid.org/psed
Funding: This study was funded by the Portuguese Foundation for Science and Technology (grant number: SFRH/BPD/110695/2015; PTDC/MHC-PED/3297/2014).
Correspondence: merchan@us.es (J. A. Mora-Merchán).
Peer-to-peer violence has been increasing globally amongst youth,
both inside and outside of school (UNICEF, 2017). Cyberbullying
refers to a particular form of violence among peers, which is often
considered an extension of bullying, defined as willful and repeated
harm imposed through electronic means (Patchin & Hinduja, 2006).
Thus, it can occur anywhere through social media. Cyberbullying
may affect adolescents’ mental health and well-being and, in
turn, relate to difficulties in school adjustment and performance
(UNICEF, 2017). Cyberbullying may be linked to an aggressive
communication style, which is an individual factor that may be
expressed while communicating with others (Lin et al., 2016). This
style of communication seems to be related with aggressors’ behavior
(Bandura, 1973; Kirchner et al., 1979).
Various theories have brought forth important contributions with
regards to the determiners of behavior. According to the Social Cognitive
Theory (Bandura, 2001), personal cognitive factors (e.g., knowledge,
beliefs/attitudes, and expectations), environmental factors (e.g., social
norms, access in community, and influence on others/environment),
Aggressive Communication Style as Predictor of Cyberbullying, Emotional Well-
being, and Personal Moral Beliefs in Adolescence
Nádia Pereiraa, Paula Ferreirab, Ana M. Veiga Simãob, Paula Paulinoa, Sofia Oliveirab,
and Joaquín A. Mora-Merchánc
a
Research Center for Psychological Science - CICPSI, Portugal;
b
University of Lisbon, Portugal;
c
Universidad de Sevilla, Spain
ARTICLE INFO
Article history:
Received 6 February 2020
Accepted 11 January 2021
Available online 31 March 2021
Keywords:
Adolescents
Behavioral intentions
Cyberbullying
Emotional well-being
Personal moral beliefs
ABSTRACT
Different forms of verbal aggression are often presented in cyberbullying and are used to harm others in online communication.
This study proposed to understand the influence of an aggressive communication style on adolescents’ intentions to engage
in cyberbullying, their emotional well-being, and personal moral beliefs. A convenience sample of 218 adolescents (
M
age =
14.67,
SD
= 0.84, 53% girls) in Portugal responded to questionnaires. Structural equation modeling analyses were conducted
to test mediating effects. An aggressive communication style may lead adolescents to perceive cyberbullying behavior as fair,
and to decrease their emotional well-being. Moreover, this communication style may contribute to adolescents’ intentions
to engage in cyberbullying, and whether they believe this type of behavior is fair or unfair may determine those intentions.
These findings contribute to an understanding of determiners of cyberbullying and the provision of insights to develop
school interventions in this field.
Un estilo de comunicación agresivo como predictor del ciberacoso, el bienestar
emocional y las creencias morales personales en la adolescencia
RESUMEN
Diferentes formas de agresión verbal están presentes a menudo en el ciberacoso y se utilizan para dañar a otros en la
comunicación online. Este estudio propuso comprender la influencia de un estilo de comunicación agresivo en la
intención de los adolescentes de participar en el ciberacoso, su bienestar emocional y sus creencias morales personales.
Una muestra de conveniencia de 218 adolescentes (
M
edad = 14.67,
SD
= 0.84, 53% niñas) en Portugal respondió a los
cuestionarios. Se realizaron análisis de modelado de ecuaciones estructurales para probar los efectos de mediación. Un
estilo de comunicación agresivo puede llevar a los adolescentes a percibir el comportamiento de ciberacoso como justo y a
disminuir su bienestar emocional. Además, este estilo de comunicación puede contribuir a la intención de los adolescentes
de participar en el ciberacoso y la creencia de que este tipo de comportamiento sea justo o injusto puede determinar
esa intención. Estos hallazgos contribuyen a comprender los factores determinantes del ciberacoso y a proporcionar
información para desarrollar intervenciones escolares en esta área.
Palabras clave:
Adolescentes
Intención acerca de un
comportamiento
Ciberacoso
Bienestar emocional
Creencias morales personales
ARTICLE IN PRESS
2
N. Pereira et al. / Psicología Educativa (2021) xx(x) xx-xx
ARTICLE IN PRESS
and behavioral factors (e.g., skills and practice) determine individuals’
behavior. In this study, we understand an aggressive communication
style as a personal cognitive factor. Communication styles may be
characterized as cognitive processes which entail micro behavior to
get literal meaning across from one individual to another, consisting
of individual distinctive features which reflect in the communication
act (Agarwal & Gupta, 2018). According to Jakubowski and Lange
(1978), there are three main communication styles which relate to
unique forms of verbal and nonverbal communication: assertiveness,
passivity, and aggressiveness. Assertiveness refers to the expression
of personal opinions, thoughts, needs, and feelings in a direct, honest,
and adequate way. Passivity consists of denying personal rights and
not being able to express personal needs. Finally, aggressiveness
entails claiming personal needs and desires without respecting
others. Classical studies on aggressive behavior (Bandura, 1973;
Kirchner et al., 1979) have connected the combination of deficits in
assertiveness and the predominance of an aggressive communication
style to aggressors’ behavior. In cyberbullying events, aggressive
language is one of the primary means used to communicate with
others, provoking embarrassment, hurt, and psychological harm (Lin
et al., 2016; Veiga Simão et al., 2018). The most frequent forms of
verbal aggression in this phenomenon refer to verbal attacks (e.g., on
intelligence and physical appearance), insults, and threats (Francisco
et al., 2015; Rachoene & Oyedemi, 2017). Therefore, it is relevant
to understand how an aggressive communication style affects
adolescents’ intention to engage in cyberbullying.
