Mapping Digital Resilience in Cyberbullying and Online Harm Research: A Bibliometric Analysis of Scopus-Indexed Publications From 2002 To January 2026

This study maps the accessible knowledge structure of digital resilience scholarship within cyberbullying and adjacent online harm research using bibliometric techniques applied to Scopus-indexed publications. The dataset was compiled on 28 January 2026 and documented using a modified PRISMA-style screening log. A total of 5,266 Scopus records and 303 supplementary screening records were initially identified. After applying predefined subject-scope, document-type, language, publication-stage, accessibility, and conceptual-relevance criteria, 928 publications published between 2002 and January 2026 were retained for analysis. Because 1,335 potentially relevant reports were not retrievable due to non-open-access or other access limitations, the findings are interpreted as representing the accessible Scopus-indexed corpus rather than the complete global literature. Performance analysis examined annual publication growth, authorship expansion, citation impact, source influence, and citation concentration, while interpretive synthesis examined how influential studies positioned resilience through explicit and proxy constructs. Results indicate a marked increase in publication output after 2018, peaking at 201 publications in 2025. The corpus also shows substantial cumulative influence, with 19,990 citations, an h-index of 66, and a g-index of 116. Frontiers in Psychology was the most productive source, whereas Computers in Human Behavior showed the strongest citation influence. The highly cited literature suggests that the field has moved from foundational work on cyberbullying prevalence and harm toward prevention, bystander behaviour, social support, parenting, wellbeing, and coping-related mechanisms. The study contributes by clarifying the accessible bibliometric structure of digital resilience-oriented cyberbullying and online harm research, explaining the use of proxy resilience terms, and outlining cautious future directions without overextending bibliometric evidence into intervention-effectiveness claims.

digital resilience, cyberbullying, online harm, bibliometric analysis, Scopus

1. Achuthan, K., Nair, V. K., Kowalski, R., Ramanathan, S., & Raman, R. (2023). Cyberbullying research—Alignment to sustainable development and impact of COVID-19: Bibliometrics and science mapping analysis. Computers in Human Behavior, 140, Article 107566. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2022.107566 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. Agnew, R. (1992). Foundation for a general strain theory of crime and delinquency. Criminology, 30(1), 47–87. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-9125.1992.tb01093.x [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50(2), 179–211. https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-T [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. Aswat, H., Purwanta, E., Wangid, M. N., Manaf, A., & Hayadin, H. (2025). Global research trends of cyberbullying and the metaverse in the virtual world: Bibliometric analysis using the Scopus database. International Journal of Cognitive Research in Science, Engineering and Education, 13(1), 157–174. https://doi.org/10.23947/2334-8496-2025-13-1-157-164 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Prentice-Hall. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. Bastiaensens, S., Vandebosch, H., Poels, K., van Cleemput, K., DeSmet, A., & De Bourdeaudhuij, I. (2014). Cyberbullying on social network sites: An experimental study into bystanders' behavioural intentions to help the victim or reinforce the bully. Computers in Human Behavior, 31(1), 259–271. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2013.10.036 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. Best, P., Manktelow, R., & Taylor, B. (2014). Online communication, social media and adolescent wellbeing: A systematic narrative review. Children and Youth Services Review, 41, 27–36. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2014.03.001 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. Calvete Zumalde, E., Orue, I., Echezarraga, A., Machimbarrena, J. M., & González-Cabrera, J. (2022). A growth mindset intervention to promote resilience in adolescents involved in cyberbullying: A pilot study. Computers in Human Behavior, 135, Article 107373. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2022.107373 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. Cohen, L. E., & Felson, M. (1979). Social change and crime rate trends: A routine activity approach. American Sociological Review, 44(4), 588–608. https://doi.org/10.2307/2094589 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. Cole, D. A., Nick, E. A., Zelkowitz, R. L., Roeder, K. M., & Spinelli, T. (2017). Online social support for young people: Does it recapitulate in-person social support, and can it help? Computers in Human Behavior, 68, 456–464. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.11.058 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

11. Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). The “what” and “why” of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry, 11(4), 227–268. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327965PLI1104_01 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

12. DeSmet, A., Veldeman, C., Poels, K., Bastiaensens, S., Van Cleemput, K., Vandebosch, H., & De Bourdeaudhuij, I. (2014). Determinants of self-reported bystander behavior in cyberbullying incidents amongst adolescents. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 17(4), 207–215. https://doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2013.0027 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

13. Extremera Pacheco, N., Quintana-Orts, C., Mérida-López, S., & Rey, L. (2018). Cyberbullying victimization, self-esteem and suicidal ideation in adolescence: Does emotional intelligence play a buffering role? Frontiers in Psychology, 9, Article 367. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00367 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

14. Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, attitude, intention, and behavior: An introduction to theory and research. Addison-Wesley. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

15. Freed, D., Bazarova, N., Consolvo, S., Cosley, D., Drouin, M., Hacker, J., Henry, A., Kim, J., Munson, S. A., Pina, L. R., Rangarajan, S., & Welsh, J. (2025). PROTECT: A framework to foster digital resilience. Social Sciences, 14(6), Article 378. https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci14060378 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

16. George, M. J., & Odgers, C. L. (2015). Seven fears and the science of how mobile technologies may be influencing adolescents in the digital age. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 10(6), 832–851. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691615596788 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

17. Ho, S. S., Chen, L., & Ng, A. P. Y. (2017). Comparing cyberbullying perpetration on social media between primary and secondary school students. Computers and Education, 109, 74–84. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2017.02.004 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

18. Hueso-Romero, J. J., Gil-Quintana, J. G., Sánchez-Ibáñez, R., & Tabernero Urbieta, C. (2025). Adolescence and cyberbullying: A bibliometric analysis. Social Sciences, 14(10), Article 596. https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci14100596 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

19. Katz, E., Blumler, J. G., & Gurevitch, M. (1973). Uses and gratifications research. Public Opinion Quarterly, 37(4), 509–523. https://doi.org/10.1086/268109 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

20. Lazarus, R. S., & Folkman, S. (1984). Stress, appraisal, and coping. Springer Publishing Company. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

21. Lee, A. Y., & Hancock, J. T. (2023). Developing digital resilience: An educational intervention. Computers and Education Open, 4, Article 100144. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeo.2023.100144 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

22. Legate, N., Weinstein, N., & Przybylski, A. K. (2019). Parenting strategies and adolescents’ cyberbullying behaviors: Evidence from a preregistered study. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 48(2), 399–409. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-018-0962-y [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

23. Leung, A. N. M. (2021). To help or not to help: Intervening in cyberbullying incidents. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, Article 483250. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.483250 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

24. Li, Q. (2010). Cyberbullying in high schools: A study of students’ behaviors and beliefs about this new phenomenon. Journal of Aggression, Maltreatment and Trauma, 19(4), 372–392. https://doi.org/10.1080/10926771003788979 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

25. Li, W., & Peng, H. (2022). The impact of strain, constraints, and morality on cyberbullying among adolescents: A general strain theory perspective. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, Article 980669. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.980669 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

26. Mallmann, C. L., Lisboa, C. S., & Zanatta Calza, T. (2018). Cyberbullying and coping strategies in adolescents from southern Brazil. Acta Colombiana de Psicologia, 21(1), 34–43. https://doi.org/10.14718/acp.2018.21.1.2 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

27. Martínez, I., Murgui, S., García, O. F., & Garcia, F. (2019). Parenting in the digital era: Protective and risk factors for cyberbullying and cyber victimization. Computers in Human Behavior, 99, 114–121. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2018.08.036 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

28. Marwick, A. E. (2021). Morally motivated networked harassment as normative reinforcement. Social Media and Society, 7(2). https://doi.org/10.1177/20563051211021378 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

29. Obermaier, M., & Schmuck, D. (2022). Youths as targets: Factors of online hate speech victimization and consequences for well-being. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 27(5). https://doi.org/10.1093/jcmc/zmac012 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

