Psychology Year 2 Note:3

The term bystander effect refers to the phenomenon in which the greater the number of people present, the less likely people are to help a person in distress.

When an emergency situation occurs, observers are more likely to take action if there are few or no other witnesses. Being part of a large crowd makes it so no single person has to take responsibility for an action (or inaction).

• Latane & Darley (1968)
  • Aim: To investigate if the number of witnesses of an emergency influences people’s helping in an emergency situation.
  • Methods : 
    • As part of a course credit, 72 students (59 female and 13 male) participated in the experiment.
    • They were asked to discuss what kind of personal problems new college students could have in an urban area.
    • Each participant sat in a booth alone with a pair of headphones and a microphone. They were told that the discussion took place via an intercom to protect the anonymity of participants.
    • At one point in the experiment a participant (a confederate) staged a seizure.
    • The independent variable (IV) of the study was the number of persons (bystanders) that the participant thought listened to the same discussion. The dependant variable (DV) was the time it took for the participant to react from the start of the victim’s fit until the participant contacted the experimenter.
• Oliner and Oilner (1988) 
  • Showed that rescuers shared personality characteristics and expressed greater pity or empathy compared to non-rescurer. Rescuers often said that parental behaviour had made an important contribution to the rescuer’s personal norms (ie. the parents of rescuer’s had few negative stereotypes of Jews compared to parents of non rescuers. The family of rescuers also tended to believe in the universal similarity of all people .
• Pilliavin et al. (1969) 

Psychology Year 2 Note:2

Altruism

The Selfish Gene Theory (1976)

Schaller and Cialdini (1988)  Negative-State Model 

 

Prosocial

Miller et al (1990)

Contrast two theories explaining Altruism 

Kin Selection Theory  

Focus more on biological reasons that re solely egotistical behind artistic actions and may explain altrisitic behaviour within relatives but not strangers 

     -Individual are more likely to sacrifice for their blood relatives in order to ensure the survival of their genetic information 

Dawkin’s Selfish Gene Theory (1989) 

Simmons et al. (1977) Kidney donor [86%of parents said yes but only 47% of sibling who could be donors said yes]

Empathy - Altruism Theory 

Batson, 1981 

When a person observes someone else’s suffering, they can feel 2 types of emotions 

     Empathetic concern 

     Personal distress

Altruism 

Behaviour that benefits another person sometimes at some costs 

• In evolutionary biology, altruism is defined as behaviour that benefits other organisms but some costs. The costs and benefits are measured in terms of reproductive fitness
• A subcategory of helping behaviour, referring to a behaviour that is meant to benefit another person rather than oneself (Batson and Coke, 1981) 
• According to Staub (1978), altruistic acts may also result in reward

Prosocial Behaviour 

Behaviour that benefits others or has positive social consequences. 

• Refers to acts intended to benefit others. These are acts that are positively valued by society (Hogg and Vaughan, 1998) 
• Aggressiveness and violent behaviour are not valued by society 
• Any behaviour that is initiated with the purposed of increasing another person’s physical or psychological well-being and has positive consequences for that person 
• Intentional prosocial behaviour is often called “helping behaviour” 
  • ie. Donating money to refugees in Somalia, doing voluntary works 

Psychology Year 2 Note:1

Examine biological, psychological and social origins of attraction

Biological 

• Fisher et al. (2003) 
• Wedekind (1995) 

Psychological

• Burne (1971) 
• Newcomb (1961) 
• Markey and Markey (2007) 
• Morry (2007) 

Sociocultural 

• Dijkstra and Barelds (2010) 
• Buss et al. (1990) 

Evolutionary explanations 

1:Neurobiology of love 

2: Partner selection based on genes 

Fisher et al (2003): fMRI study of neurobiological mechanism of attraction 

• Aim: To investigate the neural mechanisms associated with the attraction system (romantic love).
• Procedure:  Participants were 10 women and seven men aged from 18 to 26, who reported being in love for an average of 7.5 months. The participants first filled out a questionnaire (The Passionate Love Scale) to investigate how they felt about their relationship. Then they were placed in the fMRI scanner. They first looked at a photograph of their beloved, then performed a distraction task of counting backwards, and finally they looked at a photograph of a neutral acquaintance. This was repeated six times.
• Result: There was increased activity in the dopamine rich brain areas associated with reward, motivation, and goal orientation (dopamine-rich areas associated with mammalian reward and motivation) when participants looked at their lover. The results indicate the possibility of brain circuits dedicated to attraction (romantic love). The same brain circuits have been associated with “addiction”, which could support the hypothesis that “romantic love is an addiction”. Fisher argues that “romantic love” is universal and based on neurobiological factors.