PSY2001 W8 Prosocial Behaviour (L)

Question 1

What is prosocial behaviour?

Answer 1

acts that are positively viewed by society.
Positive social consequences and contributes to the physical/psychological wellbeing of another person (Wispe, 1972)
It is voluntary and intended to benefit others (Eisenberg et al., 1996)
Being prosocial includes both being helpful and altruistic
Defined by society’s norms

Question 2

What is the social perspective on why we behave prosocially?

Answer 2

Social norms and Socal learning
Norms: we help other because we should, societal norms play key role in developing and sustaining prosocial behaviour (learnt rather than innate)

Prosocial behaviour ( = social norms) is often rewarded, leading to social acceptance.
Violating social norms can be punished and result in social rejection.

Learning to be helpful - we learn prosocial behaviour (giving instructions/using reinforcement-Rewarding behaviour and exposure to models)
Social Learning Thoery

Question 3

What are the limitation of the social perspective

why we behave proscially

Answer 3

Overemphasis on External Factors
Cultural Variability

Question 4

What is the evolutionary and biological perspective on why we behave prosocially?

Answer 4

Innate tendency to help others to pass our genes to the next generation. Helping kin improves their survival rates. Prosocial behaviour as a trait that potentially has evolutionary survival value. Animals also engage in prosocial behaviour.
Mutualism and Kin selection

Question 5

What are the limitations of the evolutionary and biological perspective

why we behave prosocially

Answer 5

Doesn’t consider cultural or social norms. Does not explain why we help non-relatives, such as friends or even strangers. Little empirical evidence exists.
Does not explain why we could help in some circumstances but not in other examples of familial violence and abuse.
Social learning theories ignored

Question 6

What is the bystander effect ?

Answer 6

People are less likely to help in an emergency when they are with others than when they are alone.

Question 7

What is the bystander calculus model ?

Pilavin et al 1981

Answer 7

1-Psyciological processes - empathic response to someone in distress ( + arousal + chance we help)
2- Labelling arousal (as an emotion, distress, anger etc.) personal distress at seeing someone else suffer - helping behaviour motivated by desire to reduce own negative emotional experience.
3- Evaluating the consequences of helping - cost benefit analysos

Question 8

What is the Latané and Darley’s Cogntive model ?

Answer 8

Attend to what is happening + Define event a emergency + assume responsibility + decide what can be done = give help

Question 9

What are the two models of bystander behaviour?

Answer 9

Bystander calculus model and Latané and Darley’s cogntiive model

Question 10

What determinance helping?

Answer 10

Perceiver adn Recipient centred determiants

Question 11

What is the cost benefit analysis ?

3- Evaluating the consequences of helping Bystander calculus model

Answer 11

Cost of helping: time and effort but also personal risk
Costs of not helping: empathy costs of not helping can cause distress to a bystander who empathises with the victime, personal costs of not helping a viction can cause distress (guilt/blame)

low CNH + low CH = determined by norms
Low CNH + High CH = ignore victim
High CNH + Low CH = directly help victim
High CNH + High CH = indirectly help victime or lower cost of helping

Question 12

What is the recipient centred determinants of helping?

Answer 12

group membership, responsivility for misfortune

Question 13

What is the perceiver centred determinants of helping?

Answer 13

personality, mood, competence

Question 14

Is truly selfless altriusm possible?

Answer 14

true altruism shoudl be selfless but it can be difficult to prove selflessness, sometimes there are private rewards associated with acting pro socially (feeling good) - motives matter

Question 15

Do the receiver of help always want help?

Wakefield, Hopkins, and Greenwood (2012)

Answer 15

Female students were made aware that women may be stereotyped by men as dependant, and were then placed in a situation where they needed help.
Asked to solve a set of anagrams.
Those made aware of the dependency stereotype (compared to controls who were not) were less willing to seek help; Those that did seek help felt worse the more help they sought.
Receiving help can be interpreted negatively if it confirms a negative stereotype about the recipient

Question 16

What are helping behaviours?

Answer 16

acts that intentionally benefit someone else/group

Question 17

What is altruism?

Answer 17

acts that benefits another person rather than the self
act is performed without expectation of one’s own gain

Question 18

What are the two explanation of prosocial behaviour in animals and humans?

Stevens, Cushman and Hauser 2005

Answer 18

Mutualism
Kin selection
Study: Participant were more likely to help the sick than the healthy in everyday situations. But they were more likely to help the healthy in life-or-death situation. In general people were more likely to help people they were closely related to.

Question 19

What is mutualism?

