Be Careful When Using Peer-Influence on Nudging Solicitation: Evidence of Potential Negative Effect from a Sample of Chinese University Students

References

• Erceg N, Burghart M, Cottone A, et al. The effect of moral congruence of calls to action and salient social norms on online charitable donations: a protocol study. Front Psychol. 2018;9:1913. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01913
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Andreoni J. Toward a theory of charitable fund-raising. J Polit Econ. 1998;106(6):1186–1213. doi:10.1086/250044
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ye Y, Jiang P, Zhang W. The neural and psychological processes of peer-influenced online donation decision: an event-related potential study. original research. Front Psychol. 2022;13. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2022.899233
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Smith S, Windmeijer F, Wright E. Peer effects in charitable giving: evidence from the (running) field. Econ J. 2015;125(585):1053–1071. doi:10.1111/ecoj.12114
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Andreoni J, Rao JM. The power of asking: how communication affects selfishness, empathy, and altruism. J Public Econ. 2011;95(7–8):513–520. doi:10.1016/j.jpubeco.2010.12.008
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ugur ZB. Donate more, be happier! Evidence from the Netherlands. Appl Res Qual Life. 2018;13:157–177. doi:10.1007/s11482-017-9512-0
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bekkers R, Wiepking P. A literature review of empirical studies of philanthropy: eight mechanisms that drive charitable giving. Nonprofit Volunt Sect Q. 2011;40(5):924–973. doi:10.1177/0899764010380927
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Meer J. Brother, can you spare a dime? Peer pressure in charitable solicitation. J Public Econ. 2011;95(7–8):926–941. doi:10.1016/j.jpubeco.2010.11.026
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Filo K, Fechner D, Inoue Y. The donors supporting charity sport event participants: an exploration of the factors driving donations. J Sport Manag. 2020;34(5):488–499. doi:10.1123/jsm.2019-0253
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shang J, Croson R. A field experiment in charitable contribution: the impact of social information on the voluntary provision of public goods. Econ J. 2009;119(540):1422–1439. doi:10.1111/j.1468-0297.2009.02267.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Andreoni J. Philanthropy. In: Handbook of the Economics of Giving, Altruism and Reciprocity. Elsevier; 2006:1201–1269.
   Google Scholar
• Ajzen I. The theory of planned behavior. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process. 1991;50(2):179–211. doi:10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-T
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brooks AC. What do “don’t know” responses really mean in giving surveys? Nonprofit Volunt Sect Q. 2004;33(3):423–434. doi:10.1177/0899764004266636
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Frey BS, Meier S. Social comparisons and pro-social behavior: testing “conditional cooperation” in a field experiment. Am Econ Rev. 2004;94(5):1717–1722. doi:10.1257/0002828043052187
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Diener E. Subjective well-being. Psychol Bull. 1984;95(3):542. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.95.3.542
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kross E, Verduyn P, Demiralp E, et al. Facebook use predicts declines in subjective well-being in young adults. PLoS One. 2013;8(8):e69841. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0069841
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fardouly J, Diedrichs PC, Vartanian LR, Halliwell E. Social comparisons on social media: the impact of Facebook on young women’s body image concerns and mood. Body Image. 2015;13:38–45. doi:10.1016/j.bodyim.2014.12.002
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Feinstein BA, Hershenberg R, Bhatia V, Latack JA, Meuwly N, Davila J. Negative social comparison on Facebook and depressive symptoms: rumination as a mechanism. Psychol Pop Media Cult. 2013;2(3):161. doi:10.1037/a0033111
   Google Scholar
• Swallow SR, Kuiper NA. Social comparison and negative self-evaluations: an application to depression. Clin Psychol Rev. 1988;8(1):55–76. doi:10.1016/0272-7358(88)90049-9
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kottasz R. How should charitable organisations motivate young professionals to give philanthropically? Int J Nonprofit Volunt Sect Mark. 2004;9(1):9–27. doi:10.1002/nvsm.230
   Google Scholar
• Yang T, Zhu J. Philanthropy Blue Book: China Philanthropy Development Report. Social Sciences Academic Press; 2022.
   Google Scholar
• Jin J, Zhang W, Chen M. How consumers are affected by product descriptions in online shopping: event-related potentials evidence of the attribute framing effect. Neurosci Res. 2017;125:21–28. doi:10.1016/j.neures.2017.07.006
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• San Martín R, Kwak Y, Pearson JM, Woldorff MG, Huettel SA. Altruistic traits are predicted by neural responses to monetary outcomes for self vs charity. Soc Cogn Affect Neurosci. 2016;11(6):863–876. doi:10.1093/scan/nsw026
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Teng Z, Nie Q, Liu Y, Guo C. Is prosocial video game exposure related to prosociality? An ERP study based on a prosocial help needed decision task. Comput Human Behav. 2018;79:30–39. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2017.10.014
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cheung CK, Chan CM. Social-cognitive factors of donating money to charity, with special attention to an international relief organization. Eval Program Plann. 2000;23(2):241–253. doi:10.1016/S0149-7189(00)00003-3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wiepking P. For the love of mankind: a sociological study on charitable giving; 2008.
