For decades it was a little disputed fact:bystanders often fail to come to the rescue in emergencies on the street. Marie Rosenkrantz Lindegaard's research shows that things are different. During conflicts on the street, passers-by almost always intervene to calm things down.
New York, March 27, 1964. An article in The New York Times The gruesome murder of 28-year-old Kitty Genovese is causing a stir. Not only because of the horrific nature of the crime - she was stabbed, raped and robbed - but also because of the complete lack of help from bystanders. Although 38 people were nearby who could have responded to her cry for help, including residents of a flat, no one intervened. Not even the police were called. Partly because of this, the perpetrator was able to come back and stab Genovese twice more, while she was injured on the ground. This is how journalist Martin Gansberg described what had happened. It later became known that Gansberg's story was a bit lacking (see photo caption on the right).
The fuss that arose over the article in the The New York Times led social psychologists to investigate 'bystander behaviour'. This led to the insight that there was such a thing as the bystander effect :in the company of others, we are less likely to help a person in need. For example, because we think that others should do that or because we unconsciously mirror the behavior of the group.
Research by criminologist Marie Rosenkrantz Lindegaard of the Free University, however, shows something quite different. Together with colleagues from Denmark and England, she studied 1,225 street conflicts recorded with security cameras in Amsterdam, Cape Town (South Africa) and Lancaster (England), 219 of which intensively. This shows that passers-by almost always come to the rescue to calm things down during heated quarrels and fights in the street.
For fifty years, psychologists have assumed that there is such a thing as the bystander effect. Why do you think your research shows something completely different?
“I think the idea of the indifferent passerby fits in well with existing cultural ideas we have about the individualized society, in which we would all be preoccupied with ourselves. You can say that the bystander effect has been given the status of an urban myth. That may have influenced the investigation. In addition, a large part of the research took place in the lab, which is of course different from the real thing. Situations were also simulated and analyzed that were not necessarily related to conflict and violence, such as someone losing his wallet. As a result, all that research is not in line with more intensive situations such as quarrels and fights in the street.”
The camera images you have studied from the Netherlands, England and South Africa show that bystanders are strongly inclined to intervene during a fight, skirmish or name-calling. How exactly did that work?
“In a group of bystanders of about ten people, there are usually three people who take action. For example, by addressing the perpetrator or by separating the fighting parties. At the same time, this is not very surprising. Social psychologists have previously indicated that, despite the bystander effect, in a relatively large group there is a good chance that at least one person will do something. But we also see this effect in smaller groups. If a group of three people observed the fight, there was almost always one of those three who intervened.”
Were they mainly a certain type of people, for example muscular men?
"Well no. The propensity to intervene depended little on factors such as age and gender. Cultural-social circumstances also appeared to have little influence. For example, although the risk of violence in public spaces in South Africa is relatively high, the tendency to intervene in a fight in the street was no less than in the European cases we studied.”
Yet there are regular incidents of violence in the news where bystanders do not intervene. In London, for example, a lesbian couple was beaten up on a bus without a single passenger intervening. In the Netherlands, too, it regularly happens that someone is mistreated on the street without someone doing anything, sometimes resulting in death.
“Unfortunately, there are always exceptions to the rule. But victims in riots and fights can usually count on help from others.”
“It is also not the case that if there is no active intervention bystanders did nothing at all. That is sometimes said about certain incidents, but when you then look at the images of them, you see something else. Passers-by call the police or maintain eye contact with the victim as much as possible during the incident and then approach that person and extend a hand or comfort them as soon as the perpetrator has left. Sometimes bystanders touch each other to seek support and make contact. This also shows that the image of the indifferent passer-by is often incorrect.”
You researched different types of street violence. What stands out when we zoom in on the motivation to intervene?
Featured by the editors
MedicineWhat are the microplastics doing in my sunscreen?!
AstronomySun, sea and science
BiologyExpedition to melting land
“The CCTV footage shows that the tendency to act is greatest during fights or skirmishes. In about 90 percent of the cases, the victim receives help. But in a situation where there is a threat with a weapon, such as in robberies, bystanders rarely intervene actively. The extent to which you or the victim are at risk therefore plays a role. Nor is there usually any intervention in quarrels in the relational sphere. In this regard, clarity also plays a role:it must be clear that there is a need for help, rather than a private matter. But cultural ideas about stereotypical perpetrators and what constitutes dangerous behavior also seem to determine how bystanders deal with fights in the street. Passers-by rarely intervene in quarrels between two women.”
When you just mentioned robbery, you talked about active intervene. Are bystanders involved in other ways?
"Indeed. Instead of walking on, bystanders often hang around near such an everywhere. As soon as the robber runs away, they jump into action. For example, some people run after the robber and try to throw him to the ground. Others comfort the victims.”
“In this context, we do see a gender difference:men usually do the first and women the second. Much also depends on who does what. Instead of evading responsibility, a given with the English term diffusion of responsibility is indicated, there is rather a division of responsibility; people assume certain roles based on what is already being done and/or what is needed.”
In a text on the website of your research institute, you indicate that you would not immediately call intervention by bystanders 'altruism'. So why do people take action?
“Of course it's nice that people are willing to help someone in need. But it remains difficult to determine whether this stems from altruism or something else. According to some psychologists, for example, the stress that such a situation evokes in ourselves can also be a reason for wanting to end the situation. The degree of empathy may also play a role, whereby bystanders who are directly affected by the perpetrator are more likely to intervene. The camera images I consulted did not confirm that idea. Rather, it seemed that the level of stress that the victim showed influenced whether people took action.”
Have you actually found yourself in a threatening situation on the street?
"Yes. My husband spoke to someone on a scooter on the bike path who was not following the rules, after which he cut him off on purpose and he fell with one of our children who was sitting on the back. That was a bad situation. We were soon helped by bystanders. There were about twenty of these, ten of which took an active role. For example, by jumping in between us and this man and then talking to him. And that really helped. Afterwards, he apologized and cuddled with the kids.”
“Others offered practical help. For example, one lady touched me and asked if and how she could help us. A very good way to assist someone. This all helped with processing. And it was good to see that what I observe in my research also occurs in practice.”
You recently received a VIDI grant with which you want to draw up a 'First Aid for Bystanders Guide', among other things. What will we read in it later?
“I'm not quite there yet. In any case, it will not be tips that apply in every situation. After all, the tendency towards intervention and the way in which it takes place differs per context and there are also other dangers and factors at play.”
“On the other hand, I do have some general tips for people who fear that they will become the target of violence on the street. Always call for help if you are in a threatening situation. If you are able, you can also specifically look at people and ask for help:“Would you help me, please?” That way you increase the chance that they will detach from the group they are in and start looking for you. going to the rescue.”
“Some people also think that it is better to take a quiet back road late at night than to walk across a busy square or cycle for fear of coming into contact with a violent group there. But my research suggests that it is really best to choose the second option. If you do get into trouble, there is a relatively good chance that emergency troops will show up – while if you are attacked in a quiet place you will find it difficult to find help.”