Buzz
A depiction from Pieter Pietersz Lastman's 1612 artwork "The Good Samaritan" captures the Biblical tale of a stranger providing aid. Heritage Images/Getty ImagesPublic medical emergencies are often envisioned as scenes from CPR training videos: a mechanic suffers a heart attack mid-conversation, a construction worker tumbles from a ladder, or a diner experiences a stroke while eating alone. These videos typically show a bystander noticing the crisis, rallying others for support, calling for an ambulance, offering first aid, or comforting the victim until professional help arrives.
A recent study published in the American Journal of Public Health reveals a disheartening statistic: merely 1 in 39 individuals, or 2.5 percent, receive bystander assistance during a public health emergency before professional responders arrive. This figure drops further for black individuals or those residing in impoverished areas.
This groundbreaking study analyzed data from the National Emergency Medical Services Information System (NEMSIS), provided by medical personnel responding to emergencies in 2011. The study categorized the type of aid, if any, that 22,000 patients received before EMTs and paramedics arrived, ranging from simple gestures like offering water to critical interventions like CPR. With limited Latino representation in the data, the research focused on white and black Americans, revealing that while 4.2 percent of white individuals received some form of assistance during a medical crisis, only 1.8 percent of African-Americans experienced the same.
Individuals in densely populated and lower-income areas were also less likely to receive assistance during emergencies, whereas those in less crowded regions with average socioeconomic conditions were more frequently aided by bystanders.
"It's important to note that some patients may not have received help simply because no one else was present," explains Erin York Cornwell, lead author and assistant professor in the Department of Sociology at Cornell University. "However, we also observed low rates of bystander assistance in highly populated areas, indicating that even when bystanders are present, they often fail to engage directly with the individual in need."
This aligns with the "bystander effect," where the presence of multiple witnesses reduces the likelihood of any one person stepping forward to help, either due to a diffusion of responsibility or because bystanders take cues from others who are not acting. However, York Cornwell believes there are additional factors at play.
"First, the uncertainty of the situation may cause hesitation. Questions like 'Does this person need help? What should I do? Could I make things worse?' may deter people from intervening," she states. "While Good Samaritan laws in many U.S. jurisdictions offer some protection to those who assist during emergencies, not all areas have such laws, and their coverage varies widely."
Another contributing factor could be people's general reluctance to interact with strangers.
"Individuals may hesitate to engage with strangers due to the challenges of initiating contact or concerns about personal safety," explains York Cornwell.
The study indicates that reduced bystander assistance in low-income areas could stem from fewer community hubs like churches, senior centers, or parks, which foster interaction and a sense of belonging. Additionally, higher residential turnover in these neighborhoods often results in weaker neighborly connections.
While the 1964 killing of Kitty Genovese in New York brought the bystander effect into public consciousness, the original details of the case have been debunked. Despite this, the myth persists, and the bystander effect remains a well-documented phenomenon.
