Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Validation reveals self-efficacy is linked to bystander behaviors in alcohol risk scenarios, suggesting a need for targeted interventions.
OBJECTIVE: This study evaluated the psychometrics of two new measures of willingness and self-efficacy to intervene in alcohol-related risk situations involving others. Items assess the constructs across bystander scenarios that vary by situation (before, during, after risk), one's relation to the target (friend/stranger), and the gender of the target (man/woman). METHOD: 22.0 years, 46.0% women, 70.7% White, 23.3% Latinx) completed the new measures and related measures to assess validity, and a subsample was retested 2 weeks later. Multivariate variance decomposition was used to determine how the scenario components influenced variance; bivariate correlations evaluated validity, and intraclass correlations evaluated test-retest reliability. RESULTS: Models for willingness and self-efficacy constructs fit the data well. The largest component contributing to both measures was the general component, reflecting overall willingness/self-efficacy regardless of situation, relation, and gender components (αs > .90). For willingness, the next largest component was situation, with "after" drinking showing the greatest variability but the lowest mean. For self-efficacy, the second most important component was relation to the target, with friend showing higher self-efficacy than stranger. Participants indicated higher willingness and self-efficacy when the target was a woman, and women participants reported higher willingness than men. Validity was supported by significant correlations with bystander behaviors and alcohol-related constructs. Test-retest reliability indicated moderate stability for both measures (intraclass correlations = 0.50-0.64). CONCLUSIONS: These measures provide valid and reliable tools for measuring bystander intervention willingness and self-efficacy in alcohol-related risk situations and offer utility for the evaluation of bystander intervention programs. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2026 APA, all rights reserved).
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Barnett et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: