SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Türk Psikolojik Danışma ve Rehberlik Dergisi / 2026 / Volume: 16 Issue: 80

Adaptation of the Bystander Behavior Scale to Turkish Culture: A Validity and Reliability Study

Gamze Mukba(VAN YÜZÜNCÜ YIL ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0000-0003-2287-4115
Osman Tat(YÜZÜNCÜ YIL ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0000-0003-2950-9647
Izzettin Aydogan(YÜZÜNCÜ YIL ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0000-0002-5908-1285
Tuğba Terzioğlu(VAN YÜZÜNCÜ YIL ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0009-0006-8331-8955
Sena Yalçin(YÜZÜNCÜ YIL ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0009-0004-9211-866X
Pages
—
Publication Date
2026-03-27
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Furthermore, it may guide intervention programs aimed at reducing bullying by enhancing the understanding of students’ responses to peer victimization.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Bystanders, like victims and perpetrators, may experience anxiety, stress, and fear when they witness bullying.
📊
Key Findings & Data:This study aimed to adapt the Bystander Behavior Scale (BBS) (Thornberg, Wänström, & Jungert, 2018) to Turkish culture.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Furthermore, it may guide intervention programs aimed at reducing bullying by enhancing the understanding of students’ responses to peer victimization.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:2018 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Bystander behavior scale · scale adaptation · psychometric validation

Abstract

Bystanders, like victims and perpetrators, may experience anxiety, stress, and fear when they witness bullying. Over time, these students may develop feelings of guilt for not intervening, avoid attending school, or rationalize bullying by believing that the victim deserved it. Moreover, students who assume bystander roles may later become perpetrators or victims. This study aimed to adapt the Bystander Behavior Scale (BBS) (Thornberg, Wänström, & Jungert, 2018) to Turkish culture. This quantitative psychometric study collected data from 415 students (201 female and 214 male) aged 10–12 years. The scale consists of three subscales: pro-victimizing behavior (reinforcing or assisting bullying), passive bystanding behavior, and defender behavior. After translation and cultural adaptation, the psychometric properties of the scale were examined. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) indicated that all items had standardized factor loadings above the acceptable threshold, demonstrating a well-fitting factor structure. Convergent validity was supported by satisfactory Average Variance Extracted (AVE) values and composite reliability scores across all subscales. The internal consistency coefficients further confirmed the reliability of the Turkish version. These findings suggest that the adapted scale is a valid and reliable instrument for assessing bystander roles among elementary school students in Türkiye. Given its strong psychometric characteristics, the BBS can be used in future research to explore how different bystander roles relate to constructs such as empathy, bullying sensitivity, and moral disengagement. Furthermore, it may guide intervention programs aimed at reducing bullying by enhancing the understanding of students’ responses to peer victimization.

🔖

Cite This Article

Mukba, G., Tat, O., Aydogan, I., Terzioğlu, T., Yalçin, S., *, G. M. (2026). Adaptation of the Bystander Behavior Scale to Turkish Culture: A Validity and Reliability Study. Türk Psikolojik Danışma ve Rehberlik Dergisi, Volume: 16 Issue: 80. https://doi.org/10.17066/tpdrd.1739878

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (81)

