Category: Altruism

My preferences, what I like and do not like doing, are both innate and conditioned by my experiences. I was born with the desire to have a positive impact on society. I prefer improving the lives of others than increasing my own personal wealth. However, I also want to be intellectually stimulated and I know that greater knowledge will allow me to be more successful.

Deci and Ryan’s self-determination theory frames these preferences to be either motivated by my own satisfaction, or by external factors (Buss2000). At first glance, my preference for intellectual stimulation and success can be categorised as a result of extrinsic motivation, and my desire to help, a product of extrinsic autonomous motivation. However, a weakness of this framework is that it can encourage a constrained view, which can lead to the links between motivations being neglected. Hence, a more refined perspective is that my preference to make a difference is intrinsically motivated as it is a need; “we consider needs to be innate rather than learned and therefore to give motivational content to life” (Deci, 2000). Looking through this frame, my drive to be successful and intellectually stimulated, while being extrinsically motivated, are not governed by wealth but an innate need to help.

While preferences are based on mindset, my strengths must be defined by merit. Bandura’s Social Cognitive Theory suggests that my strengths are influenced by my self-efficacy, my “belief about (my) capabilities to successfully complete… tasks” (Bandura, 1997). I have a strong self-efficacy, which is a highly useful strength as Bandura’s confirms it improve performances (Bandura, 1997. However, for the analysis of my other strengths, this framework might be limiting; my analysis of my own strengths could be misinterpreted by vicarious experiences, social persuasion, and one’s phycology (Buss2000). Due to my strong self-efficacy, I am taking an evidence-based approach to analyse further strengths to mitigate the impact of my self-efficacy.

My academic transcript shows my high General Metal Ability. Further, my numerical reasoning skills are supported by my academic success in Electrical Engineering and the numerical Assessment conducted in this course. I also have strong communication skills and am a confident individual, which is evidenced by positive feedback I received from my workshop facilitator. Further strengths include my ability to lead a team, my diligence, and my generosity.

The HEXACO analysis was very useful to highlight areas for development as it allowed me to subconsciously reflect. The HEXACO analysis revealed that I can be insincere, and lack gentleness (appendix); likely attributed to by my lack of emotional intelligence. This will become a focus as understanding myself and others is pivotal to lead and influence. My analysis also revealed a weakness of the framework.

1. Teamwork

Last year, I founded a start-up that gives Epilepsy sufferers the ability to drive a car. I wanted to use my teamwork skills to develop an actionable business that solves a personal problem my grandfather faces. To achieve this, I looked at the project as my group’s, not my own, and ensured that everyone’s personal goals aligned. Further, I encouraged the sharing of diverse perspectives by facilitating a positive atmosphere and building strong relationships with my colleagues. My efforts resulted in the development of a product offering that was praised at pitches for investors. I would not have achieved this alone.

2. Diligence

I have demonstrated my diligence as a Bar Supervisor at the South Sydney Graphic Arts Club. One night, as I was closing the venue, I noticed that my manager had forgotten to inform me that there was an extensive furniture set up required for a christening that was booked for the following day. Despite it already being very late in the night, I decided to stay back for an extra two hours to complete the set up. I completed the set-up perfectly, as if I had known from the start of my shift. The restaurant was set up to a high level of detail and the event was able to go forward.

While this above situation may seem like a simple task it is important to mention because in “unstructured” (weaker) situations one’s personality becomes more evident (Founder, 2012). In the above STAR statement, I could have gone home with no consequences, as it was not my responsibility. However, my personality strength of being detailed and aiming for perfection shined through in this weaker situation.

3. Altruism

I have been a member of the University of Sydney Lions water polo club since I was 13. My generosity was evident last summer as I volunteered to help the club in retaining junior members when they leave school and the structure it provides. To accomplish this, I participated in coaching to communicate the transition, and organised social events to introduce junior members to senior members. I supported the club by improving their retention rate and helped juniors my providing sense of belonging.

An understanding of my preferences, strengths and weaknesses allows me to produce SMART career goals.

The congruence between values & ethics, and work is becoming increasingly important in achieving career success (Berson, 2008). My values are enduring beliefs that dictate where I place importance. Schwartz Value Theory explains how values impact my career as he defines values as motivational. The value sorting exercise conducted in the workshop reinforced that I value, hard work, responsibility to the community, status, and leaving a legacy (appendix). My ethics are a common set of guiding principles I adhere to, and impact the choices I will make in my career. My ethical beliefs are concerned with loyalty, fairness, and transparency.

My core career goal is to be a partner at a big four consulting firm. To achieve this, I plan on having a “Boundaryless career” ¬¬¬and adopting the concept of a spiral career path. Hence, I need to achieve specific mid-term goals; Firstly, I am striving to gain a graduate role at a power generation company, such as AGL, when I graduate in 2022. Secondly, in 2026 after 3 years of hands on electrical engineering experience I want to utilise the skills learnt to secure an associate role at a large and respected consulting firm, working for clients in the electricity market sector (e.g. Deloitte). Thirdly, I plan on achieving a manager role before I am 30. I believe this is achievable because of the technical expertise I would have gained working directly with companies in the sector. My core goal (partnership) is timebound as I want to be a consulting partner before I am 40.

I am ensuring my career goals are measurable¬ by implementing relevant and specific short-term goals; achievement will indicate successful progression of my mid-term goals, and eventually my core goal. I am aiming to secure two summer internships; one internship with a power generation company in the summer 2020-2021, utilising my electrical engineering degree, a second internship with a consulting company in the asset management division in the summer 2021-2022. Firstly, the power internship will provide me with exposure to the complex sector of the economy I am focusing on in my Protean Career; “self-directed approach to career management” (Hall, 1996). It will also improve my ability to obtain a graduate position with a power generation firm (mid-term goal 1). Secondly, an internship in the asset management division of a consulting firm would improve my connections within this industry and increase my employability within consulting (essential for my mid-term goal 2). These short-term goals (indicators) are achievable as I have maintained high grades in a highly respected degree, and have educated and trained myself to have strong graduate qualities. This is evidenced in how last week I progressed to the final stage of recruitment for an internship at Ernst & Young (appendix).

My career goals are relevant to my desire to pursue consulting, and my drive to improve the productivity of the national electricity market. Further, my goals are relevant to my core values and ethics. Consulting and Engineering require hard work to be successful in the industry. Further, firms in these fields respect diligence and loyalty. Consultants have a significant responsibility to the Australian and global community as they improve the product offering and efficiencies of a business to drive growth. Further, electricity is an essential commodity for households, I would be increasing the fairness in this market to drive down prices for others. Moreover, I would be able to contribute to the auditing and assurance process within these consulting firms; providing transparency to customers and investors. Lastly, partnership would provide status, and allow me to leave a legacy.

Altruistic behavior has been studied extensively by researchers due to the complex nature of the term and the emotions that influence it. It is a firmly established belief that altruism is a prosocial behavior; a behavior with the goal of benefitting another person. Altruism can best be defined as a behavior in which an individual makes a voluntary and intentional act that functions to benefit another person without any expectation of reward in return (Feigin, Owens, & Goodyear-Smith, 2014).

Altruistic Behavior

Historically, researchers have debated as to which kinds of human motivations qualify a prosocial behavior to be altruistic in nature. Some believe that selfish motivation (whether it be consciously or unconsciously motivated) and selfless motivation can fuel altruistic behavior (Barasch, Levine, Berman, & Small, 2014). For example, people who donate money to the homeless in order to make them feel better about themselves are performing a prosocial behavior that is fueled by selfish motivation. Therefore, when people have selfish motivation, it indicates that they are engaging in prosocial behavior with an expectation or anticipation of reward in return. This contradicts the concept that altruistic behavior must be selflessly motivated.

Thus, for pure altruistic behavior to occur, helping another person must be the primary and sole motivator of the individual. Because it can be difficult to ascertain that a behavior is not selfishly motivated in any way, it is sometimes challenging for experimenters to identify true altruistic behavior in research. Nonetheless, establishing a specific definition of the concept allows researchers to narrow their focus to better ensure that they are effectively measuring the concept. With that said, for the purpose of this paper, articles were chosen that best appeared to study altruistic behavior in humans.

Interestingly, research has shown that altruistic behavior can be observed throughout nearly the entire lifespan. Among the largest strides in altruism development occur during childhood. As early as 14 to 18 months, toddlers exhibit behaviors that are considered altruistic (Piliavin, 2009; Warneken & Tomasello, 2009a; Warneken & Tomasello, 2009b). This consistent finding suggests that there is a biological basis to altruistic behavior in humans.

A strong motivational component of altruistic behavior is emotion. Emotion as an intrinsic motivator is consistently present throughout childhood. Among the most prevalent emotions that drive child altruism is empathetic concern for other people. This may include feelings of sympathy and a strong desire to reduce another person’s feelings of distress. What is interesting about altruism in children is that the cognitive component, or specific train of thought, that underlies empathetic concern depends on the child’s developmental stage. Thus, depending on the age of the child, their thought process will trigger the emotional arousal that drives altruistic behavior.

The role of emotional influences of altruism and their cognitive components will be discussed at different developmental stages of childhood, including in toddlerhood, early childhood, and middle childhood. As children get older, altruistic behaviors occur more frequently because of their increase in cognitive abilities, emotional maturity, and socialization at home and at school (Hay, 2009). For example, a young child notices that her mother is crying and is driven by empathy to comfort her because she has affectionate feelings toward her mother and wants to help her feel better. However, an older child feels empathetically driven to comfort a fellow student who is in distress because she has acquired moral reasoning and judgment that it is good to help others in need. In both instances, empathy is a motivating force of altruistic behavior. However, the underlying cognitive component of emotion changes as children get older.

Toddlerhood

Through research studies, experimenters have observed that toddlers between 14 and 18 months start to show clear signs of altruistic behavior. It can be somewhat complicated to know for certain what exactly motivates the behavior, as one cannot inquire this of a toddler. Nonetheless, studies have found that by age two, toddlers will readily help adults when they appear to be struggling to attain an instrumental need (Dunfield and Kuhlmeier, 2013). The most common type of instrumental need that toddlers respond to are when adults are struggling to accomplish a simple task, such as opening a cabinet door when their hands are full or unsuccessfully trying to reach for something in a box (Warneken & Tomasello, 2009b). They were even willing to help when there were small barriers that the toddlers had to overcome, such as having to stop playing with a fun toy or navigate through a physical obstacle to approach the adult. These observed behaviors of toddlers are done in the absence of any form of praise or encouragement made by the adult.

In the toddler participant and adult interactions, the adults behaved in a way that signaled that they were unable to finish a goal-directed action, showed an unpleasant facial expression, and could not obtain a desired item. According to Dunfield and Kuhlmeier (2013), they believed that the toddlers were able to recognize and interpret these behavioral and situational cues in the encounter. The cues identified an adult in a negative state characterized by need, emotional distress, and desire. Toddlers engaged in helping behaviors through three main domains: helping the adults achieve goals, sharing valuable items with adults, and informing the adults of things that they desire. Through the helping behaviors exhibited by these toddlers, this demonstrates that they were motivated to voluntarily help others in distress without expecting anything in return. The emotion that most logically influenced this behavior was empathetic concern because the toddler recognized that the adult is struggling and made efforts to improve or resolve the problem. Thus, empathetic concern through spontaneous helping in toddlers demonstrates that emotionally-driven altruistic behavior begins very early in life.

As opposed to the more complex cognitive constructs that trigger emotions in older children, these emotions most likely resulted from constructs that are found in toddlerhood. At least one source asserts that children with a secure attachment style are more likely to display more altruistic behaviors (Sharma, 2014). When children have higher levels of attachment security, they are more likely to feel comfortable when left with strangers, can explore their environment more, and can interact positively with new friends. Also, when toddlers’ security and attachment needs are met, they are more likely to direct their energy and attention to others besides themselves. For these reasons, it makes sense that children with a warm, healthy attachment style will have enhanced social interactions and exhibit helping behaviors. On a similar thread, a toddler who has a secure attachment will likely have affection toward their caretaker. Affection may play a part in a toddler’s emotional motivation when helping their parents.

Early Childhood

Children make important advances in altruistic behavior when they are between 2 and 6 years of age. This is primarily due to cognitive advancement and socioemotional growth in this age group. Early on in this stage, children experience growth in their social cognition and cognitive awareness which impact how they interact with others in their environment. Among the developmental milestones that children reach, a particularly important one is theory of mind. When children develop this, they become aware of their mental state as well as the mental state of others. This includes being able to perceive, understand, and predict how others think and feel.

As a result of a child’s increased social cognition, an important new emotion appears: distress. This ability to perceive distress in other people increases a great deal around 2 – 3 years of age and stabilizes around 3 – 4 years of age (Dunfield & Kuhlmeier, 2013). Children are now able to experience the two major emotions that influence altruism and prosocial behavior: distress and empathy (Barasch et al., 2014). Consequently, children encounter empathy as subjective in addition to being a form of involuntary arousal. This means that they not only can become distressed by another person’s distress but can also think about how they feel in response to it as well. The integration of these two ideas form a so-called “Intrinsic altruistic motive system” (Feigin et al., 2014).

An interesting point is that distress-driven prosocial behavior is generally not considered to be altruistic behavior. For example, an adult who commits a prosocial behavior to eliminate distress is engaged in a self-focused behavior, not an other-focused or selfless behavior. However, Barasch et al., (2014) found that 4-year-olds who ranked high in sympathy and experienced distress were not self-focused. When they participated in an activity in which they could share valuable items with others who did not have as much, they were motivated to share because they were genuinely concerned for the other children. The way these children experienced sympathy was predicted to be advantageous in their social-emotional development when they progress into middle childhood and adolescence.

Another example of early childhood distress motivating altruism is a study that hypothesized that anxious children who witnessed their peers donating items of value while standing next to them would be inclined to donate more (Wildeboer et al., 2017). Results showed their hypothesis to be accurate. Additionally, when the anxious children did not have peers donate beside them, they donated less. Interestingly enough, it is debatable whether this prosocial behavior is considered to be purely altruistic, based on the description that was provided earlier. However, these findings highlight the relevance of how situational demands impact donating behavior in those with anxious affect.

Middle Childhood

Between 6 and 12 years of age, children continue to make great strides in their cognitive development that allow them to consider altruism in an increasingly mature way. Nonetheless, the emotional influences and cognitive components of earlier childhood still serve as motivators of altruistic behavior. What makes this childhood stage unique is the strong emphasis on the moral self, moral judgments, and adherence to social and cultural norms. These areas of focus help children to mediate their altruistic behaviors as they begin to act more autonomously among bigger groups of people (Warneken & Tomasello, 2009b).

It becomes a concern of those in middle childhood of whether their altruistic behaviors align with their moral self, as determined by internalized societal or cultural norms. Specifically, children more often think about whether their actions reciprocate or judge their personal reputation. This kind of moral judgment can be generalized as well; children are more likely to label others’ actions as moral or immoral (Malti, Gasser, & Gutzwiller-Helfenfinger, 2010). In addition, they might assert that people who engage in certain behaviors deserve punishment or a reward. Finally, social and cultural norms become increasingly important determinants of altruistic behavior. For example, sharing is valued in many cultural and ethnic groups; witnessing a diversion from this kind of behavior would be criticized by children who grew up in these settings.

A study by Malti and Ongley (2014) provides a good illustrative example of children’s behaviors and its relationship with moral alignment. They observed the influence of moral emotions in sharing behavior in early childhood, middle childhood, and adolescence. The authors assert that sharing exemplifies altruistic intentions of children. The dictator game, a popular economic game used by researchers to observe altruism through child sharing behaviors, was utilized in the study. Self-reports and caregiver-reports were completed to measure child sympathy. Also, each of the child participants were asked to predict what their moral emotion would be after they decisions in the game that either upheld moral norms or violated them. This demonstrated whether children in each of the age groups behaved in a way that was congruent with their internalized moral standards. The moral emotions were either positively valenced (ie., proud, being a good person, or happy) or negatively valenced (ie., guilty, being a bad person, or sad). The extent to which children allocated their resources within the dictator game determined their level of sharing.

The study found that, consistent with past research studies, that there was more sharing amongst 8-year-olds than there was amongst 4-year-olds. Additionally, for children who reported lower levels of sympathy reported higher levels of negatively valenced emotions. It is likely that these emotions were compensatory for their lack of sympathy and lower rates of sharing behaviors. Additionally, while about 40% of the 4-year-olds chose not to share their resources (stickers), it is important to note that most of them had likely not yet internalized social constructs of the importance of equality and treating others fairly. While the study had some limitations, its strongest trait was that it demonstrated how moral emotions can predict altruistic sharing behavior spanning early childhood, middle childhood, and early adolescence.

Introduction

An Eco-hotel or Green Hotel refers to one that prioritizes environmental stewardship in all aspects of its operations. Unlike other hotels, which are more concerned with increasing revenue, this prioritizes cutting down on the amount of carbon dioxide emitted, water consumption, waste generation, and electricity consumption. Recently, companies have sought to become friendlier by participating in accreditations or remaining Green Hotel groups (Pham et al., 2020). The Green premises will use eco-friendly building materials and strive to have as little impact on the environment as possible. This fact means that many eco-friendly accommodations also have zero emissions. Green hotels can be found in urban areas, rural areas, or even out in the middle of nothing. The terms “green hotels” and “eco-friendly hotels” are often used interchangeably. The demand for eco-friendly products and services increases as people become more environmentally conscious (Boateng, 2019). A tremendous amount of pressure is put on businesses in many different industries to become green and become more environmentally friendly in some way or another. Many large and small organizations in the service industry are now working hard to improve their hotels’ green credentials.

The hospitality sector values altruism as one key principle for guaranteeing a green industry. A selfless person focuses on something besides oneself, and the basis of such altruism may be found in the item that inspires those generous impulses. Altruism is the act of doing something for the benefit of someone else, even if it puts our interests in danger or costs us anything (Storm & Taylor, 2018). While some people assume that individuals are inherently selfish, a new study shows that people’s initial reaction is to collaborate rather than compete. For instance, infants spontaneously assist others in need out of sincere concern for their well-being, and even non-human primates show altruism. According to evolutionary theory, altruism is deeply ingrained in human behavior because helping others and cooperating with others is essential to the long-term survival of the human species (Pham et al., 2020). Thus, the hotels invest in charitable programs to better the welfare of the people residing within the society.

The Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB) is a widely-used psychological model. It aids in our understanding of how individuals’ behavior might change. Models predict purposeful conduct because they believe that behavior is preplanned. According to the TPB, behavioral beliefs, social norms, and perceived control are all factors that influence what a person does (Olya et al., 2019). As a consequence of attitudes, people tend to have positive or negative feelings about certain behaviors. Normative beliefs, on the other hand, lead to feelings of societal pressure or personal standards. People are more likely to engage in the activity if they have high levels of positive conduct, a subjective standard, and a sense of control.

Although the hospitality industry endeavor to promote eco-friendly initiatives, consumers have conflicting perceptions and attitudes toward the programs. Interestingly, little study has been done on hotel customers who care about the environment and pay for environmentally friendly procedures. Thus, this short discourse considers the qualitative research approach to enlighten the audience with detailed facts about the mixed perceptions of society members regarding the benefits associated with eco-friendly advancements in the sector (Agag & Colmekcioglu, 2020). Also, the detailed report will focus on establishing the relationship between TPB and the individuals’ perceptions.

Literature Review

TPB Method with Green Hotels

Guests’ desired behavioral reactions are one of the most important components of green hotels since they have a direct impact on their results. One of the stated aims of green hotels, according to some researchers, is building customer loyalty. Scholars must use a sound scientific theory to adequately describe a conceptual model before they can develop people’s behavioral intents. It is common for green hotel visitors’ behavior to be modeled using the model of planned behavior. TPB offers green hotel operators a necessary consequence (Olya et al., 2019). The first phase in predicting whether customers pick green hotels to stay in is to investigate consumers’ behavioral intention and disposition towards the green hotel. It is widely accepted among academics that TPB should be dissected, combined, or expanded to enable concepts that depict consumers’ behavioral goals.

With the help of theoretical backing and proposed modification criteria, an improved TPB notion was created. The interpretive structural analysis confirmed the idea, revealing that attitudes, normative beliefs, and perceptions of behavioral control all influenced whether or not people planned to remain in an eco-friendly hotel (Agag & Colmekcioglu, 2020). When consumers who actively perform eco-friendly actions were compared to individuals who do not regularly participate in environmentally aware actions in their daily lives, the routes between any of these determinants and intention were not significantly different.

For consumers’ green consumption behavior intents, the TPB is often used to illuminate their motivations for purchasing green products. Non-linear, ambiguous, and dynamical decision-making procedures and the complexities of environmental issue behaviors are to blame for this complexity (Taşkıran, 2019). Using these socio-psychological frameworks, individuals can see that environmental-related actions are both complicated and non-linear. They are formed by various antecedent elements acting in diverse sequences and weightings to decide the final behavior. Scholars have sought to deconstruct, expand, alter, and integrate the TPB to provide a reasonable, theoretical basis for their suggested concepts for sustainable consumption. Experts added pro-environmental principles to characterize how people behave in national parks using the TPB as an example. Travelers’ reasons for traveling to a specific location were added to the TPB, along with their actual behavior (Olya et al., 2019). They said visitors’ pro-environmental attitudes were unrelated to their motivations. Adding eco-friendly events to the system helps TPB estimate whether or not customers would choose a green hotel due to their experience there.

What Stops People to Go to Green Hotel

Researchers believe that when people become more aware of the environmental effect of different corporate operations, they will be more inclined to engage in pro-environmental conduct. The patterns of causal linkages between awareness and knowledge or mindset and environmental attributes have yet to emerge clearly in this field. There seems to be a disconnect between what people say they care about the environment and do (Thao, 2017). This disparity may be due to customers’ differing levels of care about various aspects of eco-friendly attitudes. Perceived environmental issue severity, interruption of being ecologically responsible, the significance of being eco-friendly, and corporate accountability level are all factors that researchers have shown to be associated with pro-environmental sentiments (Wu, 2021). Water, electricity, and trees are examples of scarce resources that contribute to the perceived severity of ecological concerns. Being environmentally responsible may be inconvenient if it takes more work or sacrifice. Some green actions, such as recycling, may help to minimize pollution or even enhance the environment. Business environmental concern is referred to as corporate social responsibility (CSR).

Human Behavior about a Green Hotel: Why Do People Choose a Green Hotel or Not?

Recent decades have seen increased public interest in environmental concerns, leading customers to seek ecologically friendly items. As a result, businesses across all industries have understood that becoming green is no longer an option. Because of its harmful impacts on the planet, the hostel industry likewise embraces this “greening” of operations. Hotels are working actively to lessen these negative consequences, contributing to the rise of the “green hotel industry,” or environmentally friendly accommodations. A “green hotel” is a kind of accommodation devoted to minimizing their energy and water usage, as well as their trash generation. Many hotels have recently realized the importance of pro-environmental initiatives and are working to acquire a competitive edge over their rivals by switching to green practices (Thao, 2017). Many people argue that adopting environmental strategies is crucial to their choice of accommodation. Nearly all business travelers agreed that hotels should do more to promote green initiatives.

The majority of the world’s population is enlightened about the benefits of promoting green technology in the tourist industry. New rules and regulations to reduce pollution are being passed as people become more aware of their impact on the Earth’s ecosystem. On the other hand, new laws may be enacted in response to a particular emergency (Agag & Colmekcioglu, 2020). The enlightened society considers the hotels that value the specific eco-friendly projects while intending to enhance visitors’ stay in the premises.

It is essential to have a positive attitude about the significance of environmentally friendly activities if you want to be environmentally conscious. As stated in the cognitive consistency model, a person worried about ecological difficulties is also likely to be encouraged to lessen such problems. Consumers’ inclination to buy green items is positively correlated with their level of environmental consciousness and environmental stewardship (Martínez-Martínez et al., 2019). Customers who care about the environment are more likely to plan a trip to the green hotel industry and follow through on their plans. Corporate reputation is heavily influenced by its socially responsible initiatives, which directly impact consumer behavior. The fear of inconvenience stems from the belief that environmentally friendly conduct may need extra work, which benefits society.

Unfortunately, many customers disregarded the green hotels for fear of paying more for the services therein. Customers’ favorable intentions to pay extra for a green product are closely linked to their environmental-friendly sentiments. Furthermore, according to the social identity concept, a person’s impression of the gravity of ecological issues or their judgments of the necessity of being environmentally conscious may impact their desire to pay more for goods and services (Singjai et al., 2018). According to this idea from social identity, customers’ degree of environmental care and readiness to pay for environmentally friendly efforts go hand in hand. Willingness to pay may also be influenced by how companies are seen as far as social responsibility goes. The notion of environmental discomfort works against people’s desire to pay more. Also, guests’ refusal to experience discomfort is one reason for their dislike of eco-friendly hotel practices. For instance, visitors like it when they are provided with daily new linens and clean linens as pampering (Mercade Mele et al., 2019). If engaging in green practices interferes with such a visitor’s pleasure, they may be less likely to do so.

Altruism Behavior in Hospitality Industry

Volunteerism, charity, generosity, and organ donation are all examples of altruistic behavior. When people aid strangers, they may put themselves in danger and attract felons because of selfless conduct. Customers value the hotel business due to the obvious quality of customer-employee connections, among other things. To guarantee management can continue to develop the hospitality sector in the future, organizational commitment is examined as a key component of the company’s difficulties and contributions (Mbasera et al., 2016). To improve hotels’ service quality, competitiveness, and financial results, the hotel sector should encourage commitment to the organization by its workers. This will function as a strong influencer between employees’ performance and their stance toward repair and maintenance.

In tourism, altruistic conduct generally refers to an increase in the well-being of third parties in host cultures. Some people define direct altruism as altruism that happens between people who have a shared link of attachment. Second-party benefits accrue from altruistic actions between two people, igniting debate over the idea of cooperation. Tourism may also employ reciprocal benevolence to examine the reasons for generous conduct between visitors and hosts to investigate situations of short-term interdependence between non-relatives (Agag & Colmekcioglu, 2020). Since altruistic behavior is a fundamental idea in tourism, it may analyze how hosts see visitors and tourism growth.

While it appears that SET opposes conduct motivated by altruistic goals, social exchanges may be based on incentives other than monetary gains, such as charity, competitiveness, tolerance, and constancy of status, rather than only money gain. It doesn’t matter its limitations; when joined with generosity, SET may be employed in the setting of altruistic behavior since it is reward-based. In the second case, hosts may benefit intrinsically and intangibly from supporting tourist growth (Singjai et al., 2018). Furthermore, SET stresses the significance of individual transactions and rewards rather than the advantages gained by a certain group. Keeping in mind that “social processes are essentially distinct from personal activities is critical.

Current Trends Going On About Green Hotels

The past ten years have seen travelers go beyond basic facilities when deciding where to stay. To determine whether a property adheres to its core values, they look at the sustainability activities of the establishment. Increasingly, the hotel and tourist sector is under pressure to be more sustainable. This development puts hospitality administrators in a difficult position to balance environmental stewardship with commercial ethics (Dolva et al., 2016). The hotel firm can save vast amounts of money by becoming green because of its worldwide presence. One of the most challenging challenges for hotel entrepreneurs is to help explain clients’ demand for eco-friendly consumption options. Knowing more about green customers may help businesses create more efficient and successful green efforts. Increasing hotel executives’ grasp of eco-friendly attitudes may have strategic benefits (Jerónimo et al., 2020). Little study has been done for hotel customers who care about the environment and pay for environmentally friendly procedures. There has also been minimal focus on perceived hurdles to visitors’ participation in green activities. For instance, consumers may see reusing bedding as a green gesture, while hotels may consider it a cost-saving measure.

Methodology

This study considered the principles of meta-analysis to collect and assess the data about the complex issue of green hotels. A meta-analysis is an essential tool for qualitative researchers to evaluate data from other qualitative research methods secondary to their original study. For these research methods, meta-synthesis remains a critical approach since it greatly aids in comprehending many fields’ contextual aspects in a qualitative approach, notwithstanding its contingent character and the present lack of agreement regarding certain of its elements (Hu et al., 2020). This research used a qualitative meta-synthesis, which analyzes the results of previous qualitative studies on the same subject.

It is via the use of meta-synthesis that researchers may better grasp how different methods and the findings of existing qualitative studies can be applied to a particular subject of interest and examine, contrast, and interpret them. However, the authorized research assistants utilized only basic statistical techniques and concentrated instead on content estimates based on the study’s grounded model approach (Khonje et al., 2019). An ecolodge’s gap between green predictions made by management and visitors’ views was also experimentally examined using a case-study technique, with the researchers considering the Hyatt at Olive 8 Seattle as the case study.

Results

The findings of this multi-methodology study indicated that many tourists prefer green hotels to traditional premises. Although the Hyatt at Olive 8 Seattle valued the principles of corporate social responsibility, they had to raise the prices of their services and products to ensure that they safeguarded an environmentally sound atmosphere while guaranteeing the comfort of their target customers (Mzembe et al., 2019). On the other hand, the reports indicated that over fifty per cent of the customers were displeased with the hiked prices despite supporting the idea of transforming to a green hotel. Specifically, the outcome confirmed the significance of integrated quality management (IQM). Other than guaranteeing the visitors’ expectations, the green hotel upholds the distinct principles of the tourism industry and integrates into the community (Martínez-Martínez et al., 2019). For example, the management opted to consider alternative approaches that would uphold the goals of the tourism industry while ensuring sustainability. Additionally, the study findings acknowledged the significance of the community members in assuring a successful and eco-friendly hospitality sector. Thus, it is evident that this research strategy upheld the three key elements of the IQM.

Discussion

Although the hiked prices of the green hotels discourage potential visitors from visiting the premises, the industry is committed to conserving the environment. Implementing the IQM in a hotel is costly and hence the need for the establishments’ managers to solicit alternative financers to ensure they realize their collaborative aims. For instance, introducing a “green team” will require additional resources to facilitate their distinct operations (Jerónimo et al., 2020). Consequently, the team might decide to hike the costs of their services to facilitate the sustainability of the unique programs, with many customers disregarding the move.

Almost 87 percent of global visitors say they want to travel sustainably, with 39 percent saying they frequently or always succeed. Travelers report that 39 percent of the time, they successfully make environmentally friendly decisions when traveling, while 48 percent say they are not successful. This statistic shows that despite significant progress toward a greener world, there is still space for improvement. The majority of tourists (68%) said they would stay in an eco-friendly hotel in the future (Memarzadeh & Anand, 2020). Travel itself seems to be the main drive for individuals to travel responsibly, based on this research.

Thus, with about 87% of the global tourists advocating for eco-friendly hotels, it is obvious that every hotel in the hospitality industry will commit itself to transform into green hotels.

Conclusion and Recommendations

Eco-friendly hotels emphasize comfort, health, and safety while also protecting the environment. They also promote resource efficiency and environmental stewardship in their daily operations. By being green, hotels help the environment while saving money and gaining the respect of their customers. In the corporate sector, it is crucial to be sustainable to expand and satisfy clients. Customers are increasingly looking for eco-friendly enterprises and are willing to pay a premium for environmentally friendly goods and services (Fatoki, 2020). Using sustainable best business practices in management, services, and distribution networks, an ecologically sound hotel strives to minimize its negative environmental impact. Thus, the following recommendations could play a crucial role in promoting sustainable green hotels:

1. Create a green team to oversee the eco-friendly agendas within the establishments. Employers can consider forming a “green squad” of enthusiastic workers to spearhead suggestions for environmentally friendly quality standards in their departments (Taşkıran, 2019). This strategy provides workers with a feeling of ownership and an increased motivation for the long-term implementation of green methods. Also, the motivated team will play a crucial role in guaranteeing a sustainable initiative.
2. The various organizations need to offer cost-effective services and products to attract many travelers from all parts of the world. The increased number of visitors will ensure that the green team has enough resources to facilitate their agendas. Additionally, the hotels can make the guest rooms more green by automating conservation (Peng & Chen, 2019). Such experiences attract many people to the premises, thus promoting the principles of the IQM.

References

Mzembe, A. N., Melissen, F., & Novakovic, Y. (2019). Greening the hospitality industry in the developing world: Analysis of the drivers and barriers. Business Ethics: A European Review, 28(3), 335-348.

Storm, E., & Taylor, B. (2018). Green human resource management: An organisational strategy for Greening employees. Kings & Queens Journal, 1(1), 18-26.

Pham, N. T., Chiappetta Jabbour, C. J., Vo-Thanh, T., Huynh, T. L. D., & Santos, C. (2020). Greening hotels: does motivating hotel employees promote in-role green performance? The role of culture. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 1-20.

Boateng, A. K. (2019). Green hotel development. Orașe Inteligente Și Dezvoltare Regională, 3(01), 125-136.

Martínez-Martínez, A., Cegarra-Navarro, J. G., Garcia-Perez, A., & Wensley, A. (2019). Knowledge agents as drivers of environmental sustainability and business performance in the hospitality sector. Tourism Management, 70, 381-389.

Khonje, L. Z., Simatele, M. D., & Musavengane, R. (2019). A critical review of common methodological approaches in environmental sustainability practices within the hotel sector: in pursuit of a befitting synthesis. e-Review of Tourism Research, 16(5).

Hu, R., Luo, J. M., Li, Y., Wang, L., Ma, J., & Henriques, D. (2020). Qualitative study of green resort attributes–A case of the crosswaters resort in China. Cogent Social Sciences, 6(1), 1742525.

Mercade Mele, P., Molina Gomez, J., & Garay, L. (2019). To green or not to green: The influence of green marketing on consumer behavior in the hotel industry. Sustainability, 11(17), 4623.

Memarzadeh, F., & Anand, S. (2020). Hotel guests’ perceptions of green technology applications, and practices in the hotel industry. International Journal of Tourism and Hospitality Management in the Digital Age (IJTHMDA), 4(1), 1-9.

Jerónimo, H. M., Henriques, P. L., de Lacerda, T. C., da Silva, F. P., & Vieira, P. R. (2020). Going green and sustainable: The influence of green HR practices on the organizational rationale for sustainability. Journal of Business Research, 112, 413-421.

Mbasera, M., Du Plessis, E., Saayman, M., & Kruger, M. (2016). Environmentally-friendly practices in hotels. Acta Commercii, 16(1), 1-8.

Singjai, K., Winata, L., & Kummer, T. F. (2018). Green initiatives and their competitive advantage for the hotel industry in developing countries. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 75, 131-143.

