What is the bystander effect?

Social psychology.

Noun] The inhibition of rescue behavior due to the presence of others in an emergency. The greater the number of bystanders, the higher the degree of inhibition. The main reasons are: social responsibility due to the presence of everyone.

is dispersed; Individuals are not sure what to do, want to see how others present do it, and others have similar thoughts, etc. The larger the number of people at the scene of a crisis, the less likely it is that there will be an act of assistance. This phenomenon is known as the bystander effect.

Altruistic behavior. It is influenced by many environmental factors, one of which is the "bystander effect". The bystander effect refers to the fact that an individual's response to an emergency is different when they are alone than when they are with others. Altruistic behavior is inhibited by the presence of others.

What's holding people back from taking action to help? One explanation for this phenomenon is the diffusion of responsibility. We say that in order to help people in distress, individuals must feel that they have a responsibility to act.

However, when there are many people present, there is a diffusion of responsibility, i.e., the individual does not know exactly who should act. The responsibility of helping is spread to each bystander, so that everyone reduces the responsibility to help, and it is easy to create a situation where others are waiting for help or passing the buck to each other.

The second explanation is the fear of Jean behaving at a loss. In any emergency, in order to respond, it is necessary to stop what you are doing and engage in something unusual, unexpected, and unconventional. When alone, he can act without hesitation, but because of the presence of others, he will be calmer and observe the reactions of others so as not to behave at a loss and be ridiculed.

Biological Genes**.

Bystander effect: genes that modify tumor immunogenicity in situ directly modify tumor immunogenicity in vivo, induce tumor-specific cytotoxic responses, and cytotoxic T lymphocytes in tumor tissues.

CTLs can produce a "bystander effect" in which CTLs can not only kill transduced genetically positive tumor cells.

It can also kill transduced gene-negative tumor cells, so that when the tumor lesion of the gene ** regresses, other non-** tumor lesions will also regress.

The bystander phenomenon is a socio-psychological phenomenon in which no assistance is provided to the victim in an emergency because of the presence of others. In an emergency, the inhibition of rescue behavior due to the presence of others.

The number of bystanders at the scene affects the likelihood of a prosocial response in a sudden. When the number of bystanders increases, the likelihood that any one bystander will help decreases, and even if they take a response, the reaction time is extended.

When something happens, you don't ask for help from those around you.

Crooked Sugar Spectator Effect Horizontal with icon 4k

The bystander effect is a socio-psychological phenomenon in which an individual's willingness and ability to act is reduced when others are in an emergency or dangerous situation. This phenomenon often manifests itself in the reluctance of people to help in the face of danger, choosing instead to stand by and watch.

The causes of the bystander effect can be boiled down to the following:

1.Fear and insecurity: In an emergency, people may feel scared, nervous, or unsafe. These negative emotions may make them hesitate to take action.

2.Cognitive dissonance: When people are faced with an emergency that requires immediate action, their judgment and decision-making processes may be affected.

For example, they may feel that their intervention doesn't really solve the problem, resulting in a "do it or nothing" mentality.

3.Blame bias: People tend to shift the blame onto others. In an emergency, the observer may think that someone else should take action to solve the problem, not themselves. This can lead to a waiver of willingness to help by hail watchers.

4.Herd mentality: In an emergency, people may be influenced by the behavior of those around them. If most people choose not to act, then other observers may follow their cautious behavior so as not to be perceived as anomalous or cause unnecessary trouble.

The bystander effect can lead to some negative consequences, such as delays in rescue operations, damage to the victim's life, etc. In order to mitigate this effect, certain measures can be taken, such as raising people's moral awareness, strengthening communication and education, etc.

In sociology, the "bystander effect" is often used to illustrate that in an emergency, no help is provided to the victim because of the presence of others—that is, the likelihood of rescue behavior is inversely proportional to the number of bystanders, that is, the more bystanders there are, the less likely it is that rescue behavior will occur; Even if they take a reaction, the reaction time is extended. Social psychology calls it the "responsibility diffusion effect", that is, altruistic behavior will be affected by environmental factors, when there is an emergency, due to the presence of others, the responsibility to help is diffused to each bystander, so that everyone reduces the responsibility to help, and it is easy to cause a situation of waiting for others to help or passing the buck to each other.

Thus, the problem of the bystander is not the "pathological" personality or moral turpitude of the bystander, but the social environment of the bystander. On the basis of experiments and social investigations, the researchers found that in addition to the "bystander effect" caused by the spread of responsibility caused by the presence of multiple people, there are also some factors that affect the behavior of bystanders.

2) The relationship between the perpetrator, the victim and the bystander.

The study found that the distance between bystanders, perpetrators, and victims affects bystanders' intervention behaviors. This is similar to the theory of "concentric circle structure" mentioned by Mr. Fei Xiaotong, that is, self-centered, according to the relationship with the self to form concentric circles of different sizes, and the distance from the center of the circle will become an important basis for people to deal with interpersonal relationships and take action. Tisak's 1996 study found that adolescent bystanders were more likely to intervene when their own family members were involved in violence and potential infiltration violence than when friends or other acquaintances were involved.

The author's 2012 survey also found that most respondents preferred to observe school violence between "strangers" from the sidelines, while individuals were more inclined to intervene in the perpetrators or victims they knew and were familiar with [14]. In this survey, if they knew the perpetrator or victim, more than half of the students responded by actively intervening by "coming forward to stop it" or "telling the teacher or calling the police". And if both sides of the violence do not know each other, the proportion of bystanders who choose to "leave quickly" and "quietly watch" is more than 67.

In our daily lives, we often hear stories about abusers and bystanders. In these stories, there are usually two kinds of people: one is the abuser and the other is the bystander.

In general, the perpetrator is seen as the source of evil, while bystanders are a more innocent group who may be accused of lack of courage or immorality. However, in reality, the abuser and the bystander are not completely independent individuals, and there is a certain connection between them, in which they may even transform into each other, which is the essence of the phenomenon of the "bystander effect".

The bystander effect is when multiple people observe an event at the same time (usually a crime or emergency), and each person's individual behavior is influenced by the behavior of the others. More research has shown that when a person observes that someone is being subjected to violence, if someone else is present, they will unconsciously think that it is not their business, and even if someone is injured, they are likely not to help, or even do nothing, and just sit idly by. This often happens because the observer has an inherently clear and erroneous understanding of behavior in order to maintain the group norm of "everyone does this, I do it" when they see that others do not intervene in the handling of the event.

However, this behavior can lead to some serious consequences and is considered a form of passive violence. This is because, when an event occurs, if there are many people who are just bystanders rather than participants, they will indirectly increase the pressure on the abuser and make the abuser feel that they can escape responsibility. In addition, bystanders face another kind of pressure, the pressure of social expectations.

If a person does not want to be the object of stigmatization, he or she may be reluctant to intervene in the incident and try to intervene.

Therefore, I believe that bystanders and perpetrators should not be treated as two completely separate individuals. Bystanders can also influence the perpetrator's behavior and participate in the process that produces the violence. We should recognize that everyone can be an abuser or a bystander, and when we are bystanders, we need to be brave enough to intervene in the incident and try to resolve it as much as possible.

Only in this way can we avoid some tragedies and at the same time help ourselves to build an image of morality, courage and responsibility.

The number of bystanders at the scene affects the likelihood of a pro-social leakage response in an emergency. When the number of spectators increases, the likelihood of any one bystander helping decreases, and even if they respond, the reaction time increases.