Types of parental mediation in regards to the use of ICT and their relationship with cybervictimization of Primary Education School pupils
Main Article Content
Abstract
INTRODUCTION. Families constantly assume new educational challenges derived from the need to educate minors in the increasingly widespread use of technologies. The family educational strategies that regulate it are known as parental mediation. There are four types of parental mediation based on the use of regulation-control and communication-support strategies: a) negligent parental mediation (low degree of regulation-control and communicationsupport), b) permissive-indulgent parental mediation (low degree of regulation-control, but high communication-support), c) restrictive-authoritarian parental mediation (high degree of regulation-control, but low communication-support), and d) democratic parental mediation (high degree of regulation-control and communication-support). The main objective of the study is to discover if there is any type of statistically significant relationship between these types of parental mediations based on the use of regulation-control and communication support strategies and the cybervictimization of students in 5th or 6th grade of Primary Education School pupils. METHOD. A sample of 1,169 families from 26 Primary Education Schools in Galicia (Spain) was surveyed through a self-administered questionnaire that measures both parental mediation based on the use of regulation-control and communicationsupport strategies in eight habitual situations of use of technologies by minors, as well as cybervictimization of pupils. The analyses carried out with the SPSS Statistics program were based on the non-parametric Chi-square (χ²) association test and the Spearman correlation coefficient to determine both the direction and the degree of the associations. RESULTS. The results obtained allowed us to identify a statistically significant relationship between the type of parental mediation and cybervictimization, obtaining lower cybervictimization frequencies when we refer to the type of democratic parental mediation but higher for negligent, permissiveindulgent and restrictive-authoritarian mediation. DISCUSSION. The implications for educational intervention are discussed, concluding that cyberbullying prevention programs should include parental mediation strategies that enhance communication and intra-family support.
Downloads
Article Details
References
Álvarez-García, D., Núñez, J. C., González-Castro, P., Rodríguez, C. y Cerezo, R. (2019). The effect of parental control on cyber-victimization in adolescence: the mediating role of impulsivity and high-risk behaviors. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, 1159. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01159
Ates, B., Kaya, A. y Tunç, E. (2018). The Investigation of Predictors of Cyberbullying and Cyber Victimization in Adolescents. International Journal of Progressive Education, 14(5), 103-118. http://doi.org/10.29329/ijpe.2018.157.9
Baumrind, D. (2005). Patterns of parental authority and adolescent autonomy. New Directions for Child and Adolescent Development, 108, 61-69. http://doi.org/10.1002/cd.128
Bevilacqua, L., Shackleton, N., Hale, D., Allen, E., Bond, L., Christie, D., Elbourne, D., Fitzgerald-Yau, N., Fletcher, A., Jones, R., Miners, A., Scott, S., Wiggins, M., Bonell, C. y Viner, R. M. (2017). The role of family and school-level factors in bullying and cyberbullying: a cross-sectional study. BMC pediatrics, 17(1), 160-170. http://doi.org/10.1186/s12887-017-0907-8
Bhat, C. S. (2008). Cyber bullying: Overview and strategies for school counsellors, guidance officers, and all school personnel. Australian Journal of Guidance & Counselling, 18(1), 53-66. http://doi.org/10.1375/ajgc.18.1.53
Boniel-Nissim, M. y Sasson, H. (2018). Bullying victimization and poor relationships with parents as risk factors of problematic Internet use in adolescence. Computers in Human Behavior, 88, 176-183. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2018.05.041
Bronfenbrenner, U. (1979). The ecology of human development. Harvard University Press.
Buelga, S., Martínez-Ferrer, B. y Cava, M. J. (2017). Differences in family climate and family communication among cyberbullies, cybervictims and cyber bully-victims in adolescents. Computers in Human Behavior, 76, 164-173. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2017.07.017
Castells, M. (2004). La era de la información: la sociedad red. Siglo XXI.
Comisión Europea (2008). Towards a safer use of the Internet for children in the EU–a parents’ perspective. https://bit.ly/3p4BAGF
Eastin, M. S., Greenberg, B. S. y Hofschire, L. (2006). Parenting the Internet. Journal of Communication, 56(3), 486-504. doi: http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2006.00297.x
Félix, V., Soriano, M., Godoy, C. y Sancho, S. (2010). El ciberacoso en la enseñanza obligatoria. Aula Abierta, 38(1), 47-58. https://bit.ly/3uzesBr
García-Fernández, C. M. (2013). Acoso y ciberacoso en escolares de primaria: factores de personalidad y de contexto entre iguales [tesis de doctorado, Universidad de Córdoba]. https://bit.ly/3vkU6gr
Giménez, C. M. (2015). Cyberbullying. Análisis de su incidencia entre estudiantes y percepciones del profesorado [tesis de doctorado, Universidad de Murcia]. https://bit.ly/3wxxhGC
Inchley, J., Currie, D., Budisavljevic, S., Torsheim,T., Jåstad, A., Cosma, A., Kelly, C., Arnarsson, A. M., Barnekow, V. & Weber, M. M. (2018). Spotlight on adolescent health and well-being: Finding from the 2017/2018 Health Behaviour in School-aged Children (HBSC) survey in Europe and Canada. https://bit.ly/3wx3CN5
Kirwil, L. (2009). Parental mediation of children's Internet use in different European countries. Journal of Children and Media, 3(4), 394-409. http://doi.org/10.1080/17482790903233440
Kokkinos, C. M., Antoniadou, N., Asdre, A. y Voulgaridou, K. (2016). Parenting and Internet behavior predictors of cyber-bullying and cyber-victimization among preadolescents. Deviant Behavior, 37(4), 439-455. http://doi.org/10.1080/01639625.2015.1060087
Larrañaga, E., Yubero, S., Ovejero, A. y Navarro, R. (2016). Loneliness, parent-child communication and cyberbullying victimization among Spanish youths. Computers in Human Behavior, 65, 1-8. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.08.015
Livingstone, S. (2008). Taking risky opportunities in youthful content creation: teenagers' use of social networking sites for intimacy, privacy and self-expression. New Media & Society, 10(3), 393-411. http://doi.org/10.1177/1461444808089415
López-Castro, L. y Priegue, D. (2020). O ciberacoso no alumnado de educación primaria. Eixos da prevención na contorna familia [tesis de doctorado, Universidade de Santiago de Compostela]. https://bit.ly/3fZFht4
Monks, C. P., Robinson, S. y Worlidge, P. (2012). The emergence of cyberbullying: A survey of primary school pupils’ perceptions and experiences. School Psychology International, 33(5), 477-491. http://doi.org/10.1177/0143034312445242
Navarro, R., Serna, C., Martínez, V. y Ruiz-Oliva, R. (2013). The role of Internet use and parental mediation on cyberbullying victimization among Spanish children from rural public schools. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 28(3), 725-745. http://doi.org/10.1007/s10212-012-0137-2
Rosen, L. D., Cheever, N. A. y Carrier, L. M. (2008). The association of parenting style and child age with parental limit setting and adolescent MySpace behavior. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 29(6), 459-471. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.appdev.2008.07.005
Salmivalli, C., Kärnä, A. y Poskiparta, E. (2011). Counteracting bullying in Finland: The KiVa program and its effects on different forms of being bullied. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 35(5), 405-411. http://doi.org/10.1177/0165025411407457
Smahel, D., Machackova, H., Mascheroni, G., Dedkova, L., Staksrud, E., Ólafsson, K., Ólafsson, K., Livingstone, S. y Hasebrink, U. (2020). EU Kids Online 2020: Survey results from 19 countries. https://bit.ly/3yMT7HX
Smith, P. K., López-Castro, L., Robinson, S. y Görzig, A. (2019). Consistency of gender differences in bullying in cross-cultural surveys. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 45, 33-40. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.avb.2018.04.006
Smith, P. K., Mahdavi, J., Carvalho, M., Fisher, S., Russell, S. y Tippett, N. (2008). Cyberbullying: Its nature and impact in secondary school pupils. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 49(4), 376-385. http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-7610.2007.01846.x
Sonck, N., Nikken, P. y De Haan, J. (2013). Determinants of Internet mediation: A comparison of the reports by Dutch parents and children. Journal of Children and Media, 7(1), 96-113. http://doi.org/10.1080/17482798.2012.739806
Valcke, M., Bonte, S., De Wever, B. y Rots, I. (2010). Internet parenting styles and the impact on Internet use of primary school children. Computers & Education, 55(2), 454-464. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2010.02.009
Wright, M. F. (2017). Parental mediation, cyberbullying, and cybertrolling: The role of gender. Computers in Human Behavior, 71, 189-195. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2017.01.059