step three. Efficiency

Desk step 1 portrays new incidence each and every of your own risks of the analysis, with regards to the degree of seriousness receive. Additionally, they reveals the latest comparisons amongst the distributions out of girls and boys for the various other risks. Complete, the participants whom demonstrated nothing wrong varied ranging from % that has no troubles having difficult Internet fool around with and up to 83.4% who’d no problems which have online grooming. I keep in mind that the range of moderate and major dilemmas ranged anywhere between cuatro% getting sexting and you can 17% to possess challenging Sites have fun with. 9% of average/really serious dilemmas and also in cyberbullying, they hit thirteen.7%. The wavelengths found in the more amounts of dilemmas was basically always greater for females than for boys.

Dining table step 1

Incidence of each of your own risks since the a purpose of the new severity of your own condition for the total test as well as intercourse.

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 dos ).

Table 2

Variations because the a function of informative phase (1st–2nd, 3rd–last levels from CSE and you may Blog post-secondary Degree) on the threats (letter = 3212, except for the outcome out of cyber relationship punishment which have n = 1061).

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

Table step three reveals the newest correlations within various dangers. All of them got positive and extreme correlations with each other, into dating anywhere between cyberbullying victimization and you can cyber relationship victimization updates away. Internet risks dominicancupid sorun having a sexual role (on line grooming and sexting) was indeed highly coordinated. Typically, the correlations were large to own boys in the most common of your risks, with the exception of the fresh new dating ranging from cyber matchmaking victimization and you will brushing and you may anywhere between problematic Internet sites explore and you will cyberbullying victimization, on the internet brushing and sexting.

Desk 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.

Desk cuatro gifts brand new comorbidities among the many various Web sites threats relevant to help you personal interaction (cyberbullying victimization, cyber dating abuse victimization, sexting and online grooming). Precisely the participants whom done every item in regards to the threats associated in order to victimization (letter = 1109) have been sensed (i.e., eliminating on research individuals who had no partner). Of one’s left members, sixty.7% shown one or more of one’s analysed threats (n = 674). The chance towards the high individual incidence was cyberbullying victimization (%), accompanied by on the internet grooming. The most prevalent a couple-exposure combos was cyberbullying victimization-on line brushing and you can cyberbullying-sexting. We high light the three-chance combination of cyberbullying-sexting-brushing victimization. Finally, 5.49% of one’s victimized teens presented every dangers conjointly.