Shotland R L, Heinold W D
J Pers Soc Psychol. 1985 Aug;49(2):347-56. doi: 10.1037//0022-3514.49.2.347.
Using a mock injury involving arterial bleeding, we explored the impact of variables on two different decisions in the decision-making process leading to help. Expertise (Red Cross Training), ambiguity, and number of bystanders were manipulated in a 2 X 2 X 2 design. We observed the following responses: (a) nonhelp, (b) ineffective direct help, (c) indirect help, and (d) direct help. The decision to help or not was affected by ambiguity, sex, and the presence or absence of other bystanders. Greater ambiguity led to less help; women helped less than men; and fewer people helped when other bystanders were present. Expertise affected the decision leading to the type of help used but not the decision to help. Although training did not raise the intervention rate, it did dramatically change the effectiveness of the help used and could yield as many as 28 more saved lives out of 80 such incidents. The number of bystanders affected both the decision to help and the type of help used. Ineffective direct help occurred most frequently when the bystander was alone. The presence of other bystanders also affected the type of indirect help that was used.
我们利用一个模拟动脉出血受伤的情景,探究了在寻求帮助的决策过程中,各种变量对两种不同决策的影响。专业知识(红十字会培训)、模糊性和旁观者数量按照2×2×2的设计进行操控。我们观察到以下反应:(a)不提供帮助,(b)无效的直接帮助,(c)间接帮助,以及(d)直接帮助。是否提供帮助的决策受到模糊性、性别以及其他旁观者是否在场的影响。模糊性越高,提供帮助的可能性越小;女性提供帮助的次数少于男性;当有其他旁观者在场时,提供帮助的人数更少。专业知识影响了导致所采用帮助类型的决策,但不影响是否提供帮助的决策。虽然培训并没有提高干预率,但它确实显著改变了所提供帮助的有效性,在80起此类事件中,可能会多挽救28条生命。旁观者的数量既影响是否提供帮助的决策,也影响所采用帮助的类型。当旁观者独自一人时,无效的直接帮助最为常见。其他旁观者的在场也影响了所采用间接帮助的类型。