Search results

Bystander apathy has been a source of debate for decades. In the past half-century, psychologists developed theoretical frameworks to understand bystander activity, commonly referred to as bystander intervention models (BIMs). More recently, BIMs have been modified to facilitate initiatives to prevent various forms of online victimization. This chapter begins with a review of BIMs and recent applications of bystander intervention research to online environments. We also present several future directions for research along with applications for reducing technology-facilitated violence, including programming recommendations and theoretical development.

We conduct an experiment to examine the occurrence of the bystander effect on willingness to report a fraudulent act. Specifically, we investigate the impact of evidence strength on managers’ decisions to blow the whistle in the presence and absence of other employees who have knowledge of the wrongdoing. Results indicate that when there is strong evidence indicating a fraudulent act, individuals with sole knowledge are more likely to report than when others are aware of the fraudulent act (the bystander effect). However, the bystander effect is not found when evidence of fraud is weak. Further, a mediated moderation analysis indicates that perceived personal responsibility to report mediates the relation between others’ awareness of the questionable act and reporting likelihood, suggesting that the bystander effect is driven by diffusion of responsibility. Our results have implications for all types of organizations that wish to mitigate the detrimental effect of fraud. Specifically, training or incentives may be necessary to overcome the bystander effect in an organization.

Despite growing attention to the prevalence and consequences of cyberbullying within the social sciences, research on cyber-bystander reactions has been largely overlooked. Drawing from Latane and Darley’s (1970) bystander engagement model, the current study sought to fill this gap by exploring how common it is for adolescents to encounter cyberbullying on social networking sites (SNS), how youth react to the cyberbullying witnessed on SNS, and most importantly to uncover factors that may be related to two potential bystander trajectories on SNS, namely traditional bystanding and prosocial bystander engagement.

Data was drawn from the 2011 Pew Research Center’s Internet and American Life Project (Princeton Survey Research Associates International, 2011). The secondary analysis was restricted to only adolescents who ranged in age from 12 to 17. Grounded in existing research on face-to-face bystander behaviors, two Ordinary Least Squares regression models were run testing which independent variables (age, gender, frequency of SNS use, perceived peer norms, and prior cyberbully victimization) were related to traditional and to prosocial bystander behavior online.

Approximately 88% of youth reported they’ve witnessed a cyberbullying exchange on an SNS. Among these witnesses, the majority reported engaging in both prosocial (62%) and traditional (74%) bystander practices. Based on the regression analyses, a key factor for bystander practice online appears to be observed peer behavior.

The findings from this research provide an initial exploration into cyber-bystander behavior, with potential implications for both future research directions and cyberbully prevention programming.

To inform policy, curricula, and future research on cyberbullying through an exploration of the moral reasoning of digitally active 10–14-year olds (tweens) when witnesses to digital abuse.

Conducted interviews with 41 tweens, asking participants to react as witnesses to two hypothetical scenarios of digital abuse. Through thematic analysis of the interviews, I developed and applied a new typology for classifying “upstanders” and “bystanders” to cyberbullying.

Identified three types of upstander and five types of bystander, along with five thinking processes that led participants to react in those different ways. Upstanders were more likely than bystanders to think through a scenario using high-order moral reasoning processes like disinterested perspective-taking. Moral reasoning, emotions, and contextual factors, as well as participant gender and home school district, all appeared to play a role in determining how participants responded to cyberbullying scenarios.

Hypothetical scenarios posed in interviews cannot substitute for case studies of real events, but this qualitative analysis has produced a framework for classifying upstanding and bystanding behavior that can inform future studies and approaches to digital ethics education.

This study contributes to the literature on cyberbullying and moral reasoning through in-depth interviews with tweens that record the complexity and context-dependency of thinking processes like perspective-taking among an understudied but critical age group.

Using observational and experimental designs, the purpose of this study was to explore if the power relation between the offender and the victim of incivility and the level of perceived severity of the incivility were associated with bystanders’ intentions to help when witnessing workplace incivility.

In Study 1, 160 participants completed a questionnaire where they described a recent uncivil incident they had witnessed, and completed measures of perceived severity and measures of their behavioural response as bystanders. In Study 2, 183 participants were randomised to read one of two vignettes (a manager being uncivil towards a subordinate or vice versa), and completed measures of perceived severity and of their motivation to intervene. The authors investigated whether the power relation between perpetrator and victim, and the perceived severity of the uncivil exchange, were associated with prosocial bystander behaviours in Study 1 and with motivation to defend the victim of incivility in Study 2.

Higher perpetrator power was significantly associated with the incident being perceived as more severe, and higher perpetrator power was directly related to greater tendency to confront, and lower tendency to avoid, the perpetrator. Perpetrator power was indirectly associated with social support according to the perceived severity. A supervisor acting in an uncivil manner was rated as more severe than a subordinate acting in such a way. Perceived severity mediated the relationship between perpetrator power and the witness’s introjected, identified and intrinsic motivation to intervene.

This study extends previous work by investigating how the perpetrator’s power influences both the bystander’s prosocial behaviour and their motivation to defend the victim. Furthermore, previous research has not considered how perceptions of severity might mediate the relationship between power, behaviour and motivation.

