“THINK! Before you hit send” … and other social media
and internet safety message that adolescents ignore:
Identifying those most vulnerable to exploitation and
victimization
Jennie Noll, PhD
Professor, HDFS
Director Research and Education,
Network on Child Protection &
Well-being
PRC Colloquium; Spring 2014
jgn3@psu.edu
Teen Internet Use
90% of US adolescents aged 12-17 have regular internet
access
50% (over 10 million teens) reporting daily usage
84% of whom gain access via home computers
Teens spend an average of 7.5 hrs/day “plugged in”
 Narrowing of the “digital divide”
Youth Internet Safety Survey, 2011; Pew Trust Internet Use Survey, 2011
Exposure to Sexual / Adult Content
50-60% of households lack monitoring software
40% of teens surveyed report unwanted or accidental
exposure to sexual content
20% admitting to intentionally seeking X-rated materials
Access to SnapChat ® and other temporary-image venues
 Technology developed for sexting
Youth Internet Safety Survey, 2011; Pew Trust Internet Use Survey, 2011; Noll et. al., 2012
Social Networking
Social networking venues (Facebook, MySpace, Instagram,
Kik, Tumbler, Twitter) fastest growing aspects of activity for
teens
Under-age restrictions recently lifted by Facebook
30% of teens reports online sexual solicitations
highest rates for African Americans & Females
Privacy settings difficult to manage
#legs
Youth Internet Safety Survey, 2011; Pew Trust Internet Use Survey, 2011; Noll et. al., 2012
Cyber Bullying / Slut-shaming
Via Social Networking (Instagram)
Connects EVERYONE
Bullying brought to new heights
Anonymous Posting Sites
Ask.FM allows users to post and answer questions
anonymously
“Crush” sites
Texting / Sexting shared with others
Catfishing
Suicide Attempts
MOST Internet activity is benign so why
be concerned???
We don’t know much…..
Most definitive research comes from:
 estimates from Providers (e.g., Yahoo, FaceBook)
 random digit dialing of 1500 teens (YISS)
self reported activities
76% White, middle class
Impact on Teen Development??
proliferation of the Internet is historically unprecedented
exposures to sexually explicit materials
potential for exploitation
Impact of pervasive social connections
we do not have an adequate understanding the impact
sexual development??
victimization potential??
which teens are most vulnerable??
how to protect vulnerable teens??
Internet Sex Crime Perpetrators
Perpetrators search for vulnerable teens:
 online late at night
 willing to divulge personal information
 willing to chat about sex
 PROVOCATIVE SELF PRESENTATIONS
publically available profile pages
photos
personal narratives
sexual utterances
Profile Pictures
Profile Pictures
Potential for Internet-initiated
Victimization
Social networking sites are where the majority of Internetinitiated sex crimes originate
Perpetrators locate teens online, “friend”, make frequent
contact, in order to engage in:
 Sexual solicitations (titillating sexual discourse)
 Sexual exploitation including
Exchange of sexual photos
Luring teens to porn sites
 Lure teens offline
Why be especially concerned about
sexual abuse victims?
Sexual abuse renders teens especially vulnerable
given implications sex-specific victimization:
severe sexual boundary violations
betrayal
victim stigma
shame
powerlessness
Why be especially concerned about
sexual abuse victims?
already vulnerable to aberrant sexual development
2 to 3 times more likely to be re-victimized
more preoccupied with sex
more vulnerable to the effects of pornography
low quality parenting / low parental monitoring
more likely to visit chatrooms
solicited sexually online
receive aggressive sexual solicitations
Online Self-representations
High-risk
Peers
Preoccupied
w/ sex
On-line
Sexual
Advances
Abuse
Status
Substance
Use
Off-line,
In-person
Encounters
Proteus Effect
Berkley Virtual World Studies
Those assigned a sexually provocative avatar
acted more flirtatious and engaged in sexually
charged interactions more readily than those
assigned a less provocative
avatar
Risk for internet-initiated victimization
Provocative
Avatar
.21*
Preoccupied
w/ sex
Abuse
Status
.19*
.26*
On-line
Sexual
Advances
.17*
Substance
Use
High- risk
Peers
.17*
Off- line,
In- person
Encounters
.25*
-.19*
2 =43, df=19; GFI=.94; RMSR=.07
Caregiver
Presence
Noll, JG, Shenk, CE, Barnes, JE & Putnam, FW. Childhood abuse, avatar choices and other risk factors
associated with internet-initiated victimization for adolescent females. Pediatrics 2009; 123(6):e1078-83.
Offline meetings: testimonials
The majority of offline encounters are benign
Arguably one of the most dangerous social
interactions for teen girls
Cannot confirm the identity
12 yr old “Amy” met at the mall
 14 yr old “Keesha” had cell phone # listed on
facebook
Example
Self of
Presentations
MySpace Profile
Name: Stacey Martin
Age: 16 goin on 21!
City; Florence, KY; I am a junior at Madison High
Call me or txt me at 719-562-2253; I’ll pick up, no prob
High-risk Internet and Social Networking Behaviors:
Results from pilot work on 251 females
Noll, et al., Pediatrics, 2013
New R01; Teen Internet and
Social Media Behaviors
R01 HD073130 PI: Noll 2012-2017
Procedures for New Internet R01
450 adolescent females (12-15) and caregivers
150 sexually abused; 150 matched controls;
150 census-matched controls
Annual follow-ups
2 hour psychosocial interview
Quantify Social Networking activity for 2 months
(Facebook; Twitter & Instagram Apps)
4 weeks of Internet Footprint Observation
R01 HD073130 PI: Noll 2012-2017
Internet Footprint Observation
• First naturalistic study of Internet and social
media behaviors
• MacBook laptop with wireless provided
• Engineered software records all URL activity
• Quantify URLs for adult content
• using “blacklisted” databases
• crowd-sourcing, search terms keywords and
#hashtags
R01 HD073130 PI: Noll 2012-2017
Social Media Behaviors
• Comprehensive Self report, Caregiver report
• 2 months of Social Networking activity
• Participant engagement—qualitative
quanitifcation of conversations/postings
• Crowd-sourcing of #hashtags
• Objective Coding of Publicly Available Profile
Pages
Authentication Algorithm
A Rat In The House May Eat The Ice Cream
“He MAY eat the ice cream, we don’t know that he
WILL eat the ice cream. It’s simple arithmetic.”
Clustering
of key-stroke
indicators from
separate individuals
after training
Current Safety Campaigns
(onguardonline.gov;
safekids.com;
NetSmart.org)
Rely heavily on parental monitoring software
Current Safety Campaigns
(onguardonline.gov;
safekids.com;
NetSmart.org)
DO NOT
highlight potentials for online sexual exposures
present prevalence of online solicitations
address high-risk online social behaviors
present implications for provocative selfpresentations
provide skills for warding off sexual advances
offer means to protect teens whose parents are
not internet savvy or are otherwise uninvolved
Conclusions
Internet safety campaigns have not kept pace with
historically unprecedented teen internet access
Parental control software is not a substitute for
parenting
Provocative self-presentations can invite trouble
How does child maltreatment exacerbate
vulnerabilities and impede protective factors?
The media often misses the point
Your Teen Has Probably
Banged Internet Strangers
Is this the Dr. Noll, or
just someone pretending
to be Dr. Noll?
Either way, she’ll do!