Prosocial Behaviour: Why Do People Help?: © 2004 Pearson Education Canada Inc

Chapter 11
Prosocial Behaviour:
Why Do People Help?
© 2004 Pearson Education Canada Inc.

Chapter Outline
I. Basic Motives Underlying Prosocial

Behaviour: Why Do People Help?

Basic Motives Underlying Prosocial
Behaviour
Why do people help others in some circumstances?

And why do they not help others in different
circumstances?
Helping others is referred to as prosocial behaviour.
Prosocial behaviour is defined as any act performed

with the goal of benefiting another person.

Behaviour
Some prosocial behaviour is motivated by altruism.
Altruism is the desire to help another person even if

it involves a cost to the helper.
Another possibility is that prosocial behaviour is

genetic
i.e., there is an altruistic gene that has evolved

through natural selection (survival of the fittest)
over the years. This is the purview of evolutionary
psychology.
Behaviour
Evolutionary Psychology: Instincts and
Genes
Evolutionary psychology is the attempt to explain
social behaviour in terms of genetic factors that
evolved over time according to the principles of
natural selection.
According to Darwin’s (1859) theory of evolution,

natural selection favours genes that promote the
survival of the individual.

Behaviour
Genes
But there is a problem with evolutionary theory
explaining altruism. If people’s overriding concern is to
ensure their own survival, why would they ever help
others at a cost to themselves?
There are three ways in which evolutionary theory

attempts to explain altruism: i) kin selection, ii)
reciprocity, and iii) learning social norms.

Behaviour
Genes
Kin selection is the idea that behaviours that help a

genetic relative are favoured by natural selection.
Because people’s blood relatives share some of their

genes, the more a person ensures his or her relatives’
survival, the greater the chance that his/her genes will
be past on.

Behaviour
Genes
There is empirical evidence for this notion from
studies of:
• bees (see Greenberg, 1979), and
• humans (Burnstein et al, 1994)
One problem with the evolutionary explanation is
that it does not explain why complete strangers
sometimes help each other, even when there is no
reason for them to assume that they share some of
the same genes.
Behaviour
Genes
This led psychologists to consider the norm of
reciprocity.
The norm of reciprocity is the expectation that helping
others will increase the likelihood that they will help us
in the future.
Because of its survival value the norm of reciprocity
may have become genetically based (Baron, 1997).

Behaviour
Genes
A third way in which evolutionary theory can explain

altruism, offered by Simon(1990), is the ability to learn
and follow social norms.
Simon suggests that those who are the best learners of

societal norms have a competitive advantage, and that
one important societal norm is altruism.

Behaviour
Genes
Many researchers are skeptical of the idea that all
social behaviours can be traced back to our ancestral
roots and became instilled in our genes because of
survival value (Batson, 1998).
Thus, other possible motives behind prosocial

behaviour come under consideration. One possibility is
the costs and rewards of helping (social exchange
theory).
Behaviour
Social Exchange: The Costs and Rewards of
Helping
Social exchange theory argues that much of what we
do stems from the desire to maximize our outcomes
and minimize our costs.
Like evolutionary psychology, it is a theory based on

self-interest.
Unlike evolutionary psychology, it does not assume

that self-interest has a genetic basis.
Behaviour
Helping
Helping can be rewarding in three ways:
i) it can increase the probability that someone

will help us in return
ii) it can relieve the personal distress of the
bystander
iii) it can gain us social approval and increased
self-worth.
Behaviour
Helping
Helping can also be costly, as when there is physical

danger, embarrassment, or time consumed.
A basic assumption of social exchange theory is that
people help only when benefits outweigh the costs.
Furthermore, social exchange theory argues that true
altruism does not exist.

Behaviour
Empathy and Altruism: The Pure Motive for
Helping
Still, there are proponents of true altruism, e.g., Batson

(1991).
True altruism is the idea that people often help purely
out of the goodness of their hearts.

Behaviour
Helping
Batson (1991) argues that pure altruism is most likely

to come into play when we experience empathy for the
person in need.
That is, we are able to experience events and

emotions the way that that person experiences
them.

Behaviour
Helping
Batson’s empathy-altruism hypothesis states that

when we feel empathy for a person, we will attempt to
help purely for altruistic reasons, that is, regardless of
what we have to gain (see Fig. 11.1).

