1. Cross-National Comparisons of Monetary Donations to
In-group and Out-group Members
Kanako Taku, PhD, and Velinka Marton
Abstract
Method (Cont.)
Results
Terror management theory suggests that reminders of death affects one’s connections with one’s in-group. Further, depending on the importance of one’s in-group, bias toward one’s in-group can affect decisions to commit prosocial behaviors. The current study cross-nationally examined importance of nationality, mortality salience, and monetary donations to in-group and out-group members. It was hypothesized that importance of nationality will influence donations to one’s in-group and that, regardless of culture, people will increase the amount of donation to their in-group when awareness of one’s mortality is induced. Results revealed cross-national differences in donation patterns to one’s in-group and out-group. Future research should consider other constructs \to replicate the effects of mortality salience.
Table 1. Demographics
United States (n = 598)
Japan (n = 423)
Age M(SD)
20.27 (4.27)
22.23 (7.32) n %
Religion Christianity
422
73.9 10
2.4
Buddhism 2
0.3 99
23.4
Non-Religious
110
18.4
287
67.8
Gender (female)
471
78.8
264
62.4
Introduction
Results
In-group / Out-group Patterns
Terror Management Theory: Humans respond defensively to reminders of death by strengthening their connections with their in-group (Greenberg et al., 1990)
Awareness of mortality can lead to in-group bias and affect prosocial behaviors (e.g., monetary donations) (Jonas et al., 2002)
Behaviors can be affected by perception of the importance of one’s in-group (Ben-Ner et al., 2009)
Purpose
Cross-nationally examine how importance of nationality and mortality salience affects willingness to donate money to in- group and out-group members
Hypothesis
Importance of nationality will influence people to donate more to their in-group members.
People will increase the amount of donation to their in-group members when awareness of one’s mortality is induced, regardless of culture.
Importance of Nationality
Importance of nationality was associated with in-group versus out-group distinction in the Japanese sample, F(2, 394) = 6.05, p = .003
No significant changes in the amount of donation for in-group versus out-group members were observed.
Discussion
Results suggest that people in the US are more likely than people in Japan to evenly donate to in-group / out-group members.
Subjective importance of nationality accelerated in-group bias for Japanese participants only.
This extends previous findings of in-group cues affecting donation amounts for those from collectivist cultures (Kim, 2016)
This may reflect an inherent in-group bias associated with cultures that value the whole.
Mortality salience induction effects were not observed in this study, as the majority of participants provided the same amount of donation before and after the experiment. This may be due to the country we selected as a comparison (U.S.).
Limitation
Although the amount of donation has been used to test in-group and out-group biases, a sense of obligation to one’s in-group or social desirability might play a role.
Future Direction
Future research should consider other constructs such as group entitativity to replicate the effects of mortality salience.
Table 2. Importance of Nationality and Time 1 Donations (all participants)
United States (n = 598)
Japan (n = 423)
Importance of Nationality
M = 6.50, SD = 2.09
M = 5.61, SD = 2.02 n %
Even donations
341
57.0
174
41.1
More to US members
236
39.5 6
1.4
More to JPN members 15
2.5
243
57.4
Chi-square test: (df = 3) = , p < .001
Table 3. Donations BEFORE / AFTER Mortality Salience Induction
United States (n = 299)
Japan (n = 212) n %
BEFORE
Even donations
173
57.9 87
41.0
More to US members
119
39.8 2
0.9
More to JPN members 5
1.7
123
58.0
Chi-square test: (df = 3) = , p < .001
AFTER
179
59.9 96
45.3
110
36.8 1
0.5 6
2.0
115
54.2
Chi-square test: (df = 3) = , p < .001
Method
Procedure
College students from mid-western US and a suburban area of Japan participated in the paper and pencil survey.
Measures
Importance of nationality (1 = not important, 9 = very important)
Statement BEFORE and AFTER Mortality Salience Induction (experimental group) or no manipulation (control group)
If I had $300 (or 30,000 yen) to donate, I would donate [insert amount of money] to a family in the US and/or [insert amount of money] to a family in Japan
Mortality Salience Induction
What emotions does the thought of your own death arouse in you?
What will happen to you when your body dies?
References
Ben-Ner, A., Mccall, B., Stephane, M., & Wang, H. (2009). Identity and in-group/out-group differentiation in work and giving behaviors: Experimental evidence. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 72, 153–170. doi: /j.jebo
Greenberg, J., Pyszczynski, T., Solomon, S., Rosenblatt, A., Veeder, M., Kirkland, S., … Sarason, I. (1990). Evidence for Terror Management Theory II: The effects of mortality salience on reactions to those who threaten or bolster the cultural worldview. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 58, 308–318. doi: /
Jonas, E., Schimel, J., Greenberg, J., & Pyszczynski, T. (2002). The scrooge effect: Evidence that mortality salience increases prosocial attitudes and behavior. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 28, 1342–1353. doi: /
Kim, Y. (2016). Cultural orientation affects consumer responses to charity advertising. Social Behavior and Personality, 44, 1079–1088. doi: /sbp
Presented at the American Psychological Association August 8th, 2019
Contact: