Bridging the Gap: A Mixed-Method Investigation of Cyberbullying

Background and Purpose:

Cyberbullying is a growing problem.  Bullying is a form of aggression which can be direct or indirect, and is characteristically intentional and repetitive, comprising a power imbalance.  Cyberbullying is the use of technology to bully.  Prevalence rates vary, largely due to differences in definition and measurement, but are generally between 10-40% (Kowalski et al., 2014).  This study sought to investigate the complexity of definition and measurement using a unique mixed-method inquiry.  Integrating quantitative and qualitative methodologies in social research has been emphasized, as it diminishes potential shortcomings of mono-method approaches (Johnson & Onwuegbuzie, 2004; Onwuegbuzie & Leech, 2005). 

Methods:

Collaborating with a large school board, this study employed data collected during Phase One (2012) of a mixed-method longitudinal study in Canada’s largest city.  The study utilized a stratified random sampling design based upon grade and board-level measures of student success.  Nineteen schools participated, resulting in a sample of 684 students in 4^th (n=160), 7^th (n=248), and 10^th (n=274) grades [277 males, 407 females].  Sixty students were purposively selected based on age, gender, and bullying experience for interviews [26 males, 34 females; 4^th (n=19), 7^th (n=22), 10^th (n=19) grades].  Qualitative analysis utilized grounded theory (seven coders) permitting rich understanding of participant experiences and perspectives.  Quantitative data were analysed using SPSS.

Results: 

Quantitative analysis indicated 10.8% of students reported being victims, 2.8% reported being perpetrators, and 24.4% reported witnessing cyberbullying.  Qualitative analysis revealed concerning themes: despite the relatively low prevalence of cyberbullying on quantitative measures, almost all students interviewed discussed instances of victimization or witnessing cyberbullying.  One way to understand this discrepancy is that students may define situations differently from scholarly definitions.  Strikingly, students did not agree with what the literature considers cyberbullying.  A key theme was conflictual behaviour among friends: whereby male students discussed ‘trash talk’ and female students discussed ‘drama’ within their friendship group.  Although the behaviour fit the scholarly definition, participants did not perceive it as cyberbullying.  Gender differences were also omnipresent.  Girls were bullied through social media (e.g., demeaning comments about appearance or private/compromising photos).  Boys were bullied through online games and homophobic comments.  Normalization of such behaviour was remarkable.  Students considered this behaviour common and expected, although distressing.  These findings deepen current understanding of the context within which cyberbullying occurs. 

Conclusions and Implications:

Mixed-methods offered a multi-point entry into the phenomenon of cyberbullying.  While in the typical range, the relatively low quantitatively reported prevalence is partially explained by qualitative findings indicating that students perceive cyberbullying differently than researchers, noted in the literature (Vaillancourt et al., 2008).  A mixed-method approach may yield greater understanding of how to operationalize the construct of cyberbullying for social work research, and address discrepancies in measurement.  In practice, social workers educating youth on this issue must consider how youth define their interactions, using their understanding as the entry point to discussing conflict and cyberbullying.  Key themes also elucidated that the experience of cyberbullying may be highly gendered, which has salient implications for the design of interventions.