Although enterprise social media (ESM) workgroups provide effective channels that enable employees to speak up, most employees tend to remain silent. This research aims to explain this phenomenon from the perspective of the voice bystander effect and, drawing on the arousal: cost-reward model, to explore when the voice bystander effect can be weakened. We used a scenario-based experiment (Study 1) to investigate the effects of group size on voice behavior and the moderating effect of the type of coworker voice. We also combined a critical incident technique with a scenario-based experiment (Study 2) to examine the effects of group size on voice behavior and the moderating effect of voice method. The results of these two studies consistently reveal that group size is negatively related to voice behavior. In addition, the type of coworker voice and voice method can weaken this effect. In the contexts of regular coworker voice and private voice, group size has no effect on voice behavior.
AtoubaY. C.CarlsonE. J.LammersJ. C. (2019). Directives and dialogue: Examining the relationship between participative organizational communication practices and organizational identification among IT workers. International Journal of Business Communication, 56(4), 530–559.
2.
BarleyJ. M.LatanfiB. (1968). Bystander intervention in emergencies: Diffusion of responsibility. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 8(4), 377–383.
3.
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.
4.
BhattiZ. A.ArainbG. A.AkramcM. S.FangY.-H.YasinH. M. (2020). Constructive voice behavior for social change on social networking sites: A reflection of moral identity. Technological Forecasting & Social Change, 157, Article 12010.
5.
BrodyN.VangelistiA. L. (2016). Bystander intervention in cyberbullying. Communication Monographs, 83(1), 94–119.
6.
BulgurcuB.Van OschW.KaneG. C. (Jerry). (2018). The rise of the promoters: User classes and contribution patterns in enterprise social media. Journal of Management Information Systems, 35(2), 610–646.
7.
BurrisE. R.DetertJ. R.ChiaburuD. S. (2008). Quitting before leaving: The mediating effects of psychological attachment and detachment on voice. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93(4), 912–922.
8.
CarnevaleJ. B.HuangL.Uhl-BienM.HarrisS. (2020). Feeling obligated yet hesitant to speak up: Investigating the curvilinear relationship between LMX and employee promotive voice. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 93(3), 505–529.
9.
ChenA.TreviñoL. K. (2022). Promotive and prohibitive ethical voice: Coworker emotions and support for the voice. Journal of Applied Psychology, 107(11), 1973–1994.
10.
ChenW.ZhengB.LiuH. (2025). How does social media use in the workplace affect employee voice? Uncovering the mediation effects of social identity and contingency role of job-social media fit. Internet Research, 35(2), 750–770.
11.
DengM.GanQ. (2026). Speaking out freely: The role of ESM platform affordances in employee online voice behavior. Internet Research. Advance Online Publication. https://doi.org/10.1108/INTR-12-2024-1957
12.
DingX. (2024). The investigation of employee voice behavior - from the perspective of social media use in China. Online Information Review, 48(7), 1368–1388.
13.
DovidioJ. F. (1984). Helping behavior and altruism: An empirical and conceptual overview. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 17(4), 361–427.
14.
DovidioJ. F.PiliavinJ. A.GaertnerS. L.SchroederD. A.ClarkR. D. (1991). The arousal: Cost–reward model and the process of intervention: A review of evidence. In ClarkM. S. (Eds.), Prosocial behavior (Review of personality and social psychology, Vol. 12, pp. 86–118). Sage.
15.
EllmerM.ReichelA. (2021). Mind the channel! An affordance perspective on how digital voice channels encourage or discourage employee voice. Human Resource Management Journal, 31(1), 259–276.
16.
EvansJ. R.MathurA. (2018). The value of online surveys: A look back and a look ahead. Internet Research, 28(4), 854–887.
17.
FischerP.GreitemeyerT.PollozekF.FreyD. (2006). The unresponsive bystander: Are bystanders more responsive in dangerous emergencies?European Journal of Social Psychology, 36(2), 267–278.
18.
FischerP.KruegerJ. I.GreitemeyerT.VogrincicC.KastenmüllerA.FreyD.HeeneM.WicherM.KainbacherM. (2011). The bystander-effect: A meta-analytic review on bystander intervention in dangerous and non-dangerous emergencies. Psychological Bulletin, 137(4), 517–537.
19.
FranklinC. A.BradyP. Q.AshworthL. M. (2020). Bystander behaviors following an accusation of rape: The effect of relational distance and participant sex on victim-centered intervention. Journal of School Violence, 19(3), 292–308.
20.
GhaniB.MalikM. A. R. (2023). Social media and employee voice: A comprehensive literature review. Behaviour & Information Technology, 42(14), 2407–2427.
21.
GraenG. B.Uhl-BienM. (1995). Relationship-based approach to Leadership: Development of leader-member exchange (LMX) theory of leadership over 25 years: Applying a multi-level multi-domain perspective. The Leadership Quarterly, 6(2), 219–247.
22.
HeC. Q.XiongH. Y.CaiW. J.SongJ. (2025). How does AI awareness affect employees’ voice behavior in the service industry? A transactional theory of stress perspective. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 37(5), 1662–1680.
23.
HuZ. (2024). Digging deeper into responsibility: An investigation of responses to online help-request marketing campaigns in social networking groups. Information Technology & People, 37(2), 677–699.
24.
HussainI.ShuR.TangiralaS.EkkiralaS. (2019). The voice bystander effect: How information redundancy inhibits employee voice. Academy of Management Journal, 62(3), 828–849.
25.
IsaakyanS.SherfE. N.TangiralaS.GuenterH. (2021). Keeping it between us: Managerial endorsement of public versus private voice. Journal of Applied Psychology, 106(7), 1049–1066.
26.
JensenJ. M.RaverJ. L. (2021). A policy capturing investigation of bystander decisions to intervene in workplace incivility. Journal of Business and Psychology, 36(5), 883–901.
27.
KhanM.MowbrayP. K.WilkinsonA. (2023). Employee voice on social media — An affordance lens. International Journal of Management Reviews, 25(4), 687–706.
28.
KimJ.-H.JangS. (2014). A scenario-based experiment and a field study: A comparative examination for service failure and recovery. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 41, 125–132.
29.
KimY.UysalN. (2025). Transparent communication and employee outcomes: The mediating role of workplace sense of community in enhancing voice, loyalty, and positive work behaviors. International Journal of Business Communication. Advance Online Publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/23294884251349496
30.
KlotzA. C.BolinoM. C. (2016). Saying goodbye: The nature, causes, and consequences of employee resignation styles. Journal of Applied Psychology, 101(10), 1386–1404.
31.
LamC. F.LeeC.SuiY. (2019). Say it as it is: Consequences of voice directness, voice politeness, and voicer credibility on voice endorsement. Journal of Applied Psychology, 104(5), 642–658.
32.
LataneB.DabbsJ. M. (1975). Sex, group size and helping in three cities. Sociometry, 38(2), 180–194.
33.
LePineJ. A.Van DyneL. (1998). Predicting voice behavior in work groups. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83(6), 853–868.
34.
LevineM.CassidyC.BrazierG.ReicherS. (2002). Self-categorization and bystander non-intervention: Two experimental studies. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 32(7), 1452–1463.
35.
LevineM.CrowtherS. (2008). The responsive bystander: How social group membership and group size can encourage as well as inhibit bystander intervention. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 95(6), 1429–1439.
36.
LevineM.ManningR. (2013). Social identity, group processes, and helping in emergencies. European Review of Social Psychology, 24(1), 225–251.
37.
LiangJ.FarhC. I.FarhJ.-L. (2012). Psychological antecedents of promotive and prohibitive voice: A two-wave examination. Academy of Management Journal, 55(1), 71–92.
38.
LiangY.ParkY. (2022). Because I know how it hurts: Employee bystander intervention in customer sexual harassment through empathy and its moderating factors. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 27(3), 339–348.
39.
LiuC.YuanQ.LuoJ. (2025). Technical anonymity and employees’ willingness to speak up: Influences of voice solicitation, timeliness and psychological safety. Management Communication Quarterly, 39(2), 322–358.
40.
LiuX.WangY.HuangM.XuM.LiuD.HeY. (2026). The u-shaped relationship between locus of control and prohibitive voice via perceived risk of prohibitive voice: The moderating role of team voice climate. Journal of Applied Psychology, 111(3), 388–407.
41.
MaL.ZhangX.DingX.FeiJ. (2021). How to improve employee satisfaction and efficiency through different enterprise social media use. Journal of Enterprise Information Management, 34(3), 922–947.
42.
MacMillanK.HurstC.KelleyK.HowellJ.JungY. (2020). Who says there’s a problem? Preferences on the sending and receiving of prohibitive voice. Human Relations, 73(8), 1049–1076.
43.
MaddenC.LohJ. (M. I.). (2020). Workplace cyberbullying and bystander helping behaviour. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 31(19), 2434–2458.
44.
MadsenV. T. (2016). Constructing organizational identity on internal social media: A case study of coworker communication in Jyske Bank. International Journal of Business Communication, 53(2), 200–223.
45.
MadsenV. T. (2017). The challenges of introducing internal social media: The coordinators’ roles and perceptions. Journal of Communication Management, 21(1), 2–16.
46.
MadsenV. T. (2018). Participatory communication on internal social media–a dream or reality? Findings from two exploratory studies of coworkers as communicators. Corporate Communications: An International Journal, 23(4), 614–628.
47.
MadsenV. T.JohansenW. (2019). A spiral of voice? When employees speak up on internal social media. Journal of Communication Management, 23(4), 331–347.
48.
MadsenV. T.VerhoevenJ. W. M. (2019). The big idea of employees as strategic communicators in public relations. In FrandsenF.JohansenW.TenchR.RomentiS. (Eds.), Big ideas in public relations research and practice (Advances in Public Relations and Communication Management, Vol. 4, pp. 143–162). Emerald Publishing Limited.
49.
