FAST DOWNLOAD
An assassination, 38 people witnessing the tragedy and zero reaction. It is one of the news items that will mark the United States of the 60s and that will greatly advance social psychology throughout the world.
Catherine Genovese, also known as Kitty, a 28-year-old American woman, was attacked on the night of March 13-14, 1964 in Kew Gardens (New York). As she was leaving her workplace and had only a few steps to go to reach her home, a man, lurking in the shadows, suddenly appeared and stabbed her in the back. One of the neighbors across the street, from his window, shouted at the man to stop his murderous work. The attacker fled…, only to return a few minutes later and finish the job. In this neighborhood of Queens, the young woman’s screams echoed for a long time, 1h30 of agony in all before the police intervened. Poor Kitty, without any outside help, succumbed to her terrible injuries.
The Witness Effect
Too cold outside to leave the house and stop the aggression, too busy trying to mask the screams of the young American woman and turning up the volume of the stereo, too far away to act… How can we explain these behaviors of the neighborhood completely inert in the face of the aggression? John Darley and Bibb Latané, two researchers and psychologists, will look into the case and begin studies to understand this total immobilization on the part of the witnesses. In 1968, the two experts demonstrated that an individual, if alone in the presence of the victim, will intervene in 85% of cases compared to 31% if at least 4 other people are present.
A social psychological phenomenon that will be called the “witness effect”, “spectator effect” or even “Genovese syndrome”. In fact, the presence of others greatly influences our decision-making in a dangerous situation, leading to what is called a “dilution of responsibility”. When alone with a person in distress, we know that the responsibility to intervene or not belongs only to ourselves. On the other hand, when other people witness an emergency situation, we divide this responsibility by the number of individuals present. Result: no one acts.
A bystander effect which, rest assured, is not systematically engaged. If there is an emergency and this emergency is not the subject of any ambiguity, an individual, whether in a group or alone, will intervene in the same way, with the same probability.
