Bystander responses are crucial to understanding cyberbullying dynamics, yet further research is needed to clarify which factors shape them. This study extends prior work based on the Theory of Normative Social Behavior (TNSB) by testing its explanatory power across defender, reinforcing, and passive profiles while incorporating mediators such as empathy, parental supervision, toxic online disinhibition, and need for popularity. Participants were 2,539 students aged 11 to 18 (Mage = 14.07, SD = 1.39) who completed self-report measures. Three structural equation models were estimated in Jamovi using the DWLS estimator, followed by multigroup analyses by gender. Results indicated that social norms (collective, descriptive, and injunctive) are explanatory factors of all three profiles, and mediators improved the theory’s explanatory capacity, with distinct patterns for each profile. Similar pathways were observed for boys and girls. Findings support TNSB’s relevance for understanding bystander responses and point to factors for school-based interventions aimed at reducing cyberbullying.
AlibertiM.JenkinsL.MonkM. (2023). Predictors of cyberbystander intervention among adolescents. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 38(9-10), 6454–6479. https://doi.org/10.1177/08862605221132784
2.
AllisonK. R.BusseyK. (2016). Cyber-bystanding in context: A review of the literature on witnesses’ responses to cyberbullying. Children and Youth Services Review, 65, 183–194. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2016.03.026
3.
Álvarez-GarcíaD.ThornbergR.Suárez-GarcíaZ. (2021). Validation of a scale for assessing bystander responses in bullying. Psicothema, 33(4), 623–630. https://doi.org/10.7334/psicothema2021.140
4.
Álvarez-MarínI.Pérez-AlbénizA.Lucas-MolinaB.Martínez-ValderreyV.Fonseca-PedreroE. (2022). Assessing cyberbullying in adolescence: New evidence for the Spanish version of the European Cyberbullying Intervention Project Questionnaire (ECIP-Q). International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 19(21), 14196. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph192114196
BarlińskaJ.SzusterA.WiniewskiM. (2018). Cyberbullying among adolescent bystanders: Role of affective versus cognitive empathy in increasing prosocial cyberbystander behavior. Frontiers in Psychology, 9, 799. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00799
7.
BastiaensensS.PabianS.VandeboschH.PoelsK.Van CleemputK.DeSmetA.De BourdeaudhuijI. (2016). From normative influence to social pressure: How relevant others affect whether bystanders join in cyberbullying. Social Development, 25(1), 193–211. https://doi.org/10.1111/sode.12134
8.
BastiaensensS.VandeboschH.PoelsK.Van CleemputK.DeSmetA.De BourdeaudhuijI. (2014). Cyberbullying on social network sites. An experimental study into bystanders’ behavioural intentions to help the victim or reinforce the bully. Computers in Human Behavior, 31, 259–271. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2013.10.036
9.
BastiaensensS.VandeboschH.PoelsK.Van CleemputK.DeSmetA.De BourdeaudhuijI. (2015). ‘Can I afford to help?’ How affordances of communication modalities guide bystanders’ helping intentions towards harassment on social network sites. Behaviour & Information Technology, 34(4), 425–435. https://doi.org/10.1080/0144929x.2014.983979
10.
BeavonE.JenkinsL.BradleyM.VermaK. (2024). Understanding adolescents’ bystander intervention in cyberbullying. Contemporary School Psychology, 28, 270–281. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40688-022-00437-1
11.
BottaroR.FaraciP. (2022). The use of social networking sites and its impact on adolescents’ emotional well-being: A scoping review. Current Addiction Reports, 9(4), 518–539. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40429-022-00445-4
12.
BushH. M.BellS. C.CokerA. L. (2019). Measurement of bystander actions in violence intervention evaluation: Opportunities and challenges. Current Epidemiology Reports, 6(2), 208–214. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40471-019-00196-3
13.
CamachoA. (2021). Factores motivacionales, cognitivos, emocionales y morales en acoso escolar y ciberacoso [Motivational, cognitive, emotional, and moral factors in bullying and cyberbullying] [Tesis doctoral, Universidad de Córdoba]. Servicio de Publicaciones, 2021. Repositorio Institucional de la Universidad de Córdoba. https://helvia.uco.es/handle/10396/22193
14.
ChanT. K. H.CheungC. M. K.BenbasatI.XiaoB.LeeZ. W. Y. (2023). Bystanders join in cyberbullying on social networking sites: The deindividuation and moral disengagement perspectives. Information Systems Research, 34(3), 828–846. https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.2022.1161
15.
