Nonconsensual Sexting: Are the Moral Processes the Same If Boys or Girls Appear in the Forwarded Content?

Depósito de Investigación de la Universidad de Sevilla https://idus.us.es/ This is the accepted version of the following article: Ojeda, M., Romera, E. M., & del Rey, R. (2024). Nonconsensual Sexting: Are the Moral Processes the Same If Boys or Girls Appear in the Forwarded Content? Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 27(2), 111–118. https://doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2023.0412, which has now been formally published in final form at Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking at https://doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2023.0412. This original submission version of the article may be used for noncommercial purposes in accordance with the Mary Ann Liebert, Inc., publishers’ self-archiving terms and conditions. Final publication is available from Mary Ann Liebert, Inc.: http://dx.doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2023.0412 To cite this article: Ojeda, M., Romera, E. M., & Del Rey, R. (2024). Nonconsensual Sexting: Are the Moral Processes the Same If Boys or Girls Appear in the Forwarded Content? Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking. Ahead of print. http://doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2023.0412 Non-consensual sexting: Are the moral processes the same if boys or girls appear in the forwarded content? Mónica Ojeda1, Ph.D., Eva M. Romera2, Ph.D, and Rosario Del Rey3, Ph.D. 1Department of Educational and Developmental Psychology, Universidad de Sevilla, Sevilla, Spain. monicaojed[email protected] 2Department of Psychology, Universidad de Córdoba, Córdoba, Spain. eva.rome[email protected] 3Department of Educational and Developmental Psychology, Universidad de Sevilla, Sevilla, Spain. [email protected]s Abstract Sexting is a form of intimate communication available in today’s digital society consisting of exchanging erotic-sexual content online. However, doing it without the consent of the person appearing in the content is becoming a normalised form of cyberviolence among adolescents. To advance our understanding of this phenomenon, further research is needed on its facilitating factors, which may include those related to its potential moral dimension and online disinhibition. This study aims to analyse, according to gender and age, the relationship between non-consensual forwarding of erotic-sexual content, differentiating between the type of content and the gender of the person appearing in it, moral disengagement, and toxic online disinhibition. A total of 1,611 adolescents (47.9% girls) aged 12-15 years (M = 13.4; SD = 1.0) participated. Moral disengagement and toxic disinhibition have been shown to facilitate non-consensual forwarding of erotic-sexual content, but their relevance varies depending on the type of content and whether girls or boys appear in it. Facilitating factors for non-consensual forwarding of content featuring boys were age, the diffusion of the consequences and toxic online disinhibition. For girls, identifying with the male gender and cognitive restructuring were the main facilitators. These findings represent an original advance in the field of study by discriminating between the type of content forwarded and the gender of the person who appears in it. The differences found contribute towards explaining the processes that lead to Final publication is available from Mary Ann Liebert, Inc.: http://dx.doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2023.0412 making immoral decisions when sexting and help lay the foundations for designing psychoeducational programs in the future. Keywords: sexting, consent, moral disengagement, toxic online disinhibition, adolescence. Introduction The digital environment and online social networks have provided people with a myriad of possibilities and advantages in their social life, particularly for the adolescent population. One of the areas which has been transformed by the arrival of Relationship, Information and Communication Technologies (RICT) (1) is the expression of sexuality (2). The use of electronic media to share eroticsexual content has become another form of intimate sexual communication accepted by today's digital society (3), the phenomenon known as sexting (4,5). Several studies have suggested that sexting can be considered problem-free when it is done consensually (6,7). However, concerns have arisen about the possible negative consequences for adolescent well-being (8,9), since there is not always freedom of choice (10-12). This lack of consent can take different forms, for instance, forwarding erotic-sexual content without the permission of the person appearing in it (13). In particular, sexual content featuring women and girls is the most frequently distributed without consent (12,14), so we need to look more closely to discover whether the factors facilitating this behaviour are the same when the content features boys or girls. Non-consensual forwarding of sexting among adolescents Non-consensual forwarding of erotic-sexual content is probably the most alarming aspect of sexting because of the consequences it can have (12,15), although much of the research has focused on sending and/or receiving, rather than forwarding, erotic-sexual content (16). According to a recent meta-analysis, which considered studies from Europe, North America, Australia, New Zealand, the Middle East, South America, and Africa, around 14.5% of adolescents forward erotic-sexual content without consent (17). In fact, this practice has become one of the forms of cyberviolence through which aggressors can harass others (18,19). Final publication is available from Mary Ann Liebert, Inc.: http://dx.doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2023.0412 Some of the serious consequences of this unwanted exposure are sextortion, blackmail, loss of reputation, victimization in dating violence, victimization in bullying and/or cyberbullying, and a lasting psychological impact, especially since the content can reappear repeatedly after first being posted, and can even drive some adolescents to suicide (20–25). There may also be legal consequences for the person who forwards the content (26,27). Another key characteristic of this practice is that it is influenced by the same gender inequalities and stereotypes that occur in face-to-face life, the so-called sexual double standard whereby girls are socially limited and sanctioned more than boys for the same behaviour (28–30). Besides the fact that content featuring women and girls is forwarded without their consent more often (12,14), the consequences tend to be far more damaging for girls. They are more likely to receive insults and humiliation, far more affecting their reputation (25,31). The role of moral disengagement and toxic online disinhibition Research has so far paid specific attention to identifying its possible consequences, but there is an urgent need to understand the factors that may influence an adolescent to take part in this type of unfair behaviour against a peer without their consent. To understand this practice better, more research is needed on its facilitating factors, which may include those related to its potential moral dimension (32) and online disinhibition (33). Both mechanisms could facilitate this harmful behaviour by deactivating the self-regulatory aggression mechanisms, either through processes of moral disengagement or inhibitory withdrawal. Moral disengagement refers to a set of socio-cognitive mechanisms that individuals use to justify their immoral and harmful conduct and make it acceptable, by disabling self-condemnation when violating their own moral values (34). Bandura's studies identify eight mechanisms grouped into four strategies: cognitive restructuring, distortion of consequences, minimisation of responsibility and dehumanization of the victim (35). These mechanisms have been shown to play a key role in predicting other types of cyberviolence in adolescents, such as cyberbullying (36–38), with different implications for online behaviour, depending on the type of strategy used. However, little research has focused on analysing the moral dimension of this complex practice. The study conducted by Califano et al. (32), with 587 young people and adults aged 18-52 is probably the first to show that forwarding other people's sexts Final publication is available from Mary Ann Liebert, Inc.: http://dx.doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2023.0412 without consent is related to secondary instrumental motives which are unrelated to sexuality and, in turn, to moral disengagement. To the best of our knowledge, no studies have looked into nonconsensual forwarding erotic-sexual content in adolescents and considered the specificity of the mechanisms involved in moral disengagement, based on the gender of the person appearing in the content. Furthermore, the influence of online disinhibition on the practice of nonconsensual forwarding, which is so characteristic of Internet use (39), has not been analyzed in depth. Online, individuals are more likely to exhibit more frequent or intense behaviour than they would face-to-face, sometimes in a positive way, facilitating the expression of positive thoughts, but other times in a toxic way, leading to them being more cruel and hurtful online (40). Research points to online disinhibition as a key facilitator of behaviours such as Internet addiction or the consumption of pornography, and possibly sexting (41). To date, the few studies dealing with this topic have shown its relevance as a predictor of adolescents producing online sexual images of themselves and receiving sexual