Prepare for your exams
Get points
Guidelines and tips
Sell on Docsity
Docsity AI

Prepare for your exams

Study with the several resources on Docsity

Earn points to download

Earn points by helping other students or get them with a premium plan

Guidelines and tips

Sell on Docsity

Docsity AI

Log in Sign up

Prepare for your exams

Study with the several resources on Docsity

Find documents

Prepare for your exams with the study notes shared by other students like you on Docsity

Search for your university

Find the specific documents for your university's exams

Docsity AINEW

Summarize your documents, ask them questions, convert them into quizzes and concept maps

Explore questions

Clear up your doubts by reading the answers to questions asked by your fellow students

Earn points to download

Earn points by helping other students or get them with a premium plan

Share documents

20 Points

For each uploaded document

Answer questions

5 Points

For each given answer (max 1 per day)

All the ways to get free points

Get points immediately

Choose a premium plan with all the points you need

Study Opportunities

Choose your next study program

Get in touch with the best universities in the world. Search through thousands of universities and official partners

Community

Ask the community

Ask the community for help and clear up your study doubts

Free resources

Our save-the-student-ebooks!

Download our free guides on studying techniques, anxiety management strategies, and thesis advice from Docsity tutors

Empathy, Altruism, and Prosocial Behavior: Theories and Studies, Study notes of Psychology

University of Virginia (UVA)Psychology

The concepts of empathy, altruism, and prosocial behavior, drawing on the work of batson and other researchers. It distinguishes between altruism and egoism, examining the role of cost, similarity, and empathy in motivating prosocial actions. The document also discusses evolutionary psychology, social exchange theory, and the empathy-altruism hypothesis, providing a comprehensive overview of the factors influencing helping behavior. Additionally, it covers cultural and gender differences in prosocial behavior, as well as situational factors that can either promote or inhibit helping, such as the bystander effect and pluralistic ignorance. Useful for understanding the complexities of human behavior in social contexts.

Typology: Study notes

2023/2024

Uploaded on 09/25/2025

sriharsha-sikhakollu 🇺🇸

2 documents

1 / 17

This page cannot be seen from the preview

Don't miss anything!

Empathy & Altruism (Batson) - tried to show altruism empirically

- Empathy → ability to experience events/emotions the way another person

experiences them

- “Batson - need to have empathy to altruistically indulge in prosocial behavior”

- Assume altruism only happens when people experience empathy

- How to distinguish altruism from egoism?

- Batson study (1981)

- FOCUS ON COST

- Cost prevents people from acting prosocially

- If behaving altruistically, cost should not matter

- Batson: empathy is evoked in terms of similarity to the person in need

of help

- Very similar to someone = high empathy

- Very dissimilar = low empathy

- If you are motivated by egoism → cost decides prosocial behavior

- If by altruism → cost should not matter

- IV1: Similarity (high/low match on survey)

- Telling people they are either high or low similarity match

- IV2: difficulty of escape (2 trials / 10 trials)

- DV: willingness to switch places

-

Egoistic ally motivated prosocial behavior is STILL prosocial behavior but it cannot be

empirically measured

Chapter 11

Prosocial behavior → any act performed with the goal of benefiting another person

- Concerned with prosocial behavior that is motivated by altruism

- Altruism → desire to help someone else even if it involves a cost to you

- Purely helping out of desire to benefit someone else

- With no benefit to oneself

● Charles darwin theory → natural selection favors genes that promote survival of the

individual

● Evolutionary psychology → notion of kin selection

○ Kin selection = idea that behaviors that help a genetic relative are favored by

natural selection

○ People can increase chances that genes will be passed along not just by

having children but ensuring genetic relatives have children

■ Since genes shared amongst diff generations, ensuring someone

else’s genetic survival, increases chances those genes will flourish

■ Natural selection should favor altruistic acts directed toward

genetic relatives

Discover Study notes of Psychology University of Virginia (UVA)

Partial preview of the text

Download Empathy, Altruism, and Prosocial Behavior: Theories and Studies and more Study notes Psychology in PDF only on Docsity!

