How to Move People to Action

We want people to vote. To stand up to bullies. To address racism and sexism.

When they don’t act, we’re often shocked and confused. We may assume some moral or intellectual failing. In our frustration, we might call them out or publicly shame them.

But if we’re serious about moving people to action, we need a different approach. That’s what Catherine Sanderson, Professor of Psychology at Amherst College, argues in her latest book, Why We Act: Turning Bystanders into Moral Rebels.

And it starts with reexamining one of the most famous experiments of the twentieth century.

The Experiment

In the early 1960s, Stanley Milgram, a social psychologist at Yale, posed a question. If an authority figure told us to inflict physical harm on another human being, would we do it? The research study he designed to answer this question became the famous Milgram experiment.

In the study, participants asked a series of questions to a person sitting behind a wall. If they responded incorrectly, participants were instructed to administer an electric shock. They increased the voltage with each incorrect response. That often meant delivering dangerous levels of electricity. Unbeknownst to the participants, the electric shocks were fake, as were the anguished cries of the person receiving them.

The results of the study were stark. All participants delivered dangerously high levels of voltage, and a majority (65 percent) administered the most dangerous, 450 volts.

When we hear these results, it’s natural to think we’re pulling the curtain back on humanity’s dark side. But there’s another part of the story. It’s one you rarely hear. And it reveals a very different side of human nature.

Most participants resisted.

Many agonized over what they were doing. some struggled to continue. And a significant number pleaded with the authority figure to allow them to stop.

If we focus on this part of the experiment, we get a different question: What would it have taken for these participants to refuse?

Understanding Bystanders

What Sanderson explains is that most of us don’t want to remain silent. We don’t want to blindly obey. But we need help overcoming the biological and psychological tendencies that prevent us from speaking up.

That’s why she starts by taking us inside the mind of the bystander. She reveals how their thoughts and emotions often prevent them from acting. Once we understand what the obstacles are, she believes we can take steps to remove them. Here are three:

First, bystanders often stay silent when they believe everyone’s in agreement. It’s called pluralistic ignorance. A solution? Survey everyone on the issue and then share the results. Knowing not everyone agrees gives people more confidence to speak up.

Second, when people don’t know what to do or they’re afraid to make a mistake, they often won’t act. They need clarity. When we explain what effective action looks like, provide training and opportunities for practice, we increase the chances people will act.  

Third, when there are many others standing on the sidelines, people often don’t feel like they’re responsible. They don’t need to act because someone else will. It’s called the bystander effect. We can overcome this by communicating how people’s actions make a difference.

A Better Way

Our biological and psychological biases can prevent us from taking action. Once we understand how they work, we can make the shift from blame to empathy.

Better still, we can help.