Ci a ion: Wachs, S.; Machimba ena,
J.M.; W igh , M.F.; Gámez-Guadix,
M.; Yang, S.; Si ichai, R.; Singh, R.;
Biswal, R.; Flo a, K.; Daskalou, V.;
e al. Associa ions be ween Coping
S a egies and Cybe ha e
In ol emen : E idence om
Adolescen s ac oss Th ee Wo ld
Regions. In . J. En i on. Res. Public
Heal h 2022,19, 6749. h ps://
doi.o g/10.3390/ije ph19116749
Academic Edi o : Ji-Kang Chen
Recei ed: 26 Ap il 2022
Accep ed: 28 May 2022
Published: 31 May 2022
Publishe ’s No e: MDPI s ays neu al
wi h ega d o ju isdic ional claims in
published maps and ins i u ional a il-
ia ions.
Copy igh : © 2022 by he au ho s.
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Swi ze land.
This a icle is an open access a icle
dis ibu ed unde he e ms and
condi ions o he C ea i e Commons
A ibu ion (CC BY) license (h ps://
c ea i ecommons.o g/licenses/by/
4.0/).
In e na ional Jou nal o
En i onmen al Resea ch
and Public Heal h
A icle
Associa ions be ween Coping S a egies and Cybe ha e
In ol emen : E idence om Adolescen s ac oss
Th ee Wo ld Regions
Sebas ian Wachs 1,2,* , Juan Manuel Machimba ena 3, Michelle F. W igh 2,4, Manuel Gámez-Guadix 5,
Soeun Yang 6, Ru haychonnee Si ichai 7, Ri u Singh 8, Ramak ishna Biswal 9, Ka e ina Flo a 10,
Vassiliki Daskalou 11 , E doxia Mazi idou 11 , Jun Sung Hong 12 and No man K ause 1
1Depa men o Educa ional S udies, Uni e si y o Po sdam, 14476 Po sdam, Ge many;
[email p o ec ed]
2Na ional An i-Bullying Resea ch and Resou ce Cen e, Dublin Ci y Uni e si y, D09 AW21 Dublin, I eland;
[email p o ec ed]
3Facul y o Psychology, Uni e si y o he Basque Coun y, 20018 Donos ia, Spain;
[email p o ec ed]
4Depa men o Psychology, DePaul Uni e si y, Chicago, IL 60604, USA
5Depa men o Biological and Heal h Psychology, Au onomous Uni e si y o Mad id, 28049 Mad id, Spain;
[email p o ec ed]
6Cen e o Digi al Humani ies & Compu a ional Social Sciences, Ko ea Ad anced Ins i u e o Science
and Technology, Daejeon 34141, Ko ea; [email p o ec ed]
7Kids and You h De elopmen Resea ch Cen e , Resea ch Cen e o Educa ional Inno a ions and Teaching
and Lea ning Excellence, Facul y o Humani ies and Social Sciences, P ince o Songkla Uni e si y, Muang,
Pa ani 94000, Thailand; [email p o ec ed]
8
Depa men o Human De elopmen and Family S udies, G.B. Pan Uni e si y o Ag icul u e and Technology,
Pan naga 263145, India; [email p o ec ed]
9Depa men o Humani ies and Social Sciences, Na ional Ins i u e o Technology, Rou kela 769008, India;
[email p o ec ed]
10 Depa men o Psychology, Neapolis Uni e si y Pa os, Pa os 8042, Cyp us; [email p o ec ed]
11 Depa men o Psychology, A is o le Uni e si y o Thessaloniki, 54124 Thessaloniki, G eece;
[email p o ec ed] (V.D.); [email p o ec ed] (E.M.)
12 School o Social Wo k, Wayne S a e Uni e si y, De oi , MI 48202, USA; [email p o ec ed]
*Co espondence: [email p o ec ed]; Tel.: +49-(0)-331-977-2702
Abs ac :
Cybe ha e ep esen s a isk o adolescen s’ de elopmen and peace ul coexis ence in
democ a ic socie ies. Ye , no much is known abou he ela ionship be ween adolescen s’ abili y
o cope wi h cybe ha e and hei cybe ha e in ol emen . To ill cu en gaps in he li e a u e and
in o m he de elopmen o media educa ion p og ams, he p esen s udy in es iga ed a ious coping
s a egies in a hypo he ical cybe ha e scena io as co ela es o being cybe ha e ic ims, pe pe a o s,
and bo h ic im–pe pe a o s. The sample consis ed o 6829 adolescen s aged 12–18 yea s old
(
Mage = 14.93
,SD = 1.64; gi ls: 50.4%, boys: 48.9%, and 0.7% did no indica e hei gende ) om Asia,
Eu ope, and No h Ame ica. Resul s showed ha adolescen s who endo sed dis al ad ice o endo sed
echnical coping showed a lowe likelihood o be ic ims, pe pe a o s, o ic im–pe pe a o s. In
con as , i adolescen s el helpless o endo sed e alia ion o cope wi h cybe ha e, hey showed
highe odds o being in ol ed in cybe ha e as ic ims, pe pe a o s, o ic im–pe pe a o s. Finally,
adolescen s who endo sed close suppo as a coping s a egy showed a lowe likelihood o be ic im–
pe pe a o s, and adolescen s who endo sed asse i e coping showed highe odds o being ic ims.
In conclusion, he esul s con i m he impo ance o add essing adolescen s’ abili y o deal wi h
cybe ha e o de elop mo e ailo ed p e en ion app oaches. Mo e speci ically, such ini ia i es should
ocus on adolescen s who eel helpless o eel inclined o e alia e. In addi ion, adolescen s should be
educa ed o p ac ice dis al ad ice and echnical coping when expe iencing cybe ha e. Implica ions o
he design and ins uc ion o e idence-based cybe ha e p e en ion (e.g., online educa ional games,
i ual lea ning en i onmen s) will be discussed.
