This is your brain on DOPA


Published on

  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total Views
On Slideshare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • Note here that you can see trends over time the general difference between the red and yellow lines) as well as by age group over time (e.g., comparison of points at 2006 and 2007 by age, 29% of 14 year olds said SNS were in their top-two in 2006 compared to 45% in 2007)
  • With more young people actively engaging with others online, researchers and others working are interested in learning more about the exposures and experiences youth are having online and how this may (and may not) be related to indicators of mental health.
  • Rates appear to be stabilizing. For both ‘ever harassed’ in the last year, and ‘harassed monthly or more often’, the same percentage of youth reported being affected in 2006 and in 2007.
  • Among those harassed, between 1 in 3 and 1 in 4 are upset. The good news – that means 2 in 3, or 3 in 4 are not upset by what happens. We need to figure out how to identify these kids who are upset to make sure they have the support they need. And, we need to acknowledge that the vast majority of youth are not affected by being harassed.
  • (GuwM) We say a young person is being bullied or harassed when someone else or a group of people repeatedly hits, kicks, threatens, or says nasty or unpleasant things to them. Another example is when no one ever talks to them. These things can happen at school, online, or other places young people hang out. It is not bullying when two young people of about the same strength fight or tease each other. Using a parallel measure of bullying across environments, 31% say they are bullied at school vs. 13% online and 6% via cell phones.
  • The YISS-1, YISS-2, and GuwM all used the same definition. Note: these three things query a wide range of things from the relatively benign to the serious. They do NOT all represent solicitations for *sex*.
  • We now have data from four samples that allow us to map the frequency of unwanted sexual solicitation. When we do so (above), we very clearly see a pattern in which those youth 14-15 years of age and older are much more likely than their younger peers to be involved. Note that this age group is also normatively and developmentally appropriately becoming curious about sex.
  • About 1-3 or 1-4 youth who are solicited are upset by the experience. The good news: the vast majority of targeted youth are unaffected. We need to figure out a way to identify the youth who are upset and make sure they have the support and access to services they need.
  • (From GuwM) School-based sexual solicitation / sexual harassment The following question is about your experiences at school. In the past 12 months, did the following happen to you while you were at school ? Someone tried to get me to talk about sex when I did not want to. Someone asked me for sexual information about myself when I did not want to tell the person, e.g., really personal questions, like what my body looks like or sexual things I have done. Someone asked me to do something sexual that I did not want to do . Despite what most people might assume, more youth report unwanted solicitation at school (17%) than online (13%).
  • (GuwM) In the last 12 months, have you: Gone to or seen an X-rated or “adult” website where the main topic is sex Watched an X-rated movie at a friend’s house, your house, or in the theater where the main topic was sex? Looked at an X-rated magazine on purpose, like Playboy, where the main topic was sex?
  • We now have data from four samples that allow us to map the frequency of unwanted sexual solicitation. When we do so (above), we very clearly see a pattern in which those youth 14-15 years of age and older are much more likely than their younger peers to be involved. Note that this age group is also normatively and developmentally appropriately becoming curious about sex.
  • (GuwM) A “hate” site is one that tells you to hate a group of people because of who they are, how they look, or what they believe. A “death” website that shows pictures of dead people or people dying. Some people call these “snuff” sites.
  • (GuwM) A website, including news-related sites, that shows pictures of war, death, “terrorism” A website (that’s not an online game) that shows cartoons, like stick people or animals, being beat up, hurt, or killed
  • Think about integrating online mental health services with online applications that youth have adopted. For example, see SNS as an opportunity. Before the Internet, youth who were troubled were often nameless, voiceless, and difficult to reach. Now, with SNS, they are easier to *see*. What if we integrated online services such as’s online, real-time chat resources for those in crises with popular SNS…? (and by ‘integrated’, I mean more than having a profile on the SNS)
  • This is your brain on DOPA

    1. 1. American Library AssociationThis is your brain on DOPA:THE DATAMichele L. Ybarra MPH PhDInternet Solutions for Kids, Inc.American Library Association, June 26-July 22008, Anaheim, CA* Thank you for your interest in this presentation.  Pleasenote that analyses included herein are preliminary. Morerecent, finalized analyses may be available by contactingCiPHR for further information.
