1. Soc 319: Sociological Approaches to Social Psychology Altruism (cont’d) & Aggression April 23, 2009

2. Evolutionary Perspectives Puzzle: If an organism acts altruistically, it may decrease its own reproductive fitness. Importance of kin selection: behaviors that help a genetic relative are favored by natural selection. Impact of reciprocity, or expectation that helping others will increase the likelihood that they will help us in the future. Simon (1990): The best learners of societal norms (esp. altruism) have a competitive advantage.

3. 80 60 20 0 0 High (parents, siblings, children) Cunningham et al., (1995) 40 Degree of Relatedness Mod. (grand- parents) Low (first cousins) None (attractive strangers) Would you lend this person your car? Proportion saying “yes” are plotted values.

4. Why didn’t anyone come to the rescue of Kitty Genovese? [Reprinted with permission from the March 27, 1964 New York Times. Copyright © 1964 by the New York Times Co.] 37 Who Saw Murder Didn't Call the Police Apathy at Stabbing of Queens Woman Shocks Inspector By MARTIN GANSBERG For more than half an hour thirty-eight respectable, law-abiding citizens in Queens watched a killer stalk and stab a woman in three separate attacks in Kew Gardens. Twice the sound of their voices and the sudden glow of their bedroom lights interrupted him and frightened him off. Each time he returned, sought her out and stabbed her again. Not one person telephoned the police during the assault; one witness called after the woman was dead.

5. Influences on Prosocial Behavior: Social Context Number of bystanders (Latane & Darley) Diffusion of responsibility Urban v. rural urban overload hypothesis (Milgram): persons living in cities keep to themselves to avoid being overloaded by all the stimulation they receive. Cultural context Collectivist cultures more likely to help in-group members and less likely to help out-group members than in individualist cultures. (In general, in-group favored)

6. Darley & Latane: Number of bystanders & helping behavior # in Group:OneTwoFive Percent Helping 856231 Lag Time (second) 5293166

7. Diffusion of responsibility A decrease in the individual sense of responsibility for taking action in an emergency because of the presence of other bystanders. The greater the number of bystanders, the less likely each person is to act. Bystander effect: As number of bystanders increases, likelihood of helping decreases and more time passes before help occurs.

8. Darley/Latane Model of Helping Bystander must perceive an emergency. The unaware cannot act. Bystander must interpret situation as an emergency. Pluralistic ignorance: misinterpretation/inaction by many may stifle action. Bystander assumes responsibility to act. Must know what to do, show expertise. Bystander must decide (and know how) to help. Must assess costs and efficacy of routes. Bystander actually does help. Does not ensure effectiveness.

9. 80 60 20 0 0 Alone Percentage Reporting Smoke 40 With 2 other real subjects With 2 calm confederates Darley & Latane: Smoked filled room where “subjects” were completing questionnaires.

10. Influences on Prosocial Behavior: Characteristics of Help Recipient “Deservingness”: Responsibility is assigned to victims in varying degrees. Piliavin et al. “subway” studies Weiner et al. Reason why patient as AIDS (e.g., sex v. blood transfusion) Attractiveness/likeability Similarity to help-giver Personal style Political views Race/ethnicity

11. Source: Levine (2003)

12. Defining Aggression? Behavior that results in personal injury or destruction of property (Bandura, 1973). Behavior intended to harm another of the same species (Scherer et al, 1975). Behavior directed towards the goal of harming or injuring another living being who is motivated to avoid such treatment (Baron, 1977). The intentional infliction of some form of harm on others (Baron & Byrne, 2000)

13. Types of Aggression Instrumental: Actions that are intended to hurt others, but for a specific outcome (e.g., punishment, sports, warfare) Emotional/Hostile: Driven by feelings, reactive, impulsive. Intent is to harm or injure target. Tends to be focus of most aggression research.

14. Biological Perspectives Violent, aggressive behavior is innate. Lorenz (1966): “fighting instinct” is necessary for survival. Freud (1930): Humans have a powerful “death instinct” (thanatos). Destructive energy must be expelled (catharsis) to avoid personal psychological harm.

15. Evolutionary Perspectives Individuals must maximize their resources and competitiveness relative to others, and thus enhance their own chances of reproductive success. Men and women face different evolutionary challenges, and respond accordingly. Buss and Dedden (1990) examined the pattern of intra-sexual aggression and found that: Women were more likely than men to verbally derogate the physical appearance and promiscuity of their same sex rivals. Men were more likely than women to physically aggress against male rivals.

16. If aggression were biological or evolutionary in its roots, however, we might expect to see roughly similar levels of aggression across time and place…

17. Cognitive Perspectives Aggressive behavior is shaped by cognitive factors (e.g., scripts, appraisals, attributions) and current affective state. Scripts for appropriate behavior based on socialization. Appraisals of situation include attributions about other actors’ intent and motivation Mood shapes appraisal of other and of appropriate response.

