Traditional bullying and cyberbullying: Bystander strategies

Introduction. An important aspect of any bullying is the position of the bystander. Timely intervention by a bystander can prevent bullying or mitigate its consequences for the victim. On the other hand, the bystander may join the bullying on the aggressor’s side or maintain a neutral position, which will cause the aggressor to feel impunity and increase the victimisation of the bullying object. This study compares the actions of bystanders of traditional school bullying, school cyberbullying and nonschool cyberbullying.
Aim. The current study aims to define the strategy of school bullying and cyberbullying bystanders and clarify the most frequently observed forms of bullying by bystanders.
Methodology and research methods. To study the problem, a questionnaire was developed designed to study the forms of bullying and witness behaviour strategies. The questionnaire survey was conducted among 1,762 middle-level students of educational organisations of general secondary education and secondary vocational training in Ekaterinburg and the Sverdlovsk Region.
Results. Among the bystanders of traditional bullying, 39% prefer non-interference, 36% prefer to support the victim, 23% report bullying to parents and teachers, 0.7% join the aggressor and 1% gave the answer “other”.
Among the bystanders of school cyberbullying, 44.5% prefer non-interference, 24.5% support the victim, 28% inform parents, teachers or the administration of an Internet resource, 0.5% join the harassment and 1.5% gave the answer “other”.
Among the bystanders of non-school cyberbullying, 42.5% prefer non-interference, 25.5% support the victim, 29.5% inform parents, teachers or the administration of an Internet resource, 1% join the harassment and 1% gave the answer “other”.
As can be seen, the percentage of those who prefer non-interference is highest among the bystanders of school cyberbullying, while the percentage of bystanders who support the victim is highest among the bystanders of traditional bullying. The percentage of those joining the bullying on the side of the persecutor is highest among the bystanders of non-school cyberbullying.
Scientific novelty. In this study, for the first time, the categories of bystanders of school and nonschool cyberbullying are divided as categories of bystanders of various processes. Among the possible strategies of behaviour of a bystander in a situation of bullying, for the first time, it is proposed to seek help from adults or from the administration of the Internet resource on the basis of which the bullying takes place.
Practical significance. Based on the study of the behaviour of the bystander of bullying (traditional bullying and cyberbullying), the results of this work could be applied to develop recommendations for encouraging the bystander to intervene in bullying on the victim’s side, to stop it independently or to inform teachers.

1. Olweus D. School bullying: Development and some important challenges. Annual Review of Clinical Psychology. 2013; 9: 751–780. DOI: 10.1146/annurev-clinpsy-050212-185516

2. Heirman W., Walrave M. Assessing concerns and issues about the mediation of technology in cyberbullying. Cyberpsychology: Journal of Psychosocial Research on Cyberspace [Internet]. 2008 [cited 2023 Apr 30]; 2 (2). Available from: https://cyberpsychology.eu/article/view/4214/3256

3. Corcoran L., Guckin C., Prentice G. Cyberbullying or cyber aggression?: A Review of existing definitions of cyber-based peer-to-peer aggression. Societies. 2015; 5 (2): 245–255. DOI: 10.3390/soc5020245

4. Chen L., Ho S. S., Lwin M. O. A meta-analysis of factors predicting cyberbullying perpetration and victimization. From the social cognitive and media effects approach. Media & Society. 2017; 19 (8): 1194–1213. DOI: 10.1177/1461444816634037

5. Mureșan L. M. Bullying аnd cyberbullying proximal and specific differences in middle schools In Romania. In: European Proceedings of Conference: Education, Reflection, Development. 7th ed. 2020. p. 536–544. DOI: 10.15405/epsbs.2020.06.53

6. Huseynova E. A., Enikolopov S. N. Influence of the bullying victim position on aggressive behavior. Psihologicheskaja nauka i obrazovanie = Psychological Science and Education. 2014; 6 (2): 246–256. (In Russ.)

7. Tarasova S. J., Osnitsky A. K., Enikolopov S. N. Social-psychological aspects of bullying: Interconnection of aggressiveness and school anxiety. Psihologicheskaja nauka i obrazovanie = Psychological Science and Education. 2016; 8 (4): 102–116. DOI: 10.17759/psyedu.2016080411 (In Russ.)

