The Factors that Promote Bystander Apathy and De-individuation and How an Examination of Moral Development Helps us Understand Individuals’ Responses to these Factors
There are a variety of factors that determine an individual's likeliness to help others and take action. Two researchers by the names of John Darley and Bibb Latane suggested that individuals create a “decision scheme” to decide on whether or not to progress. The first step in their decision scheme is recognizing the problem. An example of this is when I am life guarding there are signs we are supposed to recognize in a drowning person such as, flailing arms, a panicked look, or screaming for help. The second step is to interpret that the situation is an actual emergency. When you are lifeguarding after you see a person struggling in the water you must then recognize that it is an emergency your witnessing in the pool. The third and final step is to assume responsibility for the well-being of the situation. Back to my lifeguarding example: If you recognize that there is an emergency taking place you must then take stake in the situation and recognize it is your obligation to help. After the final step has taken place and the person has taken action they have completed the "decision scheme process", but if any of the three steps are not completed then the the process will be disrupted.
There are many other smaller factors that exist that can increase the likelihood that an individual will assist someone else in need. Such as: The person appears to need and deserve help- Such as if a person seems to be in immense pain and is screaming for help. Another is: The person is in some way similar to us. For example we may see someone who looks very similar to us in distress and we would be much more inclined to help them. Whatever it may be there are an endless amount of things that effect our likelihood to assist someone in danger.
At the helm of the entire decision making process is the presence of people. When people are added to the situation at any point in the process it is less likely that the process will be finished uninterrupted. When there is a person in need of assistance in a crowd they often do not receive assistance because of the bystander effect. The bystander effect is the tendency for any if en bystander to be less likely to give aid if other bystanders are present.
The freedictionary.com defines the process of de-individualization as the loss of a person's sense of individuality and personal responsibility. You can see this most often in mobs. Many times after a professional sports team wins a national title the fans riot in the streets, many times destroying shops, cars, and city property in the process. These people in these mobs often would not commit these heinous acts on their own because they posses the morals to know it is wrong.
Throughout our lives as humans we develop morals that help us identify the difference between right and wrong. These morals will help us to assist another human being in need, or to not destroy personal property. Even though we develop these morals we sometimes lose track of who we are and the morals we posses. This often happens in presence of others. To me this is very frightening. In our history we have even seen entire nations being okay withe senseless killing of millions. I believe this to really represent the shakiness of us humans as a race.
Below I have posted two links. Both are links to youtube video. The first video is about the bystander effect. They provide the example of when two or people witness a pocket pick. The second video is about de-individualization. In this video they talk about how people at parties tend to have less of a sense of morals, and tend to do things they would do in a "party environment".
Links:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z4S1LLrSzV
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JOknme9Y4gM
There are many other smaller factors that exist that can increase the likelihood that an individual will assist someone else in need. Such as: The person appears to need and deserve help- Such as if a person seems to be in immense pain and is screaming for help. Another is: The person is in some way similar to us. For example we may see someone who looks very similar to us in distress and we would be much more inclined to help them. Whatever it may be there are an endless amount of things that effect our likelihood to assist someone in danger.
At the helm of the entire decision making process is the presence of people. When people are added to the situation at any point in the process it is less likely that the process will be finished uninterrupted. When there is a person in need of assistance in a crowd they often do not receive assistance because of the bystander effect. The bystander effect is the tendency for any if en bystander to be less likely to give aid if other bystanders are present.
The freedictionary.com defines the process of de-individualization as the loss of a person's sense of individuality and personal responsibility. You can see this most often in mobs. Many times after a professional sports team wins a national title the fans riot in the streets, many times destroying shops, cars, and city property in the process. These people in these mobs often would not commit these heinous acts on their own because they posses the morals to know it is wrong.
Throughout our lives as humans we develop morals that help us identify the difference between right and wrong. These morals will help us to assist another human being in need, or to not destroy personal property. Even though we develop these morals we sometimes lose track of who we are and the morals we posses. This often happens in presence of others. To me this is very frightening. In our history we have even seen entire nations being okay withe senseless killing of millions. I believe this to really represent the shakiness of us humans as a race.
Below I have posted two links. Both are links to youtube video. The first video is about the bystander effect. They provide the example of when two or people witness a pocket pick. The second video is about de-individualization. In this video they talk about how people at parties tend to have less of a sense of morals, and tend to do things they would do in a "party environment".
Links:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z4S1LLrSzV
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JOknme9Y4gM