Bystander effect
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Like this? Share it with your network

Share
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Be the first to comment
    Be the first to like this
No Downloads

Views

Total Views
2,734
On Slideshare
2,672
From Embeds
62
Number of Embeds
1

Actions

Shares
Downloads
13
Comments
0
Likes
0

Embeds 62

http://www.scoop.it 62

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
    No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. State Budgetary Educational Establishment Of higher Professional Education Of Ministry of Public Health and Social Development Kursk State Medical UniversityDepartment Of General and Clinical Psychology The Presence of Others (Bystander Effect) Name: Gustavo Duarte Viana Group: 17 Instructor: Natalia Eskova Yurievna Kursk 2012
  • 2. Content1. Bystander Effect2. Kitty Genovese3. Factors leading to the bystander effect Situational ambiguity Unfamiliarity Perceived Cost Diffused responsibility Similarity Mood Gender Attributions of the cause of need Social norms4. Simply everyday life bystander effect5. Notorious cases of victims by the bystander effect Shanda Sharer Ilan Halimi Yue Yue6. Comparison of the three accidents involving the bystander effect7. General conclusion8. References
  • 3. 1: Bystander EffectThe bystander effect is the somewhat controversial name given to a social psychological phenomenon incases where individuals do not offer help in an emergency situation when other people are present. Theprobability of help has in the past been thought to be inversely proportional to the number ofbystanders. In other words, the greater the number of bystanders, the less likely it is that any one ofthem will help. This list describes the prototype of the effect and cites nine particularly heinousexamples. 2: Kitty GenoveseThe most infamous example of the bystander effect took place on March 13, 1964, in Kew Gardens,Queens, NY, when Catherine Genovese was entering her apartment building at about 3:15 AM, fromwork. She was stabbed twice in the back by Winston Moseley, a heavy machine operator, who laterexplained that he simply “wanted to kill a woman.”Genovese screamed, “Oh, my God! He stabbed me! Help me!” and collapsed. Several neighbors insurrounding buildings reported hearing her voice, but decided it was probably just a drunken brawl orlovers’ spat. One man shouted from his window, “Let that girl alone!” which scared Moseley away.This neighbor was sure to have seen Genovese crawling across the street, under a streetlight, to herapartment, but did nothing to help her. Witnesses saw Moseley drive away, then return about 10minutes later. He had put on a wider-rimmed hat to hide his face, and searched for Genovese in theparking lot, the train station, and the apartment complex, for 10 minutes, before finding her prone inthe external hallway at the rear of the building, where the door was locked. She could not get in.Moseley proceeded to stab her to death, inflicting multiple wounds in her hands and forearms,indicating that she tried to fight him off. She finally succumbed and he raped her as she lay dying. Hethen stole around $50 from her and fled. The whole incident spanned 30 minutes.A newspaper blasted it the next day as “Thirty-eight Who Saw Murder Didn’t Call Police,” but this isinaccurate. There were approximately 12 people who claimed to have seen the first attack. Many ofthem later stated that they “just didn’t want to get involved”. A simple phone call to the police wouldhave sufficed, but everyone assumed someone else would do it.After this tragic occurred, the psychologists begin more deeply research about this phenomena andnamed as bystander effect or sometimes called by Genovese Syndrome.
  • 4. (Kitty Genovese) 3: Factors leading to the bystander effectSituational ambiguity: indicated to involve uncertainly situation as for examplewhen people think that it is not a emergency that it is just a fight between acouple.Unfamiliarity: people are less likely to help people when they are in unfamiliarenvironment then in a familiar one.
