The Bystander Effect

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.

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

I believe that I have seen the possibility for the bystander effect when someone is injured. I play ultimate frisbee, and the closer knit the group is the more unlikely for the bystander effect to be observed when someone is hurt (closeness can be seen when people are talking to each other/participating in rituals).

PART 2 ESSAY This essay will compare and contrast the two approaches to investigating the ‘bystander effect’. It will first discuss in some depth as to what exactly is meant by the bystander effect, giving some examples of this and then go on to illustrate when this concept was first shown and why. An outline will then be made showing the different methods in which social scientists have investigated this explaining the different methods used. The essay will then show examples of the differences and similarities used in both methods.

The bystander effect is a very famous theory. It has been indited about in many Psychology Textbooks. In addition, there has been many situations that have been associated with this theory. Nevertheless, there was one story that commenced it all. This acclaimed story went viral and what some would call, legendary. This story resulted in a woman denominated as Kitty Genovese being assailed and murdered by Winston Moseley. The reason this situation became so popular was due to the fact that Kitty Genovese was murdered with witnesses nearby. Many wondered how can citizens of America sanction a woman being murdered knowing that she was in desideratum of avail.

According to Lockwood (2006), Anterior insula (AI) and Anterior Cingulate Cortex (ACC) are the neurones have been found to influence the affection and motivation of individual when experiencing the pain. The similar responses to neurones in the brain activity can be found both victim and observer. This is because the neurones involve a wide range of cognitive and social-emotional functions play a role in empathic processing. This can be explained in our result; the observers have experienced the affection changes such as emotional and biological changes because the observers saw the actor experiences painful experience with unconscious and automatic experience. This can

Every day, people encounter situations in which automatic thinking assists in decision making. How does automatic thinking cause humans to operate in different situations? In situations that are ambiguous, studies show that the bystander effect is shown to be more probable if these people were in a more controlled situation. The bystander effect shows that in situations in which there are more people present, the likelihood that someone will take action is far less than if one was alone. This is partially due to the belief that responsibility is split when there are more people present during a particular event. One is less likely to act because they expect that someone else will act first. Because everyone that is present in a particular event shares the same knowledge about the situation, they share the thought that someone else will act first, causing the shared responsibility to bounce from person to person as everyone waits for someone else to take action.

There has always been chaos around the world, but it is different when the one in charge of a country, like the President, is the main cause of the problem. However, the chaos keeps occurring due to the fact that people who are seeing the problem occur do not do anything to help stop the issue; this could also be referred to as, the bystander effect. The bystander effect is when a group of people or just one person is seeing a problem take place, yet does nothing about it other than keep quiet and watch. When the bystander effect occurs, things could get to a level where the problem is uncontrollable, an example of this is the Holocaust. Even though this was a huge part of history, some countries still seem to follow the same footsteps to get

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

Differing from the tight junction, a gap junction is composed of proteins surrounding a pore which enables the passage of amino acids, small molecules and ions between cells with a larger intercellular space than the tight junction. They play a pivotal role in communication between cells such as the heart muscle cells.

yet not getting involved. For ex: In the 1st passage it was talking about people watching someone

"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.

The article published by News Rx in Health and Medicine Week in 2007, “Cancer; Cancer-fighting virus shows promise in early clinical trial”, the researcher uses a virus called “NV-1020”, a modified herpes simplex virus that replicates in cancer cells and kills them. It does not affect normal, healthy cells, just like the JX-594 virus, and the expectation is to fight cancer without affecting the rest of the body with side effects. A trial was conducted in patients with colorectal cancer metastatic to the liver, showing positive results. In one of the cases presented, a patient with cancer spread to the liver and lungs, was given the virus, and followed by chemotherapy. After six months, the liver masses had noticeably reduced in size, almost disappearing. After the treatment, the patient survived for another 12 months, a longer life expectancy compared to the usual prognosis of three to four months of life. The treatment seems to be tolerable and safe for the patients, and researchers are hoping to extend survival time. The latest findings show that the virus is effective in killing colorectal and liver

Have you ever wondered why the company of others affects our behaviour? Why is our performance improved when you exercise with your friend, and impaired when you are alone? These processes have been studied for more than a century not only on people, but even on animals, like cockroaches or chickens. The first scientist who explained that phenomenon was Floyd Allport (1920). Allport based his conclusions on Tripplet’s (1889) observations, and termed it social facilitation, what means that performance of simple or well-learned tasks is improved in presence of others; and social inhibition which relates to a deterioration of difficult tasks in presence of passive audience (Hogg & Vaughan, 2008). This essay will describe and evaluate key theories such as Drive Theory, Evaluation Apprehension Theory and Distraction Conflict Theory, which explain mechanisms of social facilitation and social inhibition. But firstly it is important to refer to the observations and experiment of Norman Triplett (1889), from who all the research began.