Department of Vocational School of Social Sciences, Batman University, Batman, 72060, Türkiye
Abstract
This study aims to examine the barriers encountered in the digital empathy development process and the proposed solutions, from the perspective of young participants in non-formal education activities conducted under the Erasmus+ KA154-YOU "Enhancing Digital Empathy Skills of Youth" project. A qualitative research approach with a case study design was employed. The study group consisted of 30 young people aged 18-30, of whom 20 were experienced participants who had attended all project workshops while 10 were new participants who joined only the final workshop. Data were collected through group discussions and semi-structured individual interviews and analyzed using Braun and Clarke’s six-phase thematic analysis method. Findings revealed that barriers to digital empathy were grouped under four main themes: (1) Individual/Psychological barriers, (2) Technological/Structural barriers, (3) Social/Cultural barriers, and (4) Educational barriers. Solution proposals were classified under six categories: parental attitudes and family education, environmental factors, educational institutions, combating social isolation, addressing emotional deficits, and internet access regulations. Experienced participants emphasized systemic and institutional solutions, whereas new participants approached the issue from individual and experiential perspectives. The findings provide important data for developing digital empathy training programs, integrating them into curricula, and shaping youth policies in the digital era. The study contributes culturally specific recommendations relevant to the Turkish context, including the integration of digital empathy themes into religious and community-based education channels.
Keywords
Digital empathy, digital communication, Erasmus+,youth,qualitative research
How to Cite
Yildirmaz, A. (2026). Barriers and solutions in the digital empathy process from the perspective of youth: A qualitative study. International Journal of Eurasia Social Sciences, 17(65), 986–1002. https://doi.org/10.70736/ijoess.2365
📄Abou Hashish, E. A. (2025). Compassion through technology: Digital empathy concept analysis and implications in nursing. Digital Health, 11, 20552076251326221. [Crossref]
📄Ahmmad, M., Shahzad, K., Iqbal, A., & Latif, M. (2025). Trap of social media algorithms: A systematic review of research on filter bubbles, echo chambers, and their impact on youth. Societies, 15(11), 301. [Crossref]
📄Akın, S. (2024). Gençlerin dijital teknolojiyi kullanma biçimleri ve dijital şiddet üzerine nitel bir çalışma [Yayımlanmamış yüksek lisans tezi]. Süleyman Demirel Üniversitesi.
📄Akyüz, A., & Koç, Z. (2020). Empati yönelimli siber zorbalık psiko-eğitim programının lise 9. ve 10. sınıf öğrencilerinin siber zorbalık ve empati düzeylerine etkisi. Gazi Üniversitesi Gazi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 40(1), 75–111. [Crossref]
📄Alenezi, N., & Alfaleh, M. (2024). Enhancing digital citizenship education in Saudi Arabian elementary schools: Designing effective activities for curriculum integration. Frontiers in Education, 9, 1494487. [Crossref]
📄Bandura, A. (1977). Social learning theory. Prentice Hall.
📄Barnett, M. A., & Mann, T. E. (2013). Empathy and prosocial behavior. In D. S. Dunn (Ed.), Oxford bibliographies in psychology. Oxford University Press.
📄Bayrakçı, M. (2007). Sosyal öğrenme kuramı ve eğitimde uygulanması. Sakarya Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 14, 198–210.
