Response to Bystander Effect, Prejudice, Aggression and Deterrence Theory Essay

The Bystander Effect states that the greatest number of bystanders who fancy an emergency the less(prenominal) likely any one and only(a) of them pass on help. What be your views ab tabu the bystander constitute? The phenomenon of the bystander issuing became accept and found its niche in social psychology studies after the performance of Catherine Kitty Genovese in 1964. As it is one of the most opprobrious murders in the history, the emphasis on the psychological phenomenon that occurred in March 13, 1964 at about 315 am (Gado 2007) is all overrated. Trekking back to the murder of Genovese, we exclusivelyt joint set that at the very hour when the hatred occurred people atomic number 18 subdued usually asleep.According to the accounts on the incident, the victim did scream for help, and since it was a fatal assault, surely, the victims persistence to get some promote should non be doubted, -this screaming and shouting for help whitethorn stir up out the fact that the people in her proximity be still deeply asleep (as accounts say there argon 38 witnesses to this murder), alone at those very hours we need not further dig deeper to bleed the mysterious apathy of the witnesses all we need to do is take note of the time the assault happened some of the witnesses may withstand actually hear the screams but still has the need to sleep to face a Saturday-workday forward of them. We shtup complement this further with what Abraham Maslows hierarchy of needs states that the greatest need of an individual is his/her physiological needs in which sleeps or slackening falls under. Moreover, since the violent scene broke the supposedly yet sleep-times peace, it is understandable that the witnesses had chosen not to leave the refuge of their homes, fearing that they could be the beside victim. -the need for safety and security comes as the second priority in Maslows ren induceed pyramid model. These two needs therefore may have overridden any u rges to be a hero or a Good Samaritan among the witnesses at those moments. The belief that occurs each time a bystander effect happens is that every witness thinks that someone else among the new(prenominal) witnesses is more capable to help. allow us simulate a likely scenario in observance of the surmise a 79 year previous(a) dame was tripped by a rock on a crowded and busy street. In an exemplification like this you may likely see that not only one individual result rush in to help the old lady get back on her feet. A bystander effect though continuously has a encounter to occur and cast its spell to shroud a cloud of confusion that may blur the discerning of witnesses to response to an emergency. On one hand, some agents may actually trigger a witnesss or a bystanders urge to help. First, the affinity or degree of relation the bystander has with the individual in need of help. This will go down the innate will to help and would trigger a certain wizard of responsib ility on the bystanders side to help that someone he/she knows or that someone whom he/she at least have something-in-common with (for example, encouraging the very(prenominal) basketball team, someone in the resembling organization).Second, would be the empathy factor that may come from ones recalling of a previous come that will move him/her to be of help. Third, would be the effect of mood and assign of a bystander (Bordens & Horowitz 1973), this however considers the ruling of Maslows hierarchy of needs over the urge to help base on mood.How can prejudice be reduced? Through quick rivalrence to a dictionary, prejudice would simply be defined as preconceived or premature judgement. First, let us see the nature behind prejudice according to the Gale Encyclopaedia of psychology (2005), People atomic number 18 not born prejudiced many prejudices are create against groups with which a person has never had any advert. In basal analysis, we can then perceive that the existen ce of prejudice pre-requires innocence or even ignorance, -that ones mind must be a pail that should be empty or yet has to be modify (by information and initially with opinions of new(prenominal) people). Through interaction and conversation with other individuals, one would naturally absorb the prejudices of another individual he/she gets contact with. According to the communication model (Laswell 1948) in every communication fulfil there is the presence of 1) a source, 2) a message, 3) a channel, 4) a receiving organisation, 5) an effect, and 6) a feedback.Applying this process in tracing the reading of prejudice, if an individual has yet goose egg knowledge or background towards a subject, as a telephone receiver of a message he/she had to undergo the next step of the process, which is the effect. The effect here now since the receiver is yet an empty pail would be to digest the message, and if the message transmitted is prejudiced it will bourgeon a content in that em pty pail that may soon help as the receivers raw material in generating his/her own prejudices. In psychology, this model resembles the social cognition pattern which likewise explains the development of prejudice. If we are to reduce prejudice, the direct equation we can derive from Laswells Model would be to reduce the interaction and communication with other individuals. This in reality however, is improbable as communication being both innumerous and spontaneous processes cannot be reduced in terms of amount. The number of communication sources can forcibly be reduced but the messages that a receiver had already received will continue to develop and be repeatedly analysed in his/her mind which then will be used by him/her when its his/her turn to communicate as a