Piliavin Flashcards
Diffusion of responsibility
When a large crowd is present we feel less personal responsibility as we diffuse our responsibility onto others. This means we assume others will help and take responsibility. In a smaller crowd we may feel a greater need to intervene and help as there are fewer people to share responsibility with.
Pluralistic ignorance
we look to others to help us interpret different situations and this then informs how we should respond. If we see others not responding we interpret the situation as a non-emergency. If we see others helping, we are more likely to offer assistance.
Give 4 situational factors which influence bystander effect
- Diffusion of responsibility
- Pluralistic ignorance
- Noticing the event
- Cost of helping
Noticing the event
In a large crowd we pay less attention to what is going on around us. Therefore we are less likely to notice an emergency situation compared to when we are on our own
Cost of helping
If there is a risk to ourselves we tend not to help as the cost to our safety is too high.
Also we are less likely to help if we do not have the time to stop, as it is great a cost to ourselves again
Give 3 individual factors which influence bystander effect
- Competence
- Mood
- Similarity
competence
if we feel we are able to help or have the skills to help, we are more likely to intervene.
mood
good mood = pay more attention = more likely to recognise if people need help = more likely to help
bad mood = behave more inwardly
similarity
Identify with the person in need = more likely to help, because we begin to think same thing could happen to us
What is the background of the study? (why was it performed)
- wanted to carry out research in field setting, as previous in lab
- investigate variables affect whether bystander help in an emergency, such as race and type of the victim
- if could replicate the effect of ‘diffusion of responsibility’ and ‘modelling’ —unlike previous, auditory clue, now also visual clues, to see if these affect
- The murder of Kitty Genovese triggered interest in the action of bystanders and the nature of ‘diffusion of
responsibility’. This suggests that bystanders are less likely to come to someone’s aid if group members are
strangers
Give 2 previous evidence that investigated bystander effect
Kitty Genovese
- savagely attacked and the man viciously raped and stabbed her near her apartment
- at least 38 witnesses but showed no sign of assistance. despite scenes of violence and screams were heard
Latane and Darley
- seizure over headphone
- less likely to help if they believed there were others also listening to the seizure taking place
what is the aim
To investigate, under real life conditions the speed and frequency of helping in relation to
- the TYPE of victim
- the RACE of victim
- the presence or absence of MODEL
- the SIZE of witnessing group
What are the hypotheses?
- drunk = less help than ill
- more help = same race
- seeing other help = behave in similar way
- more people = less help
What is the IV?
- type of victim
- race of victim
- position and speed of response of the model
- no. of bystander
What is the DV?
Level of bystander helping, operationalised as
- time taken for the 1st passenger to help
- total no. of people who helped
- gender and race and location of each helper
- verbal comments by passengers during the incident
Where & when did they conduct the experiment?
- New York subway express train
- 7.5 minute
- weekdays between 11am-3pm during April to June
Who conducted the study?
- 16 Columbia students
- 4 teams = 2 males + 2 females
- males = victim and model
- females = observer
What was the sample?
- opportunity sample
- 4,450 passengers
- 45% black, 55% white
- mean no. per carriage = 43
- mean no. in critical area = 8.5
3 main steps of the procedure
- OBSERVER
- VICTIMS
- MODEL
Describe the procedure ( observer)
- 2 females
- recorded spontaneous comments
- recorded time taken for the 1st passenger to offer help
Describe the procedure (victim)
- age 20-26
- critical area
- Eisenhower jackets + old socks + no tie
- drunk/ill (liquor bottle+smell / carried cane) black/white
How does the victim fell?
Train passes 1st station, victim staggered forward + collapsed, remained at the floor looking at the ceiling
Describe the procedure (model)
- 4 white men
- 24-29
- unidentical, informal clothing
- raised victim to a sitting position and stayed with him for the rest of the journey
What are the differences in location and time of early/late help
- critical area early, or adjacent area early
- 70s after collapsed, 150s after collapsed
Main categories of results (there are 8)
- level of bystander helping
- no. of helpers
- gender of helpers
- position/speed of model helper
- who left
- comments
- same race helping
- diffusion of responsibility
Results related to level of bystander effect
Drunk trial, spontaneous help = 50%
cane trial, spontaneous help = 95%
Results related to no. of helpers
60% of trials received help from more than one helper
Results related to gender of helper
90% of spontaneous 1st helpers were MALE, even only 60% of the people in critical area were male
Results related to position/speed of model helper
Position = no effecet
early model = significantly more likely to bring about further helping 100%
late model = 43%
Results related to ‘who left’
highest %, at least 1 person left the critical area was for BLACK/DRUNK trial, with help after 70s
Results related to ‘comments’
drunk trials + help more than 70s = most comments
Results related to ‘same race helping’
white victim, 68% of helpers were white
black victim, 50% were white
slight same race helping
Drunk trial = mainly same race, 90% white
Results related to ‘diffusion of responsibility’
No evidence. Response time faster for groups of 7+ than groups of 1-3
7+ = 97s, 1-3 = 309s
What are the conclusions?
- ill>drunk
- male more likely to help than female
- mixed racial group = same race helping, especially when drunk than ill
- Longer emergency continues = more likely to leave, more likely to discuss (most comments in drunk), less impact of model on helping behaviour (43% late model)
What else did they conclude about ‘diffusion of responsibility’
It does not occur when people cannot leave.
2 factors of the cost-reward model
- emotional arousal
2. cost-reward calculation
How will ‘emotional arousal’ be heightened or reduced?
Heightened = empathising with, proximity, emergency continues for longer
Reduced = helping or getting help, reject as undeserving
Describe the cost-reward model
Cost of helping, cost of not helping
reward of helping, reward of not helping
Give 2 strengths of the study
- Quantitative and qualitative data
- 95% help cane, 50% help drunk
- allows comparison + objective analysis (quan)
- insight (qua)
- objective + realistic understanding
- Field experiment
- natural setting, not aware of being observed
- reduce demand characteristics
- high ecological validity
Give 2 weaknesses of the study
- violated ethical guideline
- unaware of being observed, unable to tell aim, cannot give their consent
- might suffer psychological distress, believing victim genuinely fell
- did not control extraneous variables well
- position of observer, observer’s accuracy = low, view may be blocked (delay in time recorded)
- might be inaccurate understanding, lacks ecological validity
How was the data collected?
- content analysis for the no. of comments
- by two female researchers
- also noted spontaneous comments and actions by those around her
