Bystander Effect

The bystander effect is a psychological phenomenon why it is less likely that someone is involved in an emergency situation when there are more people one alone. An example which shocked many people in the case of Kitty Genovese, which was stabbed with fatal outcome in 1964 by a serial rapist and murderer. She told reporters the killing occurred during at least half an hour. The murderer attacked and stabbed Genovese, but left the scene after attracting the attention of a neighbor. The murderer then returned ten minutes later and ended the assault. The news stories reported that 38 witnesses were watching the stabbing without intervening or coming into contact with the police. This shocked the public and published extensive editorial that claimed that the United States had become a cold and ruthless society. However, according to a study published in American Psychologist in 2007, the story of the murder of Genovese was greatly exaggerated by the media (Putman, pp. 57-63).

Specifically, there were 38 witnesses watching, they came into contact with the police at least once during the attack and many people who overheard the attack could not really see what was happening. The authors suggest that the story is still poorly described in textbooks of social psychology because it works as a parable and serves as a dramatic example for students.

A 1968 study of John Darley and Bibb Latane was the first to demonstrate the bystander effect in the laboratory. This made some simple studies like this: You put a guy alone in a room and told that you can communicate with other subjects through an intercom. Actually, just listening to a radio recording and have been told that your microphone is off until it is your turn to speak. During recording, one of the men suddenly pretends to be having an attack. The study showed that the time it took to alert the researcher varied inversely to the number of subjects.

The most common explanation for this phenomenon is that, with others present, observers assume that everyone else will step in and refrain from doing so. The group makes a blurring of responsibility. People may also assume that there will be someone else ready to help like a doctor or a policeman and therefore think that his intervention would be unnecessary. People can also have fear of being embarrassed in front of those present to be replaced by an assistant "superior" or to offer unsolicited help. Another explanation may be that bystanders monitor the reactions of others in an emergency situation to determine if they think it necessary to intervene. Since others are doing exactly the same, people concluded the reactions of others that help is unnecessary, in what may be an example of collective ignorance (Grice, pp. 120-122).

A person can counter the bystander effect addressing a specific person in the crowd instead of appealing to people in general. This places all responsibility on a particular person rather than let it fade. This also serves to ...