  1. Álvarez García, D., Thornberg, R., & Suárez García, Z. (2021). Validation of a scale for assessing bystander responses in bullying. Psicothema, 33(4), 623-630. https://doi.org/10.7334/psicothema2021.140
  2. American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association, & National Council on Measurement in Education. (2014). Standards for educational and psychological testing. Washington, DC: Author.
  3. Anasuri, S. (2023). Grandchildren’s views of old age and aging: A qualitative inquiry of 7-11-year-old children. International Journal of Science Academic Research, 4(8), 6029-6040.
  4. Ayas, T., & Pişkin, M. (2015). Akran zorbalığı belirleme ölçeği ergen formu. Akademik Bakış Uluslararası Hakemli Sosyal Bilimler E-Dergisi, 50, 316-324.
  5. Bar-On, D. (2001). The bystander in relation to the victim and the perpetrator: Today and during the Holocaust. Social Justice Research, 14(2), 125-148. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1012836918635
  6. Bauman, S., Yoon, J., Iurino, C., & Hackett, L. (2020). Experiences of adolescent witnesses to peer victimization: The bystander effect. Journal of School Psychology, 80, 1-14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2020.03.002
  7. Beaton, D. E., Bombardier, C., Guillemin, F., & Ferraz, M. B. (2000). Guidelines for the process of cross-cultural adaptation of self-report measures. Spine, 25(24), 3186-3191. https://doi.org/10.1097/00007632-200012150-00014
  8. Bezerra, L. L. D. A. L., Alves, D. L. G., Nunes, B. R., Stelko‐Pereira, A. C., Florêncio, R. S., & Gomes, I. L. V. (2023). Anti‐bullying interventions with an emphasis on bystanders: A scoping review. The Journal of School Health, 93(11), 1036-1044. https://doi.org/10.1111/josh.13349
  9. Brislin, R. W. (1970). Back-translation for cross-cultural research. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 1(3), 185-216. https://doi.org/10.1177/135910457000100301
  10. Cheung, G. W., & Rensvold, R. B. (2002). Evaluating goodness-of-fit indexes for testing measurement invariance. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 9(2), 233-255. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15328007SEM0902_5
  11. Cohane, S. K., & Schneider, B. H. (2024). Understanding the situation of bystanders to inform anti-bullying interventions. Frontiers in Psychology, 15, 1116860. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1116860
  12. Cui, K., & To, S. M. (2021). School climate, bystanders’ responses, and bullying perpetration in the context of rural-to-urban migration in China. Deviant Behavior, 42(11), 1416-1435. https://doi.org/10.1080/01639625.2020.1752601
  13. da Silva, B. G. (2024). Psychological first aid education for children in Portuguese schools (Master dissertation).
  14. Demirbaş, N. K., & Öztemel, K. (2019). Zorbalıkta Seyirci Müdahale Ölçeği’nin (ZSMÖ) Türkçe uyarlaması: Geçerlik ve güvenirlik çalışması. Turkish Psychological Counseling and Guidance Journal, 9(54), 965-985.
  15. DiRussa, C., Coyle-Eastwick, S. & Jeyanayagam, B. (2025). The Bystander Intervention Model and Bystander Behavior: The Impact of School Climate on Students’ Likeliness to Intervene in Bullying. International Journal of Bullying Prevention, 7, 58–73. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42380-023-00178-6
  16. Epskamp, S. (2019). semPlot: Path Diagrams and Visual Analysis of Various SEM Packages’ Output. R Package Version 1.1.2. Retrieved from https://CRAN.Rproject.org/package=semPlot
  17. Erreygers, S., Pabian, S., Vandebosch, H., & Baillien, E. (2016). Helping behavior among adolescent bystanders of cyberbullying: The role of impulsivity. Learning and Individual Differences, 48, 61-67. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2016.03.003
  18. Espelage, D., Green, H. & Polanin, J. (2012). Willingness to intervene in bullying episodes among middle school students: Individual and peer-group influences. The Journal of Early Adolescence, 32, 776-801. https://doi.org/10.1177/0272431611423017
  19. Etikan, I., Musa, S. A., & Alkassim, R. S. (2016). Comparison of convenience sampling and purposive sampling. American Journal of Theoretical and Applied Statistics, 5(1), 1-4. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ajtas.20160501.11
  20. Falla, D., Ortega-Ruiz, R., Runions, K., & Romera, E. M. (2022). Why do victims become perpetrators of peer bullying? Moral disengagement in the cycle of violence. Youth & Society, 54(3), 397-418. https://doi.org/10.1177/0044118X20973702