📄Bickham, D. S., Moukalled, S., Inyart, H. K., & Zlokower, R. (2021). Evaluating a middle-school digital citizenship curriculum (Screenshots): Quasi-experimental study. JMIR Mental Health, 8(9), e26197. [Crossref]
📄Börsting, J., Schwarze, V., Theophilou, E., Sánchez-Reina, J. R., Odakura, V., Taibi, D., … et al. (2026). An empathy training for sensitizing adolescents for cyberbullying on social media: A cross-national study. International Journal of Bullying Prevention, 8, 495–511. [Crossref]
📄Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. [Crossref]
📄Bussu, A., Pulina, M., Ashton, S.-A., Mangiarulo, M., & Molloy, E. (2025). Cyberbullying and cyberstalking victimisation among university students: A narrative systematic review. International Review of Victimology, 31(1), 59–90. [Crossref]
📄Castellanos, M., Wettstein, A., Wachs, S., Kansok-Dusche, J., Ballaschk, C., Krause, N., … et al. (2023). Hate speech in adolescents: A binational study on prevalence and demographic differences. Frontiers in Education, 8, 1076249. [Crossref]
📄Cinelli, M., De Francisci Morales, G., Galeazzi, A., Quattrociocchi, W., & Starnini, M. (2021). The echo chamber effect on social media. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 118(9), e2023301118. [Crossref]
📄Collins, A. M., Warburton, W. A., Bussey, K., & Sweller, N. (2024). Factor structure and psychometric properties of the Digital Communication Empathy Scale (DCES). International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 183, 103183. [Crossref]
📄Richardson, J., & Milovidov, E. (2019). Digital citizenship education handbook: Being online, well-being online, and rights online. Council of Europe.
📄Creswell, J. W. (2013). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches (3rd ed.). SAGE Publications.
📄Çimşir, E., Akdoğan, R., & Akbayrak, A. (2024). Turkish adolescents’ anonymous use of social networking sites (SNSs): A phenomenological study. Psychology in the Schools, 61(7), 2912–2929. [Crossref]
📄Dağcı-Günal, B., & Ayaz-Alkaya, S. (2025). Cyberbullying and empathy levels in adolescents and predictive factors: A cross-sectional study. Public Health Nursing, 42(6), 1794–1801. [Crossref]
📄Davis, M. H. (1983). Measuring individual differences in empathy: Evidence for a multidimensional approach. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 44(1), 113–126. [Crossref]
📄Doğan, T., Erbiçer, E. S., Akın, E., Koçtürk, N., Koca, D. B., Boranlı, E. N., … et al. (2023). The perspective of school-age adolescents on cyberbullying in Türkiye: A qualitative study. Child Indicators Research, 16(6), 2581–2607. [Crossref]
📄Domínguez-Hernández, F., Bonell, L., & Martínez-González, A. (2018). A systematic literature review of factors that moderate bystanders’ actions in cyberbullying. Cyberpsychology: Journal of Psychosocial Research on Cyberspace, 12(4), Article 1. [Crossref]
📄Francisco, S. M., Ferreira, P. C., Veiga Simão, A. M., & Pereira, N. S. (2023). Measuring empathy online and moral disengagement in cyberbullying. Frontiers in Psychology, 14, 1061482. [Crossref]
📄Friesem, Y. (2016). Empathy for the digital age: Using video production to enhance social, emotional, and cognitive skills. In S. Y. Tettegah & D. L. Espelage (Eds.), Emotions, technology, and behaviors (pp. 21–45). Academic Press. [Crossref]
📄Hosseinmardi, H., Ghasemian, A., Rivera-Lanas, M., Horta Ribeiro, M., West, R., & Watts, D. J. (2024). Causally estimating the effect of YouTube’s recommender system using counterfactual bots. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 121(8), e2313377121. [Crossref]
📄James, C., Collier, A., Davis, K., Konrath, S., Milosevic, T., Milovidov, E., …et al. (2025). Empathy, kindness, and dignity in a connected world. In D. A. Christakis & L. Hale (Eds.), Handbook of children and screens (pp. 231–237). Springer. [Crossref]
📄Karadağ, E., Tosuntaş, Ş. B., Erzen, E., Duru, P., Bostan, N., Şahin, B. M., …et al. (2015). Determinants of phubbing, which is the sum of many virtual addictions: A structural equation model. Journal of Behavioral Addictions, 4(2), 60–74. [Crossref]
📄Konrath, S. H., O’Brien, E. H., & Hsing, C. (2011). Changes in dispositional empathy in American college students over time: A meta-analysis. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 15(2), 180–198. [Crossref]
📄Köse, H., & Balcı Aydoğan, B. (2024). The problem of freedom of expression in the public sphere of social media: Descriptive analysis of the echo chamber effect. Siyasal: Journal of Political Sciences, 33(2), 277–317. [Crossref]
📄Krueger, R. A., & Casey, M. A. (2015). Focus groups: A practical guide for applied research (5th ed.). SAGE Publications.
