Social Psychology : The Bystander Effect

Why should students help pick up fellow classmate's books that he or she dropped? Why should people give to the homeless? Why should humans become organ donors? Altruism is defined as a person's ability to go out of their way to enhance the welfare of someone else without anything in return. But it's not the "what" of altruism that is intriguing, it's the "why" that is truly fascinating. Scientist and researches may never pinpoint what makes humans exhibit altruistic behavior, but there is one thing that scientist and researches are sure about. Altruism plays an important role in running society, and the world can use more of it.

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.

Nowadays, Americans find violence entertaining. It is recorded, viewed, and shared constantly. In Don DeLillo’s short story, “Videotape” a young girl recorded a man that was shot while driving in a car; the video was shown on the news repetitively. The short story revolves around a man at home attentively watching the video; he continuously called on his wife to watch the video with him. This videotape represents how everyone is being desensitized to violence, how there is a growing obsession with violence, and how quickly life can be taken away.

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

The general statement made by the author, Anna Quindlen, in her work Getting Involved, is that it is vital for human beings to be apathetic, and care for one another. More specifically, the author argues that isolating oneself from local conflict will not resolve any issues. She writes, “Neighbors heard screams and shouts and the unmistakable sound of something hitting a human being…But nothing was really done until…[the] little girl was taken to the hospital, where she was pronounced dead.” In this passage, the author is suggesting that being a bystander is detrimental and can lead to severe, preventable outcomes. In conclusion, the author’s belief is a topic that need to be spoken upon more often, the society is in desperate need of compassion

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.

The Bystander effect is a controversial theory given to social phenomenon where the more potential helpers there are, the less likely any individual is to help. A traditional explanation for this Bystander Effect is that responsibility diffuses across the multiple bystanders, diluting the responsibility of each. (Kyle et al.) The Bystander effect, also known as the Genovese Syndrome, was created after the infamous murder of “Kitty” Catherine Genovese in 1964, on the streets of New York in front of thirty-seven witnesses. After studying the Genovese syndrome and doing research on how this phenomenon occurs today, it is clear The Bystander effect is not theory, but actually fact.

This essay will ‘compare and contrast’ two approaches made in investigating the ‘bystander effect’. It will discuss in some depth as to what exactly is meant by the bystander effect, illustrating when this concept was first shown and why. An outline will be made of the different methods used, those being experiments and discourse analysis, explaining each one in turn, within the framework of two cases. The first being the murder of ‘Catherine Genovese,’ 1964.and the second ‘James Bulger’ 1993. The essay will then show examples of the differences and similarities between each method. Concluding with a summary of findings into the two approaches to investigating the Bystander Effect.

different times) act as if they were is a lot of pain or a drunk. The test was to see how long it took

Fear itself is seldom a cause of trauma in everyday existence, but having to face close-range interpersonal aggression is a traumatic experience of an entirely different magnitude (Grossman). During the initial outbreak of terror while everyone is scrambling to save his or her own life, survival mode kicks in and an individual starts to plan on saving one’s self. The need to be a powerful motivator drives an average person to do what any normal person would consider unthinkable. Abandoning monsters plaguing the entire world, helping others in need, or deciding to save one’s self is a decision that will be made. The decision to save one’s own life will bring a person to question his own humanity while discovering the benefits of self-

Everyday there are countless of people getting hurt physically, emotionally, or mentally whether by a conducted crime, a bully, or a text assault. When those things are happening, often there are people on the scene with opportunities to act upon the problems -- step in to stop the conflict, call the police, or speak up to defend those in need. They can prevent a crime, help support the victim, or even save a life if they choose to intervene. People are accountable for one another to do everything they can to save each other’s life. Therefore, bystanders should be interveners because they will never know what positive effects their actions might bring.

Darley and Latane begin their essay by using solid examples of when the bystander effect presented itself, and why people were harmed because of it. They explain why nice people do not help in certain situations, and why someone can pass by a person in distress when others are around, and why more people respond when no one is around. Darley and Latane show what it takes for people to respond; they have to actually realize that it is an emergency and not a ruse or a normal occurrence. Sitting idly by while a dangerous situation is happening does not make someone a bad person, it just reveals their humanity.

The bystander effect is both a social and psychological phenomenon in which an individual’s inclination towards showing helping behaviours are minimised by the influence of other people. Research has found that the more people acting as bystanders in a situation, the less likely it is that helping behaviours will be demonstrated. However in the correct conditions, where conditioned cues increase self-awareness, it is possible to reverse the bystander effect phenomenon. The bystander effect is prevalent in everyday life, and often decorates the news, shocking the world, especially when authority figures such as police men and women succumb to the effect. Diffusion of responsibility, ignorance of others interpretation of an event and self-consciousness are all social processes which appear to lead to social inhibition of helping behaviours and one of the main theories of the bystander effect is provided Latané and Darley (1970) whose cognitive model provides a series of decisions that can lead to social inhibition. The bystander effect is influenced by the conditions an individual is in when an event occurs, for example the bystander effect appears to be most dominant when an individual is in a group of strangers with low group cohesiveness. FINISH

"The Bystander Effect" is a short video on the study how people reacted to others in distress while in a crowd. Most would assume there is safety within numbers, however, the results prove that that may not always be the case. This study seems to bring to attention that while in a larger crowd people may actually be less likely to receive help. This may be due to our human behavior of doing the same as everyone else, or possibly a mental thought of let someone else handle it, do not get involved. These findings could easily bring on a new fear of being in crowded areas.