In . J. En i on. Res. Public Heal h 2022,19, 6749. h ps://doi.o g/10.3390/ije ph19116749 h ps://www.mdpi.com/jou nal/ije ph
In . J. En i on. Res. Public Heal h 2022,19, 6749 2 o 14
Keywo ds: cybe ha e; ha e speech; coping s a egies; c oss-na ional; coun e -speech
1. In oduc ion
Cu en ly, a majo challenge o democ a ic socie ies is he sp ead o ake news, con-
spi acy na a i es, and cybe ha e [
1
,
2
]. Adolescen s a e he age g oup ha is mo e ac i e
online han any o he [
3
]. I is, he e o e, no su p ising ha adolescen s a e inc easingly
exposed o cybe ha e [
4
–
6
]. This is conce ning because adolescence is a o ma i e pe iod
o poli ical socializa ion p ocesses which a e also in luenced by online expe iences and he
use o in o ma ion and communica ion echnologies [
7
]. Mo eo e , exposu e o cybe ha e
is associa ed wi h nega i e ou comes, including inc eases in o line ha e c imes, highe
le els o ou g oup p ejudices, lowe well-being, and agg essi e beha io [
6
,
8
–
11
]. Hence, i
is c ucial o unde s and how adolescen s can cope wi h cybe ha e. Al hough many s udies
in es iga ed how adolescen s deal wi h ela ed online isks (e.g., cybe bullying), li le e-
sea ch a en ion has been gi en o adolescen s’ coping s a egies o dealing wi h cybe ha e.
To his end, he p esen s udy examines he associa ions be ween cybe ha e-speci ic coping
s a egies and adolescen s’ likelihood o cybe ha e in ol emen . The indings can be used
o in o m he de elopmen o media educa ion p e en ion p og ams and he de elopmen
o online lea ning en i onmen s wi h he aim o imp o ing adolescen s’ abili y o cope
wi h cybe ha e, hus educing hei likelihood o becoming in ol ed in cybe ha e.
1.1. Adolescen s’ Coping wi h Cybe ha e and In ol emen in Cybe ha e
Cybe ha e (also known as ha e speech) is usually de ined as he sha ing, c ea ing, o
o wa ding o o ensi e, mean, o h ea ening, pos s, commen s, ex messages, ideos,
and pic u es ia in o ma ion and communica ion echnologies a ge ing a g oup o pe -
son because o hei gende , sexual o ien a ion, disabili y, ace, e hnici y, na ionali y, o
eligion [
1
]. Cybe ha e shows concep ual and empi ical o e laps wi h cybe bullying. Cy-
be bullying is o en desc ibed as a hos ile and epea ed nega i e beha io agains people
who canno easily de end hemsel es and is ca ied ou among people o ela i ely s able
social g oups. Cybe ha e can, howe e , also be ca ied ou as a single ac among s ange s.
While cybe bullying is a ge ing o en people based on indi idual cha ac e is ics, cybe ha e
is necessa ily di ec ed agains people because o ac ual o assigned membe ships o social
g oups [12–14].
Being he a ge o o being exposed o cybe ha e is a s ess ul expe ience and can
e oke nega i e emo ions [
6
,
15
,
16
]. The abili y o manage s ess ul e en s h ough cogni i e,
emo ional, and beha io al e o s is de ined as coping [
17
]. Based on he T ansac ional
Model o S ess and Coping [
17
], F ydenbe g [
18
] p oposed a coping ypology o adoles-
cen s consis ing o h ee coping s yles:
1.
Re e ence o o he s includes s a egies o engage wi h o he s o cope, such as seeking
emo ional suppo om close iends o amily membe s (close suppo ) o asking o
in o ma ional and ins uc i e ad ice om eache s o o he p o essionals (dis al ad ice).
2.
The p oduc i e coping s yle comp ises s a egies o deal wi h he s esso and includes
de ending onesel and con on ing he cybe ha e pe pe a o wi hou causing any
ha m (asse i eness). I also includes s a egies such as blocking he cybe ha e pe pe-
a o o p o ec pe sonal in o ma ion online o inc ease p o ec ion ( echnical coping).
Re e ence o o he s and p oduc i e coping can bo h be unde s ood as unc ional
coping s yles ha a e used wi h he in en ion o he belie in he abili y o manage o
change he p oblem causing he dis ess.
3.
The non-p oduc i e coping s yle includes s a egies such as coping h ough coun e -
agg essions ( e alia ion) o he belie ha one is no capable o dealing wi h cybe ha e
inciden s (helplessness). The non-p oduc i e coping s yle is conside ed dys unc ional
and is o en employed wi h he belie ha a pe son canno change o s op he s esso .
In . J. En i on. Res. Public Heal h 2022,19, 6749 3 o 14
Resea ch in es iga ing how adolescen s cope wi h cybe ha e is sca ce. One s udy
ound ha adolescen s’ mos equen ly used coping ac ions we e igno ing cybe ha e when
exposed o i , which was ollowed by epo ing i o online se ice p o ide s, speaking
o a iend abou i , blocking he pe son who sha ed he cybe ha e, elling a pa en o
ano he adul abou i , eplying publicly o he pe pe a o , in o ming a eache o o he
p o essional, and epo ing he beha io o he police [
19
]. Mo e ecen ly, cu en quan i-
a i e esea ch based on a mul idimensional scale o measu ing coping wi h cybe ha e
e ealed ha adolescen s used echnical coping, asse i eness, and close suppo mos
equen ly, ollowed by helplessness/sel -blame, e alia ion, and dis al ad ice [
20
,
21
]. Simi-
la ly, K ause e al. [
6
] ound based on quali a i e in e iews ha Ge man adolescen s coped
wi h expe iences o ha e speech in schools by e e ing o social suppo , a oidance, ac i e
igno ing, and coun e -speech.
