Measurement: Sensors 25 (2023) 100646

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Measurement: Sensors
journal homepage: www.sciencedirect.com/journal/measurement-sensors

Violence in digital communication social media through the of

installing technique
Mohammed EL Nadir Abdallah Tani a, *, Talal Khalid Aljabr Alrasheed b
a
Dept of Media. Ha’il University, Ha’il, Saudi Arabia
b
Dept of Social Sciences Ha’il University, Ha’il, Saudi Arabia

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: Among the most important risks that threaten social life and social communication in virtual societies; Violence
Digital communication in all its forms circulated in the virtual space. Social, communicative and psychological studies in this field
Smart technique showed the negative effects that society is witnessing as a result of the increasing phenomenon. These spaces
Through the installing technique
have become a platform for violent and hate speech, instead of raising awareness in combating and preventing it.
Manifestations of violence and hate speech have become entrenched in social networks as a result of lack of
awareness on the one hand, and on the other hand, due to the user’s lack of reservation to use phrases or publish
pictures or contents offensive to individuals and institutions through the technique of installing photos and
videos …, as a matter of taking into account the reasons, identities have become Anonymous or borrowed default
uses verbal violence to pass its agenda and tear the social and emotional fabric of society. Hate speech that is
disseminated through social networks usually leads to intolerance and generates hateful speeches. Before it
multiplies, it spreads and amplifies through social media channels, and sometimes these echoes resonate. Con­
tents through TV channels and newspapers alike, and have a special capacity for existing tensions between
different groups and ignite violence among their members, as they may raise new concerns about the association
of inflammatory discourse through these spaces with acts of violence. It may be a motive for accidents that
contribute to psychological, social, economic, emotional, material and physical harm to people. The use of social
networks has become aimed at distorting facts, spreading falsehood, and seditious violent discourse,. As for the
methods of preventing violence, it requires addressing the factors leading to violence and treating them in a
scientific way, and preventive efforts must focus on the stages of childhood and adolescence and the role of
educational institutions in this, given that the behavior of violence consists mostly of early childhood, according
to psychological studies.

1. Introduction 1.1. A search goal

Social media has secured its place in every hand and thought, and has
become inherent in communication users with each other, and because
all the innovations of the age have their own characteristics and defects,
especially if they are related to the level of human need and their daily
dealings, the problem that the research is trying to answer is what is the
extent of the contribution of social media to the exacerbation of the
phenomenon of digital violence on the human being as an interacting
sender and receiver, and on social or political interactions Which
adopted soft powers instead of hard.
- Investigate the violence that social media exerted on the user in
linguistic communication with - the digital authority itself or others.
- Indicating the extent of violence and communication with the user
- The impact of the development of communication Digital on the
evolution of violence used in social media.
1.2. Research questions
To achieve its objectives, the research sought to answer the following
questions:

* Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: m.abdallahtani@uoh.edu.sa (M.E.N. Abdallah Tani), S20200664@uoh.edu.sa (T.K.A. Alrasheed).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.measen.2022.100646
Received 23 September 2022; Received in revised form 23 November 2022; Accepted 12 December 2022
Available online 13 December 2022
2665-9174/© 2022 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-
nc-nd/4.0/).
M.E.N. Abdallah Tani and T.K.A. Alrasheed
1-What is the nature of violence practiced by social media?
2-What is the extent of violence and communication with the user?
3-are the levels of violence used in social media?
1.3. Study hypotheses
1 There is self-defense after being blackmailed by social media
accounts.
2 There is an exposure of users’ private photos being posted without
their knowledge.
3 There, the respondents were exposed to posting obscene pictures on
social media.
4 There is exposure among the respondents who have not been sub­
jected to impersonation on social media and displaying it in a bad
way.
5 There is exposure among the respondents that their electronic ac­
count was not hacked.
6 Some respondents felt fear when their accounts on social media were
hacked.
7 Reciprocity during exposure to insult and abuse on social media.
8 Immunization of the social networking account distance Exposure of
the user to any form of electronic violence.
2. Previous studies
What is clear to the research through previous studies that dealt with
violence in general or linguistic, apparent and symbolic, is that it takes
place beginning with language; By spreading ideologies or insults,
defamation, cursing, indoctrination of information, and control of
emotions, and most of the negotiation of violence is that the predomi­
nant violence spoken of is physical and material violence, and linguistic
is apparent violence, but what should be sensed and aware of its danger
is violence that is practiced with guidance and planning and applies to
the interlocutors without Rejecting or creating a linguistic collision ac­
cording to multiple patterns to prevent: the irrational, the extended [1,
2].
2.1. The uses and gratifications theory
Active audience assumption: Howitt claims that the old theories
viewed the audience as a passive recipient of the power of messages and
their effective impact, until the concept of a stubborn audience appeared
that searches for what it wants to be exposed to and controls the choice
of means that present this content [3].
Where this assumption restored the theory that viewed the audience
as a passive, powerless and easy-to-influence recipient, and became seen
as an active audience that picks and chooses what interests it from the
messages and means of communication to satisfy its needs in the end [4].
2.2. The social and psychological origins of media use
The emergence of the concept of selective based on individual dif­
ferences has led to the assumption that different types of people choose
activities themselves and interpret the media in various and different
ways, that is, psychological factors can lead to the existence of incentives
and determine5 the origins of many uses of the media [5]. Numerous
studies have provided empirical evidence on the role of demographic
and social factors in exposure to the media: such as the association of
this exposure with gender, age, occupation, and educational, social and
economic levels [6].
Motives of public exposure to the media: There are different points of
view to study the motives of public exposure to the media, but in gen­
eral, most studies divide motives of exposure into two categories) [7].
2
Measurement: Sensors 25 (2023) 100646
3. Related work
3.1. The concept of violence
The simplest definition of violence is causing harm to another. In the
language, violence is derived from the subject of violence, where it is
said to be violent with or against him, i.e. taking it with force and
strength, so it is violent [8]، and violence in the tongue of the Arabs
means breaching an order and lack of kindness to it and against it, and
the most violent thing is taking it, and rebuke is reprimanding and
blaming [9]. As for the Cambridge Dictionary of Sociology, the essence
of violence is inflicting physical harm or harming one person to another,
and the forms of violence according to the dictionary include beating,
rape, torture and murder [10].
3.2. Digital and linguistic and symbolic violence
Violence can be practiced in the various aspects of life in which
language operates. In addition to daily life and individual communica­
tion, violence is practiced in modern technology programs such as
television [11], official political speeches [12] and informal, and the
cultural production of society in all its literary genres, such as novels
[13] and it is also found in the largest literary production in circulation
among the Arabs, which is poetry [14], but the informational commu­
nication boom in the world has made linguistic violence spread in more
places, and even pursues people whether they like it or not, as social
communication and revolution programs Digital has become close to
people in general and youth - who are the backbone of societies and their
backbone - in particular, and people rely on these programs to receive
information, including political ones, and even receive them directly
through their mobile devices more than any means they might meet in
their free time and specific places where events are different. Direct and
non-intensive, studies have shown that users of digital news rely on
mobile phones and their programs more than other media [15–17] as
shown by the results of the study, and according to all of the above, see
the Examine the importance of contributing to the study of violence in
the language of society and digital power [20].
3.3. Forms of violence
Forms of violence are distinguished from non-material forms of so­
cial power such as coercion, power, ideology, or social power [21]
Violence is the most extreme expression of power, as it contains the
maximum potential of total power. Daily verbal interactions and cul­
tural and theatrical performances may contain forms of Violence may be
in what people are accustomed to in linguistic communication between
themselves or between themselves and the technological innovations of
the age).
4. Results
The violence of modern digitals is represented in its spread and the
dependence of the speaker and interlocutor in life and scientific dealings
on it, and in the attractiveness of technology and programs that incites
communicators to submit to it and use it.
A language that carries violence has infiltrated through scenes or
terms during the stage of socialization in which a person has been
brought up and implicitly taught the principles of this violence through
language, and has met electronic worlds that contain various disturbing
messages, including: frivolous, harmful, and ambiguous [18,19].
It is clear from Table 1 that 81% of the respondents are males, while
19% of the respondents are females.
It is clear from Table 2 That (12.0%) of the respondents are less than
20 years old, while (53.0%) of the respondents are from 20 to less than
30 years old, while (14.0%) of the respondents are From 30 to less than
40 years, while (21.0%) of the respondents are over 40 years old.
M.E.N. Abdallah Tani and T.K.A. Alrasheed Measurement: Sensors 25 (2023) 100646

Table 1 Table 4
Distribution of respondents according to gender. Distribution of respondents according to marital status.
percentage Repetition sex M percentage Marital status M

