This is a study concerning on whether or not the place of origin of an individual, may it be rural or urban, affects the willingness of that individual to help strangers, measuring and comparing the degree of willingness and help extended to strangers. Hypothesis Alternative Hypothesis: Individuals with a rural background are necessarily more willing to help others in need than people with an urban background. Null Hypothesis: Individuals with a rural background are not necessarily more willing to help others in need than people with an urban background.
Significance of the Study This study seeks to find out whether a person’s environmental orientation would affect his/her willingness to help other people. There has been much study about altruism or helping behaviors and this study would further the scientific knowledge about the topic through an actual social experiment. Moreover, the apparent individualism and emphasis on personal achievement have probably led to the decrease in altruistic behaviors or even the willingness to help others especially strangers.
In a way, this study would also examine the belief that individuals who live in rural areas are more inclined to helping while those who reside in urban areas are individualistic. Methodology This study makes use of participants who come from urban and rural as subjects of the social experiment. An experimental paradigm is conducted rather than a survey questionnaire to facilitate an actual social experiment in the context of actually deriving the real responses of participants. 50 people are approached and asked to help carry groceries to a car.
Two separate locations are chosen to cater to the two different subjects. For rural location, shopping mall is selected while Walmart is chosen for the urban location. Each location is expected to represent the corresponding attribute of the subjects. 25 males and 25 females from each location are approached and are counted for willing and able to help if they do carry the groceries at least 10 meters. Results of the Study After conducting the study, the results showed the following figures: Rural Males who extended help – 23 out of 25
Rural Females who extended help – 21 out of 25 Urban Males who extended help – 16 out of 25 Urban Females who extended help – 12 out of 25 This shows that 92% of the rural males and 84% of the rural females are willing to help others. While only 64% of the urban males and 48% females are willing to help others. Discussion Results showed that from those, 8% males and 16% females are unwilling to help; whereas those individuals of urban origins, 26% males and 52% females are not likely to help to others.
Such results illustrate that more individuals are willing to help in the rural compared to individuals coming from the urban. Interpretation of Data Upon using the Chi-square method, the results yielded the chi-square value of 16. 68, where p<0. 002. Using 0. 05 level of confidence, this shows that the computed value of 16. 68 is greater than the critical value of 0. 02 thus the alternative hypothesis should therefore be accepted that Individuals with a rural background are necessarily more willing to help others in need than people with an urban background.
This (chi square result) indicates that there is indeed a difference; looking at the pattern it is clear that people with a rural background are more helping than people with an urban background. Difference between genders is slight. Females may have lesser percentages of helping compared to men due to the nature of the favor asked from them such as carrying grocery bags. Usually, such kind of activity is done by males more than females do.
While the place of origin may have certainly affected the willingness of an individual to help others, it may be necessarily true that other factors may have also affected the values and beliefs of an individual regardless of their social upbringing. Works Cited Page Maner, J. K. , Gailliot, M. T. ,(2007). Altruism and egoism: Prosocial motivations for helping depend on relationship context, PP 347-358. EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY, VOL. 37. Chi Square. 15 July 2008. Dieter, Darryl. 06 Aug. 2008. <http://www. sbctc. ctc. edu/warp/chi. htm>