CYBERBULLYING AND ONLINE HARASSMENT: RECONCEPTUALIZING THE

VICTIMIZATION OF ADOLESCENT GIRLS

To be cited as:

Burgess-Proctor, A., Patchin, J. W., & Hinduja, S. (2009). Cyberbullying and online

harassment: Reconceptualizing the victimization of adolescent girls. V. Garcia and J. Clifford

[Eds.]. Female crime victims: Reality reconsidered. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall. In

AMANDA BURGESS-PROCTOR

Michigan State University

JUSTIN W. PATCHIN

University of Wisconsin-Eau Claire

SAMEER HINDUJA

Florida Atlantic University

Burgess-Proctor, Patchin, & Hinduja

ABSTRACT

Growing public awareness of electronic bullying and harassment among adolescents suggests the

need to empirically investigate this increasingly common and problematic behavior. Although

studies of cyberbullying and online harassment among young people are nascent, preliminary

findings suggest that victimization can undermine the freedom of youth to use and explore

valuable online resources, and may have negative emotional and physical consequences as well.

The current study presents both quantitative and qualitative data from an online survey of

approximately 3,000 Internet-using adolescent girls to learn more about their experiences as

victims of cyberbullying and online harassment. Though the results are exploratory and largely

descriptive, this study helps broaden our understanding of the victimization experiences of

adolescent girls in cyberspace.

Burgess-Proctor, Patchin, & Hinduja

CYBERBULLYING AND ONLINE HARASSMENT: RECONCEPTUALIZING THE

VICTIMIZATION OF ADOLESCENT GIRLS

My friend’s cousin has lately been bullying me quite a bit. She calls me all sorts

of bad things and curses me out…is sarcastic in everything she says to me and

really is absolutely terrible to me. Through talking to me online while her cousin

was watching her type she destroyed my friendship with my friend. The bullying

and torment on [AOL Instant Messenger] and on my websites made me feel

absolutely terrible…I was very upset even offline after it had happened, and it

destroyed the friendship of what used to be my closest and most reliable friend. –

9th grader from South Carolina

My ex-boyfriend and his friends leave disgusting comments in my guestbook at [an

online diary-hosting website]. Though I have locked my diary so that they no

longer have access to it, they continue to leave hurtful comments in my guestbook.

They have threatened bodily harm, and have even gone so far as to say that they

would “kill me in my sleep.” They have also OPENLY admitted to being

“obsessed” with me while taking an online survey. I feel disgusted. – 11th grader

from New York

INTRODUCTION

Research on the victimization of adolescent girls often focuses on crimes involving

physical violence, such as sexual assault and child abuse (see e.g., Finkelhor & Browne, 1986;

see e.g., Finkelhor, Hotaling, Lewis, & Smith, 2000; Kendall-Tackett, Williams, & Finkelhor,

1993; Lavoie, Robitataille, & Herbert, 2000; O'Keefe, 1997; Silverman, Raj, Mucci, &

Hathaway, 2001). However, the above testimonials from adolescent girls who are victims of

cyberbullying suggest the need to broaden our understanding of girls’ victimization experiences

to include bullying and harassment that occurs through the use of electronic media. While

academic inquiry into such behavior – alternately called cyberbullying, online aggression,

Internet-based harassment, cyberstalking, and cyberviolence – is only just beginning to emerge,

rapidly-growing media attention suggests that Internet-using adolescents are all too familiar with

cyberbullying (see e.g., Chu, 2005; Meadows, 2005; see e.g., Swartz, 2005). Still, the research

Burgess-Proctor, Patchin, & Hinduja 4

on cyberbullying that does exist has not focused exclusively on the experiences of girls. This

study represents one of the first known empirical investigations of the online victimization of

adolescent girls. After first providing an overview of cyberbullying research literature to date,

this chapter presents both quantitative and qualitative data from an online survey of

approximately 3,000 Internet-using adolescent girls. The findings from this exploratory study

reveal patterns in girls’ online victimization experiences as well as key themes that provide

insight into how adolescent girls experience and respond to online victimization. More

importantly, the results help facilitate the process of reconceptualizing victimization among

adolescent girls to include bullying and harassment perpetrated using electronic media.

