Social area

Question 1

What are the two studies in the social area

Answer 1

Piliavin (1969)

Levine et al (2001)

Question 2

What is the Key theme of the two studies in the social area

Answer 2

Responses to people in need

Question 3

What is the key theme in the Piliavin study

Answer 3

Helping behaviour

Question 4

What is the arousal cost-benefit model

Answer 4

We are more likely to carry out an action that gives us the most benefits and the least costs

Question 5

What is:
Bystander apathy
Bystander intervention

Answer 5

Bystander apathy = When someone witnesses an event where someone requires help but they choose not to help them

Bystander intervention = When someone witnesses an event where someone requires help and they choose to help them

Question 6

What is pluralistic ignorance

Answer 6

We are less likely to interpret a situation as dangerous (and therefore requiring help) if others are present and ignoring the problem -Latane and Darely

Question 7

What is diffusion of responsibility

Answer 7

The greater number of people there are in a situation, the fewer people will help -Latane and Darely

Question 8

What were the aims of the Piliavin study

Answer 8

• To carry out a field study instead of a laboratory study into bystanders behaviour
• To investigate whether helping behaviour can be explained by the arousal cost-benefit model

Question 9

What type of experiment was the Piliavin study:
Lab / Field
Participant / non participant observation
Qualitative / Quantitative
Ordinal / Nominal
Repeated / Independent / Matched pairs

Answer 9

Lab / Field —> Field experiment
Participant / non participant observation –> Participant
Qualitative / Quantitative —> Quantitative
Ordinal / Nominal —> Nominal
Repeated / Independent / Matched pairs –> Independent

Question 10

What was the independent variable in the Piliavin study

Answer 10

• The condition of the victim: Drunk or Ill

- The race of the victim: Black or White

Question 11

What was the Dependent variable in the Piliavin study

Answer 11

• How many people helped and speed they helped
• Race and gender of helpers
• If anyone moved out of the critical area
• Comments made by passengers during the incident

Question 12

What controls were made in the Piliavin study

Answer 12

• Models behaviour was timed (70 vs. 150 seconds)
• Same journey, so no stopping at stations
• Victims all wore identical clothing in a bomber jacket

Question 13

What was the sample in the Piliavin study

Answer 13

Approximately: 4450 participants (train passengers)
Mean number of people in a carriage = 43
Racial mix = 55% white and 45% black

Question 14

What sampling method was used in the Piliavin study

Answer 14

Opportunity sampling

Question 15

What was the target population in the Piliavin study

Answer 15

Everyone / New York

Question 16

Briefly describe the procedure for Piliavin’s study

Answer 16

• On a subway train in New York
• Non-stop ride for 7.5 minutes
• April-June 1968 11am-3pm
• The team entered the train through different doors and the ‘victim’ ‘collapsed’ after 70 seconds
• The 2 observers (both female) would stand in the adjacent area and record the help that people offered
• The model would step-in (male) if nobody else did
• The model would step-in early or late (or often not at all)

(the teams were supposed to alternate the victim between drunk and ill but the victim did not like performing the ‘drunk’ condition, so the ill condition was carried out more often)

1. Critical area early (70 seconds)
2. Critical area late (150 seconds
3. Adjacent area early (70 seconds)
4. Adjacent area late (150 seconds)

Question 17

What were the findings in the Piliavin study for the condition of the victim

Answer 17

• Ill received 62 out of 65 helps (95%)
• Drunk received 19 out of 38 helps (50%)
• Median time taken to help ill victim = 5 seconds
• Median time taken to help drunk victim = 109 seconds
• More comments made about drunk victim then the ill victim

Question 18

What were the findings in the Piliavin study for the race of the victim

Answer 18

Race didn’t have an effect…except in drunk condition with black victim

Question 19

What were the findings in the Piliavin study for the gender of the victim

Answer 19

• 90% of helpers were men
• Many women made comments about their size or physical strength as a reason for moving away - They suggested it was a man’s job

Question 20

What were the findings from the Piliavin study about the critical area

Answer 20

=34 People in all left the area on 21 of the 103 trials

• More likely when drunk victim
• More likely when black victim
• More likely when model stepped in late (150 seconds)

Question 21

What were the conclusions from the Piliavin study

Answer 21

• An ill victim is more likely to get help than a drunk victim
• Men are more likely than women to help a male victim
• There was some tendency for same race helping
• No relationship between number of people and speed of helping
• The longer the emergency intervention: -The more discussion among passengers. -The more likely people were to leave the critical area

Question 22

What is altruism

Answer 22

Altruism = ‘Selfless good deed’ = acts of helping when you expect no reward for yourself

Question 23

What did Levine wonder about the costs and benefits model

Answer 23

Levine wondered whether people from all cultures would weight the costs and benefits in the same way.

