Transcript Contrast two theories explaining altruism in humans

Contrast two theories explaining
altruism in humans
Why would anyone be altruistic?
Contrast two theories explaining altruism in
humans
Why would anyone be altruistic?
Kin Selection Theory
• Hamilton 1963
• We are more likely to
sacrifice ourselves for
relatives than non-relatives.
• By sacrificing yourself for
relatives (e.g. helping them
at the cost of not having
babies yourself) you still
contribute to the survival of
your genes by helping close
relatives.
Contrast two theories explaining altruism in
humans
Kin and the likelihood of kidney donations
Simmons et al. (1977)
• The study investigated
whether close relatives
were more likely to be
kidney donors.
• The results showed that
86% of parents said yes but
only 47% of the siblings
who could be donors
agreed to donate a kidney
to their relative when
asked.
Contrast two theories explaining altruism in
humans
Kin and the likelihood of kidney donations
Simmons et al. (1977)
• This is a problem because
what do you think Kin
Theory would predict?
• Family over others
(friends or strangers)
• Maybe closeness matters.
• Side note…when the
siblings are closer in age
they were more likely to
donate.
Contrast two theories explaining altruism in
humans
Contrast two theories explaining altruism in
humans
Kin Theory..is it good?
Strengths of kin selection theory
• The theory is supported by
empirical studies, which
generally shows preference
for helping close blood
relatives (e.g. in organ
donation).
Limitations of kin selection theory
• The theory cannot explain why
people help individuals who
are not relatives (e.g.
cooperation among
nonrelatives, spontaneous acts
of bravery, or the adoption of
children who are not relatives.
• Human kinship patterns are
not necessarily based upon
blood tie. Shared
developmental environment,
familiarity, and social bonding
also contribute to kinship
according to anthropologists.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=teVtgmAPWHU
The empathy-altruism theory
Batson et al. (1981)
• posits that some helpful
actions are truly altruistic
because they are
motivated by the genuine
desire to increase
another’s welfare.
• It is the helper’s motives
that determine whether a
behavior is altruistic or
not.
Contrast two theories explaining altruism in
humans
The empathy-altruism theory
Batson et al. (1981)
• Altruism can only happen if
another person’s perspective
is taken.
• Observing another person’s
situation may either produce
empathic concern (i.e. positive
emotions like sympathy or
compassion) or personal
distress (i.e. negative
emotions).
• “Empathy” evokes altruistic
motivation to reduce another
person’s distress whereas
personal distress evokes an
egoistic motivation to reduce
one’s own distress.
Contrast two theories explaining altruism in
humans
The empathy-altruism theory
Batson et al. (1981)
Three factors facilitate
perspective taking:
1. the observer has had
similar experiences (lets
say someone in school
just got dumped)
2. the observer is attached
to the victim
3. the person is instructed
to imagine what it is like
to be in the victim’s
position.
Contrast two theories explaining altruism in
humans
Experimental testing of the
empathy-altruistic theory
Batson et al. (1981)
Aim:
To investigate
participants’ motives to
help when they had the
opportunity to escape.
Procedure:
Participants were
students in an
introductory psychology
class at university. They
were tested individually.
Contrast two theories explaining altruism
in humans
Experimental testing of the
empathy-altruistic theory
Batson et al. (1981)
• Before they participated
they filled out a
questionnaire about
themselves.
• Each participant was led
to believe that he or she
was an observer to a
test where another
student (Elaine) was
being tested in recall of
digit numbers.
Contrast two theories explaining altruism in
humans
Experimental testing of the
empathy-altruistic theory
Batson et al. (1981)
• Participants read a short
description of Elaine.
Each description was
manipulated so that the
real participants could
either identify with Elaine
(high empathy) or not
(low empathy).
Contrast two theories explaining altruism in
humans
Experimental testing of the
empathy-altruistic theory
Batson et al. (1981)
• Participants then
watched Elaine over a
close-circuit TV (in fact
a pre-recorded video).
• After two trials Elaine
received electric shocks.
She clearly expressed
they were painful.
Contrast two theories explaining altruism in
humans
Experimental testing of the
empathy-altruistic theory
Batson et al. (1981)
• Participants were asked if
they would be willing to help
Elaine by taking her place.
• Half of them heard that they
could either take her place or
fill out a questionnaire and
then leave (easy escape
situation).
• The other half were told that
they could either take her
place or watch Elaine go
through the remaining eight
trials (difficult escape
situation).
Contrast two theories explaining altruism in
humans
Experimental testing of the
empathy-altruistic theory
Batson et al. (1981)
• Then participants had
to say what they
wanted to do.
• When they had chosen,
the experiment ended
and they were
debriefed.
Contrast two theories explaining altruism in
humans
Experimental testing of the
empathy-altruistic theory
Batson et al. (1981)
Results:
• High empathy
condition: Most
participants agreed to
help Elaine.
• It did not matter much
whether it was easy or
difficult to escape.
Contrast two theories explaining altruism in
humans
Experimental testing of the
empathy-altruistic theory
Batson et al. (1981)
• Low empathy
condition: Most
participants withdrew
in the easy escape
condition.
• When it was difficult
some preferred to offer
help.
Contrast two theories explaining altruism in
humans
Contrast two theories explaining altruism in
humans
Experimental testing of the
empathy-altruistic theory
Batson et al. (1981)
Evaluation:
• The experiment involved
clever manipulations with
operationalized variables.
• The participants were all
psychology students and
we cannot rule out that
they guessed the aim of
the experiment (demand
characteristics and
sample bias).
Contrast two theories explaining altruism in
humans
Empathy-altruistic theory..is it good?
Strengths
Limitations
• The theory is supported by
many experimental studies.
• The theory can, to some
extent, predict conditions
under which altruistic behavior
will happen (e.g. the more
people feel empathy the more
likely they are to help other
people and people who do not
feel empathy will probably not
help).
• It is difficult to generalize
findings from experiments
such as this one in real life.
• It is a problem that it is not
possible to determine whether
altruism is the result of
empathic motivation or the
motivation to escape one’s
own negative emotions.
• It is clear that empathy does
not always precede altruistic
behavior. People may help for
other reasons.
Contrast two theories explaining altruism in
humans
But is this truly altruistic?
In fact is anything altruistic?
• Dawkin’s (1989)
• selfish gene theory suggests
that what could look as selfsacrifice could, in reality,
promote one’s own genes
because it is not a question of
individual survival but of the
gene’s survival.
• Kin altruism is in reality
“egoism”.
Contrast two theories explaining altruism in
humans
Is there always a reason behind us
doing good?
• The theory of reciprocal
altruism (Trivers, 1971)
• This theory supplements
kin selection theory.
• Is based on the strategy
that altruistic acts are
returned(“tit-for-tat”
strategy) and therefore
pays off long term.
Contrast two theories explaining altruism in
humans