The identifiable victim effect: a meta-analytic review

References

• Abelson, R. P. (1985). A variance explanation paradox: When a little is a lot. Psychological Bulletin, 97, 129–133.10.1037/0033-2909.97.1.129
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baron, J. (1997). Confusion of relative and absolute risk in valuation. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 14, 301–309.10.1023/A:1007796310463
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bartels, D. M. (2006). Proportion dominance: The generality and variability of favoring relative savings over absolute savings. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 100, 76–95.10.1016/j.obhdp.2005.10.004
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Basil, D. Z., Ridgway, N. M., & Basil, M. D. (2006). Guilt appeals: The mediating effect of responsibility. Psychology and Marketing, 23, 1035–1054.10.1002/(ISSN)1520-6793
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Batson, C. D. (2011). Altruism in humans. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Bijmolt, T. H. A., & Pieters, R. G. M. (2001). Meta-analysis in marketing when studies contain multiple measurements. Marketing Letters, 12, 157–169.10.1023/A:1011117103381
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Borenstein, M., Hedges, L. V., Higgins, J. P. T., & Rothstein, H. R. (2006). Comprehensive meta-analysis. Englewood, NJ: Biostat.
   Google Scholar
• Brewer, M., & Gardner, W. (1996). Who is this “we”? Levels of collective identity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71, 83–93.10.1037/0022-3514.71.1.83
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Card, N. A. (2012). Applied meta-analysis for social science research. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
   Google Scholar
• Cooper, H. M. (1981). On the significance of effects and the effects of significance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 41, 1013–1018.10.1037/0022-3514.41.5.1013
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cooper, H. M. (1989). Integrating research: A guide for literature reviews (2nd ed.). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• *Cryder, C. E., & Loewenstein, G. (2012). Responsibility: The tie that binds. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 48, 441–445.10.1016/j.jesp.2011.09.009
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cryder, C. E., Loewenstein, G., & Scheines, R. (2013). The donor is in the details. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 120, 15–23.10.1016/j.obhdp.2012.08.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• DerSimonian, R., & Laird, N. (1986). Meta-analysis in clinical trials. Controlled Clinical Trials, 7, 177–188.10.1016/0197-2456(86)90046-2
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• *Dickert, S., Kleber, J., Peters, E., & Slovic, P. (2011). Numeracy as a precursor to pro-social behavior: The impact of numeracy and presentation format on the cognitive mechanisms underlying donation decisions. Judgement and Decision Making, 6, 638–650.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dovidio, J. F., Gaertner, S. L., Validzic, A., Matoka, K., Johnson, B., & Frazier, S. (1997). Extending the benefits of recategorization: Evaluations, self-disclosure, and helping. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 33, 401–420.10.1006/jesp.1997.1327
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dovidio, J. F., Piliavin, J. A., Gaertner, S., Schroeder, D. A., & Clark, R. D. III. (1991). The arousal cost-reward model and the process of intervention: A review of the evidence. In M. Clark (Ed.), Prosocial behavior: Review of personality and social psychology (Vol. 12, pp. 86–118). Newberry Park, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Duncan, B. (2004). A theory of impact philanthropy. Journal of Public Economics, 88, 2159–2180.10.1016/S0047-2727(03)00037-9
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• *Ein-Gar, D., & Levontin, L. (2013). Giving from a distance: Putting the charitable organization at the center of the donation appeal. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 23, 197–211.10.1016/j.jcps.2012.09.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• *Erlandsson, A., Björklund, F., & Bäckström, M. (2015). Organizational behavior and human decision processes. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 127, 1–14.10.1016/j.obhdp.2014.11.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fetherstonhaugh, D., Slovic, P., Johnson, S. M., & Friedrich, J. (1997). Insensitivity to the value of human life: A study of psychological numbing. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 14, 283–300.10.1023/A:1007744326393
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Friedrich, J., Barnes, P., Chapin, K., Dawson, I., Garst, V., & Kerr, D. (1999). Psychophysical numbing: When lives are valued less as the lives at risk increase. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 8, 277–299.10.1207/s15327663jcp0803_05
   Google Scholar
• *Friedrich, J., & McGuire, A. (2010). Individual differences in reasoning style as a moderator of the identifiable victim effect. Social Influence, 5, 182–201.10.1080/15534511003707352
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Genevsky, A., Västfjäll, D., Slovic, P., & Knutson, B. (2013). Neural underpinning of the identifiable victim effect: Affect shifts preference for giving. Journal of Neuroscience, 33, 17188–17196.10.1523/JNEUROSCI.2348-13.2013
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Haase, R. F., Ellis, M. V., & Ladany, N. (1989). Multiple criteria for evaluating the magnitude of experimental effects. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 36, 511–516.10.1037/0022-0167.36.4.511
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Higgins, J. P. T., Thompson, S. G., Deeks, J. J., & Altman, D. G. (2003). Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses. British Medical Journal, 327, 557–560.10.1136/bmj.327.7414.557
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jenni, K., & Loewenstein, G. (1997). Explaining the identifiable victim effect. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 14, 235–257.10.1023/A:1007740225484
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• *Kogut, T. (2011). Someone to blame: When identifying a victim decreases helping. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 47, 748–755.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kogut, T., & Beyth-Marom, R. (2008). Who helps more? How self-other discrepancies influence decisions in helping situations. Judgement and Decision Making, 3, 595–606.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kogut, T., & Ritov, I. (2011). The identifiable victim effect: Causes and boundary conditions. In D. M. Oppenheimer & C. Y. Olivola (Eds.), The science of giving: Experimental approaches to the study of charity (pp. 133–145). New York, NY: Psychology Press.