   Google Scholar
• Chinman MJ, Wandersman A, Goodman RM. A benefit-and-cost approach to understanding social participation and volunteerism in multilevel organizations. In: Processes of Community Change and Social Action. Psychology Press; 2014:105–126.
   Google Scholar
• Batson CD, Shaw LL. Evidence for altruism: toward a pluralism of prosocial motives. Psychol Inq. 1991;2(2):107–122. doi:10.1207/s15327965pli0202_1
   Google Scholar
• Croson R, Handy F, Shang J. Keeping up with the Joneses: the relationship of perceived descriptive social norms, social information, and charitable giving. Nonprofit Manag Leadersh. 2009;19(4):467–489. doi:10.1002/nml.232
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Park S, Shin J. The influence of anonymous peers on prosocial behavior. PLoS One. 2017;12(10):e0185521. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0185521
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hou T, Hou K, Wang X, Luo XR. Why I give money to unknown people? An investigation of online donation and forwarding intention. Electron Commer Res Appl. 2021;47:101055. doi:10.1016/j.elerap.2021.101055
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Croson R, Shang J. The impact of downward social information on contribution decisions. Exp Econ. 2008;11:221–233. doi:10.1007/s10683-007-9191-z
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhao X, Chen B, Jin P. Inspired to donate: how donors’ social class impacts charitable donations. J Consum Behav. 2023;22(1):3–13. doi:10.1002/cb.2042
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Piff PK, Kraus MW, Côté S, Cheng BH, Keltner D. Having less, giving more: the influence of social class on prosocial behavior. J Pers Soc Psychol. 2010;99(5):771. doi:10.1037/a0020092
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rand DG, Greene JD, Nowak MA. Spontaneous giving and calculated greed. Nature. 2012;489(7416):427–430. doi:10.1038/nature11467
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Righetti F, Finkenauer C, Finkel EJ. Low self-control promotes the willingness to sacrifice in close relationships. Psychol Sci. 2013;24(8):1533–1540. doi:10.1177/0956797613475457
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ugur ZB. Does self-control foster generosity? Evidence from ego depleted children. J Behav Exp Econ. 2021;90:101652. doi:10.1016/j.socec.2020.101652
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Andreoni J, Koessler A-K, Serra-Garcia M. Who gives? On Empathy and Impulsiveness; 2017.
   Google Scholar
• Gershon R, Cryder C. Goods donations increase charitable credit for low-warmth donors. J Consum Res. 2018;45(2):451–469. doi:10.1093/jcr/ucx126
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yin B, Li YJ, Singh S. Coins are cold and cards are caring: the effect of pregiving incentives on charity perceptions, relationship norms, and donation behavior. J Mark. 2020;84(6):57–73. doi:10.1177/0022242920931451
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Harbaugh WT, Mayr U, Burghart DR. Neural responses to taxation and voluntary giving reveal motives for charitable donations. Science. 2007;316(5831):1622–1625. doi:10.1126/science.1140738
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ye J, Zhou K, Chen R. Numerical or verbal information: the effect of comparative information in social comparison on prosocial behavior. J Bus Res. 2021;124:198–211. doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.11.053
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vohs KD, Mead NL, Goode MR. Merely activating the concept of money changes personal and interpersonal behavior. Curr Dir Psychol Sci. 2008;17(3):208–212. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8721.2008.00576.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Duncan B. A theory of impact philanthropy. J Public Econ. 2004;88(9–10):2159–2180. doi:10.1016/S0047-2727(03)00037-9
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kim H-M. Social comparison of fitness social media postings by fitness app users. Comput Human Behav. 2022;131:107204. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2022.107204
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nelissen RM. The price you pay: cost-dependent reputation effects of altruistic punishment. Evol Hum Behav. 2008;29(4):242–248. doi:10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2008.01.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vogel EA, Rose JP, Roberts LR, Eckles K. Social comparison, social media, and self-esteem. Psychol Pop Media Cult. 2014;3(4):206. doi:10.1037/ppm0000047
   Google Scholar
• Suls J, Martin R, Wheeler L. Social comparison: why, with whom, and with what effect? Curr Dir Psychol Sci. 2002;11(5):159–163. doi:10.1111/1467-8721.00191
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Taylor SE, Brown JD. Illusion and well-being: a social psychological perspective on mental health. Psychol Bull. 1988;103(2):193. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.103.2.193
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Collins RL. For better or worse: the impact of upward social comparison on self-evaluations. Psychol Bull. 1996;119(1):51. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.119.1.51
