Saturday, March 5, 2011

Social Psychology Critical Thinking Pt 3

     The Story:  A 24 year old man was found beaten to death at a road side rest stop bathroom.  Several people heard his cries for help, one saw him struggling to breathe and walked away.  Another saw his bloody body and did nothing.  Finally, a 12 year old boy see's the man and calls the police in 20 seconds but they were too late to save the man's life. 
     The Question:  What factors made people unwilling to help?  To what extent did personal character play?  Shed light on why a 12 year old was the only person to help?
     Information:  Many people adhere to an "out of sight, out of mind" mindset.  Or perhaps "don't ask, don't tell", or "don't make your problem my problem."  This is somewhat of an output of our capitalistic highly individualistic society.  We are taught that we can pull ourselves up by our bootstraps, however, a common side effect of this sense of capability is that we become selfish.  We only care about ourselves, our means, and our ends.  The factors that could contribute to the bystanders' unwillingness to help could have been that they did not want to get involved with the police or cause any trouble for themselves (let alone the fact that someone was dying in front of them).  Personal character could have a widely varying effect on this situation.  There is no doubt that a person with a friendly and optimistic personality would be more likely to help a stranger than someone with a selfish and skeptic personality.  This demonstrates that not all bystanders are equally likely to help a stranger.  If there is a personal or even subtle connection between the victim and the bystander, then the bystander will be more likely to help the victim.  This could be anything from promising to watch a woman's purse while she gets up from her seat to use the restroom; to a token small-talk conversation during which you (the bystander and the potential victim) connect over politics or beliefs, music or clothes.  The more you have in common or connect with a stranger (even on the simplest and "cheapest" level), the more likely  you will help them in time of need.  Personal obligation also factors into the situation in the opposite fashion of altruism.  However, there are psychological factors that affect our decisions that are both independent from and override our "personal character", in other words, cause us to act out of character.  For example, people are less likely to help a stranger when there are more bystanders around to witness their action(s); the same is also true of the opposite.  The fewer the number of spectators, the greater probability that a person will assist a stranger.  Also, if a group of people pass a stranger in need; they are each less likely to help the stranger than they would be if they had been walking by themselves (opposed to walking in a group). 
     Answers:  In the story told above, and in the information provided, we can conclude several things about the unfortunate story.  The people who passed the man being assaulted likely did not know him and thus involuntarily felt no obligation to help him and possibly fear for their own safety.  People who may have passed him in pairs or a group were also unlikely to help him regardless of "moral obligation."  This was also a public place which meant there were other people around to witness the events which lessens the chances of a victim receiving help.  Though the man cried out for help (which increase the chances of receiving assistance) there were too many other subliminal psychological factors involved that involuntarily override one's sense of altruistic moral duty.  As for the 12 year old boy, the answer is actually quite simple.  He is at the age where his parents probably are drilling "moral" ideas into his head so that he "behaves more like an adult."  Think of a child catching a parent in a white lie and feeling completely betrayed.  In this sense the young boy has not lived long enough for some of the psychological bystander effects (and others) to draw their full potential.  The impressionable yet rule-based mindset of a child allowed him to remain free of the subconscious (all be it subjective) factors that unwillingly shade morality.

No comments:

Post a Comment