Question 24

What is the key theme in the Levine study

Answer 24

Cross-Cultural altruism/ helping behaviour

Question 25

What is simpatia

Answer 25

Simpatia = A value in Spanish/ Latin cultures meaning agreement and harmony in relationships, family and community

Question 26

What is: Collectivism Individualism

Answer 26

Collectivism = Where the well-being and success of the group is valued over that of the individual Individualism = The opposite! (individual success is given higher priority than the achievements of the group/society)

Question 27

What is psychological/cognitive overload

Answer 27

Psychological/cognitive overload = When an individual receives too much information all at once, so cannot process it all effectively. The information-processing abilities of the individual

Question 28

What were the aims of the Levine study

Answer 28

- To find out if the amount of help given to strangers varies across cultures - To identify the characteristics of cultures that are more (and less) helpful - To see if helping (within each culture) is consistent across different (non-emergency) situations. i.e. if people will help a blind person to cross a road, will they also help a passer-by who has dropped a pen?

Question 29

``` What was the Levine study: Lab / Field Qualitative / Quantitative Primary / Secondary Nominal / Interval/Ratio / Ordinal (Not finished) ```

Answer 29

Lab / Field ---> Field Qualitative / Quantitative ---> Quantitative data Primary / Secondary ---> Primary but secondary statistics Nominal / Interval/Ratio / Ordinal --->Interval/Ratio (not finished)

Question 30

Internal Validity - Piliavin

Answer 30

-Due to it being a field experiment there were a lot of extraneous variables on the subway carriages like if the victim was not seen by participants.

Question 31

External Validity - Piliavin

Answer 31

- Can be applied to the wider population of New York but because they only tested people on the same New York subway the only population that was tested was the New York population. - However, this is a realistic situation that could happen in real life (Field experiment), someone could fall over on the subway.

Question 32

Internal Reliability - Piliavin

Answer 32

-Standardised procedures although not everything can be controlled due to the experiment being a field experiment (-Models behaviour was timed (70 vs. 150 seconds), Same journey, so no stopping at stations, Victims all wore identical clothing in a bomber jacket)

Question 33

External Reliability - Piliavin

Answer 33

-Standardised procedures would allow someone else to replicate the study, however, not everything would be exactly the same like participants etc.

Question 34

How does Piliavin relate to the debates

Answer 34

``` Situational = Depended on the situation whether people helped or not, drunk or ill Free-will = It was the choice of the participants whether they helped or not Reductionism = Only looked at people that take the subway in New York City ```

Question 35

What was the IV in the Levine study

Answer 35

The victim = Blind crossing the road =Dropped pen =Injured leg, dropped magazines

Question 36

What was the DV in the Levine study

Answer 36

Helping rate (overall helping index for each culture)

Question 37

What was the sample in the Levine study

Answer 37

23 countries

Question 38

Briefly describe the dropped pen procedure for the Levine study

Answer 38

-Dropped pen = In full view of participant, the experimenter dropped a pen and continued walking, scored on if they had given pen back or told experimenter they had dropped the pen

Question 39

Briefly describe the Hurt leg procedure for the Levine study

Answer 39

-Hurt leg = Dropped and unsuccessfully attempted to pick up magazines, participants were scored if they offered to help or approaching without offering

Question 40

Briefly describe the Blind person procedure for the Levine study

Answer 40

-Blind person = Stepped up to corner when light was green and waited until someone offered to help. scored on telling experimenter light was green

Question 41

Name 2 main results from the Levine study

Answer 41

Rio De Janerio = Most helpful city (93% helping index) | New York = Among the least helpful (45% helping index )

Question 42

What conclusions were made form the Levine study

Answer 42

- The helping of strangers is a cross-culturally meaningful characteristic of a place - There are large cross-cultural variations in helping rates - Helping was higher in countries with simpatia

Question 43

Rest of Levine

Answer 43

Validity, Reliability, ethics, debates