Content uploaded by Raghad Sh. Jassim
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Raghad Sh. Jassim on Oct 11, 2024
Content may be subject to copyright.
.
eman.hassan@ircoedu.uobaghdad.edu.iq
Raghadshakei9@uomustansiriya.edu.iq
Jonason & Webster, 2010The dirty
dozen
Çetin et al., 2011)
The dark triad of personality and its relationship to cyberbullying
among university students
Lec. Dr. Raghad Shakir Jassim , Prof. Dr. Iman Hassan Jaadan
College of Pharmacy - Al-Mustansiriyah University, College of Education Ibn
Rushd for Human Sciences - University of Baghdad
Abstract
The research aims to identify the dark triad of personality and cyberbullying among
university students, as well as identifying the statistically significant relationship between
the dark triad of personality and cyberbullying among university students. To achieve the
research aims, the researchers adopted the (Jonason & Webster, 2010) The dirty dozen
scale, which consists of 12 items. On a seven-point scale, distributed evenly across the
components of the scale, (Machiavellianism 3, 8, 9, 10) (Narcissism 4, 5, 6, 7)
(Psychopathy 1, 2, 11, 12) and the cyberbullying scale by (Çetin et al., 2011) The
validity of the translation of the tools and their adaptation to the Iraqi environment were
conducted, and the standard properties were verified and that they had good
psychometric properties. The research tools were applied to a sample of (400) male and
female students from the University of Baghdad. The results showed that the research
sample did not have dark triad tendencies in general, with the exception of narcissistic
personality traits. The research sample does not engage in cyberbullying behaviors, and
there is a statistically significant relationship between the dark triad of personality and
cyberbullying, which is a direct relationship, meaning that the higher the level of the dark
triad of personality in an individual, the higher his cyberbullying. Accordingly, a set of
recommendations and proposals have been included.
Keywords: The Dark Triad of Personality, Cyberbullying
Olweus & Limber (2018) Dehue (2013)
Barlett, DeWitt, Maronna & Johnson (2018)
PTSD)
Furnham, Richards & Paulhus (2013) Paulhus & Williams
(2002)
(Aune, 2009: 2)
(Jonason & Kavanagh, 2010; Jonason& Luevano, 2013)
.Carter, 2015:35)
The Dark Triad Personality
Paulhus and Williams (2002)
Paulhus and Williams, 2002: 556)
Paulhus and Williams, 2002)
cyberbullying
Smith et al. (2008)
(Smith et al. ,2008: 376)
Smith et al. (2008)
The Dark Triad Personality
Paulhus and Williams
:
narcissism
.
Machiavellianism
.
psychopathy
(Paulhus and Williams, 2002: 558-559) .
cyberbullying
Barlett and Gentile Cyberbullying Model(BGCM;
Barlett & Gentile, 2012)
(Barlett&
Gentile,2012: 123)
.
(Barlett, 2017: 269).
1
1
4002
2
Jonason & Webster,
2010The dirty dozen
Çetin et al.,
2011)
t-test
1.960
214
0.05
0.05
1
5.43
1.119
2.34
1.543
18.432
7
5.83
1.124
3.12
1.512
18.765
2
6.13
1.102
2.72
1.225
25.021
8
5.63
1.353
2.84
1.414
16.536
3
5.75
1.165
2.97
1.278
17.633
9
5.74
1.365
3.10
1.765
15.111
4
5.82
1.094
3.00
1.388
18.443
10
5.69
1.423
2.77
1.588
16.556
5
5.48
1.549
2.73
1.383
15.373
11
5.16
1.670
2.59
1.301
14.108
6
5.70
1.267
2.52
1.392
19.398
12
5.43
1.161
2.52
1.534
18.463
0.05
0.05
1
4.53
1.795
2.37
1.202
11.596
12
5.52
1.251
2.45
1.454
18.574
2
6.07
1.052
2.64
1.175
25.211
13
5.81
1.300
2.61
1.415
19.398
3
5.93
1.124
3.03
1.430
18.505
14
5.83
1.296
3.03
1.693
15.261
4
5.85
1.103
2.61
1.276
22.349
15
5.60
1.482
2.73
1.339
16.673
5
6.01
1.162
2.90
1.447
19.477
16
5.06
1.624
2.53
1.315
14.045
6
5.84
1.245
3.00
1.388
17.728
17
5.78
1.220
2.90
1.184
19.648
7
5.78
1.454
2.65
1.523
17.251
18
5.66
1.259
2.58
1.432
18.776
8
5.17
1.572
2.43
1.284
15.687
5.34
1.372
2.53
1.292
17.353
9
5.84
1.351
2.89
1.510
16.912
5.92
1.044
3.04
1.408
19.048