Behavioral intentions, defined as individuals’ perceived probability
that they will engage in certain behavior or achieve certain goals
(Lenhart, 2007), play an important role in cyberbullying since they
may predict actual behavior (Ajzen, 1991). Specifically, according to
the Theory of Planned Behavior, individuals consider the implications
of their actions before deciding to act (Ajzen & Fishbein, 1980).
Considering that personal cognitive factors may influence behavioral
intentions (Ajzen, 2008) and behavior (Bandura, 2001), we argue that
an aggressive communication style, as a personal cognitive factor
(Agarwal & Gupta, 2018), may determine behavioral intentions,
which in turn may influence behavior (Ajzen, 1991). In line with this
idea, we hypothesize that:
Hypothesis 1: An aggressive communication style will
predict adolescents’ intentions to engage in cyberbullying
behavior, such that those who have this style of communication
will report greater intentions to engage in this type of behavior.
An Aggressive Communication Style and its Relation to
Emotional Well-being
According to Keyes’s model (2007), positive mental health and
well-being can be defined by the presence of subjective well-being,
which goes beyond the absence of mental illness. In line with this
theoretical framework, emotional well-being is one of the three
main dimensions contributing to subjective well-being (along with
psychological and social dimensions), referring to the predominance
of satisfaction with life and the experience of positive emotions as
opposed to negative ones (e.g., anger, sadness, fear; Diener, 1984).
Cyberbullying is known to negatively impact this dimension of well-
being in adolescents. For instance, students who were aggressors and/
or victims of cyberbullying reported less satisfaction with their lives
(UNESCO, 2017), and victims reported more emotional adjustment
difficulties, such as depressive, anxiety, and psychosomatic
symptoms and low self-esteem (e.g., Cowie, 2013; Ortega et al., 2012).
On the other hand, a state of positive mental health and well-being
can act as a protective factor and significantly change the impact of
cyberbullying (Brailovskaia et al., 2018). Therefore, emotional well-
being seems to play an important role in cyberbullying, especially in
terms of the effect it may have on adolescents.
Anger is a predominant negative emotion shared by adolescents in
cyberbullying events and also an important predictor of cyberbullying
behavior (Lonigro et al., 2014). Specifically, anger can be expressed
through aggressive behavior toward others (i.e., in aggressors),
may be suppressed or may turn toward the self (i.e., in victims). In
addition, coping negatively with anger seems to result in higher levels
of cyberbullying behavior (Den Hamer & Konijn, 2016). Moreover,
cyberbullying aggressors seem to reveal lower emotional regulation
(Lin, 2017) and greater difficulties regulating negative emotions, such
as sadness and anger, which seem to be related to different forms of
aggressive behavior (Zeman et al., 2002). Considering the definition
of emotional well-being (Diener, 1984), the predominance of negative
emotions, such as anger, may lead individuals to experience low
emotional well-being.
Anger as a personal factor (i.e., emotion) seems to determine
cyberbullying behavior, which goes in line with a socio-cognitive
perspective on the factors determining an individual’s behavior
(Bandura, 2001). It is usually directed towards others through
words in cyberbullying, since aggressive language is often used
to communicate with others in this phenomenon (Veiga Simão
et al., 2018). Accordingly, low levels of positive emotions might be
related to anger and help explain the relation between cyberbullying
and emotional well-being. Thus, we argue that an aggressive
communication style may also be related to emotional well-being.
Therefore, we hypothesize that:
Hypothesis 2: An aggressive communication style will
predict adolescents’ emotional well-being, such that those who
have this style of communication will report less emotional
well-being.
An Aggressive Communication Style and the Role of Personal
Moral Beliefs in Behavioral Intentions
This research considers the social cognitive theory of moral agency
(Bandura, 2008) to conceptualize personal moral beliefs as being
influenced by an aggressive communication style and as determiners
of behavioral intentions. According to this perspective, individuals
develop agency through self-regulation, which links thought to action
(Bandura, 2001). In moral agency, individuals refrain from behaving
in ways which violate their moral standards (Osofsky et al., 2005).
Self-regulation of harmful behavior functions at a personal level and
encompasses social aspects. Individuals are not autonomous moral
agents, but rather behave morally according to cognitive, affective,
and social influences (Bandura, 2008). Moreover, morality is socially
founded, thus, moral standards function at individual and social level,
and may cause substantial harm if these standards are not within
social boundaries (Bandura, 2008). An aggressive communication
style may be linked to how individuals interpret the world
surrounding them and the specific circumstances they experience
(Crick & Dodge, 1994). How individuals interpret the world is linked to
the attitude they have towards these circumstances (Dill et al., 1997).
