1. According to Piliavin, Rodin and Piliavin diffusion of responsibility has been demonstrated in the laboratory studies on helping behaviour.

 

(a) What is meant by the term diffusion of responsibility?

[2]

 

(b) Why did it not occur in Piliavin, Rodin and Piliavin’s study on “subway Samaritans”?

[2]

 

2. In the subway Samaritan study (by Piliavin, Rodin and Piliavin), outline two difficulties that the researchers experienced when carrying out the experiment.

[4]

 

3. (a) According to the model of response to emergencies proposed by Piliavin, Rodin and Piliavin, what are the two factors that influence a person’s decision to help or not?

[2]

 

(b) Give an example of the results from the study and explain it in terms of the two factors.

[2]

 

4. In the subway Samaritan study by Piliavin, Rodin and Piliavin, the researchers made observations of behaviour inside a railway carriage.

 

Identify two practical or methodological problems with conducting these observations

[4]

 

5. (a) Piliavin’s study refers to “diffusion of responsibility”. What does this term mean?

[2]

 

(b) What did the study show us about diffusion of responsibility?

[2]

 

6. (a) In the Subway Samaritan Study by Piliavin, Rodin and Piliavin, some of the researchers acted as victims and some as models. Identify one of the model conditions.

[2]

 

(b) Outline one conclusion that was drawn from the model conditions

[2]

 

7. Piliavin, Rodin and Piliavin’s subway Samaritan study was a field study. Describe one advantage and one disadvantage of conducting field studies and relate them to this study

[4]

 

8. The study by Piliavin, Rodin and Piliavin (subway samaritans) took social psychology out of the laboratory and into the field.

 

(a) Give one reason why diffusion of responsibility was found in laboratory studies but not in the Piliavin, Rodin and Piliavin field study.

[2]

 

(b) Suggest one problem with conducting social psychological research in a laboratory.

[2]

 

9. All studies in psychology raise ethical issues.

 

Outline two ethical issues raised in the study by Piliavin, Rodin and Piliavin (subway Samaritanism).

[4]

 

10. Outline one ethical and one practical problem that occurred in the conducting of the subway Samaritan study by Piliavin, Rodin and Piliavin.

[4]

 

11. Give one finding from the subway Samaritan study by Piliavin, Rodin and Piliavin.

[2]

 

12. In the subway Samaritan study, Piliavin, Rodin and Piliavin proposed an arousal/cost-reward model.

 

From this model, give two ways of reducing arousal in the subway emergency.

[4]

 

13 (a) Outline how one ethical guideline was broken by Piliavin, Rodin and Piliavin in their subway study.

[2]

 

(b) Outline one way in which the ethical guidelines were upheld by Piliavin, Rodin and Piliavin in the same study.

[2]

 

14 Give one reason for the lack of diffusion of responsibility found in the subway study by Piliavin, Rodin and Piliavin.

[2]

 

15. (a) From the subway Samaritan study by Piliavin, Rodin and Piliavin, briefly describe one quantitative measure recorded by the observers.

[2]

 

(b) Outline one limitation of the quantitative data in this study.

[2]

 

16. Piliavin, Rodin and Piliavin used observations in their study on subway Samaritans. Outline one strength and one weakness of using observations in this study.

[4]

 

17. Briefly describe the cost benefit theory suggested by Piliavin, Rodin and Piliavin to explain how people behave when deciding whether to help a victim.

[4]

18. Outline two ethical issues raised by Piliavin, Rodin and Piliavin’s subway Samaritan study.

[4]