Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Although a popular approach for sexual violence prevention, limited research has explored the role of bystander intervention in the nonconsensual distribution of sexual images (NCD). Among 1,095 undergraduate students, online survey results indicated that although 76% had the opportunity to intervene, only 33% intervened prosocially; the most common prosocial intervention was confronting the perpetrator (28.2% of bystanders). Individual (e.g., bystander gender, sexual orientation, and prior bystander behavior) and situational variables (e.g., perpetrator and victim importance, victim gender, and how the images were shown/shared) were significantly associated with varied bystander behaviors, bearing implications for research and practice.

Keywords

NCD bystander intervention image-based sexual abuse college students

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Amudhan

Sharma

M. K.

Anand

Johnson

(2024). Snapping, sharing and receiving blame”: A systematic review on psychosocial factors of victim blaming in non-consensual pornography. Industrial Psychiatry Journal, 33(1), 3–12. https://doi.org/10.4103/ipj.ipj_166_23

Attrill-Smith

Wesson

C. J.

Chater

M. L.

Weekes

(2021). Gender differences in videoed accounts of victim blaming for revenge porn for self-taken and stealth-taken sexually explicit images and videos. Cyberpsychology: Journal of Psychosocial Research on Cyberspace, 15(4), Article 3. https://doi.org/10.5817/CP2021-4-3

Banyard

V. L.

Plante

E. G.

Cohn

E. S.

Moorhead

Ward

Walsh

(2005). Revisiting unwanted sexual experiences on campus: A 12-year follow-up. Violence Against Women, 11(4), 426–446. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077801204274388

Bates

(2017). Revenge porn and mental health: A qualitative analysis of the mental health effects of revenge porn on female survivors. Feminist Criminology, 12(1), 22–42. https://doi.org/10.1177/1557085116654565

Bendel

R. B.

Afifi

A. A.

(1977). Comparison of stopping rules in forward “stepwise” regression. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 72(357), 46–53. https://doi.org/10.2307/2286904

Burn

S. M.

(2009). A situational model of sexual assault prevention through bystander intervention. Sex Roles, 60(11-12), 779–792. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-008-9581-5

Cascardi

Krauss

O’Leary

K. D.

Loatman

K. L.

Sargent

Grych

Jouriles

E. N.

(2021). The bystander behavior (for friends) scale: Factor structure and correlation with prior victimization. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 36(9-10), NP4850–NP4873. https://doi.org/10.1177/0886260518794011

Cook

R. D.

(1986). Assessment of local influence. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B: Statistical Methodology, 48(2), 133–155. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2517-6161.1986.tb01398.x

Dardis

C. M.

Murphy

M. J.

Bill

A. C.

Gidycz

C. A.

(2016). An investigation of the tenets of social norms theory as they relate to sexually aggressive attitudes and sexual assault perpetration: A comparison of men and their friends. Psychology of Violence, 6(1), 163–171. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0039443

10.

Dardis

C. M.

Richards

E. C.

(2022). Nonconsensual distribution of sexually explicit images within a context of coercive control: Frequency, characteristics, and associations with other forms of victimization. Violence Against Women, 28(15–16), 3933–3954. https://doi.org/10.1177/10778012221077126

11.

DeSmet

Bastiaensens

Van Cleemput

Poels

Vandebosch

Cardon

De Bourdeaudhuij

(2016). Deciding whether to look after them, to like it, or leave it: A multidimensional analysis of predictors of positive and negative bystander behavior in cyberbullying among adolescents. Computers in Human Behavior, 57, 398–415. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.12.051

12.

Dodge

Lockhart

(2022). ‘Young people just resolve it in their own group’: Young people’s perspectives on responses to non-consensual intimate image distribution. Youth Justice, 22(3), 304–319. https://doi.org/10.1177/14732254211030570

13.

Eaton

A. A.

Jacobs

Ruvalcaba

(2017). Nationwide online study of nonconsensual porn victimization and perpetration: A summary report. Cyber Civil Rights Initiative.

14.

