Article 4: https://www.ethz.ch/content/dam/ethz/special-interest/gess/chair-of-s

Question

Article 4: https://www.ethz.ch/content/dam/ethz/special-interest/gess/chair-of-sociology-dam/documents/education/spieltheorie/literatur/VOD/Darley%20Latane%20Bystander%20intervention%20in%20emergencies.pdf

Latané, B., & Darley, J. M. (1968). Group inhibition of bystander intervention in emergencies. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 10 (3), 215-221. doi: 10.1037/h0026570

Please answer the following questions based on the article you are reviewing (type your response directly below each question). Make sure your responses are in your own words; do NOT copy word for word from the article or quote directly from the article.

What was the primary hypothesis of the study?

What was the independent variable (or predictor variable) used in the study (note: there could be multiple IVs)?

What was the dependent variable used in the study (note: there could be multiple DVs)?

What were the primary results from the study?

Were the hypotheses supported (yes or no)?

What were the conclusions from the study?

Explanation / Answer

1. The primary hypothesis of the study was that the number of bystanders in an emergency is inversely or negatively related to the speed at which any one bystander provides aid.

2. The independent variable in the study is group size.

3. The dependent variable in the study is time to help.

4. The primary results of the study indicated that the presence of others reduced participants’ sense of personal responsibility and reduced their speed of reporting. Furthermore, personality and background differences were not found to significantly impact differences in the speed of reporting.

Please post the other questions separately as we are supposed to answer just one question or four sub parts of a question.

Related Questions

Navigate

• Browse (All)
• Browse A
• Subjects

Integrity-first tutoring: explanations and feedback only — we do not complete graded work. Learn more.