Surveillance cues do not enhance altruistic behavior among anonymous strangers in the field

Erik J. Koornneef, Aurelie Dariel, Iffat Elbarazi, Ahmed R. Alsuwaidi, Paul B.M. Robben, Nikos Nikiforakis

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

The degree of altruistic behavior among strangers is an evolutionary puzzle. A prominent explanation is the evolutionary legacy hypothesis according to which an evolved reciprocity-based psychology affects behavior even when reciprocity is impossible, i.e., altruistic behavior in such instances is maladaptive. Empirical support for this explanation comes from laboratory experiments showing that surveillance cues, e.g., photographs of watching eyes, increase altruistic behavior. A competing interpretation for this evidence, however, is that the cues signal the experimenter’s expectations and participants, aware of being monitored, intentionally behave more altruistically to boost their reputation. Here we report the first results from a field experiment on the topic in which participants are unaware they are being monitored and reciprocity is precluded. The experiment investigates the impact of surveillance cues on a textbook example of altruistic behavior—hand hygiene prior to treating a ‘patient’. We find no evidence surveillance cues affect hand hygiene, despite using different measures of hand-hygiene quality and cues that have been previously shown to be effective. We argue that surveillance cues may have an effect only when participants have reasons to believe they are actually monitored. Thus they cannot support claims altruistic behavior between strangers is maladaptive.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Article numbere0197959
JournalPLoS One
Volume13
Issue number8
DOIs
StatePublished - Aug 1 2018

Fingerprint

Cues
hygiene
monitoring
Hand Hygiene
Textbooks
Experiments
hands
psychology
photographs
Hygiene
eyes
Psychology

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology(all)
  • Agricultural and Biological Sciences(all)

Cite this

Koornneef, E. J., Dariel, A., Elbarazi, I., Alsuwaidi, A. R., Robben, P. B. M., & Nikiforakis, N. (2018). Surveillance cues do not enhance altruistic behavior among anonymous strangers in the field. PLoS One, 13(8), [e0197959]. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0197959

Surveillance cues do not enhance altruistic behavior among anonymous strangers in the field. / Koornneef, Erik J.; Dariel, Aurelie; Elbarazi, Iffat; Alsuwaidi, Ahmed R.; Robben, Paul B.M.; Nikiforakis, Nikos.

In: PLoS One, Vol. 13, No. 8, e0197959, 01.08.2018.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Koornneef, Erik J. ; Dariel, Aurelie ; Elbarazi, Iffat ; Alsuwaidi, Ahmed R. ; Robben, Paul B.M. ; Nikiforakis, Nikos. / Surveillance cues do not enhance altruistic behavior among anonymous strangers in the field. In: PLoS One. 2018 ; Vol. 13, No. 8.
@article{47c37671cbc9493785d20d484383b8bc,
title = "Surveillance cues do not enhance altruistic behavior among anonymous strangers in the field",
abstract = "The degree of altruistic behavior among strangers is an evolutionary puzzle. A prominent explanation is the evolutionary legacy hypothesis according to which an evolved reciprocity-based psychology affects behavior even when reciprocity is impossible, i.e., altruistic behavior in such instances is maladaptive. Empirical support for this explanation comes from laboratory experiments showing that surveillance cues, e.g., photographs of watching eyes, increase altruistic behavior. A competing interpretation for this evidence, however, is that the cues signal the experimenter’s expectations and participants, aware of being monitored, intentionally behave more altruistically to boost their reputation. Here we report the first results from a field experiment on the topic in which participants are unaware they are being monitored and reciprocity is precluded. The experiment investigates the impact of surveillance cues on a textbook example of altruistic behavior—hand hygiene prior to treating a ‘patient’. We find no evidence surveillance cues affect hand hygiene, despite using different measures of hand-hygiene quality and cues that have been previously shown to be effective. We argue that surveillance cues may have an effect only when participants have reasons to believe they are actually monitored. Thus they cannot support claims altruistic behavior between strangers is maladaptive.",
author = "Koornneef, {Erik J.} and Aurelie Dariel and Iffat Elbarazi and Alsuwaidi, {Ahmed R.} and Robben, {Paul B.M.} and Nikos Nikiforakis",
year = "2018",
month = "8",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1371/journal.pone.0197959",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "13",
journal = "PLoS One",
issn = "1932-6203",
publisher = "Public Library of Science",
number = "8",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Surveillance cues do not enhance altruistic behavior among anonymous strangers in the field

AU - Koornneef, Erik J.

AU - Dariel, Aurelie

AU - Elbarazi, Iffat

AU - Alsuwaidi, Ahmed R.

AU - Robben, Paul B.M.

AU - Nikiforakis, Nikos

PY - 2018/8/1

Y1 - 2018/8/1

N2 - The degree of altruistic behavior among strangers is an evolutionary puzzle. A prominent explanation is the evolutionary legacy hypothesis according to which an evolved reciprocity-based psychology affects behavior even when reciprocity is impossible, i.e., altruistic behavior in such instances is maladaptive. Empirical support for this explanation comes from laboratory experiments showing that surveillance cues, e.g., photographs of watching eyes, increase altruistic behavior. A competing interpretation for this evidence, however, is that the cues signal the experimenter’s expectations and participants, aware of being monitored, intentionally behave more altruistically to boost their reputation. Here we report the first results from a field experiment on the topic in which participants are unaware they are being monitored and reciprocity is precluded. The experiment investigates the impact of surveillance cues on a textbook example of altruistic behavior—hand hygiene prior to treating a ‘patient’. We find no evidence surveillance cues affect hand hygiene, despite using different measures of hand-hygiene quality and cues that have been previously shown to be effective. We argue that surveillance cues may have an effect only when participants have reasons to believe they are actually monitored. Thus they cannot support claims altruistic behavior between strangers is maladaptive.

AB - The degree of altruistic behavior among strangers is an evolutionary puzzle. A prominent explanation is the evolutionary legacy hypothesis according to which an evolved reciprocity-based psychology affects behavior even when reciprocity is impossible, i.e., altruistic behavior in such instances is maladaptive. Empirical support for this explanation comes from laboratory experiments showing that surveillance cues, e.g., photographs of watching eyes, increase altruistic behavior. A competing interpretation for this evidence, however, is that the cues signal the experimenter’s expectations and participants, aware of being monitored, intentionally behave more altruistically to boost their reputation. Here we report the first results from a field experiment on the topic in which participants are unaware they are being monitored and reciprocity is precluded. The experiment investigates the impact of surveillance cues on a textbook example of altruistic behavior—hand hygiene prior to treating a ‘patient’. We find no evidence surveillance cues affect hand hygiene, despite using different measures of hand-hygiene quality and cues that have been previously shown to be effective. We argue that surveillance cues may have an effect only when participants have reasons to believe they are actually monitored. Thus they cannot support claims altruistic behavior between strangers is maladaptive.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85053518267&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85053518267&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1371/journal.pone.0197959

DO - 10.1371/journal.pone.0197959

M3 - Article

C2 - 30114252

AN - SCOPUS:85053518267

VL - 13

JO - PLoS One

JF - PLoS One

SN - 1932-6203

IS - 8

M1 - e0197959

ER -