“This presentation contains copyrighted material under the educational fair use exemption to the U.S. copyright law” AICE AS Level Psychology Piliavin,

“This presentation contains copyrighted material under

the educational fair use exemption to the U.S.

copyright law”

AICE AS Level Psychology Piliavin, Rodin, & Piliavin (1969)

Lecture 1

GOOD SAMARITANISM:AN UNDERGROUND

PHENOMENON?Piliavin, Rodin, & Piliavin (1969)

AICE Psych- Social Psych Unit

Background to the Study

“Kitty” Genovese murder in 1964 in Queens, NY

Stabbed twice in the back.. suspect ran away as someone yelled from an apt. window

After 10 minutes of no one showing up, suspect comes back and rapes her, stabs her (again), and stole $50- lasted ½ hour

Police investigation notes that 38 people heard or witnessed the attack but did not intervene b/c they “didn’t want to get involved”

Led to wave of research into “bystander effect”


A. Darley & Latane (1968) study- yielded the theory of “diffusion of responsibility” (aka “bystander effect” or “Genovese syndrome”)1. In a lab setting at Columbia U, researchers staged

emergencies with college participants2. Subject heard another 'subject' (really a tape recording

of an actor) having an epileptic fit. This 'subject' was believed to be in a nearby room.

3. In some instances, the real subject was told he was the only one around. In other trials, he was told that there were other ppl listening as well.

PollEv.com or Text to 37607 Do you think people will be more likely to help when

they are

CLASS HOUR

OPTION CODE

2 A) AloneB) w/2 other pplC) w/3 other ppl

A)728474B)728475C)728476


A)728543B)728544C)728545


A)728560B)728561C)728562


A)728014B)728579C)728580


A)528587B)528588C)528589

Background the to Study

3. Results- when alone= 80% helped, when 3 people=60% helped, and when 4+ people=30% helped

4. Showed that the more people who are present in a situation, the less likely that we are to help

5. Contend that in order for one to help, one must: ◦-notice the event◦-interpret the event as an emergency◦-assume personal responsibility◦-choose a way to help◦-implement the decision to help

Cue 1: Describe an instance where you faced the decision to help (or not) in a situation


B. Latane and Rodin (1969) conducted another similar lab experiment◦1. Found that few people in a large group would go to help an experimenter, who had pretended to fall off a chair in another roomC. But the 2 studies lacked ecological validity

-experiments were in a laboratory-the tasks were not that true to life-the victim was not in sight -the subjects were college students


D. From these 2 studies, the Piliavins and Rodin wanted to test the phenomenon in a more natural setting 1. So, the Piliavins & Rodin choose NY

subways...

Field Experiment Summary

1. An experiment conducted in a more natural environment (in the field). 2. As with the laboratory experiment, the IV is still manipulated by the researcher.3. Participants are often not aware they are

participating in an experiment4. Advantages- more ecological validity & less demand characteristics5. Disadvantages- cannot control external variables, ethics

Cue 2: Describe a field study that YOU would conduct today that investigated the bystander effect.

Purpose & Hypotheses

A. Aim of the study was to investigate whether diffusion of responsibility applies in all situations and what other factors might influence helping behaviour◦ Specifically, wanted to see which variables made it more or

less likely that someone would help a stranger who collapses in a public place. They were particularly interested in:

◦ 1. Type of victim: ill victim or drunk victim◦ 2. Race of victim: white or black◦ 3. Effect of modeling: do people follow a model?◦ 4. Group size: what effect does group

size have?

Purpose & Hypotheses

B. Unlike previous lab studies, the field experiment investigated the (a) impact of the presence of a model and (b) the relationship between the size of the group & frequency of helping.

C. Hypotheses- 1- an individual would be more inclined to help someone of

their own race2- help would be offered more and in a quicker fashion for the

ill victim (cane) over the drunk victim “people who are responsible for their own plight will receive

less help”

Cue 3: Concerning the hypotheses, what do you think the outcomes will be? Why?

Theoretical Basis & Terms

Diffusion of responsibility- the more people around, the less likely we are to intervene

Pluralistic ignorance- we look around for clues, and if no one else is helping/getting involved, we are less likely to intervene

Empathy altruism model- if we can empathize (identify) with the person, we are more likely to intervene then



copyright law”


Lecture 2

Methodology- Location

Used NY Subway system-“a lab on wheels”From 11am-3pm weekdays during April-

June 1968 at random times It was a 7 ½ minute, non-stop ride

Cue 4: Why was it important to use a non-stop ride during the trials?

Methodology- The 4 Stooges

A. 4 teams of 4 stooges (2M, 2F) (students)◦1. Males played the part of the victim & observer◦2. 1 team had a black ‘victim’, others white◦3. White females were observers in all teams◦4. All experimenters wore identical clothing

a. bomber jacket, old slacks, no tie (#losers)

Methodology- Participants

• Subway ‘participants’◦ 43- avg # of riders per section (carriage) ◦ 8.5-avg # of riders in ‘critical area’◦ roughly 55% white & 45% black◦ estimated 4,500 people overall◦ (opportunity sample)

Methodology- Layout

Cue 5: Why were the 2 observers in the adjacent area instead of the critical area?

Methodology- Terminology

Critical area- area in which the victim (confederate) collapsed

Adjacent area- area further away from the victim (confederate), at the other end of the subway train, in which the observers stood

‘Drunk condition’- victim smells of alcohol and carries a bottle wrapped in a brown paper bag

‘Cane condition’- victim appears to be sober and carries a cane

Methodology- Trials

‘Victims’ (drunk or cane) were either black or white, aged 26-35

Models (helpers) were all white, aged 24-29103 ‘experimental’ trials took place 38 drunken ones 65 cane ones

Cue 6: What critiques can be made about these characteristics of the stooges?

