This project aimed to improve current policy and practice on technology-involved harassment victimization by examining it within the context of other types of youth victimization, risk, and protective factors. A nationally representative sample of youth were surveyed to:
define a typology of technology-based harassment incidents and their relationship to adverse consequences for youth
explore the role that incident-level characteristics of technology-based harassment (e.g., duration, relationship with the perpetrator) have on its impact
assess the frequency and level of involvement of youth as bystanders of technology-based harassment
understand technology-based harassment as it is occurring in the context of concurrent and prior victimization experiences, including whether poly-victimized youth are at particular risk for technology-based harassment
determine whether technology-based harassment has similar risk and protective factors as other types of peer victimizations such as physical violence, sexual harassment, and bullying.
The study was a telephone follow-up of a subset of households that completed the National Survey of Children's Exposure to Violence II, 1993-2012 [United States] (ICPSR 36177) (NatSCEV II) in 2011-2012. The study began with an advance letter, reply form, and $5 cash mailed to the 2,127 sample households with an address on file. The survey was administered by computer assisted telephone interviewing (CATI), and data collection ran from December 12, 2013 to March 3, 2014. A total of 791 interviews (Full_THV_child-level_Wave_2_dataset__archive_ICPSR.sav) were completed. The average time for a completed survey was 58 minutes. Youth respondents who completed the survey were sent a $25 check. Of the 791 respondents, 230 reported 311 unique harassment incidents in the past year (THV_incident-level_data__archive_ICPSR.sav).
After a brief parent/caretaker survey, interviewers asked for permission to conduct the remainder of the survey with the youth. After parent/caretaker consent was obtained and the youth came to the phone, the youth was read an oral assent. Those who agreed proceeded with the youth portion of the interview. The interview was conducted only in English due to budget limitations. To increase the likelihood of contacting an English-speaking adult and successfully reaching the eligible youth, the adult respondent was not required to be the same parent or guardian who completed NatSCEV II as long as the adult was familiar with the focal child's daily routine and experiences. If a youth respondent who was 18 years or older who did not have contact with a parent was reached or if that parent only spoke Spanish, the entire interview (including a modified parent portion) was conducted with the youth respondent.
For both data files, eligible respondents included the subset of (1) all non-deceased youths between the ages of 8 and 9 at the time that their parent or guardian completed the National Survey of Children's Exposure to Violence II, 1993-2012 [United States] (ICPSR 36177) (NatSCEV II) interview on their behalf and (2) all non-deceased youth respondents 10 years old or older who completed the youth portion of the NatSCEV II survey and agreed to a follow-up for a future study. The initial sample consisted of 2,203 parent/youth pairs. During the course of data collection, researchers determined that six of the youths were deceased, yielding an eligible sample of 2,197 youths who were expected to be between the ages of 10 and 20 at the time of data collection.
Both data files: Youths who took part in the National Survey of Children's Exposure to Violence II, 1993-2012 [United States] (ICPSR 36177) and their parents or caregivers.
The data file Full_THV_child-level_Wave_2_dataset__archive_ICPSR.sav (n=791; 677 variables) contains variables related to the parental screening, as well as parental background questions composed primarily of demographic questions such as household composition, education, and income. Youth respondents answered questions about technology use and online harassment incidents including characteristics of the incident, characteristics of the perpetrator, content, bystanders, response, and impact. There are also variables related to offline harassment, harassment perpetration by the youth, and bystander experiences. A number of questions are taken from the Juvenile Victimization Questionnaire related to conventional crime, child maltreatment, peer and sibling victimization, sexual assault, witnessing and indirect victimizations, and school violence and threats. Finally, youth respondents answered questions pertaining to warmth, involvement and verbal hostility with their parent or caregiver, mental health, social support, delinquency, past year adversity, alcohol use, academic performance, shyness, and sexual orientation.
The data file THV_incident-level_data__archive_ICPSR.sav (n=311; 140 variables) contains a subset of these variables.
Both data files: The rate of household contact was 75 percent of the 2,197 eligible households. Researchers confirmed contact with the respondent's household for 52 percent of the 2,197 eligible households and 68 percent of the 1,657 households contacted. Just under one-in-five (18 percent) of the 2,197 eligible households refused to participate in the survey. This represents 24 percent of all contacted households and 20 percent of all contacted respondents. A total of 1,027 (46.7 percent of total sample) parent respondents completed the caretaker portion of the interview. Of those, 791 (77 percent of parent completes; 36 percent of total sample) were also completed by the youth respondent. For additional information regarding response rates, please refer to the Methodology Report in the accompanying documentation file.
Full_THV_child-level_Wave_2_dataset__archive_ICPSR.sav: A set of questions was taken from the Juvenile Victimization Questionnaire (JVQ). In addition, several Likert-type scales were used.