Profile of a bystander

Question: I want to help, but sometimes it feels easier than other times. Why?

Answer: Globally, wanting to help is the most widely held social value, research shows. Almost all of us help others often: waking up a friend in time for class, cheering him up, discussing a paper, showing up for her big game, discouraging his balcony acrobatics

Our comfort and skill levels around helping vary, however. In some situations we hesitate or become immobilized. Identifying the barriers to helping, and building on our existing skills,
helps us act in accordance with our values.

In bystander situations, we might initially feel more comfortable helping friends or others we relate to—e.g., students at our own college or university. Research shows that when our friends are in trouble, we are able to overcome common barriers to helping. When we’re more confident about our ability to help, we are more confident helping more people. 

Sometimes we initially feel worried about helping someone “different.” There might be a nagging doubt about whether we can really understand what they need. But someone being different from us does not need to stop us from helping.

To feel comfortable helping more people:

• Think about the last time you helped a friend. The values and skills you drew on can help here too. Even with strangers.
• As we gather more life experience, we get better at recognizing risky situations and the importance of inclusion.  Think about how much you learned between middle school and high school.
• Learning key helping skills and getting some experience make a powerful difference.

Summaries of relevant research

• A 2014 study included 242 students at a university in New England.
• The participants looked at a hypothetical situation and were asked how likely they were to intervene and why. 
• Bystanders were more likely to help friends than strangers.
• Typical barriers that prevent bystanders from intervening weren’t applicable when it came to helping friends.

Bennett, S., Banyard, V.L., & Garnhart, L. (2014). To act or not to act, that is the question? Barriers and facilitators of bystander intervention. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 29, 476–496.

• A 2007 study indirectly measured the degree of inclusiveness of participants’ “moral universe.”
• The study found that some people are less likely to apply their moral values, like compassion and supportiveness, to those they perceive as outsiders. 
• Inclusiveness is greater in societies that value equality, openness, and democracy.

Schwartz, S.H. (2007). Universalism values and the inclusiveness of our moral universe. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 38, 711–728.

Question: I know sexual assault can impact survivors badly. But how can I tell the difference between a typical college hookup situation and a precursor to sexual assault?

Answer: Be alert for typical perpetrator behaviors, like hitting on the drunkest woman at the party. Waiting until someone is wasted before making a move is predatory behavior. Predators might also target first or second year women and ply them with alcohol. They might use their body to block an exit, or touch someone without seeking consent.

What you need to know about “typical” sexual assaults:

• The victim knows the perpetrator.
• The perpetrator often targets someone who’s been drinking, or purposefully gets the victim drunk.
• The perpetrator uses manipulation and coercion, not excessive physical violence.
• The location is familiar; e.g., the dorm or home of the victim or perpetrator, or a bedroom at a party.
• Any non-consensual sexual assault is sexual assault, including kissing or fondling.
• A person incapacitated by alcohol or other substances cannot consent to sexual activity.

Summaries of relevant research

• A 2011 study involving 7,700 participants explored their likelihood of intervening in certain dangerous emergencies.
• Intervention was more likely when:
• Situations were perceived as dangerous (compared with non-dangerous)
• Perpetrators were present (compared with non-present)
• The costs of intervention were physical (compared with non-physical)
• These findings support the theory that people recognize dangerous emergencies more quickly, sense a higher level of urgency, and are more inclined to help.

Fischer, P., Krueger, J.I., Greitemeyer, T., Vogrincic, C., Kastenmuller, A., Frey, D., … Kainbacher, M. (2011). The bystander-effect: A meta-analytic review on bystander intervention in dangerous and non-dangerous emergencies. Psychological Bulletin, 137(4), 517–537.

• A 2006 study challenged previous research regarding the bystander effect which suggested that the more people present during a high-risk situation, the less likely it is that anyone will take action.
• This study explored evidence that the classic bystander effect does not occur in more dangerous situations because: (a) emergency situations are recognized faster and more clearly; and (b) the higher the stakes for not helping, the more acceptable it feels to intervene.
• In situations with low potential danger, people were more likely to intervene when they were alone. In situations with high potential danger, people were likely to intervene whether they were alone or in the presence of another bystander.

