From inside the cyber relationship abuse, there was up to 10

3. Abilities

Table step 1 portrays the fresh frequency of each of your dangers of the research, with regards to the degree of seriousness receive. Simultaneously, they suggests the fresh evaluations amongst the distributions away from girls and boys into the various other dangers. Overall, the participants which demonstrated no problem ranged anywhere between % who had no problems with tricky Sites use and up so you can 83.4% who had no troubles having on the internet brushing. We keep in mind that the range of reasonable and you can really serious trouble ranged between cuatro% having sexting and you may 17% to have difficult Sites explore. 9% of reasonable/significant difficulties along with cyberbullying, it reached thirteen.7%. New frequencies found in the other degrees of difficulties have been usually better for girls than for people.

Table 1

Frequency of each and every of one’s threats as a purpose of new seriousness of state for the overall shot and of sex.

In this regard, significant differences were also found between boys and girls in the mean total scores of cyberbullying victimization (Welch’s t = ?2.02, p < 0.043, d = 0.07), online grooming (Welch's t = ?3.51, p < 0.001, d = 0.12) and problematic Internet use (Welch's t = ?2.07, p < 0.039, d = 0.07). In these cases, the mean scores were higher for girls than for boys. There were no significant differences in the rest of the risks: cyber dating abuse victimization (Welch's t = ?1.9, p < 0.058, d = 0.12) and sexting (Welch's t = 0.94, p < 0.410, d = 0.03).

Regarding the type of school (private and public), significant differences were only found in the risks of online grooming (t = ?3.37, p < 0.001, d = 0.13) and sexting (t = 3.8, p < 0.001, d = 0.15). The mean scores were higher in public schools than in private schools in both cases.

In terms of the educational stage (1st–2nd grade of CSE, 3rd–4th grade of CSE and Post-secondary Education), statistically significant differences were found for the risks of cyberbullying victimization (p < 0.002), online grooming (p < 0.001), sexting (p < 0.001) and problematic Internet use (p < 0.001). The scores were higher in 3rd–4th grades, except for online grooming victimization, where higher scores were found in Post-secondary Education (see Table 2 ).

Table 2

Differences as a function of educational stage (1st–second, 3rd–last grades out-of CSE and you may Post-additional Education) regarding risks (letter = 3212, except for the case out of cyber dating abuse with n = 1061).

Note: Yards = arithmetic suggest; SD = basic departure, F = Welch’s-F, p = significance; ? 2 = eta squared.

Table 3 shows the newest correlations involving the some dangers. All of them got self-confident and you may significant eastmeeteast eÅŸleÅŸme hilesi correlations with each other, into relationships anywhere between cyberbullying victimization and you may cyber relationship victimization updates aside. Web sites dangers that have a sexual component (online brushing and you may sexting) have been highly synchronised. Typically, new correlations was indeed higher to have males in most of the dangers, except for the latest relationships between cyber relationship victimization and you may brushing and ranging from tricky Websites play with and you can cyberbullying victimization, on the internet grooming and you will sexting.

Dining table step 3

Note: The correlations for boys are shown below the diagonal and for girls above it. All correlations are significant at p < 0.001. M = arithmetic mean; SD = standard deviation.

Table cuatro gift ideas the fresh comorbidities one of many individuals Websites dangers associated in order to personal correspondence (cyberbullying victimization, cyber matchmaking discipline victimization, sexting an internet-based brushing). Only the players who accomplished every item regarding the risks relevant to help you victimization (letter = 1109) was indeed thought (i.e., reducing on the investigation people who didn’t come with partner). Of the leftover players, sixty.7% shown a minumum of one of your analysed dangers (letter = 674). The danger to the higher personal prevalence try cyberbullying victimization (%), accompanied by online grooming. The most frequent a few-exposure combos was in fact cyberbullying victimization-on line brushing and cyberbullying-sexting. I stress the three-risk mixture of cyberbullying-sexting-brushing victimization. Ultimately, 5.49% of your own victimized teenagers presented every threats conjointly.