Content uploaded by Can Bicer
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Can Bicer on Mar 30, 2022
Content may be subject to copyright.
Journal of Humanities and Tourism Research 2022, 12 (1): 204-217 DOI: 10.14230/johut1201
Journal of Humanities and Tourism Research
Araştırma Makalesi
The Connection between the Bystander Effect and Workplace
Bullying in Organizations and the Ways to Overcome its Major
Negative Outcomes
Örgütlerde İzleyici Etkisi ve İşyeri Zorbalığı Arasındaki İlişki ve Olumsuz
Sonuçlarının Üstesinden Gelmenin Yolları
Can BİÇER
Abstract
This study focuses on to outline the bystander behavior and its effects including
bystander decisions, actions and outcomes within the concept of workplace bullying
and to describe the correlation between them and its main outcomes in
organizations. There is a phenomenon called the bystander effect in social
psychology and it is mainly deal with the individuals who are less likely to offer
help to a victim when another individual is present and watching the scene. The
question is to explain the behavior of employees who watch workplace bullying but
fail to intervene, often don’t ignore, or even sometimes join the perpetrator. It can
be assumed that bystanders witnessing bullying will restore justice; it has been
underlined in previous studies that they might also behave in ways that continue
or worsen its progression. So, it can be argued that there is a threesome influence
between bystanders, victims, and the perpetrator of the bullying in the
organizations. In sum, the goal of this conceptual study is to focus on the
connection with the workplace bullying and the bystander effect in organizations
and to outline the reasons of the employees who choose to be remaining silent and
pretend not to see or hear and prefer not to do anything instead of acting against
bullying. Then, in conclusion section, the recommendations will be made to
decrease the negative consequences of the workplace bullying and bystander effects
in organizations.
Keywords: Workplace Bullying, Bystander Effect, Diffusion of Responsibility
Özet
Bu çalışma izleyici davranışı ve işyeri zorbalığı kapsamında, izleyici kararlarını,
hareketlerini ve sonuçlarını irdelemeye ve izleyici etkisinin işyeri zorbalığı
arasındaki bağlantının sonuçlarını açıklamaya odaklanmaktadır. Sosyal psikolojide
izleyici etkisi denilen bir olgu vardır ve bu da özellikle olay anında orada bulunan
ve olanları izleyen bireylerin yardımcı olmaya istekli olmamalarıyla ilgilidir. Sorun
ise işyeri zorbalığını izleyen ama müdahale etmede yetersiz olan, sıklıkla
görmezden gelen ve hatta bazen zorbalığı yapanın yanında olan diğer çalışan
davranışlarını açıklamaktır. Zorbalığa şahit olan izleyicilerin araya girip huzuru
sağlayacağı varsayılsa da, izleyicilerin zorbalığın devam etmesine yönelik davranış
sergiledikleri ve hatta mevcut durumu daha da kötüleştirdikleri önceki çalışmalarda
vurgulanmıştır. Bu yüzden örgütlerde izleyiciler, kurbanlar ve zorbalığı yapanlar
1Karabük Üniversitesi, Safranbolu
Şefik Dizdar Meslek Yüksekokulu,
Karabük, Türkiye
ORCID:
C.B.: 0000-0001-7270-7417
Corresponding Author:
Can BİÇER
Email:
canbicer@karabuk.edu.tr
Citation: Biçer, C. (2022). The
connection between the bystander
effect and workplace bullying in
organizations and the ways to
overcome its major negative
outcomes. Journal of Humanities and
Tourism Research, 12 (1): 204-217.
Submitted: 21.01.2022
Accepted: 20.03.2022
The Connection Between The Bystander Effect and Workplace Bullying in Organizations and The Ways to Overcome
Its Major Negative Outcomes
205 Journal of Humanities and Tourism Research 2022, 12 (1): 204-217
arasında üçlü bir ilişki olduğu söylenebilir. Özetle, bu araştırmanın amacı, örgütlerde işyeri zorbası ve izleyiciler
arasındaki ilişkiye odaklanarak, zorbalığa karşı harekete geçmektense çalışanların niçin sessiz kalarak görmezden ve
duymazdan geldiklerinin nedenlerini ve sonuçlarını ortaya koymaktır. Daha sonra, sonuç bölümünde, örgütlerde işyeri
zorbalığının ve buna olan izleyici etkisinin olumsuz etkilerini azaltmak için önerilerde bulunulacaktır.
