Tag: gyaninani

Violence, Fear, Perception and Agency

Deepali Bhattacharya

In conversation with TD, Clinical Psychologist  ·  An eleven-part reflection, with notes and references

Epilogue

As I finished writing these reflections, I realised that this series was never really about one train, one crime or one headline.

It was about us.

About how we respond when violence enters our lives—not always directly, but through the stories we hear, the images we carry and the memories we inherit.

The questions in these pages do not belong to psychologists alone.

They belong to commuters.

Parents.

Teachers.

Police officers.

Journalists.

Policy-makers.

Neighbours.

And to every one of us who has ever looked at a disturbing headline and wondered,

“What is happening to us?”

Perhaps the better question is,

“What are we going to do next?”

Because, in the end, TD’s final words remain the simplest and perhaps the wisest:

“Keep living your life. What you are going to do matters more.”

References

Bandura, A. (1977). Social learning theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: W. H. Freeman.

Bandura, A. (2006). Toward a psychology of human agency. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 1(2), 164–180.

Bonanno, G. A. (2004). Loss, trauma, and human resilience: Have we underestimated the human capacity to thrive after extremely aversive events? American Psychologist, 59(1), 20–28.

Darley, J. M., & Latáné, B. (1968). Bystander intervention in emergencies: Diffusion of responsibility. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 8(4), 377–383.

Entman, R. M. (1993). Framing: Toward clarification of a fractured paradigm. Journal of Communication, 43(4), 51–58.

Erikson, K. T. (1976). Everything in its path: Destruction of community in the Buffalo Creek flood. New York: Simon & Schuster.

Fischer, P., Krueger, J. I., Greitemeyer, T., Vogrincic, C., Kastenmüller, A., Frey, D., Heene, M., Wicher, M., & Kainbacher, M. (2011). The bystander-effect: A meta-analytic review on bystander intervention in dangerous and non-dangerous emergencies. Psychological Bulletin, 137(4), 517–537.

Foa, E. B., & Kozak, M. J. (1986). Emotional processing of fear: Exposure to corrective information. Psychological Bulletin, 99(1), 20–35.

Freyd, J. J. (1996). Betrayal trauma: The logic of forgetting childhood abuse. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Gerbner, G., & Gross, L. (1976). Living with television: The violence profile. Journal of Communication, 26(2), 172–199.

Halbwachs, M. (1992). On collective memory (L. A. Coser, Ed. & Trans.). Chicago: University of Chicago Press. (Original work published 1950)

Hirschberger, G. (2018). Collective trauma and the social construction of meaning. Frontiers in Psychology, 9, 1441.

Holman, E. A., Garfin, D. R., & Silver, R. C. (2014). Media’s role in broadcasting acute stress following the Boston Marathon bombings. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 111(1), 93–98.

International Institute for Population Sciences (IIPS) & ICF. (2021). National Family Health Survey (NFHS-5), 2019–21: India. Mumbai: IIPS.

Janoff-Bulman, R. (1992). Shattered assumptions: Towards a new psychology of trauma. New York: Free Press.

Kasperson, R. E., Renn, O., Slovic, P., Brown, H. S., Emel, J., Goble, R., Kasperson, J. X., & Ratick, S. (1988). The social amplification of risk: A conceptual framework. Risk Analysis, 8(2), 177–187.

Latáné, B., & Darley, J. M. (1970). The unresponsive bystander: Why doesn’t he help? New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.

LeDoux, J. E. (1996). The emotional brain: The mysterious underpinnings of emotional life. New York: Simon & Schuster.

Lieberman, M. D., Eisenberger, N. I., Crockett, M. J., Tom, S. M., Pfeifer, J. H., & Way, B. M. (2007). Putting feelings into words: Affect labeling disrupts amygdala activity in response to affective stimuli. Psychological Science, 18(5), 421–428.

Loewenstein, G. F., Weber, E. U., Hsee, C. K., & Welch, N. (2001). Risk as feelings. Psychological Bulletin, 127(2), 267–286.

Masten, A. S. (2001). Ordinary magic: Resilience processes in development. American Psychologist, 56(3), 227–238.

McCombs, M. E., & Shaw, D. L. (1972). The agenda-setting function of mass media. Public Opinion Quarterly, 36(2), 176–187.

National Crime Records Bureau. (2026). Crime in India 2024. New Delhi: Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India.

Öhman, A., & Mineka, S. (2001). Fears, phobias, and preparedness: Toward an evolved module of fear and fear learning. Psychological Review, 108(3), 483–522.

