Presence Of Other Bystanders Research Articles

From Bystanders to Heroes: The Role of Social Media in Influencing the Bystander Effect

The Bystander Effect refers to the phenomenon where the presence of other bystanders dissuades an individual from intervening in an emergency situation. Extensive research has demonstrated that increasing numbers of bystanders during an emergency situation decreases the likelihood of someone providing assistance. This paper aims to thoroughly analyze and evaluate the effects of social media, specifically the motivation and opportunity for fame, on the Bystander Effect. Social media has become an ubiquitous part of teenager's life; it plays an influential role in shaping consciousness and spreading information that impacts cognition and behavior. The widespread use of social media creates the opportunity for attaining overnight fame and becoming an "internet hero." This notion of fame and "heroism" propagated through social media may act as a temptation for teenagers and considerably impact their decision to intervene in emergencies. We closely examined this phenomenon utilizing two regression analyses on an anonymous survey questionnaire categorized by age, gender, social media usage duration, and content type, distributed to 82 randomized teenagers. This comprehensive approach enabled us to determine teenagers' motives and reasons for helping or not helping in various scenarios. Results suggest the presence of social media does not significantly affect the Bystander Effect, as concerns for self-protection play a more prominent role in the decision to intervene than the potential benefits of internet fame. Further research into psychological and emotional factors behind intervention decisions is warranted.

A Systematic Review Exploring Variables Related to Bystander Intervention in Sexual Violence Contexts

This article presents a systematic review of the available literature which has investigated the role of key variables in facilitating or inhibiting bystander intervention (including direct intervention, tertiary and secondary prevention) in sexual violence (SV) contexts. Studies exploring the role of individual, situational and contextual variables were grouped to provide a narrative overview of bystanders’ personal characteristics as well as the immediate and wider contexts which may be influencing their bystander behaviour. A systematic search of published literature from four electronic databases identified 2526 articles that were screened, of which 85 studies met the inclusion criteria. Most studies focused upon the role of individual variables, in particular gender of bystander. This body of work finds females are more likely to intervene than males; however, not all studies report these differences and in some cases, this is influenced by the type of intervention behaviour being considered. Regarding situational variables, the most commonly researched variable was the presence of other bystanders, although the role of this variable as inhibiting or facilitating was not clear. Finally, the most commonly researched contextual variable was social norms towards intervention, which has consistently shown greater bystander intervention when there is a belief that peers support such behaviour. Very few studies considered the interaction between these variables. Therefore, it is important for future research to consider this gap in the literature so that we can obtain a more well-rounded understanding of variables that can inhibit and facilitate bystander intervention in SV contexts.

From Empathy to Apathy: The Bystander Effect Revisited

The bystander effect, the reduction in helping behavior in the presence of other people, has been explained predominantly by situational influences on decision making. Diverging from this view, we highlight recent evidence on the neural mechanisms and dispositional factors that determine apathy in bystanders. We put forward a new theoretical perspective that integrates emotional, motivational, and dispositional aspects. In the presence of other bystanders, personal distress is enhanced, and fixed action patterns of avoidance and freezing dominate. This new perspective suggests that bystander apathy results from a reflexive emotional reaction dependent on the personality of the bystander.

Factors influencing bystanders' behavioral reactions in cyberbullying situations

The purpose of this study was to investigate the experiential, psychological, and situational factors influencing behavioral reactions of bystanders witnessing cyberbullying. It also investigated whether the ‘bystander effect’ is valid in cyberbullying situations. In addition, a moderation effect of the presence of other bystanders was examined between various influencing factors and bystander's defending tendency. A total of 1058 middle and high school students in metropolitan areas participated in the study, and the experiences of 331 students who have witnessed cyberbullying were analyzed. First, four types of bystanders were found: outsiders were the majority (n = 201, 60.7%), followed by defenders (n = 101, 30.5%), reinforcers (n = 18, 5.4%), and assistants (n = 11, 3.3%). Second, bystanders demonstrated more defending behaviors in the absence of other bystanders, thereby validating the ‘bystander effect’ in cyberbullying situations. Third, low moral disengagement, low anti-social conformity, high perceived control of the situation and bad relationship with bullies were identified as significant predictors of a bystander's defending tendency. Finally, the presence of other bystanders moderated the effect between moral disengagement and the bystander's defending tendency in relation to bullies. The implications of these results for the effective prevention and intervention of cyberbullying are discussed.

Investigation of the bystander effect in school bullying: Comparison of experiential, psychological and situational factors

The purpose of this study was to investigate whether the ‘bystander effect’ known to occur in emergency situations is effective in bullying situations through examination of the individual experiences of 467 middle- and high-school students. While the bystander effect was not found to be valid in bullying situations, there were significant differences in factors influencing a bystander’s defending behavior in terms of the presence of other bystanders. In cases where bullying was witnessed in the presence of other bystanders, factors such as one’s previous experience as a perpetrator, anti-social behavior, level of harm, relationship to the victim and popularity had an effect on the defending behavior of bystanders. On the other hand, in the absence of other bystanders, one’s previous experience as a victim, level of empathy, and perceived control had an effect on the defending behavior of bystanders. The implications of these results for an effective intervention for school bullying in terms of bystanders are discussed.

Bystander Intervention in Cyberbullying

Cyberbullying incidents often occur in the presence of other bystanders. The inaction of bystanders can augment the deleterious effects of bullying on a victim. However, bystanders can intervene to stop a cyberbullying incident or offer support to the victim. Two studies were conducted to examine variables that were expected to influence the propensity of a bystander to take action in cyberbullying incidents: the number of bystanders, the anonymity of the bystander, and the closeness between the bystander and the victim. Results supported the diffusion of responsibility effect. A higher number of bystanders was negatively associated with bystander intervention. Moreover, the perceived anonymity of bystanders was negatively related to the propensity to intervene, and closeness with the victim was associated with a greater tendency to intervene and support the victim. Altogether, the results shed light on the interplay of context, relationships, and technology in the behavior of bystanders to a cyberbullying episode.

