7 ms·

Cross-national CCTV footage shows intervention is the norm in public conflicts

90 points by rutenspitz 7y ago

rutenspitz 7y ago
Got this from https://twitter.com/DegenRolf/status/1135906266394615808 https://twitter.com/DegenRolf/status/1135906266394615808 and https://twitter.com/DegenRolf/status/868015355180003330 https://twitter.com/DegenRolf/status/868015355180003330
raxxorrax 7y ago
Probably true, but I think CCTV reduces civil intervention. Would be an interesting study to conduct.
- js8 7y ago
  I doubt it, I am actually more inclined to think it's the other way around. My own decision to intervene is mainly driven by my own feeling of safety. So if I am in an environment where is more people, or I perceive is better monitored, I will be more likely to help, because I am less worried to get into trouble.
  - raxxorrax 7y ago
    I don't think safety is the primary issue, since it often isn't applicable to most cases where help is needed. Even though we focus an absurd amount of efforts to increase it that can only be described as madness, it is astonishing how much people are willing to risk if they are put in a situation where someone needs help. But there are effects like the bystander effect that reduce the probability of help the more people are around. I would think CCTV would act as a similar way for people to question their impulse to help because of their surroundings. A conscious decision could also be made here since many developed countries have laws that make the act of helping more dangerous from a legal perspective. Oh, you call that a cardiac massage? You killed that poor guy... [exaggerating here] Why take any responsibility if big brother is around? I have no data, just suggesting that it may be interesting to test something like that. edit disclaimer: I regard CCTV as tech garbage that provides no value if it is used to identify people. GB is no more safe than other comparable countries that don't have it.
  - pbhjpbhj 7y ago
    (I'm in the UK.) I think there's an extra bystander effect if you know there is publicly monitored CCTV. "Why interfere and take a risk, the police know what's happening and will be on the way if it's serious". If I see suspicious behaviour I might stop and watch, intending to intervene if necessary. If there's police nearby, then I'd point it out to them and carry on with my own business. If you think the police already know, then it seems reasonable one might carry on and ignore uncivil, unlawful, or antisocial behaviour. There's a secondary effect, if you interfere and end up physically challenging someone then they might not even recall it a later time if they were drunk/drugged. But, if they see footage later, when sober, they might feel annoyed/angry that they were challenged and seek your prosecution.
    - lkrubner 7y ago
      “Stop and watch“ is still intervention. Twice I’ve broken up what seemed to be incipient fights by stopping and staring intently at the aggressor. Unless they are drunk, they don’t want to be observed. They will walk away if someone is staring at them.
      - ggreer 7y ago
        I've had the opposite happen. Someone tried to smash my head in with a cinder block because he thought I might take his picture. He was never caught.
      - pbhjpbhj 7y ago
        This has worked for me to. I think realising you're being observed can break one out of a cycle of escalation to. That's worked _on_ me as well.
  - snvzz 7y ago
    I'd rather not get involved, if a camera is watching.
obituary_latte 7y ago
Maybe because I’m laymen but this website makes zero sense to me. A link/button with the title in file name format which leads to a page with dollar amount to purchase? Purchase what? Is this a study? An essay?
- _gghj 7y ago
  Those accessing the site from academic networks (where their institutions have paid for the correct subscriptions, that is) will be able to read the paper. For everyone else, bookmark the following: javascript:window.location='http://sci-hub.tw/'+window.location Then you can just click it whenever you encounter an academic paywall to get a copy the article.
  - obituary_latte 7y ago
    Ah that makes sense. Thanks very much for the info and the js trick.
  - dredmorbius 7y ago
    FWIW, Sci-Hub doesn't seem to have this. Yet.
- iserlohnmage 7y ago
  If you are using Shortcuts App, you can also try this shortcut: https://www.reddit.com/r/scihub/comments/altw9l/shortcuts/ https://www.reddit.com/r/scihub/comments/altw9l/shortcuts/
_mlxa 7y ago
One of the co-authors (Mark Levine) delivered a talk on his research on ‘groups and identities in security research’, which touched a bit on the the CCTV work discussed here (amongst other things). https://bengoldsworthy.net/2018/12/security-lancaster-seminar-series-vi/ https://bengoldsworthy.net/2018/12/security-lancaster-semina...
jsbaby608 7y ago
My theory is that because guns are banned in the UK, the only real way to reduce crime is to have cameras everywhere.
- soared 7y ago
  I’m not following the logic - are you implying police with guns are intimidating, which is the only effective way to stop crime? There are many countries that counter that multiple ways. Look at the militarized police in Central American countries that are 10x more intimidating but much less effective.
  - pmorici 7y ago
    I think they are saying that part of the calculation a person makes before committing a crime is what is the likelihood that I am caught or seriously injured. In a society that outlaws citizens having guns the chances of serious injury are much smaller than one where say 20% have a weapon. To the extent that CCTV Cameras increase the likelihood of being caught they have the same deterrent effect of knowing that there is a 20% chance your victim is able to defend themselves.
