SlideServe
Menu
Préférences
© SlideServe · v2026

Understanding Social Responsibility and Altruism in Prosocial Behavior

cianna avatar
10 diapositives · 284 Views · Jul 28, 2014

Explore the nuances of social responsibility and altruism, defining prosocial behavior as helping others for self-benefit versus selfless acts done at a personal cost. This examination includes key psychological studies highlighting group size effects on helping behavior, the influence of emotional arousal on altruism, and the impact of in-group versus out-group dynamics. Insights from historical examples and interviews reveal how empathy shapes individuals’ willingness to help others during crises. Discover how upbringing and societal influences contribute to these behaviors.

Understanding Social Responsibility and Altruism in Prosocial Behavior - slide 1
01 / 10Understanding Social Responsibility and Altruism in Prosocial Behavior
1 / 17

Télécharger la présentation

Understanding Social Responsibility and Altruism in Prosocial Behavior
Une image / un lien ci-dessous est fourni (tel quel) pour télécharger la présentation

Politique de téléchargement : le contenu du site vous est fourni TEL QUEL pour votre information et votre usage personnel ; il ne peut être vendu, concédé sous licence ni partagé sur d’autres sites sans l’accord de son auteur.Le contenu vous est fourni TEL QUEL, pour votre information et votre usage personnel uniquement. Téléchargez la présentation en cliquant sur ce lien. Lors du téléchargement, si vous ne parvenez pas à télécharger une présentation, l’éditeur a peut-être supprimé le fichier de son serveur.Pendant le téléchargement, si vous ne parvenez pas à obtenir une présentation, le fichier a peut-être été supprimé par l’éditeur.

F I N

Plus de contenu associé

Transcription de la présentation
  1. Social Responsibility

  2. Prosocialbehaviour: When one helps another person to benefit oneself. • Altruism: When one helps another person for no reward and even at some cost to oneself.

  3. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N6dTU7KVpsg&list=PL6DA960579F8EC5C5&index=70http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N6dTU7KVpsg&list=PL6DA960579F8EC5C5&index=70

  4. Group Size/Diffusion of Reponsibility: Latane and Rodin (1969) Male participants helped a female researcherwho had “crashed to the floor” next door 70% of the time when alone, compared with 40% with 2 naïve participants were together and only 7% when there was a passive stooge.

  5. Latane and Darley (1970) When smoke began to fill a room, 75% left the room to report the smoke when alone, 38% of the time when in small groups of participants, and compared to 10% with two passive stooges.

  6. Arousal: Amato (1986) Amato interviewed participants after a bushfire near Melbourne and found that higher donations to help victims came from people who reported more feelings of shock or terror.

  7. Pryzbyla (1985) After watching either a erotic or non-erotic film, female and male participants had an opportunity to help a male or female confederate who had knocked over some papers. The rate of helping was highest among males who had seen an erotic film and had the opportunity to help a female confederate.

  8. In-group v. Out-group Levine et al. (2005) Manchester United fans were far more likely to help a jogger who fell over if he was wearing a Manchester United shirt than if he was wearing a Liverpool shirt.

  9. Confidence Pantin and Carver (1982) When female students showed a first aid training video, it increased their willingness to help a choking victim than those who didn’t watch the video.

  10. Disposition Oliner and Oliner (1988) They interviewed 231 Europeans who had participated in saving Jews in Nazi Europe and 126 Europeans who didn’t. Rescuers expressed greater pity and empathy compared to non-rescuers. Rescuers often said that parental behaviour played a part (e.g. rescuer’s parents had few negative stereotypes of Jews compared to parents of non-rescuers).