Social cognition and prosocial behavior in public spaces: a naturalistic study in Bogotá, Colombia

Social cognition and prosocial behavior in public spaces: a naturalistic study in Bogotá, Colombia | Research Square window.SnipcartSettings = { analytics: { enabled: false } }; (function() { var accessVector = localStorage.getItem('access_vector') || ''; window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || []; if (accessVector) { window.dataLayer.push({ user: { profile: { profileInfo: { snid: accessVector } } } }); } })(); (function(w,d,s,l,i){w[l]=w[l]||[];w[l].push({'gtm.start':new Date().getTime(),event:'gtm.js'});var f=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],j=d.createElement(s),dl=l!='dataLayer'?'&l='+l:'';j.async=true;j.src='https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtm.js?id='+i+dl;f.parentNode.insertBefore(j,f);})(window,document,'script','dataLayer','GTM-K279D39R'); Browse Preprints In Review Journals COVID-19 Preprints AJE Video Bytes Research Tools Research Promotion AJE Professional Editing AJE Rubriq About Preprint Platform In Review Editorial Policies Our Team Advisory Board Help Center Sign In Submit a Preprint Cite Share Download PDF Research Article Social cognition and prosocial behavior in public spaces: a naturalistic study in Bogotá, Colombia Tifanny Aguirre, Gabriel J. Colorado Z., Juan Carlos Caicedo Mera This is a preprint; it has not been peer reviewed by a journal. https://doi.org/ 10.21203/rs.3.rs-9555671/v1 This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License Status: Under Review Version 1 posted 10 You are reading this latest preprint version Abstract Prosociality is of increasing relevance in urban contexts characterized by complex social interactions, where it plays a fundamental role in promoting cooperation and strengthening social cohesion. In this research, we examined the relationship between social cognition and prosocial behaviors observed in a naturalistic setting - the San Alejo Flea Market in Bogotá, Colombia. Specifically, empathy and prosocial behaviors such as altruism and cooperation were explored as the foundations of human prosociality, framed within social neuroscience. Using an ecological approach, 36 hours of systematic observation were conducted to characterize prosocial behavior in situ, complemented by a survey and a psychometric instrument assessing social cognition among adults aged 25–55. A total of 32,123 behaviors were recorded, with empathy being the most frequent (86.4%), followed by spatial interaction (11.8%), cooperation (1.5%), and altruism (0.1%). Four main findings emerged: (1) social cognition scores were higher in women than in men; (2) individuals in lower socioeconomic positions exhibited higher levels of social cognition; (3) observational data showed a higher frequency of prosocial behaviors among men; and (4) environmental conditions were associated with behavior, with higher frequencies observed on warm days and in the presence of music, particularly under cloudy conditions. These results reveal a divergence between self-reported social cognition and observable prosocial behavior, and highlight the importance of studying social processes in natural contexts. Public spaces emerge as key settings where cognition, social norms, and environmental factors interact, underscoring their importance as venues for encounter, coexistence, and social cohesion in contemporary urban environments. Bogota naturalistic observation prosociality social interaction socioeconomic position urban environments Figures Figure 1 Figure 2 Figure 3 Figure 4 Figure 5 Figure 6 Introduction Prosocial behaviors are voluntary actions that benefit others, including helping, giving, altruism, reciprocal exchanges, collaboration, and cooperation (Luo, 2018 ; Schroeder & Graziano, 2015 ). These behaviors are influenced by biological, social, environmental, and psychological factors (Dovidio et al., 2006 ). In urban contexts, where social interactions are frequent and complex, prosocial behavior plays a crucial role in promoting cooperation and social cohesion (Schroeder & Graziano, 2015 ). Recent research highlights the importance of understanding prosocial behavior in public spaces, emphasizing the sensitivity of human mind to environmental cues as well as its adaptability in diverse situations. For instance, generosity increases when individuals feel observed, even by subtle cues such as images of eyes (Haley & Fessler, 2005 ; Nettle et al., 2011 ; Nettle et al., 2013 ), suggesting that prosocial actions may be shaped by social evaluation and the desire for approval, potentially boosting self-esteem (Carlo & Randall, 2002 ). Prior to engaging in prosocial action, the question arises as to what preliminary steps may motivate people to manifest different behaviors. The process of social cognition, encompassing the interpretation of social signals, involves a series of processes such as perception, attention, memory, and subsequent behavioral response, and has been investigated across various disciplines (Frith, 2008 ). A more accurate understanding of others' emotions and thoughts can lead to greater empathy and a stronger willingness to act in a prosocial manner. Individuals with high social cognition, for example, are more likely to understand the needs of others, respond positively (Richaud de Minzi, 2009 ), and express a greater number of prosocial behaviors. Thus, social cognition can be understood as a key mechanism underlying prosociality. Among the prosocial behaviors that can be found in urban settings are the adherence to rules, as compliance would benefit the collective. In contrast, behaviors such as sitting in the space or touching elements within the space may not initially seem to be directly associated with empathy or prosociality. However, the way people behave in a given space reflects their social interactions. If people feel comfortable and safe in a space, they are more likely to exhibit prosocial behaviors. For example, shared use of space (e.g., when people sit together) can increase opportunities for interaction, fostering empathy, cooperation and prosociality (Davis, 1996 ). Moreover, behaviors such as separating waste, recycling, or using sustainable means of transportation benefit the collective. There is evidence that people who exhibit prosocial behavior tend to be more likely to participate in green activities (Tapia-Fonllem et al., 2013 ; Neaman & Marió, 2015 ; Neaman et al., 2018 ). Thus, the way individuals relate to urban space influences both social interaction and the construction of place identity (Lynch, 2004 ). Additionally, environmental factors such as atmospheric conditions, time of day, and the presence of music may also shape prosocial behavior. Although social cognition (i.e., processes through which individual interpret and respond to social information, including perception, attention, memory, and behavioral responses; Frith, 2008 ) is not itself a component of prosocial behavior (Zahn-Waxler & Smith, 1992 ), it is closely connected to prosociality. The ability to attune to others' emotions plays a central role in guiding prosocial responses (Correa Duque, 2017 ; Adriaense et al., 2020 ), supported by neural processes involving brain regions such as the insula, dorsal anterior cingulate cortex, and medial prefrontal cortex (León, 2012 ). The study of social cognition has evolved from linear and individual-centered models toward more integrative approaches, including theory of mind, simulation theory, and theory-theory, which seek to explain how individuals infer others’ mental states (Gallagher, 2008 ; León Rodríguez & Cárdenas, 2017 ). Regarding the relationship between social cognition and prosocial behaviors, empirical evidence suggests that greater social cognitive abilities are associated with increased prosocial behavior. For example, developmental studies show that as children´s social cognition matures, they become more responsive to others´ needs, leading to more frequent prosocial actions (Hoffman, 2007 ; Knafo et al., 2011 ). Public space represents a key context in which social cognition and prosocial behavior converge. Urban scholars have emphasized the importance of understanding the relationship between public life and urban space (Gehl & Svarre, 2013). However, this relationship remains underexplored, particularly in the Colombian context, where public spaces play a central role as sites of interaction, encounter, and social exchange. This study examines the role of social cognition in shaping prosocial behaviors in public spaces in Bogota, Colombia, adopting an ecological perspective. Specifically, it focuses on empathy, altruism, and cooperation, while also incorporating spatial interaction behaviors as an emerging dimension of prosociality. By studying these processes in a natural setting—a flea market—this research seeks to complement experimental approaches, which are often based on self-reports and conducted in controlled environments, where social desirability bias may occur. In doing so, the study aims to provide a more comprehensive understanding of how social cognition and environmental context interact to shape prosocial behavior in urban settings. Method Study design This study adopts a quantitative, ecological approach to examine the relationship between social cognition and prosocial behavior in a natural urban setting. A non-experimental, cross-sectional correlational design was employed, as variables were not manipulated and were observed within a specific temporal and spatial context (Hernández-Sampieri & Mendoza Torres, 2018 ). Data collection was conducted in two independent phases: (1) systematic behavioral observation, and (2) application of a survey and a psychometric instrument. These phases were implemented with independent samples drawn from the same population. Study area This investigation was conducted at the San Alejo Flea Market (SAFM hereafter), situated at the intersection of Carrera Séptima and Calle 24 in Bogotá, Colombia. Established in 1985, this market brings together vendors offering a wide range of items, including curiosities, books, antiques, and traditional foods. Operating every Sunday and holiday from 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., it transforms a parking lot into a vibrant public space. Through the self-organization of its members, the market has evolved into a significant meeting point for many citizens, contributing to its relevance in terms of city appropriation and identity (Saldaña, 2014 ). Variables The study considered the following variables: Independent variables : Level of social cognition, assessed using the Exploratory Multidimensional Cooperation and Aggression Questionnaire (CEMCA). Sociodemographic characteristics (age, sex, educational level, religion, political position), collected through a survey. Perception of public space and of the SAFM, assessed through a survey. Dependent variable: Prosocial behaviors (empathy, cooperation, altruism and spatial interaction), recorded through systematic observation. Sampling and participants Two independent samples were used, corresponding to each phase of the study. For the first phase, which consisted of observing and analyzing the behaviors of market visitors, the sampling unit was randomly selected women and men who visited the SAFM. It is estimated that the market may have around 40 thousand visitors per day (Duarte Martínez, 2016 ). The type of sample was non-probabilistic, opportunistic since it depended on the people who transited inside the market. In the second phase, which aimed to quantify dimensions of social cognition, characterized participants´ sociodemographic profiles, and examine their perceptions of the city, adult women and men aged 25–55 who visited the SAFM were randomly selected and voluntarily agreed to participate. The sample size for this phase included 106 participants, partially replicating the study by Páramo and Burbano Arroyo ( 2014 ), which included 129 participants. The selected age range for the instrument application was based on evidence that this stage of life is associated with maximum brain development, involving maturation of the frontal lobe and full myelination of neuron axons. These processes are linked to more reflective and less impulsive decision-making, a greater understanding of the consequences of actions, and a clearer articulation of the ethical and normative principles that guide coexistence in society (Marzana et al., 2010 ; Arain et al., 2013 ). Furthermore, prosociality tends to increase from adolescence onward as egocentrism declines and moral reasoning becomes more complex (Sánchez-Queija et al., 2006 ). Data collection Observational phase To characterize prosocial behaviors in an urban context, a systematic non-participant observation to document instances of empathy, altruism, cooperation, and spatial interaction within this space was conducted. This approach allows the study of behavior in natural settings, enhancing ecological validity (Anguera et al., 2018 ). A total of 36 hours of video recordings were collected using a Canon PowerShot ELPH 100 HS camera between 9:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m. across six consecutive Sundays between August 28 and October 2, 2022. The camera was positioned at the entrance on Carrera Séptima at a height of 1.45 m, targeting all adults passing through a high-traffic area that facilitates social interaction. An assistant was assigned to this point, responsible for managing the recording process and maintaining a logbook. Environmental variables were recorded during the observation period. Atmospheric conditions (sunny, cloudy, rainy) were documented every 20 minutes, and contextual events such as the presence or absence of music were recorded. Prosocial behaviors were categorized into empathy, spatial interaction, altruism and cooperation based on observable movement expressions following Aponte et al., (2016) (Table 1 ). To ensure the degree of coherence when reviewing and categorizing observational data in the laboratory, the criterion of internal concordance was used (i.e., the degree of coincidence between the evaluations made by the same observer at two different times). To estimate this, Cohen's Kappa test or Kappa index (Campo-Arias and Herazo, 2010 ) was carried out. The obtained value (k = 0.80) indicated substantial agreement (Abraira, 2001 ). Table 1 Categories used to define prosocial behaviors based on observational records at the San Alejo Flea Market, Bogotá, 2022 (Based on Aponte et al, 2016). Code Movement of expression Definition Category 1 Empathy Interaction indicating affiliative behavior between individuals. 1.1 Interlock arms Crossing an arm with the arm of another individual. 1.2 Hold hands Holding the hand of another individual. 1.3 Approach Shortening distance to another individual by moving or leaning the trunk and/or turning the body in the direction of another individual. 1.4 Speaking To convey verbal information to one or more individuals. 1.5 Give a sign of approval Expressing oneself with gestures to reinforce or support other individuals, such as continuous up and down movement of the head. 1.6 Make contact Touching the other with any part of the body. 1.7 See Establish eye contact with another individual. 1.8 Receive Accepting objects given by another individual. 1.9 Hug To put one's arms around someone. 1.10 Smile and laugh Expressive movement of the mouth and face denoting laughter: raising the corners of the lips and cheeks. Category 2 Spatial interaction Dynamics of the relationship between subjects and space. 2.1 Follow the rules on the use of the space. Abide by the request of an MPSA employee, such as, for example, storing the bicycle in the parking lot when requested. 2.2 Hygiene Depositing waste somewhere in the space. 2.3 Sit down Position in which the subject rests on the buttocks. 2.4 Contact Touching elements in space with the upper extremities. Category 3 Altruism Interaction that indicates giving help to another without getting anything in return. 3.1 Support / Hold Holding elements of other individuals for a period of time. 3.2 Provide physical support Holding another individual with the hands. 3.3 Inform To give notice to another individual in order to assist them. 3.4 Give Delivering objects to another individual. 