Psychological Development and Education ›› 2026, Vol. 42 ›› Issue (1): 131-141.doi: 10.16187/j.cnki.issn1001-4918.2026.01.13

Previous Articles     Next Articles

The Trajectories of Adolescents’ Pro-bullying Bystander Behavior: Identifying Latent Subgroups and Influence Factors

BAO Zhenzhou, YANG Lingqing, CHU Yijia, YU Mingshen, XU Ziwei   

  1. School of Educational Science, Gannan Normal University, Ganzhou 341000
  • Published:2026-01-19

RichHTML

PDF (PC)

Abstract: There are individual differences in the developmental trajectories of adolescents’ pro-bullying bystander behavior. In this study, a total of 976 junior and senior high school adolescents from Jiangxi and Anhui Province were selected and tracked in an 18-month longitudinal survey, being evaluated once in six months. We aimed to investigate the developmental trajectories of adolescents’ pro-bullying bystander behavior and to identify latent subgroups. In addition, the developmental trajectories of adolescents’ pro-bullying bystander behavior were influenced by several factors (empathy, moral disengagement, peer pressure, and teacher-student relationship). The results showed that: (1) There were three types of adolescent’s pro-bullying bystander behavior trajectories, namely high increasing group (5.54%), moderate increasing group (15.38%), and low descending group (79.08%); (2) Compared with adolescents in low descending group, adolescents with high levels of negative peer pressure as well as with low levels of teacher-student relationship were more likely to be in the high increasing group; (3) Adolescents with high levels of moral disengagement as well as with low levels of teacher-student relationship were more likely to be in the moderate increasing group rather than low descending group. Thus, moral disengagement and negative peer pressure were risks factors for the development of pro-bullying bystander behavior. However, good teacher-student relationship was the protective factor of pro-bullying bystander behavior. In general, the present study revealed the dynamic changes and individual differences of adolescents’ pro-bullying bystander behavior. Besides, the present research identified the protective and risk factors associated with adolescents’ pro-bullying bystander behavior. These results provided suggestions for future pro-bullying bystander behavior intervention.

Key words: pro-bullying bystander behavior, developmental trajectories, adolescence, latent growth mixed model