8. Ivaniushina V., Khodorenko D. Alexandrov D. Age and gender differences and the contribution of school size and type in the prevalence of bullying. Voprosy obrazovanija = Educational Studies Moscow. 2021; 4: 220–242. DOI: 10.17323/1814-9545-2021-4-220-242 (In Russ.)

9. Novikova M. A., Rean A. A., Konovalov I. A. Measuring bullying in Russian schools: Prevalence, age and gender correlates, and associations with school climate. Voprosy obrazovaniya= Educational Studies Moscow. 2021; 3: 62–90. DOI: 10.17323/1814-9545-2021-3-62-90 (In Russ.)

10. Nazarov V. L., Averbukh N. V., Buinacheva A. V. Bullying and cyberbullying in a modern school. Obrazovanie i nauka = The Education and Science Journal. 2022; 24 (2): 169–205. DOI: 10.17853/1994-5639-2022-2-169-205 (In Russ.)

11. Pabian S., Erreygers S., Vandebosch H., Van Royen K., Dare J., Costello L., Green L., Hawk D., Cross D. “Arguments online, but in school we always act normal”: The embeddedness of early adolescent negative peer interactions within the whole of their offline and online peer interactions. Children and Youth Services Review. 2018; 86. DOI: 10.1016/j.childyouth.2018.01.007

12. Volkova E. N., Volkova I. V. Cyberbullying as a method of social addressing teenagers on the bulling situation. Vestnik Minskogo universiteta = Bulletin of Minin University. 2017; 3. DOI: 10.26795/2307-1281-2017-3-17

13. Willard N. E. Cyberbullying and cyberthreats: Responding to the challenge of online social aggression, threats, and distress. Champaign, IL: Research Pressж 2007. 311 p.

14. Bochkareva E. V., Strenin D. A. Theoretical and legal aspects of cyberbullying. Vserossijskij kriminologicheskij zhurnal = Russian Journal of Criminology. 2021; 15 (1): 91–97. DOI: 10.17150/2500-4255.2021.15(1).91-97 (In Russ.)

15. Nazarov V. L., Averbukh N. V., Buinachev A. V. Cyberbullying inside and outside the school collectives. Pedagogicheskoe obrazovanie v Rossii = Pedagogical Education in Russia. 2021; 6: 69–79. (In Russ.)

16. Antipina S. S. Cyber-aggression typology questionnaire: Structure and primary psychometric characteristics. Vestnik Kemerovskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta = Bulletin of Kemerovo State University. 2021; 23 (1): 113–122. DOI: 10.21603/2078-8975-2021-23-1-113-122 (In Russ.)

17. Soldatova G. U., Lvova E. N., Permjakova I. D. The phenomena of traditional bullying and cyberbullying: Similarities and differences. In: Ershova R. V. (Ed.). Cifrovoe obshhestvo kak kul’turno-istorich-eskij kontekst razvitija cheloveka: Sbornik nauchnyh statej i materialov mezhdunarodnoj konferencii = Digital Society as a Cultural and Historical Context of Human Development: Collection of Scientific Articles and Materials of the International Conference; 2018 Feb 14–17; Kolomna. Kolomna: State Social and Humanitarian University; 2018. p. 380–384. (In Russ.)

18. Smith P. K., Mahdavi J., Carvalho M., Tippett N. An investigation into cyberbullying, its forms, awareness and impact, and the relationship between age and gender in cyberbullying. Research Brief No. RBX03-062006. London: DfES; 2006. 69 p.

19. Brewer G., Kerslake J. Cyberbullying, self-esteem, empathy and loneliness. Computers in Human Behavior. 2015; 48: 255–260. DOI: 10.1016/j.chb.2015.01.073

20. Voiskunskiy A. E. Behavior in a cyberspace: Some psychological principles. Chelovek = Human. 2016; 1: 36–49. (In Russ.)

21. Soldatova G. U., Yarmina A. N. Cyberbullying: Features, role structure, parent-child relationships and coping strategies. Natsional’nyy psikhologicheskiy zhurnal = National Psychological Journal. 2019; 12 (3): 17–31. (In Russ.)

