Bystander Apathy
Bystander Apathy
复制标题
旁观者冷漠
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2020
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
S. Nida
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
S. Nida
1964年，基蒂·吉诺维斯被残忍地谋杀，这引起了公众的广泛关注，主要是因为据报道，这起谋杀案是在大约38名目击者的见证下发生的，其中大多数人都是从街对面一栋高层建筑的公寓窗户看到这一事件的。（大约50年后进行的调查工作表明，实际上并没有那么多的企业，更有可能只有七到八个。报纸专栏作家和其他人随后提供的分析往往侧重于那些选择不干预紧急情况的人所表现出的无情冷漠，这种事态后来被称为“旁观者冷漠”，至少在一段时间内是这样。(It然而，人们很快就清楚地发现，在这种事件中，旁观者很少无动于衷或漠不关心。由于对可能涉及的内部和人际动力感兴趣，两位社会心理学家比布·拉塔内（Bibb Latané）和约翰·达利（John Darley）开始了一项研究计划，得出的结论是，任何“人数安全”的概念都是虚幻的。事实上，正是其他人的存在可能会阻止在这种情况下提供帮助。更具体地说，其他反应迟钝的旁观者可能会提供线索，表明事件并不严重，不采取行动是适当的反应。此外，知道其他人可以提供帮助，使旁观者能够将干预的部分责任转移到在场的其他人身上，这一过程被拉塔内和达利称为“责任扩散”;也就是说，在场的其他人越多，任何一个人就越容易认为其他人会提供帮助。随后的研究表明，这种个体在群体中比独自一人时更不可能提供帮助的倾向现在被称为“旁观者效应”是一种非常强烈的现象。尽管社会心理学已经对驱动这种现象的机制有了透彻的理解，但应用这些知识是困难的，涉及旁观者效应的重大事件继续发生。
The brutal 1964 murder of Kitty Genovese sparked widespread public interest, primarily because it was reported to have taken place in view of some 38 witnesses, most of whom had seen the incident through the windows of their apartments in a high-rise building directly across the street. (Investigative work conducted some 50 years later suggests that there were not that many actual witnesses—more likely as few as seven or eight.) The ensuing analyses provided by newspaper columnists and others tended to focus on the callous indifference that had been demonstrated by those who had chosen not to intervene in the emergency, a state of affairs that came to be known, at least for a while, as “bystander apathy.” (It soon became clear, however, that bystanders in such events are rarely apathetic or indifferent.) Intrigued by the internal and interpersonal dynamics that might be involved, two social psychologists, Bibb Latané and John Darley, began a program of research that led to the conclusion that any notion of “safety in numbers” is illusory. In fact, it is the very presence of other people that may discourage helping in such circumstances. More specifically, other unresponsive bystanders may provide cues suggesting that the event is not serious and that inaction is the appropriate response. In addition, knowing that others are available to help allows the individual bystander to shift some of the responsibility for intervening to the others present, a process that Latané and Darley termed “diffusion of responsibility”; that is, the greater the number of others present, the easier it is for any one individual to assume that someone else will help. Subsequent research has demonstrated that this tendency for the individual to be less likely to help when part of a group than when alone—now known as the “bystander effect”—is a remarkably robust phenomenon. Even though social psychology has developed a thorough understanding of the mechanisms that drive this phenomenon, applying this knowledge is difficult, and significant incidents involving the bystander effect continue to occur.