Individual differences in reasoning style as a moderator of the identifiable victim effect

Abstract

The identifiable victim effect refers to people's greater helpfulness towards personalized, single victims compared to aggregated, statistical victims. A field study tested recent claims that analytical processing might undermine support for identified victims by suppressing emotional responses (Small, Loewenstein, & Slovic, 2007). Individual differences in analytic (“rational”) processing style moderated the effects of different request types on donations to a Zambian relief fund. Less-analytic processors donated more to a single identified victim than to requests describing statistical victims or a combination of both; more-analytic processors showed no differences. Self-reported emotional responses, however, did not support an affect-mediated account of these effects. Use of proportional reasoning strategies is discussed as a possible alternative account of current and past findings.

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 — 51 citations exist upstream.

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