Uploaded byJessaMaeAndoyLopio
138 views

PSYCH 109_Chapter 12 HELPING_PPT.pdf

The document discusses theories of altruism and helping behavior. It covers: 1) Social exchange theory which views helping as transactions that aim to maximize rewards and minimize costs. Internal rewards like positive emotions and reducing guilt also motivate helping. 2) Social norms like reciprocity and social responsibility influence helping. Reciprocity means helping those who help you, while social responsibility means helping those in need regardless of rewards. 3) Evolutionary theories suggest helping family (kin selection) and one's group (group selection) enhances gene survival. Indirect reciprocity means helping to establish a good reputation. 4) Genuine altruism refers to truly selfless helping with no expectation of rewards.

Education◦

Embed presentation

Download to read offline
PRESENTED BY: HELPING Chapter 12:
WHY DO WE HELP? WHEN WILL WE HELP? WHO WILL HELP? HOW CAN WE INCREASE HELPING? TOPIC OUTLINE Today's Discussion
2000 trees form the Garden of the Righteous These “righteous Gentiles” knew that if the refugees were discovered, Nazi policy dictated that host and refugee would suffer a common fate. Many did (Hellman, 1980; Wiesel, 1985) One hero who did not survive was Jane Haining In April 1944, Haining accused a cook of eating sparse food rations intended for her girls. A few weeks later, she was sent to Auschwitz, where she suffered the same fate as millions of Jews. Altruism is selfishness in reverse. An altruistic person is concerned and helpful even when no benefits are offered or expected in return
WHY DO WE HELP? Social Exchange and Social Norms One explanation assumes that human interactions are guided by “social economics.” We exchange not only material goods and money but also social goods—love, services, information, status (Foa & Foa, 1975). Social-Exchange Theory (The theory that human interactions are transactions that aim to maximize one’s rewards and minimize one’s costs.)
Increasing Positive Emotion External Reward We give to get Internal Reward Focused on increasing positive emotions. Rewards that motivate helping may be external or internal. Reducing Negative Emotion The benefits of helping also include reducing or avoiding negative emotions. Near someone in distress, we may feel distress.
Guilt Distress is not the only negative emotion we act to reduce. Throughout recorded history, guilt has been a painful emotion that people avoid and seek to relieve (Ty et al., 2017). Exceptions to the Feel-Bad/Do-Good scenario Among well-socialized adults, should we always expect to find the “feel-bad/do- good” phenomenon? No. One negative mood, anger, produces anything but compassion. Another exception is profound grief. People who suffer the loss of a spouse or a child, whether through death or separation, often undergo a period of intense self-preoccupation, which restrains giving to others (Aderman & Berkowitz, 1983; Gibbons & Wicklund, 1982).
Feel Good, Do Good So, are happy people unhelpful? Quite the contrary. There are few more consistent findings in psychology: Happy people are helpful people. This effect occurs with both children and adults, regardless of whether the good mood comes from a success, from thinking happy thoughts, or from any of several other positive experiences (Salovey et al., 1991). In Opole, Poland, Dariusz Dolinski and Richard Nawrat (1998) found that a positive mood of relief can dramatically boost helping.
WHY DO WE HELP? Social Norms Often, we help others not because we have calculated consciously that such behavior is in our self-interest but because of a subtler form of self-interest: because something tells us we ought to.
The Reciprocity Norm One universal moral code is a reciprocity norm: To those who help us, we should return help, not harm (Gouldner, 1960). We “invest” in others and expect dividends. The Social-Responsibility Norm The social-responsibility norm decrees that people should help those who need help, without regard to future exchanges (Berkowitz, 1972; Schwartz, 1975). If a person on crutches drops a book, you honor the social responsibility norm as you pick it up.
Gender and Receiving Help If, indeed, perception of another’s need strongly determines one’s willingness to help, will women receive more help than men? That is indeed the case. Alice Eagly and Maureen Crowley (1986) located 35 studies that compared help received by male or female victims. ((Virtually all the studies involved short-term encounters with strangers in need—the very situations in which people expect males to be chivalrous, note Eagly and Crowley.)) Women offered help equally to males and females, whereas men offered more help when the persons in need were females. Women not only receive more offers of help in certain situations but also seek more help (Addis & Mahalik, 2003). They more often welcome help from friends. Arie Nadler (1991), a Tel Aviv University expert on help-seeking, attributes this to gender differences in individualism versus collectivism—women are more collectivistic and thus more willing to ask others to help.
EVOLUTIONARY PSYCHOLOGY Life’s essence is gene survival. When our ancestors died, their genes lived on, predisposing us to behave in ways that will spread them into the future. Mechanisms for overcoming selfishness (Nowak & Highfield, 2011; Pfaff, 2014), including the following: Kin selection: If you carry my genes, I’ll favor you. Direct reciprocity: We scratch each other’s backs. Indirect reciprocity: I’ll scratch your back, you scratch someone’s, and someone will scratch mine. Group selection: Back-scratching groups survive.
KIN SELECTION The idea that evolution has selected altruism toward one’s close relatives to enhance the survival of mutually shared genes. The kin selection principle implies that nature (as well as culture) programs us to care about close relatives. Example: Carlos Rogers of the Toronto Raptors NBA basketball team volunteered to end his career and donate a kidney to his sister (who died before she could receive it), people applauded his self-sacrificial love
Reciprocity -The giver expects later to be the getter. Two forms of Reciprocity: Direct reciprocity- individuals help others, expecting that those they help will, in turn, help them when the need arises. For example, if you assist a friend with moving to a new house, you might expect them to help you in a similar way when you need it. Indirect reciprocity- involves helping or cooperating with someone, not because you expect a direct benefit from them, but because you hope to establish a positive reputation within a larger social group.
GROUP SELECTION Groups of mutually supportive altruists outlast groups of non-altruists (Krebs, 1998; McAndrew, 2002; Wilson, 2015). This idea implies that there can be an advantage to altruism at the group level, even if it comes at a cost to individuals within the group. Example: Social insects like bees and ants work sacrificially for the survival of their colonies, which can be seen as an example of group selection in action.
