The self-protective altruist: terror management and the ambivalent nature of prosocial behavior

Three studies examined the hypothesis that mortality salience (MS) will increase prosocial behaviors when the prosocial cause promotes terror management processes. However, when the prosocial cause interferes with these processes, MS will reduce prosocial behavior. In Study 1, following a MS procedure, participants indicated their willingness to donate money to charity or to donate to an organ donation organization. In Study 2, a research assistant randomly distributed fliers with reminders of death or back pain, and another research assistant solicited participants' assistance from either a charitable fund booth or an organ donation booth. Study 3 examined the impact of MS on helping a wheelchair-bound confederate or a walking confederate. The results indicated that MS increased charitable donations and increased help to a walking confederate. However, MS significantly decreased organ donation card signings and decreased help to a wheelchair-bound confederate. The discussion examines the tension between personal fear and worldview validation.     

Can an organization's philanthropic donations encourage consumers to give? The roles of gratitude and boundary conditions

This study examines whether an organization's charitable donation will prompt consumers who closely identify with the organization to give to the charity as well. We posit that identifying with a benefactor will enhance the perception that consumers are involved in the donation process, which evokes grateful feelings. We also predict that the amount of the organization's donation will positively moderate the influence of organization identification on charity‐evoked feelings of gratitude, while attitude toward the organization's charity will positively moderate the gratitude–donation relationship. In Study 1, we show how gratitude arises in the context of corporate social responsibility by demonstrating the mediating role of perceived donation contribution in the relationship between organization identification and gratitude. In Study 2, we demonstrate that organization identification has a significant indirect effect on donation intention through gratitude. Multigroup analyses show that the identification–gratitude link is more salient when the organization commits to donating a larger amount of money to a charity. Furthermore, the impact of gratitude on donation intent is significantly stronger for individuals who hold a favorable attitude toward the organization's corporate social responsibility activity. Our findings indicate that an organization's charitable giving also encourages consumers to give to the community via vicariously felt gratitude. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

面部表情与捐赠者–受益者关系对网络慈善众筹捐赠行为的影响

网络慈善众筹是从在线社区获得财力捐助的行为。本研究通过3个实验,考察在线社交平台上受益者面部表情与捐赠者–受益者关系对慈善众筹捐赠行为的影响。结果发现,快乐的面部表情对捐赠金额和分享意愿的影响总体上比悲伤更大;捐赠者–受益者共有的熟人关系比陌生人关系对捐赠金额与分享意愿的影响更大;面部表情与捐赠者–受益者关系对慈善众筹的捐赠金额存在交互作用,但对分享意愿没有显著性影响。结果表明,在线社交平台的慈善众筹捐赠行为更偏好有快乐面部表情的受益者,并且更多地受到间接的、社会交换预期微弱的熟人共有关系的影响。     

“Paying it forward” via satisfying a basic human need: The need for relatedness satisfaction mediates gratitude and prosocial behavior

People who receive kindness tend to feel gratitude and act in a prosocial manner toward third persons (i.e., “paying it forward”). Combining the separate evidence that (a) gratitude leads to the formation of strong psychological bonds from a beneficiary to a benefactor and that (b) people become more prosocial toward strangers when the need for relatedness (NFR) is satisfied, two online experiments were conducted to examine if NFR satisfaction mediates the association between gratitude and prosocial behavior toward third persons. After evoking gratitude by recalling past experiences (Study 1) or writing a letter to someone (Study 2), participants were asked to make a donation from their remuneration for the experiment to a charity organization. As predicted, emotional manipulation promoted donation via feelings of gratitude and satisfied NFR. Implications of the current model for integrating previous findings are discussed.     

Giving,Fast and Slow: Reflection Increases Costly (but Not Uncostly) Charitable Giving

Are people intuitively generous or stingy? Does reflection make people more willing to give generous amounts to charity? Findings across the literature are mixed, with many studies finding no clear relationship between reflection and charitable giving (e.g., Hauge, Brekke, Johansson, Johansson‐Stenman, & Svedsäter, 2016 ; Tinghög et al., 2016 ), while others find that reflection negatively affects giving (e.g., Small, Loewenstein, & Slovic, 2007 ), and still others find that reflection is positively associated with giving (e.g., Lohse, Goeschl, & Diederich, 2014 ). I demonstrate that reflection consistently increases costly giving to charity. In Study 1, people were initially reluctant to give costly amounts of money to charity, but those who reflected about the decision were more willing to give. In Studies 2–3, I isolated the role of costly stakes by randomly assigning people to either an uncostly donation (Are people intuitively generous or stingy? Does reflection make people more willing to give generous amounts to charity? Findings across the literature are mixed, with many studies finding no clear relationship between reflection and charitable giving (e.g., Hauge, Brekke, Johansson, Johansson‐Stenman, & Svedsäter, 2016 ; Tinghög et al., 2016 ), while others find that reflection negatively affects giving (e.g., Small, Loewenstein, & Slovic, 2007 ), and still others find that reflection is positively associated with giving (e.g., Lohse, Goeschl, & Diederich, 2014 ). I demonstrate that reflection consistently increases costly giving to charity. In Study 1, people were initially reluctant to give costly amounts of money to charity, but those who reflected about the decision were more willing to give. In Studies 2–3, I isolated the role of costly stakes by randomly assigning people to either an uncostly donation ($0.40) or costly donation condition (e.g., $100), and randomly assigning them to decide under time pressure or after reflecting. Reflection increased their willingness to give costly amounts, but did not influence their willingness to give uncostly amounts. Similarly, the relationship between decision time and giving was positive when the stakes were costly but was relatively flat when the stakes were uncostly (Study 4). Copyright © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Giving from a distance: Putting the charitable organization at the center of the donation appeal

Past research has shown repeatedly that people prefer donating to a single identified human victim rather than to unidentified or abstract donation targets. In the current research we show results countering the identifiable victim effect, wherein people prefer to donate to charitable organizations rather than to an identifiable victim. In a series of five studies, we manipulate temporal and social distance, examine a variety of donation targets, and measure intention to donate time or money as well as actual donations of money. We show that people are more willing to donate to a charitable organization when they are temporally or socially distant from the population in need. Willingness to donate to a specific person in need is higher when donors are temporally or socially close to the donation target. Furthermore, we demonstrate that (a) empathy mediates donations to a single victim, yet does not mediate donations to charitable organizations; (b) that donation giving to charitable organizations is unique and is not similar to donations to a group of victims. Theoretical and practical implications are discussed.     

To Ask or Not to Ask: Enhancing Donations to Nonprofits by Soliciting Opinions Upfront,Rather than Donations

The success of non-profit organizations depends mainly on the strategies they use to recruit new donors. One common strategy is to solicit donations upfront (mostly online)—but is this indeed an effective approach? We conducted three experiments (N_total?=?1287), in which we compared an upfront appeal of that sort with one that offered prospective donors the opportunity to express their opinion about a given fundraising campaign—and then asked if they cared to donate to it. Drawing on foot-in-the-door and escalation of commitment theories, we found that soliciting an opinion (as opposed to a donation) led to greater engagement with the charity among prospective donors, as reflected by their greater willingness to read about the cause. This, in turn, encouraged them to donate. In experiment 1, we showed that the direct effect of request type on donations was mediated by the donors’ willingness to learn about the charity. In experiment 2, we showed that pairing an appeal for an opinion with a donation request was more effective than merely appealing for a donation. Finally, in experiment 3, we found that the more donors learn about a given cause, the stronger their emotional response to it, and the greater their donations to it. Further, we showed that soliciting an opinion (as opposed to a donation) made donors feel a greater connection with the organization. In sum, we propose a simple and cost-effective intervention that may help non-profit businesses become more effective.

     

Stated goals and their influence on helping behavior toward ingroups and outgroups

When seeking to motivate individuals to help, helping behavior may be framed in terms of power‐oriented, results focused, goals or value‐oriented, ideologically based, goals. In two studies, participants were presented with a call for assistance benefitting an ingroup or an outgroup. The stated goal associated with helping behavior was power‐oriented or value‐oriented. Participants showed more willingness to help on behalf of an outgroup when they believed the charitable organization had value‐oriented goals and more willingness to help on behalf of their ingroup when they believed the charitable organization had power‐oriented goals. The results suggest that organizations should consider the relationship between who will benefit and who is providing assistance to maximize the likelihood that assistance will be provided.     

Volunteer recruitment: the role of organizational support and anticipated respect in non-volunteers' attraction to charitable volunteer organizations

In 3 experiments the authors examined how specific characteristics of charitable volunteer organizations contribute to the recruitment of new volunteers. In line with predictions, Study 1 revealed that providing non-volunteers with information about organizational support induced anticipated feelings of respect, which subsequently enhanced their attraction to the volunteer organization. However, information about the current success of the volunteer organization did not affect anticipated pride (as among those who seek paid employment) and in fact caused potential volunteers to perceive the organization as being in less need for additional volunteers. Study 2 further showed that information about support from the volunteer organization is a more relevant source of anticipated respect and organizational attraction than support from co-volunteers. Study 3 finally showed that information about task and emotional support for volunteers contributes to anticipated respect and organizational attractiveness and that this increases the actual willingness of non-volunteers to participate in the volunteer organization. Interventions aimed at attracting volunteers and avenues for further research are discussed.     

