prosocial behaviour Flashcards
How are prosocial behaviour, helping behaviour and altruism defined and differentiated?
Prosocial behaviour Acts that are positively valued by society.
Helping behaviour Acts that intentionally benefit someone else.
Altruism
A special form of helping behaviour, sometimes costly, that shows concern for fellow human beings and is performed without expectation of personal gain.
How are biological, biosocial, and social approaches to prosocial behaviour outlined?
Biological explanations- Helping others is an innate drive or tendency. It maintains the survival of the species. We are born to be prosocial
An example of a biology-related person factor that might lead to prosocial behaviour. We help because of our evolutionary history. Helping ensures survival and that we pass our genes onto the next generations.
Reciprocity theory = helping others increases the chance that they will help you later, increasing the chances of survival
Kin Selection Theory = to ensure our genes are passed on into future generations, we are biased to help those genetically related to us. (bloods thicker then water). People more willing to help a closer Kin then a more distant one.
Social explanations: Helping others is dependent on learning and the social context. We learn this from models. We learn to be prosocial.
no single theory provides a complete explanation for why prosocial behaviour occurs because they either focus too much on biology or too much on social learning Nature (biology) x nurture (social environment). So it is nature and nature
An example of the social-related situational factor that might lead to prosocial behaviour
Learning to help via:
1. Instructions (although this should be paired with modelling) need to model it yourself as well.
2. Reinforcement (e.g., praise after helping or sharing)
3. Modelling
Cultural norms (norms tell us what to do in particular situations) are an important factor that explains prosocial behaviour.
• Most cultures tell us to behave positively towards others (and not be selfish). people really value prosocial behaviour. Lots of social approval for following these norms and punish people who don’t follow them.
• Society will give social rewards (e.g., approval) for following norms and social punishments (e.g.,
criticism, ostracism) for not following them
• Therefore, we often engage in prosocial behaviour because it is the “right thing to do”
Reciprocity norm: if someone helps you, you should help them back Present for a present (big bang theory reciprocity).
Social responsibility norm: you should give to people in need (without expecting anything in
return)
E.g biosocial-related person factor that might lead to prosocial behaviour. (inside out example)
Empathy: an emotional response to a situation. Feeling what some else is feeling.
Is empathy enough to engage people in pro-social behaviour? NO
No, we need a bit more to prompt helping behaviour or help in a way that best matches the situation.
How is the bystander effect described?
Bystander effect: people are less likely to help in an emergency when they are with others than when they are alone. There are additional psychological process that can trigger some people’s reluctance to help when others are present.
Diffusion of responsibility, We assume that others will take responsibility. The more bystanders, the less responsibility we have.
Audience (social) inhibition We are fearful of negative evaluation / making a social blunder E.g., desire to avoid ridicule from overreacting
Social influence Others provide model for (in)action Reduce uncertainty about interpretation of situation
What is Latané and Darley’s cognitive model of bystander intervention?
Cognitive Model of Bystander Intervention (developed by Latane & Darley, 1970).
If the following happens, we are less likely to help:
- We don’t notice something ‘out of sorts’ is happening
- We don’t interpret events as one that require our help or we hold back because we think we could misinterpret it all (e.g., we don’t think it is an emergency)
- We don’t feel responsible to help. This is often due to a diffusion of responsibility (the more on lookers the less an individual feels responsible to help)
- We don’t think we have the skills or knowledge to help
- How are personal and situational variables which affect whether people help described?
How are personal and situational variables which affect whether people help described?
.
What explanations are offered for helping by evolutionary social psychologists?
.
Describe the bystander-calculus model of helping.
Bystander-calculus model
In attending to an emergency, the bystander calculates the perceived costs and benefits of providing help compared with those associated with not helping.
First, we are physiologically aroused by another’s distress. Second, we label this arousal as an emotion. Third, we evaluate the consequences of helping.
If the bystandercalculus model is applied strictly, it implies that ‘altruism’ is a misnomer because it is really motivated by selfinterest, or egoism
that true altruism will reveal itself when the potential helper could easily not help, such as just quietly slipping away.
Define empathy. What role does empathy play in determining altruism?
Empathy is an emotional response to someone elses distress.
Empathy
Ability to feel another person’s experiences; identifying with and experiencing another person’s emotions, thoughts and attitudes.
To experience empathic concern requires us to demonstrate perspective taking – being able to see the position of another person from that person’s point of view.
Modelling helpfulness can be effective. How does modelling and reinforcement interact to affect the acquisition of helpful behaviour?
Various theorists have argued that the processes of classical conditioning, instrumental conditioning and observational learning all contribute to being prosocial.
Giving instructions. In her studies of parenting, Joan Grusec found that simply telling children to be helpful to others actually works (Grusec, Kuczynski, Rushton & Simutis, 1978). Telling a child what is appropriate establishes an expectation and a later guide for action. However, preaching about being good is of doubtful value unless a fairly strong form of advice is used (Rice & Grusec, 1975). Furthermore, telling children to be generous if the ‘preacher’ behaves inconsistently is pointless: ‘do as I say, not as I do’ does not work. Grusec reported that when an adult acted selfishly but urged children to be generous, the children were actually less generous.
