Prosociality
Open accessAbstract
Prosociality refers to behaviours that are intended to benefit others. This definition appears to be so straightforward that it hardly bears mentioning: like certain forms of adult entertainment, we know it when we see it. Yet, determining what counts as prosocial is not as simple as it first appears. There are numerous behaviours that appear prosocial but, on scrutiny, may not have been intended and motivated for the well-being of others. Consider a banal scenario: a seated passenger on a crowded bus stands up and someone takes his seat. Did the person standing up intend that someone else take the seat? Perhaps he was getting off the bus at the next stop and did not care if anyone sat there. But what if he remained standing for several stops, or made an overt gesture such as waving his hand toward the seat? In that case it is more likely that he intended for someone to have his place on the bus. But what about his underlying motives? Maybe he was putting himself in a better position to pick the pocket of the person sitting down. Less sinister possibilities include trying to impress the person who took his seat - trying to improve his reputation, his social standing, as it were. Or maybe, just maybe, he intended for another passenger to sit comfortably, to increase the happiness of a stranger, with no ulterior motives.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Achieving the five pillars of a successful fight against emerging infectious diseases requires an ethical framework of prosociality, meaning that individuals and government regulations prioritise societal needs over narrow individual interests.
“To accomplish these five pillars requires an ethical framework of prosociality—the orientation of individuals and government regulations to the needs of society as a whole, rather than to narrow individual interests.”
From The Lancet Commission on lessons for the future from the COVID-19 pandemic (2022) · cites this paper as [5]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
Fehr, E., & Fischbacher, U. (2003) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature02043 · Cited by 3,475 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
The Lancet Commission on lessons for the future from the COVID-19 pandemic
Sachs, J. D., Karim, S. S. A., Aknin, L., Allen, J., Brosbøl, K., Colombo, F., Barron, G. C., Espinosa, M. F., Gaspar, V., Gaviria, A., et al. (2022) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(22)01585-9 · Cited by 842 · see citing works
The price of prosociality in pandemic times
Santamaría-García, H., Burgaleta, M., Legaz, A., Flichtentrei, D., Córdoba-Delgado, M., Molina-Paredes, J., Linares-Puerta, J., Montealegre-Gómez, J., Castelblanco, S., Schulte, M., et al. (2022) · Humanities and Social Sciences Communications · doi:10.1057/s41599-021-01022-2 · Cited by 7 · see citing works
- Authors
- Jensen, K.
- Affiliations
- University of Manchester (GB)
- Corresponding author
- Jensen, Keith
- ORCID
- Jensen, Keith
- Venue
- Current Biology
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2016-08
- Volume
- 26
- Issue
- 16
- Pages
- R748-R752
- ISSN
- 0960-9822 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W4231132474
- Cited by
- 85
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2026: 8 · 2025: 11 · 2024: 14 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 19 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 6 · 2016: 1
- FWCI
- 9.50
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Current Biology (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Research Explorer (The University of Manchester) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Evolutionary Game Theory and Cooperation
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Evolutionary Psychology and Human Behavior
- Social Sciences › Safety Research › Experimental Behavioral Economics Studies
- Keywords
- prosocial behavior, intentionality, motivation, altruism, helping behavior, social cognition, moral psychology
- MeSH terms
- Animals, Biological Evolution, Humans, Motivation, Social Behavior, Age Distribution
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review