It says that effective debunking consists of first stating the facts in common language, them stating the myth only once, then explaining why it came to be, why it's wrong (create a cognitive dissonance) and lastly an explanation of the facts to fill the explanatory gap.
I'm looking forward to seeing more myths debunked! :)
The people who are recording the incident may be doing so, not out of callousness, but so that the offender can be prosecuted later, or because they believe that the offender will stop what he is doing when he notices it is being recorded.
Thanks for debunking the old bystander effect! It's important to scrutinize estabłished ideas, especially in social psychology.
Speaking of debunking and science, here is the Debunking Handbook 2020 by Lewandowski et al: https://www.climatechangecommunication.org/all/handbook/the-debunking-handbook-2020/
It says that effective debunking consists of first stating the facts in common language, them stating the myth only once, then explaining why it came to be, why it's wrong (create a cognitive dissonance) and lastly an explanation of the facts to fill the explanatory gap.
I'm looking forward to seeing more myths debunked! :)
The people who are recording the incident may be doing so, not out of callousness, but so that the offender can be prosecuted later, or because they believe that the offender will stop what he is doing when he notices it is being recorded.
Interesting point!
Abe Rosenthal, at the NYT, pretty much made up the Callous Bystander version. https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2014/03/10/a-call-for-help