  21. Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39-50. https://doi.org/10.2307/3151312
  22. Forsberg, C., Thornberg, R., & Samuelsson, M. (2014). Bystanders to bullying: Fourth-to seventh-grade students’ perspectives on their reactions. Research Papers in Education, 29(5), 557-576. https://doi.org/10.1080/02671522.2013.878375
  23. Forsberg, C., Wood, L., Smith, J., Varjas, K., Meyers, J., Jungert, T., & Thornberg, R. (2018). Students’ views of factors affecting their bystander behaviors in response to school bullying: A cross-collaborative conceptual qualitative analysis. Research Papers in Education, 33(1), 127-142. https://doi.org/10.1080/02671522.2016.1271001
  24. Gaffney, H., Ttofi, M. M., & Farrington, D. P. (2021). Effectiveness of school‐based programs to reduce bullying perpetration and victimization: An updated systematic review and meta‐analysis. Campbell Systematic Reviews, 17(2), e1143. https://doi.org/10.1002/cl2.1143
  25. Gini, G., Pozzoli, T., Borghi, F., & Franzoni, L. (2008). The role of bystanders in students’ perception of bullying and sense of safety. Journal of School Psychology, 46(6), 617-638. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2008.02.001
  26. Gini, G., Thornberg, R., & Pozzoli, T. (2020). Individual moral disengagement and bystander behavior in bullying: The role of moral distress and collective moral disengagement. Psychology of Violence, 10(1), 38-47. https://doi.org/10.1037/vio0000223
  27. Gürhan, N. (2017). Her yönü ile akran zorbalığı. Turkiye Klinikleri J Psychiatr Nurs-Special Topics, 3(2), 175-181.
  28. Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2019). Multivariate data analysis (8th ed.). Cengage Learning.
  29. Hambleton, R. K., & Patsula, L. (1998). Adapting tests for use in multiple languages and cultures. Social Indicators Research, 45, 153-171. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1006941729637
  30. Jenkins, L.N., & Nickerson, A.B. (2017). Bullying participant roles and gender as predictors of bystander intervention. Agressive Behaviour, 43(3), 281-290. https://doi.org/10.1002/ab.21688
  31. Jenkins, L. N., & Nickerson, A. B. (2019). Bystander intervention in bullying: Role of social skills and gender. The Journal of Early Adolescence, 39(2), 141-166. https://doi.org/10.1177/0272431617735652
  32. Jiang, S., Liu, R. D., Ding, Y., Jiang, R., Fu, X., & Hong, W. (2022). Why the victims of bullying are more likely to avoid involvement when witnessing bullying situations: The role of bullying sensitivity and moral disengagement. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 37(5-6), NP3062-NP3083. https://doi.org/10.1177/0886260520948142
  33. Jiang, S., & Wong, G. K. (2022). Exploring age and gender differences of computational thinkers in primary school: A developmental perspective. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 38(1), 60-75. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12591
  34. Joo, H., Kim, I., Kim, S. R., Carney, J. V., & Chatters, S. J. (2020). Why witnesses of bullying tell: Individual and interpersonal factors. Children and Youth Services Review, 116, 105198.
  35. Jorgensen, T. D., Pornprasertmanit, S., Schoemann, A. M., & Rosseel, Y. (2025). semTools: Useful tools for structural equation modeling. R package version 0.5-7. Retrieved from https://CRAN.R- project.org/package=semTools
  36. Kline, R. B. (2016). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (4th ed.). The Guilford Press.
  37. Konishi, C., Hymel, S., Wong, T. K., & Waterhouse, T. (2021). School climate and bystander responses to bullying. Psychology in the Schools, 58(8), 1557-1574. https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.22512
  38. Lai, M. H. C. (2021). Composite reliability of multilevel data: It’s about observed scores and construct meanings. Psychological Methods, 26(1), 90-102. https://doi.org/10.1037/met0000287
  39. Li, C. H. (2016). Confirmatory factor analysis with ordinal data: Comparing robust maximum likelihood and diagonally weighted least squares. Behavior Research Methods, 48(3), 936-949. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-015-0619-7
  40. Mauduy, M., Bagneux, V., & Sénémeaud, C. (2023). Fostering victim-defending behaviors among school bullying witnesses: A longitudinal and experimental test of two new strategies for changing behavior. Social Psychology of Education, 26, 263-274. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11218-022-09745-z
