| Aim of the study | - Investigating the rates of helping behaviour on many different variables |
| Diffusion of responsibility | - Where the responsibility of a situation is spread among the people present
- The more people present, the more the responsibility is spread out
- So they feel less personally responsible and less likely to help |
| Pluralistic ignorance | - An individual finds it hard to go against the group who are ignorant to the emergency |
| Performance Anxiety | - The pressure felt when you have the attention of a crowd |
| Bystander apathy | - The more people present, the less likely people are to help |
| Background | - Kitty Genovese in 1964
- Stabbed to death for 30 minutes in front of 38 unresponsive witnesses |
| Research method | - Field study
- In New York Subway
- The journey lasted 7 and a half mins |
| Sample | - Around 4450 men and women used the New York subway between 11:00 am and 3:00pm
- About 45% were black and 55% white |
| Independent variables | - Type of victim (drunk or carrying a cane)
- Race of victim (black or white)
- Effect of a model (after 70 or 150 seconds, from the critical or adjacent area)
- Size of witnessing group |
| Dependent variables | - Frequency of help
- Speed of help
- Race of helper
- Movement out of critical area
- Gender of helper
- Verbal comments from bystanders |
| Procedure | - 4 teams of 4 researchers (2 female + male observers, one victim and one model)
- The victims were 3 black and 1 white, general study students
- The victim stood near a pole in the critical area, after 70 seconds he collapsed
- Remained on floor until received help
- If no help was offered either 70 or 150 seconds the model would step in |
| Issue with the procedure | - More cane trials than drunk trials
- They was an uneven no. black + white victims
- As Team 2 violated instructions by running cane rather than drunk trials because the victim 'didn't like' playing drunk |
| Findings | - Cane victim was helped 95% of the time
- Drunk victim was helped 50% of the time
- 90% of the helpers were male
- Slight tendency to help same race - especially in drunk condition
- No diffusion of responsibility, the larger the group the quicker the response |
| Conclusions | - People who appear ill is more likely to get help than people who appear drunk
- Men are more likely to help a male victim
- No connection between no. of bystanders + speed of helP
- Bystanders weigh up a cost-reward ratio |
| Model response to emergency situations | - Observation of an emergency creates an emotional arousal state - unpleasant
- The more the observer can empathise with the victim, higher it is, the longer the victim doesn't get help
- Reduced by helping directly, going to get help or rejecting the victim
- The response chosen will be from cost-reward ratio |
| Evaluation of research methods | - Field study, real life setting (New York subway)
- Used observation
- Snapshot study, limited to the time, place + culture |
| Data | - Quantitative and qualitative data |
| Quantative data | - The number of helpers
- The percentage genders of helpers
- Allowed Piliavin to compare results of different conditions |
| Qualitive data | - Comments made by passengers |
| Ethical issues | - DECPETION, victim is actor
- No consent, no right to withdraw, but could leave unknowingly
- HARM, reduced self worth if person didn't help
- No debrief
- Confidentiality, no names recorded |
| Validity | - Field study, many extraneous variables, affects results
- Controlled time of day, where the victim fell + victims clothes
- Passengers may have witnessed the experiment more than once
- High ecological validity, real life setting |
| Reliability | - Fairly reliable,103 trials, shown consistent effect
- Not enough black drunk victims (only 22), white drunk victim (57)
- Standardised, replicable |
| Sampling bias | - Very large sample, equal % of black + white participants compared to real population
- Lacked generalisability, all from same culture |
| Ethnocentrism | - Low ethnocentrism as New York has such a large range of races
- But all from same culture |
| Freewill vs determinism (Freewill) | - Helping behaviour was lower in the drunk condition (50%) compared to the cane condition this shows a choice to help |
| Freewill vs determinism (Determinism) | - Weighing up cognitively cost to reward ratio |
| Reductionism holism debate (Holism) | - There is range of factors that determine choice (physiological and cognitive)
- Study takes holistic approach |
| Reductionism holism debate (Reductionism) | - Other reasons to help, kindness, genuine unselfish desire to help other people |
| Link to area/perspectives | - Social, reveals the extent to which behaviour is..
- The likelihood of someone helping in an emergency situation if there are others around |
| Link to key theme | - Responses to people in need
- How people behave when someone is in need of help |
