IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/nas/journl/v117y2020p6463-6468.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Delayed negative effects of prosocial spending on happiness

Author

Listed:
  • Armin Falk

    (Department of Economics, University of Bonn, 53113 Bonn, Germany; Institute on Behavior and Inequality, 53113 Bonn, Germany)

  • Thomas Graeber

    (Department of Economics, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA 02138)

Abstract

Does prosocial behavior promote happiness? We test this longstanding hypothesis in a behavioral experiment that extends the scope of previous research. In our Saving a Life paradigm, every participant either saved one human life in expectation by triggering a targeted donation of 350 euros or received an amount of 100 euros. Using a choice paradigm between two binary lotteries with different chances of saving a life, we observed subjects’ intentions at the same time as creating random variation in prosocial outcomes. We repeatedly measured happiness at various delays. Our data weakly replicate the positive effect identified in previous research but only for the very short run. One month later, the sign of the effect reversed, and prosocial behavior led to significantly lower happiness than obtaining the money. Notably, even those subjects who chose prosocially were ultimately happier if they ended up getting the money for themselves. Our findings revealed a more nuanced causal relationship than previously suggested, providing an explanation for the apparent absence of universal prosocial behavior.

Suggested Citation

  • Armin Falk & Thomas Graeber, 2020. "Delayed negative effects of prosocial spending on happiness," Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, vol. 117(12), pages 6463-6468, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:nas:journl:v:117:y:2020:p:6463-6468
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.pnas.org/content/117/12/6463.full
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Masaki Iwasaki, 2023. "Social preferences and well-being: theory and evidence," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 10(1), pages 1-13, December.
    2. Dolan, Paul & Krekel, Christian & Shreedhar, Ganga & Lee, Helen & Marshall, Claire & Smith, Allison, 2021. "Happy to Help: The Welfare Effects of a Nationwide Micro-Volunteering Programme," IZA Discussion Papers 14431, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    3. Weipeng Lai & Zhixu Yang & Yanhui Mao & Qionghan Zhang & Hezhi Chen & Jianhong Ma, 2020. "When Do Good Deeds Lead to Good Feelings? Eudaimonic Orientation Moderates the Happiness Benefits of Prosocial Behavior," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(11), pages 1-12, June.
    4. Thilo K.G. Haverkamp & Heinz Welsch & Andreas Ziegler, 2022. "The Relationship between Pro-environmental Behavior, Economic Preferences, and Life Satisfaction: Empirical Evidence from Germany," MAGKS Papers on Economics 202204, Philipps-Universität Marburg, Faculty of Business Administration and Economics, Department of Economics (Volkswirtschaftliche Abteilung).
    5. Hong Zhang & Yongle Ding & Li Wei & Wenting Zhang, 2023. "Personal Relative Deprivation Reduces the Meaningfulness of Engaging in Prosocial Behavior (7,756 Words)," Journal of Happiness Studies, Springer, vol. 24(1), pages 35-56, January.
    6. Haverkamp, Thilo K.G. & Welsch, Heinz & Ziegler, Andreas, 2023. "The relationship between climate protection activities, economic preferences, and life satisfaction: Empirical evidence for Germany," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 128(C).
    7. Feldhaus, Christoph & Gleue, Marvin & Löschel, Andreas & Werner, Peter, 2022. "Co-benefits motivate individual donations to mitigate climate change," Research Memorandum 004, Maastricht University, Graduate School of Business and Economics (GSBE).

    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:nas:journl:v:117:y:2020:p:6463-6468. 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: Eric Cain (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.pnas.org/ .

    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.