Purpose: This randomized controlled trial examined Solution-Focused Brief Therapy (SFBT) effectiveness for reducing adolescent cybervictimization and psychological symptoms. Method: Twenty-eight high school students with above-average cybervictimization and psychological symptom scores were randomly assigned to experimental (n = 14) or control (n = 14) groups. The experimental group received an 8-session SFBT-oriented psychoeducational program. Self-report measures were administered at pretest, post-test, and two-month follow-up. Results: Repeated measures analysis of variance revealed significant group × time interactions for both outcomes. The SFBT program produced large effect sizes (partial η² = 0.72–0.96) with significant reductions maintained at follow-up. Control group showed no significant changes. Discussion: Findings demonstrate that SFBT-oriented interventions offer effective tools for school social workers addressing cyberbullying victimization, showing both statistical and clinical significance for school-based implementation.
ArıcakO. T. (2009). Psychiatric symptomatology as a predictor of cyberbullying among university students. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, 34(1), 167–184.
2.
ArıcakO. T.ÖzbayA. (2016). Investigation of the relationship between cyberbullying, cybervictimization, alexithymia and anger expression styles among adolescents. Computers in Human Behavior, 55, 278–285. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.09.015
3.
ArıcakO. T.TanrıkuluT.KınayH. (2012). Siber Mağduriyet Ölçeği'nin ilk psikometrik bulguları [Initial psychometric findings of the Cyber Victimization Scale]. Akdeniz Eğitim Araştırmaları Dergisi, 11, 1–6.
4.
ArslanN.AkınA. (2016). Çözüm odaklı kısa süreli grupla psikolojik danışmanın lise öğrencilerinin akran zorbalığına etkisi [The effect of solution-focused brief group counseling on high school students’ peer bullying]. Sakarya University Journal of Education, 6(1), 72–84. https://doi.org/10.19126/suje.66574
5.
AteşB. (2014). Üniversite öğrencilerinin sosyal fobi ile başa çıkmalarında çözüm odaklı grupla psikolojik danışmanın etkisinin incelenmesi [Examining the effect of solution focused group counseling on dealing with social phobia of university students] [Doctoral dissertation]. Atatürk University.
6.
BakerÖETanrıkuluİ (2010). Psychological consequences of cyberbullying experiences among Turkish secondary school children. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2(2), 2771–2776. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.03.413
7.
BarlettC. P.RinkerA.RothB. (2021). Cyberbullying perpetration and victimization in the COVID-19 pandemic: The indirect role of emotional intelligence. Cyberpsychology: Journal of Psychosocial Research on Cyberspace, 15(3), Article 6. https://doi.org/10.5817/CP2021-3-6
8.
BaştakG.AltınovaH. H. (2015). Lise öğrencilerinde yaratıcı drama yöntemiyle siber zorbalık hakkında duyarlılık oluşturma [Creating awareness about cyberbullying with creative drama method in high school students]. Yaratıcı Drama Dergisi, 10(1), 91–102. https://doi.org/10.21612/yader.2015.009
9.
BatmazM.AyasT. (2013). İlköğretim ikinci kademedeki öğrencilerin psikolojik belirtilere göre sanal zorbalık düzeylerinin yordanması [Predicting cyberbullying levels of secondary school students according to psychological symptoms]. Sakarya University Journal of Education, 3(1), 43–53. https://doi.org/10.19126/suje.53137
10.
BelseyB. (2007). Cyberbullying: A real and growing threat. ATA Magazine, 88(1), 14–21.
11.
BennettK.RhodesH.DudaS.CheungA. H.ManassisK.LinksP. (2020). Preventative effects of group-based interventions on mental health in adolescents: A meta-analysis. Prevention Science, 22, 620–634. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11121-020-01111-9
12.
BeranT.LiQ. (2007). The relationship between cyberbullying and school bullying. Journal of Student Wellbeing, 1(2), 15–33. https://doi.org/10.21913/JSW.v1i2.172
13.
BulutS. S. (2010). İlköğretim ikinci kademe öğrencilerinin sınav kaygıları, saldırganlık eğilimleri ve problem çözme becerilerindeki yetersizliklerin sağaltımında grupla çözüm odaklı kısa terapinin etkileri [The effects of group solution-focused brief therapy on reducing test anxiety, aggressive tendencies and inadequacy in problem solving skills of elementary school students]. Gazi University Journal of Gazi Educational Faculty, 30(2), 325–356.
14.
Burgess-ProctorA.PatchinJ. W.HindujaS. (2010). Cyberbullying and online harassment: Reconceptualizing the victimization of adolescent girls. In GarciaV.CliffordJ. (Eds.), Female crime victims: Reality reconsidered (pp. 162–176). Prentice Hall.
15.
CampbellM. A. (2005). Cyber bullying: An old problem in a new guise?Australian Journal of Guidance and Counselling, 15(1), 68–76. https://doi.org/10.1375/ajgc.15.1.68
16.
CeyhanE.CeyhanA. A.GürcanA. (2007). Problemli internet kullanımı ölçeği'nin geçerlik ve güvenirlik çalışmaları [The validity and reliability studies of problematic internet usage scale]. Kuram ve Uygulamada Eğitim Bilimleri, 7(1), 387–416.
17.
ChenQ.ChanK. L.GuoS.ChenM.LoC. K.IpP. (2023). Effectiveness of digital health interventions in reducing bullying and cyberbullying: A meta-analysis. Trauma, Violence & Abuse, 24(3), 1986–2002. https://doi.org/10.1177/15248380221082090
18.
ÇitemelN. (2014). Çözüm odaklı kısa süreli grupla psikolojik danışmanın lise öğrencilerinin akran zorbalığına etkisi [The effect of solution-focused brief group counseling on high school students’ peer bullying] [Doctoral dissertation]. Sakarya University.
19.
CohenJ. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
20.
DerogatisL. R. (1992). Brief Symptom Inventory: Administration, scoring, and procedures manual (3rd ed.). NCS Pearson.
21.
De ShazerS. (1985). Keys to solution in brief therapy. Norton.
22.
DoğanS. (2000). Çözüm-odaklı kısa terapi: Kuramsal bir inceleme [Solution-focused brief therapy: A theoretical review]. Türk Psikolojik Danışma ve Rehberlik Dergisi, 2(12), 28–38. https://doi.org/10.17066/pdrd.73496
23.
FranklinC.GuoS. (2019). Solution-focused brief therapy in schools. Oxford University Press.
24.
FranklinC.ZhangA.FroererA.JohnsonS. (2017). Solution focused brief therapy: A systematic review and meta-summary of process research. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 43(1), 16–30. https://doi.org/10.1111/jmft.12193
25.
FreisS. D.GurungR. A. R. (2013). A Facebook analysis of helping behavior in online bullying. Psychology of Popular Media Culture, 2(1), 11–19. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0030239
26.
HindujaS.PatchinJ. W. (2009). Bullying beyond the schoolyard: Preventing and responding to cyberbullying. Sage Publications.
27.
HorzumM. B.AyasT. (2014). Ortaöğretim öğrencilerin psikolojik belirtilere göre sanal zorba ve sanal mağdur düzeylerinin yordanması [Prediction of the cyber bullying and cyber victimization levels of high school students according to psychological symptoms]. Online Journal of Technology Addiction & Cyberbullying, 2, 21–36.
28.
JungY. (2014). What a smartphone is to me: Understanding user values in using smartphones. Information Systems Journal, 24, 299–321. https://doi.org/10.1111/isj.12031
29.
KadiroğluT.AkayG. (2024). Cybervictimization and loneliness in adolescents during the COVID-19 pandemic. Hacettepe University Faculty of Health Sciences Journal, 11(1), 157–173. https://doi.org/10.21020/husbfd.1263733
30.
