Critically evaluate the claim that the bystander effect is caused by diffusion of responsibility.
Psychological Sciences / C804.
Panagiotis Spanakis.
201232842.
Word count = 1500.
The bystander effect is a social phenomenon, whereby individuals are less likely to help when others are present. This emerged following the murder of Kitty Genovese, 1964. Manning, Levine and Collins (2007) state, ‘this iconic event focused research attention on the psychology of helping and how groups act as impediments to helping.’ (pp. 555). Theorists argue the more bystanders, the less likely people help. Arguably, one cause of the bystander effect is diffusion of responsibility, this is the idea that when a task is presented before a larger group,
…show more content…
This essay presents evidence for various arguments of the causes of the bystander effect including: diffusion of responsibility, perceived authority, audience inhibition and individual differences. Although the bystander effect is partly caused by diffusion of responsibility, it is important to remember that we must take into consideration other factors that also contribute. As individuals we have different beliefs, attitudes and values. Therefore we respond to situations differently. Some people are self-absorbed in their own lives so assume someone else will help, others comply with authority, some are embarrassed to help and many people are just not able to help. This disagrees with the claim that the bystander effect is caused by diffusion of responsibility, suggesting all factors can cause the bystander effect depending on the …show more content…
E., Mcmaster, M. R., Bartell, P. A., & Dragna, M. (1988). Subject Competence and Minimization of the Bystander Effect. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 19 (13), 1133-1148.
Critelli, J. W., Keith, K. W. (2003). The Bystander Effect and the Passive Confederate: On the Interaction between Theory and Method. Journal of Mind and Behavior, 24 (3-4), 255-264.
Darley, J.M., Latane, B. (1968). Bystander intervention in emergencies: Diffusion of responsibility. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 8 (4), 377-383.
Fatkin, J. M. (2007). Group size and personalization's effect on Facebook message response rates. Information Technology & People, 30 (1), 71-80.
Latane, B., Nida, S. (1981). Ten Years of Research on Group Size and Helping. Psychological Bulletin, 89 (2), 308-324
Manning, R., Levine, M., & Collins, A. (2007). The Kitty Genovese Murder and the Social Psychology of Helping: The parable of the 38 witnesses. American Psychologist, 62 (6), 555-562.
Markey, P. M. (2000). Bystander intervention in computer-mediated communication. Computers in Human Behavior, 16 (2), 183-188.
Milgram, S. (1963). Behavioral Study of obedience. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 67 (4),
The bystander effect refers to the tendency for an observer of an emergency to withhold aid if the:
Do we ever really know how we will act when put into a hectic situation? Some may be calm and collected in times of need and step up as a leader; others may fall under the pressures put upon them. Though the boys from William Golding’s Lord of the Flies, all react very differently in their particular situation, they all have one thing in common; they all fall victim of becoming a bystander. When looking at John Darley and Bibb Latane experiments on witness behavior, one can easily see that the boys on the island fell into what we know as the bystander effect, while stranded on the island. The work of William Golding shows many occasions where the bystander effect comes into play for the boys and changes their actions.
The bystander effect is a the phenomenon in which the more people are are around the less likely someone will step-in or help in a given situation. THe most prominent example of this is the tragic death of Kitty Genovese. In march of 1964 Kitty genovese was murdered in the alley outside of her apartment. That night numerous people reported hearing the desperate cries for help made by Kitty Genovese who was stabbed to death. Her screams ripped through the night and yet people walked idly by her murder. No one intervened and not even a measly phone call to the police was made.