Bystander 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.

To 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.

The 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.

This 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.

It is recommended that universities implement bystander interventions to disrupt the interpersonal violence and abuse that students experience in this context. Yet, there are few evaluations of bystander interventions in the UK. Building on an existing evaluation carried out on a bystander intervention at a university in 2017/18, the purpose of this research was to evaluate the intervention.

Using a one-way repeated measures design, analysis of variance was used to analyse pre- and post-intervention data gathered from 121 students, during 2018/19.

As the aims of the session were met, it can be inferred individuals who participate in the bystander intervention have the potential to disrupt interpersonal violence and abuse.

The small sample size and design of the survey limited the research. Further evaluations of bystander interventions are needed in the UK that utilises large samples and a validated survey.

This paper notes the importance of engaging many students in a cohort to participate on a bystander intervention.

This study adds to the paucity of evaluations of bystander interventions in the UK. Knowing that the intervention has the potential to disrupt interpersonal violence and abuse builds the momentum for other similarly designed interventions to be implemented in universities in the UK.

The purpose of this paper is to examine whether the impact of persistent racial bias, discrimination and racial violence is facilitated by otherwise well-intentioned individuals who fail to act or intercede. Utilizing the aversive racism framework, the need to move beyond awareness raising to facilitate behavioral changes is discussed. Examining the unique lens provided by the aversive racism framework and existing research, the bystander effect provides important insights on recent acts of racial violence such as the murder of Mr. George Floyd. Some promise is shown by the work on effective bystander behavior training and highlights the need for shared responsibility in preventing the outcomes of racial violence and discrimination to create meaningful and long-lasting social change.

This paper uses literature based on the aversive racism framework together with the literature on the bystander effect to understand the factors, conditions and consequences for lack of intervention when the victim is African American. This paper also provides evidence and theory-based recommendations for strategies to change passive bystanders into active allies.

The use of the aversive racism framework provides a powerful lens to help explain the inconsistencies in the bystander effect based on the race of the victim. The implications for intervention models point to the need for behavioral and competency-based approaches that have been shown to provide meaningful change.

Several different approaches to address incidents of racial aggression and violence have been developed in the past. However, given the principles of aversive racism, a unique approach that considers the inconsistencies between self-perceptions and actions is needed. This sets a new agenda for future research and meaningful behavioral intervention programs that seek to equip bystanders to intercede in the future.

The need to address and provide effective strategies to reduce the incidence of racial aggression and violence have wide-ranging benefits for individuals, communities and society.

By connecting the aversive racism framework to the bystander effect, the need for different models for developing responsive and active bystanders can be more effectively outlined.

The purpose of this paper is to examine bystanders’ supervisor-directed deviance to vicarious abusive supervision by supervisor-directed attribution. Furthermore, this study developed a moderated–mediation model to explore how LMX between bystander and his/her supervisor moderate the relationship between vicarious abusive supervision and the supervisor-directed attribution, which subsequently influences bystanders’ supervisor-directed deviance.

The paper tested the model using a sample of 336 workers using a two-wave survey. A moderated–mediation analysis was conducted with bootstrapping procedure to test the first stage moderated–mediation model in this study.

The results showed that LMX (between bystander and his/her supervisor) weakens the indirect relationship between vicarious abusive supervision and supervisor-directed deviance by bystanders’ supervisor-directed attribution.

Leadership training programs should be conducted to caution supervisors in terms of the deleterious consequences of vicarious abusive supervision. Organizations also should plan perception and communication training courses for leaders; such training would reduce bystanders’ responsibility attribution to them by providing timely explanations and communication. Furthermore, organizations should monitor supervisors by managers’ performance appraisal and formulate rules to punish abusive managers.

These results clarify the nature and consequences of LMX (dyadic relationships of bystanders–supervisor) for bystanders’ attribution process, and explain underlying attributional perceptions and reactions to vicarious abusive supervision. This study provides a more nuanced understanding of when and how vicarious abusive supervision leads to bystanders’ supervisor-directed deviance.

This study aims to investigate bystanders' perceptions and reactions to management responses to consumer complaints through digital service channels. Specific purposes are to examine how management response (i.e. warmth, competence) and individual differences (i.e. bystander power) work together to influence bystanders' information processing of service recovery.

This research consists of two main studies which employed web-based experiments. Both studies used a 2 (management response: warmth vs competence) × 2 (individual power: low vs high) between-subjects design. A total of 240 participants were recruited from Amazon's Mechanical Turk platform in Study 1, and 233 participants were recruited from a market research company in Study 2.

Study 1 suggested that for the high-power group, warmth-related responses increased service perceptions (perceived diagnosticity and perceived fairness), and for low-power group, competence-related responses enhanced service perceptions. Study 2 confirmed the results of Study 1 and further demonstrated bystanders' service perceptions as the underlying mechanisms to connect the interactive effect of management response and individual power on satisfaction with complaint handling and WOM intentions.

The current research demonstrates how companies can effectively manage customers' experiences (i.e. bystanders' experiences) with service recovery management on digital platforms by demonstrating effective management responses to consumer complaints through digital service channels.

To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study that explores bystanders' individual characteristics related to the information processing of service recovery through digital service channels.