Bystander Roles in Cyberbullying: A Mini-Review of Who, How Many, and Why

Cyberbullying has progressively increased due to the massive use of the internet and social networks. Bystanders constitute the largest group, occupying a key role in the evolution of the cyberbullying situation and its consequences for the victim. Research shows different ways in which bystanders behave, suggesting different types of sub-roles associated with different study variables. The objective of this literature review is to identify and characterize the roles of bystanders in cyberbullying situations that involve adolescent students. To achieve this objective, a systematic search was carried out in the Web of Science, PubMed, and Scopus databases for articles published between 2015 and 2020, resulting in 233 articles. Articles were then selected by relevant title and summary. Subsequently, the inclusion and exclusion criteria were applied, resulting in a total of nine articles. The findings of this review allowed us to identify two to five types of bystanders, the largest type representing outsiders and the smallest type representing assistants of the aggressor. The identified types of bystanders are characterized for variables such as sex, age, previous experience, and empathy. The results are discussed considering the available theoretical and empirical evidence.

Direct Bullying and Cyberbullying: Experimental Study of Bystanders' Motivation to Defend Victims and the Role of Anxiety and Identification With the Bully

School bullying among young adolescents is a globally pervasive problem, but is less common when bystanders are motivated to defend victims. Thus, the focus of this experimental study is on motivation to defend victims of bullying.

Methods: A total of 388 students (M_age = 12.22 years, 49.7% girls) from two Turkish public schools (5th–8th grade) participated in a vignette experiment. Students were randomized to one of two vignettes (direct vs. cyberbullying). Self-report measures of motivation to defend, trait anxiety, depression, and identification with the victim or bully were used.

Results: Participants reported more autonomous motivation in the cyberbullying condition, while those who witnessed direct bullying reported higher anxiety and depression.

Results also revealed that this type of condition was associated with anxiety and depression, while anxiety was associated with autonomous motivation to defend. Finally, participants in the direct bullying condition were more likely to identify with the bully.

Conclusion: Findings advance our understanding of when and why adolescents are motivated to help victims of bullying because they give a richer picture of what they assess when deciding whether or not they should intervene.

Who, When, How, and Why Bystanders Intervene in Physical and Psychological Teen Dating Violence

Teen dating violence victimization is associated with a host of adverse mental and physical health problems. A number of bystander-focused interventions have been developed to mitigate the occurrence of abuse but with varying effectiveness. There remains a need to understand more about bystander behaviors used by adolescents to ensure that existing intervention components match with bystanders' attitudes and behaviors about intervening. The current study is a scoping review of existing literature on adolescents' use of bystander behaviors to determine who, when, how, and why adolescents intervene. Seventeen articles met inclusion criteria, the majority of which used qualitative or observational survey designs. Adolescents who either feel a sense of responsibility and confidence to intervene or are directly involved with or know the individuals involved in the dating violence are more likely to intervene. Adolescents intervene when they are able to define an act as dating violence and tend to intervene when the victim is female and when they have a supportive relationship with at least one teacher in their school. The various ways how bystander intervention is engaged in ranges from verbally or physically confronting the abuser, distracting the abuser, seeking support from an adult, to passively accepting the abuse. Reasons why adolescents intervene include believing the abuse is wrong and that intervening will diffuse the situation and help the victim. A number of barriers to bystander intervention emerged from analysis including individual attitudes and school climate factors. Implications for strengthening bystander intervention programs are discussed.

Risky research and bystander consent

There is no quick and easy answer to the question whether research activities that endanger bystanders without their consent ever thereby violate those bystanders' rights. We cannot dismiss the idea that bystanders possess strong rights against researchers simply on the grounds that they are, after all, merely bystanders. Indeed, it is easy to imagine scenarios in which researchers would be morally required to gain the informed consent of bystanders whom they risk harming. Whether bystander consent is required in any particular real-world case will depend, in part, upon exactly how the research activity endangers them.

Why IRBs should protect bystanders in human research

Many types of human research activities present risks and burdens to third parties (e.g., bystanders). Few human protection policies directly address the protection of research bystanders, though some address it in passing. In what follows, I re-iterate reasons why bystanders are entitled to protections. I also argue that Institutional Review Boards (IRBs) are in the best position to signal to researchers and sponsors that bystanders should be protected in research. In some cases, IRB review would consist of evaluating bystander protection strategies directly; in other cases, this might entail merely certifying that another institutions, like a drug regulator, has taken adequate measures to protect the welfare of research bystanders.

