1 / 57

As we will see, one major advantage of this approach addresses

In attempting to understand bystander intervention -- why people may or may not intervene as a bystander to an emergency situation in a public place with an innocent victim, we could: 1. put forward ideas as we did last week.

keaton
Télécharger la présentation

As we will see, one major advantage of this approach addresses

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. In attempting to understand bystander intervention -- why people may or may not intervene as a bystander to an emergency situation in a public place with an innocent victim, we could: • 1. put forward ideas as we did last week

  2. In attempting to understand bystander intervention -- why people may or may not intervene as a bystander to an emergency situation in a public place with an innocent victim, we could: • put forward ideas as we did last week • ask other people for their ideas

  3. In attempting to understand bystander intervention -- why people may or may not intervene as a bystander to an emergency situation in a public place with an innocent victim, we could: • put forward ideas as we did last week • ask other people for their ideas • analyze why we intervened or did not when we had been • a bystander to such an emergency situation

  4. In attempting to understand bystander intervention -- why people may or may not intervene as a bystander to an emergency situation in a public place with an innocent victim, we could: • 1. put forward ideas as we did last week • ask other people for their ideas • analyze why we intervened or did not when we had been • a bystander to such an emergency situation • ask others why they had intervened or not when they had • witnessed an emergency situation

  5. In attempting to understand bystander intervention -- why people may or may not intervene as a bystander to an emergency situation in a public place with an innocent victim, we could: • ask people who have intervened in an emergency about • themselves and about the circumstances and compare their responses to individuals who had not intervened when they had witnessed an emergency

  6. In attempting to understand bystander intervention -- why people may or may not intervene as a bystander to an emergency situation in a public place with an innocent victim, we could: • ask people who have intervened in an emergency about • themselves and about the circumstances and compare their responses to individuals who had not intervened when they had witnessed an emergency • analyze public records concerning bystanders who had • intervened

  7. In attempting to understand bystander intervention -- why people may or may not intervene as a bystander to an emergency situation in a public place with an innocent victim, we could: • ask people who have intervened in an emergency about • themselves and about the circumstances and compare their responses to individuals who had not intervened when they had witnessed an emergency • analyze public records concerning bystanders who had • intervened • stage an emergency and record whether people help or • not

  8. stage an emergency and systematically manipulate some aspect of the circumstances or of the nature of the bystanders • that is, have different levels of that circumstance or of the nature of the bystanders.

  9. As we will see, one major advantage of this approach addresses The question of alternative interpretations and certainty about any interpretation.

  10. We will want to understand the basic concepts of these methods? Independent and dependent variables. Random assignment concerning the levels of the independent variable. Situational independent variables and individual difference independent variables. Generating correlational data and experimental data. Inferring a causal relation between two variables. Generalizing to other populations of research participants or to other situations. Debriefing session in laboratory experiments.

  11. Research Methods in Social Psychology • Laboratory experiment: e,g, Darley and Latane's study concerning size of group related to bystander intervention. Conducted in their laboratory with a staged emergency involving a confederate (apparent epileptic seizure).

  12. Research Methods in Social Psychology • Laboratory experiment: e,g, Darley and Latane's study concerning size of group related to bystander intervention. Conducted in their laboratory with a staged emergency involving a confederate (apparent epileptic seizure). • Field experiment: e.g., Piliavin, Rodin, and Piliavin's study concerning the physical condition of the victim (ill or drunk) and bystander intervention on a subway car.

  13. Research Methods in Social Psychology • Laboratory experiment: e,g, Darley and Latane's study concerning size of group related to bystander intervention. Conducted in their laboratory with a staged emergency involving a confederate (apparent epileptic seizure). • Field experiment: e.g., Piliavin, Rodin, and Piliavin's study concerning the physical condition of the victim (ill or drunk) and bystander intervention on a subway car. • Survey and interview study: e.g. participants were recipients of the "Good Samaritan" award in the state of California.

  14. Research Methods in Social Psychology • Archival study: e.g. concerning the recipients of the • "Carnegie Hero Medal" award.

  15. Research Methods in Social Psychology • Laboratory experiment: • e,g, Darley and Latane's study concerning size of group related to bystander intervention. Conducted in their laboratory with a staged emergency involving a confederate (apparent epileptic seizure).

  16. Results of the Darley and LataneLaboratory Experiment Independent VariableDependent Variable Size of GroupHelping Behaviour 2 3 6

  17. Results of the Darley and LataneLaboratory Experiment Independent VariableDependent Variable Size of GroupHelping Behaviour 2 85% 3 62% 6 31%

  18. Results of the Darley and LataneLaboratory Experiment • Independent VariableDependent Variable • Size of GroupHelping Behaviour • 2 85% • 3 62% • 6 31% • Was there a relation between the independent and the dependent • variables in this study?

  19. Results of the Darley and LataneLaboratory Experiment • Independent VariableDependent Variable • Size of GroupHelping Behaviour • 2 85% • 3 62% • 6 31% • Was there a relation between the independent and the dependent • variables in this study? • If so, a positive or a negative relation?

  20. Results of the Darley and LataneLaboratory Experiment • Independent VariableDependent Variable • Size of GroupHelping Behaviour • 2 85% • 3 62% • 6 31% • Was there a relation between the independent and the dependent • variables in this study? • If so, a positive or a negative relation? • Is there a causal relation? Degree of certainty by eliminating other • possible causes.

  21. Situational Independent Variables Individual Difference Independent Variables Some dimension on which people vary that can be measured – they vary on this dimension prior to coming to participate in your study.

  22. Trait Social ResponsibilitySpeed of Helping ScoresScores Subject 1 14 1.2 2 15 .7 3 7 1.3 4 8 .6 5 12 .7 . . . 90 Compute a correlation coefficient, designated as r

  23. For example, the computed correlation coefficient between trait social responsibility and speed of helping could approach +1.00, or -1.00, or could approach 0.00. This would indicate, respectively, a high positive association between the two variables, or a high negative association, or the lack of any association.

  24. Field experiment: • e.g., Piliavin, Rodin, and Piliavin's study concerning the physical condition of the victim (ill or drunk) and bystander intervention on a subway car.

  25. Example of Field Experiment (Subway CarStudy) Independent VariableDependent Variable Physical condition ofHelping Behaviour Victim ill drunk

  26. Example of Field Experiment (Subway CarStudy) Independent VariableDependent Variable Physical condition ofHelping Behaviour Victim ill 95% (62/65) drunk 50% (19/38)

  27. Survey and Interview Study e.g. Good Samaritans of the State of California 32 individuals cited by the State program were interviewed.

  28. Results 1. 31 were male, one was female

  29. Results 2. 62.5% of those cited had taken life- saving training.

  30. Results 2. 62.5% of those cited had taken life- saving training. 31% of a matched comparison group of 32 individuals had life-saving training.

  31. Archival Study e.g., Carnegie Hero Medal Recipients

  32. Carnegie Hero Medal Recipient Hannah Goorsky rescued Chad Summers from an attacking tiger, Sacramento, California, March 23, 2003. While attempting to close the door to a den of the tiger cage at the zoo where he was employed, Summer, 30, was attacked by a 320-pound tiger that had rushed the door. Wounded, he went to the floor, where the tiger began to maul him. Starting her third day as a volunteer at the zoo, Ms. Goorsky, 23, was standing nearby and witnessed the attack. She grabbed a shovel, approached the tiger, and struck it on the head repeatedly with the shovel. The tiger retreated into its den, Ms. Goorsky securing the door. Summers was hospitalized for treatment of numerous bite wounds.

  33. Archival Study e.g., Carnegie Hero Medal Recipients 101 recipients examined (one-half of one year’s sample)

  34. Archival Study e.g., Carnegie Hero Medal Recipients 1. 96 were male and 5 were female

  35. Archival Study e.g., Carnegie Hero Medal Recipients 2. 44% lived in towns of less than 10,000 pop. 66% lived in towns of less than 60,000 pop. Only 15% of the recipients lived in cities of greater than 500,000 pop.

  36. Carnegie Hero Medal Recipients 2004: 105 recipients, 10 were female. 2005: 92 recipients, 9 were female. ********************************** 2005: Current members of the Commission 21 members, 6 were female Case investigations: 3 staff, 2 were female

  37. Do we now understand the basic concepts of these methods? 1.Independent and dependent variables. 2. Situational independent variables and individual difference independent variables. 3. Random assignment 4. Correlational data and experimental data. 5. Inferring a causal relation between two variables. 6. Generalizing to other populations of research participants or to other situations. 7. Debriefing session in laboratory experiments.

  38. Suggested research procedure for your own proposed laboratory or field experiment. • A study by Darley and Batson in which research participants came to building A and were later asked to go to building B. On route, a research confederate in an alleyway pretended to be ill (the emergency). • The importance of situational factors in • determining bystander intervention. • 7. Illustration of an interaction between two • independent variables: e.g., a follow-up study by • Batson.

  39. Darley and Batson Study (Building A to Building B) Independent VariableDependent Variable Degree of HurriednessHelping Behaviour low moderate high

  40. Darley and Batson Study (Building A to Building B) Independent VariableDependent Variable Degree of HurriednessHelping Behaviour low 63% moderate 45% high 10%

  41. Follow-Up Study by Batson Degree of Hurriedness lowhigh low Degree of importance to researcher high

  42. Follow-Up Study by Batson Degree of Hurriedness lowhigh low 80% 70% Degree of importance to researcher high 50% 10%

  43. Follow-Up Study by Batson • Degree of Hurriedness • lowhigh • low 80% 70% • Degree of importance • to researcher • high 50% 10% • What was the nature of the relation between degree • of hurriedness and helping behaviour in this study as indicated in the table?

  44. Follow-Up Study by Batson • Degree of Hurriedness • lowhigh • low 80% 70% • Degree of importance • to researcher • high 50% 10% • What was the nature of the relation between degree • of hurriedness and helping behaviour in this study as indicated in the table? • Your answer is “It d------

  45. Follow-Up Study by Batson • Degree of Hurriedness • lowhigh • low 80% 70% • Degree of importance • to researcher • high 50% 10% • What was the nature of the relation between degree • of hurriedness and helping behaviour in this study as indicated in the table? • Your answer is “It d------ • On what? This is an interaction between two • independent variables!

  46. Follow-Up Study by Batson Degree of Hurriedness lowhigh low 80% 70% Degree of importance to researcher high 50% 10%

  47. 100 90 80 70 Percent Who Helped 60 50 40 30 20 10 Low High Degree of Importance

  48. 100 90 . 80 70 Percent Who Helped 60 50 40 30 20 10 Low High Degree of Importance

  49. 100 90 . 80 . 70 Percent Who Helped 60 50 40 30 20 10 Low High Degree of Importance

  50. 100 90 . 80 . 70 Percent Who Helped 60 . 50 40 30 20 10 Low High Degree of Importance

More Related