Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 5 minor 80 references

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

T0 review · 4 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-06 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read One in three Nigerian secondary students has faced an online risk, and most respond by blocking or reporting, a 409-student survey finds.

desk verdict A genuinely useful exploratory survey of Nigerian teens' online safety, but the sampling and margin-of-error claims overstate generalizability and need to be corrected before I'd trust the headline numbers. read the letter →

arxiv 2507.08914 v1 pith:PNJQV7E7 submitted 2025-07-11 cs.HC cs.CY

Munachimso B. Oguine , Ozioma C. Oguine , Karla Badillo-Urquiola , Oluwasogo Adekunle Okunade This is my paper · ORCID
classification cs.HCcs.CY
keywords NigerianteensadolescentonlinesafetyGlobalSouthcultureHCI4Dyouthparentalmediationdigitalaccess
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 reports a teen-centered survey of 409 secondary school adolescents in Nigeria's Federal Capital Territory (FCT), using paper questionnaires to map digital access, online risks, coping strategies, and support networks. It finds a moderately connected group: 59% go online several times a day, mostly through smartphones and mobile data, but shared devices and uneven connectivity shape how often and how safely they engage. About one in three reports encountering an online risk, most commonly inappropriate content (11%) and scams (9%), and blocking or reporting is the dominant response (66%), while 24% tell no one about their online problems. Interpreted through protection-motivation theory, the paper reads these patterns as the product of teens' threat perceptions and their confidence in coping options, and it uses teens' own recommendations to argue for education, parental mediation, better tools, and stronger regulation.

What carries the argument

The central object is a self-administered paper questionnaire given to 409 senior secondary students in five FCT schools, two private and three public, selected through stratified simple random sampling; closed-ended items were summarized with descriptive statistics and one open-ended item was analyzed with reflexive thematic analysis. Protection motivation theory, which separates threat appraisal (perceived severity and vulnerability) from coping appraisal (response efficacy, self-efficacy, and response costs), is the interpretive lens that turns the response rates into an explanation of why teens block, report, seek help, or do nothing. The instrument produces the rates, and the lens supplies the account of what those rates mean for design and policy.

What would settle it

A replication using a true probability sample of FCT secondary students that includes private schools, with the same questionnaire, would settle the representativeness question: if the one-in-three risk rate and the 66% blocking/reporting rate fall outside the paper's reported ±4.8% margin of error, the sample picture fails. Comparing a subset of self-reports against actual platform logs would test whether teens' accounts of blocking, reporting, and risk exposure match their behavior.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is empirical: among 409 secondary school adolescents in Nigeria's Federal Capital Territory, internet access is moderate, smartphone-centered, and shaped by infrastructural limits, and about one in three has encountered an online risk, most often inappropriate content (11%) or scams (9%). The paper further claims that blocking and reporting are the dominant coping strategy (66%), parents are the main support network (36%) while only 1% consult teachers, and 24% tell no one about online problems. It also claims that online safety education is unevenly delivered: 44% report training, 28% do not, and 28% are unsure. The paper interprets these patterns through protection-motivation theory, treating safety behavior as a function of threat appraisal and coping appraisal, and derives seven recommendation themes from 268 open-ended responses, with awareness and education the most frequent.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise, which the paper's limitations section acknowledges, is that 409 students in five FCT classrooms gave truthful, self-aware answers on a paper questionnaire and that those answers represent FCT secondary school students, including private-school students who were harder to reach.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If one in three FCT secondary students has encountered an online risk, classroom digital-safety education should treat risk exposure as a common experience rather than an exceptional one.
  • If blocking and reporting are the first-line response for 66% of teens, platform safety tools need to be reliable, localized, and accompanied by alternatives for teens who lack confidence to act.
  • If parents are the main support (36%) while teachers are consulted by only 1%, parental-mediation programs are a higher-leverage intervention than teacher training for this population.
  • If 28% of teens are unsure whether they ever had safety training, current education efforts are not being delivered clearly enough to register with their intended audience.
  • If teens' own recommendations cluster into seven themes, interventions that combine education, mediation, moderation, and regulation are more likely to fit their lived needs than any single tool.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The one-in-three risk figure may understate exposure if the 67% with no reported risk includes teens who normalized harm or lacked the vocabulary to name it; a diary or device-log study could settle this.
  • The paper's data on mobile data as the main gateway and shared-device use imply that low-bandwidth and SMS-based safety tools could reach more Nigerian families than app-only parental controls; this extends the paper's design direction.
  • Because some 12-year-olds are online despite the usual 13+ platform age minimum, age-verification rules are already being bypassed, and any national-ID-linked verification would need strong privacy safeguards before deployment.
  • The protection-motivation reading implies that fear-based warnings alone may not change teen behavior unless coping confidence rises; a testable extension is whether scenario-based or gamified training increases self-efficacy and reduces the 6% inaction rate.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

