Altruism

Presented by
Clinical Psychologist
SADAF SAJJAD

S
 Why do people help?

Prosocial Behavior
Any act performed with the goal of
benefiting another person.

Altruism
The desire to help another person even if it involves
a cost to the helper.
 Altruism

S Rooted in the Latin word alter – meaning

other

S Altruism – means “living for others”

S Key component – selflessness – an

unselfish regard for the welfare of others
 Altruism

S Altruism refers to an individual acting in a way that will

decrease its own survival chances, but improve the survival
chances of another individual.
S The Darwinian perspective emphasising ‘survival of the
fittest’ gave the impression that selfishness was the norm.
S Pioneering work involving the study of animals living in
social groups in fact revealed that co-operation and altruism
are just as ‘natural’ as selfishness.
 History of Altruism

S The French philosopher named August Comte coined the

word altruism in 1851 and it was added to the English
dictionary two years later.

S However, all human kind has been demonstrating altruism

since the world’s beginning.

S Altruism is studied today by psychologists, biologists,

theologians, anthropologists, political scientists, economists,
sociologists, mathematicians and more.
 Yesterday and Today

S Most societies acknowledge the

importance of altruism in that it benefits a
community as a whole.

S Societies also understand that it is

imperative to cooperate with one another
rather than strive on conflict. Thus, it
helps avoid war and instead, instills peace.
 Examples of Animal Altruism.

S Vampire bats will regurgitate and feed

blood that they have collected from
their prey to a hungry conspecific.

S Ground squirrels will warn others of

the presence of a predator, even
though making such a call may draw
the attention of the predator to itself
 Three Characteristics of
Altruistic Behavior

S Perceiving the need of another

person
S Being motivated by empathy to help
the other person
S Addressing the need by taking action
without expecting a reward or
recognition in return
Example of Altruism

Video 1
 Theories of Altruism

S Psychologists believe there are two types of altruism:

S Biological altruism (with its roots in evolutionary psychology)

S Psychological altruism (based more on cognitive psychology)

Theories of Altruism
 Biological Altruism

S Based in Instinct and Genes

S Evolutionary Psychology is the attempt to

explain social behavior in terms of genetic
factors that evolved over time, according to
the principles of natural selection.

S Darwin recognized that altruistic behavior

posed a problem for his theory: if an
organism acts altruistically, it may decrease its
own reproductive fitness.
 Kin Selection Theory

S Kin selection theory predicts that the extent of altruism depends

on genetic relatedness.
S By helping relatives to reproduce (even at the cost to your own
reproductive success) then your shared genes can spread.
Assisting a close relative thereby increases one’s ‘Inclusive
Fitness’.
S Using mathematical modelling, Hamilton showed that an
altruistic gene can spread through the population if it causes an
individual to help a relative, whenever the cost to the individual
is offset by the reproductive benefit gained by the receiver.
‘Hamilton’s Rule’ = r B>c
where r=coefficient of relatedness, B = benefit to the
recipient, c = cost to the giver.
 Kin Selection Theory

S In a house fire, who would you save first, your brother/sister or

your neighbor?
 Kin Selection in Humans

S Food sharing is more common amongst close

relatives.

S Political alliances between kin are more stable than

those formed between distantly related, or unrelated
individuals and involve less preconditions.

S The passing on of wealth to lineal descendants

(excluding spouses) is far more common than giving
to less closely related or unrelated individuals.

S Close relatives are preferentially sought out in times

of need and such help is less likely to be reciprocal.

S Relatives typically receive more expensive presents.

 Reciprocal Altruism Theory

Norm of Reciprocity

The expectation that helping others will increase the

likelihood that they will help us in the future.
S One reason we help people is that we assume
it will make them more likely to help us in
the future.
S This is so strong it may have become
genetically based.
 Reciprocal Altruism Theory

S Proposed by Trivers (1971).

S Natural Selection may create psychological mechanisms designed to

deliver benefits even to non-relatives, provided that such actions
lead to reciprocal beneficial actions in the future.

S This is not necessarily limited to the same species e.g. cleaner fish.

S If the benefit received is larger than the cost incurred, then

individuals who engage in such behaviour will out-reproduce those
who do not.