Fischer, P., Greitemeyer, T., Pollozek, F., & Frey, D. (2006). The unresponsive bystander: Are bystanders more responsive in dangerous emergencies? European Journal of Social Psychology, 36(2), 267–278.

Question: What if I don’t have much idea how to help?

Answer: To intervene effectively to prevent sexual assault or abuse, we need to:

• Know what might help
• Feel somewhat confident in our ability to improve the situation.

Bystander education can provide you the skills and the confidence, research shows. This might be formal bystander training. Or you can prepare by reading, practicing, and talking with friends about how you’ve helped before. Follow these three steps:

1. Understand the basics:

• Bystander intervention can be direct or indirect.
• One person can make the difference.
• Various approaches could improve most risky situations.
• Your approach depends on various factors, including your personality, your preferences, and the possible risk.
• It isn’t helpful to aim for a perfect or “correct” intervention. Aim for the best you can offer in the moment.
• It isn’t helpful to try to solve everything for everyone. But you can reduce the immediate harm.
• It is easier to intervene earlier than later. But if the moment passes, you can follow up
• It’s important to prioritize the safety of both yourself and the victim. 
• Look for the best exit strategies (getting out of the situation) for those involved.
• Abuse takes place on a continuum, from casual verbal denigration to physical, sexual, or emotional attack. Upstream interventions, like not tolerating offhand sexism and racism, help prevent downstream abuses. And they give us practice at stepping in.

2. Be aware of the multiple options. Helping behaviors fall into three categories:

• Direct intervention (E.g., “Hey! Get your hands off her, she’s not into it.")
• Distraction intervention (E.g., spill your drink on the aggressor.)
• Stealth intervention (E.g., quietly summon the bartender or bouncer.)

3. Mentally rehearse intervention techniques. For examples, see the infographic.

Summary of relevant research

• A 2007 study suggested that self-efficacy beliefs (faith in one’s own abilities) relating to emotional regulation and interpersonal relations were conducive to helping others.
• �“Both personal values and self-efficacy beliefs, both ‘I will’ and ‘I can,’ are needed.”

Caprara, G.V., & Steca, P. (2007). Prosocial agency: The contribution of values and self-efficacy beliefs to prosocial behavior across ages. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 26(2), 218–239.

We are more likely to intervene when we have social relationships with other bystanders—partly because we’re more confident we can involve them in helping the targeted person.
But we can still work effectively with bystanders who are strangers.

Question: What should I do if I’m the only person who seems concerned?

Answer:

• Collect more data. In other words, keep watching.
• Talk to someone else. Do they see what you see?
• “That guy’s making me uncomfortable. You think she’s okay with him? He seems kind of creepy.”
• Just start to help the person being targeted. Often, others will step up too.
• Involve someone else by telling them what to do:
• “I’m creating a distraction. You call the campus police.”

Summary of relevant research

• A 2008 study challenged previous research, which had suggested that as the number of bystanders increased, the likelihood of intervention decreased (also called diffusion of responsibility).
• Instead, the passive bystander effect seems less about the larger number of bystanders than the absence of social relationships among them.
• Increasing the group size inhibited intervention when bystanders were strangers but encouraged intervention when bystanders were friends.

Levine, M. & Crowther, S. (2008). The responsive bystander: How social group membership and group size can encourage as well as inhibit bystander intervention. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 95(6), 1429–1439.

Question: Sometimes I know I should help, but I just can’t make myself do it.

Answer: Research shows that certain situational and social factors can momentarily immobilize us and make it harder for us to help others. But we don’t even need that research. We know instinctively what’s holding us back. Being consciously aware of those barriers can help us manage and overcome conflicting influences.

