BEHS ANNO BIB
BYSTANDER
Article4.pdf
TEM Journal. Volume 8, Issue 4, Pages 1359-1365, ISSN 2217-8309, DOI: 10.18421/TEM84-37, November 2019.
TEM Journal – Volume 8 / Number 4 / 2019. 1359
Determination of Cyber Bullying, Cyber Victimization, Cyber Sensitivity and Virtual
Loneliness of Students and their Relationships
Sezer Kanbul, Kezban Ozansoy
Near East University, Nicosia, North Cyprus
Abstract – The aim of this study is to determine cyber bullying, cyber victimization, cyber sensitivity, and virtual loneliness of students and their relationships. The study was designed with descriptive and relational model within the framework of quantitative research method. The sample of the study consists of 208 university students. In order to collect data, 4 different scales were used and correlations between descriptive statistics of the scales and the scale scores were employed. Accordingly, especially when the students' scores on the sensitivity scale related to cyber bullying increase, the scores they receive from the e-bullying scale and virtual sharing dimension of the virtual media loneliness scale decrease, which is remarkable.
Keywords – Cyber bullying, cyber victimization, cyber sensitivity, virtual media loneliness. 1. Introduction
The concept of cyber bullying has emerged in the
last decade as a serious problem which has spread rapidly in countries where internet and online technologies are used intensively, especially the United States of America and Canada [2]. With technology, the concept of bullying described by Olweus has undergone some changes in terms of communication and psychological aspects [20].
DOI: 10.18421/TEM84-37 https://dx.doi.org/10.18421/TEM84-37
Corresponding author: Sezer Kanbul,
Near East University, North Cyprus. Email: [email protected]
Received: 10 July 2019. Revised: 15 October 2019. Accepted: 20 October 2019. Published: 30 November 2019.
© 2019 Sezer Kanbul, Kezban Ozansoy; published by UIKTEN. This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 License. The article is published with Open Access at www.temjournal.com
Anonymous calls, junk e-mails sent with a fake ID, voices, images and texts that include insults and threats which are spread by e-mails or SMS texts with the purpose of scandalizing a person or a group, virus infected e-mails and all of these malicious actions indicate cyber bullying.
Especially social media networks emerge as a phenomenon that should be taken seriously by everyone as they come into contact with every aspect of life [14]. Social networks can affect daily life to this extent, especially due to the attractive environment that can allure the younger generation, easy access and sharing features. However, they have a dark side as well [5].
It is reported that as individuals spend more time on social networks (Facebook, Youtube, Whatsapp, Instagram...etc.) and on technological devices (smart phone, laptop, tablet, PC etc.) they retire from social life, which results in the weakening of social relations and, due to the time spent in visual environment, people get into less contact with their family and social environment; thus, they feel more isolated [24],[18].
The concept of loneliness is expressed as an undesirable situation which is referred to with feelings such as sadness, anger, fear and anxiety that emphasize negativity [23],[8]. It is not manifested by social structure, but by the degree of intimacy between people [7].
In order to be able to intervene against cyber bullying, to recognize the concept of cyber bullying and to gain the coping skills, researching cyber bullying and cyber victimization is important. Cyber victimization is the situation in which an individual or group is exposed to damaging behaviors in a technical or relational manner through information and communication technologies and experiences material or spiritual victimization [27], [10].
A study conducted by Hanewald in London reported that 22% of children were cyber-victimized at least once and 7% were cyber-victimized frequently [15]. Turkish researchers stated that girls were more cyber-victimized compared to boys and students at public schools were more cyber-
TEM Journal. Volume 8, Issue 4, Pages 1359-1365, ISSN 2217-8309, DOI: 10.18421/TEM84-37, November 2019.
1360 TEM Journal – Volume 8 / Number 4 / 2019
victimized than students at private schools [1], [4], [26].
This situation raises the question “does cyber- victimization make these individuals cyber-bullies or cyber-sensitive people?” Cyber sensitivity is defined as behaviors to avoid being exposed to bullying behaviors during the use of cyber tools such as internet and mobile phones, to be aware of the existence of such threats and to take precautions, and to watch out for warnings that may implicate threats [13].
