Behind the Screens: A Systematic Literature Review on Barriers and Mitigating Strategies for Combating Cyberbullying

Abstract

With the increased availability of the internet, technology, and social media, the incidence of cyberbullying has escalated globally. Cyberbullying is becoming a significant factor that affects people’s lives, leading them to experience anxiety, depression, compulsive behaviour, and more. Therefore, it is worth exploring the various forms of cyberbullying, the barriers to its prevention, and preventive strategies. Previous research has primarily concentrated on challenges, factors, and impacts for adolescents; however, the rise in cyberbullying among adults is not explored enough. Therefore, this study intended to perform a systematic literature review focused on adults to identify the forms (types) and barriers that create challenges to applying cyberbullying prevention strategies effectively. This study followed the PRISMA model guidelines and used the Scopus online database for the literature selection process. In this effort, this research reviewed 32 studies selected from 9814 articles examined for this purpose, all published between January 2019 and January 2025. The findings identified eight themes on cyberbullying forms, six barriers to its prevention, and seven preventive measures related to cyberbullying. The outcomes of this research will deepen the understanding of various issues for adults engaged in education and work-related fields, offering valuable insights to parents, guardians, researchers, policymakers, educators, social media companies, and governments.

1. Introduction

With over five billion people worldwide using the internet [1], it has become a vital component of daily life and modern society. The swift progress of information and communication technologies (ICTs) has reshaped human interactions, altering how we communicate, work, and socialise [2]. The widespread availability of digital devices, such as smartphones, laptops, and personal digital assistants, has further integrated technology into our everyday lives, rendering digital connectivity nearly everywhere [3].

The internet is one of the most widely used communication platforms, embraced by people of all ages, especially young students [2]. Millennials, in particular, frequently utilise these technologies and are often at the forefront of adopting new tools for social and academic interactions [4]. However, this heightened exposure to technology also introduces various risks, such as vulnerability to misinformation, political manipulation, exposure to explicit material, and cyberbullying-related activities [5]. The data presented in Figure 1 indicate that young adults aged 18 to 24 constitute 19% of active internet users. Additionally, over a third (35.6%) of online users globally are aged 25 to 34, while 24% are between 35 and 44 years old. The remaining 21.4% are above the age of 45. This highlights these age groups as the most vulnerable to both the benefits and risks of digital communication. For a comprehensive age distribution of internet users worldwide, refer to Figure 1. The extent of individuals’ use of ICT is recognised as a significant factor in their exposure to risk, with young people particularly at risk of cyberbullying [2].

The growth of online connectivity has led to new types of aggression, particularly cyberbullying (CB) [7,8]. CB is generally understood as the action of individuals or groups who repeatedly send aggressive or violent messages aimed at causing harm or distress to others through electronic or digital means [9,10]. This aggression occurs through various online communication channels, such as emails, blogs, instant messaging, and text messages [7,11,12,13,14,15,16]. Although much existing research has concentrated on adolescents, CB among adults is rapidly emerging as a critical issue requiring an academic and policy focus [17]. Adult CB can take many forms, including online harassment, cyberstalking, doxxing, and defamatory attacks, often occurring via social media, email, and various digital platforms [18]. The effects of CB can be significant, resulting in psychological distress, damage to one’s reputation, and even withdrawal from online and offline interactions [19].

Although the incidence of CB among adults is rising, numerous barriers hinder effective intervention and reporting [20]. Victims are often deterred by fears of retaliation, a lack of confidence in law enforcement, and doubts about the effectiveness of reporting systems [21]. Furthermore, the legal and organisational frameworks for combating CB are insufficient, leaving victims without clear options [22]. Several prevention strategies have been suggested, such as workplace and institutional policies, digital literacy initiatives, and enhancing legal protections [23,24,25,26]. Nonetheless, the effectiveness of these approaches varies depending on the context and remains mainly unexamined in the current literature [27].

Several studies have examined various dimensions of CB, including its prevalence, effects, influencing factors, causes, consequences, and prevention strategies. Shahzad et al. [28] conducted an in-depth study that analysed 27 peer-reviewed journal articles from 2010 to 2023 to evaluate the factors influencing CB among citizens, highlighting its causes, consequences, and prevention measures, demonstrating CB’s complex nature. Another systematic review by Saleem et al. [29] analysed its prevalence, effects, and a theoretical framework based on 50 secondary studies, summarising the state of CB research as of November 2020. A separate review conducted by Nocentini et al. [30] focused on anti-bullying strategies and ICT-mediated approaches, revealing that digital tools are underutilised in efforts to combat CB. Furthermore, a systematic literature review by Shaikh et al. [2] explored the causes of CB among university students, pointing out the need for tailored interventions. While these studies provide valuable insights, they address different aspects of CB separately, highlighting a research gap in understanding the barriers and challenges along with prevention strategies for CB to understand how these barriers hinder the effectiveness of prevention strategies.

The identified research gap is based on the existing literature, and we formulated relevant research questions accordingly, discussed in Section 2.1.1. This study sought to fill these gaps by systematically reviewing the literature from the Scopus database published between January 2019 and January 2025. By synthesising current research, it aimed to provide a thorough understanding of the forms of CB encountered by adults, analyse the barriers and challenges to addressing CB, and evaluate prevention strategies for managing CB in adults. Furthermore, it identifies significant knowledge gaps and provides recommendations for educators, policymakers, and institutions to develop more effective intervention strategies while acknowledging existing obstacles.

1.1. CB Forms

CB may take many forms; the following are the forms of CB that are commonly practised:

• Cyberstalking: Sending hurtful messages via online communication [31].
• Denigration: Circulating false information to harm someone’s reputation [32].
• Doxxing/Outing: A gendered communication process in which one or more individuals (doxxer/doxxers) seek and publicly share private information about another person (subject/target) through online channels without their consent, making the individual vulnerable to exposure [33,34].
• Exclusion: Removing an individual from an online social group [35].
• Flaming: Employing vulgar language in online communication [36,37].
• Frapping: Utilising someone else’s social media accounts and pretending to be the actual owner while posting on their behalf, including unsuitable content. This is performed solely to make others believe that the owner has shared inappropriate material [35].
• Harassment: Victimisation through sending insulting, rude, and offensive texts [35].
• Masquerade: Disguising themselves as another person or, in other terms, concealing their true identity [38].
• Trolling: Deliberately provoking people to argue or fight through negative communication [5].

1.2. Topic Conceptualisation

Before proceeding, it is crucial to define and outline the available definitions of CB. Topic conceptualisation offers comprehensive information on the subject. It is important to obtain a “broad conceptualisation of what is known about the topic” [37]. Therefore,

Table 1. An overview of cyberbullying definitions.

Cyberbullying	Source
“willful and repeated harm inflicted through the use of computers, cell phones, or other electronic devices”.	[39]
“the use of electronic communication technologies to bully others”.	[40]
“An aggressive, intentional act carried out by a group or individual, using electronic forms of contact, repeatedly and overtime against a victim who cannot easily defend him or herself”.	[41]
“Being cruel to others by sending or posting harmful material or engaging in other forms of social aggression using the Internet or other digital technologies”.	[42]
“intentional harmful behaviour carried out by a group or individuals, repeated over time, using modern digital technology to aggress against a victim who is unable to defend herself/himself”.	[43]

summarises the working definitions of CB proposed by several authors for topic conceptualisation.

Given the widespread prevalence of CB globally, it is essential to pinpoint the obstacles and issues that impede CB prevention and mitigation efforts. This research intended to systematically review and synthesise the existing literature regarding the barriers to tackling CB and its prevention and mitigation strategies. By examining secondary data from previous studies, this research aimed to highlight the primary challenges in fighting CB and assess what limits the effectiveness of different intervention strategies.

2. Materials and Methods

A systematic literature review (SLR) consists of three phases: “Planning”, “Conducting”, and “Reporting” [44]. Various authors have conducted systematic reviews differently [8,27,45,46]. However, this study adopted the “3-stage review step” method shown in

Table 2. Systematic literature review activities.

SLR Steps	SLR Activities
Planning Review	Formulating Research Questions
	Develop Review Protocol
	Establishing Data Source
Conducting Review	Identify Appropriate Studies
	Select Primary Studies
	Evaluate Quality of Study
	Extract Required Data
	Synthesise Data
Documenting Review	Write a Review Report

[47]. This research adhered closely to the methodological guidelines set forth by Kitchenham and Shaikh [2,44] to perform a systematic literature review.

2.1. Phase 1: Planning the Review

2.1.1. Formulating Research Questions

The Introduction (Section 1) indicates that the existing literature highlights considerable research on CB in adolescents; adults have received significantly less attention. Additionally, current anti-bullying policies and technology-based interventions lack effective digital tools to address CB in adults. Furthermore, the existing strategies against CB are significantly influenced by contextual factors that have not been deeply explored previously. Therefore, this research aimed to fill these gaps by investigating specific research questions (mentioned below) to enhance the understanding of CB in adults and improve intervention strategies:

• RQ.1: What are the various forms of CB experienced by adults?
• RQ.2: What are the significant barriers and challenges in effectively addressing and responding to CB in adults, as identified in the existing literature?
• RQ.3: What prevention and mitigation strategies have been studied to reduce CB incidents among adults?
• RQ.4: How do these barriers hinder the effectiveness of prevention and mitigation strategies for CB in adults?

In alignment with the aforementioned research questions, the following objectives were established to achieve the aim of this review:

• Objective 1: To explore the multiple forms of CB encountered by adults.
• Objective 2: To identify the key barriers and challenges that hinder efforts to address and respond to CB in adults.
• Objective 3: To examine the existing CB prevention and mitigation strategies for adults as reported in the literature.
• Objective 4: To analyse how different barriers hinder the effectiveness of prevention and mitigation strategies, assess their impact, and suggest solutions for the improved implementation of CB policies for adults.

The whole process followed in this study is illustrated in Figure 2.

2.1.2. Search Strategy

For identifying the literature, the Scopus database was used with the keyword “cyberbullying” and search strings based on “cyberbullying AND challenges”, “cyberbullying AND barriers”, “cyberbullying AND security threat”, “cyberbullying AND prevention”, “cyberbullying AND mitigation”, and “cyberbullying AND adults AND workplace”, utilising an advanced search technique within TITLE-ABS-KEY. Further filtration was required to ensure the quality of the review; psychology, arts and humanities, and computer science were selected as subjects. Inclusion and exclusion criteria were predefined to find the appropriate literature for the study, and any redundancy found was removed after multiple screenings and upon mutual consensus among the authors.

2.1.3. Establishing Data Source

• Range of Research Paper

A total of 9814 results were identified in the database based on the keyword and search strings. The systematic literature review performed in this study covered the published literature from January 2019 to January 2025, reducing the number to 6843 results. No studies from 2019 met the criteria outlined in this study concerning barriers and prevention.

2.

Inclusion Criteria

The inclusion criteria set for this study included the following:

• Studies published from January 2019 to January 2025.
• Studies that were published only in journal articles.
• Studies conducted on CB.
• Studies published in the English language.
• The study should have addressed barriers or challenges and/or prevention or mitigation strategies to address CB.
• Studies where keywords (CB among adults, CB among university students, CB among college students, CB in higher education, and CB in workplaces) were found in the title, abstract, and keywords.

3.

Exclusion Criteria

Studies were excluded based on the following criteria:

• Studies presented as notes or at conferences, seminars, and symposiums.
• Book chapters, news articles, short paper summaries, abstracts, and incomplete studies.
• Repeated/duplicated articles found from the defined data sources and journals.
• Studies not reported in the English language.
• Studies that did not match the quality criteria.

2.2. Phase 2: Conducting the Review

2.2.1. Study Selection

The literature screening adhered to the PRISMA framework and was conducted with the author’s agreement. Studies were chosen based on a predefined set of criteria (Section 2.1.3) to enhance the quality of the systematic review. The process began by retrieving search results from the database. The initial 6843 studies were filtered by subject areas—psychology, arts and humanities, and computer science—and restricted to English-language publications, resulting in 4110 studies. The Endnote 20 tool was employed for screening by utilising downloaded RIS files from Scopus. In the first phase, using the “find duplicate” function, 627 duplicates were removed, leaving 3483 studies. Additionally, sorting through the studies using the same tool eliminated book chapters and conference papers, reducing the count to 1621. Before reviewing full texts, titles and abstracts were initially screened. The studies were then assessed according to the established inclusion and exclusion criteria. After completing the full-text review of 210 studies, 32 potential articles were identified.

2.2.2. Quality Assessment

Every paper was assessed according to the previously discussed criteria, and each author was assigned an equal number of articles for the independent evaluation of the studies. In the event of disagreements, the authors deliberated on the issues until a consensus was reached.

2.2.3. Data Extraction

The studies included in this literature review were thoroughly evaluated to gather necessary information, with the results formally recorded for an overview of all the research. Key attributes identified in this study included the authors, publication title, year of the study, country, research methodology, sample, forms, barriers, and CB preventions.

2.2.4. Validity Determination Process

The guidelines set forth by Brereton et al. [47] were carefully followed to ensure a fair selection process and prevent data extraction, study selection, and article classification inaccuracies. Factors considered in the “Validity Process” mostly concerned “Study Selection”, “inaccurate data extraction”, the “incorrect classification of studies”, the “research methodology”, and “Author Biasness”. Therefore, two authors classified the studies according to the recommendations [47]. They collaborated closely in the classification process, discussing each study thoroughly to prevent conflicts. Classification decisions were made based on the established recommendations and through mutual consensus between the authors.

2.3. Phase 3: Reporting the Review

The selection process is illustrated in Figure 3, where the PRISMA flowchart visualises the number of studies screened at each stage [48]. The entire selection was based on the exclusion and inclusion criteria for the publications included in this SLR.

3. Results

Appendix A (

Table A1. Detailed information on all the elements covered in this study.

No.	Source	Year	Country	Methodology	Gender	Participants	Age (Years)	Forms of Cyberbullying (CB)	Barriers and Challenges in Addressing CB	Prevention of CB
1.	[62]	2023	China	Quantitative	Males Females	845 College Students	18.7 (Avg)	Exploitative CB	-Psychological and Behavioural Risk Factors -Gender Differences -Cultural Context	-Education on Risks of Self-Disclosure -Targeted Interventions for Males -Leveraging Cultural Context -Promoting Social Support -Culturally Sensitive Approaches
2.	[75]	2020	Canada	Qualitative	N/A	1925 Undergraduates	N/A	Deceptive CB	-Lack of Awareness -Anonymity -Policy Gaps -Victim Blaming -Cultural Norms -Reporting Mechanisms -Bystander Intervention -Technological Solutions	-Awareness and Education -Policy Development -Protecting Privacy -Technology-Based Solutions -Empowering Better Choices and Responses -University Culture -Disciplinary Measures
3.	[74]	2021	United Kingdom	Qualitative	Comments from 34 Popular Female UK Lifestyle Influencers’ YouTube Channels	4,626,706 Comments from 2,062,265 Users	N/A	The General Context of Bullying and CB	-Self-Blame -Reluctance to Seek Formal Support	-Supportive Online Communities -Encouraging Empathy and Support -Public Discussions by Influencers -Generalisation and Abstraction -Criticising Bullies
4.	[53]	2023	Australia	Quantitative	Males Females	270 Australian University Students	18–29	Public Shaming CB	-Empathic Distress -Empathic Anger -Compassion -Gender Differences -Perceived Costs of Defending	-Empathy Training -Channelling Empathic Anger -Compassion Training -Gender-Specific Approaches -Reducing Perceived Costs of Defending
5.	[73]	2024	China	Quantitative	Females	1673 College Students	16+	CB Behaviours	-Anonymity and Virtuality -Lack of Positive Coping Strategies -Emotional Coping Strategies	-Promoting Positive Coping Strategies -Encouraging Support-Seeking -Combating Online Rumours and Biased News -Government and Media Collaboration -Reducing Emotional Coping
6.	[67]	2024	Portugal	Quantitative	Females Heterosexual Bisexual Gay or Lesbian	Study 1: 485 Students Study 2: 952 Students	16–34 13–30	Multi-Faceted CB	-High Prevalence -Psychological Distress -Lack of Awareness -Social and Family Support -Minority Groups -Bystander Intervention -Overlap with Traditional Bullying	-Social Support -Awareness Programmes -Bystander Intervention -Targeted Interventions for Vulnerable Groups -Comprehensive Bullying Prevention Programmes -Teacher and School Involvement -Promoting Positive Online Behaviour
7.	[76]	2020	Austria	Qualitative	N/A	61 College Students	N/A	Malicious CB	-Escalation and Intensity -Role Switching -Psychological Impact -Legal and Ethical Issues -Lack of Immediate Support -Interconnected Spaces	-Legal Awareness -Co-Designing Solutions -Promoting Empathy and Respect -Digital Platforms’ Role (Emergency Button)
8.	[77]	2020	India	Quantitative	N/A	365 Participants	15–25	CB in General	-Over-Reliance on Security Measures -Gender Differences -Age Factor -Family and Institutional Control -Automatic Monitoring -Regulatory and Legal Norms -Cultural and Demographic Differences -Response Rate and Data Collection -Perception-Based Study	-Targeted Prevention and Intervention -Community and Institutional Supervision -Awareness Campaigns -Security Education -Monitoring and Reporting -Regulatory Framework -Health-Related Messages -Public Awareness -Toll-Free Helpline
9.	[63]	2020	Spain	Quantitative	Males Females	1282 Students	18–46	Psychological CB	-Emotional Problems -University Adaptation -Lack of Awareness and Reporting -Complex Relationships -Institutional Climate	-Addressing Emotional Problems (Implementing Screening Systems to Detect Emotional Distress) -Enhancing University Adaptation -Developing Emotional Intelligence -Creating a Positive Institutional Climate -Promoting Social Skills and Peer Relationships -Raising Awareness and Education -Encouraging Reporting and Intervention
10.	[64]	2023	Nepal	Qualitative	Males Females	20 Participants	26–41	Workplace CB	-Lack of Awareness and Sensitivity -Inadequate Legal Framework -Administrative Failure -Fear and Social Stigma -Digital Literacy -Lack of Effective Coping Mechanism	-Awareness and Education -Training for Teachers -Support Systems -Administrative Action -Filtering and Privacy Settings -Ignoring and Deactivating Accounts -Changing Workplaces -Family’s Involvement -Collaborative Efforts
11.	[54]	2020	Romania	Qualitative	Males Females	108 Psychologists and CB Counselling Experts	N/A	Aggressive and Sexual CB	-Convincing Victims to Speak Up -Regaining Self-Confidence -Low Reporting Rates -Lack of Clear Conceptual Boundaries -Complexity of Prevention Programmes -Digital Literacy -Family Involvement -Online Counselling	-Digital Literacy Courses -Family Involvement -Online Programmes -Mandatory and Permanent Programmes -Student Involvement -Counselling and Support -Online Counselling Platforms -Information Campaigns -Teacher Responsibilities
12.	[55]	2023	China	Quantitative	Males Females	269 College Students	18–25	Social Anxiety CB	-Impact on Mental Health -Appearance Anxiety -Self-Esteem Issues -Gender Differences -Lack of Direct Predictive Effect	-Family Involvement -Educational Interventions -Encouraging Positive Self-Esteem -Awareness and Training -Support Systems
13.	[72]	2021	Jordan	Qualitative	Females	104 Undergraduate Students	18–20	Electronic Dating Violence (EDV)	-Gender Stereotypes and Social Norms -Fear of Repercussions -Lack of Support Systems -Cultural and Social Context -Technological Vulnerabilities Economic and Family Circumstances	-Awareness and Education -Support Systems -Technical Measures -Legal and Policy Interventions -Coping Strategies (Teaching Women Coping Mechanisms to Deal With Dating Violence, Such as Seeking Emotional Support, Adjusting Expectations, and Utilising Distractions Like Shopping, Exercise, and Sleeping; Encouraging Victims to Report All Types of Abuse and Not Remain Silent Due to Fear of Shame and Social Stigma)
14.	[68]	2023	Canada	Qualitative	Mixed Males Females Non-Binary Not Listed Prefer Not to Say	1073 Participants	18–25	Bystander-Influenced CB	-Distraction -Ambiguity -Relationship -Pluralistic Ignorance -Diffusion of Responsibility -Lack of Competence -Audience Inhibition -Costs Exceed Rewards	-Educational Programmes -Empowering Bystanders -Promoting Collective Responsibility -Encouraging Private Interventions -Addressing Barriers
