Temptation in public places.
Item
-
Title
-
Temptation in public places.
-
Identifier
-
AAI8820889
-
identifier
-
8820889
-
Creator
-
Podhorzer, Saul.
-
Contributor
-
Adviser: Saloman Rettig
-
Date
-
1988
-
Language
-
English
-
Publisher
-
City University of New York.
-
Subject
-
Psychology, Social
-
Abstract
-
An open field study investigated pedestrians reactions to ambiguous situations that had a potential of monetary gain and/or moral censure. The following factors were explored: (1) the unresponsiveness of urban pedestrians; (2) the effect of various signs on pedestrians' behavior; and (3) how certain types of groups may reduce unresponsiveness and promote ethical risk-taking. The stimulus was an unusual display of fifteen one-dollar bills which was left unattended on a busy New York City Street. The degree of risk and ambiguity was manipulated in several conditions of the experiment by introducing various signs that defined the situation and either prohibited or sanctioned taking the money. The risk and uncertainty produced by the unusual displays caused some bystanders to affiliate with each other in an attempt to determine the appropriate response. Three different theories predict that individuals in groups would be more likely to take the money than individuals who remained alone; (a) deindividuation, (b) diffusion of responsibility, and (c) ethical risktaking in groups. In order to increase our understanding of ethical risktaking, three different types of groups were identified and studied: (a) preformed groups; (b) preformed groups that interacted with strangers outside the group, and (c) interacting groups of strangers.;The results indicate that most pedestrians were unresponsive to the unusual display of dollar bills. Although the signs did have a significant influence on some pedestrians' behavior the effect of the signs was very limited. In all of the different sign conditions (even in conditions that sanctioned taking) the majority of subjects did not take any money. The behavior of subjects who did take money can mainly be explained on the basis of group formation. Newly-formed groups of strangers were much more likely to take money than individuals who remained alone or individuals in preformed groups that did not interact with outsiders. Apparently, interacting with strangers facilitated the development of temporary norms which condoned taking the money.
-
Type
-
dissertation
-
Source
-
PQT Legacy CUNY.xlsx
-
degree
-
Ph.D.