Rational bystanders

The bystander effect, the phenomenon that the (real or imagined) presence of others inhibits helping, has often been ascribed to bystanders' apathy. In the present research, we demonstrate that the occurrence of the bystander effect has rational roots. Three studies reveal that the presence of other bystanders does not inhibit helping when effective helping requires more than one help-giver. Mediation analyses showed that the bystander effect did not occur when many responses were needed because bystanders did not shift responsibility to others when in the presence of other bystanders. These findings suggest that the rational considerations underlying the bystander effect can mitigate the effects of the presence of other bystanders on helping behaviour when more than one help-giver is needed.

The unresponsive bystander: are bystanders more responsive in dangerous emergencies?

Previous research in bystander intervention found that the presence of other bystanders reduces helping behaviour in an emergency (bystander effect). This research was mainly conducted in the context of non-dangerous, non-violent emergencies. We hypothesize that the classic bystander effect does not occur in more dangerous situations because: a) they are faster and more clearly recognized as emergency situations; and b) higher costs for refusing help increase the accepted costs for helping. Following this line of reasoning, the present research tests whether the bystander effect is affected by the degree of the emergency's potential danger. Results supported our expectations: In situations with low potential danger, more help was given in the solitary condition than in the bystander condition. However, in situations with high potential danger, participants confronted with an emergency alone or in the presence of another bystander were similarly likely to help the victim. Copyright © 2005 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Bystander response to arterial bleeding: helping skills, the decision-making process, and differentiating the helping response.

Using a mock injury involving arterial bleeding, we explored the impact of variables on two different decisions in the decision-making process leading to help. Expertise (Red Cross Training), ambiguity, and number of bystanders were manipulated in a 2 X 2 X 2 design. We observed the following responses: (a) nonhelp, (b) ineffective direct help, (c) indirect help, and (d) direct help. The decision to help or not was affected by ambiguity, sex, and the presence or absence of other bystanders. Greater ambiguity led to less help; women helped less than men; and fewer people helped when other bystanders were present. Expertise affected the decision leading to the type of help used but not the decision to help. Although training did not raise the intervention rate, it did dramatically change the effectiveness of the help used and could yield as many as 28 more saved lives out of 80 such incidents. The number of bystanders affected both the decision to help and the type of help used. Ineffective direct help occurred most frequently when the bystander was alone. The presence of other bystanders also affected the type of indirect help that was used.

Psychology and Ecology: Beliefs in Technology and the Diffusion of Ecological Responsibility

ABSTRACT:The attitudes of individuals who engage in environmentally responsible activities (e.g., recycling, energy conservation, community projects, consumer boycotting, etc.) with either low, moderate, or high frequency were compared using semantic differential techniques. Results showed that evaluative dimension scores for “pollution,” “technology,” and “nature” yielded a multiple-R of .63 with the behavioral criterion. Attitude toward pollution was a strong predictor of involvement in anti-pollution activities. Also, strong beliefs in technology may diffuse environmental responsibility in a way analogous to the presence of other bystanders in interpersonal altruistic situations. Taken together, the results indicate that personal commitment to environmentally corrective behaviors is importantly determined by the person's evaluative response to widely publicized environmental topics. Further theoretical and educational implications are also discussed.

Race of Victim, Nonresponsive Bystanders, and Helping Behavior

Summary The effects of the presence of other bystanders, race of victim, and prejudice of the S on emergency helping were investigated. Ss (43 white female college students), either alone or in the face-to-face presence of nonresponsive bystanders, viewed an emergency involving a black or white female victim. It was hypothesized that white bystanders would succumb to conformity pressures not to intervene more readily for black than white victims. As predicted, Ss, especially those high in prejudice, in the presence of passive bystanders helped blacks more slowly than whites; high-and low-prejudice-scoring Ss believing themselves to be the only witnesses helped black and white victims equally quickly. Ss’ self-reports of severity of the victim's injury and heart-rate response, monitored by biotelemetry throughout the study, supported the view that the inhibition effect was due to susceptibility to normative pressures not to intervene.

The effect of another bystander's ability to help on bystander intervention in an emergency

Previous research in bystander intervention found that the presence of other bystanders reduced the speed of reporting an emergency. The present research tested the hypothesis that it is not the mere presence of others that reduces speed of helping, but how the others are perceived. Specifically, if another bystander is seen as not being able to help, then there should be no effect on the speed with which the S helps. Subjects who thought they were in an ESP experiment overheard what seemed to be an emergency. A “victim” cried out that a bookcase was falling on her; this was followed by a scream and a loud crash. There was no difference in helping behavior between the condition in which there were no other bystanders present and the condition in which the other bystander could not help. However, as predicted, Ss in both of these conditions helped significantly sooner than Ss in the condition in which the other bystander was perceived as being able to help.

Bystander intervention in emergencies: diffusion of responsibility.

Ss overheard an epileptic seizure. They believed either that they alone heard the emergency, or that 1 or 4 unseen others were also present. As predicted the presence of other bystanders reduced the individual's feelings of personal responsibility and lowered his speed of reporting (p < .01). In groups of size 3, males reported no faster than females, and females reported no slower when the 1 other bystander was a male rather than a female. In general, personality and background measures were not predictive of helping. Bystander inaction in real-life emergencies is often explained by apathy, alienation, and anomie. This experiment suggests that the explanation may lie more in the bystander's response to other observers than in his indifference to the victim.