Evaluate two theories explaining altruism

1. Evaluate two theories explaining altruism

2. Prisoner’s Dilemma • Play a game of ‘Prisoner’s Dilemma’ • http://serendip.brynmawr.edu/bb/pd.html

3. Remind the person next to you what altruism is.

4. How does altruism fit into Darwin’s idea of ‘survival of the fittest’?

5. Course Companion page 259 • “Altruism is a rather puzzling behaviour. It does not appear to make much sense that an individual would risk his or her life for a stranger.” Course Companion

6. Two theories of Altruism • Psychologists believe there are two types of altruism:

7. Two theories of Altruism • Psychologists believe there are two types of altruism: • Biological altruism (with its roots in evolutionary psychology), and

8. Two theories of Altruism • Psychologists believe there are two types of altruism: • Biological altruism (with its roots in evolutionary psychology), and • Psychological altruism (based more on cognitive psychology)

9. Two theories of Altruism

10. Biological Altruism • Is altruism innate or a learned behaviour? • (Nature or nurture?) • At what age to humans start to help each other?

11. Biological Altruism

12. Kin Selection Theory • Richard Dawkin’s (1976) ‘selfish gene theory’ implies that there is an innate drive for the survival of one’s genes. In his controversial book he claimed that it is our genes which compete for survival and propagation rather than individuals.

13. Kin Selection Theory • Richard Dawkin’s (1976) ‘selfish gene theory’ implies that there is an innate drive for the survival of one’s genes. In his controversial book he claimed that it is our genes which compete for survival and propagation rather than individuals. • Kin selection theory predicts that the extent of altruism depends on genetic relatedness.

14. Kin Selection Theory • In a house fire, who would you save first, your brother/sister or your neighbour?

15. Kin Selection Theory • If our sole purpose in life is to pass on our genes, why do we live so long? • That is, why do humans live way beyond their reproductive years?

16. Kin Selection Theory

17. Reciprocal Altruism Theory • Trivers (1971) suggested this theory in order to explain why people behave altruistically to those who are not genetically related. • With the person next to you, try to work out what is meant by Reciprocal Altruism Theory

18. Reciprocal Altruism Theory It may benefit an animal to behave altruistically if there’s an expectation that the favour will be returned at some point in the future. • definition

19. Reciprocal Altruism Theory • Trivers suggested that altruism can benefit the helper, regardless of genetic relatedness to the recipient. • If A helps B, (as long as B remembers), there is a chance that B will return the favour to A in the future. This would benefit both A and B, thus altruism has survivial benefits.

20. Reciprocal Altruism: Prisoner’s Dilemma Axelrod & Hamilton (1981) • Criminals A and B commit a crime together

21. Reciprocal Altruism: Prisoner’s Dilemma • Criminals A and B commit a crime together • They are caught by the police and are interviewed separately

22. Reciprocal Altruism: Prisoner’s Dilemma • Criminals A and B commit a crime together • They are caught by the police and are interviewed separately • They both know that without the testimony of the other, there is not enough evidence to imprison them for more than a year

23. Reciprocal Altruism: Prisoner’s Dilemma • Criminals A and B commit a crime together • They are caught by the police and are interviewed separately • They both know that without the testimony of the other, there is not enough evidence to imprison them for more than a year. • However, they also know that if they collaborate with the police and blame the other one, the other would go to prison for 20 years, but they would go free.

24. Reciprocal Altruism: Prisoner’s Dilemma

25. Reciprocal Altruism Theory • Axelrod and Hamilton (1981) tested their theory of reciprocal altruism using a game based on the ‘prisoner’s dilemma’.

26. Reciprocal Altruism Theory • Axelrod and Hamilton (1981) tested their theory of reciprocal altruism using a game based on the ‘prisoner’s dilemma’. • If both players cooperate, they both gain, but if they both defect there is no pay off for either of them.

27. Reciprocal Altruism Theory • Axelrod and Hamilton (1981) tested their theory of reciprocal altruism using a game based on the ‘prisoner’s dilemma’. • If both players cooperate, they both gain, but if they both defect there is no pay off for either of them. • If the players only play against each other once, what is the best strategy?

28. Reciprocal Altruism Theory • Axelrod and Hamilton (1981) tested their theory of reciprocal altruism using a game based on the ‘prisoner’s dilemma’. • If both players cooperate, they both gain, but if they both defect there is no pay off for either of them. • If the players only play against each other once, what is the best strategy? • What if the players had to play against each other many times?

