Psychology
Prosocial Behaviour And Altruism
Prosocial behavior refers to actions that benefit others or society as a whole, such as helping, sharing, or cooperating. Altruism specifically involves selfless acts that benefit others without any expectation of personal gain. Both concepts are important in understanding human social interactions and the development of empathy and compassion.
Written by Perlego with AI-assistance
Related key terms
1 of 5
9 Key excerpts on "Prosocial Behaviour And Altruism"
- Paul Seager(Author)
- 2014(Publication Date)
- Teach Yourself(Publisher)
Helping behaviour: This is characterized as an intentional act which is carried out to benefit an individual. This covers all forms of interpersonal support and it is not necessarily voluntary. For example, an assistant in a shop can help a customer, but they do this because they are paid to do so, not necessarily because they choose to do so. This form of behaviour can also be antisocial: for example, an individual can help another person in order to make them look incompetent.• Prosocial behaviour: This type of behaviour is purely voluntary and is valued positively by society (and therefore may be culturally determined). It has positive consequences, contributes to the physical and/or psychological well-being of an individual, and is not motivated by professional obligation.• Altruism: There is some debate about whether pure altruism actually exists as this type of behaviour puts the emphasis on the needs of another without any consideration of benefit to the helper. This would be exemplified by the parable of the Good Samaritan, or perhaps by the act of heroism by an individual at an underground station outlined above. However, it is difficult to define such an action as purely altruistic as it may have been carried out in order to alleviate anticipated personal distress.(C. Daniel Batson, 1998, p. 282) One of the challenges faced by researchers is to capture and understand the diversity of prosocial behaviour. For example, there are many different dimensions to helping, and these can include:‘… the broad range of actions intended to benefit one or more people other than oneself – behaviors such as helping, comforting, sharing and cooperation’… Altruism is motivation to increase another person’s welfare … Prosocial behaviour need not be motivated by altruism; altruistic motivation need not produce prosocial behaviour.• Planned vs. spontaneous• Serious vs. non-serious• Direct vs. indirectPlanned helping might include a regular monthly donation from your wages to a charity, whereas spontaneous helping could include giving directions to a motorist who stopped you in the street whilst you were out walking. Helping in a serious situation could include going to the aid of victims of a car crash, whereas non-serious intervention might be characterized by helping to pick up dropped groceries from a basket. Direct helping would be exemplified by assisting in an immediate fashion, such as rushing over to a person who has collapsed in the street, whereas indirect
eBook - ePub- Miles Hewstone, Wolfgang Stroebe, Miles Hewstone, Wolfgang Stroebe(Authors)
- 2021(Publication Date)
- BPS Blackwell(Publisher)
As the examples above demonstrate, we are seemingly surrounded with opportunities for helping. However, before we look at the various social psychological accounts of these phenomena, it is useful to begin by thinking about the nature of the phenomena themselves. What do we mean by the terms ‘prosocial behaviour’ or ‘helping’? Examples of the contrasting reactions to the emergency/disaster situations noted above highlight some of the different circumstances that seemingly require the help of others. There is, evidently, a vast range of situations that may elicit helping. Clearly this raises an additional challenge to social psychologists. Therefore, before we begin to work through the various ways in which social psychologists have approached the issue of understanding prosocial behaviour, we might first consider what we mean by prosocial behaviour itself. As we will see, much of the thinking about what constitutes prosocial behaviour focuses either on particular forms or types of behaviours, or on the motivations behind such behaviours. At a more general level, we might also begin to consider whether it is possible to develop a single theory, model or approach which can account for all the different behaviours that might be encapsulated by the term ‘prosocial behaviour’.DefinitionsAs Bierhoff (2002) has pointed out, the terms helping behaviour, prosocial behaviour and altruism are frequently used interchangeably. However, there are important differences in the way the terms are defined. The most inclusive term is ‘helping behaviour’, defined as ‘an action that has the consequence of providing some benefit to or improving the well‐being of another person’ (Dovidio, Piliavin, Schroeder, & Penner, 2006, p. 22). Bierhoff (2002) argues that the definition of prosocial behaviour is narrower because ‘helping behaviour’ is not considered as ‘prosocial behaviour’ if the act is motivated by professional obligations (e.g., a nurse caring for a patient). It is important to remember also that not all helping is good. The work of Arie Nadler and colleagues (Nadler, 2002; 2015; Nadler & Halabi, 2006; Nadler, Harpaz‐Gorodiesky & Ben‐David, 2009) demonstrates clearly that helping can, in fact, take the form of attempts by the helper (individual or group) to maintain their power or advantage over the helped. Finally, the term ‘altruism’ is the most constrained – and the most contested. Altruism is reserved for cases in which the helper tries to improve the welfare of the other person as an end in itself
