Bullying – a subset of aggressive behaviors characterized by repetition and an imbalance of power – is a cross-cultural worldwide phenomenon that causes harm and even trauma to many children and youth (Nielsen et al., 2015). Peer bystanders in schools provide an audience in 85% of bully-victim incidents but intervene to prevent the bullying only in 10% of them (Jeffrey, 2004). In their silence, they confirm the norm of bullying. While the vast majority of bystanders passively or actively encourage bullying, it is important to understand what the predictors of bystanding and defending behaviors are.

Empirical research showed that the presence of other bystanders leads to the diffusion of responsibility and reduces helping behaviors among children (Plötner et al., 2015). Past research focused only on the bully and the victim roles, however, current theory suggests a broader perspective including three bystander participant roles – outsider, pro-bully, and defender (Salmivalli, 2014). Among the intrapersonal parameters that are associated with these roles are empathy (Pozzoli et al., 2017), moral disengagement (MD; Thornberg et al., 2013), self-regulation (Valdés-Cuervo et al., 2021), and awareness of bystanders of their own role (Salmivalli, 2014). Specifically, mindfulness, as a present-moment awareness, is a protective factor in relation to bullying behavior (Georgiou et al., 2020) and may be relevant in relation to the other participant roles.

Empathy – the ability to identify and understand how someone is feeling and to respond appropriately (Davis, 2018) – was found to be negatively correlated with aggression and positively correlated with defending behavior among children (Nickerson et al., 2008). However, empathy does not always lead to prosocial action (Davis, 2018), and children often act in a manner that is not in line with their internal moral standard, known as moral disengagement (MD). MD plays a role in antisocial behaviors and is an important parameter in research on bullying in schools. Adolescents who scored high on MD self-reports were less likely to take the defender role and more likely to act as passive bystanders (Thornberg et al., 2013). Self-regulation, which is the ability to understand and manage one’s behavior and reactions to feelings and incidents happening around, may constitute a protective factor in relation to bullying behavior (Georgiou et al., 2020). Self-regulation is associated with healthy social relationships, while dysregulation is associated with aggressive tendencies (Valdés-Cuervo et al., 2021). Although the relationships of these three factors with aggressive behavior are well-established, much less is known regarding their association with the other participant roles.

Mindfulness – awareness of everyday life in a non-judgmental and non-reactive manner  (Brown & Ryan, 2003) – was recently examined in relation to aggressive behavior among school children. This body of research shows that individuals who scored high in dispositional mindfulness, are less aggressive and that this relationship may be mediated by MD (Georgiou et al., 2020). Nonetheless, the relationship of mindfulness with the other participant roles is unknown.

The main goal of the present study is to examine whether empathy, MD, self-regulation, and dispositional mindfulness are related to the participant roles in the bully-victim dynamic amongst middle and high-school students. Since mindfulness, empathy, and self-regulation can be cultivated by mindfulness practice (Bishop et al., 2004), this understanding may have implications.

A total of 429 adolescents between the age of 13 and 18 without mindfulness experience were recruited through social networks. The final set compromised 394 participants (139 males, 255 females; mean age = 16.81 years, SD = 1.62). An a-priori power analysis was performed using G*Power software and indicated that a sample size of 119 participants is appropriate to detect a small-to-medium effect size (f2=.10), with a power of .95, meaning that our study is well-powered. Due to the Covid-19 pandemic and lockdowns, data collection was conducted online via Qualtrics software (https://www.qualtrics.com). In order to examine the association of empathy, MD, self-regulation, and mindfulness with the participant roles, participants completed a battery of questionnaires, as follows – Empathic Responsiveness Questionnaire (ERQ; Olweus & Endresen, 2001) – 12 items that measure empathy through three subscales – empathic concern towards girls, empathic concern towards boys, and empathic distress. Moral Disengagement Scale (MDS; Bandura, 2011) – 14 items that assess MD through four mechanisms – cognitive restructuring, minimizing one’s agentive role, distorting the consequences, and dehumanizing the victim. Brief Self-control Scale (BSCS; Tangney et al., 2004) – 13 items that measure control over thoughts, emotional control, impulse control, performance regulation, and habit breaking. Mindfulness Attention Awareness Scale Adolescents (MAAS-A; Brown & Ryan, 2003) – 14 items that measure mindfulness by items concerned with automatic behavior in contrast to mindful behavior in daily life. Student Bystander Behavior Scale (SBBS; Thornberg & Jungert, 2013) – 12 items that measure three participant roles - defender, bystanders, and pro-bullying, in which the student evaluates his own typical behavior in situations of bullying. In accordance with IRB requirements, the participants and their parents gave informed consent before participating. In return for their participation, ten gift vouchers were raffled. All instruments were analyzed for their psychometric properties through Mcdonald’s omega and confirmatory factor analyses (CFA). The main analysis included structural equation modeling (SEM) in which empathy, MD, self-regulation, and mindfulness were entered as exogenous variables, and the three participant roles— outsider, defender, and pro-bully— were entered as endogenous variables. Gender and age were entered as observed variables. To evaluate model fit, various indices were examined including the χ2 goodness of fit statistic, the comparative fit index (CFI), the Tucker-Lewis index (TLI), and the mean squared error of approximation (RMSEA).

