Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Bullying and threats via Internet and social media:
The perspective of European children
Presentation of EU Kids Online, June 20.06.2012 Sätra Bruk, Sweden Elisabeth Staksrud, Ph.D. Dept. of media and communication, University of Oslo Norway
Our approach/conceptual decisions
Sensitive questions on risk, parental mediation and
items where privacy should be respected were
presented to children using a self-completion
format so that neither the interviewer nor any family
member present could oversee the child’s response
Rather than using emotive terms (‘bully’, ‘stranger’),
descriptions were provided using child-friendly
language to ensure that children understood what
was being asked of them.
Questions focused on children’s reports of what had
actually happened to them within a set time
period, or the last time something happened, rather
than inviting general statements of opinion or
response.
Every attempt was made to phrase questions
neutrally, avoiding value judgements. Children
were asked if a specific experience had bothered
them without assuming that it had indeed been
problematic (experienced as harmful) by all children.
‘Bothered’ was defined thus: ‘for example, [something
that] made you feel uncomfortable, upset, or feel that
you shouldn’t have seen it’.
Thus harm was measured subjectively in terms
of the child’s perceived severity and duration of
their upsetting experiences (that is, harm).
Detailed follow-up questions on what children
have experienced online, how they felt and how
they may have coped were asked for four main
risks of harm to the child’s safety: bullying,
pornography, sending/receiving sexual messages
(‘sexting’) and meeting online contacts (‘strangers’)
offline.
It was recognised that children may either be
victims or perpetrators of certain harmful events
(or both). This was explored for bullying and
sending/receiving sexual messages.
An effort was made to keep online risks in
proportion by comparing the incidence of online
and offline risk experiences where appropriate.
For sensitive questions, children could always
answer ‘don’t know’ or ‘prefer not to say’, rather
than being forced to provide an answer when
uneasy. In general, few children selected these
options but ethically it was important to give children
the option.
Surveying Internet risk in ‘Europe’
Random stratified sample: ~ 1000 9-16
year old internet users per country
Fieldwork in summer/fall 2010
Total: 25.142 internet-users, 25 countries
Interviews at home, face to face
Self-completion for sensitive questions
Indicators of vulnerability and coping
Data from child paired with a parent
Directly comparable across countries
Validation via cognitive/pilot testing
National stakeholders consulted
International advisory panel
Ethical and technical report available
Typology of Internet risk (Eukids Online)
Type risiko
Child as receiver
Child as participant
Child as actor
COMMERCIAL RISK
Commecials/Spam/
Sponsoring
Tracking, collecting personal
information
Gambling/
Hacking/
Illegal downloading
AGGRESSIVE RISK
Violent/
hateful/
cruel content
Be bullied/ Harassed/
Stalked
Bully or harass others
SEXUAL
RISK
Pornographic/unwanted
sexual content
Meet ”strangers”,
being ”groomed”
Produce/
distribute pornographic
material
VALUES AND ATTITUDES
Racist/misleading
information and advise
Selfharm, unwanted persuasion
Production of advise e.g.
Suicide,
pro-ana/pro-mia
Type of risk
Analytical model of factors shaping
children’s online engagements
Some key aims
Child centered approach
Inform policy development and
awareness work
Methodological innovation
Created (2007) and will now update
database on existing research
Comparative qualitative research to
complement the survey
Digital skills – the ladder of
opportunities
100% - schoolwork and playing games.
14% don’t get further up.
86% - using internet as a mass medium,
for
information and entertainment.
75% - use internet interactively for
communication and news.
56% - playing with others online,
downloading film and music, sharing
content p2p. Over half of 9-16 year
olds in Europe reach this point.
23% - Includes chatting, blogging,
file-sharing and spending time in a
virtual world.
Correlation between activities and
skills
AT
BE
BG
CY
CZ
DE
DK
EE
EL
ES
FI
FR
HU
IE
IT
LT
NL
NO
PL
PT
RO
SE
SI
TR
UK
2
3
4
5
6
5 6 7 8 9 10
Ave
rag
e n
um
be
r o
f d
igit
al s
kil
ls
Average number of activities on the Internet
Correlation between use and skills
AT BE BG
CY
CZ
DE
DK
EE
EL
ES
FI
FR
HU
IE
IT
LT
NL
NO
PL
PT
RO
SE
SI
TR
UK
2
3
4
5
6
30 40 50 60 70 80 90
Ave
rag
e n
um
be
r o
f d
igit
al s
kil
ls
% Use the Internet every day
Correlation between activities and risk
AT
BE
BG
CY
CZ
DE
DK
EE
EL
ES
FI
FR
HU
IE
IT
LT
NL
NO
PL
PT
RO
SE
SI
TR
UK
30
40
50
60
70
5 6 7 8 9
% w
ho
ha
ve
ex
pe
rie
nc
ed
on
e o
r m
ore
ris
k
fac
tors
Average number of activities on the Internett
Average for all
children
Correlation between risk and use
AT
BE
BG
CY
CZ
DE
DK
EE
EL
ES
FI
FR
HU IE
IT
LT
NL
NO
PL
PT
RO
SE
SI
TR
UK
30
40
50
60
70
30 40 50 60 70 80 90
% E
xp
eri
en
ced
on
e o
r m
ore
ris
k f
acto
rs
% Use Internet every day
Average for all
children
Clear connections
High use
• More activities
More activities
• More risk
• More skills
More skills
• More resilience
More resilience
• More risk
Less harm
Online communication
• 87% use at home
• 49% have in bedroom
• Privatised use s growing
• 60% use every day or almost daily, 93% use
at least weekly
• 88 minutes spent online in an average day
• SES and age matter more than gender
• SES matters especially for daily use:
67% high SES vs. 52% low SES
• Age matters also for daily use:
33% 9-10 yrs vs. 80% 15-16 yrs
• Children first go online at 9 yrs old:
at 7 for 9-10 yrs, at 11 for 15-16 yrs
(…but does not mean
“countries”/”cultures” are the same)
“Lower use, lower risk”
“Lower use, some risk”
“Higher use, some risk”
“Higher use, higher risk”
A country’s socio-economic
stratification, regulatory framework,
technological infrastructure and
educational systems
all shape children’s online risks.
HARMFUL USER GENERATED
SERVICES (HUGS)
Selected findings from Eukids II
Child has seen potentially harmful user-
generated content on websites in past 12
months (age 11+)
8
5 6 4
3
14
6
8
4 4 3
15 16
7
10 10
6
25
17 19
9 10
6
31
12
10
7 7
5
21
Hate messages thatattack certain
groups orindividuals
Ways to be verythin (such as being
anorexic or bulimic)
Ways of physicallyharming or hurting
themselves
Talk about or sharetheir experiences of
taking drugs
Ways of committingsuicide
Has seen suchmaterial at all on
any websites
Boys 11-13 years Girls 11-13 years Boys 14-16 years Girls 14-16 years All
Experiences
ranging from 43%
(CZ) and 42% (NO)
to 14% (FR) and
15% (PT)
DIGITAL BULLYING
Selected findings from Eukids II
How we define bullying
“Sometimes children or teenagers say or do hurtful or nasty things to someone and this can often be quite a few times on different days over a period of time. It can include teasing someone in a way the person does not like; hitting, kicking or pushing someone around; leaving someone out of things.
Has someone acted in this kind of hurtful or nasty way to you in the past 12 months?/ Have you been treated in a hurtful or nasty way on the internet?”
In a private, self-completion part of the questionnaire, children
were also asked whether they had ever bullied (i.e., “acted in a
way that felt nasty or hurtful [a few times, over a period of time,
teasing, hitting, or excluding] to someone else”) and whether
this has happened face-to-face, on the internet or by mobile
phone.
What is so special with digital
bullying?
