Altruism and the Experimental Data on Helping Behavior

Philosophical accounts of altruism that purport to explain helping behavior are vulnerable to empirical falsification. John Campbell argues that the Good Samaritan study adds to a growing body of evidence that helping behavior is not best explained by appeal to altruism, thus jeopardizing those accounts. I propose that philosophical accounts of altruism can be empirically challenged only if it is shown that altruistic motivations are undermined by normative conflict in the agent, and that the relevant studies do not provide this sort of evidence. Non-normative, purely causal, psychological factors would be empirically relevant only if the notion of altruism is broadened to include the requirement that one recognize certain situations as calling for altruism. But even in that case, the relevant studies are not designed in such a way that could threaten philosophical theories of altruism.     

ALTRUISM AND THE GOLDEN RULE

This essay addresses recent claims about the compatibility of the sociobiological theory of reciprocal altruism with standard Western formulations of the Golden Rule. Derek Parfit claims that the theory of reciprocal altruism teaches us to be “reciprocal altruists,” who benefit only those people from whom we can reasonably expect benefits in the future. The Golden Rule, on the other hand, teaches us to benefit anyone regardless of their intention or ability to return the favor, or as Parfit puts it, the Golden Rule teaches us to be “suckers.” I argue that this distinction is founded on a misconception of the nature of the theory of reciprocal altruism, which is sociobiological as opposed to moral, and that this distinction accordingly confuses is with ought. Sociobiological theories may explain underlying psychological motivations in individuals (and perhaps even in populations), but these theories do not prescribe any sort of moral behavior. Furthermore, the theory of reciprocal altruism does not imply mental states of which agents are aware. The unconscious motivations assumed by this theory are in fact compatible with certain formulations of the Golden Rule; I will accordingly argue for the view that certain words with moral content related to the Golden Rule—such as “altruism” and “selfishness”—exist only insofar as they are social tools, which can further the self‐interests of an individual in any group.     

Normal and pathological altruism.

The psychoanalytic literature on altruism is sparse, although much has been written on this topic from a sociobiological perspective. Freud (1917) first described the concept in "Libido Theory and Narcissism." In 1946 Anna Freud coined the term "altruistic surrender" to describe the psychodynamics of altruistic behavior in a group of inhibited individuals who were neurotically driven to do good for others. The usefulness and clinical applicability of this formulation, in conjunction with the frequent coexistence of masochism and altruism, encouraged psychoanalysts to regard all forms of altruism as having masochistic underpinnings. Since then, there has been a conflation of the two concepts in much of the analytic literature. This paper reexamines the psychoanalytic understanding of altruism and proposes an expansion of the concept to include a normal form. Five types of altruism are described: protoaltruism, generative altruism, conflicted altruism, pseudoaltruism, and psychotic altruism. Protoaltruism has biological roots and can be observed in animals. In humans, protoaltruism includes maternal and paternal nurturing and protectiveness. Generative altruism is the nonconflictual pleasure in fostering the success and/or welfare of another. Conflicted altruism is generative altruism that is drawn into conflict, but in which the pleasure and satisfaction of another (a proxy) is actually enjoyed. Pseudoaltruism originates in conflict and serves as a defensive cloak for underlying sadomasochism. Psychotic altruism is defined as the sometimes bizarre forms of caretaking behavior and associated self-denial seen in psychotic individuals, and often based on delusion. We consider Anna Freud's altruistic surrender to combine features of both conflict-laden altruism and pseudoaltruism. Two clinical illustrations are discussed.     

Altruism and antisocial behavior: independent tendencies, unique personality correlates, distinct etiologies

The relationship between altruism and antisocial behavior has received limited attention because altruism and antisocial behavior tend to be studied and discussed in distinct literatures. Our research bridges these literatures by focusing on three fundamental questions. First, are altruism and antisocial behavior opposite ends of a single dimension, or can they coexist in the same individual? Second, do altruism and antisocial behavior have the same or distinct etiologies? Third, do they stem from the same or from distinct aspects of a person's personality? Our findings indicate that altruism and antisocial behavior are uncorrelated tendencies stemming from different sources. Whereas altruism was linked primarily to shared (i.e., familial) environments, unique (i.e., nonfamilial) environments, and personality traits reflecting positive emotionality, antisocial behavior was linked primarily to genes, unique environments, and personality traits reflecting negative emotionality and a lack of constraint.     

