An exploration of online communication in dating relationships: The impact of cyber dating harassment on self-esteem and academic engagement

The present study investigated the relationship between the predictor variable of cyber dating harassment and the criterion variables of self-esteem and academic engagement. The hypothesis of the study was that a negative relationship exists between cyber dating harassment and selfesteem. It was also hypothesized that a negative relationship exists between cyber dating harassment and academic engagement; furthermore, it was predicted that self-esteem would mediate this relationship, such that cyber dating harassment would lead to low self-esteem, which would then lead to lower levels of academic engagement. A convenience sample of 126 participants was selected from the Introductory Psychology classes at King’s University College in London, Ontario. The revised sample consisted of 103 females and 23 males. Participants completed an online questionnaire composed of a cyber dating harassment scale, a self-esteem scale, and the academic sub-scale of the Student Experience in the Research University survey. Using regression analysis, a significant, negative relationship was found between cyber dating harassment and self-esteem. Furthermore, a significant relationship was also revealed between self-esteem and academic engagement. However, no significant relationship was found between cyber dating harassment and academic engagement, providing no support for the mediation hypothesis. Sex was also explored as a potential moderator variable; however, no significant interactions were found. ONLINE ASPECTS OF DATING 3 An exploration of online communication in dating relationships: The impact of cyber dating harassment on self-esteem and academic engagement The innovation of recent technology has undoubtedly provided the world with countless advantages; a wealth of knowledge is globally available simply through the use of one’s fingertips. Like many inventions, however, the initial intentions of this technology may become corrupt. With the ability to communicate and share information instantaneously, there are opportunities for misuse and abuse. This becomes particularly troubling when considering the already prevalent problem of intimate partner violence and dating abuse. With respect to social media (e.g. social networking sites, e-mail, text messages), some even state that “these technologies redefine the boundaries of romantic relationships in ways that provide fertile ground for conflict and abuse” (Draucker & Martsolf, 2010, p. 141). Data from a nationally representative survey in the United States showed that approximately 17 percent of adolescent females and 9 percent of adolescent males reported being the victim of dating violence and abuse; this survey used a limited definition of “dating abuse”, which included threats of physical violence, actual physical violence, or sexual coercion (Ackard, Neumark-Sztainer, & Hannan, 2003). Furthermore, it has been found that approximately 10 percent of students in the United States are subject to physical dating violence, and about 25 percent are victims of verbal, psychological, emotional, or sexual dating violence each year (Draucker & Martsolf, 2010). This abuse is correlated with many poor outcomes, including injury, suicide attempts, substance abuse, unhealthy sexual behaviours, emotional distress, and disruptions in self-image. One form of abuse that has been scarcely studied involves “using communication technology to harass, intimidate, threaten, or otherwise harm others” ONLINE ASPECTS OF DATING 4 (Patchin & Hinduja, 2010, p. 615). The purpose of the present study is to examine the relationship between cyber dating harassment and individual adjustment. Little research has been conducted in the field of cyber dating harassment. Previous research on similar topics has focused on either physical or verbal dating abuse or cyber-bullying in general. Cyber harassment can be defined as “using communication technology to harass, intimidate, threaten, or otherwise harm others” (Patchin & Hinduja, 2010, p. 615). There are four main elements of which this act consists: first, cyber harassment is an intentional and deliberate behaviour; second, it is repeatedly carried out over time; third, victims of cyber harassment experience real, significant pain, either psychologically, emotionally, or relationally; and finally, it is executed through the use of various electronic devices, which distinguishes it from traditional forms of harassment (Patchin & Hinduja, 2010). Although cyber harassment may be similar to traditional bullying and harassment in all forms (e.g. psychological, relational, and indirect), there are a number of distinct differences between the two. With cyberbullying, there are not any authorities to monitor online interactions and ensure civility, therefore allowing harmful or inappropriate communication to continue unabated (Patchin & Hinduja, 2010). Furthermore, it appears to be much easier