Analyze one of the four theoretical models

Beneficial Action Within Altruistic and Prosocial Behavior

John W. Toumbourou Deakin University

This article integrates knowledge from health psychology, life course development, and social psychol- ogy to outline a theoretical framework for identifying, investigating, promoting, and evaluating beneficial action. Beneficial action is defined as a subset of prosocial (motivated to benefit others that may include self-interest) and altruistic (prosocial motivation without self-interest) behavior that uses consequential (scientific) knowledge to increase freedom within the global population. Beneficial action theory seeks to increase political and social actions that are planned and evaluated to ensure key tasks in human development. Central among these is the broadening of social identity to ensure that the human potential to use science to modify the natural environment achieves benefits for the global population. This article presents a theoretical framework for conceptualizing the psychological processes that underlie the development, application and evaluation of beneficial action for individuals and populations. The need to conceptualize beneficial action arises from 3 related observations. First, the certainty of knowledge of the beneficial outcome of a specific human action increases the moral motivation to engage in that action. For example, there is consensus among psychologists and other professions that it is unethical to engage in therapeutic practices that have evidence for neutral or harmful consequences. Second, due to the rapid increase in scientific knowledge, the range of human action that has scientifically ascertainable conse- quences is rapidly expanding. Third, advancing scientific knowledge means that human actions have increasingly powerful consequences for humanity and the natural world, warranting careful consideration of how to ensure global population benefits.

Keywords: prosocial, altruism, human development, social identity, evidence-based practice

This article outlines a theory for improving the beneficial con- tribution of morally motivated human action. A theory of benefi- cial action is developed by integrating knowledge from the areas of health behavior theories, life course development, population sci- ences, social psychology, and other disciplines. Knowledge from the behavior change and population sciences is outlined to identify how human actions can be strategically planned to achieve bene- ficial ends. Knowledge from life course theory and developmental psychology is synthesized to present a contemporary position on the development and enactment of morally motivated behavior. In what follows specific theories and empirical evidence from the fields of positive youth development, health psychology, and in- ternational human development are also summarized.

Beneficial action theory is outlined in this article with reference to four principles (depicted in Figure 1). The principles specify how caring human action directed by consequential knowledge increases freedom within the global population.

The development of beneficial action theory has been influ- enced by my work as a health psychologist in the fields of public health and prevention science. My previous article (Toumbourou, 2016) outlined beneficial action theory with reference to the pre- vention of adolescent health and social problems and the promo- tion of positive youth development. The previous publication

outlined how global adolescent health issues such as international inequality and the development of adolescent risk-behavior can be reduced in the coming years by increasing investment in effective positive youth development programs that also increase active youth involvement in the dissemination of effective prevention science programs. That article (Toumbourou, 2016) described how beneficial action theory can be used in coming decades to encour- age a greater number of adolescents to experience altruistic moti- vation to engage in effective actions to achieve prevention science outcomes, resulting in an international increase in healthy adoles- cent development.

In what follows, I elaborate in more detail the four principles of beneficial action theory that have been worded to enable the testable predictions (hypotheses) outlined in the final section. Given space limitations, the development of broad theory has been emphasized above specific models and detailed theories. A broad approach to theory emphasizes common fundamentals that can integrate diverse areas of knowledge. In different parts of this article, I refer to eagle theory, by which I mean theory that offers integration of insights from an elevated view while simultaneously maintaining acuity of detail.

The increasing sophistication of evaluation techniques for causal inference in psychology, medicine, and in the applied natural sciences, such as engineering and chemistry, places these fields in a strong position to evaluate and predict the outcomes of human action. The knowledge in these fields has moral and ethical implications. These disciplines accept a neo-positivist approach to causal inference and hence their professional ethics require human actions (behavior, interventions, and policies) to be justified on the basis of evidence-based reasoning (e.g., Campbell, 1985; Sackett,

This article was published Online First August 8, 2016. Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to John W.

Toumbourou, School of Psychology and Centre for Social and Early Emotional Development (SEED), Deakin University, Geelong, 3220, Aus- tralia. E-mail: john.toumbourou@deakin.edu.au

T hi

s do

cu m

en t

is co

py ri

gh te

d by

th e

A m

er ic

an P

sy ch

ol og

ic al

A ss

oc ia

ti on

or on

e of

it s

al li

ed pu

bl is

he rs

. T

hi s

ar ti

cl e

is in

te nd

ed so

le ly

fo r

th e

pe rs

on al

us e

of th

e in

di vi

du al

us er

an d

is no

t to

be di

ss em

in at

ed br

oa dl

y.

Review of General Psychology © 2016 American Psychological Association 2016, Vol. 20, No. 3, 245–258 1089-2680/16/$12.00 http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/gpr0000081

245

Rosenberg, Gray, Haynes, & Richardson, 1996). In the field of public health psychology, the achievement of beneficial population change in areas such as reduced tobacco use and road accident trauma has increased optimism that important health and societal advances can be made through the strategic application of psycho- logical and behavioral science knowledge and scientific evalua- tion. This optimism leads to the more expansive question of whether there is the potential to replicate these advances across a broader range of applications within the field of human develop- ment (United Nations, 2008, 2015). To realize this potential, theoretical frameworks that have successfully guided applications in public health psychology and other areas of applied psychology need to be more clearly specified. In this article, these issues are examined in relation to research and theories in life-course studies, human development sciences and public health psychology.

