This article talked about helping behavior in general. It touches on the fact that people are more likely to help out it they benefit from it by getting recognition or some sort of material reward. People are also more likely to help it the costs of them not stepping in are detrimental or at least, very significant. It is that there has to be some sort of extreme to make people want to help, and that it is not so natural, not for people to just help because they see that someone needs it, especially if it is a small kind of situation. Of course, it all depends on the person, and it was said that events in early childhood affect what kinds of decisions people will make in their future regarding helping behavior. If they were brought up to always help another no matter the level of need, or if they were constantly around people who needed aid or assisace it then becomes natural and automatic. People who were raised with always getting things done for them are more likely to be selfish in the sense that they never haloed others. Also if the person never got help from anyone, they are more likely to resent hose who did receive help and therefore restrain from helping others because they never got it themselves. It also talks about how teachers in schools can have a great effect on teaching children to be helpful, especially if they are not taught at home. Teachers and schools are supposed to promote helping behavior, especially in the younger grades, so that it can become a natural response in later years.
http://www.education.com/reference/article/prosocial-behavior/
I think it's sad that people are more willing to involve themselves in any given aid attempt when recognition or reward is in question. People should take into consideration Immanuel Kant's categorical imperative when deciding to offer their help in a crisis. We should all help our fellow humans on the basis of duty rather than resulting advantages.
ReplyDelete