Final Project Milestone One
PSY-520
12/10/17
Peter Pouzbouris
The first article is written by John M Darley and Bibb Latane, written in April of 1968. According Darley and Latane hypothesis, the more bystanders to an emergency, the less likely, or the more slowly, any one bystander will intervene to provide aid. One example Darley and Latane used to show an example of Diffusion of responsibility was, a young woman in New York was stabbed to death in the middle of the street in a residential section of the city. the attacker took more than half an hour to kill Kitty Genovese, not one of the 38 people who watched from the safety of their own apartments came out to assist her. Not one even lifted the telephone to call the police …show more content…
During the discussion, one of the other subjects underwent what appeared to be a very serious nervous seizure like epilepsy. The major dependent variable was the time elapsed from the start of the victim's fit until the subject left her experimental cubicle. The major independent variable was the number of people the subject thought to be in the discussion group. The main results stated that those in group of 2 people responded quicker than those in a 3 or 6 group, an analysis of variance indicates that the effect of group size is highly significant (p < .01). Duncan multiple-range tests indicate that all but the two- and three-person groups differ significantly from one another (p < .05). The results also stated, sex made no difference in respond time. Darley and Latane concluded, the individual’s personality may not be the reasoning on why they do not help a bystander in need but more on how others react to a bystander in need of help. The article above clearly showed that individuals are less likely to help a bystander if they were in a larger group compared to a smaller …show more content…
One of their main literature reviews was based on the first article by Darley and Latane (1970). Peter Fischer and colleagues, used many examples by Latane and Nida (1981) and Darley and Latane (1970). effect. In sum, from the perspective of the focal individual who is supposed to help, Latane´ and Nida (1981) found a substantial bystander effect in groups. Whereas 75% of participants helped when they faced a critical incident alone, only 53% did so when other bystanders were present. Also, from the victim’s perspective, the likelihood of receiving help was lower when his or her need was witnessed by a group (70% helping) versus by a single person (82% helping); however, this difference was attenuated to non-significance when
PSY-520
12/10/17
Peter Pouzbouris
The first article is written by John M Darley and Bibb Latane, written in April of 1968. According Darley and Latane hypothesis, the more bystanders to an emergency, the less likely, or the more slowly, any one bystander will intervene to provide aid. One example Darley and Latane used to show an example of Diffusion of responsibility was, a young woman in New York was stabbed to death in the middle of the street in a residential section of the city. the attacker took more than half an hour to kill Kitty Genovese, not one of the 38 people who watched from the safety of their own apartments came out to assist her. Not one even lifted the telephone to call the police …show more content…
During the discussion, one of the other subjects underwent what appeared to be a very serious nervous seizure like epilepsy. The major dependent variable was the time elapsed from the start of the victim's fit until the subject left her experimental cubicle. The major independent variable was the number of people the subject thought to be in the discussion group. The main results stated that those in group of 2 people responded quicker than those in a 3 or 6 group, an analysis of variance indicates that the effect of group size is highly significant (p < .01). Duncan multiple-range tests indicate that all but the two- and three-person groups differ significantly from one another (p < .05). The results also stated, sex made no difference in respond time. Darley and Latane concluded, the individual’s personality may not be the reasoning on why they do not help a bystander in need but more on how others react to a bystander in need of help. The article above clearly showed that individuals are less likely to help a bystander if they were in a larger group compared to a smaller …show more content…
One of their main literature reviews was based on the first article by Darley and Latane (1970). Peter Fischer and colleagues, used many examples by Latane and Nida (1981) and Darley and Latane (1970). effect. In sum, from the perspective of the focal individual who is supposed to help, Latane´ and Nida (1981) found a substantial bystander effect in groups. Whereas 75% of participants helped when they faced a critical incident alone, only 53% did so when other bystanders were present. Also, from the victim’s perspective, the likelihood of receiving help was lower when his or her need was witnessed by a group (70% helping) versus by a single person (82% helping); however, this difference was attenuated to non-significance when