Choice-justifications after allocating resources in helping dilemmas
Journal Title: Judgment and Decision Making - Year 2017, Vol 12, Issue 1
Abstract
How do donors reason and justify their choices when faced with dilemmas in a charitable context? In two studies, Swedish students were confronted with helping dilemmas based on the identifiable victim effect, the proportion dominance effect and the ingroup effect. Each dilemma consisted of two comparable charity projects and participants were asked to choose one project over the other. They were then asked to provide justifications of their choice by stating the relative importance of different types of reasons. When faced with an identified victim dilemma, participants did not choose the project including an identified victim more often than the project framed statistically, but those who did emphasized emotional reasons (e.g., “Because I had more empathic feelings”), but not any other reasons, more than those choosing the statistical project. When faced with a Proportion dominance dilemma, participants more often chose the project with a high rescue proportion (e.g., you can save 100% out of 30) than the project with a low rescue proportion (e.g., you can save 4% out of 800), and those who did emphasized efficacy reasons (e.g., “Because my money can make a greater difference there”), but no other reasons, more than those favoring the low recue proportion project. Finally, when faced with an Ingroup dilemma, participants more often chose the project that could help ingroup-victims over the project that could help outgroup victims, and those who did emphasized responsibility reasons (e.g., “Because I have a greater obligation”), but no other reasons, more than those favoring outgroup projects. These results are consistent with and extend previous findings about how different helping effects are related to different psychological processes.
Authors and Affiliations
Arvid Erlandsson, Fredrik Björklund and Martin Bäckström
Keywords
Related Articles
- EP ID EP678277
- DOI -
- Views 243
- Downloads 0
Selective information sampling: Cognitive coherence in evaluation of a novel item
This study investigates the amount and valence of information selected during single item evaluation. One hundred and thirty-five participants evaluated a cell phone by reading hypothetical customers reports. Some partic...
The glow of grime: Why cleaning an old object can wash away its value
For connoisseurs of antiques and antiquities, cleaning old objects can reduce their value. In five experiments (total N = 1,019), we show that lay people also often judge that old objects are worth less when cleaned, and...
The devil you know: The effect of brand recognition and product ratings on consumer choice
Previous research on the role of recognition in decision-making in inferential choice has focussed on the Recognition Heuristic (RH), which proposes that in situations where recognition is predictive of a decision criter...
How comparing decision outcomes affects subsequent decisions: The carry-over of a comparative mind-set
In the current paper we investigate how feedback over decision outcomes may affect future decisions. In an experimental study we demonstrate that if people receive feedback over the outcomes they obtained (“factual outco...
Number preferences in lotteries
We explore people’s preferences for numbers in large proprietary data sets from two different lottery games. We find that choice is far from uniform, and exhibits some familiar and some new tendencies and biases. Players...