1. WHICH FACTORS MOTIVATE BYSTANDER INTERVENTION IN CASE OF WORKPLACE BULLYING?
Davide DAL CASON Annalisa CASINI*, Catherine HELLEMANS
Research Center for Work and Consumer Psychology (PsyTC), Université Libre de Bruxelles (ULB), Bruxelles
*Psychological Sciences Research Institute (IPSY), Université catholique de Louvain UCL, Louvain-la-Neuve
PsyTC
INTRODUCTION
Bullying does not concern only the victim-bully dyad Witnesses can play a vital role in stopping incidents.
school bullying (Polanin, Espelage, & Pigott, 2012)
witness-centered approaches reduce 
Research shows that:
campus aggression (Jennifer Katz & Moore, 2013)
effective solution to workplace bullying (Premilla D’Cruz & Ernesto Noronha, 2011)
encouraging bystanders to intervene
However, processes leading intervention behaviour is still unclear
A BETTER COMPREHENSION FOR
MORE EFFECTIVE ANTI-BULLYING STRATEGIES.
OUR STUDY
OUR AIM:
develop and valid a model about bystander reaction against workplace bullying. +
2 REFERENCE MODELS:
Latané and Darley (1970)
bystander behavior
Pozzoli and Gini’s (2012)
bullying at school
4 main elements of our model:
1.DEFENDING AND PASSIVE BYSTANDING BEHAVIOR
2.COPING STRATEGIES
3.PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY (Pozzoli and Gini, 2010)
4.PROVICTIM ATTITUDES (Salmivalli and Voeten, 2004)
4 supplemental components:
MORAL IDENTITY (Aquino and Reed, 2002)
WORKPLACE SELF-EFFICACY (Fan et al., 2013)
JOB INSECURITY (De Witte , 2000)
SOCIO-MORAL CLIMATE (Weber et al., 2008)
FIVE STEP MODEL
Latané and Darley’s (1970)
METHODOLOGY
QUESTIONNAIRE: 9 scales  operationalisation of the above concepts
SAMPLE: 416 workers contacted through social media
[Mean  age = 40,63; SD = 11,73; range: 21–81; 73% male]
AND
Key factors of the model are:
Moral identity, pervasive role
Responsibility, behavioural crossroad
Self-efficacy, improves action D I S C U O N M O D E L
Job insecurity and socio-moral climate
influence responsibility and self-esteem mean >>> CONTEXT MATTERS
PRACTICAL PROPOSAL
- Teaching problem-solving strategies increase self-efficacy for defending
IMPROVE EFFECTIVE INTERVENTION
Note: results were analyzed and model was validated through structural equation modelling (SEM), made with Mplus 6.11 program (Muthén & Muthén, 2010)
REFERENCE
Katz, J., & Moore, J. (2013). Bystander education training for campus sexual assault prevention: An initial meta-analysis. Violence and Victims, 28(6), 1054–1067.
Polanin, J. R., Espelage, D. L., & Pigott, T. D. (2012). A meta-analysis of school-based bullying prevention programs’ effects on bystander intervention behavior. School Psychology Review, 41(1), 47.
Latane, B., & Darley, J. M. (1970). The Unresponsive Bystander: Why Doesn’t He Help? New York: Prentice Hall.
Premilla D’Cruz, & Ernesto Noronha. (2011). The limits to workplace friendship: Managerialist HRM and bystander behaviour in the context of workplace bullying. Employee Relations, 33(3), 269–288.
Pozzoli, T., & Gini, G. (2013). Why Do Bystanders of Bullying Help or Not? A Multidimensional Model. The Journal of Early Adolescence, 33(3), 315–340.