Archived Blog Entry
19 Comments
Mar
29
Emergency Intervention and Good Sam
A tragic death forty-six years ago launched an intriguing field of love research: emergency intervention. I’ve been wondering what it means for imitating the Good Samaritan.
In March of 1964, Katherine “Kitty” Genovese was attacked and stabbed repeatedly coming home from work one morning. At least thirty-eight people watched or heard the attack. But not a single person came to Kitty’s assistance. An anonymous caller reported the incident a half-hour later. Before help could arrive, she bled to death.
When the public heard that thirty-eight witnesses did not intervene, a flurry of questions arose. People wondered if such apathy said something about New Yorkers or big city culture. Others wondered if this tragic event reveals a fundamental flaw in human nature. People assumed the death of Kitty Genovese proves that humans are apathetic, callous, and indifferent.
Social psychologists Bibb Latané and John Darley and other researchers, however, decided to search for experimental answers. They wanted to know why onlookers and witnesses of crisis often fail to respond. Their research takes the name “emergency intervention.”
Latané and Darley focus upon the decision-making processes we use when deciding whether to help during situation-specific tragedies. The social scientists have developed a five-step model for how bystanders decide whether to intervene to help in an emergency.
The first step in the decision model is simply noticing the emergency event. This may seem rather obvious, but various factors influence a bystander’s ability to notice a victim. Bystanders experiencing bad moods, for instance, are less likely to be sensitive to their surroundings. Bystanders are also more likely to notice vivid events. A victim of “ho-hum accident” witnessed by a bystander having a bad day is less likely to receive help.
The second step is interpretation. A bystander must not only notice a tragic incident, he or she must also interpret it as requiring assistance. In a series of studies, researchers have documented that bystanders are more likely to intervene when victims express strong distress cues. Those who observe an event and are confused by the victim’s silent or passive actions wonder if they should intervene. Bystanders are more likely to help screamers than quiet victims.
Sometimes environmental factors confuse or distract witnesses. In one study, a person wearing a cast dropped books on the sidewalk directly in front of oncoming strangers. In some instances, these books were dropped as a power lawn mower roared nearby. In other instances, books were dropped and the mower was not running. When the power lawn mower was silent, bypassers helped the injured book dropper eighty percent of the time. When the power mower was running loudly, however, bypassers helped only fifteen percent of the time. Excessive stimulation hampers a person’s ability to interpret what to do in an emergency.
The third step in Latané and Darley’s model for emergency intervention decision making is responsibility taking. Experiments show that bystanders who believe themselves the only witness to an emergency are more likely to help. Bystanders may shirk responsibility, because they assume others are better equipped or have more knowledge for helping victims. This phenomenon, labeled “diffusion of responsibility,” probably accounts for why no one intervened to help Kitty Genovese.
In one study, college students heard from an intercom system about an emergency nearby. Students who believed themselves the only ones hearing the emergency message were more likely to take responsibility to help than students who believed others also heard the message. Students who believed people others heard but were somehow unable to intervene were as likely to help as those who heard and believed themselves alone.
Step four in the intervention decision-making process involves deciding what kind of help to give. Here the issue is not so much willingness to help. The issue is discerning the best way to aide in an emergency.
One study tested the effectiveness of those with first-aid training when encountering an emergency. Both those with training and those without were equally as likely to respond to help a bleeding person. Perhaps not surprisingly, the medical assistance of those with first-aid training was most effective in the emergency. Those without such training often made the emergency worse. Sometimes those who believe they lack the expertise to help effectively will fail to intervene in emergencies like the one involving Kitty Genovese. Bystanders may worry that intervening will cause more harm than good.
The fifth and final step in the emergency intervention process is the actual implementation of the decision to help. This step raises questions of costs and rewards for a potential helper.
A number of experiments have been done under the general rubric of assessing costs and rewards to those who help the needy. Many experiments are based on the notion that people generally want to maximize rewards and minimize costs. The cost-reward approach is associated with an economic view of social interaction, and one of its strengths is its capacity for measurement.
When implementing the decision to help a victim, bystanders may consider costs and benefits related to the time and effort that giving aide requires. Some may decide that the risk for personal harm is too great. Others may intervene to avoid negative emotional consequences – e.g., guilt – they may face should they choose not to help. Some may help because they know that helping will likely put them in a good mood. Others help because they find the victim in some way attractive, similar to himself or herself, or friendly. As costs increase, the general likelihood a bystander will help decreases. As rewards increase, the likelihood a bystander will help increases.
