SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Current Research and Reviews in Psychology and Psychiatry / 2026 / Cilt: 6

The relationship between intervention in bullying and symptoms of social anxiety in students who witness peer bullying: The mediating effect of empathy and moral disengagement

Akran Zorbalığına Tanık Olan Öğrencilerde Zorbalığa Müdahale ile Sosyal Kaygı Belirtilerinin İlişkisi: Empati ve Ahlaki Uzaklaşmanın Aracı Etkisi

Halime Şenay Güzel(Ankara Yıldırım Beyazıt University)0000-0002-5345-6947
Pages
—
Publication Date
2026-07-28
🏛️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)

Conclusion: The findings indicate that empathy established with the victim in peer bullying plays a significant role and highlight factors that can be utilized to prevent peer bullying.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Objective: The present study aims to examine the relationship between students' witnessing of peer bullying and their intervention behaviours, as well as the relationship between social anxiety symptoms and bystander intervention in bullying, and to assess the mediating effects of empathy and moral disengagement in this relationship.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Method: The sample of the study consists of 133 participants aged 10-14.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Conclusion: The findings indicate that empathy established with the victim in peer bullying plays a significant role and highlight factors that can be utilized to prevent peer bullying.
🔬Design:Araştırma Makalesi
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:akran zorbalığı · seyirci etkisi · sosyal kaygı belirtileri

Abstract

Objective: The present study aims to examine the relationship between students' witnessing of peer bullying and their intervention behaviours, as well as the relationship between social anxiety symptoms and bystander intervention in bullying, and to assess the mediating effects of empathy and moral disengagement in this relationship. Method: The sample of the study consists of 133 participants aged 10-14. The data collection tools used were the Social Anxiety Scale for Children, the Moral Disengagement Scale, the Empathy Scale Toward Victims of Peer Bullying, the Bystander Intervention Scale in Bullying, and the Demographic Information Form. Results: According to the research results, the relationship between social anxiety symptoms and audience intervention was found to be positively significant; however, regression analysis revealed that social anxiety symptoms did not have a significant effect on audience intervention. Mediator effect analyses show that empathy towards the victim has a significant mediating effect on the relationship between social anxiety symptoms and bystander intervention in bullying, but that social anxiety has no indirect effect on intervention in bullying through moral disengagement. Finally, the results of the serial mediation analysis revealed that the indirect effects of empathy and moral disengagement on bystander intervention in social anxiety (SA ⇒ E ⇒ AU ⇒ BII) were not significant. Conclusion: The findings indicate that empathy established with the victim in peer bullying plays a significant role and highlight factors that can be utilized to prevent peer bullying. Based on this point, it is believed that the current study, together with other future research, will contribute to a better understanding of the bystander effect in peer bullying.

Özet

Amaç: Mevcut araştırmada akran zorbalığına tanık olan öğrencilerin zorbalığa müdahale davranışıyla sosyal kaygı belirtileri arasındaki ilişkiyi incelemek, sosyal kaygı belirtileri ve zorbalıkta seyirci müdahalesi arasındaki ilişkide empati ve ahlaki uzaklaşmanın aracı etkilerini değerlendirmek amaçlanmaktadır. Yöntem: Araştırmanın örneklemini 10-14 yaş aralığında 133 katılımcı oluşturmaktadır. Veri toplama aracı olarak Çocuklar İçin Sosyal Kaygı Ölçeği, Ahlâkî Uzaklaşma Ölçeği, Akran Zorbalığına Uğrayan Kurbana Karşı Empati Ölçeği, Zorbalıkta Seyirci Müdahale Ölçeği ve Demografik Bilgi Formu kullanılmıştır. Bulgular: Araştırma sonuçlarına göre sosyal kaygı belirtileri ve seyirci müdahalesi arasındaki ilişki pozitif yönde anlamlı bulunmuş ancak regresyon analizi, sosyal kaygı belirtilerinin seyirci müdahalesi üzerinde anlamlı bir etkisinin olmadığını ortaya koymuştur. Aracı etki analizleri, kurbana karşı duyulan empatinin, sosyal kaygı belirtileri ve zorbalıkta seyirci müdahalesi arasındaki ilişkide aracı etkisinin anlamlı olduğu göstermekle beraber ahlaki uzaklaşma aracılığıyla sosyal kaygının zorbalığa müdahale üzerinde dolaylı etkisi olmadığı görülmektedir. Son olarak, seri aracık analizi sonuçları empati ve ahlaki uzaklaşmanın sosyal kaygının zorbalığa seyirci müdahalesi üzerindeki dolaylı etkilerinin (SK ⇒ E ⇒ AU ⇒ ZSM) anlamlı olmadığını ortaya koymuştur. Sonuçlar: Elde edilen sonuçlar akran zorbalığında mağdur ile kurulan empatinin anlamlı bir yeri olduğunu göstermektedir ve akran zorbalığını önlemek adına kullanılabilecek faktörleri vurgulamaktadır. Bu noktadan hareketle, mevcut çalışmanın, gelecekte yapılacak diğer araştırmalar ile birlikte akran zorbalığında seyirci etkisinin daha iyi anlaşılmasına katkı sağlayacağı düşünülmektedir.

