Table:
incident characteristics
unwanted sexualized behaviours
discriminatory behaviours

percent
95% confidence interval
percent
95% confidence interval

from
to
from
to

number of perpetrators

always one
24
19
30
37
28
46

always two or more
24
19
30
22
15
32

it varied
37
31
44
30
22
40

don't know
10
7
15
f
..
..

gender of perpetrators

one man or multiple men
44
37
50
56
46
65

one woman or multiple women
f
..
..
f
..
..

sometimes men, sometimes women
45
39
52
32
23
41

don't know
f
..
..
f
..
..

bystanders present

yes, in at least one instance
88
84
92
75
66
82

no, in at least one instance
64
58
70
45
36
55

don't know
7
4
11
f
..
..

bystanders took action

yes, in at least one instance
40
34
47
34
24
45

no, in at least one instance
87
82
91
83
73
89

don't know
7
5
12
f
..
..

type of bystander action

separated those involved
29
20
40
f
..
..

asked if needed help
31
22
42
f
..
..

confronted the perpetrator
53
42
63
f
..
..

created a distraction
46
35
57
f
..
..

ask others to step in
f
..
..
f
..
..

tell someone in authority
f
..
..
f
..
..

encourage the behaviour
16
10
25
f
..
..

something else
23
15
34
f
..
..

relationship of perpetrator

student at their school
94
90
96
86
78
91

friend or acquaintance
53
46
59
37
28
47

stranger
11
8
16
f
..
..

student at another school
15
10
20
f
..
..

dating partner or married or common-law spouse
11
7
16
f
..
..

casual dating partner
5
3
9
f
..
..

member of a club or team to which they belong
7
4
11
f
..
..

staff member, security staff, tutor or other
8
5
12
19
12
28

supervisor or boss, coach, professor or instructor at their school, teaching assistant
f
..
..
f
..
..

don't know
f
..
..
f
..
..

Statement: the most common type of intervention taken by others at cmcs was confronting the perpetrator responsible for the behaviour.
Question: what was the percent of intervention taken by others at cmcs confronting the perpetrator responsible for the behaviour?
Answer: [53.0]