1. Potential use of audiovisual material
2. Might be easier for the bully to remain anonymous
3. Bullying can be documented
4. New forms of social exclusion in the form of digital
isolation
5. Bullying becomes more publicly visible
but, paradoxically
6. Bullying might be less visible to adults
Source: Staksrud, E. (2008). Fairytale parenting. Contextual factors influencing children's online self-representation. In K. Lundby (Ed.), Digital Storytelling, Mediatized Stories: Self-representations in New Media (pp. 233-249). New York: Peter Lang.
Child has been bullied online or offline
in past 12 months, by country
19
11 9 11
17 14
23 20
16 15 16 19 18 19 21 19 20
26 28 26
21
31 28
25
41 43
6 2 2 3 4 4 4 4 4 5 5 5 5 6 6 6 6 7 7 8 8 8
11 12 13 14
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
ALL IT PT TR EL NL IE SI ES CY DE LT FI PL BG BE HU FR AT CZ UK NO SE DK RO EE
% Been bullied at all, online or offline % Been bullied on the internet
19% have had someone act in this way, online or offline
Who? Few differences by age, gender or social class
Teenage girls 13-16 most experience this online – 9%
Where? Substantial country variations, ranging from 9% (IT) – 43% (EE) offline, and 2% (IT, PT) – 14% (EE) online
How? 13% had this happen in person face to face, 6% had this happen online, 3% by mobile phone calls/texts
Most often happens online via SNS or IM
What (11+)? 4% - nasty/hurtful messages, 2% - messages passed around about them, 1% threatened online
12% have bullied others at all, 3% online
Base: All children who use the Internet
Online services of which children have been
bullied online in the past 12 months, by age
Base: All children who use the Internet
1 1
0 0
0 0
2 2
1
1
0
1
3
3
1
0
1
0
5
4
1
0
2
0
3
3
1 1
1
0
On a socialnetworking site
By instantmessaging
By email In a gaming website In a chatroom Some other way onthe internet
9-10 years 11-12 years 13-14 years 15-16 years All children
On a social
networking
site
By instant
messaging
In a
chatroomBy email
In a gaming
website
Some other
way on the
internet
Denmark 49,1% 39,5% 24,0% 7,5% 14,4% 25,8%
UK 78,5% 51,5% 18,2% 14,1% 4,9% 3,9%
Sweden 60,5% 43,8% 15,6% 4,0% 11,6% 5,6%
Romania 4,6% 62,0% 6,9% 8,7% 15,0% 14,2%
Estonia 30,2% 56,2% 6,7% 10,2% 11,8% 23,2%
Belgium 45,7% 52,0% 8,2% 7,5% 9,2% 5,2%
Hungary 48,9% 49,3% 2,4% 13,4% 9,3% 8,1%
Czech Republic 59,1% 37,4% 11,3% 6,6% 15,6% 5,9%
Turkey 37,8% 35,3% 11,9% 17,8% 21,6% 11,0%
Poland 46,0% 45,9% 7,3% 18,3% 17,7% 4,4%
Cyprus 29,5% 51,6% 6,4% 19,2% 25,0% 6,0%
Finland 53,1% 38,9% 8,6% 13,6% 8,5% 9,4%
Norway 40,2% 56,9% 10,2% 2,4% 2,6% 5,3%
Germany 51,9% 14,0% 36,4% 22,3% ,0% 3,4%
Bulgaria 14,0% 42,1% 18,7% 6,6% 3,8% 24,4%
Spain 62,9% 50,3% 3,5% 2,1% ,0% 15,9%
Netherlands 37,5% 62,0% 4,2% 19,3% 1,5% 4,7%
Austria 53,8% 25,4% 25,9% 18,0% 9,2% 6,1%
Lithuania 60,1% 35,8% 4,7% 6,4% 27,6% 12,3%
France 44,6% 64,7% 7,6% 7,4% 14,3% 2,7%
Portugal 41,5% 56,1% 25,0% 16,4% 6,7% ,0%
Slovenia 63,3% 45,6% 5,4% 3,7% 6,1% 3,7%
Greece 57,6% 29,3% 14,3% ,0% 7,4% 4,0%
Ireland 66,5% 14,4% 2,6% 5,1% 10,1% 14,8%
Italy 38,1% 36,4% 26,4% 33,0% ,0% 5,0%
