Pro- and Antisocial Behaviour
Lecture 1 (4-2-2020) – Main theories of prosocial behaviour:
Kitty Genovese story: she was attacked, her neighbours saw it but nobody
intervened reason why people looked at prosocial behaviour
Prosocial behaviour: behaviour that is defined by society as generally beneficial to
other people and/or to the ongoing political or cultural system (interpersonal &
context dependent an instinct)
Helping: any action that had the consequence of providing some benefit to or
improving the well-being of another person
- Casual helping: small favour (not necessarily knowing the other person)
- Substantial personal helping: considerable effort (knowing the other person)
- Emotional helping: emotional support (knowing the other person, quite effort)
- Emergency helping: helping with an acute problem (not necessarily
knowing the other person)
3 dimensional classification system: serious VS not serious, direct
VS indirect, planned/formal VS spontaneous/informal
Altruism: helping purely out of the desire to benefit someone else, with no
benefit (and often a cost) to oneself. A motivational state with the ultimate
goal of increasing another’s welfare
- Reciprocal altruism: a seemingly altruistic action is also beneficial
for the helper, as it expects help in the future of the other (beneficial for
survival)
Cooperation: acting together (in a coordinated way) in the pursuit of shared goals,
the enjoyment of the joint activity, or simply furthering the relationship
When are people prosocial? (Latené and Darley Model): Whether a person will
act pro-socially is the result of a logical decision-making process that includes 5
steps
1. Notice the event: the clarity, context of the event and the (good) mood of the
helper determines whether someone notices something is wrong
2. Interpret event as emergency: clear signs of distress (scream) and actions of
bystanders increase the chance of interpreting the situation as an emergency
3. Assume responsibility: taking the event personal and feel responsible
(Bystander effect: when you are the only person witnessing an emergency,
you are more likely to help than when there are more witnesses pluralistic
ignorance (looking at others to interpret situation) & diffusion of responsibility
(believing that someone else will take responsibility and help))
4. Choose a way to help: people who know what to do, aren’t more likely to help,
but are more effective when they help
5. Implement decision: making the decision to actually help (or walk away)
,Why are people prosocial?
The benefits outweigh the costs:
- Cost-benefit analysis (minimizing our costs (social
disapproval, physical/mental problems, time/effort) &
maximizing the benefits (social recognition, positive self-view,
positive emotions))
- Arousal cost-reward model: personal costs for helping VS
costs for the victim not receiving help
It is the norm:
- Social norms: rules for acceptable and non-acceptable behavior in certain
situations (Reciprocity norm: we feel inclined to help others who have helped
us & Social responsibility norm: we feel inclined to help others who are
dependent on us)
- Personal norms: one’s individual feelings of moral obligation on how to behave
in a certain situation (does helping do more harm than good or not?)
We feel empathy and want to reduce stress (egoism VS altruism):
- Aversive arousal reduction: wanting to reduce our arousal when witnessing an
event/emergency by helping or getting away
- Negative state relief model (egoism): if we can reduce our negative arousal
which we experience at an event with helping, we are likely to help
- Empathy-altruism model (altruism): the empathy we feel for someone
determines our helping behaviour (reducing distress from the person in need)
- Empathic-joy hypothesis: when we feel empathy for the person in need & the
helper will receive positive feedback about helpfulness/feel joy, help is likely
- Empathy-specific reward: we will get praise from others
- Empathy-specific punishment: avoid other observers to think negatively of us
It is an inherited characteristic (nature) VS We learned this form others (nurture)
Explanations of prosocial behavior
Biological explanations:
- An individual is motivated to enhance reproductivity to the ones sharing their
own genes (inclusive fitness), even if this means sacrificing itself (kin
selection)
- We choose partners who are similar to ourselves and we are more likely to
help those who are genetically similar to us (genetic determinism)
Learning explanations:
- Parents and other models need to act pro-socially, rewarding prosocial acts
- Learning the capacity to recognize and appreciate the needs of others and
understand ‘social prescriptions’ (so not necessarily the more observations,
the more imitation)
, Lecture 2 (7-2-2020) – main theories of antisocial behaviour:
Aggression: any form of behaviour directed towards the goal of harming or injuring
another living being who is motivated to avoid such treatment
- Behaviour hurting another person (not an emotion, motivation or attitude)
- Intention intended to hurt someone else, voluntarily chosen (not accidental)
- Harming negative consequences for another person (physical VS
psychological & active VS passive & direct VS indirect)
- Living being act aimed at hurting a living being (could be expressed on non-
living things)
- Avoidance motivation in the recipient those who undergo the aggressive
treatment want to avoid this aggressive treatment
Why do people act aggressively?