speaker. Prejudiced beliefs cut to stereotyping, which are natural tendencies to categorise the world in order to lick sense of it (NAT.org 2003). In an attempt to make the complex world unionised as we perceive it , we tend to put labels on objects, events, and individuals that has same characteristics which come in to us stimuli that are alike. A marrow to reduce stereotyping and generalization as dictated by prejudice is to expose a prejudiced person to individuals capable of fragmentizeling it (Gale Encyclopedia2005), these individuals include those that contradict the stereotypes. This approach to reduce and neutralize stereotyping, though somewhat indirect, will help in thawing whatever barriers prejudices had formed within ones disposition which eventually is good, as sooner or later this prejudiced person will have the chance to interact with a person who belongs to a grouped he/she had stereotyped. In the treatment to reduce prejudice in the form of stereotyping, immersion could be a vital antidote. In the same manner as Edward give tongue tos Travel Theory (1983), a culture or an thought (which in some cases can be a prejudiced desire) is funk to loose its original potency, it s strength, and even its form as it gets contact with other cultures. A stereotype can likewise be tamed if the ignorance and the innocence where it was founded over will finally be bridged by discovering the truth (which may include interacting with the people whom you had a stereotype on) -this first-hand, actual, and direct encounter will not just reduce prejudice but also dispel it. More than the more common but not-at-all easily done root word to be openminded, interaction would be the best achievable solvent in reducing stereotypes. save up a two-page essay in which you mark Freuds possibility on aggression. Additionally, describe Banduras conjecture on aggression and what strategies would he recommend using to diminish aggressive behaviour. Do you think that aggression is innate or learned? wherefore? Sigmund Freud explained that the theory of aggression begins at the early ages when a male child begins to develop his loose alliance with his make, being the natural provider and nurturing entity for the boy -this intimate relationship will come to a point that the boy will have knowledgeable desires for his mother. In the family picture however, there is the presence of the father -whom the boy will treat as his rival in getting his mothers affection and attention. But eventually, the boy will realize that he cant win over his father, as the chances of winning in physical terms is impossible due the boys inferior size, the boy will concede is this competition and soon will realize that his mother is not a suitable object of love and sexual urges (cited in Freud & smith 1999). This sexual-desire idea is called the Oedipus complex date as for the girls, they also undergo the same condition and it is termed Electra complex. Freud claims that these are manifestations of the modifiers that dictate human behaviour instinct and sexual urges called libido. Libido is muscle derived from the Eros, or life instinct (cited in Freud & Smith 1999). onsl aught is the outcome when the urges of libido are not released. Eros, is present in every man, so as what Freud had introduced thereafter the exalted of Thanatos or death force. This energy from this death force seeks to deliver death and destruction, which also bounds a man to destroy his own self. Thanatos does not entirely pour its energy towards self-destruction, some of which are channelled to other objects and individuals which explains the presence of aggression. Even to begin with technology, liberal thinking, and advance science, and even before the man who gave name to the innovation was born, the world had abide with the survival of the fittest. Scientist Charles Darwin used the phrase to term the fadeless struggle of beings against one another for existence. The energy from Thanatos may relief what sends a being to take aggression upon another. Bandura (1973) claimed that human behaviour is obstinate by the environment. Likewise mans behaviour also dictates his en vironment. This means that a man learns his aggression on what he perceives on his environment, while with the presence of aggression or the absence of it around, affects what the environment will become. Banduras approach in dealing with and along the process diminishing behaviour is through self-regulation or simply to control ones own behaviour. This begins with self-observation (watching and analyzing our own behaviours), then with judgement (setting a standard or an ideal measure were we can compare our behaviours with and pattern it to them), and finally with self-response (your manner of affirming yourself whether you are satisfied or not with what was your behaviour in a special occasion). onset is innate to man, I agree for solid understandings. First, I would refer to what Abraham Maslow (1954) refer as the second immediate need safety and security. From which threats do we seek protection against? Harsh weather? -We got our concrete homes and thick spend suits. Wild A nimals? Thats what technology and urbanization is for, putting the dangerous forage-and-hunt modus vivendi locked in oblivion, then what?The best answer would be human threats -which are manifestations of the presence of aggression in man. Second man is the superior bullion of all but we are still classifiable as animals -beings which are programmed from birth to seek, hunt and fight for survival. An aspect of aggression is learned by man but this mainly covers the manners of aggression like the idea of how to use weapons and sub due impending opponents.What is determent theory? Why do people commit crimes? Punishments