Andreou, E., & Metallidou, P. (2004). The relationship of academic and social cognition to behaviour in bullying situations among Greek primary school children. Educational Psychology, 24(1), 27-41.
Bandura, A., Barbaranelli, C., Caprara, G. V., & Pastorelli, C. (1996). Mechanisms of moral disengagement in the exercise of moral agency. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71(2), 364-374.
Bandura, A. (1978) Social learning theory of aggression. Journal of Communication, 28(3), 12-29.
Batson, C. D. (1987). Prosocial motivation: Is it ever truly altruistic?Social Psychology, 20, 65-122.
Bjärehed, M., Thornberg, R., Wänström, L., & Gini, G. (2020). Mechanisms of moral disengagement and their associations with indirect bullying, direct bullying, and pro-aggressive bystander behavior. The Journal of Early Adolescence, 40(1), 28-55.
Bjärehed, M., Thornberg, R., Wänström, L., & Gini, G. (2021). Individual moral disengagement and bullying among Swedish fifth graders: The role of collective moral disengagement and pro-bullying behavior within classrooms. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 36(17-18), NP9576-NP9600.
Cho, Y., & Chung, O.-B. (2012). A mediated moderation model of conformative peer bullying. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 21(3), 520-529.
Crone, E. A., & Dahl, R. E. (2012). Understanding adolescence as a period of social-affective engagement and goal flexibility.Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 13, 636-650.
Demaray, M. K., Summers, K. H., Jenkins, L. N., & Becker, L. D. (2016). Bullying participant behaviors questionnaire (BPBQ): Establishing a reliable and valid measure. Journal of School Violence, 15(2), 158-188.
Ehrenreich, S. E., Beron, K. J., Brinkley, D. Y., & Underwood, M. K. (2014). Family predictors of continuity and change in social and physical aggression from ages 9 to 18. Aggressive Behavior, 40(5), 421-439.
Eliot, M., Cornell, D., Gregory, A., & Fan, X. (2010). Supportive school climate and student willingness to seek help for bullying and threats of violence. Journal of School Psychology, 48(6), 533-553.
Espelage, D. L. (2014). Ecological theory: Preventing youth bullying, aggression, and victimization. Theory into Practice, 53(4), 257-264.
Ettekal, I., Kochenderfer-Ladd, B., & Ladd, G. W. (2015). A synthesis of person-and relational-level factors that influence bullying and bystanding behaviors: Toward an integrative framework.Aggression and Violent Behavior, 23, 75-86.
Evans, C. B., & Smokowski, P. R. (2017). Negative bystander behavior in bullying dynamics: Assessing the impact of social capital deprivation and anti-social capital. Child Psychiatry and Human Development, 48, 120-135.
Goossens, F. A., Olthof, T., & Dekker, P. H. (2006). New participant role scales: Comparison between various criteria for assigning roles and indications for their validity. Aggressive Behavior, 32(4), 343-357.
Hong, J. S., & Espelage, D. L. (2012). A review of research on bullying and peer victimization in school: An ecological system analysis. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 17, 311-322.
Jungert, T., Piroddi, B., & Thornberg, R. (2016). Early adolescents’ motivations to defend victims in school bullying and their perceptions of student-teacher relationships: A self-determination theory approach. Journal of Adolescence, 53(1), 75-90.
Lerner, R. M, & Miller, J. R. (1993). Integrating human development research and intervention for America’s children: The Michigan State University model. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 14, 347-364.
Loke, A. Y., Mak, Y. W., & Wu, C. S. T. (2016). The association of peer pressure and peer affiliation with the health risk behaviors of secondary school students in Hong Kong.Public Health, 137, 113-123.
Meter, D. J., & Card, N. A. (2015). Defenders of victims of peer aggression: Interdependence theory and an exploration of individual, interpersonal, and contextual effect on the defender participant role. Developmental Review, 38, 222-240.
Monks, C.P., & O’Toole, S.E. (2020). The vantage points of assistants and reinforcers. In L. H. Rosen, S. R. Scott, & S. Y. Kim (Eds.), Bullies, Victims, and Bystanders (pp. 45-77). Springer International Publishing.
Muuss, R. E. (1996).Theories of adolescence (sixth edition). New York: The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc.
Nivette, A., Eisner, M., & Ribeaud, D. (2017). Developmental predictors of violent extremist attitudes: A test of general strain theory. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 54(6), 755-790.
