Read an Academic Passage

The Psychology of the Bystander Effect

The bystander effect is a well-documented social psychological phenomenon in which individuals are less likely to offer help to a victim when there are other people present. The probability of intervention tends to decrease as the number of observers increases. This concept gained significant attention following the widely reported 1964 case of Kitty Genovese in New York City, where it was claimed that dozens of people witnessed her murder without intervening, prompting research into the psychology of inaction in groups.

Two key psychological principles are often used to explain the bystander effect. The first is "diffusion of responsibility." When multiple people are present, the personal responsibility to act is divided among them. Each individual feels less pressure to help, assuming that someone else will or should intervene. The second principle is "pluralistic ignorance," which describes a situation where people in a group privately reject a norm but go along with it because they incorrectly assume that most others accept it. In an emergency, if no one else is reacting, observers may conclude that the situation is not actually an emergency and that intervention is not needed.

Despite its powerful influence, the bystander effect is not inevitable. Certain factors can increase the likelihood of intervention. For instance, when a situation is clearly and unambiguously an emergency, people are more likely to help. Trained individuals, such as those with medical knowledge, are also more prone to offer assistance. Furthermore, reducing ambiguity by singling out an individual from the crowd and giving them a specific task, such as "You in the red jacket, please call for an ambulance," can effectively overcome the diffusion of responsibility and prompt action.