Altruism Warm Glow and Charitable Giving Four Experiments

Altruism, Warm Glow and Charitable Giving: Four Experiments TIBER Conference, August 27, 2015 René Bekkers Philanthropic Studies, VU University Amsterdam r. bekkers@vu. nl

Thanks to • Co-authors: Mark Ottoni-Wilhelm (IUPUI) and Dave Verkaik (VU) • Funders: Templeton Foundation through the Science of Philanthropy Initiative August 27, 2015 TIBER Conference 2015 2

The Big Questions - nested 1. Why do people give? 2. When do altruism and warm glow motivate giving? 3. How much giving do altruism and warm glow motivate? August 27, 2015 TIBER Conference 2015 3

Giving = Altruism + Warm Glow • Giving can be motivated by altruism (utility from well-being of recipients) as well as warm glow (utility from giving). • Under altruism, giving should be crowded out by giving by others. • Previous tests have examined crowdingout at relatively low levels of giving by others. August 27, 2015 TIBER Conference 2015 4

August 27, 2015 TIBER Conference 2015 5

A test at G-i = 40 would be more informative August 27, 2015 TIBER Conference 2015 6

August 27, 2015 TIBER Conference 2015 7

Previous findings • The principle of care predicts a wide variety of helping behaviors in a national sample of US citizens (GSS 2002 -2004). • 75% to 100% of the relationship between empathic concern and helping behaviors is mediated by the principle of care. • These findings are strongest for helping people in need known in the abstract. Ottoni-Wilhelm, M. & Bekkers, R. (2010). Helping Behavior, Dispositional Empathic Concern, and the Principle of Care. Social Psychology Quarterly. 73(1): 11 -32. Bekkers, R. & Ottoni-Wilhelm, M. (2014, revised and resubmitted). ‘Principle of Care and Giving to Help People in Need’. European Journal of Personality. August 27, 2015 TIBER Conference 2015 8

Our questions • Can a manipulation of the state of moral care increase giving? Does it work through warm glow (duty? ) and / or altruism? • To what extent do third party contributions crowd out individual giving in the Netherlands? • How much giving is motivated by warm glow and altruism? August 27, 2015 TIBER Conference 2015 9

Specifically • How do experimentally induced altruism and warm glow affect giving across different levels of giving by others? • How does priming empathy and the principle of care affect altruism and warm glow motivations for giving? • In a real world setting, does warm glow lead to higher levels of giving than altruism? August 27, 2015 TIBER Conference 2015 10

Innovations • We use data from large, longitudinal, and representative sample survey, the Giving in the Netherlands Panel Survey (2015). • Pretest measures of almost anything, including socio-demographics, prosocial values and levels of giving. • Observational data from the receiving charity. August 27, 2015 TIBER Conference 2015 11

• Observe gifts in a real fundraising campaign: real & no deception. • Posttest manipulation checks through a survey. • Long term effects on giving, also to other causes: does giving in the experiment affect subsequent giving? August 27, 2015 TIBER Conference 2015 12

9 Steps Warm glow / altruism in giving behavior Empathy induction Principle of care induction August 27, 2015 Validation of measures Behavioral analysis Field experiment 1. Ottoni-Wilhelm, Vesterlund & Xie, 2014 4. Van Vliet, 2014 7. TBD 2. Batson, 1980 s 5. Bekkers, Ottoni. Wilhelm, Verkaik, 2015 a; 2015 b 8. TBD 3. Van Vliet, 2014 6. Bekkers, Ottoni. Wilhelm, Verkaik, 2015 a; 2015 b 9. TBD TIBER Conference 2015 13

Budgets 1. Ottoni-Wilhelm, Vesterlund & Xie, 2014 Budget 1 2 3 4 5 6 August 27, 2015 € funded by sponsor 4 10 28 34 4 28 TIBER Conference 2015 € for participant 40 40 46 46 14

Budgets 1. Ottoni-Wilhelm, Vesterlund & Xie, 2014 August 27, 2015 € for participant TIBER Conference 2015 Income 1 2 3 4 5 6 € funded by sponsor G-i 4 10 28 34 4 28 Crowding-out Budget 40 40 46 46 15

Procedure 1. Ottoni-Wilhelm, Vesterlund & Xie, 2014 • All 6 budgets are evaluated in random order by participants. • Only 1 will be implemented. • Yields measures of altruism (α) and warm glow (β) within participants. • In this experiment, generosity is influenced primarily by altruism and less so by warm glow. August 27, 2015 TIBER Conference 2015 16

