Psychology 3720F/G Lecture Notes - Lecture 3: Murder Of Kitty Genovese, Pluralistic Ignorance, Ingroups And Outgroups
2 May 2018
School
Department
Course
Professor
Situational Determinants of Prosocial Behaviour
The Context: When will people help?
Low Cost
High Cost
Stranger
Casual Helping
Emergency Helping
Close Other
Emotional Helping
Substantial Personal Helping
Emergency Helping - Kitty Genovese
• Man appeared to be following her
• Approached her, stabbed her
• People saw but did not help - diffusion of responsibility/ pluralistic ignorance (bystander effect)
Emergency Helping: Decision Tree Model (Latane and Darley)
Steps that must happen to help soeoe else…
1. Notice Event?
2. Interpret as Emergency? Obstacle: not noticing
a. We rely on other people to determine if it is an emergency or not
b. As Participants were completing a questionnaire, smoke entered the room through a vent
i. Alone (3/4 getting up and leaving)
ii. 2 other participants (40% of time one would get up to leave)
iii. 2 other passive confederates (10% of time)
3. Accept personal responsibility? Obstacle: bystander effect
a. Participants believed they were participating in group discussion via an intercom system
b. (In reality only one participant, with varying confederates, varying 1, 2, and 5 others)
c. At one point, one group member (confederate) reports having a seizure
d. Conditions and results:
i. Only witness - 80% of time told experimenter
ii. 1 other witness - 60%
iii. 4 other witnesses - 31%
Bystander effect: Diffusion of responsibility and pluralistic ignorance
• Groups with rules: get involved vs. not getting involved
Overcoming:
• Single out person to help; tell them what to do
• Victims who scream / make needs known receive help 75-100% of the time
• Silent victims: 25-40% of the time
4. Decide how to help? Obstacle: lack of competence
a. Ladder falling - majority of nursing students got up to help, not many education students
5. Implement Help? Obstacle: audience inhibition -> afraid of embarrassment in a group
*Only if 5 steps are met will a person give help
Helping Strangers
• Many other situational factors powerfully influence rates of helping
Arousal: Cost-Reward Model
find more resources at oneclass.com
find more resources at oneclass.com
• Piliavin et al (1981)
• Bystander calculus: Helping more likely to occur when the rewards (to self and victim) outweigh
the costs (to self and victim)
1A. Urban vs. Rural Environment
• Steblay (1987)
o Much more likely to be helped in rural areas (does not differ if over 50 000)
• Correct overpayment
• Help lost child
• Tell your name
• Give donation
• People or i rural settigs do ot retai their altruis… possile reasos
1. Stimulus overload
2. Diversity hypothesis
3. Diffusion of responsibility
1B. Presence of Helpful Model
Environmental Factors
• Bryan and Test (1967)
o Broken down car (mustang) planted at side of road (in L.A.)
o Model condition (Oldsmobile planted 400m before mustang -seeing someone else helping
that women)
o Control condition (no model)
o D.V.: % of motorists who stopped to help Mustang driver
• Following someone to make a donation - 2x as likely to make a donation
2A. Perceived Costs to Helper
1. Psychological cost
• E.g., Piliavin and Piliavin (1972)
• Confed. collapses on subway
o C1: Blood trickling down chin - % helped aye people do’t wat to oe ear lood
o C2: No blood (95% of time)
o DV: Likelihood anyone helped victim
2. Embarrassment (McDonalds and McKelvie, 1992)
• At mall, male confederate either dropped a mitten or a box of condoms
o Mitten: 47%
o Condoms: 17%
3. Physical (e.g., breaking up a bar fight)
4. Social Disapproval
5. Financial
2B. Mood of Helper
• Good Mood effect: tendency to be more helpful when were happy
o Occurs with both children and adults
• Baron (1997)
• Participants were passersby in mall
find more resources at oneclass.com
find more resources at oneclass.com
Document Summary
Emergency helping - kitty genovese: man appeared to be following her, approached her, stabbed her, people saw but did not help - diffusion of responsibility/ pluralistic ignorance (bystander effect) Emergency helping: decision tree model (latane and darley) Obstacle: not noticing: we rely on other people to determine if it is an emergency or not, as participants were completing a questionnaire, smoke entered the room through a vent. 2 other participants (40% of time one would get up to leave) Only witness - 80% of time told experimenter. Bystander effect: diffusion of responsibility and pluralistic ignorance: groups with rules: get involved vs. not getting involved. Single out person to help; tell them what to do: victims who scream / make needs known receive help 75-100% of the time. Obstacle: lack of competence: ladder falling - majority of nursing students got up to help, not many education students. Obstacle: audience inhibition -> afraid of embarrassment in a group.
