Morality distortions as risk factor in bullying and cyberbullying.

Journal title MALTRATTAMENTO E ABUSO ALL’INFANZIA
Author/s Simona C. S. Caravita, Luca Milani, Giulia Binaghi, Cristiana Apolloni
Publishing Year 2018 Issue 2018/1
Language Italian Pages 20 P. 47-66 File size 262 KB
DOI 10.3280/MAL2018-001004
DOI is like a bar code for intellectual property: to have more infomation click here

Below, you can see the article first page

If you want to buy this article in PDF format, you can do it, following the instructions to buy download credits

Article preview

FrancoAngeli is member of Publishers International Linking Association, Inc (PILA), a not-for-profit association which run the CrossRef service enabling links to and from online scholarly content.

Studies indicate that morality is important for the explanation of bullying, and that bullying and cyberbullying overlap, although these phenomena are often considered separately. The present study involved 206 adolescents (14-17 years) and was aimed at investigating whether moral acceptability of bullying and other moral dimensions differ in cyberbullying in comparison to bullying. Adolescents’ perceptions of the severity of cyberbullying as compared to bullying did not differ significantly. Nevertheless, off-line bullying elicited higher moral disengagement and moral emotions than cyberbullying. Perceiving bullying as morally acceptable was associated with both online and offline bullying, and with defending the victim but only offline. Moral disengagement was also positively associated with the outsider role only in offline bullying situations. Hence, morality seemed to be more relevant in explaining traditional bullying than cyberbullying. Nevertheless, a moral dilution appears in cyberbullying.

