There have been many high profile and tragic incidents in the media in recent years which have linked adolescent suicides to experiences with cyberbullying.  The connection between suicide and interpersonal aggression is certainly nothing new, as a number of studies have documented the association between bullying and suicide.  Sameer and I have a paper coming out in the coming months that explores the relationship between bullying (both traditional and cyber) and suicidal ideation and attempts.  We find that those who experience bullying (and those who bully) report higher levels of suicidal ideation and are more likely to have attempted suicide.

Here is the abstract:

OBJECTIVE: Empirical studies and some high-profile anecdotal cases have demonstrated a link between suicidal ideation and experiences with bullying victimization or offending.  The current study examines the extent to which a nontraditional form of peer aggression – cyberbullying – is also related to suicidal ideation among adolescents.

METHODS: In 2007, a random sample of 1,963 middle-schoolers from one of the largest school districts in the United States completed a survey of Internet use and experiences.

RESULTS:  Youth who experienced traditional bullying or cyberbullying, as either an offender or a victim, had more suicidal thoughts and were more likely to attempt suicide than those who had not experienced such forms of peer aggression.  Also, victimization was more strongly related to suicidal thoughts and behaviors than offending.

CONCLUSION:  The findings provide further evidence that adolescent peer aggression must be taken seriously both at school and at home, and suggest that a suicide prevention and intervention component is essential within comprehensive bullying response programs implemented in schools.

This research provides additional reasons not to ignore even minor forms of bullying and cyberbullying as they can easily escalate and create long-term and disastrous consequences for those involved.  We have a fact sheet that summarizes the findings in this paper which is available here.  As soon as the full article has been published, we will link to it on this site.

I greatly enjoyed being a part of a distinguished panel of guests at the National Crime Prevention Council’s Circle of Respect event on Friday, January 15th in Washington, DC.  Speaking alongside Deborah Norville (the anchor of Inside Edition), Chris Moessner (a very experienced researcher and Senior Vice President with Stewart and Partners), Rachel Simmons (author of Odd Girl Out and The Curse of the Good Girl), and Rosalind Wiseman (author of Queen Bees and Wannabees) was extremely enjoyable and enlightening.

Ann M. Harkins (National Crime Prevention Council’s President and CEO) emceed the event and it really was perfect how each speaker’s contribution led smoothly into the next contribution, and how together they built a comprehensive picture of the relevant issues surrounding bullying, relational aggression, cyberbullying, sexting, and respect.  All of my fellow panelists knew their stuff, and it was refreshing that no one shared cliched statements about Internet safety that everyone already knows.  What was shared was based on critical and original thoughts, and I loved that.

You can view the video of the event in its entirety here, cued up to my talk.  We then opened it up for Questions and Answers from the audience.

The majority of my prepared remarks are below.  We only had a few minutes to cover a great deal - and so I was constrained in all that I would have liked to say.  To note, I also covered the concept of social norming as a solution in reducing the misuse of technology by youth, but I want to save those sentiments for an expanded and exclusive blog entry in the very near future.

<PREPARED REMARKS>

Thank you for the opportunity to be on this panel of distinguished guests, and to be able to share with you on the topics of cyberbullying and sexting.  Adolescents have been bullying each other for generations. The latest generation, however, has been able to utilize technology to expand their reach and the extent of their harm. This phenomenon is being called cyberbullying, which we define as: “willful and repeated harm inflicted through the use of computers, cell phones, and other electronic devices.”  In general, cyberbullying is bullying carried out using these technologies.

In our research, we have found that:
•    Approximately 15-35% of youth have been victims of cyberbullying
•    About 10-20% of youth admit to cyberbullying others
•    That girls are just as likely, if not more likely, to be involved in cyberbullying as boys
•    That involvement seems to peak in the middle school years (grades 6-8)
•    And that most victims know, or at least think they know, who the cyberbully is.