The cost-benefit aspect of decision-making has its limits, of course. For instance, the scheme seems not to account well for bystanders who help despite the costs seeming to outweigh the benefits. Some people act self-sacrificially so that the costs for helping far outweigh any rewards. But even the generally most self-sacrificial people may choose not to intervene, because they perceive the cost of helping too high.
When I think about emergency intervention research, I often think of Jesus’ story about the Samaritan who rescued a beaten man on the Jericho road. It seems like a classic victim intervention example.
In the story, a victim of violence and theft receives no help from two with whom he apparently had much in common. A priest and Levite pass by without pausing to give aid.
When I hear this part of the story, I wonder why I don’t help every victim I encounter. I wonder why I sometimes pass on by those who need desperately need help.
I try not to be too easy on myself or too hard when I think about my own efforts to help those in need. On the one hand, I can’t rescue every victim I encounter. In a world in which the needs far outweigh my individual abilities, resources, and time, I can’t intervene in every emergency. I’m not superman. And I shouldn't feel guilty that my finitude restricts me from being the answer to every question of suffering.
When I first began work as a youth pastor, I thought I could always be the answer. I was idealistic. I ran myself ragged trying to help everyone in need. As a result, my family relationships and my personal health suffered. It didn’t take too long to discover I can’t be the Good Samaritan for every tragedy in the world – even every tragedy in my small congregation.
On the other hand, I know I sometimes give poor excuses for not helping victims of tragedy. I can rationalize my apathy. I can fail to help with my money, my time, my resources, or my empathy. The priest and Levite become my models, not the Good Samaritan.
Several factors largely influence my decisions now about how I decide to help those who suffer. One is my own discernment process. I find helpful listening to advice from wise others, spending time in prayer and reflection, and trying to be aware of the still small voice of what I think is the Holy Spirit’s leading. These help me discern when to rescue some and not others. This discernment process is not precise or inerrant. But I do think it is often helpful.
The second factor has to do with motivation: I need to be empowered to rescue victims. I think God is a necessary source of power for all motivation for doing good. Every good gift comes from the Father.
But other factors also motivate me. For instance, the community of believers with whom I associate plays a key role in persuading me to help others. The educational processes I have pursued often serve as motivational forces. And the memories I have of times that I have been a victim can motivate me. I tend to interpret the old phrase, “there but for the grace of God go I,” in this sense (not in the sense that God picks and chooses who will suffer).
A number of recent scientific studies suggest that rescuers are more likely to help victims whom they consider similar to themselves. Shared likeness motivates rescuers. I tend to help those whom I think are similar to me in some way.
My goal, however, is not to let the tendency to help those similar restrict my decisions help. Instead, my goal is to see similarities I share with everyone I meet.
Jesus says that the Good Samaritan had compassion for the beaten victim on the Jericho road. The Greek word translated “compassion” suggests empathy. To empathize with others is to identify ourselves in some way with them. The Good Samaritan’s empathetic response motivated him to intervene in an emergency.
The concluding words to Jesus' story are simple: "Go and do likewise." They serve well as a basis for our ethics. But they don't solve all the issues of discernment and motivation. We still must make difficult decisions as we encounter the myriad of crises in our world both globally and locally.
May we learn how best to follow the example of the Good Samaritan in our day and in our ways.
Posted in 2010 under Love and Altruism
About this website
You’ve reached the online home of Thomas Jay Oord, a professor, author, and theologian from the Pacific Northwest. Read more
Blog categories
- Love and Altruism
- Open and Relational Theology
- Postmodern Philosophy, Theology, and Culture
- Theology and Science
- John Wesley, Holiness, and the Church of the Nazarene
- ...and the Kitchen Sink
Add comment
Comments
Paul
03.29.2010
8:55am
I can recall several times in my life when emergency situations were in front of me. I would very much like to say that in each I acted to intervene and provide assistance. I did not.
One of the greatest regrets of and one of the greatest sources of shame in my life was failure to intervene in a non-life threatening situation. I witnessed a man beat and cut his girlfriend in my living room. Theirs was a habitually abusive relationship-the victim would turn on anyone who suggested she get out. So maybe there was an unconscious or pre-conscious idea that she chose this. I don’t know. I do know that fear was a factor in my choosing not to intervene.
I really do not understand this fear for I have acted against my physical best interests before and since to help. Hence this is a source of shame for me. Maybe it was the dope and that this man was the connection. I don’t know the answer to this.