ChenQ. (2024). Reactions of adolescent cyber bystanders toward different victims of cyberbullying: The role of parental rearing behaviors. BMC Psychology, 12(1), 377. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40359-024-01879-3
16.
ChuX.LiQ.FanC.JiaY. (2023). Life stress and cyberbullying: Examining the mediating roles of expressive suppression and online disinhibition. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 52(8), 1647–1661. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-023-01791-w
17.
DangJ.LiuL. (2022). Me and others around: The roles of personal and social norms in chinese adolescent bystanders’ responses toward cyberbullying. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 37(9–10), n6329–n6354. https://doi.org/10.1177/0886260520967128
18.
de FeliceG.BurraiJ.MariE.PaloniF.LausiG.GianniniA. M.QuaglieriA. (2022). How do adolescents use social networks and what are their potential dangers? A qualitative study of gender differences. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 19(9), 5691. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19095691
19.
DeSmetA.VeldemanC.PoelsK.BastiaensensS.Van CleemputK.VandeboschH.De BourdeaudhuijI. (2014). Determinants of self-reported bystander behavior in cyberbullying incidents amongst adolescents. Cyberpsychology Behavior and Social Networking, 17, 207–215. https://doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2013.0027
20.
DoaneA. N.PearsonM. R.KelleyM. L. (2014). Predictors of cyberbullying perpetration among college students: An application of the theory of reasoned action. Computers in Human Behavior, 36, 154–162. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.03.051
21.
Domínguez-HernándezF.BonellL.Martínez-GonzálezA. (2018). A systematic literature review of factors that moderate bystanders’ actions in cyberbullying. Cyberpsychology: Journal of Psychosocial Research on Cyberspace, 12(4), 1. https://doi.org/10.5817/cp2018-4-1
22.
ErreygersS.PabianS.VandeboschH.BaillienE. (2016). Helping behavior among adolescent bystanders of cyberbullying: The role of impulsivity. Learning and Individual Differences, 48, 61–67. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2016.03.003
23.
FabrisM. A.LongobardiC.MoreseR.MarengoD. (2022). Exploring multivariate profiles of psychological distress and empathy in early adolescent victims, bullies, and bystanders involved in cyberbullying episodes. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 19(16), 9871. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19169871
24.
FerreiraP. C.SimãoA. M. V.PaivaA.FerreiraA. (2020). Responsive bystander behaviour in cyberbullying: A path through self-efficacy. Behaviour & Information Technology, 39(5), 511–524. https://doi.org/10.1080/0144929x.2019.1602671
25.
FestlR.ScharkowM.QuandtT. (2013). Peer influence, internet use, and cyberbullying: A comparison of different context effects among German adolescents. Journal of Children and Media, 7(4), 446–462. https://doi.org/10.1080/17482798.2013.781514
26.
GahaganK.VaterlausJ. M.FrostL. R. (2016). College student cyberbullying on social networking sites: Conceptualization, prevalence, and perceived bystander responsibility. Computers in Human Behavior, 55(Part B), 1097–1105. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.11.019
27.
GeberS.BaumannE.CzerwinskiF.KlimmtC. (2021). The effects of social norms among peer groups on risk behavior: A multilevel approach to differentiate perceived and collective norms. Communication Research, 48(3), 319–345. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650218824213
28.
HayashiY.TahmasbiN. (2022). Psychological predictors of bystanders’ intention to help cyberbullying victims among college students: An application of theory of planned behavior. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 37(13–14), n11333–n11357. https://doi.org/10.1177/0886260521992158
29.
HayesB.JamesA.BarnR.WatlingD. (2022). Children’s risk and benefit behaviours on social networking sites. Computers in Human Behavior, 130, 107147. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2021.107147
30.
HerryE.MulveyK. L. (2023). Gender-based cyberbullying: Understanding expected bystander behavior online. Journal of Social Issues, 79(4), 1210–1230. https://doi.org/10.1111/josi.12503
31.
HindujaS.PatchinJ. W. (2013). Social influences on cyberbullying behaviors among middle and high school students. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 42, 711–722. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-012-9902-4
32.
HollyL.WongB. L. H.van KesselR.AwahI.AgrawalA.NdiliN. (2023). Optimising adolescent wellbeing in a digital age. BMJ, 380, e068279. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj-2021-068279
33.
HongY.-J.LeeK. (2022). Adolescent bystanders’ moral emotions in cyberbullying. School Psychology International, 43(3), 271–295. https://doi.org/10.1177/01430343221088186
34.
