IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/socsci/v100y2019i3p666-677.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Optimism and Bias When Evaluating a Prosocial Initiative

Author

Listed:
  • Curtis Child
  • Eva M. Witesman

Abstract

Objective This study examines how people evaluate prosocial initiatives—in particular, whether they exhibit optimism bias when asked to consider the outcomes of a hypothetical initiative that is described to take place in the nonprofit, business, or government sector. It also assesses the conditions under which optimism bias is malleable. Methods We use a survey with an experimental component to compare subjects’ evaluations of a hypothetical initiative across a set of priming (positive prime, negative prime, no prime) and sector (nonprofit, government, business, social business) conditions. Results We find evidence that optimism bias is widespread, regardless of the sector in question. Subjects are only inclined to alter their assessments when provided with new information that is positive (in contrast to new information that is negative). Conclusion The findings offer qualified support for the blurring hypothesis, suggesting that sector may be losing its status as a defining characteristic of the organizational landscape.

Suggested Citation

  • Curtis Child & Eva M. Witesman, 2019. "Optimism and Bias When Evaluating a Prosocial Initiative," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 100(3), pages 666-677, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:socsci:v:100:y:2019:i:3:p:666-677
    DOI: 10.1111/ssqu.12585
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/ssqu.12585
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/ssqu.12585?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Mitchell George E. & Calabrese Thad D., 2020. "Instrumental Philanthropy, Nonprofit Theory, and Information Costs," Nonprofit Policy Forum, De Gruyter, vol. 11(2), pages 1-15, July.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:socsci:v:100:y:2019:i:3:p:666-677. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=0038-4941 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.