Ind - prosocial behaviour 2

is bad stronger than good? establishing a good reputation can be shattered by one scandal.
1. very difficult to reverse an initial bad impression with later good behaviours.
OBEDIENCE
1. obedience to orders can be prosocial and in some cases it is highly desirable such as in military units and sports teams.
2. social psychologists have taken a dim view of obedience since 1963 MILGRAM's study. 65% went to the end. during the 60s when the study was published, many people became hostile to authority.
3. people are naturally inclined to belong to groups and seek social acceptance, the willingness to obey authority figures is an important part of living effectively in large groups.
4. ultimately prosocial as it supports group life.
CONFORMITY
1. conformity is going along with the crowd. conformity has a bad reputation among social psychologists. HOWEVER conformity is prosocial as it shows how people put others first in order to get along with others,
2. MUNGER AND HARRIS - 1989 - people conform more when others are watching. donated 7 times more in the public (watching condition) than private condition.
3. ASCH - 1955 - conformity in line task, no reward for conforming.
4. NORMATIVE SOCIAL INFLUENCE - conformity to be accepted by the group
5. INFORMATIONAL SOCIAL INFLUENCE - conformity based on actions of others as evidence about reality.
6. PUBLIC VS. PRIVATE CONFORMITY. going along with the crowd regardless of private belief. VS. altering one's internal attitude.
WHY DO PEOPLE HELP OTHERS?
1. EVOLUTIONARY PERSPECTIVE
  1. KIN SELECTION - suggests we help people more who share our genes. the closer we are genetically the more likely we are to help. - BURNSTEIN ET AL - 1994
    1. parents should be more devoted to their children than vice versa, as parents need to continue their genes through their children.
      1. more likely to help siblings who share half our genes than cousin who shares 1/8
  2. animals that don't share are less likely to starve. evolution should favour those selfish and unhelpful creatures.
  3. SEGAL - 1984 - genetically identical twins are more likely to help each other than fraternal twins.
  4. EMPATHY is an important emotion when it comes to understanding why people help. when an adult accidentally drops something a toddler will feel empathy and help them but when they deliberately throw it, toddlers will not help
  5. humans are hardwired to cooperate from early in life.
2. MOTIVES FOR HELPING
  1. EGOISM - the helper wants something in return for offering help, we reduce our distress by reducing theirs
  2. ALTRUISM - the helper expects no reciprocation. altruistic helping is motivated by empathy, when the feelings are shared, it makes people want to make the sufferer feel better.
    1. SINGER ET AL - 2004 - the brain's reaction was about the same for receiving shocks as for watching a loved one receive shocks.
  3. EMPATHY-ALTRUISM HYPOTHESIS - empathy motivates people to help other peoples distress by comforting them. when empathy is low people can either help or runaway from the situation. or if empathy is high then leaving the situation won't work.
  4. people feel more empathy towards someone they believe is similar to themselves.
    1. BATSON ET AL. - 1981 - participants watched a woman (elaine) receiving electric shocks, manipulated high vs. low empathy and easy vs. difficult to escape. could leave or take elaine's place. found all participants in the high empathy condition traded places with elaine. high empathy helping based on the victim's needs.
  5. EMPATHY-SPECIFIC REWARD HYPOTHESIS - empathy triggers the need for social reward e.g. praise
    1. NEGATIVE STATE RELIEF HYPOTHESIS - CIALDINI - 1973 - people help in order to relieve their own distress.
  6. EMPATHY-SPECIFIC PUNISHMENT HYPOTHESIS - empathy triggers the fear of social punishment. e.g. guilt, shame etc. which can be avoided by helping.
IS ALTRUISM POSSIBLE?
1. centuries-old debate whether people are basically good or evil. if altruistic helpers are only helping to make themselves feel good then surely they are being selfish?