- jinglebells 7y ago
  And yet the crime rates in the UK are considerably lower than the US, could it be because guns aren't widely available?
  - taborj 7y ago
    That's not the whole story. Here are some numbers: https://www.nationmaster.com/country-info/compare/United-Kingdom/United-States/Crime https://www.nationmaster.com/country-info/compare/United-Kin... You'll note that, yes the US has a higher violent crime rate, but other crime rates are higher - some far higher (drug offenses, for example, are 327 times higher in the UK; total crime victims is 25% higher in the UK, etc). So certain types of crime rates are lower - even considerably lower - than the US. But other types of crime rates are higher - even considerably higher - than the US. It's like there are pros and cons to everywhere.
astazangasta 7y ago
If people aren't familiar with it much of this myth making came from the story of 38 witnesses doing nothing while Kitty Genovese was attacked three separate times in a Queens apartment building. From the (much later) NYT correction of their initial flawed report: >While there was no question that the attack occurred, and that some neighbors ignored cries for help, the portrayal of 38 witnesses as fully aware and unresponsive was erroneous. The article grossly exaggerated the number of witnesses and what they had perceived. None saw the attack in its entirety. Only a few had glimpsed parts of it, or recognized the cries for help. Many thought they had heard lovers or drunks quarreling. There were two attacks, not three. And afterward, two people did call the police. A 70-year-old woman ventured out and cradled the dying victim in her arms until they arrived. Ms. Genovese died on the way to a hospital.
OnlyRepliesToBS 7y ago
"Purchase PDF"
geggam 7y ago
I would be interested in seeing the difference from small town US to big city US. Having been in both areas I have an opinion the results would be much different.
- jayd16 7y ago
  If intervention is the norm in areas covered by CCTV and we can assume that's mostly urban, does that imply you think small towns would keep to themselves?
  - geggam 7y ago
    Actually yes. Its more of a "he/she asked for it" mentality in a small town and taking things out back / having throwdowns is typical.
djsumdog 7y ago
I think back to the Myth of Kitty Genovese (the case where the New York Times reported a woman was raped and tens of witnesses didn't call the police; a report that was later proven totally false). Another example is that case in Indiana where a stage collapsed at a music festival. Immediately after the collapse, videos shows many people going back to try to get trapped people out: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fe5HNtfTdGE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fe5HNtfTdGE It's really cool that we have people doing this type of researching and showing there's more than just anecdotal evidence that people will respond in these situations.
- maneesh 7y ago
  The Kitty Genovese story is a myth? I've never heard that -- I'd love to see an article or something about this!
  - toomuchtodo 7y ago
    Not a myth, but is filled with inaccuracies. People did call the police (several) and the victim did not die alone. https://www.npr.org/2016/06/16/482313144/the-witness-exposes-the-myths-misconceptions-of-kitty-genoveses-murder https://www.npr.org/2016/06/16/482313144/the-witness-exposes...
    - dmix 7y ago
      NYT had a really good article on it upon the death of her murderer in jail in 2016 (one of NY state's longest serving prisoners before he died): https://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/05/nyregion/winston-moseley-81-killer-of-kitty-genovese-dies-in-prison.html https://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/05/nyregion/winston-moseley-... That Witness movie sounds similar to this film which was good: https://www.imdb.com/title/tt2704816/ https://www.imdb.com/title/tt2704816/
  - msla 7y ago
    > The Kitty Genovese story is a myth? Worse than a myth: It's an example of something I half-jokingly call "Philosophically True" because it's something repeated and believed in order to bolster a philosophical position, such that it has a truth value even if it's factually wrong because some people are just that resistant to changing their minds. If you want to believe that people are basically shit and have no redeeming value and will watch a woman get killed in full view without doing anything, the usual story appeals to you, and people saying it's factually wrong won't really sway you. Another example is how the tabula rasa idea shapes some kinds of moral philosophy: If you believe that external cultural indoctrination is absolutely required for people to develop a moral sense, you have to believe that people are blank slates at birth. This is not true, in that even toddlers have a sense of fairness [1], but if there's an innate morality, well, your favored mode of cultural indoctrination is less important and we can't have that, can we? [1] https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/do-kids-have-a-fundamental-sense-of-fairness/ https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/do-kids-ha...
andy_bandy 7y ago
This public conflict is VERY hard to watch. https://www.dailymotion.com/video/x2rwf8w https://www.dailymotion.com/video/x2rwf8w

