Most studies examining bystanders' reactions to a violent attack have used an experimental or hypothetical situation involving a single victim. This study compared the intention to intervene on behalf of three hypothetical victims: a woman, a child, and a dog. In a sample of 700 college students, there was not a significant difference in intention to intervene by type of victim. However, there was a significant interaction between the sex of the bystander and the type of victim. Women were most likely to intervene on behalf of children, while men were most likely to intervene to aid a woman. The study concludes that people who perceived themselves to be stronger, more aggressive, and more sympathetic than others were most likely to intend to intervene. It also concludes that men and women apparently have different views of the "deservingness" of various victims, perceptions of the situation (including perceptions of one's capabilities) are more important than actual capabilities such as the bystander's size, and a bystander's experience in breaking up fights is an important predictor of intention to intervene. Notes, tables, figures, references