From Games to Giving: Social Value Orientation Predicts Donations to Noble Causes

Abstract

The central purpose of the present research is to examine the ability of social value orientation (i.e., prosocial, individualistic, and competitive orientation), as measured with methods rooted in game theory (i.e., decomposed games), to predict real-life prosocial behavior. Consistent with hypotheses, results revealed that individual differences in social value orientation are predictive of various donations. Relative to individualists and competitors, prosocials reported to engage in a greater number of donations, especially donations to organizations aimed at helping the poor and the ill. Results are discussed in terms of theory and methodology regarding the individual differences in social value orientation, as well as in terms of societal implications for enhancing donations to noble causes.

Notes

¹Women were underrepresented because the sample used by NIPO consisted of many couples. We wished to avoid that both partners would participate (i.e., to obtain “independent” responses) and therefore asked one of them to complete the survey. It appeared than among these couples much more men than women decided to participate.

Note: Donations are listed in decreasing order of prevalence. The data of five participants were discarded due to missing values. Percentages with different subscripts per column differ significantly from each other in a pairwise comparison with df = 1. In these comparisons, we computed tests of different frequencies regarding any of the three pairs of social value orientation (prosocials vs. individualists; prosocials vs. competitors; individualists vs. competitors) in their “yes or no” responses to specific donation acts in the past year.

⁺ p < .10, marginal; *p < .05; **p < .01; ***p < .001

Note: Donations are listed in decreasing order of prevalence. The data of 23 participants were discarded due to missing values. Percentages with different subscripts per column differ significantly from each other in a pairwise comparison with df = 1. In these comparisons, we computed tests of different frequencies regarding any of the three pairs of social value orientation (prosocials vs. individualists; prosocials vs. competitors; individualists vs. competitors) in their “yes or no” responses to each of the “donation goals” in the past year.

⁺ p < .10, marginal; *p < .05; **p < .01; ***p < .001.

²We also examined the associations of level of education and age with the number of donation acts and number of donation goals. Consistent with previous research (e.g., Midlarsky, 1991; see also Dovidio et al., 2006), we found that level of education and age were positively associated with the number of donation acts, as well as with the number of donation goals. Also, we found that relative to women, men exhibited a greater number of donation acts and donation goals. However, after testing the effects of these variables, regression analyses revealed that the contrast of prosocial versus individualists and competitors remained significant, for number donation acts and number of donation goals (both ps < .001). Given its theoretical and empirical significance, we also explored interaction effects of social value orientation and age in their associations with specific donation acts and donation goals. Out of a total of 20 tests (for 12 donations acts and 8 donation goals), none appeared to be significant (with p < .05). These analyses support the relatively independent role of social value orientation in predicting number of donation acts and number of donation goals.

Note: Participants are classified when they make 6 or more consistent choices. Prosocial choices are: 1c 2b 3a 4c 5b 6a 7a 8c 9b; individualistic choices are: 1b 2a 3c 4b 5a 6c 7b 8a 9c; and competitive choices are: 1a 2c 3b 4a 5c 6b 7c 8b 9a.