Quantcast

What Do Your Subway Habits Say About You?

phpvnY3BoPM.jpg
Meryl Streep rides the subway in August 1981

In light of the recent incident on the D train, in which a man was stabbed and fellow straphangers were locked in a car with the murderer, this Slate article on the history of subway studies is worth a read.

Subway cars have been used for psychology experiments for decades, and the context for many in the 1970s was the Queens murder of Kitty Genovese, "whose cries for help were purportedly ignored by her neighbors... [her] story became the ur-narrative of uncaring urban pathology. The subway offered a perfect testing ground for the emerging subfield of bystander studies." One study found that the more bystanders present, the more likely it was that someone would help.

On a more normal, drama-free commute, crowding levels have been linked to higher stress levels. And your oblivious physical contact might mean something too! One study says that "elbow manipulation becomes one way of expressing sentiment concerning the person sitting next to you," as does hand position on the poles. As far as eye contact goes, "commuters were more gaze-shy in the city," than in the suburbs. Studies found this isn't because we're rude, but because we have too much to take in and process — or as they put it: "interpersonal overload leads to social withdrawal." Sure... that, or iPhones.

Contact the author of this article or email tips@gothamist.com with further questions, comments or tips.

Comments [rss]

  • mediaobserver

    It such an orrible thing! I always take the metro to go to work and now I'm a little worried...

  • Jason

    And now I take the Metro North to the Bronx to work. F the D Train. It has been the best week of commuting ever. Thanks for the push! I'll gladly pay the extra $$$.

  • gymnasticks

    well, to quote the lost aspergers kid: "Nobody really cares about the world and about people.”

  • Amanda Harletsch

    JChez, yeah, what a moron Genovese was!



    ah... bullies, cynics and apathetic, the very fiber of NYC:



    "Many saw the story of Genovese's murder as an example of the callousness or apathy supposedly prevalent in New York City, urban United States, or humanity in general. Much of this framing of the event came in reaction to an investigative article[10] in The New York Times written by Martin Gansberg and published on March 27, two weeks after the murder. The article bore the headline "Thirty-Eight Who Saw Murder Didn't Call the Police." The public view of the story crystallized around a quote from the article, from an unidentified neighbor who saw part of the attack but deliberated, before finally getting another neighbor to call the police, saying "I didn't want to get involved."

  • jchez

    Once again, the Kitty Genovese and the uncaring 40 witnesses is a myth.



    Nobody saw her getting stabbed. She screamed once but did not say she was stabbed. She and her attacker were seeing struggling in front of a notorious bar. After her attacker ran away, she just stammered like a drunk. Why call police over a couple of drunks? Kitty walked and staggered to her apartment building very slowly where twenty minutes later her attacker finished her off. She did not scream for help for twenty minutes. That doesn't even make sense. What kind of mugger/killer would rely 100% on the uncaring attitude of 40 witnesses?

  • Amanda Harletsch

    Seriously dude?



    have you heard of this guy that stabbed a homeless person in a subway car with other people on board?

blog comments powered by Disqus

send a tip

tips@gothamist.com