HuangC. L.AlimuY.YangS. C. (2024). Factors influencing ethnic minority students' helping behavior in cyberbullying: Perceived severity of cyberbullying from various perspectives, the online disinhibition effect, and parental online discipline style. European Journal of Education and Psychology, 39, 1889–1911. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10212-023-00738-w
35.
HuangC. L.ZhangS.YangS. C. (2020). How students react to different cyberbullying events: Past experience, judgment, perceived seriousness, helping behavior and the effect of online disinhibition. Computers in Human Behavior, 110, 106338. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2020.106338
36.
HuL.BentlerP. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6(1), 1–55. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705519909540118
37.
JeyagobiS.MunusamyS.KamaluddinM. R.Ahmad BadayaiA. R.KumarJ. (2022). Factors influencing negative cyber-bystander behavior: A systematic literature review. Frontiers in Public Health, 10, 965017. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2022.965017
38.
KollerováL.YanagidaT.MazzoneA.SoukupP.StrohmeierD. (2018). They think that I should defend: Effects of peer and teacher injunctive norms on defending victimized classmates in early adolescents. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 47, 2424–2439. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-018-0918-2
39.
LambeL. J.CioppaV. D.HongI. K.CraigW. 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
LevyM.Sela-ShayovitzR. (2020). Cyberaggression: The effect of parental monitoring on bystander roles. International Journal of Child Youth and Family Studies, 11(4.2), 13–36. https://doi.org/10.18357/ijcyfs114.2202019986
43.
LuoA.BusseyK. (2022). Mediating role of moral disengagement in the perpetration of cyberbullying by victims and bystanders. Journal of Adolescence, 94(8), 1142–1149. https://doi.org/10.1002/jad.12092
44.
MachackovaH.PfetschJ. (2016). Bystanders’ responses to offline bullying and cyberbullying: The role of empathy and normative beliefs about aggression. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 57(2), 169–176. https://doi.org/10.1111/sjop.12277
45.
MafteiA.Opariuc-DanC.GrigoreA. N. (2024). Toxic sensation seeking? Psychological distress, cyberbullying, and the moderating effect of online disinhibition among adults. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 65(1), 61–69. https://doi.org/10.1111/sjop.12956
46.
MeeusA.BeullensK.EggermontS. (2023). Social media, unsocial distraction? Testing the associations between preadolescents’ SNS use and belonging via two pathways. Media Psychology, 26(4), 363–387. https://doi.org/10.1080/15213269.2022.2147084
47.
MidgettA.DoumasD. M.PeckM.WinburnA. (2021). The relationship between witnessing bullying, defending targets, and internalizing symptoms: An analysis of gender differences among sixth-grade students. Professional School Counseling, 25(1), 1–13. https://www.jstor.org/stable/27141316
48.
MishnaF.Khoury-KassabriM.GadallaT.DaciukJ. (2012). Risk factors for involvement in cyber bullying: Victims, bullies and bully–victims. Children and Youth Services Review, 34(1), 63–70. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2011.08.032
49.
MorettiC.HerkovitsD. (2021). Victims, perpetrators, and bystanders: A meta-ethnography of roles in cyberbullying. Cadernos de Saúde Publica, 37(4), e00097120. https://doi.org/10.1590/0102-311X00097120
50.
MoxeyN.BusseyK. (2020). Styles of bystander intervention in cyberbullying incidents. International Journal of Bullying Prevention, 2, 6–15. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42380-019-00039-1
51.
NickersonA. B.AloeA. M.LivingstonJ. A.FeeleyT. H. (2014). Measurement of the bystander intervention model for bullying and sexual harassment. Journal of Adolescence, 37(4), 391–400. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adolescence.2014.03.003
52.
Olenik-ShemeshD.HeimanT.EdenS. (2017). Bystanders’ behavior in cyberbullying episodes: Active and passive patterns in the context of personal-socio-emotional factors. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 32, 23–48. https://doi.org/10.1177/0886260515585531
53.
OrtegaR.Del ReyR.SánchezV. (2012). Nuevas dimensiones de la convivencia escolar y juvenil. Ciberconducta y relaciones en la red: ciberconvivencia. [New dimensions of school and youth coexistence. Cyber behavior and online relationships: cyber coexistence] Ministerio de Educación, Cultura y Deporte. Gobierno de España.
54.