These attitudes may be determined by other individual factors, such
as personal beliefs, which Ajzen and Fishbein (1980) have defined as
subjective cognitions about different aspects of life in general (i.e.,
behavior or attributes). An aggressive communication style is often a
sign of someone wanting to protect his/her own ideas and opinions,
as well as having them being accepted by others, even if it is at the
expense of others (Salmivalli & Nieminen, 2002). That is, individuals
with this communication style tend to interpret situations as if they
were battles, which they want to win at all cost. In view of this, this
study proposes that an aggressive communication style may be
related to adolescents’ personal moral beliefs about cyberbullying. In
accordance, we argue that:
Hypothesis 3: An aggressive communication style will
predict adolescents’ personal moral beliefs about cyberbullying
3
Aggressive Communication Style as Predictor of Cyberbullying
ARTICLE IN PRESS
behavior, such that those who have this style of communication
will believe that this type of behavior is fair.
There seems to be a strong relationship between adolescents’
attitudes towards cyberbullying and their behavioral intention
(Heirman & Walrave, 2012). Specifically, attitudes towards
cyberbullying seem to be a strong predictor of adolescents’ behavioral
intention to engage in cyberbullying. To fully understand adolescents’
behavioral intentions, and consequently behavior, it is crucial to
understand how personal and social factors influence psychological
processes to yield behavioral effects (Bandura, 2005). This study
focuses specifically on adolescents’ personal moral beliefs and how
these may be related to their intentions to engage in cyberbullying.
Social experiences affect behavior in the different contexts in
which they unfold and how individuals interact within these
situations influences how their moral standards develop throughout
time and, therefore, guide their behavior (Bandura, 2005). This
theoretical approach may help explain how these processes occur
in cyberbullying, which is a social phenomenon (Allison & Bussey,
2017). In line with this, we argue that moral beliefs may determine
adolescents’ behavioral intentions and consequently, their behavior.
For instance, lower moral standards have been linked to higher
levels of cyberbullying behavior (Perren & Gutzwiller-Helfenfinger,
2012). Thus, we focus on adolescents’ personal moral beliefs about
cyberbullying behavior, since these beliefs may influence their actions
(Barchia & Bussey, 2011). To specify, adolescents may not intervene or
may even interfere in the situation in an aggressive manner if they
believe the actions of the aggressor are justifiable, which constitutes
a moral disengagement mechanism with regards to the situation
(Allison & Bussey, 2017; Barchia & Bussey, 2011). Research has shown
how moral disengagement could predict adolescents’ aggressive
behavior in cyberbullying (Pornari & Wood, 2010). Therefore, we
hypothesize that:
Hypothesis 4: Adolescents’ personal moral beliefs about
cyberbullying behavior will predict their intentions to engage
in this type of behavior, such that those who find cyberbullying
behavior unfair will have lower intentions to engage in this type
of behavior.
How individuals interact in face-to-face contexts is different from
online environments, especially since pseudonymity and anonymity
enable them to be more disinhibited (Bandura, 2004). Furthermore,
online contexts enable individuals to disguise their identity and
detach themselves from the physical world due to the lack of personal
and social sanctions for injurious behavior. Therefore, individuals
may feel a moral disconnection more easily when engaging in hurtful
behavior and find it more difficult to regulate their moral conduct.
In line with this, we argue that adolescents’ personal moral beliefs
help explain the nature of the relationship between an aggressive
communication style and their intentions to engage in cyberbullying
behavior. Accordingly, we hypothesize that:
Hypothesis 5: Adolescents’ personal moral beliefs about
cyberbullying behavior will mediate the relationship between an
aggressive communication style and their intentions to engage
in this type of behavior, such that the indirect effect will be lower
than the direct effect.
In conclusion, this paper intends to achieve a better
understanding of the role of a verbal aggressive communication
style in cyberbullying. Thus, we studied the relationship with
different individual variables, which may be associated with this
phenomenon. Specifically, the aims of this study are to assess
the relationship between an aggressive communication style
and intentions to engage in cyberbullying behavior. We also
tried to understand the role of an aggressive communication
style on adolescents’ emotional well-being. Furthermore, we
intended to understand how this communication style influences
adolescents’ personal moral beliefs about cyberbullying, since they
enable individuals to gain control over their thoughts, feelings,
motivation, and actions (Bandura, 2006). Finally, to understand
the specific role of personal moral beliefs as potential determiners
of individuals’ actions (Bandura, 2006), another aim of this study
was to determine the mediating effects of personal moral beliefs
in the relationship between an aggressive communication style
and adolescents’ intentions to engage in cyberbullying. Figure 1
presents our conceptual model.
An aggresive
communication
style
Personal
moral beliefs
Emotional
well-being
Intentions to engage in
cyberbullying behavior
Figure 1. An aggressive Communication Style Predicting Emotional Well-
being, Personal Moral Beliefs, a Mediator Variable, and Intentions to Engage
in Cyberbullying Behavior.
Method
Participants
A convenience sample of 218 9th graders (
M
age = 14.67,
SD
=
0.84, 53% girls) from three public schools in Lisbon participated
in this study. Student participation in data collection depended
on students’ own volunteerism and parental consent. Specifically,
all students from the schools were contacted. However, only those
who had parental consent and gave their own consent participated
in the study. The final sample was therefore not chosen by the
research team, as this could create bias in the participation, but
rather, only based on parental and students’ own consent.