OVERVIEW OF CYBERBULLYING RESEARCH

Before we present an overview of the cyberbullying research literature, it is necessary to

define “cyberbullying” and to differentiate it from “online harassment.” Cyberbullying has been

defined as “willful and repeated harm inflicted through the medium of electronic text” (Patchin

& Hinduja, 2006). Cyberbullying behaviors can be carried out using cellular phone text

messaging, electronic mail (e-mail), and Internet instant messaging, and can take place in chat

rooms, on personal websites, on social networking sites such as MySpace, on Internet bulletin

boards, and in other web-based environments. Although in many cases cyberbullying involves

traditional bullying behaviors (e.g., name-calling, spreading rumors or lies, and making threats)

that are communicated electronically rather than in person, cyberbullying also can include

behaviors unique to the Internet that have no corollary in traditional bullying. For example,

“bombing” occurs when a bully uses an automated program to flood the victim’s e-mail inbox

with thousands of messages at once, potentially causing a failure of the e-mail software or of the

Burgess-Proctor, Patchin, & Hinduja 5

entire computer system. The key to this definition of cyberbullying is “willful and repeated

harm.” Online victimization that is isolated or that is not intended to be malicious does not meet

our definition of cyberbullying, and therefore falls into the broader category of “online

harassment.” Examples of online harassment include individual incidents of name-calling or

threats, arguments between friends that occur over email or instant messaging, and online

comments that were not intended to be hurtful but which nonetheless were offensive to the

victim.

In large part, the occurrence of cyberbullying and online harassment is reflective of how

deeply Internet technology and electronic communications have permeated the lives of young

people. According to the Pew Internet & American Life Project's “Teens and Technology”

report, data collected in late 2004 from 1,100 teenagers and 1,100 parents nationwide indicate

that 87% of those youth aged 12 to 17 use the Internet (Lenhart, Madden, & Hitlin, 2005).

Almost three-fourths of respondents (73%) report having a desktop computer, 18% report having

a laptop computer, 45% report having a cellular phone, and 33% report having sent a cellular

phone text message. Nearly 90% of youth aged 12 to 17 communicate via e-mail and 75%

communicate via instant messaging, and nearly half (48%) report using these methods of

communication every day (Lenhart et al., 2005). Clearly, adolescents today are savvy and

voracious consumers of electronic media; thus it should not be surprising that some who wish to

tease, harass, or bully others use the electronic media with which they are so familiar. What may

be surprising, though, is the extent to which cyberbullying occurs and its effect on victims.

Results from the few cyberbullying studies that exist reveal some important information

about this emerging form of adolescent aggression. First, it appears that a sizeable percentage of

Burgess-Proctor, Patchin, & Hinduja 6

young people experience cyberbullying either as victims or as bullies.1 In one study of Internet

harassment (defined as “an overt, intentional act of aggression towards another person online”),

Ybarra and Mitchell (2004) analyzed data from telephone interviews with 1,501 youth between

the ages of 10 and 17. They found that 7% of young, regular Internet users were the victims of

online harassment within the previous year, 3% were aggressors and victims, and 12% were

aggressors. Similarly, Patchin & Hinduja (2006) conducted a pilot study of 384 adolescent

Internet users to assess experience with various forms of cyberbullying, including bothering

someone online, teasing in a mean way, calling someone hurtful names, intentionally leaving

persons out of things, threatening someone, and saying unwanted sexually-related things to

someone. Approximately 29% of youth reported being the victim of such behavior, 11%

reported engaging in such behavior, and almost half (47%) reported witnessing such behavior.

