2011
DOI: 10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2010.07.002
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Disadvantage and prosocial behavior: the effects of the Wenchuan earthquake

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

5
70
1
3

Year Published

2016
2016
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
5
2
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 87 publications
(79 citation statements)
references
References 23 publications
5
70
1
3
Order By: Relevance
“…Other emerging evidence exploring the effects of post-election violence (Becchetti, Conzo, and Romeo 2014), and earthquake and tsunami damage (Caló-Blanco, et al 2015;Cassar, Healy, and Von Kessler 2011;Rao et al 2011) also mimics the main finding of this paper, namely that survival threats tend to enhance local cooperation. We expect that work in these areas will yield new insights about what psychological, economic and social mechanisms could lead those who experience violence to shift to more cooperative behavior.…”
mentioning
confidence: 63%
“…Other emerging evidence exploring the effects of post-election violence (Becchetti, Conzo, and Romeo 2014), and earthquake and tsunami damage (Caló-Blanco, et al 2015;Cassar, Healy, and Von Kessler 2011;Rao et al 2011) also mimics the main finding of this paper, namely that survival threats tend to enhance local cooperation. We expect that work in these areas will yield new insights about what psychological, economic and social mechanisms could lead those who experience violence to shift to more cooperative behavior.…”
mentioning
confidence: 63%
“…In the case of domestic disasters, there may be wider within-country effects caused by the disaster that impact donations, through channels other than the fundraising appeals. These include changes in levels of social cohesion and pro-sociality (De Alessi, 1975;Solnit, 2009;Rao et al, 2011) and religiosity (Bentzen, 2015) as well as effects on economic conditions and government spending (Fidrmuc et al, 2015).…”
Section: B Dec Appealsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Prosocial behavior is generally defined as any behavior someone engages in that benefits another (Eisenberg, ; Penner, Dovidio, Piliavin, & Schroeder, ), including helping, sharing, cooperating, providing support, and taking part in volunteer activities. Existing studies have used different approaches to assess prosocial behavior, such as observing the presence and frequency of typical types of prosocial behavior in a naturalistic setting (Gurven & Winking, ), measuring with structured laboratory tasks such as the dictator game (e.g., Rao et al., ), or implementing self‐ or other‐reported behavioral measures (e.g., Carlo & Randall, ). The positive consequences of prosocial behavior have been greatly evidenced: Prosocial individuals tend to have better mental and physical health and more harmonious interpersonal relationships (see a review in Penner et al., ).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Only a few studies have examined the longitudinal changes in prosocial behavior following trauma. For example, Rao et al (2011) followed a sample of 1,720 earthquake victims and 727 nonvictims at about 1-month, 5-months, and 12-months postearthquake, and found that victims displayed more prosocial behavior than nonvictims across the time points. Reiter-Purtill, Vannatta, Gerhardt, Correll, and Noll (2003) investigated 69 children who had undergone cancer treatment and 77 healthy controls, and reported that the former were stably more prosocial than the latter over 2 years after treatment ended.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%