Psychology: Social Area: Piliavin (1969)
This flashcard set covers Piliavin’s study, which examined factors affecting helping behavior, including the victim’s condition and race, presence of a helping model, and number of bystanders. It also defines key social psychology concepts such as diffusion of responsibility and bystander apathy, which explain why people may fail to help in emergencies.
What was the aim of Piliavin?
To investigate the impact on helping behaviour of a number of different variables
Type of victim (drunk or ill)
Race of victim (black or white)
Someone setting model behaviour
Number of witnesses
Key Terms
What was the aim of Piliavin?
To investigate the impact on helping behaviour of a number of different variables
Type of victim (drunk or ill)
Race o...
What is diffusion of responsibility?
Where the responsibility for the situation is spread (diffused) among the people present. This implied that the more people present, the more the b...
What is bystander apathy?
A bystander may believe that someone else will do what is necessary so there is no need for them to off their assistance.
What is the background for Piliavins study?
Kitty Genovese in 1964, a women stabbed to death over a period of 30 minutes in front of a reported 38 unresponsive witnesses.
What was the research method?
A field experiment.
Conducted on in the New York Subway, the journey lasted about 7 and...
What were the IVs of the research?
Type of victim (drunk or carrying a cane)
Race of victim (black or white)
Effect of a model (after 70 or 150 ...
Related Flashcard Decks
Study Tips
- Press F to enter focus mode for distraction-free studying
- Review cards regularly to improve retention
- Try to recall the answer before flipping the card
- Share this deck with friends to study together
| Term | Definition |
|---|---|
What was the aim of Piliavin? | To investigate the impact on helping behaviour of a number of different variables
|
What is diffusion of responsibility? | Where the responsibility for the situation is spread (diffused) among the people present. This implied that the more people present, the more the bystander believes the responsibility is spread out so they feel less personally responsible and less likely to help. |
What is bystander apathy? | A bystander may believe that someone else will do what is necessary so there is no need for them to off their assistance. |
What is the background for Piliavins study? | Kitty Genovese in 1964, a women stabbed to death over a period of 30 minutes in front of a reported 38 unresponsive witnesses. |
What was the research method? |
Conducted on in the New York Subway, the journey lasted about 7 and a half mins. |
What were the IVs of the research? |
|
What were the DVs in this research? | Recorded by two female observers seated in the adjacent area:
|
What was the sample? | Around 4450 men and women used the New York subway between 11:00 am and 3:00pm |
Outline the procedure of the study? | 4 teams of 4 researchers (2 female observers, 2 males, one a victim and another a model). |
What was an issue with the procedure taking place? | There were more cane trials than drunk trials which were distributed uneven across black and white victims because Team 2 violated instructions by running cane rather than drunk trials because the victim ‘didn’t like’ playing drunk. |
What were they key findings from this study? | The cane victim revived help 95% of the time compare to the drunk victim 50% of the time. Help was offered more quickly to the cane victim (median of 5 seconds) compared to 109 for drunk victim. 90% of the helpers were male Slight tendency for same race helping especially in the drunk condition. No diffusion of responsibility, the larger the group the quicker the response time. |
What are the possible conclusions? | An individual who appears ill is likely to get more help than one who appears drunk. Men are more likely to help a male victim. There is not connection between the number of bystanders and the speed of helping. Bystanders weigh up a cost-reward ratio. |
Evaluate the research methods used in research Piliavin et al. | It was a field experiment and was carried out in a real life setting (New York subway). It used an observation as a means of collecting the data, It was also a snapshot study, we cannot be certain that the results weren’t just reflecting the behaviour in a particular moment of time. |
Evaluate the data collected in research Piliavin et al. | The study collected quantitative and qualitative data. The qualitative data was the comments made by passengers. |
Discuss the ethical issues of research by Piliavin et al. | The participants on the subway were deceived by the person pretending to be a victim. |
To what extent was research by Piliavin be considered valid? | A field experiment so there were many extraneous variables that may have affected the results. |
To what extent was research by Piliavin et al. be considered reliable? | The findings from the experiment were fairly reliable as they ran 103 trials they shown a consistent effect. |
To what extent did research by Piliavin et al. have a sampling bias? | Very large sample, in equal proportion of black and white participants to the real population. |
To what extent did research by Piliavin et al. be considered ethnocentric? | It can be said to have low ethnocentrism as New York has such a large range of races. |
Discuss the free will determinism debate in relation to Piliavin et al. Study T | Free will: as helping behaviour was lower in the drunk condition (50%) compared to the cane condition this shows a choice to help. |
Discuss the reductionism holism debate in relation to Piliavin et al. | Holism: the model of response to emergency situations that Piliavin et al. developed to explain their results can be seen as holistic as there a large range of factors determining the choice (physiological and cognitive). Reductionist: missed out other reasons for helping behaviour such as kindness and genuine unselfish desire to help other people. |