Second, although cyberbullying occurs in a virtual environment, the emotional and

behavioral consequences of victimization are very real. For example, Patchin & Hinduja (2006)

found that over 42% of victims were frustrated, almost 40% felt angry, and over one-fourth

(27%) felt sad. The negative effects of online victimization extended beyond cyberspace, as

31.9% and 26.5% of respondents revealed that they were negatively affected at school and at

home, respectively. Moreover, youth reported that being victimized often caused them to curtail

their web usage, whether through avoidance of the venue where the victimization occurred

(32%) or by staying offline altogether (20%) (Patchin & Hinduja, 2006). However, despite the

negative effects of cyberbullying, adolescents appear reluctant to disclose their victimization to

adults, preferring instead to seek support and understanding from friends (Patchin & Hinduja,

2006).

Third, it is unclear what factors place youth at risk of involvement in cyberbullying,

either as a victim or as a bully. In a 2005 follow-up study of 1,388 youth (700 males and 688

females), Hinduja & Patchin (in review) found that neither sex nor race predicted likelihood of

cyberbullying victimization or offending (but see the discussion of gender below), whereas older

youth, youth who spent more time online, more computer proficient youth, and youth involved in

offline bullying were all more likely to be involved with cyberbullying both as victims and as

bullies. Additionally, both cyberbullying victimization and offending were significantly related

to other adolescent problem behaviors such as scholastic difficulties, assaultive conduct,

substance use, and traditional (offline) bullying.

However, there is some evidence to suggest that involvement in cyberbullying does vary

by gender. After surveying 1,915 girls and 1,852 boys in 6th, 7th, and 8th grade from across the

southwestern and southeastern United States, Kowalski et al. (2005) found that more girls than

boys reported being bullied online (25% vs. 11%) and bullying someone else online (13% vs.

8.6%). When reporting on traditional bullying, however, this gender gap did not appear; similar

numbers of boys and girls reported being bullied offline (12.3% vs. 14.1%), while more boys

than girls reported bullying someone else offline (8% as compared to 5%). Clearly, though, far

more research is needed before conclusions can be drawn about girls’ risk of involvement in

cyberbullying offending, or about their unique experiences with cyberbullying victimization.

Indeed, it is with this latter question in mind that we framed the current study.

The Current Study

Despite preliminary support for the idea that girls have different experiences with

cyberbullying than boys (Kowalski et al., 2005), the nature and extent of cyberbullying

victimization among girls has not been fully parsed out, nor have the consequences of

Burgess-Proctor, Patchin, & Hinduja 8

victimization for this population been adequately explored. In perhaps the first study of

cyberviolence to use an exclusively female sample, Berson, Berson, and Ferron (2002:63)

studied online survey responses from 10,800 girls ages 12 to 18 and found that “a significant

number of adolescent girls are engaging in very risky activities when online and continue

potentially problematic offline practices as a result of these online interactions.” Still, this study

– while pioneering – examines girls’ risky online behaviors rather than their experiences with

cyberbullying per se. Thus, given the dearth of research on adolescent girls’ online

victimization, our understanding of this phenomenon is practically nonexistent. The current

study is intended to help fill this void. In an attempt to learn more about the unique experiences

of adolescent girls victimized by cyberbullying and online harassment, we identified the

following research questions:

1. Who are adolescent girl victims of cyberbullying?

2. What cyberbullying behaviors do adolescent girls experience?

3. Who cyberbullies adolescent girls?

4. How do adolescent girls respond to being cyberbullied?

5. How does being cyberbullied affect adolescent girls?

METHODS

Data Collection

An online survey methodology was used to explore experiences with cyberbullying

among 3,141 adolescent girls (a subset extracted from a dataset of over 6,800 total respondents).2

2 Survey was administered between December 22, 2004 and January 22, 2005.

Burgess-Proctor, Patchin, & Hinduja 9

The cyberbullying questionnaire was linked to several adolescent-oriented websites; 3 individuals

who visited these websites were asked to participate in a survey of Internet behaviors. Potential

respondents who were under the age of 18 were instructed to obtain permission from a parent or

guardian before completing the survey. It deserves comment, however, that it was not possible

to verify whether minors actually obtained such permission.4 Following an introduction and

description of the research, the survey posed demographic questions as well as questions about

the scope, extent, and frequency of cyberbullying victimization and offending that respondents

may have experienced. Finally, the survey included several open-ended questions (e.g., “Tell us

in as much detail as possible how cyberbullying makes you feel?”) that allowed respondents to

describe their cyberbullying experiences in their own words. The primary benefit of an online

survey methodology is the ability to reach a wide number of participants at an economical cost.