Philpot, R., Liebst, L. S., Levine, M., Bernasco, W., & Lindegaard, M. R. (2020). Would I be helped? Cross-national CCTV footage shows that intervention is the norm in public conflicts. American Psychologist, 75(1), 66–75.

Slovic, P. (1987). Perception of risk. Science, 236(4799), 280–285.

Slovic, P. (2007). “If I look at the mass I will never act”: Psychic numbing and genocide. Judgment and Decision Making, 2(2), 79–95.

Small, D. A., & Loewenstein, G. (2003). Helping a victim or helping the victim: Altruism and identifiability. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 26(1), 5–16.

Snyder, C. R. (2002). Hope theory: Rainbows in the mind. Psychological Inquiry, 13(4), 249–275.

Thompson, R. R., Jones, N. M., Holman, E. A., & Silver, R. C. (2019). Media exposure to mass violence events can fuel a cycle of distress. Science Advances, 5(4), eaav3502.

Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1973). Availability: A heuristic for judging frequency and probability. Cognitive Psychology, 5(2), 207–232.

World Health Organization. (2002). World report on violence and health. Geneva: WHO.

World Health Organization. (2009). Violence prevention: The evidence — Changing cultural and social norms that support violence. Geneva: WHO.

Violence, Fear, Perception and Agency

Deepali Bhattacharya

In conversation with TD, Clinical Psychologist  ·  An eleven-part reflection, with notes and references

PART XI

Keep Living Your Life

“The final word should never belong to fear.”

As our conversation drew to a close, I asked TD one last question.

“After everything we have discussed—the violence, the fear, the uncertainty—what would you like people to carry with them?”

He did not answer immediately.

Then he said something beautifully simple.

“Keep living your life.”

The sentence stayed with me.

Not because it dismissed fear.

But because it placed fear in its rightful place.

Fear has a purpose.

It warns us.

It prepares us.

Sometimes it protects us.

But it was never meant to become the author of our lives.

Violence seeks more than victims.

It seeks to alter the way the rest of us live.

It asks us to withdraw.

To distrust.

To isolate ourselves.

To become suspicious of one another.

When that happens, violence succeeds far beyond the original act.

Perhaps resilience is not the absence of fear.

Perhaps resilience is quietly refusing to surrender our humanity because of it. ²³

This does not mean becoming careless.

It does not mean ignoring danger.

It means refusing to allow danger to define every decision we make.

As I look back on my years in the development sector, I realise that the people who have inspired me most were not fearless.

The widow who learnt a new livelihood after unimaginable loss.

The survivor who chose to testify.

The social worker who continued visiting difficult communities.

The police officer who listened with compassion.

The teacher who believed one child could still change.

None of them were untouched by fear.

They simply chose not to let fear make all their decisions.

Perhaps that is what agency finally looks like.

Not extraordinary courage.

Quiet courage.

The courage to continue caring.

To continue trusting carefully.

To continue building communities.

To continue believing that kindness is worthwhile.

To continue living.

Because the opposite of violence is not only justice.

It is also connection.

The opposite of fear is not bravado.

It is agency.

And perhaps the opposite of despair is not certainty.

It is hope expressed through action.

The headlines will change tomorrow.

Another story will replace today’s.

But long after the breaking news fades, the deeper question remains.

What kind of society are we becoming?

And equally important,

What kind of society are we choosing to build?

A QUESTION THAT STAYED WITH ME…

What if our greatest contribution is not that we lived in safe times…

…but that we helped create a safer, kinder and more compassionate society for those who come after us?

Perhaps that is where every meaningful conversation on violence should finally arrive.

Not at fear.

But at responsibility.

Not at despair.

But at agency.

And certainly not at the breaking news.

But beyond it.

Notes:

22. WHO (2009) reviews the evidence that changing cultural and social norms — including the everyday speech, jokes and silences that signal acceptability — is a core violence-prevention strategy in its own right.

23.  Resilience research supports this quiet framing: Bonanno (2004) shows resilience is common rather than exceptional, and Masten (2001) famously calls it “ordinary magic” — arising from everyday human systems of relationship, meaning and agency rather than rare heroism.

Violence, Fear, Perception and Agency

Deepali Bhattacharya

In conversation with TD, Clinical Psychologist  ·  An eleven-part reflection, with notes and references

PART X

Kindness Is Not Softness. It Is Prevention.

“Violence rarely begins with a weapon. More often, it begins with everyday indifference.”

When people speak about preventing violence, the conversation usually turns towards stricter laws, policing, surveillance or harsher punishments.

These conversations are important.

But they often begin too late.

By the time the law intervenes, someone has already been hurt.

