Helping behavior

Last updated
Workers and people from the nearby town helping repair a water borehole in Ghana Workers and Volunteers helping out.jpg
Workers and people from the nearby town helping repair a water borehole in Ghana

Helping behavior refers to voluntary actions intended to help others, with reward regarded or disregarded. It is a type of prosocial behavior (voluntary action intended to help or benefit another individual or group of individuals, [1] such as sharing, comforting, rescuing and helping).

Contents

Altruism is distinguished from helping behavior in this way: Altruism refers to prosocial behaviors that are carried out without expectation of obtaining external reward (concrete reward or social reward) or internal reward (self-reward). An example of altruism would be anonymously donating to charity. [2]

Perspectives on helping behavior[ clarification needed ]

Kin selection theory

Kin selection theory explains altruism from an evolutionary perspective. Since natural selection screens out species without abilities to adapt to the challenging environment, preservation of good traits and superior genes are important for survival of future generations (i.e. inclusive fitness). [3] Kin selection refers to an inheritable tendency to perform behaviors that may favor the chance of survival of people with a similar genetic base. [4]

W. D. Hamilton proposed a mathematical expression for the kin selection:

rB>C

"where B is the benefit to the recipient, C is the cost to the altruist (both measured as the number of offspring gained or lost) and r is the coefficient of relationship (i.e. the probability that they share the same gene by descent)." [5]

An experiment conducted in Britain supported kin selection [5] It is illustrated[ clarification needed ] by diagram below. The result showed that people were more willing to provide help to people with higher relatedness, something which occurs in both genders and in various cultures. The result also shows gender difference in kin selection: men are more affected by cues suggesting a similar genetic base than women.

Kin selection.JPG

Reciprocal altruism

Reciprocal altruism is the idea that the incentive for an individual to help in the present is based on the expectation of receipt of help in the future. [6] Robert Trivers believes it is advantageous for an organism to pay a cost for the benefit of another non-related organism if the favor is repaid (when the benefit of the sacrifice outweighs the cost).

As Peter Singer [7] notes, “reciprocity is found amongst all social mammals with long memories who live in stable communities and recognize each other as individuals.” Individuals should identify cheaters (those who do not reciprocate help) who lose the benefit of help from them in the future, as seen, for example, in blood-sharing by vampire bats. [8]

Economic trade and business [9] may be fostered by reciprocal altruism in which products given and received involve different exchanges. [10] Economic trades follow the “I’ll scratch your back if you scratch mine” principle. A pattern of frequent giving and receiving of help among workers boosts both productivity and social standing.

Reciprocal altruism Reciprocal altruism summary.svg
Reciprocal altruism

Negative-state relief model

The negative-state relief model of helping [11] states that people help because of egoism. Egoistic motives lead a person to help others in bad circumstances in order to reduce personal distress experienced from knowing the situation of the people in need. Helping behavior happens only when the personal distress cannot be relieved by other actions. This model also explains people's avoidance behavior when they notice people in need: this is an alternative way for them to reduce their own distress.

Supporting studies

In one study, guilt feelings were induced in subjects by having them accidentally ruin a student's thesis data or by them seeing the data being ruined. Some subjects experienced positive events afterwards, e.g. being praised. Subjects who experienced negative guilt feelings were more motivated to help than those who had a neutral emotion. However, once the negative mood was relieved by receiving praise, subjects no longer had high motivation to help. [12]

Negative state relief.JPG

A second study found that people who anticipate positive events (in this case, listening to a comedy tape), show low helping motivation since they are expecting their negative emotions to be lifted up by the upcoming stimulation. [11]

Empathy-altruism hypothesis

People may initiate helping behavior when they feel empathy for the person they are helping—when they can relate to that person and feel and understand what that person is experiencing. [13]

Daniel Batson's Empathy-altruism hypothesis [14] asserts that the decision of whether to help or not is primarily influenced by the presence of empathy towards the person in need, and secondarily by factors like the potential costs and rewards (social exchange concerns).

The hypothesis was supported by a study that divided participants into a high-empathy group and a low-empathy group. [15] Both groups listened to Janet, a fellow student, sharing her feelings of loneliness. The results indicated that the high-empathy group (instructed to vividly imagine Janet's emotions) volunteered to spend more time with her, regardless of whether their help remained anonymous[ clarification needed ]. This finding underscores the idea that empathetic individuals are more likely to provide assistance, without being primarily motivated by considerations of costs and rewards, thus lending support to the empathy-altruism hypothesis..

Responsibility — prosocial value orientation

A strong influence on helping is feeling responsible to help, especially when combined with the belief that one can help other people. The feeling of responsibility can result from a situation that focuses responsibility on a person, or it can be a personal characteristic (leading to helping when activated by others' need). Ervin Staub described a "prosocial value orientation" that makes helping more likely when noticing a person in physical distress or psychological distress. Prosocial orientation was also negatively related to aggression in boys, and positively related to "constructive patriotism". The components of this orientation are a positive view of human beings, concern about others' welfare, and a feeling of and belief in one's responsibility for others' welfare. [16]

Social exchange theory

According to the social-exchange theory, people help because they want to gain goods from the one being helped. [17] People estimate the rewards and costs of helping others, and aim at maximizing the former and minimizing the latter.

Rewards are incentives, which can be material goods, social rewards which can improve one's image and reputation (e.g. praise), or self-reward[ clarification needed ]. [18]

Rewards are either external or internal. External rewards are things that are obtained from others when helping them, for instance, friendship and gratitude. People are more likely to help those who are more attractive or important, whose approval is desired. [19] Internal reward is generated by oneself when helping. This can be, for example, a sense of goodness and self-satisfaction. When seeing someone in distress, we may empathize with that person and thereby become aroused and distressed. We may choose to help in order to reduce this arousal and distress. [20] According to this theory, before helping, people consciously calculate the benefits and costs of helping and not helping, and they help when the overall benefit to themselves of helping outweighs the cost. [21]

Social exchange.JPG

Implications

Cultural differences

A major cultural difference is between collectivism and individualism. Collectivists attend more to the needs and goals of the group they belong to, while individualists focus on themselves. This might suggest that collectivists would be more likely to help ingroup members, and would help strangers less frequently than would individualists. [22]

Economic environment

Helping behavior is influenced by the economic environment. In general, frequency of helping behavior in a country is inversely related to the country's economic status[ clarification needed ]. [23]

Rural vs. urban area

A meta-analytical study found out that at either extreme, urban (300,000 people or more) or rural environments (5,000 people or less), are the worst places if you're looking for help. [24]

Choosing a role

Edgar Henry Schein describes three different roles people may follow when they respond to requests for help: The Expert Resource Role, The Doctor Role, The Process Consultant Role. [25] : 53–54

Expert Resource Role
This is the most common. It assumes that the person being helped is seeking information or expert service that they cannot provide for themselves. For example, simple issues like asking for directions or more complex issues like an organization hiring a financial consultant will fall into this category. [25] : 54–57
Doctor Role
This can be confused with the Expert Role because they seem to overlap each other. This role includes the client asking for information and service but also demands a diagnosis and prescription. Doctors, counselors, coaches, and repair personnel fulfill this kind of role. Contrary to the expert role, the Doctor Role shifts more power to the helper who is responsible for those duties: diagnosing, prescribing, and administering the cure. [25] : 57–61
Process Consultant Role
Here the helper focuses on the communication process from the very beginning. Before help can start, there needs to be an establishment of trust between the helper and the client. For example, in order for a tech consultant to be effective, he or she has to take a few minutes to discuss what the situation is, how often the problem occurs, what has been tried before, etc. before transitioning into the expert role or the doctor role. [25] : 61–64

See also

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Altruism</span> Principle or practice of concern for the welfare of others

Altruism is the principle and practice of concern for the well-being and/or happiness of other humans or animals above oneself. While objects of altruistic concern vary, it is an important moral value in many cultures and religions. It may be considered a synonym of selflessness, the opposite of selfishness.

Psychological egoism is the view that humans are always motivated by self-interest and selfishness, even in what seem to be acts of altruism. It claims that, when people choose to help others, they do so ultimately because of the personal benefits that they themselves expect to obtain, directly or indirectly, from so doing.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Reciprocal altruism</span> Form of behaviour between organisms

In evolutionary biology, reciprocal altruism is a behaviour whereby an organism acts in a manner that temporarily reduces its fitness while increasing another organism's fitness, with the expectation that the other organism will act in a similar manner at a later time.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Empathy</span> Capacity to understand or feel what another person is experiencing

Empathy is generally described as the ability to take on another's perspective, to understand, feel and possibly share and respond to their experience. There are more definitions of empathy that include but is not limited to social, cognitive, and emotional processes primarily concerned with understanding others. Often times, empathy is considered to be a broad term, and broken down into more specific concepts and types that include cognitive empathy, emotional empathy, somatic empathy, and spiritual empathy.

Sympathy is the perception of, understanding of, and reaction to the distress or need of another life form.

Reciprocity is a crucial aspect of how people interact and live in society but researchers who study these interactions have often overlooked its importance. Reciprocity, as a fundamental principle in social psychology, revolves around the concept that individuals tend to respond to the actions of others in a manner that mirrors the positive or negative nature of those actions. It involves a mutual exchange of behaviors and reactions, where individuals reciprocate the same type of behavior they have received from others. People's choices in how they behave are mostly based on what they can gain from others in return, while feelings of trust, liking, and togetherness are strongly influenced by the idea of giving and receiving equally

C. Daniel Batson is an American social psychologist. He has two doctoral degrees, in theology and psychology. Batson obtained his doctorate under John Darley and taught at the University of Kansas. He retired in 2006 and now is an emeritus professor in the psychology department of the University of Tennessee. He is best known for his contributions to the social psychology of altruism, empathic concern, and psychology of religion.

Empathy-altruism is a form of altruism based on moral emotions or feelings for others.

The concept of the evolution of morality refers to the emergence of human moral behavior over the course of human evolution. Morality can be defined as a system of ideas about right and wrong conduct. In everyday life, morality is typically associated with human behavior rather than animal behavior. The emerging fields of evolutionary biology, and in particular evolutionary psychology, have argued that, despite the complexity of human social behaviors, the precursors of human morality can be traced to the behaviors of many other social animals. Sociobiological explanations of human behavior remain controversial. Social scientists have traditionally viewed morality as a construct, and thus as culturally relative, although others such as Sam Harris argue that there is an objective science of morality.

Prosocial behavior, or intent to benefit others, is a social behavior that "benefit[s] other people or society as a whole", "such as helping, sharing, donating, co-operating, and volunteering". Obeying the rules and conforming to socially accepted behaviors are also regarded as prosocial behaviors. These actions may be motivated by empathy and by concern about the welfare and rights of others, as well as for egoistic or practical concerns, such as one's social status or reputation, hope for direct or indirect reciprocity, or adherence to one's perceived system of fairness. It may also be motivated by altruism, though the existence of pure altruism is somewhat disputed, and some have argued that this falls into philosophical rather than psychological realm of debate. Evidence suggests that pro sociality is central to the well-being of social groups across a range of scales, including schools. Prosocial behavior in the classroom can have a significant impact on a student's motivation for learning and contributions to the classroom and larger community. In the workplace, prosocial behaviour can have a significant impact on team psychological safety, as well as positive indirect effects on employee's helping behaviors and task performance. Empathy is a strong motive in eliciting prosocial behavior, and has deep evolutionary roots.

Empathic concern refers to other-oriented emotions elicited by, and congruent with the perceived welfare of, someone in need. These other-oriented emotions include feelings of tenderness, sympathy, compassion and soft-heartedness.

The negative-state relief model states that human beings have an innate drive to reduce negative moods. They can be reduced by engaging in any mood-elevating behaviour, including helping behaviour, as it is paired with positive value such as smiles and thank you. Thus negative mood increases helpfulness because helping others can reduce one's own bad feelings.

In psychology, personal distress is an aversive, self-focused emotional reaction to the apprehension or comprehension of another's emotional state or condition. This negative affective state often occurs as a result of emotional contagion when there is confusion between self and other. Unlike empathy, personal distress does not have to be congruent with the other's state, and often leads to a self-oriented, egoistic reaction to reduce it, by withdrawing from the stressor, for example, thereby decreasing the likelihood of prosocial behavior. There is evidence that sympathy and personal distress are subjectively different, have different somatic and physiological correlates, and relate in different ways to prosocial behavior.

