The imbalance of power affords individuals to bully others. However, limited studies have explored the specific aspects of power imbalance in predicting cyberbullying. Furthermore, a fun-seeking tendency as a motive for cyberbullying and attitudes toward cyberbullying as cognitive stimuli have rarely been studied in relation to mediating the associations between power imbalance and cyberbullying in an integrated framework. This study aims to narrow these research gaps. Multistage cluster random sampling was employed to recruit a total of 1103 adolescents (52.5% females) ranging in age from 12 to 18 years. Structural equation modeling analyses revealed that proficiency in technology use is not only directly and positively associated with cyberbullying but also indirectly associated with cyberbullying via fun-seeking tendency. Although social status among peers had no direct effect on cyberbullying, the indirect effects of social status among peers on cyberbullying via the fun-seeking tendency and attitude toward cyberbullying were significant. Notably, physical power was neither directly associated with cyberbullying nor through the fun-seeking tendency or attitude toward cyberbullying in associating with cyberbullying. Implications of these findings for developing effective interventions are discussed.
AjzenI. (2012). Martin fishbein’s legacy: The reasoned action approach. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 640(1), 11–27. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002716211423363
2.
AndersonC.GalinskyA. D. (2006). Power, optimism, and risk-taking. European Journal of Social Psychology, 36(4), 511–536. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.324
3.
AndersonCJenniferBL (2002). The experience of power: Examining the effects of power on approach and inhibition tendencies. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83(6), 1362–1377. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.83.6.1362
4.
AtlasR. S.PeplerD. J. (1998). Observations of bullying in the classroom. The Journal of Educational Research, 92(2), 86–99. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220679809597580
5.
BarkoukisVLazurasLOurdaDTsorbatzoudisH (2016). Tackling psychosocial risk factors for adolescent cyberbullying: Evidence from a school-based intervention. Aggressive Behmasculiniavior, 42(2), 114–122. https://doi.org/10.1002/ab.21625
6.
BarlettC. P. (2017). From theory to practice: Cyberbullying theory and its application to intervention. Computers in Human Behavior, 72, 269–275. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2017.02.060.
7.
BarlettC. P.GentileD. A. (2012). Attacking others online: The formation of cyberbullying in late adolescence. Psychology of Popular Media Culture, 1(2), 123–135. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0028113
8.
BarlettC. P.MadisonC. S.HeathJ. B.DeWittC. C. (2019). Please browse responsibly: A correlational examination of technology access and time spent online in the Barlett gentile cyberbullying model. Computers in Human Behavior, 92, 250–255. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2018.11.013.
9.
BaroncelliACiucciE (2014). Unique effects of different components of trait emotional intelligence in traditional bullying and cyberbullying. Journal of Adolescence, 37(6), 807–815. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adolescence.2014.05.009
10.
BaumeisterRFLearyMR (1995). The need to belong: Desire for interpersonal attachments as a fundamental human motivation. Psychological Bulletin, 117(3), 497–529. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781351153683-3
11.
BeringerA. (2011). Teacher’s perceptions and awareness of cyberbullying among middle school students (Counselor Education Masters). College at Brockport.
12.
BlumlerJ. G.KatzE. (1974) The uses of mass communications: Current perspectives on gratifications research (Vol. 1974). Sage Publications, Inc.
13.
BollenK. A. (1989). A new incremental fit index for general structural equation models. Sociological Methods & Research, 17(3), 303–316. https://doi.org/10.1177/0049124189017003004
14.
CalveteE.OrueI.EstévezA.VillardónL.PadillaP. (2010). Cyberbullying in adolescents: Modalities and aggressors’ profile. Computers in Human Behavior, 26(5), 1128–1135. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2010.03.017
15.
CarverC. S.WhiteT. L. (1994). Behavioral inhibition, behavioral activation, and affective responses to impending reward and punishment: The BIS/BAS scales. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67(2), 319–333. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.67.2.319
16.
ChaoCMYuTK (2017). Associations among different internet access time, gender and cyberbullying behaviors in Taiwan’s adolescents. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, 1104–1112. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01104. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01104.
17.
ChenXHuangXWangLChangL (2012). Aggression, peer relationships, and depression in Chinese children: A multiwave longitudinal study. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 53(12), 1233–1241. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-7610.2012.02576.x
18.
CheungC.-k.NgaiS. S.-y. (2013). Reducing youth’s drug abuse through training social workers for cognitive–behavioral integrated treatment. Children and Youth Services Review, 35(2), 302–311. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2012.11.006
19.
Cohen-AlmagorR. (2018). Social responsibility on the internet: Addressing the challenge of cyberbullying. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 39, 42–52. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.avb.2018.01.001.
20.
de BruynE. H.CillessenA. H. N.WissinkI. B. (2010). Associations and peer acceptance of perceived popularity with bullying and victimization in early adolescents. The Journal of Early Adolescence, 30(4), 543–566. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0272431609340517
21.
DiddenRScholteRHKorziliusHde MoorJMVermeulenAO'ReillyMLangRLancioniGE (2009). Cyberbullying among students with intellectual and developmental disability in special education settings. Developmental Neurorehabilitation, 12(3), 146–151. https://doi.org/10.1080/17518420902971356
22.
DoaneANKelleyMLPearsonMR (2016). Reducing cyberbullying: A theory of reasoned action‐based video prevention program for college students. Aggressive Behavior, 42(2), 136–146. https://doi.org/10.1002/ab.21610
23.
DoaneA. N.PearsonM. R.KelleyM. L. (2014). Predictors of cyberbullying perpetration among college students: An application of the theory of reasoned action. Computers in Human Behavior, 36, 154–162. https://doi.org/10.1037/e574242014-179.
24.
DodgeK. A.CrickN. R. (2016). Social information-processing bases of aggressive behavior in children. Personality & Social Psychology Bulletin, 16(1), 8–22. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167290161002
25.
DooleyJ. J.PyżalskiJ.CrossD. (2009). Cyberbullying versus face-to-face bullying: A theoretical and conceptual review. Journal of Psychology, 217(4), 182–188. https://doi.org/10.1027/0044-3409.217.4.182
EndersCK (2001). The impact of nonnormality on full information maximum-likelihood estimation for structural equation models with missing data. Psychological Methods, 6(4), 352–370. https://doi.org/10.1037/1082-989X.6.4.352
28.
FantiK. A.DemetriouA. G.HawaV. V. (2012). A longitudinal study of cyberbullying: Examining risk and protective factors. European Journal of Developmental Psychology, 9(2), 168–181. https://doi.org/10.1080/17405629.2011.643169
29.
FelixEDSharkeyJDGreenJGFurlongMJTanigawaD (2011). Getting precise and pragmatic about the assessment of bullying: The development of the California bullying victimization scale. Aggressive Behavior, 37(3), 234–247. https://doi.org/10.1002/ab.20389
30.
FishbeinM.AjzenI. (2010). Predicting and changing behavior: The reasoned action approach. Psychology Press (Taylor & Francis.)
31.
FornellC.LarckerD. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39–50. https://doi.org/10.1177/002224378101800312
32.
GarandeauCFLeeIASalmivalliC (2014). Inequality matters: Classroom status hierarchy and adolescents’ bullying. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 43(7), 1123–1133. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-013-0040-4
33.
KandelD. B. (1978). Homophily, selection, and socialization in adolescent friendships. American Journal of Sociology, 84(2), 427–436. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781351153683-14
KlineR. B. (2015). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. Guilford Publications.
36.
KowalskiRMGiumettiGWSchroederANLattannerMR (2014). Bullying in the digital age: A critical review and meta-analysis of cyberbullying research among youth. Psychological Bulletin, 140(4), 1073–1137. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0036634
37.
KowalskiR. M.LimberS. P.AgatstonP. W. (2012). Cyberbullying: Bullying in the digital age. John Wiley & Sons.
38.
LangosC (2012). Cyberbullying: The challenge to define. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 15(6), 285–289. https://doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2011.0588
39.
LawD. M.ShapkaJ. D.HymelS.OlsonB. F.WaterhouseT. (2012). The changing face of bullying: An empirical comparison between traditional and internet bullying and victimization. Computers in Human Behavior, 28(1), 226–232. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2011.09.004
40.
LeeCH (2010). Personal and interpersonal correlates of bullying behaviors among korean middle school students. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 25(1), 152–176. https://doi.org/10.1177/0886260508329124
41.
LeeKSBrittainHVaillancourtT (2018). Predicting dating behavior from aggression and self‐perceived social status in adolescence. Aggressive Behavior, 44(4), 372–381. https://doi.org/10.1002/ab.21758
42.
LiJ.HeskethT. (2021). Experiences and perspectives of traditional bullying and cyberbullying among adolescents in mainland China-implications for policy. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, 2688. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.672223.
43.
LiJ.SidibeA. M.ShenX.HeskethT. (2019). Incidence, risk factors and psychosomatic symptoms for traditional bullying and cyberbullying in Chinese adolescents. Children and Youth Services Review, 107, 104511. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2019.104511.
44.
LindwallMAsciHHaggerMS (2011). Factorial validity and measurement invariance of the revised physical self-perception profile (PSPP-R) in three countries. Psychology, Health & Medicine, 16(1), 115–128. https://doi.org/10.1080/13548506.2010.521567
45.