eBook - ePub- Miles Hewstone, Wolfgang Stroebe, Klaus Jonas, Miles Hewstone, Wolfgang Stroebe, Klaus Jonas(Authors)
- 2016(Publication Date)
- BPS Blackwell(Publisher)
As the examples above demonstrate, we are seemingly surrounded with opportunities for helping. However, before we look at the various social psychological accounts of these phenomena, it is useful to begin by thinking about the nature of the phenomena themselves. What do we mean by the terms ‘prosocial behaviour’ or ‘helping’? Examples of the contrasting reactions to the emergency/disaster situations noted above highlight some of the different circumstances that seemingly require the help of others. There is, evidently, a vast range of situations that may elicit helping. Clearly this raises an additional challenge to social psychologists. Therefore, before we begin to work through the various ways in which social psychologists have approached the issue of understanding prosocial behaviour, we might first consider what we mean by prosocial behaviour itself. As we will see, much of the thinking about what constitutes prosocial behaviour focuses either on particular forms or types of behaviours, or on the motivations behind such behaviours. At a more general level, we might also begin to consider whether it is possible to develop a single theory, model or approach which can account for all the different behaviours that might be encapsulated by the term ‘prosocial behaviour’.Definitions
As Bierhoff (2002) has pointed out, the terms helping behaviour, prosocial behaviour and altruism are frequently used interchangeably. However, distinct definitions for each are available. Piliavin (see Leader in the Field, Jane Allyn Piliavin, later in this chapter) and her colleagues have defined helping behaviour as ‘an action that has the consequence of providing some benefit to or improving the well-being of another person’ (Dovidio, Piliavin, Schroeder, & Penner, 2006, p. 22).helping behaviour actions that are intended to provide some benefit to or improve the well-being of others.prosocial behaviour refers to behaviour defined by society as beneficial to other people; it excludes behaviour that is motivated by professional obligations, and may be driven by more selfish (egoistic) and/or more selfless (altruistic) motivations.This definition makes helping behaviour the most inclusive term. Bierhoff (2002) argues that the definition of prosocial behaviour is narrower because ‘helping’ is not considered as ‘prosocial behaviour’ if the act is motivated by professional obligations. An example of helping behaviour that would not be considered prosocial behaviour would be a nurse caring for a patient, as this behaviour is performed as part of their job. Furthermore, Piliavin, Dovidio, Gaertner, and Clark (1981) point to the fact that what is considered to be prosocial behaviour is culturally dependent. They therefore suggest that prosocial behaviour is ‘defined by society as behaviour generally beneficial to other people and to the ongoing social system’, and go on to state that ‘a great deal of disagreement regarding what is really prosocial action can occur depending on where one stands’ (p. 4).
eBook - PDF- Gregory R. Bock, Jamie A. Goode, Gregory R. Bock, Jamie A. Goode(Authors)
- 2007(Publication Date)
- Wiley(Publisher)
There is no cut-off point where you would say now it is totally altruistic behaviour. Spinrad: Again, I would argue that the difference is the motivation behind the behaviour, which is difficult to assess. Some behaviours are altruistic whereas some are not, but we simply have difficulty differentiating among them because we do not know the child’s thoughts, goals and motives. Warneken: Alright, according to what you just said, prosocial behaviour can be assessed by looking at the behaviour alone without looking at the motives. When you then want to find out whether it is altruistic or not you have to look at the motives. But it rather seemed to me that it is all about motives here, and only if the motives are identified and they are all about the other can we say it is altruistic. Spinrad: Yes. Prosocial behaviour is a more general term, referring to behaviours such as volunteering, helping, sharing and comforting. Altruism is a specific case of this type of prosocial behaviour that is other-oriented (Eisenberg 1986). Blair: I want to return to the delay of gratification and impulse control questions. The disadvantage of having this as the link between empathy and prosocial behav-iour is that one of the measures was the emotional response to the pictures. This index of the basic emotional response is unlikely to relate to delay of gratification in the way that it is usually thought about. It would be difficult to link these two. Regarding the impulse control, we can be pretty sure that impulse control more generally is not the thing that is driving empathy because you have children with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), a classic impulse control disorder, and they are not showing indications of profound empathy impairment. We can be confident that this is not the explanation. EMPATHY-RELATED RESPONDING 83 Van Lange: Research on the prisoner’s dilemma confirms that the orientation with the future is quite independent of prosocial orientation.
eBook - PDFSocial Psychology
Handbook of Basic Principles
- Paul A. M. Van Lange, E. Tory Higgins, Arie W. Kruglanski(Authors)
- 2020(Publication Date)
- The Guilford Press(Publisher)
PART II Principles in Context 499 A lthough humans are capable of extraor- dinary acts of altruism when faced with people in need, it is also the case that they often attempt to shirk that duty. Indeed, perhaps the most classic research investigating altruism in social psychology—Darley and Latane’s (1968) exploration of bystander intervention—focuses on how the presence of others leads to diffusion of responsibility, and, often, the failure of any- one offering to help. Even without others to take the blame, however, people are often skilled at avoiding altruism, both in actions and in ratio- nalizations. For example, Andreoni, Rao, and Trachtman (2017) placed Salvation Army bell ringers at either one or both entrances to a su- permarket, making it either easy or difficult to “avoid the ask.” While making avoidance diffi- cult did increase donations, it was also the case that many people chose to avoid the bell ringers altogether by entering through the unmanned door. Similarly, when faced with a decision ei- ther to split $10 with another participant, or sim- ply take $9 instead (and leave the other person with $0), fully one-third of participants took the $9—provided that the recipient would never know about that choice (Dana, Cain, & Dawes, 2006). People also go to great lengths to convince themselves that their selfish behavior is in fact fair and egalitarian (see Gino, Norton, & Weber, 2016). For instance, Batson, Kobrynowicz, Din- nerstein, Kampf, and Wilson (1997) asked par- ticipants in a laboratory experiment to distrib- ute two tasks between themselves and another participant: a positive task (earning tickets to a raffle) and a negative task (described as “dull and boring”).
eBook - PDF- Saba Safdar, Catherine A. Sanderson(Authors)
- 2021(Publication Date)
- Wiley(Publisher)
DESIRE FOR REWARD. Finally, as discussed earlier in the chapter, people learn fairly early in life that they can receive rewards for helping. In turn, people may behave altruistically only when they believe that others will notice—and think less of them if they don’t help—and help- ing is therefore again motivated by a self-focused concern (Fultz, Batson, Fortenbach, McCarthy, & Varney, 1986). PREDICTING LONG-TERM HELPING Although helping may be motivated by either empathic or egoistic factors, helping that is motivated by empathy is most likely to lead to long-term helping. Researchers sought to examine how empathy is associated with prosocial behaviours among primary and secondary school students, and how these were related to video game use (Gentile, Anderson, Yukawa, Ihori, Saleem, Ming, et al., 2009). While it was found that more prosocial video games led to more prosocial behaviours, it was found that this relation was mediated by empathy, both at present and longitudinally. Such that, empathy was a significant predictor of prosocial behaviour and aids in guiding students’ helping behaviours after exposure to prosocial models in the media. In this way, even short-term prosocial models in students who are empathetic led to further empathy that may motivate students to be more helpful in the future (Gentile et al., 2009). POSITIVE PSYCHOLOGY OF HELPING It’s well established that helping, or social support, is beneficial to the recipient, but it may also be beneficial to the helper. Research indicates that there are benefits of volunteerism to the person who is volunteering. The mental health benefits of volunteerism include reduction in depressive symp- toms and greater life satisfaction (Haski-Leventhal, 2009). It has also been found that volunteering is related to better health outcomes, including both mental and physical health and social well-being (Yeung, Zhang, & Kim, 2017).
