Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
limitations to the bystander effect
bystander effect research topics
limitations to the bystander effect
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: limitations to the bystander effect
It was chilly dawn on March 13th, 1964 that 28-year-old bar manager Catherine Kitty Genovese was walking home. While she was walking towards her house, a 29-year-old machine operator came out and stabbed her twice in the back. Catherine was frightened and desperately screamed for help. There were 38 citizens who watched the killer stabbing the woman, but no one called the police as they did not want to be involved in the situation. As a result, Catherine died while her urgent cries were unanswered by 38 witnesses (Martin Gansberg, 1964). After this tragedy, psychologists named the situation in which people do not offer any help to a victim when other individuals are around them as the Genovese syndrome (Meyers, 2010). The bystander effect, which is another name of the Genovese syndrome, emerged as a hot potato in several fields of study such as psychology, sociology, and ethics since it became much more rampant in modern society with the spread of the egoism. Some bystanders rationalize their decisions according to their comparison between the values of their own safety and others’. However, the bystander effect is an undesirable phenomenon as it degrades the moral level of overall society, destroys the system of social trust, and has negative influences on various social fields.
First of all, the bystander effect corrupts the moral level of the whole society. Moral levels of the society are determined by two main factors, which are moral conscience and moral consciousness. Moral conscience is an inborn faculty that assists in distinguishing right from wrong (May, 1983). This inner voice often makes a person feel guilty when he/she commits actions that go against moral values and leads the person to behave morally. For instance, p...
... middle of paper ...
...rated. Since bystander effect is a complicated problem related to various fields such as psychology, sociology, and ethics, integrated efforts from multilateral aspects are required. While the bystander effect still exists in the society, there is always a certainty for another tragedy of Catherine Kitty Genovese to happen. Without individual and social effort to effectively eradicate the bystander effect, everyone, including you, may fall to be the next victim.
Works Cited
Martin G. (1964, March 27). Thirty-eight who saw murder didn't call the police. New York Times.
Meyers, D. G. (2010). Social psychology (10th Ed). New York: McGraw- Hill.
May, L. (1983). On conscience. American Philosophical Quarterly, 20: 57-67.
Namee, Abigail, and Mia M. School-wide intervention in the childhood bullying triangle. Taylor & Francis Online. (2012, July 25): 370-378. PDF file.
The bystander effect refers to the tendency for an observer of an emergency to withhold aid if the:
... so is sacrificial to one’s rights, it puts them in an undesirable position where they may be harmed as well, and success at being an upstander is not guaranteed. Perpetrators tyrannize those who are unable to stand up for themselves; like how predators seek out the vulnerable preys. Hence, instead of having bystanders to stand up for the victim, the victim should stand up for him/herself. In addition, unlike what Lehrman believes, bystanders are not the most dangerous to the victim; the perpetrator is. Saying that bystanders are the most dangerous is is like saying that if one witnesses something, then he/she is a criminal. Consequently, saying that bystanders should stand up for victims against perpetrators is illogical and naive. Concisely, it is not another’s responsibility to ensure one’s safety and wellness; instead, it is one’s responsibility to do so.
Crime and deviant behavior surprisingly helps increase “social activity” among various different people within a society. Therefore, crime and deviant behavior brings “people together in a common posture of anger and indignation…when these people come together to express their outrage over the offense…they develop a tighter sense of solidarity than existed earlier” (Erikson 4). For example, in the Steven Avery case, the people of Manitowoc, Wisconsin, all had very strong feelings of Steven Avery and his family, and as a result they were seen as deviant people in their own hometown. Those feelings towards him, and his family, would be a critical factor when he was accused of the horrendous crime (Making). Based on their feelings towards the Avery family, the society in which he lived developed the overall concept of us versus them (Erikson 11). Therefore, another concept that arises as a result of crime and deviant behavior is public temper, which is described as a “mutual group feeling” (Erikson
All in all, if we do not stand up then we only affirm the perpetrators, and if there are too many that affirm perpetrators instead of standing up for the victim, bystanders can prove to be more dangerous than the perpetrators.
Public opinion leads society to believe in the “good woman – stranger rapist” stereotype. In actuality, females are typically victimized by known perpetrators. According to Catalano (as cited in Kappeler and Potter, 2005, p.43), of all rapes and sexual assaults, seventy percent of women were perpetrated by someone known to the victim; thirty percent were committed by strangers. Regarding homicide, women are nine times more likely to be killed by a family member, a previous or current lover, or an acquaintance. However, Alice Sebold’s case actually played into the stranger stereotype.
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.
Kitty Genovese case led to the development of the 911 emergency call system and inspired a long line of research led by psychologists Bibb Latané and John Darley around the time of 1970 into what circumstances lead bystanders to help someone in need. They discovered that, the more people available to help, the less likely any individual person would help—a phenomenon they called the “bystander effect.” If you are the only one around when an elderly person stumbles and falls, the responsibility to help is yours alone, but, with more people present, your obligation is less clear. Latané and Darley called this the “diffusion of responsibility” (CSI). A more recent case of the bystander effect was when assault victim Marques Gains laid motionless in the street due to by a hit-and-run; traffic whizzed past along with a few people stopped and seemed to stand over Gaines, who was crumpled near the curb on North State Street. No one tried to lift him from the pavement or block traffic. The lack of action by passers-by cost the hotel cocktail server his life after a cab turned the corner and drove over him. Experts says that a traumatic or odd event occurring in a public setting triggers an array of social and cultural cues and, combined with human nature, often leads to the lack of action by witnesses
When the victim does not fit the ideal victim attributes which society has familiarised themselves with, it can cause complications and confusion. Experts have noticed there is already a significant presence of victim blaming, especially for cases involving both genders. The fear of being blamed and rejected by the public is prominent in all victims. Victim blaming proclaims the victim also played a role in the crime by allowing the crime to occur through their actions (Kilmartin and Allison, 2017, p.21). Agarin (2014, p.173) underlines the problem of victim blaming is due to the mass of social problems and misconceptions within society. The offender can have “an edge in court of public opinion” if victim blaming exists, resulting in the prevention of the case accomplishing an effective deduction in court (Humphries, 2009, p.27). Thus, victims will become more reluctant to report offences because of their decrease in trust in the police and criminal justice system, leading to the dark figure of
An individual's inclement to uphold his or her responsibility to his or her community depends greatly on society’s treatment towards their own self, changing them to become selfish or selfless towards their peers. Abigail Williams, who has been neglected by someone she loves, can feels an insatiable hunger for vengeance towards her community, whereas John Proctor, who live a respected lifestyle, is encouraged to consider the value of the loss of innocent lives compared to the loss of his own.