solicitations (33). For this reason, it is vital to continue advancing in its possible role as a predictor of adolescents nonconsensual forwarding erotic-sexual content, based on the gender of the person who appears in the content. The present study Given how important exploring the factors influencing the occurrence of this new form of normalized cyberviolence among adolescents has become recently (17), it is essential to analyse the role of moral disengagement and toxic online disinhibition in the non-consensual forwarding of erotic-sexual content (i.e. both explicit and suggestive content, where they may appear fully nude or partially nude) as an important advance which could guide future psycho-educational programs. This study therefore set the following objectives: (1) to explore the relationships between the non-consensual forwarding of erotic-sexual content, considering the type of content and the gender of the person who appears in it, the mechanisms of moral disengagement and toxic online disinhibition, according to gender; and (2) to identify whether toxic online disinhibition, moral disengagement mechanisms, age, and gender are factors that facilitate forwarding such content without consent, considering the type of content and the gender of the person who appears in it. Final publication is available from Mary Ann Liebert, Inc.: http://dx.doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2023.0412 Methods Participants and procedure In total, 1611 adolescents (52.1% boys, 47.9% girls) aged 12-15 years (M = 13.40; SD = 1.00) from 14 secondary schools in Andalusia (Spain) participated in the study. Regarding participation in nonconsensual forwarding of erotic-sexual content over the past year, 5.1% of participants (7% boys, 3% girls) had non-consensually forwarded text messages featuring girls and 5.4% (8.1% boys, 2.5% girls) images/videos featuring girls. Similarly, 6.3% of participants (6.7% boys, 5.8% girls) had nonconsensually forwarded text messages featuring boys and 4.6% (5.7% boys, 3.4% girls) images/videos featuring boys. This study was approved by the Bioethics and Biosafety Committee of the University of Córdoba. The study adopted a cross-sectional, prospective, and unified ex post facto design (42) and nonprobabilistic convenience sampling was used. Schools’ management teams were contacted and encouraged to participate in the study. Those who were interested were included. Following the approval of the management teams, permissions were obtained, and each parent authorised their child to participate in the study. This study is part of a larger research project to study decision-making and moral sensitivity to social life management. The paper-and-pencil questionnaires were administered during school hours by the researchers. During its administration, emphasis was placed on the anonymous and voluntary participation, the confidential treatment of the data, and the importance of honest responses. Measurements Non-consensual sexting was evaluated by adapting the dimension of "non-consensual forwarding" of the SBM-Q scale (43) in which the items have been duplicated to differentiate, as well as the type of content forwarded, between the gender (boys or girls) of the people who appear in the content. It consists of four items with five response frequency options, from “0 = Never” to “4 = Daily” (e.g., “I have forwarded or shared suggestive or sexual text messages featuring girls without their consent”), which evaluate the experience of non-consensual forwarding sexts over the last 12 months (α = .86). The fit indices yielded an optimal one-dimensional factorial solution (CFA χ² S-B = 3165.50; p<.001; RMSEA = .03; SRMR = .05; CFI = .91; NNFI = .91). Final publication is available from Mary Ann Liebert, Inc.: http://dx.doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2023.0412 Moral disengagement was evaluated by validating into Spanish (44) the Moral Disengagement scale by Bandura et al. (1996), which consists of 24 Likert-type items, with five response options to measure agreement, from "0 = Strongly disagree" to "4 = Strongly agree" (e.g., "It is okay to hit someone who insults your family"). This scale evaluates the predisposition to moral disengagement of different behaviour in various contexts and interpersonal relationships through the mechanisms of moral disengagement: cognitive restructuring, including moral justification, euphemistic language, and advantageous comparison; minimising one's role as agent, which includes displacement and diffusion of responsibility; victim blaming/dehumanization; and misrepresenting injurious consequences, which includes diffusion of consequences (αglobal = .90; αcognitive restructuring = .85; αminimising one's own role as agent = .64; αvictim blaming/dehumanizing = .81; αignoring/distorting consequences = .75). Toxic disinhibition was assessed