Spirituality Studies 11-2 Fall 2025 63 Peter Žitný et al. a unique predictor of cybervictimization, whereas spirituality, resilience, and social loneliness did not contribute beyond this effect. Adolescents who reported emotional loneliness also reported somewhat more frequent experiences of cybervictimization. This weak but meaningful association is consistent with findings that cybervictims tend to be socially isolated and have disrupted relationships (Coelho and Romão 2018, 223; Kumar and Goldstein 2020, 90). It suggests that a critical component of vulnerability to cybervictimization is a deficit in closeness and emotional fulfillment in relationships, not just the number of social contacts. Our findings indicate that, although spirituality and coping ability are important for overall youth resilience (Chai 2022, 21; Shukla and Chouhan 2023, 16), they do not prevent cyberbullying itself. Instead, having a close relationship appears to protect adolescents from risk. Higher spirituality in our study did not correspond to a lower risk of becoming a victim, despite expectations of a protective effect (Apostolides 2017, 9). Its positive effect seems to lie more in alleviating the impacts of cyberbullying on well-being (Chai 2022, 21) than in preventing cybervictimization per se. Similarly, we did not observe a protective effect of resilience. Although adaptive coping strategies may be associated with lower incidence of cyberbullying (McLoughlin 2019, 4307), many victims may only begin to use such strategies after being attacked (Worsley et al. 2019, 27). Thus, adolescents’ stress-coping ability appears to increase resilience to the consequences of cyberbullying (Shukla and Chouhan 2023, 15) rather than preventing the occurrence of cyberbullying. A longitudinal approach is needed to clarify the direction and nature of the relationships among loneliness, spirituality, coping, and cybervictimization. In particular, the relationship between loneliness and cyberbullying may be bidirectional; only long-term observation can reveal cause versus consequence. We also recommend including a broader spectrum of variables to increase explained variance – for example, other known risk factors such as self-esteem or empathy (Kowalski and Limber 2013, 18; Sinogina and Lomovskaya 2023, 126), as well as family and school environment factors. Finally, verifying our findings on more diverse and balanced samples (different age groups, more balanced gender representation, various cultural settings) would strengthen the generalizability of the conclusions. Preventive programs should target all adolescents regardless of gender, since the risk of cyberbullying affects girls and boys equally. In prevention, it is also important to identify adolescents who feel lonely and strengthen their social ties (e.g., through support groups or mentoring), thereby reducing their isolation and vulnerability. Teaching young people to cope effectively with cyberattacks is crucial: rather than passively enduring them, they should know how to block the aggressor, report the incident, and seek help (Worsley et al. 2019, 28), which will mitigate the psychological impact of bullying on the victim. Interventions should not neglect the spiritual dimension either – sensitive support in finding meaning, connectedness, and hope (Apostolides 2017, 5; Nowsky 2007, 77) can bolster victims’ resilience alongside psychological help. Consistent with this, practice should translate spirituality into specific, lived behaviors that directly shrink emotional loneliness: structured but youth-directed pairing with a trusted mentor or small supportive dyad; brief, routine reflection on meaning and values after cyber incidents; and opportunities for prosocial contribution within the adolescent’s chosen community. These steps treat spirituality as a relational skill set – cultivating intimacy, mutual help, and gratitude – rather than as doctrine, thereby targeting the proximal risk signal identified in our model. Programs should emphasize voluntariness and non-proselytizing, and monitor proximal outcomes that track with our findings (perceived closeness, help-seeking, and confidence in coping with online harm). In short, spiritually informed care is most actionable when it builds everyday ties that make adolescents feel known, accompanied, and supported. Finally, emphasizing the development of empathy and prosocial values (Sinogina and Lomovskaya 2023, 125; Martinkovič 2016, 51) may help reduce the occurrence of cyber aggression in school settings, thereby also lowering the risk of victimization. When interpreting the results, several limitations should be noted. First, the cross-sectional design does not allow determination of causal directions – for example, it is unclear whether loneliness increases susceptibility to becoming a victim or whether cybervictimization in turn intensifies feelings of loneliness. Second, all data were self-reported, which may have introduced inaccuracies. Third, the composition of our adolescent sample limits the generalizability of findings to other populations. Finally, the measurements captured only selected aspects: our instrument predominantly reflected less severe forms of cyberbullying and there was a floor effect in the data, and spirituality was measured unidimensionally as subjective importance. These limitations call for caution in interpreting the findings and highlight areas for future research (e.g., longitudinal studies, more representative samples, more comprehensive measurement tools).
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTUwMDU5Ng==