For example:

• I don’t relate to the victim—but I can help them anyway.
• I’m not sure help is needed—so I’ll watch and talk to my friends and figure it out.
• I’m not sure I know what to do—but maybe I can improvise an interruption and give her a chance to walk away.
• I’ll be embarrassed if she doesn’t want my help—but I’ve survived embarrassment before. (Remember middle school?)
• I don’t know these other people around me—but maybe they’ll back me up anyway.
• If she insists on being in a relationship with him, I can’t change that—but I can tell him I’m tired of hearing him yell at her, and I can invite her to take a walk.
• I know that not everyone might see this as my responsibility—but I’m choosing to step in.
• I can’t risk the guys thinking I’m deliberately blocking his chance with her—but I can act drunk and goofy and “accidentally” interrupt him.
• I’m tempted to let one of these guys step in and be a hero—but they might not, so I’m going to get things rolling myself.

Question: Once I tried saying something and it just didn’t work. What should I have done?

Answer: If our first attempt doesn’t work, we can try something else. This is far easier if we have mentally rehearsed various approaches, like these:

Use your voice

• “Where’s the bathroom? I’m about to throw up on you.”
• “Hey, you’re totally harassing her. You need to stop.”
• For more examples of what to say, see Use your voice in the infographic.

Offer a safe escape

• Give the target an out: “Your friend is trying to find you downstairs.”
• Tell the aggressor, “Bro, she looks pretty tired and I’ve called her a cab so you can go.”
• For more examples, see Offer a safe escape in the infographic.

Call for help

• Contact the campus or local police.
• Get the attention of a bouncer or bartender, or any other person with authority.
• For more suggestions, see Call for help in the infographic.

Create a distraction

• Turn on the lights and turn off the music.
• Spill your drink.
• For more suggestions, see Create a distraction in the infographic.

Help now or later

• If you aren’t able to act in the moment, don’t assume the opportunity has passed.
• Check in with the target later: “I saw you at the party on Saturday. I was concerned. Did that work out okay?” It’s an opportunity to learn whether your instinct was accurate, provide after-the-fact support if needed, and reinforce community values. Targeted people report that this is very helpful.

If the aggressor is your friend or teammate

• You might feel uncomfortable intervening, or you might feel more comfortable being real with them. But not intervening puts both him and his target at risk of serious consequences.
• Point out the likely social consequences: “People are going to think you’re a jerk!”
• Point out other possible consequences, e.g., the loss of a scholarship or reputation, the loss of valued opportunities, suspension or expulsion, or a criminal record.

Question: I want to help but I’m worried I’ll end up embarrassing myself or someone else. How can I get past this?

Answer: It’s rare to be certain that our help is needed or will be welcomed. Accept that, and help anyway. The possibility of embarrassment is outweighed by the risk of harm to another person and our future regret at not acting on our values.

When students discuss the risks of intervention, they describe three stages in their process:

• I thought about a possible downside
• I went ahead anyway
• I was glad I did

For example:

• “I was worried I’d be embarrassed. But I’ve been embarrassed before and survived it.”
• “I was afraid he’d reject my help, but I figured I can live with that, I’ll try anyway.”
• “She said she didn’t need help, but she seemed like she might be in shock. So I helped her anyway and she was really glad later.”

Common dilemmas include the awkwardness of trying to limit a friend’s alcohol consumption, or being seen to block another man’s sexual opportunity. In those situations, we can remind ourselves of the necessity of making a judgment call on behalf of an intoxicated friend, or stage an “accidental” or stealth intervention.
Summary of relevant research

• Factors that may influence whether or not people help during a high-risk situation can be influenced by cost.
• The costs for helping a victim can include: effort and time; danger; embarrassment; and disruption of an activity.
• Costs for not helping include: feelings of guilt or shame, and public opinion.

Dovidio, J.F. & Penner, L.A. (2001). Helping and altruism. In G. J. O. Fletcher, & M. S. Clark (Eds.), Blackwell handbook of social psychology: Interpersonal processes (pp. 162–195). Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.

Question: Does it matter when I hear my friends make offhand, sexist jokes or comments?

Answer: “There are literally hundreds of little comments, harassments, and other forms of abuse that lead up to what we think of as the sexually violent act,” says Joan Tabachnick, in Engaging bystanders in sexual violence prevention (National Sexual Violence Resource Center). “If we limit our interventions to a culminating ‘event,’ we miss multiple opportunities to do something or say something before someone is harmed.”