Keywords: Bullying, cyberbullying, morality, moral disengagment, moral emotions

  1. Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
  2. Berger, C., & Caravita, S. C. S. (2016). Why do early adolescents bully? Exploring the influence of prestige norms on social and psychological motives to bully. Journal of Adolescence, 46, 45-56,
  3. Camodeca, M., Caravita, S. C. S., & Coppola, G. (2015). Bullying in preschool: The associations between participant roles, social competence, and social preference. Aggressive Behavior, 41, 4, 210-221,
  4. Caravita, S. C. S., Donghi, E., Banfi, A., & Meneghini, F. (2016). Essere immigrati come fattore di rischio per la vittimizzazione nel bullismo: uno studio italiano su caratteristiche individuali e processi di gruppo. Maltrattamento e abuso all’infanzia, 18, 59-87, DOI: 10.3280/MAL2016-001004
  5. Caravita, S. C. S., & Gini, G. (2010). L’(Im) moralità del bullismo. Milano: Unicopli.
  6. Caravita, S. C. S., Pöyhönen, V., Rajala, I., & Salmivalli, C. (2011). The architecture of high status among Finnish youth. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 29, 668-679,
  7. Caravita, S. C., Colombo, B., Stefanelli, S., & Zigliani, R. (2016). Emotional, psychological and behavioral responses elicited by the exposition to cyberbullying situations: Two experimental studies. Psicología Educativa, 22, 1, 49-59,
  8. Fredstrom, B. K. (2011). Electronic and school-based victimization: Unique con-texts for adjustment difficulties during adolescence. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 40, 4, 405-415,
  9. Genta, M. L., Brighi, A., & Guarini, A. (2013). Cyberbullismo: Ricerche e strategie di intervento. Milano: FrancoAngeli.
  10. Gradinger, P., Strohmeier, D., & Spiel, C. (2009). Traditional bullying and cyber-bullying. Identification of risk groups for adjustment problems. Journal of Psychology, 217, 205-213, DOI: 10.1027/0044-3409.217.4.205
  11. Gini, G., Pozzoli, T., & Hymel, S. (2014). Moral disengagement among children and youth: A meta‐analytic review of links to aggressive behavior. Aggressive Behavior, 40, 1, 56-68,
  12. Hawley, P. H. (2003). Prosocial and coercive configurations of resource control in early adolescence: A case for the well-adapted machiavellian. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 49, 279-309.
  13. Hymel, S., Closson, L. M., Caravita, S. C. S., & Vaillancourt, T. (2010). Social status among peers: From sociometric attraction to peer acceptance to perceived popularity. In P. K. Smith & C. H. Hart (Eds.), Handbook of childhood social development: 2nd Edition (pp. 375-392). Malden, MA: Wiley/Blackwell.
  14. Høst, K., Brugman, D., Tavecchio, L., & Beem, L. (1998). Students’ perception of the moral atmosphere in secondary school and the relationship between moral competence and moral atmosphere. Journal of Moral Education, 27, 1, 47-70, DOI: 10.1080/0305724980270104
  15. Kowalski, R. M., & Limber, S. P. (2007). Electronic bullying among middle school students. Journal of Adolescent Halth, 41, 6, 22-30,
  16. Leoni, M., & Caravita, S. C. S. (2014). Vittimizzazione in situazioni di bullismo e colpevolizzazione della vittima in rapporto a dimensioni di contesto: uno studio in due città. Maltrattamento e abuso all’infanzia, 16, 1, 77-100, DOI: 10.3280/MAL2014-001005
  17. Macháčková, H., Dedkova, L., Sevcikova, A., & Cerna, A. (2013). Bystanders’ support of cyberbullied schoolmates. Journal of Community and Applied Social Psychology, 23, 25-36,
  18. Menesini, E., Nocentini, A., Palladino, B. E., Friesen, A., Friesen, S., Ortega, R., Calmaestra, J., et al. (2012). Cyberbullying definition among adolescents: A comparison across six European countries. Cyberpsychology, Behavior and Social Networking, 15, 9, 455-463,
  19. Mitchell, K. J., Jones, L. M., & Turner, H. A. (2017). Past year technology-involved peer harassment victimization and recent depressive symptoms and suicide ideation among a national sample of youth. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 13, 1-15, DOI: 10.1177/0886260517748413
  20. Muthén, B., & Muthén, L. (2017). Mplus user’s guide (8th ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Muthén & Muthén.
  21. Olweus, D. (1996). Bullismo a scuola. Ragazzi oppressi, ragazzi che opprimono. Firenze: Giunti.
  22. Palladino, B. E., Nocentini, A., & Menesini, E. (2015). Psychometric properties of the Florence cyberbullying-cybervictimization scales. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 18, 2, 112-119,
  23. Parkhurst, J. T., & Hopmeyer, A. (1998). Sociometric popularity and peer-perceived popularity two distinct dimensions of peer status. The Journal of Early Adolescence, 18, 2, 125-144, DOI: 10.1177/0272431698018002001
  24. Pornari, C. D., & Wood, J. (2010). Peer and cyber aggression in secondary school students: The role of moral disengagement, hostile attribution bias, and out-come expectancies. Aggressive Behavior, 36, 2, 81-94,
  25. Renati, R., Berrone, C., & Zanetti, M., A. (2012). morally disengaged and unempathic: Do cyberbullies fit these definitions? An exploratory study. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 15, 391-398,
  26. Salmivalli, C., Lagerspetz, K., Björkqvist, K., Österman, K., & Kaukiainen, A. (1996). Bullying as a group process: Participant roles and their relations to social status within the group. Aggressive Behavior, 22, 1-15,
  27. Slonje, R., Smith, P. K., & Frisén, A. (2012). Processes of cyberbullying, and feelings of remorse by bullies: A pilot study. European Journal of Developmental Psychology, 9, 2, 244-259, DOI: 10.1080/17405629.2011.643670
  28. Smith, P. K., Mahdavi, J., Carvalho, M., Fisher, S., Russell, S., & Tippett, N. (2008). Cyberbullying: Its nature and impact in secondary school pupils. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 49, 4, 376-385,
  29. Suler, J. (2004). The online disinhibition effect. Cyberpsychology & behavior,7, 3, 321-326, DOI: 10.1089/1094931041291295
  30. Vandebosch, H., & Van Cleemput, K. (2008). Defining cyberbullying: A qualitative research into the perceptions of youngsters. CyberPsychology & Behav-ior,11, 4, 499-503,
  31. Whittaker, E., & Kowalski, R. M. (2015). Cyberbullying Via Social Media. Journal of School Violence,14, 1, 11-29, DOI: 10.1080/15388220.2014.949377
  32. Zanetti, M. A., & Colangelo (2018, in press). Educare per prevenire la sofferenza delle cybervittime. Ricadute educative a partire dalla legge 71/2017. Maltrattamento e abuso all’infanzia, 20, 1, 11-30.
  33. Wright, M. F., & Li, Y. (2011). The associations between young adults’ face-to-face prosocial behaviors and their online prosocial behaviors. Computers in Human Behavior, 27, 1959-1962,

  • Focus Monotematico: Il Cyberbullismo come emergenza sociale: indicazioni per l'intervento alla luce della nuova normativa Maria Assunta Zanetti, Simona C. S. Caravita, in MALTRATTAMENTO E ABUSO ALL'INFANZIA 1/2018 pp.7
    DOI: 10.3280/MAL2018-001001

Simona C. S. Caravita, Luca Milani, Giulia Binaghi, Cristiana Apolloni, Il funzionamento morale come fattore di rischio per il bullismo e il cyberbullismo in "MALTRATTAMENTO E ABUSO ALL’INFANZIA" 1/2018, pp 47-66, DOI: 10.3280/MAL2018-001004