3.5 Orientar Guiding by giving guidelines or instructions to other individuals. Categoría 4 Cooperation Interaction that indicates mutual assistance to achieve a common task. 4.1 Approach to coordinate Approach other individuals to organize tasks. 4.2 To make coordination signals. Expressing with gestures to organize actions. 4.3 Giving and receiving Exchanging objects with another individual. Survey and Psychometric phase A structured questionnaire was designed to collect sociodemographic information and assess perceptions of public space and the SAFM. The instrument included 28 questions, combining demographic items (e.g., age, occupation, religion, and political position) and closed-ended questions related to participants’ experiences in urban public spaces in Bogotá. In addition, social cognition was assessed using an adapted version of Chapter VIII of the Exploratory Multidimensional Cooperation and Aggression Questionnaire (CEMCA) (Aponte et al., 2017), originally derived from the Attitudes and Social Cognitive Strategies (AECS) test (Moraleda et al., 1998 ). This instrument evaluates two main dimensions—social attitudes and social thinking—to generate an overall index of social cognition. The instrument was adapted to the Colombian context and language. It consists of 44 Likert-type items and was designed to be completed within approximately 15–20 minutes. Data collection for this phase took place within the market in the food court area and was applied simultaneously with the observational phase. Data Analysis Behavioral data from the observational phase were analyzed using The Observer XT software (Noldus Information Technology; Mosselman et al., 2018 ), which allows detailed coding and integration of contextual modifiers such as atmospheric conditions and music. To control for variation in observation effort across conditions, time segments were randomly selected and standardized into equal 60-minute intervals for the four most frequent conditions: (1) music–cloudy, (2) no music–cloudy, (3) music–sunny, and (4) no music–sunny. Chi-square tests were used to assess differences in the frequency of prosocial behaviors across environmental conditions, as well as differences by sex and behavioral category. For the psychometric data, nonparametric tests were applied due to non-normal data distribution. The Mann–Whitney U test was used to compare social cognition scores by sex, while the Kruskal–Wallis test was used to evaluate differences across socioeconomic position, which is typically used as a multidimensional construct that captures individuals’ relative standing in terms of income, education, and social conditions. Due to low sample sizes in the highest socioeconomic categories (levels 5 and 6), these were excluded from the analysis. Results Sociodemographic data 106 people were surveyed in total, with a balanced sample of 46.2% women and 53.8% men. In terms of educational level, 12.3% of the participants completed their high school studies, 68.9% completed university, and 18.9% completed graduate studies. Regarding the occupation of the respondents, the majority are employees (74.5%), followed by self-employed workers (20.8%), and in smaller proportion students (4.7%). In response to the question "Do you practice any religion?" 44% say they do, and the remaining 62% do not. Social cognition and sex To examine differences by sex, Chapter VIII of the CEMCA test (Aponte et al., 2016), which assesses social cognition, was applied. The instrument yields three dimensions: prosocial attitudes, social perception, and overall social cognition. These variables were analyzed in relation to sex. Results indicated that both prosocial attitudes (Mann–Whitney U test: U = 1052.00; N = 104; p = 0.05; Fig. 1 ) and social cognition (U = 1017.50; N = 104; p = 0.03; Fig. 2 ) were significantly higher in females than in males. Prosocial behaviors by sex (observational phase) During 36 hours of observation in public space, a total of 32,123 prosocial behaviors were recorded. The distribution of observations differed significantly by sex (52% in men and 48% in women; χ² = 342.69, df = 3, p < 0.001). The most frequently observed behavior was empathy (86.4% of observations), followed by spatial interaction (11.8%), cooperation (1.5%), and altruism (0.1%; Table 2 ). Significant differences were also found in the frequencies of behaviors across categories (χ² = 142.72, df = 17, p < 0.001). Table 2 Incidence of prosocial behaviors by sex in the SAFM, Bogota, Colombia. Categories Women Men Total Empathy 13869 13905 27774 Spatial interaction 1291 2520 3811 Cooperation 180 313 493 Altruism 15 30 45 Overall Total 15355 16768 32123 At the level of specific behaviors, notable sex differences were observed. Interlocking arms was more frequent among females (100 events) than males (10 events), whereas approaching (31 males vs. 18 females) and making contact (128 males vs. 79 females) were more common among males. Prosocial behaviors vs social cognition Results from both observational records and psychometric measures indicate that, although females reported higher levels of social cognition and prosocial attitudes, a lower frequency of prosocial behaviors was observed among females compared to males (Fig. 3 ). Social cognition and socioeconomic position Differences in social cognition were examined across categories of socioeconomic position, a multidimensional construct that captures individuals’ relative standing in terms of income, education, and social conditions. Results from the Kruskal–Wallis test indicated significant differences in social cognition across socioeconomic position groups (H = 10.755, df = 5, p = 0.05; Fig. 4 ). Specifically, individuals in lower SEP categories showed higher levels of social cognition compared to those in higher SEP groups. Perception of public space Regarding perceptions of public space, 67.9% of the respondents considered it as a dangerous environment, whereas 13.2% did not share this view, and 18.9% who did not make a definite judgment in this regard. Participants were also asked to identify the predominant feeling they experienced when passing through public space, choosing from six positive and six negative options. Results showed similar patterns for men and women, with negative sensations being more frequent (53.8%), followed by positive sensations (43.9%) (Fig. 5 ). To compare contexts, the same question was asked in relation to the SAFM. Although patterns between men and women remained similar, reported feelings differed markedly inside the market: 87.7% of respondents indicated positive feelings when passing through the market, whereas 12.3% reported negative feelings (Fig. 5 ). Another relevant question addressed participants´ evaluation of both their own behavior and that of others in public space. Individual behavior was predominantly rated as good (74.5%), followed by excellent (17.9%) and fair (6.6%). In contrast, 55.7% rate the behavior of others as fair, followed by good (26.4%), bad (13.2%), and no response (4.7%). Prosocial behaviors across environmental conditions On cloudy days, the presence of music was associated with an increase in empathetic behaviors (χ² = 44.17, d.f. = 6, p < 0.001; Fig. 6 ), whereas this effect was not observed under sunny conditions. Overall, a high number of prosocial behaviors was recorded on sunny days regardless of the presence of music. In the absence of music on cloudy days, 634 prosocial behaviors were recorded, compared to 760 behaviors when music was present under the same weather conditions. Discussion This study examined the relationship between empathy, cooperation, altruism, spatial interaction behaviors, and social cognition among adults in public spaces in Bogotá. Prosocial behaviors were characterized as they occurred in situ , while sociodemographic attributes and levels of social cognition were assessed to explore potential differences between men and women. Results indicate that social cognition varies by sex, with women exhibiting higher levels of recognition and interpretation of social signals than men. However, this pattern contrasts with observational findings, where a higher frequency of prosocial behaviors was recorded among men, suggesting a divergence between self-reported social cognition and its behavioral expression in public contexts. This pattern is consistent with findings reported by Proverbio ( 2021 ), who showed that women tend to perform better and more accurately than men in tasks involving the decoding of social signals. According to this author, such differences may arise from the interaction between biological predispositions—such as an enhanced ability to interpret facial expressions, potentially linked to evolutionary pressures associated with maternal care—and sociocultural influences that shape gendered patterns of social perception. From a complementary perspective, Shelley Taylor et al. ( 2000 ) proposed the “tend-and-befriend” theory as an alternative to the traditional “fight-or-flight” response to stress. Supported by neuroendocrine evidence in both humans and other animals, this framework suggests that oxytocin and female hormones modulate stress responses, promoting affiliative and caregiving behaviors. These mechanisms may contribute to the development of more pronounced prosocial interaction patterns in women, often associated with nurturing roles, higher levels of social communication, and collective forms of care. However, not all studies report consistent sex differences in social cognition. For instance, Di Tella et al. ( 2020 ) found no significant differences between men and women in the representation of mental states in adulthood. They argue that previously observed differences—particularly in younger populations—may reflect earlier developmental maturation in girls rather than stable differences across the lifespan. Moreover, these patterns may be shaped by cultural norms and gender expectations that influence behavior from an early age. Taken together, these perspectives suggest that sex differences in social cognition and prosociality should be understood as the result of interacting biological and sociocultural factors, rather than fixed or universal traits. A second key finding indicates that men exhibited a higher frequency of observable prosocial behaviors in public space than women (52% vs. 48%), particularly in the domains of spatial interaction, cooperation, and altruism, where male observations were nearly double those of females. This pattern contrasts with previous research, such as Sánchez-Queija et al. ( 2006 ), which reported higher levels of empathy and prosocial behavior among adolescent females, attributing these differences to early socialization processes. One possible explanation for this discrepancy lies in the gendered use of space: women have traditionally been associated with private domains, whereas men are more commonly linked to public spaces (Franck & Paxson, 1989 ). In this context, men may be more likely to engage in visible, public forms of prosocial behavior—such as helping or sharing—while women’s prosocial actions may take less observable forms, such as listening or providing emotional support (Sánchez-Queija et al., 2006 ). Addressing the central research question, this study sought to link directly observed behaviors in public space with participants’ self-reported levels of social cognition and prosociality. A clear divergence emerged between observational and self-reported data. Although women reported higher levels of social cognition and prosocial attitudes, a lower frequency of observable prosocial behaviors was recorded among women in public space. Observational data indicate that men tended to display more open and visible forms of interaction—such as approaching others and engaging in conversation—whereas women exhibited more restrained or less conspicuous behaviors, including walking arm-in-arm and expressing affiliative gestures such as smiling and laughing. These findings contribute to existing literature on gender differences by highlighting a potential gap between prosocial dispositions and their behavioral expression in public contexts. These findings also point to gender differences in the perception and use of public space, challenging common assumptions about vulnerability. Contrary to widely reported patterns suggesting that women perceive greater vulnerability to crime (e.g., Franck & Paxson, 1989 ; Yavuz & Welch, 2010 ), the present study found that a higher proportion of men perceived public space as unsafe (70% of men vs. 59% of women). Similarly, 85% of men described public space as a space of conflict, compared to 81% of women. These results are consistent with Yavuz and Welch ( 2010 ), who found that men may experience increased vulnerability in situations where they perceive limited control over their environment or when interacting with unfamiliar individuals in public settings. Together, these findings suggest that both the expression of prosocial behavior and perceptions of public space are shaped by gendered experiences and may not conform to conventional expectations. Beyond sex differences, social cognition also varied across socioeconomic position. Individuals in lower socioeconomic positions exhibit higher levels of social cognition compared to those in higher positions. This pattern is consistent with findings by Fendinger et al. ( 2023 ), who reported that, despite the common association of lower classes with deficits in cognitive performance, individuals from these groups outperform their higher-class counterparts in domains related to social cognition. One possible explanation is that, under conditions of limited material resources, individuals from lower socioeconomic positions may orient their cognition toward social goals and interpersonal relationships (Kraus et al., 2010 ; Fendinger et al., 2023 ). Supporting this idea, empirical evidence shows that people from lower socioeconomic strata tend to display greater compassion, empathy, and the ability to interpret others' emotions, potentially as a result of their greater exposure to adversity and, consequently, can connect emotionally with others (Piff et al., 2010 ). In contrast, individuals from higher socioeconomic positions may exhibit different cognitive orientations. Socioeconomic position has been widely recognized as a key factor shaping cognitive development and influencing how individuals perceive and respond to their social environment (Fendinger et al., 2023 ). Research by Kraus et al. ( 2010 , 2012 ) suggests that, while individuals from lower socioeconomic positions tend to direct their attention towards the characteristics of the social context and external cues, those from higher positions tend to focus on their personal attributes and internal states, adopting a more self-focused orientation. Together, these findings highlight that differences in social cognition across socioeconomic groups may reflect distinct adaptive strategies shaped by structural and social conditions. In addition to individual-level factors, environmental conditions were also associated with prosocial behavior. The effect of music on prosocial behavior appears to be context-dependent, particularly under cloudy conditions. On days with lower temperatures, the presence of music increased the frequency of prosocial behaviors to levels comparable to those observed on sunny days. This pattern is consistent with existing literature showing that music can act as a stimulus influencing cognitive and social processes, often promoting prosocial and cooperative behavior. For example, Ruth ( 2016 ) demonstrated that exposure to music with prosocial lyrics significantly increased prosocial actions, as participants purchased more than twice as much fair trade coffee compared to those exposed to neutral music. Beyond its content, music may also enhance prosociality through mechanisms of interpersonal coordination and synchronization. Experimental evidence shows that synchronized movement, particularly when aligned with musical rhythms, can increase cooperative tendencies. Stupacher et al. ( 2017 ) found that participants exposed to music exhibited higher prosociality scores compared to those interacting with a metronome, suggesting that music facilitates prosocial behavior by promoting social bonding through coordinated action. In addition to music, environmental