This study investigated adolescents’ understanding of cyber dating aggression in terms of frequency and aggressiveness: how prevalent they perceived cyber dating aggression among adolescents and how aggressive they perceived such behaviors to be. To do so, different WhatsApp scenarios were presented to adolescents, controlling for the typology of cyber dating aggression (verbal/emotional, controlling, or sexual) and its publicity (public or private cyber dating aggression). The moderating effect of gender and moral disengagement (MD) was also analyzed. A total of 262 adolescents (56.5% girls; mean age of 14.46 years) participated in the study and answered a computer-based questionnaire. General linear models revealed that adolescents consider cyber dating aggression to be present in most adolescent romantic relationships. Controlling online behavior was perceived as the most frequent and the least aggressive behavior. Adolescents rated private cyber aggression as more frequent and less aggressive than public cyber aggressions. Controlling for gender, girls reported that cyber dating aggression was more common and more severe than boys. Moreover, participants with high levels of MD perceived cyber dating aggressions to be less aggressive than participants with medium-low MD. This study reveals the significance of the type of cyber dating aggression, the public/private dimension, gender, and MD as variables that influence adolescent understanding of cyber dating aggression. These results have implications not only for the design of cyber dating aggression prevention programs but also for future research on cyber dating aggression.
ArriagaX. B., CapezzaN. M., GoodfriendW., & AllsopK. E. (2018). The invisible harm of downplaying a romantic partner’s aggression. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 27(4), 275–280. http://doi.org/10.1177/0963721417754198
2.
BakerC. K., & CarreñoP. K. (2016). Understanding the role of technology in adolescent dating and dating violence. Journal of child and family studies, 25(1), 308–320. http://doi.org/10.1007/s10826-015-0196-5
3.
BakerC. K., & HelmS. (2010). Pacific youth and shifting thresholds: Understanding teen dating violence in Hawai‘i. Journal of School Violence, 9(2), 154–173. http://doi.org/10.1080/15388220903585879
4.
BanduraA. (1991). Social cognitive theory of moral thought and action. In W. M. Kurtines & J. L. Gewirtz (Eds.), Handbook of moral behaviour and development, Vol. 1: Theory (pp. 45-103). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
5.
BanduraA., BarbaranelliC., CapraraG., & PastorelliC. (1996). Mechanisms of moral disengagement in the exercise of moral agency. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71(2), 364–374. http://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.71.2.364
6.
BaumanS. (2010). Cyberbullying in a rural intermediate school: An exploratory study. The Journal of Early Adolescence, 30(6), 803–833. http://doi.org/10.1177/0272431609350927
7.
BennettD. C., GuranE. L., RamosM. C., & MargolinG. (2011). College students’ electronic victimization in friendships and dating relationships: Anticipated distress and associations with risky behaviors. Violence and victims, 26(4), 410–429. http://doi.org/10.1891/0886-6708.26.4.410
8.
BorrajoE., Gámez-GuadixM., & CalveteE. (2015). Creencias justificadoras de la violencia, mitos sobre el amor y abuso online en el noviazgo [Justification beliefs of violence, myths about love and cyber dating abuse]. Psicothema, 27(4), 327–333. http://doi.org/10.7334/psicothema2015.59
9.
BronfenbrennerU., & MorrisP. A. (2007). The bioecological model of human development. In W. Damon & R. M. Lerner (Eds.), Handbook of child psychology (6th ed., Vol. 1, pp. 793-828). John Wiley & Sons. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470147658.chpsy0114
10.
BurénJ., & LundeC. (2018). Sexting among adolescents: A nuanced and gendered online challenge for young people. Computers in Human Behavior, 85, 210–217. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2018.02.003
11.
BusseyK., LuoA., FitzpatrickS., & AllisonK. (2020). Defending victims of cyberbullying: The role of self-efficacy and moral disengagement. Journal of School Psychology, 78, 1-12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2019.11.006
12.
