Psychology 301 Social Psychology Lecture 24, Nov 27, 2008

1. Psychology 301Social Psychology Lecture 24, Nov 27, 2008 Prosocial Behaviour Instructor: Cherisse Seaton

2. Announcement: Psychology Program Information Session • There are changes to the Psychology Degree requirements starting May 2009 • This information session will explain the current requirements and the new requirements coming into effect in May 2009 • This information session will be useful for any students wondering if they should stay with the current Psychology requirements or switch to the new requirements • Amanda Hancock, Student Advisor for Psychology, and Dr. Paul Siakaluk, Acting Chair of Psychology, will answer questions

3. Psychology Program Information Session • The information sessions will be held on the following dates • Tuesday, December 2 from 10:00 – 11:30 am • Wednesday, December 3 from 11:00 am – 12:30 pm • Both sessions will be held in room 7-152

4. Free Will or Scientific Determinism: Do We Freely Choose Our Behaviour? A debate presented by: Tammy Klassen & Cherisse Seaton Thursday, November 27, 2008 4:00 PM - 5:30 in room 5-177

5. Overview • Last class! • Final section on prosocial behaviour • Latane and Darley’s intervention model • What factors influence whether or not people will help others? • Exam review • Course evaluations

6. Readings for this section • Aronson et al. Chapter 10

7. Review: The Bystander effect • Definition: • “the finding that the greater the number of bystanders who witness an emergency, the less likely any one of them is to help.” (p. 343) • As the number of bystanders witnessing an emergency increases, the likelihood of each bystander's responding decreases.

8. a.Pluralistic ignorance Greatly interferes with the interpretation of the event as an emergency and therefore reduces helping When we use other people’s behaviour to define the situation & assume that nothing is wrong (or needs to be done) because no one else looks concerned (e.g., smoke study) b. Diffusion of responsibility A decrease in our sense of obligation to help due to the presence of others. Mechanisms underlying the Bystander Effect:

9. Latane and Darley’s model of Emergency Intervention (1970) No Don’t Help 1. Notice the emergency Five step model of intervention Yes No Don’t Help 2. Define the emergency Yes No Don’t Help 3. Take responsibility Yes No 4. Decide on a way to help Don’t Help Yes 5. Implement a chosen way to help Don’t Help No Yes HELP

10. Darley/Latane Model of Helping • Bystander must perceive an emergency. • The unaware cannot act. • Bystander must interpret situation as an emergency. • Pluralistic ignorance: misinterpretation/inaction by many may stifle action. • Bystander assumes responsibility to act. • Must know what to do, show expertise. • Bystander must decide (and know how) to help. • Must assess costs and efficacy of routes. • Bystander actually does help. • Does not ensure effectiveness.

11. Step 1: Noticing • Piliavin et al. (1976) • More help when dramatic event witnessed rather than just aftermath of it. • Mathews & Canon (1975) • More help without stimulus-overload (cf. Milgram, 1970). • McMillen et al. (1977) • More help when in an ‘externally-attentive’ good mood than in a ‘self-absorbed’ bad one.

12. Step 1: Noticing • Noticing and Defining the Situation • What determines if the situation will be noticed and defined correctly? • A cry for help

13. Step 1: Noticing • Yakimovich and Salz (1971) • Participants complete a survey in a room on the second floor of a building. • A window washer on a ladder falls. • In half the cases, he cries out for help. • How many participants come to his aid?

14. Step 1: Noticing

15. Step 2: Interpreting • Latané & Darley (1968) • Pluralistic ignorance can lead to reduced probability of an individual helping when in the presence of others and exposed to an ambiguous need for help. • Clark & Word (1972) • When the need is not ambiguous, the presence of others has no effect on helping levels. • Staub (1974) • The cues others give can reduce or increase the probability of an individual bystander giving help.

16. Step 2: Interpreting • Ambiguity: Does this man need help, or is he taking a nap?

17. Step 3: Taking personal responsibility • Latané & Darley (1968) • The chances of any given participant helping decrease as the number of observers seemingly increased. • Diffusion of responsibility - Taking less personal responsibility because one believes that others will (or should) provide help. • Bickman (1971) • Responsibility not diffused when co-witnesses are clearly not able to help. • Moriarty (1975) • Responsibility not diffused when specifically attached to a bystander. • ie. Someone directly requests them to help or points them out in a crowd.

18. Steps 4 & 5: Choosing how to help, and Acting • Knowing what is required, and having the skills to help • E.g., CPR training

19. Steps 4 & 5: Choosing how to help, and Acting • Shotland & Heinold (1985) • College students trained in first-aid were not more likely to help someone with profuse arterial bleeding. • They were, however, much more likely to do the right thing! • Sometimes the most helpful thing one can do is not provide direct assistance (cf. overhelping, Gilbert & Silvera, 1996). • Which of course adds to the ambiguity of whether and what help is need.

20. Factors that influence helping • Norm of Reciprocity • Nature of the relationship • In exchange relationships, people are concerned with: • Equity • Keeping track of who is contributing what to the relationship • In communal relationships, people are concerned: • Less with who gets what, and • More with how much help the other person needs

21. Factors that influence helping • Social Norms • “Mind your own business” • Shotland and Straw (1976) • Staged an attack of a woman by a man in a public place • In one condition, the woman yelled: “I don’t know you” • In the other she yelled: “I don’t know why I married you”

22. Results

23. Factors that influence helping • Social Norms • Norm of Social Justice • We should help others when they deserve it • Bickman & Kamzan (1973) • Female confederate begged for money to buy things at the grocery store • Money for milk • Money for chilled cookie dough • Milk money beggars more likely to receive money

24. Factors that influence helping • Assessment of the victim’s responsibility for the situation: • If the victim is perceived to be the cause of their situation, people are less motivated to help. • Controllability • From Attribution theory: if we believe a person had no control over the situation we view them as more deserving of help. • Uncontrollable sympathy and pity • Controllable anger and irritation.

25. Factors that influence helping • Controllability • Responsibility: We help those who are not responsible for their plight. • Pilliavin, Rodin and Pilliavin (1969) staged an emergency on a subway train: A confederate collapses. In some cases, the confederate is reeking of alcohol. Who helps?

26. Controllability & Responsibility

27. Influences on Prosocial Behavior: Characteristics of Help Recipient • “Deservingness”: Responsibility is assigned to victims in varying degrees. • Weiner et al. - Reason why patient has AIDS (e.g., sex vs. blood transfusion)

28. Other characteristics of the help recipient • Attractiveness/likeability • Similarity to help-giver • Personal style • Political views • Race/ethnicity • We help those who are similar to us. • Empathy?

29. Other characteristics of the help recipient • Victim Responses to Being Helped • Another reason that bystanders may be hesitant to help is that victims are sometimes resentful. Accepting help from others can be embarrassing and lower self-esteem because it implies that the recipient is less capable or competent. • Even if we accept responsibility and know what to do, we may fail to help because it is too costly. • Fear of embarrassment • Fear of punishment • Fear a negative response from others

30. How can we increase helping? • Reduce the ambiguity • Enhance feelings of personal responsibility • Teach norms supporting helpful behaviour • Increasing Awareness of the Barriers to Helping

31. Increasing helping in children • Rewards and models • In order to encourage prosocial behaviour, parents and others can: • Reward prosocial acts with praise, smiles, and hugs. • Behave prosocially themselves to represent a model of those behaviours for the children.

32. Reward & Punishment on Children’s Helping Behaviour (Hogg & Vaughan 2005)

33. Increasing helping in general • Increasing Awareness of the Barriers to Helping • Teaching people about the determinants of prosocial behaviour: • Makes them more aware of why they sometimes don’t help • Leads them to help more in the future.

34. Increasing helping • Beaman, Barnes, Klentx, and Mcquirk (1978) • Half the class heard lecture on the Bystander effect; half a control ‘lecture’ • Male confederate appears to be injured in a bicycle accident • Second confederate apathetic – a non-reactive bystander

35. Results

36. Conclusion • The situations we find ourselves in can have powerful effects of our behaviour • Knowledge of situational influences can help us overcome them • “Sensitizing persons to social forces in the environment gives them greater freedom to control their own behavior.” (Beaman et al, 1978, p. 410) • Not only the bystander effect, but many other ‘situational influences’ • E.g., Knowing about groupthink & implementing effective preventative measures

37. Final Exam • Friday December 5th • Room: 7-238 • 9:00 am to 12:00 pm

38. Exam Review • Non-cumulative: Only topics 5, 6, 7, & 8 chapters 7, 8, 9, & 10 • Roughly equal coverage of sections covered (including today!) • Most questions on material that was covered in BOTH text & lectures • 2nd most from material covered only in class • Also a minority of questions from text ALONE (not covered in class)

39. Exam Review • Exam format – lecture and text material (not paper topics) • Multiple choice • Definitions • Short answer • Long answer

40. Conformity Social Influence *Conformity *Compliance *Obedience *Social Norms *Informational social influence *Normative social influence Groups: Group *Social roles *Social facilitation Social Loafing *Groupthink Process loss *Group polarization *Social dilemmas *Tragedy of the commons *Diffusion of responsibility Definitions 6-8 worth 1 pt each. Only taken from those presented in lectures (not text):

41. Attraction & Relationships *The propinquity effect *Functional distance The mere exposure effect or Frequency of exposure Reciprocal-liking Similarity Attributions The fundamental attribution error *Positive illusions *Companionate love *Passionate love Prosocial Behaviour *Kin selection *Norm of reciprocity *Empathy *Empathy-altruism hypothesis *The altruistic personality *The bystander effect Pluralistic ignorance Definitions

42. Short Answer • Use ‘evidence-based reasoning’ to aswer short and long answer questions. • Sometimes asking directly about the material • E.g., “describe the three components of Latane’s Social Impact Theory ” (3pts) • Sometimes asking you to extrapolate past the material using examples • E.g., “Your date takes you to a horror movie on Halloween. You were scared out of your mind. Prior to this date you weren’t very optimistic about this relationship, but you find that you are much more attracted to this person than you first thought. How does Schacter’s theory of emotion explain your new feelings toward this person?” (3pts)

43. Long answer • Same as short answer, but longer/ worth more points. • Example Exam question: • “In research conducted by Batson and colleagues, participants are typically found to be more motivated to help if they are placed in a condition of “high empathy”. Define “empathy” and describe Batson’s Empathy-altruism hypothesis. Explain generally how Cialdini et al.’s (1987) research using the pseudo Milgram situation generally supports an egoistically based interpretation of helping under conditions of high empathy (ie. how their research indicates that even high empathy subjects may still in fact be selfishly motivated)?” (5pts)

44. Course evaluations • Please take the remaining time to fill out course evaluations. • Good luck on your final exam(s)! • Thank you and have a good holiday!!!