GROUP SELECTION There is also an ingroup loyalty, where they may sacrifice for the benefit of their own group or community. This is a kin to employees in a corporation competing with each other but also cooperating to ensure the success of the company as a whole. Ingroup loyalty can be seen as a form of group-level cooperation and altruism. Donald Campbell (1975a,b) offered another basis for unreciprocated altruism: Ethical and religious rules that encourage individuals to balance their self-interest with concern for the group. For example, moral commandments such as "love your neighbor as yourself" promote prosocial behaviors that contribute to the survival and cohesion of the community. These rules act as "brakes" on purely self- interested behavio
It emphasizes self-interest, suggesting that individuals help others with the expectation of receiving something in return or avoiding negative consequences. Comparing Theories of Altruism Social-Exchange Social Norms Evolutionary People help others because societal norms and expectations dictate that helping behavior is appropriate and praiseworthy. Helping behaviors can enhance the survival and reproduction of genes.
WHY DO WE HELP? Genuine Altruism Refers to a type of helping behavior where individuals selflessly assist others without any expectation of personal gain or reciprocity. In genuine altruism, the primary motivation is the well-being of the recipient, and the helper doesn't seek external rewards, such as recognition, material benefits, or even a "feel-good" emotion.
Genuine Altruism Batson theorized that our willingness to help is influenced by both self-serving and selfless considerations. Holland, Michigan, has a corporation with several thousand employees that, for most of the last half-century, annually gave away 10% of its pretax profits with one stipulation: The gift was always anonymous. In nearby Kalamazoo, anonymous donors in 2005 pledged to provide Michigan public university or community college costs ranging from 65 to 100% depending on length of residence for all the city’s public school graduates. Example: Abraham Lincoln noticed a sow making a terrible noise. Her piglets had gotten into a marshy pond and were in danger of drowning. Lincoln called the coach to a halt, jumped out, ran back, and lifted the little pigs to safety. Upon his return, his companion remarked, “Now, Abe, where does selfishness come in on this little episode?” Lincoln replied, “Why, bless your soul, Ed, that was the very essence of selfishness. I should have had no peace of mind all day had I gone and left that suffering old sow worrying over those pigs. I did it to get peace of mind, don’t you see?”
Genuine Altruism When we feel securely attached to someone,we also feel empathy (Mario Mikulincer 2005). Example: Loving parents suffer when their children suffer and rejoice over their children’s joys. When we value another’s welfare, perceive the person as in need, and take the person’s perspective, we feel empathic concern (Batson et al., 2007). To separate egoistic distress reduction from empathy- based altruism, Batson’s research group conducted studies that aroused empathy. Then the researchers noted whether the aroused people would reduce their own distress by escaping the situation, or whether they would go out of their way to aid the person. The results were consistent: With their empathy aroused, people usually helped, but some also observe the woman’s suffering. Nevertheless, their empathy aroused. Genuine “empathy-induced altruism is part of human nature”
WHEN WILL WE HELP?
In this sector, we can learn how to identify circumstances that prompt people to help, or not to help. Explain how and why helping is influenced by the number and behavior of other bystanders, by mood states, and by traits and values.
CASE OF KITTY GENOVESE .On March 13, 1964, 28-year-old bar manager Kitty Genovese was attacked by a man with a knife as she returned from work to her Queens, New York ,apartment house at 3:00 a.m. Her screams of terror and pleas for help —“Oh my God, he stabbed me! Please help me! Please help me!”—aroused some of her neighbors. Some supposedly came to their windows and caught fleeting glimpses as the attacker left and then returned to attack again. Not until her attacker departed for the second time did anyone call the police. Soon after, Kitty Genovese died.
As the number of bystanders at an emergency increases, any given bystander is (1) less likely to notice the incident, (2) less likely to interpret it as an emergency, and (3) less likely to assume responsibility. Experiments on helping behavior pose an ethical dilemma but fulfill the researcher's mandate to enhance human life by uncovering important influences on behavior. NUMBER OF BYSTANDERS
BYSTANDER EFFECT > the finding that a person is less likely to provide help when there are other bystanders. Factors that influence the bystander effect are the ff. Noticing Interpreting Assuming Responsibility Revisiting Research Ethics 1. 2. 3. 4.
NOTICING Noticing the incident; they conduct an experiment to find out, Latané and Darley (1968) had Columbia University men fill out a questionnaire in a room, either by themselves or with two strangers. While they were working (and being observed through a one-way mirror), there was a staged emergency: Smoke poured into the room through a wall vent. Solitary students, who often glanced idly about the room while working noticed the smoke almost immediately— usually in less than 5 seconds. Those in groups kept their eyes on their work. It typically took them about 20 seconds to notice the smoke.
INTERPRETING interpret as an emergency; once we notice an ambiguous event, we must interpret it. Another experiment conducted, the Smoke-Filled-Room Experiment, smoke pouring into the testing room was much more likely to be reported by individuals working alone than by three person groups. illusion of transparency—a tendency to overestimate others’ ability to “read” our internal states. “pluralistic ignorance”—ignorance that others are thinking and feeling what we are.
ASSUMING RESPONSIBILITY To put it simply, this phenomenon is when an individual does not take action because a large group of other people are present. As the size of the group increases, it’s generally less likely that an individual will take any action. The diffusion of responsibility is most common in larger groups, when nobody has been appointed as the leader, and when the individual does not feel personally responsible for the experience.
REVISITING RESEARCH ETHICS These principles are in place to protect the participant, protect the researcher, and protect the reputation of the field of psychology. The social psychologist has a twofold ethical obligation: to protect the participants and to enhance human welfare by discovering influences upon human behavior.
Helping When Someone Else Does Los Angeles drivers were more likely to offer help to a female driver with a flat tire if a quarter mile earlier they had witnessed someone helping another woman change a tire (Bryan & Test, 1967). British adults were more willing to donate blood if they were approached after observing someone else consent to donating (Rushton & Campbell, 1977). Example: 1. 2.
Time Pressures Similarity > a type of psychological stress that occurs when a person has less time available (real or perceived) than is necessary to complete a task or obtain a result. > is conducive to liking, and liking is conducive to helping, we are more empathic and helpful toward those similar to us (Miller et al., 2001). The similarity bias applies to both dress and beliefs.
SUMMARY When are people most likely to help? One circumstance is when they have just observed someone else helping. Another circumstance that promotes helping is having at least a little spare time; those in a hurry are less likely to help. We tend to help those whom we perceive as being similar to us.