conditions—particularly temperature—may also influence prosocial behavior, although evidence remains inconclusive. In the present study, sunny conditions were associated with a generally higher frequency of prosocial behaviors, regardless of the presence of music. However, the broader literature presents contrasting hypotheses: higher temperatures may either increase aggression and reduce prosociality or, alternatively, enhance positive social behaviors. A meta-analysis by Lynott et al. ( 2023 ) found limited empirical support for both perspectives, likely due to issues of replicability and contextual variability. Taken together, these findings suggest that while music may have a clearer facilitative role, the influence of temperature on prosocial behavior remains uncertain. These findings should be interpreted in light of certain limitations. The non-probabilistic sampling design and observational approach limit the ability to draw causal inferences. Future research would benefit from longitudinal designs that allow for better tracking of individuals over time, as well as from combining experimental and naturalistic methods to reduce biases associated with controlled settings (Burton-Chellew et al., 2016 ; Zaki & Ochsner, 2012 ). Additionally, comparative studies across different urban contexts—such as between neighborhoods within the same city (Nettle et al., 2011 ) or between public and private spaces—could enhance the robustness of inferences. This study identified four main findings: (1) higher social cognition scores in women compared to men; (2) higher social cognition in lower socioeconomic positions, (3) greater observable prosocial behaviors in men, and (4) associations between environmental conditions and prosocial behavior. Together, these findings underscore the importance of examining everyday social interactions in real-world contexts and integrating complementary methodological approaches that strengthen the analysis of associations between social cognition and behavior. Observing behavior in public space reveals the presence of positive social dynamics even within urban environments often characterized by narratives of conflict and individualism. In this sense, public spaces emerge as key settings for collective interaction and the construction of social cohesion. Strengthening research in these contexts may contribute to a deeper understanding of how social cognition and behavior interact in contemporary urban societies, and how these processes can support more cohesive and resilient communities. Declarations Funding: No funding to declare. Author contributions: all authors contributed to the design and implementation of the research, to the analysis of the results and to the writing of the manuscript. All authors approved the version to be published and agree to be accountable for all aspects of the work. Competing interest: The authors do not have any conflicts of interest relevant to the content of this article to disclose. Ethics statements: The study was approved by the Research Ethics Com­mittee of the Universidad Externado de Colombia, Approval No. 42. All participants signed the Participation Consent Form. Human Ethics and Consent to Participation : Participation was volun­tary and occurred only after signing an informed consent form. Clinical Trial Number: not applicable. References Abraira, V. (2001). El índice kappa. Medicina de Familia. SEMERGEN , 27 (5), 247–249. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1138-3593(01)73955-X Adriaense, J. E. C., Koski, S. E., Huber, L., & Lamm, C. (2020). Challenges in the comparative study of empathy and related phenomena in animals. Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews , 112 , 62–82. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neubiorev.2020.01.021 Anguera, M. T., Blanco-Villaseñor, A., Losada, J. L., & Portell, M. (2018). Pautas para elaborar trabajos que utilizan la metodología observacional. Anuario de Psicología , 48 (1), 9–17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anpsic.2018.02.001 Aponte Canecio, D. M., Martínez Cotrina, J., & Caicedo Mera, J. C. (2016). El cerebro social: expresiones desde la cooperación y la agresión en niños y jóvenes . Universidad Externado de Colombia, Centro de Investigaciones Sobre Dinámica Social. https://basesbiblioteca.uexternado.edu.co:2122/pdfreader/el-cerebro-social Arain, M., Mathur, P., Rais, A., Nel, W., Sandhu, R., Haque, M., Johal, L., & Sharma, S. (2013). Maturation of the adolescent brain. Neuropsychiatric Disease and Treatment , 9 (9), 449– 461. https://doi.org/10.2147/ndt.s39776 Burton-Chellew, M. N., El Mouden, C., & West, S. A. (2016). Conditional cooperation and confusion in public-goods experiments. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences , 113 (5), 1291–1296. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1509740113 Campo-Arias, A., & Herazo, E. (2010). Concordancia intra- e interevaluadores. Revista Colombiana de Psiquiatría , 39 (2), 424-432. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0034- 7450(14)60261-4 Carlo, G., & Randall, B. A. (2002). The Development of a Measure of Prosocial Behaviors for Late Adolescents. Journal of Youth and Adolescence , 31 (1), 31–44. https://doi.org/10.1023/a:1014033032440 Correa Duque, M. C. (2017). Aproximaciones epistemológicas y conceptuales de la conducta prosocial. Zona Próxima , 27 , 1–21. https://doi.org/10.14482/zp.27.10978 Davis, M. H. (1996). Empathy: a social psychological approach . Westview Press. de Waal, F. B. M. (2021). Empathy, the umbrella term. Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews , 129 , 180–181. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neubiorev.2021.07.034 Di Tella, M., Miti, F., Ardito, R. B., & Adenzato, M. (2020). Social cognition and sex: Are men and women really different? Personality and Individual Differences , 162 , 110045. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2020.110045 Dovidio, J. F., Piliavin, J. A., Schroeder, D. A., & Penner, L. A. (2006). The social psychology of prosocial behavior . Psychology Press/Taylor & Francis Group. Duarte Martínez, D. C. (2016). El Mercado de las Pulgas más tradicional del centro de Bogotá . Bogota.gov.co. https://bogota.gov.co/servicios/empleo/el-mercado-de-las-pulgas- mas-tradicional-del-centro-de- bogota#:~:text=Con%20poco%20m%C3%A1s%20de%20330 Fendinger, N. J., Dietze, P., & Knowles, E. D. (2023). Beyond cognitive deficits: how social class shapes social cognition. Trends in Cognitive Sciences , 27 (6). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2023.03.004 Franck, K. A., & Paxson, L. (1989). Women and urban public space. Public Places and Spaces , 121–146. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4684-5601-1_6 Frith, C. D. (2008). Social cognition. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences , 363 (1499), 2033–2039. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2008.0005 Gallagher, S. (2008). Understanding others: Embodied social cognition (P. Calvo & A. Gomila, Eds.). ScienceDirect; Elsevier. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/B9780080466163000220 Gehl, J., & Svarre, B. (2013). How to study public life (K. A. Steenhard, Trans.). Island Press. Haley, K. J., & Fessler, D. M. T. (2005). Nobody’s watching? Subtle cues affect generosity in an anonymous economic game. Evolution and Human Behavior , 26 (3), 245–256. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2005.01.002 Hernández-Sampieri, R., & Mendoza Torres, C. P. (2018). Metodología de la investigación: las rutas cuantitativa, cualitativa y mixta . Mcgraw-Hill Education. Hoffman, M. L. (2007). The origins of empathic morality in toddlerhood. In C. A. Brownell & C. B. Kopp (Eds.), Socioemotional development in the toddler years: Transitions and transformations (pp. 132–145). The Guilford Press. Knafo, A., Steinberg, T., & Goldner, I. (2011). Children’s low affective perspective-taking ability is associated with low self-initiated pro-sociality. Emotion , 11 (1), 194–198. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0021240 Kraus, M. W., Côté, S., & Keltner, D. (2010). Social class, contextualism, and empathic accuracy. Psychological Science , 21 (11), 1716–1723. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797610387613 Kraus, M. W., Piff, P. K., Mendoza-Denton, R., Rheinschmidt, M. L., & Keltner, D. (2012). Social class, solipsism, and contextualism: How the rich are different from the poor. Psychological Review , 119 (3), 546–572. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0028756 León R., D. A. (2012). Introducción a la cognición social y la neurociencia social cognitiva. Con- Textos , 9 (5), 1–11. Repositorio Institucional Universidad Piloto de Colombia. http://repository.unipiloto.edu.co/bitstream/handle/20.500.12277/8992/4_IntroduccionCo gnicion-ConTextos9.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y León Rodríguez, D. A., & Cárdenas, F. (2017). Aproximación Neurodinámica a la Cognición Social. Universitas Psychologica , 15 (5). https://doi.org/10.11144/javeriana.upsy15-5.ancs Luo, J. (2018). The Neural Basis of and a Common Neural Circuitry in Different Types of Pro- social Behavior. Frontiers in Psychology , 9 . https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00859 Lynch, K. (2004). La imagen de la ciudad . Barcelona Gustavo Gili. Lynott, D., Corker, K., Connell, L., & O’Brien, K. (2023). The effects of temperature on prosocial and antisocial behaviour: A review and meta‐analysis. British Journal of Social Psychology , 62 . https://doi.org/10.1111/bjso.12626 Marzana, D., Pérez-Acosta, A. M., Marta, E., & Gónzalez, M. I. (2010). La transición a la edad adulta en Colombia: una lectura relacional. Avances En Psicología Latinoamericana , 28 (1), 1–15. Redalyc. https://www.redalyc.org/pdf/799/79915029009.pdf Moraleda, M., González Galán, A., & García-Gallo, J. (1998). Actitudes y estrategias cognitivas sociales(AECS) . Tea. Mosselman, F., Weenink, D., & Lindegaard, M. R. (2018). Weapons, body postures, and the quest for dominance in robberies. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency , 55 (1), 3–26. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022427817706525 Neaman, A., & Marió, A. (2015). Prosociality and proenvironmentalism as components of sustainable behavior: toward an integrated approach to sustainability education. Journal of Natural Resources and Development , 5 , 14–16. https://doi.org/10.5027/jnrd.v5i0.02 Neaman, A., Otto, S., & Vinokur, E. (2018). Toward an Integrated Approach to Environmental and Prosocial Education. Sustainability , 10 (3), 583. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10030583 Nettle, D., Colléony, A., & Cockerill, M. (2011). Variation in cooperative behaviour within a single city. PLoS ONE , 6 (10), e26922. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0026922 Nettle, D., Harper, Z., Kidson, A., Stone, R., Penton-Voak, I. S., & Bateson, M. (2013). The watching eyes effect in the Dictator Game: It’s not how much you give, it’s being seen to give something. Evolution and Human Behavior , 34 (1), 35–40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2012.08.004 Páramo, P., & Burbano Arroyo, A. M. (2014). Los usos y la apropiación del espacio público para el fortalecimiento de la democracia. Revista de Arquitectura , 16 (1), 6–15. https://doi.org/10.14718/revarq.2014.16.2 Piff, P. K., Kraus, M. W., Côté, S., Hayden Cheng, B., & Keltner, D. (2010). Having less, giving more: The influence of social class on prosocial behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 99 (5), 771–784. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0020092 Proverbio, A. M. (2021). Sex differences in the social brain and in social cognition. Journal of Neuroscience Research . https://doi.org/10.1002/jnr.24787 Richaud de Minzi, M. C. (2009). Influencia del modelado de los padres sobre el desarrollo del razonamiento prosocial en los/las niños/as. Interamerican Journal of Psychology , 43 (1), 187–198. Ruth, N. (2016). “Heal the World”: A field experiment on the effects of music with prosocial lyrics on prosocial behavior. Psychology of Music , 45 (2), 298–304. https://doi.org/10.1177/0305735616652226 Saldaña, J. (2014). San Alejo. La Tercera Orilla , 12 . https://doi.org/10.29375/21457190.2936 Sánchez-Queija, I., Oliva, A., & Parra, Á. (2006). Empatía y conducta prosocial durante la adolescencia. Revista de Psicología Social , 21 (3), 259–271. https://doi.org/10.1174/021347406778538230 Schroeder, D. A., & Graziano, W. G. (2015). The field of prosocial behavior: an introduction and overview. In D. A. Schroeder & W. G. Graziano (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Prosocial Behavior (pp. 3–34). Oxford University Press. Stupacher, J., Maes, P.-J., Witte, M., & Wood, G. (2017). Music strengthens prosocial effects of interpersonal synchronization – If you move in time with the beat. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology , 72 , 39–44. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2017.04.007 Tapia-Fonllem, C., Corral-Verdugo, V., Fraijo-Sing, B., & Durón-Ramos, M. (2013). Assessing Sustainable Behavior and its Correlates: A Measure of Pro-Ecological, Frugal, Altruistic and Equitable Actions. Sustainability , 5 (2), 711–723. https://doi.org/10.3390/su5020711 Taylor, S. E., Klein, L. C., Lewis, B. P., Gruenewald, T. L., Gurung, R. A. R., & Updegraff, J. A. (2000). Biobehavioral responses to stress in females: Tend-and-befriend, not fight-or- flight. Psychological Review , 107 (3), 411–429. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033- 295x.107.3.411 Yavuz, N., & Welch, E. W. (2010). Addressing fear of crime in public space: Gender differences in reaction to safety measures in train transit. Urban Studies , 47 (12), 2491–2515. https://doi.org/10.1177/0042098009359033 Zahn-Waxler, C., & Smith, K. D. (1992). The development of prosocial behavior. Handbook of Social Development , 229–256. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4899-0694-6_10 Zaki, J., & Ochsner, K. N. (2012). The neuroscience of empathy: Progress, pitfalls and promise. Nature Neuroscience , 15 (5), 675–680. https://doi.org/10.1038/nn.3085 Additional Declarations No competing interests reported. Cite Share Download PDF Status: Under Review Version 1 posted Reviewers agreed at journal 14 May, 2026 Reviewers agreed at journal 13 May, 2026 Reviewers agreed at journal 09 May, 2026 Reviewers agreed at journal 09 May, 2026 Reviewers agreed at journal 09 May, 2026 Reviewers agreed at journal 07 May, 2026 Reviewers invited by journal 07 May, 2026 Editor assigned by journal 29 Apr, 2026 Submission checks completed at journal 29 Apr, 2026 First submitted to journal 28 Apr, 2026 You are reading this latest preprint version Research Square lets you share your work early, gain feedback from the community, and start making changes to your manuscript prior to peer review in a journal. As a division of Research Square Company, we’re committed to making research communication faster, fairer, and more useful. We do this by developing innovative software and high quality services for the global research community. Our growing team is made up of researchers and industry professionals working together to solve the most critical problems facing scientific publishing. Also discoverable on Platform About Our Team In Review Editorial Policies Advisory Board Help Center Resources Author Services Accessibility API Access RSS feed Manage Cookie Preferences © Research Square 2026 | ISSN 2693-5015 (online) Privacy Policy Terms of Service Do Not Sell My Personal Information {"props":{"pageProps":{"initialData":{"identity":"rs-9555671","acceptedTermsAndConditions":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"archivedVersions":[],"articleType":"Research Article","associatedPublications":[],"authors":[{"id":641588491,"identity":"f5a5103d-90fb-472b-8bcd-5527b7cbe7ae","order_by":0,"name":"Tifanny Aguirre","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Universidad Externado de Colombia","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Tifanny","middleName":"","lastName":"Aguirre","suffix":""},{"id":641588492,"identity":"bcfbcace-2d18-40c6-8eef-c40c01da3d03","order_by":1,"name":"Gabriel J. Colorado Z.","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Universidad Nacional de Colombia","correspondingAuthor":true,"prefix":"","firstName":"Gabriel","middleName":"J. Colorado","lastName":"Z.","suffix":""},{"id":641588493,"identity":"73ecd2b6-bf6b-4dc8-8868-fb9a4936eeb7","order_by":2,"name":"Juan Carlos Caicedo Mera","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Universidad Externado de Colombia","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Juan","middleName":"Carlos Caicedo","lastName":"Mera","suffix":""}],"badges":[],"createdAt":"2026-04-28 14:53:18","currentVersionCode":1,"declarations":"","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-9555671/v1","doiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-9555671/v1","draftVersion":[],"editorialEvents":[],"editorialNote":"","failedWorkflow":false,"files":[{"id":109760890,"identity":"8a75dd95-ce16-4fb5-8494-71da726b8c5a","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-05-22 07:29:16","extension":"jpg","order_by":1,"title":"Figure 1","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":42313,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eProsocial Attitudes dimension in the CEMCA psychometric test between women and men in the SAFM, Bogota, Colombia.