Chapter 11: Prosocial Behavior

Chapter 11: Prosocial Behavior 


Prosocial Behavior: any act performed with the goal of benefiting someone else. 


Evolutionary Perspective: 

  • Kin selection: beings will help others of their kind to make sure there is net gained. Genetic material will get passed on. (rabbits if one goes down most will survive) 

    • Burstein Study, 1994: participants come in and answer scenario questions about someone who needs help. They answer the likelihood that the participants will help that “person” based on scenarios. Vary what kind of help is needed, (loss of life, fire) or  (smaller tasks, helping a person cross the street) or (who needs help, related to the genetic basis, sibling, fam members) 

      • Results: you will help someone who is related to you rather than not, especially if there is a loss of life. (same in United States and Japan) 

      • Most likely to help the young vs. the old. 


Reciprocal Altruism: people will help others because it increases the odds that they will receive help in return. 


Social Exchange: a person doing a quick mental calculus to see if helping will benefit them. (wishing someone will choke so doing Heimlich makes you look like a hero) 

  • Rewards for helping: feeling good, making someone proud, avoids feeling bad

    •  McMillen & Austin Study, 1971: participants come to take a test, half participants are encouraged to cheat, the other half is not. Then asked to stay and help the experimenter and how long they are willing to stay. 

      • Result: Control (not cheating) they stick around and help for 2/30 minutes. Other group (cheating) stayed for 62 min. Feeling guilty (cheating) and helping come hand in hand. 


  • Costs for not helping: seeing someone in need is not pleasant (aversive arousal) 

  • To reduce aversive arousal you help. 

  • Maybe others will punish you for not helping or yourself 


Altruism (why help?): a motivational state whereby your primary goal is to benefit a person who needs help. 

  • Not egoism: the primary goal is to benefit yourself 

  • Empathy: other-oriented emotional blend that corresponds to perceiving someone suffering/ seeing someone in need. 


Empathy-Altruism Hypothesis: feeling empathy for a person in need creates altruistic motivation to reduce their stress. 

  • People are more likely to feel empathy when that person is similar to them or when people imagine how they feel. 


How to Know a Person’s True Motivation?: create situations where participants have an easy way to achieve an egoist motivation that could come from helping or a selfish thing. 

  • People are altruistic when they are feeling empathy. 


Altruism vs. Arousal Reduction, Boston 1981 study:

  • Witnessing distress is unpleasant, helping can reduce aversive arousal

    • Study: participants are taken to a cubicle and describe what the study is about, one of them tries to learn word pairs while receiving shocks. Other person is just going to watch. For half of participants it is just 2 trials and the other half is 10 trials. Trials are 2 min long, the woman being shocked starts to get very uncomfortable. Then the woman tells a traumatic story about being electrocuted before, then asked to switch with the participant watching. 

    • Experimenter made a situation where the participant can help (take the place of the person being shocked). 

    • The researchers manipulate empathy by making the participants belief the other person is very similar or not similar at all. 

      • Results: Participants who are high in empathy will help regardless of how easy it is to escape the situation. They will help regardless to reduce their reversive arousal. 

      • Egoistic explanation: people that are feeling empathy want to make themselves feel better. (usually feel sad) 

    • Altruism Vs. Empathy Specific Study 1989, Baston: 

      • Participants will listen to shows that could be in a radio station and give their opinion. The audio was a tragic story about a girl in college, then are given an option to see if they want to help the girl out (opportunity to get participants to help). Half of participants are told to really listen to what the girl is going through and how she feels, other group is told to pay attention to the technical aspect (if the audio is recorder well, good sound, blurry). 

        • Results: Those high in empathy will help more than those low in empathy, altruistic motive. 


  • Altruism Vs. Empathy Specific Punishment Study 1989, Baston: 

    • Participants are told about tapes and are told to listen to the same story “katie banks”. Researchers manipulate empathy like the previous study. Participants are given the same letter to see if they are willing to help “katie banks” NOW you see seven names in the list (list to help) and they said they cannot help, the norm is to not help because all seven people did not help. 

      • Results: if you feel high empathy you will help regardless of the norm because of altruistic motivations. 


  • There has been enough evidence that altruism exists. 



When do We Help?: Time 

  • Darley & Batson Study: 

  • 3 Independent variables: topic of speech, level of religiosity, time

  • participants were told to write an essay and read that essay to others. Half of them were told to write an essay about “how you should help others” ; others were told to write about jobs they could get after graduating. One of the groups were told they were running late and had to hurry to give speech, second group were told they were on time, third group were told they were ahead of time. Before they give the speech at the other building, there is a man that is cold and in need of help. 

    • Result: Topic of speech: made no difference. Level of religiosity: no difference

Time: participants running late helped the least. Participants that were on time helped the most


Good Moods: 

  • “Feel good, do good” effect: more likely to help 

  • Why?: desire to maintain positive mood, when people are in a good mood they are more likely to see the “brighter side” 

Bad moods: 

  • “negative -state relief” increase helping 

  • Feeling guilty 

  • Cunningham 1980 study: participants were asked to take pictures and the confederate made the participant in a bad mood. THEN they are in a position where they can help

    • Results: participants that are in a bad mood help more than those in a neutral state. 

  • Helping others to repair our mood

  • 2 limitations: when people are in a really bad mood they do not care about others at all, if the person in need is the reason why you are in a bad mood then there will be no helping. 


Where We Live

  • People help a lot more in rural settings, help less in urban environments 

  • Population density

  • Urban-Overload hypothesis: in an urban setting people are overwhelmed with stimuli impeding in our senses, to help minimize this we stick to ourselves therefore we are less likely to help others. 

  • Similarity: people prefer similar others, people are more likely to help those that are similar to you. 


Who’s Around 

  • Bystander effect: more people around less likely any of those people will help in an emergency situation. 

  • Seizure study: participants are in their own cubicle on the phone with someone who is having a seizure. They were given either 60 secs or 6 min

    • Results: people who thought they were alone helped more, three and six people as bystanders, helped less. 


Five Steps to Helping in Emergency

  • Noticing

  • Interpreting: interpret the situation where you decide if there is a need for help 

    • Public ignorance: when people falsely believe their reasons for doing something is unique even though everyone is doing the same thing. (not raising hand in class because no one else is, even though you are confused) 

  • Taking responsibility: more people present less likely they think they have to take responsibility. 

  • Knowing how to help 

  • Deciding to implement help