Developing Your Research Question (Exercise 4.1)

I came to the conclusion that the focal interest of my study, after reviewing my concept map, is that of the unknown as it relates to cyberbullying. Although I rarely build the rationale of my research on arguments about “how we know little about a phenomenon,” I seem to gravitate toward studying novel concepts rather than replication in this research domain. Perhaps this is an artifact of my latent ill regard for research and theory on cyberbullying, which has been fraught with conceptual ambiguities and inconsistencies. My guiding research question therefore is formative in a sense. 

The conceptualization of cyberbullying in the literature is clear, and a fair amount of agreement exists among scholars, practitioners, and even those enmeshed in cyberbullying episodes about the characteristics of cyberbullying. Indeed, cyberbullying can be considered an intentional hurtful or embarrassing message repeatedly transmitted over a digital medium between people of different power. The definition is noticeably multifaceted in that it comprises complex ideas such as intentionality, repetition, and power imbalance. But little attention has been paid to explicating all these components in research.

 The central focus of my study appears to be the power imbalance experienced between the bully and the victim. The concept map provides some clarity in this domain. All ideas seem to want to trace back to the power imbalance generated in cyberbullying because it is a concept so imprecise and veiled in uncertainty. My research question is undoubtedly related to the power imbalance. The things most interesting to me center around two different questions:

1.       What do child and adolescent victims of cyberbullying say affected their perceptions of power imbalance between the bully and them?

2.       Did the perceptions of power imbalance influence the type of negative outcomes experienced on account of the cyberbullying?

I was sure to include some indication about the limitations of the purposive or snowball sampling I am likely to employ with a project of this nature. Randomly sampling would not get the necessary population of individuals I need for this sample. Sampling bring into light further questions about the methods to which I can relate these questions. To answer Research Question 1, I can use a number of different methods but the one I feel might best suit my needs is the rank order, free list, and pile sort method. In scrutinizing my questions, I feel that this method is germane to locating the cultural domains that make up the power imbalance. I can ask victims: “What kinds of the things cyberbullying victims think affects the differences of power between bullies and victims communicated through digital devices?” The question will elicit cultural domains of power imbalance in cyberbullying experiences.

The methods used to test Research Question two would be more complicated given the goal of finding out information about the nature of the relationship between power imbalance and negative outcomes. First, it should be made clear what negative outcomes are being implicated at the outset of the project. Some unanswered questions right now seem to be whether I am looking at cognitive, emotional, or behavioral outcomes and are they inherently negative or can they be positive as well? I would use in-depth interviewing to answer these questions and probe the nature of the relationship between power imbalance and these outcomes.