ALTRUISM AND PROSOCIAL BEHAVIOR
A. DEFINITION OF ALTRUISM
“The action that produces and maintains the physical and or psychological good
for others. It is formed by love and emphathy, and in its extreme form may require
the free sacrifice of self for another.”
The quote is taken from one of the writings of Pitirim Sorokin, an American
sociologist who at that time had a big influence on his time. Sorokin published the work
after World War II. Many writers view Sorokin's ideas as his proposal to advance the
amitology he created to society. He is seen as having a motive to reconstruct American
society which had just been damaged by World War II. Altruism was not created by Sorokin
but was first coined by Auguste Comte who defined altruism with the words "living for
others" or in French "vivre pour autrui". This concept states that altruism is an activity that
puts others before ourselves. Altruism is of great interest to Psychological Sciences because
it influences action. Psychology wants to learn about models, model characteristics, motives
to cognitive dimensions of altruistic behavior.
A social psychologist C. Daniel Batson said that people sometimes help someone for
purely altruistic reasons. He said that empathy is the highest key of altruism. But another
social psychologist named Robert Cialdini says that it's not just empathy that plays a role, it's
the helper's personal reasons for feeling better about himself when helping people. Altruism
can be defined as a useful non-selfish desire to help others. In general, we see acts of
altruism from philanthropic groups, social workers who endanger themselves and share
their time to serve the community, and ordinary people who are used to helping. If
examined further, in fact they themselves have motivations and factors in helping people.
For example, a philanthropist who donates money to charity to feel better about himself. If
this was how he really felt, then it could not be considered a purely altruistic activity. This
can be called an activity that promotes ego because it is aimed at the benefit of the donor
rather than the recipient. Although this activity produces a positive impact.
Daniel Batson says that empathy is the key to altruism. Empathy is a feeling to
position himself if he is in that position. So Batson concluded that if we really have empathy
for others and want to help them without expecting anything in return, then that desire
comes from altruism. Different from Daniel Batson, Robert Cialdini has a different theory.
Robert says that we actually help to avoid feeling bad if we don't help the person. Imagine if
we saw someone in trouble, wouldn't we help? If we see people in distress, it will cause
suffering for us. So, if we take steps to help people in distress, it is only because we want to
eliminate the suffering within us. Robert concluded that if this is how you feel when you
help people, then your help cannot be classified as an act of altruism because your goal is to
increase your own well-being. So in this theory it is stated that we only help to avoid
negative feelings for not helping the person. It's like feeling sad if you don't help him.
People tend to respond to the suffering of others. There are two things called
Sympathy and Empathy. Sympathy is to feel the suffering of people who are overwritten by
difficulties. Empathy, on the other hand, is a feeling that allows us to experience emotions in
1
harmony. With Empathy, it allows us to feel the joy of others and feel the same sadness as
those who experience it. People of all ages respond empathetically when they see someone
else in trouble. Empathy can be expressed through facial expressions, emotions experienced
by oneself and psychological measurements. In altruism, there is a summun bonum, which
is a measure of goodness.
Then here there is a difference between altruism and prosocial behavior. Altruism is
an activity of helping without expecting anything in return, except maybe having a feeling of
having done a good deed. Prosocial behavior is helping behavior that has been designed to
expect a reward that is useful for himself. For example when participating in volunteer
activities and the helper's motive is to impress his friends or expect a certificate to fulfill the
resume to apply for a job. If indeed this is the purpose of helping, then this activity is not
categorized as an act of altruism. Prosocial actors are usually based on the type of
relationship between these people. It could be out of liking, social obligation, self-interest,
or empathy. We are more likely to help people we know and care about than those we
don't.
B. ALTRUISM AND PROSOCIAL BEHAVIOR
Often altruism and social behavior are misinterpreted and not a few think that both
are the same thing or behavior. But actually both have different meanings even though they
are almost the same. Altruism is an act that is done voluntarily to help others and does not
expect anything in return from the person being helped, except perhaps a sense of having
done something good (Schroeder, Penner, Dividio, & Piliavin, 1995). Altruism is largely
determined by the intention of the helper. For example, when a building is on fire and
someone enters the building and risks his own safety to save a trapped woman, then after
successfully rescuing the woman he disappears without a trace and expects no fame,
reward or even gratitude from others..
Meanwhile, prosocial behavior has another meaning. Prosocial is when someone
helps others who are in need of help, regardless of the helper's motives. People who carry
out prosocial behavior between pursuing satisfaction or their own desires (Fame,
relationships, prizes) or also someone who avoids something that is bad for themselves
(Guilt, regret, shame, being shunned by the environment). Someone who participates in
volunteer activities only to add relationships and add to individual experiences is referred to
as prosocial behavior. In this case, the ultimate goal of the volunteer to help is for his own
benefit, namely to add relationships and experience. Therein lies the fundamental
difference between altruism and prosocial behavior. The intensity of prosocial power is also
determined by whether the helper knows the person being helped or not. Prosocial
behavior tends to be stronger for two parties who already know each other.