4 major / 5 minor

Summary. This paper reports a mixed-methods survey of 409 senior secondary school students in Nigeria's Federal Capital Territory (FCT), organized around three research questions on digital access, online risks and coping strategies, and the roles of stakeholders in adolescent online safety. The quantitative results describe smartphone- and mobile-data-dominated access, varied frequency of internet use, a 33% overall rate of self-reported exposure to online risks (most commonly inappropriate content at 11% and scams at 9%), and a heavy reliance on blocking/reporting tools. The qualitative component analyzes 268 open-ended recommendations and identifies seven themes, including awareness and education, parental mediation, improved safety tools, stricter age restrictions, content moderation, government accountability, and resilience building. Protection Motivation Theory is used as an interpretive lens for the findings. The paper claims to provide a comprehensive, statistically reliable picture of FCT adolescents' online experiences and draws design and policy implications for parents, educators, designers, and policymakers.

Significance. If treated as an exploratory study, this paper makes a useful contribution to an understudied area: adolescent online safety in West Africa, and Nigeria in particular. Its strengths include centering adolescents' own voices through open-ended recommendations, providing detailed ethical procedures for school-based research with minors, and offering context-specific design implications grounded in Nigerian infrastructural and cultural realities. The use of PMT as a post-hoc interpretive framework is not circular and adds a useful structure for discussing threat and coping appraisals. However, the current presentation overstates the generalizability of the findings: the sampling design does not support the reported margin of error, and several internal numerical inconsistencies weaken the descriptive claims. With a careful reframing of the claims as exploratory and a correction of the descriptive reporting, the paper would be a valuable empirical addition to the AfriCHI and HCI4D literature.

major comments (4)
  1. [§3.2, Data Collection] The sampling description does not support the stated margin of error. The text calls the design 'stratified simple random sampling' and reports a ±4.83% margin of error at 95% confidence based on N=409, but the actual procedure is a convenience sample of five schools (two private, three public) with no described random selection of schools, no sampling frame, and no school-level sample sizes or response rates. Students within the same school are clustered, so the effective sample size is smaller than 409 and the simple-random-sample margin of error is not valid. This is load-bearing because the abstract and Section 1 claim a 'comprehensive' and 'statistically reliable' picture of FCT adolescents; the authors should either describe a true probability design with selection probabilities or reframe the results as an exploratory snapshot of the five participating schools and remove or heavily qualify the margin-of-error statement.
  2. [§1 vs. §4.2.2] The introduction states that 59% of respondents reported regular access to the internet 'several times a day,' but Section 4.2.2 reports that 47% (N=196) accessed the internet several times a day, while the 59% figure in Section 4.2.1 refers to mobile data as the mode of connectivity (N=241). This is not merely a typo: the introduction uses the wrong figure to summarize the central RQ1 finding, and the discrepancy should be corrected and checked against Figure 2b.
  3. [§4.6, Empowering Teens Through Online Safety Education and Awareness] The thematic counts do not add up to the stated total. The seven theme counts are N=103, 51, 42, 32, 24, 13, and 2, which sum to 267, yet the text says 268 respondents offered insights. The authors should clarify whether multiple themes per response were allowed and report the coding unit consistently; as written, the count inconsistency undermines the precision of the RQ3 qualitative summary.
  4. [§3.5 and §4.3] PMT is introduced after data collection as an interpretive lens, but the survey instrument contained no PMT-based measures of perceived severity, vulnerability, response efficacy, self-efficacy, or response costs. Statements such as 'this lack of perceived threat may reflect low perceived vulnerability or severity of risk' are therefore speculative interpretations rather than measured associations. The authors should explicitly label PMT as a post-hoc interpretive framework and avoid implying that the data provide evidence about the specific PMT constructs.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Throughout] There are several typographical errors, including 'adolescnece' in Section 1, 'In more details' in Section 4.6, 'teenagersunder' in the age-restriction quote, and the possessive 'adolescents'' in the contributions list; a careful proofreading pass is needed.
  2. [§4.3] The text introduces 'RQ2a' but the research questions in Section 1 do not define sub-parts for RQ2; either define the sub-questions or rephrase the reference.
  3. [§4.2 and §4.3 figures] Figures 2, 3, and 4 are referenced for important distributions, but their readability in grayscale is not assured; consider increasing label sizes and using distinguishable fills or patterns.
  4. [§5.3] The sentence 'This raises critical questions about whether platform interventions are truly effective' would be stronger if the specific questions were stated explicitly, since the surrounding paragraph then supplies the relevant concerns about Western-centric moderation.
  5. [References] Reference [7] is cited with a 2025 access date to a CyberLeninka viewer page and appears to be an older publication; the authors should verify the original source and year and cite it in the canonical form.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the survey findings are directly reported self-reports, and PMT is applied as a post hoc interpretive lens rather than as a fitted input.