2. However some people will help even when they could feel better by other means such as escaping a situation. It is sad to dismiss genuine helping as selfishness. The innate pleasure we get from helping points to the basic goodness of human nature.
3. If it is suggested that helping is being self-centered, then this discourages others from taking heroic risks in the future.
4. social conscience is there to make people do what is best for others.the fact that people get satisfaction from helping others makes it easier for the conscience to accomplish this.
WHO HELPS WHOM?
1. HELPFUL PERSONALITY
  1. OLINER (1988) found rescuers had higher ethical values, had stronger beliefs in equity and had greater empathy for others.
    1. Self Report Altruism Scale has been shown to correlate with peer ratings of altruism.
  2. RUSHTON ET AL - 1986 - the altruistic personality appears to have a genetic component.
2. SIMILARITY
  1. people are more likely to help someone who is similar to them than someone different.
3. GENDER
  1. EAGLY AND CROWLEY - 1986 - males are more helpful in the public sphere, women are more likely to help in the family sphere in close relationships and in situations that need repeated contact.
  2. females are more likely than males to receive help.
4. remarkable human willingness to help others even unrelated others. most people would eagerly chose to benefit a friend, especially without a cost to themselves. basic motive to help others is unique to humans.
5. BEAUTIFUL VICTIMS
  1. people are more likely to help attractive individuals than unattractive individuals. true for males and females that need help and male and female helpers.
  2. WEST AND BROWN - 1975 - more likely to give females money for a tetanus shot if they were attractive vs. not.
  3. BENSON ET AL - 1976 - callers in a phone booth were more likely to post applications when the picture included was attractive vs. not.
6. BELIEF IN A JUST WORLD
  1. the belief that the world is a just place where people get what they deserve.
  2. HEWSTONE - 1990 - those who believe in a just world will often blame the victim.
  3. ZUCKERMAN - 1975 - just world believers will only help others if they think they deserve help.
  4. people assume that rape victims dressed / acted provocatively.
7. EMOTION AND MOOD
  1. CUNNINGHAM - 1979 - positive feelings increase helping, helping is increased by all kinds of pleasant situations such as sunny weather etc.
  2. people want to maintain their good mood and acting helpfully allows this. BAD emotions can sometimes increase helping too, guilt motivates helping.
BYSTANDER HELPING IN EMERGENCIES
1. KITTY GENOVESE - 1964 - was attacked and killed, her screams aroused 38 of her neighbours although no one helped her.
2. BYSTANDER EFFECT - people are less likely to offer help when they are in the presence of others rather than alone.
3. LATANE AND DARLEY - 1968 - FIVE STEPS TO HELPING. 1. notice something is happening. 2. interpret event as emergency. 3. take responsibility for providing help. 4. decide how to help. 5. provide help.
  1. 2. hard to tell if an event is an emergency, JAMES BULGER CASE - 1993 - 2 year old killed by two 10 years olds, 61 people in mall thought they were siblings.
4. PLURALISTIC IGNORANCE - look for others for how to behave, if others don't react then we assume it's not an emergency. in emergencies therefore sometimes no one reacts.
5. DIFFUSION OF RESPONSIBILITY - the more people present, less likely to intervene as the responsibility is on many people. if alone will intervene.
6. PILIAVIN ET AL - 1975 -AUDIENCE INHIBITION - people don't want to feel like a fool in front of others if they help.
TOO BUSY TO HELP?
1. DARLEY AND BATSON - 1973 - either late for talk or plenty of time on the way to a talk, passed man in doorway groaning and coughing. the MORE time people had, the MORE likely they were to help.
INCREASING HELPING
1. need to reduce distractions, reduce pluralistic ignorance, reduce diffusion of responsibility, reduce concerns about competence to help, reduce audience inhibitions.
2. need to educate others about bystander indifference and teach moral inclusion.
3. need to provide helpful models / volunteering

Next up

Ind - prosocial behaviour 2

Description

Resource summary

Similar

	Created by becky.waine almost 11 years ago