PART 2: OPTIONS

Human relationships - Learning outcomes

General framework (applicable to all topics in the option) HR1 To what extent (AO3) do biological, cognitive and sociocultural factors influence human relationships? HR2 Evaluate (AO3) psychological research (that is, theories and/or studies) relevant to the study of human relationships. Social responsibility HR3 Distinguish (AO2) between altruism and prosocial behaviour. HR4 Contrast (AO2) two theories explaining altruism in humans. HR5 Using one or more research studies, explain (AO2) cross -cultural differences in prosocial behaviour. HR6 Examine (AO3) factors influencing bystanderism.

Interpersonal relationships HR7 Examine (AO3) biological, psychological and social origins of attraction. HR8 Discuss (AO3) the role of communication in maintaining relationships. HR9 Explain (AO2) the role that culture plays in the formation and maintenance of relationships. HR10 Analyse (AO2) why relationships may change or end. Violence HR11 Evaluate (AO3) sociocultural explanations of the origins of violence. HR12 Discuss (AO3) the relative effectiveness of two strategies for reducing violence. HR13 Discuss (AO3) the effects of short-term and long-term exposure to violence.

Human relationships
Pro-social behavior is defined as behavior that benefits another person or has positive social consequences. This definition is often considered too vague, because although it discusses the outcome of the behavior, it does not consider the motivation of the behavior. Altruism is one type of pro-social behaviour. However altruism occurs without personal benefit as its ultimate goal. The unselfish concern of one individual for the welfare of another. (Martin, et al., 2007)

The problem of altruism for biological psychology

It does not appear to make much sense that an individual would risk his or her life for a stranger. There are biological arguments for the origins of altruism, but there are also arguments that altruism is a behavior that results from cognitive processes.

Evolutionary explanations of altruism

Darwin suggested that the evolution of altruism should be seen in relation to what could be advantageous to the group a person belongs to, rather than what could be advantageous to the individual alone.

Human Relationships 01 Introduction & Theories of Altruism

1) Kin selection theory predicts that the degree of altruism depends on the number of genes shared by individuals. The closer the relationship between the helper and those being helped, the greater the chance for altruistic behavior. This has been supported by a number of empirical studies with animals. Altruistic behavior could appear to be unselfish but some argue that it should, in fact, be seen as selfish. There are behaviours however, like adoption that do not benefit kin and thus cannot be explained by kin selection theory. Dawkins (1976) proposed the selfish gene theory arguing that there is an inmate drive for the survival and propagation of ones own gene. Any organism will try to maximize its inclusive fitness- that is the number of copies passed on globally, not necessarily by a particular individual. Since animals living in a social groups share many genes, altruistic behavior is seen as a way to guarantee that ones own genes will be passed on to future generations. Seen from this perspective, it becomes clear why individuals are willing to sacrifice themselves to protect the lives of their kin. It does not explain why a smaller number of people, help complete strangers. 2) Reciprocal altruism theory suggested by Trivers (1971) is an attempt to explain the evolution of altruism among individuals who are not related. The theory postulates that it may benefit an animal to behave altruistically if there is an expectation that the favour will be returned in the future. You scratch my back and Ill scratch yours. The basis of this theory is that, through mutual cooperation, both are more likely to increase their chance of survival. One example of this could be the small fish who clean larger fish by removing parasites from their mouth and gills. The small fish feed on the parasites, and the large fish are freed from parasites, so there is mutual benefit. Axelrod and Hamilton (1891) tested reciprocal altruism with humans, using a version of the game called the prisoners dilemma where players interact in pairs.

Psychological explanations of altruism

Schaller and Cialdini (1988) the negative-state relief model. They argue that egoistic motives lead us to help others in bad circumstances in order to reduce the distress we experience from watching the bad situation. The negative-state relief model also explains why people walk away instead of helping: this is another way of reducing distress. The model does not accurately predict how one will behave - either altruistically or selfishly - in any given situation. Empathy altruism model, by Batson et al. (1981) suggests that people can experience two types of emotions when they see someone suffering. One is distress, which leads to egoistic helping. A second is empathy concern, which leads to altruistic behavior. If you feel empathy towards other person, you will help him or her, regardless you might gain from it. Relieving the persons suffering becomes the most important thing. When you do not feel empathy, you consider the cost and benefits of helping and making your decision.

Human Relationships 01 Introduction & Theories of Altruism

In Batsons classic experiment students were asked to listen to tapes of an interview with a student named Carol. She talked about her car accident in which her both legs were broken. She talked about her struggles, and how far she was falling behind at school. Students were each given a letter, asking them to meet with Carol and share lecture notes with her. The experimenters varied the level of empathy, telling one group to try to focus on how Carol was feeling (high level empathy), while members of the other group were told they did not need to be concerned with her feelings (low empathy level). The experimenters also varied the cost of not helping. The high-cost group was told that Carol would be in their psychology class when she returned to school. The low cost group believed Carol would finish the class at home. The results confirmed the empathy-altruism hypothesis. Those is the high-empathy group were almost equally like to help Carol in either set of circumstances, while the low empathy group helped out of self- interest. Thinking about seeing her in class everyday probably made them feel guilty if they did not help (Aronson et al. 2005). Batsons findings have been consistently replicated, so it appears that the theory of empathy - altruism is consistent with its predictions that helping behavior based on empathy is unselfish. However, the research has only investigated short-term altruism, and the interpretation of the results has not taken personality factors into account. This could be seen as a weakness of the explanation.

Human Relationships 01 Introduction & Theories of Altruism