Transcript Is altruism a paradox? - Arts & Sciences | Washington

Chapter 11: Pro-Social Behavior
Is everyone selfish?
Is there such thing as a purely selfless act?
The (apparent) paradox of
altruism
• Thorndike’s law of effect
Altruism presents a problem for psychology. Altruistic
behavior may please us as people, but it embarrasses
traditional theories of psychology that are founded on the
assumption that man is moved only by considerations of
reward and punishment.
The hedonistic tone of traditional reinforcement theory is at
variance with the simple observed fact that people do help
others in circumstances in which there seem to be no
gains, and considerable risk, for doing so.
From: The Unresponsive Bystander: Why Doesn’t He
Help? (Latane and Darley, 1970)
In theory…
• From The Descent of Man (Darwin, 1871)
• “It is extremely doubtful whether the offspring of the
more sympathetic and benevolent parents, or those
which were most faithful to their comrades, would be
reared in greater number than the children of selfish
and treacherous parents of the same tribe.
• On the contrary, the bravest, most self-sacrificial men
“would, on average, perish in larger number than
other men”
But in practice….
How to explain altruism?
• So, psychologists need to explain why and
when altruism exists. How?
• Preferably, the explanation should be…
– parsimonious
– generalizable
Overview/summary
Six theoretical approaches to explaining
altruism
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Altruism = selfishness (Ayn Rand)
Socialization
Kin selection
Reciprocal altruism
Social exchange theory
Empathy-altruism hypothesis
#1: Altruism is, in fact, selfish
behavior after all
• The “I couldn’t live with myself in the morning”
theory”
• Ayn Rand
• Gets around the problem by asserting that there really is no such
thing as altruism to begin with.
#2: Socialization
#3: The selfish gene view
(sometimes called “kin selection”)
• Revision of Darwinian theory
– Old view: survival of the fittest organism
– New view survival of the fittest GENE
• Genes, not organisms, are the unit of analysis
– Burnstein et al. (1994)
Those genes that are conducive to the survival and
reproduction of copies of themselves are the genes
that win. They may do this straightforwardly, by
prompting their vehicle to survive, beget offspring,
and equip the offspring for survival and reproduction.
Or they may do this circuitously—by, say, prompting
their vehicle to labor tirelessly…and “selflessly” so
that a queen ant can have lots of offspring containing
them. However the genes get the job done, it is
selfish from their point of view, even if it seems
altruistic at the level of the organism. (Robert Wright,
1994; p. 162)
Organisms as “gigantic lumbering robots” (Dawkins,
1976; p. 19) under the control of their genes.
More on kin selection
• r = degree of genetic relatedness
• Genes for altruistic behavior will thrive so
long as c < b x r, where
– C = cost to the altruist (in terms of future
reproductive success)
– B = benefit to the recipient (ditto)
– R = degree of relatedness
Some examples
• Cost-benefit ranges from 0-1; 0 = bad; 1 = good.
• Suppose you have the opportunity to save someone’s life, and that
the other person will likely live (benefit = .8) but a slight chance
that you would perish in the attempt (.2).
• If the other person is your brother:
Cost for you = .20; benefit for other: .80; r = .5
.20 < .4
• Uncle
Cost for you = .20; benefit for other: .80; r = .25
.20 = .20
• Unrelated to you
Cost for you = .20; benefit for other: .80; r = .00
.20 > 0.0
#4: reciprocity norm
• Altruism sometimes does occur between
unrelated organisms
• Reciprocity norm
• Has survival value and hence can become
genetically based
#5 Social exchange theory
• Borrows some elements from evolutionary
psychology, but doesn’t assume that desires
and motives are genetically based
• Examples
#6 Empathy-altruism hypothesis
(Batson)
• Degree of initial empathy key
– If empathy triggered, will help regardless of
cost-benefit analysis
– If empathy NOT triggered, social exchange
theory comes into play
– See figure on p. 363
• Toi and Batson (1982)
Overview/summary
Six theoretical approaches to explaining
altruism
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Altruism = selfishness (Ayn Rand)
Socialization
Kin selection
Reciprocal altruism
Social exchange theory
Empathy-altruism hypothesis
Other factors
•
•
•
•
•
Individual differences?
Gender
Culture
Mood
Situational factors
– Urban vs. rural
– Latane and Darley’s model
Situational determinants of altruism:
Urban vs. Rural settings
• Intuitions (and stereotypes) are correct:
altruism more likely in rural areas
– Replicated in many countries (e.g. Israel, Turkey,
the Sudan)
• Why?
• Socialization hypothesis, vs….
• Urban overload hypothesis (Milgram, 1970)
– Population density matters (Levine et al.. 1994)
Kitty
Genovese
Murder
Media reactions
“non-rational behavior”
“goes to the heart of whether this is a community or a jungle”
“It’s in the air of all New York, the air of injustice…The feeling that
you might get hurt if you act and that whatever you do, you will be the
one to suffer…”
“We underestimate the damage that these accumulated images (of
television) do to the brain…”
“perhaps satisfied the sadistic impulses of those who witnessed it. They
were deaf, paralyzed, hypnotized with excitation….”
Interesting historical footnote
• “The Kew Gardens
incident has become the
occasion for a general
attack on the city. It is
portrayed as callous, cruel,
indifferent to the needs of
the people and wholly
inferior to the small town
in quality of its personal
relationships.”
Stanley Milgram
Milgram:
Population density
Helping/altruism
Latane and Darley:
Decision-making tree
(e.g. perception of responsibility)
Five crucial stages
to L&D model:
1. Notice the event?
2. Interpret the event as an emergency?
3. Assume responsibility?
4. Know the appropriate form of assistance?
5. Implement decision to act?
#1 Does the person notice that
something “unusual” is taking place?
• The good Samaritan study. (Darley
and Batson (1973).
• Results: % of people in each condition
who helped.
Ahead
On time
Late
63%
45%
10%
#2 Is the situation interpreted as an
emergency (helping) situation?
• Pluralistic ignorance
– Special case of conformity (informational)
• The smoke-filled-room study (Latane and
Darley, 1968).
•
Group of 3
Alone
•
(subject plus 2 unresponsive
confederates)
75%
10%
#3 Does the person take
responsibility?
Diffusion of responsibility
The "seizure study" (Latane & Darley, 1970)
% Helping
ONE
TWO
FIVE
85%
62%
31%
93
166
(within 60 seconds)
Average delay
52
in seconds, among people
who eventually did help
Five crucial stages
to their model:
1. Notice the event?
2. Interpret the event as an emergency?
3. Assume responsibility?
4. Know the appropriate form of
assistance?
5. Implement decision to act?