There is virtually no research on the nitty gritty of heroism. It’s a bit of a minefield actually. It is this minefield that Zeno Franco and Phil Zimbardo stepped into in 2006 when they authored the “Banality of Heroism” article in Greater Good Magazine. That article spurred me to contact them and the rest is history. Or something.
A couple of years ago, they asked me to help spread word of an online survey that would provide some initial research options. I sent it to BoingBoing and it blew up. They got thousands of entries and then set to making some conclusions. Well, first they had to work out how to read the masses of data.
After a very long time on putting it all together, Kathy Blau, Zeno, and Phil have produced a paper. In it, they attempt to define heroism, separate it from altruism, analyze the public’s perceptions, and various other topics of interest. The paper has been published in the journal, Review of General Psychology. There’s very little chance you’ve seen that though, so you can exclusively download a pdf version here.
Please leave your comments here – Zeno, Kathy, and Phil would love to hear what you have to say. I am 98% sure they will respond to questions as well.
CITATION
Franco, Z. E., Blau, K., & Zimbardo, P. G. (2011, April 11). Heroism: A Conceptual Analysis and Differentiation Between Heroic Action and Altruism. Review of General Psychology.
Advance online publication. doi: 10.1037/a0022672
Hi, Matt,
I finally found an opportunity to read through Franco, Blau, & Zimbardo’s latest research, and there are some fantastic nuggets of wisdom in there. (I’ve tweeted a handful of them as I was reading!) I was somewhat disappointed that they didn’t find more to elevate “social heroism” to a level with civil and military heroes, because I think that lack of discussion in our society is one of the major contributing factors that disengages the heroic imagination of “average people”.
A few of my favorite quotes …
“Heroism is a social attribution, never a personal one; yet the act itself is often a solitary, existential choice.”
Webster’s 1913 Dictionary: “Heroism is a contempt of danger, not from ignorance or inconsiderate levity, but from a noble devotion to some great cause, and a just confidence of being able to meet danger in the spirit of such a cause.”
“The goal of social heroism can be seen as the preservation of a community-sanctioned value or standard that is perceived to be under threat. In some cases, the actor is actually trying to establish a set of extra-community standards-pushing toward a new ideal that has not yet found wide acceptance.”
“Heroism encompasses a fundamentally different class of behaviors that, while sharing some overlap with altruism, represents a difference in kind rather than a difference in degree.”
Heroism involving: Moral development, personality type, leadership style, aptitude to address the problem at hand, and external elements (presence or absence of a situation that calls for heroic action & availability of resources)
“The true power (and perhaps the final measure of success) of a social hero is that their actions can ultimately guide us through the dissonance, which they themselves produced, to embrace a challenging new set of values that has the potential to drive further constructive action.” (Wow! Powerful.)
“We have argued that the perpetuation of the myth of the “heroic elect” does society a disservice because it prevents the “average citizen” from considering their own heroic potential.”
Lastly, about Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.’s “I Have a Dream” speech: “Many of the people listening to that speech had lost the ability to imagine a better world, or to believe that their own acceptance of risky actions had the power to foster change.” (I had never though about the speech that way before.)
buildingheroes.wordpress.com
Totally agree on the social heroism angle. I think the quote you picked out explains why. Thanks for your comments Chad – appreciated as always.