Instruments
During the initial development of the measures used in the
present study within our research projects on cyberbullying (SFRH/
BPD/110695/2015; PTDC/MHC-PED/3297/2014), facial validity was
tested with three adolescents and by a panel of seven experts to
understand whether the items of assessment instruments were
appropriate for the specific constructs and assessment objectives
(Hardesty & Bearden, 2004).
Aggressiveness in Interpersonal Communication (AIC). This
instrument is a 10-item task and was developed based on Jakubowski
and Lange’s (1978) theory of communication styles, specifically with
regards to aggressiveness. As this resource is a performance task,
and not a questionnaire, we decided to assess its internal structure
and reliability with the Item Response Theory (IRT) approach by
computing Rasch analysis with the Winsteps program (Linacre,
2013 ), which measured its unidimensionality, as well as participants’
scores of aggressiveness in hypothetical situations. Participants were
asked to respond to daily life situations of adolescents (e.g., “A friend
says to you [Your shirt is really horrible!]. How likely do you respond?
[What’s that got to do with you?]”). In doing so, they should position
themselves in each situation and respond in the manner presented in
terms of likelihood from 1 (
not likely at all
) to 5 (
very likely
). Winsteps
enabled us to estimate participants’ scores on a one-dimensional
logit scale and evaluate the properties of the AIC.
We used Rasch polytomous methodology to examine the
instrument and participants’ scores. All items were assessed to
understand whether they had excessive infit and outfit mean square
residuals. None of the items showed infit/outfit higher than 1.5,
as well as
z
statistic > 2.00, as suggested in the literature (Bond &
Fox, 2007). We considered other reliability indicators from Rasch
measures for AIC, including Cronbach’s alpha, Person separation
reliability (PSR), and item separation reliability (ISR) (Smith, 2001).
AIC revealed a Cronbach’s α of .72, a PSR of .69, and an ISR of .99.
4
N. Pereira et al. / Psicología Educativa (2021) xx(x) xx-xx
ARTICLE IN PRESS
These scores indicate good internal consistency reliability (Fox &
Jones, 1998), even though the PSR revealed difficulty on participants’
behalf. After removing subjects with excessive infit/outfit, PSR was
.70, ISR remained stable (.99), and Cronbach’s α increased to .73.
Personal moral beliefs about cyberbullying behavior. This
instrument is a 9-item one-dimensional questionnaire that asks
adolescents (on a Likert-type scale from 1 =
fair
to 6 =
unfair
) to think
about whether the specific behavior of cyberbullying is fair or unfair
(“I think seeing someone being threatened online is fair/unfair”;
α = .81). After an exploratory factor analysis explaining 59% of the
variance, the values of a confirmatory factorial analysis were good
according to the literature in a previous study (Hooper et al., 2008),
namely, χ2(22) = 26.55,
p
> .05, χ2/
df
= 1.21, CFI = .98, GFI = .93, IFI =
.98, RMSEA = .02 [.00, .04], SRMR = .04, AIC = 72.55 (see Veiga Simão
et al., 2018).
Behavioral intentions in cyberbullying is a two-dimensional
questionnaire. This instrument asks adolescents (on a Likert scale of
1 =
not probable
to 5 =
very probable
) to indicate their behavioral
intentions regarding cyberbullying behavior. After an exploratory
analysis explaining 85% of the variance, confirmatory factorial
analysis values were good according to the literature in a previous
study (Hooper et al., 2008), namely χ2(134) = 296.06,
p
< .001, χ2/
df
= 2.20, CFI = .91, IFI = .91, RMSEA = .04 [.03, .05], SRMR = .09, AIC =
370.06. We only used “intentions to engage in cyberbullying behavior”
(α = 0.91), which asked adolescents whether they would engage in
cyberbullying behavior in the next six months (i.e., “If in the next six
months I see someone threatening someone on the Internet, there is
a possibility that I will do the same.”).
Emotional well-being sub-scale. This instrument is a
3-item sub-scale of the Portuguese version of the Mental Health
Continuum-Short Form for adolescents (Matos et al. 2010), which
evaluates the predominance of positive emotions and quality of life
(e.g., ‘‘How often have you felt happy?’’; α = .79) on a 6-point Likert
type scale (varying from 0 =
never
to 5 =
every day
). A confirmatory
factorial analysis revealed good values according to the literature
(Hooper et al., 2008), namely χ2(72) = 194.15,
p
<, χ2/
df
= 2.697, CFI =
.93, IFI = .93, RMSEA = .06 [.05, .08], SRMR = .05, AIC = 260.15.
Procedure
In a first phase, we requested and were granted authorization
to conduct this study by the Ministry of Education of Portugal, the
Portuguese National Commission of Data Protection, the Deontology
Committee of the Faculty of Psychology of the University of Lisbon,
schools’ boards of directors, teachers, parents, and adolescent
participants. The instruments were administered to adolescents
in a classroom context with computers with Internet access in
their own schools by researchers of this study. Prior to filling out
the instruments and performing the AIC task, all students were
informed that their participation was based on confidentiality and
their data would remain anonymous, and that they could have
psychological support (i.e., with a professional psychologist) if they
needed to talk to someone during or after participating. Moreover,
we informed all students that they could quit at any time they
wished to. All the students in the final sample chose to participate.
Data Analysis
Database was previously treated for missing values by transforming
raw data into
z
scores and by removing outliers. Before performing
structural equation modeling, we computed Pearson correlations of
the variables included in our structural equation model. We evaluated
the significance of regression coefficients with AMOS (v. 23, SPSS Inc.,
Chicago, IL). Parameters were estimated through the asymptotically
distribution-free method due to the non-normal distribution of data,
which is characteristic of cyberbullying data. Normality of variables
was evaluated with the univariate and multivariate skewness and
kurtosis. We used χ2 tests to assess the significance of the total, direct
and indirect effects (Marôco, 2010). Moreover, effects
p
< .05 were
considered significant. Also, we used the bootstrapping method
(2,000 samples, CI 90%) to test for mediation effects (Preacher &
Hayes, 2008).
Results
Table 1 shows correlations between variables in our hypotheses.
An aggressive communication style was negatively related to
personal moral beliefs regarding cyberbullying behavior and
emotional well-being, and positively related to adolescents’
intentions to engage in cyberbullying behavior.
Tabla 1. Descriptive Statistics of the Variables
Variables Mean (
SD
)Correlations
123
1. Aggressive
communication style 2.09 (0.62)
2. Personal moral beliefs 5.22 (0.65) -.27**
3. Emotional well-being 4.89 (0.92) -.20** .02
4. Intentions to engage in cyberbullying
behavior 1.45 (0.58) .15 * -.23** -.05
*
p
< .05, **
p
< .01.
All predictor variables were tested (direct and indirect effects
individually) in the model and were significant, as suggested in the
literature (Preacher & Hayes 2008). An aggressive communication
style predicted adolescents’, personal moral beliefs negatively (β =
-.29 with an effect size of .08), their emotional well-being negatively
(β = -.20 with an effect size of .04) and their intentions to engage in
cyberbullying behavior positively (β = .15 with an effect size of .03).
Also, adolescents’ personal moral beliefs predicted their intentions to
engage in cyberbullying behavior negatively (β = -.23 with an effect
size of .05). Those who believed cyberbullying behavior was unfair
reported lower intentions to engage in cyberbullying behavior.
Then, we tested a model with the independent variable an
aggressive communication style, the two dependent variables,
including emotional well-being and intentions to engage in
cyberbullying behavior, and the “personal moral beliefs” mediator
variable. The model revealed a good fit with significant direct and
indirect paths of an aggressive communication style in interpersonal
relations on adolescents’ intentions to engage in cyberbullying
behavior through personal moral beliefs and on their emotional well-
being, χ2(2) = .41,
p
> .05, χ2/
df
= .84, CFI = 1.00, GFI = .99, IFI = 1.00,
RMSEA = .00 [.00, .08], SRMR = .01, AIC = 16.41.
The standardized total effect of aggressiveness on adolescents’
intentions to engage in cyberbullying behavior was .15, 90% CI [.05,
.24], -.20, 90% CI [-.31, -.07] on their emotional well-being, and -.27,
90% CI [-.41, -.16] on their personal moral beliefs. The standardized
total effect of adolescents’ personal moral beliefs on their intentions
to engage in cyberbullying behavior was -.21, 90% CI [-.33, -.08].
While an aggressive communication style had a negative direct
effect on personal moral beliefs, -.28, 90% CI [-.42, -.17], it had a
positive effect on adolescents’ intentions to engage in cyberbullying
behavior, .09, 90% CI [-.01,.17]. This means that those who revealed an
aggressive communication style tended to believe that cyberbullying
behavior was fair and to report greater intentions to engage in
cyberbullying behavior. Personal moral beliefs had a negative direct
effect on adolescents’ intentions to engage in cyberbullying behavior,
-.18, 90% CI [-.30, -.07].
The indirect effect of an aggressive communication style on
adolescents’ intentions to engage in cyberbullying behavior
through personal moral beliefs was lower than the direct effect,
5
Aggressive Communication Style as Predictor of Cyberbullying
ARTICLE IN PRESS
.05, 90% CI [.02, -.10]. This means that adolescents’ personal moral
beliefs diminished the effect of this negative communication style
on their intentions to engage in cyberbullying behavior. The model
we present also showed a significant, but negative direct effect of
an aggressive communication style on adolescents’ emotional well-
being, -.29, 90% CI [-.46, -.11].
Discussion
Results regarding
H
1 support the notion that harmful behavior
may be determined by personal factors (Bandura, 2004). Specifically,
these results suggest that an individual’s aggressive communication
style may influence his/her behavioral intentions in relation to
cyberbullying. This, in turn, highlights the importance of working
styles of communication when intervening with adolescents in this
phenomenon. Results which concern
H
2 help explain previous findings
about the negative effects of cyberbullying on adolescents’ emotional
adjustment and well-being (Cowie, 2013; Ortega et al., 2012; UNESCO,
2017 ), since using verbal aggression to communicate with others is
usually present in cyberbullying situations (Veiga Simão et al., 2018).