Our research studies have consistently demonstrated that cyberbullying bears significant real-world consequences.   Specifically, we have found that cyberbullying leads to negative emotions such as sadness, anger, frustration, and fear, which have been linked to delinquency and interpersonal violence among youth.  Cyberbullying has also been tied to low self-esteem and suicidal ideation, problems with academic achievement, substance use and abuse, traditional bullying, carrying a weapon to school, and other forms of school violence.

I have also been asked to speak about the phenomenon of sexting.  We define sexting as “youth rendering themselves vulnerable to emotional, psychological, and physical victimization through the posting and sending of sexually-explicit or sexually-suggestive text, images or video.”

The actual extent of sexting among youth is somewhat unclear when looking across existing studies, and varies depending on how sexting is defined, whether it includes only cell phone use or other forms of online communication, the specific age group studied, and the study’s methodology and sampling.  We have seen estimates as low as 4% and as high as 19% for the proportion of youth who have sent a sexually suggestive picture or video of themselves to someone else.  We have seen estimates as low as 15% and as high as 31% for the proportion of youth who have received a sexually suggestive picture or video from someone else.  Our Cyberbullying Research Center is currently collecting data from a random sample of middle- and high-schoolers this week and next week, and will then be able to share with you a demographic and personality profile of those most likely to participate in sexting, contributive factors that make some youth more susceptible than others, and the range of consequences that can befall victims.

Sexting is largely an adolescent development issue.  Youth seek to figure out who they are and what they stand for during this tenuous period of life, and the process by which this occurs is greatly dependent upon cues from their social environment.  That is, peer perceptions and cultural norms are a large determinant in their own self-worth.  As such, adolescents often seek to present themselves to their peers in a way that attracts positive attention and increases social status.  This then serves to meet their inherent needs for affection, affirmation, and validation.

A teenage girl might hesitate for a moment when asked to send a semi-nude or nude picture of herself to a boyfriend or boy she’s interested in, but if it may improve that boy’s perception of her and consequently her perception of herself – and if it is deemed socially acceptable - she may do it.  This problem is exacerbated by the incessant cultural messages that describe and promote teen sexuality in arguably unhealthy ways - where “hooking up” may be preferred over “dating”, and where having personal privacy boundaries is viewed as “old-school” and “lame.”  My fellow panelists have keenly pointed out that respect – especially self-respect, or the lack thereof - also perpetuates this problem.

A few states are using traditional child pornography statutes to prosecute youth who engage in sexting.  Many argue these actions are outside of the original intentions of legislators who formulated the laws to prosecute adults who prey on youth.  Others believe that such strict interpretation of existing law is necessary in order to prevent tragedies like the Jesse Logan case from Ohio and the Hope Witsell case from Florida, both recent suicides stemming from sexting.

Similarly, school districts are seeking to reduce sexting through formal policies.  Based on my experience working with youth, and having been a youth myself, I don’t believe that formal law and policy is the best way to go - because adolescents tend not to be deterred by rules and laws.  It just doesn’t work as well as we would like to think.  I also don’t want the presence of law and policy to take the place of purposed educational efforts to teach teens about the responsible use of technology.  This sometimes happens when laws or policies are implemented as a way of quickly “dealing” with an issue, without understanding its fundamental causes.

I believe in the need for education and outreach to change prevailing social norms regarding what is acceptable and unacceptable in the minds of youth.  I feel that our prevention and response efforts are going to be less than ideal if we cannot effectively counter what society is hammering into the minds of adolescents.  If the dominant message our kids are hearing is that teen sexuality leads to romantic love, personal fulfillment, popularity, and celebrity status with very little (if any) public or personal fallout, youth will continue to push the proverbial envelope and the line between right and wrong in this area will be increasingly obscured.  I believe that social norming can counter this, and can help youth cultivate a deeper measure of self-respect.  This will serve as an insulating factor against participation in sexting and help them to stand firm when faced with very strong peer and cultural pressures.

I am pleased to be partnering with the National Crime Prevention Council in their far-reaching efforts to address the problems of cyberbullying and sexting, and believe that together we are making a very tangible difference through research, education, and outreach.   Thank you for your time and attention.