📄Kuran, N., & Koç, Z. (2025). Türkiye’de 2015–2024 yılları arasında siber zorbalığı önlemeye ve müdahale etmeye yönelik olarak geliştirilen eğitim/psikoeğitim programları: Bir alanyazın taraması. Türk Eğitim Bilimleri Dergisi, 23(1), 438–454. [Crossref]
📄Lacle-Melendez, J., Silva-Medina, S., & Bacca-Acosta, J. (2025). Virtual and augmented reality to develop empathy: A systematic literature review. Multimedia Tools and Applications, 84, 8893–8927. [Crossref]
📄Li, C., Wang, P., Martin-Moratinos, M., Bella-Fernández, M., & Blasco-Fontecilla, H. (2024). Traditional bullying and cyberbullying in the digital age and its associated mental health problems in children and adolescents: A meta-analysis. European Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 33(9), 2895–2909. [Crossref]
📄Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. SAGE Publications.
📄Maftei, A., Holman, A. C., & Merlici, I.-A. (2022). Using fake news as means of cyber-bullying: The link with compulsive Internet use and online moral disengagement. Computers in Human Behavior, 127, 107032. [Crossref]
📄Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2016). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation (4th ed.). Jossey-Bass.
📄Mossner, C., & Walter, S. (2024). Shaping social media minds: Scaffolding empathy in digitally mediated interactions? Topoi, 43(3), 645–658. [Crossref]
📄O’Reilly, M., Levine, D., Batchelor, R., & Adams, S. (2024). Digital ethics of care and digital citizenship in UK primary schools: Children as interviewers. Journal of Children and Media, 18(4), 585–604. [Crossref]
📄Pala, B., Ünalan, P. C., & Ergüney Okumuş, F. E. (2018). Cyberbullying and its correlation to traditional bullying, gender and frequent and risky usage of internet-mediated communication tools. Journal of Family Counseling and Education, 3(2), 9–25.
📄Patton, M. Q. (2015). Qualitative research & evaluation methods: Integrating theory and practice (4th ed.). SAGE Publications.
📄Piccerillo, L., & Digennaro, S. (2025). Adolescent social media use and emotional intelligence: A systematic review. Adolescent Research Review, 10, 201–218. [Crossref]
📄Schroeder, D. A., & Graziano, W. G. (2015). The field of prosocial behavior: An introduction and overview. In D. A. Schroeder & W. G. Graziano (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of prosocial behavior (pp. 3–34). Oxford University Press. [Crossref]
📄Suler, J. (2004). The online disinhibition effect. CyberPsychology & Behavior, 7(3), 321–326. [Crossref]
📄Syrjämäki, A. H., Ilves, M., Olsson, T., Kiskola, J., Isokoski, P., Rantasila, A., …et al. (2024). Online disinhibition mediates the relationship between emotion regulation difficulties and uncivil communication. Scientific Reports, 14, 30019. [Crossref]
📄Terry, C., & Cain, J. (2016). The emerging issue of digital empathy. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, 80(4), 58. [Crossref]
📄Vossen, H. G. M., & Valkenburg, P. M. (2016). Do social media foster or curtail adolescents’ empathy? A longitudinal study. Computers in Human Behavior, 63, 118–124. [Crossref]
📄Yıldızaç, B., & Demir, F. (2021). Siber zorbalık üzerine nitel bir araştırma. Sosyal Sağlık Dergisi, 1(1), 116–139.
📄Yin, R. K. (2018). Case study research and applications: Design and methods (6th ed.). SAGE Publications.
