A Systematic Review of Validated Measures of U.S.-Based Bystander Intervention-Related Constructs

Abstract

This review aimed to identify U.S.-based, construct-validated measures of bystander intervention. Following PRISMA-P guidelines, electronic databases were searched, and emails were solicited identifying 8,559 articles for title screening. Abstracts and full texts were double screened, resulting in 24 scales meeting inclusion criteria: (a) measured a bystander-related construct in a situation where there was a potential for actual or perceived imminent physical or emotional harm, (b) written in English, and (c) statistically validated on U.S. samples. Most scales addressed the domain of interpersonal violence (67%), with fewer relating to bias/bullying (8.2%), mental health crises (12.5%), and substance use (12.5%). Most scales (71%) assessed the “take action” step of the situational model. The modal construct represented was intent/willingness/likelihood to intervene (50%). The average number of items on a scale was 14, and most (79%) provided Likert-style response options. None of the validated scales assessing behavior first accounted for an opportunity. Sample sizes ranged from 163 to 3,397, with the modal setting from colleges. Overall, samples were young (21.8 years old), White (75%), women (64%), and heterosexual (89%). Results indicate the need to validate additional measures that capture the “interpreting the situation as problematic” step of the situational model. Scales also need to be validated using diverse samples, particularly within the mental health crisis domain. Across all domains, validated measures need to be developed that first account for an opportunity when measuring actual bystander behavior. The information gleaned can be used to assist researchers in selecting measures and guide future measure development.

A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Bystander’s Barriers to Intervene in Gender-Based Violence and the Role of Failed Prior Attempts

“…Second, there is a lack of diversity in existing bystander-related literature. Most studies, including those in our review, have focused on white, young, and highly educated populations, with few or no studies examining bystander intervention in minority populations such as LGBT individuals and people of color in community settings (DeGue et al, 2014; Kirk-Provencher et al, 2023; Mennicke et al, 2022). Future studies should aim to expand the study populations and regions to address this gap.…”

Alcohol’s Role in Campus Sexual Assault Bystander Behavior: A Systematic Review

“…Researcher should examine the impact of victims', perpetrators', and bystanders' alcohol use on bystander intervention using standardized measurement strategies that can be systematically and consistently applied across similar studies. The recent work by Mennicke et al (2022) to systematically review validated measures of bystander-related constructs provides useful insight for multi-item scales. Studies that utilize individual scenarios should review our Supplemental Appendix B so that new research can be couched within what has been used previously.…”

Development and Validation of the Bystander Engagement Scale for Witnessed Intimate Partner Violence: A South Korean Version

“…This approach can threaten the validity of findings. Participants might indicate they did not intervene because they have never witnessed such an event (Mennicke et al, 2022). In response to this challenge, some studies have been, alternatively, designed to measure bystander efficacy (Stojanov et al, 2021), bystander readiness to help and act (Rothman et al, 2018), and behavioral intention to intervene (Wong et al, 2019) as predictors of bystander behaviors.…”

“…Existing bystander measurements lack diversity, even though bystander roles are pivotal regardless of the context. According to Mennicke et al (2022), approximately 45.8% of existing scales have been validated using samples from educational institutions, mainly colleges, the majority of whom were white, young, heterosexual, and female. Consequently, most existing bystander scales adopted have been limited in their application to marginalized populations, including people of color; lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender; and people living in non-Western cultural contexts.…”

“…In response to this challenge, some studies have been, alternatively, designed to measure bystander efficacy (Stojanov et al, 2021), bystander readiness to help and act (Rothman et al, 2018), and behavioral intention to intervene (Wong et al, 2019) as predictors of bystander behaviors. According to a recent review, most existing bystander intervention scales tend to measure the bystanders’ intent, willingness, and likelihood to intervene rather than their actual behaviors (Mennicke et al, 2022).…”