Bystander intervention can involve some of these strategies:

• Object to disrespectful comments made by friends or peers, and encourage more consideration for others: “Dude, you can be mad, but don’t talk about her that way.”
• Call out comments and behaviors that suggest someone would have sexual contact even if their partner were unwilling:“Bro, that’s sexual assault, and you’re a jerk for even thinking it.”
• Call out perpetrators who might seem unaware that what they have done is a crime (e.g., “Yeah, that was messed up, but it was fun”). Let them know that what they did was not right and was against the law.
• Don’t pressure friends to drink or have sex as often or with as many people as possible.
• Don’t make or laugh at comments or jokes that undermine the severity of rape and sexual assault.
• Set the tone. Continue showing respect for the people around you and modeling healthy behaviors. If you make a mistake, apologize.

Strategies adapted from website content of the Step Up! program, University of Arizona, and Pact5.org.

Summary of relevant research

• A 2011 study suggests that teaching communication techniques is an effective part of bystander intervention training. 
• 74 percent of men in the study reported receiving bystander intervention training. 
• 70 percent reported that they’d intervened as a bystander when they were confronted with exploitive, offensive, or inappropriate behavior by other men. 
• The participants said the most frequent type of intervention they used was objecting to disrespectful comments made by their friends or peers. 53 percent of participants said they had encouraged their friends or peers to be more considerate.

Casey, E.A. & Ohler, K. (2011). Being a positive bystander: Male anti-violence allies’ experiences of “stepping up.” Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 27(1), 62–83.

Question: If the victim is a stranger to me, or it looks as though she was foolish to get into that situation, or I don’t know if the other onlookers will back me up, why should I help?

Answer: These are not the most relevant factors. Whether the target is a friend, acquaintance or stranger, or if you think she made some choices you think you wouldn’t make, you can intervene to help change the dynamic and prevent an assault. 

Students have cited these reasons for helping:

• “Someone helped me once.”
• “I was just doing what I would want someone to do for me.”
• “I knew he was drunk and I wanted to be sure no one got hurt.”
• “To me, unwanted sex shouldn’t be the punishment for making a mistake.”

If you’re the only person who seems concerned:

• Collect more data. In other words, keep watching.
• Talk to someone else. Do they see what you see? “That guy is making me uncomfortable. You think she’s okay with him? He seems kind of creepy.”
• Just start to help the person being targeted. Often, others will step up too.
• Involve someone else by telling them what to do: “I’m creating a distraction. You call the campus police.”

Summaries of relevant research

• A 2005 study explored the effects of belonging to a similar social category during an emergency: in this case, rival soccer team fans.
• People were more likely to help others in a similar social category or who were known to the helper.

Levine, M., Prosser, A., Evans, D., & Reicher, S. (2005). Identity and emergency intervention: How social group membership and inclusiveness of group boundaries shapes helping behavior. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 31(4), 443–453.

• A 2002 study demonstrated that bystanders were more likely to be influenced to intervene or not intervene by the actions of others when those others were “in-group” members rather than “out-group” members.
• The bystander effect is more nuanced and complicated than initially thought. It is not simply the presence or absence of others that affects a bystander’s intervention, but who the bystander perceives those others to be, and whether he or she identifies with them.
• Bystanders were more likely to express an intention to intervene to help “in-group” victims than they were for “out-group” victims.

Levine, M., Cassidy, C., Brazier, G., & Reicher, S. (2002). Self-categorization and bystander non-intervention: Two experimental studies. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 32(7), 1452–1463.

• A 2010 study found that participants who accepted rape myths were less likely to intervene.

McMahon, S. (2010). Rape myth beliefs and bystander attitudes among incoming college students. Journal of American College Health, 59(1), 3–11.

Question: How do I know this person even wants my help?