Adolescen s a e in ol ed in cybe ha e h ough se e al oles. They can obse e cy-
be ha e (wi nesse ), be a ge ed by cybe ha e ma e ial ( ic im), pos , o wa d, o sha e
ha m ul o hos ile cybe ha e ma e ial (pe pe a o ), and be bo h ic im and pe pe a o
( ic im–pe pe a o [
22
,
23
]). While ini ial esea ch has inc eased ou unde s anding o how
adolescen s cope wi h cybe ha e, he e is nea ly no in o ma ion on how coping s a egies
wi h cybe ha e a e ela ed o adolescen s’ in ol emen in cybe ha e as ic ims, pe pe a o s,
o bo h. Gi en he spa se esea ch on coping wi h cybe ha e, li e a u e on adolescen s’
s a egies o cope wi h o line and online agg ession will be e iewed. P io esea ch
on associa ions be ween coping s a egies and in ol emen in online and o line agg es-
sion is mixed and di icul o compa e because di e en ypologies o coping s yles and
s a egies ha e been used in he li e a u e. In addi ion, coping s a egies a e highly depen-
den and nuanced by se e al o he a iables, such as he na u e o he s esso , con ex ,
age, and se e i y [
24
], which migh u he add o he con adic o y esea ch indings in
he li e a u e.
1.1.1. Re e ence o O he s
The e e ence o o he s’ coping s yles is one o he mos highly ega ded esponses
o cybe ic imiza ion by adolescen s and p o essionals [
25
–
27
]. The e is, howe e , some
con en ion wi hin he li e a u e conce ning whe he he e e ence o o he s is e ec i e in
coping wi h adi ional and cybe ic imiza ion. Some esea ch demons a ed ha asking
o he s o ad ice was nega i ely co ela ed wi h cybe bullying ic imiza ion
[28,29]
, while
o he esea ch did no indica e an associa ion be ween using social suppo and being
ic ims o cybe bullying [
30
,
31
]. Ye o he esea ch dis inguished be ween he esou ce o
suppo and ound a nega i e ela ionship be ween seeking help om eache s and being
ic ims o cybe bullying bu no om pee s o amily [
32
]. The e is also ano he line o
esea ch ha epo ed a nega i e associa ion be ween seeking help om iends and being
ic ims o cybe bullying bu no om pa en s o eache s [
33
]. None heless, o he esea ch
showed a nega i e co ela ion be ween seeking suppo om pee s o adul s and being a
isk o adi ional ic imiza ion [
34
]. Resea ch on he use o e e ence o o he s as a coping
s yle endo sed by ic ims o cybe ha e is sca ce wi h ini ial esea ch showing a nega i e
ela ionship be ween coping by e e ence o o he s and cybe ha e ic imiza ion [
20
]. In es-
iga ions on he associa ion be ween coping and agg essi e beha io gene ally showed ha
unc ional coping s a egies a e nega i ely co ela ed wi h pe pe a ing agg ession [
35
].
Mo e speci ically, ega ding e e ence o o he s, some esea ch showed ha lowe le els
o social suppo we e linked o highe le els o adi ional agg ession [
36
–
38
] and cybe
agg ession [39].
Adolescen s who ha e s ong social suppo migh be less likely o become ic ims
han hei mo e isola ed pee s o hose who ha e di icul ies wi h social in e ac ions because
posi i e in e ac ions wi h pee s and amily p o ec agains ic imiza ion [
40
–
42
]. In he
same line, social suppo migh help o educe s ess and us a ion and, hus, makes i
less likely ha adolescen s engage in eac i e agg ession [
37
,
43
] and become a pe pe a o
In . J. En i on. Res. Public Heal h 2022,19, 6749 4 o 14
o cybe ha e hemsel es. Hence, i can be assumed ha e e ence o o he s is nega i ely
ela ed o being ic ims, pe pe a o s, and ic im–pe pe a o s o cybe ha e.
1.1.2. P oduc i e Coping
I has been emphasized by se e al esea che s ha adolescen s mos equen ly use a
p oduc i e coping s yle o deal wi h a ying online isks [
20
,
24
,
32
,
44
–
47
]. Asse i eness
(i.e., con on ing he agg esso , elling he agg esso o s op) has ecei ed mixed esul s in
he li e a u e, as i is posi i ely ela ed o a highe isk o cybe bullying ic imiza ion [
28
]
and a lowe isk o cybe g ooming ic imiza ion [
48
]. O he esea che s, howe e , ha e
ound a nega i e associa ion wi h he likelihood o expe iencing cybe bullying ic imiza-
ion [
39
], whe eas o he esea ch did no ind any co ela ion wi h cybe bullying ic im-
iza ion [
49
]. Rega ding cybe bullying pe pe a ion, one s udy ha in es iga ed po en ial
associa ions be ween asse i eness and cybe bullying pe pe a ion sugges s no signi ican
ela ionship [
39
], and ano he ound a nega i e ela ionship be ween p oblem- ocused
coping in gene al and cybe ha e pe pe a ion [47].
Ano he p oduc i e coping s a egy, namely echnical coping (i.e., blocking he ag-
g esso , paying a en ion o secu i y se ings), has also e ealed mixed indings ela ing o
p e en ing ( u u e) ic imiza ion. While Wachs e al. [
48
] ound ha using echnical coping
was posi i ely co ela ed wi h being ic ims o cybe g ooming, o he schola s ound a
nega i e ela ionship be ween u ilizing echnical coping and being ic ims o cybe bul-
lying [
32
]; ye o he esea che s did no ind a co ela ion be ween echnical coping and
cybe bullying ic imiza ion o pe pe a ion [39].
