Increasing altruistic and cooperative behaviour with simple moral nudges

Abstract

The conflict between pro-self and pro-social behaviour is at the core of many key problems of our time, as, for example, the reduction of air pollution and the redistribution of scarce resources. For the well-being of our societies, it is thus crucial to find mechanisms to promote pro-social choices over egoistic ones. Particularly important, because cheap and easy to implement, are those mechanisms that can change people’s behaviour without forbidding any options or significantly changing their economic incentives, the so-called “nudges”. Previous research has found that moral nudges (e.g., making norms salient) can promote pro-social behaviour. However, little is known about whether their effect persists over time and spills across context. This question is key in light of research showing that pro-social actions are often followed by selfish actions, thus suggesting that some moral manipulations may backfire. Here we present a class of simple moral nudges that have a great positive impact on pro-sociality. In Studies 1–4 (total N = 1,400), we use economic games to demonstrate that asking subjects to self-report “what they think is the morally right thing to do” does not only increase pro-sociality in the choice immediately after, but also in subsequent choices, and even when the social context changes. In Study 5, we explore whether moral nudges promote charity donations to humanitarian organisations in a large (N = 1,800) crowdfunding campaign. We find that, in this context, moral nudges increase donations by about 44 percent.

Short- & long-term effects of monetary and non-monetary incentives to cooperate in public good games: An experiment

“…In our experiment, the end of the incentive mechanism does not seem to affect preferences or habits towards contribution. Our results also tend to confirm some of the empirical literature, especially in terms of energy and environmental conservation [1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15], which show the existence of long-lasting effects. The specific nature of our public good game without any framing may perhaps explain the convergence to the baseline at the end.…”

The impact of place and legacy framing on climate action: A lifespan approach

“…Public discussion of these developments may have affected the participants' responses. In addition, evaluations of the impact of combining moral framing [42] with legacy or place inductions would be useful. Finally, the outcome variables were limited in scope.…”

Using social and behavioural science to support COVID-19 pandemic response

“…Several techniques, such as sanctioning defectors 187 or rewarding cooperators 188 , tend to increase cooperative behaviour in laboratory experiments using economic games. Providing cues that make the morality of an action salient (such as having people read the Golden Rule before making a decision or asking them to report what they think is the morally right thing to do) have also been shown to increase cooperation 189,190 . People are also more likely to cooperate when they believe that others are cooperating 191 .…”