full rationale

This paper makes no formal derivation and fits no parameters. The central results are descriptive frequencies computed directly from 409 self-administered questionnaires (e.g., 11% inappropriate content, 9% scams, 66% blocking/reporting, 36% parents as support). Protection Motivation Theory is introduced in Section 3.5 as an analytical lens after data collection and is used only to interpret the already-collected responses; it does not constrain which responses were recorded, so the PMT-framed discussion cannot reduce the findings to its own assumptions by construction. The margin-of-error statement in Section 3.2 is statistically dubious for a convenience/cluster sample of five schools, but that is a sampling-validity concern, not circularity: the figure is not used to generate the percentages it purports to support. The authors cite several of their own prior works ([49], [50], [51], [52]) in the background and discussion, but these citations are contextual literature support alongside many external references, and none is invoked as a uniqueness theorem or as the justification that forces the empirical results. The paper's contribution is an exploratory empirical snapshot, and its conclusions are explicitly hedged in Section 5.5, which acknowledges limitations in access to private schools and the depth of the mixed-methods design. No step in the paper equates a prediction with an input, renames a known result, or imports a load-bearing conclusion from a self-citation chain. Therefore the circularity score is 0.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claims rest on the trustworthiness of self-reported survey data, the representativeness of a five-school FCT sample, the appropriateness of the PMT lens, and the reliability of single-coder thematic analysis. No numerical parameters were fitted; the margin-of-error claim uses the standard sample-size formula with an external population figure.

assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption Self-reported survey responses accurately reflect adolescents' online experiences and behaviors.
    All findings in Section 4 rest on the truthfulness and comprehension of self-administered questionnaires filled out in classrooms; no verification against observed behavior or platform data.
  • domain assumption The FCT stratified sample of five schools is representative of the 88,721 secondary school students in FCT, justifying the stated ±4.83% margin of error.
    Section 3.2 claims a statistically reliable snapshot for FCT based on this sample; uneven access to private schools (Section 5.5) weakens representativeness.
  • domain assumption Protection Motivation Theory is an appropriate framework for interpreting the observed safety behaviors, and its constructs can be inferred from the survey responses.
    Section 3.5 applies PMT to interpret findings, but the survey did not measure PMT constructs directly; interpretations in Sections 4.3 and 5.1 rely on this inference.
  • domain assumption Thematic analysis of a single open-ended question, without reported inter-rater reliability, yields trustworthy themes.
    Section 3.4 describes reflexive thematic analysis; counts in Section 4.6 sum to 267, not 268.
  • standard math Standard formula for margin of error at 95% confidence for a proportion under simple random sampling.
    Used in Section 3.2 to compute ±4.83%.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of 'Teens Need to Be Educated on the Danger': Digital Access, Online Risks, and Safety Practices Among Nigerian Adolescents." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/PNJQV7E7

@misc{pith2026250708914,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: 'Teens Need to Be Educated on the Danger': Digital Access, Online Risks, and Safety Practices Among Nigerian Adolescents},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/PNJQV7E7}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2507.08914}
}
read the original abstract