\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"1.jpg","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-9555671/v1/9cf1779947a6a996c4505a0f.jpg"},{"id":109759500,"identity":"58b4d76a-e10f-4e15-ab10-54e56676b50a","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-05-22 07:27:12","extension":"jpg","order_by":2,"title":"Figure 2","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":39731,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eSocial cognition dimension in the CEMCA psychometric test between women and men in the SAFM, Bogota, Colombia.\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"2.jpg","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-9555671/v1/ce7e42a2eedaff7482036911.jpg"},{"id":109442897,"identity":"2236a97d-e9b3-4bba-aa15-fd851dcb350b","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-05-18 07:40:47","extension":"jpg","order_by":3,"title":"Figure 3","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":59521,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eLevel of social cognition measured through the CEMCA questionnaire compared to the occurrence of prosocial behaviors recorded in systematic observation.\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"3.jpg","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-9555671/v1/39a3b354e5df75d2bef434e0.jpg"},{"id":109442849,"identity":"7570fbd8-2a81-4344-828e-2b6f085ad88d","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-05-18 07:40:45","extension":"jpg","order_by":4,"title":"Figure 4","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":44353,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eSocial cognition dimension in the CEMCA psychometric test across socioeconomic positions in the SAFM, Bogota, Colombia.\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"4.jpg","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-9555671/v1/1ec642cc3e436e756fdcc591.jpg"},{"id":109442823,"identity":"588abc68-b77c-45c6-adf6-0d97c649ec98","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-05-18 07:40:42","extension":"jpg","order_by":5,"title":"Figure 5","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":38971,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eMost predominant sensations when walking in public spaces (left) and most predominant sensations when walking in the SAFM, Bogotá, Colombia (right).\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"5.jpg","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-9555671/v1/11421491bca5d0b2a61eef37.jpg"},{"id":109442948,"identity":"06ae018c-3151-4fc2-8670-7caa0852fa33","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-05-18 07:40:56","extension":"jpg","order_by":6,"title":"Figure 6","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":57272,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eFrequency of prosocial behaviors by category in the SAFM, Bogota, Colombia.\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"6.jpg","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-9555671/v1/3569e94d23f5138358dd1f9d.jpg"},{"id":109764059,"identity":"1fdfd0bb-46cb-42e8-a3cb-54e906af87b2","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-05-22 07:36:27","extension":"pdf","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"manuscript-pdf","size":572843,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"manuscript.pdf","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-9555671/v1/7b618a28-55ba-412a-9eaf-c6e6ccc8f50d.pdf"}],"financialInterests":"No competing interests reported.","formattedTitle":"Social cognition and prosocial behavior in public spaces: a naturalistic study in Bogotá, Colombia","fulltext":[{"header":"Introduction","content":"\u003cp\u003eProsocial behaviors are voluntary actions that benefit others, including helping, giving, altruism, reciprocal exchanges, collaboration, and cooperation (Luo, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR27\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e; Schroeder \u0026amp; Graziano, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR44\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e). These behaviors are influenced by biological, social, environmental, and psychological factors (Dovidio et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2006\u003c/span\u003e). In urban contexts, where social interactions are frequent and complex, prosocial behavior plays a crucial role in promoting cooperation and social cohesion (Schroeder \u0026amp; Graziano, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR44\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e). Recent research highlights the importance of understanding prosocial behavior in public spaces, emphasizing the sensitivity of human mind to environmental cues as well as its adaptability in diverse situations. For instance, generosity increases when individuals feel observed, even by subtle cues such as images of eyes (Haley \u0026amp; Fessler, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR19\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2005\u003c/span\u003e; Nettle et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR35\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2011\u003c/span\u003e; Nettle et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR36\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e), suggesting that prosocial actions may be shaped by social evaluation and the desire for approval, potentially boosting self-esteem (Carlo \u0026amp; Randall, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR8\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2002\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003ePrior to engaging in prosocial action, the question arises as to what preliminary steps may motivate people to manifest different behaviors. The process of social cognition, encompassing the interpretation of social signals, involves a series of processes such as perception, attention, memory, and subsequent behavioral response, and has been investigated across various disciplines (Frith, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR16\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2008\u003c/span\u003e). A more accurate understanding of others' emotions and thoughts can lead to greater empathy and a stronger willingness to act in a prosocial manner. Individuals with high social cognition, for example, are more likely to understand the needs of others, respond positively (Richaud de Minzi, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR40\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2009\u003c/span\u003e), and express a greater number of prosocial behaviors. Thus, social cognition can be understood as a key mechanism underlying prosociality.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAmong the prosocial behaviors that can be found in urban settings are the adherence to rules, as compliance would benefit the collective. In contrast, behaviors such as sitting in the space or touching elements within the space may not initially seem to be directly associated with empathy or prosociality. However, the way people behave in a given space reflects their social interactions. If people feel comfortable and safe in a space, they are more likely to exhibit prosocial behaviors. For example, shared use of space (e.g., when people sit together) can increase opportunities for interaction, fostering empathy, cooperation and prosociality (Davis, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1996\u003c/span\u003e). Moreover, behaviors such as separating waste, recycling, or using sustainable means of transportation benefit the collective. There is evidence that people who exhibit prosocial behavior tend to be more likely to participate in green activities (Tapia-Fonllem et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR46\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e; Neaman \u0026amp; Mari\u0026oacute;, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR33\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e; Neaman et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR34\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e). Thus, the way individuals relate to urban space influences both social interaction and the construction of place identity (Lynch, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR28\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2004\u003c/span\u003e). Additionally, environmental factors such as atmospheric conditions, time of day, and the presence of music may also shape prosocial behavior.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAlthough social cognition (i.e., processes through which individual interpret and respond to social information, including perception, attention, memory, and behavioral responses; Frith, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR16\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2008\u003c/span\u003e) is not itself a component of prosocial behavior (Zahn-Waxler \u0026amp; Smith, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR49\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1992\u003c/span\u003e), it is closely connected to prosociality. The ability to attune to others' emotions plays a central role in guiding prosocial responses (Correa Duque, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR9\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e; Adriaense et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e), supported by neural processes involving brain regions such as the insula, dorsal anterior cingulate cortex, and medial prefrontal cortex (Le\u0026oacute;n, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR25\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2012\u003c/span\u003e). The study of social cognition has evolved from linear and individual-centered models toward more integrative approaches, including theory of mind, simulation theory, and theory-theory, which seek to explain how individuals infer others\u0026rsquo; mental states (Gallagher, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR17\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2008\u003c/span\u003e; Le\u0026oacute;n Rodr\u0026iacute;guez \u0026amp; C\u0026aacute;rdenas, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR26\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eRegarding the relationship between social cognition and prosocial behaviors, empirical evidence suggests that greater social cognitive abilities are associated with increased prosocial behavior. For example, developmental studies show that as children\u0026acute;s social cognition matures, they become more responsive to others\u0026acute; needs, leading to more frequent prosocial actions (Hoffman, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR21\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2007\u003c/span\u003e; Knafo et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR22\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2011\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003ePublic space represents a key context in which social cognition and prosocial behavior converge. Urban scholars have emphasized the importance of understanding the relationship between public life and urban space (Gehl \u0026amp; Svarre, 2013). However, this relationship remains underexplored, particularly in the Colombian context, where public spaces play a central role as sites of interaction, encounter, and social exchange.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThis study examines the role of social cognition in shaping prosocial behaviors in public spaces in Bogota, Colombia, adopting an ecological perspective. Specifically, it focuses on empathy, altruism, and cooperation, while also incorporating spatial interaction behaviors as an emerging dimension of prosociality. By studying these processes in a natural setting\u0026mdash;a flea market\u0026mdash;this research seeks to complement experimental approaches, which are often based on self-reports and conducted in controlled environments, where social desirability bias may occur. In doing so, the study aims to provide a more comprehensive understanding of how social cognition and environmental context interact to shape prosocial behavior in urban settings.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Method","content":"\u003cdiv id=\"Sec3\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eStudy design\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThis study adopts a quantitative, ecological approach to examine the relationship between social cognition and prosocial behavior in a natural urban setting. A non-experimental, cross-sectional correlational design was employed, as variables were not manipulated and were observed within a specific temporal and spatial context (Hern\u0026aacute;ndez-Sampieri \u0026amp; Mendoza Torres, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR20\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eData collection was conducted in two independent phases: (1) systematic behavioral observation, and (2) application of a survey and a psychometric instrument. These phases were implemented with independent samples drawn from the same population.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003eStudy area\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThis investigation was conducted at the San Alejo Flea Market (SAFM hereafter), situated at the intersection of Carrera S\u0026eacute;ptima and Calle 24 in Bogot\u0026aacute;, Colombia. Established in 1985, this market brings together vendors offering a wide range of items, including curiosities, books, antiques, and traditional foods. Operating every Sunday and holiday from 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., it transforms a parking lot into a vibrant public space. Through the self-organization of its members, the market has evolved into a significant meeting point for many citizens, contributing to its relevance in terms of city appropriation and identity (Salda\u0026ntilde;a, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR42\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003eVariables\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe study considered the following variables:\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cdiv class=\"Heading\"\u003e\u003cb\u003eIndependent variables\u003c/b\u003e:\u003c/div\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cul\u003e \u003cli\u003e \u003cp\u003eLevel of social cognition, assessed using the Exploratory Multidimensional Cooperation and Aggression Questionnaire (CEMCA).\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e \u003cp\u003eSociodemographic characteristics (age, sex, educational level, religion, political position), collected through a survey.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e \u003cp\u003ePerception of public space and of the SAFM, assessed through a survey.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/li\u003e \u003c/ul\u003e \u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003eDependent variable:\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e \u003cul\u003e \u003cli\u003e \u003cp\u003eProsocial behaviors (empathy, cooperation, altruism and spatial interaction), recorded through systematic observation.