Nathan Dupper
03.29.2010
6:25pm
I have had the exact same conflict in my life. Wanting to help, but being overwhelmed by my finite capabilities. There is a very fine line between laziness in my Christian walk, and acceptance of the fact that I simply cannot help every person who is in need. I hope I can someday learn to balance this.
I think it IS much easier to help those who you can relate to. If is this is true, it becomes much easier to help those in need because the great unifier that helps relate us all together is Christ’s love and kindness. If we look at it this way, people who understand Christ’s love should be the most caring of all.
Kylie May
03.31.2010
9:14am
Thank you for this post. This is something that I have thought about too in my life. It seems like we are so consumed with our fear or are too selfish and inward focused to really look at the situations around us and find where our assistance might be of benefit. I think that we have a lot to learn from the Good Samaritan and could make a big difference in the world if we put those lessons into practice.
Kara Notson
03.31.2010
6:29pm
This was a very good post. Thank you. As a social work major, I have had it pounded into my head that I cannot help everyone that I meet. This is good advise for my professional life because I have a code of ethics and other parameters in which to work within social work. In my personal life however, this is sometimes not such good advice. Knowing this, I have to make sure to use much more discernment in deciding who I am capable of helping and who I need to pass by.
Courtney M
03.31.2010
11:30pm
The story of the Good Samaritan means more and more to me every time I hear it. My initial thought of it was pretty simple. In the Bible, there is obviously going to be beneficial stories directed to teach the reader. Yet this story in particular describes a lot about how God wants us to live. The fact that these two people came from completely different backgrounds means so much. I understand why it is hard to always be that hero but the more we make the effort, the easier wanting to help someone will be. The situation in which to help someone may not always be simple, but what we do becomes how we live. Having a busy life may never go away, but God will be with those who help others. If we live with that mindset, then the rest of our lives will be taken care of.
Preston Hills
04.01.2010
12:16pm
Emergency intervention requires skills and abilities that most people aren’t innately born with. This subject is controversial for me because I have been a witness to many cowards who didn’t stand up and do the right think, and to be honest I was the one to stand up for them and help out. An interventionist cannot worry about the outcome before they jump in and help, they must just believe that what they are doing is helping the person at that exact moment in time.
Arielle Askren
04.01.2010
1:40pm
Upon reading this I have found myself deeply considering what I would do in both a situation where people are also watching and solitary situations. In reflecting upon this, I do not know if I would react in a mass situation. I would most likely be one of the people that will pass on by. By realizing this I hope and pray that I will react and love those who are in difficult situations.
Danielle Bowman
04.01.2010
4:23pm
This article actually made me feel kind of guilty about an recent indecent where I should have helped. I think these are all very true reasons as to why we/humanity don’t help in many cases. There are times when I want to help the world and know it’s out of my control. I don’t have the resources, time, or education. There is a fine line between having good and poor examples. Helping others at your own expense is only good to a point, like how you said with your health and family relationships be hurt.
Micah Campton
04.01.2010
4:50pm
I really enjoyed and was intrigued by this article as I considered “Kitty” Genovese. I know that in these studies that have been conducted, most of the people polled seem to have been in large cities or university (smaller community within a larger city) settings. I wonder at how many of these people polled had any particular belief system, and more specifically, how many more of them were Christians. I admit that in some cases I have been guilty of disregarding a person’s cry for help, but I would like to think that given an extreme situation (such as that experienced by Kitty Genovese), I would respond according to what I would hope someone would do for me. But given a life and death situation, I wonder at how interventions vary according not only to community size but according to how many have experienced personal violence of their own.
Troy Watters
04.06.2010
12:54am
I think I’m in the same boat as everyone else on this one. Every day each one of us are faced with someone who needs help. Just driving to Wal-mart there is someone at the stop light with a sign, and they need help in this tough economy. God says what you have done for the least of these you have done for me. I believe you just have to listen to the holy spirit and follow what it’s telling you. God will put that burden on your heart if you’re suppose to help in some way, and I believe He’ll provide whatever you need to accomplish it.
William Hanson
04.08.2010
12:00pm
This is a huge issue that many Christians must face. Today we are almost constantly bombarded with opportunities to help those in third world countries. But how much should we give? Obviously we cannot personally feed every tarving child, but we could probably do without our cell phones and feed several children with the extra money. This problem is especially prevelent in our western wealthy culture. I think there is a balance that we must find between giving too much and not at all. It is important that we are sensitive to what the Holy Spirit is leading us to do.