CohenE. L., BowmanN. D., & BorchertK. (2014). Private flirts, public friends: Understanding romantic jealousy responses to an ambiguous social network site message as a function of message access exclusivity. Computers in Human Behavior, 35, 535–541. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.02.050
13.
Cuadrado-GordilloI., & Fernández-AnteloI. (2016). Adolescents’ perception of the characterizing dimensions of cyberbullying: Differentiation between bullies’ and victims’ perceptions. Computers in Human Behavior, 55, 653–663. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.10.005
14.
CutbushS., & WilliamsJ. (2016). Teen dating violence, sexual harassment, and bullying among middle school youth: Examining measurement invariance by gender. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 26(4), 918–926. http://doi.org/10.1111/jora.12244
15.
CutbushS., WilliamsJ., MillerS., GibbsD., & Clinton-SherrodM. (2021). Longitudinal patterns of electronic teen dating violence among middle school students. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 36(5-6), 2506-2526. http://doi.org/10.1177/0886260518758326
16.
DanielT. A., & CampA. L. (2020). Emojis affect processing fluency on social media. Psychology of Popular Media, 9(2), 208–213. http://doi.org/10.1037/ppm0000219
17.
DickR. N., McCauleyH. L., JonesK. A., TancrediD. J., GoldsteinS., BlackburnS., MonasterioE., JamesL., SilvermanJ., & MillerE. (2014). Cyber dating abuse among teens using school-based health centers. Pediatrics, 134(6), e1560–e1567. http://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2014-0537
18.
DrouinM., RossJ., & TobinE. (2015). Sexting: A new, digital vehicle for intimate partner aggression. Computers in Human Behavior, 50, 197–204. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.04.001
19.
FosheeV. A., ReyesH. L. M., ChenM. S., EnnettS. T., BasileK. C., DeGueS., Vivolo-KantorA. M., MoraccoK. E., & BowlingJ. M. (2016). Shared risk factors for the perpetration of physical dating violence, bullying, and sexual harassment among adolescents exposed to domestic violence. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 45(4), 672-686. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-015-0404-z
20.
GiniG., PozzoliT., & HymelS. (2014). Moral disengagement among children and youth: A meta-analytic review of links to aggressive behavior. Aggressive Behavior, 40(1), 56–68. http://doi.org/10.1002/ab.21502
21.
KernsmithP. D., VictorB. G., & Smith-DardenJ. P. (2018). Online, offline, and over the line: Coercive sexting among adolescent dating partners. Youth & Society, 50(7), 891–904. http://doi.org/10.1177/0044118X18764040
22.
KorchmarosJ. D., YbarraM. L., Langhinrichsen-RohlingJ., BoydD., & LenhartA. (2013). Perpetration of teen dating violence in a networked society. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 16(8), 561–567. http://doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2012.0627
23.
LeisringP. A., & GiumettiG. W. (2014). Stick and Stones may break my bones, but abusive text messages also hurt: Development and validation of the cyber psychological abuse scale. Partner Abuse, 5(3), 323–341. http://dx.doi.org/10.1891/1946-6560.5.3.323
24.
LuceroJ. L., WeiszA. N., Smith-DardenJ., & LuceroS. M. (2014). Exploring gender differences: Socially interactive technology use/abuse among dating teens. Affilia: Journal of Women and Social Work, 29(4), 478–491. http://doi.org/10.1177/0886109914522627
25.
MelanderL. A. (2010). College students’ perceptions of intimate partner cyber harassment. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 13(3), 263–268. http://doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2009.0221
26.
MenesiniE., NocentiniA., & CalussiP. (2011). The measurement of cyberbullying: Dimensional structure and relative item severity and discrimination. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 14(5), 267–274. http://doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2010.0002
27.
MenesiniE., Sánchez-JiménezV., FonziA., OrtegaR., CostabileA., & Lo FeudoG. (2003). Moral emotions and bullying: A cross-national comparison of differences between bullies, victims and outsiders. Aggressive Behavior: Official Journal of the International Society for Research on Aggression, 29(6), 515–530. http://doi.org/10.1002/ab.10060
28.
