Doing good for (maybe) nothing: How reward uncertainty shapes observer responses to prosocial behavior

The profit motive: Implications for children's reasoning about merit-based resource distribution

How to distribute resources in a fair way is a fundamental source of conflict in human societies. A central dilemma that people begin to grapple with during childhood is the extent to which individuals should be rewarded based on merit at the expense of equality. The current study examined children's reasoning about this dilemma by testing whether they are sensitive to information about the motives of highly productive people when determining whether they should receive extra compensation. Across two studies, children (6- to 11-year-olds, total N = 143) judged high performers to be less deserving of extra resources when they were motivated by profit rather than being intrinsically motivated, and this pattern was more pronounced among the older children. The findings demonstrate that, with age, children increasingly consider motives when deciding whether productivity should be rewarded and that the tendency of adults to view profit motives as problematic has origins during childhood.

A typology of strategies that recognize, reward, and incentivize blood donation

BACKGROUND

Blood collection agencies (BCAs) worldwide are continuously looking to improve recognition, reward, and incentive (RRI) policies to optimize the recruitment and retention of blood donors. However, given the inconsistent categorization and variety of strategies available, there is a need for a theoretically informed and empirically supported framework to guide RRI research and policy development.

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

Survey data from 1028 voluntary nonremunerated whole blood and plasma donors in Australia was used to validate a theorized RRI typology based on distinctions between the level of congruency with the act of donating blood (congruent vs. incongruent), visibility of acknowledgment (public vs. private), benefits provided (self vs. other), and likely reinforcement schedule (fixed vs. variable).

RESULTS

A six-factor solution met all statistical criteria and was most consistent with a priori theoretical underpinnings. The factors were labeled (i) deal promotion, (ii) loyalty program, (iii) BCA token, (iv) health check, (v) charity donation, and (vi) travel compensation.

DISCUSSION

This typology provides researchers with a standardized theoretical and conceptual framework to organize and synthesize findings from the existing literature and help BCAs develop RRI policies that are likely to be successful. We present a future research agenda across and within the RRI strategies.