A situation observed in individuals with high cyber sensitivity is increased awareness. Cyberbullying is a situation that can create a perception of threat for the person [22].
Today, the general characteristics, features, sociological backgrounds, desires and political tendencies of the generation Y, which corresponds to the age range of 15-35, should be studied. In general, this generation is defined as free, high in ego, smarter, more self-conscious and self-interested, irresponsible, competitive, and much more inclined to using information technologies [21].
In this context, it is important to examine the students' cyber bullying, cyber victimization, cyber sensitivity, and virtual loneliness levels and relationships which constitute the purpose of the study. For this purpose, answers were sought to the following sub-objectives:
1. What are the socio-demographic characteristics of the students, their use of internet and social media?
2. Is there a significant difference in the students' sensitivity scale for cyberbullying, cyber victimization scale, virtual media loneliness scale and e-bullying scale?
3. Is there a significant difference in the scores of sensitivity scale for cyberbullying, cyber victimization scale, virtual media loneliness scale and e-bullying scale according to the gender of the students?
4. Is there a significant difference in cyberbullying sensitivity scale, cyber victimization scale, virtual media loneliness scale and e-bullying scale scores according to students' daily internet usage time?
5. Is there a significant relationship between students' scores obtained from sensitivity scale for cyberbullying, cyber victimization scale, virtual media loneliness scale and e-bullying scale?
2. Method
2.1. Research Мodel
This study was designed with descriptive and correlational research models among quantitative research approaches in order to define an existing situation [16]. In correlation model, the relation between variables and the level of that relation is determined [11].
2.2. Sample of the Study
The universe of this research consists of 2100 students in a faculty of education affiliated to a private university in 2018-2019 academic year. The sample consisted of 208 students who were determined by 95% confidence level using simple random sampling method. In the simple random sampling method, the selection of each unit in the universe is made impartially considering the possibility of being equal and independent in the sampling selection[6].
2.3. Data Collection Tool
In order to determine the cyber bullying, cyber victimization, cyber sensitivity, and virtual loneliness levels and the relationships between them, 4 different scale forms and demographic information form prepared by the authors were used in the data collection. The scales used are as follows:
'Cyber Victimization Scale' developed by Aricak, Tanrikulu & Kinay [3], 'Virtual Media Loneliness Scale' developed by Korkmaz, Usta & Kurt [17], 'E- Bullying Scale' developed by Gencdogan & Cikrikci [12], and 'Sensitivity Scale for Cyber Bullying' developed by Tanrikulu, Kinay & Aricak [25].
2.4. Analysis of Data
The data of the study was analysed in SPSS 25.0 software, and socio-demographic characteristics, internet and social media usage status of the students were determined by frequency analysis. Descriptive statistics of Cyber Bullying Sensitivity Scale, Cyber Victimization Scale, Virtual Media Loneliness Scale and E-Bullying Scale were also given.
According to the socio-demographic characteristics of students, internet and social media usage status, Cyber Bullying Sensitivity Scale, Cyber Victimization Scale, Virtual Media Loneliness Scale and E-Bullying Scale data set were compatible with the normal distribution of Kolmogorov-Smirnov test, QQ graph and skewness-kurtosis coefficients. Parametric hypothesis tests were used in cases where it conforms to normal distribution and nonparametric hypothesis tests were used in cases where it did not fit. Accordingly, independent sample t test was used to compare the scale scores according to gender,
TEM Journal. Volume 8, Issue 4, Pages 1359-1365, ISSN 2217-8309, DOI: 10.18421/TEM84-37, November 2019.
TEM Journal – Volume 8 / Number 4 / 2019. 1361
nationality and operating system of the participants, ANOVA was used to compare the scale scores according to the age group, and Kruskal-Wallis H test was used to compare the scale scores according to the daily internet usage times.
