Bystanderism

toc =Bystander behavior=
 * LO: Examine factors influencing bystanderism **
 * Email me your youtube links or upload your video to the school portal and send me those links **
 * Examine factors influencing bystanderism**

**Classwork**
__**3A**__
 * Ugam, Jess, Hae Min - http://meetingwords.com/UNgnaCrxGv + [|video]
 * Gwen, Emma, Chiara, Sofia - https://docs.google.com/document/d/1IXLNcZuAwfdOWdjeBLEFxcqELJ-7i19ARJlhvYULFWI/edit + [|video]
 * Roger and Daniel - [] + [|video]
 * John and Angeline - http://meetingwords.com/Ee1usFOese + [|poem]

__**4A**__ Andy, Yvonne, Helena, Poppy and Marisa - //[|Bystander outline] +// // [|Lyrics] // Mimi, Sean and Ishita - //[|outline and rap lyrics]// Kelvin, Tim, Mohan, Charles // - ** please send me your Bystander outline link ** [|Diffusion of responsibility rap]+ //// [|song lyrics] // Phillip, Yuna and Brooke // - ////** please send me your Bystander outline link **** + video **// Laura and Rachelle - //** please send me your Bystander outline link **// [|video]

// people walking by when someone's on thier knees //
 * Lyrics**
 * // Bystanderism - noboday helping the homies in need //

// nobody helping, nobody tries // // everybody scoffing and just walking by //

// there are many ugly reasons for this unkind act // // arousal cost award is one of those facts //

// This little number, does no good // // stopping people from helping even if they could //

// if people don't see an award, they won't try // // if people don't experience arousal, others will die //

// Piliavin and Rodin the raddest researchers in town // // studied the behavior in the new york underground //

// an actor would trip, stagger, then fall. // // he either had a cane or was very drunk, yall //

// with the cane, he was helped 100 percent // // but as a drunk it was only 8 out of ten //

// thinking he is in a drunken haze // // people didn't reciprocate his gaze //

// they don't help him because its embarrassing to be seen // // they don't want to be laughed at or associated with him //

// they would get no reward or be looked up upon // // for helping a drunk who would keep stumbling on //

// and therefore we have arousal cost award // // an act of kindness some cannot afford. //

IB IN THE HOUSE. WE B IN THE HOUSE. EVERYBODY PUT YOUR HANDS UP!
 * // By Laura and Rachelle //** ||  || AYO, MS LEONG IN THE HOUSE.

Yeh, yeh uhuhhuh. I SAY PSYCHO! YOU SAY LO-GY!!! PSYCHO -LO-GY! PSYCHO -LO-GY! I can't hear youuu.

Drop the beat: In 1964 in a dark cold city Such horror that day, That lady named Kitty Stalked, chased, stabbed, raped No one responded to her cries, no one cared for her pain 38 witnesses of this scene yet no one did step out 2 minutes, 120 seconds was all it took for police to come, save and see A tragedy, yeh, a shame Everybody bow your heads and pray!!!!

What is this injustice, what comes to play? The bystander effect is its name It goes like this: When an emergency happens and others are round The numbers hide you, and you are bound To forget your value to forget your name And this is, diffusion of responsibility Stop hiding behind that mask of anonymity Your identity merges with the group and lessens responsibility Faceless and useless stop giving her your pity You bunch of sheep watching, muteless, without a sound Such a bitter cold ruthless reality No, its just diffusion of responsibility.

The more eyes to watch, the less heart to react When other people are around, everyone pushes Those feelings and worries back Stop thinking that lady will speak up, or surely, this man will stand up Carpe deim, be the hero of the day

Now, Lets break it down to 5 parts Yooo DJJAY

Firstly you recognize what is happening With your sense, your sight, and your heart Not to waste a second You have to understand this situation requires a pressing decision to act with speed and precision Come to the conclusion that the moment is real This emergency is overflowing your sense and feel And thirdly and most importantly, you have to accept: Personal responsibility, that’s personal responsibility.

The hero of the day, should be you A knight in shining armor, its not too good to be true Don't put the blame or heavy burden on The shoulders of others Don’t point your fingers when you have been waiting on the sidelines Don’t back out like a little meek lamb Pick up your feet, and go help out that ma’am Pounce at the opportunity, it can save lives Don’t worry kid, help her out, its your time to shine

Fourthly, before diving in, man get a hold of yourself Take a good look through that mirror And think: Wiill your help actually help Do you have the skills or should you just yelp

Lastly decide how you will help, Do this or do that, Call first or call last Save the day don’t allow diffusion of responsibility, my brother. PREACHHHHH, I'm out.


 * by Mimi, Sean and Ishita ** ||


 * Readings:**
 * Crane pp 263 - 268
 * Law et al.
 * Eysenck

The Kitty Genovese case
Research into helping behavior First - familiarize yourself with the Kitty Genovese case [|Hear it -] OR [|Read it -]

[|American Heritage site]

=Factors influencing bystanderism= Now - summarize and explain TWO of the following factors. Support your explanation with reference to specific studies:
 * diffusion of responsibility
 * arousal-cost-reward
 * pluralistic ignorance - where you assume nothing is wrong, because no one else seems concerned
 * ambiguity
 * social norms


 * Review Eysenck on diffusion of responsibility, arousal-cost-reward and social norms**

Cognitive decision model
 * Latane & Darley came up with a specific model - 5 stages where you can decide to help at any one of those stages
 * 1) recognize what's happening
 * 2) see the situation as an emergency where someone should do something
 * 3) accept personal responsibility - that the someone should be you, even if there are other people
 * 4) decide whether you can help (skills)
 * 5) decide how you will help

For __pluralistic ignorance__, if you look at Darley and Latane's 5 stage model, pluralistic ignorance corresponds to __stage 2__ (we won't think it's an emergency if no one else is doing anything), while __diffusion of responsibility__ corresponds to __stage 3__ (we might not accept personal responsibility if others are there).

