Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 1 cited by

Online Safety for All: Sociocultural Insights from a Systematic Review of Youth Online Safety in the Global South

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-16 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read A systematic review of 66 studies finds that Global South youth online safety research is Asia-heavy, survey-dominated, and centered on cyberbullying, with culture the most emphasized social factor.

desk verdict Useful first synthesis of Global South youth online safety research, but the count inconsistencies and unmeasured retrieval bias mean the findings should be treated as suggestive until fixed. read the letter →

arxiv 2504.20308 v1 pith:2CWYVMEL submitted 2025-04-28 cs.HC cs.CY

Ozioma C. Oguine , Oghenemaro Anuyah , Zainab Agha , Iris Melgarez , Adriana Alvarado Garcia , Karla Badillo-Urquiola This is my paper · ORCID
classification cs.HCcs.CY
keywords youthonlinesafetyGlobalSouthsystematicreviewcyberbullyingculturemarginalizedquantitativesurveyseducationandawareness
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

This paper sets out to establish that the research base on youth online safety in the Global South is not yet a balanced, globally inclusive field. Reviewing 66 studies published between 2014 and 2024, the authors find the literature concentrates in Asian countries, leans heavily on one-time quantitative surveys, gives little attention to LGBTQIA+ and disabled youth, and treats cyberbullying as the dominant risk. They argue that cultural factors—family structures, collectivist norms, religious values, gender expectations—are the most influential social forces shaping both how risks appear and how safety strategies are designed in these regions. If the review is right, future work should replace imported one-size-fits-all interventions with situated, participatory, and culturally responsive methods led with youth in the Global South.

What carries the argument

The carrying object is the coded corpus of 66 papers plus the qualitative scheme applied to it. The corpus was assembled through a systematic protocol: Boolean queries combining online-safety, youth, and Global South terms (including a full list of countries), restricted to 2014–2024 and to English- and Spanish-language publications, with inclusion criteria requiring peer review, a focus on youth aged 19 or younger, direct treatment of online risk, and a contribution to HCI, followed by title/abstract and full-text screening. The analytic machinery is a four-dimensional codebook—where the research took place, who was studied, how data were collected and what kind of contribution resulted, and what risks, social factors, and safety strategies were examined—and applying it consistently is what converts the article list into claims about regional concentration, methodological dominance, and cultural emphasis.

What would settle it

Re-run the review's Boolean query in regional and non-English publication venues that were not among the three selected databases, and code the additional hits with the same where/who/how/what scheme; if the added set contains many qualitative, policy-focused, or Latin American and African studies, the claims about regional concentration, methodological dominance, and the absence of marginalized-youth research would fail as statements about the field. A second check is to re-code all 66 full texts for whether any demographic or risk data about LGBTQIA+ or disabled youth appear even when not declared in the title or abstract.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central discovery, stated as the authors would state it, is a description of what a decade of research has and has not covered. Across the 66 papers, the settings cluster in Asia, with China (11), India (9), Malaysia (6), and South Africa (4) appearing most often; surveys are the dominant data-collection method (43 of 66), qualitative studies number 17, mixed-method studies 3, and longitudinal designs 1. Cyberbullying and online victimization is the most studied risk category (29 studies), followed by privacy and data-security risks (14) and sexual risks (8); education and awareness is the most recommended safety strategy (41 studies), with mediation and support systems second (21). The authors claim that culture was the most emphasized social factor (38 studies), and they report that only two studies engaged LGBTQIA+ youth or youth with disabilities and only one addressed politics and policy. They read this pattern as evidence that the field needs methodological diversification and a culturally situated, youth-centered research agenda.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the 66 papers returned by the three chosen databases, the 2014–2024 window, and the English/Spanish language filter fairly represent the entire field of youth online safety research in the Global South; if regional, non-indexed, or non-English literatures are substantial, the observed Asia-heavy and survey-heavy pattern and the apparent silence on marginalized youth and policy could be sampling artifacts rather than properties of the field.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the review is correct, the evidence base for online safety in the Global South is strongest for survey-based prevalence of cyberbullying in Asia, so interventions built on this literature should be treated as region-specific rather than globally generalizable.
  • Researchers seeking to design culturally responsive safety tools should expect that education and awareness programs and family-based mediation are the two strategies with the most evidentiary support, while policy and regulation are a largely open question.
  • The near absence of LGBTQIA+, disabled, and other marginalized youth from the corpus means current safety guidance cannot yet claim to be inclusive, and future studies will need recruitment and measurement practices that record these identities.
  • The methodological imbalance predicts that qualitative and youth-centered studies will add the most new knowledge, not by replacing surveys but by explaining why cultural norms produce the patterns the surveys detect.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Beyond the paper: because the corpus was built from three large bibliographic databases with an English/Spanish filter, the culture-emphasis finding is best read as a statement about indexed literature; a multilingual, regionally grounded search is the direct next test.
  • Beyond the paper: the review's counts imply a testable framing hypothesis—safety messages built on family honor or community responsibility may outperform individual-resilience messages in collectivist contexts—which the review does not itself test.
  • Beyond the paper: the two-study figure for marginalized youth may understate their presence if studies collected such demographics without foregrounding them; a full-text demographic-flagging pass would sharpen the claim.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. This paper reports a systematic review of 66 studies published between 2014 and 2024 on youth online safety in the Global South, following a PRISMA-inspired process and coding the corpus along four dimensions: where the research was conducted, who was studied, how it was conducted, and what risks and safety strategies were addressed. The authors report that the literature is concentrated in Asian countries, dominated by quantitative survey methods, and focused primarily on cyberbullying, with limited attention to marginalized youth populations and a strong emphasis on cultural and social factors. The paper concludes with methodological recommendations and a future research agenda calling for qualitative, participatory, and culturally situated approaches.

Significance. If the descriptive landscape claims are reliable, this is a valuable contribution to HCI and CSCW: it extends the earlier review by Pinter et al. (2017), provides a useful codebook for the field, and explicitly addresses positionality, which is still uncommon in systematic reviews. The paper gives due credit to regional scholars and identifies concrete gaps, such as the near-absence of LGBTQIA+ and disability-focused studies. However, the reliability of the headline claims is weakened by internal count inconsistencies and by a retrieval and screening strategy that may not represent the full Global South literature, so the current manuscript needs revision before its central empirical claims can be fully trusted.

