![[ Visit Client Website ]](images/banner.gif)
Background:
Bullying and other forms of peer victimization are too common for youth in the U.S., negatively affecting their academic, emotional and social development. Peer harassment or “bullying” includes physical forms of victimization, emotional or psychological forms of victimization, or “relational” aggression such as spreading rumors. How technology (i.e., the internet, cell phones) is utilized in such experiences (i.e., cyber-bullying) is of high concern to educators and other professionals working with youth. A great deal of recent research has focused on such experiences but gaps still remain, particularly in terms of populations of youth who may be at particular risk. Youth with disabilities are considered a highly vulnerable population within the school and are at heightened risk of victimization compared with those without disabilities, however little is known about their experiences of cyber-bullying. The current study examines the association between types of disability and the degree of technology (only in-person, only online, or mixed type) involved in peer harassment incidents.
Methods: Data were collected in the Technology Harassment Victimization (THV) Study, funded by the National Institute of Justice (NIJ). THV is a telephone survey of 791 youth ages 10-19 conducted in 2014, which drew its sample from a subset of households that completed a previous survey, the Second National Survey of Children’s Exposure to Violence (NatSCEV II) in 2012. The THV Study gathered information on characteristics of a national sample of youth, as well as incident-level characteristics of peer victimization incidents both at school and in other locations, as well as harassment incidents involving technology such as the internet or a cell phone.
Results: The results suggest that degree of technology used in harassment incidents may vary for youth with different types of disabilities and mental health needs. The role of technology in peer harassment incidents differed significantly among youth with specific types of disabilities, including youth with physical disabilities, depression, and learning disabilities. However, the nature of these differences varied according to the type of disability specified. For instance, 52% of the youth diagnosed with a learning disability reported only in-person peer harassment as compared to 14% of those without a learning disability. Conversely, 45% of youth with a diagnosis of depression reported a peer harassment incident that occurred both on- and off-line, as compared to about 9% of those youth who did not have a diagnosis of depression.
Implications: The findings suggest that the specific type of disability may be related to whether youth are vulnerable to harassment online, offline, or in a mixed environment. These findings suggest that youth with some identified disabilities may be more vulnerable in school settings whereas youth with other forms of disability may be targeted more often in the online environment. Future research could examine the extent to which these harassment incidents are related to specific disabilities among these youth, as well as possible preventative or supportive factors within the online environment. Assessing technology-related vulnerabilities to harassment is critical for social workers within school and mental health settings.