TD offered another perspective that stayed with me.

“Kindness,” he said, “is prevention.” ²¹

At first, I wondered whether the idea was too simple.

Then I thought about the people I have met over the years.

A teacher humiliating a child in front of the class.

Parents constantly comparing siblings.

A husband controlling every decision his wife makes.

Friends laughing at sexist jokes.

Neighbours choosing silence when they hear repeated screams next door.

None of these moments make the evening news.

Yet they quietly shape the emotional climate in which violence either grows or is challenged.

Violence is rarely born overnight.

It rehearses itself.

In language.

In ridicule.

In entitlement.

In humiliation.

In the belief that some people deserve less dignity than others.

Perhaps this is why TD insisted that we pay attention to our ordinary conversations.

Every joke that normalises dowry.

Every casual remark that blames survivors.

Every statement that dismisses emotional pain.

Every act of public humiliation.

These may appear insignificant.

They are not.

Children are always listening.

Young people are always observing.

Communities are always learning what is considered acceptable. ²²

If cruelty can be learnt, compassion can also be learnt.

If disrespect spreads through imitation, so can kindness.

I often think of development work in the same way.

Communities do not change only because policies change.

They change because everyday behaviour changes.

One respectful conversation.

One teacher who listens.

One police officer who responds with dignity.

One neighbour who chooses to intervene.

These actions may never become headlines.

Yet they prevent stories that otherwise might have.

Perhaps kindness has been misunderstood.

It is not a weakness.

It is one of society’s earliest warning systems.

It notices suffering before statistics do.

A QUESTION THAT STAYED WITH ME…

If kindness is prevention, what ultimately gives us the courage to keep choosing it in a world where violence still exists?

That was the final question I asked TD.

Notes:

21.  Public health reaches the same conclusion: the WHO’s World Report on Violence and Health (2002) locates the roots of violence in an ecology of relationships, communities and norms — prevention therefore begins long before law enforcement. On learned aggression, see Bandura (1977).

22.  WHO (2009) reviews the evidence that changing cultural and social norms — including the everyday speech, jokes and silences that signal acceptability — is a core violence-prevention strategy in its own right.

Violence, Fear, Perception and Agency

Deepali Bhattacharya

In conversation with TD, Clinical Psychologist  ·  An eleven-part reflection, with notes and references

PART IX

Agency: The Antidote to Fear

“Fear tells us what we cannot control. Agency reminds us what we still can.”

After several conversations on fear, I found myself asking TD a question that many of us quietly ask ourselves after every disturbing news report.

“What can one ordinary person possibly do?”

It is an honest question.

We cannot eliminate violence.

We cannot predict every danger.

We cannot control the choices other people make.

So where does that leave us?

TD’s answer shifted the conversation in an important way.

“Psychology uses a simple but powerful word—agency.” ¹⁹

Agency is our ability to recognise that even when circumstances are beyond our control, our response is not.

Fear narrows our world.

Agency begins to expand it again.

It is the difference between saying,

“The world has become unsafe.”

And asking,

“What can I do to become safer?”

The difference may appear small.

Psychologically, it is enormous.

Agency restores something that violence often steals.

Choice.

I have seen this repeatedly while working with women rebuilding their lives after violence.

The turning point rarely arrives through one dramatic event.

It begins quietly.

A woman decides to attend a support group.

Another applies for a job.

Someone learns self-defence.

Someone else files a complaint after years of silence.

Each decision appears ordinary.

Yet together they represent something extraordinary.

They mark the return of agency.

The same principle applies beyond individual lives.

Communities become stronger when people know one another.

When neighbours exchange phone numbers.

When commuters intervene instead of merely recording.

When schools teach children not only mathematics and science but also empathy, emotional regulation and responsible citizenship.

Preparedness is not paranoia.

It is confidence.

The purpose of preparedness is not to convince ourselves that danger is everywhere.

It is to reassure ourselves that if danger appears, we are not entirely helpless.

Perhaps that is why agency is so deeply connected with hope.

Hope is not wishful thinking.

Hope is believing that our actions still matter. ²⁰

A QUESTION THAT STAYED WITH ME…

If agency helps us respond after violence, what helps prevent violence from taking root in the first place?

Perhaps the answer lies much closer to home than we imagine.

Notes:

19.  Bandura (1997, 2006) places agency and self-efficacy at the centre of psychological functioning: the belief that one’s actions can influence outcomes is among the strongest protections against helplessness.

20.  This is close to Snyder’s (2002) hope theory, in which hope is not optimism but the combination of goals, pathways and the sense of one’s own capacity to act.