The bystander effect is a situation where people do not offer help in emergency situations when other people are present, even when one is capable of doing so. This essay will examine the main factors that influence bystanderism.
One factor that influences bystanderism is pluralistic ignorance. When in a group, people often look to others to know how to react. This is known as informational social influence. This means that if people see that others are not reacting, then they will not react either. They will conform to the group norms of bystanderism. Latane and Darley carried out an experiment on pluralistic ignorance. They asked participants to sit in a waiting room before participating in an experiment. While they were waiting, they heard the female experimenter fall and cry out for help. They found that participants reacted more quickly and more often when they were the only ones in the waiting room compared to when they were alone sitting with a confederate who showed no reaction. During post-experimental interviews, the participants said that they had felt anxious when they heard the experimenter fall, but because the other people in the waiting room did not react, they thought that it was not an emergency. This experiment shows that people look to others to know how to react. However, participants were not in their natural environment, and so this study lacked ecological validity.
Another factor that influences bystanderism is diffusion of responsibility, which is a phenomenon that occurs in large groups where there is a tendency of individuals to refrain responsibility and to expect that someone else more competent would help. Latane and Darley conducted a laboratory experiment where they told student participants that they would be interviewed about living in a high-pressure urban environment. Anonymity was preserved as they were interviewed over the intercom. Some of the students were told that there were five other people in the discussion group, others were told there was just two and some there was only one. All the comments they heard from other groups were pre-recorded. At one point, one of the voices cried for help. When the students thought that they were the only person there, 85% rushed to help. When they thought there was another person there, this dropped to 65%. When they thought there were five other people, this dropped to 31%. Believing someone else would intervene lowers the probability of a person taking responsibility. This experiment shows that people tend to refrain from responsibility in larger groups.
Another factor that influences bystanderism is proximity of bystanderism. The smaller the distance between the bystander and the victim, the more directly responsible the bystander will feel - and thus they are more likely to help. Piliavin et al conducted a field experiment where confederates acted as strangers in need of help in the New York subway. This was an opportunity sample of over 4000 participants. They found that help was offered just as much in a crowded subway than in a non-crowded one, which suggest that it is difficult to refuse help in an emergency face-to-face situation. This shows that people are more likely to help when the distance between them and the victim is small. However, this study can be criticized on ethical grounds. Participants could not give their consent, as they did not know that they were participants in an experiment. They were also deceived because they are unaware that it is not a genuine emergency. Participants were also not debriefed as this would have been almost impossible. Participants may also experienced guilt, distress or anxiety. Another problem with this field experiment is that it was difficult to control. For example, we could question whether travellers on the train saw more than one trial. They are also difficult to replicate and time consuming. However, a main strength of this study was that it is high in ecological validity. The sample size was also very large and therefore it can be generalized.
Bystanderism is an complex issue and does not only depend on pluralistic ignorance, diffusion of responsibility and proximity of bystander, but also with age, identification with the victim and perception of emergency.
No comments:
Post a Comment