1. Introduction

Bullying—whether offline or online—constitutes a major threat to the psychological, social, and educational wellbeing of children, adolescents, and even adults. With the expansion of digital communication, traditional bullying practices have evolved into cyberbullying, a complex phenomenon characterized by anonymity, permanence, and widespread reach. Both forms of aggression are interconnected but differ in modalities, mechanisms, and the intensity of harm.

2. Traditional Bullying

2.1 Definition and Characteristics

Bullying is widely defined as repeated, intentional aggression involving a power imbalance between the perpetrator and the victim (Olweus, 1993). Key elements include:

Intent to harm
Repetition of behavior
Power imbalance (physical, social, psychological, or situational)

Bullying can be:

Physical (hitting, pushing)
Verbal (insults, name-calling)
Relational/social (exclusion, spreading rumors)
Property-related (stealing or damaging belongings)

Power Imbalance

Power may arise from physical strength, popularity, social status, literacy or communication abilities, age, or group membership (Smith & Sharp, 1994).

2.2 Psychological Mechanisms

Bullying behaviors often stem from:

A desire for dominance and social status (Salmivalli, 2010)
Emotional dysregulation
Exposure to aggressive behavior at home or in media
Lack of empathy or moral disengagement (Bandura, 1999)

Additionally, group dynamics—particularly the involvement of bystanders—reinforce bullying cycles (Craig & Pepler, 2007).

2.3 Impacts of Bullying on Victims

Victims of traditional bullying often experience:

Anxiety and depression (Hawker & Boulton, 2000)
Low self-esteem
Psychosomatic symptoms (e.g., headaches, stomachaches)
Academic disengagement, absenteeism, and low performance (Glew et al., 2005)
Long-term mental health issues including PTSD-like symptoms

Chronic exposure to bullying significantly increases the risk of self-harm and suicidal ideation (Kim & Leventhal, 2008).

3. Cyberbullying

3.1 Definition

Cyberbullying refers to intentional, repeated harm inflicted through digital technologies such as:

Social networking platforms
Messaging apps
Online gaming platforms
Email, websites, or multimedia sharing

According to Hinduja and Patchin (2015), cyberbullying includes harassment, denigration, impersonation, outing, trickery, exclusion, and cyberstalking.

3.2 Key Features Differentiating Cyberbullying From Traditional Bullying

1. Anonymity

Cyberbullies can conceal their identity, increasing unpredictability and psychological distress (Livingstone & Smith, 2014).

2. Permanence (“digital footprint”)

Harmful content can be stored, reshared, and viewed indefinitely, intensifying humiliation (Slonje, Smith & Frisén, 2013).

3. Borderlessness

Cyberbullying transcends physical boundaries; victims may experience harassment at home, school, or anywhere.

4. Larger audience

Digital platforms facilitate rapid dissemination, exacerbating social embarrassment.

5. 24/7 Accessibility

Victims cannot easily escape or find safe spaces, increasing mental exhaustion.

3.3 Psychosocial Mechanisms

Cyberbullying is enabled by:

Disinhibition effect (Suler, 2004) – people behave more aggressively online.
Asynchronous communication, which reduces empathy and feedback.
Algorithmic amplification, which can spread harmful content quickly.

Perpetrators may view online aggression as low-risk due to lack of visible emotional cues (Barlett & Gentile, 2012).

3.4 Impacts of Cyberbullying

Cyberbullying is associated with:

High levels of anxiety, depression, and loneliness (Kowalski et al., 2014)
Sleep disturbances and chronic stress
Declines in academic performance and concentration
Emotional trauma due to public humiliation
Increased risk of self-harm and suicide (Hinduja & Patchin, 2010)

Some research indicates that cyberbullying effects may be as severe or more severe than traditional bullying due to its reach and permanence (Campbell, 2005).

4. Interrelationship Between Bullying and Cyberbullying

Many victims of cyberbullying are simultaneously victims of traditional bullying. The two forms often reinforce each other:

School conflicts spill into digital spaces.
Digital harassment escalates in-person intimidation.
Perpetrators may use online tools to continue harassment anonymously (Wright, 2018).

Cyberbullying does not replace traditional bullying—it amplifies it.

5. Prevention and Intervention Strategies

1. School-level policies

Anti-bullying programs (e.g., Olweus Bullying Prevention Program)
Whole-school approaches and zero-tolerance rules
Digital citizenship curricula

2. Parental involvement

Monitoring online behaviors
Open communication
Educating children on safe digital practices

3. Legal and policy frameworks

Many countries have enacted cyberbullying and online harassment laws.

4. Psychological support

Counseling and school psychological services
Restorative justice practices
Social–emotional learning interventions

5. Technology-based safeguards

Reporting tools
Content moderation
AI-based detection systems

6. Conclusion

Bullying and cyberbullying remain critical areas of concern in educational, social, and digital contexts. While rooted in similar psychological mechanisms, cyberbullying introduces complexities related to anonymity, reach, and permanence. Addressing these issues requires coordinated efforts across schools, families, communities, platforms, and mental health systems. Both forms of aggression have profound and long-lasting impacts, underscoring the need for prevention, research, and policy action.

Detailed References

Bandura, A. (1999). Moral disengagement in the perpetration of inhumanities. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 3(3), 193–209.
Barlett, C., & Gentile, D. (2012). Attacking others online: The formation of cyberbullying attitudes. Computers in Human Behavior, 28(2), 593–598.
Campbell, M. (2005). Cyber bullying: An old problem in a new guise? Australian Journal of Guidance and Counselling, 15(1), 68–76.
Craig, W., & Pepler, D. (2007). Understanding bullying: From research to practice. Canadian Psychology, 48(2), 86–93.
Glew, G. et al. (2005). Bullying, psychosocial adjustment, and academic performance. Pediatrics, 114(1), 123–130.
Hawker, D., & Boulton, M. (2000). Twenty years’ research on peer victimization. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 41, 441–455.
Hinduja, S., & Patchin, J. (2010). Cyberbullying and suicide. Archives of Suicide Research, 14(3), 206–221.
Hinduja, S., & Patchin, J. (2015). Bullying Beyond the Schoolyard: Preventing and Responding to Cyberbullying. Sage.
Kim, Y. & Leventhal, B. (2008). Bullying and suicide. International Journal of Adolescent Medicine and Health, 20(2), 133–154.
Kowalski, R. et al. (2014). Bullying in the digital age. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 15(3), 107–135.
Livingstone, S., & Smith, P. (2014). Annual research review: Harms experienced by child users of online platforms. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 55, 635–654.
Olweus, D. (1993). Bullying at School: What We Know and What We Can Do. Blackwell.
Salmivalli, C. (2010). Bullying and the peer group. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 15, 112–120.
Slonje, R., Smith, P., & Frisén, A. (2013). The nature of cyberbullying and strategies for prevention. Computers in Human Behavior, 29(1), 26–32.
Smith, P., & Sharp, S. (1994). School Bullying: Insights and Perspectives. Routledge.
Suler, J. (2004). The online disinhibition effect. CyberPsychology & Behavior, 7(3), 321–326.
Wright, M. (2018). Cyberbullying within developmental context. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 47, 1–5.

Curriculum Leadership by Glatthorn

Pages

Bullying (Olweus, 1993) and Cyberbullying (Hinduja & Patchin, 2015). I remember when I was doing assignments/completing this course, I was victim of bullying/Cyberbullying from Politics and their people 16/11/25