P oduc i e coping migh educe adolescen s’ isk o cybe ha e ic imiza ion h ough
he concep o cogni i e app aisal and posi i e hinking. Cogni i e app aisal is wha a
pe son does o e alua e whe he a pa icula encoun e is ele an o his o he well-being.
Since he in oduc ion o he p inciple o app aisal by Laza us and Folkman [
50
], he
bene i o posi i e hinking when coping wi h s ess has been acknowledged [
51
]. Posi i e
hinking migh allow adolescen s o in e p e s ess ul si ua ions in ways ha a e conduci e
o g ow h and success and, he e o e, would p e en adolescen s om pa icipa ing o
engaging in any u he cybe ha e encoun e s, ei he by blocking he a acke o by being
asse i e owa d he pe pe a o . In addi ion, i is well known ha p oduc i e coping
s a egies allow people o adjus be e o s ess ul si ua ions [
50
]. Mo e speci ically, esea ch
has shown ha p oduc i e coping mi iga es he nega i e consequences o adi ional and
cybe ic imiza ion on psychological unc ioning [
52
–
54
], inc eases e icacy when dealing
wi h s ess ul si ua ions, and he e o e educes eac i e agg ession.
1.1.3. Non-P oduc i e Coping
In gene al, non-p oduc i e coping, such as helplessness and e alia ion, was less
equen ly ecommended by s uden s o ic ims compa ed wi h e e ence o o he s o p o-
duc i e coping [
55
]. P io esea ch has e ealed a posi i e ela ionship be ween e alia ion
and being ic ims o cybe ha e [
20
] as well as adi ional o cybe bullying [
30
,
31
,
46
,
56
].
Rega ding pe pe a o s, he e is some e idence ha se e al non-p oduc i e s a egies, such
as helplessness, sel -blame, and e alia ion, we e posi i ely co ela ed wi h o line and
online agg ession [31,35,47,56,57].
Non-p oduc i e s yles a e pa icula ly wo ying coping s yles, as s a egies such as
helplessness, sel -blame, o e enge we e linked o a highe le el o dep essi e symp oms
and suicidal idea ion, whe eas e e ence o o he s and p oduc i e coping we e ela ed o
lowe le els o dep essi e symp oms [
55
,
58
,
59
]. Fu he mo e, while e alia ion can p olong
a icious ci cle o iolence and implica e he indi idual u he in o cybe ha e wi h a dual
ole (i.e., ic im and pe pe a o [
60
]), helplessness (i.e., umina ion and sel -blame) could
lead o maladap i e schemas and he ch oni ica ion o ic imiza ion [
61
]. The e o e, i
can be assumed ha non-p oduc i e coping is posi i ely associa ed wi h being ic ims,
pe pe a o s, and ic im–pe pe a o s o cybe ha e.
In . J. En i on. Res. Public Heal h 2022,19, 6749 5 o 14
1.2. The P esen S udy
The p esen s udy sough o examine he associa ions be ween a ying coping s yles
(i.e., e e ence o o he s, p oduc i e coping, and non-p oduc i e coping) and adolescen s’
cybe ha e in ol emen isk. Fi s , i was hypo hesized ha adolescen s who endo sed
close suppo and dis al ad ice ( e e ence o o he s) will show lowe odds o being ic ims,
pe pe a o s, and ic im–pe pe a o s o cybe ha e compa ed wi h adolescen s who we e
no in ol ed in cybe ha e (
H1
). Second, i was hypo hesized ha adolescen s who endo sed
asse i e and echnical coping (p oduc i e coping) will show lowe odds o being ic ims,
pe pe a o s, and ic im–pe pe a o s o cybe ha e compa ed wi h hose who we e no
in ol ed in cybe ha e (
H2
). Thi d, i was hypo hesized ha adolescen s who endo sed
helplessness and e alia ion coping (non-p oduc i e coping) will show highe odds o being
ic ims, pe pe a o s, and ic im–pe pe a o s o cybe ha e compa ed wi h hose who we e
no in ol ed in cybe ha e (H3).
2. Ma e ials and Me hods
2.1. Pa icipan s
The sample included 6829 adolescen s aged 12–18 yea s old (M
age
= 14.93; SD = 1.64;
gi ls: 50.4%, boys: 48.9, 0.7% did no indica e hei gende ) om h ee wo ld egions: Asia
(India, Sou h Ko ea, Thailand), Eu ope (Cyp us, G eece, Ge many, Spain), and No h Ame -
ica (USA). By coun y, he s udy sample included 847 Ame ican pa icipan s (12–18 yea s;
M
age
= 14.79; SD = 1.80; gi ls: 49.2%, boys: 47.9%, 2.8% did no indica e hei gende ),
221 Cyp io pa icipan s (12–18 yea s; M
age
= 14.49; SD = 1.48; gi ls: 67.4%, boys: 32.7,
0.9% did no indica e hei gende ), 1480 Ge man pa icipan s (12–17 yea s;
Mage = 14.21
;
SD = 1.23
; gi ls: 50.3%, boys: 49.7%), 670 G eek pa icipan s (15–18 yea s;
Mage = 16.49
;
SD = 1.12
; gi ls: 52.8%, boys: 45.7%, 1.5% did no indica e hei gende ), 1121 Indian pa -
icipan s (13–18 yea s; M
age
= 15.37; SD = 1.48; gi ls: 45%, boys: 55%), 756 Sou h Ko ean
pa icipan s (12–17 yea s; M
age
= 14.73; SD = 1.23; gi ls: 49.7%, boys: 50.1%, 0.1% did
no indica e hei gende ), 1018 Spanish pa icipan s (12–18 yea s;
Mage = 14.29
;
SD = 1.64;
gi ls: 51.6%, boys: 48.2%, 0.2% did no indica e hei gende ), and 716 Thai pa icipan s
(13–18 yea s; M
age
= 15.68; SD = 1.70; gi ls: 52.1%, boys: 46.6, 1.3% did no indica e hei
gende ). Table 1shows he dis ibu ion o pa icipan s by age, sex, and coun y o o igin.
