ArticleFrontiers in psychiatry2026
Development and validation of a scale of cyberbullying and online aggressive conduct in Brazilian adolescents.
Article in Frontiers in psychiatry, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Cyberbullying (CYB) is an increasing problem, especially among young people, requiring new ways to measure this construct. Currently, there are gaps in the development of a scale to validate the identification of CYB. Therefore, this study aimed to develop and validate the Scale of Cyberbullying and Online Aggressive Conduct (SCOAC), considering a sample of 642 adolescents (11-17 years old). Methods: For the internal structure, we conducted Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) and Network Analysis (NA) on 60% of the sample, followed by Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) on the remaining 40%, with multigroup invariance analyses by gender. We also evaluated external evidence, including criterion validity (using the Florence Cybervictimization Inventory - FCBVS), convergent validity (SAS-SV, SPAI-SF, STDS, IAT, PIUQ-9), and nomological validity (DASS-21, DERS-18, UPPS-P, aggression, quality of life, CRAFFT/CESARE). Predictive validity was examined with an ROC curve based on risk classes from Latent Profile Analysis (LPA). Results: EFA indicated KMO = 0.890 and explained 72.4% of the variance; the final 3-factor solution with 17 items (Threat; Defamation/Exposure; Emotional Problems) was confirmed in the CFA (CFI = 0.991; TLI = 0.989; RMSEA≈0.030; SRMR = 0.048). The reliability of the SCOAC was high (total α=0.915; total ω=0.919; subscales α=0.837-0.873). In criterion validity, the total SCOAC score correlated with the FCBVSs instrument (ρ = 0.649). In convergent validity, we found higher correlations with indicators of smartphone use/messaging. In the nomological validity analysis, correlations were moderate for anxiety (ρ=0.437), stress (ρ=0.404), and depression (ρ=0.387). The ROC analysis showed an AUC of 0.85 (95% CI 0.82-0.88) and a cutoff point of ≥8. 29.9% were classified as having signs of CYB and demonstrated greater emotional distress, impulsivity, emotional dysregulation, aggression, poorer quality of life, and increased substance involvement compared to others. Conclusions: The SCOAC has a stable structure, high reliability, strong evidence of validity, and good screening accuracy for CYB, making it a brief, practical tool for identifying cyber risks among adolescents.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.