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/li\u003e \u003c/ul\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec8\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eSampling and participants\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eTwo independent samples were used, corresponding to each phase of the study. For the first phase, which consisted of observing and analyzing the behaviors of market visitors, the sampling unit was randomly selected women and men who visited the SAFM. It is estimated that the market may have around 40 thousand visitors per day (Duarte Mart\u0026iacute;nez, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e). The type of sample was non-probabilistic, opportunistic since it depended on the people who transited inside the market.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e In the second phase, which aimed to quantify dimensions of social cognition, characterized participants\u0026acute; sociodemographic profiles, and examine their perceptions of the city, adult women and men aged 25\u0026ndash;55 who visited the SAFM were randomly selected and voluntarily agreed to participate. The sample size for this phase included 106 participants, partially replicating the study by P\u0026aacute;ramo and Burbano Arroyo (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR37\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e), which included 129 participants.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe selected age range for the instrument application was based on evidence that this stage of life is associated with maximum brain development, involving maturation of the frontal lobe and full myelination of neuron axons. These processes are linked to more reflective and less impulsive decision-making, a greater understanding of the consequences of actions, and a clearer articulation of the ethical and normative principles that guide coexistence in society (Marzana et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR30\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2010\u003c/span\u003e; Arain et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR5\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e). Furthermore, prosociality tends to increase from adolescence onward as egocentrism declines and moral reasoning becomes more complex (S\u0026aacute;nchez-Queija et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR43\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2006\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003eData collection\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cdiv id=\"Sec10\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eObservational phase\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eTo characterize prosocial behaviors in an urban context, a systematic non-participant observation to document instances of empathy, altruism, cooperation, and spatial interaction within this space was conducted. This approach allows the study of behavior in natural settings, enhancing ecological validity (Anguera et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR3\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eA total of 36 hours of video recordings were collected using a Canon PowerShot ELPH 100 HS camera between 9:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m. across six consecutive Sundays between August 28 and October 2, 2022. The camera was positioned at the entrance on Carrera S\u0026eacute;ptima at a height of 1.45 m, targeting all adults passing through a high-traffic area that facilitates social interaction. An assistant was assigned to this point, responsible for managing the recording process and maintaining a logbook. Environmental variables were recorded during the observation period. Atmospheric conditions (sunny, cloudy, rainy) were documented every 20 minutes, and contextual events such as the presence or absence of music were recorded. Prosocial behaviors were categorized into empathy, spatial interaction, altruism and cooperation based on observable movement expressions following Aponte et al., (2016) (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eTo ensure the degree of coherence when reviewing and categorizing observational data in the laboratory, the criterion of internal concordance was used (i.e., the degree of coincidence between the evaluations made by the same observer at two different times). To estimate this, Cohen's Kappa test or Kappa index (Campo-Arias and Herazo, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2010\u003c/span\u003e) was carried out. The obtained value (k\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.80) indicated substantial agreement (Abraira, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2001\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab1\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 1\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCategories used to define prosocial behaviors based on observational records at the San Alejo Flea Market, Bogot\u0026aacute;, 2022 (Based on Aponte et al, 2016).\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"3\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCode\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMovement of expression\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDefinition\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eCategory 1\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eEmpathy\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eInteraction indicating affiliative behavior between individuals.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.1\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eInterlock arms\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCrossing an arm with the arm of another individual.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.2\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eHold hands\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eHolding the hand of another individual.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.3\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eApproach\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eShortening distance to another individual by moving or leaning the trunk and/or turning the body in the direction of another individual.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.4\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSpeaking\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTo convey verbal information to one or more individuals.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.5\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eGive a sign of approval\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eExpressing oneself with gestures to reinforce or support other individuals, such as continuous up and down movement of the head.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.6\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMake contact\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTouching the other with any part of the body.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.7\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSee\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eEstablish eye contact with another individual.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.8\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eReceive\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAccepting objects given by another individual.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.9\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eHug\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTo put one's arms around someone.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.10\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSmile and laugh\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eExpressive movement of the mouth and face denoting laughter: raising the corners of the lips and cheeks.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eCategory 2\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eSpatial interaction\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDynamics of the relationship between subjects and space.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.1\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFollow the rules on the use of the space.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAbide by the request of an MPSA employee, such as, for example, storing the bicycle in the parking lot when requested.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.2\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eHygiene\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDepositing waste somewhere in the space.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.3\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSit down\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePosition in which the subject rests on the buttocks.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.4\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eContact\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTouching elements in space with the upper extremities.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eCategory 3\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eAltruism\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eInteraction that indicates giving help to another without getting anything in return.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.1\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSupport / Hold\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eHolding elements of other individuals for a period of time.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.2\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eProvide physical support\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eHolding another individual with the hands.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.3\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eInform\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTo give notice to another individual in order to assist them.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.4\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eGive\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDelivering objects to another individual.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.5\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eOrientar\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eGuiding by giving guidelines or instructions to other individuals.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eCategor\u0026iacute;a 4\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eCooperation\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eInteraction that indicates mutual assistance to achieve a common task.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4.1\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eApproach to coordinate\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eApproach other individuals to organize tasks.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4.2\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTo make coordination signals.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eExpressing with gestures to organize actions.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4.3\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eGiving and receiving\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eExchanging objects with another individual.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec11\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eSurvey and Psychometric phase\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eA structured questionnaire was designed to collect sociodemographic information and assess perceptions of public space and the SAFM. The instrument included 28 questions, combining demographic items (e.g., age, occupation, religion, and political position) and closed-ended questions related to participants\u0026rsquo; experiences in urban public spaces in Bogot\u0026aacute;.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn addition, social cognition was assessed using an adapted version of Chapter VIII of the Exploratory Multidimensional Cooperation and Aggression Questionnaire (CEMCA) (Aponte et al., 2017), originally derived from the Attitudes and Social Cognitive Strategies (AECS) test (Moraleda et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR31\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1998\u003c/span\u003e). This instrument evaluates two main dimensions\u0026mdash;social attitudes and social thinking\u0026mdash;to generate an overall index of social cognition. The instrument was adapted to the Colombian context and language. It consists of 44 Likert-type items and was designed to be completed within approximately 15\u0026ndash;20 minutes. Data collection for this phase took place within the market in the food court area and was applied simultaneously with the observational phase.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec12\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eData Analysis\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eBehavioral data from the observational phase were analyzed using The Observer XT software (Noldus Information Technology; Mosselman et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR32\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e), which allows detailed coding and integration of contextual modifiers such as atmospheric conditions and music.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eTo control for variation in observation effort across conditions, time segments were randomly selected and standardized into equal 60-minute intervals for the four most frequent conditions: (1) music\u0026ndash;cloudy, (2) no music\u0026ndash;cloudy, (3) music\u0026ndash;sunny, and (4) no music\u0026ndash;sunny. Chi-square tests were used to assess differences in the frequency of prosocial behaviors across environmental conditions, as well as differences by sex and behavioral category.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eFor the psychometric data, nonparametric tests were applied due to non-normal data distribution. The Mann\u0026ndash;Whitney U test was used to compare social cognition scores by sex, while the Kruskal\u0026ndash;Wallis test was used to evaluate differences across socioeconomic position, which is typically used as a multidimensional construct that captures individuals\u0026rsquo; relative standing in terms of income, education, and social conditions. Due to low sample sizes in the highest socioeconomic categories (levels 5 and 6), these were excluded from the analysis.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"Results","content":"\u003cdiv id=\"Sec14\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eSociodemographic data\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003e106 people were surveyed in total, with a balanced sample of 46.2% women and 53.8% men. In terms of educational level, 12.3% of the participants completed their high school studies, 68.9% completed university, and 18.9% completed graduate studies. Regarding the occupation of the respondents, the majority are employees (74.5%), followed by self-employed workers (20.8%), and in smaller proportion students (4.7%). In response to the question \"Do you practice any religion?\" 44% say they do, and the remaining 62% do not.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec15\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eSocial cognition and sex\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eTo examine differences by sex, Chapter VIII of the CEMCA test (Aponte et al., 2016), which assesses social cognition, was applied. The instrument yields three dimensions: prosocial attitudes, social perception, and overall social cognition. These variables were analyzed in relation to sex. Results indicated that both prosocial attitudes (Mann\u0026ndash;Whitney U test: U\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;1052.00; N\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;104; p\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.05; Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e) and social cognition (U\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;1017.50; N\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;104; p\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.03; Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e) were significantly higher in females than in males.