Prosocial Behaviour

Prosocial Behaviour • November 20th, 2009 : Lecture 21

Lecture Overview • Announcements • Finishing up TV and Violence • Co-operative Dilemmas • Prosocial Behaviour • How Do We Help? • When Do We Help? • Why Do We Help?

Announcements • No Office Hours next Wednesday (11/25) • No Lecture next Friday (11/27)

TV and Violence • Eron & Huesmann (1986) • Results: • Violent TV watching at age 8 predicted: • Aggression at age 19 • Criminal acts of violence (rape, robberies, assault) at age 30 • Controlled for aggression at age 8

Moderating Factors in TV-Aggression Link • Model Similarity • Punishment versus Reward • Apparent Reality • Cartoons influence aggression less than film • Apparent consequences • Modelling more likely when pain/harm caused by violence is not depicted

How Does TV Affect Aggression? • Imparts information about how to aggress • Primes anger and aggression • Makes world seem more dangerous, increases fear of victimization (Gerbner et al., 1994) • Heavy viewers tend to overestimate frequency of violent crime, probability of being assaulted • Loosens inhibitions toward violence

Food For Thought • “An angry person can pull the trigger of his gun if he wants to commit violence, but the trigger can also pull the finger …” • - Leonard Berkowitz

Co-operative Dilemmas • Situations where the most beneficial action for an individual will be harmful for the collective group • Commonly discussed social dilemmas: • Escalation of Conflict • Tragedy of the Commons • Prisoner’s Dilemma

Escalation of Conflict • Interpersonal conflict feeds itself and escalates if one side does not begin concession

Escalation of Conflict in Close Relationships • Stimulus:Partner A comes home and snaps at Partner B • Partner B’s Response: • An equally hurtful remark • Partner B is vindicated, but Partner A feels compelled to respond with an equally vehement remark • Conflict escalates • A defusing remark • Partner B takes a hit in pride, but Partner Ahas no reason to say another hurtful remark • Conflict defuses

Escalation of Conflict in International Relations • Stimulus:Country A accidentally bombs a civilian area of Country B during a training exercise • Country B’s Response: • Bomb them back • Country B is vindicated, but they are now at war with Country A • Accept apology • Country B takes a hit in many ways, but they maintain peaceful relations with Country A

Tragedy of the Commons • A co-operative dilemma in which everyone takes from a common pool of goods that will replenish itself if used in moderation but disappear if overused

Tragedy of the Commons • Why do we take more than our share? • Anchoring and Adjustment Heuristic • Desired share is used as an anchor • Do not sufficiently adjust down • Size of commons is not readily estimable

Tragedy of the Commons • When do we take our fair share? • Both the size of the commons and the group that is sharing it are easily determined • The size of an equal share is explicitly stated

The Prisoner’s Dilemma • A situation where two people must make a collectively-dependent decision without knowing the other person’s decision • A special case of John Nash’s Game Theory

The Prisoner’s Dilemma Prisoner B 1 Year Parole 1 Year Life Prisoner A Life 20 Years Parole 20 Years

The Prisoner’s Dilemma • Strategies that maximize outcomes: • Winner: Simple Tit-for-Tat strategy • Co-operate on first round • Then mirror opponent’s response • Defect as soon as opponent defects • When game is about to end (last trial): • Defect

Prosocial Behaviour • Action performed with the goal of benefiting another person

Altruism • Helping done purely out of a desire to help another person • Does not benefit the self • May even involve a cost to the self

Altruism : Examples • In 1982, Anne Herbert coined the phrase, “Random Acts of Kindness” • Idea is to do random kind acts for others with no intention of being repaid • Paying tolls for others • Shovelling snow for neighbours, anonymously

Altruistic Personality • Dispositional tendency to help others across a wide variety of situations

Are Some More Altruistic Than Others? • Hartshorne & May (1929) • Method: • Observed prosocial behaviours of 10,850 school children • Focus on behaviours across a number of situations

Are Some More Altruistic Than Others? • Hartshorne & May (1929) • Results: • Most children helped occasionally • Average correlation between helping in two different situations was .23

Are Some More Altruistic Than Others? • Summary of Hartshorne & May (1929): • Most children help, but it depends on the situation • Also, self-report measures of altruism typically do not predict actual altruistic behaviour