Adolescents increasingly rely on online technologies to explore their identities, form social connections, and access information and entertainment. However, their growing digital engagement exposes them to significant online risks, particularly in underrepresented contexts like West Africa. This study investigates the online experiences of 409 secondary school adolescents in Nigeria's Federal Capital Territory (FCT), focusing on their access to technology, exposure to risks, coping strategies, key stakeholders influencing their online interactions, and recommendations for improving online safety. Using self-administered surveys, we found that while most adolescents reported moderate access to online technology and connectivity, those who encountered risks frequently reported exposure to inappropriate content and online scams. Blocking and reporting tools were the most commonly used strategies, though some adolescents responded with inaction due to limited resources or awareness. Parents emerged as the primary support network, though monitoring practices and communication varied widely. Guided by Protection Motivation Theory (PMT), our analysis interprets adolescents' online safety behaviors as shaped by both their threat perceptions and their confidence in available coping strategies. A thematic analysis of their recommendations highlights the need for greater awareness and education, parental mediation, enhanced safety tools, stricter age restrictions, improved content moderation, government accountability, and resilience-building initiatives. Our findings underscore the importance of culturally and contextually relevant interventions to empower adolescents in navigating the digital world, with implications for parents, educators, designers, and policymakers.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2507.08914 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Gender and Age Distribution of Participants [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Age distribution of Internet Use 4.3 Prevalence of Risks Posed by Inappropriate Online Content (RQ2) To explore the risky online experiences faced by secondary school students in Nigeria (RQ2a), we included a comprehensive list of potential online risks in our survey and asked participants to iden￾tify the ones they had encountered (See Figure 4a). The analysis revealed that a significant majority of respondents, 67… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Comparison of Internet Access and Technology Use. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_2.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (1 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Comparison of online risks and safety strategies. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_4.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

80 extracted references · 69 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Youth Employment Statistics in Africa in 2023 | Matsh - Empowering Youth, Women and Professionals

    2023. Youth Employment Statistics in Africa in 2023 | Matsh - Empowering Youth, Women and Professionals. https://www.matsh.co/en/youth-employment- statistics-in-africa

    work page 2023

  2. [2]

    81% of U.S

    2024. 81% of U.S. adults – versus 46% of teens – favor parental consent for minors to use social media. https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2023/10/31/81- of-us-adults-versus-46-of-teens-favor-parental-consent-for-minors-to-use- social-media [Online; accessed 31. Jan. 2025]

    work page 2024

  3. [3]

    Nigeria must tackle corruption to improve its cyber secu- rity

    2024. Nigeria must tackle corruption to improve its cyber secu- rity. https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/africaatlse/2024/10/09/nigeria-must-tackle- corruption-to-improve-its-cyber-security [Online; accessed 31. Jan. 2025]

    work page 2024

  4. [4]

    Opinion: As a mother and teacher, I’ve seen the harmful effects of social me- dia on our children

    2024. Opinion: As a mother and teacher, I’ve seen the harmful effects of social me- dia on our children. Tech companies must be held accountable. https://www.sltrib. com/opinion/commentary/2024/08/16/opinion-tech-companies-must-be [On- line; accessed 31. Jan. 2025]

    work page 2024

  5. [5]

    Social media networks made for children to learn how to interact safely

    2024. Social media networks made for children to learn how to interact safely. https://www.internetmatters.org/resources/social-media-networks- made-for-kids

    work page 2024

  6. [6]

    Africa Has Become The First Region in The World to Im- plement a Child Online Safety and Empowerment Policy | African Union

    2025. Africa Has Become The First Region in The World to Im- plement a Child Online Safety and Empowerment Policy | African Union. https://au.int/en/pressreleases/20240523/child-online-safety-and- empowerment-policy-africa-union

    work page arXiv 2025

  7. [7]

    The Internet and Adolescent Safety: Peer Influence and Gender Difference as Potential Risk-Factors of Cyberbullying among Nigerian Secondary School Adolescents

    2025. The Internet and Adolescent Safety: Peer Influence and Gender Difference as Potential Risk-Factors of Cyberbullying among Nigerian Secondary School Adolescents. https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/the-internet-and-adolescent- safety-peer-influence-and-gender-difference-as-potential-risk-factors-of- cyberbullying-among-nigerian/viewer [Online; accessed...

    work page 2025

  8. [8]

    Anita S Acharya, Anupam Prakash, Pikee Saxena, and Aruna Nigam. 2013. Sam- pling: Why and how of it.Indian journal of medical specialties 4, 2 (2013), 330–333

    work page 2013

Show all 80 references
  1. [9]

    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. In Pervasive Computing and Social Networking. Springer, Singapore, 725–741. https:/...

