cflapter 9 prosocial Behavior J-{elping Others

-Chapter Overview

Why People Help: Motives for Prosocial Behavior Factors That Increase or Decrease the Tendency to Help Lmp,1thy-A ltnnsm: It Feels Good to Help Others Factors That Increase Prosocial Beha,ior Negt1th e·St,1te Relief: Helpmg Can Reduce Unpleasan t What Research Tells Us About. ..Pa 1ing It Fon..-ard: Feelings Helping Others Because We HaYe Been Helped Fmp.1Lh.ic Joy: Feeling Good by Helping Others Factors That Reduce Helping CPrnpeHtivc Altruism: Why Nice People Sometimes What Research Tells Us About. ..How People React to Finish Virsl Being Helped Km Selection Theory Crowdfunding: A New Type of Prosocial Beha,ior Dl'iensive Hdping: Helping Outgroups to Reduce Emotion and Prosocial Behavior: 1Iood. Feelings of 11wir Threat lo Our lngroup Eh:•\ ation, and Helping Responding to an Emergency: Will Bystanders Help? Gender and Prosocial Beha,;ior: Do, \'omen and Helping in Emergencies: Apathy-or Action? :t-.Ien Differ? Is llwre Sc1fety m Numbers? Sometimes, but Not Final Thoughts: Are Prosocial Beha,ior and Aggressio ,\lways Opposites? Kt>) Steps in Deciding to Hrlp-Or Not One Sllilny day in An1es, fowa, Chris Ihle was reh.1rnmg from lunch. He had ju St parked his 1notorc\·cle when he noticed a car parked on the tracks at a railroad crossing. Look ing up, he ~av,r a train approaching-and fast! He ran to the car and shouted at then-, , people inside to move immediately, but the dri er sat frozen at the 'vvheel, and neither he nor his passenger replied. Thinking fast, Clrris shouted to the driver to put the car in neutral and then tried to push it fonvard from behind. VVhen it didn't move, he ran to the front and tried to push it back. This time, it did move and he managed to get 1t off the track, just as the train rushed by-it missed the car by a fevv inches. So his act of heroism saved the tv:o people in the car, 84-year-old Marion Papich and his 78-year-old \vife, Jean-from \vhat was certain to be serious injury, or e,·en death. Truly, he was a hero \\·ho risked his own life to help two strangers ... and succeeded. Around the globe, more than 3 billion people cook their meals and heat their homes with small stoves; these stoves bum many kinds of fuel-,vood, charcoal, waste from farm land-but all of them are dangerous, both to the people who use them and to entire planet. These stoves are highly inefficient-they require a large amount of fuel to make a small amount of heat. They emit dangerous fumes, soot, and many other pol­ lutants. And while you might think that these arnounts are small, remember that they are probably more than a billion of them in use! The result: Together they account for more than 12 percent of all greenhouse gases released into the atmosphere (Global Al­ liance for Safe Cookstoves). Further, the pollution they emit is as harmful to the people exposed to it, since the stoves are often u sed in very small enclosures. And perhaps even worse, many thousands of children are burned by these hot stoves every year. Clearly, this is a major social and environmental problem, but can anything be done to relieve it? A group of engineers believed that it could and founded a company­ Aprovecho- which means "make the best use of" in Spanish. Their goal was to build a better, safer, and more