Would You Like to Round Up and Donate the Difference? Roundup Requests Reduce the Perceived Pain of Donating

Recently, some companies have begun to ask their customers to “round up” transactions to the next highest dollar and donate the difference to charity. However, little is known about how consumers respond to such an appeal. Across a series of lab experiments and one large field study, we find that consumers respond more favorably to a roundup than to a flat donation request, even when the requested amount is identical. We find evidence that the effect arises because a roundup request reduces consumers’ perceived pain of donating. Three alternative explanations are examined (i.e., objective financial cost, inattention to donation cost, and perceived novelty of the request) but not supported. This research has important implications for both companies and nonprofits seeking to increase charitable donations from consumers.     

Attitudes toward posthumous organ donation and commitment to donate

The medical need for human organs suitable for use as transplants far exceed the supply, and is growing. More favorable attitudes about organ donation would increase people's willingness to sign posthumous donation pledges. But effective educational programs require information about the public's present views. Verbal attitude scales were constructed and administered to 110 adults, resulting in reliable measurement of two independent dimensions, prodonation and antidonation (r = .003). Cluster analysis of the instrument revealed that the positive dimension involves belief in the humanitarian benefits of organ donation and feelings of pride experienced by the donor. The negative dimension reflects fears of body mutilation and of receiving inadequate medical treatment when one's life is at risk. Pro and anti scores in combination predicted willingness to sign a donor card. A 2 X 2 analysis of variance (High-Low Positive X High-Low Negative) revealed significant main effects for both positive and negative attitude. Also, a significant interaction effect was obtained. Those subjects who had both strong positive attitudes and weak negative attitudes were especially willing to sign donor cards. Suggestions for designing educational campaigns to promote organ donation are offered.     

Memorial Distortions in Donation Data

Abstract

In this study, participants' memory for charitable acts, including the amounts they donated to charity and the frequency of such donations, and also the processes associated with the recall of charitable acts was explored. Participants were Australian students who earned money for responding correctly to a decision-making task and then were given the opportunity to make a donation to a charity. Five weeks later they attempted to recall how much they had donated. Recall of the amount donated produced significant overestimations. A 2nd study examined estimates of donating frequency, and results suggested that the frequency of donating was overestimated. The discussion focuses on the validity of survey data on donation size and frequency and the processes associated with the recall of charitable acts.     

Cheapened altruism: Discounting personally affected prosocial actors

Are charitable donors always perceived as charitable? Three studies suggest that although having a personal connection to a cause motivates much charitable giving, donors who have been personally affected by the target cause are given less “credit” for their donations, i.e., are perceived as less intrinsically charitable. These donors are perceived as having selfish motivations even when they have nothing economic or social to gain from the donation. More specifically, personally-affected donors are perceived as driven by emotional selfishness, or a desire to improve their own hedonic state rather a desire to improve the welfare of others, which lessens the charitable credit that they receive. In addition, although donors who have been personally affected by the target cause are seen as less charitable, they are perceived more favorably in other ways (e.g., more loyal).     

The mediating role of relatedness need satisfaction in the relationship between charitable behavior and well‐being: Empirical evidence from China

Based on self‐determination theory, the current research aimed to explore the potential mediating effect of relatedness need satisfaction on the relationship between charitable behavior and well‐being in the Chinese context. Employing a cross‐sectional design, participants reported data on the aforementioned variables in Study 1. The results indicated that relatedness need satisfaction mediated the positive relationship between charitable behavior and hedonic well‐being and that between charitable behavior and eudaimonic well‐being. Subsequently, a field experiment was conducted in Study 2. Participants rated their levels of relatedness need satisfaction and well‐being after charitable donation behaviors were primed. We again observed consistent results. Specifically, charitable behavior was positively associated with both hedonic and eudaimonic well‐being, and these relationships were mediated by relatedness need satisfaction. The above findings help to clarify the association between charitable behavior and people's subjective feelings (i.e., well‐being), and they deepen our understanding of the underlying mechanism from the perspective of psychological needs satisfaction.     

Asymmetric cost and benefit perceptions in willingness-to-donate decisions

Charitable giving entails the act of foregoing personal resources in order to improve the conditions of other people. In the present paper, we systematically examine two dimensions integral to donation decisions that have thus far received relatively little attention but can explain charitable behavior rather well: the perceptions of cost for the donor and benefit for the recipients. In line with current theories in judgment and decision making, we hypothesize that people weigh these dimensions subjectively and perceive them asymmetrically, consistent with prospect theory. Costs for the donor are typically perceived as losses, whereas benefits for recipients are perceived as gains. In four studies, we presented several scenarios to participants in which both donation amounts (costs) and number of lives helped (benefits) were manipulated while keeping the ratio of costs and benefits constant. Results from Studies 1 and 2 showed that willingness to help decreased as donation amounts and number of lives helped increased. Additionally, Studies 3 and 4 provide evidence for a solution to reduce the asymmetry and increase donation amounts as the number of lives at risk increases.     

