>From the NY Times description about the Walmart trampling it doesn't seem to 
>fit well the traditional bystander intervention research. In the intervention 
>studies you have to notice an emergency, interpret it as such, know what to do 
>and then do (or fail to do) something. The classic bystander intervention 
>finding is diffusion of responsibility - you are less likely to help when 
>others are present.

But the Walmart case appears to be one of lack of crowd control. There were 
thousands of people pushing in from behind. If you have every been in a large 
(out of control) crowd you know that there is simply no choice but to move 
forward as you are pushed from behind. In fact, the force of the crowd was so 
great that the glass doors to the store were shattered (the doors were actually 
closed when the crowd pushed forward). It appears that the primary cause of the 
tragic death was lack of crowd control by the Walmart staff. The crowds were 
(according to the NY Times article) aggressive and rowdy well before this 
happened and there were few security folks or measures set up to control the 
crowds.

Marie

****************************************************
Marie Helweg-Larsen, Ph.D.
Department Chair and Associate Professor of Psychology
Kaufman 168, Dickinson College
Carlisle, PA 17013, [cid:[email protected]] (717) 245-1562, 
[cid:[email protected]] (717) 245-1971
Office Hours: Tues and Thur 9:30-10:30, Wed 10:30-11:45
http://www.dickinson.edu/departments/psych/helwegm
****************************************************

From: Paul C Bernhardt [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, December 01, 2008 9:52 AM
To: Teaching in the Psychological Sciences (TIPS)
Subject: Re: [tips] James Olds/ESB/Wal Mart


Embedded within his post is a pretty reasonable question that might come up in 
class: how is the Wal-Mart trampling similar and different  from the classic 
Latane and Darley studies of bystander apathy.

The incident appears to me to be a rather direct example of their one study in 
which they changed the time pressure on the participants (seminary students). 
In one condition they were lead to believe they were running late for a studio 
recording of the sermon they had just memorized on the Good Samaritan parable. 
In the other condition they were lead to believe they had plenty of time to get 
to the studio for the same recording. Those under time pressure were less 
likely to stop to help a person who appeared to be in need. Those rushing into 
the Wal-Mart doubtless felt they were under time pressure to get to the 
bargains that had them set the alarm for a wee hour and wait in line in the 
cold.

Of course, the flowchart that Latane and Darley described had several 
opportunities for people to fail to help in the Wal-Mart situation. Doubtless, 
many of the on-rushers did not even notice that someone was being trampled. The 
entrance to large Wal-marts is usually wide enough that something happening on 
the far side of that entrance might not be noticed by people on the other side. 
Some who noticed a person down might not necessarily fully process what they 
were seeing and interpret it as an emergency that required intervention. But 
even if they did interpret it as an emergency, they knew there were other 
security folks and other people near the man who would be reasonably thought as 
more responsible. Even if they stumbled right across the fallen man, they 
probably wouldn't know what they could do to help him in the onrush, I mean, I 
know I wouldn't know what to do without putting myself at similar risk.

With all that said, according to news reports, people were trying to get the 
man out of the rush after he was down, but to no avail. So, some folks who 
thought maybe they could help also saw people helping and possibly failing and 
getting injured. Still, I think it may be a good example to bring up in my 
Social class next semester.

Oh, and I see no reason to think that the Olds studies as you describe them 
have a single thing to do with what happened at the Wal-Mart. The people were 
not crossing a space in which they were suffering an injury.

How can you be sure that you are the only divergent thinking on Tips, by the 
way?  Doesn't that depend greatly on the operational definition of divergent?

--
Paul Bernhardt
Frostburg State University
Frostburg, MD, USA



On 11/30/08 5:47 PM, "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:







Do you remember the classic experiments done by Olds that demonstrated that 
rats will cross an electrified grid to press a bar in order to get a 
pleasurable stimulation to their brains because it felt so good?
As the only divergent thinker on Tips,I am beginning to speculate that those 
shoppers  who trampled to death a WAlMart worker were probably under a similar 
motivational paradigm.The anticipation of possession of a flat -screen TV could 
be construed as a powerful goal that overrides the  need to help someone from 
dying.
And while on this topic,compare and contrast this incidence with Kitty Genovese 
and is there a need
to hypothesize a Black Friday syndrome?Apparently,this type of mob behavior 
occurs throughout the U.S(I am not sure about Canada).
Could this also be compared to that of British soccer fans rushing the gates? 
And how about Stephen Black and Marie doing a "Queue" study at Wal Mart's 2009 
Black Friday?

Michael Sylvester,PhD
Daytona Beach,Florida


---
To make changes to your subscription contact:

Bill Southerly ([EMAIL PROTECTED])



---

To make changes to your subscription contact:



Bill Southerly ([EMAIL PROTECTED])

---
To make changes to your subscription contact:

Bill Southerly ([EMAIL PROTECTED])

<<inline: image001.gif>>

<<inline: image002.gif>>

Reply via email to