Cyber safety: issues, initiatives and implications
Ria Hanewald
University of Melbourne r.hanewald@yahoo.com
This paper concerns itself wit the definition, the major issues, concerns and current responses to cyber violence. Over the past decades, hyper-rapid change in emerging technologies has increased the use of electronic devices (mobile phone, PDA) and online environments in the educational domain. Along with the use of digital tools comes misuse or abuse. The later are labeled under the umbrella term of cyber violence, which is now a recognized, expeditious and insidious phenomenon. The social and emotional impact and psychological damage on children and adolescents is substantial. Cyber safety is promoted as an antidote, with resources (websites, educational kits, instructional and/or curriculum materials, training courses) proliferating. However, there is little evidence based research on the recommended strategies and their effectiveness. On the contrary, empirical data indicates an increase of cyber bullying over the last five years. This position paper outlines the major aspects of the cyber violence and cyber safety duo to understand the complexity of the problem. It raises the level of awareness and provides a foundational background for research, policy and practice.

CYBER SAFETY: ISSUES, INITIATIVES AND IMPLICATIONS
Much has been written about the use of digital tools and online environments but little attention has been given to their misuse. Yet, cyber violence is fast becoming a global concern for governments, educational authorities, teachers, parents and children alike. Around the world, governments, child protection agencies and educational organizations have mounted initiatives to enhance cyber safety. Substantial funding had been allocated for information dissemination on preventative strategies and the development of electronic responses to hinder perpetrators.
Despite these efforts, the phenomenon of cyber violence has grown exceedingly. Between 2000 and 2006, studies in Australia, Canada, UK and USA have documented a startling and significant increase in cyber violence (Finkelhor, Mitchell, & Wolak, 2000; UCLA Internet Report, 2000;
Herring, 2002; National i-SAFE Survey, 2004; Li, 2004; National Children’s Home, 2005; Chu,
2005; Smith, Mahdavi, Carvalho & Tippet, 2006; Wolak, Mitchell, & Finkelhor, 2006;
Kowalski, Limber & Agatston, 2007). In the face of this unexpected contradiction, this paper is intended to provide a discussion point to raise awareness of the issues and a starting point in helping to develop more effective strategies to combat cyber violence.
The paper begins with a summary of cyber violence, its characteristics, occurrences and frequency. It continues with an examination of existing literature from the educational domain to gain a comprehensive picture of work already undertaken. Following that, various cyber safety initiatives are introduced and described. Subsequently, the effectiveness of particular strategies is investigated. Finally, further options to prevent cyber violence are proposed.
DEFINITION OF CYBER VIOLENCE
The term of cyber violence was coined by Bill Belsey, a Canadian Educational Advisor who defined it as abusing, threatening or harassing of another person through electronic means.
(Belsey, n.d.). Currently, the term of cyber bullying is more widely used, which Nancy Willard,
Director of the American Center for Safe and Responsible Internet Use defines as communication that is ‘…defamatory, constitutes bullying, harassment, or discrimination, discloses personal information, or contains offensive vulgar or derogatory comments.’ (Willard, 2003, p. 66).
Kowalski, Limber & Agatston (2007) have identified distinct categories such as flaming (a short, heated exchange between two or more people, which typically occurs in chat rooms or discussion groups), cyber harassment (the repetitive sending of offensive messages to a victim, usually through email), denigration (spreading of untrue or deprecating information through text pictures via a web page, email or instant messaging), impersonation (the cyber bully poses online as the victim to send malicious information off to others), outing & trickery (humiliation of the victim by sharing private content with others, mostly through email or instant messaging), exclusion or ostracism (deliberate refusal to accept a friend on one of the social networking sites) and cyber stalking (comprises threatening communications and repetitive harassing).
PREVALENCE OF CYBER VIOLENCE
Over the last five years, a number of studies in Australia, Canada, the UK and USA have yielded empirical data on the occurrence of cyber violence. For example in Australia, a Brisbane study of
120 students in year 8 uncovered that 14 % of children were cyber victims and 11 % identified themselves as cyber bullies. Over half the students thought that cyber bullying was increasing
(Campbell & Gardner, 2005). Canada has an even higher occurrence, almost 25 % of students were cyber bully victims as a survey of 177 grade seven students from two schools in Calgary revealed (Li, 2005). Another, larger analysis of 3,700 students in Canadian middle schools

showed that 18 % of the youngsters had been affected by cyber bullying in the preceding two months alone (Kowalski, Limber & Agatston, 2007). Similar data is available from the United
Kingdom where 22 % of children had been cyber bullied at least once; more frequent cyber bullying had been experienced by almost 7 % of young people. (Smith, Mahdavi, Carvalho &
Tippett, 2006). In the United States, 48 % of 10 to 17 year old youngsters (in a sample of 1,501) had experienced cyber bullying, 9 % were victims of online harassment (Wolak, Mitchell &
Finkelhor, 2006).
THE MAIN ISSUES OF CYBER VIOLENCE
The most prevalent problem is the rapid increase of cyber violence over the last few years
(Finkelhor, Mitchell & Wolak, 2000; Wolak, Mitchel & Finkelhor, 2006). The first large scale empirical study on the emotional and social damage associated with electronic environments was conducted during 2000 in the United States. The research team of Finkelhor, Mitchell & Wolak investigated the pervasiveness of unwanted sexual materials, solicitation and harassment, particularly in relation to children and adolescents. They documented their findings in Online victimization: A Report on the Nations’ Youth with the intention of raising awareness and making the internet safer. Subsequently, numerous education and prevention programs were put in place.
Despite those materials and resources, they found five years later that more 10 to 17 year olds than before received inappropriate content online. This rise took place even with the use of filtering and blocking software on their computers. From their first study in 2000 to the second study in 2005, cyber bullying had increased from 28 % to 48 % amongst the 1500 young people
(Finkelhor, Mitchell & Wolak, 2000; Wolak, Mitchel & Finkelhor, 2006).
Another significant problem is the anonymity of the offender. ‘Disturbingly, most cyber-bullying is anonymous because perpetrators are shielded by screen names.’ (Shariff & Gouin, 2005, p. 3).
This makes it extremely difficult to detect and then stop these offenders. Li (2005) uncovered in a study of 177 Canadian middle school students that 41 % of victims did not know the identity of their tormentor. This is not to say that the online abuser is a stranger, as ‘…class-mates who may not engage in the bullying at school, can hide behind technology to inflict more serious abuse.’
(Shariff & Gouin, 2005, p. 4). In fact, a UK survey of 770 pre-teen and teens found that almost three-quarters (73%) of the cyber victims knew the bully; only one-quarter (26 %) declared the perpetrator was a stranger (National Children’s Home, 2005). The figures expose the significance of an established relationship between cyber bully and victim; it leads to the conclusion that the motive for the abuse is grounded in the history of their interaction. In terms of gender difference, a study of 1500 youngsters reported that girls are targeted twice as much as boys (Mitchell &
Wolack, 2000).
The lack of reporting of cyber abuse incidents to adults is another disturbing issue. 58 % of students have not told their parents or any other adult about their online experiences according to a British survey in 2005. Multiple replies indicated that 31 % did not report it because they did not think that it was a problem, 12 % thought that there was no one they wanted to tell, 11 % did not report it because they thought it would not stop the bullying or threats and 10 % simple did not know what to do to get help (British National Children’s Home, 2005). Without doubt
‘…incidents of online bullying are like roaches: for everyone that’s reported, many more go unrecorded’ (Chu, 2005, p. 42). This evident lack of reporting and recording gives explanation why hardly any teachers, principals and school administrators are aware that students are being cyber bullied (Beran & Li, 2004). Others are actively ignoring the issue of cyber bullying to avoid drawing attention to their institution, to side step dealing with it and subsequent entanglement in an unpleasant episode. The neglect to address the issue thus propagates the behavior (Giroux,
2003).

LEGAL ISSUES
Educational authorities and practitioners, families and young people are affected by cyber violence. It is not only a social problem but also a legal one as protective authority – often referred to as duty of care - over children is shared across their parents and their teachers. This aspect has yielded an increasing body of literature in the legal field such as discussions on actual lawsuits and the tension between the right to free speech and the unlawful act of defamation.