18. Socialization/Social Learning Perspectives Violent behavior, like all behavior, is learned. Behaviors that are rewarded persist. Behavior is learned via: Direct experience, where individual is rewarded for own behavior Indirect experience, where individual learns vicariously. Models other’s behavior, and persists in behaviors that are rewarded in others.

19. Bandura’s classic “Bobo doll” study. Young children witnessed an adult attack a bobo doll: Live Videotape Cartoon Control http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pDtBz_1dkuk

20. Results of Bandura study

21. Implications for Children’s Behavior?

22. Effect of TV violence on child behavior (Liebert & Baron, 1972)

23. Critiques of Social Learning Theory? Understanding the meaning of experimental manipulation, esp. among children. Individual-level differences (e.g., gender differences in reactions to violent images) Catharsis rather than perpetuation of violence?

24. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9S410Pcij-8 Is media violence cathartic??

25. Contextual Influences on Aggression Frustration “Culture” of violence? Physical environment (e.g., heat, crowding, etc.) Think about the extent to which this conditions of pervasive in U.S. versus other national/cultural contexts…

26. Frustration-Aggression Hypothesis (Dollard 1939) Frustration  Aggression (e.g., Barker et al. 1941) Evidence? Alternative responses to frustration Not all aggression results from frustration Frustration is one of several indicators of negative affect that may lead to aggression (Berkowitz, 1989)

27. Culture of Violence? Weapons effect (Berkowitz & colleagues): Aggressiveness occurs when “readiness to respond aggressively” is induced by arousal and aggressive cues trigger aggressive acts. Presence of weapons heightens violent tendencies. To what extent does culture of gun availability and violence in media prime individuals to view violence as an appropriate course of action?

28. Culture of Violence? “Culture of Honor”  violence (Nisbett et al.) Higher levels of aggression from southerners Culture emphasizes retaliation, aggression as appropriate course of action for transgressions Culture is transmitted via Social learning theory (observation/reinforcement) Conformity Interpretation of others’ behaviors

29. REGIONAL MURDER RATES, 2001-2004 MURDER RATES PER 100,000 PEOPLE (FBI Uniform Crime Reports, 2004) REGION 2004 2003 20022001 EXECUTIONS SINCE 1976 (As of 10/1/05) South 6.66.9 6.86.7 806 West 5.7 5.562 Midwest 4.74.9 5.15.3113 Northeast 4.2 4.14.24

30. CountryYearPopulation Total Homicide Firearm Homicide Non-Gun Homicide % Household s With Guns South Africa 1995 41,465,00 0 75.3026.6048.70n/a Colombia1996 37,500,00 0 64.6050.6014.00n/a Estonia19941,499,25728.218.0720.14n/a Brazil1993 160,737,0 00 19.0410.588.46n/a Mexico1994 90,011,25 9 17.589.887.70n/a Philippines1996 72,000,00 0 16.203.5012.70n/a Taiwan 1 1996 21,979,44 4 8.120.977.15n/a N. Ireland19941,641,7116.095.240.858.4 United States 2 1999 272,691,0 00 5.703.721.9839.0 Argentina1994 34,179,00 0 4.512.112.40n/a Hungary1994 10,245,67 7 3.530.233.30n/a

31. Situational Influences: Heat/Season Anderson (1989): Kenrick & MacFarlane (1986): drivers in air-conditioned cars less likely to honk their horns.

32. Individual-Level Influences Biological factors (e.g., testosterone) Family background Personality Gender

33. Biological Influences Does testosterone increase violent tendencies? Men more aggressive than women. Violent criminals have abnormally high testosterone levels (Dabbs et al., 1987) Prenatal exposure to testosterone increases childhood aggression (Reinisch, 1991). Alternative explanations?

34. Reinisch et al., (1991): Pre-natal testosterone exposure & child aggression

35. Family Background Very powerful evidence of intergenerational transmission of violence. Consistent with social learning theory, social norms, frustration-aggression hypotheses. Data spanning >50 years supports transmission Sears (1957): 5-year olds of aggressive parents more aggressive. Patterson (1982): “Coercive cycle”

36. “Coercive Cycle” of Family Violence (Patterson, 1982) Child behaves aggressively e.g. disobeys request Parent responds aggressively e.g. shouts at child Child responds with more aggression e.g. shouts back more loudly Parent responds with more aggression e.g. hits child

37. Personality Traits that Foster Aggression? Narcissism: over-inflated view of self “Type A” (drive to achieve, time urgency, competitiveness) Higher aggression in competitive tasks More likely to engage in child abuse More workplace conflict Hostile attributional bias: tendency to attribute hostile intentions to others (Graham et al., 1992)

38. Gender (Eagly et al., Harris, 1994) Men engage in more frequent physical aggression. Women engage in “verbal” or “indirect” aggression. Socialization, appraisal of outcome, assessment of “appropriateness” shape gendered tendencies and responses to aggression.