Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
No publicly archived datasets were created. Data are available upon request to the corresponding Authors.
Cyberbullying can be described as a form of bullying carried out by an individual or a group through digital media with the intention to harm others. It has been recognized as a public health issue recently; however, of the vast literature published in recent years on the phenomenon, only a small part concerns strategies adopted to prevent and combat cyberbullying, and the effectiveness of these strategies appears to be scarce. We conducted a systematic review of the literature published in the last five years about different interventions studied to prevent and contrast cyberbullying. Our results show how most of the strategies currently developed focus on the educational aspect, involving schools and families. Other authors describe technology-based practices to set programs to reduce and prevent cyberbullying through the usage of digital instruments, the same used by minors themselves. Finally, remaining tactics use a more comprehensive approach, mixing tools already in use in the aforementioned strategies. Cyberbullying requires wide-ranging methods to combat it, involving the contribution of mental health professionals, educators, and digital experts cooperating synergically. Prevention and contrast instruments should be defined, implemented, tested, and combined in order to deal with cyberbullying.
Keywords: cyberbullying, adolescents, prevention strategies, interventionsAlthough the Internet is characterized by many positive aspects for the personal and social development of young people (e.g., it permits to stay in contact with people all over the world and at any time), it has also accelerated the emergence of risky situations and digital forms of violence against them not only at the hands of adults but also through adolescents themselves [1,2].
This emergency is worsening because of the COVID-19 outbreak, which led governments to impose unprecedented stay-at-home orders to limit its transmission [3]. This has drastically reduced the rate of school attendance and ability for students to engage in proximity, resulting in traditional education methods’ replacement by the online learning format, conducted via digital services and devices, including e-mail, mobile phones, and social networking services (SNS). Noticeably, the more time children and adolescents spend on digital services, the more likely it is that they are exposed to digital violence, both nationally and internationally [4]. An example of this phenomenon is cyberbullying, which has emerged as a social and health concern, being recognized as a public health issue over the past few years [5]. Some contributions found in the literature have highlighted how an early intervention on the educational level is most appropriate [6,7].
At present, there is not a unified definition of cyberbullying in the world. Cyberbullying, in its broadest sense, can be defined as a form of bullying carried out by an individual or a group of perpetrators through electronic or digital media with the intention to harm others (it may include making fun of others, isolating, and spreading rumours about others) that involves repeatedly sending aggressive messages or other similar actions [8,9], or, according to the definition given by the Cyberbullying Research Centre, cyberbullying is “wilful and repeated harm inflicted through the use of computers, cell phones, and other electronic devices” [10].
In this sense, cyberbullying is a form of traditional school bullying for which ICT has provided a new platform. Recent studies have demonstrated that cyberbullying is positively connected with actual bullying: in other words, those who bullied others online were also more likely to bully others in real life and vice versa [11,12]. Considering that cyberbullying a new form of bullying, it too represents a dynamic of abuse of power exercised by a person, the bully, over another, the bullied, through aggressive and repeated behaviours that impact the victim’s private and social life [13]. However, there are other actors on this scene: supporters and bystanders, the first encouraging the perpetrator and the latter maintaining a neutral position [14].
As much as traditional bullying, cyberbullying can have long-term effects for its adolescent victims, with technology being one of the more important risk factors. Both cyberbullying victims and perpetrators are heavy Internet and mobile phone users and are more likely to engage in online risky behaviours than those not involved in cyberbullying with any role [15].
Within the recent past, many students have been aware that cyberbullying can have a terrible impact on the physical and mental health of teenagers, such as heartbreak, embarrassment, humiliation, and marginalization. Additionally, in a great number of cases, the cyberbullied develop anxiety, depression, and suicidal tendencies [16].
If we focus on the data regarding the prevalence of this problem, we can see that interest in this phenomenon has increased in recent years, with more and more data becoming available since the first study in the U.S. in 2000 [17]. Symbolic of this is that, for example, in Italy, specific rules for the prevention and the contrast to cyberbullying among adolescents were introduced only in 2017, with the law n. 71/2017, which does not introduce any type of crime related to the conducts of cyberbullies but launches some mechanisms useful to hinder it, avoiding the ignition of the criminal process. This law provides a legal definition of the phenomenon and indicates the role of schools in cyberbullying prevention, education, and rehabilitation through specific teachers’ training and the appointment of a referee among them in charge of coordination of prevention and contrast programs. This law introduces also a deadline of 24 h for an Internet website manager to take down a content after receiving a request for removal [18].
However, in face of the vast literature published in recent years on the phenomenon of cyberbullying, only a small part concerns the strategies adopted to prevent and combat this phenomenon, and the effectiveness of these strategies appears to be scarce.