🔖

Cite This Article

Güzel, H. Ş. (2026). The relationship between intervention in bullying and symptoms of social anxiety in students who witness peer bullying: The mediating effect of empathy and moral disengagement. Current Research and Reviews in Psychology and Psychiatry, Cilt: 6. https://doi.org/10.65127/crrpp.1915478

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (64)

  1. Abbott, N. ve Cameron, L. (2014). What makes a young assertive bystander? The effect of intergroup contact, empathy, cultural openness, and in‐group bias on assertive bystander intervention intentions. Journal of Social Issues, 70(1), 167-182. https://doi.org/10.1111/josi.12053
  2. American Psychiatric Association. (2013). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (DSM-5). American Psychiatric Pub.
  3. Bandura, A. (2002). Selective moral disengagement in the exercise of moral agency. Journal of Moral Education, 31(2), 101-119. https://doi.org/10.1080/0305724022014322
  4. Bandura, A., Barbarnelli, C., Caprara, G. V. ve Pastorelli, C. (1996). Mechanisms of moral disengagement in the exercise of moral agency. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71, 364-374. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.71.2.364
  5. Bixler, T. (2018). Examining the influence of perceived school climate, anxiety, victimization experience, and observed defending on bystander behaviors during bullying [Lisansüstü araştırma tezleri ve doktora tezleri, Kuzey Illinois Üniversitesi]. https://huskiecommons.lib.niu.edu/allgraduate-thesesdissertations/2984
  6. Caravita, S. C. S., Di Blasio, P. ve Salmivalli, C. (2010). Early adolescents’ participation in bullying: Is ToM involved? The Journal of Early Adolescence, 30(1), 138-170. https://doi.org/10.1177/0272431609342983
  7. Correia, I. ve Dalbert, C. (2008). School bullying: Belief in a personal just world of bullies, victims, and defenders. European Psychologist, 13(4), 248-254. https://doi.org/10.1027/1016-9040.13.4.248
  8. Coyle, S., Malecki, C. K. ve Emmons, J. (2021). Keep your friends close: Exploring the associations of bullying, peer social support, and social anxiety. Contemporary School Psychology, 25(2), 230-242. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1007/s40688-019-00250-3
  9. Davis, M. H. (1983). Measuring individual differences in empathy: Evidence for a multidimensional approach. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 44(1), 113-126. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.44.1.113
  10. Demir, T., Eralp-Demir, D., Türksoy, N., Özmen, E. ve Uysal, Ö. (2000). Çocuklar için Sosyal Anksiyete Ölçeğinin geçerlilik ve güvenilirliği. Düşünen Adam, 13(1), 42-48.
  11. Eagly, A. H., Woo, W. ve Diekman, A. B. (2012). Social role theory of sex differences and similarities: A current appraisal. The developmental social psychology of gender (s. 123-174) içinde. Psychology Press.
  12. Eisenberg, N. ve Lennon, R. (1983). Sex differences in empathy and related capacities. Psychological Bulletin, 94(1), 100-131. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.94.1.100
  13. George, D. ve Mallery, P. (2010). SPSS for Windows step by step: A simple guide and reference, 17.0 update (10. Baskı). Allyn & Bacon.
  14. Gholiyah, Y. D., Nashori, H. F. ve Diana, R. R. (2021). The effect of empathy to bystander’s role towards bullying at school through moral disengagement as a mediator. Communications in Humanities and Social Sciences, 1(1), 16-23. https://doi.org/10.21924/chss.1.1.2021.11
  15. Gini, G., Albiero, P., Benelli, B. ve Altoe, G. (2007). Does empathy predict adolescents’ bullying and defending behavior? Aggressive Behavior, 33, 467-476. https://doi.org/10.1002/ab.20204
