Becoming an Active Bystander

If most men are nonviolent, why do they not stop violence around them from occurring? Chapter 8 introduces readers to the vibrant field of bystander intervention. Readers will learn the key tenets of bystander intervention strategies as well as their strengths and weaknesses. Most importantly, readers will gain an appreciation for the barriers that prevent boys from interrupting violence that they observe and strategize about how to overcome those barriers. The chapter also discusses whether jokes and “locker room talk” are worthy of interruption. Chapter 8 closes by identifying how boys can help survivors of sexual violence who disclose to them.

Examining the Effect of Perceived Responsibility on Online Bystander Intervention, Target Hardening, and Inaction

Failure to take responsibility for intervening has been identified as a primary barrier to bystander intervention. Building on these findings, we examine how perceptions of responsibility affect responses to witnessing victimization in the online realm—a topic that has received limited attention. Using a maximum-likelihood selection model, we analyze data from the Pew American Trends Panel ( N = 3709) to estimate the effects of respondents’ perceptions of the role different groups should play in addressing online harassment on their likelihood to engage in intervention, target hardening, or inaction in response to witnessing online harassment, conditioned upon their likelihood of having witnessed such behavior. Findings indicate that the greater role respondents believe online users should have in addressing online harassment, the more likely they are to intervene. ( b = .310). The greater role respondents believe law enforcement or elected officials should have in addressing online harassment, the less likely they are to intervene ( b = −.135 and −.072, respectively). These findings have implications for future efforts to curb online harassment through users’ crime prevention efforts.

Structural family factors and bullying at school: a large scale investigation based on a Chinese adolescent sample

Backgrounds Various family factors have been identified in association with school bullying and the involvement of children and adolescents in bullying behaviors. Methods A total of 11,919 participants (female = 6671, mean age = 15) from 22 middle schools in Suzhou City, China completed the questionnaire. The associations between structural family factors (family socio-economic status, living arrangement, number of siblings, whether they were local residents/migrants, had an urban/rural hukou [a household registration system in China], parental and maternal education levels, and other various bullying-related constructs (i.e. bullying witnessing, bullying involvement, bystander intervention, and fear of being bullied) were all examined. Odds ratios (ORs) adjusted for covariates were calculated for the four bullying-related constructs (bullying witness, bullying involvement, bystander intervention, and reactions to being bullied) using structural family factors. Results The result showed that all demographic household characteristics were associated with bullying at school except for being from a single-child family. Adolescents from rural families witnessed more bullying incidents than those from local families (OR = 1.35, 95% CI: [1.09, 1.68]). Adolescents who come from migrant families (OR = 1.12, 95% CI: [1.07, 1.43]) with a rural hukou (OR = 1.31, 95% CI: [1.00, 1.74]) and low parental education levels (OR = 1.42, 95% CI: [1.01, 2.57]) were more likely to be bullies. Adolescents who came from migrant families (OR = 1.37, 95% CI: [1.03, 1.82]), with low maternal education levels (OR = 1.42, 95% CI: [1.06, 1.91]) engaged in more negative bystander intervention behaviors. Furthermore, adolescents with less educated mothers experienced a higher fear of being bullied (never versus sometimes: OR = 1.33, 95% CI: [1.00, 1.85]; never versus usually OR = 1.39, 95% CI: [1.01, 1.20]). Conclusions A systematic examination of the relationship between school bullying and demographic household characteristics may be used to inform school policies on bullying, such as training management on the importance of paying attention to adolescents from disadvantage household backgrounds. Identifying demographic factors that may predict bullying can also be used to prevent individuals from becoming involved in bullying and reduce the related negative consequences from being bullied.

The upstanding for promotion–prevention (UPP) program: A motivation science approach to encourage active bystanding

Social problems and harmful behaviors can be prevented or mitigated when active bystanders intervene to help. As a result, prevention bystander intervention programs aim to prevent problems related to safety (e.g., sexual violence), health (e.g., injury or death), and justice (e.g., racial discrimination). In contrast, promotion bystander intervention programs aim to promote aspirations and desirable behaviors. This reality led us to develop an integrative Upstanding for Promotion-Prevention (UPP) program based on the decision-making steps of a revised bystander intervention model (i.e., notice an opportunity; interpret the situation; assume responsibility; select a promotion or prevention strategy; take action: Latané & Darley, 1970; McCarty, Arnold, Booker, Pacqué, & Liskey, 2021). Program participants experience a promotion track or prevention track to impact either the promoting pathway by changing assets or the protecting pathway by addressing risks and protective factors. The UPP program offers a motivation science approach to encourage upstanders to promote benefit and prevent harm in schools and on college campuses, within workplaces, online, and throughout communities. Ultimately, existing prevention bystander programs could adopt promotion elements to address safety through peace promotion and violence prevention, health through health promotion and disease prevention, and justice through antiracism promotion and racism prevention.

From bystander to ally among faculty colleagues: construction and validation of the bystander intervention behavior scale

PurposeBystander intervention mitigates the negative impact of bias incidents in the workplace. However, intervention tends to be viewed as binary: intervention occurred or it did not. Consequently, research has focused on conditions under which witnesses of bias incidents choose to intervene, and less is known about how witnesses may intervene. This paper elucidates the intervention behavior choices available to witnesses of bias incidents and develops a bystander intervention behavior (BIB) scale.Design/methodology/approachTo develop the scale, the authors used the three-phased act frequency methodology. In phase I, the authors surveyed faculty who had both witnessed a bias incident and seen someone intervene to address it. The authors asked these faculties to list the observed bystander intervention behaviors they had personally observed. In Phase II, different survey respondents and subject matter experts assessed the prototypicality of each of the behaviors in relation to the concept of bystander intervention. In phase III, the authors tested the validity and reliability of the resulting 18-item scale and assessed the ability of bystander intervention behavior to mitigate the negative impact of bias incidents on the academic workplace.FindingsThe BIB scale consists of two theoretically derived, empirically validated and reliable dimensions; it can be used as a summary score to evaluate the extent to which colleagues intervene indirectly and directly when a bias incident occurs in the academic workplace.Originality/valueThis scale is valuable in advancing efforts to mitigate the negative effect of bias in the workplace and training colleagues to intervene in various ways when bias occurs.

Does Danger Level Affect Bystander Intervention in Real-Life Conflicts? Evidence From CCTV Footage

In real-life violence, bystanders can take an active role in de-escalating conflict and helping others. Recent meta-analytical evidence of experimental studies suggests that elevated danger levels in conflicts facilitate bystander intervention. However, this finding may lack ecological validity because ethical concerns prohibit exposing participants to potentially harmful situations. Using an ecologically valid method, based on an analysis of 80 interpersonal conflicts unobtrusively recorded by public surveillance cameras, the present study confirms that danger is positively associated with bystander intervention. In the presence of danger, bystanders were 19 times more likely to intervene than in the absence of danger. It extends this knowledge by discovering that incremental changes in the severity level of the danger (low, medium, and high), however, were not associated with bystander intervention. These findings confirm the importance of further investigating the role of danger for bystander intervention, in larger samples, and involving multiple types of real-life emergencies.

I’ll be there for you? Effects of Islamophobic online hate speech and counter speech on Muslim in-group bystanders’ intention to intervene

Online hate speech is very common. This is problematic as degrading social groups can traumatize targets, evoke stress, and depression. Since no reaction of others could suggest the acceptability of hate speech, bystander intervention is essential. However, it is unclear when and how minorities react to hate speech. Drawing from social identity theory and research on in-group intervention, we inquire how Islamophobic online hate speech and counter speech by majority or minority members shape Muslims’ willingness to intervene. Thus, in an online experiment ( N = 362), we varied the presence of Islamophobic online hate speech and counter speech by a (non-) Muslim. Results showed that Islamophobic online hate speech led to a perceived religious identity threat which, in turn, increased the personal responsibility to intervene and resulted in higher intentions to utter factual counter speech. In addition, counter speech by both majority and minority members directly reduced Muslims’ intentions to counterargue hatefully.