Piliavin’s Study Flashcards
What occurred in 1964 that inspired Piliavin to conduct his study?
Kitty Genovese was stabbed in New York
What happened to Kitty Genovese in 1964?
She was stabbed to death over 35 minutes as her attacker left twice before completing the murder in his 3rd attempt. There were 38 witnesses but no one assisted or even called the police
How many witnesses heard Kitty’s screams?
38 yet all failed to help before she died
What experiment did Darnley and Latané conduct in 1968?
Smoke filled room - which tested diffusion of responsibility by trialing participants alone and with groups of people.
What did Darnley and Latané conclude after the experiment?
People are more likely to intervene alone rather than when they’re in the presence of other people
Why did Piliavin decided to conduct his study after Darnley and Latané?
It was a laboratory experiment and he wanted to improve the ecological validity
Name all 4 hypothesis for Piliavin’s study?
- Drunk victim would receive more help than I’ll victim
- People would help the same race first
- Modelling would encourage help
- Larger groups would lead to less help
Define the term bystander apathy/effect?
People fail to help/act if in the presence of others
Define the term diffusion of responsibility?
When help is needed the more people there are the less/lower the responsibility of each individual (someone else’s problem)
What sampling method was used?
Opportunity sample- people available at the time of the study are used
What/who was Piliavin’s sample?
4450 New York Subway passengers
(55% white, 45% black)
What was the racial divide of Piliavin’s sample?
45% black
55% white
Total of 4450 participants
What is an advantage of opportunity sampling?
It’s quick, easy and convenient
What is a disadvantage of opportunity sampling?
You’re only going to get one type of person in each area (eg, urban/wealthy) so sample isn’t generalisable to the population
Where were the emergencies staged?
On express trains of New York 8th Avenue independent subway
Why was the New York 8th Avenue subway used in the study?
It made no stops between 59th and 125th street which meant they had a captive audience for 7 1/2 minutes
How long were the audience captive?
7 minutes 30 seconds
Over what time period did the study take place?
It took place over 3 months (15th April - 26th June)
When did the experiment take place?
11am - 3pm on weekdays
What is the procedure of Piliavin’s study?
- Teams of 4 university students (2 female observers and 2 male actors).
- Approx. 70s into the journey (as the train passed the first station) they victim stood next to the central pole would stagger forward and collapse. They’d remain on the ground until they received help
- The victim was aged between 26-35 (3 white:1 black) and were identically dressed in Eisenhower jackets, old trousers and no tie.
- if the victim was drunk they’d smell of alcohol and carry a liquor bottle in a brown bag
- if the victim was I’ll they’d carry a black cane
- The model was white 24-29 year old who raised the victim to sitting and remained with them for the rest of the journey (critical/adjacent early/late)
- Observers satin the adjacent area and noted race, age, sex, location, number or each passenger and timed how long it took for help to arrive
- the emergency situation occurred a total of 103 time with 6-8 run per day
What was the victim dressed in?
Eisenhower jacket
Old trousers
No tie
How did the drunk victim act?
Carried a bottle of liquor in a brown bag and smelled of alcohol
How did the victim act ill?
Carried a black cane
What was the total number of trials conducted?
103 trials
65/103 ill
38/drunk
Why was there an imbalance in the number of drunk trials compared to the number of ill trials?
The students dislike acting as the drunk victim
What were the 4 model conditions?
Adjacent early (70s)
Adjacent late (150s)
Critical early (70s)
Critical late (150s)
What type of experiment did Piliavin conduct?
Field Experiment- occurred in a natural/realistic setting to get representative behaviours
What were the independent variables?
Model conditions (critical/adjacent early/late)
Victim conditions (drunk/ill)
No of participants
What are the dependent variable in Piliavin’s study?
- no. of passengers present (avg. 43)
- comments made by passengers
- Race, Sex, Location of passengers
- Time it took for first help to arrive
What are the control variables in Piliavin’s study?
Same actors
Same time (11am-3pm weekdays)
Same clothes/props
Same script
What were the quantitative results?
95% of participants helped the ill victim - in an average of 5 seconds
50% participants helped the drunk victim - in an average of 109 seconds
In 21 trials 34 people left the critical area when the victim collapsed
What are the qualitative results of Piliavin’s study?
‘It’s for men to help’
‘You feel bad when you don’t know what to do’
What was concluded as to why there was no diffusion of responsibility?
- people were trapped in the confined situation
- there were no/few costs of helping the victim
- it was clear there was an actual problem
What is the main conclusion Piliavin reached?
As people weigh up the rewards of helping it not people are not always altruistic and are working with selfish desires
What model did Piliavin create based on her conclusion?
The Cost-Reward Analysis model
What happens when bystanders are faced with an emergency situation?
Arousal
What is arousal?
A uncomfortable and unpleasant feeling so we attempt to get rid of it as quickly as possible either by helping or leaving the situation
What’s a positive of helping?
Social approval
Praise
Satisfaction
What’s a negative of helping?
Make the situation worse
Requires time and effort
What’s a positive of not helping?
No embarrassment
Continue everyday life
What’s a negative of not helping?
Guilt
Social disapproval
With regards to the comments made what was evident from Piliavin’s results?
Gender Stereotypes
How is Piliavin’s study reliable?
Inter-Rate reliability due to 2 observers
Internal due to standardised and replicable procedure
External large sample size to confirm bystander effect
How is Piliavin’s study unreliable?
Internal - can’t easily replicate the number of passengers in each scenario /trial condition
How is Piliavin’s study valid?
Has population validity with a large sample sizes so we can assume it’s fairly representative and therefore generalisable
High ecological validity because it’s a field experiment
How is Piliavin’s study invalid?
Ecologically validity - study completed in a captive audience - in emergent situations you can easily leave + dramatic collapse
How is Piliavin’s study ethically good?
Confidentiality/Privacy
How is Piliavin’s study ethically wrong?
- Decieved passengers - pretending
- no informed consent
- No ability to withdraw from the study
- No debrief
- No protect from harm -stressful/emotional
How is Piliavin’s study ethnocentric?
Low - used a multicultural area with both races so there isn’t a cultural bias (generalisable)
High - specific to America (New York) on,y occurred between 11am - 3pm so miss working population
What did the models wear?
Informal clothes and were aged between 24-29
