• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

Discuss research evidence relating to Human Altruism and/or bystander behaviour When studying the explanations of bystander behaviour, Latane and Darley

Extracts from this document...


Discuss research evidence relating to Human Altruism and/or bystander behaviour When studying the explanations of bystander behaviour, Latane and Darley (1970) formulated the decision model, which is a five stage model to explain why bystanders at emergencies sometimes do and sometimes do not offer help. Before bystanders intervene, they go through a series of stages. At first, they must notice the situation, then they must interpret as to whether or not it is an emergency, they must then decide to accept some personality and then consider what the best form of intervention is. Lastly, at stage five, they must decide how to implement their intervention. At each stage of this model, observers may make a decision that inhibits helping. Latane and Darley identified two distinct psychological processes that might explain the social inhibition effect. If one emergency is witnessed by more than one person, the less the personal responsibility there is for one individual bystander. ...read more.


found that bystanders who stood face-to-face with other bystanders were more likely to help in an emergency than those who stood back to back. They concluded that the effects of pluralistic were stronger when in the back-to-back condition as bystanders were unable to see each others facial expressions, so were deprived of important interpretative cues. Secondly, the arousal: cost-reward model by Piliavin et al (1981) suggests that when people come across someone in need, they work their way through various stages before they respond or walk away. The first requirement is for the bystander to experience physiological arousal. When we see someone in distress, we become physiologically aroused. This arousal is unpleasant so we are motivated to reduce it. The greater the arousal, the more likely it is that a bystander will help. When people are in a state of personal distress, they are motivated to do something about it, but first costs and benefits have to be calculated. This means weighing up the costs of helping against the costs of not helping. ...read more.


The likelihood of students agreeing to help was higher when their costs were low and the costs of not helping were high. Helpfulness was much lower in all other conditions. Many studies of bystander behaviour suffer from the same problems as studies of Altruism- they use studies of psychology students as participants, and some of the experimental set-ups may lack believability. There have, however, been a number of field experiments of bystander behaviour and such experiments have their pros and cons. The behaviour studied is real-life behaviour, and since participants are not aware of participating in an experiment, they do not change their behaviour in response to experimental cues. On the downside, it is more difficult to control extraneous variables. Moreover, field studies have also shown that people who are not in a laboratory tend to behave differently, which means that many of the laboratory findings reported may well lack ecological validity. ?? ?? ?? ?? Zara Aslam Psychology A-level Essay- Pro and Anti-Social Behaviour 1 ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our AS and A Level Social Psychology section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related AS and A Level Social Psychology essays

  1. Marked by a teacher

    Compare and Contrast two theories of Bystander Behaviour

    4 star(s)

    The idea that the Bystander will choose the response that most rapidly reduces the discomfort produced by arousal is supported by Dovidio et al. 1991. (Gross 2001) Another factor in explaining why bystanders choose not to intervene that can be applied to both theories is the cost of time.

  2. Marked by a teacher

    Outline and evaluate two or more theories of bystander behaviour.

    3 star(s)

    Pilavin et al. believed that the most common way to label arousal was as personal distress, and that people intervened to quell this feeling (negative-stage relief model of altruism). Between this stage and the next, social norms come into effect.

  1. Pro and Anti Social Behaviour

    imaging how they feel rather than how we feel. Help is then given for altruistic reasons i.e. to decrease that person's distress. If the other person's perspective is not taken in, empathetic concern doesn't happen and instead we experience personal distress (concern with ones own discomfort, plus the motivation to reduce it e.g.

  2. Conformity discussion.

    Participant High Condition Answers Rank Participant Low Condition answers Rank 1 654 24 1 354 12 2 756 27 2 330 10 3 402 15 3 235 5 4 606 22 4 456 17 5 742 26 5 784 28 6 234 4 6 650 23 7 100 1 7

  1. Pro and Anti Social Behaviour

    They were then asked if they would take the remaining shocks instead of Elaine. Some students were told they could leave if they wanted, others were told that they had to stay and watch 'Elaine' receive them if they did not volunteer themselves to receive them.

  2. Bystander behaviour - I am going to talk about bystander intervention (why some people ...

    Below shows 5 stages Latene and Barley believe is a bystander's behaviour in an emergency. 1. Does the bystander notice the situation (if he does not notice how could he help)? 2. Does the bystander see it as an emergency (or are they just fooling around)?

  1. Psychology essay. Outline research evidence relating to bystander behaviour. Assess the effects ...

    One confederate said he suffered from seizures and later appeared to collapse. When participants thought they were the only listener, 85% helped, if there was only one bystander 62% helped, with four bystanders 31% helped. As the number of people they believed were also in a position to help increased, people were less likely to help.

  2. Discuss Research Relating to Bystander Behaviour.

    As the discussion develops, the confederate having the 'seizure' sounds as if he is having a fit. Latane and Darley found that when the participant in the first condition is under the impression that he is the only witness, 85% get help during the fit, 100% go for help, and on average take fifty seconds to make the decision.

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work