Several criteria have been proposed for defining cyberbullying to young people, but no studies have proved their relevance. There are also variations across different countries in the meaning and the definition of this behavior. We systematically investigated the role of five definitional criteria for cyberbullying, in six European countries. These criteria (intentionality, imbalance of power, repetition, anonymity, and public vs. private) were combined through a set of 32 scenarios, covering a range of four types of behaviors (written-verbal, visual, exclusion, and impersonation). For each scenario, participants were asked whether it was cyberbullying or not. A randomized version of the questionnaire was shown to 295 Italian, 610 Spanish, 365 German, 320 Sweden, 336 Estonian, and 331 French adolescents aged 11–17 years. Results from multidimensional scaling across country and type of behavior suggested a clear first dimension characterized by imbalance of power and a clear second dimension characterized by intentionality and, at a lower level, by anonymity. In terms of differences across types of behaviors, descriptive frequencies showed a more ambiguous role for exclusion as a form of cyberbullying, but general support was given to the relevance of the two dimensions across all the types of behavior. In terms of country differences, French participants more often perceived the scenarios as cyberbullying as compared with those in other countries, but general support was found for the relevance of the two dimensions across countries.

Despite a surge in research on self-injury in the last decade, a summary of research findings about the development of Non-Suicidal Self-Injury (NSSI) over time in community youth samples is not yet present in the scientific literature. This study aims to summarize the empirical literature on this topic, examining both the occurrence (Study 1) and frequency (Study 2) of NSSI over time, and for this reason, a Systematic Review and Bayesian Meta-Analysis were conducted. Following the PRISMA guidelines, the longitudinal studies included in the systematic review consisted of 41 papers (Study 1 = 16; Study 2 = 25). Only studies with available data were included in the meta-analysis (Study 1 = 12; Study 2 = 11). First, the findings highlight limits related to methodological aspects, the design of the studies, and the availability of data. Meta-analytic results shows that across development, the frequency (i.e., not the occurrence) of NSSI increases for the group of younger adolescents, remains stable in the group of middle adolescents, and it decreases for older adolescents. This study highlights some limitations that can be summarized in three different macro categories: the first refers to methodological aspects (e.g., the lifetime prevalence of NSSI), the second to the design of the studies (e.g., not homogeneous cohort; short-term covered), and the third to the availability of data. The current meta-analysis tries to shed light on the longitudinal research on NSSI behavior and how this behavior develops in terms of both occurrence and frequency, providing practical and methodological indications for future research.

The present study tried to answer the research need for empirically validated and theoretically based instruments to assess cyberbullying and cybervictimization. The psychometric properties of the Florence CyberBullying-CyberVictimization Scales (FCBVSs) were analyzed in a sample of 1,142 adolescents (Mage=15.18 years; SD=1.12 years; 54.5% male). For both cybervictimization and cyberbullying, results support a gender invariant model involving 14 items and four factors covering four types of behaviors (written-verbal, visual, impersonation, and exclusion). The second-order confirmatory factor analysis confirmed that a "global," second-order measure of cyberbullying and cybervictimization fits the data well. Overall, the scales showed good validity (construct, concurrent, and convergent) and reliability (internal consistency and test-retest). In addition, using the global key question measure as a criterion, ROC analyses, determining the ability of a test to discriminate between groups, allowed us to identify cutoff points to classify respondents as involved/not involved starting from the continuum measure derived from the scales.

Cyberbullying is a ubiquitous topic when considering young people and internet and communication technologies (ICTs). For interventional purposes, it is essential to take into account the perspective of adolescents. This is the reason why our main focus is 1) investigating the role of different criteria in the perceived severity of cyberbullying incidents, and 2) examining the differences between countries in the perceived severity of cyberbullying. The sample consisted of 1,964 adolescents (48.2% girls) from middle and high schools of four different countries, i.e. Estonia, Italy, Germany, and Turkey. The participants’ age ranged from 12 to 20 years old with a mean age of 14.49 (SD = 1.66) years. To assess perceived severity, participants rated a set of 128 scenarios, which systematically included one or more of five criteria (intentionality, repetition, imbalance of power, public vs private and anonymity) and represented four types of cyberbullying behaviours (Written – Verbal, Visual, Exclusion, Impersonation). The role of different criteria was analysed using the Exploratory Structural Equation Modelling (ESEM). Results showed a similar structure across the four countries (invariant except for the latent factors’ means). Further, criteria of imbalance of power and, to a lesser extent, intentionality, anonymity and repetition always in combination, were found to be the most important criteria to define the severity of cyberbullying. Differences between countries highlighted specific features of Turkish students, who perceived all scenarios as more severe than adolescents from other countries and were more sensitive to imbalance of power. German and Italian students showed an opposite perception of anonymity combined with intentionality. For Italian participants, an anonymous attack was less threatening than for participants of other countries, whereas for German students anonymity caused more insecurity and fear. In addition, Italian adolescents were more perceptive of the criterion of intentionality. Finally, Estonian adolescents did not show strong differences in their factor scores compared to adolescents from the other countries.