Warm-glow giving is an economic theory describing the emotional reward of giving to others. According to the original warm-glow model developed by James Andreoni, people experience a sense of joy and satisfaction for "doing their part" to help others. This satisfaction - or "warm glow" - represents the selfish pleasure derived from "doing good", regardless of the actual impact of one's generosity. Within the warm-glow framework, people may be "impurely altruistic", meaning they simultaneously maintain both altruistic and egoistic (selfish) motivations for giving. This may be partially due to the fact that "warm glow" sometimes gives people credit for the contributions they make, such as a plaque with their name or a system where they can make donations publicly so other people know the "good" they are doing for the community.

Social preferences describe the human tendency to not only care about one's own material payoff, but also the reference group's payoff or/and the intention that leads to the payoff. Social preferences are studied extensively in behavioral and experimental economics and social psychology. Types of social preferences include altruism, fairness, reciprocity, and inequity aversion. The field of economics originally assumed that humans were rational economic actors, and as it became apparent that this was not the case, the field began to change. The research of social preferences in economics started with lab experiments in 1980, where experimental economists found subjects' behavior deviated systematically from self-interest behavior in economic games such as ultimatum game and dictator game. These experimental findings then inspired various new economic models to characterize agent's altruism, fairness and reciprocity concern between 1990 and 2010. More recently, there are growing amounts of field experiments that study the shaping of social preference and its applications throughout society.

Evolutionary biologists have developed various theoretical models to explain the evolution of food-sharing behavior—"[d]efined as the unresisted transfer of food" from one food-motivated individual to another—among humans and other animals.

Reciprocal altruism in humans refers to an individual behavior that gives benefit conditionally upon receiving a returned benefit, which draws on the economic concept – ″gains in trade″. Human reciprocal altruism would include the following behaviors : helping patients, the wounded, and the others when they are in crisis; sharing food, implement, knowledge.

Moral emotions are a variety of social emotions that are involved in forming and communicating moral judgments and decisions, and in motivating behavioral responses to one's own and others' moral behavior. As defined by Jonathan Haidt, moral emotions "are linked to the interests or welfare either of a society as a whole or at least of persons other than the judge or agent". A person may not always have clear words to articulate, yet simultaneously, that same person knows it to be true deep down inside.

An empathy gap, sometimes referred to as an empathy bias, is a breakdown or reduction in empathy where it might otherwise be expected to occur. Empathy gaps may occur due to a failure in the process of empathizing or as a consequence of stable personality characteristics, and may reflect either a lack of ability or motivation to empathize.

Parochial altruism is a concept in social psychology, evolutionary biology, and anthropology that describes altruism towards an in-group, often accompanied by hostility towards an out-group. It is a combination of altruism, defined as behavior done for the benefit of others without direct effect to the self, and parochialism, which refers to having a limited viewpoint. Together, these concepts create parochial altruism, or altruism which is limited in scope to one's in-group. Parochial altruism is closely related to the concepts of in-group favoritism and out-group discrimination. Research has suggested that parochial altruism may have evolved in humans to promote high levels of in-group cooperation, which is advantageous for group survival. Parochial altruism is often evoked to explain social behaviors within and between groups, such as why people are cooperative within their social groups and why they may be aggressive towards other social groups.