Table 1. F equencies by Age, Sex and Coun y (n= 6722).
Age Sex
Coun y
Cyp us Ge many G eece India Sou h Ko ea Spain Thailand USA To al
n%n%n%n%n%n%n%n%n%
12–15 Male 40
0.9 616 14.4
90
2.1 399 7.9
252 5.9
372
8.7
151
3.5
241
5.6
2101 31.3
Female 115 2.7 625 14.6
83
1.9 294 6.9
290 6.8
387
9
162
3.8
231
5.4
2187 32.5
16–18 Male 29
1.2 120 4.9 216 8.9 278 11.4
127 5.2
119
4.9
182
7.5
140
5.8
1211
18
Female
34
1.4 119 4.9 271 11.1 210 8.6
85 3.5
138
5.7
211
8.7
155
6.4
1223 18.2
To al
218 3.2 1480
22
660 9.8 1121 16.7
754 11.2
1016 15.1 706 10.5 767 11.4 6722 100
2.2. Measu es
Cybe ha e In ol emen
. The ins umen o measu ing cybe ha e in ol emen con-
sis ed o a de ini ion o cybe ha e and wo single i ems o measu e cybe ha e in ol emen .
The gi en de ini ion was “Online ha e desc ibes he usage o in o ma ion and commu-
nica ion echnologies (e.g., Wha sApp, Facebook, Ins ag am, Twi e ) o o end and hu
somebody because o his o he ace, gende , e hnic g oup, na ionali y, disabili y, sexual
o ien a ion, o eligion. I can be ei he a ge ed di ec ly a a pe son o g oup o gene ally
sha ed online. Online ha e can be o ensi e, mean, o h ea ening and can be exp essed
h ough deg ading w i ings o speech online such as pos s, commen s, ex messages,
ideos o pic u es.” The i ems o measu e cybe ha e in ol emen we e adop ed by Haw-
In . J. En i on. Res. Public Heal h 2022,19, 6749 6 o 14
don e al. [
62
]. One i em was used o measu e cybe ha e ic imiza ion: “How o en did
i happen in he pas 12 mon hs ha you ha e pe sonally been he a ge o ha e ul o
deg ading w i ings o speech online because o you sex, eligious a ilia ion, ace, o sexual
o ien a ion?”. Fo cybe ha e pe pe a ion, he ollowing i em was used: “How o en did i
happen in he pas 12 mon hs ha you ha e pos ed ha e ul o deg ading w i ings o speech
online, which inapp op ia ely a acks ce ain g oups o people o indi iduals based on
hei sex, eligious a ilia ion, ace, o sexual o ien a ion?”. Bo h i ems we e answe ed on a
i e-poin scale: “ne e ” (0), “ e y a ely” (1), occasionally (2), equen ly (3), and “ e y
equen ly” (4).
To in es iga e dis inc associa ions among pu e ic ims, pu e pe pe a o s, and ic im–
pe pe a o s o cybe ha e, he cybe ha e ic imiza ion, and pe pe a ion a iables we e
ecoded in o one mul inomial a iable wi h ou dis inc g oups. Pu e cybe ha e ic ims
sco ed only highe han “ne e ” on he cybe ha e ic imiza ion i em, pu e cybe ha e pe pe-
a o s epo ed only highe han “ne e ” on he cybe ha e pe pe a ion i em, cybe ha e
ic im–pe pe a o s sco ed highe han “ne e ” on bo h cybe ha e ic imiza ion and pe -
pe a ion i ems, and non-in ol ed (i.e., adolescen s who we e no in ol ed in cybe ha e)
epo ed “ne e ” on bo h a iables. We decided o use a ca ego ical analyses app oach o
emb ace he skewed dis ibu ions o he cybe ha e a iables and allow o he compa ison
o dis inc associa ions be ween coping s a egies and being a cybe ha e ic im, pe pe a o ,
and bo h. Consequen ly, we accep ed he loss o s a is ical powe bu a oided biased
pa ame e es ima es due o non-no mal de ia ed ou comes [63,64].
Coping S a egies
. Coping s a egies we e measu ed by a alida ed ins umen o
measu e adolescen s’ coping s a egies wi h cybe ha e [
20
]. Pa icipan s a ed hei en-
do semen o h ee coping s yles wi h six subscales o al. The i s coping s yle is Re e ence
o o he s, and i includes wo subscales: Dis al ad ice (3 i ems, e.g., “
. . .
go o he police”;
α
= 0.81) and Close suppo (4 i ems, e.g., “
. . .
spend ime wi h my iends o ake my
mind o i ”,
α
= 0.84). P oduc i e coping is he second coping s yle and includes wo
subscales: Asse i eness (4 i ems, e.g., “
. . .
ell he pe son o s op i ”;
α
= 0.88) and
Technical coping (3 i ems, e.g., “
. . .
block ha pe son so ha he/she canno con ac me
anymo e”;
α
= 0.83). Non-p oduc i e coping is he hi d coping s yle and includes wo
subscales: Helplessness/Sel -blame (3 i ems, e.g., “
. . .
no know wha o do”;
α
= 0.76)
and Re alia ion (3 i ems, e.g., “
. . .
do i back”;
α
= 0.77). All i ems we e a ed on a scale:
“de ini ely no ” (0), “p obably no ” (1), “p obably” (2), and “de ini ely” (3). Supplemen a y
Table S1 p o ides coe icien alphas by coun y.
