Abstract
In school bullying, witnesses play a fundamental role because their defensive reactions can stop bullying situations. However, a great majority of witnesses remain passive despite their prodefense personal beliefs. To address this gap between witnesses’ beliefs and behaviors, we developed and tested two social psychology strategies, namely, the induced hypocrisy and implementation intention. In an experimental and longitudinal study (N = 101), we randomly divided 7th- and 8th-grade students into three conditions, namely, control, induced hypocrisy, or implementation intention. Linear mixed models showed that the two strategies immediately increased planned defending behaviors as well as self-reported defending behaviors at three months but with a stronger effect at three months for the induced hypocrisy strategy. These new prevention avenues for practitioners are discussed according to current approaches.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Notes
A pilot study conducted on witnesses of school bullying (N = 321) allowed the identification of the situations when the witnesses had most frequently reacted passively. Hurtful teasing was observed by 50.4% of witnesses (68.1% of passive reactions), deliberate exclusion was observed by 43.9% (58.9% of passive reactions), prevention from talking was observed by 30.5% (63.3% of passive reactions), unpleasant name calling was observed by 30.2% (70.1% of passive reactions), threats of warm harm were observed by 26.8% (68.3% of passive reactions), and insults were observed by 22.4% (75.0% of passive reactions).
References
American Psychological Association (2019). Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association (7th edition). American Psychological Association, Washington D.C.
Armitage, C. J. (2008). A volitional help sheet to encourage smoking cessation: A randomized exploratory trial. Health Psychology, 27(5), 557. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-6133.27.5.557
Aronson, E., Fried, C., & Stone, J. (1991). Overcoming denial and increasing the intention to use condoms through the induction of hypocrisy. American Journal of Public Health, 81(12), 1636–1638. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.81.12.1636
Brauer, M., & McClelland, G. (2005). L’utilisation des contrastes dans l’analyse des données: Comment tester les hypothèses spécifiques dans la recherche en psychologie [The use of contrasts in data analysis: How to test specific hypotheses in psychological research]. L’année Psychologique, 105(2), 273–305. https://doi.org/10.3406/psy.2005.29696
Demaray, M. K., Summers, K. H., Jenkins, L. N., & Becker, L. D. (2016). Bullying participant behaviors questionnaire (BPBQ): Establishing a reliable and valid measure. Journal of School Violence, 15(2), 158–188. https://doi.org/10.1080/15388220.2014.964801
Espelage, D., Green, H., & Polanin, J. (2012). Willingness to intervene in bullying episodes among middle school students: Individual and peer-group influences. Journal of Early Adolescence, 32(6), 776–801. https://doi.org/10.1177/0272431611423017
Fointiat, V. (2008). Being together in a situation of induced hypocrisy. Current Research in Social Psychology, 13(12), 145–153.
Gallucci, M. (2019). GAMLj: General analyses for linear models. [jamovi module].
Garandeau, C., & Salmivalli, C. (2018). Le programme anti-harcèlement KiVa [The KiVa anti-bullying program]. Enfance, 3(3), 491. https://doi.org/10.3917/enf2.183.0491
Gollwitzer, P. M., & Sheeran, P. (2006). Implementation intentions and goal achievement: A meta-analysis of effects and processes. Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 38, pp. 69–119). UK: Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2601(06)38002-1
Gollwitzer, P. M. (1999). Implementation intentions: Strong effects of simple plans. American Psychologist, 54(7), 493–503. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.54.7.493
Kärnä, A., Voeten, M., Little, T. D., Alanen, E., Poskiparta, E., & Salmivalli, C. (2013). Effectiveness of the KiVa antibullying program: Grades 1–3 and 7–9. Journal of Educational Psychology, 105(2), 535–551. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0030417
Kubiszewski, V. (2016). Prévalence des élèves témoins de harcèlement scolaire et difficultés associées: Résultats préliminaires. [Prevalence of students witnessing school bullying and associated difficulties: Preliminary results]. Pratiques Psychologiques, 22(3), 205–219. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prps.2016.02.001
Kubiszewski, V., Auzoult, L., Potard, C., & Lheureux, F. (2019). Witnessing school bullying: To react or not to react? An insight into perceived social norms regulating self-predicted defending and passive behaviours. Educational Psychology, 39(9), 1174–1193. https://doi.org/10.1080/01443410.2018.1530735