Latane and Darley see these as 2 distinct psychological processes that might help to explain social inhibition in the context of bystanderism

Diffusion of responsibility

 * 1) Define this
 * 2) How is it supposed to work?

When other people are around, everyone seems to think that someone else will assist the victim.
 * You have all the responsibility
 * more people = less responsibility

** Evidence **

 * Latane and Darley (1968) - lab experiment ** - participants were anonymously involved in a discussion over an intercom.
 * Some participants were told that there were five other people in the discussion,
 * others were told that there was only one.
 * At a certain point, the pre-recorded voice over the intercom cried for help and made severe choking sounds as though having an epileptic seizure.
 * Participants who were told that there were 4 other people in the discussion were much less likely to help than participants who were told that there was only one.
 * % who helped within 2 min when they thought they were alone?
 * % who helped within 2 min when they thought there were 4 other participants?
 * Conclusions were
 * An explanation to this may be that the participants felt they only held a small portion of responsibility over the victim.
 * the greater the number of witnesses present, the less likely for individuals to provide assistance. Because whether or not an individual chooses to help a victim is affected by situational factors such as the number of other witnesses present, results of L&D’s study indicate that DR is a situational determinant and contributing factor to bystanderism
 * Limitations
 * is there participant bias?
 * is ecological validity a consideration?
 * are there ethical considerations?

Arousal cost reward
This factor argues that there are personal costs and rewards associated with helping and not helping. Individuals may be also more inclined to help when they experience a state of arousal.

__Findings__ __Conclusions__
 * Evidence**
 * Piliavin and Rodin (1969) - field experiment ** on whether cost-reward influences altruism and bystanderism,
 * investigated helping behavior in the New York subway.
 * used a confederate who staggered forwards and collapsed on the floor, either acting sober and holding a cane or appearing drunk and holding a bottle.
 * the cost and reward evaluation played a role in helping behavior but diffusion of responsibility did not.
 * This experiment is known as a field experiment because it was carried out in a New York subway station, which is a natural environment, and the condition of the confederate was manipulated.
 * the cane victim received help 100% of the time, while the drunken victim received help 81% of the time.
 * According to arousal-cost-reward model, the motivation for a person to help is due to their desire in reducing unpleasant feelings of arousal.
 * An explanation to why the drunk is helped less often than the man with a cane may be because of the high costs outweighing the rewards of helping a drunk.
 * Helping a drunk is likely to cause disgust, embarrassment, and harm to the witness, thus turning them away from the idea of helping the victim. Furthermore, nobody will blame a person for not helping a drunk as drunken people are perceived to be partially responsible for their own victimization.
 * These findings supports the arousal-cost-reward theory that personal appraisal of costs and rewards of a situation affects bystanderism, as well as mood and cognition.
 * **cost-benefit analysis** (cognitive factor) and **unpleasant emotional arousal**(emotional factor) play a role in whether or not an individual (bystander) will intervene
 * __egoistic motivation__


 * Limitations**
 * assumes people will not act on impulse but always consider cost-benefit
 * assumes we always act for personal benefit - a__n egoistic motive__

Additional factors: Arousal and Ambiguity
See Law et al. p. 260 - 261
 * The greater the arousal (emotional factor), the more likely it is that the bystander will intervene
 * Amato (1986) - bushfire donations greater from those who reported higher feelings of shock
 * Ambiguity
 * Sterling and Gartner (1983) - participants raised heart rates through exercise acted as long as it was clear there actually was an emergency
 * Brickman (1982) - participants heard something falling plus a scream - if someone else acted as though it was an emergency, participant more likely to offer help than if the confederate said it was nothing to worry about -pluralistic ignorance at work.

=Comparison= //**(What if the command terms asks you to contrast 2 factors?)**//


 * The diffusion of responsibility theory and arousal-cost-reward model are similar in that they both generate personal responsibility and have been tested outside the lab, resulting in greater ecological validity
 * However, they are also dissimilar
 * the diffusion of responsibility theory presents a situational determinant on helping behavior,
 * the arousal-cost-reward model presents an economic model of the interaction between emotion and cognition, and a personal assessment of costs and rewards

**Topic Sentence 1**: __One similarity of the two factors is that they both generate personal responsibility.__

**Topic Sentence 2:** __Both the arousal-cost-reward model and the diffusion of responsibility theory can be tested under conditions outside of the laboratory, which increases the ecological validity of the two theories.__ Field experiments are experiments that take place in a natural environment where variables are still manipulated.


 * Topic Sentence 3:** The DR factor is a situational determinant of bystanderism, whereas the CR model focuses more on personal assessments of costs and benefits and the interaction between emotion and cognition.