Joey and Phoebe famously disagreed on whether or not there could ever be such a thing as a selfless act? (See friends season 5 episode 4). The defining factors behind seemingly altruistic behaviour is an interesting topic, one many sociologists, psychologists etc have explored.
‘There is no moral, more indispensible than that of returning a
kindness’ This quote underpins a very popular vie, most notably emphasized by Goldner, that within society there exists a norm of
reciprocity. This norm is considered ‘a
basic part of the behavioral repertoire of humans’ one that determines much of our social
behaviour. Simply put, when someone does you a favour it bestows upon you an obligation
to return the favour. This is a powerful persuasion tactic, one that has been
capitalised on by profiteers, examples including the ‘freebie’
and special privileges seem like generous free gifts, however, despite the lack of perceived expectation of return this is
none other than the reciprocity rule in action.
Is it true then to analyse much of our behaviour simply in terms of obligations to
return favours rather than obligation to others? Whatever happened to altruism and views of humanity as intrinsically valuable therefore worth helping?
Studies
have been carried out by the likes of Rushton & Berkowitz who wanted to
emphasise the existence of an additional norm in society - Social Responsibility. They claimed that ‘civilized man occasionally wants to help
other people because it is his duty and responsibility to do so’
The
following details are taken from a study by Berkowitz and Daniels which looked
at the potential link with social responsibility and dependency
Method:
80
girls were selected from the introductory psychology course at the University
of Wisconsin.
To
ensure the findings of the experiments could be compared to levels of social
responsibility, a revised version of the Harris social responsibility scale was
used.
This
is a few examples of the items that constituted the revised social
responsibility scale:
1.
It is always important to finish anything that you have started?
(Agree
or disagree?)
2.
It is no use worrying about current events or public affairs; I can't do
anything about them anyway.
(Agree
or disagree?)
Study
1:
Each
instance of the experiment involved 6 subjects. Pairs were created, two of the
pairs consisted of one ‘real’ subject and one paid participant, the other pair
consisted of two real participants. Each participant was given a letter
cancellation task – they were told that the experimenter was only interested in
how long it took them to complete the task and that once they had completed
their task they could assist their
partner if they wished.
Of
the three pairs – the 2 with the paid participant spent 10 minutes on their
task and then spent the last 7 minutes helping their partner, (prior help
variable) the other pair spent roughly the same amount of time in total working
individually on the tasks (no prior help).
The
second phase of the task involved a productivity test. The pairs were mixed up,
ensuring all 4 of the real participants were partnered together. They were told
that one person in the pair was the ‘supervisor’ who would write instruction on
how to make a paper box, the other girl would be the ‘worker’, making the box based
on the instructions. Introducing the dependency variable – one of the pairs was
told their partners rating would depend on their productivity, the others were
told that their productivity would not effect their partners rating.
The findings of both phases were recorded and
questionnaires were completed involving the social responsibility scale, the
results are below:
This table is an analysis of the dependency and
help variables used in correlation to
productivity and social responsibility score
High
Dependency
|
Low
Dependency
|
|
Prior help
|
+49
|
+33
|
No
Prior help
|
-12
|
-10
|
Berkowitz
stated that: ‘The only correlation with
productivity reaching statistical significance was the one in the High
Dependency-Prior Help group, the condition in which the social responsibility
norm presumably was most salient.’
The
hypothesis being that the girls that had been helped were more aware of social
responsibility and therefore given their partners dependency, they viewed high
productivity as responsible behaviour.
Conversely
with the high dependency but no prior help, productivity was significantly less
perhaps due to ‘the absence of assistance making relatively irresponsible
behaviour permissible for them.’
However,
could this instead be nothing more than another example of that pesky reciprocity
norm?
One
could argue that the helped subjects felt a generalised feeling of obligation
to repay the help they had previous experienced therefore motivating them to
work hard for the latter person.
The
findings of Berkowitz and Daniels provided us with a potential alternative analysis
of social behaviour – however, their research is largely inconclusive and needs
further research, so for now watch out for
those not so free freebies - reciprocity is everywhere!
References
:
The norm of
reciprocity Goldner 1960
Affecting
the Salience of the Social Responsibility Norm: Berkowitz & Daniels 1964
Intrinsic and
Instrumental Reciprocity: An Experimental Study 2012
Friends season 5 episode 4
By Clementine Parker
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.