Prosocial Behavior and the Bystander Effect Essay

Throughout life, one is to see many people they don’t know Humans walk past each other and no interaction occurs. Depending on a particular situation one might be in, it can change the ability to react, help and care for a stranger in need. In the article “We are all bystanders”, by Jason Marsh and Dacher Keltner, it shows how in certain settings people don’t act to help another, even though one might want to. “Everyday Stuart would board the bus and a couple of boys would tease him. I would sit silent and watch. I wish I would’ve helped” (Marsh/Keltner 3). People develop a feeling that prevents them from caring for strangers. This is due to a thought of peer pressure or judgement that could be given to an individual for taking action.

If you find yourself in a disaster, helping others is most likely not your first thought. The more rational look for a way to make it safely, worrying about themselves first, and others second. In the Novel Hiroshima by John Hersey even though many of the main characters are hurt, run to assist others. These people who were in the thick of it lacked any real reason to help others, yet they still made the effort to try. The disaster that befell Hiroshima was an atrocity, however, it did bring the community closer. Compassion in all forms enthralls those who have nothing to gain to help others, regardless of the repercussions or sacrifices.

This is seen through diffusion of responsibility, pluralistic ignorance, and victim effects. Each influence scopes and molds that behavior of the individual, in terms of actions pertaining to prosocial behavior. Through the diffusion of responsibility, individual diffuse responsibility onto someone else and thereby releases that mold of responsivity along with the source of added pressure. If the individual is in a group situation, they are more than likely to feel less obligated to help. Therefore, if the individual is alone, they may more responsible for calling for help.

Humans are prenatally motivated to help those around us due to its evolutionary benefits that our species has a better chance of survival if all cooperate. Humans can also be nurtured to exhibit altruistic behavior through good parenting. Although most of the population agrees that altruism benefits society, scientific research has shown that even those who believe they are altruistic are not when they are put in situations which calls for selfless behavior. One phenomena that refutes the claim that most of the population strives for selfless behavior is known as the bystander effect. The bystander effect is when a person feels less responsible for doing selfless acts when they are in an environment of a group of

When there is an emergency, why is taking out our phones to take a picture or video the very first thing we want to do? Why do we casually walk by a person who is in trouble, and go about our business as if we did not anyone? Why do we not help or act when someone is getting, but instead we just stand in a crowd and watch? Why do we bury our moral instincts during emergencies? “We witness a problem, consider positive action, and respond by doing nothing. Why do we not help in these situations and put our moral instincts in shackles” (Keltner & Marsh, 2017). We as people are bystanders to the world around us daily, but the question is why? The answer to all the “why” questions is the bystander effect.

In the early morning hours of March 13, 1964, twenty-eight year old barmaid Catherine "Kitty" Genovese was murdered and raped on the street in Kew Gardens, New York. The incident did not initially receive much attention until Martin Gansberg's infamous article, "Thirty-Eight Who Saw Murder, Didn't Call the Police", was published in the New York Times two weeks later. In reality, only twelve people witnessed the event yet each did nothing to significantly help Genovese until it was too late. The Genovese murder has become the definitive example of the "bystander effect", the social phenomenon in which individuals are less likely to help someone in distress if there are other people present. The bystander effect occurs wherever there is

Another example of the bystander effect in everyday life happened this year in New York City. A homeless man rushed to assist a woman who had been attacked. He was representing the good side of the bystander effect. He saw someone in need and immediately reacted to help that person. In his attempt to save this woman from this beating, he was stabbed. As he was lying on the street dying in a pool of blood, people walked by and did nothing to

People don’t help others people unless it benefits them. An example of this is in the article “The Dying Girl That No One Helped”, when 38 or more people saw the girl dying but not a single person stopped and went outside to help. No one even picked up a phone and called the police until she was already dead. Lieutenant Jacobs said that most people “just don’t want to get involved”(Wainwright). An example that most people can relate to in their life is when something happens, such as a fight, or any other type of argument between people. Most of the time no one will help to break up the fight, they would rather stand by and watch. These examples show that people don’t want to get involved in something that doesn’t benefit them to help. People will only help when it benefits them to help, or hurts them to not help.

Further evidence against selfless altruism comes from the evidence that individual attributes appear to effect prosocial and altruistic behaviour being displayed. Ruggiero et al (1981) found that taller, heavier and physically stronger people are more likely to put themselves in harm’s way to help others in an emergency. This would suggest that an individual has first considered the cost to themselves of helping,

Throughout society we have always been told to help those in need no matter what the situation might be. But these days it seems as if the only reason people help those in need is because they usually want something in return such as social approval and recognition for their help or if they don’t help they’ll face legal consequences due to their lack of action such as seeing crime occurring and not responding. According to Peter Singer we have a duty to render aid to others, and I agree with that because if that was you in that person’s position you would want someone to help you. The origin of this duty derives from our basic principles as humans to help those that need help if we have the ability to do so. Also because everyone will

People think if no one else is to help why should they, they have a group of people that are not going to help. They know it would be an inconveioce to them and if they help someone they think they "How could I help them? I'm Just

In the journal article “ The Bystander Intervention In Emergencies: Diffusion of Responsibility” by John M. Darley and Bibb Latane performed the study in order to see how individuals the bystanders would react in a serious situation where a victim is being harmed or is in painful situation. The researchers wanted to determine how the bystander(s) fulfilled their responsibility in a conflict with other observers being around the same conflict. The research question of this study is that how do individuals react and respond to a conflict, while being responsible to assit help? The researchers stated the hypothesis as, “ The more bystanders to an emergency, the less likely, or the more slowly, any one bystander will intervene to provide the aid” (Darley & Latane,

In the world, it is so easy to walk past an individual that is in distress without even knowing that there is something wrong. People notice something and expect the individual in front of or behind them to assist the distressed, and it happens more than often. For example, driving past an individual that is stranded on the side of the road is so simple. It is much easier to drive past than assist, especially when driving on a city street. Many people think about helping, and want to help, but they just do not.

Ethics of Emergencies “The Ethics of Emergencies” explains Ayn Rand’s radical and unique view of altruism. She believes that there are 4 consequences of altruism, all of which are negative. These, simply put, are lack of self-esteem, lack of respect for others, a pessimistic view of life, and an indifference to ethics. She says that altruism hinders acts of true benevolence, and instead people act out of an obligation to others that has been internalized over time. Rand then argues that one should only volunteer to help strangers in emergency situations, and even then, only when the risk to one’s own life is less than the risk to the stranger’s. Rand advocates action in such emergencies because of the high value of human life. But Rand

Even though there are a number of instances when people help others who are in need,