Anahtar Sözcükler: İşyeri Zorbalığı, İzleyici Etkisi, Sorumluluğun Dağılması
1. INTRODUCTION
Workplace bullying takes place nearly in all kinds of jobs and working environment and
workplace bullying can easily be differentiated from other conflicts in that a nonequal power
appears between the bully and the victim, which makes it hard for the victim to converse the
conflict to an accomplished solution (Johnson and Rea, 2009: 84-85).Workplace bullying, which
usually covers verbal, nonverbal, psychological, physical abuse and humiliation and causes either
physical or emotional harm in organizations, is commonly repeated forms of uncivil behaviors or
mistreatment from individuals toward victims at the workplace. Additionally, workplace bullying
is a persistent pattern of mistreatment and it often mentally hurts or isolate individuals in the
workplace and it may even cover negative physical contact too. Workplace bullying often refers to
repetitive actions or a form of behavior that is intended to intimidate, offend, degrade, or humiliate
a particular an individual or a group of individuals and it can also be expressed as the exercise of
power via aggression. Individuals who see or know about workplace bullying are usually
sympathetic and kind when they offer support and listen to the victims at workplaces, but they
usually don’t go out of their way to end the mistreatment or aggression, because they are often
concern about their own job security and this state is described as the bystander effect in action.
The bystander effect phenomenon has been first coined and outlined by social psychologists
John M. Darley and Bibb Latané in 1968 soon after the two psychologists focused on the
unfortunate murder of Kitty Genovese in the U.S.A, in 1964. By and large, the bystander effect
refers to the fact that individuals are reluctant to act or help to a victim on the scene when there are
other people during that time, especially when there are greater number of bystanders, they tend
less to act or help the victim with the sense of “anybody apart from me will naturally act or help
whatsoever” (Liu, 2006: 2-5). The bystander effect always comes with the murder of Kitty
Genovese because many psychologists have studied and argued the matter and the attitude of the
witnesses of the crime since 38 beholders exactly did nothing but to watch the crime scene from
their windows with the thought of anybody else has already called the police for help. But nobody
of them called for help! Kassin (2017) stated in his study that not one of an alleged 38 bystanders
called the police for help until it was too late for Kitty Genovese who was murdered brutally in
New York, in 1964. Her neighbors were unheeded to her desperate screams somehow although
Winston Moseley went on his two-phased, 35-minute barbarian assault against her.
Although it has been thought that concerning the number of bystanders who actually saw or
heard all or part of the attack, they were reluctant to act or help, instead they only watched and
pulled the curtains and this have attracted the social psychologists attention and it inspired the
study of bystander intervention in social psychology as people are less prone to offer help in a
troublesome incident when in the presence of others than especially when alone.
So, in organizations, individuals usually abstain from involving themselves in conflict
situations and they are usually reluctant to intervene and help a victim or at-risk individual at
workplaces. Moreover, similar hesitative attitudes in response to workplace bullying, uncivil
behaviors, discourteousness, rudeness, humiliation, harassment, and discrimination in
organizations are often regarded as the results of the bystander effect. In sum, although many
employees witness or even experience workplace bullying that includes uncivil, inappropriate,
C. Biçer
Journal of Humanities and Tourism Research 2022, 12 (1): 204-217 206
and harmful behaviors and acts toward themselves in the workplace, majority of onlookers don’t
want to involve in the unwanted situations, instead they often tend to play ostrich. In short, when
an individual needs help or is at risk, majority of the bystanders only stand by without doing
nothing but watching the scene. And the real problem is why does this phenomenon occur? In the
light of this information above, the bystander effect in organizations will be studied and the ways
of overcoming its major negative outcomes will be clarified and in conclusion section, the
recommendations will be made in detail.
2. WORKPLACE BULLYING AND THE BYSTANDER EFFECT IN ORGANIZATIONS
We the people are always prepared to prevent from threatening situations innately and if we
experience such behaviors in others, we often get ready to unwanted situations due to feelings of
uncertainty since we cannot predict another’s behavior beforehand. Besides, the bystander effect
can be observed because of this desire to avoid harm, while also being able to rationalize the
decision not to intervene by diffusing responsibility to others and it often occurs especially when
the more witnesses, the more people to feel the responsibility to intervene. However, it’s obvious
that most of the bullying incidents cover a lot of employees comprising of bystanders and partners
in crime apart from the bully and the victim so, witnesses play a vital role in in the accruing,
escalation or diminishment of workplace bullying and in spotting bullying in organizations and
helping victims take reprisals. Then, bystanders come into play in curbing bullying because they
tend to outnumber supervisors have the ability to react quickly to bullying actions as employees
often trust more to themselves in organizations. To sum up, workplace bullying and the bystander
effect will be defined and described by the conceptual framework in this section.
2.1. Workplace Bullying in Organizations
Workplace bullying, which was first defined by Swedish psychologist Leymann in the 1980s,
is identified as a persistent conflict in which the victim is exposed to 2 or more negative incidents
on at least a weekly basis over at least a 6-month period (Johnson and Rea, 2009: 84-85). Workplace
bullying is identified as continuous negative acts happen repeatedly and that is certainly
unwanted by the victim and that lead to humiliation, offence, and distress which can affect job
commitment and performance negatively or deteriorate workflow and cause an undesirable
working environment. However, bullying is about repeated and permanent behavior and a power
imbalance which refers to that the target for one reason or another has troubles defending him or
herself and coping with the uncivil behaviors. Hence, it can be inferred from that definition that a
conflict might not be described as bullying if the situation is viewed in an isolated event or if the
two parties are of nearly equal power are in the conflict in organizations (Salin et al.,2019: 204-205).
