AN EXPLORATORY STUDY OP ALTRUISM DISSERTATION Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University By SALOMON RETTIG, B.A., M.A. ***** The Ohio State University 1956 Approved by: Adviser Dépirtment of Psychology To My Wife 11 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I am happy to express my gratitude to the following people: To: Dr. Julian B. Rotter for his enoouragement and critical supervision of this research; for his most stimulating thinking and his important contribution to the psychological theoretical framework of this study. To; Dr. Robert A. Wherry for his advice on the statistical aspects of this study. To: Dr. Alvin Scodel for his critical review of this study and for his constant guidance and interest throughout my graduate training. To: Dr.Lauren G. Wispe for his support throughout my graduate training. To; Dr. Max Goodson and Dr. H. Gordon Hullfish who were instrumental in providing many of the subjects for this research. To: Dr. Norman Preeberg for his unfailing willingness and assistance in carrying out this research. To: Several teaching assistants for their fine cooperation in the collection of subjects and data. Finally, I wish to express my appreciation to my wife, for whose encouragement, faith, and patience I am deeply grate­ ful. iii TABLE OP CONTENTS CHAPTER PAGE I INTRODUCTION ................................. 1 II THEORETICAL AND RESEARCH BACKGROUND ............ 3 A. Historical Review ...................... 3 B. Modem Viewpoints ...................... 6 C. Studies In Altruism................... 9 III HYPOTHESES ................................... l6 A. Definition ............................. l6 B. Social Learning Theory ................. l6 C. Measures ....................... 19 D. Hypotheses.......... 21 IV METHODOLOGY......... 23 A. Pretest ............................... 23 B. The Main Experiment .................... 32 C. Specific Hypotheses .................... 37 V RESULTS AND DISCUSSION........................ 39 A. Treatment of D a t a ....... .............. 39 B. Reliability......... 40 C. The Relationship between the Altruism Scale and the Home Background Inventory .......................... 42 D. The Relationship between the Altruism Scale and the Behavioral Tests........ 48 E. The Relationship between the'Home Background Inventory and the Behavioral Tests ...... 49 P. Summary of the Results................. 50 G. Discussion of Results .............. 51 VI SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION ................... 60 BIBLIOGRAPHY ..................................... 65 APPENDIX A; 1. Sex, Scores on the Altruism Scale, and Home Background Categories, of Sample I ............. 69 2. Sex, Scores on the Altruism Scale, and Home Background Categories, of Sample II ........................... 77 Iv V TABLE OP CONTENTS (CONTINUED) CHAPTER PAGE 3. Sex, Scores on the Altruism Scale, and Home Background Categories, of Sample III ................. 81 APPENDIX B; 1. The Test Booklet .................... 83 2. Home Background Categories .......... 91 3. Slgn-up Sheet ....................... 95 APPENDIX C: The Extended P-scale .................... 96 LIST OP TABLES TABLE PAGE 1. PRODUCT MOMENT CORRELATION COEFFICIENTS BETWEEN EACH ALTRUISM SCALE SITUATION AND THE TOTAL ALTRUISM SCALE SCORE, AND BISERIAL CORRELATION COEFFICIENTS BETWEEN EACH SITUATION AND VOLUN­ TEERS AND NON-VOLUNTEERS ON THE QUESTIONNAIRE TEST (PRETEST) .............................. 29 2. PRODUCT MOMENT CORRELATION COEFFICIENTS BETWEEN THE TWELVE-ITEM ALTRUISM SCALE AND THE MAJOR CATEGORIES OF THE HOME BACKGROUND INVENTORY (PRETEST) ................................... 30 3. DIFFERENCES OF MEANS OF THE MAJOR HOME BACK­ GROUND CATEGORIES BETWEEN THE VOLUNTEERS AND NON-VOLUNTEERS ON THE QUESTIONNAIRE TEST (PRETEST) ................................... 31 4. SEX DIFFERENCES OF MEANS OF THE ALTRUISM SCALE IN THE THREE SAMPLES........................ 40 5. KUDER-RICHARDSON RELIABILITY CORRELATION CO­ EFFICIENTS OF THE HOME BACKGROUND CATEGORIES (SAMPLE I) .................................. 41 6. CORRELATION COEFFICIENTS BETWEEN THE ALTRUISM SCALE AND MAJOR HOME BACKGROUND CATEGORIES OF SAMPLE I ........... 42 7. CORRELATION COEFFICIENTS BETWEEN THE ALTRUISM SCALE AND MINOR HOME BACKGROUND CATEGORIES OF SAMPLE I .................................... , 42 8. CORRELATION COEFFICIENTS BETWEEN THE ALTRUISM SCALE AND MAJOR HOME BACKGROUND CATEGORIES ACCORDING TO SEX (SAMPLE I) ............ 43 9. CORRELATION COEFFICIENTS BETWEEN THE ALTRUISM SCALE AND MINOR HOME BACKGROUND CATEGORIES ACCORDING TO SEX (SAMPLE l) ............ 43 10. CORRELATION COEFFICIENTS BETWEENIOHE ALTRUISM SCALE AND MAJOR HOME BACKGROUND CATEGORIES OF SAMPLE I I ................................... 