Anthropology '' who survived for years without teeth probably through its group sharing their food is regarded as an early example of altruism
Marcel Mauss's essay
The Gift contains a passage called "Note on alms". This note describes the evolution of the notion of alms (and by extension of altruism) from the notion of sacrifice. In it, he writes:
Evolutionary explanations In
ethology (the scientific study of animal behaviour), and more generally in the study of
social evolution, altruism refers to behavior by an individual that increases the
fitness of another individual while decreasing the fitness of the actor. In
evolutionary psychology, this term may be applied to a wide range of human behaviors such as
charity,
emergency aid, help to coalition partners,
tipping,
courtship gifts, production of
public goods, and
environmentalism. The need for an explanation of altruistic behavior that is compatible with evolutionary origins has driven the development of new theories. Two related strands of research on altruism have emerged from traditional evolutionary analyses and
evolutionary game theory: a mathematical model and analysis of behavioral strategies. Some of the proposed mechanisms are: •
Kin selection. That humans and other animals are more altruistic towards close kin than to distant kin and non-kin has been confirmed in numerous studies across many different cultures. Even subtle cues indicating kinship may unconsciously increase altruistic behavior. One kinship cue is facial resemblance. One study found that slightly altering photographs to resemble the faces of study participants more closely increased the trust the participants expressed regarding depicted persons. Another cue is having the same family name, especially if rare, which has been found to increase helpful behavior. Another study found more cooperative behavior, the greater the number of perceived kin in a group. Using kinship terms in political speeches increased audience agreement with the speaker in one study. This effect was powerful for firstborns, who are typically close to their families. See also
Reciprocity (evolution). • Direct
reciprocity. Research shows that it can be beneficial to help others if there is a chance that they will reciprocate the help. The effective
tit for tat strategy is one
game theoretic example. Many people seem to be following a similar strategy by cooperating if and only if others cooperate in return. Because people avoid poor reciprocators and cheaters, a person's
reputation is important. A person esteemed for their reciprocity is more likely to receive assistance, even from individuals they have not directly interacted with before. This form of reciprocity is expressed by people who invest more resources in cooperation and punishment than what is deemed optimal based on established theories of altruism. • Pseudo-reciprocity. An organism behaves altruistically and the recipient does not reciprocate but has an increased chance of acting in a way that is selfish but also as a byproduct benefits the altruist. •
Costly signaling and the
handicap principle. Altruism, by diverting resources from the altruist, can act as an "honest signal" of available resources and the skills to acquire them. This may signal to others that the altruist is a valuable potential partner. It may also signal interactive and cooperative intentions, since someone who does not expect to interact further in the future gains nothing from such costly signaling. While it's uncertain if costly signaling can predict long-term cooperative traits, people tend to trust helpers more. Costly signaling loses its value when everyone shares identical traits, resources, and cooperative intentions, but it gains significance as population variability in these aspects increases. :Typically, women find altruistic men to be attractive partners. When women look for a long-term partner, altruism may be a trait they prefer as it may indicate that the prospective partner is also willing to
share resources with her and her children. Men perform charitable acts in the early stages of a romantic relationship or simply when in the presence of an attractive woman. While both sexes state that kindness is the most preferable trait in a partner, there is some evidence that men place less value on this than women and that women may not be more altruistic in the presence of an attractive man. Men may even avoid altruistic women in short-term relationships, which may be because they expect less success. Thus, while altruistic persons may under some circumstances be outcompeted by less altruistic persons at the individual level, according to group selection theory, the opposite may occur at the group level where groups consisting of the more altruistic persons may outcompete groups consisting of the less altruistic persons. Such altruism may only extend to ingroup members while directing prejudice and antagonism against outgroup members (see also
in-group favoritism). Many other evolutionary scientists have criticized group selection theory. in New York City Such explanations do not imply that humans consciously calculate how to increase their
inclusive fitness when doing altruistic acts. Instead, evolution has shaped psychological mechanisms, such as emotions, that promote certain altruistic behaviors. Selective investment theory proposes that close social bonds, and associated emotional, cognitive, and neurohormonal mechanisms, evolved to facilitate long-term, high-cost altruism between those closely depending on one another for survival and reproductive success. Such cooperative behaviors have sometimes been seen as arguments for left-wing politics, for example, by the Russian
zoologist and
anarchist Peter Kropotkin in his 1902 book
Mutual Aid: A Factor of Evolution and moral philosopher
Peter Singer in his book
A Darwinian Left.
Neurobiology Jorge Moll and
Jordan Grafman, neuroscientists at the
National Institutes of Health and LABS-D'Or Hospital Network, provided the first evidence for the neural bases of altruistic giving in normal healthy volunteers, using
functional magnetic resonance imaging. In their research, they showed that both pure monetary rewards and charitable donations activated the
mesolimbic reward pathway, a primitive part of the brain that usually responds to food and sex. However, when volunteers generously placed the interests of others before their own by making charitable donations, another
brain circuit was also selectively activated: the subgenual cortex/
septal region. These structures are related to social attachment and bonding in other species. The experiment suggested that altruism is not a higher moral faculty overpowering innate selfish desires, but a fundamental, ingrained, and enjoyable trait in the brain. One brain region, the subgenual
anterior cingulate cortex/
basal forebrain, contributes to learning altruistic behavior, especially in people with a propensity for
empathy. Bill Harbaugh, a
University of Oregon economist, in an fMRI scanner test conducted with his psychologist colleague Dr. Ulrich Mayr, reached the same conclusions as Jorge Moll and Jordan Grafman about giving to charity, although they were able to divide the study group into two groups: "egoists" and "altruists". One of their discoveries was that, though rarely, even some of the considered "egoists" sometimes gave more than expected because that would help others, leading to the conclusion that there are other factors in charity, such as a person's environment and values. The results of this study confirmed that altruism is supported by distinct mechanisms from giving motivated by reciprocity or by fairness. This study also confirmed that the right ventral striatum is recruited during altruistic giving, as well as the ventromedial prefrontal cortex, bilateral
anterior cingulate cortex, and bilateral anterior
insula, which are regions previously implicated in
empathy.