Tracey Berry
04.08.2010
2:31pm
I can personally relate to this. When I was in HS I was a lifeguard and found it really easy to just jump in and help someone, but now that I’m no longer in that place of my life and mentally know that my certification has expired, I find myself turning the blind eye to situations I would usually have done something. (nothing life threatening, just potentially dangerous situations)
I’m hopeful I’ll be able to overcome my fears and become again that lifeguard for God I was when I was younger.
Allea Meza
04.08.2010
9:38pm
It is amazing to me to think about opportunities I’ve had to help people but didn’t. The thought was there, and all it takes is a simple initiation of help. It would not matter if the person in need related to me in some way. I can just imagine the connections and doors that would be opened by just choosing to help every single time. But on the other hand I can see the draining effects that it can potentially have on someone. Mother Theresa did not have a family that she had to devote herself to like many of us do. She had a rare gift of giving herself and taking just enough time to replenish her reserves in prayer. I don’t think we should look at the amount of help we do, and instead look at the time we are spending in Jesus. If I am right with my Savior, I am right in keeping His greatest commandment which includes helping the needy.
Micah Campton
04.15.2010
4:49pm
Although I really like this article, I found that I really struggle with this article because of the issue surrounding timing. I think that there are definite instances in which we should be expected to intervene during moments of genuine evil, however, when put into practice the issue of intervention becomes more than just a method, it becomes a definite reality. I think that the most common problems are knowing when to intervene, learning how to effectively tailor your method of intervention to suit your situation, and putting it into action. I think for me the action portion becomes most difficult when facing the fear factor associated with it.
Shelby Lindley
04.16.2010
9:51am
People in an emergency panic and begin to think about themselves and how they can’t hurt themselves or someone else. When a person see’s another individual getting hurt, the first thing that comes to their mind is if i were to go out there i would be hurt. We do not want to sacrifice ourselves for the greater good no matter what the situation. People in general become very selfish to the point they can’t help others when they are in need because they don’t know how to.
Blake Wenner
04.19.2010
9:40am
Just as certain people have particular strengths and personality traits, I think that responding to a person in need is initiated by people that share more of the same common trait. Though I am not saying there is some empathy mechanism, it seems that some people are just more likely to respond in any situation of need than others. Discernment is definitely a factor that affects whether a person responds or not. But, in many situations it seems that others are just more likely to respond. One explanation could be upbringing, and the consistent and small empathetic responses that “prime” a person to responding in more desperate situations. These people are in ways more pre-disposed to empathetically responding.
Holly Morten
04.22.2010
10:50am
I guess I have never really encountered an actual emergency where it has been just me and a victim. I think I would probably panic. As much as i would like to say that I would do all I could to help, my brain ususally gives in and I forget what I am doing in a state of shock. Maybe now that I am about to be a new and first time mother some good motherly habbits will kick in, and I wont panic anymore, but I feel that its not always selfish to panic, becuase one cannot help themselves, but the on the other side I feel that its terribly wrong to do nothing. Had i seen the incident you described in the beginning of the post, I would like to think that I would not just stand around and watch. I think that God watches over everyone, and being scared the attacker will hurt you too is only selfish.
Jason Montgomery
04.22.2010
2:13pm
The way that we are brought up, combined with our natural tendencies, seem to influence the way we interpret a variety of situations. Through the Gospel, I would hope that we become capable of seeing the common humanity that we all share, which would help me to become involved in a situation like this. Having never experienced something so traumatic like this in person, however, I know that it is easy to guess what I “would” do without actually having to do anything. I simply hope and pray that I would be able to do the right thing if I ever found myself in a situation like this.
Matt Henry
04.22.2010
2:42pm
I find that a significant factor in making the leap from simply being aware of a need and actually intervening is having a loving attitude toward mankind. Coming as I am from a middle-class Christian household, it is all too tempting to develop an attitude of apathy toward the problems of the world. It is a world of difference when you are loving toward society as a whole—the problems that others are dealing with no longer seem distant, or less important than your own, but they truly move you to act because you feel a sense of community even with the most obscure strangers. Of course, this empathy may feel at times like a curse; your example of your time as a youth pastor is a good example of this. The five-part study offered some interesting information about how our surroundings affect our ability to act, but I don’t think it’s possible to measure the influence of a loving worldview.