In recent days, half the world has been shocked by what happened in the Australian marathon on April 15. Hence, interest in the functioning of helping behavior has resurfaced.

In case someone has not heard, I put you in the background. On that day, one of the leading runners, Callum Hawkins, collapsed and collapsed two kilometers from the finish line. The controversy arises because, after his fall, no one comes to help him. The organization was slow to respond. The spectators, located a few centimeters from his position, limited themselves to recording and taking photos with their mobile phones. The runner behind him passed by.

In this link you can find one of the many videos that circulate on the Internet about it.

Why didn’t anyone come over to see what was wrong with him? Why didn’t anyone help him in a situation where it seems obvious that he needed it? These are the questions that everyone is asking in recent days.

In this article I will address these issues, defining helping behaviors, and trying to solve why people, on numerous occasions, do not help others.

What is helping behavior?

First, let’s define what a helping behavior is. A helping behavior would be any action that benefits or enhances the well-being of another person. An example might be giving Callum Hawkins water after he collapsed on the ground.

Helping behavior is any action that benefits another person.

It is important not to confuse this type of behavior with altruism. The main difference between the two is that, in altruistic behaviors, the person who performs them does not think about their own interests. He only focuses his attention on the needs of the person he helps.

Why do we help?

In general terms, the reason for helping behaviors could be explained due to three different reasons:

• Learning. Like any other behavior, the action of helping others is also learned.
• Values. Whether they are moral, personal and/or social. We all have a series of internalized rules that tell us when to help.
• Activation. Whether we like it or not, people become physiologically and emotionally activated by the suffering of others. This activation can trigger helping behaviors.

To these factors should be added the influence exerted by the dominant culture. For example, in Western societies an individualistic social model predominates. This model of society would not encourage helping behaviors in the same way as another more collectivist model. Likewise, the environment also has a significant influence. As an example, it is known that people who live in hostile environments tend not to help strangers.

We help others through learning, values ​​and emotional activation

Consider now the case of the marathon runner Hawkins. Probably all the spectators at the race were triggered by watching him collapse to the ground. There is also a good chance that all of them learned as children to help people when they need medical attention. Knowing the values ​​of these people is more complicated. But I think we are not wrong if we suggest that many of them have values ​​related to caring for people in situations of vulnerability.

Why don’t we help?

Often, despite the fact that all the assumptions to help others are met, we do not (as in the case at hand). This can happen for the reasons that I explain below:

• Attribution of guilt. If, faced with a situation, we assess that the person who needs help is guilty of what has happened to them, it is highly probable that we will decide not to help them. We tend to think that if “he has asked for it” it is not our problem. And, consequently, we do not act. Let’s take Callum’s case as an example. Some viewer may have attributed her collapse to a lack of training, or poor hydration during the race. And that’s why she didn’t act to help her.
• Effect of spectators. We could also call it diffusion of responsibility. This means that the more people there are witnessing a situation where help is required, the less likely it is that someone will take the step. As there are a lot of people, we all tend to think that ” someone else will help” or “someone will call the ambulance/police/fire brigade…”. Consequently, we do not have to worry or get involved. In my humble opinion, I believe that this is the hypothesis that would best explain the case we are talking about.
• Cost-reward balance. If, faced with a critical situation, we have time to reflect, and we appreciate that helping will cause us some cost, it is highly likely that we will not do so. For example, if we see a traffic accident from our car but we assess that it is dangerous to stop in that area of ​​the road, it is most likely that we will not decide to do so.