  41. McDonald, R. P. (1970). The theoretical foundations of principal factor analysis, canonical factor analysis, and alpha factor analysis. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 23(1), 1-21. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1111/j.2044-8317.1970.tb00432.x
  42. Meredith, W. (1993). Measurement invariance, factor analysis and factorial invariance. Psychometrika, 58(4), 525-543. http://doi.org/10.1007/BF02294825
  43. Midgett, A., Doumas, D., Sears, D., Lundquist, A., & Hausheer, R. (2015). A bystander bullying psychoeducation program with middle school students: A preliminary report. The Professional Counselor, 5(4), 486–500. https://doi.org/10.15241/am.5.4.486
  44. Miranda, R., Oriol, X., & Amutio, A. (2019). Risk and protective factors at school: Reducing bullies and promoting positive bystanders' behaviors in adolescence. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 60(2), 106-115. https://doi.org/10.1111/sjop.12513
  45. Mok, W., Wang, W., Cooper, S., Ang, E. N. K., & Liaw, S. Y. (2015). Attitudes towards vital signs monitoring in the detection of clinical deterioration: scale development and survey of ward nurses. International Journal for Quality in Health Care, 27(3), 207-213. https://doi.org/10.1093/intqhc/mzv019
  46. Newman, J. B. (2010). Teacher interventions in bullying situations: Perceptions of middle school students and teachers (Doctoral Dissertation, University of Washington).
  47. 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, 495-505. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adolescence.2013.02.004
  48. Nunnally, J. C. (1978). Psychometric theory (2nd ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
  49. Oh, I., & Hazler, R. J. (2009). Contributions of personal and situational factors to bystanders' reactions to school bullying. School Psychology International, 30(3), 291-310. https://doi.org/10.1177/0143034309106499
  50. Olweus, D. (1994). Annotation: Bullying at school: basic facts and effects of a school based intervention program. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 35(7), 1171-1190.
  51. Olweus, D. (2013). School bullying: Development and some important challenges. Annual Review of Clinical Psychology, 9, 751-780. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-clinpsy-050212-185516
  52. Ortacalar, D. (2024). ‘App Kuşağı’nda zorbalık: Bir olgubilim çalışması. Journal of Computer and Education Research, 12(23), 265-291. https://doi.org/10.18009/jcer.1423579
  53. Özbek, Ö. Y., & Taneri, P. O. (2022). İlkokullar için akran zorbalığı önleme modülünün tanıtımı/ Introduction of the prevention of peer bullying module for primary schools. Çankırı Karatekin Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 13(1), 55-87. https://doi.org/10.54558/jiss.995077
  54. Patchin, J., Hinduja, S., & Patchin, J. (2016). Can someone be an unintentional bully?. In Can Someone Be an Unintentional Bully? (pp. 13-16). Corwin, https://doi.org/10.4135/9781506335957.n3
  55. 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. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-7941.2012.00027.x
  56. Pişkin, M., & Ayas, T. (2011). Akran zorbalığı ölçeği: Çocuk formu. Akademik Bakış: Uluslararası Hakemli Sosyal Bilimler E-Dergisi, 23, 1-12.
  57. Raboteg-Šarić, Z., & Bartaković, S. (2019). Empathy and moral disengagement as predictors of bystander roles in school bullying. Central European Journal of Paediatrics, 15(2), 161-176. https://doi.org/10.5457/p2005-114.248
  58. Rosseel, Y. (2012). lavaan: An R package for structural equation modeling. Journal of Statistical Software, 48(2), 1-36. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v048.i02
  59. Salmivalli, C. (2010). Bullying and the peer group: A review. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 15(2), 112-120. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.avb.2009.08.007
  60. Salmivalli, C. (2014). Participant roles in bullying: How can peer bystanders be utilized in interventions? Theory into Practice, 53(4), 286-292. https://doi.org/10.1080/00405841.2014.947222
  61. 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. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1098-2337(1996)22:1 3.0.CO;2-T
  62. Salmivalli, C., Voeten, M., & Poskiparta, E. (2011). Bystanders matter: Associations between reinforcing, defending, and the frequency of bullying behavior in classrooms. Journal of Clinical Child & Adolescent Psychology, 40(5), 668-676. https://doi.org/10.1080/15374416.2011.597090
