1. Helping Behavior
Module 80

2. Prosocial Behavior
Prosocial behavior - any behavior that helps another person, whether the underlying motive is self-serving or selfless
Sometimes we help people out of guilt or in order to gain something, such as recognition, rewards, increased self-esteem, or having the favor returned
Altruism - Unselfish regard for the welfare of others
Hero on the Potomac (start at 4:50)

3. So, Why Don’t People Always Help Others in Need?
Would you have stopped and helped this man?
Watch Hit & Run Video – 2 min.

4. Bystander Effect
The tendency for any given bystander to be less likely to give aid if other bystanders are present
Famous case of Kitty Genovese:
38 people heard her cry for help but didn’t help. She was raped and stabbed to death.

5. Why Don’t People Always Help Others in Need?
Darley & Latane studies:
Several scenarios designed to measure the help response
Found that if you think you’re the only one that can hear or help, you are more likely to do so
Diffusion of Responsibility - If there are others around, you think “Someone else will do it”
Pluralistic Ignorance - The longer things go with nobody helping it becomes more likely each person will begin to wonder if any help is really needed.
Although Gray does not give the Kitty Genovese story (using Latane's helping studies instead), I find it useful to tell her story because it really captures the attention of the students. Both the Hockenbury & the Myers texts have Kitty's story in them (Hockenbury is more detailed).

6. Psychology of Bystanders Watch Examples of this Experiment
By staging emergency events in field studies, researchers have found that an individual is less likely to offer assistance or call for help when other people are present than when he or she is the only witness. This is known as the bystander effect. In this field study, an individual steals bicycles, picks a wallet from a purse, and picks a wallet from a pocket, all in full view of several people. Bystanders intervene in only one event.
Watch Examples of this Experiment
(1:27)

7. Diffusion of Responsibility

8. Helping Behavior Decision Scheme Notice – Interpret – Assume Responsibility
ABC Primetime looks into helping behavior Video

9. Why Don’t People Always Help Others in Need?
Diffusion of responsibility
presence of others leads to decreased help response
we all think someone else will help, so we don’t
Our desire to behave in a socially acceptable way (normative social influence) and to appear correct (informational social influence)
Vague or ambiguous situations
When the personal costs for helping outweigh the benefits

10. We’ll help if… We’ve observed helpfulness We’re not hurried
We think the victim needs & deserves help
The victim is similar to us or a woman
We are feeling guilty
We are in a small town or rural area
We’re focused & not preoccupied
We are in a good mood
We don’t perceive danger
We know the victim
We know how to help

11. Helping Norms
Self-Interest underlies all human interactions – our constant goal is to maximize rewards & minimize costs.
Social Exchange Theory – If rewards exceed the costs, you will help.
Example: Donating Blood – weigh costs (time, discomfort, anxiety) vs. benefits (good feelings, social approval, less guilt)
Reciprocity Norm – Expectation that we should return help to those who help us.
Example: I’ll help you with your homework because you helped me with mine.
Gift Giving Gone Wrong? An example from Big Bang Theory (2 min)
Social-Responsibility Norm – we should help people who need/deserve our help – children, the poor – even if the costs outweigh the benefits

12. Conflict & Peacemaking

13. Social Trap
Harming the collective-well being by pursuing our own personal interests
Social Traps challenge us to find ways to reconcile our right to pursue our own best interests with our responsibility for the well-being of all.
Example: Conserving gasoline, water or electricity. Whenever our personal comfort or convenience is involved, it is highly tempting to "let the other person worry about it." Yet – in the long run when everyone things this – everybody loses.
Click HERE for more examples.

14. See an example of this at work with the British Game Show: Golden Balls

15. Prisoner’s Dilemma
When we behave in an unproductive way simply because we’re afraid others might do so.
Type of Social Trap - Two arrested & interviewed separately. You are given a deal if you squeal on your partner but if you trust he won’t talk, and you both don’t – you’ll get off with far less prison time if any.
Click HERE to see an explanation of this.
(watch first 2 min)

16. Enemy Perceptions
When in conflict, we tend to view the other side negatively this can lead to…
Mirror-image perceptions – As we see “them”- evil jerks – “They” see us.

17. Self-fulfilling Prophecies
When our beliefs and expectations create reality
I think Jim is a “jerk.” So I act negatively toward Jim whenever I see him. Noticing this, Jim doesn’t like me and acts negatively towards me.
I don’t believe I can pass a test so I don’t study. Now that I haven’t studied at all, I’ve guaranteed I won’t pass the next test.

18. Studies of the Self-fulfilling Prophecy
Rosenthal & Fode
tested whether labeling would affect outcome
divided students into 2 groups and gave them randomly selected rats
1 group was told they had a group of “super genius” rats and the other was told they had a group of “super moron” rats
all students told to train rats to run mazes
“genius” rat group ended up doing better than the “moron” rat group b/c of the expectations of the students
Instructors may wish to discuss that you can get self-fulfilling prophecy effects with SES, race, gender, etc. to further demonstrate the power/danger of labeling

19. Studies of the Self-fulfilling Prophecy
Rosenthal & Jacobson
went to a school and did IQ tests with kids
told teachers that the test was a “spurters” test
randomly selected several kids and told the teacher they were spurters
did another IQ test at end of year
spurters showed significant improvements in their IQ scores b/c of their teacher’s expectations of them
Rosenthal & Fode is not covered in Gray's text, but I always use it as an illustration of the negative effects of labeling, as Rosenthal & Jacobson was done with human subjects, in which it would be unethical to label negatively, as in Rosenthal & Fode

20. Promoting Peace & Overcoming Prejudice

21. Reducing Prejudice
Initially, researchers thought simple contact between conflicting groups would reduce prejudice (contact theory)
They now think that prejudice can be overcome when rival groups cooperate to achieve a common goal

22. Social Identity and Cooperation
Social identity theory:
States that when you’re assigned to a group, you automatically think of that group as an in-group for you
Sherif’s Robbers Cave study
11–12 year old boys at camp
Boys were divided into 2 groups and kept separate from one another
Each group took on characteristics of distinct social group, with leaders, rules, norms of behavior, and names

23. Robbers Cave (Sherif)
Leaders proposed series of competitive interactions which led to 3 changes between groups and within groups
within-group solidarity
negative stereotyping of other group
hostile between-group interactions
A fierce rivalry quickly developed
To restore harmony, Sherif created a series of situations in which the two groups would need to cooperate to achieve a common goal
After a series of joint efforts, the rivalry diminished and the groups became friends.
For more detailed explanation of this study, here are my actual lecture notes:
Leaders then proposed a series of competitive interactions which led to 3 changes between groups and within groups
within-group solidarity – loyalty to own group increased, put aside internal strife to beat enemy
negative stereotyping of other group –other group as out-group, own group as in-group; engaged in stereotyping of other group
Hostile between-group interactions – called names, loss of good sportsmanship, accusations of cheating, raiding, “warfare”

24. Cooperation Through Superordinate Goals
Overcoming the strong we/they effect
Create superordinate goals – a goal that benefits everyone but requires everyone’s cooperation
e.g., breakdown in camp water supply
This idea used in the classroom – The Jigsaw Method of cooperative learning