Chapter 10 Lecture 1 Flashcards
After the murder case of Kitty Genovese, in which no one helped, Latane and Darley (1970) wondered why no one helped in this emergency situation.
They came up with the idea that deciding to intervene takes a lot more processing then just a yes or no answer.
What 5 steps are needed before you decide to help
1) notice the event
2) interpret the event as an emergency
3) accept personal responsibility
4) know what to do
5) decide to act.
They argued that we need to go through all 5 steps IN ORDER to help, and if not all 5 are completed, then helping shuts down.
Step 1: noticing the event.
If we are not ____ to help, then we might pretend:
if we are not motivated to help, then we might pretend not to notice.
Explain the study done by Pancer et al (1979) which involves Latane and Darley’s first step of helping (noticing the event)
- they set up a table in the mall and had confederates sitting there to collect money for charity
- 2 conditions:
1) large sign on the table indicating that they were collecting money for charity
2) they don’t have the sign, so it was less obvious.
Measured: how much distance was there when people walking why table.
- when there was a big sign, people kept more of a distance, but when there was no sign, then people were much closer.
therefore, when people saw that there was a need, then they maintained a distance as to not notice so they don’t have to help.
Explain how the findings involving the Mall Study of Pancer et. al 1979 can be applied in the real world
STEP 1: NOTICING THE EVENT
when people saw that there was a need, then they maintained a distance as to not notice so they don’t have to help.
- ex/ homeless people on the street asking for money and we pretend to to see them.
- if there are OTHER PEOPLE that are not noticing them, we are also more likely to not help and pretend we don’t notice the event.
-if this phase is not completed then the person will not help at all.
Explain the study by Latane and Darley in which they found out that if there are other people who do not notice the event, people are less likely to react, or they will also pretend to “not notice”
they had participants in the lab filling out a questionnaire
- researchers started to pump in smoke at the lab
- if you had a group of people in the lab, the first person would notice, then second person was not looking, so you would continue to finish your questionnaire, and this happened with the 3rd person who would look at you
so they found that the there was a group of people, people were less likely to react or take a longer time to react to the smoke.
Step 2: interpret the event as an emergency.
- you ask yourself a question: is this situation an actual emergency and one that requires help?
In lateen and barley’s experiment where they pumped the room with smoke, some people didn’t come out. What was the reasoning for people who did not come out?
there were people who came out and reported the smoke coming out and others didn’t
people who didn’t report it said that it might be steam, smog, or an air conditioning pipe that broke through.
So, they had convinced themselves that it was not an emergency. Sometimes the way a person behaves will tell us that a situation is an emergency or not.
Step 2: interpret the event as an emergency.
the study by demoing looked at nonverbal behaviours when someone could convey they needed help. Explain this study
- done in the library
- had a male confederate walking in to the reference desk and a $10 bill drops out of pocket
- they had arranged it so that atoner confederate came alone and scooped up the money
3 conditions:
- the confederate ends up walking away and doesn’tt seem to notice that he dropped the money
- he looks puzzled and starts digging around his pockets (needs help)
- then, building on the 2nd condition they make eye contact with another student who wouldn’t seen the situation
DV: helping the guy
- first condition: 13% helped him
- second: 40% helped hikm
third: 37% helped him - when it was CLEAR that the guy needed help then more people are willing to help. When it is obvious they need help, and there is no doubt, more help is likely to be given.
Step 2: interpret the event as an emergency.
In a study done by yakimortich and salt (1993), as participants were filling out questionnaires in the lab, someone was learning the windows. What happened?
- staged it that the person cleaning the windows had a dramatic fall
2 condition;
- the window cleaner is holding onto his ankle and is screaming/moaning (NEED HELP)
- set up the same way but here he asks for “HELP”
-findings: they found that in the first condition, 30% of the participants left the lab to go help him, in the second condition, there were 80% of the participants that left to help the guy.
Step 3: accepting responsibility.:
The more people at the scene of the emergency,
the less likely people will help.
Step 3: accepting responsibility.
Explain the meta review done by Latane and Nida (review of 50 studies)
- looked at chances of being helped. It is greater when there is only one person at the scene then when there is more than one bystander
why is it greater when there is only one person at the scene then when there is more than one bystander ?
because of diffusion of responsibility.
Step 3: accepting responsibility.
Explain the study done by Moriarty on th ebeach
-had a confederate go to the beach and put down his blanket and radio next to another person at the beach
2 condtions:
- would turn to the man and say excuse me do you have a match
or - excuse me I am going to the boardwalk, would you watch my things? -> accept responsibility for looking after his things
- another confederate come along and steals the radio.
- in the first condition, 20% of the men helped him out
- in the second condition, 95% of the people actually intervened.
4) know what to do
Explainthe Pilavin and piliavin (1972) study on public transport
- would stage emergency on public transportation
- -had a confederate appear to collapse on the subway with blood trickling out o the corner of his mouth
- 2 condition
- everyone on the subway were participants
- had another confederate on the subway who was dressed as a medical intern so they had knowledge and knew what to do and was in the best position to do so.
- found that in the second condition, people were less likely to help because there was someone else with better knowledge of how to help
- in the first condition, people were more likely to help.
- if you don’t know how to help then the process of helping can break down
5) deciding to act
- people tend to weigh out costs
- costs could be interfering in a fight someone stealing something, not enough time, not enough energy etc. or helping might be embarrassing to us or the other person.
Explain the study done by Darley and Batson on theology students. DV?
- one of their requirements was to give a talk or a sermon in another building.
- hald of them were told to give the talk on the bibles’‘story “parable of the good samaritan’
- basically we should help our fellow human beings no matter what group they are from
- the other hald had to give the talk on something non-helping related
- person slumped in a back ally groaning and coughing while participants were walking by
- the other variable was how late you were to your sermon talk (deliberately made late)
DV: how many students stopped to help the person in need
- they found that the TOPIC of the sermon had no effect and the only thing that mattered was how late they were
- the later they were, the less likely they were to help the person in need of help.
- trying to showw that anyone of us is subject to a situational pressure in this case being in a hurry can override our personalities to the point where we don’t help the person regardless of whoever we are.
