Introduction
Social media and technology is very much impacting lives of people in both negative and positive ways specifically on young age people. The positive impact could be that of getting connected and touch with loved ones who are not living nearby to them. Whereas negative could be involved like that of those who are regularly using these social media tools is most potential for cyberbullying. This could be categorised to as harassment of people with the use of technology or electronic means when one person or group of person bullying or teasing the other which is causing mental or physiological pressure on them.
Increase Your Odds of Success With Our
- Scholastic academic documents
- Pocket friendly prices
- Assured reliability, authenticity & excellence
Literature Review
Prevalence of cyberbullying
According to Anderson, Steen & Stavropoulos, (2017) it was included that social media and use of electronic means is very much increased in today’s environment leading to major positive and negative impact on people and their mental health as well. The major effect could be bully and harassment which is caused by some other people or group of people in respect of any post or picture which anyone is putting on net or their social media profile as well. There are many forms of cyberbullying which are taking place in current time including like that of sexual remarks, impersonation, stalking, outing, harassing and they all could be repeated behaviour of those socially active persons. Thus resulting in many types of outcomes like that of lower down self-esteem, suicidal ideation, anxiety, depression and scared as well. This is also increasing higher authorities and governments to pass law regarding this cyberbullying and many extended up to cyber harassment in reports and case filed by local police.
As per Arseneault, (2018) it was also laid down that there are number of serious cases of victims attempting to suicides and some of them succeeding into it as well. This is also linked and associated with internet trolling which is like that of bullying or harassing one person in online community in disruption manner.
Cyberbullying and its associated psychological outcomes
Various Spears & Karklins, (2015) suggested that this cyberbullying could be mainly leading to linked or associated with psychological outcomes like that of anxiety, depression and self-esteem or selfest. As this is form of harassment which is caused by electronic means like that of phones, laptops and all other devices through reaching target from use of text messages, social networking sites etc., it was included that if this went unnoticed by any close person of that bullied victim then its effect could be seen and felt in real life as well and causing to catastrophic significances. There are certain big examples from lives of people who are serious victims of this cyberbullying and this is thus impacting real life. Hamm & Hartling, (2015) included that increased emotional distress this is the immediate reaction of victim of cyberbullying like that of anger, frustration and grief. Thus causing them huge amount of stress and online harmfulness to those people who get bullied and people who are around them who seriously could help them are not been able to identify actual problems.
As per Nixon, (2014) this cyberbullying could also be causing lowered down of self-esteem, confidence and image of self in own sense. This lends to reduce the confidence and realisation of people in front of people whom they know like peers and colleagues. It could be greatly analysed that if children or young people are behaving just opposite of their current or known behaviour then it could be high time to look into what is happening in their personal or social media life. This is the most basic effect of cyberbullying on psychological health outcomes among young adults in Australia as per author.
Studies have also showed that victim of cyberbullying would be different in psychological health outcome as that compared to non-victims. They start sometimes following or copying various lifestyles in their relationship on varies frequent bases as per John, & Hawton, (2018) it was included.
Cyberbullying and coping
It was included that cyberbullying is also linked and associated with copying of lifestyle of other people who are mostly their followers. So there must be effective strategies which is helping victim of cyberbullying to cope up with their current situation from getting it worse enough. Cross, Barnes & Lester, (2015) included that there are various methods to cope up bullying especially that of cyberbullying which would be defined to as behaviour of individual in way to get response in positive form with this approach of harassment. Thus it would be helping them to come up and manage to eliminate problem by nullifying the negative impact and handling their emotional response. One of the best strategy could be identified as like that of transactional model which is associated with problem or emotional focused (Aboujaoude, Savage & Salame, 2015). But many times victims of cyberbullying would be applying numerous strategies of coping up so it would be analysed that it is having very difficult.
Theories of human development
According to Spears & Karklins, (2015) it was said that in Psychoanalytic theory was giving major attention to issues like that of instinct, unconscious and determinism of humans which was founded by Sigmund Freud. Under this highlighted was made on vital role at time of early childhood and experience of that time. It was noted in this theory that all objects would be classified to as means of satisfying instinct of people that is only till certain time driving them for pleasure in their early life as well. Whereas author included that another theory of human development could be that of psychosocial development that was propounded by Erik Erikson. In this theory Erik also focused on childhood behaviour and all challenges that are linked up with social development.
In this theory it was included that behaviour of human would be depended upon biological and genetic origin and with the direct influence of environment forces at the time. In this theory there were 8 stages of developmental and each of them would be representing individual with that of growth task of individual and thus it was termed as crises.
Research aim:
The effects of cyberbullying on psychological health outcomes among young adults in Australia.
Research question and hypotheses
Hypothesis 1:
Null hypothesis (H0): There is no significant difference takes place in the mean score of self-esteem, anxiety, and depression across the different victimisation groups.
