Cyberbullying is commonly defined as the use of electronic communication technologies to deliberately and repeatedly inflict harm, harassment, or embarrassment on another individual (Smith et al., 2008; Runions et al., 2012). It encompasses both perpetration (or cyberaggression), which refers to actively engaging in harmful online behaviors, and victimization (or cybervictimization), which involves being the target of such actions (Shapka et al., 2018). Global prevalence rates for cyberbullying perpetration and victimization among adolescents range from 6.0 to 46.3% and 14.0 to 57.5%, respectively, depending on the region (Zhu et al., 2021). Research consistently shows a peak in cyberbullying incidents among youth aged 12-17 (Williams and Guerra, 2007), correlating with adverse physical and psychological health outcomes, including increased risks of depression and suicidality (Kowalski et al., 2014; Tao et al., 2024; Yoon et al., 2019). In this context, digital literacy (DL)—the confident, critical, and responsible use of digital technologies—emerges as an important potential protective factor, as it promotes respectful online communication and safeguarding personal data and privacy (Carretero et al., 2017).
While studies have reported a negative association between DL and cyberbullying experiences, the cross-sectional nature of much of this research limits causal interpretation (Zhu et al., 2021; Tso et al., 2022). Moreover, some studies do not distinguish between perpetration and victimization when examining cyberbullying, which can be problematic. Cyberbullying perpetration (or cyberaggression) is an active behavior influenced by factors such as impulsivity and academic stress, while cyberbullying victimization (or cybervictimization) is a passive experience, with individuals suffering from mental health issues being at greater risk (Runions et al., 2012). As the factors that contribute to becoming a perpetrator may differ from those that increase the risk of victimization, interventions effective for reducing perpetration may not necessarily benefit victims, and vice versa. The covert nature of cyberbullying also contributes to victims often becoming perpetrators, a notable characteristic that sets cyberbullying apart from traditional bullying (Hayes et al., 2021).
This study examines the bidirectional longitudinal relationship between DL and cyberbullying experiences, both as perpetrators and victims. It fills critical research gaps by adding longitudinal evidence to the existing cross-sectional studies and examining both cyberaggression and cybervictimization and how these forms of cyberbullying are related to DL, using a performance measure instead of self-reported competence. The findings are expected to inform the development of long-term DL educational programs aimed at reducing cyberbullying among adolescents.
Theoretical frameworks
Existing theories suggest a complex and dynamic relationship between DL and cyberbullying, highlighting both its protective and risk-enhancing potentials. Self-efficacy theory (Bandura, 1997) posits that individuals’ confidence in their abilities influences their behaviors. In the context of cyberbullying, this implies that people with higher DL may have better technical skills and feel more capable of navigating digital platforms. As a result, these individuals may engage in cyberaggression more confidently and effectively. Conversely, individuals with lower DL may avoid direct involvement in cyberaggression due to a lack of perceived competence in digital environments.
In contrast to the predictions of self-efficacy theory, cognitive dissonance theory (Harmon-Jones and Mills, 2019) suggests that individuals with strong beliefs in netiquette—such as the ethical and respectful use of digital platforms—may experience internal discomfort when engaging in cyberaggression. To resolve this psychological tension, they may refrain from engaging in harmful online behaviors or seek to justify their actions. This perspective implies that DL, which integrates knowledge of and the belief in ethical digital norms, may serve as a protective factor against cyberaggression rather than a risk factor.
In addition, from a victimization perspective, self-determination theory (Deci and Ryan, 2012) emphasizes the fundamental psychological needs for autonomy, competence, and relatedness. These essential needs can be disrupted by cybervictimization. Therefore, when individuals experience online harassment or exclusion, they may seek to regain autonomy and control by enhancing their DL, such as developing advanced privacy management skills, learning to recognize online threats, or actively engaging in digital safety practices. This perspective suggests a potential bidirectional relationship, where cybervictimization motivates individuals to improve their DL, which in turn may help them mitigate future online risks.
Finally, social cognitive theory (Bandura, 1999) offers a broader framework to understand the reciprocal influences between cognition (e.g., DL), behaviors (e.g., cyberaggression), and environmental experiences (e.g., cybervictimization). Applying this to cyberbullying, individuals’ DL may shape their likelihood of engaging in cyberaggression, while their experiences of cybervictimization may, in turn, influence their motivation to develop their DL further. In the event of such a reciprocal interplay, cyberaggression and cybervictimization may not be unidirectional outcomes of DL but rather part of an ongoing feedback loop where individuals continuously adapt their digital behaviors in response to their experiences.