</PREPARED REMARKS>

We’ve been discussing cyberbullying and suicide recently, and even though cases are isolated and rare, the link is worth our attention.  First, it reiterates the fact that all forms of adolescent peer aggression must be taken seriously both at school and at home, and that online harassment can have grave real-world implications.  It also follows that we should make sure a suicide prevention and intervention component is essential within comprehensive bullying response programs implemented in schools.  Without question, the topic is sensitive and its presentation should be age-appropriate, as students in all grade levels must understand the serious consequences associated with peer aggression.  While suicide is an extreme response, proper discussion of its stark reality can vividly portray the extent of harm that peer harassment can exact.  To be sure, educators must be careful not to plant ideas in the minds of youth related to suicide being a viable option to their interpersonal problems.

As evidenced by the increasing number of self-inflicted deaths among youth, though, it is essential to boldly (but delicately) broach the topic to dissuade this form of harm and to remind youth that help is available.  Parents should likewise discuss the link between offline and online peer harassment and suicidal thoughts, and ought to consider utilizing stories in the news to underscore the seriousness of the matter.  It may not be a comfortable conversation, but it seems quite necessary given the frequency with which youth are harassed and the manner in which they sometimes suffer.

There is the oft-invoked concern of “copycat” behaviors - that hearing about it will actually promote its growth rather than reduce it - but we are not finding this claim to be valid based on our experience with schools and youth across the nation.  It could just be the way Justin and I specifically talk about the issues - we’re just not sure.  It is likely worth studying through formal research in the future.  Maybe breaking down the specific ways anti-[insert problematic behavior here] messages are delivered can inform an entire population of youth-serving adults as to the best way we can go about it - since they are succeeding in some areas but failing in others.

Earlier this week, I participated in a Summit organized by the National District Attorneys Association and the National Center for the Prevention of Child Abuse with a variety of professionals in the child protection arena. While other attendees focused in on the problem of child sex trafficking, my small group concentrated on the phenomenon of sexting and self-exploitation.

To begin, none of us really like the term sexting because it’s a buzzword, and drastically overused, and because youth don’t use it in reference to what they are doing. However, we understand that the term has been largely embraced by politicians, legislators, and the mass media, and the traction it has gained will be beneficial in further commanding attention and marshaling resources from those in positions who can help.

We believe sexting refers to “youth rendering themselves vulnerable to emotional, psychological, and physical victimization through the posting and sending of sexually-explicit or sexually-suggestive text, images or video.” I’m pretty sure that covers everything that can be involved.

We don’t necessarily believe that sexting should be referred to as “self-exploitation” as that infers that the victims are fully cognizant, aware, and in support of what they are doing in harming themselves. It places blame on the victim, and renders subjective our perspective of the phenomenon. When youth participate in sexting and then that text, image, or video is circulated outside of its intended recipient (which, incidentally, could also be considered “cyberbullying”), that youth becomes a victim, and no characterization should take away from that.

Sexting is largely an adolescent development issue. This is because of neurophysiological immaturity that youth have, which prevents them from considering long-term ramifications of their actions. Coupled with the disinhibition that cyberspace communication provides, and the geographic distance afforded by computers and cell phones, it’s very easy for youth to act unwisely and participate in this phenomenon. All of this said, we also realize that we (as adults) have a responsibility to step in. I think about the doctrine of in loco parentis, where we (e.g., the government, in the case of the legal professionals who gathered at this summit) have a legal responsibility to take on some of the functions and responsibilities of a parent to protect a child from themselves (i.e., from behavior that can lead to significant victimization). Finally, we must recognize that this issue is a nontrivial problem, and that it requires formal responses in conjunction with the informal attempts that have been made to curtail the problematic behavior.

