評論
打印
If you've ever taken a psychology class, you've probably heard the shocking story of Kitty Genovese.
如果你上過心理學課程，就可能聽過凱蒂·熱諾維斯(Kitty Genovese)那令人震驚的故事。
As the story goes, she was murdered one night in 1964 with 38 witnesses,
故事是這樣的，1964年的一個晚上，她在38名目擊者面前被殺了，
yet no one helped or even called the police until it was too late.
在慘劇發生之前，沒有人幫忙，甚至沒有人報警。
Reports about this horrible, bizarre event sparked research on what came to be known as the bystander effect.
這一奇怪可怕的事件的報道引發了關于旁觀者效應的研究。
Despite what you'd think, it says that, sometimes, someone is actually less likely to help if there are others around.
不管你是怎么想的，這一效應都表明，有時，人們在周圍還有其他人的情況下實際不太可能提供幫助。
But even though it's talked about in every intro psych course,
盡管旁觀者效應在每個心理學入門課程中都提過，
the bystander effect isn't as simple as "more people equals worse odds of getting help."
但它并不像“人越多，獲得幫助的幾率就越少”那么簡單。
Sometimes, more is better, and there are other factors that matter, too. Oh, and also?
有時候，人越多越好，還有其他因素也很重要。噢，還有什么因素？
That original story of Kitty's murder isn't entirely true.
凱蒂被殺故事的最初版本并不完全是真的。
After the New York Times published their story about Kitty Genovese,
在《紐約時報》發表了關于凱蒂·熱諾維斯的報道后，
scientists set to work trying to figure out why so many witnesses hadn't responded.
科學家們開始研究這么多目擊者沒有回應的原因。
The first major study was published in the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology in 1968.
第一個主要研究發表在1968年的《人格與社會心理學雜志》上。
In it, two researchers created a similar situation in the lab.
在這項研究中，兩名研究人員在實驗室中創造了相似的環境。
They had 72 undergrads come in to what they thought was a study on common problems in students' lives.
他們讓72名大學生參與進來，這些人認為這是一項針對學生生活中常見問題的研究。
Each participant was seated alone in a room with an intercom
每個受試者都獨自坐在一個有對講機的房間里，
to share their problems with one, two, or five other so-called "participants" although they were actually recordings.
與一名、兩名或五名所謂的“參與者”分享他們的問題，不過這些“參與者”實際是錄音。
Then, one of these pre-recorded participants pretended to have a seizure,
然后，其中一名預錄參與者假裝癲癇發作，
and the scientists timed how long it took for the undergrad to get help.
同時科學家們計時這名大學生需要多久才能得到幫助。
They found that the more bystanders there were, the longer it took, if they got help at all.
他們發現，旁觀者越多，得到幫助花得時間越長，
When they were alone, 85% of participants got assistance.
當旁觀者只有一個人時，85%的參與者獲得了幫助。
But in the largest group of five bystanders, only 31% did.
但在人數最多的五名旁觀者中，只有31%的參與者獲得了幫助。
Admittedly, most people were concerned about the sick person, but they didn't know if they should do something.
誠然，大多數人都擔心病人，但他們不知道自己是否應該做些什么。
And so the bystander effect was born.
于是旁觀者效應就產生了。
Since then, multiple studies have confirmed this effect,
自此以后，多項研究證實了這一效應，
but they've also found it isn't always as straightforward as it seems.
但他們也發現，事情并不總是像表面那樣簡單。
Sometimes, people are more likely to help with bystanders, or simply aren't affected by their presence.
有時候，人們更愿意幫助旁觀者，或者根本不受他們的影響。
One major influence on this is the bystanders themselves.
對此的一個主要影響是旁觀者本身。
Not surprisingly, people who are in a hurry are typically less likely to stop and help someone.
匆忙的人通常不太可能停下來幫助別人，這一點兒也不奇怪。
And people who are highly skilled in a certain emergency, like nurses trained to handle medical situations,
而那些擅長處理緊急情況的人，比如受過醫療情況處理訓練的護士
are also more likely to try to help, whether bystanders are there or not.
不管有沒有旁觀者在，都更可能嘗試著提供幫助。
More interestingly, though, making a commitment also matters.
更有趣的是，做出承諾也很重要。
In a 2015 study in France, a man sat down his bag
在2015年法國的一項研究中，一名男子坐在他的包上，
and asked either one specific person to watch it, everyone in general to watch it,
他要么讓一個特定的人看它，要么讓所有人都看它，
or said nothing, then headed to a nearby ATM.
要么不發一言，隨后朝著附近的ATM取款機走去。
Then, the researchers faked the backpack getting stolen.
然后，研究人員捏造背包被偷了的假象。
They repeated trials of this until they had a total of 150 different bystanders, 50 for each scenario.
他們反復試驗，直到招到150名不同的旁觀者，每個場景50名。
Ultimately, the more direct of a commitment, the more likely people were to intervene when someone took the bag.
最終結果表明，承諾越直接，當有人拿走書包時，人們更有可能介入。
Other studies suggest that responses in situations like this have to do with a couple of things.
其他研究表明，這樣的情形下，人們的反應與以下幾件事有關。
One is social influence.
