Personality and Prosocial Behavior: a Theoretical Framework and Meta-Analysis
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Psychological Bulletin © 2020 American Psychological Association 2020, Vol. 146, No. 1, 30–90 ISSN: 0033-2909 http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/bul0000217 Personality and Prosocial Behavior: A Theoretical Framework and Meta-Analysis Isabel Thielmann Giuliana Spadaro and Daniel Balliet University of Koblenz-Landau and VU Amsterdam VU Amsterdam Decades of research document individual differences in prosocial behavior using controlled experiments that model social interactions in situations of interdependence. However, theoretical and empirical integration of the vast literature on the predictive validity of personality traits to account for these individual differences is missing. Here, we present a theoretical framework that identifies 4 broad situational affordances across interdependent situations (i.e., exploitation, reciprocity, temporal conflict, and dependence under uncertainty) and more specific subaffordances within certain types of interdepen- dent situations (e.g., possibility to increase equality in outcomes) that can determine when, which, and how personality traits should be expressed in prosocial behavior. To test this framework, we meta- analyzed 770 studies reporting on 3,523 effects of 8 broad and 43 narrow personality traits on prosocial behavior in interdependent situations modeled in 6 commonly studied economic games (Dictator Game, Ultimatum Game, Trust Game, Prisoner’s Dilemma, Public Goods Game, and Commons Dilemma). Overall, meta-analytic correlations ranged between Ϫ.18 Յ ˆ Յ .26, and most traits yielding a significant relation to prosocial behavior had conceptual links to the affordances provided in interdependent situations, most prominently the possibility for exploitation. Moreover, for several traits, correlations within games followed the predicted pattern derived from a theoretical analysis of affordances. On the level of traits, we found that narrow and broad traits alike can account for prosocial behavior, informing the bandwidth-fidelity problem. In sum, the meta-analysis provides a theoretical foundation that can guide future research on prosocial behavior and advance our understanding of individual differences in human prosociality. Public Significance Statement This meta-analysis provides a theoretical framework and empirical test identifying when, how, and which of 51 personality traits account for individual variation in prosocial behavior. The meta- analysis shows that the relations between personality traits and prosocial behavior can be understood in terms of a few situational affordances (e.g., a possibility for exploitation, a possibility for reciprocity, dependence on others under uncertainty) that allow specific traits to become expressed in behavior across a variety of interdependent situations. As such, the meta-analysis provides a theoretical basis for understanding individual differences in prosocial behavior in various situations that individuals face in their everyday social interactions. Keywords: cooperation, games, meta-analysis, personality, prosocial behavior Supplemental materials: http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/bul0000217.supp This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers. This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual userProsocial and is not to be disseminated broadly. behaviors such as generosity, cooperation, and reci- including dyads (Murray & Holmes, 2009; Rusbult & Van Lange, procity support the functioning of a wide range of relationships, 2003), groups (Fehr, Fischbacher, & Gachter, 2002), and societies X Isabel Thielmann, Department of Psychology, University of Koblenz- valuable comments on previous versions of the manuscript and/or the Landau, and Department of Experimental and Applied Psychology, VU Am- classification of traits, Morten Moshagen for sharing some beautiful R code, sterdam; Giuliana Spadaro and Daniel Balliet, Department of Experimental and the team of the Cooperation Databank as well as Margriet Bentvelzen, Jan and Applied Psychology, VU Amsterdam. Hendrik Henze, Maaike Homan, Luisa Horsten, Oliver Lowack, Alexander Additional materials (including the preregistration and data) are pro- Nicolay, Teresa Schimmer, Maja Stoverock, and Maximilian Tantik for their vided online on the Open Science Framework (https://osf.io/dbuk6/). The support in literature search, data handling, and coding of studies. Finally, our work reported herein was supported by grants to Isabel Thielmann from thanks go to all authors who were willing to share their data. the German Research Foundation (TH 2318/1-1) and to Daniel Balliet from Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Isabel the European