81% 19 Mention 1 90.9% Unmarried 1

19% 04 feminine 2 9.1% married 2
100.0% 23 the total 100.0% the total

Table 2 Table 5
Distribution of respondents according to age. Distribution of respondents according to the use of social me.
percentage the age M percentage If the answer is yes, then what is it M

12.0% Less than 20 years old 1 68.2% Twitter 2

53.0% From 20 to less than 30 years old 2 22.7% snap chat 3
14.0% From 30 to less than 40 years old 3 9.1% Instagram 4
21.0% More than 40 years old 4 100.0% the total
100.0% the total

It is clear from Table 3 that (4.0%) of the respondents have qualifi­ Table 6
cations Others with 4.5%, while 4.5% of the respondents hold a sec­ Distribution of respondents according to the use of other social networking site.
ondary qualification, while (90.9%) of the respondents have a university percentage Use other social networking sites M
qualification. 22.0% What’s Up 1
It is clear from Table 4 that 90.9% of the respondents are single, 59.0% two of the above 2
while9.1% of the respondents are married. 19.0% all of the above 3
100.0% the total
It is clear from Table 5 that 68.2% of the respondents have an ac­
count o Twitter، while 22.7% of the respondents have an account on
Snapchat، while (9.1% of the respondents have an Instagram account.
It is clear from Table 6 that 4.0%22.0 of the respondents have an Table 7
account on Whats App, while 3.0 59.0% of the respondents have an Distribution of respondents according to self-defense after extortion by social
media.
account on two of the above, while 12.0%19) of the respondents have an
account on whatever. percentage For self-defense after blackmail by social media M
It is clear from Table 7 that the percentage 7.0%) is single ʺ never ʺ of 7.0% Start 1
the sample members For self-defense after blackmail by social media, we 13.6% mostly 2
also recorded a rate (13.6% single ʺ often ʺ We recorded the lowest 4.5% sometimes 3
9.1% Scarcely 4
percentage 4.5% of the term “sometimes” and 9.1% of the term “rarely”،
40.0% Always 5
and the highest percentage 40% of the term “always” of the sample. For 100.0% the total
self-defense after blackmail by social media.
It is clear from Table 8 that the percentage Table 7 is single never⁒ of
the sample members For self-defense after blackmail by social media, we
Table 8
also recorded a rate 13.6% single ʺ often ʺ We recorded the lowest Distribution of respondents according to receiving swearing and insulting ex­
percentage 4.5% of the term “sometimes” and 9.1% of the term “rarely”, pressions through chat rooms.
and the highest percentage 40% of the term “always” of the sample. For
percentage Receiving swear words and insults through chat rooms M
self-defense after blackmail by social media.
It is clear from Table .12 that the rate 77.3% of the respondents were 22.7% Start 1
50% sometimes 3
not exposed to blackmail during the conversation by a user, while often
27.3% Scarcely 4
and sometimes we recorded a rate of 4.5% Of the respondents, they were 100% the total
subjected to blackmail during the conversation by a user، while rarely
were those who were subjected to blackmail during the conversation by
a user at a rate of 13.6. %
Table 9
It is clear from Table 10 that the rate 68.2% of the respondents were Distribution of respondents according to exposure to blackmail during a con­
not exposed to publishing their own pictures without their knowledge, versation by a user.
while often and sometimes of the respondents were exposed to pub­
percentage Being blackmailed during a conversation by a user M
lishing their own pictures without their knowledge (see Table 9). We
recorded 9.1% while rarely of the respondents were exposed to pub­ 77.3% Start 1
4.5% mostly 2
lishing Their private pictures without their knowledge we recorded by
4.5% sometimes 3
(13.6%). 13.6% Scarcely 4
It is clear from Table 11 that the rate 68.2% of the respondents were 100.0% the total

not exposed to the publication of obscene images on social media, while

Table 3
we often recorded a percentage of (9.1%) , while sometimes we recorded
Distribution of respondents according to educational level.
the highest rate (40.9%), % while we rarely recorded 4. Those who have
percentage Educational level M
been subjected to posting indecent images on social media, While we
4.5% other 2 always recorded 18.2 %From Individuals to sample who They were
4.5% secondary 3 subjected to posting indecent photos on social media.
90.9% collegiate 4
It is clear from Table 12 that the percentage of (81.8%) of the
100.0% the total

