ALTRUISM(1934) conception of roles as patterns of social acts
framed by a community and recognized as distinct
objects of the social environment. Roles define
individual selves and thus also guide individual
perception and action. Helping behavior has been
shown to express social roles. A series of studies of
blood donors (Callero, Howard, and Piliavin 1987;
Piliavin and Callero 1991) demonstrate that role-
person merger (when a social role becomes an
essential aspect of self) predicts blood donation,
independent of the effects of both personal and
social norms, and is more strongly associated with
a history of blood donation than are social or
personal norms. This study demonstrates the im-
portance of helping for self-validation and repro-
duction of the social structure as expressed in
roles. More recent research has shown similar
effects for identities tied to volunteering time and
giving money (Grube and Piliavin in press; Lee,
Piliavin, and Call in press). This attention to con-
cepts such as roles, interaction history, and social
structure is evidence of the sociological signifi-
cance of altruism and helping behavior.
CROSS-CULTURAL RESEARCH IN
ALTRUISMUntil the last few decades, little work had been
done systematically comparing altruism and help-
ing behavior across cultures. Beginning in the
1970s, researchers have compared helping in rural
and urban areas, rather consistently finding that
helping of strangers, although not of kin, is more
likely in less densely populated areas all around
the world. In a real sense, urban and rural areas
have different ‘‘cultures’’; small towns are more
communal or collective, while cities are more indi-
vidualistic. A review of other cross-cultural com-
parisons (Ting and Piliavin forthcoming) exam-
ines similarities and differences not only in the
helping of strangers but also in the development
of moral reasoning, socialization of prosocial be-
havior, and participation in ‘‘civil society.’’ The
collectivism-individualism distinction across socie-
ties provides a good organizing principle for un-
derstanding many of the differences that are found.
Not only do societies differ in the level of helping,
but in the pattern. For example, in communal
societies, the difference between the amount of
help offered to ingroup and outgroup members is
exaggerated in comparison with the more indi-
vidualistic societies.
ALTRUISM RESEARCH IN OTHER FIELDSScholars from many fields other than social psy-
chology have also addressed the question of altru-
ism. The long debate in evolutionary biology re-
garding the possibility that altruism could have
survival value appears to have been answered in
the affirmative (Sober and Wilson 1998). Some
authors (e.g. Johnson 1986; Rushton 1998) in fact
view patriotism or ethnic conflict, or both, as
rooted in altruism fostered by kin selection. Game
theorists have discovered that in repeated prison-
er’s dilemma games and public goods problems,
some individuals consistently behave in more co-
operative or altruistic ways than do others (Liebrand
1986). Even economists and political scientists,
who have long held to the belief that all motivation
is essentially selfish, have begun to come to grips
with evidence (such as voting behavior and the
public goods issue) that indicates that this is not
true (see Mansbridge 1990; Clark 1998).
Recommended reading. The interested read-
er is referred Schroeder et al., The Psychology of
Helping and Altruism (1995) for a relatively
nontechnical overview of the field, or Batson,
‘‘Altruism and Prosocial Behavior’’ (1998) for a
briefer, more technical approach emphasizing work
demonstrating that ‘‘true altruism’’ can be a moti-
vation for helping. For an excellent examination
of approaches to the topic of altruism by econo-
mists and political scientists, read Mansbridge,
Beyond Self-Interest (1990). For an engaging read on
the topic of both evolutionary and psychological
altruism, try Sober and Wilson’s Unto Others (1998).
Finally, for a view toward the practical application
of ideas from altruism research, read Oliner et al.,
Embracing the Other (1992). (Full citations for these
works are in the references that follow.)(SEE ALSO: Social Psychology)REFERENCES
Batson, C. Daniel 1998 ‘‘Altruism and Prosocial Behav-
ior.’’ In Daniel T. Gilbert, Susan T. Fiske, and Gardner
Lindzey, eds., The Handbook of Social Psychology, vol.
2, 4th ed., Boston, Mass.: McGraw-Hill.
——— 1991 The Altruism Question: Toward a Social-
Psychological Answer. Hillsdale, N.J.: Erlbaum.
Callero, Peter L. 1986 ‘‘Putting the Social in Prosocial
Behavior: An Interactionist Approach to Altruism.’’
Humboldt Journal of Social Relations 13:15–32.