Bystanders, risks, and consent

This paper considers the moral status of bystanders affected by medical research trials. Recent proposals advocate a very low threshold of permissible risk imposition upon bystanders that is insensitive to the prospective benefits of the trial, in part because we typically lack bystanders' consent. I argue that the correct threshold of permissible risk will be sensitive to the prospective gains of the trial. I further argue that one does not always need a person's consent to expose her to significant risks of even serious harm for the sake of others. That we typically need the consent of participants is explained by the fact that trials risk harmfully using participants, which is very hard to justify without consent. Bystanders, in contrast, are harmed as a side-effect, which is easier to justify. I then consider whether the degree of risk that a trial may impose on a bystander is sensitive to whether she is a prospective beneficiary of that trial.

Minimal or reasonable? Considering the ethical threshold for research risks to nonconsenting bystanders and implications for nonconsenting participants

When research poses risks to non-participant bystanders, it is not always practicable to obtain their consent. One approach to assessing how much research risk may be imposed on nonconsenting bystanders is to examine analogous circumstances, including risk thresholds deemed acceptable for nonconsenting research participants and for nonconsensual risks imposed outside the research setting. For nonconsenting participants, US research regulations typically limit risks to those deemed to be "minimal." Outside the research context, US tort law tolerates a more flexible "reasonable" risk threshold. This article advances a preliminary case that nonconsenting participants and nonconsenting bystanders exposed to similar research risks may be entitled to the same level of protection, but that risks generated by research may not be special in kind. Thus, limiting research risks to those that are "reasonable," rather than demanding that they be held to the "minimal" standard, may be the best approach for both nonconsenting participants and nonconsenting bystanders. Further work is needed to establish whether the descriptive standards used to support the analogies relied on here are normatively justifiable, as well as the extent to which the minimal risk standard and the reasonable risk standard would lead to meaningfully different outcomes in practice.

Bystanders and ethical review of research: Proceed with caution

Scientists seeking to conduct research with human subjects must first submit their proposals to research ethics committees (Institutional Review Boards [IRBs], in the United States). Some of these studies pose risks to "bystanders," i.e., people who may be affected by the research but who are not enrolled as study subjects. Should IRBs expand their scope to include oversight over possible harms to bystanders as well as research subjects? This paper presents arguments against this step. Prior review of research with human subjects, despite its evident burden on the research enterprise, is a necessary caution, because the tension between the objectives of humane treatment of research subjects and sound scientific design and procedure has in the past led to serious abuses. This rationale is inapplicable in the case of bystanders. Moreover, in view of the many and varied effects of both research practices and scientific advances on the broader public over time, those who may be considered to be "bystanders" may potentially expand without limit; requiring IRBs to anticipate these distant and long-term effects as part of prior ethical review could greatly increase its burden and its deterrent effect on research. While conducting research without concern for serious potential harm to bystanders may be irresponsible and unethical, expanding the scope of prior review by IRBs to include risks to bystanders is not required by the principles governing human subjects research, and the costs and burdens of this expansion may outweigh any expected gains.

The role of community engagement in addressing bystander risks in research: The case of a Zika virus controlled human infection study

There is limited guidance on how to assess the ethical acceptability of research risks that extend beyond research participants to third parties (or "research bystanders"). Community or stakeholder engagement has been proposed as one way to address potential harms to community members, including bystanders. Despite widespread agreement on the importance of community engagement in biomedical research, this umbrella term includes many different goals and approaches, agreement on which is ethically required or recommended for a particular context. We analyse the case of a potential Zika virus human challenge trial to assess whether and how community engagement can help promote the ethical acceptability of research posing risks to bystanders. We conclude that, in addition to having intrinsic value, community engagement can improve the identification of bystander risks, effective approaches to minimizing them, and transparency about bystander risks for host communities.

Compensation and reparations for victims and bystanders of the U.S. Public Health Service research studies in Tuskegee and Guatemala: Who do we owe what?

Using the infamous research studies in Tuskegee and Guatemala, the article examines the difference between victims and bystanders. The victims can include families, sexual partners, and children not just the participants. There are also the bystanders in the populations who are affected, even vaguely, decades after the initial studies took place. Differing reparations for victims and bystanders through lawsuits and historical acknowledgments has to be part of broader discussions of historical justice, and the weighing of the impact of racism and imperial research endeavors.

