Pilarven Study Flashcards
backround of pilarven
- field experiment
- was tested to investigate the bystander effect and diffusion of responsibility
- in the tube in new york
- model and ill/drunk person were both men, the 2 women - recorded the models and the participants actions and words - quantitative and qualitative
method of pilarven
The emergencies were staged in the short 7.5 min journey between two stations on the New York subway (underground). These were trains that did not stop at the stations in between. On each trial four researchers (two males and two females) entered the train. Four different research teams gathered data from 103 trails. The procedure was always the same: The female confederates took seats and kept notes as unobtrusively as possible, while the male “victim” and male model (potential “helper”) stood near a pole in the centre of the train.
The four victims were male, three white and one black, aged between 26 and 35 years, all identically casually dressed. In 38 trials the victim smelled of alcohol and carried alcohol in a brown bag; in 65 trials he appeared sober and carried a cane. All victims participated in both conditions. The models were all white and aged between 24 and 29.
After passing the first station (approximately 70 secs) the victim collapsed. In the “no help” condition, the model did nothing until the train slowed to stop, and then helped the victim to his feet. In the “helping” condition, the helper came to the victim’s assistance.
There were four different helping conditions used in both “drunk” and “cane”
sample/participants in pilarven
- victims: male age 26-35 - one was a “drunk” smelled of alcohol and was carrying a bottle (38 trials), ill person was walking with a crutch/cane (65 trials)
- models: ages 24-29 - only helped after 70 seconds and if nobody else helped
materials/apparatus in pilarven
- group of 4 people to test the experiment, 2 men and 2 women
- equipment like a bottle of alcohol and a crutch
- random participants on the new york tube
- timer - to time how long it takes people to react and how long until model needs to step in
- paper to record times and quantitative and qualitative data
procedure in pilarven
- Using teams of 4 university students (male victim, male model, 2 female observers), a situation was created on the train to see how passengers would react.
- A ‘victim’ staged an ‘emergency’ by collapsing (in the designated ‘critical area’
- After collapsing, the victim lay on his back on the floor. If not helped earlier in the journey by a participant or model, the model assisted the victim at the end of the journey.
- Participants’ reactions were then watched by covert observers.
results in pilarven
- the models were rarely needed, usually helped quickly on their own
- ill victims are more likely to be helped compared to drunk victims
- race has little effect on helping, although a drunk victim is less likely to receive opposite-race help
- males are more likely to help compared to women
- more spontaneous comments were made with the drunk victim compared to the ill victim
conclusions in pilarven
- Passengers were trapped on the train and could not really leave the situation. On the street, the results may have been different.
- It was less effort for passengers to help. If they were sitting on the train anyway and were waiting for the next stop, they may as well help.
- Unlike the situation with Kitty Genovese, it was clear what the problem was for the bystanders who were sitting next to the victim.
- there was no diffusion of responsibility, no matter how big the size of the group was it made no difference in how much help the victim received
The strengths and weaknesses of the different research methods and techniques in pilarven
- positive: high ecological validity
- negative: cannot control extraneous variables
- people may see this experiment done more than once (done again, same train)
- 2 men acted in the experiment as ill and drunk, whereas the 2 women took notes for any actions the model and the participants made - qualitative and quantitative data
- field experiment
- positives: the demand characteristics will be natural as they dont know that they are in an experiment
The strengths and weaknesses of different types of data in pilarven
- quantitative -
negative: no context, opinionated, scientific - qualitative -
negative: bias, subjective
positive: provides context
Ethical considerations in pilarven
- participants were not in any physical or mental harm however were made uncomfortable when placed in the enclosed environment of the train
- no debrief - got off the train as normal
- no consent
- kept confidential
validity in pilarven
- was ecologically valid (followed the same procedure every time) as it happened in a real life situation of a train (realistic)
- internally valid: high risk or extraneous variables, everything we standardised
- could potentially be less internally invalid - far more ill trials compared to drunk trials, could potentially be the same people in the experiment in different days during the time period
- Androcentric only a man that was ill, only the women recorded what they saw
reliability in pilarven
- pretty consistent results throughout the whole of the experiments
- did experiment 102 times
- did have a standardised procedure
- always 4 people in the team, victim and model always men, woman always recording notes, models always had to step in after 70 seconds if no one helps
sampling bias in pilarven
- has no control over who the participants are in the train
- wasn’t any bias in race/gender/class in society as everybody takes the subway
- only done between the same 5 hour period every day (same time of day)
- bias as it could be workers all time - children must be in school
- random, more generalised
ethnocenrism in pilarven
- was ethnocentric as it only happened in new york and most of the experiment took place on the exact same subway route, but lots of different people take the train - could argue that it isn’t ethnocentric
- new york is a diverse culture, has lots of different cultures within the sample