Overall, the legal perspective focused on the policing and regulating of cyber crimes and the prosecution of cyber criminals.
In an educational context, schools and individual educators have legal obligations and reasonable expectations placed upon them to act in the best interest of the child. In terms of cyber safety, they have to ensure that they acted in a reasonable and cautious manner. Factors to consider are the establishment of relevant policies and the communication of those to members of the school community, Internet access and protection protocols, the level of supervision provided, and the process for reporting and handling incidents of cyber violence. (Servance, 2003).
It is important to emphasize that there is currently no law requiring the reporting of cyber violence. Victims suffer emotionally, with symptoms including low self-esteem, self-harming, suicidal thoughts or even attempts. (Ybarra and Mitchell, 2004).
In Australia, primary and secondary school teachers and principals, nurses, doctors and police have an obligation to report to child protection services if they have reasonable ground to believe that a child is in need of protection. This mandatory reporting by professionals is formalized under The Children and Young Persons Act 1989, Section 64. Currently, this only covers harm through physical injury or sexual abuse; psychological harm is not included. The latter would be the major fall-out from cyber violence. Hence, revisiting and refining of legislation will become necessary to recognize this new dimension.
POLICY ISSUES
In addressing student safety and well being, the Australian Ministers of Education endorsed the
National Safe Schools Framework (NSSF) in July 2003. Legislation was passed in 2004 to implement the NSSF vision of happy and secure learning environments by 1 January 2006. All
Australian schools have to ‘take action to protect children from all forms of abuse and neglect’.
In terms of taking action to protect young people from harm, this paper proposes a three-pronged tactic of prevention, protection and persecution across all of the major issues raised.
Individual schools may already have policies and procedures in place to guide their students and staff such as behavior management policies (i.e. in regard to sexual harassment, anti-bullying, internet acceptable use) and codes of conduct. In light of the NSSF, these might need reworking and up-dating to include cyber bullying thus preventing incidents and protecting members of the school community. Persecution might be enabled through the expansion of relevant legislation, which needs to be linked to policy in order to reinforce compliance.
In addition to whole school policies, some schools have individual contract-like “acceptable use” agreements prepared, which stipulate the guidelines for use and the repercussions for misuse of the Internet. Some schools offer these written pacts to each student for signing at the beginning of every new school year thus reinforcing policies and gaining a commitment of adherence from their pupils.

TECHNICAL ISSUES
The electronic approach utilizes software and programming options for prevention and protection.
Subsequently, scholarly writings in the discipline of technology concentrate on the development, improvement and effectiveness of detection software.
In an educational context, the technical issue is addressed to a certain degree as most schools already have security mechanisms such as firewalls and web filtering software (also known as censorware or content-control software) in place. Internet filter software (i.e. Net Nanny,
CYBERsitter, Cyberpatrol) enables the blocking of websites and control of the content displayed on screen. This allows for filtering, monitoring and blocking of bulletin boards, chat rooms, emails, newsgroups, peer-to-peer (P2P) networks, pop-up windows and web access. Another feature is the setting of a daily time limit, which restrains the amount of time spent on the
Internet. Parental control software (i.e. McAfee, Norton, Cyber Sentinel) gives parents the power to set limits on the use of specific programs and access to the Internet. Options include whether unwanted sites are either blocked, warned or result in the closing of the browser and/or the capturing of a screen picture. In addition, detailed reports on the computer activity are created
(i.e. daily, weekly, monthly) so that parents know which sites their children have visited and when. Another quick way is also checking the browser or search history.
Installing filtering devices in school networks and on individual desktops or laptops at home and at school is only one item in the protection and prevention agenda. Protective software outdates fast and regular up-dating, perhaps even on a daily basis is necessary to keep abreast.
One of the major technical challenges would be the development of easier, faster and cheaper methods for the recording and tracking of cyber misuse. Persecution is only possible is the perpetrator can be tracked and identified, which currently requires sophisticated technical skills and applications not available to most parents or schools.