22. DeSmet A., Bastiaensens S., Van Cleemput K., Poels K., Vandebosch H., De Вoutte G., et al. The efficacy of the Friendly Attac serious digital game to promote prosocial bystander behavior in cyberbullying among young adolescents: A cluster-randomized controlled trial. Computers in Human Behavior. 2018; 78: 336–347. DOI: 10.1016/j.chb.2017.10.011

23. Bastiaensens S., Van Cleemput K., Vandebosch H., Poels K., DeSmet A., De Bourdeaudhuij I. “Were you cyberbullied? Let me help you”. Studying adolescents’ online peer support of cyberbullying victims using thematic analysis of online support group fora. In: Vandebosch H., Green L. (Eds.). Narratives in research and interventions on cyberbullying among young people. Cham: Springer; 2019. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-030-04960-7_7

24. Jungert T., Karataş P., Iotti N.O., Perrin S. Direct bullying and cyberbullying: Experimental study of bystanders’ motivation to defend victims and the role of anxiety and identification with the bully. Frontiers in Psychology. 2021; 11: 616572. DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2020.616572

25. Jenkins L. N., Yang Y., Changlani S., et al. Deconstructing prosocial bullying bystander actions. Contemporary Educational Psychology. 2022. DOI: 10.1007/s40688-022-00429-1

26. García-Vázquez F. I., Durón-Ramos M. F., Pérez-Rios R., Pérez-Ibarra R. E. Relationships between spirituality, happiness, and prosocial bystander behavior in bullying – the mediating role of altruism. European Journal of Investigation in Health, Psychology and Education. 2022; 12: 1833–1841. DOI: 10.3390/ejihpe12120128

27. Scott A., Wang C., Cheong Y. The bullying literature project: Promoting bystander behavior using children’s literature. School Mental Health. 2023; 15: 123–137. DOI: doi.org/10.1007/s12310-022-09537-y

28. Xie Z., Liu C., Teng Z. The effect of everyday moral sensitivity on bullying bystander behavior: Parallel mediating roles of empathy and moral disengagement. Journal of Interpersonal Violence. 2023; 38 (11-12). DOI: 10.1177/08862605221147071

29. Waasdorp T. E., Fu R., Clary L. K., Bradshaw C. P. School climate and bullying bystander responses in middle and high school. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology. 2022; 80: 101412. DOI: 0.1016/j.appdev.2022.101412

30. Obermaier M., Fawzi N., Koch T. Bystanding or standing by? How the number of bystanders affects the intention to intervene in cyberbullying. New Media & Society. 2016; 18 (8): 1491–1507. DOI: 10.1177/1461444814563519

31. Wang S., Kim K. Effects of victimization experience, gender, and empathic distress on bystanders’ intervening behavior in cyberbullying. The Social Science Journal. 2021. DOI: 10.1080/03623319.2020.1861826

32. Panumaporn J., Hongsanguansri S., Atsariyasing W., Kiatrungrit K. Bystanders’ behaviours and associated factors in cyberbullying. General Psychiatry. 2020; 33 (3). DOI: 10.1136/gpsych-2019-100187

33. Bastiaensens S., Vandebosch H., Poels K., Van Cleemput K., DeSmet A., De Bourdeaudhuij I. Cyberbullying on social network sites. An experimental study into bystanders’ behavioural intentions to help the victim or reinforce the bully. Computers in Human Behavior. 2014; 31: 259–271. DOI: 10.1016/j.chb.2013.10.036

34. Pabian S., Vandebosch H., Poels K., Van Cleemput K., Bastiaensens S. Exposure to cyberbullying as a bystander: An investigation of desensitization effects among early adolescents. Computers in Human Behavior. 2016; 62: 480–487. DOI: 10.1016/j.chb.2016.04.022

35. Bengina E., Grishaeva S. Cyberbullying as a new form of danger of the psychological health of a teenager’s personality. Vestnik universiteta = Bulletin of the University. 2018; 2: 153–157. (In Russ.)

36. Nazarov V. L., Zherdev D. V., Averbuh N. V. Cifrovaja transformacija shkol’nogo obrazovanija v RF: upravlencheskie i social’no-psihologicheskie aspekty = Digital transformation of school education in the Russian Federation: Managerial and socio-psychological aspects. Ekaterinburg: Ural University; 2021. 216 p. (In Russ.)