Specifically, these results suggest that an aggressive communication
style may be one of the individual factors contributing to a decrease
in adolescents’ emotional well-being when they get involved in
cyberbullying, considering the relation between cyberbullying and
anger, as a negative emotion predominant in this type of violent
events and an important predictor of cyberbullying (Lonigro et al.,
2014). Accordingly, if there is a predominance of negative emotions
(e.g., anger, sadness, fear) instead of positive ones (e.g., happiness,
joy, contentment) this reflects low emotional well-being (Diener,
198 4; Keyes, 2007). Finally, results regarding
H
3 reinforce the idea
that an aggressive communication style may be associated with how
individuals interpret their surrounding environment, as well as the
specific situations they are involved in (Crick & Dodge, 1994), which
is inevitably related to the attitude (i.e., based on personal moral
beliefs) they have towards these circumstances (Ajzen & Fishbein,
198 0; Dill et al., 1997). Hence, these results highlight the role of an
aggressive communication style in personal moral beliefs which
affect an individual’s attitudes in relation to cyberbullying. This is
particularly relevant considering that this communication style may
lead to the consideration that cyberbullying is fair, thus affecting how
adolescents intend to act towards that behavior.
Accordingly, results concerning
H
4 revealed that those who
believed cyberbullying behavior was unfair reported lower intentions
to engage in cyberbullying behavior. This result complements results
found in previous studies demonstrating that adolescents’ personal
moral beliefs predicted the appropriation of verbal aggressions they
witnessed in cyberbullying situations to communicate with others
online (Veiga Simão et al., 2018). Specifically, adolescents who may
find cyberbullying behavior unfair (i.e., with high personal moral
beliefs) may use less of the language they witnessed in cyberbullying
situations. These beliefs may also be related to their intentions to
engage in cyberbullying situations, and potentially with expressions
and words they saw being used in these incidents, which in turn may
contribute to an increase of aggressive interactions.
Moreover, we found that adolescents’ personal moral beliefs
explained the nature of the relationship between an aggressive
communication style and their intentions to engage in cyberbullying
behavior (
H
5). Specifically, these personal moral beliefs diminished
(or controlled) the effect of a negative communication style on
their intentions to engage in cyberbullying behavior. Therefore,
these beliefs serve as a mediator between this communication style
and adolescents’ intentions to engage in cyberbullying behavior.
These results reinforce the fact that moral behavior is guided and
regulated by the continuous exercise of evaluative self-influence
(Bandura, 2004). Specifically, individuals may intend to engage
in injurious behavior, as is the case of cyberbullying, but their
evaluative self-influence, which may be in the form of personal
moral beliefs, hinders them from doing so (Osofsky et al., 2005).
This self-directedness encompasses adolescents’ moral agency,
through self-regulatory processes of moral reasoning regarding
cyberbullying behavior, which then lead to behavioral intentions
and actions (Bandura, 2001). This reflection emphasizes the socio-
cognitive approach of moral agency with regards to cyberbullying
intentions and behavior, and how it directs the self in changing
moral reasoning into action through self-regulatory processes
(Bandura, 2001). This evidence is of substantial importance
because of the influence an aggressive communication style may
have on the pre-processes of cyberbullying behavior (i.e., before it
occurs), which involve behavioral intentions. The role of personal
moral beliefs in adolescents’ engagement in cyberbullying behavior
may be better understood if we consider the particularities of
online contexts, namely the possibility to assume pseudonyms or
anonymous profiles and the physical distance in virtual interactions.
These aspects altogether may contribute to the creation of
a detachment from the impact of harmful behavior towards
others, leading individuals more easily to morally disengage from
cyberbullying perpetration (Bandura, 2004). Accordingly, if an
individual perceives injurious behavior as morally fair, this may
also help explain a lower activation of self-regulatory mechanisms,
particularly regarding aggressive communication.
These results were based on a rather small convenience sample
of 218 students, which could constitute a limitation of this study
for the generalization of findings. However, it provides as important
contribution for future larger-scale studies. Accordingly, taking
these findings into account, understanding how this communication
style may be changed is imperative, as it may have an impact on
the consequences of cyberbullying (i.e., emotional adjustment and
well-being), as well as on its perpetuation amongst adolescents.
For instance, using aggressive language may lead towards greater
intentions to engage in cyberbullying behavior, as we hypothesized.
However, whether adolescents believe this type of behavior is fair or
unfair may determine if they in fact, have those intentions, which may
lead to cyberbullying behavior itself. Such results seem to make sense
according to the Social Cognitive Theory (Bandura, 2001), since they
emphasize the determining role of personal beliefs in behavior. Also,
results emphasize the relevance of personal moral beliefs in explaining
adolescents’ behavioral intentions concerning cyberbullying events,
in line with the Theory of Planned Behavior (Ajzen, 2008).
The findings presented in this study contribute to a better
understanding of the determinants of cyberbullying behavior, but
they also contribute to the scientific knowledge regarding educational
interventions which address this phenomenon. Specifically, they
give relevance to communication as a main area to intervene with
adolescents. Promoting a more assertive style of communication
amongst adolescents should be a must in the design of intervention
programs against cyberbullying. This could, consequently, contribute
to positive mental health and well-being, which can act as a protective
factor in relation to cyberbullying (Brailovskaia et al., 2018).
