ALTRUISMdemonstrate (or refute) the existence of ‘‘true’’
altruistic motivations for helping.
RESEARCH ON ALTRUISM AND HELPING
BEHAVIORPerson Variables. There has been an extensive
and confused debate, due both to definitional and
measurement problems, about the existence of an
altruistic personality (see Schroeder et al. 1995).
There is now good evidence of a pattern of prosocial
personality traits that characterize individuals whose
behavior involves long-term, sustained forms of
helping behavior (e.g., community mental health
workers, see Krebs and Miller 1985; volunteers
who work with AIDS patients, see Penner et al.
1995; Penner and Finkelstein 1998). The traits that
make up the prosocial personality include empa-
thy, a sense of responsibility, concern for the
welfare of others, and a sense of self-efficacy. With
regard to helping in emergencies, the evidence is
stronger for person by situation effects; that is,
interactions of characteristics of both individuals
and situations that influence helping in emergen-
cies. For example, self-confidence and indepen-
dence can predict differentially how individuals
will behave in emergency situations when there
are others present or when the person is alone
(Wilson 1976). And Batson and his colleagues
have found that prosocial personality characteris-
tics correlate with helping, but only when helping
is egoistically motivated, not when true altruism is
involved. The general proposal that individual
difference factors are most effective when situa-
tional pressures are weak seems generally applica-
ble in the helping area.
Internalized values as expressed in personal
norms have also been shown to influence helping.
Personal norms generate the motivation to help
through their implications for self-based costs and
benefits; behavior consistent with personal norms
creates rewards such as increased self-esteem,
whereas behavior that contradicts personal norms
generates self-based costs such as shame. This
influence has been demonstrated in high-cost help-
ing such as bone marrow donation (Schwartz 1977).
Other personality correlates of helping are less
directly related to the costs and benefits of the
helping act itself. For example, information-proc-
essing styles such as cognitive complexity influ-
ence helping.
Clary and Snyder (1991) have pursued a func-
tional approach to understanding motivations for
helping. They have developed a questionnaire
measure that distinguishes six potential motives
for long-term volunteering (e.g. value expression,
social motivation, career orientation) and have
demonstrated both predictive and discriminant
validity for the instrument (Clary, Snyder et al.
1998). In one study, they showed that it was not the
more purely altruistic motivations that predicted
long-term commitment. Temporary emotional
states or moods may also affect helping. A series of
studies by Isen (1970) and her colleagues demon-
strate that the ‘‘glow of good will’’ induces people
to perform at least low-cost helping acts such as
helping someone pick up a pile of dropped pa-
pers, and research by Cialdini and colleagues has
shown that helping can be motivated by the need
to dispel a bad mood.Situation Variables. Characteristics of the situa-
tion also influence the decision to help. The salience
and clarity of a victim’s need influence both the
initial tendency to notice need and the definition
of the perceived need as serious. Salience and
clarity of need increase as the physical distance
between an observer and a victim decreases; thus,
victims of an emergency are more likely to be
helped by those physically near by. Situational
cues regarding the seriousness of another’s need
influence whether need is defined as serious enough
to warrant action. Bystanders are more likely to
offer aid when a victim appears to collapse from a
heart attack than from a hurt knee, for example,
presumably because of perceived seriousness. The
presence of blood, on the other hand, can deter
helping, perhaps because it suggests a problem
serious enough to require medical attention.One of the most strongly supported findings
in the area of helping is that the number of others
present in a potential helping situation influences
an individual’s decision to help. Darley and Latané
(1968) demonstrated experimentally that the high-
er the number of others present, the lower the
chance of any one individual helping. One process
underlying this effect involves the diffusion of
responsibility: the higher the number of potential
helpers, the less any given individual perceives a
personal responsibility to intervene. The presence
of an individual who may be perceived as having
special competence to help also reduces the felt