Piliavin Flashcards
What was the background of this study?
March 1964 young woman called Kitty Genovese was fatally stabbed in NYC. It was suggested that there were 38 witnesses who did nothing until it was to late. Why did no one help?
diffusion of responsibility
No one helps because everyone thinks someone else will do it, and the more people there are present the less responsibility each person feels and thus the less likely they are to help
What is the aim of the study regarding diffusion of responsibility?
To find out whether diffusion of responsibility applies to all situations and what other factors might influence helping behavior.
What hypothesis is being tested in the study?
‘People who are responsible for their own plight receive less help.’
Method
- Field experiment - 103 trials over 3 months
What type of sample was used in the study?
Opportunity sample of passengers on the train.
What was the location of the sample collection?
Between 59th street and 125th street on weekdays.
What were the time parameters for the sample collection?
Between 11 am and 3 pm.
How many participants were there in total?
4450 participants.
What was the average number of people per compartment during each trial?
43 people.
How long did each trial last?
7 1/2 minutes.
How many students boarded the train separately during each trial?
A team of 4 students.
What roles did the female students play during the trials?
They acted as observers.
What roles did the male students play during the trials?
One acted as a confederate (role model) and another as a victim.
How many different teams were involved in the study?
4 different teams.
Was there a black victim in the study?
Yes, one of the teams had a black victim.
What were the two conditions used to test the hypothesis?
The drunk condition and the cane condition.
What characterized the drunk condition in the experiment?
The victim smelled of alcohol and carried a bottle wrapped in a brown paper bag.
What characterized the cane condition in the experiment?
The victim appeared sober and carried a cane.
What happened 70 seconds after the train pulled away from the station?
The male victim staggered and collapsed.
What was the purpose of the role model stepping in to help?
To see if a ‘model’ (someone offering help) affected the behavior of other passengers.
What did the observers record during the procedure?
They recorded how long it took for passengers to help, as well as information about the race, gender, and location of all passengers and those who offered help.
What additional information did the observers note?
They noted any comments as well as who moved away in each condition.
What percentage of cane victims received spontaneous help?
0.95
What percentage of drunk victims received spontaneous help?
0.5
What is the average time it took for a helper to assist a cane victim?
5 seconds
What is the average time it took for a helper to assist a drunk victim?
109 seconds
What percentage of black victims were helped before a role model stepped in?
0.24
What percentage of cane victims were helped before a role model stepped in?
0.91
Was there a significant difference in helpfulness between races?
No, but there was a slight ‘same-race’ effect.
What percentage of first helpers were male?
0.8
What effect did the number of passengers near a victim have on the likelihood of help being given?
The more passengers present, the more likely help was given.
Was there evidence of diffusion of responsibility in the study?
No evidence of diffusion of responsibility was found.
What model explains why people help or do not help?
A TWO-FACTOR MODEL
What is FACTOR ONE in the two-factor model of helping behavior?
An emergency situation creates a sense of empathy (or arousal) in the bystander.
What increases empathetic arousal in bystanders according to FACTOR ONE?
Feeling a sense of identity with the victim or being physically close to the victim.
How can empathetic arousal be reduced according to FACTOR ONE?
By helping (directly or indirectly), going away, or rationalizing why you cannot help.
What is FACTOR TWO in the two-factor model of helping behavior?
Helping behavior is determined by a cost-reward calculation.
What factors influence the cost-reward calculation in helping behavior?
The possible cost of helping (e.g. risk to self, loss of possessions) versus the possible reward for helping (e.g. praise, feeling good about oneself).
When is help less likely to be offered according to the cost-reward calculation?
When the possible cost of helping is greater than the possible reward for helping.
