Editing Bystander effect (section)

{{short description|Social psychological theory}}
{{About|the psychological phenomenon|the bystander effect in radiobiology|Bystander effect (radiobiology)}}
{{more citations needed|date=March 2023}}

The '''bystander effect''', or '''bystander apathy''', is a [[social psychology (psychology)|social psychological]] theory that states that individuals are less likely to offer help to a victim in the presence of other people. The theory was first proposed in 1964 after the [[murder of Kitty Genovese]], in which a newspaper had reported (albeit somewhat erroneously) that 37 bystanders saw or heard the attack without coming to her assistance or calling the police. Much research, mostly in  psychology research laboratories, has focused on increasingly varied factors, such as the number of bystanders, [[ambiguity]], [[group cohesiveness]], and [[diffusion of responsibility]] that reinforces mutual [[denial]]. If a single individual is asked to complete a task alone, the sense of responsibility will be strong, and there will be a positive response; however, if a group is required to complete a task together, each individual in the group will have a weak sense of responsibility, and will often shrink back in the face of difficulties or responsibilities.

Recent research has focused on "real world" events captured on security cameras, and the coherency and robustness of the effect has come under question.<ref name=":1">{{Cite journal|last1=Philpot|first1=Richard|last2=Liebst|first2=Lasse Suonperä|last3=Levine|first3=Mark|last4=Bernasco|first4=Wim|last5=Lindegaard|first5=Marie Rosenkrantz|title=Would I be helped? Cross-national CCTV footage shows that intervention is the norm in public conflicts.|journal=American Psychologist|volume=75|pages=66–75|language=en|doi=10.1037/amp0000469|pmid=31157529|issn=1935-990X|hdl=10871/37604|year=2020|issue=1|s2cid=173993332|url=https://eprints.lancs.ac.uk/id/eprint/134891/1/Would_I_be_Helped_Cross_National_CCTV_Footage_Shows_That_Intervention_Is_the_Norm_in_Public_Conflicts_Postprint.pdf|access-date=2020-06-05|archive-date=2021-03-11|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210311030150/https://eprints.lancs.ac.uk/id/eprint/134891/1/Would_I_be_Helped_Cross_National_CCTV_Footage_Shows_That_Intervention_Is_the_Norm_in_Public_Conflicts_Postprint.pdf|url-status=dead}}</ref> More recent studies also show that this effect can generalize to workplace settings, where subordinates often refrain from informing managers regarding ideas, concerns, and opinions.<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Hussain|first1=Insiya|last2=Shu|first2=Rui|last3=Tangirala|first3=Subrahmaniam|last4=Ekkirala|first4=Srinivas|date=2019|title=The Voice Bystander Effect: How Information Redundancy Inhibits Employee Voice|url=http://dx.doi.org/10.5465/amj.2017.0245|journal=Academy of Management Journal|volume=62|issue=3|pages=828–849|doi=10.5465/amj.2017.0245|s2cid=149823915|issn=0001-4273|url-access=subscription}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |last1=Bicchieri |first1=Cristina |last2=Fukui |first2=Yoshitaka |title=Experience, Reality, and Scientific Explanation |series=The Western Ontario Series in Philosophy of Science |date=1999 |volume=61 |publisher=Springer Netherlands |isbn=978-94-015-9191-1 |pages=89–121 |chapter-url=https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-94-015-9191-1_5 |language=en |chapter=The Great Illusion: Ignorance, Informational Cascades, and the Persistence of Unpopular Norms|doi=10.1007/978-94-015-9191-1_5 |s2cid=66086524 }}</ref>