Social Psychology Final: Chapter 14 (Altruism)

men vs. women in helping

men: are more likely to help in "heroic" ways: ex. putting their life on the line women: are more likely to help in "nurturing" ways: ex. long-term: volunteering at a nursing home

Batson's experiment: testing empathic concern

participant watches a confederate being shocked. the participant is asked to take shocks for them, but they also had the option to leave. the option to leave represented what the person would do if they were in personal distress, and staying and taking the shocks represented what they would do out of empathic concern. issues: social rewards due to the fact they were being watched, they selected people already high in either distress or empathic concern: they didn't manipulate these factors

the types of motives Batson proposed

selfish motives: social rewards, personal distress altruistic motives: empathic concern

who is more likely to be helped?

someone who is seriously injured, whose injuries do not add to the cost of helping them (ex. if their injuries are really draining or dangerous to help) women, especially if they are dressed femininely. people who are similar to the helpers -- people are more likely to help if the victim is similar to them, or is in their ingroup. (so, minorities are less likely to be helped)

Tit-for-Tat

the best strategy in the prisoner's dilemma begin with cooperation and then copy the partner's last move.

what is the other evidence we have for true empathic concern?

1. differential physiological responses: facial expressions, heart rate deceleration, opposite that of a fight or flight response when exposed to empathic stimuli 2. people with more empathy are more likely to volunteer. people develop empathy from a family environment of altruism as a moral value. it's very difficult to acquire through other routes.

why does the tit-for-tat strategy work?

It's: cooperative (encourages mutually supportive action toward a shared goal), not envious (not just focused on gains -- can do well without resorting to compeititve behavior), not exploitable (not blindly prosocial), forgives (if you cooperate, so will they), and is easy to read (it doesn't take long for others to know this is what you're doing)

the prisoner's dilemma

a common way of studying cooperation vs. competition players can cooperate or defect with different consequences for each outcome. double cooperation is the best compromise, because it means both get a short sentence. if 1 defects: then 1 person doesn't go to jail and the other goes for twice as long if 2 defect: both of them have to go to jail.

kin selection

altruistic behavior benefitting those who share your genes means your genes still get passed on you should help relatives and siblings so your genes will get passed on

Daniel Batson's theory about altruism

any altruistic act has multiple motives, including true altruism

evolutionary perspective of altruism

at first, seems like it contradicts evolutionary theory but kin selection and reciprocity make it compatible

bystander intervention

giving assistance to someone in need on the part of those who have witnessed an emergency. this is reduced as the number of observers increases, because each person feels that someone else will probably help -- it's caused by diffusion of responsibility

empathic concern

empathy at the heart: thinking of the feelings of the victim. identifying with the person in need and wanting to enhance their welfare, not ours.

personal distress

feeling bad at the sight of others' pain, rather than empathy we help to avoid this negative feeling we get from seeing suffering

impression formation study

fixed issues with the shock experiment empathy was directly manipulated by being asked to be objective or to vividly imagine another's feelings. those manipulated to feel empathy were more likely to help, even when no one would know if they had helped or not. they would volunteer how many hours they'd be willing to spend with this person they learned about it eliminated social rewards by: the use of an envelope so participants' actions would be secret, and in addition, they would never meet the experimenter.

pluralistic ignorance

how we see the situation has to do with others' actions and reactions. if no one acts like they perceive an emergency, everyone will think there isn't one. ex. experiment where confederates didn't react to smoke in the laboratory. not being able to see others' facial expressions makes pluralistic ignorance more likely.

reciprocity

if helping others means you'll be helped too, then the strategy of helping others is beneficial. if you help someone now, they'll help you later. ex. vampire bats: will only help bats who've helped others in the past

construal and the prisoner's dilemma

if the game was referred to as the "wall street game," people are more likely to defect because they see the game as a competition.

cultural norms and cooperation

interdependent cultures are more likely to cooperate independent cultures are more likely to defect

social rewards

praise, liking, respect when others in your group look well on you you want to be seen as a good person, so you do an altruistic act.

religion's effect on helping

priming task: when primed with religion, people helped more. but when primed with civic words, people also helped more. because religion and government emphasizes fairness, cooperation, and equality: these all elicit prosocial behavior

good samaritan seminary study

proves the effectiveness of situational factors on altruism all that mattered in determining whether or not students helped was whether or not they were in a hurry.

diffusion of responsibility

reduction of the sense of urgency to help someone involved in a dangerous situation under the assumption that others who are also observing the situation will help

rural vs. urban in helping

rural: more help urban: less help after population reaches 50,000, further increases don't matter in how much people help -- but the smaller the town the more the help "everybody knows everybody" safety is increased in small towns increase in people increases the bystander effect also, urban environments can sometimes be overstimulating, so you'll shut out cries for help

effect of class on helping

those of lower social class are more empathic and help more high power --> low empathy low power --> high empathy people who make less give a larger portion of their wealth away when wealthy were told to feel compassionate, they would then begin to approach the amount that the lower class people gave

altruism

unselfish behavior that benefits others without regard to consequences for the self there's a debate over whether or not true altruism actually exists

how does construal affect altruism?

we need to know: 1. that someone is struggling and 2. that we need to help them or we may not help

Kitty Genovese assault

woman is stabbed repeatedly and screams for help. 38 people heard her and none helped. what contributed: diffusion of responsibility, lack of bystander intervention