15.	[56]	2023	China	Quantitative	Males Females	1209 College Students	20.17 (Avg)	CB Behaviour	-Higher Incidence of CB -Sense of Security -Gender Differences	-Enhancing Sense of Security -Gender-Specific Interventions -Awareness and Education
16.	[69]	2024	United States of America	Quantitative	Males Females Not Identified	434 Undergraduate Students	18–24	Role-Based CB	-Moral Disengagement -Gender Differences -Self-Blame Among Victims -Anonymity and Accessibility -Overlapping Roles	-Reducing Moral Disengagement -Promoting Prosocial Behaviours -Educational Programmes -Self-Efficacy Training
17.	[57]	2024	Indonesia	Quantitative	Males Females	127 Internet Users	16–27	Bystander-Influenced CB	-Anonymity of the Bully -Widespread Nature -Detection Difficulty -Bystander Inaction -Gender Differences	-Promoting Personal Peacefulness -Gender-Specific Interventions -Raising Awareness
18.	[78]	2024	Australia	Qualitative	N/A	31 Popular Digital Platforms	N/A	Public Figure CB	-Higher Thresholds for Intervention -Inconsistent Policies -Lack of Clear Definitions -Ethical and Risk Assessment Gaps -Resource Disparities -Withdrawal from Public Life -Quality of Public Discourse	-Equal Protection Policies -Transparent Practices -Rigorous Risk Assessment -Regulatory Pressure -Public Awareness and Education -Ethical Frameworks
19.	[49]	2024	Pakistan	Quantitative	Males Females	1000 Social Media Users	18–50+	Personal CB	-Negative Emotions -Public Humiliation -Fear and Intimidation -Difficulty in Detecting Bullying Content -Psychological Impacts	-Regulated Use of Social Media -Social Media Detoxification -Awareness of Online Information Disclosure -Privacy Concerns as a Motivator
20.	[79]	2023	Canada	Qualitative	N/A	20 Participants (Principals, Counsellors, Technology Consultants, Researchers, Police Officers, etc.)	N/A	CB	-Overestimation of Youth Maturity -Lack of Comprehensive Research -Resource and Financial Constraints -Need for Continuous Education	-Educational Efforts -Digital Citizenship Programming -Social Skills Training -Family Involvement -Restorative Conferencing
21.	[71]	2021	Australia	Quantitative	Females	92 University Students	18–48	Weight-Based CB	-Influence of Negative Comments -Normative Social Influence -Weight Bias	-Promoting Positive Comments -Developing Better Protocols -Encouraging Body-Positive Content -Educational Programmes -Support Systems
22.	[50]	2022	Pakistan	Quantitative	Males Females	470 Administrative Employees	19–60	Workplace CB (WCB)	-Anonymity and Scale -Boundary-Blurring Nature -Cultural Acceptance -Lack of Awareness and Policies -Impact on Psychological Well-Being and Work Engagement	-Awareness and Training -Policy Development -Support Programmes -Collaboration with Legal Authorities -Promoting Psychological Well-Being and Work Meaningfulness
23.	[70]	2024	Malaysia	Quantitative	Males Females Prefer Not to Say	309 Participants	18–30	CB Among Adults	-Lack of Awareness and Understanding -Limited Reporting and Help-Seeking -Sociodemographic Influences -Heavy Social Media Use -Family Involvement -Educational Environment	-Targeted Interventions and Policies -Limiting Social Media Usage -Educational Programmes -Family Involvement -Digital Literacy and Cyber Etiquette -Collaboration Among Stakeholders -Use of Digital Interventions
24.	[51]	2023	Indonesia	Quantitative	Males Females	958 Social Media Users	18–40	CB in Social Media Scale (CSMS)	N/A	-Screening and Assessment with CSMS -Guiding Interventions -Raising Awareness -Informing Policy
25.	[52]	2022	China	Quantitative	Males Females	928 Internet Users	16–50	Perpetrator–Victim CB	N/A	-Enhancing Emotion Regulation -Strengthening Constraints -Promoting Morality -Cross-Sectoral Response -Support for CB Victims -Clear Definitions and Policies -Educational Programmes
26.	[58]	2021	Spain	Quantitative	Males Females	848 Participants	21–62	Emotionally Driven CB	N/A	-Emotional Intelligence Training -Attention to Emotional Competencies -Gender- and Age-Specific Interventions -Awareness and Education -Support Systems
27.	[59]	2022	China	Quantitative	Males Females	660 College Students	17–21	Comparison-Based CB	N/A	-Reducing Cyber Upward Social Comparison -Enhancing Online Social Support -Education and Awareness -Promoting Positive Online Behaviour -Interventions to Reduce Moral Justification -Strengthening Online Regulations
28.	[60]	2022	Spain	Quantitative	Males Females	1122 Bachelor’s Students	20.82 (Avg)	Educator Response CB	N/A	-Active Coping Strategies (Such as Seeking Support From Peers, Parents, and Teachers and Calling a Bullying Helpline) -Teacher Training -Reflecting on Personal Factors -Deconstructing Moral Disengagement -Encouraging Positive Traits -Comprehensive Education Programmes -Creating a Supportive Environment
29.	[65]	2024	Türkiye	Quantitative	Males Females	392 University Students	18–46	Verbal and Symbolic CB	N/A	-Educational Programmes -Institutional Support Mechanisms -Peer Support Networks -Promoting Courtesy and Respect -Stricter Laws and Policies -Active Bystander Intervention -Awareness Campaigns -Monitoring and Updating Measures
30.	[61]	2024	Jordan	Quantitative	Males Females	872 Academic Staff	30–50+	Workplace CB	N/A	-Enhancing Social Capital -Developing Occupational Safety Policies -Promoting Cooperation and Belonging -Raising Awareness and Education -Implementing Support Systems -Encouraging Ethical Leadership
31.	[80]	2025	New Zealand	Applied Research	N/A	N/A	N/A	Technological CB Prevention	-Nuanced and Evolving Language -Timely Interventions -Balancing Safety and Privacy -Customization and Flexibility -Scalability and Integration	-Serenity Chat Application -Real-Time Detection and Feedback (Serenity) -Customisable Tolerance Levels -Custom Lexicon -Guardian Monitoring -Nudge Mechanism -Scalability and Integration
32.	[66]	2023	USA	Mixed (Qualitative and Quantitative)	Males Females	25 University Faculty Members	18+	Workplace CB	-No Clear CB Policy -Retaliation -Lack Of Trust -Fear -Knowing Nothing Will Be Done -Hassle To Report -Intimidation -Shame -Expectations To Handle Situation -Lack Of Awareness Of Reporting	-Clear CB Policies -Anonymous Reporting System -CB Committees -Mandatory Training -Awareness Campaigns And Workshops -Anti-CB Software to be installed on campus computers and virtual networks

