Ms. Carmelitano

“Biological” explanations for Altruism

Define Altruism:When one person helps another for no reward, and even at some cost to themselves

Bell Ringer

Biological•Humans may be “hard-wired” for self-preservation•Based on evolutionary psychology

Psychological •Human beings help others to avoid “hurting” themselves•Based on cognitive psychology

Types of Altruism

Biological Altruism

Today we will discuss…

Recap:•What is evolutionary psychology?•Darwin: believed that species have evolved over time in response to the changing environment•Evolution: A trait that is favorable for survival will be passed down to the later generation•Animals not born with this trait will die out before reproducing

Evolutionary Psychology

In order for a species to “survive” what is necessary?•Evolutionary Altruism argues that people act altruistically in order to preserve the genes of a species•This is advantageous to the entire group rather than to the individual

Evolutionary Altruism

The degree of altruism is directly related to the number of genes shared by individuals•The closer the relationship between the helper and those being helped, the greater the chance for the altruistic behavior

Animal Study Evidence:•Elephants helping a baby out of a mud-pit

Kin Selection Theory

Animal Studies

“Selfish Gene Theory”•Humans have an innate drive for the survival and proliferation of their own genes•Since animals living in social groups typically share genes, altruistic behavior is seen as a way to guarantee one’s own genes will be passed on to future generations•Conclusions drawn from naturalistic observation

Dawkins (1976)

Gathered college students from the United Kingdom and two South Africa Zulu villages.

•1. Before the study participants were asked to give a list of biological relatives who did not live with them

•2. Participants were then asked to do “painful” exercises

IE: Standing against a wall in a seated position

3. Participants were told that one relative would be chosen at random and:

British - The longer they could remain seated against the wall, the more money the family member would be given

• 40 pounds/ 20 seconds

South African – The longer they could remain seated against the wall, the more food the family member would be given

Madsen et al (2007)

• UK participants spent more time against the wall as the relative became closer in relation

• South African Participants, also stayed against the wall longer when the relative was genetically close

• However: There was less delineation between parents, siblings, cousins, or uncles/aunts • Most likely due to the differences in

collective vs individual cultures.

Findings

•Analyzed accounts of how people fled from a burring building

•Found that when individuals were with unrelated group members, they were more likely to became separated

•When they were related, they were more likely to stay together, even if that meant slowing down

Why?

•Simpson and Kendrick – in-group bias• Attitudes, opinions, and behaviors accompany an instinctive desire to

help those who share the same genes

Sime (1983)

•Asked participants to report how likely they were to help people of varying degrees of relatedness in situations ranging from rescuing them from a burning house to basic favors like picking up a dropped book.• Example: grandmother, first cousin, unrelated

acquaintance

• Findings: The participants were more likely to help closer relatives, and this effect became more extreme as the possible cost to the participant increased.

Burnstein et al (1994)

Trivers (1971)•Attempts to explain altruism between people who are not related• It may benefit an animal to behave altruistically if there is an expectation that the favor will be returned in the future•“you scratch my back, I’ll scratch yours”

•Mutual cooperation where both will increase their chances of survival

Reciprocal Altruism Theory

“The Prisoner’s Dilemma”

Tested reciprocal altruism on humans

http://sometimesjustisenough.wordpress.com/tag/axelrod-and-hamilton/

Axelrod and Hamilton (1981)

•Two suspects worked together to commit a crime

•They are interviewed in different rooms

•Two options•Stay quiet•Rat one another out

The Prisoner’s Dilemma

Results of options• Both stay quiet – both get 1 year in jail• Both confess – both get 20 years in jail• 1 Confesses: Confessor will get Parole, the other gets Life

When 1 prisoner thinks the other is staying quiet, they also will stay quiet• Reciprocal altruism!

However, when it is not in their best interest, and they think the other is about to “roll” on them, they will give their friend up

Conclusion:• Reciprocal altruism only occurs when it is in the best interest of the person committing the deed.

Findings