利他人格和情境因素对于个体捐赠决策的影响

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 采用三因素被试间实验具体考察了利他人格、慈善组织有效性和同伴效应对于个体捐赠决策的影响,结果发现存在显著的主效应和交互作用。利他人格与捐赠态度和捐赠水平之间存在显著的正向关系;情境因素慈善组织有效性和同伴效应与捐赠态度和捐赠水平之间也存在显著的正向关系;高利他者的捐赠决策对慈善组织有效性更加敏感,而低利他者对同伴效应更加敏感。

关键词: 捐赠, 利他, 人格, 情境, 社会比较

Abstract: Charitable donation is a typical prosocial behavior of human′s altruism. This study′s purposes are to examine the impact of altruistic personality and contingency factors on individual charitable donation decision-making. The results showed the main effects of altruistic personality, charitable organization effectiveness and peer effect to the monetary donation amount were all significant. As the ″personality″ hypothesis predicted, compared with low altruistic personality individuals, high altruistic personality individuals contributed more money. As the ″organization effectiveness″ hypothesis predicted, compared with individuals in ″scandals″ condition, individuals in ″achievements″ condition contributed more. As the ″peer effect″ hypothesis predicted, compared with individuals in ″passive″ condition, individuals in ″positive″ condition contributed more. Simple effect analysis indicated charitable organization effectiveness was more important to the high altruistic personality individuals′ attitude and contribution of donation, and peer effect was more important to the low altruistic personality individuals′ attitude and contribution. The current results suggest that altruistic personality do have effects on charitable donation decision-making, and contingency factors such as charitable organization effectiveness and peer effect also have dramatic effects on donation decision-making, and contingency factors have distinct effects on differential altruistic personality donators′ decision-making. These results have some practical implications. There are the needs for research on the mechanisms driving such effects.

Key words: donation, altruism, personality, contingency, social compare

中图分类号:

B849

谢晔. 利他人格和情境因素对于个体捐赠决策的影响[J]. 心理与行为研究, 2013, 11(4): 535-540.

Xie Ye. Altruistic Personality and Contingency Factors Influence Charitable Donations Decision-making: An Experiment[J]. Studies of Psychology and Behavior, 2013, 11(4): 535-540.

