CHAPTER FIVE - CONCLUSIONS

CHAPTER FIVE: CONCLUSIONS

CHAPTER FIVE: CONCLUSIONS

Overview

The purpose of this final chapter is to review the findings of this study and provide an analysis of each research question in light of previous research discussed in Chapter Two. The researcher will provide an in-depth analysis comparing and contrasting the present research with prior studies and discuss possible implications of this research study. The chapter will conclude with a discussion of the limitations of the study and recommendations for future research.

Discussion

The purpose of this quantitative, causal-comparative study was to determine whether there are differences in the prevalence of cyberbullying experiences scores (victimization and offending) based on biological gender (female/male) and level of religiosity (higher/lower) among traditional undergraduate students attending faith-based universities. The goal of the study was to provide relevant, up-to-date statistical data to stakeholders at faith-based universities to assist in planning and implementing campus safety protocols that include the construct of cyberbullying. The participants in this study were from two small, faith-based universities in the southern part of the United States, where students are required to attend chapel or convocation as part of their undergraduate studies. Of the 284 (N = 284) participants, 180 (63.3%) were females and 66 (36.7%) were males, with 209 (73.5%) students answering questions on the DUREL that indicated a higher level of religiosity, and 75 (26.5%) reporting answers indicating a lower level of religiosity. All of the students completed the 25-question survey with one demographic question asking them to identify their biological gender, female or male, as defined by God (Gen. 1:27). Three students did indicate they preferred not to answer the question of gender; therefore, the scores from those three surveys were not included in the data set. Scores for all three sections of the survey (COAS for victimization, COAS for offending, and the DUREL) were entered into SPSS, where data were reviewed, descriptive statistics were aggregated, and data were screened for extreme outliers. Data screening revealed extreme outliers for all of the independent variables; however, when the outliers were removed, the significance did not change and the researcher kept the extreme outliers because the two-way ANOVA is robust enough to handle the data with the sample size N = 284. A two-way ANOVA was conducted for each research question to determine if the categorical independent variables differed when compared to the continuous dependent variable. Assumption testing was conducted for each research question as well, and the Kolmogorov-Smirnov resulted in p < 0.05; therefore, the null hypotheses were rejected for assumption of normality. However, the Levene’s test of equality of error variances, which was run for each research question, produced results that validated the assumption of equality of variance was tenable.

The first research question sought to determine if there was a difference in the prevalence of cyberbullying victimization experiences scores, based on biological gender (female/male) and level of religiosity (higher/lower), among traditional undergraduate students attending faithbased universities. The two-way ANOVA showed that there was not a significant difference in the prevalence of cyberbullying victimization experiences scores when testing the main effect of gender (p = .643). It also showed that there was no significant difference when testing the main effect of level of religiosity (p = .172) or the interaction of the two independent variables, gender and level of religiosity (p = .267). When looking at the overall score (lifetime and last 30 days) for prevalence of cyberbullying victimization experiences, 57.2% of females and 53.8% of males indicated they had never been a victim of cyberbullying. Examining the overall victimization scores, based on level of religiosity, revealed that 59.8% of students with a higher level of religiosity indicated they had never been a victim of cyberbullying, while 45.3% of students with a lower level of religiosity indicated they had never been victims of cyberbullying.

Cyberbullying prevalence rates have varied across studies that have been conducted (Webber & Ovedovitz, 2018). When considering other research, it is also important to look at the percentage of students that did report being cyberbullying victims. Webber and Ovedovitz (2018) conducted a study at a large Catholic university to examine prevalence rates but did not examine level of religiosity. Their study revealed prevalence rates of 4.3% among students while they were attending university, whereas 27.8% indicated having been a cyberbullying victim before attending university. In comparison, the present study showed prevalence rates of 4.9% among students during the last 30 days (while the students were attending university), and in contrast, this study revealed that 41.9% of students reported being a victim of cyberbullying at some point during their lifetime. This study supports the low prevalence rates found by Webber and Ovedovitz (2018) among university students at a faith-based university; however, there is a distinct difference in the lifetime prevalence rates, indicating a need for further research in this area. Zacchilli and Valerio (2011) also conducted a study at a Catholic university, and they found that 1% of freshman reported being a victim and 2.9% of seniors reported the same. This study would reinforce that research, although students in this study were not surveyed based on academic standing.

