The Effect of Everyday Moral Sensitivity on Bullying Bystander Behavior: Parallel Mediating Roles of Empathy and Moral Disengagement

Abstract

The higher moral sensitivity to bullying a student has, the more likely they are to help the victim or inhibit bullying rather than ignore it. Research has mainly focused on particular sensitivity to bullying, and it remains unknown whether sensitivity to everyday moral issues functions similarly. The present study aimed to examine the effect of everyday moral sensitivity (EMS) on bullying bystander behaviors. We included a range of school children ( n = 1,655, Grades 3–12, 27.6% girls) in Southwest China. The results show 6.10% have been a victim-only, 0.48% have been a bully-only, 0.85% have been the bullying victim, 92.57% have been neither a bully nor a bullying victim, and 45.86% have observed bullying. Students in lower grades are more likely to be bullied. After controlling for covariates (i.e., gender, grade, and social desirability), EMS is positively associated with positive bystander behaviors. Moreover, empathy and moral disengagement (MD) play a mediating role in the relationship between EMS and positive bystander behaviors. The results reveal two parallel processes of EMS influenced bystander behaviors (i.e., empathy and MD). The findings indicate the possibility of cultivating EMS and highlight the role of morality development in preventing school bullying.

Basic moral sensitivity, moral disengagement, and defender self-efficacy as predictors of students’ self-reported bystander behaviors over a school year: a growth curve analysis

“…Following previous studies examining the link between basic moral sensitivity and pro-aggressive bystander behavior (Thornberg and Jungert, 2013;Brugman et al, 2023;Xie et al, 2023), the current study found that students' baseline levels of pro-aggressive bystanding were negatively related to their basic moral sensitivity. In other words, students who scored higher in basic moral sensitivity at the first wave were less likely to side with victimizers by assisting them or reinforcing their aggressive behaviors toward the victim across the three waves.…”

“…In addition, two other studies have further extended these findings by examining the related concept of students’ sensitivity to everyday moral situations. These studies found a positive association with self-reported defending behaviors and a negative association with self-reported pro-aggressive behaviors ( Brugman et al, 2023 ; Xie et al, 2023 ).…”

Freezing Effect and Bystander Effect: Overlaps and Differences

“…Both effects, the bystander effect and freezing, can generate a sense of guilt and remorse. Those involved may feel responsible for not taking action or providing help when necessary, leading to feelings of guilt and remorse [81]. In both cases, these feelings can stem from an awareness of their own inaction and the potential contribution to the worsening of the situation or harm to the victim.…”

Confronting the Bullies, Comforting the Victim, or Reporting to University Staff? Prosocial Intentions Towards Social Exclusion in University Students

“…To mitigate the potential impact of a moralistic bias in participants' responses, we controlled for socially desirable responding, making this study one of few to incorporate socially desirable responding (e.g. Xie et al, 2023) into bystander intention research. Notably, this approach revealed that respondents may be less inclined to comfort victims in real-life situations.…”