   Google Scholar
• *Kogut, T., & Ritov, I. (2005a). The identifiable victim effect: An identified group, or just a single individual? Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 18, 157–167.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• *Kogut, T., & Ritov, I. (2005b). The singularity effect of identified victims in separate and joint evaluations. Organization Behavior and Human Decision Process, 97, 106–116.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• *Kogut, T., & Ritov, I. (2007). “One of us”: Outstanding willingness to help save a single identified compatriot. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 104, 150–157.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• *Kougt, T., & Kogut, E. (2013). Exploring the relationship between adult attachment style and the identifiable victim effect in helping behavior. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 49, 651–660.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• *Lesner, T. H., & Rasmussen, O. D. (2014). The identifiable victim effect in charitable giving: Evidence from a natural field experiment. Applied Economics, 46, 4409–4430.10.1080/00036846.2014.962226
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lipsey, M. W., & Wilson, D. B. (2001). Practical meta-analysis. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• *Ritov, I., & Kogut, T. (2011). Ally or adversary: The effect of identifiability in inter-group conflict situations. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Process, 116, 96–103.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rosenthal, R. (1994). Parametric measures of effect size. In H. Copper & L. V. Hedges (Eds.), Handbook of research synthesis (pp. 231–244). New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation.
   Google Scholar
• Sah, S., & Loewenstein, G. (2012). More affected = More neglected: Amplification of bias in advice to the unidentified and many. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 3, 365–372.10.1177/1948550611422958
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schelling, T. C. (1968). The life you save may be your own. In S. Chase (Ed.), Problems in public expenditure analysis (pp. 127–162). Washington, DC: The Brookings Institute.
   Google Scholar
• Slovic, P. (2007). If I look at the mass I will never act: Psychic numbing and genocide. Judgment and Decision Making, 2, 79–95.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Slovic, P., Finucane, M., Peters, E. R., & MacGregor, D. G. (2002). The affect heuristic. In T. Gilovich, D. Griffin, & D. Kahneman (Eds.), Heuristics and biases: The psychology of intuitive judgement (pp. 397–420). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511808098
   Google Scholar
• Small, D. A. (2004). Identifiability (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA.
   Google Scholar
• Small, D. A. (2015). On the psychology of the identifiable victim effect. In I. G. Cohen, N. Daniels, & N. Eyal (Eds.), Identified vs. statistical lives: An interdisciplinary perspective (pp. 13–23). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Small, D. A., & Loewenstein, G. (2003). Helping a victim or helping the victim: Altruism and identifiability. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 26, 5–16.10.1023/A:1022299422219
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• *Small, D. A., Loewenstein, G., & Slovic, P. (2007). Sympathy and callousness: The impact of deliberative thought on donations to identifiable and statistical victims. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 102, 143–153.10.1016/j.obhdp.2006.01.005
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Small, D. A., & Verrochi, N. M. (2009). The face of need: Facial emotion expression on charity advertisements. Journal of Marketing Research, 46, 777–787.10.1509/jmkr.46.6.777
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sutton, A. J., Abrams, K. R., Jones, D. R., Sheldon, T. A., & Song, F. (2000). Methods for meta-analysis in medical research. Chichester: Wiley.
   Google Scholar
• TV reviews—network: Everybody’s baby. (1989, May 31). Variety, 3335, 7.
   Google Scholar
• Willis, C. N. (2008). To give of not to give; Attributions of philanthropy motivation in fundraising letters (Unpublished master’s thesis). Liberty University, Lynchburg, VA.
   Google Scholar
• World of Children Award. (2015). How to end child hunger and malnutrition. Retrieved July 17, 2015, from http://www.worldofchildren.org/issues/end-child-hunger/
   Google Scholar