The analysis of the model first showed a medium fit to the data, Χ²(8)=8.81, p=.030, RMSEA=.09 [.03 - .18], CFI=.92, and TLI=.56. Therefore, modification indices were examined in which several weak relationships were excluded – self-regulation and pro-bullying, self-regulation and bystanding, empathy and pro-bullying, empathy and bystanding, MD and bystanding, age and pro-bullying, age and bystanding, gender and pro-bullying, and gender and bystanding. The modified model was a good fit to the data Χ²(12)=15.38, p=.017, RMSEA=.03 [.00, .08] , CFI=.95, and TLI=.92 (see Figure 2). In the new model, empathy was associated with defending behavior, MD was associated with pro-bullying and defending behavior, self-regulation was associated with defending behavior, and mindfulness was associated with all three roles. All the model coefficients were in the expected direction and were associated with reasonable standard error. It is noteworthy that mindfulness was the only independent variable that was associated with all the participant roles. This fact may suggest that individuals’ awareness of their role in stopping bullying incidents is stronger than feelings of empathy, self-regulation abilities, and MD tendencies. In addition to this theoretical contribution, this understanding might have practical implications. The current research examined mindfulness as a disposition but mindfulness can be cultivated by meditation practice (Bishop et al., 2004). Moreover, mindfulness recently has been suggested as a practice that was originally aimed at promoting morality and prosociality, which should be also the main core of education (Malin, 2022). From this point of view, mindfulness meditation can be used at school not only in preventing bullying but more important than that, in bringing the silent audience to defend the victim and show that aggression is unacceptable.

Bandura, A. (2011). Moral Disengagement. In The Encyclopedia of Peace Psychology. John Wiley & Sons, Bishop, S. R., Lau, M., Shapiro, S., Carlson, L., Anderson, N. D., Carmody, J., Segal, Z. V., Abbey, S., Speca, M., Velting, D., & Devins, G. (2004). Mindfulness: A proposed operational definition. Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice, 11(3), 230–241. Brown, K. W., & Ryan, R. M. (2003). The benefits of being present: Mindfulness and its role in psychological well-being. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84(4), 822–848. Davis, M. H. (2018). Empathy: A Social Psychological Approach (M. H. Davis, Ed.; 1st ed.). Routledge. Georgiou, S. N., Charalambous, K., & Stavrinides, P. (2020). Mindfulness, impulsivity, and moral disengagement as parameters of bullying and victimization at school. Aggressive Behavior, 46(1), 107–115. Jeffrey, L. R. (2004). Bullying Bystanders. Prevention Researcher, 11(3), 7–8. Malin, Y. (2022). Humanistic Mindfulness: A bridge between traditional and modern mindfulness in schools. Journal of Transformative Education, 15413446221084004. Nielsen, M. B., Tangen, T., Idsoe, T., Matthiesen, S. B., & Magerøy, N. (2015). Post-traumatic stress disorder as a consequence of bullying at work and at school. A literature review and meta-analysis. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 21, 17–24. Olweus, D., & Endresen, I. M. (2001). The Importance of Sex-of-Stimulus Object: Age Trends and Sex Differences in Empathic Responsiveness. Social Development, 7(3), 370–388. Plötner, M., Over, H., Carpenter, M., & Tomasello, M. (2015). Young Children Show the Bystander Effect in Helping Situations. Psychological Science, 26(4), 499–506. Pozzoli, T., Gini, G., & Thornberg, R. (2017). Getting angry matters: Going beyond perspective taking and empathic concern to understand bystanders’ behavior in bullying. Journal of Adolescence, 61(1), 87–95. Salmivalli, C. (2014). Participant Roles in Bullying: How Can Peer Bystanders Be Utilized in Interventions? Theory Into Practice, 53(4), 286–292. Tangney, J. P., Baumeister, R. F., & Boone, A. L. (2004). High Self-Control Predicts Good Adjustment, Less Pathology, Better Grades, and Interpersonal Success. Journal of Personality, 72(2), 271–324. Thornberg, R., & Jungert, T. (2013). Bystander behavior in bullying situations: Basic moral sensitivity, moral disengagement and defender self-efficacy. Journal of Adolescence, 36(3), 475–483. Valdés-Cuervo, A. A., Alcántar-Nieblas, C., Parra-Pérez, L. G., Torres-Acuña, G. M., Álvarez-Montero, F. J., & Reyes-Sosa, H. (2021). Unique and interactive effects of guilt and sympathy on bystander aggressive defender intervention in cyberbullying: The mediation of self-regulation. Computers in Human Behavior, 122, 106842.