Database results:
examBoard: AQA
examType: GCSE
lessonTitle: Bystander Behaviour Introduction
Have you ever seen someone in trouble and wondered whether to help? Maybe you've been in a crowd when someone needed assistance, but nobody stepped forward. This fascinating area of psychology explores why people sometimes help others in need and why, surprisingly often, they don't.
Key Definitions:
In 1964, a young woman named Kitty Genovese was murdered outside her apartment in New York. Initial reports claimed that 38 witnesses saw or heard the attack but did nothing to help. This case sparked research into bystander behaviour, though later investigations revealed the story was exaggerated by the media. Nevertheless, it raised important questions: Why don't people help in emergencies?
Understanding bystander behaviour helps us:
The bystander effect describes a strange social phenomenon: the more people who witness an emergency, the less likely any individual is to help. This seems backwards, doesn't it? You'd think more witnesses would mean more help, but psychology tells us otherwise.
Psychologists Bibb Latané and John Darley proposed that bystanders go through a five-step decision-making process before intervening:
First, a person must notice that something is happening. In busy environments, people might be distracted and miss signs of an emergency.
Next, they must interpret the situation as an emergency requiring help. Ambiguous situations make this step difficult.
The person must feel personally responsible for providing help. This is where diffusion of responsibility often prevents action.
They need to decide what form of assistance to offer. Lack of knowledge or skills can prevent intervention.
Finally, they must actually provide the help. Concerns about personal safety or embarrassment might stop them.
If a person fails at any of these steps, they won't intervene. This explains why many emergencies go unaided despite multiple witnesses.
Latané and Darley (1968) conducted a famous experiment where participants were placed in a waiting room that gradually filled with smoke. When alone, 75% of participants reported the smoke. But when with two passive confederates (actors who ignored the smoke), only 10% reported it. This demonstrated how social influence affects our perception of and response to emergencies.
Several factors can increase or decrease the likelihood that someone will step in to help:
Larger groups typically lead to less individual intervention. However, if one person in a group helps, others are more likely to follow. Groups of friends are more likely to intervene than groups of strangers.
Clear emergencies receive more help than ambiguous ones. If it's obvious someone needs help (e.g., they're bleeding), bystanders are more likely to intervene than if the situation is unclear (e.g., someone sitting motionless who might be sleeping or ill).
People are more likely to help those they perceive as similar to themselves. This could be based on age, ethnicity, gender, or other shared characteristics.
The higher the personal cost (time, effort, danger, embarrassment), the less likely someone is to help. People weigh the costs against potential benefits before deciding to intervene.
Research suggests that bystander behaviour varies across cultures and between genders:
Collectivist cultures (which emphasize group harmony) often show higher rates of helping behaviour than individualistic cultures. However, the bystander effect has been observed across many different societies.
Some studies suggest men are more likely to intervene in physically dangerous situations, while women may be more likely to provide emotional support. However, these differences are often small and context-dependent.
In 1993, two-year-old James Bulger was abducted from a shopping centre in Liverpool by two 10-year-old boys. CCTV footage showed that 38 people saw the distressed toddler being led away, yet no one intervened. This tragic case highlights how the bystander effect can occur even when a child is visibly in danger. Witnesses later reported assuming the boys were brothers, demonstrating how misinterpretation of a situation can prevent intervention.
Understanding the psychology of bystander behaviour allows us to develop strategies to encourage intervention:
Bystander behaviour is a fascinating area of psychology that helps explain why people sometimes fail to help others in need. The bystander effect and diffusion of responsibility show how social influence can prevent intervention, even in clear emergencies. By understanding the five-step decision process and factors that influence helping behaviour, we can develop strategies to overcome these barriers and create a society where people are more likely to help those in need.
In your next session, you'll explore specific research studies on bystander behaviour in more detail and learn about other aspects of prosocial behaviour.
Log in to track your progress and mark lessons as complete!
Login NowDon't have an account? Sign up here.