0 оценок0% нашли этот документ полезным (0 голосов)
1K просмотров2 страницы
Essay that details to what extent Do Biological, Cognitive and Sociocultural affect Human Relationships including all relevant studies. (recommended for IB psychology students.)
Оригинальное название
To What Extent Do Biological, Cognitive and Sociocultural affect Human Relationships
Essay that details to what extent Do Biological, Cognitive and Sociocultural affect Human Relationships including all relevant studies. (recommended for IB psychology students.)
Essay that details to what extent Do Biological, Cognitive and Sociocultural affect Human Relationships including all relevant studies. (recommended for IB psychology students.)
Human relationship in psychology looks at the nature and causes of
relationships between people, including the origins of prosocial behaviour,
attraction, friendship, and violence. To some extent, human relationships can be influenced by three levels: biological, cognitive and sociocultural. This essay focus on prosocial behaviour or the helping act in the society including theory for altruism.
In terms of biological level, Kin Selection Theory of altruism explains
human relationships. It is an evolutionary theory popularised by Hamilton in 1964 and is based on the idea that individuals are more likely to sacrifice themselves for relatives than non-relatives because they contribute to the survival of their genes. The theory is supported by Simmons et al. in 1977. The study aimed to investigate whether close relatives are more likely to be kidney donors. Researchers interviewed 39 kidney donors before the day of surgery and after the surgery. As a result, 86% of parents agreed to donate kidney while only 47% of the siblings, who could be donors, did. Also, the sibling who are the same sex and whose ages are closer to the recipients were more likely to agree than the other siblings were. At the same time, in addition, researchers asked potential recipients to rate their emotional closeness to all possible donors before the donor is chosen. As a result, they felt very close to 63% of the potential donors but only 42% of the potential non-donors. Accordingly, in conclusion, people are more likely to donate kidney when they feel closer to the recipients. Also, considering the fact that parents were more likely to donate their kidney than siblings were, the survival of genes were naturally prior cause of altruism; thus, the theory is supported. However, it does not fully explain altruism because it exists when it is not related to the relatives only. How can altruism be explained when it occurred on the street between non-relatives?
Empathy-Altruism Theory proposed by Batson in 1981 covers the
limitations of Kin Selection Theory. It explains altruism in terms of cognitive level, positing that some helpful actions are truly altruistic because they are motivated by the genuine desire to increase anothers welfare. Before conducting the theory above Batson carried out a supporting experiment Batson et al. in 1981. The study aimed to investigate participants motives to help when they had the opportunity to escape. The participants were female university students in an introductory psychology class and they were tested individually. Before the experiment starts, each of them read a story about a student named Elaine; each story was manipulated for students to have either empathy or distress. Then they watched Elaine over close-circuit TV, which was in fact a recorded video, where Elaine received several electric shocks and showed the painful expression. First half were told to take her place or fill out the questionnaire and leave (easy escape situation) and another were told to take her place or watch her suffering (difficult escape situation). As a result, most participants who had empathic concern agreed to replace Elaine regardless of the escape difficulties. In contrast, most participants with personal distress withdrew in the easy escape condition, but few of them offered to replace Elaine. In conclusion, the empathy altruism theory is, to some extent, true when people feel high empathy or personal distress when facing difficulty to escape. Therefore, considering two theories regarding to altruism, human relationships are influenced by both biological and cognitive factors. Now, to what extent do sociocultural factors influence human relationships?
Miller et al. (1990) explains how prosocial behaviors are influenced by
different cultures. The study aimed to prove that the cultural norms and moral values influence the perception of social responsibility. The researchers interviewed 400 individuals, both adults and children, on 3 situations. The first one involved parents obligation to help their child, the second one involved friends obligation to help a friend, and the last one involved peoples obligation to help a stranger. The situations were either life threatening, moderately serious, or a minor threat. The participants in this cross-cultural study were North Americans and Hindu Indians. As a result, Hindu Indians tended to see it as a moral duty to help others in all situations. Their view of social responsibility was broader and more duty based compared to the American participants. On the other hand, North American participants tended to view social responsibility and helping as personal choice. They tended to help if the danger is moderate or minor, or if they know or like the person in need. It means if the situation is danger, or if they do not know the person, they are not willing to help. Therefore, to a great extent, different cultures play role in way of human relationships.
In conclusion, as researches showed, biological, cognitive and
sociocultural factors influence human relationships to some extent; humans motive for the survival of their own genes, empathy level, and cultural differences influence prosocial behaviour.