• Using reinforcement. Acts that are rewarded are more likely to be repeated. When young children are rewarded for offering to help, they are more likely to offer help again later. Similarly, if they are not rewarded, they are less likely to offer help again (Grusec, 1991). J. Philippe Rushton has studied this field intensively. See an example of his work in Figure 9.3.
Modelling
Tendency for a person to reproduce the actions, attitudes and emotional responses exhibited by a real-life or symbolic model. Also called observational learning.
• Exposure to models. In his review of factors that influence children to give help, Rushton (1976) concluded that while reinforcement is effective in shap ing behaviour, modelling is even more effective. Watching someone else helping another is a powerful form of learning. This approach can be extended to other contexts. Take the case of young Johnny who first helps his mummy to carry some shopping into the house and then wants to help in putting it away, and then cleans up his/her bedroom. Well, maybe not the last bit!
Two types of norms have been proposed as a basis for altruism. Describe each of these and present a situation where each one might be more effective in eliciting helping behaviour.
An important influence that develops and sustains prosocial behaviour is a cultural norm. Norms provide a steady check for how we should act (see Chapters 5 and 6) and are quintessentially learned rather than innate. A norm is a standard that specifies what is expected, ‘normal’ or proper.
Almost every culture shares a norm that ‘concern for others is good; selfish
ness is bad’. An unwritten rule is that when the cost is not very great and another person’s need is high, we should help.
Reciprocity norm The principle of ‘doing unto others as they do to you’. It can refer to returning a favour, mutual aggression or mutual help.
Social responsibility norm
The idea that we should help people who are dependent and in need. It is contradicted by another norm that discourages interfering in other people’s lives.
What is the bystander effect? How is this different to bystander intervention?
. People are less likely to help in an emergency when they are with others than when alone. The greater the number, the less likely it is that anyone will help.
Bystander intervention This occurs when an individual breaks out of the role of a bystander and helps another person in an emergency.
eview Research Classic 9.4 on page 329. Compare this cognitive model proposed by Darley and Latané (1968) to Piliavin’s bystander-calculus model. What are they key arguments in both? Which model do you agree prefer and why?
Latané and Darley’s cognitive model of bystander intervention proposes that whether a person helps depends on the outcomes of a series of decisions. At any point along this path, a decision could be made that would terminate a tendency to help.
Review the series of experiments by Latané and Darley (1970), Latané and Rodin (1969), and Darley and Latané (1968). What 3 factors did they identify that were found to affect helping in these experimental situations?
Diffusion of responsibility. Other onlookers give an opportunity to transfer the responsibility for acting, or not acting, on to them. We may not actually see them. It is necessary only that they be available, somewhere, for action. People who are alone are most likely to help a victim because they believe they carry the entire responsibility for action. The presence of just one other witness allows diffusion of responsibility to operate.
Fear of social blunders
The dread of acting inappropriately or of making a foolish mistake witnessed by others. The desire to avoid ridicule inhibits effective responses to an emergency by members of a group.
• Audience inhibition. Other onlookers can make people selfconscious about an intended action; people do not want to appear foolish by overreacting. In the context of prosocial behaviour, this process is sometimes referred to as a fear of social blunders. Have you felt a dread of being laughed at for misunderstanding little crises involving others? What if things are not as they seem? What if some one is playing a joke?
• Social influence. Other onlookers provide a model for action. If they are passive and unworried, the situation may seem less serious.
Consider the individual differences briefly described in your text (mood, personality, the ‘Good Samaritan’ and attachment style). How might these individual differences be explained by the research on: a) gender; and b) competence.
Mood. When people feel good, they are more sensitive to the needs of others and therefore more helpful. For example, this can happen if you have performed well in a task and have a ‘warm glow of success’ (Isen, 1970). The opposite holds for people in a bad mood. In either case, giving help leads to a good mood!
• Personality measures. These have little or no bearing on being helpful. Further, there is no standalone, altruistic personality (Latané & Darley, 1970). At most, someone’s personality might interact with particular aspects of the situation or of the victim.
• The ‘Good Samaritan’. Supporting evidence is weak (Schwartz, 1977). However, people who are consistently helpful tend to be taller, heavier and physically stronger, and better trained to cope with crimes and emergencies (see Huston, Ruggiero, Conner & Geis, 1981).
• Attachment style. People who are secure are somewhat more compassionate and altruistic (Mikulincer & Shaver, 2005). We deal with attachment style in more detail in Chapter 10.
Describe the 4 motives for helping others, as proposed by Bateson (1994)
Egoism – prosocial acts benefit one’s self. We may help others to secure material, social and self-reward; and to escape punishment.
2 Altruism – prosocial acts contribute to the welfare of others. Acting altruistically does not imply that someone should reciprocate. This kind of prosocial motivation is esteemed in many cultures.
Collectivism – prosocial acts contribute to the welfare of a social group, e.g. one’s family, ethnic group or country. Of course, actions that benefit one’s ingroup may harm an outgroup (see Chapter 7).
4 Principlism – prosocial acts follow a moral principle, such as ‘the greatest good for the greatest number’. Although the link between moral reasoning and prosocial behaviour is not strong, the two processes are at least related (Underwood & Moore, 198