Niven et al. (2020) stated in their study that workplace bullying hardly ever happens in
complete isolation and it has been emphasized that over half of the unwanted, uncivil behaviors
occur in the presence of other individuals and it has also been underlined that workplace bullying
so common that after conducting a large-scale questionnaire by British national survey, nearly half
of the respondents (47%) stated that they had witnessed bullying in their workplace within the last
five years. Moreover, according to Peng et al. (2016), bullying, which is so prevalent in
organizations, has been an important social problem as well and bullying in an organization
should not be overlooked since it may lead to huge hidden costs like physical and psychological
damage to employees that result in high costs and big profit loss to the organization and higher
levels of employee burnout, employee turnover and eventually loss of organizational reputation.
Again, it has been outlined in their study that workplace bullying is aggressive action is repeated
and health-harming and it can be characterized by four main features as:
The Connection Between The Bystander Effect and Workplace Bullying in Organizations and The Ways to Overcome
Its Major Negative Outcomes
207 Journal of Humanities and Tourism Research 2022, 12 (1): 204-217
• Frequency: It describes the intervals weekly that the bullying behaviors are showed, for
example the minimum numbers of incidents must be one or two per week and
approximately six months’ period,
• Persistency: It points out the how long it lasts, for which the uncivil behaviors are
encountered by the victim,
• Hostility: It describes the underlying reasons of the roots of the evil, uncivil behaviors,
• Power imbalance: It displays the inequality in perceived power between the target and
the perpetrator. This power may take various forms, for instance, physical, social-peer
groups so in just not restricted to hierarchical power in organizations.
Moreover, Cowie et al. (2002) maintained in their study that bullying is now being defined as
a real problem in the organizational concept and most countries, professional organizations, trade
unions, and human resources (HR) departments have recently realized that uncivil behaviors, for
example intimidation, overly harsh and unjust criticism publicly, public humiliation, offensive
name-calling, social exclusion, and undesired physical interaction has the role to deteriorate the
unity among them and confidence of employees and decrease their efficiency significantly. It has
also been argued that individuals who have been bullied stated that it influenced them physically
and mentally, with stress, depression, and lowered self-esteem and in extraordinary cases, bullied
employees might even need counseling or psychiatric examination as well. Table 1 displays the
main types of bullying in organizations:
Table 1. Types of Bullying
Source: Cowie, H., Naylor, P., Rivers, I., Smith, P. K., & Pereira, B. (2002). Measuring workplace bullying. Aggression
and violent behavior, 7(1), pp. 33-51.
According to Saunders et al. (2007) workplace bullying, which refers to psychological,
emotional or physical harm, in which the victim is exposed to the negative verbal or non-verbal
behavior and workplace bullying has usually negative, often devastating consequences on both the
employees who are targeted and on the organization and workplace bullying includes some
uncivil behaviors such as the covert and subtle, for instance overt and veiled threats, a dirty stare
or a criticizing an employee persistently and constantly, to the extreme aggressive, such as a
physical attack or a physically abusing and threatening abuse. Figure 1 shows the main negative
effects of the workplace bullying on employee mood or employee work behaviors:
C. Biçer
Journal of Humanities and Tourism Research 2022, 12 (1): 204-217 208
Figure 1. Main Negative Effects of The Workplace Bullying on Employee Mood or Employee Work
Behaviors
Reference: Peng, Y.-C., Chen, L.-J., Chang, C.-C. and Zhuang, W.-L. (2016), "Workplace bullying and workplace
deviance: The mediating effect of emotional exhaustion and the moderating effect of core self-evaluations",
Employee Relations, Vol. 38 No. 5, pp. 755-769.
In addition, Hoel and Salin (2002) argued in their study that poor working environment can
directly or indirectly cause workplace bullying and anxious or depressed employees may also give
rise to workplace bullying by creating tension and eliciting negative reactions from coworkers and
supervisors or managers. Moreover, it has been underlined that bullying itself has negative impact
on the working environment by negatively influencing internal organizational communication and
causing more stress among employees that lead to organizational problems. Plus, it has been
concluded in the study that the underlying effects and antecedents of workplace bullying depends
highly on the characteristics of the individuals involved in the conflict, gender, age, and ethnicity
of the people and organizational contexts and demographic features of the individuals as well.
Last but not least, Nielsen and Einarsen (2012) argued in their study that workplace bullying
is often related with the mental and physical health and welfare of targeted individuals in
organizations and in workplace bullying, it is the usual state that a victim is determined
beforehand and abused by a range of perpetrators. Moreover, since workplace bullying is
described as an even in which one or a few employees continuously, and periodically, assume
themselves as being on the receiving end of negative actions from supervisors or coworkers, and
where the target of the bullying thinks that it is difficult to defend himself or herself against these
uncivil actions. Theoretically, workplace bullying is associated with the whole health and
happiness of targeted employees and it can be categorized into seven categories: work related
bullying, social isolation, attacking the private sphere, verbal aggression, the spreading of rumors,
physical intimidation, and attacking personal attitudes and values. To sum up, these incidents
might be viewed as merely mildly offensive, or at least tolerable, on the other hand, in total; these
can be viewed as destabilizing, highly distressing and even traumatic by the employees
whatsoever in organizations.
