When Prosocial Motives Matter Most: The Interactive Effects of Social Value Orientation, Message Framing, and Helping Costs on Helping Behavior

IF 1.8 3区 心理学 Q3 PSYCHOLOGY, APPLIED Journal of Behavioral Decision Making Pub Date : 2024-04-14 DOI:10.1002/bdm.2384
Tatiana Iwai, Gustavo M. Tavares
{"title":"When Prosocial Motives Matter Most: The Interactive Effects of Social Value Orientation, Message Framing, and Helping Costs on Helping Behavior","authors":"Tatiana Iwai,&nbsp;Gustavo M. Tavares","doi":"10.1002/bdm.2384","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n <p>We advance prior work on prosocial behavior by examining the situations in which prosocial motives are more likely to influence helping behavior. Building on the arousal:cost-reward model and the self-discrepancy theory, we test the moderating effects of help request framing (benevolent vs. economic) and contextual costs of helping on the relationship between social value orientation (SVO) and helping behavior. In two experimental studies, we found evidence that prosocial individuals are more likely to help than proselfs especially when it is more costly to do so. Similarly, prosocial individuals help more when requests are framed in terms of benevolence but not when they are framed as an exchange. These findings suggest that prosocial motives foster helping when it is more challenging to do so—that is, when help seekers do not have much to offer in return as well as in costly situations.</p>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":48112,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Behavioral Decision Making","volume":"37 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Behavioral Decision Making","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/bdm.2384","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, APPLIED","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

We advance prior work on prosocial behavior by examining the situations in which prosocial motives are more likely to influence helping behavior. Building on the arousal:cost-reward model and the self-discrepancy theory, we test the moderating effects of help request framing (benevolent vs. economic) and contextual costs of helping on the relationship between social value orientation (SVO) and helping behavior. In two experimental studies, we found evidence that prosocial individuals are more likely to help than proselfs especially when it is more costly to do so. Similarly, prosocial individuals help more when requests are framed in terms of benevolence but not when they are framed as an exchange. These findings suggest that prosocial motives foster helping when it is more challenging to do so—that is, when help seekers do not have much to offer in return as well as in costly situations.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
当亲社会动机最重要时:社会价值取向、信息框架和帮助成本对帮助行为的交互影响
我们通过研究在哪些情况下,亲社会动机更有可能影响帮助行为,从而推进了先前关于亲社会行为的研究。在唤醒:成本-回报模型和自我差异理论的基础上,我们检验了帮助请求框架(仁慈与经济)和帮助的情境成本对社会价值取向(SVO)和帮助行为之间关系的调节作用。在两项实验研究中,我们发现有证据表明,与亲社会个体相比,亲社会个体更有可能提供帮助,尤其是在帮助成本较高的情况下。同样,当请求以 "仁慈 "为框架时,亲社会个体会提供更多帮助,而当请求以 "交换 "为框架时,亲社会个体则不会提供帮助。这些研究结果表明,当提供帮助更具有挑战性时,也就是当求助者没有太多回报时,以及在成本较高的情况下,亲社会动机会促进提供帮助。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.40
自引率
5.00%
发文量
40
期刊介绍: The Journal of Behavioral Decision Making is a multidisciplinary journal with a broad base of content and style. It publishes original empirical reports, critical review papers, theoretical analyses and methodological contributions. The Journal also features book, software and decision aiding technique reviews, abstracts of important articles published elsewhere and teaching suggestions. The objective of the Journal is to present and stimulate behavioral research on decision making and to provide a forum for the evaluation of complementary, contrasting and conflicting perspectives. These perspectives include psychology, management science, sociology, political science and economics. Studies of behavioral decision making in naturalistic and applied settings are encouraged.
期刊最新文献
Prescribing Agreement Improves Judgments and Decisions Issue Information Do We Use Relatively Bad (Algorithmic) Advice? The Effects of Performance Feedback and Advice Representation on Advice Usage Evaluation of Extended Decision Outcomes Diffusion of Responsibility for Actions With Advice
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1