Conflict of Interest
The authors of this article declare no conflict of interest.
References
Agarwal, U. A., & Gupta, M. (2018). Communication styles of millennials:
Trends & relevance for the industry.
Indian Journal of Industrial Rela-
tions, 53
(3), 504-518.
Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior.
Organizational Beha-
vior and Human Decision Processes, 50
(2), 179-211. https://doi.
org/10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-T
6
N. Pereira et al. / Psicología Educativa (2021) xx(x) xx-xx
ARTICLE IN PRESS
Ajzen, I. (2008). Consumer attitudes and behavior. In C. P. Haugtvedt, P. M.
Herr, & F. R. Cardes (Eds.),
Handbook of consumer psychology
(pp. 525-
548). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (1980).
Understanding attitudes and predicting so-
cial behavior
. Prentice- Hall.
Allison, K., & Bussey, K. (2017). Individual and collective moral influences
on intervention in cyberbullying.
Computers in Human Behavior, 74,
7-15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2017.04.019
Bandura, A. (1973).
Aggression: A social learning analysis.
Prentice-Hall.
Bandura, A. (2001). Social cognitive theory: An agentic perspective.
An-
nual Review of Psychology, 52,
1-26. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.
psych.52.1.1
Bandura, A. (2004). Selective exercise of moral agency. In T. A. Thorkildsen
& H. J. Walberg (Eds.),
Nurturing morality
(pp. 35-57). Kluwer Acade-
mic.
Bandura, A. (2005). Adolescent development from an agentic perspective.
In F. Pajares & T. Urdan (Eds.),
Self-efficacy beliefs of adolescents
(Vol.
5, pp. 1-43). Information Age Publishing.
Bandura, A. (2006). Toward a psychology of human agency.
Perspectives
on Psychological Science, 1
(2), 164-180. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-
6916.2006.00011.x
Bandura, A. (2008). An agentic perspective on positive psychology. In S. J.
Lopez (Ed.),
Positive psychology: Exploring the best in people
(Vol. 1,
pp. 167-196). Praeger/Greenwood.
Barchia, K., & Bussey, K. (2011) Predictors of student defenders of peer
aggression victims: Empathy and social cognitive factors.
Internatio-
nal Journal of Behavioral Development, 35
(4), 289-297. https://doi.
org/10.1177/0165025410396746
Bond, T. G., & Fox, C. M. (2007).
Applying the Rasch model: Fundamental
measurement in the human sciences.
Erlbaum.
Brailovskaia, J., Teismann, T., & Margraf, J. (2018). Cyberbullying, positive
mental health and suicide ideation/behavior.
Psychiatry Research, 267,
240-242. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychres.2018.05.074
Cowie, H. (2013). Cyberbullying and its impact on young people’s emo-
tional health and well-being.
Psychiatrist, 37
(5), 167-170. https://doi.
org/10.1192/pb.bp.112.040840
Crick, N. R., & Dodge, K. A. (1994). A review and reformulation of social
information-processing mechanisms in children’s social adjustment.
Psychological Bulletin, 115
(1), 74-101. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-
2909.115.1.74
Den Hamer, A. H., & Konijn, E. A. (2016). Can emotion regulation serve
as a tool in combating cyberbullying?
Personality and Individual
Differences, 102
(11), 1-6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2016.06.033
Diener, E. (1984). Subjective well-being.
Psychological Bulletin, 95
(3), 542-
575. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.95.3.542
Dill, K. E., Anderson, C. A., & Deuser, W. E. (1997). Effects of aggressive
personality on social expectations and social perceptions.
Journal
of Research in Personality, 31
(2), 272-292. https://doi.org/10.1006/
jrpe.1997.2183
Francisco, S. M., Veiga Simão, A. M., Ferreira, P. C., & Martins, M. J. (2015).
Cyberbullying: The hidden side of college students.
Computers in Hu-
man Behavior, 43,
167-182. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.10.045.
Fox, C. M., & Jones, J. A. (1998). Uses of Rasch modeling in counseling
psychology research.
Journal of Counseling Psychology, 45
(1), 30-45.
https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0167.45.1.30
Hardesty, D., & Bearden, W. (2004). The use of expert judges in scale de-
velopment: Implications for improving face validity of measures of
unobservable constructs.
Journal of Business Research, 57
(2), 98-107.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0148-2963(01)00295-8
Heirman, W., & Walrave, M. (2012). Predicting adolescent perpetration in
cyberbullying: An application of the theory of planned behavior.
Psi-
cothema, 24
(4), 614-620. http://www.psicothema.com/pdf/4062.pdf
Hooper, D., Coughlan, J., & Mullen, M. (2008). Structural equation mo-
delling: Guidelines for determining model fit.
The Electronic Journal
of Business Research Methods, 6
(1), 53-60. http://eprints.maynoothu-
niversity.ie/6596/
Jakubowski, P., & Lange, A. (1978).
The assertive option: Your rights and
responsibilities.
Research Press Company.
Keyes, C. (2007). Promoting and protecting mental health as flourishing:
A complementary strategy for improving national mental health.
