Theme 1: definitions and theories of prosocial behaviour

What are the 3 dimensions of the 3 dimensional classifcation model by pearce and amato

• planned/formal - spontaneous/informal

• Serious - Not serious

• Direct - Indirect

What are the types of helping (Mcguire)

• casual helping

• substantial personal helping

• emotional helping

• emergency helping

Casual helping

Small favour

Substantial personal helping

E.g. helping a friend move

Emotional helping

e.g. helping a friend through a breakup

Latane and darley model

1. notice event

2. Interpret event as emergency

3. Taking personal

4. Know what to do

5. implement decision

Notice event (Latane and darley)

Ambiguous/unambiguous

Mood

Urban environment

Interpret event as emergency (latane and darley)

Are there clear signs of distress?

Take personal (darley and latane)

Bystander effect due to pluralistic ignorance and diffusion of responsibility

Know what to do (latane and darley)

People that are trained give better quality help but not more help

Cost benefit analysis

Minimize costs, maximize benefits

Theory of norm activation (schwartz) stages

Activation stage

obligation stage

defense stage

response stage

Activation stage (schwartz)

Aware of needs and that they can do something to help

Obligation stage (schwartz)

Feel moral obligation to help caused by personal norms

Defense stage (schwartz)

Assess costs and they might try to deny responsibility

Response stage (schwartz)

The person will act or not based on whether their defenses outweigh moral obligation

What are the 3 weaknesses of the norm activation theory

1. the number of norms is so enormous and vague that we could use them to explain almost anything

2. Norms may conflict with each other in situations like the social responsibility norm and the mind your business norm

3. It could be that we need a new norm for every new situation we are in

What are the three options when we choose to help someone from an egoistic perspective

1. Empathy-specific punishment

2. Empathy-specific reward

3. Aversive arousal reduction

Empathy-specific punishment

If we help, other witnesses won’t think negatively of us or we won’t think negatively of ourselves

Empathy-specific reward

If we help, maybe we will receive praise or reward from other people

Aversive arousal reduction

The elimination of the negative feelings caused by the situation

The negative state relief model

The idea that we help people to relieve ourselves from negative feelings

What was the research outcome for the experiment that supports the negative state relief model

Participants that were told their mood would improve by helping a student with her work were much more likely to offer help than participants who were told that their mood would not improve

Empathy-altruism model

the empathy we experirence motivates us to reduce the distress of the person in need by helping them

Empathy-altruism hypothesis

We do not help to reduce our distress but to reduce the distress of the person in need

What were the outcomes of the study supports the empathy altruism model

Dovidio repeated the study by cialdini but changed it slightly. The participants of the two conditons were given the opportunity to help the student with either the problem that caused the original empathy or any unrelated, different one. The participants in the high empathy condition only helped mroe when they could help with the original problem that caused the empathy

The empathetic-joy hypothesis

Compromise between the negative state relief model and the empathy altruism model

Emotional arousal leads us to help, however we behave in a way not to reduce our negative emotions but to experience the joy that helping brings us

Just world hypothesis

We want to believe in a world where people get what they deserve and deserve what they get

People are less likely to help when we think its their fault than when we believe its not their fault

What type of norms is schwartz’ theory of norm activation about

Personalized norms

Personalized norms

Relate to individual feelings

Social responsibility norms

We help people in need because we feel that they are dependent on us and we feel a social responsibility to help

Critique on social responsibility norm

People do not always offer to help in emergencies:

1. could be that not everyone has learned this norm, even tho the norm is claimed to be universal

2. It could be that individuals have learned multiple norms that conflict with one another

3. Another possibility is that the norms are too general to be applied in specific situations

Reciprocity norm

We feel obliged to help people that have previously helped us

Self-serving bias

We tend to see our prosocial behaviour as better than it is and the prosocial behaviour of others as less than it is

Socialized norms

Unwritten rules that tell us how we should behave in different situations

Audience inhibition

Adults are less likely to help people if there are other people present

What are the three ways that the learning view argues that kids learn prosocial behaviour in the same way as they learn other behaviours

1. parents and others rewarding prosocial behaviour with praise

2. Parents acting as prosocial models

3. Exposing children to other prosocial role models

Genetic determinism

We choose lovers and spouses who are genetically like us and therefore we are more likely to help people we see as genetically similar because we inhereted the assumption that this is the most effective way of making sure similar genes will survive

Kin selection

the survival of a genotype is more important than the survival of an individual

Inclusive fitness

It is not about the survival of the fittest individual but the survival of the fittest genes

paradox of altruism

it is a paradox because altruism shouldn’t naturally be selected but it still exists

Darwin’s evolutionary theory

behaviours that promote survival and reproduction are naturally selected, behaviours that are costly, like altruism, would therefore not be selected

Social psychology (according to McDougall)

Social behaviour is governed by a set of primary instincts which are linked to emotions

The parental instinct and the associated tender emotion are at the root of prosocial behaviour

Golden rule

do unto others as you would have others do unto you

Socrates

each person pursued that which was good (best interest)

plato

human beings will always be selfish to avoid pain and pursue pleasure and these base instincts can be prevented through means suchs as laws

Aristotle

Humans are noble, generous and good and humans are quite concerned about their relationships and therefore also with the wellbeing of others

Hobbes

Cooperation among humans can only be ensured by an outside agent who punishes transgressions, such as governments

Jean-Jacques Rousseau

Humans are inherently good but get corrupted by social institutions

Marx and Engels

Advocated for an ideal of everyone doing all they can possibly do for the well-being of a group, ultimately leading to everybody’s needs being satisfied

Any Rand

Egoistic approach, positing that the pursuit of one’s own self-interest is the highest form of morality