Answer: Ask yourself these five questions:

• Have you noticed something is wrong or concerning?
• Might the situation require action?
• Do you feel you might have a responsibility to act?
• What can you or someone else do? Remember, there is always more than one option.
• Do you have an idea about how to carry out your choice safely?

Recognize typical perpetrator behaviors that might indicate a precursor to a sexual assault:

• The victim knows the perpetrator.
• The perpetrator targets someone who’s been drinking, or purposefully gets the victim drunk.
• The perpetrator uses manipulation and coercion, not excessive physical violence.
• The location is familiar; e.g., the dorm or home of the victim or perpetrator, or a bedroom at a party.
• Any non-consensual sexual assault is sexual assault, including kissing or fondling.
• A person incapacitated by alcohol or other substances cannot consent to sexual activity.

Interrupt a risky situation without revealing your intentions.

Question: I want to help, but sometimes it feels easier than other times. Why?

Answer: Globally, wanting to help is the most widely held social value, research shows. Almost all of us help others often: waking up a friend in time for class, cheering him up, discussing a paper, showing up for her big game, discouraging his balcony acrobatics

Our comfort and skill levels around helping vary, however. In some situations we hesitate or become immobilized. Identifying the barriers to helping, and building on our existing skills,
helps us act in accordance with our values.

In bystander situations, we might initially feel more comfortable helping friends or others we relate to—e.g., students at our own college or university. Research shows that when our friends are in trouble, we are able to overcome common barriers to helping. When we’re more confident about our ability to help, we are more confident helping more people. 

Sometimes we initially feel worried about helping someone “different.” There might be a nagging doubt about whether we can really understand what they need. But someone being different from us does not need to stop us from helping.

To feel comfortable helping more people:

• Think about the last time you helped a friend. The values and skills you drew on can help here too. Even with strangers.
• As we gather more life experience, we get better at recognizing risky situations and the importance of inclusion.  Think about how much you learned between middle school and high school.
• Learning key helping skills and getting some experience make a powerful difference.

Summary of relevant research

• A 2009 study measured some barriers to bystander intervention and behavior involving 378 female and 210 male undergraduate participants.
• Barriers to bystander intervention and sexual assault prevention included: failure to notice a high-risk situation; failure to identify a situation as high-risk; failure to take responsibility; failure to intervene due to lack of skills; and failure to intervene due to conflicting social norms.
• Perceptions of victim’s worthiness played a factor in the likelihood of intervention, especially for men.
• If a bystander had a relationship with the potential victim or perpetrator then intervention was more likely.

Burn, S. M. (2009). A situational model of sexual assault prevention through bystander intervention. Sex Roles, 60 (11-12), 779–792.

Communities can promote helping
Most of us want to help. Communities can capitalize on this instinct in order to reduce the prevalence of sexual violence and other acts of discrimination and abuse.

Shared values around safety and community responsibility can be promoted by:

• Encouraging and celebrating the actions of bystanders.
• Working to reduce prejudice, including greater inclusion of “outsiders”.
• Facilitating positive, cooperative social interactions.
• Encouraging perspective taking and valuing others.

Summaries of relevant research

• This study involved 7,500 undergraduates at eight Indiana colleges.
• 94 percent agreed or strongly agreed that it’s important for students to play a role in keeping everyone safe.
• 87 percent agreed or strongly agreed that their intervention could keep someone from being hurt.

Indiana Campus Sexual Assault Primary Prevention Project. (2009). Indiana college student relationships survey: Summary of key findings.

• This study researched whether or not empathy can produce powerful prosocial (the tendency to act voluntarily to benefit others) and altruistic motivation.
• Shared values can be promoted by working to reduce prejudice, improve attitudes towards “out-groups,” and generate more positive, cooperative social interactions.
• When both perspective-taking and valuing were manipulated, each factor independently increased empathic concern, which in turn increased helping behavior.
• When only valuing was manipulated, it increased perspective taking and empathic concern, which in turn increased helping.

Batson, C.D., Eklund, J.H, Chermok, V.L., Hoyt, J.L., & Ortiz, B.G. (2007). An additional antecedent of empathic concern: Valuing the welfare of the person in need. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 93(1), 65–74.

