Goal Slippage: A Mechanism for Spontaneous Instrumental Helping in Infancy?

Michael, John; Székely, Marcell

doi:10.1007/s11245-017-9485-5

Cited by 14 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 73 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…For instance, prominent lines of research often assumed rather deliberative models (e.g., Latané and Darley, 1970), involving several cognitive steps until an individual decides to provide help in certain situations to anonymous others. Other research suggested empathic concern, perspective taking, identification with the others’ goal or elevation as cognitive and emotional drivers of prosocial behavior (e.g., Batson, 1981; Haidt, 2003; Tusche et al., 2016; Michael and Székely, 2017). And even other research highlighted group norms, partly as evolutionary preferences and explained helping by the motivation to avoid punishment (Fehr and Gächter, 2002; Silk and House, 2016; Tomasello, 2016; see also Nook et al., 2016).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Inspired to Lend a Hand? Attempts to Elicit Prosocial Behavior Through Goal Contagion

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Helping often occurs in a broader social context. Every day, people observe others who require help, but also others who provide help. Research on goal contagion suggests that observing other people’s goal-directed behavior (like helping) activates the same goal in the observer. Thus, merely observing a prosocial act could inspire people to act on the same goal. This effect should be even stronger, the more the observer’s disposition makes him or her value the goal. In the case of prosocial goals, we looked at the observer’s social value orientation (SVO) as a moderator of the process. In three studies ( N = 126, N = 162, and N = 371), we tested the hypothesis that prosocial observations (vs. control) will trigger more subsequent casual prosocial behavior the more the observer is prosocially oriented. In line with the original research, we used texts as stimulus material in Study 1 and short video clips in Study 2 and 3. In Study 1 and 2, SVO was measured directly before the manipulation was induced and in Study 3 even a week prior to the actual experiment. Additionally, we included a second control condition video clip in Study 3, which did not depict human beings. Despite thoroughly developed stimulus material and methods, we found no support for an effect of the interaction, nor of the prosocial observation, but some support for an effect of SVO on casual helping behavior in Study 1 and 2. A mini meta-analysis revealed an effect equivalent to zero for goal contagion and a small, but robust SVO effect across studies. The main implication for the theory of goal contagion is that prosocial goals might not be as contagious as other goals addressed in the literature. We suggest a meta-analytic review of the literature to identify suitable goals and moderators for the goal contagion process.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Inspired to Lend a Hand? Attempts to Elicit Prosocial Behavior Through Goal Contagion

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Given that infants have been shown to also help non-human agents, scholars have argued that the earliest instances of helping behavior could be subserved by goal contagion [37] and goal slippery [38]. Others proposed that a general social motivation to interact and affiliate with others could subserve helping behavior [3,39].…”

Section: A Multidimensional Approach To Early Prosocial Behaviormentioning

confidence: 99%

The multidimensional nature of early prosocial behavior: a motivational perspective

Paulus

2018

Current Opinion in Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A majority of current work indicates that the different types of prosocial behavior in young children (helping, sharing, comforting) are not related to each other. Here, I review recent studies that examined the relations between prosocial actions as well as the antecedents and correlates of the particular domains of prosociality. I argue that in addition to different social-cognitive demands also different motivations are involved in early prosocial action, and that prosociality is thus a concept that encompasses -at least early in development -heterogeneous behaviors and motivations.

show abstract

“…Whatever ways an agent (YOU) identifies the outcomes at which the other agent's (ME) actions are directed, there is still a need for a mechanism that explains why YOU would treat the identified goals as her own. Michael and Székely () propose such a mechanism, which they dub “goal slippage.” On their account, goals that are identified in instances instantiating the minimal structure are sometimes represented as motor representations within the observer's motor system—namely, when the observed action is in their own motor repertoire. When this occurs, the identified goal becomes the observer's own goals, and the observer will automatically act to bring about the identified goals unless some other mechanisms inhibit their automatic action.…”

Section: A Minimal Approachmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Given that goal slippage is hypothesized to be an automatic process, Michael and Székely () suggest that it should be more likely to occur when executive resources are occupied (e.g., under cognitive load). This generates the prediction that spontaneous helping behavior (Warneken, Chen, and Tomasello ; Warneken and Tomasello, ; for discussion and further references, see Michael and Székely, ) should increase under cognitive load.…”

Section: A Minimal Approachmentioning

confidence: 99%