3
M.E.N. Abdallah Tani and T.K.A. Alrasheed Measurement: Sensors 25 (2023) 100646

Table 10 Table 14
Distribution of respondents according to their exposure to posting photos of the Distribution of respondents according to their exposure to hacking of their
user on social media without the user’s knowledge. electronic account.
percentage Posting photos of the user on social media without the user’s M percentage Exposure to hacking of their electronic account M
knowledge
68.2% Start 1
68.2% Start 1 4.5% mostly 3
9.1% mostly 2 13.6% sometimes 4
9.1% sometimes 3 13.6% Scarcely
13.6% Scarcely 4 100% the total
100.0% the total

Table 15
Table 11 Distribution of respondents according to their exposure to threats through chat
Distribution of the respondents according to their exposure to shameful pictures rooms on social media.
on social media.
percentage Exposing them to threats through chat rooms on social media M
percentage He was exposed to posting obscene photos on social media M
68.2% Start 1
27.3% Start 1 4.5% mostly 3
9.1% mostly 2 9.1% sometimes 4
40.9% sometimes 3 18.2% Scarcely
4.5% Scarcely 4 100% the total
18.2% Always 5
100.0% the total

Table 16
Distribution of respondents according to their feeling of fear when their social
Table 12 media accounts were hacked.
Distributions of the respondents according to the exposure of impersonation on
social media and showing it in a bad way. percentage Because they feel afraid while hacking their social media M
accounts
percentage Exposure to impersonation on social media and showing it in a M
bad way 54.5% Start 1
13.6% mostly 3
81.8% Start 1 4.5% sometimes 4
04.5% sometimes 3 9.1% Scarcely 5
13.6% Scarcely 4 18.2% Always 6
100% the total 100% the total

respondents did not experience impersonation on social media and
display it in a bad way, while those who were subjected to impersona­
tion on social media and display it in a bad way at a rate of (4.5%) , while
rarely They were exposed to impersonation on social media and por­
trayed it in a bad way, at a rate of (% 13.6).
It is clear from Table 13 that 81.8 of the respondents did not %
experience the publication of private videos defaming your reputation
on social media، while most of the respondents did not experience the
publication of private videos defaming your reputation on social media
at a rate of (9.1%). While those who were exposed to impersonation on
social media rarely showed it in a bad way, at a rate of (9.1%).
It is clear from Table 14 that 68.2 %of the respondents have not
experienced hacking of their electronic account, while ʺ rarely and ʺ
sometimes ʺ Of the respondents, their electronic account was hacked by
(13.6%), while 4.5% were those whose electronic account was hacked.
It is clear from Table 15 that 68.2% of the respondents were not
exposed to threats through chat rooms on social media, and ʺ often ʺ
4.5% of respondents are exposed to threats through chat rooms on social
media, while ʺ sometimes ʺ 9.1% of respondents are exposed to threats
through chat rooms on social media, while ʺ rarely Of the respondents,
they are exposed to threats through chat rooms on social media. . 18.2%.
It is clear from Table 16 that 54.5% of the respondents did not feel
afraid when their accounts on social media were hacked, and ʺ often ʺ
Table 13
Distribution of respondents according to their exposure to private videos that
defame your reputation on social media.
percentage Post private videos defaming your reputation on social media M
81.8% Start 1 18.2%
9.1% mostly 3 4.5%
9.1% Scarcely 4 36.4%
100% the total
(13.6%) of the respondents feel fear when their social media accounts
are hacked, while ʺ sometimes ʺ (45%) of the respondents feel fear when
their social media accounts are hacked, while ʺ rarely (9.1%) of the
respondents feel fear when their social media accounts are hacked; while
ʺ is always ʺ (18.2%) of the respondents feel fear when their social media
accounts are hacked.
It is clear from Table 17 that 40.5% of the respondents did not in­
crease their anxiety when they received anonymous messages in chat
rooms, and most of the respondents increased their anxiety when they
received anonymous messages in chat rooms by 18.2%, while ʺsome­
times’ Of the respondents, anxiety increased when they received anon­
ymous messages in chat rooms by (45%), while among respondents,
anxiety increased when they received anonymous messages in chat
rooms. (36.4%).
It is clear from Table 18 that the percentage of 77.5 %of the re­
spondents. They didn’t get nervous while browsing social media, and ʺ
rarely ʺ of the sample members of the sample members They did not feel
nervous while browsing social media (22.7%).
It is clear from Table 19 that the percentage of 54.5% of the re­
spondents They did not panic once the user’s photos were exploited and
manipulated and in social media, and ʺ often ʺ of the sample members
Table 17
Distribution of respondents according to the increase in anxiety when receiving
anonymous messages in chat rooms.
percentage Increased anxiety when receiving anonymous messages in chat M
rooms
40.9% Start 1
mostly 3
sometimes 4
Scarcely 5
100% the total

