suggesting a person is in need are attended to in the case of altruism. Both models suggest these cues are taken into account before possible responses are considered and compared against possible costs. Aggressors would then evaluate how much a response is needed before acting, while the extent of responsibility toward the needy party is assessed in the defence stage of the altruism model.If the two types of behaviour are simply opposites then it would follow that those with a disposition towards prosocial behaviour would be slow to become aggressive. In fact distinct correlations have been found between those low inclination toward prosocial behaviour and high levels of aggression, a reluctance to share. (Eisenberg, 1988) and psychopathy while those who tend behave prosocially are obedient and compliant (Hart, 1997). The similarity between the models independently devised, regarding aggression and altruism, combined with the correlations observed by the temperament theorists, would suggest that the two are indeed opposites on a continuum. However, the altruism Process model does not take into account peoples unique interpersonal relationships and experiences, which help to shape future attitudes to individual cases and situations. If the proposition of a continuum is to be accepted, the decision not to help another could be regarded as an aggressive act, a controversial notion.Prosocial behaviour, by definition is beneficial to others, whilst aggression is deliberate harm to others. Throughout history we have seen war in the name of freedom and diabolical acts of genocide for the purposes of the preservation of a peoples culture. On all these occasions the political, social and environmental situation have greatly influenced the actions of men, and it is in the light of these events that the idea of prosocial behaviour and aggression being at opposite ends of the same spectrum, and therefore unable to manifest themselves at th...
