Effect of Value on Empathy and Prosocial Behavior - Lab Report Example

? Effect of Value on Empathy and Prosocial Behavior The study was conducted to examine the effect that value attributed to an ostracized target has on the experience of empathy for that individual and on the prosocial behavior shown. A sample of 371 students was exposed to one of two conditions of value. While one group (N = 194) was exposed to a nice person (high value), the other (N = 187) was exposed to a nasty one (low value). The data collected verified both hypotheses and suggests that people who are considered high value elicit more empathy and more instances of prosocial behavior. Concerns and further possibilities for research are discussed. Effect of Value on Empathy and Prosocial Behavior One area of Social Psychology deals with the way people respond to distress experienced by others, and the probability helping those who need assistance. Recognizing and responding to the distress of others forms an important foundation for human relationships and the ability to do so is called Empathy. Hoffman (2010) calls it ‘a compassionate response that may be more appropriate to another individual’s situation than to one’s own’. When experienceing empathy, people are able to recognize experiences of others and provide emotional responses that mirror those of the person observed. Empathy is experienced through feelings like compassion, sympathy, concern and tenderness (Hoffman, 2010). Empathy also helps the development of meaningful social relationships since it allows people to believe that they share/understand emotional experiences (Hoffman, 2010). People with impairment in experiencing empathy may suffer socially and cognitively. An individual experiences empathy for others as a function of one or more factors. These factors include shared similarities in features or experiences (Eklund, Andersson-Straberg & Hansen, 2009), how emotional the target person seems (Saarela, Hlushchuk, Williams, Schurmann, Kalso & Hari, 2007) and the extent to which one feels that the they are vulnerable to harm / in genuine need of help (Lishner, Batson & Huss, 2011). The amount of attention they pay is also positively related the likelihood of perceiving a need for help (Gu & Han, 2007). Another factor that increases empathy is observing someone experience ostracism (Williams, Cheung & Choi, 2000). Williams discusses the ill-effects of ostracism including negative mood and lowered self-esteem, meaningfulness, and experience of control and belonging. Zadro, Williams and Richardson (2004) have identified that humans are very sensitive to ostracism, and experience it even in a simulated situation. Since most people have experienced ostracism and isolation at some point, they are able to identify with another person who is being ostracised (Batson, Lishner, Cook & Sawyer, 2005). Batson, Eklund, Chermok, Hoyt and Ortiz (2007) found that making positive attributions to a person in need, increased empathy as compared to when negative attributions are made. They also found that the people were more willing to help someone considered nice as compared to one who was considered nasty. Also, people were likely to identify with the experience of ostracism of a nice person even when not asked to do so. On the other hand, participants were less likely to identify with the nasty person; but when asked to do so, more people felt empathy towards that person than when they were neutral (Batson, et al., 2007). One of the main paths by which empathy influences social interaction is that of prosocial behavior. Prosocial behavior is performed with the objective of helping another person and occurs when an individual feels empathy towards someone in need (Batson, Sympson, Hindman, Decruz, Matthew-Todd, Weeks, Jennings & Burns, 1991). Baston et al. (1991) have described this phenomenon as the empathy – altruism hypothesis indicating that the experience of empathy provides the motivation necessary for performing an altruistic or prosocial act. Coke, Batson and McDavis (1978) also found that taking the perspective of another person increased empathy, which in turn increased helping behavior. Nordgren, Banas and MacDonald (2011) demonstrate how knowledge of emotional pain leads to empathy and to action targeted at reducing the pain experienced by others. Alongside this information, it is important to evaluate whether the motivation to help translates into action. This experiment was designed to evaluate how the characteristics of an ostracized individual affected empathy and actual prosocial behavior. This study aims to replicate some previous findings (e.g. Batson et al., 2007) and to extend the information available about helping behavior. The hypotheses proposed are: Participants belonging to the high-valuing condition (nice ostracised target) will score higher on the Empathy Index as compared to participants in the low-valuing condition (nasty ostracised target). Participants belonging to the high-valuing condition will score higher on the prosocial index as compared to participants in the low-valuing condition. Method Variables The study used a between participant design and had one independent variable and two dependent variables. The I.V. which is the value attributed to the ostracized individual, had two levels – high and low. It was expected that ostracized targets depicted as nice would be considered as having high value by the participant, while those depicted as nasty would have low value. The two D.V.s were experience of empathy (measured by the empathy index) and prosocial behavior which was measured by counting the number of ball-throws towards the ostracized target by the participant. Participants The experiment was conducted with 381 participants ranging in age from 17 to 56 years