2.2. The Bystander Effect in Organizations
In today’s world, it can easily be inferred that individuals may think that it’s easier to not get
involved in anyone’s own business. Besides, it has often been argued that people are usually
abstain from providing help especially in the presence of other bystanders because of diffusion of
responsibility and sometimes they think that they are not for sure whether they are worsening the
situation or not. However, there’s a saying that the more evil is tolerated the more it will get
inflamed. It might be certain that if you witnessed or notice an emergency event happening right
before your eyes, you would definitely take some sort of action to help the victim having trouble
but psychologists claim that whether or not you intervene may depend on the number of other
witnesses present at the scene. Besides, witnesses of bad workplace behaviours are regarded as
The Connection Between The Bystander Effect and Workplace Bullying in Organizations and The Ways to Overcome
Its Major Negative Outcomes
209 Journal of Humanities and Tourism Research 2022, 12 (1): 204-217
secondary victims or co-victims who empathise with how the target is feeling and experience some
of the impact or exhibit concerns about being the following target.
First of all, Pouwelse et al. (2018) stated in their study that there are three main actors
involved in workplace bullying as the bystander, somebody that witnesses the bullying and
interacts with the other actors in various ways. It’s clear that there are usually more bystanders in
the real bullying incidents than bullies and targets. By the way, the bystanders are the real part of a
dynamic context. In addition, apart from of assuming workplace bullying as comprising of the
perpetrator–target dyad, it can be considered as a triadic phenomenon comprising of three actors,
the perpetrator, the target and the bystander and it can be assumed that the bystanders may
exhibit various behaviors in the bullying process, such as either providing help the bully or
providing help to the victim. The term of bystander has been identified as focusing on the
individuals who are the part of the bullying environment but who are not yet targeted and don’t
yet show mobbing behavior themselves and it has been outlined that the main types of bystanders
of workplace bullying are the constructive–destructive and active–passive continua, such as the
instigating bystander, who creates the situation; the collaborating bystander, who helps the bully
and actively joins in; the abdicating bystander, who stands still and remains passive in the bullying
incident; the intervening bystander and the defusing bystander, who either show behaviors to stop
the bullying or prevent escalation by involving themselves in the situation; the defending
bystander, who defends the target; and the last one, the sympathizing bystander, who offers
support in private yet remains passive in bullying situations. Nonetheless, Karakashian et al.
(2006) maintained in their study that the prevalence and the intensity of helping behaviors of the
individuals mainly depend on the shyness and the fear of negative evaluation of the unwanted
situation that the victim experiences.
Furthermore, Fredricks et al (2011) argued in their study that the phenomenon, the bystander
effect, might cause disastrous consequences because in many cases bystander effect might easily be
turned into a continuum from innocent bystander to guilty perpetrator since allowing harm to
occur or remaining silent may cause get things worse because they tend to think that feel that it is
not part of their job and finally the perpetrator thinks that he’s got the power and whatever he
does gets by with his/her boorish acts. However, Rowe (2018) argued in her study that although
bystanders are usually emphasized as “do-nothings,” in the literature, helpful bystander actions
are also common in daily life as well. For instance, a lot of bystanders report a wide variety of
constructive initiatives, including private, informal interventions like lost items are returned to
their owners, though they are strangers, they warn people when they drop something on the street
or pavement. In addition, it has been maintained that a number of public and private institutions,
including the armed services, now train employees to encourage responsible bystander behavior in
order to prevent from safety problems, errors, and accidents, uncivil behaviors in organizations
and multiple sectors emphasizes the importance of bystander action and some slogans have been
generated in order to flourish helpful bystander effect such as “Friends don’t let friends drive
drunk” or “See something, say something”.
For instance, Cherry (2020) reported that bystander effect is the phenomenon which refers
the greater the number of individuals present; the less likely individuals are to help a person in
tension and observers are more likely to act if there are few or no other witnesses when an
emergency even takes place. Plus, it has been underlined that there are two main factors that
trigger the bystander effect. First, the presence of other individuals creates a diffusion of
responsibility since there are other witnesses, individuals don’t think as much pressure to take
action and the responsibility to act is thought to be shared among all of other observers present.
C. Biçer
Journal of Humanities and Tourism Research 2022, 12 (1): 204-217 210
The second one is the urge to act in correct and socially acceptable ways. That is to say, when other
observers are reluctant or fail to react, people usually think it as a signal that a response is not
needed or not appropriate. For example, in the case of Kitty Genovese, many of the 38 witnesses
justified that they thought that they were witnessing a "lover's quarrel," and didn’t think that the
young woman was really being murdered at that time.
