Warning:
JavaScript is turned OFF. None of the links on this page will work until it is reactivated.
If you need help turning JavaScript On, click here.
This Concept Map, created with IHMC CmapTools, has information related to: Bystander Effect, 1964 - New York 30 seperate knife attacks 30 mins 3rd attack woman murdered {psychologists looked into altruistic behaviour and unresponsive bystanders} Latané and Darley Too many witness, no one took action dilemma left to everyone else, Brief thought about what you see Consider it a threat or not Think about whether the person needs help first Checking responses of others If others respond ok If no response, fear to look foolish: only person defining the experience as an emergency B. Diffusion of responsibility Darley/Lutané [68] Mock epileptic fit, not aware that an action is required, the presence of other people is likely to inhibit us Latané [81] Bystander Apathy The presence of others inhibits helping behaviour 1- pluralistic ignorance 2- diffusion of responsibility 3- costs/rewards of intervention, More likely to help in an emergency if the promise of profitability increases. Before helping we consider whether we are likely to gain anything from helping in the situation Extra activity/personal loss? ???? The Witness's Motivation - No profit, lose time in waiting - Rewarded by calling for help even if not staying - Minimum costs, not needed to get more involved - Will help if no personal injury/ others can blame us if not helping, no reason - 34% - gave money needed make call - 64% - gave money wallet stolen - 70% - gave money Greater sense of emergency = more altruism displayed ???? Key factors ~ sense of responsibility ~ Cost ~ fear wasting police time, not aware that an action is required, the presence of other people is likely to inhibit us The Bystander Effect 1964 - New York 30 seperate knife attacks 30 mins 3rd attack woman murdered {psychologists looked into altruistic behaviour and unresponsive bystanders}, Too many people slows responses Others remain calm, felt situ not as an emergency.. No anxiety signals to stimulate group A. Cognitive Appraisal - Lazarus [82] Thought process occur when experience emotion, Thought process occur when experience emotion ???? Brief thought about what you see Consider it a threat or not Think about whether the person needs help first Checking responses of others If others respond ok If no response, fear to look foolish: only person defining the experience as an emergency, The presence of others inhibits helping behaviour 1- pluralistic ignorance 2- diffusion of responsibility 3- costs/rewards of intervention 1 - Latané & Darley [70] Defining the situ as Emergency Too many people slows responses Others remain calm, felt situ not as an emergency.. No anxiety signals to stimulate group, Darley/Lutané [68] Mock epileptic fit Piliavin et al [69] In face to face situation Harder to diffuse responsibility Crowded lift, Too many witness, no one took action dilemma left to everyone else Study: circumstances to when people will help no reason - 34% - gave money needed make call - 64% - gave money wallet stolen - 70% - gave money Greater sense of emergency = more altruism displayed, Darley/Lutané [68] Mock epileptic fit Schwartz et al [1970] Also diffusion if it is thought there is another person with greater expertise present, Darley/Lutané [68] Mock epileptic fit ???? Concluded that: even if situ is emergency, leave for others to deal with. More bystanders = lower probability someone accept resonsibility, Concluded that: even if situ is emergency, leave for others to deal with. More bystanders = lower probability someone accept resonsibility C. Exchange Theory Thibaut & Kelley [59] More likely to help in an emergency if the promise of profitability increases. Before helping we consider whether we are likely to gain anything from helping in the situation Extra activity/personal loss?