3. Findings
Table 1. Socio-demographic characteristics, internet and social media usage of students (n=208)
f % Gender Female 95 45,67 Male 113 54,33 Age group
18-19 years 66 31,73 20-21 years 82 39,42 22 years and older 60 28,85 Nationality
TRNC 58 27,88 TR 150 72,12 Internet connection at home Yes 184 88,46 No 24 11,54 Daily internet usage time Less than 1 hour 12 5,77 1-3 hours 43 20,67 3-5 hours 57 27,40 5-7 hours 43 20,67 More than 7 hours 53 25,48 Mobile phone Yes 206 99,04 No 2 0,96 OS iOS 86 41,75 Android 120 58,25 Mobile phone usage target
Communication 169 81,25 News Following 111 53,37 Social networks 160 76,92 Education 95 45,67 Online game 56 26,92 Other 5 2,40 Social media tools used Facebook 125 60,10 Youtube 135 64,90 Whatsapp 173 83,17 Viber 11 5,29 Snapchat 52 25,00 Instagram 162 77,88 Twitter 34 16,35 Linkedin 6 2,88 Other 4 1,92 The goal of using social media Communication with friends 164 78,85 Follow the latest news 132 63,46 Spending time 138 66,35 Other 4 1,92
When Table 1. is examined, it is seen that among the students who participated in the study, 45.67 were females, 54.33% were males, 31.73% were 18- 19 years old, 39.42% were 39-42 years old, 28.85% were 22 years old and above, 27.88% were TRNC nationals and 72.12% were Republic of Turkey nationals.
It was reported that 88.46% of students had internet at home, 20.67% used internet for 1-3 hours a day, 27.40% used internet for 3-5 hours a day, 20.67% used internet for 5-7 hours a day, 25.48% used internet for more than 7 hours a day, 99.04% had mobile phones and, among those, 41.75% had IOS operating system and 58.25% had Android operating system. 81.25% of the students used their mobile phone for communication purposes, 76.92% used it for social networks, 53.37% used it for following the news, 45.67% used it for education purposes and 26.92% used it for playing games. It has been observed that 83.17% of students used WhatsApp, 77.88% used Instagram, 64.90% used YouTube and 60.10% used Facebook. It has also been found out that 78.85% of students used social media to communicate with their friends, 63.46% used to follow flash news, and 66.35% used to kill time.
Table 2. Sensitivity Scale for Cyber Bullying, Cyber Victimization Scale, Virtual Media Loneliness Scale and E-Bullying Scale scores of the students
n 𝒙� s Min Max Sensitivity Scale for Cyber Bullying
208 33,41 6,09 17 42
Cyber Victimization Scale
208 42,88 6,59 28 72
Virtual Sharing 208 25,49 5,73 8 40
Virtual Socialization 208 17,39 6,94 7 35
Virtual Loneliness 208 17,05 4,43 5 25 Virtual Media Loneliness Scale
208 59,93 10,10 24 96
E-Bullying Scale 208 4,57 7,26 0 35
When Table 2. is examined, it is seen that students
who participated in the study received x ̅=33,41±6,09 points from Sensitivity Scale for Cyber Bullying, x ̅=42,88±6,59 points from Cyber Victimization Scale. Students received x ̅=33,41±6,09 points from the entire Virtual Media Loneliness Scale, x ̅=59,93±10,10 points from virtual socialization sub- dimension, x ̅=17,39±6,94 from virtual sharing sub- dimension, and x ̅=17,05±4,43 points from virtual loneliness sub-dimension. Students who participated in the study received x ̅=4,57±7,26 points from e- bullying scale.
TEM Journal. Volume 8, Issue 4, Pages 1359-1365, ISSN 2217-8309, DOI: 10.18421/TEM84-37, November 2019.