Using, risking, and consent: Why risking harm to bystanders is morally different from risking harm to research subjects

Subjects in studies on humans are used as a means of conducting the research and achieving whatever good would justify putting them at risk. Accordingly, consent must normally be obtained before subjects are exposed to any substantial risks to their welfare. Bystanders are also often put at risk, but they are not used as a means. Accordingly-or so I argue-consent is more often unnecessary before bystanders are exposed to similar substantial risks to their welfare.

Online Celebrity Bashing: Purely Relaxation or Stressful Confrontation? An Experimental Study on the Effects of Exposure to Online Celebrity Bashing on the Emotional Responses and Physiological Arousal Among Adolescent Bystanders

Adolescents regularly observe practices of online celebrity bashing. Existing research pointed to adolescent bystanders' approving attitudes toward this practice. However, knowledge is lacking on how adolescent bystanders respond emotionally and physiologically to cases of celebrity bashing. An experimental study with two conditions (bashing/neutral) was conducted to investigate the influence of exposure to online celebrity bashing on the emotional responses and physiological arousal among adolescent bystanders (n = 67). Self-reported questionnaires before and after exposure to celebrity bashing were used to measure participants' emotional state. Their physiological activation (heart rate and skin conductance) was recorded using the E4 Empatica Wristlet. The results indicated that adolescents responded quite negatively to the cases of celebrity bashing, expressing increased feelings of anger, sadness, frustration and powerlessness, and decreased feelings of amusement. Moreover, adolescent bystanders experienced celebrity bashing as stressful, as both the heart rate and phasic skin conductance significantly increased after exposure to bashing.

"Involved in something (involucrado en algo)": Denial and stigmatization in Mexico's "war on drugs"

This article responds empirically to the question posed by Stan Cohen about "why, when faced by knowledge of others' suffering and pain-particularly the suffering and pain resulting from what are called 'human rights violations'-does 'reaction' so often take the form of denial, avoidance, passivity, indifference, rationalisation or collusion?". Our context is Mexico's "war on drugs." Since 2006 this "war" has claimed the lives of around 240,000 Mexican citizens and disappeared around 60,000 others. Perpetrators include organized criminal gangs and state security services. Violence is pervasive and widely reported. Most people are at risk. Our study is based on qualitative interviews and focus groups involving 68 "ordinary Mexicans" living in five different Mexican cities which have varying levels of violence. It investigates participant proximity to the victims and the psychological defense mechanisms they deploy to cope with proximity to the violence. We found that 62 of our participants knew, directly or indirectly, one or more people who had been affected. We also found one dominant rationalization (defense mechanism) for the violence: that the victims were "involved in something" (drugs or organized crime) and therefore "deserved their fate." This echoes prevailing state discourses about the violence. We argue that the discourse of "involved" is a discourse of denial that plays three prominent roles in a highly violent society in which almost no-one is immune: it masks state violence, stigmatizes the victims, and sanctions bystander passivity. As such, we show how official and individual denial converge, live, and reproduce, and play a powerful role in the perpetuation of violence.

You're It-You've Got to Save Someone: Immediate Responders, Not Bystanders

Recurring disasters and life-threatening emergencies mandate that communities across the world be adequately prepared to prevent, respond, and recover from these events. Experiences throughout the world with mass casualty incidents and other disasters have increasingly highlighted the vital role that “active bystanders”—persons at the scene of an event who step forward to help—can play in preventing, containing, reporting, saving lives, decreasing morbidity, and increasing resilience. This paper seeks to emphasize the importance of the public in response to emergencies. No longer should we use the passive word “bystanders.” Rather immediate responders fill a critical silent gap before trained professionals arrive. In support of immediate responders this paper will identify the barriers to bystander action, and provide next steps to increase the number of individuals who take action at times of emergency. Immediate responders can and do play a valuable and unique role in reducing mortality, morbidity, and suffering from emergency events. While some cultures and countries have a long history of engaging the public as critical in an emergency response, others do not. The challenge is how best to increase the number of individuals who are motivated, prepared and ready to respond appropriately when they find themselves at the scene of an active shooter, bombing, hurricane, earthquake, tornado, fire, vehicle crash, or other life-threatening emergency.

