Dynamics in charity donation decisions:Insights from a large longitudinal data set

Despite the vast body of research on charitable giving and its drivers, no research has investigated the longitudinal dynamics of individual donation decisions. We analyzed unique data with nearly 300,000 real donation decisions made by more than 20,000 individuals for a period of 10 months. Each decision entailed a choice of what to do with money received for completing a survey (on average, Euro 0.67 per survey): keep it or donate to charity. We found that most of the participants (89%) always chose to keep the money. Within the group of people who sometimes kept and sometimes donated the money (that is, Switchers), we find that people do not change their decision very often (cf. moral consistency). However, the likelihood of donating increases when people kept the money the previous time, and the amount at stake differs substantially (both positively and negatively). Finally, once Switchers donated, they are more likely to keep the money next time if they can earn more (for example, 2 Euro now versus 0.50 Euro last time), signaling moral compensation. These longitudinal data provide a first step to better understand charity donation decisions, not only in terms of a more nuanced description of decision-makers but also in terms of the dynamics of charity donations

The Moral Self-Image Scale:Measuring and Understanding the Malleability of the Moral Self

Recent ethical decision-making models suggest that individuals’ own view of their morality is malleable rather than static, responding to their (im)moral actions and reflections about the world around them. Yet no construct currently exists to represent the malleable state of a person’s moral self-image (MSI). In this investigation, we define this construct, as well as develop a scale to measure it. Across five studies, we show that feedback about the moral self alters an individual’s MSI as measured by our scale. We also find that MSI is related to, but distinct from, related constructs, including moral identity, self-esteem, and moral disengagement. In Study 1, we administered the MSI scale and several other relevant scales to demonstrate convergent and discriminant validity. In Study 2, we examine the relationship between the MSI and one’s ought versus ideal self. In Studies 3 and 4, we find that one’s MSI is affected in the predicted directions by manipulated feedback about the moral self, including feedback related to social comparisons of moral behavior (Study 3) and feedback relative to one’s own moral ideal (Study 4). Lastly, Study 5 provides evidence that the recall of one’s moral or immoral behavior alters people’s MSI in the predicted directions. Taken together, these studies suggest that the MSI is malleable and responds to individuals’ moral and immoral actions in the outside world. As such, the MSI is an important variable to consider in the study of moral and immoral behavior

Prosocial Compensation Following a Service Failure:Fulfilling an Organization’s Ethical and Philanthropic Responsibilities

Prosocial compensation (PC) is a corporate social responsibility (CSR) practice that involves donating money to a charitable cause on behalf of customers as a means to compensate them for their loss after a service failure. In order to determine the effectiveness of PC, we carried out three experiments while also comparing its effectiveness within private and public settings. Experiment 1 focused on the signaling effects of communicating the promise to offer PC to potential customers in the event of service failure. Results show that, in both private and public settings, PC has positive effects on corporate image, credibility, and word-of-mouth intent. More significantly, PC improved one's CSR image, whereas more tangible compensation, such as a gift voucher, did not. Experiments 2A and 2B focused on the effects of offering PC after a service failure on perceptions of justice. Results show that PC contributes to perceived distributive justice, procedural justice, and post-recovery satisfaction in both private and public settings. Our study showed that PC could be a relevant new CSR practice for organizations wanting to enhance theirs CSR image while contributing to fulfilling their ethical and philanthropic CSR responsibilities. We discuss the implications of our findings and offer several avenues for follow-up research on this initial study on PC

Understanding the influence of outcome valence in bargaining: a study on fairness accessibility, norms, and behavior

"In this study we investigate how outcome valence affects the importance of self-interest and fairness in ultimatum bargaining. In three experiments we systematically study the effect of outcome valence on fairness accessibility, norms, and behavior. Results on all three aspects show strong evidence for the hypothesis that fairness becomes more important and self-interest becomes less important in negative valence bargaining. Fairness accessibility was higher when bargaining involved negative payoffs than when it involved positive payoffs (Experiment 1), the fairness norm was stronger in negatively versus positively valenced bargaining when an identical unequal offer benefiting the allocators was evaluated (Experiment 2), and allocators allocated more to recipients in negative valence bargaining than in positive valence bargaining (Experiment 3). We relate our findings to insights derived from the do-no-harm principle." [author's abstract