) features a matrix summarising 32 studies regarding their author, publication year, countries, methods, gender studied, ages studied, sample, forms of cyberbullying studied, barriers/challenges identified, and prevention strategies identified. This matrix serves as a foundation for addressing the research questions posed in this SLR with supporting evidence. In total, 32 studies were conducted across 16 countries, as shown in blue (light to dark based on the frequency of publications) in Figure 4. The most significant number of studies took place in China, accounting for six. Except for Africa, South America, and Antarctica, studies were conducted on all other continents, with the majority located in Asia.

The summary in Appendix A (Table A1) indicates that most studies utilised a quantitative research design (22), with qualitative research (9) being the second most common approach. In contrast, only one study employed a mixed-method approach. There were 18,898 participants across these 32 studies, representing learners from various educational levels and people from various occupations, including college and university students, psychologists, CB counselling experts, administrative staff, police officers, principals, and academic personnel. Additionally, one of the studies incorporated 4,626,706 comments from 2,062,265 users across 32 popular digital platforms. Participants ranged in age from 13 to 62 years. This SLR primarily targeted adults; however, some studies also featured participants starting in adolescence and continuing up to around 30 years of age. Consequently, those studies were incorporated into the review.

Figure 5 illustrates the distribution of publications based on gender. Most of the studies published involve a combination of male and female participants [49,50,51,52,53,54,55,56,57,58,59,60,61,62,63,64,65,66], accounting for 56.2%. Mixed-gender studies [67,68,69,70] and those focused solely on females [71,72,73,74] each represented 12.5% of the total. Additionally, a significant portion of studies, comprising 18.7%, did not specify any gender [75,76,77,78,79,80]. Among the studies that included both male and female participants, a large proportion of 82.3% reported a higher number of female victims of CB as compared to their male counterparts.

3.1. Forms of CB

In response to RQ.1, “What are the various forms of CB experienced by adults?”, these studies identified eight themes derived from the categorisation of the CB forms observed in the various studies, each featuring unique traits and consequences for both individuals and society, as shown in

Table 3. Forms of cyberbullying.

No.	Themes	Forms of CB	Source
1.	General and Contextual CB	CB in General CB Behaviour	[56,73,74,77]
2.	Role- and Influence-Based CB	Perpetrator–Victim CB Bystander-Influenced CB Role-Based CB	[52,57,68,69]
3.	Youth, Social Media, and Educational CB	CB among Adults CB in Social Media Scale (CSMS) Educator Response CB	[51,60,70,79]
4.	Workplace and Professional CB	Workplace CB (WCB)	[50,61,64,66]
5.	Psychological and Emotionally Driven CB	Psychological CB Emotionally Driven CB Social Anxiety Comparison-Based CB	[55,58,59,63]
6.	Aggressive, Malicious, and Exploitative CB	Aggressive and Sexual CB Malicious CB Electronic Dating Violence (EDV) Exploitative CB Deceptive CB	[54,62,72,75,76]
7.	Public, Personal, and Character-Based CB	Public Figure CB Public Shaming CB Personal CB Weight-Based CB Verbal and Symbolic CB	[49,53,65,71,78]
8.	Multi-Faceted CB and CB Prevention	Multi-Faceted CB Technological CB Prevention	[67,80]

.

General and contextual CB [56,73,74,77] covers a broad range of definitions, behaviours, and patterns characterising this issue. Grasping these essential elements is crucial for recognising and effectively responding to online harassment. The dynamics of role- and influence-based CB [52,57,68,69] involve intricate relationships among perpetrators, victims, and bystanders. The involvement of bystanders, whether they take action or stay silent, greatly impacts the intensity of CB situations. Additionally, some people may alternate between being victims and perpetrators, adding complexity to intervention efforts.

The issues faced by adults regarding social media and CB in educational settings [51,60,70,79] underscore the rising concern about online harassment among people, particularly on social media and in institutions. Educators and institutions must actively combat and prevent CB, as individuals are significantly engaged in digital environments. Workplace CB [50,61,64,66] refers to digital harassment occurring in professional environments, which can adversely affect employees’ mental well-being, productivity, and the overall culture of the workplace. This type of CB can take various forms, including targeted harassment, social exclusion, or harm to one’s reputation.

Psychologically and emotionally motivated CB [55,58,59,63] highlights the severe emotional and mental health effects it has on victims. Aggressive, malicious, and exploitative CB [54,62,72,75,76] encompasses detrimental tactics like sexual harassment, deception, and electronic dating violence. These methods are especially harmful because they involve intentional manipulation and coercion and may carry legal repercussions.

Furthermore, CB can be classified into three categories: public, personal, and character-based [49,53,65,71,78]. It typically focuses on individuals based on their identity, physical appearance, or social standing. Public figures, people who experience body shaming, and those targeted for personal grievances often suffer lasting damage to their reputation and psychological well-being. A comprehensive, multi-faceted, and preventative strategy [67,80] for addressing CB acknowledges its intricate nature, as it frequently overlaps with different categories. Technological prevention methods like monitoring tools, AI-powered moderation, and digital literacy education are essential for decreasing CB instances and promoting safer online communities.

3.2. Barriers and Challenges Identified

In this section, findings are showcased for the second research question, RQ.2, “What are the significant barriers and challenges in effectively addressing and responding to CB in adults, as identified in existing literature?” The barriers hindering CB reporting and the challenges in addressing them were identified from the literature reviewed for this SLR. To enhance comprehension and synthesise the identified barriers, these obstacles were categorised into six primary categories, i.e., ‘‘Psychological Barriers’’, ‘‘Social and Cultural Barriers’’, ‘‘Awareness and Reporting Challenges’’, “Legal and Policy related Barriers”, “Technological Barriers”, and ‘‘Prevention and Intervention Barriers’’. The categorisation of these barriers and challenges relied on their nature, relevance, and context discussed in the existing literature. Figure 6 presents a conceptual map illustrating the CB barriers and challenges that prevent CB victims from addressing or reporting these crimes.

3.2.1. Psychological Barriers

This SLR identified psychological barriers that hinder victims from addressing CB effectively. Various psychological and behavioural risk factors [49,62,67,76], such as attachment anxiety [62] and emotional difficulties [63], heighten individuals’ vulnerability to CB. Victims often engage in self-blame [74] and moral disengagement [69], which leads to the internalisation of negative experiences and discourages them from seeking assistance. Responses to CB are influenced by empathetic distress, anger, and compassion [74], sometimes resulting in emotional exhaustion.

The intersection with traditional bullying [67] complicates intervention, as victims may already be enduring persistent harassment. Factors like gender differences [62] and appearance anxiety [55] exacerbate self-esteem challenges, increasing psychological distress. Fear and social stigma [64] deter victims from reporting incidents, while worrying about repercussions [72] makes them hesitant to confront their aggressors. Rebuilding self-confidence [54] poses a significant obstacle, as CB severely affects mental health [55], prompting withdrawal from social engagements.

Negative emotions, distractions, and public humiliation [49,66,68] intensify feelings of insecurity, while the impact of negative remarks [71] can lead to long-term psychological damage. A sense of security [56] is essential for victims to cope [64,73], yet the lack of immediate support [76] intensifies their sense of isolation.

3.2.2. Social and Cultural Barriers

When people notice certain behaviours in their communities and surroundings, they often adopt those behaviours, believing that if everyone else is doing it, it must be appropriate [2]. Social and cultural barriers arise from the relationships among individuals and the environments in which they grow up [81]. The current SLR found that one significant type of barrier impeding the understanding and addressing of challenging behaviours was social and cultural barriers. Victim-blaming [75], gender stereotypes [53,55,56,57,62,69,72,77], and social and cultural norms [50,72,75] shift responsibility away from perpetrators and discourage victims from seeking support [67,74]. Additionally, bystander inaction [75] further perpetuates the problem, as a fear of retaliation or social indifference discourages people from intervening. Furthermore, cultural and demographic contexts [62,72,77], along with economic and family circumstances [72], influence access to support and resources, often making marginalised groups more vulnerable to these issues [67].