This work constitutes a systematic review focused on illustrating what has been published in the literature in the last five years, from 2017 to 2022, in order to verify the effectiveness of the strategies adopted to combat the phenomenon of cyberbullying.
This review was performed in adherence with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines [19]. A systematic literature review regarding strategies or interventions adopted to address the cyberbullying phenomenon was conducted using a public electronic database (PubMed) using the following query strings separately: “cyberbullying adolescent survey”, “cyberbullying children survey”, “adolescent cyberbullying interventions”, “adolescent cyberbullying strategies”, “children cyberbullying interventions”, and “children cyberbullying strategies”, identifying a total of 1670 articles. The last search was performed on 31 March 2022.
Duplicates (n = 927) were then removed. Articles published before 2017 (n = 220) were excluded, and filters “English, Abstract, Full Text” were added, excluding other 10 papers and leaving a total of 513 articles to be screened.
Results management was performed with the use of Microsoft Office software such as Excel and Word. Zotero software was used to edit and organize the bibliography.
Two of the reviewers (O.C. and E.M.) carried out the initial search of the papers. In case of disagreements, the consensus of research supervisors (L.C. and P.T.) was required. Articles selected using the forementioned strings and filters were screened first through titles, then through abstracts, and lastly through a full paper’s reading. Reasons of exclusion were defined as non-relevance, intervention or strategy only descripted but not tested, and population sample consisting of adults.
A total of 405 articles were excluded after title reading and another 62 after abstract reading. In total, 46 articles were examined in full text for eligibility.
After full-text examination, 29 studies published between 2017 and 2022 were selected for qualitative synthesis.
The number of articles included and excluded at each step are reported in the PRISMA flowchart ( Figure 1 ).
Preferred Reporting Items for Systemic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) 2020 flow diagram.
In order to make the results obtained in the current review more comprehensible to the reader, we organized the selected articles into four categories based on the type of intervention/strategy studied: (a) educational strategies involving school or families; (b) digital strategies; (c) hybrid strategies; and (d) other strategies.
We grouped in this category all strategies that involved a path of educational interventions at multiple levels. The settings in which these programs take place involve mainly schools and, in some cases, families or both.
The majority of studies included in this category focus attention on educational activities carried out in school settings during schooltime hours ( Figure 2 ).
This figure summarizes descriptions and objectives of the educational strategies involving school that will be presented below. The name of the strategy is reported in orange boxes. Yellow boxes contain different strategies’ descriptions, while objectives are stated in the green boxes.
In 2018, Schoeps et al. [20] studied an emotional education intervention in the Spanish school setting: PREDEMA. This program was designed with the aim of promoting classroom coexistence (and thus reducing cyberbullying) and subjective well-being. A trained psychologist held the sessions that all started with a personal experience discussed in order to draw a lesson from it and use it for future situations. Students were given home activities and a worksheet to register their daily experience. Results collected immediately after the intervention showed that cyberaggression and cybervictimization had reduced significantly in the experimental group compared to control group, and this effect was still effective at 6 months after the end of the program.
In 2019, Guarini et al. [21] explored the effects of a short intervention developed in Italy (RPC, “Relazioni per crescere”—Relationships to Grow) on students’ increased awareness of cyberbullying phenomenon and coping strategies. This program was entirely delivered through teachers previously trained by expert psychologists. In-class activities focused on digital literacy, education on cyberbullying, empathy training, and coping skills improvement. Teachers actively involved students through brainstorming, teamwork, role-playing, and production of posters, slogans, and pictures. This intervention was performed for a period of two months. In the questionnaires administered after that, the number of students acknowledging the different roles in cyberbullying increased, and mentioning keywords related to victimization doubled compared to what had been detected before the intervention. Similar effects were found for coping strategies, whereas a non-significant reduction of cyberbullying or cybervictimization emerged.
In 2019, Ferrer-Cascales et al. [22] examined the effectiveness of Spanish TEI (“Tutoría Entre Iguales”—Peer Tutoring) Program focused on the ecological model of peer tutoring. The goal of the program is promoting the improvement of school climate and the promotion of positive school coexistence through developing problem-solving strategies. To do so, given the main role played by peer tutors, teachers, as coordinators, and parents as well are involved in the implementation of the program. Results proved the program was successful in the reduction of fighting, bullying, and cyberbullying victimization and on school climate improvement.
In 2019, Tiiri et al. [23] explored the implication of the introduction of a nationwide anti-bullying program (KiVa) in Finnish schools in 2009. This whole-school intervention considers bullying a group phenomenon and works on reducing bystanders and, in doing so, reducing support for bullies and their motivation to bully. This program focuses mainly on preventing traditional bullying. Results, however, showed a reduction of bullying victimization (especially for boys) and a reduction of frequent cyberbullying victimization only for boys. On the other hand, the sense of security at school increased significantly. In the discussion, the authors highlighted that, although KiVa promotes a strong bystander approach, only 31% of the adolescents reported that other students always or usually tried to stop bullying. They suggest, as an interpretation of the reduction of victimization, a change in the culture since Finland had frequent media coverage on the theme. KiVa targets classroom norms and behaviours in groups, and they differ from those of online social networks.
