PSYC1001 Lecture Notes - Lecture 14: Murder Of Kitty Genovese, Socalled, Crash Twinsanity
12 Jun 2018
School
Department
Course
Professor
What is prosocial behaviour?
Emergency helping
Who is likely to help?
How to get help
Who is likely to receive help?
How to increase helping?
WHAT IS PROSOCIAL BEHAVIOUR
E.g. giving time and money, charity, donating etc.
○
Textbook definition: Actions intended to benefit others
•
Kitty was attacked outside her apartment in New York and called for help
▪
Murdered outside apartment in 1964
▪
Attack continued for 45 minutes --> made it clear that she needed help
▪
No one helped or called the police until after 45 minutes
▪
Surveyed around --> many people were home in nearby buildings, no one came to her aid; no one did anything
▪
Punchline: people could've helped but they didn't --> caught public attention and social psychologists
○
People assumed that New Yorkers were evil or apathetic, but many of the so-called witnesses reported being
distressed for years --> therefore, they did not lack empathy
○
If they didn't lack empathy --> why didn’t they help?
○
Social psychologists grasp onto this question --> not a personal situation but a social situation
○
Case: Kitty Genovese
•
When the presence of others inhibits helping
□
Ironic decrease in helping
□
The Bystander Effect:
▪
E.g. if asked whether one is likely to help if someone needs it in front of a lecture presentation or
alone --> most would say in front of a presentation but this is false
Number of people present increases, individuals feel less personal responsibility and help becomes less
likely
□
Diffusion of responsibility:
▪
One other person or
◊
Two three four or five other people
◊
Thought that they were either talking to: (key manipulation)
This was all pre-recorded
The people talked about their epilepsy, then one minute in, begins to have a seizure
The people would go silent for a minute and then pretend to have a seizure
Participants talked about campus life to other participants over an intercom
□
Researchers were interested if the participants would get the experimenter for help
□
However, Latane and Darley was interested in how many people would help
□
Experiment: The seizure study
▪
Proposed that maybe people didn't help in emergency need is because of the thought processes happening while
the event is happening i.e. figuring someone else was going to do it
○
Latane and Darley witnessed the case
•
EMERGENCY HELPING
5C - Social Psychology
Wednesday, May 30, 2018
2:53 PM
PSYCH 1001 Page 1
Emergency intervention: Decision Tree (Latane & Darley, 1973)
•
As someone is going through witnessing an emergency, they go through the steps and if they fail at any step, they fail
to help
•
E.g. beach --> everyone is screaming and splashing in the water --> ambiguous --> they might be having fun
□
The situation isn't always perceived as an emergency
▪
Seminary students: prepare a sermon and report to the lab in the building next door
Low: it'll be a few minutes before they're ready for you, but you might as well head on over
Medium: assistant is ready for you, so please go right over
High: they were expecting you a few minutes ago, they should be waiting for you so hurry
Manipulation: casual phrase that the experimenter used
◊
Groaning victim in the alley
Results:
Experiment: Good Samaritan study
□
Presumably, the 45% didn't see it happening so they didn't really choose to stop
◊
In a hurry, people are less likely to notice the emergency
▪
Notice the emergency
1.
E.g. beach situation - identify if it is actually an emergency situation
□
Ambiguity of situation --> look to others
▪
cues to an emergency
"I don't know you!"
"I don't know why I ever married you!"
Manipulation - half the time the woman says..
◊
People who interpret the second phrase, they interpret it differently
Many stop to intervene when woman says the first phrase (more than 3x many observers tried
to stop the assault by the stranger as opposed to the "husband")
Results
◊
Man and woman physically fighting on the street
Experiment
□
Informational social influence - when it is unclear, we often look to other people to see what they are doing. If
no one is doing anything, then they might not see it as an emergency
▪
Interpret as emergency
2.
Diffusion of responsibility - each bystander's sense of responsibility to help decreases as the number of
witnesses increases.
□
E.g. seizure study --> if there was an emergency in the lecture theatre, the people are more
anonymous whereas by yourself, you are less anonymous --> hence more likely to help
Most likely under conditions of anonymity and when it's difficult to tell what others have done.
□
Bystander effect/diffusion of responsibility
▪
Assume responsibility
3.
PSYCH 1001 Page 2
Document Summary
E. g. giving time and money, charity, donating etc. Kitty was attacked outside her apartment in new york and called for help. Attack continued for 45 minutes --> made it clear that she needed help. No one helped or called the police until after 45 minutes. Surveyed around --> many people were home in nearby buildings, no one came to her aid; no one did anything. Punchline: people could"ve helped but they didn"t --> caught public attention and social psychologists. People assumed that new yorkers were evil or apathetic, but many of the so-called witnesses reported being distressed for years --> therefore, they did not lack empathy. Social psychologists grasp onto this question --> not a personal situation but a social situation. Proposed that maybe people didn"t help in emergency need is because of the thought processes happening while the event is happening i. e. figuring someone else was going to do it.