KarahanFŞ (2016). Üniversite öğrencilerinde çözüm odaklı düşünmenin depresyon, anksiyete, stres ve psikolojik iyi oluş ile ilişkisi [The relationship of solution-focused thinking with depression, anxiety, stress and psychological well-being among university students] [Doctoral dissertation]. Necmettin Erbakan University.
31.
KarmakarS.DasS. (2020). Evaluating the impact of COVID-19 on cyberbullying through Bayesian trend analysis. In Proceedings of the 2020 European Interdisciplinary Cybersecurity Conference, (pp. 1–6). https://doi.org/10.1145/3424954.3424960
32.
KavukM. (2011). İlköğretim öğrencilerinin sanal zorba ve sanal kurban olma durumlarının incelenmesi [Examination of elementary school students’ status of being cyberbully and cybervictim] [Master's thesis]. Ankara University.
33.
KırcaburunK.KokkinosC. M.DemetrovicsZ.KirályO.GriffithsM. D.ÇolakT. S. (2019). Problematic online behaviors among adolescents and emerging adults: Associations between cyberbullying perpetration, problematic social media use, and psychosocial factors. International Journal of Mental Health and Addiction, 17(4), 891–908. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11469-018-9894-8
34.
KowalskiR. M.LimberS. P.McCordA. (2019). A developmental approach to cyberbullying: Prevalence and protective factors. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 45, 20–32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.avb.2018.02.009
35.
MelarisishaM.SarayaT. S. (2022). Effectiveness of solution-focused brief therapy on academic stress and procrastination on young adults: Review paper. International Journal of Health Sciences, 6(S3), 5040–5049. https://doi.org/10.53730/ijhs.v6nS3.7006
36.
Melo-CarrilloA.Van OudenhoveL.AvilaA. (2012). Depressive symptoms among Mexican medical students: High prevalence and the effect of a group psychoeducation intervention. Journal of Affective Disorders, 136, 1098–1103. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jad.2011.10.040
37.
MomenipoorE.AsgharinekahS. M.AkbariA. (2025). Effectiveness of solution-focused brief therapy on resilience, coping self-efficacy and attitudes of mothers with hearing-impaired children. Journal Health Reports and Tecnology, 11(2), e160564. https://doi.org/10.5812/jhrt-160564
38.
MorokumaI.ShimoderaS.FujitaH.HashizumeH.KamimuraN.KawamuraA.InoueS. (2013). Psychoeducation for major depressive disorders: A randomised controlled trial. Psychiatry Research, 210, 134–139. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychres.2013.05.018
39.
MuratA.SoyerF. (2021). The effect of solution-focused brief therapy on psychological well-being of adolescents: A meta-analysis. Children and Youth Services Review, 127, 106079. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2021.106079
40.
National Association of Social Workers. (2017). NASW code of ethics. NASW Press.
41.
NewsomeW. S. (2004). Solution-focused brief therapy groupwork with at-risk junior high school students: Enhancing the bottom line. Research on Social Work Practice, 14(5), 336–343. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049731503262134
42.
NgE. D.ChuaJ. Y. X.ShoreyS. (2022). The effectiveness of educational interventions on traditional bullying and cyberbullying among adolescents: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Trauma, Violence, & Abuse, 23(1), 132–151. https://doi.org/10.1177/1524838020933867
43.
PapatraianouL. H.LevineD.WestD. (2014). Resilience in the face of cyberbullying: An ecological perspective on young people's experiences of online adversity. Pastoral Care in Education, 32(4), 264–283. https://doi.org/10.1080/02643944.2014.974661
44.
PekerA. (2013). İnsani değerler yönelimli psiko-eğitim programının problemli internet kullanımı ve siber zorbalık üzerindeki etkisi [The effect of human values-oriented psycho-education program on problematic internet use and cyberbullying] [Doctoral dissertation]. Sakarya University.
45.