Empathy & Altruism (Batson) - tried to show altruism empirically

Empathy → ability to experience events/emotions the way another person experiences them
“Batson - need to have empathy to altruistically indulge in prosocial behavior” - Assume altruism only happens when people experience empathy
How to distinguish altruism from egoism? - Batson study ( 1981 )
- FOCUS ON COST
  - Cost prevents people from acting prosocially
  - If behaving altruistically, cost should not matter
  - Batson: empathy is evoked in terms of similarity to the person in need of help - Very similar to someone = high empathy - Very dissimilar = low empathy
  - If you are motivated by egoism → cost decides prosocial behavior
  - If by altruism → cost should not matter - IV 1 : Similarity (high/low match on survey)
    - Telling people they are either high or low similarity match - IV 2 : difficulty of escape ( 2 trials / 10 trials) - DV: willingness to switch places

Egoistic ally motivated prosocial behavior is STILL prosocial behavior but it cannot be empirically measured

Chapter 11

Prosocial behavior → any act performed with the goal of benefiting another person

Concerned with prosocial behavior that is motivated by altruism
- Altruism → desire to help someone else even if it involves a cost to you
  - Purely helping out of desire to benefit someone else - With no benefit to oneself ● Charles darwin theory → natural selection favors genes that promote survival of the individual ● Evolutionary psychology → notion of kin selection ○ Kin selection = idea that behaviors that help a genetic relative are favored by natural selection ○ People can increase chances that genes will be passed along not just by having children but ensuring genetic relatives have children ■ Since genes shared amongst diff generations, ensuring someone else’s genetic survival, increases chances those genes will flourish ■ Natural selection should favor altruistic acts directed toward genetic relatives

Norm of reciprocity (to explain altruism) → expectation that helping others will increase likelihood that they will help us in the future ● People are rewarded for helping ○ Especially when helping at a personal cost ○ Emotion of gratitude → positive feelings that are caused by perception that one has been helped by others ● Group selection → altruism favors survival of altruistic groups ● Evolutionary psychologists believe people help others b/c helping facilitates survival Social Exchange Theory → “much of what we do stems from the desire to maximize our rewards and minimize our costs”

Difference from evolutionary approaches
- Social Exchange Theory does not trace this desire back to evolutionary roots nor is it genetically based
- Social exchange theory: assumes people in an economic marketplace trying to maximize ratio of profits to losses Benefits of helping: 1 ) Norm of reciprocity 2 ) Investment in the future i.e. someone will help us when we need it 3 ) Relieve personal distress of a bystander a) Evidence indicates people are aroused and disturbed when they see someone else suffer and helping relieves their own distress 4 ) Social approval & increased feelings of self-worth **Helping decreases when costs are high
Social exchange theory→ True altruism does not exist
“People only help when benefits outweigh the costs” Empathy and Altruism
C. Daniel Baston →** “People often help purely out of goodness of their hearts” - Pure altruism comes into play when we feel empathy for person in need of help
Putting ourselves in other shoes and experiencing emotions & events the way he/she experiences them Goal when you feel empathy → relieve the other person’s distress Empathy-altruism hypothesis = when we feel empathy for another person, attempt to help that person for purely altruistic reasons regardless of what we have to gain Baston says: if we do not feel empathy:
Social exchange concerns come into play
“What's in it for me” An act that seems altruistic, sometimes motivated by self-interest

Nov 13 - mini lecture

● Most researchers did not do what batson did but instead skip the question of motivation altogether and just get down to the behaviors ○ In what circumstances or situations are people more or less likely to engage in prosocial behaviors to see about helping people when they need it? ● Some things come up that prevent people from engaging in prosocial behavior and if we look at the different circumstances of when they occur → come up with a flowchart ● At each of these steps, there is a way person won't end up helping → breakpoints where individuals decide they aren't actually going to engage in prosocial action Study by Latane and Darley (Smoke study)

Focusing on the first two steps → noticing something is happening and interpreting the situation as an emergency
Ps brought into the lab on a pretext
- Rs say they want to talk to you about the stress involved of living in an urban environment while going to college
- Before the study, fill out preliminary questionnaire
IV: who’s in the room
- Alone
- 3 naive Ps of the study
- Two other people in the room (confederates) and 1 naive P (you)
There’s a vent in the wall and the researcher has access to the vent behind the wall. Rs create some smoke that they blow through the vent. Rs want to measure two DVs - See how long does it take Ps to notice smoke’s coming through the room through the vent (noticing) - Timing how long it takes to seek advice or assistance (interpreting)
If people are by themselves, 63 % notice that smoke is in the room < 5 seconds
When you add confederates or other naive Ps
- 26 % of Ps notice smoke in < 5 seconds
- When you have 2 confeds or 3 naive Ps

