BibTex RIS Cite

The Bystanders’ Effect: A Game Theoretic Approach To One Social Dilemma Situation

Year 2013, Volume: 15 Issue: 4, 649 - 662, 20.03.2014

Abstract

Abstract

In social psychology, the bystander effect, defined as a social dilemma, is related to the probability of help to a victim by the mere presence of others. This dilemma has been generally assumed, by game theoreticians and experimental economists, to represent the same social phenomenon as the volunteer’s dilemma. In this paper, we analyze these two different social dilemmas and the main question of the article is whether these two different social dilemmas represent the same social state. We first provide a broad literature review, and discuss the game theoretical foundation of the volunteer’s dilemma. Then, we provide an alternative theoretical explanation for the bystander effect and discuss the differences between these two social states.

Keywords: Behavioral Economics, Bystander Effect, Volunteer's Dilemma, Altruism, Social Dilemma. 

References

  • Batson, C. D., Van Lange, P. A. M., Ahmad, N. ve Lishner, D. A. (2003). Altruism and helping behavior. M. A. Hogg ve J. Cooper (Ed.) The Sage handbook of social psychology: İçinde 279-295. Londra: Sage.
  • Bickman, L. (1971). The effect of another bystander’s ability to help on bystander intervention in an emergency. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 7 (3): 367-379.
  • Chekroun, P. ve Brauer, M. (2002). The bystander effect and social control behavior: the effect of the presence of others on people’s reactions to norm violations. European Journal of Social Psychology, 32 (6): 853-867.
  • Cramer, R. E., McMaster, M. R., Bartel, P. A. ve Dragna, M. (1988). Subject competence and minimization of the bystander effect. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 18 (13): 1133-1148.
  • Darley, J. M. ve Latane, B. (1968a). Bystander intervention in emergencies: diffusion of responsibility. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 8 (4): 377-383.
  • Darley, J. M. ve Latane, B. (1968b). Group inhibition of Bystander intervention in emergencies. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 10 (3): 215-221.
  • Diekmann, A. (1985). Volunteer’s dilemma. The Journal of Conflict Resolution, 29 (4): 605-610.
  • Fehr, E. ve Schmidt, K. (1999). A theory of fairness, competition and cooperation. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 114 (3): 817-868.
  • Franzen, A. (1995). Group size and one-shot collective action. Rationality and Society, 7 (2): 183-200.
  • Gansberg, M. (27.03.1964). Thirty-eight who saw murder didn't call the police. New York Times.
  • Gilovich, T., Keltner, D. ve Nisbett, R. E. (2006). Social psychology. New York: W.W. Norton & Company Inc.
  • Goeree, J. K., Holt, C. A. ve Moore, A. K. (2005). An experimental examination of the volunteer’s dilemma. İnternet çalışma tebliği. http://people.virginia.edu/~cah2k/vg_paper.pdf, (01.02.2014).
  • Hewstone, M., Stroebe, W. ve Klaus, J. (2008), Introduction to social psychology - A European perspective. Londra: Blackwell Publishing.
  • Hogg, M. A. (2004). SAGE benchmarks in social psychology, Volume II: Social İnteraction. Londra: SAGE Publications.
  • Küçükşenel, S. (2012). Behavioral mechanism design. Journal of Public Economic Theory, 14 (5): 767-789.
  • Latane, B. ve Dabbs, J. M. (1975). Sex, group size and helping in three cities. Sociometry, 38 (2): 180-194.
  • Levine, M. (1999). Rethinking bystander nonintervention: social categorization and the evidence of withnesses at the James Bulger murder trial. Human Relations, 52 (9): 1133-1155.
  • Levy, P., Lundgren, D., Ansel, M., Fell, D., Fink, B. ve McGrath, J. E. (1972). Bystander effect in a demand-without-threat situation. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 24 (2): 166-171.
  • Murnighan, J. K., Kim, J. W. ve Metzger, A. R. (1993). The volunteer dilemma. Administrative Science Quarterly, 38 (4): 515-538.
  • Pantin, H. M. ve Carver, C. S. (1982). Induced competence and the bystander effect. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 12 (2): 100-111.
  • Rapoport, A. (1988). Experiments with N-person social traps I: prisoner's dilemma, weak prisoner's dilemma, volunteer's dilemma, and largest number. The Journal of Conflict Resolution, 32 (3): 457-472.
  • Weesie, J. (1993). Asymmetry and timing in the volunteer’s dilemma. The Journal of Conflict Resolution, 37 (3): 569-590.
  • Weesie, J. ve Franzen, A. (1998). Cost sharing in a volunteer's dilemma. The Journal of Conflict Resolution, 42 (5): 600-618.

