Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Dating violence (DV) is a pressing issue that leads to adverse health outcomes and poses significant threats to victims. Bystanders may witness or evaluate these incidents, and their role is increasingly emphasized as a crucial component of DV response strategies. Accordingly, various educational programs have been developed to modify bystander behaviors to promote their interventions. The purpose of this study was to explore bystanders’ behavioral responses to DV incidents following exposure to a film-based video education program, “With-You.” We recruited 10 participants who participated in the With-You education program and, subsequently, either heard of or witnessed DV. In-depth individual interviews were conducted to explore the participants’ behavioral responses and the underlying mechanisms of these responses, considering educational content and contextual factors. All interviews were recorded, transcribed, and analyzed through thematic analysis using a critical realist approach. Of the 10 participants, 9 reportedly intervened in the DV incidents they encountered after the education. Participants’ behavioral responses were categorized into five themes based on the mechanism from the education: (a) responding to victims, (b) applying intervention protocols, (c) responding to perceived threats, (d) perceiving violence, and (e) adhering to education. Factors such as bystanders’ characteristics, perceptions of safety, availability for intervention, and relational and situational considerations influenced their behavioral responses. The educational program effectively enhanced bystander intervention behaviors. However, the complexity of these behaviors renders them difficult to categorize simply as successes or failures. Further research is necessary to discuss methods of measuring bystander behavior and address bystander safety considerations in educational programs.

Keywords

behavior bystander intervention dating violence intervention qualitative research

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Ajzen

(1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50(2), 179–211. https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-T

Banyard

V. L.

(2008). Measurement and correlates of prosocial bystander behavior: The case of interpersonal violence. Violence and Victims, 23(1), 83–97. https://doi.org/10.1891/0886-6708.23.1.83

Banyard

V. L.

Moynihan

M. M.

Walsh

W. A.

Cohn

E. S.

Ward

(2010). Friends of survivors. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 25(2), 242–256. https://doi.org/10.1177/0886260509334407

Christodoulou

(2024). The four C’s model of thematic analysis. A critical realist perspective. Journal of Critical Realism, 23(1), 33–52. https://doi.org/10.1080/14767430.2023.2256109

Hong

T. K.

(2019). A study on recognition of dating violence and victim factors of dating violence among university students. Journal of the Korean Society of Private Security, 18(2), 113–146.

Hoxmeier

J. C.

McMahon

Cusano

(2024). Bystander intervention for the prevention of campus sexual violence: Opportunity, frequency of action, and consequences for confronting those at risk of perpetration. Violence Against Women, 30(15–16), 4012–4033. https://doi.org/10.1177/10778012231185546

Jouriles

E. N.

Krauss

N. L.

Banyard

V. L.

McDonald

(2018). Bystander programs addressing sexual violence on college campuses: A systematic review and meta-analysis of program outcomes and delivery methods. Journal of American College Health, 66(6), 457–466. https://doi.org/10.1080/07448481.2018.1431906

Khusumadewi

Juliantika

Y. T.

(2018). The effectiveness of cinema therapy to improve student empathy. In Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Education Innovation (ICEI 2018) (pp. 566–569). Atlantis Press. https://doi.org/10.2991/icei‑18.2018.124

Park

(2025). Analyzing perspectives on bystander intervention in intimate partner violence: Insights from South Korean bystanders. Psychology of Violence, 15(4), 406–415. https://doi.org/10.1037/vio0000569

10.

Krauss

McDonald

Cascardi

Grych

J. H.

Banyard

V. L.

Rosenfield

Jouriles

E. N.

(2023). Quantifying college students’ bystander behavior to prevent sexual assault and intimate partner violence: Can we make improvements? Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 38(15–16), 9369–9394. https://doi.org/10.1177/08862605231173939

11.

Kuskoff

Parsell

(2024). Bystander intervention in intimate partner violence: A scoping review of experiences and outcomes. Trauma, Violence, and Abuse, 25(3), 1799–1813. https://doi.org/10.1177/15248380231195886

12.

Latane

Darley

J. M.

(1970). The unresponsive bystander: Why doesn’t he help. Appleton-Century-Crofts.

13.

McMahon

(2024). How helpful is bystander intervention? perspectives of dating and sexual violence Survivors. Violence Against Women, 30(2), 575–597. https://doi.org/10.1177/10778012221117596

14.

McMahon

Banyard

V. L.

(2012). When can I help? A conceptual framework for the prevention of sexual violence through bystander intervention. Trauma, Violence & Abuse, 13(1), 3–14. https://doi.org/10.1177/1524838011426015

15.

McMahon

Palmer

J. E.

Banyard

Murphy

Gidycz

C. A.

(2017). Measuring bystander behavior in the context of sexual violence prevention: Lessons learned and new directions. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 32(16), 2396–2418. https://doi.org/10.1177/0886260515591979

16.

Mulla

M. M.

Haikalis

Orchowski

L. M.

Berkowitz

A. D.

(2022). The prospective influence of perceived social norms on bystander actions against sexual violence and relationship abuse: A multiple mediation model. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 37(3–4), NP2313–NP2337. https://doi.org/10.1177/0886260520933035

17.

O’Brien

B. C.

Harris

I. B.

Beckman

T. J.

Reed

D. A.

Cook

D. A.

(2014). Standards for reporting qualitative research: A synthesis of recommendations. Academic Medicine, 89(9), 1245–1251. https://doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0000000000000388

18.

Park

Kim

S. H.

(2021). A mixed-method pilot study to test a program for friend-supporters of victims of dating violence. Journal of Community Psychology, 49(5), 1153–1168. https://doi.org/10.1002/jcop.22568

19.

Park

(2023). Social marketing program for dating violence bystander intervention on university campus: Analyzing its effectiveness and sociocultural feasibility. Journal of American College Health, 71(8), 2319–2328. https://doi.org/10.1080/07448481.2021.1967361

20.

Park

Woo

(2023). Types of bystanders among South Koreans based on their subjective reactions to intimate partner violence. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 38(15–16), 8969–8990. https://doi.org/10.1177/08862605231162652

21.

Son

M. S.

Cho

J. Y.

(2016). Survey of Dating violence victimization. Korean Women’s Hot Line. https://www.dwhotline.or.kr/index.php?mid=board_RXTY18&page=1&sort_index=title&order_type=desc&document_srl=11163

22.

Witte

T. H.

Casper

D. M.

Hackman

C. L.

Mulla

M. M.

(2016). Bystander interventions for sexual assault and dating violence on college campuses: Are we putting bystanders in harm’s way? Journal of American College Health, 8481(March 2017), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1080/07448481.2016.1264407

23.

Woo

Lee

Park

(2025). Utilizing film for bystander education on dating violence: A randomized controlled trial on its impact and mechanism. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, in press.

Bystander Responses to Dating Violence Situations After Bystander Education: Implications for Measuring the Behaviors

Abstract

Keywords

Get full access to this article

References