Visceral needs and donation decisions: Do people identify with suffering or with relief?

Harel, Inbal; Kogut, Tehila

doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2014.08.005

Cited by 18 publications

(25 citation statements)

References 29 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This is also reflected in Panel A of Table where the H 0 is rejected at the 5% level. In line with the findings of Harel and Kogut (), our first main result is formalized as follows. RESULT 1 Outside Ramadan, abstaining dictators transfer significantly less money to recipients relative to nonabstaining dictators .…”

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 72%

“…This is also reflected in Panel A of Table 4 where the H 0 is rejected at the 5% level. In line with the findings of Harel and Kogut (2015), our first main result is formalized as follows.…”

Section: B Analysismentioning

confidence: 61%

“…Existing physiological literature establishes that individuals with higher blood glucose levels are more giving than individuals with depleted glucose levels (Aarøe and Petersen ). Along the same lines, Harel and Kogut () indicate that people tend to be more generous when satisfied than when actively experiencing a visceral need, such as hunger. HYPOTHESIS 1 Outside Ramadan, abstaining dictators transfer less money to recipients relative to dictators who do not abstain .…”

Section: General Hypothesesmentioning

confidence: 90%

See 2 more Smart Citations

The Religious Observance of Ramadan and Prosocial Behavior

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 72%

Section: B Analysismentioning

confidence: 61%

Section: General Hypothesesmentioning

confidence: 90%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The Religious Observance of Ramadan and Prosocial Behavior

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Given the generality of the belief that hunger must undermine cooperation, it is not surprising that researchers have studied the effects of short-term hunger manipulations on laboratory cooperation paradigms, usually with the expectation that the hungry participants will cooperate less than controls. Though some studies report results conforming to expectation (Briers et al, 2006;Harel and Kogut, 2015;Xu et al, 2014), other results have been null. Hausser et al (2019) either manipulated or measured hunger prior to a series of different cooperation tasks and measures (economic games, survey measures and a volunteering task), finding no significant hunger effects on any outcome.…”

Section: General Introductionmentioning

confidence: 86%

“…The experimental effects of hunger on cooperation have been most studied in tasks towards the less rich end of the continuum. Many of these are DG or unconditional donation-style tasks (Briers et al, 2006;Harel and Kogut, 2015;Xu et al, 2014), whilst Rantapuska et al (2017) used two tasks that were interdependent, but where there was no possibility for one player to sanction the other and no repeated interaction between the same players. Häusser et al (2019) extended the set of tasks studied to include the Ultimatum Game.…”

Section: General Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Hunger affects social decisions in a multi-round Public Goods Game but not a single-shot Ultimatum Game

Fraser¹,

Nettle²

2019

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective. People have the intuition that hunger undermines social cooperation, but experimental tests of this have often produced null results. One possible explanation is that the experimental tasks used are not rich enough to capture the diverse pathways by which social cooperation can be sustained or break down in real life. We studied the effects of hunger on cooperation in two tasks of differential interaction richness. Methods. We manipulated hunger by asking participants to eat, or refrain from eating, breakfast. Participants in experiment 1 (n = 106) played a one-shot Ultimatum Game. Participants in experiment 2 (n = 264) played twenty rounds of a Public Goods Game in the same groups of four, ten rounds with the possibility of punishing other group members, and ten without. Results. In experiment 1, skipping breakfast had no significant effects on either amounts proposed or minimum acceptable offers. In experiment 2, there were multiple different significant effects of the manipulation. No-breakfast participants were more generous in the first round of the game without punishment, and in subsequent rounds, were more influenced by what other group members had done the round before. In the punishment game, no-breakfast participants were also less likely to punish their group-mates than breakfast participants. Consequently, the possibility of punishment was less effective in increasing group cooperation levels in no-breakfast groups. Conclusion. Replicating earlier findings, we found a null effect of hunger on cooperation in a one-shot Ultimatum Game. However, in our richer Public Goods Game, the dynamics of cooperation differed with hunger, in subtle ways not simply classifiable as hungry participants being ‘more’ or ‘less’ cooperative overall.

show abstract

Psychological Determinants of Charitable Giving

Kogut¹,

Ritov²

2017

Economic Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Visceral needs and donation decisions: Do people identify with suffering or with relief?

Cited by 18 publications

References 29 publications

The Religious Observance of Ramadan and Prosocial Behavior

The Religious Observance of Ramadan and Prosocial Behavior

Hunger affects social decisions in a multi-round Public Goods Game but not a single-shot Ultimatum Game

Psychological Determinants of Charitable Giving

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About