As Internet use by children and teenagers increases, so do concerns about their online safety. Providing a safe environment requires an in-depth understanding of the types and prevalence of online risks young Internet users face, as well as of the solutions most effective in mitigating these risks.
Despite the very significant amount of research that has been conducted regarding these risks, improving child/youth Internet safety remains a challenge. In part, this is because definitions of terms and categories relevant to online safety (such as “cyberbullying”) often vary, making the comparison of statistics and findings among sources imprecise. In addition, there are complex overlaps among different online safety subtopics. Overall, these factors can make identifying the specific gaps in existing research and knowledge difficult. If these gaps can be better identified and filled, a data-based understanding of issues facing youth could play a key role in driving policy decisions regarding online safety.
 To address this issue, the present paper aims to provide 1) an overview of existing online safety research across a wide range of categories, 2) an analysis of major findings, 3) an identification of knowledge gaps, and 4) a set of recommendations for specific areas of research that can further the policy dialog regarding online safety. 

 
 CYBERBULLYING

 Some instances of cyberbullying are clearly identifiable, given the language and tactics used to harass and/or intimidate a victim online. Given the range of problematic/harmful behaviors involved, however, it can sometimes be difficult to pinpoint when an action crosses the line from poor conduct to a more serious – and possibly criminal – offense.1 Nevertheless, researchers generally characterize cyberbullying as actions using a technological medium to intimidate or convey an intent to harm. The communication often involves repetition of actions, and a power imbalance between the victim and perpetrator.
In discussions of cyberbullying, repetition implies that the communication is repeated and harm is intentionally inflicted—it is not typically an isolated, one-time occurrence.3 Power imbalance broadly refers to the dynamic that gives a bully power over the victim(s). In traditional, in-person bullying, power imbalance often comes in the form of physical strength, size, or other strategic advantage. In Internet bullying, power imbalance can be conceptualized in a variety of ways. For example, a bully might possess a greater familiarity with the Internet than does the victim. The bully is also able to preserve anonymity: physical strength is not necessary to maintain power, as a cyberbully is able to shield his or her identity from the victim(s) for a prolonged period of time. 4 This ability to conceal one’s identity can also lead to cyberbullying by people who might not have engaged in bullying in traditional contexts. Additionally, the fact that content in cyberspace is difficult or impossible to delete can also contribute to a victim’s feelings of powerlessness or humiliation, which can sometimes deter them from seeking help from an adult.5
There are many similarities between the motives and natures of traditional bullying and cyberbullying. Some researchers point to the offline presence of many of the same risks youth face on the Internet. For example, there is “often a nexus between school bullying and cyberbullying.”6 The strong overlap in motives between traditional in-person bullying and cyberbullying—namely in seeking revenge and wielding power— has led many researchers to suggest implementing school and community-wide strategies to address the underlying climate and causes of peer bullying. Bullying might start offline and continue online or vice versa, though in some cases cyberbullies and victims do not know each other in the offline world. School and community-based initiatives to improve the relationships and attitudes youth have with and toward each other are thought of as potentially effective prevention measures, though more research on which particular programs and strategies are most effective is still needed.7