Show Don T Tell Analysis

When responding to situations in life people must consider if doing so will benefit themselves or the people around them. In circumstances that demand quick thinking people often can not form a concrete decision based on how little information and time they have. In life people frequently must try to do so through their daily battles with the people around them as well as themselves.

It is within the human nature to be interested in other people’s experiences. Whether it be with reality shows or blog posts, people like to hear different incidents through diverse perspectives. Writers take advantage of this curiosity and try to tie experiences into their works. Many times writers will include experiences of their own in order to convince their audience of their perspective on a subject. These personal experiences are done in order to make an impact on the audience and it is written in a certain way to make it the most efficient for the readers. The use of personal anecdotes is effective when details are described to the point where readers can create their own opinions, when they are used as the main topic against an argument as opposed to being an unimportant detail, and when it has the ability to appeal to the audience’s emotion.

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

Social psychology first examined the phenomena later termed “bystander effect” in response to a 1964 murder. The murder of a young woman with as many as 38 witnesses and none who helped until it was too late. The bystander effect is individuals seeing an emergency situation but not helping. There are many reasons why individuals do not respond: diffusion of responsibility, not noticing or unsure if it is an emergency, and not wanting to be liable if the person still dies are a few.

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.

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).

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

Using your paraphrase and notes of the text, write a four- to six-sentence journal entry. Write your own topic sentence. Then provide two supporting examples and a closing sentence to back up the topic sentence.

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.]

C. Wright Mills offers three groups of questions that he states must be asked by those who are

My most significant experience in my life is unforgettable. I was there with my sisters, my mom, and my dad. It was the most horrifying event that I have ever witnessed. The daunting image in my head is still clear as day, as though it happened yesterday. This event did not affect only me, but also my family. The story that I am about to tell you may change the way you see things and it may not. All I can say is, it

I agree with the emotivism analysis because I also could not change the course of the train. My emotions

The Red Hot Chili Peppers, formerly known as Tony Flow and the Miraculously Majestic Masters of Mayhem, are a funk and punk rock band that was founded in 1983. Although the members have changed numerous times during their almost 35-year span of success, the Red Hot Chili Peppers have been known to be provocative at performances and frequently utilize sexual innuendos in both lyrics and music videos. This is simply part of who they are as a band. Consequently, fans can be blinded by the energy and upbeat instruments to the extent that they may miss what is being said in the lyrics. This is certainly the case in the Red Hot Chili Peppers 1991 hit song, “Give It Away.” Fans may think that lead singer Anthony Kiedis is talking about sex when he repeats, “What I’ve got you’ve got to get it put it in you,” but he is referring to giving away material belongings as the primary message (Red Hot Chili Peppers, l. 5).

In the novel, Behind Closed Doors written by B.A. Paris., power is the focal point of the text portrayed by the antagonist, Jack Angel, whom uses power to manipulate the protagonist, Grace. Paris uses Jack to shine a light on a societal issue dealt with on a daily basis. Paris is able to illustrate patriarchy through the power demonstrated by Jack and the position that he has on Grace which makes him the one always a few steps ahead of her. Power is illustrated through the language and dialogue between the characters as well as word choice. The author’s purpose of the work as a whole focuses on Paris’ concern about a social issue on male authority and inequality or feminism and patriarchy. Paris presents these beliefs she uses to convey the ultimate or the overall meaning of the text through the main characters as well as through tone, voice and the author’s writing style.