14 Comments on The reality check is in the post

Joanna on Tue, 21st Aug 2012 7:42 pm


Was the letter addressed by hand? Maybe poorer people have fewer positive experiences of receiving business mail and assumed that the recipient would be glad not to receive it….

Carl Allen on Tue, 21st Aug 2012 9:54 pm


A. Where there is hope and belief, then the people and individuals do significantly more with less by dint of stretching their every fibre of being.

B. When there is despair and lack of trust, then the people and individuals fight fiercely , one against the other, for material resources despite there being no rational shortage of resources.

Leaders in each instance above face the same problem of strategy except that in instance B the leader has an additional problem of culture i.e. is the cup being seen as emptying or filling?

Joe on Tue, 21st Aug 2012 10:22 pm


Structural – does it say anything about access to a post office?

Behavioural – I’m sure someone will have shown that past successes impact on future behaviour. The closest thing I can thing of is the Pygmalion effect; the collective expectations of the area?

I guess there is also a potential issue with associating good behaviours with the behaviour of the elite. Here, the discovered reaction of the well off is thought of as the desirable outcome. Was that predisposed by the prejudices of the experimenters?

Sounds like interesting research though, I think it fits nicely with your points about the possibility/desirability of social mobility in an unequal society, building a more nuanced argument for social equality.

Alex Kenmure on Wed, 22nd Aug 2012 8:32 am


This is interesting. I wonder if you touch upon a key issue in your 2nd to last paragraph when you refer to self-confidence. It’s interesting that the experiment is seen in the context of “altruism” and “crime levels” but maybe it is a much more personal reflection – am i not delivering the letter because a) I’m a miserable git, b) i’m worried I might get robbed/assaulted or c) I’m worried someone might talk to me and I won’t know what to say back?

If it is the latter (and I suspect it might be) then is it more about building confidence and self-worth in those “less-blessed” areas than it is transferring resources?

Jack Borelli on Wed, 22nd Aug 2012 12:53 pm


1-Assuming that it is true,–There is always the possibility that the story of that research is a fake designed to make the “Rich” look Better- One of the reasons that, that attitude took place, is that “The poor”" are always scavenging for whatever they can get to increase their little income. And has little to do with honesty.
2-In the well off area, people “knew” that no one, -in their area-sends cash in envelops, and if they send cheques, they know that they are addressed to the payee and marked “Not negotiable”.
3- the well off, didn’t “need” to bother and they had the time to post it for other people.
4-Altruism.- You are kidding me when you say that well off people are more altruists. Why?
a)- They are well off, because they are MEAN!! and STRINGEee !!- Just ask everyone who does any service for them. Do they ever tip well, except to show off? NO!!
b)- They always pay the minimum they can to their employees.
c)- Whatever they “Give” to charity, is not their money. Is the Government money- tax deductible money which could go to Gov. Projects.
d)- 99% of people that “really” help others, is almost always, the one who has less, to “help” the one who has more. ex; doing small favors, discounted work, etc. The other way, is mostly in the way of discarded (not needed) whatever they give away. Except big “favors” among themselves.

Finally, well-off people do not “Need” to commit, any crimes…they just change the “Law”. to make whatever they want to do, ‘Legal”.

Matthew Mezey on Wed, 22nd Aug 2012 2:22 pm


Hi Matthew,

This is an interesting and challenging topic – and I don’t feel that we have yet got very close to understanding why altruism is higher in well-off areas.

As we don’t yet know what’s going on, I’m not sure why ‘transferring resources from well-off areas’ necessarily follows from what we currently know about altruism (even if it’s a good idea for various other reasons). (Perhaps it’s more pressing to undertake the educational etc work to increase self-authorship in citizens, that was discussed towards the end of the RSA report ‘Beyond the Big Society’).

You say: “One conclusion could be that poor people are simply constitutionally less altruistic then the well-off” – I think such issues of trying to understand human nature are key.

Before I saw your new blog post, I’d tweeted earlier today:

“RSA speakers like Pinker, Haidt, Baron-Cohen say ‘Blank slate’ is scientifically dead, yet this is taboo politically: http://bit.ly/ReEKCU ”

I believe the RSA should pursue the difficult question of what politics looks like after ‘Blank slate’ – alongside a focus on social/environmental/economic explanations.

It would go against much of what most of us believe in, but hopefully we like to be challenged

Re the dropped letters experiment, do I remember something about them dropping them outside different churches – and finding some denominations far more altruistic…?

Quick thoughts on other potential factors:

- People with Sustenance-driven Values Modes have fewer, but stronger social ties – rather than the numerous ‘weak ties’ that people with Inner Directed Values Modes often have. These values/motivations might be important. Perhaps people with weak ties are more used to valuing distant connections?