eBook - PDF- Catherine A. Sanderson, Saba Safdar(Authors)
- 2014(Publication Date)
- Wiley(Publisher)
(1981). Is empathic emotion a source of altruistic motivation? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 40, 290–302. CHAPTER 13 ALTRUISM AND PROSOCIAL BEHAVIOUR 462 on a university application, or you may be motivated to donate to a local hospital because your name will be mentioned publicly. In other words, people help because it makes them feel better about themselves (not to make other people feel better), and helping is therefore based on egoistic factors. This motive for prosocial behaviour is illustrated by a famous story about Abraham Lincoln (Sharp, 1928). As Lincoln was in a carriage crossing over a bridge, he noticed a number of baby pigs who were in great danger of drowning. He quickly jumped out of the carriage, ran to the pigs, and carried them to safety. When he returned to the carriage and was praised for his generosity, he remarked that “that was the very essence of selfishness. I should have had no peace of mind all day had I gone on and left that suffering old sow worrying over those pigs. I did it to get some peace of mind” (Sharp, 1928, p. 75). Although helping for selfish reasons doesn’t really fit our definition of true altruism, this type of motivation may ironically lead to providing more help (Omoto & Snyder, 1995). Allen Omoto and Mark Snyder (1995) examined the motivations of people who volunteered to help persons with AIDS, and then measured how long the volunteers continued to work. People who were motivated to work for more altru- istic motives (e.g., wanting to help others, wanting to contribute to their community) were less likely to continue volunteering than those who were motivated by more selfish concerns (e.g., wanting to make friends, wanting to learn more about HIV prevention). The Would You Believe box describes a perhaps surprising way in which helping other people increases our own happiness.
eBook - PDF- Roy F. Baumeister; Brad J. Bushman, Roy F. Baumeister, Brad Bushman(Authors)
- 2016(Publication Date)
- Cengage Learning EMEA(Publisher)
All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s). Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it. 316 | CHAPTER 9 Prosocial Behavior: Doing What’s Best for Others Before we look at specific factors that differentiate who helps whom, let us consider the big picture. One thing that is special and remarkable about humans is their willingness to help others, even unrelated others. Imagine that you were offered a chance to get a nice reward for yourself, maybe money or good food. You could either get it just for yourself, or you could get a duplicate of your reward delivered to someone you had known for 15 years (and still get your own full reward). Which would you choose? Most people would eagerly choose to benefit a friend or acquaintance, especially if they could do so without cost to themselves. Yet when this exact experiment was tried on chimps, the results were quite different. Chimps are biologically similar to human beings, 126 but they did not show any interest in helping their longtime (15-year) acquaintances. They took the reward for themselves, but they did not do the kind favor for others. 127 Thus, the basic motive to bring help and benefits to others who aren’t blood relatives appears to be something that sets human beings apart from our closest animal relatives.
eBook - PDFSocial Beings
Core Motives in Social Psychology
- Susan T. Fiske(Author)
- 2018(Publication Date)
- Wiley(Publisher)
Mood might be an explanation, although he makes the decision over a period of time when he doesn’t seem particularly happy, guilty, or sad. One could make parallel arguments about Ms. McCarty. Maybe, instead of all these motives that social psychologists have interpreted as egoistic, just maybe their motives are pure altruism. Altruism, as introduced earlier, constitutes the motivation to help out of a concern for others and their welfare. In this view, people are motivated by other-interest. Altruism goes with a belief that people are responsible for each other and that they deserve help. As such, it fits with motives to believe the best of other people, the core social motive here termed trusting. Trust in others goes with a concern for others. Individual differences in empathy correlate with the tendency to trust others (Piliavin & Charng, 1990). People have a strong need to believe that the world is benevolent and will go to great lengths to restore that belief (Janoff-Bulman, 1992). Altruism Hypotheses: Maintaining Trust in the World as Benevolent 293 Evidence for altruism consists partly in showing that prosocial behavior is (1) based on pro- cesses demonstrating concern, such as attributions of responsibility to self and (2) partly based on showing that people and situations high on empathy tend to facilitate helping. The best situational predictors of helping are the victim’s unambiguous and severe need, attractive appearance, and similarity to the potential helper. Also, more bystanders present (as noted earlier) and being in a big city (with stimulus overload) are factors that reliably decrease helping (Batson, 1998). All these situational factors impact people’s felt responsibility and empathy, consistent with altruistic motivations.