WHO WILL HELP? IDENTIFY SOME TRAITS AND VALUES THAT PREDICT HELPING.
PERSONALITY TRAITS AND STATUS Individual Differences Individual differences in helpfulness and shown that those differences persist over time and are noticed by one’s peers (Hampson, 1984; Penner, 2002; Rushton et al., 1981). Network of Traits Those with high in positive emotionality, empathy, and self-efficacy are most likely to be concerned and helpful (Eisenberg et al., 1991; Krueger et al., 2001; Walker & Frimer, 2007). Those with callous traits (psychopathy) are less helpful and empathic (Beussink et al., 2017). Effectsofpersonalityonaltruism Effectsofpersonalityonaltruism inthreeways inthreeways (Personalityresearchers) (Personalityresearchers)
PERSONALITY TRAITS AND STATUS Personality Influences Those high in self-monitoring are attuned to others’ expectations and are therefore helpful if they think helpfulness will be socially rewarded (White & Gerstein, 1987). People who are more sympathetic to the victims in emergency situations respond faster when they are the only ones there, but slower when there are other bystanders (Hortensius et al., 2016). Effectsofpersonalityonaltruism Effectsofpersonalityonaltruism inthreeways inthreeways (Personalityresearchers) (Personalityresearchers)
PERSONALITY TRAITS AND STATUS Less privileged people were more generous, trusting, and helpful than more privileged people (Piff, 2014; Stellar et al., 2012). Statusandsocialclassalsoaffect Statusandsocialclassalsoaffect altruism. altruism.
The effect of personality or gender may depend on the situation. In dangerous situations in which strangers need help, men more often help (Eagly & Crowley,1986). Recipients of the Carnegie medal for heroism in saving human life, 91% have been men (Eagly, 2009). GENDER
GENDER Indiana University’s Women’s Philanthropy Institute reports that: Single women donate more than single men, Men donate more if married to a woman, and At every income level, female-headed households donate more than male-headed households. 1. 2. 3.
RELIGIOUS FAITH The religiously committed have reported volunteering more hours as tutors, relief workers, and campaigners for social justice, than have the religiously uncommitted (Benson et al., 1980; Hansen et al., 1995; Penner, 2002). Those who feel more spiritually connected to other congregants provide more help (including giving time or money) to family and strangers (Krause & Hayward, 2014).
RELIGIOUS FAITH Worldwide surveys confirm the correlation between faith engagement and volunteering. Highly religious people are despite averaging lower incomes, more likely to report having given away money, volunteered and helped a stranger. Highly religious people said religion is important in their daily life and attended a service. Less religious are all others 1. 2. 3.
HOW CAN WE INCREASE HELPING?
HOW CAN WE INCREASE HELPING? REDUCE AMBIGUITY, INCREASE RESPONSIBILITY Helping can increase if we can prompt people to correctly interpret an incident and to assume responsibility.
HOW CAN WE INCREASE HELPING? REDUCE AMBIGUITY, INCREASE RESPONSIBILITY Personalized Appeal Personal appeals for help are effective; especially if from friends. Leonard Jason and collaborators (1984) confirmed that personal appeals for blood donation are much more effective than posters and media announcements, if the personal appeals come from friend.
HOW CAN WE INCREASE HELPING? GUILT AND CONCERN FOR SELF-IMAGE Awakening people’s guilt increases their desire to help. A Reed College research team led by Richard Katzev (1978) experimented with guilt induced helping. 58% of the guilt-laden individuals offered help. Guilt-laden people are helpful people.
HOW CAN WE INCREASE HELPING? GUILT AND CONCERN FOR SELF-IMAGE Labeling people as helpful can strengthen a helpful self-image. Robert Kraut (1973) told some Connecticut women, “You are a generous person.” Two weeks later, these women were more willing than those not so labeled to contribute to a different charity
HOW CAN WE INCREASE HELPING? TEACHING MORAL INCLUSION Five ways on how to Socialize Altruism: 1. Moral exclusion an omitting certain people from one’s circle of moral concern has the opposite effect. It justifies all sorts of harm, from discrimination to genocide (Opotow, 1990; Staub, 2005a; Tyler & Lind, 1990). A first step toward socializing altruism is therefore to counter the natural ingroup bias favoring kin and tribe by personalizing and broadening the range of people whose well-being should concern us. One way to practice moral inclusion is to believe “all humanity is my ingroup” (McFarland et al., 2012). SOCIALIZATION ALTRUISM 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.
HOW CAN WE INCREASE HELPING? SOCIALIZATION ALTRUISM Five ways on how to Socialize Altruism: 2. TEACHING MORAL INCLUSION a behavior that when we see or read about someone helping, we become more likely to offer assistance. If they had earlier witnessed someone helping a woman who’d dropped books, female shoppers in a real life experiment then became more likely to assist someone who had dropped a dollar (Burger et al., 2014). Real-Life Modeling
HOW CAN WE INCREASE HELPING? SOCIALIZATION ALTRUISM Five ways on how to Socialize Altruism: 2. TEACHING MORAL INCLUSION Prosocial TV models have actually had even greater effects than antisocial models. Lynette Friedrich and Aletha Stein (1973; Stein & Friedrich, 1972) showed preschool children Mister Rogers’ Neighborhood episodes each day for 4 weeks as part of their nursery school program. (Mister Rogers’ Neighborhood aimed to enhance young children’s social and emotional development.) During the viewing period, children from less-educated homes became more cooperative, helpful, and likely to state their feelings. Media Modeling
HOW CAN WE INCREASE HELPING? SOCIALIZATION ALTRUISM Five ways on how to Socialize Altruism: 3. LEARNING BY DOING Staub and his students found that after children were induced to make toys for hospitalized children or for an art teacher, they became more helpful. When children act helpfully, they develop helping-related values, beliefs, and skills, notes Staub. “service learning” and volunteer programs woven into a school curriculum have been shown to increase later citizen involvement, social responsibility, cooperation, and leadership (Andersen, 1998; Putnam, 2000). Ervin Staub (2005b, 2015) has shown that just as immoral behavior fuels immoral attitudes, helping increases future helping.
HOW CAN WE INCREASE HELPING? SOCIALIZATION ALTRUISM Five ways on how to Socialize Altruism: 4. ATTRIBUTING HELPFUL BEHAVIOR TO ALTRUISTIC MOTIVES Overjustification Effect is the result of bribing people to do what they already like doing; they may then see their actions as externally controlled rather than intrinsically appealing. Another clue to socializing altruism comes from research on the overjustification effect:
HOW CAN WE INCREASE HELPING? SOCIALIZATION ALTRUISM Five ways on how to Socialize Altruism: 5. LEARNING ABOUT ALTRUISM Experiments with University of Montana students by Arthur Beaman and colleagues (1978) revealed that once people understand why the presence of bystanders inhibits helping, they become more likely to help in group situations. Researchers have found another way to boost altruism, one that provides a happy chapter conclusion.
THANK YOU FOR LISTENING

