Prosocial Behaviour And Altruism

Examples of Prosocial Behaviour

Prosocial behaviour refers to actions performed to benefit others. In plain English, we usually call prosocial behaviours helping. There is a whole range of actions that fall into this category, so let's first distinguish the two main types of prosocial behaviour:

• Mutualism or cooperation

• Altruism

Cooperation occurs when both the actor and the recipient benefit from the action. In hunter-gatherer societies, everyone had a way to contribute to the group; some people hunted, some sought out berries or edible plants others took care of children. This way, everyone benefited from the work of others.

On the other hand, altruistic behaviour benefits the recipient with no benefit to the actor.

The common denominator in all these examples is that the act is selfless, with no expectations that the other person will return a favour.

The motivations behind prosocial behaviours can be diverse; they can be part of the social norms. When it's customary to offer help, we don't think twice about whether we should do it or not. We can also be motivated by reciprocity. We might want to help people that have helped us before. Other times, we might be motivated by empathy – we help them because we want others to help us in a similar situation. We'll break down the theories which highlight how all these motives can inform our actions.

Fig 1 - We've seen the power of prosocial behaviour in community responses to the Covid-19 pandemic.

Differences Between Prosocial Behaviour and Altruism

Altruism is a type of prosocial behaviour. Contrary to other prosocial behaviours, it involves a selfless concern for the well-being of others. Altruistic behaviour refers to acts that benefit others with no benefit to you or at a cost to yourself. It can be motivated by genetic survival, feelings of empathy, or social norms, but it's not motivated by reciprocity.

Social learning theory: examples of prosocial behaviours in early childhood

Research has found that children spontaneously help others early, but why is it so? According to the social learning theory, children learn to be prosocial through reinforcement and exposure to social norms.

Growing up, we learn helping behaviour by being exposed to social norms like reciprocity (if you do good to others, they will repay with the same behaviour) or social responsibility (we are responsible for helping those who depend on us).

As children, we are also rewarded for helping others, and we are told off for behaviour that is harmful to others. This way, we learn to act prosocial in the future.

However, other studies suggest that prosocial behaviour might be present in early childhood before we begin to learn about social norms (Warneken and Tomasello, 2006); this might suggest something intrinsic about helping behaviour.

Fig 2 - Some studies suggest that we learn how to behave from the content we are exposed to.

Factors Affecting Helping Behaviour

The bystander effect is one phenomenon that gives us insight into what factors affect helping behaviour. The bystander effect refers to situations when people fail to act in an emergency because of the presence of other bystanders.

One factor contributing to helping behaviour is feeling responsible for acting. Let's consider one popular example illustrating the bystander effect – the case of Kitty Genovese, who was murdered outside of her New York flat in the 1960s. After her murder, it was reported that 38 people witnessed the murder but did not respond during the entire 35 minutes that the murder was occurring.

The presence of multiple other people that could act instead of us can reduce the feeling of personal responsibility to help the person in need.

Another explanation for the bystander effect is pluralistic ignorance. People base their judgements on the reactions of others. If we don’t see others around us reacting, we might conclude there is no emergency. It, therefore, takes effort to be the first person to react when surrounded by an ignorant crowd.

Piliavin et al. (1969) Subway Samaritan study

Pilavin and colleagues experimented on bystanders in an everyday environment. They watched the responses of people travelling on the New York subway to a person collapsing. They were specifically interested in whether the reaction of bystanders would be affected by the victim's personal characteristics.

• They found that when the person, who collapsed was using a walking cane, people helped them 95% of the time, but when the person, who collapsed was acting like a drunk they were only helped 50% of the time.

• When they manipulated the race of the victim, there was no difference in helping behaviour when the victim was using a mobility aid. However, in the drunk condition, the victim was less likely to be helped by a bystander of an opposite race.

• Interestingly, the number of other bystanders did not influence the speed of helping, meaning that the diffusion of responsibility played little role in influencing helping behaviour.

According to the authors, when we are exposed to an emergency where someone might require help, we are motivated to act because of the physical arousal we experience. However, whether we act or not further depends on our cost-benefit analysis of the situation. We engage in helping behaviour when the benefits outweigh the costs.

Fig 2 - Pilavin et al. studied factors affecting helping behaviour on a Subway

Levine et al. (2001) Cross-cultural altruism

To investigate the potential cross-cultural factors that could influence helping behaviour, Levine and colleagues set up a series of repeated experiments in large cities across 23 countries. They measured helping in non-emergency situations (a person dropping a pen or a person in a leg brace dropping magazines) and emergencies (a blind person attempting to cross the street).

The researchers analysed the correlations between the population size, the economic situation, individualism-collectivism and walking speed in each country with the helping behaviour observed. It was found that the only variable that correlated with helping behaviour was the economy.

• People in richer countries were less likely to help strangers than those in poorer countries.

• Moreover, people engaged in helping behaviour more in Latin America, this was linked to simpatia, which is a cultural value of working towards harmony in society and cultivating warm interpersonal relationships.

In the study, Levine demonstrates how economic or cultural factors can affect people's likelihood to engage in prosocial behaviour.

Benefits of Prosocial Behaviour

When considering the benefits of prosocial behaviour, we must consider the benefits to society and the individual.

Prosocial behaviour can certainly benefit society as a whole. It encourages reciprocity and cooperation or even selfless support of others in need. If prosocial behaviour is the standard, we can feel safe that we won't be left alone when we are in need. Moreover, groups can often achieve more than a single person, which benefits the productivity of a society. For example, in hunter-gatherer societies, men hunted in groups rather than alone. By hunting in groups, they could hunt down bigger prey than alone.

From an individual perspective, the benefits of prosocial behaviour can contribute to the decision to act prosocially (cost-benefit analysis). These benefits can be direct or indirect. We directly benefit when we receive something in return from the person we helped or indirectly when the action makes us feel better about ourselves or improves our reputation in the community.