Biological approach:
- Ethology (Lorenz): steam-boiler model = aggression is a release of internal
aggressive energy (level of aggressive energy & strength of external stimuli),
so aggressive acts can’t come in a row (which isn’t true) within species
aggression (determining power hierarchy) & between species aggression
(driven by hunger)
- Socio-biology (Darwin): natural selection, aggression as adaptive behaviour =
facilitating selective transmission of aggressive genes to future generations.
(too much aggression diminishes the chance of survival)
- Behaviour genetics: genetically related individuals are more similar in their
aggressive behaviour (41%) than non-related individuals. Genes>environment
- Hormones: Testosterone (higher in man and show more physical aggression)
& Cortisol (low level fearlessness, insensitive to punishment, risky)
Psychological approach:
- Psychoanalysis (Freud): conflict between life instinct and death instinct leads
to aggression, to release the tension of the conflict.
- Frustration-Aggression hypothesis (Dollard): frustration (result of goal directed
behaviour being blocked) always leads to some form of aggression
(contributing elements: expected satisfaction when goal will be reached,
magnitude of interference, number of responses being blocked) displaced
aggression (not directing aggression to source of frustration because: afraid of
punishment (authority) & source of frustration is unavailable) & Aggressive
cues (prerequisites for aggression: readiness for aggression (frustration) &
external cues that trigger the display of aggression (weapons))
- Cognitive neo-associationism (Berkowitz): frustration emotion (arousal)
reducing negative affect with primitive reaction (associational reaction =
aggression (fight) or withdrawal (flight))
Lecture 1 (4-2-2020) – Main theories of prosocial behaviour:
Kitty Genovese story: she was attacked, her neighbours saw it but nobody
intervened reason why people looked at prosocial behaviour
Prosocial behaviour: behaviour that is defined by society as generally beneficial to
other people and/or to the ongoing political or cultural system (interpersonal &
context dependent an instinct)
Helping: any action that had the consequence of providing some benefit to or
improving the well-being of another person
- Casual helping: small favour (not necessarily knowing the other person)
- Substantial personal helping: considerable effort (knowing the other person)
- Emotional helping: emotional support (knowing the other person, quite effort)
- Emergency helping: helping with an acute problem (not necessarily
knowing the other person)
3 dimensional classification system: serious VS not serious, direct
VS indirect, planned/formal VS spontaneous/informal
Altruism: helping purely out of the desire to benefit someone else, with no
benefit (and often a cost) to oneself. A motivational state with the ultimate
goal of increasing another’s welfare
- Reciprocal altruism: a seemingly altruistic action is also beneficial
for the helper, as it expects help in the future of the other (beneficial for
survival)
Cooperation: acting together (in a coordinated way) in the pursuit of shared goals,
the enjoyment of the joint activity, or simply furthering the relationship
When are people prosocial? (Latené and Darley Model): Whether a person will
act pro-socially is the result of a logical decision-making process that includes 5
steps
1. Notice the event: the clarity, context of the event and the (good) mood of the
helper determines whether someone notices something is wrong
2. Interpret event as emergency: clear signs of distress (scream) and actions of
bystanders increase the chance of interpreting the situation as an emergency
3. Assume responsibility: taking the event personal and feel responsible
(Bystander effect: when you are the only person witnessing an emergency,
you are more likely to help than when there are more witnesses pluralistic
ignorance (looking at others to interpret situation) & diffusion of responsibility
(believing that someone else will take responsibility and help))
4. Choose a way to help: people who know what to do, aren’t more likely to help,
but are more effective when they help
5. Implement decision: making the decision to actually help (or walk away)
,Why are people prosocial?
The benefits outweigh the costs:
- Cost-benefit analysis (minimizing our costs (social
disapproval, physical/mental problems, time/effort) &
maximizing the benefits (social recognition, positive self-view,
positive emotions))
- Arousal cost-reward model: personal costs for helping VS
costs for the victim not receiving help
It is the norm:
- Social norms: rules for acceptable and non-acceptable behavior in certain
situations (Reciprocity norm: we feel inclined to help others who have helped
us & Social responsibility norm: we feel inclined to help others who are
dependent on us)
- Personal norms: one’s individual feelings of moral obligation on how to behave
in a certain situation (does helping do more harm than good or not?)
We feel empathy and want to reduce stress (egoism VS altruism):
- Aversive arousal reduction: wanting to reduce our arousal when witnessing an
event/emergency by helping or getting away
- Negative state relief model (egoism): if we can reduce our negative arousal
which we experience at an event with helping, we are likely to help
- Empathy-altruism model (altruism): the empathy we feel for someone
determines our helping behaviour (reducing distress from the person in need)
- Empathic-joy hypothesis: when we feel empathy for the person in need & the
helper will receive positive feedback about helpfulness/feel joy, help is likely
- Empathy-specific reward: we will get praise from others
- Empathy-specific punishment: avoid other observers to think negatively of us
It is an inherited characteristic (nature) VS We learned this form others (nurture)
Explanations of prosocial behavior
Biological explanations:
- An individual is motivated to enhance reproductivity to the ones sharing their
own genes (inclusive fitness), even if this means sacrificing itself (kin
selection)
- We choose partners who are similar to ourselves and we are more likely to
help those who are genetically similar to us (genetic determinism)
Learning explanations:
- Parents and other models need to act pro-socially, rewarding prosocial acts
- Learning the capacity to recognize and appreciate the needs of others and
understand ‘social prescriptions’ (so not necessarily the more observations,
the more imitation)
, Lecture 2 (7-2-2020) – main theories of antisocial behaviour:
Aggression: any form of behaviour directed towards the goal of harming or injuring
another living being who is motivated to avoid such treatment
- Behaviour hurting another person (not an emotion, motivation or attitude)
- Intention intended to hurt someone else, voluntarily chosen (not accidental)
- Harming negative consequences for another person (physical VS
psychological & active VS passive & direct VS indirect)
- Living being act aimed at hurting a living being (could be expressed on non-
living things)
- Avoidance motivation in the recipient those who undergo the aggressive
treatment want to avoid this aggressive treatment
Why do people act aggressively?
Biological approach:
- Ethology (Lorenz): steam-boiler model = aggression is a release of internal
aggressive energy (level of aggressive energy & strength of external stimuli),
so aggressive acts can’t come in a row (which isn’t true) within species
aggression (determining power hierarchy) & between species aggression
(driven by hunger)
- Socio-biology (Darwin): natural selection, aggression as adaptive behaviour =
facilitating selective transmission of aggressive genes to future generations.
(too much aggression diminishes the chance of survival)
- Behaviour genetics: genetically related individuals are more similar in their
aggressive behaviour (41%) than non-related individuals. Genes>environment
- Hormones: Testosterone (higher in man and show more physical aggression)
& Cortisol (low level fearlessness, insensitive to punishment, risky)
Psychological approach:
- Psychoanalysis (Freud): conflict between life instinct and death instinct leads
to aggression, to release the tension of the conflict.
- Frustration-Aggression hypothesis (Dollard): frustration (result of goal directed
behaviour being blocked) always leads to some form of aggression
(contributing elements: expected satisfaction when goal will be reached,
magnitude of interference, number of responses being blocked) displaced
aggression (not directing aggression to source of frustration because: afraid of
punishment (authority) & source of frustration is unavailable) & Aggressive
cues (prerequisites for aggression: readiness for aggression (frustration) &
external cues that trigger the display of aggression (weapons))
- Cognitive neo-associationism (Berkowitz): frustration emotion (arousal)
reducing negative affect with primitive reaction (associational reaction =
aggression (fight) or withdrawal (flight))
