A global case of the bystander effect? Considering human behavior and inaction amidst the climate crisis
The role of social cues and pressures during emergency situations and what this may look like on a global scale
The latest IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) Climate Report has made it clear that the climate situation requires immediate action and is worsening (IPCC 2021). While it is disheartening, this may be no large surprise – comprehending climate change is daunting and there has been comparatively little done to counteract it. Climate change is a uniquely human-induced environmental phenomenon with a uniquely human way of grappling with it. Human behavior created the situation that we find ourselves in today and human psychology poses explanations for the murky uncertainty that we continue to wade through.
We are living in what has been labeled a climate crisis. It has been labeled a crisis yet largely in our own day to day we do not see panic. We look around and the sky has not fallen, instead our neighbors are mowing their lawns, people are working, people are shopping, they are busy, they seem happy. We feel a little better, we should be happy too.
Looking to others and acting off of their cues historically has been helpful to human belongingness and survival. Yet it can also lend itself to confusion and uncertainty during high pressure situations. One classic example of this is the widely known bystander effect. This refers to the phenomenon where the greater the number of people present, the less likely a given person is to act on or report an issue in an emergency (Cherry 2020). With more people present, individuals will look to each other to discern the appropriate call. Is it in fact an emergency? If so, certainly someone will make the call and act. The bystander effect, or bystander confusion, has been studied by researchers such as Latané and Darley (1969) who found that “…the amount of time it takes the participant to take action and seek help varies depending on how many other observers are in the room” (As cited in Cherry 2020). In one such experiment, smoke began filling the room as participants were filling out questionnaires. Participants who were alone reported the smoke to the experimenters 75% of the time. They reported it 38% of the time with two other participants present, and only 10% of the time with two confederates posing as normal participants who had visibly noted the smoke but did not report it (Latané and Darley (1969) as cited in Cherry 2020).
This diffusion of responsibility has resulted in public crimes, even murders (see case of Kitty Genovese) coming to fruition and people not getting the help that they need. Thus, counterintuitively, the more people present the less likely individual action will take place. If no result or action is coming from other bystanders, “nothing” becomes the perceived correct response (Manning 2009). Additionally, people do not want to be seen by their peers as making the incorrect call. If they were to declare an emergency during the instance of uncertainty when it was merely a misunderstanding, it would be embarrassing and draw unwelcome attention to themselves (Cherry 2020).
The article Psychology of Sustainable Behavior references environmental writer Janisse Ray who likens the current climate situation to a society-wide case of bystander confusion (Manning 2009). This way of viewing and reflecting on human behavior during the climate crisis is an interesting lens by which to consider the human response. It is particularly resonant as it offers an explanation that we are familiar with to a situation that we as a society are unsure of how to handle. If offers the idea that we are not alone in our concerns, yet we are all looking to one another. Given that social cues guide us in how we feel we should act, when looking around during the climate crisis we internalize that serious action is not the appropriate response (Manning 2009). Instead, small actions such as changing out light bulbs become the measure of action, or instead rather to “wait and see” how others are reacting (Manning 2009).
There are numerous ways by which to view human action or inaction and such behaviors during the climate crisis. People certainly are not acting in accordance with the urgent warnings issued by scientists (Manning 2009). While a potential case of a global bystander effect will be harder to break and resolve than a more fixed and defined case, similar solutions can be applied. Being aware of the effect itself offers individuals insight into their own human behavior and that of those around them. By stepping forward, taking device action, speaking out, others feel their own concerns are validated and are more likely to take action as well.
Solutions at such scale as needed are not easy. Apprehensively looking around for cues and internalizing climate concerns and fears are not easy either. Individual action at times can feel futile and like a drop in an ocean. However, individuals make up communities, businesses, likeminded groups, and organizations that have real and meaningful effects. It is important to speak about climate concerns as well as to envision goals by which to work from. How might sustainability look like in your line of work? In the workforce in general? What green jobs can transform our society? What does a sustainable society look like? In the wise and resonant words of climate activist Greta Thunberg, “I want you to panic, I want you to feel the fear I feel every day. And then I want you to act…” This quote reflects the emotional underpinnings at play in what may be a case of the bystander effect on a more global level and what recognition and consequent needs look like.
Until next week, stay savvy.
Cherry, Kendra. “What Psychology Says about Why Bystanders Sometimes Fail to Help.” How Psychology Explains the Bystander Effect, Verywell Mind, 2020, www.verywellmind.com/the-bystander-effect-2795899.
“Climate Change Widespread, Rapid, and Intensifying.” IPCC, 9 Aug. 2021, www.ipcc.ch/2021/08/09/ar6-wg1-20210809-pr/.
Manning, Christie. The Psychology of Sustainable Behavior. Minnesota Pollution Control Agency , Sept. 2009, www.pca.state.mn.us/sites/default/files/p-ee1-01.pdf.