Walking the Walk or Just Talk?: A Global Examination of Men’s Intentions to Take Violence Preventative Action

Abstract

Given the increasing prominence of both bystander-based approaches to gender-based violence (GBV) prevention and of proactively engaging men and boys to join efforts to end GBV, understanding the factors that support men's anti-violence bystander behavior is important. This study examined correlates of willingness to engage in violence preventative bystander behavior in a global sample of 299 adult men engaged in GBV prevention events or work. Participants came from over 50 countries and provided data via an online, anonymous survey available in English, Spanish and French. Path analysis was used to model participants' willingness to engage in a variety of violence preventative behaviors in the future, with variable selection guided by the Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB) and by research implicating gender-related attitudes in bystander willingness and behavior. Findings suggest that bystander willingness was supported by past bystander behavior, self-efficacy to engage in bystander behavior, positive beliefs about the contributions of anti-violence involvement, and by an awareness of male privilege. Social network support for GBV prevention work, and support for gender equity were not significant correlates of bystander willingness in the full path model. These findings held across participants from the Global North and Global South, suggesting that self-efficacy, an awareness of male privilege, and positive attitudes toward anti-violence work are factors which may support men's violence preventative actions across broad regional contexts.

Educating university allied health students about gender-based violence: Report of a pilot study

“…Whilst the benefit of the bystander approach is that all participants are engaged as proactive bystanders to address GBV (Katz, 2018), it is particularly important to engage men as bystanders as they often hold positions of power, can influence culture and can advocate for change (Our Watch, 2020). A global study of almost 300 men engaged in antiviolence work found that bystander willingness was supported with self-efficacy to engage in bystander behaviour, positive beliefs about the contributions of antiviolence involvement and an awareness of male privilege (Casey et al, 2019).…”

Men’s perspectives on risk identification, taking responsibility, and prosocial intervention: Primary prevention or harm reduction?

“…The descriptions of men’s experiences revealed a relationship between taking responsibility via personal morals/ethics and direct confrontation of men’s behavior, illuminating how men’s recognition of gender inequities, or social justice motivations, may result in confronting contradictory norms in their peers (Casey et al, 2018). If bystanders experience a positive response from female friends who avoided victimization as a result of intervention, it is perhaps unsurprising that men’s discussion of intervention opportunities were primarily of this type, as intervening with a potential perpetrator may result in a negative response (Moschella et al, 2018).…”

“…Men have been found to report weaker prosocial intentions, and, in some cases, less prosocial intervention behaviors, compared with women (Brown et al, 2014;Hoxmeier, Acock, et al, 2017;Hoxmeier, McMahon, et al, 2017;Moschella, Bennett, & Banyard, 2018). There is great need to understand the bystander intervention model in the context of primary prevention of sexual violence (DeGue et al, 2014;McMahon & Farmer, 2011), where men can play a critical role (Berkowitz, 2002;Casey, Allen, Tolman, Carlson, & Leek, 2018;Gidycz, Orchowski, & Berkowitz, 2011). Increasingly, research shows that men do not intervene as often, or across the spectrum of violence, to the same degree as women (Brown et al, 2014;Hoxmeier, Acock, et al, 2017;Hoxmeier, McMahon, et al, 2017;Moschella et al, 2018).…”

“…The majority of men do not perpetrate sexual violence, and so, the nonviolent male majority is well-positioned to aid in its prevention (Gidycz, Orchowski, & Berkowitz, 2011). Men, as bystanders, can play a critical role in prevention by recognizing gender inequity that allows for the persistence of sexual violence and shifting social norms that are often barriers to bystander interventions (Casey et al, 2018). Latané and Darley (1970) proposed a five-step model to illustrate the decisional process that bystanders engage when faced with a potential opportunity to intervene: notice the situation, identify the situation as high-risk, take responsibility to intervene, decide to act, and act.…”

“…Investigations of potentially modifiable factors related to men’s intervention behaviors continue. Beyond risk identification, intervention responsibility, and skills, socialized masculinity and gender norms also serve as barriers to prosocial action (Casey et al, 2018). Part and parcel of risk identification for sexual violence is recognizing a victim worthy of intervention (Burn, 2009), yet research demonstrates that the behavior of the victim, or potential victim, may signify diminished worth, particularly when alcohol consumption is involved (Burn, 2009; McMahon & Farmer, 2011; Pugh, Ningard, Vander Ven, & Butler, 2016).…”