44 11. CORRELATION COEFFICIENTS BETWEEN THE ALTRUISM SCALE AND MINOR HOME BACKGROUND CATEGORIES OF SAI4PLE II ................................... 44 Vi vil LIST OF TABLES (CONTINUED) TABLE PAGE 12. CORRELATION COEFFICIENTS BETWEEN THE ALTRUISM SCALE AND MAJOR HOME BACKGROUND CATEGORIES ACCORDING TO SEX (SAMPLE II) .................. 45 13. CORRELATION COEFFICIENTS BETWEEN THE ALTRUISM SCALE AND MINOR HOME BACKGROUND CATEGORIES ACCORDING TO SEX (SAMPLE II) ............... 45 14. CORRELATION COEFFICIENTS BETWEEN THE ALTRUISM SCALE AND MAJOR HOME BACKGROUND CATEGORIES OF SAMPLE III .............................. 46 15. CORRELATION COEFFICIENTS BETWEEN THE ALTRUISM SCALE AND MINOR HOME BACKGROUND CATEGORIES OF SAMPLE III ....................... 46 16. CORRELATION COEFFICIENTS BETWEEN THE ALTRUISM SCALE AND MAJOR HOME BACKGROUND CATEGORIES ACCORDING TO SEX (SAMPLE III) ............... 4? 17. CORRELATION COEFFICIENTS BETWEEN THE ALTRUISM SCALE AND MINOR HOME BACKGROUND CATEGORIES ACCORDING TO SEX (SAMPLE III) ............... 4? 18. THE SIGNIFICANCE OF DIFFERENCES OF MEANS OF THE ALTRUISM SCALE BETWEEN VOLUNTEERS AND NON- VOLUNTEERS ON THE BLIND STUDENT TEST (SAMPLES I AND II) .................................. 48 19. THE SIGNIFICANCE OF DIFFERENCES OF MEANS OF THE ALTRUISM SCALE BETWEEN VOLUNTEERS AND NON­ VOLUNTEERS ON THE QUESTIONNAIRE TEST (SAMPLE I) 48 20. THE SIGNIFICANCE OF DIFFERENCES OF MEANS OF THE MAJOR HOME BACKGROUND CATEGORIES BETWEEN VOLUNTEERS AND NON-VOLUNTEERS ON THE QUESTION­ NAIRE TEST (SAMPLE l) ...................... 49 21. THE SIGNIFICANCE OF DIFFERENCES OF MEANS OF THE MAJOR HOME BACKGROUND CATEGORIES BETWEEN VOLUNTEERS AND NON-VOLUNTEERS ON THE BLIND STUDENT. TEST (SAMPLE l) .................... 49 22. THE SIGNIFICANCE OF DIFFERENCES OF MEANS OF THE MAJOR HOME BACKGROUND CATEGORIES BETWEEN VOLUNTEERS AND NON-VOLUNTEERS ON THE BLIND STUDENT TEST (SAMPLE II) ................... 50 AN EXPLORATORY STUDY OP ALTRUISM CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION Among the various types of human behavior of interest to the psychologist is the problem of man's relationship to man. Of the many forms that this relationship may take, one in particular seems of utmost necessity to the existence of man, namely the relationship which is characterized by the mutual aid that men give each other. Man all over the world is gregarious. Hence, it would seem sound to assume that the association with other men is not accidental and that it must be of great value to every human being for otherwise man would live in isolation. The expression of the relationship of mutual aid may differ from society to society, and from individual to individual. This expression is a function of the particu­ lar cultural system, the specific time and the specific situation in which an individual may find himself. The form of this expression may vary anywhere from that of inten­ tional mutual benefit to that of the administration of help without the clear awareness of any specific gain. Tradi­ tionally, we refer to the former as cooperation and to the latter as altruism. It is with the latter that this investigation is concerned. 1 2 The Investigation of the existence of altruism, the antecedent conditions which make for it, and the frequency of its occurrence, are some of the questions with which the author confronted himself. Because of the complexity of the topic under investigation, this study could only be exploratory in nature. Yet because of the many important implications attached to the notion of altruism, and the scarcity of experimental evidence, it was felt that even an exploration of this topic may be of some value in the pre­ diction of human behavior. Some of the psychological theoretical frameworks will be reviewed with particular focus on learning theory, and some of the experimental findings will be cited. In reading the following study it would be helpful to bear in mind that the interest of this investigation is focused upon altruistic behavior rather than cooperative behavior and that the purpose of this discussion is psychological rather than ethical in nature. The concern is primarily with what man does, not with what man ought to do. CHAPTER 2 THEORETICAL AND RESEARCH BACKGROUND A. HISTORICAL REVIEW Although philanthropy is a Greek word, it is not a Greek idea. The concept of altruism did not originate in Greek civilization. "The thought of whole-hearted giving without correspondent personal gain would have puzzled a Greek" (25, p.2). The roots of the concept of altruism in the Western mind probably lie in the Old and later the New Testament. The Hebrew notion of "love thy neighbor as thyself" (Leviticus, 19, 18) corresponds closely to the notion of "love your enemies" (St. Matthew, 5, 44) in the New Testament. Prom here on the belief in the love of our