Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-lnqnp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T02:02:13.279Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Cyberbullying: Labels, Behaviours and Definition in Three European Countries

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 February 2012

Annalaura Nocentini*
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, University of Florence, Italy. [email protected]
Juan Calmaestra
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, University of Cordoba, Spain.
Anja Schultze-Krumbholz
Affiliation:
Department of Educational Science and Psychology, Freie Universität Berlin, Germany.
Herbert Scheithauer
Affiliation:
Department of Educational Science and Psychology, Freie Universität Berlin, Germany.
Rosario Ortega
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, University of Cordoba, Spain.
Ersilia Menesini
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, University of Florence, Italy.
*
*Address for Correspondence: Annalaura Nocentini, Department of Psychology, Via S. Salvi, 12 – Padiglione 26, 50135 Firenze, Italia.
Get access

Abstract

This study aims to examine students' perception of the term used to label cyberbullying, the perception of different forms and behaviours (written, verbal, visual, exclusion and impersonation) and the perception of the criteria used for its definition (imbalance of power, intention, repetition, anonymity and publicity) in three different European countries: Italy, Spain and Germany. Seventy adolescents took part in nine focus groups, using the same interview guide across countries. Thematic analysis focused on three main themes related to: (1) the term used to label cyberbullying, (2) the different behaviours representing cyberbullying, (3) the three traditional criteria of intentionality, imbalance of power and repetition and the two new criteria of anonymity and publicity. Results showed that the best word to label cyberbullying is ‘cyber-mobbing’ (in Germany), ‘virtual’ or ‘cyber-bullying’ (in Italy), and ‘harassment’ or ‘harassment via Internet or mobile phone’ (in Spain). Impersonation cannot be considered wholly as cyberbullying behaviour. In order to define a cyberbullying act, adolescents need to know whether the action was done intentionally to harm the victim, the effect on the victim and the repetition of the action (this latter criterion evaluated simultaneously with the publicity). Information about the anonymity and publicity contributes to better understand the nature and the severity of the act, the potential effects on the victim and the intentionality.

Type
Articles
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2010

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)