4
M.E.N. Abdallah Tani and T.K.A. Alrasheed Measurement: Sensors 25 (2023) 100646

Table 18 Table 21
Distribution of respondents according to the sense of tension while browsing Distribution of respondents according to self-defense after blackmailing the user
social media. through social media.
percentage Sensation and feeling of tension while surfing M percentage Self-defense after blackmailing a user via social media M
Social media
31.8% Start 1
77.3% Start 1 13.6% mostly 3
22.7% Scarcely 5 9.1% Scarcely 4
100% the total 4.5% sometimes 5
40.9% Always 6
100% the total

Table 19
Distributions of respondents according to the feeling of panic once the user’s
images are exploited and manipulated and on social media. Table 22
Distribution of respondents according to self-defense after blackmailing the user
percentage The feeling of panic once the user’s photos are exploited M
through social media.
And manipulate it and in social media
percentage Self-defense after blackmailing a user via social media M
54.5% Start 1
45% mostly 3 31.8% Start 1
22.7% Scarcely 4 13.6% mostly 3
18.2% Always 5 9.1% Scarcely 4
100% the total 4.5% sometimes 5
40.9% Always 6
100% the total
They felt panic once the user’s images were exploited and manipulated
on social media by (45%), while ʺ rarely ʺ They felt panic once the user’s
images were exploited and manipulated on social media by (22.7%), Table 23
while ʺ always ʺ of the sample members They felt panic once the user’s Distribution of respondents according to the protection and immunity of the
images were exploited and manipulated on social media, at a rate of account on social media after the user was exposed to any form of electronic
(18.2%). violence.
It is clear from Table 20 that the percentage of71.4% of the re­ percentage Account protection on social media yet Exposure of the user to M
spondents They were not treated reciprocally after being subjected to any form of electronic violence
insults and insults on social media, just as ʺ is often ʺ of the sample 27.3% Start 1
members They were treated similarly after being subjected to insults and 4.5% mostly 3
insults on social media by (4.8%), while ʺ rarely ʺ of the sample members 9.1% Scarcely 4
They were treated similarly after being subjected to insults and insults 59.1% Always 6
100% the total
on social media by (19%), while ʺ sometimes ʺ of the sample members
They were treated similarly after being subjected to insults and insults
on social media, with a rate of (4.8%). electronic violence, and ʺ often ʺ Of the respondents, (4.5%) fortified
It is clear from Table 21 that the percentage of 31.8% of the re­ their account on social media after the user was exposed to any form of
spondents is self-defense after blackmailing the user through social electronic violence, while ʺ rarely (9.1%) of the respondents fortified
media, and most of the respondents are self-defense after blackmailing their account on social media after the user was exposed to any form of
the user via social media at a rate of (13.6%), while (13.6%) (9.1%) of electronic violence, while ʺ always ʺ (⁒59.1 of the respondents fortified
the respondents rarely defended themselves after blackmailing the user their account on social media after the user was exposed to any form of
via social media, while ʺsometimes ʺ of the respondents defended electronic violence.
themselves after blackmailing the user via social media with a rate of
(4.5%), while ʺalways’ of the respondents defended themselves After 5. Discussion
blackmailing the user via social media, with a rate of (40.9%).
It is clear from Table 22 that (31.8%) of the respondents expressed 1. The first hypothesis:
self-defense after blackmailing the user through social media, and ʺ often
ʺ (13.6%) of the sample responded to self-defense after blackmailing the There is self-defense after being blackmailed by social media ac­
user via social media, while ʺ rarely ʺ Of the respondents self-defense counts. The hypothesis was confirmed, as stated in the results of the
after blackmailing the user via social media, with a rate of (9.1%), study that (77.3%) of the respondents were not subjected to blackmail
while ʺ sometimes ʺ Of the respondents, self-defense after blackmailing during the conversation by a user.
the user via social media, by (4.5%), while ʺ always ʺ Of the respondents,
self-defense after blackmailing the user via social media, (40.9%). 2. The second hypothesis:
It is clear from Table 23 that 27.3% of the respondents did not secure
their account on social media after the user was exposed to any form of There is an exposure of users’ private photos being posted without
their knowledge. The hypothesis was refuted, as stated in the results of
the study, that (68.2%) of the respondents were not subjected to the
Table 20 publication of their private pictures without their knowledge.
Distribution of respondents according to reciprocity after exposure to insults and
insults on social media.
3. The third hypothesis:
percentage Reciprocity after being insulted and insulted on social media M

