Social Heuristics and Social Roles: Intuition Favors Altruism for Women But Not for Men

David G. Rand, Victoria L. Brescoll, J. Everett, V. Capraro, Hélène Barcelo
{"title":"Social Heuristics and Social Roles: Intuition Favors Altruism for Women But Not for Men","authors":"David G. Rand, Victoria L. Brescoll, J. Everett, V. Capraro, Hélène Barcelo","doi":"10.1037/xge0000154","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Are humans intuitively altruistic, or does altruism require self-control? A theory of social heuristics, whereby intuitive responses favor typically successful behaviors, suggests that the answer may depend on who you are. In particular, evidence suggests that women are expected to behave altruistically, and are punished for failing to be altruistic, to a much greater extent than men. Thus, women (but not men) may internalize altruism as their intuitive response. Indeed, a meta-analysis of 13 new experiments and 9 experiments from other groups found that promoting intuition relative to deliberation increased giving in a Dictator Game among women, but not among men (Study 1, N = 4,366). Furthermore, this effect was shown to be moderated by explicit sex role identification (Study 2, N = 1,831): the more women described themselves using traditionally masculine attributes (e.g., dominance, independence) relative to traditionally feminine attributes (e.g., warmth, tenderness), the more deliberation reduced their altruism. Our findings shed light on the connection between gender and altruism, and highlight the importance of social heuristics in human prosociality.","PeriodicalId":159232,"journal":{"name":"ERN: Altruism (Topic)","volume":"14 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-01-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"252","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ERN: Altruism (Topic)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1037/xge0000154","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 252

Abstract

Are humans intuitively altruistic, or does altruism require self-control? A theory of social heuristics, whereby intuitive responses favor typically successful behaviors, suggests that the answer may depend on who you are. In particular, evidence suggests that women are expected to behave altruistically, and are punished for failing to be altruistic, to a much greater extent than men. Thus, women (but not men) may internalize altruism as their intuitive response. Indeed, a meta-analysis of 13 new experiments and 9 experiments from other groups found that promoting intuition relative to deliberation increased giving in a Dictator Game among women, but not among men (Study 1, N = 4,366). Furthermore, this effect was shown to be moderated by explicit sex role identification (Study 2, N = 1,831): the more women described themselves using traditionally masculine attributes (e.g., dominance, independence) relative to traditionally feminine attributes (e.g., warmth, tenderness), the more deliberation reduced their altruism. Our findings shed light on the connection between gender and altruism, and highlight the importance of social heuristics in human prosociality.
社会启发式和社会角色:直觉倾向于女性的利他主义,而不是男性的利他主义
人类是本能地利他主义,还是利他主义需要自我控制?社会启发式理论认为,直觉反应倾向于典型的成功行为,这表明答案可能取决于你是谁。特别是,有证据表明,女性被期望表现得无私,而没有做到无私则会受到比男性更大程度的惩罚。因此,女性(而不是男性)可能将利他主义内在化,作为他们的直觉反应。事实上,一项对13项新实验和其他小组的9项实验的荟萃分析发现,在独裁者游戏中,促进直觉而不是深思熟虑会增加女性的捐赠,但在男性中却没有(研究1,N = 4366)。此外,这种影响被明确的性别角色认同所缓和(研究2,N = 1831):女性越是用传统的男性特征(如支配、独立)来描述自己,而不是用传统的女性特征(如温暖、温柔)来描述自己,她们的利他主义倾向就越低。我们的研究结果揭示了性别与利他主义之间的联系,并强调了社会启发式在人类亲社会性中的重要性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信