博文
38名公民眼睁睁地看着凶手杀人是以讹传讹（补充）
精选
|||
杨牧川的博文心理学解释18路人的冷漠 中讲第二个旁观者冷漠的例子：
这是一起发生在纽约市皇后区的一桩普通的谋杀案，一位约30的妇女，吉诺维西深夜下班回家时在所住的街道遇害。吉诺维西并不是很快地、安静地被杀死的。她的死亡过程极其漫长、喧闹、残忍， 而且相当公开。在最后一刀结束她的求救声之前，杀人犯在长达35分钟的时间里，在街上追逐并袭击了她3次。令人难以置信的是，她的38个邻居透过自己家的窗户看到了谋杀案的发生，却没有一个人愿费举手之劳拨打报警电话。
这个“令人难以置信”的故事的出处是事发两星期后《纽约时报》的一篇有很多错误的报道，被后来的研究发现不符合事实。维基百科上有详细的描述，见：http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_Kitty_Genovese
现将更接近事实的过程简略翻译如下。
1964年3月13日凌晨3：15，28岁的吉诺维西下班回家，从百米远的停车地点向公寓走，发现有人跟踪，于是加快步伐，跟踪者追上她，向她后背刺了两刀。吉诺维西大喊“我的天，他捅了我！救救我！”
她的喊声惊醒了几位居民，但这是一个寒冷的深夜，窗户都紧紧地关着，只有一两人听出她的喊声是求救，但不知道发生了什么。其中一位邻居对凶手喊道：“放了那个女孩！”，凶手随即跑掉。
受了伤的吉诺维西慢慢地走向公寓后门，出了被吵醒居民的视野，这几位居民当时也没有怀疑有大事，有人说他们以为是小两口吵架，也有人说以为是醉鬼喧闹。
在比较隐蔽的公寓后门，吉诺维西没能打开门，就被回来寻找她的凶手又连刺几刀，在凶手第三次向她行凶时，被一位见证者看到，给警察局打了电话，几分钟后警车到来，但吉诺维西伤势太重，在去医院的路上死亡。
尸检发现吉诺维西第一次被捅后，肺部受重伤，这是导致她死亡的主要原因，肺部受伤后她不大可能再大声喊叫。当晚听到一些动静的居民不是38位，那是《纽约时报》记者杜撰的数字，请不要再以讹传讹。
补充: "38名公民眼睁睁地看着凶手杀人"被作为“旁观者效应”的典型例子，这个效应也被称为“吉诺维西综合症”。不过所谓的“旁观者效应"是否存在，以什么形式存在也是个问题，不是简单地有旁观者出现时，人们通常不站出来帮助受害者。今年7月的《心理学通报》上发表了一篇“旁观者效应”的荟萃分析，有兴趣者可以看看。
The bystander-effect: A meta-analytic review on bystander intervention in dangerous and non-dangerous emergencies.
Fischer, Peter; Krueger, Joachim I.; Greitemeyer, Tobias; Vogrincic, Claudia; Kastenmüller, Andreas; Frey, Dieter; Heene, Moritz; Wicher, Magdalena; Kainbacher, Martina
Psychological Bulletin, Vol 137(4), Jul 2011, 517-537. doi: 10.1037/a0023304
Abstract:
Research on bystander intervention has produced a great number of studies showing that the presence of other people in a critical situation reduces the likelihood that an individual will help. As the last systematic review of bystander research was published in 1981 and was not a quantitative meta-analysis in the modern sense, the present meta-analysis updates the knowledge about the bystander effect and its potential moderators. The present work (a) integrates the bystander literature from the 1960s to 2010, (b) provides statistical tests of potential moderators, and (c) presents new theoretical and empirical perspectives on the novel finding of non-negative bystander effects in certain dangerous emergencies as well as situations where bystanders are a source of physical support for the potentially intervening individual. In a fixed effects model, data from over 7,700 participants and 105 independent effect sizes revealed an overall effect size of g = –0.35. The bystander effect was attenuated when situations were perceived as dangerous (compared with non-dangerous), perpetrators were present (compared with non-present), and the costs of intervention were physical (compared with non-physical). This pattern of findings is consistent with the arousal-cost-reward model, which proposes that dangerous emergencies are recognized faster and more clearly as real emergencies, thereby inducing higher levels of arousal and hence more helping. We also identified situations where bystanders provide welcome physical support for the potentially intervening individual and thus reduce the bystander effect, such as when the bystanders were exclusively male, when they were naive rather than passive confederates or only virtually present persons, and when the bystanders were not strangers. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2011 APA, all rights reserved)https://blog.sciencenet.cn/blog-714-498481.html
上一篇：青蒿素的成就：不要忘记周维善(补充+转载)
下一篇：比较各国科学论文的质量
