HUMAN RELATIONSHIPS Social responsibility 8.1

Social responsibility Learning outcomesLearning outcomes 1.Evaluate psychological research (through theories and studies) relevant to the study of human relationships 2.Distinguish between altruism and pro-social behaviour 3.Evaluate research investigating altruism 4.Explain cross-cultural differences in pro-social behaviour 5.Evaluate research investigating bystanderism

Help or not to help… Kitty Genovese:Kitty Genovese: &feature=related &feature=related Another example from the USAAnother example from the USA And another…smoke filled room:

terms Pro-social behaviour – is when a behaviour that benefits another person or has positive consequences (focus on the outcome not the motivation)Pro-social behaviour – is when a behaviour that benefits another person or has positive consequences (focus on the outcome not the motivation) Helping behavior – is when a behaviour intends to help or benefit another person (is planned)Helping behavior – is when a behaviour intends to help or benefit another person (is planned) Altruism – is when one helps another person for no reward, EVEN at some cost to oneselfAltruism – is when one helps another person for no reward, EVEN at some cost to oneself Activity: come up with one example for each

Psychological research on altruism Biological altruism (evolutionary)Biological altruism (evolutionary) Psychological altruism (mostly cognitive)Psychological altruism (mostly cognitive)

Biological altruism

Biological altruism – what could be advantageous to the group a person belongs to rather than the individual alone Kin Selection theory: the closer/ more related the greater the chance of altruistic behaviourKin Selection theory: the closer/ more related the greater the chance of altruistic behaviour Dawkins (1976) proposed the "selfish gene theory" explains why individuals are willing to sacrifice themselves to protect the lives of their kin but does not explain why one help strangers… and genes does not directly cause a behaviour (more complex than that)Dawkins (1976) proposed the "selfish gene theory" explains why individuals are willing to sacrifice themselves to protect the lives of their kin but does not explain why one help strangers… and genes does not directly cause a behaviour (more complex than that)

Reciprocal altrusim theory By Trivers (1971)By Trivers (1971) ”you scratch my back and I’ll scratch yours””you scratch my back and I’ll scratch yours” Meaning that one help (even strangers) with the expectation that the favour will be returned in the futureMeaning that one help (even strangers) with the expectation that the favour will be returned in the future Come up with an exampleCome up with an example "prisoner's dilemma" – game by Axelrod and Hamilton"prisoner's dilemma" – game by Axelrod and Hamilton

Evaluation of the evolutionary theories AnimalsAnimals CultureCulture AdoptionAdoption

Psychological explanations of altruism

Lerner and Lichtman (1968) carried out an experiment similar to Milgram’sLerner and Lichtman (1968) carried out an experiment similar to Milgram’s Schaller and Cialdini (1988) proposed the negative- state relief model – we help so we feel better (reduce the distress) or we walk awaySchaller and Cialdini (1988) proposed the negative- state relief model – we help so we feel better (reduce the distress) or we walk away The empathy- altruism model by Batson et al. (1981) consists of two emotions: personal distress (egoistic behavior) and empathetic concern (altruistic behaviour)The empathy- altruism model by Batson et al. (1981) consists of two emotions: personal distress (egoistic behavior) and empathetic concern (altruistic behaviour) Is empathy biological or learned? Read the study on p. 262 and link it to the biological level of analysisIs empathy biological or learned? Read the study on p. 262 and link it to the biological level of analysis

Are you really caring ( CAS) P. 261P. 261 John Rabe: a good Nazi? P. 263John Rabe: a good Nazi? P. 263

Pro-social behaviour and the bystander effect Starting on p. 263 – 268Starting on p. 263 – 268 Two responisible for p. 263 – 265:Two responisible for p. 263 – 265: Two responsible for :the arousal-cost- reward model of pro-social behaviourTwo responsible for :the arousal-cost- reward model of pro-social behaviour One : the role of social norms in pro- social behaviourOne : the role of social norms in pro- social behaviour Read and present to the others – clearly and without reading from the paper – use only key words – present Tuesday after the break.

Last part of 8.1 Cross-cultural research on pro-social behaviour

Culture play a role on pro-social behaviour Whiting (1979) studyied children in six countries and their helping behaviour. Results were that Kenya, Mexico scored high compared to US that scored lowestWhiting (1979) studyied children in six countries and their helping behaviour. Results were that Kenya, Mexico scored high compared to US that scored lowest - why do you think?- why do you think?

Social identity theory Helps to explain how we determine wheter to help someone or not – we tend to help more to those who are similar to usHelps to explain how we determine wheter to help someone or not – we tend to help more to those who are similar to us The US were most likely to help someone from an out-group compared to Chinese and Japanese who helped the most to their in-groupThe US were most likely to help someone from an out-group compared to Chinese and Japanese who helped the most to their in-group

Levine et al. 1990: helpfulness towards strangers was assessed In 36 cities across the USIn 36 cities across the US And 23 large cities around the worldAnd 23 large cities around the world Independent field experiments were usedIndependent field experiments were used Explain the experimental design + mention + and -Explain the experimental design + mention + and -

Results:Results: In the US:In the US: Small and medium-sized cities in the south east were most helpfulSmall and medium-sized cities in the south east were most helpful North-eastern and west coast cities the leastNorth-eastern and west coast cities the least Best predictor: population densityBest predictor: population density Levine et al. 1990: helpfulness towards strangers was assessed

Results: using the US data to compare:Results: using the US data to compare: Latin America highestLatin America highest Helping rates high in low economic productivity countries (less purchasing power for each citizen)Helping rates high in low economic productivity countries (less purchasing power for each citizen) Higher in cities with slow pace of life ( walking speed)Higher in cities with slow pace of life ( walking speed) Thought that the city’s personality affects individual behaviour (what do think Helsingborg’s is?)Thought that the city’s personality affects individual behaviour (what do think Helsingborg’s is?) Levine et al. 1990: helpfulness towards strangers was assessed

However, two cities went against these tendencies. Copenhagen and Vienna, which are both fast paste and have more moneyHowever, two cities went against these tendencies. Copenhagen and Vienna, which are both fast paste and have more money And in Kuala Lumpur (slow paste) they were not helpful at allAnd in Kuala Lumpur (slow paste) they were not helpful at all Conclusion: studies show that where the person was raised has less effect on helping than the place where they currently liveConclusion: studies show that where the person was raised has less effect on helping than the place where they currently live Levine et al. 1990: helpfulness towards strangers was assessed

The methodological limitations:The methodological limitations: 1-5 on p. 270 go through1-5 on p. 270 go through Do “be an enquirer” on p. 270Do “be an enquirer” on p. 270 Levine et al. 1990: helpfulness towards strangers was assessed