IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/jobhdp/v139y2017icp18-29.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A helping hand is hard at work: Help-seekers’ underestimation of helpers’ effort

Author

Listed:
  • Newark, Daniel A.
  • Bohns, Vanessa K.
  • Flynn, Francis J.

Abstract

Whether people seek help depends on their estimations of both the likelihood and the value of getting it. Although past research has carefully examined how accurately help-seekers predict whether their help requests will be granted, it has failed to examine how accurately help-seekers predict the value of that help, should they receive it. In this paper, we focus on how accurately help-seekers predict a key determinant of help value, namely, helper effort. In four studies, we find that (a) helpers put more effort into helping than help-seekers expect (Studies 1–4); (b) people do not underestimate the effort others will expend in general, but rather only the effort others will expend helping them (Study 2); and (c) this underestimation of help effort stems from help-seekers’ failure to appreciate the discomfort—in particular, the guilt—that helpers would experience if they did not do enough to help (Studies 3 & 4).

Suggested Citation

  • Newark, Daniel A. & Bohns, Vanessa K. & Flynn, Francis J., 2017. "A helping hand is hard at work: Help-seekers’ underestimation of helpers’ effort," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 139(C), pages 18-29.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:jobhdp:v:139:y:2017:i:c:p:18-29
    DOI: 10.1016/j.obhdp.2017.01.001
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0749597815302004
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.obhdp.2017.01.001?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Herbert A. Simon, 1955. "A Behavioral Model of Rational Choice," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 69(1), pages 99-118.
    2. Van Boven, Leaf & Loewenstein, George & Dunning, David, 2005. "The illusion of courage in social predictions: Underestimating the impact of fear of embarrassment on other people," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 96(2), pages 130-141, March.
    3. Vanessa K. Bohns & Francis J. Flynn, 2013. "Guilt by Design: Structuring Organizations to Elicit Guilt as an Affective Reaction to Failure," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 24(4), pages 1157-1173, August.
    4. Mas-Colell, Andreu & Whinston, Michael D. & Green, Jerry R., 1995. "Microeconomic Theory," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780195102680.
    5. Andreoni, James, 1990. "Impure Altruism and Donations to Public Goods: A Theory of Warm-Glow Giving?," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 100(401), pages 464-477, June.
    6. Alison Wood Brooks & Francesca Gino & Maurice E. Schweitzer, 2015. "Smart People Ask for (My) Advice: Seeking Advice Boosts Perceptions of Competence," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 61(6), pages 1421-1435, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Park, YeJin & Nault, Kelly & Kuwabara, Ko, 2024. "When brokers don’t broker: Mitigating referral aversion in third-party help exchange," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 180(C).
    2. Mingdan Han & Ran Li & Wenjing Wang & Zehou Sun & Jiaming Zhang & Haokun Han, 2022. "The Effect of Mutual Help Behavior on Employee Creativity—Based on the Recipient’s Perspective," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(18), pages 1-22, September.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Frör, Oliver, 2008. "Bounded rationality in contingent valuation: Empirical evidence using cognitive psychology," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(1-2), pages 570-581, December.
    2. Daniel Sutter & Daniel J. Smith, 2017. "Coordination in disaster: Nonprice learning and the allocation of resources after natural disasters," The Review of Austrian Economics, Springer;Society for the Development of Austrian Economics, vol. 30(4), pages 469-492, December.
    3. Delgado, Michael S. & Khanna, Neha, 2015. "Voluntary Pollution Abatement and Regulation," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 44(1), pages 1-20, April.
    4. Kjell Hausken & Jun Zhuang, 2011. "Governments' and Terrorists' Defense and Attack in a T -Period Game," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 8(1), pages 46-70, March.
    5. Mercure, Jean-François, 2018. "Fashion, fads and the popularity of choices: Micro-foundations for diffusion consumer theory," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 46(C), pages 194-207.
    6. Horaguchi, Haruo, 1996. "The role of information processing cost as the foundation of bounded rationality in game theory," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 51(3), pages 287-294, June.
    7. Gebhard Kirchgässner, 2014. "On Self-Interest and Greed," CESifo Working Paper Series 4883, CESifo.
    8. Hagen, Martin, 2022. "Tradable immigration quotas revisited," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 208(C).
    9. Woertman, W.H., 2008. "Learning in consumer choice," Other publications TiSEM c467376b-ae4e-49ad-a336-7, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    10. Erhard Glötzl & Florentin Glötzl & Oliver Richters, 2019. "From constrained optimization to constrained dynamics: extending analogies between economics and mechanics," Journal of Economic Interaction and Coordination, Springer;Society for Economic Science with Heterogeneous Interacting Agents, vol. 14(3), pages 623-642, September.
    11. Gebhard Kirchgässner, 2013. "The Weak Rationality Principle in Economics," Swiss Journal of Economics and Statistics (SJES), Swiss Society of Economics and Statistics (SSES), vol. 149(I), pages 1-26, March.
    12. Agnieszka Lipieta & Andrzej Malawski, 2016. "Price versus quality competition: in search for Schumpeterian evolution mechanisms," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 26(5), pages 1137-1171, December.
    13. Brendan Markey-Towler, 2018. "A formal psychological theory for evolutionary economics," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 28(4), pages 691-725, September.
    14. Mati Dubrovinsky & Ralph A. Winter, 2015. "Organizational form and output quality," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 48(1), pages 189-206, February.
    15. Alger, Ingela, 2022. "Evolutionarily stable preferences," TSE Working Papers 22-1355, Toulouse School of Economics (TSE), revised Dec 2022.
    16. Stavros A. Drakopoulos, 2025. "The Conceptual Resilience of the Atomistic Individual in Mainstream Economic Rationality," Review of Political Economy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 37(1), pages 1-20, January.
    17. Moscati, Ivan, 2021. "On the recent philosophy of decision theory," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 115039, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    18. Croson, Rachel & Gächter, Simon, 2010. "The science of experimental economics," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 73(1), pages 122-131, January.
    19. Dan Johansson, 2004. "Economics Without Entrepreneurship or Institutions: A Vocabulary Analysis of Graduate Textbooks," Econ Journal Watch, Econ Journal Watch, vol. 1(3), pages 515-538, December.
    20. Di Caprio, Debora & Santos-Arteaga, Francisco J. & Tavana, Madjid, 2019. "The role of anticipated emotions and the value of information in determining sequential search incentives," Operations Research Perspectives, Elsevier, vol. 6(C).

    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:eee:jobhdp:v:139:y:2017:i:c:p:18-29. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/obhdp .

    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.