Bibliometric Analysis of Research on Cyberbullying

Abstract

The aim of this study is to conduct a bibliometric analysis of domestic theses on cyberbullying in Turkey, examining current academic trends, research methodologies, and key themes related to cyberbullying. The study employs the case study model, one of the qualitative research designs. The population of the study consists of theses on cyberbullying accessible in full text via the YÖK Thesis Database. The sample includes theses published in Turkish and/or English between 2020 and December 2024 (inclusive) and available in full text on the YÖK Thesis Database. A total of 116 theses were included in the analysis. Data were collected using the Academic Publication Evaluation Form, and document analysis was applied for data analysis. The results of the study indicate that the majority of these were concentrated in 2024, with a predominance of master’s theses. Most of the theses were written in Turkish and were affiliated with universities such as Istanbul Gelişim, Gazi, Marmara, and Mersin. The findings also reveal that research predominantly focused on psychology, education, and sociology, employing quantitative methods and survey models. Frequently utilized tools included the Cyberbullying and Cyber Victimization Scales. Commonly explored variables were cyber victimization, empathy, academic achievement, and psychological well-being.

Keywords

• Bullying
• cyberbullying
• psychology
• education
• bibliometric analysis

Bibliometric Analysis of Research on Cyberbullying

Abstract

The aim of this study is to conduct a bibliometric analysis of domestic theses on cyberbullying in Turkey, examining current academic trends, research methodologies, and key themes related to cyberbullying. The study employs the case study model, one of the qualitative research designs. The population of the study consists of theses on cyberbullying accessible in full text via the YÖK Thesis Database. The sample includes theses published in Turkish and/or English between 2020 and December 2024 (inclusive) and available in full text on the YÖK Thesis Database. A total of 116 theses were included in the analysis. Data were collected using the Academic Publication Assesment Form, and document analysis was applied for data analysis. The results of the study indicate that the majority of these were concentrated in 2024, with a predominance of master’s theses. Most of the theses were written in Turkish and were affiliated with universities such as Istanbul Gelişim, Gazi, Marmara, and Mersin. The findings also reveal that research predominantly focused on psychology, education, and sociology, employing quantitative methods and survey models. Frequently utilized tools included the Cyberbullying and Cyber Victimization Scales. Commonly explored variables were cyber victimization, empathy, academic achievement, and psychological well-being.

Keywords

• Bullying
• cyberbullying
• psychology
• education
• bibliometric analysis

References

1. Akbaba, S., & Eroglu, Y. (2013). Predictors of cyberbullying and victimization in primary school students. Uludag University Journal of Education Faculty, 26(1), 105-122.
2. Akca, E. B., & Sayımer, I. (2017). The concept of cyberbullying, its types and related factors: An evaluation based on existing research. AJIT-e: Academic Journal of Information Technology, 8(30), 7-19.
3. Arıcak, O. T., Kınay, H., & Tanrıkulu, T. (2012). The first psychometric findings of the cyberbullying scale. Istanbul University Hasan Ali Yücel Faculty of Education Journal, 9(1), 101-114.
4. Arıcak, O.T. (2009). Psychiatric Symptomatology as a Predictor of Cyberbullying among University Students. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, 34 (34), 167-184.
5. Arıcak, T., Siyahhan, S., & Sarıbeyoğlu, S. (2012). Cyberbullying scale and cyber victimization scale: Development of Turkish form. Turkish Journal of Psychological Counseling and Guidance, 4(37), 174-184.
6. Aygun, F. (2016). Cyberbullying among high school students: The case of Adıyaman [Master's Thesis]. Cumhuriyet University Institute of Social Sciences.
7. Balcı, A. (2022). Research in the social sciences: Methods, techniques and principles: Vol. 16. Oppression. Pegem Academy Publishing.
8. Belsey, B. (2004, March 15). Cyberbullying: An emerging threat to the "alway on" generation. https://billbelsey.com/?p=1827 accessed from the website on 01/12/2024.