    2022 doi

  2. [10]

    Ifeanyi Adigwe and Thomas van der Walt. 2020. Parental mediation of online media activities of children in Nigeria: A parent-child approach. Computers in Human Behavior Reports 2 (Aug. 2020), 100041. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chbr. 2020.100041

    2020

  3. [11]

    Zainab Agha. 2023. To Nudge or Not to Nudge: Co-Designing and Evaluating the Effectiveness of Adolescent Online Safety Nudges. In Proceedings of the 22nd Annual ACM Interaction Design and Children Conference (Chicago, IL, USA) (IDC ’23). Association for Computing Machinery, Ne...

    2023

  4. [12]

    S Ahola Kohut, C LeBlanc, K O’leary, AC McPherson, E McCarthy, C Nguyen, and J Stinson. 2018. The internet as a source of support for youth with chronic conditions: A qualitative study. Child: care, health and development 44, 2 (2018), 212–220

    2018

  5. [13]

    Bolanle Nafisat Akeusola. 2023. Social media and the incidence of cyberbullying in Nigeria: Implications for creating a safer online environment. NIU Journal of Humanities 8, 3 (2023), 125–137

    2023

  6. [14]

    Mamtaj Akter, Leena Alghamdi, Jess Kropczynski, Heather Richter Lipford, and Pamela J Wisniewski. 2023. It takes a village: A case for including extended family members in the joint oversight of family-based privacy and security for mobile smartphones. In Extended Abstracts of...

    2023

  7. [15]

    Wisniewski

    Mamtaj Akter, Leena Alghamdi, Jess Kropczynski, Heather Richter Lipford, and Pamela J. Wisniewski. 2023. It Takes a Village: A Case for Including Extended Family Members in the Joint Oversight of Family-based Privacy and Security for Mobile Smartphones. In Extended Abstracts o...

    2023

  8. [16]

    Ashwaq Alsoubai, Jihye Song, Afsaneh Razi, Nurun Naher, Munmun De Choud- hury, and Pamela J Wisniewski. 2022. From’Friends with Benefits’ to’Sextortion:’A Nuanced Investigation of Adolescents’ Online Sexual Risk Experiences. Proceed- ings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interacti...

    2022

  9. [17]

    N Anaemejeh, G Bachmann, J Hutchinson-Colas, and K Alshowaikh. 2022. Sexual Health Education-Using Animated Videos to Teach Teenagers and Young Adults. The Journal of Sexual Medicine 19, 8 (2022), S23

    2022

  10. [18]

    Oghenemaro Anuyah, Karla Badillo-Urquiola, and Ronald Metoyer. 2023. Char- acterizing 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 ...

    2023

  11. [19]

    Sanjay Asthana. 2017. Translation and localization of children’s rights in youth- produced digital media in the Global South: A hermeneutic exploration. new media & society 19, 5 (2017), 686–700

    2017

  12. [20]

    Abdullahi Bello. 2025. Child Online Protection. https://ncc.gov.ng/technical- regulation/internet/child-online-protection [Online; accessed 31. Jan. 2025]

    2025

  13. [21]

    Neeraj Chatlani, Arianna Davis, Karla Badillo-Urquiola, Elizabeth Bonsignore, and Pamela Wisniewski. 2023. Teen as research-apprentice: A restorative justice approach for centering adolescents as the authority of their own online safety. International Journal of Child-Computer...

    2023

  14. [22]

    Baldreck Chipangura and Gustave Dtendjo-Ndjindja. 2022. Securing the cy- bersafety of South African online high school learners beyond COVID-19. Journal for Transdisciplinary Research in Southern Africa 18, 1 (Dec. 2022), 8. https://td-sa.net/index.php/td/article/view/1256/2274

    2022

  15. [23]

    Victoria Clarke and Virginia Braun. 2017. Thematic analysis. The journal of positive psychology 12, 3 (2017), 297–298

    2017

  16. [24]

    Lenka Dedkova and Vojtěch Mýlek. 2023. Parental mediation of online inter- actions and its relation to adolescents’ contacts with new people online: the role of risk perception. Information, Communication & Society (Dec. 2023). https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/1369...