EDUCATIONAL ISSUES
In complying with their duty of care responsibility, educators and their institutions have to ensure that adequate supervision of computer users are implemented. Procedures for reporting and investigating inappropriate episodes (to safeguard from repetition) need to be formulized and recorded in the relevant policy documents. Monitoring and controlling of electronic interactions and subsequent punishment (i.e. loss of online privilege) may not be the most effective deterrent or from of prevention. The biggest challenges lies in the offender’s ability to “hide” behind the screen and remain “unknown”. Even if the victims known the perpetrator, there is reluctance to inform adults of the abuse. Ybarra & Mitchell (2004) found that victims often do not report the online abuse out of fear that they will no longer be allowed to use the Internet.
Improved technical capabilities to track and identify the perpetrator would allow persecution in the case of a school community “outsider”, particularly if the incident would be serious in nature.
The current deficiency of tracking and detection thwarts any follow-up, which allows perpetrators to remain anonymous and continue their malicious activities without reprimand. The lack of consequences of cyber bullying is unlike traditional bullying, which often involves follow-up with some form of disciplinary action (i.e. detention, suspension from school). A record of the incident and unpleasant consequences may shock or frighten the offender sufficiently to prevent repetition of the behavior. For some members of the school community, a non-punitive or restorative approach is perhaps a more appropriate course of action. A whole school approach based on articulated values and objectives might create a culture that supports such an implementation. It would need investigation to ascertain that this is indeed the most effective direction. Further probing should examine if the required time and effort of the restorative discussions and conferences process is worth in relation to the outcome. In addition, the initial

training and ongoing skills development of teachers and counselors to manage this task needs to be scrutinized to justify funding such initiatives.
Promoting cyber safety within the context of safe schools while fostering positive relationships between students through the teaching of social and emotional skills are broad approaches. More specific strategies are awareness raising campaigns such as whole school anti-bulling weeks or days as a vehicle to educate school communities on cyber violence. Workshops on cyber safety, integration of cyber safety lessons into the curriculum, drama performances and competitions on cyber safety are others methods that can be employed in schools. The effectiveness of these projects should be evaluated. Teachers, students and parents could provide feedback and guidance for future initiatives.
The website listed in the following section title initiatives – and others on the Internet – offer activities, resources ad educational kits. Educators could use these for instructions in the classroom, adapt them to suit their needs or use them as inspiration to produce customized resource-kits for their students. Alternatively, students may generate their own cyber safety learning materials with individually, in pairs or small group; which could be offered to peers in other schools on a “swap” or “gift” basis or made available for the use of younger pupils within the school. Another strategy might be the production of resources (posters, kits, activity sheets, quiz, videos) for the library, which then can be taken home includes whole families into the cyber safety awareness approach.
A significant component to ensuring cyber safety in schools would be through training of preservice teachers and professional development of in-service teachers. Seminars, workshops and forum attendances such as the annual conference by the National Center Against Bullying
( http://www.ncab.org.au/ ) or the NetSafe conference
( http://www.cybersafety.org.nz/conference08/ ) for example could be encouraged through financial support and time allowance to enable participation. School or individual teacher may subscribe to professional journals, magazines or newsletters offered by the CyberAngels Internet
Safety Program ( http://www.cyberangels.org/ ) or CyberSafety ( http://www.cybersafety.com/newsletter.html
) for example. These publications are valuable resources to keep informed about rapidly emerging technologies and their associated potential for harmful usage.
Staff initiatives and self-education efforts of teachers to foster safe school environments could receive recognition at the time of a pending promotion or advancement of increments on the salary scale.
RESEARCH ISSUES
Until now, there is little material that explores the complexities of cyber violence - and particularly the most prevalent form of cyber bullying - from an educational perspective. Most publications focus on the legal perspective and the technical challenges of cyber safety. The discipline of psychology has generated a body of work comparing cyber bullying to conventional bullying, investigating the psychological impact of the victim and developing counseling approaches. Assumptions seem to be derived from familiar abuse scenarios in conventional, real life contexts. Scholarly writings on policy implications of cyber safety are increasingly emerging.