30. Obermaier, M., Schmid, U. K., & Rieger, D. (2023). Too civil to care? How online hate speech against different social groups affects bystander intervention. European Journal of Criminology. https://doi.org/10.1177/14773708231156328 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

31. Pan, Q., Lan, M., Tan, C. Y., Tao, S., Liang, Q., & Guo, Z. (2025). Development and validation of digital resilience scale for children and adolescents. BMC Psychology, 13(1), Article 1412. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40359-025-03739-0 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

32. Peker, A., Cengiz, S., & Eroğlu, Y. (2024). Coping skills and perceived stress as pathways between cyber victimization and depression. Current Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-024-05864-2 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

33. Schmid, U. K., Kümpel, A. S., & Rieger, D. (2024). Social media users’ motives for (not) engaging in counter speech against hate speech: A mixed-methods approach. Social Media and Society, 10(4). https://doi.org/10.1177/20563051241306322 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

34. Slonje, R., Smith, P. K., & Frisén, A. (2013). The nature of cyberbullying, and strategies for prevention. Computers in Human Behavior, 29(1), 26–32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2012.05.024 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

35. Smith, P. K., Mahdavi, J., Carvalho, M., Fisher, S., Russell, S., & Tippett, N. (2008). Cyberbullying: Its nature and impact in secondary school pupils. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry and Allied Disciplines, 49(4), 376–385. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-7610.2007.01846.x [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

36. van Cleemput, K., Vandebosch, H., & Pabian, S. (2014). Personal characteristics and contextual factors that determine “helping,” “joining in,” and “doing nothing” when witnessing cyberbullying. Aggressive Behavior, 40(5), 383–396. https://doi.org/10.1002/ab.21534 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

37. Viner, R. M., Aswathikutty-Gireesh, A., Štiglic, N., Hudson, L. D., Goddings, A.-L., Ward, J. L., & Nicholls, D. E. (2019). Roles of cyberbullying, sleep, and physical activity in mediating the effects of social media use on mental health and wellbeing among young people in England: A secondary analysis of longitudinal data. The Lancet Child and Adolescent Health, 3(10), 685–696. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2352-4642(19)30186-5 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

38. Vlaanderen, A., Bevelander, K. E., & Kleemans, M. (2020). Empowering digital citizenship: An anti-cyberbullying intervention to increase adolescents’ empathy, prosocial behavior, and constructive bystander behavior. Computers in Human Behavior, 112, Article 106459. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2020.106459 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

39. Wachs, S., Costello, M., Wright, M. F., Flora, K., Daskalou, V., Maziridou, E., Kwon, Y., Na, E.-Y., Sittichai, R., Biswal, R., Singh, R., Almendros, C., Gámez-Guadix, M., Görzig, A., & Hong, J. S. (2021). “DNT LET ’EM H8 U!”: Applying the routine activity framework to understand cyberhate victimization among adolescents across eight countries. Computers and Education, 160, Article 104026. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2020.104026 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

40. Wen, H., Kong, X., & Feng, Y. (2022). The relationship between cyber upward social comparison and cyberbullying behaviors: A moderated mediating model. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, Article 1017775. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.1017775 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

41. Yang, S.-J., Stewart, R., Kim, J.-M., Kim, S.-W., Shin, I.-S., Dewey, M. E., Maskey, S., & Yoon, J.-S. (2013). Differences in predictors of traditional and cyber-bullying: A 2-year longitudinal study in Korean school children. European Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 22(5), 309–318. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00787-012-0374-6 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

• Assessment of the Role of Artificial Intelligence in Repositioning TVET for Economic Development in Nigeria
• Teachers’ Use of Assure Model Instructional Design on Learners’ Problem Solving Efficacy in Secondary Schools in Bungoma County, Kenya
• “E-Booksan Ang Kaalaman”: Development, Validation, and Utilization of Electronic Book in Academic Performance of Grade 9 Students in Social Studies
• Analyzing EFL University Students’ Academic Speaking Skills Through Self-Recorded Video Presentation
• Major Findings of The Study on Total Quality Management in Teachers’ Education Institutions (TEIs) In Assam – An Evaluative Study