Total EU25 50,5% 46,2% 14,5% 12,8% 9,7% 7,1%
SNS use and risk, by age
(controlling for gender, internet use, parental rules, SNS and country)
Meeting strangers
Being bullied Seeing sexual images
Receiving sexual messages
0,0
0,1
0,2
0,3
0,4
0,5
9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
Pre
dic
ted
pro
bab
ilit
y o
f seein
g s
exu
al im
ag
es
Age
Is not on SNS
Is on SNS
0,0
0,1
0,2
0,3
0,4
0,5
9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
Pre
dic
ted
pro
ba
bil
ity o
f b
ein
g b
ull
ied
on
lin
e
Age
Is not on SNS
Is on SNS
0,0
0,1
0,2
0,3
0,4
0,5
9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16Pre
dic
ted
pro
ba
bil
ity o
f m
ee
tin
g s
tra
ng
ers
Age
Is not on SNS
Is on SNS
0,0
0,1
0,2
0,3
0,4
0,5
9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
Pre
dic
ted
pro
bab
ilit
y o
f seein
g s
exu
al m
essag
es
Age
Is not on SNS
Is on SNS
Parents’ accounts of whether child has been bullied
online (only children who have been bullied online),
by country
56
29 36 36 38
46 49 50 50 51
55 59
63 65 67 67 68 68 70 71 74 79 79 81
89 91
29
67 56
27
43 28
35
45 36 35 28
32 22
4
24
5
20
29
13 11 7
7 12
19 4 6
15
4 8
36
19 26
15
6
14 14 17
9 15
30
9
28
12
3
17 18 19 14
9 7 3
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
ALL FI NL AT UK SI SE DK FR BE DE NO PL PT ES BG EE IE CZ TR LT RO EL IT HU CY
% Parent NO % Parent YES % Parent Don't know
Also important to note this for
methodological consideration
- Parents do not always know
(or want to know)
- Children can answer (also
quantitative) surveys
Disintegration of social
ties:Distrust in expert systems
12% of European 9-16 year-olds say
that they have been bothered or
upset by something on the Internet.
Overwhelmingly, children tell a
friend, followed by a parent, when
something online upsets them.
Rarely do they tell a teacher or any
other adult in a position of
responsibility. Their apparent lack
of trust in those who may have
more expert solutions is a concern.
“I am writing to you because someone is sending me
scary messages. What should I do about this?
Please help me.”
Response time to minor user asking the major social networking services of Europe for help
Source: Staksrud, E., & Lobe, B. (2010). Evaluation of the Implementation of the Safer Social Networking Principles for the EU Part I: General Report. Luxembourg: European Commission under the Safer Internet Programme.
Less than 24 hours; 7
1-7 days; 2
No reply during test period; 12
HARM & COPING
Selected findings from Eukids II on online bullying
31
22
32
42
34
27
32
23
37
24
23
25
20
22
30
22
17
23
24
30
36
28
28
27
29
32
40
36
26
15
19
15
10
17
13
14
12
18
13
30
0 20 40 60 80 100
All children
High SES
Medium SES
Low SES
15-16 yrs
13-14 yrs
11-12 yrs
9-10 yrs
Boys
Girls
% Very upset % Fairly upset
% A bit upset % Not at all upset
From risk to harm?
Online bullying
Among the 6% who have been
bullied online, on the last time
this happened:
30% were a bit upset, 24% fairly
upset, 31% very upset
Who was more upset?
Younger, girls, low SES homes
How long did this last?