efficient cookstove and provide it to hundreds of millions of people at a price they could afford-a price that would provide no profits for the com­ pany or its founders, but would help solve this serious problem. More recently, this task has been carried forward by the Global Alliance for Clean Cookstoves, vvith the same goal and again, without making any profit. One of the stoves they developed is shown in Figure 9.1, and it-and others that burn different kinds of fuel-has been provided (at the lowest price possible) to more than 100 million people, who benefit greatly from these products. \l tir~l gl.,nct', tlw:,c s lllriL•s might seem totally Figure Pro~ocial 8Bhav1or Can Help One ,I 1tl'd.; in tl'rms of tl·w l'\'L'nls they Lil-scribe they "re 9.1 1111 ft • . . • ' u Person-or Many Millions ftcn•nl But, m Jad, thL•rc is ,1n undt>rlyi n<• lhl'JT\e that I 1 ' Tl ·1 t'1 ,,1n1H'ds tlwm: ~t'\' I lust'.·.. 1tl ~ wh,1t soci,,1 psychologists Prosocial actions can be focused on helping one or a few dL'~.:ribe as prosoc1a~ beha:1or- -actions by individu,1ls lh,1t other people, but can also benefit millions of people. A dramatic instance of this is provided by efforts to develop hdP others, ott~n, ,v1th no nnmc-tii,1tc lw,wfil to llw lwlpl'rs. cooking stoves that are more efficient-and safer-than Chris Jhk' ~ertamly h~Iped_tlw coup It• tht> car, in s,l\'ing them the ones that exist today. The scientists working on this frl101 certnm harm. L_1kt.>w1se, efforts \l) s upply htt11drl'd., of tnsk are doing so without any pay or other compensation. rni!lions of people with safer and morL' L'ffkh•nl cookstovps l hus, th ey are showing prosocial behavior. certainly help tlwm, an~i the entire planet, loo. So, prosoci,1I 11 :1\'ior t,1k.es man)' different forms ,,,c~ c 1. f l}~ ' ' " .I ,11\ L)l' OCU SL'l 1 on " . neopk, or on helping hw•e nun"lb(•i·s · .· a fe r , . . n . - 111 Vil110us ways. ln one sense, p1osoc1c1l behavior 1·s sun c,wl . t . • • 1 1a myslen ~· Wh, should the people who enrrw·c' ·n ·l .· k th • ci U• • • • • o< o 1 1 11 s cir own :,..•• fetY , well-bemg, and tnne to help otl1ers, wl~o, canno. t re dprocate (at least immediately or overtly) such help? The answer, as uncovered by social psychologists, is that there are mam· motives behind such behavior·, ar~d, many f ac tors that increase, or decrease, its occurrence. In this. chapter, ~ve will examine many aspects of proso­ cial bchavmr We V,'111 start by describing the motives from which it springs. Then, since dramatic instances in which people help others occur in emergency situations (as it did in tlie situation involving the car stuck on the railroad track), we \\ ill focus attention on helping in such situations, becau e the, prm ide important insights into the nature of prosoci,11 behavior. After that, we will examine several fac­ tors that influence the occurrence of prosocial actions-both e\.ternal factors relating to the situations in which it occurs and personal characteristics that influence the likelihood that specific people will, or will not, provide help when it is needed. We will also focus attention on an especially intrigui ng question: How do people who receive help respond to it? Will it be with gratitude, OJ, perhaps with embarrassment, or even resentment over receiving such assistance?