using the “toxic disinhibition” subscale of the Online Disinhibition Scale (39), which consists of four Likert-type items with five response options to measure agreement, ranging from “0 = Strongly disagree” to “4 = Strongly agree” (e.g., “I don't mind writing insulting messages about others on the Internet because it's anonymous”). This scale evaluates toxic online disinhibition (α = .80). Data analysis The data was coded and analysed using SPSS 26.0. Basic descriptive analyses, including Cronbach's alphas and frequencies, and bivariate analyses were conducted. Specifically, Pearson correlations to assess associations between the four non-consensual forwarding variables (forwarding of messages featuring boys, forwarding of images/videos featuring boys, forwarding of messages featuring girls, and forwarding images/videos featuring girls), moral disengagement mechanisms, and toxic disinhibition. Student's t-tests for independent samples were also conducted to analyse gender differences in these variables. Cohen's d was used to measure the effect size. Multivariate analyses were conducted using multiple linear regressions (MLR) to analyse associations between age, moral disengagement factors, and toxic disinhibition as independent variables, and the four types of forwarding as dependent variables. Interaction relationships between the independent variables of toxic online disinhibition and moral disengagement were included in the MRL models. R2 was Final publication is available from Mary Ann Liebert, Inc.: http://dx.doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2023.0412 considered as a measure of the effect size. Given the exploratory nature of this study, all the variables were introduced following the stepwise regression statistical method. Results Correlation analysis The correlation analyses showed significant relationships between all the non-consensual forwarding variables. Significant relationships were also found between moral disengagement mechanisms and non-consensual forwarding behaviours and between toxic online disinhibition and non-consensual forwarding behaviours (Table 1). [TABLE 1 ABOUT HERE] Gender differences The t-tests revealed differences according to the gender of the participants in all the variables analysed, except in forwarding boys’ text messages and in the moral disengagement mechanism of minimising one's own role as an agent. Boys were found to participate significantly more than girls in forwarding boys’ images/videos (t[1470,96] = 2.48, p < .05), as well as in forwarding girls’ text messages (t[1524,99] = 2.78, p < .01) and girls’ images/videos (t[1316,18] = 4.60, p < .001). Boys also present significantly higher levels in the moral disengagement mechanisms of cognitive restructuring (t[1502,34] = 8.55, p < .001), blaming/dehumanizing the victim (t[1507,05] = 6.70, p < .001) and diffusion of consequences (t[1527,72] = 5.95, p < .001), as well as toxic online disinhibition (t[1490.81] = 5.75, p < .001) (Table 2). [TABLE 2 ABOUT HERE] Regression analysis for the forwarding of content about boys Multiple linear regression models showed significant results for the variables of non-consensual forwarding content featuring boys (Table 3). In the model of forwarding boys' text messages, variables related to age, the cognitive restructuring moral disengagement mechanism, the interaction between toxic online disinhibition and the consequence diffusion mechanism, and the interaction between toxic online disinhibition and the agent Final publication is available from Mary Ann Liebert, Inc.: http://dx.doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2023.0412 role minimisation mechanism accounted for 7.1% of the variance (F [4.1236] = 24.664, p < 0.001; R2 = .0 71). Specifically, being older, starting the cognitive restructuring mechanism, and toxic online disinhibition linked to distorting the consequences of one's actions, as well as toxic online disinhibition linked to minimising one's agentive role, were significantly associated with forwarding text messages featuring boys. In the model of forwarding boys' images/videos, variables related to the moral disengagement mechanism of diffusion of consequences and toxic online disinhibition accounted for 6.4% of the variance (F [3.1237] = 37.820, p < 0.001; R2 = .064). To be exact, distorting the consequences of one's own actions and toxic disinhibition in the online environment were significantly associated with forwarding images/videos featuring boys (see Table 3). [TABLE 3 ABOUT HERE] Regression analysis for the forwarding of content about girls The multiple linear regression models showed significant results for the variables of non-consensual forwarding content featuring girls (Table 4). In the model of forwarding girls’ text messages, variables related to the cognitive restructuring moral disengagement mechanism, as