More Related Content

PPTX
Chapter 11 – attraction and intimacy(1)
bySiphamandla Ntuli
 
PPTX
Group influence - Social Psychology
byAilene Alea
 
PPTX
Social Psychology: Deindividuation
bycncomeau
 
PPTX
Conflict and Peacemaking
byMingMing Davis
 
PPTX
Helping
byArge143
 
PPTX
Group influence
byMaicah Saballegue
 
PPTX
Social Influence
byCJ F.
 
PPTX
Analyzing Results
byVeniez Sunga
 
Chapter 11 – attraction and intimacy(1)
bySiphamandla Ntuli
 
Group influence - Social Psychology
byAilene Alea
 
Social Psychology: Deindividuation
bycncomeau
 
Conflict and Peacemaking
byMingMing Davis
 
Helping
byArge143
 
Group influence
byMaicah Saballegue
 
Social Influence
byCJ F.
 
Analyzing Results
byVeniez Sunga
 

What's hot

PPT
Social Psychology PowerPoint
byKRyder
 
ODP
Groups & Leadership
byJames Neill
 
PPTX
Deindividuation
byCol Mukteshwar Prasad
 
PPTX
Chapter 1 Introduction to Health Psychology.pptx
byWANMUHAMMADSYAFIQBIN1
 
PPTX
Social Psychology, ch 5 Genes, Culture and Gender by Nouman Khilji
byNoman Khilji
 
PPT
Chapter 18 (social psych)
bydcrocke1
 
PPTX
Behavioral science teaching notes
byRolling Plans Pvt. Ltd.
 
PPTX
George kelly
byMartin Vince Cruz, RPm
 
PPTX
The self in the social world
byFaizaKhalid50
 
PPT
chapter 16 - social psychology
bykbolinsky
 
PPT
Pro social behaviour social psychology
byzahidismailbughlani
 
PPTX
Prosocial behavior ppt final
byDisha Chaudhry
 
PPTX
DRIVE THEORIES.pptx
byNajla45
 
PPTX
Groupthink
byCol Mukteshwar Prasad
 
PPTX
intergroup relationships
byRABIA SHABBIR
 
PPTX
Group Influence In social Psychology Chapter 8
byAsad Majeed
 
PPTX
Adlerian Family Therapy.pptx
byRoseWanjiru7
 
PPTX
Social psychology
bySamanthalee96
 
ODP
Prosocial Behaviour
byJames Neill
 
PPT
Prejudice
byMurali Krishnan L
 
Social Psychology PowerPoint
byKRyder
 
Groups & Leadership
byJames Neill
 
Deindividuation
byCol Mukteshwar Prasad
 
Chapter 1 Introduction to Health Psychology.pptx
byWANMUHAMMADSYAFIQBIN1
 
Social Psychology, ch 5 Genes, Culture and Gender by Nouman Khilji
byNoman Khilji
 
Chapter 18 (social psych)
bydcrocke1
 
Behavioral science teaching notes
byRolling Plans Pvt. Ltd.
 
George kelly
byMartin Vince Cruz, RPm
 
The self in the social world
byFaizaKhalid50
 
chapter 16 - social psychology
bykbolinsky
 
Pro social behaviour social psychology
byzahidismailbughlani
 
Prosocial behavior ppt final
byDisha Chaudhry
 
DRIVE THEORIES.pptx
byNajla45
 
Groupthink
byCol Mukteshwar Prasad
 
intergroup relationships
byRABIA SHABBIR
 
Group Influence In social Psychology Chapter 8
byAsad Majeed
 
Adlerian Family Therapy.pptx
byRoseWanjiru7
 
Social psychology
bySamanthalee96
 
Prosocial Behaviour
byJames Neill
 
Prejudice
byMurali Krishnan L
 

Similar to PSYCH 109_Chapter 12 HELPING_PPT.pdf

PPTX
Helping others and prosocial behavior
byFathÄąma Thabsheera
 
PPTX
C:\Fakepath\Helping Others
byguestb49b5
 
PPTX
HELPING BEHAVIOUR ALTRUISM. Altruism involves acting in a manner that will be...
byMdJahidulIslam91674
 
PPTX
Lecture_16_or_so_Prosocial_Behavior_.pptx
bySakshiAlex
 
PPTX
Altruism
bySuresh Kumar Murugesan
 
PPTX
Is altruism a myth
byGerd Naydock
 
PPTX
Prosocial behavior
byKavery Prathap
 
PPTX
Human Altruism and Cooperation
byArvind Krishnaa
 
PPT
Helping
byMingMing Davis
 
PDF
Understanding the Psychology of Altruism (www.kiu.ac.ug)
bypublication11
 
PPT
Prosocial Behavior
byChristie Barakat
 
PPT
prosocialbehaviour
byzahidismailbughlani
 
PPTX
altruism in psychology university lecture.pptx
byraheelnadeem3
 
PDF
Is Altruism Exist
byCarolina Lewis
 
PPT
8377646.ppt8377646.ppt8377646.ppt8377646.ppt
byalihassantahir2024
 
PPTX
Alturism
byDr. sreeremya S
 
PPTX
Why do people help
byAnn Cabuenas
 
PDF
Altruism Essay
byPaper Writing Services
 
PDF
Altruism Essay
byBuying Essays Online Newark
 
PPTX
ALTRUISM AND HELPING OTHER SENSATION.pptx
byHaniJaleel
 
Helping others and prosocial behavior
byFathÄąma Thabsheera
 
C:\Fakepath\Helping Others
byguestb49b5
 
HELPING BEHAVIOUR ALTRUISM. Altruism involves acting in a manner that will be...
byMdJahidulIslam91674
 
