Empathy, Parental Styles, Prosocial-flow and Different Types of Prosocial Behaviors

BELÉN MESURADO; LUCAS MARCELO RODRIGUEZ

Congreso; 2017 Society for Research in Child Development (SRCD) Biennial Meeting; 2017

Society for Research in Child Development (SRCD)

Prosocial behaviors are voluntary actions that are intended to help or benefit another individual or group of individuals. Carlo and Randall propose, for their part, that prosocial behaviors (2002) are based on different types of motivations such as, for example, an intrinsic motivation or primary desire to benefit others. In contrast, other types of prosocial behaviors might be motivated by extrinsic processes or concerns (e.g., social approval) or by avoiding punishment. Moreover, most studies on prosocial behavior have focused on prosocial behavior toward strangers, despite evidence that children can aptly distinguish between the potential recipients of their helping behaviors (de Guzman et al. 2008), and engage in prosocial behavior toward family and friends more frequently than toward strangers (Eberly et al.1999). Padilla-Walker and colleagues have highlighted the importance of considering prosocial development within the context of relationships (2015). A recent study, which included 454 children and adolescents, showed that 72% of participants could identify flow experience while doing collaborative activities (Mesurado, 2014). Mesurado (2014) defined prosocial-flow as an optimal experience during prosocial activities (e.g. tutoring sessions) which are characterized by cognitive (e.g. attention, control, engagement) and affective aspects (e.g. happy, excited) on one hand, and the ability perception required to identify prosocial activity and achievement perception on the other. The objective of the present study is to test whether types of prosocial tendencies and prosocial behavior toward different targets (family, friends and strangers) vary depending on different levels of flow (low, moderate and high) during the performance of prosocial activities. Participants were 425 university students (286 females; of 18 to 25 years of age; M age = 22.2, SD =1.9) who were enrolled in undergraduate social responsibility courses at University in Argentina. The Interpersonal Reactivity Index (Davis, 1980), Optimal Experience Scale (Mesurado, 2008), Argentinean adaptation of Prosocial Tendencies Measure (Richaud, et al. 2012) and Adolescents? prosocial behavior toward different targets (Padilla-Walker & Christensen, 2011) were used to measure the variables. A three (levels of flow) by empathy (levels of empathy) factorial MANOVA provided the tool to test the comparing prosocial behavior toward family, friends and strangers across the three levels of flow experience and according to sex. The model was significant, according to Hotelling?s trace criterion, for the flow, F(6, 832) = 24.24, p ≤ .001, η2 = .15, as well as for empthy, F(3, 417) = 18.24, p ≤ .001, η2 = .10, the interaction, flow × empathy, was significant. The post hoc Scheffé contrast indicates that students with high level of prosocial-flow have more prosocial behavior toward family, friends and strangers than the adolescents with low and moderate levels of flow. Another three by two MANOVA was used to test the difference of prosocial tendencies and the model also was significant (Hotelling?s trace criterion, for the flow, F(8, 830) = 9.95, p ≤ .001, η2 = .09, and for empthy, F(4, 416) = 11.89, p ≤ .001, η2 = .10, and the interaction, was significant. The post hoc Scheffé contrast indicates that students with high level of prosocial-flow and empthy have more intrinsic motivation to benefit others than adolescents with low and moderate levels of flow.