We have to realize that sexting occurs along a continuum. This ranges first from what my colleague Nancy Willard calls “stupid teen” behavior - which is just part of adolescent courtship rituals and relationships in a time where cell phones, texting, and Picture Mail are practically ubiquitous. Most cases of sexting seem to fall under this category. Then we have problematic boyfriend/girlfriend relationships where there is a measure of abuse or dating violence that takes place. Third, we have sexting that involves intentional exploitation - blackmail, extortion, coercion, deception and trickery. This might, by the way, also be termed “compliant victimization” - which occurs after a period of grooming and the building of trust (forensic pediatrician Dr. Sharon Cooper shared that distinction with me at the Summit). An adult may be involved in these situations as well. Finally, we have what can be termed self-exploitation - which involves youth who brazenly and willingly flaunt and advertise themselves online in a sexual manner. This could range from a youth creating a social networking profile with various sexually suggestive images, videos, or text, to a youth actively prostituting herself in similar environments.

We believe that this can and should be dealt with through multidisciplinary teams that involve law enforcement (school liaison officers, local/state departments, and Internet Crimes Against Children units), child protective services workers and agencies, schools, mental health professionals, medical professionals like pediatricians and nurse practitioners, and social workers. The primary goal of prevention should be addressed through education/awareness efforts to school professionals, other youth-serving professionals, community and after-school organizations, faith-based organizations, NGOs, and of course parents and youth. This multidisciplinary team should be created at the local level, and - if and when done well - it should be shared with, and promoted by, organizations at the state level (such as the Department of Education, Department of Family and Child Services, and similar entities) to the rest of the state. This will then enable other local areas to model their own multidisciplinary team from the initial, pioneering local team. As an eventual consequence, teams will spring up - consisting of a variety of professionals who play a role in stemming the tide of sexting - all around a state, each uniquely positioned and equipped to combat the problem.

Prevention should also occur through formal research of sexting. We need to identify correlative and contributive factors to the problem. We need to empirically determine and assess the range of consequences that befall a victim of sexting. We need to find out - if possible - a demographic and personality profile of those most likely to participate, and whether their background, past, upbringing, and life experiences render them more susceptible than others. Finally, we need formal evaluation studies to uncover best practices in dealing with sexting that can be shared with stakeholders and other constituent organizations.

One major outcome that we have seen in recent years has been the increase in suicides related to an experience with bullying. As a point of reference, in 2004, suicide was the third-leading cause of deaths among those between the ages of 10 and 24. Even though suicide rates have decreased 28.5 percent between 1990 and 2004 among this age group, upward trends were identified in the 10- to 19-year-old age group in 2003-2004 (the most recent data available from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention). Though research involving traditional bullying and suicide is plentiful, empirical research involving cyberbullying and suicide is sparse.

We just got word that a research paper we submitted to the journal Archives of Suicide Research has just been accepted for publication. Its general focus is the phenomenon of cyberbullicide, which we define as “suicide indirectly or directly influenced by experiences with online aggression” (Hinduja & Patchin, 2009). We’ll be posting a new fact sheet summarizing the research soon, but it details the empirical link we have uncovered between suicidal thoughts/actions and online victimization.

In our quantitative study, we found that youth who experienced traditional bullying or cyberbullying, as either an offender or a victim, scored higher on a well-validated suicidal ideation scale than those who had not experienced those two forms of peer aggression. Moreover, bullying and cyberbullying victimization was a stronger predictor of suicidal thoughts and behaviors than bullying and cyberbullying offending.

We also found that traditional bullying victims were 1.7 times more likely and traditional bullying offenders were 2.1 times more likely to have attempted suicide than those who were not traditional victims or offenders. Similarly, cyberbullying victims were 1.9 times more likely and cyberbullying offenders were 1.5 times more likely to have attempted suicide than those who were not cyberbullying victims or offenders.

My next post will offer some policy and programming suggestions to address this problem. Even though cyberbullicide occurs quite rarely, it still merits purposed and informed prevention and response efforts.

Well, it’s official.  On Sunday, U.S. District Judge George Wu acquitted Lori Drew of all federal criminal charges for her involvement in the suicide of 13-year-old Megan Meier.  As you may recall, back in November a jury initially found Drew guilty of three misdemeanor charges of illegally accessing a protected computer (in essence, she was found guilty of violating MySpace.com’s Terms of Service). About two months ago, Judge Wu alluded to the fact that the case would be dismissed. Now it is official.