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec16\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eProsocial behaviors by sex (observational phase)\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eDuring 36 hours of observation in public space, a total of 32,123 prosocial behaviors were recorded. The distribution of observations differed significantly by sex (52% in men and 48% in women; χ\u0026sup2; = 342.69, df\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;3, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001). The most frequently observed behavior was empathy (86.4% of observations), followed by spatial interaction (11.8%), cooperation (1.5%), and altruism (0.1%; Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e). Significant differences were also found in the frequencies of behaviors across categories (χ\u0026sup2; = 142.72, df\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;17, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab2\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 2\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eIncidence of prosocial behaviors by sex in the SAFM, Bogota, Colombia.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"4\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCategories\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eWomen\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMen\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTotal\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eEmpathy\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e13869\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e13905\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e27774\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSpatial interaction\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1291\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2520\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3811\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCooperation\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e180\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e313\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e493\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAltruism\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e15\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e30\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e45\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eOverall Total\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e15355\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e16768\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e32123\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAt the level of specific behaviors, notable sex differences were observed. Interlocking arms was more frequent among females (100 events) than males (10 events), whereas approaching (31 males vs. 18 females) and making contact (128 males vs. 79 females) were more common among males.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec17\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eProsocial behaviors vs social cognition\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eResults from both observational records and psychometric measures indicate that, although females reported higher levels of social cognition and prosocial attitudes, a lower frequency of prosocial behaviors was observed among females compared to males (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig3\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec18\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eSocial cognition and socioeconomic position\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eDifferences in social cognition were examined across categories of socioeconomic position, a multidimensional construct that captures individuals\u0026rsquo; relative standing in terms of income, education, and social conditions. Results from the Kruskal\u0026ndash;Wallis test indicated significant differences in social cognition across socioeconomic position groups (H\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;10.755, df\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;5, p\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.05; Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig4\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e). Specifically, individuals in lower SEP categories showed higher levels of social cognition compared to those in higher SEP groups.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec19\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003ePerception of public space\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eRegarding perceptions of public space, 67.9% of the respondents considered it as a dangerous environment, whereas 13.2% did not share this view, and 18.9% who did not make a definite judgment in this regard. Participants were also asked to identify the predominant feeling they experienced when passing through public space, choosing from six positive and six negative options. Results showed similar patterns for men and women, with negative sensations being more frequent (53.8%), followed by positive sensations (43.9%) (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig5\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e5\u003c/span\u003e). To compare contexts, the same question was asked in relation to the SAFM. Although patterns between men and women remained similar, reported feelings differed markedly inside the market: 87.7% of respondents indicated positive feelings when passing through the market, whereas 12.3% reported negative feelings (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig5\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e5\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAnother relevant question addressed participants\u0026acute; evaluation of both their own behavior and that of others in public space. Individual behavior was predominantly rated as good (74.5%), followed by excellent (17.9%) and fair (6.6%). In contrast, 55.7% rate the behavior of others as fair, followed by good (26.4%), bad (13.2%), and no response (4.7%).\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec20\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eProsocial behaviors across environmental conditions\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eOn cloudy days, the presence of music was associated with an increase in empathetic behaviors (χ\u0026sup2; = 44.17, d.f. = 6, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001; Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig6\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e6\u003c/span\u003e), whereas this effect was not observed under sunny conditions. Overall, a high number of prosocial behaviors was recorded on sunny days regardless of the presence of music. In the absence of music on cloudy days, 634 prosocial behaviors were recorded, compared to 760 behaviors when music was present under the same weather conditions.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"Discussion","content":"\u003cp\u003eThis study examined the relationship between empathy, cooperation, altruism, spatial interaction behaviors, and social cognition among adults in public spaces in Bogot\u0026aacute;. Prosocial behaviors were characterized as they occurred \u003cem\u003ein situ\u003c/em\u003e, while sociodemographic attributes and levels of social cognition were assessed to explore potential differences between men and women. Results indicate that social cognition varies by sex, with women exhibiting higher levels of recognition and interpretation of social signals than men. However, this pattern contrasts with observational findings, where a higher frequency of prosocial behaviors was recorded among men, suggesting a divergence between self-reported social cognition and its behavioral expression in public contexts.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThis pattern is consistent with findings reported by Proverbio (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR39\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e), who showed that women tend to perform better and more accurately than men in tasks involving the decoding of social signals. According to this author, such differences may arise from the interaction between biological predispositions\u0026mdash;such as an enhanced ability to interpret facial expressions, potentially linked to evolutionary pressures associated with maternal care\u0026mdash;and sociocultural influences that shape gendered patterns of social perception. From a complementary perspective, Shelley Taylor et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR47\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2000\u003c/span\u003e) proposed the \u0026ldquo;tend-and-befriend\u0026rdquo; theory as an alternative to the traditional \u0026ldquo;fight-or-flight\u0026rdquo; response to stress. Supported by neuroendocrine evidence in both humans and other animals, this framework suggests that oxytocin and female hormones modulate stress responses, promoting affiliative and caregiving behaviors. These mechanisms may contribute to the development of more pronounced prosocial interaction patterns in women, often associated with nurturing roles, higher levels of social communication, and collective forms of care.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eHowever, not all studies report consistent sex differences in social cognition. For instance, Di Tella et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR11\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e) found no significant differences between men and women in the representation of mental states in adulthood. They argue that previously observed differences\u0026mdash;particularly in younger populations\u0026mdash;may reflect earlier developmental maturation in girls rather than stable differences across the lifespan. Moreover, these patterns may be shaped by cultural norms and gender expectations that influence behavior from an early age. Taken together, these perspectives suggest that sex differences in social cognition and prosociality should be understood as the result of interacting biological and sociocultural factors, rather than fixed or universal traits.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eA second key finding indicates that men exhibited a higher frequency of observable prosocial behaviors in public space than women (52% vs. 48%), particularly in the domains of spatial interaction, cooperation, and altruism, where male observations were nearly double those of females. This pattern contrasts with previous research, such as S\u0026aacute;nchez-Queija et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR43\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2006\u003c/span\u003e), which reported higher levels of empathy and prosocial behavior among adolescent females, attributing these differences to early socialization processes. One possible explanation for this discrepancy lies in the gendered use of space: women have traditionally been associated with private domains, whereas men are more commonly linked to public spaces (Franck \u0026amp; Paxson, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR15\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1989\u003c/span\u003e). In this context, men may be more likely to engage in visible, public forms of prosocial behavior\u0026mdash;such as helping or sharing\u0026mdash;while women\u0026rsquo;s prosocial actions may take less observable forms, such as listening or providing emotional support (S\u0026aacute;nchez-Queija et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR43\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2006\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAddressing the central research question, this study sought to link directly observed behaviors in public space with participants\u0026rsquo; self-reported levels of social cognition and prosociality. A clear divergence emerged between observational and self-reported data. Although women reported higher levels of social cognition and prosocial attitudes, a lower frequency of observable prosocial behaviors was recorded among women in public space. Observational data indicate that men tended to display more open and visible forms of interaction\u0026mdash;such as approaching others and engaging in conversation\u0026mdash;whereas women exhibited more restrained or less conspicuous behaviors, including walking arm-in-arm and expressing affiliative gestures such as smiling and laughing. These findings contribute to existing literature on gender differences by highlighting a potential gap between prosocial dispositions and their behavioral expression in public contexts.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThese findings also point to gender differences in the perception and use of public space, challenging common assumptions about vulnerability. Contrary to widely reported patterns suggesting that women perceive greater vulnerability to crime (e.g., Franck \u0026amp; Paxson, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR15\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1989\u003c/span\u003e; Yavuz \u0026amp; Welch, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR48\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2010\u003c/span\u003e), the present study found that a higher proportion of men perceived public space as unsafe (70% of men vs. 59% of women). Similarly, 85% of men described public space as a space of conflict, compared to 81% of women. These results are consistent with Yavuz and Welch (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR48\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2010\u003c/span\u003e), who found that men may experience increased vulnerability in situations where they perceive limited control over their environment or when interacting with unfamiliar individuals in public settings. Together, these findings suggest that both the expression of prosocial behavior and perceptions of public space are shaped by gendered experiences and may not conform to conventional expectations.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eBeyond sex differences, social cognition also varied across socioeconomic position. Individuals in lower socioeconomic positions exhibit higher levels of social cognition compared to those in higher positions. This pattern is consistent with findings by Fendinger et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e), who reported that, despite the common association of lower classes with deficits in cognitive performance, individuals from these groups outperform their higher-class counterparts in domains related to social cognition. One possible explanation is that, under conditions of limited material resources, individuals from lower socioeconomic positions may orient their cognition toward social goals and interpersonal relationships (Kraus et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR23\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2010\u003c/span\u003e; Fendinger et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e). Supporting this idea, empirical evidence shows that people from lower socioeconomic strata tend to display greater compassion, empathy, and the ability to interpret others' emotions, potentially as a result of their greater exposure to adversity and, consequently, can connect emotionally with others (Piff et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR38\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2010\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn contrast, individuals from higher socioeconomic positions may exhibit different cognitive orientations. Socioeconomic position has been widely recognized as a key factor shaping cognitive development and influencing how individuals perceive and respond to their social environment (Fendinger et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e). Research by Kraus et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR23\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2010\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR24\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2012\u003c/span\u003e) suggests that, while individuals from lower socioeconomic positions tend to direct their attention towards the characteristics of the social context and external cues, those from higher positions tend to focus on their personal attributes and internal states, adopting a more self-focused orientation. Together, these findings highlight that differences in social cognition across socioeconomic groups may reflect distinct adaptive strategies shaped by structural and social conditions.