The Bystander Effect On Intimate Relationships

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.

1. After the 1964 murder of Kitty Genovese, John Darley and Bibb Latane were in shock as the rest of the city/world that a 28 year old lady could be stabbed in a neighborhood with about 38 by standers or more and say or do nothing. Why didn’t anyone try and help her? How could people stand by and watch this go on? People speculated that the failure of people to get involved might be due more to the influence (socially) that bystanders have on each other. To test this theory, Darley and Latane, two psychologists, decided to conduct a study. “Diffusion of Responsibility” Everyone hopes that someone else will be the first to step up

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).

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

I found it interesting that the authors found that actual similarity did not predict romantic attraction, that in fact similarity was significantly or marginally related to romantic liking for 6 of the 26 results were in the expected direction. They also found that significant effect of socio-sexuality similarity on liking, and socio-sexuality shares some conceptual overlap with extraversion.

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

For example at the 9/11 attack there was bystanders those in need and got them out of the way of the building and debris that was falling from the buildings. Another example would be the Las Vegas shooting that had recently happened, there was a lot of bystanders who were moving people to safety and out of the shooters way so they won't get hit. People are even bystanders on social media; just by seeing somebody being bullied on the media is being a bystander. Some more examples are the Sandy Hook shooting when the teacher hide all her students in the bathroom to keep the shooter from killing them, but eventually the shooter had found them. There are many examples. For example one of the most famous case occurred in 1964 with a rape and murder of Kitty Genovese. While a man attacked, raped, and killed this young women, over 38 men and women witnessed the assault and did nothing but be a

“Why People Don’t Help in a Crisis” co-written by John M. Darley and Bibb Latané states that there are three primary reasons to a bystander’s unresponsive behavior. In the event of an emergency a person must first take notice of the situation. Then interpret if the scene is truly an emergency and ultimately determine if one has a personal responsibility to help. Darley and Bibb conclude that someone’s reactions are manipulated by how other people around respond to the situation.

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

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.]

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.

Bystander apathy is a strange psychological effect that has been observed over several years. It happens when a person is in a large group of people and an emergency is occurring. Although under different circumstances the person will have the reasonable reaction and assist the person in need. However when in a large group of people the people who are observing the emergency go through an occurrence called “diffusion of responsibility”. This causes them to think that because of the amount of people around the emergency, one of them will act, allowing them to be inactive. This is an issue as this causes every person around the area think that others will act, therefore, nobody acts as a result.

In the clip “Bystander Effect”, a social experiment is done to see how bystanders would respond to a girl potentially being abducted (The Today Show, n.d.). The experiment is recorded and observed from afar to witness how people responded. In this clip, there are various examples of pro-social and anti-social behavior to note. Unfortunately, the clip is made up of primarily anti-social behavior. All but one set of people chose not to respond to the situation. Instead, they kept on walking and chose not to get involved. These individuals seemed to not want to have to be in the middle of the situation, or take responsibility for what may or may not be happening with the adult