ABSTRACT

Helping a person or someone in need has always been considered as part of social behavior
which fosters and sustains sociability and productivity. It is also dependent upon changing and
adopting values of egoism, collectivism and individualism. A Stranger’s Request is a Social
Experiment meant to measure a student/s willingness to extend a helping hand to someone they do
not personally know. The experimenters would like to test the helpfulness of the Polytechnic
University of the Philippines students while on their free time or waiting time as well as to learn
the reactions and responses the students would give especially when approached by a person who
badly need a helping hand.
 INTRODUCTION
By the peak of the afternoon where the students of Polytechnic University of the
Philippines were either rushing home to get some rest or do different school requirements, or were
just entering the campus for the night classes, there were also students who would want to just sit
and rest to regain strength or maybe just waiting for a friend. The month of March has always been
a busy month for students in PUP, with deadlines approaching, quizzes, there are final
examinations coming, not to mention the other group and solo activities required by different
programs the students were enrolled to. Let’s be clear with this, students are most of the time
exhausted, if not always.
With loads increasing faster than decreasing, additional obligation is something students
or even most people reluctantly accept. Who would want an additional thing to do? When they
could just sit there and try to rest or were just waiting for time to pass by. As a Filipino with the
kind of culture who always tries to help whenever help is needed, exhaustion and distrust had been
the greatest reason why it is not much present in this generation.
A request. It was a thing that can be approved or declined. When someone you know ask
for request, it is normal. But what if someone you do not personally know, ask you a request?
Would you agree? Ignore? Or simply decline? Thoroughly, how are you going respond to “A
Stranger’s Request”?
This social experiment is to test the helpfulness and trust of a student/s to take obligation
from a stranger. The researchers came up with the idea of measuring the helpfulness of some of
the students in PUP-main during their leisure time or “rush” time when someone quite distressed
suddenly approach him/her/them asking for a request that will take their time and effort.
Alongside, the researchers also compared the responses of the participants in individual and by
group noting the differences and the reactions of the different participants.
 THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK

Theories in helpfulness can be simple or complex. A person’s decision in helping someone

unfamiliar varies when alone or in group. While a person is alone, it is easier to convince him/her
as there was no other people whom he/she could ask for help or ask for opinion. It was a person’s
nature to help but when a person declined, he/she often feel guilty about it and also consider what
other people who were present or in hearing range would think of him/her. In the Arousal Cost
Reward, a person will choose to engage in the arousal-decreasing response associated with the
fewest net costs. Net costs are based on two types of rewards and costs associated with the helping
situation: costs for not helping and rewards and costs for helping. Costs for not helping occur when
no assistance is given and may include experiences such as feeling troubled because someone in
need is continuing to suffer, or receiving criticism from others for being callous. Costs for helping
are direct negative outcomes that the potential helper might experience after offering help, such as
loss of time, embarrassment, or injury. Helping, however, can also be associated with positive
outcomes such as praise, gratitude, and feelings of self-worth.
While in the group, the decision of the majority usually affect the decision of a single
person. There could also one person, the leader who usually decides for the group. Sometimes,
when he/she speaks, it’s already final. The Theory of Social Impact, explained it. There are several
principles included in this theory. First, the more people present, the more influence they will have
on each individual. Additionally, the more important the people are to the individual, the more
influence they will have on him or her. Second, the theory of social impact states that while the
impact of others on the individual increases as the number of people increases, the rate of increase
in impact grows less as each new individual is added. Third, each individual can influence others;
but the more people are present, the less influence any one individual will have.
 METHODOLOGY

The social experiment was conducted in four separate days including the ocular day. The
experimenters used Random sampling with Descriptive method which describes the characteristics
of the population or phenomenon that were being studied. Under descriptive method, the technique
used was Observational method focusing on Qualitative observation that does not involve
measurements or numbers but instead just monitoring characteristics of the subjects.
Experimenters looked for a target place that was perfect for performing the experiment; they
observed the place and took a short video for fifteen (15) minutes on the 4th of March, 2019 at the
3 to 4 in the afternoon. The target venues were PUP catwalk and PUP entrance and exit gate. There
were intervention for the next two consecutive days so the researchers started the official
conducting of experiment on the 7th of March, 2019, in 3 in the afternoon to 6 in the evening.
The same experiment was conducted after three consecutive days. The second trial was
performed on the 11th of March, 2019 same place and time at 3 in the afternoon to 6 in the evening,
the last conduction of experiment was performed on the 14th of March, 2019, during this time the
experimenters also ventured to the Freedom park at 3 in the afternoon to 6 in the evening. All the
materials used during the experiment were provided by the researchers.

