A Bibliometric Analysis of Cyberbullying Research in Turkey

Abstract

This study aims to analyze cyberbullying research in Turkey through bibliometric analysis. To this end, the study dealt with six research questions which included the most frequently used keywords and co-occurrences of these keywords, Turkey’s collaboration with other countries, the frequency distribution of articles and citations by year, the most cited articles, the most productive journals, and authors. The bibliometric data were limited to the Web of Science (WoS) database. The first search yielded a total of 3974 publications. However, excluding the publications which did not comply with the aim of the study resulted in 105 articles to be analyzed. The findings suggested that there were 268 keywords used at least once. The keywords occurring at least five times other than “cyberbullying” were “cyber victimization,” “adolescent,” “bullying,” “reliability,” “validity,” and “internet addiction.”. Turkey had at least one collaboration with 21 countries. The top five countries with at least two collaborations were England, the U.S.A., Australia, Hungary, Czech Republic, and Germany. The most productive year was 2021. The most cited article was published in 2010, and the most influential journal was "Education and Science.” It was also revealed that the fifteen most productive authors had 57 publications. Considering the increasing interaction among people in virtual environments, cyberbullying research which has a nearly quarter-century history, should take more attention from Turkish scholars. Additionally, a gap was observed in the literature regarding studies conducted on parents. Thus, further studies may attempt to fill this gap.

Keywords

• cyberbullying
• Turkey
• bibliometric analysis.

Türkiye’de Yapılan Siber Zorbalık Çalışmalarının Bibliyometrik Analizi

Abstract

Bu araştırmanın amacı, Türkiye’deki siber zorbalık çalışmalarının bibliyometrik profillerini ortaya koymaktır. Bu amaç doğrultusu altı alt amaç belirlenmiştir. Bu alt amaçlar; en sık kullanılan anahtar kelimeler ve bu anahtar kelimelerin ilişki ağlarını, Türkiye’nin diğer ülkelerle ilişki ağlarını, makale ve atıf sayısının yıllara göre dağılımını, en çok atıf alan makaleleri, en çok yayın yapan dergileri ve en üretken yazarları içermektedir. Araştırmada bibliyometrik yöntem kullanılmıştır. Veriler Web of Science (WoS) ile sınırlandırılarak sadece bu veritabanı üzerinden elde edilmiştir. Ilk taramada 3974 yayın olduğu ortaya çıkarken, çalışmanın kriterlerine uymayan araştırmalar hariç tutulmuş ve analizler 105 yayın ile gerçekleştirilmiştir. Elde edilen bulgulara göre; 105 makale içerisinde en az bir kez kullanılan 268 anahtar kelimenin olduğu tespit edilmiştir. “Cyberbullying” dışında en az beş kez kullanılan anahtar kelimelerin; cyber victimization, adolescent, bullying, reliability, validity and internet addiction olduğu belirlenmiştir. 105 makale içerisinde Türkiye’nin 21 farklı ülke ile en az bir ilişki ağının olduğu ve en az iki ilişki ağına sahip 5 ülkenin sırasıyla; England, USA, Australia, Hungary, Czech Repunlic and Germany olduğu tespit edilmiştir. En fazla çalışmanın 2021 yılında gerçekleştirildiği gözlenmiştir. En fazla atıf alan makalenin 2010 yılında yayınlandığı, en fazla makale yayını olan derginin “Education and Science” olduğu tespit edilmiştir. En üretken ilk 15 yazarın toplam 57 çalışmasının olduğu da son bulgu olarak ortaya konmuştur. Sonuç olarak insanlar arası etkileşimin sanal dünyada her geçen arttığı düşünüldüğünde; yaklaşık çeyrek asırlık bir geçmişi olan siber zorbalık araştırmalarının Türkiye’de daha fazla çalışılması gerektiği söylenebilir. Ayrıca aileler ile yapılan çalışmaların da yeterli düzeyde olmadığı ve ailelerle ilgili çalışmalara ağırlık verilmesi gerektiği düşünülmektedir.