71.4% Start 1 There, the respondents were exposed to posting obscene pictures on
4.8% mostly 3 social media. The hypothesis was refuted, as stated in the results of the
19% Scarcely 4 study, that (68.2%) of the respondents were not exposed to the publi­
4.8% sometimes 5
cation of indecent images on social media.
100% the total

5
M.E.N. Abdallah Tani and T.K.A. Alrasheed
4. The fourth hypothesis:
There is exposure among the respondents who have not been sub­
jected to impersonation on social media and displaying it in a bad way.
The hypothesis was refuted as it was stated in the results of the study
that the percentage (81.8%) of the respondents did not experience
impersonation on social media and show it in a picture.
5. The fifth hypothesis:
There is exposure among the respondents that their electronic ac­
count was not hacked. The hypothesis was refuted, as stated in the re­
sults of the study, that (68.2%) of the respondents had not experienced
hacking of their electronic account.
6. The sixth hypothesis:
Some respondents felt fear when their accounts on social media were
hacked. The hypothesis was refuted as it was stated in the results of the
study that (54.5%) of the respondents did not feel fear when their ac­
counts on social media were hacked.
7. The seventh hypothesis:
Reciprocity during exposure to insult and abuse on social media. The
hypothesis was refuted, as stated in the results of the study, that (71.4%)
of the respondents were not treated reciprocally after being subjected to
insults and insults on social media, The percentage 68.2% of the re­
spondents have an account on Twitter, while the percentage (22.7%) of
the respondents have an account on Snapchat, while the percentage
9.1% of the respondents have an Instagram account.
The percentage 7.0%) of the respondents did not defend themselves
after blackmail by social media, and we also recorded a rate of (13.6%)
single ʺ often ʺ And we recorded the lowest percentage 4.5%) of the term
“sometimes” and (9.1%) of the term “rarely”. We also recorded the
highest rate (40%) of the respondents who defended themselves after
extortion by social media.
The percentage (77.3%) of the respondents were not exposed to
blackmail during the conversation by a user, while often and sometimes
we recorded 4.5% of the respondents were exposed to blackmail during
the conversation by a user, while rarely those who were subjected to
blackmail during the conversation by a user by (13.6%. That the per­
centage (77.3%) of the respondents were not exposed to blackmail
during the conversation by a user, while often and sometimes we
recorded 4.5% of the respondents were exposed to blackmail during the
conversation by a user, while rarely those who were subjected to
blackmail during the conversation by a user by (13.6%.)
The percentage (68.2%) of the respondents were not subjected to the
publication of their private photos without their knowledge, while most
and sometimes of the respondents were subjected to the publishing of
their own photos without their knowledge, we recorded a rate of 9.1%,
while rarely of the respondents were subjected to the publication of their
private photos without their knowledge, we recorded a percentage
(13.6%).
The percentage (68.2%) of the respondents were not exposed to the
publication of indecent images on social media, while we often recorded
(9.1%), while sometimes we recorded the highest rate (40.9%), while
we rarely recorded (4.5%) of those who were exposed to publication
Indecent photos on social media, while we always recorded (18.2%) of
the sampled individuals who were exposed to posting indecent photos
on social media.
The percentage of (81.8%) of the respondents did not experience
impersonation on social media and display it in a bad way, while those
who were exposed to impersonation on social media sometimes and
display it in a bad way at a rate of (4.5%), while rarely those who were
exposed to impersonation on social media and showing it in a bad way
6
Measurement: Sensors 25 (2023) 100646
by (13.6%).
The percentage of (81.8%) of the respondents did not experience the
publication of private videos defaming your reputation on social media,
while most of the respondents did not experience the publication of
