Part 4: Bystander interventions in violence prevention
Encourage. Support. Act!
Bystander Approaches to Sexual Harassment in the Workplace
- Back to Contents
- Foreword
- Executive summary
- Introduction
- Part 1: Sexual harassment: an overview
- Part 2: Sexual harassment from the perspective of bystanders
- Part 3: The motivations and actions of bystanders: theoretical perspectives on bystander intervention
- Part 4: Bystander interventions in violence prevention
- Part 5: Legal and organisational implications of bystander approaches for sexual harassment
- Part 6: Towards a prevention framework
- Conclusion
- Acknowledgements
Part 4: Bystander
    interventions in violence prevention
Bystanders have received growing attention as a potential means of violence
    prevention. Amongst efforts oriented towards the primary prevention of domestic
    and family violence, sexual violence and  other forms of interpersonal violence,
    mobilising bystanders to prevent and respond to violence or to the situations
    and factors which increase the risk of violence taking place (‘bystander
    intervention’), is understood as an important form of primary prevention
    and is an increasingly prominent
    strategy.[196]
In the field of violence prevention, strategies focused on bystander
    intervention have been primarily developed in relation to specific forms of
    violence, particularly physical and sexual violence and related forms of
    coercion and abuse between adults who know each other. However, there has been
    less attention on bystander intervention for other forms of interpersonal
    violence such as male-male public violence, child sexual abuse and  sexual
    harassment.
Bystanders, in the violence prevention literature, are understood to be
    individuals who observe an act of violence, discrimination, or other problematic
    behaviour, but who are not its direct perpetrator or
    victim.[197] Rather, bystanders
    are onlookers, spectators or otherwise present in some sense. However, in some
    accounts of bystander intervention, the term ‘bystander’ expands to
    include those who directly perpetrate violence. For example, in a revision by
    McMahon and colleagues [198] of a
    scale for measuring bystander behaviour first developed by Banyard and
    colleagues, several items regarding individuals’ own practices of sexual
    consent were included. Such accounts blur the line between bystanders to violence and perpetrators of violence. In practice of course, individuals
    who act as prosocial bystanders, intervening in ´Ç³Ù³ó±ð°ù²õ’ violent and
    violence-supportive behaviours, should ‘put their own house in
    order’, ensuring that they do not use violence themselves. Notwithstanding
    this conflation of terms, it is preferable to reserve the term
  ‘bystander’ for those who are not directly involved in the violence
    in question.
Work on bystanders to violence distinguishes between ‘passive’
    bystanders, who do not act or intervene and  ‘active bystanders’ who
    take action. Active or ‘pro-social’ bystanders may take action
    to:
- Stop the perpetration of a specific incident of violence;
- Reduce the risk of violence escalating and  prevent the physical,
 psychological and social harms that may result; and
- Strengthen the conditions that work against violence
 occurring.[199]
The
    following section addresses how bystander interventions are framed as various
    levels of prevention, the specific behaviours of bystanders that can be
    encouraged and supported, the kinds of strategies that have been employed in the
    violence prevention area and the effectiveness of these strategies.
4.1	The framing of
    bystander intervention as prevention
Efforts to prevent and reduce domestic violence and sexual violence in the
    past two decades have been marked by a growing emphasis on both the primary
    prevention of these forms of violence and on the need to engage men in a range
    of prevention strategies. The increasing prominence of bystander intervention is
    informed by both these emphases.
In the last two decades, prevention has become a central focus of community
    and government efforts to address men’s violence against women. This
    development reflects the recognition that it is important to not only respond to
    the victims and perpetrators of violence, but also work to prevent violence from
    occurring in the first place. Efforts have been made to address the underlying
    causes of violence, in order to reduce its occurrence and ultimately, to
    eliminate it altogether. Prevention work has only become possible because of
    years of hard work and dedication by survivors, advocates, prevention educators
    and  other professionals.[200] It
    is important to note however, that primary prevention efforts complement, but do
    not replace or take priority over, work with victims and survivors.
Activities to prevent and respond to violence can be classified in a number
    of ways. One of the most common is a three-part classification of activities
    according to when they occur in relation to
    violence:[201]
- Before the problem starts: Primary prevention
- Activities which take place before violence has occurred to
 prevent initial perpetration or victimisation.
