Search results

The bystander effect is one of the most well researched and replicated phenomena in social psychology. It repeatedly shows that the presence of other people inhibits the impulse to help due to the concept of diffusion of responsibility. Recently, researchers have studied this phenomenon online in the context of e-mails, internet chat rooms, and discussion forums. The results provide evidence that the presence of “virtual” others decreases the likelihood of helping behavior. Personalization is another factor that strongly influences helping behavior. Referring to a person by name when soliciting help request increases the likelihood of receiving assistance. Yet, with the most popular activity on the internet now being social media, it would be beneficial to know if diffusion of responsibility and personalization also occurs in this part of the online world. The paper aims to discuss these issues.

To investigate the validity of diffusion of responsibility as well as personalization in a social media context, 176 participants sent out one private Facebook message soliciting help in the form of an online survey to one, three, six, or nine of their Facebook friends. They greeted their friend(s) by name or just said “Hi” or “Hi all.”

Responses to the survey provided strong support for personalizing the greeting, but did not support the theory of diffusion of responsibility.

This study has many practical implications. For one, with social media being used not only by individuals but by businesses and industries, it is important to know the most effective way in eliciting help and responses from individuals. It is also beneficial for researchers as well who are increasingly using social media as a recruitment tool to find participants. This study suggests that personalizing salutations is an effective way of eliciting more responses and raises important research questions about the validity of diffusion of responsibility in online environments.

This study also has originality and value in that it provides a start for understanding helping behavior in a social media environment as well as applying relevant social psychological theories to online behavior. It highlights the similarities as well as differences between offline and online human behavior as well as highlights the importance of personalization in online requests.

Outlines the history of the specialist lubrication group of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers – which was originally called the Lubrication Group and is now the Tribology Group. Describes how the organization was formed and lists its achievements, special activities and publications. Concludes by looking to the future, stating that the group has developed a dynamic five‐year plan to take it into the next century.

In an article on “Scientific Societies and Alien Enemies,” which appeared in the May issue of The British Food Journal, we expressed the hope that every British Scientific and Technical Society would take immediate steps to expel all foreign members who are to be numbered among the enemies of Great Britain and her Allies, and that each Society should pay special attention to the necessity of purging itself particularly from any existing German taint. Having stated that we were waiting to learn what had been done, or is to be done in this matter by such bodies as The Chemical Society, The Institute of Chemistry, The Society of Chemical Industry and the Royal Society— mentioning only a few of the institutions in whose lists of members the names of enemy aliens appear—we took occasion to point out that the Chemical Society and the Society of Chemical Industry, especially, were probably in need of drastic purification. Since that article was written it appears that the Council of the Chemical Society has taken the matter into consideration and, in this connection, we have been requested to publish two letters addressed to the President of the Society by one of its Fellows together with the President's reply. We comply with the request in view of the facts that the points raised by this correspondence are of public importance and that their application extends far beyond the mere question of a controversy within the narrow circle of a particular scientific body. COLONEL CASSAL, to whom we are indebted for supplying us with copies of the letters referred to, makes the following caustic remarks, with which we fully agree, in a covering letter:—“It will perhaps hardly be credited, but the fact remains, that the Council of the Chemical Society of London, one of the oldest scientific bodies in this country, which, on that account, if, unfortunately, at present, on no other, may possibly be thought to be entitled to some sort of public respect— has refused to take the necessary steps to bring about the immediate expulsion of the alien‐enemy members of the Society, among whom it is practically certain that there are several persons who are acting as expert advisers to the German Government in regard to the use, by their hordes of criminals, of corrosive fluids and poisonous gases in contravention of the universally recognised laws of honourable warfare. It will be seen that in its futile endeavour to find an excuse for its failure to discharge a plain duty the Council has hopelessly stultified itself, and there can be no doubt that the vast majority of the Fellows of the Society will repudiate the ludicrous and self‐condemnatory resolution which, at one and the same time, brings contempt on the Society and ridicule on the Council.”