Funded by the National Science Foundation September 27 – 29, 2010 Sheri Bauman, Convener University of Arizona

Welcome

We come from – 8 countries From distances as much as 9,836 miles – 6 U.S. states – A variety of disciplines, including psychology, public health, social work, counseling, communications, and education

Rationale It is difficult to make sense of the extant research because of differences in the three areas we are focusing on here. If we can produce and disseminate collaborative position papers, we have the potential to positively influence this line of inquiry.

Objectives to attempt to reach consensus on an operational definition of cyberbullying to discuss methodological issues (sampling, research design, statistical analyses) that could increase the quality and consistency of research in this area to examine and evaluate existing measures and identify promising measures that could be piloted and subjected to rigorous psychometric analyses in different countries to identify substantive research questions that should be addressed to advance this field of inquiry to plan future collaborative projects (including an edited book) to address these questions

Format Brief introductions Include welcome from Linda Shaw, Department Head Paperwork for stipends As a whole group, generate topics, issues, items that we think each committee should address. Finalize committees, move to locations, and work on the task Tuesday evening, we will share the position papers with the whole group, get feedback and attempt to reach consensus on the content. Plan for finalizing papers, dissenting opinions, etc. Wednesday will be to plan the book, collaborative projects going forward, and follow-up contact.

Definition Jina Yoon Cristina Del Barrio Dorothy Espelage Faye Mishna Ikuko Aoyama Marilyn Campbell Peter Smith

Measures Dagmar Strohmeier Michele Ybarra Noel Card Rhonda Craven Petra Gradinger Jenny Walker

Methods Donna Cross Guadalupe Espinoza Robert Tokunaga Tony Talbert Marion Underwood Georges Steffgen Sheri Bauman

Plan Today - brainstorm with entire group to give committees guidance regarding issues to address in their discussions Then meet with committees today (and TV news at 3:30 if you are willing) and tomorrow. By end of meeting tomorrow, have a PPT of your conclusions (and dissenting views if they exist) to present to whole group for comment at our working dinner.

Wednesday morning we will generate some substantive research questions we hope can be the focus of future research, plan collaborative endeavors, and finalize book outline. New NSF proposals?

Revised Plan Tuesday morning: Rounds 2 and 3 of Envoy meetings 9 – 10:30: Definition → Measures Measures → Methods Methods → Definition 10:30 – noon: Definition → Methods Measures → Definition Methods → Measures

Noon – lunch Afternoon: Work in original committee to Finalize what you will present to entire group tonight at dinner (PPT, white paper, chapter outline). The final final will incorporate comments from the entire group. 6 PM – dinner in main meeting room provided by Inn at which we present for comment

Wednesday morning Breakfast - paperwork Whole group meeting about next steps – How to use the website – How to maintain the connections – What are substantive research questions going forward? – What would the book look like? I will submit final proposal to publisher next week or two Complete evaluation, say goodbye 