The Martyrdom Effect: When Pain and Effort Increase Prosocial Contributions

Most theories of motivation and behavior (and lay intuitions alike) consider pain and effort to be deterrents. In contrast to this widely held view, we provide evidence that the prospect of enduring pain and exerting effort for a prosocial cause can promote contributions to the cause. Specifically, we show that willingness to contribute to a charitable or collective cause increases when the contribution process is expected to be painful and effortful rather than easy and enjoyable. Across five experiments, we document this “martyrdom effect,” show that the observed patterns defy standard economic and psychological accounts, and identify a mediator and moderator of the effect. Experiment 1 showed that people are willing to donate more to charity when they anticipate having to suffer to raise money. Experiment 2 extended these findings to a non‐charity laboratory context that involved real money and actual pain. Experiment 3 demonstrated that the martyrdom effect is not the result of an attribute substitution strategy (whereby people use the amount of pain and effort involved in fundraising to determine donation worthiness). Experiment 4 showed that perceptions of meaningfulness partially mediate the martyrdom effect. Finally, Experiment 5 demonstrated that the nature of the prosocial cause moderates the martyrdom effect: the effect is strongest for causes associated with human suffering. We propose that anticipated pain and effort lead people to ascribe greater meaning to their contributions and to the experience of contributing, thereby motivating higher prosocial contributions. We conclude by considering some implications of this puzzling phenomenon. Copyright © 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Goal gradient in helping behavior

People are more likely to pitch in as charitable campaigns approach their goals. Such “goal gradient helping” occurs in part because late-stage efforts provide donors with a heightened sense of personal impact, an influential source of satisfaction from prosocial acts. Using web robot technology in an Internet field study of micro-lending, Study 1 demonstrated that charity contribution rates increase as recipients approach their fundraising goals. Study 2, a large-scale field experiment, found that funds close to reaching campaign goals received more donations than did funds far from reaching campaign goals. Study 3 replicated the goal gradient helping effect in a controlled scenario experiment, and mediational analyses showed that increased perceived impact of late-stage contributions, and the resultant satisfaction from this impact, explain goal gradient helping. In conclusion, people are not charitable simply to be kind or to relieve negative emotions; they find satisfaction from having personal influence in solving a social problem.     

Moral credentials and the expression of prejudice

Three experiments supported the hypothesis that people are more willing to express attitudes that could be viewed as prejudiced when their past behavior has established their credentials as nonprejudiced persons. In Study 1, participants given the opportunity to disagree with blatantly sexist statements were later more willing to favor a man for a stereotypically male job. In Study 2, participants who first had the opportunity to select a member of a stereotyped group (a woman or an African American) for a category-neutral job were more likely to reject a member of that group for a job stereotypically suited for majority members. In Study 3, participants who had established credentials as nonprejudiced persons revealed a greater willingness to express a politically incorrect opinion even when the audience was unaware of their credentials. The general conditions under which people feel licensed to act on illicit motives are discussed.     

Reflections upon charitable giving: A comparison of individuals from business, ‘manual’ and professional backgrounds

This paper compares three groups of individuals in their beliefs about charitable giving. Focusing upon their preferences for different kinds of needy recipients, the paper compares the views of 49 people from (a) business, (b) professional and (c) ‘manual’ backgrounds. Their justifications of need provided the basis for comparisons on the basic themes of emotional response to requests for funds, to local versus overseas aid and to the relative roles of charity and state provision. It is argued that distinctions between the groups show the need to examine specific beliefs as well as generally held ideologies about charity. In addition, a further comparison of the groups is used to argue that they exemplify differences in the actual form of the gift relationship. These differences in form show the importance of examining charitable giving within specific social contexts, as well as with reference to the various ways of raising funds.     

Let's Dialogue About Penny: Effectiveness of Dialogue Involvement and Legitimizing Paltry Contribution Techniques1

Earlier research has shown (Cialdini & Schroeder, 1976) that the statement “Even a penny will help” added to a standard request for charity donation considerably increases the probability of carrying it out. The present study tested the effectiveness of this technique in various contexts in a set of 3 field experiments conducted on the streets of 2 Polish cities. The results proved, first, that success can be strengthened when combined with a dialogue in which a requester is involved prior to being asked for a donation. Second, it was shown that the dialogue itself produced more compliance than did a monologue. Third, it was demonstrated that dialogue related to the content of the requested issue may or may not result in an increase in compliance, presumably depending on the in‐group/out‐group focus of the dialogue's content. Practical implications for charity donation are offered.