Empathy promotes altruistic behavior in economic interactions

Abstract

What are the determinants of altruism? While economists assume that altruism is mainly driven by fairness norms, social psychologists consider empathy to be a key motivator for altruistic behavior. To unite these two theories, we conducted an experiment in which we compared behavior in a standard economic game that assesses altruism (the so-called Dictator Game) with a Dictator Game in which participants’ behavioral choices were preceded either by an empathy induction or by a control condition without empathy induction. The results of this within-subject manipulation show that the empathy induction substantially increased altruistic behavior. Moreover, the increase in experienced empathy predicted over 40% of the increase in sharing behavior. These data extend standard economic theories that altruism is based on fairness considerations, by showing that empathic feelings can be a key motivator for altruistic behavior in economic interactions.

Empathy leads to increased online charitable behaviour when time is the currency

“…The findings of this study provide partial support for the hypothesis, as it was found that participants induced with empathic feelings spent more time to donate grains of rice to charity than participants not induced with emotions at all. Therefore, this finding supports previous research (e.g., Farrelly et al, ; Klimecki et al, ) that empathic feelings can lead to altruistic behaviour by revealing that such effects are present in interactions with real world charities where time spent is the donation requested. Furthermore, by using time as the currency, we show that inducing empathy can lead to longer lasting prosocial behaviour to alleviate negative mood that is similar to the instantaneous effects of donating money that previous studies have found (e.g., Klimecki et al, ).…”

“…Therefore, this finding supports previous research (e.g., Farrelly et al, 2015;Klimecki et al, 2016) that empathic feelings can lead to altruistic behaviour by revealing that such effects are present in interactions with real world charities where time spent is the donation requested. Furthermore, by using time as the currency, we show that inducing empathy can lead to longer lasting prosocial behaviour to alleviate negative mood that is similar to the instantaneous effects of donating money that previous studies have found (e.g., Klimecki et al, 2016). Interestingly, however, this effect of induced empathy did not lead to greater charitable donations as predicted than when another emotion, anger, was induced.…”

“…Therefore, there is a need to apply the above to real world scenarios, such as actual charitable causes where it is not money that is requested, which is the aim of the current study. To do so, this study will test the established theory from social psychology that empathic feelings can lead to increased altruistic behaviour or attitudes to others (Batson, Batson, Slingsby, & Harrell, 1991;Batson, Duncan, Ackerman, Buckley, & Birch, 1981;Edele, Dziobek, & Keller, 2013;Klimecki, Mayer, Jusyte, Scheeff, & Schönenberg, 2016;Pavey, Greitemeyer, & Sparks, 2012). To achieve this, this study will examine whether inducing empathic emotions in individuals leads to them behaving more altruistically, which has been shown to happen previously (Farrelly et al, 2015;Klimecki et al, 2016), via the novel use of a real world online charity.…”

The social mind: disentangling affective and cognitive routes to understanding others

“…Several studies have verified the role of empathy and ToM for prosociality (Masten, Morelli, and Eisenberger 2011;Klimecki et al 2016;Hare et al 2010). Specifically, costly helping of others in need is predicted by both activation in the anterior insula and the temporoparietal junction (Tusche et al 2016).…”

All for one or some for all? Evaluating informative hypotheses using multiple N = 1 studies

“…Rather than evaluating hypotheses at the group level, the hypotheses are evaluated for each person separately. In social psychology, for example, it is often hoped or thought that if a hypothesis holds at the group level, this also applies to all individuals (see for example, Moreland & Zajonc, 1982;Klimecki, Mayer, Jusyte, Scheeff, & Schönenberg, 2016). Hamaker (2012) describes the importance of individual analyses using an example: Cross-sectionally, the number of words typed per minute and the percentage of typos might be negatively correlated.…”