参考文献

1 段文婷, 江光荣.(2008) . 计划行为理论述评. 心理科学进展, 16 (2), 315-320.
2 王海梅, 陈会昌, 谷传华.(2004) . 关于儿童分享的研究述评. 心理科学进展 ,(1), 52-58.
3 邢淑芬, 俞国良.(2005). 社会比较: 对比效应还是同化效应? 心理科学进展, 14 , 944-949.
4 Batson, C. D., & Shaw, L. L.(1991) . Evidence for altruism: Toward a pluralism of prosocial motives. Psychological Inquiry, 2 (2), 107-122.
5 Baum, K.(2001). Golden eggs: Towards the rational regulation of oocyte donation. Brigham Young University law review ,(1), 107-166.
6 Bellemare, C., Kröger, S., & Van Soest, A.(2008). Measuring inequity aversion in a heterogeneous population using experimental decisions and subjective probabilities. Econometrica, 76 (4), 815-839.
7 Bennett, R., & Barkensjo, A.(2005). Causes and consequences of donor perceptions of the quality of the relationship marketing activities of charitable organisations. Journal of targeting, measurement and analysis for marketing, 13 (2), 122-139.
8 Carlo, G., Eisenberg, N., Troyer, D., Switzer, G., & Speer, A. L.(1991). The altruistic personality: In what contexts is it apparent? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 61 (3), 450-458.
9 Carlo, G., PytlikZillig, L., Roesch, S. C., & Dienstbier, R. A.(2009). The elusive altruist: The psychological study of the altruistic personality. In D. Narvaez & D. Lapsley(Eds.), Moral Personality, Identity, and Character: Explorations in Moral Psychology (pp. 1-36). New York: Cambridge University Press.
10 Colby, A., & Damon, W.(1994). Some do care: Contemporary lives of moral commitment . New York: Free Press.
11 De Quervain, D. J. F., Fischbacher, U., Treyer, V., Schellhammer, M., Schnyder, U., Buck, A., et al.(2004). The neural basis of altruistic punishment. Science, 305 (5688), 1254-1258.
12 Eisenberg, N., Guthrie, I. K., Cumberland, A., Murphy, B. C., Shepard, S. A., & Zhou, Q., et al.(2002). Prosocial development in early adulthood: A longitudinal study. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82 (6), 993-1006.
13 Fehr, E., & Fischbacher, U.(2003). The nature of human altruism. Nature, 425 (6960), 785-791.
14 Fehr, E., & Schmidt, K. M.(1999). A theory of fairness, competition, and cooperation. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 114 (3), 817-868.
15 Fischbacher, U., Gachter, S., & Fehr, E.(2001). Are people conditionally cooperative? Evidence from a public goods experiment. Economics Letters, 71 , 397-404.
16 Frey, B. S., & Meier, S.(2004) . Social comparisons and pro-social behavior: Testing ″conditional cooperation″ in a field experiment. The American Economic Review, 94 (5), 1717-1722.
17 Griskevicius, V., Cialdini, R. B., & Goldstein, N. J.(2008). Applying(and resisting)peer influence. MIT Sloan Management Review, 49 (2), 84-88.
18 Handy, F.(1995). Reputation as collateral: An economic analysis of the role of trustees of nonprofits. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 24 (4), 293-305.
19 Harbaugh, W. T., Mayr, U., & Burghart, D. R.(2007). Neural responses to taxation and voluntary giving reveal motives for charitable donations. Science, 316 (5831), 1622-1625.
20 Hoffman, M. L.(2008). Empathy and prosocial behavior. In M. Lewis, J. M. Haviland-Jones, & L. F. Barrett(Eds.), Handbook of Emotions (pp. 440-455). New York: The Guilford Press.
21 Hsu, J. L., Liang, G. Y., & Tien, C. P.(2005). Social concerns and willingness to support charities. Social Behavior and Personality: an international journal, 33 (2), 189-200.
22 Kahneman, D., & Knetsch, J. L.(1992). Valuing public goods: The purchase of moral satisfaction. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 22 , 57-70.
23 Krajbich, I., Adolphs, R., Tranel, D., Denburg, N. L., & Camerer, C. F.(2009). Economic games quantify diminished sense of guilt in patients with damage to the prefrontal cortex. The Journal of Neuroscience, 29 (7), 2188-2192.
24 Milinski, M., Semmann, D., & Krambeck, H. J.(2002). Reputation helps solve the tragedy of the commons. Nature, 415 , 424-426.
25 Moll J., Krueger F., Zahn R., Pardini M., de Oliveira-Souza R., & Grafman J.(2006). Human fronto-mesolimbic networks guide decisions about charitable donation. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 103 (42), 15623-15628.
26 Neuman, G. A., & Kickul, J. R.(1998). Organizational citizenship behaviors: Achievement orientation and personality. Journal of Business and Psychology, 13 (2), 263-279.
27 Penner, L. A., & Finkelstein, M. A.(1998). Dispositional and structural determinants of volunteerism. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74 (2), 525-537.
28 Piliavin, J. A.(1981). Emergency intervention . New York: Academic Press.
29 Rilling, J. K., & Sanfey, A. G.(2011). The neuroscience of social decision-making. Annual review of psychology, 62 , 23-48.
30 Rushton, J., Fulker, D., Neale, M., & Nias, D. K.(1989). Ageing and the relation of aggression, altruism and assertiveness scales to the eysenck personality questionnaire. Personality and Individual Differences, 10 (2), 261-263.
31 Rushton, J., Fulker, D., Neale, M., Blizard, R., & Eysenck, H.(1983). Altruism and genetics. In Twin research 4. Part B: Twin Psychology and behavior genetics proceeding of the fourth international congress on twin studies (pp. 265-271). Acta Genet Med Gemllo, London.
32 Sargeant, A., West, D., & Ford, J.(2004). Does perception matter?: An empirical analysis of donor behaviour. The Service Industries Journal, 24 (6), 19-36.
33 Wagner, S. L., & Rush, M. C.(2000). Altruistic organizational citizenship behavior: Context, disposition, and age. The Journal of Social Psychology, 140 (3), 379-391.

