Levine 2001
Method
Field experiment
Independent measures design
Variables
IVs: Dropped pen, Injured leg/dropped magazines, Blind/trying to cross street
DV: Helping rate of the 23 individual cities (overall helping index)
Data was collected by travelling students or cross-cultural psychologists
All researchers were college age and dressed neatly/casually, were men and received instructions and training. They did not have to speak during the trials.
Dropped pen: Moderate walking pace (15 paces per 10 seconds) towards pedestrian, 10-15ft away from pedestrian the experimenter dropped the pen and continued walking. 214 men and 210 women were approached.
Injured leg: Walked with limp and leg brace, drops magazines 20ft away from pedestrian. 253 men and 240 women were approached.
Bling/crossing street: Worse dark glasses and carried white cane, trial was terminated after 60 seconds or after the light turned red and no one helped. 281 trials were conducted.
Keywords
Helping behaviours: Voluntary actions intended to help others
Kin selection theory: Performing a behaviour that increases the likelihood of an individual's genetic relation surviving
Reciprocal altruism: An individual helps based on expectation that they will receive help in the future
Responsibility - prosocial value orientation: A strong influence based on helping behaviour/a feeling and belief in ones responsibility to help.
Sample
1198 participants
Opportunity sampling method
<17s, physically disabled, elderly, people carrying packages were not approached
23 countries, including Brazil and Spain.
Conducted during British Summer
Conducted during main business hours (only unemployed/part time workers)
Aim: To investigate helping behaviour in relation to four community variables:
Population size
Economic wellbeing (wealth of the city/purchasing)
Cultural values (10 point scale for individualism/collectivism)
Pace of life (walking speed over 60ft)
Simpatia: A cultural value particularly associated with Spanish and Latin American societies. It is defined by concern for the well-being of others, with an obligation to be friendly, polite and helpful
Results
100% blind trials received help in Brazil, only 54% in Malaysia.
80% injured leg trials received help in Brazil, 28% in USA
Collectivism/individualism is unrelated to helping behaviour
Poorer cities tended to help more often
Simpatia countries were more helpful than non-simpatia countries
Evaluation
Psychology as a science: Collected quantitative data, manipulated IVs, but was a field experiment.
Usefulness: Used to increase probability of helping behaviours
Nurture/Situational explanations: Simpatia countries and countries with worse economic well being tended to help more
Reductionism: Doesn't investigate participant variables
Holism: Investigates 4 community variables: cultural values, economic well being, pace of life and population size
Socially sensitive/spiritual/moral issues: Only 54% of blind trials received help in Malaysia
Ethical considerations: No consent, not debriefed but no harm to participants
Determinism: 100% of blind trials received help in Rio De Janerio
Free will: 54% of blind trials received help in Malaysia
Validity: Field experiment (high ecological/low internal), standardised (high internal), 23 countries/males and females (high population)
Reliability: Standardised/replicable and collected quantitative data (high internal)
Sampling bias: Males and females, no under 17s, no elderly, no physically disabled