Alternative hypothesis (H1): There is a significant difference takes place in the mean score of self-esteem, anxiety, and depression across the different victimisation groups.
Hypothesis 2:
Null hypothesis (H0): There is no statistically significant difference takes place in the mean value of cyber-bullying, a psychological outcome/
Alternative hypothesis (H1): There is a statistically significant difference takes place in the mean value of cyber-bullying, a psychological outcome.
Research Methodology
Research type:
To have the effective research study this study will be comprises with quantitative techniques. Therefore, these are the methods which will be beneficial for researches as to analyse the large sources of data with the help of statistical tools. Therefore, it will bring the accurate and clear determination of the facts as well as proper reasons regarding the changes into operations.
Research approach and philosophy:
The research approach will be consist of positivism philosophy. Therefore, there will be consideration of all the relevant data and information which will be collected and analysed and used to have appropriate increment In the knowledge. Moreover, it brings the accurate analysis through the behaviour and preferences of the mass people and growth towards the research issues. Therefore, it will bring the analysed outcomes to the professionals as to have clear analysis over all the issues.
Data analysis:
It comprises with the collection of data and details through various sources which in turn will be effective and helpful as to have appropriate research. Therefore, there will be influences of various techniques such as sampling, primary and secondary sources of data collection however, in relation with this research study, there has been collection of data through secondary sources which were beings analysed and studies as to have clear assessment of the operations (Research Methodology, 2018).
Data Analysis And Findings
In this, statistical tools (SPSS) have been used by the researcher to assess the extent to which aspects in relation to cyberbullying are prevailed among young adults. Statistical tools are highly significant which in turn helps in assessing the level to which psychological health outcomes of cyberbullying victims differ from another or non-victims. In this, mean assessment of the concerned variables such as anxiety, depression etc have been done for meeting research objectives.
Frequencies
Statistics |
|||
VICTLEV |
|||
N |
Valid |
224 |
|
Missing |
0 |
||
VICTLEV |
||||||
Frequency |
Percent |
Valid Percent |
Cumulative Percent |
|||
Valid |
NEVER |
79 |
35.3 |
35.3 |
35.3 |
|
SINGLE |
104 |
46.4 |
46.4 |
81.7 |
||
REPEATED |
41 |
18.3 |
18.3 |
100.0 |
||
Total |
224 |
100.0 |
100.0 |
|||
Interpretation: The above depicted table shows that 35.3% individuals fall into the category never victimized. Further, survey’s results clearly exhibit that 46.4% young people suffered from cyber-bulling aspect one or single time. Outcome of survey presents that 18.3% youngsters were faced issue of cyberbullying repeatedly.
Crosstabs
Case Processing Summary |
||||||||
Cases |
||||||||
Valid |
Missing |
Total |
||||||
N |
Percent |
N |
Percent |
N |
Percent |
|||
ANXIETY * VICTLEV |
224 |
100.0% |
0 |
0.0% |
224 |
100.0% |
||
ANXIETY * VICTLEV Crosstabulation |
|||||||
Count |
|||||||
VICTLEV |
Total |
||||||
NEVER |
SINGLE |
REPEATED |
|||||
ANXIETY |
.92 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
||
1.00 |
21 |
16 |
6 |
43 |
|||
1.25 |
10 |
23 |
8 |
41 |
|||
1.50 |
11 |
13 |
3 |
27 |
|||
1.62 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
|||
1.75 |
2 |
10 |
4 |
16 |
|||
2.00 |
9 |
12 |
5 |
26 |
|||
2.25 |
1 |
6 |
1 |
8 |
|||
2.50 |
7 |
1 |
6 |
14 |
|||
2.75 |
5 |
2 |
1 |
8 |
|||
2.79 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
|||
3.00 |
3 |
5 |
3 |
11 |
|||
3.25 |
2 |
4 |
0 |
6 |
|||
3.50 |
1 |
5 |
1 |
7 |
|||
3.75 |
2 |
2 |
1 |
5 |
|||
4.00 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
2 |
|||
4.25 |
1 |
2 |
0 |
3 |
|||
4.50 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
2 |
|||
4.75 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
|||
5.00 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
|||
Total |
79 |
104 |
41 |
224 |
Crosstabs: SELFEST * VICTLEV
Case Processing Summary |
||||||||
Cases |
||||||||
Valid |
Missing |
Total |
||||||
N |
Percent |
N |
Percent |
N |
Percent |
|||
SELFEST * VICTLEV |
224 |
100.0% |
0 |
0.0% |
224 |
100.0% |
||
SELFEST * VICTLEV Crosstabulation |
||||||||||
Count |
||||||||||
VICTLEV |
Total |
|||||||||
NEVER |
SINGLE |
REPEATED |
||||||||
SELFEST |
1.00 |
0 |
0 |
2 |
2 |
|||||
1.25 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
||||||
1.38 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
||||||
1.50 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
||||||
1.75 |
1 |
1 |
2 |
4 |
||||||
1.88 |
1 |
1 |
2 |
4 |
||||||
2.00 |
1 |
3 |
2 |
6 |
||||||
2.13 |
3 |
7 |
3 |
13 |
||||||
2.23 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
||||||
2.25 |
4 |
1 |
1 |
6 |
||||||
2.36 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
||||||
2.38 |
2 |
5 |
1 |
8 |
||||||
2.50 |
2 |
10 |
0 |
12 |
||||||
2.63 |
7 |
1 |
4 |
12 |
||||||
2.75 |
4 |
13 |
2 |
19 |
||||||
2.88 |
4 |
7 |
4 |
15 |
||||||
3.00 |
5 |
2 |
2 |
9 |
||||||
3.13 |
7 |
5 |
2 |
14 |
||||||
3.25 |
8 |
7 |
1 |
16 |
||||||
3.38 |
7 |
5 |
2 |
14 |
||||||
3.50 |
3 |
12 |
2 |
17 |
||||||
3.63 |
6 |
5 |
4 |
15 |
||||||
3.75 |
4 |
6 |
0 |
10 |
||||||
3.88 |
5 |
3 |
3 |
11 |
||||||
4.00 |
5 |
6 |
1 |
12 |
||||||
Total |
79 |
104 |
41 |
224 |
||||||
Crosstabs: DEPRESS * VICTLEV
Case Processing Summary |
||||||||
Cases |
||||||||
Valid |
Missing |
Total |
||||||
N |
Percent |
N |
Percent |
N |
Percent |
|||
DEPRESS * VICTLEV |
224 |
100.0% |
0 |
0.0% |
224 |
100.0% |
||
DEPRESS * VICTLEV Crosstabulation |
||||||
Count |
||||||
VICTLEV |
Total |
|||||
NEVER |
SINGLE |
REPEATED |
||||
DEPRESS |
1.00 |
4 |
10 |
1 |
15 |
|
1.20 |
10 |
13 |
2 |
25 |
||
1.40 |
8 |
6 |
4 |
18 |
||
1.57 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
||
1.60 |
8 |
4 |
2 |
14 |
||
1.75 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
||
1.80 |
8 |
14 |
2 |
24 |
||
2.00 |
6 |
9 |
5 |
20 |
||
2.20 |
5 |
8 |
6 |
19 |
||
2.40 |
2 |
6 |
0 |
8 |
||
2.60 |
6 |
11 |
3 |
20 |
||
2.80 |
5 |
6 |
2 |
13 |
||
3.00 |
7 |
1 |
2 |
10 |
||
3.20 |
3 |
3 |
2 |
8 |
||
3.40 |
1 |
3 |
1 |
5 |
||
3.60 |
1 |
2 |
1 |
4 |
||
3.80 |
1 |
4 |
1 |
6 |
||
4.00 |
1 |
2 |
3 |
6 |
||
4.20 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
2 |
||
4.40 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
||
4.60 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
2 |
||
4.80 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
||
5.00 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
||
Total |
79 |
104 |
41 |
224 |
||
Means
Case Processing Summary |
||||||||
Cases |
||||||||
Included |
Excluded |
Total |
||||||
N |
Percent |
N |
Percent |
N |
Percent |
|||
ANXIETY * VICTLEV |
224 |
100.0% |
0 |
0.0% |
224 |
100.0% |
||
SELFEST * VICTLEV |
224 |
100.0% |
0 |
0.0% |
224 |
100.0% |
||
DEPRESS * VICTLEV |
224 |
100.0% |
0 |
0.0% |
224 |
100.0% |
||
Report |
|||||
VICTLEV |
ANXIETY |
SELFEST |
DEPRESS |
||
NEVER |
Mean |
1.8887 |
3.0981 |
2.0876 |
|
N |
79 |
79 |
79 |
||
Std. Deviation |
.95450 |
.57689 |
.79453 |
||
SINGLE |
Mean |
1.9122 |
2.9720 |
2.1442 |
|
N |
104 |
104 |
104 |
||
Std. Deviation |
.89715 |
.63028 |
.86729 |
||
REPEATED |
Mean |
2.0061 |
2.7409 |
2.5902 |
|
N |
41 |
41 |
41 |
||
Std. Deviation |
.89702 |
.80156 |
1.06673 |
||
Total |
Mean |
1.9211 |
2.9742 |
2.2059 |
|
N |
224 |
224 |
224 |
||
Std. Deviation |
.91461 |
.65619 |
.89791 |
||
ANOVA Table |
||||||||
Sum of Squares |
df |
Mean Square |
F |
Sig. |
||||
ANXIETY * VICTLEV |
Between Groups |
(Combined) |
.388 |
2 |
.194 |
.230 |
.795 |
|
Linearity |
.322 |
1 |
.322 |
.382 |
.537 |
|||
Deviation from Linearity |
.065 |
1 |
.065 |
.078 |
.781 |
|||
Within Groups |
186.153 |
221 |
.842 |
|||||
Total |
186.541 |
223 |
||||||
SELFEST * VICTLEV |
Between Groups |
(Combined) |
3.446 |
2 |
1.723 |
4.113 |
.018 |
|
Linearity |
3.299 |
1 |
3.299 |
7.876 |
.005 |
|||
Deviation from Linearity |
.146 |
1 |
.146 |
.350 |
.555 |
|||
Within Groups |
92.576 |
221 |
.419 |
|||||
Total |
96.021 |
223 |
||||||
DEPRESS * VICTLEV |
Between Groups |
(Combined) |
7.557 |
2 |
3.779 |
4.849 |
.009 |
|
Linearity |
5.549 |
1 |
5.549 |
7.121 |
.008 |
|||
Deviation from Linearity |
2.008 |
1 |
2.008 |
2.577 |
.110 |
|||
Within Groups |
172.233 |
221 |
.779 |
|||||
Total |
179.790 |
223 |
||||||
Interpretation: By applying statistical tool on data set it has assessed that p
Measures of Association |
|||||
R |
R Squared |
Eta |
Eta Squared |
||
ANXIETY * VICTLEV |
.042 |
.002 |
.046 |
.002 |
|
SELFEST * VICTLEV |
-.185 |
.034 |
.189 |
.036 |
|
DEPRESS * VICTLEV |
.176 |
.031 |
.205 |
.042 |
|
Discussion
In this current document or report it was studied with according to aim and objective of finding out effects of cyberbullying on psychological health outcomes among young adults in Australia. There were various results which was made like cyberbullying is majorly having its effect on psychological health having on depression and self-esteem while not having on anxiety of young people (Hamm & Hartling, 2015). This result was made after various test and studies that if people are been bullied on social media or other similar platforms then it must be having its effect on psychological health of people.
Cyberbullying on anxiety- it would be having greater than standard value which is 0.05 so it shows no significant difference between mental health and cyberbullying if we are calculating level of victim. The impact of cyberbullying is not be seen or analyzed much on anxiety of people as they are only witnessing level of lowered in self-esteem and higher level of depression as well.
Cyberbullying on depression- it was concluded that there is having very strong relation with depression with that of cyberbullying as there is having significant difference between mental health. In the above part it was also included that the people who were victims of cyberbullying are likely to be affected by depression the most (Anderson, Steen & Stavropoulos, 2017). Victims of cyberbullying could be having greater impact on their psychological health as they are so they been victimized as depressed personalities.
Cyberbullying on self-esteem- it was also seen significant difference between self-esteem and effect of cyberbullying on people who are victims. This shows that if they are been bullied on any type of social media platforms then they would be witnessing bullying in greater and higher number.
Set in Motion the Plan for Exemplary Grades with Our Extensive Academic Writing Services
Premium Assignment Services
References
- Aboujaoude, E., Savage, M. W., & Salame, W. O. (2015). Cyberbullying: Review of an old problem gone viral.Journal of Adolescent Health.57(1). 10-18.
- Anderson, E. L., Steen, E., & Stavropoulos, V. (2017). Internet use and Problematic Internet Use: A systematic review of longitudinal research trends in adolescence and emergent adulthood.International Journal of Adolescence and Youth.22(4). 430-454.
- Arseneault, L. (2018). Annual research review: the persistent and pervasive impact of being bullied in childhood and adolescence: implications for policy and practice.Journal of child psychology and psychiatry.59(4). 405-421.
- Cross, D., Barnes, A., & Lester, L. (2015). A social–ecological framework for understanding and reducing cyberbullying behaviours.Aggression and Violent Behavior.
- Hamm, M. P., & Hartling, L. (2015). Prevalence and effect of cyberbullying on children and young people: A scoping review of social media studies.JAMA pediatrics.169(8). 770-777.
- John, A., & Hawton, K. (2018). Self-harm, suicidal behaviours, and cyberbullying in children and young people: systematic review.Journal of medical internet research.20(4).
- Nixon, C. L. (2014). Current perspectives: the impact of cyberbullying on adolescent health.Adolescent health, medicine and therapeutics.5. 143.
- Spears, B. A., & Karklins, L. T. (2015). Cyberbullying, help-seeking and mental health in young Australians: Implications for public health.International journal of public health.60(2). 219-226.