Eaton

A. A.

Ramjee

Saunders

J. F.

(2022). The relationship between sextortion during COVID-19 and pre-pandemic intimate partner violence: A large study of victimization among diverse U.S men and women. Victims & Offenders, 18(2), 338–355. https://doi-org/10.1080/15564886.2021.2022057 https://doi.org/10.1080/15564886.2021.2022057

15.

Flynn

Cama

Scott

A. J.

(2022). Preventing image-based abuse in Australia: The role of bystanders. Australian Institute of Criminology.

16.

Flynn

Cama

Scott

A. J.

(2025). Image-based sexual abuse and bystander intervention: A mixed methods study of attitudes, barriers, and facilitators. Palgrave Macmillan.

17.

Flynn

Scott

A. J.

Cama

(2024). An empirical research study on barriers, facilitators, and strategies to promote bystander intervention in intimate image abuse contexts. In Summerer

Caletti

G. M.

(Eds.), Criminalising intimate image abuse (pp. 376–399). Oxford University Press.

18.

Hayes

B. E.

(2019). Bystander intervention to abusive behavior on social networking websites. Violence Against Women, 25(4), 463–484. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077801218793221

19.

Holtzman

(2024). Predictors of bystander intervention: Examining the heteronormative bias in bystander intervention research. The Journal of Public and Professional Sociology, 16(1), Article 1. https://doi.org/10.62915/2154-8935.1189

20.

Hoxmeier

J. C.

O’Connor

McMahon

(2019). “She wasn’t resisting”: Students’ barriers to prosocial intervention as bystanders to sexual assault risk situations. Violence Against Women, 25(4), 485–505. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077801218790697

21.

Kania

Cale

(2018). Preventing sexual violence through bystander intervention: Attitudes, behaviors, missed opportunities, and barriers to intervention among Australian university students. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 36(5–6), 2816–2840. https://doi.org/10.1177/0886260518764395

22.

Katz

(2015). Effects of group status and victim sex on male bystanders’ responses to a potential party rape. Journal of Aggression, Maltreatment & Trauma, 24(5), 588–602. https://doi.org/10.1080/10926771.2015.1029184

23.

Latané

Darley

J. M.

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

24.

Lenhart

Ybarra

Price-Feeney

(2016). Nonconsensual image sharing: One in 25 Americans has been a victim of “revenge porn”. Data & Society Research Institute. https://datasociety.net/pubs/oh/Nonconsensual_Image_Sharing_2016.pdf

25.

Mainwaring

Gabbert

Scott

A. J.

(2022). A systematic review exploring variables related to bystander intervention in sexual violence contexts. Trauma, Violence, & Abuse, 24(3), 1727–1742. https://doi.org/10.1177/15248380221079660

26.

Mainwaring

Scott

A. J.

Gabbert

(2024). Facilitators and barriers of bystander intervention intent in image-based sexual abuse contexts: A focus group study with a university sample. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 39(11–12), 2655–2686. https://doi.org/10.1177/08862605231222452

27.

Mainwaring

Scott

A. J.

Gabbert

(2025). Situational facilitators and barriers of bystander intervention intent in image-based sexual abuse contexts. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 8862605251336347. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/08862605251336347

28.

Marcantonio

T. L.

Haikalis

Misquith

Leone

R. M.

(2024). Alcohol’s effects on the bystander decision-making model: A systematic literature review. The Journal of Sex Research, 61(5), 783–798. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224499.2023.2267547

29.

McMahon

Allen

C. T.

Postmus

J. L.

McMahon

S. M.

Peterson

N. A.

Lowe Hoffman

(2014). Measuring bystander attitudes and behavior to prevent sexual violence. Journal of American College Health, 62(1), 58–66. https://doi.org/10.1080/07448481.2013.849258

30.

Meade

A. W.

Craig

S. B.

(2012). Identifying careless responses in survey data. Psychological Methods, 17(3), 437–455. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0028085

31.

Mennicke

Coates

C. A.

Jules

Langhinrichsen-Rohling

(2022). Who do they tell? College students’ formal and informal disclosure of sexual violence, sexual harassment, stalking, and dating violence by gender, sexual identity, and race. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 37(21-22), NP20092–NP20119. https://doi.org/10.1177/08862605211050107

32.