Keywords

• siber zorbalık
• Türkiye
• bibliyometrik analiz

References

1. Ak, Ş., Özdemir, Y., & Kuzucu, Y. (2015). Cybervictimization and cyberbullying: The mediating role of anger, don’t anger me!. Computers in human behavior, 49, 437-443. Doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2015.03.030
2. Akbulut, Y., & Eristi, B. (2011). Cyberbullying and victimisation among Turkish university students. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 27(7). Doi: 10.14742/ajet.910
3. Akbulut, Y., Sahin, Y. L., & Eristi, B. (2010). Cyberbullying victimization among Turkish online social utility members. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 13(4), 192-201
4. Alsawalqa, R. O. (2021). Cyberbullying, social stigma, and self-esteem: the impact of COVID-19 on students from East and Southeast Asia at the University of Jordan. Heliyon, 7(4), e06711. Doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2021.e06711
5. Agatston, P. W., Kowalski, R., & Limber, S. (2007). Students’ perspectives on cyber bullying. Journal of Adolescent Health, 41(6), 59-60. Doi: 10.1016/j.jadohealth.2007.09.003
6. Arıcak, O. T. (2009). Psychiatric symptomatology as a predictor of cyberbullying among university students. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research (EJER), (34)
7. Ayas, T. & Horzum, B., (2010). Sanal Zorba/Kurban Ölçek Geliştirme Çalışması. Akademik Bakış Dergisi, 19, 1-17. (Ayas, T. & Horzum, B., (2010). Cyber bully/victim scale development study. Journal of Academic Perspective, 19, 1-17)
8. Barlett, C. P., Simmers, M. M., Roth, B., & Gentile, D. (2021). Comparing cyberbullying prevalence and process before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. The Journal of Social Psychology, 161(4), 408-418. Doi: 10.1080/00224545.2021.1918619

