Methodological Rationale

The purpose of social research is to contribute to the body of knowledge by explaining social reality, and according to Williamson (1982), ‘to add to knowledge through exploration, description and explanation of social reality’ (pp. 31-32). As noted in chapter 1, the field of cyberbullying has been dominated by studies that have employed quantitative research designs, focusing on identifying rates and forms of bullying (e.g. Wang et al., 2009; Smith et al., 2008; Mnet, 2001). However, understanding of the more complex social and psychological dynamics that influence cyberbullying is poorly served by an exclusively quantitative approach. It is therefore unsurprising that those few studies (e.g. De Lara, 2012) that have employed a qualitative approach to examinations of cyberbullying have provided valuable explanatory insights that have considerably progressed knowledge within the field.

The decision to use one research method as opposed to another is a philosophical and practical one based on the researcher evaluating both the purpose of the research and the phenomenon of interest in terms of feasibility constraints (Bonoma, 1985). Yin (1994: 6) asserts that the choice of research method employed is dependent on the researcher understanding the nature of the research question that he or she seeks to answer in addition to understanding the characteristics of the research method utilised to achieve that answer. To choose a suitable research method, Yin (1994) contends that it is essential to consider the answer to three questions. These are:

1. The type of research question;

2. The extent of control an investigator has over the behavioural events;

3. The degree of focus on contemporary, as opposed to historical events should be considered.

This study examined ‘How’ (Nature of Cyberbullying Experience), and ‘Why’ (Reporting Response Motivation Factors) types of research question. The primary question was to identify the factors that influence (predict or inhibit) the decision to report cyberbullying to adult caregivers. In order to satisfactorily answer that question, it was necessary to first examine the experience of cyberbullying from the perspective of individuals who have direct knowledge of that experience and its impact. In line with the primary research question, the study investigated the target group’s reporting responses, specifically the considerations which influenced their decisions to report their behaviour to adult caregivers, as well as why some students resist reporting to teachers or parents and the experiences which inhibited their reporting response. These ‘How’ and Why’ types of questions, which enable capture of the individual narrative, are most suitably addressed via open ended questions that will permit each participant to describe their own experience and motivating factors. In summary, it was clear that the type of research questions in this study and their associated need to capture descriptive narrative can be most effectively achieved via a qualitative research methodology.

Yin suggests that consideration be given to the amount of control that the researcher has over measuring behaviour. A practical issue in this research was the absence of control over behavioural events. For example, this was not an experimental study and as the narrative of the students reflects their differing experience, it can only be captured through allowing reflection and self- expression of experience, attitudes and motivation. Such expression is most suitably captured through use of a qualitative methodology. Finally, in this study, the focus on contemporary events was high, as technology-mediated bullying is a relatively new phenomenon that is an issue of contemporary concern both for parents, teachers and policy makers. As a relatively new phenomenon, the potential for disclosure of new or previously unconsidered issues is high. Such disclosure is most likely to be facilitated through a qualitative methodology. In conclusion, the answers to all three of the questions proposed by Yin point to a qualitative methodology as the most suitable research method for the purpose of this study.

In addition to Yin’s guiding questions, the rationale for using a qualitative research approach as the preferred method of collecting data for this study included the following considerations:

Firstly, the aforementioned literature review demonstrates the issue of concern in this study. Adolescent reporting of cyberbullying experiences is considered to be a multi-faceted construct and consequently the reasons for non-reporting are likely to vary considerably depending on population type and context. Investigating a topic such as ‘cyberbullying’ incorporates multiple elements that are defined by each individual’s unique experience, the impact and internalisation of that experience, and their personal evaluations of the consequences of reporting are some examples. To capture details comprehensively requires that individuals be provided with the opportunity to elaborate on specific points, as well as providing the researcher with the opportunity to further explore particular responses as necessary. A qualitative methodology is most suitable for enabling this type of an in-depth insight into the research issue.

Secondly, cyberbullying is moderated by context. The literature suggests that females place greater emphasis on social support networks than do males. Equally the impact of bullying on females can be more severe than is the case for males. The reasons for greater impact on female adolescents, the nature of their context and the rationale for their choice of reportee cannot be drawn out fully through an exclusively quantitative gender-neutral approach. Female adolescents are more likely to successfully identify the issues that are most salient to them via an open interview approach. As Miller and Dingwall (1997) note, the ‘attempt to establish correlation between variables depends upon a lack of attention as to how these variables are defined by the people being studied’ (p.3).

Thirdly, previous research on cyberbullying has predominantly employed a quantitative approach with an emphasis on questions such as ‘how many’, ‘what’ and ‘when (O’Moore and Minton, 2011; Walker, et al., 2012; Cotter and McGilloway, 2011; Hinduja and Patchin, 2010). This is understandable when dealing with research that is of an embryonic nature. This approach would not assist in achieving the purpose of this study, as it would not allow the respondents

to discuss the motivations that influenced their response behaviour, which is the purpose of this research. As a result, it was determined that the study would be best served by adoption of a qualitative methodology explore the experiences of gifted Irish adolescents and the reasons why they report, or resist reporting their experiences to parents and teachers.

Finally, the literature (Creswell & Clark, 2011) posits that qualitative research should be applied when: (a) the topic is relatively new; (b) the important aspects of the phenomenon are unknown; and (c) discourse was not given to a specific group of people. The study of gifted adolescents’ experiences with cyberbullying and the reasons underlying their non-reporting responses satisfies all three of these criteria. For example, examinations of cyberbullying are relatively rare and the topic has received limited academic attention, particularly when compared with traditional bullying. The reasons underlying non-reporting behaviour have received little attention, consequently remaining unknown. Added to that fact, discourse has not previously been given to the population of gifted adolescents. Qualitative research is therefore appropriate in order to gain richness of insight into the impact of the cyberbullying experience on the adolescent, the reasons for their reporting response and the nature of their individual cyberbullying experiences.