Piliavin et Al. Study (revision)
Piliavin et al. (1969)
- Wanted to investigate factors that influence helping behaviour
- Became interested in the behaviour of bystanders following the case of Kitty Genovese in New York in 1964. Not 1 of the 40 witnesses who watched the murder tried to help or call the police over a half an hour frame. This attracted psychologists.
- Many laboratory experiments were run to test bystander apathy. This is the phenomenon of when observers of an emergency do not intervene. Social psychologists looked for the cause of bystander behaviour – not in the type of people but in situational factors that influence helping behaviour.
- Early laboratory experiments into bystander apathy consisted of candid camera/trigger happy style scenarios where people were placed in situations such as a smoke filled room to investigate if people would sound the alarm or not. These experiments consisted of many confederates and one participant. One of the findings of such laboratory experiments was that people did demonstrate diffusion of responsibility. That is where they were less likely to interfere/help the more bystanders there were.
- However these lab experiments lacked in ecological validity. – They did not demonstrate how people would act in a realistic situation. Piliavin therefore planned to investigate helping behaviour using a field experiment, where they could observe behaviour as it is in the real world.
Aim
The main aim of the study was to investigate factors that influenced helping behaviour.
The factors they were interested in included:
1. Type of victim (drunk/ill)
2. Race of victim
3. Speed of helping*
4. Frequency of helping
5. Race of helper
The field experiment also investigated the impact of the presence of a model, as well as the relationship between size of the group and helping (diffusion of responsibility).
Method/Procedure
The method used was a type of field experiment that used participant observation.
- The participants were 4,450
- Wanted to investigate factors that influence helping behaviour
- Became interested in the behaviour of bystanders following the case of Kitty Genovese in New York in 1964. Not 1 of the 40 witnesses who watched the murder tried to help or call the police over a half an hour frame. This attracted psychologists.
- Many laboratory experiments were run to test bystander apathy. This is the phenomenon of when observers of an emergency do not intervene. Social psychologists looked for the cause of bystander behaviour – not in the type of people but in situational factors that influence helping behaviour.
- Early laboratory experiments into bystander apathy consisted of candid camera/trigger happy style scenarios where people were placed in situations such as a smoke filled room to investigate if people would sound the alarm or not. These experiments consisted of many confederates and one participant. One of the findings of such laboratory experiments was that people did demonstrate diffusion of responsibility. That is where they were less likely to interfere/help the more bystanders there were.
- However these lab experiments lacked in ecological validity. – They did not demonstrate how people would act in a realistic situation. Piliavin therefore planned to investigate helping behaviour using a field experiment, where they could observe behaviour as it is in the real world.
Aim
The main aim of the study was to investigate factors that influenced helping behaviour.
The factors they were interested in included:
1. Type of victim (drunk/ill)
2. Race of victim
3. Speed of helping*
4. Frequency of helping
5. Race of helper
The field experiment also investigated the impact of the presence of a model, as well as the relationship between size of the group and helping (diffusion of responsibility).
Method/Procedure
The method used was a type of field experiment that used participant observation.
- The participants were 4,450