The bystander effect was first studied by two social psychologists Bibb Latané and John Darley. This all started after the incident of the infamous murdering of Kitty Genovese in Kew Gardens New York. Kitty Genovese had just parked her car and started walking towards her apartment when she was attacked by her murderer and repeatedly stabbed three times over a half an hour period of time. As she was screaming for help while being stabbed to death, there were a total of 38 bystanders who heard her screams and some were even watching the event go on from their window and not a single one of these bystanders bothered help her or even call the police until it was too late and she was killed.
However, that opposing argument can be found as hypocritical. If a person was getting robbed in an ally and they saw many witnesses taking no action they would likely be upset by the fact of no one is offering any assistance to them. Bystanders should put themselves into the shoes of the person in need and ask themselves how they would expect others to respond if they were the one in need. Often time’s bystanders take no intervention because of the diffusion of responsibility. “When there are four or more people who are bystanders to an emergency situation, the likelihood that at least one of them will help is just 31%” (Gaille). Another statistic shows that 85% of people who were bystanders would intervene if they knew or at least though they were the only person present in the situation. Often the only thing keeping people from intervening in bystander situations are other people. It is important for bystanders to understand the statistics of the people around them in order to create action because often times they do not realize that if they were to intervene other people would likely support them in the situation. Bystanders need to make it a personal responsibility to intervene in situations for the good of other. If people were to always take action the amount of bullying, sexual harassment, crime, and many other significant issues within a society would drastically
Bystander effect, (Darley & Latane, 1970) refers to decrease in helping response when there are bystanders around relative to no bystanders. Referring to previous study stating that there are some cases of which group size may promote helping instead of hindering it (Fischer et al., 2011). Researchers then speculate the possibility of positive influences from bystanders by taking public self-awareness into consideration. Researchers proposed that high public self-awareness would reverse the bystander effect in this study with 2 independent variables which are bystander and presence on the forum. They are defined as number of bystanders (absent vs present) and salience of name (salient vs non-salient) respectively. 86 students are randomly assigned to one of the four conditions in the experiment. Response of participants in the online forum is the operational definition for the dependent variable of helping behavior. The result shows that number of response increases with respect to increase in bystanders when public self-awareness is enhanced by using accountability cue (Bommel et al., 2012). Participants were asked to rate how notable they were from their view afterwards as a manipulation check.
In conclusion, moral disengagement is a means by which people can more easily commit inhumane acts, and is a theory as to why people commit these acts. However, the article that defines moral disengagement and its mechanisms so well fails to propose any fixes for the social conditions that it claims are the most likely to cause outbursts of heinous behavior.
On March 13, 1964 a woman by the name of Catherine “Kitty” Genovese was coming back to her apartment in Queens, New York at 3:00 a.m. when she was impaled to death by a serial killer. According to the news, the said attack was about 30 minutes long. During the attack, Kitty Genovese screamed for help numerous times. The killer left the scene when the attention of a neighbor was attracted. Ten minutes later, the killer returned to the scene and murdered Genovese. It came to attention that 38 people witnessed the attack and murder, but all thirty-eight failed to report it until after the murder. This ordeal got the attention of many people including scientists and psychologists who wanted to figure out why this occurred. Later, the events that were published by the news were found to be false. It seemed as if the news was experiencing the bystander effect as well, because their information did not contribute to the actual facts. There were not 38 witnesses to the crime, but several had heard the screams and a few calls were made to the police during the attack. But there was still talk about something that affected the minds of people during emergency situations. This phenomenon has become known as the Bystander Effect. There were several cases that are fairly similar to the Genovese one. As well as the Genovese case, these occurrences attracted the attention of many scientists and even the news had something to say about “apathy.” Is the bystander effect real? My hypothesis is that the bystander effect is in fact, a real everyday occurrence that limits the help offered by people. This is due to the number of bystander present during a given situation. The Bystander Effect is the social psychological idea that refers to cases in whi...
...ames M. Hudson and Amy S. Bruckman study a specific component of the bystander effect: social cues. This component states that, “Individuals actively look to one another for cues about how to behave in the situation. The inaction of others will likely cause the inaction of the individual” (Hudson and Bruckman 170). Humans are always worrying about what others think of them. Therefore, if there is a situation which requires help, but the majority is simply watching, an individual who may be willing to assist will quickly change their mind. This is the case with the magistrate. Since so many people were watching and treating his torture as a spectacle, those who would want to help didn’t for fear of standing out. This fear of helping the magistrate and going against the Empire is a result of the pressure that war brings to stay completely loyal to a person’s nation.