Additionally, reluctance to pursue formal support [74] arises from feelings of inefficacy and a fear of stigma, leading to low intervention rates. The widespread prevalence of CB [67] normalises online aggression, making it more challenging to address. While social and family support [54,67,77] is essential, many victims do not receive sufficient backing, and some parents misjudge their children’s ability to handle online situations. Furthermore, role-switching [76] between a victim and perpetrator complicates intervention efforts, while age [77] also impacts vulnerability to coping mechanisms. The complex relationships between victims and aggressors [63], alongside insufficient institutional support [72], hinders effective solutions. Normative social influences and weight bias [71] contribute to CB by reinforcing harmful behaviours. The quality of public discourse [78] and sociodemographic influences [70] shape societal responses and how seriously CB is addressed. Family involvement [70] can either reduce or worsen the issue based on the support level provided. Overcoming these barriers necessitates a comprehensive strategy encompassing awareness, intervention, and policy development for adequate victim protection.

3.2.3. Awareness and Reporting Challenges

Addressing the barriers related to increasing the awareness and reporting of CB is quite challenging, preventing victims from receiving necessary assistance. A primary challenge found in the literature was a lack of awareness [50,63,66,67,70,75]; many individuals do not fully understand what constitutes CB or its potential repercussions, resulting in delayed or non-existent reactions to incidents. Additionally, reporting mechanisms [63,75] are often ineffective or poorly structured, discouraging people from filing reports about CB incidents. Low reporting rates [54,70] exacerbate this challenge as victims or witnesses often do not report due to fears of retaliation, scepticism about any changes, or uncertainty regarding how to file a report. Bystander intervention [57,67,75] remains a significant concern, as many individuals observe CB but fail to act. The perceived risks of defending victims [53], including the possibility of becoming targets themselves or disrupting their social lives, often discourage intervention.

Additionally, encouraging victims to come forward [54] presents another challenge; they may experience feelings of shame, powerlessness, or uncertainty about where to seek help [70]. Moreover, in many instances, the absence of support systems [72] further discourages both victims and bystanders from reporting because there is no clear pathway for assistance. Furthermore, the ambiguity [68] about what defines CB often leads to reluctance to confront the issue. Pluralistic ignorance [68] occurs when individuals think others do not view the situation as a problem, resulting in inaction. In the same vein, the diffusion of responsibility and audience inhibition [68] add to the dilemma, as people assume that someone else will take action or that they are not accountable. Moreover, the belief that the drawbacks of intervening outweigh the benefits and higher thresholds for interventions [78] often prevent individuals from stepping in until a situation dramatically escalates. These obstacles underscore the critical need for more transparent reporting mechanisms, improved support systems, and heightened awareness to address CB effectively.

3.2.4. Legal and Policy-Related Barriers

Legal and policy-related barriers [50,66,75] significantly impede effective responses to CB. A primary issue is the presence of policy gaps that fail to address the dynamic nature of CB, which leaves individuals without clear guidance on how to navigate it. Legal and ethical dilemmas [76,77] further complicate matters as policymakers struggle to balance the freedom of expression with the need to protect individuals from harm. An uncommitted institutional climate [63], outdated laws, and administrative shortcomings [64] exacerbate the situation, leaving victims without adequate protection. Moreover, the lack of clear definitions [54] surrounding CB weakens efforts to enforce rules and prosecute offenders, while the intricate nature of prevention programmes [54] poses challenges for organisations in maintaining consistent implementation.

The absence of direct predictive effects [55] in legal and policy measures often results in ineffective interventions and fosters scepticism regarding their impact. Higher thresholds for intervention [78] tend to overlook less severe cases of CB, and inconsistent policies [78] across different jurisdictions contribute to confusion and hinder coordinated efforts. Additionally, vague law definitions [78] complicate a uniform approach to addressing CB, while deficiencies in risk assessment [78] limit effective prevention strategies. Resource disparities [78,79] further constrain the ability to implement prevention programmes and support victims. Moreover, a lack of comprehensive research [79] impedes our understanding of how legal frameworks can be enhanced. These challenges underscore the urgent need for more precise and consistent policies to confront the issue of CB effectively.

3.2.5. Technological Barriers

Technical barriers significantly hinder efforts to combat CB, primarily due to the anonymity and virtual nature [50,57,69,73,75] of online interactions, which allow perpetrators to act without the fear of immediate repercussions. While technological solutions [75] can be beneficial, they often fall short in effectiveness and fail to prevent or halt incidents in real time. The escalation and severity [76] of CB can rapidly spiral out of control, particularly in interconnected spaces [76] where harmful content spreads quickly across multiple platforms. An over-reliance on security measures such as automated monitoring [77] can be insufficient for detecting nuanced or complex forms of CB, further complicating intervention efforts.

Also, digital literacy [54,64] is vital, as many individuals may lack the skills to recognise or effectively report CB incidents. Furthermore, challenges regarding response rates and data collection [77] hinder the ability to effectively assess and address the scope of the issue. Technological vulnerabilities [72] within platforms create opportunities for CB to occur with relative ease, while the higher prevalence [56] of CB in these contexts makes management increasingly complex. The challenge of detection [49,57] is exacerbated by the widespread and boundary-blurring nature [50,57] of online environments, where CB can transpire across various social networks and digital spaces. Additionally, heavy social media usage [70] amplifies the issue, providing individuals with more opportunities for online harassment. These technical barriers underscore the challenges in leveraging technology to address CB effectively.

3.2.6. Intervention and Prevention Barriers

Barriers to prevention, coping, and intervention significantly impede efforts to address CB. Prevention programmes frequently face complexity and difficulty in implementation [54], and their lack of a direct predictive impact [55] means they may not result in meaningful change [66]. Additionally, a lack of competence [68] among educators, parents, and authorities in managing CB contributes to inconsistent responses. The overlapping roles [69] of various parties, who are often unclear about their responsibilities, leads to confusion in addressing the issue. The evolving and nuanced language [80] of online interactions also complicates the recognition of and response to instances of CB in real time. These barriers underscore the need for more effective coping strategies, precise role delineations, and adaptable approaches.

3.3. Prevention Strategies Identified

In this section, findings are showcased for the second research question, RQ.3, “What prevention and mitigation strategies have been studied to reduce CB incidents among adults?” A conceptual map of prevention strategies associated with CB is shown in Figure 7 and is discussed in the following section.

