Both Selfishness and Selflessness Start with the Self: How Wealth Shapes Responses to Charitable Appeals

A.V.  Whillans; E.M.  Caruso; E.W.  Dunn

Article | Journal of Experimental Social Psychology

Both Selfishness and Selflessness Start with the Self: How Wealth Shapes Responses to Charitable Appeals

by A.V. Whillans, E.M. Caruso and E.W. Dunn

Abstract

Wealth is associated with differences in people's self-concepts. We propose that these self-concepts should define the types of appeals that are most effective at motivating generosity. Across three field studies, we randomly assigned participants to view an appeal for a charitable organization that emphasized agency (the pursuit of personal goals) or communion (the pursuit of shared goals). When the appeal emphasized agency, wealthier individuals reported greater willingness to give and donated more money to charity. In contrast, when the appeal emphasized communion, less wealthy individuals reported greater willingness to give. These findings could not be explained by relevant demographic characteristics such as age, ethnicity, or gender. This work adds to a growing body of research suggesting that wealth does not inherently result in selfishness or generosity. By tailoring messages to fit with people's self-concepts, it is possible to catalyze giving across the socioeconomic spectrum.

Keywords: Philanthropy and Charitable Giving; Wealth; Personal Characteristics; Behavior; Identity;

Format: Print

Find at Harvard Read Now

Citation:

Whillans, A.V., E.M. Caruso, and E.W. Dunn. "Both Selfishness and Selflessness Start with the Self: How Wealth Shapes Responses to Charitable Appeals." Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 70 (May 2017): 242–250. (This publication was featured as an "Editor's Choice" at Science in January, 2017.)

Conventional wisdom says you should ask your colleagues for feedback. However, research suggests that feedback often has no (or even a negative) impact on our performance. This is because the feedback we receive is often too vague—it fails to highlight what we can improve on or how to improve. New research suggests a better approach. Across four experiments—including a field experiment conducted in an executive education classroom—researchers found that people received more effective input when they asked for advice rather than feedback.

When making major life decisions—such as choosing what to do after graduation—is it better to prioritize time or money? In a pre-registered longitudinal study of 1,232 graduating university students, respondents who valued time over money chose more intrinsically rewarding activities and were happier one year after graduation. These results remained significant controlling for baseline happiness, potential confounds such as materialism and socioeconomic status, and when using alternative model specifications. These findings extend prior research by showing that the tendency to value time over money is not only predictive of daily consumer choices but also of major life decisions. Additionally, this research clarifies the direction of the observed associations between valuing time and money and happiness, showing that valuing time over money uniquely contributes to well-being, in part by encouraging intrinsic motivation. Together, this work sheds new light on whether, when, and how valuing time shapes happiness.

When looking to improve workplace performance, people often seek third-party input by asking for feedback. However, we propose that asking for feedback might not be the most effective way of soliciting critical and actionable input. We offer a simple yet powerful alternative: ask for advice instead. Across four experiments (N=1,438), including a field experiment, we show that people offer more critical and actionable input when they are asked to provide advice (versus feedback)—even when they are asked to provide comments on identical output. When asked to provide feedback (versus advice), givers focus too much on evaluating the recipient, which undermines their ability to generate constructive (i.e. critical and actionable) input. Our findings suggest that framing feedback provision as advice provision may be a promising way of soliciting constructive third-party input.

Faculty & Research

Both Selfishness and Selflessness Start with the Self: How Wealth Shapes Responses to Charitable Appeals

Abstract

Citation:

About the Author

More from the Author