Definition of DL
As technology increasingly permeates education, work, and social interactions, DL has become an essential competence for adolescents, shaping their ability to navigate, evaluate, and engage with online information and communication in the 21st century (Law et al., 2018). However, the concept of DL has been defined in various ways. For example, Reddy et al. (2022) describe DL as a combination of skills, knowledge, and competencies necessary for effectively using digital technologies. The European Commission and UNESCO highlight the importance of a range of skills to use digital technologies for engaging with digital information, communicating via digital means, and solving problems across all aspects of life (Law et al., 2018; Carretero et al., 2017). Other, less comprehensive conceptual frameworks of DL have also been proposed.
In this study, we adopt the definition of DL outlined in DigComp 2.1, which comprehensively defines DL across five key domains: (1) information and data literacy, (2) communication and collaboration, (3) digital content creation, (4) safety, and (5) problem-solving (Carretero et al., 2017). Within this framework, DL is directly relevant to cyberbullying. Adolescents with high DL know how to protect their personal data online (domains 1 and 4), how to communicate and cooperate with others online in appropriate ways (domain 2), and how to deal with cyberbullying (domain 5)—thereby reducing the risk of becoming victims of cyberbullying. On the other hand, high levels of data literacy (domain 1) and technical literacy (domain 3) may enable individuals to engage in more sophisticated forms of cyberaggression, thereby potentially increasing the likelihood of cyberbullying experiences.
Empirical evidence on the relation between DL and cyberbullying
Cross-sectional studies dominate existing empirical research on cyberbullying and show mixed results regarding the relationship between DL and cyberbullying. For cyberbullying perpetration, some studies suggest that higher DL correlates with increased exposure to digital environments, thereby raising cyberaggression risks (Vandebosch and Van Cleemput, 2008; Livingstone and Smith, 2014), while others indicate that strong digital skills and ethical media competence can deter cyberaggressive behaviors (Müller et al., 2014; Shim and Shin, 2016; Festl, 2021). Such discrepancies may stem from varying conceptualizations of DL. When defined primarily as technical proficiency, higher DL can increase online exposure and confidence, potentially lowering perceived risks and facilitating cyberaggression. In contrast, when viewed as responsible online behavior, advanced DL fosters critical content evaluation, adherence to digital norms, and prosocial engagement, reducing cyberaggression risk. However, DL is a holistic competence rather than a mere collection of separate skills (Jin et al., 2020). Therefore, the current study adopts a comprehensive perspective integrating technical skills and ethical awareness (Carretero et al., 2017).
Cross-sectional studies typically also reveal a negative association between DL and victimization risk, suggesting that while more screen time may increase vulnerability, higher DL can moderate this risk (Livingstone and Smith, 2014; Kapucu et al., 2021; Tao et al., 2022). Higher DL has been found to be associated with less exposure to online attacks (Livingstone and Smith, 2014; Shim and Shin, 2016), suggesting that DL may act as a protective factor against cybervictimization. However, the existing cross-sectional studies do not capture the dynamic, potentially reciprocal nature of these online interactions.
The mixed empirical evidence and contradictory theoretical perspectives raise critical questions. Is promoting DL an effective educational strategy to reduce cyberbullying (both perpetration and victimization) and its negative consequences? Or is DL a double-edged sword that facilitates cyberaggression (due to more confidence in effectively perpetrating) but also reduces experiences of cybervictimization (because victimized individuals seek to acquire digital skills to prevent being cyberbullied in the future)? Furthermore, how do cyberbullying experiences influence subsequent DL, and do the associations with DL differ between cyberaggression and cybervictimization? Addressing these questions requires a longitudinal understanding of the relationship between DL and cyberbullying experiences. Although a previous meta-analysis elucidated the longitudinal bidirectional relation between cyberbullying perpetration, victimization, and youth’s externalizing and internalizing problems, the role of DL in these dynamics remains insufficiently explored (Marciano et al., 2020).
The current study
Given the mixed theoretical perspectives and inconsistent empirical findings regarding the relationship between DL and cyberbullying, we aimed to clarify the described puzzle by examining the bidirectional relationships between cyberbullying experiences (cyberaggression and cybervictimization) and DL in 679 Hong Kong adolescents over 2 years. Specifically, this study aimed to address the research question: What are the bidirectional relationships between DL and cyberbullying experiences (cyberaggression and cybervictimization) among adolescents over a 2-year period?
Based on existing theory and prior research, we proposed the following hypotheses:
H1: Drawing on self-determination theory, we hypothesized that prior experiences of cybervictimization are associated with increased DL at a later time, as adolescents seek to enhance their skills to better cope with online risks.
H2: Based on previous empirical studies (Livingstone and Smith, 2014; Shim and Shin, 2016), we also expected higher levels of DL to predict fewer subsequent incidences of cybervictimization, reflecting a protective role of DL.
Due to contradictory theoretical perspectives (e.g., self-efficacy theory would suggest that high DL increases cyberaggression, while cognitive dissonance theory would suggest the opposite) and inconclusive empirical findings, the bidirectional relationship between DL and cyberaggression was explored without a specific directional hypothesis.