PanumapornJ.HongsanguansriS.AtsariyasingW.KiatrungritK. (2020). Bystanders’ behaviours and associated factors in cyberbullying. General Psychiatry, 33(3), e100187. https://doi.org/10.1136/gpsych-2019-100187
55.
PearsonM. R.HustadJ. T. (2014). Personality and alcohol-related outcomes among mandated college students: Descriptive norms, injunctive norms, and college-related alcohol beliefs as mediators. Addictive Behaviors, 39(5), 879–884. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.addbeh.2014.01.008
56.
PeplerD.MishnaF.DoucetJ.LameiroM. (2021). Witnesses in cyberbullying: Roles and dilemmas. Children & Schools, 43(1), 45–53. https://doi.org/10.1093/cs/cdaa027
57.
PriceD.GreenD.SpearsB.ScrimgeourM.BarnesA.GeerR.JohnsonB. (2014). A qualitative exploration of cyber-bystanders and moral engagement. Australian Journal of Guidance and Counselling, 24(1), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1017/jgc.2013.18
58.
Real-FernándezM.Navarro-SoriaI.Collado-ValeroJ.Lavigne-CervanR.Delgado-DomenechB. (2022). Ciberacoso y funciones ejecutivas en niños y adolescentes: Una revisión sistemática. Revista de Educación, 397, 69–95. https://doi.org/10.4438/1988-592X-RE-2022-397-540
59.
RimalR. N.LapinskiM. K. (2015). A re-explication of social norms, ten years later. Communication Theory, 25(4), 393–409. https://doi.org/10.1111/comt.12080
60.
RimalR. N.RealK. (2005). How behaviors are influenced by perceived norms: A test of the theory of normative social behavior. Communication Research, 32(3), 389–414. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650205275385
61.
RimalR. N.YilmaH. (2022). Descriptive, injunctive, and collective norms: An expansion of the theory of normative social behavior (TNSB). Health Communication, 37(13), 1573–1580. https://doi.org/10.1080/10410236.2021.1902108
62.
RudnickiK.VandeboschH.VouéP.PoelsK. (2023). Systematic review of determinants and consequences of bystander interventions in online hate and cyberbullying among adults. Behaviour & Information Technology, 42(5), 527–544. https://doi.org/10.1080/0144929x.2022.2027013
SandstromM.MakoverH.BartiniM. (2013). Social context of bullying: Do misperceptions of group norms influence children’s responses to witnessed episodes?Social Influence, 8(2–3), 196–215. https://doi.org/10.1080/15534510.2011.651302
65.
SantorD. A.MesserveyD.KusumakarV. (2000). Measuring peer pressure, popularity, and conformity in adolescent boys and girls: Predicting school performance, sexual attitudes, and substance abuse. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 29, 163–182. https://doi.org/10.1023/a:1005152515264
66.
SassonH.MeschG. (2016). Gender differences in the factors explaining risky behavior online. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 45(5), 973–985. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-016-0465-7
67.
SchultzW. P.TabanicoJ. J.RendonT. (2008). Normative beliefs as agents of influence: Basic processes and real-world applications. In CranoW. D.PrislinR. (Eds.), Attitudes and Attitude Change (pp. 385–409). Psychology Press.
68.
SedlanderE.RimalR. N. (2019). Beyond individual-level theorizing in social norms research: how collective norms and media access affect adolescents' use of contraception. Journal of Adolescent Health, 64(4S), S31–S36. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jadohealth.2018.12.020
69.
Sela-ShayovitzR.LevyM.HassonJ. (2024). The role of self-control in cyberbullying bystander behavior. Social Science, 13(1), 64. https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci13010064
70.
SongH.LeeY.KimJ. (2020). Gender differences in the link between cyberbullying and parental supervision trajectories. Crime and Delinquency, 66(13-14), 1914–1936. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011128720912371
71.
SongJ.OhI. (2018). Factors influencing bystanders’ behavioral reactions in cyberbullying situations. Computers in Human Behavior, 78, 273–282. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2017.10.008
72.
SteffgenG.KönigA.PfetschJ.MelzerA. (2011). Are cyberbullies less empathic? Adolescents’ cyberbullying behavior and empathic responsiveness. Cyberpsychology Behavior and Social Networking, 14(11), 643–648. https://doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2010.0445
73.
SteinvikH. R.DuffyA. L.Zimmer-GembeckM. J. (2024). Bystanders’ responses to witnessing cyberbullying: The role of empathic distress, empathic anger, and compassion. International Journal of Bullying Prevention, 6, 399–410. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42380-023-00164-y
74.
