310 likes | 328 Views
Pro-social Behavior. Chapter 11. Altruism. Pro-social Behavior -benefits other people “Altruism” “True” altruism???. TYPES OF HELPING. EXAMPLES: SHORT-TERM, DIRECT , BEHAVIORAL, DANGER PRESENT Prevent other’s drowning Stopping a shoplifter SHORT-TERM, INDIRECT , BEHAVIORAL
E N D
Pro-social Behavior Chapter 11
Altruism • Pro-social Behavior -benefits other people • “Altruism” • “True” altruism???
TYPES OF HELPING • EXAMPLES: • SHORT-TERM, DIRECT, BEHAVIORAL, DANGER PRESENT • Prevent other’s drowning • Stopping a shoplifter • SHORT-TERM, INDIRECT, BEHAVIORAL • Call 911 • DIRECT RESPONSE WITHOUT DANGER • Giving up seats on a bus • Picking up dropped goods LONG VERSUS SHORT-TERM HELPING DIRECT VERSUS INDIRECT (COSTS) BEHAVIORAL, EMOTIONAL, OR INFORMATIONAL
D) RESPONSE TO A DIRECT REQUEST • Give some spare change • Let someone use your phone • Give directions • E) RETURNING LOST ARTICLES • Letters • Wallet • Money • F) LONG-TERM HELPING • Listen to a friend in need • Letting an elderly parent live with you • Reading to a child • Working on a help/hot line • Care for someone with a terminal disease • DONATIONS • Money, clothes, food, blood, organs, time Examples cont…
Evolutionary Theories • “Evolutionary Psychology” • “ The Selfish Gene” – Dawkins, 1976 • Kin Selection – helping genetic relatives - Burnstein, Crandall & Kitayama (1994) -more likely to help genetic relatives in life-threatening situation - Sime (1983) more likely to search for familty than friends in a building fire
Evolutionary Theories • “Reciprocity Norm” - “I’ll scratch your back, if…” -cooperation increases survival - Gratitude evolved as an emotion to regulate reciprocity - used frequently in fund campaigns
Group Selection • Controversial theory • Selection at group level • Imagine two villages at war….. - Group A (all selfish) - Group B (selfless warriors) -which group wins the war?
Social Exchange Theory • Social Psychology theory • Based on proximal self-interests • Maximizing gains/minimizing loss • Treats a relationship like an economy • Helping is socially rewarded • Example: helping a bystander relieves distress • People help when benefits outweigh the costs • Too cynical?
True Altruism? • Daniel Batson (1991): -Empathy Altruism Hypothesis • True altruism exists under certain circumstances • Key to true altruism is empathy • More likely to feel empathy to more similar others • See illustration on page 306
Individual Differences in Altruism • “Altruistic Personality?” - alone does not predict behavior - those with high scored not much more likely to help • Gender differences (western) - men…short term, heroic - women….long term help, volunteer work
Cultural Differences in Altruism • Simpatia…prominent in Spanish-speaking countries • Range of good-natured traits • Helping tends to be higher in many countries that value simpatia. (table, page 310) • Religious people not more likely to help in private situations.
Moods and Helping • “Feel good, do good.” - Isen and Levin (1972) - boosted shoppers moods with money - much more likely to help confederate after finding money: - 84% that found money helped - 4 % that did not find money helped
Moods and Helping • Good moods increase helping in 3 ways: - Looking on the bright side helps you give other the benefit of the doubt. - Helping prolongs a good mood. - Good moods make us pay more attention to ourselves.