Moreover, the subject matter itself was appropriate for this methodology because it involves a

global phenomenon that occurs exclusively online.

Analytic Strategy

This study uses a mixed-methods design, in which both quantitative and qualitative data

are analyzed into order to gain the broadest possible understanding of adolescent girls’

experiences with cyberbullying and online harassment. A mixed-methods design is particularly

appropriate in this study for several reasons. First, qualitative methods are particularly useful

when researching sensitive topics (Rosenblatt & Fischer, 1993). As cyberbullying victimization

may be difficult for respondents to discuss, a mixed-methods design may elicit information more

effectively than a quantitative design alone. Second, cyberbullying is a newly-emerging form of

adolescent aggression that is not fully understood. A universally accepted definition of

cyberbullying does not exist, so the concept of cyberbullying may not be adequately captured by

asking survey questions designed to measure the prevalence and frequency of specific

cyberbullying behaviors. Indeed, the qualitative data allowed us to differentiate behavior that

meets our definition of “cyberbullying” from behavior that is more appropriately labeled “online

harassment.” Third, in part due to the ambiguous definition of cyberbullying, as well as the vast

spectrum of behaviors that adolescents are likely to label as cyberbullying, establishing the

validity of a purely quantitative measure may prove difficult. Our quantitative measures were

informed by traditional bullying research and from our own previous research on cyberbullying.

Nevertheless, due to the embryonic nature of this line of research, it is in our best interest to keep

an open mind in order to establish a comprehensive conceptual and operational definition of

cyberbullying. In other words, without allowing respondents to discuss what online bullying

means to them in the context of their individual experiences, researchers cannot be entirely

confident that a survey instrument measures “cyberbullying” as it is perceived by the

respondents. Therefore, including open-ended measures of cyberbullying helps ensure that

respondents’ victimization experiences are accurately measured.

We began by using the quantitative data to examine descriptive characteristics of our

sample, from which we identified patterns in victimization experiences. Next, we used

qualitative analysis to code the narrative responses to the open-ended survey question, “Please

describe – in as much detail as possible – your most recent experience with being bullied

online.” In so doing, we looked to code around our five research questions. For this portion of

the analysis, the first author read every narrative response and identified initial themes. Once

initial themes were identified, the second and third authors each coded a subset of the responses

Burgess-Proctor, Patchin, & Hinduja 11

in order to refine the initial themes. On the rare occasion when questions or disagreements about

themes arose, all three authors discussed the findings until a consensus was reached. In general,

however, the consensus level was very high, giving us confidence in our interpretation of the

results.

RESULTS

Who are adolescent girl victims of cyberbullying?

As noted above, data from 3,141 female respondents under age 18 were analyzed in the

current study. As detailed in Table 1, respondents ranged in age from 8 to 17 years old, with

most girls falling in the 13 to 17 range (mean = 14.6 years). Similarly, most girls (69.1%) were

high school students in grades 9 through 12. Finally, girls in the sample were disproportionately

Caucasian/white (78%), and from the United States (75%).

INSERT TABLE 1 ABOUT HERE

What cyberbullying behaviors do adolescent girls experience?