  16. Gini, G., Albiero, P., Benelli, B. ve Altoe, G. (2008). Determinants of adolescents’ active defending and passive by standing behavior in bullying. Journal of Adolescence, 31(1), 93-105. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adolescence.2007.05.002
  17. Gini, G., Pozzoli, T. ve Hymel, S. (2014). Moral disengagement among children and youth: A meta‐analytic review of links to aggressive behavior. Aggressive Behavior, 40(1), 56-68. https://doi.org/10.1002/ab.21502
  18. Gómez-Tabares, A. S. (2024). Social-cognitive mechanisms of moral disengagement, gender differences and psychological predictors in young populations. Revista Colombiana de Psicología, 33(2), 63-84. https://doi.org/10.15446/rcp.v33n2.102537
  19. Gökkaya, F. ve Tekinsav-Sütçü, S. (2020). An investigation of the prevalence of peer bullying among middle school students. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 35(1), 40-54. https://doi.org/10.16986/HUJE.2018042225
  20. Hayes, A. F. (2017). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach. Guilford Publications.
  21. Hikmat, R., Suryani, S., Yosep, I. ve Jeharsae, R. (2024). Empathy’s crucial role: Unraveling ımpact on students bullying behavior-a scoping review. Journal of Multidisciplinary Healthcare, 17, 3483-3495. https://doi.org/10.2147/JMDH.S469921
  22. Hoffman, M. L. (1977). Sex differences in empathy and related behaviors. Psychological Bulletin, 84(4), 712-722.
  23. Jenkins, L. N. ve Nickerson, A. B. (2017). Bullying participant roles and gender as predictors of bystander intervention. Aggressive Behavior, 43(3), 281-290. https://doi.org/10.1002/ab.21688
  24. Jungert, T., Karataş, P., Iotti, N. O. ve Perrin, S. (2021). Direct bullying and cyberbullying: Experimental study of bystanders’ motivation to defend victims and the role of anxiety and identification with the bully. Frontiers in Psychology, 11, 616572. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.616572
  25. Jungert, T., ve Perrin S. (2019). Trait anxiety and bystander motivation to defend victims of school bullying. Journal of Adolescence, 77, 1-10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adolescence.2019.10.001
  26. Kashdan, T. B. ve Herbert, J. D. (2001). Social anxiety disorder in childhood and adolescence: Current status and future directions. Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review, 4, 37-61. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1009576610507
  27. Kennedy, J. A., Kray, L. J. ve Ku, G. (2017). A social-cognitive approach to understanding gender differences in negotiator ethics: The role of moral identity. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 138, 28-44. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1016/j.obhdp.2016.11.003
  28. Killer, B., Bussey, K., Hawes, D. J. ve Hunt, C. (2019). A meta‐analysis of the relationship between moral disengagement and bullying roles in youth. Aggressive Behavior, 45(4), 450-462. https://doi.org/10.1002/ab.21833
  29. Kurt-Demirbaş, N. ve Öztemel, K. (2019). Zorbalıkta Seyirci Müdahale Ölçeğinin (ZSMÖ) Türkçe uyarlaması: Geçerlik ve güvenirlik çalışması. Türk Psikolojik Danışma ve Rehberlik Dergisi, 9(54), 965-985. https://izlik.org/JA75SE79JH
  30. La Greca, A. M. ve Stone, W. L. (1993). Social anxiety scale for children-revised: Factor structure and concurrent validity. Journal of Clinical Child Psychology, 22(1), 17-27. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15374424jccp2201_2
  31. Levy, M. ve Gumpel, T. P. (2018). The interplay between bystanders’ intervention styles: An examination of the “bullying circle” approach. Journal of School Violence, 17(3), 339-353. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15388220.2017.1368396
  32. Menolascino, N. (2016). Empathy, perceived popularity and social anxiety: Predicting bystander intervention among middle school students [Yüksek lisans tezi, Doğu Illinois Üniversitesi]. https://thekeep.eiu.edu/theses/2507
