Ch. 12 - Helping

Altruism

a motive to increase another’s welfare without conscious regard for one’s own self-interests

• Each view of altruism proposes two types of prosocial behavior

  • Tit-for-tat reciprocal exchange

  • More unconditional helpfulness

• Each view is also vulnerable to charges of being speculative and after the fact

• Each, however, offers a broad perspective that illuminates both enduring commitments and spontaneous help

paradox of altruism

behaviorism, freudianism, darwinism all viewed people as inherently egoistic

• Ex: natural selection “will never produce anything in an organism that is injurious to itself, for natural selection acts solely by and for the good of each”

Social-exchange theory

the theory that human interactions are transactions that aim to maximize one’s rewards and minimize one’s costs

• Does not contend that we consciously monitor costs and rewards, only that such considerations predict our behavior 

Reciprocity norm

an expectation that people will help, not hurt, those who have helped them

• Helps define the social capital—the mutual support and cooperation enabled by a social network—that keeps a community healthy

Social responsibility norm

An expectation that people will help those needing help

• Women offer help equally to males and females, whereas men offer more help when the persons in need are females

  • Perhaps not surprisingly, men more frequently help attractive than unattractive women

• Women receive more offers of help in certain situations and also seek more help

  • They more often welcome help from friends

Kin selection

the idea that evolution has selected altruism toward one’s close relatives to enhance the survival of mutually shared genes

• Being nice to those who share one’s genetic material

• cannot explain being nice to strangers (which does happen)

When will we help?

• We do tend to help when someone else does so

  • Prosocial models promote altruism

• Time pressures affect whether people help

  • When hurried, preoccupied, and rushing, people often do not take time to tune in to a person in need

• Because similarity is conducive to liking, and liking is conducive to helping, we are more empathetic and helpful toward those who are similar to us

  • Where racial similarity is concerned, reactions may be affected by the desire to not appear prejudiced

• Internal influences on the decision to help include guilt and mood

• External influences includes social norms, number of bystanders, time pressures, and similarity

How do attributions matter for social norms?

Attributions (internal vs external reason for help needed) matter for social norms

• External attribution → people more likely to be altruistic

• Internal attributions → people less likely to be altruistic

Decision-tree model of bystander intervention (Latene & Darley, 1970)

Steps 1 and 2: Noticing and Interpreting (Latane & Darley, 1968)

• Normative influence - pressure not to “freak out” when others can see you; need clear proof it’s an emergency

• Informational influence - pluralistic ignorance = everyone ignorant of others’ thoughts

• More ppl = lower probability of noticing and interpreting emergencies → lower helping

Step 3: Assuming Responsibility (Moriarty, 1975)

• Trip to the beach → confederate lays down towel and radio next to participant on beach → either just leaves or asks participant, “would you watch my things?”

• Second confederate walks by and takes radio

• DV = % stopping theft (when asked, more people stopped it)

First Aid Training Study (Schwartz & Clausen, 1970)

• Epileptic seizure situation

• Half given first aid training prior to emergency and half given no training

• DV = % helping 

• When trained, more gave help than non-trained 

From Jerusalem to Jericho (Darley & Batson, 1973)

• Inspired by parable of the Good Samaritan

• Seminary students asks to give lecture on either “careers for ministers” or “parable of the good samaritan”

• Told either “you’re late” or “you have plenty of time”

• On way to campus, come upon a man in distress

• DV = % stopping to help

• 70% of those not in a hurry helped, only 10% in a hurry helped 

Bystander effect

the finding that a person is less likely to provide help when there are other bystanders

Researchers’ twofold ethical obligation

• Protect the participants

• Enhance human welfare by discovering influences upon human behavior—altering us to unwanted influences and showing us how we might exert positive influences

Personality traits and status

• Attitudes and trait measures seldom predict a specific act; but they can predict average behaviors

  • Individual differences in helpfulness persist over time and are noticed by one’s peers

  • Network of traits—positive emotionality, empathy, and self-efficacy—predisposes a person to helpfulness

  • Personality influences how people react to particular situations—such as whether they are attuned to others’ expectations

• Status and social class also affect altruism

Gender differences in helping

• When faced with potentially dangerous situations, men more often help

• In safer situations, women are slightly more likely to help

  • Women are more likely to describe themselves as helpful

  • Faced with a friend’s problem, women respond with greater empathy and spend more time helping

  • Women tend to be more generous 

Religious differences in helping

• Although often associated with opposition to gov’t assistance such as support for the poor, religiosity also promotes prosocial values

  • Christianity, Islam, Hinduism, and Buddhism all teach compassion and charity

  • Highly religious people report markedly higher than averages rates of charitable giving, volunteerism, and helping a stranger

• Prosocial effects of religiosity appear to be strongest in countries in which religious behavior is a matter of personal choice 

How can we increase helping?

One way to promote altruism is to reverse those factors that inhibit it

• Reduce ambiguity, increase responsibility

• Awaken people’s guilt and concern for their self-image

• Socialize altruism

Guilt and concern for self-image

• People who feel guilty will act to reduce guilt and restore their self-worth

  • Guilt-inducing messages on signs

  • Asking for contributions so small that people can’t say no

• Labeling people as helpful can also strengthen a helpful self-image and influence their willingness to contribute

Moral exclusion

the perception of certain individuals or groups as outside the boundary within which one applies moral values and rules of fairness

• Moral inclusion is regarding others as within one’s circle of moral concern

• First step in socializing altruism is therefore to counter people’s natural ingroup bias