Bystander Intervention

Bystander intervention, also known as the bystander effect, is the propensity for an individual to remit responsibility to other bystanders in ambiguous situations. This phenomenon may cause an individual to refrain from involvement in ambiguous situations; due to rational or irrational fears (Darley & Latane, 1968, p. 377). This suggests that people are concerned with their own wellbeing, and could also explain the need for an individual to part take in illegal activity as well. Diffusion of responsibility would explain why someone would go against their ethical and moral standards. This assemblage of individuals would deflect responsibility of their actions to higher authority, calming they were under orders. In any case there is strong evidence to support this concept; when there are a greater number of an individuals present or witness to an ambiguous situation one is less likely to extend a helping hand. Individuals are more inclined to defer such responsibilities onto another bystander; holding true to the idea that it is not their responsibility, rather someone else’s, or they may conclude that another witness to the situation has already taken action. However rational or irrational their fear or decision may be the consequences can detrimental in either scenario.

The case of “Kitty” Genovese best illustrates the effects of bystander intervention. A young women age 28, bar manager, finishes a late shift and is going home; about 100ft from her door she is frightened by a man named Winston Mosley, and begins to run in the opposite direction. During the attack, 38 of “Kitty’s” neighbors witnessed Winston Mosley attack her three separate times, and did nothing to prevent it. Finally one of her neighbors called the police but it was too late, Mosley had returned and fatally stabbed “Kitty” Genovese. At first the murder of “Kitty” Genovese did not garner too much attention. However when the New York Times wrote a story in the newspaper about the attack the community was outraged; “Preachers, professors, and news commentators sought the reasons for such apparently conscienceless and inhumane lack of intervention” (Darley & Latane, 1968, p. 377).

Two social psychologists, John Darley and Bibb Latane, were determined to figure out why 38 individuals refrained from getting involved, in the initial attack on “Kitty” Genovese. Darley and Latane had a few ideas on why Genovese neighbors might have neglected to help her. Darley and Latane suggested that when there is only one person who is witness to a high intensity situation (emergency), the help must come from that individual; “…if help is to come, it must come from him” (Darley & Latane 1968, p. 377). However an individual may still refuse to involve himself in such matters, out of concern for his own wellbeing. But there was more than one person to witness the murder of Kitty Genovese; each individual, felt that anyone of the 38 witnesses