90 points by rutenspitz 7y ago

Got this from https://twitter.com/DegenRolf/status/1135906266394615808 https://twitter.com/DegenRolf/status/1135906266394615808 and https://twitter.com/DegenRolf/status/868015355180003330 https://twitter.com/DegenRolf/status/868015355180003330

raxxorrax 7y ago

Probably true, but I think CCTV reduces civil intervention. Would be an interesting study to conduct.

js8 7y ago
I doubt it, I am actually more inclined to think it's the other way around. My own decision to intervene is mainly driven by my own feeling of safety. So if I am in an environment where is more people, or I perceive is better monitored, I will be more likely to help, because I am less worried to get into trouble.
- raxxorrax 7y ago
  I don't think safety is the primary issue, since it often isn't applicable to most cases where help is needed. Even though we focus an absurd amount of efforts to increase it that can only be described as madness, it is astonishing how much people are willing to risk if they are put in a situation where someone needs help. But there are effects like the bystander effect that reduce the probability of help the more people are around. I would think CCTV would act as a similar way for people to question their impulse to help because of their surroundings. A conscious decision could also be made here since many developed countries have laws that make the act of helping more dangerous from a legal perspective. Oh, you call that a cardiac massage? You killed that poor guy... [exaggerating here] Why take any responsibility if big brother is around? I have no data, just suggesting that it may be interesting to test something like that. edit disclaimer: I regard CCTV as tech garbage that provides no value if it is used to identify people. GB is no more safe than other comparable countries that don't have it.
- pbhjpbhj 7y ago
  (I'm in the UK.) I think there's an extra bystander effect if you know there is publicly monitored CCTV. "Why interfere and take a risk, the police know what's happening and will be on the way if it's serious". If I see suspicious behaviour I might stop and watch, intending to intervene if necessary. If there's police nearby, then I'd point it out to them and carry on with my own business. If you think the police already know, then it seems reasonable one might carry on and ignore uncivil, unlawful, or antisocial behaviour. There's a secondary effect, if you interfere and end up physically challenging someone then they might not even recall it a later time if they were drunk/drugged. But, if they see footage later, when sober, they might feel annoyed/angry that they were challenged and seek your prosecution.
  - lkrubner 7y ago
    “Stop and watch“ is still intervention. Twice I’ve broken up what seemed to be incipient fights by stopping and staring intently at the aggressor. Unless they are drunk, they don’t want to be observed. They will walk away if someone is staring at them.
    - ggreer 7y ago
      I've had the opposite happen. Someone tried to smash my head in with a cinder block because he thought I might take his picture. He was never caught.
    - pbhjpbhj 7y ago
      This has worked for me to. I think realising you're being observed can break one out of a cycle of escalation to. That's worked _on_ me as well.
- snvzz 7y ago
  I'd rather not get involved, if a camera is watching.

obituary_latte 7y ago

Maybe because I’m laymen but this website makes zero sense to me. A link/button with the title in file name format which leads to a page with dollar amount to purchase? Purchase what? Is this a study? An essay?

_gghj 7y ago
Those accessing the site from academic networks (where their institutions have paid for the correct subscriptions, that is) will be able to read the paper. For everyone else, bookmark the following: javascript:window.location='http://sci-hub.tw/'+window.location Then you can just click it whenever you encounter an academic paywall to get a copy the article.
- obituary_latte 7y ago
  Ah that makes sense. Thanks very much for the info and the js trick.
- dredmorbius 7y ago
  FWIW, Sci-Hub doesn't seem to have this. Yet.
iserlohnmage 7y ago
If you are using Shortcuts App, you can also try this shortcut: https://www.reddit.com/r/scihub/comments/altw9l/shortcuts/ https://www.reddit.com/r/scihub/comments/altw9l/shortcuts/

_mlxa 7y ago

One of the co-authors (Mark Levine) delivered a talk on his research on ‘groups and identities in security research’, which touched a bit on the the CCTV work discussed here (amongst other things). https://bengoldsworthy.net/2018/12/security-lancaster-seminar-series-vi/ https://bengoldsworthy.net/2018/12/security-lancaster-semina...

jsbaby608 7y ago

My theory is that because guns are banned in the UK, the only real way to reduce crime is to have cameras everywhere.

