The unresponsive bystander: are bystanders more responsive in dangerous emergencies?

Previous research in bystander intervention found that the presence of other bystanders reduces helping behaviour in an emergency (bystander effect). This research was mainly conducted in the context of non‐dangerous, non‐violent emergencies. We hypothesize that the classic bystander effect does not occur in more dangerous situations because: a) they are faster and more clearly recognized as emergency situations; and b) higher costs for refusing help increase the accepted costs for helping. Following this line of reasoning, the present research tests whether the bystander effect is affected by the degree of the emergency's potential danger. Results supported our expectations: In situations with low potential danger, more help was given in the solitary condition than in the bystander condition. However, in situations with high potential danger, participants confronted with an emergency alone or in the presence of another bystander were similarly likely to help the victim. Copyright © 2005 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Mirror neurons and the phenomenology of intersubjectivity

The neurological discovery of mirror neurons is of eminent importance for the phenomenological theory of intersubjectivity. G. Rizzolatti and V. Gallese found in experiments with primates that a set of neurons in the premotor cortex represents the visually registered movements of another animal. The activity of these mirror neurons presents exactly the same pattern of activity as appears in the movement of one's own body. These findings may be extended to other cognitive and emotive functions in humans. I show how these neurological findings might be “translated” phenomenologically into our own experienced sensations, feelings and volitions.     

Why mood affects help giving,but not moral courage: Comparing two types of prosocial behaviour

A long tradition in the help giving literature assumes that mood states determine the level of prosocial behaviour shown by individuals. Most research in this area has been conducted in the context of low cost prosocial behaviour, whereas research has been neglected in which participants were confronted with situations involving potential severe and dangerous negative consequences (i.e., high cost situations) with the help‐giver risking his moral integrity and social disapproval (i.e., moral courage). To address this gap in the literature, the present studies investigate differential effects of positive and negative compared with neutral mood states on help giving versus moral courage. Study 1 shows that in situations requiring low cost helping, participants were more likely to help in positive and negative moods than those in a neutral mood, whereas in situations requiring moral courage (high cost), participants were comparably likely to help in each of the three mood conditions. In Study 2, we find that salience of moral norms mediates the interaction between type of prosocial behaviour and mood. Finally, Study 3 investigates whether the apparent discrepancy between help giving and moral courage as established by the differential impact of mood states can be determined still differently. It reveals that justice sensibility, civil disobedience, resistance to group pressure, moral mandates, and anger lead to moral courage, but not to help giving. Differences between these two types of prosocial behaviour are discussed. Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.