Comparing school-related risk factors of stereotypical bullying perpetration and cyberbullying perpetration
| DOI | 10.1177/1477370819887519 |
| Published date | 01 January 2022 |
| Date | 01 January 2022 |
| Author | Marie Christine Bergmann |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
https://doi.org/10.1177/1477370819887519
European Journal of Criminology
© The Author(s) 2019
Article reuse guidelines:
sagepub.com/journals-permissions
DOI: 10.1177/1477370819887519
journals.sagepub.com/home/euc
Comparing school-related
risk factors of stereotypical
bullying perpetration and
cyberbullying perpetration
Marie Christine Bergmann
Criminological Research Institute of Lower Saxony, Germany
Abstract
Based on the combination of two representative surveys of ninth graders (N = 20,150) conducted
in 2013 and 2015 in Lower Saxony, Germany, this article first examines the prevalence of
cyberbullying perpetration and stereotypical bullying perpetration. Second, in addition to already
existing research, the prevalence of the simultaneous perpetration of stereotypical bullying and
cyberbullying is presented here as well. In order to overcome the limitations of existing research,
General Strain Theory (GST; Agnew, 1992) is used to theoretically determine why it is expected
that school characteristics are associated with the three forms of bullying. In the students’
preceding semester, 6.1 percent of the surveyed adolescents were perpetrators of stereotypical
bullying, 1.1 percent bullied someone online, and 1.3 percent of the juveniles engaged in both
bullying behaviors. Binary logistic multilevel analyses show that school-related strains are in fact
related to the perpetration of stereotypical bullying, cyberbullying, and the perpetration of both
behaviors simultaneously. The risk of engaging in the perpetration of stereotypical bullying, and
the perpetration of cyberbullying and stereotypical bullying simultaneously, is especially increased
by school-related strains. Thus, those respondents who carry out bullying behaviors in the school
context seem to be especially affected by school-related strains.
Keywords
Cyberbullying perpetration, stereotypical bullying perpetration, General Strain Theory, student survey
Introduction
Following Olweus (1993), bullying in the school context is often defined as ‘the inten-
tional, repetitive or persistent hurting of one pupil by another (or several others)’,
Corresponding author:
Marie Christine Bergmann, Criminological Research Institute of Lower Saxony, Lützerodestraße 9,
Hannover, 30451, Germany.
Email: Marie.Bergmann@kfn.de
887519EUC0010.1177/1477370819887519European Journal of CriminologyBergmann
research-article2019
Article
2022, Vol. 19(1) 77–97
whereby a further condition is that ‘the relationship involves an imbalance of power’
(Lucia, 2016: 50). Bullying behavior can be verbal, physical, and/or psychological
(Dooley et al., 2009). In contrast to stereotypical bullying, however, cyberbullying
encompasses no form of physical violence but, instead, aims at psychological aggression
(Baier et al., 2016). It is frequently based on Olweus’s (1993) initial definition of stereo-
typical bullying as ‘a repeated aggressive act by individuals or groups, intended to inflict
harm or discomfort on others by means of contemporary information and communica-
tion technologies (i.e. cellular phones, smart phones, emails, social networks, chat rooms,
instant messaging programs, etc.)’ (Athanasiades et al., 2016; Patchin and Hinduja,
2012; Smith et al., 2008: 376). Although school bullying and cyberbullying are both
similar aggressive behaviors (Dooley et al., 2009), there are critical differences between
the two. Hence, in contrast to stereotypical bullying, cyberbullying can take place regard-
less of time and space and can be witnessed by a larger audience (Baier et al., 2016; Del
Rey et al., 2015; Slonje and Smith, 2008).
The prevalence of bullying and cyberbullying varies substantively depending on how
these behaviors are defined and measured (Athanasiades et al., 2016; Dooley et al., 2009;
Kowalski et al., 2014; Patchin and Hinduja, 2015). Modecki et al. (2014) conducted a
meta-analysis, taking into account 80 studies concerning bullying and cyberbullying.
They reported that the mean prevalence rate of bullying was 35 percent, whereas the
mean prevalence rate of cyberbullying was 16 percent. Further, higher rates were found
when a clear definition of bullying was provided and when terms that indicated a rather
minor deviance such as ‘fun’ were included (Modecki et al., 2014). Other studies report
a range of 15–25 percent of juveniles who engage in cyberbullying (Hinduja and Patchin,
2008; Patchin and Hinduja, 2006; Ybarra et al., 2007; Ybarra and Mitchell, 2004), and a
range of 7–34 percent of juveniles who engage in stereotypical bullying (Finkelhor et al.,
2005; Lucia, 2016; Patchin and Hinduja, 2011).
The existing extensive body of research shows that engagement in both stereotypical
bullying and cyberbullying is associated with several negative outcomes, such as: social
isolation, eating disorders, deterioration of academic performance, poorer psychosocial
adjustment, and engagement in other deviant behaviors (for example, Earnshaw et al.,
2017; Kowalski and Limber, 2013; Nansel et al., 2004; Staubli and Killias, 2011; Ttofi
et al., 2012, 2016; Zych et al., 2015). Thus, bullying and cyberbullying are still a public
concern.
Previous research on risk factors for both perpetration of school bullying and cyber-
bullying has focused mainly on individual factors (for example, Cook et al., 2010; Festl,
2016; Lucia, 2016). Several meta-analyses have condensed the influencing factors (Cook
et al., 2010; Kowalski et al., 2014; Modecki et al., 2014). With regard to gender, it is
frequently reported that girls tend to engage more often in indirect stereotypical bullying,
whereas boys are more likely to use physical violence (Baier et al., 2016; Dooley et al.,
2009). Lucia (2016), however, reports that boys were more likely to engage in psycho-
logical bullying. With respect to cyberbullying, the evidence is more contradictory. It is
often argued that girls tend to be more likely than boys to communicate using electronic
means (Dooley et al., 2009) and, thus, have more opportunity to engage in cyberbullying.
In fact, however, as with stereotypical bullying, Sourander et al. (2010) report a higher
cyberbully prevalence for boys. Nevertheless, other studies do not find a gender
78 European Journal of Criminology 19(1)
To continue reading
Request your trial