3.3.1. Education and Awareness

Education and awareness are vital in preventing CB and enabling individuals to identify, avert, and effectively address online harassment. Without adequate awareness, victims might find it challenging to seek assistance, while perpetrators may not fully comprehend the damage they inflict. Digital literacy initiatives teach students responsible online practices, cultivating empathy and ethical internet use [66,82]. Enhancing awareness through education regarding the risks of self-disclosure [49,62], as well as public advocacy and educational campaigns [51,52,55,56,58,59,60,61,63,64,65,67,68,69,70,71,72,75,77,78,79], empowers individuals to make informed choices about their online presence. Awareness initiatives can boost self-esteem and ethical leadership [55,61] and encourage reporting and intervention [55,63], thereby fostering a culture of accountability. Furthermore, improving emotional regulation and focusing on emotional skills [58,63] help individuals build resilience against CB. By reflecting on personal elements [57,60] and understanding their legal rights [76], individuals can take proactive measures to ensure their digital safety.

Learning initiatives and training programmes are critical in combatting CB by equipping individuals with the knowledge and skills to navigate digital environments safely. These educational programmes help individuals develop the competencies required for responsible online engagement. Digital literacy and cyber etiquette [54,70] initiatives help users understand safe online behaviours, while digital citizenship [79] programmes promote responsible participation. Training for educators [55,60,64,66] alongside programmes focused on empathy, compassion, self-efficacy [53,69,74,76], and social skills [79] fosters awareness and sensitivity toward the experiences of others. Self-efficacy and social skills training empower individuals with the confidence needed to manage online interactions. Encouraging a culture of support-seeking and cultivating positive traits [60,63,67,73,74] that enhance morality and prosocial behaviours [52,69] can reduce moral disengagement [60,69] and build a supportive digital community. Additionally, coping strategies—such as teaching women how to deal with online harassment—contribute to mental well-being [72,73]. Enhancing emotional intelligence [58,63] further improves an individual’s capacity for positive engagement in digital spaces.

3.3.2. Behavioural Strategies

Promoting positive online behaviour and nurturing ethical, social interactions are essential for preventing CB. Lowering the perceived costs of defending [53] against it, along with encouraging bystander intervention [65,67,68], aids in responding to bullying situations effectively. Critiquing bullies [74] and transforming empathetic anger [53] into constructive responses can deter harmful conduct. Advocating for courtesy [65] and respect and promoting positive online behaviour [59,71] contribute to building a supportive digital environment. Influencers engaging in public discussions [74,77] can motivate behavioural changes within online communities. Reducing moral justification [59] is crucial to discourage individuals from rationalising harmful actions. Empathy training, ethical education, and fostering personal accountability can accomplish this. Together, these strategies aim to cultivate a culture of kindness and responsibility in the digital world.

3.3.3. Policy and Legal Measures

Policy and legal frameworks are vital in setting clear guidelines and consequences for online misconduct. Clearly defining the public policies of social media platforms [52], hotels [50], and universities [66,75] helps individuals grasp their online rights and responsibilities more effectively. Equal protection policies and stricter laws [65,78] promote transparent practices [78], fostering fair and inclusive digital environments. A regulatory framework combined with pressure [77,78] from legal authorities such as the Cyber Crime Wing [50] emphasises the necessity of adhering to online safety regulations. Monitoring and reporting mechanisms [65,77], along with disciplinary measures [75], serve as enforcement tools that deter cyberbullying and other harmful behaviours. An ethical framework [78] and thorough risk assessments [78] enable institutions and platforms to identify and address online threats proactively. Furthermore, regulated social media [49,70] use and comprehensive bullying intervention programmes [67] enhance the safety of online communities.

3.3.4. Technological Interventions

Technological interventions are vital in maintaining online safety and reducing harmful interactions. By utilising filtering and privacy settings [49,64,75], individuals can manage their digital exposure effectively. Solutions grounded in technology [72,75], such as monitoring and updating tools [65], and anonymous reporting systems [66] offer proactive protection. Digital platforms also contribute significantly, providing features like emergency buttons [76] and real-time detection applications, such as the Serenity Chat app [80], to assist users during online crises. Furthermore, customisable tolerance-level lexicons strengthen safety mechanisms [80]. The implementation of nudge mechanisms [80], along with their scalability and seamless integration into existing platforms, ensures that these interventions remain effective and accessible. Consistent and permanent programmes [54] contribute to individuals feeling more secure in digital environments.

3.3.5. Support Systems

It is essential to provide psychological and social support to individuals impacted by online harassment and CB. Support systems, such as counselling and organised support programmes [52,54,55,58,59,60,61,62,64,65,67,71,72], equip victims with the resources needed to manage online distress. Online counselling platforms [54] and supportive communities offer safe environments for sharing experiences [66,74]. Peer support networks [65] and the promotion of social support foster resilience against CB. Increasing social capital [61] and nurturing empathy [53,74,76] also help encourage positive online interactions. A collective sense of responsibility [68] and targeted interventions [77] for at-risk groups are necessary to ensure that those who are more vulnerable receive the crucial support they need. Addressing emotional issues [72,73] and enhancing feelings of security [56] are key components of this support.

3.3.6. Supervision

Oversight from colleges, universities, and educational institutions is crucial in curbing harmful online behaviours. Community engagement, family involvement, and guardian supervision [54,55,60,63,64,70,77,79,80] create an environment where children feel comfortable discussing their online experiences. Institutes play a vital role in teacher participation [54,60,67], promoting responsible online conduct among students. The culture within universities [75] and administrative initiatives [64] further influence digital responsibility at the institutional level. Teachers’ roles in supervising online activities and mentoring students are key to prevention. Support mechanisms [65,77] within institutions, along with active student participation [54], foster a collaborative approach to addressing cyberbullying. Promoting cooperation and a sense of belonging [61] within colleges and universities cultivates community and enhances adaptation to the digital environment [63].

3.3.7. Intervention Mechanisms

Targeted support mechanisms [62] are designed to ensure that high-risk individuals receive specialised assistance [64]. Interventions tailored to gender and age [53,56,57,58,67] address specific vulnerabilities in online interactions. By focusing on vulnerable groups, targeted initiatives offer personalised solutions. Effective support strategies involve co-designing solutions [76] through collaboration between the government and the media [73], enhancing awareness campaigns. Furthermore, collaborative efforts among stakeholders [64,70] unite educators, law enforcement, and tech companies in addressing cyberbullying (CB). Targeted policies [77] aim to protect high-risk groups, while psychological well-being [50] initiatives foster resilience. Reducing negative self-perception through minimising social comparisons [59] and encouraging victims to report abuse is crucial for accountability [72].

Utilising the Cyber Safety Management System (CSMS) [51,63] for screening and assessment enables early detection and appropriate intervention responses [51]. Culturally sensitive approaches [62] enhance inclusivity in interventions. Additionally, toll-free helplines [77], legal and policy interventions [72], and online counselling platforms ensure accessible support. Online educational programmes [54] and information campaigns [54] raise awareness about policy and cyber safety. Social media detoxification and account deactivation strategies provide relief from online stress [49,64]. A cross-sectoral response [52] integrates education, law, and technology for a comprehensive approach, while reinforcing online regulations [52,59] promotes a safer digital environment. Collectively, these efforts establish a proactive and supportive framework for preventing cyberbullying.