If we look deeper, the motivation for prosocial behavior is to get personal welfare,
while what motivates altruistic behavior is for the person being helped to get welfare. The
contrast between these two behaviors leads us to three things, namely:
2
1. Helping as a habit, still at this point it must be seen whether the final goal of the helper is
for himself (Prosocial) or for others (Altruism)
2. The motivation or end goal of helping activities can also be a mixture of altruism and
prosocial. It doesn't have to be purely prosocial or altruistic.
3. Both altruistic and prosocial people pay attention to the welfare of the person being
helped, only the levels are different.
To examine more deeply about altruism and prosociality, Piliavin and Piliavin (1973)
conducted a study that used two approaches, namely the end goal or what the helper
expected. And the second approach is the possibility of getting out of the problem.
According to Piliavin and Piliavin, a prosocial person will take an action with the ultimate
aim of gaining profit or avoiding misfortune for himself and this prosocial person can choose
to get out of this problem if possible. Meanwhile, altruistic people have the ultimate goal so
that the people they help benefit and avoid disasters, and if there is an opportunity to get
out of this problem, altruistic people will not get out and will continue to help the people
they are helping. In other words, an altruism, the intensity of helping him will not decrease
even though he can get out of the problem. The motivation or end goal of helping activities
can also be a mixture of altruism and prosociality. It doesn't have to be purely prosocial or
altruistic.
Altruism and prosocial behavior are also determined by empathy. The greater the
empathy we feel, the better our altruism and prosocial behavior will be. But there is a
difference to the use of this attitude of empathy. For altruistic people, although empathy
still influences the power of the helper, even though it is not as significant as for people who
are prosocial (the greater the empathy of an altruistic person, the more motivated they are
to help). Even if there is an easy way out that is offered by an altruist with not too much
empathy, they still choose to help and not run away or get out of the problem. Whereas a
prosocial person, a sense of empathy supported by difficult solutions will encourage this
prosocial person to continue to help. Meanwhile, if this sense of empathy is accompanied by
an easy way out, prosocial people tend to opt out of the problem and forget about it so they
don't feel guilty or regretful. This sense of empathy is also influenced by the closeness
between the helper and the person being helped. The more the helper knows the person
being helped, the sense of empathy will be greater than when the helper does not know the
person being helped.
C. FACTORS INFLUENCING HELPING BEHAVIOR
We, humans, were created in this world to carry out our duties, one of which is as
social beings. Where helping is what we have to do. This behavior of helping each other
does not just happen, there must be factors that encourage a human being to help others.
The first helping behavior factor is that the tendency to help is a genetic inheritance, where
helping is an innate attitude. Even if we go back to pre-literate times, our ancestors helped
each other even though they did not know writing and language. The second factor is the
perspective of social culture which emphasizes that there are social norms where we have
to help others who are in trouble. From a young age, our parents taught us about helping,
like when our mother told us to help with her homework and so on. The values of mutual
3
help are indeed ingrained in the human body. But education about helping each other is
also sometimes misused. For example, when parents force their children to help with their
work in an unpleasant way or by making threats that make the child unwilling to help his
parents. Later the child will grow up to be arrogant and tend to be "bossy".
The third factor is reinforcement and modeling. Unknowingly, if we are surrounded
by an environment that likes to help, we will become people who are happy to help too. For
example, when all your friends take part in volunteer activities, maybe at first you are not
interested, but seeing the enthusiasm and invitation of your friends, you will become a
volunteer too. Furthermore, the fourth factor is the benefits we get by helping each other.
For example, when we take part in volunteer activities, our motivation for doing this activity
is to gain experience, add to relationships, and fill in free time. It was mentioned above that
helping is genetically inherited and our sense of empathy will be greater for someone who is
similar to our figure. This statement is supported by the fact that this helping activity is not
only carried out by fellow humans, but also by fellow animals.
Darwin (1871) said that a rabbit would stamp its hind legs many times to warn other
rabbits that there was a predator. Likewise with baboons, when there is an attack the male
baboon will be in front to block the attack, but when there is no attack the male baboon is
behind the group and risking his life. Dolphins also have a unique way of helping injured
friends. Because dolphins are mammals, they need air to breathe, and if a friend is injured
so they cannot rise to the surface, two dolphins will lift their fins and carry them above the
water and accompany them until they recover and can survive on their own.
This helping behavior can also occur non-reciprocally. According to a sociobiologist
Robert Trivers (1971) helping behavior that does not occur reciprocally is called "Cheaters"
where he receives help but does not return it. But nature has given guilt and shame to a
"Cheaters" as a reward for his behavior. Each region has a different culture, so there are
many different behaviors and social norms in each country or region. A researcher named
Joan Miller (1994) confirmed further whether it is true that social norms and culture can
influence helping behavior. This study involved 180 Hindus and 180 Americans. Miller chose
the Hindu community in India and America because as we know that Hindus have the
principle that they must help all human beings regardless of their background. Meanwhile,
Americans who are known for their capitalist attitudes tend to only help people they know.
The correspondents were presented with a story in which there were three types of needs.
The first is a minor need (ask for a tissue) to an extreme need (requires a kidney donor). The
story also presents three types of people who are helped, namely family, friends, and
strangers.
4
