ALTRUISM:

HELPING OTHERS
Chapter Outline
■ Why, and when, will people help?
■ Who will help?
■ How can we increase helping?
The Story of the Good Samaritan
A man was going down from Jerusalem to Jericho, and fell into the hands of robbers, who stripped

him, beat him, and went away, leaving him half dead. Now by chance a priest was going down that

road; and when he saw him, he passed by on the other side. So likewise a Levite, when he came

to the place and saw him, passed by on the other side. But a Samaritan while traveling came near

him; and when he saw him, he was moved with pity. He went to him and bandaged his wounds,

having poured oil and wine on them. Then he put him on his own animal, brought him to an inn,

and took care of him. The next day he took out two denarii, gave them to the innkeeper, and said,

“Take care of him; and when I come back, I will repay you whatever more you spend.” (Luke

10:30–35, NRSV)
 Altruism
■ A motive to increase another’s welfare without
conscious regard for one’s self-interests.

The Samaritan story illustrates altruism.

Filled with compassion, he is motivated
to give a stranger time, energy, and money
while expecting neither repayment
nor appreciation
Why do we help?
■ Helping not only benefits the receiver but the giver as well.

■ In social economics, we exchange not only material goods and

money but also social goods—love, services, information,
status (Foa & Foa, 1975). In doing so, we aim to minimize
costs and maximize rewards.

■ Social Exchange Theory and Social Norms

Social Exchange Theory
■ The theory that human interactions are transactions
that aim to maximize one’s rewards and minimize
one’s costs.
Social Exchange Theory

■ Giving alms to an elderly beggar

– Lessen guilt vs losing a few coins

– Helping others vs not being able to buy
yosi
Social Exchange Theory
■ Rewards that motivate helping may be external or internal.

– External reward: we give to get

(we tend to help attractive people whose approval we seek,
boost one’s status, etc)
– Internal reward: increase self-worth
(makes you feel god about yourself, gives you a feeling of
self-satisfaction)
Social Exchange Theory
■ Rewards that motivate helping may be external or internal.

– External reward: we give to get

(we tend to help attractive people whose approval we seek,
boost one’s status, etc)
– Internal reward: increase self-worth
(makes you feel god about yourself, gives you a feeling of
self-satisfaction)
Those who do good tend to do well.
■ Study on couples
– One month-long study of 85 couples found that giving
emotional support to one’s partner was positive for the giver;
giving support boosted the giver’s mood (Gleason & others,
2003)
■ Youth Studies
– less risk for delinquency, pregnancy, and school dropout and are
more likely to become engaged citizens. Volunteering likewise
benefits morale and health (Piliavin (2003) and Susan Andersen
(1998)
■ Grieving
– Bereaved spouses recover from their depressed feelings faster
when they are engaged in helping others (Brown & others,
2008).
■ Reward theories imply that a helpful act is never truly
altruistic—that we merely call it ‘altruistic’ when its
rewards are inconspicuous.
If we help the screaming woman so we can gain social
approval, relieve our distress, prevent guilt, or boost our
self-image,
is it really altruistic?

■ Egoism - A motive (supposedly underlying all behavior)

to increase one’s own welfare. The opposite of altruism,
which aims to increase another’s welfare.
Reflection questions:
■ Does the cost-analysis of helping others seem
demeaning?

■ Or does it also tell us that helping is inherent to

humans and that we are prosocial and not
antisocial?
Internal Rewards
■ We help to reduce our negative feelings:
– Distress
– Near someone in distress, we may feel distress.
– Guilt
– Experiment on college students taking an exam
“Don’t Lie or youl Live with gilt.”
Internal Rewards
– Exceptions to the feel-bad-do-good scenario:
■ Negative emotion: anger
■ Profound grief: Loss of spouse or children, whether
through death or separation (intense self-
preoccupation)
Internal Rewards
– Feel good, do good
– Helping softens a bad mood and sustains a
good mood. A positive mood is, in turn,
conducive to positive thoughts and positive
self-esteem, which predispose us to positive
behavior
Social Norms
– We ought to return the wallet we found.
– We ought to protect our combat buddies from harm.
■ Norms, the oughts of our lives, are social expectations.
■ They prescribe proper behavior.
■ Two social norms that motivate altruism: the reciprocity
norm and the social-responsibility norm
Social Norms
■ Reciprocity Norm
– An expectation that people will help, not hurt, those who have
helped them.

– Reciprocity within social networks helps define the social

capital — the supportive connections, information flow, trust,
and cooperative actions—that keep a community healthy.

