If character is what we do when no one’s watching, a new study suggests that only some of us truly have enough character to be labeled altruists. What’s more, altruism may bring unexpected rewards down the line.
In the study, published in the June issue of Social Psychology Quarterly, researchers first gave participants a survey to assess whether they were an “egoist” or an “altruist.” The researchers define egoists as people who only give to others when they expect a reward for their generosity, or where giving won’t hurt them. Altruists, on the other hand, give because they want to help others, even at a cost to themselves.
Next, the researchers gave the participants $8, telling them they could keep all of it or give some away to another participant. Before they made their decision, they were also told it would be kept private. No one would know how much they chose to give or keep.
Then came a second round. This time, participants were told a third party would learn how much of their $8 they shared. What’s more, the third party was going to give some money to the participants in a subsequent round. This created an incentive for the participants to establish a reputation for being generous, in the hope that their generosity would be reciprocated.
The results showed that, on average, egoists gave away 46 percent of their money when they thought the third party was watching them, but they gave only 22 percent in private. Altruists gave away 51 percent in the public situation and 40 percent in the private situation—almost twice as much as the egoists.
The findings suggest some generosity, or “prosocial” behavior, may be motivated by pure altruism, not self-interest. It also raises the question of whether altruists lose a competitive edge in the real world, since they’re less strategic about how and when they’re kind to others.
But another dimension to the study suggests altruists may ultimately gain from giving more. In a final stage, the researchers asked the participants to give money to a person who had demonstrated generosity while playing a similar game. Some participants were told this person knew his generosity would be reported to the participants. Others were told this person didn’t know that anyone would learn of his generosity.
The altruists gave almost the same amount of money to the person in either case. But the egoists gave substantially less to the person when they had reason to believe that person was only trying to boost his reputation. They seemed to reward true altruistic behavior, even if they weren’t altruists themselves.
“If private prosocial acts are found out—as they often are—altruists will receive more rewards than would egoists,” says Brent Simpson, a sociology professor at the University of South Carolina and the study’s lead author. “Similarly, to the extent that people punish others who fail to act prosocially, altruists do not bear the costs of being punished when ostensibly private acts become public.”
"Ikiwa tabia ni kile tunachofanya wakati hakuna mtu anayeangalia, utafiti mpya unaonyesha kwamba ni baadhi yetu tu tuna tabia ya kutosha kutajwa kama ""altruists.""" Isitoshe, ubinafsi waweza kuleta thawabu zisizotarajiwa baadaye. Katika utafiti huo, uliochapishwa katika toleo la Juni la jarida la Social Psychology Quarterly, watafiti waliwapa washiriki uchunguzi wa kwanza ili kutathmini kama walikuwa "wenye ubinafsi" au "wenye ubinafsi." watafiti wanafafanua ubinafsi kama watu ambao hutoa tu kwa wengine wakati wanatarajia thawabu kwa ukarimu wao, au wakati kutoa hakutawaumiza. Kwa upande mwingine, watu wasio na ubinafsi hutoa kwa sababu wanataka kuwasaidia wengine, hata ikiwa watakuwa na hasara yao wenyewe. Baada ya hapo, watafiti waliwapa washiriki $ 8 na kuwaambia wanaweza kuweka yote au kutoa baadhi kwa mshiriki mwingine. Kabla ya kufanya uamuzi wao, pia waliambiwa kwamba jambo hilo lingekuwa siri. Hakuna mtu angejua ni kiasi gani walichagua kutoa au kuweka. Kisha kukawa na mzunguko wa pili. Wakati huu, washiriki waliambiwa kwamba mtu wa tatu angeweza kujua ni kiasi gani cha dola zao 8 walizoshiriki. Nini zaidi, chama cha tatu ilikuwa kwenda kutoa baadhi ya fedha kwa washiriki katika raundi ya baadaye. Hii iliwachochea washiriki wafanye sifa ya ukarimu, kwa matumaini kwamba ukarimu wao ungepatikana kwa njia nyingine. Kwa mfano, watu wenye ubinafsi walipa asilimia 46 ya pesa zao wakati walipofikiri kwamba mtu wa tatu alikuwa akiwatazama, lakini walipa asilimia 22 tu wakati wa faragha. Altruists walipa asilimia 51 katika hali ya umma na asilimia 40 katika hali ya kibinafsi - karibu mara mbili zaidi ya wenye ubinafsi. Matokeo yanaonyesha kwamba ukarimu fulani, au tabia ya "kujiunga na jamii", yaweza kuchochewa na ubinafsi safi, wala si kupendezwa na kibinafsi. Pia inaibua swali la kama altruists kupoteza faida ya ushindani katika ulimwengu wa kweli, tangu wao ni chini ya kimkakati kuhusu jinsi na wakati wao ni aina ya wengine. Lakini mwelekeo mwingine wa utafiti huo unaonyesha kwamba watu wenye ubinafsi huenda hatimaye wakapata faida kwa kutoa zaidi. Katika hatua ya mwisho, watafiti waliwaomba washiriki wa mchezo huo wa kuigiza wape pesa mtu aliyewahi kuwa mkarimu wakati wa mchezo huo. Baadhi ya washiriki waliambiwa kwamba mtu huyo alijua kwamba ukarimu wake ungeelezwa kwa washiriki. Wengine waliambiwa kwamba mtu huyu hakujua kwamba mtu yeyote angeweza kujifunza juu ya ukarimu wake. Katika visa vyote viwili, watu waliojitoa kimakusudi walimpa mtu huyo kiasi sawa cha pesa. Lakini wenye ubinafsi walimpa mtu huyo kiasi kidogo sana wakati walipokuwa na sababu ya kuamini kwamba mtu huyo alikuwa akijaribu tu kuongeza sifa yake. Walionekana tuzo ya kweli tabia altruistic, hata kama hawakuwa altruists wenyewe. "Ikiwa vitendo vya kibinafsi vya kijamii vinagunduliwa - kama vile mara nyingi vinagunduliwa - watu wenye ubinafsi watapata thawabu zaidi kuliko watu wenye ubinafsi", anasema Brent Simpson, profesa wa sosholojia katika Chuo Kikuu cha South Carolina na mwandishi mkuu wa utafiti huo. "Vivyo hivyo, kwa kiwango ambacho watu wanawaadhibu wengine ambao hushindwa kutenda kwa ushirika, altruists hawachukui gharama za kuadhibiwa wakati vitendo vinavyoonekana kuwa vya kibinafsi vinakuwa vya umma. """