Tweak your community’s social norms

Helping others is a powerful social norm. But sometimes conflicting social norms, like minding our own business, are barriers to helping. When someone does nothing, their inaction is often rooted in a conflicting social norm.

Bystander intervention involves tweaking social norms so that it’s more acceptable to do or say something than to look the other way. “So, programs that shift social norms, develop institutional policies, and create legislative initiatives will support individual behavioral change by transforming the forces surrounding the individual,” says Joan Tabachnick, in Engaging bystanders in sexual violence prevention (National Sexual Violence Resource Center).

Communities can promote helping as a social norms by:

1. Explicitly permitting and encouraging intervention.
2. Encouraging safe behavior and healthy relationships
3. Encouraging and celebrating the actions of bystanders.
4. Providing bystander intervention education.

Summaries of relevant research

1. The Spectrum of Prevention is a tool used to encourage widespread action and social normative change.
2. A sexual violence prevention strategy must address social norms because of their power in influencing behavior.
3. Programs can help prevent sexual violence when the norms encourage safe behavior or support healthy, and safe relationships.
4. Social normative change is best accomplished through a community approach.

Davis, R., Parks, L. F., & Cohen, L. (2006). Sexual violence and the Spectrum of Prevention: Towards a community solution. Unpublished manuscripts, National Sexual Violence Resource Center and The Prevention Institute, Enola, PA.

1. This study evaluated the effects of a sexual assault prevention program on 635 men living in first-year dormitories. 
2. The program incorporated social norms and bystander intervention education. 
3. The men self-reported reduced sexual aggression and an increased expectation of peer intervention to limit inappropriate behavior. 
4. The men also reported less reinforcement for engaging in sexually aggressive behavior, fewer associations with sexually aggressive peers, and reduced exposure to sexually explicit media.

Gidycz, C.A., Orchowski, L.M., & Berkowitz, A.D. (2011). Preventing sexual aggression among college men: An evaluation of a social norms and bystander intervention program. Violence Against Women, 17(6), 720–742. 

Bystander education involves teaching people how to intervene in problematic behaviors. In studies, students trained in bystander intervention report engaging in and observing significantly more active bystander behaviors than untrained students report.

“Bystander intervention is a promising practice for reducing interpersonal violence, particularly sexual assault and relationship abuse on campuses,” says Dr. Victoria Banyard, professor of psychology at the University of New Hampshire, Durham.

What is a bystander?
“A bystander is anybody who is not a perpetrator or a victim in a given situation. Friends, teammates, colleagues, coworkers, family members: those of us who are not directly involved in a dyad of abuse but are embedded in social, family, work, school and other peer culture relationships with people who might be in that situation,” says Dr. Jackson Katz, co-founder of the Mentors in Violence Prevention program for professional and college athletes.

Summaries of relevant research

• This 2011 study evaluated the efficacy of the Green Dot bystander intervention program among 2,500 students aged 18 to 26.
• 46 percent had heard a Green Dot speech on campus, and 14 percent had received active bystander training during the previous two years.
• Trained students reported engaging in and observing significantly more active bystander behaviors than did untrained students.
• Students who had received bystander training reported significantly more active bystander behaviors than those simply hearing a Green Dot speech.

Coker, A.L., Cook-Craig, P.G., Williams, C.M., Fisher, B.S., Clear, E.R., Garcia, L.S., & Hegge, L.M. (2011). Evaluation of Green Dot: An active bystander intervention to reduce sexual violence on college campuses. Violence Against Women, 1–20.

• This 2009 study evaluates a bystander program using two groups of student leaders from one midsize public university campus in the Northeast.
• The framework is grounded in research on the causes of sexual assault on campuses and factors identified by health behavior theories for changing attitudes and behavior.
• Results show the program was effective for both student leaders and non-student leaders.

Banyard, V.L., Moynihan, M.M., & Crossman, M.T. (2009). Reducing sexual violence on campus: The role of student leaders as empowered bystanders. Journal of College Student Development, 50(4), 446–457.