English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

8 answers

False.

As studied in social psychology, there is this social phenomenon that has been studied since the 1960s, known as the general theory of diffusion of responsibility:

Anything that diminishes an individual's sense of responsibility for sovling a problem makes that person less likely to take action. Therefore, people are less likely to help in an emergency when there are other witnesses, the way people will also pay less attention to instructions when co-workers are also listening.

This is also specifically known as bystander apathy. Perhaps the most famous and shocking example of bystander apathy took place in New York in 1964, when a woman called Kitty Genovese was stabbed to death by a mentally ill serial rapist and murderer, Winston Moseley. The attack took place near the apartment block where Kitty lived, and lasted more than 30 minutes. 38 people were home in the apartment block that night, and not a single one came to her aid.

At one stage, having stabbed Kitty twice, Moseley left the scene, when a neighbour shouted at him to "let that girl alone". Ten minutes later he returned, and searched the area for Kitty, who had meanwhile begun crawling towards her own apartment. When he found her, now out of sight of the street and of anyone in the building who might have heard the original attack, he continued his attack, stabbing her several more times. As she lay dying he attempted to rape her.

Subsequent media coverage sensationalised the story, and perhaps unfairly laid blame at the doors of those 38 people who didn't help Kitty - most of whom claimed not to have been aware that anything had happened, and none of whom could have seen the attack in its entirety. However, it is certainly likely that a number of people heard or saw at least part of the attack, and the fact remains that no-one did anything - apparently because everyone assumed that someone else would take responsibility and come to Kitty's aid.

So there... A little long-winded, but I hope I have enlightened adequately.

2007-01-22 17:34:11 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 3 0

Press down on the top of the can if there is no movement or "give" there is no gas inside the can. Gas forms inside a can when the can is in any way compromised, e.g. when the coating in the can is broken it rusts, the rust will cause the food inside to go bad. A bulging end looks exactly like the word says, the end of the can bulges outward from pressure built up inside, and sometimes if you open a can like this the contents will spray out. Even though most canned products in the market today are dated, I still date my cans with magic marker with the month and year of purchase, and do not keep the item for more than a year. I store items I use on a regular basis which I then rotate. There isn't that much that comes in a can that I want to eat cold anyway (cold canned chili? ugh). For emergencies I prefer to store dry products, cereal bars, pop tarts, snack packs, chips and anything else that is high in calories and is less dangerous and wasteful than cans. Loss of power, gas, water should be a consideration.

2016-03-14 22:33:14 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Neither. Sometimes people will just assume somebody else will help. Sometimes there are cultural taboos on helping and individual given a set of circumstances. Sometimes a group of people really are self centered and hateful people who'll pluck your wallet rather than help. Depends greatly on the situation and motivations.

It is true though if you are in a group who can clearly discern reasons that each member's success and survival impact the rest of the group in a positive way. For example if your on an expidition far out in the wilderness. The more with you the better chances you will get help since helping helps themselves. If you are in a group of friends or a club. Again there is a bond there. So again your chances of getting help even if that help is risky or possibly suicidal are greatly improved.

If a car flips off the road and 20 other cars saw it. How many do you think would stop to help or even bother to call an the paramedics? Sometimes you get dozens of people stopping, sometimes not one. I read about a Houston woman who flipped her car off a freeway into some brush. Given how busy the freeway normally is and the time range they suspect it happened the odds are good at least one person saw the accident happen. Likely several. It was months later when they found her car and only because they were looking for something else. I've personally been the only person to stop and help until cops arrived with a wreck in a very busy intersection. At least fifty cars in the area. I had to run accross a busy street and almost got run over going to aid the people in the accident. Other times I did not stop because there were ten people already helping the people in the accident. Depends more on who is there rather than how many. So if forced to say true or false I say false because quality is far more important than quanity.

2007-01-22 17:48:30 · answer #3 · answered by draciron 7 · 0 1

True. In Australia, too many are dying from not receiving help when needed due to living in regional areas such as Tamworth.
If you're in Sydney CBD, although, help can arrive in 10-15 seconds, literally.
Safety in numbers? Certainly. One is more likely to get killed walking home in the dark than five are.

2007-01-22 17:22:22 · answer #4 · answered by Clarke . 3 · 0 1

ughn ugh .Okay we can be civilized.safety in numbers is relevent.However in several cases I have received help in a dire situation and been the only person around for miles.luck of the draw I guess in running into descent people.

2007-01-22 17:22:17 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

True for most case. In some case no. For example, when there are fire or panic going, more people means higher chance to stampede one to another. There are many cases that panic spread on a crowded area and people are killed by other stepping on them.

However, in most case, the statment is true.

2007-01-22 17:29:05 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1 1

false. the more people present the less likely it is that someone will get help because everyone will assume or believe that someone else has already done so.

2007-01-22 17:58:51 · answer #7 · answered by gwenwifar 4 · 0 1

yes

2007-01-22 17:23:51 · answer #8 · answered by david j 5 · 0 1

true

2007-01-22 17:17:37 · answer #9 · answered by dana5169 7 · 0 1

fedest.com, questions and answers