//
sign in
Profile
by @danabra.mov
Profile
by @dansshadow.bsky.social
Profile
by @jimpick.com
AviHandle
by @danabra.mov
AviHandle
by @dansshadow.bsky.social
AviHandle
by @katherine.computer
EventsList
by @katherine.computer
ProfileHeader
by @dansshadow.bsky.social
ProfileHeader
by @danabra.mov
ProfileMedia
by @danabra.mov
ProfilePlays
by @danabra.mov
ProfilePosts
by @danabra.mov
ProfilePosts
by @dansshadow.bsky.social
ProfileReplies
by @danabra.mov
Record
by @atsui.org
Skircle
by @danabra.mov
StreamPlacePlaylist
by @katherine.computer
+ new component
Profile
Loading...









Loading...
We wondered whether these same mechanisms drive our decisions for when we stop to help other people, and if they did so more strongly than decisions for when to help ourselves. 🤔
Overall, we find that our immediate environment has a significant impact when making prosocial decisions, and that poorer environments can drive greater generosity.
Existing tasks that measure prosocial behaviour often ask people to choose between two options: to help or not help. However, theories from behavioural ecology suggest that our willingness to help isn't fixed, but changes depending on the kinds of opportunities we encounter in our environment.
🎉 New paper in Nature Communications 🎉 rdcu.be/e24jT Does our environment influence how likely we are to help others?
4mo
4mo
4mo
4mo
🥳 Many thanks to the great team involved in this: Luke Priestley, @drjocutler.bsky.social, Tabitha Hogg, Neil Garrett, @brainapps.bsky.social, Matthew Rushworth, & @thepsychologist.bsky.social
Across 3 studies (n=500+), we tested how willing people were to stop a movie to put in effort to help someone else while we changed the richness of the environment. In poor environments, opportunities to help were generally lower in quality, whereas in rich environments, they were generally higher.
We found that: • People were more willing to help in poor environments. • Opportunity costs were distinctly encoded for self and other, and for both environments. • Those higher in empathy and utilitarian thinking were generally more likely to stop to help in both environments.
4mo
4mo
New paper! Greater (objective and subjective) wealth is consistently associated with higher prosocial preferences and behaviours across 76 countries. Resource scarcity (precarity) also has an effect. bit.ly/410jni3 @thepsychologist.bsky.social @fabiankosse.bsky.social @drjocutler.bsky.social
4mo
Nature Communications - People constantly decide whether to stop what they are doing to do something else. Here, the authors show that the quality of available options has a greater influence on...
Humans are more prosocial in poor foraging environments
rdcu.be
Todd Vogel
Todd Vogel
Todd Vogel
Todd Vogel
Feb 4, 2025
Todd Vogel
Todd Vogel
🌟 Research Assistant opportunity 🌟 I'm looking for an RA to support research @thechbh.bsky.social on social information seeking and decision making, including fMRI and MEG 🧠 Details: tinyurl.com/chbh-ra-uob Deadline: 20th July ⏳ Start: From September 🗓️ Please share 🔁
Looking for a PhD? Interested in cognitive computational neuroscience, motivation and decision-making? See our project listed in the BBSRC MIBTP competition for funding for a 4-year PhD in the @msnlab.bsky.social in the @thechbh.bsky.social. Deadline 27/11. More info: tinyurl.com/5d5vz8m7
Todd Vogel
11mo
7mo