  33. Midgett, A. ve Doumas, D. M. (2019). Witnessing bullying at school: The association between being a bystander and anxiety and depressive symptoms. School Mental Health, 11, 454-463. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12310-019-09312-6
  34. Midgett, A., Doumas, D. M., Peck, M. ve Winburn, A. (2021). The relationship between witnessing bullying, defending targets, and internalizing symptoms: An analysis of gender differences among sixth-grade students. Professional School Counseling, 25(1), https://doi.org/10.1177/2156759X211058159
  35. Nalbant, A., Babaoğlan, E. ve Çelik, E., (2018). The adaptation of Empathy towards Peer Bullying Victim Scale into Turkish culture. Journal of Mersin University Faculty of Education, 14(2), 840-851. https://doi.org/10.17860/mersinefd.330394
  36. Nickerson, A. B., Aloe, A. M. ve Werth, J. M. (2015). The relation of empathy and defending in bullying: A meta-analytic investigation. School Psychology Review, 44(4), 372-390. https://doi.org/10.17105/spr-15-0035.1
  37. Nickerson, A. ve Mele-Taylor, D. (2014). Empathic responsiveness, group norms, and prosocial affiliations in bullying roles. School Psychology Quarterly, 29(1), 99. https://doi.org/10.1037/spq0000052
  38. Obermann, M. L. (2011a). Moral disengagement among bystanders to school bullying. Journal of School Violence, 10(3), 239-257. https://doi.org/10.1080/15388220.2011.578276
  39. Obermann, M. L. (2011b). Moral disengagement in self-reported and peer-nominated school bullying. Aggressive Behavior, 37(2), 133-144. https://doi.org/10.1002/ab.20378
  40. Olthof, T., Pronk, J., Vermande, M. M., van der Meulen, M., Aleva, A. E. ve Goossens, F. A. (2025). Understanding defender subtypes in bullying: Implications for effective anti-bullying ınterventions. International Journal of Bullying Prevention, 1-12. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42380-025-00309-1
  41. 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.
  42. Olweus, D. (2004). Bullying at school (9. Baskı). Blackwell.
  43. Piccardi, L., Burrai, J., Palmiero, M., Quaglieri, A., Lausi, G.,. Mari, E. (2023). A cross-sectional study of gender role adherence, moral disengagement mechanisms and online vulnerability in adolescents. Heliyon, 9(8) e18910. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e18910
  44. Pittelkow, M. M., Aan Het Rot, M., Seidel, L. J., Feyel, N. ve Roest, A. M. (2021). Social anxiety and empathy: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of Anxiety Disorders, 78, 102357. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.janxdis.2021.102357
  45. Portt, E., Person, S., Person, B., Rawana, E. ve Brownlee, K. (2020). Empathy and positive aspects of adolescent peer relationships: A scoping review. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 29, 2416-2433. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10826-020-01753-x
  46. Pöyhönen, V., Karna, A. ve Salmivalli, C., (2008). Classroom-level moderators of the empathy-defending link. R. Veenstra (Chair). Bullying and victimization. International Society for the Study of Behavioral Development. Würzburg, Germany.
  47. Rivers, I., Poteat, V. P., Noret, N. ve Ashurst, N. (2009). Observing bullying at school: The mental health implications of witness status. School Psychology Quarterly, 24(4), 211-223. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0018164
  48. Robson, C. ve Witenberg, R. T. (2013). The influence of moral disengagement, morally based self-esteem, age, and gender on traditional bullying and cyberbullying. Journal of School Violence, 12(2), 211-231. https://doi.org/10.1080/15388220.2012.762921
  49. 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