References

    • Eisenberg, Nancy; Mussen, Paul Henry (1989). The Roots of Prosocial Behavior in Children. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ISBN   0-521-33771-2.
    • Siegler, Robert S. (2006). How children develop, exploring child development student media tool kit & Scientific American Reader to accompany how children develop. New York: Worth Publishers. ISBN   0-7167-6113-0.
  1. Miller, P.A.; Bernzweig, J.; Eisenberg, N.; Fabes, R.A. (1991). "The development and socialization of prosocial behavior". In Hinde, Robert Aubrey; Groebel, Jo (eds.). Cooperation and Prosocial Behaviour. New York: Cambridge University Press. pp. 54–77. ISBN   0-521-39999-8.
    • Hoffman, M.L. (1981). "Is altruism part of human nature?". Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 40 (1): 121–137.
    • Sober, E.; Wilson, D.S. (1998). Unto others: The evolution and psychology of unselfish behavior. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.
    • Michael, F.C. (1984). "Co-operative breeding by the Australian Bell Miner Manorina melanophrys Latham: A test of kin selection theory". Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology. 14: 137–146.
  2. 1 2 Madsen, E.A.; Tunney, R.J.; Fieldman, G.; Plotkin, H.C.; Dunbar, R.I.M.; Richardson, J.; McFarland, D. (2007). "Kinship and altruism: A cross-cultural experimental study". British Journal of Psychology. 98 (2): 339–359.
  3. Trivers, Robert (1971). "The evolution of reciprocal altruism". Quarterly Review of Biology. 46: 35–56.
  4. Singer, Peter (1994). Ethics. Oxford: Oxford University.
  5. Wilkinson, G.S. (1984). "Reciprocal Food Sharing in the Vampire Bat". Nature. 308: 181–184.
  6. Loch, C.H.; Wu, Y. (2007). "Behavioral Operations Management". Foundations and Trends in Technology, Information and Operations Management. 1 (3): 121–232.
  7. Kaplan, H.; Hill, K. (1985). "Food Sharing among Ache Foragers: Tests of Explanatory Hypotheses". Current Anthropology. 26: 223–245.
  8. 1 2 Fultz, J.; Schaller, M.; Cialdini, R.B. (1988). "Empathy, sadness and distress: Three related but distinct vicarious affective responses to anothers' suffering". Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. 14: 312–315.
  9. Cialdini, R.B.; Darby, B.L.; Vincent, J.E. (1973). "Transgression and altruism: a case of hedonism". Journal of Experimental Social Psychology. 9 (6): 501–516.
    • Aronson, E.; Wilson, T.D.; Akert, R.M. (1997). Social Psychology (2nd ed.). U.S.: Addison-Ewsley Educational Publishers Inc.[ page needed ]
    • Gilovich, T.; Keltner, D.; Nisbett, R.E. (2006). Social Psychology. New York: W.W. Norton.[ page needed ]
  10. Batson, C.D.; Shaw, L.L. (1991). "Evidence for altruism: Toward a pluralism of prosocial motives". Psychological Inquiry. 2: 107–122.
  11. Fultz, J.; Batson, C.D.; Fortenbach, V.A.; McCarthy, P.M.; Varney, L. (1986). "Social evaluation and the empathy altruism hypothesis". Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 50: 761–769.
  12. Staub, Ervin (2003). The psychology of good and evil: What leads children, adults and groups to help and harm others. New York: Cambridge University Press. p. 592. ISBN   0-521-52880-1.
  13. Foa, U.G.; Foa, E.B. (1975). Resource theory of social exchange. Morrisontown, N.J.: General Learning Press.
    • Campbell, D.T. (1975). "On the conflicts between biological and social evolution and between psychology and moral tradition". American Psychologist. 30: 1103–1126.
    • Nowak, M.A.; Sigmund, K. (1998). "Evolution of indirect reciprocity by image scoring". Nature. 393: 573–576.
    • Nowak, M.A.; Page, K.M.; Sigmund, K. (2000). "Fairness versus reason in the ultimatum game". Science. 289: 1773–1775.
    • Gilovich, T.; Keltner, D.; Nisbett, R.E. (2006). Social Psychology. New York: W.W. Norton.[ page needed ]
    • Krebs, D. (1970). "Altruism—An examination of the concept and a review of the literature". Psychological Bulletin. 72: 258–302.
    • Unger, R.K. (April 1979), "Whom does helping help?", Eastern Psychological Association convention
  14. Piliavin, J.A.; Piliavin, I.M. (1973), The Good Samaritan: Why does he help? Unpublished manuscript, University of Wisconsin
  15. Myers, D.G. (1999). Social psychology (6th ed.). United States of America: McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc.[ page needed ]
  16. Triandis, H.C. (1991). "Cross-cultural differences in assertiveness/competition vs. group loyalty/cooperation". In Hinde, R.A.; Groebel, J. (eds.). Cooperation and prosocial behavior. New York: Cambridge University Press. pp. 78–88.
  17. Levine, R.V.; Norenzayan, A.; Philbrick, K. (2001). "Cross-cultural differences in helping strangers". Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology. 32 (5): 543–560.
  18. Steblay, N.M. (1987). "Helping behavior in rural and urban environments: A meta-analysis". Psychology Bulletin. 102: 346–356.
  19. 1 2 3 4 Schein, Edgar H. (2009). Helping : how to offer, give, and receive help (1st ed.). San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler Pub. ISBN   978-1-57675-863-2.