    2023

  17. [25]

    We were just havin’a bit of fun

    Debra Dudek, Lelia Green, and Giselle Woodley. 2025. “We were just havin’a bit of fun”: Teenagers and Porn in Sex Education. Sex Education: School’s Out for Netflix (2025), 209

    2025

  18. [26]

    Rebecca Eynon and L-E Malmberg. 2012. Understanding the online information- seeking behaviours of young people: the role of networks of support. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning 28, 6 (2012), 514–529

    2012

  19. [27]

    Favour Femi-Oyewole. 2024. Nigeria’s Cybersecurity Challenge: Four Steps To Curb Cybercrime. Forbes (Aug. 2024). https://www.forbes.com/councils/ forbestechcouncil/2024/02/06/nigerias-cybersecurity-challenge-four-steps-to- curb-cybercrime

    2024

  20. [28]

    Diana Freed, Natalie N Bazarova, Sunny Consolvo, Eunice J Han, Patrick Gage Kelley, Kurt Thomas, and Dan Cosley. 2023. Understanding digital-safety experi- ences of youth in the US. In Proceedings of the 2023 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems . 1–15

    2023

  21. [29]

    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 (April 2021), 31 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3449116

    2021 doi

  22. [30]

    Amelia Hassoun, Ian Beacock, Sunny Consolvo, Beth Goldberg, Patrick Gage Kelley, and Daniel M. Russell. 2023. Practicing Information Sensibility: How Gen Z Engages with Online Information. In Proceedings of the 2023 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Hamburg...

    2023

  23. [31]

    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...

    2020 doi

  24. [32]

    Veronika Kalmus, Marit Sukk, and Kadri Soo. 2022. Towards more active parent- ing: Trends in parental mediation of children’s internet use in European countries. Children & Society 36, 5 (2022), 1026–1042

    2022

  25. [33]

    Mercy King’Ori. 2025. Nigeria’s New Data Protection Act, Explained - Future of Privacy Forum. https://fpf.org/blog/nigerias-new-data-protection-act-explained [Online; accessed 31. Jan. 2025]

    2025

  26. [34]

    Ellen A Knowles and BreAnne A Danzi. 2025. The Role of Online Social Support in Mental Health: Comparing Rural and Urban Youth. Children 12, 2 (2025), 113

    2025

  27. [35]

    E Kritzinger. 2015. Enhancing cyber safety awareness among school children in South Africa through gaming. In 2015 science and information conference (SAI) . IEEE, 1243–1248

    2015

  28. [36]

    Pramod Kumar, Ankitha Katkar, Manyatha Kanukuntla, Jeevana Bodakunta, Karthik Yarraboina, and Srinath Jamalapuri. 2024. Smart Device for Child Safety with Parental Alerts. In 2024 2nd International Conference on Intelligent Data Communication Technologies and Internet of Thing...

    2024

  29. [37]

    Kumar, Marshini Chetty, Tamara L

    Priya C. Kumar, Marshini Chetty, Tamara L. Clegg, and Jessica Vitak. 2019. Privacy and Security Considerations For Digital Technology Use in Elementary Schools. In Proceedings of the 2019 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Glasgow, Scotland Uk) (CHI ’19). As...

    2019

  30. [38]

    Michael Kunnuji. 2012. Online sexual activities and sexual risk-taking among adolescents and young adults in Lagos Metropolis, Nigeria. African journal of reproductive health 16, 2 (2012), 207–218

    2012

  31. [39]

    Sonia Livingstone, Anulekha Nandi, Shakuntala Banaji, and Mariya Stoilova

  32. [40]

    Amia Luthfia, Daru Wibowo, Maria Anggia Widyakusumastuti, and Mia Ange- line. 2021. The role of digital literacy on online opportunity and online risk in Indonesian youth. Asian Journal for Public Opinion Research 9, 2 (2021), 142–160

    2021

  33. [42]

    Christine Marsden. 2023. Age-Verification Laws in the Era of Digital Privacy. Nat’l Sec. LJ 10 (2023), 210

    2023

  34. [43]

    Nobody sees it, nobody gets mad

    Alice Marwick, Claire Fontaine, and Danah Boyd. 2017. “Nobody sees it, nobody gets mad”: Social media, privacy, and personal responsibility among low-SES youth. Social Media+ Society 3, 2 (2017), 2056305117710455

    2017

  35. [44]

    Benjamin A Mason, Daniel B Hajovsky, Luke A McCune, and Joshua J Turek

  36. [45]

    Sarah Masud, Sahajpreet Singh, Viktor Hangya, Alexander Fraser, and Tanmoy Chakraborty. 2024. Hate Personified: Investigating the role of LLMs in content moderation. arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.02657 (2024)

    2024 arXiv

  37. [46]

    School Psychology Review 46, 2 (2017), 177–189

    Conflict, closeness, and academic skills: A longitudinal examination of the teacher–student relationship. School Psychology Review 46, 2 (2017), 177–189

    2017

  38. [47]

    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. In Proceedings of the Second African Conference for Human Computer Interaction: Thri...

