Exploring a Classic Case in Social Psychology Essay

Before acting during an emergency, a person is most likely to scan around and observe whether others are already taking responsibility, or are about to take responsibility for it; if those people in the scene of an emergency are not doing anything, then the person will feel

Picture this. Someone is on their daily 3.5km run and as they pass the bus stop a woman grabs her chest and collapses. There are crowds of people passing by her but no one’s stopping to help. They probably aren't going to stop and help, because no one is stopping they are going to think if those many people aren’t stopping to help then she is fine, they might also be thinking someone else will help her. Now picture this that same person is out just for a walk around the park and they hear someone cry out for help, no one’s around but them so they probably would go over and help them. These situations are representing the bystander effect. John Darley and Bibb Latane came up with the bystander effect, the bystander effect states that the more people that are present the less likely anyone is to help someone in need. The bystander effect can be connected to the characters in William Golding's Lord of the flies. People just stand by in emergency situations when other people are around, and them no helping the victim can have some serious consequences.

It states that when the amount of bystanders increases, the likelihood of one of the bystanders assisting drastically decreases. Many feel that if they have no obligation to help they should not, almost as if it's none of their business. To victims, a bystander who doesn’t take action is as equally evil as the perpetrator. The easiness of laughing along with others, or acting as if you saw nothing is correlated to the fact that it is easier than ever to be influenced in today’s society. Too often, ignoring the humiliation of another is seen. It may be the easy way out, however, it is certainly not the morally correct way

In the 2007 article “the bystander effect” the author Dorothy Barkin’s was talking about the reasons why most people decide not to get involved in complex situations. Many think that the reasons maybe very obvious such as the fear of possible danger to one’s self or having to go through long legal proceedings. However, the author talks about two main reasons for such actions. The first being ambiguity, the fact the most people do not know how to evaluate different situations and there lays most for the decision making. As knowing what the problem that you are facing in that moment, that alone creates a high-pressure environment that most people would not like to be involved in. Not to mention, being able to help effectively

The Bystander Intervention in Emergencies: Diffusion of Responsibility study 's main goal was to uncover whether the amount of people in emergency situations decreased the speed of reporting due to the

Well it does and it’s called Bystander Nonintervention. Bystander Nonintervention means just the way it sounds; it’s when people, bystanders, watch instead of intervene in a situation. This article relates very well to chapter 13 in our psychology. I would say this article is the number #1 example used to show bystander nonintervention, I mean it’s used in the book. So what causes bystander intervention? It’s not so much that people don’t care, which psychologist used to think was the case, coining the term bystander apathy. But the bystander effect was more along the lines of “psychological paralysis” according to John Darley and Bibb Latane. People want to help in an emergency but find themselves frozen perhaps because of shock. With bystander nonintervention there is more danger in numbers than safety, totally opposite from what you usually hear. The more people around the less likely people will help. There are to major factors the contribute to bystander nonintervention according to Darley and Latane; pluralistic ignorance which prevent us from interpreting if a situation is an emergency, if no one is around helping is must not be an emergency, and diffusion of responsibility which discourages us from offering assistance in an emergency, if you don’t help it’s not your

For example, in the Kitty Genovese case, referenced by both reading sources, there were multiple witness who saw the murder, but did not help. This is because of what the textbook refers to as the bystander effect. There are two main rationales that were discussed concerning the bystander effect.

The Bystander-Effect has a major impact on these types of situations. The Bystander-Effect is a theory that in an emergency, people don’t get involved due to various reasons. For instance, people don’t get involved because

Nonetheless, the bystander effect does not apply to everybody without exception. There are still some people who will sincerely try their best to help others, like Hugo Tale-Yax who actually was trying a help a woman under assault when the attacker killed him (Litch 651). I believe as long as one person try their best to help, so will others. In the end, try our best to help is better than do nothing but only the help from other

They assured us, they would be among the first to help [in a real emergency]” (Darley and Latane 770). Then Darley and Latane explained why bystanders act the way they do, with their final example. [It involved an individual in a room and a tape recorder playing simulating an individual having major speech difficulties. More individuals, that thought they were alone, came out to help the person having difficulties (the tape recorder). Every time the individual listening to the tape recorder thought that there were more people with them, they were less likely to respond.]

The Bystander Effect is a social psychological phenomenon in which individuals are less likely to offer help to a victim when other people are present. The greater the number of bystanders, the less likely it is that any one of them will help. Several factors contribute to the bystander effect, including ambiguity, cohesiveness and diffusion of responsibility. Research shows that the term bystander apathy is an incorrect description because people feel genuine concern for the victim. The bystander effect occurs when the presence of others discourages an individual from intervening in an emergency situation. Social psychologists Bibb Latané and John Darley popularized the concept following the infamous 1964 Kitty Genovese murder in New York

The bystander effect has known effects on emergency situations, creating inaction when groups of people witness an event (Darley & Latane, 1968). Pluralistic ignorance and social proof principle are other social process that can cause major problems in the evolution of a crisis response. People in groups witnessing a potential emergent situation will look to others for

Bystander effect, or also known as bystander apathy, is a social psychological phenomenon that attributes to cases in which others do not help people in need while others are around. The possibility of help is contrarily connected to the amount of bystanders. Basically, the larger amount of bystanders the less likely people will help the one in need. Various variables help to explain why the bystander effect occurs. These variables include: ambiguity, cohesiveness and diffusion of responsibility (Wikipedia Contributors).

“Research known as the bystander effect project, discovered that there are complicated set of factors that determine who will assist in life-threating or dangerous situation (p.107)” In short the bystander apathy can be explained simply as bystanders who witness a crime occurring yet do nothing to assist or help. Most people who are put in this situation do not want to get in involved, especially in life-threating situations for fear of putting their own life at risk. However many people are not physically or mentally prepared to see an actual violent or criminal event take place. Studies have found that the more bystanders there are the less likely it is for some one to volunteer to help. In the case of Catherine Genovese there were a total

An interesting point to take into consideration is that when multiple bystanders take action, the emergency often can become worse. The action—or perceived or suspected action—of one bystander effectively blocks others from taking action. For example, in most face-to-face situations, such as the classroom, blocking plays a protruding role. In refined conversation, only one person can speak at once. If one person has the floor, all others are effectively blocked from actively participating. In a situation where only a small percentage of the bystanders can take action, responsibility is diffused. Each individual feels he or she has only limited responsibility for the negative consequences of inaction. “The world is too dangerous to live in – not because of the