well as the interaction between toxic online disinhibition and the mechanism of minimisation of the agent’s role, accounted for 4.2% of the variance (F [3.1237] = 19.342, p < 0.001; R2 = .042). In particular, activating the cognitive restructuring mechanism and toxic online disinhibition, together with minimising one's agentive role, were significantly associated with forwarding text messages featuring girls. In the model of forwarding girls' images/videos, variables related to gender, the cognitive restructuring moral disengagement mechanism, as well as the interaction between toxic online disinhibition and the mechanism of minimising one's agentive role, accounted for 7.6% of the variance (F [3.1237] = 34.998, p < 0.001; R2 = .076). Specifically, being a boy, activating the cognitive restructuring mechanism and toxic online disinhibition, together with minimising one's agentive role, were significantly associated with forwarding images/videos featuring girls (see Table 4). [TABLE 4 ABOUT HERE] Final publication is available from Mary Ann Liebert, Inc.: http://dx.doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2023.0412 32. Califano G, Capasso M, Caso D. Exploring the roles of online moral disengagement, body esteem, and psychosexual variables in predicting sexting motivations and behaviours. Comput Human Behav. 2022;129:107146; doi: 10.1016/J.CHB.2021.107146 33. Kerstens J, Stol W. Receiving online sexual requests and producing online sexual images: The multifaceted and dialogic nature of adolescents’ online sexual interactions. Cyberpsychology: Journal of Psychosocial Research on Cyberspace. 2014;8(1); doi: 10.5817/CP2014-1-8 34. Bandura A, Barbaranelli C, Caprara G v., et al. Selective Moral Disengagement in the Exercise of Moral Agency. http://dx.doi.org/101080/0305724022014322. 2010;31(2):101–19; doi: 10.1080/0305724022014322 35. Bandura A, Barbaranelli C, Caprara GV, et al. Mechanisms of Moral Disengagement in the Exercise of Moral Agency. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1996;71(2):364–74; doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.71.2.364 36. Marín-López I, Zych I, Ortega-Ruiz R, et al. Empathy online and moral disengagement through technology as longitudinal predictors of cyberbullying victimization and perpetration. Child Youth Serv Rev. 2020;116:105144; doi: 10.1016/J.CHILDYOUTH.2020.105144 37. Paciello M, Tramontano C, Nocentini A, et al. The role of traditional and online moral disengagement on cyberbullying: Do externalising problems make any difference? Comput Human Behav. 2020;103:190–8; doi: 10.1016/J.CHB.2019.09.024 38. Falla D, Ortega-Ruiz R, Romera EM. Mechanisms of Moral Disengagement in the Transition from Cybergossip to Cyberaggression: A Longitudinal Study. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 2021, Vol 18, Page 1000. 2021;18(3):1000; doi: 10.1016/J.CHB.2019.09.024 39. Udris R. Cyberbullying among high school students in Japan: Development and validation of the Online Disinhibition Scale. Comput Human Behav. 2014;41:253–61; doi: 10.1016/J.CHB.2014.09.036 40. Suler J. The Online Disinhibition Effect. Cyberpsychology & Behavior. 2004;7(3):321–6. Final publication is available from Mary Ann Liebert, Inc.: http://dx.doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2023.0412 41. Sharma MK, Anand N, Kumar K, et al. Constructing the understanding of teenagers deviant use of cyberspace. 2021;67(8):1068–71; doi: 101177/0020764020975791 42. Montero I, León OG. A guide for naming research studies in Psychology. International Journal of Clinical and Health Psychology. 2007;7(3):847–62. 43. Del Rey R, Ojeda M, Casas JA. Validation of the sexting behavior and motives questionnaire (SBM- Q). Psicothema. 2021;33(2):287–95; doi: 10.7334/PSICOTHEMA2020.207 44. Romera EM, Herrera-López M, Ortega-Ruiz R, et al. The Moral Disengagement Scale-24: Factorial Structure and Cross-Cultural Comparison in Spanish and Colombian Adolescents. Psychol Violence. 2022;13(1):13–22; doi: 10.1037/VIO0000428 45. Norman J. Implications of Parenting Behaviour and Adolescent Attachment for Understanding Adolescent Sexting. University of Windsor; 2017. Available from: https://bit.ly/2zNsysI [last accessed: 11/17/2023] 46. Symons K, Ponnet K, Walrave M, et al. Sexting scripts in adolescent relationships: Is sexting becoming the norm? New Media Soc. 2018;20(10):3836–57; doi: 10.1177/1461444818761869 47. Houck CD, Barker D, Rizzo C, et al. Sexting and sexual behavior in at-risk adolescents. Pediatrics. 2014;133(2); doi: 10.1542/peds.2013-1157 48. Dobson AS, Ringrose J. Sext education: pedagogies of sex, gender and shame in the schoolyards of Tagged and Exposed. Sex Educ. 2016;16(1):8–21; doi: 10.1080/14681811.2015.1050486 49. Ojeda M, Del Rey R. Lines of Action for Sexting Prevention and Intervention: A Systematic Review. Arch Sex Behav. 