Social Comparison Affects Brain Responses to Fairness in Asset Division: An ERP Study with the Ultimatum Game

Previous studies have shown that social comparison influences individual’s fairness consideration and other-regarding behavior. However, it is not clear how social comparison affects the brain activity in evaluating fairness during asset distribution. In this study, participants, acting as recipients in the ultimatum game, were informed not only of offers to themselves but also of the average amount of offers in other allocator–recipient dyads. Behavioral results showed that the participants were more likely to reject division schemes when they were offered less than the other recipients, especially when the offers were highly unequal. Event-related brain potentials recorded from the participants showed that highly unequal offers elicited more negative-going medial frontal negativity than moderately unequal offers in an early time window (270–360 ms) and this effect was not significantly modulated by social comparison. In a later time window (450–650 ms), however, the late positive potential (LPP) was more positive for moderately unequal offers than for highly unequal offers when the other recipients were offered less than the participants, whereas this distinction disappeared when the other recipients were offered the same as or more than the participants. These findings suggest that the brain activity in evaluating fairness in asset division entails both an earlier (semi-) automatic process in which the brain responds to fairness at an abstract level and a later appraisal process in which factors related to social comparison and fairness norms come into play

Brain Activity in Fairness Consideration during Asset Distribution: Does the Initial Ownership Play a Role?

Previous behavioral studies have shown that initial ownership influences individuals’ fairness consideration and other-regarding behavior. However, it is not entirely clear whether initial ownership influences the brain activity when a recipient evaluates the fairness of asset distribution. In this study, we randomly assigned the bargaining property (monetary reward) to either the allocator or the recipient in the ultimatum game and let participants of the study, acting as recipients, receive either disadvantageous unequal, equal, or advantageous unequal offers from allocators while the event-related potentials (ERPs) were recorded. Behavioral results showed that participants were more likely to reject disadvantageous unequal and equal offers when they initially owned the property as compared to when they did not. The two types of unequal offers evoked more negative going ERPs (the MFN) than the equal offers in an early time window and the differences were not modulated by the initial ownership. In a late time window, however, the P300 responses to division schemes were affected not only by the type of unequal offers but also by whom the property was initially assigned to. These findings suggest that while the MFN may function as a general mechanism that evaluates whether the offer is consistent or inconsistent with the equity rule, the P300 is sensitive to top-down controlled processes, into which factors related to the allocation of attentional resources, including initial ownership and personal interests, come to play

The intrapersonal level:The moral self

The moral self is an individual's dynamic and malleable moral self- concept. In this chapter, we describe how the moral self functions within the working self- concept, relates to an individual's broader identity, and is affected by and affects behavior and cognition. Specifically, we differentiate the moral self from related constructs such as moral identity, self- esteem, and actual, ideal and ought selves. We then discuss how the moral self serves to regulate individuals' moral behavior and review the literature on what shapes the moral self and what the moral self is likely to shape in return. We close by discussing future directions in research about the moral self. • The moral self indicates how people think about themselves and their behavior. • The moral self is malleable and resides in people's working self concepts. • The moral self shapes and is shaped by moral cognition and behavior. • The moral self functions to regulate moral behavior. • Measuring the moral self can affect subsequent moral behavior and cognition; this makes it challenging to detect mediational effects of the moral self on prior to subsequent moral behavior and cognition.</p

Social distance modulates recipient's fairness consideration in the dictator game:An ERP study

Previous research showed that social distance (e.g., being friends or strangers) influences people's fairness consideration and other-regarding behavior. However, it is not entirely clear how social distance influences the recipient's evaluation of (un)fair behavior. In this study, we let people play a dictator game in which they received (un)fair offers from either friends or strangers while their brain potentials were recorded. Results showed that the medial frontal negativity (MFN), a component associated with the processing of expectancy violation, was more negative-going in response to unfair than to fair offers from friends whereas it did not show differential responses to offers from strangers. The P300 was more positive for fair than for unfair offers irrespective of friends or strangers making the offers. These results suggest that violation of social norms can be detected at an early stage of evaluative processing and that this detection can be modulated by social distance. (C) 2011 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved