Why Don't Bystanders Help? Diffusion of Responsibility or Social Norms?

Authors Avatar

Why Don’t Bystanders Help?

Diffusion of Responsibility or Social Norms?

Abstract

The aim of this study was to determine the extent that people are willing to assist a person that is in need of help in a non-emergency situation.

This experiment was designed to test two concepts of helping behavior. Diffusion of responsibility, where the person in a group situation feels that is not his personal responsibility to intervene and others will intervene if necessary. Social norms concept, where people will do what society expects them to do.

Using 125 participants, a non emergency situation was simulated. Finding a lone person in the street, an experimenter dropped approximately 100 sheets of loose leaf paper from a folder in the presence of a lone person, and reported those that helped. Using a confederate (a person taken into the confidence of the experimenter, and told the purpose of the study), 3 different conditions were conducted as follows:

  1. Experimenter in the presence of a confederate that helped to pick up the papers.
  2. Experimenter in the presence of a confederate that did not help to pick up the papers.
  3. Experimenter by himself.

It was found that only 40% helped if the experimenter was alone, 44% helped if the confederate did not help, and 55% helped if the confederate helped, supporting that of the social norm concept.

                                Introduction

This study is aimed at determining the amount of assistance onlookers will give a person in difficulty when in a group situation and when they are alone.

The study will examine two concepts of interest: Diffusion of responsibility, and Social norms. Definitions of norms as expectations, Popenoe (1983, cited in Cialdini, Reno & Kallgren, 1990), “of how people are supposed to act, think, or feel in specific situations” or Ross (1973, cited in Cialdini, et al) described, “cultural rules that guide behavior within a society”.

Since the attack on Kitty Genovese, where she was stabbed to death in a residential section of New York City, with no fewer than 38 witnesses watching, and not one of which helped or tried to call for help. Her stabbing proceeded until her death, more than half an hour later. All the onlookers were watching from the safety of their own apartments, saw lights and figures in adjoining apartments, knowing others were also watching, yet nobody was willing to help, Rosenthal, (1964, cited in Latane` & Darley, 1968). This diffusion of responsibility seen in the case of Kitty Genevese has initiated a lot of research in this area.

Latane` and Darley (1968), suggest that before an individual can decide whether or not to act upon a situation, there are several steps that first need to be taken. The first step is the bystander needs to notice the event, he then has to interpret that the event is an emergency, then he must decide if it is his personal responsibility to act upon the situation. During this process the person is able to remove himself from the situation by either choosing not to notice the event, not interpreting the event as an emergency, or he is able to diffuse the responsibility onto others, in a group situation.  

Latane` and Darley’s (1968) study on the effects of group size on helping behavior, suggests that group situations prohibit an onlooker from intervening or calling for assistance. The onlooker presumes others will intervene if necessary, diffuse the responsibility. In an experiment involving a room filling with smoke, the experimenter put one person in the company of two confederates that were to act like the smoke was of no concern. The participants reaction to the smoke was that of indecision and relied upon the others (confederates) reaction for help in interpreting the situation, when the participant realised the others (confederates) lack of concern for the smoke he ignored it himself. In another experiment, the participant was alone when the smoke started filling the room and after assessing the situation himself he called for help. This research suggested that people are more inclined to help when they are alone than when they are in the presence of others. In group situations, the onlookers may feel embarrassed to help Edelmann (1984). They may feel they have interpreted the situation wrongly, this is why nobody else is helping. Initiating help when it is seemed unnecessary may bring feelings of foolishness for making the wrong decision. The bystander could interpret the situation as not an emergency following the lack of response from  others. The onlooker may be in a hurry, busy at the time, or over loaded with current responsibility, Krupat & Epstein (1973), finding it easier to diffuse the responsibility onto others present.

Join now!

Research has found that social norms have a great effect on bystanders helping response. In a study conducted by Bryan & Test (1967), they conducted 3 experiments, testing the social norm explanation. Experiment 1. Lady in Distress: A Flat tyre story, their findings were that of social norms. The experiment consisted of 2 conditions, a control condition where a lady who had a flat tyre and quite obviously needed assistance to change it, and a model condition where there was a model car parked ¼ of a mile before the control car, the car was raised with a jack, and ...

This is a preview of the whole essay