Levine

Question 1

research method

Answer 1

correlational analysis

Question 2

aim/hypothesis

Answer 2

to see if the tendency of people within a city to offer non emergency help to strangers was stable across different situations

Question 3

DROPPED PEN

Answer 3

214 men 210 women approached
10-15feet away from subject, dropped pen
and continued on walking
P’s scores on if they told them or picked it up

Question 4

HURT LEG

Answer 4

493 P’s approached
walking with heavy limp and a leg brace dropped magazines and struggled to pick them up
within 20 feet of subject

Question 5

HELPING A BLIND PERSON

Answer 5

281 trails conducted
dark glasses carrying a cane waited before lights t urned green , trail terminated after 60 secs or when light turned red
scored at minimum if P’s told them light was green

Question 6

data collected

Answer 6

from 23 countries including mexico, spain, sweden

Question 7

standardised procedure

Answer 7

all experimenters male, college age, dressed neatly, all trained, had detailed instructions

Question 8

results

Answer 8

(% helped)
Brazil highest = 93.3% Malaysia lowest = 40.3%

significant relationship between measure of purchasing power and overall helping behaviour

Question 9

ethical guidelines

Answer 9

not very ethical

Question 10

links to area

Answer 10

culture people live in influences levels of hell given

Question 11

link to key theme (responses to people in need)

Answer 11

level of help varied depending on what country, cultural factors influence amount of help received