Dating CAFE Ambassador Programme: Chinese College Students to Help Peers in Dating Violence

Dating violence prevention programs have been understudied in Asia, including China. The current study sought to evaluate the feasibility of the Dating Compassion, Assessment, reFerral, and Education (CAFE) Ambassador Programme in China. This program is designed to enhance the behavioral intentions of Chinese students to help peers who are experiencing dating violence and to compare students' attitudes toward dating violence, students' subjective norms about helping peers, and students' perceived behavioral control in helping peers before and after attending the 7.5 hour program. A quasi-experimental design was used, including two student groups (n = 85) assessed at baseline and 3-month follow-up. Quantitative pre- and postintervention measurements, in conjunction with qualitative focus group interviews, were used to evaluate the program's effectiveness. The findings indicated a significant enhancement in the behavioral intentions of participants in the intervention group to help peers experiencing dating violence, a stronger subjective norm regarding helping others, and an enhanced sense of perceived behavioral control to help, compared with the control group, over time. Focus group data revealed that students who participated in the program developed a more comprehensive definition of dating violence, increased awareness of dating violence in peers, a shift in their focus concerning the role of intention in dating violence and felt more responsible for helping their peers. The findings support the effectiveness of the Dating CAFE Ambassador Programme.

Sex partners as bystanders in HIV prevention trials: Two test cases for research ethics

Research involving human subjects can impose risk on some 'bystanders'- people who are not themselves research subjects but whom the study may affect. We examine the consequences of research for a particular category of bystanders - research subjects' sex partners - in trials testing interventions to reduce (1) HIV transmission (HIV treatment-as-prevention trials) and (2) HIV acquisition (HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis trials). Both types of trials provide useful test cases for assessing whether bystanders to research deserve special consideration in ethics reviews, and potentially some of the benefits and protections that research subjects receive. In HIV treatment-as-prevention trials, there are two groups of people who are alike in many important respects but treated very differently by research ethics: research subjects who contribute data on the primary endpoint of the trial (because some of them have sex with the people receiving the treatment conditions of the trials) - and bystanders who are not enrolled in the trials but who could have contributed primary endpoint data in the same way as the first group. In pre-exposure trials, the sex partners of people participating in pre-exposure prophylaxis trials are bystanders, even though they are necessary for the success of the trial. Research subjects' autonomy is fiercely protected by trial enrolment processes. Bystanders, by contrast, often have no choice but to be affected by the study, because of their relationship to a research subject. In HIV prevention trials, standing by can come with important risks, including the same ones on which the success of the research hinges. It is thus important to consider the ethical obligations to protect bystanders, and the related procedural responsibilities.

The ethical relevance of two types of adverse health effects on research bystanders as applied to HIV, mosquito bednet and organ transplant trials

Using cases from this symposium, I illustrate a distinction between clinical trials that harm research non-participants' health and clinical trials that reduce a distinct health benefit to research non-participants. This distinction is ethically relevant for the design and justification of clinical trials. The relative stringency of the ethical duty to avoid harm makes it more important, all other things being equal, to avoid harms rather than avoid reduction of benefits. This is especially ethically important as it is often difficult to identify research non-participants who will suffer health harms due to research, let alone obtain their informed consent. In these difficult cases, all other things being equal, we have ethical reason to prefer clinical trials that only reduce non-participants' health benefits to those that only involve harms to non-participants' health. When such trials are not feasible and we are unable to get consent for the significant harms to research non-participants, these (and other) countervailing considerations must be outweighed by substantial social benefits in order for the trial to be ethically justified. Ethical research design must not just be concerned with the magnitude of adverse health effects on research non-participants but also the types of those effects.

A meta-analysis of the relationship between moral disengagement and bullying roles in youth

Over the last several years, researchers have become increasingly interested in the influence of moral factors on bullying behaviors. This is the first meta-analytic review to exclusively examine the relationship between moral disengagement (MD) and the key bullying roles of bully, victim, defender, and bystander. Forty-seven independent samples examining a total of 43,809 children/adolescents (aged 7-19) were included in this meta-analysis. Results indicated a positive relationship between MD and bullying (r = 0.31; 95% CI [0.27, 0.34]), MD and victimization (r = 0.08; 95% CI [0.05, 0.12]), and a negative relationship between MD and defending (r = -0.11; 95% CI [-0.17, -0.04]). No significant relationship was found for MD and bystanding behavior. Moderators of bullying type (traditional vs. cyberbullying), reporting type (self vs. peer report), age, and gender were included in the analyses. The results are discussed in the context of relevant literature with particular emphasis on the importance of distinguishing between guilty and unconcerned bystanders, and the significant overlap between bullying and victimization in the cyber context.