As discussed in the section on the main issues of cyber violence, the most significant concern is its rise despite protective software, educational programs and various initiatives through online websites. The reasons for this increase need to be investigated through empirical research, as should be the motivation to indulge in cyber violence in the first place. Data on the profile and behavior patterns of the cyber bully would assist in more targeted prevention strategies.
Currently, contradictory views are offered to explain the causes for cyber bullying. Li (2004) for example believes that cyber bullying is simple bullying in a new territory while

Shariff (2005:2) argues that ‘…cyber-bullying is an extension of general bullying in school…’.
Ybarra & Mitchell (2004) deduct that cyber bullies are victims of real-life bullying who go online to seek revenge.
It is also not clear, what is driving this increase in cyber bullying. It could be assumed that a greater saturation with electronic equipment allows greater use and thus abuse.
In Australia for example, 98 % of families have a computer, nine in ten families have the Internet and 76 % have broadband. In this data gathered across 750 families during last December, most families had three mobile phones. (Australian Communications and Media Authority, 2007).
In stemming cyber bullying, it would be important to know where it occurs but available findings on the physical location are conflicting. The British National Children’s Home (2005) for found that half of all cyber bullying (48 %) occurred at school or college. Unsupervised time combined with easy access to computers might facilitate inappropriate use. The study also found that 21 % of cyber bullying occurred after school or college, 17 % was done during the weekend and 6 % happened during school holidays. The low rate of incidents during school holidays and on weekends might be attributed to travel and leisure activities; with schedules reducing opportunities to use the Internet. Contrary, the British scholars Smith, Mahdavi, Carvalho &
Tippet (2006) found that cyber bullying is mostly done outside school. Lower rates of cyber bullying in schools might be due to close supervision by teachers, whereas in the home environment, parents’ lack of technical skills and awareness might result in minimal scrutiny.
Another reason might be the electronic filtering devices installed in school networks and desktops; protective software might be absent or outdated on home computers. In any case, these opposing results need further investigation and clarification.
Other key questions for research would be identifying the preferred tools for electronic abuse and the type of misuse in each forum. Smith, Mahdavi, Carvalho & Tippett (2006) found that phone calls, text messages and email were the most widespread form of cyber bullying, with chat room bullying the least common. These insights came from data collected in 14 different schools across
London where they were asking 92 youngsters aged 11-16 years to fill out questionnaires. A different trend emerged in Australia, where text messages are mostly used for cyber bullying followed by chat rooms (Campbell & Gardner, 2005). More research could explain the variations in behavior and thus assist in more focused prevention and education campaigns. Equally, this applies to the selection of tools for specific cyber bullying tactics. Kowalski, Limber and
Agatston (2007) for example found that flaming occurred mostly in chat rooms or discussion groups, harassment was preferably conducted through emails, denigration dominated email or instant messaging while exclusion was a preferred strategy for social networking sites. Shedding light on these choices will inform counter strategies.
In addition, gender differences emerged from the same study, which indicated that girls were more likely than boys to be involved in cyber bullying both as perpetrators and as victim. It surfaced that girls enjoyed chatting and thus the use of mobile phones, whereas boys usually employed text messages. The impact of picture or video clips and phone call bullying was felt as the most damaging (Kowalski, Limber and Agatston, 2007).
Further investigation into the findings is needed to explain and ultimately counter these phenomena.
INITIATIVES
Over the last few years, websites from various organizations and individuals have mushroomed, offering advice, support and help to tackle the cyber safety and cyber violence duo. The major sites can be categorized in three groups: charitable organizations, government funded initiative and commercial providers.

Non-profit organizations provided the largest number of websites concerned with safe experiences for young people. The world's largest Internet safety and help group is
WiredSafety.org ( http://www.wiredsafety.org/ ). It offers help, information and education to
Internet and mobile device users. All work and help is provided online and free of charge by volunteers. In Australia, the National Centre Against Bullying (NCAB) ( http://www.ncab.org.au/ ) which focuses on research, knowledge dissemination and advocacy to reduce bullying and minimize its harm on young people. There are two Government funded initiatives in Australia.
One is NetAlert ( http://www.netalert.gov.au/ ), which offers practical information and advice on protecting children online, free internet content filters and a section that explain how to complain about content on the internet or report illegal activity. It also offers a free internet safety help line.