Used Material for the Actor Black Jansport Backpack with prints,
Yellow Floral Ecobag, Brown Laptop Bag,
Green Folder, Papers and Books

Video Recorder Huawei P20Lite mobile phone, Oppo F3

mobile phone, Canon DSLR camera

Audio Recorder Samsung J5 mobile phone, Oppo A37 mobile

phone, Ipod

Table no. 1: Materials used in the experiment

The researchers were divided by roles and were scattered, solo and pairs for the recording of
videos and audios to get better angles and positions. They also provided three questions for the
respondents who accepted the request and ask consent to also conduct an interview. The questions
were:

1. Bakit po kayo pumayag na mapag-iwanan ng gamit ng isang stranger?

2. Ano pong naramdaman niyo n’ung manghingi ng favor si stranger sa inyo?
3. Ano pong masasabi niyo sa mga stranger na humihingi ng favor sa kapwa stranger?

Respondents

The respondents were students from PUP Sta. Mesa Manila. The researchers choose
simple random sampling in which anyone could be selected. There was no specifically chosen
degree or people, but since the researchers performed a mini interview, the researchers were able
to learn the degree of some of the respondents.
• Senior High School Student/s
• Psychology major
• Accountancy major
The researchers intentionally did not interview the students who refused to help in order for them
to not feel guilty nor have negative feeling towards the researchers or among themselves.

DATA GATHERING

A. Preliminary procedures

Before the experiment was officially performed, the researchers looked for a target place that was
possible for them to conduct the experiment. The experimenters considered these things in
choosing the target place, volume of people (students), extraneous variables that they could
possibly encounter (the noise and events that could be held on the open court). The researchers
then, made a careful observations and thorough planning in order to make the experiment a
successful one.
 Time Procedure

March 04 2019, 3:00 - 3:30 pm Observation of Target place

March 04 2019, 3:00 - 3:45 pm Pre-video shoot of the Target place

March 04 2019, 3:00 – 4:00 pm General meeting of the group

Table no.2 Schedule Preliminary process of the experimental procedures

B. Experimental procedures
After the preliminary process, the researchers proceeded to the actual process of the experiment.
In this experiment the actor will approach an individual or group whom he doesn’t know to ask a
favor if he can leave his belongings (please see Table No. 1 Chapter: Methodology) for 5 minutes
because he would be going back to the sixth floor to pass his papers asked by his groupmates in a
phone call. (the actors reason was an excuse made by the researchers so the actor could leave the
area and leave his belongings.)

Trial Time Procedure

1st Trial March 7, 3:30pm - 3:40pm Sighting for a subject

(INDIVIDUAL)

March 7, 3:40pm - 3:50pm Audio and video recording of

the experiment with the first
subject

March 7, 3:50pm - 4:15pm Sighting for a subject

(INDIVIDUAL)

March 7, 4:15pm - 4:25pm Audio and video recording of

the experiment with the
second subject

March 7, 4:25pm - 4:45pm Sighting for a subject

(INDIVIDUAL)

March 7, 4:45 - 4:55pm Audio and video recording of

the experiment with the third
subject
 2nd Trial March 11, 4pm - 4:30pm Sighting for a subject
(INDIVIDUAL)

March 11, 4:30 - 4:40pm Video and Audio recording

the experiment with the fourth
subject

March 11, 4:40pm - 4:50pm Break

March 11, 4:50pm - 5:15pm Sighting for a subject

(GROUP)

March 11, 5:15pm - 5:25pm Audio and video recording of

the experiment with the first
group subject

3rd Trial March 14, 4pm - 4:30pm Sighting for a subject

(GROUP)

March 14, 4:30pm - 4:45pm Audio and video recording of

the experiment with the
second group subjects

March 14, 4:45pm - 4:55pm Break

March 14, 4:55pm - 5:25pm Sighting for a subject

(GROUP)