In 2019, in the USA, Acosta et al. [24] studied the impact of the Restorative Practices Intervention, hypothesizing that a positive school environment, which can be created through a training of emotional skills and by developing relationships with adults, can lead adolescents to experience or perpetrate fewer incidents of bullying. Results showed that Restorative Practices Interventions did not affect cyberbullying but reported the best intervention experiences thanks to their teachers’ actions, reporting less cybervictimization. Hence, even if the intervention itself did not prove effective, a positive effect of a good school environment on cyberbullying indirectly emerged, suggesting that interventions that target improving educational environments are to be considered.
In 2019, Del Rey et al. [25] presented the Asegùrate Program’s impact on cyberbullying. This intervention, developed in Spain, targets teachers, but it overcomes other programs’ need for teachers to take part in costly training processes. In fact, the key component of the Asegùrate Program is The Teachers’ Manual, which instructs on how to conduct the eight sessions planned. Along with the manual, worksheets, and instructions for presenting the program in the classroom, a guide to work together with children’s families and audio–visual materials to be used with pupils were provided. Schools were divided in two groups, of which one carried out the intervention, and the other did not. Both the roles of cybervictim and aggressor were notably lowered in the experimental group after the intervention compared with the control group.
In 2020, in England, Bonell et al. [26] implemented the knowledge of the Learning Together Program by studying its long-term effects (at 24 and 36 months after the intervention). The target of this intervention was creating a more engaging school environment using “restorative approaches” to address conflict, involving students in the revision of data on student experience, and using those to implement school policies and providing an emotional skills curriculum. “Restorative practices” include primary prevention of conflict (through activities aimed at bringing students together and encouraging them to build new relationships) and secondary prevention to resolve incidences once they occur, holding conferences to discuss them together. The present analysis explored the effect on other outcomes, and it found that intervention schools showed lower rates of cyberbullying victimization than control schools at 24 months, whereas at 36 months, they showed reduced rates of cyberbullying perpetration but not victimization. Authors explained this inconsistency of results across time points as a result of chance.
In 2021, Agley et al. [27] explored the effectiveness of ACT Out!, a social issue theatre tested in Indiana, whose scenarios are specifically designed to meet the audience’s needs, although its performances, which were attended during school hours, are improvisational and interactive. The principle upon which this intervention is founded is catharsis, through which a dramatic performance can convey new ways of perception about a situation, in this case, new ways of feeling and thinking about behaviours and attitudes. Although results did not show a superiority of 1 h ACT Out! intervention compared to the standard treatment offered to the control group, evidence of a small reduction of cyberbullying victimization was found, suggesting a promising application of this new type of intervention in view of its particularly short duration.
In 2021, Zafra et al. [28] examined the impact of police information sessions on bullying and cyberviolence held during school time in Spain. Questionnaires self-administered 15 to 30 days after the meeting showed the low impact of this intervention in preventing and clarifying bullying since low perception of bullying involvement and high percentage of inadequate reaction to witnessing bullying episodes emerged.
In 2022, Peng et al. [29] analysed a new intervention and conducted a pilot study in China through some classroom sessions held by graduate students majoring in Public Health, in which various activities were conducted: an introduction on the topic (definition and consequences of bullying), distribution of bullying educational leaflets, playing videos on the consequences of bullying, and a class meeting on strategies to adopt to deal with or prevent bullying. Results showed an increase in awareness of bullying in the experimental group compared to the control group, and cybervictimization decreased significantly in the experimental group compared to the control group. However, there was no significant reduction in cyberbullying.
In 2022, Bright et al. [30], starting from a randomized control trial (RCT) lasting two years, aimed to evaluate the knowledge acquisition of children receiving the Monique Burr Foundation’s Child Safety Matters curriculum in Florida schools (across eight countries), which consists of a program conceived to educate children, from kindergarten to grade 5, about bullying, cyberbullying, four types of abuse (physical, sexual, emotional, and neglect), and digital dangers. Findings illustrate that, on one hand, children who received the curriculum increased their knowledge about potentially risky situations, and on the other hand, children in the control schools did not have similar gains. Therefore, this program is a promising strategy to address children’s vulnerability to cyberbullying and its consequences.
Studies involving families describe strategies aimed at sensitizing their members to gain greater control of the online activity of minors and at educating them to recognize warning signs in the behaviour of their children and to address eventual problems with them ( Figure 3 ).