2021;1:1–29; doi: 10.1007/s10508-021-02089-3 50. Wurtele S, Miller-Perrin C. Preventing technology‐initiated sexual victimization of youth: A developmental perspective. In: Sex Education: Attitude of Adolescents, Cultural Differences and Schools’ Challenges. (Kenny MC. ed.) Nova: New York; 2014. pp. 147–175. Address correspondence to: Dr. Mónica Ojeda Department of Educational and Developmental Psychology, Faculty of Education Sciences Universidad de Sevilla C/Pirotecnia S/N. Sevilla 41013, Spain E-mail: monicao[email protected] Final publication is available from Mary Ann Liebert, Inc.: http://dx.doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2023.0412 Table 1 Descriptive statistics and Pearson correlations between the variables analysed. Variable n M SD 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 1. Gender 1611 1.48 0.50 — 2. Age 1611 13.40 1.00 .02 — 3. Forwarding messages featuring girls 1611 0.09 0.46 -.07** .06* — 4. Forwarding images/videos featuring girls 1611 0.10 0.50 -.11** .04 .70** — 5. Forwarding messages featuring boys 1611 0.11 0.51 -.02 .07** .61** .54** — 6. Forwarding images/videos featuring boys 1611 0.09 0.47 -.06* .03 .51** .64** .66** — 7. Cognitive Restructuringa 1519 0.66 0.70 -.21** .09** .18** .22** .21** .17** — 8. Minimising one’s Agentive Rolea 1347 1.31 0.76 -.04 -.01 .08** .10** .07** .08** .30** — 9. Blaming/Dehumanizing the Victima 1547 0.56 0.70 -.17** .05 .14** .22** .20** .19** .83** .30** — 10. Disregarding/Distorting the Consequencesa 1571 0.49 0.76 -.15** .06* .18** .22** .24** .22** .76** .28** .76** — 11. Toxic online disinhibition 1565 0.32 0.65 .14** .08** .17** .24** .21** .26** .44** .18** .43** .47** — Note. aMecanisms of Moral Disengagement. *p < .05. **p < .01. Final publication is available from Mary Ann Liebert, Inc.: http://dx.doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2023.0412 Table 2 Descriptive statistics and independent t-test of the variables analyzed by gender. Boys Girls t p Cohen’s d n M SD n M SD Forwarding messages featuring girls 840 0.12 0.53 771 0.06 0.38 2.78 .006 0.13 Forwarding images/videos featuring girls 840 0.16 0.61 771 0.05 0.33 4.60 .000 0.22 Forwarding messages featuring boys 840 0.12 0.54 771 0.10 0.48 0.89 .373 0.04 Forwarding images/videos featuring boys 840 0.12 0.55 771 0.06 0.37 2.48 .013 0.13 Cognitive Restructuringa 785 0.80 0.73 734 0.50 0.62 8.55 .000 0.44 Minimising one’s Agentive Rolea 695 1.34 0.79 652 1.28 0.74 1.40 .162 0.08 Blaming/Dehumanizing the Victima 801 0.67 0.76 746 0.44 0.60 6.70 .000 0.33 Disregarding/Distorting the Consequencesa 812 0.60 0.83 759 0.37 0.66 5.95 .000 0.31 Toxic online disinhibition 804 0.45 0.71 757 0.27 0.54 5.75 .000 0.28 Note. a Mechanisms of Moral Disengagement. Final publication is available from Mary Ann Liebert, Inc.: http://dx.doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2023.0412 Table 3 Multiple linear regression analysis for non-consensual forwarding of content featuring boys (text messages or images and videos) as dependent variables. Variable β SE t p 95% CI General forwarding of content featuring boys Age .03 .01 2.25 .025 [.01, .05] Disregarding/Distorting the Consequences a .08 .02 4.62 .000 [.05, .11] Interaction Online Disinhibition*Minimising one’s Agentive Role a .07 .01 5.67 .000 [.04, .09] Forwarding of text messages featuring boys Age .04 .01 2.74 .006 [.01, .06] Cognitive Restructuring a .08 .02 3.29 .001 [.03, .12] Interaction Online Disinhibition *Disregarding/Distorting the Consequences a .03 .01 2.14 .033 [.01, .06] Interaction Online Disinhibition *Minimising one’s Agentive Role a .04 .02 2.58 .010 [.01, .08] Forwarding of images/videos featuring boys Disregarding/Distorting the Consequences a .07 .02 4.00 .000 [.04, .11] Toxic Online Disinhibition .12 .02 5.57 .000 [.08, .16] Note. a Mechanisms of Moral Disengagement. Final publication is available from Mary Ann Liebert, Inc.: http://dx.doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2023.0412 Table 4 Multiple linear regression analysis for non-consensual forwarding of content featuring girls (text messages or images and videos) as dependent variables. Variable β SE t p 95% CI General forwarding of content featuring girls Gender a -.05 .02 -2.14 .033 [-.10, -.01] Cognitive Restructuring b .08 .02 3.90 .000 [.04, .11] Interaction Online Disinhibition*Minimising one’s Agentive Role b .06 .01 5.44 .000 [.04, .09] Forwarding of text messages featuring girls Cognitive Restructuring b .07 .02 1.00 .004 [.02, .11] Interaction Online Disinhibition*Minimising one’s Agentive Role b .04 .02 2.30 .022 [.01, .07] Forwarding of images/videos featuring girls Gender a -.06 .03 -2.36 .019 [-.11, -.01] Cognitive Restructuring b .08 .02 3.81 .000 [.04, .12] Interaction Online Disinhibition *Minimising one’s Agentive Role b .07 .01 5.80 .000 [.05, .10] Note. a 0 = boy, 1 = girl. b Mechanisms of Moral Disengagement.