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liu P, He J, Li A. Upward social comparison on social network sites and impulse buying: a moderated mediation model of negative affect and rumination. Comput Human Behav. 2019;96:133–140. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2019.02.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shang J, Reed A, Croson R. Identity congruency effects on donations. J Mark Res. 2008;45(3):351–361. doi:10.1509/jmkr.45.3.351
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Agerström J, Carlsson R, Nicklasson L, Guntell L. Using descriptive social norms to increase charitable giving: the power of local norms. J Econ Psychol. 2016;52:147–153. doi:10.1016/j.joep.2015.12.007
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Klucharev V, Hytönen K, Rijpkema M, Smidts A, Fernández G. Reinforcement learning signal predicts social conformity. Neuron. 2009;61(1):140–151. doi:10.1016/j.neuron.2008.11.027
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van Teunenbroek C, Bekkers R, Beersma B. Look to others before you leap: a systematic literature review of social information effects on donation amounts. Nonprofit Volunt Sect Q. 2020;49(1):53–73. doi:10.1177/0899764019869537
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Partika A. Donate, everybody’s doing it: social influences on charitable giving. Psi Chi J Psychol Res. 2017;22(1):39–45. doi:10.24839/2325-7342.JN22.1.39
   Google Scholar
• Schultz PW, Nolan JM, Cialdini RB, Goldstein NJ, Griskevicius V. The constructive, destructive, and reconstructive power of social norms. Psychol Sci. 2007;18(5):429–434. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2007.01917.x
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Harmon-Jones E, Mills J. An introduction to cognitive dissonance theory and an overview of current perspectives on the theory. In: Cognitive Dissonance: Reexamining a Pivotal Theory in Psychology. 2nd ed. American Psychological Association; 2019:3–24.
   Google Scholar
• Polezzi D, Lotto L, Daum I, Sartori G, Rumiati R. Predicting outcomes of decisions in the brain. Behav Brain Res. 2008;187(1):116–122. doi:10.1016/j.bbr.2007.09.001
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Correll J, Urland GR, Ito TA. Event-related potentials and the decision to shoot: the role of threat perception and cognitive control. J Exp Soc Psychol. 2006;42(1):120–128. doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2005.02.006
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Martin LE, Potts GF. Reward sensitivity in impulsivity. Neuroreport. 2004;15(9):1519–1522. doi:10.1097/01.wnr.0000132920.12990.b9
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Potts GF, Martin LE, Burton P, Montague PR. When things are better or worse than expected: the medial frontal cortex and the allocation of processing resources. J Cogn Neurosci. 2006;18(7):1112–1119. doi:10.1162/jocn.2006.18.7.1112
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Flores A, Münte TF, Donamayor N. Event-related EEG responses to anticipation and delivery of monetary and social reward. Biol Psychol. 2015;109:10–19. doi:10.1016/j.biopsycho.2015.04.005
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Broyd SJ, Richards HJ, Helps SK, Chronaki G, Bamford S, Sonuga-Barke EJ. An electrophysiological monetary incentive delay (e-MID) task: a way to decompose the different components of neural response to positive and negative monetary reinforcement. J Neurosci Methods. 2012;209(1):40–49. doi:10.1016/j.jneumeth.2012.05.015
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Novak KD, Foti D. Teasing apart the anticipatory and consummatory processing of monetary incentives: an event‐related potential study of reward dynamics. Psychophysiology. 2015;52(11):1470–1482. doi:10.1111/psyp.12504
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Glazer JE, Kelley NJ, Pornpattananangkul N, Mittal VA, Nusslock R. Beyond the FRN: broadening the time-course of EEG and ERP components implicated in reward processing. Int J Psychophysiol. 2018;132:184–202. doi:10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2018.02.002
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Folstein JR, Van Petten C. Influence of cognitive control and mismatch on the N2 component of the ERP: a review. Psychophysiology. 2008;45(1):152–170. doi:10.1111/j.1469-8986.2007.00602.x
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ma Q, Wang X, Dai S, Shu L. Event-related potential N270 correlates of brand extension. Neuroreport. 2007;18(10):1031–1034. doi:10.1097/WNR.0b013e3281667d59
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Spapé MM, Band GP, Hommel B. Compatibility-sequence effects in the Simon task reflect episodic retrieval but not conflict adaptation: evidence from LRP and N2. Biol Psychol. 2011;88(1):116–123. doi:10.1016/j.biopsycho.2011.07.001
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wang Q, Meng L, Liu M, Wang Q, Ma Q. How do social-based cues influence consumers’ online purchase decisions? An event-related potential study. Electron Commer Res. 2016;16:1–26. doi:10.1007/s10660-015-9209-0