Rummel-KlugeC.Pitschel-WalzG.KisslingW. (2009). Psychoeducation in anxiety disorders: Results of a survey of all psychiatric institutions in Germany, Austria and Switzerland. Psychiatry Research, 169, 180–182. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychres.2008.10.016
46.
SağarM. E. (2022). The effect of solution-focused group counseling on the resilience of university students. E- international journal of educational research, 13(1), 103–117. https://doi.org/10.19160/e-ijer.1034931
47.
ŞahinN. H.DurakA. (1994). Kısa Semptom Envanteri: Türk gençleri için uyarlanması [Brief symptom inventory: Adaptation for Turkish youth]. Türk Psikoloji Dergisi, 9(31), 44–56.
48.
SaleebeyD. (2013). The strengths perspective in social work practice (6th ed.). Pearson.
49.
SamaraM.FoodyM.GöbelK.AltawilM.ScheithauerH. (2020). Do cross-national and ethnic group bullying comparisons represent reality? Testing instruments for structural equivalence and structural isomorphism. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, 3018. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.03018
50.
Sarıcı-BulutS. (2008). İlköğretim ikinci kademe öğrencilerinin sınav kaygıları, saldırganlık eğilimleri ve problem çözme becerilerindeki yetersizliklerin sağaltımında grupla çözüm odaklı terapinin etkileri [The effects of group solution-focused therapy on reducing test anxiety, aggressive tendencies and inefficacy in problem solving of elementary school second stage students] [Doctoral dissertation]. Atatürk University.
51.
SmithP. K.MahdaviJ.CarvalhoM.FisherS.RussellS.TippettN. (2008). Cyberbullying: Its nature and impact in secondary school pupils. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 49(4), 376–385. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-7610.2007.01846.x
52.
TamerN. (2014). Ergenlerin teknolojik zorbalık algıları ve buna yönelik teknolojik zorbalık farkındalığı eğitimi: Pilot uygulama [Adolescents’ perception of technological bullying and technological bullying awareness education: Pilot implementation] [Master's thesis]. Bahçeşehir University.
53.
TanrıkuluT. (2013). Siber zorbalıkla ilgili değişkenlerin incelenmesi ve gerçeklik terapisi yönelimli bir müdahale programının siber zorbaca davranışlar üzerindeki etkisi [The investigation of variables related to cyberbullying and the impact of reality therapy-oriented intervention program on cyberbullying behaviors] [Doctoral dissertation]. Sakarya University.
54.
TanrıkuluT.KınayH.ArıcakO. T. (2015). Sensibility development program against cyberbullying. New Media & Society, 17(5), 708–719. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444813511923
55.
Thompson-HollandsJ.AbramovitchA.TompsonM. C.BarlowD. H. (2015). A randomized clinical trial of a brief family intervention to reduce accommodation in obsessive-compulsive disorder: A preliminary study. Behavior Therapy, 46, 218–229. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.beth.2014.11.001
56.
TunaD. (2012). Çözüm odaklı kısa süreli yaklaşıma dayalı öfke kontrolü eğitim programının lise öğrencilerinin öfke kontrolü ve iletişim becerileri düzeylerine etkisi [The effect of anger management training program based on solution-focused brief approach on high school students’ anger control and communication skills levels] [Master's thesis]. Dokuz Eylül University.
57.
WillifordA.DepaolisK. J. (2016). Predictors of cyberbullying intervention among elementary school staff: the mederating effect of staff status. Psychology in the schools, 53(10), 1032–1044. https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.21973
58.
YbarraM. L.MitchellK. J. (2004). Online aggressor/targets, aggressors, and targets: A comparison of associated youth characteristics. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 45(7), 1308–1316. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-7610.2004.00328.x
59.
ZhuC.HuangS.EvansR.ZhangW. (2021). Cyberbullying among adolescents and children: A comprehensive review of the global situation, risk factors, and preventive measures. Frontiers in Public Health, 9, 634909. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2021.634909