What’s more, Coyne et al. (2019) maintained in their study that the witnesses of workplace
bullying are regarded as secondary victims or co-victims especially the ones who empathize with
how the victim is feeling and experience some of the effect or being stressful about being the next
target as they put themselves psychologically in the position of the target and eventually feel some
of the concerns of the victim. Thus, it has been emphasized in their study that the empathy with
the target is essential in creating this felt bad experience, and empathy has been emphasized as the
type of schema a witness of traditional workplace bullying adopts. Indeed, bystander perceptions
of the fairness of bullying often depend on the level of empathy with the target and the resultant
co-victimization they see. Consequently, it has been argued that the more an individual
empathizes with a victim, the more likely they will become a secondary victim and the stronger
the need to act and perceptions of injustice and empathic understanding may therefore be
moderated by characteristics of the workplace bullying situation in organizations.
Additionally, Madden and Loh (2018) claimed in their study that the bystander effect can be
described by a five-step psychological process model in which the model proposes for bystander
intervention to occur, yet bystanders won’t intervene if any of the five steps is missed in the model.
The other factor that is thought to prevent the completion of the five-step model is the presence of
others because when others are present at the scene, a diffusion of responsibility occurs that the
individual mentally shifts the responsibility for intervention to other bystanders and in doing so,
reduces the psychological cost associated with non-intervention. Figure 2 displays the five-step
psychological process for bystander intervention to occur if any of the five steps is not missed in
the model upon workplace bullying:
Figure 2. The Five-Step Psychological Process for Bystander Intervention to Occur
Source: Madden, C., & Loh, J. (2018). Workplace cyberbullying and bystander helping behaviour. The International
Journal of Human Resource Management, pp. 1-25.
Plötner et al. (2015) have also outlined in their study that the bystander effect can be focused
on a five-step model of intervention in an bullying incident: An actor has to realize the case (Step
1), thinks and interprets it as an emergency (Step 2), takes responsibility for providing help (Step
3), and know how to help (Step 4) before he or she can provide help (Step 5). Moreover, it has been
asserted that the presence of bystanders interferes with the successful completion of these steps
The Connection Between The Bystander Effect and Workplace Bullying in Organizations and The Ways to Overcome
Its Major Negative Outcomes
211 Journal of Humanities and Tourism Research 2022, 12 (1): 204-217
through three processes; it has been referred to as social referencing, diffusion of responsibility,
and shyness to act in front of others. Social referencing, or noting bystanders’ passivity, interferes
with Step 2; diffusion of responsibility interferes with Step 3; and shyness is most likely to interfere
with Step 5.
To be concluded, bystanders are the observers who usually prefer to remain silent by when
an individual needs help especially within a bullying scene. It can easily be inferred from the
information above, the more bystanders there are, the less likely they are to help, because of the
concept known as diffusion of responsibility for example with the thinking that someone else will
certainly take care of it. It’s also clear that most of the workplace bullies are managers or
supervisors and they usually abuse their subordinates verbally, even sexually seeking for craving
power and control, and usually struggle with emotional instability in the organization. On the
other hand, the most important issue with workplace bullying is usually that individuals know
very well that workplace bullying exist, but they often do nothing to stop it for their own security
reasons about their jobs.
3. THE LINK BETWEEN WORKPLACE BULLYING AND THE BYSTANDER EFFECT IN
ORGANIZATIONS
Initially, in this study, a conceptual overview is given focusing on issues related to
bystanders in workplace bullying to fill the gap in the literature since the early studies have often
focused on the types and the prevalence workplace bullying. However, it’s so obvious that there is
a correlation between workplace bullying and bystanders, and it can be assumed that bystanders
are the part of the problem and therefore they are likely to be the part of the solution in
organizations. Therefore, it has been aimed in this study that possible interventions from
bystanders can be encouraged to vanish the workplace bullying and this study presents promising
and consistent framework on the effect of the bastanders on workplace bullying and concludes
with practical implications and solutions for future researches.
Individuals at work often remain silent in order to feel more secured especially when it’s
time to speak up to managers with work-related ideas, concerns, and opinions or observing
workplace bullying, organizational corruption and unfair treatments from their coworkers or
supervisors. Then, the management department may fail to get the accurate and instant
information for the right decision-making process and it can deteriorate the work flow and work
group cohesion in organizations and it will be very hard to get the feedback and solve the
organizational problems. However, if the bystanders are brave enough and confident to take
promising and effective action to help the victims, it will likely that bullying can stop and the
victim who is bullied can recover and workplace bullying might not be observed again in the
organizations. According to Emdad et al. (2012) it has been maintained that bully-victim-
bystanders who are usually involved in bullying process as a triadic interaction workplace
bullying is not only a matter dealing with the individual level but also is an organizational
dynamic that effects on every employee who are experienced whether primarily or secondarily
and it has also been defined that too much negative feelings and tension may influence on both the
victim of the bullying behavior and bystanders to the bullying as well. So, it’s clear that the
findings outlined that individuals who are exposed to bullying in the workplace face various
negative psychological health problems such as depression especially bystanding to bullying
behavior also leads to frustration and depression and most of the bystanders can eventually quit
their jobs because of witnessing bullying.