major comments (3)
  1. [Section 5.3 and Table 4] The count of quantitative studies is internally inconsistent. The text states 'a significant predominance of articles using quantitative methods (N=66)', but Table 4 reports Quantitative (46), Qualitative (17), and Mixed-method (3), which sum to 66. The surrounding sentences also report qualitative N=17 and mixed-method N=3, so the N=66 for quantitative methods appears to be a typographical error. Since 'predominance of quantitative methods' is one of the three headline findings in the abstract, this discrepancy must be corrected and all counts reconciled with Table 4.
  2. [Sections 5.1, 5.5, and Table 4] Several other frequency counts do not add up. In Section 5.5, the text says 'Most studies (N=44) investigated risks among five major categories' and 'The remaining 20 studies' used a broad definition, which totals 64, not 66; yet the enumerated category counts for cyberbullying (29), privacy (14), sexual risks (8), inappropriate content (2), and technology addiction (3) sum to 56, not 44 or 64. In Section 5.1, the text reports Africa N=13, while Table 4 lists Africa (12), and the regional counts for Asia (48), Africa, and South America (8) together exceed 66. These inconsistencies directly affect the claim that cyberbullying is the most prominent risk and the claim about regional concentration, so a full audit of the coded frequencies is required.
  3. [Sections 4.1, 4.2, and 6.5] The sampling frame is too narrow to support the unqualified landscape claims in the abstract. The search is limited to ACM Digital Library, Web of Science, and PubMed, with queries in English and Spanish, and the initial title/abstract screening was performed by the first author alone. This design likely underrepresents Portuguese-language literature indexed in SciELO and Redalyc, Francophone African and Middle Eastern research, and Chinese-language work in CNKI, all of which are relevant to the Global South. The observed pattern of few African/South American studies and few marginalized-youth studies could be an artifact of this retrieval frame rather than a true property of the field. Section 6.5 acknowledges that only four Spanish-language papers were found, but it does not quantify how many non-English or non-indexed records were missed. The authors should either broaden the search and screening process or explicitly reframe the conclusions as describing the indexed English/Spanish literature in these three databases, rather than 'the Global South' as a whole.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Section 5.3 and Table 4] The text reports 'survey-based studies (N=43)' while Table 4 lists 'Survey (52)' as the method count; please clarify whether studies could be assigned multiple methods and reconcile the numbers.
  2. [References [54] and [55]] References [54] and [55] appear to be the same work (Hendricks et al., 2020, 'Cyber-Harassment Victimization Among South African LGBTQIA+ Youth'), which creates confusion in Section 5.2 where the paper says only two marginalized-population studies were found and then appears to cite the same study twice.
  3. [Section 3.1] There is a typographical error in the phrase 'youth' consider online risks and safety to be on a spectrum'; the apostrophe should be removed.
  4. [Section 4.1, footnotes 3-5] The footnotes say that both BrazilIHC and AfriCHI proceedings have been published in ACM 'since the seventeenth edition of the conference held in 2016', which is not accurate for either conference; please verify the edition numbers and years.
  5. [Table 4] The 'Authors' affiliation' row lists countries without counts or percentages; adding per-country frequencies would improve transparency and align this row with the other coded dimensions.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: the systematic review's landscape claims are empirical codings of 66 external studies, not derivations from fitted inputs or self-cited assumptions.

full rationale

This paper is a systematic literature review. Its central findings—Asia-heavy concentration, quantitative predominance, cyberbullying focus, limited marginalized-youth research—are descriptive summaries produced by coding 66 external articles, not predictions derived from a model or fitted parameters. The search strategy and inclusion criteria are inputs to the review; the findings summarize what those inputs retrieved. No equation, fitted parameter, or renamed prediction is presented as an independent derivation. The authors cite their own prior work in the background (e.g., Agha et al. [9], Badillo-Urquiola et al. [20], Oguine et al. [88]), and a few co-authored papers appear in the reviewed corpus, but these citations are contextual and not load-bearing: the review's claims would not reduce to or be forced by those self-citations. The paper explicitly acknowledges corpus limitations in Section 6.5 (e.g., only four Spanish-language articles, geographic imbalance), which is a validity caveat rather than circularity. Concerns about database and language coverage raised by a skeptic are threats to external validity or representativeness, not circular reasoning. Internal count inconsistencies (e.g., N=66 in Section 5.3 versus N=46 in Table 4) are reporting errors that affect precision but do not constitute a reduction of the conclusions to their inputs. Therefore no circular step can be exhibited, and the appropriate finding is no significant circularity.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No free parameters or invented entities appear in this paper. The central claims rest on a coded corpus of 66 studies, which depends on assumptions about the definition of the Global South, the age range for youth, database coverage, and the reliability of consensus coding.

assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption The Global South is defined by the UNOSSC economic classification, and the corpus is restricted to studies set in or about these countries.
    Section 3.3 and Section 4.1 adopt this classification; the landscape findings depend on which countries are labeled Global South.
  • domain assumption Youth is operationalized as age 19 and younger for study inclusion.
    Section 3.2 and the inclusion criteria in Section 4.2 set this boundary, which affects which studies enter the corpus.
  • domain assumption Searching ACM Digital Library, Web of Science, and PubMed with the listed keyword sets is sufficient to capture the Global South youth online safety literature.
    Section 4.1 defines the search strategy; if coverage is incomplete, the prevalence claims in Section 5 may be artifacts of database indexing.
  • domain assumption Consensus coding by two authors without an inter-rater reliability metric yields trustworthy themes.
    Section 4.3 justifies this by citing McDonald et al. [78], but no reliability metric is reported, so the stability of the coded categories is unmeasured.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Online Safety for All: Sociocultural Insights from a Systematic Review of Youth Online Safety in the Global South." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/2CWYVMEL

@misc{pith2026250420308,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Online Safety for All: Sociocultural Insights from a Systematic Review of Youth Online Safety in the Global South},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/2CWYVMEL}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2504.20308}
}
read the original abstract

Youth online safety research in HCI has historically centered on perspectives from the Global North, often overlooking the unique particularities and cultural contexts of regions in the Global South. This paper presents a systematic review of 66 youth online safety studies published between 2014 and 2024, specifically focusing on regions in the Global South. Our findings reveal a concentrated research focus in Asian countries and predominance of quantitative methods. We also found limited research on marginalized youth populations and a primary focus on risks related to cyberbullying. Our analysis underscores the critical role of cultural factors in shaping online safety, highlighting the need for educational approaches that integrate social dynamics and awareness. We propose methodological recommendations and a future research agenda that encourages the adoption of situated, culturally sensitive methodologies and youth-centered approaches to researching youth online safety regions in the Global South. This paper advocates for greater inclusivity in youth online safety research, emphasizing the importance of addressing varied sociocultural contexts to better understand and meet the online safety needs of youth in the Global South.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2504.20308 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Search, Screening, and Selection Process (Flow Diagram) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_1.png] view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. 'Teens Need to Be Educated on the Danger': Digital Access, Online Risks, and Safety Practices Among Nigerian Adolescents

    cs.HC 2025-07 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    Nigerian adolescents in the FCT report moderate digital access, frequent reliance on blocking tools, parents as primary support, and a strong demand for better online safety education.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

136 extracted references · 45 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    Conferences

    2024. Conferences. https://sigchi.org/conferences

    2024

  2. [2]

    Erikson’s Stages of Development

    2024. Erikson’s Stages of Development. https://www.simplypsychology.org/erik-erikson.html

    2024

  3. [3]

    The Convention on the Rights of the Child: The children’s version

    2024. The Convention on the Rights of the Child: The children’s version. https://www.unicef.org/child-rights- convention/convention-text-childrens-version

    2024

  4. [4]

    The EU’s Digital Services Act

    2024. The EU’s Digital Services Act. https://commission.europa.eu/strategy-and-policy/priorities-2019-2024/europe- fit-digital-age/digital-services-act_en

    2024

  5. [5]

    What Does the Rise of the Global South Mean for the World? https://lkyspp.nus.edu.sg/gia/article/what-does- the-rise-of-the-global-south-mean-for-the-world

    2024. What Does the Rise of the Global South Mean for the World? https://lkyspp.nus.edu.sg/gia/article/what-does- the-rise-of-the-global-south-mean-for-the-world

