Piliavin 1969 Responses to people in need

what is the background of piliavin’s study

murder of kitty genovese

woman stabbed to death in a period of 30 minutes in front of 38 witnesses

what is the aim of piliavin’s study

to investigate factors affecting bystander behaviour

what time of experiment is piliavin’s study

field experiment

how long was the journey on the subway

7.5 minutes

what were IVs

• type (drunk or carrying a cane)

• race (black or white)

• effect of a model (after 70 or 150 second, from adjacent or critical area) or no model at all

• size of witnessing group (naturally occurring)

what were the DVs and who were they recorded by

by 2 female observers seated in the adjacent area

1. frequency of help

2. speed of help

3. race of helper

4. gender of helper

5. movement out of the critical area

6. verbal comments by bystanders

sample of this study

• 4,450 men and women on the NY subway

• between 11 am and 3 pm on weekdays

• 45% black 55% white

how many teams of researchers and their gender

4 teams of 4

2 female observers

1 male model

1 male victim

describe victims

3 white, 1 black

general studies students

26-35 years old

all dressed alike

what did victims do

they either smelled of liquor or had a cane

the victim stood near the pole in the critical area

after about 70 seconds he staggered forward and collapsed

until receiving help he stayed on the floor looking at the ceiling

if received no help by the time the train stopped model helped him up on his feet

procedure of the study

• observers were recording the DVs

• in addition she counted number of people who came up to victims assistance

• the other one recorded the latency of the first victim’s arrival after he had fallen

• both recorded spontaneous comments made by passengers

the victim stood near the pole in the critical area

after about 70 seconds he staggered forward and collapsed

until receiving help he stayed on the floor looking at the ceiling

if received no help by the time the train stopped model helped him up on his feet

• between 6-8 trials were run on a given day all using the same victim condition

why was there more ill trials than drunk

because team 2 violated instructions by running cane rather than drunk trials

key findings of piliavin’s study

the cane victim received spontaneous help 95% of the time whereas drunk victim 50%

overall 100% help for cane victim and 81% help for drunk victim

help was offered more quickly to the cane victim

90% of the first helpers were male

on 60% of trials help was received by 2 or more helpers

slight tendency for the same race help especially in the drunk condition

no diffusion of responsibility was found in fact response times were faster with larger groups