Bullying and cyberbullying bring adverse physical and psychological impacts on individuals and an economic burden for society. Scholars have developed anti-bullying intervention programs to combat these problems. This meta-analysis aims to examine and compare the effectiveness of digital health interventions (DHIs) in reducing bullying and cyberbullying. A comprehensive search was conducted using databases (PsycINFO, Social Service Abstracts, Sociological Abstracts, MEDLINE, ERIC, and EMBASE). Quasi-experimental and randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published before 31 January 2021 that reported the effects of DHIs in reducing bullying or cyberbullying were included. The 16 studies included in the synthesis reported overall random effect sizes (Cohen’s d) for bullying and cyberbullying reduction were 0.41 and 0.19, respectively. The results provide evidence on the effectiveness of DHIs, comparable to that of face-to-face interventions. The subgroup analysis revealed that the critical components of effective DHIs include training on bystander and bully–victim dual roles, coping skills, and interactive serious games. It highlights the promising effects of digital health approaches in bullying and cyberbullying interventions. Our review identifies avenues for future research on the development of more effective DHIs to reduce bullying and cyberbullying.
AndersonE. J.KrauseK. C.Meyer KrauseC.WelterA.McClellandD. J.GarciaD. O.KossM. P (2019). Web-based and mHealth interventions for intimate partner violence victimization prevention: A systematic review. Trauma, Violence & Abuse, 22(4), 1524838019888889. https://doi.org/10.1177/1524838019888889
2.
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
3.
*BeranT. N.TuttyL.SteinrathG. (2004). An evaluation of a bullying prevention program for elementary schools. Canadian Journal of School Psychology, 19(1-2), 99–116. https://doi.org/10.1177/082957350401900105
4.
*BosworthK.EspelageD.DuBayT.DaytnerG.KarageorgeK. (2000). Preliminary evaluation of a multimedia violence prevention program for adolescents. American Journal of Health Behavior, 24(4), 268–280. https://doi.org/10.5993/ajhb.24.4.3
5.
Calvo-MorataA.Alonso-FernándezC.FreireM.Martínez-OrtizI.Fernández-ManjónB. (2020). Serious games to prevent and detect bullying and cyberbullying: A systematic serious games and literature review. Computers & Education, 157(2), 103958. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2020.103958
6.
CantoneEPirasAPVellanteMPretiADaníelsdóttirSD’AlojaELesinskieneSAngermeyerMCCartaMGBhugraD (2015). Interventions on bullying and cyberbullying in schools: A systematic review. Clinical Practice and Epidemiology in Mental Health, 11(Suppl 1 M4), 58–76. https://doi.org/10.2174/1745017901511010058
7.
CassidyT. (2009). Bullying and victimisation in school children: The role of social identity, problem-solving style, and family and school context. Social Psychology of Education, 12(1), 63–76. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11218-008-9066-y
8.
ChenM.ChanK. L (2020). Effectiveness of digital health interventions on unintentional injury, violence, and suicide: Meta-analysis. Trauma, Violence & Abuse, 23(1), 1524838020967346. https://doi.org/10.1177/1524838020967346
9.
ChenQ.LoC. K.ZhuY.CheungA.ChanK. L.IpP. (2018). Family poly-victimization and cyberbullying among adolescents in a Chinese school sample. Child abuse & neglect, 77, 180–187.
10.
ChenQ.ZhuY.ChuiW. H (2020). A meta-analysis on effects of parenting programs on bullying prevention. Trauma, Violence & Abuse, 22(5), 1209–1220. https://doi.org/10.1177/1524838020915619
11.
CrossD.BarnesA. (2014). Using systems theory to understand and respond to family influences on children’s bullying behavior: Friendly schools, friendly families program. Journal of Theory into Practice, 53(4), 293–299. https://doi.org/10.1080/00405841.2014.947223
12.
*CrossDShawTHadwenKCardosoPSleePRobertsCThomasLBarnesA (2016). Longitudinal impact of the cyber friendly schools program on adolescents’ cyberbullying behavior. Aggressive Behavior, 42(2), 166–180. https://doi.org/10.1002/ab.21609
13.
Della CioppaV.O'NeilA.CraigW. (2015). Learning from traditional bullying interventions: A review of research on cyberbullying and best practice. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 23(1), 61–68. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.avb.2015.05.009
14.
*DeSmetA.BastiaensensS.Van CleemputK.PoelsK.VandeboschH.DeboutteG.HerrewijnL.MallietS.PabianS.Van BroeckhovenF.De TroyerO.DeglorieG.Van HoeckeS.SamynK.De BourdeaudhuijI. (2018). The efficacy of the Friendly Attac serious digital game to promote prosocial bystander behavior in cyberbullying among young adolescents: A cluster-randomized controlled trial. Computers in Human Behavior, 78(1), 336–347. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2017.10.011
15.
DivakarUNazehaNPosadzkiPJarbrinkKBajpaiRHoAHYCampbellJFederGCarJ (2019). Digital education of health professionals on the management of domestic violence: Systematic review and meta-analysis by the digital health education collaboration. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 21(5), e13868. https://doi.org/10.2196/13868
16.
