• Shuffle
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Alphabetize
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Front First
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Both Sides
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Read
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
Reading...
Front

How to study your flashcards.

Right/Left arrow keys: Navigate between flashcards.right arrow keyleft arrow key

Up/Down arrow keys: Flip the card between the front and back.down keyup key

H key: Show hint (3rd side).h key

A key: Read text to speech.a key

image

Play button

image

Play button

image

Progress

1/19

Click to flip

19 Cards in this Set

  • Front
  • Back
Prosocial behavior
Behavior performed with the goal of benefiting another person
Altruism
Prosocial behavior that does not benefit the helper at all
Subset of prosocial behavior..in no way benefits the person providing the help
3 evolutionary factors
Evolutionary Factors
Kinship selection
Preferential helping of genetic relatives
Help the people genetically related to you
If relative survive, genes also survive..more likely to help if related closer genetically
Reciprocal helping
Help others so they will help you
Fits with norm of reciprocity…humans evolves in groups
More likely to survive if they had understanding with neighbors for a norm of reciprocity
Cooperative groups
Help ingroup members more than outgroup members
Even if this doesn’t directly help my genes survive, it still makes sure that my group will survive longer than the other group (adaptive)
Social exchange theory
Help when rewards are greater than costs
Motivated by us maximizing awards and minimizing costs
Empathy
Putting self in another person’s place
Can lead to altruism
Empathy-altruism hypothesis (Batson, 1991)
Empathy: Altruistic motivation drives helping
No empathy: Social exchange drives helping
The same act being explained
Goal will be to help that person…a selfless goal
Just feels personally upset…he is doing it for selfish reasons because he will benefit..his motive is to make himself feel better
How do we know if they did it for altruistic reasons or ego reasons? You have to ask “was there an easy way out of this situation”
Role models with altruistic personalities
People who have role models to help, are more likely to help
Study manipulated whether there was a role model helping that woman or not..second flat tire down the road..more likely to help second woman
Also, parents who model it have kids that help more often
5 things of WHO is likely to help
Role models
Ingroup status
People more likely to help people in their ingroup
Gender?
Women are more likely to help in ways that require emotional nurturance/commitment
Men are more likely to help in heroic events…mayor rushed in to carry woman out
Good mood
Good moods! People who are near cookie smells are more likely to provide help

Increase compliance too with mood maintenance…happy primes
Bad mood
Sometimes bad moods can increase helping too
Guilt increases likelihood of unasked-for helping, even if no one helps
Will you take a picture of me with your friend..camera doesn’t work “you broke my camera” or “this thing breaks all the time”…manipulating whether you feel guilty…old lady walks by and candy falls out of bag..who is going to help her pick up that candy more often? “you broke my camera”
(negative state relief hypothesis)
4 things of who is more likely to RECEIVE help
Friends (vs. strangers)
Whether you are asking for help from friends or strangers..more likely to get help if asking friends or people you are close with
Other factors?
Attractiveness
Attractive people get more help…have that stereotype that attractive people have all of these other good qualities
Responsibility for predicament
More likely to receive help, if it seems like it was not your fault
Or maybe the “Just world hypothesis”
More comforting if the people did something to deserve it..this would be a impediment to helping
Similarity
Like people who are similar to us…evolutionary motivated to help people in our in-groups
Bystander effect
Presence of other people actually inhibits helping behavior
Its not my place to tell her..somebody else will tell her..the number of people witness an event, determines
The more people witness someone needing help, less likely each individual person is for providing help
Why? Diffusion of responsibility
Expectation that others will or should take responsibility for helping
Darley and Latane study
Group discussion over intercom
IV: 2-student, 3-student, or 5-student group
“Victim”:
“. . .I could really er use some help so if somebody here er help er uh uh uh (choking sounds) . . . I’m gonna die er er I’m gonna die er help er er seizure (chokes, then is quiet).”
DV: % who helped within 6 minutes
And how quickly

As there are more people who witness emergency, less chance that people get help over time
Van Bommel reading/study
Hypothesis?
High public self-awareness (concern with how others view us) & bystander effect:
The bystander effect can be reversed if the people feel accountable for their actions, or other people are watching them or judging them..high in public self awareness
2 studies
How do they manipulate public self-awareness?
S1? Does your name stand out
S2? camera
How do they manipulate number of bystanders?
# of others in chat room
How do they measure helping?
How many responses they gave to help seeking messages
What do they find?
Study 1 is classic bystander effect…the more bystanders, less people helped…they saw this effect when name wasn’t special..when name stood out, they got a reversal…more bystanders, less people helped

Study 2 same thing..more people, less helping…but with camera, get reversal
If you are made to feel that there are eyes on you, you will reverse it..more likely to help
5 steps of providing help
Noticing, interpreting, taking responsibility, deciding how to help, helping
Step 1: noticing
Ps were studying to be ministers, asked to give a talk
Talk topic: ½ Good Samaritan (parable) or ½ job prospects
Rushed or not: ahead of schedule, on time, or late
On their way to the talk, Ps passed a person who was slumped in a doorway, coughing & groaning
Who helped?


THINKING OF HELPING OR NOT HAD NO EFFECT ON WHETHER HELPED OR NOT
Step 2: Interpreting
Pluralistic Ignorance
People mistakenly believe that their own feelings are different from those of others, even though everyone’s behavior is the same.
You think they have more information than you.
Darley & Latane (1968)
Smoke-filled room
Alone or in groups of 3
Who alerted the experimenter?
Alone? 75%
Group of 3? 38%

Interpreting what you notice as an emergency
More about Step 2 interpreting
2: we feel less likely to interpret something as emergency if the two know each other
Step 3: taking responsibility
If feel anonymous, less likely to help..like Van bommel article
Group roles make you feel more responsible
Step 4: deciding how to help
Special skills?

Direct help
Do something yourself (e.g., medical procedure)
Competence important
Indirect help
Get someone else to do something


Particularly important for direct help
But some kinds of help are more indirect like calling the police

lack of competence
Step 5 helping
Still have to overcome…
Cost-benefit analysis
Still have to overcome social exchange theory (is it worth the risk to help)




Audience inhibition
Reduced helping due to concern over how we will look to others