How do people support each other in emergencies? A qualitative exploration of altruistic and prosocial behaviours during the COVID‐19 pandemic

Abstract

The Ball State University Center for Peace and Conflict Studies in the United States has compiled altruistic stories from different countries such as India, Australia, the United States, and England since the onset of the COVID‐19 pandemic. We examined those stories to understand (1) who receives the most support, (2) what type of support is provided, (3) who those supporters are, and (4) why people support each other during the pandemic. Conducting a qualitative content analysis of 104 altruistic stories, we first identified that (a) older individuals , (b) people with sensitive health conditions, and disabilities, (c) frontline workers, and (d) working class and marginalized communities received the primary support. Second, we identified three types of support: (a) material, (b) social/emotional, and (c) psychological. Third, we found that support was coming from (a) different organizations, (b) advantaged groups, and (c) volunteers. Last, (a) sharing a community/humanity identity, (b) allyship, and (c) showing gratitude were the reasons behind altruistic and prosocial behavior. Our findings contribute to the literature by providing some possible reasons and ways that allies have supported disadvantaged communities via sharing the available resources and how showing gratitude can be a reason for altruism and prosocial behavior in a pandemic.

Individual and collective protective responses during the early phase of the COVID-19 pandemic in 10 different countries: Results from the EUCLID online survey

“…This pattern of results does not support the notion that people tend to "free ride" on collective measures ( Cato et al, 2020 ;Yong and Choy, 2021 ), which would imply that people who are more confident in the protective value of collective measures minimize individual costs by relying on collective protection while refraining from taking individual protective measures. In line with this, research on crisis events such as mass emergencies (e.g., train accidents) and disasters (e.g., hurricanes) shows that, in the face of a shared threat, most people do not put themselves first and engage in exclusively selfish behaviors but rather respond prosocially, showing solidarity and cooperation ( Drury et al, 2009 ;Drury et al, 2020 ;Rodríguez et al, 2006 ;Tekin et al, 2021 ). Alternatively, following the concept of "risk compensation", one could have assumed that people who perceive collective measures to be effective show less individual protective behavior because their perceived risk falls below their individual target level of risk, which they strive to maintain ( Hedlund, 20 0 0 ).…”

“Let the strongest survive”: Ageism and social Darwinism as barriers to supporting policies to benefit older individuals

“…For example, during the pandemic period, the disadvantages of older women compared to older men doubled because the female identity is already described as weaker and powerless compared to men in the eyes of society (Gutterman, 2022). In addition, being both old and disabled has caused these people to have more difficulties in accessing resources (e.g., scarcity of food and supplies in markets during the early days of the pandemic) and being seen as a burden in the pandemic (Arcieri, 2021; Tekin et al., 2021). As Greenwood (2012) rightly states that intersectional identities together create a more underprivileged identity, future studies should consider the intersectional identities of older people in understanding ageism toward them and thus contribute to understanding the barriers to support for policies that benefit older people.…”

“…When both the scarcity of resources emphasized by social Darwinism and the consumption‐based aspect of ageism are considered together, it will be useful to offer solutions focused on economic competition in interventions targeting intergenerational conflict in the post‐pandemic period. As the ongoing COVID‐19 pandemic has disproportionately affected older adults across the world (Tekin et al., 2021), we urge future research to design social interventions in order to tackle both social Darwinism and ageism at their roots.…”

“…Thus, many stores arranged special hours for older people to protect them from this “panic buying” (Williams, 2020). In addition, many donation campaigns and charities involving older people were organized (Adamczyk, 2020; Stahl, 2021; Tekin et al., 2021). Yet, according to some national polls, the pandemic has reportedly fostered the public's negative attitudes and discriminatory behavior toward older adults in this country (Aronson, 2020; Skipper & Rose, 2021; WHO, 2021).…”

Reflection of Types of Prosocial Behavior During COVID-19 in Collectivistic Asian Countries—India and Indonesia

“…However, studies during the pandemic either focus on prosocial activities preventing COVID-19 or everyday volunteering activities like donating food, money, or clothes or providing emotional comfort ( Aresi et al, 2022 ; Drury et al, 2021 ; Mao et al, 2021 ; Tekin et al, 2021 ; Templeton et al, 2020 ). So far, researchers have not explored the prosocial intention among people when they come across a confirmed/suspected COVID-19 patient.…”