*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
17.
*EversK. E.ProchaskaJ. O.Van MarterD. F.JohnsonJ. L.ProchaskaJ. M. (2007). Transtheoretical-based bullying prevention effectiveness trials in middle schools and high schools. Educational Research, 49(4), 397–414. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131880701717271
18.
FodorLACoteCDCuijpersPSzamoskoziSDavidDCristeaIA (2018). The effectiveness of virtual reality based interventions for symptoms of anxiety and depression: A meta-analysis. Scientific Reports, 8(1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-018-28113-6
19.
FontaineG.CossetteS.Maheu-CadotteM. A.MailhotT.DeschênesM. F.Mathieu-DupuisG (2017). Effectiveness of adaptive e-learning environments on knowledge, competence, and behavior in health professionals and students: Protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis. JMIR Research Protocols, 6(7), e8085. https://doi.org/10.2196/resprot.8377
20.
FrenkJChenLBhuttaZACohenJCrispNEvansTFinebergHGarciaPKeYKelleyPKistnasamyBMeleisANaylorDPablos-MendezAReddySScrimshawSSepulvedaJSerwaddaDZuraykH (2010). Health professionals for a new century: Transforming education to strengthen health systems in an interdependent world. The Lancet, 376(9756), 1923–1958. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(10)61854-5
21.
GaffneyH.FarringtonD. P.EspelageD. L.TtofiM. M. (2019a). Are cyberbullying intervention and prevention programs effective? A systematic and meta-analytical review. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 45(1), 134–153. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.avb.2018.07.002
22.
GaffneyH.FarringtonD. P.TtofiM. M. (2019b). Examining the effectiveness of school-bullying intervention programs globally: A meta-analysis. International Journal of Bullying Prevention, 1(1), 14–31. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42380-019-0007-4
23.
GaffneyH.TtofiM. M.FarringtonD. P. (2019c). Evaluating the effectiveness of school-bullying prevention programs: An updated meta-analytical review. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 45(1), 111–133. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.avb.2018.07.001
24.
Gámez-GuadixMOrueISmithPKCalveteE (2013). Longitudinal and reciprocal relations of cyberbullying with depression, substance use, and problematic internet use among adolescents. Journal of Adolescent Health, 53(4), 446–452. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jadohealth.2013.03.030
25.
*GaraigordobilM.Martínez-ValderreyV. (2018). Technological resources to prevent cyberbullying during adolescence: The cyberprogram 2.0 program and the cooperative cybereduca 2.0 videogame. Frontiers in Psychology, 9(1), 745. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00745
26.
GarandeauC. F.Laninga-WijnenL.SalmivalliC. (2021). Effects of the Kiva anti-bullying program on affective and cognitive empathy in children and adolescents. Journal of Clinical Child & Adolescent Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1080/15374416.2020.1846541
27.
GoodyearV. A. (2017). Social media, apps and wearable technologies: Navigating ethical dilemmas and procedures. Qualitative Research in Sport, Exercise and Health, 9(3), 285–302. https://doi.org/10.1080/2159676x.2017.1303790
28.
HawleyP. H.WillifordA. (2015). Articulating the theory of bullying intervention programs: Views from social psychology, social work, and organizational science. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 37(1), 3–15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appdev.2014.11.006
29.
HigginsJPThompsonSG (2002). Quantifying heterogeneity in a meta-analysis. Statistics in Medicine, 21(11), 1539–1558. https://doi.org/10.1002/sim.1186
30.
HowardM. C.GutworthM. B. (2020). A meta-analysis of virtual reality training programs for social skill development. Computers & Education, 144(4), 103707. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103707
31.
HuangY.EspelageD. L.PolaninJ. R.HongJ. S. (2019). A meta-analytic review of school-based anti-bullying programs with a parent component. International Journal of Bullying Prevention, 1(1), 32–44. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42380-018-0002-1
32.
IngramKMEspelageDLMerrinGJValidoAHeinhorstJJoyceM (2019). Evaluation of a virtual reality enhanced bullying prevention curriculum pilot trial. Journal of Adolescence, 71(1), 72–83. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adolescence.2018.12.006
LancasterM. (2018). A systematic research synthesis on cyberbullying interventions in the United States. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 21(10), 593–602. https://doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2018.0307
*LeungA. N. M.FungD. C.-L.FarverJ. M. (2018). A cyberbullying intervention for Hong Kong Chinese college students. Applied Research in Quality of Life, 13(4), 1037–1053. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11482-017-9572-1
*MenesiniE.NocentiniA.PalladinoB. E (2012). Empowering students against bullying and cyberbullying: Evaluation of an Italian peer-led model. International Journal of Conflict and Violence (IJCV), 6(2), 313–320. https://doi.org/10.4119/ijcv-2922.
39.
MenesiniESalmivalliC (2017). Bullying in schools: The state of knowledge and effective interventions. Psychology, Health & Medicine, 22(sup 1), 240–253. https://doi.org/10.1080/13548506.2017.1279740
40.
ModeckiKLMinchinJHarbaughAGGuerraNGRunionsKC (2014). Bullying prevalence across contexts: A meta-analysis measuring cyber and traditional bullying. Journal of Adolescent Health, 55(5), 602–611. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jadohealth.2014.06.007
41.