    2024

  6. [6]

    Krishnashree Achuthan, Sharanya Muthupalani, Vysakh Kani Kolil, and Kapil Chalil Madathil. 2022. Theoretical perspectives of parental influence on adolescent cyber behaviour: A bi-national Instagram-based study.Heliyon8, 11 (Nov. 2022). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e11813

    work page doi:10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e11813 2022

  7. [7]

    Ademola Olusola Adesina, Sunday Adeola Ajagbe, Olakunle Sunday Afolabi, Oluwashola David Adeniji, and Olalekan Ibrahim Ajimobi. 2022. Investigating Data Mining Trend in Cybercrime Among Youths. InPervasive Computing and Social Networking. Springer, Singapore, 725–741. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-19-2840-6_55

    work page doi:10.1007/978-981-19-2840-6_55 2022

  8. [8]

    Chandni Agarwal and Akshath Singhal. 2017. Securing Our Digital Natives: a Study of Commonly Experience Internet Safety Issues and a One-Stop Solution. InProceedings of the 10th International Conference on Theory and Practice of Electronic Governance(New Delhi AA, India)(ICEGOV ’17). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 178–186. https:/...

    arXiv 2017

Show all 136 references
  1. [9]

    Strike at the Root

    Zainab Agha, Karla Badillo-Urquiola, and Pamela J. Wisniewski. 2023. "Strike at the Root": Co-Designing Real-Time Social Media Interventions for Adolescent Online Risk Prevention.Proc. ACM Hum.-Comput. Interact.7, CSCW1, Article 149 (apr 2023), 32 pages. https://doi.org/10.114...

    2023 doi

  2. [10]

    Wisniewski

    Zainab Agha, Jinkyung Park, Ruyuan Wan, Naima Samreen Ali, Yiwei Wang, Dominic Difranzo, Karla Badillo- Urquiola, and Pamela J. Wisniewski. 2024. Tricky vs. Transparent: Towards an Ecologically Valid and Safe Approach for Evaluating Online Safety Nudges for Teens. InProceeding...

    2024

  3. [11]

    Alfakeh, Abdulrahman A

    Sulhi A. Alfakeh, Abdulrahman A. Alghamdi, Khalid A. Kouzaba, Mohammed I. Altaifi, Sultan D. Abu-Alamah, and Malik M. Salamah. 2021. Parents’ perception of cyberbullying of their children in Saudi Arabia.Journal of Family & Community Medicine28, 2 (May 2021), 117. https://doi....

    2021 doi

  4. [12]

    Suzan Ali, Mounir Elgharabawy, Quentin Duchaussoy, Mohammad Mannan, and Amr Youssef. 2020. Betrayed by the Guardian: Security and Privacy Risks of Parental Control Solutions. InACSAC ’20: Proceedings of the 36th Annual Computer Security Applications Conference. Association for...

    2020

  5. [13]

    Wisniewski, and Gianluca Stringhini

    Shiza Ali, Afsaneh Razi, Seunghyun Kim, Ashwaq Alsoubai, Joshua Gracie, Munmun De Choudhury, Pamela J. Wisniewski, and Gianluca Stringhini. 2022. Understanding the Digital Lives of Youth: Analyzing Media Shared within Safe Versus Unsafe Private Conversations on Instagram. InPr...

    2022

  6. [14]

    Aljasir and Maisoon O

    Shuaa A. Aljasir and Maisoon O. Alsebaei. 2022. Cyberbullying and cybervictimization on digital media platforms: the role of demographic variables and parental mediation strategies.Humanit. Soc. Sci. Commun.9, 320 (Sept. 2022), , Vol. 1, No. 1, Article . Publication date: Sept...

    2022 doi

  7. [15]

    Dittin Andrews, Sreejith Alathur, Naganna Chetty, and Vishal Kumar. [n. d.]. Child Online Safety in Indian Context. In2020 5th International Conference on Computing, Communication and Security (ICCCS). IEEE, 14–16. https: //doi.org/10.1109/ICCCS49678.2020.9277038

  8. [16]

    Oghenemaro Anuyah, Karla Badillo-Urquiola, and Ronald Metoyer. 2023. Characterizing the Technology Needs of Vulnerable Populations for Participation in Research and Design by Adopting Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs. In Proceedings of the 2023 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Co...

    2023 doi

  9. [17]

    Oghenemaro Anuyah, Ruyuan Wan, Cornelius Adejoro, Tom Yeh, Ronald Metoyer, and Karla Badillo-Urquiola

  10. [18]

    Nazilah Ahmad@Ahmad Arifin, Umi Asma’ Mokhtar, Zaihosnita Hood, Sabrina Tiun, and Dian Indrayani Jambari. 2019. Parental Awareness on Cyber Threats Using Social Media.Jurnal Komunikasi: Malaysian Journal of Communication 35, 2 (June 2019). https://ejournal.ukm.my/mjc/article/v...

    2019

  11. [19]

    Emma Louise Backe, Pamela Lilleston, and Jennifer McCleary-Sills. 2018. Networked individuals, gendered violence: A literature review of cyberviolence.Violence and gender5, 3 (2018), 135–146

    2018

  12. [20]

    Karla Badillo-Urquiola, Chhaya Chouhan, Stevie Chancellor, Munmun De Choudhary, and Pamela Wisniewski. 2020. Beyond parental control: designing adolescent online safety apps using value sensitive design.Journal of adolescent research35, 1 (2020), 147–175

    2020

  13. [21]

    Karla Badillo-Urquiola, Scott Harpin, and Pamela Wisniewski. 2017. Abandoned but not forgotten: Providing access while protecting foster youth from online risks. InProceedings of the 2017 Conference on Interaction Design and Children. 17–26

    2017

  14. [22]

    Wisniewski

    Karla Badillo-Urquiola, Xinru Page, and Pamela J. Wisniewski. 2019. Risk vs. Restriction: The Tension between Providing a Sense of Normalcy and Keeping Foster Teens Safe Online. InProceedings of the 2019 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems(Glasgow, Scotland Uk...

    2019

  15. [23]

    Karla Badillo-Urquiola, Zachary Shea, Zainab Agha, Irina Lediaeva, and Pamela Wisniewski. 2021. Conducting Risky Research with Teens: Co-Designing for the Ethical Treatment and Protection of Adolescents.Proc. ACM Hum.-Comput. Interact.4, CSCW3, Article 231 (jan 2021), 46 pages...

    2021 doi

  16. [24]

    Badillo-Urquiola, Arup Kumar Ghosh, and Pamela Wisniewski

    Karla A. Badillo-Urquiola, Arup Kumar Ghosh, and Pamela Wisniewski. 2017. Understanding the Unique Online Challenges Faced by Teens in the Foster Care System. InCompanion of the 2017 ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work and Social Computing(Portland, Oregon, U...

    2017

  17. [25]

    Xuqing Bai, Liangshuang Yao, Changying Duan, Xiaojun Sun, and Gengfeng Niu. 2022. Deviant Peer Affiliation and Adolescent Tobacco and Alcohol Use: The Roles of Tobacco and Alcohol Information Exposure on Social Networking Sites and Digital Literacy.Behavioral Sciences12, 12 (D...

