Most of us would like to think of ourselves as decent, helpful people. We proclaim that we would never turn our backs on someone in obvious need of help-or would we? In fact, any of us, when faced with a person who seems to be in trouble, do nothing. To explain this, the term bystander effect was coined by sociologist and psychologists. It is a psycho-social phenomenon that suggest the more people there are present at a scene of emergency, the less likely they are to help. In the mind of the individuals in the group, a common unconscious thought occurs: “This group is really big; surely someone has dealt with the situation or eventually will”. Basically, the mere presence of bystanders reduces the chances of intervention, and reduces the likelihood …show more content…
Logically, if everyone thinks like this, no helpful actions will be taken towards the emergency and the consequences could be fatal. This seems to sound a little backwards. It would be fair to say that common sense leads us to believe that there is safety in numbers. However, through research and to this phenomenon in our society, the proof of this definition is all too real and quite shocking. John Darley and Bibb Latane revealed that the amount of time a participant takes to initiate action and seek aid varies in accordance to the number of observers present in the room (Hudson and Bruckman 175). There are numerous explanations for the bystander effect, although social psychologists have placed emphasis on two explanations: social influence and diffusion of responsibility. This paper discusses the psychology behind the bystander effects and its impacts on society and outlines the Darley and Latane’s theory and the experiments relating to the bystander effect, and will also include and ethical …show more content…
Philosophers debate ethics and morals from many perspectives. John Stuart Mill provides one of the most holistic approaches to ethics. He provides an a posteriori approach to ethics for any rational being with a developed mind. Even with solid definitions for utilitarianism, Mill still is faced with fundamental issue: the inability to prove the morality of bystanders. He uses a happiness based approach to ethics, where exercising a role in the community is the key to happiness: “His own good, either physical or moral, is not a sufficient warrant. He cannot rightfully be compelled to do or forbear because it will be better to do so, because it will make him happier…”(Mill). According to utility, duty inhibits pleasure because it is be a requirement(like in the good Samaritan law). However, this assumption neglects the actual definition of utility. Mill defines utility as pleasure, in its own essence. Therefore, utility is equivalent to happiness, ultimate end for all virtuous actions. As long as the action results in increased happiness, the action is worth doing. As long as actions increase the happiness of society, it is virtuous. However, Mill states that the main focus of duty should be individual, not societal. He also says do whatever it takes to protect yourself, but do no harm. In consequentialism, actions are judged as right or wrong solely based on whether or
The bystander effect refers to the tendency for an observer of an emergency to withhold aid if the:
The principle of utility states that actions or behaviors are right in so far as they promote happiness or pleasure, wrong if they tend to deliver despondency or torment. Mill believes that the principle of utility is the perfect way to evaluate ethics is through the individual's happiness. People who have the opportunity to chose or purse there own form of happiness usually makes really wise ethical decisions, which improves society. I agree with mill’s theory because happiness always produces good things, which would very beneficial to the
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
Martin Luther King, Jr. once said, “The ultimate tragedy is not the oppression and cruelty by the bad people but the silence over that by the good people.” We are All Bystanders by Jason Marsh and Dacher Keltner is an article that reflects on the psychological and social phenomenon that refers to cases in which people do not offer any assistance or help to a victim. Studies say that a person's personality can determine how they react to a bystander situation. In a book called, The Heart of Altruism, author Kristen Monroe writes the altruistic perspective. Altruistic people are strongly connected to other humans and have a concern for the well-being of others. Markus Zusak’s The Book Thief exemplifies the bystander theory through Liesel and
Latane and Darley (1968) investigated the phenomenon known as the bystander effect and staged an emergency situation where smoke was pumped into the room participants was in. Results showed that 75% of participants who were alone reported the smoke, whereas only 38% of participants working in groups of three reported (Latane & Darley, 1968). Their findings provide evidence for the negative consequence of the diffusion of responsibility. In line with the social influence principle, bystanders depend on reactions of others to perceive a situation as an emergency and are subsequently less likely to help. Latane and Darley’s findings were also supported in recent research: Garcia and colleagues (2002) found that even priming a social context by asking participants to imagine themselves in a group could decrease helping behaviour. It can be contended that these findings are examples of social proof where individuals believe actions of the group is correct for the situation, or examples of pluralistic ignorance where individuals outwardly conform because they incorrectly assumed that a group had accepted the norm (Baumeister & Bushman,
John Stuart Mill argues that the rightness or wrongness of an action, or type of action, is a function of the goodness or badness of its consequences, where good consequences are ones that maximize the greatest amount of happiness for the greatest number of people. In this essay I will evaluate the essential features of Mill’s ethical theory, how that utilitarianism gives wrong answers to moral questions and partiality are damaging to Utilitarianism.
With the utilization of the internet search engine Bing, I was able to pursue a Pennsylvania State University source from the electronically published brochure Policies Safety & U: 2017 Annual Security Report and Annual Fire Safety Report in PDF form, updated on September 28th. As a well-established institution, Penn State has an accredited reputation that accumulated over the course of the last century and a half, dedicated to education, research, and serving the public through various ways. The current information gives insight into the procedure of the esteemed institution, in addition to other links and sources that can supplement the discussion topic. Being a periodically issued document to all students of the University, it states non-biased procedures, actions to take in case of an emergency, and moreover, crucial information leading to external resources to assist the enrolled scholars in various areas concerning Penn State.
John Stuart Mill claims that people often misinterpret utility as the test for right and wrong. This definition of utility restricts the term and denounces its meaning to being opposed to pleasure. Mill defines utility as units of happiness caused by an action without the unhappiness caused by an action. He calls this the Greatest Happiness Principle or the Principle of Utility. Mill’s principle states that actions are right when they tend to promote happiness and are wrong when they tend to produce the reverse of happiness. Happiness is defined as intended pleasure and the absence of pain while unhappiness is defined as pain and the lack of pleasure. Therefore, Mill claims, pleasure and happiness are the only things desirable and good. Mill’s definition of utilitarianism claims that act...
The bystander effect plays a key role in society today. More and more people ignore a person in distress.
A bystander is a person who is present and overlooks an event but takes no part within it. If someone was to be lying on a sidewalk unconscious and another person walked by and ignores the fact that there is a human being lying passed out in front of them, it makes them a bystander. However, bystanders are present in many different varieties. A possible bystander could be someone who hears a conversation occurring about breaking into a house, if the person decides not to say anything and later the house gets broken into it makes them a bystander. A psychological study done by Bibb Latané and John Darley discovered that “…people are less likely to offer help when they are in a group than when they are alone” (Burkley). This discovery can be
Thankfully, researchers have changed since Nijinsky was diagnosed. Doctors in the early 1900s didn’t know how to properly treat a person with schizophrenia. Medical doctors would often place a person with the condition into an institution for an extremely long period of time and would perform tests that are now seemingly absurd, such as John Nash’s’ shock treatment. Many would undergo such where they would inject a patient with large doses of insulin in order to produce daily comas over several weeks It was one of a number of physical treatments introduced into psychiatry in the first four decades of the twentieth century. These included the convulsive therapies (cardiazol/metrazol therapy and electroconvulsive therapy), deep sleep therapy
Bystander effect (Darley & Latane, 1970) refers to a decrease in response when there are bystanders around relative to no bystanders. Referring to a previous study stating that there are some cases in which group size may promote helping instead of hindering it (Fischer et al., 2011). Researchers then speculated on 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: 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.
Based on the articles, human behavior is very weird. Some people will help you right away and even stay by your side throughout your entire time of need while others would just elude away from it. Some of the people will even abet people on even if it is wrong. That is why humans are so weird. We do things without even noticing it and that is our problem today.
Darley, J. M. & Latané, B. (1968) Bystander intervention in emergencies: Diffusion of responsibility, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 8, 377–383