Emotion vs. deliberation in helping: a two-step model of donating decisions

Abstract

Emotions are influential in determining individuals to donate to charitable causes. However, emotions could interfere with the later decision to whom to allocate the donation resources by making people more likely to donate to a few individual victims instead of many statistical ones. Nevertheless, rationality could direct the allocation decision on the right way (i.e., by donating to statistical victims instead of determined victims). This paper investigated the role of emotional vs. deliberative information processing mode in decision-making in helping situations. In two studies, it was examined whether information processing mode (either emotional or rational) influenced participants' donation decisions. Information processing was manipulated by using both a mindset and conceptual prime (Study 1) or only a mindset prime (Study 2). The results yielded, similarly to Dickert, Sagara, and Slovic (2011), that an emotional processing mode increased people's tendency to donate to charity and also the amount donated (Study 1; Step 1). Furthermore, a rational processing mode determined people to choose the most normatively correct (i.e., from an utilitarian point of view) alternative, that is, to allocate the donation to a greater number of statistical victims instead of a lesser number of determined victims (Study 2; Step 2). The potential beneficial and disruptive implications for both emotions and rationality are discussed in line of a more complete two-step model of donating decisions, where Step 1 refers to the decision to donate or not donate and how much and Step 2 involves the decision to whom to allocate the donations.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 2 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.