We have discussed this issue at length on this blog, acknowledging the various issues at play. Without question, what Lori Drew did was wrong. The question always has been, though, were those behaviors criminal? At the time, there really wasn’t any clear criminal statute that Drew had violated (that has since changed with several states and cities recently passing “cyberbullying laws”). The local prosecutor refused to pursue the case but a federal prosecutor in Los Angeles ultimately filed charges in federal court. It was those charges that have now been thrown out.

So what can we learn from this experience? First, it is important for federal, state, and local officials to clearly articulate legislation that unambiguously addresses the undesirable behaviors. This can be tricky given the constantly-changing nature of technology deviance. That said, any legislation should be grounded in what we know about youth and interpersonal aggression. Second, it is essential that parents, educators, and teens themselves work to prevent cyberbullying from occurring in the first place so that tragic incidents like this do not repeat themselves. Teens need to be empowered to shrug off minor forms of cyberbullying and to consult with an adult when the behaviors become too much to handle. Witnesses need to stand up for targets of cyberbullying by reporting what they see to teachers or parents so that the behaviors do not escalate. Everyone needs to recognize their role in cyberbullying prevention and response. If you don’t know what your role is, find out. You have a responsibility to take action. More on this in future postings…

The case against Lori Drew has been dismissed in federal court today, as the judge seemingly thought it would be wrong to criminalize certain Terms of Service violations of MySpace and other social networking web sites since users often misrepresent themselves online. (Bottom line when it comes to this ruling is that the law used to prosecute Drew was misapplied (and, frankly, not written very well).  I am pleased about this decision due to its implications, and hope that those who make law and adjudicate cases related to online communications continue to carefully evaluate the long-term usefulness of regulation.  I hope that Megan’s family can somehow obtain closure;   Tina Meier continues to work tirelessly to bring attention to cyberbullying through her experience, and we are in her corner.

We are all waiting with baited breath to learn of the sentencing decision to be handed down this week against Lori Drew.  In part because of the incredible amount of controversy surrounding this case, I believe the sentence will be minor and not amount to more than a proverbial slap on the wrist.  Already we have seen what some consider a misapplication of the law (prosecuting Ms. Drew under the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act), and another questionable, emotion-laden decision by the courts in a uniquely complicated case has the potential to seriously and negatively affect how we use and benefit from the Internet.

The article provides a quote that represents and perpetuates one of the most misguided perspectives surrounding cyberbullying:

“If federal law recognises this new form of bullying, police and prosecutors will be better equipped and educated to deal with this problem. Prosecutors, more importantly, will then have the ability to punish this behaviour in court.”

While Justin has covered this in a recent post, I would encourage everyone in favor of this response strategy to methodically evaluate whether more law enforcement, more fines, and more imprisonment are going to a) deter a person’s decision to harass or mistreat another person *online* (not face-to-face) in the heat of the moment b) lead to a fundamental change in the way individuals treat each other in cyberspace (we have so many laws on the books that have done NOTHING to truly improve our bent towards wrongdoing) and c) contribute to a culture of respect, tolerance, empathy, and kindness across all interpersonal interactions.  As a scholar of criminal justice and criminology, I can’t emphasize enough that regulation will NOT lead to these outcomes, and that it is naïve at best and ignorant at worst to believe that it will.

While the circumstances of Megan Meier’s death are horrific, the legacy stemming from her tragedy should not be the creation of unncessary and fruitless regulation buttressed by the threat of unnecessary and fruitless penalties.  Rather, the legacy should be that of an eye-opener that revolutionizes and radically propels forward educational efforts to instruct, guide, and empower individuals (both youth and adults) to participate in online communications with wisdom, rationality, caution, and kindness.

Another story has surfaced where a teen committed suicide after experiencing bullying.  The Chicago Tribune reports that Iain Steele, a 15-year-old boy from a western suburb of Chicago, hung himself in the basement of his home.  This case, like many others, illustrates the omnipresent nature of adolescent bullying in the 21st century.  Iain was bullied at school and online and really had nowhere to go to escape the torment.