Storm-MathisenF. (2025). ‘Violence is completely normal’: Managing violence through narrative normalization. British Journal of Criminology, 65, 37–53. https://doi.org/10.1093/bjc/azae030
TorgalC.EspelageD. L.PolaninJ. R.IngramK. M.RobinsonL. E.El SheikhA. J.ValidoA. (2021). A meta-analysis of school-based cyberbullying prevention programs’ impact on cyber-bystander behavior. School Psychology Review, 52(2), 95–109. https://doi.org/10.1080/2372966X.2021.1913037
77.
TrachJ.HymelS.WaterhouseT.NealeK. (2010). Bystander responses to school bullying: A cross-sectional investigation of grade and sex differences. Canadian Journal of School Psychology, 25(1), 114–130. https://doi.org/10.1177/0829573509357553
78.
UdrisR. (2014). Cyberbullying among high school students in Japan: Development and validation of the online disinhibition scale. Computers in Human Behavior, 41, 253–261. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.09.036
79.
Valdés-CuervoA. A.Alcántar-NieblasC.Parra-PérezL. G.Torres-AcuñaG. M.Álvarez-MonteroF. J.Reyes-SosaH. (2021). Unique and interactive effects of guilt and sympathy on bystander aggressive defender intervention in cyberbullying: The mediation of self-regulation. Computers in Human Behavior, 122, 106842. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2021.106842
80.
Van CleemputK.VandeboschH.PabianS. (2014). Personal characteristics and contextual factors that determine “Helping,” “Joining In,” and “Doing Nothing” when witnessing cyberbullying. Aggressive Behavior, 40, 383–396. https://doi.org/10.1002/ab.21534
81.
VoggeserB. J.SinghR. K.GöritzA. S. (2018). Self-control in online discussions: Disinhibited online behavior as a failure to recognize social cues. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, 2372. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.02372
82.
WachsS.WrightM. F. (2018). Associations between bystanders and perpetrators of online hate: The moderating role of toxic online disinhibition. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 15(9), 2030. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph15092030
83.
WachsS.WrightM. F.VazsonyiA. T. (2019). Understanding the overlap between cyberbullying and cyberhate perpetration: Moderating effects of toxic online disinhibition. Criminal Behaviour and Mental Health, 29(3), 179–188. https://doi.org/10.1002/cbm.2116
84.
WangL.JiangS.ZhouZ.FeiW.WangW. (2024). Online disinhibition and adolescent cyberbullying: A systematic review. Children and Youth Services Review, 156, 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2023.107352
85.
WangS.KimK. J. (2024). Effects of victimization experience, gender, and empathic distress on bystanders’ intervening behavior in cyberbullying. The Social Science Journal, 61, 853–862. https://doi.org/10.1080/03623319.2020.1861826
86.
WeissD. J. (2011). Better data from better measurements using computerized adaptive testing. Journal of Methods and Measurement in the Social Sciences, 2(1), 27.
87.
WrightM. F.HarperB. D.WachsS. (2019). The associations between cyberbullying and callous-unemotional traits among adolescents: The moderating effect of online disinhibition. Personality and Individual Differences, 140, 41–45. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2018.04.001
88.
WrightM. F.SchiambergL. B.WachsS.HuangZ.KambleS. V.SoudiS.BayraktarF.LiZ.LeiL.ShuC. (2021). The influence of sex and culture on the longitudinal associations of peer attachment, social preference goals, and adolescents’ cyberbullying involvement: An ecological perspective. School Mental Health, 13(3), 631–643. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12310-021-09438-6
89.
WuX.LiL.ZhenR. (2024). The influence of social norms and bullying types on the defending intentions of school bullying bystanders. Current Psychology, 43, 19283–19293. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-024-05735-w
90.
ZhaoY.ChuX.RongK. (2023). Cyberbullying experience and bystander behavior in cyberbullying incidents: The serial mediating roles of perceived incident severity and empathy. Computers in Human Behavior, 138, 107484. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2022.107484
91.
ZhouZ.TangH.TianY.WeiH.ZhangF.MorrisonC. M. (2013). Cyberbullying and its risk factors among Chinese high school students. School Psychology International, 34(6), 630–647. https://doi.org/10.1177/0143034313479692
92.
ZhuC.HuangS.EvansR.ZhangW. (2021). Cyberbullying among adolescents and children: A comprehensive review of the global situation, risk factors, and preventive measures. Frontiers in Public Health, 9, 634909. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2021.634909