1362 TEM Journal – Volume 8 / Number 4 / 2019
Table 3. Sensitivity Scale for Cyber Bullying, Cyber Victimization Scale, Virtual Media Loneliness Scale and E-Bullying Scale Scores obtained by students by gender (n = 208)
Gender n 𝒙� s t p Sensitivity Scale
for Cyber Bullying
Female 95 34,41 6,20 2,186 0,030*
Male 113 32,58 5,89 Cyber
Victimization Scale
Female 95 43,43 6,03 1,098 0,273
Male 113 42,42 7,02
Virtual Socialization
Female 95 24,34 5,73 -2,700 0,008*
Male 113 26,46 5,58
Virtual Sharing Female 95 16,86 6,69
-1,013 0,312 Male 113 17,84 7,14
Virtual Loneliness
Female 95 17,01 4,35 -0,112 0,911
Male 113 17,08 4,52
Virtual Media Loneliness Scale
Female 95 58,21 9,64 -2,277 0,024*
Male 113 61,38 10,29
E-Bullying Scale
Female 95 2,67 5,56 -3,551 0,000*
Male 113 6,17 8,13 *p<0,05
When Table 3. is examined, it can be found that the difference between the scores obtained from cyber bullying sensitivity scale, virtual media loneliness scale and its virtual socialization sub- dimension, and E-Bullying Scale are statistically significant according to gender (p <0,05). Female students' scores obtained from the Sensitivity Scale for Cyber Bullying are significantly higher than that of the male students. The scores of male students from the Virtual media Loneliness Scale and from its virtual socialization sub-dimension as well as E- Bullying Scale are found to be higher than with the female students.
There is no statistically significant difference between the scores obtained from the cyber victimization scale and the virtual sharing and virtual loneliness subscales of the virtual media loneliness scale (p> 0.05).
Table 4. Cyber Bullying, Cyber Victimization Scale, Virtual Media Loneliness Scale and E-Bullying Scale Scores of students according to daily internet usage time (n = 208)
Daily Internet Usage Time n 𝒙� s X
2 p
Se ns
it iv
it y
Sc al
e fo
r C
yb er
B ul
ly in
g
less than 1 hour 12 33,75 7,12 6,179 0,186 1-3 hours 43 34,42 6,01 3-5 hours 57 34,26 6,13 5-7 hours 43 31,72 6,42 more than 7 hours 53 32,98 5,44
C yb
er V
ic ti
m iz
at io
n Sc
al e
less than 1 hour 12 46,58 9,10 3,402 0,493 1-3 hours 43 43,81 4,39 3-5 hours 57 42,51 5,40 5-7 hours 43 42,70 7,73 more than 7 hours 53 41,85 7,42
V ir
tu al
So
ci al
iz at
io n
less than 1 hour 12 22,42 9,39 5,031 0,284 1-3 hours 43 24,77 4,98 3-5 hours 57 25,51 4,88 5-7 hours 43 26,47 5,34 more than 7 hours 53 25,96 6,31
V ir
tu al
S ha
ri ng
less than 1 hour 12 17,42 9,59 8,361 0,079 1-3 hours 43 15,86 6,60 3-5 hours 57 15,82 5,16 5-7 hours 43 18,88 6,96 more than 7 hours 53 19,11 7,72
V ir
tu al
L
on el
in es
s
less than 1 hour 12 13,33 3,75 18,248 0,001* a-b
1-3 hours 43 17,21 4,18 a-c
3-5 hours 57 18,47 3,16 a-d
5-7 hours 43 17,40 5,08 a-e
more than 7 hours 53 15,94 4,78
V ir
tu al
M ed
ia
L on
el in
es s
Sc al
e less than 1 hour 12 53,17 17,12 8,604 0,072 1-3 hours 43 57,84 8,57 3-5 hours 57 59,81 7,79 5-7 hours 43 62,74 10,33 more than 7 hours 53 61,02 10,55
E -B
ul ly
in g
Sc al
e less than 1 hour 12 4,58 7,01 3,457 0,484 1-3 hours 43 3,77 6,70 3-5 hours 57 3,11 5,49 5-7 hours 43 5,33 7,59 more than 7 hours 53 6,19 8,85
p <0.05 * a: less than 1 hour, b: 1-3 hours, c: 3-5 hours, d: 5-7 hours, e: more than 7 hours
An examination of Table 4. shows that there is no statistically significant difference between scores obtained from Sensitivity Scale for Cyber Bullying, Cyber Victimization Scale, Virtual Media Loneliness Scale in general and its virtual socialization and virtual sharing sub-dimensions and e-bullying scale
TEM Journal. Volume 8, Issue 4, Pages 1359-1365, ISSN 2217-8309, DOI: 10.18421/TEM84-37, November 2019.
