Bystander apathy is a long established phenomenon in social psychology which has yet to be translated into practical strategies for increasing bystander intervention. This paper argues that the traditional paradigm is hampered by a focus on the physical co-presence of others rather than an analysis of the social meanings inherent in (non)intervention. The testimony provided by 38 bystanders at the trial of two 10-year-old boys for the murder of 2-and-a-half-year-old James Bulger is analyzed. It is argued that their failure to intervene can be attributed to the fact that they assumed-or were told-that the three boys were brothers. The way in which this category of "the family" served to prohibit or deflect intervention is analyzed. This approach is contrasted with a traditional bystander apathy account of the bystanders' actions in the Bulger case. It is argued that bystander (non)intervention phenomenon should be analyzed in terms of the construction of social categories in local contexts.
The role of the discourses of town planning and development played an important role in the Zionist leadership's attempts to expand its urban territorial base, nowhere more obviously than in Tel Aviv. This article examines the land and town planning legislation introduced by the Mandate, how the rapidly growing Municipality of Tel Aviv used this legislation to annex lands from the surrounding Arab villages, and the local Palestinian population's understanding of and resistance to the Zionist-inspired urbanization of the region.
A PREVIOUS ARTICLE (JESSE F. MARQUETTE, "STANDARD SCORES AS INDICES: THE PITFALLS OF DOING THINGS THE EASY WAY," MIDWEST JOURNAL OF POLITICAL SCIENCE, 1972, 16, 278-286) CRITICIZES THE USE OF SUMMATED STANDARD SCORES AS INTRODUCING SYSTEMATIC ERROR INTO ANALYSES OF DATA. AN ALGEBRAIC EXAMPLE IS PRESENTED TO SHOW USEFUL RESULTS CAN BE DERIVED, & THAT SUMMATED RAW SCORES FURNISH LESS USEFUL OR RELIABLE RESULTS THAN SUMMATED STANDARD INDICES. SOME INDICES MUST BE CONSTRUCTED; THE QUESTION IS THE PARTICULAR GAINS & LOSSES OF EACH METHOD OF DOING SO. 2 TABLES. W. H. STODDARD.