View article

Thirty-two individuals who intervened in dangerous criminal episodes such as street muggings, armed robberies, and bank holdups, were interviewed at length and compared with a group of noninterveners matched for age, sex, education, and ethnic background. Interveners, in contrasts to noninterveners, reported considerably more exposure to crime in terms of personal victimization and witnessing the victimizations of others. Crime interveners also were taller, heavier, and better trained to cope with crimes and emergencies, having had significantly more life-saving, medical, and police training; and were more likely to describe themselve as physically strong, aggresive, emotional, and principled. In spite of an intensive search for personality differences between the two groups, none were found. Results suggest that crime intervieners are not prompted to action by notably strong humanitarian purpose or by …