When Everyone is to Blame, No One is to Blame

In social psychology, this phenomenon is called diffusion of responsibility, and it refers to the tendency of individuals to assume that others will take action in a given situation, leading to no one reacting.

Psychologists became particularly interested in this phenomenon after the shocking murder of Kitty Genovese. The young woman was attacked by
a maniac with a knife as she returned home late at night in March 1964. The incident took place in a New York neighborhood, which the media of the time described as a "respectable neighborhood." Her screams and the struggle initially scared the attacker away, but seeing that no one was coming to help her, the man returned to attack again. Kitty continued to cry for help, but in vain. She was stabbed eight times and then sexually assaulted. During the roughly half-hour it took for the man to commit the crime, not a single neighbor came to her aid.

Catherine Susan Genovese

About half an hour after the attack began, the local police station received an anonymous phone call from a witness. The next day, when police took statements from local residents, thirty-eight people openly admitted that they had heard the screams. All of them had the time to act, even just to call the police, but no one did.

This incident, which attracted extensive interest from the American media, raised the question of when people will help in an emergency situation. The key factor in the subsequent research was whether the potential helper was alone or in a group. As we now know, a lone observer is more likely to act than any individual among numerous bystanders. Even the same person may intervene without hesitation when they are the only one present, but remain passive when part of a group of onlookers. In global literature, this has been referred to as the "Bystander Effect," or in Greek, "Φαινόμενο του αμέτοχου παρατηρητή" (Phenomenon of the Passive Observer).

It would be easy to label the failure to assist a victim in an emergency simply as apathy. However, experimental findings in social psychology show that the likelihood of not offering help increases with the size of the group of eyewitnesses. It is the presence of others that discourages people from reacting. More specifically, the larger the crowd, the slower the reaction. Even worse, many of those who do not respond convince themselves through the passive behavior of others that the situation is not an emergency.

Whether an individual will help depends on the consequences of a series of decisions. They must first notice the event, judge it as an emergency, assume responsibility, and then provide help. Inductively, we might expect that the more observers present, the greater the likelihood that someone will help. This reasoning is disproven because, in such situations, people either do not take the time to assess the situation or shift responsibility to the other bystanders.

Before we rush to interpret the Kitty Genovese incident as something that happened in a different time, country, or society, let us each reflect on how many times we have assessed the seriousness of a situation on the street based on whether a crowd has gathered. In any case, each of us can be the one to assume responsibility.

The information for this article was drawn from the book "Social Psychology" by Hogg M.A. and Vaughan G.M., published by Gutenberg, edited in Greek by Alexandra Chatzi.

Kitty Genovese's story was also presented in the fascinating documentary "The Witness" by James Solomon.