Methodology- Procedure

Procedure: ◦1. 70 seconds after the subway left the stop, ◦ victim pretended to collapse ◦2. Victim remained on floor until helped OR ◦3. Model was instructed to help either after 70 ◦ seconds (early trial) or 150 seconds (late ◦ trial) to see if others would also help

Methodology- Procedure

4. Observers recorded response time, info on race, gender, sitting or standing, & location of

passengers and those who helped5. Observers also noted overheard comments or if the passengers moved away 6. Whether the victim (cane or drunk) was helped or not, the team would exit the train at the new station and cross over to another train going back to the original station7. 6 to 8 trials were ran on any given day

Methodology- Variables

Independent Variables:◦ -Type of victim (drunk or cane)

-Race of victim (white or black)-Manipulated actions of the model

Dependent Variables:◦ -Race of the helper◦ -Which victim was helped most◦ -Speed of helping◦ -Gender of helper◦ -How many people helped◦ -Whether bystanders moved away◦ -Overheard comments

Methodology- Data Collection

A. Study implemented observational data collectionB. Advantages

◦-Behaviour is more naturalistic◦-More ecologically validity

C. Disadvantages◦-May be difficult to record so much information at

any one time and may miss some data◦ -Difficult to pinpoint variables in observations (what

actually constitutes helping?)◦-May misinterpret some behaviours and inter-rater

reliability is sometimes difficult◦-Easy to gather quant data (but not qual data)◦-Possible unexpected behaviour ◦ -Less ethical



copyright law”


Lecture 3

Results- Data (quan)

A. Overall, 93% spontaneous help (before the model), 60% had more than one helper

LOOK AT TABLE 1 IN STUDYB. Cane victim- 100% help w/out model (62/62) -100% help w/model (3/3) -=95% spontaneous help of total trials (62/65) -avg of 5 seconds to helpC. Drunk victim- 86% help w/out model (19/22) -75% help w/model (12/16)

-=50% spontaneous help of total trials (19/38) -avg of 109 seconds to help

Results- Data (quan)

Results- Data

E. Black victims received less help less quickly (especially in drunk condition)F. Neither race was more helpful overall…

◦1. BUT there was a slight ‘same race effect’ where whites were more likely to help the white victim (most noticeable in drunk condition among blacks too)

G. Men were significantly more likely to help (90% of first helpers)

Cue 7: Why do you think that there was a race effect? What about more males helping?

Results- Data (mixed)

H. In 20% of the trials, subway riders moved away from the critical area (34 people)

-mostly females, noting their size/strength “It’s for men to help him” “I wish I could help him – I’m not strong enough” “I never saw this kind of thing before – I don’t know where to look” "You feel so bad that you don't know what to do."

Results

I. No ‘diffusion of responsibility’ was found ◦1. In fact, there was a trend for more help being

offered with the larger group size 2. Authors suggest this may be b/c the Ps were face

to face with the victim unlike in the lab experiments

Cue 8: What other factors may have led to the difference b/w this study and the previous lab studies?

Results

K. The longer that the victim went without help:◦(1) the less impact a model had on bystanders

intervening◦(2) the more likely that bystanders were to

leave the critical area◦(3) the more likely bystanders were to discuss

the incident

Discussion- ACR Model

A. Arousal: Cost-Reward Model-(ACR model)◦1. “proposes that the decision to help others

depends on the arousal and the costs and rewards of helping versus not helping”

B. According to the Piliavins and Rodin (1969), their model explains the behavior on the subway system:

1) When there is an emergency, bystanders have an unpleasant experience of nervous arousal and they want

to decrease/eliminate this


2) We can reduce this arousal by either (a) helping the victim, (b) going and getting help for the victim (not an option in this study), (c) leaving the area, or (d) deciding not to offer help b/c you think the victim doesn’t deserve it

3) Bystanders choose their response based on a COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS. This means they weigh the costs of helping or not, weigh the benefits of helping or not, and choose the option with the lowest costs & the highest benefits


D. Possible costs of helping:◦ -the effort (may be physically demanding)◦ -the time required (we may be late for work)◦ -the loss of resources (damage to clothes)◦ -the risk of harm◦ -negative emotional response (we may feel sick)E. Possible costs of not helping:

-may feel guilty/ashamed-if something bad happens, “it was my fault”

F. Possible rewards for helping -self-esteem & social approval


G. The ACR Model may help explain some of the results from the study:

◦1)There was less help for the drunk-victim, because the costs were higher (disgust, fear) and the benefits lower (it was his own fault he fell)◦2) Lower female help b/c they felt the costs were higher (danger) and the benefits were lower (it's not a woman's role to be heroic)


3) There was more same-race help because of greater empathy for the victim and the costs of not helping (disapproval for not helping your own) 4) The longer the emergency lasted, the more people moved away from the critical area (reducing arousal)

Strengths & Weaknesses

Strengths High ecological validity

◦High internal validity Standardized procedure Proposed new theoretical explanation

Weaknesses Less strict conditions in field than lab Unequal trials (only 8 black cane) Ethical considerations

Ethical Considerations

Numerous ethical problems:

Lack of informed consentDeceptionNo debriefing took placeNo explanation of purposePossibly caused anxiety, inconvenience,

and/or lasting effects on subway riders

Follow-up studies

1972 study- victim used a fake blood capsule- help rate decreased to 60% due to psychological aversion- bystanders more likely to get someone else to help

1975 study- when victim had ‘ugly facial birthmark,’ help rate at 61%

Documents

“This presentation contains copyrighted material under the educational fair use exemption to the U.S. copyright law” AICE AS Level Psychology Piliavin,