who were all students of Psychology classes at UBL University. Of these, 170 participants were female and 111 were male. Participants were recruited by including students from different classes who were asked to register themselves with the laboratory for an experiment about visualization. Materials The experiment was conducted using computers at the college laboratory. Participants logged in and played a virtual game called Cyberball. Cyberball 4.0 was designed by Kipling, Yeager, Cheung, and Choi (2012) to be used to research ostracism, empathy and prosocial behavior. The game provides a simulation of an interactive game so that users believe that they are playing with other individuals. Interactions and characteristics may be followed using a dialogue box. The game depicts a simple ball-throwing condition in which players ostracize one individual. The game allows for modification, and for the present experiment a 4-player condition was chosen with the participant being an observer to another player being ostracized. Each simulated ostracizing player threw the ball to the participant and another player 47.5% of the times each and to the ostracized player 5% of the times. The simulated ostracized player threw the ball 33.3% of the times to each player. Positions of the ostracized player was counterbalanced across participants by placing it to the right, left and middle each in a third of the games. Additional materials used included the Perceived Ostracism index (POI) and the valuing index which were used as manipulation checks. POI was calculated by using the participants’ estimates of the proportion of ball throws between all players. A positive POI indicated awareness of discrimination and a high value indicates greater sensitivity to ostracism. The Valuing index provided an indication of how the participant felt about the ostracized target and was calculated by aggregating responses on a 9 point scale to two questions: How likeable did you find X? How much did you find yourself caring about how X was feeling during the game? The participants also completed the Empathic Concern Scale (Empathy index) which lists six emotions (compassionate, tender, softhearted, moved, sympathetic, warm). Each was rated on a 9 point rating scale and the responses were summed. The prosocial index was calculated by counting the number of throws to the target. Procedure Registered Participants logged into the game and read the masking instructions about a visualization task provided. Participants were prompted to enter a name and statement to begin play and were randomly assigned to high or low value conditions. After playing a practice game, the participants played a recorded game of Cyberball after which they were prompted to fill out the questions for the POI, valuing index and empathy index along with some filler items with respect to the ostracized target and another player. After the experiment, the participants were debriefed fully. Results The experiment was conducted to evaluate the effect of valuing on empathy and prosocial behavior. About 70.9% of participants were female and mean age of the group was 20.48 (S.D=4.82). The mean and standard deviations per index for the entire group are tabulated in table 1 while the means and S.D.s of per index for the experimental groups are tabulated in table 2. Table 1. Group Means and S.D.’s Mean Std. Deviation Valuing Index 4.797 1.933 Empathy Index 19.59 9.955 POI 0.209 0.282 Prosocial Index 6.651 2.494 Table 2. Means and S.D.’s for experimental groups Valuing condition N Valuing Index Empathy Index Prosocial Index low-valuing 187 3.864 (1.834) 15.866 (8.778) 5.417 (2.58) high-valuing 194 5.696 (1.567) 23.18 (9.721) 7.84 (1.71) The means for the experimental groups are represented in figure 1. Figure 1. Mean scores on the three indices Manipulation checks The positive low value of the mean POI shows that participants perceived the presence of ostracism, but did not believe it to be very high. the participants in the high valuing condition (M = 5.696, S.D. = 1.567) did value the ostracized participant significantly more than participants who experienced the low valuing condition (M = 3.864, S.D. = 1.834) [t(379) = -10.495, p < .05] showing that there was a difference in the way participants view nice and nasty ostracized players in favor of nice players. Correlations verified the nature of the relationships shared by the three indices. The valuing index was positively correlated with both, the empathy index [r (379) = 0.637, p < 0.05] and the prosocial index [r (379) = 0.521, p < 0.05]. The empathy index and the proscial index were also significantly correlated [r (379) = 0.330, p < 0.05] showing that the two dependent variables shared a moderate positive correlation. These results assure us that the manipulation of I.V. was successful. Hypothesis testing To test the first hypothesis, mean scores for empathy were compared across the two conditions. Participants in the low valuing condition (M = 15.866, S.D. = 8.778) showed significantly lower empathy compared to participants in the high valuing condition (M = 23.18, S.D. = 9.721) [t (379) = -7.699, p < .05, one tailed]. A t-test also verified the second hypothesis and showed a significant difference in the scores on prosocial behavior. Participants in the low value condition (M = 5.417, S.D. = 2.58) scored significantly less compared to those in the high value condition (M = 7.84, S.D. = 1.71) [t (379) = -10.839, p < .05, one tailed]. Thus, both hypotheses may be accepted. Discussion This study was an attempt to understand how valuing influenced the experience of empathy and the practice of prosocial behavior. Two hypotheses were tested. One proposed that participants who encounter nice ostracized individuals will experience more empathy