Table 3.

Two-way ANOVA about the differences in mother parenting practices according to the interaction between the role of involvement in cyberbullying and gender.

Variable	Group	Sex	Mean	SD	N	F	F.D.	Sig.	Post Hoc	Cohen’s d
Affection and communication	NI	boys	5.31	0.85	710	2.94	(3, 1863)	0.032	NI ≠ VIC	−0.56
		girls	5.41	0.80	801				NI ≠ AGGR	−0.45
	VIC	boys	4.80	1.30	63				NI ≠ B-VIC	−0.36
		girls	4.95	1.37	61				NI ≠ B-VIC	−0.86
	AGGR	boys	4.91	1.12	59				NI ≠ VIC	−0.72
		girls	4.80	0.94	20				NI ≠ VIC	−0.54
	B-VIC	boys	4.99	1.02	118				NI ≠ AGGR	−0.60
		girls	4.55	1.42	32				NI ≠ B-VIC NI ≠ B-VIC	−0.50 −1.03
Psychological control	NI	boys	3.09	1.24	680	4.98	(3, 1802)	0.002	NI ≠ NI	−0.19
		girls	2.85	1.20	776				NI ≠ VIC	0.45
	VIC	boys	3.65	1.18	62				NI ≠ VIC	0.66
		girls	3.29	1.34	61				NI ≠ B-VIC	0.41
	AGGR	boys	3.06	1.22	58				NI ≠ B-VIC	0.77
		girls	3.73	1.05	19
	B-VIC	boys	3.34	1.15	116
		girls	3.78	1.29	31
Inductive discipline	NI	boys	3.60	1.79	659	3.55	(3, 1750)	0.014	NI ≠ NI	−0.79
		girls	3.19	1.62	766				NI ≠ B-VIC	−0.44
	VIC	boys	3.89	2.07	58
		girls	3.60	1.65	58
	AGGR	boys	3.46	1.66	54
		girls	4.40	1.95	20
	B-VIC	boys	3.91	1.75	109
		girls	4.08	1.36	27
Punishment	NI	boys	1.70	1.88	622	3.30	(3, 1694)	0.019	NI ≠ NI	−0.33
		girls	1.18	1.27	752				NI ≠ VIC	0.40
	VIC	boys	2.47	2.22	61				NI ≠ B-VIC	0.44
		girls	2.05	2.20	58				NI ≠ VIC	0.94
	AGGR	boys	2.14	1.65	52				NI ≠ VIC	0.64
		girls	2.66	2.20	19				NI ≠ AGGR	0.74
	B-VIC	boys	2.54	1.87	104				NI ≠ AGGR	1.13
		girls	2.88	2.56	27				NI ≠ BVIC NI ≠ BVIC	1.00 1.27
Response cost	NI	boys	2.38	1.95	657	4.45	(3, 1754)	0.004	NI ≠ NI	−0.38
		girls	1.72	1.51	763				NI ≠ VIC	0.19
	VIC	boys	2.76	2.37	60				NI ≠ VIC	0.10
		girls	2.58	2.19	60				NI ≠ BVIC	0.19
	AGGR	boys	2.48	1.65	57				NI ≠ BVIC	0.40
		girls	2.88	2.48	19
	B-VIC	boys	2.76	1.75	109
		girls	3.17	2.16	30

Notes: = boys; = girls; NI = Non-involved; VIC = Cyber-victim; AGGR = Cyber-aggressor; B-VIC = Cyber-bully/Victim; F.D. = Freedom Degrees; SD = Standard Deviation.