Why Time Poverty Matters for Individuals, Organisations, and Nations

Ashley V. Whillans; Laura M. Giurge (shared authorship); Colin  West

Article | Nature Human Behaviour

Why Time Poverty Matters for Individuals, Organisations, and Nations

by Ashley V. Whillans, Laura M. Giurge (shared authorship) and Colin West

Abstract

Over the last two decades, global wealth has risen. Yet, material affluence has not translated into time affluence. Instead, most people today report feeling persistently “time poor”—like they have too many things to do and not enough time to do them. This is critical because time poverty is linked to lower well-being, physical health, and productivity. For example, in our analysis of 2.5 million Americans, subjective feelings of time poverty had a stronger negative effect on well-being than being unemployed. However, individuals, organisations, and policymakers often overlook the pernicious effects of time poverty. Billions of dollars are spent each year to alleviate material poverty, while time poverty is often ignored or exacerbated. In this Perspective, we discuss the organisational, institutional, and psychological factors that explain why time poverty is often under appreciated. We argue that scientists, policymakers, and organisational leaders need to devote more attention and resources toward understanding and reducing time poverty to promote psychological and economic well-being.

Keywords: time poverty; Health; Welfare or Wellbeing; Human Needs; Global Range;

Format: Print

Read Now

Citation:

Whillans, Ashley V., Laura M. Giurge (shared authorship), and Colin West. "Why Time Poverty Matters for Individuals, Organisations, and Nations." Nature Human Behaviour (in press).

Who benefits most from helping others? Previous research suggests that common polymorphisms of the oxytocin receptor gene (OXTR) predict whether people behave generously and experience increases in positive mood in response to socially-focused experiences in daily life. Building on these findings, we conducted an experiment with a large, ethnically homogenous sample (N=437) to examine whether individual differences in three frequently studied single nucleotide polymorphisms of OXTR (rs53576, rs2268498, rs2254298) also predict differences in the positive mood benefits of financial generosity. Consistent with past research, participants who were randomly assigned to purchase items for others (vs. themselves) reported greater positive affect. Contrary to predictions, using Bayesian statistics, we found conclusive evidence that the benefits of generosity were not moderated by individual differences in OXTR SNPs. The current work highlights the importance of publishing null results to build cumulative knowledge linking neurobiological factors to positive emotional experiences.

This article reveals a behavioral tendency that may contribute to the spread of the novel coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2). Across seven studies—including two representative samples of Americans and Canadians (N = 3,408)—we show that people consistently underestimate the risk of contracting the coronavirus from close others (i.e., friends) compared to other groups (e.g., colleagues or strangers). We reveal that informing people of their (unconscious) preference to believe that friends are less risky than strangers can effectively attenuate this behavioral tendency. Together, these results shed light on a critical area of intervention for promoting social distancing: people’s beliefs about the risk of contracting the coronavirus from their friends.

Across five studies (N=3,071), we explore the interpersonal consequences of COVID risk communication when rejecting social invitations. In Study 1, people underestimate the benefits and overestimate the costs of rejecting social invitations for risk-related reasons. In Studies 2a&b, people are more likely to communicate risk when they are focused on welfare (vs. social) concerns. In Studies 3a&b, we replicate and extend these results in the context of actual social invitations. Together, these studies suggest that people should feel less concerned about rejecting social concerns for COVID-related reasons: risk communication could be more effective, and more positively perceived than people predict. These studies also suggest that policy makers should emphasize the welfare (vs. social costs) of COVID in ongoing communications.

Faculty & Research

Why Time Poverty Matters for Individuals, Organisations, and Nations

Abstract

Citation:

About the Author

More from the Author