Exploring the Mechanism of Adult Users’ Cyber-Aggression Against Adolescents: The Roles of Online Communication,Age Group Identity,and Online Moral Disengagement

Abstract

The increasing prevalence of adults’ prejudice against adolescents on the Internet could cause opposing attitudes and even online aggression against teenagers. Yet, such age discrimination is less challenged compared to other social biases in cyberspace. Employing a social identity approach, this study aims to explore how features of online communication, teen-related personal experiences, and the dual identity of adult aggressors influence online moral disengagement (OMD), motives, and behaviors for cyber-aggression. We conducted an online survey of 767 Chinese adults in May 2023. The results demonstrated that perceived controllability of online speech, negative teen-related online experiences, and generation-based bias were positively associated with OMD. Next, adult respondents’ self-serving motives positively predicted moderate and severe cyber-aggression, while educational motives only increased moderate cyber-aggression. Mediation analysis revealed that generation-based bias was the sole significant factor that amplified OMD, self-serving motives, educational motives, and cyber-aggression behaviors. In contrast, the effects of lifestage-based bias were insignificant. Our findings yield insights into individuals’ moral transgressions in digital environments and shed light on the dynamics of the identity of adult aggressors in age-based discrimination. This study suggests that empathy from adults and age-appropriate prevention by online platforms are crucial to address online aggression against young generations.

Keywords

cyber-aggression moral disengagement age group identity adolescent age discrimination

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Anderson

C. A.

Bushman

B. J.

(2002). Human aggression. Annual Review of Psychology, 53(1), 27–51. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.53.100901.135231

Ang

R. P.

Huan

V. S.

Florell

(2014). Understanding the relationship between proactive and reactive aggression, and cyberbullying across United States and Singapore adolescent samples. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 29(2), 237–254. https://doi.org/10.1177/0886260513505149

Avdagic

Savage

(2021). Negativity bias: The impact of framing of immigration on welfare state support in Germany, Sweden and the UK. British Journal of Political Science, 51(2), 624–645. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0007123419000395

Balleys

Millerand

Thoër

Duque

(2020). Searching for oneself on YouTube: Teenage peer socialization and social recognition processes. Social Media+Society, 6(2), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1177/2056305120909474

Bandura

(2016). Moral disengagement: How people do harm and live with themselves. Worth Publishers.

Bedrosova

Machackova

Šerek

Smahel

Blaya

(2022). The relation between the cyberhate and cyberbullying experiences of adolescents in the Czech Republic, Poland, and Slovakia. Computers in Human Behavior, 126, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2021.107013

Betts

L. R.

Spenser

K. A.

(2017). “People think it’s a harmless joke”: Young people’s understanding of the impact of technology, digital vulnerability and cyberbullying in the United Kingdom. Journal of Children and Media, 11(1), 20–35. https://doi.org/10.1080/17482798.2016.1233893

Blanco

Davies-Rubio

De la Corte

Mirón

(2022). Violent extremism and moral disengagement: A study of Colombian armed groups. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 37(1–2), 423–448. https://doi.org/10.1177/0886260520913643

Califano

Capasso

Caso

(2022). Exploring the roles of online moral disengagement, body esteem, and psychosexual variables in predicting sexting motivations and behaviors. Computers in Human Behavior, 129, 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2021.107146

10.

Camodeca

Baiocco

Posa

(2019). Homophobic bullying and victimization among adolescents: The role of prejudice, moral disengagement, and sexual orientation. European Journal of Developmental Psychology, 16(5), 503–521. https://doi.org/10.1080/17405629.2018.1466699

11.

Carr

C. T.

Walther

J. B.

(2014). Increasing attributional certainty via social media: Learning about others one bit at a time. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 19(4), 922–937. https://doi.org/10.1080/15213269.2015.1049276

12.

Chasteen

A. L.

Horhota

Crumley-Branyon

J. J.

(2021). Overlooked and underestimated: Experiences of ageism in young, middle-aged, and older adults. The Journals of Gerontology: Series B, 76(7), 1323–1328. https://doi.org/10.1093/geronb/gbaa043

13.

China Internet Network Information Center. (2022). National research report on internet use by minors in 2021. China Internet Network Information Center.

14.

Chonody

J. M.

Teater

(2016). Why do I dread looking old?: A test of social identity theory, terror management theory, and the double standard of aging. Journal of Women & Aging, 28(2), 112–126. https://doi.org/10.1080/08952841.2014.950533

15.

D’Errico

Paciello

(2018). Online moral disengagement and hostile emotions in discussions on hosting immigrants. Internet Research, 28(5), 1313–1335. https://doi.org/10.1108/IntR-03-2017-0119

16.

Ellemers

Barreto

(2001). The impact of relative group status: Affective, perceptual and behavioural consequences. In Brown

Gaertner

(Eds.), Blackwell handbook of social psychology: Intergroup processes (Vol. 3, pp. 324–343). Wiley-Blackwell.

17.

Francioli

S. P.

North

M. S.

(2021). Youngism: The content, causes, and consequences of prejudices toward younger adults. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 150(12), 2591. https://doi.org/10.1037/xge0001064

18.

