Onlooker Impact Research

The bystander effect is a social psychological scenario where a person who is in an urgent situation is not given any help by the people around due to the discourage from the presence of others (whatispsychology.biz, 2017). Social psychologists, John Darley and Bibb Latane, introduced the bystander effect in the 1960s after the murder of Kitty Genovese, a young woman who was stabbed to death outside her home in New York City. It took her attacker more than half an hour to kill her, and during that time, thirty-eight people saw her being murdered, and they did nothing to help her. “The responsibility for helping was diffused among the observers” (Darley & Latane, 1968).

People have a tendency, known as social proof, to believe that others' interpretation of the ambiguous situation is more accurate than their own. Hence, a lack of response by others leads them to conclude that the situation is not an emergency and that response is not warranted. Finally, empirical evidence has shown that the bystander effect is negated when the situation is clearly recognized as an emergency. In a 1976 study published in the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Lance Shotland and Margaret Straw illustrated that when people witnessed a fight between a man and a woman that they believed to be strangers to each other, they intervened 65 percent of the time. Thus, people often do not respond appropriately to an emergency situation because the situation is unclear to them and as a result, they have misinterpreted it as a non-emergency based on their own past experience or social cues taken from others.

If you saw someone being attacked on the street, would you help? Many of us would quickly say yes we would help because to state the opposite would say that we are evil human beings. Much research has been done on why people choose to help and why others choose not to. The bystander effect states that the more bystanders present, the less likely it is for someone to help. Sometimes a bystander will assume that because no one else seems concerned, they shouldn't be (Senghas, 2007). Much of the research that has been done supports this definition of the bystander effect. There have also been recent situations where this

Obviously, the narrator’s attempt of showing genuine compassion with the incongruous and indigent man ends up with an utterly adverse upshot, due to the protagonist’s oppositely wealthy past in the upper class. Apparently, he has his own way of behaving properly due to sophisticated customs and manners, which is the reason he rejects the help form the narrator. In conclusion it is exceedingly essential not to carry out precipitate endeavors to help people. Help has to be offered and given in a proper

The study by Darley and Latane leaves society with the knowledge that everyone who is witnessing an emergency is most likely thinking the same thing “someone else will call for help or has already” so “Always act as if you are the only person there” (Darely & Latane, 1968). The concept of situationism is the driving force behind bystander effect. Situationism is “social behavior is, to a larger extent than people commonly realize, a response to people’s social context, not a function of individual personality” (Fiske, 2010, p. 7). Individuals first have to decide if they are witnessing an emergency. Then they need to decide if they have a responsibility to act which is when situationism comes in. If there are hundreds of witnesses each individual see the situation from a different perspective and responsibility to act is diffused among the crowd. On the other hand if one individual sees an emergency and believes there is no one else to help the responsibility rests on him or her. The context of the situation will determine how an individual will react, but people should consider the reality of everyone believing someone else will react and no one reacting. Kitty Genovese would still be alive if even one person would have called the cops when the first attack started.

How does an individual’s perspective of, and response to, a crisis define him or her?

First ‘The Bystander Effect’, states ‘that individuals are less likely to intervene in emergency situations when other people are present’. Latne & Darley, (1970) cited in Byford J.( 2014 pp 232). Simply put, where emergency situations arise, if more than one person is present the likelihood of someone in distress being helped reduces. This is the ‘diffusion of responsibility’ effect were each bystander feels less obliged to help because the responsibility seems to be divided with others present’. (Byford J., 2014 pp233) An example of Bystander Apathy shown within a video (The Open University 2016).

Walking along the busy street of Manhattan, Katie becomes light headed passing out; although she is in a large group of people, no one stops to help. This phenomenon is called the “bystander effect.” A bystander is often anyone who passed by, witnessed, or even participated in a certain situation (Polanin, Espelage & Pigott, 2012). The bystander effect is the idea that the larger the group, the less likely an individual is to be helped. The likelihood of someone getting helped is inversely compared to the number of people who are around witnessing the event at the time. This phenomenon has played a huge role in the increase of civilians failing to be helped in the past years, and is starting to have more light shined upon it. Knowledge of

Author Thaler and Sunstein wrote about how to influence choices people make or not making any choices. The essay stated that when people don’t make any decision this can create problems and or make them worst. Something had to be done to cause people to react or make choices to address or direct them in the arears that where important to the organizations.

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

Understudy accomplishment falls simply over the state normal, and he perceives that the new rural population expects a larger amount of scholastic perfection than the region has generally advertised. While in the past the advising staff was fulfilled to just get kids a high school confirmation by satisfying the base prerequisites, the requirements of the understudies are never again being met by this approach. Tim trusts that his understudies, in all cases, are able to do considerably more than has been asked of them, and he and Superintendent Stamp Scott, an old training mate, would like to utilize the entry of the suburbanites to increment the scholastic accomplishment of the whole school group (Huddleston, 2014)

Darley and Latane, use the concept of diffusion of responsibility to explain the psychology behind why no one stepped in to help in either scenarios. According to Slater, diffusion of responsibility is explained as “The more people witnessing an event, the less responsible any one individual feels and, indeed, is because responsibility is evenly distributed among the crowd” (Slater, 102). Basically, the greater amount of spectators decreases the chances for the an individual to aid the victim in an emergency situation. A sole witness is less likely to respond if there are multiple witnesses around in comparison to scenario being one on one. The reason being that, the individual no longer feels as though they are the only ones responsible considering multiple witnesses are now as involved as they are.

The purpose of “Bring in the Bystander” is to train and inform a general college population on how to be a positive bystander. Anyone is a bystander in any situation regardless if they are a positive or a negative one. A bystander is someone who witnesses a situation or is a part of a situation, and has the power to take action or not. A positive bystander will take action in a much more logical way. In order to be a positive bystander, one has to make sure that they are not putting themselves at risk in the situation. I believe that if someone has the opportunity to act positively in a situation that they should act on it. I was raised with the motto “if you can help someone, do it”. If someone doesn’t act in a situation that they were a part

When an individual is proposed with a moral dilemma they will often seek the advice of others rather than acting solely upon their immediate cultural, familial, and cognitive predispositions; suggesting that judgments are also made about the moral judgments of others (Rest, Cooper, Coder, Masanz & Anderson, 1974).

According to Lillibridge and Klukken (1978), crisis is an event or situation that cause " 地n upset in equilibrium at the failure of one's traditional problem-solving approach which results in disorganization, hopelessness, sadness, confusion, and panic" (62). In the face of crisis, there is an urgent need to swing to action and communication is the only vehicle that can convey this message to everyone concerned. When crisis occur, communication challenges becomes worsened because the