Pro-Social Behavior

Prosocial behavior is a voluntary, positive social behavior that is done in order to benefit others. It is not self-directed (Fiske, 2014). This behavior includes sharing, helping, comforting, donating, volunteering, and cooperating. Studies show that when it comes to prosocial behavior, personality and situation contribute to it, or lack thereof (Fiske, 2014). If a person decides to volunteer to help the homeless, this is an example of prosocial behavior. This person would be doing something that benefits others beside himself and it’s benefiting others. A combination of egotistic and altruistic motivations drives prosocial behavior (Fiske, 2014).

One of the most notable cases of diffusion of responsibility comes from the story of Kitty Genovese, a woman who was murdered while her neighbors ignored her pleas (Darley & Latane, 1968). In the minds of the people who heard her screams for help, they may have felt that someone else would have heard and called the appropriate authorities (Fiske, 2014). However, if everyone thinks the same way, no one will get called. A saying that I remember hearing when I was young spoke about too many cooks in the kitchen. When there are two many, the other feels that someone else will cook the food. Therefore, the responsibility is diffused from them in order to take responsibility for carrying out the deed. No one wants to take responsibility as long as someone else is able to do it.

Another way in which diffusion of responsibility may occur is if there are several bystanders around (Fiske, 2014) (Latane & Darley, 1968). The more people around, the less someone is prone to act. I remember a situation when I first attended college where a wreck happened on campus. Everyone was standing around watching, but no one called the ambulance or police. With so many people around, the expectation is that someone would indeed have given the proper authorities a call. However, this didn’t happen. In one piece of research, a woman fell and cried out in pain while 120 male graduates were waiting either alone, with a friend, or a stranger. The researched showed that people who were in pairs were not as inhibited from acting (Latane & Rodin, 1969).

Lately there has been an increasingly heated debated on the issue of men “catcalling” women in the streets. The topic has taken social media by storm. One of the issues that were brought up was why other men do not call out the behavior of others of their own gender. Some of the responses stated that women bring it on themselves by the way they dress and their attitude and behavior. This is to say, that if a woman dresses in a nice or even way that can be perceived to be sexy, she is the cause for men catcalling her. As you can imagine, this argument did not go over very well. This was especially the case for women who say they do not have to dress in a certain way in order to garner this attention.

This is a condition that can be described as an attribution to the victim. Others will not get involved because they feel that it’s the victim’s fault for causing the harm in the first place (Cacioppo, Petty, & Losch, 1986; Fiske, 2014). This issue has also been seen in several social experiments. In one experiment, a man played the role of a homeless man who was in the middle of the sidewalk in pain. No one stopped to help and no inquired about his condition. If someone is responsible for their own plight, people are less likely to help. The person who steals an elderly lady’s purse and is subsequently caught and brutally beat up by a crowd may not find anyone to help them or anyone who will sympathize with him or her.

There are several steps to acting in a prosocial manner. These include taking notice of the events, interpreting the event as an emergency, feeling responsible for acting, considering what form of assistance is needed, and implementing as action (Fiske, 2014). The first of the steps doesn’t take any explanation. However, the second step is a key part in understanding what was going on with Kitty Genovese. I would imagine that if a person heard a couple arguing next door in their apartment building that it would cause any concern. However, what would it take before you notice that someone needs to be called for help?

Being able to distinguish between an argument and hitting and abuse is something that many people do not think about. However, if a person can interpret an event as an emergency, they are more likely to respond. Feeling responsible for acting is key part of this. If one can determine that an event is an emergency, they have to move away from the belief that someone else will help out. This can be explained as seeing a crime take place in a crowd of people. We cannot assume that someone else will report it, even if we see a person on the phone. Considering what form of assistance is relevant due to the event may require an expert or credentials that you may not have. Lastly, a person should implement an action on behalf of the victim should they choose to act.

References

• Cacioppo, J. T., Petty, R. E., & Losch, M. E. (1986). Attributions of responsibility for helping and doing harm: Evidence for confusion of responsibility. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 50(1), 100–105. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.50.1.100 ↩
• Darley, J. M., & Latane, B. (1968). Bystander intervention in emergencies: diffusion of responsibility. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 377–383. doi:10.1037/h0025589 ↩
• Fiske, S. T. (2014). Social beings: Core motives in social psychology (3rd ed.). Wiley Global Education. ↩1 ↩2 ↩3 ↩4 ↩5 ↩6 ↩7
• Latane, B., & Darley, J. M. (1968). Group inhibition of bystander intervention in emergencies. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 10(3), 215–221. ↩
• Latane, B., & Rodin, J. (1969). A lady in distress: Inhibiting effects of friends and strangers on bystander intervention. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 5(2), 189–202. doi:10.1016/0022-1031(6990046-8 ↩