prosocial behaviour and morality

prosocial behaviour

acts that generally benefit others, typically helping behaviours

social motives

helping for group identity, norms, values, social worth, and social rewards

prosocial behaviour

expressing gratitude for reviewing a cover letter led to more what

personal motives

helping to relieve feelings of discomfort or personal distress

direct benefit

something such as a tax break or alleviation of emotional arrousal is an example of what factor of a personal motive

empathetic concern

helping due to understanding of another persons circumstances or for their perceived similarities, even minor ones such as similar dress

system 1 - prosocial intuition

result from Rand et al. study, people have an automatic tendency to care about others, with this response dominating under time pressure

cooperation

learned social heuristic from everyday life; it is often rewarded with the social norm of fairness internalized

system 2 - strategic override

result from Rand et al. study. With time, people calculate personal payoff and override intuitive care for others

diffusion of responsibility

witnesses in a large group assume someone else will act

pluralistic ignorance

people look to others for cues, and if no one reacts, the situation is interpreted as non-emergency

Kitty Genovese case

what directly inspired Darley’s study on Bystander Intervention

• help

• act quickest

in the bystander intervention study, participants who were alone when hearing the distressed cries were more likely to

• not help

• take a long time to respond

in the bystander intervention study, participants who were in a group when hearing the distressed cries were likely to

social context

the urge to help others while in public is shaped by what

• noticing the event

• recognizing help is needed

• deciding to take personal responsibility

• deciding how to help

decision to help in an emergency situation depends on what

slow and less concerned

despite the risk of harm in the smoke filled room scenario, those who were paired with others acted

• 75% reported smoke

• 5 seconds to notice and report

when alone in the smoke study, how participants reported and noticed the smoke

• 10% reported

• 20 seconds to notice

when grouped together in the smoke study, people reported and noticed smoke when

attention diffusion

with more people, attention is spread out. This causes the assumption that others are monitoring the situation and people become less vigilant

rural

people in what kind of population settings are more prosocial and respond to requests for help

50,000

population size matters in prosocial behaviour, with it decreasing as population increases. This plateaus at what population number

greater

in terms of proportional giving, lower SES individuals give a ——percentage of their income to others compared to high SES individuals

empathetic

people in lower SES situations have greater —- concern due to their reliance on social networks and sensitivity to need

just as, or more generous as lower SES

when compassion or empathy was experimentally induced, wealthier participants became what

moral intuitions

moral judgements are driven primarily by —-, not deliberate reasoning

after

reasoning comes —- a judgement is made

system 1

moral intuitions, which are emotionally charged and largely unconscious are connected to which system

• culture

• social norms

• emotions

moral intuitions are shaped by

system 2

moral reasoning, which is slow, effortful and conscious, connects to which system

• persuade others

• maintain social relationships

moral reasoning is used to

deliberate reasoning

Greene argues that —— can directly influence moral decisions, not just justify them afterward

emotion and reason

Greene believed that morality was a competition between what

• anthropological

• philosophical

• psychological

• evolutionary

foundations are built on what morality relevant evidence

harm

What factor asses whether or not someone cared for someone weak or vulnerable

fairness

what factor asses whether or not someone acted unfairly

Ingroup

what factor asses whether or not someone’s action showed love for his or her country

authority

what factor asses whether or not someone showed a lack of respect for authority

purity

what factor asses whether or not someone violated standards of purity and decency

commitment device

A product, promise, or system, that binds you to some future outcome or activity

• helps bypass or reduce role of System 1 impulses
• helps resolve the tension between present and the future self

willpower

tendency to attain our controlled, System 2 goals, while trying to suppress our automatic, System 1 urges

present bias

we prefer good things now, postpone bad things for the future

present bias declines with what two factors

• magnitude

• time

cognitive load

When our System 2 is busy, we are more likely to give in to immediate rewards, especially for those that are more impulsive