Piliavin et al.

Question 1

Background

Answer 1

Murder of Kitty Genovese when no-one helped

Question 2

Design

Answer 2

Independant measures

Question 3

Method

Answer 3

Field experiment

Question 4

Aims (4)

Answer 4

1. Test diffusion of responsibility in real life settings
2. Effect of type of victim and race of victim on speed of helping, frequency of helping and race of helper
3. Effects of modelling in emergency situations
4. Relationship between size of group, frequency and latency of helping response with a face to face victim

Question 5

Diffusion of responsibility (4)

Answer 5

• As group size increases, the amount of helping behaviour decreased
• when more people are present, the less likely a person is to help
• responsibility is shared
• example is Kitty Genovese case where they thought other people would help

Question 6

Sampling technique

Answer 6

Opportunity

Question 7

Experimenters details

Answer 7

Students from Columbia university (four teams)
- four male victims
- four male models
- eight female observers

Question 8

Standardised procedures (4)

Answer 8

• same train journey
• victims fell the same way
• victims wore the same clothes
• each team member stood in the same place

Question 9

Apparatus (3)

Answer 9

• Clothing worn by the victim- same jacket and slacks
• ill victim carried a black cane
• drunk victim smelled of alcohol and carried a liquor bottle covered in a brown bag

Question 10

Sample size

Answer 10

4,450

Question 11

Time and date when test was done

Answer 11

11am to 3pm
April to June

Question 12

Number of people in the carriage

Answer 12

43

Question 13

Mean number of people in the critical area

Answer 13

8.5

Question 14

Race of sample

Answer 14

45% black
55% white

Question 15

Observer 1 records (2)

Answer 15

• sex, race and location of passengers in the critical area
• total number of people that went to help and their location

Question 16

Observer 2 records (2)

Answer 16

sex, race and location of people in the adjacent area
- time taken for the first observer to help

Question 17

Both observers record

Answer 17

• comments made by the passengers sitting next to them

Question 18

When does the victim collapse

Answer 18

70 seconds after the train starts

Question 19

What are the four model conditions

Answer 19

critical early
critical late
adjacent early
adjacent late

Question 20

What does ciritcal/ adjacent mean in the model conditions

Answer 20

critical- model stood in the critical area
adjacent- model stood in the adjacent area

Question 21

What does early/ late mean in the model conditions

Answer 21

early- 70 seconds after collapse
late- 150 seconds after collapse

Question 22

Quantitative data recorded (2)

Answer 22

demographic characteristics
frequency of helping

Question 23

Qualitative data

Answer 23

Comments made by observers

Question 24

Effect of model on helping result

Answer 24

In all but three cane trials that were planned to be model trials, the victim received help before the model was scheduled to assist

Question 25

Percentage of male in the critical area

Answer 25

60%

Question 26

Percent of time spontaneous help was given

Answer 26

78%

Question 27

Race of spontaneous helpers for cane victim

Answer 27

64% were white

Question 28

Gender of spontaneous helpers

Answer 28

90% were male

Question 29

Cane condition, victims received help percent of time

Answer 29

95%

Question 30

Drunk condition, victims received help what percent of time

Answer 30

50%

Question 31

In which condition does it take longer to help

Answer 31

Drunk

Question 32

In how many trails did passengers move away from the critical area

Answer 32

21

Question 33

Total number of trials

Answer 33

103

Question 34

How many people left the critical area

Answer 34

34

Question 35

Effect of race on helping

Answer 35

Drunk, same race effect- more likely to be helped by same race than different race.
Ill, no same race effect

Question 36

Diffusion of responsibility results

Answer 36

Response times are faster for the 7 or more groups than the 1 to 3 groups

Question 37

Conclusion 1 (ill/drunk)

Answer 37

ill were more likely to be helped than drunk

Question 38

Conclusion 2 (gender)

Answer 38

men are more likely to help than women

Question 39

Conclusion 3 (relationship between number of bystanders and speed of helping)

Answer 39

no relationship

Question 40

Conclusion 4 (race)

Answer 40

same race helping is more likely

Question 41

Conclusion 5 (effect of model)

Answer 41

Longer the emergency continues, the less the impact the model has

Question 42

Cost benefit analysis

Answer 42

Individual weighs the cost and benefits of a situation before helping
if costs are higher, they won’t help

Question 43

Describe debriefing (2)

Answer 43

As participants did not know they had taken part in the study, this was difficult

Large numbers of participants made it difficult to explain and participants could not have the full aims of the study explained so may have experienced psychological harm

Question 44

Individual factors (1)

Answer 44

• when model was present, someone came to help. This could suggest that there is a certain personality type that helps

Question 45

Situational factors (2)

Answer 45

• when no model was present, someone came to help. This suggests that the situation triggered the helping behaviour
• People left the critical area when no help was provided showing that the situation was too distressing so they left to decrease arousal

Question 46

Study lasted for how long

Answer 46

7.5 minutes

Question 47

Comments made by participants that did not help (3)

Answer 47

• it’s for men to help him
• I wish I could help - I am not strong enough
• You feel so bad when you don’t know what to do

Question 48

Describe what the victim did during the trail
(5)

Answer 48

• stood at pole in the critical area
• after 70s
• staggered forward and collapsed
• remain face up
• if no one helped model helped then left