Abigail Marsh has conducted studies of real-world altruists that have also identified an important role for the
amygdala in human altruism. In real-world altruists, such as people who have donated kidneys to strangers, the amygdala is larger than in typical adults. Altruists' amygdalas are also more responsive than those of typical adults to the sight of others' distress, which is thought to reflect an empathic response to distress. This structure may also be involved in altruistic choices due to its role in encoding the value of outcomes for others. This is consistent with the findings of research in non-human animals, which has identified neurons within the amygdala that specifically encode the value of others' outcomes, activity in which appears to drive altruistic choices in monkeys.
Psychology The
International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences defines
psychological altruism as "a motivational state to increase another's welfare". Psychological altruism is contrasted with
psychological egoism, which refers to the motivation to increase one's welfare. In keeping with this, research in real-world altruists, including altruistic kidney donors, bone marrow donors, humanitarian aid workers, and
heroic rescuers findings that these altruists are primarily distinguished from other adults by unselfish traits and decision-making patterns. This suggests that human altruism reflects genuinely high valuation of others' outcomes. There has been some debate on whether humans are capable of psychological altruism. Some definitions specify a self-sacrificial nature to altruism and a lack of external rewards for altruistic behaviors. However, because altruism ultimately benefits the self in many cases, the selflessness of altruistic acts is difficult to prove. The
social exchange theory postulates that altruism only exists when the benefits outweigh the costs to the self.
Daniel Batson, a psychologist, examined this question and argued against the social exchange theory. He identified four significant motives: to ultimately benefit the self (egoism), to ultimately benefit the other person (altruism), to benefit a group (collectivism), or to uphold a moral principle (
principlism). Altruism that ultimately serves selfish gains is thus differentiated from selfless altruism, but the general conclusion has been that
empathy-induced altruism can be genuinely selfless. The
empathy-altruism hypothesis states that psychological altruism exists and is evoked by the empathic desire to help someone suffering. Feelings of empathic concern are contrasted with personal distress, which compels people to reduce their unpleasant emotions and increase their positive ones by helping someone in need. Empathy is thus not selfless since altruism works either as a way to avoid those negative, unpleasant feelings and have positive, pleasant feelings when triggered by others' need for help or as a way to gain social reward or avoid social punishment by helping. People with empathic concern help others in distress even when exposure to the situation could be easily avoided, whereas those lacking in empathic concern avoid allowing it unless it is difficult or impossible to avoid exposure to another's suffering. trainees swearing in as volunteers in
Cambodia, 4 April 2007 In psychological research on altruism, studies often observe altruism as demonstrated through
prosocial behaviors such as
helping, comforting,
sharing, cooperation,
philanthropy, and
community service. However, a witness with a high level of empathic concern is likely to assume personal responsibility entirely regardless of the number of bystanders. In a study of older adults, those who volunteered had higher life satisfaction and will to live, and less
depression,
anxiety, and
somatization. Volunteerism and helping behavior have not only been shown to improve mental health but physical health and longevity as well, attributable to the activity and social integration it encourages. One study examined the physical health of mothers who volunteered over 30 years and found that 52% of those who did not belong to a volunteer organization experienced a major illness while only 36% of those who did volunteer experienced one. A study on adults aged 55 and older found that during the four-year study period, people who volunteered for two or more organizations had a 63% lower likelihood of dying. After controlling for prior health status, it was determined that volunteerism accounted for a 44% reduction in mortality. Merely being aware of kindness in oneself and others is also associated with greater well-being. A study that asked participants to count each act of kindness they performed for one week significantly enhanced their subjective happiness. Happier people are kinder and more grateful, kinder people are happier and more grateful and more grateful people are happier and kinder, the study suggests. While research supports the idea that altruistic acts bring about happiness, it has also been found to work in the opposite direction—that happier people are also kinder. The relationship between altruistic behavior and happiness is bidirectional. Studies found that
generosity increases linearly from sad to happy affective states. Feeling over-taxed by the needs of others has negative effects on health and happiness. Older humans were found to have higher altruism.
Genetics and environment Both genetics and environment have been implicated in influencing pro-social or altruistic behavior. Candidate genes include OXTR (
polymorphisms in the
oxytocin receptor),
CD38,
COMT,
DRD4,
DRD5,
IGF2,
AVPR1A and
GABRB2. It is theorized that some of these genes influence altruistic behavior by modulating levels of neurotransmitters such as
serotonin and
dopamine. According to
Christopher Boehm, altruistic behaviour evolved as a way of surviving within a group.
Sociology "Sociologists have long been concerned with how to build the good society". The structure of our societies and how individuals come to exhibit charitable, philanthropic, and other pro-social, altruistic actions for the
common good is a commonly researched topic within the field. The American Sociology Association (ASA) acknowledges
public sociology saying, "The intrinsic scientific, policy, and public relevance of this field of investigation in helping to construct 'good societies' is unquestionable". Studies show that
generosity in laboratory and in online experiments is contagious – people imitate the generosity they observe in others. ==Religious viewpoints==