Sex Differences in Violent versus Non-Violent Life-Threatening Altruism

Abstract

Many studies on Hamilton's (1964) inclusive fitness theory have used the burning house and kidney donation examples of life-threatening altruism. However, these examples may not be sufficiently exhibiting the risk involved with life-threatening altruism that would have occurred in hunter-gatherer societies, such as fighting off attackers and/or predators. The present study examined participants' estimated likelihood to perform altruistic acts for specific kin members/friends in two violent life-threatening situations (i.e., being mugged and being chased) and two non-violent life-threatening situations (i.e., the burning house and kidney donation examples). Participants were 216 undergraduate students who completed a questionnaire on altruism toward an actual kin member/friend. Each questionnaire contained four life-or-death scenarios (two violent and two non-violent) in which either the participant's sibling, cousin, or best friend was in danger and needed help. Results indicated that people were more likely to help siblings than cousins and friends in both the violent and non-violent hypothetical scenarios. Participants indicated a greater likelihood to help people in violent situations than in non-violent situations. Women indicated a greater estimated likelihood than men to help people in non-violent situations while men indicated a greater estimated likelihood than women to help people in violent situations. Both male and female participants indicated a greater estimated likelihood to help women than men in violent situations.

Do we really need evolution in our psychology classes? A letter exchange between two colleagues in search of understanding

“…But unless it can predict, for example, which specific situational factors might matter (beyond those that, after the fact, seem to enhance survival and reproductive success), what does it add to the understanding of any human behavior? This is a crucial test of the soundness of any theory and especially important if, as is claimed in a recent paper, (Fitzgerald & Whitaker, 2009) that EvoS should (do they mean "can") remake all of psychology and break down our disciplinary walls.…”

Do Relatives With Greater Reproductive Potential Get Help First?: A Test of the Inclusive Fitness Explanation of Kin Altruism

“…Hence, it may be the case that factors related to genetic relatednesses (e.g., frequency of interaction, emotional closeness) rather than genetic relatedness per se that contributed to the willingness to help (assuming that people generally interact more with, and feel emotionally closer to, genetically close relatives than genetically distant relative). Fitzgerald and Whitaker (2009) experimentally varied genetic relatedness by randomly assigning participants to indicate their willingness to help a sibling, a cousin, or a friend in a hypothetical violent (e.g., burning house) or nonviolent (e.g., chased by an attacker) life-threatening situation; participants in this study reported higher likelihood of helping in the sibling scenario in comparison to the cousin scenario, which did not differ from the friend scenario, regardless of the violence of the situations.…”

Prosocial Behaviour Towards Victims of Road Accidents: Examining Personality, Gender and Traumatic Experience

“…Based on gender roles, females generally are expected and believed to be more responsive, empathetic and prosocial than males, whereas males are expected to be relatively independent and achievement-oriented [8]. [16] examined gender differences in violent versus non-violent life-threatening altruism using 216 undergraduate students (108 males and 108 females) from Central Michigan Universitya Midwestern American University with an on-campus student population of about 20,000. The study consisted of a 3(genetic relatedness between participants and recipient) x 2(types of altruism: violent vs non-violent) x2(sex of participants) mixed design.…”