  • 5. Perceived Cost: the likelihood of helping decreases as the perceived cost increase,people don’t want to pay anything that unfortunately comes with this helping inthe emergency.Diffused responsibility: This occurs when observers all assume that someoneelse is going to intervene and so each individual feels less responsible andrefrains from doing anything.Similarity: people are more likely to help people that are more like tothemselves, these similarity are connected with the same race, belief, financialstatus, religious, color of skin, nationality. People are more likely to help otherpeople from the same professional life and that dress like them then helpingpeople that are not from the same professional carrier or are not dressed likethem, people are likely to help at first place their relatives them others.Mood: people are willing for helping depending on their emotional states, ifthey have a lot of problem and they are sad, less likely they would help others,they think that they also need help, why should I help someone else.Gender: women has seemed more likely for helping then men, and thewomen is also more acceptable to receive any help from strangers then men.Attributions of the cause of need: people are much more likely to helpothers the judge to be innocent victims then those they believe have broughttheir problems on themselves. Thus they may fail to lend assistance to ahomeless people, drunk or drug addicts whom they feel that “deserves whatthey get”.Social norms: in this case people are more likely to help if they expected tohelp in a social situation, it is when their behavior is observed by others. 4: Simply everyday bystander effectAn simple bystander effect example that everybody bypassed sometimes inthe social environment is that when someone is smoking next to a person thatdoes not smoking or even hate smoking and its smell and the smoking causeto this person allergic reaction, this person feels not familiar or comfortable toask who is smoking to stop, even if they are in a non-smoking area.In this cause, more people smoking in a non-smoking area, less likely thisperson will ask them to stop.
  • 6. 5: Notorious cases of victims in the bystander effect Shanda SharerFrom the 10th to the 11th of Janury, 1992, 12-year-old Shanda Sharer was abducted and tortured byfour teenage girls, Laurie Tackett, Melinda Loveless (a propo), Hope Rippey, and Toni Lawrence. Tackettwas more or less the leader of the four, and interested the others in the Goth lifestyle, punk rock,vampirism, witchcraft, Satanism, lesbianism, and such, and devised the plan for abducting Sharer andstabbing her to death, out of revenge for stealing Loveless’s girlfriend.They abducted Sharer from her house just after midnight, pretending to take her to see their mutualfriend, Amanda Heavrin, the girlfriend Loveless believed Sharer to have stolen. As soon as she was in thecar, Loveless put a knife to her throat and interrogated her about Heavrin, until they arrived at “theWitch’s Castle,” a local run-down house where teenagers liked to hang out.They took her inside, tied her up and discuss how they would kill her, at which point Sharer startedcrying. They claim to have been frightened by passing headlights, so they took her to a nearby landfill inthick woods, where Loveless beat her savagely with her fists. Lawrence and Rippey claim to have wantedout of the situation by this point, but did not dare try to run and call the police.
  • 7. Loveless then tried to cut Sharer’s throat but the knife was too dull. Rippey then got out, had Lovelessand Tackett hold her down, and strangled her with a rope. They thought she was dead and threw in thetrunk, then went to Tackett’s home to wash up. They heard Sharer screaming, and Tackett went outwith a kitchen knife and returned covered in blood. The screaming had stopped.She then took out her runes, part of the Wicca lifestyle, and told the girls’ futures. They then Tackettand Loveless went joyriding from 2:30 AM, while Lawrence and Rippey stayed at her home. Sharerbegan struggling to get out of the trunk, so Tackett stopped, and beat her unconscious with a tire iron.They returned a little before dawn, washed up again, and Tackett laughed as she told what she haddone. They left and went to a neighborhood burning area, where leaves and limbs, etc., are disposed of,and showed Sharer, nearly dead in the trunk to the others. Lawrence claimed to have been so disgustedthat she turned away. She still refused to rat out her friends. Tackett sprayed Sharer with Windex,probably to exacerbate her wounds, and taunted her, “You’re not looking so hot, now, are you?”They then filled a 2-liter Pepsi bottle with gasoline at a nearby station, drove to a secluded