Most (62%) got over it straight
away, 31% still upset a few days
later and 6% still upset a few
weeks later
Intensitivity* of harm,
by country
Austria
Belgium
Bulgaria
Cyprus
Czech
Denmark
Estonia
Finland
France
Germany
Greece
Hungary
Ireland
Italy
Lithuania
Netherlands
Norway
Poland
Portugal
Romania
Slovenia
Spain
Sweden
Turkey
UK
0,15
0,20
0,25
0,30
0,35
0,40
0,45
0,50
0,55
0% 2% 4% 6% 8% 10% 12%
Inte
ns
ivit
y o
f B
ull
yin
g h
arm
Bullying harm
Average for all children
Base: % children at least a bit bothered
*Intensitivity of harm consisted of questions: Thinking about the LAST TIME you were bothered by something like this, how upset did you feel about it (if at all)?/How long did you feel like that for? Values were multiplied and divided by its maximum (scale 0-1).
Coping strategies
Just those who encountered the risk and were bothered by it
Online help? 46% blocked person 41% deleted messages
20% stopped using Internet for a while
What did they do? 24% hoped it would go away 36% tried to fix it 16% felt guilty
Who did they tell? 77% talked to
somebody 52% talked to
a friend 42% talked to
a parent 14% talked to
a sibling
9% talked to another adult
they trust
7% talked to a teacher
2% talked to someone
whose job it is to help children
Parental mediation – what works?
By active mediation of use, we mean: parents talk to
their child about the internet, stay nearby or sit with
them while they go online, encourage them to
explore the internet, and share online activities with
them. These activities, our findings show, tend to
reduce children’s exposure to online risks without
reducing online opportunities, and they also reduce
young children’s (9-12 years) reports of being upset
when they encounter online risks.
Most important predictors of being
bullied, by country
Variables
Has done
either of the
two things
associated
with being a
perpetrator
Risky online
experiencesChild gender
Time spent on
the internet
(minutes)
I get very
angry and
often lose my
temper*
Austria 1 2 3
Belgium 1
Bulgaria 3 1 2
Cyprus 1
Czech Republic 1
Germany
Denmark 1 3 2
Estonia
Greece 1
Spain 1
Finland 1
France 1 3 2
Hungary 1
Ireland 1 3 2
Italy 1
Lithuania 1
Netherlands 2 1
Norway 1 3 2
Poland 1
Portugal 1
Romania 1 2
Sweden 2 1
Slovenia 2 1
Turkey 2 1
UK
• Being a bully yourself predicts being bullied
Most predictive variable and level
of bullying risk.
Austria
Belgium
Bulgaria
Cyprus
Czech
GermanyDenmark
Estonia
Greece
Spain
Finland
France
Hungary
Ireland
Italy
LithuaniaNetherlands
NorwayPoland
Portugal
Romania
Sweden
Slovenia
Turkey
UK
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%
50%
55%
0% 2% 4% 6% 8% 10% 12% 14%
Bu
llyin
g r
isk
(%
of
ex
pe
rie
nc
ed
)
% Has been perpetrator
Average for all children
Base: All children who experience bulllying
What makes a bully a cyberbully?
Those children who bully others via the internet or a mobile
device differ in several ways from those who bully others face-
to-face only. In particular:
cyberbullies (all else being equal) are at least four times as likely to
engage in risky online activities, (OR=4.24, p<.001),
twice as likely to spend more time online and to find it easier to be
themselves online, time online (OR=2.05, p<.001), online persona (OR=2.05, p<.005)
almost 1.9 times more likely to have a higher ICT ability self-concept (OR=1.88, p<.005),
1.6 times more likely to be female (OR=1.57, p<.001)
Online bullies differ from offline bullies in their internet behaviors and
attitudes, but not in their offline behaviors.
Online bullying and psychological
vulnerability
•The three bullying groups
show higher psychological
difficulties compared to those
neither having bullied nor
having been bullied online.
•The three bullying groups
show higher sensation
seeking compared to those
neither having nor having
been bullied online.
•Those who have been bully
victimes or both (bullies and
victims) show higher
ostracism than those who
experienced neither.
How do children respond to
being bullied online?
1 in 3 who had bullied others online
said that they try to get back at the
other person when being bullied
online
Revenge might be motive for
bullying.
