Chapter 8: Altruism - Helping Others Flashcards
Social exchange theory?
- the theory that human interactions are transactions that aim to maximize one’s reward and minimize one’s costs
Social exchange theory:
- rewards?
- internal or external
- increasing self worth, reclaiming a positive public image
- reducing distress, guilt (especially when others are aware) to restore self image
- *egoism : the idea that self interest motivates all behaviour
Social exchange theory:
- feel bad, do good?
- when one’s attend is on others, altruism is rewarding
* exception: when angry or experiencing depression or profound grief
Social exchange theory:
- feel good, do good?
- happy people are helpful people, seen in both children and adults
Social exchange theory:
-Why do we do altruism ??
- sustains good mood
- predisposes one to positive behaviours
- positive thinkers –> positive actors
What are the two social norms which motivate altruism?
- reciprocity norm
- social-responsibility norm
Social norms which motivate altruism:
- reciprocity norm?
- an expectation that people will help, not hurt, those who have helped them
- helps define the “social capital”
Social norms which motivate altruism:
- Social-responsibility norm?
- an expectation that people will help those dependent on them (ex children; those who are impoverished and those with disabilities)
- responses are closely tied to attributions however, less likely in western cultures if the need is seen as the result of own negligence
Social norms which motivate altruism:
- Gender and receiving help, Eagly and Crowley (1986)?
- 35 studies that compared help revived by male or female victims
- short term encounters with strangers in need
- women offered help = to males and females
- men offered more help when the strangers in need were female
- **motivation by men to help women in need may not be via altruism but mating,
- men help attractive women more than unattractive ones.
- women receive and give more help in situations
- women seek out medical and psychiatric help more than men by 2 x
- women are more often to accept help from a friend
Evolutionary Psychology:
- Kin protection?
- idea that evolution has selected altruism toward one’s close relatives to enhance the survival of mutually shared genes
Evolutionary Psychology:
- reciprocity ?
- helping another because of the expectation that the favour will be returned.
- stronger in small, isolated groups
Evolutionary Psychology:
- what are the three things this are looks at with respect to altruism?
- kin protection, reciprocity and group selection
Empathy?
- the vicarious experience of another’s feeling; putting oneself in another’s shows
- comes naturally and may be hard wired - Baston,Fultz and Schoenrade (187)
Empathy:
- Schaller and Cialdini (1988)?
- question existence of genuine altruism; conclude if we feel empty but know that there is something else that might make us feel better we aren’t as likely to help
Empathy:
- Schaller and Cialdini (1988)?
L>other researchers conclusion??
- HOWEVER, Baston and other researchers concluded, after 25 experiments on egoism vs empathy that some people do focus on others’ welfare rather than their own.
Bystander effect?
- the finding that a person is less likely to provide help when there are other bystanders
Bystander effect
- Latane and Darely (1970)??
L>also various other studies ..
- staged emergencies
- the presence of bystanders greatly decreased intervention
- given unrestricted communication among the bystanders, a person was at least as likely to be helped by a lone bystander as when observed by several.
- *in internet communication, ppl are more likely to help when people request for it if they believe they alone have received the request and not several others.
- elevator studies revealed that when someone dropped coins in an elevator with one other person present they received help 40% of the time but when there were many people with them in the elevator they were helped less than 20% of the time.
As the number of bystanders increases, bystanders may be less likely to what?
- notice
- interpret as a problem (illusion of transparency and pluralistic ignorance)
- assume responsibility
As the number of bystanders increases, bystanders may be less likely to notice.
L> Latane and Darley (1968)?
- men fill out questionnaire in a room by themselves or with two strangers
- staged emergency
- those alone noticed the smoke almost immediately, usually lass than five seconds
- those in group noticed it in about 20 seconds…keeping their eyes on their work.
- when in a group, less likely to notice things
As the number of bystanders increases, bystanders may be less likely to interpret something a problem:
- Illusion of transparency?
L> Gilovich et al(1997)
- a tendency to overestimate others’ ability to “read: our internal states.