Lecture_16_or_so_Prosocial_Behavior_.pptx
bySakshiAlex
 
Altruism
bySuresh Kumar Murugesan
 
Is altruism a myth
byGerd Naydock
 
Prosocial behavior
byKavery Prathap
 
Human Altruism and Cooperation
byArvind Krishnaa
 
Helping
byMingMing Davis
 
Understanding the Psychology of Altruism (www.kiu.ac.ug)
bypublication11
 
Prosocial Behavior
byChristie Barakat
 
prosocialbehaviour
byzahidismailbughlani
 
altruism in psychology university lecture.pptx
byraheelnadeem3
 
Is Altruism Exist
byCarolina Lewis
 
8377646.ppt8377646.ppt8377646.ppt8377646.ppt
byalihassantahir2024
 
Alturism
byDr. sreeremya S
 
Why do people help
byAnn Cabuenas
 
Altruism Essay
byPaper Writing Services
 
Altruism Essay
byBuying Essays Online Newark
 
ALTRUISM AND HELPING OTHER SENSATION.pptx
byHaniJaleel
 

Recently uploaded

PPTX
Exploring Higher education and its pathways
byEVAMAEBONGHANOY5
 
PDF
Chapter 05 Drug Acting on CNS Sedatives & Hypnotics | Antipsychotics.pdf
bySandeshSul
 
PPTX
HABIT. Cognitive process. I Semester Shilpa Hotakar pptx
bySHILPA HOTAKAR
 
PPTX
COMMUNICATION ITS PROCESS ELEMENTS & BARRIER .pptx
byPoojaSen20
 
PPTX
West Hatch High School - GCSE Spanish Presentation
byWestHatch
 
PPTX
Grade 9 and 10 learner Fuse and Switch.pptx
byCarlJohnCabayao
 
PPTX
Poster Based Ethical Reflection - Dharma and Values Poster.pptx
byRajshreeBeneymadoo
 
PPTX
Metabolism ( BIOCHEMISTRY & CLINICAL PATHOLOGY )
byBushraDeshpande
 
PPTX
West Hatch High School - GCSE Media Studies
byWestHatch
 
PDF
Aminoglycosides.pdf for B.Pharmacy Medicinal Chemistry-III (BP601T), GPAT, a...
bymominzarinamdnajeeb
 
PDF
Risks and opportunities of artificial intelligence in education: A critical view
byYannis
 
PPTX
Appreciations - Jan 26 01.pptxkkkmmkmkmkmkm
bypreetheshparmar
 
PDF
U.S. Departments of Education and Treasury fact sheet
byMebane Rash
 
PDF
Information about Presentation strategies
bymansivaja18126
 
PDF
Beak Modifications by Dr. Ramzan Virani pptx.pdf
byDr. Ramzan Virani
 
PPTX
"Aristotle : Father Of Western Philosophy"
bymitalbarathod28
 
PPTX
West Hatch High School -- GCSE Geography
byWestHatch
 
PPTX
Toba Tek Singh - Visualising Partition through Manto's Lens
bymiraljoshi48
 
PPTX
'Colonial Mentality and Social Identity in Karma by Khushwant Singh'
byKrishnarajsinh Parmar
 
PPTX
Unit 3- Culture.pptx....................
byAkanksha Kotangale
 
Exploring Higher education and its pathways
byEVAMAEBONGHANOY5
 
Chapter 05 Drug Acting on CNS Sedatives & Hypnotics | Antipsychotics.pdf
bySandeshSul
 
HABIT. Cognitive process. I Semester Shilpa Hotakar pptx
bySHILPA HOTAKAR
 
COMMUNICATION ITS PROCESS ELEMENTS & BARRIER .pptx
byPoojaSen20
 
West Hatch High School - GCSE Spanish Presentation
byWestHatch
 
Grade 9 and 10 learner Fuse and Switch.pptx
byCarlJohnCabayao
 
Poster Based Ethical Reflection - Dharma and Values Poster.pptx
byRajshreeBeneymadoo
 
Metabolism ( BIOCHEMISTRY & CLINICAL PATHOLOGY )
byBushraDeshpande
 
West Hatch High School - GCSE Media Studies
byWestHatch
 
Aminoglycosides.pdf for B.Pharmacy Medicinal Chemistry-III (BP601T), GPAT, a...
bymominzarinamdnajeeb
 
Risks and opportunities of artificial intelligence in education: A critical view
byYannis
 
Appreciations - Jan 26 01.pptxkkkmmkmkmkmkm
bypreetheshparmar
 
U.S. Departments of Education and Treasury fact sheet
byMebane Rash
 
Information about Presentation strategies
bymansivaja18126
 
Beak Modifications by Dr. Ramzan Virani pptx.pdf
byDr. Ramzan Virani
 
"Aristotle : Father Of Western Philosophy"
bymitalbarathod28
 
West Hatch High School -- GCSE Geography
byWestHatch
 
Toba Tek Singh - Visualising Partition through Manto's Lens
bymiraljoshi48
 
'Colonial Mentality and Social Identity in Karma by Khushwant Singh'
byKrishnarajsinh Parmar
 