Median time of noticing smoke is 20 seconds
Why does this occur?
One reason → distraction from doing the questionnaire
Distraction is going to be controlled between all the groups though
So why is there is a much delayed response time? - Urban overload hypothesis
Idea that in a very stimulus dense environment (urban setting) lots of stimuli that are trying to grab people’s attention
This creates a high amount of arousal which might be found unpleasant
You want to learn how to ignore some of that simulation, try to ignore so you are not in this constant state of arousal trying to deal with all the stimuli - Urban overload hypothesis → people will see about limiting the number of stimuli that they focus on to prevent themselves from being overaroused
Doesnt have to be an urban setting, can be any environment with lots of stimuli - Interpreting part
How long it took people to leave the room and tell someone about the smoke coming in through the vents
In the alone condition, < 2 minutes of noticing they reported
75 % in the alone condition reported before study ended
In the 3 naive Ps,
Only 1 group that people reported < 4 mins
Only 38 % of groups actually reported and sought help
In the 2 confeds condition
Only 10 % of naive Ps went out to get some help
Confeds were told to do nothing and ignore the smoke compared to 3 naive Ps naturally responding in that circumstance **- Rationales that broke people out of the process of engaging and helping behavior and led them to not consider it as an emergency
Pluralistic Ignorance**
Where people interpret the situation as a non emergency due to apparently calm reaction of others
People look to other people to find out what's going on
Informational social influence
You look fairly neutral as you aren't sure and others look at you also fairly neutral and a cyclical process
Confeds acted like not a big deal hence predicted that condition would have lowest level of reporting - Audience inhibition
When people withhold help for fear of embarrassment/negative evaluation
Maybe due to ambiguity of being wrong etc and people dont want to be embarrassed

Helping others is rewarding hence can make someone feel better
Feeling guilty
Also increases helping
People often act on idea that good deeds cancel bad deeds hence if one feels guilty, helping another person balances things out Urban overload hypothesis: bombarded with stimulation and keep to themselves to avoid being overwhelmed by it
If you put urban dwellers in a calmer,less stimulating environment, they would be as likely as anyone else to reach out to others ● People who lived for a long time in one place, more likely to engage in prosocial behaviors that help their community ○ Because staying in one place leads to a greater attachment to the community, more interdependence with one’s neighbors and greater concern with one’s reputation ○ Increase in helping can arise quite quickly → even in one time lab setting Bystander effect → greater the # of bystanders who witness an emergency, less likely any one of them is to help the victim In the interpreting the event as an emergency
The greater # of bystanders, less likely to know it is an emergency
WHY? → due to informational social influence Pluralistic ignorance → where people think that everyone else is interpreting a situation in a certain way when in fact they are not Diffusion of responsibility
When there are many bystanders
Each bystander’s sense of responsibility to help decreases as the # of witnesses increases
No single bystander feels a strong personal responsibility to act due to others being present When addressed by name, people are more likely to feel a responsibility to help even when others are present Effects of Media: Video games and music lyrics
Playing prosocial video games or seeing people act in prosocial ways makes people more cooperative
Listening to songs with prosocial lyrics works too - Why?
Increases people’s empathy toward someone in need of help
Increases accessibility of thoughts about helping others

How can helping be increased?

Knowing about bystander prevention
Knowing how we can be unwittingly influenced by others can by itself help overcome our barriers to help and intervene in an emergency
Remind ourselves it's important to overcome our inhibitions and do the right thing
Increasing volunteerism
- Benefits both helper and those being helped Overjustification effect: giving people strong external reasons for performing an activity can undermine intrinsic interest in that activity

Chapter 9

Group: consists of two or more people who interact and are interdependent in the sense that their needs and goals cause them to influence each other ● Joining forces helps accomplish objectives easier and faster ● Fulfills a number of basic human needs ● Need to belong is evident in all societies ● People also have a need to feel distinctive from those who do not belong to the same groups ● Groups help define who we are ○ Provide a lens through which we can understand the world and our place in it ○ Groups become an important part of our self-concept ● Groups help establish social norms → explicit or implicit rules defining what is acceptable behavior ● Most groups have social roles → shared expectations in a group about how particular people are supposed to behave ○ Norms specify how all should act ○ Roles specify how people who occupy certain positions should behave Following roles = tend to be satisfied and perform well But also being too dedicated can lead to committing fraud and cover up wrongdoings → whether social roles lead to ethical vs unethical behavior depends on how one construes these roles Group Cohesiveness: qualities of a group that bind members together and promote mutual liking

The more cohesive a group is, the more its members are likely to stay in the group, take part in activities and recruit new members (for social groups)
If function of group is work together (military unit or sales team), doing well on a task = more cohesive

It's the presence of others who are evaluating us that causes arousal
How distracting other people can be
Distraction = put us in a state of conflict since its difficult to pay attention to two things at once
Divided attention leads to arousal Social Loafing → tendency for people to relax when they are in the presence of others and individual performance cannot be evaluated
People perform worse on simple tasks
Perform better on complex tasks Gender and Cultural Differences in social loafing
Tendency to loaf is **stronger in men
Women are higher than men in relational interdependence**
Tendency to focus on and care about personal relationships with other individuals
Tendency to loaf is stronger in western cultures
Asians more likely to have interdependent view of the self which reduces tendency toward social loafing when in groups
Women and asians still engage in loafing but smaller extent Need to know two things to predict whether presence of others will help or hinder your performance
Whether individual efforts can be evaluated
Whether task is simple or complex If performance can be evaluated:
Presence of others makes you alert and aroused = social facilitation If performance cannot be evaluated:
Become more relaxed = social loafing Deindividuation
Loosening of normal constraints on behavior when people can’t be identified
Getting lost in a crowd can lead to an unleashing of behaviors that we would never think of doing
Eg: military atrocities, looting, arson violence “ Mob mentality” ● Becoming deindividuated increases the extent to which people obey the group’s norms ● Norms of group could conflict with society at large (eg: KKK) ○ Deindividuation reduces likelihood one person will stand out and be blamed but increases adherence to local group’s norms ● Whether deindividuation is bad or good depends on norm of the group ● Deindividuation thrives with less physical forms of interaction ○ Due to anonymity ● Reminding one of personal identity helps combat deindividuation

Group Decisions

In general, groups can perform better than individuals when group members freely contribute independent opinions from a variety of viewpoints - If people are motivated to search for the answer that is best for group rather than just themselves Process Loss: any aspect of group interaction that inhibits good problem solving
Like when you convince GITG to follow an idea but they oppose you and then just sit there and watch them make a wrong decision Why does process loss occur?
Groups might not try hard enough to find out who the most competent members are
Which leads to them relying on someone who doesnt know what they’re talking about
Communication problems
Failure to listen
One person being allowed to dominate convo Shared information: everyone knows the same things Unique information: each person has information that only they know Groups tend to focus on the information they already collectively share → talking less about facts in regards to unique info Ways to get groups to focus on unique info
Group discussions should last long enough
Helps to tell group members not to share their initial preferences at the start of discussion so can focus on unique info
Assign diff members to specific areas of expertise so they know they are responsible for certain types of info Transactive memory: when combined memory of group is more efficient than memory of individual members
Some people remembering x and some others remembering y Groupthink
Kind of thinking in which maintaining group cohesiveness and solidarity is more important than considering the facts in a realistic manner - When does groupthink occur?
When group is highly cohesive
Isolated from contrary opinions
Ruled by a directive leader
When preconditions of groupthink are met, symptoms →
Group begins to feel invulnerable and can do no wrong - Self censorship: failing to voice contrary views because afraid of dampening group’s morale or fear of being criticized = pressure to conform
Illusion of unanimity

This theory argues there are two kinds of leaders - Task oriented leaders:
- Concerned more with getting the job done than with workers’ feelings and relationships
- Do well in high or low control work situations
  - When the leader’s position in the company is perceived as powerful and work that needs to be done is structured and well-defined
  - Works well also the same vice versa when not powerful and not well defined work - Relationship oriented leaders
- Concerned more with workers’ feelings and relationships
- Most effective in moderate-control work situations
  - When wheels are turning fairly smoothly but important work still needs to be done
  - Leader who can promote strong relationships will be most successful Why is it difficult for women to achieve leadership positions?
People believe good leaders have agentic traits (assertive, controlling, dominant, independent) which is associated with men
Woman expected to be communal (traits) - warm, helpful, kind etc Glass ceiling – women are more likely to be put in precarious, high risk positions where it is difficult to succeed because they are often thought to be better at managing crises due to being communal Gender differences: lessening over time Cultural differences
Autonomous leadership (being independent of one’s superior and spending more time working alone) → europe than latin america
Researchers recently turned attention to kinds of traits people value in leaders in different cultures Social Dilemmas
Conflict in which the most beneficial action for an individual will be harmful to everyone
Changing wall street game to community game → increased cooperation
Showing symbols of chinese culture before a game made people more cooperative
Showing american culture, made people more competitive Tit for tat strategy:
Way of encouraging cooperation by at first acting cooperatively but then always responding the way opponent did in the previous trial ● Allowing individuals to resolve a conflict rather than groups resolve a conflict as being in a group can be deindividuation ○ Groups also produce more extreme and polarized attitudes

Using threats to resolve conflict

Acme and Bolt trucking game
- One company had a threat, both lost money
- Both companies had bilateral threats, lost even more money Negotiation and Bargaining
Negotiation → form of communication between opposing sides in a conflict in which offers and counteroffers are made and a solution occurs only when both parties agree - Integrative solution:
An outcome to a conflict whereby parties make tradeoffs on issues according to different interests
Each side concedes on whats unimportant to them but important to other side - Mediators (neutral mediators) to solve labor disputes, legal battles etc to recognize mutually agreeable solutions to a conflict ● Trust is more easily established in old-fashioned face to face negotiations

Social facilitation → facilitating a dominant response ● For easy tasks, the dominant response is success ● For difficult tasks, dominant response is failure Zion ’s idea → mere presence

Conspecifics (same species) create arousal
When other human beings are around us, it automatically creates arousal
But its not mere presence that accounts for all the arousal Evaluation apprehension : people don't want to be negatively evaluated
Desire to avoid embarrassment/negative evaluation Study looking at people running at a city park. There was a bench, enough trees over there. If you were sitting on a bench, it was like you were right at their face so it means someone could see you while running but if you run from another way the turn would block visibility.

Prisoner’s dilemma Harvesting dilemma

Do you exploit?
You and others in the group have access to the same resource and if you overharvest then your cooked Contributions dilemma - free ride
Aka public goods dilemma, give some dilemma
Do you neglect?
Have an existing resource that you can get for free however this resource is not self generating
Eg: public radio and public television
Eg of a resource: money
If there is no money, then the services like radio and television wont continue
Will you just neglect or will you support the radio and provide them money even if you don't have to
The dilemma comes in the sense that the thing that is better for the group is the objectively better choice
The thing that is better for the individual is basically the worst decision **How do you solve the dilemmas?
Coercion
Appeals to group identity**

List of terms

● Prosocial behavior ● Empathy ● Altruism ● Egoism ● Kin selection ● Norm of reciprocity ● Batson altruism and empathy study ● Emotion of gratitude ● Social exchange theory ● Empathy altruism hypothesis ● Carol egoism and altruism study ● 3 motives for prosocial behavior ● Altruistic personality

● In and out groups ● Simpatia ● Urban overload hypothesis ● Distraction ● Pluralistic ignorance ● Audience inhibition ● Bystander effect ● Diffusion of responsibility ● Why you wouldn’t assume responsibility → bystander effect & diffusion of responsibility ● Why you wouldnt “implement” → cost ● Overjustification effect ● Group ● Social norms ● Social roles ● Group cohesiveness ● Group diversity ● McLeod, Lobel and Cox group study ● Social Facilitation ● Evaluation apprehension ● Social loafing ● Relational interdependence ● Deindividuation ● Mob mentality ● Process loss ● Shared information ● Unique information ● Transactive memory ● Groupthink ● Self censorship ● Group polarization ○ Persuasive arguments interpretation ○ Social comparison interpretation ● Great person theory ○ Transactional leaders ○ Transformational leaders ● Contingency theory of leadership ○ Task oriented leaders ○ Relationship oriented leaders ● Agentic traits ● Communal traits ● Glass ceiling ● Social dilemmas ● Tit for tat strategy ● Integrative solution ● Mediators ● Coordination loss ● Residential mobility

Empathy, Altruism, and Prosocial Behavior: Theories and Studies, Study notes of Psychology

Related documents

Partial preview of the text

Download Empathy, Altruism, and Prosocial Behavior: Theories and Studies and more Study notes Psychology in PDF only on Docsity!

Chapter 11

Nov 13 - mini lecture

Chapter 9

List of terms