Van Heugten (2011) stated that the bystanders are usually described as passive and silent
when they encounter workplace conflict and uncivil and destructive behaviors of bullies and the
C. Biçer
Journal of Humanities and Tourism Research 2022, 12 (1): 204-217 212
bystander effect depends on the diffusion of responsibility which refers to the witnesses expect
others to take action and wait for signals to best behavior from those others at the scene. On the
other hand, it has been pointed out that when the bystander support lacks, it will cause
uncertainty, loss of trust, and isolation at workplace and it will also lead to huge hidden costs such
as increased staff turnover, absenteeism, and poisoned working environment and loss of
organizational reputation. Paull et al. (2012) argued in their study that the bystanders usually act
either actively or passively on the side of bully or victim, yet they are not often detached third
parties and such behaviors have been defined as from active involvement, for instance, motivating
or affecting the bully’s actions, to passive involvement, where the bystander begins to think or act
as a fellow victim in a bullying incident in organizations. Plus, the bystander is defined with the
bully or victim at the two extremes through varying degrees of identification with either position
and these roles might be undertaken actively or passively – for instance, through the preventing
from speaking out. It has also mentioned that educating organizational members on the nature of
bystanders, along with other types of the bullying incident will certainly help decrease or
minimize bullying in organizations.
According to MacCurtain et al. (2018), the main bystander actions may differ within a range
from active to passive and constructive or destructive and bystanders might think to intervene-or
not-for a variety of reasons, and their motives might be altruistic or more hedonistic—acting to
ease crime or to look fine and bystander action can be categorized as;
• high involvement, addressing the perpetrator directly,
• low involvement, passively watching,
• high immediacy, acting when the incident is happening,
• low immediacy, taking action after the incident.
Moreover, bystander behaviors seem to be affected by different variables in organizations
and if there are a lot of bystanders compared with the fewer bystanders, their intention of acting
more responsible and then certainly deters bystander intervention directly. Table 2 shows the main
roles of the bystanders and equating them to the types of bystander reactions:
The Connection Between The Bystander Effect and Workplace Bullying in Organizations and The Ways to Overcome
Its Major Negative Outcomes
213 Journal of Humanities and Tourism Research 2022, 12 (1): 204-217
Table 2. The Descriptions and Main Role Types of Bystanders in Organizations
Source: Paull, M., Omari, M., & Standen, P. (2012). When is a bystander not a bystander? A typology of the roles of
bystanders in workplace bullying. Asia Pacific Journal of Human Resources, 50(3), pp. 351-366.
In short, Ng et al (2019) stated in their study that there is a common sense that witnesses are
usually prone to intervene either to help victims or punish perpetrators of the bullying, but the
usual reaction of the bystanders is usually responding with apathy and overlooking the
mistreatments that they observe in organizations, though they might involve in bullying they
observe to the extent they think that injustice or unfair treatment has happened after observation
of mistreatment or bullying at workplaces. To be concluded, as Mazzone (2020) asserted that the
behaviors of passive bystanders to enhance the prevalence and the level of bullying since such
behaviors might be perceived as signal of silent assent by the perpetrators. Hence, it has been
underlined that the presence of bystander is common not only in organizations but also at schools
and it has been found out that bystanders exist at 88% of workplace bullying incidents, but they
involve in 19% of them and approximately 30% of individuals have observed bullying at
workplaces and nearly 76% of younger employees had been bystanders at least once.
CONCLUSION
This conceptual research study aims to fill the gap by focusing on the behaviors of
bystanders that they exhibit to workplace bullying and the facts that affect their behaviors by the
bystanders and the purpose of this conceptual research article has been to display the role of
bystanders in the workplace through bullying actions by creating fundamental definitions,
research findings and approaches, and to develop a conceptual framework that both synthesizes
and provides guidance for future researches. Although the destructive effects of workplace
bullying have been searched in previous studies very much, fewer studies have been done on the
relationship between bullies and bystanders in organizations. As there has been a growing interest
C. Biçer
Journal of Humanities and Tourism Research 2022, 12 (1): 204-217 214
in research around the role of bystanders in bullying recently, this study provides an insight into
this matter by investigating the role of bystander behaviors and effects on workplace bullying
within the concept of bystander effect.
Drawing on this linkage, on the one hand workplace bullying covers harmful, targeted
behaviors which especially occurs at work and since it can be spiteful, offensive, mocking, or
intimidating it is usually directed at one person or a group of people in organizations and it often
forms some patterns such as extreme harsh or unjust criticism or yelling or using profanity in front
of other individuals and threats, criticizing an employee persistently or constantly, humiliation,
physically abusing or threatening abuse, behaving aggressively, forcing someone to behave
inappropriately and other verbal abuse or even excluding or isolating someone socially in
organizations. On the other hand, it is very vital for organizations to evaluate such outcomes of
behaviors and negative psychology in organizations and so, to stop the destructive behaviors and
mitigate the risks dealing with observed uncivil, bullying, harassment or discrimination at
workplaces, bosses or managers must take action to encourage their employees to take action
immediately. As some of the advice can be given when a type of bullying or unwanted-uncivil
behaviors happened has happened at workplace, individuals should take actions such as they can
report it to a supervisor or manager, a health and safety representative or the human resources
department, even a representative of an authorized union or visit the Unions and fill a form as a
complaint on company’s employer relations webpage to find contact with registered unions
related with the organization.