Pörhöla (2016) conducted a study among university students at a secular university and found that 50% of students reported being cyberbullied during Grades K-12. This study is comparable to that study in that prevalence rates for students who were victims of cyberbullying sometime during their life was 41.9%. More research on prevalence rates among different demographic groups to compare and contrast factors that influence cyberbullying behaviors is recommended.

Webber and Ovedovitz (2018) also reported victimization by gender. Of their 187 participants, 99 were females and 88 were males. They found that seven females reported victimization while attending university and one male reported being a victim. The present study had 284 (N = 284) participants with 180 females and 104 males. Of the 180 females, 10 reported being a victim of cyberbullying in the last 30 days (5.5%), whereas four males reported being a victim (3.8%) in the same time-period. Although there were more females who reported victimization, due to the sample size of the present study, there is not a statistically significant difference.

In addition, this study added to the miniscule body of research on cyberbullying at faithbased universities by examining level of religiosity and cyberbullying victimization. Of the 284 participants, 134 females (74.4%) reported a higher level of religiosity and 46 (25.6%) reported a lower level of religiosity; moreover, 75 males (72.1%) reported a higher level of religiosity and 29 males (27.9%) reported a lower level of religiosity. Of the female students surveyed who had higher levels of religiosity, 38.1% reported being a victim of cyberbullying during their lifetime. The prevalence of cyberbullying victimization experiences (overall score) among female students with lower levels of religiosity was 56.5%. Additionally, 44% of male participants with higher levels of religiosity reported being a victim during their lifetime; furthermore, 51.7% of males with lower levels of religiosity reported they had been a victim. This is a significant finding for this study because it reveals that students are victims of cyberbullying regardless of their religious background or beliefs. Although the victimization rates were small for the last 30 days compared to victimization rates during the student’s lifetime, there were still eight students who reported they had been cyberbullied in this time-period; therefore, this research is important to understanding student behavior and can assist administrators and stakeholders in addressing student safety. Examining the construct among university students, based on academic standing and over a longer period of time, may give clearer insight into the potential scope of the issue. Although the percentages appear to be greater among students with lower levels of religiosity, when considering the sample size, the statistical data did not support rejecting the null hypothesis that gender and level of religiosity did not have an effect of prevalence rates of victimization experiences.

The second research question sought to determine the prevalence of cyberbullying offending experiences, based on biological gender and level of religiosity, among traditional undergraduate students attending faith-based universities. The two-way ANOVA conducted for this research question showed that there was no significant difference in the prevalence of cyberbullying offending experiences scores when testing the main effect of gender (p = .080). It also showed that there was no significant difference when testing the main effect of level of religiosity (p = .338) or the interaction of the two independent variables, gender and level of religiosity (p = .586), on the dependent variable of cyberbullying offending experiences.

In the Webber and Ovedovitz (2018) study, the prevalence of cyberbullying offending experiences among students at a large, Catholic university was 7.5% while attending university and 7.5% reported being a cyberbully prior to attending university. The present study found that 16.9% of participants reported being a cyberbully in their lifetime; however, only 0.07% reported having any cyberbullying offending experiences in the last 30 days (while attending university). Although the prevalence rates for lifetime offending is higher in this study, the sample size is also larger. Based on the data collected from the sample (N = 284), the researcher asserts that students in this study were not actively participating as a cyberbully while attending university during the time-period surveyed. Zacchilli and Valerio (2011) also found small incidents of cyberbullying offending among college students, with prevalence rates of 8.6% among freshman and seniors while attending college; therefore, this study reinforces previous studies that prevalence rates of cyberbullying offending experiences at faith-based universities appear to be low. There are so few studies in this area that further research with larger populations would be beneficial to this field of study.