MorelliM., BianchiD., ChirumboloA., & BaioccoR. (2018). The cyber dating violence inventory. Validation of a new scale for online perpetration and victimization among dating partners. European Journal of Developmental Psychology, 15(4), 464–471. http://doi.org/10.1080/17405629.2017.1305885
29.
MorelliM., BianchiD., BaioccoR., PezzutiL., & ChirumboloA. (2016). Not-allowed sharing of sexts and dating violence from the perpetrator’s perspective: The moderation role of sexism. Computers in Human Behavior, 56, 163–169. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.11.047
30.
MuiseA., ChristofidesE., & DesmaraisS. (2014). “Creeping” or just information seeking? Gender differences in partner monitoring in response to jealousy on Facebook. Personal Relationships, 21(1), 35–50. http://doi.org/10.1111/pere.12014
31.
NiolonP. H., KearnsM., DillsJ., RamboK., IrvingS., ArmsteadT., & GilbertL. (2017). Preventing intimate partner violence across the lifespan: A technical package of programs, policies, and practices. National Center for Injury Prevention and Control, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
32.
NocentiniA., CalmaestraJ., Schultze-KrumbholzA., ScheithauerH., OrtegaR., & MenesiniE. (2010). Cyberbullying: Labels, behaviours and definition in three European countries. Journal of Psychologists and Counsellors in Schools, 20(2), 129–142. http://doi.org/10.1375/ajgc.20.2.129
33.
PacielloM., TramontanoC., NocentiniA., FidaR., & MenesiniE. (2020). The role of traditional and online moral disengagement on cyberbullying: Do externalising problems make any difference? Computers in Human Behavior, 103, 190–198. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2019.09.024
34.
PalladinoB. E., MenesiniE., NocentiniA., LuikP., NaruskovK., UcanokZ., DoganA., Schultze-KrumbholzA., HessM., & ScheithauerH. (2017). Perceived severity of cyberbullying: Differences and similarities across four countries. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, 1524. http://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01524
35.
PattonD. U., HongJ. S., RanneyM., PatelS., KelleyC., EschmannR., & WashingtonT. (2014). Social media as a vector for youth violence: A review of the literature. Computers in Human Behavior, 35, 548–553. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.02.043
36.
PeskinM. F., MarkhamC. M., ShegogR., TempleJ. R., BaumlerE. R., AddyR. C., HernándezB., CuccaroP., GabayE. K., ThielM., & EmeryS. T. (2017). Prevalence and correlates of the perpetration of cyber dating abuse among early adolescents. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 46(2), 358–375. http://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-016-0568-1
37.
PicardP. (2007). Tech abuse in teen relationships study. Teen Research Unlimited. http://www.breakthecycle.org/sites/default/files/pdf/survey-lina-tech-2007.pdf
38.
PornariC. D., & WoodJ. (2010). Peer and cyber aggression in secondary school students: The role of moral disengagement, hostile attribution bias, and outcome expectancies. Aggressive Behavior, 36(2), 81–94. http://doi.org/10.1002/ab.20336
39.
QuesadaS., Fernandez-GonzalezL., & CalveteE. (2018). Sexting in adolescence: Frequency and association with the victimization of cyberbullying and dating violence. Behavioral Psychology, 26(2), 225–242. http://www.behavioralpsycho.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/01_Quesada_26-2-1.pdf
40.
ReedL. A., ConnK., & WachterK. (2020). Name-calling, jealousy, and break-ups: Teen girls’ and boys’ worst experiences of digital dating. Children and Youth Services Review, 108. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2019.104607
41.
ReedL. A., TolmanR. M., & WardL. M. (2017). Gender matters: Experiences and consequences of digital dating abuse victimization in adolescent dating relationships. Journal of Adolescence, 59, 79–89. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.adolescence.2017.05.015
42.
ReedL. A., TolmanR. M., WardL. M., & SafyerP. (2016). Keeping tabs: Attachment anxiety and electronic intrusion in high school dating relationships. Computers in Human Behavior, 58, 259–268. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.12.019
43.
