Altruism and Prosocial Behavior Flashcards
- Determinants of Prosocial Behavior
group membership, reputation, mood, and altruistic versus egoistic motivation.
a. Group Membership
People tend to help in-group members due to:
Identification and similarity, which fosters empathy.
Reciprocal altruism, where help is expected in return.
Helping out-group members is often motivated by humanitarian values and compassion for those less fortunate.
Example: Emperor penguins huddling together to conserve energy and survive harsh winters, demonstrating a survival-based form of cooperative behavior.
More helping behavior is observed in smaller communities, such as small towns, schools, and churches, where reciprocal help is more likely.
b. Reputation
People engage in prosocial behavior for:
Publicity and recognition.
Gaining social approval and being liked by peers.
Public vs. Private Altruism Study (Bereczkei et al., 2007):
Volunteers were more likely to sign up for charitable activities when their actions were public (50%) than private (25%).
Public helpers were rated as more sympathetic and trustworthy.
The possibility of gaining reputation played a significant role in charitable behavior.
c. Mood and Helping
Feel Bad, Do Good?
When focused on others, helping can be a way to relieve negative emotions.
Guilt as a Motivator: People who feel guilty are more likely to help, even if the task is unpleasant.
Feel Good, Do Good
Happy people are more inclined to help as a side effect of their positive mood.
Study on Mood and Helping (Manucia et al., 1984):
Participants induced into happy, sad, or neutral moods.Those in a sad mood helped only when they believed their mood was changeable.
Helping was reduced if the task was unpleasant unless the person felt guilty.
Altruistic Motivation
Helping purely to benefit others.
Egoistic Motivation
Helping to obtain rewards or avoid punishments.
Empathy and Helping Study (Batson et al., 1981):
Participants were asked to switch places with a distressed confederate receiving shocks.
Empathy Manipulation: Participants who perceived similarity with the confederate were more likely to help.
Escape Manipulation: Those who could leave without watching were less likely to help unless empathy was high.
Results suggest empathy leads to truly altruistic helping.
Counterargument: Some studies indicate that helping might be driven by a desire to reduce personal distress rather than pure altruism.
Helping in an Emergency: The Bystander Effect
The likelihood of helping decreases as the number of bystanders increases.
a. Noticing the Event
Good Samaritan Study:
Seminary students giving a talk on the Good Samaritan passed a victim in distress.
Time pressure significantly affected whether they stopped to help.
b. Interpreting as an Emergency
Pluralistic Ignorance:
Individuals gauge how serious a situation is based on others’ reactions.
Example: People in a classroom avoid asking questions, assuming others understand.
Smoke-Filled Room Study:
Participants in a room filling with smoke were less likely to report it if others remained passive.
c. Assuming Responsibility
Diffusion of Responsibility:
The presence of others reduces the perceived personal obligation to act.
Increasing Helping in Crowds:
Reduce ambiguity by making it clear that help is needed.
Directly single out individuals: “You, in the red jacket – call 911!”
Increasing Prosocial Behavior
Reducing Restraints on Helping:
Reducing Restraints on Helping:
Reduce ambiguity and emphasize responsibility.
Induce guilt as a motivator.
Socializing Altruism:
Define positive social norms.
Education and awareness (e.g., learning about the bystander effect increases helping behavior).
Personal contact increases helping behavior later (e.g., casual conversation before an emergency makes people more likely to help).
Framing requests: “Even a penny helps” increases compliance.