- Perhaps altruism relates to levels of ‘Openness’ (in the Big 5/OCEAN) model of personality. (Though the pioneeers of this approach highlight a significant genetic component!)

- Self-control (as we’ve talked about before, the awesome Dunedin longitudinal multidisciplinary study of health and development has identified self-control as a vital factor in key educational/crime/health etc behaviours (levels of self-control at age 5 predict outcomes 30 years later). They controlled for class and intelligence – which are, of course, worth analysing in their own right. (Intelligence and human nature – and connections to race and class – is the topic people find most controversial, and part of the reason the liberal/blank slate view is rarely questioned).

- But this ‘self-control’ measure is partly just a Robert Kegan/Loevinger developmental stage/action logic in a new guise (as Dunedin’s Prof Terrie Moffitt told me). Higher developmental stages are far better at putting themselves into the shoes of others, at creating mutual solutions – and so probably at wanting to return a letter to someone they don’t know. This strong respect for people’s autonomy contrasts with the hostility and hedonism consistently found in some of the earlier stages of adult development (which may be prevalent in poorer areas?). I doubt people centred at Loevinger’s Impulsive or Self-protective stages would bother to return someone else’s dropped letter.

- Maybe altruism relates to levels of trust, to ‘Bridging’ vs ‘Bonding’ social capital? (Interesting that this UCL research seems to go against Robert Putnam’s findings about diverse communities and the collapse of trust: “In the presence of diversity, we hunker down. We act like turtles. The effect of diversity is worse than had been imagined. And it’s not just that we don’t trust people who are not like us. In diverse communities, we don’t trust people who do look like us,” he told the FT. These depressing findings understandably had so troubled Putnam’s optimstic liberal view that he kept them hidden for 5 years while he tried to work on some solutions to mitigate this bleak picture!).

The RSA has a report coming out soon that looks at citizens, networks and Values Modes in Newham – this might touch on many of these issues.

Here’s a recent blog in the Independent about Values Modes:
http://blogs.independent.co.uk/2012/07/23/we-shouldnt-simply-try-to-change-peoples-values-when-it-comes-to-the-environment/

Matthew

PS The nuanced explanations for adult crime emerging from the Dunedin longitudinal study are well worth looking at, by the way. Type in ‘crime’ here: http://dunedinstudy.otago.ac.nz/publications

–

Matthew Kalman Mezey
(Online Community Manager)

RSA
Tel 020 7451 6825

** Is there an ‘RSA Connector’ for your country yet?: http://bit.ly/RSAconnectors **

Leandro Herrero FRSA on Wed, 22nd Aug 2012 3:48 pm


Although I have not read the report (and I will!) an element that may be missing in the drawing of Big Society conclusions is the ‘social copying’ factor as I have described in my work on Viral Change™ and my latest book Homo Imitans. Would results be different in the low(er) compliance groups if people knew or saw that other people were doing it? I bet they will. Individual behaviours change course once they are infected by a peer-to-peer effect of the ones my organization orchestrates (no apologies for the term). As multiple insights from the behavioural economics side (OK, this is a heterogeneous lot) will show, the simple awareness that ‘others do’ could change these poor results. This is like trying to understand the Arab Spring as the sum of individual behaviour. It would be meaningless. If Stanley Milgram could do it again, he could perhaps at least have a control group posting what they have done in facebook. I am not suggesting it is all technological (which still penalises poverty!) Individuals are social animals (‘Homo imitans’) and any societal drive needs to take this into account. Voluntarism efforts need to abandon the individual focus and embrace the power of social copying, social imitation and Viral Change™ (‘I am doing X, what about you? She is doing it’) Not even the famous Nudge approach understands this well, with its focus on triggering behaviours as opposed to network effects, spread, scale up and sustainability

Alexsandra on Wed, 22nd Aug 2012 6:10 pm


There’s another perspective here, I believe….a simple one but could also be indicative, but in other ways.

In London, for example, the more affluent an area, the less litter lacing the streets and sidewalks. The more economically challenged the more litter. Perhaps instead of the supposed and somewhat weak conclusion of this rather naive study, those more socioeconomically deprived areas had more litter and therefore assumed the letter was just another piece of detritus amongst the lot. That seems most likely…but no one mentioned how littered the area tended to be. London is notable for it’s litter and the amount does vary depending on the area.

The sad but indicting but correlating piece is that litter is so prolific here in the UK generally but specifically in less economically stable areas, indicating how little responsibility people feel–they either have or are willing to take- for themselves. A cultural training had over the decades, echos from within this feudal cultural heritage no doubt. In a supposedly 21c modern pretty abundant stable culture, this proliferation of litter has- for me- always been so shocking and disappointing about the UK.