一個是社會影響。
In general, when you aren't sure what is going on, you probably tend to look at other people for more information.
一般來說，當你不確定到底發生了什么時，你可能會傾向于看別人以獲取更多信息。
And if no one else seems to be concerned, then maybe this guy's backpack isn't a big deal,
如果沒有人關心，那么這個人的背包可能不是大事兒，
so you don't do anything, just like everyone else.
你就會像其他人那樣什么都不做了。
Another factor is diffusion of responsibility.
另一個因素是責任分散。
If something happens when you're in a big group,
如果你所在的一個大群體發生某事，
like some participants in this backpack study, it isn't up to only you to help. Other people could help too.
就像這個背包研究中的某些參與者一樣，不是只有你能幫上忙，其他人也能幫忙。
So, you don't feel as responsible and don't act, and suddenly that man's out of a bag.
那么你不覺得自己有責任，也不去行動，突然，那個男人的書包沒了。
Besides the bystanders, another major factor in general is the specific situation.
除了旁觀者之外，一般來說，另一個主要因素是具體情況。
Sometimes, it's hard to tell if someone needs help or not.
有時，我們很難辨別某人是否需要幫助。
And many studies have found that when things are ambiguous, people are less likely to jump in.
許多研究表明，當事情模棱兩可時，人們不太可能介入。
Which seems reasonable.
這似乎是合理的。
After all, if it turns out someone is just playing around, it could be really embarrassing to be wrong.
畢竟，如果事實只是有人在胡鬧，那么這種錯誤可能會讓人很尷尬。
Research suggests that ambiguous situations can make people fear being judged negatively,
研究表明，模棱兩可的情況會讓人害怕得到負面評價，
which can stop them from acting.
這可能阻止他們行動。
The good news is that when it's clear that there is an emergency, the bystander effect doesn't usually happen.
好消息是，當緊急情況明顯時，旁觀者效應通常不會發生。
A 2011 meta-analysis of more than 50 studies also showed that
2011年對50多項研究的薈萃分析還顯示，
if the situation is dangerous, like if the perpetrator is still there,
如果情況危險，比如行兇者仍在那里，
people are more likely to help if there are bystanders. And that makes sense.
如果有旁觀者的話，他們更愿意幫忙。這能講得通。
Those situations are clearly an emergency, and it's safer if other people have your back.
這些情況顯然是緊急情況，如果別人支持你，你會更安全。
Ultimately, although there are some trends,
最終，盡管有一些趨勢，
a lot of different social and psychological factors determine whether or not someone will offer help.
但許多不同的社會和心理因素決定了一個人是否會提供幫助。
Today, research suggests that your best bet in an emergency is to make it clear that you do need assistance,
現在研究表明，在緊急情況下，你最好的選擇是明確表示你確實需要幫助，
and to make individuals feel responsible for stepping in.
讓人們覺得有責任介入。
Really, though, it isn't that surprising that this effect isn't totally straightforward.
不過，這種效應并不完全明確，這一點兒也不奇怪。
Humans aren't exactly clear-cut, so the bystander effect isn't, either.
人類并不是完全清晰的，所以旁觀者效應也不是。
Even the original Kitty Genovese story wasn't as black-and-white as the New York Times reported.
甚至是最初的基蒂·熱諾維斯故事也沒有《紐約時報》報道的那么黑白分明。
The truth is, 38 people did not witness the murder.
事實是，38人沒有目擊到謀殺。
When Kitty was first attacked on the street, many may have briefly heard something,
當凱蒂第一次在街上遭到襲擊時，許多人可能聽到過一些聲音，
but only a handful of people saw anything happening in the dark.
但只有少數人在黑暗中看到了什么。
And even then, it was the middle of the night, and it was hard to tell what was going on.
即使那樣，已經是半夜了，他們也很難識別發生了什么。
In other words, it was ambiguous.
換句話說，它是模糊的。
One person scared the attacker away by yelling out the window, and, injured, Kitty tried to get to her apartment.
有一個人對著窗外大喊，把攻擊者嚇跑了，凱蒂受傷了，她試著回到公寓。
Then, unfortunately, in the building's entrance where people couldn't see or hear her very well, the attacker came back.
不幸的是，在大樓的入口處，人們無法看到或聽到她聲音的地方，攻擊者又回來了。
Police were called but didn't arrive until it was too late to save her.
警察被召來，但趕到時已為時已晚。
The newspaper article wasn't published until two weeks after the event,
報紙上的這篇文章直到事件發生兩周后才發表，
so there was time for details to get a little fuzzy.
所以時間讓細節變得模糊。
Thankfully, we have researchers studying this phenomenon to make sure that's less likely to happen again.
值得慶幸的是，我們的研究人員正在研究這一現象，以確保這種情況不會再次發生。
Thanks for watching this episode of SciShow Psych!
感謝您收看本期的心理科學秀！
If you'd like to dig deeper into some of the topics you might've covered in Psych 101,
如果你想深入研究一下心理學101中可能涉及到的一些主題，
you can watch our episode about Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs.
你可以看我們那期“馬斯洛需求層次”，
Turns out, that's not as helpful as you'd think, either.
事實證明，它也沒有你想象的那么有用。
