Prosocial and antisocial behaviour: helping, the bystander effect and aggression (QCE Psychology Unit 4)
“Interpret the findings of Latané and Darley's (1969) study of bystander intervention; Describe social factors that influence prosocial behaviour, with reference to the reciprocity principle and social responsibility; Describe personal characteristics that influence prosocial behaviour, with reference to empathy, mood, competence and altruism; Make predictions using the general aggression model (GAM), with respect to single and multiple episodes; Explain how media can influence aggression, with reference to advertising, video games and social media”
Prosocial behaviour is voluntary action intended to benefit others, driven by social factors (reciprocity, social responsibility norms) and personal factors (empathy, mood, competence, altruism). Helping is reduced by the bystander effect, where the presence of others lowers helping through diffusion of responsibility and audience inhibition (Darley and Latane). Antisocial behaviour and aggression are influenced by social learning; Bandura's Bobo doll study showed children imitate observed aggression.
Jump to a section
What this dot point is asking
QCAA wants you to explain both sides of social behaviour: what leads people to help others (prosocial behaviour) and what leads people to harm others or fail to help (antisocial behaviour and aggression). You need named factors for each, the bystander effect with its mechanisms, and named studies, including Bandura's work on learned aggression. The goal is to show that both helping and harming are shaped by situational and personal factors.
The answer
Prosocial and antisocial behaviour are two ends of how we treat others. Both are powerfully shaped by the social situation and by individual characteristics, which is why ordinary people can be remarkably helpful in one context and unhelpful or aggressive in another.
Prosocial behaviour and what increases it
Prosocial behaviour is any voluntary action intended to help or benefit another person. Altruism is a subset: helping with no expectation of reward. Several factors increase helping.
- Social factors. The reciprocity principle (we help those who have helped us, or expect future return) and the social responsibility norm (the expectation that we should help those who depend on us) both encourage helping.
- Personal factors. Empathy (feeling another's distress) is a strong driver, along with a positive mood (the good-mood effect), competence (believing you can help effectively), and a stable disposition toward altruism.
The bystander effect and what reduces helping
The bystander effect is the finding that the more people present, the less likely any individual is to help. Bibb Latane and John Darley investigated this after the murder of Kitty Genovese. Their studies (such as the staged seizure experiment) showed helping dropped as group size rose. They identified the mechanisms.
- Diffusion of responsibility. Each bystander assumes someone else will act, so personal responsibility is shared and diluted.
- Audience inhibition (evaluation apprehension). People fear being judged for intervening wrongly, so they hold back.
- Pluralistic ignorance. People look to others to judge whether it is an emergency; if everyone appears calm, each concludes there is no problem.
Latane and Darley described a five-step decision model: notice the event, interpret it as an emergency, assume responsibility, decide how to help, then act. Failure at any step stops helping.
Antisocial behaviour and aggression
Antisocial behaviour includes actions that harm or disregard others, with aggression as a central example. It is influenced by both situational and learned factors.
- Social learning. Albert Bandura's Bobo doll study showed that children who watched an adult behave aggressively toward an inflatable doll later imitated that aggression, especially when the model was rewarded or went unpunished. This demonstrated that aggression can be learned by observation and modelling, not only through direct reinforcement.
- Group and situational factors. Deindividuation (losing self-awareness in a group), diffusion of responsibility, and the influence of an aggressive social norm can all increase antisocial behaviour.
- Cost-benefit analysis. People may weigh the personal costs and benefits before acting either prosocially or antisocially.
Linking the two
The same situational variables cut both ways. The presence of others can inhibit helping (bystander effect) and can also disinhibit aggression (deindividuation). Personal factors such as empathy push toward prosocial behaviour, while observed aggressive models push toward antisocial behaviour.
The bystander effect (Darley and Latane) reduces helping through diffusion of responsibility, audience inhibition and pluralistic ignorance, and follows a five-step decision model. Bandura's Bobo doll study is the key aggression study, showing children imitate observed aggression, especially when the model is rewarded (vicarious reinforcement).
Putting it together for an exam
A strong answer names a factor, classifies it as social or personal, and attaches a study. For example: helping decreases as group size grows because of diffusion of responsibility, demonstrated by Darley and Latane, while aggression can be acquired through observation, demonstrated by Bandura's Bobo doll study.
- Equating prosocial behaviour with altruism
- Altruism is a subset of prosocial behaviour: helping with no expected reward. Reciprocity-based helping is still prosocial but not altruistic.
- Saying the bystander effect is apathy
- It is driven by diffusion of responsibility, audience inhibition and pluralistic ignorance, not by people simply not caring.
- Misremembering Bandura's finding
- Children imitated aggression most when the model was rewarded or unpunished, showing vicarious reinforcement, not just exposure.
- Treating helping and aggression as separate worlds
- The same situational factors, such as the presence of a group, can both inhibit helping and disinhibit aggression.
Exam-style questions
Questions in the style of QCAA exam questions on this dot point, each with a worked answer. They are written by ExamExplained unless tagged "Past paper"; the year shows the paper a question is modelled on.
Practice2 marksExplain how perceived competence can lead to increased prosocial behaviour by bystanders in emergencies. Use an example in your response.Show worked answer →
Explanation (1 mark): perceived competence is a bystander's belief that they have the skills or ability to help effectively. When people feel competent to deal with the situation, they are more likely to take responsibility and act, overcoming the hesitation caused by diffusion of responsibility and fear of doing the wrong thing.
Example (1 mark): a bystander trained in first aid or CPR who witnesses someone collapse is more likely to step in and assist, because they believe they can help effectively, whereas an untrained bystander may hold back.
Practice3 marksExplain how advertising, video games and social media can influence aggression.Show worked answer →
Award up to 3 marks, ideally one mark for each medium, framed through social learning theory (observation, imitation and reinforcement of modelled aggression).
- Advertising can model aggressive or dominant behaviour as desirable or rewarded, so viewers imitate it (vicarious reinforcement).
- Violent video games provide repeated, often rewarded, rehearsal of aggressive actions and can desensitise players to violence and prime aggressive thoughts.
- Social media exposes users to aggressive models and norms, can reward aggression with attention or approval, and reduced accountability (anonymity) can disinhibit hostile behaviour.
Practice2 marksDescribe altruism and provide an example of this behaviour.Show worked answer →
Description (1 mark): altruism is a form of prosocial behaviour in which a person voluntarily helps another at some cost to themselves and with no expectation of reward or personal benefit in return.
Example (1 mark): a stranger diving into a river to rescue a drowning person, risking their own safety with nothing to gain, or anonymously donating to charity. The key feature is that the helper acts for the other's benefit, not for any reward.