Thao, N. T. P. (2017). The relationship between eco-friendly practices and attitudes toward green hotels for domestic tourists. VNU Journal of Science: Economics and Business, 33(2).

Peng, N., & Chen, A. (2019). Luxury hotels going green–the antecedents and consequences of consumer hesitation. Journal of Sustainable Tourism.

Wu, C. H. (2021). Exploring green hotel competitive strategies by using the hybrid method for complex data analysis. Mathematical Problems in Engineering, 2021.

Taşkıran, G. (2019). The relationship between organizational citizenship behavior and entrepreneurial orientation: A research in the hospitality industry. Procedia Computer Science, 158, 672-679.

Fatoki, O. (2020). Consumers’intention to stay in green hotels in south africa: the effect of altruism and green self-identity. GeoJournal of Tourism and Geosites, 32(4), 1310-1316.

Agag, G., & Colmekcioglu, N. (2020). Understanding guests’ behavior to visit green hotels: The role of ethical ideology and religiosity. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 91, 102679.

Olya, H. G., Bagheri, P., & Tümer, M. (2019). Decoding behavioural responses of green hotel guests: A deeper insight into the application of the theory of planned behaviour. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management.

Dolva, G., Susomrith, P., & Standing, C. (2016). Greening business cultures. In ECU Business Doctoral and Emerging Scholars Colloquium 2016 (p. 95).

There has been indisputable evidence that media violence accelerates aggressiveness and violent behavior that might have either short or long-term consequences in any given society (Nier, 2006). It has also been argued that exposure to media violence triggers aggression whether verbally, emotionally or in terms of perception.

Converging studies reveal that children who are exposed to elements of media violence tend to become aggressive during adulthood. Additionally, undesirable acts such as spouse abuse, forcible rape as well as physical assaults are likely to be aggravated by habitual exposure to media violence from childhood (Nier, 2006).

Apparently, study conducted delineates the reason for increased aggression by evaluating on the existing aggressive scripts and programs in the media (Nier, 2006). Consistent presence of children in violent media avenues is a major factor that results to increased aggression even as they grow up.

Statistics indicate that individuals who spent more time watching media programs committed violent acts more than those who spend fewer hours in the media (Nier, 2006). Scholars argue that, media violence influences social behaviors both positively and negatively (Nier, 2006).

However, enormous damage has been noted in correlation with watching aggressive programs. A qualitative review from psychologists affirms that, as media violence amplifies, case of aggressive behavior has become widespread. Pointless to say media violence exceedingly contributes to violent behavior.

However television and media institution decline that violent media can not result to aggressive behavior (Nier, 2006). Moreover, they insist that entertainment industries influence behavior positively.

In this case, violent media shows help to release aggression that would be locked in peoples mind. For instance, films on murder are seen as therapy to remove individual antagonism (Nier, 2006). Philosophers argue that, viewing violent plays enhances an emotional release from bad feelings such as doubt and phobia.

Imperatively, my opinion supports the scientific perspective indicating that, media violence results to aggressive behavior. Apparently, a country like America whose media is full of violence has experienced a high score of violent cases (Nier, 2006). In this case, there is a close link of social aggressive behavior with media violence.

Article analysis: Altruism

Altruism is a behavioral condition where individuals voluntarily help others at their own cost. In an ethical perspective, altruistic individuals benefit others without expecting returns or compensation (Fels & Zeckhauser, 2008).

Philosophers affirm that philanthropists opt to enhance their wellbeing with their colleagues in order to live happily co-exist with them. Theoretically, altruism has a basic principle that asserts that man has no right to live for his own sake.

In this case, philanthropists view serving other people as the only way to justify holistic existence (Fels & Zeckhauser, 2008). Moreover, self-sacrifice is perceived as a basic virtue and moral duty. Most importantly, altruism promotes cohesiveness within families since it enhances cooperation. Amazingly, individuals’ altruisms have impacted positively on global affairs.

It is definite that total altruism demands absoluteness from people bearing in mind that the latter is a natural condition that normally has an evolutional value. Sociologists confirm that this behavior evolve in order for individuals to fit among their counterparts.

In this case, philanthropists broaden their perspectives as part and parcel of ensuring that they eliminate barriers that inhibit their complex social web. Additionally, evidence indicates that the condition is depicted by every individual in some manner (Fels & Zeckhauser, 2008).

However, there is growing controversy on whether altruism is different from egoism. Undeniably, egoism is driven by individuals benefitting themselves without caring whether they offend others or not. In most cases, people deny the very existence of true altruism since they doubt the authenticity of their own motives when helping other people.

Definitely, research indicates that true altruism exists though there are those who are more philanthropic than others. To shed light on this, it is vital to note that human altruism should not be construed with compassion. Although the two are connected, the former involves emotion while the latter is real action (Fels & Zeckhauser, 2008).

References

Nier, J. (2006). Taking sides clashing views in social psychology. Washington: McGraw Hill.

Fels, S. & Zeckhauser, R. (2008). Perfect and total altruism across the generations. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 37(3), 187-197.

Introduction

The book that brought Richard Dawkins into prominence was named The Selfish Gene. It relates to evolution and was in print by 1976. It builds on the foundation theory which was presented in the volume Adaptation and Natural Selection authored by George C. Williams’s. His theory indicates that the motif behind evolution is true altruism but for a greater cause. An organism tries to evolve to capitalize on its inclusive fitness i.e., the numerous replicas of its genes passed on globally rather than by a certain individual. This leads to populations being headed towards an evolutionarily stable approach. The book introduces the term meme as an element of human cultural evolution parallel to that of the gene, proposing that such “selfish” copying may also represent human culture, in a distinct manner. Memetics has emerged as the theme of numerous researches after the publication of this concept.

Main Text

By calling genes as being “selfish”, Dawkins should not be misinterpreted that his intent is to imply that genes are determined by any motive or will and should be understood that only their impacts suggest as if they are really “selfish”. (Dawkins, 2003) The argument is that the genes which are passed on are the ones whose outcomes serve their own inherent interests to carry on being duplicated and not essentially those of the organism which contains it. This viewpoint makes obvious the occurrence of altruism at the personage level in existence, mainly in family relations when an entity relinquishes its own existence to safeguard the lives of relatives, and by doing so it acts in the goodwill of its own genes.

There is a range of approaches explicitly oriented towards the moral and normative basis for behavior some of which address pro social behavior, and its subset altruism, as predictors of environmentally friendly behavior. For example, Borden and Francis (1978) suggest that individuals with a selfish and competitive orientation are less likely to act in environmentally favorable ways and that individuals who have met their basic needs will act in more environmentally responsible ways because they have the resources to do so. Another approach which examines an explicitly pro environmental value orientation is the New Environmental Paradigm which when first developed in the mid 1970s held that implicit within the growing practice of environmentalism there was a fundamental reorientation of views about the interrelation of nature and humans (Dunlap et al., 2000). Despite becoming the foundation for a widely used measure of environmental concern, the New Environmental Paradigm has been criticized for being too ambiguous in nature; this is not surprising since it is used as a way of assessing not only an endorsement of a worldview, but also of assessing attitudes and even lower level values (Stern et al., 1995).

Another influential approach which falls under the heading of moral and normative approaches is that of Schwartz (1977) which suggests that pro social behaviors are a function of personal norms. As shown in Fig 4, there are two antecedents to a personal norm according to Schwartz, awareness of consequences of actions and acceptance of responsibility for those consequences; additionally, the strength of the relationship between a personal norm and pro social behavior is dependent on the strength of the antecedents. An approach which combines the New Environmental Paradigm and Schwartz’s Norm Activation Theory is Stern et al.’s (1999) Value Belief Norm Theory. Important limitations of the New Environmental Paradigm and similar approaches to pro environmental behavior include the tendency to take too linear of an approach to addressing behavior that is harmful to the environment. Linear approaches assume that environmental knowledge influences attitudes towards the environment which in turn influences behavior. Thus, altruism exists in society but it is present in a mixed form.

On the other hand there is Ethical Egoism. Ethical Egoism is also known as egotism and according to it moral agents should do what they want to as per their individual self-interest when in a normative ethical situation. Egotism is completely different from ethical altruism which says that moral agents must help and attend to others’ needs. Although egotism does not say that moral agents should ignore the welfare of other people, it also does not say that moral agents should abstain from thinking about the welfare of others during moral consideration. This is because something which may concern with the self-interest of the moral agent can also accidentally have beneficial, detrimental or completely neutral effects on other people. It is very important and also a basic necessity that our actions be morally right so that our self-interest gets maximized. Thus, it can be well stated that even though egoism, in the ethical form, does support egocentricity, it is not aligned with the parameters of wrong decisions or approve any idiocy. Ethical egoism has also sometimes been viewed as a philosophical basis which supports individualist anarchism and libertarianism.