    2022 doi

  18. [26]

    Daniel A Bell and Thaddeus Metz. 2011. Confucianism and Ubuntu: Reflections on a dialogue between Chinese and African traditions. (2011)

    2011

  19. [27]

    Eric Blancaflor, Nathaniel Christian Alcantara, Aeron Charles Javier, Elson Benn Macalintal, Ireland John San Pedro, and Christie Valero. 2023. Security Risks on Video sharing social media platforms: A literature review. InProceedings of the 2023 11th International Conference ...

    2023

  20. [28]

    Jan Boehmer, Robert LaRose, Nora Rifon, Saleem Alhabash, and Shelia Cotten. 2015. Determinants of online safety behaviour: Towards an intervention strategy for college students.Behaviour & Information Technology34, 10 (2015), 1022–1035

    2015

  21. [29]

    2021.Thematic Analysis: A Practical Guide

    Virginia Braun and Victoria Clarke. 2021.Thematic Analysis: A Practical Guide. SAGE Publications, London, England, UK. https://books.google.com/books/about/Thematic_Analysis.html?id=mToqEAAAQBAJ

    2021

  22. [30]

    Mary Callaghan, Colette Kelly, and Michal Molcho. 2015. Exploring traditional and cyberbullying among Irish adolescents.International journal of public health60 (2015), 199–206

    2015

  23. [31]

    Kuss, Mark D

    Rubaiya Matin Chandrima, Kagan Kircaburun, Humyon Kabir, Baizid Khoorshid Riaz, Daria J. Kuss, Mark D. Griffiths, and Mohammed A. Mamun. 2020. Adolescent problematic internet use and parental mediation: A Bangladeshi structured interview study.Addict. Behav. Rep.12 (Dec. 2020)...

    2020

  24. [32]

    Maia Chankseliani. 2023. Who funds the production of globally visible research in the Global South?Scientometrics 128, 1 (Jan. 2023), 783–801. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-022-04583-4 , Vol. 1, No. 1, Article . Publication date: September 2025. 24 O.C Oguine et al

    2023 doi

  25. [33]

    Liang Chen, Xiaoming Liu, and Hongjie Tang. 2023. The Interactive Effects of Parental Mediation Strategies in Preventing Cyberbullying on Social Media.Psychology Research and Behavior Management16 (2023), 1009. https://doi.org/10.2147/PRBM.S386968

    2023 doi

  26. [34]

    Pham Thi Lan Chi, Vu Thi Hoang Lan, Nguyen Hanh Ngan, and Nguyen Thuy Linh. 2020. Online time, experience of cyber bullying and practices to cope with it among high school students in Hanoi.Health Psychology Open7, 1 (June 2020), 2055102920935747. https://doi.org/10.1177/20551...

    2020 doi

  27. [35]

    Baldreck Chipangura and Gustave Dtendjo-Ndjindja. 2022. Securing the cybersafety of South African online high school learners beyond COVID-19.Journal for Transdisciplinary Research in Southern Africa18, 1 (Dec. 2022), 8. https://td-sa.net/index.php/td/article/view/1256/2274

    2022

  28. [36]

    Tanni Choudhury and Rashmi Choudhury. 2023. Digital experiences of children and adolescents in India: New challenges for school counsellors.Psychology in the Schools60, 4 (April 2023), 1094–1106. https://doi.org/10.1002/ pits.22821

    2023

  29. [37]

    Nour Dados and Raewyn Connell. 2012. The Global South.Contexts11, 1 (Feb. 2012), 12–13. https://doi.org/10.1177/ 1536504212436479

    2012

  30. [38]

    Nicola Dell and Neha Kumar. 2016. The Ins and Outs of HCI for Development. InProceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems(San Jose, California, USA)(CHI ’16). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 2220–2232. https://doi.org/10....

    2016

  31. [39]

    Mutshaeni

    Parvaneh Farhangpour, Cynthia Maluleke, and Humbulani N. Mutshaeni. 2019. Emotional and academic effects of cyberbullying on students in a rural high school in the Limpopo province, South Africa.SA Journal of Information Management21, 1 (March 2019). https://doi.org/10.4102/sa...

    2019 doi

  32. [40]

    Joel E Fischer. 2023. Generative AI Considered Harmful. InProceedings of the 5th International Conference on Conversational User Interfaces(Eindhoven, Netherlands)(CUI ’23). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, Article 7, 5 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/357...

    2023

  33. [41]

    Finance Center for South-South Cooperation. 2015. Global South Countries. http://www.fc-ssc.org/en/partnership_ program/south_south_countries

    2015

  34. [42]

    Rocio Fragoso-Luzuriaga and Itzell Ramírez-Santiago. 2022. Grooming e inteligencia emocional en adolescentes. ¿Puede el desarrollo emocional en la escuela prevenir este tipo de acoso cibernético?RELATEC21, 2 (July 2022), 45–58. https://doi.org/10.17398/1695-288X.21.2.45

    2022 doi

  35. [43]

    Bazarova, Sunny Consolvo, Eunice J Han, Patrick Gage Kelley, Kurt Thomas, and Dan Cosley

    Diana Freed, Natalie N. Bazarova, Sunny Consolvo, Eunice J Han, Patrick Gage Kelley, Kurt Thomas, and Dan Cosley

  36. [44]

    the bonds you make with staff and peers

    Susan Gair, Ines Zuchowski, Daisy Jebichii, Sara O’Reilly, Raechelle Rauwerda, and Nikkola Savuro. 2024. At-risk youth peer researchers highlight safety and “the bonds you make with staff and peers”.Australian Social Work77, 2 (2024), 311–323

    2024

  37. [45]

    Xiong Gan, Pinyi Wang, Chen Huang, Hao Li, and Xin Jin. 2022. Alienation from school and cyberbullying among Chinese middle school students: A moderated mediation model involving self-esteem and emotional intelligence. Front. Public Health10 (2022). https://doi.org/10.3389/fpu...

    2022

  38. [46]

    Zohreh Ghorashi, Marzeyeh Loripoor, and Seyede Maryam Lotfipur-Rafsanjani. 2019. Mobile Access and Sexting Prevalence in High School Students in Rafsanjan City, Iran in 2015.Iranian Journal of Psychiatry and Clinical Psychology24, 4 (Feb. 2019), 416–425. https://doi.org/10.325...

    2019 doi

  39. [47]

    Aytac Gogus and Yücel Saygın. 2019. Privacy perception and information technology utilization of high school students.Heliyon5, 5 (2019)

    2019

  40. [48]

    Gassem Gohal, Ahmad Alqassim, Ebtihal Eltyeb, Ahmed Rayyani, Bassam Hakami, Abdullah Al Faqih, Abdullah Hakami, Almuhannad Qadri, and Mohamed Mahfouz. 2023. Prevalence and related risks of cyberbullying and its effects on adolescent.BMC Psychiatry23, 1 (Dec. 2023), 1–10. https...

    2023 doi

  41. [49]

    Courtney Gregoire. 2023. New Microsoft research illustrates the online risks and value of safety tools to keep kids safer in the digital environment - Microsoft On the Issues. https://blogs.microsoft.com/on-the-issues/2023/02/06/safer- internet-day-global-online-safety-survey-...

