Levine et al.

Levine et. al (2001)

Cross-cultural altruism

Background

-Many studies have shown that helping rates differ between
communities in a single country.

-There is a popular hypothesis that the tendency to help
strangers declines as the size of the city increases.

Aim

-To determine if a city’s tendency to offer non-emergency
help to strangers is the same across situations over many
range of cultures.

-To research whether there are variations across the
cultures studied.

-To identify variables that can affect the differences in
helping.

Sample

-23 countries/cities (all with >230,000 people), including cities like New York,

-1198 participants

-Correlation study.

-Children (<17) and those who couldn’t help were excluded

Method

-Data collected by students, who were confederates acting
on behalf of the researchers. All men. Told to dress
neatly and casually.

-Collected data in relation to 3 helping measures.
Administered in 2 or more locations, in main city
locations, during main business hours.

Fill in the Blanks

Method

The students collected data in relation to three helping
situations…

1.

Dropped pen: Person walked towards a pedestrian walking the

opposite direction and drop their pen when they’re 10-15 feet away.

If the person helped pick up the pen, it’s noted as they helped.

214 men and 210 women approached.

Method

2. Hurt leg: Confederates would walk with a leg brace/heavy
limp. They would accidentally drop a pile of magazines and
struggle to pick them up. Helping was defined as offering to
help/beginning to help without offering.

253 men and 240 women were approached.

Method

3. Helping a blind person cross the street: Dressed in dark
glasses/carried a white cane, and would stand at busy
pedestrian crossings. Before light turned green, they would
step up to the corner and wait for someone to offer them
help. Helping was defined as having helped if they told the
confederate that the light was green.

281 trials conducted.

Multiple Choice

What type of sampling is Levine et al?

• Opportunity sampling

• Snowball sampling

• Self-selective sampling

• I don't know :(

Results

-Highest ranked country was Rio de Janeiro, Brazil (1), with 100% helping
blind, 100% helping dropped pen, 80% helping those with
hurt leg.

-Lowest ranked country was Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia (23), with 54% helping
blind, 26% helping dropped pen, 41% helping those with
hurt leg.

Conclusion

-In conclusion, overall levels of helping is inversely
related to a country’s economic productivity.

-This may be because less economically active countries
have more traditional values, including helping people.

-The countries with the cultural tradition of simpatia are
on average more helpful than countries with no such
tradition.

-Simpatia is usually in Latin cultures.

Simpatia: tendency to prefer friendly behaviour and be more helpful.

Multiple Choice

What classical study do you think pairs with Levine?

• Piliavin

• Milgram

• Lee

• Kohlberg

Piliavin vs. Levine

Similarities

Both were field experiments so high
in ecological validity

Both looked into cultural
differences in helping behaviours

Differences

Piliavin has sampling bias, as all
of the participants are commuters
from New York city.

Levine is cross-cultural and looked
in 23 different countries.

Multiple Choice

What is simpatia?

• The idea that you are more likely to help strangers if you walk with other people

• The idea that the environment you grow up in influences the way you act and behave, and you are more likely to help someone if you were brought up in a poorer area.

• The idea that you have a proactive concern for the social-wellbeing of others and are more likely to help out those in need.

• The idea that you feel pity and sorrow for someone else's misfortunes.

Poll

What type of countries helped the higher proportion of strangers?

• Rich countries

• Middle-income countries

• Poor countries