  50. Salmivalli, C., Voeten, M. ve 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
  51. Song, J. ve Oh, I. (2018). Factors influencing bystanders’ behavioral reactions in cyberbullying situations. Computers in Human Behavior, 78, 273-282. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1016/j.chb.2017.10.008
  52. T.C. Millî Eğitim Bakanlığı. (2021). Akran zorbalığı farkındalık programı ortaokul (Genel Yayın no.7733). https://orgm.meb.gov.tr/meb_iys_dosyalar/2022_08/23150037_Ortaokul_FarkYndalYk_ProgramY.pdf
  53. Tani, F., Greenman, P. S., Schneider, B. H. ve Fregoso, M. (2003). Bullying and the big five a study of childhood personality and participant roles in bullying incidents. School Psychology International, 24, 131-146. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1177/0143034303024002001
  54. Thornberg, R., Jungert, T. ve Hong, J. S. (2023). The indirect association between moral disengagement and bystander behaviors in school bullying through motivation: Structural equation modelling and mediation analysis. Social Psychology of Education, 26(2), 533-556. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11218-022-09754-y
  55. Trach, J., Hymel, S., Waterhouse, T. ve Neale, K. (2010). Bystander responses to school bullying: A cross-sectional investigation of grade and sex differences. Canadian Journal of School Psychology, 25(1), 114-130. https://doi.org/10.1177/0829573509357553
  56. Twemlow, S. W., Fonagy, P. ve 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. https://doi.org/10.1196/annals.1330.014
  57. Van Noorden, T. H., Haselager, G. J., Cillessen, A. H. ve Bukowski, W. M. (2015). Empathy and involvement in bullying in children and adolescents: A systematic review. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 44, 637-657. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-014-0135-6
  58. Wang, D., Zhang, Y., Tian, H., Sun, H., Wang, K., … Wei, Y. (2024). The relationship between being bullied and bystander intervention in adolescent school bullying: The moderating mediation of moral disengagement and only child status. Current Psychology, 43(22), 19617-19627. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-024-05734-x
  59. Xie, X., Zhang, Y., Xu, B., Wang, K. M. ve Wu, X. (2025). Transformation from school bullying outsider to cyberbullying perpetrator: The role of anxiety and moral disengagement. Deviant Behavior, 1-16. https://doi.org/10.1080/01639625.2025.2606143
  60. Xie, Z., Liu, C. ve Teng, Z. (2023). The effect of everyday moral sensitivity on bullying bystander behavior: Parallel mediating roles of empathy and moral disengagement. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 38(11-12), 7678-7701. https://doi.org/10.1177/08862605221147071
  61. Yalçın, M. G., Şenyurt, A. Y., Gültepe, B. ve Coşkun, H., (2016). Ahlâkî Uzaklaşma Ölçeğinin Türkçeye uyarlanması. Kalem Uluslararası Eğitim ve İnsan Bilimleri Dergisi, 6(1), 309-332. https://doi.org/10.23863/kalem.2017.63
  62. Yang, L. ve Gao, T. (2023). Defending or not? The role of peer status, social self-efficacy, and moral disengagement on Chinese adolescents’ bystander behaviors in bullying situations. Current Psychology, 42(33), 29616-29627. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-022-04039-1
  63. Zych, I., Ttofi, M. M. ve Farrington, D. P. (2019). Empathy and callous-unemotional traits in different bullying roles: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Trauma, Violence, & Abuse, 20(1), 3-21. https://doi.org/10.1177/1524838016683456
  64. Piccardi, L., Burrai, J., Palmiero, M., Quaglieri, A., Lausi, G.,. Mari, E. (2023). A cross-sectional study of gender role adherence, moral disengagement mechanisms and online vulnerability in adolescents. Heliyon, 9(8) e18910. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e18910