Conclusion: The study suggests that bystander apathy is not due to indifference, but rather to situational factors, such as diffusion of responsibility.
Social Approach
Psychology Notes
A Level/AS Level/O Level
Social Approach
The Social Approach to Understanding Behavior: Why We Do What We Do
We're social creatures, wired to connect with others. This means our behavior is heavily influenced by the people around us.
1. The Power of the Group:
Think about it: You dress differently for a school dance than you do for a study session, right? That's social influence at work!
-Social norms:
These are unwritten rules about how we should behave in different situations. Like, holding the door for someone, or saying "thank you" after someone gives you something.
-Conformity:
This is the tendency to adjust our behavior to match those around us. Imagine everyone in your class starts wearing a certain style of shoes. You might feel pressured to do the same, even if you don't like them!
2. The Bystander Effect: Why We Don't Always Help
Imagine you see someone lying on the street. Would you help? Sadly, research shows that the more people around, the less likely someone is to intervene. This is called the bystander effect.
-Diffusion of responsibility:
When there are lots of people around, we feel less responsible for taking action. We think, "Someone else will help, so I don't need to."
-Pluralistic ignorance:
This is when we look to others to figure out how to behave, but everyone else is doing the same thing. So, if no one seems concerned, we assume there's no real need to help.
-Example: The Kitty Genovese Case:
This famous case illustrated the bystander effect. Kitty was murdered in New York City while 38 people watched, but no one intervened. This sparked research into the bystander effect.
3. The Social Approach in Action: Real-World Applications
-Social marketing:
Companies use social approaches to influence our behavior. Think about ads that show how everyone is using a certain product, making you want to join the trend.
-Community initiatives:
Programs that promote prosocial behavior, like anti-bullying campaigns, use social influence to create positive change.
-Understanding prejudice:
The social approach helps us understand why prejudice exists. It's not just individual attitudes, but also social norms and group pressures.
-Social media:
Our online interactions are a powerful example of social influence. We're constantly bombarded with information, opinions, and trends, which shape our thoughts and behaviors.
Conclusion:
The social approach helps us understand how our behavior is influenced by the people around us. It highlights the power of social norms, conformity, and the bystander effect. By understanding these concepts, we can become more aware of the forces that shape our actions and make informed decisions about how we want to behave in the world.
Bonus Notes
Bystander Apathy: A Psychological Phenomenon
1. Social Norms and Bystander Apathy:
Social norms, like the "norm of conformity" or the "norm of obedience to authority," can reinforce inaction in emergencies. People may hesitate to intervene due to fear of appearing foolish or breaking social expectations. These norms can be overcome by educating individuals about the importance of intervention and by creating social pressure to act.
2. Cognitive and Emotional Processes:
Bystander apathy arises from complex interactions between cognitive and emotional factors:
⭐Cognitive: Diffusion of Responsibility (believing others will help), Pluralistic Ignorance (assuming no one else sees the emergency), and Ambiguity of the situation.
⭐Emotional: Fear of embarrassment, fear of harm, and feeling overwhelmed.
3. Interventions and Challenges:
Interventions like bystander training and social marketing campaigns are effective in increasing helpfulness by raising awareness, providing practical skills, and promoting responsibility. However, challenges include the difficulty of maintaining long-term impact and the potential for backlash against intervention efforts.
4. Ethical Implications:
Bystander apathy raises ethical dilemmas regarding moral responsibility and collective action. Individuals have a moral obligation to intervene in emergencies, but societal norms can create a sense of diffusion of responsibility, leading to inaction and collective inaction. This can have devastating consequences, particularly in cases of injustice and harm.
5. Situational Factors and Limitations:
While situational factors like diffusion of responsibility are crucial, they are not the sole determinants of bystander apathy. Individual differences, including personality traits, empathy levels, and sense of social responsibility, also play a significant role. Attributing bystander apathy solely to situational factors risks oversimplifying the issue and neglecting the role of individual agency.
Conclusion:
Bystander apathy, a complex phenomenon driven by a confluence of social, cognitive, and emotional factors, underscores the critical need for intervention and ethical reflection. While situational factors are crucial, focusing solely on them risks neglecting individual responsibility and the potential for proactive change.