MadsenV. T.VerhoevenJ. W. M. (2016). Self-censorship on internal social media: A case study of coworker communication behavior in a Danish bank. International Journal of Strategic Communication, 10(5), 387–409.
50.
MaoC. M.DeAndreaD. C. (2019). How anonymity and visibility affordances influence employees’ decisions about voicing workplace concerns. Management Communication Quarterly, 33(2), 160–188.
51.
MartinK. K.NorthA. C. (2015). Diffusion of responsibility on social networking sites. Computers in Human Behavior, 44, 124–131.
52.
McFarlandL. A.PloyhartR. E. (2015). Social media: A contextual framework to guide research and practice. Journal of Applied Psychology, 100(6), 1653–1677.
53.
MorrisonE. W. (2011). Employee voice behavior: Integration and directions for future research. Academy of Management Annals, 5(1), 373–412.
54.
NieberleK. W.FladererM. P. (2025). Voice echoes: A critical review and future research agenda on the consequences of employee voice for voicers, their co-workers, and managers. Organizational Psychology Review, 15(2), 209–255.
55.
ObermaierM.FawziN.KochT. (2016). Bystanding or standing by? How the number of bystanders affects the intention to intervene in cyberbullying. New Media & Society, 18(8), 1491–1507.
56.
PalmerJ. E.NicksaS. C.McMahonS. (2018). Does who you know affect how you act? The impact of relationships on bystander intervention in interpersonal violence situations. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 33(17), 2623–2642.
57.
ParkerC.ScottS.GeddesA. (2019). Snowball sampling. In AtkinsonP.DelamontS.CernatA.SakshaugJ. W.WilliamsR. A. (Eds.), Sage Research Methods Foundations. Sage Publications.
58.
RutkowskiG. K.CruderC. L.RomerD. (1983). Group cohesiveness, social norms, and bystander intervention. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 44(3), 545–552.
59.
SajadiP.VandenbergheC. (2025). Psychological climate for diversity, racial/ethnic workplace discrimination, and prosocial voice behavior: The moderating role of social dominance orientation. International Journal of Manpower, 46(9), 1810–1830.
60.
SivunenA. E.Van ZoonenW.TreemJ. W. (2025). Friendly skies and unfriendly workplace communication: Examining emotion displays on enterprise social media in the aviation industry. Communication Monographs, 92(1), 169–192.
61.
SongJ.OhI. (2018). Factors influencing bystanders’ behavioral reactions in cyberbullying situations. Computers in Human Behavior, 78, 273–282.
62.
TangiralaS.RamanujamR. (2012). Ask and you shall hear (but not always): Examining the relationship between manager consultation and employee voice. Personnel Psychology, 65(2), 251–282.
63.
Van BommelM.Van ProoijenJ.-W.ElffersH.Van LangeP. A. M. (2012). Be aware to care: Public self-awareness leads to a reversal of the bystander effect. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 48(4), 926–930.
64.
Van OschW.BulgurcuB. (2020). Idea generation in enterprise social media: Open versus closed groups and their network structures. Journal of Management Information Systems, 37(4), 904–932.
65.
VoelpelS. C.EckhoffR. A.FörsterJ. (2008). David against goliath? Group size and bystander effects in virtual knowledge sharing. Human Relations, 61(2), 271–295.
66.
WangS. (2021). Standing up or standing by: Bystander intervention in cyberbullying on social media. New Media & Society, 23(6), 1379–1397.
67.
WangX.OwT. T.LiuL.FengY.LiangY. (2020). Effects of peers and network position on user participation in a firm-hosted software community: The moderating role of network centrality. European Journal of Information Systems, 29(5), 521–544.
68.
WangX. T.DuanJ. Y.XuY.ShiL. X. Y.QianC. (2025). Voice for ourselves or myself in times of crisis: When and how crisis-related uncertainty motivates employee voices. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 98(1), Article e70007.
69.
WhitingS. W.MaynesT. D.PodsakoffN. P.PodsakoffP. M. (2012). Effects of message, source, and context on evaluations of employee voice behavior. Journal of Applied Psychology, 97(1), 159–182.
70.
WuJ.van KnippenbergD.GiessnerS. R.WongS. I. (2026). When will employees voice up? Leader-member exchange similarity and leader group prototypicality. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 33(1), 114–133.
71.
XuE.HuangX.OuyangK.LiuW.HuS. (2020). Tactics of speaking up: The roles of issue importance, perceived managerial openness, and managers’ positive mood. Human Resource Management, 59(3), 255–269.
72.
YouL.LeeY.-H. (2019). The bystander effect in cyberbullying on social network sites: Anonymity, group size, and intervention intentions. Telematics and Informatics, 45, Article 101284.
73.
YueC. A.ThelenP.VergheseA. K. (2025). Should I speak up? How supervisory communication, team culture, and team relationships determine employees’ voice behavior. International Journal of Business Communication, 62(1), 131–160.
74.
ZhangZ.LiangQ.LiJ. (2019). Understanding managerial response to employee voice: A social persuasion perspective. International Journal of Manpower, 41(3), 273–288.
