to review Flashcards
KIN SELECTION THEORY
The Kin Selection Theory is connected to the biological approach. The Kin Selection Theory proposes that altruism can be explained through inclusive fitness. Altruism is selfless behavior that aims to help another person with no reward and sometimes at the expense of themself. Inclusive fitness is a concept that states an organism’s genetic success comes from cooperation and altruism. The theory predicts that the number of genes you share with an individual will influence the degree of altruism shown towards them.
HACHLIN AND JONES: Hachlin and Jones’ study involved 206 American university students being given 7 levels of social distance (for example, mother, partner, roommate, etc.) and were asked to identify a person in their life who best fits that role. Then, they were given a questionnaire where they were asked if they would give 75 dollars to the people they identified. The results found that participants were more likely to give the money to close relatives rather than distant relatives or non-relatives. This study supports the kin-selection theory because it shows that the greater the degree of biological closeness, the greater the degree of altruism.
MADSEN ET AL: Madsen et al’s study aimed to investigate the degree to which an individual self-sacrifices for someone else is influenced by biological relatedness. The procedure involved students from the UK and South Africa being asked to supply a list of blood relatives and how related they were to them. The participants then sat in an uncomfortable position and for every 20 seconds they did so, a relative chosen by the researcher from the participant’s list, would be paid. The results found that participants suffered through pain for longer when the recipient of the money was a closer relative. This study supports the kin-selection theory because it shows that the greater the degree of biological closeness, the greater the degree of altruism.
EMPATHY ALTRUISM MODEL
EMPATHY ALTRUISM MODEL: The empathy altruism model is connected to the cognitive approach. One explanation for the cognitive approach relates to the empathy altruism model. The empathy altruism model refers to there being 2 emotions when witnessing suffering: personal distress, which leads to egoistic behavior, and empathetic concern, which leads to altruistic behavior.
BATSON ET AL: The aim of Batson et al’s study was to investigate motives to empathetic behavior. The procedure involved psychology students watching Elaine receiving electric shocks. In the easy to escape condition, participants were told they could either take her place or fill out a questionnaire about their experience. In the difficult to escape condition, participants were told they could either take her place or watch Elaine go through additional trials. The results found that in the hard to escape condition, most participants agreed to take her place, whereas in the easy to escape condition, most participants filled out the questionnaire. This study supports the empathy altruism model because it shows that when participants were put in a position where they witnessed someone suffering, they either experienced a response that promoted personal distress, which resulted in egotistical behavior as seen through participants in the easy to escape condition being more likely to fill out the questionnaire, or the participants experienced a response that promote emotional concern, which resulted in altruistic behavior as seen through participants in the hard to escape condition being more likely to take Elaine’s place.
AROUSAL COST REWARD MODEL
AROUSAL COST REWARD MODEL: The arousal cost reward model is connected to the cognitive approach. Another explanation for the cognitive approach relates to the arousal cost reward model. The arousal cost reward model proposes that when we see someone in distress, we have an emotional reaction followed by us weighing the costs and benefits to helping. If the cost outweighs the reward, we are less likely to help. If the reward outweighs the cost, we are more likely to help.
PILIAVIN ET AL: The aim of Piliavin et al’s study was to test how situation factors influence prosocial behavior. The procedure involved New York subway travelers witnessing either a man who appeared ill or a man who appeared drunk fall onto the floor of a subway. The results found that the people helped the man who appeared ill 95% of the time, whereas people helped the man who appeared drunk 50% of the time. The average time it took for someone to help the man who appeared ill was 5 seconds, whereas the average time it took for someone to help the man who appeared drunk was 109 seconds. This study supports the arousal cost reward model because it shows that the participant’s elongated response in helping the man who appeared drunk was a result of them weighing the cost and benefits of help; helping a man who appears drunk is more of a threat to people because there is a chance he could harm them, compared to helping a who appears ill, who cannot defend himself.
BYSTANDER EFFECT
The bystander effect is connected to the sociocultural approach. One explanation for the sociocultural approach relates to the bystander effect. A bystander is someone who witnesses, but does not partake in an event. The bystander effect describes how the presence of others discourages an individual from intervening in an emergency situation. People often diffuse responsibly by assuming that others will help.
DARLEY AND LATANE: Darley and Latane’s study involved students being told they were taking part in an anonymous interview. Students were told they were either alone, there was 1 other person, or there were 4 other people, depending on the condition. During the interview, a recording of the interviewer crying for help would be played. The results found that when the students thought they were alone, they helped 85% of the time. When they were told 1 other person was present, they helped 65% of the time. When they were told 4 other people were present, they helped 31% of the time. This study connects to the bystander effect.
LATANE AND RODIN: Latane and Rodin’s study involved participants sitting in a waiting room, during which they would hear the experimenter cry for help in the next room. The results found that the participants reacted quicker when they were alone than when they were sitting with a confederate who did not react to the situation. This study connects to the bystander effect.
PROSOCIAL BEHAVIOR
Prosocial behavior is behavior that benefits others or has positive social consequences. It is usually shown through acts of kindness, compassion, and helping behaviors. Prosocial behavior can decrease the negative effects of stress and have positive effects on mental health.
GREITEMEYER AND OSSWALD: The aim of Greitemeyer and Osswald’s study was to investigate whether video games can promote prosocial behavior. The procedure involved students being assigned to play a prosocial or neutral video game. The participants then witnessed a situation where a male researcher acted aggressively towards a female researcher. The results found that 20% of the participants who played a neutral video game intervened, whereas 60% of the participants who played the prosocial video game intervened. The results indicate that playing prosocial video games has at least a short-term effect on someone’s likelihood to act prosocially.
SPRAFKIN ET AL: The aim of Sprafkin et al’s study was to test whether television with prosocial content promoted prosocial behavior. The procedure involved children watching either a video about a dog saving her puppies, if they were in the prosocial condition, or a dog demonstrating no prosocial behavior, if they were in the control condition. The results found that children exposed to the prosocial condition were more likely to help a puppy afterwards, when being given the chance to, compared to those in the control condition.
