The Helping Behavior of Individuals - Assignment Example

Theoretical Background We often come across incidences were someone has been injured, assaulted or being mishandled. However in many circumstances, members of public have tended to not come to the aid of the person in need. A good number of research were curried out in 1970s by psychologists, after a young woman was viciously murdered and yet eye witnesses living with her in the same apartment did not come to her rescue. One of the traditional studies used to try and evaluate the helping behavior of individuals was undertaken by the diffusionist group, Latane & Darley (1970) who formulated a research after evaluating the bystander helping behavior. They argued that the helping reaction of a bystander may be inhibited at any particular stage of the emergency. Stages such as when the by stander does not notice the emergency. I f the emergency is ambiguous therefore and the bystander is forced to interpret the condition by looking at other bystanders behavior. In situations were bystanders offers to assist the y may not actually be competent enough or well trained in terms of dealing with the emergency situation. They further brought an analysis that people who are competent may actually not help in an emergency due to the fact that they may have a feeling of self consciousness that is exceeding, they may also be worried about appearing to be silly at the scene of the emergency. The second category of early researchers on the evaluation of helping behavior was undertaken by Latene & Nida, who analyzed the bystander effect. They came up with finding that highlighted that the reason as to why many on lookers do not help during emergency situations is due to the presence of other people. In situations whereby there are many observers of the incident at the same time. The role of helping is spread amongst all the individuals who are present. The limitations linked to these early studies involved the fact that they were not able to clearly demonstrate the effects of a bystander on the helping behavior (Latene & Nida, 1981). Abstract Many psychologists have tried to explain factors that determine the helping behavior of individuals. Early researchers of the 1970s came up with experiments to try and demonstrate this particular issue. However more valid experiments have not been able to explain the reason as to why people do not help in emergency situations. The experiment o concerned with a man experiencing a seizer on the street can basically be used to provide more valid explanations concerning this particular issue. Factors such as the moral aspects held by individuals concerning helping others, the presence of other bystander, the seriousness of the emergency and the psychological relationship that exists between the bystanders and the victim can be state as some of the factors that influence helping behavior. Aims of the Present Experiment To analyze the factors that influences the helping behavior of individuals. Through the evaluation of the factors that determine the helping behavior of individuals, one can understand reasons as to why people tend not to react during emergencies. Participants The participants of this particular experiment include a young man who has a health condition linked to seizures. The other participants include several members of public who are walking along the street while a few are standing within the scene of the emergency. Procedures A young person suffering from seizure disorders was confronted by the situation in a public environment. As it turned out responses by people on the scene were different. Two men dashed to the scene of the emergency as one person tried to help him out. Others came near the scene however they stood aside and watched. Others looked from a far in order to observe if those who rushed to the scene sorted out the situation. The man recorded before the arrival of the ambulance; however everyone at the scene went away living the only one. Design The experiment is designed to analyze the factors that contribute to the helping behavior of individuals especially when other bystanders are present. What inhibits people from trying to respond to an emergency? The design mechanism aims at analyzing the initial steps that bystanders take in an emergency situation. The experimental design was also developed in a manner that the on lookers of the seizure experience were separated in order for them to not discuss the situation. The experiment can be associated to the Good Samaritan parable indicated in the book of Luke. Where a man was lying almost dead on the on the road side however in despite of the two onlookers who passed by he was only saved by one individual. The dependent variable in this particular experiment is that man who has fallen sick with the seizure. The independent variables are the onlookers who are being manipulated by the experimenter for the purpose of coming up with results. Results The man later got over the seizure experience before the arrival of the ambulance. What was evident later is that the group that gathered near the man later dispersed quickly as each person went on with their business. The man who quickly ran to the scene initially was left with the man as he still tried to help him out. The factor that was noticed in this particular scenario is that the presence of a bystander who is willing to help in an emergency situation can result to group inhibition in the intervention of a particular emergency situation. Under this particular circumstance it seemed the presence of an active bystander results to diffusion of responsibility as highlighted by (Laten & Darley, 1968). In order to effectively demonstrate the aspect of diffusion of responsibility by the bystanders each person could clearly see that one person had already started to intervene by helping the man out which is a characteristic of many emergencies, each person tends to leave the whole responsibility to the willing individual. The constraints that are attained during emergency scenarios that require help is the presence of a group which basically inhibits the helping behavior of people. The increased likelihood that one individual can report to the scene is usually determined by the size of the group (Brehm & Kassin, 1996). Discussion There are various reasons or factors that determine the helping behavior of individuals during an emergency situation. It however appears that in many circumstances crowds are usually unhelpful. One of the reasons is due to misinterpretation of the emergency situation. In many cases the onlookers may actually not be very much sure about the seriousness of the emergency situation. This results to a situation whereby a person can just look at the incident and pass way or just stand and look without attempting to help out. The aspect of noticing an emergency is the initial step toward dealing with the emergency. An individual interprets the emergency to evaluate its meaning immediately after noticing it. One of the questions that people ask themselves in emergency situations include, does the victim really require help, in a situation whereby the emergency seems to be ambiguous, the lesser chance for the bystander to intervene. In this particular experiment, people who stood afar from the man experiencing the seizer may have not effectively interpreted the emergency. They may have imagined that the individual was a comic or just pulling a punk (Latane & Nida 1981). Another particular reason that explains the reasons as to why people do not intervene in emergencies is linked to individual moral behavior and the capacity to take responsibility. Each person has their individual moral believe concerning helping other in emergency circumstances. The aspect of diffusing responsibility can not occur if a person believes that they have a responsibility of to help person who is in need. Personal responsibility however is evaded in situations whereby there are many potential people who can help out in the emergency (Ross 1973). The psychological distance that is available among by standers also influences the helping behavior of people. In many emergency circumstances were people are not familiar with the victim, they may tend to shy away and not actually help out. This explains the reason as to why a man lying dead on the road side may stay there for hours without being taken away. In a situation were the bystanders know each other, such as two friends may volunteer to help out a victim in danger (Smith 1973). The type of emergency also determines the helping behavior of individuals. A victim is likely to be helped in a situation whereby the emergency situation is very serious and requires quick correspondence. However controversy arises in circumstances such as were the emergencies seems very urgent and yet people tend to not correspond quickly. The presence of other on lookers or bystanders also influences individual reaction in emergency situations. When faced with emergency situations individual onlookers may tend to look at the reactions of others in order to analyze the next step they should make. In the present experiment the presence of a good number of people on the street influenced some of the people to just stay aside and watch while others went to help out. In the situation whereby there was a bystander who was actively involved in the rescue mission people tend to diffuse all the responsibility to this person. This explains the reason as to why the man who tried to help the man was left all alone with him after he had recovered from the seizer (Latane & Darley 1970). It is essential to examine the reasons as to why people may be witnesses of emergency situations and yet not make any sort of effort to help the victim in need. Such analysis is essential in understanding the varied situations that bring about difference in the helping behavior of people. References Brehm, S.S., & Kassin, S.M. (1996). Helping others. In Social psychology (3rd ed., pp. 270 – 277). Boston, MA; Houghton Mifflin. Bryan, J.H., & Test, M.A. (1967). Model and helping: Naturalistic studies in aiding behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 6, 400 – 407 Darley, J.M., & Latane, B. (1968). Bystander intervention in emergencies: Diffusion of responsibility. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 8, 377 – 383. Latane, B., & Darley, J.M. (1970). Characteristics of emergencies and the intervention process. In The unresponsive bystander: Why doesn’t he help? (pp. 29-36). New York, USA: Appleton-Century-Crofts. Latane, B., & Darley, J.M. (1970). Group inhibition of bystander intervention in emergencies. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 10, 215 – 221. Latane, B., & Nida, S. (1981). Ten years of research on group size and helping. Psychological Bulletin, 89, 308 – 324. Ross A. S. (1973).Effects of increased responsibility on intervention by a bystander. Journal of personality and social psychology. Smith R.E. (1973). Inhabitation of the helping behavior. Journal of personality and social psychology. 6, 400 – 407 Read More