S E.g, in vampire bats, an individual will share food with a

conspecific (whether related or not) if the other has shared food
with that individual in the past
 Conditions Under Which
Reciprocation Flourishes

S Individuals must associate for long-enough periods of time to

develop reciprocal interactions.
S The likelihood of one individual performing some social exchange
with another should be predicted on the basis of their past
associations.
S The roles of giver and receiver should reverse at least once.

S The short-term benefits to the recipient are greater than the costs to
the donor.
S Givers should be able to recognise and expel cheaters from the
system.
 Reciprocal Altruism: Prisoner’s Dilemma

S Criminals A and B commit a crime together

S They are caught by the police and are interviewed separately

S They both know that without the testimony of the other, there is not
enough evidence to imprison them for more than a year.

S However, they also know that if they collaborate with the police and blame
the other one, the other would go to prison for 20 years, but they would go
free.
Reciprocal Altruism: Prisoner’s Dilemma
 Psychological Altruism

S Where biological explanations of

altruism can be seen in many animals,
psychological explanations of altruism
are witnessed only in higher-level
mammals.
S While biological explanations of altruism
occur almost automatically, psychological
explanations of altruism arise as a result
of cognition. That is, this type of
altruism relies on the ‘helper’
understanding the situation. This kind of
altruism is not innate.
 Negative-state relief model

S When encountering a homeless person

asking for money, we can either:

S Give them some money or

S Walk away
 Negative-state relief model

S Schaller and Cialdini (1988) proposed the

negative-state relief model.

S Pro-social behavior results from egoism rather

than altruism.

S We help others in order to relieve the stress we feel

when encountering a bad situation.

S This model also explains why people walk away.

Walking away also alleviates distress.
 Empathy-altruism model

S Batson disagrees with the notion that we only help

to relieve negative feelings.

S Batson et al (1981) suggests that people experience

two kinds of emotion when they see suffering.
Empathy-altruism model
 Empathy-altruism model

S According to Batson, if you feel empathy towards a

person, you will help, regardless of what you may gain
from it.

S Relieving suffering becomes the most important thing.

S If a person feels no empathy, then they would consider

the costs and benefits before making the decision to
help
 Empathy-altruism model

S The empathy-altruism hypothesis has been

tested empirically many times, in order to
distinguish it from egoist hypotheses (e.g.
Schaller and Cialdini’s ‘negative-state relief ’
model).

S It is, however, very difficult to determine from

observed behavior, whether someone is acting
out of empathy or to relieve distress.
Empathy-altruism model
Empathy-altruism model

Video 2
 Process of Helping

Has something happened?

Is it an emergency?

Is this something for which I should take personal responsibility?

What form of assistance should I give?

I’ll help.
Process of Helping

Video 3
 Factors that Influence Helping

S Number of bystanders
S How does a large crowd influence noticing an
emergency, interpreting something as an
emergency, and assuming responsibility?
S Leads to the bystander effect.

S Factors exist that reduce bystander effect.

S Clear emergencies vs. ambiguous.
S Cohesive groups vs. strangers.
Bystander Effect

Video 4
 Additional Factors

S Presence of Prosocial models.

S Salvation Army contributions increase if person
has just seen someone else give.

S Time pressure
S You are less likely to receive aid from someone in a
hurry
S They are less likely to notice an emergency and
less likely to interpret a situation correctly.
 Emotions

S Guilt
S Increases helping behavior.
S In one study, those who had not lied volunteered
to help an experimenter for an average of 2
minutes, those who had lied helped for
approximately 63 minutes!
S More likely to help if our guilt is public
knowledge.
 Emotions

S Negative mood
S For adults, not children, a bad mood increases the
likelihood of helping behavior.
S It appears that adults have learned that helping is a self-
gratifying behavior.
S Exceptions to this tendency include feelings of anger
and grief.

S Positive mood
S Happy people are helpful people.
S Parking ticket study: fear turning to relief increases
helping behavior significantly.
 Personality Traits

S No one trait predicts altruism

S However,
S There are individual differences in helpfulness over
time.
S Network of traits (emotionality, empathy, self-
efficacy) are linked to helping.
S High self-monitors help if they believe it will be
socially rewarded (interaction of personality and
situation).
S Men more likely to help in dangerous situations;
women in safer situations.
 How do we teach altruism?

S Teach moral inclusion

S If we are more likely to help those who are like
us, expand that group.

S Model altruism
S Even television can be helpful here!

S Attributing behavior to altruistic motives

S Avoid over justification effect. That is, don’t
coerce people into altruism, don’t reward them
too much, etc.