Con ol a iables
. Adolescen s’ age, sex (male e sus emale), and coun y o o igin
we e used as con ol a iables, as he e is some ini ial esea ch ha showed di e ences in
demog aphic a iables conce ning cybe ha e in ol emen [4,9,22,65].
2.3. P ocedu e
App o al o conduc his esea ch was ecei ed om he Ins i u ional Re iew Boa ds
o he associa ed esea che s’ uni e si ies, and he Helsinki e hics p o ocol was ollowed
o his s udy [
66
]. Da a o his p ojec we e collec ed by i s con ac ing school p incipals
ia emails o calls o discuss he aims o he s udy. Upon secu ing app o al om he school
p incipals, class oom announcemen s abou he s udy we e made in he pa icipa ing
schools. Pa en al pe mission slips we e sen home wi h adolescen s o acqui e consen o
pa icipa ion om he pa en (s)/gua dian(s). The esponse a e a he s uden le el among
all pa icipa ing coun ies was be ween 71% and 85%. Adolescen s we e in o med ha
hei pa icipa ion is olun a y and ha hey could s op aking pa in he s udy whene e
hey wan o o lea e ce ain ques ions ou i hey we e no com o able answe ing he
ques ions. Da a we e collec ed du ing egula school hou s.
The esea ch eam ollowed he ecommended p ocess o ansla e he su ey be ween
a ious languages. This helped ensu e ha s uden s in di e en coun ies we e esponding
o he same se o ques ions and ha he espec i e esul s we e he e o e compa able. The
p ocess included i s ansla ing he o iginal ins umen s in o he a ge language and hen
In . J. En i on. Res. Public Heal h 2022,19, 6749 7 o 14
ansla ing hem back by someone who had no seen he o iginal ques ionnai es. Finally,
he new ansla ion was compa ed o he o iginal ins umen o ensu e consis ency [
67
].
All ansla ed e sions can be eques ed om he i s au ho .
2.4. Da a Analyses
Desc ip i e s a is ics and co ela ions we e compu ed o all main s udy a iables.
Subsequen ly, he polynomial cybe ha e in ol emen a iable was used in a mul ino-
mial logis ic eg ession analysis as he dependen a iable o in es iga e he p edic ion
o cybe ha e in ol emen by pa icipan s’ endo semen o se e al coping s a egies while
con olling o pa icipan s’ sex, age, and coun y o o igin. The co ela ion ma ix was e al-
ua ed o examine mul icollinea i y be o e conduc ing he mul inomial logis ic eg ession
analysis (see Table 2).
Table 2. Desc ip i e s a is ics and co ela ions (n= 6562).
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
1. Vic imiza ion —0.37 *** −0.02 −0.02 0.01 −0.05 *** −0.07 *** 0.11 *** 0.05 *** −0.02
2. Pe pe a ion — −0.04 *** −0.06 *** −0.06 *** −0.10 *** 0.04 *** 0.12 *** 0.07 *** 0.08 ***
3. Dis al Ad ice — 0.40 *** 0.42 *** 0.26 *** 0.36 *** 0.17 *** −0.08 *** −0.04 ***
4. Close Suppo — 0.58 *** 0.64 *** 0.42 *** 0.33 *** −0.04 *** −0.14 ***
5. Asse i eness — 0.56 *** 0.40 *** 0.26 *** −0.02 ** −0.10 ***
6. Technical Coping — 0.30 *** 0.26 *** −0.03 *** −0.12 ***
7. Helplessness — 0.28 *** −0.04 *** −0.10 ***
8. Re enge — −0.01 0.08 ***
9. Age — 0.01
10. Sex —
M (SD)
0.32
(0.76)
0.22
(0.61) 1.16 (0.99) 1.77 (1.03) 1.87 (1.07) 1.82 (1.13) 0.94
(0.93) 0.93
(0.94) 14.93
(1.64) —
** p< 0.01, *** p< 0.001.
The esul s indica ed ha all coping s a egies we e sui able o conside a ion, as
independen a iables in one mul inomial eg ession analysis did no de ec any high
co ela ions (>0.70). Missing alues anged be ween 1.2% (cybe ha e ic imiza ion) and
3.5% (close suppo ). The Li le’s MCAR es e ealed ha he da a we e missing comple ely
a andom (
χ2
= 131.85 d = 111; p= 0.086), sugges ing a pai wise o lis wise dele ion o
missing da a does no lead o biased pa ame e s and s anda d e o s [
68
]. All analyses
we e conduc ed using IBM SPSS S a is ics so wa e e sion 26 (SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL, USA)
o Mac.
3. Resul s
Desc ip i e s a is ics and bi a ia e co ela ions o all main s udy a iables a e included
in Table 2. Supplemen a y Table S2 p o ides desc ip i e s a is ics and co ela ions among
he main s udy a iables by coun y. O e all, 11.4% (n= 780) we e pu e ic ims, 6% (n= 409)
we e pu e pe pe a o s, 8% (n= 548) we e ic im–pe pe a o s, 73.2% (n= 4998) we e non-
in ol ed, and 1.4% (n= 94) could no be classi ied due o missing alues. Supplemen a y
Table S3 p o ides a b eakdown o cybe ha e in ol emen by coun y.