    2023

  42. [50]

    Jean Hardy, Susan Wyche, and Tiffany Veinot. 2019. Rural HCI research: Definitions, distinctions, methods, and opportunities.Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction3, CSCW (2019), 1–33

    2019

  43. [51]

    Christina Harrington, Sheena Erete, and Anne Marie Piper. 2019. Deconstructing community-based collaborative design: Towards more equitable participatory design engagements.Proceedings of the ACM on human-computer interaction3, CSCW (2019), 1–25

    2019

  44. [52]

    Heidi Hartikainen, Netta Iivari, and Marianne Kinnula. 2016. Should We Design for Control, Trust or Involvement? A Discourses Survey about Children’s Online Safety. InProceedings of the The 15th International Conference on Interaction , Vol. 1, No. 1, Article . Publication dat...

    2016

  45. [53]

    Heidi Hartikainen, Afsaneh Razi, and Pamela Wisniewski. 2021. Safe Sexting: The Advice and Support Adolescents Receive from Peers Regarding Online Sexual Risks.Proc. ACM Hum.-Comput. Interact.5, CSCW1, Article 42 (apr 2021), 31 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3449116

    2021 doi

  46. [55]

    Kayla Hendricks, Pitso Tsibolane, and Jean-Paul van Belle. 2020. Cyber-Harassment Victimization Among South African LGBTQIA+ Youth. InResponsible Design, Implementation and Use of Information and Communication Technology. Springer, Cham, Switzerland, 135–146. https://doi.org/1...

    2020 doi

  47. [56]

    Ram Herkanaidu, Steven M Furnell, and Maria Papadaki. 2021. Towards a cross-cultural education framework for online safety awareness.Information & Computer Security29, 4 (2021), 664–679

    2021

  48. [58]

    Min-Wei Hung, Chien Wen (Tina) Yuan, Nanyi Bi, Yi-Chao Chen, Wan-Chen Lee, Ming-Chyi Huang, and Chuang- Wen You. 2022. To Use or Abuse: Opportunities and Difficulties in the Use of Multi-channel Support to Reduce Technology Abuse by Adolescents.Proc. ACM Hum.-Comput. Interact....

    2022 doi

  49. [59]

    Nguyen Id, Thu H

    Luot V. Nguyen Id, Thu H. Tran, Thu T. A. Nguyen, E. Dat, and Dat B. Nguyen. 2020. Exposure to sexually explicit Internet material among adolescents: a study in Vietnam.Health Psychology Report9, 3 (Nov. 2020). https: //doi.org/10.5114/hpr.2020.99394

    2020

  50. [60]

    Sarosh Iqbal, Rubeena Zakar, and Florian Fischer. 2021. Predictors of parental mediation in teenagers’ internet use: a cross-sectional study of female caregivers in Lahore, Pakistan.BMC Public Health21, 1 (Dec. 2021), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-021-10349-z

    2021 doi

  51. [61]

    Julie Jargon. 2024. How to Use Parental Controls on YouTube, TikTok, Instagram and Snapchat. https://www.wsj. com/articles/how-to-use-parental-controls-on-youtube-tiktok-instagram-and-snapchat-11650065233

    2024

  52. [62]

    Simon Kaggwa, Tochukwu Onunka, Prisca Ugomma Uwaoma, Okeoma Onunka, Andrew Ifesinachi Daraojimba, and Nsisong Louis Eyo-Udo. 2024. Evaluating the efficacy of technology incubation centres in fostering entrepreneurship: case studies from the global sout.International Journal of...

    2024

  53. [63]

    That Courage to Encourage

    Naveena Karusala, David Odhiambo Seeh, Cyrus Mugo, Brandon Guthrie, Megan A Moreno, Grace John-Stewart, Irene Inwani, Richard Anderson, and Keshet Ronen. 2021. “That Courage to Encourage”: Participation and Aspirations in Chat-Based Peer Support for Youth Living with HIV. InPr...

    2021

  54. [64]

    Jennyphar Kavikairiua and Fungai Bhunu Shava. 2022. Algorithm to Impact Children’s Online Behaviour and Raise their Cyber Security Awareness. In2022 International Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Big Data, Computing and Data Communication Systems (icABCD). 1–7. https://d...

    2022

  55. [65]

    Unger, Tess Boley Cruz, and Sabrina L

    Stephanie Kim, Alia Mourali, Jon-Patrick Allem, Jennifer B. Unger, Tess Boley Cruz, and Sabrina L. Smiley. 2021. Instagram Posts Related to Backwoods Cigarillo Blunts: Content Analysis.JMIR Public Health and Surveillance7, 2 (Feb. 2021), e22946. https://doi.org/10.2196/22946

    2021 doi

  56. [66]

    Minsam Ko, Seungwoo Choi, Subin Yang, Joonwon Lee, and Uichin Lee. 2015. FamiLync: Facilitating Participatory Parental Mediation of Adolescents’ Smartphone Use. InProceedings of the 2015 ACM International Joint Conference on Pervasive and Ubiquitous Computing(Osaka, Japan)(Ubi...

    2015

  57. [67]

    Kumar, Fiona O’Connell, Lucy Li, Virginia L

    Priya C. Kumar, Fiona O’Connell, Lucy Li, Virginia L. Byrne, Marshini Chetty, Tamara L. Clegg, and Jessica Vitak

  58. [68]

    Surakshya Kunwar, Sudim Sharma, Sabina Marasini, Anjali Joshi, Ashish Adhikari, Anushka Ranjit, Ishwori Byanju Shrestha, Archana Shrestha, Akina Koju Shrestha, and Biraj Man Karmacharya. 2024. Cyberbullying and cyber-victimisation among higher secondary school adolescents in a...

    2024 doi

  59. [69]

    Anna Lavis and Rachel Winter. 2020. Online harms or benefits? An ethnographic analysis of the positives and negatives of peer-support around self-harm on social media.Journal of child psychology and psychiatry61, 8 (2020), , Vol. 1, No. 1, Article . Publication date: September...

    2020

  60. [70]

    InProceedings of the 22nd Annual ACM Interaction Design and Children Conference(Chicago, IL, USA)(IDC ’23)

    Understanding Research Related to Designing for Children’s Privacy and Security: A Document Analysis. InProceedings of the 22nd Annual ACM Interaction Design and Children Conference(Chicago, IL, USA)(IDC ’23). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 335–354. ht...

  61. [71]

    Cong Liu, May Lwin, and Rebecca Ang. 2019. Parents’ role in teens’ personal photo sharing: a moderated mediation model incorporating privacy concerns and network size.UI Scholars Hub23, 2 (2019), 145–151. https://doi.org/10. 7454/hubs.asia.1010819

    2019

  62. [72]

    Sonia Livingstone. 2013. Online risk, harm and vulnerability: Reflections on the evidence base for child Internet safety policy.ZER: Journal of Communication Studies18, 35 (2013), 13–28

    2013

  63. [73]

    Phil Wai Shun Leung, Shirley Xin Li, Eleanor Anne Holroyd, Carmen Sze Oi Tsang, and William Chi Wai Wong. 2023. Online social media poses opportunities and risks in autistic youth: implications for services from a qualitative study. Front. Psychiatry14 (June 2023), 959846. htt...

