Table 1.

Description of the Studies on LGBTQ Cyberbullying Included in the Systematic Review

Study	Definition of Cyberbullying	Cut-off-value	Participants	Representative or Ad hoc-sample	Prevalence
Bauman and Baldasare (2015)	Intentional and repeated harm of others through the use of computers, cell phones, and other electronic devices.	Multiple items; Responses from 1 (never) to 6 (every day/almost every day).	N = 1078; undergraduate students (freshman through senior).	Ad hoc	1- When compared to their heterosexual and cisgender counterparts, LGBT respondents reported higher rates of unwanted contact online (t = 3.49, df = 91.98, p = .001, η2 = .01).
Blais et al. (2013)	Definition not provided.	Single item; Responses coded on dichotomous scale (no/yes). Forms of prejudiced: dichotomous score (never vs. rarely to always).	N = 8029; ages 14–22.	Representative	1–28% to 48.95% of the youths of students reported cyberbullying (study does not distinguish between sexual minority youth and others). 2- Sexual orientation rates of prejudice: 1.67–2% for heterosexual participants and 32.02–64.42 for sexual minority youth. 3- Gender non-conformity rates of prejudice: 5.29–6.47% for heterosexual participants and 25.66–60.49 for sexual minority youth.
Blumenfeld and Cooper (2010)	Deliberate, intentional, and repeated aggressive and hostile behaviors through the use of computers, cell phones, and other electronic devices to humiliate, harm, and control another individual or group of individuals with less power.	Multiple items; Cut off score not provided.	N = 444; ages 11–22.	Ad hoc	1- Rates of cyberbullying of LGBT vs. non-LGBT was not measured.
Bouris et al. (2016)	Definition not provided.	Multiple item; Items recoded so that 0 = no victimization and 1 = one or more victimization experiences.	N = 1907; high school students; age mean 15.7 years old.	Ad hoc	1- Cyberbullying based on sexual orientation: 16.81% for sexual minority and 11.03% for heterosexual participants.
Cénat et al. (2015)	An intentional and aggressive behavior or act repeatedly carried out by an individual (or a group) against another person (or group) who cannot easily defend himself (or themselves) using electronic tools such as social networks, emails, cell phones power.	Single item; Response coded on a 4-point-scale: Never (0), 1 to 2 times (1), 3 to 5 times (2) and 6 times and more (3). Dichotomized score: the behavior happened at least 1 to 2 times and more.	N = 8194; high schools students (grades 10 to 12); ages 14–20 years old.	Representative	1–28% for gay/lesbian, 32.9% bisexual, and 24% questioning vs. 21.4% for heterosexual participants.
Cooper and Blumenfeld (2012)	Receiving rude, angry or vulgar, intimidating or threatening messages, have someone send or post personal information about a person, been excluded from a group, receiving harmful messages by someone who hid their identity.	Multiple items; Four-point scale: 1 = Never/Rarely and 4 = Frequently.	N = 310; middle and high school; ages 11–18 years old.	Ad hoc	1- Rates of “frequently” experiencing cyberbullying for LGBT vs. LGBT allies: 22.7% - 32.8% for LGBT vs. 10% - 28.3% for LGBT allies.
Duong and Bradshaw (2014)	Bullying occurring through electronic communications, such as e-mail, instant messages, websites, or text messages; Behavior carried out repeatedly over time, and occurs in interpersonal relationships marked by an imbalance of power.	Single item; Dichotomous responses (yes/no). Categorized into 1 of 4 groups: “not bullied,” “cyber bullied only,” “school bullied only,” or “both.”	N = 951; grades 9 through 12; Only LGBTQ participants, no comparison group.	Representative (of NYC)	1–9.7% experienced cyberllying and 10.1% experienced both cyberbullying and traditional bullying.
GLSEN et al. (2013)	Definition not provided.	Number of items not specified; Bullying ranged from once a day to once or a few times in the last 12 months.	N = 1960; ages 13–18 years old; Only LGBTQ participants, no comparison group.	Ad hoc	1- In the past year: 42% harassed online, 19% cyberbullied via phone call, 27% harassed via text message. 2- One in four (24%) said they had been bullied online because of their sexual orientation or gender expression. 3–30% experienced bullying due to heir sexual orientation or gender expression via text message or online while at home. 4–32% said they had been sexually harassed online. 5–25% had been sexually harassed via text message in the past year. 6–30% experienced sexual harassment online. 7–20% experienced sexual harassment via text message.
Guasp (2012)	Definition not provided.	Number of items not specified; Rating for victimization from never to frequently.	N = 1614; ages 11–19 years old; Only LGBTQ participants, no comparison group.	Ad hoc	1–23% experienced cyberbullying.
Hillier et al. (2010)	Definition not provided.	No cut off score provided.	N = 3134; between ages 14 and 21; Only LGBTQ participants, no comparison group.	Ad hoc	1- Approximately 25% males, 18% female, and 27% gender questioning.
Hinduja and Patchin (2012)	Definition not provided.	No cut off score provided.	N = 4400; ages 11–18.	Representative (of the district)	1- LGBT students reported experiencing more cyberbullying throughout their life time when compared to their heterosexual counterparts (36.4% vs. 20.1%). 2- LGBT students reported being the victim of cyberbullying in the previous 30 days when compared to their heterosexual counterparts (17.3% vs. 6.8%). 3- Non-heterosexual females experience more cyberbullying than their heterosexual counterparts (38.3% vs. 24.6%). 4- Non-heterosexual males experience more cyberbullying than their heterosexual counterparts (30.4% vs. 15.7%).
Kosciw et al. (2012)	Using an electronic medium, including cell phones or Internet communications, to threaten or harm others.	Number of items not specified; Coded: frequently, often, sometimes, rarely.	N = 8584; ages 13–20; Only LGBTQ participants, no comparison group.	Representative	1–55% of LGBTQ youth experienced cyberbullying in the past year.
Kosciw et al. (2016)	Using an electronic medium, such as a mobile phone or Internet communications, to threaten or harm others.	Number of items not specified; Coded: frequently, often, sometimes, rarely.	N = 10,528 students; ages 13 and 21; Only LGBTQ participants, no comparison group.	Representative	1–48.6% of LGBTQ youth experienced cyberbullying at in the past year; 15% experienced it often or frequently.
Mace et al. (2016)	When one person or a group of people repeatedly try to hurt or embarrass another person on purpose using technology, such as computers or mobile phones.	Multiple items; Response coded: less than once a week, once a week, one or two times a week, most days, or every day.	N = 528; ages 18–25 (undergraduate students).	Ad hoc	This study measured perceived social support among heterosexual and non-heterosexual university sample; no information on cyberbullying prevalence was reported.
Priebe and Svedin (2012)	Harassing, threatening, spreading rumors, writing offensive things, and/or disseminating sexual pictures or films electronically or digitally, such as via mobile phone or the Internet.	Multiple items; Response coded: “yes, once,” “yes, several times,” and “no, never.”	N = 3432 high school seniors; ages 16–22.	Representative	1- Non-heterosexual male students reported experiencing more cyberbullying than their heterosexual male counterparts (10.4% to 23.0% vs. 2.0% to 16.8%). 2- Non-heterosexual female students reported experiencing more cyberbullying than their heterosexual female counterparts (3.3% to 23.2% vs. 1.5% to 16.1%).
Ramsey et al. (2016)	Repeated and intentional aggression that is delivered through electronic means.	Multiple items; A single recent cyber victimization score was created from a set of nine items.	N = 634; college students; ages 18–22.	Ad hoc	1- Sexual minority participants reported significantly higher levels of recent cyber victimization compared to heterosexual participants (M = 1.07 vs. M = 1.02).
Rice et al. (2015)	Willful and repeated harm perpetrated against some one else through the use of technology, including computers, cell phones, or other electronic means.	Multiple items; Response coded: never, once or twice, a few times, many times, and every day.	N = 1185 Middle school age (grades 6–8); average age of 12.3 years old.	Representative of the school district (LA)	1- Sexual-minority students were more likely to report cyberbullying victimization than their heterosexual counterparts.
Robinson and Espelage (2011)	Definition not provided.	Single item; Response coded: never, rarely, sometimes often, very often.	N = 13,213 middle and high school students; median of 13 years old for middle school students and median of 16 years old for high school students.	Ad hoc	1- LGBTQ students reported experiencing more cyberbullying; approximately 14.8% more than heterosexual students. 2- Bisexual students reported higher incidents of cyberbullying than heterosexual and LGTQ students; approximately 25.5% more than heterosexual and 10.7% more than LGTQ students.
Schneider et al. (2015)	Acts of intentional and repeated harm delivered through computers, mobile phones, and other electronic devices.	Single item; Dichotomize responses (yes or no).	N = between 16,385 and 17,089; 9–12 grade students.	Ad hoc	1- Sexual minority youth reported experiencing more cyberbullying than their heterosexual counterparts for 2006 (28.6% vs. 13.6%), 2008 (32.8% vs. 14.3%), 2010 (34.6% vs. 18.6%), and 2012 (31.5% vs. 20.3%).
Schneider et al. (2012)	Using the Internet, a phone, or other form of electronic communication to bully, tease, or threaten someone.	Single item.	N = 20,406; 9–12 grade.	Ad hoc	1- Sexual minority youth reported experiencing more cyberbullying than their heterosexual counterparts (33.1% vs. 14.5%). 2- Sexual minority youth reported experiencing more school bullying and cyberbullying combined than their heterosexual counterparts (22.7% vs. 8.5%).
Sinclair et al. (2012)	Cyber harassment through the Internet or text messages.	Single item.	N = 17,366 students; middle and high school students.	Ad hoc	This study reported on the correlates of cyberbullying with academic, substance use, and mental health problems; No prevalence of cyberbullying was provided.
Sterzing et al. (2017)	Definition not provided.	Single item; This never happened to me (0), Once in the past year (1), One or more times a month (2), One or more times a week (3), One or more times a day (5), Not in the past year but it happened (6).	N = 1177; 14–19 years old; Only LGBTQ participants, no comparison group.	Ad hoc	1- Cisgender sexual minority males: 37.2%; Cisgender sexual minority females: 35.6%; Transgender male: 51.4%; Transgender females: 71.3%; Genderqueer- assigned male at birth: 43.8%; Genderqueer- assigned female at birth: 44.8%.
Stoll and Block (2015)	The willful and repeated harm inflicted through electronic mediums.	Multiple items; Responses were dichotomize (never’ = 0 and experienced cyberbullying and some degree = 1).	N = 752; 9–12 grade students.	Ad hoc	1- Non-heterosexual students experienced more than half an additional instance of cyberbullying than their heterosexual peer.
Taylor et al. 2011	Definition not provided.	Single item; Responses were dichotomized (yes or no).	N = 3607; 91.9% high school students and 8.1% post-secondary institution; average of 17.4 years old.	Ad hoc	1- LGBTQ youth reported experiencing more lies and rumors spread by text messaging and Internet than their non-LGBTQ counterparts (27.7% vs. 5.7%).
Varjas et al. (2013)	Bullying that occurs online or in some other form of cyberspace.	No cut off score given (qualitative study).	N = 18 LGB adolescents; grades 9–12, 15–18 years of age; Only LGBTQ participants, no comparison group.	Ad hoc	Qualitative study; no prevalence reported.
Walker (2015)	Using technology tools (such as social networking sites, cell phones, instant message, or other form of technology) to slander, harass, or send messages that result in the person who receives it.	Multiple items; Response coded: never, one time, two to four times, five to seven times, or more than seven times. Dichotomous score (1 = never and 2 = one or more times).	N = 438 undergraduate students; ages 18–24.	Ad hoc	1- Non-heterosexual participants experienced more cyberbullying than their heterosexual counterparts (22.9% vs. 9.5%). 2- Percentages of specific forms of cyberbullying ranges ranged from .0% to 29.9% for heterosexual participants and 5.7% to 43.2% for non-Heterosexual participants.
Wensley and Campbell (2012)	When one person or a group of people try to hurt or embarrass another person, using their computer or mobile phone; the person bullying has some advantage over the person targeted.	Multiple items; One incident of cyber bullying sufficient to qualify as being a victim.	N = 528 undergraduate students; 18–25 years old.	Ad hoc	1- Non-heterosexual participants experienced more cyberbullying than their heterosexual counterparts (10.8% vs. 15.4%). 2- Non-heterosexual males experienced more cyberbullying than their male heterosexual counterparts (11.1% vs. 35.3%). 3- Non-heterosexual females experienced more cyberbullying than their female heterosexual counterparts (10.5% vs. 11%).