9.1 : Why People Help: Motives for Prosocial Behavior

OhiPr.tive Assess the factors that lead people to help others

Why do people help others? Before addressing the specific factors that increase or decrease the tendency to engage in such actions, we will first focus on a key question: What motives underlie the tendency to help others? As we will see soon, many factors play a role in determining whether, and to what extent, specific people engage in such actions. Several aspects of the situation are important, and a number of personal (i.e., dispositional) factors are also influential. We will focus on these factors in later discussions. 9.1.1: Empathy-Altruism: It Feels Good to Help Others One explanation of prosocial behavior involves empathy-the capacity to be able to experience others' emotional states, feel sympathetic toward them, and take their perspective (e.g., Eisenberg et al., J 999; Hodges, Kiel, Kramer, Veach, & Vil­ laneuva, 2010). In other words, we help others because we vicariously experience any unpleasant feelings they are experiencing and want to help bring their negative feelings to an end, and one way of doing so is to help them in some way. This is unselfish because it leads us to offer help for no extrinsic reason, but it is also self­ ish, in one sense, since the behavior of assisting others helps us, too: It can make us feel better. Reflecting these basic observations, Batson, Duncan, Ackerman, Buckley, and Birch offered the empathy-altruism hypothesis, which suggests that at least some prosocial acts are motivated solely by the desire to help someone in need. Such moth·ation can be sufficiently strong that the helper is willing to engage in unpleasant, dangerous, and even life-threatening activities. Compassion for other people mar outweigh all other considerations (Goetz, Keltner, & Simon-Thomas, 2010) In fact, research findings indicate that empathy consists of three distinct compo- nf'nts: an emotional aspect (emotional empathy, which involves sharing the feelings and emotions of others), a cognitive component, which involves perceiving others' thoughts and feelings accurately (empathic accuracy), and a third aspect, known as empathic concern, which involves feelings of concern for another's well-being (e.g., Gleason, Jensen-Campbell, & Ickes, 2009). This distinction is important, because it appears that the three components are related to different aspects of prosocial behav­ ior, and have different long-term effects. For instance, consider the effects of empathic accuracy. This appears to play a key role in social adjustment-the extent to which we get along well with others. In an informative study on this topic, Gleason and colleagues (2009) hypothe­ sized that the higher adolescents are in empathic accuracy-that is, the better their skill in what has been termed "everyday Figure 9.2 Empathic Accuracy: An Important Aspect mind-reading" (accurately understanding in Social Adjustment what others are thinking and feeling), the Recent research indicates that empathic accuracy-the ability to better their social adjustment: The more accurately understand others' feelings and thoughts (sometimes termed friends, they will have, the more they will everyday mind-reading) plays an important role in social adjustment. be liked by their peers, the better the qual­ Adolescents who are high in this skill have more friends and greater ity of their friendships, and the less they acceptance from their peers, and are victimized less by others than will be victims of bullying or social exclu­ adolescents who are low in this skill. In contrast, those low in empathic accuracy tend o develop problems of social adjustment. sion. Basically, the researchers reasoned that empathic accuracy would help the stu­ Good social dents respond appropriately to others; this relationships in turn would lead to better relationships, ~ ~ and better adjustment (see Figure 9.2). Em­ Responding Empathic ,r pathic accuracy was assessed by showing effectively to the participants in the study a videotape in others '-.. .______.. ~ which a student interacted with a teacher. The tape was stopped at specific points, and Good social participants wrote down what they thought adjustment the other people were thinking or feeling; 1 ti.:,u1,1cy \\'• ~ ,)SSl'S~cd _b" comparing tlwir rl'sponscs lo \\'hat the people in the tape ,rtcd ,1d u,1lh thmk111g and foelinv . n'f'l . . n r~c ... ulb u'.dicated t~1..1.t the higher students ,.._.ere in empathic accuracy, the better thl'ir :-ncial c1dJt1Slmcnl m lerms of all the dimensions listed earlier (numb<.>r of friends, . •cL'1,tan ce etc.). In short 1 l11·g1 I 1 f I · pL'~'I ,lL r , ' . ' ' ' 1 eve o em pat uc accuracy- - clear understc1nd- it18 l)t lllhers feelmgs and thoughts-contributed strongly to their ability to get along ,,,ell with otl:ers. Of course, we should add that it 1s possible that people who get 1th 0th ,1]onb wel_l '" ers become more empathettc, perhr1ps as cl result of pleasant inter­ ,idil1n~ ,~·1th lots of 0ther people. We mention lhb possibility not because we think it . 1m1re hkel\ to be accurate, but mainlv to remind yoti t·h,.,t t bl ' h' 1· · 1~ . ~ . ; " es a 1s mg causa 1ty 1s ,ih\',1y:,; ,1 chff1cult and tncky task, even in excellent research like this.

