How one teen's app could stop cyberbullying at its source

Trisha Prabhu says kids aren't evil – they just don't know how to stop and think before hitting 'send' on a cruel message. Enter: ReThink.

Fifteen-year-old Trisha Prabhu thinks ending cyberbullying in teens may be as easy as asking people to stop and rethink before sending a potentially hurtful message.

The solution may sound naive, but she has data on her side: last year, she developed a software program called ReThink that did just that. When forced to slow down and think, kids reduced their willingness to send mean-spirited messages by 93 percent.

Now, her technology is on the cusp of becoming available for download: It will launch this week as an add-on for multiple internet platforms, MTV News reported.

The release caps off two years of labor, starting in 2013 when Ms. Prabhu read about the suicide of a 12-year-old following cyberbullying attacks.

“I’ve been coding from a very young age. I love using my technology skills,” said Prabhu, whose parents are computer scientists, to TakePart. “So I thought, OK, I know how to code. I know that [fighting cyberbullying] is something I’m passionate about. Let me try and fuse them together to see if I can make a difference.”

While conducting research for a science project at her suburban Chicago high school, she found that 12-18-year-olds were 40 percent more willing to send hurtful messages than older age groups.

The adolescent brain is like a car with no brakes, she said in a 2014 TEDxTeen talk. That discovery by neuroscientists confirmed Prabhu’s suspicion that “kids are not mean devils that run around with cruel intentions” – they are less able to slow down and think before acting.

Working off the hypothesis that putting brakes on the teenage brain would result in better decision-making on social media, Prabha developed ReThink.

The software scans message drafts for language that may be offensive or cruel, drawing from Cyberbullying Research Center data, and prompts a warning when a user hits “send.” It gives users the option to reconsider with a message like, “This message may be harmful to others. Are you sure you want to post this message?”

In trials she ran at school, the 71 percent of subjects who were willing to post a hurtful message without the pop-up warning dropped to 4 percent when the warning was added.

“I was shocked,” she told MTV News. “I thought there might be a bit of a change, but part of me thought teens would think it was so stupid that they would feel even more encouraged to post [a hurtful] message.... I realized I’d stumbled onto something that could change the game in cyberbullying.”

Identifying hateful terms in message drafts may not catch subtler instances of bullying, but the organization NoBullying found that in 2014, 1 in 10 middle school and high school students have been on the receiving end of “hate terms.”

Prabhu emphasizes Rethink’s attitude of prevention: stopping bullying at the source, before it happens, rather than putting the burden on victims to report an incident once the damage has already been done – a tactic she found many social media platforms to encourage, which she found troubling. “Because 90 percent of the time the victims don’t tell anyone,” she told MTV News.

“Very rarely in this connected world do we remember we need to slow down, pause, think about what we're doing,” she said in the TEDxTeen talk. “We’re posting a message, and that has significance.”

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.