Nocentini, A., Menesini, E., & Salmivalli, C. (2013). Level and change of bullying behavior during high school: A multilevel growth curve analysis. Journal of Adolescence, 36(3), 495-505.
Pepler, D., Jiang, D., Craig, W., & Connolly, J. (2008). Developmentaltrajectories of bullying and associated factors. Child Development, 79(2), 325-338.
Pouwels, J. L., Lansu, T. A. M., & Cillessen, A. H. N. (2016). Participant roles of bullying in adolescence: Status characteristics, social behavior, and assignment criteria. Aggressive Behavior, 42(3), 239-253.
Pouwels, J. L., van Noorden, T. H. J., Lansu, T. A. M., & Cillessen, A. H. N. (2018). The participant roles of bullying in different grades: Prevalence and social status profiles. Social Development, 27, 732-747.
Saarento, S., & Salmivalli, C. (2015). The role of classroom peer ecology and bystanders’ responses in bullying. Child Development Perspectives, 9(4), 201-205.
Salmivalli, C., Lagerspetz, K., Björkqvist, K., Österman, K., & Kaukiainen, A. (1996). Bullying as a group process: Participant roles and their relations to social status within the group.Aggressive Behavior, 22(1), 1-15.
Salmivalli, C., Lappalainen, M.,& Lagerspetz, K. M. J. (1998). Stability and change of behavior in connection with bullying in schools: A two-year follow-up. Aggressive Behavior, 24, 205-218.
Salmivalli, C., & Poskiparta, E. (2012). Making bullying prevention a priority in Finnish schools: The KiVa antibullying program. New Directions for Youth Development, 133, 41-53.
Sjögren, B., Thornberg, R., Wänström, L., & Gini, G. (2021). Associations between students’ bystander behavior and individual and classroom collective moral disengagement. Educational Psychology, 41(3), 264-281.
Smokowski, P. R., & Evans, C. B. R. (2019). To intervene or not intervene? That is the question: Bystanders in the bullying dynamic. In P. R. Smokowski & C. B. R. Evans (Eds.), Bullying and victimization across the lifespan: Playground politics and power (pp. 87-106). Springer, Cham.
Thornberg, R., & Jungert, T. (2013). Bystander behavior in bullying situations: Basic moral sensitivity, moral disengagement and defender self-efcacy. Journal of Adolescence, 36(3), 457-483.
Thornberg, R., Wänström, L., Hong, J. S., & Espelage, D. L. (2017). Classroom relationship qualities and social-cognitive correlates of defending and passive bystanding in school bullying in Sweden: A multilevel analysis. Journal of School Psychology, 63, 49-62.
Troop-Gordon, W., Frosch, C. A., Wienke Totura, C. M., Bailey, A. N., Jackson, J. D., & Dvorak, R. D. (2019). Predicting the development of pro-bullying bystander behavior: A short-term longitudinal analysis.Journal of School Psychology, 77, 77-89.
Twemlow, S. W., Fonagy, P., & Sacco, F. C. (2004). The role of the bystander in the social architecture of bullying and violence in schools and communities.Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1036(1), 215-232.
Van Cleemput, K., Vandebosch, H., & Pabian, S. (2014). Personal characteristics and contextual factors that determine “helping”, “joining in”, and “doing nothing” when witnessing cyberbullying.Aggressive Behavior, 40(5), 383-396.
Winter, K., Spengler, S., Bermpohl, F., Singer, T., & Kanske, P. (2017). Social cognition in aggressive offenders: Impaired empathy, but intact theory of mind. Scientific Reports, 7(1), 670.https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-00745-0
Wood, L., Smith, J., Varjas, K., & Meyers, J. (2017). School personnel social support and nonsupport for bystanders of bullying: Exploring student perspectives. Journal of School Psychology, 61, 1-17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2016.12.003
Yun, H. Y. (2019). New approaches to defender and outsider roles in school bullying.Child Development, 91(4), 814-832.
Zhang, J., Li, D., Ahemaitijiang, N., Peng, W., Zhai, B., & Wang, Y. (2020). Perceived school climate and delinquency among Chinese adolescents: A moderated mediation analysis of moral disengagement and effortful control. Children and Youth Services Review, 116, 105253. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2020.105253
Zhang, M. C., Wang, L., Dou, K., & Liang, Y. (2021). Why victimized by peers promote cyberbullying in college students? Testing a moderated mediation model in a three-wave longitudinal study. Current Psychology, (3), 1-11. https://doi.org/10.1007/S12144-021-02047-1
鲍振宙, 储怡佳, 王帆, 柳希希. (2023). 校园欺凌中的“袖手旁观”:校园氛围、学校联结和道德推脱的作用. 心理发展与教育, 39(4), 580-589.
丁凤琴, 陆朝晖. (2016). 共情与亲社会行为关系的元分析. 心理科学进展, 24(8), 1159-1174.
杜建军. (2018). 论新型师生关系的构建——基于哈贝马斯交往行为理论的研究. 河南大学学报, 58(4), 129-135.
郭素然, 吕少博. (2022). 学校氛围与青少年欺凌行为的关系. 中国健康心理学杂志, 30(10), 1590-1594.
李小青, 刘银章, 汪玥, 蒋索. (2023). 暴力暴露对不同性别青少年早期校园欺凌的影响:基于潜在剖面分析. 心理发展与教育, 39(2), 255-265.