Feel Bad, Do Good • Guilt leads to increases in helping behaviors. - idea of cancelling out bad deeds • Harris, Benson & Hall (1975) - parishioners more likely to donate to a charity before going to confession than after
Kitty Genovese Story (From New York Times, March 27th, 1964) 37 WhoSaw Murder Didn’t Call the Police Apathy at Stabbing of Queens Woman Shocks Inspector By Martin Gansberg For more than half an hour 38 respectable, law-abiding citizens in Queens watched a killer stalk and stab a woman in three separate attacks in Kew Gardens. Twice the sound of their voices and the sudden glow of their bedroom lights interrupted him and frightened him off, Each time he returned, sought her out and stabbed her again. Not one person telephoned the police during the assault; one witness called after the woman was dead. That was two weeks ago today. But Assistant Chief Inspector Frederick M. Lussen, in charge of the borough’s detectives and a veteran of 25 years of homicide investigations, is still shocked. He can give a matter-of-fact recitation of many murders. But the Kew Gardens slaying baffles him — not because it is a murder, but because the ‘good people’ failed to call the police. ‘As we have reconstructed the crime,’ he said, ‘the assailant had three chances to kill this woman during a 35-minute period. He returned twice to complete the job. If we had been called when he first attacked, the woman might not be dead now.’
‘He Stabbed Me!’ She got as far as a street light in front of a bookstore before the man grabbed her. She screamed. Lights went on in the 10-storey apartment house at 82—67 Austin Street, which faces the bookstore. Windows slid open and voices punctured the early-morning stillness. Miss Genovese screamed: ‘Oh, my God, he stabbed me! Please help me! Please help me!’ From one of the upper windows in the apartment house, a man called down: ‘Let that girl alone!’ The assailant looked up at him, shrugged and walked down Austin Street toward a white sedan parked a short distance away. Miss Genovese struggled to her feet. Lights went out. The killer returned to Miss Genovese, now trying to make her way around the side of the building by the parking lot to get to her apartment. The assailant grabbed her again. ‘I’m dying!’ she shrieked.
A City BusPassed Windows were opened again, and lights went on in many apartments. The assailant got into his car and drove away. Miss Genovese staggered to her feet. A city bus, Q-10, the Lefferts Boulevard line to Kennedy International Airport, passed. It was 3.35 am. The assailant returned. By then, Miss Genovese had crawled to the back of the building where the freshly painted brown doors to the apartment house held out hope of safety. The killer tried the first door; she wasn’t there. At the second door, 82—62 Austin Street, he saw her slumped on the floor at the foot of the stairs. He stabbed her a third time — fatally. It was 3.50 by the time the police received their first call, from a man who was a neighbor of Miss Genovese. In two minutes they were at the scene. The neighbor, a 70-year-old woman and another woman were the only persons on the street. Nobody else came forward. The man explained that he had called the police after much deliberation. He had phoned a friend in Nassau County for advice and then he had crossed the roof of the elderly woman to get her to make the call. ‘I didn’t want to get involved,’ he sheepishly told the police.
Suspect is Arrested Six days later, the police arrested Winston Moseley, a 29-year-old business-machine operator, and charged him with the homicide. Mosely had no previous record. He is married, has two children and owns a home at 133—19 Sutter Avenue, South Ozone Park, Queens. On Wednesday, a court committed him to Kings County Hospital for psychiatric observation. The police stressed how simple it would have been to get in touch with them. ‘A phone call,’ said one of the detectives, ‘would have done it.’ Today witnesses from the neighborhood, which is made up of one-family homes in the $35,000 to $60,000 range with the exception of the two apartment houses near the railroad station, find it difficult to explain why they didn’t call the police. Lieut. Bernard Jacobs, who handled the investigation by the detectives, said: ‘It is one of the better neighborhoods. There are few reports of crimes. You only get the usual complaints about boys playing or garbage cans being turned over.’ The police said most persons had told them they had been afraid to call, but had given meaningless answers when asked what they had feared. ‘We can understand the reticence of people to become involved in an area of violence,’ Lieutenant Jacobs said, ‘but where they are in their homes, near phones, why should they be afraid to call the police?’