  63. Satorra, A., & Bentler, P. M. (2001). A scaled difference chi-square test statistic for moment structure analysis. Psychometrika, 66(4), 507-514. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02296192
  64. Shultz, E., Heilman, R., & Hart, K. J. (2014). Cyber-bullying: An exploration of bystander behavior and motivation. Cyberpsychology: Journal of Psychosocial Research on Cyberspace, 8(4), Article 3. https://doi.org/10.5817/CP2014-4-3
  65. Sjögren, B., Bjereld, Y., Thornberg, R., Hong, J. S., & Espelage, D. L. (2025). Prevalence rates of bullying: A comparison between a definition-based scale and a behavior-based scale. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 40(7-8), 1530-1552. https://doi.org/10.1177/08862605241262
  66. Skrzypiec, G., Wyra, M., & Lawson, M. J. (2023). The confounding and problematic nexus of defined and perceived bullying. Children and Youth Services Review, 155, 107175. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2023.107175
  67. Taşkın, G., & Aksoy, G. (2019). Fen Bilimleri dersine yönelik tutum ölçeği geliştirme; geçerlik ve güvenirlik çalışması. İnönü Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri Enstitüsü Dergisi, 6(12), 20-35. https://doi.org/10.29129/inujgse.542568
  68. Thornberg, R., Tenenbaum, L., Varjas, K., Meyers, J., Jungert, T., & Vanegas, G. (2012). Bystander motivation in bullying incidents: To intervene or not to intervene?. Western Journal of Emergency Medicine, 13(3), 247-252. https://doi.org/10.5811/westjem.2012.3.11792
  69. Thornberg, R., & Wänström, L. (2018). Bullying and its association with altruism toward victims, blaming the victims, and classroom prevalence of bystander behaviors: A multilevel analysis. Social Psychology of Education, 21(5), 1133-1151. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11218-018-9457-7
  70. 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. https://doi.org10.1016/j.sp.2017.03.002
  71. Thornberg, R., Wänström, L., & Jungert, T. (2018). Authoritative classroom climate and its relations to bullying victimization and bystander behaviors. School Psychology International, 39(6), 663-680. https://doi.org/10.1177/0143034318809762
  72. Tian, X., Huebner, E. S., & Tian, L. (2025). Bystander Behavior in Traditional and Cyberbullying in Late Childhood: Profiles, Developmental Paths, and Their Associations with Psychosocial Adjustment. Computers in Human Behavior, 173, 108791. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2025.108791
  73. Trajtenberg, N., Dodel, M., Sanchez De Ribera, O., Cabello, P., & Claro, M. (2021). Online and offline victimisation: A cluster analysis of adolescent victims of bullying and cyber-bullying in Chile. Journal of Children and Media, 15(4), 568-587. https://doi.org/10.1080/17482798.2021.1902358
  74. Triantafyllou, A. (2023). School teachers' perceptions of the bystanders' role in school bullying: A study in the Finnish context. Children & Society, 37(3), 738-752. https://doi.org/10.1111/chso.12624
  75. Tsang, S. K., Hui, E. K., & Law, B. C. (2011). Bystander position taking in school bullying: The role of positive identity, self‐efficacy, and self‐determination. The Scientific World Journal, 11(1), 2278-2286. https://doi.org/10.1100/2011/531474
  76. Türker, M., & Bahçeci, F. (2023). Bullying & peer bullying. In F. Kayalar (Ed.), Pioneer and contemporary studies in educational sciences (pp.81-124). Duvar Yayınları.
  77. Twemlow, S. W., Sacco, F. C., & Williams, P. (1996). Perspective on the bully-victim-bystander relationship. Bulletin of the Menninger Clinic, 60(3), 296-313.
  78. van der Ploeg, R., Steglich, C., & Veenstra, R. (2020). The way bullying works: How new ties facilitate the mutual reinforcement of status and bullying in elementary schools. Social Networks, 60, 71-82. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socnet.2018.12.006
  79. Volk, A. A., Veenstra, R., & Espelage, D. L. (2017). So you want to study bullying? Recommendations to enhance the validity, transparency, and compatibility of bullying research. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 36, 34-43. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.avb.2017.07.003
  80. Waasdorp, T. E., Fu, R., Clary, L. K., & Bradshaw, C. P. (2022). School climate and bullying bystander responses in middle and high school. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 80, 101412. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appdev.2022.101412
  81. Yıldırım, R. (2012). Akran zorbalığı. Manisa Celal Bayar Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 10(2), 39-51.