    2. 2. BackgroundMore than 9 in 10 US youth now have Internetaccess (USC Center for the Digital Future, 2006; Lenhart, Rainie, &Lewis, 2001)One in three teens 12-17 engage in some formof content creation in 2006 (Lenhart, Madden, Magill et al.,2007) Girls are more likely to post photos (54% v40%) Boys are more likely to post video (19% v10%)
    3. 3. SNS use is growing across time andincreases by age2% 4%13%19%29% 28%9%26%23%45%52%41%0%10%20%30%40%50%60%10 11 12 13 14 15 16GuwM 2006GuwM 2007
    4. 4. RoadmapToday we will talk about: Experiences: Internet harassment and bullying Unwanted sexual solicitation Exposures: Unintentional and intentional access topornography Access of other violent web site content
    5. 5. Brief Description of the data Growing up with Media 1,588 households Online Survey: Baseline survey in 2006, 14-monthfollow up in 2007 Youth between the ages of 10-15 years Youth Internet Safety Surveys 1 and 2 1,500 households Random digit dial telephone survey: First survey in2000, follow up survey in 2005 Youth between the ages of 10-17 years Conducted by Dr. David Finkelhor and colleagues at UNHCCRC
    6. 6. Online experiences of youth:Internet harassment&CyberBullying
    7. 7. Internet harassmentWhat Youth Said… Boy, 14: “I have my own … website and I havemy own page on it and someone postedsomething bad about me on it.” Boy, 15: “I was playing a first person shootergame and unintentionally offended this personwho became very serious and began to threatenme by saying if this was real life he wouldphysically harm me. [It happened because he]was unable to accept this was just a game.”Quotes taken from the Youth Internet Safety Survey – 2 report (Wolak, Finkelhor,Mitchell, 2006)
    8. 8. Internet harassment: DefinitionsDepends on the survey.. YISS1 & YISS2 Rude or mean comments (YISS1 only) Felt worried or threatened because someone wasbothering or harassing them online Someone has used the internet to threaten or embarrassthem by posting or sending information for others to see Growing up with Media Rude or mean comments Threatening or aggressive comments Spread rumors about youth, whether they were true or not
    9. 9. Internet harassment:Prevalence rates over time From YISS1 to YISS2, the12-month prevalence rateof Internet harassment increased from 6% to 9%(Mitchell, Wolak, Finkelhor, 2006). In the Growing up with Media Survey, 34% reportedharassment at baseline, 34% at follow-up Frequent harassment: 8% reported being harassedmonthly at baseline, 8% at follow-up Continuity of harassed youth over time 20% reported harassment at baseline and follow-up 13% reported harassment at baseline only 14% reported harassment at follow-up only .
    10. 10. Internet harassment: Who is theharasser?Based upon data from the YISS2 (Ybarra, Mitchell, Wolak,Finkelhor, 2006). 8%: Preadolescent (10-12 years old) 51%: Adolescent (13-17 years old) 21%: Young adult (18-25 years old) 2% Adult (26-40 years): 2% 18% Don’t know: 18%The majority (59%) of harassment comesfrom other minors
    11. 11. Impact of Internet harassmentAbout one in three youth targeted byInternet harassment report feelingvery/extremely upset (or afraid) becauseof the incident: 30% in YISS-1 38% in YISS-2 25% in GuwM (wave 2)
    12. 12. How do rates compare online andoffline? (GuwM)69%87%94%89% 87%27%11% 10% 12%5% 2% 2% 1%6%1%0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%School Internet Cell phones Community Other placesMonthly +Once / a few timesNever
    13. 13. Online experiences of youth:Unwanted sexual solicitation
    14. 14. Defining unwanted sexual solicitationon the Internet Someone tried to get me to talk about sex onlinewhen I did not want to. Someone online asked me for sexual informationabout myself when I did not want to tell the person,e.g., really personal questions, like what my bodylooks like or sexual things I have done. Someone asked me to do something sexual when Iwas online that I did not want to do.