He said that his men were able to piece together what happened — and capture the suspect — because the residents furnished all the information when detectives rang doorbells during the days following the slaying. ‘But why didn’t someone call us that night?’ he asked unbelievingly. Witnesses — some of them unable to believe what they had allowed to happen — told a reporter why. A housewife, knowingly if quite casual, said, ‘We thought it was a lovers’ quarrel’. A husband and wife both said, ‘Frankly, we were afraid’. They seemed aware of the fact that events might have been different. A distraught woman, wiping her hands in her apron, said, ‘I didn’t want my husband to get involved’. One couple, now willing to talk about that night, said they heard the first screams. The husband looked thoughtfully at the bookstore where the killer first grabbed Miss Genovese. ‘We went to the window to see what was happening,’ he said, ‘but the light from our bedroom made it difficult to see the street’. The wife, still apprehensive, added: ‘I put out the light and we were able to see better’. Asked why they hadn’t called the police, she shrugged and replied, ‘I don’t know’.
Latane and Darley’s model of Emergency Intervention (1970) What are the cognitive steps an individual must progress through before offering help in and emergency? No 1. Notice the emergency Don’t Help Yes No 2. Define the emergency Don’t Help Yes 3. Take responsibility No Don’t Help 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
Cumulative Percentages of Subjects Responding to an Epileptic Fit Under Different Conditions Does the bystander effect occur in an unambiguous emergency involving a suffering human victim? Latane and Daley (1970) had subjects communicate via a microphone with another student in a nearby room. Subjects believed there were no, one, or four other people listening in on the conversation. Partway through the experiment, the other student seemed to experience an epileptic seizure. The researchers observed how quickly subjects helped the victim ***As the next graph shows, subjects were more likely to help the victim of the seizure when they were the only person participating in the conversation. All subjects who believed that they were alone when they heard the seizure aided the victim within three minutes; however, not all subjects in the other two situations aided the victims.
“Diffusion of Responsibility” – Others Can Help 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 Cumulative Proportion Helping (%) Subject & Victim Subject, Victim & Stranger Subject, Victim & 4 Strangers 60 120 180 240 Time from Beginning of Fit (Seconds)
Cumulative Percentages of Subjects Responding in Different Conditions to Smoke Pouring into the Room What effect does the presence of other people have on our response to a possible emergency??? In this study by Latane and Darley (1970) subjects sat in a room either alone with two other subjects, or with two passive confederates. As they completed questionnaires, smoke began pouring into the room through an air vent. The researchers measured how quickly subjects sought help or reported the emergency. *** As the next graph shows, single subjects were much more likely to seek help, and they responded to the possible emergency more quickly.
“Pluralistic Ignorance” – Social Comparison Alone Three Naïve Subjects Two Passive Subjects 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 Cumulative Proportion Reporting Smoke (%) 1 2 3 4 5 6 Time from Start of Smoke Infusion (minutes)
Types of Relationships • Communal Relationships - based on concern for welfare - Clark & Mills (2007) - tend to help those in com. rel. • Exchange Relationships - based on equity - Tesser ( 1988) - more likely to help in this rel. under certain conditions (page 321)
Media and Helping • Greitmeyer Studies (page 320) - “Lemmings” vs “Tetris” - Lemmings players (prosocial) more likely to help - Prosocial song lyrics: more likely to help - increases feelings of empathy - increases thoughts about helping
Prosocial Lyrics & Romance? • Gueguen, Jacob & Lamy (2010) - French female college stud. - Waiting room: romantic or neutral song playing - later performed consumer taste test with male student rated as “average” - male asked for digits - 52 % yes (romantic cond.) - 30% yes (neutral cond. )
Increasing Helping • Increased awareness of factors that inhibit altruism • 1998 – Cornell university student prevent a suicide after remembering a class on the bystander effect. • Vasser college – student who witnessed a mugging and called police. Lots of other witnesses did nothing. Student had just taken Social Psychology.
Beaman (1978) • Social psych students encountered person on floor 2 weeks after receiving “bystander effect” lecture • Heard lecture : 43 % helped • No lecture: 25% helped
Positive Psychology • Martin Seligman • Shift of focus from pathology to health • Study of “Strength and Virtue” • Improving lives of humans • Mix of Clinical, Social Psych http://www.ted.com/talks/martin_seligman_on_the_state_of_psychology