How to Coach Yourself and Others How to Influence, Persuade and Motivate | Página 243

The Dark Side of Social Validation
Bystander Apathy
Numerous studies demonstrate that when someone is in trouble or in need
of help, as the number of bystanders increases, the number of people who
actually help decreases. Termed "bystander apathy," this effect occurs
because, in almost any situation, the more people that are present, the
more we feel a diffusion of responsibility. Our sense of social pressure is
lessened when we feel that there might be any number of people more
capable of helping than we are.
Have you ever been in a situation where, because of the numbers in your
group, you didn't really give it your all? For example, maybe on an
academic group project you weren't as diligent as you would have been
had you been solely responsible for the assignment. Or, maybe you've
helped push a stalled car to safety with some other people but didn't really
push your hardest. When we find ourselves in groups, there is a diffusion
of responsibility. Sometimes we don't know whether we should even
involve ourselves in the first place, since there are so many other people
who could take action. Have you ever seen someone pulled over on the
side of the road, but you just kept driving along with all the other cars
speeding by? When there are large numbers of people involved, we tend
to assume someone else will respond and take action first, or we might
conclude that our help is not really needed.
One particular case in history stands out as a classic example of bystander
apathy. Catherine Genovese, a young woman living in New York City,
was murdered one night when returning home from work. The
unfortunate truth of the matter was that, in a city like New York, her death
was just another of countless murders. Consequently, the incident didn't
receive any more coverage than a few short lines in the New York Times.
Genovese's story would have remained an obscure and incidental case had
it not been for the publicity given one additional fact of her killing.
A week later, A.M. Rosenthal, editor of the New York Times, went out to
lunch with the city police commissioner. Rosenthal asked the
commissioner about another homicide in the area, but the commissioner,
mistakenly thinking he was being asked about the Genovese case,
revealed a shocking piece of information that had been uncovered by the
police. Genovese's death had not been a silent, hidden, or secretive
243