How Do People Help? • McGuire (1994) • Method: • Surveyed 2 sample of college students for types of helping both given and received • First sample received only open-ended questions • Second sample rated the first sample’s responses on frequency, importance, causes, and consequences • Factor analysed data

How Do People Help? • McGuire (1994) • Results: Factor Analysis revealed 4 dimensions of helping • Casual helping • Substantial helping • Emotional helping • Emergency helping

How Do People Help? • McGuire (1994) • Results: Casual Helping • Helping with a homework assignment or schoolwork • Lending a book, notes, record album, household item • Giving a ride within the city • Giving directions • Opening or holding a door • Giving someone a snack

How Do People Help? • McGuire (1994) • Results: Substantial Personal Helping • Bringing or sending flowers, a card, or a small gift • Giving a ride a long distance (greater than 20 miles) • Helping someone pack or move • Visiting someone from out of town

How Do People Help? • McGuire (1994) • Results: Emotional helping • Listening to someone talk through a problem • Giving advice about a situation someone is in • "Being there" for someone; providing loyalty

How Do People Help? • McGuire (1994) • Results: Emergency helping • Starting a car or changing a tire for someone • Taking care of someone who is sick • Walking someone home at night

When Do We Help? • The situation can influence whether we will help another person (Altruism) or not (Bystander Apathy)

When Do We Help? • Situational Factors in Helping: • Mood • Spare time • Environment • Number of Bystanders • Relationship with Person In Need

Mood • Mood affects helping behaviour • Good news: • Both good and bad moods increase helping relative to neutral mood

Positive Mood & Helping • Isen & Levin (1972) • Method: • Participants were random shoppers at a shopping mall • Positive mood induced or not: • Positive mood induction: Left a dime in a pay phone • Control: No dime • Observe other person drop papers after leaving phone booth

Positive Mood & Helping • Isen & Levin (1972) • Results: How many people helped pick up the person’s papers?

Why Positive Mood? • More likely to make positive attributions for others’ behaviour and give them the benefit of the doubt • Helping helps us maintain good mood • Good moods increase self-attention, so we act more consistently with our values

Negative Mood & Helping • Negative State Relief • When we feel bad, we are more likely to help

Spare Time • We help less when we feel rushed for time

Good Samaritan Study • Darley & Batson (1973) • Method: • Ps were Princeton theology students, told it was a study about persuasion • Ps first spent 10 minutes preparing a sermon on the Good Samaritan, which they will give to an audience at another building on campus • Hurry manipulation: Experimenter says ... • Not in hurry: “You will have enough time to get there” • Moderate hurry: “You will have just enough time to get there” • High hurry/Late: “You will be late” • On the way to talk, pass hurting confederate

Good Samaritan Study • Darley & Batson (1973) • Results: % of Theology Students Who Stopped to Help

Environment • Urban versus Rural Environments • Do you think you are more likely to be helped if: • You fall down and break a leg in the middle of the Annex • You fall down and break a leg in the middle of Grimsby • Equally likely to get help in either place

Urban vs. Rural • Why Would You Get More Help in Rural Environments? • Rural values: Rural people are more likely to help • Immediate Context: Rural environment facilitates helping • A little of both

Urban Overload Hypothesis • Urban environments constantly bombard you with stimulation, so you keep to yourself to avoid being overwhelmed by it • Evidence: • Where an incident occurs is more important than where the witnesses grew up • City density more important than city size

Bystander Apathy • March 13, 1964 • Kitty Genovese stabbed to death crossing a parking lot while returning from work late at night • Murder took place over 30 minutes • At least 38 independent witnesses • No one called the police for help

Bystander Apathy Effect • The greater the number of bystanders who witness an emergency, the less likely that any one of them is to help

Bystander Apathy • Latané & Darley (1970) • Method: • Participants discussed “college life” over headphones • Group size manipulation: • Lone witness: 1 Participant + 1 Confederate • Two witnesses: 2 Participants + 1 Confederate • Four witnesses: 4 Participants + 1 Confederate • During the discussion, the actor fakes a seizure

Bystander Apathy • Latané & Darley (1970) • Results: How many people helped?

Why Does This Happen? • Pluralistic Ignorance • Diffusion of Responsibility

Pluralistic Ignorance • Bystanders assume that nothing is wrong in an emergency because no one else looks concerned

Smoking Room Study

Prosocial Behaviour