MIRROR NEURONS: A BIOLOGICAL FOUNDATION FOR EMPATHY-AND HELPING onlERS . Reseclrch on _tl~e role of empathy in prosocial behavior raises an intrigu­ illb t.JUe...,tio n: Is our abtlity to e>.perience what others are experiencing somehow "built into" our bra.ins, so that it happens automatically? The answer, provided by rnore th,u1 a decade of research, is that, in fact, there are areas of our brain special­ ized for just this function-to allow us to feel what others are feclmg. This system is described b) the term mirror neurons . The role of mirror neurons in empathy is sup­ ported ln seYeral different lines of research (e.g., Baird, Scheffer, & Wilson, 2011). fir--t studies have investigated the relationship between individuals' self-reported caf ·-::ity to experience empathy and activity in brain regions identified as includ­ in& wto:: neurons. Findings (e.g., Pfeifer, Iacoboni, Mazziotta, & Dapretto, 2007) ind i(a te that the higher an individual's capacity to experience empathy, the greater the activity in these regions when, for example, they observe another person in pain. Other investigations have focused on what is known as autism spectrum disorder, a r~ vchological disorder involving deficits in SQcial communication and social interac­ tio · across multiple contexts. People with this disorder are characterized by reduced capacity to experience empathy. While research results have not been entirely consis­ tent, they suggest, overall, that individuals with this disorder show reduced activity in tbe mirror neuron system, which implies this system underlies the occurrence of empathy. Additional research (Montgomery, Seeherman, & Haxby, 2009) has found that mirror neurons are active when individuals observe others' emotional expres­ sions, but are not active when they observe facial movements unrelated to emotions­ fo r instance, chewing or sneezing. This suggests that motor neurons are "tuned" to others' emotional experiences-and, thus, to empathy. Finally, it has been found that compassion training-providing individuals with practice experiencing compassion or empathy toward others-increases activity in mirror neuron regions (Weng et al., 2013). In sum, there does indeed appear to be a neural foundation in our brains for empathy-in other words, for our human capacity to share others' pain-and joy. Before concluding this discussion of empathy and its effects, we should add that after reviewing available evidence, Zaki (2014) concluded that several fact~rs encourage empathy-positive affect, the desire to affiliate with others, and so~ial desirability-the desire to "look good" to others by doing the right or approved tlung in a given situation. However, empathy can be discouraged, by other factors, such as others' suffering (which can be too painful to watch), and the cos_ts of e~peri~n~­ ing empathy. In short, empathy toward others is far from an automatic reaction-it 1s more likely to occur under some circumstances than others. . , • SL il•· Relief: Helping Can J,{educe \}, f l: Npg,1 lI\ l • '- [ In 1lt'.1s,ln1 Fl'('lin~;s . . . I I • llwrs is in a sense, the.· mirror image of empa- , ',,•.;1! ,I,• l\\l\(l\ l' (lll I\l' t>lll)~ () •• , \11,,fl,,·, I' ' • , t,oul the welfore of another person (empathic 'It 1 1 1 ,1 lt1•l1>1111 · 111•(',lllSl' \VI ldl( ' . . tin • l11•,l, ·' '' , • . •• • ,s (prnnnlhic nccuracy), and share them (emotional , ) in,lt•i,l,111d I 111•11 1t t 1111 ),· r . , ,,n,' 'II t , . ·I ,1· s 11low 11s to reduce our own negative emo- l ) , [l ,, , [,,., .t\lSI' •,Ill l ,1l l()ll, < t'lll!'•\t n "' ' I . I . > I lhinv in order to stop focling bad. The knowledge . I 11(!11•1 · \\'1H\I!; \\ l' ( ll ,I ),lH ( M • :;;:~;~· ':.,n; .in' ~,ulkrhig. ,r ,min• 111 1 ~t•iwrnlly, witrn.,s.sin~ those in need can be distress- . J' I, ., '11•(' thi-, d,•;tn•ss Ill ours1•lvl's, we help oth<:rs. 111 '' \ l I \ \ \ ,, • I f ,,. . , , · r•)sm·i ii bclwvior is known as t1e nega 1ve-s t a t ere1 1ef· 1 lu-; ,,,p 1.111,1 tllll 1 11 11 , , ' . . , ,. . • 1 & K.l'nrick 198 1) . Research indicates that 1t docsn t matter mod,•I t( i,1 11l 1111, 1i,11tn1,1nn, , " . . wlwthN thl' li\Sl,mdi•r's nq~,,ti\,•p 1•molions were c:iroused by something umelat~~ to thl' l 11.Wrgt'nC\, m h>' tlw l'nll'rgency itself. That is, you _cc~ uld be up~et ab_out receiving .l b,,d r•r,1Ck or .,L,intt sccmg th,1t a stranger has been m1ured. In either mst~nce, you ,, · ·1 to improve your own negative mood l'ni;,11~t· ,n ,1 prm,11c1,1I ,,ct pnman y as a way ...... (Pict~ich & lk•rkowilz, 1997; Fultz, Schaller, & Cialdiru, 1988). In thlS kind of situation, • mtlvppml':;s IP,1ds to prosooa- · I b e l1av10r, · and empathy is not a necessary component (C1,1l,iini t'l al., 1987).

