12. Piliavin et al. (1969) - Social Approach

Question 1

Psychology being investigated in Piliavin’s study (3)

Answer 1

Role of bystanders in emergency situation.
‘Diffusion of responsibility’ —> individual person’s perceived obligation to help in a situation is reduced when other people are present.
However, if we witness those around us assisting or ‘modeling’ help behavior —> we are more likely to imitate and engage in helping.

Question 2

Aim of Piliavin’s experiment (5)

Answer 2

To study bystander apathy and diffusion of responsibility in a natural setting.
In four different variables:
1. type of victim (drunk or cane)
2. race of victim (black or white)
3. behviour of a ‘model’ (at what time they helped)
4. size of the group of bystanders

Question 3

Research method and design in Piliavin’s experiment

Answer 3

Field experiment: New York City subway
Independent groups design: trials were repeated on different days and involved different participants

Question 4

IV of Piliavin’s experiment (4)

Answer 4

1. Type of victim
2. race of victim
3. behavior of model (either close to or distant from the victims, either early or late)
4. size of the group of bystanders

Question 5

DV of Pilivain’s experiment (3)

Answer 5

Level of bystanders helping.
Quantitivie: time taken for the first passenger to help and total number off of passengers who helped. Race , gender and location in the carriage was also recorded
Qualitative: verbal remarks by passengers

Question 6

Sample in Piliavin’s experiment: Where, Time, Who (estimated number) (3)

Answer 6

New York City subway
Participants were passengers traveling between Harlem and the Bronx on weekdays between 11 am and3 pm. W
Total estimated number of participants were 4450 (45% black 55% white)

Question 7

Roles of the confederates in Piliavin’s experiment (5)

Answer 7

2 females always recorded data during the trials adjacent to the immediate critical area
1 male was model
1 male was victim
After about 70 seconds the ‘victim’ staggered forward and collapsed —> remained lying on the floor looking upwards.
—> if he received no help, the model would help him to his feet at the next stop
Vitims were all male —> made to look similar (dresssed in identical, casual clothing) 38 out of 103 the victim smelled of alcohol and carried a bottle of alcohol. 65 trails they carried black cane. —> behaved identically
Models were also dressed informally

Question 8

Different conditions in Piliavin’s experiment (5)

Answer 8

1. Critical / early — model stood in critical area and waited 70 seconds to help the victim
2. Critical / late — model stood in critical area and waited 150 seconds to help victim
3. Adjacent / early — model stood in adjacent (far?) and waited 70 seconds “ “ “
4. Adjacent / late — model stood “ “ “ “ and waited 150 to help the victim
5. No model — the model did not help the victim until after the trial was over and the train had reached the next stop

Question 9

Meaning of Spontaneous help in Piliavin’s experiment (1)

Answer 9

Helped before the model helped

Question 10

__ % of victims received spontaneous help in Piliavin’s experiment and __ % of cases more than one person helped.

Answer 10

78 , 60

Question 11

Results (8) cane / drunk / race / sex / time /diffusion of responsibility Pilivain’s experiment

Answer 11

1. Participants were more likely to help the cane victim than the drunk
2. Cane victim received help faster than the drunk
3. In all except 3 trials help occurred before model in cane
4. Both black and white cane cities were equally likely to receive help
   —> minor evidence participants more likely to help their own race
5. 90% of helpers were male
6. Females mostly made comments ‘I wish I could help him - I’m not strong enough’ —> keep in mind all victims were male
7. 70 was slightly more likely to result in helping behaviour than 150 seconds
8. Found no evidence to support the diffusion of responsibility

Question 12

Conclusion: Victim , sex , race , duration (4) of Piliavin’s experiment

Answer 12

1. Cane will be helped more than a drunk person
2. men are more likely to help (however the victims were only)
3. may be more likely to help members of their own race —> especially when drunk
4. The longer the emergency continues, the less likely anyone will help —> find another way of coping with arousal (make comments)

Question 13

Strengths of Piliavin’s study (3)

Answer 13

1. Field experiment —> High ecological validity : Participants were ordinary train passengers who were unaware they were taking part in the experiment — > able to see natural behavior
2. Large sample size: about 4500 individuals which included mix of ethnicities and genders —> increases generalisbility
3. Quantitative measurement : time —> by 2 observers objective record

Question 14

Weakness in Piliavin’s study + ethics (4)

Answer 14

1. Field experiment: less control over extraneous variable eg: whether conditions or train delays —> this could affect participants behaviour —> lower the validity and reliability of the study
2. Not sure that participants only took part in the experiment once —> they used the sane route : this could lead to demand characteristics
3. Unrepresentative sample: only passengers from New York City
4. Ethics : participants did not give their consent nor debriefed —> participants may have gotten psychological harm (not helping the victim —> guilt or concern)