TEM Journal – Volume 8 / Number 4 / 2019. 1363
according to their daily internet usage periods (p>0,05).
It was found that the difference between the scores obtained by students who participated in the study from the virtual loneliness subscale in the Virtual Loneliness Scale was statistically significant according to their daily internet usage period (p <0,05). Students whose daily internet usage time was less than 1 hour scored lower in the virtual loneliness subscale of Virtual Media Loneliness Scale.
Scores obtained by students who participated in the study from Sensitivity Scale for Cyber Bullying, Cyber Victimization Scale, Virtual Media Loneliness Scale and E-bullying Scale were compared according to their age groups, nationalities, internet connection status at home, and it was found out that there was no statistically significant difference (p>0,05). Table 5. Correlations between Sensitivity Scale for Cyber Bullying, Cyber Victimization Scale, Virtual Media Loneliness Scale and E-Bullying Scale Scores of students
Se ns
it iv
it y
Sc al
e fo
r C
yb er
B ul
ly in
g
C yb
er V
ic ti
m iz
at io
n
V ir
tu al
S oc
ia liz
at io
n
V ir
tu al
S ha
ri ng
V ir
tu al
L on
el in
es s
V ir
tu al
M ed
ia
L on
el in
es s
Sc al
e
E -B
ul ly
in g
Sc al
e
Sensitivity Scale for
Cyber Bullying
r 1
p . Cyber
Victimizati on Scale
r 0,132 1 p 0,057 .
Virtual Socializatio
n
r 0,025 -0,008 1 p 0,717 0,906 .
Virtual Sharing
r -0,265 -
0,256 0,340 1 p 0,000*
0,000 *
0,000 * .
Virtual Loneliness
r 0,065 0,122 -0,005 -
0,411 1
p 0,349 0,079 0,946 0,000* . Virtual Media
Loneliness Scale
r -0,088 -
0,091 0,812 0,676 0,079 1
p 0,209 0,189 0,000* 0,000
* 0,255 .
E-Bullying Scale
r -0,277 -
0,406 0,094 0,308 -
0,224 0,170 1
p 0,000* 0,000
* 0,177 0,000
* 0,001
* 0,014
* .
*p<0,05 When Table 5. is examined, it can be found out
that there are statistically significant, negative and low correlations between scores obtained by students who participated in the study from Sensitivity Scale for Cyber Bullying and virtual sharing in Virtual Media Loneliness Scale and E-bullying Scale
(p<0,05). As the scores obtained by students from Sensitivity Scale for Cyber Bullying increase, their scores from virtual sharing in Virtual Media Loneliness Scale and E-bullying Scale decrease.
It is also found that there are statistically significant and negative correlations between the scores obtained from the cyber victimization scale and the scores obtained from the virtual sharing in the Virtual media Loneliness Scale and e-bullying scale (P <0.05). These correlations are negative, and as the scores of the students on the Cyber Victimization Scale increase, the scores of the virtual sharing and E-Bullying Scale decrease.
It is determined that there are statistically significant and positive correlations between scores obtained by students who participated in the study from e-Bullying Scale and sub-scales of Virtual Media Loneliness Scale whereas negative correlations are found out between scores obtained from virtual loneliness scale (p<0,05). Accordingly, as the scores obtained by students from e-Bullying Scale increase, so do the scores they receive from Virtual Media Loneliness Scale in general and its virtual sharing sub-dimension whereas their scores from virtual loneliness scale decrease.