The Health Risks of Electronic Cigarette Use to Bystanders

This works aimed to assess the health risks of e-cigarette use to bystanders. The exhaled breath of 17 volunteers was collected while they were vaping, and the levels of nicotine, propylene glycol, glycerol, formaldehyde, acetaldehyde, acrolein, tobacco-specific nitrosamines (TSNAs), and heavy metals were analyzed. Increased levels of nicotine, propylene glycol, TSNAs and copper were found in the exhaled breath of the volunteers. From these measurements, bystander exposure was estimated for two different scenarios: (1) A non-ventilated car with two e-cigarette users and (2) a ventilated office with one e-cigarette user. Our results show that bystanders may experience irritation of the respiratory tract as a result of exposure to propylene glycol and glycerol. Systemic effects of nicotine should also be expected if nicotine-containing e-liquid is used, including palpitations, and an increase of the systolic blood pressure. Furthermore, due to the presence of TSNAs in some e-liquids, an increased risk of tumors could not be excluded for the ‘car’ scenario. While e-cigarette use can clearly have effects on the health of bystanders, the risks depend on the rate of ventilation, dimensions of the room, and vaping behavior of the e-cigarette user. The presence of TSNAs in e-liquids can be avoided, which will prevent the most serious effect identified (increased risk of tumors).

Cyberbullying across the Lifespan of Education: Issues and Interventions from School to University

Research on cyberbullying amongst students has tended to be conducted separately within specific education institutional contexts, schools, further education (FE) and higher education (HE), neglecting a view that takes account of the entire educational lifespan. The present article addresses this gap in the literature, providing a novel take on examining its nature, social environments, legal consequences and potentially helpful interventions. To facilitate this, the article conceptualises cyberbullying in broad terms, recognising that it can take multiple forms of online and digital practice including: spreading rumours, ridiculing and/or demeaning another person, casting aspirations on the grounds of race, disability, gender, religion or sexual orientation; seeking revenge or deliberately embarrassing a person by posting intimate photos or videos about them without their consent; accessing another's social networking profiles with malicious intent and socially excluding a person from a social network or gaming site. This article demonstrates that harm from cyberbullying is a cause for concern for students at each developmental stage and that there are continuities in its appearance that need to be challenged at each point in the educational lifespan. And inaccurately, by university, the idea that 'nothing can be done' still is one of the main concerns for the victims. The article concludes with five key recommendations for future research and practice across the educational lifespan.

Implementation of Online Opioid Prevention, Recognition and Response Trainings for Laypeople: Year 1 Survey Results

BACKGROUND

This article reports on the first implementation of an online opioid-overdose prevention, recognition and response training for laypeople. The training was disseminated nationally in November 2014. Between 2000 and 2014, U.S. opioid deaths increased by 200%. The importance of complementary approaches to reduce opioid overdose deaths, such as online training, cannot be overstated.

OBJECTIVES

A retrospective evaluation was conducted to assess perceived knowledge, skills to intervene in an overdose, confidence to intervene, and satisfaction with the training.

MEASUREMENTS

Descriptive statistics were used to report sample characteristics, compare experiences with overdose and/or naloxone between subgroups, and describe participants' satisfaction with the trainings. Z-ratios were used to compare independent proportions, and paired t-tests were used to compare participant responses to items pre- and posttraining, including perceived confidence to intervene and perceived knowledge and skills to intervene successfully.

RESULTS

Between January and October 2015, 2,450 laypeople took the online training; 1,464 (59.8%) agreed to be contacted. Of these, 311 (21.2% of those contacted) completed the survey. Over 80% reported high satisfaction with content, format and mode of delivery and high satisfaction with items related to confidence and overdose reversal preparedness. Notably, 89.0% of participants felt they had the knowledge and skills to intervene successfully posttraining compared to 20.3% pretraining (z = -17.2, p <.001). Similarly, posttraining, 87.8% of participants felt confident they could successfully intervene compared to 24.4% pretraining (z = -15.9, p <.001).

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrates the effectiveness of the GetNaloxoneNow.org online training for laypeople.