Unit 3- Culture.pptx....................
byAkanksha Kotangale
 

PSYCH 109_Chapter 12 HELPING_PPT.pdf

  • 1.
  • 2.
    WHY DO WEHELP? WHEN WILL WE HELP? WHO WILL HELP? HOW CAN WE INCREASE HELPING? TOPIC OUTLINE Today's Discussion
  • 3.
    2000 trees formthe Garden of the Righteous These “righteous Gentiles” knew that if the refugees were discovered, Nazi policy dictated that host and refugee would suffer a common fate. Many did (Hellman, 1980; Wiesel, 1985) One hero who did not survive was Jane Haining In April 1944, Haining accused a cook of eating sparse food rations intended for her girls. A few weeks later, she was sent to Auschwitz, where she suffered the same fate as millions of Jews. Altruism is selfishness in reverse. An altruistic person is concerned and helpful even when no benefits are offered or expected in return
  • 4.
    WHY DO WEHELP? Social Exchange and Social Norms One explanation assumes that human interactions are guided by “social economics.” We exchange not only material goods and money but also social goods—love, services, information, status (Foa & Foa, 1975). Social-Exchange Theory (The theory that human interactions are transactions that aim to maximize one’s rewards and minimize one’s costs.)
  • 5.
    Increasing Positive Emotion ExternalReward We give to get Internal Reward Focused on increasing positive emotions. Rewards that motivate helping may be external or internal. Reducing Negative Emotion The benefits of helping also include reducing or avoiding negative emotions. Near someone in distress, we may feel distress.
  • 6.
    Guilt Distress is notthe only negative emotion we act to reduce. Throughout recorded history, guilt has been a painful emotion that people avoid and seek to relieve (Ty et al., 2017). Exceptions to the Feel-Bad/Do-Good scenario Among well-socialized adults, should we always expect to find the “feel-bad/do- good” phenomenon? No. One negative mood, anger, produces anything but compassion. Another exception is profound grief. People who suffer the loss of a spouse or a child, whether through death or separation, often undergo a period of intense self-preoccupation, which restrains giving to others (Aderman & Berkowitz, 1983; Gibbons & Wicklund, 1982).
  • 7.
    Feel Good, DoGood So, are happy people unhelpful? Quite the contrary. There are few more consistent findings in psychology: Happy people are helpful people. This effect occurs with both children and adults, regardless of whether the good mood comes from a success, from thinking happy thoughts, or from any of several other positive experiences (Salovey et al., 1991). In Opole, Poland, Dariusz Dolinski and Richard Nawrat (1998) found that a positive mood of relief can dramatically boost helping.
  • 8.
    WHY DO WEHELP? Social Norms Often, we help others not because we have calculated consciously that such behavior is in our self-interest but because of a subtler form of self-interest: because something tells us we ought to.
  • 9.
    The Reciprocity Norm Oneuniversal moral code is a reciprocity norm: To those who help us, we should return help, not harm (Gouldner, 1960). We “invest” in others and expect dividends. The Social-Responsibility Norm The social-responsibility norm decrees that people should help those who need help, without regard to future exchanges (Berkowitz, 1972; Schwartz, 1975). If a person on crutches drops a book, you honor the social responsibility norm as you pick it up.
  • 10.
    Gender and ReceivingHelp If, indeed, perception of another’s need strongly determines one’s willingness to help, will women receive more help than men? That is indeed the case. Alice Eagly and Maureen Crowley (1986) located 35 studies that compared help received by male or female victims. ((Virtually all the studies involved short-term encounters with strangers in need—the very situations in which people expect males to be chivalrous, note Eagly and Crowley.)) Women offered help equally to males and females, whereas men offered more help when the persons in need were females. Women not only receive more offers of help in certain situations but also seek more help (Addis & Mahalik, 2003). They more often welcome help from friends. Arie Nadler (1991), a Tel Aviv University expert on help-seeking, attributes this to gender differences in individualism versus collectivism—women are more collectivistic and thus more willing to ask others to help.
  • 11.
    EVOLUTIONARY PSYCHOLOGY Life’s essence isgene survival. When our ancestors died, their genes lived on, predisposing us to behave in ways that will spread them into the future. Mechanisms for overcoming selfishness (Nowak & Highfield, 2011; Pfaff, 2014), including the following: Kin selection: If you carry my genes, I’ll favor you. Direct reciprocity: We scratch each other’s backs. Indirect reciprocity: I’ll scratch your back, you scratch someone’s, and someone will scratch mine. Group selection: Back-scratching groups survive.
  • 12.
    KIN SELECTION The ideathat evolution has selected altruism toward one’s close relatives to enhance the survival of mutually shared genes. The kin selection principle implies that nature (as well as culture) programs us to care about close relatives. Example: Carlos Rogers of the Toronto Raptors NBA basketball team volunteered to end his career and donate a kidney to his sister (who died before she could receive it), people applauded his self-sacrificial love
  • 13.
    Reciprocity -The giver expectslater to be the getter. Two forms of Reciprocity: Direct reciprocity- individuals help others, expecting that those they help will, in turn, help them when the need arises. For example, if you assist a friend with moving to a new house, you might expect them to help you in a similar way when you need it. Indirect reciprocity- involves helping or cooperating with someone, not because you expect a direct benefit from them, but because you hope to establish a positive reputation within a larger social group.
  • 14.
    GROUP SELECTION Groups ofmutually supportive altruists outlast groups of non-altruists (Krebs, 1998; McAndrew, 2002; Wilson, 2015). This idea implies that there can be an advantage to altruism at the group level, even if it comes at a cost to individuals within the group. Example: Social insects like bees and ants work sacrificially for the survival of their colonies, which can be seen as an example of group selection in action.
  • 15.
    GROUP SELECTION There isalso an ingroup loyalty, where they may sacrifice for the benefit of their own group or community. This is a kin to employees in a corporation competing with each other but also cooperating to ensure the success of the company as a whole. Ingroup loyalty can be seen as a form of group-level cooperation and altruism. Donald Campbell (1975a,b) offered another basis for unreciprocated altruism: Ethical and religious rules that encourage individuals to balance their self-interest with concern for the group. For example, moral commandments such as "love your neighbor as yourself" promote prosocial behaviors that contribute to the survival and cohesion of the community. These rules act as "brakes" on purely self- interested behavio
  • 16.