for these individuals as compared to participants who encounter nasty ostracized individuals; and the other proposed that participants in the high value condition will show more prosocial behavior compared to participants in the low value condition. The results confirm both hypotheses as the means for empathy and the prosocial behavior are both significantly higher for participants in the high valuing condition. The findings of this experiment are consistent with those of Batson et al. (2007) and Batson et al. (1996). The participants who found an individual valuable were able to empathize with them and were aware of the isolation that occurred. They were also motivated to reduce the effects of this ostracizing by trying to include this individual in the game as much as they could. It is possible that we find it easier to identify with individuals who seem to be nice people, as this allows us to feel positive about ourselves as well (Hoffman, 2010). Most people have experienced some ostracism; and seeing someone being treated in this manner may activate these memories and provide access to the emotional experience of being isolated (Eklund et al. 2009). We also prefer to maintain a difference from people who seem nasty, and so the ostracizing may not seem as harsh in this case. The results also verify the empathy – altruism hypothesis given by Coke et al. (1978). The correlation shared by the two D.V.’s was significant, and the difference in the experimental groups was also significant for both variables. This shows that experiencing empathy and performing prosocial behaviour are related so that the more empathy a person experiences, the more are they likely to perform prosocial actions. While the results verify the hypotheses, there are some limitations to this study. Since different persons provided data for the two conditions; and as the data collection procedure was an availability sampling procedure, it is not possible to ascertain whether the two groups are equivalent in all relevant respects. The sample is also spread across a large age-range, and has far more female participants than male. A repeated measures design would control for all these issues; and if possible, the study could be replicated with within groups’ data. Another major concern is that the study is conducted on Psychology students who are sophisticated towards such test material. This may have influenced the manner in which they responded to the experience. It is important to replicate the findings with naive groups in order to ensure that knowledge or practice have not contaminated the results. Finally, as the study has two dependent variables, using multivariate analysis may have reduced the chances of Type I error and helped in understanding the phenomenon in a better manner. Further research could be carried out using more sophisticated analyses procedures. Conclusion The experiment verified that a person regarded as nice is given higher value, and this person invokes more empathy and elicits more incidences of prosocial behaviour as compared to an individual who is regarded as nasty. These results imply that people actively evaluate others for cues to the kind of persons they are and use this information to monitor the emotional investment made in that person. References Batson, C.D., Eklund, J.H., Chermok, V.L., Hoyt, J.L., & Ortiz, B.G. (2007). An additional antecedent of empathic concern: Valuing the welfare of the person in need. Journal of personality and social psychology, 93(1), 65-74. Batson, C.D., Lishner, D.A., Cook, J., & Sawyer, S. (2005). Similarity and nurturance: Two possible sources of empathy for strangers. Basic and applied social psychology, 27, 15–25. Batson, C.D., Sympson, S.C., Hindman, J.L., Decruz, P., Matthew Todd, R,. Weeks, J.L., Jennings, G., & Burns, C.T. (1996). "I've been there, too": Effect on empathy of prior experience with a need. Personality and social psychology bulletin, 22, 474 – 482. Coke, J.S., Batson, C.D., McDavis, K. (1978). Empathic mediation of helping: A two-stage model. Journal of personality and social psychology, 36(7), 752 - 766. Eklund, J., Andersson-Straberg, T., & Hansen, E. (2009) “I’ve also experienced loss and fear”: Effects of prior similar experience on empathy. Personality and Social Sciences, 50, 65 – 69. Gu, X. & Han, S. (2007). Attention and reality constraints on the neutral processes of empathy for pain. Neuroimage, 36, 256-267. Hoffman, M.L. (2010). Empathy and prosocial behaviour. In Lewis, M., Haviland-Jones, J.M. & Feldman Barrett, L. (Ed.s). Handbook of emotions (3rd ed.). (pp. 440 – 455). New York: Guilford press. Lishner, D.A., Batson, C.D. & Huss E. (2011). Tenderness and sympathy: Distinct empathic emotions elicited by different forms of need. Personality and social psychology bulletin, 37(5), 614-625. Nordgren, L.F., Banas, K & MacDonald, G. (2011). Empathy gaps for social pain: Why people underestimate the pain of social suffering. Journal of personality and social psychology, 100(1), 120 –128. Saarela, M.V., Hlushchuk, Y., Williams, A.C., Schurmann, M., Kalso, E., & Hari, R. (2007). The compassionate brain: Humans detect intensity of pain from another’s face. Cerebral cortex, 17, 230-237. Williams, K.S., Yeager, D.S., Cheung, C.K.T., & Choi, W. (2012). Cyberball (version 4.0) [Software]. Available from https://cyberball.wikispaces.com. Williams, K. D., Cheung, C.K.T., & Choi, W. (2000). Cyberostracism: Effects of being ignored over the internet. Journal of personality and social psychology, 79, 748 -762. Zadro, L., Willaims, K.D., & Richardson, R. (2004). How low can you go? Ostracism by a computer is sufficient to lower self-reported levels of belonging, control, self-esteem, and meaningful existence. Journal of experimental social psychology, 40, 560 – 567. Read More