The mul inomial eg ession analyses e ealed se e al s a is ically signi ican asso-
cia ions among he six coping s a egies, namely dis al ad ice, close suppo , asse i e-
ness, echnical coping, helplessness, e enge, and being ic ims, pe pe a o s, o ic im–
pe pe a o s o cybe ha e while con olling o pa icipan s’ age, sex, and coun y o o igin
(see Table 3). The model was signi ican , Log-likelihood (null) = 6970.33; Log-likelihood
( ull) = 6101.35; Likelihood Ra io Chi-Squa e es = 868.97, d = 45, p< 0.001, Nagelke ke’s
R2= 0.155.
In . J. En i on. Res. Public Heal h 2022,19, 6749 8 o 14
Table 3.
Resul s o Coping S a egies P edic ing In ol emen in Cybe ha e as Vic im, Pe pe a o , o
Vic im–Pe pe a o .
Va iables Vic ims aPe pe a o s aVic im-Pe pe a o s a
Exp (B) CI95% Exp (B) CI95% Exp (B) CI95%
Re e ence o
o he s
Dis al Ad ice 0.687 *** 0.578–0.817 0.541 *** 0.422–0.692 0.820 *** 0.726–0.925
Close Suppo 1.13 0.936–1.37 1.11 0.860–1.44 0.669 ** 0.533–0.840
P oduc i e
Coping
Asse i eness 1.23 * 1.11–1.51 0.978 0.752–1.27 0.834 0.662–1.05
Technical Coping 0.755 ** 0.622–0.918 0.533 *** 0.415–0.685 0.419 *** 0.337–0.521
Non-P oduc i e
Coping
Helplessness 1.43 ** 1.16–1.67 1.33 * 1.04–1.71 1.91 *** 1.52–2.36
Re enge 1.23 ** 1.03–1.48 2.27 *** 1.81–2.86 3.02 *** 2.45–3.71
Con ol Va iables
Age 1.30 *** 1.11–1.53 1.25 *** 1.04–1.54 1.64 *** 1.36–1.98
Being a gi l b1.41 *** 1.19–1.65 0.655 *** 0.527–0.813 0.817 * 0.676–0.988
Being Ge man c0.352 *** 0.258–0.480 0.657 0.431–1.00 0.211 *** 0.147–0.303
Being G eek c0.217 *** 0.147–0.321 0.502 ** 0.300–0.840 0.186 *** 0.118–0.296
Being Cyp io c0.229 *** 0.131–0.398 0.331 ** 0.136–0.807 0.079 *** 0.028–0.221
Being Spanish c0.439 *** 0.320–0.602 0.444 *** 0.276–0.716 0.139 *** 0.090–0.216
Being Thai c0.542 *** 0.384–0.764 1.24 0.794–1.93 1.36 * 1.10–1.86
Being Ko ean c0.212 *** 0.145–0.310 0.284 *** 0.160–0.503 0.064 *** 0.034–0.119
Being Indian c0.233 *** 0.169–0.322 0.799 0.540–1.18 0.157 *** 0.110–0.224
*p< 0.05, ** p< 0.01, *** p< 0.001.
a
= e e ence ca ego y: non-in ol ed,
b
= e e ence ca ego y: being a boy,
c= e e ence ca ego y: being Ame ican.
Re e ence o o he s
: Dis al ad ice dec eased he likelihood o classi ying a pa icipan
as being a cybe ha e ic im (OR = 0.687, CI
95%
[0.578–0.817]), pe pe a o (OR = 0.541, CI
95%
[0.422–0.692]), and ic im–pe pe a o (OR = 0.820, CI
95%
[0.726–0.925]); i.e., i pa icipan s
endo sed dis al ad ice, hey we e less likely o be cybe ha e ic ims, pe pe a o s, o bo h
han non-in ol ed pa icipan s. Close suppo p edic ed lowe odds o being a cybe ha e
ic im–pe pe a o (OR = 0.669, CI
95%
[0.533–0.840]); i.e., i pa icipan s endo sed close
suppo , hey we e less likely o be ic im–pe pe a o s han non-in ol ed pa icipan s.
P oduc i e coping
: Asse i eness p edic ed highe odds o being a cybe ha e ic im
(OR = 1.23, CI
95%
[1.11–1.51]); i.e., i pa icipan s endo sed asse i e coping wi h cybe ha e,
hey we e mo e likely o be ic ims han non-in ol ed pa icipan s. Technical coping
p edic ed lowe likelihoods o being a cybe ha e ic im (OR = 0.755, CI
95%
[0.622–0.918]),
pe pe a o (OR = 0.533, CI
95%
[0.415–0.685]), and ic im–pe pe a o (OR = 0.419 CI
95%
[0.337–0.521]); i.e., i pa icipan s endo sed echnical s a egies o cope wi h cybe ha e, hey we e
less likely o be ic ims, pe pe a o s, o ic im–pe pe a o s han non-in ol ed pa icipan s.
Non-p oduc i e coping
: Helplessness/Sel -blame p edic ed a highe p obabili y o
being a cybe ha e ic im (OR = 1.43, CI
95%
[1.16–1.67]), pe pe a o (OR = 1.33, CI
95%
[1.04–1.71]), and ic im–pe pe a o (OR = 1.91, CI
95%
[1.52–2.36]); i.e., i pa icipan s
el helpless o cope wi h cybe ha e, hey we e mo e likely o be ic ims, pe pe a o s,
o ic im–pe pe a o s o cybe ha e han non-in ol ed pa icipan s. Simila ly, highe
sco es o e alia ion we e posi i ely associa ed wi h highe odds o being a cybe ha e
ic im (OR = 1.23, CI
95%
[1.03–1.48]), pe pe a o (OR = 2.27, CI
95%
[1.81–2.86]), and ic im–
pe pe a o (OR = 3.02, CI
95%
[2.45–3.71]), i.e., i pa icipan s endo sed e alia ion as coping
s a egy, hey we e mo e likely o be ic ims, pe pe a o s, o ic im–pe pe a o s han
non-in ol ed pa icipan s.
