Discover the best ways to public safety


asucrp.org keyword stats



Most current MSN search phrases:

how to choose the best mental health activities
poilice kids social skill making friends

Weakness Of The Masses

Have you ever been in a situation where,experimenters, they were told they could
because of the numbers in your group, youchoose only one piece of candy. In some
didn't really give it your all? For example,cases, the experimenter asked the children
maybe on an academic group project youtheir names, while in other cases the
weren't as diligent as you would have beenchildren were allowed to remain anonymous.
had you been solely responsible for theThe experimenter would then leave the room,
assignment. Or, maybe you've helped push aas though they had to go get something.
stalled car to safety with some other peopleUnseen observers took careful note of how the
but  didn't  really  push  your  hardest.children responded: When alone, 7.5 percent
took more than one piece of candy; when in
When we find ourselves in groups, there is agroups, 20.8 percent took more than one
diffusion of responsibility. Sometimes wepiece! It was also interesting to observe
don't know whether we should even involvethat the children who remained anonymous
ourselves in the first place, since there arestole more candy than did the children who
so many other people who could take action.gave out their names. De-individuation
Have you ever seen someone pulled over on theprompted many of the trick-or-treaters to go
side of the road, but you just kept drivingagainst what was socially acceptable and
along with all the other cars speeding by?steal  more  candy.
When there are large numbers of people
involved, we tend to assume someone else willOne particular case in history stands out as
respond and take action first, or we mighta classic example of Bystander Apathy.
conclude  that our help is not really needed.Catherine Genovese, a young woman living in
New York City, was murdered one night when
Numerous studies demonstrate that whenreturning home from work. The unfortunate
someone is in trouble or in need of help, astruth of the matter was that, in a city like
the number of bystanders increases, theNew York, her death was just another of
number of people who actually help decreases.countless murders. Consequently, the incident
Termed "Bystander Apathy," this effect occursdidn't receive any more coverage than a few
because, in almost any situation, the moreshort lines in The New York Times. Genovese's
people that are present, the more we feel astory would have remained an obscure and
diffusion of responsibility. Our sense ofincidental case had it not been for the
social pressure is lessened when we feel thatpublicity given one additional fact of her
there might be any number of people morekilling.
capable  of  helping  than  we  are.
A week later, A.M. Rosenthal, editor of the
Another experiment conducted in New YorkNew York Times, went out to lunch with the
highlighted this tendency for "Bystandercity police commissioner. Rosenthal asked the
Apathy." It determined that when a lonecommissioner about another homicide in the
individual observed smoke leaking from underarea, but the commissioner, mistakenly
a door, 75 percent of those studied reportedthinking he was being asked about the
the smoke. In groups of three, however,Genovese case, revealed a shocking piece of
reporting incidences dropped to 38 percent.information that had been uncovered by the
If in that group two people encouraged thepolice. Genovese's death had not been a
third person to do nothing, reporting of thesilent, hidden, or secretive occurrence.
smoke  dropped  to  10  percent.Rather, it had been a loud, drawn-out, public
event. As her attacker chased her down and
Often we don't know whether we are reallystabbed her three separate times in a
witnessing an emergency or not. For example,35-minute period, thirty-eight neighbors
if we see a man collapsed on the floor, wewatched from their apartment windows and
might waver between two conclusions: Did hedidn't even call the police! Rosenthal
just have a heart attack or did he pass outpromptly assigned a team to investigate this
because he'd been drinking too much? So,incidence of "Bystander Apathy." Soon after,
bystanders may be "apathetic" more because ofthe New York Times came out with a lengthy,
uncertainty than insensitivity. And if theyfront-page article detailing the incident and
are uncertain, then they often don't helpthe  alleged  reactions  of  the  neighbors:
because they don't know if they're
responsible  for  doing  so.For more than half an hour, 38 respectable,
law-abiding citizens in Queens watched a
Everybody else observing the event is alsokiller stalk and stab a woman in three
likely to be looking for social evidence.separate attacks in Kew Gardens. Twice the
Because most people prefer to appear poisedsound of their voices and the sudden glow of
and levelheaded when in the presence oftheir bedroom lights interrupted him and
others, they are likely to search for thatfrightened him off. Each time he returned,
evidence with brief glances at those aroundsought her out, and stabbed her again. Not
them. Therefore, everyone sees everyone elseone person telephoned the police during the
looking unflustered and failing to act. Whenassault; one witness called after the woman
people clearly know their responsibilities inwas  dead."
a recognized and obvious emergency, however,
they  are  remarkably  quick  to  respond.Everyone was completely stunned and baffled.
How could people just witness such a scene
Festinger, Pepitone, and coined the termand do absolutely nothing? Even the very
"de-individuation" in 1952. De-individuationneighbors alluded to in the article didn't
refers to how, when we find ourselves in aknow how to explain their inaction. Responses
group, we become less self-aware and alsoincluded, "I don't know," "I was afraid," and
less concerned with how others will evaluate"I didn't want to get involved." These
us.19 Think of all the people you've heard"explanations" didn't really answer anything.
yell obscenities at sporting events. Do youWhy couldn't one of them have just made a
think they would do that if they were in aquick, anonymous call to the police?
small, intimate group watching that sameDifferent branches of the media--newspapers,
event? Basically, de-individuation means thatTV stations, magazines, radio
when in a group, we feel more anonymous andstations--pursued their own studies and
therefore less individually responsible forinvestigations to explain the incredible
our actions, often causing us to say or doscenario, all o f them finally arriving at
things that we would not normally feelthe same conclusion: The witnesses simply
comfortable  with.didn't care. They concluded that there was
just no other explanation, or so they
Diener, Fraser, Beamnan, and Kelemn conductedthought.
a study that showed how de-individuation can
lead to antisocial behavior. On Halloween,Do you really think thirty-eight people did
researchers evaluated 1,352not care enough to make an anonymous phone
trick-or-treaters--either alone or incall? Did the researchers not understand the
groups--who had the chance to steal candydiffusion of responsibility? The neighbors
from twenty-seven Seattle homes. Thedid not react, thinking someone else would
researchers figured that Halloween would behelp or someone else would call the police.
the perfect occasion to conduct such a studyMost of us are good people. If each
because the children would be in costume,individual neighbor knew it was up to them to
making them more anonymous. When the childrenphone the police and get help, I guarantee
came to doors where they were greeted bythey would have made the call.



1 A B C D 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 91 92 93 94 95 96 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109