As seen in Table 2, 1203 girls (38.3% of the sample) responded positively to the

statement “I have been bullied online.” Interestingly, when asked later in the survey whether

they had experienced individual behaviors, including being disrespected and ignored by others

online, a greater number of girls responded affirmatively. As we discuss below, this finding

further supports the distinction between “cyberbullying” and the less insidious “online

harassment” behaviors that appear to occur with some regularity among adolescent girls. Indeed,

the two online victimization behaviors reported most frequently were being ignored (45.8%) and

being disrespected (42.9%), both of which are relatively mild behaviors. Still, it is important to

note that some girls did report serious behaviors like being threatened (11.2%) that likely are

Burgess-Proctor, Patchin, & Hinduja 12

more indicative of cyberbullying than online harassment. Finally, online victimization of any

kind occurred most commonly in Internet chat rooms (26.4%), via computer text message

(21.7%), and via email (13.5%).

INSERT TABLE 2 ABOUT HERE

Online victimization behaviors identified in the narrative data overlap with those

identified in the quantitative data. For example, name-calling was commonly reported by the

girls in our study, who described being called “fat,” “ugly,” “slut,” “bitch,” and a host of other

unpleasant names. Similarly, the spreading of gossip – including lies and rumors about the

victim – was a very common occurrence. These themes make sense as examples of “being

disrespected by others,” a behavior reported by over forty percent of the sample. Finally, the

narrative responses lend support to the idea that adolescent girls do receive online threats,

ranging from vague warnings (“she threatened to get me”) to threats that are very specific (“she

said she would knock me out and bash my head in”) and very serious (“she [instant messaged]

me saying that she would kill me”). However, it is interesting to note that the most common

online behavior captured by the quantitative data, “being ignored by others,” which was reported

by over 45% of the sample, did not emerge as a particularly strong theme in the narrative data.

The qualitative data also revealed behaviors that were not captured by the quantitative

data. First, many respondents indicated behaviors involving duplicity, or cyberbullies’ use of

misrepresentation of self. Such behavior occurred when the bully used another person’s screen

name or otherwise concealed her identity before contacting the victim, or when she passed off

her own communications (e.g., inflammatory email messages) as the work of the victim.

Second, many girls described instances in which bullies used electronic communication devices

(instant messages, chat rooms, e-mail) to reveal confidential or sensitive information about them

to others. One victim described how “[the cyberbullies] brought up things [I] am not so proud of

that happened last summer.” A third very prominent example involves victims being teased for

sharing their opinions. Again, though more indicative of online harassment than cyberbullying,

many girls described being teased or ridiculed – usually in chat rooms, and often by several

members at one time – based on their political beliefs, musical preferences, religious affiliations,

and loyalty to particular bands or movie stars. While one might expect girls who are teased for

sharing their beliefs to feel inhibited about expressing their opinion, this does not appear to be

the case in our study. As we will discuss more fully below, many girls held firmly to their

beliefs and dismissed affronts to their opinions as immature and non-threatening. Finally, the

narrative data revealed many examples of sexual harassment directed at adolescent girls, which

appear to occur frequently in incidents involving strangers or anonymous sources. Behaviors

mostly involved unsolicited sexual advances (“[I] was online playing a game and a guy asked me

if [I] wanted to ‘suck his cock’”), including requests for the victim to “cyber” (i.e., engage in

cyber sex with) the aggressor.

Who cyberbullies adolescent girls?

Respondents were asked how often they knew the person bullying them online (see Table

3). Of the 1203 girls who reported being the victim of online bullying, only about 1 in 5 (20.5%)

“never” knew who was bullying them. Thus, most victims appear to know the bully, and report

that the bully was most often a friend from school (31.3%), someone else from school (36.4%),

or someone from a chat room (28.2%). In general, the qualitative data taken from the narrative

responses support the results of the quantitative analysis, indicating that girls most often were

cyberbullied by offline peers such as friends, ex-friends, or other classmates, and by online peers

whose screen names they knew from online message boards or chat rooms. However, the

Burgess-Proctor, Patchin, & Hinduja 14

qualitative analysis revealed two important sources of cyberbullying not identified in the

quantitative data. First, there were several accounts of girls being cyberbullied by their exboyfriends,

which typically involved name-calling and, in some cases, threats. Second, many

girls reported victimization by strangers, usually someone with an unfamiliar screen name.