Step 1 1. Ottoni-Wilhelm, Vesterlund & Xie, 2014 Warm glow / altruism in giving behavior Empathy induction Principle of care induction August 27, 2015 Validation of measures Behavioral analysis Field experiment 1. Ottoni-Wilhelm, Vesterlund & Xie, 2014 4. Van Vliet, 2014 7. TBD 2. Batson et al. , 1997 5. Bekkers, Ottoni. Wilhelm, Verkaik, 2015 a; 2015 b 8. TBD 3. Van Vliet, 2014 6. Bekkers, Ottoni. Wilhelm, Verkaik, 2015 a; 2015 b 9. TBD TIBER Conference 2015 17

Empathy induction 2. Batson et al. , 1997 Neutral condition: 
 High-empathy condition: 
 “While you are listening to this broadcast, try to be as objective as broadcast, try to imagine how the possible about what has person being interviewed feels happened and how it has affected about what has happened and his or her life. To remain how it has affected his or her life. objective, do not let yourself get Try not to concern yourself with caught up in imagining what this all the information presented. other person has been through Just concentrate on trying to and how he or she feels as a result. imagine how the person Just try to remain objective and interviewed in the broadcast detached. ”
 feels. ” Batson, C. D. , Early, S. , Salvarani, G. (1997). Perspective Taking: Imagining How Another Feels Versus Imagining How You Would Feel. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 23 (7): 751 -758. August 27, 2015 TIBER Conference 2015 18

Step 2 Warm glow / altruism in giving behavior Empathy induction Principle of care induction August 27, 2015 Validation of measures Behavioral analysis Field experiment 1. Ottoni-Wilhelm, Vesterlund & Xie, 2014 4. Van Vliet, 2014 7. TBD 2. Batson et al. , 1997 5. Bekkers, Ottoni. Wilhelm, Verkaik, 2015 a; 2015 b 8. TBD 3. Van Vliet, 2014 6. Bekkers, Ottoni. Wilhelm, Verkaik, 2015 a; 2015 b 9. TBD TIBER Conference 2015 19

Inducing empathy and morality 3. Van Vliet, 2014 • Participants read an article about Oxfam helping people in need because of the lack of water in Mali. • Before reading the story participants completed empathy and principle of care scales. Design: 3 (induction: neutral, empathy, principle of care) x 2 (crowding-out: no, yes) Participants: convenience sample of friends / family (n = 381) August 27, 2015 TIBER Conference 2015 20

Empathy induction 3. Van Vliet, 2014 Neutral condition: 
 High-empathy condition: 
 “While you are reading the note, try to take an objective perspective toward what is described. Try not to get caught up in how the other person feels; just remain objective and detached. ”
 “While you are reading the note, try to imagine how the other person feels about what is described. Try to imagine how it has affected his or her life and how he or she feels as a result. ” August 27, 2015 TIBER Conference 2015 21

Principle of care induction 3. Van Vliet, 2014 Care condition: 
 “While you are reading the note, try to think about what’s morally the right thing to do. How should you act in this situation and towards the people in need? ” August 27, 2015 TIBER Conference 2015 22

Crowding-out manipulation 3. Van Vliet, 2014 Adding: 
 “To support this initiative, VU University is donating € 10 for each participant reading this text. ” Note: no balanced budgets; real money; no deception August 27, 2015 TIBER Conference 2015 23

Crowding-in Oxfam donations 3. Van Vliet, 2014 100 90 82 94 88 No induction (n=96) 80 70 No social information 60 50 VU University donates € 10 40 Remembered that VU donates € 10 30 20 10 0 August 27, 2015 Donates € 20 TIBER Conference 2015 24

Empathy lowers crowding-in 3. Van Vliet, 2014 100 90 80 79 83 81 70 Empathy induction (n=96) No social information 60 50 VU University donates € 10 40 Remembered that VU donates € 10 30 20 10 0 August 27, 2015 Donates € 20 TIBER Conference 2015 25

Care induces crowding-out 3. Van Vliet, 2014 100 90 80 70 Care induction (n=107) 88 70 69 No social information 60 50 VU University donates € 10 40 Remembered that VU donates € 10 30 20 10 0 August 27, 2015 Donates € 20 TIBER Conference 2015 26