9.1.3: Empathic Joy: Feeling Good by Helping Others How do )'llll feel when you do a favor for someone you know or even a stranger? If ynu are like most people, such actions enhance your mood-you experience positive fedings. for instance, when I have lots of items in my shopping cart at the grocery ::-.tore, and the person behind me in line has only two or three, I often say "Please, go ahead of me" Usually they smile and thank me-and as a result I get a small boost in po5itive feelings. Such situations illustrate another source of prosocial behavior: the empathic joy hypothesis (Smith, Keating, & Stotland, 1989). This view suggests that helpers enioy the positive reactions shown by others whom they help. For instance, do you recall how good it felt seeing someone you care about smile and show pleasure when you gave them a gift? That is an example of empathic joy. An important implication of this idea is that it is crucial for the person who helps to know that his or her actions had a positive impact on the victim. If helping were based entirely on emotional empathy or empathic concern, feedback about its effects would be irrelevant since we know that we "did good" and that should be enough. But it would not guarantee the occurrence of empathic joy. To test that prediction, Smith, Keating, and Stotland (1989) asked participants to watch a videotape in which a female student said she might drop out of college because she felt isolated and distressed. She was described as either similar to the participant (high empathy) or dissimilar (low empathy). After participants watched the tape, they were given the opportunity to of­ fer helpful advice. Some were told they would receive feedback about the effectiveness of their advice while others were told that they would not be able to learn what the student eventually decided to do. It was found that empathy alone was not enough to produce a prosocial response. Rather, participants were helpful only if there was high empathy and they also received feedback about their action's impact on the victim. Very impressive evidence for the importance of the rewards of helping others is provided by a study that was conducted in 136 different countries. In an :initial study, the researchers (Aknin et al., 2013) had 200,000 people in all these different countries . ure 9.3 The Joy of Helping Others Around the World f1g eng age in prosocIal behavior ,cl1 findings lr, ci lcnte thnt around th e globe people who 5t'J . · I h e universal among human fl<' I1,tpJ.) er. T 8 positive effects of helping seem to b 1 1eolln~1 c,1n be fou nd In many different cultures ,,,por . ind • l.)tJl11P 5 '

I I ~~ ·\

the past month and to indicate whether they had donated money to charity during degree to which they complete a brief measure of their subjective well-being-the there would be a posi­ were satisfied with their Jives. The researchers predicted that that helping others pro­ tin• correlation between these two variables, thus suggesting was some variation in the duced positive feelings in donors around the world. There reflect what is known strength of this relationship, suggesting that these findings in varying degrees, rather as a f11nctio11 nl relationship-it exists in all countries but everywhere with little tJ,an an accessible relationship-which means that it appears others and feeling positive or no, ariation. In other words, the link between helping than others. In addi­ emotions exists everywhere, but it is stronger in some cultures countries that differ tional research, Aknin et al. (2013) asked individuals in different past instance in which they greatly in wealth (Canada, Uganda, and India) to recall a to a brief measure had spent money on themselves or others. They also responded in each country of their happiness after doing so. Results indicated that participants than after spending on reported fee ling happier after spending on another person proposal that one rea­ themselves. In short, overall, the findings support the general so makes them feel hap­ son individuals engage in prosocial behavior is that doing pier (see Figure 9.3).

