Clever Grades

🎧 Read Aloud

Piliavin et al. (1969) Subway Study

Aim and Scope

1

Core Objective

Piliavin et al. (1969) sought to study helping behaviour in real-world settings, focusing on factors influencing whether people would help a victim.
2

Variables Explored

The aim was to explore the roles of victim characteristics (type of victim, intoxication), situational factors (crowd size), and modeling effects on the likelihood of receiving help.

Method and Design

The Subway Setting

The study was a field experiment conducted on a subway train in New York City that ensured naturalistic observation of behaviour without social desirability effects that often affect laboratory studies.

The design was largely naturalistic, allowing real passengers to react naturally to staged emergencies.

Sample Overview

👤

Participants

approximately 4,500 subway passengers.
🕒

Time Frame

travelling between 11 am and 3 pm over several days.
🏙️

Demographics

a diverse urban sample of mixed race, age, and socio-economic background.
🗺️

Sampling Type

Sampling was incidental—passengers were naturally present.

Materials and Variables

✓

The Victim

The victim was a confederate collapsing on the subway floor.
✓

Victim Conditions (IVs)

Two types of victims: a ‘drunk’ victim carrying a bottle of alcohol, and a ‘cane’ victim (appearing lame).
✓

Observed Variables (DVs)

Observers recorded variables such as number of helpers, race, sex, and time to help.

The Procedure Flow

Phase Action Detail
Incident Staged Victim would stagger and collapse in the middle of the carriage.
Model Intervention On some trials, a ‘model’ helper was nearby.
Data Collection Observers recorded helpers, time taken to help, and passenger characteristics.
Test Purpose Victim conditions were alternated to test whether perceived vulnerability or victim responsibility affected helping behaviour.

The Cane vs. Drunk Conditions

✅
The Cane Victim (High Help)The cane victim received help 95% of the time, significantly more than the drunk victim (about 50%).
❌
The Drunk Victim (Low Help)Passengers tended to ignore the drunk victim more often, suggesting that perceived cause of the victim’s state influences willingness to help.

Key Results Snapshot

💡

Helper Characteristics: Typically, the first helper was male. Helping was quicker in the cane condition than in the drunk condition. Presence of a model increased helping, especially when help was delayed.

Conclusions on Prosocial Behavior

🤔
What key factors determine if someone helps?
🦉
Helping behaviour is influenced by the perceived vulnerability and responsibility of the victim; people are more likely to help victims who seem genuinely in need and less responsible for their condition. The presence of a model helps facilitate helping behaviour, underlining social learning influences.

Relation to Social Psychology

Social Behaviour = Situational Cues + Prosocial Action
This study fits within social psychology by examining real-life prosocial behaviour and offering ecological validity lacking in lab studies. It explains social behaviour in terms of situational and social cues, key themes in social psychology.

Methodology and Ethical Issues

Summary of strengths, weaknesses, and ethical considerations.

ID Type Factor Detail Control Validity Confound Ethic
01 Strength Data Natural behaviour observed Low High Eco Passenger Mood Low Risk
02 Weakness Field Lack of full experimental control Low Limited Int Demographics No Consent
03 Utility Relevance Practical insights for emergency situations N/A High N/A Applications
Piliavin et al. (1969) Study Deck
Q
Aim of the study

What was the aim of Piliavin et al.'s (1969) study?

A
Answer

To explore factors influencing helping behaviour, including victim characteristics, situational factors, and modeling effects.

Q
Research method

What research method was used in the study?

A
Answer

A field experiment conducted on a New York City subway train.

Q
Types of victims

What were the two types of victims used in the study?

A
Answer

A ‘drunk’ victim carrying an alcohol bottle and a ‘cane’ victim appearing lame.

Q
Sample size

How many participants were involved in the study?

A
Answer

Approximately 4,500 subway passengers.

Q
Effect of model helper

What effect did the presence of a model helper have?

A
Answer

It increased the likelihood of passengers helping the victim.

Q
Victim helped more

Which victim received more help, cane or drunk?

A
Answer

The cane victim received help 95% of the time, much more than the drunk victim.

Q
Victim responsibility

What role did perceived victim responsibility play in helping behaviour?

A
Answer

People were less likely to help victims perceived as responsible for their condition (drunk victim).

Q
Methodological strength

What was a key methodological strength of the study?

A
Answer

High ecological validity with natural behaviour observed in a real-world setting.

Q
Ethical concern

What ethical concern arose from the study?

A
Answer

Passengers were unaware they were part of a study, raising issues about informed consent.

Q
Relation to social psychology

How does Piliavin et al.'s study relate to social psychology?

A
Answer

It examines real-life prosocial behaviour and highlights the influence of situational and social cues.

Tip: Tap a card to flip. Shuffle or Reset anytime.

🌸 Piliavin et al. (1969) Study Quiz

1. What was the setting of Piliavin et al.’s (1969) study?

The study took place on a New York City subway to observe natural behaviour.

2. Which victim was more likely to receive help?

The cane victim was helped 95% of the time, showing perceived vulnerability influences help.

3. How did the presence of a model helper influence helping behaviour?

Seeing someone else help encouraged more passengers to help.

4. Which factor was NOT directly studied by Piliavin et al.?

The study focused on victim type, modeling, and crowd size but not victim gender.

5. What was a major ethical concern with the study?

Passengers were unaware they were part of a study, raising consent issues.

📊 Results

  • Notes and Quiz
  • Psychology
  • A Level
  • Social Psychology
  • OCR