The problem with the discussion is that folks couch in simplistic terms:
1. Their moral philosophy - usually implying their worthiness and toughness
2. The need to avoid risk.
However, the decision to act altruistically is really driven by many factors that sum up to make a go/no go intervention discussion. To ignore that they influence you and to only talk about risk or philosophy really is very shallow.
In an intense discussion coming out the NTI 2 years ago - I summarized some of these factors - in some FOF simulations that had possible altruistic acts - you can get some of the scenarios from the context.
------------
Here's a first shot at one of the NTI issues. In ATSA village and some scenarios, there were places where you might have helped a victim of a crime or a bystander. Many of us didn't. Personally, I leaped over the abused woman, headed for the sunset while yelling for the Lawperson Vicki. I gave no thought to the attorney. In the bank robbery, I gave no thought to the bank staff (of course, our group had the preplanning of clam chowder - a good lesson). In the Pizza delivery scenario or saving my family, I did not check on the health of the victims (in this case it was not lack of altruism, I told them to keep down and don't move - I will be back after I deal with the BGs).
However the issue is altruism or helping behavior. In the after action discussion, folks tended to deal with lack of helping as a moral failure to the current political climate in the USA and presence of liberals, collectivism and sheer self- interest. Being the psychologist that I am, I have delved into the books and summarized the factors that have been found to influence helping behavior. These studies were motivated by the famous Kitty Genovese case (woman stabbed).
Now readers, remember that I'm posting these to shed insight (ah) into the behavior. I'm trying to present what knowledge we have of factors that might operate even though people like to form the discussion in terms of moral philosopy. Like the Iraqi prison scandal - you can tear Bush a new one because you don't like him or his policy and that's what led to it or you can realize from the Zimbardo prison experiment, that the situation produces this behavior - independent of Bush. Anyway, here's the factors with some commentary about motivations. I'm adding some personal hypotheses.
Bystander Intervention:
1. Factors that increase likelihood:
a. The feel good, do good effect - people who feel good, successful, etc. are more likely to help
b. Feeling guilty - we tend to help more if we feel guilty about something
c. Seeing others willing to help - if we see others help, we are more likely to help
d. Perceiving the other person as deserving of help - we're more likely to help people who are in need of help through no fault of their own
- The lawyers and bankers are not close to me or overly sympathetic in my world scheme. I feel little sympathy. The domestic dispute seemed like an argument among trailer trash. I might care not who is deserving in this one.
If we had a scenario, where a child is being kidnapped in ATSA village (might be an idea - have a stranger tugging at a screaming, protesting, child) - intervention might increase. ( Added-this year we did a save the baby while fighting armed terrorists - you had a side arm and an AK. I saved the baby, some didn't
e. Knowing how to help - contributes greatly to helping if you know what to do. Most of use had some knowledge how to fight - however, we also knew the risks and that might be more important.
f. A personalized relationship - if you have some relationship, you are more likely to help. Even minimal social interaction, like eye contact before an incident, will greatly increase helping
We had no real relationship with the bankers, lawyers, etc. One thing is that not many went to help Vicki. We did have contact with her but my group really didn't hear the rack so by the time we went to Code Confused it was too late. If I had heard her specifically, I might.
In the FOF team tatics, I chose not to help the lawman search for my buddy. Pragmatically, my face mask had fogged up and I was blind as a bat. I also felt it was a strange request from an officer, so I declined. If I could have been able to see - perhaps, my ability factor will have encouraged me to go.
2. Factors that Decrease likelihood
a. The presence of other people - called the bystander effect - in the domestic, I don't recall the attorney chiming in much. As it was his town, did I feel that he should take more of an active role. If he did, would I have joined? Maybe, conformity suggests I would.
b. Factors are:
Diffusion of responsibility - more folks don't feel fully responsible to help, assume someone else might.
Desire to behave in socially acceptable fashion - normative social influence
Appear correct - informational social influence
Both led us to rely on reactions of others in the situation
that's an interesting specific situational variable in ATSA village for a newbie. We are taught to save ourselves, not to intervene in an unknown situation as we can't always identify the real villain. I've previously seen folks shoot the cop wrestling with the crazed junky woman at Karl's. If I intervene, will folks think I'm reckless?
c. Being in a big city or a very small town - ATSA is a small town but I don't think that is a real factor in our excercise d. Vague or ambiguous situations - is it a lover's quarrel - the domestic dispute - who's right in all the screaming. I fled and yelled for the sherrif. She can sort out the players. I note in the checking cashing scenario, I didn't act on the weird feel as I was clueless, felt embarrassed about simply bolting out of every place in the village. As soon as someone said Hello: - Glenn in heading for the tall timber? e. When the personal costs for helping outweigh the benefits - In the real world, I have a family to support. I die and they are screwed. Even with insurance, their life goes down the drain - are others really that important to me. I can sacrifice myself but do I have the moral responsibility to lay hardship on my family for strangers? Tough call. If the victim was a true innocent, like the kidnapped child - perhaps knowing the horror of what would happen to her would override the hardship of my family. However, a trailer trash fight - sorry, I vaulted the woman and ran by Jeff.
---------
Thus, the action decision is complex. It's easy to say you will do XYZ. I do find it confusing to read some tough guys who:
1. I will intervene to save the person in the store
2. I think we should let those in New Olrleans drown and do nothing to help the refugees as they should have listened to the .... blah, blah.
Kind of an altruism disconnect. Do they say they will save the person as it fits their macho fantasy but wouldn't help Katrina victims because :
a. The first action is really for macho posturing
b. The second heartless statement is because of lack of identifying with those poor folks or even racism?
So, these discussions are way to easy on the internet.
