Contact Heterogeneity as a Mediator of the Relationship between Social Class and Altruistic Giving

Abstract

Research on the relationship between social class and altruistic giving has provided inconsistent evidence. Using the dictator game, in which one participant is endowed with a certain amount of money and has to allocate this amount between herself and another individual, several studies found that higher-class actors have a lower tendency toward altruistic giving than lower-class actors; other studies found the opposite pattern. We show that social class has a positive effect on altruistic giving in the dictator game with a sizeable sample of residents of the United States using both an objective measure of social class—that is, a composite of income, education, and occupational prestige—and a subjective measure. Shedding more light on the mechanisms underlying the positive effect of social class, it is demonstrated that class affects altruistic giving not so much by differences in empathic concern but by differences in the marginal utility of money and contact heterogeneity. It is argued that the latter effect can be derived from Collins’s theory of interaction rituals and class cultures.

Social Status Differences in Altruism, Fairness and Retaliatory Defection in an Unequal Country

“…Nevertheless, it is surprising that higher (objective) status participants in our research tended to be more altruistic when experiencing a slight economic advantage, but less altruistic when not. Relatedly, our results also rule out the explanation that because classes differ in their marginal utility of money they differ in their prosocial behavior (Tutić & Liebe, 2020): higher-status individuals might be more altruistic because giving is less costly for them. As we showed here, high objective status individuals conditioned their altruistic behavior to their relative rank in a modified DG (Study 1); and both objective and subjective measures of SES were not related to altruistic behavior in the canonical DG (Study 3).…”

“…Recent research has cast doubts on the negative relationship between social status and prosociality, with some studies concluding that there is no clear link (Dubois et al, 2015;Trautmann et al, 2013) or even a positive relationship between the two (Andreoni et al, 2021;Bauer et al, 2014;Korndörfer et al, 2015;Tutić & Liebe, 2020). Due to these conflicting results, some researchers have proposed that inequality moderates the association between social status and prosociality (Piff & Robinson, 2017).…”

Explaining civic engagement: The role of neighborhood ties, place attachment, and civic responsibility

“…However, their findings are mixed. While Tutić and Liebe (2020) Piff and Robinson (2017) likewise concludes that individuals from lower social classes are more interested in the concerns of others, are less self-oriented, and, therefore, exhibit higher levels of prosocial behaviors, such as helping or sharing with one another. Furthermore, Hale (2016) reports a negative relationship between racial bias and altruism.…”

“…However, their findings are mixed. While Tutić and Liebe ( 2020 ), Van Doesum et al ( 2017 ), and Korndörfer et al ( 2015 ), for example, conclude that social class has a positive influence on altruistic giving, Piff et al ( 2010 ) and Chen et al ( 2013 ) identify a negative effect, which means that individuals from lower social classes are more inclined to support others in an altruistic way. A literature review by Piff and Robinson ( 2017 ) likewise concludes that individuals from lower social classes are more interested in the concerns of others, are less self‐oriented, and, therefore, exhibit higher levels of prosocial behaviors, such as helping or sharing with one another.…”