Sign up to access the complete lesson and track your progress!
Unlock This CourseWhilst genes play a role in prosocial behaviour, many psychologists argue that genetic determinism - the idea that our genes completely control our behaviour - is far too simple. This view suggests that helping others is entirely programmed into our DNA, but the evidence shows a much more complex picture.
The arguments against genetic determinism highlight how our environment, culture and personal experiences shape whether we help others. Understanding these arguments helps us see that humans have the power to choose their actions, rather than being slaves to their genetic code.
Key Definitions:
Our surroundings have a massive impact on whether we help others. Children who grow up in caring families are more likely to be helpful, whilst those in hostile environments may become less prosocial. This shows that nurture, not just nature, matters.
One of the strongest arguments against genetic determinism comes from social learning theory. Albert Bandura showed that children learn behaviour by watching others - including prosocial behaviour. This means helping isn't just programmed into us; we learn it from our role models.
Social learning happens in several ways that challenge the idea that helping behaviour is purely genetic. Children observe their parents, teachers and peers, then copy what they see. This process can override genetic tendencies.
Children watch how adults respond to people in need. If parents help others, children learn this is the right thing to do.
Young people copy the helpful behaviours they see, even if it goes against their immediate self-interest.
When helping behaviour is praised or rewarded, it becomes more likely to happen again in the future.
Darley and Batson (1973) studied seminary students (training to be priests) to see if they would help someone in distress. Even these religious individuals, who should be genetically predisposed to help according to determinists, often walked past someone in need when they were in a hurry. This shows that situational factors can override supposed genetic programming for prosocial behaviour.
If prosocial behaviour was purely genetic, we would expect to see the same patterns of helping across all cultures. However, research shows dramatic differences between societies in how, when and why people help others.
Different cultures have very different approaches to helping behaviour, which suggests that social factors, not genes, are the main drivers of prosocial acts.
In countries like Japan and China, people are more likely to help family members and close community members. The focus is on group harmony and mutual support within established relationships.
In Western countries like the UK and USA, people are more likely to help strangers in emergency situations. The focus is on individual responsibility and helping those who cannot help themselves.
Research consistently shows that the situation someone finds themselves in has a huge impact on whether they help others. This challenges genetic determinism because it suggests that context, not DNA, often determines our actions.
Numerous studies have identified specific situational factors that make helping more or less likely to occur, regardless of someone's genetic makeup.
People in a hurry are much less likely to help others, even if they normally would. This shows environment overriding genetics.
The more people present, the less likely any individual is to help. This social phenomenon contradicts genetic programming.
People in small towns help more than those in big cities, suggesting that environment shapes behaviour more than genes.
In 1964, Kitty Genovese was attacked in New York whilst 38 people watched from their windows. Despite genetic theories suggesting humans should help those in distress, the bystander effect meant nobody intervened. This tragic case shows how social situations can override supposed genetic programming for prosocial behaviour.
If genetic determinism were true, we would expect prosocial behaviour to remain constant throughout someone's life. However, research shows that people can learn to become more or less helpful depending on their experiences and training.
Schools and organisations have successfully developed programmes that increase helping behaviour in children and adults. This demonstrates that prosocial actions are not fixed by genetics but can be developed through learning.
Anti-bullying initiatives and empathy training have been shown to increase prosocial behaviour in students. Children learn to be more helpful and considerate through structured activities and role-playing exercises.
Healthcare workers, teachers and volunteers can be trained to be more empathetic and helpful. This professional development shows that prosocial skills can be learned at any age.
Modern psychology recognises that the debate isn't really about genes versus environment, but about how they work together. This interactionist approach provides a more balanced view than genetic determinism.
Rather than genes controlling behaviour directly, they create tendencies that can be strengthened or weakened by environmental factors. This gives humans much more control over their actions than genetic determinism suggests.
Genes may create a capacity for empathy and helping, but this potential needs to be developed through positive experiences and social learning to become actual behaviour.
The right environment can bring out the best in people, encouraging prosocial behaviour even in those who might not seem naturally inclined to help others.
Studies of Romanian orphans adopted into loving families showed that children who experienced severe neglect early in life could still develop prosocial behaviour when placed in nurturing environments. This demonstrates that environmental factors can overcome even the most difficult genetic or early developmental challenges.
Understanding the arguments against genetic determinism has important implications for how we approach social problems and education. If behaviour can be changed through environmental factors, then we have the power to create a more prosocial society.
The evidence against genetic determinism suggests that we can actively promote prosocial behaviour through policy, education and social initiatives rather than accepting that some people are just "naturally selfish".
Schools can teach empathy, cooperation and helping skills as part of the curriculum, developing prosocial citizens.
Local initiatives can create environments where helping behaviour is encouraged and rewarded.
Government policies can be designed to promote prosocial behaviour through incentives and social programmes.