field, laidSharer, alive, in a blanket in the grass, doused and set her afire. Loveless returned a moment later andpoured the rest of the gasoline on her, to be sure.Lawrence was scared to death by this point, and finally called a friend of the same age, and told herwhat had happened. She refused to call the police, now out of fear as an accomplice. Loveless strangledbecame hysterical, sorry about what she had done, and called Amanda Heavrin to tell her. Heavrin didnot believe them, until she and another friend saw the trunk of Tackett’s car with blood and Sharer’ssocks.None of them called the police. Sharer’s body as discovered by two hunters earlier that morning, the11th, and reported. By 8:00 PM that night, the whole community knew, and Loveless finally confessed ina fit of hysteria to the police. Tackett, Loveless, and Rippey were sentenced to 60 years in prison,Lawrence 20 years. Lawrence was released on good behavior in 2000, Rippey in 2006.
  • 8. Ilan HalimiIlan Halimi was a French Jew who was kidnapped in Paris by Moroccan “barbarians,” as they like to becalled, on Janury 21, 2006, and tortured for 24 days, finally dying on February 13. During this time, hiskidnappers, at least 20 of them, beat him all over his body, especially his testicles, completely wrappedhis head in duct tape, except for his mouth, so he could breathe and eat, stabbed him, burned his bodyand face with lighters and cigarettes, and broke his fingers in order to extract a ransom of 450,000 Eurosfrom his family. They stripped him, they scratched him, they cut him with knives, and finally pouredgasoline on him and set him afire.During these three weeks, neighbors in the apartment block where his kidnappers had taken him (andwhere they lived) heard the commotion and came to watch. No one ever called the police. 27 peoplehave so far been charged with joining in. 19 people have been convicted and given long prisonsentences. One of the torturer’s fathers knew what was happening and did nothing to stop them. Thisman, Alcino Ribeiro, was sentenced to 8 months, but this sentence was suspended. He has served notime.Those neighbors known only to have watched were not convicted, most not even indicted. Halimi wasfound handcuffed and bound with nylon rope, naked, to a tree about 40 yards inside a woodlot from arailway outside Paris, on February 13. More than 80% of his body had been burned with acid, as well asgasoline, to the point that he was difficult to recognize. He had severe contusions, blood blisters, andhematomas covering most of his body, to the point that he was more blue than flesh-colored, multiplebroken bones, one ear and one big toe missing, and his testicles looked like “blackened oranges.”Halimi died en route to a hospital.
  • 9. Yue YueThe chinese girl of 2 years old that was crushed by two vans and 20 people bypassed and none of themhelped her. 6: Comparison of the three accidents involving the bystander effectIn those three cases above, we analyze that if someone would interview onthat situation, they could had escaped alive from the killers or escaped andgone up to a hospital for the primary aim. But they preferred to do not involvethem on the problems of the responsibility to themselves, even when they arealready involved in the process as in the case of Shanda Sharer and Yue Yue. 7: General conclusion We typically think that the more people who witness a crime, the more peoplethere will be to help the victim, but these classic social psychology experimentscall this assumption into question. By making yourself and others aware of thefactors that lead to such bystander apathy, we can hopefully make events likethose that occurred in Richmond, CA and Bedford, MA a thing of the past.In USA is stipulated that 2000 people could survive from begin slain, if thepeople that is in the visibly surroundings just call a anonymous calling tothe police.
  • 10. 8: Referenceshttp://www.slideshare.net/EvanJFranz/bystander-effect-14459049http://listverse.com/2009/11/02/10-notorious-cases-of-the-bystander-effect/https://www.google.com/#hl=pt-BR&tbo=d&sclient=psy-ab&q=bystander%20effect%20factors&oq=&gs_l=&pbx=1&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.r_cp.r_qf.&bvm=bv.1355325884,d.Yms&fp=f0ebf39bb5e97456&bpcl=39967673&biw=910&bih=416&pf=p&pdl=300http://lilitheden.hubpages.com/hub/The-Bystander-Effect-The-Case-of-Kitty-Genovesehttp://www.slideshare.net/colonelhomer/bystander-effect-article