Altruistic behavior and cooperation: The role of intrinsic expectation when reputational information is incomplete

Altruistic behavior is known to be conditional on the level of altruism of others. However, people often have no information, or incomplete information, about the altruistic reputation of others, for example when the reputation was obtained in a different social or economic context. As a consequence, they have to estimate the other's altruistic intentions. Using an economic game, we showed that without reputational information people have intrinsic expectations about the altruistic behavior of others, which largely explained their own altruistic behavior. This implies that when no information is available, intrinsic expectations can be as powerful a driver of altruistic behavior as actual knowledge about other people's reputation. Two strategies appeared to co-exist in our study population: participants who expected others to be altruistic and acted even more altruistically themselves, while other participants had low expected altruism scores and acted even less altruistically than they expected others to do. We also found evidence that generosity in economic games translates into benefits for other social contexts: a reputation of financial generosity increased the attractiveness of partners in a social cooperative game. This result implies that in situations with incomplete information, the fitness effects of indirect reciprocity are cumulative across different social contexts.     

Beyond Pro-Social Behaviour: An Exploration of Altruism in Two Cultures

Altruism is primarily defined as behaviour aimed at benefiting others. Recent studies in evolutionary, social and positive psychology have highlighted that altruistic emotions and behaviours significantly contribute to wellbeing, happiness, health and longevity. However, few studies specifically focused on the concept of altruism, its experiential dimensions, cultural variants, meaning and related life domains. Hence, this study aims at exploring: a) how do people define altruism; b) perceived individual and social consequences of altruism; c) perceived difficulties in being altruistic; d) cultural influences on conceptions of altruism and related behaviours. The Altruism Questionnaire was specifically developed to address these issues. Qualitative data were collected among 119 adult participants (60 Indians and 59 Italians). Findings revealed that in both cultures altruism is perceived more than just as pro-social behaviour, emphasising it as human and social value along with its relational and psychological features. Improvement in relationships is reported as the most prominent benefit of being altruistic. Paradoxically, negative social evaluation such as criticism, isolation and misunderstanding is reported as the prominent difficulty. Influences of culture-specific factors were detected in the conceptualization and evaluation of altruism and altruistic behaviours, raising questions for assessment, intervention and further research.     

A Holist Deontological Solution to the All or Nothing Problem

Philosophia - The All or Nothing Problem is a paradox developed in recent debates about effective altruism. One argues that the paradox can be resolved by rejecting some of its claims in favor of...     

内隐和外显测量对利他行为的预测:来自IAT和BIAT的证据

利他行为是指人们自愿付出一定代价做出的有益于他人的行为。该研究以联结性-推理性评价模型为理论基础探讨内隐和外显测量对利他行为的预测效度,研究以193名大学生为被试,将4种内隐利他测量方法和1种外显利他测量方法相结合,以自发性水平不同的3种利他行为为结果变量。结果发现,IAT和BIAT的信度和效度较好,BIAT尤其值得采用。内隐利他自我概念测量能有效地预测真实情境中自发性较高的捐助行为,外显测量则预测了意识控制下自我报告的利他行为。结果表明,只有内隐利他自我概念测量能预测真实情境中快速发生的利他行为。其作用是外显利他测量和内隐利他态度测量所不能代替的。     

The roots and branches of human altruism

The authors' rigorous and ingenious programme of work documents young humans' capacity for prosocial action ( Warneken & Tomasello, 2009 ). Their laboratory findings are corroborated by centuries of observational data, spanning cultures, and historical epochs. Two general questions are raised. Firstly, what are the rules of evidence needed in using comparative data to make claims about the evolution of human social behaviours? Secondly, what ontogenetic processes contribute to the transformation of toddlers' helpfulness into mature, cognitively informed and rule‐governed altruism? These findings alone do not provide complete evidence for the phylogenetic roots of altruism. I argue that selective pressures in human evolution have favoured sociability, which could lead to aggression or altruism, depending on context and the nature of the rearing environment. Any social behaviour shown in infancy may have multiple functions, at phylogenetic, ontogenetic and episodic levels of analysis.     