private videos defaming your reputation on social media at a rate of
(9.1%), while those who were rarely subjected to impersonation on
Social media and showing it in a bad way (9.1%).
The percentage (68.2%) of respondents did not experience hacking
of their electronic account, while ʺ rarely ʺ and ʺ sometimes ʺ (13.6%) of
the respondents experienced hacking of their electronic accounts, while
(4.5%) of respondents experienced hacking of their electronic accounts.
The percentage (68.2%) of the respondents were not exposed to
threats through chat rooms on social media, and ʺ often ʺ (4.5%) of re­
spondents are exposed to threats through chat rooms on social media,
while ʺ sometimes ʺ (9.1%) of respondents are exposed to threats
through chat rooms on social media, while ʺ rarely (18.2%) of re­
spondents are exposed to threats through chat rooms on social media.
The percentage (54.5%) of the respondents did not feel fear when
their accounts on social media were hacked, and ʺ often ʺ (13.6%) of the
respondents feel fear when their social media accounts are hacked, while
ʺ sometimes ʺ (45%) of the respondents feel fear when their social media
accounts are hacked, while ʺ rarely (9.1%) of the respondents feel fear
when their social media accounts are hacked; while ʺ is always ʺ (18.2%)
of the respondents feel fear when their social media accounts are
hacked.
The percentage (40.5%) of respondents did not increase their anxiety
when receiving anonymous messages in chat rooms, and ʺ often ʺ Of the
respondents, anxiety increased when receiving anonymous messages in
chat rooms by (18.2%), while ʺ sometimes ʺ Of the respondents, anxiety
increased when receiving anonymous messages in chat rooms by (45%),
while ʺ rarely Of the respondents, anxiety increased when receiving
anonymous messages in chat rooms by (36.4%).
The percentage (77.5%) of the respondents did not feel nervous
while browsing social media, and ʺ rarely ʺ Of the sample members,
(22.7%) did not feel nervous while browsing social media.
The percentage (54.5%) of the respondents did not feel panic once
the user’s images were exploited and manipulated on social media, and ʺ
often ʺ (45%) of the respondents felt panic once the user’s images were
exploited and manipulated on social media, while ʺ rarely ʺ felt panic
once the user’s images were exploited and manipulated and on social
media by (22.7%), while ʺ always ʺ (18.2%) of the respondents felt panic
when the user’s photos were exploited and manipulated on social media.
The percentage (71.4%) of the respondents were not treated recip­
rocally after being subjected to insults and insults on social media, and ʺ
often ʺ (4.8%) of the respondents were treated similarly after being
subjected to insults and insults on social media, while ʺ rarely (19%) of
the respondents were treated similarly after being subjected to insults
and insults on social media, while ʺ sometimes ʺ Of the respondents,
(4.8%) were treated similarly after being subjected to insults and insults
on social media.
The percentage (31.8%) of the respondents expressed self-defense
after blackmailing the user through social media, and ʺ often ʺ
(13.6%) of the sample responded to self-defense after blackmailing the
user via social media, while ʺ rarely ʺ Of the respondents self-defense
after blackmailing the user via social media, with a rate of (9.1%),
while ʺ sometimes ʺ Of the respondents, self-defense after blackmailing
the user via social media, by (4.5%), while ʺ always ʺ Of the respondents,
self-defense after blackmailing the user via social media, by (40.9%).
The percentage (27.3%) of the respondents did not secure their ac­
count on social media after the user was exposed to any form of elec­
tronic violence, and ʺ often ʺ Of the respondents, (4.5%) fortified their
account on social media after the user was exposed to any form of
electronic violence, while ʺ rarely (9.1%) of the respondents fortified
their account on social media after the user was exposed to any form of
electronic violence, while ʺ always ʺ (59.1%) of the respondents fortified
their account on social media after the user was exposed to any form of
M.E.N. Abdallah Tani and T.K.A. Alrasheed
electronic violence.
CRediT authorship contribution statement
Mohammed EL Nadir Abdallah Tani: Conceptualization, Method­