Interestingly, stranger harassment was regarded as particularly frightening to some girls (“I

didn’t even know the person so I got really scared”) and as relatively harmless to others (“I did

not [feel] very scared since [the person] did not even know my name”).

INSERT TABLE 3 ABOUT HERE

How do adolescent girls respond to being cyberbullied?

Table 4 summarizes the responses to cyberbullying identified by those girls who reported

being bullied online (N=1203). Many girls responded to online victimization by retaliating or

“cyberbullying back” (27.3%). Notably, relatively few victims of cyberbullying informed a

parent (13%) or another adult (7%) about their experiences with online victimization. Instead,

victims were more far more likely to confide in an online buddy (46.5%) or another friend

(18.4%). Some respondents felt forced to stay offline for a period of time (17.3%), while others

did nothing different as a result of the victimization (24.5%). Finally, a significant number of

girls did not respond to the victimization, reporting that they told nobody (35.5%) or that they

did nothing at all (24.5%).

INSERT TABLE 4 ABOUT HERE

The narrative data confirmed that many girls responded through retaliation, or

“cyberbullying back.” There are several mentions in the narratives of girls responding to namecalling,

harassment, or threats in kind. For example, one girl commented, “Some annoying kid

in my school that I didn’t really know [instant-messaged] me telling me that I had an eating

disorder and [that] I was ugly. I was annoyed and told him to go fuck himself.” This type of

retaliatory response may be particularly common among victims of online bullying because there

exists little threat of the situation escalating into physical violence, unlike in face-to-face

bullying situations. Similarly, many girls reported that they received protection from online

peers. Particularly in chat rooms and message boards, many girls reported being defended by

online peers who, together with the victim, “fought back” against the bully on the victim’s

behalf. For example, one girl described this scenario, “A person I didn’t know contacted me via

computer text messaging and we …got into a verbal argument over the computer. We basically

made fun of each other and my friend came in and supported me and made fun of the person I

was in the argument with.” Several girls also indicated that they had come to the defense of

other cyberbullying victims.

The narrative responses also confirmed that a few girls responded by taking official

action, such as contacting the Internet Service Provider (ISP), their parents, or friends, whereas

others responded to their online victimization by curtailing their web use, such as avoiding

particular websites, chat rooms, or message boards where they had been harassed. Interestingly,

contacting law enforcement was never mentioned in the narrative the responses, even though

certain severe cyberbullying behaviors (such as death threats) are criminal acts.

On the other hand, many girls did not respond in any way to their victimization.

Although it is possible that some girls did nothing or told nobody because they were scared of

retaliation, as our discussion in the following section reveals, it seems far more likely that girls

did not respond because they were not particularly bothered by this behavior. Additionally, it is

noteworthy that cyberbullying victims can “walk away” from the situation in ways that victims

of face-to-face bullying cannot. In fact, the ease of removal from the situation may be a

characteristic that is unique to cyberbullying. With one click of the mouse, victims of

cyberbullying and online harassment can block the user, log off the Internet, or shut off their cell

phone, effectively ending the opportunity for continued victimization and eliminating the need to

respond further.5

How does being cyberbullied affect adolescent girls?

Finally, it is important to investigate how victims of cyberbullying were affected by the

experience. Of the 1203 girls who reported being bullied online, almost 35% reported feeling

angry, over 30% felt sad, and 41% were frustrated by being cyberbullied. Victims also reported

being affected at home (27.1%) and at school (22.7%). However, the majority of girls in our

sample reported that they were not affected (55.4%) by being cyberbullied. This seemingly

counterintuitive finding begins to make sense once the qualitative data are examined, as we

discuss below.

