5.3 Piliavin et al (Subway Samaritans)

Question 1

Diffusion of responsibility

Answer 1

When there are other people available to help in an emergency, an individual is less likely to take action because they feel a reduced sense of personal responsibility.

Question 2

Aim (also mention four variables being studied)

Answer 2

Aimed to study bystander apathy and diffusion of responsibility in a natural setting.
Investigate the effect of the four variables on helping behaviour-
type of victim
race of victim
the behaviour of a model
size of the group of bystanders

Question 3

Research method and design

Answer 3

Field experiment and independent measures design.

Question 4

Four IVs and how they were operationalised
DV

Answer 4

Type of victim (drunk or ill)
Race of victim (black or white)
Behaviour of model (close/distant and eary/late)
size of bystanders (naturally occurring number of passengers)
DV- level of bystander helping (quantitative-number of people who helped along with the time taken for the first passenger to help, qualitative-verbal remarks)

Question 5

Location of experiment

Answer 5

New York City subway
7.5-minute journey from Harlem to Bronx on weekdays
11 a.m to 3 p.m

Question 6

Sample and sampling technique

Answer 6

opportunity sampling technique
passengers of the New York City subway
estimate of 4450 people
45% black 55% white
mean per carriage 43
mean in critical area 8.5

Question 7

Data recorded by the two observers

Answer 7

observer 1- recorded the number of people in the car, the race, sex and location of each passenger in the critical area. Also noted the how many people assisted the victim, as well as race, sex and location
observer 2-recorded the race, sex and location of each passenger in the adjacent area as well as the time taken to assist after the collapse.
Both observers noted the comments made by passengers and tried to elicit them.

Question 8

Victims description (race, age, clothes)

Answer 8

3 white and 1 black
26 to 35 years old
Eisenhower jacket, old trousers, no tie

Question 9

(Behaviour of model) Trial conditions

Answer 9

critical/ early: The model is in the critical area and waited for 70sec before helping
critical/ late: The model is in the critical area and waited for 150sec before helping
adjacent/ early: The model is in the adjacent area and waited for 70sec before helping
adjacent/ late: The model is in the adjacent area and waited for 150sec before helping
no mode: The model did not help until after the trial was over and the train reached the station

Question 10

% of cases where victims received spontaneous help
% of cases where more than one person helped

Answer 10

78%
60%

Question 11

number of trials when the victim with a cane was helped (before model could help)

Answer 11

62/65 trials

Question 12

number of trials when the drunk victim was helped

Answer 12

19/38 trials

Question 13

% of trials in which help was given to
white victims (no model condition)
cane
drunk
black victim (no model condition)
cane drunk

Answer 13

white victims
cane- 100%
drunk- 100%
black victims
cane-100%
drunk- 73%

Question 14

which sex was more likely to help

Answer 14

male, 90% of the time were first helpers

Question 15

cost-benefit model

Answer 15

decision-making process in which a person weighs up both the advantages and disadvantages of helping. If it seems beneficial to help, then the person is more likely to do so; if the risks are too great, they may not help.

Question 16

Factors that influence a person’s decision to help

Answer 16

type of victim (cane will be more helped than a drunk person)
gender of helper (men more likely to help than females)
similarity of the victim to the helper (more likely to help own race, especially if drunk)
duration of emergency (the longer the emergency continues, less likely that anyone will help)

Question 17

methodological strengths

Answer 17

good ecological validity - a field experiment, participants are unaware they are in an experiment so behaviour is natural
quantitative measures- objective
two observers
qualitative data also recorded
large sample size
standardisation- victims wore the same clothes, collapsed at the same time

Question 18

methodological weakness

Answer 18

less control over extraneous variables- weather conditions or delays
participants could be exposed to the condition more than once so demand characteristics- used the same route every time
all participants from New York City- unrepresentative
only one black victim

Question 19

ethical issues

Answer 19

lack of informed consent- unaware they were in a study so could not give permission to take part in the study.
debrief- could not debrief due to the nature of the subway and a large number of people, participants may have left shocked or guilty
may have suffered psychological distress

Question 20

real-life applications

Answer 20

Educating students on the cognitive process people go through in emergency situations may help them to change their response and be more likely to help.
Understanding the cost-benefit matrix can help in override negative or non-altruistic feelings in order to help a victim