When bullied online, bullies are more
likely than others to say they «feel
guilty» or «try to get back at the
other person», but they are less
likely than others to say they «try to
fix the problem»
The mode of bullying others – on- vs.
offline – seem to correspond with the
mode of being bullied by others.
Note: All differences were statistically significant
(x2(2)
= 6.8 to 55.5; all ps < .05)
Bullying – or just kidding around?
«It is sooo easy to fight with someone online. If I am mad at someone and she logs on to chat and she is nagging and lost of stuff like that, I can just suddenly say like – why don’t you just leave? You just type it straight out. Your just write – i do not want to talk to you, so just leave. – you are so needy and lots like that. You just write – you are an ass – and – I really hate you – and lots like that. Sometimes it is not like you mean it, like, it just comes out that way. If you are really pissed, like, then you can just say what ever you want. It is not like you mean it, like you can just write like «you fucking whore, leave!!!» and just be like really bitchy. You can just really say it online»
Girl, 15 years
Summary
1. Offline bullying is more prevalent than online bullying
2. Off all online risks we study, bullying is less likely to be
experienced, but has the highest intensitivity of harm
3. Parents are not likely to know their child is being bullied
4. Children who are bullied online are more likely than not to
bully others
5. Cyber bullies are different from offline bullies, being more risk
takers, spending more time online, have high ICT ability self
concept, and are more likely to be girls
6. Level of digital skill is vital for children to cope and avoid
harm
Comparing bullying and HUGS
to other online risk
5 3
0
13
2 0 0 1 0
8
5 7
20
4
12
7
2 2
16
6
13
32
9
22
10
3 2
25
8
22
46
16
29
11
5 5
14
6
15
30
9
21
9
3 3
Seen sexualimages on
websites in past12 months
Have been sentnasty or hurtful
messages onthe internet inpast 12 months
Seen orreceived sexual
messages onthe internet inpast 12 months
Ever hadcontact on theinternet withsomeone not
met face to facebefore
Ever gone on tomeet anyoneface to face
that first meton the internet
Have comeacross one ormore types of
potentiallyharmful user-
generatedcontent in past
12 months
Haveexperiencedone or more
types of misuseof personal
data in past 12months
Acted in a nastyor hurtful waytowards otherson the internetin the past 12
months
Sent or posteda sexual
message of anykind on the
internet in thepast 12 months
9-10 years 11-12 years 13-14 years 15-16 years All children
Parental awareness
Among those children who have encountered the particular risk online …
Seeing sexual images online:
40% of parents are not aware of this, 26% say they don’t know
Parents are least aware when daughters (46%) and
younger children (54% 9-10 and 11-12 year olds) have seen sexual images
online
Being bullied online:
56% of parents are not aware of this, 15% say they don’t know
Parents are less aware when this involves their 9-10 year olds (65%)
Receiving sexual message online:
52% of parents are not aware of this; 27% say they don’t know
Parents of younger children, and in higher SES homes, are least aware
Meeting an online contact offline:
61% of parents are not aware of this, 11% say they don’t know
Parents of younger children, of boys, and in higher SES homes, are less aware
Specific recommendations
Parents - awareness-raising to alert them to the risks their children may encounter online whilst
encouraging parent/child dialogue and understanding.
Parents’ preferred sources of information on internet safety are the child’s school, so greater efforts
should be undertaken by the education sector.
Schools - digital skills training is vital for coping, thus needs continued emphasis and updating to
ensure all children reach a minimum standard and to promote creative, positive uses.
Government (and others) – target resources and guidance where particularly needed: on ever
younger children/newer users and those who are vulnerable.
Industry - efforts are needed to support awareness, usability and take up of internet safety tools to
support blocking, reporting and filtering of other users if needed without jeopardizing children's
access and participation.
Children, civil society - encourage children to be responsible for their online behaviour/ safety if
possible, promoting empowerment and digital citizenship.
The absence of clear country differences in characteristics of those children who bully others
online suggests that pathways across European countries to tackle cyberbullying could be similar –
perhaps also global
We are very worried about the many children seeking out suicide, hate and self-harm content
Coming up….
Policy book (Nordicom)
Sibling status vs. Risk taking
HUGS
Children’s own warnings
+ + +
Contact information and
references
[email protected] Information about the project and signing up to our newsletter www.eukidsonline.net
Twitter Estaksrud #Eukidsonline
References
Bjørnstad, T. L., & Ellingsen, T. (2002). Nettsvermere. En rapport om ungdom og Internett. In D. Asbjørnsen (Ed.),
Statens filmtilsyn rapportserie (pp. 127). Oslo: Statens filmtilsyn og SAFT prosjektet.
Brandtzæg, P. B., Staksrud, E., Hagen, I., & Wold, T. (2009). Norwegian Children’s Experiences of Cyberbullying
when Using Different Technological Platforms. Journal of Children and Media, 3(4), 349 - 365.
Görzig, A (2011) Who bullies and who is bullied online? EU Kids Online. London: LSE.
Livingstone, S., Haddon, L., Görzig, A., & Ólafsson, K. (2011). Risk and safety on the internet. The perspective of
European children. Full findings from the EU Kids Online survey of 9-16 year olds and their parents EU Kids
Online. London: LSE.
Livingstone, S., Ólafsson, K., & Staksrud, E. (2011). Social Networking, Age and Privacy EU Kids Online. London:
LSE.
Livingstone, S., Ólafsson, K., & Staksrud, E. (accepted). The social networking skills and practices of ‘under-age’
users: Lessons for evidence-based policy. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication.
Lobe, B., Livingstone, S., Ólafsson, K., & Vodeb, H. (2011). Cross-national comparison of risks and safety on the
Internet. Initial analysis from the EU Kids Online survey of European children EU Kids Online. London: LSE.
Staksrud, E. (2008a). Children, Internet, pornography and policy International Journal of Media and Cultural
Politics, 4(3), 397-402.
Staksrud, E. (2008b). Fairytale parenting. Contextual factors influencing children's online self-representation. In K.
Lundby (Ed.), Digital Storytelling, Mediatized Stories: Self-representations in New Media (pp. 233-249). New York:
Peter Lang.
References cont. …
Staksrud, E. (2009b). Problematic conduct: juvenile delinquency on the internet. In S. Livingstone & L.
Haddon (Eds.), Kids online (pp. 147-157). London: The Policy Press.
Staksrud, E. (forthcoming, 2012). Children and the Internet: Risk, Regulation, Rights. London, Ashgate
Staksrud, E. (2012b). Metodiske og etiske utfordringer ved å forske med barn på Internett. In H. Fossheim
(Ed.), Forskning med barn [tbc]: De nasjonale forskningsetiske komiteer.
Staksrud, E., & Kirksæther, J. (forthcoming, 2012). 'He who buries the little girl wins!' - Moral panics as
double jeopardy. The Case of Rule of Rose. In C. Critcher, J. Hughes, J. Petley & A. Rohloff (Eds.), Moral
Panics in the Contemporary World. London: Bloomsbury Academic.
Staksrud, E., & Livingstone, S. (2009a). Children and online risk: Powerless victims or resourceful
participants? Information, Communication & Society, 12(3), 364-387. doi: 10.1080/13691180802635455
Staksrud, E., & Livingstone, S. (2009b). I bambini davanti ai rischi della Rete. Vittime inermi o partecipanti
competenti? Comunicazioni Sociali, Settembre-Dicembre(3), 274-298.
Staksrud, E., & Lobe, B. (2010). Evaluation of the Implementation of the Safer Social Networking
Principles for the EU Part I: General Report. Luxembourg: European Commission under the Safer Internet
Programme.
Staksrud, E., Ólafsson, K., & Livingstone, S. (accepted). Does the use of social networking sites increase
children's risk of harm? Computers in Human Behavior.
Thank you
More at www.eukidsonline.net
And at our Facebook page Twitter: Estaksrud
#eukidsonline