 
- Activities which take place before violence has occurred to
- Once the problem has begun: Secondary prevention
- Immediate responses after violence has occurred to deal with
 the short-term consequences of violence, to respond to those at risk and to
 prevent the problem from occurring or progressing.
 
- Immediate responses after violence has occurred to deal with
- Responding afterwards: Tertiary prevention
- Long-term responses after violence has occurred to deal with
 the lasting consequences of violence, minimise its impact and prevent further
 perpetration and victimisation.
 
- Long-term responses after violence has occurred to deal with
Primary prevention
    strategies are implemented before the problem ever occurs. In relation to
    violence by boys and men against girls and women for example, these early
    strategies aim to lessen the likelihood of boys and men using violence, or girls
    and women suffering violence, in the first place. Therefore, primary prevention
    strategies strive to circumvent
    violence[202], remove the causes
    or determinants of violence, prevent the development of risk factors associated
    with violence and /or enhance protective factors against
    violence.[203] They are successful
    when the first instance of violence is
    precluded.[204]
Secondary prevention focuses on early identification and intervention,
    targeting those individuals at high risk for either perpetration or
    victimisation and working to reduce the likelihood of their further or
    subsequent engagement in or subjection to violence. In contrast, tertiary
    prevention is centred on responding after violence has occurred. Activities
    focus on responding to, or treating the problem, minimising the impact of
    violence, restoring health and safety and  preventing further victimisation and
    perpetration.[205]
Returning to the notion of whistle blowing outlined in Part 3, whistle
    blowing can be located primarily within secondary and tertiary forms of
    prevention, given that actions widely associated with whistle blowing take place
    at or after the time of specific incidents of wrongdoing. At the same time, as
    with bystander intervention, one could also understand whistle blowing in a
    wider sense to include actions taken in order to prevent such incidents from
    occurring in the first place or to change the antecedents of them, thus
  ‘stretching’ the notion of whistle blowing to include its
    contributions to primary prevention.
Depending on the particular form they take, bystanders’ pro-social
    actions may be understood in terms of any of these three forms of prevention.
    Most attention to bystanders has focused on their action or inaction at or after
    the time of specific violent incidents, thus locating bystander intervention
    within secondary and tertiary forms of prevention. Bystanders can contribute to
    secondary and tertiary prevention by acting to reverse progress towards violence
    and to reduce its impact.
However, bystander intervention is also identified as a strategy of primary
    prevention precisely because bystanders can take action to prevent initial
    perpetration or victimisation. An emphasis on the primary prevention of
    men’s violence against women directs attention to the ways in which
    bystanders can further contribute to primary prevention by working to strengthen
    the social conditions that work against violence
    occurring.[206] It invites a focus
    on the roles individuals can play, not just in responding directly to victims
    and perpetrators, but in challenging the attitudes and norms, behaviours,
    institutional environments and  power inequalities which feed into violence
    against women.
4.2	Behaviours in
    bystander intervention
Approaches to bystander intervention in the field of violence prevention show
    some terminological and conceptual diversity, if not vagueness. One area of
    complexity is the nature of bystander interventions at various levels. As
    explained above, bystanders may intervene productively at various points along
    the spectrum from primary to secondary and tertiary prevention. It is widely
    recognised that bystanders can intervene not only in violent behaviour but in
    the wide range of other behaviours which sustain violent behaviour, such as
    sexist and violence-supportive jokes and comments to domineering and controlling
    behaviours by intimate partners in relationships. However, there has been
    relatively little attention to what kinds of bystander behaviours are relevant
    for these different forms of prevention and there has been little examination of
    how such interventions may be mobilised and
    encouraged.[207]
Another area of conceptual diversity concerns whether bystander interventions
    are seen as individual, collective or cultural. In research and programming
    regarding ‘bystanders’ in the field of violence prevention,
    bystanders typically are understood to be individual people and  there is
    relatively little framing of bystanders also in terms of collective or
    institutional actors. At the same time, the notion of workplaces or
    organisations as passive or prosocial bystanders is evident for example in
    Powell’s review. [208] It is
    taken for granted in violence prevention scholarship that men’s violence
    against women is sustained in part by institutional and collective factors and
    forces and  that addressing these therefore is crucial to primary
    prevention.[209]
Plausibly, one could stretch the concept of ‘bystander’ such that
    it applied also to organisations and indeed to entire cultures. This
    definitional move would have value in highlighting the roles of organisations
    and cultures in allowing and sustaining such behaviours as domestic violence or
    sexual harassment and their collective (and indeed legal) responsibilities to
    change. However, applying the term ‘bystander’ to collective
    entities only makes sense if there are ways in which such entities have agency
    or the capacity to act. Indeed, the notion of the bystander risks losing its
    value when applied to entities such as entire cultures where a collective
    capacity to act is either diffuse or non-existent. Therefore, in this discussion
    the term ‘bystander’ is reserved for individuals and for
    institutional entities with some degree of collective agency such as specific
    organisations or workplaces.
4.3	Existing strategies
    involving bystander intervention
The growing prominence of bystander intervention is informed by an increasing
    emphasis in violence prevention on the roles men in particular can play in
    preventing men’s violence against
    women.[210] This emphasis is
    visible in both community-based violence prevention programming and state and
    national plans for the prevention of violence against
    women.[211]
Primary prevention strategies aimed at men typically emphasise that most men
    do not use violence against women and  that non-violent men can play a positive
    role in building a world where such violence is unthinkable. In one typical
    account for example, men have three roles to play: ‘Men can prevent
    violence against women by not personally engaging in violence, by intervening
    against the violence of other men and  by addressing the causes of
    ±¹¾±´Ç±ô±ð²Ô³¦±ð.’[212] The second
    and third of these effectively constitute forms of bystander intervention.
    Bystander intervention (whether framed in these terms or not) then becomes an
    obvious way in which to mobilise non-violent men’s actions to prevent
    violence. Bystander approaches are evident particularly in the growing number of
    anti-violence men’s groups and networks emerging in North America and
    elsewhere.[213]
Efforts to engage men in the prevention of men’s violence against women
    have used a wide variety of strategies, but the most common strategies involve
    various forms of community education, defined broadly here to include
    face-to-face educational groups and programs and communication and social
    marketing.[214] Appeals to men as
    bystanders to other men’s violence and violence-supportive behaviour are
    evident in the curricula and content of a range of face-to-face and media-based
    initiatives. In addition, some programs centre entirely on a bystander approach.
    To give some examples, prevention efforts may address rape-supportive attitudes
    and norms through public information and awareness campaigns in mass media or in
    particular contexts such as sports and workplaces, education programs, or
  ‘edutainment’. They may address gender inequalities and patriarchal
    power relations through policies promoting gender equality, skills training in
    respectful relationships, or community development and the mobilisation of
    women’s and men’s networks for
    change.[215]
Bystander intervention strategies vary along at least two axes: (1) the
    populations and settings to which they are addressed; and (2) the strategies
    they use to effect change. In terms of targeted populations, the majority of
    educational programs with a bystander intervention component are addressed to
    children and young people and in school and university settings. Violence
    prevention education is particularly well developed on college and university
    campuses in the USA and  a number of notable bystander intervention programs in
    the US take place primarily in such settings, such as Bringing in the
    Bystander[216] and The Men’s
    Program.[217] Another prominent
    bystanders program among young adults is the Mentors in Violence Prevention
    (MVP) program among student athletes and student
    leaders.[218]
Many violence prevention education programs among young people include
    components intended to foster individuals’ prosocial bystander behaviour.
    To give a prominent US example, the campaign organised by Men Can Stop Rape,
    involves a multi-session education program involving ‘Men of
    Strength’ clubs and a social marketing campaign focused on the theme,
  ‘My strength is not for hurting’. Similar Australian examples
    include the Sexual Assault Prevention Program for Secondary
    Schools[219] and Sex &
    Ethics.[220]
In addition, some violence prevention initiatives are focused particularly on
    the creation of settings and contexts which are conducive to prevention,
    including bystander intervention. A prominent and innovative Australian example
    is the Australian Football League’s (AFL) Respect and Responsibility
    strategy. The strategy includes the introduction of model anti-sexual harassment
    and anti-sexual discrimination procedures across the AFL and its Clubs, the
    development of organisational policies and procedures to ensure a safe,
    supportive and inclusive environment for women, changes to AFL rules relating to
    problematic or violent conduct, the education of players and other Club
    officials, the dissemination of model policies and procedures at community club
    level and  a public education
    program.[221] Respect and
    Responsibility addresses bystander intervention in two ways: first, by promoting
    intervention skills among the players and others it educates and  second, by
    establishing responsibility for preventing violent and disrespectful behaviours
    directed towards women at the level of the sporting organisation as a whole.
In Australia, various other violence prevention programs are intended to
    generate change at the level of particular settings or organisational contexts
    (religious institutions, workplaces, schools and  so
    on).[222] It is unclear to what
    extent such programs explicitly address individual bystanders to violence, but a
    typical element in their efforts is encouraging participants to intervene in
    ´Ç³Ù³ó±ð°ù²õ’ violence or violence-supportive behaviours. Some prevention
    programs frame their efforts in terms of creating institutional environments and
    cultures which are conducive to individuals’ bystander behaviours, such as
    some schools programs addressing bullying and other forms of violence or
    coercion.[223]
The second major axis along which bystander intervention programs vary is the
    types of strategies used to effect change. The vast majority of existing
    violence prevention initiatives involving or focusing on bystander intervention
    rely on one or more of three streams of action to effect change: face-to-face
    education, social marketing and communications and  policy and law. This likely
    reflects the character of violence prevention in general, with most efforts
    relying on these strategies rather than other strategies such as community
    development and mobilisation. Within these three streams of prevention, there is
    further diversity in the actual processes used. Within face-to-face education,
    existing strategies include:
- Strategies to build individuals’ skills in behaving as active
 bystanders and their perceived capacity to do so (their self-efficacy);
- The formation of groups or clubs of individuals who act as peer-based
 educators, mentors and supporters in local contexts such as schools and
 universities;
- ‘Buddy’ and befriending schemes;
- Public commitments or pledges to speak up and act in relation to
 ´Ç³Ù³ó±ð°ù²õ’
 violence.[224]
Within
    social marketing and communications strategies, strategies include:
- Media materials (print, radio, etc.) designed to encourage an orientation
 towards and involvement in pro-social bystander intervention in particular
 contexts such as a school or university;
- Media materials directed to larger audiences across communities and
 countries.
A third stream of prevention addresses itself to
    collective and institutional contexts, as noted above, through policy and law.
    While it often uses the strategies to encourage bystander intervention which
    have already been discussed, it also relies on additional strategies
    including:
- Policies and institutional commitments;
- Legal and institutional sanctions (for example for workers, managers, or
 sports players);
- Management plans and processes for particular institutional contexts (such
 as classrooms, among sports players and so on);
- Law and legislation, including mandatory reporting and ‘bystander
 ²õ³Ù²¹³Ù³Ü³Ù±ð²õ’[225].
Some
    violence prevention initiatives focused on bystander intervention use multiple
    strategies, such as both face-to-face education and social marketing. For
    example, Bringing in the Bystander above is complemented by a poster campaign
    titled Know Your Power: Step In, Speak
    Up.[226] Men Can Stop Rape’s
    education program is complemented by its ‘My strength is not for
    hurting’ media campaign, although the latter is focused on young
    men’s own practices of consent and respect rather than their intervention
    as a bystander.