Religion is another aspect on this issue. Buddhism would be embraced by the Chinese only after they transformed the belief system somewhat. The work Mou Tzu- The Disposition of Error (the author is unknown) helped make Buddhism more palatable to the Chinese. In this apologia for Buddhism, the unknown writer asserts that good Chinese citizens can also be good Buddhists (Gregory, 2003). Significantly, the author attempts to present Buddhism as similar to Confucianism and Taoism. Mao Tzu asserts that all three religions shared some common beliefs. These included altruism and strict moral standards. Later on, Buddhism would be greatly influenced by these native Chinese religions. Buddhists in China would later conclude that human beings have souls and that the spirit inside each individual can achieve immortality (Gregory, 2003).

Conclusion

In conclusion, true altruism is a mixed reality. However, the forms that exist are a form of art: the art of understanding, the art of using logic, reason and rationale to understand how we human beings fit in larger scheme of things. The human beings are the only species who have the capability to think insightfully, so it should be taken advantage of. When a child is shown a sophisticated toy for the first time, he is obviously fascinated by how wonderfully it works. But when someone teaches how to operate it and he is given the control of it, is it not a wonderful feeling for him? He tries to understand the intricacies of its work. Such is the natural inquisitiveness of a human brain. And we should make our efforts to quench its thirst. Though philosophical and moral issues which go beyond the reach of science are serious contentions which occupy the human mind, the power of knowledge seems to be the only feasible solution.

References

BORDEN, R.J. and J.L. FRANCIS (1978) Who cares about ecolgoy? Personality and sex differences in environmental concern. Journal of Personality. 46 190-203.

DAWKINS, R. (2003). The Selfish Gene. Auckland: Auckland University Press.

DUNLAP, R.E., VAN LIERE, K.D. MERTIG A.G. and R.E. JONES (2000) Measuring Endorsement of the New Ecological Paradigm: A Revised NEP Scale. Journal of Social Issues. 56(3) 425-442

GREGORY, P. (2003). Tsung-Mi and the Sinification of Buddhism. LA: University of Hawaii Press.

STERN, P.C. (2000) Toward a Coherent Theory of Environmentally Significant Behavior. Journal of Social Issues. 56(3) 407-424.

Summary Overview

This issue under analysis focuses on arguments that support and withdraw the evidence of altruistic behavior. Due to the fact that altruism can be defined as unselfish concern with problems and welfare, there are still contradictions concerning the genuineness of those actions. In this respect, individuals can help others to make themselves feel better. As an example, many people donate money for the sake of their own moral welfare, as well as for increasing their popularity. With regard to the slight distinction existing between altruism and egoism, assessing behavior is vital for making distinctions. Due to the emerged controversy concerning the nature of altruism, two sides of the debate have been presented. In the first section, the researchers have discovered that empathy is considered the foundational aspect of altruistic behavior because it identifies the ability to understand someone else’s problems and challenges. Thus, when we are genuinely concerned with other people’s problems, we are expected to help people for altruistic reasons. Such a hypothesis is described in detail and is proved by a laboratory experiment. The second side of the research introduces a different model to describe the nature of helping behavior, which is called the Negative State Relief Model. According to this framework, failure to help makes people suffer more and, therefore, their helping behavior is premised on egoistic purpose. Reducing personal distress, therefore, is a priority for a person.

Evaluation of Arguments Against and in Favor of Altruism

Boston et al. (1981) have proposed that altruistic behavior can be justified in case individuals are directed toward end-state goal of restraining one’s grief. The argument is grounded on many theoretical frameworks. Despite the fact that supporters of egoistic response mechanisms believe that genuine goals of helping other people is based on personal interesting feeling better, there are many other theories that undermine such an assumption. The researchers’ explanation about behavior being the only factor identifying the differences between egoism and altruism is well justified. According to their research, emphatic emotion results in development of altruistic motivation. Regardless of the consequences and the costs of helping, altruistically oriented actors are always ready to face the problems of other individuals. Therefore, escape must be excluded because it would testify to egoistic behavior. Such an assumption can also be undermined because egoistic people also resort to helping mechanisms to minimize their personal distress. Nevertheless, the existence of emphatic emotion cannot be entirely withdrawn. Interestingly, the altruistic pattern of behavior has been approved by the experiment in which the empathy level was high enough.

The second side of debates has introduced a skeptic outlook on altruism as an absolute reaction to other people’s distress. However, high-emphatic concern does not always indicate genuine altruistic intensions of individuals because of number of reasons. In this respect, Cialdini et al. (1987) provide an egoistically oriented explanation of unselfish concern with helping. There are situations that make individuals help only to reduce the feeling of sadness and frustration. In these terms, empathy cannot be the only reason for provoking altruistic behavior. Such an explanation is quite logic and convenient because it envisions a suffered victim as an object that causes stress, which should be immediately eliminated. Helping, therefore, can serve as a powerful tool that restores mood and enhances the feeling of happiness. All these aspects are vital for justifying egoistic behavior, standing at the core of all human intensions.

Rationale for Personal Determination

Due to the fact that the nature of altruistic and egoistic behavior is hard to define, both outcomes of are possible. In particular, the analysis of the first experiment seems to be persuasive. Yet, there are controversies in defining the degree of individual’s engagement in helping the others. Although altruistic behavior is recognized by Batson (1981), it is impossible to state definitely that people can commit actions based on the unselfish interest, but not on personal needs of self-accomplishment. In this respect, the arguments in favor of egoism are much stronger because they rely on deep psychological analysis of human nature. Specific attention requires reflective mechanism. The feeling of survival and security can outstrip the human duty to help others, even if this intent does not bear a subjective character. Under stressful situation, few people can sacrifice their personal welfare and they can help individuals if they take no risk.

Justifying actions can allow people to reduce their distressful state and make them feel less concerned. Personal interests will always exist even if a person is not conscious about this fact. In order to explain the truly altruistic behavior, one should develop an experiment under which an individual should commit an action that contradicts his/her interests. Such situations are quite rare, but their occurrence still takes place. The phenomenon proves that people can be endowed with the genuine desire to help because they are not fully aware of their subconscious mechanisms compelling them to do such actions. More importantly, as soon as they become more experienced, they can realize that their actions are motivated to reduce their problems or eliminate their sadness.

References

Batson, C. D., Duncan, B. C., Ackerman, P., Buckley, T., & Birch, K. (1981). “Is Emphatic Emotion a Source of Altruistic Motivation? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 40 (2), 378-388.

Cialdini, R. B., Shaller, M., Houlihan, D., Arps, K., Fultz, J., & Beaman, A. L. (1987). Empathy-Based Helping: Is It Selflessly or Selfishly Motivated. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 389-398.

Introduction

The heroism which some individuals demonstrate in the face of critical social situations continues to amaze people from every social and economic background. Nowadays, the actions associated with empathy and altruism confuse many researchers in the fields of the social studies and biology, and they thus now regard this phenomenon as a “persistent puzzle” (Simpson & Willer, 2008).

In other words, prosocial behaviour (PB) is not consistent with the traditional evolutionary theoretical framework scientific and the evidence accumulated in the previous investigation of human nature and the behaviour of biological organisms. PB contradicts the well-known theory of biological evolution, which is grounded in the idea that only the strongest and the most ruthless survives in the highly competitive and dangerous environment.

The phenomenon of PB began to draw the attention of social psychologists in 1660’s when the murder of Kitty Genovese took place in New York in 1964. The researchers became interested in the fact that the murder was witnessed by thirty-seven people, but nobody had called the police or made any effort to help the young woman (Griggs, 2015). The lack of witnesses’ response to the situation was called the bystander effect or the Genovese syndrome.

The experts explained the passivity of the woman’s neighbours by introducing the concepts of urban citizens’ alienation and lack of common identity. And since then, the psychologists began to investigate the conscious and unconscious motives of individuals that stimulate them to help others in more or less risky situations.

The concept of PB includes a spectrum of individual’s actions varying from small-scale acts, such as the assistance for an elderly person in crossing the street, and the large-scale acts, such as the attempts to rescue another person’s life at the expense of own welfare or safety. The researchers make significant efforts to explore the major constituents of PB, and it is considered that empathic and altruistic concerns support the individuals’ PB formation and motivate them for helping others (Penner, Dovidio, Piliavin, & Schroeder, 2005).

There is no doubt that the expressed empathy and altruism have multiple favourable effects on the well-being of both parties, the helping one and the one that is being helped. It is also possible to say that PB motivated by empathic concerns contributes to the increase in the social cohesion and overall quality of social performance within the community. Therefore, the further investigation of PB, empathy, and altruism is of significant importance because the future findings will help to identify the stimuli of PB and will support the promotion of the favourable behaviour in the society.

