A person’s thoughts and emotions have a major influence on the decision they make during an emergency. Two individuals who followed emotion and not thought, Alek Skarlatos and Laurie Ann Eldridge, found themselves in action before they even knew it. Impulsive emotions during an urgent situation are a driving force that cause an ordinary bystander to become a hero. (59) Taken over by adrenaline, Alek Skarlatos took down a gunman on a flight to Paris. In the New York Times article by Adam Nossiter, published on August 22, 2015, “A Shot, a Glimpse of an AK-47, and U.S. Servicemen Pounced on Gunman on Train to France”, Mr. Skarlatos stated that he didn't fully comprehend what went on but adrenaline was the cause of his reaction. Being the first to react, there was not much time for him to hesitate or read the situation. He and a few others attacked the gunman right away. There were many disadvantages to account for, such as lack of weapons he had compared to the well-equipped gunman. However, there were lives at stake if this gunman wasn't caught. Mr. Skarlatos didn’t think about any of those factors and jumped right into action because he felt it was necessary at the time. (146) …show more content…
From her garden, Ms. Eldridge noticed an elderly woman at a railroad crossing, unaware of the nearing train. "All I could think about was the lady's face. She looked lost. She needed help, and she needed help right then," mentioned Ms. Eldridge in Wall Street Journal’s “Are You a Hero or a Bystander” by Sue Shellenbarger published on August 21, 2012. With the help of her determination, she sprinted to the elderly woman and pulled her out of the vehicle just in time. There was no time to contemplate ‘what ifs’ or to reconsider her decision. Even though her life could’ve been taken away along with the elder’s, she made the decision to run towards the tracks nonetheless.
And when it became clear to us that things were bad, the rest of the world still lacked comprehension.. We don’t see our own vulnerability until we’re standing knee-deep in mud in our basements” (Knufken 510-512). Her frustration about the desensitization of disasters and people’s reaction towards them is portrayed through statements such as this one. A different form of frustration is also noticed when she claims that she “wanted to help, but the rain wouldn’t stop. All I could do, all any of us could do was watch and wait, watch and wait"(Knufken 510-512). Her tone of frustration at this point is due to her reflection upon the inability which she had to help, her powerlessness and the lack of ability which all of the victims of this disaster had. This tone continues throughout most of the essay as she compares disasters such as this flood, to being another face in the crowd of headlines. She furthers this frustration by stating that “today alone, I read in the news that 260,000 people had to evacuate Kyoto due to a typhoon. In Washington’s Navy Yard, someone murdered 13 people with a gun. There’s the new episode of “Breaking Bad” and the threat of war in Syria. every headline screams to be first in line. Everything is a crisis” (Knufken
In Pia Orrenius and Madeline Zavodny’s article, “The Economics of U.S Immigration Policy,” Orrenius and Zavodny state that Americans’ are split between those who believe immigrants (legal and illegal) positively impact the economy and those who believe immigrants negatively impact the economy. Pia Orrenius and Madeline Zavodny’s argue that the United States needs to implement an “immigration policy that addresses the concerns” about low-skill, unauthorized “immigration’s labor market and fiscal impacts” (954). The article may appeal to experts or those who have a higher interest in immigration due to the academic diction and the genre of the article, while discussing the public concerns with immigration, how immigration impacts the economy,
Richard Connells “The Most Dangerous Game” is a short story which illustrates that calm analytical thinking can increase your odds of survival and controlling panic.
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
"It is your killer instinct which must be harnessed if you expect to survive in combat. Your rifle is only a tool; it is a hard heart that kills. If your killer instincts are not clean and st...
Bystander inaction is more influenced by the bystander’s response to other observers. The experimenters hoped to inform people of the situational forces that affect people’s behaviors in emergency situations in order to help people overcome forces that result in inaction.
It was stated that whether or not people help depends on a series of interconnected events and decisions. They must first notice what’s happening, understand that it is an emergency and accept personal responsibility. When this fails to happen that is called the bystander effect (Carpenter & Huffman, 2008, p. 422).
Also, social psychologists have long been concerned in when and why some individuals help others while some decline to help. Although the evidence for the inhibitory effect confounding, there are also counter-examples which exemplifies individuals demonstrating pro-social behavior in the presence of others. Hence, while the bystander effect can have a negative impact on prosocial behavior, altruism and heroism, researchers have identified factors that can help people overcome this predisposition and increase the probability that they will engage in helping act. Lantane and Darley (1968) proposed a five-step psychological process model to account for the bystander effect. These processes include observing that a critical situation is current, interpret the circumstance as a crisis, generate a feeling of individual obligation, believe that we have the adequate skills necessary to succeed, and finally reaching a conscious decision to render help (hellen et al )
Fear in combat can be both a blessing and a curse. Uncontrolled fear can make a soldier ineffective in combat, placing not only that soldier’s life ...
The Bystander effect can be described as the apathy to help others in distress situations. The higher the number of bystanders facing an emergency situation, the less likely are them to help. This is a demonstration of how others influenced the way we act in different situations. As we learned in class, many factors influenced our apathy to help others in distress situations. “The bystander effect contains different components related to the assistance of the bystanders helping behavior, as well as different social and cultural manifestations and their relevant causes (Rodarte, 2015).” One of the main reasons why the Bystander Effect occurs, it is that sometimes we do not perceived the situation as an emergency. Nowadays,
...next day” (McPherson, 41). Battling sickness was not the only thing that adrenaline helped. Injured men could continue to fight during an adrenaline rush. These chemical changes caused men to ignore the fact that they were in danger and made them even more dangerous killers.
Realize the event is a true emergency: Once an individual notice that there is something unusual happening, they need to determine what is happening and whether it needs attention. Interpretation of the situation is vital. If there is a true emergency, they move on to the next step
He presents a few hypothetical stories and one real one to get the students to think this question through. In one of the illustrations used the professor asks how many in the audience would actually push a “fat man” over a bridge onto the tracks below to stop a runaway trolley from killing five workers who were on the tracks in the way of the unstoppable trolley. I was surprised to see that a few hands actually went up. The argument of a student that had raised their hand in hypothetical agreement to pushing the man over the bridge, for the greater good, was that five other lives would be saved for the life of this one. Opposing views, of which whom I agreed with, were that by pushing the “fat man” over the bridge you were actually choosing and making a conscious decision to take a life; who are we to decide whose life is more valuable than
“When we sense danger, the body’s defenses kick into high gear in a rapid, automatic process known as the ‘fight-or-flight’ reaction.” (Smith)
When studying the meanings of reason and emotion it is often that reason is defined as being synonymous with logic, and emotion with spontaneity. Common associations relate logic with conscious thought and contemplation, and emotion with impulse and reflex. Emotions can undermine reasoning when they “run away with us” (Bastien 66), clouding our judgments and causing us to make bad choices. However, emotion can also enhance reasoning by giving useful guidance whenever the environment fails to provide all the information needed for thoughtful analysis.