Real-life prosocial behavior decreases after being socially excluded by avatars, not agents

Kothgassner, Oswald D.; Griesinger, Mirjam; Kettner, Kathrin; Wayan, Katja; Vlkl-Kernstock, Sabine; Hlavacs, Helmut; Beutl, Leon; Felnhofer, Anna

doi:10.1016/j.chb.2016.12.059

Cited by 62 publications

(41 citation statements)

References 44 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The perception of agency is core to experiencing machine partners as social entities, as compared to human partners. The suggestion that a digital body is controlled by a human (i.e., an avatar vs. being technologically autonomous agent) elicits stronger social influence effects (Fox, Ahn, et al, 2015), promotes more prosocial behavior (Felnhofer et al, 2018), and engenders greater sadness at social exclusion (Kothgassner et al, 2017). Stronger perceived behavioral realism of an agent (independent of its actual autonomy) engenders more positive agent evaluations and feelings of mutual awareness (von der Pütten et al, 2010) such that there would seem to be clear differences in how people would experience HMC-S with human-and machine-cued partners.…”

Section: Exploring Ontological-category Differences In Sexual Communimentioning

confidence: 99%

Cybersex with human- and machine-cued partners: Gratifications, shortcomings, and tensions.

Banks¹,

Ouytsel²

2020

Technology, Mind, and Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

From social-network spambots and forensic chatbots to dating simulation games, sexual communication with machines is not uncommon in contemporary culture-however, it remains effectively a black-box phenomenon. There is little empirical research examining how sexual human-machine communication (HMC-S) is experienced, whether it is impactful, or whether it may be similar or different to human-human sexual communication. Advancing our understanding of those questions is vital in understanding the potential for machine partners to foster the health and welfare benefits, as well as the potential to have negative impacts. This study takes a first step in considering experiential parity or divergence by experimentally investigating 271 people's cybersex experience with a chat partner that was visually and textually cued as a human or a machine. Multimethod analysis suggests there may be no difference in gratifications from sex chat with ostensible machine versus human partners; however, participants seem to experience tensions between the gratifications and shortcomings of cybersex with machine-cued partners.

show abstract

Section: Exploring Ontological-category Differences In Sexual Communimentioning

confidence: 99%

Cybersex with human- and machine-cued partners: Gratifications, shortcomings, and tensions.

Banks¹,

Ouytsel²

2020

Technology, Mind, and Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Social exclusion can lead to decreased trust in the community (Twenge et al., ), which can perpetuate a vicious cycle that results in reduced prosocial behaviour and increased social exclusion (Aydin, Agthe, Pfundmair, Frey, & DeWall, ; Kothgassner et al., ). Specifically, people who have experienced social exclusion tend to donate and volunteer less than do those who have not.…”

Section: Research Questions and Hypothesesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Social exclusion and donation behaviour: What conditions motivate the socially excluded to donate?

Lee

Park²

2019

Asian J of Social Psycho

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Previous research has indicated that social exclusion can result in people becoming more focused on themselves than on others, and this may reduce their likelihood of engaging in prosocial behaviour. However, the question of how to promote prosocial behaviour in people who have experienced social exclusion remains. This study comprised two experiments that address this question in the context of donation advertising. Experiment 1 examined participants' donation intentions after experiencing social exclusion in a ball-passing game. Experiment 2 followed the same design as Experiment 1, except that reallife donation behaviour was measured. Consistent with prior findings, our results indicated that those who experienced social exclusion displayed lower donation intentions (Experiment 1) and donated less (Experiment 2) than did those who did not experience social exclusion. However, when those who experienced social exclusion watched advertisements that only portrayed alienated people, they showed as much donation intent as those who did not experience social exclusion (Experiment 1) and ultimately donated more (Experiment 2). These findings indicate that social exclusion may increase an individual's tendency to help others who also are alienated.

show abstract

“…Helping, as one of the components of prosocial behavior, is evident early in development, and is more other-focused when compared to, for example, sharing (Weltzien, Marsh, & Hood, 2018). Adaptations of the "Dropped Pencils" task have been successfully used in other studies as a measure of prosocial behavior (e.g., Dovidio & Morris, 1975;Kothgassner et al, 2017;Lefevor & Fowers, 2016;Twenge, Baumeister, DeWall, Ciarocco, & Bartels, 2007). These studies found that participants picked up fewer pencils when stressed (Dovidio & Morris 1975) and socially excluded (Kothgassner et al, 2017;Twenge et al, 2007).…”

Section: Prosocial Behaviormentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Adaptations of the "Dropped Pencils" task have been successfully used in other studies as a measure of prosocial behavior (e.g., Dovidio & Morris, 1975;Kothgassner et al, 2017;Lefevor & Fowers, 2016;Twenge, Baumeister, DeWall, Ciarocco, & Bartels, 2007). These studies found that participants picked up fewer pencils when stressed (Dovidio & Morris 1975) and socially excluded (Kothgassner et al, 2017;Twenge et al, 2007). Because most children in this study either picked up no pencils (80%), some pencils (5.9%), or all the pencils (14.1%), a dichotomous variable was used that indicated whether or not the child picked up any pencils.…”

Section: Prosocial Behaviormentioning

confidence: 99%

Parent–Infant Room Sharing During the First Months of Life: Longitudinal Links With Behavior During Middle Childhood

Beijers¹,

Cassidy

Lustermans³

et al. 2018

Child Development

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Current recommendations encourage parent–infant room sharing for the first 6 months of life. This longitudinal study (N = 193) is the first to examine long‐term relations of early room sharing with three domains of child behavior: sleep, behavior problems, and prosocial behavior. Information on room sharing was collected daily for infants’ first 6 months. At ages 6, 7, and 8 years, outcomes were assessed with maternal and teacher questionnaires and behavioral observations. Early room sharing was not related to sleep problems or behavior problems. Additionally, more weeks of room sharing were positively related to higher maternal ratings of child sleep quality and more prosocial behavior. In conclusion, early room sharing appears to be related to positive, but not negative, behavior outcomes in middle childhood.

show abstract

Real-life prosocial behavior decreases after being socially excluded by avatars, not agents

Cited by 62 publications

References 44 publications

Cybersex with human- and machine-cued partners: Gratifications, shortcomings, and tensions.

Cybersex with human- and machine-cued partners: Gratifications, shortcomings, and tensions.

Social exclusion and donation behaviour: What conditions motivate the socially excluded to donate?

Parent–Infant Room Sharing During the First Months of Life: Longitudinal Links With Behavior During Middle Childhood

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About