are pre-emptive instruments set by open up laws and rules meant to discourage and intimidate would-be offenders. An ever-existing idea based on what is called the deterrence theory. determent theory is based on the concept that, if the consequence of committing a crime outweighs the benefit of the crime itself, the individual will be deterred from committing the c rime. (Summerfield, 2006, p. 1). By default, deterrence theory lies on the fear a punishment can instil to the subjects of a law. Ideally, a law applies to everyone in a state both the government and the subjects. But in reality, since deterrence theory was put to practice in an organized-society nation, it has revealed some serious flaws in itself. Write Morgan Summerfield traced the origin of the deterrence theory -stemming out the roots of its practice from old England from the Dark Ages, Feudal Era, the Tudor period, when feudal lords, kings, and queens, where the first to introduce the system of punishment. Although crimes at that era meant heavy punishment, as Summerfield would collectively describe as brutal and severe, an individuals economic status would shape his vulnerability to the legal consequences of the crime Someone wealthy or authoritative could often commit offences with impunity, while someone of lesser birth would be severely punished for the same offence. Be tween this statements lines lies an innuendo the power of money, and the call to have it, which is avarice, is also encouraged. Money, power, and influence has been the tie to punishment-evasion several centuries ago. These gives definition to deterrence theory as the imperfect concept where present laws and subjects-controlling policies are taken from. The answer to the question wherefore do people commit crimes lies in the failures of deterrence theory. By default, law enforcers tire that making it known to the people that crimes are met with punishments is not enough. First reason not every evil are caught, hence the crime = penalty equation is not absolute. Second, every criminal does not have the same level of fear the fear variable is defined by how stiff the criminal/law offender is (a repeatedly imprisoned individual may not fear the conditions of being in jail as ofttimes as a first-time convict would. Third would be how able the criminal is in protecting/saving him self/herself from the legal repercussions of the crime. If we are to directly interest the question why do people commit crimes with the fear-dependent deterrent theory, we can conclude that the discrepancy of fear among the subjects of a law do explains why not all individuals are stopped by impending punishments and thus, go on and commit crimes. Another premise that may explain why do people commit crimes is the existence of informal will When they act in a criminal manner, they do so out of discontinue will and weigh the consequences of their actionsthey know what they are doing and choose to do it (Summerfield 2006). along with it is the belief of Chinese Philosopher, Kong Zi (Xun-Zi) that man is by nature evil. -reflected in the oldest concord of all time, the Bible, in the chapter of Genesis where the first man used its free will to ignore the rule set by God in the Garden of Eden. Kong Zi meanwhile acknowledges too that man is capable of doing good but for a man to do a good act it has to be done consciously. The societys means of increasing mans awareness and sensitivity to do conscious good acts, to teach what is set and to do right is by establishing institutions (schools, churches) to teach norms, and make laws and policies (to assure that the norms are followed). -Which brings us to an uncomplicated cycle the naturally evil man is straightened out and taught what is good being covered by different laws and policies which is based from the deterrence theory.On a research done by Richard Lebow and Janice Stein (1995), they claimed thatDeterrence theory rarely succeeds. Although their work underwent waves of criticisms and was thoroughly scrutinized for gaps and flaws, the spirit of deterrence theory, which is carried over by the laws in present time seems to testify on the findings of Lebow and Stein.ReferencesContributors Bandura, A. (1973). Aggression A Social Learning Analysis. p. 183. Englewood Cliffs, NJ. Prentice-Hall.Bordens, K. Sm, Horo wtiz, I, A.(Eds.). (2001) Social psychology (second edition). Lawrence Erlbaum AssociatesGado, M. (2007) A exclaim in the Night The Kitty Genovese Murder Retrieved February 26, 2008 from Crime Library, royal court Television Network, LLC.Gale Group, (2001). Gale Encyclopaedia of Psychology, 2nd Ed.. Retrieved February 27, 2008from http//findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_g2699/is_0002/ai_2699000270Huitt, W. (2006). Social cognition. Educational Psychology Interactive. Valdosta, GA Valdosta State University. Retrieved February 28, 2008 from http//chiron.valdosta.edu/whuitt/col/soccog/soccog.html.Jervis, R., Lebow, R., Stein, (Eds.). (1985) Psychology and Deterrence . Baltimore The Johns Hopkins Press,Laswell, H.D., (1948). The structure and prevail of communication in society -in the communication of ideas, ed. Bryson, L. New York Harper.Maslow, A (1954). pauperization and Personality.NAT.org. (February 2003). The Psychology of Prejudice Retrieved February 28, 2008 from http//w ww.e-alliance.ch/media/media-4301.pdf.Said, E. W. (1983) Travelling Theory, The World, the Text, and the Critic. Cambridge Harvard University Press.Smith, A. K. (1999) Theories of Aggression. Biology 202 1999 Final Web Reports-Biology. Retrieved February 28, 2008 from Serendip database.Summerfield, M. (2006). growing of Deterrence Crime Theory, a journey with an End. Retrieved February 27, 2008 from Associated Content, Inc.