4. Discussion

This section presents a thorough discussion of the findings based on the results outlined in Section 3. The most prominent and recurring CB themes identified were general and contextual CB; role- and influence-based CB; adults, social media, and education; psychological and emotionally driven CB; and aggressive, malicious, and exploitative CB, in addition to public, personal, and character-focused CB (Table 3, Section 3.1). All of these were notably experienced by adults [46,83,84,85,86,87]. Furthermore, this study identified and the barriers associated with CB and combined them into six main categories (Figure 6, Section 3.2). The most frequently noted barriers included social and cultural issues, psychological factors, awareness and reporting, legal and policy concerns, and technological challenges [88,89,90]. Similarly, researchers have identified various methods to prevent CB. Among the numerous preventive measures, this study categorised them into seven groups based on their characteristics and relevance (Figure 7, Section 3.3). The literature’s most frequently reported prevention strategies included education and awareness, intervention mechanisms, support systems, and supervision [91,92].

Preventing CB remains a significant challenge, primarily due to various barriers, as stated in Figure 6. This section answers RQ.4, “How do these barriers hinder the effectiveness of prevention and mitigation strategies for CB in adults?” These obstacles impede effective responses to CB and contribute to its ongoing presence in online environments [79]. In Section 3.2.1, we discussed how the study found that psychological elements are particularly important, as victims often contend with feelings of fear, shame, or anxiety that discourage them from speaking up. The emotional consequences of CB can lead to self-blame, further complicating individuals’ willingness to seek help. On the other hand, perpetrators may demonstrate a lack of empathy, especially in digital contexts where the repercussions of their actions feel remote. Additionally, the “bystander effect” can inhibit intervention, as witnesses may hesitate to act, assuming someone else will step in. These challenges hinder the effective prevention of CB.

Similarly, Section 3.2.2 states that social norms and peer influences significantly hinder prevention efforts. Often, CB is normalised within friend groups, schools, or online communities, making it hard for victims to challenge such harmful behaviours. The fear of being socially rejected or facing retaliation frequently stops individuals from reporting incidents of CB. Fear and social stigma serve as significant barriers to the reporting of bullying behaviour. Victims frequently exhibit hesitance in disclosing their experiences due to concerns regarding public humiliation, intimidation, or potential repercussions. The findings also illustrate that gender differences in experiences of bullying indicate that specific demographics, particularly females, may encounter additional societal pressures that deter them from seeking institutional support [93,94,95]. Therefore, although policy-driven interventions provide a necessary framework for action, addressing the issues of fear and stigma necessitates broader cultural transformations and the establishment of supportive community systems. Additionally, institutions like universities or workplaces may minimise its seriousness. Moreover, cultural beliefs also affect how CB is addressed, with some societies perceiving it as insignificant rather than a critical threat to mental health. In cultures where discussing victimisation is taboo, victims can endure CB in silence, and authorities may not prioritise effective solutions. Evidence put forth by Pepler and Mishna [96] suggests that peer support programmes can play a pivotal role in alleviating stigma by creating a safer environment for victims to articulate their experiences and access financial assistance.

On the other hand, technical obstacles (see Section 3.2.5) pose a significant challenge, as the anonymity provided by online platforms enables cyberbullies to operate with minimal fear of repercussions [97]. Numerous social media platforms find it challenging to implement anti-harassment policies effectively, and even when users are banned, they can easily create new accounts. While privacy safeguards and encryption are vital for online security, they also hinder the ability to monitor and curb harmful activities. Additionally, legal challenges impede efforts to address CB, given that laws differ from jurisdiction to jurisdiction, and enforcement is frequently lacking. Some nations are without definitive regulations regarding CB, whereas others find it challenging to balance prevention initiatives with the protection of free speech. In the absence of robust legal structures and reliable enforcement, cyberbullies continue to take advantage of loopholes, making it hard for victims to achieve justice. A critical examination of these barriers alongside preventive measures reveals the complex interrelationship between issues and solutions, illustrating how specific strategies may prove inadequate due to psychological vulnerabilities, institutional shortcomings, and societal stigmas.

Given these barriers, specific preventive measures can significantly reduce the occurrence of CB. Awareness programmes in educational environments and communities encourage proactive reporting and intervention, lowering the incidence of CB [98]. Learning initiatives and training programmes (see Section 3.3.1) are essential in preventing CB by fostering digital literacy, encouraging responsible online conduct, and implementing proactive intervention techniques. Additionally, educating parents about internet safety strengthens home supervision, fostering a protective environment for children [99]. Continuous investment in education and training is crucial for establishing a safer and more responsible digital society [100]. Additionally, in developing nations, the challenges associated with countering sophisticated cyber threats are exacerbated by a lack of advanced technological resources [101]. Moreover, various scholars have identified concerns regarding data privacy and ethical implications as significant barriers to implementing robust cybersecurity systems, further complicating efforts to ensure digital safety [102,103,104]. Both victims and perpetrators are capable of utilising artificial intelligence. Therefore, a critical need exists for policies and regulations that facilitate organisations’ integration of advanced cybersecurity technologies to combat CB effectively [105]. These barriers collectively undermine attempts to combat CB, enabling it to persist despite awareness initiatives and policy strategies. A holistic strategy is needed, which includes stricter legal enforcement, technological advancements for identifying harmful actions, and cultural changes that emphasise digital accountability. If these interconnected challenges are not addressed, CB will continue to be a significant problem, adversely affecting mental health and online safety.

5. Conclusions

This study contributed significantly by recognising various forms of CB involving adults and offering a comprehensive view of the barriers and challenges that foster CB alongside the employed prevention strategies for better problem-solving. The outlined forms of CB can guide the prediction of such behaviours. CB among young people remains a pressing issue; however, earlier research predominantly concentrated on adolescents, largely overlooking adults in educational and professional settings. Thus, this study explored and analysed CB by identifying forms, barriers, and prevention strategies applicable to adults. The existing literature on predicting CB behaviour is quite varied and “heterogeneous”. The insights from this study can prove valuable for researchers, parents, educators, university administrators, individuals, IT experts, psychologists, students, and other relevant parties, as it sheds light on the challenges that obstruct effective mitigation strategies among adults. Additionally, this study reveals the connections between the identified barriers to CB prevention. Understanding these connections will deepen the comprehension of the CB phenomenon. A total of 32 studies meeting the inclusion criteria were analysed, identifying eight themes related to adult CB, six barriers, and seven mitigation strategies. The categorisation of barriers and mitigation strategies enables a clear understanding of the issue and its ties to CB behaviour, enabling researchers and policymakers to recognise challenges and develop tailored prevention approaches.

6. Future Recommendations

Future research should adopt a multidisciplinary approach to address existing gaps. Psychological studies must focus on the mindsets of cyberbullies and bystanders while developing interventions that promote empathy and proactive reporting. Culturally diverse case studies can reveal how societies perceive and handle CB, leading to more inclusive prevention strategies. Additionally, exploring technological advancements, particularly AI-driven content moderation and behaviour prediction models, is crucial for improving the detection of harmful online behaviours. Legal research should evaluate current regulations and propose new frameworks that balance cyberbullying prevention with digital rights. Lastly, longitudinal studies are needed to assess the long-term effects of policies and interventions, ensuring sustainable solutions. Addressing these research gaps can foster a more comprehensive approach to CB prevention.