- keenly aware of our own emotions we assume people can see right through us
As the number of bystanders increases, bystanders may be less likely to interpret something a problem:
- pluralistic ignorance?
- the assumption that others are thinking and feeling what we are.
ex: in an emergency, each person may think “ I’m very concerned” but perceive others as not looking alarmed - “ maybe its not an emergency”
**this was seen in the smoke experiment…
L> those in groups reported less vs those alone
As the number of bystanders increases, bystanders may be less likely to assume responsibility.
L> Latane ad Darley (1968)?
- actor crying for help in another room
- asked students tot all about their problems with university life over an intercom. Guaranteeing anonymity stating on one would be visible or eavesdrop.
- during the situation students heard someone go into epileptic seizure.
- when thought they were the only listener 85% went to help
- when they thought others heard…only 31% left to help
- *when asked people deny the influence of other people being present
As the number of bystanders increases, bystanders may be less likely to assume responsibility.
-Piliavin (1969)?
- staged an emergency in a lab
- subway passengers
- a confederate entered…he staggers and collapses
- when the victim carried a cane, one or more bystanders almost always promptly helped
- even when the victim was carrying bottle and smelled of liquor he was often helped and especially prompt when many male observers were close by.
As the number of bystanders increases, bystanders may be less likely to assume responsibility.
- Solomon et al (1978), ambiguity?
- when the cry for help /emergency was visible and heard, people in groups were more likely to help vs emergencies that were more ambiguous when people that were solitary helped more so than those in groups.
As the number of bystanders increases, bystanders may be less likely to assume responsibility.
L> what happens to people living in large cities that hinders them from helping people when in big groups?
- compassion fatigue and sensory overload from encountering so many people in need further restrains helping in larger cities across the world.
- bigger and more densely populated the city = less likely to be helped
- larger cities the bystanders are often strangers whose increasing numbers depress helping
- when bystanders are friends or people who share a group indignity , increased numbers am instead increase helping
As the number of bystanders increases, bystanders may be less likely to assume responsibility.
- differences around the world? Levine et al (2001 and 2003)
-people in economically advanced countries offered les help to strangers and those in cultures marked by amiable and agreeably simpatico were more helpful
When will we help?
- help when someone else does
L> helpful models - time presser (people are less likely to help when they are busy, in a rush and late for something important - in the hurry they do not fully grasp the situation)
- similarity to the victim
L>more empathetic toward this similar to us (dress and beliefs)
L> in one study 2/3 of students helped those similarly dressed to them
L> people in another study were also more likely to help when the victim had morphological characteristics similar to the person that may be offering the help
**even just sharing a birthday, fingerprint or first name leads people to be more helpful.
When will we help?
-elevations?
a distinctive feeling in the chest of warmth and expansion ..often inspires people o become more self giving
Who will we help?
- do individual differences in helpfulness exist?
YEPPERS
Who will we help?
-individual differences in helpfulness exist. Such as?
- personality
- will be socially rewarded
- gender
Who will we help?
-individual differences in helpfulness exist.
L> personality?
- predisposing traits: emotionality, empathy and self efficacy
- personality influences how particular peopler eat to a particular situation e.g. high self monitoring people when they think helpfulness
Who will we help?
-individual differences in helpfulness exist.
L> gender?
- interacts with the type of situation
- men were found to be more helpful in dangerous situations and women were more likely to help in volunteer situations
How may helping others be increased?
- reduce ambiguity, increase responsibility
- enable guilt and concern for self image
(door in the face) - socialize altruism
L> teach moral inclusion, model altruism, learn by doing, attribute helping behaviour to altruism (oversustificaiton effect) - learn about altruism
How may helping others be increased
- door in the face?
- a strategy for gaining a concession. After someone first turns down a large request, the same request counter offers with a more reasonable offer
How may helping others be increased:
- Socialize altruism:
- Moral exclusion? Moral inclusion(teach this) ?
- the perception of certain individuals or groups as outside the boundary within which you apply moral values and rules of fairness
- regarding others as within your circle of moral concern