The purpose of the paper is the evaluation of the role of empathy and altruism in PB formation. The study is aimed to analyse the major motives that make people help others and identify the principal qualities of PB. The research has many social and ethical implications, and the findings may help to promote the emphatic and altruistic qualities among the members of the community. By addressing the issues of PB, emphasising the empathic considerations and altruistic concerns of human behaviour within the education systems and mass media, it is possible to foster the positive social transformation that will lead to the acceptance of the concept of common good in the social consciousness.

Literature Review

Altruism and Empathy

Nowadays, it is believed that PB is motivated either by altruism or empathy. Psychological altruism is a type of behaviour in which a person tends to help others on the voluntary basis at the expense of his/her well-being (Stich, 2016). Altruism is considered a social phenomenon, and although it can be defined through the opposition to egoism, it is not necessarily related to the expression of emotional warmth to another person. According to distinct theoretical perspectives, altruism may be regarded as an innate evolutionary mechanism aimed to preserve the genotype, or a form of social regulation supporting the principles of reciprocity and social responsibility (Simpson & Willer, 2008).

It is considered that the main driving force of any altruistic behaviour is a desire to improve the well-being of another person without waiting for any reward in return. At the same time, altruism is understood as a moral action (Buck, 2002). In this context, altruism is regarded as a set of specific actions helping to fulfil the certain social standards of goodness or morality. But according to Batson and Powell (2003), it is inappropriate and methodologically wrong to reduce altruism to morality – unlike the moral motivation, the altruistic motivation produces behaviour that may be moral, immoral, or completely irrelevant to the concept of morality.

Although the social and moral standards play a significant role in the behavioural development, empathy influences human decisions the most. To some extent, it is possible to say that altruism and empathy are the interrelated phenomena. Altruist reacts to the situation according to his/her ethical values and norms. The ability to empathise to a person who is in need is one of the crucial intrinsic features of the altruistic individual. The more emphatic abilities are developed, the more readiness to help is expressed by the person in a particular case.

Overall, empathy is the ability to comprehend the psychological state of others, and the emotional receptiveness towards the feelings of others (Mathur, Harada, Lipke, & Chiao, 2010). Although some individuals may be predisposed to an early expression of empathic feelings, the skills of empathy are usually developed in person gradually, through the accumulation of social experience. Empathy has emotional, cognitive and predictive implications – an emphatic person can feel with another individual, provide psychological support, and, based on the personal experience, provide the personal resources for the relieve of negativity (Mathur et al., 2010).

Since emphatic attitude is largely associated with the personal emotional or psychological identification, it is observed that people tend to help those who are related to them. The sense of shared affinity increases the opportunity for the development of empathic motivation. People are more perceptive towards the pain of their ingroup relatives, and, as a result, the emphatic motivation for the ingroup PB is usually greater (Mathur et al., 2010).

Batson and Powell (2003) consider that the authentic PB should include the conscious orientation to the achievement of benefits for others, and the conscious prosocial actions are thus conceptually different from accidental or unintentional PB. The source of the conscious motivation may be both the empathic concern or the altruistic concern (Batson & Powell, 2003). Empathic concern is defined as the response to the perceived suffering endured by another individual and the appropriate subjective assessment of pain. It occurs when a person puts self in the position of another person, and it requires a subjective evaluation of the psychological or physical state of others.

Emphatic concern implies the generation of such senses as sympathy, compassion, tenderness, etc. The concept emphasizes the idea that the emphatic concern stimulates the altruistic motivation actualizing PB. The given theoretical framework was empirically proved in the multiple research studies where the sample participants were ready to receive the electric shock in return for helping others while knowing about the opportunity to refuse provision of aid and avoid the shock. The findings make it clear that the emphatic concern in an essential element of PB and its ultimate goal is the creation of altruistic motivation aimed to achieve the improvement of the well-being of others.

Mechanisms Triggering PB

According to a common academic point of view, PB may be actualized by the egocentric and altruistic motivational state, or it may be comprised of both of these motivational aspects (Batson & Powell, 2003). It is possible to distinguish between the specific features of PB’s motivational content by introducing the terms of ultimate and instrumental goal where the instrumental goal is regarded as a mean for the achievement of the ultimate goal (Batson & Powell, 2003).

While the emphatic concern stimulates for the achievement of the ultimate goal that is the creation of benefits for others, in the egoistic motivation, the well-being of another person is the instrumental goal and the achievement of personal benefits is the major goal (Batson & Powell, 2003).

According to the theory of social reciprocity, altruism implies a certain amount of selfishness because the attempts to comply with the moral standards is motivated by the anticipation of direct or indirect reward. In the case of “kin selection,” the members of a tribe or family do not hesitate to help their group members because the benefits of performing this type of action are direct and familiar to them (Mathur et al., 2010). When it comes to the indirect reciprocity, the perception of the expected reward often remains unclear, and yet, the strangers or those who are not affiliated with a tribe or community may perform the altruistic actions because they know that the reward will follow.

The politicians who perform the principles of PB for their constituents fall under this category. A politician is not related to the recipient of a humanitarian action, and yet the given politician makes that particular sacrifice because he/she knows that when election time comes, he/she can count on the prosocial and altruistic actions that were made previously.

The same thing can be observed when the businessmen invest in charity or development of education programs for the underprivileged students. It is another good example of indirect proximity. Business leaders cannot observe an immediate tangible effect of their actions, but, after some time, the recipients of the scholarship program may become psychologically indebted to the investors who helped them to graduate and will be thus stimulated for working in the company that supported them in pursuit for a college diploma.

Development of PB

PB is perceived as a type of behaviour acquired through the experience of social interrelations and various learning processes so that it becomes a part of individuals’ culture and behavioural standards (Thompson & Gullone, 2003). As a consequence, when an opportunity or an emergency situation arises, the learned behaviour and social values create an arousal that compels the person to react to the given stimulus (Buck, 2002).

It is important to highlight the fact that the identification of a potential reward as a consequence of an altruistic or humanitarian action plays a crucial role in the realisation of a certain PB. However, the numerous cases of individuals’ performance beyond the call of duty and expectation of reward were reported (Sze, Gyurak, Goodkind, & Levenson, 2012). In this case, it is possible to say that the triggering mechanism is rooted in the empathic concern.

For instance, some medical specialists move to the remote areas to be able to provide the services to the patients on the everyday basis. It is possible to say that, in this case, the physician’s motivation for PB is largely influenced by the feeling of compassion and personal ethical values.

The physicians who decided to live in the poorest regions of the world will likely not be completely compensated by the material rewards for all the challenges that they need to overcome in the regions associated with the highest levels of poverty or the severe military conflicts. The examples demonstrate that there is a necessity for the development of PB motives categorisation that will include empathic motivations along with the frameworks of reciprocal altruism and indirect reciprocity.

Nowadays, the researchers suggest that some individuals have an innate predisposition towards PB development due to the intrinsic emphatic motivation (Batson & Powell, 2003). It is considered that those who are predisposed to this type of behaviour are devoted the other people’s welfare and well-being (Burks & Kobus, 2012). The idea does not fit well with other findings in the field of social science. The researchers argue that a person can be devoted to others and at the same time value himself above all else. In other words, the individuals characterised with the innate qualities of generosity and altruism struggle with the same problems of selfishness.

Summary

The current “persistent puzzle” contradicts the evolutionary view of human and animal behaviour which implies that a healthy dose of selfishness and self-centeredness is necessary for the individual development (Simpson & Willer, 2008). The researchers emphasize the important role of cultural and social environments in the formation of individual behaviours and formation of personal values (Sze et al., 2012; Thompson & Gullone, 2003).

People adopt the social norms and standards through the process of education and social interrelations that teach them to recognize the potential consequences of the altruistic and emphatic performance (Thompson & Gullone, 2003).

However, the researchers still fail to give a rational explanation to the voluntary work of the social activists and other professionals such as doctors in the remote and underdeveloped regions for the improvement of the adverse conditions and the increase in the quality of life of the local inhabitants. Although some researchers consider that the expression of empathy may be largely influenced by the innate nature of individuals, the scientific community needs an alternative and systematic explanation of the phenomenon.

According to the accepted point of view, the motivation for doing humanitarian and voluntary work is associated with a kind of intangible reward, such as the formation of positive social and self-identity (Burks & Kobus, 2012). The reward, in this case, is not material and is not represented as something that will directly benefit the performer of PB. However, it is still a reward, because the ultimate goal of the given prosocial actions is the achievement of personal content and pleasant feelings.

Most of the people do not will to help strangers because they do not see the potential for the achievement of personal benefits. On the other hand, there are multiple intangible and non-material benefits that communities or individuals can acquire if they decide to choose to lend a helping hand for those who are in desperate need. For example, In the long run, the acts of helping the victims of accidents can help to establish a culture based on altruism.

Therefore, the individual who expressed empathy and helped others despite the potential threats to personal well-being may be similarly rewarded by receiving aid from the unfamiliar people in times of future crises or danger. For example, in the context of the Syrian conflict, the refusal to help the refugees can provoke the development of hostile attitude towards the West, and it thus beneficial for the European and American officials to be altruistic as it will help to reduce the threat of the further international conflict outburst.

There is no doubt that the manifestation of PB principles in the everyday life creates a chain reaction of positive events, and, as a result, the positive social transformation takes place at the global scale. It is mutually advantageous to promote PB for all nations. Therefore, it is imperative to understand the triggering mechanisms, such as altruistic and empathic concerns, that lead to PB development. By focusing on the scientific evidence of behavioural mechanisms activation, it will be possible to encourage the sound global development.

Discussion

The literature review helped to reveal the major elements that contribute to the formation of PB: empathy and altruism. It is observed that people may have various motives for helping others. The individual’s behaviours are influenced by the personal characteristics and largely depend on the social contexts and particular cultural backgrounds as well. It is possible to assume that in the different macro- and micro-social environments, PB will be defined by distinct motivational concerns: the expectation of material and non-material rewards, attempts to comply with the social norms of behaviour, development of positive self-identity, or the attempts to fulfil the urge for empathic feelings expression.

The researchers suggest that emphatic concern is the essential part of PB development as it implies the focus on the achievement of benefits for others. In this way, emphatic concern involves the realisation of the common good concept which emphasises the significance of social equality and shared advantages and wealth among the community members.

The significant observation is made by the researchers who claim that the sense of empathy and altruism may be greater developed in the contacts with the ingroup members. The findings make it clear that the majority of people tend to empathise to those with whom they can be easily associated (culturally, psychologically, and socially). Thus, there is a greater possibility for PB to be developed or adopted in the communities with a high level of communion or cultural/social identification.

It is observed that PB has multiple positive impacts on society at the local levels, but the achievement of sustainable large-scale favourable results is possible only in case the empathic and altruistic aspects of behaviour are taken into consideration and addressed by the forces responsible for the development of social structure. Moreover, it is possible to say that the promotion of values of equality and acceptance of social diversity may facilitate the shaping of PB patterns because the ethical principles contribute to the increase of social cohesion and tolerance.

Through discussion of PB issues in schools and other educational institutions, promotion of empathic and altruistic concerns in mass media, it is possible to raise public awareness and integrate PB qualities into the social consciousness. And, as a result, it may lead to the improvement of the quality of social performance at the global scale.

References

Batson, C. D., & Powell, A. A. (2003). Altruism and prosocial behavior. Handbook of Psychology. Web.

Buck, R. (2002). “Choice” and “emotion” in altruism: Reflections on the morality of justice versus the morality of caring. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 25(2), 254-255. Web.

Burks, D. J., & Kobus, A. M. (2012). The legacy of altruism in health care: The promotion of empathy, prosociality and humanism. Medical Education, 46(3), 317-325. Web.

Griggs, R. A. (2015). The Kitty Genovese Story in introductory psychology textbooks: Fifty years later. Teaching of Psychology, 42(2), 149-152. Web.

Mathur, A., Harada, T., Lipke, T., & Chiao, J. Y. (2010). Neural basis of extraordinary empathy and altruistic motivation. NeuroImage, 51(4), 1468-1475. Web.

Penner, L. A., Dovidio, J. F., Piliavin, J. A., & Schroeder, D. A. (2005). Prosocial Behavior: Multilevel Perspectives. Annual Review of Psychology Annual, 56(1), 365-392. Web.

Simpson, B., & Willer, R. (2008). Altruism and Indirect Reciprocity: The Interaction of Person and Situation in Prosocial Behavior. Social Psychology Quarterly, 71(1), 37-52. Web.

Stich, S. (2016). Why there might not be an evolutionary explanation for psychological altruism. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part C: Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences, 56, 3-6. Web.

Sze, J. A., Gyurak, A., Goodkind, M. S., & Levenson, R. W. (2012). Greater emotional empathy and prosocial behavior in late life. Emotion, 12(5), 1129-1140. Web.

Thompson, K. L., & Gullone, E. (2003). Promotion of empathy and prosocial behaviour in children through humane education. Australian Psychologist, 38(3), 175-182.

The essential nature of human action has been one important issue that scientists and philosophers have been keen to determine. The question on whether or not true altruism exists is by far and large, theoretical and abstract. In order to answer this question, it is imperative to note that an individual understands whether certain actions of an individual are aimed at personal gain, are egoistic and driven by human motives or are simple and genuinely selfless.

Altruism, which refers to the act of unselfishly offering help to others, is a commonplace behavior among many philanthropists who apparently offer helping hand, put their lives at risk and donate charities without ulterior motives. However, a section of social psychologists argue that there might be other factors motivating the actions of philanthropists. This essay will examine and pose the fundamental question on whether true altruism exists.

Supporting arguments

As Daniel Batson argues in the article “Taking Sides Clashing Views in Social Psychology” (2006), the force behind altruistic behavior by an individual who offer help to others is termed as empathy (Nier, 2006). It is what causes one person to feel the intrinsic experience of another person. This is evident especially if another person is in a troublesome situation. It is this feeling, as Batson further explains, that provokes altruistic reasons which are considered to be genuine concerns for helping others.

It is imperative to note that reducing or ending another person’s distress is an end-state goal of a truly altruistic behavior. It is driven by a feeling of empathy and not by an instrumental response that has been caused by ego. Research studies indicate that distinguishing the motivational concepts between altruism and egoism is difficult. However, Batson provides a clear contrast that enables individuals to appreciate true altruism.

Additionally, true altruism focuses only on behavior and not motivation. An egoistic person offering help is motivated by personal gains such as the desire to avoid pain, shame and guilt, or for self-esteem, to receive praise or material rewards. On the contrary, true altruism is concerned with increasing the welfare of others as an end-state goal of offering help. This forms a clear contrast between altruism and egoism.

In true altruism, the end-state goal of a philanthropist demonstrates unselfish desire towards increasing the welfare of others. Since it is not egoistically motivated, the response given to helping others is not instrumental and intermediate towards an agent’s own good. Based on some of the observations made by Batson and his colleagues, even though relief or personal satisfaction may be felt by a philanthropist after offering help, the goal of altruistic behavior is purely unselfish concern.

Opposing arguments

As already mentioned, philanthropists demonstrate unselfish interests in their bid to lend a helping hand to others. However, some social psychologists have taken keen interest in determining factors motivating behaviors of philanthropists. In most instances, it becomes difficult to determine the motives behind human actions.

According to Robert Cialdini in “Taking Sides Clashing Views in Social Psychology” (2006), individuals helping others do it with intention of avoiding the feeling of shame, guilt and other related negative feelings (Nier, 2006). He argues that the suffering of others usually causes philanthropists to feel distressed.

Based on this case and countering Batson’s argument, he claims that the distress in a philanthropist will prompt a reaction not fully aimed at helping the suffering individual but to reduce the distress philanthropist is experiencing. In this sense, the motivation will not only be aiming at helping the suffering individual, but also to increase the welfare of the philanthropist. Therefore, this will not be true altruism.

Additionally, most philanthropists feel uneasy as they helplessly watch others suffer (Nier, 2006). To get satisfaction, they offer help or put their lives at risk for others. Caldini refers to this action of offering help by a philanthropist intending to come out of distress and sadness as a negative state relief action. This term springs from the fact that the helping behavior of a philanthropist is driven by other factors besides altruism.

Research studies have indicated that the help that a great percentage of individuals give to others do not fully come from purely altruistic reasons. In the article “Taking Sides Clashing Views in Social Psychology” (2006), Caldini points out that it is a fact that most people, rather than reducing the distress of others, offer help just to relieve themselves from feeling distressed by the sufferings of others (Nier, 2006).

Grief, fear, disgust or shock of knowing about another person suffering causes an empathic emotion and desire to use an intermediate means to save self. This takes away the existence of true altruism since in the process of reducing self-distress; an individual will have reduced an equal distress of a suffering person.

Evaluation

It is definite that true altruism exists. While it may be an illusion to others, those caught in its web fully agree that it exists. According to Batson, the denial of egoism is altruism. Most individuals act purely and intentionally to benefit others. Even though egoism possesses some powerful lure over the weak doctrine of true altruism, it does not eliminate the fact that individuals can act altruistically.

For instance, a person can forsake a comfortable life to live in a hard and remote place in order to take care of HIV/AIDS patients. The self-sacrifice made by such a person will be for the welfare of the aforementioned patients and not merely for self-satisfaction.

Reference

Nier, A. J. (2006). Taking sides clashing views in social psychology. Washington DC: McGraw Hill.