Why Is Beneficial Action Theory Necessary?

The prominent physicist Steven Hawking recently stated that science-based threats such as genetically engineered viruses, nu- clear war, and global warming “all threaten to wipe out the human race in the foreseeable future” (Knapton, 2016, p. 4). Naomi Klein (2014) also described despair and pessimism on the part of many scientists who believe that the catastrophic effects of climate change cannot be averted because the solution would require a radical overthrow of capitalism.

Beneficial action theory presents a solution by synthesizing knowledge gleaned from successful population-level behavior change interventions within public health to outline how a positive future for human and other life systems can be secured. The policy implications of beneficial action theory align with the ambitious recommendations for integrated action to establish a global move- ment to increase human caring capacity recently outlined by psy- chologists with expertise in behavior change interventions (Biglan, 2015). Beneficial action theory integrates the potential to more fully utilize the behavior change and prevention sciences to en- courage human care, but is distinctive in deliberately encouraging a broadening in human identification toward global population systems, while addressing vested interests and harnessing the benefits of science.

The need to more clearly define beneficial action as a subfield of prosocial and altruistic behavior arises partly from experience in public health psychology, where prosocial and altruistic motiva- tions have, in a number of cases, been observed to result in neutral or harmful outcomes. For example, over recent decades consider- able enthusiasm and support have been maintained by prosocially motivated individuals and organizations in Australian communi- ties to promote and support knowledge-based drug education pro- grams, despite scientific evidence that these programs had poten- tially harmful outcomes in encouraging adolescent interest in tobacco use (Hawthorne, 1996). Similar problems have occurred in the United States (Ringwalt, Ennett, & Holt, 1991). Another ex- ample occurs with boot-camps and targeted group interventions for deviant youth that continue to be promoted and supported by prosocially motivated individuals and organizations despite evi- dence that they are ineffective or harmful (Dodge, Dishion, & Lansford, 2006). Two additional examples of strategies that are counterproductive, ineffective or less effective than alternative options, yet continue to be widely implemented by prosocial and altruistic actors with adverse impacts for large populations are as follows:

• Health care services and systems that are more expensive and less effective than available alternatives. As one exam- ple, U.S. health outcomes are poor relative to equivalent nations (Sachs, 2011).

• Reliance on aggressive military and policing interventions, incarceration and tough penalties as a means of protecting society from civil unrest, crime, violence, and antisocial behavior. These options continue to be promoted and im- plemented by civil society despite extensive evidence and availability of superior prevention and behavioral treatment strategy options (Toumbourou et al., 2015).

The examples presented above of cases where altruistic or prosocially motivated individuals and organizations engage in behaviors that achieve neutral or destructive outcomes raise the question as to whether behavior can be considered as altruistic or prosocially motivated when available scientific knowledge indi- cates the likelihood of adverse outcomes? The answer is “yes” within current psychological definitions of altruism and prosocial behavior. This is because it is motives or social consensus in anticipated outcomes that are used to define these behaviors (Penner, Dovidio, Piliavin, & Schroeder, 2005). This lack of attention to the scientifically ascertainable outcomes of behavior is understandable given that historically there has been limited po- tential to disentangle complex causal associations and behavioral consequences. However, evaluation techniques for causal infer- ence have advanced considerably in psychology and other empir- ical disciplines in recent decades (Cook & Campbell, 1979; Pearl, 2009).

I propose a solution to this problem by distinguishing “benefi- cial action” as a component within prosocial and altruistically motivated behavior. Altruism (discussed in more detail subse- quently) is defined as behavior that is selflessly motivated. Proso- cial behavior (also discussed in detail subsequently) is not neces- sarily altruistic, but it is behavior that is motivated to benefit others. Beneficial action is a distinctive subset of these behaviors that a competent appraisal of current scientific understanding of consequences reveals to be the most likely to result in collective benefits. This article presents a strategy by which beneficial action

beneficial ac�on

(Principle 2)

competent care for out-

groups (Principle 4)

understanding consequen�al

knowledge (Principle 3)

global popula�on

freedom (Principle 1)

Figure 1. Beneficial action theory.

T hi

s do

cu m

en t

is co

py ri

gh te

d by

th e

A m

er ic

an P

sy ch

ol og

ic al

A ss

oc ia

ti on

or on

e of

it s

al li

ed pu

bl is

he rs

. T

hi s

ar ti

cl e

is in

te nd

ed so

le ly

fo r

th e

pe rs

on al

us e

of th

e in

di vi

du al

us er

an d

is no

t to

be di

ss em

in at

ed br

oa dl

y.

246 TOUMBOUROU