What factors shape bystanders’ defensive responses to non-consensual sexting? An approach from social and behavioral theoretical frameworks
Non-consensual sexting (NCS) is a form of cyberviolence with serious consequences, particularly during adolescence—a developmental stage characterized by peer influence and identity formation. While conventional approaches focused on victims and perpetrators, increasing attention is being directed t...
| Autores: | , , , |
|---|---|
| Tipo de recurso: | artículo |
| Estado: | Versión publicada |
| Fecha de publicación: | 2026 |
| País: | España |
| Institución: | Universidad de Sevilla (US) |
| Repositorio: | idUS. Depósito de Investigación de la Universidad de Sevilla |
| OAI Identifier: | oai:dnet:idus________::db5f3e8f05c82a5da351302807403b0f |
| Acceso en línea: | https://hdl.handle.net/11441/183824 https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-026-09085-7 |
| Access Level: | acceso abierto |
| Palabra clave: | Non-consensual sexting Bystanders Defensive response Adolescents Theoretical frameworks |
| Sumario: | Non-consensual sexting (NCS) is a form of cyberviolence with serious consequences, particularly during adolescence—a developmental stage characterized by peer influence and identity formation. While conventional approaches focused on victims and perpetrators, increasing attention is being directed toward bystanders, who have the potential to intervene and disrupt these harmful dynamics. Unlike previous research, which often applies a single theoretical model, this study comparatively explored the applicability of three theoretical frameworks: the Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB), the Theory of Normative Social Behavior (TNSB), and Social Learning Theory (SLT) in explaining bystanders’ defensive responses. The analytic sample consisted of 2,496 Spanish adolescents (50% boys and 50% girls) aged 11–18 (M = 14.07; SD = 1.39). Structural equation modeling revealed SLT had the highest explanatory power (55.6%), followed by TPB (37.9%), and TNSB (28.5%). Key factors included subjective norms, intention to help, and self-efficacy. By adopting a comparative theoretical approach that considers both individual and contextual factors, this study identifies the most influential variables within each framework and provides a clearer account of the mechanisms underlying bystander intervention in NCS. The results highlight the need for multilevel strategies that integrate individual and contextual influences to promote defensive bystander responses and challenge the normalization of NCS. |
|---|