    2018

  39. [48]

    Bridget Christine McHugh, Pamela J Wisniewski, Mary Beth Rosson, Heng Xu, and John M Carroll. 2017. Most teens bounce back: Using diary methods to ex- amine how quickly teens recover from episodic online risk exposure. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction 1, CS...

    2017

  40. [49]

    Oguine, Oghenemaro Anuyah, Zainab Agha, Iris Melgarez, Adri- ana Alvarado Garcia, and Karla Badillo-Urquiola

    Ozioma C. Oguine, Oghenemaro Anuyah, Zainab Agha, Iris Melgarez, Adri- ana Alvarado Garcia, and Karla Badillo-Urquiola. 2025. Online Safety for All: Sociocultural Insights from a Systematic Review of Youth Online Safety in the Global South. arXiv (April 2025). https://doi.org/...

    2025 doi arXiv

  41. [50]

    Odeigah, Ogbemudia P

    Ogochukwu W. Odeigah, Ogbemudia P. Michael, and Adeola G. Adeoye. 2025. Age verification and underage accessibility of official alcohol companies’ websites and brand pages on Facebook and Instagram. International Journal of Drug Policy 136 (Feb. 2025), 104689. https://doi.org/...

    2025

  42. [51]

    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). https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_ id=4381787

    2023

  43. [52]

    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. In Companion Publication of the 2024 Conference on Computer- Supported Cooperative Work and Social Computing (San Jo...

    2024

  44. [53]

    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

  45. [54]

    Ozioma C Oguine, Jinkyung Katie Park, Mamtaj Akter, Johanna Olesk, Abdulma- lik Alluhidan, Pamela Wisniewski, and Karla Badillo-Urquiola. 2025. How the Internet Facilitates Adverse Childhood Experiences for Youth Who Self-Identify as in Need of Services. Proc. ACM Hum.-Comput....

    2025 doi

  46. [55]

    Daniel Oloo Ong’ong’a, LL Mukhongo, and S Chebii. 2017. Utilization of digital communication technologies in Kenya: How children aged 12–14 years report cyber bullying in school. IOSR Journal of humanities and Social Science 22, 8 (2017), 49–56

    2017

  47. [56]

    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 Conference acronym ’XX, June 03–05, 2025, Woodstock, NY Munachimso Oguine et al

    2022

  48. [57]

    Alanna Peebles and Y Anthony Chen. 2024. Parental Internet practices in the family system: Restrictive mediation, problematic Internet use, and adolescents’ age-related variations in perceptions of parent-child relationship quality. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships...

    2024

  49. [58]

    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 & Privacy 22, 05 (Sept. 2024), 52–62. https://doi.org/10.110...

    2024

  50. [59]

    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. In Proceedings of the 2017 Conference on Interaction Design and Children . 352–357

    2017

  51. [60]

    Yelena Petrykina, Hadas Schwartz-Chassidim, and Eran Toch. 2021. Nudging users towards online safety using gamified environments. Computers & Security 108 (2021), 102270

    2021

  52. [61]

    Farzana Quayyum and Giske Naper Freberg. 2024. Designing Cybersecurity Awareness Solutions for Young People in Rural Developing Countries: Insights and Lessons Learned. In Universal Access in Human-Computer Interaction . Springer, Cham, Switzerland, 3–18. https://doi.org/10.10...

    2024 doi

  53. [62]

    Gina Porter, Kate Hampshire, Albert Abane, Alister Munthali, Elsbeth Rob- son, Ariane De Lannoy, Augustine Tanle, and Samuel Owusu. 2020. Mo- bile phones, gender, and female empowerment in sub-Saharan Africa: stud- ies with African youth. Information Technology for Development...

    2020 arXiv

  54. [63]

    Wisniewski

    Afsaneh Razi, Karla Badillo-Urquiola, and Pamela J. Wisniewski. 2020. Let’s Talk about Sext: How Adolescents Seek Support and Advice about Their Online Sexual Experiences. In Proceedings of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Honolulu, HI, USA) (CHI ...

    2020

  55. [64]

    Matjorie Rachoene and Toks Oyedemi. 2015. From self-expression to social aggression: Cyberbullying culture among South African youth on Facebook.Com- municatio (July 2015). https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/02500167. 2015.1093325?casa_token=O_QqEv_TIvUAAAAA:cnVdjj5c4...