Is it just me or are the facts of these kinds of tragedies eerily similar?  In most of the bullycide or “cyberbullicide” cases that we are aware of, the story is often the same: a troubled teen who is taking medication for mental health issues is harassed by peers to the point of suicide.  Many times a romantic relationship gone bad is also part of the equation.  Schools and parents usually know that something is going on, but don’t know what to do to help.  In some cases parents take some initial steps to try to rectify the situation (by meeting with school administrators or having doctors evaluate their children), but the bullying continues.

As the article points out, the link between adolescent bullying and suicide is very clear.  Youth who are victims of bullying, and also those who bully, are at a higher risk for suicidal thoughts and attempts.  Sameer and I have an article under review that extends that relationship to cyberbullying incidents.  It’s yet another reason to take all forms of bullying seriously and to hold bullies accountable and provide support for targets.  And yes, it is YOUR responsibility.

We recently received this email and I thought I would respond to it here so that others too can add their thoughts:

Dear CyberBullying.us ~

I recently discovered your website as I was wandering the internet.  I read some of the stories on your site and I would just love it if you could publish my words.  I am 18 from the UK.  I have been using the internet since I was 4 years old. And I have had some experiences with ‘cyber-bullying’, as it is now called. Funny, we used to call it “people being idiots”.

As most people who have been actually bullied in real life will tell you, cyberbullying is really stupid. “Oh no. Some girl said to me in an email “ur fat lulz”. I’m scarred for the rest of my life.” Nowhere NEAR as bad as getting hit, punched, abused, ect.

I myself have had many arguements over the internet, ranging from ones that are deeply personal to stupid things. (Such as who runs the police department on a game.)

However, I feel that people are getting used to a cushy real life, going on the internet and expecting it to be all cuddles and joy. It is NOT. And it isn’t in the ‘real world’, either. I’m not saying that bullying isn’t wrong, but I am just saying that it’s a tad immature to go whinge on and on about some immature kid who called another immature kid names OVER THE DAMN INTERNET. ITS THE INTERNET, SERIOUSLY, COME ON. THEY CAN’T HURT YOU. Just dish out what they say right back to them.

Always letting my opinions be heard.

Thanks —

Alastair

Dear Alastair,

Thanks for your thoughts.  We agree that all forms of bullying are hurtful and that the physical effects of “real life” bullying can be very damaging.  I will disagree with you, however, when you assert that the effects of cyberbullying are trivial or inconsequential.  To be fair, a lot of things said and done online are relatively minor and should be ignored, but there are a lot of very serious instances of cyberbullying that result in long term harm to those who experience it.

As an 18-year-old adult, it may be hard for you to understand, but as a young teenager developing through adolescence, peer approval is everything and what your peers say to you online and off can have dramatic effects on your daily life.  And the fact that a victim can never really remove him or herself from an online bully makes it even more difficult to handle.  Some people say that victims can simply turn off their computers or cell phones to remove themselves from the situation.  Those who have been to our presentations know that this simply isn’t an adequate response.  For one thing, you don’t have to be online to be cyberbullied (e.g., if I create a web site containing rumors about you and then circulate it among others at school).  Also, since when has it been appropriate to blame the victim?  So I am being cyberbullied, and now I can’t use my computer or cell phone?  Pretty ridiculous if you ask me.  But, if you don’t believe me, and still feel that cyberbullying really isn’t that bad, feel free to contact John Halligan or Tina Meier, or any of the other parents here in the U.S. who recently lost their children due, at least in part, to the effects of peer harassment carried out online.  Cyberbullying was so unbearable for these teens that taking their own life was evidently a better option for them than living with the torment.

Thanks again for the comment and I am hopeful that you will come to understand that even though cyberbullying is not physical in nature, it is still harmful.  In the words of a 14-year-old girl who told us about her cyberbullying experience: “They say sticks and stones may break my bones but words will never hurt me. That quote is a lie and I don’t believe in it. Sticks and stones may cause nasty cuts and scars but those cuts and scars will heal. Insultive words hurt and sometimes take forever to heal.”