Step 3 Validation of measures Warm glow / altruism in giving behavior Empathy induction Principle of care induction August 27, 2015 Behavioral analysis Field experiment 1. Ottoni-Wilhelm, 4. Bekkers et al. , 2014 Vesterlund & Xie, 2014 7. TBD 2. Batson, 1980 s 5. Bekkers, Ottoni. Wilhelm, Verkaik, 2015 a; 2015 b 8. TBD 3. Van Vliet, 2014 6. Bekkers, Ottoni. Wilhelm, Verkaik, 2015 a; 2015 b 9. TBD TIBER Conference 2015 27

Correlations 3. Van Vliet, 2014 Trait care State empathy State care for recipients Trait empathy Trait care . 54. 33. 39 . 35. 47 State empathy . 60 E. g. , “I am often E. g. , “People struck by what should be willing other people to help others who experience” are less fortunate” August 27, 2015 TIBER Conference 2015 28

Empathic state measure 3. Van Vliet, 2014 • Please tell us which emotions you are feeling at the moment. (1 – 7) – Compassion. – Sympathy. – Pity. – Warmth. – Care. – Devastated. August 27, 2015 Following Batson (1997) Eigen value = 3. 70, explaining 62% of the variance in a PCA α =. 871. TIBER Conference 2015 29

Empathy induction manipulation check 3. Van Vliet, 2014 Z-standardized difference from sample mean 1 0. 8 0. 6 0. 4 0. 2 0 Control (4. 11) Empathy (4. 26) Care (4. 10) -0. 2 August 27, 2015 TIBER Conference 2015 30

Care for recipients state 3. Van Vliet, 2014 • Items (1 -5): – “While reading the text I thought I should do something for people who have trouble getting clean water. ” – “I think we should all do something to provide clean drinking water facilities for people who need them. ” New items, r =. 59 August 27, 2015 TIBER Conference 2015 31

Care manipulation check 3. Van Vliet, 2014 Z-standardized difference from sample mean 1 0. 8 0. 6 0. 4 0. 2 0 Control (3. 38) Empathy (3. 42) Care (3. 22) -0. 2 August 27, 2015 TIBER Conference 2015 32

Steps 2, 3, 4 Validation of measures Warm glow / altruism in giving behavior Empathy induction Principle of care induction August 27, 2015 Behavioral analysis Field experiment 1. Ottoni-Wilhelm, 4. Bekkers et al. , 2014 Vesterlund & Xie, 2014 7. TBD 2. Batson, 1997 3. Van Vliet, 2014 5. Bekkers, Ottoni. Wilhelm, Verkaik, 2015 a; 2015 b 8. TBD 6. Bekkers, Ottoni. Wilhelm, Verkaik, 2015 a; 2015 b 9. TBD TIBER Conference 2015 33

Limitations improvements • The measure of state care was poor develop one which can be used across situations • The manipulations of empathy and the principle of care did not work develop effective ones • Single budget test multiple budgets August 27, 2015 TIBER Conference 2015 34

A better measure of state care • We decided to use an adjective checklist, describing the principle of care, avoiding emotions. – Moral – Rational – Principled – Deliberate – Responsible August 27, 2015 Following the model of the empathic state measure developed by Batson TIBER Conference 2015 35

Inducing empathy / morality • Perhaps the induction was too strong, and reactance occurred. • Can we use more subtle manipulations? • We looked at the priming literature and talked to several psychologists warning us against using scrambled sentences, subliminal and physical cues, in order to avoid disappointment. August 27, 2015 TIBER Conference 2015 36

• Perhaps we subtly manipulated empathy and morality in the previous experiment by asking participants about their selfimage as an empathic / caring person before reading the text. • We decided to test this systematically. August 27, 2015 TIBER Conference 2015 37

Priming empathy and morality 4. Bekkers et al. , 2014 • Participants read an article about Oxfam helping a family in need by providing them with chickens. • Participants either completed empathy and principle of care Design: 2 (self-image questions: no, yes) x 4 (priming: scales or not. none, image of hands, religion, moral appeal) Participants: MTurk (n = 457) August 27, 2015 TIBER Conference 2015 38

Developing a state care measure 4. Bekkers et al. , 2014 Please indicate the degree to which you thought about these principles after reading the story. Responsibility, Helpfulness, Beauty(F) Benevolence, Loyalty(F), Humanity, Commonality, Authority(F), Assisting, Commitment, Purity(F), Justice, Selfcentered(*), Liberty, Disregard(*), Remoteness(*) August 27, 2015 TIBER Conference 2015 39

