Piliavin Flashcards
What is the nickname for the study?
The Good Samaritan Study
What was the background to the study?
Kitty Genovese was murdered by a man at night, people heard her screams but nobody helped her or called the police.
What does bystander behaviour mean?
What people do when watching an emergency situation.
What does bystander apathy mean?
The bystander doesn’t really care about what is happening.
What is diffusion of responsibility?
Less likely to take responsibility when others are present.
What is your pluralistic ignorance?
Majority of group members privately reject the norm, assume incorrectly that others accept it.
What is cost-benefit analysis?
What are the benefits/costs of helping.
What is attribution effect?
Explain the cause of a behaviour.
What is altruistic behaviour?
Doing for others without expectation/reward.
What did Darley & Latane do in their experiments?
Woman falls off chair in next room, epileptic seizure, smoke room studies.
Found people are more likely to be a good samaritan if they observed someone else behave in a prosocial manner.
What are the similarities between Darley & Latane and Milgram?
Pre-recorded sections (seizure/screams)
Lab experiments (high levels of control)
Ethics (deception & distress)
What are the aims?
- To test bystander behaviour/apathy in a real life setting.
- To see the effect of (IV) on helping behaviour.
What were the research methods used?
Field experiment using observational techniques, independent measures, snapshot study
What were the main IV’s?
Type of victim (drunk/cane)
Race of the victim (black/white)
What were the additional IV’s?
Impact of modelling (intervene/not intervene)
Group size (large/small)
What were the DV’s?
Number of people who helped
Time taken to help
Gender, race, location of helpers
Whether people moved away
Any comments made
What was the sample?
Estimated 4450 travellers on train
45% black and 55% white
Average number in each carriage - 43
Average number in critical area - 8.5
What sampling method was used?
Opportunity sampling (not biased, didn’t know anyone on the train)
How many researchers were there?
16 researchers, 4 per group (2 male, 2 female), always in the same groups and roles.
What roles did the males/females always play?
Males were always the victim & model, females were always observers.
What did the victims look like?
Victims were dressed casually, 3 white & 1 black, 26-35 years old.
How many trials occurred and when?
There were 103 trials, between 11am and 3 pm, 15th April to 26th June 1968, 7 1/2 min journey.
How were the researchers spread on the train?
Boarded train using different doors, each team varied the location, females sat outside critical area & recorded data. Model & victim stayed standing, victim stood next to pole in centre of critical area.
When did the models help?
Critical area - early = 70 seconds
Critical area - late = 150 seconds
Adjacent area - early = 70 seconds
Adjacent area - late = 150 seconds
What types of data were created?
Quantitive & qualitative data - mixed methods.
What was the quan data produced?
- number of helpers & speed at which they helped
- race, gender, location of helpers
- anyone moved out of critical areas
What was the qual data produced?
- comments made by passengers
What were some results of the drunk/cane condition?
- cane were helped 95% of the time
- drunk were helped 50% of the time
- In 60% of the trials, help was given by 2+ helpers
- help was offered faster in the cane condition than the drunk
What were some results of the race & gender condition?
- if the victim was black, they received less help, less quickly than if the victim was white (especially in the drunk condition)
- a white person was more likely to help a white victim than a black victim in the drunk condition
-males were more helpful -> 90% of the first helpers were males (more male ppts & victims were male)
What were some results for the modelling condition?
- if the model intervened early, more people helped the victim
- small amount of data -> victims were already helped before model stepped in
What were some results for the group size condition?
- if there was more passengers in the immediate vicinity, the more likely it would be for help to be given
- found the reverse of Darley + Latane -> diffusion of responsibility not found (lab experiment -> no. of helpers counterbalanced), helpers could see the victim
What were some results for the comments made?
- more comments were made in the drunk condition than the cane
- most comments were made when help was given within 70 seconds
- many women made comments
-> ‘it’s for men to help him’ ‘i never saw this kind of thing before - i don’t know where to look’ ‘you feel so bad when you don’t know what to do’
What were some conclusions made?
- Someone who appears drunk will get less help than someone who appears ill
- With a male victim & public helping situation, men were more likely to get help
- No diffusion of responsibility was found
- Same race helping occurs more when victim was drunk
- Results explained using cost-benefit analysis
What did findings tell us about human behaviour?
- Contradicts previous lab research - provides useful, valid information
- Realistic setting & large sample - reflects what happens in real life
- Explains many emergency situations