9. Cakmak, H. (2009). Threats and Concepts in the Cyber World. In Crime, Terror and the Cyber World in the Triangle of War (pp. 23-55). Platinum Publications.
10. Calvete, E., Orue, I., Estevez, A., Villardon, L., and Padilla, P. (2010). Cyberbullying in adolescents: Modalities and aggressors' profile. Computers in Human Behavior, 26, 1128-1135.
11. Çelik, A., Çelen, F. K., & Seferoğlu, S. S. (2015). Ortaokul öğrencilerinin sanal zorbalık ve sanal mağduriyet durumlarının incelenmesi. XVII. Akademik Bilişim Konferansı (AB15), https://ab.org.tr/ab15/kitap/468.pdf accessed from the website on 01/12/2024.
12. Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2007). Research methods in education, Routledge falmer: Taylor and Francis Group. Büyüköztürk, Ş., Kılıç Çakmak, E., Akgün, Ö. E., Karadeniz, Ş., ve Demirel, F. (2008). Bilimsel araştırma yöntemleri. Ankara: Pegem Akademi.
13. Dilmaç, B., Hamarta, E., & Aydoğan, D. (2010). The relationship between psychological symptoms and self-esteem of the students from Turkish and Turkic societies in Turkey. GESJ: Education Science and Psychology, 1(16), 22–30. Englander, E., Donnerstein, E., Kowalski, R., Lin, C. A., & Party, K. (2017, November). Defining cyberbullying. Pediatrics Official Journal Of The American Academy Of Pediatrics, 140, 148-151. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2016-1758U
14. Erdur-Baker, Ö., & Kavşut, F. (2007). Akran zorbalığının yeni yüzü: siber zorbalık. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research (EJER), (27), 31-42.
15. Eroglu, Y. and Peker, A. (2015). Investigation of the relationship between peer relationships and cyberbullying status in adolescents. Journal of Turkish Studies, 10 (11), 593-606.
16. Garnefski, N., Kraaij, V., & Spinhoven, P. (2001). Negative life events, cognitive emotion regulation and emotional problems. Personality and Individual Differences, 30(8), 1311-1327. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0191-8869(00)00113-6
17. Eğri, B. B. (2022). Türkiye'de siber zorbalık üzerine yapılan lisansüstü tezlerin içerik analizi [Yüksek lisans tezi], Gazi Üniversitesi, Eğitim Bilimleri Enstitüsü.
18. Gonzá lez-Calatayud, V. and Prendes Espinosa, M.P. (2021). Role-based cyberbullying situations: Cybervictims, cyberaggressors and cyberbystanders. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 18, 8669.
19. Kaya, B., & Cenkseven Önder, F. (2022). Investigation of students' types of cyberbullying and coping methods in Turkey: A meta-synthesis study. Humanistic Perspective, 4(3), 512-528. https://doi.org/10.47793/hp.1143663
20. Kepenekçi, K. Y., & Çınkır, Ş. (2003). Bullying between students. Educational Administration in Theory and Practice, 34(34), 236-253.
21. Kocaşahan, N. (2012). Peer bullying and cyberbullying in high school and college students [Master's Thesis]. Balıkesir University Institute of Social Sciences.
22. Hamm, M. P., Newton, A. S., Chisholm, A., Shulhan, J., Milne, A., Sundar, 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.
23. Kowalski, R. M., & Limber, S. P. (2007). Electronic bullying among middle school students. Journal of Adolescent Health, 41(6), S22-S30. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jadohealth.2007.08.017
24. Kowalski, R. M., & Limber, S. P. (2013). Psychological, physical, and academic correlates of cyberbullying and traditional bullying. Journal of Adolescent Health, 53(1), 50–58.
25. Köhler, T., & Stemmler, M. (1997). Normative versus ipsative configural frequency analysis in personality research—their use discussed in a reanalysis of data on situation‐bound anxiety. European Journal of Personality, 11(1), 69-79.
26. Li, Q. (2008). A cross-cultural comparison of adolescents' experience related to cyberbullying. Educational Research, 50 (3), 223-234.
27. McMillan, J. H. (2000). Educational research: Fundamentals for the consumer. New York: Longman.
28. Merriam, S. B. (2009). Qualitative research: a guide to design and implementation, CA: John Wiley and Sons Inc. Publishers.
29. Miles, M. B. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook. California: Thousand Oaks.
30. Moessner, C. (2007). Cyberbullying. Harris Interactive, April.(http://www. harrisinteractive. com/news/newsletters/k12news/HI_TrendsTudes_2007_v06_i04. pdf). accessed from the website on 01/12/2024.
31. Özdemir, M. and Akar, F. (2011). Investigation of high school students' views on cyberbullying in terms of some variables. Educational Administration in Theory and Practice, 17 (4), 605-626.
32. Patchin, J.W. and Hinduja, S. (2006). Bullies move beyond the schooldyard: A preliminary look at cyberbullying. Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice, 4 (2), 148-169.
33. Rohner, R. P. (2004). The parental "acceptance–rejection syndrome": Universal correlates of perceived rejection. American Psychologist, 59(8), 830-840. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.59.8.830
34. Strauss, A. L. & Corbin, J. (1990). Basic of qualitative research: grounded theory producers and techniques. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
35. Tezer, M. (2017). Cyber bullying and university students: Behaviours, opinions and reactions. International Journal of Educational Sciences, 19(2-3), 199-204.
36. Tokunaga, R.S. (2010). Following you home from school: A critical review and synthesis of research on cyberbullying victimization. Computers in Human Behavior, 26, 277-287.
37. Uludaşdemir, D. and Küçük, S. (2021). An important concept in the prevention of cyberbullying: Digital parenting and pediatric nursing. Turkish Journal of Health Sciences and Research, 4(3), 54-70.
38. Vranjes, I., Baillien, E., Vandebosch, H., & De Witte, H. (2018). The dark side of working online: Towards a definition and an Emotion Reaction Model of workplace cyberbullying. Computers in Human Behavior, 69, 324-334. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.12.055
39. Wallen, N. E., & Fraenkel, J. R. (2013). Educational research: A guide to the process. Routledge.
40. Yaman, E., & Peker, A. (2012). Adolescents' perceptions of cyberbullying and cyber victimization. Gaziantep University Journal of Social Sciences, 11(3), 819-833.
41. Tavşancıl, E., & Aslan, A. E. (2001). Sözel, yazılı ve diğer materyaller için içerik analizi ve uygulama örnekleri. Epsilon.
42. Yıldırım, A., & Şimşek, H. (2008). Nitel araştırma yöntemleri. Ankara: Seçkin Yayıncılık
43. Türk, B., & Şenyuva, G. (2021). Şiddet sarmalı içinden siber zorbalık: Bir gözden geçirme. IBAD Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, (10), 462-479.
44. Ybarra, M.L., & Mitchell, K.J. (2004). Online aggressor/targets, aggressors, and targets: A comparison of associated youth characteristics. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 45 (7), 1308-1316.
45. Yildirim, A., & Simsek, H. (2008). Qualitative research methods in social sciences, Ankara: Seçkin Publishing.
46. Yin, R. K. (2009). Case study research: Design and methods, Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.