to be cruel and malicious through virtual social mediums (e.g. text message, e-mail, posted photo or video) due to the physical distance between the perpetrator and the victim, and the fact that personal and social norms, rules, morals, and laws become less pertinent when communicating electronically (Patchin & Hinduja, 2006). The use of technology is becoming more and more prevalent in the lives of teenagers and young adults. A 2006 telephone survey revealed a high Internet usage rate among adolescents in ONLINE ASPECTS OF DATING 5 the United States; 93 percent of adolescent respondents were Internet users, 61 percent of which used the Internet on a daily basis, and 34 percent used the Internet multiple times a day (Lenhart & Madden, 2007). The 2007-2008 rate of cell phone usage by adolescents aged 12-17 was equally striking; 71 percent of adolescents were cell phone owners, and 38 percent sent text messages each day (Lenhart, 2009). It is evident from these statistics that technology is becoming the main source of communication for youth. When technology is used to perpetrate aggression against acquaintances, friends, or even intimate partners, this phenomenon is called “electronic aggression” and is considered a serious emerging health concern among youth. Electronic aggression can be defined as “any type of harassment or bullying, including teasing, telling lies, making fun of, making rude or mean comments, spreading of rumors, or making threatening or aggressive comments, that occurs through e-mail, a chat room, instant messaging, a Web site, or text messaging” (David-Ferdon & Hertz, 2007, p. 2). It has been estimated that the prevalence rates for electronic aggression lie somewhere between 9 and 34 percent for victimization, and between 4 and 21 percent for perpetration (David-Ferdon & Hertz, 2007). However, the incidence of electronic aggression among adolescents and young adults appears to be increasing; a 50 percent increase was reported between 2000 and 2005 (Mitchell, Wolak, & Finkelhor, 2007). Electronic aggression is associated with a number of negative psychosocial consequences for both victims and perpetrators, including poor caregiver-child relationships, substance abuse, interpersonal victimization, delinquency, depression, and school problems (Ybarra & Mitchell, 2004). Victimization in particular is associated with social anxiety, depression, perpetration of online harassment against others, interpersonal victimization, social and behavioral problems, and school problems (e.g., skipping school, detentions, and/or ONLINE ASPECTS OF DATING 6 suspensions) (Hinduja & Patchin, 2006). In the present study, I will examine one form of electronic aggression: cyber dating harassment (i.e. abuse through various forms of technology and other new media; Zweig, Dank, Yahner, & Lachman, 2013). Johnson’s (1995) typology of intimate partner violence can account for the aggressive use of technology in intimate relations. According to this typology, there are “four distinct forms of couple aggression that are based on the degree of control and violence present within a relationship: situational couple violence (SCV), intimate terrorism (IT), mutual violent control (MVC), and violent resistance (VR)” (Melander, 2010, p. 263). Situational couple violence (SVC) refers to aggressive behaviours that occur only within the context of a situation and rarely escalate to severe forms of violence; minor forms of violence, such as slapping or grabbing a partner, are typically considered to be a form of SVC. Intimate terrorism (IT) occurs when one partner violently controls the other partner within an intimate relationship; controlling tactics include economic subordination, threats, isolation, and physical aggression. Intimate terrorism is a form of violence that is more likely to be expressed through technology; although a partner may not be physically violent through technology, they may control their partner by monitoring their behaviours through the use of cell phones and social networking websites. Mutual violent control (MVC) occurs when both partners are mutually violent and controlling toward each other. These behaviours are similar to those that occur with intimate terrorism. Finally, violent resistance (VR) refers to situations in which one partner is violent and controlling and the other partner retaliates with violence as a form of self-defense (Melander, 2010). Various forms of couple aggression can be seen in electronic communications between partners. Among adolescents, verbal aggression is often carried out through the use of ONLINE ASPECTS OF DATING 7 technology, particularly cell phones. Communication technologies can escalate arguments between partners, allow partners to monitor the behaviours of one another, and encourage interactions between estranged couples, which often results in more violence (Draucker & Martsolf, 2010). Zweig, Dank, Yahner and Lachman (2013) found that intimate partners communicated electronically primarily in eight ways, the last six of which w