According to Kim (2020), the notion of moral courage has often been mentioned as a means
of erasing workplace bullying and its roots out of organizations because it has been claimed in the
literature that establishing and flourishing moral courage among employees and empowering
them to take a stance against would reduce the evolution of bullying since moral courage depends
on moral and ethical values that are directly against evil thoughts and behaviors and refer to good
and moral, ethical values. Therefore, as workplace can be regarded as a certain form of moral
violation and anti-humane, employees don’t fear of these costs inhibits personal involvement
against bullying anymore if they have more moral courage because they would possibly interpret
and recognize when something terrible is happening such as workplace bullying and think to
intervene directly to help the victim.
Desrumaux et al. Also (2018) maintained in their study that the bystander effect is both
confusing and surprising since the witnesses often know the victims and the perpetrators as
coworkers, and it has been argued that the bystanders are not only incidental but also they are an
integral part of the concept of bullying since the concept is due to the judgements, thoughts,
words, and intentions of bystanders. Besides, it has been discussed that their non-intervention can
be identified by their emotions, for instance, intense fear and vulnerability. It has also been
concluded that number of the workplace bullying events can be reduced if the management
department tries to create a positive workplace environment by promoting a cooperative and
helpful working climate, organizational citizenship, or pro-sociability and providing a healthy
workplace environment which involves the physical environment of the office or workshop and
the occupational health and safety of the employees. And, it has also been claimed that bystander
intervention against workplace bullying can be improved if the employees are educated on
workplace bullying and make them realize the negative influences of passivity and help them to
become active peer supporters in overcoming the serious psychological outcomes and risks of
unwanted hostile behaviors.
There is a famous saying that as Albert Einstein pointed out “The world will not be
destroyed by those who do evil, but by those who watch them without doing anything” (Hussein
The Connection Between The Bystander Effect and Workplace Bullying in Organizations and The Ways to Overcome
Its Major Negative Outcomes
215 Journal of Humanities and Tourism Research 2022, 12 (1): 204-217
et al., 2019: 829) so something must be done in order not to be some kind of partner in an ugly
crime and reduce the diffusion of responsibility factor in organizations. Some recommendations
can be made to increase the rate of intervention among bystanders and some preemptive
precautions can be taken about not being a bystander at a workplace bullying scene as follows:
If you observe bullying at workplace taking notes about the incident well will be an efficient
action about not being a bystander and not being a partner in crime as well. For example, keeping
a journal of the who, what, when, where, why of things that happened at that time. In this way, if
you have witnessed the bullying occurred in front of you, then go back to your office and sit down
at your desk and write down who else was observing the uncivil incident and what has been said,
why has it been done or said, and try write down as much detail as you can around kind of the
facts of the event just like writing a page in your diary. If you think of reporting the workplace
bullying later, then you can present concrete clues or examples of the behaviors you’re talking
about.
It’s very important that if the organization has a policy about workplace bullying because it’s
obvious that bullying is illegal in many countries dealing with the labor act or regulations so
companies should have a formal policy against it and make efforts about printing handbook or
any other documents that display the organization’s norms values and expectations from the
employees. Then, it’s required to inform the employees about the policy and the principles of the
company well and employees should be encouraged to read, learn and obey the organizational
rules and file a formal complaint if they witness mistreatment, verbal abuse and workplace
bullying at workplace.
If ten of you witness the workplace bullying and ten of your coworkers document the
workplace bullying well about what time and where happened then it will be easier you build a
case to which HRM and your management will act accurately with documented details. Last but
not least, HRM or management department will take actions more efficiently if they think that they
have concrete evidence and real witnesses of the bullying.
REFERENCES
Cherry, K. (2020). How psychology explains the bystander effect. Theories. Social Psychology. https: //www.
verywellmind. com /the-bystander-effect-2795899.
Coyne, I., Gopaul, A. M., Campbell, M., Pankász, A., Garland, R., & Cousans, F. (2019). Bystander responses
to bullying at work: The role of mode, type and relationship to target. Journal of Business Ethics,
157(3), 813-827.
Cowie, H., Naylor, P., Rivers, I., Smith, P. K., & Pereira, B. (2002). Measuring workplace bullying. Aggression
and violent behavior, 7(1), 33-51.
Desrumaux, P., Jeoffrion, C., Bouterfas, N., De Bosscher, S., & Boudenghan, M. C. (2018). Workplace
bullying: How do bystanders’ emotions and the type of bullying influence their willingness to help?
Nordic Psychology, 70(4), 259-277.
Emdad, R., Alipour, A., Hagberg, J., & Jensen, I. B. (2013). The impact of bystanding to workplace bullying
on symptoms of depression among women and men in industry in Sweden: an empirical and
theoretical longitudinal study. International archives of occupational and environmental health, 86(6),
709-716.