Answer 19

prosocial behaviour benefits the co-operator as well as others; a defector will do worse than a co-operator.

Question 20

What is kin selection?

Answer 20

prosocial behaviour is biased towards blood relatives because it helps their own genes.

Question 21

What are social norms?

Lay et al. 2020

Answer 21

Social guidelines that establish what most people do in a certain context and what is socially acceptable

Question 22

What are 3 social norms that may explain why people engage in prosocial behaviour

Answer 22

Reciprocity principle (Gouldner, 1960)
Social responsibility (Berkowitz, 1972)
Just-world hypothesis (Lerner & Miller 1978)

Question 23

What is reciprocity principle?

Gouldner, 1960

Answer 23

we should help people who help us

Question 24

What is social responsibility ?

Berkowitz, 1972

Answer 24

we should help those in need independent of their ability to help us.

Question 25

What si just-world hypothesis ?

Lerner & Miller 1978

Answer 25

world is just and fair place, if we come across anyone who is undeservedly suffering, we help them to restore our belief in a just world

Question 26

How do children learn prosocial behaviour?

Answer 26

Childhood is a critical period during which we learn prosocial behaviour (Zahn-Waxler et al., 1992).
1- Giving instructions
2-Using reinforcement - rewarding behaviour
3- exposure to models

Question 27

How does giving instructions help children learn prosocial behaviour?

Grusec et al., 1978

Answer 27

Simply telling children to be helpful works.
Telling children what is appropriate establishes an expectation and guide for later life. Though, if a child is told to be good but the preacher is inconsistent then it is pointless.

Question 28

How does exposure to using reinforcement - rewarding behaviour children learn prosocial behaviour?

Rushton and Teachman (1978)

Answer 28

when young children are rewarded they are more likely to offer to help again; if children are not rewarded or punished they are less likely to offer to help again

Study:
Children 8-11 observe an adult playing a game. Adult is seen to donate tokens won in the game to a worse off child
Conditions of: (1) positive reinforcement, (2) no consequences, and (3) negative reinforcement

Question 29

How does exposure to model help children learn prosocial behaviour?

Rushton 1976 and Gentile et al. (2009)

Answer 29

Rushton (1976) concluded from the review that modelling is more effective in shaping behaviour than reinforcement.

Gentile et al. (2009)
Children (9-14) assigned to play prosocial, neutral or violent video games. Playing video games with prosocial content increased short term helping behaviour and decreased hurtful behaviour in a puzzle game

Question 30

What is the Social Learning Thoery?

Bandura 1973

Answer 30

When a person observes a person and then models the behaviour, is this just a matter of mechanical imitation?

Bandura’s social learning theory (1973) argues against this –it is the knowledge of what happens to the model that determines whether or not the observer will help.

Question 31

What are Hornstein 1970 findings?

Answer 31

Experiment where people observed a model returning a lost wallet. The model appeared either pleased to be able to help, displeased at helping, or no strong reaction.

Later the participant came across a ‘lost wallet’. Those who observed the pleasant condition helped the most; those who observed the negative helped the least.
Therefore modelling is not just imitation

Question 32

What were Darley & Latane 1968’s findings?

Answer 32

Emergency situations whilst completing a questionnaire: presence of smoke in the room or another participant suffering a medical emergency

Presence of others: (1) confederates who do not intervene, (2) other participants or (3) alone

Very few people intervened in the presence of others, especially when others did not intervene

Question 33

What processes contributed to the bystander effect?

Answer 33

Diffusion of responsibility, audience inhibition and social influence

Question 34

What is diffusion of responsibility?

bystander effect

Answer 34

tendency of an individual to assume that others will take responsibility

Question 35

What is the audiance inhibition?

bystander effect

Answer 35

other onlookers may make the individual feel self-conscious about taking action; people do not want to appear foolish by overreacting

Question 36

What is social influence?

Bystander effect

Answer 36

other people provide a model for action. If they are unworried, the situation may seem less serious

Question 37

5 conditions

How was the processes underlying the bystander apthy effect tested?

Latané & Darley 1076

Answer 37

Five conditions:
1. Control: Alone, cannot be seen by others nor can see others
2. Diffusion of responsibility: aware of another participant but cannot see them
3. Diffusion of responsibility+ social influence: aware of another participant, can see the other participant in the monitor, cannot be seen themselves
4. Diffusion of responsibility + audience inhibition: aware of another participant but cannot see them, but can be seen themselves
5. Diffusion of responsibility + audience inhibition + social influence: aware of another participant, can see them and aware they can be seen themselves

1 most to help at first and most P helped by the end
2 less helped at first but 2nd most by the end
3/4 2nd most to help at first but flatters out to 3rd most by the end
5 least help

Question 38

When is empathic concern triggered?