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ahern KR, Duchin R, Shumway T. Peer effects in risk aversion and trust. Rev Financ Stud. 2014;27(11):3213–3240. doi:10.1093/rfs/hhu042
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yu M, Liu T, Shi J. Food is discounted more steeply than money: evidence from N2 and P3 responses in delay discounting tasks. Neuropsychologia. 2020;142:107469. doi:10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2020.107469
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Euser AS, Van Meel CS, Snelleman M, Franken IH. Acute effects of alcohol on feedback processing and outcome evaluation during risky decision-making: an ERP study. Psychopharmacology. 2011;217(1):111–125. doi:10.1007/s00213-011-2264-x
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Li P, Jia S, Feng T, Liu Q, Suo T, Li H. The influence of the diffusion of responsibility effect on outcome evaluations: electrophysiological evidence from an ERP study. Neuroimage. 2010;52(4):1727–1733. doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2010.04.275
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Leng Y, Zhou X. Modulation of the brain activity in outcome evaluation by interpersonal relationship: an ERP study. Neuropsychologia. 2010;48(2):448–455. doi:10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2009.10.002
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wu Y, Zhou X. The P300 and reward valence, magnitude, and expectancy in outcome evaluation. Brain Res. 2009;1286:114–122. doi:10.1016/j.brainres.2009.06.032
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• San Martín R. Event-related potential studies of outcome processing and feedback-guided learning. Front Hum Neurosci. 2012;6:304. doi:10.3389/fnhum.2012.00304
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Funkhouser CJ, Auerbach RP, Kujawa A, Morelli SA, Phan KL, Shankman SA. Social feedback valence differentially modulates the reward positivity, P300, and late positive potential. J Psychophysiol. 2019;34:255–267. doi:10.1027/0269-8803/a000253
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van der Veen F, van der Molen MJ, Van der Molen M, Franken I. Thumbs up or thumbs down? Effects of neuroticism and depressive symptoms on psychophysiological responses to social evaluation in healthy students. Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci. 2016;16(5):836–847. doi:10.3758/s13415-016-0435-2
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yao Z, Lin X, Hu X. Optimistic amnesia: how online and offline processing shape belief updating and memory biases in immediate and long-term optimism biases. Soc Cogn Affect Neurosci. 2021;16(5):453–462. doi:10.1093/scan/nsab011
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Faul F, Erdfelder E, Buchner A, Lang A-G. Statistical power analyses using G* Power 3.1: tests for correlation and regression analyses. Behav Res Methods. 2009;41(4):1149–1160. doi:10.3758/BRM.41.4.1149
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Beijing News. The Average Living Cost of College Students is Nearly 2000 Yuan. Why is it not enough? 2021. Available from: https://baijiahao.baidu.com/s?id=1715188732059167631&wfr=spider&for=pcfor=pc. Accessed 29 July 2023.
   Google Scholar
• Delorme A, Makeig S. EEGLAB: an open source toolbox for analysis of single-trial EEG dynamics including independent component analysis. J Neurosci Methods. 2004;134(1):9–21. doi:10.1016/j.jneumeth.2003.10.009
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Semlitsch HV, Anderer P, Schuster P, Presslich O. A solution for reliable and valid reduction of ocular artifacts, applied to the P300 ERP. Psychophysiology. 1986;23(6):695–703. doi:10.1111/j.1469-8986.1986.tb00696.x
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Picton TW, Bentin S, Berg P, et al. Guidelines for Using Human Event‐related Potentials to Study Cognition: Recording Standards and Publication Criteria. Wiley Online Library; 2000.
   Google Scholar
• Cohen J. Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences. Academic press; 2013.
   Google Scholar
• Moll J, Krueger F, Zahn R, Pardini M, de Oliveira-Souza R, Grafman J. Human fronto–mesolimbic networks guide decisions about charitable donation. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2006;103(42):15623–15628. doi:10.1073/pnas.0604475103
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moseley A, James O, John P, Richardson L, Ryan M, Stoker G. The effects of social information on volunteering: a field experiment. Nonprofit Volunt Sect Q. 2018;47(3):583–603. doi:10.1177/0899764017753317
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bartke S, Friedl A, Gelhaar F, Reh L. Social comparison nudges—Guessing the norm increases charitable giving. Econ Lett. 2017;152:73–75. doi:10.1016/j.econlet.2016.12.023
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gailliot MT, Schmeichel BJ, Baumeister RF. Self-regulatory processes defend against the threat of death: effects of self-control depletion and trait self-control on thoughts and fears of dying. J Pers Soc Psychol. 2006;91(1):49. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.91.1.49
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar