Here is the research we’ve found on cyberbullying in Estonia, with the most recent first. Please email us if you have any articles to add with the details ordered in the same format as the others.


Authors: Berne, S., Frisén A., Schultze-Krumbholz, A., Scheithauer, H., Naruskov, K., Luik, P., Katzer, C., Erentaite, R., Zukauskiene, R.

Year: 2013

Title: Cyberbullying assessment instruments: A systematic review

Journal: Aggression and Violent Behavior

URL: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.avb.2012.11.022

Abstract: Although several instruments to assess cyberbullying have been developed, there is nevertheless a lack of knowledge about their psychometric properties. The aim of the present systematic review is to provide a representative overview of the current instruments designed to assess cyberbullying. Further, emphasis will be placed on the structural and psychometric properties of cyberbullying instruments, such as validity and reliability, as well as their conceptual and definitional bases. It will also provide criteria for readers to evaluate and choose instruments according to their own aims. A systematic literature review, limited to publications published prior to October 2010, generated 636 citations. A total of 61 publications fulfilled the delineated selection criteria and were included in the review, resulting in 44 instruments. Following a rater training, relevant information was coded by using a structured coding manual. The raters were the nine authors of this review. Almost half of the instruments included in this review do not use the concept of cyberbullying. The constructs measured by the instruments range from internet harassment behavior to electronic bullying behavior to cyberbullying. Even though many of the authors use other concepts than cyberbullying they claim that their instruments do measure it. For the purpose of this systematic review, we have chosen to categorize them as two different groups, cyberbullying instruments and related instruments. Additionally, most of the included instruments had limited reports of reliability and validity testing. The systematic review reveals a need for investigating the validity and reliability of most of the existing instruments, and resolving the conceptual and definitional fluctuations related to cyberbullying.

Citation: Berne, S., Frisén, A., Schultze-Krumbholz, A., Scheithauer, H., Naruskov, K., Luik, P., Zukauskiene, R. (2013). Cyberbullying assessment instruments: A systematic review. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 18(2), 320–334. doi: 10.1016/j.avb.2012.11.022

 


 

Author(s): Naruskov, K., Luik, P., Nocentini, A., & Menesini, E.

Year: 2012

Title: Estonian students’ perception and definition of cyberbullying.

Journal: TRAMES: A Journal of the Humanities & Social Sciences

URL: http://www.eap.ee/public/trames_pdf/2012/issue_4/trames-2012-4-323-343.pdf

Abstract: Rapid development of information and communication technologies is having a direct impact on the lives of adolescents, and a new form of bullying has emerged. This study aims to examine how Estonian students perceive and define cyberbullying based on five cyberbullying criteria (imbalance of power, intention, repetition, anonymity, and publicity/privacy) and four types of cyberbullying behaviour (written-verbal, visual, exclusion, and impersonation). A quali-quanti approach was used consisting of focus groups and a questionnaire. Two mixed-gender focus groups of 12- and 15-year-old students were interviewed to deepen their perception in relation to cyberbullying criteria and behaviours. Results were used for the quantitative study. The questionnaire was conducted with 336 adolescents from twelve Estonian schools, aged from 11 to 17 years. Results by MDS revealed a two-dimensional model characterized by imbalance of power and anonymity. This study can help to improve understanding of the phenomenon with respect to student perceptions.

Citation: Naruskov, K., Luik, P., Nocentini, A., & Menesini, E. (2012). Estonian students’ perception and definition of cyberbullying. TRAMES: A Journal of the Humanities & Social Sciences, 16(4), 323-343.