The
Empathy-Altruism Debate: An Empirical Approach
C. Daniel Batson is arguably the authority on pro-social behavior and
motivational factors, specifically the topic at hand: the altruism-empathy
debate. The altruism-empathy debate describes the phenomenon whereby individuals
help another due to feelings of empathy for them, regardless of the gain/cost
analysis. In this model, empathy is the motivational factor and not simply the
need to alleviate a negative state of guilt, shame, etc.
Summary
In this early (1981) study, Batson
et al. performed two experiments in order to test their hypothesis—contrary to
the consensus of the past few decades of literature—that empathy does indeed stem
from altruistic and not egoistic motivation. The researchers note from the
outset the inherent difficulties with this task. Since altruism and egotism are
motivational factors that can’t be directly observed, the experiment must be
constructed and participants manipulated in such a way that the behavior can be
measured. After a brief hiatus, providing the reader with operational
definitions, Batson gets to the guts of the experiment.
The experiment contained a rigged
lottery held to determine that the confederate (Elaine) be required to work a
10-trial task where participants are told she would receive random electrical
shocks. Participants were informed that the purpose of the study was to gauge
task performance under adverse conditions. Participants monitored Elaine’s
progress on CCTV, and also had access to a galvanic skin response (GSR)
monitor. During the course of the experiment, the assistant inquired about
Elaine’s well-being. At this time Elaine disclosed that she had previously
fallen on an electrical fence, that this experience was traumatic at the time
and somewhat troubling now considering the nature of the experiment. Elaine insisted
she would continue. The assistant would then ask the observer/participant if
they would be willing to take Elaine’s place, so as to alleviate her suffering
from the electrical shocks. The researchers found that almost all participants
willingly traded places with Elaine when they knew (via questionnaires) that
Elaine’s interests were similar to their own. Batson et al. presumed that
empathy was elicited due to their commonly shared values and interests.
Conversely, the participants that declined to aid Elaine, and instead left the situation
after knowing that they did not share common values with her. Again, the
researches presumed the low levels of empathy are attributable to their lack of
commonality.
Analysis
Most of the
concerns I had while reading the article were addressed in the final, general
discussion section: the fact that all the participants in both studies were all
female, who were watching a same-sex confederate. Prior research has already shown females score
higher on empathy than males. Further, only two experiments were conducted.
Again, the researchers note the necessity of further research. My only other
caveat would be the necessity to explore other motivational factors besides
simply altruism vs. egotism. What about morality? Religious beliefs? Social
responsibility? Negative state relief? Race? Other under-lying biases?
Conclusion and further questions
The notion of a pure sense altruism
has been a philosopher’s playground for centuries. In fact, Batson himself
notes the antiquity of the question in a later article (Batson, 1991). My
already alluded to question for further research regards the possible plurality
of motivational factors. I’m honestly not sure how to set up an experiment that
would be simple enough to engage in, yet complex enough measure several
motivational factors for altruistic behavior. In this vein, I found Van Lange’s
(2008) research on the subject an interesting starting point inasmuch as he
explored the activation of altruism in terms of egalitarianism (justice) and
selflessness. Finally, and perhaps somewhat excitingly to those who enjoy
research as much as I do, there is a vast bibliography on this topic. Batson’s
references are the tip of the iceberg, but a good place to start researching
the empathy-altruism hypothesis. Further suggestions for reading are listed
below. Finally, whether your motivations stem from an enlightened and pure
selflessness, being altruistic to others in need is always a good thing. J
References
Batson,
C., Duncan, B. D., Ackerman, P., Buckley, T., & Birch, K. (1981). Is
empathic emotion a source of altruistic motivation?. Journal Of Personality
And Social Psychology, 40(2), 290-302.
doi:10.1037/0022-3514.40.2.290
Batson,
C., Dyck, J. L., Brandt, J., Batson, J. G., Powell, A. L., McMaster, M., &
Griffitt, C. (1988). Five studies testing two new egoistic alternatives to the
empathy-altruism hypothesis. Journal Of Personality And Social Psychology,
55(1), 52-77. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.55.1.52
Batson,
C., Oleson, K. C., Weeks, J. L., Healy, S. P., Reeves, P. J., Jennings, P.,
& Brown, T. (1989). Religious prosocial motivation: Is it altruistic or
egoistic?. Journal Of Personality And Social Psychology, 57(5),
873-884. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.57.5.873
Batson,
C., & Shaw, L. L. (1991). Evidence for altruism: Toward a pluralism of
prosocial motives. Psychological Inquiry, 2(2), 107-122.
doi:10.1207/s15327965pli0202_1
Van
Lange, P. M. (2008). Does empathy trigger only altruistic motivation? How about
selflessness or justice?. Emotion, 8(6), 766-774.
doi:10.1037/a0013967
Prepared
by +Phillip Kuna
For
John G. Kuna, PsyD and Associates
(570)961-3361
No comments:
Post a Comment