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn addition to individual-level factors, environmental conditions were also associated with prosocial behavior. The effect of music on prosocial behavior appears to be context-dependent, particularly under cloudy conditions. On days with lower temperatures, the presence of music increased the frequency of prosocial behaviors to levels comparable to those observed on sunny days. This pattern is consistent with existing literature showing that music can act as a stimulus influencing cognitive and social processes, often promoting prosocial and cooperative behavior. For example, Ruth (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR41\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e) demonstrated that exposure to music with prosocial lyrics significantly increased prosocial actions, as participants purchased more than twice as much fair trade coffee compared to those exposed to neutral music. Beyond its content, music may also enhance prosociality through mechanisms of interpersonal coordination and synchronization. Experimental evidence shows that synchronized movement, particularly when aligned with musical rhythms, can increase cooperative tendencies. Stupacher et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR45\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e) found that participants exposed to music exhibited higher prosociality scores compared to those interacting with a metronome, suggesting that music facilitates prosocial behavior by promoting social bonding through coordinated action.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn addition to music, environmental conditions\u0026mdash;particularly temperature\u0026mdash;may also influence prosocial behavior, although evidence remains inconclusive. In the present study, sunny conditions were associated with a generally higher frequency of prosocial behaviors, regardless of the presence of music. However, the broader literature presents contrasting hypotheses: higher temperatures may either increase aggression and reduce prosociality or, alternatively, enhance positive social behaviors. A meta-analysis by Lynott et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR29\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e) found limited empirical support for both perspectives, likely due to issues of replicability and contextual variability. Taken together, these findings suggest that while music may have a clearer facilitative role, the influence of temperature on prosocial behavior remains uncertain.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThese findings should be interpreted in light of certain limitations. The non-probabilistic sampling design and observational approach limit the ability to draw causal inferences. Future research would benefit from longitudinal designs that allow for better tracking of individuals over time, as well as from combining experimental and naturalistic methods to reduce biases associated with controlled settings (Burton-Chellew et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR6\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e; Zaki \u0026amp; Ochsner, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR50\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2012\u003c/span\u003e). Additionally, comparative studies across different urban contexts\u0026mdash;such as between neighborhoods within the same city (Nettle et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR35\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2011\u003c/span\u003e) or between public and private spaces\u0026mdash;could enhance the robustness of inferences.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThis study identified four main findings: (1) higher social cognition scores in women compared to men; (2) higher social cognition in lower socioeconomic positions, (3) greater observable prosocial behaviors in men, and (4) associations between environmental conditions and prosocial behavior. Together, these findings underscore the importance of examining everyday social interactions in real-world contexts and integrating complementary methodological approaches that strengthen the analysis of associations between social cognition and behavior. Observing behavior in public space reveals the presence of positive social dynamics even within urban environments often characterized by narratives of conflict and individualism. In this sense, public spaces emerge as key settings for collective interaction and the construction of social cohesion. Strengthening research in these contexts may contribute to a deeper understanding of how social cognition and behavior interact in contemporary urban societies, and how these processes can support more cohesive and resilient communities.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Declarations","content":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eFunding:\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003eNo funding to declare.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAuthor contributions:\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003eall authors\u0026nbsp;contributed to the design and implementation of the research, to the analysis of the results and to the writing of the manuscript. All authors approved the version to be published and agree to be accountable for all aspects of the work.\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eCompeting interest:\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003eThe authors do not have any conflicts of interest relevant to the content of this article to disclose.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eEthics statements:\u003c/strong\u003e The study was approved by the Research Ethics Com\u0026shy;mittee of the Universidad Externado de Colombia, Approval No. 42. All participants signed the Participation Consent Form.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eHuman Ethics and Consent to Participation\u003c/strong\u003e: Participation was volun\u0026shy;tary and occurred only after signing an informed consent form.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eClinical Trial Number:\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003enot applicable.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"References","content":"\u003col\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAbraira, V. (2001). El \u0026iacute;ndice kappa. \u003cem\u003eMedicina de Familia. SEMERGEN\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e27\u003c/em\u003e(5), 247\u0026ndash;249. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1138-3593(01)73955-X \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAdriaense, J. E. C., Koski, S. E., Huber, L., \u0026amp; Lamm, C. (2020). Challenges in the comparative study of empathy and related phenomena in animals. \u003cem\u003eNeuroscience \u0026amp; Biobehavioral Reviews\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e112\u003c/em\u003e, 62\u0026ndash;82. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neubiorev.2020.01.021 \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAnguera, M. T., Blanco-Villase\u0026ntilde;or, A., Losada, J. L., \u0026amp; Portell, M. (2018). Pautas para elaborar trabajos que utilizan la metodolog\u0026iacute;a observacional. \u003cem\u003eAnuario de Psicolog\u0026iacute;a\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e48\u003c/em\u003e(1), 9\u0026ndash;17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anpsic.2018.02.001 \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAponte Canecio, D. M., Mart\u0026iacute;nez Cotrina, J., \u0026amp; Caicedo Mera, J. C. (2016). \u003cem\u003eEl cerebro social: expresiones desde la cooperaci\u0026oacute;n y la agresi\u0026oacute;n en ni\u0026ntilde;os y j\u0026oacute;venes\u003c/em\u003e. Universidad Externado de Colombia, Centro de Investigaciones Sobre Din\u0026aacute;mica Social. https://basesbiblioteca.uexternado.edu.co:2122/pdfreader/el-cerebro-social \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eArain, M., Mathur, P., Rais, A., Nel, W., Sandhu, R., Haque, M., Johal, L., \u0026amp; Sharma, S. (2013). Maturation of the adolescent brain. \u003cem\u003eNeuropsychiatric Disease and Treatment\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e9\u003c/em\u003e(9), 449\u0026ndash; 461. https://doi.org/10.2147/ndt.s39776 \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBurton-Chellew, M. N., El Mouden, C., \u0026amp; West, S. A. (2016). Conditional cooperation and confusion in public-goods experiments. \u003cem\u003eProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e113\u003c/em\u003e(5), 1291\u0026ndash;1296. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1509740113 \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eCampo-Arias, A., \u0026amp; Herazo, E. (2010). Concordancia intra- e interevaluadores. \u003cem\u003eRevista Colombiana de Psiquiatr\u0026iacute;a\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e39\u003c/em\u003e(2), 424-432. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0034- 7450(14)60261-4 \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eCarlo, G., \u0026amp; Randall, B. A. (2002). The Development of a Measure of Prosocial Behaviors for Late Adolescents. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Youth and Adolescence\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e31\u003c/em\u003e(1), 31\u0026ndash;44. https://doi.org/10.1023/a:1014033032440 \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eCorrea Duque, M. C. (2017). Aproximaciones epistemol\u0026oacute;gicas y conceptuales de la conducta prosocial. \u003cem\u003eZona Pr\u0026oacute;xima\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e27\u003c/em\u003e, 1\u0026ndash;21. https://doi.org/10.14482/zp.27.10978 \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eDavis, M. H. (1996). \u003cem\u003eEmpathy: a social psychological approach\u003c/em\u003e. Westview Press.\u2028de Waal, F. B. M. (2021). Empathy, the umbrella term. \u003cem\u003eNeuroscience \u0026amp; Biobehavioral Reviews\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e129\u003c/em\u003e, 180\u0026ndash;181. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neubiorev.2021.07.034 \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eDi Tella, M., Miti, F., Ardito, R. B., \u0026amp; Adenzato, M. (2020). Social cognition and sex: Are men and women really different? \u003cem\u003ePersonality and Individual Differences\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e162\u003c/em\u003e, 110045. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2020.110045 \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eDovidio, J. F., Piliavin, J. A., Schroeder, D. A., \u0026amp; Penner, L. A. (2006). \u003cem\u003eThe social psychology of prosocial behavior\u003c/em\u003e. Psychology Press/Taylor \u0026amp; Francis Group. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eDuarte Mart\u0026iacute;nez, D. C. (2016). \u003cem\u003eEl Mercado de las Pulgas m\u0026aacute;s tradicional del centro de Bogot\u0026aacute;\u003c/em\u003e. Bogota.gov.co. https://bogota.gov.co/servicios/empleo/el-mercado-de-las-pulgas- mas-tradicional-del-centro-de- bogota#:~:text=Con%20poco%20m%C3%A1s%20de%20330 \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eFendinger, N. J., Dietze, P., \u0026amp; Knowles, E. D. (2023). Beyond cognitive deficits: how social class shapes social cognition. \u003cem\u003eTrends in Cognitive Sciences\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e27\u003c/em\u003e(6). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2023.03.004 \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eFranck, K. A., \u0026amp; Paxson, L. (1989). Women and urban public space. \u003cem\u003ePublic Places and Spaces\u003c/em\u003e, 121\u0026ndash;146. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4684-5601-1_6 \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eFrith, C. D. (2008). Social cognition. \u003cem\u003ePhilosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e363\u003c/em\u003e(1499), 2033\u0026ndash;2039. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2008.0005 \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eGallagher, S. (2008). \u003cem\u003eUnderstanding others: Embodied social cognition \u003c/em\u003e(P. Calvo \u0026amp; A. Gomila, Eds.). ScienceDirect; Elsevier. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/B9780080466163000220 \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eGehl, J., \u0026amp; Svarre, B. (2013). \u003cem\u003eHow to study public life \u003c/em\u003e(K. A. Steenhard, Trans.). Island Press. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eHaley, K. J., \u0026amp; Fessler, D. M. T. (2005). Nobody\u0026rsquo;s watching? Subtle cues affect generosity in an anonymous economic game. \u003cem\u003eEvolution and Human Behavior\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e26\u003c/em\u003e(3), 245\u0026ndash;256. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2005.01.002 \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eHern\u0026aacute;ndez-Sampieri, R., \u0026amp; Mendoza Torres, C. P. (2018). \u003cem\u003eMetodolog\u0026iacute;a de la investigaci\u0026oacute;n: las rutas cuantitativa, cualitativa y mixta\u003c/em\u003e. Mcgraw-Hill Education. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eHoffman, M. L. (2007). The origins of empathic morality in toddlerhood. In C. A. Brownell \u0026amp; C. B. Kopp (Eds.), \u003cem\u003eSocioemotional development in the toddler years: Transitions and transformations \u003c/em\u003e(pp. 132\u0026ndash;145). The Guilford Press. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eKnafo, A., Steinberg, T., \u0026amp; Goldner, I. (2011). Children\u0026rsquo;s low affective perspective-taking ability is associated with low self-initiated pro-sociality. \u003cem\u003eEmotion\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e11\u003c/em\u003e(1), 194\u0026ndash;198. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0021240 \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eKraus, M. W., C\u0026ocirc;t\u0026eacute;, S., \u0026amp; Keltner, D. (2010). Social class, contextualism, and empathic accuracy. \u003cem\u003ePsychological Science\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e21\u003c/em\u003e(11), 1716\u0026ndash;1723. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797610387613 \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eKraus, M. W., Piff, P. K., Mendoza-Denton, R., Rheinschmidt, M. L., \u0026amp; Keltner, D. (2012). Social class, solipsism, and contextualism: How the rich are different from the poor. \u003cem\u003ePsychological Review\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e119\u003c/em\u003e(3), 546\u0026ndash;572. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0028756 \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eLe\u0026oacute;n R., D. A. (2012). Introducci\u0026oacute;n a la cognici\u0026oacute;n social y la neurociencia social cognitiva. \u003cem\u003eCon- Textos\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e9\u003c/em\u003e(5), 1\u0026ndash;11. Repositorio Institucional Universidad Piloto de Colombia. http://repository.unipiloto.edu.co/bitstream/handle/20.500.12277/8992/4_IntroduccionCo gnicion-ConTextos9.pdf?sequence=1\u0026amp;isAllowed=y \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eLe\u0026oacute;n Rodr\u0026iacute;guez, D. A., \u0026amp; C\u0026aacute;rdenas, F. (2017). Aproximaci\u0026oacute;n Neurodin\u0026aacute;mica a la Cognici\u0026oacute;n Social. \u003cem\u003eUniversitas Psychologica\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e15\u003c/em\u003e(5). https://doi.org/10.11144/javeriana.upsy15-5.ancs \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eLuo, J. (2018). The Neural Basis of and a Common Neural Circuitry in Different Types of Pro- social Behavior. \u003cem\u003eFrontiers in Psychology\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e9\u003c/em\u003e. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00859 \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eLynch, K. (2004). \u003cem\u003eLa imagen de la ciudad\u003c/em\u003e. Barcelona Gustavo Gili.\u2028\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eLynott, D., Corker, K., Connell, L., \u0026amp; O\u0026rsquo;Brien, K. (2023). The effects of temperature on prosocial and antisocial behaviour: A review and meta‐analysis. \u003cem\u003eBritish Journal of Social Psychology\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e62\u003c/em\u003e. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjso.12626\u2028\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMarzana, D., P\u0026eacute;rez-Acosta, A. M., Marta, E., \u0026amp; G\u0026oacute;nzalez, M. I. (2010). La transici\u0026oacute;n a la edad adulta en Colombia: una lectura relacional. \u003cem\u003eAvances En Psicolog\u0026iacute;a Latinoamericana\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e28\u003c/em\u003e(1), 1\u0026ndash;15. Redalyc. https://www.redalyc.org/pdf/799/79915029009.pdf\u2028\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMoraleda, M., Gonz\u0026aacute;lez Gal\u0026aacute;n, A., \u0026amp; Garc\u0026iacute;a-Gallo, J. (1998). \u003cem\u003eActitudes y estrategias cognitivas sociales(AECS)\u003c/em\u003e. Tea.\u2028\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMosselman, F., Weenink, D., \u0026amp; Lindegaard, M. R. (2018). Weapons, body postures, and the quest for dominance in robberies. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Research in Crime and Delinquency\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e55\u003c/em\u003e(1), 3\u0026ndash;26. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022427817706525\u2028\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eNeaman, A., \u0026amp; Mari\u0026oacute;, A. (2015). Prosociality and proenvironmentalism as components of sustainable behavior: toward an integrated approach to sustainability education. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Natural Resources and Development\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e5\u003c/em\u003e, 14\u0026ndash;16. https://doi.org/10.5027/jnrd.v5i0.02 \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eNeaman, A., Otto, S., \u0026amp; Vinokur, E. (2018). Toward an Integrated Approach to Environmental and Prosocial Education. \u003cem\u003eSustainability\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e10\u003c/em\u003e(3), 583. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10030583 \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eNettle, D., Coll\u0026eacute;ony, A., \u0026amp; Cockerill, M. (2011). Variation in cooperative behaviour within a single city. \u003cem\u003ePLoS ONE\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e6\u003c/em\u003e(10), e26922. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0026922 \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eNettle, D., Harper, Z., Kidson, A., Stone, R., Penton-Voak, I. S., \u0026amp; Bateson, M. (2013). The watching eyes effect in the Dictator Game: It\u0026rsquo;s not how much you give, it\u0026rsquo;s being seen to give something. \u003cem\u003eEvolution and Human Behavior\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e34\u003c/em\u003e(1), 35\u0026ndash;40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2012.08.004 \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eP\u0026aacute;ramo, P., \u0026amp; Burbano Arroyo, A. M. (2014). Los usos y la apropiaci\u0026oacute;n del espacio p\u0026uacute;blico para el fortalecimiento de la democracia. \u003cem\u003eRevista de Arquitectura\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e16\u003c/em\u003e(1), 6\u0026ndash;15. https://doi.org/10.14718/revarq.2014.16.2\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003ePiff, P. K., Kraus, M. W., C\u0026ocirc;t\u0026eacute;, S., Hayden Cheng, B., \u0026amp; Keltner, D. (2010). Having less, giving more: The influence of social class on prosocial behavior. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Personality and Social Psychology\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e99\u003c/em\u003e(5), 771\u0026ndash;784. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0020092 \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eProverbio, A. M. (2021). Sex differences in the social brain and in social cognition. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Neuroscience Research\u003c/em\u003e. https://doi.org/10.1002/jnr.24787 \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eRichaud de Minzi, M. C. (2009). Influencia del modelado de los padres sobre el desarrollo del razonamiento prosocial en los/las ni\u0026ntilde;os/as. \u003cem\u003eInteramerican Journal of Psychology\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e43\u003c/em\u003e(1), 187\u0026ndash;198. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eRuth, N. (2016). \u0026ldquo;Heal the World\u0026rdquo;: A field experiment on the effects of music with prosocial lyrics on prosocial behavior. \u003cem\u003ePsychology of Music\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e45\u003c/em\u003e(2), 298\u0026ndash;304. https://doi.org/10.1177/0305735616652226 \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSalda\u0026ntilde;a, J. (2014). San Alejo. \u003cem\u003eLa Tercera Orilla\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e12\u003c/em\u003e. https://doi.org/10.29375/21457190.2936 \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eS\u0026aacute;nchez-Queija, I., Oliva, A., \u0026amp; Parra, \u0026Aacute;. (2006). Empat\u0026iacute;a y conducta prosocial durante la adolescencia. \u003cem\u003eRevista de Psicolog\u0026iacute;a Social\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e21\u003c/em\u003e(3), 259\u0026ndash;271. https://doi.org/10.1174/021347406778538230 \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSchroeder, D. A., \u0026amp; Graziano, W. G. (2015). The field of prosocial behavior: an introduction and overview. In D. A. Schroeder \u0026amp; W. G. Graziano (Eds.), \u003cem\u003eThe Oxford Handbook of Prosocial Behavior \u003c/em\u003e(pp. 3\u0026ndash;34). Oxford University Press. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eStupacher, J., Maes, P.-J., Witte, M., \u0026amp; Wood, G. (2017). Music strengthens prosocial effects of interpersonal synchronization \u0026ndash; If you move in time with the beat. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Experimental Social Psychology\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e72\u003c/em\u003e, 39\u0026ndash;44. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2017.04.007 \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eTapia-Fonllem, C., Corral-Verdugo, V., Fraijo-Sing, B., \u0026amp; Dur\u0026oacute;n-Ramos, M. (2013). Assessing Sustainable Behavior and its Correlates: A Measure of Pro-Ecological, Frugal, Altruistic and Equitable Actions. \u003cem\u003eSustainability\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e5\u003c/em\u003e(2), 711\u0026ndash;723. https://doi.org/10.3390/su5020711 \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eTaylor, S. E., Klein, L. C., Lewis, B. P., Gruenewald, T. L., Gurung, R. A. R., \u0026amp; Updegraff, J. A. (2000). Biobehavioral responses to stress in females: Tend-and-befriend, not fight-or- flight. \u003cem\u003ePsychological Review\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e107\u003c/em\u003e(3), 411\u0026ndash;429. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033- 295x.107.3.411 \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eYavuz, N., \u0026amp; Welch, E. W. (2010). Addressing fear of crime in public space: Gender differences in reaction to safety measures in train transit. \u003cem\u003eUrban Studies\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e47\u003c/em\u003e(12), 2491\u0026ndash;2515. https://doi.org/10.1177/0042098009359033 \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eZahn-Waxler, C., \u0026amp; Smith, K. D. (1992). The development of prosocial behavior. \u003cem\u003eHandbook of Social Development\u003c/em\u003e, 229\u0026ndash;256. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4899-0694-6_10 \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eZaki, J., \u0026amp; Ochsner, K. N. (2012). The neuroscience of empathy: Progress, pitfalls and promise. \u003cem\u003eNature Neuroscience\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e15\u003c/em\u003e(5), 675\u0026ndash;680. https://doi.org/10.1038/nn.3085 \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003c/ol\u003e"}],"fulltextSource":"","fullText":"","funders":[],"hasAdminPriorityOnWorkflow":false,"hasManuscriptDocX":true,"hasOptedInToPreprint":true,"hasPassedJournalQc":"","hasAnyPriority":false,"hideJournal":false,"highlight":"","institution":"","isAcceptedByJournal":false,"isAuthorSuppliedPdf":false,"isDeskRejected":"","isHiddenFromSearch":false,"isInQc":false,"isInWorkflow":false,"isPdf":false,"isPdfUpToDate":true,"isWithdrawnOrRetracted":false,"journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"human-arenas","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"externalIdentity":"huar","sideBox":"Learn more about [Human Arenas](http://link.springer.com/journal/42087)","snPcode":"42087","submissionUrl":"https://submission.nature.com/new-submission/42087/3","title":"Human Arenas","twitterHandle":"","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":true,"editorialSystem":"em","reportingPortfolio":"Springer Hybrid","inReviewEnabled":true,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":false},"keywords":"Bogota, naturalistic observation, prosociality, social interaction, socioeconomic position, urban environments","lastPublishedDoi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-9555671/v1","lastPublishedDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-9555671/v1","license":{"name":"CC BY 4.0","url":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"},"manuscriptAbstract":"\u003cp\u003eProsociality is of increasing relevance in urban contexts characterized by complex social interactions, where it plays a fundamental role in promoting cooperation and strengthening social cohesion. In this research, we examined the relationship between social cognition and prosocial behaviors observed in a naturalistic setting - the San Alejo Flea Market in Bogot\u0026aacute;, Colombia. Specifically, empathy and prosocial behaviors such as altruism and cooperation were explored as the foundations of human prosociality, framed within social neuroscience. Using an ecological approach, 36 hours of systematic observation were conducted to characterize prosocial behavior in situ, complemented by a survey and a psychometric instrument assessing social cognition among adults aged 25\u0026ndash;55. A total of 32,123 behaviors were recorded, with empathy being the most frequent (86.4%), followed by spatial interaction (11.8%), cooperation (1.5%), and altruism (0.1%). Four main findings emerged: (1) social cognition scores were higher in women than in men; (2) individuals in lower socioeconomic positions exhibited higher levels of social cognition; (3) observational data showed a higher frequency of prosocial behaviors among men; and (4) environmental conditions were associated with behavior, with higher frequencies observed on warm days and in the presence of music, particularly under cloudy conditions. These results reveal a divergence between self-reported social cognition and observable prosocial behavior, and highlight the importance of studying social processes in natural contexts. Public spaces emerge as key settings where cognition, social norms, and environmental factors interact, underscoring their importance as venues for encounter, coexistence, and social cohesion in contemporary urban environments.\u003c/p\u003e","manuscriptTitle":"Social cognition and prosocial behavior in public spaces: a naturalistic study in Bogotá, Colombia","msid":"","msnumber":"","nonDraftVersions":[{"code":1,"date":"2026-05-18 07:39:05","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-9555671/v1","editorialEvents":[{"type":"communityComments","content":0},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"214840717951783140324023277171003836681","date":"2026-05-14T21:36:04+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"138493156311650425341853622445583830907","date":"2026-05-13T04:50:58+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"64487400112267185326496893250498606178","date":"2026-05-09T19:48:59+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"66263595805023507474316074414112119653","date":"2026-05-09T16:58:47+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"82827077952725867667195801972575267038","date":"2026-05-09T12:44:29+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"22523580513911300691703133622739923885","date":"2026-05-07T18:57:00+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewersInvited","content":"","date":"2026-05-07T16:40:19+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorAssigned","content":"","date":"2026-04-29T14:25:54+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"checksComplete","content":"","date":"2026-04-29T14:25:22+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"submitted","content":"Human Arenas","date":"2026-04-28T14:41:08+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""}],"status":"published","journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"human-arenas","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"externalIdentity":"huar","sideBox":"Learn more about [Human Arenas](http://link.springer.com/journal/42087)","snPcode":"42087","submissionUrl":"https://submission.nature.com/new-submission/42087/3","title":"Human Arenas","twitterHandle":"","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":true,"editorialSystem":"em","reportingPortfolio":"Springer Hybrid","inReviewEnabled":true,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":false}}],"origin":"","ownerIdentity":"5374e33d-7b00-4caf-b962-b0106a936bd1","owner":[],"postedDate":"May 18th, 2026","published":true,"recentEditorialEvents":[{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"214840717951783140324023277171003836681","date":"2026-05-14T21:36:04+00:00","index":79,"fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"138493156311650425341853622445583830907","date":"2026-05-13T04:50:58+00:00","index":78,"fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"64487400112267185326496893250498606178","date":"2026-05-09T19:48:59+00:00","index":73,"fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"66263595805023507474316074414112119653","date":"2026-05-09T16:58:47+00:00","index":71,"fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"82827077952725867667195801972575267038","date":"2026-05-09T12:44:29+00:00","index":68,"fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"22523580513911300691703133622739923885","date":"2026-05-07T18:57:00+00:00","index":62,"fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewersInvited","content":"54","date":"2026-05-07T16:40:19+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""}],"rejectedJournal":[],"revision":"","amendment":"","status":"under-review","subjectAreas":[],"tags":[],"updatedAt":"2026-05-18T07:39:05+00:00","versionOfRecord":[],"versionCreatedAt":"2026-05-18 07:39:05","video":"","vorDoi":"","vorDoiUrl":"","workflowStages":[]},"version":"v1","identity":"rs-9555671","journalConfig":"researchsquare"},"__N_SSP":true},"page":"/article/[identity]/[[...version]]","query":{"redirect":"/article/rs-9555671","identity":"rs-9555671","version":["v1"]},"buildId":"8U1c8b4HqxoKbykW_rLl7","isFallback":false,"isExperimentalCompile":false,"dynamicIds":[84888],"gssp":true,"scriptLoader":[]}