Lambe, L. J., Cioppa, V. D., Hong, I. K., & Craig, W. M. (2019). Standing up to bullying: A social ecological review of peer defending in offline and online contexts. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 45, 51–74. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.avb.2018.05.007
Mauduy, M., Bagneux, V., & Sénémeaud, C. (2021). Unmasking school bullying witnesses: Five different psychological profiles related to intention to defend victims unmasking school bullying witnesses: Five different psychological profiles. School Psychology Review. https://doi.org/10.1080/2372966X.2021.1978272
Mauduy, M., Priolo, D., Margas, N., & Sénémeaud, C. (2022). When combining injunctive and descriptive norms strengthens the hypocrisy effect: A test in the field of discrimination. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, 989599. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.989599
Nickerson, A. B., & Mele-Taylor, D. (2014). Empathetic responsiveness, group norms, and prosocial affiliations in bullying roles. School Psychology Quarterly, 29(1), 99–109. https://doi.org/10.1037/spq0000052
Polanin, J. R., Espelage, D. L., & Pigott, T. D. (2012). A meta-analysis of school-based bullying prevention programs’ effects on bystander intervention behavior. School Psychology Review, 41(1), 47–65. https://doi.org/10.1080/02796015.2012.12087375
Priolo, D., Pelt, A., Bauzel, R. S., Rubens, L., Voisin, D., & Fointiat, V. (2019). Three decades of research on induced hypocrisy: A meta-analysis. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 45(12), 1681–1701. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167219841621
Rigby, K., & Johnson, B. (2006). Expressed readiness of australian schoolchildren to act as bystanders in support of children who are being bullied. Educational Psychology, 26(3), 425–440. https://doi.org/10.1080/01443410500342047
Salmivalli, C. (2014). Participant roles in bullying: How can peer bystanders be utilized in interventions? Theory into Practice, 53(4), 286–292. https://doi.org/10.1080/00405841.2014.947222
Salmivalli, C., & Voeten, M. (2004). Connections between attitudes, group norms, and behaviour in bullying situations. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 28(3), 246–258. https://doi.org/10.1080/01650250344000488
Schwarzer, R. (2016). Coping planning as an intervention component: A commentary. Psychology and Health, 31(7), 903–906. https://doi.org/10.1080/08870446.2016.1158260
Shaw, T., Dooley, J. J., Cross, D., Zubrick, S. R., & Waters, S. (2013). The forms of bullying scale (FBS): Validity and reliability estimates for a measure of bullying victimization and perpetration in adolescence. Psychological Assessment, 25(4), 1045–1057. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0032955
Son Hing, L. S., Li, W., & Zanna, M. P. (2002). Inducing hypocrisy to reduce prejudicial responses among aversive racists. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 38(1), 71–78. https://doi.org/10.1006/jesp.2001.1484
Stone, J., & Fernandez, N. C. (2008). To practice what we preach: The use of hypocrisy and cognitive dissonance to motivate behavior change. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 2(2), 1024–1051. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1751-9004.2008.00088.x
Acknowledgements
We are grateful to the parents, teachers, and school administrators who made the research possible, and the students who contributed to this study.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
Dr. MM is currently a postdoctoral researcher in social psychology at the University of Caen Normandie (LPCN, Caen, France) and a lecturer at University of Lausanne (FSSP, Lausanne, Suisse). His research interests are cognitive dissonance, school bullying, and students’ substance use (alcohol and tobacco), where he studies their underlying psychological processes to develop prevention strategies. Dr. VB, is an Assistant Professor at the University of Caen Normandie (LPCN, Caen, France). Her research interests are emotional and cognitive biases in information processing and critical thinking. PDr. CS, is a Professor at the University of Caen Normandie (LPCN, Caen, France). She is an expert in psychological processes at play in behavioral change, especially in the public health domain (blood donation, addictions, bullying). She more specifically studied the effectiveness of various communication strategies on behavioral change as a function of individual differences.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The authors have no interest conflict.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Supplementary Information
Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Mauduy, M., Bagneux, V. & Sénémeaud, C. Fostering victim-defending behaviors among school bullying witnesses: A longitudinal and experimental test of two new strategies for changing behavior. Soc Psychol Educ 26, 263–274 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11218-022-09745-z
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11218-022-09745-z