MageeJCSmithPK (2013). The social distance theory of power. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 17(2), 158–186. https://doi.org/10.1037/e578192014-014
NaitoT.GielenU. P. (2005). Bullying and ijime in Japanese schools. In DenmarkF. L.KraussH. H.WesnerR. W.MidlarskyE.GielenU. P. (Eds), Violence in schools: Cross-national and cross-cultural perspectives (pp. 169–190). Springer. doi: 10.1007/0-387-28811-2_9.
48.
NewcombAFBukowskiWMPatteeL (1993). Children’s peer relations: A meta-analytic review of popular, rejected, neglected, controversial, and average sociometric status. Psychological Bulletin, 113(1), 99–128. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.113.1.99
49.
NgS. H. (1980). of power. Academic Press.
50.
OlweusD. (1993). Bullying at school: What we know and what we can do. Blackwell.
51.
PabianS.VandeboschH.PoelsK.Van CleemputK.BastiaensensS. (2016). Exposure to cyberbullying as a bystander: An investigation of desensitization effects among early adolescents. Computers in Human Behavior, 62, 480–487. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.04.022
52.
PieschlS.PorschT.KahlT.KlockenbuschR. (2013). Relevant dimensions of cyberbullying—results from two experimental studies. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 34(5), 241–252. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appdev.2013.04.002
53.
PouwelsJLSalmivalliCSaarentoSvan den BergYHMLansuTAMCillessenAHN (2018). Predicting adolescents’ bullying participation from developmental trajectories of social status and behavior. Child Development, 89(4), 1157–1176. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.12794
54.
RaoJWangHPangMYangJZhangJYeYChenXWangSDongX (2019). Cyberbullying perpetration and victimisation among junior and senior high school students in Guangzhou, China. Injury Prevention, 25(1), 13–19. https://doi.org/10.1136/injuryprev-2016-042210
55.
RigbyK. (2004). Addressing bullying in schools: Theoretical perspectives and their implications. School Psychology International, 25(3), 287–300. https://doi.org/10.1177/0143034304046902
RunionsKCSalmivalliCShawTBurnsSCrossD (2018). Beyond the reactive-proactive dichotomy: Rage, revenge, reward, and recreational aggression predict early high school bully and bully/victim status. Aggressive Behavior, 44(5), 501–511. https://doi.org/10.1002/ab.21770
58.
SchumannLCraigWRosuA (2014). Power differentials in bullying: Individuals in a community context. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 29(5), 846–865. https://doi.org/10.1177/0886260513505708
SlonjeR.SmithP. K.FrisénA. (2013). The nature of cyberbullying, and strategies for prevention. Computers in Human Behavior, 29(1), 26–32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2012.05.024
61.
SmithPKTalamelliLCowieHNaylorPChauhanP (2004). Profiles of nonvictims, escaped victims, continuing victims and new victims of school bullying. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 74(4), 565–581. https://doi.org/10.1348/0007099042376427
62.
SuttonS. K.DavidsonR. J. (1997). Prefrontal brain asymmetry: A biological substrate of the behavioral approach and inhibition systems. Psychological Science, 8(3), 204–210. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.1997.tb00413.x
63.
TanrikuluIErdur-BakerÖ (2019). Motives behind cyberbullying perpetration: a test of uses and gratifications theory. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 1, 1–26. doi:10.1177/0886260518819882. https://doi.org/10.1177/0886260518819882.
64.
VandeboschHVan CleemputK (2008). Defining cyberbullying: A qualitative research into the perceptions of youngsters. CyberPsychology & Behavior, 11(4), 499–503. https://doi.org/10.1089/cpb.2007.0042
65.
VandeboschH.Van CleemputK. (2009). Cyberbullying among youngsters: Profiles of bullies and victims. New Media & Society, 11(8), 1349–1371. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444809341263
66.
Vanden AbeeleM.De CockR. (2013). Cyberbullying by mobile phone among adolescents: The role of gender and peer group status. Communications - The European Journal of Communication Research, 38(1), 107–118. https://doi.org/10.1515/commun-2013-0006
67.
WangJIannottiRJNanselTR (2009). School bullying among adolescents in the United States: Physical, verbal, relational, and cyber. Journal of Adolescent Health, 45(4), 368–75. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jadohealth.2009.03.021
68.
WeggeD.VandeboschH.EggermontS.PabianS. (2016). Popularity through online harm: The longitudinal associations between cyberbullying and sociometric status in early adolescence. The Journal of Early Adolescence, 36(1), 86–107. doi: 10.1177/0272431614556351. https://doi.org/10.1177/0272431614556351.
69.
WongR. Y. M.CheungC. M. K.XiaoB. (2018). Does gender matter in cyberbullying perpetration? An empirical investigation. Computers in Human Behavior, 79, 247–257. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2017.10.022.
70.
WongN.McBrideC. (2018). Fun over conscience: Fun-seeking tendencies in cyberbullying perpetration. Computers in Human Behavior, 86, 319–329. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2018.05.009.
