Motivation and Emotion

, Volume 40, Issue 3, pp 351–357

Prosocial behavior increases well-being and vitality even without contact with the beneficiary: Causal and behavioral evidence

Original Paper

Abstract

A number of studies have shown that prosocial behavior is associated with enhanced well-being, but most prior experimental studies have involved actual or potential face-to-face contact with the beneficiary. To establish that it is prosocial behavior itself, and not only an increased sense of social relatedness to the recipient that improves well-being, participants (n = 76) were invited to play a simple computer game, where half were made aware of a chance to have an anonymous prosocial impact through gameplay. As compared to the control condition, this group experienced more positive affect, meaningfulness and marginally more vitality. Going beyond self-reported outcomes, they also demonstrated better post-game performance on a subsequent Stroop task, providing behavioral evidence for the positive effects of prosocial behavior. Also supported was the hypothesis that these positive effects of prosocial behavior on well-being were mediated by subjectively assessed autonomy and competence need satisfactions.

Keywords

Prosocial behavior Prosocial giving Prosocial impact Well-being Self-determination theory 

References

  1. Aknin, L. B., Barrington-Leigh, C. P., Dunn, E. W., Helliwell, J. F., Burns, J., Biswas-Diener, R., et al. (2013a). Prosocial spending and well-being: Cross-cultural evidence for a psychological universal. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 104(4), 635–652.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Aknin, L. B., Dunn, E. W., Sandstrom, G. M., & Norton, M. I. (2013b). Does social connection turn good deeds into good feelings? On the value of putting the “social” in prosocial spending. International Journal of Happiness and Development, 1(2), 155–171. doi:10.1504/IJHD.2013.055643.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Aknin, L. B., Dunn, E. W., Whillans, A. V., Grant, A. M., & Norton, M. I. (2013c). Making a difference matters: Impact unlocks the emotional benefits of prosocial spending. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 88, 90–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Aknin, L. B., Fleerackers, A. L., & Hamlin, J. K. (2014). Can third-party observers detect the emotional rewards of generous spending? The Journal of Positive Psychology, 9(3), 198–203. doi:10.1080/17439760.2014.888578.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Baumeister, R. F., & Leary, M. R. (1995). The need to belong: Desire for interpersonal attachments as a fundamental human motivation. Psychological Bulletin, 117(3), 497–529.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Chen, B., Vansteenkiste, M., Beyers, W., Boone, L., Deci, E. L., Deeder, J., et al. (2015). Basic psychological need satisfaction, need frustration, and need strength across four cultures. Motivation and Emotion, 39(2), 216–236.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). The“what” and“why” of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry, 11(4), 227–268.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. DeWall, C. N., Baumeister, R. F., & Vohs, K. D. (2008). Satiated with belongingness? Effects of acceptance, rejection, and task framing on self-regulatory performance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 95(6), 1367–1382. doi:10.1037/a0012632.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  9. Diener, E., Wirtz, D., Tov, W., Kim-Prieto, C., Choi, D., Oishi, S., & Biswas-Diener, R. (2010). New well-being measures: Short scales to assess flourishing and positive and negative feelings. Social Indicators Research, 97(2), 143–156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Gailliot, M. T., Baumeister, R. F., DeWall, C. N., Maner, J. K., Plant, E. A., Tice, D. M., et al. (2007). Self-control relies on glucose as a limited energy source: Willpower is more than a metaphor. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 92(2), 325–336.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Gray, K. (2010). Moral transformation: Good and evil turn the weak into the mighty. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 1(3), 253–258.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Harbaugh, W. T., Mayr, U., & Burghart, D. R. (2007). Neural responses to taxation and voluntary giving reveal motives for charitable donations. Science, 316(5831), 1622–1625.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Harris, M. B. (1977). Effects of altruism on mood. The Journal of Social Psychology, 102(2), 197–208.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Hawley, P. H. (2014). Evolution, prosocial behavior, and altruism: A roadmap for understanding where the proximate meets the ultimate. In L. Padilla-Walker & G. Carlo (Eds.), Prosocial development: A multidimensional approach (pp. 43–69). Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Hayes, A. F. (2013). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach. New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