– When people cannot reciprocate, they may feel threatened and

demeaned by accepting aid. Thus, proud, high-self-esteem
people are often reluctant to seek help
“If you don’t go to somebody’s funeral,
they won’t come to yours.”
Social Norms
■ Social-Responsibility Norm
– belief that people should help those who need help,
without regard to future exchanges

– If they are victims of circumstance, such as natural

disaster, then by all means be generous. If they
seem to have created their own problems (by
laziness, immorality, or lack of foresight, for
example), then, the norm suggests, they don’t
deserve help.
Social Norms
■ Gender and Receiving Help
– Women offered help equally to males and females,
whereas men offered more help when the persons
in need were females.

– Mating motives not only increase men’s spending on

conspicuous luxuries, they also motivate displays of
heroism.
– Not surprisingly, men more frequently helped
attractive than unattractive women
Evolutionary Psychology
■ Kin Protection
– Our genes dispose us to care for relatives. Thus, one
form of self-sacrifice that would increase gene
survival is devotion to one’s children.

– KIN SELECTION
– The idea that evolution has selected altruism
toward one’s close relatives to enhance the
survival of mutually shared genes
Evolutionary Psychology
■ Reciprocity
– The giver expects later to be the getter. Failure to
reciprocate gets punished.
– Reciprocity works best in small, isolated groups,
groups in which one will often see the people for
whom one does favors.
– Reciprocity among humans is stronger in rural
villages than in big cities.
Genuine Altruism
Are anonymous benefactors—along with lifesaving heroes, everyday blood donors, and
Peace Corps volunteers—ever motivated by an ultimate goal of selfless concern for
others?

Or is their ultimate goal some form of self-benefit, such as gaining a reward,

avoiding punishment and guilt, or relieving distress?

Abraham Lincoln illustrated the philosophical issue in a conversation with another

passenger in a horse-drawn coach.
After Lincoln argued that selfishness prompts all good deeds, he noticed a sow making
a terrible noise. Her piglets had gotten into a marshy pond and were in danger of
drowning. Lincoln called the coach to a halt, jumped out, ran back, and lifted the little
pigs to safety. Upon his return, his companion remarked,
“Now, Abe, where does selfishness come in on this little episode?”
“Why, bless your soul, Ed, that was the very essence of selfishness. I should have had
no peace of mind all day had I gone and left that suffering old sow worrying over those
pigs. I did it to get peace of mind, don’t you see?”
Genuine Altruism
■ Empathy
– The vicarious experience of another’s feelings;
putting oneself in another’s shoes.

– Empathy VS Sympathy
When will we help?

■ Seventeen-year-old Andrew Mormille was knifed in the stomach as he rode the

subway home. After his attackers left the car, 11 other riders watched the young
man bleed to death.
■ Eleanor Bradley tripped and broke her leg while shopping. Dazed and in pain, she
pleaded for help. For 40 minutes, the stream of sidewalk pedestrians simply parted
and flowed around her. Finally, a cab driver helped her to a doctor (Darley & Latané,
1968).
When will we help?

■ Number of bystanders
– the presence of other bystanders—greatly
decreased intervention.

– person was at least as likely to be helped by a

lone bystander as when observed by several
bystanders
When will we help?

■ Number of bystanders
– Why does the presence of other bystanders sometimes inhibit
helping?

– As the number of bystanders increases, any given bystander

– is less likely to notice the incident,
– less likely to interpret the incident as a problem or an
emergency,
– and less likely to assume responsibility for taking action
When will we help?

■ Number of bystanders
– Noticing
– Interpreting
– Assuming Responsibility

– Bystander effect
– The finding that a person is less likely to
provide help when there are other bystanders.
When will we help?

■ Number of bystanders
– Interpreting
■ Latané and Darley (1968) had Columbia University men fill out a
questionnaire in a room, either by themselves or with two strangers. While
they were working (and being observed through a one-way mirror), there
was a staged emergency: Smoke poured into the room through a wall vent.
Solitary students, who often glanced idly about the room while working,
noticed the smoke almost immediately—usually in less than 5 seconds.
Those in groups kept their eyes on their work. It typically took them about
20 seconds to notice the smoke.
When will we help?

■ Helping When Someone Else Does

– Prosocial models do promote altruism.
■ Time Pressures
– A person not in a hurry may stop and offer help to a
person in distress. A person in a hurry is likely to keep
going.
■ Similarity
– Because similarity is conducive to liking (Chapter 11),
and liking is conducive to helping, we are more
empathic and helpful toward those similar to us
Who will help?

■ Personality Traits
– Personality researchers have found:
– individual differences in helpfulness and shown
that those differences persist over time and are
noticed by one’s peers
– those high in positive emotionality, empathy, and
self-efficacy are most likely to be concerned and
helpful
– those high in self-monitoring are attuned to others’
expectations and are therefore helpful if they think
helpfulness will be socially rewarded
Who will help?

■ Gender
– when faced with potentially dangerous
situations in which strangers need
help men more often help
– In safer situations, women are slightly
more likely to help
Who will help?

■ Religious Faith
– Religious faith predicts long-term
altruism, as reflected in volunteerism
and charitable contributions.