4. Conclusion and Discussion
In this study, which aims to determine the cyber bullying, cyber victimization, cyber sensitivity, and virtual loneliness levels of students and their relationships, important results are obtained based on the findings:
When the socio-demographically remarkable results as regards students are examined, it was observed that almost all students (88.46%) had internet connection at home and that a majority (72.12%) were citizens of the Republic of Turkey. There are several political and academic cooperation schemes between Northern Cyprus and Turkey. It was also concluded that almost all of the students (99.04%) had mobile phones and 76.92% used these devices for entering social networks.
The most recent world social media statistics in the 'Digital in 2019' report published by ‘We Are Social and Hootsuite’ published in 2019 show that the number has reached 3.48 billion. 45% of the world is using social media and the number of mobile social media users has reached 3.2 billion.
Another noteworthy result is that female students have higher levels of sensitivity to cyber bullying than male students. Studies in the literature which support this result have found that girls become both less cyber bullies and less cyber victims than boys [19],[11].
On the other hand, it has been concluded that male students feel lonelier and more frequently engage in virtual bullying activities in real life compared to
TEM Journal. Volume 8, Issue 4, Pages 1359-1365, ISSN 2217-8309, DOI: 10.18421/TEM84-37, November 2019.
1364 TEM Journal – Volume 8 / Number 4 / 2019
female students. Another result that is parallel to this finding is that, as students' virtual bullying activities increase, the isolation they feel deepens as well. Dogan & Karakus, concluded that adolescents who suffer from loneliness in romantic relationships and family relationships are associated with intense social media usage. In this study, it can be said that male students suffer from similar isolation [9].
The other conclusion is that the age, nationality and internet connection of male and female students do not affect cyber bullying, cyber victimization, cyber sensitivity and virtual loneliness. The only relevant finding is that students whose daily internet usage time is less than 1 hour feel less lonely in daily life than others.
Another result is that as students' cyber sensitivity increases, their e-bullying status decreases slightly. One result that is in parallel with this finding is that virtual bullying activities are decreasing as students become victims in cyber environment. In support of these results, Williams & Guerra reported that individual's thinking that bullying is morally unacceptable prevents him/her from being involved in cyber bullying as both cyberbully and victim [28].
It is expected that this study will shed light on the research of other researchers on cyber-bullying related concepts and their relationships.
References
[1]. Akbulut, Y., Sahin, Y. L., & Eristi, B. (2010). Cyberbullying victimization among Turkish online social utility members. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 13(4), 192-201.
[2]. Aricak O. T. (2009). Psychiatric Symptomatology As a Predictor of Cyberbullying Among University Students. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, 34, 167-184.
[3]. Aricak, O. T., Tanrikulu, T., & Kinay, H. (2012). Initial Psychometric Findings of Cyber Victimization Scale. Mediterranean Journal of Educational Research, 11, 1-6.
[4]. Aricak, T., Siyahhan, S., Uzunhasanoglu, A., Saribeyoglu, S., Ciplak, S., Yilmaz, N., & Memmedov, C. (2008). Cyberbullying among Turkish adolescents. Cyberpsychology & Behavior, 11(3), 253-261.
[5]. Baccarella, C. V., Wagner, T. F., Kietzmann, J. H., & McCarthy, I. P. (2018). Social media? It's serious! Understanding the dark side of social media. European Management Journal, 36(4), 431- 438.
[6]. Balci, A. (2007). Sosyal Bilimlerde Arastirma. Ankara: PegemA Yayincilik
[7]. Chelune, G. J., Sultan, F. E., & Williams, C. L. (1980). Loneliness, self-disclosure, and interpersonal effectiveness. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 27(5), 462.
[8]. DiTommaso, E., & Spinner, B. (1997). Social and emotional loneliness: A re-examination of Weiss’ typology of loneliness. Personality and Individual Differences, 22(3), 417-427.
[9]. Dogan, U., & Karakas, Y. (2016). Multi-Dimensional Loneliness as the Predictor of High School Students' Social Network Sites (SNS) Use. Sakarya University Journal of Education, 6(1), 57-71.
[10]. Eroglu Y., & Peker A. (2011). Perceived Social Support from Familyand Friends and Cyber Victimization: An Investigation with Structural Equation Modeling. Journal of Akademik Bakis, 27, 1-20.