Behaviour
Helping
What if we do not feel empathy for another person in a
given situation? Will we still help?
Batson (1991) suggests that it depends on social

exchange considerations. If the rewards outweigh the
costs then we will help; if not then we won’t help.
This notion has received empirical support in a study

by Toi and Batson (1982) (see Fig. 11.2).
Behaviour
Helping
A recent twist to the altruism-empathy hypothesis
suggests that we will be helpful if we can cover up our
altruism with a social exchange interpretation, making
it look as though there was some gain to us.
Why would we do this?
Because if we saw ourselves as pure altruists, we
would feel compelled to help on every occasion, which
is impossible and which would lead to feelings of
failure and despair.
Behaviour
Helping
If instead, we can view helping in exchange terms (eg,
we receive candles for contributing to charity), we can
help in some situations without feeling obligated to
help in all situations.
Holmes and colleagues tested this thinking. Results
were supportive. As predicted, participants were most
generous in the condition where they received
something in exchange for helping when the need was
high.

Chapter Outline
II. Personal Determinants of Prosocial

Behaviour: Why Do Some People
Help More Than Others?

Personal Determinants of Prosocial
Behaviour
Individual Differences: The Altruistic
Personality
Regardless of basic motives, it is clear that some
people are more helpful than others.
Thus, we need to consider personal determinants of

prosocial behaviour that distinguish the helpful
person from the selfish one—such as the altruistic
personality.

Behaviour
Individual Differences: The Altruistic
Personality
An altruistic personality refers to the aspects of a
person’s makeup that are said to make him or her
likely to help others in a wide variety of situations.
Researchers who have studied both children and
adults have not found much evidence that people
with high scores on personality tests of altruism are
more likely to help than those with lower scores.
Personality is not a major determinant of whether
people will help.
Behaviour
The Effects of Mood on Helping: Feel Good,
Do Good
Mood is a determinant of whether people will help or

not; People’s mood can strongly affect their helping
behaviour.
People who are in a good mood are more likely to

help (see Isen & Levin, 1972 dime study).

Behaviour
Do Good
Researchers have found this ‘feel good, do good’
effect in diverse situations, and
when people are in a good mood, they are more
helpful in many ways, including contributing money
to charity, helping someone find a lost contact lens,
tutoring another student, donating blood, and
helping co-workers on the job.
What is it about a good mood that makes people
more altruistic?© 2004 Pearson Education Canada Inc.
Behaviour
Do Good
Good moods can increase helping for three reasons:
i) good moods make us interpret events in a
sympathetic way
ii) helping another prolongs the good mood
iii) good moods increase self-attention, and this in
turn leads us to be more likely to behave
according to our values and beliefs, which
typically include helping others.
Behaviour
The Effects of Mood on Helping: Negative
State Relief Hypothesis
What about when we are in a bad mood, does this
decrease the probability that we will help? No.
Research shows that we are more likely to help if we
are feeling guilty, sad, or distressed—in an attempt to
alleviate this negative emotional state. This is called
the negative-state relief hypothesis.
Negative-state relief hypothesis says that people help
in order to alleviate their own sadness and distress; it
exemplifies a social exchange approach.
Behaviour
Gender Differences in Prosocial behaviour
Gender is another personal variable that comes into
play.
Though one sex is not more altruistic than the other,
the ways in which men and women help often differ.
• Men are more likely to help in heroic,

chivalrous ways
• Women are more likely to help in nurturant
ways that involve a long-term commitment.
Behaviour
Cultural Differences in Prosocial Behaviour
Cultural difference is another variable that influences
helping behaviour.
In all cultures people are more likely to help a
member of their ingroup than their outgroup.
An ingroup is the group with which an individual
identifies, and of which he/she feels a member.
An outgroup is the group with which the individual
does not identify.

Behaviour
Cultural Differences in Prosocial Behaviour
Members of collective societies where greater
emphasis is placed on connectedness and needs of
the ingroup, are
• more likely to help ingroup members, and

• less likely to help outgroup members than
are people from individualistic societies.

Chapter Outline
III. Situational Determinants of

Prosocial Behaviour: When Will
People Help?

Situational Determinants of Prosocial
Behaviour
Rural Versus Urban Environments
People in rural areas are more helpful. This effect holds

over a wide variety of ways of helping and in many
countries.
One possible explanation is that people from rural
settings are brought up to be more neighbourly and
more likely to trust strangers. This experience
enhances the altruistic personality.
This seems unlikely to be true.