Tessy Britton on Wed, 22nd Aug 2012 8:45 pm


Thanks for sharing this research Matthew – really fascinating. Personally I would suggest too little data to draw large conclusions (a lot of that around at the moment).

Designing research which tested the authenticity of correlational results in this instance would be very interesting. Are they taking letter-posting as a proxy for altruism? That seems quite a big leap. What about walking past someone that was hurt or upset as an alternative test. Frankly I often forget to post my own letters …

Also the Milgram experiments were pretty thorough in testing a whole range of factors e.g. far few participants went to full voltage after then had seen someone refuse. Perhaps more people would pick up the letter and post it after seeing someone else do it? Is that about altruism or learning from modelled behaviour?

In a study in Italy they found that “A 1-standard-deviation increase in blood donations leads to significant reductions in common thefts by 13 percent and in robberies and car thefts by 15 percent” Here they are using blood donations as proxy for social capital. Could you reduce crime through blood donation drives?

In the US they have found strong correlations between civic participation and unemployment. “An increase of one point in the state’s rate of working with neighbors was associated with a decrease of 0.256 percentage points in the unemployment rate when the economic factors were controlled.” Could you reduce unemployment by increasing participation?

Thinking that correlational data is very important in giving us proper clues and helping us design good interventions – but that those conclusions need testing in the real world. I think it would be great if we saw more of this sort of research work in social situations – combinations of action research and/or data analysis plus second phase live experiments with strict data gathering.

Helen Milner on Thu, 23rd Aug 2012 8:57 am


When people are giving money not time, there is research to show that people on lower incomes donate a higher proportion of their discretionary income than those on higher incomes. Some new US research by the Chronicle of Philanthropy illustrates this well. http://www.npr.org/2012/08/20/158947667/study-reveals-the-geography-of-charitable-giving

I know this view has been around for a while but don’t know of any UK research to back it up.

Matthew Mezey on Thu, 23rd Aug 2012 9:16 am


ALTRUISM, TRUST, HUMAN NATURE – THE GENETIC CONTRIBUTION?

I should also have mentioned…

The Feb 2012 special issue of the journal ‘Twin Research and Human Genetics’ looked at genetics and political science. (A copy of it was kindly left here by a Fellow for staff to read, after a recent rather straw man-ish RSA lecture critiquing genetic ‘reductionism’).

That special issue includes an article showing that social trust includes a genetic component at around .3 – .4 and is related to extraversion, personal control and intelligence.

The article is titled: ‘The Genetic Origins of the Relationship between Psychological Traits and Social Trust’.

The ‘Personal control’ link to social trust is interesting, as the shift from an external ‘locus of control’ to an internal ‘locus of control’ apparently correlates with the shift to later Kegan/Loevinger stages of development. (It presumably relates to Carol Dweck’s mindsets work too).

I hope I’ve understood the article correctly – articles that go on about ‘bivariate Cholosky decompositions’ can get rather too dense for me…

Matthew M

** Is there an ‘RSA Connector’ for your country yet?: http://bit.ly/RSAconnectors – please let me know if there is a Fellow you would recommend**

Carl Allen on Thu, 23rd Aug 2012 8:16 pm


Well off areas have so few opportunuties for altruism that when an opportunity arises within the areas it is eagerly seized upon.

This being the case, it is useless and poor reasoning to draw comparision with deprived areas.

And that exceptions to the above do occur is a mere confirmation of magnificent isolation.

Robert Burns on Sat, 25th Aug 2012 10:31 pm


There is a plenty of altruism amongst ‘the poor’, they simply don’t have any to waste on petty issues like mis-delivered letters.

This ‘research’ builds a mountain out of a molehill.

Hard though it may be for people looking out from the comfort of middle class sensibility the fact is that a lot of their ‘morality’ and ‘civic engagement’ is just a conceit and a luxury.

More telling tests of ‘altruism’ might be:

(a) to look at how regular contributors to charities are distributed across the socio-economic spectrum

(b) the proportion of individual income regularly contributed and how this is distributed across the socio-economic spectrum

(c) what charities are supported by whom across the socio-economic spectrum

(d) the distribution across the socio-economic spectrum of individuals held up as exemplars in public rituals of approval

(e) the distribution across the socio-economic spectrum of those claiming ‘tax breaks’ on ‘charity giving’

Perhaps I’m wrong but isn’t ‘altruism’ about giving up something personally significant for the benefit of others and without reward or public recognition.

On those tests the middle class fail.

Carl Allen on Mon, 27th Aug 2012 5:22 pm


Agreed that this instance the research builds a mountain out of a molehill.

Tell me what you're thinking...
and oh, if you want a pic to show with your comment, go get a gravatar!