Why Don't Bystanders Help?

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.

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.

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.

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

Well it does and it’s called Bystander Nonintervention. Bystander Nonintervention means just the way it sounds; it’s when people, bystanders, watch instead of intervene in a situation. This article relates very well to chapter 13 in our psychology. I would say this article is the number #1 example used to show bystander nonintervention, I mean it’s used in the book. So what causes bystander intervention? It’s not so much that people don’t care, which psychologist used to think was the case, coining the term bystander apathy. But the bystander effect was more along the lines of “psychological paralysis” according to John Darley and Bibb Latane. People want to help in an emergency but find themselves frozen perhaps because of shock. With bystander nonintervention there is more danger in numbers than safety, totally opposite from what you usually hear. The more people around the less likely people will help. There are to major factors the contribute to bystander nonintervention according to Darley and Latane; pluralistic ignorance which prevent us from interpreting if a situation is an emergency, if no one is around helping is must not be an emergency, and diffusion of responsibility which discourages us from offering assistance in an emergency, if you don’t help it’s not your

Many people assume that someone will get involved in a dangerous situation. You would think that one person would take action and help, but most people fail to help someone in need. Why does no one help or take action during these types of events?. Are they scared for their own safety or are they too busy worrying about themselves to get involved. What would you do if that person in need of help was a loved one?. Would you react differently or would your actions remain the same?.

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 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 by stander effect is a term that came to fruition when Kitty Genovese was brutally raped and murdered in front of her apartment, and 38 individuals witnessed the entire tragedy and turned a blind eye. Researchers were interested in this phenomenon and set out to research the bystander effect further. The bystander effect occurs when an individual’s likeliness of helping decreases when in the presence of others in an emergency situation (Fischer, Krueger, Greitmeyer, Vogrincic, Kastenmuller, & Frey, 2011). The purpose of this study is to measure the level of helpfulness among college age students with emphasis on the bystander effect. The model that this study follows is the Bystander Intervention Model by Latane and Darley. A series of five steps must be followed while intervening in the case of an emergency, the stages are again as follows: (1) noticing the event, (2) interpreting the event as an emergency, (3) making the choice to intervene, (4) knowing how to provide help, and (5) applying the behavior (Jenkins & Nickerson, 2016). As a group, we set out to analyze the bystander effect among college age students, while focusing on how gender impacts the given scenario.

According to Aronson, Wilson, and Akert (2013) prosocial behavior is defined as an act performed for the benefit of another person. Altruism is referred to as the want to help another individual even if it means no benefits, or possibly a cost, for the helper (Aronson, Wilson, & Akert, 2013). One particular factor, the bystander effect, has a profound impact on whether or not people help others. The bystander effect states that as the number of people who witness an emergency increases, the likelihood that any of those people will help decreases (Aronson et al., 2013). Processes associated with the bystander effect such as pluralistic ignorance, diffusion of responsibility, and victim effect all impact the likelihood of prosocial