The Effect of Intergroup Contact, Empathy, Cultural Openness, and In-Group Bias on Assertive Bystander Intervention Intentions.”, they discuss how in a bystander effect experiment in which a group of adolescent girls is presented with a name-calling scenario. Instead of perpetuating the situation due to intergroup anxieties they behaved as assertive bystanders because they employed empathy, as stated in the following quote, “…we found that intergroup contact had an indirect effect on assertive bystander intentions via empathy, cultural openness and in-group bias. More specifically, greater intergroup contact was related to higher levels of empathy, higher levels of cultural openness and reduced intergroup bias, which in turn were associated with greater assertive bystander intentions.” The presence of empathy allowed the girls to understand the position and perspective of the immigrant being called names. This exemplifies the progressive direction groups of future generations are moving toward, acting on information and understanding, rather than biased emotion. The one limitation in adding bystanders to cause positive effects seems to be around surveys or feedback, such as on social media like Facebook, Instagram or twitter. In their article, “Leverage Between the Buffering Effect and the Bystander Effect in Social Networking.”, Yu-Ping Chiu and Shu-Chen Chang discuss how when one reaches a certain
As our textbook describes the bystander effect as the tendency for any given bystander to be less likely to give aid if other bystanders are present. To put it into my own words, I think that bystander effect is where people are less likely to help because of the diffusion of responsibility. We are more likely to help: the person appears to need and deserve help, if the person is in some way similar to us, the person is a woman, when we have just observed someone else being helpful, if we are not in a hurry, if we are in a small town or rural areas, when we are feeling guilty, when we are focused on others and not preoccupied, and when we are in a great/good mood (Myers).
Latane and Darley (1968) investigated the phenomenon known as the bystander effect and staged an emergency situation where smoke was pumped into the room participants was in. Results showed that 75% of participants who were alone reported the smoke, whereas only 38% of participants working in groups of three reported (Latane & Darley, 1968). Their findings provide evidence for the negative consequence of the diffusion of responsibility. In line with the social influence principle, bystanders depend on reactions of others to perceive a situation as an emergency and are subsequently less likely to help. Latane and Darley’s findings were also supported in recent research: Garcia and colleagues (2002) found that even priming a social context by asking participants to imagine themselves in a group could decrease helping behaviour. It can be contended that these findings are examples of social proof where individuals believe actions of the group is correct for the situation, or examples of pluralistic ignorance where individuals outwardly conform because they incorrectly assumed that a group had accepted the norm (Baumeister & Bushman,
The bystander effect plays a key role in society today. More and more people ignore a person in distress.
Milgram, Stanley. Issues in the Study of Obedience: A Reply to Baumrind. From American Psychologist. Vol. 19, pp.848-852, 1964.
The size of a group is considered to be a restrictive condition on the quantity and quality of connection that can transpire amongst particular members. Kephart (1950) established that as group size increases the number of relationships that exist among member’s increases greatly. He suggests that as a result of this increase in relationships among members there will be an increased tendency towards divisions into subgroups in which participants relate to one another.
Owen, K., & Hancock, A. B. (2010). The role of self- and listener perceptions of
Some characteristics in this study are worthy of featuring its strength. One of the strengths is providing a new insight in bystander effect. The study argued that researchers have previously neglected the potential benefit of bystanders and thus, the study provided a new horizon by proving reversed bystander effect through experiment. This allows us to be aware of the fact that someone may be providing help merely due to impression management. This arouses a doubt on whether the one who provides help is genuinely concerning a...
Darley, J. M. & Latané, B. (1968) Bystander intervention in emergencies: Diffusion of responsibility, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 8, 377–383
A bystander is a person who is present and overlooks an event but takes no part within it. If someone was to be lying on a sidewalk unconscious and another person walked by and ignores the fact that there is a human being lying passed out in front of them, it makes them a bystander. However, bystanders are present in many different varieties. A possible bystander could be someone who hears a conversation occurring about breaking into a house, if the person decides not to say anything and later the house gets broken into it makes them a bystander. A psychological study done by Bibb Latané and John Darley discovered that “…people are less likely to offer help when they are in a group than when they are alone” (Burkley). This discovery can be
Milgram, S. (1963). Behavioural study of obedience. Journal of abnormal and social Psychology. 67 (4), p371-8.
In contrast, when observers perceive a nonconforming behavior as unintentional, it does not result in enhanced perceptions of status and competence. When a nonconforming behavior appears to be