9.1.4: Competitive Altruism: Why Nice People Sometimes FiI1ish First the affective state of the The three theoretical models described so far suggest that All three formulations rest person engaging in a prosocial act is a crucial element. l • h ,,ptlll belh1\·i(ff t'ithe:.'r bL'(.1USt' lh1.c,,· w,lnt . . .. un tl:e ..- .... 5 .... ~~L"'~I'"'!'\ th..1t !-"'t:"l.~r e t'l1~4l~t' 111 t r - . · • f - . . . i:,,. rn,e dL,in,· sci ht'lps 1/J ,•111 tt.'L'l bettL'r-il 1 ::- L'I t .._, - t" . to n,,• __.;t.' ,,t,'!.er~ nt:'f,1t1Yt' ee inc- b, i ,. • . Thi - ,.,.t.'lk'I' 11 idt',1 1::- c.:nnt'd one :;tcp further ~. 1 .. .t'"t.:' ,i..!1,S~- ~ t, " • :c~:e, °".''" 1:~-:: ..1~\ t> 111.L'\.'d~ l..'f . -,~ ~... -..--., ... ,-~- -ir· ""'r•'"-L'c·· 11 beludL-.r-thc corn_peti th·e aHrmsm approach ..::J'i.L"'!:. ..-:e --~ _ ...... ,. "-- .... 't , ~ ,. .. help otht'rS b that doing so TitL-- Ylt:'' :'~:;-,:~\'- tlut ,'11~ tn,r0rt.'!.'lt '\.'.1St'l1 th,1t pct..,rle brings them large h ..,,,.,::te; t..\t>i.. L~\: :, :--c.1tu:' .i.n ...i reput.1tic•n and in this ,,· ,1) ultimatdy 0 l actions. ,'cneh~ ont':- th..1 .. ·nL, "-' th.1n L,tt::-ct the (L '::-L"' t '1 en1;.1~in~ in pr()s du 1 is costly, l\ hY mh:L ~1c'\"' ;,,:: c•thers ,L'nict ::-t.1tus.., Bt.Y,1use 1. fk•n, helping l)thcrs such beha\·ior .mi :.I:is .S!l~~~c.s~~ :L' (1~ht'r ft'L'IJ.'lt' Uut tl·h' ind1ndu.1b engagin~ in L)f a group-or l:,:,Ye .:fesir.+le .... er.S,':"l..11 qu.11iti1?.s; the) a•e ddi111teh the k.ind people ,1ctions, too, ,:e.'l:ie~ -· ·.m.t::- w ;,-1\·c .,round. F,~r rl'lL' F't'("rlc ,, hL) enga~e in ~..,rosocial and people who tl-,e ~-- ':C- :-,.1,· h> .:'-ubst.1nti,1I. H1gl~ st,1t11s c,Y1ft'rs many ,1ch·,rntJgt'S, for their \.-ind and considerate e·~s;;c. .!'_ r~soci.11 beha\'ior m,1~· be" el wmpl'n::-.itcd large amounts ..- :ti,... .;'..., Fe:. i.:.stJ"..::c .1.:: ,·,,u pn'b.11,1,· 1..11-),,·. many pt>l1ple " ·ho donate alma mater, and \....,t nD:1t:•, to unn·t'•sit e:ce ,1r.:' trcah.',i like ::.t.:irs "hen theY Yi~it their confirm that tl·e~· n,.:.\" h .."n-e tT.ai.c L'L ldins:s named ,1tter them. Research findings • C many acts of pro- fae- ~1,,th c> to t",}-'t'rit>1Ke .1 bOL':-t in s,1c1a: stah1s does lie behind Reagans, ~0a..u beha, ior---t?sred2.lly ones that l"ri.ng rubhc recognition (e.g., Flynn, rnoti\'e for /i..n:d.natu.l.l:i.h ~ Ames, :m~n). 5L1, m erall, this appears to be an important helFm~ others

Figure 9.4 \i\1hy J\IL'11S Sometimes Make Huge Gifts to Their Colleges

~::,.,..,per t,1, e .\Jtr..:,sm in Ac:icn imes engage in prosocial behavior A:.::o,c -;_i to tne competit;\ e ait. u,sm tt-ieory. people somet is visible on heca;ise .:Jc -g so prO\ aes trelT', ith large gains in status. This kind of outcome named after people who make rr,a.-y ..:n\e·sity ca:Tpcises. where bt/rdirigs or entire schools are of Oklahoma State a.·::l= do-a~ or.s T Boore Pickens .shown here in the center), is a graduate note: We don't u~ vers1tr. and recertly donated $100,000,000 to the university. But please donation. In fact, mea'1 to 1".oly that P1is was his only or primary reason for making such a large State University and his we're s:.:re h de 1\ed largely from his deep commitment to Oklahoma personal kirdf'ess. 9,1.5: Kin Selection Theory A \,·n LlilferL'nt approach tu undcrst,rnding prosocial behavior i& offered by kin se­ lt>ction theory (Ci.:ildini, Brown, Lewis, Luce, & Neuberg, 1997, Pinker, 1998). From _111 e,,)lutionc1rv perspectiYe, ,1 key goal for all organisms- including us-is getting vtll' gcnt>S intn the next genernlion. Support for thb general prediction has been ob­ t,,incd in many studies suggesting that in general we .ire more likely to help others to wh ,rn1 we are closely related th,m people to whom we are not related (Neyer & L.Hlf,, 20lK1). For example, Burnstein, Crandall, and Kitayama (1994) conducted a se­ rie~ ot studies in which participants were asked whom they would choose to help in ,m emergency. As predicted on the basis of genetic similarity, participants were mwe 1 likd) to s<1y they would help n close relntive than either a distant relative or a nn~L1t 110 h e. Furthermore, and consistent with kin selection theory, they were more Jikt>h to help young relatives, who have many year5 of reproductive life ahead of them th,m older ones. So, given a choice between a female relative young enough to reproduce and a female relative past menopause, help would go to the younger ind.iYidual. Overc1 1l, then, there is considerable support for kin selection theory. There is one ba$iC' problem, though: We don't just help biological relatives; instead, often, we do help peop I:' who are unrelated to us. Why do we do so? According to kin selection theory, this would not be useful or adaptive behavior since it would not help us transmit our genes to future generations. One answer is provided by reciprocal altruism theory-a vie,., • suggesting that we may be willing to help people unrelated to us because help­ ing is usually reciprocated: If we help them, they help us, so we do ultimately benefit, and our chances of survival could then be indirectly increased (Korsgaard, Meglino, Lester, & Jeong, 2010).