The examination of levels of religiosity and cyberbullying was unique to this research study. Although the null hypotheses for cyberbullying offending experiences were not rejected, there is valuable information gleaned from this study to help fill the gap in the literature. Of the 284 participants (N = 284), 134 females and 75 males had higher levels of religiosity, with 19.4% of females and 18.6% of males indicating they had been a cyberbully in their lifetime. Among the same population, 46 females and 29 males had lower levels of religiosity, with 8.6% of females and 13.7% of males indicating they had been a cyberbully in their lifetime. One might assume that students attending a faith-based institution would make decisions about how to treat others based on Scripture. In Scripture, the second greatest commandment is to love one’s neighbor as oneself (Mark 12:31); therefore, the fact that there are higher prevalence rates for students with higher levels of religiosity could indicate disconnected thinking between faith and moral issues. These numbers line up with the research by Hudson and Díaz Pearson (2018) that indicated that only 14% of students who attended a faith-based institution believed that faith played a role in their understanding of morality.

Framed within the TRA and the TPB, cyberbullying is a behavior that the bully can control; however, it also involves the individual’s normative beliefs, which take into account the expectations of others. It is possible that self-reporting of a negative behavior (cyberbullying offending) is difficult because the students understand expectations within a Christian worldview and answered accordingly. The prevalence rate of 0.07% of cyberbullying offending in the last 30 days demonstrates how this may have been a factor in this study. Reporting of cyberbullying victimization was much higher, and although there may be more victims than offenders, the possibility that the student understands that there is empathy for victims may have influenced their willingness to report those behaviors. Within the TRA, this is the person’s attitude toward a behavior, which can then influence his or her actions. The research on religiosity and cyberbullying is limited; therefore, the data from this study adds to the body of research to help improve and identify factors that may or may not influence cyberbullying behaviors and reporting.

Implications

Research has been conducted at some secular universities to determine cyberbullying prevalence, and although those rates vary, studies at faith-based universities are scant. This study is unique in adding the level of religiosity as a factor to the overall study of the construct. This research demonstrates that gender and level of religiosity are not significant factors in influencing the prevalence rates of cyberbullying victimization and offending experiences scores; however, it does open the doors for future research to investigate further how one’s religious beliefs affect one’s behaviors. It also provides confirmation that prevalence rates are low at the few faith-based universities that have been studied for both victims and offenders while they are attending university.

Even though the prevalence rates are low at faith-based universities, students did report being victims of cyberbullying. This information is useful for stakeholders at faith-based universities who can use this data to reinforce campus safety plans and better understand the challenges facing students before they arrive at college and while they are on campus. Cyberbullying can cause students of all ages to experience disruption in many areas of their lives (Williford & Depaolis, 2016); therefore, knowing if a student has been cyberbullied in their lifetime can provide relevant statistical data for college counselors to enable them to meet the needs of incoming freshmen. Data related to cyberbullying offending did not indicate that students had been cyberbullying offenders in the last 30 days. This may be a result of the student being hesitant to report aggressive behaviors for fear of being discovered, or it may be an indicator that cyberbullying offending is not a prevalent issue at faith-based universities. More research is needed in this area to make definitive conclusions.

Another implication of this research is the number of students attending the faith-based universities who reported having lower levels of religiosity. Of the 284 participants, 209 (73.5%) indicated they had a higher level of religiosity, which reasons that they believe in God, they participate in organized and non-organized religious activities, and that God influences their behavior and life choices. The other 75 (26.5%) indicated they had a lower level of religiosity, which represents answers indicating that they have little to no participation in organized and nonorganized religion and do not believe God influences their lives and life decisions. Of the 209 participants who reported higher levels of religiosity, 134 were female and 75 were male. Of the 75 participants that indicated a lower level of religiosity, 46 were female and 29 were male. This information is valuable because stakeholders at faith-based universities may assume that students who choose to attend have strong levels of faith since they are required to attend chapel or convocation as part of their educational studies. This research shows that 26.5% of the participants in this study do not have a strong faith, and many indicated God does not influence their behaviors. Focusing on spiritual growth and discipleship can also influence a student’s behaviors, how the student acts on campus, in the community, and eventually in the workforce (Quinn & Lewin, 2019). These would all be important aspects for a faith-based university to consider.

Limitations

When conducting research, the opportunities for limitations to arise during the course of the study are inevitable; however, understanding the limitations can give a more accurate picture of the research and provide useful information for future researchers. The first limitation was the number of participating schools. This study was conducted at two small, faith-based universities in the southern part of the United States. The researcher contacted 15 faith-based universities in the same geographic region; however, only two universities were willing to participate. If more schools had participated, there may have been greater opportunity to increase the sample size and gain a broader perspective of the prevalence of cyberbullying experiences (victim and offender) among this demographic.