4.4	The effectiveness of
    existing strategies involving bystander intervention
In addressing bystander interventions in violence prevention and how they may
    translate to workplace sexual harassment, it is important to consider the extent
    to which strategies to date have been effective. A challenge in establishing
    this is that evidence regarding the effectiveness of violence prevention efforts
    in general is limited. Few interventions have been formally evaluated and
    existing evaluations often are limited methodologically or
    conceptually.[227]
Nevertheless, there is a small but growing body of evidence demonstrating
    that bystander intervention strategies can increase participants’
    willingness to take action, their sense of efficacy in doing so and  their
    actual participation in prosocial bystander behaviour. Some evaluation studies
    involve simple comparisons of participants’ pre- and post-program
    attitudes and beliefs, while more sophisticated studies use experimental designs
    in which participants are compared to a control group who did not undergo the
    education program. Some studies also are methodologically more robust in using
    standardised measures of impact, including longer term follow-up of
    participants, or examining mediators of change. Some examples of evaluations
    include the following:
- US college students were trained in the Bringing in the Bystander program to
 recognise potentially problematic situations as they were developing and to
 intervene safely in disrespectful and sexually coercive interactions. Students
 showed significant increases in positive bystander behaviour and reductions in
 rape-supportive attitudes and beliefs compared to students who had not received
 the training.[228] In a further,
 pilot study without a control group, the program showed positive results among
 university students in fraternities and sororities and a men’s athletic
 team.[229]
- Young men who participated in the 16-week ‘Men of Strength’
 clubs organised by Men Can Stop Rape showed improvements in their self-reported
 likelihood of intervening to prevent violence against women. Pre- and
 post-program data showed that they were now more likely to intervene when: a
 young woman was touched inappropriately by her male peers; a man bragged about
 how far he got with his girlfriend on their last date; or when a young man
 called another man negative
 names.[230]
- In a non-experimental evaluation of the Mentors in Violence Prevention (MVP)
 program among male and female high school students, after the program
 participants felt more capable of confronting harassing or disrespectful conduct
 and had greater knowledge of violence against women and reduced
 violence-supportive
 attitudes.[231]
- College men who attended The Men’s Program reported a greater sense of
 bystander efficacy and willingness to intervene than a control group of men, as
 well as showing declines in rape myth
 acceptance.[232]
[196] See for example,
VicHealth, More than ready: Bystander action to prevent violence against
women (2012). At  (viewed 1 June 2012).
[197] A Powell, Review of
    bystander approaches in support of preventing violence against women, Victorian Health Promotion Foundation (VicHealth) (2011), p. 8.
[198] S McMahon, J L Postmus
    and R A Koenick, ‘Conceptualizing the engaging bystander approach to
    sexual violence prevention on college campuses’ (2011) 52(1) Journal of
      College Student Development, pp. 115-130.
[199] A Powell, Review of
    bystander approaches in support of preventing violence against women,
    Victorian Health Promotion Foundation (2011), p. 8-10.
[200] CDC (Centers for Disease
    Control and Prevention) Sexual Violence Prevention: Beginning the
      dialogue (2004), p. 1; A Harvey, C Garcia-Moreno and A Butchart, Primary
        Prevention of Intimate-partner Violence and Sexual Violence, background paper for WHO Expert Meeting (2007), p. 5.
[201] This summary combines and
    modifies the accounts given by the CDC (2004: 3) and Chamberlain (2008:
    3).
  [202] T Cornelius and N
    Resseguie, ‘Primary and secondary prevention programs for dating violence:
    a review of the literature’ (2006) 12 Aggression and Violent
      Behavior, p. 366.
[203] L Chamberlain, A
    Prevention Primer for Domestic Violence: Terminology, Tools and  the Public
    Health Approach, The National Online Resource Center on Violence Against
    Women (2008).
[204] V Foshee, K Bauman, X
    Arriaga, R Helms, G Koch and G Linder, ‘An evaluation of safe dates, an
    adolescent dating violence prevention program’ (1998) 88 American
      Journal of Public Health, pp. 45.
[205] L Chamberlain, A
    Prevention Primer for Domestic Violence: Terminology, Tools and  the Public
    Health Approach, The National Online Resource Center on Violence Against
    Women (2008).
[206] A Powell, Review of
    bystander approaches in support of preventing violence against women, Victorian Health Promotion Foundation (VicHealth) (2011), p. 8.
[207] S McMahon, J L Postmus
    and R A Koenick, ‘Conceptualizing the engaging bystander approach to
    sexual violence prevention on college campuses’ (2011) 52(1) Journal of
      College Student Development, pp. 118.
[208] A Powell, Review of
    bystander approaches in support of preventing violence against women, Victorian Health Promotion Foundation (VicHealth) (2011), p. 8.
[209] M Flood, Background
    document for Preventing Violence Before It Occurs: A framework and background
      paper to guide the primary prevention of violence against women in Victoria,
    Victorian Health Promotion Foundation, (2007).
[210] M Flood, ‘Involving
    men in efforts to end violence against women’ (2011) 14(3) Men and
      Masculinities.
