6 ms·
It's quite shocking to me how many social science and social psychology experiments have been debunked in recent years. It's as if the whole field is filled wit
by Jerry2 7y ago
It's quite shocking to me how many social science and social psychology experiments have been debunked in recent years. It's as if the whole field is filled with false research. They should do what psychology has done and start a massive replication effort of most cited results. [0] That should bring back some credibility back to the field.
[0] https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/scientists-replicated-100-psychology-studies-and-fewer-half-got-same-results-180956426/ https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/scientists-rep...
- pfundstein 7y agoSocietal norms are constantly evolving; what is normal today might have been unthinkable in the past when these studies were conducted.
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- de_watcher 7y agoOr the surveillance cameras have pushed people to act because it looks awesome on youtube.
- rubber_duck 7y agoI think awareness of the effect changes the behavior more - at least for me - I usually wouldn't act in situations where someone needed help because I don't feel particularly qualified but knowing that nobody else is likely to respond I try to help. This makes social science even less reliable.
- jsjw7sbw 7y ago> nobody else is likely to respond They are now. But maybe after some time everyone will think someone will help them anyway and stop. And so the cycle continues.
- rubber_duck 7y agoI just try to help untill I see someone more qualified take over to avoid the issue. Don't know if it's because I'm aware of this effect or just maturing but I know when I was younger I just avoided situations like this and I had a few recently where I did actually try to help.
- archgoon 7y agoAlso; awareness of the bystander effect may have led to increased pro-activeness. This is really something that would need to have data going further back to figure out if the original effect existed. See another post in this thread where someone has recieved specific training to counteract the bystander effect.
- owens99 7y agoThis. Debunked is the wrong word (clickbait). It's a great thing if the bystander effect can be overcome or nullified.
- usaphp 7y agoI doubt that average Joe would know anything about bystander effect studies.
- cyborgx7 7y agoI have come across the bystander effect often enough in popular culture, that I would say a very significant amount of people is aware of the concept, even if they might not remember its specific name.
- pbhjpbhj 7y agoI guess you're in USA, I'd expect it to be a large minority in UK - everyone who ever did a first-aid course should know about it for starters.
- clort 7y agoalso, the way I read it is that bystander effect was posited to be something like nobody else is doing anything and therefore I won't do anything but if society has changed and somebody does get involved, it would be more like that other guy is doing something and therefore I will get involved too because we are social animals and we do what feels right, what we see others doing. So, although the outcomes might have changed, the process is still the same. I remember reading a book some years ago (Lauren Slater, Opening Skinners Box) about some of the psychological experiments which had been done in the past. One of the general conclusions of those experiments that stood out to me seemed to be that only about 30% of people would actively take initiative if given the chance, but that generall people would follow social leads. I remember passing this book around at work to a couple of friends who both said that they felt that reading about this concept made them feel as if they were more aware of the social pressures to not act in situations and that they would therefore be more likely to step up as a result.
- watwut 7y agoYep. I used not to act in situations, because I assumed it is not my business, that I will look like nosy idiot who messes into things without them being her business and nothing is the correct/expected/respectful action. Some articles I read convinced me of the opposite, that it is ok for me to react and the previous passive strategy often amounts to enabling. Therefore, I act differently now.
- AmericanChopper 7y agoEven with flawed studies aside, the word science is used very liberally to describe these fields. Even psychology’s most robust and well tested theories can’t come anywhere close to making accurate predictions.
- snowwrestler 7y agoNo field of science made accurate predictions when it started. It took centuries of hard work to arrive at the levels of precision and accuracy that we take for granted in, say, physics or chemistry. And psychology is attempting to study phenomena that are far more complex than anything in physics or chemistry. Being wrong or incomplete, doesn’t mean it’s not science.
- AmericanChopper 7y agoWhile most of what you just said is open to debate, I was merely commenting on the scientific maturity of the fields. Which to me seem relevant to a discussion on the debunking of it’s theories.
- Iv 7y agoSocial psychology is very hard. Making correct experiments is hard, costly, often unethical and highly culture-dependent. You can only get so far with questionnaire handled to middle-class/high-class university students...
- cm2187 7y agoPlus I would expect it would also be a function of the legal system. Some countries like France are typically hostile to self-defence / vigilanties as opposed to a country like the US. If you intervene and the assaulter gets hurt, you might be in significant legal troubles.
- cf498 7y agoI was shocked to learn about the difference a while back, especially concerning first aid. In Germany you are facing criminal charges if you dont aid injured people, by either first aid or calling an ambulance. Then you have countries where not even dragging a person out of a burning car is protected under good Samaritan laws.
- ptero 7y agoYes, so researchers must be very careful to caveat their findings. Not only as footnotes in the middle of the article but also in general terms in abstract and introduction as those are the sections copied into newspapers and such. My 2c.
- cjslep 7y agoThe stakes become even higher when people attempt to use Social Psychology as either the basis for moral frameworks or in evaluating morality. This can be problematic for a multitude of reasons (bias being the largest), and the biggest offender I've found is Jonathan Haidt and his 4 moral evaluators. Actually, I think in The Righteous Mind he's up to 5 now, time will tell if that continues to change with continued "no comment" about how, maybe, his approach is flawed.
- pathseeker 7y agoIs that a defense or an indictment?
- your-nanny 7y agoOne result that disagrees with other results does not "debunk" anything. It merely changes our confidence in the hypothesis. It's not even clear that this result contradicts that social psych result.
- owens99 7y agoDebunked = Clickbait. Nullified or reversed is different than debunked. Flat-earth theory is debunked. This is not even close to that.
- BeetleB 7y agoTo be frank, this study likely did not debunk anything. Even 30 years ago, psychologists had outlined the criteria by which the bystander effect does not occur. A well known criterion (seen in many comments on HN) is to direct your plea for help to a single individual amongst the bystanders ("You! Call 911!" as opposed to "Someone call 911!"). Another aspect that's been known for over 30 years is that if someone in the crowd feels (s)he is an outsider, that person is a lot more likely to intervene. Did they account for these in the study? How will they determine if a particular person thought of himself as an outsider? If they did not account for these, then the article is attacking a strawman.