March 14, 5:25pm - 5:35pm Audio and video recording of

the experiment with the third
group subject

March 14, 5:35pm - 5:45pm Sighting for a subject

(GROUP)

March 14, 5:45pm - 5:55pm Audio and video recording of

the experiment with the fourth
group subject

Table no. 3 Schedule of Actual experimental procedures

 RESULTS and DISCUSSIONS

This chapter presents the results and discussion of the data gathered from the social experiment
done by the researchers at Polytechnic University of the Philippines.
Location
The social experiment was done at the Polytechnic University of the Philippines-Main Manila
Campus;
a. Catwalk
b. Main Entrance Gate
c. Main Exit Gate
d. Freedom Park (added on the last day of the experiment)
DATE ACTIVITY TOTAL NO. OF TOTAL NUMBER
SUBJECTS OF RESPONDENTS

DAY 1 March 04, Ocular Inspection. N/A N/A

2019 Observe and inspect
target venue/s
DAY 2 March 07, Actual Social Two (2) persons Two (2) persons
2019 Experiment
(Individual)
DAY 3 March 11, Actual Social Two (2) persons and Two (2) person and
2019 Experiment One (1) group One (1) group with
(Individual and five (5) people
Group)
DAY 4 March 14, Actual Social Three (3) groups
2019 Experiment (Group)

TOTAL
Table No. 1 – Participants Data

The researchers did the experiment during afternoon, within 3:00 PM – 6:00 PM since this is the
time where students were present at the chosen location to wait for their friends, rest, and/or stay
to have small talks, or just pass by to go inside or outside the campus.

FINDINGS
This social experiment was to test and see the helpfulness and trust of the students of Polytechnic
University of the Philippines to do a favor for a stranger.
1. The researchers found the script of the actor effective since it caught the attention and was
relatable to the students.
2. Dealing with groups, the researchers noticed that even if one person wanted to help but the
majority did not want to, he/she would also decline as the whole group do so.
3. During the interview the common reasons why respondents showed their willingness to
help were:
a. Sympathy to co-students
b. They could keep the actor’s belongings since they still have spare time.
4. For the first two (2) days the researchers spent their social experiment only at the PUP
Catwalk and the gates, but this entailed longer time in waiting for possible respondents. So
the researchers decided to add another venue on the last day of the social experiment –
Freedom Park. Despite the effort of adding another venue, the researchers did not get any
respondent who was willing to help.
5. The respondents who helped the researchers’ actor looked curious and suspicious of what
was inside the bag.
6. The respondents saw the act of leaving and entrusting to a stranger one’s personal
belongings was not a usual thing since done in a public place and has no assurance if he
could retrieve it after.
 CONCLUSION

Filipinos are known because of our generous and helpful attitude. One of our nature is to
help without thinking of anything in exchange or in the negative part, what harm it may cause us.
Being helpful was never wrong. But as news of harm and abuse started pouring the media, that
helpful attitude we have has gone down the slope. And it was because of safety.
As students, we always see others who are in need of help, may it be carrying a chair,
holding a lot of books, in need of motivational or financial support. We are always in need for
something. We always oblige when professors ask us to do stuff, but what were are responses
when asked by our fellow students? In this experiment, we tried asking for help to someone we
didn’t know. Some agreed, and some did not. We also learned that a person’s decision can be
influenced by the people around him/her. Declining a favor from someone is fine, especially
from someone you do not know. It is always better to be wise and protect yourself especially
when you are alone. Helping someone takes your time, effort and trust. These are what we invest
in helping, and when we help we always feel good about it. It actually lifts our mood and make
us happy as the time the person we extended help feels it too.
While more people starts to doubt humanity, we can always start to change that mindset.
Let us have faith in Humanity while being wise at the same time.
 REFERENCES

https://www.europeanmedical.info/psychology-basics/arousal-costreward-model.html
http://www.mhhe.com/cls/psy/ch15/impact.mhtml

APPENDIX
First meeting (the brainstorming)
 31/01/2019

Final Agenda
28/01/2019

First day( area observation)

04/03/2019

The Actor
Target area
The final wave
14/03/2019