Altruism And Indirect Reciprocity Case Study

“Altruism and Indirect Reciprocity: The Interaction of Person and Situation in Prosocial Behavior” was based significantly off of the findings of the study done by David De Cremer called “Why Prosocials Exhibit Greater Cooperation then Proselfs: The Roles of Social Responsibility and Reciprocity.” Both studies preliminarily tested the college students with a social value orientation test to classify the participants as either prosocial or proself. Next, the participants participated in series of “games” that differed in each study. De Cremer used scenarios that allowed the participant to decide how many chips (a made up source of perceived value) they wanted to contribute to either a group or partner, followed by an inquiry as to how responsible they felt to “further the collective interest.” This study aimed to understand the different behaviors and feelings associated with being prosocial or proself. For example, it was found that a prosocial feel more socially responsible and want to restore equality in outcomes of situations, therefore increasing their tendency to behave cooperatively. The “Altruism and Indirect Reciprocity” study went through scenarios in which the participants would participate in “dictator games” in which they were given two opportunities to help another person, once in public the other in private. This study aimed to explain why certain people behave in prosocial ways. For example, the study found that altruists were more likely to

De Cremer established the main differences between prosocials and proselfs as being the way that they feel about their role in society therefore influencing their behavior within society. Brent Simpson and Robb Willer use these findings to establish a base for their own study about the relationship between altruism and indirect reciprocity. They use previous data to formulate a hypothesis that aims to explain why people act