Behaviour
An alternative hypothesis, proposed by Milgram

(1970), is the urban-overload hypothesis.
The urban-overload hypothesis is the idea that people

living in cities are likely to keep to themselves in order
to avoid being overloaded by all the stimulation they
receive.

Behaviour
If over-stimulation is the key, then one would expect
that population density, not overall population, would
produce more stimulation and less helping behaviour.
This is what was found in a number of field studies

conducted in the U.S. (Levine et al, 1994).
Thus, research evidence supports the urban-overload

hypothesis.

Behaviour
Bystander Intervention: The Latané and
Darley Model
One would intuitively think that the greater the number
of bystanders who observe an emergency, the greater
would be the probability of those in need receiving
help.
But, this is not true. Indeed, research shows that the

opposite is the case—the greater the number of
bystanders, the less likely it is that help will be offered.
This is referred to as the bystander effect.
Behaviour
Darley Model
The bystander effect is the finding that the greater the

number of bystanders who witness an emergency, the
less likely any one of them is to help (see the Kitty
Genovese example).
Latané and Darley conducted a number of studies, all
demonstrating the bystander effect (see Fig. 11.3).

Behaviour
Darley Model
Why is it that people are less likely to help when other

bystanders are present?
Because there are many decision that have to be taken,
each with an affirmative answer before help will be
offered.
Latané and Darley outlined a series of five decision
steps that bystanders must consider before offering
help in an emergency (see Fig. 11.4).
Behaviour
Darley Model
These five decisions steps are (Latané & Darley, 1970):
i) Noticing an event
ii) Interpreting the event as an emergency
iii) Assuming responsibility
iv) Knowing how to help
v) Deciding to implement the help
Behaviour
Darley Model
Noticing an event: When people are in a hurry they are
less likely to notice an emergency, or if they do they are
still less likely to stop and offer assistance.
Interpreting an event as an emergency: When other

bystanders are present, people are more likely to
assume an emergency is something innocuous.

Behaviour
Darley Model
Interpreting an event as an emergency: Often it is not
clear whether a situation constitutes an emergency or
not. When this happens we look to others for
clarification. If they also look bewildered and
unconcerned we interpret this as indicating that an
emergency is not present. This is called pluralistic
ignorance.
Pluralistic ignorance is the phenomenon whereby
bystanders assume that nothing is wrong in an
emergency because no one else looks concerned.
Behaviour
Darley Model
Assuming responsibility: The number of bystanders

present is crucial here as well. With others present we
assume someone else has intervened; we don’t want to
overreact and look foolish. There is a diffusion of
responsibility.
Diffusion of Responsibility: Each bystander’s sense of
responsibility to help decreases as the number of
witnesses increases.
Behaviour
Darley Model
Knowing how to help: Not knowing how, or not being
qualified to help can deter people from offering
assistance. Is the person ill? Has he/she had a heart
attack? Does he/she need CPR?
Implementing help: Not being qualified, fear of
embarrassment (see Edwards, 1975 condom study),
fear of doing the wrong thing and making matters
worse can inhibit helping behaviour.

Behaviour
The Nature of the Relationship: Communal
Versus Exchange Relationships
Most helping occurs between people who know each
other well: family members, lovers, close friends.
What determines whether people help in these kinds

of relationships?
One variable is the type of relationship between the

parties, whether it is communal or exchange.

Behaviour
Communal relationships are those in which people’s
primary concern is the welfare of the other.
Exchange relationships are governed by equity

concerns (see Clark et al, 1989 light study; Fig. 11.5).
We are more likely to help a partner in a communal

relationship than one in an exchange relationship.
Behaviour
Helping in exchange relationships appears to be
governed by rules and norms that differ from those
governing helping in communal relationships.
-ie, In exchange relationships, people are conerned
more with who is getting what,
-ie, In communal relationships, people are concerned
less with who gets what, and more with how much
help the other person needs.
Chapter Outline
IV. How Can Helping Be Increased?

How Can Helping Be Increased?
Instilling Helpfulness with Rewards & Models
Prosocial behaviour occurs early in life. Even

children as young as 18 months frequently help
other, eg, trying to make a crying infant feel better.
One powerful way to encourage prosocial behaviour

is for parents and others to reward such acts with
praise, smiles, and hugs, research shows.

We must be careful and not over emphasize the

reward aspect because this can lower the intrinsic
value of performing the prosocial behaviour, and
decrease the probability of acting prosocially in
subsequent situations, in the absence of rewards.
We want children to perceive themselves as

altruistic people, so that they enhance the intrinsic
value of acting prosocially.