[1]	谢东杰, 苏彦捷. 学龄儿童的规范理解与利他惩罚的关系：从描述性到指令性倾向[J]. 心理与行为研究, 2022, 20(5): 622-628.
[2]	张鹏程, 李喜, 桑宇杰, 陈宁. 神经质人格对中小学生抑郁的影响：班级环境的跨层调节作用[J]. 心理与行为研究, 2022, 20(5): 637-643.
[3]	程刚, 邹燕, 余玮, 丁芳媛, 贾云丞. 入学过渡期高中新生大五人格与主观社会地位变化轨迹的关系：基于潜变量增长模型的分析[J]. 心理与行为研究, 2022, 20(5): 692-699.
[4]	鲍旭辉, 黄杰, 李娜, 李健军, 李亚红. 主动性人格对学习投入的影响：领悟社会支持和积极情绪的链式中介作用[J]. 心理与行为研究, 2022, 20(4): 508-514.
[5]	尹静, 李传英, 马世超, 徐瑜姣, 李永升. 大学生人格与手机依赖的关系：压力感知的中介与性别的调节作用[J]. 心理与行为研究, 2022, 20(3): 426-432.
[6]	朱娜平, 王文平, 李丽琼, 刘雁伶. 数量让位价值：5～10岁儿童公平分配发展的“此消彼长”[J]. 心理与行为研究, 2022, 20(2): 233-239.
[7]	孙云瑞, 韩映虹, 吕勇, 刘芳. 人格对幼儿白谎行为的影响：“冷”“热”执行功能的并行中介作用[J]. 心理与行为研究, 2022, 20(2): 240-247.
[8]	徐晓惠, 张耀华, 徐敏, 张明浩. 社会比较对大学生公平感知的影响：主观社会经济地位的调节作用[J]. 心理与行为研究, 2022, 20(2): 274-281.
[9]	周广方, 魏子晗, 欧阳良媛, Ngure Mary Muthoni, 王晓庄. 描述信息与经验不一致对个体风险选择的影响：决策模型的拟合[J]. 心理与行为研究, 2022, 20(1): 29-36.
[10]	姚崇, 惠琪, 王媛, 席海莎, 雒朝梁. 公费师范教师社会支持与职业倦怠的关系探究[J]. 心理与行为研究, 2021, 19(6): 816-823.
[11]	邓颜彦, 郭成. 合作与竞争关系中社会比较对高中生认知信任与情感信任的影响[J]. 心理与行为研究, 2021, 19(4): 556-562.
[12]	彭丽仪, 胡义秋, 曾子豪, 詹林. 儿童期受虐经历对大学生抑郁的影响：神经质人格和MAOA基因rs3027407多态性的作用[J]. 心理与行为研究, 2021, 19(2): 230-236.
[13]	曹晓丽, 彭晨, 张王琼. 变革型领导对高校教师变革支持行为的影响：有调节的中介效应模型[J]. 心理与行为研究, 2021, 19(2): 273-279.
[14]	曾练平, 田丹丹, 黄亚夫, 赵守盈. 中小学教师人格类型及其对工作家庭平衡与工作绩效关系的调节作用[J]. 心理与行为研究, 2021, 19(2): 280-286.
[15]	颜玉枝, 董圣鸿. 中国人幸福人格的结构与内涵[J]. 心理与行为研究, 2020, 18(6): 755-761.