soared 7y ago
I’m not following the logic - are you implying police with guns are intimidating, which is the only effective way to stop crime? There are many countries that counter that multiple ways. Look at the militarized police in Central American countries that are 10x more intimidating but much less effective.
- pmorici 7y ago
  I think they are saying that part of the calculation a person makes before committing a crime is what is the likelihood that I am caught or seriously injured. In a society that outlaws citizens having guns the chances of serious injury are much smaller than one where say 20% have a weapon. To the extent that CCTV Cameras increase the likelihood of being caught they have the same deterrent effect of knowing that there is a 20% chance your victim is able to defend themselves.
jinglebells 7y ago
And yet the crime rates in the UK are considerably lower than the US, could it be because guns aren't widely available?
- taborj 7y ago
  That's not the whole story. Here are some numbers: https://www.nationmaster.com/country-info/compare/United-Kingdom/United-States/Crime https://www.nationmaster.com/country-info/compare/United-Kin... You'll note that, yes the US has a higher violent crime rate, but other crime rates are higher - some far higher (drug offenses, for example, are 327 times higher in the UK; total crime victims is 25% higher in the UK, etc). So certain types of crime rates are lower - even considerably lower - than the US. But other types of crime rates are higher - even considerably higher - than the US. It's like there are pros and cons to everywhere.

astazangasta 7y ago

If people aren't familiar with it much of this myth making came from the story of 38 witnesses doing nothing while Kitty Genovese was attacked three separate times in a Queens apartment building. From the (much later) NYT correction of their initial flawed report: >While there was no question that the attack occurred, and that some neighbors ignored cries for help, the portrayal of 38 witnesses as fully aware and unresponsive was erroneous. The article grossly exaggerated the number of witnesses and what they had perceived. None saw the attack in its entirety. Only a few had glimpsed parts of it, or recognized the cries for help. Many thought they had heard lovers or drunks quarreling. There were two attacks, not three. And afterward, two people did call the police. A 70-year-old woman ventured out and cradled the dying victim in her arms until they arrived. Ms. Genovese died on the way to a hospital.

OnlyRepliesToBS 7y ago

"Purchase PDF"

geggam 7y ago

I would be interested in seeing the difference from small town US to big city US. Having been in both areas I have an opinion the results would be much different.

jayd16 7y ago
If intervention is the norm in areas covered by CCTV and we can assume that's mostly urban, does that imply you think small towns would keep to themselves?
- geggam 7y ago
  Actually yes. Its more of a "he/she asked for it" mentality in a small town and taking things out back / having throwdowns is typical.

djsumdog 7y ago

I think back to the Myth of Kitty Genovese (the case where the New York Times reported a woman was raped and tens of witnesses didn't call the police; a report that was later proven totally false). Another example is that case in Indiana where a stage collapsed at a music festival. Immediately after the collapse, videos shows many people going back to try to get trapped people out: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fe5HNtfTdGE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fe5HNtfTdGE It's really cool that we have people doing this type of researching and showing there's more than just anecdotal evidence that people will respond in these situations.

maneesh 7y ago
The Kitty Genovese story is a myth? I've never heard that -- I'd love to see an article or something about this!
- toomuchtodo 7y ago
  Not a myth, but is filled with inaccuracies. People did call the police (several) and the victim did not die alone. https://www.npr.org/2016/06/16/482313144/the-witness-exposes-the-myths-misconceptions-of-kitty-genoveses-murder https://www.npr.org/2016/06/16/482313144/the-witness-exposes...
  - dmix 7y ago
    NYT had a really good article on it upon the death of her murderer in jail in 2016 (one of NY state's longest serving prisoners before he died): https://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/05/nyregion/winston-moseley-81-killer-of-kitty-genovese-dies-in-prison.html https://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/05/nyregion/winston-moseley-... That Witness movie sounds similar to this film which was good: https://www.imdb.com/title/tt2704816/ https://www.imdb.com/title/tt2704816/
- msla 7y ago
  > The Kitty Genovese story is a myth? Worse than a myth: It's an example of something I half-jokingly call "Philosophically True" because it's something repeated and believed in order to bolster a philosophical position, such that it has a truth value even if it's factually wrong because some people are just that resistant to changing their minds. If you want to believe that people are basically shit and have no redeeming value and will watch a woman get killed in full view without doing anything, the usual story appeals to you, and people saying it's factually wrong won't really sway you. Another example is how the tabula rasa idea shapes some kinds of moral philosophy: If you believe that external cultural indoctrination is absolutely required for people to develop a moral sense, you have to believe that people are blank slates at birth. This is not true, in that even toddlers have a sense of fairness [1], but if there's an innate morality, well, your favored mode of cultural indoctrination is less important and we can't have that, can we? [1] https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/do-kids-have-a-fundamental-sense-of-fairness/ https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/do-kids-ha...

andy_bandy 7y ago

This public conflict is VERY hard to watch. https://www.dailymotion.com/video/x2rwf8w https://www.dailymotion.com/video/x2rwf8w