First, adolescent girls who responded to our survey reported a wide variety of emotional

effects of cyberbullying, including feeling “sad,” “angry,” “upset,” “depressed,” “violated,”

“hated,” “annoyed,” “helpless,” “exploited,” and “stupid and put down.” While the quantitative

data captured a few of these emotions, the narrative responses allowed us to understand the

broader range of emotional impact of cyberbullying for victims. For example, some girls

described how the victimization made them feel unsafe: “It makes me scared. I [sometimes

don’t] know the person so that makes me wonder if [I] have a stalker, and that gets me pretty

scared.” Other girls reported having extreme emotional responses to being victimized, including

suicidal ideation. The dramatic words of one girl underscore this point:

I was talking to 2 girls who used to be my friends…they went on a chat [that I]

was also talking on and started saying horrible things about me…they used my

[screen] name and everything…they even told one of my guy friends that [I] liked

him since the day we met and he stopped talking to me…I was both depressed

and angry… [I] wanted to die…[I] wanted to leave every thing behind….”

Another girl wrote of her online victimization, “[I]t made me feel so bad I started to cry.

Nobody likes me.” Clearly, although online victimization is easily dismissed for some girls, for

others the experience is, in fact, quite painful.

However, the quantitative data also indicate that being cyberbullied had no negative

effects for over half (55%) of the respondents. The narrative responses are particularly useful at

explaining this seemingly perplexing finding, as they reveal that many girls exhibited attitudes of

dismissal. Indeed, many girls share their belief that cyberbullies are merely “stupid,” “pathetic,”

“bored,” “just trying to amuse themselves,” and “don’t have anything better to do” with their

lives. Further, it appears that attitudes of dismissal are particularly common in cases of online

harassment rather than cyberbullying. From the narrative responses, it is clear that many girls

who experience name-calling, gossiping, and other common forms of adolescent harassment

perpetrated online exhibit healthy resilience to this behavior. What is less clear is the extent to

which girls who are victims of more problematic cyberbullying behaviors are similarly able to

ignore their victimization.

DISCUSSION

In this study we have identified some patterns in the victimization experiences of

adolescent girls as well as some themes that help broaden our understanding of cyberbullying

and online harassment in this population. This analysis has provided several important new

insights into this behavior.

First, the narrative data in particular help clarify the range of behaviors that make up

girls’ online victimization experiences, and help distinguish “cyberbullying” from other, often

less serious, forms of “online harassment.” For example, the survey responses reveal that 31.3%

of girls reported being “cyberbullied” by a friend from school, and 36.4% reported being

“cyberbullied” by someone else from school. However, upon closer inspection of the narrative

responses, it is clear that most incidents of “cyberbullying” reported by the respondents are more

accurately described as “online harassment” because they do not involve willful and repeated

harm.6 Repetition seemed to be the characteristic of the victimization experience that appeared

to be missing most often. While one instance of harassment is often harmful, it fails to meet our

definition of bullying. Thus, much of the victimization adolescent girls experience by offline

peers appears to be an extension of common adolescent behavior, including name-calling,

arguing, and gossiping. Indeed, the narrative responses revealed that many of these conflicts

with friends or ex-friends were resolved and ended with the parties going back to being friends,

further distancing these examples from cases of true cyberbullying. Still, though informative,

this finding raises many questions. How often does “true” cyberbullying occur? Do adolescents

recognize or fully understand cyberbullying, or distinguish it from online harassment? Are

instances of the former more or less memorable, and for what reasons? Can rationalizations and

justifications be more readily employed because of the nontraditional context in which

cyberbullying occurs?

Second, one particularly disturbing finding is how desensitized many girls seem to be to

the threat of unwanted sexual advances that occur online. Based on the comments of several

girls, unwanted sexual advances or sexually explicit communication is startlingly common

online. In the words of one respondent, “I was on [MSN instant messenger] and somebody I’ve

never met added me. I asked who it [was], and the person started saying inappropriate sexual

things to me, so I blocked him and that was it. It didn’t bother me because I know there are sick

people out there.” Still many questions remain. Is this awareness simply an extension of girls’

awareness of unwanted sexual advancements in the offline world? Is exposure to unwanted

sexual advances simply a fact of life for Internet-using adolescent girls? If so, what impact does

this have for Internet-using girls?

