1 / 38

See You Around Campus: Why People Help, Why They Don’t and What To Do About It. Prepared for

See You Around Campus: Why People Help, Why They Don’t and What To Do About It. Prepared for Counseling Centers of New York. Caroline F. Keating, Ph.D. Colgate University June 6, 2013. A counselor, a social worker, and a social psychologist walk into a bar. Not really.

gareth-clark
Télécharger la présentation

See You Around Campus: Why People Help, Why They Don’t and What To Do About It. Prepared for

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. See You Around Campus: Why People Help, Why They Don’t and What To Do About It. Prepared for Counseling Centers of New York Caroline F. Keating, Ph.D. Colgate University June 6, 2013

  2. A counselor, a social worker, and a social psychologist walk into a bar . . . Not really But if we did . . .

  3. Why People Help, Why They Don’t and What To Do About It Research Update I. “bystander-effect” Presence of others inhibits helping • Others don’t have to be ‘present’** • Can be a blessing - as well as a curse II. Identify motivational & situational factors III. Implications for designing programs

  4. Prosocial actions intended to benefit others Intervening in emergency situations Helping; altruism Empathy, sympathy, kindness Support, inclusion Sharing, charity, donating Antisocial actions intended to harm others Stigmatization, exclusion, rejection Maltreatment (inflicting punishment, distress) Aggressive behavior hostile or instrumental overt & relational Harmful Inaction – intended or otherwise

  5. icebreaker

  6. Nonconscious cues Shared and Nonshared Social Goals A 2012 meta-analysis of the social goals & aggression of children (18 & younger) revealed a “fit” The BigWE versus bystander effect

  7. Classic “Helping Behavior” Paradigms: Naïve participants alone OR presence of others - others may be naïve OR confederates (passive) “emergency”

  8. Results for the ‘smoke-filled room’ experiment

  9. Piliavin, Rodin, & Piliavin, (1969) Figure 1: Layout of adjacent and critical areas of subway car

  10. Conclusions from Early Bystander Studies • Bystanders inhibit helping • Diffusion of responsibility • Pluralistic ignorance • Evaluation apprehension • Implication for intervention programs based on increasing bystander responsiveness

  11. Recent re-analysis of the bystander effect -- bystanders may be (some of) your best friends But only in the most dangerous situations – which few researchers have put to the test

  12. Disney ABC News: What Would You Do? Host: John Quinones

  13. WWYD Scenario: Abuse of Homeless People 3 key features related to college life: victim: outcast (stigmatized) “campus” emergency = hostile aggression Prediction (according to the bystander effect):

  14. See ABC’s WWYD on the abuse of homeless peoplehttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VWNQ5zbKw-Q

  15. elements

  16. Group action/peer support Cost of not helping (guilt, shame) elements Responsibility & duty Empathy/sympathy arousal Helper’s High Ease of escape Perceived threat pride, positive affect community humanization norms Ability, expertise disgust, anger

  17. Collective action more likely when • Bystanders are friends& danger is clearly evident • Psychological mechanisms:

  18. Adult men, alone or in groups, matched the face of a terrorist with a body, estimating muscularity & other traits. Fessler & Holbrook, 2013, Psyc Sci

  19. Sadly, a race bias persists • Individual Whites are quicker to come to the aid of White than Black victims even in high emergency situations Individual Blacks = aid Blacks and Whites

  20. From: Kuntsman & Plant (2008). Racing to help: Racial bias in high emergency situations. JPSP, 95.

  21. Fiske (2011). Envy Up, Scorn Down: How Status Divides Us

  22. Can contact with ‘outgroup’ members prosocial behavior? • Koschate et al., (2012) studied workgroups in organizations • Assessed task and personal contacts • Assessed prosocial behavior & empathydirected toward outgroup generally directed toward individuals from outgroup

  23. Results Personal contact increased empathy & help for outgroup individuals Task contact increased expected rewards (& reduced costs) for helping & more help for the outgroup as a whole Applied to campus . . .

  24. WWYD Hazing Scenario:attitudes toward the victim See: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dMR7t_A55hk

  25. elements

  26. Moral outrage Sympathy for victim? elements disgust

  27. WWYD version of Jersey Shore . . . WWYD: The Drugged Drink Scenario

  28. Youtube links for WWYD parts I and II of drugged drink scenario http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ue_fGd32Ewo http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u716oysCtyI

  29. elements

  30. Established bond with abusive agent Evaluation apprehension Presence of like-minded others Appearance of target Concern Relief elements Anger Attitude toward target “America”

  31. Presence of like-minded others • Empowers • Blinds in 2 waysexample: political attitudes (J. Keating, 2013)

  32. Example: enclaves on campus • Men express less willingness to aid a female sexual assault victim after being embedded in an all male group. • Women express less willingness to aid a female sexual assault victim after being singly embedded in a group of males; they express more willingness after being embedded in a group of females.

  33. The mere knowledge that similar others share your goal intensifies goal pursuit • Two experiments: Results: • UGs played a game independently; instructed to either • Study 1: get points • Study 2: avoid mistakes“Similar” others ‘chose’ the same color avatar (minimal group paradigm) • UGs achieved more points (or avoided more mistakes) IF they knew that similar others shared their goal. • Knowing that others share your goal stimulates pursuit; no collaborative effort necessary!

  34. Putting the elements together

  35. Potential solutions: Easy to identify; challenging to implement • The problem Potential solution • Foster the Big We • Shared social goals*-campus-wide projects • Virginia Tech example • Identity salience/large group- Off-campus opportunities BOB, the bus • Promote liking among dissimilar individuals* • -The Ba

  36. Potential solutions: Easy to identify; challenging to implement • The problem Potential solutions • Foster Self-Awareness • (reinforce The Self) • Exposure to individuating experiences (reduce enclavement) • Prime the right self • Reduce social comparison • Meditation/Mindfulness

  37. Potential solutions: Easy to identify; challenging to implement • The problem Potential solutions • Make it easy to intervene • Create a culture of interveners- moral peers • Model intervention • WWYD (use media power)

  38. Thank you! • Colgate’s counseling center • Tech support Wonderful audience – a hand for the volunteers!

More Related