ology, Software, Validation, Formal analysis, Resources. Talal Khalid
Aljabr Alrasheed: Supervision, Writing – original draft, Writing – re­
view & editing, Visualization.
Declaration of competing interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial
interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence
the work reported in this paper.
Data availability
No data was used for the research described in the article.
Aknowledement
This research has been funded by Scientific Research Deanship at
University of Ha’il – Saudi Arabia through project numbe GR-22 024”.
References
[1] A. Abramovitch, D.A. Pizzagalli, L. Reuman, S. Wilhelm, Anhedonia in obsessive-
compulsive disorder: beyond comorbid depression, Psychiatr. Res. 216 (2) (2014)
223–229.
[2] M. Axness, Mail attachment and the self-struggle, J. Prenat. Perinat. Psychol.
Health 19 (2) (2004) 131–147.
[3] S.S. Bhar, M. Kyrios, An investigation of self-ambivalence in obsessive-compulsive
disorder. Behaviour Research and Therapy 45 (8) (2007) 1845–1857.
[4] M.M. Breuninger, J.A. Wilt, C.L. Bautista, K.I. Pargament, J.J. Exline, T.L. Fletcher,
E.J. Teng, The invisible battle: a descriptive study of religious/spiritual struggles in
veterans, Mil. Psychol. 31 (6) (2019) 433–449.
Measurement: Sensors 25 (2023) 100646
[5] C. Buonanno, E. Iuliano, G. Grossi, F. Mancini, E. Stendardo, F. Tudisco, B. Pizzini,
Forgiveness in the modulation of responsibility in a sample of Italian adolescents
with a tendency towards conduct or obsessive-compulsive problems, Brain Sci. 11
(10) (2021) 1333.
[6] D.L. Chambless, M.M. Gillis, Cognitive therapy of anxiety disorders, J. Consult.
Clin. Psychol. 61 (2) (1993) 248.
[7] L. Costa Jr., E.L. Worthington, C.C. Montanha, A.B. Couto, C. Cunha, Construct
validity of two measures of self-forgiveness in Portugal: a study of self-forgiveness,
psychological symptoms, and well-being, Research in Psychotherapy:
Psychopathology, Process, and Outcome 24 (1) (2021).
[8] K.E. Ellis, Responsibility as a Moderator between Self-Forgiveness and Depressive
Symptoms, Doctoral dissertation, Middle Tennessee State University, 2014.
[9] J.J. Exline, S.J. Homolka, V.A. Harriott, Divine struggles: links with body image
concerns, binging, and compensatory behaviors around eating, Ment. Health Relig.
Cult. 19 (1) (2016) 8–22.
[10] S. Ferreira, B. Couto, M. Sousa, R. Vieira, N. Sousa, M. Picó-Pérez, P. Morgado,
Stress influences the effect of obsessive-compulsive symptoms on emotion
regulation, Front. Psychiatr. 11 (2021) 1622.
[11] Bilal S.A. Alhayani, Nagham Hamid, et al., Optimized Video Internet of Things
Using Elliptic Curve Cryptography Based Encryption and Decryption, Computers
and Electrical Engineering, Volume101, 2022.
[12] S. Ferrier, C.R. Brewin, Feared identity and obsessive-compulsive disorder, Behav.
Res. Ther. 43 (10) (2005) 1363–1374.
[13] H.P. Hsu, The psychological meaning of self-forgiveness in a collectivist context
and the measure development, Psychol. Res. Behav. Manag. 14 (2021) 2059.
[14] S.T. Abbas, H.J. Mohammed, J.S. Ahmed, et al., The optimization efficient energy
cooperative communication image transmission over WSN, Appl. Nanosci. (2021).
[15] H. Nelson-Becker, M. Thomas, Religious/spiritual struggles and spiritual resilience
in marginalized older adults, Religions 11 (9) (2020) 431.
[16] C. Palmer, Does Religiosity Inhibit the Proclivity to Self-Forgive?, 2020.
[17] S. Rachman, A cognitive theory of obsessions, in: Behavior and Cognitive Therapy
Today, Pergamon, 1998, pp. 209–222.
[18] S. Rachman, A cognitive theory of obsessions: Elaborations, Behavior research and
therapy 36 (4) (1998) 385–401.
[19] A. Bassel, A.B. Abdulkareem, Z.A.A. Alyasseri, N.S. Sani, H.J. Mohammed,
Automatic malignant and benign skin cancer classification using a hybrid deep
learning approach, Diagnostics 12 (10) (2022).
[20] I.Z. Chaloob, R. Ramli, Mohd Kamal Mohd Nawawi, Measuring economic and
environmental efficiency for agricultural zones in Iraq using data envelopment
analysis, Int. J. Inf. Decis. Sci. 10 (3) (2018) 235–248.
[21] A. Hameed Al-ali, L. Khalid Qalaja, A. Abu-Rumman, Justice in organizations and
its impact on Organizational Citizenship Behaviors: a multidimensional approach,
Cogent Business & Management 6 (1) (2019), 1698792.