MoherD (1998). CONSORT: An evolving tool to help improve the quality of reports of randomized controlled trials. Consolidated standards of reporting trials. Jsls: Journal of the Society of Laparoendoscopic Surgeons, 279(18), 1489–1491. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.279.18.1489
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), 132-151.2.
43.
NocentiniAMenesiniE (2016). KiVa anti-bullying program in Italy: Evidence of effectiveness in a randomized control trial. Prevention Science, 17(8), 1012–1023. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11121-016-0690-z
44.
NocentiniA.ZambutoV.MenesiniE. (2015). Anti-bullying programs and information and communication technologies (ICTs): A systematic review. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 23(2015), 52–60. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.avb.2015.05.012
45.
*PalladinoBENocentiniAMenesiniE (2012). Online and offline peer led models against bullying and cyberbullying. Psicothema, 24(4), 634–639. https://www.psicothema.com/PDF/4065.pdf
46.
PietrzakEPullmanSMcGuireA (2014). Using virtual reality and videogames for traumatic brain injury rehabilitation: A structured literature review. Games for Health: Research, Development, and Clinical Applications, 3(4), 202–214. https://doi.org/10.1089/g4h.2014.0013
47.
PolaninJ. R.EspelageD. L.PigottT. D. (2012). A meta-analysis of school-based bullying prevention programs’ effects on bystander intervention behavior. School Psychology Review, 41(1), 47–65. https://doi.org/10.1080/02796015.2012.12087375
48.
RiveraSCLiuXChanAWDennistonAKCalvertMJ (2020). Guidelines for clinical trial protocols for interventions involving artificial intelligence: The SPIRIT-AI extension. Bmj: British Medical Journal, 370(9), m3210. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.m3210
49.
Rubin-VaughanA.PeplerD.BrownS.CraigW. (2011). Quest for the Golden Rule: An effective social skills promotion and bullying prevention program. Computers & Education, 56(1), 166–175. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2010.08.009
50.
*SalmivalliC.KärnäA.PoskipartaE. (2011). Counteracting bullying in Finland: The KiVa program and its effects on different forms of being bullied. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 35(5), 405–411. https://doi.org/10.1177/0165025411407457
51.
*SapounaMWolkeDVanniniNWatsonSWoodsSSchneiderWEnzSHallLPaivaAAndréEAndreEDautenhahnKAylettR (2010). Virtual learning intervention to reduce bullying victimization in primary school: A controlled trial. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 51(1), 104–112. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-7610.2009.02137.x
52.
SedgwickP. (2013). Selection bias versus allocation bias. Bmj: British Medical Journal, 346(4), f3345–f3345. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.f3345
53.
TtofiM. M.FarringtonD. P. (2011). Effectiveness of school-based programs to reduce bullying: A systematic and meta-analytic review. Journal of Experimental Criminology, 7(1), 27–56. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11292-010-9109-1
54.
Van CleemputKDeSmetA.VandeboschH.BastiaensensS.PoelsK.BourdeaudhuijDe. (2014). A systematic review of studies evaluating anti-cyberbullying programs. In Proceedings of the Etmaal Van De Communicatiewetenschap, Wageningen, The Netherlands, 3–4 February 2014.
55.
ViechtbauerW (2010). Conducting meta-analyses in R with the METAFOR package. Journal of Statistical Software, 36(3), 1–48. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v036.i03
56.
VöllinkT.BolmanC. A. W.DehueF.JacobsN. C. L. (2013). Coping with cyberbullying: Differences between victims, bully-victims and children not involved in bullying. Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology, 23(1), 7–24. https://doi.org/10.1002/casp.2142.
57.
von MaréesN.PetermannF. (2012). Cyberbullying: An increasing challenge for schools. School Psychology International, 33(5), 467–476. https://doi.org/10.1177/0143034312445241
58.
*WillifordAElledgeLCBoultonAJDePaolisKJLittleTDSalmivalliC (2013). Effects of the KiVa antibullying program on cyberbullying and cybervictimization frequency among Finnish youth. Journal of Clinical Child & Adolescent Psychology, 42(1), 820–833. https://doi.org/10.1080/15374416.2013.787623
YangA.SalmivalliC. (2013). Different forms of bullying and victimization: Bully-victims versus bullies and victims. European Journal of Developmental Psychology, 10(6), 723–738. https://doi.org/10.1080/17405629.2013.793596
61.
*YangA.SalmivalliC. (2015). Effectiveness of the KiVa antibullying programme on bully-victims, bullies and victims. Educational Research, 57(1), 80–90. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131881.2014.983724
62.
YeagerD. S.FongC. J.LeeH. Y.EspelageD. L. (2015). Declines in efficacy of anti-bullying programs among older adolescents: Theory and a three-level meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 37(1), 36–51. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appdev.2014.11.005
63.
YokooM.WakutaM.ShimizuE. (2018). Educational effectiveness of a video lesson for bullying prevention. Children & Schools, 40(2), 71–79. https://doi.org/10.1093/cs/cdy001