马坤. (2015). 特拉华州校园氛围量表中文版用于高中生的信效度研究 (硕士学位论文). 湖南师范大学, 长沙.
宋仕婕, 佐斌, 温芳芳, 谭潇. (2020). 群体认同对群际敏感效应及其行为表现的影响. 心理学报, 52(8), 993-1003.
王小凤, 丁道群, 龙耀华, 龚小梅, 邱小艳. (2022). 中学生校园欺凌道德推脱特点及其与欺凌参与行为的关系. 中国临床心理学杂志, 30(02), 360-365.
夏丹. (2011). 基于移情量表(BES)中文版的信效度及初步应用研究 (硕士学位论文). 郑州大学.
叶婷. (2020). 不同欺凌受害反应情境下共情、道德敏感性对初中生旁观行为的影响 (硕士学位论文). 云南师范大学, 昆明.
曾欣然, 汪玥, 丁俊浩, 周晖. (2019). 班级欺凌规范与欺凌行为:群体害怕与同辈压力的中介作用. 心理学报, 51(8), 935-944.
张荣荣, 董莉. (2019). 校园欺凌中旁观者行为的作用机制. 心理技术与应用, 7(2), 118-128.
张文新. (2023). 欺凌的界定:文化和发展的视角. 心理发展与教育, 39(4), 590-598.
张莹瑞, 佐斌. (2006). 社会认同理论及其发展. 心理科学进展, 14(3), 475-480.
张云运, 牛丽丽, 任萍, 秦幸娜. (2018). 同伴地位对青少年早期不同类型攻击行为发展的影响:性别与班级规范的调节作用. 心理发展与教育, 34(1), 38-48.
周浩, 龙立荣. (2004). 共同方法偏差的统计检验与控制方法. 心理科学进展, 22(12), 942-950.
[1] LI Dan, CHEN Jiayu, LIU Sige, WU Dehua, YIN Huazhan. The Effect of Trait Gratitude on Subjective Well-being during Adolescence: Longitudinal Explanatory Effect of Life Meaning [J]. Psychological Development and Education, 2026, 42(1): 28-38.
[2] WANG Yulong, WANG Danyun, LIN Xiuyun. The Relationship between Non-suicidal Self-injury and Suicidal Ideation during Early Adolescence: The Longitudinal Moderating Role of Parent-child Communication [J]. Psychological Development and Education, 2026, 42(1): 142-152.
[3] BAO Zhenzhou, CHU Yijia, WANG Fan, LIU Xixi, YU Mingshen. Bullying Victimization and Adolescents’ Pro-bullying Bystander Behaviors: The Mechanisms of Moral Disengagement and Perceived Antibullying Class Norms [J]. Psychological Development and Education, 2025, 41(2): 265-275.
[4] WANG Yulong, LI Rong, CHEN Huilin, LIN Xiuyun. Impact of Parental Conflict on Non-suicide Self-injury in Early Adolescence: Longitudinal Mediating Effects of Depression [J]. Psychological Development and Education, 2025, 41(2): 276-283.
[5] FENG Xueke, DOU Kai, TANG Ying. Positive Parenting and Prosocial Risky Behavior in Adolescents: Testing a Moderated Mediation Model [J]. Psychological Development and Education, 2024, 40(5): 658-666.
[6] LIU Xiaoting, ZHANG Ning. The Development of Sleep Problems in Early Adolescence: Gender Difference and the Role of Positive and Negative Affect [J]. Psychological Development and Education, 2024, 40(4): 551-562.
[7] HUANG Yuancheng, YUAN Qiumei, XIN Ting, LI Caina. The Effect of Academic Achievement on Subjective Well-being in Early Adolescence: The Role of Self-esteem and Mobility [J]. Psychological Development and Education, 2024, 40(3): 384-392.
[8] LIU Sihan, WU Xinchun, WANG Xinyi. Latent Profiles of Parenting Styles and Their Associations with Academic Engagement and Anxiety Symptoms in Adolescents [J]. Psychological Development and Education, 2023, 39(5): 673-682.
[9] XIN Guogang, ZHANG Libin, CHANG Ruisheng, ZHANG Yunyun. Bullying Victimization Trajectories in Early Adolescence: The Predictive Role of Depression, Self-esteem and Academic Achievement [J]. Psychological Development and Education, 2023, 39(4): 568-579.
[10] LI Jinwen, BAI Rong, WANG Yumeng, LIU Xia. The Relationship between Developmental Trajectories of Adolescents’ Depression and Self-injury: A Two-year Longitudinal Study [J]. Psychological Development and Education, 2023, 39(3): 429-438.
[11] LI Xiaoqing, LIU Yinzhang, WANG Yue, JIANG Suo. Effects of Violence Exposure on School Bullying among Early-age Adolescents of Different Genders: Based on Latent Profile Analysis [J]. Psychological Development and Education, 2023, 39(2): 255-265.
[12] JIANG Suo, DING Jinqi, LIU Yan, LU Yuanyuan, LI Xiaoqing, CHEN Jing. The Effect of Cyber-bullying/Cyber-victimization on Sleep Quality in Early Adolescence: A Serial Mediation Model of Social Anxiety and Depression Mood [J]. Psychological Development and Education, 2023, 39(1): 85-96.
[13] LIN Lin, QIU Shaojie, LIU Yu, YANG Yang, YANG Ya'nan, JIA Xuji, XU Zhansheng, BAI Xuejun. The Trajectories of Impulsivity during Early Adolescence: Identifying Latent Subgroups and Influence Factors [J]. Psychological Development and Education, 2022, 38(3): 339-347.
[14] JI Linqin, ZHANG Meng, DONG Meihui, PAN Bin, ZHANG Wenxin. The Bidirectional Associations between Aggression and Peer Victimization from Late Childhood to Early Adolescence: A Cross-lagged Study [J]. Psychological Development and Education, 2021, 37(5): 701-709.
[15] WU Peng, ZHANG Qi, WANGYANG Chunzi. The Relationship between Parental Style and Cyber Victimization of Junior High School Students: A Longitudinal Study [J]. Psychological Development and Education, 2021, 37(5): 719-726.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited
  Shared   
  Discussed   
No Suggested Reading articles found!
Copyright 2018 © Editorial office of Psychological Development and Education
Supported by Beijing Magtech Co.Ltd