Another way for parents to increase prosocial

behaviour in their children is to behave prosocially
themselves.
Children often model behaviours they observe in

others, including prosocial behaviour.

Pancer and Pratt (1999) found that Canadian youth

who spend time volunteering are likely to have
parents who have instilled values of kindness and
helping, and who model prosocial behaviour.
Children also imitate adults other than their parents,

eg, teachers, relatives, TV characters, sports heroes.
They can be used to model prosocial behaviour.

Increasing Awareness of the Barriers to Helping
There is evidence that simply being aware of the

barriers to helping can increase people’s chance of
overcoming those barriers (see Beaman et al, 1978
awareness study).
Research shows that teaching people about the

determinants of prosocial behaviour makes them
more aware of why they sometimes don’t help, and
leads to greater helping in the future.

Increasing Awareness of the Barriers to Helping
A final word. We shouldn’t impose help on everyone
we think needs it. Not everyone wants to be helped.
If being helped means that they appear incompetent,

resulting in lowered self-esteem then some people
will chose not to accept help__they will often suffer
in silence, even at the cost of failing at the task.
We need to make help supportive and non-

threatening for it to be most effective.

The End

Prosocial Behaviour: Why Do People Help?: © 2004 Pearson Education Canada Inc

Cargado por

Información del documento

Título original

Derechos de autor

Formatos disponibles

Compartir este documento

Compartir o incrustar documentos

Opciones para compartir

¿Le pareció útil este documento?

¿Este contenido es inapropiado?

Copyright:

Formatos disponibles

Prosocial Behaviour: Why Do People Help?: © 2004 Pearson Education Canada Inc

Cargado por

Copyright:

Formatos disponibles

Chapter 11

© 2004 Pearson Education Canada Inc.

I. Basic Motives Underlying Prosocial

© 2004 Pearson Education Canada Inc.

Why do people help others in some circumstances?

Helping others is referred to as prosocial behaviour.

Prosocial behaviour is defined as any act performed

© 2004 Pearson Education Canada Inc.

Some prosocial behaviour is motivated by altruism.

Altruism is the desire to help another person even if

Another possibility is that prosocial behaviour is

i.e., there is an altruistic gene that has evolved

According to Darwin’s (1859) theory of evolution,

© 2004 Pearson Education Canada Inc.

There are three ways in which evolutionary theory

© 2004 Pearson Education Canada Inc.

Kin selection is the idea that behaviours that help a

Because people’s blood relatives share some of their

© 2004 Pearson Education Canada Inc.

© 2004 Pearson Education Canada Inc.

A third way in which evolutionary theory can explain

Simon suggests that those who are the best learners of

© 2004 Pearson Education Canada Inc.

Thus, other possible motives behind prosocial

Like evolutionary psychology, it is a theory based on

Unlike evolutionary psychology, it does not assume

i) it can increase the probability that someone

Helping can also be costly, as when there is physical

© 2004 Pearson Education Canada Inc.

Still, there are proponents of true altruism, e.g., Batson

© 2004 Pearson Education Canada Inc.

Batson (1991) argues that pure altruism is most likely

That is, we are able to experience events and

© 2004 Pearson Education Canada Inc.

Batson’s empathy-altruism hypothesis states that

© 2004 Pearson Education Canada Inc.

Batson (1991) suggests that it depends on social

This notion has received empirical support in a study

© 2004 Pearson Education Canada Inc.

II. Personal Determinants of Prosocial

© 2004 Pearson Education Canada Inc.

Thus, we need to consider personal determinants of

© 2004 Pearson Education Canada Inc.

Mood is a determinant of whether people will help or

People who are in a good mood are more likely to

© 2004 Pearson Education Canada Inc.

• Men are more likely to help in heroic,

© 2004 Pearson Education Canada Inc.

• more likely to help ingroup members, and

© 2004 Pearson Education Canada Inc.

III. Situational Determinants of

© 2004 Pearson Education Canada Inc.

People in rural areas are more helpful. This effect holds

© 2004 Pearson Education Canada Inc.

An alternative hypothesis, proposed by Milgram

The urban-overload hypothesis is the idea that people

© 2004 Pearson Education Canada Inc.

This is what was found in a number of field studies

Thus, research evidence supports the urban-overload

© 2004 Pearson Education Canada Inc.

But, this is not true. Indeed, research shows that the

The bystander effect is the finding that the greater the

© 2004 Pearson Education Canada Inc.