Encouraging Prosocial Decisions: The Role of Fairness Salience and Uncertainty

Abstract

Although the decision to engage in prosocial behavior has received research attention, the literature offers a limited understanding of fairness and uncertainty as antecedents. We propose that one can encourage prosocial decision making simply by invoking the notion of fairness because of its effects on the perceived trustworthiness of the invoking party. We also elucidate the complex role of uncertainty in prosocial decisions in that it has a negative effect while also serving to strengthen the positive effect of fairness salience. Our ideas are tested in two prosocial decision contexts, including participative pricing (i.e., "pay what you want") and charitable giving. Data from an archival study of a naturally occurring event and two controlled experiments offer support for our arguments.

Pay-What-You-Want pricing: An integrative review of the empirical research literature

“…Schröder et al (2015) find that naming the procedure as "Reduce The Price As Much As You Can" resulted in significantly lower payments than presenting it as PWYW. Sleesman & Conlon (2016) report significantly higher payments if the name framing is "Pay What You Believe/s Fair" instead of PWYW. Taken together the six studies and their nine data sets point in the direction that the prices paid in PWYW contexts can be positively influenced by presenting name frames that emphasize the value of the goods offered or the financial standing of the buyers instead of saving opportunities triggered by this price setting approach.…”

“…Consequently, the provider is not entitled to withdraw from a sale even if the customer pays nothing (i.e., a price of zero) or an amount that falls below a minimal threshold value of the seller (unknown to the customer) as in the case of the "Name-Your-Own-Price" procedure (Fay, 2004). The English-speaking literature also uses the terms "Pay What You Think It Is Worth" (El Harbi et al, 2014), "Pay What You Believe Is Fair" (Sleesman & Conlon, 2016), "Pay As You Wish" (Bertini & Koenigsberg, 2014), "Pay What You Like" (Fernandez & Nahata, 2009), "Pay What You Can" (Saccardo et al, 2015) and "Pick Your Own Price" (Bourreau et al, 2015) as synonyms for the PWYW pricing method.…”

A review of the empirical literature on Pay-What-You-Want price setting

“…For instance, from a theoretical viewpoint, it is to be expected that new products or services, for which consumers experience considerable difficulties in assessing their quality and which are sold under PWYW conditions, are purchased by a lower share of potential customers and are characterized by a larger variance of the prices paid voluntarily for them than established goods whose quality is well know to prospective buyers. The PWYW studies of Sleesman and Conlon (2016) and Weisstein et al (2016) contain some support for this proposition. The expected differences can be explained by information gaps and resulting uncertainty of consumers, who are heavily influenced by characteristics of the goods sold in a PWYW setting (Greiff et al, 2014).…”

“…Schröder et al (2015) find that naming the procedure as "Reduce The Price As Much As You Can" resulted in significantly lower payments than presenting it as PWYW. Sleesman and Conlon (2016) report significantly higher payments if the name framing is "Pay What You Believe/s Fair" instead of PWYW. Taken together the six studies and their nine data sets point in the direction that the prices paid in PWYW contexts can be positively influenced by presenting name frames that emphasize the value of the goods offered or the financial standing of the buyers instead of saving opportunities triggered by this price setting approach.…”

“…Consequently, the provider is not entitled to withdraw from a sale even if the customer pays nothing (i.e., a price of zero) or an amount that falls below a minimal threshold value of the seller (unknown to the customer) as in the case of the "Name-Your-Own-Price" procedure (Fay, 2004). The English-speaking literature also uses the terms "Pay What You Think It Is Worth" (El Harbi et al, 2014), "Pay What You Believe Is Fair" (Sleesman and Conlon, 2016), "Pay As You Wish" (Bertini and Koenigsberg, 2014), "Pay What You Like" (Fernandez and Nahata, 2009), "Pay What You Can" (Saccardo et al, 2015) and "Pick Your Own Price" (Bourreau et al, 2015) as synonyms for the PWYW pricing method.…”