Courageous altruism: Personal and situational correlates of rescue during the Holocaust

Abstract

This study investigated whether positive personality variables associated with the character strengths of courage and kindness, when examined in the context of situational and demographic variables, distinguish Holocaust-era courageous altruists from bystanders. Seventy-nine non-Jewish rescuers and 73 non-Jewish bystanders were administered measures of empathic concern, social responsibility, risk-taking, altruistic moral reasoning, and perceived marginality. Situational variables included wartime living arrangements, history of persecution, previous experience with Jews, and whether an individual had been asked for help. A two-group discriminant function analysis was able to correctly classify 96.1% of the sample, separating the rescuers and bystanders by more than three standard deviations. The discriminant function was best defined by social responsibility, altruistic moral reasoning, empathic concern, and risk-taking. Implications are discussed regarding the relationship between character strengths and altruistic behavior.

The susceptible circle: A taxonomy of followers associated with destructive leadership

“…Prior research on mass genocide, namely the Holocaust, indicates that, unlike bystanders, rescuers maintained a courageous-prosocial disposition characterized by increased levels of empathic concern, altruistic moral reasoning, social responsibility, and risk-taking (Fagin-Jones & Midlarsky, 2007;London, 1970;Midlarsky & Kahana, 1994;Midlarsky et al, 2005;Oliner & Oliner, 1988;Staub, 2005). Together, these characteristics form the backbone of valor, kindness, and self-sacrifice (Peterson & Seligman, 2004), and are believed to be necessary for helping in high stress situations involving the potential for high personal costs to the actor.…”

Development of Sport Courage Scale

“…The latest courage research covered such subjects as courage in the classroom (Martin, 2011), courageous actions and success (Pury and Hensel, 2010), organizational courage (Kilmann et al, 2010), fear and courage in children (Moris, 2009), civil courage, implicit theories, and measurement (Greitemeyer et al, 2007; Rate et al, 2007), the subjective act and experience of courage (Hannah et al, 2007), courageous actions, and general as well as personal courage (Pury and Kowaski, 2007; Pury et al, 2007), courageous altruism (Fagin-Jones and Midlarsky, 2007), the construct of courage and measurement (Woodard and Pury, 2007), hardiness and the concept of courage (Salvtore, 2006; Woodard, 2004), and partnership in courage (Mavroudis, 2003). Although researchers have concentrated on concepts and measurements related to courage in various aforementioned fields, there is a paucity of research to understand sport courage.…”

The Making of a Hero: Cultivating Empathy, Altruism, and Heroic Imagination

“…In short, empathy was easier when the participants saw immediate commonalities with the victims; this pattern has been seen in heroes as well. When comparing rescuers during the Holocaust to bystanders, Fagin-Jones and Midlarsky (2007) found evidence that heroes who had experienced persecution themselves were more likely to help because they were more likely to empathize with the victims. However, they also found that bystanders had more previous experience with Jews than the heroic rescuers (Fagin-Jones & Midlarsky, 2007).…”