Home > Research > Publications & Outputs > Would I Be Hurt?

Research

Associated organisational units

Links

Text available via DOI:

View graph of relations

Would I Be Hurt?: Cross-National CCTV Footage Shows Low Victimization Risk for Bystander Interveners in Public Conflicts

Research output: Contribution to Journal/Magazine › Journal article

Published

Standard

Would I Be Hurt? Cross-National CCTV Footage Shows Low Victimization Risk for Bystander Interveners in Public Conflicts. / Liebst, Lasse Suonperä; Philpot, Richard; Levine, Mark et al.
In: PsyArXiv, 11.01.2020.

Research output: Contribution to Journal/Magazine › Journal article

Harvard

Liebst, LS, Philpot, R, Levine, M & Lindegaard, MR 2020, 'Would I Be Hurt? Cross-National CCTV Footage Shows Low Victimization Risk for Bystander Interveners in Public Conflicts', PsyArXiv. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/v3me8

APA

Liebst, L. S., Philpot, R., Levine, M., & Lindegaard, M. R. (2020). Would I Be Hurt? Cross-National CCTV Footage Shows Low Victimization Risk for Bystander Interveners in Public Conflicts. PsyArXiv. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/v3me8

Vancouver

Liebst LS, Philpot R, Levine M, Lindegaard MR. Would I Be Hurt? Cross-National CCTV Footage Shows Low Victimization Risk for Bystander Interveners in Public Conflicts. PsyArXiv. 2020 Jan 11. doi: 10.31234/osf.io/v3me8

Author

Liebst, Lasse Suonperä ; Philpot, Richard ; Levine, Mark et al. / Would I Be Hurt? Cross-National CCTV Footage Shows Low Victimization Risk for Bystander Interveners in Public Conflicts. In: PsyArXiv. 2020.

Bibtex

@article{baf3f34dd7674ec882f5fc974ea47301,
title = "Would I Be Hurt?: Cross-National CCTV Footage Shows Low Victimization Risk for Bystander Interveners in Public Conflicts",
abstract = "Accumulating evidence shows that bystanders witnessing public disputes frequently intervene to help. However, little is known regarding the risks entailed for those bystanders who enter the fray to stop conflicts. This study systematically examined the prevalence of bystander victimizations and associated risk factors. Data were a cross-national sample of CCTV video recordings of real-life public disputes, capturing the potential victimizations of intervening bystanders. Data showed that interveners were rarely physically harmed, at a rate of approximately one in twenty-five. Confirmatory regression results indicated, although not robustly, that conflict party affiliation and male gender were possible risk factors of bystander victimization. The severity of the conflict at the time of intervention was not found to increase the risk of victimization. Our findings highlight the ecological value of naturalistic observation for bystander research, and emphasize the need for evidence-based bystander intervention recommendations.",
author = "Liebst, {Lasse Suonper{\"a}} and Richard Philpot and Mark Levine and Lindegaard, {Marie Rosenkrantz}",
year = "2020",
month = jan,
day = "11",
doi = "10.31234/osf.io/v3me8",
language = "English",
journal = "PsyArXiv",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Would I Be Hurt?

T2 - Cross-National CCTV Footage Shows Low Victimization Risk for Bystander Interveners in Public Conflicts

AU - Liebst, Lasse Suonperä

AU - Philpot, Richard

AU - Levine, Mark

AU - Lindegaard, Marie Rosenkrantz

PY - 2020/1/11

Y1 - 2020/1/11

N2 - Accumulating evidence shows that bystanders witnessing public disputes frequently intervene to help. However, little is known regarding the risks entailed for those bystanders who enter the fray to stop conflicts. This study systematically examined the prevalence of bystander victimizations and associated risk factors. Data were a cross-national sample of CCTV video recordings of real-life public disputes, capturing the potential victimizations of intervening bystanders. Data showed that interveners were rarely physically harmed, at a rate of approximately one in twenty-five. Confirmatory regression results indicated, although not robustly, that conflict party affiliation and male gender were possible risk factors of bystander victimization. The severity of the conflict at the time of intervention was not found to increase the risk of victimization. Our findings highlight the ecological value of naturalistic observation for bystander research, and emphasize the need for evidence-based bystander intervention recommendations.

AB - Accumulating evidence shows that bystanders witnessing public disputes frequently intervene to help. However, little is known regarding the risks entailed for those bystanders who enter the fray to stop conflicts. This study systematically examined the prevalence of bystander victimizations and associated risk factors. Data were a cross-national sample of CCTV video recordings of real-life public disputes, capturing the potential victimizations of intervening bystanders. Data showed that interveners were rarely physically harmed, at a rate of approximately one in twenty-five. Confirmatory regression results indicated, although not robustly, that conflict party affiliation and male gender were possible risk factors of bystander victimization. The severity of the conflict at the time of intervention was not found to increase the risk of victimization. Our findings highlight the ecological value of naturalistic observation for bystander research, and emphasize the need for evidence-based bystander intervention recommendations.

U2 - 10.31234/osf.io/v3me8

DO - 10.31234/osf.io/v3me8

M3 - Journal article

JO - PsyArXiv

JF - PsyArXiv

ER -