Flexible decision-making in grooming partner choice in sooty mangabeys and chimpanzees

Living in permanent social groups forces animals to make decisions about when, how and with whom to interact, requiring decisions to be made that integrate multiple sources of information. Changing social environments can influence this decision-making process by constraining choice or altering the likelihood of a positive outcome. Here, we conceptualized grooming as a choice situation where an individual chooses one of a number of potential partners. Studying two wild populations of sympatric primate species, sooty mangabeys (Cercocebus atys atys) and western chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes verus), we tested what properties of potential partners influenced grooming decisions, including their relative value based on available alternatives and the social relationships of potential partners with bystanders who could observe the outcome of the decision. Across 1529 decision events, multiple partner attributes (e.g. dominance ranks, social relationship quality, reproductive state, partner sex) influenced choice. Individuals preferred to initiate grooming with partners of similar global rank, but this effect was driven by a bias towards partners with a high rank compared to other locally available options. Individuals also avoided grooming partners who had strong social relationships with at least one bystander. Results indicated flexible decision-making in grooming interactions in both species, based on a partner's value given the local social environment. Viewing partner choice as a value-based decision-making process allows researchers to compare how different species solve similar social problems.

Meeting the Needs of Young Adolescents: ABBL Anti-Bullying Program During Middle School Transition

This article introduces ABBL, the anti-bullying program for the transition to middle school, which was designed as a free, feasible, and easily applicable solution for teachers who, for any reason, cannot take advantage of comprehensive anti-bullying school-based programs. The ABBL, based on the identification of the causal risk factors and mechanisms that lead to bullying, aims to influence the peer group in such a way that students do not reward antisocial behaviors and are, instead, able to create supportive class atmospheres and strong networks of personal attachments. The evaluation of the program effectiveness showed that it reduced bullying in the classroom. Indications for wider implementations are presented together with the ready-to-use ABBL anti-bullying program (see http://blizej.org/abbl-antibullying-program/ ).

Variations in Involvement: Motivating Bystanders to Care for Senior Citizens

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to determine the impact of a senior service advertising campaign designed to increase volunteerism and financial donations among bystanders.

DESIGN/METHODOLOGY/APPROACH

A cross-sectional mail survey was administered to 2,500 adults; 384 usable responses were obtained. Survey responses were analyzed by level of exposure and involvement in senior care.

FINDINGS

High involvement individuals viewed the ads more favorably and exhibited stronger senior caretaking intentions. Low-involvement consumers were less likely to see their own potential contributions to senior care services as effective.

RESULTS/IMPLICATIONS

It is argued that nonparticipants in prosocial helping may fail to notice the need (low awareness), fail to view the cause as urgent (low perceived susceptibility), or have low prior experience with the issue.

PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS

A typology of involvement could be developed that can be used for audience segmentation in marketing health behaviors to bystanders.

ORIGINALITY

With limited theoretical and practical guidance on how to motivate bystanders to engage in prosocial behaviors, health communicators and marketers are challenged to tap into the vital resource that bystanders potentially could provide. The research reviewed and presented here indicates hope for engaging the public to become active players in making the nation a safer and healthier place.

Bystanders' responses to offline bullying and cyberbullying: The role of empathy and normative beliefs about aggression

Cyberbullying often takes place with the virtual presence or knowledge of bystanders. While we have some evidence about the determinants of bystanders' responses to offline bullying, we lack empirical studies concerning the variables that influence bystanders' responses to cyberbullying. The current study examines bystanders' responses to offline bullying and cyberbullying incidents. Two types of responses were captured: support toward the victims and the reinforcement of bullies' actions. Using data from 321 German adolescents (ages 12-18; M = 14.99; 44% girls), the association between bystanders' responses and normative beliefs about verbal aggression and cyberaggression, and affective and cognitive empathy, were tested in a path model. Both types of normative beliefs positively predicted the reinforcement of bullies, and normative belief about verbal aggression also predicted support for the victims of offline bullying. Both types of empathy predicted support in offline bullying, but only affective empathy predicted support in cyberbullying. There was no link between affective or cognitive empathy to the reinforcement of bullies. Moreover, bystanders' tendencies to respond supportively to the victim or to reinforce the bully were rather consistent in both cyber- and offline bullying, but there was no link between support and reinforcement. The findings are discussed with regard to implications for prevention and intervention efforts.