Third, our data strongly suggest that many girls are simply not bothered by the online

victimization they experience. The ease with which girls dismiss these incidents, coupled with

the repeated assessments of cyberbullies as being “bored” or “pathetic,” indicates that at least

some portion of girls who experience online victimization do not suffer lasting negative

consequences. Conversely, other girls reported having severe emotional responses to their

victimization, up to and including prolonged crying, withdrawal, and thoughts of suicide.

Though this information helps us better understand the range of effects that online victimization

has on adolescent girls, it raises important questions. Are girls more inclined to be dismissive of

these behaviors because the victimization does not occur in person? Do girls who experience

more serious forms of cyberbullying suffer more serious consequences than girls who experience

online harassment?

All of the questions raised by our analysis merit meaningful inquiry in future research

endeavors. In addition, our study has several limitations which provide opportunities for future

studies to improve upon our analysis. Most notably, our sample of adolescent girls is

disproportionately Caucasian/white (78%) and from the United States (75%). Coupled with the

potential problems associated with self-selection bias related to online survey methodology,

generalization to a broader population of adolescent girls is very difficult. While the

homogeneous nature of this sample is partially explained by the web sites to which the survey

instrument was linked (which likely attracted white female respondents from the U.S.), further

research is necessary to better understand the relative lack of non-white and non-U.S.

respondents completing our survey. In particular, the question of whether access to Internet

technology is evenly distributed across social groups, and what implications this has for risk of

online victimization, needs more exploration. Of course, research employing a random sample

of a known population is necessary in order to avoid the complications inherent in our

methodological approach.

One unexpected challenge involved in our analysis involved deciphering the shorthand

language used by so many young people to communicate online.

“Sometimes referred to as netspeak, the language of the Internet entails both

traditional linguistic forms and adapted ones including slang and non-standard

forms that are sometimes used in offline life…The use of acronyms (e.g., “lol =

laugh out loud,” “brb = be right back,”), plays or variations on words (e.g., “cya =

see you,” “latah = later”), graphical icons that represent emotions called

emoticons (e.g., : ) or ;-{}) or graphical icons that represent a real person in a

virtual context, called avatars, are all examples of language produced by online

communicators.” (Huffaker & Calvert, 2005:2-3)

These factors, coupled with the disregard for conventions of standard English such as

capitalization and punctuation that so often occur in online communication, can make reading

and understanding online communications difficult for people who are unfamiliar with these

customs. For example, the following passage is presented verbatim from one of the online

survey responses: “i cant remember when i did get bullied. its just been random names like bitch

and things. if i do bully them and they get there friends who are shit hot at cussing. im a bit arrr

god what am i gonnna do? but i get over it.” This example is representative of the syntax

appearing in many of our survey responses, and it is clear that extracting meaning from passages

like this can be a difficult task. Thus, one potential limitation of our study is that we may have

misinterpreted the intended meaning of the respondents.7 Certainly, future research should seek

to more capably comprehend the complex character of cyberspace communication.

CONCLUSION

Data from this study of over 3,000 Internet-using adolescent girls has provided valuable

information about their online victimization experiences. Both the quantitative and qualitative

data identify patterns in girls’ experiences with cyberbullying and online harassment, and

highlight themes that help us to broaden our understanding of this type of victimization as it

ranges from trivial to serious in scope. Although our data indicate that much of the electronic

victimization adolescent girls experience involves relatively minor forms of online harassment,

the testimonials presented at the beginning of this chapter underscore the severe emotional and

psychological consequences that can accompany cyberbullying victimization. Although many

questions remain and much more research is needed, this exploratory study provides justification

for reconceptualizing girls’ victimization to include experiences with cyberbullying and online

harassment.