Gaming for Good: Evaluating an Interactive Online Bystander Intervention

Treatment:

The treatment is supplied on a proprietary website. It consists of an interactive film and a subsequent quiz. Both the film and the quiz follow the gamification approach by using game principles and design elements. The interactive film puts the viewer in the position of a witness who observes a potentially violent situation. After each sequence of the film, a pop-up asks the viewer to choose one of two options for action. Depending on these choices, the plot takes a different course. The subsequent quiz refers to the content of the film by asking for offender characteristics, progression of events, and optimal bystander behavior. At the end, the viewer receives feedback and a score as a result of his decisions.

Experimental Design:

We conduct a randomized controlled trial (RCT) by randomly assigning the participants into two treatment groups and two control groups. The treatment groups participate in the interactive film and the subsequent quiz. The control groups receive no treatment (TBD). The two treatment groups (and the two control groups) respectively differ in the way that two major outcomes are measured. Thereby we want to control for priming effects.

Data Collection:

We draw a random sample of 1,600 observations from a pool that is representative of the German working population. We randomly assign the observation units into the four groups as described above. Data collection takes place via online survey at three points in time: directly after treatment and two follow-ups, 2-weeks and 8-weeks post-intervention.

For the follow-up survey, we send the respondents reminders via e-mail. To ensure compliance with the European General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), we technically and organizationally separate survey data from (personal) contact data.

Outcomes:

To assess the success of the intervention, we select outcome variables that are informative about whether the intervention is able to increase the willingness to intervene and convey behaviors for safe and effective intervention. As primary outcomes, we thus use bystander attitudes and bystander efficacy. Additionally, we use the willingness to donate for victims of violence as an incentivized outcome that approximates actual bystander helping behavior.

To further pin down the importance of different channels, we use secondary outcome variables. The survey questionnaire permits the investigation of various explanations including the barriers to intervention (detection, interpretation, assumption of responsibility, and perception of subjective intervention skills) and the parameters of the Reasoned Action Approach (attitudes, social pressure, and perceived control).

2020-05-06

2020-07-16

Bystander attitudes;
Bystander efficacy;
Bystander behavior (incentivized)

A. Barriers to intervention:
Detection,
Interpretation,
Responsibility,
Perceived ability.

B. Reasoned Action Approach:
Attitudes,
Perceived norms,
Perceived behavioral control,
Behavioral intention.

C. Further Correlates of Bystander Behavior/ Civic Courage:
Acceptance of negative social consequences,
Empathy,
Anticipated guilt,
Indignation.

Randomized Controlled Trial (RCT).

Randomization done if office by a computer.

Individual

No

1,600 individuals

1,600 individuals

800 indviduals control, 800 individuals interactive film and quiz