Altruism in social networks: Evidence for a ‘kinship premium’

Why and under what conditions are individuals altruistic to family and friends in their social networks? Evolutionary psychology suggests that such behaviour is primarily the product of adaptations for kin‐ and reciprocal altruism, dependent on the degree of genetic relatedness and exchange of benefits, respectively. For this reason, individuals are expected to be more altruistic to family members than to friends: whereas family members can be the recipients of kin and reciprocal altruism, friends can be the recipients of reciprocal altruism only. However, there is a question about how the effect of kinship is implemented at the proximate psychological level. One possibility is that kinship contributes to some general measure of relationship quality (such as ‘emotional closeness’), which in turn explains altruism. Another possibility is that the effect of kinship is independent of relationship quality. The present study tests between these two possibilities. Participants (N= 111) completed a self‐report questionnaire about their willingness to be altruistic, and their emotional closeness, to 12 family members and friends at different positions in their extended social networks. As expected, altruism was greater for family than friends, and greater for more central layers of the network. Crucially, the results showed that kinship made a significant unique contribution to altruism, even when controlling for the effects of emotional closeness. Thus, participants were more altruistic towards kin than would be expected if altruism was dependent on emotional closeness alone – a phenomenon we label a ‘kinship premium’. These results have implications for the ongoing debate about the extent to which kin relations and friendships are distinct kinds of social relationships, and how to measure the ‘strength of ties’ in social networks.     

The Roles of Altruism,Free Riding,and Bandwagoning in Vaccination Decisions

Because vaccines can reduce the ability to transmit a contagious disease to others as well as the ability to contract a disease, the decision to vaccinate might be motivated in part by patients′ tendencies to act altruistically or, alternatively, to free ride on the vaccination decisions of others. We hypothesized that altruism and free riding motivate decisions to obtain vaccination, that individuals can be persuaded by the way questions are framed to free ride or to act altruistically, and that some individuals make vaccination decisions by "jumping on the bandwagon" and doing what most other people do. Four-hundred and seventy-two subjects answered whether they would agree to be vaccinated against a contagious disease under six different hypothetical scenarios. Regression analysis provides evidence that altruism (p < .001), free riding (p < .001), and bandwagoning (p < .001) are significant motivators in the decision to undergo vaccination. Frames stressing the opportunity to free ride increase free riding. Frames stressing altruism do not increase altruism. If generalizable to other settings, these results suggest that public health programs to increase vaccine usage should stress high vaccination rates.     

The most good you can do: a response to the commentaries

Anthony Skelton, Violetta Igneski and Tracy Isaacs share my view that our obligations to help people in extreme poverty go beyond what is conventionally accepted. Nevertheless, the other contributors argue that my view is too demanding, while noting some tensions between my different writings on this issue. I explain my position, drawing on Sidgwick’s distinction between what someone ought to do, and what we should praise or blame someone for doing or not doing. I also respond to the position that Skelton considers preferable to mine, drawing this time on an argument that Katarzyna de Lazari-Radek and I have made in our recent book, The Point of View of the Universe. I also address Igneski’s concerns about gender inequality, and indicate my broad agreement with Isaacs’ suggestion that effective altruism could benefit from a more co-ordinated approach.     

An Emergent Theory of Altruism and Self‐Interest

Beliefs about altruism and self‐interest of 25 participants were examined through a grounded theory methodology. Altruism was defined as the promotion of needs of others and self‐interest as the promotion of needs of self. Data sources included interviews, focus group, journal analysis, artifacts, and a measure of altruism. The relationship between altruism and self‐interest emerged and was composed of 12 themes. Themes described a dynamic theory that was systemic, values oriented, and interactional.     