Familiar correlations 4. Bekkers et al. , 2014 Trait care State care for recipients State empathy adjectives State care adjectives Filler adjectives Isolation adjectives August 27, 2015 Trait empathy. 69. 60 Trait care . 69 State care for recipients . 57 . 58 . 75 . 33. 01 -. 06 . 55. 02 -. 22 . 65. 27 -. 22 TIBER Conference 2015 40

No self-image priming effects 4. Bekkers et al. , 2014 1 0. 8 0. 6 0. 4 0. 2 0 -0. 2 -0. 4 state care for state empathy state care recipients adjectives -0. 6 filler adjectives 48 < n < 117; 0. 256 < F < 1. 686 (df = 3); p >. 167 isolation adjectives 48 < n < 65; F = 2. 685 (df = 3); p =. 047 -0. 8 -1 no self-image August 27, 2015 care only empathy only TIBER Conference 2015 care and empathy 41

No priming effects on states… 4. Bekkers et al. , 2014 1 0. 8 0. 6 0. 4 0. 2 0 -0. 2 -0. 4 state care for state empathy state care recipients adjectives -0. 6 filler adjectives isolation adjectives 55 < n < 118; 0. 271 < F < 1. 435 (df = 3); p >. 233 -0. 8 -1 no priming August 27, 2015 hands religion TIBER Conference 2015 moral appeal 42

…or giving behavior 4. Bekkers et al. , 2014 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Average gift (€) no priming August 27, 2015 hands Gives > 0 (%) religion TIBER Conference 2015 moral appeal 43

Very little crowding out 25 % of responses 20 15 4 10 28 10 34 5 0 August 27, 2015 n = 457 gives nothing TIBER Conference 2015 gives half 44

Budgets 4. Bekkers et al. , 2014 ΔG-i Δgi 6: 4 10 6: 28 34 18: 10 28 24: 4 28 30: 4 34 -. 37 -. 04 -. 65 -1. 02 -1. 68 Crowding-out Effect -. 06 -. 01 -. 03 -. 04 -. 06 24 (W 46): 4 28 -. 69 -. 03 August 27, 2015 TIBER Conference 2015 45

ΔG-i 0 0 6 12 18 24 30 -0. 2 -0. 4 -0. 6 -0. 8 ΔGi -1 -1. 2 -1. 4 -1. 6 -1. 8 -2 August 27, 2015 TIBER Conference 2015 46

ΔG-i 0 0 6 12 18 24 30 Observed crowd-out -5 -10 -15 -20 ΔGi Fu ll c ro wd - ou t -25 -30 August 27, 2015 TIBER Conference 2015 47

Does care affect crowding out? 100 Gives > € 0 90 % of responses 80 70 60 4 50 10 40 28 34 30 20 n = 55 (no self-image questions) 10 0 August 27, 2015 No priming TIBER Conference 2015 Moral appeal 48

Does care affect crowding out? 100 Gives > € 0 90 % of responses 80 70 60 4 50 10 40 28 34 30 20 10 0 August 27, 2015 No priming TIBER Conference 2015 Moral appeal n = 57 (started with selfimage questions) 49

Do empathy / care affect giving? 4. Bekkers et al. , 2014 Q 1 Q 2 Q 3 Q 4 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 trait care trait state care state filler isolation empathy for adjectives empathy adjectives recipients adjectives. 40 < r <. 51 August 27, 2015 TIBER Conference 2015 r =. 11 r = -. 36 50

Step 4: Summary of Results • Very little crowd-out. • No priming effects whatsoever on empathic or moral states or giving. • Hypothetical giving increases strongly with dispositional empathy / care. August 27, 2015 TIBER Conference 2015 51

Step 4 Validation of Behavioral analysis measures Warm glow / altruism in giving behavior Empathy induction 1. Ottoni-Wilhelm, Vesterlund & Xie, 2014 4. Bekkers et al. , 2014 7. TBD 2. Batson, 1997 5. Bekkers, Ottoni. Wilhelm, Verkaik, 2015 a; 2015 b 8. TBD 6. Bekkers, Ottoni. Wilhelm, Verkaik, 2015 a; 2015 b 9. TBD 3. Van Vliet, 2014 Principle of care 3. Van Vliet, 2014; induction 4. Bekkers et al. , 2014 August 27, 2015 Field experiment TIBER Conference 2015 52

