Moral disengagement level and self-efficacy jointly determine whether bystanders tolerate or resist abuse

Evidence

Their level of moral disengagement influences how they respond to witnessed abuse. Thornberg and Jungert (2013) found that high moral disengagers cheer bullies on in their maltreatment of victims. In contrast, bystanders who see the moral wrongness of the abusive conduct are prone to come to victims’ defense. However, intervening carries the risk of also becoming a target of bullies. It is the bystanders with a high sense of efficacy in mediating conflicts and subduing bullies who act on their moral disquiet. … Obermann (2011) also found that bystander tolerators of abuse exhibit higher moral disengagement than guilty bystanders and those who come to the defense of victims. The guilty ones see the moral wrongness of bullying but apparently are deterred from intervening. However, empathy for the suffering of others combined with self-efficacy at managing difficult social relationships increases bystanders’ willingness to come to the defense of victims (Gini, Albiero, Benelli, & Altoè, 2008). — Albert Bandura, Moral Disengagement, 283

Categorization

• XREF: Moral courage as a function of efficacy-plus-empathy parallels authoritarians who act on prejudice only when social conditions permit — supports explaining who resists rather than complies. — connects to: Bystander passivity compounds through self-justification and victim devaluation. — Leonard S. Newman and Ralph Erber (eds.), Understanding Genocide: The Social…, 138
• corroborated: 2 independent passages support this claim — Albert Bandura, Moral Disengagement: How People Do Harm…, 283