When a woman gets raped in front of a crowd, and no one intervenes

A nuanced look at the bystander effect

Social psychology was among my favorite subjects in university. It is fascinating how people behave in groups, and insights from this field can be applied to daily life and the work environment.

The bystander effect is a powerful concept through which to look at group dynamics. The premise is that the larger a group of witnesses, the less likely it is for someone to help the victim of a crime.

This seems counterintuitive, as one could reason that, with strength in numbers, witnesses in a group would be more likely to help.

Before we can begin to explain the phenomenon, we need to look at the unfortunate events that inspired the theory.

The Murder of Kitty Genovese

In March 1964, 28-year-old bartender Kitty Genovese was stabbed and raped outside of her apartment building. The assault spanned more than half an hour; Kitty died on the way to the hospital.

The New York Times claimed that 38 people in the surrounding buildings had seen or heard the attack, but no one helped the victim or called the police. The article understandably sent shockwaves throughout the community and reflected poorly on her neighbors.

Many years later, it became public knowledge that several people did call the police, and a neighbor was with Kitty until she was picked up by the ambulance. The mistakes in the original report were finally acknowledged by The New York Times in 2016.

The most commonly cited example of the bystander effect is thus faulty but remains significant for inspiring research into the phenomenon in the years that followed. The bystander effect has even been referred to as Genovese syndrome.

Actual Examples

There have been quite a few news stories about actual examples of the bystander effect, showcasing that it is indeed a real occurrence.

A student of Richmond High School was gang raped on campus, with reportedly as many as 20 witnesses aware of the attack.

A French student was raped in a full train carriage in 2015.

A passenger was sexually assaulted on a Philadelphia train, while bystanders did not intervene.

Furthermore, the bystander effect has been reproduced in various lab settings, which greatly contributed to understanding the underlying mechanisms.

Diffusion of Responsibility

You may recall a situation from school where the teacher asks the class if someone would like to volunteer for a task. The majority would not feel particularly responsible and keep quiet.

This also happens in a crowd witnessing a crime; is it really up to you to help when there are so many others? The larger the group is, the less likely someone would feel responsible as an individual.

The teacher in the classroom example would resolve a lack of volunteers by appointing someone. This implies that, if you ever find yourself the victim of an attack in a crowded area, it could help to ask a specific bystander for help, rather than the crowd at large.

Research has found that group cohesiveness also plays a role. A group of people who know each other would be more likely to collectively take social responsibility.

Ambiguity

We are social creatures and do not want to embarrass ourselves in front of a group. Instinctively, we fall in line with the behavior of the majority.

When no one does anything in a particular situation, extraordinary or not, we might question ourselves; do we understand what is going on? Apparently, it is normal for everyone else to remain passive.

This is a form of pluralistic ignorance, where people erroneously believe that everyone else interprets something differently from themselves.

One study from 2006 suggests that help is more likely when a situation is clearly an emergency and thus less ambiguous, leading further credence to this theory.

While we may be quick to judge people who fail to help, it is important to understand that their lack of action does not necessarily result from a deep moral defect.

Recent Developments

Since I was in university, the bystander effect has continued to be taught and researched.

The very act of making people aware of it likely already increases the likelihood of them correctly perceiving and making the right decision in a situation where someone needs help. Furthering the understanding of group dynamics rarely gets more valuable than this.

An interesting cultural anthropology study from 2019 had radically different findings from those we have seen traditionally; in an analysis of 200 real-life disputes recorded across Lancaster, Amsterdam, and Cape Town, the majority involved a bystander intervening.

This is encouraging, as these findings are not from lab settings and were taken from cities in three different countries.

It is too early to conclude that times have changed, but it would be worthwhile to keep studying the bystander effect.