prosoical Flashcards
Long answer Q
Based on your knowledge of social psychology, what can help you to continue to act prosocial for the rest of the year?
Reinforce positive behaviours…
Define:
- prosocial
- Helping
- Altruism
Prosocial Behavior
Definition: Any action that benefits others, regardless of the motivation behind it.
Helping behavior
Definition: A type of prosocial behavior that specifically aims to assist someone in need or to alleviate someone’s distress.
Altruism
Definition: Helping or prosocial behaviors that are motivated by genuine concern for the welfare of another, without any expectation of reward or benefit for oneself
Prosocial behaviour:
-Scope
-Examples:
Scope - It’s a broad term that encompasses a wide range of actions, including sharing, comforting, rescuing, and cooperating.
Examples - Donating money to a charity because you genuinely want to help (altruistic motive) OR donating to be seen in a positive light by others (selfish motive) are both considered prosocial behaviors.
Helping:
-Scope
-Examples:
Scope: While all helping behaviors are prosocial, not all prosocial behaviors can be classified as helping. For instance, cooperating with a team member on a project is prosocial but not necessarily “helping” in the strict sense.
Examples: Assisting a lost student with directions, helping a friend move into a new apartment, or giving first aid to someone injured.
Altruism
-Scope
-Examples:
Scope: Not all prosocial behaviors or helping actions are altruistic. Altruism is about the motivation behind the behavior rather than the behavior itself. An action is altruistic if it’s done purely for the benefit of another, even if it comes at a cost to oneself.
Examples: A stranger jumping into a river to save a drowning child, even if it puts their own life at risk, or anonymously donating a large sum to a cause without any desire for recognition or benefit
What biological factors influence people to help?
Consider mutualism and Kin selection:
Two possible innate tendencies: –
Mutualism – helping behaviour benefits the helper and the person being helped. Co-operating benefits everyone.
Kin selection – those who help are biased towards blood relatives because it helps propagate their own genes.
Combination of biology and social factors?
Empathy & arousal theory of prosocial behaviour?
Gaertner and colleagues argued that a trigger to being prosocial is an increase in arousal (heart rate, pulse, perception of emergency) PLUS an experience of empathy for the person needing help.
How did The Kitty Genovese murder effect research into prosocial and bystander behaviour?
1950s, the single event credited with stimulating and heavily influencing the entire field of prosocial behaviour was the
murder of Kitty Genovese. Her murder also sparked research into bystander involvement.
- The tragic event raised questions about the people who didn’t help and the factors that influenced those decisions.
Costs and Benefits perspective into helping behaviour?
According to Piliavin and colleagues help happens when:
Bystander-calculus model states in attending to an emergency, the person calculates the perceived costs and benefits of providing help vs those associated with not helping.
According to Piliavin and colleagues help happens when we are
(i) physiologically aroused by another’s distress,
(ii) we label this arousal as an emotion and
(iii) when we evaluate the consequences of helping.
How is prosocial behaviour learnt?
-Patterns emerge between the ages of 1 and 2.
-The processes of classical conditioning, instrumental conditioning and observational learning
-instructions, reinforcement and exposure models
What is the bystander effect?
People are much 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 usually only occurs when an individual breaks out of the role of a bystander and helps another person in an emergency.
What is Latané and Darley’s cognitive model of bystander intervention?
Latané and Darley’s cognitive model of bystander intervention in an emergency situation 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 helping behavior.
Emergency–> notice that something is happening –> interperet event as an emergency –> take responsibility –> decide how to help –> provide help
Processes contributing to bystander apathy:
Three key processes could be responsible for reluctance to help:
Is the individual aware that others are present? – Responsibility can fall to someone else
Can the individual actually see or hear the others and be aware of how they are reacting? – Others perception of the situation
Can these others monitor the behavior of the individual? – Others perception of my actions – will I look stupid.
What are some examples of bystander apathy?
consider:
-diffusion of responsibility
-Audience inhibition
-Social influence
- Diffusion of responsibility. People who are alone are most likely to help a victim because they believe they carry the entire responsibility for action. I
- Audience inhibition. Other people can
make people self-conscious about taking
action: people do not want to appear foolish by overreacting - social blunders - Social influence. Other people provide a
model for action. If they are passive and
unworried, the situation may seem less
serious.
Situational effects on helping for people.
Consider: mood, personality, location, competency, leadership, gender.
Mood: People are much more likely to help others if they are in a good mood; if in a bad mood, they are more self-focused.
Personality traits: People who believe that fate lies within personal control; mature moral judgment; need for social approval and tendency to take responsibility for others. secure attachment
Geographic location: As population levels rise, helping behavior decreases.
Competency: Feeling competent to deal with the emergency will increase helping behavior.
Leadership: Leaders do not experience the same degree of diffusion of responsibility as ordinary group members.
Gender interactions: males being more helpful to women, despite a baseline difference of women showing more empathy generally than men.