4. Discussion
The p esen s udy aimed o add ess gaps in he li e a u e on p edic o s o cybe ha e
in ol emen among adolescen s. Mo e speci ically, we in es iga ed associa ions be ween
h ee coping s yles, namely e e ence o o he s, p oduc i e coping, and non-p oduc i e
coping, and being in ol ed in cybe ha e as ic ims, pe pe a o s, and ic im–pe pe a o s,
while con olling o adolescen s’ age, sex, and coun y o o igin.
In . J. En i on. Res. Public Heal h 2022,19, 6749 9 o 14
We ound only pa ial suppo o ou i s hypo hesis ha adolescen s who endo sed
e e ence o o he s as a coping s yle would show a lowe isk o being in ol ed in cybe ha e.
Suppo ing ou i s hypo hesis, adolescen s who we e inclined o use dis al ad ice as
a coping s a egy showed a lowe isk o be cybe ha e ic ims, pe pe a o s, o ic im–
pe pe a o s. Howe e , adolescen s who endo sed close suppo as a coping s a egy
did no show a lowe isk o being cybe ha e ic ims o pe pe a o s bu showed lowe
odds o being ic im–pe pe a o s o cybe ha e. Ou indings sugges ha dis al ad ice
appea ed o help educe di e en o ms o cybe ha e in ol emen and ha close suppo
migh be pa icula ly impo an o ic im–pe pe a o s o cybe ha e. These indings a e
b oadly in line wi h some p io esea ch on he associa ions be ween e e ence o o he s
and in ol emen as ic im o pe pe a o in adi ional and cybe agg ession [
20
,
28
,
35
–
39
]
bu in con as o o he esea ch [
30
,
31
]. These con adic ing indings s ess wha schola s
pos ula ed be o e, i.e., ha he e a e no uni e sally e ec i e coping s a egies and ha
e ec i eness di e s depending upon si ua ional ac o s and he na u e o he s esso [
24
].
Ou second hypo hesis, i.e., ha adolescen s who endo sed p oduc i e coping would
show a lowe isk o being in ol ed in cybe ha e, was pa ially con i med as well.
Consis en wi h ou second hypo hesis, we ound ha adolescen s who endo sed
echnical coping o deal wi h cybe ha e showed consis en ly lowe likelihoods o being
cybe ha e ic ims, pe pe a o s, and ic im–pe pe a o s. This inding sugges s ha dealing
wi h cybe ha e by echnical means (i.e., blocking he pe son who sha es cybe ha e) migh
be a p o ec i e coping s a egy. Con adic ing ou second hypo hesis, adolescen s who
endo sed asse i e coping showed highe odds o being cybe ha e ic ims. This inding
is aligned wi h some esea ch on cybe bullying ic imiza ion [
28
,
29
] bu no wi h o he
esea ch, which ound a nega i e o no signi ican ela ionship be ween asse i eness
and cybe ic imiza ion [
39
,
48
,
49
]. This esul migh indica e ha showing he willingness
o con on people who sha e cybe ha e migh pu adolescen s in dange o becoming
ic imized and seems no o be an app op ia e coping s a egy o deal wi h cybe ha e.
The a ailable esea ch on coping wi h cybe ic imiza ion shows e idence o a nega i e
ela ionship be ween echnical coping and cybe ic imiza ion [
32
], a posi i e and no sig-
ni ican ela ionship wi h in ol emen in cybe agg ession as ic im o pe pe a o [
39
,
48
].
O he esea ch ound ha p oduc i e coping (i.e., echnical coping) is associa ed wi h highe
le els o digi al skills and sel -e icacy [
69
]. We a gue, he e o e, ha adolescen s who use
echnical coping migh be mo e e icacious when dealing wi h s ess ul si ua ions and hus
less likely o become in ol ed in cybe ha e. This esul may be o g ea impo ance o
in e en ions, as i could po en ially explain why some adolescen s p e e o no become
in ol ed in cybe ha e inciden s by emaining neu al obse e s. Thus, i appea s o be
impo an o educa e adolescen s o p ac ice coun e -speech wi hou making hemsel es
ulne able o encou age hem o use echnical coping.
Finally, we ound suppo o ou hi d hypo hesis, ha unp oduc i e coping was posi-
i ely associa ed wi h cybe ha e in ol emen . Mo e speci ically, adolescen s who endo sed
helplessness/sel -blame o e enge as coping s a egies o deal wi h cybe ha e showed a
highe likelihood o be ic ims, pe pe a o s, and ic im–pe pe a o s. We p opose ha
adolescen s migh en e a icious ci cle o iolence when s a ing o ake e enge on he
pe son who pe pe a es cybe ha e, while helplessness inc eases he isk o de eloping
maladap i e schemas and ch oni ica ion o ic imiza ion [
61
], he eby inc easing he isk
o cybe ha e in ol emen . Acco ding o his s udy, cybe ha e pe pe a ion can be un-
de s ood as a possible eac ion o eeling helpless conce ning how o deal wi h cybe ha e
cons uc i ely. This assump ion is u he suppo ed by cu en esea ch wi h s uden s
showing ha adolescen s pe pe a e ha e speech (online and o line) o compensa e o
eelings o us a ion and in e io i y [
16
,
70
]. Ou indings a e in line wi h p io esea ch
ha showed a posi i e ela ionship be ween non-p oduc i e coping and online o o line
ic imiza ion [20,30,31,46,56], as well as online and o line pe pe a ion [31,35,56,57].
Compa ing he h ee g oups o cybe ha e in ol emen conce ning non-p oduc i e
coping e ealed he s onges associa ions o ic im–pe pe a o s, hus e i ying ha ado-