    It emphasizes self-interest, suggestingthat individuals help others with the expectation of receiving something in return or avoiding negative consequences. Comparing Theories of Altruism Social-Exchange Social Norms Evolutionary People help others because societal norms and expectations dictate that helping behavior is appropriate and praiseworthy. Helping behaviors can enhance the survival and reproduction of genes.
  • 17.
    WHY DO WEHELP? Genuine Altruism Refers to a type of helping behavior where individuals selflessly assist others without any expectation of personal gain or reciprocity. In genuine altruism, the primary motivation is the well-being of the recipient, and the helper doesn't seek external rewards, such as recognition, material benefits, or even a "feel-good" emotion.
  • 18.
    Genuine Altruism Batson theorizedthat our willingness to help is influenced by both self-serving and selfless considerations. Holland, Michigan, has a corporation with several thousand employees that, for most of the last half-century, annually gave away 10% of its pretax profits with one stipulation: The gift was always anonymous. In nearby Kalamazoo, anonymous donors in 2005 pledged to provide Michigan public university or community college costs ranging from 65 to 100% depending on length of residence for all the city’s public school graduates. Example: Abraham Lincoln noticed a sow making a terrible noise. Her piglets had gotten into a marshy pond and were in danger of drowning. Lincoln called the coach to a halt, jumped out, ran back, and lifted the little pigs to safety. Upon his return, his companion remarked, “Now, Abe, where does selfishness come in on this little episode?” Lincoln replied, “Why, bless your soul, Ed, that was the very essence of selfishness. I should have had no peace of mind all day had I gone and left that suffering old sow worrying over those pigs. I did it to get peace of mind, don’t you see?”
  • 19.
    Genuine Altruism When wefeel securely attached to someone,we also feel empathy (Mario Mikulincer 2005). Example: Loving parents suffer when their children suffer and rejoice over their children’s joys. When we value another’s welfare, perceive the person as in need, and take the person’s perspective, we feel empathic concern (Batson et al., 2007). To separate egoistic distress reduction from empathy- based altruism, Batson’s research group conducted studies that aroused empathy. Then the researchers noted whether the aroused people would reduce their own distress by escaping the situation, or whether they would go out of their way to aid the person. The results were consistent: With their empathy aroused, people usually helped, but some also observe the woman’s suffering. Nevertheless, their empathy aroused. Genuine “empathy-induced altruism is part of human nature”
  • 20.
  • 21.
    In this sector,we can learn how to identify circumstances that prompt people to help, or not to help. Explain how and why helping is influenced by the number and behavior of other bystanders, by mood states, and by traits and values.
  • 22.
    CASE OF KITTYGENOVESE .On March 13, 1964, 28-year-old bar manager Kitty Genovese was attacked by a man with a knife as she returned from work to her Queens, New York ,apartment house at 3:00 a.m. Her screams of terror and pleas for help —“Oh my God, he stabbed me! Please help me! Please help me!”—aroused some of her neighbors. Some supposedly came to their windows and caught fleeting glimpses as the attacker left and then returned to attack again. Not until her attacker departed for the second time did anyone call the police. Soon after, Kitty Genovese died.
  • 23.
    As the numberof bystanders at an emergency increases, any given bystander is (1) less likely to notice the incident, (2) less likely to interpret it as an emergency, and (3) less likely to assume responsibility. Experiments on helping behavior pose an ethical dilemma but fulfill the researcher's mandate to enhance human life by uncovering important influences on behavior. NUMBER OF BYSTANDERS
  • 24.
    BYSTANDER EFFECT > thefinding that a person is less likely to provide help when there are other bystanders. Factors that influence the bystander effect are the ff. Noticing Interpreting Assuming Responsibility Revisiting Research Ethics 1. 2. 3. 4.
  • 25.
    NOTICING Noticing the incident;they conduct an experiment to find out, Latané and Darley (1968) had Columbia University men fill out a questionnaire in a room, either by themselves or with two strangers. While they were working (and being observed through a one-way mirror), there was a staged emergency: Smoke poured into the room through a wall vent. Solitary students, who often glanced idly about the room while working noticed the smoke almost immediately— usually in less than 5 seconds. Those in groups kept their eyes on their work. It typically took them about 20 seconds to notice the smoke.
  • 26.
    INTERPRETING interpret as anemergency; once we notice an ambiguous event, we must interpret it. Another experiment conducted, the Smoke-Filled-Room Experiment, smoke pouring into the testing room was much more likely to be reported by individuals working alone than by three person groups. illusion of transparency—a tendency to overestimate others’ ability to “read” our internal states. “pluralistic ignorance”—ignorance that others are thinking and feeling what we are.
  • 27.
    ASSUMING RESPONSIBILITY To put itsimply, this phenomenon is when an individual does not take action because a large group of other people are present. As the size of the group increases, it’s generally less likely that an individual will take any action. The diffusion of responsibility is most common in larger groups, when nobody has been appointed as the leader, and when the individual does not feel personally responsible for the experience.
  • 28.
    REVISITING RESEARCH ETHICS These principlesare in place to protect the participant, protect the researcher, and protect the reputation of the field of psychology. The social psychologist has a twofold ethical obligation: to protect the participants and to enhance human welfare by discovering influences upon human behavior.
  • 29.
    Helping When SomeoneElse Does Los Angeles drivers were more likely to offer help to a female driver with a flat tire if a quarter mile earlier they had witnessed someone helping another woman change a tire (Bryan & Test, 1967). British adults were more willing to donate blood if they were approached after observing someone else consent to donating (Rushton & Campbell, 1977). Example: 1. 2.
  • 30.
    Time Pressures Similarity > atype of psychological stress that occurs when a person has less time available (real or perceived) than is necessary to complete a task or obtain a result. > is conducive to liking, and liking is conducive to helping, we are more empathic and helpful toward those similar to us (Miller et al., 2001). The similarity bias applies to both dress and beliefs.
  • 31.
    SUMMARY When are peoplemost likely to help? One circumstance is when they have just observed someone else helping. Another circumstance that promotes helping is having at least a little spare time; those in a hurry are less likely to help. We tend to help those whom we perceive as being similar to us.
  • 32.
    WHO WILL HELP? IDENTIFY SOMETRAITS AND VALUES THAT PREDICT HELPING.
  • 33.