American Psychologist, 62
(2), 95-108. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-
066x.62.2.95
Kirchner, E. P., Kennedy, R. E., & Draguns, J. G. (1979). Assertion and aggres-
sion in adult offenders.
Behavior Therapy, 10
(4), 452-471. https://doi.
org/10.1016/s0005-7894(79)80050-7
Lenhart, A. (2007).
Cyberbullying and online teens.
Pew Internet & Ame-
rican Life Project. http://www.pewinternet.org/PPF/r/216/report_dis-
play.asp
Lin, M. T. (2017).
Risk factors associated with cyberbullying victimization
and perpetration among Taiwanese children
. Texas Medical Center
Dissertations. https://digitalcommons.library.tmc.edu/dissertations/
AAI10126751
Lin, Y., Durbin, J. M., & Rancer, A. S. (2016). Perceived instructor argumenta-
tiveness, verbal aggressiveness, and classroom communication climate
in relation to student state motivation and math anxiety.
Communica-
tion Education, 66
(3), 330-349. https://doi.org/10.1080/03634523.201
6.1245427
Linacre, J. M. (2013).
Winsteps
®
Rasch measurement computer program
user’s guide.
Winsteps.com.
Lonigro, A., Schneider, B. H., Laghi, F., Baiocco, R., Pallini, S., & Brunner, T.
(2014). Is cyberbullying related to trait or state anger?
Child Psychia-
try & Human Development, 46
(3), 445-454. https://doi.org/10.1007/
s10578-014-0484-0
Marôco, J. (2010).
Análise de equações estruturais: fundamentos teóricos,
software and aplicações
[Structural equation analyses: Theoretical
foundations, software and applications] (ReportNumber, Lda.).
Matos, A. P., André, R. S., Cherpe, S., Rodrigues, D., Figueira, C., & Pinto, A.
M. (2010). Preliminary psychometric study of the Mental Health Con-
tinuum-Short Form for youth, in a sample of Portuguese adolescents.
Psychologica, 53,
131-156. https://doi.org/10.14195/1647-8606_53_7
Ortega, R., Elipe, P., Mora-Merchán, J. A., Genta, M. L., Brighi, A., Guarini, A.,
Smith, P. K., Thompson, F., & Tippett, N. (2012). The emotional impact
of bullying and cyberbullying on victims: A European cross-national
study.
Aggressive Behavior, 38
(5), 342-56. https://doi.org/10.1002/
ab.21440
Osofsky, M. J., Bandura A., & Zimbardo, P. G. (2005). The role of moral disen-
gagement in the execution process.
Law and Human Behavior, 29
(4),
371-393. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10979-005-4930-1
Patchin, J., & Hinduja, S. (2006). Bullies move beyond the schoolyard: A
preliminary look at cyber bullying.
Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice,
4
(2), 148-169. https://doi.org/10.1177/1541204006286288
Perren, S., & Gutzwiller-Helfenfinger, E. (2012). Cyberbullying and traditio-
nal bullying in adolescence: Differential roles of moral disengagement,
moral emotions, and moral values.
European Journal of Developmental
Psychology, 9
(2), 195-209. https://doi.org/10.1080/17405629.2011.643
168
Pornari, C. D., & Wood, J. (2010). Peer and cyber aggression in secondary
school students: The role of moral disengagement, hostile attribution
bias, and outcome expectancies.
Aggressive Behavior, 36
(2), 81-94.
https://doi.org/10.1002/ab.20336
Preacher, K. J., & Hayes, A. F. (2008). Asymptotic and resampling strate-
gies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple media-
tor models.
Behavior Research Methods, 40
(3), 879-891. https://doi.
org/10.3758/BRM.40.3.879
Rachoene, M., & Oyedemi, T. (2017). From self-expression to social aggres-
sion: Cyberbullying culture among South African youth on Facebook
.
South African Journal for Communication Theory and Research, 41
(3),
302-319. https://doi.org/10.1080/02500167.2015.1093325
Salmivalli, C., & Nieminen, E. (2002). Proactive and reactive aggression
among school bullies, victims, and bully-victims.
Aggressive Behavior,
28
(1), 30-44. https://doi.org/10.1002/ab.90004
Smith, E. V. (2001). Evidence for the reliability of measures and validity
of measure interpretation: A Rasch measure perspective.
Journal of
Applied Measurement, 2
(3), 281-311. https://doi.org/10.1680/cehlat-
tv.28760.0010
United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF, 2017).
A familiar face: Violence in
the lives of children and adolescents.
UNICEF.
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization Educatio-
nal, Scientific and Cultural Organisation (UNESCO, 2017).
School vio-
lence and bullying: Global status.
UNESCO.
Veiga Simão, A.M., Ferreira, P., Francisco, S., Paulino, P., & Souza, S. (2018).
Cyberbullying: Shaping the use of verbal aggression through normati-
ve moral beliefs and self-efficacy.
New Media & Society. 20
(12), 4787-
4806. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444818784870
Zeman, J., Shipman, K., & Suveg, C. (2002). Anger and sadness regulation:
Predictions to internalizing and externalizing symptoms in children.
Journal of Clinical Child & Adolescent Psychology, 31
(3), 393-398.
https://doi.org/10.1207/s15374424jccp3103_11
