first_img Email Sign up for our daily newsletter Get more great content like this delivered right to you! Country “The usual explanation has been that people do this for the so-called ‘warm glow,’” said Alan Sanfey, a neuroscientist at the Donders Center for Cognitive Neuroimaging at Radboud University in Nijmegen, the Netherlands. “But I’ve found that people never look particularly happy when they’re giving money back.”That led him to wonder whether a bigger factor in their decisions might be that people expect they would feel guilty if they didn’t give their partner an equal share. “And as an Irish Catholic, I feel very well qualified to study guilt,” Sanfey said.To test this, he and researchers tweaked the trust game so that Peter is told Paul will get four times the amount he is given, when unbeknownst to his partner, Paul actually receives six times the amount. (Peter gets $10 and thinks Paul will get $40, but Paul really gets $60.) Paul also knows he got more than his partner thinks he did.That puts Paul in a moral quandary. Like others who have played the trust game, he tends to want to give Peter an equitable share of the winnings, but from Peter’s perspective that would only be $20. So should he give back a truly equitable share, or just what Peter expects is a fair share? If fear of feeling guilty motivates people to act altruistically, Sanfey reasoned, then simply meeting Peter’s expectations would assuage that, whereas those who are in it for the warm fuzzy feelings would tend to give half away regardless of Peter’s beliefs.Sanfey and colleagues ran this experiment with a few dozen university students with various multiplications of money. They found that some people were inveterately equitable, always giving half the actual winnings. Others always gave only what their partners would expect to be half. Then there was a group Sanfey called “moral opportunists” whose behavior shifted toward keeping a larger share as the winnings went up.Running the game while recording people’s brain activity with a functional MRI machine revealed that people who made similar giving choices (either to give half or what they had, or half of what their partner thought they had) showed similar brain patterns in the medial prefrontal cortex, a region associated with decision-making. Sanfey calls these tendencies “moral phenotypes,” categories that predict exactly what flavor of altruism people engage in when faced with complex moral scenarios.Understanding these patterns in individuals and groups could shed light on why, for example, some people bristle at communism and thrive under capitalism and vice versa. His lab is currently exploring how these moral phenotypes react to experimental mockups of economic inequality.The work is thought provoking, says Warren Page, a professor emeritus of mathematics at the City University of New York in New York City, who attended the session. But he would like Sanfey to explore in future studies how a different motivation, loss aversion, also plays into these findings. “The pain of losing money is greater than the satisfaction we get from gaining money,” he said. With larger sums of money, the expected pain of giving so much away might deter even the most altruistic, he added.Check out our full coverage of AAAS 2017. Why do we give to others? Country * Afghanistan Aland Islands Albania Algeria Andorra Angola Anguilla Antarctica Antigua and Barbuda Argentina Armenia Aruba Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bahamas Bahrain Bangladesh Barbados Belarus Belgium Belize Benin Bermuda Bhutan Bolivia, Plurinational State of Bonaire, Sint Eustatius and Saba Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana Bouvet Island Brazil British Indian Ocean Territory Brunei Darussalam Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Canada Cape Verde Cayman Islands Central African Republic Chad Chile China Christmas Island Cocos (Keeling) Islands Colombia Comoros Congo Congo, the Democratic Republic of the Cook Islands Costa Rica Cote d’Ivoire Croatia Cuba Curaçao Cyprus Czech Republic Denmark Djibouti Dominica Dominican Republic Ecuador Egypt El Salvador Equatorial Guinea Eritrea Estonia Ethiopia Falkland Islands (Malvinas) Faroe Islands Fiji Finland France French Guiana French Polynesia French Southern Territories Gabon Gambia Georgia Germany Ghana Gibraltar Greece Greenland Grenada Guadeloupe Guatemala Guernsey Guinea Guinea-Bissau Guyana Haiti Heard Island and McDonald Islands Holy See (Vatican City State) Honduras Hungary Iceland India Indonesia Iran, Islamic Republic of Iraq Ireland Isle of Man Israel Italy Jamaica Japan Jersey Jordan Kazakhstan Kenya Kiribati Korea, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Republic of Kuwait Kyrgyzstan Lao People’s Democratic Republic Latvia Lebanon Lesotho Liberia Libyan Arab Jamahiriya Liechtenstein Lithuania Luxembourg Macao Macedonia, the former Yugoslav Republic of Madagascar Malawi Malaysia Maldives Mali Malta Martinique Mauritania Mauritius Mayotte Mexico Moldova, Republic of Monaco Mongolia Montenegro Montserrat Morocco Mozambique Myanmar Namibia Nauru Nepal Netherlands New Caledonia New Zealand Nicaragua Niger Nigeria Niue Norfolk Island Norway Oman Pakistan Palestine Panama Papua New Guinea Paraguay Peru Philippines Pitcairn Poland Portugal Qatar Reunion Romania Russian Federation Rwanda Saint Barthélemy Saint Helena, Ascension and Tristan da Cunha Saint Kitts and Nevis Saint Lucia Saint Martin (French part) Saint Pierre and Miquelon Saint Vincent and the Grenadines Samoa San Marino Sao Tome and Principe Saudi Arabia Senegal Serbia Seychelles Sierra Leone Singapore Sint Maarten (Dutch part) Slovakia Slovenia Solomon Islands Somalia South Africa South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands South Sudan Spain Sri Lanka Sudan Suriname Svalbard and Jan Mayen Swaziland Sweden Switzerland Syrian Arab Republic Taiwan Tajikistan Tanzania, United Republic of Thailand Timor-Leste Togo Tokelau Tonga Trinidad and Tobago Tunisia Turkey Turkmenistan Turks and Caicos Islands Tuvalu Uganda Ukraine United Arab Emirates United Kingdom United States Uruguay Uzbekistan Vanuatu Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of Vietnam Virgin Islands, British Wallis and Futuna Western Sahara Yemen Zambia Zimbabwe Ed Yourdon/Wikimedia Commons center_img Why are we altruistic? Guilt may play a role BOSTON—Why do we share our resources with people even though we’re unlikely to see any direct benefit? Research into altruistic behavior has centered largely on the warm, fuzzy feelings we get when we give selflessly. But according to new findings reported here today at the annual meeting of AAAS, which publishes Science, some people’s altruism might be motivated by a very different emotion: guilt.The results come from a tweak to a well-known psychological experiment called the trust game. In it, participants are paired with a partner. One is given a sum of money and the other receives some multiplication of that. (Both know how much the other got.) Then, the latter person must choose how much money they want to give back to their partner, if any. For instance, if Peter receives $10, then Paul will receive, say, $40 and decide how much of that sum to give back to Peter.Over the years, researchers have learned that most people who receive the multiplied amount consistently give about half of it back to their partner, despite being under no obligation to do so. Click to view the privacy policy. Required fields are indicated by an asterisk (*) By Michael PriceFeb. 18, 2017 , 3:15 PMlast_img read more