Gámez-Guadix

Incera

(2021). Homophobia is online: Sexual victimization and risks on the internet and mental health among bisexual, homosexual, pansexual, asexual, and queer adolescents. Computers in Human Behavior, 119, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2021.106728

19.

Graf

Yanagida

Runions

Spiel

(2022). Why did you do that? Differential types of aggression in offline and in cyberbullying. Computers in Human Behavior, 128, 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2021.107107

20.

Hawdon

Oksanen

Räsänen

(2017). Exposure to online hate in four nations: A cross-national consideration. Deviant Behavior, 38(3), 254–266. https://doi.org/10.1080/01639625.2016.1196985

21.

L. T.

Bentler

P. M.

(1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6(1), 1–55. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705519909540118

22.

Huang

C. L.

Alimu

Yang

S. C.

Kang

S. K.

(2023). What you think is a joke is actually cyberbullying: The effects of ethical dissonance, event judgment and humor style on cyberbullying behavior. Computers in Human Behavior, 142, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2023.107670

23.

Inguglia

Musso

(2013). In-group favoritism and out-group derogation towards national groups: Age-related differences among Italian school children. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 37(3), 385–390. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijintrel.2013.02.005

24.

Kite

M. E.

Stockdale

G. D.

Whitley

B. E.

Jr. Johnson

B. T.

(2005). Attitudes toward younger and older adults: An updated meta-analytic review. Journal of Social Issues, 61(2), 241–266. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4560.2005.00404.x

25.

Lee

S. Y.

Hoh

J. W.

(2021). A critical examination of ageism in memes and the role of meme factories. New Media & Society, 25(12), 3477–3499. https://doi.org/10.1177/14614448211047845

26.

Dai

(2021). Research on cyberaggression in minors. In Wei

(Ed.), Protection on Developmental of internet protection for minors (pp. 133–146). China Social Science Press.

27.

Liel

Ulrich

S. M.

Lorenz

Eickhorst

Fluke

Walper

(2020). Risk factors for child abuse, neglect and exposure to intimate partner violence in early childhood: Findings in a representative cross-sectional sample in Germany. Child Abuse & Neglect, 106, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chiabu.2020.104487

28.

Han

Kang

H. R.

(2022). Physical punishment, physical abuse, and child behavior problems in South Korea. Child Abuse & Neglect, 123, 105385. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chiabu.2021.105385

29.

Maftei

Holman

A.-C.

Merlici

I.-A.

(2022). Using fake news as means of cyber-bullying: The link with compulsive internet use and online moral disengagement. Computers in Human Behavior, 127, 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2021.107032

30.

McQuail

(2005). McQuail’s mass communication theory (5th ed.). Sage Publications Ltd.

31.

Mou

Lin

C. A.

(2017). The impact of online social capital on social trust and risk perception. Asian Journal of Communication, 27(6), 563–581. https://doi.org/10.1080/01292986.2017.1371198

32.

North

M. S.

Fiske

S. T.

(2012). An inconvenienced youth? Ageism and its potential intergenerational roots. Psychological Bulletin, 138(5), 982–997. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0027843

33.

North

M. S.

Fiske

S. T.

(2013). Act your (old) age. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 39(6), 720–734. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167213480043

34.

Novick

K. K.

(2023). Teenism—The prejudice against adolescents. The Psychoanalytic Study of the Child, 76(1), 140–147. https://doi.org/10.1080/00797308.2022.2137364

35.

Paciello

Tramontano

Nocentini

Fida

Menesini

(2020). The role of traditional and online moral disengagement on cyberbullying: Do externalizing problems make any difference? Computers in Human Behavior, 103, 190–198. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2019.09.024

36.

Park

C. S.

Liu

Kaye

B. K.

(2021). Analysis of ageism, sexism, and ableism in user comments on YouTube videos about climate activist Greta Thunberg. Social Media + Society, 7(3). 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1177/20563051211036059

37.

Pauwels

L. J.

Heylen

(2020). Perceived group threat, perceived injustice, and self-reported right-wing violence: An integrative approach to the explanation right-wing violence. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 35(21–22), 4276–4302. https://doi.org/10.1177/0886260517713711

38.

Peebles

(2021). Victim blame of missing people based on race and media framing [Electronic Theses and Dissertations 2020–2023, 742]. https://stars.library.ucf.edu/etd2020/742

39.

Previtali

Allen

L. D.

Varlamova

(2020). Not only virus spread: The diffusion of ageism during the outbreak of COVID-19. Journal of Aging & Social Policy, 32(4–5), 506–514. https://doi.org/10.1080/08959420.2020.1772002

40.

Priante

Ehrenhard

M. L.

van den Broek

Need

(2018). Identity and collective action via computer-mediated communication: A review and agenda for future research. New Media & Society, 20(7), 2647–2669. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444817744783

41.

Protzko

Schooler

J. W.

(2019). Kids these days: Why the youth of today seem lacking. Science Advances, 5(10), 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.aav5916

42.

Runions

K. C.

Bak

(2015). Online moral disengagement, cyberbullying, and cyber-aggression. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 18(7), 400–405. https://doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2014.0670

43.

Runions

K. C.

Bak

Shaw

(2017). Disentangling functions of online aggression: The cyber-aggression typology questionnaire (CATQ). Aggressive Behavior, 43(1), 74–84. https://doi.org/10.1002/ab.21663

44.

Schouten

A. P.

Valkenburg

P. M.

Peter

(2007). Precursors and underlying processes of adolescents’ online self-disclosure: Developing and testing an “Internet-attribute-perception” model. Media Psychology, 10(2), 292–315. https://doi.org/10.1080/15213260701375686

45.

Schumacker

R. E.

Lomax

R. G.

(2004). A beginner’s guide to structural equation modeling (2nd ed.). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.

46.

Shapka

J. D.

Law

D. M.

(2013). Does one size fit all? Ethnic differences in parenting behaviors and motivations for adolescent engagement in cyberbullying. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 42, 723–738. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-013-9928-2

47.

Sourander

Klomek

A. B.

Ikonen

Lindroos

Luntamo

Koskelainen

Ristkari

Helenius

(2010). Psychosocial risk factors associated with cyberbullying among adolescents: A population-based study. Archives of General Psychiatry, 67(7), 720–728. https://doi.org/10.1001/archgenpsychiatry.2010.79

48.

Steer

O. L.

Betts

L. R.

Baguley

Binder

J. F.

(2020). “I feel like everyone does it”—Adolescents’ perceptions and awareness of the association between humour, banter, and cyberbullying. Computers in Human Behavior, 108, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2020.106297

49.

Tajfel

Turner

J. C.

(1979). An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. In Hatch

M. J.

Schulz

(Eds.), Organizational identity: A reader (pp. 55–65). Oxford University.

50.

Teng

Z. J.

Nie

Zhu

Z. G.

Guo

(2020). Violent video game exposure and (Cyber)bullying perpetration among Chinese youth: The moderating role of trait aggression and moral identity. Computers in Human Behavior, 104, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2019.106193

51.

The Children’s Society. (2021). Dangers of teenage stereotypes. Retrieved February 28, 2024, from https://www.childrenssociety.org.uk/what-we-do/blogs/common-teenage-stereotypes

52.

Trillò

(2023). “It’s like the fridge magnet of the Internet”: Platform aesthetics, generational taste, and the cross-cultural valuation of good morning memes. Social Media+Society, 9(2), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1177/20563051231177951

53.

Trzesniewski

K. H.

Donnellan

M. B.

(2010). Rethinking “generation me”: A study of cohort effects from 1976–2006. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 5(1), 58–75. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691609356789

54.

Walther

J. B.

Burgoon

J. K.

(1992). Relational communication in computer-mediated interaction. Human Communication Research, 19(1), 50–88. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2958.1992.tb00295.x

55.

Walther

J. B.

Liang

Y. J.

DeAndrea

D. C.

Tong

S. T.

Carr

C. T.

Spottswood

E. L.

Amichai-Hamburger

(2011). The effect of feedback on identity shift in computer-mediated communication. Media Psychology, 14(1), 1–26. https://doi.org/10.1080/15213269.2010.547832

56.

Wang

Qiao

Gao

Yang

Wang

(2022). Parental phubbing and adolescents’ cyberbullying perpetration: A moderated mediation model of moral disengagement and online disinhibition. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 37(7–8), 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1177/0886260520961877

57.

Wang

(2022). Understanding the role of social factors in cyberbullying at work. Computers in Human Behavior, 134, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2022.107325

58.

Weber

Viehmann

Ziegele

Schemer

(2020). Online hate does not stay online – How implicit and explicit attitudes mediate the effect of civil negativity and hate in user comments on prosocial behavior. Computers in Human Behavior, 104, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2019.106192

59.

Western

K. A. B.

Cruwys

Ryan

M. K.

(2022). What does it mean to be a woman? How the content of gender identity may facilitate women’s coping with sexual harassment. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 37(23–24), NP22921–NP22943. https://doi.org/10.1177/08862605211073095

60.

Wright

M. F.

(2014). Predictors of anonymous cyber aggression: The role of adolescents’ beliefs about anonymity, aggression, and the permanency of digital content. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 17(7), 431–438. https://doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2013.0457

61.

(2023). Making the most effective strategy more effective: Examining the situational and interaction effects of accommodative CCSs in corporate crises. International Journal of Business Communication, 60(1), 260–286. https://doi.org/10.1177/2329488420929748

62.

Riddle

(2022). An experimental test of the effects of digital content permanency on perceived anonymity and indirect effects on cyber bullying intentions. Social Media+Society, 8(1), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1177/20563051221087255.

63.

Zhang

X.-C.

Chu

X.-W.

Fan

C.-Y.

Andrasik

Shi

H.-F.

X.-E.

(2022). Sensation seeking and cyberbullying among Chinese adolescents: Examining the mediating roles of boredom experience and antisocial media exposure. Computers in Human Behavior, 130, 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2022.10718