Fredricks, S., Ramsey, M., & Hornett, A. (2011). Kinship and bystander effect: The role of others in ethical
decisions. Journal of Religion and Business Ethics, 2(1), 2.
Johnson, S. L., & Rea, R. E. (2009). Workplace bullying: concerns for nurse leaders. JONA: The Journal of
Nursing Administration, 39(2), 84-90.
C. Biçer
Journal of Humanities and Tourism Research 2022, 12 (1): 204-217 216
Hoel, H. & Salin, D. (2002). Organisational antecedents of workplace bullying. In Bullying and emotional
abuse in the workplace, Einarsen, S., Hoel, H., Zapf, D., Cooper, C. L. (Eds.), (pp. 221-236). CRC Press.
Taylor Francis Inc. New York, U.S.A.
Hussain, I., Shu, R., Tangirala, S., & Ekkirala, S. (2019). The voice bystander effect: How information
redundancy inhibits employee voice. Academy of Management Journal, 62(3), 828-849.
Karakashian, L. M., Walter, M. I., Christopher, A. N., & Lucas, T. (2006). Fear of negative evaluation affects
helping behavior: The bystander effect revisited. North American Journal of Psychology, 8(1), 13-32.
Kassin, S. M. (2017). The killing of Kitty Genovese: what else does this case tell us? Perspectives on
psychological science, 12(3), 374-381.
Kim, K. (2020). Exploring the influence of workplace violence and bystander behaviour on patient safety in
Korea: A pilot study. Journal of Nursing Management, 28(3), 735-743.
Liu, K. C. (2016). Factors Associated with Intervention by Bystanders in Sexual Violence Crimes, MPA/MPP
Capstone Projects. 256, https://uknowledge.uky.edu/mpampp_etds/256.
MacCurtain, S., Murphy, C., O'Sullivan, M., MacMahon, J., & Turner, T. (2018). To stand back or step in?
Exploring the responses of employees who observe workplace bullying. Nursing inquiry, 25(1),
e12207.
Madden, C., & Loh, J. (2018). Workplace cyberbullying and bystander helping behaviour. The International
Journal of Human Resource Management, 1-25.
Mazzone, A. (2020). Bystanders to Bullying: An Introduction to the Special Issue. International Journal of
Bullying Prevention, 2:1–5.
Ng, K., Niven, K., & Hoel, H. (2019). ‘I could help, but...’: A dynamic sensemaking model of workplace
bullying bystanders. Human Relations, 0018726719884617.
Nielsen, M. B., & Einarsen, S. (2012). Outcomes of exposure to workplace bullying: A meta-analytic review.
Work & Stress, 26(4), 309-332.
Niven, K., Ng, K., & Hoel, H. (2020). Bullying and Harassment in the Workplace: Theory, Research and
Practice. Einarsen, S. V., Hoel, H., Zapf, D., & Cooper, C. L. (Eds.), CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL.
Paull, M., Omari, M., & Standen, P. (2012). When is a bystander not a bystander? A typology of the roles of
bystanders in workplace bullying. Asia Pacific Journal of Human Resources, 50(3), 351-366.
Peng, Y.-C., Chen, L.-J., Chang, C.-C. and Zhuang, W.-L. (2016), "Workplace bullying and workplace
deviance: The mediating effect of emotional exhaustion and the moderating effect of core self-
evaluations", Employee Relations, Vol. 38 No. 5, 755-769.
Plötner, M., Over, H., Carpenter, M., & Tomasello, M. (2015). Young children show the bystander effect in
helping situations. Psychological science, 26(4), 499-506.
Pouwelse, M., Mulder, R., & Mikkelsen, E. G. (2018). The role of bystanders in workplace bullying: An
overview of theories and empirical research. In Pathways of Job-related Negative Behavior. Springer.
Rowe, M. (2018). Fostering constructive action by peers and bystanders in organizations and communities.
Negotiation Journal, 34(2), 137-163.
Salin, D., Cowan, R., Adewumi, O., Apospori, E., Bochantin, J., D’Cruz, P., Djurkovic, N., Durniat, K.,
Escartín, J., Guo, J., Išik, I., Koeszegi, S.T., McCormack, D., Monserrat, S.I. and Zedlacher, E. (2019),
"Workplace bullying across the globe: a cross-cultural comparison", Personnel Review, Vol. 48 No. 1,
pp. 204-219. https://doi.org/10.1108/PR-03-2017-0092.
Saunders, P., Huynh, A., & Goodman-Delahunty, J. (2007). Defining workplace bullying behaviour
professional lay definitions of workplace bullying. International journal of law and psychiatry, 30(4-5),
340-354.
The Connection Between The Bystander Effect and Workplace Bullying in Organizations and The Ways to Overcome
Its Major Negative Outcomes
217 Journal of Humanities and Tourism Research 2022, 12 (1): 204-217
Van Heugten, K. (2011). Theorizing active bystanders as change agents in workplace bullying of social
workers. Families in Society, 92(2), 219-224.
