Helping Behavior at a Busstop
This paper reports the findings of a preliminary field study of helping behavior. It was hoped that this pilot attempt would provide data bearing on some equivocal findings in some laboratory and field studies of helping behavior (Darley & Latane, 1968; Piliavin, Rodin, & Piliavin, 1969). The "diffusion of responsibility" effect, i.e., the inverse relation between number of potential helpers present and probability of an individual's helping, was found by Darley and Latane in a laboratory situation; this phenomenon did not appear in the field srudy of Piliavin, et al. In the interaction used in the present study a young man (El), carrying a heavy suitcase, approached another young man ( E n ) standing at a busstop located in an integrated, middle-class neighborhood in Brooklyn, New York. El asked E? for directions to the subway? E2 responded accurately ("Five blocks that way."). However, the function of the bus servicing that stop was to act as a shuttle to the subway. A bystander could help El by giving him more efficient directions, e.g., "Take the bus to the subway and avoid carrying the suitcase." If the bystander did not help in this way, El began to walk away. After he had taken a few steps En told of the shuttle function of the bus? told E= that he did not have enough money for both the bus and the subway.' A bystander could help here by offering all or part of the required car fare. Thirrv Ss were studied. All were adults and a third were black. Fifteen Ss were members of 2-person groups (En and S ) , 11 were in 3-person groups (E3, S and 1 other bystander), and 4 were in 4-person groups. Only one S per group was studied although, as indicated, other bystanders were present in 3and 4-person groups. In these groups S was chosen randomly. A significant majority of the 30 Ss helped (67%, p < . 0 l ) in some way: 9 Ss gave the more efficient directions, 3 Ss gave money, and 8 Ss gave both directions and money. Consistent with the results of Piliavin, et al., the probability of helping did not decrease with increased group size, i.e., the responsibility diffusion effect found in Darley and Lacane's laboratory study, did not obtain. Helping was as likely to occur in 2-person groups as in 3or 4-person groups, compared separately or in combination. Also consistent with the findings of Piliavin, et al., the probability of a black bystander helping a white ( E l ) was not significantly different from the probabilty of a white helping a white. The present results suggest that field and laboratory methods may lead to discrepant findings about helping behavior. The general issue here, of course, is an old one, i.e., ecological validity. It appears that present data warrant a reconceptualization of the cootextural controls presently used in laboratory social psychological research. REFERENCES DARLEY, J., & LATANE, B. Bystander intervention in emergencies: diffusion of responsibility. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1968, 8, 377-383. PILIAVIN, I. M., RODIN, J., & PILIAVIN, J. A. Good samaritanism: an underground phenomenon? JournaL o f Personality and Social Psychology, 1969, 10, 289-299. Accepted December 21, 1970.