    PERSONALITY TRAITS AND STATUS IndividualDifferences Individual differences in helpfulness and shown that those differences persist over time and are noticed by one’s peers (Hampson, 1984; Penner, 2002; Rushton et al., 1981). Network of Traits Those with high in positive emotionality, empathy, and self-efficacy are most likely to be concerned and helpful (Eisenberg et al., 1991; Krueger et al., 2001; Walker & Frimer, 2007). Those with callous traits (psychopathy) are less helpful and empathic (Beussink et al., 2017). Effectsofpersonalityonaltruism Effectsofpersonalityonaltruism inthreeways inthreeways (Personalityresearchers) (Personalityresearchers)
  • 34.
    PERSONALITY TRAITS AND STATUS PersonalityInfluences Those high in self-monitoring are attuned to others’ expectations and are therefore helpful if they think helpfulness will be socially rewarded (White & Gerstein, 1987). People who are more sympathetic to the victims in emergency situations respond faster when they are the only ones there, but slower when there are other bystanders (Hortensius et al., 2016). Effectsofpersonalityonaltruism Effectsofpersonalityonaltruism inthreeways inthreeways (Personalityresearchers) (Personalityresearchers)
  • 35.
    PERSONALITY TRAITS AND STATUS Lessprivileged people were more generous, trusting, and helpful than more privileged people (Piff, 2014; Stellar et al., 2012). Statusandsocialclassalsoaffect Statusandsocialclassalsoaffect altruism. altruism.
  • 36.
    The effect ofpersonality or gender may depend on the situation. In dangerous situations in which strangers need help, men more often help (Eagly & Crowley,1986). Recipients of the Carnegie medal for heroism in saving human life, 91% have been men (Eagly, 2009). GENDER
  • 37.
    GENDER Indiana University’s Women’sPhilanthropy Institute reports that: Single women donate more than single men, Men donate more if married to a woman, and At every income level, female-headed households donate more than male-headed households. 1. 2. 3.
  • 38.
    RELIGIOUS FAITH The religiously committedhave reported volunteering more hours as tutors, relief workers, and campaigners for social justice, than have the religiously uncommitted (Benson et al., 1980; Hansen et al., 1995; Penner, 2002). Those who feel more spiritually connected to other congregants provide more help (including giving time or money) to family and strangers (Krause & Hayward, 2014).
  • 39.
    RELIGIOUS FAITH Worldwide surveys confirmthe correlation between faith engagement and volunteering. Highly religious people are despite averaging lower incomes, more likely to report having given away money, volunteered and helped a stranger. Highly religious people said religion is important in their daily life and attended a service. Less religious are all others 1. 2. 3.
  • 40.
  • 41.
    HOW CAN WE INCREASE HELPING? REDUCE AMBIGUITY, INCREASE RESPONSIBILITY Helping canincrease if we can prompt people to correctly interpret an incident and to assume responsibility.
  • 42.
    HOW CAN WE INCREASE HELPING? REDUCE AMBIGUITY, INCREASE RESPONSIBILITY Personalized Appeal Personalappeals for help are effective; especially if from friends. Leonard Jason and collaborators (1984) confirmed that personal appeals for blood donation are much more effective than posters and media announcements, if the personal appeals come from friend.
  • 43.
    HOW CAN WEINCREASE HELPING? GUILT AND CONCERN FOR SELF-IMAGE Awakening people’s guilt increases their desire to help. A Reed College research team led by Richard Katzev (1978) experimented with guilt induced helping. 58% of the guilt-laden individuals offered help. Guilt-laden people are helpful people.
  • 44.
    HOW CAN WEINCREASE HELPING? GUILT AND CONCERN FOR SELF-IMAGE Labeling people as helpful can strengthen a helpful self-image. Robert Kraut (1973) told some Connecticut women, “You are a generous person.” Two weeks later, these women were more willing than those not so labeled to contribute to a different charity
  • 45.
    HOW CAN WE INCREASE HELPING? TEACHING MORAL INCLUSION Fiveways on how to Socialize Altruism: 1. Moral exclusion an omitting certain people from one’s circle of moral concern has the opposite effect. It justifies all sorts of harm, from discrimination to genocide (Opotow, 1990; Staub, 2005a; Tyler & Lind, 1990). A first step toward socializing altruism is therefore to counter the natural ingroup bias favoring kin and tribe by personalizing and broadening the range of people whose well-being should concern us. One way to practice moral inclusion is to believe “all humanity is my ingroup” (McFarland et al., 2012). SOCIALIZATION ALTRUISM 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.
  • 46.
    HOW CAN WE INCREASE HELPING? SOCIALIZATION ALTRUISM Five wayson how to Socialize Altruism: 2. TEACHING MORAL INCLUSION a behavior that when we see or read about someone helping, we become more likely to offer assistance. If they had earlier witnessed someone helping a woman who’d dropped books, female shoppers in a real life experiment then became more likely to assist someone who had dropped a dollar (Burger et al., 2014). Real-Life Modeling
  • 47.
    HOW CAN WE INCREASE HELPING? SOCIALIZATION ALTRUISM Five wayson how to Socialize Altruism: 2. TEACHING MORAL INCLUSION Prosocial TV models have actually had even greater effects than antisocial models. Lynette Friedrich and Aletha Stein (1973; Stein & Friedrich, 1972) showed preschool children Mister Rogers’ Neighborhood episodes each day for 4 weeks as part of their nursery school program. (Mister Rogers’ Neighborhood aimed to enhance young children’s social and emotional development.) During the viewing period, children from less-educated homes became more cooperative, helpful, and likely to state their feelings. Media Modeling
  • 48.
    HOW CAN WE INCREASE HELPING? SOCIALIZATION ALTRUISM Five wayson how to Socialize Altruism: 3. LEARNING BY DOING Staub and his students found that after children were induced to make toys for hospitalized children or for an art teacher, they became more helpful. When children act helpfully, they develop helping-related values, beliefs, and skills, notes Staub. “service learning” and volunteer programs woven into a school curriculum have been shown to increase later citizen involvement, social responsibility, cooperation, and leadership (Andersen, 1998; Putnam, 2000). Ervin Staub (2005b, 2015) has shown that just as immoral behavior fuels immoral attitudes, helping increases future helping.
  • 49.
    HOW CAN WE INCREASE HELPING? SOCIALIZATION ALTRUISM Five wayson how to Socialize Altruism: 4. ATTRIBUTING HELPFUL BEHAVIOR TO ALTRUISTIC MOTIVES Overjustification Effect is the result of bribing people to do what they already like doing; they may then see their actions as externally controlled rather than intrinsically appealing. Another clue to socializing altruism comes from research on the overjustification effect:
  • 50.
    HOW CAN WE INCREASE HELPING? SOCIALIZATION ALTRUISM Five wayson how to Socialize Altruism: 5. LEARNING ABOUT ALTRUISM Experiments with University of Montana students by Arthur Beaman and colleagues (1978) revealed that once people understand why the presence of bystanders inhibits helping, they become more likely to help in group situations. Researchers have found another way to boost altruism, one that provides a happy chapter conclusion.
  • 51.