Research Council (StG 635356). Moreover, we thank Simon Thielmann, Department of Psychology, University of Koblenz-Landau, Columbus, Reinout de Vries, Benjamin Hilbig, and William Fleeson for Fortstraße 7, 76829 Landau, Germany. E-mail: [email protected] 30 PERSONALITY AND PROSOCIAL BEHAVIOR 31 at large (Nowak, 2006). Broadly speaking, prosocial behaviors Pletzer et al., 2018; Zettler, Thielmann, Hilbig, & Moshagen, in refer to all kinds of actions that benefit others, often at a personal press; Zhao & Smillie, 2015). We present the first comprehensive cost to the actor. As such, prosocial behaviors can affect the health meta-analytic review to summarize the entire 60 year history of and wellbeing of romantic partners (Le, Impett, Lemay, Muise, & research studying the relation between personality traits and proso- Tskhay, 2018), promote the productivity of organizations (Podsa- cial behavior in economic games. koff, Ahearne, & MacKenzie, 1997), enhance the wealth of soci- As we elaborate in what follows, the meta-analysis offers four eties (Knack & Keefer, 1997), and even provide a key solution to main contributions: First, we aim for a theory-driven, comprehen- global challenges (e.g., climate change; Alston, 2015; Marx & sive understanding of which traits (most strongly) relate to proso- Weber, 2012). Corresponding to this importance and omnipres- cial behavior across a variety of interdependent situations. Second, ence, human prosociality has received considerable attention we consider the underlying question of how personality relates to across scientific disciplines, including biology, economics, sociol- prosocial behavior in specific situations in terms of key affor- ogy, and psychology. dances that allow the expression of corresponding psychological Across the numerous disciplines, researchers have adopted a processes in behavior. To do so, we develop and test a theoretical standardized experimental method to study prosocial behavior: framework informed by Interdependence Theory (Kelley & Thi- economic social decision-making tasks, or simply games (Bau- baut, 1978; Thibaut & Kelley, 1959) and prior research that mard, André, & Sperber, 2013). These game paradigms were generates hypotheses about which traits should (not) relate to developed to model the complexity of real-life interdependent prosocial behavior in which situations. Third, we provide a com- situations in a precise yet parsimonious approach that allows parison of personality concepts and frameworks, illuminating how assessing actual prosocial behavior in standardized experimental much specificity it requires on the level of traits to account for settings (Murnighan & Wang, 2016; Pruitt & Kimmel, 1977). One individual differences in prosocial behavior. Fourth, and finally, of the most well-known games is the Prisoner’s Dilemma (Luce & we test how several structural features of social interactions (e.g., Raiffa, 1957; Rapoport & Chammah, 1965), a situation involving degree of conflict of interests, repetition of interaction) and aspects a conflict of interests between maximizing one’s personal gain of the experimental design (e.g., behavior-contingent incentives, (defection) and maximizing collective gain (cooperation). How- deception) moderate the relation between personality and prosocial ever, researchers have developed many different games to study behavior. prosocial behavior, each representing a specific type of social In what follows, we first briefly introduce how games are interaction that provides a useful testbed for theories of prosocial used to model interdependent situations and to study prosocial behavior. behavior, and we describe the games included in the meta- One of the most striking observations from thousands of analysis. Next, we provide an overview of the traits that have studies using economic games is that individuals are—contrary been assessed in studies using games, and so are included in the to the assumptions of classic economic theory (Luce & Raiffa, meta-analysis. Then, we present our theoretical framework that 1957; von Neumann & Morgenstern, 1944)—not purely selfish, generates predictions about which traits should relate to proso- but indeed willing to forgo personal gains for the sake of others’ cial behavior across and within situations. We end this section welfare. Importantly, however, these prosocial tendencies yield by introducing the distinction between broad versus narrow substantial interindividual variability: Whereas some individu- traits (bandwidth-fidelity dilemma) and the moderators we con- als are willing to benefit others at personal cost, others are sider in our analysis. mostly self-interested and motivated to maximize their individ- ual profit (e.g., Camerer, 2003; Engel, 2011; Sally, 1995)—and this tendency exhibits stability across games and over time Economic