  16. Hayes, A. F., & Preacher, K. J. (2014). Statistical mediation analysis with a multicategorical independent variable. Britisth Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 67, 451–470.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Job, V., Dweck, C. S., & Walton, G. M. (2010). Ego depletion—is it all in your head? Implicit theories about willpower affect self-regulation. Psychological Science, 21(11), 1686–1693. doi:10.1177/0956797610384745.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Kazén, M., Kuhl, J., & Leicht, E.-M. (2015). When the going gets tough…: Self-motivation is associated with invigoration and fun. Psychological Research. doi:10.1007/s00426-014-0631-z.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. King, L. A., & Hicks, J. A. (2009). Detecting and constructing meaning in life events. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 4(5), 317–330. doi:10.1080/17439760902992316.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Krebs, D. (1982). Psychological approaches to altruism: An evaluation. Ethics, 92, 447–458.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Martela, F., & Ryan, R. M. (2015). The benefits of benevolence: Basic psychological needs, beneficence, and the enhancement of well-being. Journal of Personality. doi:10.1111/jopy.12215.
  22. Muraven, M., Gagné, M., & Rosman, H. (2008). Helpful self-control: Autonomy support, vitality, and depletion. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 44(3), 573–585.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  23. Piliavin, J. A. (2003). Doing well by doing good: Benefits for the benefactor. In C. L. Keyes, J. Haidt, & M. E. P. Seligman (Eds.), Flourishing: Positive psychology and the life well-lived (pp. 227–247). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Post, S. G. (2005). Altruism, happiness, and health: It’s good to be good. International Journal of Behavioral Medicine, 12(2), 66–77.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Poulin, M. J., Holman, E. A., & Buffone, A. (2012). The neurogenetics of nice receptor genes for oxytocin and vasopressin interact with threat to predict prosocial behavior. Psychological Science, 23(5), 446–452.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. Richeson, J. A., & Trawalter, S. (2005). Why do interracial interactions impair executive function? A resource depletion account. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 88(6), 934–947.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2008). From ego depletion to vitality: Theory and findings concerning the facilitation of energy available to the self. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 2(2), 702–717.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Ryan, R. M., & Frederick, C. (1997). On energy, personality, and health: Subjective vitality as a dynamic reflection of well-being. Journal of Personality, 65(3), 529–565.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Ryan, R. M., & Hawley, P. (in press). Naturally good? Basic psychological needs and the proximal and evolutionary bases of human benevolence. In M. Leary & K. W. Brown (Eds.), The psychology of hypoegoic behavior. New York: Guildford Press.Google Scholar
  30. Schroeder, D. A., & Graziano, W. G. (2015). The field of prosocial behavior: An introduction and overview. In D. A. Schroeder & W. G. Graziano (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of prosocial behavior (pp. 3–34). Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Shariff, A. F., & Norenzayan, A. (2007). God is watching you priming god concepts increases prosocial behavior in an anonymous economic game. Psychological Science, 18(9), 803–809.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. Sheldon, K. M., & Filak, V. (2008). Manipulating autonomy, competence, and relatedness support in a game-learning context: New evidence that all three needs matter. British Journal of Social Psychology, 47(2), 267–283.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. Weinstein, N., & Ryan, R. M. (2010). When helping helps: Autonomous motivation for prosocial behavior and its influence on well-being for the helper and recipient. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 98(2), 222–244.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. Williamson, G. M., & Clark, M. S. (1989). Providing help and desired relationship type as determinants of changes in moods and self-evaluations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 56(5), 722–734.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of HelsinkiHelsinkiFinland
  2. 2.Institute for Positive Psychology and Education, Australian Catholic UniversityBanyoAustralia
  3. 3.University of RochesterRochesterUSA

Personalised recommendations