Sociocognitive and Behavioral Correlates of a Measure of Prosocial Tendencies for Adolescents

Abstract

The present study was designed to examine the psychometric properties of a multidimensional measure of prosocial behaviors to use with early adolescents and middle adolescents. One hundred thirty-eight students ( X̄ age = 15.8 years; 80 girls; 70% White, non-Hispanic) from a public middle school and high school completed measures of prosocial moral reasoning, sympathy, perspective taking, aggression, ascription of responsibility, social desirability, verbal skills, and a revised prosocial tendencies measure (PTM-R). The questionnaires were completed in two sessions each separated by a 2-week time span (to assess test-retest reliability of the PTM-R). Moreover, teacher ratings of adolescents’ generosity and helpfulness toward others were obtained. Analyses were conducted separately for early adolescents and middle adolescents and results showed adequate reliability and evidence of validity for PTM-R. Discussion focused on individual differences in prosocial behaviors among early adolescents and middle adolescents and the need to differentiate among differing types of prosocial behaviors.

Two Sides of the Same Coin? The Relations between Prosocial and Physically Aggressive Behaviors

“…Because compliant prosocial behavior was not theorized to be related to sympathy (Carlo and Randall, 2002) and that previous research has suggested that compliant prosocial behaviors are not related to sympathy (Eisenberg et al, 1999), this relation between compliant prosocial behaviors and physical aggression warrants further attention. Similar to the present fi nding, Carlo et al (2003) reported a significant and negative relation between compliant prosocial behaviors and aggression in early adolescence. However, this same relation was nonsignifi cant in middle adolescence.…”

“…Consistent with previous research, dire, emotional, and anonymous prosocial behaviors had no signifi cant relations with physical aggression (Carlo et al, 2003). Consequently, no mediation tests were conducted.…”

“…Carlo and his colleagues (Carlo et al, 2003;Randall, 2001, 2002) have identifi ed six types of prosocial behaviors based on either the situation or personal motives: altruism (selfl ess helping, usually motivated by sympathy), public (helping in front of an audience, usually motivated by wanting to gain approval, respect from others, and self-worth), compliant (helping because it has been requested by another), emotional (helping under emotionally evocative circumstances), dire (helping in emergency situations), and anonymous (helping without the receiver knowing the identity of the helper).…”

“…Altruistic prosocial behaviors, for example, have been found to be signifi cantly and positively related to perspective taking, sympathy, and internalized moral reasoning, whereas public prosocial behaviors have been found to be signifi cantly and negatively correlated with these same measures (Carlo et al, 2003). Aggression has also been found to be negatively related to altruistic prosocial behaviors and positively related to prosocial behaviors that benefi t the self (Carlo et al, 2003;Persson, 2005). Compliant helping is another prosocial behavior that is positively related to perspective taking, sympathy, and internalized moral reasoning and negatively related to aggression, but these relations with aggression have been less conclusive.…”

“…Participants were asked to rate the extent to which statements (sample items: "I tend to help people who are hurt badly", "Helping others when I am in the spotlight is when I work best") described themselves on a 5-point scale ranging from 1 (does not describe me at all) to 5 (describes me greatly). Although the reliability of the subscales is moderate to strong, the PTM has been found to have adequate reliability and validity in prior samples (Carlo and Randall, 2002;Carlo et al, 2003;Hardy and Carlo, 2005).…”