Görgü Tanıklarının Etkisi: Sosyal Bir İkilem Durumu Üzerine Oyun Teorisi Yaklaşımı

Year 2013, Volume: 15 Issue: 4, 649 - 662, 20.03.2014

Abstract

Öz

Sosyal psikolojide “görgü tanıklarının etkisi” olarak ifade edilen sosyal ikilem, herhangi bir durumda mağdur konumundaki bir kişiye etrafındaki diğer kişilerin yardım etme ihtimalleri ile ilgilidir. Oyun teorisyenleri ve deneysel iktisatçılar tarafından bu sosyal ikilemin genel olarak gönüllülerin ikilemi ile aynı sosyal olguyu ifade ettiği varsayılmıştır. Bu makalenin amacı, farklı isimlerle anılan ancak aynı sosyal olguyu ifade ettiği tartışılan bu iki farklı ikilemi incelemektir. Makalenin temel sorusu “acaba bu iki sosyal ikilem, aynı sosyal olguyu mu temsil etmektedir?” şeklindedir. Çalışma öncelikle geniş bir literatür taraması verecek, ardından oyun teorik bir yaklaşım ile gönüllülerin ikileminin çözümünü ortaya koyacak ve son olarak görgü tanıklarının etkisi için alternatif bir teorik yaklaşım sunarak bu iki durumun benzer ve farklı yönlerini tartışacaktır.

Anahtar Kelimeler: Davranışsal İktisat, Görgü Tanığı Etkisi, Gönüllünün İkilemi, Fedakârlık, Sosyal İkilem.

 

References

  • Batson, C. D., Van Lange, P. A. M., Ahmad, N. ve Lishner, D. A. (2003). Altruism and helping behavior. M. A. Hogg ve J. Cooper (Ed.) The Sage handbook of social psychology: İçinde 279-295. Londra: Sage.
  • Bickman, L. (1971). The effect of another bystander’s ability to help on bystander intervention in an emergency. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 7 (3): 367-379.
  • Chekroun, P. ve Brauer, M. (2002). The bystander effect and social control behavior: the effect of the presence of others on people’s reactions to norm violations. European Journal of Social Psychology, 32 (6): 853-867.
  • Cramer, R. E., McMaster, M. R., Bartel, P. A. ve Dragna, M. (1988). Subject competence and minimization of the bystander effect. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 18 (13): 1133-1148.
  • Darley, J. M. ve Latane, B. (1968a). Bystander intervention in emergencies: diffusion of responsibility. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 8 (4): 377-383.
  • Darley, J. M. ve Latane, B. (1968b). Group inhibition of Bystander intervention in emergencies. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 10 (3): 215-221.
  • Diekmann, A. (1985). Volunteer’s dilemma. The Journal of Conflict Resolution, 29 (4): 605-610.
  • Fehr, E. ve Schmidt, K. (1999). A theory of fairness, competition and cooperation. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 114 (3): 817-868.
  • Franzen, A. (1995). Group size and one-shot collective action. Rationality and Society, 7 (2): 183-200.
  • Gansberg, M. (27.03.1964). Thirty-eight who saw murder didn't call the police. New York Times.
  • Gilovich, T., Keltner, D. ve Nisbett, R. E. (2006). Social psychology. New York: W.W. Norton & Company Inc.
  • Goeree, J. K., Holt, C. A. ve Moore, A. K. (2005). An experimental examination of the volunteer’s dilemma. İnternet çalışma tebliği. http://people.virginia.edu/~cah2k/vg_paper.pdf, (01.02.2014).
  • Hewstone, M., Stroebe, W. ve Klaus, J. (2008), Introduction to social psychology - A European perspective. Londra: Blackwell Publishing.
  • Hogg, M. A. (2004). SAGE benchmarks in social psychology, Volume II: Social İnteraction. Londra: SAGE Publications.
  • Küçükşenel, S. (2012). Behavioral mechanism design. Journal of Public Economic Theory, 14 (5): 767-789.
  • Latane, B. ve Dabbs, J. M. (1975). Sex, group size and helping in three cities. Sociometry, 38 (2): 180-194.
  • Levine, M. (1999). Rethinking bystander nonintervention: social categorization and the evidence of withnesses at the James Bulger murder trial. Human Relations, 52 (9): 1133-1155.
  • Levy, P., Lundgren, D., Ansel, M., Fell, D., Fink, B. ve McGrath, J. E. (1972). Bystander effect in a demand-without-threat situation. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 24 (2): 166-171.
  • Murnighan, J. K., Kim, J. W. ve Metzger, A. R. (1993). The volunteer dilemma. Administrative Science Quarterly, 38 (4): 515-538.
  • Pantin, H. M. ve Carver, C. S. (1982). Induced competence and the bystander effect. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 12 (2): 100-111.
  • Rapoport, A. (1988). Experiments with N-person social traps I: prisoner's dilemma, weak prisoner's dilemma, volunteer's dilemma, and largest number. The Journal of Conflict Resolution, 32 (3): 457-472.
  • Weesie, J. (1993). Asymmetry and timing in the volunteer’s dilemma. The Journal of Conflict Resolution, 37 (3): 569-590.
  • Weesie, J. ve Franzen, A. (1998). Cost sharing in a volunteer's dilemma. The Journal of Conflict Resolution, 42 (5): 600-618.
There are 23 citations in total.

Details

Primary Language Turkish
Journal Section Articles
Authors

Serkan Küçükşenel

Ü. Barış Urhan This is me

Publication Date March 20, 2014
Submission Date January 20, 2015
Published in Issue Year 2013 Volume: 15 Issue: 4

Cite

APA Küçükşenel, S., & Urhan, Ü. B. (2014). Görgü Tanıklarının Etkisi: Sosyal Bir İkilem Durumu Üzerine Oyun Teorisi Yaklaşımı. Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 15(4), 649-662.