10
5.88
1.333
2.81
1.452
18.079
5.41
1.537
3.24
1.357
12.255
11
5.63
1.303
2.44
1.380
19.545
4.54
1.904
2.38
1.177
11.229
1
0.294
4
0.453
7
0.452
10
0.447
2
0.423
5
0.387
8
0.436
0.383
3
0.339
0.531
9
0.390
0.342
1
0.354
7
0.411
13
0.288
19
0.328
2
0.362
8
0.298
14
0.410
20
0.309
3
0.257
9
0.462
15
0.512
0.500
4
0.342
10
0.430
16
0.431
0.360
5
0.448
0.372
17
0.417
0.494
0.427
18
0.321
0.01398
0.115
0.01398
0.115
3
0.326
0.422
0.503
0.510
0.331
2
0.292
0.402
0.512
1
0.444
0.303
0.462
0.409
0.01398
0.115
1
0.533
0.606
0.828
1
0.521
0.808
1
0.824
1
Validity of the Scale
Construct Validity
Scale Reliability
Test-Retest Method
1
0.850
2
0.777
3
0.818
4
0.790
0.807
Cronbach Alpha Coefficient
1
0.822
2
0.843
3
0.769
4
0.810
0.899
Statistical Means
(SPSS)
T-Test
Person Correlation
T-Test
1
11
t
0.05
400
1.96
400
1.96
400
1.96
400
1.96
1.960.05
399
1.960.05399
1.960.05399
1.960.05399
Furnham, Richards & Paulhus (2013)(Jonason & Kavanagh,
2010; Jonason& Luevano, 2013) Paulhus & Williams (2002)
0.05
1.96
12
t
0.05
400
1.96
.Olweus & Limber (2018)
Dehue (2013)Barlett, DeWitt, Maronna & Johnson (2018)
13
13
t
0.05
400
0.402
8.758
1.96
400
0.366
7.846
1.96
400
0.447
9.969
1.96
400
0.359
7.673
1.96
0.402
8.7581.96
0.05398
0.366
7.8461.960.05
398
0.447
9.9691.960.05398
0.359
7.6731.960.05
398
.
.
.
1. Aune Nicole M. (2009).
Cyberbullying
. A Research Paper Submitted
in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Master of Science Degree
With a Major in School Psychology, University of Wisconsin-Stout.
2. Barlett, C. P. (2017). From theory to practice: Cyberbullying theory
and its application to intervention.
Computers in Human Behavior
, 72, 269–
275.
3. Barlett, C. P., DeWitt, C.C., Maronna, B., & Johnson, K. (2018).
Social media use as a tool to facilitate or reduce cyberbullying perpetration:
A review focusing on anonymous and nonanymous social media platforms.
Violence and Gender
, 5(3), 147–152.
4. Barlett, C. P., & Gentile, D. A. (2012). Attacking others online: The
formation of cyberbullying in late adolescence.
Psychology of Popular Media
Culture
, 1, 123–135.
5. Carter, G. (2015).
Deep into that darkness, peering: A series of
studies on the Dark Triad of personality
, Durham theses, Durham University.
6. Dehue, F. (2013). Cyberbullying research: New perspectives and
alternative methodologies. Introduction to the special issue.
Journal of
Community & Applied Psychology
, 23,1–6.
7. Furnham, A., Richards, S., Rangel, L., & Jones, D. N. (2014).
Measuring malevolence: Quantitative issues surrounding the Dark Triad of
personality.
Personality and Individual Differences
,
67
, 114-121.
8. Jonason, P. K., & Luévano, V. X. (2013). Walking the thin line
between efficiency and accuracy: Validity and structural properties of the
Dirty Dozen.
Personality and Individual Differences
,
55
(1), 76-81.
9. Jonason, P.K., Kavanagh, P.S.,Webster, G.D., & Fitzgerald, D.
(2011). Comparing the measured and latent Dark Triad: Are three measures
better than one?
Journal of Methods and Measurement in the Social
Sciences, 2 (
1), 28-44.
10. Olweus, D., & Limber, S. (2018). Some problems with cyberbullying
research.
Current Opinion in Psychology
, 19, 139–143.
11. Paulhus, D. L., &Williams, K. M. (2002). The Dark Triad of
personality: Narcissism, Machiavellianism, and psychopathy.
Journal of
Research in Personality
,
36
(6), 556-563.
12. Smith, P. K., Mahdavi, J., Carvalho, M., Fisher, S., Russell, S., &
Tippett, N. (2008). Cyberbullying: Its nature and impact in secondary school
pupils.
Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry
, 49, 376–385.
13. Smith, P.K., Mahdavi, J., Carvalho, M., Fisher, S., Russell, S., &
Tippett, N. (2008). Cyberbullying: Its nature and impact in Secondary
School pupils.
Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry
, 49(4), 376-385.