The other is Cybersmart kids online ( http://www.cybersmartkids.com.au/ ) by the Australian
Communications and Media Authority (ACMA), which provides parents and children with information and tools for a safe experience of the internet. The site is a community awareness project, which offers help for people from Non-English Speaking Backgrounds via a Telephone
Interpreter Service. Commercial providers include Cyber Safe Kids
( http://www.cybersafekids.com.au/cybersafe/index.asp
). The site offers a cyber safe teaching kit for sale and provides a list of related websites, news and research. Cyberbullying.us
( http://www.cyberbullying.us/services.php
) is a United States based site, which offers cyber violence and cyber bullying prevention training seminars for young people, parents, educators, counselor, mental health professional and others. The cyber safety advocate Rob Nickel provides information, resources and helpful links for parents, teachers and children on Cyber-Safety.com
( http://www.cyber-safety.com/ ).
The above selection is not intended to be comprehensive as new sites and initiatives are appearing at breathtaking pace and existing sites are constantly changing their content and appearance.
However, the collection illustrates the patchwork of effort by governments, charitable and commercial organizations and individuals the world over who are replicating information, services and resources.
IMPLICATIONS
Despite these vast efforts and substantial investments by sponsors and agencies and the use of protective software, there is little research or evidence that these programs prevent cyber violence. On the contrary, a study by the same research team replicated over a five years span indicates that cyber violence is on the rise (Finkelhor, Mitchell & Wolak, 2000; Wolak, Mitchel
& Finkelhor, 2006).
Given the insidious nature and rapid rise in cyber violence combined with the lack of empirical research of the phenomena, the ineffectiveness of electronic guards and the patchy assortment of educational websites, a strong concerted effort to address issues is proposed.
Most importantly, substantial funds need to be dedicated to investigate the under researched area of cyber violence and its antidote of cyber safety. Methodical research into cyber-safety issues is indispensable to determine future policy and evidence-based best practice for educational programs. Future research needs to identify clear categories of cyber violence and their correlations to the preferred online location or digital tool, which will help in determining an accurate taxonomy. Knowledge creation will illuminate the field of cyber violence, thus helping to understand behavior patterns, which in turn will contribute to more targeted and thus effective combat strategies.
Meanwhile, it is suggested that mandatory reporting for online maltreatment or exploitation is introduced. An obligation by law to report specific forms of cyber violence would send a clear

message to abusers that their acts are recorded, followed up and penalized. Cyber violence is not bound by national borders and a global register for online perpetrators to monitor or restrict their future activities is therefore advisable. The forming of a global working party to serve as an umbrella organization for the various national endeavors is recommended. A “blacklist” of harmful and inappropriate online materials could also be compiled; which could be used to supply a “clean feed” of internet services to schools and public computers (i.e. libraries) to filter out prohibited content. In addition, a rating system for online content – similar to the classification system used for television programs – may need to be introduced. A cyber safety ranking on a set scale would give advice on the type of content and safety of source. Easily identifiable symbols in combination with written and verbal announcements would inform about the suitability of online material. On a national level, the founding of a parliamentary committee is suggested to examine cyber-safety and to up-date the Government on the issue to ensure relevant initiatives are implemented and funded. This could include cyber-safety awareness campaigns, educational programs and resources for communities, law enforcement, schools, parents and youth. Specific training courses to prepare professionals in relevant agencies to deal with mounting issues of cyber violence are also necessary. Mandatory training for teachers (either pre-service or inservice) on all aspects of online safety, privacy, responsible use and security and curriculum integration of these aspects are vital. Acceptable use policies and codes of practice for students, teachers and parents are crucial to implement protocols for appropriate behavior. These strategies for training and advice would prevent and uncover cyber violence and assist with investigations.
In addition, help for victims of online abuse needs to be available.
In closing, current initiatives are well intended but have shown to be ineffective. Therefore, heavy investment into cyber safety research and a systematic tackling of the problem through policy and practice on a national as well as worldwide scale is imperative to reduce cyber violence.
