Click on the following links. Please note these will open in a new window.

Journal Article 10.1: Habashi, M., Graziano, W. G., & Hoover, A. E. (2016). Searching for the prosocial personality: A big five approach to linking personality and prosocial behavior. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 42, 1177–1192.

URL: https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167216652859

Abstract: The search for the prosocial personality has been long and controversial. The current research explores the general patterns underlying prosocial decisions, linking personality, emotion, and overt prosocial behavior. Using a multimethod approach, we explored the links between the Big Five dimensions of personality and prosocial responding. Across three studies, we found that agreeableness was the dimension of personality most closely associated with emotional reactions to victims in need of help, and subsequent decisions to help those individuals. Results suggest that prosocial processes, including emotions, cognitions, and behaviors, may be part of a more general motivational process linked to personality.

Journal Article 10.2: van Bommel, M., van Prooijen, J., Elffers, H., & van Lange, P. A. M. (2014). Intervene to be seen: The power of a camera in attenuating the bystander effect. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 5, 459–466.

URL: https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550613507958

Abstract: Security cameras became such a part of everyday life that their presence may escape from our conscious attention. The present research examines the impact of cameras on intervening in crime, a situation in which the classic bystander effect has been uncovered. In our experimental set up, participants witnessed how another participant (a confederate) stole money, in the presence of either two or no other bystanders. Moreover, we used a security camera to make people feel watched. We expected to replicate the bystander effect without security camera’s presence and an attenuation of the bystander effect with a security camera present. As expected, the findings revealed that without a camera, participants were less likely to stop our confederate from stealing money when other bystanders were present. However, when there was a camera present this effect was attenuated: The camera increased intervention when people are otherwise least likely to help--when other bystanders are present.