9.1.6: Defensive Helping: Helping Outgroups to Reduce Their Threat to Our Ingroup As we saw in our discussion of prejudice (Chapter 6), people often divide the social world into two categories: their own ingroup and outgroups. Furthermore, they often per ceive their own group as distinctive from other groups, and superior in several ways. Sometimes, however, outgroups achieve successes that threaten the suppo sed superiority of one's own group. Can that provide a motive for helping? Recent research suggests that it can, because one way of removing the threat posed by outgroups is to help them-especially in ways that make them seem dependent on such help, and therefore as incompetent or inadequate (Sturmer & Snyder, 2010). In other words, sometimes people help others-especially people who do not belong to their own ingroup-as a means of defusing status threats from them. Such actions are known as defensive helping because they are performed not primarily to help the recipients, but rather to "put them down" in subtle ways and so reduce their threat to the ingroup's status. In such cases, helping does not stem from empathy or positive reactions to the joy or happiness it induces among recipients, but, rather, from a more selfish motive: protecting the distinctiveness and status of one's own group. Evidence for precisely such effects has been reported by Nadler, Harpaz­ Gorodeisky, and Ben-David (2009). They told students at one school that students at another school scored either substantially higher than students at their own school on a test of cognitive abilities d h" h threat to the superiority of their (this pose a tg t d own group), ·while students · h 1 . red about the same as s u ents at at a third sc oo sea . . . . p's their school (this was low threat to their 0wn grou supenonty). \!\'hen given a chance to help students ti · ants offered more help to the at these two schoo l s, par Clp . · the high-threat school, presumably as a way o f red ucmg status threat from this rival institution. · · Fmdmgs 5uch · f th t h ] ing others as these emphcJ-.tLf the act a e P · can. stern. from many different motin~s. Like many forms of social behavior, then, prosooal actions are com- plex not only in the forms they take and the factors that affect them, but_with respect tot 11e underlying· motives· h" h l . · · ,An..atever from\.\' 1c t 1ey spnng. vv 11 the .preC1se causes of ~uch behavior, though it is clear that helping is an important and fauly common part of the social ~ide of life-one with many beneficial effects both for helpers and those who receive assistance.

ey Points

• Several different "natives may underlie prosocial • Recent evidence 1nd 1cates that people around the behavior. The empathy-altruism hypothesis proposes world experience positive feelings (affect) when they that, oecause of 6rrpathy, we help trose 1n need be­ engage in prosoc1a1 behavior. cause we experience empathic concern tor them. • The competitive altruism theory suggests that we • Empathy actually consists of t'1ree distinct compo­ help others as a means of increasing our own status nents-emotional empathy. empathic accuracy, and and reputation-and so benefit from helping in impor­ empatr1c concern. All three components can serve as tant ways. a basis for helping others. • Kin selection theory suggests that we help others • The negative-state relief model proposes that people who are related to us because this increases the help other people in order to relieve and make less likelihood that our genes will be transmitted negative their to future own emotional discomfort. generations. • The empathic joy hypothesis suggests that helping • Another motive for helping behavior is that of reducing stems from the positive reactions recipients show when the threat posed by outgroups to one's own ingroup; they receive help (e.g., gifts), and the pos1t1ve feelings this is known as defensive helping. this, in turn, induces in helpers.