Piliavin

Question 1

Key terms

Answer 1

Bystander behaviour
Diffusion of responsibility
Modelling

Question 2

Define diffusion of responsibility

Answer 2

responsibility for the situation is spread (diffused) among people present

because more people present, less personally responsible people feel, the less likely they are to help

Question 3

Background of Piliavin

Answer 3

A study tested theory of diffusion of responsibility

students sat in booths and confederate has fake epileptic fit, they were either by themself or in a group

found people are more likely to help if they were on their own than if they were in a group

Pilivan recognised that research into bystander behaviour were laboratory settings and lacked ecological validity, so planned field experiment

Question 4

Aim of Piliavn

Answer 4

1) to study bystander behaviour in a realistic setting

2) to see whether bystander behaviour is affected by
(a) victim’s responsibility for being in situation
(b) race of victim
(c) effect of modelling helping behaviour
(d) size of group

Question 5

Sample of Piliavin

Answer 5

4,450 men and women
used New York subway on weekdays

Question 6

Variables in Pilivan

Answer 6

IVs
i. type of victim (drunk or can)
ii. race of victim (black or white)
iii. early model (70s) or late model (150s) or no model
iv. size of witnessing groups (naturally occuring)

DV
1. number of people who help
ii. time taken to help
iii. race and sex of helper
iv. verbal comments by bystander

Question 7

Procedure in Pilliavin

Answer 7

Experimenters worked in teams of four : 2 females record results, 2 males play roles of victim and model helper, one was black male

The vitim either acted drunk with a bottle in a brown paper bag or ill with a cane

On 7.5 min journey on NY subway, one male from each team playe role of victim and collapsed 70s after train left station.

Model helped after 70 or 150s and was in the critical or adjacent area

Observers noted the total number of passengers who helped, plus race,sex,location and how long it took to help. They sat in adjacent area

Question 8

Results of Pilivan

Answer 8

The cane victim received spontaneous help 95% of the time compared to the drunk victim 50% of the time

After the model helped the victim, 100% helped cane, 81% drunk cane

More men helped than women (the victim was male)

Slight tendency for same race helping

No diffusion of responsibility as response times were faster with larger groups than smaller

Question 9

Conclusions of Piliavin’s study

Answer 9

A person who is viewed as more deserving of help eg. cane victim is more likely to receive help than a drunk person

Men are more likely to help another man than women are

The cost of helping affected bystander behaviour eg. would they get hurt helping or not

Question 10

Why was diffusion of responsibility not found

Answer 10

not found in cane-carrying situation because of the cost of not helping is high and cost of helping is low

As time increases the arousal level increases. late model isn’t copied as people chosen way of reducing arousal eg. leave the area to justify their lack of help

Question 11

Generalisability of Pilliavan

Answer 11

Large sample of 4550
One culture - new york USA
helping behaviour may be different in other cultures

Question 12

Reliability of Pilivan

Answer 12

Standardised procedure
= victim fell down after 70s. all wore same clothes Eisenhower jackers. fell down in same part of carriage

Field Experiment
= harder to control extraneous variables such as travellers on train could’ve seen more trials

Question 13

Applications of Pillivan

Answer 13

suggests if we are ill and need help, we need to make sure people realise we aren’t drunk and ill

suggests more likely to get help if we are in an enclosed space where people can’t walk away eg. train

Question 14

Validity of Piliavin

Answer 14

Good ecological validity
= true to life enviro consisted of an incident which does happen

Not true representation of diffusion of responsibility
= participants couldn’t escape from victim
= other situations eg. street where people can escape

Question 15

Ethics in Pilivan

Answer 15

Responsibility - protection from psychological harm

= participants may have felt guilt, distress or anxiety about not helping the victim

= no debriefing so didn’t know it wasn’t real

Question 16

Piliavin relate to the key theme

Answer 16

looked at whether people would help a victim who falls down on a trail (respond to people in need)

found people are more likely to help the can victim than the drunk victim

Question 17

Pilivan relate to social area

Answer 17

= looked at how helping behaviour is affected by social context we are in

= more likely to help others if we don’t think there’s costs to helping

= means person with cane (vulnerable) is more likely to receive help than a drunk person as less likely to get hurt

Question 18

Situational explanation of piliavn

Answer 18

= looked at how victims characteristics affected helping behaviour

= participants more likely to help the cane victim than the drunk victim

= situation affects helping

Question 19

Scientific status of Pilivan

Answer 19

manipulated IV (type of victim + race) and measured DV (frequency of help + speed of help)

standardised procedure
= victim always fell after 70s in same place in train carriage

field experiment
= harder to control extraneous variables

Question 20

Free will vs Determinism - Pilivan

Answer 20

= suggest that people’s helping behaviour is determined by factors in the environment (victim drunk or cane)

= however people can choose whether to help or not