A second limitation was the sample size. Out of the approximately 2,000 traditional undergraduate students who received the recruitment email, 324 responded; however, only 287 surveys were completed. Of those 287, three had to be removed because the student chose not to share their biological gender; therefore, the final sample size was N = 284. The small sample size produced results that were not statistically significant; however, the result may not accurately reflect the prevalence of cyberbullying victimization and offending experiences among all traditional undergraduate students attending faith-based universities. The sample was also not evenly distributed by gender or university. More females (62.7%) completed the survey than males (36.3%), and a greater percentage of students from University A (76.7%) participated than students from University B (23.3%). This is a limitation because the study sought to determine prevalence based on biological gender. The survey was available via an anonymous link, so there was also no way to reward the students for participating, adding to the potential reasons for the small sample size. Although the survey was anonymous, students may have seen that the survey was on cyberbullying and might have not wanted to take the chance that any information they shared could be traced back to them. The sample size may have been small because of the limited recruitment, as well.

Another limitation was the student recruitment procedures. The students received the survey via an anonymous link in a recruitment email on Monday of week one that the research was scheduled to begin, and a reminder email was subsequently sent on the Monday of week two and week three. The initial recruitment email was long, wordy, and not easy to navigate. The reminder emails did produce results; however, the survey responses were dramatically lower on the days the students did not receive the reminder email. This limitation could be avoided by including some form of chapel announcement on a different day explaining the research and inviting students to participate. Designing a more user-friendly recruitment email would also be beneficial.

The researcher also notes that a limitation exists in that the students only had a threeweek window of time to participate in this research. Students at the postsecondary level are busy, and this survey dropped in the middle of the semester when midterms were underway. If the amount of time allotted for research was increased from three to six weeks, there would potentially have been a greater opportunity to recruit more students and avoid overwhelming the students during a particularly busy time of the semester.

The anonymous, self-reported survey is also a limitation for this study. According to Gall et al. (2007), self-reported data leave room for an increase in participant bias and subjectivity. Data falsely reported can also potentially skew results. Bullying is a difficult topic, and admitting to being a bully is not easy (even in an anonymous survey). Students attending faith-based universities tend to have the pressure of the institution’s Christian worldview and might struggle to report data accurately because of the pressure to behave as expected.

Finally, the scoring of the DUREL, although accurate, was not divided into the three different sections (organized religious activity, non-organizational religious activity, and intrinsic religiosity) for scoring and evaluation purposes. For this research, the instrument was used to determine a composite score, which was then used to assign a level of religiosity for comparative purposes. This limitation could be avoided in future research by doing a correlational study and scoring the subsections individually, then comparing them to cyberbullying prevalence.

Recommendations for Future Research

This research study examined cyberbullying among university students at faith-based universities. University students as a whole and more specifically university students at faithbased postsecondary institutions are both populations that have been understudied, especially when compared with students in Grades K-12, in cyberbullying research (Khine et al., 2020; Orel et al., 2017; Slovak et al., 2015; Webber & Ovedovitz, 2018). This research added to the gap in the literature; however, there is more that can be done among university students and university students attending faith-based universities. In light of the findings and subsequent limitations of this research study, recommendations for future research in this field include:

Investigate the differences in cyberbullying prevalence rates among students who attend secular universities in comparison to students who attend faith-based universities. Suggested demographic questions are gender, race, religion, and grade point average.
Investigate the prevalence of cyberbullying at faith-based universities in different regions of the country to determine if one’s geographic region is a mitigating factor.
Revisit the participating schools to investigate the students’ level of religiosity and investigate if a student’s level of religiosity correlates with choosing to attend a faithbased university.
Conduct a broader study among students attending faith-based universities to determine if there is a correlation between level of religiosity and prevalence of cyberbullying experiences.
Investigate cyberbullying experiences using a qualitative design with focus groups to determine the effect of cyberbullying on college students and which types of cyberbullying are prevalent among this demographic.