New research challenges the widely held belief that encouraging students to become 'upstanders'—those who intervene when they witness bullying—is an effective anti-bullying strategy. The findings, based on several large-scale international studies, indicate that such interventions may do little to reduce bullying or improve outcomes for victims, and in some cases could even be counterproductive.
The concept of mobilising bystanders was popularised in the late 1990s by Finnish psychologist Christina Salmivalli, who argued that because bullying occurs in groups, interventions should target the whole group. This approach has since been incorporated into many evidence-based anti-bullying programs in Australia and worldwide. However, recent high-quality studies have failed to confirm the assumption that bystander defence reduces bullying.
A 2023 Dutch study involving more than 5,000 students found that victims who were defended by peers at the start of the school year did not differ from non-defended victims in self-esteem, depression, or the severity of bullying experienced by the end of the year. Similarly, a 2025 Chinese study of over 1,000 students found that bystander defence did not reduce the likelihood of a victim being bullied six months later. A 2025 Finnish study of more than 6,000 students also found no difference in bullying or psychological problems between defended and non-defended victims.
Further meta-analyses have questioned the effectiveness of actively encouraging peer intervention. A 2021 meta-analysis distinguished between different types of peer involvement and found that while informal peer strategies (such as general class discussions) were associated with greater program effectiveness, actively encouraging bystanders to intervene was linked to less effectiveness in reducing victimisation. A 2022 meta-analysis also found that 'non-punitive' methods, where peers help find solutions, were associated with reduced program effectiveness.
These findings do not necessarily mean that bystander intervention never helps, but they suggest that the effectiveness may depend on factors such as the helper's status and relationship to the victim. The research highlights the need for more rigorous evaluation of anti-bullying programs and caution in promoting upstander strategies without evidence of their impact on actual bullying outcomes.