RossJ. M., DrouinM., & CoupeA. (2019). Sexting coercion as a component of intimate partner polyvictimization. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 34(11), 2269–2291. http://doi.org/10.1177/0886260516660300
44.
Rubio-GarayF., AmorP., & CarrascoM. (2019). The contribution of moral disengagement to dating violence and general aggression: The gender and age moderating effects. The Spanish Journal of Psychology, 22, E59. http://doi.org/10.1017/sjp.2019.57
45.
RuedaH. A., LindsayM., & WilliamsL. R. (2015). “She posted it on Facebook”: Mexican American adolescents’ experiences with technology and romantic relationship conflict. Journal of Adolescent Research, 30(4), 419–445. http://doi.org/10.1177/0743558414565236
46.
Sánchez-JiménezV., & Muñoz-FernándezN. (2021). When are sexist attitudes risk factors for dating aggression? The role of moral disengagement in Spanish adolescents. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 18(4). http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18041947
47.
Sánchez-JiménezV., Muñoz-FernándezN., LucioL. A., & Ortega-RuizR. (2017). Cyber-aggression in adolescent couples: A cross-cultural study Spain-Mexico. Revista Mexicana de Psicología, 34(1), 46–54. http://www.redalyc.org/articulo.oa?id=243056045005
48.
SmithK., CénatJ. M., LapierreA., DionJ., HébertM., & CôtéK. (2018). Cyber dating violence: Prevalence and correlates among high school students from small urban areas in Quebec. Journal of Affective Disorders, 234, 220–223. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jad.2018.02.043
49.
SmithP. K. (2012). Cyberbullying and cyber aggression. In S. R. Jimerson, A. B. Nickerson, M. J. Mayer, & M. J. Furlong (Eds.), Handbook of school violence and school safety: International research and practice (pp. 93–103). Routledge.
50.
Smith-DardenJ. P., KernsmithP. D., VictorB. G., & LathropR. A. (2017). Electronic displays of aggression in teen dating relationships: Does the social ecology matter? Computers in Human Behavior, 67, 33–40. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.10.015
51.
StephensonV. L., WickhamB. M., & CapezzaN. M. (2018). Psychological abuse in the context of social media. Violence and Gender, 5(3), 129–134. http://doi.org/10.1089/vio.2017.0061
52.
StonardK. E., BowenE., WalkerK., & PriceS. A. (2017). “They’ll always find a way to get to you”: Technology use in adolescent romantic relationships and its role in dating violence and abuse. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 32(14), 2083–2117. http://doi.org/10.1177/0886260515590787
53.
StonardK. E. (2020). “Technology was designed for this”: Adolescents’ perceptions of the role and impact of the use of technology in cyber dating violence. Computers in Human Behavior, 105, Article 106211. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2019.106211
54.
UtzS., & BeukeboomC. J. (2011). The role of social network sites in romantic relationships: Effects on jealousy and relationship happiness. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 16(4), 511–527. http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1083-6101.2011.01552.x
55.
Van OuytselJ., Van GoolE., WalraveM., PonnetK., & PeetersE. (2016). Exploring the role of social networking sites within adolescent romantic relationships and dating experiences. Computers in Human Behavior, 55, 76–86. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.08.042
56.
YahnerJ., DankM., ZweigJ. M., & LachmanP. (2015). The co-occurrence of physical and cyber dating violence and bullying among teens. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 30(7), 1079–1089. http://doi.org/10.1177/0886260514540324
57.
ZweigJ. M., DankM., YahnerJ., & LachmanP. (2013). The rate of cyber dating abuse among teens and how it relates to other forms of teen dating violence. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 42(7), 1063–1077. http://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-013-9922-8
58.
ZweigJ. M., LachmanP., YahnerJ., & DankM. (2014). Correlates of cyber dating abuse among teens. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 43(8), 1306–1321. http://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-013-0047-x
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