Bystander calculus model

Answer 38

Emphatic concern is triggered when we believe we are similar to the victim and can relate to them, we are more likely to help the person (Batson & Coke, 1981)

Question 39

What evidence is there for the bystander calculus model ?

Shotland & Straw 1976

Answer 39

Experiment 1:
Participants witness a man and a woman fighting. Condition: married couple versus strangers.
Results:
Intervention rate is measured: 65% in the strangers condition vs 19% in the married couple condition.

Question 40

What study contradicts the bystander effect?

Philpot et al 2020

Answer 40

CCTV recordings of 219 street disputes in three cities (Lancaster, Amsterdam, Cape Town).
At least one bystander intervened in 90% of cases.
Contrary to the previous research, presence of others increased likelihood of helping.

Question 41

What are the positive of Philpot et al. 2020 CCTV study?

critical evaluation

Answer 41

large scale test bystander effect in reallife scenarios ecocogical validity.
Effect consistent across three different countries one with slightly different context.

Question 42

What are the negatives of Philpot et al. 2020 CCTV study?

critical evaluation

Answer 42

X Only in cities and mostly western countries
X Intervention defined very broadly
X Lack of audio

Question 43

perceiver centred determinants of helping

Is there such a thing as altruisitic personality?

Bierhoff, Klein & Kramp 1991

Answer 43

People who helped in a traffic accident vs those who did not help. Helpers and non-helpers distinguished on:
* the norm of social responsibility
* internal locus of control
* greater dispositional empathy

Evidence is correlational and it’s not clear whether personality traits cause helping behaviour

Question 44

perceiver centred determinants of helping

Does your mood affect your helping behaviour?

Holloway et al 1977 and Isen 1970

Answer 44

Individuals who feel good are more likely to help someone in need compared to those who feel bad.

Holloway et al., 1977: receiving good news-> increased willingness to help

Isen (1970) found that teachers who were more successful on a task were more likely to contribute later to a school fundraising event. In fact, those who did well donated 7 times as much as others!

Though mood effects may be short-lived: Isen, Clark, Schwartz 1976: increased willingness to help a stranger only within the first seven minutes of positive mood induction

Question 45

perceiver centred determinants of helping

Does competence affect willingness to help?

Answer 45

Feeling competent to deal with an emergency makes it more likely that help will be given; there is the awareness that ‘I know what I am doing’ (Korte, 1971).

Specific kinds of competence have increased helping in these contexts:
People were more willing to help others move electrically charged objects if they were told they had a high tolerance for electric shocks (Midlarsky & Midlarsky, 1976);
People were more likely to help to recapture a dangerous lab rat if they were told they were good at handling rats (Schwartz & David, 1976).

Certain skills are perceived as being relevant to some emergencies, e.g., in reacting to a stranger who is bleeding, first-aid trained individuals were more likely to intervene (Shotland & Heinold, 1985).

Question 46

recipient centred determinants of prosocial behaviour

Does group membershit affect willingness to help?

Levine et al., 2005 Study 1 and 2

Answer 46

45 ManU fans - Participants directed to take a short walk during which they witness an emergency incident. Group membership is manipulated
- confederate wears Man U, Liverpool FC or plain sports top

Rate of helping the confederate measured: ManU fans were more likely to help other ManU fans than Liverpool FC fans or those not supporting a football team
Helping behaviour increased for in group members

Study 2: Participants were told they were taking part in a study about football fans Focusing on the positives of being a football fan
Measured helping behaviour to confederate who is wearing ManU, Liverpool FC, or plain top.
Results: Equally likely to help confederate wearing ManU or Liverpool FC top. those wearing a plain top were less likely to be helped.

Question 47

recipient centred determinants of prosocial behaviour

Does responsibility for misfortune affect willingness to help?

Answer 47

People are generally more likely to help people who are not responsible for their misfortune (e.g., just-world hypothesis)

Turner DePalma et al., 1999: participants read booklet about a fictional disease [ either caused by a genetic anomality or an action of the individual or no information was given]
Measured participants’ belief in a just world - Offered twelve helping options with differing commitment levels
Results: Helping behaviour was significantly increased when it was believed that the person was not responsible for illness
People with high belief in a just world helped more only when the person was believed not to be responsible for their illness.

Question 48

What is the just world hypothesis?

Answer 48

the world is a just and fair place and, if we come across anyone who is undeservedly suffering we help them to restore our belief in a just world.