    2015

  56. [65]

    Wei Ren and Xiaowen Zhu. 2022. Parental Mediation and Adolescents’ Internet Use: The Moderating Role of Parenting Style. Journal of Youth and Adolescence 51, 8 (April 2022), 1483. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-022-01600-w

    2022 doi

  57. [66]

    Kira A. Regan. 2017. Socially Marginalized Youths’ Experiences with So- cial Media and its Impact on their Relationships. Scholarship@Western (2017). https://ir.lib.uwo.ca/etd/4476/?utm_source=ir.lib.uwo.ca%2Fetd%2F4476& utm_medium=PDF&utm_campaign=PDFCoverPages

    2017

  58. [67]

    Farhana Shahid and Aditya Vashistha. 2023. Decolonizing Content Moderation: Does Uniform Global Community Standard Resemble Utopian Equality or West- ern Power Hegemony?. In Proceedings of the 2023 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems . 1–18

    2023

  59. [68]

    Omotola Saba. 2024. Must-Watch African Animated Series and Films. Mar- malade Collective (Feb. 2024). https://www.marmaladecollective.com/must- watch-african-animated-series-and-films

    2024

  60. [69]

    Aminu Shehu. [n. d.]. FCT Secondary Education Board. https://www.fctseb.gov. ng/sch_statistics.php [Online; accessed 2025-04-17]

    2025

  61. [70]

    Shwadhin Sharma and Ching Yee Lee. 2024. Parental mediation and preferences for regulation regarding children’s digital media use: role of protection motivation and theory of planned behaviour.Behaviour & Information Technology 43, 8 (2024), 1499–1517

    2024

  62. [71]

    Fatima Shittu, Adesina Simon Sodiya, and Orunsolu Abdul. 2025. A NIN- BASED MODEL FOR SOCIAL MEDIA SECURITY IN NIGERIA – Digital Li- brary. https://library.ncs.org.ng/download/a-nin-based-model-for-social-media- security-in-nigeria

    2025

  63. [72]

    Aminu Shehu. 2025. FCT Secondary Education Board. https://www.fctseb.gov.ng

    2025

  64. [73]

    Łukasz Tomczyk and Katarzyna Potyrała. 2021. Parents’ knowledge and skills about the risks of the digital world. South African Journal of Education 41, 1 (2021)

    2021

  65. [74]

    Elizabeth A Sweigart, Jinkyung Katie Park, and Pamela J Wisniewski. 2025. It Takes a Village: Youth Online Safety Research Highlights Need for Interdisci- plinary, Multistakeholder Solutions. Journal of Advances in Information Technol- ogy 16, 1 (2025)

    2025

  66. [75]

    Kimani-Kariuki Lucy Wanjiru. 2010. A Study on the Uses and Gratification of Facebook among the Youth in Kenya . Ph. D. Dissertation. University of Nairobi, Kenya

    2010

  67. [76]

    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 & Security 59 (2016), 138– 150

    2016

  68. [77]

    Pamela Wisniewski, Arup Kumar Ghosh, Heng Xu, Mary Beth Rosson, and John M. Carroll. 2017. Parental Control vs. Teen Self-Regulation: Is there a middle ground for mobile online safety?. In Proceedings of the 2017 ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work and Social...

    2017

  69. [78]

    Daricia Wilkinson and Bart Knijnenburg. 2022. Many islands, many problems: An empirical examination of online safety behaviors in the caribbean. In Proceedings of the 2022 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems . 1–25

    2022

  70. [79]

    Wisniewski, Heng Xu, Mary Beth Rosson, and John M

    Pamela J. Wisniewski, Heng Xu, Mary Beth Rosson, and John M. Carroll. 2014. Adolescent online safety: the "moral" of the story. In Proceedings of the 17th ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work & Social Computing (Baltimore, Maryland, USA) (CSCW ’14). Associatio...

    2014

  71. [80]

    Doty, and Heidi Hartikainen

    Pamela Wisniewski, Jinkyung Park, Karla Badillo-Urquiola, Joy Gabrielli, Jen- nifer L. Doty, and Heidi Hartikainen. 2024. Moving Beyond Fear and Re- striction to Promoting Adolescent Resilience and Intentional Technology Use. In Handbook of Children and Screens . Springer, Cha...

    2024 doi

  72. [2017]

    Gage (2017)

    Young adolescents and digital media: uses, risks and opportunities in low- and middle-income countries: a rapid evidence review. Gage (2017). https: //eprints.lse.ac.uk/83753

    2017

Pith tools

Reviewed August 6, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.