Latifa Derasmo

Social Psychology, section 4436

The Bystander Effect

The term bystander effect (or in the Genovese case, non-intervention) refers to the apathetic
phenomenon in which, it was hypothesized that, the greater the number of people witnessing a
given situation, the less likely bystanders will help a person in distress. In other words when an
emergency condition occurs, witnesses are more likely to intervene if there are fewer or no other
people around. This is illustrated by the concept of diffusion of responsibility as evidenced in
the tragic 1964 Genovese murder in which 38 neighbors assumed the others had alerted the
authorities.
The concept of the Bystander Effect (Darly & Latane; To Help or Not To Help, 1968) was
popularized by John Darley of New York University and Bibb Latan of Columbia University
several years after the Genovese case. These social psychologists wanted to conduct a study
called Bystander Intervention in Emergencies. The purpose of the study was to examine the
factors that affect our decisions to help others in emergency situations. Especially the time it
takes to intervene and get help whether the individual was the only witness or one of many
people witnessing the emergency.
As it was not possible to replicate the conditions of the Genovese case, the researchers conducted
an experiment with NYU psychology students. The experiment was to have students
anonymously describe their feelings about competitive urban college life, over intercom to elicit
natural behavior in each grouping.

The independent Variables were the number of participants within a discussion group; thus three
levels of IVs were created. Group 1 would be talking to one person only, group 2 would speak
with two other people and group 3 believed that there would be five others on the intercom.
Now that the IVs were established, an emergency had to be concocted to set the stage for the
experiment. This condition was in the form of a staged epileptic seizure. This scenario would
have provided the Dependent Variable which was time taken for participants to seek and
request help during the emergency; and also the percentage of those participants who sought help
for the affected student.
Darley and Latan wanted to test their hypothesis which is that the large number of people who
witnessed the violent event, decreased the willingness of individuals to step in and help(To help
or not To help, 1968)
To test this hypothesis they wanted to conduct an experiment using students from a general
psychology class. The participants were told that they were partaking in an anonymous group
discussion about personal problems of college life with other students. In order for the students
to avoid shame and embarrassment they were to speak through an intercom system. Of course
this was just a cover story to get the students to behave in a natural way (In reality they were all
talking to a recording). The most important part of this cover story was the way the students
were divided into three different experimental conditions. Subject in group 1 believed that they
were talking to only one person, group 2 believed there would be two other people on the
intercom and group 3 were told there will be five other people on the line. The researchers had
one student, who was actually a research confederate, fake a medical emergency to assess
helping behavior in the presence of bystanders. On the intercom it appeared that the student

begun to have an epileptic seizure. The participants realized that this was clearly an emergency
and that the student was in trouble and needed help immediately.
The researchers found that in a one-on-one conversation 85% left the room to provide help.
However, when two or five other bystanders were present, research participants left the
room to help the "victim" 62% and 31% of the time.
The results of the experiment showed that there is a positive correlation
between the two variables. In other words as the amount of participants
increase, the amount of time it takes for the participants to help also
increases.
Darley and Latane concluded that people did not help in the studys
emergency situation strongly supported the hypothesis, which is the more
people are present in an emergency, the more it takes for bystanders to act
decisively. Thus the hypothesis was supported.
To relate this to Stantons experiment from Date Line NBC, we see the staged
car break-in scenario brought similar results in that very few people took
action. Thus Stantons experiment restated and reaffirmed Darley and
Latanes findings nearly 40 years later.
Bill Stanton used hidden cameras to record peoples reaction to him breaking
in to a car in broad daylight. He was dressed like a businessman and
smashed a car window hence making the alarm go off. Fifteen people
witnessed him in action at a train station, but only two of them called 911.
This experiment was tested in more densely populated areas and the
outcome was the same effect in the other scenarios: Bystander Apathy

(Breaking and Entering Dateline NBC-Wild Bill: Breaking and Entering

msnbc.com)
After reading and researching about these findings, I am even more inclined
to help others who are in danger or in need of assistance. The concept that
these situations may constitute Somebody Elses Problem can truly lead to
dangerous and even deadly consequences.