prosocial behavior Flashcards

You may prefer our related Brainscape-certified flashcards:
1
Q

explain the bystander effect?

A

INDIVIDUALS ARE LESS LIKELY TO OFFER HELP TO SOMEONE IF THERE ARE OTHER PEOPLE PRESENT.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

does the number of witnesses, influence people helping in emergency situations?

A

yes, people were less likely to do it if there were other people in the room < more likely to do it alone.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

what is diffusion of responsibility?

A

the tendency to assume others will take action / responsibility ( in emergency situations)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

identify the steps in latane and Darley’s cognitive staircase model?

A

Emergency, notice the event, interpret the event as an emergency, assume responsibility, know appropriate form of assistance and provide help

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

key step of latane and Darley’s model?

A

ASSUME RESPONSBILITY

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

bystander effect rises due to?

A

diffusion of responsibility

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

the primary explanation for the bystander effect is?

A

diffusion of responsibility

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

what is bystander calculus?

A

perception of danger, risk “because hes part of the right group, everyone wants to help”

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

with regards to bystander calculus, piliavin et al 1981 argued?

A

piliavin et al 1981 > they argued that there is this calculation in someone’s mind about the costs/benefits of help

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

physiological arousal?

A

empathy experienced for the person in need ( increased heart rate, sweaty palms)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

labelling arousal?

A

translating experience of arousal into a particular emotion, often distress

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

action or no action depends on

A

the costs/benefits of helping someone in need relative to the costs and benefits of not helping

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

greater cost of helping…

A

time, effort, safety

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

costs of not helping…..

A

empathy costs (personali distress) , personal costs ( experience of blame ect)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

another explanation of the bystander effect?

A

conformity

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

it takes just one person to intervene and bystanders

A

become helpers

17
Q

identify who helps? individual differences

A

Gender: men and women differ in likelihood to help in different situations < men are more likely to behave in front of an audience, women in contrast are more likely to help in long-term aid situations.
Mood states – there is a feel good factor in triggering prosocial behavior ( because – good mood = external focus, bad mood = internal focus) < listening to uplifting music associated with people who tend to be more helpful
Religiosity - religious beliefs have been associated with altruistic behavior
Similarity – people are more empathetic towards people they view as similar ( eg: people trust strangers whose faces resemble their own)

18
Q

situational differences in prosocial behaviour?

A

Group identity – people are more likely to help individuals who belong to the same group as them rather than out-group (consistent with bias for self-similarity)
Competence – people who feel competent are more likely to help (eg: certain skills are relevant to some emergencies… i know what to do, i know how to act)
Responsibility – leaders are likely to experience emergency’s differently than followers, may feel more responsible to offer help?
Culture – the inclination to help varies across culture < countries where people earn more = help less, had expected the opposite < that stressful conditions would lead to more selfishness.

19
Q

economic productivity?

A

appears to be negatively associated with benevolence and or cultural norms towards helpfulness < perhaps those who experience deprivation are better able to empathize?

20
Q

Carolyn zahn-waxler learning theory of helping?

A

Carolyn zahn waxler argues that helping is learned in childhood between the ages of 1 and 2 via the following methods
Giving instructions, using reinforcement and exposure to models
Evidence of this from education and tv and gaming

21
Q

who gets help?

A

Age – as we age we become more reluctant to seek help
Gender – women are more likely to recieve help than men ( ask for it more often?)
Attractiveness – attractive people recieve more help eg: more likely to give directions)
Personality – people high in self esteem are less likely to ask for ( and receive?) help
ASKING FOR HELP IS THE BIGGEST COMMON FACTORS: IF YOU DO ASK FOR HELP YOU TEND TO GET IT.

22
Q

how can the tendency to be cooperative evolve and be maintained?

A

We help relatives – KIN SELECTION

I help you, you help me back – RECIPROCAL ALTRUISM

23
Q

Kin selection? explain

A

Hamiltons rule
Behave altruistically towards those with whom you share genes
Kin vs non-kin, close vs distant kin
Hamiltons rule – a gene for altruism will evolve when….
RB > C
The benefit to recipient of altruistic act must be greater than the cost to the donor/actor
Basic idea of kin selection is that you should help relatives
People are more willing to help kin, especially in life and death situations ( less likely to help as the degree of kin ship decreases)
The donner party diaster -

24
Q

but we also help non-kin….why?

A

Leading explanation is reciprocal altruism
If an individual behaves altruistically but is paid back for their altruistic act at a later date, then both participants will ultimately gain a net benefit ( trivers, 1971)
Helping with the expectation of future help received
Eg: ill buy this round, yous buy the next
Ill take the kids to school, you cut my grass and so on
Central idea: the help i give today will be returned in future.

25
Q

cooperation =

A

behaviour that benefits another individual

26
Q

altruism =

A

behaviour that benefits another individual, at a cost to oneself / with no expectation of reward

27
Q

can there ever be true altruism?

A

Some scope for it – john smeaton example

28
Q

there may never be true altruism, explain?

A

Reputation : apparent altruistic behavior often enhances the helpers reputation
Reputation is important in indirect reciprocity > choosing to cooperate with someone you know to be cooperative
Costly signaling – signals an ability to ‘afford’ the altruistic act ( eg: men leaving a costly tip to waiter to impress their date, signalling mate value)
Women typically donate same amount of money irrespective of audience
Direct reward – involuntary improvement in physiological wellbeing through activation of direct reward centers of our brain
Orbitofrontal cortex – reward center

29
Q

the sad story of George price?

A

Price equatio > showed how organisms are more likely to show altruism towards each other as the become more genetically similar to each other ( kin selection)
If he was right, then altruistic (KIND) behaviour is never truly selfless: instead it is an adaption that organisms have to spread their own genes
Commited suicide : saddened by implications of his work < true altruism doesn’t exist.

30
Q

the case of kitty genevese, the parable of social psychology

A

Kitty genovese murder – a parable for social psychology
1964 she was returning home late one night from work, parked 100 feet away from her apartment and was attacked on her way in. The attack started at 3.20am and police received a call at 3.50am < 38 law abiding citizens admitted to police they heard her screams/watched the attack unfold.
She lived in middleclass, respectable area in NY
As many as 38 people took as long as half an hour to help – why did it take so long?
This case raised concern from the american publlic and sparked a great deal of research on ‘prosocial’ or HELPING behavior.

31
Q

Tragedy of the commons =

A

a dilemma arising from the situation in which multiple individuals, acting independently and rationally consulting their own self-interest, will ultimately deplete a shared limited resource, even when it is clear that it is not in anyones long term interest for this to happen

32
Q

how to tackle the tragedy of the commons?

A

we need to awknowledge our selfish behaviour and overcome it through use of insights such as reputation, signalling green behaviour, rewards…..as well as others < cooperation on this scale is probably the biggest challenge we will ever face.

33
Q

one of the greatest challenges for humanity….

A

being able to cooperate at the national and international levels, particularly sharing our worlds resources and managing them sustainably.