Mickey

R. M.

Greenland

(1989). The impact of confounder selection criteria on effect estimation. American Journal of Epidemiology, 129(1), 125–137. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a115101

33.

Naezer

Van Oosterhout

(2020). Only sluts love sexting: Youth, sexual norms and non-consensual sharing of digital sexual images. Journal of Gender Studies, 30(1), 79–90. https://doi.org/10.1080/09589236.2020.1799767

34.

Office of the eSafety Commissioner . (2017). Image-based abuse national survey: Summary report. https://www.esafety.gov.au/sites/default/files/2019-07/Image-based-abuse-national-survey-summary-report-2017.pdf

35.

Orchowski

L. M.

Edwards

K. M.

Hollander

J. A.

Banyard

V. L.

Senn

C. Y.

Gidycz

C. A.

(2020). Integrating sexual assault resistance, bystander, and men’s social norms strategies to prevent sexual violence on college campuses: A call to action. Trauma, Violence, & Abuse, 21(4), 811–827. https://doi.org/10.1177/1524838018789153

36.

Pacilli

M. G.

Pagliaro

Giovannelli

Spaccatini

Berlin

Rollero

(2024). From non-traditional sexual behavior to non-legitimate victims: Moral virtue, victim blame, and helping intentions toward a woman victim of image-based sexual abuse. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 53, 4079–4088. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-024-02970-x

37.

Powell

Henry

Flynn

Scott

A. J.

(2019). Image-based sexual abuse: The extent, nature and predictors of perpetration in a community sample of Australian residents. Computers in Human Behavior, 92, 393–402. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2018.11.009

38.

Powell

Scott

A. J.

Flynn

Henry

(2020). Image-based sexual abuse: An international study of victims and perpetrators. RMIT University. https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.35166.59209

39.

Ruvalcaba

Eaton

A. A.

(2020). Nonconsensual pornography among U.S. Adults: A sexual scripts framework on victimization, perpetration, and health correlates for women and men. Psychology of Violence, 10(1), 68–78. https://doi.org/10.1037/vio0000233

40.

Scott

A. J.

Gavin

(2018). Revenge pornography: The influence of perpetrator-victim sex, observer sex and observer sexting experience on perceptions of seriousness and responsibility. Journal of Criminal Psychology, 8(2), 162–172. https://doi.org/10.1108/JCP-05-2017-0024

41.

Stoltzfus

J. C.

(2011). Logistic regression: A brief primer. Academic Emergency Medicine, 18(10), 1099–1104. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1553-2712.2011.01185.x

42.

Strahan

Gerbasi

K. C.

(1972). Short, homogeneous versions of the marlowe-crowne social desirability scale. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 28(2), 191–193. https://doi.org/10.1002/1097-4679(197204)28:2<191::AID-JCLP2270280220>3.0.CO;2-G

43.

Umbach

Henry

Beard

(2025, April). Prevalence and impacts of image-based sexual abuse victimization: A multinational study. In Proceedings of the 2025 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems (pp. 1–20).

44.

Van Ouytsel

Walrave

De Marez

Vanhaelewyn

Ponnet

(2021). Sexting, pressured sexting and image-based sexual abuse among a weighted-sample of heterosexual and LGB-youth. Computers in Human Behavior, 117, 106630. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2020.106630

45.

Waterman

E. A.

Edwards

K. M.

Beaulieu

A. E.

Banyard

V. L.

(2020). Who sees opportunity to help? A prospective study on adolescents’ detection of intervention opportunities in situations of sexual and dating violence. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 37(10–11), 2843–2862. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265407520940415

46.

Weitzman

Cowan

Walsh

(2020). Bystander interventions on behalf of sexual assault and intimate partner violence victims. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 35(7-8), 1694–1718. https://doi.org/10.1177/0886260517696873

47.

Zhang

(2016). Model building strategy for logistic regression: Purposeful selection. Annals of Translational Medicine, 4(6), 111. https://doi.org/10.21037/atm.2016.02.15

Who Intervenes and When? Individual and Situational Correlates of Bystander Behavior When Sexual Images Are Shared Nonconsensually

Abstract

Keywords

Get full access to this article

References