References:
- Barack, A. (2005). Sexual harassment on the Internet. Social Science Computer Review,
23 (1), 77-92
- Belsey, Bill (n.d.). www.bullying.org. Where you are not alone. Available at http://www.cyberbullying.ca/ , Retrieved 14 May 2008.
- Beran, T. & Li, Q. (2004). Is cyber-harassment a significant problem? A report on children's experiences. Calgary: University of Calgary.
- Chu, J. (8 August 2005). You Wanna Take this Online? Cyberspace is the 21 st century bully’s playground, where girls play rougher than boys. Time. Toronto.: ONT. 42-43.
- Campbell, M.A., & Gardener, S. (2005). Cyberbullying in high school. Manuscript in preparation.
- DEST, (2003). National Safe Schools Framework. Student Learning and Support Services
Taskforce of the Ministerial Council on Education, Employment, Training and Youth
Affairs. Canberra, Australia.
- Finkelhor, D.; Mitchell, K.; & Wolak, J. (2000) Online Victimization: A report on the
Nation’s Youth. National Center for Missing and Exploited Children Bulletin,
Alexandria, VA. , US Department of Justice, Washington, DC.
- Giroux, H. (2003). The Abandoned Generation: Democracy Beyond the culture of Fear. New
York, NY: Palgrave MacMillian.
- Herring , S.C. (2002) Cyber violence: Recognizing and resisting abuse in online environments.
Asian women, 14, 187-212.
- Kowalski, R., Limber, S. & Agatston, P (2007). Cyber Bullying: Bullying in the Digital Age.
Malden, MA. Blackwell Publishers.

- Li, Qing (2004). Cyber-bullying in school: Nature and extent of adolescents’ experience.
Available at http://www.ucalgary.ca/~qinli/publication/cyberbully_aera05%20.html
,
Retrieved on 14 May 2008.
- Li, Qing (2005). Gender and CMC: A review on conflict and harassment. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology. 21(3), 382-406.
- Shariff, S. and Gouin, R. (2005), Cyber-Dilemmas: Gendered Hierarchies, Free Expression and
Cyber-Safety in Schools. Presented at “Safety and Security in a Networked World:
Balancing Cyber-Rights and Responsibilities,” Oxford Internet Institute conference,
Oxford, U.K. September 8–10, 2005. Available at http://www.oii.ox.ac.uk/research/cybersafety/extensions/pdfs/papers/shaheen_shariff.pdf
.
Retrieved on 14 May 2008.
- Shariff, S. (2005). Cyber-dilemmas in the New Millennium. McGill Journal of Education,
40(3), 467-487.
- National Children’s Home. (2005). The children’s charity. Putting U in the picture.
Mobile bullying survey 2005. Available at http://www.nch.org.uk/uploads/documents/Mobile_bullying_%20report.pdf
, Retrieved on 14 May 2008.
- National i-SAFE Survey. (2004). Available from www.isafe.org
Retrieved on 14 May
2008.
- Servance, R. (2003). Cyber-bullying, cyber-harassment, and the conflict between schools and the First Amendment. Wisconsin Law Review. 1213 at 1215.
- Smith, P., Mahdavi, J.; Carvalho, M.; & Tippet, N.; (2006). An investigation into cyber bullying, its forms, awareness and impact, and the relationship between age and gender in cyber bullying. A Report to the anti-Bullying Alliance. London. UK.
Available at http://www.anti-bullyingalliance.org/ Retrieved on 14 May 2008.
- UCLA Internet Report (2000). UCLA internet report: Surveying the digital future – year one. UCLA Center for Communication Policy. Los Angeles, CA, USA. Available at http://www.ccp.ucla.edu/ Retrieved on 24 October 2007.
Willard, N. (2003). Off0campus, harmful online student speech. Journal of School
Violence. 1(2), 65-93.
- Wolak, J., Mitchell, K., & Finkelhor, D. (2006). Online victimization of youth: five years later. National Center for Missing & Exploited Children bulletin - #07-06-025.
Alexandria, VA.
- Ybarra, M. L. & Mitchell, J. K. (2004). Online aggressor/targets, aggressors and targets:
A comparison of associated youth characteristics. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 45, 1308-1316.