    15. 15. Prevalence rates of unwanted sexualsolicitation across time and ages2%8%14% 14%23%25% 25%21%0%5%9%10%15%18%19%15%6% 6%12%13%23% 24%5%13%10%18%22%7%0%5%10%15%20%25%30%10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17YISS-1YISS-2GuwM W1GuwM W2
    16. 16. Impact of unwanted sexual solicitationAcross studies, about one in three solicitedyouth report feeling very/extremely upset(or afraid) because of the incident: YISS1: 26% YISS2: 31% GuwM: 39% (at Wave 2)
    17. 17. How do rates compare online andoffline? (GuwM)83% 87%14% 10%2% 3%0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%School InternetMonthly +Once / a few timesNever
    18. 18. Online exposures of youth:Unintentional exposure to x-ratedmaterial
    19. 19. Demographic profile of youthreporting unwanted exposure to pornAmong 1,501 10-17 year olds surveyed in 2005YISS-2:34% reported an unwanted exposure (40%reported ANY exposure) 54% were boys Most (76%) were older youth (14-17)Wolak, Finkelhor and Mitchell, 2006
    20. 20. Demographic profile of youthreporting unwanted exposure to pornSimilarly, in the UK… 57% of 9-19 year olds who use the Internetweekly have been exposed to pornography. As age increases, the likelihood of exposurealso increases: 21% of 9-11 year olds, 58% 12-15 year olds, and 76% of 16-17 year oldsLivingstone & Bober, 2005
    21. 21. Where did the exposure happen? YISS2: Wolak, Finkelhor and Mitchell, 2006 83% happened while surfing the web 40% occurred when doing online searches 17% clicked on links within sites 12% were from misspelled web addresses 18% came in the form of an email or IM In the UK:Livingstone & Bober, 2005 Surfing the web: 38% from a pop-up 36% accidentally founds themselves on a website 25% received pornographic junk mail
    22. 22. What does it mean to be “unwanted”21% in YISS2 said they could tell it was x-ratedbefore entering (Wolak, Finkelhor, Mitchell, 2006) Perhaps they didn’t understand the term “x-rated” untilthey *saw* it Perhaps they saw a different type (e.g., moreextreme) of pornography then they were expecting
    23. 23. Other important event characteristics There is significant overlap of youth reportingunwanted and wanted exposure YISS-2 respondents reporting unwantedexposure are 2.8 times more likely to reportwanted exposure than those not reportingunwanted exposure to sexual material online. 2% report going back to the web site(Wolak, Finkelhor, Mitchell, 2006)
    24. 24. Online exposures of youth:Intentional exposure to x-ratedmaterial
    25. 25. Frequency of intentional exposure(GuwM)10%11%13% 13%10%0%2%4%6%8%10%12%14%16%18%20%2006 (n=1588 10-15 yo) 2007 (n=1206 11-16 yo)InternetMagazinesMovies
    26. 26. Intentional exposure to x-ratedmaterial across age and time0% 0%2%6%10% 10%12%14%1% 2%3%10%12%17%22%19%1%7%6%8%22%13%1%6%10%18%13%12%0%5%10%15%20%25%10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17YISS-1 (2000)YISS-2 (2005)GuwM W1 (2006)GuwM W2 (2007)
    27. 27. Demographic profile of youth lookingat internet porn (GuwM)Among 1,206 11-16 year old youth in Oct-Dec, 2007: 80% male (OR = 4.2, p<.001) 14.4 years old (OR = 1.3, p<.001)How did they hear about the site? (top 5): From a friend: 53% Search engine: 30% Another web site: 29% Typed in an address to see what would come up: 22% Pop-up ad: 22%
    28. 28. Online exposures of youth:Exposure to violent web sites
    29. 29. Frequency of exposure to violent websites (GuwM)2% 4%51%42%47%54%0%10%20%30%40%50%60%Hate sites Death sitesYesNoI dont know what youre talking about
    30. 30. Frequency of exposure to violent websites (GuwM)22%18%49%46%29%36%0%10%20%30%40%50%60%News sites Violent cartoon sitesYesNoI dont know what youre talking about
    31. 31. Final thoughts The majority of youth who use theInternet have positive experiences andreport that none of these types ofexposures occur. The data do not support the assertion thatyouth are more likely to have negativeexperiences (i.e., sexually solicited,harassed) or exposures (i.e., access x-rated material) online than offline.
    32. 32. Implications for professionals workingwith youth We need to do more to provide support andintervention for youth who are targeted by peeraggression, both online and offline. We need to focus on the child, not the onlineapplication. Most youth do not operate in a ‘vacuum’. Whatare we doing to treat children more globally andprovide services that address all of their needs?
    33. 33. AcknowledgementsThe Growing up with Media survey was supported by CooperativeAgreement number U49/CE000206 from the Centers for DiseaseControl and Prevention (CDC). The contents of this presentationare solely the responsibility of the authors and do not necessarilyrepresent the official views of the CDC.I’d also like to acknowledge and thank Dr. David Finkelhor andcolleagues at the University of New Hampshire’s Crimes againstChildren Research Center for their ground breaking work andcontributions to the field with the YISS and YISS-2.