29. Reciprocal Altruism Theory Axelrod & Hamilton found that a ‘tit for tat’ strategy used in this game demonstrated cooperative behaviour. They argue that this kind of cooperation is evolutionarily adaptive.

30. Evolutionary explanations of altruism • Re-read pages 258-261 of the course companion • Read ‘The kin selection hypothesis’ section of Pearson (p255-256) • Also read page 16 of Pro-Social and Anti-Social Behaviour (Routledge) • Write detailed notes (about 200 words) on: • The evolutionary explanations of altruism, explaining kin selection theory and reciprocal altruism theory. • (You will be adding to these notes later when we have discussed psychological explanantions of altruism.)

31. Psychological explanations of altruism • Discuss this issue with the person next to you: • Why do we give money to beggars? (How many reasons can you think of?)

32. Not Waving But Drowning

33. Psychological explanations of altruism • Where biological explanations of altruism can be seen in many animals, psychological explanations of altruism are witnessed only in higher-level mammals.

34. Psychological explanations of altruism • Where biological explanations of altruism can be seen in many animals, psychological explanations of altruism are witnessed only in higher-level mammals. • While biological explanations of altruism occur almost automatically, psychological explanations of altruism arise as a result of cognition. That is, this type of altruism relies on the ‘helper’ understanding the situation. This kind of altruism is not innate.

35. Negative-state relief model • When encountering a homeless person asking for money, we can either: • Give them some money or • Walk away

36. Negative-state relief model • Schaller and Cialdini (1988) proposed the negative-state relief model. • Pro-social behaviour results from egoism rather than altruism. • We help others in order to relieve the stress we feel when encountering a bad situation. • This model also explains why people walk away. Walking away also alleviates distress.

37. Negative-state relief model • This model does explain some behaviour, however feelings of distress do not always lead to helping behaviour.

38. Negative-state relief model • This model does explain some behaviour, however feelings of distress do not always lead to helping behaviour. • Neither does this model predict how people will behave – will they help, or walk away?

39. Empathy-altruism model • Batson disagrees with the notion that we only help to relieve negative feelings. • Batson et al (1981) suggests that people experience two kinds of emotion when they see suffering.

40. Empathy-altruism model

41. Empathy-altruism model • According to Batson, if you feel empathy towards a person, you will help, regardless of what you may gain from it. • Relieving suffering becomes the most important thing. • If a person feels no empathy, then they would consider the costs and benefits before making the decision to help.

42. Empathy-altruism model • The empathy-altruism hypothesis has been tested empirically many times, in order to distinguish it from egoist hypotheses (e.g. Schaller and Cialdini’s ‘negative-state relief’ model). • It is, however, very difficult to determine from observed behaviour, whether someone is acting out of empathy or to relieve distress.

43. Empathy-altruism model:Batson et al (1981) • Students were asked to listen to recording of a student called Carol, talking about an accident where she broke both of her legs, the struggles she was having and how she was having difficulty keeping up with her school work.

44. Empathy-altruism model:Batson et al (1981) • Students asked to listen to recording of a student called Carol, talking about an accident where she broke both of her legs, the struggles she was having and how she was having difficulty keeping up with her school work. The students were divided into two groups: low empathy and high empathy.

45. Empathy-altruism model:Batson et al (1981) • Students asked to listen to recording of a student called Carol, talking about an accident where she broke both of her legs, the struggles she was having and how she was having difficulty keeping up with her school work. The students were divided into two groups: low empathy and high empathy. The students were then given a letter, asking them to meet up with Carol and share their lecture notes with her.

46. Empathy-altruism model:Batson et al (1981) • Some participants were told that Carol would be finishing her studies from home. • Another group were told that she would be in their class when she returned to school. With another student, sketch a quick table / diagram of the different conditions that the participants were in

47. Empathy-altruism model:Batson et al (1981)

48. Empathy-altruism model:Batson et al (1981) • Which group do you think would be more likely to share their notes with Carol?

49. Empathy-altruism model:Batson et al (1981) • Findings: • Participants from the high empathy group were almost equally likely to help Carol, whether she would be in their class or not. • Participants from the low empathy group were more likely to help if they thought Carol would be in their class. • What does this suggest?

50. Empathy-altruism model:Batson et al (1981) • The results of this experiment confirm the empathy-altruism model. • When participants had listened to the recording of Carol with empathy, they were (almost) just as likely to want to help her, whether it was in their best interest (i.e. she would be in their class) or not.