ALTRUISM: TOWARD A PSYCHOBIOSPIRITUAL CONCEPTUALIZATION

Altruism, defined here as a regard for or devotion to the interest of others with whom we are interrelated, is pitted against two other dispositions in human beings: nepotism and egoism. We propose that to become fully human is to become more altruistic. We describe how altruism is mediated by our physiology, is expressed in our psychological development, is evolving in our social institutions, and becomes the moral communities that enforce our sense of right and wrong. A change in any one of these influences changes our disposition—changes who we are and what we do—potentially making altruism more possible in the world.     

ALTRUISM IN NATURE AS MANIFESTATION OF DIVINE ENERGEIA

Abstract. Christian theological attempts to integrate scientific claims about altruism in nature have not been completely successful largely because Western theologies—particularly some Protestant versions—lack a theologically grounded ontological basis for speech about altruism, agape, and other forms of love. Patristic theologies of divine essence, energeia and logoi, most fully developed in Eastern Orthodox thought, provide just such an ontological basis upon which Christian thought can stand in order to demonstrate that altruism in nature does not challenge religious claims that moral behavior has transcendent meaning but rather suggests that it is itself a manifestation of the divine will.     

Sociomoral reasoning in children and adolescents from two collectivistic cultures

This study compared the sociomoral reasoning of 7-, 9-, 12-, and 15-year-old children and adolescents of two collectivistic cultures in the 1990s: Spain (horizontal collectivism; N = 208) and Russia (vertical collectivism; N = 247). Participants reasoned about choices and moral justifications of a protagonist in a sociomoral dilemma where participants can focus on different moral and non-moral concerns (e.g., going with their best friend, going with a new classmate or trying to do something with both). Results support previous research in western societies: participants tend to choose the option “visiting the best friend”, and self-interest tends to decrease with age whereas altruism tends to increase. Moreover, Spanish participants tended to consider all parties involved in the dilemma (i.e., old friend and new classmate), whereas Russian participants did not. These results are discussed in light of their differences as horizontal and vertical collectivistic societies. Overall, the results open an avenue for new studies when comparing the effects of culture on children's and adolescents' development.     

J.P. Rushton’s contributions to the study of altruism

This essay describes Rushton’s work on altruism over the past 40 years. During his academic career, he changed his theoretical approach from social learning theory to trait theory to sociobiology. My essay includes five sections. The first gives an overview of Rushton’s work on altruism. The second reviews his early work based on social learning theory. His laboratory and naturalistic experiments led him to conclude that altruism could be increased by exposure to models exemplifying the behavior, and that, once engaged in, the behavior could be durable over months and generalizable across situations. The third section discusses his work on the genetic foundation of altruism with social biology including his twin studies of prosocial behaviors using different age groups of both western and Asian samples. He concluded that about 50% of the variance in prosocial behaviors is heritable. The fourth section will describe altruism as part of the general factor of personality, the apex of the personality hierarchy. The last section summarizes my review of Rushton’s work on altruism.     

Deservingness for Foreign Aid: Effects of Need, Similarity, and Estimated Effectiveness

This study was conducted to determine how people form conceptualizations of other countries' deservingness for nonmilitary foreign aid. A factor analysis of 78 college students' ratings of 21 variables for their importance in determining whether another country is deserving of economic aid yielded appropriate variables for closer examination. In the second part of this study, a new group of 40 college students was asked to rate 96 stimulus countries (constructed by factorially varying the levels of six need, similarity, and effectiveness variables) on their deservingness for foreign aid. The results suggested that ratings of other countries' deservingness for foreign aid are based on perceived need, similarity, and effectiveness, with a multiplicative combination of the recipient's need and similarity playing a prominent role. The results are related to two other conceptions of altruism and helping behavior.     

Socialization toward a career as a marriage and family therapist: How is our profession doing?

To date, marriage and family therapy does not have formal socialization programs at the undergraduate level. Socialization activities may include career classes, advising, providing internships, or actively recruiting the most talented and qualified students. These socialization activities may also aid in the recruitment of minority students. A survey of the accredited programs revealed that most programs do not have formal opportunities for the faculty to interact and discuss therapy as a career option. While most programs have at least one faculty member who teaches undergraduates, this contact alone is not very good in terms of socializing students into choosing therapy as a career option. While there are some valid concerns about undergraduates, marriage and family therapy as a distinct discipline may benefit from actively recruiting the best students.