Piliavin et al. Flashcards
Define altruism
the disinterested and selfless act of helping someone, which by doing so does not serve ay benefit to oneself
diffusion of responsibility
occurs when a duty or task is shared between a group of people - people are therefore less obligated to complete the task
What is the bystander affect
- when an individual does not help someone in a more dangerous situation when other bystanders are around
- supports the fact that if less people are present, an individual is more likely to help
Psychology investigated
- altruism and the bystander affect
link to the assumptions of the social approach
- behaviour, cognitions and emotions can be influenced by groups or social situations
- Behaviour, cognitons and emotions can be influenced by pther individuals
Aim
- to bring a study on altruistic behaviour and the bystander affect to a natural setting (field experiment), and see the effect of 4 situational variables:
- Type of victim (drunk or cane)
- Race of victim (black; white)
- Behaviour of model (instant or not)
- Size of the group of bystanders
hypothesis (3)
- people will be more likely to help their same race
- the ill victim will recieve help more frequently and quickly
- The larger the group, the more latency there will be in the victim recieving help
Number of Pp
4450
Demographic of sample
45% black; 55% white
- mean number of people in the carraige was 43
- lived in NYC between harlem and Bronx
Details on the train journey in Piliavin
- between Harlem and Bronx NYC
- used old NYC subway cars
- between 11am and 3pm weekdays
- 7.5 minute train ride
Groups and who played what role?
4 teams of 4: 4x in a group - 2M and 2F
- both females were observers
- Males were vicitms and models
Vicitm apparatus
- all wore eisenhowler jacket, old socks, no tie
- drunk trials smelt of alcohol and carried a bottle in a paper bag
- Cane victims were ill and held a black cane
Total number of trials
103
Observer one
seated closer to the critical area:
- noted race, gender, location of everyone in the critical area
- counted total number of people in the car
- total number of people came to victim’s assistance, as well as sex & race of these people
Observer two
seated in the adjacent area
- noted race, sex, location everyone in adjacent area
- recorded time taken for first helper to assist after the fall, and if appropriate, first helper after model helped
- recorded any comments from close by
- Tried to elict comments from person sitting next to them
Type of study
field experiment - naturalistic observation
Experimental design
Independant measures
IVs
- cane or drunk victim
- black or white victim
- number of Pp in car
- early or late model helping
- adjacent or critical area - model
DV
- latency for helping victim
- number of Pp in car
- race/sex/location helpers
- race/sex/location all pp
Conclusions (5)
- Ill appearing people are more likely to recieve help than drunk
- males are more likely to help male victims
- Some tendency towards racial helping, especially when victim is drunk
- Diffusion of responsibility was not seen
- the longer the situation goes without help being offered:
a. The less impact model has on helping behaviour
b. people are more likely to leave critical area
Individual vs situational
individual:
- individual experiences of arousal may be different depending on type and relation to model
Situational:
- drunk/cane victim - whether it seemed safe to help
- if someone else is already helping
Generalisability
positive:
- Large sample
- mostly even split between sex and races
Negative:
- specific types of people who use the train at 11am-3pm
- only done in NYC
reliability
Positive:
- standardised observers, victim procedures, length of train rides
Negative:
- no inter-rater reliability as observers were looking for different things
- field experiment - less variables could be controlled
application
- helps people to be aware that biases do come in when help is being offered - should try to reduce this
- you should make yourself appear less threatning if needing help
validity
positive:
- ecological validity - field experiment, mundane realism
- qualitative and quantitative data used
- range of numbers in the cars to test for diffusion of responsibility
Negative:
- only 1 black victim
- all trials done around the same time
- potential demand characteristics if Pp had seen victim more than once
- less drunk (38) than cane (65) trials
Ethics
positive:
- no physical harm
- privacy
- right to withdraw - pp could leave critical area
Negative:
- potential psychological harm - guilt and arousal
- deception - fake situation
- no informed consent
- No debrief
Number of cane trials
65
Number of drunk trials
38