    2023

  64. [74]

    Divine Maloney, Guo Freeman, and Andrew Robb. 2020. A Virtual Space for All: Exploring Children’s Experience in Social Virtual Reality(CHI PLAY ’20). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 472–483. https://doi.org/10.1145/3410404.3414268

    2020

  65. [75]

    Shariffah Mamat, Wan Amizah Wan, and Anis Azlan. 2023. Security Threats to Privacy Data of Malaysian Youth’s: Online Transaction and Communication.ResearchGate39, 1 (April 2023), 336–352. https://doi.org/10.17576/JKMJC- 2023-3901-19

    2023 doi

  66. [76]

    Yudan Ma, Tilde Bekker, Xipei Ren, Jun Hu, and Steven Vos. 2018. Effects of Playful Audio Augmentation on Teenagers’ Motivations in Cooperative Physical Play. InProceedings of the 17th ACM Conference on Interaction Design and Children(Trondheim, Norway)(IDC ’18). Association f...

    2018

  67. [77]

    Seberger, Denise Agosto, and Pamela J

    Nora Mcdonald, Afsaneh Razi, Karla Badillo-Urquiola, John S. Seberger, Denise Agosto, and Pamela J. Wisniewski

  68. [78]

    Nora McDonald, Sarita Schoenebeck, and Andrea Forte. 2019. Reliability and Inter-rater Reliability in Qualitative Research: Norms and Guidelines for CSCW and HCI Practice.Proc. ACM Hum.-Comput. Interact.3, CSCW, Article 72 (Nov. 2019), 23 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3359174

    2019 doi

  69. [80]

    Thang Siew Ming, Lay Shi Ng, and Adzuhaidah M. Taha. 2020. Awareness of the Risks and Dangers of Social Networking: Exploration on Four Types of Malaysian Secondary Schools.Jurnal Komunikasi: Malaysian Journal of Communication36, 1 (March 2020). https://ejournal.ukm.my/mjc/art...

    2020

  70. [81]

    InCompanion Publication of the 2023 Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work and Social Computing(Minneapolis, MN, USA)(CSCW ’23 Companion)

    AI through the Eyes of Gen Z: Setting a Research Agenda for Emerging Technologies That Empower Our Future Generation. InCompanion Publication of the 2023 Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work and Social Computing(Minneapolis, MN, USA)(CSCW ’23 Companion). Associati...

    2023

  71. [82]

    David Moher, Alessandro Liberati, Jennifer Tetzlaff, Douglas G Altman, Prisma Group, et al. 2010. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement.International journal of surgery8, 5 (2010), 336–341

    2010

  72. [83]

    Josephina Mikka-Muntuumo, Anicia Peters, and Hussin Jazri. 2018. CyberBullet - Share Your Story: an interactive game for stimulating awareness on the harm and negative effects of the internet. InProceedings of the Second African Conference for Human Computer Interaction: Thriv...

    2018

  73. [84]

    Thirusha Naidu, Carrie Cartmill, Sunitha Swanepoel, and Cynthia Ruth Whitehead. 2024. Shapeshifters: Global South scholars and their tensions in border-crossing to Global North journals.BMJ Glob. Health9, 4 (April 2024), e014420. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjgh-2023-014420 arXiv...

    2024 doi

  74. [85]

    Siti Aisyah Mohd Fadhli, Jasy Liew Suet Yan, Ahmad Shahril Ab Halim, Asrenee Ab Razak, and Azriani Ab Rahman

  75. [86]

    Marije Nouwen, Maarten Van Mechelen, and Bieke Zaman. 2015. A Value Sensitive Design Approach to Parental Software for Young Children. InProceedings of the 14th International Conference on Interaction Design and Children (Boston, Massachusetts)(IDC ’15). Association for Comput...

    2015

  76. [87]

    Oguine, Ozioma C

    Munachimso B. Oguine, Ozioma C. Oguine, Karla Badillo-Urquiola, and Oluwasogo Adekunle Okunade. 2025. ‘Teens Need to Be Educated on the Dangers’: Digital Access, Online Risks, and Safety Practices Among Nigerian Adolescents

    2025

  77. [88]

    Maryam Mustafa, Abdul Moeed Asad, Shehrbano Hassan, Urooj Haider, Zainab Durrani, and Katharina Krombholz

  78. [89]

    InCCS ’23: Proceedings of the 2023 ACM SIGSAC Conference on Computer and Communications Security

    Pakistani Teens and Privacy - How Gender Disparities, Religion and Family Values Impact the Privacy Design Space. InCCS ’23: Proceedings of the 2023 ACM SIGSAC Conference on Computer and Communications Security. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 195–209. ...

    2023

  79. [90]

    Oguine, Jinkyung Katie Park, Mamtaj Akter, Johanna Olesk, Abdulmalik Alluhidan, Pamela Wisniewski, and Karla Badillo-Urquiola

    Ozioma C. Oguine, Jinkyung Katie Park, Mamtaj Akter, Johanna Olesk, Abdulmalik Alluhidan, Pamela Wisniewski, and Karla Badillo-Urquiola. 2024. How the Internet Facilitates Adverse Childhood Experiences for Youth Who Self-Identify as in Need of Services.arXiv(Oct. 2024). https:...

    2024 doi arXiv

  80. [91]

    Joyce Samuel Ndalaye and George Anthony Giannoumis. 2022. Universal Design and Child Online Protection: Understanding Parental Information Literacy, Online Risks, and Safety Skills Awareness in Global South. https: //doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4252197

    2022 doi

  81. [92]

    Ojanen, Pimpawun Boonmongkon, Ronnapoom Samakkeekarom, Nattharat Samoh, Mudjalin Cholratana, Anusorn Payakkakom, and Thomas E

    Timo T. Ojanen, Pimpawun Boonmongkon, Ronnapoom Samakkeekarom, Nattharat Samoh, Mudjalin Cholratana, Anusorn Payakkakom, and Thomas E. Guadamuz. 2014. Investigating online harassment and offline violence among young people in Thailand: methodological approaches, lessons learne...

    2014

  82. [93]

    Ong’ong’a Daniel Oloo. 2022. Online digital platform use by adolescents in Kenya.Journal of Children and Media (April 2022). https://doi.org/10.1080/17482798.2021.1969254

    2022

  83. [94]

    Hughes, and Karla Badillo-Urquiola

    Ozioma Collins Oguine, Oghenemaro Anuyah, Emelia M. Hughes, and Karla Badillo-Urquiola. 2024. Examining Mainstream News Media Narratives on Youth Online Safety. InCompanion Publication of the 2024 Conference on Computer-Supported Cooperative Work and Social Computing(San Jose,...

    2024

  84. [95]

    Ozioma Collins Oguine and Karla Badillo-Urquiola. 2023. You Don’t Belong Here: Ableist Microaggressions on Adolescents with Disability (ies) and Special Needs in Social Virtual Reality (VR). InCHI’23: Workshop on Combating Toxicity, Harassment, and Abuse in Online Social Space...

    2023

  85. [96]

    Luci Pangrazio and Lourdes Cardozo-Gaibisso. 2020. Beyond cybersafety: The need to develop social media literacies in pre-teens.DER37 (June 2020), 49–63. https://doi.org/10.1344/der.2020.37.49-63

    2020 doi

  86. [97]

    Timo Tapani Ojanen, Pimpawun Boonmongkon, Ronnapoom Samakkeekarom, Nattharat Samoh, Mudjalin Cholratana, and Thomas Ebanan Guadamuz. 2015. Connections Between Online Harassment and Offline Violence among Youth in Central Thailand.Child Abuse Negl.44 (April 2015), 159. https://...

    2015 doi

  87. [98]

    Pinter, Pamela J

    Anthony T. Pinter, Pamela J. Wisniewski, Heng Xu, Mary Beth Rosson, and Jack M. Caroll. 2017. Adolescent Online Safety: Moving Beyond Formative Evaluations to Designing Solutions for the Future. InProceedings of the 2017 Conference on Interaction Design and Children(Stanford, ...

    2017

  88. [99]

    Maša Popovac and Lee Hadlington. 2020. Exploring the role of egocentrism and fear of missing out on online risk behaviours among adolescents in South Africa.International Journal of Adolescence and Youth(Dec. 2020). https://doi.org/10.1080/02673843.2019.1617171

    2020

  89. [100]

    Jesús Redondo Pacheco. 2023. Variables asociadas al fenómeno del ciberbullying en adolescentes colombianos.1.41, 1 (2023), 219–239. https://doi.org/10.18800/psico.202301.009

    2023 doi

  90. [101]

    Matthew J Page, Joanne E McKenzie, Patrick M Bossuyt, Isabelle Boutron, Tammy C Hoffmann, Cynthia D Mulrow, Larissa Shamseer, Jennifer M Tetzlaff, Elie A Akl, Sue E Brennan, et al. 2021. The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews.Internati...

    2021

  91. [102]

    Farzana Quayyum and Giske Naper Freberg. 2024. Designing Cybersecurity Awareness Solutions for Young People in Rural Developing Countries: Insights and Lessons Learned. InUniversal Access in Human-Computer Interaction. Springer, Cham, Switzerland, 3–18. https://doi.org/10.1007...

    2024 doi

  92. [103]

    Jinkyung Katie Park, Mamtaj Akter, Pamela Wisniewski, and Karla Badillo-Urquiola. 2024. It’s Still Complicated: From Privacy-Invasive Parental Control to Teen-Centric Solutions for Digital Resilience.IEEE Security & Privacy22, 5 (2024), 52–62. https://doi.org/10.1109/MSEC.2024.3417804

    2024

  93. [106]

    Uma Maheswari

    Nandhini Priya and P. Uma Maheswari. 2024. A New Approach to the Parental Mediation Theory From Adolescents’ Perspective: Inclusion of Participatory Use and Participatory Learning.mpq69, 3 (May 2024), 215–239. https: //doi.org/10.1353/mpq.2023.a928419

    2024 doi

  94. [107]

    Juan Pérez, Romina Torres, and Sven von Brand. 2020. CyberKids: video game for raising cyber security awareness in children. In2020 39th International Conference of the Chilean Computer Science Society (SCCC). 1–8. https: //doi.org/10.1109/SCCC51225.2020.9281253

    2020

  95. [108]

    Cibrian, Marianela Ciolfi Felice, Carolina Fuentes, Laura Sanely Gaytán-Lugo, Vivian Genaro Motti, Monica Perusquia- Hernandez, and Oscar A Lemus

    Pedro Reynolds-Cuéllar, Marisol Wong-Villacres, Karla Badillo-Urquiola, Mayra Donaji Barrera Machuca, Franceli L. Cibrian, Marianela Ciolfi Felice, Carolina Fuentes, Laura Sanely Gaytán-Lugo, Vivian Genaro Motti, Monica Perusquia- Hernandez, and Oscar A Lemus. 2023. Para Cima ...

    2023

  96. [109]

    André Queirós, Daniel Faria, and Fernando Almeida. 2017. STRENGTHS AND LIMITATIONS OF QUALITATIVE AND QUANTITATIVE RESEARCH METHODS.European Journal of Education Studies0, 0 (Sept. 2017). https: //doi.org/10.46827/ejes.v0i0.1017

    2017 doi

  97. [110]

    Sarita Schoenebeck, Amna Batool, Giang Do, Sylvia Darling, Gabriel Grill, Daricia Wilkinson, Mehtab Khan, Kentaro Toyama, and Louise Ashwell. 2023. Online Harassment in Majority Contexts: Examining Harms and Remedies across Countries. InProceedings of the 2023 CHI Conference o...

    2023

  98. [111]

    Blumenthal

    Richard [d-Ct] Sen. Blumenthal. 2023. S.1409 - 118th Congress (2023-2024): Kids Online Safety Act. https: //www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/senate-bill/1409

    2023

  99. [112]

    Jones, Aravinda Kosaraju, David Shemmings, Paul Rigby, Kristen Scharf, and Emma Soutar

    Emerita Jane Reeves, Stephanie E. Jones, Aravinda Kosaraju, David Shemmings, Paul Rigby, Kristen Scharf, and Emma Soutar. 2024. May and Bay: Online Child Sexual Exploitation and Abuse in Southeast Asia — Using Digital Games in Preventative Education.J. Hum. Rights Soc. Work(Ju...

    2024 doi

  100. [113]

    Annisa Reginasari, Tina Afiatin, Subandi Subandi, Bhina Patria, and Muchlisah Muchlisah. 2021. Adaptation for Harmony: A Thematic Analysis Study of Internet Parental Monitoring Strategy in Indonesian Context.NSUWorks26, 10 (2021), 3234–3261. https://doi.org/10.46743/2160-3715/...

    2021

  101. [114]

    Ruthaychonnee Sittichai and Peter K Smith. 2020. Information technology use and cyberbullying behavior in south Thailand: a test of the Goldilocks hypothesis.International journal of environmental research and public health17, 19 (2020), 7122

    2020

  102. [115]

    Reynaldo Rivera, David Santos-Velasco, Victoria Cabrera-García, and María-del-Carmen Docal-Millán. 2016. Consumo de pornografía on-line y off-line en adolescentes colombianos.Comunicar: Revista Científica de Comunicación y Educación24, 46 (2016), 37–45. https://doi.org/10.3916...

    2016 doi

  103. [116]

    Franziska Tachtler, Toni Michel, Petr Slovák, and Geraldine Fitzpatrick. 2020. Supporting the Supporters of Unac- companied Migrant Youth: Designing for Social-Ecological Resilience. InProceedings of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems(Honolulu, HI, U...

    2020

  104. [117]

    Griffiths, and Md Salleh Hassan

    Misha Teimouri, Seyed Rahim Benrazavi, Mark D. Griffiths, and Md Salleh Hassan. 2018. A Model of Online Protection to Reduce Children’s Online Risk Exposure: Empirical Evidence From Asia.Sexuality & Culture22, 4 (Dec. 2018), 1205–1229. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12119-018-9522-6

    2018 doi

  105. [118]

    Wonsun Shin and Nurzali Ismail. 2014. Exploring the Role of Parents and Peers in Young Adolescents’ Risk Taking on Social Networking Sites.Cyberpsychology, behavior and social networking17, 9 (Aug. 2014). https://doi.org/10. 1089/cyber.2014.0095

    2014

  106. [119]

    Silva, Glívia A

    Cristiana S. Silva, Glívia A. R. Barbosa, Ismael S. Silva, Tatiane S. Silva, Fernando Mourão, and Flávio Coutinho. 2017. Privacy for Children and Teenagers on Social Networks from a Usability Perspective: A Case Study on Facebook. In WebSci ’17: Proceedings of the 2017 ACM on ...

    2017

  107. [120]

    Hsin-yi Sandy Tsai, Mengtian Jiang, Saleem Alhabash, Robert LaRose, Nora J Rifon, and Shelia R Cotten. 2016. Understanding online safety behaviors: A protection motivation theory perspective.Computers & Security59 (2016), 138–150

    2016

  108. [121]

    Sharifa Sultana, François Guimbretière, Phoebe Sengers, and Nicola Dell. 2018. Design Within a Patriarchal Society: Opportunities and Challenges in Designing for Rural Women in Bangladesh. InProceedings of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems(Montreal ...

    2018

  109. [122]

    DNT LET’EM H8 U!

    Sebastian Wachs, Matthew Costello, Michelle F Wright, Katerina Flora, Vassiliki Daskalou, Evdoxia Maziridou, Yeji Kwon, Eun-Yeong Na, Ruthaychonnee Sittichai, Ramakrishna Biswal, et al. 2021. “DNT LET’EM H8 U!”: Applying the routine activity framework to understand cyberhate v...

    2021

  110. [123]

    DNT LET ’EM H8 U!

    Sebastian Wachs, Matthew Costello, Michelle F. Wright, Katerina Flora, Vassiliki Daskalou, Evdoxia Maziridou, Yeji Kwon, Eun-Yeong Na, Ruthaychonnee Sittichai, Ramakrishna Biswal, Ritu Singh, Carmen Almendros, Manuel Gámez-Guadix, Anke xn Grzig-isf, and Jun Sung Hong. 2021. “D...

    2021

  111. [124]

    David Thiel, Melissa Stroebel, and Rebecca Portnoff. 2023. Generative ML and CSAM: Implications and Mitigations

    2023

  112. [125]

    Nor Faiza Mohd Tohit and Mainul Haque. 2024. Forbidden Conversations: A Comprehensive Exploration of Taboos in Sexual and Reproductive Health.Cureus16, 8 (Aug. 2024), e66723. https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.66723

    2024 doi

  113. [126]

    Hartal (Strike) Happens Here Everyday

    Asra Sakeen Wani, Divyanshu Kumar Singh, and Pushpendra Singh. 2022. “Hartal (Strike) Happens Here Everyday”: Understanding Impact of Disruption on Education in Kashmir. InProceedings of the 2022 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems(New Orleans, LA, USA)(CHI ’2...

    2022

  114. [127]

    Yohana Pereira Vieira, Vanise Dos Santos Ferreira Viero, Elizabet Saes-Silva, Priscila Arruda da Silva, Laura Silva da Silva, Mirelle de Oliveira Saes, Lauro Miranda Demenech, and Samuel Carvalho Dumith. 2022. Excessive use of social media by high school students in southern B...

    2022 doi

  115. [128]

    Tracy Weru, Joseph Sevilla, John Olukuru, Lorna Mutegi, and Tabitha Mberi. [n. d.]. Cyber-smart children, cyber-safe teenagers: Enhancing internet safety for children. In2017 IST-Africa Week Conference (IST-Africa). IEEE, 2017–02. https://doi.org/10.23919/ISTAFRICA.2017.8102292

    2017

  116. [129]

    Daricia Wilkinson and Bart Knijnenburg. 2022. Many Islands, Many Problems: An Empirical Examination of Online Safety Behaviors in the Caribbean(CHI ’22). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, Article 102, 25 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3491102.3517643

    2022

  117. [130]

    Sebastian Wachs, Anna Michelsen, Michelle F Wright, Manuel Gámez-Guadix, Carmen Almendros, Yeji Kwon, Eun- Yeong Na, Ruthaychonnee Sittichai, Ritu Singh, Ramakrishna Biswal, et al . 2020. A routine activity approach to understand cybergrooming victimization among adolescents f...

    2020

  118. [131]

    Qiong Wang, Ruilin Tu, Yihe Jiang, Wei Hu, and Xiao Luo. 2022. Teasing and Internet Harassment among Adolescents: The Mediating Role of Envy and the Moderating Role of the Zhong-Yong Thinking Style.Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health19, 9 (May 2022), 5501. https://doi.org/10.3...

    2022 doi

  119. [132]

    Pamela Wisniewski, Heng Xu, Jack Carroll, and Mary Beth Rosson. 2013. Grand challenges of researching adolescent online safety: A family systems approach. (2013)

    2013

  120. [133]

    Putri Wardhani and Laras Sekarasih. 2021. Parental Decisions on Sharing Their Children’s Private Information on Social Media among Families in Jakarta Area.UI Scholars Hub25, 2 (2021), 127–136. https://doi.org/10.7454/hubs. asia.1161121

    2021 doi

  121. [134]

    Perkins, and John M

    Pamela Wisniewski, Heng Xu, Mary Beth Rosson, Daniel F. Perkins, and John M. Carroll. 2016. Dear Diary: Teens Reflect on Their Weekly Online Risk Experiences. InProceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems(San Jose, California, USA)(CHI ’16). As...

    2016

  122. [135]

    Wobbrock and Julie A

    Jacob O. Wobbrock and Julie A. Kientz. 2016. Research contributions in human-computer interaction.Interactions23, 3 (April 2016), 38–44. https://doi.org/10.1145/2907069

    2016 doi

  123. [136]

    Wisniewski

    P. Wisniewski. 2018. The Privacy Paradox of Adolescent Online Safety: A Matter of Risk Prevention or Risk Resilience? IEEE Security & Privacy16, 02 (mar 2018), 86–90. https://doi.org/10.1109/MSP.2018.1870874

    2018

  124. [137]

    Preventative

    Pamela Wisniewski, Haiyan Jia, Heng Xu, Mary Beth Rosson, and John M. Carroll. 2015. "Preventative" vs. "Reactive": How Parental Mediation Influences Teens’ Social Media Privacy Behaviors. InCSCW ’15: Proceedings of the 18th ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Wor...

    2015

  125. [139]

    Pamela Wisniewski, Heng Xu, Mary Beth Rosson, and John M. Carroll. 2017. Parents Just Don’t Understand: Why Teens Don’t Talk to Parents about Their Online Risk Experiences. InProceedings of the 2017 ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work and Social Computing(Por...

    2017

  126. [142]

    Jacqueline Yi and Nathan R Todd. 2024. Reinforcing or challenging the status quo: A grounded theory of how the model minority myth shapes Asian American activism.Journal of Counseling Psychology71, 1 (2024), 7. , Vol. 1, No. 1, Article . Publication date: September 2025. 30 O....

    2024

  127. [2022]

    Healthcare10, 5 (May 2022), 856

    Finding the Link between Cyberbullying and Suicidal Behaviour among Adolescents in Peninsular Malaysia. Healthcare10, 5 (May 2022), 856. https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare10050856

    2022 doi

  128. [2024]

    InProceedings of the 4th African Human Computer Interaction Conference(East London, South Africa)(AfriCHI ’23)

    Cultural Considerations in AI Systems for the Global South: A Systematic Review. InProceedings of the 4th African Human Computer Interaction Conference(East London, South Africa)(AfriCHI ’23). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 125–134. https://doi.org/10....

Pith tools

Reviewed August 16, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.