[11]. Fraenkel, J. R., Wallen, N. E., & Hyun, H. H. (2012). How to design and evaluate research in education (8th edition). New York: McGraw Hill.
[12]. Gencdogan, B., & Cikrikci, O. (2015). Reliability and Validity Studies of the Turkish Version of the E- Bullying Scale (E-BS) and E-victimization Scale (E- VS). Journal of Theory & Practice in Education (JTPE), 11(1).
[13]. Gezgin, D. M., & Cuhadar, C. (2012). Investigation of the Computer Education and Instructional Technologies Students’ Awareness to Cyber- Bullying. Journal of Educational Sciences Research, 2(2), 93-104.
[14]. Amichai-Hamburger, Y., & Ben-Artzi, E. (2003). Loneliness and Internet use. Computers in human behavior, 19(1), 71-80.
[15]. Hanewald, R. (2008). Confronting the pedagogical challenge of cyber safety. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 33(3), 1-16.
[16]. Karasar, N. (2002). Bilimsel Arastirma Yontemleri. Ankara: Nobel Yayinlari.
[17]. Korkmaz, Ö., Usta, E., & Kurt, I. (2014). A validity and reliability study of the virtual environment loneliness scale (VELS). Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi [Haccettepe University Journal of Education], 29(2), 144-159.
[18]. Kraut, R., Patterson, M., Lundmark, V., Kiesler, S., Mukophadhyay, T., & Scherlis, W. (1998). Internet paradox: A social technology that reduces social involvement and psychological well- being?. American psychologist, 53(9), 1017-1031.
[19]. Li, Q. (2006). Cyberbullying in schools: A research of gender differences. School psychology international, 27(2), 157-170.
[20]. Smith, P. K., Catalano, R., Slee, P., Morita, Y., Junger-Tas, J., & Olweus, D. (Eds.). (1999). The nature of school bullying: A cross-national perspective. Psychology Press.
[21]. Prensky, M. (2001). Digital natives, digital immigrants. On the Horizon, 9(5), 1-5.
[22]. Raffone, A., Tagini, A., & Srinivasan, N. (2010). Mindfulness and the cognitive neuroscience of attention and awareness. Zygon®, 45(3), 627-646.
[23]. Russell, D., Peplau, L. A., & Cutrona, C. E. (1980). The revised UCLA Loneliness Scale: concurrent and discriminant validity evidence. Journal of personality and social psychology, 39(3), 472-480.
[24]. San, M. K., & Hira, I. (2005). Bilgi Toplumu: Bir Risk Olarak Ozel Alanin Kaybolusu. IV. Ulusal Bilgi-Ekonomi ve Yonetim Kongresi , Kocaeli.
TEM Journal. Volume 8, Issue 4, Pages 1359-1365, ISSN 2217-8309, DOI: 10.18421/TEM84-37, November 2019.
TEM Journal – Volume 8 / Number 4 / 2019. 1365
[25]. Tanrikulu, T., Kinay, H., & Aricak, O. T. (2013). Cyberbullying Sensibility Scale: Validity and Reliability Study. Trakya University Journal of Education, 3(1), 38-47.
[26]. Topçu, Ç., Erdur-Baker, Ö., & Çapa-Aydin, Y. (2008). Examination of cyberbullying experiences among Turkish students from different school types. CyberPsychology & Behavior, 11(6), 643-648.
[27]. Wang, J., Iannotti, R. J., Luk, J. W., & Nansel, T. R. (2010). Co-occurrence of victimization from five subtypes of bullying: Physical, verbal, social exclusion, spreading rumors, and cyber. Journal of Pediatric Psychology, 35(10), 1103-1112.
[28]. Williams, K. R. & Guerra, N. G. (2007). Prevalence and Predictors of Internet Bullying. Journal of Adolescent Health, 41, 14-21.
Copyright of TEM Journal is the property of UIKTEN-Association for Information Communication Technology Education & Science and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.