9. Barlett, C. (2017). From theory to practice: Cyberbullying theory and its application tointervention. Computers in Human Behavior, 269-275. Doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2017.02.060
10. Barlett, C. P., & Gentile, D. A. (2012). Attacking others online: The formation of cyberbullying in late adolescence. Psychology of Popular Media Culture, 1, 123e135. Doi: 10.1037/a0028113
11. Barragán Martín, A. B., Molero Jurado, M. D. M., Pérez-Fuentes, M. D. C., Simón Márquez, M. D. M., Martos Martínez, Á., Sisto, M., & Gázquez Linares, J. J. (2021). Study of cyberbullying among adolescents in recent years: a bibliometric analysis. International journal of environmental research and public health, 18(6), 3016. Doi: 10.3390/ijerph18063016
12. Belsey, B., (2004). “Cyberbullying an emerging threat to the always on generation”, http://www.cyberbullying.ca/pdf/Cyberbullying_Article_by_Bill_Bel sey.pdf
13. Cáceres-Reche, M. P., Hinojo-Lucena, F. J., Navas-Parejo, M. R., & Romero-Rodríguez, J. M. (2019). The Phenomenon of Cyberbullying in the Children and Adolescents Population: A Scientometric Analysis. Research in social sciences and technology, 4(2), 115-128. https://doi.org/10.46303/ressat.04.02.8
14. Cetin, B., Yaman, E., & Peker, A. (2011). Cyber victim and bullying scale: A study of validity and reliability. Computers & Education, 57(4), 2261-2271. Doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2011.06.014
15. Dilmac, B. (2009). Psychological needs as a predictor of cyber bullying: A preliminary report on college students. Educational Sciences: Theory and Practice, 9(3), 1307-1325
16. Ellegaard, O., & Wallin, J. A. (2015). The bibliometric analysis of scholarly production: How great is the impact?. Scientometrics, 105(3), 1809-1831. Doi: 10.1007/s11192-015-1645-z
17. Erdur-Baker, Ö. (2010). Cyberbullying and its correlation to traditional bullying, gender and frequent and risky usage of internet-mediated communication tools. New media & society, 12(1), 109-125. Doi: 10.1177/1461444809341260
18. Erdur-Baker, Ö., Kavşut, F. (2007). “Cyber Bullying: A new Face of peer Bullying”. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, 27, Sayfa: 31 – 42
19. Feınberg, T. & Robey, N., (2008), Cyberbullying: Whether it Happens at School or Off-Campus, Cyberbullying Disrupts and Affects All Aspects of Students’ Lives. National Association of School Psychologists (NASP), 10 (14)
20. González-Moreno, M. J., Cuenca-Piqueras, C., & Fernández-Prados, J. S. (2020, March). Cyberbullying and education: State of the art and bibliometric analysis. In Proceedings of the 2020 8th International Conference on Information and Education Technology, 191-195. Doi: 10.1145/3395245.3396449.
21. Henry, N., & Powell, A. (2016). Sexual violence in the digital age: The scope and limits of criminal law. Social & legal studies, 25(4), 397-418. Doi: 10.1177/0964663915624273
22. Hinduja, S., & Patchin, J. W. (2019). Connecting adolescent suicide to the severity of bullying and cyberbullying. Journal of School Violence, 18(3), 333–346. Doi: 10.1080/15388220.2018.1492417
23. Isik, B., & Ozdemir, N. (2019). How does cyberbullying affect the values of university youth?: Its’ analysis in terms of education and mental health. New Trends and Issues Proceedings on Humanities and Social Sciences, 6(1), 405-412. Doi: 10.18844/prosoc.v6i1.4193
24. Kowalski, R. M., Giumetti, G. W., Schroeder, A. N., & Lattanner, M. R. (2014). Bullying in the digital age: a critical review and meta-analysis of cyberbullying research among youth. Psychological bulletin, 140(4), 1073. Doi: 10.1037/a0035618
25. Lan, M., Law, N., & Pan, Q. (2022). Effectiveness of anti-cyberbullying educational programs: A socio-ecologically grounded systematic review and meta-analysis. Computers in Human Behavior, 107200. Doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2022.107200
26. López-Meneses, E., Vázquez-Cano, E., González-Zamar, M. D., & Abad-Segura, E. (2020). Socioeconomic effects in cyberbullying: Global research trends in the educational context. International journal of environmental research and public health, 17(12), 4369. Doi: 10.3390/ijerph17124369
27. Mason, K. L., (2008). Cyberbullying: A Preliminary Assessment For School Personel. Psychology in the School, 45 (4). 323 – 348
28. Ng, E. D., Chua, J. Y. X., & Shorey, S. (2022). The effectiveness of educational interventions on traditional bullying and cyberbullying among adolescents: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Trauma, Violence, & Abuse,, 23(1), 132-151. Doi: 10.1177/1524838020933867
29. Patchin, J. W., & Hinduja, S. (2016). Summary of our cyberbullying research (2004-2016). http://cyberbullying.org/summary-of-ourcyberbullying-research
30. Patchin, J. W., & Hinduja, S. (2015). Measuring cyberbullying: Implications for research. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 23, 69–74. Doi: 10.1016/j.avb.2015.05.013
31. Peker, A., & Nebioğlu-Yıldız, M. (2021). Mediating Role of self-control in the relationship between aggressiveness and cyber bullying. Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, 11(1), 40-49. Doi: 10.5455/PBS.20210114051215
32. Şahin, M. (2012). The relationship between the cyberbullying/cybervictmization and loneliness among adolescents. Children and Youth Services Review, 34(4), 834-837. Doi: 10.1016/j.childyouth.2012.01.010
33. Sengil Akar, S., & Kurtoglu Erden, M. (2021). Distance Education Experiences of Secondary School Math Teachers during the Pandemic: A Narrative Study. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education, 22(3), n3. Doi: 10.17718/tojde.961809
34. Serebrennikova, A. V., Kyrychenko, T. M., Leonov, B. D., Shablystyi, V. V., Chenshova, N. V. (2021). Cyberbullyıng As A Way Of Causıng Suıcıde In The Dıgıtal Age. Medıcıne And Law, 40 (4). 449-470
35. Sezgin Nartgün, Ş., & Limon, İ. (2020). Prevention of cyberbullying at schools. In S.Polat & G. Günçavdı (Eds), Empowering Multiculturalism and Peacebuilding in Schools (pp.225-237). IGI Global. Doi: 10.4018/978-1-7998-2827-3.ch010
36. Sharıff, S., & Hoff, D.,L., (2007). Cyber Bullying: Clarifying Legal Boundaries for School Supervision in Cyberspace. International Journal of Cyber Criminology. 1 (1). 76 – 118
37. Slonje, R. & Smıth, K. P., (2008). Cyberbullying: Another Main Type of Bullying. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 49. 147 – 154. Doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2022.107238
38. Tanrikulu, I., & Erdur-Baker, Ö. (2021). Motives behind cyberbullying perpetration: a test of uses and gratifications theory. Journal of interpersonal Violence, 36(13-14), NP6699-NP6724. Doi: 10.1177/0886260518819882
39. Topcu, Ç., & Erdur-Baker, Ö. (2012). Affective and cognitive empathy as mediators of gender differences in cyber and traditional bullying. School Psychology International, 33(5), 550-561. Doi: 10.1177/0143034312446882
40. Topçu, Ç., Erdur-Baker, Ö., & Çapa-Aydin, Y. (2008). Examination of cyberbullying experiences among Turkish students from different school types. CyberPsychology & Behavior, 11(6), 643-648.
41. Utemissova, G. U., Danna, S., & Nikolaevna, V. N. (2021). Cyberbullying during the COVID-19 pandemic. Global Journal of Guidance and Counseling in Schools: Current Perspectives, 11(2), 77-87. Doi: 10.18844/gjgc.v11i2.5471
42. Willard, N., (2007). “Educator’s Guide to Cyberbullying and Cyberthreats”. http://new.csriu.org/cyberbully/docs/cbcteducator.pdf
43. Wolke, D., Lee, K., & Guy, A. (2017). Cyberbullying: A storm in a teacup? European Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 26(8), 899–908. Doi: 10.1007/s00787-017- 0954-6
44. Zuckerman, D. (2016). Bullying harms victims and perpetrators of all ages. Health Progress, 97(4), 63-66
45. Zych, I., Baldry, A. C., & Farrington, D. P. (2017). School bullying and cyberbullying: Prevalence, characteristics, outcomes, and prevention. Handbook of behavioral criminology, 113-138 Doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-61625-4