Learning from practice • How would practitioners prime the principle of care? • Can we develop an effective manipulation that can easily be used in practice? • To what extent do real world fundraising materials affect the principle of care? August 27, 2015 TIBER Conference 2015 53

Testing 5. Bekkers, Ottoni-Wilhelm, Verkaik, 2015 • Participants are exposed to Oxfam’s mission statement in different visual forms. • Then participants completed state and dispositional measures. Design: 3 (visual: text only, text with still image, video) x • No giving. 2 (moral appeal: no, yes) Participants: Crowdflower (n = 287); MTurk (n = 304) August 27, 2015 TIBER Conference 2015 54

Oxfam America mission statement August 27, 2015 TIBER Conference 2015 55

Excluding references to injustice, ‘right the wrong’ August 27, 2015 TIBER Conference 2015 56

Principle of care affected 50 45 40 35 Short 30 25 Long 20 Long + remembers 1 in 3 lives in poverty 15 10 5 0 Text August 27, 2015 Text + image Video TIBER Conference 2015 Mturk sample only (n = 304) 57

Empathic state 50 45 40 35 Short 30 25 Long 20 Long + remembers 1 in 3 lives in poverty 15 10 5 0 Text August 27, 2015 Text + image Video TIBER Conference 2015 Mturk sample only (n = 304) 58

Personal distress state 50 45 40 35 Short 30 25 Long 20 Long + remembers 1 in 3 lives in poverty 15 10 5 0 Text August 27, 2015 Text + image Video TIBER Conference 2015 Mturk sample only (n = 304) 59

Trait care 50 45 40 35 Short 30 25 Long 20 Long + remembers 1 in 3 lives in poverty 15 10 5 0 Text August 27, 2015 Text + image Video TIBER Conference 2015 Mturk sample only (n = 304) 60

Trait empathy 50 45 40 35 Short 30 25 Long 20 Long + remembers 1 in 3 lives in poverty 15 10 5 0 Text August 27, 2015 Text + image Video TIBER Conference 2015 Mturk sample only (n = 304) 61

What we learned from practice • Exposure to the Oxfam America mission statement marginally increased (+5 -10%) the state of care, empathy, and distress. • Also trait empathy and care affected. • These effects are most pronounced for the text only version. August 27, 2015 TIBER Conference 2015 62

Steps 5 and 6 Validation of Behavioral analysis measures Warm glow / altruism in giving behavior Empathy induction 1. Ottoni-Wilhelm, Vesterlund & Xie, 2014 4. Bekkers et al. , 2014 7. TBD 2. Batson, 1997 5. Bekkers, Ottoni. Wilhelm, Verkaik, 2015 a; 2015 b 8. TBD 6. Bekkers, Ottoni. Wilhelm, Verkaik, 2015 a; 2015 b 9. TBD 3. Van Vliet, 2014 Principle of care 3. Van Vliet, 2014; induction 4. Bekkers et al. , 2014 August 27, 2015 Field experiment TIBER Conference 2015 63

Questions for discussion • Why did we find such a low level of crowd -out, in contrast to a previous lab experiment? • Any ideas to more effectively manipulate the principle of care? August 27, 2015 TIBER Conference 2015 64

Procedure for field experiment • GINPS 15 participants will receive a letter explaining the experiment and a link to an online survey in which the experiment is implemented. • Informed consent + ERB approval. • Six decisions, one implemented. • Match donations in experiment with Oxfam donation history from database. August 27, 2015 TIBER Conference 2015 65

René Bekkers Center for Philanthropic Studies Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam r. bekkers@vu. nl www. giving. nl Twitter: @renebekkers

The Measure – Sample Items 1. People should be willing to help others who are less fortunate. 2. Everybody in this world has a responsibility to help others when they need assistance. 3 (*). These days people need to look after themselves and not overly worry about others. 4. When people are less fortunate, it is important to help them even if they are very different from us. August 27, 2015 TIBER Conference 2015 67

Full principle of care scale a. People should be willing to help others who are less fortunate. b. Everybody in this world has a responsibility to help others when they need assistance. c. These days people need to look after themselves and not overly worry about others. d. When people are less fortunate, it is important to help them even if they are very different from us. e. It is important to help one another so that the community in general is a better place. f. Personally assisting people in trouble is very important to me. g. When thinking about helping people in trouble, it is important to consider whether the people are like us or not. h. We should not care too much about the needs of people in other parts of the world. August 27, 2015 TIBER Conference 2015 68