[211] M Flood, Where Men
    Stand: Men’s roles in ending violence against women, White Ribbon
    Prevention Research Series, No. 2, (2010), pp. 30-31.
[212] A Berkowitz, Working
    With Men to Prevent Violence Against Women: An Overview. (Part One),
    National Resource Centre on Domestic Violence (2004), p. 2.
[213] E Casey and T Lindhorst,
  ‘Toward a multi-level, ecological approach to the primary prevention of
    sexual assault: prevention in peer and community contexts’ (2009) 10(2) Trauma, Violence & Abuse, p. 107. See also White Ribbon –
    Australia’s Campaign to Stop violence Agaisnt Women. At  (viewed
    1 June 2012). .
[214] M Flood, ‘Involving
    men in efforts to end violence against women’ (2011) 14(3) Men and
      Masculinities.
[215] A Harvey, C Garcia-Moreno
    and A Butchart, Primary Prevention of Intimate-partner Violence and Sexual
      Violence, Background Paper for WHO Expert Meeting (2007).
[216] V L Banyard, E G Plante
    and M Moynihan, ‘Bystander education: bringing a broader community
    perspective to sexual violence prevention’ (2004) 32(1) Journal of
      Community Psychology, pp. 61-79.
[217] J Foubert, The
    Men’s Program: How To Successfully Lower Men’s Likelihood of
    Raping. (2nd ed, 2000).
[218] J Katz, Mentors in
    violence prevention: Gender violence prevention education and training. Website
    available at 
[219] CASA House, Evaluation
    of the CASA House Sexual Assault Prevention Program for Secondary Schools, Centre Against Sexual Assault (2008).
[220] M Carmody, Sex &
    Ethics: Young People and Ethical Sex (2008); M Carmody, Sex & Ethics:
      The Sexual Ethics Education Program for Young People (2008).
[221] AFL (Australian Football
    League), Respect & Responsibility: Creating a safe and inclusive
      environment for women at all levels of Australian Football (2005). 
[222] M Flood, Background
    document for Preventing Violence Before It Occurs: A framework and background
      paper to guide the primary prevention of violence against women in Victoria,
    Victorian Health Promotion Foundation, (2007).
[223] A Powell, Review of
    bystander approaches in support of preventing violence against women, Victorian Health Promotion Foundation (VicHealth) (2011), p. 25-26.
[224] A Powell, Review of
    bystander approaches in support of preventing violence against women, Victorian Health Promotion Foundation (VicHealth) (2011), p. 23-28.
[225] A Powell, Review of
    bystander approaches in support of preventing violence against women, Victorian Health Promotion Foundation (VicHealth) (2011), p. 26-31.
[226] A Powell, Review of
    bystander approaches in support of preventing violence against women, Victorian Health Promotion Foundation (VicHealth) (2011), p. 36-37.
[227] M Flood, L Fergus and M
    Heenan, Respectful Relationships Education: Violence prevention and
      respectful relationships education in Victorian secondary schools,
    Department of Education and Early Childhood Development, State of Victoria,
    (2009), pp. 19-21.
[228] V L Banyard, M M Moynihan
    and E G Plante, ‘Sexual violence prevention through bystander education:
    an experimental evaluation’ (2007) 35(4) Journal of Community
      Psychology, pp. 463-481.
[229] M Moynihan and V Banyard,
  ‘Community responsibility for preventing sexual violence: a pilot with
    campus Greeks and intercollegiate athletes’ (2008) 36(1) Journal of
      Prevention and Intervention in the Community, pp. 23-38.
[230] S Hawkins, Evaluation
    Findings – Men of Strength Club 2004-2005, Washington DC, Men Can Stop
    Rape (2005). At .
    mencanstoprape.org/info-url2696/info-urlshow.htm?docid=236151 (Viewed 2 April
    2007), pp. 8-10.
[231] K Ward, MVP:
    Evaluation 1999-2000 (2000). 
[232] J Langhinrichsen-Rohling,
    J Foubert H Brasfield, B Hill and S Shelley-Tremblay, ‘The Men’s
    Program: does it impact college men’s self-reported bystander efficacy and
    willingness to intervene?’ (2011) 17(6) Violence Against Women, pp.
    743-759.