One of the key questions of social psychology is whether we can learn to be helpers. Many education programs, including the IB's CAS program, believe that we can teach students to be better world citizens and to take responsibility for helping others.  But the question is, do these programs really work?

Latané and Darley hypothesized that there are three factors that negatively influence our willingness to help.

1. Diffusion of responsibility - when there are other people present, we assume that someone else will help. So, the more people present, the less likely one is to help.
2. Informational social influence - a form of conformity in which we figure out how to behave by watching the behaviour of others. In the case of helping behaviour, if others don't help, we won't either.
3. Evaluation apprehension - the fear of social criticism for helping in a situation where helping was unnecessary.

The following study wanted to see if students were actually taught about these three factors, would they be more willing to help a person in need in help.

The study's sample was made of 80 introductory psychology students.  20 participants were allocated to each of the following conditions:

1. The Helping Film: Participants watched a 50-minute film that explained the helping model of Latané and Darley. The film explained several reasons why people often do not help – and simulated the classic studies that were done.  

2. The Helping Lecture: Participants attended a 50-minute lecture based on the film, but without the actual simulations of the studies.  The lecture outlined the model and described the studies.

3. The Obesity and Emotion lecture:  Participants attended a 50-minute lecture on emotional factors in obesity. There was no reference to helping behaviour in the lecture.

4. The control group: Participants were not exposed to any treatment in this first part of the experiment.

After watching the film or attending the lecture, the participants were given a questionnaire to see how much they had learned.  This was a control to make sure that the participants paid attention and understood the content of the presentations. The helping behaviours question asked participants to describe Latané and Darley’s model as well as to explain factors that influence whether someone would help or not. The obesity and emotion group also filled out a questionnaire to test for understanding.

Two weeks later, all participants were asked to take part in another study - this time on communication.  The participant and a female confederate arrived for the study and then were told to go to another room that was set up with recording equipment for the experiment.  When they went to the room, there was a sign on the door indicating that they were to go to yet another room, but there was also a male confederate in the room who was lying on the floor of the room, appearing to be in need of help. The female confederate was instructed not to help or to comment on the man lying on the floor.  The researchers were measuring whether the participant would help.  Helping was measured by going to the victim, calling out to the victim, saying to the female confederate that they needed to get help or report the incident to the experimenter.

The researchers found no significant difference between the rate of helping in the film and lecture condition.  The helping rate was 42.5%.

There was also no significant difference between the control lecture (obesity) and the control condition (neither film nor lecture).  The helping rate was 25%.

The sample was matched for gender.  The researchers found no significant difference between male and female rates of helping.

It appears that teaching about helping behaviour may have a positive effect on prosocial behaviour.

• The study was experimental in design.  This means that a cause and effect relationship can be inferred.
• The study is easily replicable, allowing us to establish the reliability of the findings.
• The researchers debriefed the participants to see if they realized the aim of the "second study."  Those that were suspicious of the experiment and thought it was linked to the first were excluded from the study.  This was a total of three participants.
• There is an ethical concern about the deception used in the study. But it was necessary to avoid expectancy effect.
• There is a sampling bias - using only US students of psychology.
• The study had good ecological validity even though it was highly controlled.
• The study only looked at a two week period, so it does not determine just how long a lecture may influence a person's willingness to help.  However, it is supported by research that shows that people who are trained to help - e.g. military and health professionals - are more likely to help a stranger.
• The study only looked at an emergency situation.  The male confederate appeared to be passed out on the floor.  The study does not look at other forms of helping - e.g. intervening when someone is shoplifting or cleaning up litter in a local neighbourhood.